Chapter 22

But the sinner is ensnared through his lips,And the fool stumbleth through his mouth (xxiii. 8).

But the sinner is ensnared through his lips,

And the fool stumbleth through his mouth (xxiii. 8).

Ben-Sira’s teaching concerning the origin of Sin may, then, be summed up thus: He implies, though he hardly goes so far as to make the definite assertion, that the origin of Sin is due to God; yet in one important passage he strongly combats this. He teaches, further, that so far as the human race is concerned the origin of Sin is to be sought in the fall of Eve, but he does not attempt to trace its history further back; this was, however, from his point of view unnecessary if, in accordance with his third theory, sin originates in the individual; nevertheless, he involves himself in a contradiction here in saying that because of Eve’s sin all men must die. In addition to this, however, there is a further inconsistency regarding this third theory, for while teaching that Sin originatesinman, he sometimes speaks of it as something external to him. These contradictory thoughts bring into clear relief Ben-Sira’s inability to formulate a consistent and logical doctrine as to the origin of Sin; and in this he but shows himself the forerunner of the Rabbis, from whose writings it can be seen that these later thinkers were involved in precisely the same inconsistencies as soon as they attempted to construct a working theory on the subject.

There is one other point connected with this subject to which brief reference must be made, namely, the means whereby sins are atoned for; the importance here lies in the fact that the teaching of this book concerning atonement for sins is the same as that of the later Rabbinical literature; it is, therefore, a great development upon Old Testament teaching. Ben-Sira follows the teaching of theOld Testament in so far that he believes in the need of the sacrificial system provided that sacrifices are offered in the right spirit; he says, for example, in one place:

Give a meal-offering with a memorial,And offer a fat sacrifice to the utmost of thy means (xxxviii. 11);

Give a meal-offering with a memorial,

And offer a fat sacrifice to the utmost of thy means (xxxviii. 11);

but it depends upon the spirit of him who offers as to whether the sacrifice is acceptable or not:

The sacrifice of the unrighteous man is a mocking offering,And unacceptable are the oblations of the godless.The Most High hath no pleasure in the offerings of the ungodly,Neither doth He forgive sins for a multitude of sacrifices(xxxiv. 18, 19, in the Greek xxxi. 21-23).

The sacrifice of the unrighteous man is a mocking offering,

And unacceptable are the oblations of the godless.

The Most High hath no pleasure in the offerings of the ungodly,

Neither doth He forgive sins for a multitude of sacrifices

(xxxiv. 18, 19, in the Greek xxxi. 21-23).

That sacrifices atoned for sins is a fundamental Old Testament doctrine, but the other means of atonement which Ben-Sira mentions show a development; these are as follows; (one quotation in support of each must suffice for illustration). Concerning Almsgiving it is said in iii. 30:

A flaming fire doth water quench,So doth almsgiving atone for sin.

A flaming fire doth water quench,

So doth almsgiving atone for sin.

That Fasting is an atonement is implied in the following:

... So a man fasting for his sinsAnd doing the same again,—Who will listen to his prayer,And what hath he gained by his humiliation?(xxxiv. 26; in the Greek xxxi. 31).

... So a man fasting for his sins

And doing the same again,—

Who will listen to his prayer,

And what hath he gained by his humiliation?

(xxxiv. 26; in the Greek xxxi. 31).

Another means of atonement is Death; this is seen, or at any rate adumbrated, in the words in xviii. 22:

Delay not to pay thy vow in due time,And wait not till death to be justified.

Delay not to pay thy vow in due time,

And wait not till death to be justified.

This last assumed ever-increasing importance with the growth of the belief in the resurrection; in Ecclesiasticus it is perhaps no more than adumbrated, for where there was as yet no belief in the resurrection nor in punishment for unatoned sins hereafter there was no inducement toformulate a doctrine as to the atoning efficacy of death; the above-quoted passage is, however, worth giving as illustrating a tendency. One other means of atonement must be mentioned because it teaches the truth of mediatorship; this is in xlv. 23:

Moreover Phinehas, the son of Eleazar,Was glorious in might as a third [i.e. after Moses and Aaron],In that he was jealous for the God of all,And stood in the breach for his people,While his heart prompted him,And he made atonement for the children of Israel.

Moreover Phinehas, the son of Eleazar,

Was glorious in might as a third [i.e. after Moses and Aaron],

In that he was jealous for the God of all,

And stood in the breach for his people,

While his heart prompted him,

And he made atonement for the children of Israel.

What little is found in the Book of Tobit concerning the doctrine of Sin is connected with Demonology, which will be considered in § (h). There is a reference to the atoning efficacy of almsgiving in iv. 10, 11: “... Because alms delivereth from death, and suffereth not to come into darkness. Alms is a good offering in the sight of the Most High for all that give it”; and especially xii. 9, “Almsgiving doth deliver from death, and purgeth away all sin.” There is nothing that calls for particular mention in the Book of Judith; or in the Additions to Daniel, with the exception of one interesting passage in the Prayer of Azariah, verse 12, where it is said: “Cause not thy mercy to depart from us, for the sake of Abraham that is beloved of Thee, and for the sake of Isaac Thy servant, and Israel Thy holy one”; so, too, in the Prayer of Manasses, verse 8, where it is implied that the patriarchs are sinless: “Thou, therefore, O Lord, that art the God of the righteous, hast not appointed repentance unto the righteous, unto Abraham, and Isaac, and Jacob, which have not sinned against Thee; but thou hast appointed repentance unto me that am a sinner.” This is important, for the same idea finds expression in the later Rabbinical literature, and closely connected with it is the doctrine of the merits of the fathers, i.e. that the good deeds of the patriarchs and other greatpersonalities in the history of Israel serve as an atonement for their descendants. There is probably no book in the Apocrypha in which such deep realization of sin is expressed as in this short one; this is shown in verses 8-13:

For the sins I have sinned are more in number than the sands of the sea,For my transgressions were multiplied, O Lord;My transgressions were multiplied,And I am not worthy to behold and see the height of heaven by reason of the multitude of mine iniquities....

For the sins I have sinned are more in number than the sands of the sea,

For my transgressions were multiplied, O Lord;

My transgressions were multiplied,

And I am not worthy to behold and see the height of heaven by reason of the multitude of mine iniquities....

The next book that calls for notice is 2 Maccabees, on account of its strangely particularistic doctrine of retribution for sin; in vi. 12-16 it is said: “Now I beseech the readers of this book not to be discouraged by such calamities,[330]but to reflect that our people were being punished by way of chastening, and not for their destruction. For indeed it is a mark of great kindness when the impious are not let alone for a long time, but punished at once. In the case of other nations, the Sovereign Lord in His forbearance refrains from punishing them till they have filled up their sins to the full, but in our case He has determined otherwise, that His vengeance may not fall on us in after-days when our sins have reached their height....” The teaching of this subject in 1 (3) Esdras and Baruch is that of the Old Testament; but it is worth mentioning that the doctrine of the merits of the fathers referred to above is expressly repudiated in Baruch ii. 19: “For we do not present our supplication before Thee, O Lord our God, for the righteousness of our fathers, and of our kings”; evidently this doctrine must have been held by some, since it receives such a pointed repudiation.

The doctrine of Sin in 2 (4) Esdras is important as it is very fully dealt with; this will require a little more detailed notice, but we can restrict ourselves to the “SalathielApocalypse” portion of the book (iii.-x.), as the other parts do not offer anything of importance so far as this subject is concerned. The origin of Sin is traced to Adam, as the following passage (iii. 20-22, 25, 26) will show: “And yet Thou didst not take away from them the evil heart, that Thy Law might bring forth fruit in them. For the first Adam, clothing himself with the evil heart, transgressed, and was overcome; and likewise also all who were born of him. Thus the infirmity became inveterate; the Law indeed was in the heart of the people, but together with the evil germ; so what was good departed, and the evil remained.... And, after this had been done many years, the inhabitants of the city committed sin, in all things doing as Adam and all his generations had done; for they also had clothed themselves with the evil heart.” This teaching occurs more than once; in iv. 30 it is said: “For a grain of evil seed was sown in the heart of Adam from the beginning, and how much fruit of ungodliness hath it produced unto this time, and will yet produce until the threshing-floor come!” And, once more, in vii. 118: “O thou Adam, what hast thou done! For though it was thou who sinned, the fall was not thine alone, but ours also who are thy descendants!” Adam’s fall and sin in man are thus directly connected, but how this connection came about the writer nowhere says. From the passage quoted above, however, it will be seen that the writer of this book recognizes each man’s individual responsibility for his own sins (“they also had clothed themselves with the evil heart”). “It is noteworthy,” says Box,[331]“that the form of the apocalyptist’s conception is specifically Rabbinic. He bases his conclusions on theYetzer ha-ra‘[i.e. the “evil tendency”]; there is no suggestion that the introduction of evil into the world was due to external agents or forces. The older mythological view (found in Genesis and in theolder apocalyptic literature) that the fall of man was brought about by demonic incitement is tacitly discarded. The corruption of the human race is regarded as due to a development of something inherent in man’s nature (theYetzer ha-ra‘). Though this doctrine is sometimes combined, in the Rabbinical literature, with the popular view of Satan (Satan works his evil purpose by the instrumentality of theYetzer ha-ra‘), it probably really represents a theological refinement which was intended to supersede the older crude popular ideas about demonic agency.... Where our apocalyptist differs, and differs fundamentally, from the orthodox doctrine of Judaism, expressed in the Rabbinical literature, is in the emphasis he lays on the ravages of the evilYetzerupon human nature generally. The enfeeblement of man’s nature is such that practically no one has been able successfully to withstand theYetzer; the whole race has fallen into corruption. The Rabbis insisted, on the other hand, that human nature is not, by any means, in such a hopeless condition. Man can, by moral effort and assisted by the grace of God, successfully resist the suggestions of the evil impulse.” In this book, therefore, it is taught that Sin is universal among men: “For in truth there is none of the earth-born that has not dealt wickedly, and among those that exist that has not sinned” (viii. 35); and therefore the writer’s sense of sin is very pronounced: “For the evil heart has grown up in us, which has estranged us from God, and brought us into destruction; and has made known unto us the ways of death, and showed us the paths of perdition, and removed us far from life; and that not a few only, but well-nigh all that have been created!” Turning now to the Book of Wisdom, we may note first that the writer believed in an original state of good:

Court not death in the error of your life;Neither draw upon yourselves destruction by the works of your hands;Because God made not death,Neither delighteth He when the living perish.For He created all things that they might have being,And the products of the world are healthsome,And there is no poison of destruction in them ... (i. 12 ff.).

Court not death in the error of your life;

Neither draw upon yourselves destruction by the works of your hands;

Because God made not death,

Neither delighteth He when the living perish.

For He created all things that they might have being,

And the products of the world are healthsome,

And there is no poison of destruction in them ... (i. 12 ff.).

Still more explicit are the words in viii. 19, 20:

Now I was a child good by nature, and a good soul fell to my lot;Nay rather, being good, I came into a body undefiled.

Now I was a child good by nature, and a good soul fell to my lot;

Nay rather, being good, I came into a body undefiled.

Without going into the question here of the writer’s belief whether, and in what manner, the soul pre-existed, it is clear enough that he did not believe in the innate sinfulness of human nature. In the second part of the book, however, a somewhat different attitude is taken, for in xii. 10, 11, when speaking about the Canaanites, he says:

But judging them by little and little Thou gavest them a place of repentance,Though Thou knewest their nature was evil, and their wickedness inborn,And that their manner of thought would in no wise ever be changed;For they were a seed accursed from the beginning;Neither was it through fear of any that Thou didst pass over their sins.

But judging them by little and little Thou gavest them a place of repentance,

Though Thou knewest their nature was evil, and their wickedness inborn,

And that their manner of thought would in no wise ever be changed;

For they were a seed accursed from the beginning;

Neither was it through fear of any that Thou didst pass over their sins.

The view here held is quite contrary to that found in the two former quotations which suggest a different authorship for the two parts of the book. This is also borne out by what is said regarding death, as the result of Adam’s sin presumably; for in ii. 23, 24 it is said:

Because God created man for incorruption,And made him an image of His own proper being.But by the envy of the devil death entered into the world,And they that belong to his realm experience it.

Because God created man for incorruption,

And made him an image of His own proper being.

But by the envy of the devil death entered into the world,

And they that belong to his realm experience it.

Death, which is the result of Sin, was thus not originally intended to come upon the human race. But in the second part of the book there is no hint of this. The first part of the Book of Wisdom is, therefore, quite unique among the books of the Apocrypha on this subject; the second part offers nothing that is new.

A true balance is kept in Ecclesiasticus between Grace and Free-will; many passages could be cited to show this, but the few following will suffice. In speaking of the ideal scribe, Ben-Sira says (xxxix. 6):

If it seem good to God Most High,He [i.e. the scribe] shall be filled with the spirit of understanding;He himself poureth forth wise sayings in double measure,And giveth thanks unto the Lord in prayer.

If it seem good to God Most High,

He [i.e. the scribe] shall be filled with the spirit of understanding;

He himself poureth forth wise sayings in double measure,

And giveth thanks unto the Lord in prayer.

Again, in i. 14 it is said:

To fear the Lord is the beginning [i.e. the essence] of Wisdom,And with the faithful she was created in the womb.

To fear the Lord is the beginning [i.e. the essence] of Wisdom,

And with the faithful she was created in the womb.

Equally definite is Ben-Sira’s teaching on Free-will; he says, e.g. in xv. 15-17:

If thou so desirest thou canst keep the commandment,And it is wisdom to do His good pleasure.Poured out before thee are fire and water,Stretch forth thine hand unto that which thou desirest.Life and death are before man,That which he desireth shall be given to him.

If thou so desirest thou canst keep the commandment,

And it is wisdom to do His good pleasure.

Poured out before thee are fire and water,

Stretch forth thine hand unto that which thou desirest.

Life and death are before man,

That which he desireth shall be given to him.

Both truths are combined in the words:

If thou desire Wisdom keep the commandments,And the Lord will give her freely unto thee.

If thou desire Wisdom keep the commandments,

And the Lord will give her freely unto thee.

The important point about Ben-Sira’s teaching here is the way in which he combines the two apparently opposing truths; he shows that they are not mutually contradictory, but complementary. He thus continues the teaching of the Old Testament concerning the omnipotence of God and the responsibility of man.

In the Book of Tobit similar teaching is found; for example in iv. 5 Tobit says to his son Tobias: “My child, be mindful of the Lord all thy days, and let not thy will be set to transgress His commandments; do acts of righteousness all the days of thy life, and walk not in the ways of unrighteousness.” But that divine grace is needed forthis is taught in iv. 19: “Bless the Lord thy God at all times, and ask of Him that thy ways may be made straight, and that all thy paths and counsels may prosper.” In the rest of the books belonging to this century nothing calls for particular note under this heading; but in the secondary text of Ecclesiasticus the same balance of doctrine is found as in the original book; thus, dependence on God and the reception of the gift of love from Him are expressed in the addition to xvii. 17:

Whom [i.e. Israel] He brought up as His first-bornWith severity, yet loving them,Imparting to them the light of love;And He forsook them not.

Whom [i.e. Israel] He brought up as His first-born

With severity, yet loving them,

Imparting to them the light of love;

And He forsook them not.

Man has, however, his part to play, for in the addition to xx. 31 it is said:

Better is persistent endurance in seeking the Lord,Than a driver of his own life without a master.

Better is persistent endurance in seeking the Lord,

Than a driver of his own life without a master.

In 1 Maccabees the doctrinal subject under consideration is closely connected with the doctrine of God as presented in this book. We have seen above that direct divine intervention in the nation’s affairs is not nearly as prominently expressed here as in the books of the Old Testament; and it has also been already remarked that God is never mentioned by name in the whole book. The writer is certainly not wanting in earnest belief and faith in God; his conviction of the existence of an all-seeing Providence is clear from many passages; but he also has a strong belief in the truth expressed by the modern proverb that “God helps those who help themselves.” This attitude was largely due to the influence of certain tendencies which were beginning to assert themselves. These centred round the doctrine of God. Just as there was a disinclination, on account of its transcendent holiness, to utter the name of God, and instead to substitute paraphrases for it, sothere arose also a disinclination to ascribe action among men directly to God on account of His inexpressible majesty. One result of this was the further tendency to emphasize and extend the scope of human free-will. We find, therefore, in this book that much more emphasis is laid on free-will than on divine grace. In the Additions to Esther it is just the other way about; for here human free-will is scarcely taken into account, while the divine activity among men is throughout insisted upon. But in both this book and 1 Maccabees there can be no doubt that the one-sided emphasis on divine grace and human free-will respectively was prompted by the particular subject-matter of either book.

In the case of 2 Maccabees, though written with a definitely religious object, there is very little to note under the present heading; the frequent stress laid, however, on the fact that the Jews are God’s chosen people, and therefore under His special protection and guidance, is a point to be borne in mind. The next book to be considered is 2 (4) Esdras, and here again it is only the “Salathiel Apocalypse” that claims attention. “The writer’s intense sense of sinfulness, and his conviction of man’s inability to acquire justification by the works of the Law, impel him to throw himself wholly upon the divine compassion; he despairs of a life of absolute obedience to the Law, even by Israel, not to speak of the world. The unconscious and unexpressed cry of the book is for a moral dynamic, which legalism could not supply.”[332]This deeply religious writer must, therefore, perforce have looked to divine grace where human will-power was helpless. As we should expect, in the Book of Wisdom the main stress is laid on free-will, though the other side of the truth is not lost sight of. The former is plainly taught in i. 12-16:

Court not death in the error of your life,Neither draw upon yourselves destruction by the works of your hands.But the ungodly by their hands and words called him [i.e. Hades] unto them;Deeming him a friend they were consumed with love of him,And they made a covenant with him,Because they are worthy to be of his portion.

Court not death in the error of your life,

Neither draw upon yourselves destruction by the works of your hands.

But the ungodly by their hands and words called him [i.e. Hades] unto them;

Deeming him a friend they were consumed with love of him,

And they made a covenant with him,

Because they are worthy to be of his portion.

But, on the other hand, the opening words of the book bring out in a very clear manner the indispensable need of divine grace for the right exercise of the will:

Love righteousness, ye that be judges of the earth,Think ye of the Lord with a good mind,And in singleness of heart seek ye Him;For He is found of them that tempt Him not,And is manifested unto them that do not mistrust Him....For the holy spirit of discipline will flee deceit,And will start away from thoughts that are without understanding,And will be scared away when the unrighteous approacheth (i. 1-5).

Love righteousness, ye that be judges of the earth,

Think ye of the Lord with a good mind,

And in singleness of heart seek ye Him;

For He is found of them that tempt Him not,

And is manifested unto them that do not mistrust Him....

For the holy spirit of discipline will flee deceit,

And will start away from thoughts that are without understanding,

And will be scared away when the unrighteous approacheth (i. 1-5).

The didactic character of Ecclesiasticus is sufficient to account for the extreme meagreness of references to the Messiah. In the few cases in which the subject is referred to it is the seed of David to which the Messiah belongs, viz.:

He will not cut off the posterity of His chosen ones,Nor will He destroy the offspring of them that love Him;And He will give to Jacob a remnant,And to the house of David a root from him (xlvii. 22).

He will not cut off the posterity of His chosen ones,

Nor will He destroy the offspring of them that love Him;

And He will give to Jacob a remnant,

And to the house of David a root from him (xlvii. 22).

And in the eighth verse of the Hymn of Praise which (in the Hebrew only) is inserted after li. 12, occur these words:

Give thanks unto Him that maketh a horn to sprout for the house of David,For His mercy endureth for ever.

Give thanks unto Him that maketh a horn to sprout for the house of David,

For His mercy endureth for ever.

Ben-Sira, therefore, believes in a Messiah who is purely human, according to the usual Jewish doctrine, and who belongs to the house of David; but his belief is otherwise vague.Apart from the nature of the book itself, it must be remembered that the conceptions of a Messiah were largely conditioned by the historical circumstances of any given period; during the time of Ben-Sira these were not of a nature to call forth Messianic hopes, and therefore the teaching regarding the Messiah was indefinite, and receded into the background. In the Book of Tobit the Messiah is never mentioned, but the renovated Jerusalem which the writer speaks of, and the gathering in of the dispersed Israelites as well as of the Gentiles, gives a picture of what corresponds to the Messianic Kingdom:

O Jerusalem, thou holy city! He will chastise thee for the works of thy hands,And will again have mercy on the sons of the righteous.Give thanks to the Lord with goodness, and bless the everlasting King,That thy tabernacle may be builded in thee again with joy,And that He may make glad in thee all that are captives,And love in thee all that are miserable and all the generations of eternity.A bright light shall shine unto all the ends of the earth;Many nations shall come from afar,And the inhabitants of the utmost ends of the earth unto Thy holy name ...(xiii. 7-18; see also xiv. 4-6).

O Jerusalem, thou holy city! He will chastise thee for the works of thy hands,

And will again have mercy on the sons of the righteous.

Give thanks to the Lord with goodness, and bless the everlasting King,

That thy tabernacle may be builded in thee again with joy,

And that He may make glad in thee all that are captives,

And love in thee all that are miserable and all the generations of eternity.

A bright light shall shine unto all the ends of the earth;

Many nations shall come from afar,

And the inhabitants of the utmost ends of the earth unto Thy holy name ...

(xiii. 7-18; see also xiv. 4-6).

No other books of the Apocrypha offer any teaching on this subject until we come to 1 Maccabees, where there is conceivably in the mind of the writer the thought of the Messiah in iv. 46, “... so they pulled down the altar, and laid down the stones in the mountain of the House, in a convenient place, until a prophet should come and decide as to what should be done concerning them.” The reference here is probably to Deuteronomy xviii. 18, which is not a Messianic passage, though it may have been so interpreted in later times. A somewhat more definite reference to the Messiah is perhaps to be seen in xiv. 41: “And the Jews and the priests were well pleased that Simon should be their leader and high-priest for ever, until a faithful prophet shouldarise.” The words “for ever” mean that the high-priesthood should continue hereditary in the house of the Hasmonæans, so that if by “a faithful prophet” the Messiah is meant, the writer would imply that the Messiah would be of Hasmonæan lineage. In 2 Maccabees there is no reference to the Messiah, though there is to the Messianic Kingdom, for the gathering together of the scattered Israelites in Jerusalem is an undoubted Messianictrait: “Gather together our dispersion, set at liberty them that are in bondage among the heathen.... Plant Thy people in Thy holy place” (i. 27); and again in ii. 18: “In God have we hope, that He will speedily have mercy upon us, and gather us together from under the wide heaven to the holy place.”[333]In Baruch the Messianic Kingdom, though not the Messiah, is spoken of in iv. and v., where the destruction of Israel’s enemies is referred to:

... But shortly thou shalt see his [i.e. the enemy’s] destruction,And shalt tread upon their necks (iv. 25, cf. verses 31 ff.).

... But shortly thou shalt see his [i.e. the enemy’s] destruction,

And shalt tread upon their necks (iv. 25, cf. verses 31 ff.).

The ingathering of Israel is also described:

... O Jerusalem, look about thee toward the east,And behold the joy that cometh unto thee from God,Lo, thy sons come, whom thou sentest away,They come gathered together from the east to the west,Rejoicing in the glory of God ... (iv. 36-v. 9).

... O Jerusalem, look about thee toward the east,

And behold the joy that cometh unto thee from God,

Lo, thy sons come, whom thou sentest away,

They come gathered together from the east to the west,

Rejoicing in the glory of God ... (iv. 36-v. 9).

The only other book which has teaching on this subject is the important apocalypse 2 (4) Esdras, and here, as one would expect, the teaching is full. The first point to notice is that as this book is of composite authorship the conceptions of the Messiah differ; thus, in the “Salathiel Apocalypse” (iii.-x.) the Messiah is regarded as purely human: “For my son the Messiah shall be revealed, together with those who are with him, and shall rejoice the survivors four hundred years. And it shall be, after these years, that my son the Messiah shall die, and all in whom there is humanbreath” (vii. 28, 29). On the other hand, in the “Eagle Vision” (xi.-xii. 39) the pre-existence of the Messiah is taught, though he is to spring from the seed of David: “This is the Messiah, whom the Most High hath kept unto the end of the days, who shall spring from the seed of David ...” (xii. 32). The same is taught in the “Vision of the Man from the Sea” (xiii.): “Whereas thou didst see a Man coming up from the heart of the sea—this is he whom the Most High is keeping many ages ...” (xiii. 25, 26). In this vision the Messiah is of a supernatural character. This truth of the Messiah’s pre-existence is likewise implied in the “Ezra Legend” (xiv.): “For thou shalt be taken up from among men, and henceforth thou shalt remain with my son, and with such as are like thee, till the times be ended” (xiv. 9). Only in the “Salathiel Apocalypse” are the signs which are to precede the Messianic Kingdom (i.e. the “Messianic Woes”) mentioned, but they are given in considerable detail: “Concerning the signs, however—Behold the days come when the inhabitants of the earth shall be seized with great panic, and the way of truth shall be hidden, and the land of faith be barren. And iniquity shall be increased above that which thou thyself now seest or that thou hast heard of long ago. And the land that thou seest now to bear rule shall be a pathless waste; and men shall see it forsaken; if the Most High grant thee to live, thou shalt see it after the third period in confusion. Then shall the sun suddenly shine forth by night, and the moon by day; and blood shall trickle from the wood, and the stone utter its voice. The peoples shall be in commotion, the outgoings of the stars shall change. And one whom the dwellers upon earth do not look for shall wield sovereignty, and the birds shall take to general flight, and the sea shall cast forth its fish. And one whom the many do not know shall make his voice heard by night; and all shall hear his voice. Andthe earth o’er wide regions shall open, and the fire burst forth for a long period. The wild beasts shall desert their haunts, and women bear monsters. Salt waters shall be found in the sweet. Friends shall attack one another suddenly. Then shall intelligence hide itself, and Wisdom withdraw to its chamber—by many shall be sought and not found. And unrighteousness and incontinency shall be multiplied upon the earth. One land shall also ask another and say: Is righteousness—that doeth the right—passed through thee? And it shall answer: No. And it shall be that in that time men shall hope and not obtain, shall labour and not prosper” (v. 1-12).

Regarding the Messianic Kingdom itself it is to be of limited duration, and, according to the “Eagle Vision” Gentiles as well as Jews are to enjoy it: “And so the whole earth, freed from thy violence, shall be refreshed again, and hope for the judgement and mercy of Him that made her” (xi. 46).[334]In the “Vision of the Man from the Sea” the Gentiles are wholly destroyed by the Messiah, and his kingdom is only for his own people (xiii. 8-13).

In the Book of Wisdom there is no doctrine of the Messiah, nor is there, in the Jewish Palestinian sense, a belief in a Messianic Kingdom; what we do find, however, is that Jewish traditional eschatological conceptions are utilized by the author, and that a glorious future is believed to be reserved for the Jews; there are two passages in which this future is portrayed, viz. iii. 8:[335]

They [i.e. the righteous] shall judge nations, and have dominion over peoples;And the Lord shall reign over them for evermore.

They [i.e. the righteous] shall judge nations, and have dominion over peoples;

And the Lord shall reign over them for evermore.

The thought that is apparently in the writer’s mind here is that of such passages as Isaiah ii. 4a: “And He shall judge among the nations, and shall decide concerning many peoples,” and Isaiah xlix. 23: “And kings shall be thy nursing-fathers and queens thy nursing-mothers; they shall bow down to thee with their faces to the earth ...”; these, it is true, refer to an earthly theocracy, whereas the author of Wisdom is speaking of the hereafter, but theadaptationof Scriptural passages is a very natural procedure; he does not define closely the nature of the eternal kingdom which will be set up hereafter, any more than the prophet does in regard to his ideal earthly kingdom. The other passage is v. 15-23:

But the righteous live for ever,And the Lord is their reward,And the care for them with the Most High.Therefore shall they receive a glorious kingdom,And a diadem of beauty from the Lord’s hand;Because with His right hand will He cover them,And with His arm will He shield them.

But the righteous live for ever,

And the Lord is their reward,

And the care for them with the Most High.

Therefore shall they receive a glorious kingdom,

And a diadem of beauty from the Lord’s hand;

Because with His right hand will He cover them,

And with His arm will He shield them.

So far this passage, like the other one, is based upon Old Testament Messianic passages such as Isaiah xl. 10, iv. 5, 6, xxviii. 5, 6, lix. 16, 17, and others[336]; but in verses 17-23ab,where the Most High goes out Himself as a warrior, a different element enters in. It is true, that here, too, the Old Testament conception of Jehovah as a mighty man of war lies at the back of the passage, but there are also other eschatological, or rather apocalyptic, traits which appear. These elements have been utilized by the author of Wisdom, who has sought to spiritualize them:

He shall take His jealousy as complete armour,And shall make the whole creation His weapons for vengeance on His enemies;He shall put on righteousness as a breastplate,And shall take judgement unfeigned as a helmet;He shall take holiness as an invincible shield,And shall sharpen stern wrath for a sword;And the world shall go forth with Him to fight against His insensate foes.Shafts of lightning shall fly with true aim,And from the clouds, as from a well-drawn bow, shall they leap to the mark.And as from an engine of war shall be hurled hailstones full of wrath;The water of the sea shall rage against them,And rivers shall sternly overwhelm them;A mighty blast shall encounter them,And as a tempest shall it winnow them away.So shall lawlessness make all the land desolate,And their evil-doing shall overturn the thrones of princes.

He shall take His jealousy as complete armour,

And shall make the whole creation His weapons for vengeance on His enemies;

He shall put on righteousness as a breastplate,

And shall take judgement unfeigned as a helmet;

He shall take holiness as an invincible shield,

And shall sharpen stern wrath for a sword;

And the world shall go forth with Him to fight against His insensate foes.

Shafts of lightning shall fly with true aim,

And from the clouds, as from a well-drawn bow, shall they leap to the mark.

And as from an engine of war shall be hurled hailstones full of wrath;

The water of the sea shall rage against them,

And rivers shall sternly overwhelm them;

A mighty blast shall encounter them,

And as a tempest shall it winnow them away.

So shall lawlessness make all the land desolate,

And their evil-doing shall overturn the thrones of princes.

These two last lines are strikingly out of harmony with what has preceded, since they deal with this world; such a sudden change of subject is unnatural, the lines cannot originally have stood here.

There is, thus, no doctrine of a Messiah or a Messianic Kingdom in the ordinary Jewish sense; the kingdom which is described has God as its ruler, it is an eternal kingdomwhich only the righteous shall possess; the writer does not make clear whether it is to be set up on this earth, or whether it is to be a spiritual kingdom hereafter. From the way in which he spiritualizes it is presumably to be a kingdom in the world to come; against this it cannot be urged that there are materialistictraitswhich point to a kingdom to be set up on this earth, for the writer has clearly borrowed and incorporated traditional eschatological material without intending to utilize more than its outward form. To interpret otherwise would, in view of the spirit of the rest of this portion of the book, be to misunderstand the author.

In Ecclesiasticus the teaching on this subject is substantially that of the normal Old Testament type; one or two quotations will suffice to illustrate this:

For what pleasure hath God in all that perish in Hades,In place of those who live and give Him praise?Thanksgiving perisheth from the dead as from one that is not,But he that liveth and is in health praiseth the Lord (xvii. 27, 28).

For what pleasure hath God in all that perish in Hades,

In place of those who live and give Him praise?

Thanksgiving perisheth from the dead as from one that is not,

But he that liveth and is in health praiseth the Lord (xvii. 27, 28).

The corruption of the body is looked upon as the end of man:

When a man dieth he inheritethWorm and maggot, lice and creeping things (x. 11);

When a man dieth he inheriteth

Worm and maggot, lice and creeping things (x. 11);

though the annihilation of the spirit as well as the body is evidently not contemplated in view of such words as these:

Weep gently for the dead, for he hath found rest (xxii. 11);

and in xxx. 17 death is spoken of as an “eternal rest” (cp. xxxviii. 23, xlvi. 19). This idea of rest for the soul hereafter is “very different from that of death being corruption and the end of all things, which is the more usual one in Ecclesiasticus, and one is perhaps justified in seeing the beginnings of development here, based, it is true, on some Old Testament passages; the conception of the dead restingmust involve some sort of a belief beyond the bare existence of the shade hereafter.”[337]It is of particular interest to note that in one or two cases the Greek shows signs of some development of conception regarding the future life where in the Hebrew the normal Old Testament position is maintained; thus in vii. 17 the Hebrew has:

Humble thy pride greatly,For the expectation of man is worms.

Humble thy pride greatly,

For the expectation of man is worms.

This is rendered in the Greek:

Humble thy soul greatly,For the punishment of the ungodly man is fire and the worm.

Humble thy soul greatly,

For the punishment of the ungodly man is fire and the worm.

It is clear that the development which is known to have taken place in the doctrine of the future life during the second centuryB.C.is reflected here. Very noticeable is the fact that a kind of technical sense has become attached to the word “worm,” such as we find in Mark ix. 48 (“... where their worm dieth not, and the fire is not quenched”). In xxi. 9, 10 it is probable that a similar development exists, though in this case it cannot be proved as the Hebrew is unfortunately not extant; but in view of the example just given it is highly probable that the following reading of the Greek likewise represents a developed idea:

Like tow wrappedtogether is theassembly of the ungodly,And their end is the flame of fire.The way of sinners is made smooth without stones,And at the end thereof is the pit of Hades.

Like tow wrappedtogether is theassembly of the ungodly,

And their end is the flame of fire.

The way of sinners is made smooth without stones,

And at the end thereof is the pit of Hades.

It will be noticed that the parallelism between “the flame of fire,” and “the pit of Hades,” suggests that the latter has developed into Gehenna. Another example is to be found in xlviii. 11, where the reference is to Elijah; only one line of the original couplet is decipherable in the Hebrew, viz.:

Blessed is he that seeth thee and dieth;

i.e. the man who before he died saw Elijah is blessed; the next line is illegible in the Hebrew and corrupt in the Greek; but the point of importance is that the Greek adds this further line:

And we also shall surely live,

the reference being evidently to the life hereafter, since Elijah is the subject of the preceding couplet.

One other passage must be mentioned, not because in itself it points to any development of thought, but because the Old Testament episode (1 Kings xvii. 17-24) to which it refers must sooner or later have suggested the thought of the dead rising; it is also in reference to Elijah (xlviii. 5):

Who didst raise up a dead man from death,And from Sheol, according to the good pleasure of Jehovah.

Who didst raise up a dead man from death,

And from Sheol, according to the good pleasure of Jehovah.

The Hebrew and the Greek do not differ materially.

In the Book of Tobit the normal Old Testament doctrine is taught; so, e.g., when Tobit prays: “Command my spirit to be taken from me, that I may be released from off the earth and become earth” (iii. 6); in the same verse Sheol is spoken of as “the everlasting place,” it is a place of “darkness” (iv. 10), and “below the earth” (xiii. 2). In the Book of Judith there is only one reference to the future life, but the passage is an important one as it witnesses to a development of thought similar to that found in the Greek text of Ecclesiasticus vii. 17, xxi. 9, 10, where Hades is a place of punishment; the passage is xvi. 17—Judith speaks as follows:

Back to Index Next