4 BARUCH (1st - 3rd century) Questions

[rakovsky]

4 Baruch is also known as Paraleipomena Jeremiou, meaning in Greek: 'The Things Omitted from Jeremiah'. Baruch Ben Neriah was the student and secretary of Jeremiah.
As with 3 Baruch, Scholars are divided on whether it is a simply Christian text or an originally nonchristian Jewish work with Christian interpolations. Those who think it is originally nonChristian point to things like the return from Babylon of only those Israelites who had not taken foreign wives. Wikipedia's entry on 4 Baruch notes: "Like the greater prophets, it advocates the divorce of foreign wives and exile of those who will not do so." But I think that a Christian author could also have asserted that only those Israelites returned, since an early Christian author might also tend to be against intermarriage with pagans.
It must have been a widespread work because Greek, Ethiopic, Armenian, Old Church Slavonic, and Romanian versions survive. According to George Lyons, professor of Biblical Literature, evidence suggests that it was originally written in a Semitic language like Hebrew.

The Greek text can be found here: pseudepigrapha.org/docs/text/4Bar
Robert Kraft's edition of the longer and shorter versions of 4 Baruch are here: ccat.sas.upenn.edu/rak//publics/pseudepig/ParJer-Eng.html
Jens Herzer's edition with commentary is partially online here: books.google.com/books?id=GbR4RkK5X_QC
James Charlesworth's translation is here: books.google.com/books?id=TNdeolWctsQC&pg=RA1-PA419&lpg=RA1-PA419&dq#v=onepage&q&f=false

(Question 1) What does the "coming of the beloved one" mean in verse 11 of 4 Baruch 3 mean? The convocation of Israel, the church/assembly of the Messiah, or the coming of the Messiah
Here is Charlesworth's translation of 4 Baruch 3, wherein the Lord tells Jeremiah to hide the temple's vessels because of the oncoming Babylonian conquest:

8. And Jeremiah said, Behold, Lord, we know now that you are delivering the city into the hands of its enemies, and they will carry the people off into Babylon.
9. What do you want me to do with the holy vessels of the (Temple) service?
10. And the Lord said to him, 'Take them and deliver them to the earth, saying, 'Hear, earth, the voice of him who created you, who formed you in the abundance of the waters, who sealed you with seven seals in seven periods (of time), and after these things you will receive your fruitful season.(A)
11. Guard the vessels of the (Temple) service until the coming(B) of the beloved one.

CHARLESWORTH'S FOOTNOTES
(A) Literally, "your ripeness of fruit."
(B) Following the suggestion of G.D. Kilpatrick... although this rendering is elsewhere unattested. Literally the word is 'coming together,' or 'union,' or perhaps even 'marriage.' The variant c'consummation, completion' (MSS A B P) should be noted. According to R A Kraft and A.-E. Purintun, 'coming' is supported by the Armenian version.

Charlesworth relates verse 10 about the seven seals to Rev.5:1: "And I saw in the right hand of him that sat on the throne a book written within and on the backside, sealed with seven seals."

Verse 11, about the coming of the beloved, says in Greek: φύλαξον τὰ σκεύη τῆς λειτουργίας ἕως τῆς συνελεύσεως τοῦ ἡγαπημένου.

In his book "4 Baruch (Paraleipomena Jeremiou)", Jens Herzer discusses the use of the Greek term for "coming":

Kilpatrick writes, 'eleusis ... is a messianic term and nearly always appears in a certain kind of phrase which first occurs in two prophetic peudepigrapha and probably in others now lost, where it was used to describe the coming of the Messiah.' However, in 4 Baruch the term sineleusis refers to the people, not to the Messiah. THe suggestion that one read eleusis instead of sineleusis is the result of seeking to interpret 4 Baruch 3:8 messianically. ... The term beloved one for the people is taken up again in 4 Baruch 4:6. The understanding that God loves his people is rooted in the Old Testament tradition (particularly in LXX Isa 44:2; Deut 32:15; 33:5,26; Ps. 59[60]:7;107[108]:7;126[127]:2 [etc.])
One should, however, interpret 4 Bar. 3:8 within the theological conception of creation and new creation ('until the gathering of the beloved on'): the earth that God created was sealed by him with seven epochs until the eschatological new creation.

It's true that God loves His people, but I did not find the "Beloved" to be a term for His people in the verses that Herzer points to, as in Psalm 127:2. Psalm 127:2 seems to just use the term "beloved" to refer to people in general whom God loves, and not to the Israelite nation in particular. Here is Psalm 127:2:

It is vain for you to rise up early,
To sit up late,
To eat the bread of sorrows;
For so He gives His beloved sleep.

So I am skeptical of Herzer's claim that "the Beloved" refers to the Israelite nation as opposed to the Messiah.

On the other hand, elsewhere in 4 Baruch, the author speaks of the "beloved people" and the "beloved son", Baruch.

In "The Pseudepigrapha and Christian Origins", edited by Gerbern S. Oegema, James H. Charlesworth, the words in the Martyrdom of Isaiah 3:13: "i ekseleusis tou agapiton", 'the coming of the Beloved one'; are compared with 4 Baruch 3:11: 'i ekseleusis tou agapiton, 'until the coming of the Beloved One'. But a few pages earlier Charlesworth's book says eks/sineleusis, so he seems to equate or closely associate ekseleusis with sineleusis.

The Martyrdom & Ascension of Isaiah 4 refers to the "twelve apostles of the Beloved" and "those who have associated together to receive the Beloved", and says that the antiChrist "will speak and act like the Beloved". It says that the Beloved's servants will "await his coming" and some manuscripts put this as "the coming of the Beloved."
"The Pseudepigrapha and Christian Origins" also notes how "the coming of _______" and "the arrival of _______" are common Messianic terms. Note also how Acts 7:52 refers to the "coming of the Just One":

Which of the prophets have not your fathers persecuted? and they have slain them which shewed before of the coming of the Just One; of whom ye have been now the betrayers and murderers:

τίνα τῶν προφητῶν οὐκ ἐδίωξαν οἱ πατέρες ὑμῶν; καὶ ἀπέκτειναν τοὺς προκαταγγείλαντας περὶ τῆς ἐλεύσεως τοῦ δικαίου οὗ νῦν ὑμεῖς προδόται καὶ φονεῖς ἐγένεσθε

In the "Odes of Solomon", "the Beloved" is repeatedly a term for the Messiah, as in Odes 3, 7, 8, and 38.
In the Lives of the Prophets, Jeremiah seals Temple artefacts and tells the Israelites present that the Lord will come with might:

9. This prophet, before the destruction of the temple, took possession of the ark of the law and the things within it, and caused them to be swallowed up in a rocky cliff, and he said to those who were present:
10. "The Lord departed from Sinai into heaven, and he will again come with might; and this shall be for you the sign of his appearance, when all the Gentiles worship a piece of wood."
11. He said also: "No one shall bring forth this ark but Aaron, and the tables within it no one of the priests or prophets shall unfold but Moses the elect of God." 12And in the resurrection the ark will rise first, and come forth from the rock, and will be placed on Mount Sinai; and all the saints will be assembled to it there, awaiting the Lord and fleeing from the enemy wishing to destroy them.

Herzer emphasizes that the term in 4 Baruch actually means "assembly ("συνέλευσης", suneleusis) of the Beloved".
And so we should consider whether one may speak of the "assembly" belonging to a single person. There is such a term as "Assembly of God", but typically the phrase I think refers to more than one being, like Assembly of Angels or Assembly of the Righteous(plural). Yet the Greek word for Beloved in 4 Baruch is in the singular (ἡγαπημένου , "the Beloved One"), so this makes me think that it refers to the assembly of a Beloved person. Otherwise, in what other ancient writings like the Bible does God refer to the Israelite nation in the singular as "the Beloved One"?
In Deuteronomy 33:12, "the Beloved" refers to a person: <<Of Benjamin he said: “The beloved of the Lord shall dwell in safety by Him, Who shelters him all the day long; And he shall dwell between His shoulders.”>>
In Ephesians 1:6, it refers to Christ: <<to the praise of the glory of His grace, by which He made us accepted in the Beloved.>>

Compare however 4 Baruch 3 on the "coming" or "gathering of the Beloved" with 2 Maccabees 2, wherein the place where Jeremiah hid the temple vessels will be unknown until God gathers his people together:

6. And some of those that followed him came to mark the way, but they could not find it.
7. Which when Jeremy perceived, he blamed them, saying, "As for that place, it shall be unknown until the time that God gather his people again together, and receive them unto mercy.
8. Then shall the Lord shew them these things, and the glory of the Lord shall appear, and the cloud also, as it was shewed under Moses, and as when Solomon desired that the place might be honourably sanctified."

(Question 2) Does 4 Baruch 3 allude to Jesus and Christianity?
In 4 Baruch 3, as discussed above, God tells Jeremiah to "Guard the vessels of the (Temple) service until the coming of the beloved one."
The passage continues:

12. And Jeremiah spoke, saying, I implore you, Lord, show me what I should do for Abimelech the Ethiopian, for he did many good deeds for your servant Jeremiah.
13. For he pulled me out of the muddy cistern, and I do not want him to see the destruction of this city and (its) desolation, but that you may show him mercy and that he might not be grieved.
14. And the Lord said to Jeremiah, Send him to the vineyard of Agrippa and in the shadow of the mountain I will shelter him until I return the people to the city.

First, the "seven seals" with which God sealed the earth in 4 Baruch 3:10 could be related to the seven seals of the Christian book of Revelation 5:1 as Charlesworth suggests.

Second, notice what it says about the vessels- they are buried. Jesus' body was buried and the apostles would have been buried for martyrdom, and in Christianity, vessels are openly considered a reference to Christians' bodies (in the NT). The burial of the vessels before the Temple's destruction in 4 Baruch could mirror the burial of the martyrs. The vessels remain buried until the coming of the Beloved (the second coming that will raise the dead).

Third is the relevance of Abimelech. It says he pulled Jeremiah out of the muddy cistern. That is nowhere narrated in the Tanakh. What it means allegorically to get pulled out of the muddy cistern is resurrected, as it's used in the Psalms. In Christianity, Jesus is the savior who performs resurrection.

Fourth, what is the point of Agrippa's vineyard being mentioned, as well as the "shadow of the mountain"? Is it a purely geographical reference with no spiritual or symbolic meaning? In Christianity, Jesus was born in Bethlehem and ministered and was killed in Judea, and is considered to be "the vine". Paul was put on trial by Herod Agrippa, who was king of Judea in the early 40's AD. And Jesus' burial was in a cave hewn out of the rock, which is like the shadow of a mountain. The narrator breaks form by having God talk about the "vineyard of Agrippa", because Agrippa didn't even exist at the time of Jeremiah. 4 Baruch therefore probably has in mind a reference outside of one purely historical.

Fifth, in a later passage, 4 Baruch talks about Abimelech gathering a few blessed figs carried by an eagle to Babylon to serve the sick. The Fig Tree in Christian symbolism is Israel, so the figs would represent the righteous Israelites. And based on New Testament Christian concepts, the righteous Jews could be the early Christians. The eagle carrying them is Rome, as Rome's symbol animal was the eagle. Babylon would be the stand-in for Rome. The apostles' job was to serve the "sick", sinners and those with physical ailments.

(Question 3) Why does 4 Baruch 3:11-6:25 have Abimelech sleep for 66 years and have Jeremiah sit in a tomb during that time?
I think that the 66 year sleep, sitting, awakening, and leaving the tomb are allusions to death and resurrection.
In Jeremiah 25, the prophet said that Babylon would destroy Israel, which would then serve Babylon for seventy years, upon which God would destroy Babylon.
God had decided in 4 Baruch 3 to have Baruch rescuer, Abimelech, sleep in the shadow for 66 years in response to Baruch's request that Abimelech not be grieved by Jerusalem's destruction. That is, Abimelech went to sleep and then Jerusalem was destroyed and its people enslaved by Babylon. Meanwhile, Baruch sat in the tomb during that long period. Then Abimelech woke up on the 12th day of the month of Nisan and brought out Baruch while the city was still in ruins. This happened four years before the end of the 70 years of Babylonian captivity. The 12th of Nisan is also four days before the Feast of First Fruits, which occurs on the 16th of Nisan. The Feast of First Fruits in Christian thought alludes to resurrection, because it's the third day of the killing of the Passover lambs and also the day (ie. the 24 hour period "day" to be precise) of Jesus' resurrection.
Just as Abimelech awoke and Baruch came from the tomb four days before the Feast of First Fruits, they also did this four years before the end of the 70 years of Jerusalem's destruction.

Jens Herzer writes in his 2005 book 4 Baruch (Paraleipomena Jeremiou):

According to the biblical tradition, the exile lasted seventy years*, and many attempts have been made to explain 4 Baruch's variation from this tradition. ... Most interesting concerning the interpretation of this number is a text in Pseudo-Hecataeus (fragment found in Josephus, Ag.Ap. 1.187), in which the age of a high priest named Ezekias is given as approximately sixty-six years... This is surprising because xisty-six is not at all an approximate number.

HERZER'S FOOTNOTE:
*Accordingly, some manuscripts have changed sixty-six to seventy (v. slav); in Armenian one finds sixty-eight years...

Herzer notes that another scholar, Harris, theorizes that the 66 years means that 4 Baruch was written in 136 AD., 66 years after the Temple's destruction in 70 AD. Herzer doubts this explanation because he believes that a date of 136 AD would lead the author to include more references to the disastrous events of that time (eg. the Bar Kokhba revolt and fresh destruction of Jerusalem).
Herzer adds: "To understand the number sixty-six as a gematric play on numbers and words is equally unconvincing [as Harris' idea that it refers to the text's date], since there is neither a word or name of significance in the context of 4 Baruch that has the numberical value sixty-six."

(Question 4) What does the milk from Abimelech's figs represent, if anything?
4 Baruch 5 talks about Abimelech finding the milk from the figs when he wakes up:

And leaning his head on the basket of figs (and) falling asleep, he slept for sixty-six years, and he did not wake from his sleep, And afterward, when he arose from his sleep, he said, I slept pleasantly a little, but my head is weighed down because I didn’t get enough sleep. Then, uncovering the basket of figs, he found them dripping milk.

Later in Chapter 5, Abimelech tells an old man:

And when I woke up, I uncovered the basket of figs, thinking I was late, and found the figs dripping with milk, just as (when) I picked them. And you say that the people were taken captive into Babylon! But (just) so you’ll know, take the figs (and) see!

And he uncovered the basket of figs for the old man, and he saw them dripping milk.

And when he saw them, the old gentleman said, O my son, you are a righteous man, and God did not want you to see the desolation of the city, so he brought this stupor upon you. For behold, it is today sixty-six years since the people were taken captive into Babylon. And so that you may learn, son, that what I am telling you is true, look out into the field and see that the growth of the crops is not (yet) apparent. See also the figs, that it is not (yet) time for them, and understand.

Then Abimelech cried in a loud voice, saying, I will bless you, O God of heaven and of the earth, the rest of the souls of the righteous in every place.

Then he said to the elderly gentleman, What month is this? And he said, Nisan, the twelfth (day).

And picking up (some) of the figs, he gave them to the old gentleman and said to him, May God guide you with (his) light to the city above, Jerusalem!

In Chapter 6, Baruch meditates to his heart:

Look at this basket of figs; for behold, they are sixty-six years old and they have not withered nor do they stink, but they are dripping with milk. Thus will it be for you, my flesh, if you do the things commanded you by the angel of righteousness. He who preserved the basket of figs, the same one again will preserve you by his power.

I could guess that the fig tree represents the assembly of Israel and the figs represent the righteous Israelites. In that case, what are the "milk" that they exude? Back in Chapter 3, Jeremiah had instructed Abimelech to give the figs to the sick. So metaphorically, the figs could have spiritually healing properties for those who suffer from spiritual sicknesses.

In 1 Peter 2:2, milk seems to refer to God's Word or its spiritual benefits: "as newborn babes, desire the pure milk of the word, that you may grow thereby".
In Hebrews 5:12, it seems to refer to the first principles of God's teachings: "For though by this time you ought to be teachers, you need someone to teach you again the first principles of the oracles [or "sayings"] of God; and you have come to need milk and not solid food."
In 1 Corinthians 3:1-3, "Milk" again appears to refer to first, elementary Christian teachings.

[alon]

4 Baruch is tough to pin down because so much was apparently added as time went on. That alone, and the flowery Greek style with all manner of pagan weirdness would make it a pseudepigraphic work, even if it had started out an honest one (which it probably did not). I believe it is only the Ethiopic canon which considers it holy writ (check me on that- not really sure my memory is working these days). At any rate, I wouldn't call it Christian or Jewish, just wrong. It was probably first authored mid second cen CE, and by that time there was so much going on with Jewish sects trying to convince all others they were the true Judaism and bring on the Messianic age; and the catholic church idea being in its infancy many sects were also trying to make the universal church in their image. I really don't know.

I have a lot going on right now, including a serious discussion on how much of the additions to Esther should be included in canon (I say none, but the prayer of Esther is, if taken as a rendition of what her heart must have felt at the time a worthwhile read). So I will probably answer this piecemeal. To start, if it was a Jewish source I would think "the Beloved" would refer to the Messiah. This was what those Jews who had not accepted Yeshua wanted to bring about was conditions favorable to bring on the Messiah.

The 7 Seals of Revelation correspond to the sealed scroll of a kethubah, a Jewish wedding contract. This is why only Yeshua is worthy to open it. 

I don't waste much time in Baruch, because it is pseudepigraphic and because it is not always clear whose thought processes you are gaining insight to. This makes it dangerous to put any stock in at all.

Dan C

[alon]

Mar 17, 2019 15:29:11 GMT -8 rakovsky said:

So I am skeptical of Herzer's claim that "the Beloved" refers to the Israelite nation as opposed to the Messiah.

On the other hand, elsewhere in 4 Baruch, the author speaks of the "beloved people" and the "beloved son", Baruch.

I think you are correct to be skeptical. Whether one of the sects of mainstream Judaism of the time (if in fact there was such a thing outside Pharisaical Judaism) or possibly a Jewish Christian of one of the new Gentile sects, this does show Jewish influence. Jews, in denying Yeshua as Messiah had to come up with some way to obviate the obvious references to Yeshua in prophecy. That turned out to be claiming those prophecies referred to the Jewish people, not Messiah. It is still the case today.

Speaking of a "beloved people" is specific, and the only thing it has to do with Messiah is that as God incarnate, those people would be beloved by Him.
 

rakovsky said: 10. "The Lord departed from Sinai into heaven, and he will again come with might; and this shall be for you the sign of his appearance, when all the Gentiles worship a piece of wood."

Again, this shows at least the origins of this text was probably a mid 2nd cen Jew, as the Christians were at that time starting to venerate the Cross. However since pagans had been worshiping wooden idols for centuries, and this is clearly laid out in scripture, this is not a definite conclusion, but more one inferred from known history.

rakovsky said: Compare however 4 Baruch 3 on the "coming" or "gathering of the Beloved" with 2 Maccabees 2, wherein the place where Jeremiah hid the temple vessels will be unknown until God gathers his people together:

These writings are from the same traditional style, and so will share many common themes and statements. No doubt if this was in any way a Jewish apocalyptic text, the books of the Maccabees would have influenced the original author. 

rakovsky said: Second, notice what it says about the vessels- they are buried. Jesus' body was buried and the apostles would have been buried for martyrdom, and in Christianity, vessels are openly considered a reference to Christians' bodies (in the NT). The burial of the vessels before the Temple's destruction in 4 Baruch could mirror the burial of the martyrs. The vessels remain buried until the coming of the Beloved (the second coming that will raise the dead).

Remember that those early believers were mostly Jews, and the Apostles were all Jews. They thought and wrote like Jews. So those early martyrs were all believing Jews, and the reference to vessels was a Jewish euphemism for bodies or a reference to ossuaries. Later Christian authors would have easily picked up on this, so again it is not conclusive evidence of Jewish origins. But the apocryphal style does tend to suggest it.

rakovsky said: Third is the relevance of Abimelech. It says he pulled Jeremiah out of the muddy cistern. That is nowhere narrated in the Tanakh. What it means allegorically to get pulled out of the muddy cistern is resurrected, as it's used in the Psalms. In Christianity, Jesus is the savior who performs resurrection.

Clearly a Christian addition.

rakovsky said: Fourth, what is the point of Agrippa's vineyard being mentioned, as well as the "shadow of the mountain"? Is it a purely geographical reference with no spiritual or symbolic meaning? in Christianity, Jesus was born in Bethlehem under Herod Agrippa IIRC and is considered to be "the vine". And his burial was in a cave hewn out of the rock, which is like the shadow of a mountain. The narrator breaks form by having God talk about the "vineyard of Agrippa", because Agrippa didn't even exist at the time of Jeremiah. 4 Baruch therefore probably has in mind a reference outside of one purely historical.

The reference to Agrippa helps date this to at least after 70 CE and the fall of Jerusalem and destruction of the Temple; and probably after Bar Kochba's revolt, 132-135 CE. Remember that the Jewish believers were forced out of the revolt when R Akiva had everyone bow and proclaim Bar Kochba to be the Messiah. They then fled to Pella in the mountainous region of SW Jordan, NE of Jerusalem. I don't know if this is a reference to Pella or not. It's just a possibility.

Ancient Jews also referred to direction more as being towards some landmark than in modern terms of N, S, E, & W. Or they would say "go up to" (Jerusalem) or "down to" (the Jordan). So if Agrippa's vineyard was a well known landmark it could be a directional reference rather than a specific destination.

rakovsky said: Fifth, in a later passage, 4 Baruch talks about Abimelech gathering a few blessed figs carried by an eagle to Babylon to serve the sick. The Fig Tree in Christian symbolism is Israel, so the figs would represent the righteous Israelites. And based on New Testament Christian concepts, the righteous Jews could be the early Christians. The eagle carrying them is Rome, as Rome's symbol animal was the eagle. Babylon would be the stand-in for Rome. The apostles' job was to serve the "sick", sinners and those with physical ailments.

Again, remember where the Christians got there symbolism from, and that all the apostles and most of the believers of the first 2 centuries after the Christ were Jews. So if this part were written by one of the few Gentile Christians who were sympathetic to the Jewish believers, it is conceivably a Christian addition. It may also be a later addition by a Jewish believer or by a mainstream Jew. I don't really know. And this is the problem with pseudepigrapha of this period. It is just hard to know who is writing. All I do know is this:

It is a lie, whoever wrote it. As such it is worthless as a holy reference and difficult if not impossible to even understand who you are dealing with, let alone how they thought. I suppose it may hold some interest to true scholars trying to unravel the times- their customs and history. But for the average believer like myself these writings hold little value.

Dan C

[alon]

rakovsky said: (Question 4) What does the milk from Abimelech's figs represent, if anything?
4 Baruch 5 talks about Abimelech finding the milk from the figs when he wakes up:
And leaning his head on the basket of figs (and) falling asleep, he slept for sixty-six years, and he did not wake from his sleep, And afterward, when he arose from his sleep, he said, I slept pleasantly a little, but my head is weighed down because I didn’t get enough sleep. Then, uncovering the basket of figs, he found them dripping milk.

Later in Chapter 5, Abimelech tells an old man:
And when I woke up, I uncovered the basket of figs, thinking I was late, and found the figs dripping with milk, just as (when) I picked them. And you say that the people were taken captive into Babylon! But (just) so you’ll know, take the figs (and) see!

And he uncovered the basket of figs for the old man, and he saw them dripping milk.

And when he saw them, the old gentleman said, O my son, you are a righteous man, and God did not want you to see the desolation of the city, so he brought this stupor upon you. For behold, it is today sixty-six years since the people were taken captive into Babylon. And so that you may learn, son, that what I am telling you is true, look out into the field and see that the growth of the crops is not (yet) apparent. See also the figs, that it is not (yet) time for them, and understand.

Then Abimelech cried in a loud voice, saying, I will bless you, O God of heaven and of the earth, the rest of the souls of the righteous in every place.

Then he said to the elderly gentleman, What month is this? And he said, Nisan, the twelfth (day).

And picking up (some) of the figs, he gave them to the old gentleman and said to him, May God guide you with (his) light to the city above, Jerusalem!

In Chapter 6, Baruch meditates to his heart:
Look at this basket of figs; for behold, they are sixty-six years old and they have not withered nor do they stink, but they are dripping with milk. Thus will it be for you, my flesh, if you do the things commanded you by the angel of righteousness. He who preserved the basket of figs, the same one again will preserve you by his power.

I could guess that the fig tree represents the assembly of Israel and the figs represent the righteous Israelites. In that case, what are the "milk" that they exude? Back in Chapter 3, Jeremiah had instructed Abimelech to give the figs to the sick. So metaphorically, the figs could have spiritually healing properties for those who suffer from spiritual sicknesses.

In 1 Peter 2:2, milk seems to refer to God's Word or its spiritual benefits: "as newborn babes, desire the pure milk of the word, that you may grow thereby".
In Hebrews 5:12, it seems to refer to the first principles of God's teachings: "For though by this time you ought to be teachers, you need someone to teach you again the first principles of the oracles [or "sayings"] of God; and you have come to need milk and not solid food."
In 1 Corinthians 3:1-3, "Milk" again appears to refer to first, elementary Christian teachings.

If a Christian addition or change, then yes, it might mean "elementary Christian teachings." But if of Jewish origin (as were all the books of the so called "New Testament") it would mean just elementary biblical teachings. As used in Baruch it seems to be a metaphor tieing the juice of the figs still there and the basics of and the prophets teachings still alive within the Jewish community after their return from captivity. After being allowed to return by Cyrus, the Jews rebuilding Jerusalem had to ask for (and received) teachers from those exiles still remaining in what were now Persian lands. They had the "milk," now they needed to relearn the "meat." And the meat could also metaphorically be the solid part of the fig, also (obviously) present.

Both the deportations and the return happened in stages, so it is difficult to place a time on how long was the captivity. But it would by all accounts be around 60+ years. You sometimes see it represented as 70 years. Jewish writers often rounded numbers to make a point, any multiple of 7 being "completion," in this case of the Jews captivity and punishment. This amount of time would have also meant most of the faithless generation had perished before being allowed to return.

But again, the original author as well as all those who added to the text were looking back on history. They were also looking back on early Jewish texts, both holy writ and not so holy, though dealing with holy topics. And each wrote according to the precepts and prejudices of his own sect, be he Jew, Jewish believer (unlikely), Christian, or purely pagan.

Dan C 

[alon]

rakovsky, you have a much greater understanding of these texts than I do. All I can do is give a very basic Messianic take, as well as round out your understanding with things the church and Christian authors have little understanding of or won't (for various reasons) tell you. I hope this all helps. It certainly gives those reading the forum insights into writings we typically do not study. I've read some, skimmed some and studied a few of the various texts considered deuterocanon and pseudepigrapha by various denominations, as well as some of the writings of various Jewish traditions of the 2nd-2nd centuries BCE and CE and others. But I have to again tell you I'm not a serious student of any of them. So do as the Berians and check what I say. But you won't find a lot of this in Christian sources. My understanding of history and holy writ comes from Messianic teachings and background, which can get messy. Since we are a relatively new movement there are many different interpretations of and understandings of information taught as Messianic. So god luck!

Your interpretations will necessarily lean to your own denominational understandings. However one of the things about true Godly information is it should be shared, not hoarded. And since the Messianic movement started questioning our interpretations of the Bible and other writings most of Christianity has been changing their views also. If, after all we are looking for the truth and we have not changed at least some of our views, I'd say we haven't found any truth yet!   (See my "I found Out I was Wrong" thread  , which if I had time I should update). 


Dan C

[rakovsky]

Dan,
To answer your question

Mar 17, 2019 20:17:26 GMT -8 alon said:

I believe it is only the Ethiopic canon which considers it holy writ (check me on that-

Yes, 4 Baruch is only in the Ethiopic Bible.

You brought up an interesting point when you said:

The 7 Seals of Revelation correspond to the sealed scroll of a kethubah, a Jewish wedding contract. This is why only Yeshua is worthy to open it. 

What makes you see the Kethubah as corresponding to the 7 seals of Revelation?
It would be relevant because one reading of the term for the "coming" of the Beloved is the marriage of the Beloved.

[rakovsky]

Mar 18, 2019 7:52:41 GMT -8 alon said:

rakovsky said: 10. "The Lord departed from Sinai into heaven, and he will again come with might; and this shall be for you the sign of his appearance, when all the Gentiles worship a piece of wood."

Again, this shows at least the origins of this text was probably a mid 2nd cen Jew, as the Christians were at that time starting to venerate the Cross. However since pagans had been worshiping wooden idols for centuries, and this is clearly laid out in scripture, this is not a definite conclusion, but more one inferred from known history.

Let me clarify. What I quoted above about the worship of the wood being a sign of the Lord's coming was from the Lives of the Prophets, not from 4 Baruch.
I was asking whether the coming/convocation of the beloved before the revealing of the Ark in Baruch 4 referred to the coming/assembly of the Messiah. To help answer the question I was showing a similar passage in the Lives of the passage that talked about the coming of the Messiah, the revealing of the Ark, and the assembly of the saints.

[alon]

Sept 1, 2019 8:07:30 GMT -8 rakovsky said:

Dan,
To answer your question

Mar 17, 2019 20:17:26 GMT -8 alon said:

I believe it is only the Ethiopic canon which considers it holy writ (check me on that-

Yes, 4 Baruch is only in the Ethiopic Bible.

You brought up an interesting point when you said:

The 7 Seals of Revelation correspond to the sealed scroll of a kethubah, a Jewish wedding contract. This is why only Yeshua is worthy to open it. 

What makes you see the Kethubah as corresponding to the 7 seals of Revelation?
It would be relevant because one reading of the term for the "coming" of the Beloved is the marriage of the Beloved.

Actually I've heard different ideas of what the scroll with 7 seals represents. I generally go with the Kethubah because this is all part of the process of the Christ claiming His people in the last days. But I won't say it is an absolute. But a Ketubah was (and is- my wife's cousin had a Kethubah done before he was married) a document which mostly details the grooms responsibilities to his bride. Judaism has always protected women's rights. It actually has 5 sections relating to the books of . You're going to make me think here ... It has a section on the grooms history, the Bride's history, the bride and groom's story, his responsibilities to her, and ... I had to look this one up- their combined lineage. These relate directly to , but I don't remember exactly how. Should be easy enough to search if you really want to know. The seals are for (and again, this is from a failing memory) The bride and groom, the 2 fathers, the scribe who prepared the document, and 2 witnesses unrelated to the bride. 7 seals, any one of which if it is needed as evidence if they are broken then tampering is suspected. If the husband dies before she has children, then the goel (kinsman redeemer) was responsible to marry her. I don't know if he had to keep all the terms, but I doubt it. Still, he'd want that document. Yeshua is our goel. our redeemer. As such He is the only one worthy to break those seals.

DIsclaimer: I am doing some studies right now that may touch on this somewhat obliquely, so stay tuned. I may change my mind. It has happened ...

Dan C

 

[rakovsky]

For Question 1 (Is the coming together or coming of the beloved about the Messiah or people Israel), one of my hurdles to seeing the passage as about the people Israel is that I am much more familiar with places that use the term The Beloved to refer to the Messiah. But Jeremiah 11 uses it to refer to Israel, it seems:

14 “So do not pray for this people, or lift up a cry or prayer for them; for I will not hear them in the time that they cry out to Me because of their trouble.

15 “What has My beloved to do in My house,
Having done lewd deeds with many?
And the holy flesh has passed from you.
When you do evil, then you rejoice.

It feels kind of weird how Jeremiah 11:15 switches midsentence from talking about My Beloved as the people in the third person to You, the people in the second person. It gives me a second thought on whether the Beloved is Israel in Jeremiah 11. But maybe sometimes the Tanakh switches the persons that way in speech.

What do you think about the identity of the beloved in Jeremiah 11?

Good explanation of the 7 seals. It's a good explanation of why I would want to discuss these early Nazarene or Jewish texts here.

One of the most remarkable discoveries for me a few years ago along the lines of mystical insights came from Messianic websites: the meaning of the letters of Hashem, arm, behold, nail, behold.

The identity of the beloved in 4 Baruch sounds ambiguous.

[rakovsky]

The answer to Question 1 must be that the "coming together of the Beloved" most apparently refers to the regathering of the dispersed people Israel, although there is a less likely secondary reading in which it alludes to the coming of the Messiah.

First, the main manuscripts say "sineleusis", which according to Charlesworth's book The Old Testament Pseudepigrapha means "'coming together,' or 'union,' or perhaps even 'marriage.'" This term better matches the regathering of the dispersed people, because the "coming together" of the Messiah doesn't make much sense. On the other hand, the interpretation that sineleusis refers to "marriage" would go along with the concept of the Messiah as a bridegroom who has the right to unseal the Jewish Kethubah marriage scroll of seven seals, which in turn would relate to the seven seals with which the earth was sealed in 4 Baruch 3.

Second, Charlesworth notes a text variant meaning "consummation, completion" (Manuscripts A B P). This text variant doesn't seem to make much sense, but nor does it seem to point to either understanding of the Beloved (ie. as the completion of the Messiah or Israel).

Third, Charlesworth writes that the text variant term "'coming' is supported by the Armenian version." The concept of the "coming" (eleusis) of the Beloved has Messianic connotations. For example, Acts 7:52 says "Which of the prophets have not your fathers persecuted? and they have slain them which shewed before of the coming of the Just One (τῆς ἐλεύσεως τοῦ δικαίο)..."  The Martyrdom of Isaiah 3:13 refers Messianically to "the coming of the Beloved one" ("i ekseleusis tou agapiton"), and Mart. Isaiah 4 says that the Beloved's servants will "await his coming" or "the coming of the Beloved." But the Armenian version that this reading is based on is less reliable.

Fourth, the context suggests that the passage is talking about the coming together again of the dispersed people. In 4 Baruch 3, Jeremiah observes that the people will be taken away and asks the Lord about the Temple vessels: "Behold, Lord, now we know that you are delivering the city into the hands of its enemies, and they will take the people away to Babylon. What do you want me to do with the holy vessels of the temple service?"And God responds: " Take them and consign them to the earth, saying: 'Hear, Earth, the voice of your creator who formed you [ie. formed the Earth] in the abundance of waters, who sealed you with seven seals for seven epochs, and after this you will receive your ornaments -- Guard the vessels of the temple service until the coming together ("sineleusis") of the beloved.'" This can go along with the idea that the earth should hold the vessels until the people who were using them return. Later in chapter 4, Baruch wails about the above-mentioned captivity of the people, referring to them as "beloved": "Why has Jerusalem been devastated? Because of the sins of the beloved people she was delivered into the hands of enemies -- because of our sins and those of the people." Finally, Jeremiah refers to Baruch as "My beloved son", so the term "Beloved" could refer to a person like the Messiah.

[rakovsky]

For Question 2, I wrote that "in Christianity, Jesus was born in Bethlehem under Herod Agrippa IIRC and is considered to be "the vine"." This was incorrect. Gotquestions.org explains that "Herod Agrippa I was the king of Judea from AD 41 to 44. He was a grandson of Herod the Great and nephew of Herod Antipas." Wikipedia notes that before Agrippa became king, he "was allowed to take up residence in Tiberias, and received the rank of aedile in that city, with a small yearly income. ... Following Tiberius' death and the ascension of Agrippa's friend Caligula in 37, Agrippa was set free and made king of the territories of Gaulanitis (the Golan Heights), Auranitis, Batanaea, and Trachonitis, which his uncle Philip the Tetrarch had held, with the addition of Abila."

What is clear to you that Abimelech taking Jeremiah out of the cistern is Christian? I see it as a motif of resurrection, but is that certainly Christian, not rabbinical?

[rakovsky]

For Question 2, to see if it is a Christian/Nazarene text, you would want to find an allusion to a Christian/Nazarene concept. I found five possible allusions. What estimate would you give that each doesn't come from belief in Yeshua:
1. The seven seals the Lord put on the world, vs. the 7 seals on the scroll in Revelation. Maybe 70% chance that it is not a Nazarene/Christian reference?

2. The burying of the vessels until the gathering of the Beloved vs the burial of the saints until the return of the righteous or second coming. Another 70%?

3. Abimelech raising Jeremiah vs Yeshua raising the saints and righteous. 45% chance it's not a Nazarene/Christian reference?

4. Jeremiah sleeping in the shadow of the mountain in Agrippa king of Judea's vineyard vs. the blessed repose of the saints with Abraham or in Yeshua the vine's paradise. 80% chance it doesnt allude to Yeshua?

5. The eagle bringing figs from Abimelech to Babylon vs. Roman roads and ships carrying Nazarene righteous teachers from the Israelite fig tree like Peter and Paul to Rome, which is sometimes called Babylon. 55% chance it doesn't refer to Christian/Nazarene concepts?

Based on math principles, I think that the chance that none of those 5 passages would be Christian/Nazarene allusions would be 70% x 70% x 45% x 80% x 55%= only 9.7% chance that none of those are Christian/ Nazarene allusions.

[alon]

Sept 1, 2019 12:34:38 GMT -8 rakovsky said:

What do you think about the identity of the beloved in Jeremiah 11? Several times the prophet says he/God is speaking directly to the "men" (which would mean all the people) of Judah. Therefore in vs. 15 where the term "my beloved" is used, I would say this refers specifically to the people of Judah at that time. Like most Bible texts, there is a message there for a specific people and time, and also for peoples of all times and places.

One of the most remarkable discoveries for me a few years ago along the lines of mystical insights came from Messianic websites: the meaning of the letters of Hashem, arm, behold, nail, behold. You mean the word picture formed by the ancient pictographic form of Hebrew. The yud, or Y is actually a hand and arm like it is used for work, and the emphasis is more on the hand as the part of His mighty arm that does the work. The vav is a peg or nail, and hey is a window. "yud hey vav hey." So it would read "The Hand revealed the Nail revealed." Even the very name of God points to Messiah Yeshua, our salvation and His work at Calvary. 

Give me some time with the other posts. Kind of busy right now. Thanks.

Edit: It somehow dumped a large part of my reply here. I'll get back and redo it in a bit.

[alon]

Sept 1, 2019 12:34:38 GMT -8 rakovsky said:

The identity of the beloved in 4 Baruch sounds ambiguous. ... It feels kind of weird how Jeremiah 11:15 switches midsentence from talking about My Beloved as the people in the third person to You, the people in the second person. It gives me a second thought on whether the Beloved is Israel in Jeremiah 11. But maybe sometimes the Tanakh switches the persons that way in speech.

Yes, frequently. This is one reason it is so important to learn to view ALL scripture from a Hebrew mindset. Much of scripture is poetry, but not like we know it. It does use all the poetic devises we are familiar with and then some! And it can have structure we are mostly not familiar with, like chiasm as a good example because from your posts you are familiar with this. Most Gentiles by far are not. The rest of scripture, while not poetic still makes frequent use of poetic devices such as metaphor. Tense changes, change in perspective and person are common. Prophecy is especially ambiguous if you are not familiar with this style of writing and are not able to decipher it. When Jews talk of there being a code in the Bible, this is part of what they mean. There are also a lot of idioms which if you weren't raised with the phrases and terms can be confusing. Also whenever a place or person is mentioned it has specific meaning to Jews. Like when it says "Moses has in every city men who read him every Sabbath," to a Jew this means the weekly reading in every synagogue every Shabbat. Or when in the story of the Woman at the Well, Jesus speaks to her at Jcob's well, they immediately think of their common patriarch. And while Samaritans and Jews did not get along, and in fact Samaritans were not even considered Jews by most Jews, still in this case Jesus was directly addressing one of the lost sheep of Israel. So there is a lot to this "code," which boils down to thinking Hebraically.

The good news is that EO folks tend to already have a lot of knowledge in some of these areas.

The Bad news is that EO folks tend to be heavily indoctrinated with their church theology and understandings, which for the most part fly in the face of Hebrew thought. And this can be a very hard thing to overcome. But overcoming is essential if you want to really understand scripture. Even coming on to Messianic boards and asking questions will only get you so far. Like going from radio to B&W TV. But if you want the Bible in color, you have to learn this for yourself. And if you want to actually be there, to see, smell and hear all that is going on, you have to stick with it 'till you know it intimately. Another way to look at it is like going from a solid to liquid to gaseous  stages. A solid has definite shape and size, basically your Bible from cover to cover. Take your understanding of that and pour it like a pile of sand next to that Bible and everyone has a different size pile, but they all look like a cone shaped pile of sand. A liquid takes the shape of its container, up to the level it fills, so now you have that cover-to-cover book and some fair understanding. But a gas expands to fill the entire container. Now yu have that book open, pages turning and the words leaping from the pages right at you; and in loud, living, breathing, colorful glory, no less!

But the first step to getting there is to divest yourself of catholic (church, Gentile) thinking and think like a Jew- an ANCIENT Jew. Not telling you you have to become Messianic (though that helps- hey, I had to get in the plug  ). If you are called to stay in the EO church, then I won't argue with God. Just stay open to His leading in all of this! But you are going to have to learn a whole new way of thinking, and that means shelving, if only temporarily how you think now. And believe me, that is tough. I am right now like a liquid, but there is a definite cloud starting to form just above my surface. I have a long way to go, but the farther I go the more realities I begin to see! And that is amazing! But God always meets us wherever we are, and if you are making a prayerful effort in this direction, He will start taking the scales from your eyes, a bit at a time.

[alon]

Sept 1, 2019 16:01:01 GMT -8 rakovsky said:

The answer to Question 1 must be that the "coming together of the Beloved" most apparently refers to the regathering of the dispersed people Israel, although there is a less likely secondary reading in which it alludes to the coming of the Messiah.

First, the main manuscripts say "sineleusis", which according to Charlesworth's book The Old Testament Pseudepigrapha means "'coming together,' or 'union,' or perhaps even 'marriage.'" This term better matches the regathering of the dispersed people, because the "coming together" of the Messiah doesn't make much sense. On the other hand, the interpretation that sineleusis refers to "marriage" would go along with the concept of the Messiah as a bridegroom who has the right to unseal the Jewish Kethubah marriage scroll of seven seals, which in turn would relate to the seven seals with which the earth was sealed in 4 Baruch 3. This more goes with the scroll as the deed to the earth idea, probably the second most prevalent nterpretation.

Second, Charlesworth notes a text variant meaning "consummation, completion" (Manuscripts A B P). This text variant doesn't seem to make much sense, but nor does it seem to point to either understanding of the Beloved (ie. as the completion of the Messiah or Israel). As in consummation of a marriage?

Third, Charlesworth writes that the text variant term "'coming' is supported by the Armenian version." The concept of the "coming" (eleusis) of the Beloved has Messianic connotations. For example, Acts 7:52 says "Which of the prophets have not your fathers persecuted? and they have slain them which shewed before of the coming of the Just One (τῆς ἐλεύσεως τοῦ δικαίο)..."  The Martyrdom of Isaiah 3:13 refers Messianically to "the coming of the Beloved one" ("i ekseleusis tou agapiton"), and Mart. Isaiah 4 says that the Beloved's servants will "await his coming" or "the coming of the Beloved." But the Armenian version that this reading is based on is less reliable. Still, and without giving overdue to any pseudepigraphic work, many times these ambiguities in Jewish religious writings can serve to show several aspects to what is said, all of them true. This happens in canon as well. 

Fourth, the context suggests that the passage is talking about the coming together again of the dispersed people. In 4 Baruch 3, Jeremiah observes that the people will be taken away and asks the Lord about the Temple vessels: "Behold, Lord, now we know that you are delivering the city into the hands of its enemies, and they will take the people away to Babylon. What do you want me to do with the holy vessels of the temple service?"And God responds: " Take them and consign them to the earth, saying: 'Hear, Earth, the voice of your creator who formed you [ie. formed the Earth] in the abundance of waters, who sealed you with seven seals for seven epochs, and after this you will receive your ornaments -- Guard the vessels of the temple service until the coming together ("sineleusis") of the beloved.'" This can go along with the idea that the earth should hold the vessels until the people who were using them return. Later in chapter 4, Baruch wails about the above-mentioned captivity of the people, referring to them as "beloved": "Why has Jerusalem been devastated? Because of the sins of the beloved people she was delivered into the hands of enemies -- because of our sins and those of the people." Finally, Jeremiah refers to Baruch as "My beloved son", so the term "Beloved" could refer to a person like the Messiah. Again, as I said above, another aspect that while having different meaning can shed the light of understanding on the whole.