* Charles’ ed., note on 608, EXTRA VOL,—20
righteous from henceforth (62). Still another modification of the older view of Gehenna occurs in Enoch 91-104, where the wicked are cast into the furnace of fire as incorporeal spirits (98°). Hither- to the punishment of Gehenna had been thought of as both bodily and spiritual, but here the former element is eliminated. In this book no distinction is made between Sheol and Gehenna (99! ete.). 2 (4) Esdras contains the following statements : ‘The Most High shall be revealed upon the seat of judgment’ (7*), and ‘the pit of torment shall appear, and over against it shall be the place of rest: and the furnace of hell (Gehenna) shall be showed, and over against it the paradise of delight’ (7°). The nations that are raised from the dead will then be called upon to behold the contrast between the delight and rest on one side, and fire and torments on the other (7°). It was only in the later Rabbinism that the word was used to denote a temporary purgatory as well as the abode of the wicked after death. As employed by Christ in the Synoptic Gospels, ‘Gehenna’ retains its older meaning as ‘the final retributive scene or con- dition, not any intermediate place, whether of penalty or of purification, between death and the resurrection.’* On the momentous and difficult question as to the eternity of the penal condition in Gehenna, the student is referred to the dis- cussion in bk. ili. ch. vi. of the work just quoted.
(3) The Resurrection.—The first occurrence in the OT of the idea of a resurrection is in Hos 67, where the hope expressed is clearly not individual but national. It appears again in a national sense in Ezekiel’s vision of the valley of dry bones (37!""4). Chronologically, the next reference to this idea is found in the post-exilic prophecy of Is 24-27, Here there is a distinct advance upon former con- ceptions. Although the thought of a resurrection is still, as in Hosea and Ezekiel, limited to Israel (264), its application to individuals (26), even if the prophets’ words do breathe a pious hope rather than contain a clear-cut doctrine, is new. One other OT passage is of importance in this con- nexion, viz. Dn 12? ‘And many of them that sleep in the dusty ground (lit. the ground of dust ?=Sheol) shall awake, some to everlasting life, and some to reproaches and everlasting abhor- rence.’ There is here taught for the first time a resurrection of the wicked, as also the doctrine of a diversity of lot reserved for the righteous and the wicked in the future. In both cases the writer thinks of Israelites only, and does not even include all of these. Only those are in his view who have distinguished themselves either by their promotion of, or antagonism to, the Divine kingdom.
In the subsequent development of the doctrine the extent of the resurrection was variously con- ceived. In Dn 12" the writer thinks of a partial resurrection of both righteous and wicked ; Enoch 1-36 speaks of a resurrection of all the righteous and some of the wicked ; the Similitudes represent at one time that all will be raised up, good and bad alike (51), and at another contemplate the resurrection of the righteous only (61°); while Enoch 91-104, and the later Jewish literature generally, limit the idea of the resurrection to the righteous (Enoch 91! 923, 2 Mac 914-6, Ps-Sol 316 13° etc.). It is in all these cases the resurrec- tion of Israel that is spoken of ; there is as yet no thought of a general resurrection.
Different views were held also as to the nature of the resurrection itself. From 2 Maccabees (which as a professed epitome of the work of Jason of Cyrene must be taken to reflect the eschatological views of the century preceding that in which it appeared) it is evident that in the 2nd cent. B.C. the doctrine of the resurrection of the_
* Salmond, op. cit. p. 360.
[Sree
306 DEVELOPMENT OF DOCTRINE
body was very distinctly held. In the account of the cruel death of the seven brothers and their nother, the resurrection is represented at once as a resurrection to eternal life (7° **) in fellowship with the risen righteous (7), and as a resurrection of the body (74). By thus uniting the doctrine of a resurrection with that of immortality, 2 Mac. takes up a more advanced position than any other Apocryphal work.
During the last century B.c. the mode of con- ceiving the resurrection underwent a change in keeping with the altered view as to the scene of the Messianic kingdom. So long as the latter was regarded as an eternal kingdom on this earth, the idea of a bodily resurrection seemed quite in place. But, after it became usual to think of that kingdom as having its only fitting manifestation in a new heaven and a new earth, the resurrection was con- ceived either as purely spiritual (Enoch 91-104, Ps.-Sol.), or as one in which the risen righteous shall be invested with garments of glory and of life (Enoch 62"), The Stmilitudes, however, reflect the older view of a bodily resurrection.
Although at the beginning of the Christian era the limitation of the resurrection to the righteous was the accepted view of Judaism, there were still different ideas held with reference to the resurrec- tion itself. According to Jos. (BJ II. viii. 14), the Pharisees taught that ‘the souls of good men only are removed into other bodies,’ 7.e. bodies of another nature than the present, while the Essenes believed in the soul’s immortality, but not in a bodily resur- rection. In the Jewish-Alexandrian writings the resurrection is regarded as wholly spiritual, and as taking place immediately after death.’* Matter being essentially evil, there can be no resurrection of the body. As the true self, the soul only is immortal, and can be redeemed only through Wisdom (Wis 8%). The knowledge of God’s do- minion is the root of immortality (15%). The author starts from the position that ‘ righteousness is immortal’ (15) as God is immortal. Then follows the statement that ‘God created man for incorruption’ (2%); in consequence of his Divine origin he bears the stamp of immortality. Death would have been unknown but for the envy of the devil (2%). Eternal life in fellowship with God is therefore the portion of the righteous. To them death is but an apparent calamity (35°). The ungodly, on the other hand, are doomed to death (24), and are punished for their crimes both here and hereafter (3'), In this book only the larger thought of immortality is emphasized; it leaves it to be implied that there must be a previous (spiritual) resurrection to life. The righteous dead, moreover, are not merely as in OT said to rite in Sheol, but in immediate nearness to God _ The same view is set forth still more explicitly in the writings of Philo. According to this author, the body is only the temporary and_ polluted prison-house of the rational soul, which, as an emanation of Deity, is immaterial and imperish- able. This is essentially the Platonic doctrine ; although Philo, for whom Genesis is only an alle- gorical history of the soul’s development, found it already taught in the statements that God made man in His own image (125) and breathed into him His spirit (2”). Philo’s view as to the essentially evil nature of matter precludes the possibility of a bodily resurrection. e quotes approvingly the word-play of Heraclitus, who calls the body (cua) the tomb (onua) of the soul (Leg. Alleg. i. 33).