|
Introduction
The work that has come to be known as “2 Esdras” is
actually a composite work of three separate works. There has been
considerable confusion regarding the name of the work due to the Latin
Vulgate. The various sections of the book are as follows:
2 Esdras 1-2 = 5 Ezra
2 Esdras 3-14 = 4 Ezra
2 Esdras 15-16 = 6 Ezra
Chapters 1-2 and 15-16 are Jewish-Christian compositions that
date in the second century and third century A.D. The core of the 2
Esdras (3-14) are a independent unity written by a Jew around 90 A.D.
as he reflects on the destruction of the Temple and Jerusalem and the
continued prosperity of Rome.
2 Esdras has survived the ancient world in numerous
versions/languages. It has survived in Greek, Latin, Syriac, Arabic,
Ethiopic, Armenian and partially survived in Coptic and Georgian.
The original language of 2 Esdras is Hebrew and was likely written by
a Jew in Palestine about the same time John wrote the Book of
Revelation.
What is sometimes called 5 Ezra (ch’s 1-2) was written
after the Second Jewish Revolt (i.e. A.D. 135) and 6 Ezra (ch’s 15-16)
dates after 200 A.D.
Outline of 2 Esdras
Second Esdras differs from the other 14 books of the
Apocrypha in being an “apocalypse.” The reader will immediately be
reminded of the Revelation of John which is also an “apocalypse.”
This apocalypse, 2 Esdras, is composed of seven clearly delimited
episodes, each separated by some narration of the seer’s ascetic
preparation for the next visionary experience.
Episode I: 3.1-5.20
Episode II: 5.21-6.34
Episode III: 6.35-9.26
Episode IV: 9.27-10.59
Episode V: 11.1-12.51
Episode VI: 13.1-58
Episode VII: 14.1-48
What is 2 Esdras About?
2 Esdras (3-14) seeks first to overcome the collapse of
the Jewish worldview under the weight of the intense suffering and
devastation in the wake of the First Jewish Revolt (A.D. 66-73). The
conflict is between Jewish faith and Jewish experience. It is the
same conflict that many of God’s People have had down through the
years. How can God’s justice be affirmed when, having used a grossly
sinful nation like Rome to punish Israel, the divinely chosen people
who at least tried to honor God? How can one even make sense
of the principle of the covenant itself, when it is clear that Israel
has never been able to keep it on account of the power of sin and the
evil inclination in human nature? These are the big questions with
which the author wrestles.
The second “big” concern of the author is to reaffirm the
observance of the Torah as the path to life and salvation, even in the
wake of so many disasters. The author invites readers to gather
themselves and their fellow Jews around diligent performance of Torah,
to organize their whole lives around that key to salvation, and thus
at last to respond wholeheartedly to Deuteronomy’s invitation to
“choose life” for themselves.
Theology in 2 Esdras and Early Christianity
Second Esdras was too late to have had any direct
influence on the NT writers. However, we must not assume therefore
that this work sheds no light on the early church. Such would be an
inaccurate conclusion. There is a clear affinity between 2 Esdras
(especially 3-14) and the New Testament on eschatology. Both have an
expectation of a heavenly city and rest – Hebrews and Revelation for
example.
Second Esdras is intensely concerned about who a “real”
Jew is. Israel is no longer defined along ethnic lines but “those
who stored up treasures of faith” (6.5). Who a real Jew was, was
of vital concern to the early church as well. Paul would write, “not
all Israelites truly belong to Israel” (Romans 9.6). For Paul and
the author of 2 Esdras, redefining the boundaries of Israel became the
means by which to understand how God remained faithful to God’s
covenant people.
Second Esdras asks deep and difficult questions for one
with faith. This work was immensely popular in the early church –
Myers gives four pages of citations in his commentary (I and II
Esdras: The Anchor Bible, pp. 131-134). The question needs to be
asked, “Why?” Perhaps it is because the way the book connects grief
with theology. Ezra the Prophet provides a model for how one might
move through various stages of doubt, grief, particularly with regard
to wrestling with God. Ezra begins by blaming God and questioning his
justice, given his experience in the “real” world. He moves through
this period of questioning to a point where the distance between his
experiences and the answers he knows to be true begins to close, such
that he can still grieve but in the context of trusting God’s justice
and his provision for a better feature for the faithful. This is
especially evident in his consolation of the mourning woman
(9.38-10.24). As he continues avidly to seek to ascertain greater
insight into God’s mysterious ways – Ezra’s intentionality cannot be
missed, since he devotes forty days to fasting and prayer to seeking
God in solitude – he eventually arrives at a point where he can again
wholly affirm God’s justice in governing the world (13.57-58). This
is a model of hope for those who wrestle with grief like Ezra’s,
whether national or personal trials.
Taken this way 2 Esdras offers this wise counsel: not
every question can be answered, but receiving assurance of God’s
goodness and justice does not depend on getting all the answers; one
cannot expect to make it through the difficult time of questioning and
grieving if one is not committed to seeking God in serious,
intentional ways. It is important to give expression in prayer to
what is truly on one’s heart and mind. It is equally important not to
leave the place of prayer without listening for the “voice” of the
divine conversation partner.
Second Esdras and Christopher Columbus
That a passage from the Apocrypha encouraged Christopher
Columbus in his adventures which resulted in the modern European
discovery of the New World, is a little known but authentic fact. To
sure the verse is an erroneous comment upon the Genesis narrative of
creation, and Columbus was mistaken in attributing its authority to
the “Prophet Ezra” of the Hebrew Bible, but for that it played a
notable part in pushing back Europe’s horizons.
Near the beginning of the 15th century, Pierre
d’Ailly, a scholar and Archbishop of Cambrai, published a series of
geographical essays by the title Ymago Mundi (1410). Like most
educated men of his d’Ailly believed in the sphericity of the earth.
In his book he develops the idea that the habitable earth is of great
extent in comparison to the amount covered by water. He believed that
only one-seventh of the earth’s surface was water, therefore the ocean
between the west coast of Europe and the east coast of Asia was “no
great width.” As proof of his assertion he claimed no less authority
than the “prophet Ezra” who had commented on God’s work in creation in
the following words:
“On the third day you commanded the waters to be gathered together
in a seventh part of the earth; six parts you dried up and kept so
that some them might be planted and cultivated and be of service to
you” (2 Esdras 6.42, cf. verses 47, 50, and 52).
Columbus studied d’Ailly and owned his book. His hand written notes
are still preserved today in the margins this book. Columbus had
difficulty in getting support for his voyages and it is partly from
quoting this verse to the hesitant sovereigns of Spain that Columbus
finally secured the backing he needed for his adventure.
|
