The prevalence of apocalyptic in Palestine in the time of Jesus

Citation preview

THE PREVALENCE OF APOCALYPTIC IN PALESTINE IN THE TIME OF JESUS

A Dissertation Presented to the Faculty of the School of Religion University of Southern California

In Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree Doctor of Theology

by Harold Emil Carlson June 1950

UMI Number: DP32199

All rights reserved INFORMATION TO ALL USERS The quality of this reproduction is dependent upon the quality of the copy submitted. In the unlikely event that the author did not send a complete manuscript and there are missing pages, these will be noted. Also, if material had to be removed, a note will indicate the deletion.

Di&sgftstie n Pub! sb*.ftg

UMI DP32199 Published by ProQuest LLC (2014). Copyright in the Dissertation held by the Author. Microform Edition © ProQuest LLC. All rights reserved. This work is protected against unauthorized copying under Title 17, United States Code

ProQuest LLC. 789 East Eisenhower Parkway P.O. Box 1346 Ann Arbor, Ml 48106- 1346

jfl.D

ft

'5°

C

T h is disse rta tio n , w r it t e n by

.......MROLP.EMIL. CAHLSON......... u n d e r the g u id a n c e o f .JaoS— F a c u lt y C o m m itte e on S tudies, a n d a p p r o v e d by a l l its m em bers, has been p resen ted to a n d accepted by the F a c u lt y o f the G r a d u a te S c h o o l o f R e li g io n , in p a r t i a l f u l f i l l m e n t o f the re q u ire m e n ts f o r the degree o f DOCTOR OF THEO LO G Y

.... D ean

D a te

MB.

Com m ittee on Studies

C hairm an

TABLE OP CONTENTS CHAPTER I.

II.

PAGE

THE P R O B L E M ..................................... Statement of the p r o b l e m ..............

2

Importance of the study

3

THE PROBLEM OF TERMINOLOGY Apocrypha Apocalypse

.................... * . . . .............

7

. . . . .

7

... ..........

IQ

Eschatology . . . . . . . . . .

.............

12

Prophetic and Apocalyptic Eschatology . . . . .

19

.............

27

Apocalyptic writings examined III.

IV.

1

RELATION OP TEACHING OP JESUS TO APOCALYPTIC

.

28

Central teaching of Jesus ...................

28

Jesus f debt to prophecy and apocalyptic . . .

29

Problems faced in this investigation

. . . .

30

RELEVANT FACTORS OP THE P R O B L E M ...............

32

The Jewish apocalyptic writings and other l i t e r a t u r e .................

32

Synoptic Gospels and apocalyptic V.

...........

32

HISTORICAL BAGKGROUND OP A P O C A L Y P T I C .........

39

Importance of historical conditions ........

39

The role of Hellenic culture

. . . . . . . .

hfi

Uprising of the Maccabaeans

...............

Il3

.............

I4.6

Rise of the Pharisees

iii

CHAPTER

VI.

VII.

PAGE Palestine under Roman r u l e .................

ij-7

Historical conditions and apocalyptic

...

52

...............

5k

THE BOOK

OP DANIEL

Historical b a c k g r o u n d .....................

511-

Elements of apocalyptic in the Book

. . . .

57

Concept of Son of M a n .....................

62

Angel ology

73

THE BOOK

.....................

OP E N O C H ............

78

I Enoch a c o m p i l a t i o n .....................

78

Importance for New Testament background

79

..

Doctrine of the Messianic K i n g d o m ........ VIII.

THE BOOK

.82

OP J U B I L E E S .....................

102

Unity of the B o o k

.

102

Ideas of the B o o k ......................... IX.

THE TESTAMENTS OP THE TWELVE PATRIARCHS Claim as to origin

.

105

. .

.............

Ill

Teachings X.

Ill

115

THE SIBYLLINE O R A C L E S ............... Books III, IV, and V of Jewish origin

•.. .

..

123 123

Book III--eschatological prediction of doom

125

Book IV--repentance and j u d g m e n t ...........

127

Book V— late o r i g i n .......................

128

Sibylline Oracles III, IV, and V and Jesus* day and teaching

.......................

128

CHAPTER XI.

PAGE

THE PSALMS OP S O L O M O N ........................ Date and problem of unity

..

135

..............

Hope of Messiah from line ofDavid . . . . . XII.

THE ZADOKITE WORK

Teachings XIII.

. .

lij-3

.. ................

lli-3

............................

lij-5

ASSUMPTION OF M O S E S .......................... Apocalyptic

character offirst

153

part. . . .

153

Date and a u t h o r s h i p ..........................

155

................................

157

Teachings XIV.

II4.O

. . .............

Problem of authorship

135

.

THE LITTLE A P O C A L Y P S E .................

l65

Description of End of Age and Coming of Son of M a n .......... ................. . Apology for

delay ofComing

The Dreadful Desecration .

of Christ

..

.

l65

.

l6 ?

.................

l 68

Parallels between Mark 13 and Matthew and L u k e .......................... XV.

SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS

.............

Summary Conclusions , BIBLIOGRAPHY

1

17ii. .

.....................

17^ 182

CHAPTER I THE PROBLEM In the preface to his invaluable work in the field of Old Testament literature, Dr* Robert H. Pfeiffer makes reference to a quotation by Jerome: Sicut enim a perfecta s u m s , levioris culpae arbitramur saltern pa rum, quam omnino nihil dicere (Remote as we are from perfect knowledge, we deem it less blameworthy to say too little rather than nothing at allj.l

Like Dr* Pfeiffer, after the past year of

study in the field of apocalyptic literature, the investi­ gator comes humbly to the task of presenting that

study.

the

result of

The lack of first-hand sources, as well

asthe

wide variation of their interpretation, especially as regards dates of extant apocalyptic works by leading scholars in the field, make it difficult to arrive at an incontrovertible conclusion.

However, after examining the apocalyptic works

themselves and considering the previous studies made by scholars, as well as the lectures of Dr. Lric L. Titus and Dr. Willis W. Fisher of the School of Religion, University of Southern California, and Dr. Albert C. Knudson, Boston University School of Theology, it has been possible to

Robert H. Pfeiffer, Introduction to ment (New York: Harper & Brothers, 194-1) > P*

the

Old

Testa­

2 arrive at a definite conviction as to the prevalence of apocalyptic in Palestine in the time of Jesus. All references to the Old Testament and the New Testa­ ment used in this study are taken from the work, "The Biblean American Translation,” by J. M. Powis Smith and Edgar J. Ooodspeed .2 Statement of the problem.

The purpose of this study

is to determine and evaluate the influence of apocalyptic in Palestine in the time of Jesus, including also the period up to the destruction of Jerusalem, the date of which coincides with that commonly assigned to the Gospel of Mark, 70 A.D. To thoughtful readers of the Synoptic Gospels there is the sense of a background of apocalyptic in the teachings of Jesus.

The Gospel of Mark strikes a note of urgency in

the first chapter that pervades most of the whole work: After John was arrested, Jesus went into Galilee pro­ claiming the good news from God, saying, fThe time has come and the reign of God is near; repent, and believe this good news.f3 The writer of the Gospel seems certain that his readers understand what he means by the words, ”the reign of God is near.”

This is in direct line with the apocalyptic teaching

of the prophet Joel: ”Let all the inhabitants of the land

^ J. M. Powis Smith and Edgar J. Goodspeed, The BibleAn American Translation (Chicago: The University of Chicago Press, 1933)• 3 Mark l:llj.-l5«

3 tremble, for the day of the Lord comes I For near is the day of darkness and gloom, the day of clouds and deep dark­ ness.”^

And according to the gospel records, Jesus enters

upon the scene of his ministry as a herald of the message of John the Baptist.

For we read:

From that time Jesus began to preach and say, For the Kingdom of Heaven is coming.ff5

fRepenti

The roll of the prophet Isaiah was handed to him (Jesus), and he unrolled it and found the place where it says, *The spirit of God is upon me, for he has consecrated me to preach the good news to the poor, he has sent me to announce to the prisoners their release, and to the blind the recovery of their sight, to set the down­ trodden at liberty, to proclaim the year of the Lord's favor . ft . . . . And he began by saying to them, *This passage of Scripture has been fulfilled here in your hearing today 11o This is the language of prophetic eschatology and prophetic theism.

Jesus began preaching the imminence of the Kingdom

of God which was apparently the flaming torch of John the Baptist. Importance of the study.

Until recent years, probably

due chiefly to the influence of that prodigious scholar, R. H. Charles, it had been more or less implicitly accepted

4- Joel 2:1-2. Dependent on Zephaniah Izlkff; in turn, on Amos j?:l8 ff. ■5 Matthew Ip:17 • 6 Luke k:X 7 -1 9 , 21.

k that apocalyptic represented typical Judaism.

But a

revolutionary idea was born when R. Travers Herford, a Christian scholar with a profound knowledge of rabbinics, adopted the position of the Jewish scholar, Joseph Klausner. In Klausner*s Hebrew work, MJesus of Nazareth,” he sets forth the position that Jesus was a Pharisee, and that early Christianity was essentially a Jewish d e v e l o p m e n t . 7 So Herford, influenced by Klausner, in his work on Pharisa­ ism, argues that the influence of Pharisaic Judaism is paramount in the teachings of Jesus.®

But the signal work

of this period and field of study is that by George Foot Moore who has given students of the New Testament his valuable study on Judaism which deals primarily with the rabbinic l i t e r a t u r e . 9

This work has influenced New Testament

scholars in the field of apocalyptic to the extent that the beginnings of Christianity are found almost wholly in normative tJudaism.

7 Joseph Klausner, Jesus of Nazareth (New York: The Macmillan Co., 1926), pp. 289-290. 8 R. Travers Herford, The Pharisees (New York: The Macmillan Co., I92 I4.), pp. 203-209.

9 George Foot Moore, Judaism (Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1927), I, 110-121; II, 323-395.

5 But historical criticism has not mad© clear that Jesus is adequately understood against a background of the canonical Old Testament alone.

Dr. Donald W. Riddle has

epitomized it in these words: ffApocalyptic has been shown to be an eddy aside from the main stream of Judaism, which was legalistic and similar to that which was articulated in the rabbinical writings. ff10

George H. Box makes the statement

that the importance of this literature lies, to a large ex­ tent, in the fact that it emanates from lay circles outside the rabbinical schools • • . and it seems to represent a distinct tendency within Judaism. It is possible that circles of this kind may have flourished in Galilee.H More recently, H. A. Guy of England has said: The apocalyptic movement seems to have been a ‘popular 1 one. It was probably frowned upon by the orthodox religious leaders of the Jews. They were concerned with the observance of the Law. . . . The apocalyptic litera­ ture probably represented the lay literature of the unprofessional classes. 1 ^ This is also the position of Dr. Leslie 32; Fuller: "In all probability, the apocalyptic writings had their origin in lay circles outside of Jerusalem, and as most scholars

10 Donald W. Riddle, Early Christian Life (Chicago: The University of Chicago Press, 193Fn~pT"lE7^ 11 George H. Box, The Abingdon Bible Commentary (Hew York: Abingdon Press, 1929), p. 84 O . 12 H. A. Guy* The New Testament Doctrine of the ‘Last Things * (London: Oxford University Press, 19M*), p. 17*

6 suppose, in Galilee, ”3-3

And Charles has said:

This (apocalyptic) literature, only a part of which has been preserved under the names of Ezra, Baruch, Jeremiah, Isaiah, Moses, Enoch, and others, was written for the most part in Galilee, the home of the religious seer and mystic. Hot only was the development of a religious, but also of an ethical character. In both these respects, the way was prepared for the advent of Christianity, while a study of the Hew Testament makes it clear that its writers had been brought up in the atmosphere r created by these books, and were themselves directly acquainted with many of them.lHIn this study the possibility will be examined that ’’the eddy aside from the main stream of Judaism’1 may be a powerful force In the weaving of the fabric of the pristine gospel.

This study will attempt to evaluate the power of

this ’’eddy.”

^•3' Leslie E. Puller, The Abingdon Bible Commentary (Hew York: Abingdon Press, 1 9 2 9 ), p . lSB. B. H. Charles, Religious Development Between the Old and Hew Testaments (Hew York: Henry Holt.& Co., 1913jT 7 P* 9.

CHAPTER I I

THE PROBLEM OP TERMINOLOGY Before classifying the Jewish apocalyptic writings chronologically, it is necessary to discuss the involved terminology related to the area of study.

This terminology

is complicated enough to warrant a rather extensive state­ ment dealing with distinctions and their historical roots. The apocryphal and apocalyptic literature of the Jews fills the gap between the Bible and the Mishnah, the compre­ hensive term for !!the teaching and learning of tradition” shortly before the beginning of the Christian era and up to the close of the first century A.D*^

This kind of literary

activity is commonly regarded as having extended about three centuries, from 200 B,C. to about 100 A.D. By the term "apocrypha” is meant the collection of fourteen books, not included by Protestants in the sacred canon, although found in Luther*s Bible and the Bible of the Anglican Ghurch as a kind of appendix to the Old Testament. These books vary in length, several being mere fragments, although the book Ecclesiasticus is nearly as long as the

1 George Foot Moore, Judaism (Cambridge: Harvard University Press, , I, 311* 319*

8 Book of Jeremiah, the longest single work in the Bible,

The

term "apocrypha,” is derived from the Greek word, ditoKpocpoi which means "hidden things,"

The word has been applied to

this group of books, Meyer Waxman points out, in three different usages:

(l) First, in the sense that these books

have been excluded from the canon of the Old Testament, since no more books were added to it; (2) secondly, In the sense that they were "hidden away from the eyes of the masses on account of the sacred teaching" which they con­ tained; and (3 ) in the third place, in the sense that they "were attributed by the writers to personages of Biblical fame,"

At any rate, it seems these books were the private

property of select groups and were "hidden things" from ordinary people.2

Jerome found that the Greek-speaking Jews

of Egypt included these "hidden books" scattered through their religious literature.

When he formed the Latin Bible

in 382 A.D. they were included as a part of the Latin Vulgate.

And when the Latin Bible was translated into German

by Martin Luther In l53h- f,he translated them last, making them . , , the final part of his Bible,"3

Beginning with

the Great Bible of 1539* the Protestant English Bibles

2 Meyer Waxman, A History of Jewish Literature (New York: Bloch Publishing Company, 1938)$ P * 2. 3 Edgar J. Goodspeed, The Story of the Apocrypha (Chicago; The University of Chicago Press, 1939/, p. k.

9 followed Luther in grouping these books by themselves.

How­

ever, The Great Bible of 1539 in a prologue to them quotes with approval Jeromers judgment that they may be read for the edifying of the people, but not to confirm and strengthen the doctrine of the church . . . . In the second Authorized Bible, the Bishops* of 15&8, however, they are introduced with no such qualification, and in the third Authorized Bible, the King James of l 6 ll, they are headed simply *Apocrypha . *4 Due to Puritan influence, these books were pushed into the background and This practical rejection of them found expression in 1827, in the action of the British and American Bible societies declining to use any of the funds given them in publishing the Apocrypha,5 Most of these books carry out the main stream of thought of ethical prophecy of the Old Testament, but the Book of Baruch and the Epistle of Jeremiah which are in­ cluded in the Apocrypha belong more to apocalyptic type of literature for they are supposed revelations given as from the lips of Baruch, the prophet Jeremiah*s secretary, and Jeremiah the prophet himself. Besides the Apocrypha are the Jewish writings in the period from 200 B.C. to 100 A.D. known as pseudepigrapha. These writings, purporting to have been written by Biblical characters, were never accepted in any form or manner as

k Ibid., pp. 5-6. 5 Ibid., p. 7 .

10 were the apocryphal books, which as has been seen, were accepted as a kind of appendix to the Old Testament to be read for example of life and spiritual instruction*

The

term, pseudepigrapha, is, therefore, more comprehensive and inclusive, and embraces the Jewish apocryphal writings.

"The

pseudepigrapha, as a whole, however, were apocalyptic in character ."6 The term "apocalypse,"

, means unveiling,

or disclosure, and the Latin equivalent means revelation, the disclosure of events in the future which are beyond ordinary human knowledge.

The books called "apocalyptic"

claim to draw aside the curtain which hides the future, both immediate and distant.

There are apocalyptic writings in

the canonical books of the Old Testament--Ezekiel 5-39$ Zechariah

Joel; Isaiah 2k-27; 56-66.

But most of the

apocalyptic writings are outside the Old and New Testaments of the Bible.

The apocalypses were underground writings—

tracts for bad times— meant to encourage the faithful Jews who were being oppressed by the Gentiles and their culture. The apocalyptic writers aimed at encouraging their readers by "revealing" to them what God was planning to do to their enemies in the near future.

They told their readers that

God was going to intervene, destroy their enemies, and give

6 Charles,

ojd .

cit. , p. 221.

11 His loyal people high place of honor in the coming Kingdom of righteousness.

In order to accomplish this purpose, the

apocalyptic writers must write in veiled language. Certain outstanding features characterize apocalyptic writings.

First, the author of an apocalypse wrote, not as

speaking his own mind, but as presenting a revelation given him in a direct vision from God, or given him by an angel. Secondly, the apocalyptic writers wrote what would seem to their enemies a historical work about heroes or saints of Israel and their situations of long ago.

But the readers

would see in the writings parallels to their o?/n day and circumstances which gave them assurance and comfort that God had brought deliverance to their forefathers.

A third

characteristic of apocalyptic was that the author of a work prophesied the course of future events so that the persecuted saints of God were enabled to see how their troubles would terminate.

By this means, authority was gained for the

writing and its purpose was concealed from hostile eyes. Since the content of a vision revealed lay beyond human ex­ perience, symbolic language was used by/'the writers in the attempt to describe it.

In the fourth place, the apocalyptic

writers thought of this present world as evil and ruled over by demons.

But they believed that this present evil world

would be destroyed by an act of God and in Its place would appear a heavenly Kingdom.

And this Kingdom was imminent—

12 its coming was in the near future.

Lastly, the thought of

reward was a central motivating factor in the religion of the apocalyptists.

The apocalyptic writers believed that the

saints of God would find the satisfactions denied them in this present evil world would be theirs in the heavenly Kingdom. Another term which enters into a study of apocalyptic is eschatology. ecrxaxa,

!,It is derived from a Greek plural term--ra

— which means

*the Last Things . 1!,'7

Eschatology is,

therefore, the study of the doctrine of the last things, and deals with the belief in immortality, resurrection, reward and punishment, and the Messianic Kingdom.

George Foot Moore

points out Jewish eschatology is the ultimate step in the individuali­ zation of religion, as the messianic age is the culmina­ tion of the national conception. Every man is finally judged individually, and saved or damned by his own deeds. Therein lies its religious significance .8 There is a distinction to be drawn between apocalyptic and eschatology, and this is clearly made by Maurice Goguel. Although the thought of Jesus about the Kingdom of God was definitely eschatological, it was not apocalyptic. The two ideas of eschatology and apocalyptic are often confused, but this should not be. Eschatology is characterized by the idea that the present world should be replaced by a new world, and that the transition from one order to the other is imminent. To this fundamental

7 Guy, op. cit., p. 1. 8 Moore, o£. cit., II, 377.

13 idea concept apocalyptic adds the conviction that the coming of the new world will take place according to a plan which is not merely fixed in advance by God, but which also can be known and is revealed to the wise man by the study of and combination of traditions and prophecies. The fundamental idea of apocalyptic is that it is possible to calculate in advance, with precision, the successive phases of the great drama which is about to be played in such a way that when it occurs it will be possible to follow its development, moment by moment, scene by scene,9 The message of Jesus was. esehatological.

As the coming of

the Kingdom, which was constantly expected, was delayed, apocalyptic became more and more a factor as the first cen­ tury went on. There is also a difference— a point relevant to the study of the prevalence of apocalyptic in Palestine in the time of Jesus— , between the eschatology of the Old Testament prophets and the eschatology of the apocalyptists.

The

eschatology of the prophets dealt only with the destiny of Israel as a nation, and of the Gentile nations, but carried no hopeful and comforting message for the individual beyond the grave.

The prophets had nothing mpre to offer men as

the abode of the dead than Sheol, the nether world, a gloomy realm to which the soul— concretely imagined as the vital breath^-0 — must one day go.

9 Maurice Goguel, The Life of Jesus, Eng. Tr. Olive Wyon (New York: The Macmillan Company, 19 I4I1-), p. $ 6 9 . 10 Genesis 2:7.

ll* Charles shows that: Every advance on this heathen conception, we owe to apocalyptic* (l) First, the belief in a blessed future life springs not from prophecy, but from apocalyptic . . . . .The apocalyptist made it (the doctrine of the last things) a fundamental postulate of his belief in God . . • . (2) Again, the Christian expectation of a new heaven and a new earth is derived not from prophecy, but from apocalyptic • • • • Old Testament prophecy looked forward to an eternal Messianic kingdom on the present earth which should be initiated by the final judgment, but in apocalyptic this underwent a gradual transformation, until the hopes of the righteous were transformed from a kingdom of material blessedness'to a spiritual kingdom in which they were to be as the angels and become companions of the heavenly hosts . . . . (3 ) One more doctrine which has been adopted into later Judaism and the New Testament . . ♦ from apocalyptic is that the end of the present world will be catastrophic . . . . (k) And whereas prophecy incidentally dealt with the past and devoted itself to the present and the future as rising organically out of the past, apocalyptic, though its interests lie chiefly in the future as con­ taining the solution of the problems of the past and present, took within its purview things past, present, and to come . . . . With this end in view, apocalyptic sketched in outline the history of the world and of man­ kind, the origin of evil, its course, and inevitable overthrow, the ultimate triumph of righteousness, and the final consummation of all things.J-l A term which has come into apocalyptic study since Albert Schweitzer*s thoroughgoing study of eschatology is ’’realized eschatology.”

Schweitzer holds that Jesus* con­

ception of the Kingdom of God is wholly, eschatological.

The

prophets of the Old Testament spoke about ’’the Day of Yahweh,” Amos being the first, it seems to use the phrase. 12

Charles, 0£. cit.. pp. 1 8 -1 9 , 21, 25-26. 12 Amos 5:18.

it was

15 to be a day of G o d fs wrath and judgment, and saving goodness and vindication*^-3

But the prophets do not set a specific

time for the advent of the Day of Yahweh.

They hold the

characteristic attitude expressed by Deutero-Isaiah in the words, tfThus saith the Lord, keep ye justice, and do righteousness; for My salvation is near to come, and My righteousness to be revealed.”-*-^- God was always about to manifest himself in human history for the prophets.

But

Schweitzer makes Jesus 1 message of repentance imminent in view of the nearness of the Kingdom,

He interprets the

Charge to the Twelve by Jesus as an eschatological discourse in which Jesus says in Matthew 10:23 that: . . . he (Jesus) does not expect them back in the present age. The Parousia of the Son of Man, which is logically and temporally identical with the dawn of the Kingdom, will take place before they shall have completed a hasty journey through the cities of Israel to announce it . . . But the disciples return to Him; and the appearing of the Son of Man had not taken p l a c e . 15 When Jesus saw that he was mistaken and the Kingdom did not appear, according to Schweitzer, "Jesus concluded that the disciples were to be spared the tribulation.

Jesus must him-

x3 Amos 9:1-10; Hosea 2:18-23; Joel 1-3; Micah 3-lj.j Isaiah 2-3; 13:0,9,13;: 3^:8; 56:1; 65:17; Zephaniah 1:17. 1-kr Isaiah 56:1. 15 Albert Schweitzer, The Quest of the Historical Jesus (London: A. & C. Black, Ltd., 192F7, p. 357.

1.6 self be the Suffering Servant, go up to Jerusalem to die and out of his suffering would come the

K i n g d o m .

111 6

Schweitzer^

thoroughgoing, or consistent, eschatological view of Jesus, however, has not met with ready and full acceptance on the part of most New Testament scholars. Over against the position by Schweitzer on the King­ dom of God is the other extreme view held by the social gospel school in American Protestant theology of the early part of this century.

By this view, the Kingdom of God is

the new social order of justice and righteousness which will be established on earth through the human efforts of men. Walter Rauschenbusch, its father and chief advocate, held that the central teaching of Jesus, the Kingdom of God, had been subordinated and replaced by the Church.17

He made the

concept of the Kingdom of God to mean the reign of God in the social order.1®

Moreover, he gives evidence of the in­

fluence of the doctrine of evolution on interpretation of Jesus 1 teaching about the Kingdom of God.

He says:

lk Albert Schweitzer, The Mystery of the Kingdom of God (London: A. & C. Black, Ltd., 192^), p. 2lj2. 17 Walter Rauschenbusch, Christianizing the Social Order (New York: The Macmillan Company, 1912)/ PP* 70-79• 18 Ibid.,

pp.

96-97.

17 The higher spiritual insight of Jesus reverted to the earlier and nobler prophetic view that the future was to grow out of the present by divine help. While they (the Jews) were waiting for the Messianic cataclysm that would bring the Kingdom of God ready-made from heaven, he saw it growing up among them. 19 But between these two views of the Kingdom of God is that called “realized eschatology .11

According to this view,

Jesus proclaimed the Kingdom of God as a present, “realized" fact.

C. H. Dodd is associated with this school of thought.

“The teaching of Jesus is not an ethic for those who expect the speedy end of the world," says Dodd, “but for those who have experienced the end of this world and the coming of the Kingdom of

God.

“20

Jesus used the phrase, Kingdom of God,

according to Dodd, as the eternal righteous sovereignty of God, and believes that this Kingdom was being manifested in a unique and supreme way in Jesus 1 own life and work.

This

view holds that Jesus was not announcing a future order but was preaching about an eternal Reality which was making it­ self known in history.

It relies on Jesus 1 words, “The

Kingdom of God has- .come...upon you“21 which are identified in meaning with the phrase, “The Kingdom of God is at h a n d , “22

19 Walter Rauschenbusch, Christianity and the Social Crisis (New York: The Macmillan Company, 19207, p. 5>9* 20 c . H. Dodd, History and the Gospel (New York: Charles Scribner *s Sons, 193®) 9 P* 12JJT 21 Matthew 12:28; Luke 11:20. 22 Mark 1:15.

18 that the Kingdom of G-od has come and is imminent.

Clarence

T. Craig observes: Dodd insists upon translating Mark 1:15, fRepent for the Kingdom of G-od has come J as imminent . . . . Men were not summoned unto repentance because powers of healing were being manifest, but because the judgment was near. Matthew understood the words in that sense when he put them on the lips of John the Baptist, for surely no one would hold that John announced the presence of the Kingdom.23 John Knox points out that whereas Schweitzer held that Jesus 1 conception of the time of the coming of the Kingdom was an imminent future event, and H. B. Sharman that the coming of the Kingdom was past, present, and future, and be­ longing to those who acknowledged the kingship of Jesus, Dodd holds that it was an eternal reality above time alto­ gether, supremely revealed in Jesus 1 life and w o r k . 2k

The

taxcLTOv — the last time— is here as a matter of actual ex­ perience.

There is the future aspect of the Kingdom which

Jesus visualized as a future consummation.

And 11there are

other kinds of immediacy besides temporal immediacy," Knox points out, "and Dodd has rendered a great service in making us more vividly aware of that f a c t . ”25

At any rate, the view

23 Clarence T. Craig, ’'Realized Eschatology," Journal of Biblical Literature, LVI, March 1937> 19-20. 2lf John Knox, Christ The Lord (Chicago: Willett, Clark & Company, 1945") > P P • 25-30* 25 Ibid., p. 30.

19 of ’’realized eschatology” as held by Dodd attaches more importance to the permanent validity of Jesus* ethical teaching than can be argued for Schweitzer*s position that Jesus* conception of the time of the Kingdom was the im­ mediate future. The foregoing discussion on thoroughgoing eschatology and ’’realized eschatology” raises the question of the dis­ tinction between prophetic and apocalyptic eschatology. ’’The eschatology of the Old Testament prophets is summed in the phrase

*the Day of Yahweh. *”26

Beginning with Amos, the

thought of the awfulness of the Day of Yahweh as a day of judgment was emphasized by most of the Old Testament prophets. Just when the Day of Yahweh would occur these prophets did not know.

But they were certain of its coming.

Moreover,

they were tremendously concerned that thought of the Day of Yahweh should serve the purpose of inculcating righteousness and justice and loyalty to God, for God held deliverance for the faithful. Amos conceived of divine judgment of Yahweh on the nations.

But in the popular mind, the Day of Yahweh was

conceived as a day of deliverance of Israel and vengeance on the nations which had treated Israel unjustly.^7

26 Guy, op. cit., p. 13. 27 Amos 5:l8f.

The phrase,

20 nin that day,w which is repeatedly used in the Old Testament, and the term, flthe day of Yahweh ,11 both seem to carry the idea, in many instances, of a judgment of God that shall climax the present age*

The phrases, nin the latter days”

and ”the latter end of the days,” which are used in connec­ tion with the Day of Yahweh suggest the present time and the age to follow. In spite of the fact that the thought of the prophets about the Day of Yahweh was predominantly a time of doom, it was not altogether without hope.

For beyond the Day of

Yahweh, the prophets beheld the glorious age when the worship of God shall have united all men;28 when universal peace shall reign and men shall learn war no more;29 when the reign of God and the increase of His government shall not end; 30 when even the nature of beasts shall have been transformed;31 and when God shall have created ,fnew heavens and a new earth ,11 and human life shall have lengthened so that he who falls short of a hundred shall be accursed.32 The factors which have been set forth as outlining a

28 Isaiah 2:2-3. 29 Isaiah 2:14.. 30 Isaiah 9:7. 31 Isaiah 11:6-8. 32 Isaiah 65:17, 20.

21 ) sketch of the esehatology of the Old Testament prophets-judgment on Israel and all the nations, deliverance for the faithful, and the hope of a glorious age of peace and jus­ tice and length of life— are also characteristic of apocalyptic esehatology.

The germs of the apocalyptic

esehatology are to he found in the prophets.

Isaiah 2k-27,

A "Vision of Judgment, describes the world catastrophe just at hand when the earth will be stripped bare, 33 "the Lord will punish the hosts of the heights on high, and the kings of the earth on the earth. "3^1*

"Jacob will take rest, Israel

will blossom and bud, and they will fill the face of the earth with fruit, "35 and when "those who were lost in the land of Assyria, and those who Were outcasts in the land of Egypt, will come and worship the Lord on the holy mountain in Jerusalem. "3&

In much the same spirit the Book of Joel

describes the Day of Yahweh as "a day of darkness and gloom, "37 calling for penitence, 38 when the faithful sons of Zion "shall eat and be satisfied, "39 and when they will

33 Isaiah 2lj.:13. 3b Isaiah 2Il: 2 1 .

35 Isaiah 27•6. 36 Isaiah 27:13. 3? Joel 2:2. 38 Joel 2:12. 39 Joel 2:26.

22 experience the rroutpouring of the spirit of the Lord ,ff^-0 and 11Judah shall abide forever, and Jerusalem throughout the ages.u^-l In these portions of Scripture, history is portrayed as approaching a climax and a new glorious age is promised the faithful people of God.

These passages stand out as

showing the transition between Jewish prophetic and apoca­ lyptic literature.

Both the prophets and the apocalyptists

spoke to their own day and generation.

When the prophets

first stand out in the Old Testament during the monarchy, they are preachers of righteousness and godliness both in politics and religion.

They proclaim political unity and

loyalty to the living God.

But their call to loyalty to God

is not exploiting religion for political ends, for they be­ lieved that the Hebrew religion could be maintained only by political independence.

And throughout the following history

of the Jews, in period after period, whenever national political unity was at stake, there was always a revival of loyalty to God along with political revival, except the period of religious reform under Hehemiah and Ezra.

The ex­

ception was due to the fact that when the Jews were under the rule of Cyrus of Persia they were given wide religious

40 Joel 2:29. Joel 3:20.

23 liberty and freedom*

And this period consequently served

as the time when the Jews collected and organized the writings of the prophets and made them the effective national instru­ ment for loyalty to God.

That instrument we call Judaism.

The point to be stressed here is that the prophets were concerned about both politics and r eligion.

The early

prophets even promoted revolution in the name of loyalty to God.

The later prophets came to be divided on militarism

and revolt as the means for achieving their place in the sun. Consequently, there arose the division between those who promoted revolt and those who opposed it, each accusing the other of being false prophets.

And when we look at the

Maecabaean period, we find that the Book of Daniel favors the group who take issue with the oppressing ruler, and promote their cause as revolutionists.

But the writer does not look

for victory to come from military power, but from divine in­ tervention which issues from loyalty to God.

He encourages

the faithful to have fortitude in the midst of their suffer­ ings under persecution and oppression.

The revolt of the

Maecabaean period began because of the persecution of the faithful people of God.

This situation, therefore, was

different from that of the early prophets. cerned about existing moral conditions.

They were con­

They were certain

that men were disloyal to God when their nation joined in entangling alliances with foreign nations and carried

2]± internal policies which created the spirit of revolt.

They

addressed their messages to the people whom they condemned as disloyal to God, whereas the writer of the Book of Daniel addressed himself to the loyal people of God who carried out the spirit and teaching of the prophets.

And the writer of

the Book of Daniel must have regarded himself as one of the line of prophets, for he prophesied disaster for the oppress­ ors and deliverance for the loyal people of God. That apocalyptic was born in the soil of prophecy is therefore not to be denied.

But there are elements which

characterize apocalyptic and mark it as literature wholly distinct from prophecy.

H. Wheeler Robinson

the marks of apocalyptic

as follows:

succinctly lists

(l) It is deliberately pseudonymous and not simply anonymous. (2) Its view of history is deterministic, following the divine appointment and culminating in some crisis which is that of the writerfs own age. (3 ) Its emphasis is thus on the future and tends more and more to become extra-mundane, in contrast with the prophetic conception of a Kingdom of God in this world, though this may be included. (k) Apocalyptic Is literary, not oral, and Is marked by the excessive use of symbolism, use of animal figures being especially noticeable. 4*2 Both the apocalyptists and the prophets delivered their messages to their own day out of a conviction that they were G o d fs word to them.

The unshakeable conviction of the

apocalyptists was that God is the Determiner of history.

In

H. Wheeler Robinson, Companion to the Bible (T. W. Manson, editor, New York: Charles Scribner's Sons, 1939) P* 307.

25 the hour of political crisis in their nation, the apoca­ lyptists foreshortened time and portrayed their visions in symbolic realism that we find difficult today to accept on the background of the doctrine of progress,

J. A. McCulloch

explains this mode of expression: In time of intense thought we 'can crowd eternity Into an hour. ' This was true of many prophetic utterances and it was much more true of many apocalyptic convic­ tions, which frequently speak of the nearness of the last things, as if they could not otherwise be conceived of . . . . Still, what is emphatic is less the thought te certainty of the reality of the things of the end .,1 The prophets believed in the divine initiative and hand of God in history, but the apocalyptists, with no less such faith, were vitally concerned about the last chapter of history as solely and distinctly the act of God.

The apoca­

lyptists firmly believed in a power of evil which opposed God and in the present world as being so evil that there was no possibility of its regeneration.

They saw the wicked

heading for destruction and the righteous suffering for their faith, but God was very soon going to intervene in history. They saw the present age hopelessly going from bad to worse, and imminently to be overthrown by God and replaced by a new heaven and a new earth.

^4-3 J. A. McCulloch, ffEschatology,ft Encyclopedia of Religion and Ethics (James Hastings, editor; New York: Charles Scribner's Sons, 1908), p. 390.

26 Two more characteristics mark apocalyptic and differ­ entiate it from prophecy.

The prophets saw the conditions

and events of their own day with penetrating insight and predicted the future.

The apocalyptists foretold the future

on the basis of what they were convinced it would be when God should intervene in history.

Although the predictions

of the prophets were not always fulfilled, the scheme of future events of the apocalyptists who wrote with assured confidence of their power to foretell it, was not consistent and unified.

According to

A. Guy, ,fsometimes they

(apocalyptists) thought of the political establishment of the Kingdom of Israel under a Messiah who would be like David. At other times, they emphasized the spiritual aspect of the expected Kingdom."kkFurthermore, apocalyptic has for the most part, an esoteric character.

The apocalyptists held that future

events were hidden from ordinary man.

,fThe eschatological

hope was only for those who were righteous.ft^-5

When the

apocalyptists wrote their messages of hope, therefore, they wrote pseudonymously, claiming revelation that had been mediated by angels, or by visions, to ancient men of God

Ml- Guy, p£. cit., p. 15>. kS Amos Niven Wilder, Esehatology and Ethics in the Teaching,of Jesus (New York: Harper & Brothers, 1939T7 p. 21.

27 such as Daniel, Enoch, Noah, Moses, and Ezra, With this survey of terms and clarification of apocalyptic as related to, but differentiated from prophecy, we may turn to classification of the Jewish apocalyptic writings up to the destruction of.Jerusalem 70 A.D.

The

apocalyptic writings which this study will embrace includes those which R. H. Charles, Robert H* Pfeiffer, George Foot Moore, Meyer Waxman, and other leading scholars in the field list as distinctly apocalyptic literature, dating before JO A.D. The The The The The The The The The

Book of Daniel Ethiopic Book of Enoch— I Enoch Book of Jubilees (“Little Genesis") Testaments of the Twelve Patriarchs Jewish Sibylline Oracles Psalms of Solomon Zadokite Work (Covenanters of Damascus) Assumption of Moses Little Apocalypse (Mark 13) These writings, with the exception of the Jewish

Sibylline Oracles, are more or less commonly regarded by most scholars as Jewish apocalyptic literature which originated on the soil of Palestine.

It shall be the purpose of this

study to examine each of these writings, and to sift out the cardinal apocalyptic teachings and features of each, in order to determine the extent to which they give evidence of their prevalence and influence in the time of Jesus.

CHAPTER I I I

RELATION OF THE TEACHING OF JESUS TO APOCALYPTIC It seems pertinent at the outset of this study of the prevalence of apocalyptic in Palestine in the time of Jesus that it be set forth as clearly as possible the relation of Jesus and his central teaching to apocalyptic. The three cardinal teachings of Jesus, as clearly stated and emphasized by Dr. Eric L. Titus in his lectures on New Testament study, are:

(1 ) Absolute devotion to God,

(2) Absolute goodwill toward men, and (3 ) Absolute integrity toward oneself.

These concepts are central in the Sermon on

the Mount (Matthew 5-7).

But the background of these is

Jesus* concept of the Kingdom of God— the Old Testament idea of the prophets of a coming New Order.

For membership in the

Kingdom of God, Jesus taught that men must have love of God, love toward their fellowmen, and inner integrity of heart. These conditions constitute his idea of repentance, 11the volitional act which was to result in character and conduct which would assure one of entrance into the Kingdom. MJesus makes the conditions of entrance ethical and not

1 Ernest W. Parsons, The Religion of the New Testament (New York: Harper and Brothers, 1939;, p. 1$.

29 merely national.

In so doing, he takes his stand with the

prophetic view of the righteous remnant.ft2

It can be said,

therefore, that the central teaching of Jesus was that of the Kingdom of God. When Jesus came upon the scene in the Gospel of Mark, it was as a herald of the Kingdom such as his contemporaries were expecting.

And his teaching carried an apocalyptic

significance which claimed for him ready and wide acceptance. It is well known that in his day Jewish thought held two different conceptions of the coming of the Kingdom on earth— that it would be ushered in by a political Messiah, or by a transcendent Messiah who should come on the clouds of heaven. Jesus held the latter, an eschatological view which included the belief that the present age was evil because It was under the domination of demons.

But the Day was at hand when the

Messiah would have dominion over the evil spirits, and this would be ushered in by a cataclysmic sudden change in the world order which would take place by an act of God. 3

r,But

while Jesus speaks in apocalyptic language and declares that the expected Kingdom is just at hand ,11 says Ernest F. Scott, Mhe throws all the weight on ideas of a moral and spiritual

2 Ibid., p. 16. 3 Luke 2 1 :3 5 ; Mark 1 3 :2 6 ; 1Ll:62; 1 3 : I l ; 1 :1 5 } 1 ^ :2 5 ; Matthew 1 0 :2 3 ; 2 5 :1 3 ; ii: 17; 2 6 :2 9 .

30 nature.”^

It seems clear that Jesus owed a debt to both the

prophets of the Old Testament and the teaching of the apoca­ lyptists. The problem of determining the prevalence of apocalyptic in Palestine in the time of Jesus, therefore, calls for a cursory study of all the apocalyptic literature before and through the time of Jesus.

Each apocalyptic work

will require examination in order to discover and evaluate the elements which may give evidence of having been current in the time of Jesus.

R. H. Charles held the firm conviction

that in order to understand and evaluate Christianity, the student should have a knowledge of all the Jewish apocalyptic literature.

In his Schweich Lectures on the New Testament

Apocalypse, The Revelation of St. John, in speaking of the reception given to his work, said: ‘’Practically all my re­ viewers have been brought to admit the necessity of an exhaustive knowledge of Jewish apocalyptic, if we are to understand the Christian revelation.“5

And since most

scholars have found that an exhaustive knowledge of Jewish apocalyptic is necessary in order to understand one

b Ernest F. Scott, “The Place of Apocalyptical Concep­ tions in the Mind of Jesus,” Journal of Biblical Literature, XL I (April, May, June, 1922), liid. 5 Harold R. Willoughby, The Study of the Bible Today and Tomorrow (Chicago: The University of Chicago Press, 19q-7)> pTT^.1, quoted by J. C. Rylaarsdam in “Intertestamental Studies Since Charles*s Apocrypha and Pseudepigrapha .11

31 apocalypse of the New Testament, the thoughtful student will no less come to the conclusion that in order to determine the prevalence of apocalyptic in Palestine in the time of Jesus, he, too, must concede the necessity of a comprehensive knowledge of the apocalyptic literature prior to and until after the time of Jesus. But any thoughtful student who has made anything of an attempt to classify the Jewish apocalyptic writings chronologically has sooner or later come face to face with the problem of the dates of authorship of some of the books, and the wide spread of variation among dates assigned by leading scholars to these books, in some instances.

A work

which ostensibly contained information and date of the time of Jesus, but which the consensus of scholarship assigned to a period one or two hundred years after Jesus would not be materially helpful to the problem at hand.

CHAPTER IV

RELEVANT FACTORS OF THE PROBLEM This study will examine the Jewish apocalyptic writings and will deal only indirectly with apocalyptic which occurs in legendary, wisdom, and philosophical litera­ ture from 200 B.C. to 70 A.D.

Some of this literature, in

some instances, however, contains current apocalyptic ideas of its own day.

Only Books III, IV, and V of the twelve

Sibylline Oracles will be examined for these are commonly regarded by scholars as Jewish in origin. A factor which may first be considered is that, help­ ful in many ways as the study of the Synoptic Gospels can be, to some degree, to determine the prevalence of apocalyptic in Palestine in the time of Jesus, there are certain facts in this connection which must be borne in mind.

First, it must

be borne in mind that the gospels are the crystallization of the oral tradition of the early Christian community. Synoptic Gospels are compilation, not composition.

The Form-

criticism of the past twenty-five years has afforded invalu­ able aid in setting into relief the life situation--sitz im leben— of a pericope, a unit of tradition, which has shed light on Jesus and his teaching as it actually took place. And it must not be forgotten that the Synoptic Gospels were written long years after Jesus* time and are therefore

33 colored by the circumstances, interests, and needs of the day in which they were written.

B. H. Streeter in his in­

tensive work, The Four Gospels, assigns the date 65 A.D. for the Gospel of Mark, written at Rome; 80 A.D. for the Gospel of Luke, written probably at Corinth; and 85 A.D. for the Gospel of Matthew, written at Antioch. 3-

It is a significant

contribution of Streeter to a study of the gospels that he has identified each Gospel with a locality.

Scholars today

commonly accept 70 A.D. as the date of the Gospel of Mark on the basis of internal evidence found in chapter 13 which places it just before or shortly after the destruction of Jerusalem in 70 A*D.

The contemporary scholars, Ernest F..

Scott^ and Edgar J. Goodspeed3 assign the approximate date of 90 A.D. to Luke-Acts and the Gospel of Matthew.

It is

obvious that these gospels having been written at such remote time after Jesus— having first passed through the stage of oral tradition, and each gospel being a product colored by the Christian community which produced it, and having its own purpose for having been written— will only indirectly shed

B. H. Streeter, The Four Gospels: A Study of Origins (New York: The Macmillan Company, 1925)> pp. Ll93> IxEE-I l & 7 , 5^-0. ^ E. F. Scott, The Literature of the New Testament (New York: Columbia University ^ress, 1 9 W , p. W 7~ 3 Edgar J. Goodspeed, An Introduction to the ^ew Testament (Chicago: The University of Chicago Press, 1937), pp. 177, 196-

314 -

light on the prevalence of apocalyptic in the time of Jesus when studied on the background of literature preceding and during his life time.

Moreover, the difficulty is compli­

cated by the Synoptic problem, for the eschatological and apocalyptic materials of Jesus are used by the Synoptic Gospels in varying manner and degree.

For the purpose of

this study it is assumed that the Gospel of Mark was the earliest, that the Gospel of Matthew and the Gospel of Luke both give evidence of the use of the Gospel of Mark in their writing, and that all three reveal that a collection of say­ ings of Jesus, which scholars today commonly designate as HQ,tt (standing for the German word, ftquelle,H meaning source) was used by each writer.

Furthermore, it is agreed

for the purpose of this study that each of the Synoptic Gospels contains its own independent matter, and that each gospel was written independently of the others, except as sources were used. The eschatological and apocalyptic teaching of Jesus in the Synoptic Gospels, by the side of the emphasis on absolute ethical values, is fragmentary and unorganized.

Of

the three Synoptic Gospels the most colorful and heightened emphasis on apocalyptic is that of the Gospel of Matthew, which reflects considerable Jewish tone in contrast to the Gentile spirit of the Gospel of Luke.

It is concerned about

the fulfillment of the Old Testament prophecies which was of

35 vital significance to Jewish Christians but of little or no concern to Gentile Christians.

In almost every chapter, the

Gospel of Matthew carries the phrase, ”that the Scriptures might be fulfilled.ff And the Gospel of Matthew lays emphasis on the apocalyptic Idea of the coming of the Son of Man on the clouds of heaven as the sign of the consummation of the present age.

The Gospel of Luke, on the whole, when writing

about apocalyptic matters usually reproduces parallel passages from the Gospel of Mark when they have a concrete and objec­ tive meaning (Luke 21:20 cf. Mark 13:lk and Matthew 2lf.:l5; Luke 21:27 cf* Mark 13:26-27 and Matthew 2k:30-31)*

Luke

makes the reference to the Vbomination of desolation” of Mark and Matthew mean attack upon Jerusalem in Luke 21:20 as compared with Mark 13-1^4- and Matthew 2lt:30-31.

And Luke re­

produces Mark 13:26 in the Gospel of Luke 21:27* although he omits the phrase, ”gather his chosen people from the four winds,” while Matthew 2lj.:30-31 colors the reference to ”the coming of the Son of Man in clouds” of Mark and Luke, by eschatological and apocalyptic heightening by adding the words, ”the sign of the Son of Man,” ”the nations of the earth will lament,” and ”he (Son of Man) will send out his angels with a loud trumpet-call.”

It may be said as a

general observation that the Gospel of Mark carries more or less an eschatological atmosphere from beginning to end. Jesus takes up the message of John the Baptist and in all

36 urgency as one driven by the Spirit of God carries forth the mission of calling men to repentance in order that they might share in the kingdom of God just at hand.

The success

which Jesus made through exorcism in overcoming demons, according to the Gospel of Mark, is taken as a sign that the kingdom was imminent, and that God was working in and through him,k-

The exhortation of Jesus, ”You must be on the

watch, for you do not know when the master of the house is coming , . . for fear he should come unexpectedly and find you asleep,” suggests the unexpected suddenness with which Jesus expected the kingdom to be ushered in,5

The Gospel of

Mark, from beginning to end, gives the reader the feeling that Jesus had been called to proclaim the imminence of the kingdom, and that God was just ready to intervene in history. Since each of the Synoptic Gospels made use of a neutral source, Q, to which we are pushed back, the question naturally arises: What light will a study of this source shed on the question of the prevalence of apocalyptic in Palestine in the time of Jesus?

The position of Ernest P,

Scott on the nature and character of

seems reasonable.

He

holds that: . . . it never existed as a definite work, but it grew, perhaps, around some primitive nucleus, . . ♦ and was

4- Mark 3:19-30. 5 Mark 13:35-36.

37 constantly being added to and modified. Each important community would have its own copy of which it kept revising for itself, and Matthew and Luke, apparently, had access to two different copies which agreed only partially with each other .6 It seems that this condition existed in the first and second generations after the time of Jesus. Another fact in regard to Q is that it contains few passages which relate to esehatology and apocalyptic.

There

are two definitely eschatological passages: Luke 17:22-37> and Luke 1 2 : 35^6, both of which are also to be found in Matthew 2 I4.:26-28, 37-^1# and Matthew 2il:1l3-51> respectively. Luke 17:22-37 on the time of the coming of the Son of Man, is wanting in the apocalyptic note of the parallel passage in the Gospel of Mark 13:20^23.

Luke 12:35-k-8 on watchfulness,

is similar to the Parable of the Ten Virgins in the Gospel of Matthew 25:1-13> although the eschatological note in the latter is heightened.

Watchfulness is exhorted in Mark 13:

32-37. A characteristic of the Q passages which are eschato­ logical and apocalyptic in nature is that the Gospel of Matthew heightens and intensifies their esehatology and apocalyptic, whereas the Gospel of Luke softens them.

The

explanation, probably, is that the Gentile interest, which

6 Scott, Literature of the New Testament, pp. 38-39*

38 more or less characterizes the Gospel of Luke, was not so much concerned about the eschatological and apocalyptic emphases as the Judaistic interest which in a greater degree marks the Gospel of Matthew, 11In the documents or traditions which lie at the foundation of our Synoptic Gospels,” says Guy, ”the order of ascending eschatological and apocalyptic interest is: Luke, Q, Mark, M a t t h e w , ” 7 It is obvious from these facts that in order to de­ termine the prevalence of apocalyptic in Palestine in the time of Jesus it will be necessary to examine the Jewish writings of apocalyptic literature before and during the time of Jesus.

Thus we may seek to ascertain the extent to

which their leading ideas are corroborated and confirmed by the actual circumstances of the life and teaching of Jesus.

7 Guy, o£. cit., p. 38.

CHAPTER V

THE HISTORICAL BACKGROUND OF APOCALYPTIC The great debt of apocalyptic to prophecy is that of an unconquerable faith in God and an unquenchable hope for the future.

But historical conditions had an important role

to play in the development of the apocalyptic writings.

The

variety of circumstances during the entire period of apoca­ lyptic literature from 200 B.C. to 100 A.D. was wide, to be sure, but the historical factors which characterize the Maecabaean age are more or less the marks of the background for each apocalyptic writing during the entire period. Apocalyptic writings draw upon the past in each case, although each one is colored by conditions of the present.

There is

probably no literature connected with the Bible which requires an historical understanding of its inception more than does Jewish apocalyptic. From the days of Moses, the Jews had believed in Jehovah as their Deliverer.

As the years went on, there de­

veloped an unshaken belief that Jehovah would triumph over their enemies, and they would enjoy the blessings of abiding prosperity, righteousness and peace as a nation through a Deliverer whom Jehovah would send them. called the Messiah, the Anointed One.

This Deliverer was

Il O

It was during this period (175-120 B.C.), owing to historical conditions, that hopes of the advent of a Deliverer in the person of an anointed one of Davidic descent arose with unexplained fervency* Such hopes had, of course, been expressed in earlier times, but the pressure of the present evil days caused these hopes to be resuscitated with unprecedented force. First, we have the Maecabaean Wars (175-120 B.C.), then the unquiet times of the Hasmonaean rulers, followed shortly after by the supremacy of Rome from o3 B.C. onwards.1 Hellenic culture had gained a firm hold on Palestine by the beginning of the second century B.C.

Greek language

and art and customs had been widely accepted by the upper classes of the Jews. About 200 B.C. Palestine had been under the domination of the Ptolemies of Egypt.

In 201-200 B.C. occurred

. . . the historical landmark, the Battle of Panion, when Antiochus III gained an overwhelming victory over the Egyptian forces under Scopas. The victory was followed up with energy during the succeeding months, and within a year the whole of Coele-Syria had become incorporated in the Seleucid empire. 2. Many of the Jews hailed the change of rule to the Seleucids with great hope for better things to come, but the Syrians proved more burdensome than the Egyptians.

Antiochus III

waged costly wars which the Jews must help to pay for by in­ creased taxation. Seleucus IV succeeded Antiochus III.

In order to

obtain money to pay for the wars with Rome, Seleucus attempted

1 W. 0. E. Oesterley, Judaism and Christianity (Hew York: The Macmillan Company, 1937), I, $5-86.

2 Ibid.. p. 13.

4i

to rob the Temple at Jerusalem of Its gold.

Although this

sacrilege was thwarted, it served only to excite bitterness and enmity against him in the loyal orthodox Jews.

W. 0. E.

Oesterley emphasizes that: Important for Jewish history is the fact that a strongly Hellenistic party among the Jews existed before the beginning of the Maecabaean struggle. In opposition to them were the upholders of orthodox Judaism with their championship of the Law. The strictest upholders of the national traditions among these latter came to be known as the Chassidim, the ’pious1, or ’godly* ones', from whom issued later the Pharisaic party.3 In 175 B.C. Seleucus was murdered by his own chief minister, Heliodorus.

In order to establish himself as king,

Heliodorus used the strategy of having the young son of Seleucus placed on the throne.

Demetrius, an older brother

of the murdered king, who had been a hostage in Rome for his father, was also a contender for the throne.

Antiochus IV,

a brother of Seleucus IV, who was living in Athens, with a force at his disposal, might not have been able to overthrow the usurper in power, had not at this moment the king of Pergamum come forward to conduct him to Syria with a Pergamene army.^

But the loyal Jews did not look with dis­

favor upon Antiochus IV, uncle of the heir to the throne, as a usurper.

3 Ibid., pp. I3 -II4.. 4 E. R. Bevan, The Cambridge Ancient History (Hew York: The Macmillan Company, 193Oj, VIII, Ij.97.

l±2

Our scrappy data indicate that it took a good deal of dexterity and intrigue on the part of Antiochus for him to establish his position in Syria, but that he did get the better of the opposing elements. The way in which he is spoken of in the Book of Daniel— fa contemptible person upon whom had not been conferred royal majesty* who *shall come in unawares and seize the kingship by guile 1 (11 £2 1 )'— is probably not due entirely to the abhorrence excited later by Antiochus 1 assault on the Jewish religion, but echoes things already said in Coele-Syria at the beginning of his reign.5 The policy of Hellenization which the Ptolemies had carried out during their rule of Palestine was continued and intensified under the Seleucids.

Many of the Jews aided the

extension of Hellenistic culture, but many others resisted Hellenism as an enemy of their faith in Jehovah.

There ex­

isted, therefore, a division among the Jews on their relation to Greek culture and customs. The effort on the part of Antiochus Epiphanes to Hellenize the Jewish state, and for which he received the support of Hellenistically minded Jews, was, in the first instance, the cause of the Maecabaean revolt.

W. 0. E.

Oesterley says that tfAntiochus IV was approached by these leaders with a view to obtain his permission to introduce Greek customs into Jerusalem. tf6 Maccabees 1:11-15.

This is described in First

Rivalry existed between the House of

Tobias and the High Priestly house of Onias.

5 Ibid. , p. ij.9 8 . 6 Oesterley, op. cit. . p. 15.

The house of

k3

Tobias had secured the rights to farming of idle taxes for Palestine under the Ptolemies.

Onias the High Priest had

influence in the religious life of the people by virtue of his position.

These factors reacted on each other.

Onias

hoped that the rule of Palestine by the Seleucids would strengthen his office.

But he was opposed by one of the most

powerful families in the Jewish community, the house of Tobias, which favored Hellenistic culture.

Since the

Seleucids favored Hellenism no less than the Ptolemies, Onias the High Priest, did not have favor with the rulers of the land in his attempt to enforce the rigid observances of Judaism.

His own brother, Jason,

had gone over to the Hellenizing camp . . . and by the promise of a larger tribute, he induced the Seleucid government to establish him as High Priest in the place of his brother.7 Details of this are given in II Maccabees if:7-17. Revolt against the ascendant Hellenizing party was headed by the priest Mattathias, of the house of Hasmon, the name of the ancestor of the Maccabaeans.

Antiochus IV,

described on Seleucid coinage as Epiphanes, or Theos Epiphanes, ,!God-Manifest,u "who found pleasure in being recognized as a god,lf^ was pro-Hellenistic in his sympathies

7 Bevan, op. cit. » V I I I , ‘£02. 8 Ibid., p. I4.99

hit fI and was energetic in aiding the Hellenistic party.

The

opposition to the ambition of Jason, the resentment against Greek culture, and the opposition to the saereligious act of buying the office of High Priest, had brought feeling against Antiochus Epiphanes to a high pitch among the faith­ ful religious Jews*

Confident that he had the support of

the ruling classes, Antiochus determined to wipe out Judaism. Consequently he forbade the Jewish religious practices of the observance of the Sabbath, the rite of circumcision, and the reading of their Scriptures, and transformed the Temple into a temple for the worship of Zeus.

Then he ordered the

Jewish Scriptures to be burned and forbade sacrifice to nidols'* inasmuch as the statue of Zeus had been set up in the Temple.

The death penalty was decreed for violation of these

orders.

Many loyal Jews suffered the death penalty.

It was

then that Mattathias the priest of Modiin struck and killed an unfaithful Jew who was in the act of carrying out idola sacrifice and the officer of the king before whom the sacri­ fice was being carried out, that the Maecabaean revolt started. After that he fled with his five sons into the wilderness, where they formed the nucleus of a band which eluded capture, made descents upon the country towns and villages and killed Hellenizing Jews. The little band grew continually as the ‘godly* (the Chasidim) gathered to them. 9

9 Ibid., p. 509.

ks The signal achievement of Judas, the best soldier among the sons, whose surname Maccabaeus is generally ex­ plained as meaning "hammer ,11 was that religious freedom was gained for the people.

This is described in I Maccabees

Il:36-59> and II Maccabees 10:1-8.

After the encounters be­

tween the nationalist bands and the Seleucid government, finally under the son, Simon, the faithful Jewish people had the satisfaction of seeing that their religious freedom had been gained.

The Hellenistic party, for the time being, had

been subdued, and the High-priesthood had been vested in the Maccabaean family.

Oesterley says:

The Jews became once more, after so many centuries, an independent people. Like his brother and predecessor, Jonathan, Simon was treacherously murdered by his son-inlaw, Ptolemy, of whom it is said in I Maccabees 16:13 that . . . h e ’was minded to make himself master of the country . 1 This . . . shows that in spite of all, the Hellenistic Jews were still in evidence in Palestine.10 The background of the Maccabaean revolt, therefore, was obviously religious, political and economic.

Antiochus

Epiphanes was not wholly the cause of it, yet he was a very important factor in it. During the Maccabaean period Egypt did not seek to regain Ceole-Syria.

When Onias the High Priest was driven

out by the Hellenistic Jews he fled to Egypt where he was kindly received and permitted by the Egyptian king to build a Jewish temple.

In Palestine,

10 Oesterley,

. cit.9

ojd

p. 19*

k6

Simon was succeeded in the High-priesthood by his son, John Hyracanus B.C.), who was the first of the Hasmonaean rulers to assume the title of king. At the beginning of his reign, John Hyrcanus was on friendly terms with the orthodox party, represented by those who came to be known as the Pharisees, . . . but later he opposed them and espoused the cause of the Sadducees; . . . the reason for this was that the orthodox party resented the assumption of the royal title by the High Priest.H It is to be noted that the definite breach between the Hasmonaean High Priest and the religious sect who had been called Chasidim in the days of Judas Maccabaeus, but who now perhaps began to be known by the name ’’Pharisees ’1— those who separate themselves— took place under John Hyrcanus.

The

occasion of the breach is obscured for us in Babbinic legend, but as E. R. Bevan says, ”it is possible to see in the Jewish apocalyptic literature traces of the abhorrence with which the godly had come to regard the Hasmonaean priesthood. 1112. Alexander Jannaeus (102-76 B.C.), brother of Aristobulus I who reigned but a year following John Hyrcanus, antagonized the Pharisees, who were shocked by the incessant fighting on the part of the High Priest.

After civil war

ensued and had been crushed by Alexander Jannaeus, he recog­ nized the wisdom of keeping on good terms with the Pharisees. He added territory to the land and under him the extent of

11 Ibid.. p. 2 0 .

Bevan, 0£. clt., p. 532.

Ki Judea was greater than ever.

On his death, his widow

Alexandra (Salome), became queen (75-67 B.C.).

She appointed

the elder of her two sons, Hyrcanus, to the High-priesthood. During her reign, the Pharisees increased in strength and ruled Palestine both politically and religiously.

But they

were opposed by the Saddueees under the leadership of Aristobulus, Alexandrafs second son.

The enmity came to a

head in a battle in which Hyrcanus was defeated.

A number

of years later, his friend Antipater of Idumea persuaded him to renew his struggle, but at this juncture Home intervened. Pompey, the Roman general, sided with Hyrcanus, besieged Jerusalem and at the end of three months Jerusalem was taken in 63 B.C.

"This meant the end of the Jewish kingdom,” says

Oesterley, "and Judea shrank greatly in territorial extent and was added to the Homan province of S y r i a . ”13 The friendship which had long existed between Rome and the little Jewish kingdom disappeared under the Homan pro­ consuls.

This is seen in I Maccabees 8:17-32, and in II

Maccabees 11:34-38•

The tactlessness on the part of the

proconsuls and the resentment of the Jews against the power which had robbed them of their independence, aroused mutual hatred and contempt. In I4.8 B.C. a brighter day loomed when Antipater gained

13 Oesterley,

. cit., p.

ojd

21.

L8

the friendship of Caesar and the Homan emperor confirmed Hyrcanus as High Priest and Antipater as procurator of Judea.

Moreover, Caesar showed great favor to the Jews for

. . . all taxation was remitted; entire religious liberty was confirmed with full permission to exercise the laws and customs of the race; the people were to be judged by their own tribunals; they were relieved of military ser­ vice in the legions; Roman troops were withdrawn from the land, a welcome relief for more reasons than one. The boundaries of the land were extended in Galilee, and what was more important, the seaport of Joppa was given back; the immense advantage of this to a small state like Judea cannot be overestimated--it meant greatly extended opportunities for trade and commerce. But these favorable conditions ended with the assassination of Caesar in I^Il B.C. on the Ides of March. Unhappy conditions soon fell upon the Jews again, owing chiefly to the deep resentment the Jews harbored toward any foreign power that ruled over them.

And the fact that

Antipater, an Idumean, actually ruled over them was resented by them because the Jews hated the Idumeans as a non-Jewish race.

John Hyrcanus had foisted Judaism upon the Idumeans

and consequently the relations between Jews and Idumeans were already strained. Palestine.

As a result, internal quarrels arose in

Besides, the Homan proconsuls had not ruled over

the Jews with any degree of diplomacy. In \\Z B.C. Rome had her attention drawn from Syria

W. 0. E. Oesterley and H. Wheeler Robinson, A History of Israel» (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 193li), P. 339*

h-9

when she was threatened by the Parthians, with whom the Jews allied themselves in the hope that they could free themselves from the Romans.

And at this moment, Antigonus,

the son of Aristobulus, and nephew of John Hyrcanus the High Priest, came upon the scene, hoping that with the aid of the Parthians he might gain the throne.

For a brief time,

through victory of the Parthians, Antigonus became king of Judea and was also confirmed as High Priest in place of his uncle.

But Rome soon put an end to this when Herod, the son

of Antipater, was made king of Judea (37-^ B.C.). Roman point of view," says Robert H. Pfeiffer,

"From the

"Herod earned

the title of 1Great , 1 for he carried out in his corner of the Roman world the great plans of A u g u s t u s . I n d e e d ,

for

the Romans, Herod was a trustworthy and able vassal king, but for the Jews he was a self-seeking tyrant, a hypocritical 1half-Jew , 1 wholly pagan at heart, a bloodthirsty oppressor

and robber of the people.

Antigonus was put to death, and

with him the Hasmonaean High-priest came to an end. "The leading principle of Antipater’s policy," says E. R. Bevan, "was to secure the favor of the ruler of the Roman w o r l d . H e r o d

followed out the policy of his father.

1-5 Robert H. Pfeiffer, A History of New Testament Times (New York: Harper & Brothers, 1949T7 P* 27. Bevan,

ojd.

cit., IX, 1^.03.

5o For the next thirty-three years Palestine was to lie, without possibility of resistance, under the strong rule of the new king, an Edomite by race, a circumcised Jew by professed religion, and mainly a pagan by prac­ tice. 3-7 In 20 B.C. he began rebuilding the Temple which was still in process forty-six years later, although he built foreign temples to conciliate the Jews. In II A.D., on the death of Herod, the kingdom of the Jews was left according to his will to his three sons, Arche laus, Philip, and Antipas.

But Rome shortly afterwards

ruled that Palestine should be governed by procurators. Nevertheless, Agrippa, grandson of Herod, was made king of Judea through the friendship of Caligula, and after the death of this emperor, he ingratiated himself with Claudius. But he reigned only from 37 to iflj. A.D. After a brief reign, the son of Agrippa, having the same name, was made king through the friendship of Claudius, but this was of short duration. ratorship.

Judea again became a procu-

Pontius Pilate, procurator from 26 to 36 A.D.,

who crucified Jesus to please the mobs, was a ruler whose character and capacity fell below those of the ordinary provincial official.

But his rule has been made famous by

the trial and crucifixion of Jesus, which took place

!7 Ibid., p. 4 0 6 .

51 probably in 30 A.D., according to the Synoptists.

Maurice

Goguel, however, believes the crucifixion took place in the year 28 A.D.l®

What is relevant for the purpose of this

study concerning the crucifixion is the terse words of Goguel: ’’There was no real trial of Jesus before Pilate, The Procurator simply had Jesus brought before him and told him that since he was the King of the Jews he would be crucified.”19

In his misunderstanding of the people whom

Pilate was sent to rule, it seems, his rule was filled with blunder on blunder.

At the beginning of his rule, Pilate

insisted on having his own way.

But when he learned that the

Jews who were loyal to their faith would suffer death rather than be disloyal to their Law, he had images of the emperor taken out of Jerusalem, as other procurators had done. Following the period of Pontius Pilate, the internal condition of Judea went from bad to worse.

During the reign

of Cuspus Fadius anti-Roman agitations gathered strength and took on a Messianic coloring. Theudas gathered around him bands of disciples by promising wonders and ended by urging them to rise against R o m e . ^ 0

Goguel, 0£. cit., pp. 226-228. x9 Ibid. , p. 5 2 6 . 20 a. Momigliano, The Cambridge Ancient History (New York: The Macmillan Company, 193^) $ X, 61i9-65>0.

52

_

The procurators failed to reconcile the Jews to Homan rule; even the wisest and best intentioned among them unwittingly offended the religious scruples of the Jews, while the worst of them contributed to precipitate the disastrous war of 66 to 70 A . D . 21

Jerusalem fell in JO A.D., the Temple— just completed six or seven years before— was utterly destroyed, and the kingdom of the Jews was at an end. The historical background of apocalyptic succinctly outlined, suggests why the apocalyptists wrote such messages as they did for their people.

There burned in their hearts

the hope of a better order to come.

The deplorable conditions

of the times led them to believe that the destruction of the present world was inevitable and would take place by the intervention of God.

The keen bitterness between the Jews

and the Romans since the time of Pompey to the destruction of Jerusalem in JO A.D., fired the apocalyptists with their messages of hope which in turn fired the masses of people. And as the people became more and more restive and discontent­ ed, their Homan rulers were more and more exasperated with them and meted out more severe laws against them*

This went

on as a vicious circle until the climax came in JO A.D. W. 0 . E. Oesterley points out: t

We can readily understand how in these circumstances people sought out those teachers, inspired as they be­ lieved themselves to be, and inspired as they were

21 Pfeiffer, A History of Hew Testament Times, p. 3 8 .

53 believed to be by others, who spoke of the near approach of deliverance, of the coming of the Messianic ruler who would annihilate their enemies and set up a kingdom above all the kingdoms of the earth .^2

^

Oesterley, op. cit., p. 86.

CHAPTER V I

THE BOOK OP DANIEL • In the light of the historical circumstances of the Maccabaean period the Book of Daniel, uthe first great apocalyptic work of J u d a i s m , i s clearly understood.

The

author wrote to encourage the devout Jews who were suffering at the hands of the Syrian king Antiochus Epiphanes, l 68 to 165 B.C.

With the support of Jews favoring Greek culture,

Antiochus attempted to stamp out Judaism by forbidding the offering of sacrifice to Jehovah, circumcision, observance of the Sabbath, and ordered the sacred Scriptures to be destroyed.

Great stress is laid on the sacrilege of the

erection of a heathen altar, probably to Zeus, upon the altar of burnt - of fering (I Maccabees 1:55) •

^or the devout

Jews this was the sacriligious profanation of the Temple which required the purification of the altar until it could serve again the holy purpose of the worship of Jehovah.

It

was the abomination that made desolate the holy place, described in the first chapter of Maccabees.

The author of

the Book of Daniel undertook to encourage his fellow Jews to resist the demands of Antiochus and to remain faithful to

^ H. H. Rowley, The Rediscovery of the Old Testament (Philadelphia: The Westminster Press, 1956)/ p. 262.

55 the laws of God. In order to encourage the faithful, he showed how Daniel and his three friends were exposed to similar suffer­ ing during the Exile but refused to forsake Jehovah, and how God protected them and gave them happiness and prosperity. Stories of heroic faithfulness and of former kings like Nebuchadnezzar, Belshazzar and Darius would appear perfectly harmless on the surface to Antiochus and his followers, but to those for whom they were written the clue to their meaning was not hidden.

By means of this clever strategy of veiled

language the author predicted that the tyrant Antiochus would fall,^ and that the God of Heaven would establish His endur­ ing kingdom of righteousness.3 It will be profitable to look at the ingenuity of the author of the Book of Daniel.

In Daniel 1:2 he tells of the

ancient king, Jehoiachim of Judah, who carried away the sacred vessels of the Temple.

The readers would be reminded

of Antiochus who took the golden altar and vessels A

In

Daniel 3 the author relates about Nebuchadnezzar who erected the image of gold, sixty cubits in height, and six cubits in breadth, which he set up on the plain of Dura and demanded

2 Daniel ll:lj.O-45.

3 Daniel 2:lili; 7:11^22,27. 5- X Maccabees 1:21.

56 that all men should worship it on pain of death.

The

readers would be reminded of the image Antiochus had erected in the Temple and the penalty for failure to worship it.5 In Daniel lj..is the story of arrogant Nebuchadnezzar 1s dream of a great and high tree which Daniel interpreted to show the contempt to which the haughty is to be brought.

The

readers would be reminded of Antiochus who called himself rtEpiphanes,M "God Manifest,” but for whom they had no respect whatever.

The story in the third chapter of the Book of

Daniel about the loyal men who maintained their faith in God and came through the fiery furnace unharmed meant to the readers that God would deliver them as He did the three Hebrew sons if they were loyal to the faith.

In order to

keep his message of encouragement a story, the author uses the device of setting forth the lesson of the sovereignty of God as a dream of Nebuchadnezzar.

He uses the idea of four

world empires--graphically portrayed as a struggle of wild animals with vicious-looking horns— to bring his story up from the Babylonian period, through the Median, Persian, and the Macedonian, or Greek periods to the age of the kingdom of God in which the Jews would dominate the world. &

And as

a climax to all this the author brings his readers the

^ I Maccabees 1 :!l1.

6 Daniel 7-8.

57 encouragement that on the death of Antiochus “there shall be a time of trouble such as there has never been since there was a na t i o n . fl7

But for the faithful people of God “at that

time shall Michael arise— the archangel who stands on guard over your fellow-countrymen .11® Prom all this, it is obvious that the Book of Daniel was written with the practical purpose of encouragement and hope to the loyal Jews, to stimulate their faith in God and in the great consummation of history when “the saints of the Most High shall receive the kingdom, and shall retain the kingdom forever, even forever and e v e r . u9

It Is not concerned

with historical accuracy, but it is tremendously concerned with mediating a message of God to faithful Jews in the midst of trial and persecution.

The divine throne of judgment

among men was not consummated in the age of Antiochus Epiphanes.

Various predictions of the Book of Daniel failed,

but it served the high purpose of giving hope to the- faith­ ful. There are several elements of apocalyptic, some of which occur in the Book of Daniel, that have bearing on the prevalence of apocalyptic in Palestine in the time of Jesus.

7 Daniel 12:1b. 8 Daniel 12:1a.

^ Daniel 7:18.

58 A first element is the coneept of the Messiah, which is prominent in the Synoptic Gospels*

But distinction needs

to be made between the term Messiah or Christ in these gos­ pels, where it is equated with the Son of David and therefore is closely associated in thought with the Old Testament passages connected with Davidie royal lineage.

In II Samuel

7:l 6 the promise of the writer that the house of David and his kingdom should be Hestablished forever” was an encourage­ ment and hope to the Jewish people in the vicissitudes of the history of Judah and Israel.

This hope on the part of the

Jewish people is what George Foot Moore calls the national or * . . political expectation, and is an inheritance from prophecy . . . . This golden age to come presents itself to the imagination as a renascence of the golden age in the past, the good old times of the early monarchy, and in this the revival of the kingdom under a prince of the Davidie line. In some passages 11the name of David stands for the king in the restoration, U11 Hosea 3*5* Jeremiah 30^9* Ezekiel and Ezekiel 3

7

23-25,

and in others as the Scion, or the Servant

or Branch as in Zechariah 3zB and nmuch as the L ord’s Anointed became in the use of later Jews and Christians

’the

Anointed’ (Messiah), and in the Targum, the Aramaic transla­ tion of the synagogue lessons instituted b y Ezra.”!^

1° Moore, o£. cit., II, 32lj.. 11 Ibid., p. 326. 12 Ibid., p. 325*

Moreover, in the Old Testament, as H. H. Rowley points out: The word which is transliterated Messiah is frequently found, but it is applied to the reigning king, or to the High Priest, or even to Cyrus, the Persian King, For it was in the period between the Testaments that the term Messiah became attached to the concept of this Davidie leader . . . . When the popularity of the Hasmonaean house waned and its fortunes fell, men returned to the hope of a Davidie leader, -*-3 The Hebrew term Messiah, or in Creek, Christ, therefore, which is transliterated into the New Testament from the Old Testament means 11Anointed,ft but in the New Testament it is used with reference to and significance of the ideal, or the future ideal person. In the Book of Daniel, however, the figure of the Messiah does not appear.

f,An anointed one” is alluded to in

Daniel 9*25-26, but it seems clear that this is no reference to an ideal or future ideal person, but evidently to an historical person who does not have any further significance in the vision for the writer.

It is not to be expected that

the Book of Daniel should make reference to the house of David for the idea of Messiah from the line of David, for opposition to Antiochus Epiphanes was not led by any one of Davidie descent, but by that of a loyal priest from an obscure town and family.

3*3 Rowley, ojd. c i t . , p. 266.

6o When one turns his thought in connection with the concept of the Messiah to Jesus in the Synoptic Gospels for some clue to the prevalence of apocalyptic in Palestine in the time of Jesus, there are some interesting observations to be made.

In the quarter century just before the time of

Jesus, history is witness to the fact that Jewish national­ ism was marked and hatred of foreigners was intense. "Patriotism now became the popular religion,’* states William Fairweather.

"To rebel against Rome was conceived to be a

religious duty and a work of faith . . . and so there was formed that idea of a political Messiah, who would restore the earthly kingdom to Israel.”^

But another type of

Messiah in the time of Jesus was that of an agent of God to come from the heavens at the close of the present evil age to set up the New Age.

The Synoptic Gospels portray Jesus as a

transcendental Messiah.

This interpretation of the life and

office of Jesus was made after his death and resurrection. And there seem to be no authentic passages in the Synoptic Gospels which make clear that Jesus ever referred to himself as Messiah.

The geneologies of the Davidie lineage of Jesus

in Matthew and Luke present him as political leader, but both of these gospels nevertheless conceive of Jesus as the

^ William Fairweather, The Background of the Gospels (Edinburgh: T. Sc T. Clark, 192677V. 1 6 9 .

6i heavenly Messiah.

The mark of cleavage between the early

followers of Jesus after his crucifixion and the faithful Jews of legalism was that the former had come to the conclu­ sion that Jesus of Hazareth had proven beyond the shadow of a doubt by his resurrection that God had declared him Lord and Ghrist.15

The message of the imminence of the kingdom

of God which Jesus had proclaimed on earth would now soon be fulfilled by Jesus* return in the clouds of heaven to in­ augurate the kingdom.

But the point to be noted in this

discussion of the concept of the Messiah in its relation to the problem of the prevalence of apocalyptic in Palestine in the time of Jesus is that the Book of Daniel itself has ob­ viously not been a factor in the Synoptic presentation of Jesus as Messiah of the line of David.

The transcendental

Messianic presentation of Jesus in the Synoptics, however, gives evidence of having been vitally influenced by the Book of Daniel itself. A second element which has an intimate relation to the foregoing discussion of the Messiah concept, and points to a direct bearing on the prevalence of apocalyptic in Palestine in the time of Jesus is the figure of the Son of

Man.i^

Acts 2 :3 2 -3 6 Daniel 7:13-

62 11In the Book of Daniel the term *Son of M a n 1 is a

figure for the kingdom of God, or for the saints as vested with the authority of the k i n g d o m . "17 terpretation of George Foot Moore* 1®

This is also the in-*In contrast to the

first six chapters, which deal with stories from the life of the ancient hero, Daniel, who is portrayed as having lived in circumstances similar to those of the readers, chapters 7 to 12 are "prophecy” on the lips of Daniel of what will come to pass before the kingdom of God comes*

The four

beasts in chapter 7 represent the Babylonian, Median, Persian, and Macedonian kingdoms*

These four powers successively

dominated the life of Israel from the time of the Exile to the author*s day.

Symbolism in the form of animals and horns

representing kingdoms and kings, and the use of number are all typical of apocalyptic.

The little horn with eyes and a

loud mouth almost certainly represent Antiochus Epiphanes for we read: "He shall speak words against the Most High and shall wear out the saints of the Most High."19

The saints

will suffer under his rule for two and a half years,2*-* but then shall come the judgment, for the Venerable One on his

^7 Rowley, o p * c i t ., p. 268. 1® Moore, o p . c it * , II, 33^4— 19 Daniel 7:25a. 20 Daniel 7:25b*

flaming throne shall open his books and ’*on account of the great words that the horn had spoken,” the beast shall be slain.^l

Then ’’the saints of the Most High shall receive

the kingdom .”22

But not only does the symbolism of beasts

representing the empires that have dominated the life of Israel figure in the apocalyptic picture, but the use of time figures in the Book of Daniel.

In chapter 9* the author

uses the figure of Seventy Weeks and seeks to show his read­ ers the ”true f1 meaning of Jeremiah*s prophecy of Judah*s glorious future.^3

The kingdom of God is to come, not after

seventy years of punishment, but after seventy weeks of years four hundred ninety years after the fall of Jerusalem in 587 B.C.2^*

And the kingdom of God that shall come at the

end of this time is to be a ’’kingdom which shall never be destroyed.‘*^5

Although the time does not work out exactly,

the author expects the kingdom to fall in the time of Antiochus Epiphanes. Now the symbolism, **with the clouds of the heavens there came one like a m a n ,”26 in contrast to the figures of

21 Daniel 7:9-11. 22 Daniel 7:18,27.

^

Jeremiah 30

2k Daniel 9:2k-27.

25 Daniel 2:2*4; 7:14,27; 9:24; 12:326 Daniel 7:13-

61^.

beasts representing the destructive world powers under whom the Jews suffered, represents the enduring kingdom*

This

enduring kingdom is represented as a human-like kingdom of the Jews who shall rule over the world.

H. H. Rowley points

out: This kingdom could not be represented as arising from below, for it arises not from the activity of man but by the intervention of God* From heaven, therefore, it must come. . . . It is not to be denied that the author of the Book of Daniel would hardly have thought of the kingdom as without any leader, but the person of that leader is of no moment to him beside the thought of the kingdom as G o d fs kingdom, in which the now persecuted saints of God shall be in the ascendant. . . . Ho Davidie Messiah was on the horizon, but the kingdom seemed to him about to break into history*27 To be sure, the author of the Book of Daniel does not seem to have thought of the kingdom of God as without some leader, but obviously he was not immediately concerned with who the leader was as a person.

The figure of 11one like a man 11 was

enough to individualize the leader for the kingdom soon to be consummated. Scholars differ on their interpretation of this figure but discussion of the various schools of interpretation would more likely draw us away from the thesis at hand than tend to focus our thinking on apocalyptic in the time of Jesus. George Foot Moore is of the conviction that the figure was at first given ,ran individual, and then in the conventional

27 Rowley, pp. cit., pp. 268-269.

65

sense !messianic! Interpretation.”28

Most scholars, includ­

ing Moore, hold that the figure stands in the Book of Daniel as representative of the saints vested with the authority of the kingdom of God.

But it seems probable that by the

time of Jesus, especially by the influence of I Enoch, and in particular by the section of the book called the Simili­ tudes of Enoch, that the figure "one like a man,,f had become individualized and stood for the leader and representative of the kingdom of God.

Originally personifying all the

saints of the Most High, in time the leader and representative of the kingdom stood for all the saints.

H. H. Rowley, in

his book, ^ I s r a e l ^ Mission to the World ,11 here also makes a pertinent observation of comparison between the concept of the suffering servant and the figure of "one like a man": In general I believe the author was personifying Israel, but in the fourth poem--Isaiah 53:12--that personifica­ tion is carried to a point where it is hard to escape the feeling that he really thought of an individual, so supremely the Servant of Yahweh that within the Servant community he stood out as its representative and leader, carrying its mission of service to a point no other should reach.29 Both ideas, that the kingdom Is to come not from the activity of men but from the intervention of God, and the Messianic idea that the intervention of God in. history is

Moore, op. cit. , II, 33 I4.. 29 H. H. Rowley, Israel1s Mission to the World (London: Student Christian Movement* 1939)> P* 13*

66 not only imminent, but that the kingdom is to be established by a divinely sent leader, though thought of as quite dis­ tinct from the Messiah, it seems, had become current by the time of Jesus*

It needs to be stated that the Book of Daniel

speaks of the kingdom of God as the dominion of the saints of the Most High without any reference to a Davidie or priest­ ly leader.

George Foot Moore says, however, that

It was the universal belief that shortly before the ap­ pearance of the Messiah, Elijah should return: *Behold, I will send you Elijah the prophet, before the coming of the great and terrible day of the Lord; and he shall turn the hearts of fathers toward their sons, and hearts of sons toward their fathers, lest I come and smite the land with a curse.* (Malachi 4 :5-6)!.30 And the coming of the Messiah was believed to be a judgment of the generation to which he should come, and the announce­ ment of his coming by the forerunner, Elijah, would be a call to repentance. It may fairly be inferred from their words (those of John the Baptist and Jesus), *Repent for the kingdom of God is at h a n d , * that conceptions similar to those which we have found in the Midrash— the higher exegesis of scripture-were current in their t i m e . 31 Now the question arises as to what extent the belief in the intervention of God in history and the coming of the Messiah as at hand was due to apocalyptic rather than to prophecy.

The extent of the influence of prophecy is clearly

30 Moore, o£. cit., II, 357 31 Ibid.,

p.

363.

67 evidenced by the fact that the idea of the kingdom of God which was to be inaugurated by a divinely sent representa­ tive was current by the time of Jesus.

But it seems true

that Jesus inherited a background of Jewish apocalyptic which had for its central hope that of a sudden inauguration of the kingdom in his own day.

Yet this does not mean that

Schweitzer's position beheld that Jesus expected a literal coming of the Son of Man imminently.

But nthe use of the

phrase 'the Son of Man' in the gospels ,11 in the words of George Foot Moore, is of extraordinary difficulty. It occurs in the gos­ pels only in the mouth of Jesus, and outside of them only in Acts 7:56 in the dying words of Stephen, *I see the heavens opened and the Son of Man standing on-the right hand of G o d . '32 These conceptions need to be kept separate in a study of the Synoptic Gospels. And when a study of the passages on the Son of Man is carried out in their own light without reading into them thought from the teaching of Jesus on the kingdom of God, one feels that Jesus' view of the time of the end of this age and the intervention of the reign of God in the new age were near at hand.

The impression gained is that Jesus

anticipated some sudden, visible, catastrophic act of God as

3 2 Ibid. , p. ^ 8 6 .

68 near at hand, when God would pass his judgment upon men who were not spiritually prepared. Some of the passages may be noted. parallels in Matthew 16:28 and Luke 9 J27):

Mark 9 :1 (and its HI tell you, some

of you who stand here will certainly live to see the reign of God come in its might, r,33 it seems clearly stated that Jesus expected the consummation of the age to take place in the lifetime of his hearers.

It might be argued that this

statement voices the hope of the early church that the return of Jesus as the Messiah would establish the kingdom in its day.

But there seems to be no reason why this statment may

not have been that of Jesus about the Son of Man.

Another

passage Is Matthew 10:23, which is without parallel in Mark and Luke: ■ But when they persecute you in one town, make your escape to another, for I tell you, you will not have gone 1 the towns of Israel before the Son of Man There remains a residue of sayings in which Jesus seems to adopt the conventional apocalyptic idea, which was probably read into Daniel 7:13 and reproduced by books like the Similitudes of Enoch and IV Ezra, of the Son of Man as a glorious figure, coming in the clouds, to appear in that generation.35

33 Mark 9:1« Matthew 10:23. 35 Guy, 0£. cit., p. 77.

It seems that this passage must have been used by Jesus himself, for it is hardly a statement that would have been made later by the early church to describe this mission of the personal disciples of Jesus.

It speaks, therefore, of

Jesus 1 anticipation of the end of the Age and the inaugura­ tion of the reign of God by the Messiah. Again, the Little Apocalypse, Mark 13 (and its par­ allels Matthew 2k and Luke 21:5-33)» which will receive separate treatment in this study, also bears out the impres­ sion gained of the Son of Man passages that Jesus anticipated the sudden intervention of God in his generation. al apocalyptic

1signsr are given ,11 says H. A. Guy,

!,Conventiont?and the

climax is the coming of the Son of Man and the exhortation to watch (Mark 13:26-28; 33-37)

Although these portions

of the Synoptic Gospels give evidence of reference to a later day than the time of Jesus, there are exhortations which seem to have come from Jesus to watch and be prepared for the sudden, catastrophic coming of the Messianic era. You must look out and be on the alert, for you do not know when it will be time . . . s o you must be on the watch for you do not know when the master of the house is coming . . . f o r fear he should come unexpectedly and find you asleep. And what I am telling you I mean for all— Be on the w a t c h .*37 Therefore you must be ready too, for the Son of Man is

36 ibid.. p. 58. 37 Mark 13:33-37.

coming at a time when you do not expect him. 38 Just as it was in the time of Noah, it will be at the coming of the Son of Man. For just as in those days before the flood people were eating and drinking, marrying and being married, until the very day that Noah entered into the ark, and knew nothing about it until the flood came and destroyed them all, so it will be at the coming of the Son of Man.39 These passages all contain the same note--the exhortation to be prepared for the sudden intervention of God to establish his new Kingdom among men.

The thought throughout is

thoroughly eschatological.

Although the original situations

and circumstances out of which these injunctions found their source are obscure and vague, it seems clear that such teach­ ing as they contain must have come from Jesus in connection with his emphasis on repentance. Another passage which bears out the apocalyptic in­ fluence in the time of Jesus is seen in Luke 22:llj.-l8: When the time came, he took his place at the table, with his apostles about him. And he said to them, *I have greatly desired to eat this Passover supper with you before I suffer. For I tell you, I will never eat one again until it reaches its fulfilment in the kingdom of G o d . 1 And when he was handed a cup, he thanked God, and then he said, *Take this and share it among you, for I tell you, I will not drink the product of the vine again until the kingdom of God comes.fk0 The same idea is found 22-25.

in Matthew 26:26-29* and in Mark lk:

The meaning in these passages is simply that

38 Matthew 39 Matthew 2lj.:37. Luke 22:lk-18.

in

71 Jesus* thinking as the shadow of the cross lay heavy upon his mind, the culmination of the present evil age was at its close and the Messianic era was just upon them.

These

passages of all three of the Synoptic Gospel writers empha­ size the same idea of momentary expectation and anticipation of Jesus in connection with the story of the last meal of Jesus with his disciples.

It seems clear that Jesus must

have spoken some such words about the last meal and they were crystallized in the Passion narrative.

These passages are

clearly marked by the high note of expectancy of Jesus that the end of the Age had come*

Here, as well as in the other

passages discussed in connection with the figure of the Son of Man, Jesus* statements about the coming of the Son of Man are synonymous with the coming of the kingdom of God. The question, therefore, is to be asked: Since these passages reveal that Jesus used the term Son of Man--the apocalyptic figure of Daniel 7^13— is it identified with the concept of the Messiah?

The figure of the Son of Man, it has

been pointed out above, originally was a personification of the reigning saints which in time was conceived of as a true individual--the personal representative and leader of the coming kingdom.

wIn eschatological contexts of the gospels,**

says George Foot Moore,

**the Son of Man is plainly the

figure of Daniel*s vision, taken individually, and identified

72

with the Messiah coming to judgment. "Ip.

Although Jesus is

represented throughout the Synoptic Gospels as referring to himself as the Son of Man, he does not seem to have ap­ plied the term "Messiah” to himself.

Thus at his trial, in

answer to the question of the High Priest, "Are you the Christ, the son of the Blessed One?" Jesus replies:

"I am 1

And you will see the Son of Man seated at the right hand of the Almighty and coming in the clouds of the s k y . I n these passages, the figure of the Son of Man in Daniel 7:13 is obviously identified with Jesus himself.

And the pointed

and pertinent question asked Jesus was, "Are you the Christ?" It is to be inferred that men had applied the title to him, but that he had never applied it to himself.

Furthermore,

it may be inferred that Jesus identified the Son of Man with the Messiah, but that this had presumably not been done be­ fore Jesus. For why should he have been challenged to express his mission in terms of Messiahship, if the term Son of Man, so freely applied to himself, had been an acknowledged synonymf Moreover, his solemn charge to his disciples, after Peterfs confession at Caesarea Philippi, to tell no man that he was the Messiah (Mark 8:27-30$ Matthew 16:13-20; Luke 9 :18-21), would have been utterly futile if every one knew that the Son of Man and the Messiah were one and the same in their significance.43

Moore, 0£. cit., IX, 335. h? Mark lk:61-62.

h-3 Rowley, The Rediscovery of the Old Testament, p. 268.

73 It seems probable, therefore, that the figure of the Son of Man became identified with that of the Messiah in the time and ministry of Jesus.

The influence of later apocalyptic

writings than the Book of Daniel, especially the Similitudes of Enoch, seem to have made current In the time of Jesus, not only individualizing of the figure of the Son of Man but heightening of the expectation of the end of the Age. Another element in connection with the Book of Daniel that bears upon the prevalence of apocalyptic in Palestine in the time of Jesus beside the concept of the Messiah and the figure of the Son of Man, is angelology.

George Foot

Moore, among other scholars, is convinced that ”Jewish angelology and demonology were developed under Babylonian and Persian influence. "Mi-

In the Old Testament, angels are

represented as messengers of God.

The early prophets had re­

ceived their messages directly from God.

Ezekiel, it seems,

was the first prophet nfcose message was mediated to him through an angel. ks

And the author of the Book of Daniel is

portrayed as having had his vision given to him through angel s. 4-6

Furthermore,

names of individual angels are found within the canon first in Daniel; in succeeding apocalypses they multiply.

Ml- Moore, ojs. cit. , II, 39k• M> Ezekiel

l{-3:6.

Daniel 1^:13,23; 7:16; 8:13-26; 9:21-27; 10:5-12:5.

74 The giving of personal names to angels is a very signifi­ cant step. Whereas the divine messenger formerly had individuality in men's apprehension only ad hoc, and in the errand upon which he was for the occasion employed, and even the angelus comes et interpres of Ezekiel has no other* Gabriel and Michael, though they do no other things in their anonymous prototypes, acquires a perma­ nent function and a distinct personality: Gabriel is the angel of revelation (Daniel 8 :l6 ; 9:21 cf Luke 1:19-20), Michael is the champion of the Jews (Daniel 10:13,21; 1 2 :1 ), other nations have their own angelic princes as champions (Daniel 10:13-21). . . . The author of the Book of Daniel does not introduce the names of Gabriel and Michael as if they were something new: on the con­ trary he assumes that both the names and the functions of these angels were familiar, and it is evident from the approximately contemporary parts of Enoch that the Jews by that time had a much more extensive angelic lore. 47 Job 1:5-12 describes the demonic adversary— the Satanwho is represented as having the office among G o d fs heavenly beings of a kind of advocate to insist upon the infliction of appropriate penalty for evil.

In time, the Satan was

conceived as the embodiment of evil he championed.

The

author of the Book of Daniel represents the angel Michael as the champion of the Jews against the guardian angel of the kingdom of Persia.4$

Furthermore, the author of the Book of

Daniel presents the idea of the existence of angels of an innumerable host.49

Later apocalyptic writings develop the

ideas of angelology until by the time of Jesus the world

47 Moore, o p . cit. , I, Ii02-if03. ^f-8 Daniel 10:13,20.

U-9 Daniel 7:10.

75 was conceived ais a realm of spirits in which existed a limited dualism between demons and the power of God. A fourth element which is a significant factor in re­ lation to the prevalence of apocalyptic in Palestine in the time of Jesus is its teaching on the future life.

After the

fall of Antiochus Epiphanes, the author of the Book of Daniel prophecies that flthere shall be a

time of

there has never been since there was a

trouble suchas

nation«!!50

But the

faithful Jews will be protected and delivered for wat that time shall Michael arise--the archangel who stands on guard over your fellow-countrymen,1 1 “even every one whose name is found written in the bookn52— uthe register of the faith­ ful. "53 And before the coming of the kingdom of God, the righteous martyrs and the apostate Jews vtio opposed the faithful saints tfwho sleep in the

land of

the dust shall

awake, the martyrs to everlasting

life in

the kingdom,and

the apostate Jews to everlasting reproach and contempt.

50 Daniel 12:1b. Daniel 12:1a. 52 Daniel 12:1b. £3 Moore, ojo. cit., II, 297. Daniel 12:2.

76 George Foot Moore makes the comment that everlasting life here means ,f,to live forever , 1 and ‘forever 1 may be hyper­ bolic. if55 It seems that Daniel 12:2 and Isaiah 26:19, ”a postExilic passage probably from the fourth century B.C.,n56 are the only Old Testament passages which allude to everlasting life.

The Old Testament doctrine held that when one died he

was gathered to his fathers in Sheol, the common abode of all the dead in the nether world.

Here the dead lived in

semiconscious state, lfthe semblance of their former selves, bereft of all strength, as in Homer.”57 was no returning.

From Sheol there

But such a doctrine was not adequate to

satisfy the human soul.

After the Exile in 567-536 B.C.,

when the Jews became a people without a nation, the life of the individual, instead of the life of the nation, became the heart of Israel*s religion.

The saints of the Most High

who endured suffering and persecution under Antiochus Epiphanes could not be rewarded by everlasting life of the nation without seeing the promise of the kingdom realized. The author of the Book of Daniel felt that a just God would

55 Moore, op. cit., II, 297* 5b Guy, 0£. cit.. p. 12. 57 Moore, o£. cit. , XI, 2 8 9 .

77 not exclude his faithful saints from sharing in the joys of the promised kingdom.

The idea of resurrection was found in

Persian thought and this undoubtedly led to the belief that Sheol was not the ultimate reward of a faithful life on earth.

Besides, the growth of the emphasis in Jewish re­

ligion on fellowship with God led to faith in the resurrec­ tion of the dead.

Moreover, the author had emphasized in

his stories of faith and heroism that God delivered men who were faithful.

And he believed that God would deliver the

faithful saints who were martyrs for Him.

But the sheer

fact was that those who died in the persecutions under Antiochus Epiphanes were not delivered.

Therefore the author

with his high faith in the God of power and justice was led to reason, it seems, that God purposed for them resurrection from the dead in order that they should share in the kingdom of God.

And for the apostate Jews who had been enemies of

the saints, the author contemplated also resurrection from the dead, but nto everlasting reproach and contemptu on earth.

The idea of resurrection which the author of the Book

of Daniel holds is not that of the quality and character which Jesus taught, but the apocalyptic kind of resurrection which the former presents underwent considerable development in later apocalyptic writings.

CHAPTER V I I

THE BOOK OF I ENOCH The Book of I Enoch is a compilation of heterogeneous apocalyptic writings, "a library rather than a book, prob­ ably written in the course of a century (163-63 B.C.)."1 Charles says that "the Book of I Enoch, like the Book of Daniel, was written originally in Aramaic and partly in Hebrew, and much of the original text was written in verse. As a whole the Book of I Enoch is preserved only in Ethiopic according to Pfeiffer and Moore.3 This collection of books bears the name of Enoch, which is explained by its interpretation of Genesis 5:2k: "Enoch walked with God, and then he disappeared; for God took him away."

The teaching that Enoch had been translated

to heaven during his earthly life was prevalent among the Jews in early times*

And this tradition we find carried

down to New Testament times, for in the Letter of Hebrews, Enoch is described as a man of faith who was translated:

Robert H. Pfeiffer, History of New Testament Times (New York: Harper & Brothers, 19k9)> P* 75. 2 R. H. Charles,'The Religious Development Between the Old and the New Testaments (New York: Henry Holt & Co., 19157 > p p . 2 2 k- 2 2 5• 3 Pfeiffer, op. cit., p. 77. George Foot Moore, Judaism (Cambridge: Harvard Uni­ versity Press, 19i|-6), II, 282.

79 Faith caused Enoch to be taken up from the earth with­ out experiencing death; he could not be found, because God had taken him up. For before he was taken up there is evidence that he pleased God, but without faith it is impossible to please him .4 The traditional teaching that Enoch ascended into heaven is significant, for such a man would be regarded by the readers of the books of Enoch as one who was in a position to write about the heavenly luminaries and astronomical questions in I Enoch 72-82, and to such a man all secrets could be trusted. Charles states that: . . . the author of the earliest portions of I Enoch was a Jew who lived . . . in northern Palestine, in the land of Dan, southwest of the Hermon range, near the- head­ waters of the Jordan. This is important, as it tends to show that the book, or books, is really Palestinian, and one which, therefore, circulated among Jews in Palestine.5 The apocalyptic sections of I Einoch are some of the most suggestive materials for the background of the New Testament.

Charles says that nthe Book of I Enoch is for

the history of theological development the most important pseudepigraph of the first two centuries B.C.n&

In his work,

k- Hebrews 11:5* 5 R. H. Charles, The Book of Enoch (London: Society for Promoting Christian Knowledge, 1917J, p. xv. ° R. H. Charles, The Apocrypha and Pseudepigrapha of the Old Testament (Oxford: The Clarendon Press, 1913}/ p. 153.

80 The Apocrypha and Pseudepigrpha of the Old Testament, he gives a list of passages in the New Testament which he shows depend on, or illustrate, either in phraseology or idea, passages in I Enoch.7

Furthermore, he lists various docu­

ments in I Enoch which had their influence in shaping corresponding New Testament d o c t r i n e . $

And doctrines which

he finds in I Enoch that have had a part in moulding corre­ sponding New Testament doctrines are:

(1) the nature of the

Messianic kingdom and of the future life,

(2) the Messiah,

(3) Sheol and the Resurrection, and (I4.) demonology. Before turning to a discussion of these cardinal doctrines of I Enoch to ascertain the extent to which they point to the prevalence of apocalyptic in Palestine in the time of Jesus, it will be helpful to outline the contents of the Book.

nThe Book of X Enoch was intended by its final

editor to consist of five sections, like the Pentateuch, the Psalms, Proverbs, Sirach, and many other Jewish works,ff9 Charles points out significantly.

The writings give evidence

of being of different character, authorship, and age.

Ac­

cording to G-eorge Foot Moore, the obvious divisions of the Book are, u (1) chapters 1-36;

(2) chapters 37-71;

(3)

7 Ibid., pp. 180-181. 8 Ibid., p p .

I 8 i i .- l 8 5 .

9 Charles, The Apocrypha of the Old Testament, p. l 6 8 .

81 chapters 72-82; 105.{t^-®

(ij.) chapters 8 3 -9 O; and (5) chapters 9 1 -

Each of these sections may be named (l) Introduc­

tion and the Angels in Relation to the Universe; Parables, or Similitudes of Enoch;

(2) The

(3) The Book of the

Courses of the Luminaries of the Heaven;

(I4.) Visions of the

Flood and of the History of Israel; and (5>) Exhortations, the Apocalypse of Weeks, the Last Judgment, and Fragment of the Book of Noah. The problem of the dates of the various sections of I Enoch is one of intricate and controversial questions.

It

will be unnecessary to discuss this problem for the purpose of determining the extent to which apocalyptic was prevalent in Palestine in the time of Jesus.

All of the Jewish apoca­

lypses, in general, may be divided into two groups— those which date before the fall of Jerusalem, 70 A.D., and those after this event.

The general position of G-eorge Foot Moore

on the dates of authorship of the various sections of I Enoch is pertinent at this point. It is now generally agreed that the so-called Parables— chapters 37-71--for which at first many scholars assumed a Christian origin, are Jewish, and probably came from the earlier decades of the first century before our era. The other parts of the book . . . represent less advanced conceptions, and so far as this constitutes a presumption of age, are older. The oldest which seems to offer a more definite indication of time is what is commonly called the Apocalypse of the Seventy Shepherds (chapters

10 Moore, o£. cit., II, 281.

82 83-90), but opinions are divided between a date before the death of Judas Maccabaeus (l6l B.C.), making it but a few years later than the Visions in Daniel (before the end of l65 B.C.), and the reign of John Hyrcanus (135-lOli. B.C.)--probably not in his last years. Of the other parts of the Book it is sufficient to say that from their general affinities they may be assigned to the century which lies between the Maccabaean rising and the appearance of the Homans upon the scene.H Dr. Robert H. Pfeiffer has outlined the dates of authorship of the various sections of I Enoch which are in keeping with this general position of G-eorge Foot Moore. The dates of the several sections cannot always be de­ termined with accuracy, but for general orientation may be set down approximately as follows: I. . II. III. IV.

A. Introduction (1-5) 150-100 B. Angels and Universe (6 -3 6 ) 100 Parables or Similitudes (37-71) 100-80 Astronomical Book (72-82). 150-100 A. First Dream Vision (83 - 8 L) 163-130 B. Second Dream Vision or Apocalypse of the Seventy Shepherds (85-90) 163-130 V. A. Introduction (92:1-5; 91:1-11*18 f) 100-80 B. Apocalypse of Weeks (93:1-10; 91:12-17) 163 C. Final Judgment (9^-105) 100-80 D. Appendices (106-108) 100 -8 01 2 The first of the doctrines already alluded to which

Charles lists as one of the five found in I Enoch is the nature of the Messianic kingdom and of the future life.

One

of the central ideas of I Enoch is the differing conceptions presented of the Messianic kingdom, or the kingdom of God.

11 Moore, o£. cit., II, 282. 12 Pfeiffer, History of New Testament Times, pp.

76-77.

83 According to the first section (chapters 1-36), the Messianic kingdom will be established on earth with Jerusalem as its center (chapters 26-28), and in the fifth section this king­ dom is the prelude to the spiritual and eternal kingdom to be established (chapters 102-105).

On the basis of the

dates of the different sections according to Pfeiffer above, the sections setting forth these two conceptions as to the future— the one nationalistic and the other more spiritual and universal— both emanate from the period 100 to 80 B.C.

But what is more significant, it is to be noted that these two conflicting conceptions are to be found not only in other apocalyptic writings to be examined in this study, but are seen in the conflict between the accepted belief of the dis­ ciples and the teachings of Jesus. The incident in the Synoptics describing the conflict of Jesus with the Sadducees about whose life a certain woman who had been married to seven brothers should be in the Messianic kingdom, is representative.

This incident is

recorded in Mark 12:18-27, Matthew 22:23-33* and Luke 20: 27-38*

It is clear in this incident that the Sadducees are

arguing from the nationalistic and materialistic conception of the Messianic kingdom.

It is in chapters 21 to 36 of the

first section of I Enoch that the background for such a view of the kingdom is to be found.

Here Enoch is described as

being conducted through the universe by the Watchers and he

81^ sees the pillars of the earth, the abodes of the winds, the underworld, the spirits of men, both of the righteous who wait for reward and the wicked who wait for judgment.

And

he even sees Jerusalem, the Tree of Life, the holy mountain in the middle of the earth.

The idea runs through these

chapters of I Enoch that the risen righteous men of God en­ joy all the good things of earth--a long life on earth (25:6), knowledge from the Tree of Wisdom (32:3)> and a thousand children for each member (10:17).

It is obvious

that the Sadducees hoped to trip Jesus up so that he would have to take either the position that there was no resurrec­ tion of the dead or that polygamy would be practiced in the Messianic kingdom.

But the Sadducees are portrayed in the

Synoptic Gospels which describe the incident as being de­ feated in their attempt.

For these passages describe Jesus

as presenting the spiritual conception of the resurrection which is found in I Enoch 91-1°^-*

Jesus answers the Sadducees

in these words: Does not this show that you are wrong, and do not under­ stand the Scriptures or the power of God? For when people rise from the dead there is no marrying or being married, but they live as angels do in heaven.13 Charles makes the significant observation that: the conception of the future life portrayed in our L o r d fs reply tallies almost exactly in thought, and partially

13 Mark 12:2k-25

85 in word, with, that described in I Enoch 91-184* ac­ cording to which there is to be a resurrection indeed, but a resurrection of the spirit, and the risen righteous are to rejoice 'as the angels of heaven* (I Enoch lOl^rk) ♦ . . Mark 12:25) *being companions of the hosts of heaven* (I Enoch 1Ok: 67.14 A second doctrine listed by Charles as a central idea in I Enoch is the conception of the Messianic age.

There

is allusion to the Messiah in I Enoch 98:37-38, where we read about the white bull which was born and all generations were transformed and became white bulls.

Charles makes the

comment on these verses that: The Messiah emerges from the bosom of the community, and he is not angelic, but human, yet superior to the righteous symbolized by sheep. As human he corresponds to the Messiah of the prophets, not that of the Parables, or Similitudes.15 It seems clear that the influence of the Book of Daniel is seen in this section (8 3 -9 8 ), for the use of the figures of bulls and sheep to symbolize men marks the Book of Daniel. By the symbolism of the lambs (I Snoch 9°: 6 ), the Maccabees are to be understood . . . and It is very likely that . . . by the great horn (I.Enoch 98:9)* it is John Hyrcanus that is referred to. 18 This allusion to the Messiah as a white bull, however, seems to have had no direct or specific influence on New Testament

Charles, The Apocrypha of the Old Testament, p. l 8 k. Ibid., p. 260. Emil Schurer, A History of the Jewish People in the Time of Christ (Eng. Tr. by Sophia Taylor and Rev. Peter Christie; New York: Charles Scribner*s Sons, 1885)» III, 6 6 .

86

concepts of the Messiah. But the Parables, or Similitudes, of I Enoch have exercised a direct influence on Hew Testament concepts of the Messiah. Charles points out: Pour titles applied for the first time in literature to the personal Messiah in the Parables are afterwards re­ produced in the New Testament. These are 1Christ,1 or fthe Anointed One,1 1the Righteous One,1 1the Elect O n e , 1 and 1the Son of M a n . *17 The title, Christ, or the Anointed One, which in earlier writings referred to contemporary kings or priests, in the Similitudes, for the first time, it seems, is applied to the ideal Messianic king who is to come (I Enoch k8:10; 5 2 :k).

The title, the Righteous One, occurs for the first

time in literature, according to Charles, nin I Enoch as a Messianic designation--! Enoch 38:2 and 53*6.”16

In the

Hew Testament, the title occurs in Acts 3:lk; 7:52; 22:lk. I Enoch Il6: 3 gives a good description of the righteousness of the Messiah: This is the Son of Man who hath righteousness, with whom dwelleth righteousness, and who revealeth all the treasures of that which is hidden, because the Lord of Spirits (God) hath chosen him, and whose lot hath the preeminence before the Lord of Spirits in uprightness forever.19

17 Charles, The Apocrypha of the Old Testament, pp.

1814.- 185.

18 Ibid. , p. 185. 19 Ibid. . pp. 2ll|.-2l5.

87 The title, Elect One, occurs in I Enoch 14-0:5; I|.5t3“^*;. k-9: 2 -14-; 5l:3*5; 52:6; 5 3 :65 6 l : 5 > H *

6 2 :1 ; etc*

In the New

Testament, the title, the Elect One, occurs in Luke 9 :35 and Luke 23:35*

Charles says, ■

The title of the Messiah as the Son of Man is found in I Enoch for the first time in Jewish literature, and is historically the source of the New Testament designation, and contributes to it some of its most characteristic

contents.20

The figure of the Son of Man in Daniel 7:13* it has been pointed out, stood for the community of saints who were in­ vested with power from the Most High to rule in the coming kingdom of God.

George Foot Moore says that:

The Parables of Enoch (chapters I4.5 to I4-7 ) enlarges upon the theme of Daniel adapting it to a different situation and with a different conception of the *one that looked like a m a n 1 (I Enoch I4.6:1 5 Daniel 7:13) who appears in the judgment a c t . 2 1 In I Enoch the term, Son of Man, is a

transcendental Being,

preexistent (I Enoch I4-8 :3) and seated

on the throne of

glory, possessed of all wisdom and administering judgment. This is not a human figure any longer

as we found it in

Book of Daniel, but a personification

of the concept of

Daniel.

the

In I Enoch, this Being is described as the heavenly

person who is to be the representative and leader of the kingdom who shall dwell with men (I Enoch L5-if7).

20

i b i d . , p.

I8g.

21 Moore, o£. olt. ,. IX, 3 0 3 - 30 !*..

Dr.

88

Pfeiffer says that ’’this figure (Son of Man) is definitely an individual, the supernatural Messiah, as sometimes in the New Testament where the expression may also mean fa human b e i n g 1 or fI f (Jesus).”22

While the figure of the Son of

Man of I Enoch may have had a good deal of influence on New Testament thought, we cannot go so far as to say that it was solely responsible for having influenced men in the time of Jesus to have conferred the title on him.

For the early

Christians to read back their conceptions from Hebrew litera­ ture to the person of Jesus is one thing, but to equate their conceptions with pre-Christian expectation of a De­ liverer properly called the Messiah is another.

To equate

the figure, 11Son of Man,” with the titles, the Anointed One, the Righteous One, and the Elect One, does not involve equating the Son of Man with the Messiah in the technical sense of the term.

For in the Similitudes— I Enoch 37-71—

the Messiah portrayed is not a Messiah in the sense of a human deliverer of Davidic or priestly descent.

And the

Son of Man in these chapters who will judge all things, will slay sinners with the word of his mouth, and will banish wickedness from the face of the earth is not to be equated with the Old Testament hope which the Synoptic G-ospels ex­ press by the word, ’’Messiah,” or ’’Christ.”

22 Pfeiffer, History of New Testament Times, p. 78.

89' A third central teaching of I Enoch which had its influence in moulding corresponding New Testament thought is the conception of this book on Sheol and the Resurrec­ tion*

Charles states that !tif we except the Psalms, we have

in I Enoch the first instances in which this word (Sheol) is found in its New Testament signif ication. *'23

In Enoch 13-3&,

Enoch is translated into heaven and sees two visions:

(1) The

Eternal Watchers of heaven ask him to intercede on their be­ half with the Holy Great One (God), which he does, but the fallen angels are not reinstated and their doom is announced; (2) then Enoch is taken on a journey through the whole uni­ verse and visits Sheol, where he sees the spirits of men, divided into two groups— the righteous who wait for their just reward and the wicked who await punishment for their transgressions.

He sees Paradise appointed for the righteous

and holy, and the Accursed Valley for those who are to be accursed forever.

In the second and third Parables— chapters

Il6-71— Enoch sees the Messiah— the Son of Man— to whom the

Lord of Spirits (God) will commit all angels and kings and men as sinners for judgment and slay them by the word of his mouth.

But the righteous and the Elect of past ages

will be resurrected and will share with the righteous men

23 Charles, The Apocrypha of the Old Testament, p. 185.

90 living on earth material blessedness and spiritual blessings forever.

In the fourth section of I Enoch there is also

portrayed, but in a more concrete manner, the impending judgment of the world (chapters 83-90) in two visions.

In

the first, Enoch relates to his son, Methuselah, what great destruction will occur on the earth.

In the second vision,

he describes the history of the world to the founding of the Messianic kingdom in terms of conflicts between animals— bulls, rams, sheep, lions, and tigers.

Israel, represented

by sheep, Is described as suffering, partly because of their own sins, but also because of "Seventy Shepherds" who had been appointed by the Lord of the sheep to guard them.

It

is probable that the Seventy Shepherds represent angels who were not faithful and the sheep suffered as a consequence. But Enoch sees the Day of Deliverance and a house— a familyfrom which a Deliverer will arise*

The sheep receive a

sword and assail their enemies— the Gentiles.

Then (I Enoch

9 0 :2 0 -14.2 ), the Judgment of the fallen angels, shepherds and

apostates is described.

A new Jerusalem will be set up by

the Lord of the sheep, the righteous will be raised up, the Messiah--symbolized by a white bull— will appear, and the age of blessing will begin.

In the last section (91-108),

which deals chiefly with the problem of the suffering of the righteous and the prosperity of the wicked', the wicked are represented as those who persecute the righteous, possess

91 unrighteous wealth, and break the Law and lack faith in the providence of God*

Sinners, according to this section, will

be punished immediately after death in Sheol.

And in this

section, the Messianic age is a prelude to the final judg­ ment.

It will endure for two T/orld Weeks, for the author

conceives of all the time of the world as ten World Weeks. And at the end of the two World Weeks, the Judgment will occur, and will be followed by the creation of a new earth and the resurrection of the righteous.

According to this

section, the resurrected righteous men will exist as spirits and not as men in the new earth. Sheol then, according to I Enoch, does not have the connotation it carried early in the Old Testament.

The Old

Testament conception of Sheol as the common abode of the dead in. the depths of the earth has become a place where the righteous and wicked spirits are separated between death and the judgment.

In I Enoch 22, Enoch is conducted by angels

to the underworld where he sees a great high mountain of hard rock with deep hollows and smooth walls. One of them was light and had a fountain of water in it, while the other three were dark. The angel Raphael, who presides over the spirits of men (I Enoch 20:3), tells him that these hollow places were created that in them should be collected all the souls of men until the time appointed for the great judgment. The one that is light and has the fountain in it is for the spirits of the righteous; the others for different classes of the wicked. ^4-

Moore, op>. cit., II, 302

92 Chapters 20-23 of I Enoch speak of Jews only and do not mention the Gentiles.

Furthermore, the resurrection of the

righteous Jews is assumed and not specifically stated in these chapters.

However, in chapters If.8-53* Enoch sees the

unrighteous men of earth in the presence of the Messiah con­ sumed as straw in the flames; sees the instruments of torture being prepared by angels for punishing the unrighteous rulers and fallen angels; and sees the righteous Jewish dead arise and inherit the earth.

And in chapters 91-3-03* Enoch

announces woes against the wicked and assurances to the righteous that if they remain faithful and do not receive their just reward here in life they will be raised from the dead (9 1 :1 0 ; 9 2 :3 -5 )* and will, receive material prosperity and spiritual blessing on earth forever (103-10k).

In these

chapters (9 1 -1 0 3 ) there is no promise of resurrection from the dead for the unrighteous, but the doom pronounced upon them of eternal punishment in Sheol by means of chains and darkness and fire (102:7-11; 103:5-8).

In chapter 9 9 : H >

the wicked, it is said, are to be slain in Sheol.

‘Coming

as does I Enoch from a period of a century, from different historical situations, and from different authors, it is but natural that the doctrine of Sheol should have all these varying views.

At any rate, the fact that we find these

different views is evidence of the emphasis which the ideas of Sheol and the resurrection from the dead were given in

93 Jewish thought and religion from 150-80 B.C. The development of the idea in I Enoch of spiritual life after death is possibly the most important contribution of the book to New Testament thought.

The early Old Testa­

ment concept of Sheol was the soil on which the Book of Daniel planted the seed idea of a resurrection of the faith­ ful to receive their reward in this life.

The apocalyptic

writers of I Enoch cultivated the tree planted by the author of the Book of Daniel' in the background of their historical circumstances.

It seems that weight should be given the

fact that the only two references in the Old Testament to resurrection (Daniel 12:2 and Isaiah 26:19)> a**e both found in apocalypses.

In the Old Testament concept of Sheol,

"bhere was little of what we should consider flif e f after death; a man who was dead simply ’was not. fl,25

Although the

ideas about Sheol and the resurrection vary in I Enoch, so that the teaching oh these subjects cannot be given in one brief statement, it is clear that the ideas of Sheol and resurrection in I Enoch are a significant development over the Old Testament.

For in I Enoch, Sheol is a place where

the spirits of the dead await the Judgment, or it is a place of punishment for the wicked.

Sheol, later identified with

the Greek Hades--as already stated in several places—

25 Guy, o£. cit., p. 11

91l originally the abode for all the dead, in I Enoch takes on the moral significance of being conceived as the place where the righteous and the wicked spirits await their judgment* By the time of Jesus, however, the concept of Sheol as the place of punishment for the wicked had taken on the feature associated with the word Gehenna.

In Jesus1 day

Gehenna was the valley outside Jerusalem where the refuse of the city was constantly burning.

Its continual fires were

symbolic of the punishment of spirits after death.

Mark 9 :

k3 and Matthew 25:14-1 are undoubtedly allusions to Gehenna, the former of which alludes to the pit of fire and the latter to the everlasting fire destined for the devil and his angels. In contrast to the concept of Gehenna as the place of punish­ ment for the wicked was the concept of Paradise as the final abode of the righteous.

Paradise seems to have been a

Persian term meaning a garden.

George Foot Moore points out

that A frequent name for the Garden of Eden, Eden, !delight*; it earthly paradise in

the abode of the blessed souls is with reflection of the meaning of is the celestial counterpart of the which the first parents were put.^^

And the prevalence of the use of the term as well as the idea, is borne out be the reference of Luke 23:1^3, the words of Jesus on the cross:

ffI tell you, you will be in Paradise

with me today.n

26 Moore, o£. cit. , II, 390-391.

95 In the story of the Rich Man and Lazarus (Luke l 6 : 19-31)» the beggar is said to go to f,Abrahamfs bosom’1 (Luke l6:22), and the Rich Man goes to Hades (Luke 16:23)*

It

seems, therefore, that by the time of Jesus, Hades was common­ ly thought of as the place of punishment of the dead, and Paradise, or as in this story of Luke, ”Ab.raham?s bosom,” was the abode of the righteous, where they enjoyed the re­ wards of the good life.

In the story of Dives and Lazarus,

the punishment of the ’’wicked” Dives takes place in the very presence of Lazarus the beggar.

In the inference in this

story is that Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob, as in Mark 12:26-27, already live the resurrected life.

At any rate, it seems

that most of the Jews believed in a resurrection (except the Sadducees), which had its rise and development in the apoca­ lypses examined thus far.

Ernest W.

Parsons says that:

It is probable that Jesus shared in the main, the con­ temporary views on these beliefs, and that, if they were changed at all, it was because of the religious insight of Jesus and his sensitiveness to certain fine elements in his conception of God and man.27 There are a resurrection which

few passages with reference to Sheol and bear close resemblance to each other in

the Synoptic Gospels and I Enoch.

The statement of Jesus,

already referred to in the discourse with the Sadducees about the future life of the woman who had been married to

27 Parsons, o£. cit., p. 37.

96 seven brothers leaving no child (Mark 12:18-2?)> that those who rise from the dead "are as angels in heaven” (Mark 12:25) is paralleled by I Enoch 5l:k*

In Matthew 19:29 the words

"inherit eternal life," are reproduced in I Enoch 1l0:9. the Judgment scene of Matthew

In

1, the words "prepared for

the devil and his angels," which describe the everlasting fire prepared for the accursed of God are closely paralleled by I Enoch 5l|*:l4--5.

And in connection with this Judgment

scene in Matthew 25:31* the words and thought used are closely paralleled by I Enoch 69:27.

In Matthew 26:2Ij. the

words of Jesus at the last meal, "It had been good for that man if he had not been born," have their parallel in I Enoch 38:2, except that the case is plural.

Such exact use of

words by the Synoptic writers in relating the gospel narrative and putting the exact words of I Enoch on the lips of Jesus point with no small degree of probability to the current in­ fluence of I Enoch in the time of Jesus before the oral tradition had become crystallized. R. H. Charles says: To Jewish apocalyptic we owe three great doctrines— in some respects conceived, it is true, rather crudely. The first of these is the belief in a blessed future life. Not even a hint of this doctrine is to be found in Old Testament prophecy. The second doctrine embodies the expectation of a new heaven and a new earth, and the third that the end of the present world will be catastropic. These three doctrines passed over from Jewish apocalyptic into Christianity, and have become

97 imperishable elements of the Christian faith,28 In I Enoch $1:1-2, the first of these great doctrines was vitally influenced by the teaching of resurrection for all Israelites when Sheol should "give back what it owes," Good and bad alike are here first described as sharing alike in the resurrection at the Judgment, when the faithful alone, however, shall rise again (I Enoch

Ariel this doc­

trine gave way to the idea of future reward and punishment which was developed through the period of 150-80 B.C. by the different writers of I Enoch.

At the resurrection of

the dead in the Judgment at the end of the Age, the faithful will inherit a new heaven and a new earth (I Enoch 'l±$:l±-$; $1:$), but the wicked will be condemned to Sheol (I Enoch 27:2).

The fact that these ideas are found in I Enoch sug­

gests the influence they must have had by the time of Jesus so that in his day belief in spiritual resurrection of the dead had become well nigh universal. The last central doctrine in I Enoch which has an undoubted share in moulding the corresponding New Testament doctrine is demonology.

It was in the Book of Daniel 10:13

and 20 where it was pointed out that every nation was believed to have its own guardian angel.

But the subject of angel-

ology in this apocalyptic writing is simple and undeveloped

28 Charles, Religious Development, pp. 98-99*

98 compared to I Enoch.

In I Enoch 9^1* the angels Michael,

Uriel, Raphael, and Gabriel are mentioned as if they were well known to the reader.

Another interesting fact observed

in I Enoch is that the names of the many angels mentioned all end in "el," and suggests that the angels are subordinate beings to God.

And in the apocalyptic writing is to be

found a remarkable development of the idea of angels in re­ lation to the origin of evil.

It is in Genesis 6 :1 -14-, the

J Document— probably dating as early as 850-800 B.C.— which gives evidence, it seems, of unassimilated mythology, that the origin of evil is referred to degenerate angels or sons of God.

The belief in evil spirits was indeed characteristic

of early Jewish religion, but it is to be noted that it was strongly developed in the apocalyptic writings in I Enoch. In I Enoch 6-l6 is told the story of the angels who did not keep their first pure estate, but "lusted after the daughters of men" and whose fall was punished by their being bound and cast into darkness among jagged rocks, and on "the day of great judgment" will be cast into the fire.

Prom the time

of their fall they are said to have been imprisoned in dark­ ness.

And I Enoch lists the names of the seven holy angels,

or archangels— Uriel, Raphael, Raguel, Michael, Saraqael, Gabriel, and Remiel (I Enoch 20:1-8).

It was pointed out in

the study of the Book of Daniel that the angel Michael was^ the guardian of Israel (Daniel 10:21; 12:1).

In I Enoch

99

20:5 Michael has become uhe that is set over the best part of mankind and over chaos ,11 But it is in I Enoch that the idea of a kingdom of evil under the rule of a head leader, Satan, and his hosts occurs for the first time.

In the Old Testament, Satan was

an angel who served as the Accuser before God holding out for the full penalty of every transgressor.

But in I Enoch,

Satan appears as the ruler of the kingdom of evil, who led the angels astray and made them his subjects (I Enoch %l±:6; 69:5-6).

W. 0. E. Oesterley states, however, uthe Genesis

passage (Genesis 6 :1—14.) is not the basis of what is said in I Enoch, but that more than one ancient tradition has been placed under c o n t r i b u t i o n . B u t

I Enoch 15:8—

The giants who are produced from the spirits and flesh, shall be called evil spirits upon the earth, and on the earth shall be their dwelling. Evil spirits have pro­ ceeded from their bodies; because they are born from men and from the holy Watchers is their beginning and primal origin, they shall be called evil spirits on earth, and evil spirits shall they be called . . . . seems to have been the common theory of the origin of the demons as the offspring of the fallen angels.

All evil is

said to come from the fallen angels in I Enoch 6 - 3 6 .

And

the fallen angels are imprisoned until the last judgment and ”on the day of the great judgment they shall be cast into

29 W. 0. E. Oesterley, The Companion to the Bible (Edited by T. W. Manson; New York: Charles Scribnerfs Sons,

1939), P. 3kl-

100

the fire." (I Enoch 10:6; 21:7-10;: 67:I}.-?) In I Enoch 5:8; 91*17; 92:5 and. 1 0 0 :5> George Foot Moore points out that it says 11the new era will be free from sin, when once the sinners and the authors and solicitors of sin have been destroyed, and the survivors have been en­ dued with wisdom."30

And in Enoch 90*20-27 is a description

of the judgment of the fallen angels and the apostate Jews who f,are cast into an abyss, full, of fire and flaming, and full of pillars of fire." (I Enoch 90:2if) The demonology of I Enoch appears, for the most part, in the New Testament, and much of it in the Synoptic Gospels. In Matthew 12:lf3-ij-5 and its parallel, Luke 11:21^-26, Jesus gives his conception of evil spirits living as disembodied and finding habitation in the personality of men and con­ trolling them during the present evil age.

That the evil

spirits are not punished until the last judgment--an idea common to I Enoch— is seen in Mark 5:7 and its parallels Matthew 8:29 and Luke 8:28.

And as Satan appears in I Enoch

as a ruler of a kingdom of evil, so also is this idea preva­ lent in the Synoptic Gospels and reported as coming from the lips of Jesus (Mark 3*26; Matthew 12:26; Luke 11:18). Jesus held the idea of a hierarchy of evil spirits in conflict r

with God and his holy angels.

He believed that Satan and

30 Moore, o£. cit., II, 316

101

his hosts must be overthrown before the new glorious age could come when God would usher in the kingdom of the Messiah.

And on the background of this belief, Jesus

carried on his activity of exorcism (Matthew 12:27-28; Luke 11:19-20).

Moreover, the practice of exorcism is. associated

with "proclaiming the good news of the kingdom" (Mark 1:39> Matthew 9*35)*

And Jesus believed that his success with

exorcism was evidence of the weakening of the power of Satan in this present evil age.

CHAPTER V I I I

THE BOOK OP JUBILEES The Book of Jubilees, unlike I Enoch,

”is peculiar in

being the work of one author, composed on a preconceived plan and with a definite purpose.”!

And that purpose was to

oppose Hellenism and uphold the validity of the Law which the author held had been kept in heaven by the angels (Jubilees 3:31? 6:17).

It is a Midrash of Genesis and

Exodus, chapters 1-12.

The author sought to do with these

canonical writings what the Chronicler had done with Samuel and Kings— present them as law which the Patriarchs had ob­ served.

The work is written as a revelation made to Moses

on Mt. Sinai by 11the angel of the presence” (Jubilees 2:1), who went before the hosts of Israel carrying the ”heavenly tablets” (Jubilees 3-10*31; 1j--5*32; 30:20; 31il6), and dictated to Moses the history of the world from its beginning. By this means the author traced the traditions and obser­ vances of Judaism to antiquity, even long before Moses.

And

this strategy, the author also traced not only customs but Jewish laws back to the times of the Patriarchs as ”there delivered by God for all future time.”2

For instance, in

I George Foot Moore, Judaism (Cambridge: Harvard Uni­ versity Press, I 9 I4.6 ), I, 195^ ^ Loc. cit.

103 Jubilees 6:9* Noah and his sons are said to have sworn that they would never eat flesh with any blood, and in Jubilees 6 :ll-lif, Moses is bidden to renew this law against the eat­ ing of blood.

Another law which the author of Jubilees has

11the angel of the presence" speak of as having its source in antiquity is circumcision.

In Jubilees 15:11 we read:

The Lord said unto Abraham: rAnd as for thee, do thou keep My covenant, thou and thy seed after thee; and circumcise ye every male among you, and circumcise your foreskins, and it shall be a token of an eternal coven­ ant between Me and you.1 Regarding the Sabbath, the Book of Jubilees says: He (God) created heaven and earth and everything that He created in six days, and God made the seventh day holy, for all His works. . . , Wherefore do thou (Moses) command the children of Israel to observe this day that they may keep it holy and do not do thereon any work. (Jubilees 2:25-26; cf 50:7) But the Book of Jubilees derives its name from the fact that it divides history covering Genesis and Exodus 1-12, into jubilee periods of forty-nine years each.

According to

Leviticus 25:1-5# there was to be "a sabbath of complete rest for the land," and the fiftieth year was to be a jubilee when the land was not to be sown, nor any after growth was to be reaped, nor grapes to be gathered from its undressed vines (Leviticus 25:11-12),

In Leviticus, the jubilee year follows

seven seven-year periods; but in the Book of Jubilees, reckoning of jubilee periods is every forty-nine years (Jubilees 7:20-39; 50:1-5).

Events are dated according to

lOij.

years, and weeks of years, and jubilees, from the begin­ ning of history in the Book of Jubilees. This work has sometimes been called the Little Genesis, not because the book is small in size by the side of other apocalyptic writings, but because "it is a re­ writing of the Book of Genesis from the standpoint of late Jewish legalism."3

And it is also called the Apocalypse of

Moses, because it is represented as a revelation by "the angel of the presence" to Moses on Mt. Sinai (Jubilees l:k, 2 6 ).

"The author," says Dr. Robert H. Pfeiffer,

"was a

Pharisee, deeply devoted to the Law, even though he held some original views on its interpretat ion.nb substantially the same statement.

R. H. Charles makes

In addition he remarks

that the author of Jubilees "held the strictest views on circumcision, the Sabbath, and the duty of complete separa­ tion from the Gentiles. The Book of Jubilees was probably written in the second half of the second century B.C.— 150-100 B.C.

Charles

3 Leslie E. Puller, "The Literature of the Intertestamental Period," The Abingdon Bible Commentary (Frederick C. Eiselen, editor; Hew York: The Abingdon tress, 19.29) P* 193* ^ Pfeiffer, History of New Testament Times, p. 6 9 .

%

C h a r le s , The A p ocryp ha o f th e

O ld T e s ta m e n t,

II,

8.

105 believes that it was written during the reign of John Hyrcanus.6 There are ideas in the Book of Jubilees that point to the prevalence of apocalyptic in the time of Jesus. First, the author of the book feels that the Messi­ anic age is at hand, and anticipates the immediate advent of the Messiah from Judah.

But he conceives of the Messianic

age differently than the author of the Book of Daniel.

He

does not look for any kind of a catastrophic establishment of the new era, but for the immediate advent of a Messiah to come from Judah (Jubilees 23:11-3^)*

The Messianic kingdom

is to come through the simultaneous transformation of nature and man.

And men shall live to be a thousand years in the

midst of peace for their days are said ”to draw nigh to one thousand years” (Jubilees 23:27).

In Jubilees 23:11

All the generations whidh shall arise from this time u n ­ til the day of the great judgment shall grow quickly, before they complete to jubilees, and their knowledge shall forsake them by reason of their old age, and all their knowledge shall vanish away. it seems that the judgment is to precede the gradual estab­ lishment of the Messianic kingdom, as we have already seen is the order in the Book of Daniel and I Enoch 83-90*

The

prevalence of this apocalyptic idea of the imminence of the kingdom was common in the time of Jesus.

6 Ibid.. p. 6

During the Messianic

io6 age 1,there shall be no Satan nor any evil destroyer11 (Jubilees 23:29)*

Am* this idea, it has been seen, was in

the background of the teaching of Jesus, for he believed that the Messianic kingdom was to be established when the manifestations of Satanic power came to an end.

In the Book

of Jubilees, not only are the faithful Israelites to share in the new Age, but the Gentiles who are righteous, i.e., are proselytes to Israel, are regarded by the author it seems, to share in the kingdom, for a contrast is felt in the phrase, !,the sinners of the Gentiles11 (Jubilees 23:23). The tolerance and mercy of Jesus toward men in the Synoptic Gospels, in every instance, outweighs any partiality and favoritism.

The more inclusive and universalistic teaching

which we feel in the Book of Jubilees regarding those who are to share in the Messianic kingdom is preeminent in the teaching of Jesus.

T. W. Manson says:

There was a real inconsistency In the singling out of one nation by a God of perfect righteousness and uni­ versal dominion for a position of special privilege. The fact is, as we can see clearly enough now, that as usual the whole doctrine is governed by the conception of God; and in this case the inconsistency arises from the fact that there are two ideas of God determining the form which the apocalyptic expectations should take.7 The mission ascribed to Jesus— ”the Son of Man has come to

7 T. W. Manson, The Teaching of Jesus (Cambridge: University Press, 19-U-S)> p. 258*

107 search for what was lost and to save it” (Luke 19:10)— is evidence of his universalistic conception of God and the inclusiveness of all men in the Messianic kingdom which the Book of Jubilees offers as advance and development upon the teaching of the Book of Daniel and I Enoch. A second idea of the Book of Jubilees which had its influence in the time of Jesus was the teaching on the eternal validity of the Law.

The Law in its completeness

and finality is regarded as having been given by Moses.

Ac­

cording to such a doctrine there was little room for any further revelation.

The author holds that the ideal of the

faithful Jew is to be realized in the fulfilment of the moral and ritual precepts of the Law.

But he strikes a deep

spiritual note in the words: And the Lord said unto Moses: *1 know their (Israel!s contrariness and their thoughts and their stiffnecked­ ness, and they will not be obedient till they confess their own sin and the sin of their fathers. And after this they will turn to Me in all uprightness and with all their heart and with all their soul, and I will circumcise the foreskin of their heart and the foreskin of their seed, and I will create in them a holy spirit, and I will cleanse them, so that they shall not turn away from Me from that day unto eternity.® Here is reflected not only phraseology--f,with all their heart and with all their soul”— which Jesus used (also found in Deuteronomy 6:£, however),, but the deep, vital teaching

8'Jubilees 1 :22-23.

108

of Jesus on sin and repentance.

The author of the Book of

Jubilees makes sin not merely external and ritualistic, but as suggested by the use of the words ’’thoughts” and ’’heart11 and ’’soul,” makes sin a spiritual condition.

And Jesus no ­

where according to the Synoptic Gospels makes sin merely a matter of omissions and commissions, but a condition of the soul (Mark 2:17; Matthew 9 :12; Luke 5:31)*

The idea of the

author of the Book of Jubilees that God ’’will create in them (men) a holy spirit,” and ’’will cleanse them so they shall not turn away from Me,” suggests the spiritual teaching of Jesus on repentance.

It was change of heart--allegiance to

God, not merely reformation of behavior--that Jesus stressed. It was the inner quality of life of men, not the observance of ritual, that Jesus taught rendered men fit for communion with God (Mark 7:1-23; Matthew 15:1-20). A third idea in the Book of Jubilees which points to the prevalence of apocalyptic in the time of Jesus is the angelology and demonology of the book.

The names of angels

are not designated as in the Book of Daniel and I Enoch. Four classes of angels are mentioned— angels of the presence (2:1), angels of sanctification (2 :1 8 ), guardian angels over individuals (35:17)* and angels over.natural phenomena (2:2). There is development of the angelology of the Book of Jubi­ lees over the Book of Daniel and also over I Enoch.

Guardian

angels over individuals spoken of in Matthew 18:10 and Acts

109 12:1$, are mentioned for the first time in Hebrew literature in Jubilees 35>:17: ,fFear them not on account of Jacob; for the guardian of Jacob is great and powerful and honored, and praised more than the guardian of Bsau.fl The demonology of the Book of Jubilees is in large part reflected in the Synoptic Gospels.

In this apocalyptic

work Mastema, not Satan, is the principal demon in the court of God.

The demons are conceived as the spirits which have

gone from the souls of the giants who were the children of the fallen angels (Jubilees 5:7*9)*

They attack men and

corrupted and mastered them (Jubilees 10:3*6).

The purpose

of the demons, according to Jubilees 10:8, is ftfor corruption and leading astray before my judgment, for great is the wickedness of the sons of men.” spirits (Jubilees 22:17).

And men worship these evil

The demons are to carry on in

their wicked way until the Judgment of Mastema (Jubilees 10:8), when the messianic kingdom shall be established.

Then

”all their (men’s) days they shall complete and live in peace and in joy, and there shall be no Satan nor any evil destroy­ er; for all their days shall be days of blessing and healing” (Jubilees 23:29). In the Synoptic Gospels demons, as conceived in the Book of Jubilees, are also disembodied spirits.

Matthew

1 2 11|_3 and. Luke 11:24-26 speak of a foul spirit going out of a man and roaming through deserts in search of rest and

110

finding none.

Mark 3*22, and its parallels, Matthew 12:21}.

and Luke 11:15, tell of the scribes who accused Jesus of being possessed by Beelzebub and driving out demons by the help of the prince of demons. is Satan.

Here the chief of the demons

And the idea of the Book of Jubilees that the

wicked spirits are not to be punished until the time of the judgment is also the teaching of Matthew 8:29# which makes this clear by the words, ’’before the appointed time (the judgment).11

This verse in the account of the Possessed Man

of G-erasa does not contain the phrase ’’before the appointed time” in Mark 5*1-20 and Luke 8:26-39*

Nevertheless, the

inference is clear in each gospel, and the entire story re­ flects the demonology of the day. It is to be noted as a fifth idea of the Book of Jubilees that it holds no teaching on the resurrection of the body.

But the spirits of the righteous shall enjoy a

blessed immortality (Jubilees 23:27-31).

B. H. Charles makes

the significant observation that ’’this is the earliest attest ed instance of this expectation in the last two centuries B. C.

It is next found in I Enoch 9 1 “10 L. ”9

9 Charles, The Apocrypha of the Old Testament, II, 9-10.

CHAPTER IX

THE TESTAMENTS OP THE TWELVE PATRIARCHS The Testaments of the Twelve Patriarchs claim to be the last words of the twelve sons of Jacob to their child­ ren.

The work takes its suggestion . . . from the Blessing of Jacob in Genesis Ij.9, and the Blessing of Moses in Deuteronomy 33$ each of the sons of Jacob, when his time comes to die, gathers his descend­ ants about him and delivers to them his parting charge. Drawing a lesson from them from his own life, he dwells particularly on the sin or (sins) into which he had fallen, with the consequences in his case and in general, warns his children against the occasions and temptations which lead men into the like sins, and commends the con­ trary virtues with the disposition by which they are cultivated. In one or two cases the triumph over temp­ tation (Joseph), or the superiority of the simple life in single-mindedness (Issachar), is the main theme; the patriarch is an illustration of virtue, rather than a warning against vice.l

This apocalyptic writing is a good example of moralizing of the biblical stories, modeled upon the Testament of Jacob in Genesis 1l9.

Two chapters of the Book of Jubilees--3L. and

37— contained some of this type of writing.

The exhortation

of the sons of Jacob to their children are based upon haggadi references to the different patriarchs 1 sins and virtues. In every case where they sinned they hold out warning to their children, and where they had been morally excellent

1 George Foot Moore, Judaism (Cambridge: Harvard University Press, I 9 I1-6 ), I, 1 9 0 .

112 and virtuous they hold themselves up as examples of virtue and commendation.

Only Joseph and Issachar, however, could

commend themselves as examples of virtue to their descend­ ants. Each of the patriarchs predicts the future of his own tribe, and as wise counsel most of them exhort their child­ ren to be loyal to the tribes of Judah and Levi, the former representing the priesthood and the latter the royal power recognized by G-od.

,!A11, except God,n Dr. Robert H. Pfeiffer

points out, ,fadd to the wise counsel some apocalyptic pre­ dictions. It is generally held that the Testaments of the Twelve Patriarchs contain interpolation by Christian writers.

On

this point George Foot Moore remarks: The Testaments were long regarded as a Christian compo­ sition. The Christianity of many passages is indeed salient and of others is strongly probable. On the other hand the bulk of the book is prima facie Jewish, the morals no less than the l e g e n d s . 3 Emil Schurer long ago (1885) made the observation that since the Testaments contain circles of thought of a very heterogenous character f,they contain a great deal that it

2 Robert H, Pfeiffer, History o f ,Hew Testament Times (New York: Harper & Brothers, 19^-9) > p. 5IJ7 3 Moore, 0£. cit., I, 192#

113 seems impossible to explain except on the assumption that they were composed by a Jewish author. ”4* It seems clear that the work has undergone frequent revision, and that ’’before the Christian interpolators, Jewish hands had made additions to the Testaments.”5 There are sections which contain material and interest all their own.

These have nothing to do vd.th the main in­

terest of the book already pointed out.

For the purpose of

this study, it is not necessary to list these sections.

It

seems clear, however, that such sections are most probably interpolation and not part of the original work.

The extent

of the interpolation in the Testaments of the Twelve Patri­ archs has long been a problem in the study of this work. Charles believes in unity of authorship in the main, with some hesitation, ’’though it must be confessed, a want of co­ herence at times, and the parts dealing with the duty of submission to Levi, or to Levi and Judah jointly, come in occasionally very abruptly.

k- Emil Schfirer, A History of the Jewish People in the Time of Jesus Christ, Translators, Sophia Taylor and Rev. Peter Christie, Div. II; (New York: Charles ScribnerTs Sons, 1885), III, 115.

5 Moore, op> cit., I, 192. ^ R. H. Charles, The Testaments of the Twelve Patri­ archs (London: Society for Promoting Christian Knovirledge, 1917T, p. xx.

111}. The date of the book in its original form is not difficult to determine within limits.

The Testament of

Reuben 6 :10-11 exhorts his sons to "draw near to Levi in i

humbleness of heart . . .

to receive a blessing from his

mouth . . . because him the Lord has chosen to be king over all the nations."

Here the author speaks of the high priest

Levi who has also been chosen king by the Lord.

"Such a

combination of officers naturally makes us think of the Maceabaean priest-kings of the second century B.C."7 is borne out by the Testament of Simeon

This

in which the

high priest is not only to be king, but also "to wage the war of the Lord."

On the basis of the Testament of Levi 8 :lk,

Charles points out that "the Maceabaean high priests were the first Jewish priests to assume the title

fpriests of the Most

High G o d 1," anciently given to Melchizedek (Genesis ll|.:18). ® This title is also found in the Book of Jubilees 32:1 and l6 .

In the Testament of Levi 8:llj.-15> this title is applied

to John Hyrcanus, and not to all the Maceabaean priest-kings for, as, generally agreed, the author of the main part of the book was a Pharisee, and it could not have been composed after the breach arose between John Hyrcanus and the Phari­ sees.

This break took place toward the close of the century.

7 R. H. Charles, The Apocrypha and Pseudepigrapha of the Old Testament (Oxford: Clarendon Press"J 19131} H > 2 8 9 . 8 Loc. cit.

115

The date of the authorship, therefore, lies between the year when Jonathan the Maccabee became high priest— 153 B.C.— and the time when the breach between John Hyrcanus and the Pharisees occurred. from 137-107 B.C.

The reign of John Hyrcanus extended But f,in all Jewish history,” declares

Charles, ”the triple offices (priest, king and prophet) were ascribed to only one individual, John Hyrcanus.”

Hence we

conclude that the Testaments were written between 137 and 107 B.C.9

This is practically confirmed by Dr. Pfeiffer

who assigns the book to- the period lk0-110 B.C.^ V/. 0 . E. Oesterley, however, thinks that its date is about 100 B . C . H There are several ideas in the Testaments of the Twelve Patriarchs that give evidence of their prevalence in the time of Jesus. The first is the idea of the Messiah.

There are a

number of passages which apparently conceive of the Messiah as descending from the tribe of Levi (Testament of Reuben 6:7;12;: Testament of Levi 8 :lip; 18:2; Testament of Judah 1 —3 5 Testament of Dan 5:10-11; Testament of Joseph

9 L o c . cit. 10 Pfeiffer,

ojd.

cit., p. Sip.

11 W. 0. E. Oesterley-, Companion to the Bible, Ed. by T. W # Manson (Hew York: Charles Scribner*s Sons, 1939), p. 990.

116 19:5-9)*

T!We have here the attestation of a most remarkable

revolution in the Jewish expectations of the Messiah,M says Charles.

nFor some thirty or forty years the hope of a

Messiah from Judah was abandoned'in favor of a Messiah from Levi.”12

The hope of the Messiah to come from the house of

Judah was abandoned when the breach between John Hyrcanus and the Pharisees occurred.

The hope of the Messiah to come

from Judah reappears, according to Charles, in the first century B.C. in the additions of the book which were written about 7 O-I4.O B.C. 13 The Messiah to come from the house of Levi is der— scribed in high and exalted terms.

”He shall walk with the

sons of men in meekness and righteousness, and no sin shall be found in him. ”3-4*

The idea of the Messiah as ”true and

long-suffering, meek and lowly” also occurs in the Testament of Dan 6:9*

At once it seems strange that this exalted de­

scription of the Messiah should appear in the Testament of Judah where it is expected to proclaim the Messiah to come from Judah, but Charles believes that the first three verses of this chapter which t!speak of a Messiah from Levi, as !from

12 Charles, 0£. cit., II, 29413 H. H. Charles, Religious Development Between the Old and the Hew Testaments (Hew York: Henry Holt & Co, 191^-) * p. 233. 3*4* Testament of Judah 2^:1.

117 my seed 1 is an interpolation.

Verses five and six start

afresh and refer directly to a Messiah from Judah. ”3-5 the Testament of Levi 8 :lk it is said of the Messiah: shall establish a new priesthood. and in 18:11:

In ”He

. . to all the Gentiles ,11

”He shall give to the saints to eat from the

tree of life, and the spirit of holiness shall be on them.” The work of the Messiah is stated in the Testament of Levi 18:12:

”And Beliar shall be bound by Him and He shall give

power to His children to tread upon the evil spirits.”

And

”Beliar shall be cast into the fire forever” (Testament of Judah 25:3) •

With the ministry of the Messiah the Testament

of Levi 18:9 says: ”The Gentiles shall be multiplied in know­ ledge upon the earth . . . and sin shall come to an end.”

In

the Testament of Levi 8:15 the Messiah is to be a ”prophet of the Most High, of the seed of Abraham our father.”

It

was undoubtedly the priestly prerogatives and work of the Maceabaean priest-kings that developed the idea and hope of the Messiah’s being a priest as well as a king. The influence of these ideas Is evident in the time of Jesus.

On turning attention to the passages just noted

it is pertinent to this study to note that the author of the Testament of Reuben 6:8 speaks of ‘the Messiah as making

3-5 Charles, The Apocrypha, II, 323-

118 "sacrifice for all Israel.”

It is clear that the author

conceives of the Twelve Tribes as located in Palestine. The conception of the Messiah in the period from 70-lfO B.C. which speaks of the Messiah as coming from the house of Judah is the concept which the Synoptic Gospels present of Jesus.

The genealogies of these gospels (Matthew 1:17 and

Luke 3:23-21^.) present Jesus as coming from the lineage of David.

And this concept is also found in Paul in Romans

1:3— "Jesus Christ,

• . . physically descended from David,”

and also expressed by the author of Hebrews in 7-14— "It is perfectly clear that our Lord sprang from the tribe of Judah."

In the Annunciation to Mary— Luke l:32-33--the

angel Gabriel announces that Jesus will be called great and will be the Son of the Most High, and the Lord will give Him the throne of His forefather David, and He will reign over Jacob!s house forever.

The idea of the Testaments which

represent the Messiah as priest and king and prophet is com­ mon in the Synoptic Gospels.

Jesus is portrayed in the

Triumphant Entry (Mark 11:1-11; Matthew 21:1-11; Luke 19: 29-itii.) as a king coming in righteousness and lowliness.

But

’bleakness is not an attribute of the Messiah in Jewish literature 200 B.C. to 100 A . D . I t

would seem, therefore,

that the influence of this idea made itself felt in a ’

16 Ibid., p . '324.

119 singular way in the time of Jesus.

The prevalent idea of

the sinlessness of the Messiah in the minds of men in Jesus* day, which is expressed in the passage of the Testament of Judah 21}.:1 — ”no sin shall be found in h i m 11— is reflected in the baptism of Jesus as told by the Synoptists (Mark 1:11; Matthew 3:17; Luke 3:22), in which Jesus is spoken of as God's Beloved and Chosen One.

The thought of the holiness

of the saints, or the followers of the Messiah, is current in the Synoptic Gospels*

This is clearly seen in the expression

of Jesus, ’’sons of your Father” (Matthew

Luke 6:3$).

The work of the Messiah described in the Testament of Levi 18:12 as binding Beliar, the prince of demons, is reflected in Mark 3:27 (cf Matthew 12:28-29> Luke 11:19-21):

’’How can

anyone get into a strong man's house and carry off his property unless he first binds the strong man?” and in Luke 10:19—20— ’’Master, when we use your name the very demons sub­ mit to us i

He said to them.

. . I have given you the power

to tread on snakes and scorpions, and to trample on all the power of the enemy.”

The idea of the power of the Messiah

over the forces of evil was common in the time of Jesus. A second influence of the Testaments of the Twelve Patriarchs is the high ethical teaching of the book. says:

Charles

120 The value of the work in regard to the Messianic ex­ pectation is hard to exaggerate, but its main worth lies in another direction . . . in its ethical teaching, which has attained a real immortality by influencing the thought and diction of the writers of the New Testa­ ment, and even of the Sermon on the Mount. This ethical teaching forms alike the warp and woof of the book.17 Many resemblances between the moral teaching of the Testa­ ments of the Twelve Patriarchs and the ethical teachings of Jesus are obvious.

In the Testament of G-ad 6:3-7 is contained a teaching of social relations which reflect the emphasis of the deep inward ethical emphasis of Jesus: Love ye one another from the heart; and if a man sin against thee, speak peaceably to him, and in thy soul hold not guile;, and if he repent and confess, forgive him. But if he deny it, do not get into a passion with him, lest catching the poison from thee he take to swearing and so thou sin doubly. And though he deny it, and yet have a sense of shame when reproved, give over reproving him. For he who denieth may repent, so as not again to wrong thee; yea, he may also honor thee, and be at peace with thee. But if he be shameless and persist in his wrong doing, even so forgive him from the heart and leave God the avenging. The teaching of Jesus In Mark 11:25 and Matthew 6:lli.-l5* that men are to forgive others who offend them and God will for­ give their transgressions bears a close kinship to this pass­ age.

Matthew 18:15-17 and Luke 1 7 0 °n Jesus* teaching

concerning reconciliation so closely parallel the thought and diction of the passage in the Testament of Gad 6:3-7* that It seems Jesus must have been acquainted with it.

17 Charies*Religious Development, p. 229.

121 The statement of Jesus called the Great Commandment-(Mark 12:30-31) and its parallels Matthew 22:37-39 and Luke 1. 0 :2 7 --is to be found in substantially the same thought and

somewhat the same wording as in the Testament of Issachar 5:2--"Love the Lord and your neighbor ,*1 and 7:6, 111 love the Lord; likewise also every man with all my heart.” A third teaching of the Testaments of the Twelve Patriarchs that gives evidence of having been prevalent in the time of Jesus is that of universalism.

This work is in

advance of this teaching over the Book of Jubilees where< there is little hope, if any, held out for the destiny of the Gentiles.

The contrast made by the author of the Book of

Jubilees 15:31-32 between Israel and the Gentiles presents the view of that book: "Over all hath He (God) placed spirits in authority to lead them astray from Him.

But over Israel

He did not appoint an angel . . . for He alone is their rul­ er, and He will preserve them..

. ."

But the author of the

Testaments of the Twelve Patriarchs has a breadth of charity and tolerance that equals the teaching of Jesus.

This

writer is dominated by the thought of the righteous, not solely the faithful Jews.

In the Testament of Levi 5:7 he

says:. "After these things I awaked, and blessed the Most High, and the angel who interceded for the nation of Israel and for all the righteous." 9:2 the

And in the Testament of Levi

spirit of universalism is to be noted in the hope of

122 a general conversion of the Gentiles: The temple of God shall be in your portion, and the last shall be more glorious than the first. And the twelve tribes shall be gathered together there, and all the Gentiles, until the Most High shall send forth his sal­ vation in the visitation of an only begotten prophet. Although it cannot be claimed that Jesus broke com­ pletely the racial barrier and took his teaching directly to the Gentiles, in principle he did.

He made the foundation of

his teaching ethical and not na-tional, universal and not Jewish.

That foundation Jesus laid in the Great Commandment

(Mark 12:30-31; Matthew 22:37-39; Luke 10:27)--love to God and love to neighbor.

Jesus made the love of neighbor to

mean a new relation in the heart to God. The doctrine of the resurrection shows development in the Testaments of the Twelve Patriarchs but there is no essential advance in thought.

There is to be a gradual

resurrection of the Old Testament heroes which will be follow' ed by the rising of f,all men, some unto glory and some unto shame” (Testament of Benjamin 10:6-8).

It seems that there

is no new world, although the everlasting character of the Messianic kingdom is described as the New Jerusalem, where the righteous shall rejoice and l!it shall be unto the glory of God forever” (Testament of Dan 5-12).

CHAPTER X

THE SIBYLLINE ORACLES The Sibylline Oracles are a group of twelve books— originally fifteen in number-— which were written in the period between l6o B.C. and the fifth century A.D.

They are

not treated by G-eorge Foot Moore in his invaluable work on Judaism, for they seem, in most probability to have origin­ ated with Christian writers of a late date, with the exception of three books which are regarded as emanating from Alexandri­ an- Jewish circles.

These three books are included in this

study— the first being chiefly considered— because of a few suggestions which they give of light upon the prevalence of apocalyptic in Palestine in the time of Jesus. Most of the material of these books is, however, of a Hellenistic character, but Books III, IV, and V, which are generally regarded as Jewish, contain some distinctly apoca­ lyptic teaching.

These Jewish oracles were a polemic against

the Gentiles and glorified Judaism among the heathen.

These

three books are readily distinguished from the non-Jewish books by their subject matter such as references to God, the Law, Israel, Beliar and the Messiah.

Robert H. Pfeiffer

says: The extant collection of Sibylline Oracles was preserved, as well as abundantly edited by Christians., so that it is at times difficult to say whether some verses are

12i|.

Jewish or Christian, . . . In view of the popularity of the Sibylline Oracles among pagans, it is not sur­ prising that an Alexandrian Jew living about lkO B.C. should compose some spurious oracles in the same style to teach the truths of the Jewish religion. !I1 The legend of the prophetess, Sibyl, was current among the people of antiquity.

!,To look for oracular utterances of

divine . . . inspiration from the mouth of old women, such as are represented by the witch of Endor in the Old Testament” was common in antiquity.

Men regarded the early oracles of

the Sibyls as genuine and Books III, IV and V show how Alexandrian-Jewish circles patterned propaganda writings after the Sibylline oracles under the name and authority of the ancient prophetesses. Books III, IV and V are written in the form of prophecy, and contain some apocalyptic materials.

The

Biblical incidents, the building of the tower of Babel (Book III, 97-10?), the establishment of the kingdom of Solomon (l62-l6k), and the history of nations about Israel to the time of Cyrus are discussed (165-195).

A long series

of oracles (Book III, 295-333) follow, which prophesy judg­ ment against Babylon, Egypt, God, Magog, and even Libya for their paganism and failure to worship the one true God of the Jews.

There are also a number of prophecies announcing

1 Robert H. Pfeiffer, History of Nev/ Testament Times (New York: Harper & Brothers, 19^9)*> P* 226.

125 judgment of Antiochus Epiphanes (Book III, 38I-I1OO), Phrygia (l4.Ol-I1.32), Cyprus (14.57-14-58) , Rhodes (24J4I1.—I4J4.8), and Italy (k6k-14.69*) • Lines I4.89 to 829 of Book III are oracles of doom and eschatological predictions*

They are words of comfort and

hope to the Jews who. are faithful upon the worship of God. Doom is pronounced upon Phoenicia (Book III, I4.8 9-503)* Crete

(503-507), Thrace (508-5ll), Gog and Magog (512-519)> and Greece (520-572).

The Jews are described as faithful to

G o d fs law (Book III, 573-585), worshipping the true God

(591-593), and avoiding pagan immorality (59lf-800).

The es­

chatological prediction is made that God will cause tfretri­ bution and famine, woes and groans, war, too, pestilence andi fearful calamities upon men, because they would not honor in holiness the eternal Father of all m e n ” (Book III, 6OI-60I4.). But in the time of the t!youthful king of Egypt, seventh in line,” (Book III, 6 0 9 ), Ptolemy VII, and contemporary of Antiochus Epiphanes IV, ”the works (Idols) of m e n ’s hands shall all fall into the flame of fire” (Book III, 6 l 8 ), after which God ”shall give great joy to all m e n ” (6 1 9 K

Then the

Messiah will come— ”From the sunrise God shall send a king” (Book III, 652)— who will judge the nations (662-701), and send peace and prosperity to the Jews— ”The sons of the great God shall live quietly around the temple, rejoicing in those gifts which He shall give” (702-70k).

The Golden Age will

126 follow the judgment of the nations (Book III, 7kl~76l), for f,Earth the universal mother shall give to mortals her best 11 (7 6 1 ).

It seems probable that a good deal of this material

finds its foundation in Old Testament passages (Isaiah 11: 1-95’ Micah 5>:2-k; Jeremiah 23:5-8).

The idea of war against

the faithful Jews may have its basis in Psalm 2 in which the thought seems to be that Gentile kings shall rise up against the Lord (Psalm 2:2-6)*

But what is significant for this

study is the observation that the Messiah in this Oracle is a human being, a kind, it seems, who establishes the kingdom and then drops from sight*

And the kingdom portrayed is an

earthly kingdom with its center at Jerusalem. Book III carries expanded treatment of the Biblical incidents of the building of the tower of Babel, the estab­ lishment of the kingdom of Solomon, and concludes with an outline of the history of the Jewish people up to the time of Cyrus.

The Jews are glorified as a God-fearing nation.

Oracles of judgment are announced against Babylon, Bgypt, Gog, Magog, Troy, and Lybia, all of which are denounced for their sins of idolatry.

There are some prophecies about

Antiochus Epiphanes, Phrygia and Cyprus.

The general

prophecy foretelling judgment upon a sinful world (Sib. Oracles III, 6 6 9 -6 7 9 ).

After this judgment of men the

Messiah, a king from the east who will usher in universal peace (Sib. Oracles III, 652-655).

12? Lines 809 to 829 a**e interesting for they state how the Jewish Sibylline Books were utilized on the background of the Hellenistic Sibylline Oracles for Jewish propaganda. The author takes the position that the Sibyl, a woman proph­ etess, came from Babylon (Sib.

Oracles, III, 8 0 9 K

though '’mortals of Greece” contend

and al­

that she is ”a stranger

of another land, born of Erythrae” (Sib. Oracles III, 8 ll), she is ”the prophetess of the mighty God” (Sib. Oracles, III, 8l5)* daughter-in-law of Hoah (Sib. Oracles III, 821). Book IV, according to Dr. Pfeiffer, ’’dates about 80 A.D.,- for the destruction of Jerusalem (Il5-ll6;127-129) . . . is clearly mentioned.”^

And here again, the Sibyl is

conceived as the prophetess of

the holy and mighty God (1-23).

Happy are the men (Jews) who ’’truly love the mighty God” (2k). The history of the world, after the pattern of the Book of Daniel, is recounted— the Assyrian Empire (if7-53)* the Median Empire (5lf-6o), and the Persian Empire (6l-75)«

Ihe

Macedonian wars of Rome of conquest of Corinth and Carthage in l 6 !f B.C. 66 A.D.

(105-106), down to R o m e Ts Armenian wars in lf3 to

(lllf), and the destruction of Jerusalem in 70 A.D.

(115-127) are set forth.

Then follows prophecies of judg­

ment against Antioch (lk0-lk2), Cyprus (lif3-lkk)> Rome (lk5lli.8 ), and Carla (lk9-l6l).

2

I b i d . . P.

229

Men are urged to repent and not

128 t!to drive the Great God to divers deeds of wrath" (1 6 3 ), and God r,will stay His wrath once more" (1 6 9 ); otherwise God nshall burn the whole earth’* (1 7 6 ),

The concluding lines of

Book IV speak of the final judgment (179-192).

Following

destruction of the earth by fire, God shall again "raise up mortals once more as they were before" (1 8 2 ), and "all who have sinned with deeds of impiety, a heap of earth shall cover again" (1 8 6 ), but "all who are godly shall live again on earth" (1 8 7 ). Book V is commonly regarded as late, Dr. Pfeiffer dating it about 125 A*D.3 What bearing do the Jewish Sibylline Books have upon the question of the prevalence of apocalyptic in the time of Jesus? A first fact to be considered in the emphasis these Books have on judgment by the God of the world.

It has been

noted that the earliest of these Books dates about' the mid­ dle of the second century B.C.

"The middle of the second

century B.C.," says Charles, "was a time when men's minds were very full of the thought of coming judgment of God, and the literature of that age influenced deeply the thought of successive g e n e r a t i o n s . T h e

wrath of God as judgment upon

^ Hoc. >cit. R. H # Charles, The Apocrypha and Pseudepigrapha of the Old Testament (Oxford: The Clarendon Press, 1913)V II> 375>*

129 the earth in these Books is chiefly shown by fire*

In Book

III, lines 672 and 7 9 8 > the wrath of God is described as swords coming down from heaven, a rather confused figure. John the Baptist in the Synoptic Gospels (Mark 1:7-85 Matt­ hew 3:11-12; Luke 3*l6-l8) speaks of the Coming One who shall execute judgment in view of the coming wrath according to -Mark, and according to Matthew and Luke who shall baptize in the holy spirit and fire.

^Matthew 3*11-12 and Luke 3:l6-l8,

both have it (Mark*s phrase, ”He will baptize you with the holy spirit” ), having taken it, not from Mark, but from the V

source,” B. Harvey Branscomb points out.^

The idea in

Matthew and Luke is that the evil and the good would be sorted out as the farmer separates out the chaff from the wheat on the threshing floor, and gathers the wheat into the barns, but the chaff would be burned. Generally, it is to be noted, the Jewish Sibylline Books represent judgment of God upon only the ungodly.

They

are to be destroyed, but the righteous are to enjoy a blessed life (Book III, 6 1 9 -6 2 3 ).

In the Synoptic Gospels we gain

the idea that the judgment separates men into two classes— the good and the evil.

This is the lesson in each instance

of the Parables of the Wheat and the Tares (Matthew 12:36-^3),

5 B. Harvey Branscomb, The Gospel of Mark (New York: Harper & Brothers, 1937) 5 p. 15T~

the Dragnet (Matthew 13:l|.7-50), the Marriage Feast (Matthew 22:ll-lli.), the Wise and Foolish Virgins (Matthew 25; 1-13 and the teaching of Jesus concerning the Judgment of the Son of Man (Matthew 25:31-l±-6).

It is significant that in the

Sibylline Oracles the judgments described do not distinguish clearly between the universal and the particular.

But these

parables and the teaching of Jesus on the•Judgment (Matthew 25:31-^6), show the idea of the Judgment had become definitely the thought of the separation of the good from the evil, with the former sharing the blessings of God and the latter suffer­ ing eternal punishment. A second idea in these three Books is that of the Messiah.

In Book III, 652-653> the author says that "from

the sunrise God shall send a king, who shall give every land relief from the bane of war; some shall He slay and to others He shall consecrate faithful vows.1*

On the coming of this

king "the people of the mighty God shall be laden with ex­ cellent wealth, with gold and silver and purple adornment" (Book III, 657-658).

But because of this special blessing

of God through His Messiah, the envy of the Gentiles is ex­ cited and they vainly attack Palestine (Book III, 660). "The shrine (the Temple) of the mighty God and the noblest men, they the Gentiles seek to ravage” (Book III, 665).

But

God "shall judge all with war and sword, and with fire and cataclysms of rain” (Book III, 6 9 0 ).

But the author comforts

131 and encourages the faithful Jews with the promise that they "shall live quietly around the Temple rejoicing in those gifts He shall give *1 (Book III 702).

And then the Gentiles

shall have their eyes opened to the loving kindness of God toward His faithful ones (Book III, 710).

A description of

the Messianic Age is set forth as a material prosperity of !,fruit in countless store of corn, wine and oil . . . luscious honey,

. . . rich flocks, and kine, and lambs of sheep and

kids of goatstf (Book III, 7^4-^-—7i-i-8)•

And ,fGod will raise up

His kingdom for all ages

over men" (Book III,

7^7-768).

And

men will come from every

land and "they shall bring frankin­

cense and gifts to the house of the great God” (Book III, 772-773)*

It is to be emphasized that the conception of the

Messiah is throughout that of a human figure.

He establishes

the kingdom of God on earth, which is conceived in wholly materialistic terms, and then He has no further relation to the new order.

There is, however, one passage which seems

to take a different view: ,fWhen Rome shall rule over Egypt . . . then the mightiest kingdom of the immortal king over men shall appear.

And a holy prince shall come to wield the

sceptre over all the world unto all ages of hurrying time 11 (Book III, lj.6-50).

Here

as immortal and reigning

it seemsthat Messiah is thought of over His kingdom.

In all the apocalyptic writings in which judgment is regarded as the work of God Himself, the emphasis is that of

132 a world-judgment, and little or no place is left for the Messiah Himself,

There is no idea of a personal Messiah in

Books III and IV of the Jewish Sibylline Oracles.

This is

contrary to the concept of the Messiah in the Synoptic Gos­ pels, where Jesus is the heavenly Man, and the future Judge of the world.

The Jewish apocalypses studied thus far have

each, more or less, conceived of the Messiah as a personal figure.

But Books III and IV of the Sibylline Oracles, by

the very fact of this lack of emphasis on a concrete personal Messiah reflect the ideal outlook of Jewish-Alexandrian circles of thought.

Even if it could be clearly proved that Jesus

actually used the title Son of Man with the connotation seen in the apocalyptic books thus far discussed, the fact is that very early in the life of the church the idea of God as Judge of the world fell into the background and Jesus was conceived as the Judge of the world.

But the crucial passage in this

discussion, it seems, is the statement of Jesus himself: nBut about that day or hour no one knows, not even the angels in heaven, nor the Son; only the Father 11 (Mark 13:32).

Jesus

makes it clear that within the province of his ministry it was not his office to predict the time of the end of the Age. But that he personally looked for the

imminence of the coming

of the kingdom is felt in such passages as Mark 9 :1 Matthew 16:28 and Luke 9 :27)— "I tell

you, someof you who

stand here will certainly live to see

the reign of God come

in its might,” and Mark 13:30 (cf Matthew 2L:3l4--36 and Luke 2 1 :2 9 -3 3 )--ftI tell you, these things will all happen before

the present age passes away, earth and sky will pass away, but my words will not,” and Matthew 10:23— ”But when they persecute you in one town, make your escape to another, for I tell you, you will not have gone through all the towns of Israel before the Son of Man arrives,” Book III of the Sibylline Oracles, coming as it has been noted from the middle of the second century B,C., re­ flects the problem with which apocalyptic had to deal in that period.

The destiny of G o d fs spiritual people was warp and

woof of the destinies of all nations. beyond the borders of Palestine.

The problem extended

T. W. Manson says:

While the prophetic call was for repentance in the face of approaching judgment, the apocalyptic message was an exhortation to be faithful under the present trials in view of the approaching vindication of God*s p e o p l e . 6 Book III sounds this note of comfort and exhortation to faithfulness and patience.

The idea of judgment in this Book

is universal and embraces the thought of a right relation to God.

The universalism of Jesus is commonly known.

Jesus was

broad and tolerant toward.the Gentiles, despite the fact that he was closely bound to his beloved native land by very close ties and wept over his own city of Jerusalem.

^ T. W. Manson, The TeacnJesus The University Press, 19ti$), p t „

(Cambridge, Eng.

13k There is no thought or the resurrection in Book III of the Sibylline Oracles*

Book IV, it has been pointed

out, which dates beyond the period of the life time of Jesus, does, however, speak of the resurrection— that "all who are godly shall live again"(Book IV, 187)•

CHAPTER X I

THE PSALMS OP SOLOMON The Psalms of Solomon, eighteen in number, unlike the Jewish Sibylline Oracles considered in the foregoing chapter, scholars are agreed originated, in most probability, on Palestinian soil.

"The author was evidently a resident of

Jerusalem," says George Foot Moore, "and writes with personal knowledge and feeling of the calamities that befell the city and its inhabitants in those troublous times,"1

And the times

of which Moore writes are the period of the middle of the first century B.C., according to most scholars.

R. H. Charles

specifies the period in his statement that "the Psalms of Solomon were written by various authors between the years 70 and 1|,0 B . C .

References are made to the taking of Jerusalem

by Pompey (Psalm 2:1-2; 8:19-22) about 63 B.C., and to Pomp e y fs death (Psalm 2:31) about lf8 B.C.

"It is probable that

the latest of the Psalms were written before these e v e n t s . "3 The various authors of these Psalms were most prob­ ably Pharisees and the Psalms were "composed in Hebrew but

George Foot Moore, Judaism (Cambridge: Harvard Uni­ versity Press, 19 I4.6 ), I, 181. ^ R. H. Charles, Religious Development Between the Old and New Testaments (New York: Henry Holt & Co.^ 19 1 I4.) > p* 232. 3 Moore,

ojd.

cit. , p. l 8 l.

136

are extant only in a Greek translation and in a Syriac ver­ sion made from the Greek text,11 according to Pfeiffer.4 This is also the position of George Foot Moore who believes that there is no question but that the original language of these Psalms was Hebrew.£

These Psalms are hot, as a whole,

strictly apocalyptic writings, but rather Pharisaic moralizations and treatises on piety, glorification of the Law, and exhortations to strict observance of the Law.

But

Psalm XVII is an apocalyptic writing and presents the Messianic hope as familiar to the Jews of this period. There is no longer any hope for the Messiah to come from the Maccabaean line; the hope in this Psalm is for the Messiah to come from the line of David (Psalm 17:23)*

Leslie E.

Fuller, in his article ,,Intertestamental Literature,11 in The Abingdon Bible Commentary does not classify the Psalms of Solomon as apocalyptic but as wisdom literature.6

It is,

however, because of the importance of Psalm XVII as an apoca lyptic writing that it is embraced in this study of the prevalence of apocalyptic in Palestine in the time of Jesus.

4 Robert H. Pfeiffer, History of New Testament Times (New York: Harper & Brothers, 1949)> P* 63. ^ Moore,

ojd

.

cit., I, 181.

^ Leslie E. Fuller, "Intertestamental Literature," The Abingdon Bible Commentary (New York: The Abingdon Press,

192917pp.“187-199.

137 Before turning to consideration of the significance of Psalm XVII there is a general fact of importance relative to all the Psalms of Solomon.

In these Psalms is reflected

the opposition between the Pharisees and the Sadducees. Throughout the different Psalms the description of an in­ vader, whom most scholars identify as Pompey, runs through the text.

All Judea is spoken of as plunged into war by

his invasion (Psalm 1:2)*

And the invader is described as

”a man that was alien to our race” (Psalm 17:7)*

He was met

by the princes of the land who “met him with joy: they said unto him: Blessed be' thy way I Gome ye, enter ye in with peace 11 (Psalm 8 :6 )*

But it seems that he met with resistance

within the gates of the city* . We read: tfHe captured her fortresses and the wall of Jerusalem 11 (Psalm 8:19).

IHe re­

sult of the conquering power of the invader over Jerusalem is told in the words:

’’Her beauty was dragged down from the

throne of glory” (Psalm 2:19).

Charles points out that

“according to Dio Cassius XLII, 3-5 . . .

Pompey was slain

near Mount Cassius, or possibly beside the streams of Egypt.”7 It seems that Psalm 2:26-27 is a description of the death of Pompey: I had not long to wait before God showed me the insolent one, slain on the mountains of Egypt, esteemed of less

7 R. H. Charles, The Ap (Oxford: The Clarendon Press, ! ,

138 account than the least, on land and sea; his body borne hither and thither on the billows with much insolence, with none to bury him, because He had rejected him with dishonor. That any of the faithful Jews should show favor toward such a Gentile invader is sensed as utterly inconsistent with true Pharisaic piety. On this background of the picture of the invader, Pompey, it is readily seen that there was an antagonistic spirit toward any secularization of Israel. author of Psalm 1?:6 writes:

The Pharisaic

"They set a worldly monarch in

place of that which was their excellency."

Charles points

out that the thought is there were those wiho enjoyed the title of kings rather "than to recognize the sovereignty of God which was the true excellency of the

J e w s * " ^

The author

believes in the theocracy of post-exilic times and not any kind of worldly princedom.

He does not believe in the priest-

kings of the Maccabaean times who practiced intrigue and waged wars for selfish aim and end.

But over against this

position of the Pharisees of this period in the middle of the first century B.C. stood the Sadducees who believed in the political aspect of the faith of their fathers.

In this

period Alexander Jannaeus and Aristobulus II were members of the Sadducean party.

® Charles,

But the authors of the Psalms view them

. cit»

ojd

p. 6I4.8.

139 as sinful men.

Over against them Pompey is regarded as a

Gentile whom they only denounce for his impiety and profan­ ation of the Temple.

As George Foot Moore expresses it:

. . . they (Sadducees) were usurpers of the throne of David, which God had sworn should belong to his posteri­ ty forever. Pompey was the instrument of G o d fs judgment upon them; but his arrogance was visited upon him in his dishonored death.9 The Psalms, therefore, give evidence of the fact that Pharisaic legalism was current in the middle of the first century before the time of Jesus, and was making itself felt even in that period as a spiritual force.

Throughout the

Psalms runs the distinction between saints and sinners, pious and godly men.

But the concept of righteousness in these

Psalms is wholly external and ceremonial.

Psalm lk:l-2 de­

fines the righteous as tfthem that endure His chastening, . . . that walk in the righteousness of His commandments, in the law which He commanded us that we might live for ever." Such men are the pious— the righteous; others are spoken of as sinners and Sadducees.

Jesus dealt with this conception

of righteousness time and again.

In the Sermon on the Mount

he said: TII tell you that unless your uprightness is far superior to that of the scribes and Pharisees you will never enter into the Kingdom of H e a v e n . " ^

9 Moore, o£. cit., I, 181. ^■0 Matthew 5:20.

Jesus 1 teaching about

124-0 the Pharisee and the Publican goes to the heart of his idea of righteousness as humility and inwardness of spirit toward God and m e n . ^ But these Psalms in general, and Psalm XVII in par­ ticular, carry the hope of a Messiah to come from the line of David, who shall be king of Israel and cleanse Jerusalem of the Gentiles and the ungodly.

The Messiah is conceived

as personal and mighty. He shall gather together a holy people, . . . shall judge the tribes of the people that has been sanctified by the Lord his God. Hor shall there dwell with them any man that knoweth wickedness, • . . and He shall divide them according to their tribes upon the land, and neither so­ journer nor alien shall sojourn with them any more. The idea of the Messiah is that of a deliverer who shall come in the future.

Psalm XVIII carries the title:

of the Anointed of the Lord." up unto them their king, the

The hope is expressed: son of David,

which thou seest, 0 God, that He servant" (Psalm 17:21).

And

over His people, Israel, but

"Again

may reign

not only will

"Raise

at the timein the over IsraelThy the Messiah reign

lfHe will destroy the godless

nations with the word of His mouth . . . and He shall reprove sinners for the thoughts of their hearts" (Psalm 17:2Ll-25). All nations shall fear Him as a mighty ruler— "All nations shall be in fear before Him" (Psalm 17:3^*)*

3-2 Psalms of Solomon 17:26-31.

And all the

lip. earth will be blessed by His reign*

For “He shall judge

peoples and nations in the wisdom of His righteousness” (Psalm 17:29) It is clear from such passages cited that the Messianic Kingdom according to the Psalms is nationalistic in outlook and thought*

It is earthly and a glorious materialistic king­

dom in which the Gentiles shall be given their “place”--a place of subjection and not rule.

Moreover, the concept of

the kingdom is that of an eternal kingdom, for the implica­ tion is just that according to the following passages:

“He

will smite the earth with the word of His mouth forever” (Psalm 11:35)9 and "Neither shall sojourner nor alien sojourn with them any more” (Psalm 17:31).

The narrative of Mark

10:35~k-5 and Matthew 20:20-28, called the Ambition of James and John, comes to our minds as we think of the materialistic kingdom of which they conceived.

The central conception of

the kingdom of God in'the minds of men in Jesus 1 time was that of a glorious future state.

This state was to be won by

force through the action of God, and it was to be chiefly for the Jews themselves, with the Gentiles entirely excluded. However, there was a hope held by some of the faithful Jews for this kingdom of God to include men of other nations. Jesus came from such a background of thought.

His teaching

consistently carries out the position that he was at all times making clear a spiritual, inward and ethical conception

1

of the kingdom to most of his hearers.

k2

"The kingdom of God

will be taken away from you^ and given to a people that will produce its proper fruit,” he said in the narrative of the Vineyard and the Husbandmen (Matthew 21:lf3).

And another

teaching which Jesus made prominent, which gives evidence of refutation of the current materialistic conception held of the kingdom, is the thought of the Parable of the Sower that ”the field is the world.

The good seed is the people of the

kingdom” (Matthew 13:38).

Character is made the key to

entrace into the kingdom which is in this world.

To be sure,

Psalms of Solomon promise a kingdom of the holy but it is not the holiness which Jesus conceived. There is no suggestion of the idea of resurrection in the two Psalms which have been emphasized— Psalms XVII and XVIII.

The only thought is that ”blessed be they that shall

be in those days, in that they shall see the good fortune of Israel” (Psalm 17*$0), and the similar statement in Psalm 1 8 :7 : ”Blessed shall be they that shall be in those days,

that they shall see the goodness of the Lord.”

in

But in Psalm

3:11 this author says, ”The destruction of the sinner is for­ ever,” and in Psalm 3:1&: ”But they that fear the Lord shall rise to life eternal.”

These statements give evidence that

the teaching about resurrection was prevalent in the middle of the first century B.C.

Jesus emphasized this conception

of reward for the righteous and punishment for the unrighteous.

CHAPTER X I I

THE ZADOKITE WORK The title used for this chap ter - - 11The Zadokite Work" — is that of Charles, but Pfeiffer speaks of the two "Hebrew documents of the Covenanters of Damascus, called incorrectly, the Zadokite Work.

These documents were discovered in the

ruins of a cellar repository for worn-out manuscripts of old Cairo about I910-

'The reason why the fragments are called

"A Zadokite Work" is that Charles, soon after their dis­ covery believed they were part of a book "most probably called *the Book of Zadok.1"2

German scholars speak of the

work as "Die Damaskusschrift."

And this is fitting for the

work represents the beliefs and teaching of a party which sprang up within the priesthood of Judah in the second century B.C. which "either voluntarily, or under compulsion, withdrew to Damascus (Zadokite Work 6:1^ 8 :6 ,15; 9*28) under the leadership of *the Star*

(Zadokite Work 9* 8 ), otherwise

designated as *the Law Giver,* where they established *the

1 Robert H. Pfeiffer, History of New Testament Times (New York: Harper 5c Brothers, 19^9)\ P* 37* 2 R. H. Charles, The Apocrypha and Pseudepigrapha of the Old Testament (Oxford: The Clarendon Press, 1913)* Tl* 7SE.

New Covenant1— fthe Covenant of Repentance.1"3 The exact date of these fragments is difficult to determine.

The documents themselves were undoubtedly writ­

ten after the withdrawal of the party from Judaism. dates them in the period 18-8 B.C.

Charles

His argument is based on

the concept of the Teacher of Righteousness.

11Throughout

the full period of the wickedness 11 (Zadokite Work 8:9) > the members of the Zadokite party are to obey the precepts of the Law Civer until the coming of the Teacher of Righteous­ ness.

But all who disobey and "place idols upon their

hearts and walk in stubbornness of their hearts shall have no share in the House of the Law" (Zadokite Work 905~35>)» And "they shall get nothing until there arises the Teacher of Righteousness in the end of the days" (Zadokite Work 8 : 10).

The eschatological phrase, "in the end of the days,"

of course, does not designate any date.

But it is after the

death of the Teacher of Righteousness, The men of war were consumed who walked with the man of lies about forty years, and during this period there was kindled the wrath of God against Israel and He said, ’There is no king and no prince and no judge and none rebuketh in righteousness. ? (Zadokite Work 9^39“^ ) The statement here, "about forty years," may be counted from the time of the death of the Teacher of Righteousness, or

3 R. H. Charles, Religious Development Between the Old and New Testaments (New York: Henry Holt & Company, 19157, p. 2357

145 from some year subsequent to his death.

At any rate, it is

clear that forty years have passed since the Teacher died and we have come upon the time of the author himself.

11Dur­

ing these forty years,” says Charles those *who repented of transgression in Jacob* (Zadokite Work 9:iil) had fobserved the Covenant of G o d , 1 exhorting each other to *hold fast to the way of God* (Zadokite Work 9:k2). But as for those who had been faithless, they were to be handed over to the sword when the Messiah ’from Aaron and Israel* comes (Zadokite Work 9:10,29).4 The advent of the Messiah from ’’Aaron and Israel” is awaited in the author *s day.

Contrary to the expectation of the

Messiah to come from the house of Levi, as has been pointed out, the Zadokite party expected him to be a priest or a Levite who should arise from -’Aaron and Israel” (Zadokite Work 15 ri4-)•

Charles reasons that the Messiah was to spring

from Israel--a non-priestly source, on his father’s side, and Aaron— a priestly source on his mother’s side.

And such a

possibility he finds in the historical situation of a son of Mariamne and Herod, in which situation Herod was an Israelite and Mariamne carried royal claims of the Maccabaean house. For the male descendants of the Maccabees were put to death-Antigonus II in 37 B.C., Antigonus III, brother of Mariamne, in 35 B.C., and Hyrcanus II in 30 B.C.,— leaving only Mariamne, the wife of Herod carrying the royal line on both

k-

Charles, op. cit., pp. 793-79^-

i Il6

her father’s and moth e r ’s side of the Maccabees*

Herod

regarded himself as a Jew although at times he was castigated as being only a half-Jew.

The two sons of Herod and Mariamne

were held in high favor by the Jewish people, and since they held blood descent through their mother as Maccabaeans, it is possible that the Zadokite party conceived the hope that one of them might become the Messiah.

But both of the sons —

Alexander and Aristobulus— were put to death by their own father in 8 B.C.

The date of the Zadokite Work, therefore,

cannot be placed later than 8 B.C.

And Charles believes it

cannot be placed earlier than 18 B.C., the year nwhen these youths (Alexander and Aristobulus) returned to Jerusalem after finishing their education in Rome.5

This scheme of

reasoning by Charles seems to the writer as a remarkable piece of intellectual ingenuity, but the conclusion of Pfeiffer is more commendable and acceptable.

Pfeiffer says:

It seems fairly certain to the present writer, that these documents were composed before the fall of Jerusalem in 70 A.D. and well after 200 B.C., when the eight volumes of the prophets were canonized (Zadokite Work 9:7). A teaching of the Zadokite Work which bears on the problem of apocalyptic in Palestine in the time of Jesus is that concerning the Messiah.

In the preceding discussion about

5 Ibid. , II, 788. ° Pfeiffer, ojs. clt. . p. 58.

lii-7

the date of authorship of the Work, it has been pointed out that the Zadokite party expected a Messiah not from the priestly line of Levi, but from 11Aaron and Israel .*1

The

Testaments of the Twelve Patriarchs looked for a Messiah to come from Levi.

But as Charles observes,

Our author was acquainted with the Testaments of the Twelve Patriarchs; the fact that he does not simply repeat the expectation there entertained . . . leads us to conclude that the difference of phraseology points to a real difference in the nature of the expectation . . . . The words fand from Israel 1 are surely signifi­ cant.? The general hope among men of the period was for a Messiah to come from Judah.

There is a tendency in the Work against

Judah and the line of David, and the expected Messiah is to come **from. Aaron and Israel *1 who have not descended from Judah.

In the Testaments of the Twelve Patriarchs, prominence

and favor are accorded to Levi and from the line of Levi the Messiah was to come.

And in the Book of Jubilees, the house

of Levi is glorified, although the Messiah is expected to come from Judah (Jubilees 31:18).

But this tendency to

exalt the house of Levi came to a head in the Zadokite Work and Israel was honored as being the source of the Messiah. There are a number of passages which together give a good description of the coming Messiah.

The figure of the

Teacher of Righteousness holds a prominent place in the

7 C h arles,

o p .c i t . . IX ,

795.

Xlf8 Zadokite Work.

The Teacher of Righteousness is a forerunner

of the Messiah--one whom "God raised up a Teacher of Right­ eousness to lead them in the way of His heart” (Zadokite Work 1:7).

This person is also called the Unique Teacher--

"There was gathered in the Unique Teacher until there should arise from Aaron and Israel 11 (Zadokite Work 9 :^9); and also simply the Teacher (Zadokite Work 9 :50)*

This Teacher is

spoken of as arising "in the end of the days 11 (Zadokite Work 8:10).

A period of forty years is said to elapse from the

time of the Unique Teacher "until all the men of war are consumed" (Zadokite Work 9 :39)--the Messianic Age of peace. During the period of forty years, a remnant of faithful men are left "to fill the face of the earth with their seed 11 (Zadokite Work 2:9) wko shall recognize the Messiah when He comes by His holy spirit (Zadokite Work 2:10).

Judgment is

to descend upon all "the people with few words, each accord­ ing to his spirit in the counsel of holiness” (Zadokite Work 9:^8).

Those who have"proved faithless to the New Covenant

shall be delivered by the sword” of the Messiah (Zadokite Work 9:10). A second idea in the work is the teaching about the future life. statement:

In Zadokite Work

is this significant

"They vtiio hold fast to Him are for the life of

eternity, and all the glory of man is for them."

Charles

says "This line shows that the author believed in a blessed

Ik9 immortality .118

This brief verse is in keeping with the

teaching throughout the Work which carries out the spirit of the Prophets, and which gives its assent and confirma­ tion to the Book of Jubilees and the Testaments of the Twelve Patriarchs. A third teaching to be noted in the Zadokite Work is the emphasis on Beliar.

In the Work, the Old Testament

form of the term Is used— Belial.

And he is spoken of as

f!let loose against Israel ’1 during the forty years (Zadokite Work 6 :9 )9 and as having ’’raised Jochanneh and his brother with evil devices” against Moses (Zadokite Work 7^19)* It is to be noted that the Zadokite Work contains the burning hope of a coming Messiah even though it is the teaching of a party within Judaism that held beliefs materi­ ally different from the Pharisees and the Sadducees. Throughout these fragments is the thought of the end of the age and the imminence of a new day to be ushered in by the Messiah.

But the emphasis upon the coming of the Messiah,

not from Davidic stock and from Judah but from the crossing of Maccabaean and Israelitish lines in singular.

It is

evident, therefore, that the concept of the Messiah and the Messianic Kingdom was not crystallized at this time.

8 Ibid., p. 808.

i5o Thus far in this study it has been found that con­ ceptions of the Messiah and the Kingdom have varied in one way or another.

The teaching of the Zadokite Work of a

blessed future life was a current belief on the part of the Pharisees by the time of Jesus.

But the fact to be empha­

sized is that the ideas about a Messiah and a Messianic King­ dom, even in the time of Jesus, were not uniform.

The

apocalypses studied have presented writings that have been composite, that have been treatises on past history and descriptions of the present day of the authors and that have all been clothed in symbolic language not always easy to understand.

Some of these apocalypses have looked for the

coming of a Messiah, others have described a New Age established on earth by God Himself.

In some, Judgment of

men precedes an eternal Messianic Kingdom on earth, and i n . others a temporary Messianic Kingdom.

Jesus took these

varying conceptions that came down to his day and moulded them according to his deep inward ethical faith in God,

As

In the Zadokite Work, so also in the apocalypses discussed the idea of two kingdoms— the kingdom of God and the kingdom of Satan— always figures in one way or another. By the time of Jesus the problem of the Messiah and His Kingdom became essentially the problem of the time when the manifestations of Satanic power would come to an end. As persecution of the faithful Jews became more and more

151 acute, it seems that about 100 B.C. when a great transforma­ tion of the Messianic hope took place, many people conceived of the present world as unfit for the Messianic Kingdom. The Kingdom was consequently looked for as belonging to the coming age which would be inaugurated after the Resurrection. Charles states that the dominating thought had come to be that ’’the ebernal Messianic kingdom can attain its consumma­ tion only in the world to come, into -which the righteous should enter through the gate of resurrection.”9 be a new heaven and a new earth.

There would

This view superceded the

view of the prophets of an eternal kingdom on the earth with its center at Jerusalem. veloped.

But a view between these two de­

It held that a period would elapse between the

manifestation of the Messiah and the ultimate overthrow of the evil spirits.

This intervening period would be a tempor­

al Kingdom on earth at Jerusalem ruled over by the Messiah. In the time of Jesus the Messianic Kingdom was con­ ceived as a glorious future age.

It seems that the chief

conception of it was that it was to come by the power and action of God. the Jews.

And this Kingdom was to be exclusively for

But at the close of the century, just before the

time of Jesus, the Pharisaic Quietists were making them­ selves felt.

They upheld the old tradition of resignation

9 Charles, o£. cit., p. 71.

152 and non-resistance.

Jesus apparently came from this group.

The Synoptic Gospels give evidence of such a group.

Mark

speaks of Joseph of Arimathea as a man ’’living in expectation of the reign of God,” and Luke 2:25 speaks of Symeaon as ’’living in expectation of the comforting of Israel and under the influence of the holy spirit.”

CHAPTER X I I I

THE ASSUMPTION OP MOSES According to Charles, the Assumption of Moses like the Zadokite Work, is a fragment of a larger work.^

He be­

lieves that the work originally consisted of two distinct works, of which the first was called the Testaments of Moses and the second the Assumption of Moses,

But Pfeiffer de­

clares that What appears to be the first part of such a work was pub­ lished by Ceriani in l 8 6 l in an old Latin version, based on a G-reek translation made from the Aramaic original. If such was the case, the firs.t part of this book was apocalyptic, and the second (now lost except for a few quotations) was le g e n d a r y . 2 The book purports to be the content of a revelation delivered by Moses to Joshua before his death.

The future

of Israel is prophesied and Joshua is instructed to hide the books ’’until the day of repentance in the visitation where­ with the Lord will visit them in the consummation of the end of the days” (Assumption of Moses 1:18).

The whole course

of the history of Israel up to the time of the author is foretold.

Reference is made to the rebuilt Temple following

1 R. H. Charles, Religious Development Between the Old and New Testaments (New York: Henry Holt & Co,”, I 91 IIT, p. 237. 2 Robert H. Pfeiffer, History of New Testament Times (New York: Harper 5c Brothers, 19ii-9/* P* 79*

15k the exile (Assumption of Moses 1l:8), to Antiochus Epiphanes who forced the Jews **by goads to blaspheme with insolence the word . . . the laws and what they had above their altar” (Assumption of Moses 8:5)* to the Hasmonaean rulers who ncalled themselves priests of the Most High God 11 (Assumption of Moses 6 :1 ), to the cleavage between Pharisees and Sadducees in Assumption of Moses 7:3-10, according to Charles,3 and to Herod the Great who **shall execute judgments on them (Jews) as the Egyptians executed upon them, during thirty and four years (the length of the reign of Herod after the death of Antigonus), and he shall punish them” (Assumption of Moses 6 :6 ).

And when **a powerful king of the west shall come . . .

and take them (Jews) captive, and burn a part of their temple with fire, and shall crucify some around their colony,

. . .

the times shall be ended1* (Assumption of Moses 6 :8-7:1). Charles points out that Varus, a governor of Syria quelled a rebellion in Palestine in k B.C. and burned a part of the temple which was not repaired until the time of N e r o !s reign. And when ?fthe times shall be ended,** **then His kingdom shall appear throughout all His creation, and Satan shall be no more, and sorrow shall depart with him** (Assumption of Moses 10:1).

And **the Most High will arise, the Eternal God alone,

3 R. H. Charles, The Apocrypha and Pseudepigrapha of the Old Testament (Oxford: The Clarendon Press, 1913)* I I « 519.

1 55

and H© will appear to punish the Gentiles, destroy their idols” (Assumption of Moses 10:7-8) and Israel shall be happy. The date of the book is determined largely according to chapter six.

It is clear that the author wrote after

the death of the "insolent king,” Herod the Great, and after the rebellion of the Jews quelled by the Roman governor, Varus, k B.G.

And according to Assumption of Moses 6:7*

Herod was to be succeeded by his children who "should rule for shorter periods, the work must have been written before any one of Herod's sons had reigned longer than Herod. Charles points out that this was "true of Archelaus only, as Antipas reigned forty-three years and Philip thirtyseven."^- The book was written, therefore, after the end of the reign of Archelaus--6 A.D.--and before the end of the reign of Antipas in 39 A'.D.

The interpretation of the phrase

in Assumption of Moses 7:1* "the four hours," is conjectural, but as Charles says, "it' may be fairly concluded that part of these had .already elapsed when the author wrote, . . . and thus the book was written between the years 7 and 30 A.D."5

^ Ibid., p . kl9 ^ Ibid., p. kll

156

The author of the Assumption of Moses, as Charles has shown, was not

sl

Sadducee, a Zealot, nor an Essene, but a

Pharisaic Quietist .6

He protested against the seculariza­

tion of the Pharisees for their part in political ideals and programs in his day.

It has already been noted that he did

not favor the Maccabaean priest-kings.

The author was not a

Sadducee for he looks to the intervention of God on behalf of Israel (Assumption of Moses 10:3/7)•

And he was not a

Zealot, for he pleads for simple obedience in the Law, and if men are faithful to the Law, he exclaims, "If we do this and die, our blood shall be avenged before the Lord" (Assumption of Moses 9:7).

Nor was the author an Essene who was indivi­

dualistic and not nationalistic in his outlook and aspirations. He hoped for the return of the Ten Tribes (Assumption of Moses 2:5; ii-t9) ond triumph of Israel over her enemies (10:2). The Essenes disapproved of animal sacrifices, but this writer favors the system of sacrifice of the Temple Moses 2:7; 3*2;6:1).

(Assumption of

But the author of the Assumption of

Moses was a Pharisee of the early type who believed in simply faithful keeping of the Law and preparing for the interven­ tion of God in behalf of his people through repentance.^ In Chapter 9* A man of the tribe of Levi, whose name shall be Taxo, exhorts his seven sons to "Fast for the space of three

6 Loc. c it.

157 f

days and on the fourth day . . . go into a cave . and die rather than transgress the commands of the Lord of Lords, the God of our Fathers ’1 (Assumption of Moses

9:6).

Then their deaths would be avenged by God, and ’’His kingdom would appear throughout all creation” (Assumption of Moses 9:7)It is to be noted that in structure the Assumption of Moses is patterned after the Book of Daniel.

The history

of the Jews is covered from the time of the purported author to the writer’s own day. One teaching of the book which has a bearing on the problem of the prevalence of apocalyptic in Palestine in the time of ^esus is that on the Messianic kingdom.

It needs to

be stated here at the outset that there is no office of a Messiah in this book.

Charles makes a good observation on

this point when he says that ’’this is probably due to the fact that the conception of the Messiah, as a man of war, was gaining more and more acceptance among the Pharisees . . . . No such Messiah could be acknowledged by our a u t h o r . ”7

The

author of this work, like the author of the Book of Daniel, believes in the establishment of the kingdom of God, not by men, but by the divine intervention of God.

He believed that

the kingdom would be ushered in by a day of repentance— ’’His

7 Ibid., p. k!2.

(God’s) name should be called upon until the day of repent­ ance in the visitation of wherewith the Lord will visit them in the consummation of the end of the days 11 (Assumption of Moses 1:18)•

The author of the Book of Daniel, it has

been pointed out, felt that the resort to force and violence on the part of the Maccabaeans was ”a little help” (Book of Daniel 11:3^-)* but he looked for the full realization of the hopes of the saints in their unflinching loyalty to God and the Law*

If only they would hold out a little while in the

face of threat and suffering under Antiochus Epiphanes they would be delivered individually by the Most High, but more, through them, the enduring kingdom of God would be ushered in and all evil would be destroyed.

In the Assumption of

Moses, the author glorifies ” a man of the tribe of Levi, whose name shall be called Taxo” (9*1)> who was ready to die rather than to transgress ”the commands of the Lord” (Assump­ tion of Moses 9 :6 ).

He emphasizes that absolute loyalty to

God will ’’forthwith avenge them (the saints) of their enemies (Assumption of Moses 10:2) and ’’His (God’s) kingdom will appear throughout all His creation” (Assumption of Moses 10:1) This kingdom of God is spoken of as accompanied by trembling of the earth and Shaking down of the high mountains (Assump­ tion of Moses 1 0 :k), darkening of the sun (10:5) > and turn­ ing of the moon into blood (10:5).

But it is significant to

observe that there is no mention, however, of a new heaven

159 and a new earth*

And God would 11appear to punish the

Gentiles and . . ♦ destroy all their idols” (Assumption of Moses 10:7)# and Israel would !,be happy and . . . mount upon the necks and wings of the eagle” (10:8)— be exalted.

Israel

is described as being happy to ”look from on high and see her enemies in Gehenna” (Assumption of Moses 10:10).

The king­

dom which is here visioned is not an earthly but a supramundane kingdom.

This conception of the kingdom of God is

not the idealistic political kingdom on earth under the rule of the saints, that was the conception of the author of the Book of Daniel.

And another observation to be made is that

although the Assumption of Moses has developed the idea of the separation of the righteous for heaven and the evil for Sheol, as in I Enoch 103:3-7 and I Enoch 99:11# it does not contain the thought of a final assault of the enemy on the saints as a prelude to the Judgment, as seen in I Enoch