Documente Academic
Documente Profesional
Documente Cultură
SUPPLEMENT SERIES
14
Editor
James H. Charlesworth
Associate Editors
Philip R. Davies
James R. Mueller
James C. VanderKam
Series Editors
Craig A. Evans
James A. Sanders
JSOT Press
Sheffield
The Pseudepigrapha
and Early Biblical
Interpretation
edited by
James H. Charlesworth
and
Craig A. Evans
ISBN 1-85075-443-8
CONTENTS
Preface 7
Abbreviations 8
List of Contributors 11
JAMES A. S A N D E R S
Introduction: Why the Pseudepigrapha? 13
JAMES H . CHARLESWORTH
In the Crucible: The Pseudepigrapha as Biblical Interpretation 20
H O W A R D CLARK KEE
Appropriating the History of God's People: A Survey of
Interpretations of the History of Israel in the Pseudepigrapha,
Apocrypha and the New Testament 44
GORDON Z E R B E
'Pacificism' and 'Passive Resistance' in Apocalyptic Writings:
A Critical Evaluation 65
JAMES C. VANDERKAM
Biblical Interpretation in 1 Enoch and Jubilees 96
DAVID E. AUNE
Charismatic Exegesis in Early Judaism and Early Christianity 126
B R U C E D . CHILTON
God as 'Father' in the Targumim, in Non-Canonical Literatures
of Early Judaism and Primitive Christianity, and in Matthew 151
CRAIG A . E V A N S
Luke and the Rewritten Bible: Aspects of Lukan Hagiography 170
6 The Pseudepigrapha and Early Biblical Interpretation
D A V I D P. M O E S S N E R
Suffering, Intercession and Eschatological Atonement:
An Uncommon Common View in the Testament of Moses and
in Luke-Acts 202
PETER H . D A V I D S
The Use of the Pseudepigrapha in the Catholic Epistles 228
PEDER BOROEN
Heavenly Ascent in Philo: An Examination of Selected Passages 246
RICHARD J. BAUCKHAM
Resurrection as Giving Back the Dead: A Traditional Image of
Resurrection in the Pseudepigrapha and the Apocalypse of John 269
J.H. Charlesworth
Princeton Theological Seminary
C.A. Evans
Trinity Western University
ABBREVIATIONS
AB Anchor Bible
AGJU Arbeiten zur Geschichte des antiken Judentums und des
Urchrislentums
AnBib Analectabiblica
ANRW Aufsrieg und Niedergang der rSnuschen Welt
APOT R.H. Charles (ed.), Apocrypha and Pseudepigrapha of the Old
Testament
BA Biblical Archaeologist
Bib Biblica
BNTC Black's New Testament Commentaries
BO Bibliotheca orientalis
BWANT BeitrSge zur Wissenschaft vom Alien und Ncucn Testament
BZNW BeiheftezurZWW
CBQ Catholic Bibiical Quarterly
CBQMS Catholic Biblical Quarterly Monograph Series
ConBNT Coniecianea biblica. New Testament
CRINT Compendia rerum iudaicarum ad novum testamentum
CSCO Corpus scriptorum christianorum orientalium
DBSup Dictionnaire de la Bible, Supplement
EncJud Encyclopaedia Judaica (1971) -
ETR Etudes theologiques et religieuses
ExpTim Expository Times
FRLANT Forschungen zur Religion und Literatur des Alten und Neuen
Testaments
GCS Griechischechristliche Schriftsteller
HAT Handbuch zum Allen Testament
HDR Harvard Dissertations in Religion
HSM Harvard Semitic Monographs
HTR Harvard Theological Review
HTS Harvard Theological Studies
HVCA Hebrew Union College Annual
ICC International Critical Commentary
IDB G.A. Buttrick (ed.). Interpreter's Dictionary of the Bible
JAOS Journal of the American Oriental Society
JBL Journal of Biblical Literature
JETS Journal of the Evangelical Theological Society
Abbreviations
James A. Sanders
1. There are a few of the so-called Pseudepigrapha that are in the Greek and
Slavonic Bibles and/or the Appendix to the Vulgatesome of the Esdras literature.
14 The Pseudepigrapha and Early Biblical Interpretation
literary works from the period, such as the pes ha rim and other
distinctly denominational literature from Qumran, which do not com-
fortably fit the mix, while there are others from Qumran that do fit.
And the question of fit in those instances is not related to anonymity
or pseudepigraphy but rather to certain literary characteristics. No
one in the field has found another term that has gained acceptance to
designate this important body of literature which has in this century
alone grown dramatically by discovery and recovery.^
Why are the Pseudepigrapha, in the sense described, important?
First and foremost, they provide us with an immeasurable treasure of
primary sources, beyond the Apocrypha, for the intellectual and social
history of late Early Judaism. They prove that earlier views of there
having been an orthodox, pre-rabbinic (early Pharisaic) Judaism, on
the one hand, and a heterodox Judaism, on the other (the consensus
until the discovery of the Dead Sea Scrolls), were false. While a few
scholars still speak and write of 'normative Judaism' in this period,
most now do not. The history of Early Judaism is now seen to have
been highly diverse from the early post-exilic days until the fall of
Jerusalem in 70 CE. The older tendency to speak of four or five
'parties' in the Early Jewish period is no longer appropriate; there
were many, diverse groups whose several contours are evidenced in
the Pseudepigrapha and other Jewish literature of the period.
The older tendency to speak or write of Palestinian Judaism over
against Hellenistic Judaism is no longer appropriate; the former is
now seen as variously hellenized in various parts of Palestine, and the
latter is now seen as unlimited by geographic bounds in themselves. It
is important now also to allow for there having been so-called ortho-
dox Jewish communities scattered throughout the diaspora in the
period in question. And though we do not yet know enough about the
diverse denominations and groups to identify any pseudepigraphon
3 and 4 Maccabees, the Prayer of Manasseh, and Psalm 151 (and Psalms of
Solomon in Alexandrinus); the Armenian lacks 4 Maccabbees. It is difficult to speak
of a widely accepted canon, in the narrow sense (norma normata) of the Greek Old
Testament in antiquity since the contents and orders of books differ after Genesis to 4
Kingdoms in the early, more complete LXX manuscripts.
2. See the comments by James H. Charlesworth in the introduction to The Old
Testament Pseudepigrapha, I, D (= OTP) (Garden City: Doubleday, 1983, 1985),
pp. xxiv-xxv, and in A. Caquot (ed.). La Litterature intertestamentaire (Paris:
Presses universitaires de France, 1985), pp. 11-28.
Introduction: Why the Pseudepigrapha? 15
while reading all its parts, along with the developing theocentric and
monotheizing hermeneutic thrust of Scripture, one does not stumble
over the modes and expressions of polytheism, even tribalism, that
pervade the Bible from inception through the NT; they were legion.
If one gains that canonical hermeneutic perspective through the
Torah and the Prophets and moves with it on through the Writings,
the Apocrypha, the Pseudepigrapha, the Qumran literature and Philo,
the NT takes its rightful place in the Jewish-Christian canonical mix.
Each historical period has its own characteristics which frame the
texts; but the cultural traps and trappings need not be the focus of
reading. One might ask, why include the Pseudepigrapha in such a
diachronic reading? Other bodies of Hebraic and Jewish literature
(variously influenced by many cultures including the Hellenic and
Hellenistic) form parts of current canons of Scripture.
So why the Pseudepigrapha? Canon in this functional sense is a
paradigm, and not a 'box' with rigid boundaries. Some of the writings
that we call Pseudepigrapha actually functioned as canon for some
Early Jewish communities, and some are included in current canons;
others of them may possibly have done so in antiquity. After all, we
inherit no autographs of any of them but only apographs (copies of
copies), or ancient translations from the original-language copies,
which means that some Early Jewish and then Early Christian
communities must have thought highly enough of most of them to
share them that widely. To include the Pseudepigrapha in the reading
is to witness the process in its fullest extent, and especially in its full
Hellenistic-Roman guise.'
The canonical process was not a smooth development, far from it.
On the contrary, it exhibits the various degrees in which cultural givens
shaped the literature. But to monotheize, or perceive the integrity of
Reality through these texts, was no easier or less rough in the Iron
Age or Persian period than in Hellenistic and Roman times. The first
three commandments of the Decalogue (no polytheism, no idolatry
and no co-opting of God's name for one theology, ideology, agenda or
point of view) have been humanity's greatest challenge through the
ages to the present, whatever the cultural frame.
Arguably (and minimally) only the Book of Jude in the NT exhibits
direct intertextuality with any of the Pseudepigrapha (7 Enoch). That
is not the point. If one studies all of the literature, Hebraic and Jewish,
in whatever language available, from its beginnings through the NT,
including the Apocrypha and Pseudepigrapha, both intertextually and
with the theocentric/monotheizing thrust of the whole (if not of each
of die parts), one then comes to the NT with no more nor less than the
same necessary cross-cultural and intertextual task for understanding
and perception. One gains a perspective it is impossible to gain if one
attempts to understand the NT only from its own literature alone, or
from its synchronic position in the Hellenistic/Roman world of the
first century alone, or, indeed, from a current (and denominationally
restricted?) canonical context alone.*
Study of the NT is commonly done synchronically, focusing on its
own and contemporary literature, and often with a moralizing
hermeneutic that puts the mores and cultural givens of the first-century
Hellenistic world in a privileged position and a distorted perspective.
It is another way to decanonize the NT. It takes it out of any canon
whatever, ancient or current, all of which begin with Genesis and the
late Bronze Age paradigm and process, which initiates the task that
continues through the N T and beyond to today. The same cultural
traps and trappings evident in the NT would already have been dealt
with by the time one reaches the NT, if its problems are tackled in the
light of the intertextual canonical process that continues through Early
Judaism and into Early Christianity, even in the literature which may
have been included in no widely recognized canon of which we are
aware.
One can then perceive with sharp clarity the truly canonical nature,
for the Christian, of the NT. The NT seems quite late in biblical-his-
torical terms, and it is written in a strange, vulgar Greek. But if it is
read intertextually, with a monotheizing hermeneutic, the NT finds its
true place in the full canonical paradigm by which Christians may know
who they really are and what they stand for. They may also learn how
they should continue the canonical, traditioning process, theologizing
and moralizing (preaching), in their own day and within their own
cultural traps and trappings, which is by and large what the authors
and communities of the various canons, and of the Pseudepigrapha,
did in their day.
IN THE CRUCIBLE:
T H E PSEUDEPIGRAPHA AS BiBUCAL INTERPRETATION
James H. Charlesworth
1. Philo and Josephus, despite some claims to the contrary, are both exegetically
influenced by the Old Testament. H.W. Attridge has persuasively argued that
Josephus intcrpretatively presents scriptural narratives. His 'theology is very much
an apologetic one, which reworks Jewish u-adition in categories derived from and
comprehensible to a Greco-Roman public'. See Attridge, The Interpretation of
Biblical History in the Antiquitates Judaicae of Flavius Josephus (HDR, 7;
Missoula, MT: Scholars Press, 1976), p. 17. Likewise, as R.D. Hecht has attempted
to show, Philo is 'exclusively engaged in deducing the reasonableness of the Law'.
See Hecht, 'The Exegetical Contexts of Philo's Interpretation of Circumcision', in
F.E. Greenspahn, E. Hilgertand B.L. Mack (eds.). Nourished with Peace: Studies in
Hellenistic Judaism in Memory of Samuel Sandmel (Scholars Press Homage Series;
C H A R L E S W O R T H In the Crucible 21
Six Misconceptions
Six misconceptions hinder the perception of the Pseudepigrapha as
exegetical works.
First, biblical exegesis during die period of Early Judaism, or circa
150 BCE to 200 CE, was once Uiought to be primarily reflected in the
Targumim and Midrashim;^ but then we learned that each of these is
the sacred story' (div. 2, vol. Ill, p. 134); they are interpretations of Torah by
reciting and expanding the stories, and thereby making them more meaningful and
paradigmatic for daily life.
Some pseudepigrapha probably did rival and replace canonical works in some
communities, for example in the groups that produced the Books of Enoch (cf. also
I IQTemple and IQpHab); but the pseudepigrapha should not be portrayed as rivals
of canon. They are supporters of it. Random comments by Schurer indicate that he
may well have agreed with this insight; but he did not adequately integrate his
voluminous and (at times) brilliant reflections. Of course, the precursor is seldom the
perfector.
3. See the brilliant discussions by P.M. Cross, not only in his classic woric The
Ancient Library of Qumran and Modern Biblical Studies (Garden City, NY:
Doubleday, 1961 [rev. edn] and recently reprinted) but also in his articles in Bible
Review. In 'New Directions in Dead Sea Scroll Research: Original Biblical Text
Reconstnicted from Newly Found Fragments' (Bible Review I [1985], pp. 26-35),
Cross demonsu-ates dramatically that '4QSam preserves lost bits of the text of
Samuel' (p. 26).
4. See especially the chapters in the present book by J.A. Sanders, H.C. Kee,
J.C. VanderKam, C.A. Evans and R.J. Bauckham.
C H A R L E S W O R T H In the Crucible 23
The Qumran group, the Samaritans, the Pharisees, the Sadducees, and
virtually every group in Early Judaism (c. 2 5 0 BCE to 2 0 0 CE) of
which we have any knowledge, thought of themselves as 'Israelites*.
Each would have described their own peculiar thoughts as the only
right belief. They are so diverse that one cannot describe them as
5. E.P. Sanders, Judaism: Practice and Belief 63 BCE-63 CF. (London: SCM;
Philadelphia: Trinity Press International, 1992), p. 197. Also see Sanders's Jewish
Law from Jesus to the Mishnah (London: SCM; Philadelphia: Trinity Press
International, 1990).
6. L. Rost, Einleitung in die alttestamentlichen Apokryphen und Pseudepigra-
phen einschliesslich der grossen Qumran-Handschriften (Heidelberg, 1971), p. 22.
English translation: Judaism outside the Hebrew Canon (trans. D.E. Green;
Nashville: Abingdon, 1976), p. 30.
7. N.J. McEleney, 'Orthodoxy in Judaism of the First Christian Century', JSJ
4 (1973), pp. 19-42 (20).
24 The Pseudepigrapha and Early Biblical Interpretation
8. As Morton Smith stated long ago, i f there was any such thing, then, as an
"orthodox Judaism", it must have been that which is now almost unknown to us, the
religion of the average "people of the land". But the different parts of the country
were so different, such gulfs of feeling and practice separated Idumea, Judea,
Caesarea, and Galilee, that even on this level there was probably no more agreement
between them than between any one of them and a similar area in the Diaspora'
(M. Smith, 'Palestinian Judaism in the First Century', in M. Davis [ed.], Israel: Its
Role in Civilization [New York: Jewish Theological Seminary of America, 1956J,
p. 8 1 .
9. W.D. Davies. 'Contemporary Jewish Religion', in M. Black and
H.H. Rowley (eds.), Peake's Commentary on the Bible (London: Van Nostrand
Reinhold, 1961), pp. 705-11 (705).
10. Rost, Judaism outside the Hebrew Canon, p. 22.
C H A R L E S W O R T H In the Crucible 25
More than one Hebrew script was used at Qunnran, and each of
these were used because they were perceived to be sacred." The
ancient and hallowed language of Israel was Hebrew.
The Torah's scripts were the most sacred form of writing. It was
only proper, therefore, in light of die powerful influence of the Torah
at Qumran to continue the use of this script. The publication of the
Leviticus Scroll amply illustrates the presence of paleo-Hebrew at
Qumran.'^ The claim that the Holy Spirit continued to be alive in the
Qumran community, and that the secrets of a prophet's words were
disclosed only to die Moreh Has-sedek (see especially IQpHab 7) illus-
trates the high regard for the Torah felt at Qumran. According to the
Rule of the Community die Torah was to be read throughout the day
and night. The so-called 'new' laws and ordinances were considered
ancient, and derivative from the quintessential and primary impor-
tance of the Torah. The new was an exegesis of die old; the latter ele-
vated die former. I am convinced die same phenomenon characterizes
die Pseudepigrapha.
Fourthly, from the foregoing general misunderstanding some
scholars tend to suggest that the Pseudepigrapha were produced to
replace the Tanach. The impression is sometimes given that the so-
called extracanonical works were used in some early Jewish groups as
anti-canonical works. This confused idea seems to be present in
Solomon Zeitlin's contention that a large portion of the Pseude-
pigrapha, namely the apocalypses, were composed 'in opposition to
riormative Judaism. Normative Judaism regarded the Apocalyptists as
destructive.'"
I shall try to demonstrate that the Pseudepigrapha are not anti-
canonical works. Many documents in die Tanach represent vast differ-
ences in the interpretation of data and traditions. This healthy debate
continues among die Pseudepigrapha. There are no neat literary cate-
gories, like pre-rabbinics and anti-rabbinics. 4 Ezra and 2 Baruch,
among many other writings, reflect the origins of Rabbinic Judaism,
which is die type of Judaism Zeitlin labeled 'normative'. Likewise, the
11. The Greek copies of the Septuagint were most likely brought to Qumran.
12. See D.N. Freedman and K.A. Mathews, The Paleo-Hebrew Leviticus
Scroll (UQpaleoLev) (with contributions by R.S. Hanson; American Schools of
Oriental Research; distributed by Eisenbrauns, Winona Lake, IN, 1985).
13. S. Zeitlin, 'Jewish Apocryphal Literature', Studies in the Early History of
Judaism (New York: Ktav, 1974), II, p. 241.
26 The Pseudepigrapha and Early Biblical Interpretation
Criteria
How should one begin to comprehend die Pseudepigrapha as a type of
early Jewish biblical exegesis? How should die data be organized?
George W.E. Nickelsburg in 'The Bible Rewritten and Expanded'
opts for the criteria of dividing die documents into those which are
17. D.S. Russell, The Old Testament Pseudepigrapha: Patriarchs and Prophets
in Early Judaism (Philadelphia: Fortress Press, 1987), p. xi.
28 The Pseudepigrapha and Early Biblical Interpretation
very loosely connected to the biblical traditions and diose which are
'closely related to the biblical texts'.'* Among the documents only
loosely connected to the Bible are the following:
Daniel 1-6
The Prayer of Nabonidus
Susanna
Bel and the Dragon
Tobit
Judith
Martyrdom of Isaiah
The Lives of the Prophets
The Testament of Abraham
Joseph andAseneth
Paraleipomena ofJeremiah
Epistle ofAristeas
and 3 Maccabees.
Among the documents closely linked widi die Bible are diese:
/ Enoch and the Book of the Giants
Jubilees
The Genesis Apocryphon
The Book of Biblical Antiquities
The Apocalypse of Moses
The Life of Adam and Eve
Philo the Epic Poet
Theodotus the Epic Poet
Ezekiel the Tragedian
The Story of Darius' Bodyguards
Additions to the Book of Esther
David's Compositions
Baruch
The Episde of Jeremiah, and
The Prayer of Azariah and the Song of the Three Young Men.
I agree with Nickelsburg that the 'tendency to follow die ancient texts
more closely may be seen as a reflecdon of their developing canonical
status' (p. 89).
Rather than be seen as writings oblivious or antagonistic to die
Tanach, die Pseudepigrapha witness to the centrality of Tanach among
early Jews and its movement to a canonical status. The audior of 4 Ezra
18. G.W.E. Nickelsburg in Jewish Writings of the Second Temple Period; see
esp. p. 89.
C H A R L E S W O R T H In the Crucible 29
Inspiration
Many Pseudepigrapha were written by Jews who were primarily
inspired by the Tanach, but were also free to think creatively under
die influence, at times, of the insights and advances in the contiguous
world cultures. The best example of this exegetical method is found in
the category labeled 'Prayers, Psalms and Odes'. The 'More Psalms of
David' are structured according to the poetry of the Davidic Psalter,
and are frequently indistinguishable from diem. The Psalms are the
inspiration for these additions to it. Psalm 151A also evidences the
characteristic of the second category; it uses 1 Samuel 16 and 17 as die
framework for four verses. Note the following translation of the
Hebrew (11 QPs 151):
I was the smallest among my brothers,
and the youngest among the sons of my father;
and he made me shepherd of his flocks,
and the ruler over his kids. (151 A. 1)
These hues are based upon 1 Sam. 16.1-11, 17.14 and 2 Sam. 7.8, and
perhaps also on Pss. 78.70-71 and 89.20. It is understandable why die
Hebrew of this psalm contains the title 'A Hallelujah of David the Son
of Jesse'.^^
The next psalm, 151B (11 QPs 151), is also based on die Davidic
Psalter, and on another episode in the life of David, one which is
recorded in 1 Sam. 17.8-25. A translation from the Hebrew is as
follows:
Then I s[a]w a Philistine
who was uttering taunts from the ra[nks of the
enemy...].
22. The translations are by Charlesworth and are printed in OTP, 11, ad he.
C H A R L E S W O R T H In the Crucible 31
Other verses in the additional psalms, or Psalms 151 through 155, are
also inspired by the Davidic Psalter and by episodes in the life of
David.
The Prayer of Manasseh, one of the most beautiful penitential
psalms ever written, was composed in the century before the destiiic-
tion of the Temple by a devout Jew who wished to supply the prayer
of Manasseh described in 2 Chronicles 33. Note this comparison:
2 Chronicles 33 Prayer of Manasseh
I provoked
[Manasseh]. . . provoking
his (Yahweh's] anger your fury (or anger)
[Mana.sseh]. . . placed I set up
. . . the i d o l . . . in idols
the Temple
Manasseh with hooks I am ensnared
. . . in I am bent by a multitude
chains... of iron chains
humbling himself I am bending
deeply the knees of my
I before heart before you
the God of his ancestors God of our fathers.
Framework
Framework is a type of exegesis in which the Tanach provides the
setting for a work that has a different purpose. A story in the Tanach
provides the basis, or framework, for a considerably different narra-
tive. The best examples of the type of exegesis called 'Framework' are
found in the Fourth Book of Ezra, 2 Baruch, and in die Testaments
32 The Pseudepigrapha and Early Biblical Interpretation
The author has used the framework of the story of the destruction of
Jerusalem, Zion, by the Babylonians in the sixth century BCE to tell
the story of the devastation wrought by the Romans in the first cen-
tury CE. The audior of this passage knew well die traditions related to
and based exegetically in 2 Kings 25, according to which Nebuchad-
nezzar, king of Babylon, attacked and conquered Jerusalem.
The same source, combined widi Jeremiah traditions, produced the
apocalypse called 2 Baruch. Note in particular ch. 6.1-2.
Now it happened on the following day that, behold, an army of the
Chaldeans [= Babylonians] surrounded the city. And in the evening I,
Baruch [= Jeremiah's scribe], left the people, went outside, and set
myself by an oak. And I was grieving over Zion and sighed because of
the captivity which had come upon the people.^*
Scholars often explain the use of 'Babylon* for 'Rome' because of the
need of die Jews to hide their anti-Roman polemic from them. This
attractive suggestion does not exhaust die possibilities or reasons for
such pseudepigraphical writing. In my opinion, an equally important
one is the powerful paradigmatic force of the biblical text and the
ti'aditions related to it. By using an exegesis of 2 Kings and Jeremiah
as the framework for articulating the search for meaning in a new
day, it _was possible to stress diat as once growdi sprang up from the
ruins of 587 so it will be possibleindeed certain in light of the
vision revealed to Baruchfor the new to begin again, thanks to the
fact that God was indeed in control of the destruction of his Temple
and is about to bring in die promised eschaton.
The source for the testamentary literature is the account of Jacob's
last word, or testament, to his sons; and in particular the record of
diat scene described in Genesis 49.
Then Jacob called his sons, and said, 'Gather yourselves together, that I
may tell you what shall befall you in days to come.
Assemble and hear, O sons of Jacob,
and hearken to Israel your father' (Gen. 49.1-2, RSV).
25. There is considerable controversy over the Jewish or Christian origin of the
Testaments of the Twelve Patriarchs. It is clear that at least two testaments, one
attributed to Levi and the other to Naphtali, are Jewish and pre-Christian, since frag-
ments of each were found in medieval manuscripts in the Cairo Geniza and also in
Cave IV at Qumran. It is also clear that these testaments are not identical to the Greek
testaments in the critical text of the Testaments of the Twelve Patriarchs. The crucial
question is now whether a document of twelve testaments was composed by a Jew or
a Christian. Acknowledging that the distinctions between 'Jewish' and 'Christian'
are now blurred, and that the Jewish fragments mentioned above are not identical
with the critical text of the Testaments of the Twelve Patriarchs, M. de Jonge and I
have tended to differ on assessing the origin of the document. He continues (since
1953) to favor the possibility that a Christian conceived the idea of twelve testaments
in the second century. He is certainly correct to stress that with the Greek document
we are faced not with interpolations but with redactions, with extensive deletions as
well as additions, of the Jewish sources; I, however, am more convinced that the
Jewish strata is far more extensive than he thinks and that it is found behind each of
the twelve testaments. My conviction that a Jew composed a document that contained
twelve testaments may now be confirmed, in part at least, by the discovery of a
Testament of Judah among the fragments of the Dead Sea Scrolls. This discovery
was presented to specialists in Cambridge and Uppsala and will be published in the
near future.
The most recent publications on this debate are the following: M. de Jonge,
'The Testaments of the Twelve Patriarchs', in H.F.D. Sparks (ed.). The Apocryphal
Old Testament (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1984), pp. 505-12; H.C. Kee,
'Testaments of the Twelve Pauiarchs', in OTP, I, pp. 775-80; J.H. Charlesworth,
The Old Testament Pseudepigrapha and the New Testament: Prolegomena for the
Study of Christian Origins (SNTS, 54; Cambridge: Cambridge University Press,
1985); M. de Jonge, Jewish Eschatology, Early Christian Christology and the
Testaments of the Twelve Patriarchs (NovTSup, 63; Leiden: Brill, 1991).
34 The Pseudepigrapha and Early Biblical Interpretation
apocalyptic sections filled out the brief statement by Jacob 'diat I may
tell you what shall befall you in days to come' (Gen. 49.1).
Both the old framework and the new content is pellucidly repre-
sented in the Testament of Levi; note die following excerpts:
A copy of the words of Levi: the things that he decreed to his sons con-
cerning all they were to do, and the things that would happen to them until
the day of judgment. He was in good health when he summoned them to
him, but it had been revealed to him that he was about to die. When they
all were gathered together he said to them: (1.1-2)... 'At this moment the
angel opened for me the gates of heaven and I saw the Holy Most High
sitting on the throne. And he said to me, "Levi, to you I have given the
blessing of the priesthood until I shall come and dwell in the midst of
Israel- (5.1-2).^*
The Testaments of the Twelve Patriarchs thus evolves out of the Old
Testament narrative, especially Genesis 47 through 50, and in that
sense belongs widiin die broad study of exegesis widiin Early Judaism.
The Testament of Job, which was written in the century before the
destrucdon of Jerusalem, also evolves out of an exegesis of Jacob's
testament. As R.P. Spitder perceives, die Old Testament provided for
the composition of the Testament of Job the following framework
features:
the blessing from father to sons (Gen. 47.29-50.14):
an ill father (Gen. 48.1),
who is near death (Gen. 47.29),
and on his death bed (Gen. 47.31).
calls his sons (Gen. 49.1),
disposes of his possessions (Gen. 48.22),
and issues a forecast of future events (Gen. 49.1).
The father dies (Gen. 49.33),
and a lamentation completes the framework
of the .story (Gen. 50.2-14)."
This framework provides the basis for the genre, loosely defined, diat
unites the Jewish testaments, namely the Testaments of the Twelve
Patriarchs, the Testament of Job, and to a lesser extent die Testament
of Abraham and the Testament of Moses (cf. also I En. 91.1-19, Tob.
14.3-11, Acts 20.17-38, I Tim. 4.1-16 and Jn 17.1-26). Here is die
opening to die Testament of Job (which is extant in Greek):
Now on the day when, having fallen ill, he [Job] began to settle his
affairs, he called his seven sons and his three daughters [cf. Job 1.2]...
And when he had called his children he said, 'Gather round, my children.
Gather round me so that I may show you the things which the Lord did
with me and all the things which have happened to me' (1.2-4).^
As can be surmised from the last clause, 'that I may show you the
things which the Lord did with me and all the things which have
happened to me', this testament is basically a recital of Job's life. It,
therefore, contrasts with the Testament of Levi, and constantly returns,
after expansive narratives, to the biblical framework and book of Job.
In essence, the Testament of Job is an imaginative exegesis and
legendary expansion of the biblical book. For example. Job's wife has
a speech of only two lines in the Hebrew text, which is expanded in
the Septuagint to a full paragraph; in the Testament of Job she is
namedSitisand shares a rather lengthy dialogue with Job. As I
stated long ago, the Testament of Job is a type of midrash in the form
of a testament on the canonical book.^' It is an example of the early
phases of what will later be called midrashim.
The Testament of Abraham (extant only in Greek) continues in the
direction taken by the author of the Testament of Levi and away from
that followed by the author of the Testament of Job. It does not
expand on the life of Abraham; it describes how Abraham refuses to
die. Michael is sent by God to help Abraham prepare for death and to
write a testament; eventually Michael is to collect his soul. Abraham,
however, refuses to die and forces Michael to take him on a celestial
journey (somewhat reminiscent of the journeys of Enoch). In contrast
to the Testament of Job, as E.P. Sanders states, virtually nothing from
die Old Testament is found in the Testament of Abraham, other than
the obvious and relatively insignificant references which can be traced
back to Genesis.'" Surprisingly, in light of the vast iconographical and
documentary evidence, there is no clear reference to Abraham's
attempt to sacrifice Isaac. With the authors of many apocalypses and
apocalyptic writings the author of the Testament of Abraham is inter-
ested in the cosmic dimensions of Jewish theology.^'
Launching
Launching is a type of Jewish exegesis by which a passage or story in
die Tanach is used to produce, or launch, another different story. The
best examples of using a passage in the Old Testament for launching
forth into a new setting are die Books of Enoch. The books gadiered
together now into what is called / Enoch and 2 Enoch are based upon
two verses in Genesis 5:
Thus all the days of Enoch were three hundred and sixty-five years.
Enoch walked with God; and he was not, for God took him (Gen. 5.23-
24, RSV. See also Sir. 44.16).
From these brief comments the early Jews developed exegetically the
ideas that Enoch must be somehow associated with die solar calendar
of 365 days, that he was perfecdy righteous, and that he did not die,
but is with G o d . ' ' Since Enoch then tends to transcend time and
placehis place is either unknown or hidden (cf. 1 En. 12.1-2)he is
the perfect candidate for ascending through the heavens and viewing
the world below, its history, and the future ages.
According to I Enoch (extant in its full form only in Ethiopic,
although early Aramaic Qumran fragments have been found) he
receives from the angels a vision and says, 'I heard from them every-
thing and I understood. I look not for this generation but for the dis-
tant one that is coming (1.2)'.''' Enoch falls asleep and has a dream
and visions, according to I En. 13.8. According to 2 Enoch (extant
only in Slavonic) he is awakened from his sleep and guided by 'two
huge men' (2 En. 1.4). Subsequently in both works Enoch journeys
dirough the heavens.
Another passage in the Old Testament has significandy influenced
the diought of the authors of / Enoch and 2 Enoch. It is the story of
the fall of the watchers found in Gen. 6.1-4. In 1 Enoch 1-36 this
story is considerably reworked and expanded. In 2 Enoch 18 [J] the
fallen angels are seen being punished in the fifth heaven and others are
in die second heaven, 'imprisoned in great darkness'."
Another passage in Genesiswhich is exceedingly important for
understanding early Jewish exegesis, because of a Qumran scroll,
Philo, Josephus, and Hebrewshas considerably shaped die ending of
2 Enoch, which unfortunately was excised by R.H. Charles. 2 Enoch
71-72 describes die miraculous birdi of Melchizedek; these chapters,
like 11Q Melchizedek, are similar to the early midrashim and to the
'Expansions of the "Old Testament" and Other Legends'. They are an
exegesis with fantastic expansions of Gen. 14.17-24, according to
33. A careful study of the origin of apocalyptic thought and the role of Enoch in
its development is J.C. VanderKam's Enoch and the Growth of an Apocalyptic
Tradition (CBQMS, 16; Washington, DC: Catholic Biblical Association, 1984).
34. E. Isaac, '1 (Ethiopic Apocalypse oO Enoch', in OTP, 1, p. 13.
35. See F.I. Andersen, '2 (Slavonic Apocalypse of) Enoch', in OTP, I, pp. 130-
32.
38 The Pseudepigrapha and Early Biblical Interpretation
Inconsequential
Some pseudepigrapha have only an inconsequential relation to the Old
Testament. They have inherited from the Tanach only the personae,
or other details, in order to create a new story. The link with the
Tanach is clear and seminal; but it is inconsequential in contrast with
die other three types of exegesis found in the Pseudepigrapha.
The Sibylline Oracles are not essentially shaped or created by
biblical exegesis, even diough the third book is influenced by Psalms
2 and 48, Isaiah 11, and the traditions about the pilgrimage of the
gentiles to Jerusalem in the eschaton (cf. Isa. 2.1-4; Mic. 4.1-4; 2fech.
14.16-21). Likewise, books four, five and eleven are only marginally
influenced by the Old Testament. To understand the Third Sibylline
Oracle it is important to understand die exegetical base for some
verses, but it is more important to comprehend developments in non-
Jewish cultures, especially in Greece, Italy and Egypt.
Similarly the Treatise of Shem and Hoe Apocalypse of Adam received
from the Old Testament little more dian the name pseudepigraphically
linked with the document. In fact the astrological interest of the
former and the present gnostic nature of the latter expose the vast
differences between these two pseudepigrapha and die Old Testament,
even if the Old Testament is a library of widely differing documents.
Also related to the Tanach in only a relatively inconsequential way
are the documents that belong under the category of 'Wisdom and
Philosophical Literature'. The Wisdom books in die Tanach are Jewish,
but they are profoundly shaped by humanity's common treasury of
universal wisdom and morality. Developing later out of diis Wisdom
traditionbut certainly not an exegesis of itare 3 Maccabees,
4 Maccabees, Pseudo-Phocylides and Syriac Menander.
Expansions
The most important category of the Pseudepigrapha for our present
purposes is the expansion of the biblical narrative. Here the biblical
story has been told and retold until it is discussed and questions arise.
C H A R L E S W O R T H In the Crucible 39
What was life like in Paradise before Eve and Adam disobeyed God?
What were their reactions to the first experience of death and sick-
ness? What was the name of Jepthah's daughter, and what was her
reaction to her father's vow? What was Asenedi, Joseph's wife, like,
and how was it possible for him to marry an Egyptian who wor-
shipped idols? Who were Jannes and Jambres, and Eldad and Modad?
The answers given to these questions and the lore that developed from
retelling the biblical stories produced the expansions of them found in
the Life of Adam and Eve, Pseudo-Philo, Joseph and Aseneth, Jannes
and Jambres and Eldad and Modad.
Exegesis by expansion is stunning evidence that the Pseudepigrapha
were often produced within the crucible of biblical interpretation. The
biblical stories were memorized; they were taken seriously, as bruta
facta, as revealed truths; but to speak to the curiosities and needs of a
later time die stories needed to be retold and completed widi details.
All die evidence seems to suggest diat what we call additional facts and
details were considered by the early Jews who revered these Pseude-
pigrapha to be part of the true story. Now they were revealed to serve
the curiosities and needs of later generations.
The following are the Pseudepigrapha that are 'Expansions of die
Old Testament' in one column and the portion of the Tanach that is
expanded in die second column:
Jubilees Genesis 1.1-Exodus 12.50
Martyrdom of Isaiah 1, 2 Kings
Joseph and Aseneth Genesis 37-50
Life of Adam and Eve Genesis 1 - 6
Pseudo-Philo Genesis to 2 Samuel
Lives of the Prophets Kings, Clironicles, Prophets
Ladder of Jacob Genesis 28
4 Baruch Jeremiah, 2 Kings
2 Chronicles, Ezra, Nehemiah
Jannes and Jambres Exodus 7-8
History of the Rechabites Jeremiah 35
Eldad and Modad Numbers 11.26-29
Like die Dead Sea Scrolls and die documents collected into die New
Testament, the Pseudepigrapha tend to treat the Tanach in ways that
are shockingly cavalier to modern biblical critics. It seems obvious that
die text was considered divine, but the spirit for interpretation allowed
the Jewish exegete to alter, ignore, expand, and even rewrite the
sacred Scripture. Pneumatic exegesis was a phenomenon which at once
40 The Pseudepigrapha and Early Biblical Interpretation
was shaped by and in turn shaped the received text and accompanying
tradition. The study of the use of the Tanach in the Pseudepigrapha
accentuates a major insight brilliantly expressed by Edward
Schillebeeckx: scholars too often forget that in Early Judaism the
Tanach 'was not functioning per se or in isolation but in the context of
late Jewish piety as diat had since been developing. One cannot with
impunity skip over die time that had elapsed between the great
prophets and Jesus.''*
Essential Perspectives
To grasp the ways the Pseudepigrapha were fashioned by biblical
interpretation five perspectives are essential. First, we must leave
behind the once dominant conceptions of pre-70 Judaism. It was not
categorized by a clear separation of Palestinian Judaism from Diasporic
Judaism, by a monolidiic closed and 'normative Judaism', by the
continuing purity of an indigenous well-defined Judaism, or by some
identifiable and wide spread orthodoxy. Once these modern mydis are
removed, it is possible to see diat the Pseudepigrapha are the products
of many divergent groups within Early Judaism. Some, like I Enoch,
Jubilees smA the Testaments of the Twelve Patriarchs, move us close to
the various types of Essenes. The Psalms of Solomon, 4 Ezra and
2 Baruch show us some movements in die direction of Pharisaism and
early rabbinic thought. 4 Baruch and Pseudo-Eupolemus show us
affinities with the Samaritans. The Testament of Moses and Psalms of
Solomon 17 and 18 reveal what might be polemics against the earliest
phases of the Zealots. But most importandy, the Pseudepigrapha warn
us not to think about Judaism as divided into four sects. There were
more than a dozen groups and many more subgroups.
Secondly, the tendency of the audiors of the Pseudepigrapha was not
to replace but to heighten Torah. This well known phenomenon,
dianks to die recovery of die Temple Scroll, is most clearly evident in
Jubilees, sometimes called the 'Littie Genesis'. The audior of 2 Baruch
especially elevated the Torah. Recall Klijn's translation of 2 Baruch
77.15-16, which reads as follows:
Shepherds and lamps and fountains came from the Law, and when we go
away, the Law will abide. If you, therefore, look upon the Law and are
intent upon wisdom, then the lamp will not be wanting and the shepherd
will not give way and the fountain will not dry up (OTP, 1, p. 647).
Along with the same trend came the elevation of biblical heroes.
Some, like Jacob, were accorded angelic and divine status, as Mardn
Hengel in Germany,'^ James D.G. Dunn,'* Christopher R o w l a n d "
and D.S. Russell*" in England, and G. Nickelsburg,"' odiers, and I
myself^ in the USA have attempted to illustrate. The interpretation of
die status of the biblical saints, which is exegesis of Scripture, was the
crucible in which the Pseudepigrapha were fashioned. These so-called
extra-canonical writings shine light on the importance of Tanach, or
the canonical Scriptures.
Thirdly, early Jewish lore deposited in the Pseudepigrapha reveal
how much Palestinian Jews cherished die biblical tales. One diat must
have been popular, judging from the Apocalypse of Abraham, was the
altercation between Terah, the idol maker, and his son, Abraham, to
whom the Jews allocated die belief in one and only one God. Many
works in the Pseudepigraphaespecially the Apocalypse of Abraham,
the Testament of Job, the Lives of the Prophets and Pseudo-Philo
attest to folk tales developing around the Tanach. They show how
Torah permeated the far reaching corners of Early Judaism and
helped produce die Pseudepigrapha.
Fourthly, we have learned to see how sociologically conditioned are
the documents in the Pseudepigrapha, reflecting consecutively the
crises of the Maccabean era, and the growing stranglehold on Palestine
by the Romans, beginning with Pompey's entrance into the Temple in
63 BCE and culminating with the destruction of the Temple in 70 CE.
Now, we need to perceive the exegetical dimensions that have also
Conclusion
A change has occurred in the study of pre-70 Palestinian Judaism. In
the last twenty years the Pseudepigrapha have come into their own.
Now diese writings are accorded some respect, and it is generally and
internationally recognized that the history of pre-70 Judaism must
depend upon diem in describing the fluid and vibrant culture known as
Early Judaism.
If we desire to understand the origins and sociological functions of
the Pseudepigrapha, we must now recognize that diey were fashioned
in the crucible of biblical interpretation. They point to the importance
of Torah in the daily life of the religious Jew, especially in Palestine
before the destruction of die nation in 70. As die late Samuel Sandmel
stated in a very popular article on die Pseudepigrapha,
Without a Genesis, there could never have been a 'Jubilees'. Indeed, had
there not already been a Bible, there could have been no Pseudepigrapha
for, in one way or another, these books all derive from the Bible."'*
44. S. Sandmel, 'The Books That Were Left Out', Keeping Posted (February,
1973), pp. 19-23 (23).
APPROPRIATING THE HISTORY OF G O D ' S PEOPLE:
A SURVEY OF INTERPRETATIONS OF THE HISTORY OF ISRAEL
IN THE PSEUDEPIGRAPHA, APOCRYPHA A N D THE
N E W TESTAMENT
Claims made by post-exilic Jews and by early Christians that they were
the true heirs of the covenant promises to Abraham, Moses, David and
the prophets required them to develop a framework for interpreting
and appropriating that central strand in the biblical tradition.
Inevitably, the dominant conceptual framework of the dme and culture
of each specific segment of the religious communities had a deter-
minative effect on how this tradition was perceived and appropriated.'
Comparative analysis of these interpretative phenomena requires
more than merely noting which historical figures or events were
highlighted by the different groups in this process of appropriadon of
die tradition. By looking at die larger context and the specifics of the
world-view of each document under analysis, the interpreter must ask
what are die dominant features implicit and explicit widiin die wridng
concerning such basic features as the view of reality, the nature of
knowledge, the mode of interpretation of Scripture, and the idendty
of the social group making the claims to be heirs of this tradition. In
abstract terms, the modern interpreter must consider ontological,
epistemological, hermeneudcal, cultural and sociological factors in
analyzing the relevant texts.
That treatment of the early history of die covenant people was an
important ingredient in very different documents within the biblical
tradition is not surprising, since basic to the claim of participation in
die people of God was the affirmation diat God called and guided the
1. The methodological principles on which this essay is based are set out in my
book. Knowing the Truth: A Sociological Approach to New Testament Interpretation
(Minneapolis: Augsburg-Fortress, 1989).
K E E Appropriating the History of God's People 45
patriarchs from the period of dieir earlier nomadic existence and their
experience of slavery in Egypt undl their settlement in the land of
Canaan. It was in that land that the formerly mobile, portable pre-
sence of God in die covenant box was given a fixed location, although
the tradition is in disagreement as to whedier die holy place should be
Bethel, Shechem or Jerusalem. Central in all diese corporate, histori-
cal experiences are the leaders called and empowered by God, since
through them die purpose of God is disclosed and effected in behalf of
God's people. As scholars have long noted, in ancient Israel the
equivalent of die creeds is the recital of what God has done to call and
constitute his covenant people, as in Deut. 26.1-11. In Deuteronomy,
following that confession, is an ostensibly predictive description of die
establishment of the central sanctuary at Shechem (Deut. 27) and of
the monarchy, its failure and the exile (Deut. 28), followed by the
restoration of the people in the land (Deut. 30). Obviously, there is
almost universal scholarly agreement that the closing chapters of
Deuteronomy were written centuries after Israel had in fact settled in
die land. Clearly essential to die maintenance of the covenant relation-
ship and of the special place of the people in the purpose of God is
dieir obedience to the commandments (Deut. 30.19-20):
I call heaven and earth to witness against you this day, that I have set
before you life and death, blessing and curse; therefore choose life, that
you and your descendants may live, loving the LX>RD your God, obeying
his voice, and cleaving to him; for that means life to you, and length of
days, that you may dwell in the land which the LORD swore to your
fathers, to Abraham, Isaac, and to Jacob, to give them.
That Israel was to identify with its history, with covenant promises
and responsibilities, is obvious. The process and the differences in
appropriation of diat historical tradition are also obvious when it com-
pares documents produced before, during and shortly after the exile:
Deuteronomy, the books of Samuel and Kings; die books of Chronicles.
But, given the more radically changed and changing circumstances of
the post-exilic period, how was the community to understand and
appropriate its history and perceive its future? Far more than a
conceptual, theological issue was involved in Deuteronomy: the
promises were made to die twelve tribes, but apparendy after the exile
Judah alone remained as an identifiable entity. Initially, following the
return from the exile, die sanctuary was operated under what seem to
have been the generous policies of the Persian government, but by the
46 The Pseudepigrapha and Early Biblical Interpretation
purpose (43.13-16). God bestows this wisdom tois eusebesin (on those
who are pious). Sirach, having made the case for the basic congruity
of immanent divine order and purpose with the law of the covenant,
proceeds to 'sing the praises of famous men* (44.1-50.21), most of
them described in Scripture, who were both wise and righteous in
their obedience to God*s commandments.
'Everlasting covenants* were made by God with Noah, who is des-
cribed as dikaios and teleios (44.17-18). Abraham 'kept the law of the
Most High, and entered into a covenant with him' (44.20). Likewise,
Isaac and Jacob shared in the covenant (44.22). Moses' crucial role
was to receive from God 'the commandments, the law of life and
knowledge, so that he might teach Jacob the covenant* (44.1-5).
Clearly this role of Moses is described with conscious or unconscious
references to a correlation between the all-permeating law of nature
and the revealed law of the covenant with Israel. The interrelation
between law and covenant is evident in the descriptions of the roles of
Aaron and Phineas (45.6-22), in diat the establishment of the covenant
gave them both priestly and educational duties. Thus Aaron was
granted 'authority and statutes and judgments to teach Jacob die testi-
monies, and to enlighten Israel with [God*s] law* (45.17), while
Phinehas, widi whom God established 'a covenant of friendship*, will
through his descendants 'have the dignity of the priesthood-forever*
(45.23-24). God*s control of the forces of nature is dramatically
evident in two incidents in die time of Joshua: the sun standing still,
and the hailstones that strike down the enemy of Israel (46.4-5). Yet
the role of Joshua and Caleb in fostering obedience and piety is shown
whenone reads that they actively 'restrained the people from sin and
stilled their wicked grumbling* (46.7). David is instrumental in estab-
lishing order in the life of God's people, not only in a military and
political sense, by defeating dieir enemies (47.4-7), but by instituting
the proper worship of God through singers and their psalms of praise,
and in establishing the annual cycle of festivals (47.8-10). God
honored David for these modes of ordering the life and worship of
Israel, in that he 'gave him a covenant of kingship and a glorious
throne in Israel' (47.11). Although Solomon's sexual promiscuity
brought subsequent judgment on Israel and the dividing of the
kingdom, he did reign 'in an age of peace' and built a house for God,
'a sanctuary to stand forever' (47.13). His wisdom was embodied in
the songs, proverbs and parables, which 'astounded the nations' and
K E E Appropriating the History of God's People 49
Isaiah's prophetic spirit enabled him to see 'what was to occur to the
end of time, and the hidden things before they happened' (48.23-25).
The prophet is attuned to the divine purpose and power that are
invisibly but inexorably at work to fulfil the covenant promises.
Similarly, Josiah reformed the people by keeping 'his heart fixed on
the Lord', widi the result that 'in lawless times' (en hemerais anomon)
he made eusebeia prevail (49.2-3). Conversely, die ruin of Judah and
of the sanctuary in Jerusalem were die consequence of die abandon-
ment by the kings of 'the law of the Most High' (49.4-7). Moving
beyond the events reported in the scriptural narratives, Sirach offers
extended praise of Simon, son of Onias, who as king and priest
restored the temple, provided a water supply for die city, and led the
priests and die people in dignified, orderly worship of God (50.1-21).
Following this review of the history of God's people, Sirach des-
cribes what he has done in terms that derive from the traditions of
popular Greek philosophy: he has written down instruction, or training
(paideia) in understanding (sunesis) and knowledge (episteme). Those
who 'lay them to heart will become wise*, and those who 'put them
into practice* will be ready for anything that life may bring (50.27-
29). In the concluding autobiographical poem, Sirach describes how
he sought and gained wisdom through much disciplined instruction
(pollen paideian). He appeals to those who are untrained (apaideutoi)
50 The Pseudepigrapha and Early Biblical Interpretation
18), the author asserts that these experiences toolc place as disciplinary
learning for Israel (12.19-23). The error of the neighboring nations
which refused to recognize the God of Israel was that in their idolatry
they worshipped the created things rather than the Creator (12.27;
13.1-3). What they failed to recognize is the cosmological argument
for the existence of God: 'From the greatness and beauty of created
things comes a corresponding (analogos) perception of their Creator
(genesiourgosY (13.5). The folly of idolatry is spelled out in 1 3 . 1 -
15.17. Examples of the consequences of idolatry are recalledwith-
out specifying the culpritsin relation to Israel's worshipping the
brass serpent in the wilderness (15.18-16.14) and the Egyptians'
punishment in the form of the plagues (16.15-19). Conversely, God
supplied his people with bread from heaven.
For creation, serving you who made it, exerts itself to punish the
unrighteous,
and is kind through good actions on behalf of those who Uiist in you.
For the author of die Wisdom of Solomon, the point in retelling these
stories of die history of Israel is not a romantic recalling of the past
nor is it historic legitimation for the legal and cultic institutions of
Israel. Instead, these depersonalized accounts serve as concrete illus-
trations of the Creator's ordering of die universe for the welfare of
diose who conform to die divinely established cosmic laws and for die
punishment of those who do not.
(3.13). It is he who has raised up from the dead the one whose
sufferings 'God foretold by the mouth of all the prophets' (3.18).
Repentance on the part of those who rejected him is essential in order
that God can inaugurate the new epoch that is in store for his people:
'So that times of refreshing may come from the presence of the Lord'
(3.19). Meanwhile, 'heaven must receive' Jesus 'until the time for
establishing all that God spoke by the mouth of all his holy prophets
from old' (3.21). Both the coming of diis ultimate prophet and the
dire consequences of failure to heed him and his message were fore-
told in die Scriptures (Deut. 18.15-16, 19; Lev. 23.29). Response to
him is the ultimate criterion for identity of God's people. Peter tells
his hearers diat they stand in the tradition of die prophets and especi-
ally of God's covenant with Abraham ('You are the sons of the
prophets and of die covenant which God gave to your fadiers'), but
die potential participants in the benefits of diis covenant are the entire
human race, since God said 'to Abraham, "In your posterity shall all
die families of die earth be blessed'" (3.25; Gen. 22.18). The genetic
descendants of Abraham are diose to whom God has sent his messen-
ger 'first' (3.26). In short, Jesus is die criterion by which participation
in the eschatological purpose of God is decided. The community of
faith consists of all dioseJews or Gentileswho see in die crucified
and risen Jesus the agent of God for renewal of his people and of the
creation. What impact does this conviction have on the interpretation
of die history of Israel?
The first and most detailed address on this theme is the speech of
Stephen (Acts 7.1-51). Abraham was shown die land of promise by
God, but was never able to possess 'even a foot's length' of it (7.5).
His offspring through Isaac, Jacob and the twelve patriarchs were ill-
treated by die Egyptians for 400 years (Gen. 15.13-14; Exod. 12.40).
Yet die fulfilment of die covenantal promise to Abraham was affirmed
in spite of the seeming delays, and Abraham's response to the covenant
was given concrete expression in the distinctive sign, circumcision
(Acts 7.8). The future orientation of the covenant is expressed in 7.17,
where Stephen remarks that 'as die time of promise drew near, which
God had granted to Abraham, the people grew and multiplied' until
the Egyptians began the oppression of the Israelites that led to their
deliverance by God in die events of the exodus. Even as these divine
actions were being readied, die covenant people 'did not understand...
that God was giving them deliverance by his hand' (7.25). The
K E E Appropriating the History of God's People 59
Scriptures and brought about what God had promised to the fathers
(13.23-32). The message that Paul brings to them he identifies as 'what
God promised to the fathers', and then proceeds to declare it to have
been fulfilled by the resurrection of Jesus (Ps. 2.7; Isa. 55.3; Ps. 16.10).
These promises were not fulfilled by David, who died and whose body
decayed. Rather, forgiveness of sins is available for all who trust in
Jesus, as is freedom, which the law of Moses cannot provide (7.36-
39). Even the hostile response of some of his hearers is in fulfilment
of Scripture, Paul declares, quoting Hab. 1.5 and then Isa. 49.6 to
justify the extension of the invitation to Gentiles to share in the light
of the knowledge of God's purpose through Jesus (7.47). In the pur-
pose of God, Jews were to be the first to hear this message, but now
they reject it and judge themselves 'unworthy of eternal life'. It is
those who 'were ordained to eternal life' who believe the message
(7.48), just as it is the Lord's command that Paul and his associates
now 'turn to die Gentiles'.
What Acts reports Paul as saying here is not a rejection of the
Scriptures or of the covenantal tradition that is embodied in it, but
stands rather in the later prophetic tradition of Israel, with its empha-
sis on eschatological expectation of fulfilment of the divine promises
to Israel. Paul here declares diat diose who claim to be the people of
God have failed to comprehend the full range of what God promised
to their ancestors and what he has now done through Jesus in fulfil-
ment of diose promises. The extension to die Gentiles of the invitation
to share in God's people is not a radical innovation but is instead the
culmination of what God announced beforehand through die prophets.
The problem is with the failure of diose who see themselves as heirs
of the covenant to heed and accept what God has told them. Paul's
message assumes the unity and continuity of God's purpose as
disclosed through the Scriptures throughout die history of Israel.
rewards diose who seek him' across die boundaries that separate the
transitory world from die realm of eternity (11.5-6). Similarly, Noah
trusted what God told him about the future, even though diere there
was no human basis for such an expectation. His action in building the
ark was a negative judgment on this ephemeral, material world and an
act of faith through which he participated in the transcendent reality
(11.7). Abraham left his native land and went to live a humanly
uncertain but divinely assured way of life in 'the land of promise',
where his descendants, Isaac and Jacob, also resided. Their confidence
was not in what they possessed, but in what God had said. Abraham
did not seek to establish a human society or governmental system, but
looked to God to built his polls (11.8-10). Similarly, Sarah had no
human basis for expecting offspring, but by trust in the divine pro-
mise there came from her one whose progeny are innumerable (11.12).
Moses refused to accept the humanly-proffered position of power as
Pharaoh's son, preferring 'to share ill-treatment with the people of
God' and to embark on die journey of faidi. He was enabled to do so
because he 'endured as seeing him who is invisible' (11.23-27).
It was this sort of faidi diat enabled the Israelites to cross die Red
Sea, to capture the walled city of Jericho and to accomplish all the
other marvels that are summarized in 11.32-38. In each case they
were able to see beyond die immediate situation and die merely human
resources. The author summarizes, 'These, though well attested by
dieir faidi, did not receive what was promised, since God had foreseen
something better for us' (11.39). That 'something' was Jesus, who is
described as the prototype or primary model (archegos) and the one
who completes and accomplishes God's purpose, the (teleidtes) 'of our
faith'. He persevered through suffering and death, and has already
attained the place of highest honor 'at the right hand of the throne of
God' (12.1-2). By faith, God's new people need no longer merely
look forward in hope to the fulfilment of God's purpose. They have
already 'come to Mount Zion and to the city of die living God, the
heavenly (epoMran/os) Jerusalem...to the assembly of the first-born
who are enrolled in heaven, and to a judge who is God of all, to the
spirits of the righteous who are now made complete (teleios), and to
Jesus, the mediator of the new covenant...' (12.22-24). Proleptically,
die new community of faith has access to and in the present age is
already living widiin the context of eternal reality. The experiences of
men and women of faith in the days of ancient Israel anticipated diat
K E E Appropriating the History of God's People 63
6. Conclusion
Although the five writers reviewed in this essay drew upon the same
basic biblical materialdie stories of die patriarchs and die exodus, of
die conquest of Canaan and the establishment of die monarchydiey
each interpret the stories in ways they serve their own distinctive ends
in their own specific time and cultural circumstances. In each case
there are overarching assumptions about God and the creation, about
human knowledge, about divine purpose for the creation, and for
God's people. In each case cultural and social conditions of the
writer's time influence directly and pervasively the ways in which the
biblical material is understood and its meaning inferred.
At the height of the epoch when Hellenistic culture was having
maximum and widespread influence on Jewish thinking, the assump-
tions of Sirach about reality and the work of God in die world were
powerfully shaped by the dominant philosophy of that time: Stoicism.
Immanent law is seen as the divine force at work within the created
order, and its oral dimensions are evident in die Mosaic law, to which
God's people are called to obedience. When the system of Platonic
ontology becomes a significant cultural force in the Roman period, the
nature of creation and die sense of the divine movement within history
as exemplified by the history of Israel are perceived as temporal
manifestations in human experience of ultimate reality which remains
hidden from ordinary view in the eternal sphere. This way of diinking
is apparent in the interpretation of Israel's history in the Jewish
Wisdom of Solomon and die Christian Letter to the Hebrews.
The theme of eschatological fulfilment of the prophetic promises of
64 The Pseudepigrapha and Early Biblical Interpretation
God shapes the thought of the sermons in Acts. The future of God's
people has been foreseen by the prophets, and God is asserted to be at
work through Jesus effecting the fulfilment of that plan for the
renewal and vindication of his people. What God has purposed was
announced through the prophets, but its implications involve alt
human beings who see in Jesus the agent of God to bring that purpose
to fhiition. Stephen emphasizes the judgmental aspects of this point of
view, on condemning the insensitivity and unbelief of historic Israel,
while Paul underscores the inclusive potential of the message about
what God has begun to do through Jesus.
Reaction to aggressive pagan culture and to the determined efforts
of Hellenistic rulers to conform Jewish life and diought to die Greco-
Roman patterns is the potent force that contributed to the rise of
apocalyptic, as is evident in such writings as Daniel and I Enoch.
God's will for and through his people can triumph only beyond cata-
clysmic judgment which will bring to an end the present dominant
socio-cultural order. With the end of that structure and the political
power that seeks to impose it on God's people, the faithful elect com-
munity will be vindicated. To them alone has God granted insights
into his past and present activity in behalf of his own people.
Gordon Zerbe
1. See esp. J.J. Collins, The Apocalyptic Vision of the Book of Daniel (HSM,
16; Missoula. MT: Scholars Press, 1977), pp. 191-222; A. Yarbro Collins, 'The
Political Perspective of the Revelation to John', JBL 96 (1977), pp. 241-56;
F.J. Murphy, '2 Baruch and the Romans', JBL 104 (1985), pp. 663-69.
66 The Pseudepigrapha and Early Biblical Interpretation
Among the faithful who stand firm and take action' (11.34), these
maskilim are described as 'giving understanding to many' (11.33),
'leading many to righteousness' (12.3), and 'falling by sword and
flame, by captivity and plunder' (11.33).* Through the publication of
the book of Daniel, the maskilim exhort their fellow Jews to remain
steadfast to the covenant in the face of persecution, especially by
helping them understand their situation in broad apocalyptic perspec-
tive. The readers are assured of the imminent and final victory of God
and his heavenly army over the forces of evil.
The interpretation that Daniel also promotes the stance of passive
resistance in direct opposition to the armed resistance of the
Maccabees is based variously on the following lines of evidence. First,
some who take this view argue that the reference to 'little help' that
the persecuted faithful receive in 11.34 represents an ironic and dis-
paraging comment regarding the Maccabees.'' Secondly, the supposed
derivation of Daniel from the circles of the Hasidim, interpreted as a
peace-minded group during the Hellenistic crisis, is used to support
die pacifisdc interpretadon.* Thirdly, 11.14 is seen as a disparagement
of violent mediods: 'sons of violence {b'ne parisim) among your own
people shall rise u p to establish a vision {I'ha '"mid hazon); but they
Hasidim with the refugees in the caves who were slaughtered on the
Sabbath because of their refusal to fight (1 Mace. 2.29-41) cannot
contribute to a pacifistic profile of the Hasidim. This identification has
no textual basis;^" and the refusal of the refugees to fight was based on
their Sabbath convictions, a feature of their zeal for the Law.^' As
Tcherikover puts it, 'The very fact that the soldiers saw fit to attack
them on the seventh proves convincingly that on any other day they
could have expected stiu-dy resistance'."
The reference in 11.14 to 'sons of violence' who rise up alludes to
aid that certain Jews gave Antiochus during the uprisings against the
Egyptians during the reign of Ptolemy V, which culminated in the
defeat of the Egyptians by the Seleucids at Paneas around 200 BCE
(11.15-16).^' Little is known of this Jewish uprising. It was probably
led by a pro-Seleucid and Hellenizing faction which had hopes of
completely throwing off the foreign yoke and thus of fulfilling the
prophetic predictions ('to estabHsh a vision', 11.14).^" The author
identifies this group as 'son of violence', either as a disparagement of
the character of this group as opportunists and Hellenizers or because
of their violent rebellious activity. While this text may reflect an
opposition to armed resistance as a matter of principle and faith, it
remains somewhat obscure.
The primary evidence for the pacifistic interpretation, as hi. Collins
and A. Yarbro Collins concede,^' rests in the depiction of the final
drama and the role of the elect in it. On the positive side, the presenta-
tion of Daniel is indeed striking when it is contrasted with the military,
synergistic ideology of other groups and writings, particularly those
that are apocalyptic in character. Accounts or depictions of the
Hellenistic crisis that exhibit a synergistic ideology, in which human
military action works in concert with the divine and heavenly action.
sinners and oppression with the sword, is lacking in 4QEn^ and may be a later
expansion; see Black, / Enoch, p. 292. The final victory comes when the faithful are
given a sword for the destruction of sinners and oppressors (91.12). Black (/ Enoch,
pp. 20, 293) supposes that the Apocalypse of Weeks should be dated to before the
rededication of the Temple; J.J. Collins {Apocalyptic Imagination [New York:
Crossroad, 1984], p. 49) dates it before 160. Cf. also / En. 95.3; 96.1; 98.12 for
synergistic holy war motifs. Collins (Apocalyptic, pp. 55-56) notes that the Animal
Apocalypse and the Apocalypse of Weeks affirm a 'militant role for the righteous*.
32. On the two-storey conception of military conflict, see e.g. Isa. 24.21-23;
1 Mace. 7.41-42; 2 Mace. 2.21; 5.1-4; 10.29-31; 15.8-16. See further nn. 26-28.
33. See esp. I Mace. 1.62-63; 2.19-68, esp. 2.50.
Z E R B E 'Pacificism'and'Passive Resistance' 73
34. See e.g. 2 Mace. 6-8. In 1 Maccabees what stays God's wrath (e.g. 1.64)
are Mattathias's 'zeal for the Law' (2.23-26; Nickelsburg, Jewish Literature,
pp. 114-15) and the military action of Judas (3.3-8). For martyrdom among the
'Zealots', see M. Hengel, Die Zeloten (AGJU, 1; Uiden: Brill. 1961), pp. 261-76
('Die Bereitschaft zum Martyrium').
35. Thus Yarbro Collins, 'Political Perspective', p. 244.
36. Contra Collins, Apocalyptic Vision, pp. 208, 213.
37. See esp. 8.4, 12, 24; 11.3. 7, 16. 24, 39. The combination of 'standing
firm' (hzjq) and 'taking action' to refer to military activity is apparent in 11.5, 6, 7;
with different terms for 'standing', cf. 8.4. 12; 11.16. God's deliverance is denoted
with the verb 'to take action' in 9.4,19.
38. See esp. I Mace. 2.19-68.
39. The parallels in Pss. 34.8; 84.12; Jer. 17.7-8 are not quite as close to Dan.
12.12 as that of Isa. 30.18.
74 The Pseudepigrapha and Early Biblical Interpretation
close a passage which claims that the strength of the elect is their
repentance, quietness and trust, not their military might (30.15-18). It
is tempting, therefore, to see here a reference to an old Israelite
tradition that favors the passive stance of mist and opposes the reli-
ance on military might on the basis of Yahweh's elusive prerogative
for defense and security.*" Attributing such a meaning to Dan. 12.12,
however, probably reads too much into the text. The verse was prob-
ably added immediately prior to the publication of the book after
calculations for the time of the end were adjusted and is primarily an
encouragement for the faithful to accept some delay in the arrival of
the end.*'
A feature that might provide a more significant indication of a
pacifistic tradition is the use of the image of the suffering servant
from Isaiah 52-53 to express the action and fate of the maskilim.*^
The action of the maskilim in relation to 'the many' parallels that of
the servant in relation to 'the many' (Isa. 53.11, 12). In particular, the
references to the maskilim 'making many understand' (yabtnH larabbim,
11.33) and 'making many righteous' {masdtqe harabbim, 12.3) allude
direcdy to Isa. 53.11: 'by his knowledge my righteous servant will
make many righteous' (b'da'td yasdlq sadiq 'abdi larabbim). The
atoning character of the deadis (Dan. 11.34; 12.10), then, appears to
be based on the model of the suffering servant. Similarly, the exalta-
tion of the servant (Isa. 52.13; 53.10-12) is a model for the maskilim
and martyrs (12.2-3).*' Finally, the usage of the term maskilim is
probably adapted from the first line of the poem: 'See, my servant
will act wisely (yasktl 'abdi, Isa. 52.13). It would seem very likely,
dien, that die servant's pattern of non-retaliation and passive acceptance
of suffering (53.7; cf. 50.4-11) also provided the maskilim a model
for proper action.
40. On this tradition, whicli appears in certain Psalms (20; 30; 44; 118), Hosea
and Isaiah, and which contrasts with the royal ideology, see B.C. OUenburger.
Zon, the City of the Great King: A Theological Symbol of the Jerusalem Cub
(JSOTSup, 41; Sheffield: JSOT Press. 1987), pp. 81 -144.
41. E.g. Lacocque. Dani'e/, p. 250.
42. On Daniel's use of suffering servant text, see esp. H.L. Ginsberg, 'The
Oldest Interpretation of the Suffering Servant', VT3 (1953). pp. 400-404.
43. For another use of this tradition of suffering and exaltation, see Wis. 2.12-
20; 3; 4.20-5.14 (compare esp. Dan. 11.32, 35; 12.3 and Wis. 2.13; 3.6-7) and 1
En. 62-63. See Lacocque. Daniel, p. 230; Nickelsburg, Jewish Literature, pp. 89,
178-79, 219-20.
Z E R B E 'Pacificism'and'PassiveResistance' 75
47. Arguing tiiat the entire document emerged in the first century are Charles.
Assumption of Moses, pp. Iv-lvii; Rowley, Relevance, p. 108; E.-M. Laperrousaz,
Le Testament de Mo'ise (Paris: Librarie d'Amerique et d'Orient, 1970), J.J. Collins,
"The Date and Provenance of the Testament of Moses', in G.W.E. Nickelsburg
(ed.). Studies on the Testament of Moses (SCS, 4; Cambridge, MA: Scholars Press,
1973); E. Brandenburger, 'Himmelfahrt Moses', JSHRZ,\I2, pp. 59-60; J. Priest,
'The Testament of Moses', OTP, I, pp. 920-21. Preferring a second-century date,
but with differing views as to the extent of the redaction, are J. Licht. 'Taxo, or the
Apocalyptic Doctrine of Vengeance', JJS 12 (1961), pp. 95-103; Nickelsburg,
Jewish Literature, p. 80; J. Goldstein, 'The Testament of Moses: Its Content, its
Origin, and its Attestation in Josephus', in Nickelsburg (ed.). Studies on the
Testament of Moses, pp. 44-47; Collins, Apocalyptic Vision, p. 199; A. Yarbro
Collins, "The Composition and Redaction of the Testament of Moses 10', HTR 69
(1976), pp. 179-86.
48. D.J. Harrington, 'Interpreting Israel's History: The Testament of Moses as a
Rewriting of Deut. 31-34', in Nickelsburg (ed.). Studies on the Testament of
Moses, pp. 59-70; Nickelsburg, Jewish Literature, pp. 80-82.
49. Collins, Apocalyptic Imagination, p. 103; cf. idem, 'Date and Provenance',
pp. 23, 26, 30; 'it set the model of pacifistic piety'.
50. Nickelsburg. Jewish Literature, p. 213.
51. D.M. Rhoads, 'The Assumption of Moses and Jewish History: 4 BC-AD
48', in Nickelsburg (ed.). Studies on the Testament of Moses, p. 56. Also taking
this general position are Charles, Assumption, pp. li-lii (it represents 'Pharisaic
Quietism'); S. Zeitlin, 'The Assumption of Moses and the Bar Kockba Revolt', JQR
38 (1947-48), pp. 1-45; Yarbro Collins, 'Political PerspecUve', pp. 244-45.
Z E R B E 'Pacificism'and'PassiveResistance' 77
kings of the earth' who has supreme authority (8.1-5).'^ In the midst
of this p e r s e c u t i o n / ' a Levite named T a x o ' " will come. He speaks to
his sons, nodng first die severity of die persecution and its apparent
injustice (9.2-3). He continues:
(4) Now, therefore, sons, heed me. If you investigate, you will surely
know that never did (our) fathers nor their ancestors tempt God by trans-
gressing his commandments. (5) Yea, you will surely know that this is
our stfength. Here is what we shall do. (6) We shall fast for a three-day
period and on the fourth day we shall go into a cave, which is in the open
country. There let us die rather than transgress the commandments of the
Lord of Lords, the God of our fathers. (7) For if we do this, and do die,
our blood will be avenged before the Lord (9.4-7)."
52. Although in an eariier edition ch. 8 may have referred specifically to the
Antiochian persecution, in its present form it takes the form of a generalized
'eschatological tableau'; so Collins, 'Date and Provenance', pp. 18-22; Laperrousaz,
Testament, pp. 122-24; Brandenburger, 'Himmelfahrt Moses' p. 60. The displace-
ment theories whereby both chs. 8 and 9 (Charles) or ch. 8 alone (Rowley,
Relevance, p. 107) are (re)placed before ch. 6 break the obvious flow of the
eschatological drama.
53. The text has illo dicenle ('while he was speaking'. Priest, OTP), which
would constitute a major aporia between chs. 8 and 9. Brandenburger ('Himmelfahrt
Moses', p. 75) favors the emendation illo ducente ('while he (the king] was ruling')
instead of the emendations illo edicente ('he (the Lord] was decreeing/ordaining') and
illo die erit ('in that day', Charles).
54. Interpretations of the meaning of the name Taxo and of his historical or
eschatological identity are legion and the reference remains obscure. See Charles,
Assumption, pp. 35-36; Rowley, Relevance, pp. 149-56.
55. Citations from Priest in OTP. Similar martyr and cave stories occur in the
Maccabean literature and may provide the basis for the present story: I Mace. 1.53;
2.29-38; 2 Mace. 6.11-7.40; 10.6; Josephus. Ant. 12.6.2 268-78; 14.15.5
420-30. See Charles, Assumption, pp. 33-34. On T. Mos. 9.6-7 cf. esp. I Mace.
2.37;
2 Mace. 7.2, 6, 14, 17, 19, 34-37.
56. T.W. Manson ('Miscellanea Apocalyptica', JTS 46 (1945], p. 43) argues
that since an angelic messenger is usually U^slilerated from angelos as angelus, here
nuntius designates a human messenger (Elijah). At most, this argument can show
that the Latin tfanslator had a human messenger in mind. Most interpreters
78 The Pseudepigrapha and Early Biblical Interpretation
avenge them of their enemies* (10.2). (2) God himself will go forth
from his dirone with wrath on behalf of this people (10.3), effecting
cosmic upheavals (10.4-6), and 'alone*" will work 'vengeance on the
nations* (10.7). (3) Israel will be raised to the heights of heaven and
will enjoy bliss (10.8-10).
The pacifistic interpretation of the T. Mos. is based primarily on the
following three factors: (1) the character of the action by the hero
Taxo (ch. 9); (2) the manner in which the final victory emerges
(ch. 10); and (3) the implied connection between these two.'*
It is difficult to deny the paraenetic intention of the model and
exhortation of the end-time hero Taxo for the readers, particularly in
view of the testamentary form of the exhortation." The exhortation
(9.4-7) implies a passive stance in relation to persecutors. Taxo empha-
sizes that their strength {vires, power, might) is to keep the conunand-
ments, implicitly not to display military prowess (9.4). Accordingly,
Taxo prepares himself and his sons for possible martyrdom, commit-
ting his cause to God. The interpretation diat the course of martyrdom
was deliberately sought,*" however, goes beyond the textual evidence.
with his expectation that such innocent death will arouse G o d ' s
vengeance (9.7). This expectation is based directly on Deut. 32.43:
'for he avenges the blood of his servants, and takes vengeance on his
adversaries'.** The coming of the kingdom is described immediately
following this resolve and expectation, and the reader is apparently to
infer tfiat Taxo and his sons act in accordance with Taxo's exhorta-
tion, and that it is specifically these innocent deaths that trigger the
wrath of God and precipitate the onset of the eschatological age.*' The
repetition of the theme of vengeance in 10.2 and 10.7 indicates that
die expectation of Taxo will be fulfilled specifically.** In die perspec-
tive of the T. Mos., then, it is especially martyrdom that provokes
divine wrath. To suggest, however, that Taxo deliberately seeks
martyrdom and that the T. Mos. promotes martyrdom as the proper
human contribution in the holy war against the enemies of God*'
seems to go beyond die evidence.
In summary, it must be admitted diat there is no outright rejection
of the sword or armed resistance and that accordingly it is impossible
to say that the T. Mos. rejects armed resistance as a matter of
principle. Neverdieless, die ideal of passive resistance is evident in die
resolve of the end-time hero Taxo, who instructs his sons (and the
readers) diat purification, strict observance of the Law and readiness
to die on behalf of the Law are the 'strength' of the righteous. While
the author seems to indicate that it is innocent deadi in particular diat
triggers the eschaton, it is not clear that the author promotes
martyrdom as the primary contribution diat the elect make in die final
battle. The T. Mos. does present the notion, however, based on an
exegesis on Deut. 32.35, that vengeance is God's prerogative and
should be deferred to him.
66. Similarly. 2 Mace. 7.6 cites Deut. 32.36 and shares the expectation of divine
vengeance for martyrdom. Cf. also 1 Mace. 2.37; and the allusion to Deut. 32.43 in
Rev. 19.2.
67. Licht. 'Taxo'. p. 98.
68. So also Nickelsburg, Jewish Literature, p. 82.
69. See e.g. Collins, Apocalyptic Vision, p. 200; idem, 'Traditio-Historical
Problems', p. 42. Rhoads ('Assumption', p. 57) observes that the author exhorts
'obedient death as the way to guarantee vengeance against the enemy'.
ZERBE 'Pacificism'and'Passive Resistance' 81
Second Baruch
The present Syriac version of 2 Baruch probably derives, through a
Greek translation, from a Semitic original written in Palestine at the
end of the first century C E or in the first two decades of the second
century CE. F. Murphy, in his recent dissertation,'' argues that
in general... the intention of the author is to draw the attention of the
people away from the loss of Zion and away from a preoccupation with
the punishment of the desU-oyers of Jerusalem. Through references to the
Mosaic covenant, and by paralleling Baruch with Moses, the author seeks
to recall the people to covenantal obedience. In his use of die two-world
scheme, he manages to relaiivizc the importance of the Temple and land in
Judaism and to reorient the People away from a this-worldly attitude to an
other-worldly one.
Murphy also suggests that the author may have wished to discourage a
growing resistance movement against Rome, so that he represented a
'quietistic' group in opposition to a 'militant* group within the nascent
rabbinic movement.'^ Murphy develops this notion further in an
article'' in which he contends that
the author of 2 Baruch deliberately urged pacifism on his contemporaries.
In so doing, he was careful to assure his readers that those who had des-
U-oyed the Temple and the city of Jerusalem in 70 CE would be punished,
but at the same time he conveyed the idea that punishment was entirely die
business of God. It should play no role in the thought or action of Israel
itself. Instead of concerning itself with revenge or with the judgment of
the destroyers of Zion, the people should turn their attention to the other
world and concern themselves with the salvation of their souls.
70. For diis general scholarly consensus, see A.F.J. Klijn. '2 Baruch', in OTP,
I. pp. 616-17.
71. F.J. Murphy. 77i<> Structure and Meaning of Second Baruch (SBLDS, 78;
Atlanta: Scholars Press, 1985). p. 28.
72. Murphy, Second Baruch, pp. 136-42.
73. Murphy, '2 Baruch and the Romans*, p. 663.
74. For the outline followed here, see Murphy, Second Baruch, pp. 11-13.
82 The Pseudepigrapha and Early Biblical Interpretation
Immediately following this statement, God goes on to say that the end
of all things is near when God will judge sinners and reward the
righteous, and diat the sorrow and evils of the present life, including
die destruction of Zion, are irrelevant in comparison to true happiness
in die new aeon (19.5-20.6).
A second critical passage occurs in Section V (chs. 48-52). Here a
dialogue between God and Baruch focuses on the ultimate fate of the
righteous and the wicked in die coming aeon. The decisive factor, as
throughout 2 Baruch, is the way in which one obeys die Law.'*
Indeed, it is the Law diat will 'repay' die wicked on the day of judgment
(48.47). At die end of the dialogue, there is a transition to the second
75. Citations are from Klijn in OTP. Murphy ('2 Baruch', p. 664) argues that
die introductory 'but I shall say as I think' (12.1) indicates that the author intends the
proclamation of vengeance as Baruch's early and unenlightened attitude.
76. Cf. chs. 82-83. 2 Bar. nowhere states that the enemies will be punished
specifically for the desuiiction of Jerusalem. Indeed 2 Bar. seems to take away the
desuiiction of Jerusalem as a pretext for seeking vengeance against the Romans by
arguing that the destruction was God's own work on account of the sins of Israel.
See Murphy, Second Baruch, p. 137; idem, '2 Baruch', pp. 665-66. It should be
noted, however, that oUier documents that hope explicidy for vengeance against the
oppressors also explain die suffering as being on account of Israel's sins; e.g.
1 Maccabees, 2 Maccabees, Testament of Moses.
77. For the notion diat 19.3 answers 11.3, see Murphy, Second Baruch, p. 15.
78. For references, see Klijn, OTP, I, p. 619.
Z E R B E 'Pacificism'and'Passive Resistance' 83
79. For the motif of preparation, see also 32.1-7; 44.2-8; 46.5-6; 83.7; 85.11.
80. Some interpreters argue diat in the judgment die distinction between Israel
and die Gentiles is somewhat blurred because it involves a separation between the
righteous and the wicked within Israel (chs. 41-42; 51; 54.22); so e.g. Murphy,
Second Baruch, p. 137; idem, '2 Baruch', pp. 666-67 n. II. But in response, it
should be observed that a purification of Israel does not mean a blurring of the
distinctions between true Israel and the Gentiles.
84 The Pseudepigrapha and Early Biblical Interpretation
81. Although the Messiah appears to play a passive role in 29.2-30.1, he appears
expliciUy as warrior and judge in die 3 9 . 7 ^ . 2 and 70.9; 72.2-6. The advent of the
Messiah's dominion will mean the demise of Rome (die fourth world dominion); the
Messiah will destroy the last rulers' entire host and will bring him bound to Zion for
judgment and execution (39.7-40.2). All three passages affirm that at the height of
die Uibulation die inhabitants of die holy land will be protected by the Messiah (29.2;
40.2; 71.1), and that die rule of the Messiah will have a limited duration as the
penultimate stage before the establishment of die new aeon at die end (30.1-5; 40.3;
73.1-74.4).
82. See e.g. P. Bogaert, Apocalypse de Baruch: Introduction, traduction du
Syriaque et commentaire (SC. 144. 145; Paris: Cerf, 1969), I, pp. 413-19;
A.F.J. Klijn, 'The Sources and the Redaction of the Syriac Apocalypse of Baruch',
JSJ 1 (1970), pp. 74-76; Murphy, Second Baruch, pp. 31-116, esp. pp. 66-67.
The following arguments are adduced. (I) The diree passages are inconsistent wiUi
each odier and simply appropriate traditional materials. (2) The duration of the
Messianic era is limited as the penultimate stage before the final consummation and
belongs to the present world of corruption. (3) The passages do not play an
important role in the presentation of 2 Baruch as a whole and do not always
constitute the focus of die larger passages in which diey appear.
83. (I) The diree messianic passages, while presenting somewhat different
pictures, are not actually 'contradictory'; see Collins, Apocalyptic Imagination,
p. 172. The traditional character of the material does not diminish its importance for
die author. The fact that this material was used, even if modified, means diat it was
accepted by the author. (2) Even if the Messianic era is limited in duration (but cf.
40.3, it lasts 'forever'), it is still an essential part of die eschatological scenario as an
intermediate hope for a national victory in Palestine. While there may be a relative
subordination of the Messianic era, there is no absolute 'rejecUon' or 'correction' of
diis hope. (3) The thrust of the larger passages is indeed on die faithfulness to the
law as die means to membership in die future world (31-32; 41-44; 77.1-17). But
diis is complementary to die eschatological presentation, not in opposition to it.
ZERBE 'Pacificism' and 'Passive Resistance' 85
absent or even discouraged.*'* it is clear that die author still hopes for
a Messianic interregnum.
Murphy proposes that the Messianic passages present no difficulty
for the pacifistic interpretation since the Messiah is the sole agent of
judgment and punishmenttiie people or army of the Messiah play no
role in the battle.*' But tiiis argument from silence is ratiier inconclu-
sive.'* If the author was actually opposing tiie rising resistance move-
ment one would expect a much stronger statement against military
activity or ideology.
In conclusion, then, the primary interest of the autiior of 2 Baruch
is the arrival of the new aeon and its implications. In the light of its
coming, the primary concern of tiie people should be the preparation
of tiieir souls dirough obedience to the Law. Focusing on tiie rewards
and punishments of die age to come, the people should desist from
preoccupation widi die punishment of the enemies of Israel, especially
Rome ( 1 9 . 3 - 4 ; 5 2 . 6 - 7 ; 8 3 . 4 - 8 ) . Vengeance and judgment are the
business of God and the Messiah in die appropriate future time.
On the odier hand, however, there are no explicit commands against
armed resistance, and the author does express hope for a national
restoration in Palestine and die punishment of the oppressors dirough
the leadership of the Messiah. The author remains silent on whether
or not he expects the people to join in battle with die Messiah against
dieir enemies. While the author may well represent a 'quietistic' pos-
ture, to say that he 'deliberately urged pacifism' seems to go beyond
die evidence.
87. For this scholarly consensus, see e.g. A. Yarbro Collins, Crisis and
Catharsis: The Power of the Apocalypse (Philadelphia: Wesuninster Press, 1984),
pp. 25-83; E. Schiissler Fiorenza, The Book of Revelation: Justice and Judgment
(Philadelphia: Fortress Press, 1985), pp. 181-203.
88. For a review of proposals regarding die sources and redaction of Revelation,
see e.g. Schiissler Fiorenza, Revelation, pp. 159-80.
89. W. Klassen ('Vengeance in the Apocalypse of John', CBQ 27 [1966],
pp. 300-11) also highlighu these two features, although he excessively softens the
notion of vengeance, claiming diat the author wrote to bring all to repentance by
warning them of the consequences of dieir actions (p. 304).
90. Yarbro Collins, 'Polidcal Perspective', p. 247.
91. Cf. 2.16; 12.5; Pss. Sol. 17.23-24. This motif is based on Ps. 2.9.
92. This text refers to die angelic armies. In 15.6 angels have a similar attire; and
parallels wiUi oUier apocalyptic texts also suggests this (Zech. 14.15; Mk 8.38;
13.27; 1 Thess. 3.13; Mt. 26.53). R. Mounce (The Book of Revelation [Grand
ZERBE 'Pacificism' and 'Passive Resistance' 87
Rapids: Eerdmans, 1977]. p. 346) suggests that the reference in 17.14 (see below,
n. 96) suggests that the martyrs who now stand in God's presence (cf. 7.9-17)
should be included in die group.
93. See 8.3-5; 8.6-9.21; 14.14-20; 16.1-21.
94. Yarbro Collins. 'Political Perspective', p. 247.
95. Yarbro Collins, 'Political Perspective', p. 248.
96. Kletos and eklektos occur only here in Revelation, but clearly indicate the
elect of humanity; pistos occurs elsewhere of Christ (1.5; 3.14; 19.11), of the words
of John's revelation (21.5; 22.6). and of Christians in the context of dying for die
faidi (2.10, 13).
97. See Yarbro Collins, 'Political Perspective', p. 248 n. 37.
98. Seeing a military reference in 14.4a are e.g. E. Lohmeyer. Die Offenbarung
88 The Pseudepigrapha and Early Biblical Interpretation
The author does not make it clear, however, whether he supposes that
the elect will actually participate in the final battle or uses this
imagery primarily as a symbol of the abstention from adultery with
Babylon (cf. 14.8).
While the author leaves it somewhat ambiguous whether the elect
will participate militarily in the final battle, he is quite clear that the
elect will participate in the final judgment and rule over their persecu-
tors. This is indicated by the references to their participadon in die
Messianic rule and judgment'' and the probability that in 20.4 it is the
resurrected martyrs who are given thrones for judgment.'""
With Yarbro Collins, dien, one can agree diat die dominant emphasis
is on the direct agency of the Messiah and the heavenly armies to
effect eschatological victory. Nevertheless, one must admit that there
is some ambiguity as to whether or not the elect play any role in the
final battle and that the elect will participate at least in the judgment of
the world. The use of the holy war tradition by itself, then, does not
seem to categorically exclude the possibility of armed participation
with God on the final day.
What does Revelation specifically counsel, however, as to the proper
conduct and stance of believers in persecution? To ascertain this, we
begin by observing tiie language of 'conquering' (nikan) as applied to
die elect. In die messages to die seven churches (2.7, 11, 17, 2 6 - 2 8 ;
3.5, 12, 21) and in the conclusion (21.7) various promises are held out
for 'those who conquer'. In some passages the 'conquerors' are identi-
fied especially as diose who remain faithful.'"' But more significandy.
des Johannes (HNT, 16; Tubingen: Mohr, 1926), p. 120; G.B. Caird, The
Revelation of St John the Divine (London: Harper & Bros.. 1966); G.R. Beasley-
Murray, Revelation (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1978), p. 223; Yarbro Collins,
'Political Perspective', p. 248. For OT references to purity regulation for war, cf.
Deut. 23.9-10; 1 Sam. 21.5; 2 Sam. 11.11. For such regulations at Qumran, see
F. Cross, The Ancient Library of Qumran (Garden City: Doubleday, rev. edn,
1961), pp. 98-99.
99. See esp. 2.26-27 in relation to 19.15. Cf. die future tense ofbasileud for the
elect: 5.10; 22.5.
100. BasedonDan.7.9-10, 22.See e.g.Beasley-Murray,/?eve/arion, pp. 292-93.
101. E.g. die promises for rewards to die 'conquerors' in die messages follow
immediately upon call to obedience and/or repentance; in 21.7 the rewards for
'conquerors' are contrasted with those for the 'cowardly, faithless' (deilois,
apistois), implying that the 'conquerors' are specifically die faidiful; and in 2.26 the
'conqueror' is identified as the one 'who keeps my word until die end' (2.26).
Z E R B E 'Pacificism'and'Passive Resistance' 89
the 'conquerors' are seen specifically as those who remain faithful unto
death.'"^ Rev. 1 2 . 1 1 clarifies die basis for the victory by the elect:
And diey [our brediren] have conquered him [die accuser] by die blood of
the Lamb and by die word of dieir testimony (marmria), for diey loved not
their lives even unto deadi (RSV).
102. In 2.10 'conquering' is equated widi being 'faidiful unto death'; in 15.2-4
'those who had conquered die beast and its image' are apparendy martyrs (13.7, IS)
who now stand in God's presence (cf. 7.9-17); and those who have remained
faidiful unto death in 12.11 are said to have 'conquered' Satan.
103. For martyr and martyria as applied to die elect, see 2.13; 6.9; 11.3, 7, 12;
12.11; 17.6; 20.4; cf. 1.2,9; 12.17; 19.10.
104. See 1.5; 3.14; cf. 19.11.
105. See Yarbro Collins, 'Political Perspective', p. 249; F. Hauck,
'hupomend', TDNT, IV, p. 688.
90 The Pseudepigrapha and Early Biblical Interpretation
106. For the case in favor of this textual reading (Alexandrinus) of the couplets
on captivity and the sword, based on Jer. 15.2 and 43.17, see R.H. Charles, A
Critical and Exegetical Commentary on the Revelation of St John (ICC; New York:
Scribner's, 1920), I. pp. 355-57; B.M. Metzger. A Textual Commentary on the
Greek New Testament (London: United Bible Societies, 1971), pp. 749-50. On this
reading, bodi couplets refer to the plight of the persecuted and dius suit die context of
persecution and endurance. On the various readings with apokte(i)nei...dei in the
second couplet ('if any one slays with the sword, with the sword must he be slain',
R S V ) the text could refer either to the persecutors, expressing die inevitable
reuibution coming to them, or to die persecuted, proscribing die use of arms (in
continuity with the adaptation of Jer. 15.2 in Mt. 26.52). While this last
interpretation is attractive in diat it would entail 'an explicit rejection of die militant
option' (Yarbro Collins, 'Political Perspective', p. 247), on external and contextual
grounds it is not Uie best reading. Also secondary are die readings that have apagei in
the first half of the first couplet ('if any one leads into captivity, to captivity he
goes'), in which case both couplets would refer to the final lot of the persecutors.
107. Yarbro Collins, 'Political Perspective', pp. 249-52, 256.
Z E R B E 'Pacificism'and'Passive Resistance' 91
is a fixed number of souls that must be killed before the end should
come.'"* Yarbro Collins concludes that in Revelation
the role of the elect is not purely passive; rather there is the possibility of a
kind of synergism. Each martyr's deadi brings the eschaton closer.'*"
While it is true that each death brings the eschaton closer, it seems
unwarranted to conclude that Revelation promotes martyrdom as such
as that which they can synergistically contribute to the final outconne.
The notion of the fixed number of martyrs ( 6 . 1 1 ) explains why the
end has not yet arrived; it does not encourage martyrdom per se. The
author does affirm that the cry of the martyrs is heard; immediately
following is a proleptic description of the final battle against the kings
of the earth ( 6 . 1 2 - 1 7 ) .
2 . T h e prelude to the seven trumpets ( 8 . 3 - 5 ) also indicates that
vengeance upon the earth is the response to the prayers of the
martyrs. An angel comes to a golden altar before the throne and
mingles incense with the prayers of the saints to God. The prayers of
the saints and the altar here recall the vision of the fifth seal. After
offering the prayers to God, the angel takes fire from the altar and
throws it on the earth, which represents the answer to the prayers of
the (martyred) saints for vengeance.
3 . When the third bowl of wrath is poured upon the earth, the
rivers and fountains of water become as blood ( 1 6 . 4 ) . The commen-
tary that follows explains the significance of this scene:
And I heard die angel of die waters say, 'You are just, O Holy One, who
are and were, for you have judged {ekrinas) diese diings; because they
shed die blood of die saints and prophets, you gave them blood to drink.
It is what diey deserve (axioi eisin)'. And I heard die altar respond, 'Yes,
O Lord God, die Almighty, your judgments are true and just' (16.5-7,
NRSV).
108. For references to diese modfs in other apocalyptic writings, see Yarbro
Collins, 'Political Perspective', p. 249.
109. Yarbro Collins, 'Political Perspective', p. 249.
92 The Pseudepigrapha and Early Biblical Interpretation
doxology that begins the final heavenly liturgy celebrating the fall of
Babylon (19.1-8), Babylon's destruction is interpreted as judgment for
her 'fornication' and as vengeance for the execution of the martyrs:
he has judged (ekrinen) die great harlot who corrupted die earth with her
fornication, and he has avenged (exedikesen) on her the blood of his
servants (19.2, RSV).
110. Bodi 6.10 and 19.2 allude to Deut. 32.43 (cf. 2 Kgs 9.8; Ps. 79.10) just as
die Testament of Moses docs when it anticipates vengeance on account of the martyrs
(see above, n. 62).
111. The hoitines in 20.4 might be taken eidier as an ordinary relative, dius
qualifying 'die souls of diose who had been beheaded', or in its classical usage, thus
signifying a wider group dian die 'beheaded'.
112. If so, we see here a perspective much like diat of Qumran (see above,
n. 26). While vengeance is proscribed for the present, penultimate hour and deferred
to God, the elect can anticipate their own participadon in die conquest and judgment
Z E R B E 'Pacificism'and'PassiveResistance' 93
Conclusion
This essay has sought to determine if four apocalyptic writings, namely
Daniel, the Testament of Moses, 2 Baruch and Revelation, promote
the stance of 'passive, non-violent resistance' and/or 'pacificism* in
relation to illegitimate and oppressive rule. All four writings seem to
encourage the response of 'passive resistance*. None contains a call to
military resistance; all emphasize that victory and vengeance will
come through the direct action of God and his special agents; none
indicates that the elect will participate in the final battle against the
enemies. The action that is characteristic or recommended of the elect
represents non-military forms of resistance, primarily faithfulness and
endurance.
Do these writings, however, also display a 'pacifistic* perspective?
The evidence remains somewhat ambiguous. The primary evidence
for die perspectives of both 'passive resistance' and 'pacificism' con-
sists of the emphasis on the direct action of God and his special agents
in the final victory, on the one hand, and the lack of any explicit
participation by the elect in the final batUe, on the other. This sort of
depiction does indeed contrast sharply from those writings, apoca-
lyptic and non-apocalyptic, which express an overtly synergistic,
military ideology ( 1 Maccabees, 2 Maccabees, Jubilees 23, Animal
Apocalypse [1 En. 8 5 - 9 0 ] , Apocalypse of Weeks [1 En. 93.1-10;
9 1 . 1 1 - 1 7 ] ) . But there are also other apocalyptic writings diat focus on
the direct intervention of God and lack any reference to the syner-
gistic participation of the elect in die final battle, some of which even
contain rhetoric against the weapons of war. One can note here the
Wisdom of Solomon,"" the Psalms of Solomon,^ 4 Ezra"* and the
of persecutors in the final hour. If this is the author's view, it is very muted.
113. On 13.10, die one text which might indicate an explicit rejection of armed
resistance, see above, n. 106.
114. The Wisdom of Solomon promotes the stance of forbearance (epieikeia,
2.19), endurance of evil (anexikakia, 2.19), non-retaliation (18.1-2), and prayer
versus force of arms (18.22) in response to abuse from foreign oppressors. The
94 The Pseudepigrapha and Early Biblical Interpretation
Sibylline Oracles 3 - 5 . " ' While some of these seem to reflect the
persp)ective of passive resistance (Wisdom of Solomon) or quietism
(Psalms of Solomon, but not pacifistic), others cannot be so clearly
identified. It is mediodologically somewhat dubious, dien, to suppose
agents of deliverance and vengeance are 'wisdom', God's hand, word and warfare,
and die forces of creation. Instances of armed warfare in Israel's history appear to be
downplayed. See, further, Zerbe, Non-Retaliation, ch. 2.
115. In Pss. Sol. 17 the Davidic 'Lord Messiah will destroy the Gentile
oppressors 'with an iron rod' and 'widi die word of his moudi' (vv. 24, 35, 36; cf.
Ps. 2.9; Isa. 11.2-4). There is a polemic against relying on die weapons of war or
numbers in battle (17.33-34a) and die su^ngdi of the Messiah is seen especially in
his word and character. There is no reference to any role on the part of die devout in
die desuiicdon of the oppressors, although die expectation is diat die devout will be
the beneficiaries of the Messiah's victory. R.B. Wright ('Psalms of Solomon',
OTP, II, p. 643) asserts diat members of the group diat produced die psalms 'were
not political pacifists, and appear as quietists only because they have no opportunity
to be activists'.
116. 4 Ezra is concerned with the future release of Israel from the tyranny of
Rome. The Davidic Messiah will conquer, judge and destroy the Romans (11.36-
12.3; 12.31-33) and establish the kingdom in security (12.34). In 4 Ezra 13 the
Messiah will destroy die nations assembled to conquer Israel, but widiout 'a spear or
any weapons of war' (13.9, 28). RaUier, he will conquer by a stream of fire, a
flaming breath, and a storm of sparks issuing from his moudi, which will bum up
the multitude (13.10-22,27). The three discharges symbolize die Messiah's reproof
of the nations for their ungodliness, his reproach of them, and his destruction of
them 'without effort by the law' (13.38). There is no reference to any synergistic
participation by the elect; the Messiah will defeat the oppressors of Israel
miraculously widiout reliance on military might
117. According to Sib. Or. 3, God uses human agents, even foreign kings, to
achieve his purposes in history (352. 356, 366). But in the final conflict, God will
direcUy intervene to judge die nations gathered against Israel (669-701) and will
usher in an age of peace. Cosmic catastrophes, including fire and fiery swords from
heaven (672-73, 689-91, 798) will destroy the enemies of Israel. Then Israel will
live in peace, free from war, 'for [the Lord] alone will shield diem... The Immortal
himself and die hand of the Holy One will be fighting for them' (702-13; Collins in
OTP). Weapons of war will be gathered and used to fuel fires (727-31) and
'prophets of the great God will take away die sword' (781). In Sib. Or. 4, God will
also intervene to judge die Romans (135-36) and die whole earth (159-61) widi a
great conflagration, especially dirough fire from heaven (171-78). In Sib. Or. 5, a
savior figure with a scepter will come from heaven to destroy die enemies of Israel
and to restore Jerusalem (414-25). The destruction will occur especially by fire from
heaven (274, 299, 325, 375-80). None of die Oracles refer to any synergistic
participation by the elect in die present or future conflicts.
ZERBE 'Pacificism'and'PassiveResistance' 95
James C. VanderKam
I. Introduction
The subject of this essay is the large topic of biblical interpretation in
1 Enoch and the Book of Jubilees. These two extended works are
among the very earliest of the Jewish pseudepigraphs from the Second
Temple period, and their andquity raises at least two problems in con-
nection widi their relation to die Hebrew Bible. The book of / Enoch,
as commentators have long noted, consists of five major parts, each of
which appears to have been written at a different time. The oldest
sectionthe Astronomical Book (chs. 72-82)dates from no later
than the third century BCE, while the Book of Watchers (chs. 1-36)
may come from approximately the same time' and the Epistle of
Enoch (chs. 91-107) from perhaps 170 BCE.^ If these dates are
correct, then all three compositions predate the second half of Daniel
(chs. 7-12) which is commonly assigned to ca. 165 BCE. It has also
been argued that Jubilees, too, is earlier than the last six chapters of
1. The dates for the Astronomical Book and Book of Watchers are based
primarily on paleographical considerations. J.T. Milik (The Books of Enoch:
Aramaic Fragments of Qumran Cave 4 [Oxford: Clarendon, 1976], p. 7) dates die
oldest cave 4 MS of die Astronomical Book to die late diird or early second century
BCE, while die oldest copy of die Book of Watchers ' . . . is connected widi die semi-
cursive scripts ('semi-formal') of the diird and second centuries BC. Our manuscript
probably datesf from die first half of die second century' (p. 140).
2. It has been customary to date the Epistle to die end of the second century, but
for the earlier date see now G.W.E. Nickelsburg, Jewish Literature between the
Bible and the Mishnah (Philadelphia: Fortress Press, 1981), pp. 149-50; and
J.C. VanderKam, Enoch and the Growth of an Apocalyptic Tradition (CBQMS, 16;
Washington: Catholic Biblical Association, 1984), pp. 142-49.
VANDERKAM Biblical Interpretation in 1 Enoch and Jubilees 97
Daniel,' but the case has not been made in a convincing way." The
result is, nevertheless, that a substantial part of the Enochic corpus is
more ancient than one section of what became Scripture; these
booklets belong to what might be called the biblical period. They,
along with books such as 1-2 Chronicles, provide other witnesses to
the fact that older biblical books were being interpreted already in the
age that produced the Hebrew Bible.
A second problem is that at the early times in which the various
parts of 1 Enoch and the unified Book of Jubilees were written, the
term 'biblical' would not have had the precision that was later given to
it. Contrary to the view of R. Beckwith, it seems highly unlikely that
the Hebrew canon had been closed in the time of Judas Maccabeus;'
1 Enoch and Jubilees diemselves and the popularity of bodi at Qumran
are eloquent testimony to the fact that other works billed themselves
as revelations and tiiat their claims were accepted by at least some
ancient Jews. Which works the authors of diese books may have con-
sidered authoritative is not entirely clear, although it is obvious tiiat
Genesis had a special appeal for them and diat they valued many
others. Thus the Enochic pamphlets and the Book of Jubilees provide
windows into die processes of interpreting older authoritative com-
positions at a time when the bounds of the Hebrew Scriptures were not
set and when other writers were making revelatory claims for their
literary efforts.
Though they are very different kinds of books, 1 Enoch and
Jubilees are righUy treated together in a study of this kind. The parts
of / Enoch focus on the eschatological judgment that will separate and
reward the righteous and the evil and formulate admonitions on the
basis of it, while Jubilees, as it retells the biblical account from
creation to Sinai, is a prime example of the so-called 'Re-written
Bible'.* But behind the obvious differences between the two in form
and content, there lie some shared beliefs and practices. Among the
common views of the writers are the importance of the story about
heavenly angels who descended and married women, the revealed
character of the 364-day solar calendar, and the firm conviction that
there would be a time of ultimate reckoning. The authors articulated
these shared beliefs through interpretation of and reflecdon on earlier
authoritadve religious texts, many of which are now found in the
canon of Hebrew Scripture.
The plan of die paper is first to study die uses of earlier Scriptures
in the five secdons of / Enoch (arranged chronologically) and second
to do the same for Jubilees. The size of the two books makes an
exhaustive study impossible within the confines of a single essay; con-
sequendy, a selection has been made of what were judged to be
especially instructive cases. Obviously, other examples than those
found below could have been selected, but die ones chosen are impor-
tant instances of biblical uses and should give the reader a good
impression of how the various authors operated. Before turning to the
texts, one important observation should be made: the different
Enochic authors (and die writer of Jubilees to a certain extent), even
in diose places in which they are not quoting or reworking a specific
passage, resort to what might be called a biblically saturated language.
The rhetoric of the writers was manifestly conditioned by die ancient
texts of their nation and faidi, and they expressed this indebtedness
repeatedly both in die pericopes that will be studied here and in other
sections of their works.
7. Milik, Books of Enoch, pp. 89-98. His conclusions about the date of die
Book of Parables are quite unlikely to be correct
8. Milik, Books of Enoch, pp. 7-8.
100 The Pseudepigrapha and Early Biblical Interpretation
Enochic passage the writer says of the sun: 'As for the intensity of its
light, it is sevenfold brighter than that of the moon; nevertheless (the
sun and the moon) are equal in regard to their (respective) sizes'. Isa.
3 0 . 2 6 predicts (referring to a time of divine grace on God's people,
cf. V. 2 3 ) :
Moreover ihe light of the moon will be as the light of the sim, and die light
of the sun will be sevenfold, as the light of seven days, in die day when
the Lord binds up die hurt of his people, and heals die wounds inflicted
by his blow.
In fact, Hartman sees bodi die theophany passage and die rib or dispute
chapters ( 2 - 5 ) as belonging 'in a field of covenant associations, visible
also in the ways in which different Jewish texts deal with motifs
contained in our 1 En passage'."
and Interpretation of Mikra', pp. 402-406. The most diorough study of 1 Enoch 6 -
11 remains Dimant's unpublished dissertation, "The Fallen Angels" in die Dead Sea
Scrolls and in the Apocryphal and Pseudepigraphic Books Related to Them'
(Hebrew University, Jerusalem, 1974 [Hebrew]), pp. 23-72.
17. So Milik, The Books of Enoch, pp. 30-32; P.R. Davies, 'Sons of Cain' in
J.D. Martin and P.R. Davies (eds.), A Word in Season: Essays in Honour of
William McKane (JSOTSup, 42; Sheffield: JSOT Press, 1986), pp. 46-50.
18. It is generally agreed diat diere are two versions of die angel story in chs. 6 -
II: one that centers about Shemihazah and one that focuses on Asael. On this
distincdon. see die familiar essays of G.W.E. Nickelsburg ('Apocalyptic and Mydi in
1 Enoch 6-1 r , JBL 96 [1977], pp. 383-405) and P.Hanson ('Rebellion in
Heaven, Azazel and Euhemeristic Heroes in I Enoch 6-11', JBL 96 [1977],
pp. 197-233). Dimant ('"The Fallen Angels'", pp. 23-72) finds evidence of a diird
version and distinguishes the three as follows (see the summary on pp. 64-65): I.
die Shemihazah version involves the story of the angels who defiled diemselves widi
women, fathered giants and thus sinned; diis is an interpretation of Gen. 6.1-4 but
without any connection widi die flood. 2. a story about angels who taught divinadon
and other secrets to mankind, thus leading them astray. They, too, had children. This
is an interpretadon of Gen .6.1-4 diat is connected with die flood as a punishment on
sinful mankind. 3. the story of Asael who taught various arts to mankind and in this
way led diem into sin. The account is an interpretation of Gen. 6.11-12 and explains
the destrucdon that transpired before die flood and also die reason for die punishment
of the flood.
The additional question whedier Lev. 16 with its goat for Azazel has
influenced the text (Hanson ['Rebellion in Heaven', pp. 220-25] makes much of
diis) is complicated by die fact that die name is spelled Asael in die Aramaic
fragments, noi Azazel as it is in Lev. 16. But Lev. 16 may have played some role in
the formation of die BW; see the comment of D.J. Halperin, The Faces of the
Chariot: Early Jewish Responses to Ezekiel's Vision (Texte und Studien zum
Andken Judentum, 16; Tubingen: Mohr, 1988), p. 82 (regarding / Enoch 14).
19. The very literal translations of the Genesis and 7 Enoch passages are mine;
diey have been worded to accent die points of agreement and similarity between the
two texts.
VANDERKAM Biblical Interpretation in 1 Enoch andJubilees 105
At this juncture each text has material that is not reflected directly in
the other. Gen. 6.3 speaks of the divine decision to limit life to 120
years, while 1 En. 6.3-8 tells about Shemihazah, the leading angel, and
his companions who swore to carry out the resolve they had just
made. The text also lists the names of die 20 chief angels. Once die
additional lines are given in the two works, they resume paralleling
one another.
The nephitim were in the eardi in diose And all the others with them. And
days, and also afterwards when (?) die diey took for themselves women, and
sons of the elohim came into die each one chose one for himself. And
daughters of mankind, and they bore they began to come into them, and
for diem. They are the gibborim who they were promiscuous with them.
were from eternity, the men of the And they taught them...And they
name. became pregnant and gave birth to
great giants, and the height of each
one was 3000 cubits.
A comparison of the two shows that the author of 1 En. 6-11 has
nuanced die biblical text in many minor ways (e.g. moving 'in diose
days' to the beginning of the story, whereas Genesis has it in v. 4 in
connection with the nephilim). One noteworthy change, apart from
labeling the 'sons of the elohim' as 'angels', is that the wording in
Enoch highlights the physical, lustful side of the angels' action by
using two adjectives to describe the women (beautiful and lovely),
only one of which comes from Genesis; and by using two verbs (saw
and desired), where Genesis has one (saw).^" Also, the author wished
to stress that the angels' decision was not based upon a momentary
passion but was deliberate and its implications clearly understood.
Only after inserting this and other material does the writer return to
his terse base in Genesis 6.
It should also be noticed that I Enoch specifies the purpose of the
angels' cohabiting with women. Gen. 6.2 relates only that 'they took
for themselves women from all whom they chose'. I En. 6.2 has the
angels say to one another: 'Come on, let us choose wives for ourselves
from among the daughters of man and beget us children'. This addi-
tion is of considerable interest because it seems related to the omitted
words of Gen. 6.3 {Jub. 5.7-8 associates them explicitly): 'Then the
Lord said, "My spirit shall not abide in man forever, for he is flesh,
but his days shall be a hundred and twenty years'". The issue of length
of life for the offspring of the angels recurs in several passages in
1 Enoch. It appears diat the watchers wished long life on the earth for
their children. Gabriel is commanded:
Proceed against die bastards and die reprobates and against the sons of die
fornicators, and destroy the sons of the fornicators and the sons of the
Watchers from amongst men. And send diem out, and send diem against
one another, and let them destroy themselves in battie, for they will not
have lengdi of days. And they will all petition you, but Uieir fathers will
gain nothing in respect of them, for they hope for eternal life, and dial
each of diem will live life for five hundred years (10.9-10).^'
Rather than enjoying extended life, the children of the angels will kill
one another in the presence of their fathers. Then the fathers
diemselves will be bound for 70 generations until tiie final judgment,
when their sentence will last forever (a word from Gen. 6.3; see 1 En.
10.11-14). It seems that the author has interpreted the word 'flesh' in
Gen. 6.3 to refer to the gigantic children of the angels and has dius
21. Translation of M. Knibb, The Ethiopic Book of Enoch: A New Edition in the
Light of the Aramaic Dead Sea Fragments (2 vols.; Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1978).
V A N D E R K A M Biblical Interpretation in I Enoch andJubilees 107
Here, as in die AB (see above), one meets die notion diat Enoch spent
time with die angels. Where the Ethiopic text twice uses the verb 'to
be hidden' (takabta, a form found in some MSS of Ethiopic Gen.
5 . 2 4 ) , the Greek translation contains 'to be taken' (eXfintpOii) which
reflects the reading of die MT npb in Gen. 5 . 2 4 . Furthermore, die fact
diat no one knew the whereabouts of Enoch seems to be a clarification
of Genesis' cryptic 'and he was not*. The language, then, is closely
tied to Gen. 5 . 2 4 , but it is not impossible (widiin die chronology of
Genesis) that die first of Enoch*s two removals to angelic company is
here under consideration.^^ According to 7 En. 1 2 . 1 , his removal
occurred before the events which had just been narrated.
The only other passage in tiiese five chapters with especially close
22. See the discussion in VanderKam, Enoch and the Growth of an Apocalyptic
Tradition, pp. 130-31.
108 The Pseudepigrapha and Early Biblical Interpretation
23. For bibliography on the passage, cf. VanderKam, Enoch and the Growth of
an Apocalyptic Tradition, p. 134 n. 85. To diat list should be added M. Black, The
Book of Enoch or 1 Enoch: A New English Edition (SVTP, 7; Uiden: Brill, 1985),
pp. 146-52; G.W.E. Nickelsburg, 'Enoch, Levi, and Peter: Recipients of Revelation
in Upper Galilee', JBL 100 (1981), pp. 576-87.
VANDERKAM Biblical Interpretation in I Enoch andJubilees 109
14.20 Great Glory sat on the throne (Ezek. 1.28 [see 3.23; 9.3]; 10.4 [cf.
43.4; 44.4])
bright raiment (cf. Ezek. 1.27-28; Dan. 7.9)
14.21 could not look at his face (Isa. 6.2; cf. Targ. Ezek. 1.27)
14.22 10,000 times 10,000 were before him (Dan. 7.10; odier texts men-
don die heavenly rednue but not the number [1 Kgs 22.19; Isa.
6.2])
14.23 holy ones near him did not leave by night or day (cf. Ezek. 1.19-
21; 10.16-17; Rev. 4.8)
14.24-25 die deity calls widi his moudi (Isa. 6.6-13; 1 Kgs 22.21-22;
Ezek. 1.28; 2.2).
Since the antecedent biblical throne visions (and not Daniel 7) function
as the settings in which prophets receive their commissions, it is not
surprising that the same happens on this occasion for Enoch.
The end puipose of Enoch's ascent is to be commissioned by God to play
die role of prophet His approach to God's dirone room is prelude to this
commission, and, conversely, the message he is commissioned to deliver
is the climax of the vision.^"
Yet, despite the author's heavy reliance upon traditional language and
models, he departs from them in important respects: Enoch is
summoned to speak words of judgment to the angelic watchers, and he
not only sees the heavenly throne room in his vision but he actually
ascends to that forbidden place, into the celestial temple.^^ Thus, in
this case, various biblical models are exploited to produce a new text
which is closely tied to larger themes in the books of Enoch: a
righteous man condemns the primordial sinners and speaks from the
ultimate position of authority.
29. K. Koch ('Die mysteridsen Zahlen der judaischen Konige und die
apokalyptischen Jahrwochen", VT 28 [1978], pp. 439-40) maintains diat each one
of weeks 4-7 covers 490 years.
30. On these points, see VanderKam, Enoch and the Growth of an Apocalyptic
112 The Pseudepigrapha and Early Biblical Interpretation
Tradition, pp. 156-57; 'Studies in the Apocalypse of Weeks', pp. 520-21; and
P. Grelot, 'Soixante-dix semaines d ' a n n ^ ' . Bib 50 (1969). pp. 169-86.
31. A. Hultgird, for example, has shown that die story has significant parallels
widi the account of Zaradiustra's birth ('Das Judentum in der hellenistisch-romischen
Zeit und die iranische Religionein religionsgeschichUiches Problem', ANRW,
11.19.551).
V A N D E R K A M Biblical Interpretation in 1 Enoch and Jubilees 113
Working with these playful etymologies and building upon the lore
about Enoch's residing far away with the angels, the author fashions a
picture of Noah and the circumstances of his birth that is related to
biblical data but only in a loose sense. He has packed extra-biblical
traditions about Enoch and about the appearances of heroes at birth
into the sparse frame provided by his biblical source.
32. The longer Greek text at diis point is supported by die fragmentary remains of
4QEn<= (Milik. The Books of Enoch, pp. 207-208), and it is the text dial puns on
Lamech's name. Milik {ibid.) suggests that the paronomasia involved the words
no, but Black {The Book of Enoch, p. 320) prefers -\a th. For diis etymology of
Lamech's name in odier texts, see Milik, ibid., p. 215; L. Grabbe, Etymology in
Early Jewish Interpretation: The Hebrew Nantes in Philo (BJS, 115; Atlanta:
Scholars, 1988), pp. 177-78.
33. For Uiese suggestions, see Milik, The Books of Enoch, pp. 213, 209, 214;
cf. Grabbe, Etymology, pp. 192-93. Gen. 5.29 also offers a play on his name.
34. For the date, see Milik, TTie Books of Enoch, pp. 42-44. He argues that the
BatUe of BeUi-Zur, which occunwl in 164, is reflected in 90.13-15.
114 The Pseudepigrapha and Early Biblical Interpretation
35. For the symbolism, see Dimant, 'History according to the Animal Vision
(Ediiopic Enoch 85-90)', in Jerusalem Studies in the Thought of Israel 2 (1982),
pp. 18-37 (Hebrew); and 'Jerusalem and die Temple in the Animal Vision (Ethiopic
Enoch 85-90) in Light of die Views of die Dead Sea Sect', Shnaton 5-6 (1981-82).
pp. 177-93 (Hebrew).
V A N D E R K A M Biblical Interpretation in I Enoch and Jubilees 1 1 5
hands of the nations; the condemnation of the shepherds has also been
pre-ordained.'* Of interest in this apocalypse is also the detailed
picture of the end in which one finds not only the expected punishment
of die wicked and reward of die righteous, but also a new Jerusalem
( 9 0 . 2 8 - 3 3 ) and a figurea white bullwho recalls die imagery of the
patriarchal period and may be a messiah, though he is not called one
( 9 0 . 3 7 - 3 8 ) . In fact, all are transformed into white bulls in imitation of
die primordial age ( 9 0 . 3 8 ) .
36. Cf. the summary and bibliography in VanderKam. Enoch and the Growth of
an Apocalyptic Tradition, pp. 164-67.
37. As noted, for example, by Nickelsburg, Resurrection, p. 215;cf.p.227 n. 13.
38. Nickelsburg, Resurrection, pp. 70-74.
39. D.W. Suter, Tradition and Composition in the Parables of Enoch (SBLDS,
47; Missoula, MT: Scholars Press, 1979), pp. 1-2. 39-72, 107-23.
40. In the following paragraphs I draw heavily on my study 'Righteous One,
Messiah, Chosen One, and Son of Man in I Enoch 37-71', in J.H. Charleswordi
(ed.). The Messiah: Developments in Earliest Judaism and Christianity (The First
Princeton Symposium on Judaism and Chrisdan Origins; The AB Reference Library;
Minneapolis: Fortress Press, 1992), pp. 169-91.
116 The Pseudepigrapha and Early Biblical Interpretation
A. Quotation
Jubilees is such a close retelling of the biblical stories that in many
places it simply quotes from a Hebrew Bible. The first chapter is an
exception. It sets the stage for the action and draws upon a wide
variety of scriptural passages as it places Moses on Mt Sinai and has
the deity predict to him Israel's apostasy, repentance, and the renewed
divine favor that would eventuate in a second creation. An angel of
the presence is then commanded to reveal to Moses the remaining
material of the book. Chapters 2 - 5 0 retell the biblical stories from
Genesis 1-Exodus 20. The version in which the stories are presented
is so frequently a quotation or near-quotation of the text that Jubilees
is an extremely valuable witness to a form of the Hebrew Bible in the
second century BCE. The writer does not, of course, merely cite; he
makes innumerable changes in die text. But enough precise evidence
remains to demonstrate that die biblical text diat lay before die writer
was not identical with the Masoretic Text which later became the
normative Hebrew version."'
B. Creative Rendering
When the text deviates firom the Bible's version, it does so in a variety
of ways. They may be distinguished as in the list below, though some
of the categories overlap.
41. For studies of this issue, see J.C. VanderKam, Textual and Historical
Studies in the Book of Jubilees (HSM, 14; Missoula, MT: Scholars Press, 1977),
pp. 103-205; and "Jubilees and die Hebrew Texts of Genesis-Exodus*. Textus 14
(1988), pp. 71-85.
VANDERKAM Biblical Interpretation in I Enoch and Jubilees 119
'For on the first day he created the heavens, which are above,
and the earth, and the waters and all of the spirits which
minister before h i m . . . ' The text then proceeds to enumerate
the sundry types of angels or spirits. Thus, angels were among
the seven classes of works that God created on the first day."^
b. The deaths of Adam and Eve: According to Gen. 2.16-17,
'And the Lord God conunanded the man, saying, "You may
freely eat of every tree of the garden; but of the tree of the
knowledge of good and evil you shall not eat, for in the day
that you eat of it you shall die"'.The first pair do, of course,
eat the fruit but diey do not die on that very day. Rather, they
continue to Uve for a long time afterward, apparendy for
centuries. Genesis never deals with this conflict, but Jubilees
does. When it relates the death of Adam after a life of 930
years, it says: 'And he lacked seventy years from one diousand
years, for a thousand years are like one day in the testimony
of heaven and therefore it was written concerning the tree of
knowledge, "In the day you eat from it you will die".
Therefore he did not complete the years of this day because
he died in it' (4.30). The writer's approach is obvious: he has
applied the teaching of Ps. 90.4 ('For a thousand years in thy
sight are but as yesterday when it is past'; cf. 2 Pet. 3.8) to
the problem. The psalmist impUed that with the Lord KXK)
years and one day were die same. Hence, he concluded tiiat
the word 'day' in Gen. 2.17 meant 1000 years. As Adam died
before ICXX) years had passed, die divine warning held true.""
c. Gen. 2.2 suggests diat God worked on the first sabbath: 'And
on die sevendi day God finished his work which he had done,
and he rested on the sevendi day from all his work which he
had done'. Jubilees rephrases the text (with other ancient
witnesses) in order to preclude this inference: 'And he com-
pleted all of his work on the sixth day, everything which is in
the heavens and die eardi and the seas and the depdis and in die
light and in the darkness and in every place' (2.16; cf. 2.25).'*"
42. See Charles. The Book of Jubilees or the Little Genesis (Oxford: Clarendon
Press. 1902; repr. Jerusalem: Makor, 1972), pp. 11-12; O.H. Steck.'Die Aufnahme
von Genesis 1 in Jubilaen 2 und 4. Esra 6', JSJ 8 (1977). pp. 157, 163-64.
43. See Charles, The Book of Jubilees, p. 41, for parallels.
44. In reading 'sixdi' instead of 'seventh' Jubilees agrees widi the Samaritan
120 The Pseudepigrapha and Early Biblical Interpretation
Pentateuch, the LXX, the Peshitta. the Old Latin, and Josephus. Epiphanius's citation
of Jub. 2.16 confirms die reading of die Ethiopic text. For die texts, see VanderKam,
The Book of Jubilees (2 vols.; CSCO, 510-11, Scriptores AeUiiopici, 87-88;
Louven: Peeters, 1989).
45. See Dimant, "The Fallen Angels"', pp. 92-103 for an analysis of these
sections.
46. On this material, see P.S. Alexander, 'Notes on the "Imago Mundi" of the
Book of Jubilees', JJS 33 (1982), pp. 197-213; 'Retelling die Old Testament', in
D.A. Carson and H.G.M. Williamson (eds.). It is Written: Scripture Citing
Scripture: Essays in Honour of Barnabas Lindars (Cambridge: Cambridge
University Press. 1988). pp. 102-103.
47. J. Endres {Biblical Interpretation in the Book of Jubilees [CBQMS, 18;
Washington: Catholic Biblical Association, 1987], pp. 51-84) has studied this and
related sections in detail.
48. For parallels and analysis, see Charles, The Book of Jubilees, pp. 200-204.
214-22.
V A N D E R K A M Biblical Interpretation in 1 Enoch andJubilees 121
49. The material about these holidays is examined in J.C. VanderKam. 'The
Temple Scroll and the Book of Jubilees', in G.J. Brooke (ed.). Temple Scroll
Studies: Papers Presented at the International Symposium on the Temple Scroll,
Manchester. December 1987 (JSPSup, 7; Sheffield: JSOT Press. 1989), pp. 219-21.
V A N D E R K A M Biblical interpretation in 1 Enoch andJubilees 123
father curses him (Gen. 34; 49.5-7). However, Jubilees, which knows
of him as the ancestor of all priests, applauds his role at Shechem and
has him officiate as priest already during the time of his father. Jub.
28.14 highlights his importance by putting his birth on 1/1. His role at
Shechem is interpreted favorably as implementing the law against
mixed marriages in Deut. 7.2-4. Not only was he, therefore, applauded
for his efforts, but his zeal became a cause for his elevadon to the
priesthood (30.5, 17, 18-20). In order to draw this conclusion the
writer used passages such as Exod. 32.25-29 (the levites are ordained
to the Lord's service for their zeal in killing those guilty of the sin of
die golden calf), Num. 25.1-13 (the eternal covenant of the priesthood
with Phinehas for his zeal in slaying the couple who engaged in an
illicit union) and Mai. 2.7 (which speaks, like Num. 25.12, of a
covenant of peace, but in this case with Levi). Also, he found
significance in the fact diat Levi was die third of 12 sons. In Jub. 32.1-
9 he relates a dream diat Levi had about his being priest and informs
the reader that Jacob then counted his sons in reverse order so that
Levi turned out to be the tenth (Benjamin had just been conceived).
Thus, Levi, who was himself a kind of ddie, was die one worthy to
receive his father's ddies. Again there is a scriptural base: In Genesis
35 the scene takes place at Bethela city where, when he came to it
for the first dme, Jacob had vowed to give a tenth to the Lord (Gen.
28.22; Jub. 27.27). Genesis fails to mention whether he implemented
his vow, but Jubilees exploits die dieme and relates it to another tidiing
passageGen. 14.18-20by referring to Levi as priest of God most
high (32.2). The special blessing diat Isaac gives to Levi in 31.12-17
has some parallels widi die blessing of Levi in Deut. 33.9-11.'
50. Cf. Endres, Biblical Interpretation, pp. 120-54, 158-68; J.C. VanderKam,
'Jubilees and the PriesUy Messiah of Qumran', RevQ 13 (1988), pp. 359-65.
124 The Pseudepigrapha and Early Biblical Interpretation
diminution of their ages. From Moses' time and beyond, all will age
more quickly (he draws upon Ps. 90.10 here) and times will be
terrible until the great punishment comes. Only when the children
begin to study the law will the process be reversed, and once more
ages will increase until they approach 1000 years again (23.8-31).
A similar phenomenon figures in ch. 6 where the writer has concen-
trated his teachings about the revealed calendar of 364 days. He has
exploited the fact that the biblical text supplies a relative abundance of
dates in its account of the flood. Using these, the author of Jubilees
elaborates the calendar and the festival of weeks which, as seen above,
he also tied to the flood dates (6.15-38). The same happens with the
Sabbath in ch. 2 and with die mention of tidies in ch. 32 (see above).
2. Sermonic elaborations that have the purpose of solving difficulties
may be illustrated by two cases. The first has to do with Reuben and
Bilhah, Jacob's concubine. Genesis mentions Reuben's lying with
Bilhah, reporting only the fact and that Jacob learned of it (Gen.
35.22); in 49.4 Jacob curses his son for it. Jubilees devotes much more
space to the incident (33.2-20), most of which is a condemnation of
various kinds of forbidden marriages. However, the problem that
requires resolution is that Reuben and Bilhah should have died for the
offense according to Lev. 20.11 ('The man who lies with his father's
wife has uncovered his father's nakedness; both of diem shall be put to
deadi, their blood is upon them'). Knowing this law (see Jub. 33.10),
die audior explains to anyone who objects tiiat Reuben and Bilhah
were allowed to live because the law of Lev. 20.11 had not yet been
revealed in their time (15-16). Now that it has been revealed, it is
eternally valid; Reuben and Bilhah should not, then, serve as a
convenient example for others to imitate."
Anodier such sermonic passage occasioned by a problem in die text
concerns Judah and Tamar (Jub. 41.8-28; Gen. 38.12-26). Judah is
one of the heroes in Jubilees, and in the Bible he is, of course, the
ancestor of the dominant tribe and of David and the other kings. He
unwittingly used his daughter-in-law Tamar as a prostitute and
according to Lev. 20.12 both should have been executed. Here die
explanation for their survival is different, however, than in the case of
Reuben and Bilhah: Judah was forgiven because he acknowledged his
51. See the discussion in Charies. The Book of Jubilees, pp. 197-99; Alexander.
'Retelling the Old Testament*, pp. 103-104. The term 'sermonic' for passages of
this kind is Alexander's.
V A N D E R K A M Biblical Interpretation in 1 Enoch andJubilees 125
David E. Aune
I. Introduction
'Charismatic exegesis' is one of several terms that have been used in
recent years to describe various types of Biblical interpretation prac-
ticed in early Judaism and in early Christianity,' whose distinctive
feature is the implicit or explicit claim diat die interpretation itself has
been divinely revealed. The phrase 'charismatic exegesis' itself was
coined by H.L. Ginsberg, in conversation with William Brownlee, to
describe the type of biblical interpretation practiced in the Qumran
Community by the author of the Habbakkuk commentary (IQpHab).^
Despite the fact diat 'charismatic exegesis', or one of its aliases, is fre-
quendy referred to in scholarly discussion, there are many miscon-
ceptions about it diat require clarification.' One of the results of diis
discussion will be to suggest diat 'charismatic exegesis' is an infelici-
tous umbrella term used to designate a wide variety of claims that share
the common conviction that the interpretation of sacred or revealed
texts carries divine authority. The main problem with the term
4. H.M. Oriinsky has emphasized die fact diat books of die Hebrew Bible were
canonized, not texts ("The Septuagint and its Hebrew Text*. The Cambridge History
of Judaism [4 vols.; Cambridge: The University Press. 1984-]. II, pp. 557-62).
Therefore the phenomenon of the alteration of the sacred text, or the conscious
selection of particular variant readings to bring the text more into line with the
interpreter's understanding of the text, occurs both in eariy Judaism and early
Christianity and does not conu^dict the sacred status of such biblical books.
5. Many of these exegetical procedures, which are often associated with
midrash. were practiced during die late second temple period even diough diey did
not have fonnal labels; diis is convincingly demonstrated for die Qumran literature by
Brooke. Exegesis at Qumran, pp. 166-67, 279-323.
128 The Pseudepigrapha and Early Biblical Interpretation
The sanctity of the Torah and the Prophets was a central and unifying
feature of early Judaism. Yet the Bible, like all sacred foundational
texts (whether oral or written), was subject to manipulation through
interpretation. Different understandings of the same sacred texts served
to legitimate die often conflicting views held by diverse groups. While
there were many formal and informal principles and procedures used
to interpret Scripture in early Judaism, the written product of these
mediods was expressed in a variety of literary f o r m s . S o m e , though
not all, of these were adopted by early Christians, who tended to see
Scripture either in terms of eschatological prophecy or in terms of
typological anticipations of the Christian dispensation.
These forms include:" 1. Paraphrastic translation, in which particu-
lar understandings of tiie text are folded into a translation (Aramaic
Targumim, the earliest examples of which are 4QtgLev, 4QtgJob and
l l Q t g J o b , ' * and the Septuagint).'* 2. Rewritten Scripture, whereby
portions of the Hebrew Bible were understood in new or different
ways through additions, deletions and modiflcations (intracanonical
example: 1-2 Chronicles; extracanonical examples: Jubilees, Ps.-Philo,
Liber Antiquitatem Biblicarum, tiie Genesis Apocryphon or IQapGen;
tiie Temple Scroll or 1 IQTemple; Philo, De vita Mosis; Josephus,
Jewish Antiquities). 3. Anthological style, in which the biblical text is
not explicitly cited and commented upon but is woven into the style of
the composition (IQH, apocalypses).'* 4. Commentaries, in which the
biblical text is quoted and interpreted (pesharim, midrashim; many of
Philo's works including Legum allegoriae, De cherubim, e t c . ) , "
which can again be subdivided into verse-by-verse commentary or
thematic commentary. There are examples of all four of these genres
which are attributed to divine revelation. One way of viewing these
various Hterary forms of biblical interpretation is in terms of their
degree of proximity or distance from the biblical text: paraphrastic
translations present themselves as the sacred text, rewritten Scripture
is at once more distant from the biblical text, yet may be intended to
replace that text, the anthological style links a new composition in
often very subtle ways to biblical texts, while commentaries carefully
distinguish the text fi-om the interpretation.
By the second temple period, the Jewish concern with the study of
the Torah was increasingly expressed in terms of the necessity for
receiving divine enlightenment to understand it. This theme is reiter-
ated in Ps. 119 (vv. 12, 18-19, 27, 33-35, 73); v. 18 is typical: 'Open
my eyes, tiiat I may behold wondrous things out of diy law'. This
motif is also evident in die famous description of vocation of die sage
in Sir. 39.1-11, esp. 39.6-7 (NRSV):
If the great Lord is willing, he will be filled widi the spirit of under-
standing (Ttvevnaxi ODveoeo)? enjtXtioGrioeToi); he will pour forth
words of wisdom and give dianks to die Lord in prayer. He will direct his
counsel and knowledge aright, and meditate on his secrets (ev xoii;
d)tOKpw<poii;).
In part tiiis may be based on the association and even identity of Torah
and Wisdom. Sir. 24.1-33, entitled Aivicic, Zotpiaq, 'Praise of
Wisdom' in the three great Greek uncial manuscripts, identifies
Wisdom widi Torah in v. 23: 'All this is die book of die covenant of
the Most High God, the law which Moses commanded us as an inheri-
tance for die congregations of Jacob' (see also Wis. 6.18; Bar. 3.29-
18. The identification of Wisdom and Torah is made elsewhere in Sirach, though
less forcefully (1.11-30; 6.32-37; 15.1; 19.20; 21.6; 23.27); see G.T. Sheppard,
'Wisdom and Torah: The Interpretation of Deuteronomy Underlying Sirach 24.23',
in G.A. Tuttle (ed.). Biblical and Near Eastern Studies (Grand Rapids, MI:
Eerdmans, 1978), pp. 166-76.
19. For further references, see 10.5-7; 11.4-5, 9-10, 16-17; 12.11-14, 32-34;
13.18-19; 18.10-11, 19-21. Knowledge, often equated with enlightenment is
extremely important in the (Jumran literature; see H. Ringgren, The Faith of Qumran
(Philadelphia: Fortress Press, 1963). pp. 114-20.
20. E.E. Urbach, TTie SajM (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1987),
pp. 286-314; J. Neusner, The Way of Torah (Belmont: Wadswordi Publishing, 4di
edn, 1988). pp. 81-85.
21. H.-P. Miiller, 'Mantische Weisheit und Apokalypdk', in J.A. Emerton et al.
(eds.). Congress Volume, Uppsala 1971 (VTSup, 22; Leiden: Brill, 1972),
pp. 283-85.
132 The Pseudepigrapha and Early Biblical Interpretation
22. A. Finkel. 'The Pesher of Dreams and Scripture", RevQ 4 (1960). pp. 357-
70; L.H. Silberman, 'Unriddling die Riddle: A Study in the Stfucture and Language
of die Habakkuk Pesher', RevQ 5 (1961), pp. 323-64; K. Elliger, Studien zum
Habakuk-Kommentar vom Toten Meer (Tubingen: J.C.B. Mohr [Paul Siebeck],
1953). pp. 154-57.
23. F.F. Bruce, Biblical Exegesis in the Qumran Texts (Grand Rapids. MI:
Eerdmans, 1959), pp. 7-17; Silberman, 'Unriddling die Riddle', pp. 323-64.
24. Elliger. Studien zum Habakkuk-Kommentar, p. 164; cf. A. Szordnyi, 'Das
Buch Daniel, ein kanonisierter Pescher?'. in J.A. Emerton et al. (eds.). Congress
Volume. Geneva 1965 (VTSup, 15; Leiden: Brill, 1966), pp. 278-94.
25. J.L. Kugel and R.A. Greer. Early Biblical Interpretation (Philadelphia:
Wesuninster Press, 1986), pp. 58-59.
A U N E Charismatic Exegesis 133
They, the men of violence and the breakers of the Covenant, will not
believe when diey hear all diat [is to happen to] die final generation from
the Priest [in whose heart] God set [understanding] that he might interpret
(niOB*?) all the words of His servants die prophets, through whom he
foretold all diat would happen to His people and [His land].
And God told Habakkuk to write down diat which would happen to the
final generation, but He did not make known to him when the time would
come to an end. And as for dial which He said. Thai he who reads may
read it speedily: interpreted (nos) Uiis concerns die Teacher of Right-
eousness, to whom God made known (wiin) all the mysteries Cn) of
His servants the Prophets.
32. G. Vermes. The Dead Sea Scrolls in English (London: Penguin Books, 3rd
edn, 1987).
33. Horgan, Pesharim, p. 229.
34. The relationship between die pesharim and die historical tiaditions they may
contain remains a problematic issue which has yet to be adequately investigated; see
P.R. Davies, 'Eschatology at Qumran", JBL 104 (1985), p. 48. Outside die
pesharim, there is no uace of a confrontation between the Teacher of Righteousness
and the Man of the Lie. The probability is dial diere was no single Wicked Priest or
Man of Lies but rather a series of such figures; cf. A.S. van der Woude. 'Wicked
Priest or Wicked Priests? Reflections on die Identification of die Wicked Priest in die
Habakkuk Commentary", JJS 33 (1982). pp. 349-59; W.H. Brownlee, 'The
Wicked Priest, the Man of Lies, and the Righteous TeacherThe Problem of
Identity", JQR 73 (1982). pp. 1-37.
35. E. Jucci, 'Interpretations e storia nei pesharim qumranici', BO 29 (1987),
pp. 163-70.
36. B.E. Thiering. 'Once More the Wicked Priest". JBL 97 (1978), pp. 191-
A U N E Charismatic Exegesis 135
Qumran commentaries under the rubric of ' m i d r a s h ' , ' ' and Vermes
has even categorized them as t a r g u m i c , " there is a prevailing
tendency to regard the pesharim as constituting a distinct literary
g e n r e . " The structure of the pesharim is consistent and exhibits the
following pattern: 1. a series of brief secdons (varying from a phrase
to live verses), that is, lemmata, are quoted from a particular biblical
book in order, followed by 2. the interpretation of the biblical passage
introduced by tiie term nDB.*" In virtually every instance of the use of
the term n o s in the literature from Qumran, the term is used as a
stereotyped formula to introduce the interpretation of a biblical text.
Analyses of the lemmata of the pesharim suggests that the authors
have altered the biblical text to bring it more into line with their
understanding of the true meaning of the text."*'
205; W.H. Brownlee. The Midrash Pesher of Habakkuk (Missoula. MT: Scholars
Press. 1979), p. 57.
37. Bloch. 'Midrash'. cols. 1276-78; Bloch, who provides a broad definition of
midrash, finds a close relationship between midrash and apocalyptic (the latter is a
type of the former), and dierefore between midrash and IQpHab (col. 1277): 'Le
Commentaire d'Habacuc, qui est une paraphrase actualisante des deux premiers
chapitres d'Habacuc, met en oeuvre tous les proc^d6s midrashiques connus'.
A.G. Wright considers IQpHab to be haggadic midrash ('The Literary Genre
Midrash", CBQ 28 [1966]. pp. 418-22). G. Brooke argues diat die pesharim con-
stitute a type of midrash. but that to regard them as an independent genre unneces-
sarily multiplies generic categories ('Qumran Pesher: Towards die Redefinition of a
Genre", RevQ 10 [1981], pp. 483-503).
38. G. Vermes, 'A propos des commentaires bibliques d^ouverts k QumrSn".
RHPR 35 (1955), pp. 96-102.
39. Horgan, Pesharim, pp. 229-59; I. FrOhlich, 'Le genre litt^raire des
pesharim de QumrSn", RevQ 12 (1986), pp. 383-98.1. Rabinowitz argues diat the
pesharim are not midrashim. but have a closer affinity with apocalyptic
CPesher/Pittaron. Its Biblical Meaning and its Significance in die Qumran Literature',
RevQ 8 (1973), pp. 219-32. See also K.G. Friebel, 'Biblical Interpretation in the
Pesharim of die Qumran Community', Hebrew Studies 22 (1981) pp. 13-24.
40. The term nos occurs within several stereotyped phrases: '7V lain itis ('die
interpretation of passage concerns'). nioQ ('its interpretation concerns'), ned* ITDB
('its interpretation is diat'). widi variations (Brownlee, Midrash Pesher, p. 23;
Horgan. Pesharim, pp. 239-44).
41. T.H. Kim, 'Eschatological Orientation and die Alteration of Scripture in die
Habakkuk Pesher'. JNES 49 (1990). pp. 185-94. The audior cites IQpHab 12.1-10
and 5.8-12 as specific examples. See also the alterations of Isa. 6.9-13 in IQIsa*
6.2-10 discussed by C.A. Evans, 'I Q Isaiah" and die Absence of Prophetic Critique
at Qumran', RevQ 11 (1984), pp. 537-42.
136 The Pseudepigrapha and Early Biblical Interpretation
For the purpose of this essay, of course, the crucial issue is the claim
that the pesharim preserved revealed interpretations of Scripture.
Here it must be observed that the author of IQpHab does not claim
divine insight into the meaning of Scripture for himself, but rather
attributes such insight to the founder or leader of the Community."^
Further since the claim that the true meaning of the mysteries of
Scripture have been revealed to the Teacher of Righteousness occurs
just twice in the pesharim, such a claim cannot be considered a generic
feature of diese commentaries.*' The revealed character of this inter-
pretation is evident in IQpHab 2.8, where the Teacher of
Righteousness is described as:
The priest into whose heart God placed understanding to interpret all the
words of his servants die prophets.
The idiom ]n3, 'to put into the heart', occurs in Neh. 2.12 and
7.5 where it refers to die divine guidance of Nehemiah's plans for
Jerusalem (the same idiom occurs in Greek in Rev. 17.17).'*'' A
similar gift of divine understanding is claimed for the Teacher of
Righteousness in 4QpPs* 4.27, and recurs several times in the
Hodayot, of which he may have been tiie autiior (IQH 2.13; 4.27-29;
7.27; 14.8).*' A special revelation of the meaning of the Torah that
42. This implies diat die interpretations in the pesharim had dieir origin in some
form of communal study of the Scriptures at which die Teacher of Righteousness
presided. Some suggestions regarding the Sitz im Leben of the pesharim have been
made by J.T. Milik. 'Fragments d'un midrash de Michfe dans les manuscrits de
Qumrin'. RB 59 (1952). p. 418: during die daily watch when a group probably read
and interpreted a biblical book verse by verse (cf. IQS 6.6-8). Elsewhere Milik
suggested that die commentaries might be linked to interpretations of Scripture
presented during community meetings for worship {Ten Years of Discovery in the
Wilderness of Judaea [uans. J. Sttugnell; London: SCM Press, 1959], p. 41).
43. Thus die claim by F. Garcia Martfnez ('El pesher: Interpretaci6n prof^tica de
la Escritura'. Salmanticensis 26 [1979]. pp. 125-39). that the chief distinction
between pesharim and midrashim is diat the former claims to be divinely revealed,
must be tieated with caution. Similarly, M. Horgan has called them 'revealed inter-
pretations of revealed mysteries concerning history' ('The Bible Explained
[Prophecies]', p. 251).
44. For parallels to diis idiom, see G. von Rad, 'Die Nehemia-Denkschrift'.
Z4W 76(1964). pp. 176-87.
45. The identification of the Teacher of Righteousness as die author of the
AUNE Charismatic Exegesis 137
The phrase n3 ru? n^an biso, 'according to all that has been revealed
from time to time', which occurs again in IQS 9.13, suggests that the
insight into the true meaning of Scripture was not based on a single
revelation, but rather on a continuing series of revelatory insights.
Further, while the Holy Spirit is never mentioned in connection with
the charismatic interpretation of Scripture, it is mentioned here as the
instrument of prophetic revelation. There is no indication, however,
that the revealed interpretation of Scripture, whether disclosed to the
Teacher of Righteousness or to the 'sons of Zadok' or perhaps other
members of the community, is linked to particular exegetical
techniques.'"
'Inspiration, if any. does not lie in the result of the exegesis as such, in its content,
but radier in die ability of any member of die community and especially die Teacher
of Righteousness to interpret scripture through die correct application of exegetical
techniques' (Exegesis at Qumran, pp. 43-44). E. Slamovic has also argued that
rabbinic mediods of exegesis are present in Qumran literature in 'Toward an Under-
standing of die Exegesis in die Dead Sea Scrolls', RevQ 7 (1969-71), pp. 3-15.
50. Despite the rabbinic view dial prophecy had ceased with the activity of
Haggai, Zechariah and Malachi. early Judaism was extremely diverse, and there is
abundant evidence to suggest that prophecy continued in altered forms to die end of
the second temple period; see Aune, Prophecy in Early Christianity, p. 103-106,
R.A. Horsley, 'Popular Prophetic Movements at the Time of Jesus. Their Principal
Features and Social Origins', JSNT 26 (1986). pp. 3-27. and J.-C. Ingelaere,
'L'inspiration prophdtique dans le judaj'sme: le t^moignage de Ravius Josfephe', ETR
62 (1987), pp. 237-45.
51. J.L. Blenkinsopp, 'Prophecy and Priesthood in Josephus', JJS 25 (1974),
pp. 239-62, and L.H. Feldman, 'Prophets and Prophecy in Josephus', in D.J. Lull
(ed.), SBLSP 1988 (AUanta: Scholars Press, 1988). pp. 424-41.
52. Ingelaere, 'L'inspiration proph^tique', p. 240.
A U N E Charismatic Exegesis 139
53. When he speaks of die inspiration of die biblical prophets, he uses die phrase
Ti ejtijtvoiav fi otJto tow 6eow (Apion 1.7 37), but he does use die term evGeo? of
Saul when he prophesies (Ant. 6.4.2 56), and of Elijah (Ant. 8.13.6 346); cf.
Feldman, 'Prophets and Prophecy', p. 436.
54. M. Hengel, The Zealots (U-ans. D. Smidi; Edinburgh: T. & T. Clark, 1989),
pp. 233-45.
55. Hengel, Zealots, p. 237. The same ambiguous prophecy is referred to in
Tacitus Hist. 5.13 and Suetonius Ves. 4.5.
56. This passage is discussed in some detail by Hengel, Zealots, pp. 236-40.
140 The Pseudepigrapha and Early Biblical Interpretation
little more can be said with any certainty about this passage, which is
probably not less ambiguous than the oracle to which it refers. There
is no clear indication that this oracle was circulated in Zealot circles.
There is no clear indication that the 'ambiguous oracle' referred to
Num. 24.17 (or even Dan. 7.13-14). Nor is there any evidence that a
'prophetic charism* was involved in the interpretation of diis oracle.
While littie can be said about charismatic exegesis in Zealot circles,
it appears clear that Josephus himself was a charismatic exegete in the
sense that he regarded his ability to understand and interpret bodi
revelatory dreams and Scripture as die product of divine enlightenment.
57. Bloch. 'Midrash', col. 1270; Michael Fishbane. 'Revelation and Tradition:
Aspects of Inner-Biblical Exegesis', JBL 99 (1980), pp. 343-61. idem. Biblical
Interpretation in Ancient Israel (Oxford: Clarendon Press. 1985).
58. Kugel and Greer. Early Biblical Interpretation, p. 38.
59. E. Tov. 'Die griechischen Bibel iibersetzungen'. in Wolfgang Haase and
Hildegard Temporini (eds.), ANRW 2.II.20.1 (Beriin: Walter de Gruyter, 1987),
pp. 143-45, 147-51; S. Jellicoe. The Septuagint in Modern Study (Oxford:
Clarendon Press, 1968), pp. 318-24.
60. Septuagint manuscripts often differ among diemselves; die version of Tobit
found in codex Sinaiticus (). for example, is more paraphrastic dian the versions of
Tobit in die codices Alexandrinus (A) and Vaticanus (B).
A U N E Charismatic Exegesis 141
61. The author of the Epistle of Aristeas clearly regarded the Septuagint
translators as inspired; see the recent arguments of Oriinsky. 'The Septuagint and its
Hebrew Text'. II. pp. 542-48; see also D. Georgi. The Opponents of Paul in
Second Corinthians (Philadelphia: Fortress Press. 1986), pp. 110-11. The
inspiration of die Septuagint translators is emphasized in Philo {Vit. Mos. 2.37.40;
he is familiar with Epistle of Aristeas), who claims diat the tfanslators of the
Septuagint wrote 'as though divinely inspired' (icaSajtep evGowoiwvte^). and were
not simply translators but hierophants and prophets (ovx ep(iTivEa<; eKeivov<; aXX'
iepo<pdvta(; KOI )tpo<pf|xo(;).
62. R. Le D^aut, The Message of the New Testament and the Aramaic Bible
(Targum) (Rome: Biblical Institute Press, 1982). pp. 13-15.
63. J.W. Bowker. 'Haggadah in the Targum Ongelos',755 12 (1967).pp. 51-65.
64. See J.-P. Ruiz. Ezekiel in the Apocalypse: The Transformation of Prophetic
Language in Revelation 16,17-19,10 (Frankfurt am Main: Peter Lang. 1989).
65. D.W. Suter (Tradition and Composition in the Parables of Enoch
[SBLDS. 47; Missoula, MT: Scholars Press, 1979]) analyzes die 'midrashic' use of
142 The Pseudepigrapha arui Early Biblical Interpretation
Isa. 24.17-23 in / En. 54.1-56.4 and 64.1-68.1. Suter uses die term midrash
incorrectiy, however, for no distinction is made in / En. 37-71 between text and
interpretation, and such a distinction is a sine qua non of midrash.
66. J.C. Endres has identified 25 pericopes freely composed by the author in
Jub. 19-45 (Biblical Interpretation in the Book of Jubilees [CBQMS, 18;
Washington, DC: Cadiolic Biblical Association of America. 1987], pp. 197-98).
67. Kugel and Greer. Early Biblical Interpretation, pp. 60-61.
68. Y. Yadin, 'Is the Temple Scroll a Sectarian Document?*, in G.M. Tucker
and D.A. Knight (eds.). Humanizing America's Iconic Book: SBL Centennial
Addresses 1980 (Chico, CA: Scholars Press, 1982), pp. 153-69.
69. H.-A. Mink has characterized the Temple Scroll as 'pseudepigraphic
halakah' in 'The Use of Scripture in die Temple Scroll and die Status of die Scroll as
U w ' , SJOT 1 (1987), pp. 20-50.
70. A.M. Wilson and L. Wills, 'Literary Sources of die Temple Scroll', HTR
75 (1982). pp. 275-88; G. Brin, 'Concerning Some of die Uses of die Bible in die
Temple Scroll'. RevQ 12 (1987). pp. 519-28.
AUNE Charismatic Exegesis 143
71. Some of the more important treatments of this subject include C H . Dodd.
According to the Scriptures: The Sub-Structure of New Testament Theology
(London: James Nisbet. 1952); K. Stendahl, The School of St Matthew and its Use
of the Old Testament (Philadelphia: Fortress Press, 1968 [1954]); B. Lindars, New
Testament Apologetic: The Doctrinal Significance of Old Testament Quotations
(London: SCM Press, 1961); D. Juel, Messianic Exegesis: Christological Inter-
pretation of the Old Testament in Early Christianity (Philadelphia: Fortress Press,
1988).
144 The Pseudepigrapha and Early Biblical Interpretation
72. J.J. Collins, 'Prophecy and Fulfillment in the Qumran Scrolls*. JETS 30
(1987), pp. 267-78.
73. The first Christian known to comment on an enUre biblical book was
Heracleon, a Valentinian Gnostic whose activity was centered at Rome, ca. 170 CE.
Fifty-one fragments of his comments on the gospels are preserved, largely in
Clement of Alexandria. Eel. 25.1 and Strom. 4.71-72, and Origen, Comm. in Joh.
13 (trans, in Werner Foerster, Gnosis: A Selection of Gnostic Texts [Oxford:
Clarendon Press. 1972], I, pp. 162-83). Earlier (ca. 160 BC). the Valentinian
Ptolemaeus had commented on the prologue to the Gospel of John (fragments in
Irenaeus. i4Jv. haer. 1.8.5).
74. K. Stendahl. The School of St Matthew and its Use of the Old Testament
(Philadelphia: Fortress Press, new edn. 1968). pp. 194-202 (where die similarities
between (^mran pesher methods and Matdiaean formula quotations are emphasized).
Nowhere does Stendahl find it useful to apply terms like 'charismadc exegesis' to
early Chrisdan biblical interpretation.
75. E.E. Ellis, Paul's Use of the OU Testament (Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans,
1957). On pp. 139-47, Ellis argues for die similarity between 'midrash pesher' (an
interpretative reshaping of the text from an apocalyptic perspective) and Paul's
exegedcal technique.
A U N E Charismatic Exegesis 145
Here the Greek term translated 'disclosed' is in die passive voice, which
functions here as a passivum divinum, tiiat is, as a circumlocution used
76. See D.E. Aune, The Presence of God in the Community: The Eucharist in
its Early Christian Cultic Context'. 5 / 7 2 9 (1976), pp. 451-59.
77. M.E. Boring, 'The Influence of Christian Prophecy on the Johannine
Portrayal of die Paraclete and Jesus', NTS 25 (1978), pp. 113-23.
78. Cerfaux. ' L ' e x ^ g ^ de I'Ancien Testament', p. 138.
79. P. Stuhlmacher. 'The Hermeneutical Significance of 1 Cor. 2.6-16', in
G.F. Hawthorne (ed.), Tradition and Interpretation in the New Testament: Essays in
Honor of E. Earle Ellis (Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans; Tubingen: J.C.B. Mohr
[Paul Siebeck], 1987). pp. 328-47; see also K.O. Sandnes. '"PaulOne of the
Prophets"?A Contribution to the Apostle's Self-Understanding' (Stavanger: Sandnes,
1987). pp. 79-119 (now published in Tubingen by J.C.B. Mohr [Paul Siebeck].
1990).
80. D. Luhrmann, Die Offenbarungsverstdndnis des Paulus und in paulinischen
Gemeinden (Neukirchen-Vluyn: Neukirchener Veriag, 1965). pp. 113-17.
146 The Pseudepigrapha and Early Biblical Interpretation
VII. Conclusion
The foregoing discussion suggests that 'charismatic exegesis' is an
extremely complex phenomenon which (at least for early Judaism and
89. Examples of this literary form: 2 Chron. 20.18-19; Dan. 2.20-23; / En.
90.40; 4 Ezra 13.57-58; 2 Bar. 75.1-8; Josephus, War 3.8.3 354; Corpus
Hermeticum 1.31-32; Mt. 11.25-27 (and par. Lk. 10.21-22); Hermas, Vis. 2.1.1-2.
AUNE Charismatic Exegesis 149
For an examination of the parallels between the Qumran pesharim and the Gnostic
Pistis Sophia, see J. Carmignac, 'Le genre litt^raire du "pesher" dans la Pistis-
Sophia', RevQ 4 (1963-64), pp. 497-522.
150 The Pseudepigrapha and Early Biblical Interpretation
91. G. van der Leeuw. Religion in Essence and Manifestation (2 vols.; trans.
J.E. Turner; New York: Harper & Row. 1963), II. pp. 564-65.
92. J.Z. Smith. 'Wisdom and Apocalyptic'. Map is not Territory: Studies in the
History of Religions (SJLA. 23; Uiden: E.J. Brill, 1978). pp. 74-85. An example
is found in Dan. 9.2,24-26, in which Jeremiah's prophecy that the exile would last
seventy years (Jer. 25.11-12; 29.10) is expanded to mean 70 weeks of years, i.e.,
490 years, since the author lived in die second, rather dian the sixdi, century BCE; see
P. Grelot, 'Soixante-dix semaines d'anuses'. Bib 50 (1969), pp. 169-86.
93. Kugel and Greer, Early Biblical Interpretation, pp. 37-39.
GOD AS 'FATHER' IN THE TARGUMIM, IN NON-CANONICAL
LITERATURES OF EARLY JUDAISM AND FRIMMVE
CHRISTIANITY, AND IN MATTHEW
Bruce Chilton
ideology of the Third Reich.' The first contention has already been
shown to be false. The second is more difficult to refute, because it
relies on the old technique of imputing guilt by association: because
Kittel was sympathetic with National Socialism, anti-Semitism is
attributed to contributors to the Wdrterbuch. Vermes is interested in
claiming that his own perspective is original, according to which
'Abba' was particularly used as an address to God among people he
calls charismatic Hasids.' Two specific figures are in Vermes's mind,
Honi, known as die circle drawer, and Hanina ben Dosa. A story is
told according to which a grandson of Honi, named Abba Hilkiah, was
approached by children during a drought, saying 'Abba, Abba, give us
rain!' He then prayed to the 'Lord of the universe', to help those who
did not know the difference between the Abba who gives rain and the
Abba who does not.'"
Vermes's solution is troubled by many of the same problems that
afflict Jeremias's. The focus, first of all, is too narrowly resbicted to
rabbinica, and even dien, die instances widiin rabbinica are miscon-
strued. The examples of Honi and Hanina do not, as Vermes main-
tains, establish a type of charismatic Hasid. The fact is that both of
them are referred to within rabbinica as among rabbis, and, as
George Foot Moore pointed out, Aqiba also (and effectively) prayed
for rain, so that tiie ability is scarcely a unique charism." That Aqiba
heavenly Father he took up the chatter of a small child. To assume diis would be a
piece of inadmissible naivety'. Jeremias elsewhere (cf. pp. 58-62) gives a much
fuller linguistic discussion of the usage among adults than Vermes does, and to see
some of the same evidence marshaled against Jeremias by Vermes is what might be
called an exercise in creative midrash.
8. Vermes, Jesus and World of Judaism, pp. 64-66. On p. 65, Vermes
remarks that scholars of die New Testament treat the Wdrterbuch 'as a gospel Uiith
above all criticism'.
9. Cf. G. Vermes, Jesus the Jew: A Historian's Reading of the Gospels
(London: Collins, 1973). pp. 69-82.
10. Vermes. Jesus the Jew, p. 211; Jesus and the World, p. 42. on both
occasions citing b. Ta'an. 23b. In neither book does Vermes mention diat Jeremias
cites the passage in full and discusses it (pp. 61. 62), and also gives credit for the
reference to J. Leipoldt in Jesu Verhaltnis zu Juden und Griechen (Leipzig:
G.Wigand, 1941). pp. 136-37.
11. G.F. Moore, Judaism in the First Centuries of the Christian Era, II
(Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1927), p. 235. Moore's presentation
of stories about Honi and Hanina (pp. 222.235-36)which Vermes does not cite
makes it plain that efficacious prayer did not constitute die line of demarcation of a
CHILTON God as 'Father' 155
was associated with powers to pray for divine aid in the course of
nature did not in any way reduce his status as a teacher, or demand
anodier category for him. Even if die existence of such a category be
granted, for the sake of argument, Hilkiah's paternity would by no
means demonstrate he belongs within it. Further, as we will shortly
see, God could be appealed to as 'father', by those outside the circle of
rabbinic teachers. In any case, Jeremias observed that Abba Hilkiah
does not address God as 'Fadier', even diough he knows he is as a
fadier. He calls him 'Lord','^ a change from 'Father' which is also
made in Targum Jeremiah.'' Although Vermes's purpose is com-
prehensively to refiite Jeremias' posidon, he in fact only aggravates die
mediodological weaknesses of the latter's approach, by limiting his
survey of the evidence of Judaism to late, rabbinic sources, and by
attempting to justify a christological reading of Jesus. Vermes' charis-
matic Hasid is certainly less orthodox than Jerenuas' unique Jesus,
peculiarly conscious of a filial relationship with God, but both
represent tiie sort of effort at Christology which is appropriate only
after evidence has been adduced, not at the foundational stage of inquiry.
The Pentateuchal Targumim called Neofiti, the Fragmentary
Targum, and Pseudo-Jonathan, widi their expansive, often innovative
readings, provide clear evidence of an understanding of God as father
widiin Judaism. For die present purpose, only Pentateuchal Targums
may be considered,''' and Onqelos, the most literal of die Targumim,
is excluded from consideration here precisely because, as the most
accurate translation of the Hebrew text, it is the least obviously
special group among or apart from the rabbis, although it did mark out certain
teachers as especially favored.
12. Jeremias. Prayers of Jesus, pp. 61. 62.
13. Cf. 3.4,19, cf. 31.9 (widi die MasoreUc Text, in each case), and R. Hayward,
The Targum of Jeremiah (Aramaic Bible, 12; Wilmington: Glazier, 1987).
14. The development of a more circumspect approach to God's fadierhood is
evident in the Targumim to Isaiah (63.16; 64.8), Jeremiah (3.4. 19; 31.9), and
Malachi (1.6; 2.10). Cf. B.D.Chilton, 77ie Isaiah Targum (Aramaic Bible, 11;
Wilmington: Glazier. 1987); Hayward, Jeremiah; K.J. Cadicart and R.P. Gordon,
The Targum of the Minor Prophets (Aramaic Bible. 14; Wilmington: Glazier, 1989).
In aggregate, what the readings demonstrate is that a more reverential approach to
God was probably current, at least linguistically, among the rabbis as compared to
some circles of Judaism during the first century. Bodi Jeremias and Vermes attempt
to employ a nuance of usage in order to posit a categorical distinction of Jesus, when
a model involving gradations of usage would be more productive.
156 The Pseudepigrapha and Early Biblical Interpretation
15. Cf. R. Le Ddaut. "The Targumim', The Cambridge History of Judaism. II.
The Hellenistic Age (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1989), pp. 563-90,
cf. p. 578 and p. 581 in particular. Unfortunately, die article as a whole simply fails
to take account of recent research, and criticism of the stance Le Ddaut has
championed for some diirty years.
16. Cf. A. Dfez Macho, Neophyti 1. Targum Palestinense Ms de Ui Biblioteca
Vaticana, I (Madrid: Consejo Superior de Investigadones Cientfficas, 1968).
CHILTON God as 'Father' 157
They pray before their father in heaven, and he answers them and they
deliver."
21. Cf. J.J. Slotki, Numbers: Midrash Kabbah (London: Soncino, 1983);
H. Freedman. Genesis: Midrash Rabbah (London: Soncino, 1983). A comparison
might be made widi die teaching ascribed to Yohanan ben Zakkai, that die stones of
die altar, upon which no iron tool was to be lifted, establish peace between Israel and
'their fadier in heaven'. By using die argument kai vahomer, he reasons diat a person
who establishes peace is to be protected. Cf. Mek. on Exod. 20.21-23 (Bahodesh
11) in J.Z. Lauterbach. Mekilta de-Rabbi Ishmael (3 vols. Philadelphia: Jewish
Publication Society of America, 1933), n, p. 290.
22. Cf. S. Lund and J. Foster, Variant Versions of Targumic Traditions within
Codex Neofiti I (SBL Aramaic Studies, 2; Missoula, MA: Scholars Press. 1977).
Lund and Foster argue for the affinity between the Fragments Targum and at least
one of die versions reflected in the marginalia.
23. Cf. M.L. Klein, The Fragment-Targums of the Pentateuch according to their
CHILTON God as 'Father' 159
Extant Sources (AnBib, 76; Rome: Biblical Institute Press, 1980), p. 25; Moses
Ginsburger, Das Fragmententhargum (Berlin: Calvary, 1899).
24. Cf. also the MSS from the Cairo Geniza presented in M.L. Klein. Genizah
Manuscripts of Palestinian Targum to the Pentateuch, I (Cincinatd: Hebrew Union
College Press. 1986). pp.240, 241, 244, 245. Although the substance of die
haggadah is given in boUi fragments, so diat its existence c. AD 1000 is established,
neither refers to God as 'fadier'.
160 The Pseudepigrapha and Early Biblical Interpretation
there, although the haggadah does (in the Vatican MS). In the same
connection, it should be pointed out that the Targum called Pseudo-
Jonathan, from the seventh century, does not preserve most of the
references cited above, although it does present analogous renderings
at Exod. 1.19; Deut. 32.6, and an innovative usage at Deut. 28.32, 33,
where it is a question of praying to God with good works (ffao vros)
in one's hands for release in judgment.^' Clearly, as we come to later
sources, there is a tendency both to embellish and to qualify the notion
of God as 'father'.
25. The analogy to the reading at Exod. 15.12 in the Fragments Targum is
evident, and further suggests that die forensic reference to God as 'father' is
relatively late within the Targumim. For editions of Pseudo-Jonathan, cf.
B. Walton, Triplex Targum: Biblia Sacra Polyglotta, IV (London: Roycroft, 1657);
M. Ginsburger. Pseudo-Jonathan (Olms: Hildesheim, 1971); D. Rieder, Pseudo-
Jonathan (Jerusalem: Salmon, 1974); E.G. Clarke, Targum Pseudo-Jonathan of the
Pentateuch (Hoboken, NJ: Ktav, 1984). Until die Targum is published in 'The
Aramaic Bible', we have recourse for a translation only to J.W. Edieridge, The
Targums ofOnkelos and Jonathan ben Uzziel on the Pentateuch (New York: Ktav,
1968), reprinted from the last century.
CHILTON God as 'Father' 161
29. My interpretation liere differs from SpitUer's, who takes die 'fadier' to be Job
himself (aldiough he capitalizes the iniUal letter in his translation). As he himself
observes, however ('Job', p. 865 n. 'j'). the MS at Messina and Rome read 'die
Lord', much as diey do at 40.2. so diat his exegesis would appear unnatural.
30. Cf. K. Preisendanz, Papyri Graecae Magicae, II (Sammlung Wissen-
schafdicheCommentare; Stuttgart:Teubner. 1974), pp. 148,149; J.H. Charleswordi,
'Prayer of Jacob*, OTP, II. pp. 715-23. Charleswordi's contention that die prayer is
neidier 'peculiarly gnostic' nor 'a charm' (p. 718) is well taken; on the odier hand,
his attempt to back die dating up to as eariy as die first century is tendentious. It is
partially based on an alleged similarity to die 'Prayer of Joseph', which must be
eariier dian die third century, when it was quoted by Origen. but die range of parallels
CHILTON God as 'Father' 163
to the angelology of its few lines certainly do not support Smith's confident
ascription of it to die first century (cf. J.Z. Smith, 'Prayer of Joseph', APOT, II,
pp. 699-714). Charlesworth himself acknowledges 'parallels' widi documents of the
second century, and he nowhere addresses the central point of Preisendanz's
chronology; in form and function, die 'Prayer of Jacob' comports well widi odier
incantations of the fourdi century, which also were designed to summon deities.
31. Cf. M. Rhodes James, The Testament of Abraham (Texts and Studies,
11.2; Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1892); E.P. Sanders. 'Testament of
Abraham'. APOT, I, pp. 871-902.
32. Cf. M. Delcor, Le Testament d'Abraham (Studia in Veteris Testamenti
Pseudepigrapha; Leiden: Brill, 1973), p. 49; B. Chilton, '"Amen": An Approach
dirough Syriac Gospels', ZNW 69 (1978), pp. 203-11. and Targumic Approaches
to the Gospels (Lanham. MD: University Press of America, 1986), pp. 15-23.
164 The Pseudepigrapha and Early Biblical Interpretation
Around 100 CE,'' or somewhat later during the second century,'* the
Odes of Solomon were composed in Edessa" (or perhaps Antioch'*);
they utilize the address of God as 'father' more frequently, and with
far greater density, than any of the documents adduced above. That
feature of the usage of the Odes is easily explained on the basis of
their Christian provenience, and some of the usages in fact join the
evidence which indicates that is their provenience. After the unambig-
uously Christian statement, 'you are saved in him who was saved'
(8.21c), the Odes go on to speak of being found incorrupt 'on account
of the name of your father' (]-oi3i noob, 8.22)." The Christian idiom,
'God the father', on the way towards becoming trinitarian, is also
evidenced (cf. 9.5; 14.1, cf. v. 8), as when Christ calls God 'my fadier'
(cf. 10.4). But that doctrinal development becomes most explicit at
19.1, 2:
A cup of milk was offered to me,
and I drank it in the sweetness of the Lord's kindness.
The Son is die cup.
die Fadier is he who was milked;
and die Holy Spirit is she who milked him."
33. So J.H. Charleswordi, 'The Odes of Solomon', APOT, II, pp. 725-71, 727.
34. Cf. R. Harris and A. Mingana, The Odes and Psalms of Solomon (2 vols.;
Manchester University Press, 1916. 1920). II, p. 64.
35. Cf. Harris and Mingana, Odes, pp. 36-40, 42-47, 64, 68, 69.
36. So Charleswordi, 'Odes', p. 727, aldiough Ignatius' knowledge of the Odes
can scarcely be used as evidence of their origin; it only shows they were widely
disseminated. Given the u-aditions of wisdom at Edessa (evidenced in the Thomaean
corpus), and the tradition of hymnody there, above all in the case of Bardaisan. an
Edessene origin is more probable.
37. Cf. die Syriac text in Harris and Mingana, Odes, I.
38. Thetianslationand die capitalizations are Charlesworth's.
CHILTON God as 'Father' 165
sacrifice (cf. 7.10). The link by means of the term 'father' between the
notions of God's cosmological power and of the acceptable worship of
God is reminiscent of the Testament of Job. Of course, the reminis-
cence we can observe is a matter of a pattern of usage, not dependence
(literary or otherwise), but it does tend to confirm that God's father-
hood was connected with his cosmological grandeur and his availability
through worship within the first century. The same chapter of the
Odes also presents an innovative usage, in comparison to what we
have seen so far, in which God's fatherhood is related specifically to
his wisdom (7.7):
The father of knowledge is die word of knowledge.
Given die Christian stance of the Odes, that statement is not surprising
in die mouth of one who says diat God begat him widi his riches and
his thought (v. 10). But it is startling that Christ says that God
'acquired me from the beginning' (n'ona p '33pi in), when diat is what
Neofiti says emphatically of Israel in its clever rendering of Deut.
32.6. It is apparent that the tradition that, when they are in distress,
the 'father' would answer the prayers of the people he acquired has
been applied particularly to Christ in the Odes in respect of his cosmic
39. The idendty of the speaker with Christ in each of the examples to be cited is
also asserted by Charlesworth.
166 The Pseudepigrapha and Early Biblical Interpretation
grandeur, just the verb used in the Testament of Job 40.2 (see also
Tob. 13.3). Peter is also said to benefit from God's revelation (16.17)
and 'little ones' are said to have 'angels' that see the 'father' (18.10),
in a manner also somewhat reminiscent of the angelology of the
Testament. The 'father' is held to retain certain specific knowledge
(20.23; 24.36), but the surprise is more the nature of the knowledge
than the designation 'father', much as is the case {mutatis mutandis)
within the first category.
The idea of God's response to prayer (category 3) is consistent with
die focus upon reward in Matthew (6.1, 4, 18), but diere is also a
more direct appeal to the imagery of fadierhood in order to express
God's merciful response in prayer (7.11). Much more startlingly,
Matthew's Jesus claims diat God will respond, as 'fadier', whenever
two petitioners agree (18.19), and that promise is made in the context
of one of the imperatives for forgiveness (18.18). It seems clear that a
distinctive view of prayer is being promulgated by Matthew's Jesus,
but it remains most unclear diat any unusual idiom of God as 'fadier'
is die precedent. The appeal to die cosmological fadier is, on die odier
hand, quite as direct as we find in the Pseudepigrapha (in category 4).
The images are sometimes striking (6.26; 10.29), but one of the
usages under the fourth category can only be described as banal
(18.14). The idea of election, as compared to the gentiles (6.32), is
also unexceptional, but the distinction from those who call people
'father' is unusual (23.9). There, too, however, as in the cases of
forgiveness in prayer and the father's apocalyptic knowledge,
category 5 is not notable for tiie usage of 'fatiier' in respect of God,
but for what is said by means of tiiat Judaic idiom.
Many usages widiin Matthew do not fall into the categories developed
above. In the case of the final instance in the Gospel, where the risen
Jesus calls for die disciples to baptize all nations in the name of die
fadier, die son, and the holy spirit (28.19), die Christian provenience
of tiie usage is obvious, and comports well with the Odes of Solomon.
The odd reference to 'die kingdom of my fatiier' in 26.29 is another
such instance,"" and the confidence that the father will provide the
disciples with the holy spirit when they are under duress (Mt. 10.20)
might come direcdy from the Odes. The passages are a reminder that
die whole of Matthew represents signal developments of Jesus' message,
43. The parallel in Mk 14.25, and the more distant echo in Lk. 22.18, confirm
the suspicion.
168 The Pseudepigrapha and Early Biblical Interpretation
Given that the bulk of die usages of Mattiiew's Jesus fall within tiie
norms of early Judaism, in the light of the readings of Pseudo-
Jonathan and Neofiti, late though they undoubtedly are, it is histori-
cally dubious to use the distinctiveness of the Matdiean usage to argue
diat Jesus was 'unique', 'radical', or diat he in some way 'transcended'
44. Jeremias. Prayers of Jesus, p. 19, also discusses die teaching ascribed to
Judah in b. Qid. 36a, diat 'If you behave like children, you are called children; if you
do not behave like children, you are not called children'.
CHILTON God as 'Father' 169
Judaism. To argue that his talk of God as 'father' somehow put him in
a special category of Judaism is simply specious.
The present essay, it must be stressed, is by no means a full account
of references to God as 'father' in the relevant literatures. There are
sporadic references in the Apocrypha, elsewhere in the Pseudepigrapha,
and in a score of rabbinic documents (particularly within prayers and
parables). Documents have been considered here that present clear
profiles of usage, for the sake of comparison. That comparison leads
to a simple finding: Matthew's Jesus does not say anything radically
new about God in calling him 'father'. He simply prays, enjoys or
speaks of the visions and revelations of prayer, anticipates G o d ' s
response, praises him as tiie fatiier of all and of his follows particu-
larly. That he also stresses the judgment of the 'father' and his demand
for ethical conduct is unusual, but hardly unprecedented. The
persistence and character of the usage in Mattiiew is distinctive, but no
mystery; and tiie usage of Matthew is a suitable starting point for pro-
ceeding to discover tiie usage of Jesus, which may well emerge as
distinctive, but hardly unique or esoteric.
LUKE AND THE REWRITTEN BIBLE:
ASPECTS OF LUKAN HAGIOGRAPHY*
Craig A. Evans
* Portions of this chapter have been read at various regional and national
meetings of die Society of Biblical Literature.
1. See S.Sandmel. 'The Haggada widiin Scripture', JBL 80 (1961). pp. 105-22.
2. See J.A. Sanders. 'Hermeneutics in Trueand False Prophecy', in G.W.Coats
and B.O. Long (eds.). Canon and Authority: Essays in Old Testament Religion and
Theology (Philadelphia: Fortress Press. 1977). pp. 21-41; repr. as 'Canonical
Hermeneutics: True and False Prophecy', in J.A. Sanders. From Sacred Story to
Sacred Text: Canon as Paradigm (Philadelphia: Fortress Press. 1987), pp. 87-105.
3. For further discussion see J.A. Sanders. Torah and Canon (Philadelphia:
Fortress Press, 1972); idem, 'Adaptable for Life: The Nature and Function of
Canon', in F.M. Cross et aL (eds.). Magnolia Dei: The Mighty Acts of God
(G.E. Wright Festschrift; Garden City. NY: Doubleday, 1976), pp. 531-60; repr. in
Sanders. Fwm Sacred Story to Sacred Text, pp. 9-39; M. Fishbane,'Revelation and
EVANS Luke and the Rewritten Bible 171
5. See E. Tov, 'The Septuagint', in M.J. Mulder (ed.), Mikra: Text, Transla-
tion, Reading and Interpretation of the Hebrew Bible in Ancient Judaism cmd Early
Christianity (Philadelphia: Fortress Press; Assen, The Netherlands: Van Gorcum,
1988), pp. 161-88, esp. 169-74; and S.P. Brock, 'Translating die Old Testament',
in D.A. Carson and H.G.M. Williamson (eds.). It is Written: Scripture Citing
Scripture (B. Lindars Festschrift; Cambridge: Cambridge University, 1988),
pp. 87-98.
6. See Tov, 'The Septuagint', pp. 181-87.
7. See P.S. Alexander. 'Jewish Aramaic Translations of Hebrew Scriptures',
in Mulder (ed.), Mikra, pp. 217-54. esp. 225-41.
8. For a competent example of die work diat needs to be done in order to begin
die exegesis of a targum. see B.D. Chilton. The Glory of Israel: The Theology and
Provenience of the Isaiah Targum (JSOTSup. 23; Sheffield: JSOT Press. 1982).
9. See M.J. Mulder, 'The Transmission of die Biblical Text', in Mulder (ed.),
Mikra, pp. 87-135, esp. 104-13.
EVANS Luke and the Rewritten Bible 173
10. See W.H. Brownlee. The Meaning of the Qumran Scrolls for the Bible
(New York: Oxford University Press, 1964), pp. 155-246; M. Fishbane. 'Use,
Authority and Interpretation of Mikra at (^mran', in Mulder (ed.), Mikra, pp. 339-
77. esp. 366-75; D. Dimant, 'Qumran Sectarian Literature', in M.E. Stone (ed.).
Jewish Writings of the Second Temple Period (Philadelphia: Fortress Press; Assen.
The Nedierlands: Van Gorcum, 1984), pp. 483-550, esp. 503-22; and T.H. Kim,
'Eschatological Orientadon and the Alteration of Scripture in the Habakkuk Pesher',
JNES 49 (1990). pp. 185-94.
11. See C.A.Evans, 'IQIsaiah'and the Absence of Prophetic Critique at
CJumran'. RevQ 11 (1984). pp. 537-42.
12. See llQMelch9-16.
13. See G.J. Brooke, 'The Biblical Texts in die Qumran Commenuries: Scribal
Errors or Exegetical Variants?' in C.A. Evans and W.F. Stinespring (eds.). Early
Jewish and Christian Exegesis (FS W.H. Brownlee; Homage, 10; Adanta: Scholars
Press, 1987). pp. 85-100; M.P. Horgan, Pesharim: Qumran Interpretations of
Biblical Books (CBQMS, 8; Washington. DC: Cadiolic Biblical Association, 1979).
14. In a recent study J.H. Charlesworth ('The Pseudepigrapha as Biblical
Exegesis', in Evans [ed.]. Early Jewish and Christian Exegesis, pp. 139-52) has
suggested that the pseudepigraphal writings that bear only a general relationship to
die Old Testament fall into four categories: (I) Inspiration, whereby the OT inspires
the writer to develop a story or dieme (such as the various Prayers, Psalms and
Odes); (2) Framework, whereby the OT provides the setting for die pseudepigraphal
story (4 Ezra, 2 Baruch, most of the Testaments); (3) Launching, whereby the OT
launches a new story that departs from die original OT setting (Books of Enoch); and
(4) Inconsequential, in which die pseudepigraphal writings borrows only the barest
facts, usually names, from the OT (Sibylline Oracles, Treatise of Shem and the
Apocalypse of Adam). See now his updated and expanded version of this paper, and
see also J.C. VanderKam. 'Biblical Interpreution in I Enoch and Jubilees', in this
volume.
174 The Pseudepigrapha and Early Biblical Interpretation
reasons and for others some scholars have concluded that in all prob-
ability the evangelist had been a member of the synagogue, either as a
proselyte or, as is more likely, as a 'God-fearer'.^^ If this conclusion
is correct, it is reasonable to assume that the evangelist Luke had been
exposed to the rewritten Bible within this context. Regardless of what
exposure he may have had to Hellenistic literature, his exposure to the
s y n a g o g u e ^ ' and to the Greek Bible of the Diaspora must not be
underrated. When the evangelist's exposure to Judaism is appreciated,
one has all the more reason to expect his writing to reflect the
literature of the Judaism of his day.
J. Jervell, 'The Law in Luke-Acts', in idem, Luke arui the People of God: A New
Look at Luke-Acts (Minneapolis: Augsburg, 1972), pp. 133-51. According to
S.G. Wilson (Luke and the Law [SNTSMS. 50; Cambridge: Cambridge University
Press. 1983]). Luke's view toward the law is inconsistent. He thinks diat only in
reference to Paul is the evangelist concerned to show dial die law is respected.
22. See Fitzmyer. Luke I-IX, pp. 35-47. Although the evangelist sharply
polemicizes against Jewish rejection of Christianity, I diink diat accusing him of anti-
Semitism, as does J.T. Sanders (The Jews in Luke-Acts [Philadelphia: Fortress
Press. 1987]), is a gross misreading. A better assessment is offered by
R.L. Brawley. Luke-Acts and the Jews: Conflict, Apology, and Conciliation
(SBLMS, 33; Adanta: Scholars Press. 1987).
23. M. Smidi ('A Comparison of Early Christian and Eariy Rabbinic Tradition',
JBL 82 [1963], pp. 169-76) has remarked: 'Their [the gospels'] Sitz im Uben
seems to have been the synagogue...' (p. 173).
24. J.L. Kugel, Early Biblical Interpretation (widi R.A. Greer; Library of Early
EVANS Luke and the Rewritten Bible 177
Is this not what Luke has done in his own distinctive chronological
presentation in which we have the period of Israel, the period of
Jesus, and the period of the Church?^*
Redaction criticism, moreover, assumes the existence and utilization
of various written and oral sources. This is also the case in the exam-
ples of biblical rewriting that will be surveyed below. But do the
evangelists view their sources the same way that the Jewish rewriters
and retellers of biblical narrative view theirs? To this question we
now turn.
instructive examples is the parallel in Lk. 24.19 and Acts 7.22. In the
former passage Jesus is described as 'a prophet mighty in deed and
word' (jtpo(pr|xii(; Suvatot; ev epYtp K A I X^oytp), while in the latter
Moses is described as 'mighty in his words and deeds' ( S w a x o q ev
"KoTioxc, KTTL E P Y O K ; avxow). Because Jesus' word is likened to that of
Moses, the most significant contributor to Scripture, it seems quite
likely that the evangelist Luke would have viewed the words of die
mighty prophet Jesus as at least equal in authority to those of the
lawgiver himself. Secondly, within a generation of Luke's writings
there are strong indications diat Christians viewed some of the New
Testament writings as Scripture. In 1 Tim. 5.18 a verse firom the Old
Testament (Deut. 25.4) and a saying fi-om Q (Lk. 10.7; cf. Mt. 10.10)
are introduced as 'the Scripture' (fj YPa<PT|)- I" 2 Tim. 3.16 the
reference to 'all Scripture' ( M O A Ypacpri) probably includes both Old
Testament writings and some New Testament writings, for the
expression 'sacred writings' ( I E P A Y p d n n a t a ) in v. 15, with which
the more inclusive 'all Scripture', contrasts, probably refers only to
the Old Testament. In 2 Pet. 1.16-21 die heavenly voice of die New
Testament Transfiguration event is called a 'prophetic word'
(repotpiitiKov XoYOv), after which the author states that 'every
prophecy of Scripture' (jtaoa J t p o 9 T | T E I A ypo.<pr[c,) is the result of
God's activity. Finally, in 3.15-16 the Petrine author classifies Paul's
letters with 'the other Scriptures' (xat; X.oiita(; YP<pa<;) which the
ignorant and unstable twist, an expression that clearly has in mind the
Old Testament writings as well. It is not likely that such sentiments
represent completely novel Christian views, but are likely extensions
of the implicit authority in much of the dominical tradition itself (Lk.
9.26: 'Whoever is ashamed of me and of my words, of him will die
Son of man be ashamed when he comes in his glory'; 11.32: '...they
repented at the preaching of Jonah, and behold, something greater
than Jonah is here', a saying that implies that Jesus' word carries more
weight than Jonah's; Mt. 24.35: 'Heaven and eardi will pass away, but
my words will not pass away', an utterance that approximates the
eternal validity of the Law in Mt. 5.18 [compare also Isa. 55.10-11])
and the explicit authority sometimes found in Paul (1 Thess. 2.13,
where the gospel is described as the 'Word of God'; 1 Cor. 14.37,
where the prophet or spiritual person will recognize that Paul's word
is 'die command of the Lord'; Gal. 1.11-12, where Paul claims tiiat
EVANS Luke and the Rewritten Bible 179
Chronicles
The Chronicler rewrites the Deuteronomistic history (mosdy Samuel-
Kings), recasting this history in a manner that will advance post-exilic
reform and renewal. His work has been described as 'targum',"*
27. I concur with the judgment of E.E. Ellis (Paul's Use of the Old Testament
[Edinburgh: Oliver & Boyd, 1957], p. 36). who says the 'sayings of Christ were
regarded as the Word of God by Paul'.
28. So R. Le D6aut, 'Apropos d'une definition du Midrash'. Bib 50 (1969),
pp. 395-413, esp. 408 n. 3. According to L.C. Crockeu ("The Old Testament in
Luke with Emphasis on die Interpretadon of Isaiah 61.1-2' (PhD dissertation. Brown
University, 1966], p. 334). 'Luke read[s] Mark in a way that is analogous to die
way he reads the Old Testament'. I am not sure, however, if Luke actually viewed
Mark as sacred text, as he undoubtedly viewed die dominical tradidon in particular
and the Jesus story in general.
29. The 'radicalness' of the paraphrase of each writing varies, of course.
1 Esdras and Josephus are quite conservative; Chronicles less so. with Jubilees and
Uber Antiquitatum Biblicarum taking the greatest liberties. For further discussion,
see C.A. Evans, 'The Genesis Apocryphon and the Rewritten Bible', in F. Garcfa
Martfnez and E. Puech (eds.). Memorial Jean Carmignac: Etudes Qumrdniermes
(RevQ 13 [1988]). pp. 153-65.
30. W.E. Barnes. 'Chronicles a Targum', ExpTim 8 (1897), pp. 316-19.
180 The Pseudepigrapha and Early Biblical Interpretation
David king over Israel, according to die word of the Lord by the hand
of Samuel'. The Chronicler's addition is inspired by 1 Sam. 16.1, 3,
12, 13 and is intended to show that David's coronation was in keeping
witii prophetic utterance. According to 2 Sam. 5.6, 'the king and his
men went to Jerusalem'. But in 1 Chron. 11.4 ' David and all Israel
went to Jerusalem'. The Chronicler replaces 'his men' with 'all Israel'
in order to emphasize the unity of the nation behind David. According
to 2 Sam. 5.21, '[The Philistines] left their images diere, and David
and his men took diem away'. 1 Chron. 14.10-12 reads: 'They left
their gods there; and David gave commandment, and they were
burned with fire'. The Chronicler wishes to remove any doubt about
what David did with the 'gods' that he had captured. According to
2 Sam. 24.1, 'The anger of the Lord was kindled against Israel, and he
moved David against them, saying, "Go, number Israel and Judah"'.
But 1 Chron. 21.1 reads: 'And Satan stood up against Israel, and
moved David to number Israel'. The Chronicler is reluctant to have
Yahweh incite David to sin, so he mentions Satan instead. The substi-
tution is likely to have been inspired by, and probably was understood
as justified by, the parallel in Job 2.3 where Satan 'moved' God
against Job.'*
This addition explains why Saul died and justifies tfie ti-ansference of
the throne to the family of Jesse. For it was Yahweh who 'turned
over' the kingdom."*"
vv. 34-36 with Ps. 106.1. 47-48). The fire that rained down from
heaven (1 Chron. 21.26b-30) probably reflects the similar accounts in
Lev. 9.24 and 1 Kgs 18.38. David's giving of instructions regarding
the temple (1 Chron. 28.2-10) alludes to Scripture at many points
(compare v. 2 with Ps. 132.1-8; vv. 6-8 with Deut. 4.5; vv. 9-10
with Deut. 4.25-31).
1 Esdras
Following its sources much more closely, 1 Esdras is a retelling of
biblica] history from Josiah (2 Chron. 35.1-27) to Ezra's public
reading of the Law (Neh. 7.73-8.12). The writing emphasizes the
roles of Josiah, Zerubbabel and Ezra in the reform of Israelite
worship."*' This emphasis becomes apparent when 1 Esdras is com-
pared to its biblical parallels. Josiah. Whereas according to 2 Chron.
35.1, 'Josiah kept a passover to the Lord in Jerusalem; and they killed
tiie passover lamb', 1 Esd. 1.1 says, 'Josiah kept the passover to his
Lord in Jerusalem; he killed the passover l a m b . . . ' 1 Esdras says that
it was Josiah himself who observed die feast (rather than 'diey').
According to 1 Esd. 1.3 Josiah enjoined the Levites to sanctify them-
selves (compare 2 Chron. 35.3). Zerubbabel. The only major addition
in 1 Esdras is the story of the three young men in die court of Darius
(1 Esd. 3.1-5.6), a story tiiat is widiout parallel in the Old Testament.
One of die young men is identified as Zerabbabel (4.13). Because of
his wise answer (4.14-41), Darius grants Zerubbabel his wish to have
Jemsalem and the temple rebuilt (4.42-63). This story enhances
Zembbabel's reputation. In keeping with his prominence, Zerubba-
bel's name is added to Sissinnes' letter (compare I Esd. 6.18 with
Ezra 5.14) and to Darius's reply (compare I Esd. 6.27 widi Ezra 6.7).
41. See J.M. Myers. I &H Esdras (AB, 42; Garden City, NY: Doubleday,
1964), pp. 1-6. 16-19.
184 The Pseudepigrapha and Early Biblical Interpretation
Ezra. According to Ezra 7.10, 'Ezra had set his heart to study the law
of the Lord, and to do it, and to teach his statutes and ordinances in
Israel'. The parallel in 1 Esd. 8.7 emphasizes Ezra's knowledge and
teaching: 'Ezra possessed great knowledge, so that he omitted nothing
from die law of die Lord or the commandments, but taught all Israel
all die ordinances and judgments'. In order not to lose sight of Ezra,
1 Esdras omits Neh. 1.1-7.72, where the narrative continues with the
story of Ezra reading die law (Neh. 7.73-8.12). In 1 Esd. 9.39 Ezra is
called 'chief priest', whereas in Neh. 8.1 he is Ezra the 'scribe' (and
'priest' in 8.2). Although 1 Esdras follows the Hebrew text closely, it
is still an example of 'radical paraphrase'. For it has selected only
portions of the biblical story, adding one apocryphal story, and
omitting a large section of Nehemiah.
Jubilees
In his summary of the relationship of Jubilees to die biblical narrative,
O.S. Wintermute has noted diat in retelling the biblical narratives, the
author has freely condensed (e.g. the story of plagues on Pharaoh,
Exod. 7-10 = Jub. 48.4-11), omitted (e.g. tiie blessing of Ephraim and
Manasseh, Gen. 48.1-20), expurgated (e.g. the notice of Abraham's
presenting his wife to foreign rulers as his sister. Gen. 12.10-20;
20.2-7), explained (e.g. Reuben's apparent incest. Gen. 35.22 = Jub.
33.2-20), supplemented (e.g. tales of Abraham's youtii, Jub. 12.1-9,
12-13, 16-21, 25-27), and sometimes radically reshaped tiie biblical
episodes (e.g. Isaac's covenant widi Abimelech, Gen. 26.31-33 = Jub.
24.21-33).*^ Wintermute believes tiiat tiie activity of tiie author may
be described as 'midrash'.*' J.H. Charlesworth agrees, stating that
Jubilees 'is a type of midrash on Gen. 1.1 tiirough Exod. 12.50. It
rewrites tiiese portions of tiie Tanach from a different perspective.'**
Years ago, R.H. Charles called Jubilees an 'enlarged targum on
Genesis and Exodus'.*' In a recent study J.C. Endres, however, has
described the activity of the author of Jubilees as 'retelling' and his
46. J.C. Endres. Biblical Interpretation in the Book of Jubilees (CBQMS, 18;
Washington, DC: Cadiolic Biblical Association, 1987), pp. 196-225. see esp. 196.
47. Nickelsburg. T h e Bible Rewritten*, in Stone (ed.). Jewish Writings,
pp. 97-104 (98).
186 The Pseudepigrapha and Early Biblical Interpretation
drawing upon virtually the same biblical texts (Gen. 12.2; 38.24;
Exod. 20.5; Lev. 20.10; 21.9; Deut. 7.13; 22.23; 27.15; 28.8; Isa. 1.9;
65.15; Jer. 29.18; Ezek. 16.40). Jub. 22.10-24 provides yet a third
farewell speech, this one a blessing to grandson Jacob. As in the case
of the others, this one too draws upon various, but different, biblical
passages (Gen. 14.19; 27.29; 28.1; Num. 24.17; Deut. 26.14; Isa.
52.11; Ps. 106.28). Finally, Jub. 22.25-30 is an account of a second
blessing pronounced upon Jacob, a blessing that echoes diverse biblical
texts (Gen. 15.7; 1 Kgs 8.29, 52; Neh. 1.6; 9.6-7; Dan. 9.18). From
these examples, it is quite evident that the author of Jubilees enriches
his material by freely drawing upon Scripture.
'midrash'). God, the Law, angels, and future judgment are major
themes in Pseudo-Philo, and the biblical narratives are retold with
these concerns in mind. Nickelsburg, moreover, has observed that
Pseudo-Philo views sacred history in terms of the cycle of sin, punish-
ment and deliverance, the cycle that is so well known in Judges.'^
In a recent study R. Bauckham assesses the manner in which
Pseudo-Philo retells biblical narrative.'' I shall draw upon a few of
his examples.
1. Pseudo-Philo adds names and genealogical details. Cain's
wife's name is Themech (LAB 2.1-2), Jephdiah's daughter is
Seila (40.1), Samson's mother is Eluma, daughter of Remac
(42.1), and so forth. Full genealogies are provided for Caleb,
Joshua and Manoah (LAB 15.3; 52.1).
2. Problems are explained. LAB 16.4 explains why the sons of
Korah did not die, while God's speech in 36.4 explains why
Gideon was not punished for his idolady. LAB 64.1 explains
why Saul, who otherwise showed litde regard for G o d ' s
commands, opposed witchcraft.
3. Pseudo-Philo often creates new connections and transitions.
He seems to assume that tiie sequence of the biblical narrative
implies a cause and effect relationship (an assumption that
frequendy lies behind rabbinic exegesis). Therefore, when
the biblical narrative, in his view, seems to lack transition,
Pseudo-Philo will supply tiie missing link. For example,
since the law of tassels in Num. 15.37-41 immediately
precedes die story of Korah's rebellion in Numbers 16, LAB
16.1 explains that the rebellion was occasioned by die law of
the tassels. The stories of the building of the tower of Babel
(Gen. 11) and God's call of Abram (Gen. 12) are linked in
LAB 6 - 7 .
4. Pseudo-Philo often rewrites speeches and conversations.
Sometimes it is a brief summary (LAB 3.4; 22.3-4), some-
times it is an expansion (LAB 3.9; 7.2), often it is a free
rewriting (LAB 10.2; 15.5-7; 31.1). He often adds speeches
Josephus
In his story of Josephus's Jewish Antiquities, H.W. Attridge has con-
cluded that Josephus redefined Jewish history and tradition so that they
would become 'relevant, comprehensible and attractive in a new
environment'.'* Josephus, writing in the aftermath of Jerusalem's des-
truction and the disappointment of Jewish expectations, believed that
God's covenant with the Jewish race was still valid and that Jewish
history yielded enduring value and meaning. This conviction, tem-
pered by his personal experience during the Jewish war with Rome,
appears to be a major, if not controlling, factor in his retelling of
biblical history.
F.G. Downing has compared Josephus's rewriting of the Joshua-
Judges narratives in Jewish Antiquities to L u k e . " He observes five
basic ways in which Josephus rewrites the biblical narrative.
1. Josephus omits material to avoid discrepancies in multiple accounts,
to avoid repetition, to avoid interruptions in the flow of the story, to
avoid miraculous and magical details, to excise inappropriate theo-
logy, and to excise apologetically awkward material. 2. Josephus adds
material to promote harmony and continuity in the narrative, to
Genealogies
Luke supplements his Markan source witii a genealogy of Jesus (3.23-
38). It is likely that Luke traces Jesus' genealogy back to Adam in
order to underscore Jesus' relevance for the entire human race, not
simply for Israel (as the Matthaean genealogy possibly implies).
Moreover, by tracing die genealogy in descending order, Luke is able
to conclude with Adam, 'the son of God' (3.38), whom the evangelist
probably wishes to contrast witii Jesus, tiie second 'son of God' who
successfully widistands tiie Devil's temptations (4.1-13). Genealogical
details are provided elsewhere (1.5, 27; 2.36).
Qualifications
The Lukan evangelist typically qualifies his Markan source where
Jesus seems to be tt-eated witii disrespect or where die disciples suffer
58. I am. of course, assuming Marcan priority. Should Matthew (or Luke) be
judged to be prior, the retelling categories would sdll be present, diough obviously
die synopdc parallels would have to be explained quite differendy.
EVANS Luke and the Rewritten Bible 191
Summaries
The Lukan evangelist is fond of sunmiaries. Often a summary signals
a transition from, to, or between sources. Lk. 4.13 summarizes the
temptation narrative (4.1-12), a narrative based on Mk 1.12-13 and Q
(compare Mt. 4.3-10), while the summary in 4.14-15 (an adaptation
of Mk 1.14) anticipates the Nazareth sermon in vv. 16-30. Lk. 12.1 is
a Lukan summary that introduces the sayings that follow. Lk. 15.1-2
(possibly derived from Mk 2.15-17) summarizes the Pharisees' criti-
cism of Jesus' conduct in anticipation of tiie tiiree parables that follow.
Luke's notices of Jesus' 'going' to Jerusalem function as summaries
(9.51, 57; 10.1, 38; 11.53; 13.22, 33; 17.11; 18.31, 35; 19.1).
192 The Pseudepigrapha and Early Biblical Interpretation
and John request to sit next to Jesus, the request and reaction to which
Luke probably regarded as less than becoming to the disciples. Luke
omits Mk 11.12-14, 20-21 where Jesus curses the fruitless fig tree, an
action which the evangelist is likely to have thought unbecoming to
Jesus. In his retelling of the garden prayer Luke abbreviates Mark's
three-fold reference to the disciples' sleep and omits altogether Jesus'
rebuke of the disciples (Lk. 22.40-46; cf. Mk 14.32-42). Again, it
would appear that Luke wishes to spare the characters of the disciples.
Finally, in his account of Peter's denials Luke omits reference to
Peter's cursing (Lk. 22.60; cf. Mk 14.71).
Cultural Adaptation
As a general rule, Luke avoids Mark's Semitisms, replacing them widi
Greek or Latin equivalents ('Boanerges' in Mk 3.17, cf. Lk. 6.14;
'Talidia, cum* in Mk 5.41, cf. Lk. 8.54; 'Abba' in Mk 14.36, cf. Lk.
22.42). In 5.19 Luke says that the friends of the paralyzed man
removed the tiles of the roof, instead of digging through the roof (cf.
Mk 2.4), a revision likely to have been motivated to make the scene
more intelligible to his readers. Luke uses the more correct 'Lake
Gennesaret', instead of 'Sea of Galilee (5.1; cf. Mk 1.16).
Transformations
Luke completely transforms Mark's version of the Nazareth sermon
(4.16-30; cf. Mk 6.1-6a). Luke wishes to show that Jesus' ministry
provoked opposition because of his willingness to extend messianic
blessings to Israel's traditional enemies and not simply because his
people did not believe in him. Often Luke not only transforms a peri-
cope but also gives it a new location in die narrative. Luke inserts his
expanded version of Jesus' sermon in the Nazareth synagogue (4.16-
30) between Mk 1.15 and 1.21. Luke widiholds Mark's account of die
calling of the disciples (Mk 1.16-20) until 5.1-11, probably so as to
explain why the disciples would drop everything and follow Jesus.
Moreover, Luke expands diis pericope probably in order to explain
why the disciples would follow Jesus, for the calling as presented in
Mark is quite abrupt. Luke's account of Mary and her sons requesting
to see Jesus (8.19-21; cf. Mk 3.31-35) is made to follow die Parable of
die Sower and related sayings (Lk. 8.1-18; cf. Mk 4.1-25). Luke has
relocated this unit probably because he wishes it to serve as part of his
theme on hearing and obeying the Word of God. Luke sometimes
194 The Pseudepigrapha and Early Biblical Interpretation
Targumsl
One might, I suppose, argue that Matthew and Luke bear a targumic
relationship to Mark, just as one scholar suggested similarly with
regard to Chronicles' relationship to Samuel/Kings, or Jubilees'
relationship to Genesis and Exodus. However, the objections that have
been raised against this interpretation of Chronicles probably apply
equally to such an interpretation of Matdiew and Luke (or of John as a
targum of one or more of the synoptics). Bruce Chilton's conclusion
diat tiie Gospels are 'cognate', radier dian identical, to the targums is
appropriate."
Lectionariesl
Are die Gospels instances of early Christian lectionaries? M.D. Goulder
has produced two major studies in which he argues that the synoptic
60. M.D. Goulder. Midrash and Lection in Matthew (London: SPCK, 1974);
idem. The Evangelists' Calendar: A Lectionary Explanation of the Development of
Scripture (London: SPCK. 1978). It should be noted, however, diat Goulder
(Midrash and Lection, p. 172) diinks diat a 'Gospel is not a literary genre at all' but
a 'liturgical genre'. Goulder diinks that Matthew's five major discourses correspond
to major Jewish feasts and holidays: (1) the Sermon on the Mount (chs. 5-7)
Pentecost; (2) the Sending of the Twelve (ch. 10)Rosh Hashanah and Yom
Kippur; (3) die Parables of die Kingdom (ch. 13)Sukkah; (4) Rules for Church
Order (ch. 18)Hanukkah; and (5) die Eschatalogical Discourse (chs. 24-25)
Pesahim.
61. A. Guilding, The Fourth Gospel and Jewish Worship (Oxford: Oxford
University. I960).
62. Works that have won less scholarly attention would include those of
R.G. Finch. The Synagogue Lectionary and the New Testament (London: SPCK.
1939). and P. Carrington. The Primitive Christian Calendar (Cambridge: Cambridge
University Press. 1952).
63. L. Morris. 'The Gospels and die Jewish Lecdonaries'. in Studies in Midrash
and Historiography, pp. 129-56.
64. C. Perrot, La lecture de la Bible dans la Synagogue (Hildesheim:
Gerstenberg, 1973). p. 287. The evidence of b. Meg. 31b, possibly reflecUng
second-century tradidon. suggests that diere was no uniform Jewish lecdonary. For a
criticism of Goulder's interpretation of diis passage, see Morris, 'The Gospels and
the Jewish Lectionaries'. p. 136.
196 The Pseudepigrapha arui Early Biblical Interpretation
be raised widi respect to the other Gospels. In the final analysis, the
lectionary hypotiiesis rests upon litde more than imagination and sheer
speculation.
Midrashim
Are the Gospels instances of Christian midrash? Goulder has argued
tiiat Matthew is a midrash on Mark and that the materials scholars
usually identify as ' Q ' are really no more than midrashic expansions
of Markan materials and themes.*' J. Drury extends this approach
further by suggesting diat not only is Matdiew a midrash on Mark, but
diat Luke is a midrash on bodi Matdiew and Mark (and John is a 'free
midrash' on die synoptic tradition).** It as sometimes been argued that
the Gospels are midrashim on various parts of Tanach. Recently
R.H. Gundry has argued that various pericopae in Matthew represent
Matthaean midrashim on various Old Testament passages, especially
with reference to the birth narrative.*' On a grander scale J.D.M.
Derrett has argued diat Mark is a 'gigantic midrash' on the Hexateuch
and Lamentations.** This is a thesis diat I find highly implausible.
There simply are not enough explicit citations or clear allusions to the
Hexateuch throughout Mark to make a convincing case for such a
putative midrash. Would any reader of antiquity have observed that
Mark was such a midrash? The pesharim at (jumran proceed verse by
verse. The later rabbinic midrashim proceed similarly. But Mark has
69. Of the various Gospels-as-midrash theories Gundry's has die most to com-
mend it. But even his presentation is not without serious difficulties: see
P.B. Payne. 'Midrash and History in the Gospels with Special Reference to
R.H. Gundry's Afatthew', in Studies in Midrash and Historiography, pp. 177-215.
198 The Pseudepigrapha and Early Biblical Interpretation
Radical Paraphrase?
Is the Gospel of Luke an example of radical paraphrase of the Jesus
tradition? I think that it is, and I think that this is the best way to
understand the evangelist's literary-exegetical activity. He has retold
the Jesus story, not in a targumic manner, closely following Mark's
text, nor in a midrashic manner, interpreting portions of Mark's text.
He has instead freely adapted his various sourcesMark, Q, whatever,
according to his own purposes. His technique closely resembles that of
the Chronicler who made use of various Old Testament books, freely
selecting and omitting material, freely rewriting it according to his
theological perspective. Luke's technique also resembles many aspects
of the radical paraphrases of biblical history seen in 1 Esdras,
Jubilees, Jewish Antiquities and Liber Antiquitatum Biblicarum. Just
as it is appropriate to classify these wridngs as radical paraphrase, a
part of the phenomenon of the 'rewritten Bible', so I think diat it is
appropriate to classify Luke (and Matdiew) similarly. Luke's affinides
to the 'Jewish approach' to sacred story must be taken into account, if
diis Gospel is to be adequately understood.
What about Luke's reladonship to die Old Testament? Can diat be
called midrash? The funcdon of the Old Testament in Luke, as well as
in the odier wridngs of the New Testament, at times may properly be
regarded as midrash. How much of it should be so regarded depends
on the definition given to midrash. I think that while the view that
only rabbinic exegesis should be called midrash is too narrow, the
view that virtually all early Jewish and Christian literature should be
called midrash is too broad. To what extent the function of Scripture
in Luke (and the New Testament) is truly midrash or midrashic must
await a resolution of tiie debate over tiie definition of midrash, par-
ticularly in tiie context of the first century." But I repeat, the question
the scriptural s t o r y . ' ' Luke does not see himself primarily as a
biographer, nor even a historian. The Lukan evangelist is a writer of
Scripture, a hagiographer who is proclaiming what God has
'accomplished among us*.
David P. Moessner
3. See inter alia Ant. 2.15.4-5 327-29. 2.15.4 334; 3.1.3 11-12, 3.13
295-99; 4.2.3 22. 4.3.2 40-50.4.8.2 177-79. It is inteiesting that Josephus
mentions four different occasions in which the people try or desire to stone Moses
(Ant. 2.15.4 327; 3.1.3-4 12-22, 3.14.3 307; 4.2.3 22). wheieas diis detail is
mentioned only once (Exod. 17.4) in die Hebrew Bible; on the relation of these
extrabiblical traditions to Deuteronomistic traditions, see, e.g., O.H. Steck, Israel
und das gewaltsame Geschick der Propheten (WMANT, 23; Neukirchen-Vluyn:
Neukirchener Verlag. 1967). pp. 81-86; D.P. Moessner, Lord of the Banquet: The
Literary and Theological Significance of the Lukan Travel Narrative (Minneapolis:
Foruess Press, 1989). pp. 85-87.
The fragmentary nature of many of the sources of this period does not allow
die conclusion diat Moses' suffering and death was of no interest or even of con-
siderable importance. The (^mran community, for instance, nuiy have placed great
stock in Moses' suffering mediatorial role, especially in light of dieir own Teacher's
fate (see, e.g., 4QDib Ham; cf. 4QpHos 2.3b-6; KJpHab 2.6-10, 11.4-8; 4QpPs
37.14-15; IQH 2.9-19, 32-37; 4.8-10; 5.5-19; 9.1-36). On Qumran, see furdier
Meeks. Prophet-King, pp. 173-75; Moessner. Lord of the Banquet, pp. 87-90.
Typical, however, of longer U-eatments of Moses is the juxtaposing of several roles
and experiences, including his rejection or suffering, and the subsuming of the latter
to more overarching portrayals of die ideal legislator, sage and ruler, as in Philo and
Josephus. For Philo. see. e.g., Vit. Mos. 2.163-73, where Moses, in inner turmoil
over die golden calf, takes 'die part of mediator and reconciler... begging that their
sins might be forgiven... and softened die wrath of die Ruler' (LCL edn). But this
role is only one aspect of die much wider function of priest, die cenu-al feature of
which is 'piety' (Vit. Mos. 2.66). In Pseudo-Philo. widiin die context of foretelling
secrets of die future, Moses is presented as intercessor (LAB 19.3). For Josephus,
see n. 3 above, and see further. Tiede (Charismatic Figure, pp. 101-37.207-40).
Interest in Moses' suffering role and deadi figures more prominendy in die
later rabbinic literature; see. e.g., L. Ginzberg, The Legends of the Jews, I-VII
(Philadelphia: Jewish Publication Society of America. 1910-38]). Itt, pp. 439-81;
VI, pp. 151-68; Meeks, Prophet-King, pp. 176-215, esp. 198-204.
4. Most scholars hold to a first-century CE date for the final form, given the
radier vivid descriptions of die Herodian period and die campaign of Varus in ch. 6.
There is no indication of die destruction of die Temple in 70 CE. G.W.E. Nickelsburg
has built a convincing case for a basic text of T. Mos. from die period of Antiochus's
persecution with a later redaction in Herodian times; see, e.g.. his 'Antiochan Date
for the Testament of Moses', in Nickelsburg (ed.). Studies on the Testament of
Moses, pp. 33-37; idem. Resurrection, Immortality, and Eternal Life in Intertesta-
mental Judaism (HTS, 26; Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1972),
pp. 43-45; idem, Jewish Uteramre between the Bible and the Mishnah (Philadelphia:
Fortress Press, 1981), pp. 80-83, 212-14; cf. A. Yarbro Collins, 'Composition and
204 The Pseudepigrapha and Early Biblical Interpretation
and death forms the focal point of the unknown writer's (writers')
entire portrait of Moses. The thesis of this study is that within this
uncommon profile of Moses in the Testament of Moses, insufficient
attention has been paid to Moses' death as an interpretative key to the
significance of the suffering and deadi of the enigmatic Taxo (and
sons) in T. Mos. 9. Moses' impending death is not only die setdng for
a testament widi apocalyptic elementsas most acknowledge'but his
death also seals God's preordained plan to effect a final or eschato-
logical atonement for Israel through Taxo's faithful suffering and
death. Taxo dius fills up die full measure of propitiatory suffering
prophesied and decisively put into effect for Israel long before by
Moses himself. Moreover, in Part II, I shall expand the thesis by argu-
ing that in a similar way, the apostles/witnesses of Acts are filling up a
full measure of faithful suffering and even death which has been
eschatologically sealed by die deadi of Jesus Messiah, die prophet like
Moses of Deuteronomy.
Redaction of die Testament of Moses 10'. HTR 69 (1976). pp. 179-86. For die
period 4 BCE-48 CE. see D.M. Rhoads. T h e Assumption of Moses and Jewish
History: 4 BC-AD 48'. in Nickelsburg (ed.). Studies on the Testament of Moses,
pp. 53-58. For a summary of positions, see J.J. Collins, Testaments', in
M.E. Stone (ed.). Jewish Writings of the Second Temple Period (CRINT. 2.2;
Assen: Van Gorcum; Philadelphia: Fortress Press, 1984). pp. 347-48; and idem.
T h e Testamentary Literature in Recent Scholarship', in R.A. Kraft and
G.W.E. Nickelsburg (eds.),flr/y Judaism and its Modem Interpreters (Philadelphia:
Fortress Press; Adanta: Scholars Press. 1986). p. 277.
5. See, e.g.. A.B. Kolenkow. 'The Assumption of Moses as a Testament', in
Nickelsburg (ed.). Studies on the Testament of Moses, pp. 71-77; and idem, 'I. The
Literary Genre 'Testament'", in Kraft and Nickelsburg (eds.). Early Judaism and its
Modern Interpreters, pp. 259-67.
MOESSNER Suffering, Intercession, Atonement 205
6. The contours of the final form of the text are themselves disturbed by
Joshua's questions at die beginning of ch. 11; it is as diough he has heard very litde
if anydiing at all of Moses' prophecy of die future, especially of Israel's final exalta-
tion to 'the heaven of the stars' in 10.9. The prophetic prospect (chs. 2-10) appears
to be a distinct if not separate literary unit at some point combined with the narrative
framing. G. Reese (Die Geschichte Israels in der Auffassung des friihen Judentums
[Diss., University of Heidelberg. 1967]. pp. 90-93) reckons 1.6-15. 2.1-2, 10.14-
15 and 11, lb-12.13 to be an older narrative which the later author of T. Mos. used
for his historical presentation. This 'Moses-Joshua story' may well stem from die
same literary-dieological circle that produced Pseudo-Philo with its emphasis on die
role of die people within God's covenant faidifulness. See below, n. 11.
7. For T. Mos. as an expansion and/or rewriting of Deut. 31-34. see, e.g..
D.J. Harrington. 'Interpreting Israel's History: The Testament of Moses as a
Rewriting of Deut. 31-34', in Nickelsburg (ed.). Studies on the Testament of
Moses, pp. 59-68; Nickelsburg. Resurrection, pp. 29, 44; idem. Between the Bible
and the Mishnah, pp. 80-82; J. Priest. 'Testament of Moses. A New Translation
and Inu-oduction'. in OTP, I, pp. 923-24. Though the last chapters of Deuteronomy
are clearly the setting for T. Mos., especially with Moses' prophetic prospect in his
'song' in ch. 32. T. Mos. draws on die conceptions of God's covenant relationship
constitutive to and distincdy accented in the whole of Deuteronomy and in the later
Deuteronomistic history; see below, n. 11.
206 The Pseudepigrapha and Early Biblical Interpretation
9. Probably msrt (e.g. Josh. 1.1) is indicated here (so R.H. Charles. APOT,
II. pp. 414 n. 7; 423 n. 15).
10. Cf. Exod. 12.37 and R.H.Charles, The Assumption of Moses (London:
A. & C. Black, 1897), p. 94 n. 14. for die suggested insertion.
208 The Pseudepigrapha and Early Biblical Interpretation
against Israel. Moses' prayers have thus protected Israel, not from the
unenlightened, guilty nations (1.12-13) but from themselves vis-a-vis
the anger of God.
But the role of Moses' prayers and consequently Joshua's distress
become fully comprehensible only in Moses' rejoinder (12.1-13).
Moses confirms the nations' assertion about his prayers and Israel's
plight, while denying their conclusion. God has, he says, 'established
or appointed me on dieir [Israel's] behalf and for dieir sins' (me con-
stituit pro eis et pro peccatis eorum, 12.6). Moreover, it is not because
he himself is worthy or capable of meedng this task; rather, it is
solely God's compassion and long-suffering that are the basis of his
calling and diat have accrued to him (contegerunt mihi). The context
now becomes transparent. Moses' calling or task includes not only his
prayers of intercession, which up to this point have been effective, but
it also includes his deadi, that is, the denial of entry into the land of
the forebears and his imminent departure, which is causing such con-
sternation and crisis for Joshua and for Israel. For as Moses continues,
it is certain that Israel under Joshua's leadership will not enter the
land because of their godliness (pietas).
Those who do and fulfil the commandments of God shall increase and be
prospered, but those who sin and set at naught the commandments shall
deprive diemselves of die good diings mentioned before, and diey shall be
punished widi many torments by die nations (12.11).
I I . I am arguing diat die posture of the whole book is deuteronomistic. That is.
the audior bases his hope in the final salvation on God's faidifulness to God's oath
sworn to Israel's ancestors and mediated through the Horeb covenant (see esp.
MOESSNER Suffering, intercession, Atonement 209
T. Mos. 1.9; 3.9; 11.17; 12.13). This covenant includes the blessings but also the
cursespunishment diat follows continued disobedience of the people as a whole.
Corporate repentance/confession of sin is a sine qua non for blessing/restoration and
becomes constitutive of die hope in God's faidifulness and ultimate blessing. Thus a
pattern emergessin, punishment/judgment, repentance/intercession, salvation/
vindicationin which the punishment of 587 BCE becomes proto-lypical of die final
judgment of a disobedient Israel (e.g. T. Mos. 8.1; 9.1). For diis 'Doppelschema'
pattern and variations, see. e.g.. Steck. Israel, pp. 60-264; Nickelsburg. Beftveen the
Bible and the Mishnah, pp. 9-18; E. SjOberg. Gott und die Siinder im paldstinischen
Judentum (BWANT. 79; Stuttgart: Kohlhammer, 1938), pp. 201-202; J.J. Collins.
'Some Remaining Traditio-Historical Problems in the Testament of Moses', in
Nickelsburg (ed.). Studies on the Testament of Moses, pp. 40-42; D.P. Moessner.
'"The Christ Must Suffer": New Light on die Jesus-Peter. Stephen. Paul Parallels in
Luke-Acts'. NovT 28 (1986). pp. 225-30. For application of some aspect of
deuteronomic/istic historical categories to T. Mos., see. e.g., Steck. Israel und das
gewaltsame Geschick, pp. 172-73; Nickelsburg. Bible and the Mishnah, pp. 80-82;
Sjoberg, Gott und die Sunder, pp. 232. 235. 238-39, 250. 257, e.g. 235: 'Ass.
Mos... ist durch und durch von der deuteronomistischen Geschichtsbetrachtung
geprSgt'; Collins. 'Traditio-Historical Problems'; idem, 'Testaments', in Stone (ed.),
Jewish Writings, pp. 346-47; Kolenkow, 'Assumption', pp. 73-74; Reese.
Geschichte Israels, pp. 117-24. e.g. 123: 'Die grosse Bedeutung. die das
Deuteronomium in der AssMos gewinnt, ISsst sich doch nur begriefen. ..dass die
Vf. der AssMos in seinem theologischen Denken im Bereich einer dt-dtr bestimmien
Theologie verwurzelt ist'; J. Priest. 'Some Reflections on the Assumption of
Moses', Perspectives on Religious Studies 4 (1977). p. 94; E. Brandenburger,
'Einleitung: Himmelfahrt Moses', in JSHRZ, 5/2. Apokalypsen (1976). pp. 63-64;
Harrington. 'Rewriting of Deut. 31-34'. pp. 60-61, 63-66; primarily non-deutero-
nomic/istic: e.g. E. Janssen, Das Gottesvolk und seine Geschichte (Neukirchen-
Vluyn: Neukirchener Veriag. 1971), pp. 107-8; cf. Charles, APOT, 11, p. 424 n. 8:
'The nation is so evil and needs such frequent chastisement, that its selection by God
must be due not to merit but to die Divine purpose'; Samaritan: K. Haacker,
'Assumptio MosisEine samaritanische Schrift?', TZ 25 (1969). pp. 385-405.
210 The Pseudepigrapha and Early Biblical Interpretation
to the perceived 'problem' of his absence. Moses' death does not now
cut off the mediation of the covenant to Israel. Rather in his death
Moses' intercession for Israel is sealed and made effective for the end.
Israel will not be totally cut off (in totum exterminet...non potest,
12.12), a part or remnant will be saved. 'Accordingly [as Moses first
introduces himself] die Lord designed me and prepared me before the
foundation of die world diat I should be the mediator of his covenant'
(1.14). And now in his death Moses declares 'that the time of die years
of my Ufe are consummated' (consummatum est, 1.15). In life and
death Moses is die eternal mediator of the covenant.
12. See above, n. 6; cf. Kolenkow. 'Assumption', pp. 73-74. 76; Nickelsburg,
'AnUochan Date', pp. 33-37.
13. See, e.g.,Char]es,AssumptionofMoses,p.67 n. \3:de isto ('i.\'i) = 'hryw =
'after him', i.e. 'after his deadi'. He points also to 2 Bar. 84.4 and Job 21.21.
MOESSNER Suffering, Intercession, Atonement 211
17. The final form of T. Mos. requires a reading of chs. 7-10 in dieir present
sequence in order to make logical sense of Taxo's role in die final events of ch. 10.
Taxo himself (9.2-3) refers to an unprecedented persecution diat has already befallen
die people, a 'second punishment... surpassing die former one'; diough the text of
8.1a is corrupt, it intfoduces precisely just diat. a 'vengeance and wradi such as has
never happened to diem from die beginning up to diat time in which...' (ultio et ira
quae talis non fuit in illis a saeculo usque ad ilium tempus in quo). Moses is thus
linking Taxo's significance direcdy to diis final persecution (and hence to Moses'
own suffering!); note also die four 'horae' that come when 'the times will be ended'
(7.1). See further. J. Licht. 'Taxo, or the Apocalyptic Docuine of Vengeance'. JJS
12 (1961). pp. 101-103; Reese. Geschichte Israels, pp. 102-16; J.J. Collins. 'The
Date and Provenance of die Testament of Moses', in Nickelsburg (ed.). Studies on
the Testament of Moses, pp. 17-22).
18. blasfemare verbum... haec leges (8.5); in 11.16 Moses is 'lord of the word'
(dominum verbi). In 1.9, 16 Moses' prophetic word to Joshua on Israel's law is
represented as die 'book'. T. Mos.
19. The analogy of even greater suffering and punishment for Israel vis-J-vis that
of the nations holds only if Taxo is comparing Israel's sin over against die nations'
'impiety' and 'abominations' against the Lord. As in the message of Deutero-Isaiah
(40.2). die emphasis in T. Mos. is that widi Taxo's (and sons') persecution and deadi
Israel will have 'paid' die full measure for their sin. Yet it must also be seen that die
basis of Taxo's declaration is a clear admission of Israel's guilt and God's righteous
punishment, i.e.. an orientation of repentance (see also 1.18; 3.4-7; 4,1-4; 11.17;
12.6) See also Charles, Assumption of Moses, p. 15 n. 8; Steck,Israel, pp. 172-73;
MOESSNER Suffering, Intercession, Atonement 213
forebears who did not transgress the commands of the Lord. Neither
does Taxo intend to do so. Like die line of the faithful, Taxo and his
sons will not tempt God so as to (ut) make themselves vulnerable to
breaking die commands. Radier, diey will go into a cave and die, if
need be/preferably (potius, 9.6), before transgressing 'die commands
of die God of our forebears'. In odier words, Taxo knows that his
'strength' lies in acdng in solidarity with a long lineage of a faithful
remnant who refused to violate the Law (9.5). In 11.16 (frame) it is
Moses, 'worthy of die Lord, lord of die word, who was faidiful in all
diings'. 3. Like Moses, Taxo knows diat God will use his own faidi-
fulness and his death to bring deliverance for Israel. Ironically, as
Moses' death must occur before Israel can enter into the land of the
covenant, so Taxo's death must occur as the final act of faithful
suffering before Israel enters its exalted place in the final purpose of
die covenant (10.8-10, 15).^ For as Moses continues to narrate in his
prophecy of die future (lO.l-lO),^' Taxo's (and sons') deadi/'blood'
will indeed be 'avenged' by die Most High, Eternal God, who himself
will come to avenge Israel of their enemies (9.7, sanguis noster
vindicabitur coram Domino; 10.7, Deus aeternus solus...veniet ut
vindicet gentes; cf. 10.2: die chief angel vindicabit illos ab inimicis
eorum). In fact, Moses' death (as we have seen) marks the beginning
of the '250 times' that must run their course until Taxo's (and sons')
deadi ushers in die final 'Kingdom' of God. What Moses' deadi in his
suffering mediation makes effective and seals for the end, Taxo's (and
sons') death completes and unlocks in his suffering mediation at the
end. Like Moses, Taxo describes God's 'visitation' upon a guilty
nation (9.2-3; cf. 1.18; 8.1).^^ But now unlike Moses, Taxo declares
that God's punishment upon Israel through the Gentiles is now dirough
his own faithful suffering becoming completely full. Consequendy,
Reese, Geschichte Israels, pp. 95-99; SjSberg. Gott und die Siinder, p. 250 n. 4.
20. Notice how Israel's 'kingdom' (regnum) of 2.2-9 is consummated in the
'kingdom' (regnum) of God in 10.1-10.
21. It is not certain in 10.1-10 whedier Taxo continues to speak in Moses'narra-
tion or if Moses utters the eschatological 'hymn' directly, as I am assuming. If die
former, dien my third point stands out all die more.
22. For the relation of Taxo's fasting to ritual repentance, see. e.g..
Reese. Geschichte Israels, pp. 110-11. who mentions 1 Sam. 7.6; Joel 1.14; 2.12-
14; Neh. 9.1-38; Jon. 3.7-8. Dan. 9.3. 4-19 should also be mentioned. Cf., e.g..
G.W.E. Nickelsburg. 'Introduction', in idem (ed.). Studies on the Testament of
Moses, pp. 8-9; Collins, 'Traditio-Historical Problems', pp. 41-42.
214 The Pseudepigrapha and Early Biblical Interpretation
23. For discussions of Taxo's role and identity, see. e.g.. H.H. Rowley, The
Relevance of Apocalyptic (New Yoik: Association Press. 1964), pp. 149-56; Collins,
'Date and Provenance', pp. 22-30; Rhoads, 'Assumption', pp. 55-58; Priest.
'Reflecdons'.pp. 97-104; C. Lattey. 'The Messianic Expectation in "The Assumption
of Moses'", CBQ 4 (1942). pp. 9-21; Reese. Geschichte Israels, pp. 103-10;
S.K. Williams. Jesus' Death as Saving Event: The Background and Origin of a
Concept (HDR, 2; Missoula, MT: Scholars Press, 1975), pp. 69-70; S. ZeiUin, "The
Assumption of Moses and die Revolt of Bar Kokba', JQR 38 (1947-48). pp. 27-45.
MOESSNER Suffering, intercession. Atonement 215
II
A number of trajectories through Luke-Acts, though indicating
fundamental differences with the Testament of Moses, point never-
tiieless to a closely parallel view of Israel's past and tiie need for a
decisive eschatological act of God to deliver Israel first and foremost
from its own sin, as well as from the destruction of the Gentiles. In
bodi the Testament of Moses and Luke-Acts, God acts decisively for
Israel in the life and death of Moses/Jesus to effect eschatological
salvation.
ben Jehoida whose 'murder' at the Temple is recorded in the last book
of the Writings. Because Jesus himself now receives the prophet's
reward at Jerusalem'You stoner and killer of those sent' by God
Israel's 'house' there 'will be abandoned' (11.47-53; 13.33-35a).
c. Jesus, Peter and the Apostles, Stephen, and Paul as Suffering Inter-
cessors. Like Moses together widi the intercessors of chs. 4 and 9 in
T. Mos., so in Luke-Acts Jesus is portrayed as a suffering intercessor
on behalf of Israel's sin whose mediation continues after his death
through the apostles/witnesses of Acts.
Jesus. Not only is Jesus often at prayer (more than the other
Synoptics), his praying also occurs at pivotal points in his gathering a
laos and in their growing rejection of his sending to bring Israel
eschatological release (aphesis) from dieir own sin. From his baptism
with 'all the laos' who have heeded John's call to repentance (Lk.
3.21-22, 7-14) to his selection of 'twelve' 'aposdes' from tiie large
gathering of disciples of the laos from Judaea and Jerusalem and the
districts of Tyre and Sidon (6.12-13, 17), to die feeding of the
burgeoning laos in the wilderness near Bethsaida (9.13-17), to the
disciples journeying with him to Jerusalem (11.1-4; cf. 10.38), to the
twelve gathered at die Passover table in Jerusalem (22.14-20), Jesus is
in soUdarity with Israel at prayer as he proclaims the final reign of
God and exhorts a change of posture vis-^-vis God's powerful presence
MOESSNER Suffering, Intercession, Atonement 217
Peter and the Apostles. Peter and the apostles' preaching of repentance
and offer of eschatological life to Israel which is centered at Israel's
place of worship is sharply opposed by the guardians of diat cult. The
abuse, beatings and imprisonment of Acts 4 - 5 are summarized in 5.41
as suffering or being 'shamefully treated on behalf of the name' of
Jesus Messiah. This suffering dius becomes a means or medium through
24. On the role of the Pharisees and their scribes in the death of Jesus in Luke,
see D.P. Moessner. 'The "Leaven of die Pharisees" and "This Generation": Israel's
Rejection of Jesus according to Luke', JSNT 34 (1988). pp. 21-46.
25. Seeesp. Isa. 51.17-23.
218 The Pseudepigrapha and Early Biblical Interpretation
26. For the classic and sUU determinadve study, see G. von Rad, 'Deuteronomy's
"Name" Theology and the Priesdy Document's "Kabod" Theology', in Studies in
Deuteronomy [SBT, 9; London: SCM Piss. 1953). pp. 37-44.
MOESSNER Suffering, intercession, Atonement 219
nation, which has come to a climax in their killing of Jesus the Just
One, the prophet like Moses (7.37-41, 51-53). Moreover, the narrator
has taken pains to dovetail the charges against Stephen with those
against Jesus:
He [Stephen] speaks blasphemous words against Moses and God [cf. Lk.
22.71; 23.5, 1 4 ] . . . never ceasing to speak words against diis holy place
and die Law. for we have heard him say that this Jesus of Nazaredi will
destroy this place and will change the customs Moses delivered to us
(Acts 6.11b. 13b-14).
27. For the connection of glory with Jesus. Peter and the aposdes. Stephen, and
Paul, see Moessner. 'The Christ Must Suffer', pp. 227-56.
28. Notice the ironic use of 'to bind' {ded): Paul who is zealous to bind all diose
who call on the name of the Lord Jesus (Acts 9.2. 14. 21; 22.5) becomes pre-
eminendy die one bound by his fellow Jews (24.27; cf. 28.20). even as he is bound
'in die Spirit' (20.22) to be bound in Jerusalem! (21.11,13. 33; 22.29).
MOESSNER Suffering, Intercession, Atonement 221
29. Notice how Jesus in Lk. 19.41-44 and Paul in Acts 20.19. 31 weep for/over
Israel in die midst of opposition from Israel to their mission to Israel. In T. Mos.
11.1-4. in a similar context in which Israel has been depicted as increasing in
disobedience until the end of history, Moses and Joshua weepl
222 The Pseudepigrapha and Early Biblical Interpretation
30. For discussions of die pattern of the Suffering Servant of Isaiah for Paul's
mission in Acts, see D.P. Moessner. 'The Ironic Fulfillment of Israel's Glory', in
J.B. Tyson (ed.). Luke-Acts and the Jewish People (Minneapolis: Augsburg
Publishing House. 1988). pp. 35-50. and die articles by D.L. Tiede (pp. 35-50)
and R.C. Tannehill (pp. 83-101) in die same volume.
MOESSNER Suffering, Intercession, Atonement 223
unlike the Testament of Moses, for the nations as well (2.38; 3.26;
5.31; 10.43; 13.38; 26.18).
31. In the Synoptic imagery of Jesus' prediction of the 'final catastfophe' of die
universe, only Luke (21.25-28) has die sequence sun, moon, stars and sea, similar
to T. Mos. 10.5-6 (cf. M t 24.29-31; Mk 13.24-27). For Lk. 21 and Deut. 32, see
further D.P. Moessner, 'Paul in Acts: Preacher of Eschatological Repentance to
Israel", NTS 34 (1988), pp. 98-101.
226 The Pseudepigrapha and Early Biblical Interpretation
32. Cf. this stock phrase in T. Mos. 3.11: 'mulia passus est'.
MOESSNER Suffering, intercession, Atonement 227
33. See the discussions in Nickelsburg. 'Antiochan Date', pp. 35-37; Collins,
'Date and Provenance', pp. 22-30; and Williams, Jesus' Death, pp. 59-90, 137-
202.
THE PSEUDEPIGRAPHA IN THE CATHOLIC EPISTLES
Peter H. Davids
1. James
It is clear that James never cites any of the pseudepigrapha directly.
However, it is just as certain that he knew of the traditions contained
in them, for whenever he cites OT characters he reveals a knowledge
of traditions that were pseudepigraphal. In fact, he may be far more
influenced by these traditions than other writers who make a more
direct use of such material. A series of examples will illustrate.
James cites four OT characters, Abraham, Rahab, Job and Elijah.'
The citation of Abraham in 2.18-24 includes a direct reference to
Gen. 15.6, as well as one to the binding of Isaac narrative in Gen.
22.1-19. But it is also obvious that James knows a somewhat different
version of the Abraham narrative from that in Genesis.^ It is true that
BCE to the first CE. R.P. Spittler suggests that it was first produced in
Greek among the Therapeuts in Egypt and later used by the
Montanists in Asia Minor."* This means that it is possible that James
actually knew the work. However, the data at hand are not extensive
enough (mainly the use of the term vnojiovfi, 'patient endurance') to
prove such a claim. The most we can argue is that James shows con-
tact with the traditions incorporated in the Testament. But as in the
case of Abraham this tradidon colors his perception of the canonical
text. Without die pseudepigraphical tradition we would not be able to
explain James' use of Job as an example.
Finally we come to Elijah, whom James connects to prayer (Jas
5.17-18). While a reasonable assumption on James' part, diis is some-
diing of a strange reference in that to begin the drought die canonical
Elijah simply appears and makes an announcement that only by his
word will rain come (1 Kgs 17.1). At die end of the drought there is
prayer for fire from heavem (I Kgs 18.36-37) and a posture that
might imply prayer for rain (I Kgs 18.42), but no explicit connection
of prayer and rain. Jewish tradition, however, did connect Elijah and
die Carmel narrative to prayer (m. Ta'an. 2.4)." More importandy,
however, 4 Ezra 7.39 (109) states in a context of intercessory prayer
that 'Elijah [prayed] for those who received the rain, and for one who
was dead, that he might live'. Again we cannot claim that James
actually knew and used 4 Ezra, for in all probability it was completed
after James was already published,'^ but 4 Ezra witnesses to a Jewish
evaluation of Elijah that was current in James' world and colored
10. R.P. Spittler. Testament of Job', in OTP, I. pp. 833-34. Cf. R.A. Kraft.
Testament of Job (Missoula. MT; Scholars Press, 1974), pp. 17-20.
11. In this passage it is staled that on days of fasUng in the temple the Eighteen
BenedicUons were recited along widi die six Remembrance and Shofar verses. After
the fifth of diese verses the person praying is supposed to say. 'May he diat
answered Elijah in Carmel answer you and hearken to die voice of your crying this
day! Blessed art diou. O Lord, that hearest prayer!' The date of this passage is
uncertain. Judah ha-Nasi is die first rabbi to comment upon it. It may or may not go
back to the second temple period. But it does show a u-adidonal connection of Elijah
to prayer which likely does go back diat far.
12. B.M. Metzger ('The Fourdi Book of Ezra', in OTP, I. p. 520) argues diat
die Hebrew original was completed between 100 CE and 'not much after' 120, for
the Greek version had to be circulating in Christian circles before the Bar-Kokhba
revolt. No modem scholar dates James later than 96 CE, which means that James
clearly cannot have used 4 Ezra.
DAVIDS The Pseudepigrapha in the Catholic Epistles 233
2 . 1 Peter
When we turn to 1 Peter we discover a somewhat different use of the
pseudepigraphical traditions. First, there are only two references to
OT characters in an epistle just slighdy longer than James; i.e. to
234 The Pseudepigrapha and Early Biblical Interpretation
Sarah and Noah. Second, references to the Jesus traditions are far
more explicit than in James as Jesus becomes an example of suffering
for the community." Yet we will observe a number of similarities in
the general milieu of the two epistles.
Both 1 Peter and James are addressed to Diaspora communities,
although James is presented as more of a literary letter and 1 Peter as
a circular letter. Both are written to communities under pressure,
although James appears more interested in low-grade economic pres-
sure and 1 Peter with social osd-acism and perhaps physical assault.'"
Yet the greatest similarity is in their use of pseudepigraphal material,
where diis can be tested.
Of the two O T characters named in 1 Peter, Sarah is die least prob-
lematic. The reference is to Gen. 18.12 in which in die LXX Sarah
refers to Abraham as 6 icupv6(; nov (my lord), which is itself a good
translation of the H e b r e w . " In other words, while the selection of
Sarah, one of tiie four motiiers of Israel, is significant, tiie usage is not
determined by any pseudepigraphal material.
The situation with Noah is quite anodier matter. While this is not the
place to get into a full discussion of I P e t 3.18-22, some aspects of
tills passage do need to be examined. Certain spirits (jtvevnaoiv) were
disobedient (otTceidfioaoiv) while God was patient during the time
that Noah was building the ark. The issue, of course, is what these
spirits were? The two most significant positions are I. the spirits are
tiie souls of tiiose who died in die flood,'* and 2. die spirits are die 'sons
13. James alludes almost exclusively to the ediical teaching of Jesus, especially
die 'Q' O-adiUon. See further P.H. Davids. 'James and Jesus', in D. Wenham (ed.).
The Jesus Tradition outside the Gospels (Gospel Perspectives. 5; Sheffield: JSOT
Press. 1985). pp. 63-84.
14. While some see official persecution in I Peter, I have found those arguments
unconvincing. But even in situations in which the government is not officially
involved, physical injury and death are possible. See further, P.H. Davids. / Peter
(NICNT; Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans. 1990). p. 170; Cf. L. Goppelt. Der erste
Petrusbrief {MeyerK; G6ningen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht. 1978). pp. 60-64;
J. Knox. 'Pliny and I Peter: A Note on I Pet. 4, 14-16 and 3. 15'. JBL 72 (1953),
pp. 187-89.
15. Cf. N. Brox. 'Sara zum Beispiel". in P. Muller (ed.). In Kontinuitdt und
Einheit: Festschrift fur F. Mussner (Regensburg: Friedrich Pustet. 1981). pp. 484-
93.
16. C.E.B. Cranfield ('The Interpreution of I Peter iii.l9 and iv.6', ExpT 69
[1957-58], pp. 369-72) represents diis view among British scholars, F.W. Beare
DAVIDS The Pseudepigrapha in the Catholic Epistles 235
{The First Epistle of Peter [Oxford: Basil Blackwell. 1970]. pp. 171-73) among
Canadians and H.-J. Vogels {Christi Absteig ins Totenreich und das Latenmgs-
gericht an den Toten [Freiburg, 1976]) as well as Goppelt and Windisch in their
commentaries, among die Germans; W. Grudem (/ Peter [TNTC; Grand Rapids.
MI: Eerdmans. 1988]. pp. 157-61 and 203-39) is the most recent American
proponent
17. While first proposed by F. Spitta {Christi Predigtan die Geister [Gdttingen:
Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 1890]). it is best known from the work of J. Dalton.
Christ's Proclamation to the Spirits (Rome: Pontifical Biblical Institute. 1965).
B. Reicke and J. Jeremias as well as Selwyn are notable example of scholars who
have followed diis posidon. A recent twist is diat of J.R. Michaels (7 Peter [WBC.
49; Waco, TX: Word. 1988], pp. 205-11), who argues diat die spirits are demons,
die offspring of the fallen angels of Gen. 6.1-4. But this connection of demons to
Gen. 6 is itself dependent upon 7 Enoch and similar pseudepigrapha, so for our pur-
poses it is not a significant departure from die position of die others.
18. As. for example, in Heb. 12.23. Ttvevnaoi 5iKai(ov ('spirits of righteous
people').
19. E.g. Rev. 6.9. Two of the examples often listed as showing that 'spirit' can
mean 'deceased human spirit', i.e. Dan. 3.86 (LXX) and 7 En. 22.3-13. use 'soul' as
a clarifying term, showing diat die authors did not consider 'spirit' alone a sufficienUy
clear designation.
236 The Pseudepigrapha and Early Biblical Interpretation
20. In 1.12. 25; 4.6 he uses tio-yyeXit^oi) and in 4.17 ebayyiXiov. Both are
more common terms for referring to die proclamation of die gospel.
21. For further discussion see R.T. France. 'Exegesis in Practice', in
I.H. Marshall (ed.). New Testament Interpretation (Grand Rapids. MI: Eerdmans.
1977), p. 271. See also Davids. / Peter, pp. 138-41.
22. 2 Bar. 56.12-16; T. Job 5.6; 6QD 2.18-21; IQapGen 2.1. 16; T. Naph. 3.5;
2 En. 7.1-3 also refer to diis same tradition, so we cannot be sure diat I Peter knows
die exact form found in / Enoch.
23. It is difficult to know where I Peter locates this event. 2 Enoch places the
prison in die second heaven, so J.N.D. Kelly {The Epistles of Peter and Jude
[London: A. & C. Black. 1969], pp. 155-56) argues diat it took place as part of die
ascent of Christ. But since odier of die literature cited places die prison on the earth,
in the West, or under the eardi. diis is far from a certain scenario.
24. This feature, of course, explains the catechetical and baptismal homily
theories of the formation of I Peter. While none of these have proved convincing,
diey do point to the basic nature of die teaching in die episde.
DAVIDS The Pseudepigrapha in the Catholic Epistles 237
Mart Isaiah
1.3 parallel 3.22
/ Enoch
1.1-2 only idea of searching
Scripture
6
9.1 parallel I.II
10-16
16.3
21
21.10
21.6
22.3-13
48.6 parallel (or Chrisdan 1.20
interpoladon)
61.10 parallel 3.22
62.7 parallel (or Chrisdan 1.20
interpoladon)
2 Enoch
7.1-3
20.1 parallel 3.22
50.4 parallel 3.9
3 Maccabees
3.8 use of same verb 5.10
5.25 'Creator* 4.19
6.28 subsdtudonary atonement 3.18
7.22 persecution uadition 1.6
9.23 'brodierhood' 2.17
9.24 substitutionary atonement 3.18
238 The Pseudepigrapha and Early Biblical Interpretation
Odes Solomon
19.1 parallel 2.3
Pss. Solomon
17.45 God as shepherd 5.2
22.7 use of 'keystone' 2.6-8
Sib. Oracles
5.143 parallel Babylon = Rome 5.13
5.159 parallel Babylon = Rome 5.13
T. Benjamin
4.1 parallel 'crown of glory' 5.4
5.4 parallel response to 2.23
suffering
10.8-9 parallel (judgment begins 4.17
with God's people)
T. Judah
8.1 use of 'chief shepherd* 5.4
T. Uvi
3.8 parallel 3.22
10.5 'it stands in Scripture' 2.6
T. Naphtali
3.5
T. Reuben
5.5 parallel idea 3.3
T. Moses
7.3-10 parallel vice list 4.3
3. 2 Peter-Jude
It is clear diat 2 Peter and Jude are well aware of the pseudepigrapha.
For this reason they are discussed last and more briefly than the other
two works in this study. One needs only to look at Jude 14-15 and its
quotation of 7 En. 1.9, condensed out of the break between 2 Pet. 2.17
and 2.18,^* or Jude 9 and its probable reference to a lost ending of the
25. Indeed, there is far more reason to believe and evidence for die acquaintance
of 1 Peter with die Jesus-tradition, but dial reladonship is hoUy debated. If that is the
case with die level of evidence which can be generated, dien how much more should
it be the case in relation to die pseudepigrapha. See further Davids. 7 Peter, pp. 26-
27.
26. For a full discussion of this idea see R.L. Webb. T h e Apocalyptic
Perspective of First Peter' (ThM diesis. Regent College. Vancouver. BC. 1986). a
work that deserves to be in print, given its thorough grasp of the nature of
apocalypdc and careful application of it to I Peter.
27. This is even more interesting when we realize diat die Christians addressed in
I Peter are gentile believers, not Jewish Christians. Cf. Davids. / Peter, pp. 8-9.
28. For the purposes of this discussion I assume diat 2 Peter is dependent upon
Jude. The fact diat topics are taken up in die same order and that diere is considerable
240 The Pseudepigrapha and Early Biblical Interpretation
32. I am assuming that Jude is interested in die stories in their OT form. Given
die data observed above about James, we cannot be sure diat Cain's way. Balaam's
error or Korah's rebellion are die same as die criticisms made of those individuals in
the canonical writings, but unlike James also, we have no data in Jude that would
make us believe diat he was cidng a pseudepigraphal u-adition about diose characters
instead. Thus we are safest in taking the conservative assumption that he is indeed
cidng die OT stories.
33. Furthermore, like OTprophedc references, it has been made Christological.
by shifting the meaning of 'die Lord'. See C D . Osbum. 'The Christological Use of
1 Enoch 1.9 in Jude 14.15', NTS 23 (1976-1977), pp. 334-41.
34. R. Beckwith (The Old Testament Canon of the New Testament Church
[Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans. 1985]. pp. 403-405) argues that Jude understands
the Testament of Moses story (and likely also 7 Enoch) as narradve haggadah similar
to Deut. R. 11.10. and that both Jews and Jude viewed such haggadah as 'edifying
but not necessarily historical'. This may be the case, but die fact remains that there is
no disdncdon in die way Jude cites pseudepigrapha from the way he cites OT text. If
such a distinction is in his mind, he is not concerned to let his readers know about i t
242 The Pseudepigrapha and Early Biblical Interpretation
Michael the archangel from Jude 9, but makes the same point by
referring to angels in general. After clearly identifying the error of
Balaam with elements of the biblical narrative (2.15), he completely
drops the prophecy of Enoch from Jude 14-15 (2.17). He also drops
the references to Cain and Korah.
These observations could be read in three ways. First, 2 Peter
clearly shows a tendency to simplify by using fewer stories, canonical
or pseudepigraphal, and to use these stories more thoroughly. Exodus,
Michael, Cain and Korah are dropped. Sodom is expanded to make a
clear parallel widi Noah, who is added to the fallen angels reference.
But the Noah theme is picked up again in 3.6, which shows diat it was
more than a casual parallel to 2 Peter. Likewise the 'error' of Balaam
is clarified. This tendency to use fewer stories more thoroughly
perhaps explains the dropping of the reference to Michael.
Secondly, 2 Peter is likely to be revealing that his community (or
his readers, to die extent that he has a definite group in view) is not as
familiar with the pseudepigrapha as that of Jude. If they knew the
general traditions of die fallen angels but not I Enoch or the Testa-
ment of Moses, it would explain why 2 Peter might excise the pro-
phecy of Enoch and die story of Michael, which would have appeared
obscure to his readers.
Thirdly, 2 Peter may be showing an adversion to the use of the
pseudepigrapha. He is surely aware of the sources of his references,
but the casual reader would not be aware that he was doing anything
other than interpreting die biblical narrative in 2.4 and giving a gene-
ral teaching about angels in 2.11, an unawareness diat 2 Peter does not
want to illumine. While it cannot be proved (i.e. alternative explana-
tions are available, as noted above), I still suspect that the reason tiiat
his community does not know the pseudepigrapha well is that it did
not fully approve of the use of those works. This disapproval was not
so strong diat 2 Peter would reject die use of Jude (perhaps because he
accepted the traditional authorship), but it appears tiiat it was real
enough to cause him to excise all clear references to pseudepigraphical
stories."
What does this data tell us then? In at least some parts of die church
there was a use of the pseudepigrapha in a manner indistinguishable
from the use of OT literature. Stories could be used interchangeably.
35. So also D.J. Rowston, "The Most Neglected Book in the New Testament'.
NTS 21 (1974-75). p. 557.
DAVIDS The Pseudepigrapha in the Catholic Epistles 243
7 Enoch (or at least the part cited) was considered on a par with OT
prophets. Later the same or another part of the church appears to use
the pseudepigrapha less, possibly because it was beginning to be
rejected as fit for use in Christian services.
4. Summary
Our study of the use of the pseudepigrapha in the Catholic Epistles
(excluding the Johannine epistles) is complete. It has been complicated
by the fact that there was no 'canon' of pseudepigrapha in that period,
no Charles or Charlesworth, so to speak. Nor are we sure of the form
in which each of the books existed. This makes detecting use difficult.
But at the same time some conclusions have emerged.
At least some parts of the church, namely the community repre-
sented by Jude, appear to have known and used the pseudepigraphal
books in a manner indistinguishable firom their use of the OT. This is
true both of the use of pseudepigraphical narrative and of prophecy.
While it would be premature and anachronistic to speak of their
including at least 7 Enoch in their 'canon', it would not be incorrect to
state that the parts of this work that they knew at least stood alongside
the traditional Jewish 'canon' as a supplement and interpretation of it,
much as the Jesus-tradition must have fiinctioned.
Other parts of the church, that is, the conununities represented by
James and 1 Peter, move in an apocalyptic world in which the ideas
recorded in the pseudepigrapha were known and appreciated. Further-
more, when they cite OT narratives tiiey show tiiat tiiey understood
them dirough a grid that supplemented and interpreted them as the
pseudepigrapha do. Unfortunately, diere is not enough verbal similarity
to claim that these authors knew any specific pseudepigraphal book,
even if James is very close to the Testament of Job and 1 Peter to
7 Enoch. But it is clear that diey knew at least an early form of the
material included in these books, that they expected this knowledge to
be shared by their readers, and tiiat they had integrated these perspec-
tives into their theology (especially in the case of 1 Peter, which
integrates Jesus' resurrection-ascension with material included in the
7 Enoch narrative). Thus, while not direcdy quoted, we have reason
to believe that pseudepigraphical traditions formed part of the
teaching of their communities. They are comfortable with them.
Thirdly, a final part of die church, namely tiiat represented by
244 The Pseudepigrapha and Early Biblical Interpretation
36. Thai is. James can quote the decalogue, but he never feels die need to men-
tion dial his reference is to 'Moses' or 'The Law'. Likewise diese writers never note
in which book die narrative references are lo be found.
37. See further, for example. Davids. 'James and Jesus', pp. 63-84, or
D.B. Deppe, The Sayings of Jesus in the Epistle of James (Chelsea, MI:
Bookcrafters, 1989).
38. This is not to imply dial one can therefore argue dial James and 1 Peter form
an earlier suge than 2 Peter or a later stage dian Jude because of their attitude to the
pseudepigrapha. All of diese attitudes probably existed simultaneously in die church,
bul 2 Peter clearly shows the direction in which die church would move as it did in
fact separate from Judaism, a process dial look time and did not move at equal speed
in all sections of the church.
DAVIDS The Pseudepigrapha in the Catholic Epistles 245
Peder Borgen
The present study is based upon the assumption that Philo's inter-
pretation continues this presentation of the Laws of Moses to the
Greek half of tiie world. Moreover, it assumes that when Philo in Vit.
Mos. 1.4 says that he always weaves together the Laws as read and the
traditions told him by the elders of the nation, he gives a clue to the
method used not only in his treatise On the Life of Moses, but also in
his other writings."*
11. Josephus. Ant. 4.326; Sifre Deut. 357, on Deut. 34.5; b. Sot. 13b. See
L. Ginzberg. 77ie Legends of the Jews (Philadelphia: JPS. 12di repr.. 1968), II.
p. 161 n. 951; H.A. Wolfson, Philo (Cambridge: Harvard University, 1948), I.
pp. 402-403; K. Haacker and P. Schafer. 'Nachbiblische Traditionen vom Tod des
Moses', in O. Betz, et aL (eds.). Josephus-Studien: Festschrift O. Michel
(GOttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 1974), p. 171 and nn. 34 and 35.
12. There is a sulking parallel to Quaest. in Gen. 1.86 in Midrash Hag-Gadol 1:
250 The Pseudepigrapha and Early Biblical Interpretation
Proclamatio Graeca
In order to illustrate how Jewish and non-Jewish elements are woven
together in a passage on heavenly journey in Philo, On the Creation
(Op. Mund.) 69-71 may serve as an example. The passage is an
exegetical interpretation of the concepts of 'man', 'the image of God'
and 'His likeness' in the quotation from Gen. 1.26. These words are
paraphrased in die opening exegesis in Op. Mund. 69ab. Then a more
independent elaboration about the eardily and heavenly journey by the
mind follows in 69c-71b. The structure of the exposition is as
f o l l o w s : " 1. scriptural quotation (Gen. 1.26); 2. an affirmative
paraphrasing interpretation; 3. rejection of a possible misunder-
standing, in casu, an anthropomorphic understanding; 4. an acceptable,
Just as the Holy One. blessed be He. fills die whole world, so die soul
fills die body. Just as the Holy One. blessed be He. sees, but is not seen,
so the soul sees but is not itself seen (b. Ber. 10a).
'tread the ether*. This latter verb also occurs in Spec. Leg. 1.207 and
Migr. Abr. 184, cf.. Her. 238 (birds). References to astrological
sources are Anthologia Palatina, Planudea 4.328; Pseudo-Lucian
Philopatris 25. The astrological background is also evident by the
similar term ovpavoPateo), 'tread the heaven', which is used by the
astrologer Vettius Valens, VI, Introduction." Cf. also Quaest. in Gen.
3.3. The idea of the dancing and singing of the stars occur also in
apocalyptic and rabbinic writings.^
Philo marks the distinction between the travel up to the etherial
region and the next stage of the ascent by employing the Platonic
category of the world of the senses and the noedc world, Op. Mund.
7 0 - 7 1 . The final stage, however, draws on Cybele-tradidon ('filled
with Corybandc frenzy') and on Jewish tradidon (God seen as 'the
Great King*). Philo here sees the vision of God, die Great King, as the
final aim of the ascent. God is called the Great King in several apoca-
lypdc and odier Jewish sources, such as I En. 84.2, 5; 91.13; Sib. Or.
3.499, 560; Pss. SoL 2.32.
In Spec. Leg. 3.1-2 Philo tells about his own inspired ascent in a
way similar to the descripdon of die ascent found in Op. Mund. 70 In
Op. Mund. 70 it is said that the mind 'was borne even higher to the
ether and the circuit of heaven, and is whirled around with
(ovunEpiitoXeo)) the dances of die planets and the fixed stars... *, and
in Spec. Leg. 3.1 Philo tells that he seemed 'to be borne aloft into die
heights widi a soul possessed by some God-sent inspiradon, whirling
around with (avnrtepiJcoA,e(o) the sun and the moon and the whole
heaven and cosmos...*. In Op. Mund. 70-71 the mind goes still
further to the intelligible world and the God himself, while Philo has
the region of moon and sun as a lookout-place for viewing the earthly
things. Both in apocalyptic and in Hellenistic sources there are
examples given about ascents to the heavenly region from which the
person gets a view of the earthly matters.^* It is worth noticing that
the ascent makes it possible for Philo not only to read the Laws of
Moses, but to peer into them and reveal what is not known to the
multitude. Spec. Leg. 3.6.
Thus, Philo utilizes in his autobiographical report traditions that he
at other places draws on in his exposition of the ascent in Op. Mund.
69-71 and in other passages in the Laws of Moses. Moreover, he does
not hesitate in adding his own inspiration and ascent to the heavenly
region to the ascents of the biblical persons, such as Enoch, Moses and
Elijah. This observation should be considered when discussing die fact
that the author of the Book of Reveladon, John, tells about his own
ascent." Moreover, in different ways bodi Philo and John look upon
earthly events seen from the heavenly region and they interpret
Scripture as seen from die heavenly lookout-place to which they have
entered by means of ascents, which they have experienced through
God-sent inspiradon. It should also be added that the passage about
Philo's ascent is written into the collection of treatises diat we call the
'Exposition of die Laws of Moses'. This 'Exposition' concludes witii
die treatise On Rewards and Punishments which has an eschatological
outlook, even including the theme of reversal, which is a central
feature in several apocalyptic writings.^' Thus Philo is an inspired and
There are only traces of the motif of angelic opposition and rivalry
between human beings and angels in Philo. In a very moderate form
this idea is present in Philo's report on the Song of Moses in Virt. 11-
75. As an illustration of the virtue philanthropy Philo presents the life
of Moses in Virt. 51-79. When Moses knew that his end was near, he
in the proper way arranged for Joshua to be his successor (53-71) and
then broke into the Great Song (72-75) followed by the Blessing of
the tribes (76-79). With this concentration on Moses as an ideal ruler,
Philo in his report on Moses' song focuses the attention more on him
dian on die various ideas found in Deuteronomy 32. Thus Virt. 72-75
is largely an elaboration of the terms 'hymn', 'earth' and 'heaven' and
die reference to an assembly in tiie opening verse, Deut. 32.1, and the
words about 'angels' and 'heavens' in LXX Deut. 32.43.
Moses sang his song before his death, before 'the body was stripped
32. See especially J.P. Schultz, 'Angelic Opposition to the Ascension of Moses
and die Revelation of the Law'. JQR 61 (1970-71), pp. 287-89 widi reference to
L. Ginzberg. Legends, VI. p. 57. etc. P. Alexander, '3 (Hebrew Apocalypse oO
Enoch', in OTP, I. p. 241 n. 58. K.E. GrSzinger. Musik und Gesang, pp. 310-11.
33. In addition to Deut. 32. see Ps. 148.1-6; Isa. 43.7 and 20-21, etc.
Concerning Platonic traditions, see D. Runia, Philo of Alexandria and the Timaeus
of Plato (Leiden: Brill, 1986), pp. 115-18.
34. Himmelfarb. 'Heavenly Ascent', pp. 91-96. Grdzinger. Musik und Gesang,
pp. 76-99.
258 The Pseudepigrapha and Early Biblical Interpretation
35. For the Platonic background for the connection made in Virt. 73-75 between
angels and the fifdi element, ether, see Wolfson, Philo, I, pp. 369-70. For the idea
of die choral dancers in the ediereal sphere, see Op. Mund. 70. discussed above.
BORGEN Heavenly Ascent in Philo 259
In 3 En. 12.5 and b. Sanh. 38b the angel of Exod. 23.20 is identified
as Metatron. And the archangel Yahoel (Apoc. Abr. 10, etc.) probably
originated in speculation about the angel in whom God's name resides,
according to Exod. 2 3 . 2 0 - 2 1 . "
In Migr. Abr. 174-75 the Logos/Angel and Abraham are seen as
runners, with the Logos/Angel running ahead.
But when he [Abraham] has arrived at full knowledge, he will run widi
more vigorous effort, and his pace will be as great as diat of him who
before led die way; for so they will bodi become attendants of the All-
leading God (175).
Philo dien mentions diose who cause dangers and obstacles on die jour-
ney: 'and no holder of heterodox doctrines will dog their steps any
more'. According to Spec. Leg. 2.193 and Sobr. 68 those who hold
heterodox views are die ones who prefer bodily and external things,
such as lavish banquets and the like. Thus the obstacles for Abraham
were the same as for Moses (Migr. Abr. 172): wealdi, fame, and so
on."
Thus several of Philo's texts fit togedier with Himmelfarb's charac-
terization of tiie apocalypses in her article 'Heavenly Ascent...', cited
above: the heroes are taken to heaven at God's command. Thus they
ascend widiout meeting hostile forces.
36. See Alexander, '3 Enoch'. I. pp. 243-44; A. Segal, 'Heavenly Ascent',
p. 1362.
37. Cf. Apoc. Abr. 13-14. where die fallen angel Azazel is trying to stop
Abraham. The angel Yahoel then says: 'Shame on you. Azazel! For Abraham's
portion is heaven, and yours is on earth'. Translation by R. Rubinkiewicz.
'Apocalypse of Abraham', in OTP, I, p. 695.
38. In Rel. 18 (1988). pp. 47-67.
39. Halperin. 'Ascension or Invasion', p. 47.
260 The Pseudepigrapha and Early Biblical Interpretation
Halperin has seen that the positive form of ascent often is pictured
against the background of a confrast. At several places this is the case
in Philo's writings. It has to be added, however, that the contrast
between ascension and invasion is one among several contrasts used by
Philo.
In a rudimentary way the idea of 'invasion' is formulated in Philo's
exposition of Num. 15.30 in Virt. 171-72:
'Whosoever sets his hand to do anything with presumptuousness pro-
vokes God'...the arrogant man is always filled with the spirit of
unreason, holding himself, as Pindar says, to be neither man nor demi-
god, but wholly divine, and claiming to overstep the limits of human
nature.
Gains invades the divine realm in this way: 'he no longer considered it
worthy of him to abide within the bounds of human nature but over-
stepped them in his eagerness to be thought a god' (Leg. Gai. 75).
Gains was a counterfeit of Israel and Moses, and features associated
with Moses as king are attributed to Gains by Philo in the form of a
parody,*"
The idea of invasion into the heavenly realm is also present else-
where in Philo's writings, for example in the areas of doctrines and of
wealth. The story about the tower of Babel is interpreted by Philo as
an invasion of heaven by means of false doctrines (Somn. 2.283-99).
In Somn. 2.274-99 Philo lists three kinds of wrong speaking: 1. the
speaking of the pleasure lovers, represented by Pharaoh (276-79),
2. the sophists, represented by the people of Egypt (279-82), and
3. diose who deny die existence of God and providence, such as diose
who built the tower of Babel (Gen. 11):
diose who extended their activities of their word-cleverness to heaven
itself... They declared that nodiing exists beyond diis world of our sight
and senses, that it is neither was created nor will perish, but is uncreated,
imperishable, without guardian, helmsman or protector. Then piling
enterprises one upon anodier they raised on high like a tower dieir edifice
of unedifying doctrines... And therefore when they hoped to soar to
40. See W.A. Meeks. 'The Divine Agent and his Counterfeit in Philo and the
Fourth Gospel', in E. SchUssler Fiorenza (ed.). Aspects of Religious Propaganda
in Judaism and Early Christianity (NoU-e Dame. IN: NoUie Dame University Press.
1976). pp. 50-51. Concerning Gaius's claim to divinity, see E.M. Smallwood,
Philonis Alexandrini Legatio ad Gaium (Leiden: Brill. 2nd edn. 1970), pp. 191-92
and 209-11.
BORGEN Heavenly Ascent in Philo 261
heaven in mind and diought. to desuoy die eternal kingship, die mighty
undestroyable hand cast them down and overturned their edifice and dieir
doctrine. And die place is called 'confusion'... (Somn. 2.283-86)."'
When attacking the theocratic view that God is the king, these
imposters argue for die absolute sovereignty of human rulers (Somn.
2.290-91). In diis interpretation of die tower of Babel, Philo has
primarily in mind non-Jewish philosophies and governments.
Also in Conf. Ling. 111-14 die invasion into heaven by die building
of die tower of Babel is understood in terms of (non-Jewish) philo-
sophical ideas and human-centered government and human vices:
'Let us build ourselves a city' [Gen. 11.4], which is like... Let us enact
laws which shall eject from our community the justice whose product is
poverty and disreputelaws which shall assure the emoluments of the
stronger to the succession of those whose powers of acquisition are
greater than odiers. And let a 'tower' (Gen. 11.4] be built as an acropolis,
as a royal and impregnable castle for die tyrannic evil, whose feet shall
walk upon the earth, and whose head reach to 'heaven' [Gen. 11.4],
carried by our vaulting ambition to diat vast height. For in fact that tower
not only has human misdeeds for its base, but it seeks to rise to the region
of celestial ('Olympic') diings, widi die argument of impiety and godless-
ness in its van. Such are its pronouncements, eidier that the Deity does not
exist, or diat it exists but does not exert providence, or that the world has
no beginning in which it was created, or that though created its course is
under the sway of varying and random causation.
41. Widi regard to the (non-Jewish) philosophical background for die ideas criti-
cized by Philo. see Wolfson, Philo, I. pp. 164-67. 299; 11. p. 382; Philo. V (LCL
edn, uans. F.H. Colson and G.H. Whitaker). p. 610.
42. Concerning tyrannic rule. etc. see E.R. Goodenough. The Politics of Philo
Judaeus (Hildesheim: Olms. 1967). 86. 93. etc. Concerning Philo's rejection of
views found in Greek philosophical tfaditions, see Wolfson, Philo. I. pp. 108-15,
165-99,295-300. and Philo (LCL edn). Ill, p. 508 n. on 199.
262 The Pseudepigrapha and Early Biblical Interpretation
that of many sophists, and the fate of those who reach high up in
wealth and power. Thus Philo here as in Conf. Ling. 110-15 and
Somn. 2.283-92 combines theoretical reasoning and moral evil and
not only spiritualizes the ascent, but he also materializes it.
As for die invasion by the sophists, the English translation of Migr.
Abr. 171 in LCL runs:
...rather thati to lift ourselves heavenward and incur shipwreck as
imposters. This has been the fate of multitudes of sophists, dirough dieir
imagining that wisdom consists in finding specious arguments, and not in
appealing to die solid evidence of facts.
43. See P. Borgen. Bread from Heaven (NovTSup. 10; Leiden: Brill, repr.
1981). pp. 123-24.
BORGEN Heavenly Ascent in Philo 263
In this way Philo pictures the proper ascent to God by those who are
guided by God and the Logos/angel (Migr. Abr. 170-75) against the
contrasting background of the imposters who attempt to invade heaven
(cf. the tower of Babel) and are overturned. The invasion and the ascent
are applied to the two areas of 1. intellectual argumentation and 2.
moral lifestyle in connection witii wealtii, holding of office, and fame.
In Migr. Abr. 171-72 Philo understands ascent to mean tiie right
way of life of persons who possess wealth and hold offices.** At times
he is more radical and states that those who ascend to heaven seek to
stay away from such 'worldly* activities and prefer solitude: Spec.
Leg. 2.44-45; 3.1-6 and tiie treatise On the Contemplative Life.
Since the idea of invasion into heaven can be applied to kings and
kingship, it is quite natural that corrupt kingship can be used as con-
ti-ast to proper ascent, also without picturing the contrast as an
invasion into heaven. This is the case in Vit. Mos. 1.148-62.
In Vit. Mos. 1.148-62 the basic dualism is die difference between
Israel and the other nations in general and Egypt in particular: Moses
was not like those who gain positions of power by military means; he
gave up the lordship of Egypt because of the iniquities committed in
die land; he did not exalt his own house and promote his sons; he did
not treasure up gold and silver, did not levy tribute and abjured die
accumulation of lucre and wealdi. Thus, instead of being the heir of
die throne of tiie Pharaoh of die Egyptian people, God
thought good to requite him with die kingship of a nadon more populous
and mightier, a nadon destined to be consecrated above all odiers to offer
prayers for ever on behalf of the human race diat it may be delivered from
evil and participate in what is good (Vit. Mos. 1.149).
As a reward God gave Moses the whole cosmos, land and cosmic
elements as his portion, and as the representative good man and world
citizen he was given partnership with God.
Again, was not the joy of his partnership with the Father and Maker of all
magnified also by the honour of being deemed worthy to bear the same
dtle? For he was named god and king of die whole nadon. and entered,
we are told, 'into die darkness where God was', diat is into die formless,
invisible, incorporeal and archetypal essence of existing thing, seeing
what is hidden for mortal nature (Vit. Mos. 1.158).
Here Exod. 20.21, 'Moses went into die darkness where God was', is
paraphrased togedier with the word 'god' which is applied to Moses in
Exod. 7.1: 'See, I make you as God to Pharaoh' (cf. 4.16: 'as God to
him [Aaron]')."'
Moses' ascent is then the divine confirmadon of his appointment as
king {Vit. Mos. 1.163). Philo does not describe any heavenly scene
with God's throne and Moses' installadon, however. Instead he elabo-
rates on the word 'darkness' in Exod. 20.21, and states that Moses
entered into the realm that is hidden for mortals. In Quaest. in Exod.
2.28 Philo reveals that Moses, the prophetic mind, entered 'the
darkness' (Exod. 20.21) and dwelt in the forecourt of die palace of the
Father. Thus by die realm hidden for mortals in Vit. Mos. 1.158 Philo
meant God's royal premises. It should also be mentioned that in The
Mishnah of Rabbi Eliezer (ed. H.G. Enelow [New York: Bloch, 1933],
p. 150), Moses grasped the throne when he entered the darkness
where God was (Exod. 20.21).
45. See Meeks. The Prophet-King, pp. 110-11 and 192-95. widi references to
die use of main elements of the same tradidon about Moses being 'God' and his
ascent in ran/i., ed. Buber, 4.51ff., Num. R. 15.13, cf. Pes. R. Piska 32. 198b.
etc.; P. Borgen. 'Philo of Alexandria', pp. 267-68.
BORGEN Heavenly Ascent in Philo 265
and the ascent is related to the area of wealth, holding office, and the
like, as well as to the arguments of the sophists. Also in Poster. C. 1 4 -
15 Moses is understood to be 'the soul' (viixn)- In Op. Mund. 69-71
Philo interprets Gen. 1.26, 'the image of God', as the human 'mind'
and 'soul'. The material in Philo is thus varied. At times he spiritu-
alizes the ascent, as stated by Halperin. At other times he materializes
the ascent, however, and at times he just deals with the biblical
persons as persons.**
In various ways the ascents of biblical persons serve as paradigm
for others or reveals teachings to others:
1. As for Gen. 5.24 about Enoch, in Quaest. in Gen. 1.86 the
term 'translation' is not only applied to Enoch's ascent, but it
means also that ' . . . t h e end of worthy and holy men is not
death, but translation and approaching another place'. Thus,
Enoch's (Moses', and Elijah's) translation without death serves
as model for the translation of holy individuals after death.
2. In the Song of Moses, Virt. 73-75, Moses sang his canticles
with every kind of harmony and symphony in order that
humans and ministering angels should listen. From this
human beings, as disciples, should learn from him the lesson
of the same kind of dianksgiving.
3. According to Migr. Abr. 168-75 die ascents of Abraham and
Moses show diat the one who 'has been exalted to such high-
soaring height will no longer suffer any parts of his soul to
have their converse down below among things mortal, but
will draw them all up with him as if hanging on a rope'.
4. Having perceived the 'invisible and incorporeal archetypal
essence of existing things', Moses, being god and king, so
models his life after it that he becomes a paradigm for those
who are willing to copy it, Vit. Mos. 1.158. As king destined
also to be legislator, he was a living and articulate law, Vit.
Mos. 1.162.
5. In several places Philo tells about ascent without connecting it
with any particular persons. Thus, in Op. Mund. 69-71 it is
tiie soul, as the image of God, that ascends. In Spec. Leg.
1.36-38 for 'those who have not taken a mere sip of philo-
sophy' tiie reason is lifted up. According to Spec. Leg. 2.44-45
Sumrtiary
above: the heroes are taken to heaven at God's command. Thus they
ascend without meeting evil forces.
At several places Philo pictures the ascent against the opposing idea
of invasion of heaven, or in a more general way against the opposing
idea of corrupt behaviour against God's Laws.
The material on ascent in Philo is extensive and varied. Often the
biblical persons serve as paradigm for others or reveal teachings to
others. Since ascent in this way is not only the experience of heavenly
journeys by biblical and other persons, but also serves as a paradigm,
it is not surprising that Philo understands the people of Israel to be the
nation that ascends to God. The true ascent of the Jewish nadon has as
contrast die invasion into divinity by die emperor Gains.
Philo's ascent texts have closer affinides to the ascent stories in
some rabbinic texts and in apocalypdc writings than to the ascents
as pictured in the hekhalot literature and in gnostic writings. Philo
provides interesting background perspectives for the New Testament,
especially for die Revelation of John.
RESURRECTION AS GIVING BACK THE DEAD:
A TRADITIONAL IMAGE OF RESURRECTION IN THE PSEUDEPIGRAPHA
AND THE APOCALYPSE OF JOHN
Richard Bauckham
them. Thus one could ask whether John is indebted to Jewish apoca-
lyptic for the literary forms he uses, for theological ideas, for
symbolic images, for the ways in which he interprets Old Testament
Scriptures. In each of these aspects he may be more or less distinctive
while also being indebted to apocalyptic tradition. His distinctiveness
may be comparable to that of one Jewish apocalypse in relation to
others' or it m.ay come out of his deliberately Christian prophetic con-
sciousness and message. We should probably reckon with both types
of distinctiveness.
One aspect of Revelation's relationship to the Jewish apocalypses
that has been little enough explored is Revelation's use of specific
items of apocalyptic tradition that also appear in Jewish apocalypses
and sometimes also in later Christian apocalypses. Where these have
been noticed they have often been taken to show that John was actually
borrowing from a particular Jewish apocalyptic work, such as
/ Enoch.* Although it is a priori quite likely that John had read some
of the Jewish apocalypses diat we know, it seems to me impossible to
prove his specific literary dependence on any such work. The U-adi-
tions in question usually turn out to be attested in a variety of works,
Jewish and Christian, in such a way tiiat a chain of literary dependence
is very difficult to reconsUnct, and it seems more plausible to think of
u-aditions that were known, independendy of their use in particular
apocalypses, in circles, Jewish and Christian, diat studied and produced
apocalyptic literatiire. One such u-adition, which occurs in Revelation,
will be studied in this chapter.' It is a way of describing the general
resurrection, which in Rev. 20.13a takes tfiis form: 'And the sea gave
up the dead which were in it, and Death and Hades gave up the dead
which were in them'.
The study of the U-adition to which Rev. 20.13a belongs will not
only illuminate this verse's relationship to that tradition and illusttate
3. 1 point out some rarely noted differences between Reveladon and die major
Jewish apocalypses in R.J. Bauckhem, The Climax of Prophecy: Studies on the
Boole of Revelation (Edinburgh: T & T Clark. 1993), pp. 174-77.
4. E.g. R.H. Charles. A Critical and Exegetical Commentary on the Revelation
of St John (ICC; Edinburgh: T & T Clark. 1920). I. pp. Ixv. Ixxxii-lxxxiii; and
for discussion, cf. Mazzaferri, Genre, pp. 48-49.
5. I deal with other examples in The Climax of Prophecy, ch. 2.1 show
Revelation'sextensive allusions to traditions about the messianic war in The Climax
of Prophecy, ch. 8.
BAUCKHAM Resurrection as Giving Back the Dead 271
II
In diis section I present the collection of texts tiiat will be discussed in
die rest of die chapter:
A. 7 Enoch 5\.\:
And in those days the earth will return diat which has been entrusted
to it.
and Sheol will return that which has been entrusted to it, that which
it has received,
and desuiicdon [Abaddon] will return what it owes.'
In dwse days. Sheol will return all die deposits which she had
received
and hell [Abaddon] will give back all which it owes.
Isaac discusses the textual variants in this verse in 'New Light upon the Book of
Enoch from Newly-Found Ethiopic MSS', JAOS 103 (1983). p. 408. where he
272 The Pseudepigrapha and Early Biblical Interpretation
B. 4 Ezra 7.32:
Et tena reddet qui in earn dormiunt
et pulvis qui in eo silendo habitant
et promptuaria reddent quae eis commendatae sunt animae.
And die earth shall give back diose who sleep in it,
and die dust those who dwell silendy in it,
and die chambers shall give back die souls which have been committed
to diem
C. Revelation 20.13:
KOI e8(0Kev f) GdXaooa xow; veKpowi; xo\><; ev ouTfj,
Koi 6 GovoTO? Koi 6 "AiSii; eStoKtv tov? veKpovi; TOU? ev
awtoi?...
. . . And I will give life to the dead, and raise from die earth diose
who sleep,
and Sheol will give back what it owes,
and Abaddon will restore what has been enuiisted to it...
E.2BarMc/i21.23:
Therefore, reprove the angel of deadi. and let your glory appear, and
let the greamess of your beauty be known,
and let die realm of deadi [Sheol] be sealed so diat it may not
receive die dead from diis dme,
and let the treasuries of die souls restore diose who are enclosed in
them.*
argues diat die diree-clause form of die text is a secondary scribal harmonization widi
4 Ezra 7.32 (our text B). However, die diree-clause form of die text of / . 51.1 is
closer to LAB 3.10 (our text D). widi which it shares the same diree terms for die
place of the dead (die earth, Sheol, Abaddon). Since LAB is not extant in Ediiopic.
this correspondence cannot have originated within the Ethiopic textual tradition.
Therefore most probably die diree-clause form of die text of / >i. 51.1 is original.
8. Trans. A.F.J. Klijn, in OTP, I, p. 628.
BAUCKHAM Resurrection as Giving Back the Dead 273
F. Apocalypse of Peter 4 . 3 - 4 :
He will command Gehenna to open its gates of steel and to give back
all who are in it.
"He will command die beasts and die birds to give back all the flesh
diat diey have eaten,
because he wills diat (all) humankind appear...'
G . Apocalypse of Peter 4 . 1 0 - 1 2 :
'"See and understand die seeds that are sown, dry and lifeless, upon die
ground, and come to life and bear fruit' 'The eardi gives back as it were
the deposit widi which it has been enuvsted. That which dies is the seed
that is sown upon the ground, and comes to life, and is given for Ihe life
of humankind. '^How much more, on the day of judgment will God
raise up diose who believe in him, and his elect for whose sake he made
(die world).'"
I. 2 Baruch 4 2 . 8 :
And dust will be called, and told,
'Give back dial which does not belong to you
and raise up all that you have kept undl its own time'."
J. 2 Baruch 50.2:
For Ihe earth will surely give back the dead at that Ume;
it receives diem now in order to keep diem, not changing anydiing in
their form.
But as it has received them so it will give them back
And as I have delivered diem to it so it will raise diem.'^
K. 4 Ezra 4.41b-43a:
In inferno prompUiaria animarum matrici adsimilala sunt.
*^Quemadmodum enim fesdnavit quae parii effugere necessitatem
partus,
sic et haec fesdnat reddere ea quae commendata sunt "'ab inido.
Sheol which has received what has been enuiisted to it will not
restore it unless it is reclaimed by him who entrusted it to
it...
me, I shall return to Him what He laid away with me, as it is said Thy
dead shall live, my dead bodies shall ariseAwake and sing ye that dwell
in the dust [Isa. 26.19], and I will blossom as dte rose, and sing a song
to God, as it is said From the uttermost part of the earth have we heard
songs: "Glory to the Righteous" [Isa. 24.16]."
13. Trans. W.G. Braude. The Midrash on Psalms, I (New Haven: Yale
University Press. 1959), pp. 28-29. Braude's note explains the first paragraph as
referring to the generation that died in the wilderness wanderings and were buried in
the desert, but another possibility is suggested by I En. 61.5. quoted and discussed
in section IV below.
14. Trans. M. Simon in H. Freedman and M. Simon (eds.), Midrash Rabbah,
IX (London: Soncino Press. 1939), p. 92.
15. Trans. G. Friedlander, Pirke de Rabbi Eliezer (New York: Sepher-Hermon,
2nd edn, 1965), p. 258.
276 The Pseudepigrapha and Early Biblical Interpretation
Q. b. Sanh. 92a:
R. Tabi said in R. Josia's name: What is meant by. The grave; and the
barren womb; and the earth that is not filled by water [Prov. 30.16]: now,
what connection has die grave widi die womb? But it is to teach thee: just
as the womb receives and brings forth, so does die grave too receive and
bring forth. Now, does not this furnish us with an a fortiori argument? If
die womb, which receives in silence, yet brings forth amid great cries [of
jubiliation]; then die grave, which receives the dead amid cries [of grief],
will much more so bring them forth amid great cries [of joy]!"
Ill
It will be useful to preface our consideration of the texts given in
section 11 with a brief distinction between two basic ideas of resurrec-
tion in Jewish tradition, which we may call unitary and dualistic. The
simplest and doubtless the earliest Jewish notion of resurrection was
that the dead would return from the place of the dead to life on earth.
This presupposed the existence of the dead as shades in Sheol and
imagined these shades returning from Sheol to real life. Because
ancient Israelite thought made no sharp distinctions between Sheol and
the grave or between the dead person in Sheol and the body in the
grave, such distinctions did not belong to the original notion of resur-
rection. The dead person was conceived as returning from Sheol and
of course resuming a fully corporeal existence, but this did not neces-
sarily mean that the shade from Sheol was reunited with his or her
corpse, resuscitated from the grave. Since death was not conceived as
16. Trans. W.G. Braude, Pesikta Rabbati, I (Yale Judaica Series. 18; New
Haven: Yale University Press, 1968), p. 419.
17. Trans. H. Freedman in I. Epstein (ed.). The Babylonian Talmud: Sanhedrin
(London: Soncino Press. 1935), p. 618.
BAUCKHAM Resurrection as Giving Back the Dead 111
the separation of the person from his or her body, but as the death of
the bodily person, so resurrection was not the reunion of person and
body, but the resurrection of the bodily person. The notion is not the
resurrection of the body so much as the bodily resurrection of the
dead.
Reflection on and apologetic defence of this idea could easily pro-
duce a more dichotomous anthropology in which death is seen as the
separation of the shade diat descends to Sheol from the body diat is
laid in the grave, and resurrection is therefore understood as the
reunion of the two. Such a development is quite comprehensible even
witiiout Hellenistic influence, though Hellenistic influence may have
had some part to play in it. In any case, the dualism implied in this is
not a truly Greek dualism, but preserves in its own way tiie Jewish
conviction that human life is essentially corporeal. If the shade and its
body are sharply distinguished in death, then precisely because the
body is integral and essential to die person's life, a return to life must
mean the return of the body to life just as much as the return of the
shade to life. It must mean the reunion of shade and body in restored
bodily life. When the words soul or spirit are used in this conception
to refer to the shade in Sheol," they should not be taken in the fully
Platonic sense of the real person who never dies but escapes from the
body into eternal life. Bodi die soul in Sheol and the body in the grave
are deadboth come back to life in the resurrection when they are
reunited. The more soul and body were distinguished in death, die
more it was necessary to preserve the Jewish unitary view of human
life by insisting that this earthly body is raised to eternal life." While
the older view was content to think of the dead returning (of course,
to bodily life), many Jews and Christians of the first and second
centuries CE increasingly insisted on the resurrection (as well as, of
course, transformation) of this body which has been buried in the
grave. They did not all do so, but often it was precisely those who
were most aware of Hellenistic antiiropological dualism who guarded
against it by stressing the resurrection of this body, and who entered
on a rather detailed apologetic for this somewhat difficult notion.
However, what we need especially to recognize in the present
18. For the usage of these terms, see D.S. Russell, The Method and Message of
Jewish Apocalyptic (London: SCM Press. 1964), pp. 357-60.
19. Of course, there were also forms of Jewish expectation that did not expect
bodily resurrection: e.g. Jubilees, Wisdom.
278 The Pseudepigrapha and Early Biblical Interpretation
20. Therefore it is rather doubtful whedier die correspondence between / En. 51.1
and examples of our uadition in 2 Baruch, 4 Ezra and LAB can itself be taken as an
indication of a latefirst-centuryCE date for die Parables of Enoch, as G. Stemberger
(Der Leib der Auferstehung: Studien zur Anthropologic und Eschatologie des
paldstinischen Judentums im neutestamentlichen Zeitalter [ca. 170 v. Chr100
n. Chr.l [AnBib, 56; Rome: Biblical Institute Press, 1972], p. 29) proposes.
21. M. Black (77ie Book of Enoch or I Enoch: A New English Edition [SVTP. 7;
Leiden: Brill. 1985]. p. 214) regards LAB 3.10 as 'a clear allusion' to / En. 51.1,
but die full range of parallels makes common tradition at least as likely.
BAUCKHAM Resurrection as Giving Back the Dead 279
the earth) the subject of the act of resurrection, just as our tradition
does. Modem scholarship usually takes "j'sn to mean 'will give birth
to' (lit. let [the young] drop). The earth gives birth to the dead who
are at present in her womb. This image of resurrection as birth is rare
in later Jewish literature, but texts K (4 Ezra 4.41-42) and text Q {b.
Sanh. 92a) both compare the place of the dead with the womb and the
act of resurrection with childbirth. Isa. 26.19 may lie behind these
passages. It is worth nodng that text Q (included at the end of our
collection of texts because it uses the idea, though not the actual
language of giving back the dead) understands childbirth as a matter
of giving back what has been received. Just as the womb receives and
brings forth, so the grave receives die dead and brings them fordi.
However, if our tradition originated from interpretation of Isa.
26.19, the Jewish reader of Isa. 26.19 who originated it missed or did
not appreciate the image of childbirth. Instead, he paraphrased the last
three words of the verse in terms of a legal metaphor: 'the earth will
retum that which has been entrusted to i t ' . " This statement occurs in
tills form in text A (/ n. 51.1), which may well preserve die most
original form of our tradition, and the same idea recurs in many of
our texts (see texts B , D, G, I, K, L, M, O, P). The full legal termi-
nology is clearest in text L (LAB 33.3). The idea is that God has
entrusted tiie dead to the place of the dead for safekeeping. The place
of the dead does not therefore own them, but owes them to God and
must return them when he reclaims them at the time of the resurrec-
tion. The point of the metaphor is diat Sheol has no absolute right to
the dead, as though it could retain diem for ever. It has only a tempo-
rary right, a kind of custodianship of die dead, granted it by God. The
deadactiially belong to God; he entrusts tiiem to Sheol for safekeeping,
but retains the right to reclaim diem. The idea dierefore represents a
powerful step beyond the old idea that in death a person falls out of
the sphere of God's sovereignty into the power of Sheol. The meta-
phor of G o d ' s entmsting the dead to Sheol for safekeeping is an
assertion of God's sovereignty over die realm of the dead, and there-
fore of his power to demand that Sheol surrender the dead back to life.
The three lines of text A (7 n. 51.1) repeat the same thought in
synonymous parallelism. The three terms ' e a r t h ' , ' S h e o l ' and
22. The same legal metaphor is used differendy in the idea that a person's soul is
entrusted to him or her by God and must be returned at deadi: C t Apoc. Ezra 6.3,
17. 2\;Apoc. Sedr. 9.2; Hermas. Mand. 3.2.
280 The Pseudepigrapha and Early Biblical Interpretation
'Abaddon' are used synonymously for the place of the dead. The
thought of the whole verse is simply that the place of the dead will
give back the dead who have been entrusted to it. Some have inter-
preted this text (as well as other texts in our collection) according to
the dualistic understanding of resurrection, according to which the
body must be recovered from one place, the soul from another, in
order to be reunited. The earth restores the body, Sheol and Abaddon
die soul. But in that case one would have expected two lines radier
than diree. R.H. Charles diought diat Sheol and Abaddon represent
two different places from which the righteous and die wicked souls
respectively come;^' but diere is no evidence of such a distinction
between the terms Sheol and Abaddon in Jewish literature.^* In Old
Testament texts they occur in synonymous parallelism as alternative
terms for tiie place of die dead (Job 26.6; cf. Prov. 15.11; 27.20; IQH
3.19). It is best to interpret die whole verse in continuity with Old
Testament thought, according to which the dead person is in the earth
or Sheol or Abaddon.^' The personification of die place of die dead is
also rooted in Old Testament usage (e.g. Job 24.19; 28.22; Isa. 5.14).
Comparison of text A (7 n. 51.1) with the following texts (B-E)
shows that there was a traditional formulation, whose basic structure
is three lines of synonymous parallelism expressing the thought that
the place of the dead will give back the dead. The persistence of the
direefold form indicates that in none of these cases are we likely to be
justified in distinguishing a place of the body and a place of the soul:
the idea expressed in diis form remains die simple one of the return of
the dead. The various terms for the place of the dead that are used in
these texts can be understood, largely from an Old Testament back-
ground, as synonyms for Sheol.
As well as the diree terms for die place of the dead in text A (7 En.
51.1)die earth, Sheol, Abaddonwhich recur exactiy in text D and
two of which recur individually in some other texts (earth: texts B, D,
G, M, N, O, P; Sheol/Hades: texts: C, E, L), tiie following terms are
also u.sed in these texts to describe the place or the power that gives
23. R.H. Charles. The Book of Enoch (Oxford: Clarendon Press. 2nd edn.
1912). p. 99.
24. Stemberger. Leib der Auferstehung, p. 46. In Asc. Isa. 10.8. Abaddon is
die lowest part of die underworld, below Sheol. but there is no indicadon that it
contains a disdnct class of die dead.
25. For the earth as synonymous with Sheol, see 1 Sam. 28.13.
BAUCKHAM Resurrection as Giving Back the Dead 281
back the dead: die dust (texts B, I), die chambers or treasuries of die
souls (texts B, E, K), die sea (text C), Deadi (text C), die angel of
deadi (text E), and Gehenna (text F). The last is surprising, especially
since the text refers to die iron gates which are elsewhere those of
Sheol/Hades,^* and must be understood as die Ethiopic translation's
rendering of Hades in the original Greek of the Apocalypse of Peter}''
This is confirmed by Sib. Or. 2.228-29 (quoted in section IV below),
which is dependent on this verse of the Apocalypse of Peter and refers
to 'die gates of Hades'. The references in texts F and H to animals that
are commanded to give back die dead will be left aside now for
discussion in section IV.
Of the remaining terms, 'die dust* is used as in Isa. 26.19 and Dan.
12.2, two key passages for the Jewish concept of resurrection, as well
as in otiier Old Testament passages (e.g. Job 17.16; 20.11; Pss. 22.29;
30.10), for die place of die dead. 'The angel of deadi' in text E (2 Bar.
21.23) may be Abaddon, who is 'die angel of die abyss' in Rev. 9.11.
The personification of Abaddon in Job 28.22 could have led to die
idea that he is the angel in charge of the underworld and therefore the
angelic power to whom God entrusts the dead.
In Rev. 20.13 the diree places of die dead are the sea, Death and
Hades. The personified Death may be this author's substitute for
Abaddon, since he has used the latter name for the king of the demons
(rather dian die ruler of die dead) in 9.11 (cf. also 4QBer 2.7). Deadi
and Hades are a standard pair in Revelation (1.18; 6.8; 20.13-14; cf.
also LAB 3.10b) and may represent tiie Old Testament pair Sheol and
Abaddon, diough tiiere is also Old Testament precedent for the pair
Death and Sheol (Hos. 13.14). More problematic is die sea. It is not
plausible to introduce a distinction between body and soul into this
verse, so diat sea is die place from which die bodies of diose who have
died at sea are recovered, while Death and Hades surrender tiieir
souls.^* In diis case, the earth as the place where the bodies of other
26. Isa. 38.10; Wis. 16.13; 3 Mace. 5.51; Pss. Sol. 16.2; Mt. 16.18; cf. Ps.
107.16; OdM 17.10.
27. Cf. D.D. Buchholz. Your Eyes Will Be Opened: A Study of the Creek
(Ethiopic) Apocalypse of Peter (SBLDS. 97; AUanta: Scholars Press, 1988). p. 293.
28. J. Dani61ou (The Theology of Jewish Christianity (u-ans. J. A.Baker; London:
Danon. Longman & Todd; Philadelphia: Westminster Press. 1964]. pp. 24-25)
suggests that according to die original text of 4 (5) Ezra 2.31 God will bring the dead
from die 'depdis of the earth' and 'the depdis of die sea'; but diis reconstruction of
282 The Pseudepigrapha and Early Biblical Interpretation
the original text is highly conjectural. Cf. also Sib. Or. 2.233 (quoted in section IV
below): but here those who die at sea are only one category of several whose bodies
are destroyed widiout burial.
29. Charles {Revelation, II, pp. 195-96) diinks diis is die meaning of die present
text, though he considers die original text to have read tot tajieio rather than f)
BdXaooa.
30. Cf. H.B. Swete, The Apocalypse of St John (London: Macmillan, 2nd edn,
1907). p. 273; M. Kiddle, The Revelation of St John (MNTC; London: Hodder &
Stoughton. 1940), p. 406; G.B. Caird. The Revelation of St John the Divine
(BNTC; London: A. & C. Black, 1966), p. 260. These writers depend on a
passage in Achilles Tatius (fifdi century CE). cited by Wettstein. to the effect diat
those who die at sea have no access to Hades. I do not know die basis for the claim
by Ford {Revelation, p. 359). diat *diere was a U-adition diat only diose who died on
dry land would rise from die dead'.
31. This is how the chambers (xaneia) of Isa. 26.19 are understood in / Clem.
50.4.whichgivesacompositequotationof Isa. 26.19 and Ezek. 37.12.(Ondiis quota-
tion, see Dani^lou. Theology of Jewish Christianity, p. 95; and idem, 'La vision des
ossements dess&hds (Ezech. 37.1-14) dans les testimonia'. RSR 53 [ 1965].pp. 221.
225). That the chambers of Isa. 26.19 are in Sheol could have been concluded by
comparison with Prov. 7.27, according to the midrashic technique of g'zlrd sawd.
BAUCKHAM Resurrection as Giving Back the Dead 283
explicitly located the chambers of the souls in Sheol, there can be little
doubt that both 2 Baruch and 4 Ezra imply that the chambers are in
Sheol. So the phrase 'the chambers of the souls' is another equivalent
to Sheol, the place of the dead, at least with reference to the righteous
dead.
In this context 'souls' need mean no more than the dead in Sheol,
the shades. It need not imply the distinction of body and soul in death
and resurrection as the reunion of the two. Certainly, this dichoto-
mous view of death and resurrection seems not to be found in 2 Baruch,
which can describe the resurrection either as the coming forth of the
souls from the chambers (ch. 3 0 ) or as the restoration of the dead by
the earth in the same bodily form in which they died (ch. 5 0 ) . These
are surely not two distinct aspects of resurrection, but alternative
ways of describing the same event: the return of the dead to bodily
life. 2 Baruch never speaks of death as the separation of soul and body
or of resurrection as the reunion of the two.
4 Ezra, however, does explicitiy speak of death as die separation of
soul and body ( 7 . 7 8 , 8 8 - 8 9 , 1 0 0 ) . " Presumably, dierefore, for diis
author resurrection must be the reunion of body and soul, and
Stemberger argues that he actually describes it in those terms in 7 . 3 2
(our text B ) , though his use of the traditional formulation hampers
him in doing so. According to Stemberger, the first two lines of this
text are intended to describe the retum of die body from the earth, the
third line the return of die soul from the chambers." He argues that
the third line is set apart from the first two by the change from die
simple pronoun (qui) to 'the souls which' (animae quae)}*
However, it remains more plausible to interpret all three lines as
synonymous parallelism, as elsewhere in diis tradition. In each line the
author uses a traditional description of the dead which is appropriate
to the place of the dead as specified in that line. Thus in the first line,
the earth gives back those who sleep in it, because 'those who sleep in
the earth' is a traditional description of the dead (Dan. 1 2 . 2 ; 2 Bar.
1 1 . 4 ; 2 1 . 2 4 ) , while in the second line the dust gives back those who
dwell silendy in it, because 'those who dwell in the dust' is another
ti-aditional description of tiie dead (Isa. 2 6 . 1 9 ; cf. Job 7 . 2 1 ; Dan. 1 2 . 2 ;
32. On 4 Ezra's anthropology, see Stemberger. Leib der Auferstehung, pp. 79-
81.
33. Stemberger. Leib der Auferstehung, pp. 75, 82.
34. Stemberger. Leib der Auferstehung, p. 74.
284 The Pseudepigrapha and Early Biblical Interpretation
IQH 6.34)." When in the third line the author uses 'souls' to describe
the dead, this is not meant to distinguish this line from the first two,
but simply to correspond to the conventional phrase 'the chambers of
the souls'. When 'the chambers' is used for the place of the dead, the
appropriate term for the dead is 'souls', just as when 'the earth' is
used for the place of the dead, the appropriate term for the dead is
'those who sleep in it'. Thus 4 Ezra has not broken the rule that the
three lines of the traditional form are synonymous, and although the
author himself probably understood resurrection as the reunion of
soul and body, the language of the traditional form he uses in itself
expresses no more than the simple idea of the retum of the dead from
die place of the dead.
In 4 Ezra 7.32 we see the persistence of the traditional form in a
context where it is no longer stricdy appropriate. If diis form is to be
interpreted consistendy with a dichotomous view of death and resur-
rection, it becomes necessary to regard the dead whom Sheol restores
as either souls who retum from tiie place of souls or bodies that are
brought up from tfieir graves. If tiie audior of 4 Ezra himself inter-
preted 7.32 in line with his own dichotomous view, he must have
taken it to refer to the return of souls rather than bodies. In other
writers, however, the language of bringing back the dead was adapted
to die dichotomous view in the alternative manner, diat is, it is used of
die retum of bodies from dieir graves. This is the case in text Q, a
late rabbinic passage, which is clearly concerned with the physical
continuity of the old body and the resurrection body, and interprets
the traditional language to mean diat the earth receives and restores
the corpse. It dierefore exhibits an apologetic concern witii the prob-
lem of the decay of the corpse, which is foreign to the older way of
speaking represented by die majority of our texts. It is worth noticing
that although the rabbis in general held a dichotomous view of death
and resurrection, the other rabbinic texts in our collection (N, P, Q)
still speak of the earth receiving and restoring the dead, not their
bodies. This is a striking example of tiie persistence of conventional
language about resurrection.
A particularly interesting use of our tradition occurs in 2 Bar. 50.2
(text J). Like Paul in 1 Cor. 15.35, the audior is here concerned to
answer die question, 'In what form will tiie dead rise?' (cf. 49.2-3).
The answer is a kind of two-stage resurrection: the dead are first
raised in exactly the form in which they died (50.2) and then trans-
formed into glory. The first stage is necessary so that the dead can be
recognized. This seems to be in answer to an apologedc problem that
is explicidy raised in rabbinic literature (e.g. Gen. R. 95.1 (on Gen.
46.28); Eccl. R. 1.4 2): how will it be possible to know diat it is
really the dead who are raised? The answer is that they will inidally
be recognizable as the same people who died.'* But in order to
maintain that the dead will inidally be raised in exactly the form in
which they died, 2 Baruch does not, as has often been said," appeal to
the nodon of resurrecdon as resuscitation of the corpse. At any rate,
die passage need not be read as concerned with the material identity of
the body. Essentially what it does is to press the implications of the
notion that the place of the dead will restore the dead who were
committed to it. In strict law, this legal notion requires that Sheol
restore exactly what was entrusted to it. Therefore tiie dead will
retum fi-om Sheol exactly as they went to it.
Finally in this section, some further observations on the form die
tradition takes in our various texts will be appropriate. The tradition
appears in its pure form only in texts A and B: three lines, each of
which states that the place of the dead will give back the dead who
were entmsted to it. Text C (Rev. 20.13) has abbreviated the form: it
has three terms for die place of the dead, but couples the last two in
one line. It has also dropped the legal metaphor, and with this omis-
sion the idea of giving back the dead has receded from prominence.
Text D retains the legal metaphor and die same three terms for die
place of the dead as are found in text A. However, the first line no
longer speaks of the earth returning the dead but of God raising them.
This change has probably been made in order to adapt the form to its
context here in a divine speech and to emphasize the divine initiative
in the act of resurrection. A similar motivation may account for the
more drastic modification in text E, which is in the context of a
prayer to God. Here the idea of the place of the dead restoring the
dead is found only in the last clause, but the three terms (angel of
death, Sheol, treasuries of the souls) may indicate that the direefold
formula still lies behind diis text.
Another group of texts (I-O) do not preserve the threefold
formula, but use only one term for the place of the dead. However,
they employ the same image of resurrection: the place of the dead
restores the dead who have been conmiitted to it. It should be noted
diat most of the texts in diis group make explicit what die standard
formula (found in the threefold form in texts A - E ) does not: that
Sheol restores the dead when and because God requires it to do so
(texts I, L-P). These texts are evidendy concerned to sttess diat resur-
rection is God's act. The same concern is found in texts F and H,
which also, in referring to animals that have eaten the dead, constitute
a special variation of die whole tradition, which raises problems to be
considered separately in tiie next section.
Text G (Apoc. Pet. 4.10-12) is anomalous in diat the deposit with
which the earth is entrusted and returns is here die seeds tiiat are sown
in it and grow out of it as plants. The Apocalypse of Peter is using the
rather widespread analogy of the sown and sprouting seed for the
process of death and resurrection (cf. 1 Cor. 15.36-38; Jn 12.24;
1 Clem. 24.4-5; Justin, 1 Apol. 19.4; 3 Cor. 3.26-27; Theophilus, Ad
Autol. 1.13; b. Ket. 11 lb; b. Sanh. 90b; Eccl. R. 5.10 1; PRE 33)."
The two traditions about resurrection are combined in such a way that
our tradition retains its original referenceto the earth giving back
the deadonly indirecdy, as it were, by way of the seed which is an
image for the dead.
IV
The two texts F and H in our collection of texts in section II are dis-
tinguished from the others by their common use of the idea that God
will command animals that have eaten the dead to give back die dead.
There are two other texts (7 En. 61.6; Sib. Or. 2.121-Yl) tiiat were
not included in die collection in section n because diey do not belong
to the tradition represented by that collection, but which do share with
texts F and H an interest in die resurrection of the dead diat have been
consumed by animals. Since diese will be relevant to our discussion of
texts F and H, it will be useful to give them here, along with texts F
(extended) and H:
/ Enoch 61.6:
And diese measurements will reveal all the secrets of the depths of
die earth,
and diose who were destroyed by die desert,
and diose who were destroyed by die fish of die sea and by the
animals,
that they may retum and rely on the day of die Chosen One;
for no one will be destroyed before the Lord of Spirits,
and no one can be destroyed."
Sibylline Oracles 2 . 2 2 7 - 3 7 :
Kttl xox' aneiXiKtoio Kai opprjKtow dSonovtoi;
KXeiGpa iteXtopa nvX&v xe axaX.Kevxov 'AiSao
pTi^djievo? OupifiX, peyai; ayyeXo? evGw paXeixai,
KOI ndoo? (lopipdi; itoXwitevGeo? eii; xpioiv o^ei
eiSwXmv xa jidXioxo jtaXoiYeveoiv Tvxf|v<ov
fi8e xe riydvxwv, KOI ooai; eiXev KOXOKXVOHO?,
Kai 6' ai; ev iteXdYecoiv djtwXeoe KVHO SaXdooii?
Ti5' onooai; ftripe? Kai epiiexd Kai Tiexeiivd
GoivTjoavxo, oXa? tawta? ati pfijia KaXeooei-
Kai jtdXiv, d? e<p6eipev evi (pXoyi oapKO<pdYov jtSp,
Kai xavxa? eiti Piijio GeoO oxiioeicv dyeipai;.'**
Then Uriel, die great angel, will break the gigandc bolts,
of unyielding and unbreakable steel, of the gates
of Hades, not forged of metal; he will throw diem wide open
and will lead all die moumful forms to judgment,
especially diose of ancient phantoms. Titans
and the Giants and such as die Flood destroyed.
Also diose whom the wave of the sea destroyed in the oceans,
and as many as wild beasts and serpents and birds
devoured; all diese he will call to die tribunal.
Again, those whom die flesh-devouring fire desu-oyed by flame.
these also he will gather and set at the tribunal of God.**
The second of these texts occurs within a passage {Sib. Or. 2.196-
338) that is largely a poetic paraphrase of the Apocalypse of Peter.*^
The passage quoted is dependent on Apoc. Pet. 4.3-4, 9; 6.7. It is
possible that lines 233-37, with tfieir references not only to tfiose eaten
by animals, but also to those destroyed by sea and fire, reflect a longer
text of Apoc. Pet. 4.4 than is preserved in the Ethiopic version. But
Sibylline Oracles 2 frequently expands on its soiffce in tfie Apocalypse
of Peter.
The relationship of tiie other texts is more problematic. The Apoca-
lypse of Peter has in common with I En. 61.1 not only the reference
to animals who have devoured tiie dead (animals and birds in one case,
fish and animals in the other), but also an explanatory statement to the
effect that God allows none to be permanentiy destroyed:
'For to God nodiing is lost' {Apoc. Pel. 4.5)
'For no one will be destfoyed before die Lord of Spirits' (/ En. 61.1).
quotation, unlilce 1 Enoch, state tliat God will command the animals in
question to restore what they have eaten, which is in one case said to
be flesh and in the other bones (whereas in 1 Enoch the reference is to
persons destroyed). This makes it less likely than has usually been
thought*' that Tertullian himself or his quotation is directly dependent
on 7 n. 61.1. It is possible that the Apocalypse of Peter is dependent
on / En. 61.1 (which would make it the earliest evidence of the exis-
tence of the Parables of Enoch), but it remains most likely that all
three texts are dependent on a common tradition. In the Apocalypse of
Peter this tradition in 4.4 occurs in a form exactly parallel to 4.3 and
so becomes a variant of the tradition that die place of die dead will
give back the dead. This is also, diough less clearly, the case in
Tertullian's quotation (where the more graphic 'vomit up' takes the
place of 'give back'). The idea of God commanding the place of the
dead to give back the dead is found elsewhere in die texts we have
collected in section II (see texts E, I, M, N, O, P).
In Tertulhan's quotation the specification that it is 'bones* that are
eaten and restored by the fish is appropriate to the last line of the
quotation, which alludes to Ezek. 37.7, but in a particular form that is
also found in Justin (/ Apol. 52.5: 'Joint shall be joined to joint, and
bone to bone, and flesh shall grow again...*).** Botii Tertullian*s
quotation and Justin*s (which is attributed to Ezekiel but continues
with words from Isa. 45.24) are tiie kind of composite and adapted
quotations typical of die early Christian testimonia.*^ At first sight it
looks as though Tertullian*s quotation may be dependent on the
Apocalypse of Peter, since the latter has not only a parallel to the first
two lines of tiie former in 4.4 but also a quotation from Scripture in
4.7-8 that includes words similar to tiie last line of Tertullian's
quotation. But diis line is in fact closer to Justin's quotation than it is
to Apoc. Pet. 4.7-8,** whereas die latter can now be seen to be, not a
49. J. Suugnell and D. Dimant. '4Q Second Ezekiel'. RevQ 13 (1988), pp. 45-
58. In R. Bauckham, 'A Quotation from 4Q Second Ezekiel in die Apocalypse of
Peter', RevQ 15 (1992). pp. 437-45.1 demonsttate in detail diat Ap. Pet. 4.7-8 is a
quotation from this work. It may well be die Apocryphon of Ezekiel known to
several of the Church Fadiers.
50. E.g. Adienagoras, De Res. 3-7; Augustine, De Civ. Dei 22.12,20.
BAUCKHAM Resurrection as Giving Back the Dead 291
INDEX OF REFERENCES
OLD TESTAMENT
APOCRYPHA
NEW TESTAMENT
Matthew 6.15 166 13.43 168
1.22 144 6.18 167 15.13 168
2.15 144 6.26 167 16,17 167
2.17 144 6.32 167 16,18 167, 281
2.23 144 7.11 167 16,27 168
4.3-10 191 7.21 168 18 195
4.14 144 8.17 144 18,10 167
5-7 195 10 195 18,14 167
5.16 168 10.10 178 18.18 167
5.18 178 10.20 167 18.19 167
5.45 168 10.29 167 18.35 166
5.48 168 10.32 168 20.23 167
6.1 167 10.33 168 21.4 144
6.4 167 11.25-27 148. 166 21.31 168
6.6 166 12.17 144 22.1-14 194
6.8 166 12.45 235 23.9 167
6.9 166 12.50 168 24-25 195
6.10 166 13 195 24.15 224
6.14 166 13.35 144 24.29-31 225
Index of References 299
24.35 178 11.20-21 193 6.5 217
24.36 167 13.14 224 6.7 217
25.34 168 13.24-27 225 6.12-13 216
25.41 168 13.27 86 6.12 192
26.29 167 14.25 167 6.14 193
26.39 166 14.32-42 193 6.17 216
26.42 166 14.36 193 6.18-49 217
26.51-53 72 14.47 192 7.5 175
26.52 90 14.71 193 8.1-18 193
26.53 86, 166 15.32 191 8.11-21 177
27.9 144 15.34-36 194 8.19-21 192. 193
28.19 167 15.39 195 8.24 191
8.25 191
Mark Luke 8.45 191
1.9-10 192 1.1-4 200 8.54 193
1.12-13 191 1.5 190 9.1-50 202
1.14 191 1.16-17 175 9.7-9 192
1.15 193 1.27 190 9.10-11 192. 217
1.16-20 192, 193 1.32-33 175 9.13-17 216
1.16 193 1.54-55 175 9.18 192. 217
1.21 193 1.68-79 175 9.19-27 217
1.23 235 2.22-24 175 9.22 192, 223.
1.26 235 2.27 175 226
1.45 191 2.29-32 175 9.26 178. 217
2.4 193 2.34-35 223 9.28-29 217
2.15-17 191 2.36 190 9.28 192
2.26 192 2.39 175 9.29 192
3.13 192 3.7-14 216 9.30-45 217
3.17 193 3.10-14 192 9.32 191
3.30 235 3.21-22 216 9.41 215, 217
3.31-35 192, 193 3.21 192 9.44 217
4.1-25 193 3.23-38 190 9.51 191
4.38 191 3.38 190 9.57 191
4.40 191 4.1-13 190 10.1 191
5.31 191 4.1-12 191 10.7 178
5.41 193 4.13 191 10,13-16 215
6.1-6 193 4.14-15 175. 191 10.20 235
6.14-29 192 4.16-30 175, 191. 10.21-22 148
6.30-34 192 193, 218 10.38 191. 216
6.45-8.26 192 4.32 177 10.39 177
8.27 192 5.1-11 192, 193 n.1-4 216
8.31-33 192 5.1 177. 193 11.5-36 217
8.38 86 5.15 191 11.28 177
9.2-8 250, 251 5.16 217 11.29-32 215
9.2 192 5.17-6.11 217 11.29 215
9.6 191 5.19 193 11.32 178
10.35-41 192 5.24 217 11.42-52 219
11.12-14 193 6.4 192 11.42-48 215
300 The Pseudepigrapha and Early Biblical Interpretation
PSEUDEPIGRAPHA
1 Enoch 14.18 108 61.6 286-88
1-36 37, 54,96. 14.20 109 61.10 237
99. 101 14.21 109 62-63 74, 115
1-5 101-103 14.22 109 62.1 116
1.1-2 237 14.23 109 62.5 116
1.1 102 14.24-25 109 62.7 116, 237
1.2 37 16.3 237 64.1-68.1 115, 142
1.3-9 102 17-36 101 65-69 55
1.8 102 17.1-22.14 54 65.6-10 55
1.9 102. 241 17-19 101 65.11 55
2-5 102, 103 20-36 101 67-69 55
2.1-5.3 103 21.1-22.14 54 69.16-25 55
5.8-10 54 21 237, 240 70-71 115
6.1-9.11 54 21.6 237 71.14 115. 116
6-11 98. 101. 21.10 237 72-82 20. 55.96,
103-105 22.3-13 235, 237 98.99
6-7 117 24.1-36.4 54 72-79 99
6 237 37-71 55,99, 115, 72 99
6.1-2 105 142 72.1 99. 100
6.2 106 37.1 115 72.37 100
6.3-8 105 38-44 115 74.2 100
6.3-4 106 38 55 75.1-9 20
6.6 112 39 55 75.3 100
7.1-2 105 39.2-3 115 75.4 100
7.1 107 39.2 115 76.14 100
7.2 107 42 55 77-79 55
9.1 237 45-57 115 78.10 100
10-16 236. 237 46-50 55 79.6 100
10.9-10 106 46.2 115 80 55
10.11-14 106 48.2 116 80.1 99, 100
12-16 101, 107 48.6 U6, 237 80.2-81.10 101
12.1-13.10 54 48.10 116 80.2-8 99
12.1-2 37, 107 51.1 271. 272, 81 99
12.1 107 278-80 81.5-6 100
13.8 37 52.4 116 81.6 100
14 104, 108, 52.6 116 82 99
116 53.6 116 82.1-20 20
14.1-7 54 54.1-56.4 115, 142 82.1 100
14.8-25 108 56.5-8 55 82.5-6 20
14.8 108 58-69 115 82.7 100
14.13-14 108 61.1 289 83-90 56, 99, 113
14.14 108 61.5 275. 290 84.2 254
Index of References 305
QUMRAN
CD IQM 4QFlor
19.5-13 133 11.1-6 71 1-2 i 14 133
11.17 71
IQapGen 12.4-10 71 4QpHos
2.1 236 13.14-16 71 2.3-6 203
2.16 236 18.13-19.2 71
16-17 4QpPs
IQpHab 37.14-15 203
IQH 2.6-10 203
1.21 131 2.7-10 134 4QpPs''
2.9-19 203 2.8 136 3.15 134
2.13 136 5.8-12 135 4.27 136
2.32-37 203 7 25
2.17-18 131 7.1-5 134 4Q385
3.19 280 11.4-8 203 2.5-7 290
4.8-10 203 12.1-10 135
4.27-29 136 6QD
5.5-19 203 IQS 2.18-21 236
6.34 284 1.9 137
7.27 136 5.8-10 137 llQMelch
9.1-36 203 6.6-8 136 9-16 173
10.5-7 131 8.13-15 133 12 133
11.4-5 131 8.15 137 17 133
11.9-10 131 9.12-23 71
10.16-17 131 9.13 137 II QPs
12.11-14 131 9.25 71 151-55 31
12.32-34 131 10.17-21 71 151 14, 30
13.18-19 131 11.1-2 71 151A. 1 30
14.8 136 151A. 5 30
18.10-11 131 4QBer^ 151A. 7 30
18.19-21 131 1.1 281
18.19 131
4QDib Ham
IQIsaf 203
6.2-10 135
TARGUMS
Isaiah Jeremiah 11.20 146
53 172 3.4 155 16.17 146
63.16 155 3.8 146 31.9 155
64.8 155 3.19 155
8.4 146 Ezekiel
1.27 109
310 The Pseudepigrapha and Early Biblical Interpretation
Numbers Leviticus
20.21 157. 159 22.28 168
MIDRASHIM
PlIILO
JOSEPHUS
CHRISTIAN AUTHORS