The Book of Baruch, sometimes called 1 Baruch, can be found in the Greek Septuagint and the Old Testament Apocrypha, but is not found in the Hebrew Bible or in most versions of the Old Testament. Who is Baruch? What is the Book of Baruch all about? How should Christians view the Book of Baruch?

The Book of Baruch claimed to be written by Baruch ben Neriah (Baruch 1:1). Baruch ben Neriah was a scribe associated with the prophet Jeremiah ben Hilkiah of Anathoth: Baruch would often write down the prophecies of Jeremiah which Jeremiah would dictate to him, and when Jeremiah was not allowed to enter the Temple precinct, he commissioned Baruch to go on his behalf and read out the word of YHWH which was given to Jeremiah (cf. Jeremiah 32:12-13, 16, 36:1-32, 43:3, 6). Jeremiah 45:1-5 represented a word of YHWH through Jeremiah specifically to Baruch: Baruch had despaired in his suffering and groaning; YHWH did not present the situation in glowing terms, since He was bringing disaster on the world, but promised Baruch he would escape with his life wherever he might go. Baruch ben Neriah, therefore, was a real person, living at the beginning of the sixth century BCE, a witness to the destruction of Jerusalem, and ultimately an exile in Egypt with Jeremiah (cf. Jeremiah 43:6). Baruch was indeed a Biblical character of some importance: not only was he an associate of Jeremiah, but Baruch was most likely the one responsible for the actual composition and writing of the Book of Jeremiah, and received a specific blessing from YHWH Himself.

The Book of Baruch was collected as part of the Greek Septuagint and has been fully preserved in Codices Alexandrinus and Vaticanus (among others), although not in Codex Sinaiticus. Arabic, Armenian, Bohairic, Coptic, Ethiopic, Latin, and Syriac versions all present indications they are direct translations from the Greek text. Origen betrayed no understanding of any Hebrew original in the Hexapla of the Book of Baruch, and Jerome said there were no existing copies in Hebrew in his own day; nevertheless, some aspects of the text, especially in Baruch 1:1-3:4, present Semitisms and perhaps even mistranslations of an original Aramaic or Hebrew, so a Hebrew original cannot be entirely ruled out.

The Book of Baruch can be found in almost all versions of the Apocrypha and also online here. The Book of Baruch began with an editorial comment, identifying the author as Baruch (with a much more expanded genealogy) and suggesting material was read out before Jeconiah and the exiled people of Judah in Babylon “in the fifth year, on the seventh day of the month,” when the Chaldeans destroyed Jerusalem (Baruch 1:1-4; cf. Jeremiah 36:1-32, Ezekiel 1:2?). After they wept, fasted, and prayed, the exiles of Judah then sent a collection with a priest, Jehoiakim ben Hilkiah, to be sent to Jerusalem, so offerings could be made before God there, and for the welfare of Nebuchadnezzar and his son Belshazzar, and for themselves, and for Baruch to read the scroll as a form of confession and contrition in the Temple; at the same time Baruch was collecting the silver vessels taken from the Temple to return them to Jerusalem (Baruch 1:5-14).

The confession which was supposed to be spoken in the Temple was set forth in Baruch 1:15-3:8. Baruch 1:15-2:10 featured a confession of sin, lamenting the disobedience of Israel since the days in the Wilderness, the rejection of the messages of the prophets, recognition of the suffering of the consequences for disobedience laid out in the Law of Moses, and recognition of continued distress, exile, and suffering because of the sins of the people presently. Baruch 2:11-3:8 turned toward an appeal to God for His anger to turn away from them for the sake of His Name, begging for God’s mercy, aware of how they did not listen to what the prophets told them and thus have suffered devastation and exile, and imploring God to remember promises of restoration given through Moses.

After this extended prayer, and without any real transition of any sort, the Book of Baruch presented an exhortation toward obtaining wisdom in Baruch 3:9-4:4. Israel was exhorted to reflect well on her past and obtain wisdom in the process, to turn to God and to know His ways (Baruch 3:9-15). Such wisdom was not found among the Canaanites, Edomites, or Arabs; a person could not go and search for it and find it in the heavens or elsewhere; only God knows the ways of knowledge and wisdom, and would give them to Israel, found in the commandments of Torah; therefore Israel should not give God’s glory to foreigners but be happy they can know what pleases God (Baruch 3:16-4:4).

The Book of Baruch continued, again without any noted transition, into what has been deemed the “Consolation of Baruch” in Baruch 4:5-5:9. In what seems to be a pastiche of all kinds of prophecies regarding Jerusalem and Zion, the author exhorted the people of Israel to take courage, understanding how the destruction of Jerusalem and their exile was the result of angering God on account of disobedience in idolatry; Zion grieved because of it; their neighbors were invited to see and learn from the disobedience of the Israelites; and yet Zion maintained the confidence God would restore His people, and God would comfort her and make sure she was rebuilt; Jerusalem would again exult and rejoice and would forever enjoy the glory of God when He would lead Israel back again.

In many modern translations of the Apocrypha, including the Revised Standard Version and New Revised Standard Version, the Letter of Jeremiah is presented as the final chapter of the Book of Baruch (as Baruch 6:1-73). This follows the convention set forth in the Latin Vulgate. In the Greek Septuagint, however, the Letter of Jeremiah was presented as an independent work. Since the Letter of Jeremiah would claim to have been written by Jeremiah, not Baruch, and by common confession the Letter of Jeremiah reflects an independent composition, we will not consider it as part of the Book of Baruch.

What should we make of the Book of Baruch? We find no attestation of it in the Dead Sea Scrolls or in rabbinic literature. Early Christians have a high regard for the Book of Baruch in evidence from the late second century onward. The Book of Baruch and the Letter of Jeremiah were often found right after Jeremiah and before Lamentations in the Greek Septuagint. We should remember the Greek Septuagint edition of Jeremiah is one-seventh shorter than the edition in the Masoretic Text, and the text is ordered differently, with Jeremiah’s message of blessing Baruch coming at the end of the Greek version of Jeremiah (Jeremiah 51:31-35 LXX). The editorial comment of Baruch 1:1-4, in fact, is more naturally understood to refer to reading aloud that which came before rather than that which would follow afterward: therefore, early Christians understood the Book of Baruch as simply carrying on the narrative begun in Jeremiah with Baruch reading the Book of Jeremiah before exiled Israelites in Babylon. To this end, Augustine thus argued for Jeremiah, the Book of Baruch, the Letter of Jeremiah, and Lamentations as all the words of Jeremiah written down by Baruch. Such is why the Book of Baruch was believed to be canonical according to many early Christians, and why it was more explicitly attested in the East while more likely wrapped in with Jeremiah in the West.

Nevertheless, the Book of Baruch proves very difficult to accept as a sixth century BCE composition. The editorial framework of Baruch 1:1-14 stands at variance with narratives presented within Jeremiah and with recorded history. First of all, the framing itself seems rather confused: in Baruch 1:1, it seems to borrow “the fifth year” from the fifth year of Jehoiachin’s exile from Ezekiel 1:2, which would be 593 BCE, but the Chaldeans would only take Jerusalem and burn it with fire in 586 BCE. A pre-destruction date might make better sense of the exiles sending silver with a priest in order to make offerings at the Temple; offerings might still have been offered after the destruction according to Jeremiah 41:5, but the whole scene remains difficult to imagine in its context, since we have no evidence the Judahite exiles were in any mood to pray for the welfare of Nebuchadnezzar immediately before or in the immediate wake of the destruction of Jerusalem, and plenty of evidence in Jeremiah and Ezekiel to the contrary (cf. Jeremiah 29:1-32, Ezekiel 37:11). Speaking of Belshazzar as Nebuchadnezzar’s “son” and expecting prayers for him in the 580s would prove quite historically anachronistic and very much influenced by Daniel 5:2. Yet, above all, the Book of Jeremiah consistently bears witness of Baruch staying with Jeremiah in Jerusalem and ultimately ending up exiled with Jeremiah in Egypt (cf. Jeremiah 32:12-13, 16, 36:1-32, 43:3, 6); Baruch is never in Babylon or among the exiles in Babylon, contrary to Baruch 1:1-14. The editorial composition of Baruch 1:1-14 is far better understood as a far later composition of the Second Temple Period providing either some kind of independent introduction to the material which would follow, or perhaps intentionally written as a bridge connecting the following material with the Book of Jeremiah as presented in the Greek Septuagint.

But what of the material in the rest of the Book of Baruch? The confession of sin in Baruch 1:15-3:8 and the “Consolation of Baruch” in Baruch 4:5-5:9 do sound very similar to prayers of confession and contrition in Daniel, Ezra, and Nehemiah and the prophetic messages regarding Jerusalem and Zion in Isaiah and Jeremiah, respectively. The exhortation regarding wisdom in Baruch 3:9-4:4, however, has no parallel in any of the books of the prophets in the Hebrew Bible. While one might want to make connections with the Book of Proverbs and the wisdom literature tradition, the stronger point of connection would be the Book of Sirach.

Based upon all these considerations and factors, it proves far more challenging to suggest the Book of Baruch as part of the Book of Jeremiah or an additional composition of Baruch in the sixth century BCE, and makes far more sense to understand the Book of Baruch as a pseudepigraphal, apocryphal work of exhortation, quite likely written around the second century BCE, perhaps in the wake of Antiochus IV Epiphanes’ defilement of the Second Temple and its eventual cleansing by the Maccabees.

Therefore, the Book of Baruch was most likely not written by Baruch ben Neriah. It should not be recognized as inspired literature or therefore part of the canon of the Old Testament. We should not seek to establish any principle of dogma, faith, or practice based on anything written in the Book of Baruch.

But just because the Book of Baruch was not written by Baruch and is not Scripture does not mean Christians cannot benefit from it. Instead, Christians can take encouragement and gain some insight from the confession of sin, exhortation toward wisdom, and hope in consolation presented in the Book of Baruch: not as the inspired words of Jeremiah’s scribe, but as examples of the devotion, faith, and piety of some Jewish people of the Second Temple Period a few generations before the coming of the Lord Jesus Christ. Christians can always benefit from deeper consideration of prayers of confession and contrition; there are many aspects of Baruch 1:15-3:8 which we could well appropriate in our own lives in prayer. The wisdom presented in Baruch 3:9-4:4 can instruct us as well to seek wisdom and knowledge in God and how people have failed in any attempt to create their own substitute. We can also take comfort and assurance in how God is working to restore Jerusalem in His work through the life, death, resurrection, ascension, lordship, and imminent return of the Lord Jesus Christ, and perceive the true fulfillment of the hope of restoration which infused the consolation of Baruch 4:5-5:9.

The Book of Baruch might seek to project itself into the context of Israel in exile in the sixth century BCE, but most likely reflects the situation of Israel in its own kind of exile and challenging predicament in the second century BCE. While Christians should not believe Baruch ben Neriah wrote the Book of Baruch, and they should not reckon it as an inspired, canonical part of the Scriptures, Christians do well to read the Book of Baruch and appreciate it as a piece of devotional literature from the Second Temple Period. May we find appropriate profit in the Book of Baruch, but in all things find knowledge and wisdom and the fulfillment of the hope of restoration in Israel in God in Christ through the Spirit!

Ethan R. Longhenry

The Book of Baruch (accessed 2025/25/08).

The post The Book of Baruch (1 Baruch) appeared first on de Verbo vitae.