2 BARUCH, 4 EZRA, AND THE EPISTLE TO THE HEBREWS:

THREE APPROACHES TO THE INTERPRETATION

OF PSALM 104:4

Eric F. Mason

This short article considers how three texts from the late ¿rst/early
second centuries C.E.—2 Baruch, 4 Ezra, and the Epistle to the
Hebrews—interpret Ps 104:4. First, however, it is appropriate to preface
this study with a few words about the broader context for this investi-
gation.
I have argued elsewhere that the author of Hebrews understood
Melchizedek as a heavenly ¿gure—most likely angelic—as in three texts
found at Qumran (Visions of Amram, Songs of the Sabbath Sacri¿ce, and
especially 11QMelchizedek). This interpretation is demanded by the
language of Heb 7:3 and the subsequent comparison the author makes
about the eternal, non-Levitical priesthood held by Melchizedek and
Jesus later in the chapter.1 One objection has been that Melchizedek
cannot be understood as angelic or eternal on the basis of Heb 7:3
because earlier the author of Hebrews asserts that angels (as created
beings) are contrasted with Jesus in Heb 1:5–14.2 The author quotes Ps

1. See my ‘You Are a Priest Forever’: Second Temple Jewish Messianism and
the Priestly Christology of the Epistle to the Hebrews (STDJ 74; Leiden: Brill,
2008), which incorporating arguments from my earlier article, “Hebrews 7:3 and the
Relationship Between Melchizedek and Jesus,” BR 50 (2005): 41–62.
2. Gareth Lee Cockerill, “Melchizedek Without Speculation: Hebrews 7.1–25
and Genesis 14.17–24,” in A Cloud of Witnesses: The Theology of Hebrews in Its
Ancient Contexts (ed. R. Bauckham, D. Driver, T. Hart, and N. Macdonald; LNTS
387; London: T&T Clark, 2008), 128–44, esp. 132. Cockerill responds to my con-
ference paper (from the meeting titled “Hebrews and Christian Theology,” hosted
by the University of St. Andrews, Scotland, July 2006) rather than the BR article,
but this is not consequential. Both there and in his recent commentary on Hebrews
(The Epistle to the Hebrews [NICNT; Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 2012], 298–99
n. 14), Cockerill’s argument hinges in part on his denial of the existence of heavenly
62 Interpreting 4 Ezra and 2 Baruch

104 (LXX 103):4 in Heb 1:7. Use of this particular quotation has some-
times been assumed to imply that the Son created angels, as numerous
interpreters in Second Temple Judaism use Ps 104:4 that way. Also,
some scholars have found additional support for this reading through
proposals for how best to understand the relationship between the af¿r-
mations about the Son in Heb 1:1–4 and the series of biblical citations in
1:5–14. John P. Meier articulated this idea in a pair of very inÀuential
articles, arguing that the sequence of af¿rmations in 1:1–4 is paralleled
and supported successively by the themes of the quotations in 1:5–14.3
Though elsewhere in his articles Meier stops short of demanding a one-
to-one correlation between the themes and citations, he does explicitly
link the theme of creation in 1:2c (“through whom he also created the
worlds”) with the citation of Ps 104:4 in Heb 1:7 (normally translated as
“he makes his angels winds, and his servants Àames of ¿re” or similar).4

Melchizedek traditions completely, even at Qumran. This forces him to reject the
dominant, mainstream interpretations among Qumran scholars of all three scroll
texts mentioned above in favor of a proposal that the word “Melchizedek” normally
was understood in the Qumran texts as the title “King of Righteousness” (as it was
later rendered etymologically in Greek texts including Philo, Josephus, and
Hebrews). His argument is further hindered by his insistence that the orthographic
form 98 ')+/ demands interpretation as a title rather than a personal name—despite
differing from the MT in both Gen 14 and Ps 110 only by the lack of a maqqƝph—
because it is written as two words. In contrast, Cockerill argues, writers at Qumran
wrote 98')+/ for the ¿gure who met Abram, and he cites the Genesis Apocryphon
(unfortunately called the Genesis Apocalypse in his commentary) as the sole
example for this claim. This is problematic, however, because Cockerill apparently
assumes that the Genesis Apocryphon is a sectarian document composed at Qumran.
Instead, Daniel A. Machiela notes that “a large majority of scholars,” following
Joseph A. Fitzmyer, assert that this document was composed outside the Qum-
ran community and shows no evidence of distinctive Qumran beliefs or practices.
Also, Machiela observes that “all Qumran writings of certain Essene origin were
penned in Hebrew,” whereas the Genesis Apocryphon was written in Aramaic. See
Machiela, The Dead Sea Genesis Apocryphon: A New Text and Translation with
Introduction and Special Treatment of Columns 13–17 (STDJ 79; Leiden: Brill,
2009), 7–8.
3. John P. Meier, “Structure and Theology in Heb 1,1–14,” Bib 66 (1985): 168–
89; and “Symmetry and Theology in the Old Testament Citations of Heb 1,5–14,”
Bib 66 (1985): 504–33.
4. See Meier, “Symmetry,” 511–13, 523. A key factor that Meier cites in support
of this connection is use of the verb ÈÇÀšÑ in both Heb 1:2 and 1:7, but it should be
noted that the author of Hebrews uses this word sixteen times elsewhere in the book
with a variety of meanings. (Unless otherwise noted, biblical translations here and
elsewhere are from the NSRV.) Compare the translation of Heb 1:7 (“He is the one
who makes his angels spirits and his ministers a Àame of ¿re”) in Craig R. Koester,
 MASON 2 Baruch, 4 Ezra, and the Epistle to the Hebrews 63

It is common for other scholars, including those who do not follow

Meier’s schema, to assert that Heb 1:7 af¿rms the creation of angels.5
I ¿nd both assertions problematic—the correlation of Heb 1:7 with
Heb 1:2c, and the assumption that the author of Hebrews must be using
Ps 104:4 in the same way most of his contemporaries do. While Meier’s
articles are extremely insightful and my own approach to reading Heb 1
is highly inÀuenced by his arguments, I propose (and develop the
argument much more fully elsewhere) that the relationship between the
af¿rmations and quotations should be read in a chiastic, not successive,
order.6 Thus the creation language of Heb 1:2c is better paired with the
citation of Ps 102:25–27 (LXX 101:26–28) in Heb 1:10–12 (“In the
beginning, Lord, you founded the earth”). Likewise, the quotation of
Ps 104:4 in Heb 1:7 is better read in tandem with Heb 1:3b (“he sustains
all things by his powerful word”), expressing the dominion of the Son.
Furthermore, I question whether the quotation of Ps 104:4 in Hebrews
has anything to do with the origins of angels. Discussion of the origins of
angels in the Hebrew Bible is ambiguous.7 Certainly there is a substantial
exegetical tradition in Second Temple Judaism for reading Ps 104:4 to
explain angelic origins, but it is not unanimous, as consideration of the
use of this psalm in 2 Baruch and 4 Ezra will demonstrate.8 Attention
turns ¿rst to the psalm itself in Hebrew and Greek translation, followed

Hebrews (AB 36; New York: Doubleday, 2001), 190, which is intended to empha-
size the related usage of Ps 104:4 here and in Heb 1:14 (“Are they not all ministering
spirits…?). See also the discussion of this below.
5. Recent examples include David L. Allen, Hebrews (New American Commen-
tary; Nashville: B&H, 2010), 176–77; Cockerill, Hebrews, 108; Paul Ellingworth,
The Epistle to the Hebrews (NIGTC; Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1993), 120; pre-
sumably Luke Timothy Johnson, Hebrews: A Commentary (New Testament Library;
Louisville: Westminster John Knox, 2006), 80; William L. Lane, Hebrews (WBC,
47A–B; 2 vols.; Dallas: Word, 1991), 1:29; and Peter T. O’Brien, The Letter to the
Hebrews (Pillar New Testament Commentary; Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 2010), 72.
6. This is the thesis of a paper I presented at the 2011 Society of Biblical
Literature International Meeting (London), titled “A Chiastic Approach to the
Af¿rmations about the Son in Heb 1:1–4 and the Biblical Quotations of Heb 1:5–
14.” My chiastic approach differs from the proposed by Victor (Sung Yul) Rhee,
“The Role of Chiasm for Understanding Christology in Hebrews 1:1–14,” JBL 131
(2012): 341–62.
7. I address this in a paper presently being prepared for publication in another
venue.
8. Surprisingly, use of Ps 104 receives very minimal attention in Michael Mach,
Entwicklungsstadien des jüdischen Engelglaubens in vorrabbinischer Zeit (TSAJ 34;
Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck, 1992).
64 Interpreting 4 Ezra and 2 Baruch

by a survey of its dominant interpretation in the Second Temple period

as exempli¿ed in 2 Baruch and other texts, and ¿nally to a consideration
of use of the psalm in 4 Ezra. The paper concludes with brief comments
about the similar approaches in 4 Ezra and Hebrews.

Psalm 104:4
In the Hebrew Bible, Psalm 104 is a lengthy psalm of 35 verses, one in
which God is praised for the creative work that allows for great bounty
for all creatures.9 Overall the psalm is marked by ample use of theo-
phoric language, with God described as harnessing various aspects of
nature for service. The ¿rst four verses are most important for our
purposes:
1 Bless the LORD, O my soul.
O LORD my God, you are very great.
You are clothed with honor and majesty,
2 wrapped in light as with a garment.
You stretch out the heavens like a tent,
3 you set the beams of your chambers on the waters,
you make the clouds your chariot, you ride on the wings of the
wind,
4 you make the winds your messengers, ¿re and Àame your ministers
[&!+ < #'=:</ =#%#: #')+/ !<3].

The language reÀects that of Ugaritic texts that praise Baal for his
defeat of the sea and provision of fertility for the earth, themes subse-
quently addressed in this psalm and also present elsewhere in the book of
Psalms.10 The word (+/ appears in v. 4 and theoretically could be
translated as either “angel” or “messenger.” Similarly, the other noun in
the phrase, %#:, could be translated as “wind” or “spirit,” but the former
best ¿ts the context, consistent with mention of clouds and winds in the
previous verse.

9. See Robert E. Wallace, The Narrative Effect of Book IV of the Hebrew Psalter
(Studies in Biblical Literature 112; New York: Lang, 2007), 70–76, for a recent
survey of major themes and issues in the psalm.
10. Richard J. Clifford, Psalms 73–150 (AOTC; Nashville: Abingdon, 2003),
148. Language in the psalm also is very similar to that of the Hymn to the Aten found
at El Amarna; Hans-Joachim Kraus argues that this Egyptian imagery was mediated
to Israel via Canaanite inÀuence (Psalms 60–150 [CC; Minneapolis: Fortress, 1993],
298).
 MASON 2 Baruch, 4 Ezra, and the Epistle to the Hebrews 65

The thrust is cosmic and ¿gurative, stressing God’s control of the

clouds, wind, and ¿re in the divine service. As such, it is very unlikely
that the author intends a reference to angels. The NRSV reads, “you make
the winds your messengers, ¿re and Àame your ministers,” and the
NJPS and NAB translations are similar. These statements parallel the com-
ments in the previous verse that the clouds serve as God’s chariot and
that God rides “on the wings of the wind.” In the words of Leslie Allen,
the psalmist
uses a description of divine theophany to convey a sense of the power of
Yahweh, to whom the elemental forces of nature render homage as
minions and adjuncts in his royal service. He paints a picture with colors
borrowed from the palette of Canaanite lore, to the greater glory of the
true God. It is a picture of Yahweh majestically manifesting himself from
his celestial tent or palace. He appears royally clad in radiant light, travel-
ing on cloud and wind, and attended by an impressive retinue. He comes
down to create the earth and to impose upon it his benevolent order, and
thus to extend from heaven to earth his achievement of dominion.11

In the LXX (Ps 103:4), (+/ is rendered with Óºº¼ÂÇË, which too may
be de¿ned broadly as messenger or speci¿cally as angel, and %#:
becomes Èżıĸ: ĝ ÈÇÀľÅ ÌÇİË ÒººšÂÇÍË ¸ĤÌÇı Èżŧĸ̸ Á¸Ė ÌÇİË
¼ÀÌÇÍȺÇİË ¸ĤÌÇı ÈıÉ ÎšºÇÅ. The syntax of the key phrase is admit-
tedly ambiguous in the Hebrew, with context of course the determinative
feature. One also ¿nds contrasting understandings of the syntax of the
Greek, which may depart from the meaning of the Hebrew.12 Albert
Pietersma’s rendering in the New English Translation of the Septuagint
is: “He who makes spirits his messengers [with “angels” a footnoted
option], and Àaming ¿re his ministers.” On the other hand, Harold
Attridge asserts that in the LXX (and subsequently in the passage’s
citation by the author of Hebrews) the angels are acted upon, thus “he
makes his angels winds.”13 Paul Ellingworth also reads the Septuagint as
discussing the transformation of angels into winds.14 Craig Koester’s
approach to the LXX is similar, though he prefers in Hebrews the
translation “the one who makes his angels spirits,” not winds, because
the author of Hebrews concludes the discussion in 1:14 by reminding the

11. Leslie C. Allen, Psalms 101–150 (WBC; Waco: Word, 1983), 33.
12. Allen (ibid., 26) comments that “the quotation of v 4 in Heb 1:7 is basically
from LXX and is understood in a disparaging sense by reversing predicate and object,
an interpretation which is grammatically possible but contextually improbable.”
13. Harold W. Attridge, Hebrews: A Commentary on the Epistle to the Hebrews
(Hermeneia; Philadelphia: Fortress, 1989), 49, cf. 57–58 n. 83.
14. Ellingworth, Hebrews, 120.
66 Interpreting 4 Ezra and 2 Baruch

audience that angels are “ministering spirits” sent to serve humanity.15

Regardless of how the grammar is construed, subsequent interpreters of
Ps 104:4 feel free to harvest various terms from this context and reuse
them in ways that make clear their dependence on this text.

Use of Psalm 104:4 in 2 Baruch and Other Second Temple Period

Texts
Several texts from the Second Temple period cite or allude to Ps 104:4,
and consideration of their use of this verse allows for observation of
different ways early exegetes could speak of angels and their origins. The
intent here is to provide examples, not to be comprehensive, and the
“Second Temple” period is de¿ned broadly.16 Also, it should be noted
that some possible allusions to Ps 104:4 may be too vague for much
comment. For example, in a passage describing Enoch’s tour of the earth
and Sheol, one reads in 1 En. 17:1, “And they lifted me up into one place
where there were (the ones) like the Àaming ¿re. And when they (so)
desire they appear like men” (OTP 1:22). While this may reÀect the
prominent interpretative trajectory in which the psalm is used to present
angels as created from ¿re, George Nickelsburg urges caution about
identi¿cation of these ¿ery ¿gures, noting that “the description here is
too evasive in a context of frequent, matter-of-fact references to angels.”17
Though angels can be discussed elsewhere in 1 En. 1–36 in the context
of ¿re—and ¿re is described as punishment for disobedient angels in ch.
21—their creation is not discussed in the Book of the Watchers. Instead,
in 1 En. 15 their intended nature is contrasted in several ways with that
of mortals, whose sexual behavior the fallen Watchers have adopted:
angels are spirits, but mortals are Àesh and blood; angels are eternal, not
dying, and thus have no need for wives, but mortals die and perish and
thus must procreate.18
That said, it is clear that numerous interpreters did understand angels
as created by God from ¿re on the basis of Ps 104:4 (along with other
elements mentioned in the psalm). Jubilees very explicitly does so with
appeal to this verse. The setting is the giving of the law at Sinai. God
calls Moses to the mountain, but after God foretells the destiny of Israel,

15. Koester, Hebrews, 193–94.

16. See the brief comments below about the dating of 2 Enoch.
17. George W. E. Nickelsburg, 1 Enoch 1: A Commentary on the Book of
1 Enoch, Chapters 1–36; 81–108 (Hermeneia; Minneapolis: Fortress, 2001), 281.
18. Ibid., 272.
 MASON 2 Baruch, 4 Ezra, and the Epistle to the Hebrews 67

an angel of the presence is summoned to take the “tablets of the divisions

of years” (Jub. 1:29) and read them to Moses.19 He begins with a
reworking of the Gen 1 account of creation, supplemented with elements
from the Gen 2 account and other biblical and extracanonical traditions.
The very obvious insertion of the creation of angels stands out:
For on the ¿rst day he created the heavens, which are above, and the
earth, and the waters and all of the spirits which minister before him:
the angels of the presence,
and the angels of sancti¿cation,
and the angels of the spirit of ¿re,
and the angels of the spirit of the winds,
and the angels of the spirit of the clouds and darkness and snow and hail
and frost,
and the angels of resoundings and thunder and lightening,
and the angels of the spirits of cold and heat and winter and springtime
and harvest and summer,
and all of the spirits of his creatures which are in heaven and on earth.
And (he created) the abysses and darkness—both evening and night—and
light—both dawn and daylight—which he prepared in the knowledge of
his heart. Then we saw his works and we blessed him and offered praise
before him on account of all his works because he made seven great
works on the ¿rst day. (2:2–3; OTP 2:55)

The passage is full of biblical allusions, and clearly the constellation

of ¿re, wind, and clouds points to Ps 104:3–4, even if the mention of ¿re
is lacking in some manuscripts (OTP 2:55 n. b). Not only that, but the
author of Jubilees has stipulated the day—the ¿rst day—on which the
angels were created using the schema of the Gen 1 week. (Later in Jub.
15 the author again will speak in passing about the creation of angels of
the presence and angels of sancti¿cation.) Jacques van Ruiten notes that
the author has taken an expansive approach to God’s activity on the ¿rst
day, including the materials in Gen 1:1–2 that normally are read as
preceding creation proper. Doing so allows the author to present God as
creating seven things on the ¿rst day; nothing is allowed to exist before
creation, and the seven things created match the seven categories of
angels created.20 The passage ends with the angels blessing God,

19. See James C. VanderKam, “The Angel of the Presence in the Book of Jubi-
lees,” DSD 7 (2000): 378–93, which includes an overview of discussion of angels in
the book.
20. Jacques van Ruiten, “Angels and Demons in the Book of Jubilees,” in
Angels: The Concept of Celestial Beings—Origins, Development and Reception
(ed. F. V. Reiterer, T. Nicklas, and K. SchöpÀin; Deuterocanonical and Cognate
Literature Yearbook 2007; Berlin: de Gruyter, 2007), 585–609, esp. 587–89.
68 Interpreting 4 Ezra and 2 Baruch

reminiscent of other traditions that describe angels rejoicing when they

see God’s handiwork (e.g., Job 38:7 and the Qumran “Hymn to the
Creator,” the latter mentioned below).
This Jub. 2 passage is extant in 4QJubileesa, and Raija Sollamo
emphasizes that the explicit correlation of angels with natural phenom-
ena in this account is a foundational contribution, one likely rooted in
the language of Ps 104:4.21 Sollamo also notes that a similar list of
phenomena appears in the “Hymn of the Three Young Men” in Dan
3:57–73 LXX, but there the things listed are called to praise God and are
not associated explicitly with classes of angels.22 Still others suggest a
connection with the “Hymn to the Creator” in 11QPsa from Qumran.23
This hymn uses theophoric language but nothing that explicitly links it to
Ps 104:4. The verse is extant in Qumran biblical manuscripts, but no
explicit citation has survived in non-biblical manuscripts. It seems likely,
however, that some texts do reÀect the interpretation of the verse as
describing the creation of angels. For example, one reads in 1QS 3.15–17
that God created two spirits, the Prince of Light (later called the “angel
of his truth”) and the Angel of Darkness (emphasis added). The possible
reÀection of Ps 104:4 concerns the synonymous use of angel and spirit,
perhaps reÀecting a conÀation of terms in the verse, though angels and
spirits may also be called “eternal” in the corpus as well.
A similar interpretation to that found in Jubilees appears in 2 Enoch, a
text notoriously dif¿cult to date but perhaps stemming (at least in part)
from the ¿rst century C.E.24 As in Jubilees, the context is a reworking of
the seven-day creation sequence from Gen 1, though now the creation of
angels is dated to the second day (as is the rebellion of the archangel
Satanail and his minions shortly after their creation, leading to their

21. Raija Sollamo, “The Creation of Angels and Natural Phenomena Intertwined
in the Book of Jubilees (4QJuba): Angels and Natural Phenomena as Characteristics
of the Creation Stories and Hymns in Late Second Temple Judaism,” in Biblical
Traditions in Transmission: Essays in Honour of Michael A. Knibb (ed. C. Hempel
and J. M. Lieu; JSJSup 111; Leiden: Brill, 2006), 273–90, esp. 274–76.
22. Ibid., 277–82.
23. Patrick W. Skehan, “Jubilees and the Qumran Psalter,” CBQ 37 (1975):
343–47. See also the discussion in Sollamo (”Creation,” 282–84) and van Ruiten
(“Angels,” 589–90).
24. This was an important point of discussion at the Fifth Enoch Seminar
(Naples, Italy, 2009) and is considered (directly or indirectly) in the essays by
Christfried Böttrich, Liudmila Navtanovich, Grant Macaskill, Andrei A. Orlov, and
David W. Suter in the conference volume New Perspectives on 2 Enoch: No Longer
Slavonic Only (ed. Andrei A. Orlov and Gabriele Boccaccini; Studia Judaeoslavica
4; Leiden: Brill, 2012).
 MASON 2 Baruch, 4 Ezra, and the Epistle to the Hebrews 65

The thrust is cosmic and ¿gurative, stressing God’s control of the

clouds, wind, and ¿re in the divine service. As such, it is very unlikely
that the author intends a reference to angels. The NRSV reads, “you make
the winds your messengers, ¿re and Àame your ministers,” and the
NJPS and NAB translations are similar. These statements parallel the com-
ments in the previous verse that the clouds serve as God’s chariot and
that God rides “on the wings of the wind.” In the words of Leslie Allen,
the psalmist
uses a description of divine theophany to convey a sense of the power of
Yahweh, to whom the elemental forces of nature render homage as
minions and adjuncts in his royal service. He paints a picture with colors
borrowed from the palette of Canaanite lore, to the greater glory of the
true God. It is a picture of Yahweh majestically manifesting himself from
his celestial tent or palace. He appears royally clad in radiant light, travel-
ing on cloud and wind, and attended by an impressive retinue. He comes
down to create the earth and to impose upon it his benevolent order, and
thus to extend from heaven to earth his achievement of dominion.11

In the LXX (Ps 103:4), (+/ is rendered with Óºº¼ÂÇË, which too may
be de¿ned broadly as messenger or speci¿cally as angel, and %#:
becomes Èżıĸ: ĝ ÈÇÀľÅ ÌÇİË ÒººšÂÇÍË ¸ĤÌÇı Èżŧĸ̸ Á¸Ė ÌÇİË
¼ÀÌÇÍȺÇİË ¸ĤÌÇı ÈıÉ ÎšºÇÅ. The syntax of the key phrase is admit-
tedly ambiguous in the Hebrew, with context of course the determinative
feature. One also ¿nds contrasting understandings of the syntax of the
Greek, which may depart from the meaning of the Hebrew.12 Albert
Pietersma’s rendering in the New English Translation of the Septuagint
is: “He who makes spirits his messengers [with “angels” a footnoted
option], and Àaming ¿re his ministers.” On the other hand, Harold
Attridge asserts that in the LXX (and subsequently in the passage’s
citation by the author of Hebrews) the angels are acted upon, thus “he
makes his angels winds.”13 Paul Ellingworth also reads the Septuagint as
discussing the transformation of angels into winds.14 Craig Koester’s
approach to the LXX is similar, though he prefers in Hebrews the
translation “the one who makes his angels spirits,” not winds, because
the author of Hebrews concludes the discussion in 1:14 by reminding the

11. Leslie C. Allen, Psalms 101–150 (WBC; Waco: Word, 1983), 33.
12. Allen (ibid., 26) comments that “the quotation of v 4 in Heb 1:7 is basically
from LXX and is understood in a disparaging sense by reversing predicate and object,
an interpretation which is grammatically possible but contextually improbable.”
13. Harold W. Attridge, Hebrews: A Commentary on the Epistle to the Hebrews
(Hermeneia; Philadelphia: Fortress, 1989), 49, cf. 57–58 n. 83.
14. Ellingworth, Hebrews, 120.
70 Interpreting 4 Ezra and 2 Baruch

Psalm 104:4 in 4 Ezra

One encounters a different kind of use of Ps 104:4 in 4 Ezra 8:20–22.
Here Ezra is presented as engaging God directly, not with an angelic
mediator. In a prayer begging for God’s mercy on creation, he describes
the heavenly throne scene:
He said, “O Lord who inhabits eternity, whose eyes are exalted and
whose upper chambers are in the air, whose throne is beyond measure
and whose glory is beyond comprehension, before whom the hosts of
angels stand trembling and at whose command they are changed to wind
and ¿re [Syr.; Latin ‘they whose service takes the form of wind and ¿re’;
OTP 1:542 note j], whose word is sure and whose utterances are certain,
whose ordinance is strong and whose command is terrible…” (OTP
1:542–43, emphasis added)

Here the idea seems not to be that angels are created from wind and ¿re,
but rather that God’s incomparable dominion is af¿rmed, i.e., God may
transform even the heavenly retinue.27
Several other statements in the book—all recitals of creation—may
reinforce this understanding. In 6:1–6, God af¿rms his control over the
events of the end of the age by reminding Ezra that all was planned even
before creation. The passage is full of creation language, but the way
angels are discussed is unusual. They are not identi¿ed as created, but
rather God’s plan is said to have been established “before the innumer-
able hosts of angels were gathered together,” among several other things.
The language of gathering, not forming or creating, is distinctive, and
one might be tempted to ¿nd here faint echoes of a very different way
of understanding the origins of angels that has its roots in conceptions
of the Canaanite pantheon, namely, that angels were Israel’s way of
accounting for the fourth-level servant or messenger deities in Canaanite

[OTP 1:636]). See Michael Edward Stone, Fourth Ezra: A Commentary on the Book
of Fourth Ezra (Hermeneia; Minneapolis: Fortress, 1990), 273.
27. Stone’s translation is very similar to that of OTP, and he writes that the key
phrase “expresses the idea that the angelic hosts, at God’s command, are trans-
formed into ¿re and water” (Fourth Ezra, 273). Presumably “water” is accidental
here, as the passage discusses ¿re and wind; Stone connects those terms to Ps 104:4.
Stone implies that the author of 4 Ezra also holds to the interpretative trajectory
described above, as an explanation for the creation of angels. He cites several texts
discussed here but also provides examples from rabbinic literature, including Gen.
Rab. 78:1 and PRE 4. The latter is especially signi¿cant, as it states that angels were
created on the second day and are transformed to winds when sent as messengers,
but ¿re when ministering in the heavenly court. See also n. 25.
 MASON 2 Baruch, 4 Ezra, and the Epistle to the Hebrews 71

thought.28 Elsewhere in 4 Ezra creation can be described—even in

lengthy accounts—without mention of angels (6:38–54, but see the “spirit
of the ¿rmament” on day 2) or with the reminder that it is folly to seek to
hide sins from God and his angels (16:51–67). Overall, the impression is
that the author of 4 Ezra did not share the trajectory discussed earlier of
interpreting Ps 104:4 as pertaining to the creation of angels.

Conclusion
In contrast to the meaning of the text in its original context in both the
Hebrew and the LXX as af¿rming the power and majesty of God
(admittedly in a psalm with strong creation imagery overall), the
dominant trajectory of interpretation of Ps 104:4 in the Second Temple
period was to read it as describing the creation of angels from ¿re and
wind. This is evident in 2 Baruch and several other texts. I have
suggested above, however, that the author of 4 Ezra takes a different
approach, one that ¿nds in the verse an af¿rmation of God’s dominion
and absolute control over his angels (and the rest of creation) but not a
statement about the origins of angels per se. I also proposed that the
author of Hebrews cited the verse (in Heb 1:7) with a similar intent, to
undergird the earlier af¿rmation of the Son’s dominion (Heb 1:3b) rather
than his creative activity (Heb 1:2c). Naturally one cannot claim to know
fully what was in the minds of the authors of 4 Ezra and Hebrews, and it
certainly may be the case that they indeed did follow the emerging
tradition in the Second Temple period that understood angels as created
beings. Their only uses of Ps 104:4 serve a different function, however,
one that more accurately reÀects the meaning of the original psalm itself
(allowing for Christian reappropriation of the psalm to refer to the Son,
not God, in Hebrews).

28. See especially Mark S. Smith, The Origins of Biblical Monotheism: Israel’s
Polytheistic Background and the Ugaritic Texts (Oxford: Oxford University Press,
2001); and Lowell K. Handy, Among the Host of Heaven: The Syro-Phoenician
Pantheon as Bureaucracy (Winona Lake: Eisenbrauns, 1994). Compare Stone’s
approach, though he identi¿es angels as created beings here. He argues that
luminaries must be intended in the previous and parallel phrase “before the powers
of movement were established” (emphasis mine) and notes that the association of
such stars with angelic beings reÀects “demythologized pagan deities, although that
is far in the background in our text” (Fourth Ezra, 157 n. 97). Stone also notes,
however, that the “powers of movement” may also be earthquakes, an identi¿cation
supported by the Syriac version.