In the book as we have it there is, indeed, the assertion that a relative good is attainable in the enjoyment of the pleasures of life, but it is a question whether these Epicurean passages are by the original author. Whoever inserted them, however, drew a natural conclusion from the premises of the author. In the book there are, moreover, a number of passages which plainly contradict its main teaching. Where Koheleth saw only perversity in the administration of the world and wickedness in high places, the pious annotator assures us that God will judge the righteous and the wicked (317). Direct rebuke seems to be administered to the author by the insertion: "Because sentence against an evil work is not executed speedily the heart of the sons of man is fully set in them to do evil; but though a sinner do evil a hundred times and prolong his days yet surely I know that it shall be well with them that fear God; but it shall not be well with the wicked, neither shall he prolong his days which are as a shadow before God" (8:11-13). Most instructive of all is the edifying conclusion of the book in which the orthodox defender of the faith shows his assurance that he has silenced his adversary: “The end of the matter when all has been heard is: Fear God and keep his commandments, for this is the whole of man; for God will bring every work into judgment even every hidden thing whether it be good or whether it be evil" (12: 13).

If it had not been for these edifying insertions it is probable that Ecclesiastes would not have been received into the Jewish canon. And some may even now demur at the inclusion of the original author among the sages of Israel. Yet there is no reason to doubt that he counted himself a loyal Jew, and that he claimed a place among the teachers of Israel. The editor of his book assures us that because Koheleth was wise he still taught the people knowledge. Scattered through the book we find wise saws such as adorn the book of Proverbs: "Better a handful of quiet than two handfuls of toil"; "Two

1 These Epicurean passages are 3: 12 ƒ., 22; 5: 17–19; 8: 15 and 9:7-10.

are better than one"; "Better is a poor and wise youth than an old and foolish king"; "Better the rebuke of the wise than the song of fools." Such passages impressed the average reader more distinctly than did the scepticism of the book, and they gave it currency. No doubt, the thought that the riches and wisdom of Solomon convinced him of the vanity of worldly prosperity also attracted many minds. For us who seek to know the actual course of religious thought in Israel the book is significant, as showing the near approach to bankruptcy of faith made by one who sought an explanation of the phenomena of life.

How it escaped bankruptcy in the case of some minds is made evident by the latest book in this group, the Wisdom of Solomon. Since the book was written in Greek and at the very end of the Old Testament period, it might be a question whether it belongs in our discussion. Yet the author is a loyal Jew, and he makes use of Solomon to teach the lessons he has at heart. Far from making the great king the blasé and disillusioned pursuer of pleasure, however, it holds him up as an example, a man who has attained the best there is in life. We can hardly avoid seeing in this an intentional confutation of the older book. Ben Sira and Koheleth are apparently opposed to Greek philosophy. The author of Wisdom, on the other hand, finds the solution of the problems of life in the doctrine of immortality, and this not in the Jewish form of a resurrection of the body, but distinctly in the form already wrought out by Greek philosophy, that is, the immortality of the soul set free from the body by death. To him it is the sinner who says that in the death of a man there is no remedy, neither is any known to return from the grave (Wisdom 2: 1). "In the world to come the righteous shall enjoy eternal felicity in the presence of God and receive a beautiful crown from him" (3:8).

CHAPTER XVIII

APOCALYPTIC DEVELOPMENT OF THE MESSIANIC HOPE

ECCLESIASTES Shows a rationalising tendency at work on the religion of Israel, and it is a question whether Greek thought was not undermining the distinctive beliefs embodied in the Jewish Scriptures. What might have happened had there been no violent attack on those beliefs (and the practices which went with them) we cannot tell. What actually took place is clear to us. The persecution of Antiochus kindled the zeal, not to say fanaticism, of the observers of the Law and gave to Legalism a new and stronger hold on the affections of the faithful. The conflict with the Syrian monarchy showed that a considerable party in Jerusalem sympathised with the desire of the king to "civilise" his subjects, as he phrased it. These men were not moved altogether by a desire to secure court favour. Some of them were attracted by Greek ideals. They were to be found among the more educated of the nation and were in any case only a minority. Opposed to them were the strict observers of the Law, and the course of the struggle showed that these were divided into two parties. One we may call the Maccabeans, adherents of the heroic family which led the revolt. They were at first moved only by the determination to resist tyranny, but as they achieved success they indulged hopes of restoring the politicial independence of their nation. The other fraction consisted of the Asideans, the Pious, as they called themselves. They would take no part in political affairs, believing that Yahweh would set up his kingdom in his own time by an act of miraculous intervention. Until that time should come, the duty of the loyal Jew, as they

believed, was to obey the Law to the letter, and wait upon God. This party did, indeed, make common cause with the Maccabeans when the possibility of keeping the Law was threatened, but as soon as they were again allowed to observe their customs without interference they withdrew from the struggle.

We have seen the importance which the Messianic hope assumed in postexilic Judaism. What now interests us is the intensity with which the hope was held in the time of persecution. It is only in accordance with human nature that the expectation of divine intervention should rise to fevered heat in proportion as persecution becomes more bitter. At such times believers argue that God cannot long leave his people to be a prey to the wicked. In the history of the Christian Church expectation of the Second Coming becomes acute at those times in which the puritan party is oppressed by worldlings. So in the Jewish Church the Messianic hope was kindled into flame when persecution arose. It then took new and fantastic forms, and the more ardent spirits even ventured to calculate the time of the end and to revive the spirits of their coreligionists by specific promises that the day was just at hand. The evidence is found in a group of books to which we give the name apocalypses.

The author of an apocalypse conceives of prophecy as essentially predictive—the miraculous revelation of what is to come to pass. But the older books of prophecy very imperfectly conform to this ideal. The predictions which they contain are much less definite and specific than the believer would like to have them. This defect is remedied in the apocalypse. On the basis of a tradition or of visionary experiences, or of both, the author sets forth the divine plan as he conceives it. And since this plan embraces the past as well as the future, he dates his work in the past, ascribing it to some ancient worthy. This name will carry weight with the reader. The predictions embodied in the work are really history under the guise of prophecy, and they are usually couched in the form of vision, that

being the traditional means of revelation. In the theory of the book the ancient seer to whom it is ascribed had the course of human history unrolled to him in trance from his own time until it reached its end with the triumph of the Kingdom of God.

The representative apocalypse in the Hebrew canon is the book of Daniel, in which all these points are fully illustrated. It has, however, precursors in some older fragments. Ezekiel has distinctly apocalyptic features. It was he who first set forth the scheme adopted by later writers, according to which there would be a miraculous annihilation of the heathen world-power, followed by an equally miraculous rebuilding of the temple. In the other prophets we have similar utterances. Thus Habakkuk describes the coming of Yahweh to judgment: "Yahweh comes forth to judge his people; his presence shakes the earth, dries up the streams, causes the sun to forget his rising, and the moon to cease her shining" (Hab. 3). Several passages now included in the book of Jeremiah have the apocalyptic colouring, and with them we may class the little book of Joel. This example is especially instructive, for it shows how any extraordinary event in nature may awaken the expectation of Yahweh's coming. The extraordinary event in this case was a plague of locusts such as often visits the countries bordering the desert. The author describes what seems to him an unprecedented event and the description is in such terms that expositors have been in doubt whether a veritable swarm of locusts is intended or whether the author is picturing the approach of a hostile army: "A people has invaded my land mighty and without number. . . . Like heroes they run, like veteran warriors they climb the wall, they march every one in his way and they do not break their ranks" (Joel 16 and 27). The decision, however, cannot be doubtful; the author is describing an invasion of locusts pure and simple. It is significant of his point of view that his chief grief is that the desolating swarm has cut off meatoffering and drink-offering from the house of God (1:13).