With regard to this development, there seems no adequate reason for retjardinjf it as introducing? a mechanical and un- gpiritual conception of resurrection (Charles, Esohatology) as distinguished from a ' high and spiritual ' conception of resurrec- tion limited to the just. This also rises from an ethical root. It is based in apprehension of the necessity of Divine justice, conceived as requiring not only the vindication of righteous- ness, but the condenniation on equal terms of unrighteous- ness ; a justice from which death itself aflords no hiding. The doctrine of a general resurrection of good and evil alike follows from the apprehension of God as Judge of the whole earth, dealing with man and not with Israel only, and marks a widen- ing of eschatological outlook from being an interest in the fulfihr.ent of promise to Israel to become an interest in the assertion of God as fulfilling righteousness for the world.
As to the nature of the resurrection body, in 2 Mac. only the facts of restoration and identity are insisted on. In Enoch, while the resurrection body is one in which the righteous shall ' eat and lie down and rise up,' it is changed to be imperish- able and glorious — ' garments of glory . . . gar- ments of life' (61'^"^^); they are 'clad in shining- light,' and share the nature and rank of the angels (51* 104^). In Apoc. of Baruch the dead are raised as they have died, in order that the living may know the verity of their resurrection (49-'*) ; but thereafter a judicial change passes upon both them and those who have been alive at the time (5P), the wicked ' becoming wor.se ' than those who pres- ently occupy Gehenna (52^- ^^- ^^), while the right- eous are transfigured and are fitted for immortality and the eternal world (57^- ^- ^''■'). We have here much more than a doctrine of physical resuscita- tion ; resurrection is apprehended as advance to a new and higher plane of life.
(3) The doctrine of immortality without restir- rection appears in two forms — Palestinian and Alexandrian. («) In the Palestinian form the consummation of the soul's destiny is postponed to the end. There is an intermediate state, in which the righteous and wicked are already separ- ated ; and tiiere is Final Judgment, after wliich the righteous pass to the heavenly world of glory and felicity, and the wicked to eternjil woe. Thus the Book of Jubilees speaks of the ' Day of the Great Judgment,' and goes on to say of the right- eous : ' Their bones will rest in the earth and their spirits will have much joy' (23^^- '^) ; and this is pi'obably the view of the Assumption of Mo.ses as well (10^"'"), and periiaps of the Slavonic Enoch. In the latter the translated Enoch does indeed receive a raiment of Divine glory instead of his ' earthly robe ' (equivalent to tiie changed body, 'garments of glory,' of the Simil. of Enoch) ; but his case is exceptional, and he is destined for ' the highest heaven ' (67^). Nothing is said of any reclothing for those who have died. There is a place prepared for every soul of them (49^), ' Many
mansions . . . good for the good, evil for the evil ' (61"), 'their eternal habitation' (65'"). With re- gard, however, to these two last-named writers, there is .silence as to the resurrection rather than denial of it ; and it is ditticult to say, especially of the Assump. of Moses, that they were conscious of divergence from current beliefs.
(b) Alexandrian Judaism, adopting a Hellenic philo.sophy, taught a doctrine of personal immor- tality of tlie individual soul, which it endeavoured more or less successfully to disentangle from the questions of the corporate destiny of the nation and of cosmic judgment. Accepting from Platon- ism the ideas of the eternity and evil of matter, it necessarily ignored that of resurrection ; and accepting from the same source the ideas of the .souls pre-existence and of salvation by wisdom, it was compelled to regard each soul as working out its own fate in this life, and as reaching that fate at the point of severance from the flesh ; immor- tality in its final form beginning from the moment of death. Thus in Wisdom the body is essentially 'subject to sin' (l**) : the soul is pre-existent and essentially good (8-"), but is entangled in matter which weighs it down (9'^) ; man is destined for immortality (2^^), which the wise attain (8'^- '''), and find it in all blessedness as they depart from our sphere of knowledge (3^"^ 4'"''* 5"). The despisers of wisdom, on the other hand, have neither hope nor comfort in death ; it is for them an immediate passage to judgment and retribution (3'^"'^ 418-20 5'^). The Hebrew idea of death as unnatural and punitive is nevertheless, however inconsistently, also present to the mind of the writer. God maile not death, but the impious called it in (1'^"") ; death entered by envy of the devil, and is the portion of his servants (2-'^). The idea of a future Judgment, a 'day of decision,' also keeps its place in the writer's thought (3'* 4'-"). Nor is his con- ception that of an immortality wholly immaterial ; the righteous shall receive a palace and royal crown ; they shall judge the nation and have dominion over the people, sharing their Lord's king- dom (3**). He has not successfully assimilated his Hellenism, but requires the Hebraic eschatology to supplement it. The teaching of Wisdom on this subject is sub.stantially that of Philo as well : ' Apparently he did not look forward to a general and final judgment. All enter after death into their final abode ' (Charles, Eschatol. p. 260). The philosophy of 4 Mac. is Stoical, not Platonic ; but it agrees with Wisdom and Philo in ignoring the ideas of an intermediate state and of resurrection, and in teaching an immortality of the spirit only, commencing when tliis life ends.