Lydia Gore-Jones

What is the meaning of the “Sign of Jonah”? Despite numerous studies in
nearly a century, scholarly consensus is apparently still lacking. This essay
re-examines the use of the “Sign of Jonah” in the Gospel of Matthew. It
argues that, although Jonah had already become a symbol of the miracle of
rebirth and the conversion of Gentiles in the Second Temple period, it is
the Jewish evangelist Matthew who re-interpreted it afresh in the light of
the early Christian kerygma about Jesus within an eschatological context.
It is due to Matthew’s treatment of the “Sign of Jonah” that it became the
most characteristic Christian symbol of the passion of Christ and the resurrection of all humanity, in the early centuries and beyond.

This paper examines the use of Paul's letter to the Romans by Irenaeus of Lyons in his Against Heresies. The approach is to situate Irenaeus within his second-century context and to analyse his use of Romans within his own discourse and framework of argument. Instead of looking for specific quotations and allusions, attention is paid to Irenaeus's applications of Paul's thought patterns and prominent themes and motifs in Romans, including the faith of Abraham, the Adam and Christ antithesis and the metaphor of the wild olive branch. The focus will be especially placed on his use of Paul to combat his opponents' denigration of the flesh in their proposed schemes of human perfection (AH Book 5). The paper argues that, although Pauline texts are applied in totally different contexts, Irenaeus nonetheless remains "faithful" to Pauline writing in his application of Pauline conceptualization of salvation by participation in his own second-century context.

Theoretical thesis.Bibliography: pages 223-235.1. Introduction: 4 Ezra and 2 Baruch in their historical, religious and literary contexts -- 2. Covenant in crisis in 4 Ezra -- 3. Eschatology and Torah in 4 Ezra -- 4. The unity and coherence of 4 Ezra and Its authorial intention -- 5. The structure and content of 2 Baruch in relation to Its authorial intention -- 6. The covenant in crisis in 2 Baruch -- 7. Eschatology and Torah in 2 Baruch -- 8. Baruch Ben Neriah -- 9. Conclusion : Conclusion: What Is in a name? Covenant tradition and apocalyptic revelation in 4 Ezra and 2 Baruch -- Bibliography.This thesis is a study of religious thought in two Jewish apocalypses, 4 Ezra and 2 Baruch, written around the end of the first century as a response to the destruction of Jerusalem and the Temple by the Romans in 70 CE. The true nature of the crisis is the perceived loss of covenantal relationship between God and Israel, and the Jewish identity that is under threat. Discussions of various asp...

The ‘Animal Apocalypse’ in the Ethiopic Book of Enoch (1 Enoch) presents a fascinating rendition of human history, and Israelite history in particular, entirely in an extended metaphor of animals. This article argues that the author's animal symbols are systematically applied, based on his ethical understanding of the Law regarding clean and unclean animals. Under its symbolic imagery the ‘Animal Apocalypse’ offers an alternative view on human history which combines both the earthly and the cosmic realms. The animal symbolism reveals the author's worldview and carries a depth of meaning which otherwise would be lost in a story told in a literal sense.

Scholarly interpretations of 4 Ezra have very often endeavoured to resolve the issue of the apparent disunity and inconsistency in its form and content. The approaches used are largely divided between the psychological perspective on the one hand, which understands the work as describing Ezra’s religious transformation as a result of his dialogue with Uriel and his visions, and the theological approach on the other, which views it as an intra-Jewish debate, with Uriel and Ezra representing conflicting theological views. While the theological perspective often neglects the significance of the visions and the epilogue for the work as a whole, the psychological perspective often fails to give due consideration to authorial intention. This article argues that the author of 4 Ezra intends to propose a solution to the crisis created by the destruction of Jerusalem in 70 ce and to give scriptural authority to his solution. The key to interpreting his purpose in writing lies in the choice o...

This essay is concerned with the meaning of torah and its relationship with wisdom in late Second Temple Judaism. It has been previously argued that, as the Mosaic torah had gained dominance, the wisdom school absorbed and accommodated the Mosaic torah tradition, and yet maintained all the essential elements of the sapiential tradition. Through a study of two Jewish apocalypses, 4 Ezra and 2 Baruch, the essay discovers not only the sapientialization of the Mosaic torah, but also the total submission of the wisdom tradition under the authority of the Mosaic torah tradition to gain legitimacy. It argues that this is done through a submission of sapiential revelations to the Mosaic revelation received at Sinai, and a portrayal of wisdom recipients and apocalyptic visionaries as types of Moses. This process reflects religious innovation under the disguise of compliance with established, older traditions.

This is an open access article. It is concerned with the meaning of torah and its relationship with wisdom in late Second Temple Judaism. It has been previously argued that, as the Mosaic torah had gained dominance, the wisdom school absorbed and accommodated the Mosaic torah tradition, and yet maintained all the essential elements of the sapiential tradition. Through a study of two Jewish apocalypses, 4 Ezra and 2 Baruch, the essay discovers not only the sapientialization of the Mosaic torah, but also the total submission of the wisdom tradition under the authority of the Mosaic torah tradition to gain legitimacy. It argues that this is done through a submission of sapiential revelations to the Mosaic revelation received at Sinai, and a portrayal of wisdom recipients and apocalyptic visionaries as types of Moses. This process reflects religious innovation under the disguise of compliance with established, older traditions.

There is a growing understanding of metaphor as fundamental to the way we think as embodied ‘minds’. They are more than a literary 9ourish but structure how we think, perceive and feel. The article will look at a shared metaphor in two quite di;ferent literary genres to illustrate how metaphor functions beyond the categories of literature. Its focus is the metaphor of sowing as it appears in 4 Ezra and the Gospel of Matthew. Though various terms can be used to denote the literary object under consideration here, we will employ ‘parable’ as per- haps the most widely applied term. For our purpose a parable is an extended or narrated metaphor.

In Book 5 of his Against Heresies (Adversus Haereses), Irenaeus envisions an eschaton that coheres with the beginning of creation and serves God’s purpose of perfecting man in His divine dispensation. For this argument, Irenaeus cites extra-biblical traditions about end times. His depiction of the earthly Messianic Kingdom demonstrates striking similarities to the eschatological visions in the Syriac Apocalypse of Baruch (2 Baruch), a Jewish apocalypse written around the end of the first century, thus indicating shared traditions. In this regard, Irenaeus is rather unique among early Church Fathers. While others show influences of the strand of Jewish apocalyptic tradition that features heavenly journeys, spiritual ascents and angelic theoria, Irenaeus, on the other hand, shows to be heir to the strand of Jewish apocalyptic tradition that envisions an end with the blessing of union with God that is materially abundant, concretely earthy, upon this world created by God from the beginning.

A cluster of Christian Ezra apocalypses from the 2nd to 9th century, namely the Greek Apocalypse of Esdras, the Greek Apocalypse of Sedrach and the Latin Vision of Ezra, clearly draw their inspiration from the first-century Jewish apocalypse 4 Ezra (2 Esdras 3–14) and share many common features among themselves. Yet conventional textual criticism has failed to offer a satisfactory explanation to account for their similarities and divergences both among themselves and vis-à-vis other apocalyptic works not in the pseudonym of Ezra. This article presents an alternative approach to explain textual relationship by taking into account 1) the role orality played in the process of composition, performance and transmission; 2) the interplay of orality and literacy; 3) the role of memory in the formation of traditions; and 4) eventually viewing textual relationship not as stemmatics but a network of traditions in a common religious and intellectual context.

Scholarly interpretations of 4 Ezra have very often endeavoured to resolve the issue of the apparent disunity and inconsistency in its form and content. The approaches used are largely divided between the psychological perspective on the one hand, which understands the work as describing Ezra's religious transformation as a result of his dialogue with Uriel and his visions, and the theological approach on the other, which views it as an intra-Jewish debate, with Uriel and Ezra representing conflicting theological views. While the theological perspective often neglects the significance of the visions and the epilogue for the work as a whole, the psychological perspective often fails to give due consideration to authorial intention. This article argues that the author of 4 Ezra intends to propose a solution to the crisis created by the destruction of Jerusalem in 70 CE and to give scriptural authority to his solution. The key to interpreting his purpose in writing lies in the choice of Ezra as his pseudonymous mouthpiece and in the epilogue. With this authorial intention in mind, the different parts of the book become a coherent whole.

The 'Animal Apocalypse' in the Ethiopic Book of Enoch (1 Enoch) presents a fascinating rendition of human history, and Israelite history in particular, entirely in an extended metaphor of animals. This article argues that the author's animal symbols are systematically applied, based on his ethical understanding of the Law regarding clean and unclean animals. Under its symbolic imagery the 'Animal Apocalypse' offers an alternative view on human history which combines both the earthly and the cosmic realms. The animal symbolism reveals the author's worldview and carries a depth of meaning which otherwise would be lost in a story told in a literal sense.

“And for all of the transgressions of the Torah is not the whole world punished? Isn't it written: ‘And they shall stumble one upon another?!’ [That is to say,] one because of the iniquity of the other. This teaches us that all Israel are sureties (responsible) for another!” Thus taught Talmud Shevuot 39a. While it is not possible to trace this rabbinic teaching in a linear historical development, it is the aim of this paper to demonstrate that the idea goes back at least four hundred years before the Talmud. The Jewish composition contemporary to the Tanna, Rabbi Aqiba, towards the end of the first century CE, known as Fourth Ezra, gave full expressions to it in the aftermath of the destruction of Jerusalem and the Temple in 70 CE by the Romans. Written in the name of the biblical Ezra and fictionally set in the time after the destruction of the First Temple by the Babylonian, the book endeavours to come to terms with the crisis and to point a way forward for a nation deep in shock and perplexity. The author struggles to understand the purpose of Israel’s election and the persistence of human sins. Though declared by God to be among the righteous, Ezra the protagonist voluntarily takes up the position of the wicked and pleads for their case. While doing so he is caught in the tensions between the efficacy of the Torah and the effect of Adam’s sin, between divine justice and God’s mercy, as well as between the hope that all Israel shall be saved and the belief that only a remnant will be redeemed.

Whereas in earlier periods angels played the roles of heavenly hosts and God’s messengers, from the Second Temple period they developed a new role, that of an angelus interpres. The precursor of this role can perhaps be traced to the visions of Ezekiel, but particularly to the visions of Zechariah. However, it was in the apocalyptic literature of the Second Temple period that these angeli interpretes began to take on their individual personality by adopting names and specific offices. Earliest evidence is found in the Book of the Watchers (1 Enoch 1-36) dated to the mid- or late third century BCE. The Book of Daniel of the second century BCE , which is considered the only apocalyptic book in the Hebrew Bible, is also the only biblical book that names the two archangels, Michael and Gabriel. The two Jewish apocalypses, 4 Ezra and 2 Baruch, also feature an angelus interpres, Uriel and Remiel, respectively. Both apocalypses are regarded as pseudepigrapha written towards the end of the first century in response to the destruction of Jerusalem and the Temple by the Romans in 70 CE. Although it is impossible to establish direct textual relationship between the two, they have been seen as sister works, sharing many common themes and features. Why, then, did the authors choose a different angel for the revelations received by their respective protagonists? Do the angels, despite their different names, play identical roles in the two apocalypses? How are the roles of Uriel and Remiel similar to or different from Gabriel, the angelus interpres in Daniel, on the one hand, and the unnamed angeli interpretes in the Apocalypse of John, on the other?