2. Another interesting and important factor here enters into the discussion, viz. the relation im which the later Judaism stood to foreign systems of thought, for it was undoubtedly owing to the influence of these, combined with a certain decay of the older Hebraism itself, that it assumed its distinctive character.
The choice of Israel did not absolutely exclude the rest of the human race from being the objects of Divine regard (Jn 19), On the contrary, it was distinctly contemplated that they should ultimately be received into the larger Israel of the Christian Church (Mt 811, Jn 1016). While the Jews were selected for the discharge of the missionary function of transmitting the Divine revelation to the world, God was also by His providence gradu- ally and surely preparing the world for Christianity. Oonse- quently, the idea of other nations making some contribution towards the sum-total of the religious knowledge attained in pre-Christian times is not one to be summarily rejected as unworthy of consideration. When in Jn 19 Christ is designated ‘the true Light, which lighteth every man that cometh into the world,’ may we not warrantably trace to this source the reason- ings and yearnings of a Socrates for a future and endless life, and the profound thoughts of a Plato concerning the im- mortality of the soul? After a struggle with his native Jewish prejudices, the Apostle Peter perceived that ‘God is no re- specter of persons: but in every nation he that feareth God and worketh righteousness is accepted with him’ (Ac 1034f), That other nations besides the Jews had at least some measure of light is therefore a fact which should be thoughtfully acknow- ledged rather than grudgingly admitted. It can in no way derogate from the supreme honour due to the religion of Jesus Christ to recognize that Confucius taught obedience to parents ; that Buddha based his system of morality on the notion of the equality of all, and enjoined the widest toleration; that Zoro- aster, so far-from being accurately described as a ‘famous impostor’ and ‘very crafty knave,’ was a teacher of mono- theism and of many valuable ethical principles; or that in
* Second Statement, etc. (1826), p. 60. — + Rev. Andrew Lothian, at annual meeting of E.B.S., 1827. t Keerl, Das Wort Gottes und die Apokryphen des AT’, p. 17,
———
274 DEVELOPMENT OF DOCTRINE
DEVELOPMENT OF DOCTRINE
other nies Serban nar oon r= ena ere Ee gh aE
ancient Egypt men were familiar with the conceptions of im- mortality and eternity. These were only so many ‘past stars getting light from the everlasting sun.’ All that was true or good in these ancient faiths was derived from Jesus Christ. The providential shaking together of the nations which took place during the centuries immediately preceding the Christian era enabled each to pour what contribution it could into the great treasury of religious thought and sentiment. The fusion of the diverse tendencies and thoughts of East and West was not without its effect in developing in a forward direction (though not uniformly so) the truth that God had communi- cated to His people; and the constant intermingling of ideas that took place was, under God, destined to result in nothing less than the inbringing of a cosmopolitan religion, equally suitable for all climates and peoples, and capable of assimilating all that was noblest and purest in human aspiration and culture. Whatever of real advance in doctrinal development is anywhere traceable during this important and formative period is there- fore still to be attributed to the revealing Spirit and guiding hand of Jehovah, and is not to be regarded as simply the pro- duct of human reason or philosophical speculation.
With the exception of certain modes of thought and expression, including perhaps the ponderous visionary style so much employed by Ezekiel, the patriotic Jew apparently brought back with him from Babylon no new literary possession. His religious borrowing was upon a still smaller scale : he had viewed the idolatrous practices of his cap- tors with lofty scorn (Is 44°-*°), But his debt to Persian and Greek religious thought proved to be much more considerable.
(1) Persian influence.—The worship of the One Supreme God which was common to both Persians and Jews (Ormazd and Jahweh being to this ex- tent practically identified) sufficiently accounts for the bond of religious sympathy which undoubtedly united the two peoples, They were at one in their repudiation of idolatry ; both looked for the abso- lute reign of the good. That the final destruction of evil is well within the horizon of Zoroaster appears from the G'dthds, or hymns, the only part of the Avesta claiming to be from the prophet’s own hand. (For further details, see art. ZOROAS- TRIANISM in vol. iv., and Cheyne in Expos. Times, li. (1891) 202, 224, 248). Apart from the influence inevitably exerted on one another by men of diverse creeds who are brought by circumstances into close mutual relationship, these fundamental resem- blances between their respective faiths naturally led to a certain interaction of belief in other direc- tions also. For example, the Zoroastrians, like the Jews, expected a Saviour (Saoshyant, of the stem of Zoroaster) at whose advent the powers of evil were to be overthrown. Again, it need not be doubted that the Zoroastrian expectation of a glorious and happy future, in which the faithful, freed from all contact with evil, should enjoy eter- nal fellowship with Ormazd and his angels, led the Jews towards a clearer apprehension at least of the hitherto but dimly entertained and scarcely formulated doctrine of a personal immortality. Persian ideas have been traced in the OT itself (Dn 10": °° 121) ; they are certainly present in the Apoer. (To 12”) ; and seem to have passed through the earlier Jewish apocalyptic (En 902) into the NT Apocalypse of St. John (1482). A noticeable feature of Zoroastrianism is its artistic and lavish use of numbers and images. This tendency was specially developed in connexion with the doctrine of good and evil spirits, and is already reflected in the later canonical books of the OT (1 Ch 21}, Zee 3° 41°), and still more, as we shall see, in the post- canonical literature. These foreign elements began to produce a freer play of the imagination within the sphere of things sacred than had been possible under the former limitations; they supplied the old faith with a new stock of names and images. That Jewish ritual as well as doctrine was affected by Persian influence appears not only from the institution of the Feast of Purim, but in connexion with such a matter as the saying of the first prayer (Shéma’) in the temple at daybreak.