of the persons in Shebl, there was naturally • popular superstition that they could be reached. This belief^ gave rise to the necromancy practised among the Hebrews, as among most peoples, though it is proscribed in the law and ridiculed by the prophets (Is 8'*). The practice probably did not repose on any general idea that the dead must have a wider knowledge than the living, that 'there must be wisdom witli great Death,' but on the idea that great personages continued still to be in death that whicli they had been in life. This appears to have been the idea of Saul in seeking unto Samuel. There is no record of any one answering from the dead except Samuel. The question whether any connexion was thought to exist between the person in Shebl and his body can hardly be answered. No such connexion existed as to interfere with the passage of the person into Shebl, whatever befell the body. The want of burial was in itself dishonouring, and the dishonour continued to cleave to the person among the dead, but it did not, as among some nations, prevent his descent to the world of the dead. There are some passages which seem to speak of a sympathetic rapport still existing between the body and the person in Shebl, but probably they hardly go further than to suggest the idea that the body, though thrown off, was still part of the man, and not mere common unrelated dust. (4) The main point is that the relation between the dead person and God is cut off. This is what gave death its significance to the religious mind. Fellowship ■rnth God ceases — 'In death there is no remem- brance of thee ; in Shebl who shall give thee thanks ? ' ' For Shebl cannot praise thee ; they that go down to the pit cannot hope for thy truth ' (Is 38^«).
The passages relating to the eschatology of the individual person are mostly poetical, and they are in some points obscure. They are such passages as Ps 16. 17. 22. 37. 49. 73, and many fragments of others, and Job. Now, with regard to these pas- sages several things must be said : first, they are all late, later at all events than the prophetic faith of the 8th cent. This faith — belief in the coming manifestation of God, in the judgment, and in the eternal rest of the people in God's perfect kingdom — was the faith of tlie writers. Again, all the passages repose upon an acknowledged distinction among men, the distinction of the righteous and the ungodly. This distinction is visible, men are difl>;rently related to God. But the problem arose from the fact that men's destinies in the world were not seen to correspond to this distinction : in a moral world morality was not triumphant, in the government of the righteous God righteous- ness was not acknowledged. No doubt, the pious mind sometimes composed itself by a deeper analysis of that wherein true prosperity or felicity lay — the portion falling to it, even God Himself, was a pro- founder good tlian all earthly possessions ( Ps 17. 73). Nevertheless, the problem remained and demanded solution. The smution was always an eschato- logical one, and was just the distinction between the righteous and the ungodly truly realizing itself. In other words, immortality or eternal life is the corollary of religion, as Christ, summing up the whole OT teaching, said, God is not the God of the dead, but of the living ; it might even be said to be the corollary of morality — if tha universe be a moral world there is everlasting life. The general position of OT saints, with their faitli in the advent of God to judge, was very similar to tliat of tlie early Cliristians, who looked for the speedy coming of Clirist. This coming would change the world and tlie Church, but the Church would pass living into perfect blessedness ; and, of course, individuals would share the change- 'We
ESCHATOLOGY
ESCHATOLOGY
741
»hnll not all die, but we shall all be changed.' Now, this was very like the feeling of OT saints. The individual would share the transition of the eomraunity, the Day of the Lord would break, and the living would enter into fulness of life without tasting death. True individualism is little seen in OT. It is real to this extent : the individual realized keenly his own personal life, and longed earnestly to share for himself in the bles-sings upon which the community would enter when God appeared to abide for ever among them. He longed that he, the living man, should see with his people the glory of Uie Lord revealed, and enter with his people into life. It was, perhaps, only the prospect of death, or reflection on it, tliat rounded off individualism and revealed its energies. The life of the community wa-s perennial, but with death before him the individual could not share this life, and he sought to forecast his own personal destiny.
Thus there may be two classes of passages: (1) pa.s.«ages which, though spoken perhaiis by in- dividuals, express the hope of the living people, and refer to that great change which the Day of the Lord shall introduce, and which the individual, as part of the people, shall experience without tasting death ; and (2) pas.saj'es where the in- dividual contemplates death, nut expresses the a-ssurance that he will not, like the ungodlj-, fall into SheM, but see life. Ps 37 belongs to the fir.'it cl.a.ss, and po.ssibly Ps 73, though the phrase ' take me ' might, as in Ps 49, refer to escaping SheM at death. Ps 49 has two peculiarities : lirst, its open- ing verses imply that its teacliing on immortality is no more an aspiration, but a firm conviction ; and secondly, it seems to start from the assumption that death is universal. If this be the ca.se, the words, 'God will redeem my soul from Shehl,' must refer to the Psalmist's hope in death. This interpretation may certainly be supported by reference to the parable of Lazarus in Abraliam s bosom, which shows that the idea of a blessedness of the spirit at death had been reached before the time of our Lord. It is enough here to state some general principles and give a classification of pas- sages ; for details the commentaries must be con- sulted.* The prophets and saints of the OT were not speculative men. They did not reason that the soul was immortal from its nature, — this was not the kind of immortality in which tliey were interested, — though, for all tnat appears, the idea that any human person should become extinguished or be annihilated never occurred to them. They did not lay stress in a reflective way on man's instinctive hopes of immortality, though they may be oViserved giving these instinctive desires expression. So far as they rea.soned, their assurance was ba-ned on the moral idea— Righteousness is eternal. So far as they experienced and felt, their assurance was immediate — religion is reciprocal, the conscious- ness of God is God's giving Himself in the con- iciousne.ss.