days of Messiah as days of storm and conflict was Daniel. In his exposition of Nebuchadnezzar's dream the four empires are depicted which were to last until the times of the restitution of all things. In that remarkable picture the Kingdom of Messiah was represented as a stone cut out of the mountain quarry without human interposition. In the days of the fourth kingdom that stone was to smite the metallic image upon its feet of iron and clay, break it into pieces and become a mountain, which would fill the whole earth. No indication, however, is given in Daniel's prophecy of any long struggle between the kingdom of darkness, and the kingdom of light. Had his prophecies stood alone one might suppose that there would be one tremendous collision and the power of evil would be broken and crushed for ever.

In a later vision new details are given (Dan. vii.). The same four kingdoms are represented under the figure of four wild beasts which came up, one after the other, from the waters of the Mediterranean Sea. Those four worldpowers are noticed because they were severally brought into contact with the ancient people of Jehovah, and trode it under foot "upon the mountains of Israel,"

By God's sovereign decisions one after the other of those world-powers were cast down. The dominion of the three first wild beasts was taken away on account of their abuse of power. Their lives, or their existences, however, as subjugated nations, were prolonged for a season and a time (Dan. vii. 12). Zechariah throws light upon the statement of Daniel. The former saw in vision four horns belonging to some wild animals scattering Judah, Israel, and Jerusalem. And while he contemplated the ruin the horns were causing, he saw four "smiths" (R.V.) raised up by God to check the ravages of those wild animals. The smiths cut off the horns of the animals, and thus rendered them powerless for evil, though their lives were still preserved.

When Daniel in vision beheld the fourth wild beast coming up from the western sea, about in turn to extend his dominion over the lands of the rising sun, he saw one like unto a son of man," that is, one in human form, coming in the clouds of heaven, who as he came before the throne set in heaven, upon which the Ancient of Days was sitting, was brought near amid acclamations and rejoicings. To him was accorded power and dominion over all, although for a while he was to "rule in the midst of his enemies." In Ps. cx. where the phrase just quoted occurs, Messiah is represented under two distinct characters: (1) as the priest-king like Melchizedek sitting on the throne at the right hand of Jehovah,

and (2) as the champion warrior toiling in the conflict below, and refreshing himself, like Samson of old when wearied in battle, by drinking of the brook in the way. The picture presented in Dan. vii. is somewhat similar to that in Rev. xii., where also under two aspects Messiah is pictured, first as a child just born, and saved from the great red dragon; then, under another character, as Michael the warriorprince, putting to flight the great dragon and his army. In the vision of Daniel Messiah is not represented as personally engaged in the battle. The enemy of the Lord's Christ was, however, there seen making war with the saints and overcoming them, until the Ancient of Days came, and the time arrived that the saints possessed the kingdom.

We cannot here discuss the interpretation of that prophecy of Daniel. All we want to call attention to is that the saints are represented in it as engaged in a bitter struggle during the Messianic age. In all ages the Lord's people have been, and are to be, "a poor and afflicted people." Hence with true spiritual intuition St. John perceived that Daniel's prophecy was being fulfilled before his very eyes. He accordingly designated the false teachers who then manifested themselves as "the Antichrist." Those false apostles were the vanguard of the vast army of deceivers, liars, and Antichrists, who by force or fraud, even up to the time of the Second Advent, are to be persistent in efforts "to withstand the truth; men corrupted in mind, reprobate concerning the faith" (2 Tim. iii. 8).

We can only glance at the particular form of error to which the Apostle John specially alludes. The Church of Christ had to contend in that day on the one hand, against attempts on the part of Judaisers to place the Gentiles under the bondage of the Mosaic Law, and against the encroachments of Greek philosophy. The Greeks were not altogether unwilling to accept new light, and were somewhat disposed to welcome Christ as a teacher, and Christianity as a new power in the world. They were ready to admit that God might appear among men in the likeness of man. But that the Word should "become flesh" (John i. 14), and "being found in fashion as a man, humble himself" (Phil. ii. 8), even to "the death of the cross" was opposed to all their ideas. Hence some of them maintained that on the cross of Calvary some person was substituted in place of Christ. Others regarded the crucifixion as a mere illusion; and some imagined that the Divinity which dwelt in the man Christ Jesus was withdrawn from Him on the cross. Greek philosophy could not conceive it possible that one who was both God and man could die; and hence men trained up in that philosophy denied

that Jesus Christ had come in the flesh. All such teaching was contrary to "the truth as it is in Christ Jesus." The apostle John in the opening of both his Gospel and First Epistle emphatically proclaimed the Divinity of the Redeemer. With equal emphasis he asserted the reality of Christ's incarnation, for the union of the Divine and human in one Person is a fundamental doctrine of the Christian faith.

The Church had, however, to fight for centuries a hard battle on the question of the Person of Christ, because men were unwilling to accept Christianity as taught by those who "from the beginning were eye-witnesses and ministers of the word." Their minds were preoccupied with the ideas which they had learned under other masters (2 Cor. iv. 4, R.V.). The Greek, by conclusions drawn by "the wisdom of the world," was led to transform "the Christ of the Gospels" into a being in harmony with his philosophy.

As men were led to reject the Christ of the Prophets and of the Gospels and to invent a Messiah of their own devising, so it was with regard to Antichrist. They first conveniently ignored the fact that St. John had applied the term "the Antichrist" to the false teachers of the time in which he lived, although early Fathers like Cyprian, &c., often employed the term as applicable to all opponents of the Gospel. "The spirit of truth" given to the people of God was to "guide them into all truth" (John xvi. 13), and they had an anointing from the Holy One whereby they might know all things (1 John ii. 27) concerning truth and godliness. But there was also another spirit, the "spirit of error" ready to lead aside the unwary, If Christ was with His people, Antichrist was with them also.

Fantastic notions, introduced by good men, concerning an imaginary Antichrist by degrees became popular. The Antichrist was incorrectly identified with St. Paul's "man of sin" (2 Thess. ii. 1-8). "The Antichrist" spoken of by St. John was a collective term for the false teachers of that apostle's time, and the name was applicable to false teachers of a later age. See MAN OF SIN.

Early Christian writers preserved for a considerable time the correct sense of St. Paul's prophecy, and interpreted it of an apostasy in the visible Church. Tertullian (who died A.D. 220) says: "We (Christians) are temples of God, and altars and lights, and sacred vessels " (De Corona, cap. 9.) Hilary of Poitiers (who died A.D. 366) protests against the false interpretation which was then coming in, and says: "Because of that Antichrist ye do wrong to attach importance to the walls of temples, or to regard a building as the Church of God. Is then (he asks) it doubtful that Antichrist

may not establish his throne there?" Theodoret (who died A.D. 457) says: The Apostle calls the Churches the temple of God in which endeavouring to show himself as God he (the man of sin) shall seize the pre-eminence."

We cannot here discuss St. Paul's prediction. We may safely, however, draw the following conclusions: (1) St. Paul's " 'Man of Sin" is not to be identified with St. John's Antichrist; and (2) that St. Paul like St. John speaks of an apostasy within the professing Church of Christ.

"The Antichrist" was thus detected by St. John within the Church of his day; while the "man of sin" was not to usurp authority over the Church until the Roman Empire was broken up into separate kingdoms.

It should be remembered that men in all ages have likened their enemies to wild and ravenous animals. Such comparisons may, perhaps, be traced back to the days when men had everywhere to contend in deadly contest with the wild beasts of the earth. In the Old Testament Scriptures those comparisons abound; nor are they wholly absent from the New Testament writings, in which Satan is compared to a roaring lion, seeking whom he may devour; and Christ is described as the Lion of the tribe of Judah.

Victories over hostile nations were often represented by the ancient Assyrians and Babylonians under the figures of such symbolical contests. The idea can be traced in the earliest Hebrew Scriptures, but it is common in the book of Daniel. It was quite natural that Daniel's writings should exhibit traces of the allegorical pictures sculptured in stone in the palaces and temples of the great city of Babylon.

The student of folk-lore and the investigator of comparative religion may be justified in tracing the Babylonian dragon-myth back to the early times of mankind, and of their struggles with huge monsters. Those struggles, handed down by tradition and magnified by frequent recital, may after centuries have formed the basis for allegories. But that possibility does not justify the attempt now being made to dissolve into mythical legends prophecies constructed on ideas drawn from such common events of human history. In John Bunyan's allegories ordinary incidents, as falling into a quagmire, being attacked by a dog, robbed on a highway, eating of forbidden apples, ascending a steep mountain, falling asleep in an arbour, are related alike side by side with supernatural events such as combats with Apollyon, fights with giants, and battles with a sevenheaded monster. Bunyan's pictures are not to be traced back and explained as legends of contests in pre-historic ages, but, as is well known,

represent spiritual experiences and spiritual struggles.

We ought then to be on our guard against permitting the modern sceptic who enters upon the path of Biblical exposition to unite passages which, when honestly interpreted, are not to be united; or, by what he chooses to term a "felicitous combination," resolving into fable the prophecies of Scripture.

He

An able German Professor well observes: "The temptation to yield to fancy flights is all but irresistible." His own work is, however, a striking example of the truth of the saying.1 He endeavours to show that the prophecies concerning Antichrist are simply "a legend," "a chapter in Christian and Jewish folk-lore," an "anthropomorphic transformation of the Babylonian dragon-myth," which is "doubtless one of the earliest known to primitive man." The author constructs his imaginary "legend" | by weaving together passages which have no connection with one another. From the Futurists he borrows the misinterpretation that St. Paul, writing to the Thessalonians, was thinking of the unbelieving Jews and of Antichrist as seated in their material temple. affirms that of this "there can scarcely be any doubt" (p. 133), and that our Lord's words in John v. 43 refer to Antichrist. Both statements we regard as fanciful. With equal dogmatism he erroneously identifies the Antichrist with the "abomination of desolation," which our Lord refers to in the prophecy on the Mount of Olives. The Babylonians in their story represented the dragon as warring against the gods. The writer therefore argues that St. John in Rev. xii. repeats that legend. In St. Luke's Gospel we read that when the seventy disciples told their Lord the success which they had experienced in their mission, the Master exclaimed, "I beheld Satan as lightning fall from heaven" (Luke x. 18). Those words of Christ are similarly explained to refer back to the old legend. The grotesque fancies of some of the Fathers that the tyrant Nero would be raised from the dead to war a second time against the saints of God, that Satan would become incarnate in the person of a man, are all adduced as interesting fragments of the same story.

The misinterpretations of passages in Daniel in Professor Bousset's work are as numerous as "the poisonous flies," which according to the

1 The Antichrist Legend. A Chapter in Christian and Jewish Polk-lore. Englished from the German of W. Bousset, with a prologue on the Babylonian dragon-myth, by A. H. Keane, F.R.G.S., late VicePresident Anthropological Institute, author of Ethnology, &c. London: Hutchinson & Co., 34 Paternoster Row; 1896.

ment.

wise man make the oil of the perfumer to stink and ferment (Eccl. x. 1). His caricatures of the book of the Revelation are painful reading. The solemn parables and discourses of Christ in Matt. xxv. 15 ff., are, without a scintilla of evidence, supposed to be fragments of some lost Apocalypse of the Antichrist (p. 214). If the Master's words are thus misrepresented, it is not strange that the Apostles' writings are subjected to similar treat[C. H. H. W.] ANTIMENSIUM.-A Grecised Latin word meaning a pro-table or pro-altar. The upper cloth placed upon the Holy Table in the Greek Church, specially consecrated by the bishop. In this cloth a relic is generally inserted in order to recall the fact that the Christians were wont in early days to hold Divine Service at the graves of the martyrs. ANTIPHON.-A hymn or song one part of which is a response to another. Antiphonal singing is alternate singing, i.e. first by the voices of one side of the choir and then by those of the other. It is of very great antiquity, since Pliny, in his letter to Trajan, describes the early Christians as singing a hymn by parts or in turns to Christ as God. An antiphon is a verse generally of Holy Scripture, which was sung in the Middle Ages before and after the Psalms and Canticles, and, like the Invitatory, gave the keynote to the Psalm. See Wheatley, On the Prayer Book, p. 158. See ANTHEM.

APOCRYPHA OF THE OLD TESTA

MENT.-The designation Apocrypha (concealed, or hidden) is the title under which "the other books" mentioned in Article VI. of the Thirty-Nine Articles of the Church of England are generally known. It is often forgotten that three of those books, namely, the "Prayer of Manasseh" (Manasses), with "Third" and "Fourth" Esdras, were not regarded as canonical by the Council of Trent, although they were appended to the Latin Vulgate in order to prevent their being lost, which was considered undesirable, because they are often cited in the writings of the Fathers. Those three books are, therefore, not included in the Roman Catholic accredited English Translation of the Bible, popularly termed the Douay Version.

Several books in the list given in Article VI. are not found under the same titles in the Greek (LXX.), Vulgate, or Douay Versions. For (1) "the Rest of the Book of Esther" consists of portions which in those Versions are appended to different chapters. These portions, disconnected enough in their original shape, are still further damaged in the English Apocrypha by being severed from their connection and placed together. Those ad

ditions are, indeed, later than the canonical Esther, and are marked by a highly religious tone. (2) The three small books in the English Apocrypha, severally designated as the Song of the Three Children, the Story of Susanna, and Of Bel and the Dragon, are similarly additions to the Book of Daniel, and in the Greek, Latin, and Douay Versions are to be found in various parts of that book.

Following the order of these books given in Article VI. we proceed to give a brief sketch of them. Not one of them belongs to an age higher than B.C. 150. Not one of them was ever included in the threefold division of the Jewish Scriptures referred to by our Lord in Luke xxiv. 44. They are never quoted in the New Testament, and were never recognised by the Jews as inspired books. Most of them were included in the old Greek Septuagint Version. They were generally derived from Egypt, in which country the Jews were not so strict as those living in Palestine. The Egyptian Jews had a Temple of their own, in which sacrifices were offered contrary to the Law of Moses, and which was served by a rival High Priest and priesthood. When the Christian Church lost contact with the Jews, the knowledge of Hebrew became rare, and hence many of the Fathers believed that all the books included in the Greek Septuagint Version belonged to the Sacred Scriptures. Our Reformers, however, soon returned to the faith of the Primitive Church, and refused to acknowledge any Old Testament books not recognised by Christ and His Apostles.

"Third" Esdras (called "First" in the LXX. and Syriac and by A.V., but called "Third" in the Vulgate) is probably a production of the century before Christ. It is partly compiled from the canonical Ezra, termed in the LXX. "Second Esdras," is apparently an unfinished work, and was known to Josephus. The earliest form in which it has come down to us is the Greek, in the LXX. Version. author and exact date are unknown.

Both

"Fourth" Esdras, styled in the A. V. and R. V. "Second" Esdras, is a composite work, probably belonging to the first century after Christ, but possibly founded upon earlier writings. It is sometimes termed the Apocalypse of Ezra. Its original language appears to have been Greek, but the work is now extant only in translations, the earliest of which is the Latin. There are also translations in Syriac, Arabic, &c. Some sixty-nine verses belonging to chapter vii., and not found in the authorised Vulgate editions, were discovered by Professor Bensly of Cambridge, in 1875, in a ninth-century MS. at Amiens, and since that time in other MSS. also. The page which contained those verses was deliberately cut out of the Latin MS. from

which the majority of Latin MSS. in Europe were copied, no doubt owing to the fact that the doctrine taught in those verses concerning the state of the dead was opposed to that of the Roman Church. The verses are not to be found in the Authorised English Translation of the Apocrypha, but are duly given in the Revised Version of the Apocrypha.

Fourth Esdras is a work of considerable importance, written originally by a Jew, although it contains not a few interpolation, some of which seem to have had a Christian origin. The book was regarded as a genuine book of prophecy even by the writer of the Epistle of Barnabas (ch. xii. 2), who does not seem to have been acquainted with Hebrew. The main portion of the work, which consists of seven visions alleged to have been seen by Ezra in Babylon, is to some extent modelled on the Book of Daniel.

The Book of Tobit is probably a composition of the century prior to the Christian era and may even be older. It is extant in Greek, Latin, Hebrew, and Aramaic. None of the extant versions appear to be the original. It is uncertain where the book was composed. It contains a romance, possibly resting on some historical basis, the angelology and demonology of which is interesting, and which occasionally contains valuable information. Owing to its teaching concerning justification by works, and its assertion of the intercession of angels, it is a book much valued by Roman controversialists. Its ethical teachings have given it also considerable popularity. It is never referred to in the New Testament.

The Book of Judith may be as old as B.C. 135, but by many scholars is assigned to B.C. 50. The story it contains of Holofernes, chief captain of Nebuchadnezzar, his siege of Bethulia, and his assassination by Judith, a noble Jewish widow, is unhistorical, and may be a historical fiction composed with a moral object. It has been maintained by some scholars that the work is to some degree of an allegorical character (partially founded on some facts of history), even though the allegory is not sustained throughout; and this is the view we are inclined to adopt, though it is not the view generally accepted by scholars. The vivid character of the story and the earnest religious tone of the work has rendered it popular throughout many ages. The original of the book was probably Hebrew or Aramaic, though it has come down to us only through the Greek version contained in the Septuagint Version.

The Book of Wisdom was written at some time between B.C. 150 and B.C. 50. Its author was an Egyptian Jew, and it was written originally in Greek. The writer assumed the name of Solomon, partly to counteract false

teaching ascribed to that king. The book describes the influence and power of wisdom in the history of man. Although the patriarchs and leading characters of the Old Testament are noticed, no proper name occurs in the book. Their works are spoken of as those of the righteous. The general teachings of the book concerning the life to come are excellent. It teaches the immortality of the soul, but does not mention the resurrection, nor speak of the Messiah. Many passages are remarkable for their beauty and force of expression.

The Book of Jesus the Son of Sirach, or Ben Sira, is more popularly known as the Book of Ecclesiasticus, and was so termed because it was widely used as an ecclesiastical reading book. It is also termed the Wisdom of Jesus the Son of Sirach. Its original language was Hebrew or Aramaic. Fragments of the book in both languages are found embedded in the Talmud. Large portions of it in Hebrew have been lately discovered, but whether they belong to a Hebrew translation of the tenth century, or are remains (in a more or less mutilated form) of the original Hebrew, is a matter at present under the serious discussion of eminent scholars. The Greek translation of the book was preserved in the LXX. Ancient translations are extant in Greek, Latin, and Syriac. The Greek text has been translated into English in the Authorised Version and the Revised Version. The Greek translation professes to have been made by the author's grandson in Egypt, and cannot have been later than B.C. 132. Consequently the original work cannot be assigned to a later period than B.C. 170. Scholars, however, have maintained that those dates ought to be fifty years earlier. The book contains a remarkable collection of sententious proverbs, closing with a section in praise of the great men of Israel, followed by a short epilogue with a final chapter containing a prayer of Jesus the son of Sirach.

The Book of Baruch the Prophet is formed of three distinct parts written by different authors. (a) Ch. i. to iii. 8 professes to have been written by Baruch in Babylon after the destruction of Jerusalem by Nebuchadnezzar. That portion may have been originally written in Hebrew or Aramaic. The prayer it contains was evidently based on Daniel ix. 7 ff. (b) Ch. iii. 9 to the end of ch. v. is an exhortation to Israel to return to God. It contains some fine passages, especially that in ch. iii. which several of the Fathers considered to be a prophecy of Christ. Whether its original language was Hebrew or Greek is much disputed. (c) The so-called Epistle of Jeremiah or Jeremy given in ch. vi. is a pungent description of the folly of idolatry. This part of the book was written in Greek, and probably composed by some Hellen

istic Jew in the first century after Christ. This third part in the Greek Septuagint is regarded as a separate book, and is placed after the Book of Lamentations. The present arrangement of that chapter as the closing portion of the book is derived from the Latin Vulgate.

The three additions made in the Apocrypha to the Book of Daniel are of no historical value. The Prayer of Manasseh is also unhistorical, and is not regarded as canonical by the Church of Rome. It is extant in Greek and Latin, the former being possibly its original language.

The First Book of the Maccabees is a work of great value, containing a history of the Jews in Palestine for forty years, from B.C. 175 to B.C. 135, during the great Maccabean struggle. It was probably written about B.C. 105. Its original language was Hebrew, as Origen and Jerome testify, but it is extant only in Greek.

The Second Book of the Maccabees is much inferior to the first. It is divisible into two

distinct parts. (a) The first contains two fictitious documents, one (ch. i. 1-10) purporting to be a letter from the Palestinian Jews to their brethren in Egypt concerning the Feast of the Dedication; the second (ch. i. 11-ch. ii. 18) is an epistle which gives a portentous account of the death of Antiochus Epiphanes. (b) The second part (ch. ii. 19 to the end of the book), in the Revised Version rightly divided off from the former by a considerable space, professes to be an epitome of a lost work by Jason of Cyrene. This portion contains the history of sixteen years from B.C. 176 to B.C. 160. It is the work of an Egyptian Jew, and was originally composed in Greek some time in the first century before Christ. The story of the martyrdoms related in ch. vii. made the work popular among the Christians of the early ages; and the approbation of prayers for the dead expressed in ch. xii. has rendered the book popular among Roman Catholic controversialists. But it is, however, more than doubtful whether the narrative in the latter chapter has been correctly explained. See Dr. Wright's book on the Intermediate State, ch. ii. § 3.

The above-mentioned books are popularly "the Apocrypha." There are, however, a considerable number of other books which might fairly be for the most part comprehended under the same heading, though usually known as Pseud-epigraphal-that is, books falsely ascribed to the persons whose names they bear. Many of them have been described ia Dr. Wright's work. The following may be mentioned: (1) Third Book of the Maccabees, which is not a history of the Maccabees, but of a professedly earlier attempt to destroy