Apocalyptic Literature

VIEW:67 DATA:01-04-2020

APOCALYPTIC LITERATURE.—The apocalypse as a literary form of Jewish literature first appears during the Hellenistic period. Its origin is to a considerable degree in dispute, but is involved in the general development of the period. Among the Hebrews its forerunner was the description of the Day of Jehovah. On that day, the prophets taught, Jehovah was to punish the enemies of Israel and to establish His people as a world power. In the course of time this conception was supplemented by the further expectation of a judgment for Jews as well as for heathen (Amo_2:3-8; Amo_3:9-15; Amo_5:10-13, Zec_1:2-18; Zec_2:4-13; Joe_2:18-28, Eze_30:2 f.). The first approach to the apocalyptic method is probably to be seen in Zec_9:1-17; Zec_10:1-12; Zec_11:1-17; Zec_12:1-14; Zec_13:1-9; Zec_14:1-21. It was in the same period that the tendencies towards the aesthetic conceptions which had been inherited from the Babylonian exile were beginning to be realized under the influence of Hellenistic culture. Because of their religion, literature was the only form of aesthetic expression (except music) which was open to the art impulses of the Jews. In the apocalypse we thus can see a union of the symbolism and myths of Babylonia with the religious faith of the Jews, under the influence of Hellenistic culture. By its very origin it was the literary means of setting forth by the use of symbols the certainty of Divine judgment and the equal certainty of Divine deliverance. The symbols are usually animals of various sorts, but frequently composite creatures whose various parts represented certain qualities of the animals from which they were derived.
Apocalyptic is akin to prophecy. Its purpose was fundamentally to encourage faith in Jehovah on the part of those who were in distress, by ‘revealing’ the future. Between genuine prophetism and apocalyptic there existed, however, certain differences not always easy to formulate, but appreciable to students of the two types of religious Instruction. (a) The prophet, taking a stand in the present, so interprets current history as to disclose Divine forces at work therein, and the inevitable outcome of a certain course of conduct. The writers of the apocalypses, however, seem to have had little spiritual insight into the providential ordering of existing conditions, and could see only present misery and miraculous deliverance. (b) Assuming the name of some worthy long since dead, the apocalyptist re-wrote the past in terms of prophecy in the name of some hero or seer of Hebrew history. On the strength of the fulfilment of this alleged prophecy, he forecast, though in very general terms, the future. (c) Prophecy made use of symbol in literature as a means of enforcing or making intelligible its Divinely inspired message. The apocalyptists employed allegorically an elaborate machinery of symbol, chief among which were sheep, bulls, birds, as well as mythological beings like Beliar and the Antichrist.
The parent of apocalyptic is the book of Daniel, which, by the almost unanimous consensus of scholars, appeared in the Maccabæan period (see Daniel [Bk. of]). From the time of this book until the end of the 1st cent. a.d., and indeed even later, we find a continuous stream of apocalypses, each marked by a strange combination of pessimism as to the present and hope as to the future yet to be miraculously established. These works are the output of one phase of Pharisaism, which, while elevating both Torah and the Oral Law, was not content with bald legalism, but dared trust in the realization of its religious hopes. The authors of the various works are utterly unknown. In this, as in other respects, the apocalypses constitute a unique national literature. Chief among apocalyptic literature are the following:—
1. The Enoch Literature.—The Enoch literature has reached us in two forms: (a) The Ethiopic Enoch; (b) The Slavonic Book of the Secrets of Enoch. The two books are independent, and indicate the wide-spread tendency to utilize the story of the patriarch in apocalyptic discourse.
(a) The Ethiopic Book of Enoch is a collection of apocalypses and other material written during the last two centuries before Christ. It was probably written in Hebrew or Aramaic, and then translated into Greek, and from that into Ethiopic and Latin. As it now exists, the collection is a survival of a wide-spread Enoch literature, and its constituent sections have been to a considerable extent edited by both Jews and Christians. Critics, while varying as to details, are fairly well agreed as to the main component sources, each probably representing a different author or school.
(i.) The original ground-work of the present book is to be found in chs. 1–36 and 72–104, in the midst of which are, however, numerous interpolations (see iv. below). These chapters were probably written before b.c. 100. Chs. 1–36 deal chiefly with the portrayal of the punishment to be awarded the enemies of the Jews and sinners generally on the Day of Judgment. The eschatology of these chapters is somewhat sensuous as regards both the resurrection and rewards and punishments. In them we have probably the oldest piece of Jewish literature touching the general resurrection of Israel and representing Gehenna as a place of final punishment (see Gehenna).
The dream visions (chs. 83–90) were probably written in the time of Judas Maccabæus or John Hyrcanus. By the use of symbolic animals—sheep, rams, wild beasts—Hebrew history is traced to the days of the Hasmonæan revolt. The years of misery are represented by a flock under seventy shepherds, who, in the new age about to dawn, are to be cast with the evil men and angels into an abyss of fire. The Messiah is then to appear, although his function is not definitely described. In ch. 91 the future is somewhat more transcendentally described.
In the later chapters of this oldest section the new eschatology is more apparent. In them are to be found representations of the sleep of the righteous, the resurrection of the spirit of the Messiah, though human, as God’s Son (105.2), the Day of Judgment, and the punishment of the wicked in hell.
(ii.) Whether or not the second group of chapters (37–71), or the Similitudes, is post- or pre-Christian has been thoroughly discussed. The general consensus of recent critics, however, is that the Similitudes were probably written somewhere between b.c. 94 and 64: at all events, before the time of Herod. The most remarkable characteristic of these Similitudes is the use of the term ‘Son of Man’ for the Messiah. But it is not possible to see in the use of this term any reference to the historical Jesus. More likely it marks a stage in the development of the term from the general symbolic usage of Dan_7:13 to the strictly Messianic content of the NT. In the Similitudes we find described the judgment of all men, both alive and dead, as well as of angels. Yet the future is still to some extent sensuous, although transcendental influences are very evident in the section. The Messiah pre-exists and is more than a man. The share which he has in the reorganization of the world is more prominent than in the older sections.
(iii.) Interspersed throughout the book are sections which Charles calls ‘the book of celestial physics.’ These sections are one of the curiosities of scientific literature, and may be taken as a fair representative of the astronomical and meteorological beliefs of the Palestinian Jews about the time of Christ.
(iv.) Interpolations from the so-called Book of Noah, which are very largely the work of the last part of the pre-Christian era, although it is not possible to state accurately the date of their composition.
The importance of Enoch is great for the understanding of the eschatology of the NT and the methods of apocalyptic.
(b) The (Slavonic) Secrets of Enoch probably had a pre-Christian original, and further, presupposes the existence of the Ethiopic Enoch. It could not, therefore, have been written much prior to the time of Herod, and, as the Temple is still standing, must have been written before a.d. 70. The author (or authors) was probably a Hellenistic Jew living in the first half of the 1st cent. a.d. The book is particularly interesting in that in it is to be found the first reference to the millennium (xxxii. 2–xxxiii. 2), which is derived from a combination of the seven creative days and Psa_90:4. At the close of the six thousand years, the new day, or Sabbath of the thousand years, was to begin. The Secrets of Enoch is a highly developed picture of the coming age and of the structure of the heaven, which, it holds, is seven-fold. Here, too, are the Judgment, though of individuals rather than of nations, the two æons, the complete renovation or destruction of the earth. There is no mention of a resurrection, and the righteous are upon death to go immediately to Paradise.
2. The Book of Jubilees is a Haggadist commentary on Genesis, and was probably written in the Maccabæan period, although its date is exceedingly uncertain, and may possibly he placed in the latter half of the last cent. b.c. In this writing angelology and demonology are well developed. While there is no mention of the Messiah, the members of the Messianic age are to live a thousand years, and are to be free from the influence or control of Satan. The book contains no doctrine of the resurrection; but spirits are immortal. While there is punishment of the wicked, and particularly of evil spirits and the enemies of Israel, the Judgment is not thoroughly correlated with a general eschatological scheme. The chief object of the book is to incite the Jews to a greater devotion to the Law, and the book is legalistic—rather than idealistic.
The ‘new age’ was to be inaugurated by wide-spread study of the Law, to which the Jews would be forced by terrible suffering. Certain passages would seem to imply a resurrection of the dead and a renewing of all creation along with the endless punishment of the wicked.
3. The Psalms of Solomon—a group of noble songs, written by a Pharisee (or Pharisees) probably between b.c. 70 and 40, the dates being fixed by reference to the Roman conquest of Jerusalem and the death of Pompey (Ps-Sol 2:30, 31). The collection is primarily a justification of the downfall of the Maccabæan house because of its sins. Its author (or authors) was opposed to monarchy as such, and looked forward to the time when the Messiah would really be king of Judæa. The picture of this king as set forth in Psa_17:1-15; Psa_18:1-50 is one of the noblest in Jewish literature. He is to be neither sufferer nor teacher, pre-existent nor miraculously horn. He is not to be a priest, or warrior. He is to be sinless, strong through the Holy Spirit, gaining his wisdom from God, conquering the entire heathen world without war, ‘by the word of his mouth,’ and to establish the capital of the world at Jerusalem. All the members of the new kingdom, which, like the Messiah, is miraculous, are to be ‘sons of God.’ These two Psalms are not of a kin with the ordinary apocalyptic literature like the Enoch literature, and probably represent a tendency more religious than apocalyptic. At the same time, the influence of the apocalyptic is not wanting in them.
4. The Assumption of Moses was probably written in the opening years of the 1st cent. a.d., and narrates in terms of prophecy the history of the world from the time of Moses until the time of its composition, ending in an eschatological picture of the future. As it now stands, the writing is hardly more than a fragment of a much larger work, and exists only in an old Latin translation. The most striking characteristic is the importance given to Satan as the opponent of God, as well as the rather elaborate portrayal of the end of the age it narrates. The Judgment is to be extended to the Gentiles, but no Messiah is mentioned, the Messianic kingdom rather than He being central. Further, the writer, evidently in fear of revolutionary tendencies among his people, says distinctly that God alone-is to be judge of the Gentiles.
5. The Testaments of the Twelve Patriarchs is a composite work purporting to preserve the last words of the twelve sons of Jacob. It was probably written during the first two centuries of the Christian era, although some of its material may be earlier. As it now stands, it is full of Christian interpolations, and it has little apocalyptic material, being rather of the nature of homilies illustrated with much legendary matter, including eschatological pictures and references to demons and their king Beliar. The new age is not distinctly described, but apparently involves only earthly relationships. God’s judgment on wicked men and demons is, however, elaborately pictured, sometimes in terms hard to reconcile with the less transcendental accounts of the blessings assured to the Jewish nation. Each of the patriarchs is represented as dealing with that particular virtue or vice with which the Biblical account associates him, and also as foretelling appropriate blessings or curses. The work is preserved in Greek and Armenian translations.
6. The Ascension of Isaiah is a composite book which circulated largely among the Christian heretics of the 3rd century. At its basis lies a group of legends of uncertain origin, dealing with the Antichrist and Beliar. These in turn are identified with the expectation that Nero would return after death. The book, therefore, in its present shape is probably of Christian origin, and is not older than the 2nd cent., or possibly the latter part of the 1st. The Isaiah literature, however, was common in the 1st cent., and the book is a valuable monument of the eschatological tendencies and beliefs of at least certain groups of the early Christians. Particularly important is it as throwing light upon the development of the Antichrist doctrines. It exists to-day in four recensions—Greek, Ethiopic, Latin, and Slavonic.
7. The Apocalypse of Ezra (Second Esdras), written about the time of the destruction of Jerusalem. It is the most complete expression of Pharisaic pessimism. Written in the midst of national misery, it is not able to see any relief except in the creation of a new world. The age was coming to an end, and the new age which was to belong to Israel would presently come. The judgment of Israel’s enemies was presently to be established, but not until the number of the righteous was complete. The book is no doubt closely related to the Apocalypse of Baruch, and both apparently reproduce the same originally Jewish material. It has been considerably affected by Christian hopes. Both for this reason and because of its emphasis on generic human misery and sin, with the consequent need of something more than a merely national deliverance, it gives a prominent position to the Messiah, who is represented as dying. As Second Esdras the book has become part of the Apocrypha of the OT, and has had considerable influence in the formation of Christian eschatology. In 2Es_7:30-70 is an elaborate account of the general Resurrection, Judgment, and the condition of souls after death; and it is this material quite as much as the Messianic prediction of chs. 12–14 that make it of particular interest to the student. It is possessed, however, of no complete unity in point of view, and passes repeatedly from the national to the ethical (individual) need and deliverance. The separation of these two views is, however, more than a critical matter. As in Mar_13:1-37, the two illustrate each other.
8. The Apocalypse of Baruch is a composite work which embodies in itself a ground-work which is distinctly Jewish, and certain sections of which were probably written before the destruction of Jerusalem. Criticism, however, has not arrived at any complete consensus of opinion as regards its composition, but there can be little doubt that it represents the same apocalyptic tendencies and much of the material which are to be seen in Second Esdras. Just what are the relations between the two writings, however, has not yet been clearly shown. The probability is that the Apocalypse of Baruch, as it now stands, was written in the second half of the 1st cent. a.d., and has come under the influence of Christianity (see esp. chs. xlix–li). Like Second Esdras, it is marked by a despair of the existing age, and looks forward to a transcendental reign of the Messiah, in which the Jews are to be supremely fortunate. It exists to-day in Greek and Syriac versions, with a strong probability that both are derived from original Hebrew writing. This apocalypse, both from its probable origin and general characteristics, is of particular value as a document for understanding the NT literature. In both the Apocalypse of Baruch and Second Esdras we have the most systematized eschatological picture that has come down to us from Pharisaism.
9. The Sibylline Oracles are the most important illustration of the extra-Palestinian-Hellenistic apocalyptic hope. As the work now exists, it is a collection of various writings dealing with the historical and future conditions of the Jewish people. The most important apocalyptic section is in Book iii. 97–828, written in Maccahæan times. In it the punishment of the enemies of the Jews is elaborately foretold, as are also the future and the Messianic Judgment. This third book was probably edited in the middle of the 2nd century by a Christian. In general, however, this Sibylline literature, although of great extent, gives us no such distinct pictures of the future as those to be found in the Ezra-Baruch apocalypses.
Shailer Mathews.
Hastings' Dictionary of the Bible
Edited by James Hastings, D.D. Published in 1909

During the three centuries leading up to and including the New Testament era, the distinctive kind of literature known as apocalyptic flourished among Jewish writers. The name ‘apocalyptic’ comes from the Greek apokalypto, meaning ‘to reveal’ (cf. Rev_1:1). The literature has been given this name because the authors presented their messages in the form of divinely sent visions that revealed heavenly secrets. The revelations were particularly concerned with coming great events.
The Old Testament books of Ezekiel, Daniel and Zechariah (also Isaiah Chapters 24-27) show some of the apocalyptic features that began to develop in the later prophetical writings. Likewise, some New Testament writings, such as the book of Revelation and Mark Chapter 13, contain apocalyptic features.
A message for difficult times
With Israel’s release from captivity in 539 BC and its re-establishment in its homeland, many Jews expected that the messianic age was about to dawn. Their hopes, however, were disappointed, and one powerful nation after another continued to rule over Israel.
By this time, the ministry of Israelite prophets, which had never been as prominent after the captivity as before, had almost disappeared entirely. Apocalyptic writers replaced prophetic preachers as the interpreters of Israel’s history. But whereas the prophets were largely concerned with denouncing Israel’s unfaithfulness and assuring the people of their coming judgment, the apocalyptists were more concerned with condemning Israel’s oppressors and announcing certain doom upon them.
A popular practice among apocalyptic writers was to write under the name of a respected Israelite of a previous era. Through prophecies and visions, this ‘writer’ from the former era then spoke of events from his time to the time of the actual writer, as a means of assuring the readers that God was always in control of events. He wanted to encourage God’s people to endure their sufferings, in the assurance that God would soon overthrow evil and bring in the golden age.
Some features of the literature
Throughout the apocalyptic literature there is a sharp contrast between evil and good, between the present world and the age to come. In the present world God’s people suffer because of the evil that hostile governments and ungodly people direct against them. In the age to come, by contrast, God’s people will enjoy unending contentment, whereas those who are evil will be destroyed (cf. Isa_24:21-23; Isa_25:6-12; Dan_7:9-14; Rev_19:1-5; Rev_21:1-8).
Meantime, God’s people must persevere. They have to realize that history must move along the path that God has determined for it, till the time comes for him to intervene decisively (cf. Eze_39:1-6; Eze_39:21; Eze_39:25; Dan_12:6-13; Mar_13:24-27; Mar_13:32).
The visions reported by the apocalyptic writers were not usually in the form of scenes taken from real life. In most cases they contained features that were weird and abnormal, such as unnatural beasts and mysterious numbers (Dan_8:3-8; Dan_9:24; Dan_12:11-12; Rev_13:1-5; Rev_13:11-18). The visions had symbolic meaning and were often interpreted by angels (Eze_40:2-4; Dan_8:15-19; Zec_1:9; Zec_1:19; Zec_5:5-6; Rev_21:9; Rev_21:15). Such writings enabled the Jews to comment safely on the oppressors who ruled them; for they were able to use symbols (usually beasts) instead of the names of their overlords (Dan_7:1-8; Mar_13:14; Rev_13:1-4; Revelation 17).
In contrast to the prophets, who said, ‘This is what God said to me’, the apocalyptists said, ‘This is what God showed me’ (Jer_7:1-3; Jer_23:18 with Zec_1:20; Rev_4:1). Yet in the biblical writings there is much overlap between the prophetic and the apocalyptic. The biblical apocalyptic writers, though they had similarities with other apocalyptic writers, also had the fervent evangelistic and pastoral spirit of the biblical prophets. Although they saw visions that carried symbolic meanings, they also had the prophet’s awareness that they spoke words from God. And those words made spiritual demands upon people (Eze_11:1-12; Eze_33:30-33; Zec_1:1-6; Zec_3:1; Rev_1:3; Rev_2:1-7; Rev_22:1-4; Rev_22:7; Rev_22:18).
Bridgeway Bible Dictionary by Don Fleming
PRINTER 1990.

a-pok-a-lip?tik lit?ẽr-a-t̬ū̇r:
INTRODUCTORY
I. Background of Apocalyptic
1. Judaism and Hellenism
2. Political Influences
II. General Characteristics of Apocalyptic
1. Differences from Prophecy in Content
2. Differences from Prophecy in Literary Form
III. Authorship of Jewish Apocalyptic Works
1. Pseudepigraphic Authors not Known Individually
2. General Resemblance and Mutual Dependence Show Them to be Products of One Sect
3. Three Jewish Sects Comprise Whole Literary Class
4. Not the Product of the Sadducees
5. Nor of the Pharisees
6. Probably Written by the Essenes
WORKS ENTITLED APOCALYPTIC
I. Apocalypses Proper
1. Enoch Books
(1) History of the Books
(2) Summary
(3) Language
(4) Date
(5) Internal Chronology: The Book of Noah
(6) External Chronology
(7) Slavonic Enoch
(8) Secrets of Enoch
2. Apocalypse of Baruch
(1) Summary
(2) Structure
(3) Language
(4) Date
(5) Relation to Other Books
(6) The Rest of the Words of Baruch
3. The Assumption of Moses
(1) Summary
(2) Structure
(3) Language
(4) Date
(5) Relation to Other Books
4. The Ascension of Isaiah
(1) Summary
(2) Structure
(3) Language
(4) Date
5. The Fourth Book of Esdras
(1) Summary
(2) Structure
(3) Language
(4) Date
II. Legendary Works
The Book of Jubilees
(1) Summary
(2) Structure
(3) Language
(4) Date
III. Psalmic Pseudepigrapha
1. The Psalter of Solomon
(1) Summary
(2) Language
(3) Date
(4) Christology
2. The Odes of Solomon
(1) Relation to Pistis Sophia and Summary
(2) Date
IV. Testaments
1. Testaments of the Twelve Patriarchs
(1) Summary
(a) Reuben
(b) Simeon
(c) Levi
(d) Judah
(e) Issachar
(f) Zebulun
(g) Dan
(h) Naphtali
(i) Gad
(j) Asher
(k) Joseph
(l) Benjamin
(2) Structure
(3) Language
(4) Date and Authorship
(5) Relation to Other Books
2. Testament of Adam
3. Testament of Abraham
4. Testament of Job
(1) Summary
(2) Structure
(3) Language
(4) Date and Authorship
V. Sibylline Oracles
VI. Conclusion
Literature
A series of pseudepigraphic works, mainly of Jewish origin, appeared during the period between 210 bc and 200 ad. They have many features in common. The most striking is the resemblance they all bear to the Book of Daniel. Following this model, most of them use ?vision? as a literary device by which to introduce their conceptions of the remote future. A side product of this same movement was the composition, mainly in Alexandria, of the Sibylline books. The literary device of ?vision? was one used in the Aeneid by Virgil, the classical contemporary of a large number of these works. One peculiarity in regard to the majority of these documents is the fact that while popular among the Christian writers of the first Christian centuries, they disappeared with the advent of the Middle Ages, and remained unknown until the first half of the 19th century was well on in its course.

I. Background of Apocalyptic
1. Judaism and Hellenism
When the Jews came back from Babylon to Palestine, though surrounded by heathen of various creeds, they were strongly monotheistic. The hold the Persians had of the empire of Southwest Asia, and their religion - Zoroastrianism - so closely akin to monotheism, prevented any violent attempts at perverting the Jews. With the advent of the Greek power a new state of things emerged. Certainly at first there does not seem to have been any direct attempt to force them to abandon their religion, but the calm contempt of the Hellene who looked down from the superior height of his artistic culture on all barbarians, and the influence that culture had in the ruling classes tended to seduce the Jews into idolatry. While the governing orders, the priests and the leaders of the Council, those who came in contact with the generals and governors of the Lagids of Egypt, or the Seleucids of Syria, were thus inclined to be seduced into idolatry, there was a large class utterly uninfluenced by Hellenic culture, and no small portion of this class hated fanatically all tampering with idolatry. When the dominion over Palestine passed out of the hands of the Ptolemies into that of the house of Seleucus, this feeling was intensified, as the Syrian house regarded with less tolerance the religion of Israel. The opposition to Hellenism and the apprehension of it naturally tended to draw together those who shared the feeling. On the one side was the scribist legal party, who developed into the Pharisaic sect; on the other were the mystics, who felt the personal power of Deity. These afterward became first the Chasidim, then later the Essenes. These latter gradually retired from active participation in national life. As is natural with mystics their feelings led them to see visions and to dream dreams. Others more intellectual, while they welcomed the enlightenment of the Greeks, retained their faith in the one God. To them it seemed obvious that as their God was the true God, all real enlightenment must have proceeded from Him alone. In such thinkers as Plato and Aristotle they saw many things in harmony with the Mosaic law. They were sure that there must have been links which united these thinkers to the current of Divine revelation, and were led to imagine of what sort these links necessarily were. The names of poets such as Orpheus and Linus, who survived only in their names, suggested the source of these links - these resemblances. Hence, the wholesale forgeries, mainly by Jews, of Greek poems. On the other hand, there was the desire to harmonize Moses and his law with the philosophical ideas of the time. Philo the Alexandrian, the most conspicuous example of this effort, could not have been an isolated phenomenon; he must have had many precursors. This latter movement, although most evident in Egypt, and probably in Asia Minor, had a considerable influence in Judea also.
2. Political Influences
Political events aided in the advance of both these tendencies. The distinct favor that Antiochus the Great showed to the Greeks and to those barbarians who Hellenized, became with his son Antiochus Epiphanes a direct religious persecution. This emphasized the protest of the Chasidim on the one hand, and excited the imagination of the visionaries to greater vivacity on the other. While the Maccabees and their followers were stirred to deeds of valor, the meditative visionaries saw in God their refuge, and hoped for deliverance at the hand of the Messiah. They pictured to themselves the tyrant smitten down by the direct judgment of Yahweh. After the death of Epiphanes, the Maccabeans had become a power to be reckoned with, and the visionaries had less excitement from external events till the Herodian family found their way into supreme power. At first the Herodians favored the Pharisaic party as that which supported John Hyrcanus II, the friend of Antipater, the father of Herod the Great, and the Essenes seem to have taken Herod at first into their special favor. However, there was soon a change. In consequence of the compliance with heathen practices, into which their connection with the Romans forced the Herodians, the more religious among the Jews felt themselves compelled to withdraw all favor from the Idumean usurper, and to give up all hope in him. This naturally excited the visionaries to new expectation of Divine intervention. Behind the Herodians was the terrible iron power of Rome. The Romans had intervened in the quarrel between John Hyrcanus and his brother Aristobulus. Pompey had desecrated the temple by intruding into the Holy of Holies. The disastrous overthrow that he suffered at the hands of Caesar and his miserable end on the shores of Egypt seemed to be a judgment on him for his impiety. Later, Nero was the especial mark for the Apocalyptists, who by this time had become mainly Christian. Later Roman emperors impressed the imagination of the Apocalyptists, as the Flavians.

II. General Characteristics of Apocalyptic
1. Differences from Prophecy in Content
Both in matter and form apocalyptic literal and the writings associated with it differ from the prophetic writings of the preceding periods. As already mentioned, while the predictive element as present in Apocalypses, as in Prophecy, it is more prominent and relates to longer periods and involves a wider grasp of the state of the world at large. Apocalypse could only have been possible under the domination of the great empires. Alike in Prophecy and in Apocalypse there is reference to the coming of the Messiah, but in the latter not only is the Messianic hope more defined, it has a wider reference. In the Prophets and Psalmists the Messiah had mainly to do with Israel. ?He will save his people?; ?He will die for them?; ?His people shall be all righteous.? All this applies to Israel; there is no imperial outlook. In the Apocalypses the imperial outlook is prominent, beginning with Daniel in which we find the Messianic kingdom represented by a ?son of man? over against the bestial empires that had preceded (Dan_7:13) and reaching the acme of Apocalypse, if not its conclusion, in the Revelation of John: ?The kingdom of the world is become the kingdom of our Lord, and of his Christ? (Rev_11:15). While the prophet was primarily a preacher of righteousness, and used prediction either as a guarantee, by its fulfillment, of his Divine mission, or as an exhibition of the natural result of rebellion against God's righteous laws, to the Apocalyptist prediction was the thing of most importance, and in the more typical Apocalypse there is no moral exhortation whatever.
2. Differences from Prophecy in Literary Form
In the literary form employed there are marked differences between Apocalyptic and Prophecy. Both make use of vision, but in Prophecy, in the more restricted sense of the word, these visions are as a rule implied, rather than being described. Although Isaiah calls the greater part of his Prophecy ?vision,? yet in only one instance does he describe what he sees; as a rule he assumes throughout that has audience knows what is visible to him. The only instance (Isa_6:1-13) in which he does describe his vision is not at all predictive; the object is exhortation. In the case of the Apocalypses the vision is the vehicle by which the prediction is conveyed. In Ezekiel there are visions, but only one of these - ?the valley of dry bones? - is predictive. In it the symbols used are natural, not, as always in Apocalypses, arbitrary. Compare in Daniel's vision of the Ram and the He-goat (Dan 8). In Ezekiel the dry bones naturally suggest death, and the process by which they are revivified the reader feels is the natural course such an event would take did it come within the sphere of ordinary experience; while in what is told of the horns on the head of the Greek goat there is no natural reason for the changes that take place, only a symbolical one. This is still more marked in the vision of the Eagle in 4 Esdras 11. What may be regarded as yet more related to the form is the fact that while the Prophets wrote in a style of so elevated prose that it always hovered on the border of poetry - indeed, frequently passed into it and employed the form of verse, as Isa_26:1 - the apocalyptists always used pure prose, without the elaborate parrallelism or cadenced diction of Hebrew poetry. The weird, the gorgeous, or the terrible features of the vision described are thrown into all the higher relief by the baldness of the narrative.

III. Authorship of Jewish Apocalyptic Works
1. Pseudepigraphic Authors Not Known Individually
In most cases the question of authorship is one that has to be discussed in regard to each work individually. A number of the characteristics of the works render such a procedure impossible in regard to them. If we put to the one side the two Apocalypses that form part of the canon, they are all pseudonymous, as Enoch and Baruch, or anonymous, as the Book of Jubilees. Many of them in addition show traces of interpolation and modification by later hands. If we had a full and clear history of the period during which they were written, and if its literature had to a great extent been preserved to us we might have been in a position to fix on the individual; but as matters stand, this is impossible. At the same time, however, from internal evidence, we may form some idea of the surroundings of those who have written these works.
2. General Resemblance and Mutual Dependence Show Them Products of One Sect
From the striking resemblance in general style which they exhibit, and from the way in which some of them are related to the others, many of these works seem to have been the product of similar circumstances. Even those most removed from the rest in type and general attitude are nearer them than they are to any other class of work. All affirmative evidence thus points to these works having been composed by authors that were closely associated with each other. The negative evidence for this is the very small traceable influence these works had on later Jewish thought. Many of them axe quoted by the Christian Fathers, some of them by New Testament writers. The whole of these works have been preserved to us through Christian means. A large number have been preserved by being adopted into the Old Testament canon of the Ethiopic church; a considerable number have been unearthed from Ambrosian Library in Milan; most of them have been written in Palestine by Jewish writers; yet no clear indubitable sign of the knowledge of these books can be found in the Talmud.
3. Three Jewish Sects Comprise Whole Literary Class
The phenomenon here noted is a striking one. Works, the majority of which are written in Hebrew by Jews, are forgotten by the descendants of these Jews, and are retained by Gentile Christians, by nations who were ignorant of Hebrew and preserved them in Greek, Latin or Ethiopic translations. A characteristic of the Judaism during the period in which these books were appearing was the power exercised by certain recognized sects. If one takes the most nearly contemporary historian of the Jews, Josephus, as one's authority, it is found how prominent the three sects, Pharisees, Sadducees and Essenes, were. To a certain extent this is confirmed by the Gospels and the Acts, with this noticeable exception - the Essenes are never mentioned by name.
4. Not the Product of the Sadducees
The scribes, the literary class among the Jews, all belonged to one or other of these ruling sects. Consequently these works must have proceeded from members of one of those sects. Their mutual resemblance precludes their authors from belonging some to one sect and some to another. We know pretty exactly from Josephus and the New Testament what the character and tenets of the Sadducees were. They were the priestly sacerdotal class, and were above all, political schemers. They received only the Pentateuch as authoritative, and had no share in the Messianic hopes of which the Prophets were full. They believed neither in angel nor spirit, and had no hope of immortality (Act_23:8). Josephus compares them with the followers of Epicurus among the Greeks. Nothing could be farther removed from the spirit and doctrines of the Apocalypses than all this. The Messianic hopes bulk largely; angels are prominent, then, hierarchies are described and their names given. The doctrine of immortality is implied, and the places of reward and punishment are described. The Apocalypses cannot therefore be attributed to the Sadducees.
5. Nor of the Pharisees
There is greater plausibility in attributing them to the Pharisees. So far as doctrines are concerned, there is no doubt that the agreement is relatively close. There are, however, difficulties in accepting this view of their origin. With the fall of the Jewish state, the Sadducees disappeared when there was no field for political activity, and when with the destruction of the temple there were no more sacrifices to require the services of Aaronic priests. Nearly contemporaneously the Essenes disappeared in Christianity. The Pharisees alone remained to carry on the traditions of Judaism. We have in the Talmud the result of Pharisaic literary activity. The Mishna is the only part of this miscellaneous conglomeration which is at all nearly contemporary with the works before us. It has none of the characteristics of the apocalyptic writings. The later Hagadi Midrash have more resemblance to some of these, noticeably to the Book of Jubilees. Still, the almost total want of any references to any of the Apocalypses in the recognized Pharisaic writings, and the fact that no Jewish version of any of these books has been preserved, seems conclusive against the idea that the Apocalypses owed their origin to the Pharisaic schools. The books that form the ordinary Apocrypha are in a different position. The majority, if not the whole of them, were received into the Jewish canon of Alexandria. Some of them are found in Hebrew or Aramaic, as Ecclesiasticus, Tobit and Judith. None of the Apocalypses have been so found. This leads necessarily to the conclusion that the Pharisees did not write these books.
6. Probably Written by the Essenes
By the method of exclusions we are led thus to adopt the conclusion of Hilgenfeld, that they are the work of the Essenes. We have, however, positive evidence. We know from Josephus that the Essenes had many secret sacred books. Those books before us would suit this description. Further, in one of these books (4 Esdras) we find a story which affords an explanation of the existence of these books. 2 (4) Esdras 14:40-48 tells how to Ezra there was given a cup of water as it were fire to drink, and then he dictated to five men. These men wrote in characters which they did not understand ?for forty days? until they had written ?four score and fourteen books? (Revised Version (British and American)). He is commanded, ?The first that thou hast written publish openly, and let the worthy and unworthy read it: but keep the seventy last that thou mayest deliver them to such as be wise among thy people.? While the twenty-four books of the ordinary canon would be open to all, these other seventy books would only be known by the wise - presumably, the Essenes. This story proceeds on the assumption that all the biblical books had been lost during the Babylonian captivity, but that after he had his memory quickened, Ezra was able to dictate the whole of them; but of these only twenty-four were to be published to all; there were seventy which were to be kept by a society of wise men. This would explain how the Books of Enoch and Noah, and the account of the Assumption of Moses could appear upon the scene at proper times and yet not be known before. In the last-named book there is another device. Moses tells Joshua to embalm (hedriare) the writing which gives an account of what is coming upon Israel. Books so embalmed would be liable to be found when Divine providence saw the occasion ripe. These works are products of a school of associates which could guard sacred books and had prepared hypotheses to explain at once how they had remained unknown, and how at certain crises they became known. All this suits the Essenes, and especially that branch of them that dwelt as Coenobites beside the Dead Sea. We are thus driven to adopt Hilgenfeld's hypothesis that the Essenes were the authors of these books. Those of them that formed the Community of Engedi by their very dreamy seclusion would be especially ready to see visions and dream dreams. To them it seem no impossible thing for one of the brotherhood to be so possessed by the spirit of Enoch or of Noah that what he wrote were really the words of the patriarch. It would not be inconceivable, or even improbable, that Moses or Joshua might in a dream open to them books written long before and quicken their memories so that what they had read in the night they could recite in the day-time. As all the Essenes were not dwellers by the shores of the Dead Sea, or ?associates with the palms of Engedi,? some of the writings of this class as we might expect, betray a greater knowledge of the world, and show more the influence of events than those which proceeded from the Coenobites. As to some extent corroborative of this view, there is the slight importance given to sacrifice in most of these works.

Works Entitled Apocalyptic

Classes of Books
In the classification of plants and animals in natural science the various orders and genera present the observer with some classes that have all the features that characterize the general Mass prominent and easily observable, while in others these features are so far from prominent that to the casual observer they are invisible. This may be seen in the apocalyptic writings: there are some that present all the marks of Apocalypses, such as the Book of Enoch, the Assumption of Moses and the Apocalypse of Baruch. They all claim to be revelations of the future - a future which begins, however, from the days of some ancient saint - and then, passing over the time of is actual composition, ends with the coming of the Messiah, the setting up of the Messianic kingdom and the end of the world. There are others, like the Book of Jubilees, in which the revelation avowedly looks back, and which thus contain an amount of legendary matter. One of the books which are usually reckoned in this class, has, unlike most of the Apocalypses, which are in prose, taken the Book of Psalms as its model - the Psalter of Solomon. A very considerable number of the works before us take the form of farewell counsels on the part of this or that patriarch. The most famous of these is the Testament of the Twelve Patriarchs. Although the great masonry have been written in Hebrew or Aramaic by Jews resident in Palestine, the Sibylline books, composed to a great extent by Jews of Alexandria, present an exception to this.
We shall in the remainder of the art consider these sub-classes in the order now mentioned: (1) Typical Apocalypses; (2) Legendary Testaments; (3) Psalmic; (4) Testaments; (5) Sibylline Oracles.

I. Apocalypses Proper
As above indicated, all these take the Book of Daniel as their model, and imitate it more or less closely. One peculiarity in this connection must be referred to. While we have already said these later Apocalypses were practically unknown by the Jews of a couple of centuries after the Christian era, the Book of Daniel was universally regarded as authoritative alike by Jews and Christians. In considering these works, we shall restrict ourselves to those Apocalypses that, whether Jewish or Christian by religion, are the production of those who were Jews by nation.
1. Enoch Books
The most important of these is the Book, or rather, Books of Enoch. After having been quoted in Jude and noticed by several of the Fathers, this work disappeared from the knowledge of the Christian church.
(1) History of the Books
Fairly copious extracts from this collection of books had been made by George Syncellus, the 8th century chronographer. With the exception of those fragments, all the writings attributed to Enoch had disappeared from the ken of European scholars. In the last quarter of the 18th century. Bruce, the Abyssinian traveler, brought to Europe three copies of the Book of Enoch in Ethiopic, which had been regarded as canonical by the Abyssinian church, and had consequently been preserved by them. Of these three copies, one he retained in Kinnaird House, another he presented to the Bodleian Library In Oxford, the third he gave to the Royal Library in Paris. For more than a quarter of a century these manuscripts remained as unknown as if they had still been in Abyssinia. In the year 1800 Sylvestre de Sacy published an article on Enoch in which he gave a translation of the first sixteen chapters. This was drawn from the Parisian copy. Twenty-one years after Archbishop Laurence published a translation of the whole work from the manuscript in the Bodleian. Seventeen years after he published the text from the same MS. The expedition to Magdala under Lord Napier brought a number of fresh manuscripts to Europe; the German missionaries, for whose release the advance had been undertaken, brought a number to Germany, while a number came to the British Museum. Some other travelers had brought from the East manuscripts of this precious book. Flemming, the latest editor of the text, claims to have used 26 manuscripts. It needs but a cursory study of the Ethiopic text to see that it is a translation from a Greek original. The quotations in George Syncellus confirmed this, with the exception of a small fragment published by Mai. Until the last decade of last century. Syncellus' fragments formed the only remains of the Greek text known. In 1892 M. Bouriant published from manuscripts found in Gizeh, Cairo, the Greek of the first 32 chapters. More of the Greek may be discovered in Egypt. Meantime, we have the Greek of Jud_1:1 - 32, and from the Vatican fragment a portion of chapter 89. A study of the Greek shows it also to have been a translation from a Hebrew original. Of this Hebrew original, however, no part has come down to us.
As we have it, it is very much a conglomeration of fragments of various authorship. It is impossible to say whether the Greek translator was the collector of these fragments or whether, when the mass of material came into his hands, the interpolations had already taken place. However, the probability, judging from the usual practice of translators, is that as he got the book, so he translated it.
(2) Summary
The first chapter gives an account of the purpose of the book, Enoch 2 through 5 an account of his survey of the heavens. With Enoch 6 begins the book proper. Jud_1:6-19 give an account of the fallen angels and Enoch's relation to them. Jud_1:20 through 36 narrate Enoch's wanderings through the universe, and give an account of the place of punishment, and the secrets of the West and of the center of the earth. This may be regarded as the First Book of Enoch, the Book of the Angels. With chapter 37 begins the Book of Similitudes. The first Similitude (chapters 37 through 44) represents the future kingdom of God, the dwelling of the righteous and of the angels; and finally all the secrets of the heavens. This last portion is interesting as revealing the succession of the parts of this conglomeration - the more elaborate the astronomy, the later; the simpler, the earlier. The second Similitude (chapters 46 through 57) brings in the Son of Man as a superhuman if not also superangelic being, who is to come to earth as the Messiah. The third Similitude occupies chapters 58 through 71, and gives an account of the glory of the Messiah and of the subjugation of the kings of the earth under Him. There is interpolated a long account of Leviathan and Behemoth. There are also Noachian fragments inserted. The Book of the Courses of the Luminaries occupies the next eleven chapters, and subjoined to these are two visions (chapters 83 through 90), in the latter of which is an account of the history of the world to the Maccabean Struggle. Fourteen chapters which follow may be called ?The Exhortations of Enoch.? The exhortations are emphasized by an exposition of the history of the world in 10 successive weeks. It may be noted here that there is a dislocation. The passage Enoch 91:12 contains the 8, 9, and 10 weeks, while chapter 93 gives an account of the previous 7. After chapter 104 there are series of sections of varying origin which may be regarded as appendices. There are throughout these books many interpolations. The most observable of these are what are known as ?Noachian Fragments,? portions in which Noah and not Enoch is the hero and spokesman. There are, besides, a number of universally acknowledged interpolations, and some that are held by some to be interpolated, are regarded by others as intimately related to the immediate context. The literary merit of the different portions is various: of none of them can it be called high. The Book of Similitudes, with its revelations of heaven and hell, is probably the finest.
(3) Language
We have the complete books only in Ethiopic. The Ethiopic, however, is not, as already observed, the original language of the writings. The numerous portions of it which still survive in Greek, prove that at all events our Ethiopic is a translation from the Greek. The question of how far it is the original is easily settled. The angels assemble on Mt. Hermon, we are told (En 6), and bind themselves by an oath or curse: ?and they called it Mount Hermon because they had sworn and bound themselves by mutual imprecation upon it.? This has a meaning only in Hebrew or Aramaic, not in Greek. A very interesting piece of evidence of the original language is obtained from a blunder. In Enoch 90:38 we are told that ?they all became white bullocks, and the first was the Word? (nagara). As for the appearance of this term, from its connection it is obvious that some sort of bullocks is intended. In Hebrew the wild ox is called re'ēm (Aramaic rı̂ma). The Greek translators, having no Greek equivalent available, transliterated as rēm or rēmǎ. This the translators confused with Tēma, ?a word.? It is impossible to decide with anything like certainty which of the two languages, Hebrew or Aramaic, was the original, though from the sacred character ascribed to Enoch the probability is in favor of its being Hebrew.
(4) Date
The question of date is twofold. Since Enoch is really made up of a collection of books and fragments of books, the question of the temporal relation of these to each other is the primary one. The common view is that chapters 1 through 36 and 72 through 91 are by the same author, and form the nucleus of the whole. Although the weighty authority of Dr. Charles is against assigning these portions to one author, the resemblances are numerous and seem to us by no means so superficial as he would regard them. He, with most critics, would regard the Book of Similitudes as later. Nevertheless, we venture to differ from this view, for reasons which we shall assign.
(5) Internal Chronology: The Book of Noah
The fragments of the Book of Noah above alluded to present an intrusive element in the Book of Enoch. These, though fairly numerous, are not so numerous as Dr. Charles would claim. Those that show clear traces not only of being interpolations, but also of being interpolations from this Book of Noah, are found only in those portions of the Book that appear to be written by the author of Enoch 37 through 71. In them and in the Noachian fragments there are astronomical portions, as there are also in the portion that seems to proceed from another hand, chapters 1 through 36; 72 through 91. When these are compared, the simplest account of the phenomena of the heavens is found in the non-Noachian portions, the first noted chapters 37 through 71; 92 through 107; the next in complexity is that found in the Noachian interpolations; the most complex is that contained in chapters 72 through 91. This would seem to indicate that the earliest written portion was chapters 37 through 71; 92 through 107. Our view of the date of this middle portion of En, the Book of Similitudes, is opposed by Dr. Stanton (Jewish and Christian Messiah, 60 through 63; 241 through 44), who maintains that it is post-Christian. For this decision he rests mainly on the use of the title ?Son of Man.? This title, he says, as applied to the Messiah, is unknown in rabbinic literature. Rabbinic literature is all so late as to be of no value. The Mishna has few traces of Messianic belief, and was not committed to writing till the end of the 2nd century, when the difference between church and synagogue was accentuated. He further states that it was not understood by the Jews who heard our Lord, and brings as proof Joh_12:34, ?The Son of Man must be lifted up. Who is this - the Son of Man?? Dr. Stanton (Jewish and Christian Messiah, 241) so translates the passage. To us, the last clause is a mistranslation. The Greek usage in regard to hoútos ho would lead us to translate: ?Who is this peculiar kind of Son of Man?? This is the meaning which suits the context. our Lord had not in all the preceding speech used the title ?Son of Man? of Himself. This sentence really proves that the multitude regarded the title as equivalent to Messiah or Christ. It might be paraphrased, ?The Christ abideth ever; how sayest thou then, the Christ must be lifted up? Who is this Christ?? In fact, our Lord's adoption of the title is unintelligible unless it were understood by His audience as a claim to being Messiah. It had the advantage that it could not be reported to the Romans as treasonable. There are supplementary portions of Enoch which may be neglected. At first sight Rom_10:1-3 appear to declare themselves as Noacinan, but close inspection shows this to be a misapprehension. If we take the Greek text of Syncellus, Uriel the angel sent to Noah. The Ethiopic and Gizeh Greek are at this point clearly corrupt. Then the introduction of Raphael implies that the first portion of this chapter and this Raphael section are by the same author. But the Raphael section has to do with the binding of Azazel, a person intimately connected with the earlier history of the Jews. Should it be objected that according to the Massoretic reckoning, as according to that of the Septuagint, Noah and Enoch were not living together, it may be answered that according to the Samaritan they were for 180 years contemporaries. In chapter 68 Noah speaks of Enoch as his grandfather, and assumes him to be a contemporary of himself. Moreover, we must not expect precise accuracy from Apocalyptists.
(6) External Chronology
When the internal chronology of the book is fixed, the way is open for considering the relation of external chronology. Dr. Charles has proved that the Book of Jubilees implies the Noachian portion in the Enoch Books. There are notices of the existence of a Book of Noah (Jub Rom_10:13). There is reference also to a Book of Enoch (Jub 21:10). Dr Charles would date the Book of Jubilees between 135 and 105 bc. If, then, the Book of Noah was already known, and, as we have seen, the Book of Enoch was yet older, it would be impossible to date Enoch earlier than 160 bc. Personally we are not quite convinced of the correctness of Dr. Charles' reasonings as to the date of the Book of Jubilees, as will be shown at more length later. There appears to us a reference in Enoch 66:5 to the campaign of Antiochus the Great against the Parthians and the Medes. Early in his reign (220 bc) he had made an expedition to the East against the revolted provinces of Media and Persia, which he subdued. This was followed (217 bc) by a campaign in Palestine, which at first successful, ended in the defeat of Raphia. In the year 212 bc he made a second expedition to the East, in which he invaded India, and subdued into alliance the formidable Parthian and Bactrian kingdoms. The expectation was natural that now, having gained such an access of power and reputation, Antiochus would desire to wipe out the dishonor of Raphia. It was to be anticipated that along with the nationalities from which ordinarily the Syriac armies were recruited, the Parthians would be found, and the earlier subdued Medes. The description of the treading down of the land of the Elect is too mild for a description of the desecration wrought by Epiphanes. If we are right, we may fix on 205 bc, as the probable date of the nucleus. The Book of the Lummaries of the Heavens which we feel inclined to attribute to the same hand as Enoch 1 through 36 contains a history of Israel that terminates with the Maccabean Struggle still proceeding. Dr. Charles would date this portion at 161 bc. Personally, we should be inclined to place it a few years earlier. He would place chapters 1 through 36 before the Maccabean Struggle. According to our thinking the genuine Noachian fragments fall between these. The Book of Noah seems to have existed as a separate book in the time when the Book of Jubilees was written. It is dependent on Enoch, and therefore after it. The use of portions taken from it to interpolate in the Enoch Books must have taken place before the Maccabean Struggle. There are other passages that have every appearance of being interpolations, the date of which it is impossible to fix with any definiteness.
(7) Slavonic Enoch
In the year 1892 the attention of Dr. Charles was directed to the fact that a Book of Enoch was extant in Slavonic. Perusal proved it not to be a version of the book before us, but another and later pseudepigraphic book, taking, as the earlier had done, the name of Enoch. It is totally independent of the Ethiopic Enoch Book, as is seen by the most cursory consideration. It begins by giving an account of Enoch's instruction to his descendants how he had been taken up to the seventh heaven. Another manuscript adds other three heavens. In the third (?) heaven Enoch is shown the place of the punishment of the wicked. In the description of the fourth heaven there is an account of the physical conditions of the universe, in which the year is said to be 365 1/4 days; but the course of the sun is stated as a course of 227 days; which appears to be all that is accounted for. Here the independence of the Slavonic Enoch is clear, as the Ethiopic Enoch makes the year 364 days. There are many points of resemblance which show that the writer of the Slavonic Enoch had before him the book which has come down to us in Ethiopic, but the relationship is not by any means so close as to be called dependence. The definite numbering of the heavens into seven or ten is a proof of its later date. It is related to the Testament of the Twelve Patriarchs, and also to the Ascension of Isaiah. We cannot quite acknowledge the cogency of the proofs that any portion of this Book has been composed in Greek: hence, we cannot agree with Dr. Charles that it was composed in Alexandria. The resemblances to Philo are too few and slight to be convincing. That some of it was originally Hebrew Dr. Charles admits. The date Dr. Charles assigns to it - 1-50 ad - seems reasonable, with this qualification, that it seems nearer the later than the earlier of these dates. A double translation, with the certainty of some interpolations and the probability of many more, makes any decided Judgment as to date hazardous, so much has to depend on resemblances between books in cases where it is impossible to decide which is dependent on which. It is at once an interesting and a valuable addition to our knowledge of the mind of the age preceding the publication of the gospel.
(8) Secrets of Enoch
In imitation of this Book and in some sense in dependence on it was written a rabbinic Book of the Secrets of Enoch. It is attributed to Rabbi Ishmael, who was a prominent figure in the rebellion of Barcochba. Enoch is there noted as Metatron. It follows to some extent the course of the Slavonic Book of Enoch. It is this book that is referred to in the Talmud, not the more important book quoted by Jude.
2. Apocalypse of Baruch
Though not without its value in estimating the trend of pre-Christian speculation, the Apocalypse of Baruch did not influence thought in the way that the Books of Enoch have done. It is neither quoted nor referred to by any of the Christian Fathers. Irenaeus (V, 33) quotes a saying which he attributes to our Lord on the authority of Papias, who claims to have in this attribution the authority of John behind him. This saying we find in the Apocalypse before us, though considerably expanded. In regard to this, in the first place we have only the Latin version of Irenaeus, not the Greek original. In the next place, even though the Latin may be a faithful translation of the Greek, still it is only a quotation from a lost book, which itself records traditions. The fact that it is in the shortest form in the book before us would seem to indicate that it is the original. If that is so, we may regard it as having a certain vogue among the Essenian school and their sympathizers. In the Syriac Apocrypha published by Lagarde there is a small book entitled ?The Epistle of Baruch the Scribe.? This occurs at the end of our Apocalypse of Baruch. In Cyprian's Test. contra Jud., III, 29 we have a passage of considerable length attributed to Bar, a few words of which agree with a passage in this Apocalypse. Hippolytus quotes an oath used by certain Gnostics which he says is found in the Book of Baruch. There are features in the passage thus quoted which seem to be echoes of the book before us. This was all that was known of the Apocalypse of Baruch until the last half-century, when Ceriani discovered a Syriac version of it in the Arabroaian Library in Milan, nearly complete.
(1) Summary
It begins after the model of a prophecy: ?The word of the Lord came to Baruch, the son of Neriah, saying.? In this he follows the phraseology of Jeremiah. He and Jeremiah are commanded to leave Jerusalem as God is about to pour forth His judgment upon it. Baruch entreats God for his city, and God shows him that the punishment will be temporary. Then the Chaldeans come to fulfill what God has threatened, but Baruch is shown the angel ministers of Divine vengeance saving the sacred vessels by calling upon the earth to swallow them up. Then the angels helped the Chaldeans to overthrow the walls of Jerusalem. Notwithstanding that in the canonical Book of Jeremiah (Jer_43:6, Jer_43:7) and in 2 Kings the prophet goes down to Egypt, Baruch declares that Jeremiah is sent to comfort the captives in Babylon, while he, Baruch, is to remain in Judea. He mourns over Jerusalem and denounces woes in Babylon (chapters 1 through 12). While he is standing upon Mt. Zion he is called into colloquy with God as to the method of Divine dealing with Judah, and a revelation is promised him (chapters 13 through 20). This revelation is introduced by a prayer of Baruch followed by a colloquy with the Almighty. Baruch asks, ?Will that tribulation continue a long time?? He is answered that there will be twelve successive different forms of judgment which shall come. Then follows an enigmatic sentence, ?Two parts weeks of seven weeks? are ?the measure and reckoning of the time? which probably means that each of the parts is a jubilee or half a century. At the termination of this period the Messiah is to appear. Here a description is given of the glories of the Messianic kingdom in the course of which occurs the passage already referred to as quoted by Papias (chapters 21 through 30). The writer, forgetting what he has already said of the desolation of Jerusalem, makes Baruch assemble the Elders of Jerusalem and announce that he is going to retire into solitude. In his retirement he has a vision of a wooded hill, and at the foot of it is a vine growing and beside the vine a spring of water. This fountain swelled and became tempestuous, sweeping away all the forest on the hill but one great cedar. It, too, falls at length. The interpretation is given The forest is the fourth Empire of Daniel - the Roman - the many magistracies being symbolized by the numerous trees of the forest. The Messiah is the vine and the fountain. It is probable that Pompey is the leader referred to (Baruch 31 through 40). Then follows a colloquy of Baruch first with God, then with his son and the Elders of the people. A long prayer with God's answer which includes a description of the punishment of the wicked and the reward of the righteous - the latter is next given with greater fullness (Baruch 41 through 52). Mother vision is given to Baruch of twelve showers of rain alternately bright and dark and a final torrent blacker than anything else and closed by a bright light. The angel Runnel comes to Baruch to interpret the vision. It represents the history of Israel to the return to Judea under the decree of Cyrus. The last dark waters represent the Maccabean Struggle. It would seem as if the vision carried the conflict on to the fratricidal conflict between John Hyrcanus II and Aristobulus (Baruch 53 through 77). Then follows the epistle to the nine and a half tribes (Baruch 78 through 87).
(2) Structure
Preliminary to anything further is the discussion of the state of the book - how far it is one, how far it is composite or interpolated. That it contains different portions is obvious on the slightest careful study. The first portion that the reader marks off is the ?epistle to the nine tribes and a half.? As has already been mentioned this portion appears independently and is preserved by Lagarde in his Libri Vet. Test. Apocryphi, in which collection it precedes the ordinary apocryphal Book of Baruch. The last section, which relates how this epistle was sent to the nine tribes and a half by an eagle, is omitted. The last section (chapter 79) has been added, and has been modified in order to introduce this epistle. It is not at all in the spirit of the rest of this Apocalypse that the tribes carried away captive by ?Salmanasser, king of Assyria? have any share in the blessings revealed in the vision. The epistle itself merely narrates the capture of the city, and the help of the angels who hid the sacred vessels. It is to be noted that in the earlier portion of this Apocalypse it is the earth that opens her mouth and swallows down the sacred vessels. Another division reveals itself on further scrutiny. From the beginning to the end of chapter 30 the course of the narrative is fairly continuous. A revelation is promised, and in the end we have a picture of the glory and plenty of the times of the Messiah. The next section begins with an exhortation which has little bearing on what has preceded. Then follows the vision of the forest and the surviving tree. The colloquy and the prayers that follow, to chapter 52, are all connected, though not closely. But close connection is not to be expected from an oriental and an Apocalyptist. Then follow the sections connected with the vision of the twelve showers of rain, and its interpretation. There are thus five independent sections exclusive of interpolations which may be due to different writers.
(3) Language
In the first place it is clear that the Syriac in which the work has come down to us is itself a translation from Greek. The manuscript of Ceriani states this in its title. This is confirmed by Graecisms filtering through, as ho Manasseh in Baruch 65:1, where ho represents the Greek article. In some cases the readings that are unintelligible can be explained by translation back into Greek, as shown by Dr. Charles. The most convincing is the use made of this book by the writer of the ?Rest of the Words of Baruch,? who wrote in Greek. Although not a few scholars have followed Langen in maintaining that Greek was the original tongue, careful investigation proves that behind the Greek was Hebrew. The strongest of these proofs is that the echoes of Scriptural texts are almost invariably from the Hebrew as against the Septuagint. Thus, in 6:8, Jeremiah three times addresses the earth and calls upon it to hear the word of the Lord. So it is in the Massoretic Text and in the Vulgate, but not in the Septuagint, where the word ?earth? is only given twice. There are several other instances. Dr. Charles has carefully compared the idiomatic phrases and sees proof that usages of the Massoretic Text have been preserved in the Greek, and thence conveyed to the Syriac. The most interesting of these is the peculiar Hebrew idiom of infinitive with finite verb to emphasize the action narrated. This is rendered in Septuagint sometimes by cognate noun and verb, and sometimes by participle and verb. The examples chosen by Dr. Charles have the disadvantage that none of them show the effect on this idiom of passing through the two languages, Greek and Syriac. In Paulus Tellensis there are examples - e.g. 2Ki_18:33. He is scarcely accurate in saying that this idiom never occurs in the Peshitta unless it is in the Greek. See Luk_1:22; Joh_13:29, etc., as examples to the contrary. The proof seems conclusive that Hebrew was the original language of this Apocalypse, and that it was first translated into Greek, and from that into Syriac. From this it follows almost necessarily that its place of origin was Palestine. That it has had practically no effect on Jewish literature, and was potent enough among the Christians to lead a Christian about the middle of the 2nd Christian century to compose an addition to it, proves to our thinking its Essenian origin.
(4) Date
Although the writer assumes the destruction of Jerusalem by the army of the Chaldeans, he evidently has no conception of what such a catastrophe would really mean. He has no conception of the length of time occupied by a siege, the terrors of famine, or the desolation that follows the capture of a city. Josephus tells us (BJ, VII, i, 1) that save a portion of the west wall and three towers, the city was utterly razed to the ground - ?there was nothing left to make those who came there believe that ever it had been inhabited.? Yet, when endeavoring to realize the similar destruction which had befallen the city under Nebuchadnezzar, he speaks of himself sitting ?before the gates of the temple? (Baruch 10:5), when the gates had wholly disappeared. Again, he assembles the people and their elders ?after these things? ?in the valley of the Kedron.? The Apocalypse must be dated at all events considerably before 70 ad. On the other hand, it is subsequent to the first part of En; it assumes it as known (Baruch 56:10-13). But a closer discrimination may be reached. In the vision of the wood and the one tree that survives we have Pompey pointed out clearly. The multitude of trees points to the numerous magistracies of Rome. (Compare description of Senate of Rome in 1 Macc 8:15.) The seer in his vision sees all these swept away and one remaining. It could not be an emperor, as that title was regarded as equivalent to ?king,? as Nero in the Ascension of Isaiah is called ?the matricide king.? The only other besides Pompey likely to be pointed to would be Julius Caesar. But the fall of the great desecrator of the temple, which the seer foresaw, would not have failed to be noted as succeeded by that of Caesar who had conquered him. It is difficult for us to realize the position Pompey occupied in the eyes especially of the eastern world before the outbreak of the civil war. Cicero's letters and his oration Pro lege Manilia show the way Pompey filled the horizon even in republican Rome, in a society most of the prominent members of which claimed a descent that would have enabled them to look down on Pompey. But in the East he had enjoyed dictatorial powers. His intervention in the contest between the brothers John Hyrcanus II and Aristobulus could not fail to impress the Jews, and his desecration of the temple would mark him off for a very special destruction. The date is so far before the death of Pompey (48 bc) - though after the desecration of the temple - that the possibility of anyone entering into conflict with him is not dreamed of. When we turn to the twelve showers, we are led to the time of this struggle also as that which shall immediately precede the coming of the Messiah. Another note of time is to be found in Baruch 28 - ?The measure and reckoning of the time are two parts, weeks of seven weeks.? This we regard as two jubilees - i.e. approximately a century. The point to be fixed is the time from which this century is to be reckoned. To our idea it must be from some event connected with the temple. Such an event was the dedication of the temple by Judas Maccabeus in the 148th year of the Seleucid era - that is, 163 bc. A century brings us exactly to the year of Pompey's capture of Jerusalem and desecration of the temple. Thus three different lines converge in pointing to 60 or 59 bc as the date at which this book was written.
(5) Relation to Other Books
The strange mingling of knowledge of Scripture and ignorance of it is a phenomenon to be observed. The very first clause contains a gross anachronism, whatever explanation may be given of the statement. Taken with what follows, the statement is that Jerusalem was taken by Nebuchadnezzar, ?in the 25th year of Jeconiah, king of Judah.? This naturally ought to mean the 25th year of the reign of Jeconiah, but he only reigned three months. Whether the date is reckoned from his life or his captivity, it will not suit the date of the capture of Jerusalem by the Chaldeans. Another strange blunder appears in the subjoined ?Epistle of Baruch?; the number of northern tribes who rebelled against Rehoboam is confused, with that of the tribes settled on the west of Jordan, and that of the tribes following the House of David with that of those on the east of Jordan. Yet the general course of Biblical history is quite understood. The author seems fairly well acquainted with Jer and Ps, as there are frequent echoes of these books. Most marked is the connection between this Apocalypse and the other books of the same class. This connection is not so obvious in quotable sentences as in the general atmosphere. This is very marked in regard to the Enoch books, Ethiopic and Slavonic. In the case of the latter, of course, the resemblance is not imitation on the part of the writer of this Apocalypse. One marked distinction, one that precludes any thought of direct imitation, is the elaborate angelology of the Enoch books as compared with the one name which appears in the Apocalypse of Baruch. The book with which the present Apocalypse has closest relation is 2 (4) Esdras. Dr. Charles has given at the end of his translation of the work before us (Apoc of Baruch, 171) a long list of resemblances, not always of equal value. Sometimes the references are inaccurate. The main thing to be observed is that while 2 Esdras as we have it has on the one hand a markedly Christian coloring, which it seems impossible to attribute to interpolation, and on the other, to have seen the desolation of Jerusalem under the Romans, there is no Christian element in the genuine Baruch, and the desolation is more sentimental as proved by the inability to realize the conditions consequent on the capture of the city by victorious enemies.
(6) The Rest of the Words of Baruch
One of the evidences of the influence our Apocalypse had in the Christian community is the composition by a Christian of ?The Rest of the Words of Baruch? (or Jer). This was found, like so many other treasures, by Ceriani in the Ambrosian Library, Milan. Jer is the principal spokesman in the book. It is revealed to him that Jerusalem is to be given into the hands of the Chaldeans, and he announces this to Baruch. He is desirous to save Abimelech (Ebedmelech), and prays God for him, and Abimelech is sent away out of the city while the angels are overturning it. He goes to the vineyard of Agrippa and falls asleep. His sleep continues sixty years. When, arising from sleep, he enters Jerusalem again he does not recognize it. An angel leads him to Baruch who had made his abode in a tank. Baruch writes to Jeremiah, who has departed to Babylon. His letter is conveyed by an eagle. Jeremiah on receipt of this epistle collects all the captives and leads them back to Jerusalem. Certain of them would not submit to the law in all its strictness, but, turning aside, founded Samaria. After some time Jeremiah dies, rises again on the third day and preaches Christ as the Son of God, and is stoned by the Jews. A noticeable thing is the relatively accurate account of the date of Christ's appearance after the return from the captivity, 477 years, only it must be calculated from the reign of Artaxerxes and to the resurrection. This, however, would make Jeremiah nearly two hundred years old. Such a thing, however, is not a matter that would disturb a Jewish chronologer. ?The Rest of the Words of Baruch? seems to have been written by a Christian Jew in Palestine before the rebellion of Barcochba.
3. The Assumption of Moses
In the Epistle of Jude is a reference to a conflict between the archangel Michael and Satan, when they ?disputed about the body of Moses? Origen (de Princip, iii.2) attributes this to a book he calls Ascensio Mosis. Clement Alexandrinus gives an account of the burial of Moses quoted from the same book. There are several references to the book up to the 6th century, but thereafter it disappeared till Ceriani found the fragment of it which is published in the Acta Sacra et Profana (Vol I). This fragment is in Latin. It is full of blunders, some due to transcription, proving that the last scribe had but an imperfect knowledge of the tongue in which he wrote. Some of the blunders go farther back and seem to have been due to the scribe who translated it from Greek. Even such a common word as thlı̄́psis (?affliction?) he did not know, but attempted, by no means with conspicuous success, to transliterate it as clipsiš. So with allóphuloi ?foreigners,? the common Septuagint equivalent of ?Philistine,? and yet commoner skēnḗ (?a tent?) and several others. It probably was dictated, as some of the blunders of the copyist may be better explained as mistakes in hearing, as fynicis for Phoenices, and venient for veniet. Some, however, are due to blunders of sight on the part of the translator, as monses for moyseš. From this we may deduce that he read from a manuscript in cursive characters, in which ?ν? and ?υ? were alike. This Milan manuscript has been frequently edited. Dr Charles has suggested with great plausibility that there were two works, a Testament of Moses, and an Assumption, and that these have been combined; and, while Jud_1:9 is derived from the Assumption, as also the quotation in Clement of Alexandria, he thinks that Jud_1:16 is derived from separate clauses of the Testament. It may be observed that in the fragment which has been preserved to us, neither the passages in Clement nor that referred to in Jud_1:16 are to be found.
(1) Summary
Moses, now in the plain of Moab, calls Joshua to him and gives him commands for the people. He had already blessed them tribe by tribe. Now he calls his successor to him and urges him to be of good courage. He tells him that the world has been created for Israel, and that he, Moses, had been ordained from before the foundation of the world to be the mediator of this covenant. These commands are to be written down and preserved in clay jars full of cedar oil. This sentence is added to explain the discovery and publication. A rapid summary of the history of Israel to the fall of the Northern Kingdom follows. The successive reigns are called years - eighteen years before the division of the kingdom, 15 Judges and Saul, David and Solomon, and nineteen after, the kings from Jeroboam to Hoshea. The Southern Kingdom has twenty years or reigns. The Southern Kingdom was to fall before Nebuchadnezzar, the king from the East who would cover the land with his cavalry. When they are in captivity one prays for them. Here follows a prayer modeled on Dan 9:4-19 - almost a version of it. In this connection it may be noted that of the ten tribes it is asserted they will multiply among the Gentiles. There is a sudden leap forward to the time of the Greek domination. Singularly, the period of the Maccabees does not appear in this sketch of history. The times of Judas Maccabeus are not mentioned, but the kings of his house, the descendants of Simon, are referred to as ?Kings ruling shall rise from them, who shall be called priests of the Most High God.? To them follows Herod, rex petulans, ?who will not be of the race of the priests.? He will execute judgment on the people like those of Egypt. Herod is to leave children who will reign after him for a short period. The Roman emperor is to put an end to their rule and to burn up Jerusalem. Then comes a mutilated chapter, which, while following in the narrative, may yet be only another aspect of the oppression. The Roman officials figure duly as the source of this, and the Sadducean high-priestly party as their instruments. The resemblance to the terms in which our Lord denounces the Pharisees leads one to think that they, too, are meant by the Essene authors. We have noted above that the Maccabean period is completely omitted. The persecution under Antiochus appears in Assumption of Moses 8 and 9. With Dr. Charles we are inclined to think they have been displaced. In chapter 9 occurs the reference to the mysterious Taxo with his seven sons. Dr. Charles is quite sure the reference is to the seven sons of the widow who suffered before Antiochus Epiphanes as related in 2 Macc 7 (4 Macc 8 through 17), but the ?mother? is the prominent person in all the forms of the story, while in no form of it is their father mentioned. It is to be noted that if T of this mysterious name, represents taw (ת) in the Hebrew (= 400), and Ξ represents the letter camek (ס) (= 60) which occupies the same place in the Hebrew alphabet, and if the O represents waw (ו) (= 6), adding those numbers together we have the number 466, which is the sum of the letters of Shimeon. But nothing in the history of the second son of Mattathias resembles the history of the mysterious Taxo. On this subject the reader is recommended to study Charles, Assumption of Moses, 32 through 34. Taxo recommends his sons, having fasted to retire into a cave, and rather to die than to transgress the commands of God. In this conduct there is a suggestion of the action of several of the pious in the beginning of the Antiochus persecutions. Taxo then breaks into a song of praise to God, in the course of which he describes the final discomfiture of the enemies of God and of His people. The establishment of the Messianic kingdom is to be 250 times after the Assumption of Moses. The interpretation of this is one of the difficulties in regard to this Apocalypse. Langen takes the times as equivalent to decades, and Dr. Charles as year-weeks. The latter seems a more probable meaning of ?time,? as more in the line of Jewish thought. It should be noted that Dr. Charles thinks illius adventum refers not to the Messiah's coming, but to the last judgment. In answer to the declaration of Moses as to his approaching death, Joshua rends his garments and breaks forth into lamentations, wondering who will lead on the people when his master has departed. There is one phrase that seems to imply a tincture of classical culture. Joshua says of Moses, ?All the world is thy Sepulchre,? which seems to be a reminiscence of Pericles' funeral oration (Thucyd. ii.4), ?The whole earth is the monument of men of renown.? He then casts himself at the feet of Moses. His master encourages him and promises him success. At this point the fragment ends. It is to be expected that shortly after this would occur the passage quoted by Clement of Alexandria, and still later that quoted in Jude.
(2) Structure
It seems to have been united with one, if not two other books, a ?Testament of Moses? and our Book of Jubilees. It would seem that in the present work we have mostly the ?Testament.? The insertion of the word receptione after morte in Assumption of Moses 10:12 indicates that when this copy was made the two writings were united. As above remarked, there appears to have been a displacement of Jud_1:8 and Jud_1:9; they ought to have been placed between Jud_1:4 and Jud_1:5.
(3) Language
As already mentioned, the manuscript found by Ceriani in the Ambrosian Library is in Latin. No one, however, has maintained that this was the language in which it was originally written. It is evidently a translation from the Greek. A number of Greek words are transliterated, some of them common enough. So clearly does the Greek shine through, that Hilgenfeld has reproduced what he imagines the Greek text to have been. That having been settled, a further question rises, Is the Greek the original tongue, or was it, too, a translation from a Sere original? The first alternative is that adopted by Hilgenfeld. His arguments from the alleged impossibility of certain grammatical constructions being found in Hebrew are due to mistake. The presence of such words as Allofile and Deuteronomion simply prove that in translating a book which claimed to be written about Moses, the writer followed the diction used by the Septuagint, just as Archbishop Laurence in translating Enoch used the diction of the King James Version of the Bible These questions have been ably investigated by Dr. Charles in his edition of the Assumption of Moses (42 through 45). He shows a number of Semitic idioms which have persisted through the Greek - some cases in which the meaning can only be got by reconstructing the Hebrew text. Again, corruption can only be explained by means of a Semitic text. It might be suggested
International Standard Bible Encyclopedia
PRINTER 1915.

FACEBOOK

Participe de nossa rede facebook.com/osreformadoresdasaude

Novidades, e respostas das perguntas de nossos colaboradores