lumptre (The Spirits in Prison, Ps 128, 266) and Luckock (After Death, p. 77, The Intermediate State, p. 211). Others, as Barrett (The Inter- mediate State, p. 113), find in the words no more than ‘a pious wish.’ On the whole question it may be suflicient to quote the carefully weighed words of Hammond (Paraphrase and Annot. on the NT, im loco): ‘How far it may be fit to pray for them that are departed this life, needs not to be disputed here. *Tis certain that some measure of bliss, which shall at the day of judgment be vouch- safed the Saints, when their bodies and souls shall be reunited, is not till then enjoyed by them, and therefore may safely and fitly be prayed for them (in the same manner as Christ prays to his Father, to glorifie him with that glory which he had before the world was). And this is a very distant thing from that prayer which is now used in the Romish Church for deliverance from temporal pains, founded in their doctrine of sch let which would no way be conclusible from hence, though Onesiphorus, for whom Saint Paul here prays for mercy, had been now dead.’
Winer (RWB ii. 175) quotes a tradition from Fabricius (Lux. Evang. p. 117) that Onesiphorus became bishop of Corone in Messenia.
G. MILLIGAN. ONIARES.—1 Mac 19} (AY).
See ARIUS.
ONIAS (Ὀνίας, of which Jastrow suggests @ correspondence with xjx ‘a man of Oni’ [y\x= ix Neh 757, though he appears to prefer the better derivation from xypn or vin, Menach. xiii. 10, an abbrey. of πὴ πὴ). 1, ONIAS I. was the son of Jaddua (Jos. Ant. ΧΙ. viii. 7), and father of Simon the Just (i+. xm. ii. 4; Sir 50'; see, however, Herz- feld, Gesch. ii. 189ff.; Zunz, Vortrdége*, 38). In 1 Mac 127 he is said to have received a friendly letter from the Spartan king Arius (“Apeios, more correctly ᾿Αρεύς ; see Corp. Inscript. Attic. ii. 352). He must therefore have been a contemporary of Areus L,who reigned from 5.6. 309 to 365 (Diod. xx. 29). Areus I. died at the age of eight in B.C. 255 (Pausanias, iii. 6. 6), and, as no other Areus is known, the evidence is strongly against Josephus, wno represents the communication as having been made to Onias ΠῚ. The alleged letter
is given in two forms in Jos. Ant. x11. iv. 10 and in 1 Mac 12”,
2. ONIAS I. was the son of Simon the Just (Jos. Ant. xi. iv. 1). On the death of his father he was disqualified by youth for immediate succession to the high priesthood, which, however, he after- wards held during the 2 ei part of the reign of Ptolemy Euergetes. He is not mentioned in the Apocr., but Josephus (Ant. xu. iv. 1-5) describes how advantage was taken of his imprudence by his nephew to found a family whose civil influence exceeded for a time that of the titular high priest. _ 8, ONIAS ΠΙ. was the son of Simon I. (id. xu. iv. 10), whom he succeeded in B.C. 198 or 195. His loyalty to the Syrian over-rule was such that Selencus Philopator bore the cost of ‘the services of the sacrifices’ (2 Mac 3%). But he was soon involved in a quarrel with Simon the Benjamite, who held in the temple a high office, similar in part to that of the edileship. Simon became im-
atient of the priest’s control, and in despite informed the Syrian military governor that the temple was full of treasures, which lay at the ΤΑΡΣΟΥ͂ of any despoiler. Seleucus quickly de- spatched Heliodorus to seize this money, but the latter is said (2 Mac 852) to have been deterred by an apparition, and to have returned to Antioch in dismay. Simon ascribed the failure to the high priest's trickery (2 Mac 4"), and the quarrel became so bitter that the latter decided at length to pro- ceed in person to the king. Scarcely had he reached Antioch when Seleucus was assassinated ; and, in the confusion that followed, the high priest- hood was secured by purchase by Jason, the brother of Onias, and Onias himself was detained at Antioch. Jason proceeded at once to redeem his promise to thoroughly Hellenize Judea (2 Mac 49-15) ; but in B.C. 171 he was deposed by Antiochus, whose favour had been won by the larger gifts of Menelaus (2 Mac 4%), the brother of yaaa (Jos. Ant. XII. ν. 1), or more probably of Simon (2 Mac 4%). Menelaus was rebuked by Onias for sacrilege in stealing some of the vessels of the temple (2 Mac 45%-), and in revenge had him decoyed from his refuge in the sanctuary at Daphne and put to death (2 Mac 4%), The account of Onias’ murder is regarded by some as apocryphal ; see Willrich, Juden τι. Grie- chen vor d. makkab Erhebung, 1895, p. 71 ff., Wellh. GGA, 1895. p. 950f., 1JG%, 1897, p. 244 ff., οἵ. Baethgen, ZA W, 1886, p. 278 ff.; but see, on the other side, Biichler, Die Tobiaden u. Oniaden, 1899, pp. 106 ff., 240 f., 275 f., 353 ff. Josephus simply states (Ant. xir. v. 1) that Jason succeeded to the high priesthood on the death of Onias.
4. ONIAS, generally reckoned as Iv. though it is not likely that he ever acted as high priest in Jerusalem. On the death of his father Onias ΠῚ., he was too young for the succession ; and, after- wards finding no means of securing the rights of his birth, he took refuge with Ptolemy Philometor in Egypt (Jos. Ant. XI. ix. 7). About B.c. 154 (Gritz, iii. 34) he obtained from the king, who wished to conciliate the Jews and use them in his wars with Syria, the gift of a disused temple of Bubastis Agria (the cat-headed goddess Bast or Bastet ; see Herod. ii. 137, and Egypt. Exp. Fund, Eighth Memoir, 3f.) in Leontopolis, and recon- structed it after the model of the temple in Jerus. (Jos, Ant, xin. iii. 1-3). The foundation was defended as a fulfilment of the prophecy of Is 19%; and a complete temple service was instituted, which was οὐδ σε δὴ until A.D. 73, when the temple was closed by the Romans (Jos. Wars, vil. x. 2-4). From Menachoth xiii. 10 it appears that only partial sanction was given to the services vi this temple by the Jewish authorities at home, whilst in the opinion even of the Egyp. Jews it never entirely superseded the temple at Jerusalem