Although there are dozens of
citations and allusions to 1 Esdras in the Church Fathers, the most eminent
Christian reading of 1 Esdras is that supplied by Augustine in De civitate
Dei 18.36.
After these three prophets,
Haggai, Zechariah, and Malachi, during the same period of the liberation of the
people from the Babylonian servitude Esdras also wrote, who is historical
rather than prophetical, as is also the book called Esther, which is found to
relate, for the praise of God, events not far from those times; unless,
perhaps, Esdras is to be understood as prophesying of Christ in that
passage where, on a question having arisen among certain young men as to what
is the strongest thing, when one had said kings, another wine, the third women,
who for the most part rule kings, yet that same third youth demonstrated that
the truth is victorious over all [= 1 Esdras 3-4]. For by consulting the
Gospel we learn that Christ is the Truth (italics added).
Augustine sees 1 Esd 4:35 (4:41
Vulg.) concerning Zerubbabel's climactic remark that "truth is great, and
stronger than all things" (η αληθεια μεγάλη καί ίσχυροτέρα παρά πάντα, magna veritas et praevalet)
a prophecy about Christ fulfilled in the Gospel. The Gospel that Augustine refers
to of course is the Fourth Gospel, in particular, it appears that he has in
mind John 14:6 with the Johannine Jesus' saying: "I am the way, and the
truth, and the life. No one comes to the Father except through me."
Augustine knows full well that 1 Esdras is a historical work and not a
prophetic book and there is no question as to whether or not this was the
intended point of Zerubbabel's speech in the text of 1 Esdras-it clearly was
not-but Augustine is not engaging in crass allegory or rank eisegesis. Rather,
Augustine is approaching the text with a canonically shaped imagination. The
underlying premise is that Christian Scripture ultimately has one divine author
(God) and it has one ultimate object of its testimony (Jesus Christ). Given
those suppositions can one attempt to relate the Ezra-story and the
Gospel-story together if one is convinced that the same God stands behind both
of them and if the telos of all Scripture is the revelation of Jesus Christ. No
doubt some scholars with a historical-critical bent will regard such an
enterprise as full of hermeneutical make-believe. Be that as it may, Christians
have read and still read 1 Esdras, not simply to excavate historical data for
the post-exilic period, but also for its typological, spiritual, and devotional
significance. Study of the historical context of an ancient writing will always
retain its legitimacy as long as we treat texts as storehouses of ancient
information and not simply as mirrors to hold up to the reader; still, the
reader is part of the process by which meanings are found and created. The
canonical context (of the Old and the New Testaments) and the communal location
of the readers (be they Jews, Christians, or others) are themselves legitimate
variables that impact the reading of ancient texts that purport to have sacred
meaning. In other words, a Christian reading of 1Esdras is just as valid as a
source-critical one, perhaps even more so if the enhancement of the human
condition is the goal of all reading. (Michael F. Bird, 1 Esdras:
Introduction and Commentary on the Greek Text in Codex Vaticanus
[Septuagint Commentary Series; Leiden: E. J. Brill, 2012], 29-30)
