As thus defined, the doctrine of the Millennium is not found in OT. The prophets look forward to a state of blessedness and glory for Israel, to be introduced, either by the advent of J” Himself (Is 409-11 527-12), or of the Messiah (Is 9°, Zec 91°). This state is variously described—sometimes in language which requires no more than the estab- lishment of the Speed Israel in the first place among the nations; at others, in words which imply a change of nature itself, and the creation of a new heavens and a new earth (Is 65". Yet note that even this picture does not represent the individual members of the redeemed Israel as im- mortal. Cf. Enoch 5° 10 258, Apoc. Bar 735). But, however conceived, this blessed state bounds the horizon of prophecy (cf. Jer 33!-, Ezk 37%, J1 4%). Especially in Daniel is the eternity of the Messianic kingdom epee ‘And in the days of those kings shall the God of heaven set up a kingdom which shall never be destroyed’ (2*). ‘And the kingdom and the dominion, and the greatness of the kingdom under the whole heaven, shall be given to the people of the saints of the Most High. His kingdom is an everlasting king- dom’ (7%, ef. 7").
In much of the Pseudepigraphical literature we find the same point of view. So Sibyll 3, Jub 52 (quoted oy Drummond, 314), Ps-Sol 174, Sibyll 37%
MILLENNIUM
«And then will he raise up a kingdom for all time for all men’; Enoch 62" ‘ And the Lord of spirite will abide over them, and with that Son of Man will they eat and lie down and rise up for ever and ever.’ Doubtless it is true, as Drummond remarks (314), that these expressions do not necessarily imply strict eternity (cf. Bar 73! with 405; and see Enoch 10"), although, in the case of Enoch 62™ as of Daniel, this seems required by the context. But in any case the ideal which is set forth in these passages is final. The same view appears (Jn 12*) in the objection to Christ’s prophecy concerning His lift- ing up. ‘We have heard out of the law that the Christ abideth for ever.’ So in the Targ. Jon. (on 1 K 4%) the Messianic time and the world to come are identified. (Cf Mishna, Berachoth i. 5, and the literature cited by Schiirer, JZ/P 11. ii. 177.)
Side by side with this view, we find in the Pseudepigraphical books another, which distin- guishes between the Messianic kingdom, which it regards as belonging to this present age, and the final consummation of all things in the world to come. Perhaps the first trace of this doctrine is in Enoch 9122", a fragment assigned by Charles to B.C. 104-95, and by Dillmann to the time of John Hyreanus. The seer has described the seven weeks into which he conceives the past history of the world to be divided (93°). ‘And after that there will be another week, the eighth, that of righteousness, and a sword will be given to it that judgment and righteousness may be executed on those who commit oppression, and sinners will be delivered into the hands of the righteous. And at its close they will acquire houses through their righteousness. And the house of the Great King will be built in glory for ever more. And after that, in the ninth week, the righteous judgment will be revealed to the whole world, and all the works of the godless will vanish from the whole earth, and the world will be written down for destruction, and all mankind will look to the path of uprightness. And after this, in the tenth week, in the seventh part, there will be the great eternal judgment, in which he will execute vengeance amongst the angels. And the first heaven wili depart and pass away, and a new heaven wil} appear, and all the powers of the heavens will shine sevenfold for ever. And after that there will be many weeks without number for ever, in oodness and righteousness, and sin will no more be men- tioned for ever’ (Charles’ tr. p. 268 ff.). Here we have a period of righteousness, in which the temple is to be rebuilt, and a missionary week resulting in the conversion of the world, preceding the final judg- ment, which introduces the new heaven. There is, however, no mention of a personal Messiah. Briggs (Mess. Gosp. 15, 16; ef. Mee Apost. 9), calls atten- tion to the parallel between this passage and the later Persian eschatology, which regards the finai resurrection and judgment as preceded by two uaa arse millenniums, in which the pre hets
khshyat-ereta, or Aushétar, and U <hshyat- nemah, or Aishétar-mah, of the Avesta and the Pehlevi literature of Zoroastrianism, prepare the way for the coming of the final redeemer Saoshyant or Soshans. It is, of course, possible that in this, as in the allied doctrine of the resurrection, Jewish thought may have been affected by Persian ideas. But our sources for the Persian eschatology are so late (the Bundahis, in their present form, dating not earlier than the 7th cent. A.D.; οἵ. West in. Sac. Books of East, v. p. xii, cf. also vols. χχῖν. XXXVil. and xlvii.) that we must use great caution ἴῃ draw- ing conclusions.*
* On Persian eschatology, cf. Hiibschmann, ‘Die parsische