DIASPORA SS ae ee
nemo Christianorum presbyter non mathematicus, non haruspex, non aliptes’). Side by side with syneretistic mixture we find also philosophic in- difference to the literal sense of the Law. There were Jews with an education in philosophy who, on the basis of the allegorical interpretation of Scripture, regarded the higher, philosophical, or ethical sense of the commandments as the only one of value, and neglected the observation of the literal sense (Philo, de Migratione Abrahami, § 16 [ed. Mangey, i. 450]: clot ydp rives of rovs pyrods vouous avmBora vonr&v mpayudtrwv srodauBdvoyres Ta Mev dyav nKkplBwoav, rOv dé padVuws dydpyoav). It may be also assumed in general that the observ- ance of the Law on the part of Greek Judaism did not attain to the rigour and preciseness of the Pharisaic party in Palestine. Greek culture formed a heavy counter-weight to the latter. Nevertheless, the Judaism of the Diaspora asserted itself in the main along the same lines asin Palestine. Syncre- tistic movements and philosophic indifference never gained the upper hand. The leaders of the com- munities took care that even in the Diaspora the religious life was regulated by the standard of the Law of Moses. Any one who seriously broke off from the latter was expelled from the community. Even a philosopher like Philo complains of the depreciation and neglect of the literal sense men- tioned by him in the above quotation. With all his skill in the allegorical interpretation, he yet maintained the binding character of the literal sense, nay he attempted to show that all commands, even those relating to ceremonial purity and to food, are based upon reason and nature.
One principal agency in maintaining the ancestral faith was found in the regular gatherings in the synagogue on the Sabbath. It is beyond question that these were held also in the Diaspora in every instance where a community had been organized. According to Philo, ‘On the Sabbath day in all cities thousands of houses of instruction are opened, in which understanding and self-restraint and ability and justice and all virtues are taught’ (de Septenario, §6 [ed. Mangey, ii. 282]). The apostle Paul, in the course of his journeys in Asia Minor and Greece, found Jewish synagogues everywhere, e.g. at Antioch in Pisidia (Ac 13), Iconium (144), Philippi (16-*), Ephesus (181 26 198), Thessalonica (17), Bercea (171°), Athens (17!”), Corinth (18* 7). In the larger cities there were more than one synagogue; at Alexandria there were a great many (Philo, Legatio ad Gaiwm, § 20 [ed. Mangey, li. 565]: modal 6€ eior Kad? Exacrov TuAua THs worews).
The language used in the synagogue service was undoubtedly as a rule Greek. The Church Fathers expressly testify that the Greek Bible was used in the synagogues (Justin, Apol. i. 31, Dial. c. Tryph. 72; Tertull. Apol. 18; Pseudo-Justin, Cohort. ad Grec. 13). The Old Testament is familiar to St. Paul in the LXX translation only. It is not there- fore likely that the Hebrew and Greek texts were used both together. The prayers and the address were also, it may be regarded as certain, in Greek, for in every instance where this language prevailed the Jews adopted it as their mother tongue. This is shown above all by the tomb-inscriptions. The early period at which the language of the LXX began to exercise a commanding influence on lit- urgical forms, and especially on the language of prayer, has been recently shown by the above (p. 97) mentioned imprecatory inscriptions of the island of Rheneia near Delos. These should be dated, in the opinion of epigraphic experts, not later than about B.c. 100. They are couched quite in the style of the LXX (émKcadoduae Kal Gi Tov Oedy Tov HYoTov, Tov KUpioy TOY TvEvUdTWY kal mdons capkés . . . KUpre 6 mavTa epopdy Kai ot dvyedo. Oeod, @ maou puxh ev TH orpepov Tjmépac
DIASPORA 107
Tamewovrac jueO ixerelas). Even the Palestinian Rabbis could not avoid sanctioning the writing of the Scriptures in Greek and the uttering of prayers in the same language. The exceptions not covered by this permission are very trifling (Meégilla, i. 8; Sétd, vii. 1, 2). For the ordinary prayers (Shéma', Shémoneh ‘Esreh, and blessing at meals) the employment of any language is expressly sanctioned.
No sacrificial cultus was legal, after the Deutero- nomic reformation, outside Jerusalem. In spite of this, such a cultus was practised in Egypt for more than two centuries. The occasion of its establish- ment was the deposition of the ancient high priestly family during the general upheaval under Antiochus Epiphanes. The high priest’s son, Onias, having no prospect of gaining his ancestral office at Jeru- salem, came to Egypt in the time of Antiochus v. (Eupator) (B.C. 164-162). Here he received a cordial welcome from Ptolemy vi. (Philometor) and his consort Cleopatra. The king placed at his disposal an ancient ruined temple at Leontopolis in the nome of Heliopolis, which had formerly been a sanctuary of the dypia BovBacrs.* This was con- verted by Onias into a Jewish sanctuary, modelled after the temple at Jerusalem, but smaller and plainer, and with a number of deviations in details, Since there were already priests on the spot in sufficient numbers, a formal Jewish temple-cultus was established, which continued uninterrupted from that date (c. B.c. 160) until, after the de- struction of Jerusalem, the temple of Leontopolis was also closed by the Romans in the year A.D. 73 (see, in general, Jos. Ant. XII. ix. 7, XIII. iii. 1-3, x.4, XX. x. 3; BJ 1. i. 1, vil. x. 2-4; Orac. Sibyll. v. 429-511). It is true that this cultus was never regarded by the teachers of the Law in Palestine as justifiable, and that the sacrifices offered in the Egyptian temple had only a very limited degree of validity attributed to them (Mishna, Ménahéth, xiii. 10). Nay, even the Egyptian Jews themselves were not satisfied with their own cultus, but kept, up their connexion with Jerusalem. They per- formed the pilgrimages to that city like all other Jews (Philo, de Providentia, quoted in Euseb. Prep. Evang. viii. 14, 64, ed. Gaisford), and their priests, when they married, always had the gene- alogy of their wives verified at Jerusalem (Jos. c. Apion. i. 7).