[5449] But I do not see, with Schürer, a reference to its coming down from heaven, not even in the passage in Baruch to which he refers, which is as follows: Et postea oportet renovari in gloria, et coronabitur in perpetuum.'
[5450] Orac. Sibyll. iii. 47-50; and especially Psalter of Solomon xvii., particularly vv. 23 &c., 32, 35, 38, 47.
[5451] I cannot understand how Schürer can throw doubt upon this, in view of such plain statements as in Ps. of Sol. xvii., such as (in regard to the Messiah): ka ats basiles dkaios didakts p Theo p' atos.
[5452] Bk. of Jub. xxxii.
[5453] Or. Sibyll. x. 8.
[5454] Et ascendes supra cervices et alas aquilæ.'
[5455] Comp. ver. 9.
[5456] Ass. Mos. iii. 715-726.
[5457] u. s. 766-783.
[5458] De Præm. et Poen. ed. Mang. ii. 422-424; ed. Fref. 923-925.
[5459] Book of Enoch xlviii. 4, 5; xc. 37; Ps. of Sol. xvii. 34, 35, 38-40.
[5460] This is expressed in the clearest language in every one of these books. In view of this, to maintain the opposite on the ground of these isolated words in Baruch (xl. 3): Et erit principatus ejus stans in saeculum, donec finiatur mundus corruptionis,' seems, to say the least, a strange contention, especially when we read in lxxiii. 1.: Sederit in pace in aeternum super throno regni sui.' We can quite understand that Gfrörer should propound this view in order to prove that the teaching of the New Testament is only a reflection of that of later Judaism; but should an argument so untenable be repeated? IV. Esdras must not here be quoted, as admittedly containing New Testament elements.
[5461] Book of Enoch xlv. 4, 5.
[5462] Dr. Schürer, following in this also Gfrörer, holds that one party placed the renewal of the earth after the close of the Messianic reign. He quotes in support only Bar. lxxiv. 2, 3; but the words do not convey to me that inference. For the reason stated in the preceding Note, IV. Esdras cannot here serve as authority.
[5463] Ap. Bar. 1, 2, 3.
[5464] Sanh, 91 a and b.
[5465] u. s. li. 1-6.
[5466] Ant. xviii. 1, 3; War ii. 8, 14.
[5467] In support of it Schürer quotes Ps. of Sol. iii. 16, xiv. 2, &c. But these passages convey to me, and will, I think, to others, the very opposite. Ps. iii. 16 says nothing of the wicked, only of the righteous. But in ver. 13 b we have it: pleia to martolo es tn ana, and in ver. 15, ate mers tn martoln es tn ana. Ps. xiv. 2 has again only reference to the righteous, but in ver. 6 we have this plain statement, which renders any doubt impossible, di toto kleronoma aton des ka sktos ka pleia.
[5468] Comp. Book of Enoch and Apoc. of Bar.
[5469] St. Matt. xxiv. 4-35, and parallels.
[5470] St. Matt. xxiv. 36 to end, and parallels.
[5471] vv. 4-35.
[5472] vv. 4-8; 9-14; 15-28; 29-35.
[5473] St. Matt. xxiv. 8; St. Mark xiii. 8.
[5474] rch dnon, St. Matt. xxiv. 8, and so according to the better reading also in St. Mark.
[5475] St. Matt. xxiv. 6.
[5476] Generally, indeed, these are regarded as the birth-woes' of the end.' But this not only implies a logical impossibility (the birth-woes of the end), but it must be remembered that these travail-pains' are the judgments on Jerusalem, or else on the world, which are to usher in the new - to precede its birth.
[5477] ver 4.
[5478] Acts v. 36; viii. 9; xxi. 38.
[5479] War ii. 13, 4, 5; Ant. xx. 5, 1; 8,10.
[5480] Of such wars and rumours of wars not only Josephus, but the Roman historians,. have much to say about that time. See the Commentaries.
[5481] St. Matt. xxiv. 6-8.
[5482] We know how persistently Nero has been identified with Anti-Christ, and how the Church then expected the immediate return of Christ; nay, in all ages, the End' has been associated with troubles in the Roman Empire.'