These three tendencies of thought which were at work in the mind of Israel during and after the E.xile seem to spring naturally out of the previous OT religion, and not to reiiuire any extraneous influence to account for the shape which they took. No doubt, such a passage as Ya.ma Ix. II, 12 is sulGcient proof of a clear and lofty doctrine of resurrection in Persian religious chought.t But at the most such belief among their foreign rulers did no more than stimulate the home-born expectation of resurrection in the breast of Israel. B. Apocrypha. — The variations which th«
* It must be confessed tbat both the text and the excpe^is of this passage are still involved in considerable ohaciirity. Se« the Comitu, especially those o( Diilmann, A. B. Da\ idaon, and Duhm.
t ' In order that cur minds may be delighted and our souls the best, let our bodies be glorified as well, and let them, O Muzda,
§0 likewise openly (to Heaven) as the best world of the saintfl evoted to Anura. and accompanied by Afiha Vabista, who is righteousness the i)est and most beautiful, and may we seethe* and may we approaching come round about thee, and att&in to entire companionship with thee." — Sacred Bkt. oj the East, voL xxxi. p. 312.
RESURRECTION
RESURRECTION
233
doctrine of resurrection underwent in the inter- Tcstamental period are various and complicated. Their inconsistencies may hie gatliered from tlie brief suniniai-y of tlieni in art. Eschatoloqy, vol. i. p. 748'' : for a full account of their phases, Charles, Eschntology (Jowett Lecture), chs. v.-viii., should (if course be studied. See especially an admirable summary in Bouk of Enoch, ed. Charles, ch. 51, note.
Three of the deutero-canonical books require a lew words, viz. Sirach, Wisdom, 2 Maccabees, as rei)resentatives of widely diverj;eut views. The earliest of the.se (Sirach) is on the lines of Ecclesi- astes, not risinj; beyond the old popular coiueptiim of Sheol. The ininiorlality of man is distinctly denied in Sir 17*. The contrary statement in 19'» is omitted in BkAC (followed by RV). It is found, however, in the Complutensian te.xt, and in the very important MS, Ho \H&. Ajiparently, the only immortality expected is (1) that of the nation, and (2) for the individual a good name, 37^. The three passages which appear to iiiiidy a better hope (46'^ 48" 49'") are capable of l)eing other- wise interpreted ; cf. Schwally, Das Lcban nach dem Tode, § 40. — In direct ojiposition to Sirach is Wisdom, see Wis 1^ 3'"-. But the expectation of immortality in this book is jirobably drawn
from Greek philosophy nmch more tlian from
A belief in the pre- of souls is held to be involved in it (Wis 8-"), and
Fsalms or Prophets. A belief in the preexistcnce
resurrection of the body is nowhere contemplated. — On the other hand, 2 .Mac. expres.ses the :iasurance of such a resurrection not only as an opinion, but as the motive and support of martyrdom. The persecutor can mutilate the body, but God will restore it intact ('2 .Mac V" 11"- =« 14«). And 12" thows that the author had a Sadducean denial of resurrection confronting him, such as is implied by the silence of 1 M;ic. in regard to everything relating to a future life. Thus we liave in these three books severally (1) the ancient view of Sheol as the end of m.an, (2) the expectation of immortality for the soul alone, (3) belief in the resurrection of the body. It may be added that in 2 Mac. for the first time avaaTaaa occurs in the Gr. Hible in the sense of ' resurrection ' (but cf. Ps Go title).— 2 Es. need not be discussed here, as it is entirely post- Christian. For the pseudepigrapliic literature the reader has already been referred to EsCH.VTOI.oaY. ii. Effect of tiik Teaching and Kksuuhec- TioN of.Iksus on TitK E.xi'kctation of KliSUU- RECTION IN Israel.— In the lir.st place there may be room for doubt as to the precise character of this expectation. May 2 Mac. be taken as the expression of it? Was it regarded as a return to life under previous physical conditions in order to partake in a Mes,sianic kingdom upon the present earth subjugated and renewed ? ft is to this that a survey of OT propheiry seems to lead, and it is this which seems to be in the minds of the apostles so far as we can judge by their utterances in the Gospels. It has indeed been shown by Charles {Eer/uilolof/t/, Jowett Lect p. 238) that such a view is more properly characteristic of the 2nd cent. n.c. than of the 1st. The portions of Eth. Enoch which belong to the Ist cent. D.c. declare that the Messianic kingdom is of only temporary duration, and that the goal of the risen righteous is not this transitory kingdom, but heaven itself {op. cit. p. 201 ir.). Yet the literature of a period is not deci.sive as to popular belief, and the ex- pectation of the kingdom of God in the Gospels
* Teii'hmuiD {Die Paulinixfim Vortlrllimnen von Auferaleh- uwi niut (Irrichrt endeuvoura to Bhow llmt in 2 Co 6 SL Paul hiw »l)ni lonM hia early Judaic belief In a littrnl rcmirrectlon, under the inHuenc« ol Hellenic thoiiKht, nn'l eRpciinlly ol the Ilooli ol Wi«doin, cf. on. See pp. 11-76 for the whole ar^'UMl^nt, which. Ibouyb Iniceiiioualy worked out, la nevertheleBB uncon- vincing.