APHEKAH (••tijsi;).— A city not yet clearly identi- fied. It may have been in the mountains of Judah (Jos 15"), but is probably the same place as Aphek 1. W. Ewing.
APHERRi ('Ai^ppd), 1 Es 5".— His descendants were among the ' sons of Solomon's servants ' who returned with Zerubbabel. This name, with the five preceding and two succeeding names, has no equivalent in the parallel lists of Ezr and Neh. U. St. J. Thackeray.
APHIAH (TSi;).— One of Saul's ancestors (1 S 9').
APHIK (pcu).— A city of Asher (Jg 1"), the same •a Aphek 2.
APHRAH. — See Beth-lk-Aphrah.
APOCALYPSE. — See Revelation. LYP8E OF BARUCH.— See Bakuch.
APOCA-
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.