Purpose and Motifs of 4 Ezra
When one reads through 4 Ezra, there is a sense of anguish of soul played out in the character of Ezra. This is especially so in the first three visions. The dialogues with the angel Uriel is like a window into the soul of Ezra, and thereby the author of the work. Wright puts it this way: "This is almost a biography of one person's psychological and theological struggles over the sufferings of his people at the hands of the Romans. It is an intensely personal text."1
In the first vision, Ezra is struggling over the fact that God gave Israel into the hand of the Gentiles. His problem is a theological one. He admits that he and his people have violated the covenant God gave them and that they have inherited an evil heart from Adam. But the real force of his question comes out in 3:28-32:
Then I said in my heart, Are the deeds of those who inhabit Babylon any better? Is that why she has gained dominion over Zion? For when I came here I saw ungodly deeds without number, and my soul has seen how you endure those who sin, and have spared those who act wickedly, and have destroyed your people, and have preserved your enemies, and have not shown to anyone how your way may be comprehended. Are the deeds of Babylon better than those of Zion?
Many of the biblical characters wrestled with the same issue (e.g. David, Job). There is a barb in the question. If the wicked Babylon is no better (indeed far worse in Ezra's mind) then what is one to conclude about God. Therein lies Ezra's theological problem and hence the psychological anguish he is experiencing. Ezra is answered with only rhetorical questions and his heart is still in anguish.
In the second vision, Ezra asks essentially the same question only this time he is bold enough to make it even more personal with God. He builds up to his question with logical facts. He utters the fact that the Lord, the sovereign one, has selected his choice vine out from all the choices of the forest; He has selected one region out from all the lands in the world; He has selected one lily out from all the flowers of the world. Ezra continues pressing the point of divine selection mentioning God's sovereign choice of one river, one city, one dove, one sheep, and finally one people. To this very special people God has set his love on them and given them the Law. Now he is ready to pose the question. He asks:
And now, O Lord, why have you given over the one to the many, and dishonored the one root beyond the others, and scattered your only one among the many? And those who opposed your promises have trodden down on those who believed your covenants. If you really hate your people, they should be punished at your own hands.
In other words, Ezra is saying that if anyone should be punishing Israel it is the One who has specially chosen Israel and to whom they belong. At this point, Ezra is calling God into account.
The third vision is closely related and is really an outgrowth of both of the first two visions. Ezra believes he can make his point stronger by going back to the very beginning. He recounts the biblical record of the six days of creation. He notes that on the sixth day God placed Adam as ruler over all creation; God's vice-regent. Next, he deduces that the Israelites have come from Adam and that, therefore, the world was created for God's special people to rule. So he poses this question: "If the world has indeed been created for us [i.e. Israel], why do we not possess our world as an inheritance? How long will this be?" (6:59). The answer to Ezra questions come first by way of analogy and then it is reiterated in very clear terms in what may be the key verse of the book. First, the angel points out that the sea is set in a wide expanse that is very broad and vast (7:4). But the entrance, the angel says, is a river which is comparatively very narrow. The only way to the broad expanse of the sea is by way of the narrow river. He draws another analogy with a city that is broad and great, but the entrance into it is very narrow. If a man has an inheritance in that city, he will not be able to get it unless he first passes through the narrow entrance. So the analogy gives way to the explicit answer. The angel says that because Adam sinned, the inheritance that belonged to Israel became protected by narrow entrances.
And so the entrances of this world were made narrow and sorrowful and toilsome; they are few and evil, full of dangers and involved in great hardships. But the entrances of the greater world are broad and safe, and really yield the fruit of immortality. Therefore unless the living pass through the difficult and vain experiences, they can never receive those things that have been reserved for them.
This is a key passage revealing the purpose of the author. As a Jew who has lived through the terrible ordeal of the destruction of the Jerusalem in A.D. 70, and also witnessing the awful brutality of the destruction of war and the many family and friends who were slaughtered, his heart was indeed in anguish. How could God allow such a thing? Is God a merciless God? No. The inheritance God offers is available only through a narrow passageway of suffering and tribulation. Hence, perseverance and faith are the mainstay.
A change occurs in the heart and mind of Ezra beginning in the fourth vision. This middle vision becomes the transition point for Ezra's change of heart. This vision depicts a vision of a woman weeping for her dead child. Ezra reproves her for her small vision because in the city of Zion there have been hundreds and thousands who have died. The woman needs to broaden her vision, in a sense, according to Ezra. Then the woman is transformed into the very city of Zion. Ezra sees that the very advice he gave to the woman is the very advice he should heed for himself. He, like the woman, had too small of a vision. He needed to see the bigger and grander plan of God. After Ezra's catharsis in vision four, he is now ready to receive the truly apocalyptic visions of the remainder of the book. Once Ezra removed the blinders of his tunnel vision, God filled his vision with more than he could imagine.
The basic theme that unifies the last three visions is that of eschatological salvation. Salvation in this sense is at least liberation from foreign domination through a merciless judgment by God and also a renewing of the covenant people through the divine hand of mercy. This renewing will be the vindication of the Jews, but will not be the result of a military strategy that God divinely empowers. No, it will be a miraculous intervention apart from human effort. This is the idea of the messiah who "carved out for himself a great mountain" (13:6) and who will stand up on top of Mount Zion (13:36) and "will reprove the assembled nations for their ungodliness" (13:37). This is the one who "neither lifted his hand nor held a spear or any weapon of war" (13:9) but fought only with fire from his mouth. Bauckham makes this insightful comment in this regard: "This is a forceful rejection of the kind of militaristic messianic activism which had issued in the Jewish revolt and led to the destruction of Jerusalem by the Romans."2
There are some significant motifs that run throughout 4 Ezra. One that is very prominent is the concept of original sin and the heritage of sin that is passed down to every man. Consider 3:21-23:
For the first Adam, burdened with an evil heart, transgressed and was overcome, as were also all who were descended from him. Thus the disease became permanent; the law was in the people's heart along with the evil root, but what was good departed, and the evil remained.
Later, in 4:30, he states that "a grain of evil seed was sown in Adam from the beginning." He does not state who sowed this original evil seed, but one would be led to conclude that God is the planter. Thus, the problem of evil raises its head in a number of ways in 4 Ezra.
Several other motifs can be briefly introduced at this point. The motif of covenant faithfulness can be found in a number of places. When the author implies that God made the world for Israel to rule but the roles are now reversed, there is a clear implication that God has broken his covenant. There are a couple of other passages worthy of further contemplation. In 13:23, the angel provides an interpretation of the man from the sea vision. In doing so, he explains to Ezra about the remnant that will be left on the earth. He says, "He who brings the peril at that time will himself protect those who fall into peril, who have works and have faith in the Almighty." But the content of that faith is not spelled out. One would surmise from the entire message of 4 Ezra that such a faith is directed toward Torah. But this is one of Ezra's biggest complaints. The "evil root" that is in man makes it impossible for man to keep the Law. But Ezra is speaking nationally. It is possible for individuals to keep God's commandments, but not entire nations (3:36). According to Bauckham, this is how Ezra is able to justify God's faithfulness to his covenant, i.e. by showing mercy to the faithful remnant.3 It would seem, then, that the author of 4 Ezra is attempting to stimulate at least a remnant of his countrymen to a life of faith and conformity to the Torah. In this sense, his purpose is somewhat ethical. Perhaps this can be seen in a statement Ezra makes to his people in 12:47-4: "Take courage, O Israel; and do not be sorrowful, O house of Jacob; for the Most High has you in remembrance, and the Mighty One has not forgotten you in your struggle." Perhaps this is the same idea behind the ethical expression in 14:13 when the voice speaks to him from the bush (reminiscent of Moses at the burning bush): "Now therefore, set your house in order, and reprove your people." What the author is saying to his people through Ezra is that they, God's chosen ones, are going through a narrow passage. Sorrow and tragedy are a necessary part of the experience, but there is a future day when they will be vindicated. They must, therefore, live in the light of that future day and put away the corruptible lifestyles of the pagans they have adopted.
Notes
1J. E. Wright, "Esdras, Books of," in Dictionary of New Testament Backgrounds, eds. Craig A. Evans and Stanley Porter (Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsity Press, 2000): 338.
2Richard Bauckham, "Apocalypses," in Justification and Variegated Nomism: The Complexities of Second Temple Judaism, eds. D. A. Carson, Peter T. O'Brien, and Mark A. Seifrid, vol. 1 (Grand Rapids: Baker Academic, 2001): 165.
3Ibid., 169.
Back to 4 Ezra Index
Back to Apocalypses Index
Apocalyptic and the NT Home Page
This page is provided by Roger DePriest, M.A., Ph.D. student, as part of the "Apocalyptic and the New Testament" site project.