Apocalyptic literatdre

No attempt to study Christianity in its origins can dispense with a knowledge of this literature. If we wish to reconstruct the world of ideas and aspirations which filled the heart of an earnest Jew at the beginning of the Christian era, it is to this litera- ture that we must have recourse for materials. Although in its higher a.spect8 Christianity in- finitely transcends the Judaism that preceded it, yet in others it is a genuine historical development from such Judai.sm.

Christianity came forth from the bosom of Pharisaic Judaism, and in Apoca- lyptic literature this form of Judai.sm found its essential utterance. The value, tlierefore, of such literature is obvious. From such writings, further, we see how the great Pharisaic movement arose ; how it in its turn had been a transformation and a development of movements already at work in the proi)hetic period.

Thus Jewish Apocalypses not only supply a history of religious beliefs in the two pre-Christian centuries, but they also fill up the otherwise unavoidable gap in the nistory of Jewish thouglit, and constitute the living link between the proiihetic teachings and ideals of the OT and their fullilment in Christianity. Apocalyptic took the place of Prophecy.

The Psalmist exclaims with grief : ' We see not our signs : (here is no more any projjliet : neither is there among as any that knoweth how long ' (Ps 74*). But the immediate 8ucces.sor of Prophecy was not Apocalj'ptic, but Scribism. The task of the scribes was to study the law and apply it to the altered circumstances of the time. As a result of their study and teaching, Israel was firmly estab- lished in its adhesion to the law. But Scribism could not satisfy the a.s|)iration8 of the nation.

In one aspect we might describe it as an unpro<luctive ago of criticism following a productive age of pro- plietic genius. Its chief task was to study, dis- criminate, and systematise the products of i)ast spiritual genius. For ever engaged in distinguish- ing and criticising, it acquired the habits of caution and fear as it lost those of courage and love. Its maxims were mainly negative.

Its higliest service was, not to inspire and lead into new paths of duty and goodness, but to conline every enthusiasm and new sjiiritual force within the narrow limits of a traditional routine, and to close eveiy avenue of danger with a llaming sword and the unvarying prohibition: ' Thou shalt not.' But Scribism had anotlier side.

In times of oppression especially, its ellorts were directed to (inding an answer for hearts that were asking in their anguish when God would visit and redeem His people. By ignoring the fact that the pro- phetic accounts of an ideal future for Israel could not be literally fulfilled after the fall o( the ancient State, they easily found materials in the ni;uss of unfullilled prophecy on which to build their hopes anew.

By symbolising what was literal and literalising what was hgurative, by various re- arrangements and rea<ljustmcnts of the resulting products, they were able to depict the future in a certain chronological sequence, and arrive at this desired consummation. By such means Scribism in some measure kept alive the hopes of the nation.

It was to this side of Scribism that Apocalyi)tic was naturally related, although at the same time it was to a certain extent a revolt against the other and chief pursuit of Scribism.

The higher ideals and larger outlook of Apocalyptic failed in due course to find room within the narrow limits of Scribism ; and wliereas the anxious scrupulosities of the latter were incompatible ^vith anything but the feeblest inspiration and vigour, tue former attested beyond aouljt the reappearance of spiritual genius in the field of thought and action. Our conception of Apocalyptic will become clearer by observing wherein it agrees with, and wherein it differs from, OT prophecy. 1.

Prophecy and Apocalyptic agree in this — (1) That they both claim to be a communication through the Divine Sjiirit of the character and will and purposes of God, and of the laws and nature of Ilis kingdom. This, it is needle.ss to add, man could not attain to by himself. (2) But Prophecy and Apocalyptic were related, not only in their primary postulate, but, at least in the case of the later prophets, in similarity of materials and method.

Thus the eschatological element which later attained its full growth in the writings of Daniel, Enoch, Noah, etc., had already strongly asserted itself in the later prophets, sucli as Is 24-27, Joel, Zee 12-14. Not only the be- ginnings, therefore, but a well-defined type of this literature had already establbhed itself in OT prophecy. 2.

But Prophecy and Apocalyptic differ in the following respects : — (1) I'rophecii still believes that this world is God's world, and that in this world His goodness and truth will yet be justified. Hence the proiilict addresses himself chielly to the present anu its concerns, and when he addresses himself to the future his prophecy springs naturally from the present, and the future which he depicts is reganied as in organic connexion with it.

Thf A/ioin/i/jitic writer, on the other liand, almost wholly dfs/mirs of the present ; his main interests are su/>ra- mundane. He cherishes no hope of arousing his contemporaries to faith and duty by direct and personal ajipcals ; for though God spoke in the past, 'there is no more any prophet.' This [>cK.simism and want of faith in the present, alike in the leailcrs and the led, limited and defined the form in which the religious ardour of the former should manifest itself.

They prescribed, in fact, as a necessity of the age and as a condition of successful ollort, the ado/dion of pstuidoni/mniis authorship. And thus it is that the Aiiocalyptic writer approaches his countrymen with a work which claims to bo the pioduction of some great 110 APOCALYPTIC LITERATUKE APOCRYPHA .^> 6jrnre in the past, such as Enoch, Moses, Isaiah, Daniel, or Baruch.

Thus far two characteristics of Apocalyptic have emerged — the transference of interest, from the present t/i the fntnre, fronTTIie mundane to the Bnpra^mundane, and the adoption of pstudonymous autliorship' ' (2y Another feature of Apocalyptic as distin- guished from Prophecy was imposed upon it by the necessities of the time, i.e. its_ijidpjinitdji_i/!i^f.r view of the worldLsJiistorii.

Thus, whereasancient Prophecy had to deal with temporary reverses at the hands of some heathen power, Apocalyptic arose at a time when Israel had been subject for centuries to the sway of one or another of the great world-powers.

Hence, in order to harmonise such difficulties with God's righteousness, it had to take account of the r6le of such empires in the counsels of God ; to recount the sway and down- fall of each in turn, till, finally, the lordship of the world passed into the hands of Israel, or the final judgment arrived.

The chief part of these events belonged, it is true, to the past ; but the Apocalyptic \vriter represented them as still in the future, arranged under certain artificial categories of time, and as definitely determined from the beginning in the counsels of God, and revealed by Him to His servants the prophets. Determinism tkus became -a-leatliag. chajmcteristic nf Jewish Ajwca- lijptir.

; and ncrordinijly irs^oiirrjitinn of history, as distinguishrii from that oj rrophecjJL, was Tnetiu^iieal rather than ot:gjjfi^ (S^igain, Prophecy and Apocalyptic differ in the harsher treatment dealt outtathe Jieathen jjs__tlie finaJ4iuignients. Israel's repeated oppressions have at last affected the judgment and insight of its writers. The iron has entered into their soul.

No virtue or goodness can belong to their heathen oppressors, and nothing but eternal destruction can await the enemies of Israel in the time to come. The ruthless crueltythey had experienced, inspired till 111 with a like nitlilefsnes.

s to waxds-th« faithless natiiHi ami thu taitliluis iiiJiviiiual ; and expressions descriptive of the future lot of such, which in pro- phetic writings had been limited in their scope to the present liie, or were merely poetical exaggera- tions, were accepted by Apocalyptic writers as true of the future, and often intensified because in- sufficient to satisfy their merciless hatred. Thus it wRH in thJH pprinH ^^lat-^e doctrine of the future and eternal damnatiDiLaEItlie^QcEed.

JE*s delTnitely formulated, and came to possess an un- q^uesfioned atHHionty. It is true that in later times, as we discover from the Talmud, the severity of this dogma was considerably moderated, but only in favour of Israelites. No single mitigation of the awful horrors foretold as awaiting the wicked was extended to the hapless Gentile. The foregoing will make the object of Apoca- lyptic easy of comprehension. This J)biect,_^ shoxt^TCaatoJQlvejthe-riiffif.iiltiej.

connected willi a _belief in Go<l'a di^liteousness, andthe^sulleiing vOaiiltonof His servants on eartli. The righteous- ness of God postulated the temporal prosperity of the righteous, and this postulate was accepted and enforced by the law.

But the expectations of material wellbeing which had thus been authenti- cated and fostered, had in the centuries immediately preceding been falsified, and thus a grave con- tradiction had emerged between the old prophetic ideals and the actual experience of the nation, between the promises of God and the bondage and persecution tney had daily to endure at the hands of their pagan oppressors.

The difficulties thus arising from this conflict between promise and experience may be shortly resolved into two, which concern respectively the position of the righteous as a community and the position of the righteous man as an individual. The OT prophets had concerned themselves chiefly with the former, and pointed in the main to the restoration or ' resur- rection ' of Israel as a nation, and to Israel's ultimate possession of the earth as a reward of her righteousness.

But, later, with the growing claims of the individual, and the acknowledgment of these in the religious and intellectual life, the latter problem pressed itself irresistibly on the notice of religious thinkers, and made it impossible for any conception of the divine rule and righteous- ness to gain acceptance which did not render adequate satisfaction to the claims of the righteous individual. Thjia^iaorder to justify the.

riglilsicus- nesa oi (jQd,-tliei£-ivas piistiUatod the resurrection, not only of the rigliteoua iiation_^buiaIso of^Ee righteous individual- Apocalyptic^ nTerefSTCl strove to show that, alike in respect of the nation' and of the individual, the righteousness of God would be fully vindicated ; and, in order to justify its contention, it sketched_in.X}utlme the history of the world and of mankind, the origin~of evinmd its course, and the consummation of all things.

Thus, in fact, it presented a Semitic_Ehilosophy of rejigion. The righteous as a nation sEouUTyef possess" the earth either in an eternal or in a temporary Messianic kingdom, and the destiny of the righteous individual should be finally deter- mined according to his works. For though amid the world's disorders he might perish untimely, he would not fail to attain through the resurrection the recompense that was his due, in the Messianic kingdom, or in heaven itself.

The conceptions as to the risen life, its duration and character, vary i with each writer. / The chief Apocalyptic writings which will be treated of in this Dictionary are — 1. Apocalypse of Baruch, a composite work written 50-90 A.D. in Palestine, if not in Jerus., by four Pharisees. Preserved only in S3rriac. 2. Ethiopic Book of Enoch, written originally in Heb. by at least five ^Jasid authors, 200-64 B.C., in Palestine. Preserved in Ethiopic and partly in Greek and Latin. 3.

Slavonic Book of Enoch, or The Book of the Secrets of Enoch, \vritten by an Alexandrian Jew about the beginning of the Christian era. Pre- served only in Slavonic. 4. Ascension of Isaiah, a composite work written, 1-100 A.D., by Jevvish and Christian authors. Pre- served in Ethiopic and partly in Latin. 5. Book of Jubilees, written originally in Hebrew by a Pal. Jew, probably 40-10 B.C. Preserved in Ethiopic, and partially in Hebrew, Syriac, Greek, and Latin. 6.

Assumption of Moses, written in Palestine, probably in Heb. or Aram., 14-30 A.D., by a Pharisee. Preserved only in Latin. 7. Testaments of the XII. Patriarchs, a com- Sosite work written originally in Hebrew by two evvish authors belonging to the legalistic and apocalyptic sides of Pharisaism, 130 B.C.-IO A.D., and interpolated by a succession of Christian writers down to the fourth century A.D. Pre- served in the ancient Greek and Armenian ver- sions. 8.

Psalms of Solomon, written originally in Heb. by a Pharisee (or Pharisees), 70-40 B.C. 9. Sibylline Oracles, written in Greek hexa- meters by Jewish and Christian authors, 180 B.C.- 350 A.D. LiTBRATTTRK. — Hilpenfeld, Die Jiidische Apokalyptik, 1867 ; Drummond, The JeicUh Messiah, 1877 ; Smend, 'Jewish Apoca- l.l-ptic" in ZATW (1S8S) pp. 222-260; Schjirer, UJP II. iiL "«iq. R. H. CHAKLKS.

APOCRYPHA The title 'The Apocrypha," oi ' The Apocrypha of the OT,' is applied by English- APOCRYPHA APOCRYPHA in Bpeaking Protestants to the following collection of books and parts of books : — BOOU. i. 1 (l^draa ... IL i EMlroa UL Tobit It. Judith V. The rcat of the chapters of the Book of Esther (i.e. lO^lC^] ri. The Wisdom of Solomon Tii. The Wisdom of Jesus the aon of Sirach, or Ecclesiasticus /iii. Barudi . ... [Ch. vi. = The Epistle of Jeremv) . ll.

The Sonpof the Three Holy Children . (i.e. Tlie Praver of Azarias and the Song of the Three.]" X. The History of Susanna ... xi. The History of the Destruction of Bel and the Dragon (ix. X. and xi. are the Additions to the Book of Daniel] xij. The Prayer of Manasses xiii. 1 Maccabees xiv. 2 Maccabee4 ........ 1 En 2 Es To Jth Ad. Est Wis Sir Bar Ep. Jer Three Sus Bel Ad. Dn Pr.

Man 1 Mao 2 Mao Both the collection, and the use of the word Apocrypha as its title, are distinctively Protestant, though having roots in the history of the OT Canon. The collection consists of the excess of the Lat. Vulg. over the Heb. OT ; and this excess is due to the Gr. LXX, from which the old Lat. VS was made. The ditrerence between the Prot. and the Rom. Cath. OT eoes back, then, to a difference between Pal. and Alex. Jews. The matter is complicated, however, by the fact that the Vulg.

was revised after the Ueb. by Jerome, and that the extant MSS of the LXX differ much in contents and order. For clearness and for reference in the later discussion, the following tables are given. They represent the official Vulg. (ed. 1592) ; the two chief MSS of LXX ; the Canon of Cyril, as a representative of the view of the E. Church ; and (he Hebrew. The books of our A. are printed in italics, other uncan. books, not in the A., in capitals.

thei=e, 1 and 2 Es are not in Luther's Bible, and 2 Es is not in the hXX. Vn the other hand, 3 and 4 Mac are couimonly present in the LXX, but are not found in the Vulg. and A. Tlie same is true of Ps 151. Further, the many more or less signilicant variations of LXX from Heb. OT, in text and order, do not appear in this comparison, for, owing to Jerome, the Vulg. follows the Heb. in the can. books, the LXX only in the case of books not extant in Heb. The A.

, then, can be said only in a general way to represent the dili'erence between the Heb. and the Gr. OT. The books of the A. are treated in this Dictionary individually under their titles. Under the heading- Apocrypha two matters require consideration : tlie history of the use of the word ' Apocnjph/i ' in reference to books ; and the history and significance of the collection now so called.* Witli these the present article will deal in the following order : — L The word Apocrypha. 1.

The Hiildt-n Books of Judaism. 2. The words ijeniizim and hizo7iim, 8. The Hidden Books of Christianity, and the word Ajificrypha. U. The Apocrypha in Judaism. 1. The Urij^in of the Collection. a. The Work of the Scribes. b. The A. in relation to the Ha^o^rapha. e. Palestinian and Hellenistic elements in theA. L Its Use and Relation to the Canon. a. In Hellenistic Judaism. b. In Palestinian Judaism. 8. Its Relation to the Religious Tendencies and Parties of Judaism.

liL The Apocrj'pha in Christianity. 1. In the New Testnment. 2. In the Eastern Cliurch- a. Orij^nal Usage. b. Scholarly Theory. e. Manuscripts. d. Versions. «. The Ijitcr Greek Churcb. 8. In the Western Church. a. Roman. b. Protestant. Vdlo. r.xx OraiL. Hn. Cod. Vat. (B). Cod. AUa. (A)k Pent Pent Pent 1-6. Pen L • Torah ' (Law)— Jot Jos Jos 6. Jos 1-4. Pent Jg Ru J? Ru & 7. Jg-Ru 8. 1. 2K U.Nebiim'(PropheU)— a. * Fonner' 6. Jos 7. Jg S S 9 K 1-»K 1-4 K 1-4 K 9. 8. 4 K 1. 2Ch 1. 2Ch 1.2 Oh 10.

1. 2Ch 1 Kk[ = Ezt] I El XII 11. 1. 2 Es 2 Es(-Nehl ZEsf^Eir+Neh] Is 12. EstMAn To Psiiei] Jer (with Bar la, Ep. 13. Job 6 ' Latter Jth Pr Jtri 14. Ps 10. Is 11 Jpf Est [Ad. 10-M«1 Eo Ezk 16. Pi Job Ca Dn \Ad.) 18. Eo 12. I-Jzk Ps (ISO] Job Est [.Ad.'\ 17. Ca Pr Wit To 18. -XI! Eo Sir Jth 10. Is IIL Eethub[m (Ho^o- Ca Est lAd.t 1 I'.l 20. Jer Bar I« J^ Jtr prapha)— Wis Jth 2 Es[°Ezr-t-Neh] 21. Ezk 14. Ps Sir To xa 1. 2 Hat 22. Da[Ad.r] 16. Pr 16. Job Jer (L» Barl Is Ps [lSlandl4Cantlcle», i.

«. 12 historical, 6 17. Ca -V Elk Jer of which one Is Pr. noetipjil, and 5 prophet- ical books. The number 18. Hu Dn [Ad. 8»«M Thrte Bar J/anfl 19. La y-MeffUloth' l3Siu La Job of the Heb. Can. is 20. Ec 1 14 Bet] Ep. Jm Pr reduced by Joining Ru to Jg and La to Jer. 21. Est j ZII(<.«. Minor Prophets] Ezk Eo 22. I>n X.tMa4, Dn \Ad.\ Ca 23. Ezr-Neh 24. Ch After the NT, as an Appendix, in small type and wivh new po^ng : •The Ad. Ett are In their original places, vir..

lO 111 after IW: Sir After the NT stood thin order, which ia that Pr. Man 11> 12« before ll ; 131-7 originally, of the pritiUMi edcj., art- iEidr[.lEt] otter 3i»; 13ia 141 1» Psalms op Solouoi. found in the case of Ihc t Kidr l-i J^Ml. 15 ii« after tiTj 181W attwBU t 9 are from OT. The others — M annijieat, Jiune dijnirtit, Unif- dictua, and the Morning Hymn. mudic lisU, which niny bo more ori^ntml. But the threo diviiiionB and the contents of «aoh remain flxcd.

It ia to be noticed that of our A., 1 and 2 Es and Pr. Man are regarded also by Rome an a^. Of | •In thli artifle Apocrypha (A.) dgnifleB tMs collr-f'tlon : Aporr}iphii (A.) the txKtkji originally to callod ; apocrjphiU (t^) It uoeu in eilhor eoim 112 APOCRYPHA APOCRYPHA 1. THE WORD 'APOCRYPHA.'

— The word ir6Kpv<pos, meaning ' hidden,' was no doubt at first applied to books in quite a literal sense, as the designation, whether by those who hid them or by those from whom they were hidden, of books kept from the public. The hiding of a book was easy when copies were few. It might be done upon two opposite grounds.

An exclusive sect might hide its sacred books in order to keep from outsiders the secret laws or wisdom which they contained ; or I he religious authorities of a community might hide books judged by them to be useless or harm- ful. The two grounds might indeed approach each other in the case of books jud^'ed unfit for public use, not because of the error, but because of the depth and difficulty of their contents.

Indeed, a book judged wholly erroneous and harmful we should expect the authorities to destroy rather than to hide. A certain value, or at least a certain doubt, should naturally be attached to books hidden in this sense, wnile their peculiar value is the reason for their being hidden in the former — which is, in all probability, the more original sense of the Greek word.

From the place of secret books in Judaism and in Christianity we may therefore hope to gain a knowledge of the original sense ancl use of the word ; and we shall find its first and proper applica- tion to be, not to the books of our A., but to the (chiefly apocalyptical) literature commonly desig- nated Pseudejnijrajj/ui. 1. The Hidden Books of Judaism.— Esoteric doctrines and books do not belong properly to the Isr. religion.

Their home is in beatlienism, from which, however, they gained a foothold from time to time in Judaism. The occult lore connected with sorcery and magic, lurked beneath the surface of old Israel's religiou. ife, but was condemned by law and prophets (Dt iS™-, Lv 19^', Is 8" 19^ etc.) No priestly religion, indeed, can be without a partly esoteric priestly tradition respecting rites, their form, and perhaps their meaning.

But it was a characteristic of Judaism that it was based upon a priestly law made public and openly adopted by the people (Neh 8-10). Yet Judaism did not escape from the charm which mystery exerts over the human mind. It was esp. in the after de- velopment's of OT wisdom literature under Hellenic influence, on the one side, and of OT pro- phetic literature, under Pers. and Bab.

influence, on the other, that the idea of the superior religious value of hidden things, mysteriously disclosed to the favoured few, took possession of the Jewish mind. Even Jesus, son of Sirach, the Palestinian, finds it the chief task of the wise man to discover the 'apocrypha, ' the hidden things, of wisdom and of God ( 14»> 39»- '), and thinks that the hidden things of the world are greater than the manifest (43'"). ' Apoc- rypha' was for him a word of honour (yet see 3i"-» and 24»-»<).

But it was esp. in Hel. circles that the love of hidden things was cultivated. Philo presents the results of his deepest study and reflexion, and of his highest insight, in the form of an exposition of the Pent., making of this a hidden book, which only the initiated could understand. There was, however, another way in which the love of hidden things and reverence for antiquity could be a<ijusted.

Instead of hidden meanings in openly published books, it was possible to think or pnvate teachings, by the side of the public, committed by patriarch or prophet to the few, and handed on to the present in a secret tradition, or a hidden book. Tnis was the procedure of those Pal. Jews who were interested in the secrets of the fntnre, and in prophecy. The beginnings of the production of hiilden books along this line can be easily traced.

If a prophet committed tlie record oi openly spoken predictions to the keeping of his disciples, to await the time of their fulfilment (Is 8'°), it would not be strange if he should give them fuller knowledge for which the public was not prepared. The Bk of Dan. is represented as bavin" neen ' shut up and sealed ' by its author, until, long after its writing, the time came for its publication (Dn l'^-). "This may well be called ' the fundamental passage for the conception of apocrypha.''

Daniel appears as the publication of a book hitherto hidden. The justification of the claim lies in the revelation of the mysteries of Israel's future which it contains, and in the mysterious manner in which the revelation is made in Wsions, through angels. It is indeed, in part, an interpretation of the hidden sense of Jer 25" 29'° (Dn 9), but the interpretation is given by an angel.

The way was prepared for Daniel by the later prophets, in whom the vision of hidden things plays an increasingly important part. Ezekiel's vision (ch. 1) became the favourite and fruitful study of Jews who loved mysteries. Zee con- tains similar material. But the chief development of apocalyptical literature followed Daniel. Great numbers of books were put forth during the cent, before and the cent, after Christ, in the name of patriarchs or prophets, as books that had been hidden.

They contain esp. disclosures of the mysteries of the spirit world, of the future of Israel, and of the abode and fortunes of the dead. In one of these books the tradition is related that Ezra was inspired to dictate to his scribes the sacred books that had been burned at the destruction of Jerus. ' In forty days they wrote ninety-four books.

And when the forty days were ended, the Most High spoke, saying : The earlier books that thou hast written, publish openly, and let the worthy and the unworthy read them ; but the last seventy thou shalt keep, that thou mayest deliver them to the wise of thy people ; for in them is the spring of understanding and the fountain of ■»%-isdom and the stream of knowledge' (2 Es 14"-").

In the 70 esoteric books, valued more highly by the writer than the 24 books of open scripture, we have the original conception of apocrypha. The character of these books may be accurately known from those that have survived, e.g. Enoch, Assumption of Moses (in part), the Apoc. of Baruch, and 2 Est itself. Their material is largely foreign to Isr. traditions, and was com- monly felt to be 80.

Yet traditional it must, in the nature of the case, have been, and only in a very limited degree the free invention of the writers. That its source is, in an important measure, to be found in the Bab. and Pers. re- ligions, is highly probable. If we ask in what circles of Judaism these books, or the writings or traditions that lie behind them, were current, various lines of evidence point to- ward the obscure sect of the Essenes.

They possessed a secret lore and hidden books, and took oath to disclose none of their doctrines to others, and ' to preserve equally both the books of their sect and the names of the angels' (Jos. BJ n. viii. 7). In regard to the contents of their secret books we are not left wholly in the dark. Jos. says that the Essenes derived from the study of ' the writings of the ancients ' (can.

) a knowledge of the healing properties of plants and stones (§ 6), an<l that bj' reading 'the holy books' they were able to foretell future tilings (§ 12). He also as- cribes to them an elaborate doctrine of the pre- * Zahn, Gach. d. KT Kanoiu, t. 1S5, cf. 124 1., who, however, does not put this observation to itfi natural uee. t Notice the different applications given to the titles, 1 and 2 Ea, in LXX, Vnlg. and Enjr. A. Still other confusions appear in certain SISS.

Misunderstanding would be avoided by calling 1 Es [ = Vulg. 3 F^ ; LXX 1 E-s] Greet Ezra, and 2 St [ = Vulg. 4 EsJ the Apocalj-pse of Ezra (i.e. properly ch. ^14), oi 4 Ezr. APOCKYPHA APOCRYPHA 11 existence of souls, and of the lot of good and bad Bools aft«r death (§ 11).

When, therefore, we find in books like Enoch, the Assumptio Mosis, and 4 Ezr, disclosures of the secrets of nature and of history, lists of angels, descriptions of heaven and hell, and of the experiences of the soul after death, beside other Essenic marks, such as the praise of asceticism and the unfavourable estimate of the second temple, the opinion seems not unfounded that ' their secreli literature was perhaps in no small degree made use of in the Pseudepigrapha, and has through them been indirectly handed down to us' (WeUhausen).

To attribute the apocalyptical literature exclusively to Essenism, however, as Jewish scholars wish to do, is without historical justification. It is true tliat a rela- tionship of Essenism with Zoroastrianism is prob- able (Lightfoot, Colossians ; Cheyne, Expository Timet, iL 202-8, 248-63 ; Bainptun Led. pp. 417-21, 445-49); and Zoroastrianism treasured secret books, some of which certain Christian Gnostics claimed to possess.

It is probable also that the foreign (heathen) character of these books was felt by many, since Judaism never gave these books ofBcial sanction ; and no apocalypse after Dn was preserved in Hebrew. Nevertheless, the foreign elements here dominant reach far back into OT literature ; and, on the other hand, Essenism was much more closely related to Pharisaism than to Zoroastrianism, being, in the first place, ' only Pharisaism in the superlative' (Schiirer).

If the Essenes are to be understood historically as Bira|)ly more consistent protestants against the high- priesthood of the Maccabtean princes than the Pharisees, — carrying their protest to the point of refusing sJl participation in the temple service, — then in the Hasida^ans of 1 Mac 2" V^- we have the roots of both Pharisaism and Essenism, and the Book of Dn would stand near the beginning of each. The Messianic hope is the genuinely Jewish element in the apocalypses.

That this had a far larger place in tne mind of the Pharisee during the two centuries preceding the destruction of Jems, than it had after that event, — and esp. after Akiba's death, — is evident to all but Jewish scholars, who are apt to judge of the whole post- exilic period by the Talmud. The apocalyptical literature in question was, then, in all probability falued and cultivated by Pharisees, certainly by some circles of Pharisees, as well as by Essenes.

Indeed, in spite of its rejection by rabbinical Judaism, germs of it survived, and afterwards came to new life, in the late Jewish Kabbala, or secret philosophy (12th cent.)

It is a striking fact that while official Judaism rejected these hidden books, and declared for tlie exclusive recognition of the 24 books of the Canon, it yet proceeded to claim for itself the possession of an oral law which Moses delivered to Joshua when he gave the Pent, openly to Israel, and which passed on through the hands of the elders, the prophets, the men of the Great Synagogue, to an unbroken succession of scribes (Pirke Aboth), until it came to writing in the Mishna, and then in ',he Talmud.

By the theory of a secret tradition the scribes sought to give their law the authority of MoseB, and yet account for its late appearance. 2. The Words 'Genuzim' and ' uizonim.' — The designation of these hidden books in II eb. we do not know. A Heb. synonym for irbKpiKf^oi is O'njj ; but this word and the verb ui are used in theTalm., not of thesecret books just described, bnt nsually of a hiding, by the authorities, of books judged unfit for pulilic use.

A possible exception is the report<;d 'hiding' by Hezekiah of a book of medical lore, in order that the sick might call rather upon God (Mishna Pesach iv. 9). But It was commonly used with reference to some VOL. I.— 8 book of the Canon. Thus a worn-out roll of a sacred scripture was ' hidden,' perhaps because, though unhtted for use in the synagogue, it wn^ yet sacred and not to be destroyed (Mishna Sabli. IX. 6 ; Sanh. x. 6).

But the word was commonly used in reference to the question wliether some book should be withdra^vn from the class of sacred Scriptures. Thus there were Ivabbis who wished to 'hide' Pr, because of its contradiit- tions ; Ca, because of its seculr.r character ; Ec, because of its heresies. But tL.j objections were in every instance met.

The case of Ksc was more serious, and it is not improbable that it was put in the class of genuzim for a time among certain circles, though we have only the evidence of sonic Christian lists of the Canon, which claim (or secnii to follow the instructions of Jews (esp. Melito. Sue below).

If there existed at any time a class of books called genuzim, the Talmudic use of the woul would lead us to expect that it would contain the books nearest to the Canon in authority oi common esteem: books which once stood within the circle of sacred writings, or made a fair claim to stand there ; in other words, books like tlie antilegomena of early Christian use.

If there weie such a class, Sir and 1 Mac, if not To and Jtli, should stand in it ; but the word is never applied to these books in extant writings. This is not, in- deed, a proof that it was not so used j and the testi- mony of Origen suggests that it was. He says that the Jews had bidden Sus and other books from the people, while Jth and To, they ha*! told him, they did not possess even among their hidden books, or apocrypha (Ep. ad A/ric).

For writings that stood wholly outside of the circle of sacred books, esp. for the books of heretics such as the Samaritans, the Sadducees, and Chris tians (DT? "!?P), the Rabbis had another name, hizonim (D'j'isn d-!;t)> I't. 'external' or 'outsi.lu' books. 'The danger to Judaism of the reailing of these books led Akiba, who had himself been attracted by them, to prohibit thuir use. ' Who- ever reads in the sepnnrim hizunim has no part in the world to come.

Books, on the other hand, like Sir and other such, which were composed after the age of the prophets had been closed, may be read just as one reads a letter.' * Sir, then, and otner such books, are not hizonim in Akiba's view, the correctness of which is evident from the free use of Sir by Rabbis in Pal.

for a century and a half after Akiba, and in Babylon still later But it appears that the maintenance of a middle class of txioks between sacred and profane involved dangers, and it was finally decided that ' he who reads a verse which is not out of the 24 books of sacred scripture, his oll'enoe is as if he had read in the sepkarim hizonim' (Midr. r. Num. S 14, and at Koheleth 12'^ cf. Jer. Sabb. 16).

It is possible that this practical transfer of books like Sir into the class of hizonim may have ob- scured the evidence of their having once been in the cla-ss of ijenuzim. 3. The Bidden Books op Christianity and THE Word ' ArocRvriiA.' — Christianity was at its beginning, even less than Judaism, a religion of mysteries, to be hidden by the few from the nuiny. Christ's words in Lk 10", Mt ll" ('hidden' from the wise, revealed to babes), were a diuct contrailiction of esoteric religion.

If there aic aiiocrj'plia, hidden things, they ore to be made known (Mk 4", Lk 8", cf. Mt 13"). In Christ the hidden wisdom of God had become manifest, and the mysteries of the coming of His • For this renderinff by Qrmetx of ft corrupt t«xt (.Sanh. x. 1. anil Ihc Bab. and Jtr. Talm.), ve Ilubl. Canon and Trzt of (IT. p. 8; and cf. HamburKPr, Ural-Encye. ii. 6Sff. Tbo Jer. Taltn \;i\vH Sirach aH an illustration of tlio h^onim. 114 APOCRYPHA APOCRYPHA kingdom were disclosed by its realisation.

Yet this faith gained a slow and hard victory. In two ways the love of mysteries and of tlie books that contained thera was fostered. (a) The Christian religion made its start in the Jewish world in close connexion with the Messianic ideas as they had been developed, esp. in the apoca- lypses, from Dn onwards.

Jewish Christians clung to the Jewish apocalyptic literature, modifying indeed its references to the person of the Messiah, making room for His earthly life and death, but feeling the less need of radical changes because the proper fulfilment of the Messianic hopes was con- nected, not with the first, but with the second coming of Christ. This led, naturally, less to the production of new Christian revelations than to the keeping and Christian editing of the old.

Jewish patriarchs and prophets were in this way made to testify to the truth, and to forecast the future, of Christianity. Thus the Book of Enoch and the Apoc. of Ezra were used as authentic revelations by many Church Fathers. Jewish apocalypses of Abraham, Moses, Elijah, Is, Jer, Barueh, and others in great numbers, in part extant, but chiefly known to us only by name, were treasured by early Christianity.

Even when apocalypses in the names of Christian apostles were put forth, their material was of necessity largely traditional and Jewish in origin. These books, then, Jewish and Christian, are the earliest apocrypha of Christianity (cf. the lists below). They are books usually put forth as having been hidden (the pseudepigraphic form), and always contain accounts of hidden things miraculously disclosed. In the latter sense even the Apoc. of St. John is called ' a*" ' by Gregory of Nyssa {Or.

de Ordin. ii. 44) and by Epiplianius {Hair. 51). The cultivation of such 'hidden' books by no means belonged at first to heretical sects, but was characteristic of early Christianity in general. It was opposed chiefly by those who fell under Gr. influence ; but among them another sort of mystery took the place of the Jewish apocalyptic, namely, the Gr. gnosis. \b) As Je'vrish Christians made Christianity less tho fulfilment than the reaffirmation of Jewish hopes, so Hel.

Christians made it less the solution of the mystery of existence than a new, supreme mystery. Christ was made the central figure — in one case in Je^vish eschatology, in the other m Greek cosmology. St. Paul's lan^age in 1 Co 1 and 2 discloses the existence in Corinth of those who valued a hidden wisdom more than his gospel of the crucified Christ. Aj>d later, at Colossas, St.

Paul urges, against an essentially Gnostic tendency, as the word of God, 'the mystery which hath been hidden from the a{,'es and from the generations, but now hath been mitni/ested to his saints' (1^). The mystery of G'ld is ' Christ, in whom are all the treasures of wisdom and knowledge hidden ' (awiKpvipot, 2). The special Colossian gnosis, with its worship of angels, it asceticism, its visions, and its secret doctrines, reminds us of Essenism.

The strongest influence ou the development of a secret Christian gnosis came, however, from Alexandria : Gnosticism being indeed 'nothing but a Christian Hellenism' (Har- nack). As the Jeisnsh Apocalypse furnished one way of uinnecting the new faith with the old, Hel. allegorical interpretation supplied another ready means of finding Christ and Christianity in the OT ; thus making of it, as PhUo did, a hidden book. But the allegorical method was capable of a further nse. The Gr.

Christian was less concerned to find Christianity in the OT than to find Gr. philosopliy in Christianity. It wa." not an unnatural eflort, af(er St. Paul, and in apparent connexion with him. to set the OT wholly aside, and to apply allegory to the person and history of Christ. Gnosticism, indeed, based and pushed its claims on the ground of apostolic authority, and, with its rejection o! the OT, it was even the first to feel the need of new authoritative scriptures.

But it established its position (1) by requiring an allegorical inter- pretation of the commonly received apostolic writings, making them books of hidden import ; (2) by claiming to possess, besides the open apos tolic writings, a secret apostolic tra.lition (Basilides and Valentinus claim to derive their secret gnosis from pupils of St. Paul ; the Ophites, from a pupil of St. James, etc.)

; (3) by the production of grea,t numbers of books, chiefly gospels and acts of the various apostles ; * (4) by the claim (like that of Hel. Judaism) to immediate prophetic inspiration, so that prophets and apocalypses played in some Gnostic communities an important part, though few traces of Gnostic apocalypses remain. Hel. Gnosticism stands as the extreme con- trast to the Jewish apocalyptic tendency.

It re- nounced the OT on which the Apocalypse rests, and rejected the coming of Christ, the resurrection, and tne earthly kingdom, in which the Apoc. centres. Yet both make of Christianity a mystery, and claim for the books that unfold the mystery especial sanctity. From these two sources came multitudes of a*" books into Christian use. They were called A.

by those who valued them, for the word contained no necessary disparagement, but described the character of the books ; and they were by no means condemned at the outset as heretical. The Book of Enoch is directly cited by Jude (w."""), who also uses the Assumption of Moses (v.^). From such books may have come other citations and references which are not found in known books (see Origen's view below). The Book of Enoch was used as a genuine and sacred book by the Ep.

Barnabas, Irena^us, Tertullian, and Clement of Alex. Tertullian says, indeed, that it was not received by some Christians. He, however, defends its reception {i.e. among the books of sacred Scripture) by appealing to Jude ; and explains its absence from the Heb. scriptures by saymg that the Jews rejected it, as they did other books, because it spoke of Christ, — an explanation not, indeed, wholly unhistorical. Clement of Ale.x. uses Ass. Mos. and 4 Ezr, and also many other prophetic A.

unknown to us. He was a warm defender of the value of secret traditions, and used not only Jewish, and even heathen, but Christian secret books. He believed in a secret tradition entrusted by Christ to His disciples, and valued it highly {Strom, i. 11. 13. 14 ; V. 60-4). Some of these traditions were preserved in secret books, among which he cites certain a"" gospels and acts. Though he knows that heretics make a bad use of such books {Strom, iii. 29), yet his view oi A.

&8 a, whole is extremely favourable. Origen is more discriminating. He finds a use for A. in NT interpretation. In 1 Co 2», 2 Ti 3», He 11", Mt 23"-" 27" he finds references to a" books, and says that 'not all A.

current in the name of holy men are to be received on account of the Jews, since they perhaps invented some for the destruction of our true Scriptures and the confirma- tion of false doctrines ; but not all are to be re- jected, since some pertain to the demonstration of our Scriptures' (Comment, on Mt 23-'*). Origen seems, however, to have been influenced in his use of the word by the Jewish genuzim, for in his Evist. ad Afric.

he speaks of Sus as made a"" by Jewish authorities, though the Christian Church did not so regard it. Jth and To, he says, the Jews do not possess even among their A. • See Lipsius in Smith and Wace, Diet. 0/ Chrittian Biog. arU. ' Gospels' aud AcU of Apostles. APOCRYPHA APOCRYPHA 115 These books are not •secret' in the proper sense, and cun be called A. only in the sense of being withdrawn from publicity, and so from canonicity. The defence of A.

proper became more and more a mark of hereay. Even Orijren in ProL in Cant, ai^ues for their ex- clusion, because of the corrupt traditions, contrary to true faith, which they contain. They were long current in Gr., but found no pennanent place in the LXX, though the Oriental VSS received some of them, and one became current in lAt., though Vulg did not give it recognition (4 Ezr). tUilcmter of Brescia (on Heresies, c. 3S3-391 A.D.) condemns the ' heresy which accepts only A., i.e.

secrets of prophets and apostles, not can. scrii'tures' ; but he would allow A. to be read * /or the sake of manners by the perfect,' not in the church, and Dot b^ all. PruciUianut (tract iii.) ar^efl, from the generally accepted account of the restoration of the can. books by Ezra in 4 Ezr 14, for the value of the 70 secret books also, including 4 Ezr it«cif.

Epiphanxnt also justilics by the same reference the use of vanous a»i hooka, which he thinks were translated by the Seventy in addition to the canonical. The conviction, however, (rnulually prevailed tliat the cultiva- tion of secret books was dangerous, both because of the errors they contained and because of the sectarianism ttiey fostered. There could be no Catholic Church so long as sects could claim to possess either new revelations or a secret apostolic tradition.

Secret doctrines and hooka were cut off by the two principles, that valid inspiration was limited to the apostolic age, and that only the books generally received in the churches were genuinely apostolic. No doubt a sense of the unchristian character of tfee books in question worked, together with the growing con- viction that their jKtssession was uncatholic, to bring about their condemnation.

The gradually prevailing Catholic prin- ciple {quod xtbique, quod snnpcr, quod ab omniOwi) would give to th very word apocryphu the meanings : false, spurious, heretical. The principle that only what the churches generally receive is apostolic is found in the Muratorinn Fragm^it (2i-id ctnt.) /r^TUPUJ stands early in the line of this growing Catholicism. Ue opposes the theory, which Clem. Alex, defends, of the existence and value of secret traditions (ii. 27. 2, iii. 2. 1, 3. 1, 14. 2, 15.

1), and condemns the 'countless multitude of a^ and spurious writings* which the Marcosians, appealing to Dn 12v, claim to possess, but which they really fabricate for themselves. £1 ege-tippus &\bo spc&ks of 'the so-called A.' (i.e. BO called by the heretics themselves), and says that 'some of them were written in his own time by certain heretics' (Eus. HE iv. 22. 8). Terttiilian charges the heretics with adding to Scripture 'secrets of A., hlosphenious fables '(/£e«tir.

CarvjisOS); and writes a vigorous polemic against the Gnostic claim to possess a secret tradition (prcescr. 22-27). ■ He applies the word apocrj/phu* to an apoc. which he regards as spurious (Sliepherd), but not to Enoch, which he (as well as Irenieus) regards as genuine (de fmdic. 10, de anima, 2). Cyril of Jerua., in his Catechetics (iv. 83-6, ab. 348 a.d.), uses the word of all Jewish books except the 22 which are openly read In the churches. Cyril's insistence that the A., t.e.

the books not read in the churches, are not to be read even in private, is evidently aimed against the distinction of three classes of books — those read in church, those read privately, and those wholly rejected. This distinction is as old as the Muratorian Fragment, which puts the Shepherd in such a middle class. It is implie(i by Origen, in his discrimination amon^ A. It is definitely formulated by Athananus, who, in his 39th Easter Letter (367 A.D.), gives the name A.

only to the third class of books written by heretics as pleased their fancy, and i»ut forth as old, to lead astray the Hiniplo. Athanasius gives no list of these A., but Later lists teach us the current understanding of the word. The Chronography of Nieephonia (patriarch of Constantinople 806-^15), In a revised fonn which originated in Jerus. about 860, contains a stichometric list of Biblical books which has inner marks of a much earlier dat« (Zahn, 'perhaps before 6U0').

It contains (1) the can. books of OT and of NT; (2) the antile- ffomena of OT and of NT; (8) A. of OT and of NT. Under the last heading the following list Is given -.—Apocrypha of OT: a)Eno<:h, (2) Patriarchs, (3) Prayer of Joseph, (4) Testa- ment of Moses, (5) Assumption of Moses, (6) Abram, (7) Eldad and Modwl, (8) Elijah, the prophet, (0) Zcnhaniah, the prophet, (10) Zocbariah, father of John, [UJ PBeu(iepignn)ha of Hanich, Habakkuk, Ezekiel, and Daniel.

Apocrypha of y f :(1) Itinerary of Paul. (2) Itin. of Peter, (3) Itin. of John, (4) Itln. of Thomas, f6) GoBjiel according to Thomas, (f>) Teaching of the Apostles, (7, 8) Clement's [two Epistles], (9) [Epistles] of Ignatius, of Folycarp, and of Hennas. Of the A. of OT, Nos. 1, 2, 4, 5 are. In whole or in part, extant ; Nos. 3, 7, 8, 9 are cited as genuine * by Urigen or some still older Church l-'ather.' They are all Jewish apfK-alypses, Ce. A.

in the earliest sense, but the word now carries an adverse Judgment. This list is repeated tn the so-called Synopjtit of Athanojiiiui. Similar, but in some degree inde- pendent, is the summary of ^. in the anonymous ' Lint of tixty' can. hooks, which may represent the views of the Ejistei-n Church In the 7th cent. After the can. books follows the Intermediat class of ' thotie outtide of the irixty ' ; and then apocrypha' as follows :— <1) Adnm. (2) Enoch.

(:t) Lame<'h, (4) Patriarchs, (5) Prayer of Joseph («) P:iilail and .M<^Mlad, (7) Testa- ment of Moses, (8) Assumption of Moses. (0) Psalms of Solomon, (10) Apoc. of EUiJah, (11) Vision of Isaiah, (12) Apoa of Zcph- aniah, (13) Apoc. of Zachariah, (14) .\\k>c. of Ezra. (15) Historj- of James, (10) Apoc. of Peter, (17) Itinerary and TeachinL'S of the Apostles, (18) Epistle of Barnabas, (lit) Acts of Paul, (liU) .Xpoc. of Paul.

(21) Didascaliaof Clement, (22) Didascalia of Ignatius, (23) Didascalia of Polycarp, (24) Gospel ace. to Barnabas, (25) Gosjiel ace. to Matthew. With reference to these lists, it is to be noticed that they contain in general just those books, Jewish and Christian, which were put forth in the first place as A. in the proper sense. Not the application but the interpretation of the word is changed, in accordance with a changed estimate of the books. Once vahied by some as even super-can.

, they are now set apart not only from the Canon, but from the class of books that are good for private reading. Nevertheless, they still stand in a recognised class by themselves under the old" title Apocrypha, and are distinct not only from secular or heathen books, bvit from later heretical literature. The great part they played in early Oburcb history has so much recognition.

The Latin Church was further removed from the traditional use of the word, and it is not strange that we find there various novelties in its ajjplica- tion. The greatest extension of its use is fount] in the Decretnm Gelasiit which presents a list of IJibl. books tliat may be regarded as that of the Rom.

Synod of 382, under Damasus, After lists of (JT and NT, and a list of patristic works approved by the Church, follows, under the heading Notitia librorum apocryphorum qui non recipiuntury a list of some 60 titles. Only NT A. are given, and to these are added (perhaps in later reWsions of the work) a miscellaneous collection of books con- demned by the Church, including even the works of Kusebius, Tertullian, Clement of Alex., etc.

, lo each of which, as to the earlier list, the adjective apocnjjthus is added. Almost equally novel in Christian usage is Jerome's extension of the word in the opposite direction to cover the books of our A., though this rests upon Heb. usage, as we know it from Origen. ' Quidquid extra hos [the 22 books of Heb. Can.] est, inter a.Tri>Kpv<pa esse ponemium ' (Prologus Galeatus). Jerome, in practice, how- ever, gives to our A.

an intermediate position (see below), in substantial harmony with Jiujinus, who attempted to introduce the Eastern tlireefuld divi- sion into the West, and gave the name apocrypha to the third class. The Western Church, however, did not adopt the threefold division. Against Jerome's theory, it included the second division in the first. Neitber did it extend the word apocrypha to heretical books in general, but retained practically its orifrinal application.

Another Western novelty, how- ever, maintained it.self through the middle ages, namely, the interpretation of the word aporryphu.t as meaning obscurity of origin or authorsliip. According to Augustine, the A, were so called • because their obscure origin was not clear to the Fathers' [de Civ. Deiy xv. 23), and he oj)])oscs this explanation to the idea of heretics, that they 'are to l»e held in a certain secret authority' (c. Faust, xi. 2).

This brought confusion, for the word IkkI come to mean practically non-can., but obscurity of origin was not a corresj)onding concejition. So, during the middle ages, it was variously inodilied by extending the idea of obscurity or unctTl.ainty from the authorsliip to the truth of a book, or to its reception by common consent of the Chnrch. Jth, a"" in the sense that its autlior is un- known, was received (can.) because its truth is evident (Hugo de St. Caro, 1240).

Job, a"' in llie same sense, is in the Canon because not uncertainly confirmed by the authority of the Church (Hugo ite St. Victore, d. Il-H). The usage of I'rotestantism is prepared by Carlstadt in his Pe canoniris scnpfuns, 1.V20. He reviews the opinions of Augustine and .lerorne. and sides with the bitter in respect both to the intiT- jtretation of the word and its api)lication to our A.

Not uncertainty of authorsbij*, but simply noD-canonicity, is the meaning of the word apocry- ne APOCRYPHA APOCRYPHA ohcU. He applies the word to the books of our A. as an adjective, not as a title. Throui^h Protestant edd. of tne Bible, beginning with Luther, the word came, by a natural misunderstanding, to be re- garded aa the title of this particular collection, and the word ' pseudepigraplia' was used of the A.

proper, which neither Jerome, Carlstadt, nor Luther thought of depriving of their old name. On the other hand, the name ' Apocrypha,' to which a bad sense adhered, contributed to a gradu- ally diminishing regard for the books now so called. Conclusions.

— (1) The word apocryphal was used before the Eeformation quite consistently of a certain class of books, namely, the Jewish and Jewish, Christian Apocalypses, which we call Pseudepigrapha, and the Apocrypha of the NT, still 80 called, made up largely of the books of Gnostic and other sects. These are properly secret or hidden books in their formal claim and in their contents, if not originally in their actual use. (2) Jewish Rabbis applied a synonymous word, genuzim, to books ' hidden,' i.e.

withdrawn and withheld from public (synagogue) use by the Jewish authorities, and so made nncanonical. This 'hiding' (the verb is used more often than the adjective) might happen to books in no sense of hidden origin or meaning. Through Origen and Jerome, the Jewish word seems to have had some influence upon the Christian. (3) The Catholic Church, however, did not first make books a"^ by excluding them from the Canon (the verb is not used), but it decided that the A.

already existing under that name were not to be regarded as sacred scriptures, since publicity and universality were marks of genuineness and truth. The secret books of sects were, as such, spurious and false. (4) It was therefore easy to forget that A. was the original name of these books, and to regard it as expressing the judgment of the Church concern- ing them. Those books were hidden which belonged to sects, which lacked common, open usage by the Church.

A'^ meant, not received by the Church. But since books which the Church received were thereby proved apostolic, a non- apostolic and obscure origin was a mark of A. (5) Protestantism went over to the Jewish usage, applying the word to the books withdrawn by it from the commonly accepted Canon, though this no longer meant withdrawn from public reading and common use, but only from full authority for doctrine.

Protestants thus came to apply the word to books used with the canon in church service, not disapproved but recommended as good and useful, not secret or hidden in origin, meaning, or use. The evil name, however, helped to lower the first estimate of the books. u. THE APOCRYPHA IN JUDAISM. — 1. Origin of the Collection. — In order to under- stand the origin and historical significance of the collection of Dooks which we call the A.

, it is necessary to survey the work of the Jewish scribe, for in the scribe the literary history of Judaism centres. {a) The Work of the Jercish Scribes. — This can, in a general way, be divided into (A) the collecting and editing of the sacred books, (B) the production of new books. The transition between the two was made by the tr. or paraphrasing, and the interpretation of the sacred books.

More particu- larly, (A) the scribes collected and edited (1) the Law ; (2) the Prophets, 'former' and 'latter' ; (,3) the re.st of the religious literature of the nation, the so- called Hagiographa. (B 1) In connexion with this 3rd Canon, which contains some independent work of the scribes, the production of other books of similar character was encouraged {e.ff. the A.)

; ;2) with the Maccalwean crisis came a revival of pro]ihecy, and the production of books interpreting and imitating those of the 2nd Canon (apociilypses, or apocrypha proper) ; (3) the interpretation ot the 1st Canon, the Law, always a chief task of the scribes, was especially stimulated after the de- struction of Jerus., and resulted in the Mishna and Talmud. The synagogue was the centre of the scribe's literary activity ; and the centre of the synagogue service was the Law.

The religious instruction of the people in the religion of the law was his aim. His collection of other sacred books was for the sake of their public reading in the sj-nagogue service, in exposition and enforcement of the Law. Such public reading was the mark and meaning of canonicity. The translations (Targumim) and commentaries (Midrashim) that accompanied the reading were for the same end, the religious teach- ing of the community, and were free and oral before they were fixed in writing.

The order of the independent work of the scribes sketched above (B) reverses the order of their work as editors (A). This sequence is not to be over- pressed. The editing of the scribes involved, especi- ally at first, independent work, in the way of com- ment as well as selection and arrangement j on the other hand, their independent writing was always based on tradition. Perhaps in the case of none of the books of the scribes have we original works in the proper sense.

The stories of hag^adists and the visions of seers are re\Tsion8 and elaborations of traditional material. Further, the three lines of independent work outlined existed side by side, and the order given is only that of the first preval- ence of each kind of work. Gr. influence favoured the first, the Maccab.tan reaction the second, and the fall of the nation the third.

Of the products of the first kind, some gained admission into the 3rd Canon (Hagiographa), and so became the com mon property of Pal. and Alex. Judai-sm and Chris- tianity. But as they were especially congenial to Jews who fell most under Gr. influence, some of them were preserved, others contributed, by Alex. Jews. So far as they gained a place in the Gr. Bible, these, too, passed over to Christianity (the A.) Products of the 2nd class we have con- sidered under i. 1.

Writings of the first and second kinds are called by Jews Haggada, while the third, the elaboration and definition of tlie Law, is called Halacha. The A., then, are to Vie viewed in close connexion, on the one side, with the Hagiographa, and, on the other, with later developments of the Je>vish Haggada. (6) The Apocrypha in relation to the Hagio- grapha.

— That the three divisions of the Jewish Canon (compare the list at the beginning of this article) represent three successive collections, widely separated in time, and that they stood originally, in the Jewish view, in a decreasiu'' order of authority and importance, are ascertained facts in the history of OT Canon. The Hagio- grapha is, then, a relatively late collection of books on the whole late in origin, and, according to the Jewish view, inferior in authority to Law and Prophets*.

The order of books composing it is variously given, and the limits of the collection were open to dispute long after the Law and Prophets were closed. In regard to Ca, Ec, and Est, there were still diirerences of opinion up to the time of Akiba [c. 110-135 A.D.) The I5k of Ps owes its place here to the fact that its use was in the temple, not in the synagogue.

Apart from Ps and La, the Hagiographa consists of (1) history, in continuation of that told in Kings (Ezr-Neh) ; (2) history retold with a view to instruction (Ch)* ; (3) stories, based on history • In the Midnushic treatment of history, Ch follows still older attempts (see 2 Ch 24^? 1323). APOCRYPHA APOCRYPHA 117 or tradition, told to illustrate religious truth (Ru, Est, Ca(?), Dn). In Job the transition is made from story to (4) ethical and philosophical books (Pr. Ec).

Under similar headings fall the contents of the A. (1) History proper is found in I Mac. (2) History and story are retold with edifying em- bellishinents. 1 Es is made up of extracts from 2 Ch (35. 36), Err, and Neh, with an additional story of the \s'isdom of Zorobabel (3-5"). This Midrash perhaps preceded the literal tr. of Ch, Ezr, Neh, into Greek. Such an Haggadic addition to history was Pr. Man (suggested by 2 Ch 33', ").

Est appears in the LXX only in the form of a midrash, in which, among other things, are supplied the letter referred to in 3", prayers of Mordecai and Esther at 4", the decree mentioned in 8'-. Dn is similarly enlarged by a prayer and song at 3", and the new stories of Daniel's wisdom, Sus and Bel.

Even the late Maccabrean history is treated in the Haggadic way in 2 Mac, an epitome of a larger work by Jason of Cyrene, which adorns the history with legendary elements to make of it a sermon on the Pharisaic religion. 3 and 4 Mac are found usually in the LXX, though not in the A. 3 Mac is a poor example of moralising under the form of history ; and 4 Mac makes an incident in the Maccabsean story the text for a philosophical treatise on the lordship of the religious reason over the passions.

(3) Of new stories the A. contains two famous examples. To and Jth ; Tobit teaching the reward for the individual of a faithful life of Pharisaic righteousness ; Judith connecting a patriotism like Esther's with regard for a ceremonially correct life. (4) Direct moral and religious instmction ('ethical Haggada') is represented by Sir and Wis, the one a Pal. con- tinuation, the other a Hel. development of the earlier wisdom books.

As in the Hagiographa one book, Dn, makes the transition from story to prophecy, so in the A., Bar and the Ep. of Jeremy are prophetic in character. It is not, however, with prophecy nor with law, but with history and story, that both Hagiographa and A. have chiefly to do (cf. the use made of Dn by Hellenists [LXX] and by later I'alestinians [Enoch, etc.] The line between history and story is in both an uncertain one, as history, too, is told for religious, not for scientific purposes.

With stories and with proverbial sayings the Jewish Kabbis long continued to occupy tliemselves. The value of these forms of religious instruction no one will question in view of the gospels. As to the relative worth of their use in the Hagiographa and the A., k fair judgment, apart from doctrinal considera- tions, will strongly justify the choice of the Pales- tinians, taking the two collections as wholes. A relation between them is, however, not to be denied, and is grounded in their history.

(c) I'altatinuin and Hellenistic Elements in the Apocryph/i. — The a*' Iwoks of the LXX were in part translations of Pal. (Heb.) books, in part original writings of Greek Jews ; but it is not possible to draw the line between the two with Becnrity. As the LXX was recognised as a tr., one would expect that translations would more readily find their way into it. Yet the Hel. scribes were busy writers, especially in the lines which the A. follows (history, story, wisdom).

Sir contains its own testimony that it was written in Heb. and tr. by the writer's grandson into Greek. 1 Mac was unaoubtedly a Heb. book, and Jerome (if not Origen) knew it in the original. Jth and To, Jerome knew in ' Chaldee,' ana a Heb. original is almost cert-ain. The Ad. Est may be Heb., or at least similar additions may have arisen in Pal. in connexion with the yearly celebration of Puriiu. Pr. Man may have been Heb.

, and even 1 Es, if it E receded the LXX 2 Es [Ezr-Neh], may have ad a Heb. precursor. Of the Ad. Dn, Sua turns on a Or. play on words. Wis and 2, 3, and 4 Mac were certainly Greek. 2. Use of the Ai'ocryi'ha and its relation TO THE Canon.— (a) In Hellenistic Juilaism.— The a'' books are found in all MSS of the LXX, scattered among the books of the Heb. Canon without discrimination.

These MSS are, indeed, all of Christian origin, and some of tliera even contain Christian songs; but, apart from these, they undoubtedly represent the O'l which was current among the Gr. Jews and used in Gr. synagogues in the apostolic and early post-apostolic age. The additions to the Heb. Canon are not oulj' of Jewish origin, but are, as a whole, books which would interest Gr. Jews, but would not specially interest Christians, since the projilietic element in them is consjucuously small.

The addition of these books by Christians would be inexplicable. The preservation of this longer OT by Christians only, is naturally explained by the fact that soon after 70 A.D. Hel. Judaism in the di-stinct sense ceased to exist, giving place either 'o rabbinical Judaism or to Christianity ; so that the earlier diflerence regarding the limits of sacred Scriptures between I'al. and Alex. Jews survived only as a diU'erence between Jews and Christians. We must not, however, conclude that the A.

had been in the strict sense canonized by Alex. Judaism. Their place among Scriptures is rather due, in part, to the supreme dignity of the Law ; in part to the broad view of inspiration current among Hellenists. In a more exclusive way than in later Pal. Judaism, the Pent, was to Alexandrians the sacred Scripture, the Canon by pre-eminence. It was such to Philo. In this respect the Alexandrians perhaps remained at the standpoint of the earlier Palestinians of the 3rd and 2nd centuries B.C.

When Alex. Judaism was founded, the Law was the Canon of Judaism. The work of the 70 concerned it alone (Aristeas). The tr. of the other books into Greek iu Ejjypt went on, in part, side by side with the formation of the 2nd and 3rd Canons in Pal. That the suc- ceeding translators disregarded the Pal. distinc- tion of Prophets and Hagiographa, and aiTariged the books, after the Law, toj>ically, though in no fixed order, indicates their dill'erent view of these books. The relatively freer tr.

points in the same direction ; and this freedom passes over by natural degrees into the incorporation of explana- tory' and ulustrative additions of less or greater extent. For this procedure the Pal. translators of OT into Aram, (largumim) had perhaps already set the example. That, finallv, Sir and Wis should be put in connexion with the Solomonic books, making, with Ps and Job, a volume of poelrv, or that, in connexion with Est, Jth and To sliould be inserted, cannot seem strange.

This was mailc easier by the Hel. view of inspiration. Whili- Palestinians inclined to limit inspiration to tlii! age of the projdiets, long ended, the AlexandriaiiH regarded the divine spirit as stUI active, and viewed as inspiration the experience of the thinker and writer in moments oi special clearness of insight and exaltation of feeling. Against the evidence that the LXX conlainc<l a** books, Philo's silence is inconclusive. I'liilo:" text is the Pent.

It is true that he cites none of the A., hut in the prophetic Canon he pa.sses by Ezk and all the minor prophets except Hos and Zee; and of the Hagiographa, except I's, he makes almost no use, citing Pr twice. Job and Ch once, and Dn and the live NIegilloth not at all. (6) Jn I'alrMinian Ju<Liirm. — Here, too, the Law, long the only Canon, remained supieuie.

The 118 APOCRYPHA APOCRYPHA Jemsh scribes regarded the prophets as those who gave an authoritative interpretation of the Law, handing on the Mosaic tradition from the elders to the Bcnbes. The Law has always had the chief place in the synagogue service, the prophets an important secondary place, the Hagiographa a place altogether subordinate. For a long time these difl'erent collections could not be written on the same roll.

As they did not form one volume, it was the easier to keep them distinct in use and estimation. The books of the 2nd and 3rd Canons were, however, according to the Jewish view, inspired, and this in the end distinguished them from all later books. Jos. (c. Ap. i. 8) says that the prophets ' learned the earliest and most ancient events by inspiration of God, and wrote down the events of their own times plainly, as they occurred.'

'But from Artaxerxes [Est] to our times all events have indeed been written down ; but these late books are not deemed worthy of the same credit, because the exact succession of the prophets was wanting.' By the use of the formal principle that with Alalachi prophecy ceased (cf. Mai 4»-«, Zee 13», 1 Mac 4" 9^ U"), though they could use the test only uncritically, the scribes drew the line between Hagiographa and A., or justified the line already drawn by the popular religious sense.

All the Hagiographa could be regarded as meeting this test,* but Sir and 1 Mac, which were the most valued books of the A., could not. It is true that Jesus Sirach himself does not share this (later) view of inspiration. He may represent the earlier Pal. standpoint, from which Alexandrianism took its start. For him the Law is supreme. It is the embodied Wisdom of God (24'''). In some sense his knowledge is all derived from it (39'- « 1i^).

On the other hand, between the prophets and the high priest of his own time he makes no sharp distinction (44-49) ; and for himself he claims an inspiration like that of the prophet (cf. Sg""- with 48", and see l'" 24»'-'«' 5V-). The step from Sir to the Hellenistic Wis is not great. Here, too, the Law is the supreme revelation (e.g. 18*), t and here, too, in answer to prayer (cf.

Sir 39°), the spirit of wisdom is given to men, that spirit which is the life and reason of the world, and which 'generation after generation enters into holy souls and makes friends of God and prophets' (T", cf. chs. 1. 6 ff.) Apart from 4 Ezr, which, not being in the LXX, does not deserve consideration at this point, the other books of the A. make no claun to be reckoned among sacred Scriptures.

It is not easy to estimate the significance of the fact that we have no evidence in Jewish books that they were ever so regarded. Disputes are recorded regarding the exclusion of books of the Canon, but none regarding the admission of a*" books. Yet it should oe said that the Je'wish Rabbis usually covered up the tracks of past wanderings from the straight path that led to their own position.

That additions to Dn and Est, and books like To and Jth, were once current among the Hagiographa in Pal. is not impossible. Josephus uses 1 Mac, 1 Es, and Ad. Est, without distinction from can. books as historical sources, and even says that he has written his whole history ' as the sacred books record it' (Ant. XX. xi. 2, cf. Pro. §3). Yet he counts 22 books, and excludes from the first rank all later than Est. In his time, then, the line had been drawn.

In the rabbinical writings there are many • Baba bathra 14 aBcribea Job to Moses, Ru to Samuel, Ps to Pavid, Ca and Ec to Uezekjoh and his friends, Dn and Est to the men of the Great Synapopriie, Ch to Ezra and Nehemiah. t The identification of Wisdom with the Law is found also In Bar S^ff- 4. Judith and Tobit and his son are examples of the gloriflcatioD ol ths Law in life.

citations from Sir ; Zunz * counts 40, among them some ' in a manner usual only of Scripture passages,' and some as late as the 4th cent., which speak of it as one of the Kethubhim. Some doubt, at least, regarding its canonicity is probable. Of Ad. Est some traces exist in Heb. literature, Haggadic stories concerning Dn, among them traces of Bel, are found. The Mac- cabcean legend of the mother and seven sons (2 Mac, 4 Mac) was a favourite theme of rabbinical Midrashim.

Yet 1 Mac, which Jerome knew in Heb., seems to have left no trace in rabbinical books. The legend of Judith is found, though in a form very diflerent from the LXX, and Tobit is still extant in Heb. Jerome says the Jews had Jth and To, and regarded them as historical but not as canonical ; while Origen says they did not possess them even among their A. 3. The Relation of the Apocrypha to the Religious Tendencies and Parties of Judaism. — Of a theology of the A. it is unhistorical to speak.

The collection presents the ideas of no one man or party, of no one period or place. The theology, or the religious ideas of each book, may be treated (see separate articles), or a history of the religious ideas and movements in Judaism in a given period (e.g. 200 B.c.-lOO a.d.) may be under- taken, in which these books will be important sources ; but the historian of theology cannot separate the A. from the later can.

books on the one side, and from Philo and Josephus, the Pseudepigrapha and the early rabbinical literature, on the other. A few suggestions may, however, be made regarding the relation of these books to the chief religious tendencies and parties of Judaism. Tne main distinction in the post-exilic Jewish religion was that between the pnest, whose sphere was the temple and its cultus, and the scribe, whose activity centred in the synagogue and the law.

The centre of gravity seems to have shifted gradually from the temple to the synagogue, from priestly ritual to the legalism of the scribes, whose work made it possible for Jews in the Dispersion, out of reach of the temple, to live religious lives, and prepared Judaism to survive the loss of its temple. The Hagiographa stands, as a whole, at the earlier stage, beginning with the Ps, the book of temple devotion, and ending with the great temple history of Ch, Ezr, Neh.

The five ^legil- loth also came into connexion with the cultus by their use at the national feasts, though it is not known how early this happened. On the other hand, there is no early evidence of the regular use of Hagiographa in the synagogue service, and of the scribes' legalism they contain little. Only Dn, perhaps the latest book in this collection, can be called Pharisaic in tendency. In the A., on the other hand, the legal pre- dominates over the priestly interest.

Sir, perhaps its oldest book, shows a transition from the priestly standpoint of Ch (to which belongs 1 Es) to the legal standpoint of the scribes (Zunz). The writer delights in the temple and the high priest's impressive ceremony, and dwells upon Aaron much more at length than upon Moses (ch. 45), and with stUl more enthusiasm upon the Simon whose minis- trations he had himself witnessed (ch. 50) ; while Ezra, the patron saint of the Rabbis, is passed by in his praise of famous men.

Yet he praises also the law as the wisdom of God (see above), and glorifies the office of the scribe (3S"»* 39'-"). But it was especially the Maecabayin crisis that sharpened the contrast between the two tendencies. The desecration of the temple by Antiochus was the occasion of the war. The recovery and recon- secration of the temple was the great deed of • Ootteadiemtlichen Fvrtrage der Judm 2 Aufl. 1892, p. 106. APOCKYPKA APOCRYPHA 119 Judas.

This meant to the scribes the re-observance ol the law, and with tliat they wore content. It meant to Judos the lirst step toward a recovery of political independence. Judaism was organised about its temple. Its supreme authority was the high priest. So that the Alaccab.tan princes coveted the high priesthood as a political power, and tinallj' gained it.

But this was a %'iolation of the law, and alienated the legalists, who became a party of separatists, Pharisees, with the scribes at their head and the synagogue as their institution. Against them the adherents of the temple and the new high priests became an opposing party, the Sadducees. The priestly tenilency issued in a political party, the scribal in a religious party; and in the conflict of these parties the inner his- tory of Judaism chiefly consisted until the fall of Jerusalem.

Since Saaduceism was bound up with the temple and the national life, it ceased to be after the destruction of temple and State ; and since its views were as obnoxious to Christianity as to sur- viving Judaism, none of its distinct literary pro- ducts could survive. The A.

, however, owing partly to its Alex, selection, partly to its com- paratively early date, is not a purely Pharisaic product, and stands aside from the controversy Detween the two parties of which we know (from the Pharisaic side) in Ps-Sol, Enoch, etc. Two books of the A. are Sadducean in tendency. Sirach writes before the Maccabiuan wars, so that his book can be called Sadducean only by anticipa- tion.

Sadducean in tone was not only his attach- ment to the temple and the priesthood (above), but also his reserve in regard to angels, his sceptical attitude as to demons (21") and the future life {e.ff. n""' H""" 41''), perhaps his insistence on the entire freedom of man (15"'" 17'-'), and his spirit of liberality toward outside sources of knowledge and culture {e.ff. 39^). There is, indeed, a polemic against a Pharisaic spirit of ceremonialism in 34i3-« 35iff.

_ 1 Mac follows the crisis ont of which the parties arose, but precedes their serious conflicts. The writer's admiration for Judas and his brothers, ' through whose hand salvation was given to Israel,' is unbounded (5", cf. 3'-» 9^"- 13»-« H^"- 16» etc.) He paints Simon's reign in thoroughly Messianic colours (14*'"), and in the decision that 'until a trustworthy prophet should arise . . Simon should be their prince and high priest for ever,' his political and religious creed was summed up.

It was the creed of Smlduceism. Sadducean also is the writer's attachment to the laws and customs of the nation, and his opposition to innovations (2'"^ 331. 39QM etc.); but laws are for thostren^heningand safety of the nation, and, when the observance of even BO eacred a law as the Sabbath exposed the nation to danger, its non-observance was decreed (2»-«). He looks to the valour of the hero to win victories (no miracle even in 9"-" 11"""); as Jos. Bays, 'The Sadducees take away fate ...

we are ourselves the causes of good,' etc. {Ant. XIII. v. 9). Hia interest is in man more than in God, and in the present more than in the future. The essence of Pharisaism was that it pave religion (i.e. legali.sm) the lirst place. The Sudducce attempted to further the welfare of the individual and of the nation by direct means (politics, war, etc.) ; the Pharisaic faith was that if tlie individual and the community kept the law, God would by a Bupematural act secure their welfare.

The Saddu- cees would set aside the law in smaller things (Sabbath), or in greater (high priesthood), wliun circumstances required. To the Pharisee the law was inviolable, whatever the extremity. This is the iirincijile of Pharisaism. Out of it various developments issued. That the law might never be broken by inadvert- ence, the scribes put about it a ' hedge ' of addi- tional precautionary rules, the Ualacha, or oral law, which the Sadducees did not recognise.

The belief that well-being was God's reward for the observance of the law, and misfortune His punish- ment for its transgression, though applied at flrst to the present life and lot of men and nations, might easily be referred to the future, and foster the thought of a coming national glory for Israel, and of an individual life after death. It might also stimulate the belief in miracles and in angels and demons as agents of God's blessings and judg- ments.

Yet these marks of later Pharisaism are not uniformly or conspicuously present in the A. Fasting is almost the only addition which we find to the Mosaic law (To l-2\ Jtli 8" etc., cf. Dn 9^ lO'), with a further ascetic emphasis upon ihe laws regarding food (Jth 10^ 11" 12'-», To l'"'-. Ad. Est 14", 2 Mac 5" 6-"').

The creed of tlie Bk of Jth is that no enemy can prevail against Israel so long OS it keeps the ceremonial law, but if it breaks it, under whatever stress, it ■mh fall (5"'''' jia-iu jjn-aj) Moreover, Judith's deliverance of the nation is conditioned upon her individual fulfilment of the law even amid the greatest difliculties (8^'' 121-8).

fiii^ jg jrue Pharisaism, and yet the book contains neither Messianic hope, nor rewards aftei death (16" is not to be so understood), nor miracle, nor angel. Tobit illustrates the Pharisaic prin- ciple in the life of an individual. Legal righteous- ness is rewarded by deliverance from evil, long life and prosperity ; while sin is always punished by evil, and all evil is due to sin (3'" I*'-"' 14^-»-"j. Here angels and demons play a far greater part than in any other book of the A.

The national hope also is expressed (13. 14^'), but there is no resur- rection. I'lie Hk of Bar contains the national hope (2'" 4»-»' 5'"), but no individual resurrection. 2 Mac views the work of Judas as an illustration of I'harisaism. It knows of no laxity regarding the law (cf. 6" 6" S-" 12^ 15'). The history is helped forward by angels and miracles and signs (3'»-" 5«-9» 10»'- 11" lu"''-). The national hope finds frequent expression (l"-*» 2'-" etc.); and, here only in the A., the resur.

of the bodies of the righteous is insisted upon (7». "•"■' 12^'- 14*'). It is evident that the later marks of Pharisaism (cf. Ac 23'"") were not uniformly present. Legalism stands as the characteristic mark. 'This is the book of the commandments of God, and the law that endureth for ever. All they that hold it fast are destined for life, but such as leave it shall die' (Bar 4'). And since the law of life was Israel's law, with legalism went particularism.

' O Israel, happy are we I for the things that are pleasing to God are made kno^vn unto us' (Bar 4''). Of this feeling, and the corresponding contempt for other peoples, passing over, in times of trouble, into jealousy and hatred, there is enough in the A. It inspires Ad. Est as it does Est it.self. Jth and 2 Mac are dominated by it. It is a presup]iosition of To (4" etc.) Even Sir shares it, though liis ruling interest is in the individual, not in the nation (esp. 30'"", cf.

24, and in 44-50, e.y. 47''"'-). Only the Hel. lik of Wis rises to a broader view. In chs. 10-19 the special care of God for Israel is sliow'n. ' In every way thou didst magnify thy jicople, and glorify tliem, . . standing by them in every time and place' (19^). But while Israel is (jod's son (18", cf.*), He also loves all men (IIM-M 57 ii3)_ ^nj jijg judjriiionts are remedial (12"''-). Nor, in spite of the first impression of 3'- " 5'""''" (cf.

4'"'"), does the writer hold to a future earthly glory for Israel. The consummation is heavenly (immortality of the soul, here first in Jewish nooks), and is morally conditioned. The Essenio type of Pharisaism is represented only in 4 Ezi, which does not properly belong t* 120 APOCRYPHA APOCRYPHA the collection. Here only do we find a personal Messiah. Hel.

Judaism, which stood at one side of the conflict between Pharisee and Sadducee, is represented by Wis, which, though it sets the religious life and faith in contrast to worldliness and scepticism, puts no stress on ceremonialism, but interprets the law in a more ethical sense, and reviews the history of Israel to illustrate the beneficent rule of God's wisdom, rather than the inviolableness of His law.

But 4 Ezr cannot be treated apart from other apocalypses, nor Wis apart from other products of Hellenism. It is chiefly in these two isolated books that foreign elements are prerainent. Apart from these, and the (Pers. 1) angelology of To, the A. stands in the main on (later) OT ground in its views of God, of man, and of the world. ui. THE APOCRYPHA IN THE CHRISTIAN