Back to Mormonism Researched Page

The Messianism in the Pseudepigrapha and the Book of Mormon

Excerpts selected by Kerry A. Shirts

James H. Charlesworth, the Dean of scholars concerned with the Pseudepigrapha gave a talk at the BYU Religious Studies Symposium in March 10-11, 1978, which essay was included by Truman G. Madsen, ed., in the book "Reflections on Mormonism: Judeo-Christian Parallels," which ought to be better known. His essay is quite large and detailed, so I will include the salient points and show how some scholars, who upon looking at the Book of Mormon carefully, have not necessarily concluded that it is simply a fraud or phony book at all, but reflects some interesting ideas held in the ancient world. When taken seriously the Book of Mormon comes across rather different than when a deliberate anti-Mormon analyzes it. This is an instructive essay for that reason alone, among others.

Charlesworth begins by acknowledging the virtual flood of new documents available to scholars now, to cross-check, compare, see differences, similarities, etc. It is not an easy job at all to try and understand the nature of scripture, the Bible, the Book of Mormon, etc. The period of time Charlesworth worked with the documents for his essay was from 200 B.C. to 200 A.D. the period separating the Old and New Testaments.

One of the major thoughts contained in these writings is the claim that God is about to bring an end to all normal history and time, bring in the promised day, and inaugurate the fullness of times. The feeling is one of pessimism and hence the writings look into the future for that blessed time.

Charlesworth notes that 50 years ago scholars held ideas about the Intertestamental times which are far different than today because the documents have changed the tone. It is now known that Intertestamental Judaism was not isolated from the Greek and Roman world, but rather was a richly varied phenomenon. Hellenistic Judaism is now known to be an astonishingly variagated thing. So now the Rabbinic writings are not the main nor only key witness for intertestamental Judaism. The Pseudepigrapha cannot be discarded any longer as documents from a fringe group of heterodox Jews; rather these writings must be recognized as containing many important ideas, concepts, expressions, and dreams that were permeating the fabric of Hellenistic Judaism.

The methodology that Charlesworth uses is analyzing 50 documents which deal with the ideas associated with the Messiah. Some passages do define the Messiah as the Prophet, but such an equation does not allow us to begin collecting passages about "the Prophet" and impose on them messianic overtones. Different authors do not necessarily define terms in the same way.

Interestingly only five documents in the Pseudepigrapha contain Jewish comments about "the Messiah," "the Anointed One," or "the Christ." The best known is the Psalm of Solomon, written around the middle of the first century B.C. The description of the Messiah is as a descendant of David who will purge Jerusalem of her enemies not by the sword, but by the word of his mouth. The usual interpretation of this is that the Messiah would be a militant Messiah. But the picture in the Psalm of Solomon is much less militant than that in the Targum of Pseudo-Jonathan. In the Targum of Genesis 49:11 we read:

How noble is the king, Messiah, who is going to rise from the House of Judah. He has girded his loins and come down, setting in order the order of battle with his enemies, and killing kings with their rulers (there is not a king or ruler who shall stand before him), reddening the mountains with the blood of their slain. With his garments dipped in blood, he is like one who treads grapes in the press.

The Messiah in the Psalm of Solomon is not depicted as a bloody warrior however. The contrast with the War Scroll in the Dead Sea Scrolls is impressive.

In the Psalm of Solomon, we are to understand that it is God, not the Messiah who is clearly the actor. We even read that the Lord God himself is the King and the Lord of "the Messiah." The end of the Psalm clarifies that the Messiah is God's agent. The emphasis is on God as the one who will accomplish the messianic goals is in line with the major thrust of the Psalms of Solomon and is found in many earlier Psalms.

Messianic concepts are also found in 2 Baruch. In 29:3 we read the prophecy that the Messiah will begin to be revealed when the other prophecies come to pass. Interestingly we read also that when the times are fulfilled, the Messiah shall return in glory and all those who have fallen asleep in hope of Him will rise again. While the Messiah apparently is given a passive role, the effects of his return are spectacular! It is obvious that only the righteous shall be resurrected at this time, while the wicked continue decaying in their graves.

In the second section of 2 Baruch, chapters 39, 40 the Messiah confronts the leader of the enemies and defeats him in death. The Messiah is given an active role and puts to death the leader of the enemies of God's people.

The third section in chapters 72-74 of 2 Baruch, the Messiah also takes an active role. He shall summon all the nations and spare those who have not oppressed Israel, but shall slay those who rule over Israel. The Messiah's kingdom shall be eternal. The Messiah is portrayed as a militant Messiah who slays the enemies of God's people. He specifically will give them up to the sword.

The Apocalypse of Ezra has the idea, the only place in all of the Pseuepigrapha, that the Messiah shall come and die. It is a Jewish conception because there is no talk of an efficacious nature to the death of the Messiah here however. Then there are seven days of silence, followed by the judgment. In it both the righteous and wicked shall be resurrected and then judged by their deeds.

In the second section of 4 Ezra, we learn that the Messiah, a descendant of David, shall come at the end of days and judge, denounce, reprove, and destroy the ingodly, and on the other hand he shall deliver the remnant of his people. It is obvious that here the Messiah is seen as both a warrior and a judge.

In another section, the Messiah is seen as not confronting his enemies with the sword, but with a fire from his mouth, his word, and he burned up his enemies.

1 Enoch also identifies the Messiah. Though no functions are attributed to Him. Interestingly Odeberg in 3 Enoch notes that the Messiah is the son of Joseph, the son of David, and this Messiah will fight Gog and Magog in the time to come. Charlesworth notes that there very well may be two Messiahs just as in the Dead Sea Scrolls. Interestingly in 3 Enoch the Messiah will come and end the war of wars, himself fighting the enemies of Israel, and the text uses the Old Testament books to make his case. Isaiah 52:10; Deut. 32:12, and Zechariah 9:9.

So the Pseudepigrapha depicts a Messiah, sometimes as militant, other times as conquering Israel's enemies through supernatural nonmilitary means. Charlesworth then notes many texts that have Christian interpolations in them concerning the Messiah, the anointed one, the Son of God, etc., which I will not go into at this point in order to get to what he says concerning the Book of Mormon.

Both the Pseudepigrapha and Book of Mormon have Jewish as well as Christian conceptions in them. Both preserve some passages that prophesy the future of an ambiguously described Messiah, and others that are more pointed and detailed. A significant passage in the Book of Mormon dealing with the future Messiah is 1 Nephi 10:4-17. which identifies the Messiah as the Savior of the world. Charlesworth then notes that many passages seem to show later Christian ideas in them of the Messiah's life and activities, such as 2 Ne. 25: 16-19; 2 Ne. 26:3, and perhaps the clearest is Mosiah 3:8-10. Most interestingly, Charlesworth notes that all scholars would see these sections as later additions, so does this not vitiate the claim that these passages of the Book of Mormon was written before 91 B.C.? In other words, does this not wreck the BofM's claims to being an ancient book? Not necessarily. And here Charlesworth notes something that all other critics have missed. His ever sharp eye saw that in the BofM itself, Mormon in the 4th century A.D. was abridging and editing the BofM, and his life postdated Christ's and he had the records, so he could have been responsible for those additions in 400 A.D. Something more critics ought to be made aware of! To quote his conclusion: "The recognition that the Book of Mormon has been edited on more than one occasion would certainly explain why certain of the messianic passages appear to be Christian compositions." (p. 125).

2 significant links that Charlesworth notes between the Pseudepigrapha and the Book of Mormon are 3 Ne. 17:4

"But now I go unto the Father, and also to show myself unto the lost tribes of Israel, for they are not lost unto the Father, for he knoweth whither he hath taken them."

While the author of this is not identified, in the contiguous verses he is called Jesus and earlier he is called Jesus Christ (3 Ne. 11:10).

The idea that the Messiah will visit the lost tribes of Israel is unique, not being in either the Old or New Testaments. It is paralleled in the Pseudepigrapha however! At 2 Baruch 77:17-26 the author talks about the lost tribes, though not stating the Messiah will visit them at this point. In 4 Ezra which clearly develops a sophisticated concept of the Messiah in chapter 7, also discussing the Messiah as a man, who is later identified by God as "My Son" one of his functions is to gather together the lost tribes of Israel!

The second parallel Charlesworth notes is that idea of the advent of the Messiah as his return. The so-called second coming of Christ is the idea here. 2 Ne. 6:14 demonstrates this idea of return of the Messiah. "The Messiah will come again a second time..." This same concept of the advent as a return is found in Psalm of Solomon 18:5 as well. 2 Baruch 30 also talks about the Messiah coming a second time in glory. The Syriac of 2 Baruch here quite clearly reads "he shall return." The verb in Syriac is the Peal imperfect of "hpk" "he shall return." This is not a Christian interpolation either! This is the genuine Jewish idea according to Charlesworth.

Charlesworth notes that there are many important parallels between the 2 sets of literature that deserve careful examination. In the Ascension of Isaiah it speaks of the Crucifixion and the Ascension, and his disciples forsaking the teaching and their faith. It also discusses many exchanging their garments etc. Mormons will not only think about the reference to a spiritual garment but perhaps also of 1 Ne. 13:26 "... for behold, they have taken away from the Gospel of the Lamb many parts which are plain and most precious; and also many covenants of the Lord have they taken away."

Charlesworth final concluding thought is that the Messiah is clearly and obviously, as the Mormons have understood, the ONE IN HEAVEN WHO STILL SPEAKS (emphasis Charlesworth's). It is a revealing Messiah who is the true Messiah, as we Mormons have always contended.