SQLite format 3@   ltl\5yindexidx_topics_rel_ordertopicsCREATE INDEX idx_topics_rel_order on topics(rel_order)BatableconfigconfigCREATE TABLE config(name text, value text)dtablecontentcontentCREATE TABLE content(topic_id integer primary key, data text, data2 blob) mtabletopicstopicsCREATE TABLE topics(id integer primary key, pid integer default 0, subject text, rel_order, content_type string) eweLesson 7Lesson 6Lesson 5Lesson 4Lesson 3Lesson 2Lesson 1300-Title & ContentskVD/ 5titleCarroll-Between.topx)schema.version1user1type3 n to the period. The Old Testament books written during the Babylonian exile are, part of Jeremiah, all of Ezekiel, all of Daniel, and possibly a few of the psalms. The Old Testament books written after the Jews\rquote return from the Babylonian captivity are the following, in their order, as stated: Haggai, Zechariah, Ezra, Esther, Nehemiah, Malachi\emdash Nehemiah and Malachi having been written about the same time. The Old Testament closes, then, about 433 B.C. with the books of Nehemiah and Malachi.\par The extent of the period between the Old and New Testaments, in round numbers, is over 400 years, that is, from 433 B.C. to 4 B.C., the true date of Christ\rquote s birth, four years before the time it is usually given. We may learn the history of that 400 years: First, from the Jewish historian, Josephus, Jewish Antiquities and the first part of his Wars of the Jews. Josephus was a Jewish general in the war which led to the destruction of Jerusalem under Titus, living forty and more years after Christ died. Second, from a radical critic, Ewald, who has written, perhaps, the most remarkable history of the Jewish people. I do not very well see how we could do without it on account of its great scholarship and research, though many things in it cannot possibly be accepted on account of his radical criticisms. One volume of his history is devoted to this period. As that book may not be accessible, I mention Stanley\rquote s Jewish Church, the third volume. He is something of a radical critic himself, and follows Ewald just about as closely as Dr. Boyce, in his theology, follows lodge. But better than all of them for brevity and clearness is a little book of the Temple Series of the Bible, entitled, "Connection Between Old\par and New Testaments." The author is Rev. George Milne Rea. This is the shortest, clearest, and most forcible history of the period that I know anything about. He is somewhat of a radial critic, but there is little poison in it.\par Then, for a great part of the period, we find 1 a nd 2 Maccabees indispensable. They are apocryphal books of the Old Testament. The first book of the Maccabees is good, great, and spiritual. it is a fine history. It is not an inspired book, but many uninspired books are very valuable. I have been reading the first book of Maccabees ever since I was ten years old. The second book of Maccabees is also. good, but not quite so reliable.\par Daniel\rquote s prophecies concerning the Persian, Grecian, and Roman Empires, while prophecies are really a forecast of all the history there is on the subject.\par I will sum up the histories of the period: (1) Daniel; (2) Josephus; (3) Ewald\rquote s History of the Jewish People; (4) Stanley\rquote s Jewish Church; (5) Milne Rea\rquote s Connection Between the Testaments; (6) 1 and 2 Maccabees. In giving these histories let me say that Josephus on that period sometimes gives the chronology wrong\emdash in one instance at least a hundred years. The ancient Greek historians Herodotus, Xenophon, Polybius, Appianus, Arri anus, and others, touched on the period. The ancient Roman historians, Livy, Tacitus, Diodorus, and others, touch the period. The great modern histories of ancient times which cover the period are Rollin, Rawlinson\rquote s Monarchies, Grotes\rquote History of Greece, and Mommsen\rquote s History of Rome.\par We next notice the Jewish literature during this period, i. e., what the Jews wrote during this period. We get the literature of this period to find out how the people were thinking, to what their minds were being given. A large part of that literature appears in the Septuagint Old Testament, and is incorporated in the Roman Catholic Bible. In our Bible the Roman Catholics make their insertions of the Jewish literature as follows: Just after Nehemiah they put in two books, Tobit and Judith, neither one of them historically good, and a good deal of Tobit is exceedingly silly. To the book of Esther they add ten verses to the tenth chapter, and then add six more chapters. That these additions were wri tten in this period, and after the inspiration closed, is evident from the reading of them. Just after the Song of Solomon, they put two Apocryphal books, Wisdom and Ecciesiasticus. These books, while not inspired, make very good reading, but they are written, as I said, in that interval between the two Testaments, and rather late in that interval. Just after the Lamentations of Jeremiah, they put the book of Baruch. Baruch himself was the scribe of Jeremiah and a good man. This book, some of it, is exceedingly silly, and evidently not written by Baruch.\par To our book of Daniel they make the following additions: When Shadrach, Meshach, and Abed-nego were cast into the fiery furnace, they put a long song of about sixty-six verses into the mouths of these three men, and make them sing it in that furnace. At the end of the book of Daniel they put two stories: The story of Susanna, and the story of Bel and the Dragon\emdash good stories to tell the children. Just after Malachi they put 1 and 2 Maccabees.\ par The Romanist Bible, Douay Version, has these additions and shows just where they come in. All these books were written during the period of which I speak, and in addition to them the following which do not appear in the Romanist Bible:\par the Prayer of Manasseh. He was the wicked son of the good king, Hezekiah, and the record states that when he was a captive in Babylon he repented and prayed to God to forgive him. It occurred to one of these inter-biblical Jews to write out that prayer for him. It is a splendid prayer and I do not see anything wrong in it.\par A letter from Jeremiah to the Babylonian exiles. He had written one that we find in the book of Jeremiah, but this is falsely attributed to Jeremiah. Then, during that period, they wrote certain psalms and attributed them to Solomon, calling them The Psalms of Solomon. Most of these are good reading.\par But the greatest exploit of the Jewish mind during the period of which I speak was the translation of the Old Testament into Greek, the S eptuagint version. I will have a good deal to say about it later.\par I did not include in that period two other books written by Jews, and sometimes classed in the period. One is the book of Enoch. That is an apocalypse, an imitation of Daniel, and a good deal like Revelation. Some of it is fine reading. It is barely possible that part of it was written before Christ was born, but it cannot be proved. The other books are 1 and 2 Esdras. They were certainly written after Christ, both of them, and it is not yet clear whether a Christian Jew wrote them or an unchristian Jew, but they are intolerable stuff, no matter who wrote them.\par I will now restate the literature of that period. I called attention to the part of the literature incorporated in the Romanist Bible, the following books in their order: Tobit, Judith, Ecciesiasticus, Baruch, 1 and 2 Maccabees, then the additions to Esther and Daniel. Apart from what is incorporated in the Romanist Bible I gave these: The Prayer of Mannasseh, the Psalms of Solomon, the letter of Jeremiah, the great work of translating the Old Testament into the Greek language\emdash the Septuagint. That commenced about 250 years before Christ, and it was about 100 years before all of it was done.\par The king of Persia at the time the Old Testament closed was Artaxerxes Longiinanus, and the book that mostly influenced the Jewish thought and hope during that period of 400 years was unquestionably the book of Daniel. Revelation is the quickening book of the New Testament, as Daniel was the quickening book to the Jewish mind, both of them apocalypses.\par There are ten great preceding events which influenced this\par period of 400 years, as follows:\par 1. The first event was 722 B.C. Sargon, king of Assyria, reigning at Nineveh, captured the capital of the Northern Kingdom, the kingdom of the ten tribes, deported the inhabitants into the Far East, and colonized their territory with heathen people from his own realm. As we go on, not only up to Christ, but beyond Christ, we will see the tremendous significance of that mixed population in Samaria\emdash a heathen population settled there to take the place of the deported Jews, intermarrying with the remnant of Israelites left behind, and constituting what later was called the Samaritan people.\par 2. The second great event was in. 587 B.C. Nebuchadnezzar, king of Babylon, captured and destroyed Jerusalem, the capital of the lower kingdom, the kingdom of Judah, and deported the best and most influential of the inhabitants to Babylon. All through the period comes the echo of that event.\par 3. The third great preceding event was in 538 B.C. Cyrus, king of the Medo-Persian Empire, captures Babylon, and in 536 B.C., two years later, he issued a decree allowing the Jewish captives in Babylon, so many as wished to do it, to go back to their own country, instructing them to rebuild their Temple, which Nebuchadnezzar had destroyed. This event, as we will find, was mighty in influencing the inter-biblical period in several respects. Heretofore the fortunes of the people of Israel had been influenced by the Hamitic and Semitic nations, who held them in subjection. Henceforward it is the Japhetic nations that affect them. The Medo-Persians were descendants of Japhet. The Babylonians and Assyrians were descendants of Shem, as were also the Ammonites, the Moabites, and the Esau-ites. The people of Egypt were the descendants of Ham, and so were the Canaanites, including the Philistines and Phoenicians. Now, with the coming of Cyrus to Babylon the nations to affect the Jews are the descendants of Japhet.\par The second respect, and a very remarkable one, was that the policy of Assyria and Babylon had been to deport the inhabitants of the countries that they conquered and colonize them elsewhere. That had been the settled policy. The policy of Cyrus was exactly the opposite\emdash to send all the exiles home, when conquering any people. Cyrus was not a Persian, but an Elamite, and hence not a monotheist, but a polytheist. He was a great man. A heathen, while he did not know God, God knew him, and God raised him up to do the work that he did. As Isaiah prophesied, "God says, I will raise up and guide Cyrus, though he knows me not." He not only sent home those of the Jews that wanted to go, but any other captive nation.\par The third respect was the policy of all the Hamitic and Semitic nations that when they conquered the people of Israel they destroyed their religion. Cyrus\rquote policy was exactly the opposite; he did not want to interfere with the religion of any conquered people. lie even sent back all the captured idols in Babylon and sent the people back to their native land. He sent the Jews back and gave them all the Temple vessels, the sacred vessels of the sanctuary. No Persian king ever interfered with the religion of a conquered nation. At no time during the subjection of the Jews to the Persians, while they controlled the political end, did they interfere with their consciences. They let them worship God in their own way.\par The fourth respect was that the Medo-Persian policy allowed a Jew, who was qualified, to be local governor, subject to the satrap who controlled a district, and was like a viceroy. The king appointed him and he had a great district under him. For instance, the district of Syria was ruled by a satrap, with headquarters at Damascus, but Judea was one province of this district whose local governor might be a Jew; and we know of two distinguished Jews who were local governors; Zerubbabel was one\emdash he was the first one, who belonged to the line of David. He was not made king, but was the local governor over all the territory reoccupied by the Jews. The high priest, with a council of elders, attended to the religious matters. Nehemiah also was a local governor, but I do not know that any other Jew was local governor during that period. It is somewhat doubtful, from an expression in Nehemiah and one in Malachi, but those two were permitted to rule in civil matters.\par \par 4. The fourth great event that affected the inter-biblical period was in 535 B.C., when nearly 50,000 Jews returned to their own country with Zerubbabel as governor and Joshua as high priest, with orders to rebuild their own Temple and worship God according to their old forms. The question has often been asked why no more returned. There were forty-two thousand and some hundreds, besides some seven or eight thousand servants and some singing people, but less than fifty thousand Jews accepted the privilege conferred by Cyrus. One reason that the number was so small is that they would not allow anybody to go back\emdash the Jews would not\emdash who could not prove hi8 genealogy\emdash his pure descent by the genealogical tables. His pedigree had to be traceable all the way back to Abraham. That let out a good many of them. Now, as less than fifty thousand of them returned, that brings us to a new word diaspora, the "dispersion." The Jews who remained, from that time. on till now, are called the dispersion. We find that language repeated in the New Testament. James and Peter both write letters to the dispersion.\par 5. The fifth great event was that these Samaritans, not being permitted to help rebuild the Temple, though claiming that they worshipped Jehovah, became bitter enemies to its rebuilding. Zerubbabel and Joshua were not counting numbers, but wanted a pure and homogeneous people. The Samaritans were a mixed race, and they refused to allow them to be associated in the work, whereupon they wrote letters back to Persia, making all sorts of accusations against the Jews, and finally securing an order for a discontinuance of the work of rebuilding the Temple, and held it suspended for fifteen years, until a new Persian dynasty received letters from the Jews asking him to search the records of the reign of Cyrus and see if he could not find that decree allowing the Jews to rebuild their Temple.\par 6. Darius did have the records searched, and did find it, and he used a pretty strong hand to help the Jews, and told them to go on with the building of their Temple. So, protected by him, the Temple was completed and dedicated in the year 516 B.C. The rebuilding of that Temple, the re-establishing of the old Jewish worship, can hardly be overestimated as an event bearing on the period we are discussing.\par 7. The seventh great preceding event was in 478 B.C. Esther, a Jewess of the dispersion, living in Babylon, became the wife of Xerxes the Great, he who is called Ahasuerus in the book of Esther. She became his wife and saved the Jews of the dispersion from being destroyed by Haman. That Ahasuerus, the husband of Esther, is the very Xerxes that invaded Greece with so great an army, but that was before he married Esther. I will tell all about it in a later chapter in showing the struggle between Greece and Persia. The war really commenced under Darius Hystaspris, and just about the time that Darius was having that Temple completed he sent the Persian soldiers to fight the battle of Marathon, just outside the city of Athens, in which they were ingloriously defeated. When Xerxes the Great came to the throne, he led an army of over two million people against the Greeks. At the pass of Thermopylae, Leonidas and his three hundred Spartans died fighting for Greece. Then in \lquote the great battle of Plataea his land forces were terribly defeated. When Attica was invaded, Themistocles caused the Athenians to take to their ships and let the city be burned, and on the sea he fought and won the great battle of Salamis.\par The seventh great event was in 458 B.C., when Ezra leads another caravan of Jewish exiles to Jerusalem. This was in the reign of Artaxerxes Longimanus. He was reigning when the Old Testament closed. This was by far the most influential factor in the future of the Jews; indeed, with Ezra comes the rise of Judaism. The people are called Jews from his time on. The great factors of Ezra\rquote s coming were: first, he brought back a copy of the Mosaic law, the Pentateuch; second, with him commenced that remarkable body of people called the scribes. Ezra was a notable scribe. They were the publishers of the Bible, not indeed by printing, but they multiplied the manuscript copies of it. We may credit the publication of the Old Testament to Ezra and the scribes. These scribes, by giving the people copies of their Bible, had more to do with the great advance in the period of four hundred years that I am going to tell about than anything else.\par \par With Ezra also commenced the Jewish Council of Elders, which afterward became the Sanhedrin, so well known in New Testament times. With Ezra\rquote s return from Babylon came also the synagogue, and of all the potential things that preserved the Jewish faith from that time on the synagogue takes the lead. Up to that time they were temple ritualists. Theirs was a sacrificial worship. From now on, wherever three or four Jews could be found in a place, they would establish a proseuche, or "prayer-chapel," like the one that Paul found at Phiippi.\par Where there were more of them they established a synagogue. The synagogue is not a temple, but it is a place of public worship. Every Sabbath day, throughout the world, they come up to these synagogues and read a part of the law, and a part of the prophets, and a part of the other writings, and then expound them just as a preacher now reads a portion of the Scriptures and expounds it. Then, that synagogue was a popular assembly. For the first time, anybody in the audience that wanted to, could get up and say what was in his mind.\par When Christ went to the synagogue at Nazareth, they handed him the lesson to be read that day. He read it and expounded it. When Paul entered a synagogue, the leader said to him, seeing he was a visitor, a stranger, "Brother, if you have anything to say, say on." It was of tremendous importance that the people should have Bibles and places of worship. The synagogue more nearly embodies the idea of a New Testament church than the temple does, and in the Greek Old Testament, / it is sometimes called ecclesia. With the return of Ezra, idolatry by the Jews died forever. Up to that time God had scourged them continually with other nations because of their idolatry. But from the time of Ezra throughout all their history to this very hour in which I write, no Jew has been an idolater; they ceased to worship idols. Well might the Jews call Ezra the second Moses.\par 9. The ninth, and last, great antecedent event is this: In 445 B.C., Nehemiah, the cupbearer to Artaxerxes Longimanus, asked to be appointed governor of Judea, and the Persian king, who loved him very much, made him governor. The Babylonians would call him Pekher, the Turks would call him Pasha, the Persian would say Tirshathe, but we say "governor." Nehemiah caused a wall to be built around Jerusalem to protect it from the Samaritans and Arabians, and their other enemies close by, and after staying twelve years he returned to Persia. He remained there a while, then came back and served as governor until 433 B.C.\par I will briefly repeat these great events: first, the destruction of the ten tribe by Sargon in 722 B.C.; second, the destruction of Jerusalem by Nebuchadnezzar in 587 B.C.; third, the destruction of Babylon by Cyrus, king of the Persians, in 538 B.C., and the marvelous advantages of his policy; fourth, in 535 B.C., fifty thousand Jews returned with Zerubbabel as governor and Joshua as high priest; fifth, the Samaritans opposed the building of the Temple and obstructed it for fifteen years; sixth, Darius Hystaspis, the head of the second Persian Dynasty, in 516 ~.; ordered the finishing of the Temple; seventh, Esther became Queen of Persia, 478 B.C.; eighth, 458 B.C., Ezra led another caravan to Jerusalem; ninth, Nehemiah was made political governor.\par We have now before us the books of the Bible that were written in exile, the books of the Bible written after the exile, the histories that cover this period, the literature of the Jews during this period, and the great antecedent events influencing this period.\par \par QUESTIONS\par 1. What Old Testament books were written during the Babylonian exile?\par 2. What Old Testament books were written after the Jews\rquote return from the Babylon captivity?\par 3. What then is the extent of the period between the two Testaments?\par 4. From what books may we learn the history of this period?\par 5. What Jewish literature was written during this period?\par 6. Who was king of Persia at the close of the Old Testament canon?\par 7. What book mostly influenced the Jewish thought and hope during the inter-biblical period?\par 8. What is the first great preceding event which influenced this period and how?\par 9. What is the second, and how?\par 10. What is the third, and in what four respects was it mighty in influencing this period?\par 11. What is the fourth, and how?\par 12. What is the fifth, and how?\par 13. What is the sixth, and how?\par 14. What is the seventh, and how?\par 15. What is the eighth, and how?\par 16. What is the ninth, and how?\par \par } yy {\rtf1\ansi\ansicpg1252\deff0\deflang1033\deflangfe1033{\fonttbl{\f0\fswiss\fprq2\fcharset0 Arial;}{\f1\froman\fprq2\fcharset0 Times New Roman;}{\f2\fnil\fcharset0 Arial;}} {\*\generator Riched20 5.40.11.2210;}\viewkind4\uc1\pard\sb120\qc\b\f0\fs32 Between the Testaments\par \fs22 (A Class on Biblical History)\b0 \par \b by\b0 \par \b Dr. B. H. Carroll\par \pard\sb120\qj\b0\par \pard\sb120\qc\b Late President of Southwestern Baptist Theological Seminar, Fort Worth, Texas\par \b0 [This work is in the Public Domain.]\par \fs20\par \pard\sb120\qj\lang1023\b\f1\fs28 Table of Contents\par \b0\fs22 \par \f2 Lesson # 1 Introduction\fs24\par \fs22 Lesson # 2 Persian Period\par Lesson # 3 Greek Period 1\par Lesson # 4 THE JEWS UNDER ANTIOCHUS III\par Lesson # 5 Greek Period 3\par Lesson # 6 Maccabees Period\par Lesson # 7 Roman Period\par \lang1033\f0\fs20\par \par } {w{\rtf1\ansi\ansicpg1252\deff0\deflang1033\deflangfe1033{\fonttbl{\f0\fswiss\fprq2\fcharset0 Arial;}} {\*\generator Riched20 5.40.11.2210;}\viewkind4\uc1\pard\sb120\qj\b\f0\fs22 Lesson # 1\par \b0\par \pard\sb120\qc\b INTRODUCTION: Between the Testaments\par \pard\sb120\qj\b0 \par We commence this study with an introductiodays also I saw that the Jews of the land had married wives of Ashdod, of Ammon, and of Moab; and their children spake half in the speech of Ashdod, and could not speak in the Jews\rquote language, but according to the language of each people. And I contended with them, and crushed them, and smote certain of them, and plucked off their hair, and made them swear by God, saying, Ye shall not give your daughters unto their sons, nor take their daughters for your sons, or for yourselves. . . . And one of the sons of the high priest, Eliashib, was son-in-law to Sanballat, the Horonite: therefore I chased him from me.\emdash\cf1\ul Neh_13:23-28\cf0\ulnone .\par That started the event that I am going to tell about. It ends the Old Testament, but it started the event. The woman that Eliashib had married was very beautiful, as famous in her day as Helen of Troy. Eliashib went to his father-in-law, Sanballat, and said, "I must give up either my priesthood or my wife, but I do not want to lose either." Sanballat says, "I will manage it for you. I will build you a temple here on Mount Gerizim, and you shall be the high priest of that temple." And he carried out his promise. That temple was built. They worshiped Jehovah, and they had for their Bible the Pentateuch only, though the text of the Samaritan Pentateuch does not agree literally with tie Hebrew Pentateuch, but nearly so. They admit, as historical value, the book of Joshua. Now, there was a Jehovah religion, with its temple, with its high priest, and with its Bible, within a few miles of Jerusalem. About 107 B.C., John Hyrcanus, one of the descendants of the Maccabees, and next to Judas Maccabeus one of the greatest of them, not only destroyed that temple, but also destroyed the city of Samaria, as he says: "So that a visitor could not even find where that city had stood"\emdash but we will learn all about that later. I am just telling now what became of that rival temple. The destruction of the temple, however, did not stop the feud. It existed in New Testa ment times. In John 4 we find our Lord talking with a woman of Samaria, who insists that the worship of God ought to be upon Mount Gerizim. In the life of our Lord the Samaritans would always welcome the Jews passing through going north, but would not give any shelter to a Jew going south to worship at the temple. Because Christ was refused shelter in passing south, that son of thunder, John, wanted to call down fire from heaven on them. So that was a marvelous event as bearing on the subsequent history of the Jews. It came about in connection, as many things do, with a pretty woman.\par The second great event of the inter-biblical period under Persian rule was the union of civil and religious powers in one person by the satrap of the district, making the high priest to be also the governor. The duty of the governor was to collect the tribute coming to the Persian Empire. In order to simplify matters the satrap of Syria made the Jewish high priest governor. The evil consequences, the far-reaching consequ!ences of that act may be gathered, first, from a story in Josephus\rquote Antiquities book XI, chapter 7. He shows that when Eliashib, the high priest, died he left two eons, Johanan the elder and Joshua the younger. Both of these wanted to be high priest, because to be high priest was also to be governor. Johanan was the one entitled to it, but a very influential general of the Persian king, Bagoses, had promised the high priesthood to the younger, son whenever the vacancy occurred, whereupon, in a row in the temple itself, Joshua the younger son was killed. The Persian general came and started to enter the temple, and they stopped him. He said, "Will I defile your temple any more than the man you murdered here in the temple?" And he put this kind of a tax on them: Fifty shekels for every lamb that was offered in sacrifice. Of course, that was a great deal more than the price of the lamb\emdash it was 200 or 300 per cent more, and as they offered thousands of lambs we can imagine only what that tax was." It was a window tax that Victor Hugo went wild over, France taxing light, that is, the poor people could not have windows in their houses because, for every window in the house they had to pay so much more tax. So to tax the very offerings of religion was a tremendous innovation. Sup-pose every time we gave a dollar to missions, the state should tax us three dollars. That would dry up the source of contribution pretty soon, wouldn\rquote t it?\par The first evil was in uniting the civil and the religious powers in one person. And the second evil was, that whenever we begin to unite church and state, the state may say, "I have the right to tax all contributions of the church." The third and greatest evil that arose was that the state, from this precedent, began to claim the right to appoint the high priest, claiming that the leader of religion must be appointed by the state.\par The next great evil was that the office of high priest became a matter of barter and sale. The one who controlled the revenues#, just so he satisfied the central government, could keep just as much as he pleased in his own pocket. For instance, if the Persian governor needed a revenue, say $100,000 a year, and this high priest were to tax them $300,000, he could send the state $100,000 and keep $200,000. Later on in the history this fearful precedent, established at this time, had evil effects more far reaching. In Christ\rquote s time, there were two living high priests. Whoever was governor would claim the right to appoint the high priest. Caiaphas and his father-in-law, Annas, were both high priests. In order to illustrate the thought: What if the Tarrant County judge claimed the right to appoint all the pastors of the churches in the county? What if the governor claimed the right to appoint our superintendent of missions, or the president of our convention?\par The third event of the inter-biblical period was the overthrow of the Medo-Persian Empire by Alexander the Great, consummated 330 B. C. The several periods of the str$uggle between the Greeks and the Persians were as follows:\par Period the First: Before the Greeks were united into one government under Phillip II, king of Macedonia. This period extends from 500 B.C. to 336 B.C. The three Persian kings most concerned were Darius I, son of Hystaspis, Xerxes the Great, who married Esther; and Artaxerxes Mnemon, the last only coming within the period. Under Darius I, as I briefly discussed in the preceding chapters, came the defeat of the Persians 200,000 strong by the Athenians under Miltiades, 20,000 strong, at the battle of Marathon, right under the walls of Athens on the plain touching the sea.\par Under Xerxes the Great, as I have already said, were gathered an army of 2,000,000 men for the invasion of Greece. There were 1,800,000 by measurement, not by counting. Ten thousand were made to stand in the smallest square possible, the space was marked off, and then, without any more counting, was filled 180 times. The great battles of this invasion were, first the defen%se of the pass at Thermopylae by Leonidas and his Spartans; second, the decisive defeat of the Persians in the great sea fight at Salamis by the Athenian general, Themistocles; third, the decisive defeat of the Persian land forces at Platea.\par The battle of Marathon made such an impression on the young men of Athens that when a man said to Themistocles:\par "Why is it you cannot sleep? You are restless all night long," he said, "The honors of Miltiades will not let me sleep." I have often quoted that to show the inspiring effect of a great action on the mind of young men; how an achievement by one will suggest and stimulate a like achievement by others. The Persian fleet was almost entirely destroyed.\par Now, under Artexerxes Mnemon occurred a great battle east of the Euphrates River, at Cunaxa, against his brother Cyrus \emdash Cyrus the younger. Cyrus rebelled against his brother, Artaxerxes Mnemon. He wanted to be king of Persia, and having found out how the Greeks could fight, he hired 11,000 Gr&eeks for his army. In this great battle east of the Euphrates River, in the first charge, Cyrus was killed and all of his army defeated except the 11,000 Greeks. They swept away everybody that stood in front of them, but when the fight was over, there stood 10,000 Greeks with half a million men around them, but they would not surrender. They were asked to parley, and their generals, under a flag of truce, went to confer with the Persians and the Persians killed them. And that body of Greeks, now without officers, elected new officers, and the most masterly retreat in any history is the retreat of that body of 10,000 Greeks. We find the history of it in Xenophon\rquote s Anabasis. That column of Greeks on their march from the Euphrates to the Black Sea, going over an entirely new country, and without ever breaking ranks or being whipped in a fight, they\bullet got safely back home. It was a great enterprise. The effect of that battle was far greater than all the others I have mentioned. It left the impres'sion on the Greek mind that the Persians were very vulnerable, and that the Greeks could whip them under any fair circumstances, and suggested the unity of\bullet the Greek states with the view to the destruction of the Persian Empire.\par Period the Second: The conquest of Alexander the Great from 336 B.C. to 323 B.C. This is a very short time. Phillip II, king of Macedonia, united the petty Greek states into one government with himself as the commander-in-chief, and made preparations to invade Persia, but was assassinated by an enemy in 336 B.C. His nineteen-year-old boy, Alexander, succeeded him, and he devoted about a year to continuing the preparations of his father, and that same year the last Persian king came to the throne, Darius III Codomannus. Here is a world-ruling empire; there is a nineteen-year-old boy. In the spring of 334 B. C., Alexander crossed the Hellespont. Soon after crossing the Hellespont he met the Persian army at the river Granicus. Indeed, he had to ford the river to get to t(hem. But his men, when he plunged into the stream himself, forded the river and utterly routed the much larger Persian army on the other side. That was the spring of 334 B. C. He devoted a little over a year to conquering Asia Minor, and as he moved eastward he safeguarded the seaports on the Mediterranean. In 333 B., C., that is, the next year after he started, he met the great army of Darius in a pass in the mountains between Cilicia and Syria, at Issus. It was a pass between the mountains; the mountains went up on one side and the sea was on the other. Alexander, with an equal front, cared nothing how many deep the Persians were packed. The Persian army was almost annihilated, and the mother, wife, daughter, and camp equip-age of Darius were captured.\par Instead of going right on to Babylon, he determined to make all the Mediterranean coast safe, so he turned aside to conquer the city of Tyre, and all the coast cities to Gaza. Then he turned to Jerusalem and received the submission of that city, whic)h I will tell more about directly. Then he went to Egypt and conquered it, and built a city after his own name at the mouth of the Nile, and called it Alexander, and it has been a great city from that date to this.\par Then, to give the next date, in 331 B.C., he crossed the Euphrates River, and gave the final blow to the power of the Persians in the great battle of Arbela. That is a little east of where ancient Nineveh stood, and in that great battle the Persian power was ground to fine dust. Darius fled, but was soon assassinated. Alexander then turned south, and in 330 B. C. he made his triumphal entrance into Babylon. But that did not satisfy him. He marched out still into the Far East, conquering and exploring, and building cities in Afghanistan and Bokhara, crossed the great river, Indus, and conquered the Punjab section of India, and would have gone on to the other ocean but his old veterans said they did not want to go any further. So he turned around, and in 324 B. C. he re-entered Babylon to ma*ke it the capital of his empire\emdash and the next year he died from taking too big a drink of ardent spirits. There was an immense cup called Hercules, and because somebody said that no man could drink all that was in that vessel at one time, he, believing himself a demigod, drank it all. He never recovered. That was in 323 B.C. When he died he was just thirty-two years old, and no man known to history had such a career\emdash no Caesar, no Hannibal, no Bonaparte\emdash a boy conquered the world in about six years, including much of the country that England now holds in India.\par I have given a brief account of his history, and now we come to the important part about him\emdash his touch with the Jews living in Jerusalem during the inter-biblical period. I will follow the account here given by Josephus. While Alexander was besieging Tyre he wrote a letter to the high priest and governor at Jerusalem, demanding that he send auxiliary troops and supplies. Jaddua replied, "I have taken the oath of alleg+iance to Darius. I cannot do it." Alexander said nothing, but kept it in his mind. The Samaritans sent the supplies. As soon as he had conquered Gaza he determined to look in on that Jerusalem that would refuse him. When Jaddua heard that Alexander was approaching, he formed a great procession of the priesthood and himself in full regalia, according to the Aaronic custom, marching at the head of it and holding the sacred Scriptures, without a sword or spear, coming simply with the Word of God.\par The conquer, of the world and the high priest met. Alexander\rquote s generals expected him to order them all to instant execution. Instead he leaped down from his horse, approached and saluted the high priest with great respect, walked with him back into the city, and paid for the sacrifices to be offered according to the Jewish law, and then turned to the high priest and said, "Ask me what you. will."\par The high priest said, "Our people plant no crops the seventh\par year; exempt us from tribute on the sa,bbatic year."\par He said, "Granted."\par "Our people want to enjoy our own religion in our own way."\par "Granted."\par "Our brethren of the dispersion in Babylon and Media, where you are going, want to enjoy their religion in their own\par way."\par "Granted."\par "Can we enter your army on a footing of equality?"\par "Granted, and I will transport a number of you to Egypt where I am going, and when I build a city there I will give you a separate section of the city to be known as the Jewish quarter."\par [Subsequent histories of certain cities tell us of the Jewish\par quarter. Tacitus, Paul, and the Roman poets tell us about it.1\par "In your own quarter of the city you may elect your own\par magistrates, and have your religion as you wish it."\par Parmenio, the leading general of Alexander, was astounded, and in explanation Alexander said: \par "While I was in Macedon, before I started on this expedition, and was studying in my mind about this movement, one night I slept, and in my drea-m I saw this very man in this very dress he is wearing now, come to me and say, \lquote Hesitate not; cross the Hellespont; the Persians will fall before you.\rquote "\par And it is a remarkable fact that in Babylon and in every part of the country that he swayed he gave many privileges tothe Jews.\par Daniel represents the transition of empire from Persian to Grecian as follows: In \cf1\ul Dan_2:32\cf0\ulnone he makes the body and thighs of brass of that luminous image seen by Nebuchadnezzar represent Greece, and in 7:6 the vision of the leopard with four wings, he makes Greece. And in 8:5 (we find all Grecian history for centuries forecast in Daniel), he says,\par And as I was considering, behold a he-goat came from the west over the face of the whole earth and touched not the ground: and the goat had a notable horn between his eyes. And he came to the ram that had the two horns, which I saw standing before the river, and ran upon him in the fury of his power. And I saw him come close unto the ram a.nd he was moved with anger against him, and break his two hems; and there was no power in the ram to stand before him; but be cast him down to the ground, and trampled upon him; and there was none that could deliver the ram out of his hand.\par \par We will come to the four horns later, but just now I give the\par account that relates to the breaking of the one horn, the notable\par horn:\par And the he-goat magnified himself exceedingly, and when he was strong the great horn was broken, and instead of it there came up four notable horns toward the four winds of heaven.\par \par QUESTIONS\par 1. How long lasted the Medo-Persian Empire established by Cyrus?\par 2. From the close of the Old Testament how long was Judah under the Persian rule?\par 3. What the first great event of the inter-biblical period under Persian Nile, and how was it brought about?\par 4. When and by whom was this temple destroyed, and did the destruction of the temple end the feud?\par 5. What and when the second great event in the inter-biblical period under Persian rule, how was it brought about, what its far-reaching developments, and what its evil?\par 6. What the third great event of the inter-biblical period, and how and when brought about?\par 7. What the first period of the struggle between the Greeks and the Persians and who the Persian kings most concerned?\par 8. What the author's experience in learning Greek history?\par 9. What the relative sizes of the Grecian and Persian armies in this struggle, and what the great battles of the invasion of Xerxes?\par 10. Describe the battle of Cunaxa and the results.\par 11. What the second period of the struggle between the Greeks and the Persians?\par 12. Describe the various conquests of Alexander the Great, and his death.\par 13. What the relation between Alexander and the Jews, how illustrated and what Alexander\rquote s own explanation of it?\par 14. how does Daniel represent the transition of empires from the Persians to the Grecians\par \par \par }  A{\rtf1\ansi\ansicpg1252\deff0\deflang1033\deflangfe1033{\fonttbl{\f0\fswiss\fprq2\fcharset0 Arial;}} {\colortbl ;\red0\green128\blue0;} {\*\generator Riched20 5.40.11.2210;}\viewkind4\uc1\pard\sb120\qj\b\f0\fs22 Lesson # 2\par \b0\par \pard\sb120\qc\b THE PERSIAN PERIOD, INCLUDING THE CONFLICT BETWEEN THE GREEKS AND THE PERSIANS\par \pard\sb120\qj\b0 The Medo-Persian Empire established by Cyrus lasted about 200 years\emdash to be exact, 207 years. But from the close of the Old Testament Judah was under the Persian rule about 100 years.\par The first great event of the inter-biblical period under Medo-Persian rule \lquote was the building of the Samaritan temple on Mount Gerizim, and the establishment of a rival Jehovah worship. It was brought about in this wise: The last chapter of Nehemiah says this (pretty vigorous language, too,):\par In these 1on 323 B.C. We found Alexander to be the greatest of all military conquerors in the annals of time, whose greatness was largely attributable to one teacher, Aristotle, who had charge of his education from thirteen to sixteen years of age, and to one inspiring book, the greatest of all epics, Homer\rquote s Iliad, which he carried with him in all his wars and explorations, putting it under his camp pillow every night.\par What a lesson that is! The power of a great teacher and the power of a great book, as reproduced in a student\rquote s life!\par Our concern with this marvelous ancient history is limited to a single inquiry: How did the Greek conquest of the world affect the kingdom of God? We have considered so much of that inquiry as related to Alexander himself and the Jews. We are now to continue the inquiry on the relation of the Jews and Alexander\rquote s successors. Here we are stopped from limiting our investigation to the comparatively few Jews occupying the small territory around Jerusalem, 2for that territory at this time, and ever since their return from exile, was very small. Later on in this inter-biblical period, we will see an expansion of territory equal to David\rquote s kingdom.\par The first thought of the lesson is that with Alexander there came into crystallized use a new term that will largely affect Jewish history for hundreds of years. In fact, it is very prominent during the New Testament period. This term was "Hellenism," or "Hellenistic," which was applied to the Jews of the dispersion, in contrast with the Hebrews living in the Holy Land. The Hellenistic were Grecianized in foreign lands, many of them so Grecianized that they could not even speak, either the Hebrew or the Aramaic language. The modification was not one of language only; the Greek cult influenced them in many ways. We find in Acts 6 and many places elsewhere, that it was a problem in the apostolic church. Some of the New Testament books are addressed exclusively to the Hellenists: James wrote to the twelve t3ribes of the dispersion in Asia Minor, and the letter to the Hebrews was to the same class. All the other letters of Paul concerned the Hellenists more than the Hebrews of Judea. The Jews of the dispersion constituted the overwhelming majority of the Jewish race. There had been many forced deportations of Jews by conquerors into foreign lands, few of whom ever returned to live in Palestine. Many colonies of Jews, by their own consent, were planted in various parts of the world by the rulers. Then their own restless migrations for the purposes of trade and commerce carried them everywhere. They all, however, regarded Jerusalem as their holy city, and their restored Temple as their center of unity. They paid their Temple tax, and thousands of them from every land went up to the great annual feasts.\par At the famous Pentecost, (Acts 2), they were present from every nation under heaven, as that record says\emdash Parthia, Proconsular Asia, Phrygia, Pamphylia, Egypt, Cyrene, Rome, Crete and Arabia. The Greek4 influence, mark you, was not limited to the Jews of the dispersion. The small Judea about Jerusalem was circled by Greek cities, multiplying points of contact with the home Jews. In Alexander\rquote s time these environing Greek cities were Gaza, Joppa, Ashkelon, Ashdod, Samaria, Hyppus; east of the Jordan, Scythopolis and Gadara in Galilee; Alexandria and others in Egypt; and under Ptolemy Philadelphus, Ptolemais on the coast was added, and the famous Rabbah of the Ammonites became the Greek Philadelphia.\par These Greek cities kept multiplying in the passing years, until Jerusalem was ring-fired by them, and there was no resisting the Greek culture. So powerful was it that it conquered Rome after Rome had conquered the Grecian Empire. Generally, under the Greek rule, as it had been generally under the Persian rule, the Jews enjoyed great privileges, both at home and abroad, under Alexander himself, under Ptolemies, and for a part of the time under the Seleucids at Antioch. Code-Syria, that is, from Le5banon to Egypt, was a Greek province, of which Judea was a part. We now come to\par \par \b THE DIVISION OF ALEXANDER\rquote S EMPIRE\par \b0 For many years after Alexander\rquote s death there were stormy times in settling the succession. The various provinces were under the most famous of the Greek generals, who battled with each other for the supremacy. When all of Alexander\rquote s children died the issue lay between Antigonus, the old general, on one side, and four other generals combined on the other side, namely: Ptolemy, Seleucus, Lysimachus, and Cassander. This issue was settled in the great battle of Ipsus, in Phrygia, 301 B. c. Antigonus was defeated and slain, and the four conquering generals divided the empire among themselves, that is, Lysimachus and Cassander getting the European part of the empire and the Bosporus, while Ptolemy retained Coele-Syria, which he had already held ever since the death of Alexander. This included Judea. The Ptolemies held Egypt for 300 years, succumbing to 6the Romans, 30 B. C. Seleucus got for his part all of Asia except Coele-Syria, and built for his capital the famous Antioch at the mouth of the Orontes. There the Seleucids reigned for 250 years, until they were broken up by the Romans, 80 B. c. This was the partition expressed in one verse by Daniel (8:8), where he says the one notable horn being broken off, thee arose four other horns.\par Now, because Judea lay directly between Egypt and Antioch, occupying the most strategically position between Asia and Africa-.--if not the most strategical position in the world\emdash it became a bone of contention between the Ptolemies and the Seleucids, and thus connecting those monarchies with the kingdom of God. The Ptolemies held Egypt and Coele-Syria, as I have already said, before the original partition, and held it until 198 B. c. They had already been holding it for twenty-two years before the partition, and that partition merely confirmed the position of the Ptolemies. The Ptolemies held Coele-Syria until7 198 B. c., which I will tell more particularly about a little later. Then Judea passed under the reign of the Seleucids at Antioch. That was brought about by a great battle near the head of the Jordan River, Paneas, in which the sixth Seleucid, Antiochus III, named the Great, overwhelmingly defeated the general of the fifth Ptolemy, surnamed Epiphanes, and attached Coele-Syria to his kingdom. From that date on the Seleucids held Coele-Syria and Judea until it was freed under the Maccabees\emdash the most heroic part of the Jewish history, which we will consider later.\par \par \b JUDEA UNDER THE PTOLEMIES\par \b0 We are now to consider Judea under the Ptolemies, from 323 B. C. to 1~ B. c. The plan of administration was partly according to the Greek method, and partly accommodated to Jewish home rile. The high priest, assisted by a council, which afterward became the Sanhedrin, was the local governor, who collected all the taxes due the Ptolemies and remitted them to Egypt. Ptolemy Lagus, surnamed Sot8er, or Savior, held Judea and Coele-Syria when Alexander died, 323 B. C., and was confirmed in it after the battle of Ipsus, 301 B. c., as he had already been holding it over twenty years. Five Ptolemies have to do with this section, and I will cite only one great event in the reign of each one.\par 1. The first event touching the Jews was an act of treachery and inhumanity on Ptolemy\rquote s part, which called forth the most sarcastic remarks from Josephus on the misfit of his name, Savior. According to Josephus, he came to Jerusalem on the Sabbath day under the pretense of offering sacrifice to Jehovah, and was received into the city. There installed, he disclosed the purpose of his expedition to be a slave hunt on a large scale. By unresisted violence there and elsewhere in Judea and in the whole of the province, he enslaved many thousands of the Jews, and transplanted them into Egypt.\par Josephus quoted a reproach from a Greek historian that so great a city should allow itself to be captured, whil9e so well fortified, on account of a silly superstition of nonresistance on the Sabbath day. The reproach was better justified on another occasion in the later times of the Maccabees, and still later when the Romans besieged Jerusalem. This injustice perpetrated by Ptolemy Soter occurred before the battle of Ipsus, while the war of the four generals against Antigonus was going on. After the partition following that battle, the rule of this first Ptolemy was, on the whole, favorable to the Jews, in both Egypt and Judea. There was no interference with their religion, and they enjoyed many special privileges in the city of Alexandria. The first Ptolemy reigned forty years, that is, from the death of Alexander, 323 B. C.\par 2. The second great event\emdash and I count it one of the most memorable in the annals of time\emdash (or rather a series of events) occurred in the reign of his successor, Ptolemy Philadelphus. The story as given by Josephus is somewhat too marvelous, though he publishes the original d:ocuments of correspondence passing between Ptolemy and the high priest at Jerusalem. This great event was the translation of the Hebrew Scriptures into Greek\emdash that famous version known to all subsequent ages as the Septuagint. This was an event of worldwide importance. Greek had become the vernacular of the world. No other language has ever equaled it in expressing delicate shades of thought. The world had now the Hebrew Bible, the Greek Bible, and the Samaritan Bible. In later times there were other Greek versions, but the Septuagint has easily held first. place among the versions in subsequent ages. Christ and the apostles quoted the Greek text oftener than the Hebrew. The name is derived from the number of the translators, seventy (or strictly, 72). This version is an expression of the relation between Hel1enism and Hebraism.\par The history of the version is on this wise: The Greeks the world over were noted for literature, arts, philosophy, rhetoric, oratory, and architecture. And this Ptolemy; Philadelphus had gathered at Alexandria the world\rquote s greatest library and museum. Alexandria became the world\rquote s greatest city of learning. It was proposed to place in this famous library the Greek version of the Hebrew sacred books. But as the Jews jealously guarded the manuscripts of their sacred Scriptures, an expedient to gain their confidence was suggested, to wit: That Ptolemy, out of his own revenues, redeem from bondage, not only the great multitude of Jews enslaved by his father, Ptolemy Soter, but all Jewish slaves in Egypt, whether brought into bondage before or since that time, including their children, to the number of more than 100,000. He paid cash to the owners of the slaves and redeemed all of them. What a contrast with the Pharaoh ruling Egypt in Moses\rquote time!\par Second, that he donate many precious utensils and priceless jewels for the Temple furniture. Third, that he make a large cash contribution for the purchase of sacrifices at Jerusalem. Fourth, that he send an< honorable embassy announcing his generosities, and carrying a written petition from the king addressed to the high priest, and all the translators to be his honored guests in Alexandria while they were translating, and then to be dismissed with great honors and precious gifts to each of the scholars.\par \par It is evident from the records that\rquote only a version of the Pentateuch was originally contemplated, but once undertaken it finally included all the sacred books, and other Jewish literature besides. The translation began 250 B. C., and all the Pentateuch was translated in a few days, but it was not completed in all its parts until seventy-five or 100 years later. The latter part is very much inferior to the first work done, and it, moreover, included Jewish literature never considered by the Jews as a part of their sacred books. The Ptolemies were after books for their library, whether profane or sacred. Josephus makes a very clear distinction between the sacred Jewish books and other Jewis=h literature.\par If only half the details given by Josephus be true\emdash if we allow much for exaggeration\emdash there is nothing in human history to compare with it. The story of Jerome\rquote s Vulgate and King James Version are tame beside it. Ptolemy Philadelphus stands immortalized as a manumitter of slaves, and as a promoter of learning, and is entitled to more enduring fame than any Greek whatsoever.\par But this great enterprise did not work altogether for good, because it was through the Septuagint, followed by the Vulgate, that Romanists got their apocryphal additions to the Old Testament, of which I gave an account in a preceding chapter, and it was from the Septuagint that the Greek Catholic Church got the same apocryphal additions. The Reformation restored the sanctity of the Hebrew Scriptures as the Jews themselves held it. Yet to the Greeks are we indebted for that beginning of translation which today gives to every nation our Bible in its own tongue. The story of the versions is one >of the most thrilling in the annals of time.\par One of the most pleasing parts of the story of Josephus is the account of the impression made on the mind of the great king by his reading of the Pentateuch in Greek. He was profoundly stirred by the sublime and divine majesty of that holy law. How incomparably superior to his Homer, Xenophon, Herodotus, Thucydides, Demosthenes, Socrates, Plato, Zeno, Aristotle, and Epicurus. So ever to great and dispassionate minds do God\rquote s holy words appear. If Socrates, without gospel light, was a seeker after God, according to \cf1\ul Act_17:26-27\cf0\ulnone , surely Ptolemy Philadelphus, who walked in the light when he saw it, was nigh the kingdom of God, and we may at least indulge the hope that through God\rquote s grace in Christ, both of these illustrious heathen may appear in the heavenly kingdom.\par 3. The third great event, or series of events, of Jewish history under the rule of Egypt occurred in the reign of the third Ptolemy, surnamed Euergetes, 247? B. C. to 222 B. C. The Jewish high priest, Onias II, as Josephus says, was a man of "very little soul," obstinate as a mule, and a contemptible miser who flatly refused to send any tribute to Ptolemy. In vain Ptolemy threatened; in vain the people protested that they would lose their nation and their holy city. This bull-headed priest said, "I don\rquote t care; let it bring ruin." He was not going to pay out any money to Ptolemy\emdash and it was not his money, either. This brought on a crisis in Jewish affairs. His nephew, Joseph, a son of Tobias, was allowed to save the situation by an expedient that was a bad precedent, and entailed many disasters. This young Joseph went to Egypt, gained the favor of the king, and modestly had himself appointed assessor and collector of the king\rquote s revenue in the whole province of Coele-Syria, which included Judea, at a high fixed rental. Backed by an adequate corps of Egyptian troops he returned, and by violent and oppressive methods farmed the revenue for twe@nty-two years. He would go to a place and select the names of the wealthiest citizens and confiscate their property until he got revenue from that place. In this way he combined in himself absolute power, both civil and ecclesiastical. Ptolemy got his revenue all right from these abundant confiscations, and Joseph in the meantime feathered well his own nest.\par 4. The fourth notable event under the Ptolemies was the alienation of the Jews from the Egyptian rule. There had been a smouldering fire against Egypt on account of the methods of Joseph, the son of Tobiah, in collecting revenue. Such methods will always bring revolt, if not revolution, and this prepared the way in the hearts of many Jews for swapping masters. An opportunity was presented in the bitter war being waged between the sixth Seleucid, Antiochus III, surnamed the Great, who reigned 223 B. c. to 187 B. c. and the Ptolemies. In the great battle between them, fought at Raphia, near Gaza, 217 B. c., Antiochus was defeated. Ptolemy, resentinAg the favors shown by some of the Jews to Antiochus, now thoroughly alienated the whole Jewish nation by two acts:\par 1. He went up to Jerusalem and outraged their religious feelings by thrusting himself into the most holy place of the Temple, from which he fled, as Josephus says, in superstitious terror as if he had seen some awful apparition.\par 2. On his return to Egypt he aggravated the general Jewish resentment by cruelty and oppression of the Jews there\emdash quite an unusual thing for a Ptolemy to do. That is, all the ground gained in the Jewish favor under Ptolemy Philadelphus was now lost.\par 5. The fifth and last series of events of the period of this section was the damage done the Jews by Scopas, the general of the fifth Ptolemy, surnamed Epiphanes. With fire and sword and confiscation he swept the land. But in the decisive battle of Paneas, near the head of the Jordan, 198 B. C., Antiochus overwhelmingly defeated Scopas, and marched to Jerusalem, received him with open arms. And so JudBea was lost to Egypt and passed under the rule of the Seleucids at Antioch.\par \par QUESTIONS\par \par 1. What teacher and what book most shaped the character of Alexander the Great?\par 2. What concern have we with all this ancient Greek history?\par 3. What the extent of Judea at this time?\par 4. Where the overwhelming majority of the Jews?\par 5 What new tam came in with Alexander, and what the explanation of it.\par 6. Give some New Testament traces of it.\par 7. What cause had brought about the dispersion?\par 8. What their relation to Jerusalem?\par 9. Explain ho, Judea itself was somewhat Hellenized.\par 10. What the extent of the province of Coele-Syria?\par 11. Under what Greek general was it when Alexander died, and how long did his successors hold it?\par 12. Tell about the division of Alexander\rquote s Empire, the battle that decided it, and when and where fought.\par 13. How does Daniel in one verse foretell this partition?\par 14. Name the four Greek generals and the paCrt of the empire each received.\par 15. With which two only are we concerned, and why?\par 16. How long did the Ptolemies hold Egypt, and to whom did its control pass?\par 17. How long did the Seleucids hold Antioch, and to whom did its control pass?\par 18. What the name of the first Ptolemy, and how long did he reign?\par 19. What great event of his reign touched Judea, and was it before or after the battle of Ipsus?\par 20. What unjust reproach was cast upon the Jews and Jerusalem by a Greek historian concerning this event?\par 21. What the second great event under the Ptolemies, and what the remarkable story as told by Josephus?\par 22. When did this work of translation commence, to what extent was it originally limited, and bow enlarged, and when completed?\par 23. What the effect on Ptolemy\rquote s mind in reading the Pentateuch in Greek?\par 24. What place in history do these events give Ptolemy?\par 25. What the importance of this version?\par 26. Why were apocryphal books included?\par 27. What the subsequent evil of this inclusion?\par 28. What third great event under the Ptolemies, and what its evil consequences?\par 29. What notable event under the fourth Ptolemy, and how brought about?\par 30. What the events under the fifth Ptolemy, and where and when was the decisive battle fought which transferred Judea to the rule of the\par Seleucids?\par QUESTIONS\par 1. Tell the stay of the fate of the great library at Alexandria.\par 2. Cite some corrupt doctrines taught in the apocryphal books, and yet fostered by Romanists.\par 3. How does Josephus distinguish between the sacred books and other Jewish literature? Quote the passage.\par 4. How does Josephus make out the twenty-two sacred books so as to include the whole Old Testament, and how do other Jews make them twenty-four?\par 5. What other translations of the Old Testament into Greek besides the Septuagint?\par 6. Origen bad in parallel column six texts called the Hexapla: What were the six texts?\par \par \par } YYO{\rtf1\ansi\ansicpg1252\deff0\deflang1033\deflangfe1033{\fonttbl{\f0\fswiss\fprq2\fcharset0 Arial;}} {\colortbl ;\red0\green128\blue0;} {\*\generator Riched20 5.40.11.2210;}\viewkind4\uc1\pard\sb120\qj\b\f0\fs22 Lesson # 3\par \pard\sb120\qc THE JEWS UNDER GREEK RULE, FROM THE DEATH OF ALEXANDER THE GREAT TO THE TIME JUDEA PASSED FROM THE RULE OF THE PTOLEMIES OF EGYPT TO THE RULE OF THE SELEUCIDS AT ANTIOCH\par 368 B. C. to 198 B. C.\par \pard\sb120\qj\b0 This chapter covers a period of 125 years. We have briefly considered in the preceding chapter, first, the struggle between the petty Greek states and the Persians, until the consolidation of the Greek power under Phillip II, king of Macedonia, who was assassinated 336 B.C.; and second, the consummation of that struggle at the battle of Arbela, the overthrow of the Persian Empire, and the conquest of the world by Alexander the Great, who died at Babyl0Fadelphus. Third, the stupidity and greed of the high priest, Onias II, resulting in the farming of the revenue of Coele-Syria committed to Joseph, son of Tobias, under Ptolemy III, surnamed Euergetes. Fourth, the alienation of the Jews from Egyptian rule, caused by Ptolemy IV, surnamed Philopater, after his victory at Raphia over Antiochus III of Antioch, surnamed the Great. Fifth (and in my discussion before I did not sufficiently touch this), the great damage to the Jews done by Scopas, the general of Ptolemy V, surnamed Epiphanes, terminating with the defeat of Scopas at the battle of Paneas.\par We are now to consider the fortunes of the Jews under Antiochus the Great, and his son Seleucus IV. Throughout the wars of the Ptolemies with the Seleucids for the province of Coele-Syria, including Judea, the Jews were ground to powder as between the upper and nether millstones. In such a brief discussion of this period our trouble has been to condense from such vast historical material, which enlarges as weG go on. We have been compelled to touch lightly the Greek historians, and from this point are embarrassed with the riches of material in the contemporaneous Roman historians\emdash Livy, Tacitus, and others, to say nothing of great modern histories\emdash Rollin, Rawlinson, and Brace, and Mommsen\rquote s great History of Rome, probably one of the greatest contributions to history of modern times. The matter has been complicated by treaties between the two powers, based on intermarriages. The most notable of these, so far, was the marriage of Antiochus II to Bernice, the daughter of Ptolemy Philadelphus, and later to be followed by a marriage between Cleopatra, daughter of Antiochus the Great, and Ptolemy V, surnamed Epiphanes. These political marriages make a great deal of trouble in history.\par As I have said before, the prophecies of Daniel constitute the clearest guide to this period. If we want to understand the war between the Seleucids and the Ptolemies, we will find it in the interpretation of tHhe Daniel 11, connecting \cf1\ul Dan_8:9-26\cf0\ulnone with 11:2-20, as both of these refer to Antiochus Epiphanes. A commentary on Daniel from the Cambridge Bible, by Driver, a pronounced radical critic, has as much poison in much of the book as there ~ meat in an egg. But his exposition of Daniel 11 and that section of chapter 8 that touches this period is very fine, very scholarly, and very clear. Josephus is hard to follow because he makes such a mix-up of his historical matter, particularly in his dates. Sometimes he gives a date a hundred years wrong, accept where he follows the Maccabees. When he sticks to Maccabees be is generally right.\par \b THE JEWS UNDER THE SELEUCIDS\b0\par We now consider the fortunes of the Jews under Antiochus the Great. After the battle of Paneas and his welcome into Jerusalem, after his annexation of the province of Coele-Syria, he was as generous to the Jews as Ptolemy Philadelphus. When he got to Jeri~a1em and received the joyful welcome in that city, after he had Idefeated and captured the generals of the Ptolemies, he vas so impressed with their devotion to him and the valuable service they had rendered, that he gave a signal proof of his gratitude. I do not know just where we may find a more signal testimony of gratitude, manifested in the letters he wrote to the generals of his empire everywhere with reference to the Jews.\par First, he set apart a large pension for Temple sacrifice. He used his treasury to furnish them food and supplies for a year, and seeds for planting. Now, to me that is a very pleasant bit of history to read. True, a selfish motive prompted him. He wanted these faithful Jews as a buffer between him and dangerous enemies. But even then this heathen did it more gracefully than the proscriptive Episcopalians of Virginia reluctantly endured the settlement of the Scotch-Irish Presbyterians in the Shenandoah Valley as a buffer against the hostile Indian tribes.\par I had not space in the preceding chapter to tell of the movements of Antiochus aJfter his defeat at Raphia. He had turned his mind to the East, waging successful warfare and enriching himself with spoils until he had re-established boundaries of Alexander\rquote s old empire. Hence, with largely increased resources he returned to defeat the Ptolemies at Paneas and to annex Coele-Syria. Now his thought is toward the West. He wants to break or block the rising Roman Empire, and aspires to restore the western boundary of Alexander\rquote s Empire, which had been pushed east by the Romans. He intends also to absorb Egypt, but just now wants peace with the Ptolemies, that he may concentrate against Rome.\par To this end he makes alliance with Philip of Macedon and gives his daughter in marriage to Ptolemy, having two ends in view by this marriage\emdash to secure peace behind him while he wars with Rome, and through his daughter to gain a quasi title to Egypt when opportunity serves to enforce it. Daniel foretells that marriage in these words:\par And he shall set his face to come with tKhe strength of his whole kingdom, and with him equitable condition: and he shall perform them: and he shall give them the daughter of women to corrupt her [i. e., Egypt], but she shall not stand, neither be for him. After this shall he turn his face into the isles, and shall take many: but a prince shall cause the reproach offered by him to cease; yea, moreover, he shall cause his reproach to turn upon him.\emdash\cf1\ul Dan_11:17-18\cf0\ulnone .\par In the phrase of Daniel "to corrupt her," the pronoun "her" does not refer to his daughter, but to Egypt. The thought is to use his daughter to give him a hold on Egypt. But as Daniel foreshows, the marriage, while it brought temporary peace to the Jews, did not serve the purpose of Antiochus. Like a true wife, Cleopatra stood by her husband, and she bears a glorious name in Egyptian history. She determined that if she was to be married off-hand that way, to suit the political need of her father, she would make a true marriage of it. And she lived and died iLn Egypt, beloved by a]l the people. It is refreshing to come to the history of a woman of high mind and a high standard of morals. That marriage, he thought, would enable him to get possession of Egypt, and then, as he was going west, to get all the zest of the old empire, but he made a mistake. That marriage did not help him with the Romans, but it did help Ptolemy. As Daniel says: "Then shall he turn his face to the isles, ath shall take many." The islands here mean the islands of the Mediterranean Sea, along the coast of Asia Minor and Greece, following the track of all the conquerors. He did strike out west with a great army and captured all of Asia Minor. Re then crossed the Hellespont, over into Macedonia. Three times he touches the Romans. The last crushes him.\par At Lysimalacia the Roman legation met him in warning. He gruffly replied, putting a reproach on them: "You have no more right to inquire into what I do in Asia than I have to inquire what you do in Italy." The Romans never forgot a thinMg of that kind. Antiochus pursued his march, following the tracks of Xerxes the Great toward lower Greece. But in the pass of Thermopylae he had a battle with the Romans, and they whipped him. That is his second touch with them. He then fled back to Ephesus in proconsular Asia. The Romans, after the Punic wars, that is, after they had captured Carthage, were looking East, and they had already annexed the European part of Alexander\rquote s Empire, and when Antiochus came into Greece interfering with their eastward trend, they determined to carry the war into his own country. He had entered into an alliance with Philip V, king of Macedonia, to fight the Romans. The Romans easily disposed of Philip, and crossed the Hellespont, going after Antiochus. The third contact was when the two armies came together in Phrygia at Magnesia. The book of Maccabees gives a very exaggerated account of the numbers engaged and of the war elephants employed, i. e., if we may trust the more moderate estimates of the Greek histoNrian, Polybius. In this battle, 190 B.C., the Romans entirely broke the power of Antiochus the Great, exacting the following humiliating conditions of peace:\par 1. The cession of all Asia Minor west of the Taurus Mountains.\par 2. The surrender of his floats and war elephants.\par 3. A crushing war indemnity that emptied his treasury and whose annual payments kept it empty. This vast war indemnity was more crushing than that which Germany exacted of France after the war of 1870. This empty treasury brought on all the woes of succeeding Seleucids until the dynasty perished.\par 4. They required him to give up his children and other kindred as hostages. It became a proverb: "Antiochus the Great was a king." Or, as Virgil describes Troy: Ilium fuit. Mommsen comments: "Never, perhaps, did a great power fall so rapidly, so thoroughly, so ignominiously, as the kingdom of the Seleucidae under the Antiochus the Great.\par Daniel\rquote s prophecy concludes the story: "Then he shall turn his face toward the Ofortresses of his own land; but be shall stumble and fall, and shall not be found"\emdash fulfilled when he was attacked and slain by the inhabitants of Elymais whose temple of Bel he sought to rob of its treasures to meet the war Indemnity exacted by Rome. "He was not found," disappearing as completely as Enoch and Elijah, but it was not a translation upward. Kings have to have money, especially when they keep up armies, and it occurred to him that the best way to get the money was to rob the temples.\par In Mark Twain\rquote s Innocents Abroad is one of his quaint sayings: "When I passed over Italy and saw the poverty and squalor of the people, without clothes, without food and without money, and when I saw the wealth of the ages in the churches and in the cathedrals, it was a wonder to me that they never thought to rob the churches." While the Italians never thought of it, yet Antiochus the Great thought of it.\par There was a very rich temple over in the East, at Elymais. The temples were the banks Pof the country. They were the sanctuaries\emdash the one place one could keep money free from \lquote the robber. The temple of Diana at Ephesus had all the wealth of the East stored in it. Now, this temple was full of riches, and when the priest who had charge of the temple (a heathen priest) heard of the purpose for which Antiochus was coming, he let him and a few of his men enter the temple, then shut and barred the door, and killed them with rocks\emdash al1 of them.\par Well might Daniel say: "But he shall stumble and fall, and shall not be found." He left two sons, Seleucus, the rightful heir, and Antiochus IV, called Epiphanes. Seleucus succeeded his father. Daniel describes him: "Then shall stand up in his place one that shall cause an exactor to pass through the glory of the kingdom; but within few days he shall be destroyed, neither in anger nor in battle." That is his history; twelve years he reigned. And in order to meet these annual payments to Rome he had to become a tax collector. He sent Qinto CoeleSyria after taxes, and after gleaning all he could he still needed much money. In the meantime Judea was prosperous from the account of it in 2 Maccabees:\par Now when the holy city was inhabited with all peace, and the laws were kept very well, because of the godliness of Onias, the high priest, and his hatred of wickedness, it came to pass that even the kings themselves did honor the place, and magnify the temple with their best gifts: and insomuch that Seleucus, king of Asia, of his own revenue bare all the coats belonging to the service of the sacrifice. [The reference here is to the grant of Antiochus III before the Romans broke his power. But all the treasure cannot remain hidden when the impecunious son of Antiochus is exacting taxes.]\par But a certain Jew, Simon, of the tribe of Benjamin, who was made governor of the temple, fell out with the high priest about disorder in the city. And when he could not overcome Onias, he got hun to Apollonius, the son of Thraseas, who then was governRor of Coele-Syria and Phenice, and told him that the treasury at Jerusalem was full of infinite sums of money, so that the multitude of their riches which did not pertain to the account of the sacrifices was innumerable, and that it was possible to bring all into the king\rquote s hand. Now when Apollonius came to the king and had showed him of the money whereof he was told, the king chose out Heliodorus, his treasurer [we will have more to say about him later], and sent him with a commandment to bring the aforesaid money. So forthwith Heliodorus took his journey, under color of visiting the cities of Coele-Syria and Phenice, but indeed to fulfill the king\rquote s purpose. And when he was come to Jerusalem, and had been courteously received of the high priest of the city, he told him what intelligence was given of the money [what Simon had said about all that money in the temple] and declared wherefore he came, and asked if these things were so indeed. Then the high priest told him that there was such moSney laid up for the widows and the fatherless children: that some of it belonged to Hyrcanus, son of Tobias, a man of great dignity, and not as that wicked Simon has misinformed: the sum whereof was in all 400 talents of silver, and 200 of gold; and that it was altogether impossible that such wrong should be done unto them that had committed it to the holiness of the place, and to the majesty and inviolable sanctity of the temple, honored over all the world.\par Heliodorus said: "All the same I have to have it." The high priest fell into a trance in which his face was marked; all of the priests commenced praying, the women of the city ran out into the streets, the children and the women, in view of such sacrilege as was contemplated, and while the tears ran down the high priest\rquote s cheeks, he led this prayer: "Oh Lord God Almighty, intervene, and prevent this horrible sacrilege." Whereupon, as Heliodorus entered the temple he met two flaming angels, one of them on a horse, clothed with gold, that stTruck him with his hoof and knocked him down. The shock nearly took away his life. And lest Seleucus might misunderstand, the high priest then went into the temple and offered sacrifice unto heaven for the sin of Heliodorus, and asked God to forgive him and raise him up, and on the intercession of the high priest he was restored, and returned to report to Seleucus to this effect: "If you have any man in your kingdom against whom you have a grudge\emdash if you have a special enemy \emdash send him to get that money, for he will meet a doom from God when he seeks to violate that Holy Place."\par I cited what Daniel said about Seleucus. He died in twelve years by poison, and that brings us down to 175 B.C. When he died his brother, Antiochus Epiphanes, succeeded him.\par What a temptation it is to me when I come in touch with all this ancient Jewish history and so many wonderful things related concerning it, by Greek and Roman historians, both ancient and modern, to switch off from the main point! But I amU trying to limit the history to its contact with the Jews, and to do this I must condense two or three thousand pages of history to make one chapter.\par QUESTIONS\par 1. What the scope of this chapter?\par 2. Who are the ancient and modern historians of Rome covering this period?\par 3. What complicates the history of the Ptolemies and Seleucids?\par 4. What prophet forecasts all the wars between these two Greek kingdoms, and what the sections of his book giving them?\par 5. What commentary on this part of Daniel is commended, notwithstanding the author\rquote s objectionable radical criticism on other parts?\par 6. What great battle placed Judea under the Seleucide? When and where fought?\par 7. How did the Jews receive the new master?\par 8. How did Antiochus evince his gratitude?\par 9. Compare this heathen with Louis XIV of France and Philip II of Spain.\par 10. Compare the settlement of the 2,000 Jewish families with the attitude of Episcopal Virginia toward the settlement of the Scotch-Irish Presbyterians in the Shenandoah Valley.\par 11. What the motives prompting Antiochus to give in marriage his daughter Cleopatra to Ptolemy, and how did the marriage fail of its purpose?\par 12. Cite the three contacts of Antiochus with the Romans, and Mommsen\rquote s comment on the battle of Magnesia.\par 13. What terms did the Romans exact of Antiochus after the battle of Magnesia, what parallel in modern times, and their effect on the subsequent fortunes of the Seleucids?\par 14. To what expedient did Antiochus III and his successors resort for means to pay the Roman war indemnity?\par 15. Why were temples made to serve as banks of deposit?\par 16. Give Daniel\rquote s forecast of the fate of Antiochus Ill and a Jewish account of its fulfillment.\par 17. Give Daniel\rquote s forecast of Seleucus IV, successor of Antiochus \cf1\ul 3Jo_1:18\cf0\ulnone . Give substance of the story in 2 Maccabees of the treasure in the temple, how Seleucus heard of it, and his failure to get it.\par \par } BBre{\rtf1\ansi\ansicpg1252\deff0\deflang1033\deflangfe1033{\fonttbl{\f0\fswiss\fprq2\fcharset0 Arial;}} {\colortbl ;\red0\green128\blue0;} {\*\generator Riched20 5.40.11.2210;}\viewkind4\uc1\pard\sb120\qj\b\f0\fs22 Lesson # 4\par \pard\sb120\qc THE JEWS UNDER ANTIOCHUS III, SURNAMED THE GREAT, AND HIS SON SELEUCUS IV, SURNAMED PHILOPATER\par \pard\sb120\qj\b0 This period is only twenty-three years, that is, from the battle of Paneas, 198 B.C., to the beginning of the reign of Antiochus Epiphanes, 175 B.C. In the preceding chapter we considered the Jews under the Ptolemies of Egypt, a period of 125 years, 323 B.C. to 198 B.C. We limited our discussion to one notable event, only, touching the Jews under each of the five Ptolemies. First, the treacherous enslavement of many of the Jews by Ptolemy I, surnamed Soter. Second, the translation of the Scriptures into Greek, with the attendant generosities, under Ptolemy II, surnamed PhilEXof the Seleucid and the Ptolemies. There is certainly no historical verification of it in the life of Antiochus Epiphanes.\par My theory of interpreting \cf1\ul Dan_11:21\cf0\ulnone to the end of the chapter (12:2) is:\par First, like many other prophecies, there is in this part of Daniel reference to some things near at hand and some things far distant\emdash as when David\rquote s prophecy of Solomon\rquote s kingdom glides into the far remote Messiah\rquote s kingdom in P8alms 45 and 72.\par This blending of things near and remote arises from the perspective in prophecy. It may be illustrated by the appearance of a far distant mountain range. Far-off, it seems to be one mountain, but as we approach nearer, the one mountain becomes a range, and what seemed its high point is a succession of elevations, far apart if they are viewed laterally, but blended into one peak if they are in one line of vision from the observer\rquote s viewpoint\par Second, so here, seen from only one angle of prophetic visiYon, Antioch, the antichrist of his day, enemy of the Jews, is blended with a far more remote antichrist, an enemy of the Jews, who shall try to destroy them after their final restoration to their own land, and whose own destruction results in the salvation of all the Jewish nation, which we have presented in \cf1\ul Rev_19:11-21\cf0\ulnone , collated with \cf1\ul Isa_63:1-6\cf0\ulnone ; Ezekiel 36-37; \cf1\ul Zec_12:8\cf0\ulnone to 14:11. Now, I am showing how to study this chapter. First, study it in the light of the interpretation of that passage in Daniel.\par A certain part of the books of the Maccabees touches the reign of Antiochus Epiphanes, viz.: 1 Maccabees: 1-6; 2 Maccabees:4-9. There is nowhere a better statement of this discussion than in those chapters from the books of Maccabees. However, 1 Maccabees is much more trustworthy as history than 2 Maccabees, which was written much later.\par Certain parts of Josephus should be read also to understand the reign of Antiochus Epiphanes, viz: AntiZquity of the Jews, Book XII, chapters 5-9. But 1 Maccabees is more reliable as history than Josephus.\par We now take up the most notable matters in connection with the reign of Antiochus Epiphanes. First, we will consider the man himself. His father, Antiochus the Great, died leaving him as hostage in Rome, after the great battle of Magnesia. While in Rome, where he grew up, he became carried away with the Roman fashion of admiring the Greek cult. The second fact about the man himself is that he was not entitled to the throne. His older brother, Seleucus, indeed had died, but Seleucus had a son, Demetrius, a little fellow, also a hostage in Rome, and that boy was the rightful king of Antioch. Daniel tells how by flattery and treachery this Antiochus usurped the place of his young nephew.\par The next thing about him is to consider his character. Daniel says he was a "vile person." He is the little horn of Daniel 2. He had a very brilliant mind, but he was more impressed by the way things seemed than th[e way things were. He had no conscience about sacred things at all\emdash indeed, he defied himself. In the "Cambridge Bible" are photographic copies of some of the coins he issued, and on those coins were these inscriptions: Antiochus Basilanos ("king") Theos Epiphanes ("God manifest"), Nicephorus ("victory bearer"). The last is the title of Jupiter, "Victory bearer," and he had the artist who drew the plans for these coins to make his face on the coins resemble the face of Jupiter, as presented in his statues. It needed some change to make it look like that, but he did not mind it.\par So much for the man. We will now consider the events. At the close d his brother\rquote s reign, Onias III, the good high priest, had gone to Antioch to remove the impression about the temple treasury that had been made by Simon, and Onias is in Antioch when Antiochus Epiphanes comes to the throne. A brother of Onias, named Joshua, who had become an infidel Jew and changed his name to Jason, then went to see Antiochus, a\nd convinced him that he would make a good deal more money if he would depose Onias and make him, Jason, the high priest; that be was already Hellenized and believed in the Greek religion, and it would be a great help if Antiochus would make him high priest. So Antiochus kept Onias there until he died. He never saw his home any more, and this renegade Jew, Jason, was made high priest.\par I am glad to notice that a great while after that, a still greater renegade Jew, Menelaus, being sent to Antioch by Jason, persuaded Antiochus to depose Jason and make him (Menelaus) the high priest, and he would get a better bargain still. So one thief turns out another, and Menelaus was made high priest. & made no pretensions to the observances of the Jewish religion. Jason, to show how much he was Hellenized, erected in the holy city, a Greek gymnasium. In these athletic days, when t~ schools are all turning almost exclusively to athletics, and the glory of a school is its athletics, we may understand what a baleful ]influence that gymnasium would have in Jerusalem, for both Jason and Menelaus, who succeeded him, persuaded the Jews that the best thing to do would be to attend that Greek theater and let their Temple alone. No Sunday moving picture show in modern times so nearly breaks up worship as did that Greek theater in Jerusalem.\par The next event in connection with the reign of Antiochus was his purpose to bring Egypt into his realm. His satrap, Apollonius, informed him that two men in Egypt had charge of the little king, the nephew of Antiochus. Cleopatra, a sister of Antiochus, was sent over there to become the wife of one of the Ptolemies. I have already shown what a good woman she was. Now, her little son at this time was king of Egypt, but those who had charge of the boy after his mother died were renegades. This satrap persuaded Antiochus that if he would make a demonstration in Egypt, he could easily capture the whole country. Now in order to make everything clear behind him, he made his first visit to J^erusalem, where the renegade high priest received him with open arms, and made great promises about what he was going to do for the Jews. He then led his first expedition into Egypt and captured Pelusium, a port of Egypt, on one of the mouths of the Nile. The young king tried to flee, but his renegade tutor betrayed him to Antiochus, who caught him and pretended to act in his name. He subjugated nearly all Egypt, and issued some of those coins I told about and had himself crowned there.\par While he was over there, however, the report reached Jerusalem that he had been killed. Whereupon the superseded Jason, whom I told about, and who had fled over the Jordan, collected a thousand men, returned to Jerusalem and tried to depose Menelaus. Antiochus hears of it, and thinks it to be a revolt of the Jews against his authority. So he comes back by Jerusalem, murders thousands of its people in cold blood, enters the Temple, takes away the sacred vessels, and among them the famous golden candlesticks, and robs t_he Temple of its treasure, and Menelaus helps him in all of it. He then made a second expedition into Egypt, 169 B.C., and recaptured all of the country except Alexandria, which held out.\par He returns again, continuing all this time his oppression of the Jews, and makes a third expedition into Egypt. Cleopatra, that good woman I told about, had left two sons, and these two boys had fled to Rome and appealed for help. Rome sent an embassy to warn Antiochus to let the Egyptians alone.\par When Antiochus was within four miles of Alexandria the Roman embassy met him. The leader of it was Popilus. The Roman had nothing but his staff in his hand. He lifted his staff and said:\par "In the name of the Senate of Rome I command you to go back to your own country and let Egypt alone."\par Antiochus said: "I will call a council of my friends and take it into consideration.?\par The Roman stopped and drew a circle around him in the Band and said: "You will answer me before you get out of that circle, yes or no.`"\par Those Romans were stern fellows. Antiochus said: "Yes," and went home, but he went home mad.\par The Romans made him abandon all his conquests in Egypt and the Mediterranean islands. Being exceedingly mad, he sent his general, Apollonius, to Jerusalem with instructions to make all Ceole-Syria adopt the Greek religion and particularly required the Jews to abandon their religion.\par The general captured Jerusalem, tore down its walls, and erected a fortification that commanded the Temple. He erected a Greek altar to Jupiter right on top of Jehovah\rquote s brazen altar, and sacrificed a sow, the abominable flesh to a Jew, and took the broth and flung it all over the holy place, and had filth cast into the most holy place, and commanded every Jew that had a Bible to bring it to him, and he tore their holy books to pieces and burnt there fragments. He issued an order that no child should be circumcised, and when some of the women disobeye4 he had their babies killed and tied around their necks and tahen. murdered the women. He then made every one that professed to be a Jew come up and eat swine\rquote s flesh.\par There was one old Jew named Eleazer, so devout and venerable that even the Hellenizing Jews loved him. They told him they did not want to see him die, and to bring a piece of other meat with him and eat that so that it would seem that he had eaten the hog\rquote s meat. But he said, "No, this is no time for compromising; if I would even seem to eat the swine\rquote s flesh my name would be disgraced. I am an old man, and a few days more or less matters nothing to me. Kill me. I will not violate my law." And so they murdered him.\par A much more notable event we find in 2 Maccabees, concerning a pious widow and her seven boys. I lift my hat to them every time I think about them. This woman and her seven sons were commanded to violate the laws. She exhorted her boys to be faithful. They scalped the oldest one, and put coals of fire on his head, after taking the skin off, and then killed himb, his mother looking on. But she exhorted the other six to be faithful. They killed the second one by horrible torture, and she exhorted the other five to be faithful. And they killed the third, fourth, fifth, and sixth the same way. She .turned to her baby boy, her youngest, the pride and darling of her heart, and told him that his mother was expecting him to be true to his God and his religion, and they tortured him to death, and she kept on praising Jehovah until they put her to death.\par I read that when I was ten years old, and it struck, me as being one of the heroic things in history. It is to such events that a certain passage in Hebrews 11 refers. The old proverb is: "When you double the tale of the brick, then comes Moses." So now there arose in Judea an order called Asideans, pious people who preferred religion to everything else, and they entered into a solemn covenant to stand by the faith. When they were attacked on Saturday, their Sabbath, because they would not fight on the holy day, thecy submitted to death without defense; 1,000 were murdered at one time, as on another occasion their priests had been done in the Temple\dn5 1 \up0 who kept on offering incense and worshipping God until they were slain at the altar.\par There was a man named Asmon, from whom we get the name Asmoneans. A descendant of Asmon, an old Jew, a perfect giant, named Mattathias, had five sons, vigorous men, named John, Simon, Judah, Eleazer, and Jonathan, and the history of the old man and his five sons is more memorable than the history of the woman and her five sons. He determined that ho would not be passive if they attacked him on the Sabbath, but that he would fight, and that he would not consent to the destruction of the Jewish religion. When the deputies of Antiochus came to Samaria with the demand to adopt the Greek religion, they submitted at once, and dedicated their temple to Jupiter and joined Antiochus in fighting the Jews, as usual. Finally a deputy reached the little village where Mattathias, lived,d and commanded him to obey the law. He said, "I they God\rquote s law." They then called up another Jew who offered to obey the law, and when he started to do it Mattathias killed him, and then killed the deputy, and tore down the heathern altar. He and his sons went all over the country tearing down the heathen altars.\par The old man, seeing he was about to die, appointed his son Judas to have charge of the army\emdash Judas, surnamed Maccabeus. "Maccabeus" means hammerer; Judas the Hammerer. Edward II 1 England, was called "the hammerer of the Scots," and ii Westminster Abbey there is the inscription:\par "Edward, Hammerer of the Scots." In Jane Porter\rquote s Scottish Chiefs is given the history of William Wallace redeeming Scotland from the bondage to which Edward the Hammerer had subjected it. I used to read it and cry. No hero of history comes nearer king like William Wallace than Judas the Hammerer. His ilk, even as told by his enemies, and particularly the account by the Jewish historians, surepasses anything in history, showing the heroic force of a man fighting for his religion and hi country.\par I remember once, when I was a schoolboy, I had to recite Fitz-Green Halleck\rquote s poem, "Marco Boyario"\emdash Greeks fighting Turks (just as they are doing now); that part of it where the Turk awoke to hear his sentry shriek: "To arms! They come! The Greek! The Greek!" when he awoke to hear Bouaris cry:\par "Strike till the last armed foe expires!\par "Strike for your altars and your fires!\par "God and your native land," may be given an original turn by applying it to Judas Maccabeus. The reader should cover the whole period, and even its approaches, by giving some account in order of the following battles:\par 1. Marathon, Salamis, Thermopylae, Plataea, Cunaxa.\par 2. Granicus, Issus, Arbela.\par 3. Ipsus, Raphia, Paneas, Magnesia.\par 4. Beth-horon, Emmaus, Beth-zur, Beth-Zeeharias, Capharsalama, Adasa, Eleasa.\par 5. Pharsalia, Philippi, Actium.\par These five series of battles givfe an outline of the period. The fourth series names not all but the most of the great battles fought by Judas Maccabeus. None of these, however, comes within three of his greatest campaigns, to wit, the redemption of Galilee, the conquests east of the Jordan, and the war against Edom.\par Judas then brought Esau back to Jacob. He conquered Edom that had helped always in oppressing Judah, and from that time on Esau and Jacob were together. He and his brothers Crossed the Jordan and drove the armies of Antiochus out of that country; they redeemed Galilee, and brought back to Jerusalem the persecuted Jews that were there. Antiochus, in the meantime, had left a general to take charge of his army and continue the war against the Jews, while he went on a temple-robbing expedition, like his father before him, and the same temple at Elymais. When he got there the gates were shut against him and he could not rob that temple. While there he heard the account of the overthrow of his army by Judas Maccabeus.\par I gwill close this chapter by giving an account of Antiochus\rquote death, from 1 Maccabees, in the one hundred and forty-ninth year (not of his age, but of the Greek Supremacy):\par Now, when the king heard these words [about the defeat of his armies by Judas] he was astonished and sore moved; whereupon he laid him down upon his bed, and fell sick for grief, because it had not befallen him as he looked for. And there he continued many days: for his grief was ever more and more, and he made account that he should die. Wherefore, he called for all his friends and said unto them: "The sleep is gone from mine eyes, and my heart faileth for very care. And I thought with myself into what tribulations am I come, and how great a flood of misery it is, wherein now I am! for I was bountiful and beloved in my power. But now I remember the evils that I did at Jerusalem, and that I took all the vessels of gold and silver that were therein, and sent to destroy the inhabitants of Judea without cause. I perceive, therefohre, that these troubles have come upon me, and behold I perish through great grief in a strange land." Then called he for Philip, one of his friends, whom he made ruler over all his realm, and gave him the crown, and his robe, and his signet, to the end he should bring up his son Antiochus, and nourish him up for the kingdom.\par \par The account of his death in 2 Maccabees, which is not as good history as 1 Maccabees, is varied from the account in the first book and less historical.\par QUESTIONS\par 1. What the subject and period of this chapter?\par 2. What sections of Daniel refer to this man?\par 3. Why not apply \cf1\ul Dan_11:20\cf0\ulnone to 12:1 to the war of the Seleucids and Ptolemies?\par 4. What parts of the books of the Maccabees refer to Antiochus Epiphanes?\par 5. What parts of Josephus?\par 6. How was Antiochus a usurper?\par 7. Give his character.\par 8. How does his blasphemy appear on the coins issued by him?\par 9. Give in order of time, the first relations of Antiochus ito the Jews as presented in the history of three high priests, Onias, Jason, and Menelaus.\par 10. What the effect on Jewish temple worship of Jason\rquote s Greek gymnasium? Illustrate by events of our day.\par 11. How and through whom was Antiochus persuaded to add Egyot)t to his realm?\par 12. Tell of his first visit to Jerusalem and his promises.\par 13. What occurred at Jerusalem while he was in Egypt to inflame his mind against that city, and what the result of his second visit on his return from Egypt?\par 14. Give the dramatic account of his retirement from Egypt on the third invasion.\par 15. In his fury against Jerusalem what fearful havoc was wrought there by his general Apollonius?\par 16. In this case what was the "Abomination of Desolation" spoken of by Daniel the prophet?\par 17. In that case how do you explain \cf1\ul Mat_24:15\cf0\ulnone ?\par 18. How does Daniel give the time from this desecration of the temple by Antiochus to its cleansing by Judas Maccabeus, and what is the tijme in years?\par 19. What general policy looking to uniformity in religion did Antiochus now adopt and its sweeping character toward the Jews?\par 20. How did Samaria respond to this religious demand?\par 21. Cite two notable instances of Jewish martyrdom from 2 Maccabees.\par 22. Who were the Asideans, and what their attitude toward this religious persecution?\par 23. What massacre of them occurred, and why did they not resist?\par 24. Tell about Mattathias and his sons, the commencement of their revolt, and their policy of fighting on the Sabbath.\par 25. Of whom was Mattathias a descendant, and what long line was named after this ancestor, and can you tell now the person of the line and her fate?\par 26. In view of death to whom did Mattathias commit the military lead, and to whom the high priesthood?\par 27. What the meaning of "Maccabeus" and what English king bore a similar cognomen?\par 28. To what Scottish hero may Judas Maccabeus be compared?\par 29. What great battles did he fight, and in which two was he defeated?\par 30. Can you name the most distinguished generals of Antiochus against whom he fought?\par 31. Describe some of his campaigns, particularly in Galilee, east of the Jordan, and against Edom.\par 32. Up to what point in his conquests did all the pious Jews support him, and for what was he striving beyond that point?\par 33. Where do we find two variant accounts of the death of Antiochus and which the most historical?\par 34. Describe his horrible death.\par 35. What five series of battles give a battle, history of the inter-biblical period and its approaches?\par 36. At the close of the study of the period be ready to date and analyze these battles, and tell their leaders and the issues decided by them.\par 37. By the conquest of Edom Judas Maccabeus annexed Esau to Jacob. How can you anticipate subsequent history by showing how this annexation ultimately resulted in placing both Esau and Ishmael on the throne of Jacob in one obnoxious person?\par \par \par } K{\rtf1\ansi\ansicpg1252\deff0\deflang1033\deflangfe1033{\fonttbl{\f0\fswiss\fprq2\fcharset0 Ariall9s{\rtf1\ansi\ansicpg1252\deff0\deflang1033\deflangfe1033{\fonttbl{\f0\fswiss\fprq2\fcharset0 Arial;}} {\colortbl ;\red0\green128\blue0;} {\*\generator Riched20 5.40.11.2210;}\viewkind4\uc1\pard\sb120\qj\b\f0\fs22 Lesson # 5\par \pard\sb120\qc ANTIOCHUS EPIPHANES\par 175 B.C.-164 B.C.\par \pard\sb120\qj\b0 The prophecies of Daniel forecast Antiochus IV, surnamed Epiphanes, first, in \cf1\ul Dan_8:9-14\cf0\ulnone , interpreted by 8:23-26; second, \cf1\ul Dan_11:2-20\cf0\ulnone . The book of Daniel covers fairly nearly all the inter-biblical period. We stop Daniel\rquote s account of Antiochus at 11:20, and do not go on to the end of that chapter, as all radical critic commentaries do, because we are unable to apply that part of the book of Daniel to the wars Wm;}} {\*\generator Riched20 5.40.11.2210;}\viewkind4\uc1\pard\sb120\qj\b\f0\fs22 Lesson # 6\par \pard\sb120\qc THE MACCABEES\par 164 B.C.-65 B.C.\par \pard\sb120\qj\b0 \par We have about 100 years of exciting history to consider in this chapter. Our last chapter closed with Judas Maccabees in power, and with Menelaus, the renegade Jew, as high priest appointed by the Syrian king. Menelaus, having been driven out by Judas, made an appeal to the king at Antioch, and a number of the Jew8 sided with him\emdash those who had gone into copying the Greek spirit. He went to the king at Antioch and told him that Judas had driven out all his friends and was taking the country away from the Seleucids at Antioch, whereupon the Syrian king sent against Judas the old general, Lysias, who had served under Antiochus Epiphanies, with a great army. They went down on the east side of the Jordan and around the Dead Sea, and came up on the south. It was a very strong army. Judas, at that time besieging the stronghold in nJerusalem still held by a garrison of the Syrian king, had to rush hurriedly to meet this vast invasion with a very inferior force, about 3,000 men. Many of the 3,000 advised him not to fight - that it was impossible for 3,000 Jews to overcome such a host as stood opposed to him. The battlefield was at Beth-Zecharias. But Judas fought anyhow\emdash he always fought.\par A great many elephants were in the army of Lysias, and one of them being larger than the others and having more gorgeous trappings, was supposed by Eleazar to carry the commander-in-chief, Lysias So he dashed forward alone and got under the elephant and, stabbing upward, killed him. But the elephant in falling crushed Eleazar and killed him. Judas was defeated and fell back on Jerusalem. Lysias, when he got in eight of Jerusalem and saw how formidable were the preparations made by Judas, and being very much disturbed by the fear of the increasing Roman power, advised Antiochus to make peace, and so peace was made on the condition that theo Jews were forever after to be free in their religion, but remain subject to the Syrian government.\par This peace secured the main thing for which the war was undertaken by Judas\rquote father, Mattathias, and the Pharisees from this time on were opposed to the war. That is, they cared very little about political freedom. They were willing enough to be subordinate to another government if they were allowed to retain their religion. And about this time the renegade, Menelaus, died. From this time on the war between the Maccabees and Syria was a political rather than a religious war.\par Just about this time the right heir to the throne at Antioch, Demetrius I, surnamed Soter, came to Antioch, dethroned the son of Antiochus Epiphanes, and killed him and Lysias, the general. Now comes to the front Alcimus\emdash a man as bad as Menelaus or Jason. He wants to be high priest. He is thoroughly filled with the Hellenistic spirit, and in favor of Syrian domination. Demetrius appoints him high priest, and sendps John Bacchides with an army to install him in office. The Pharisees thought they could accept him as high priest, inasmuch as he was a descendant of Aaron, in spite of the warning of Judas. But Alcimus, with Bacchides and his army to help him, killed a portion of the noblest of the inhabitants of Jerusalem in cold blood. Judas comes and drives out Alcimus, who makes a second appeal to Demetrius. Demetrius sends another great army to meet this great host of Syrians at the battle of Capharsalama, in Joshua\rquote s old battlefield at Beth-horon. Judas twice overwhelmingly defeats the Syrian general, kills him, and brings such spoils to Jerusalem as had not been seen for years.\par Just at this time Judas began to be depressed in mind, thinking how often be had to fight great armies with only a handful of men, so he made an appeal to Rome\emdash which was a mistake on his part. Woe to the nation that ever appealed to Rome! He made an appeal to Rome and sent an embassy empowered to enter into a treaty of aqlliance with Rome, and also with Sparta in Greece. That treaty was made, but Judas was dead before the news came. The following is the treaty, from page 45 of 1 Maccabees:\par Good success to the Romans, and to the people of the Jews, by land and by sea forever; the sword also and enemy be far from them. If there comes first any war upon the Romans, or any of their confederates throughout all their dominion, the people of the Jews shall help them with victuals, vessels, money, or ships, as it bath seemed good unto the Romans; but they shall keep their covenants without taking anything therefor. In the same manner, also, if war come first upon the Jews, the Romans shall help them with all their hearts, according as the time shall be appointed them; neither shall victuals be given them that take part against them, or weapons, or money, or ships, as it hath seemed good to the Romans, but they shall keep the covenants, and that without deceit. According to these articles did the Romans make a covenant with trhe Jews. Howbeit if hereafter the one party or the other shall think meet to add or diminish anything, they may do it at their pleasures, and whatsoever they shall add or take away shall be ratified. And as touching the evils that Demetrius doeth to the Jews, we have written unto him, saying, wherefore hast thou made thy yoke heavy upon our friends and confederates, the Jews? If therefore they complain any more against thee, we will do them justice, and fight with thee by sea and by land.\par Now that is what is called a treaty of alliance, offensive and defensive. An embassy had been sent to Sparta as well as to Rome, and here is the most singular document of history that came from the Spartans:\par Areus, king of the Lacedaemonians, to Onias, the high priest, Greeting: it is found in writing that the Lacedaemoniana and the Jews are brethren, and that they are of the stock of Abraham: now, therefore, since this has come to our knowledge, ye shall do well to write unto in of your prosperity. We do writes back again unto you that your cattle and goods are ours, and that ours are yours. We do commend, therefore, our ambassadors to make report unto you on this wise.\par If I had that king of the Spartans before me, I would ask for a sight of the document proving that the Spartans, like the Jews, were the descendants of Abraham. I would like to see how he makes out his case. I cannot do it. That is a singular claim.\par Let us now consider the death of Judas, which took place before the knowledge of the Roman treaty came to him. Demetrius had sent a still greater army under Bacchides, and sent back Alcimus, the high priest. Judas met him at Eleasa; Judas had 3,000 men, but Bacchides had 22,000 men. The men of Judas\rquote army could not stand to face such a multitude and they went home and left him with only 800 men. He said, "It is not for me to flee; what if I am killed, I perish for my country." Never did 800 men make a braver fight than they made at Eleasa; but the little Jewish force was destroyed, etxcept a very few, and Judas was killed. His brothers, Simon and Jonathan, rescued the body and buried it in the family cemetery, beside the aged father and the other brother that had fallen. That was in 161 B.C.; Jonathan was then made both high priest and commander-in-chief. We have seen two of Mattathias\rquote sons pass away\emdash Judas and Eleazar. Jonathan is now the commander-in-chief, and about this time Alycimus died.\par I must now refer to an event, one of the most important in the inter-biblical period. It took place 160 B.C.: Onias IV, the son of the good and pious Onias, whom Antiochus had killed, went to Egypt. He was entitled to the priesthood, but he did not believe there would ever be any chance to have regular worship at Jerusalem, so he asked the Ptolemies to have a temple built in Egypt. He read to him a verse from Isaiah (19:19): "In that day shall there be an altar to Jehovah in the midst of the land of Egypt, and a pillar at the border thereof to Jehovah." Onias quoted that passauge from Isaiah, and a temple was erected at Leontopolis, or On, that stood as long as the Temple at Jerusalem. So now there are three temples: one at Jerusalem, the Samaritan temple, still standing, and the temple over in Egypt.\par The next important event is that Bacchides, finding out that Jonathan was as wise as Judas, and that the people were going to stand by him, made a treaty of peace with Jonathan, agreeing that Jonathan should take the office of high priest which the Jews had conferred upon him.\par We now come to another very important event. In 153 B.C., Alexander, a son of Antiochus Epiphanes, claimed to be the legitimate ruler of Syria, and opposed Demetrius. Both of them, Demetrius and Alexander, began to make bids for Jonathan\rquote s help. Jonathan is now the arbitrator of the war\emdash he has the ball at his feet and keeps it rolling between these two, and each one keeps raising his bid as to what he would do if Jonathan would lead the Jews to support him. Jonathan accepted the propovsition of Alexander. To further strengthen himself, Alexander entered into a treaty of peace with Ptolemy, king of Egypt. This treaty was based upon a marriage between Alexander and Cleopatra, the daughter of the Ptolemies and the Seleucids. But Ptolemy begins to change his policy of friendship toward Alexander, wishing to make himself ruler of the kingdom of the Seleucids. To this end he negotiates a treaty with Demetrius, the contestant for the throne of the Seleucids against Alexander, and promises to take his daughter, Cleopatra, away from Alexander and give her to Demetrius. I wonder how the woman felt in being swapped off that way\emdash first to one man, then to another, for political reasons. The daughters of kings have a hard time of it on the marriage question, since they are disposed of for political reasons without regard for their own will or affections.\par I have not the space to continue the history of the Maccabees in detail. It is sufficient to say that Jonathan, who succeeded Judas, wwas not only a great general, but a great diplomatist. He maintained his treaties of peace with the Romans and Lacedaemonians; he won many important victories and established himself thoroughly in the affections of the people, and enlarged the territory d his country.\par The tragic termination of his life was on this wise: A certain Trypho, minister and general of Alexander, began to aspire to be king at Antioch himself, and knowing that the most formidable adversary in his way was Jonathan and the Jewish army, he ensnared Jonathan under false pretenses to visit at Ptolemais. Jonathan accepted the invitation, taking with him only a thousand men. As soon as they entered the city the gates were closed, the thousand men were killed and Jonathan placed in prison. Jonathan\rquote s brother Simon raised an army to rescue his brother, and Trypho, dreading the result of an engagement, proffered to restore Jonathan for an immense sum of money, and provided that Jonathan\rquote s sons be left with him as hostages.x Simon sent the money and the boys. Trypho kept the money and put Jonathan to death. Simon then succeeded Jonathan as both high priest and commander-in-chief. We find his great history set forth in detail in the first book of Maccabees. He brought the Jews into great prosperity; he expelled the Syrian garrison from the tower in Jerusalem, and occupied Joppa as a seaport. The territory of the Jews was greatly enlarged. If Judas was the hero of the Maccabees, and Jonathan was the diplomatist, surely Simon was the great statesman. I have not space to tell of all his great deeds, but will give from the first book of Maccabees a pleasing bit of his history:\par Then did they till their ground in peace, and the earth gave her increase, and the trees of the field their fruit. The ancient men sat all in the streets, communing together of good things, and the young men put on glorious and warlike apparel. He provided victuals for the cities, and set in them all manner of munition so that his honorable name was reynowned unto the end of the world. He made peace in\rquote the land, and Israel rejoiced with great joy. For every man sat under his vine and fig tree, and there was none to fray them; neither was there any left in the land to fight against them; yea, the kings themselves were overthrown in those days. Moreover, he strengthened all his people that were brought low. He searched out the law, and every dissenter of the law and wicked person he took away. He beautified the sanctuary and all the temple, and, multiplied its vessels. [He is the last of the Maccabean brothers. His brother John was killed by the Arabians.]\par We now relate the tragic termination of Simon\rquote s life. His son-in-law, Ptolemy, was a governor of Jericho, and this son-in-law aspired to occupy the priesthood and the generalship held by Simon. He invited Simon to visit him. Simon went and took his wife, his eldest son, Judas, and his youngest son, Mattathias, with him. His most illustrious son, John Hyrcanus, was, fortunately, not wzith him. Ptolemy infamously murdered\par Simon and the two Sons, and John Hyraces came with an army to punish him. Ptolemy led John\rquote s mother out on the walls and threa1~ied to put her to death if John did not retire from his position. His mother implored him to storm the place and not to mind her being killed. But he could not stand to bring his mother to death, and turned away. Then Ptolemy killed the mother anyhow and fled the country. I am sorry that we have no record of his being hanged.\par John Hyrcanus, the son of Simon, is now made the high priest and commander-in-chief, and under him Judea wonderfully enlarged its territory. He destroyed the Samaritan temple and the city so that one could not tell where the city ever stood. He invade Edom, the home of Esau, and annexed it to Jacob. Little did he think that in thus uniting Esau with Jacob he was arranging unwittingly for the placing of an Edomite on the throne of Judea, Antipas, an Edomite, was made local governor of Edom, to be succeeded{ by his son Antipater, whose policy will be considered in the last chapter on this inter-biblical period. John was now at the height of his power and influence, but a quarrel was developed between him and the Pharisees.\par I here stop t. make some explanation of the three Jewish sects\emdash the Pharisees, the Sadducees, and the Essenes. The Pharisees were derived from the scribes. The scribes originated with Ezra, and the Pharisees were a development of the scribes. They held as binding the written Bible and the oral traditions. The oral traditions, as they claimed, were handed down from Moses, and afterward were embodied in the Talmud. Now, there are some good things about them. They believed in the resurrection of the dead, in the immortality of the soul, in the existence of angels; they kept alive the hope of a coming personal Messiah. But they became intense ritualists and formalists.\par Now, the Sadducees. The word means simply Zadokites, that is, they claim to be the followers of the high pries|t, Zadok, away back yonder in Solomon\rquote s time. As the Pharisees were derived from the scribes, the Sadducees were derived from the priests. The Sadducees rightly held to the written Bible only, and rejected all traditions. But they were skeptics; they did not believe in angels, nor in spirits, nor in the immortality of the soul, nor in the resurrection of the body. In the next place, they were simply a political party; they believed in religion as an institution, but not as an inspiration. Like many politicians now that think they should hold on to religion to keep the people under control, but do not believe in it for themselves.\par The Essenes were neither a political nor an ecclesiastical party. They were rather a monastic order. They abjured marriages; they were vegetarians; they would not eat any meat, and would not let a woman come into the settlement at all. They perpetuated themselves by adopting children and training them to be monks. They would not go into trade nor commerce, and, like t}he Quakers, would not take an oath. They were the Pharisees gone to seed. They prayed, but, like the ancient Persians, they prayed toward the sun and not toward the temple.\par I have not space to relate in detail the illustrious deeds of John Hyrcanus. He was the last great Maccabee. The illustrious members of the family were as follows: Old Mattathias, who led in the rebellion against Antiochus Epiphanes; the great Judas, who succeeded him; Jonathan, who followed Judas; Simon, who followed Jonathan; and John Hyrcanus, the son of Simon, who followed his father. John Hyrcanus died about 105 B.C. His eons were the first to crown themselves as kings. There were none of them equal to or worthy of the five great Maccabees whose names have been given above. While the sons of John were ruling, Rome comes upon the scene and history rapidly develops until the coming of our Lord.\par QUESTIONS\par 1. What the name and extent of the period discussed in this chapter?\par 2. At what point did the last chapter clo~se?\par 3. Describe the occasion of the battle at Beth-Zecharias.\par 4. Tell of the death of Eleazar, the brother of Judas.\par 5. What prompted Lysias to advise Antiochus to make peace with Judas, and what is the result of the peace?\par 6. From this time on, what the nature of the war between the Maccabees and Syria?\par 7. Tell how Demetrius I became king at Antioch.\par 8. Whom did he appoint to be high priest, and why did the Pharisees accept him?\par 9. What outrage was committed by this high priest which caused Judas to drive him out of Jerusalem?\par 10. What the occasion of another invasion of Judea by the Syrians? Describe the battle of Capharsalama.\par 11. What two noted embassies were sent out by Judas?\par 12. Give the treaty between the Romans and the Maccabees.\par 13. Give the transcript of the letter from the Lacedaenionians.\par 14. Describe the battle of Eleasa and the death of Judas.\par 15. Who succeeded Judas as high priest and commander-in-chief?\par 16. Give the history of the temple in Egypt at Leontopolis.\par 17. What new claimant for the throne at Antioch?\par 18. Describe the third marriage between the Ptolemies and the Seleucids, and the ultimate result.\par 19. Tell of the tragic death of Jonathan, and who succeeded him.\par 20. What the fate of John, the brother of Simon?\par 21. What the relative excellencies of Judas, Jonathan, and Simon?\par 22. Give the quotation from 1 Maccabees showing a pleasant part. of the history of Simon.\par 23. Give an account of the tragic death of Simon.\par 24. What the great achievement of John Hyrcanus, son of Simon?\par 25. Give some account of the three Jewish sects\emdash the Pharisees, Sadducees and Essenes.\par 26. About what time did John Hyrcanus die?\par 27. Which one of his sons first became king of the Jews?\par 28. What may we say of the Asmonaean kings in comparison with the five preceding Maccabees?\par \par \par } 0\qj\b0 I commence this chapter with these opening remarks:\par First, I have not been able, in the space allowed, to even name all of the Jewish books of the period, nor to distinguish sufficiently between them. The classifications of that literature are: The Wisdom literature, such as Wisdom and Ecciesiasticus; the Romance literature, such as Tobit and Judith; and the Apocalyptic literature, such as Baruch and Enoch\emdash though it is doubtful if any part of Enoch was written before Christ; and the spurious prophetic literature, such as the Sibylline books and the imitation Psalter literature; the philosophic literature of the Alexandrian Jews; and the historical literature, such as 1 and 2 Maccabees; and the forged epistolary literature, such as the letter of Jeremiah; and the literature of forged prayers, such as those attributed to Manasseh and Azarias.\par Second, There has not been space enough to examine critically the discrepancies between Jewish historians on the one hand and the Greek and Roman historians on the other hand.\par Third, There has been such condensation of names and dates and little chance to differentiate enough to make living pictures before the mind.\par It will, therefore, be understood that these seven chapters do not constitute a full discussion on the inter-biblical period, but are intended merely as a guide to a more extended study of this period.\par I will now give a very brief summary of the preceding six chapters:\par 1. The names, "Jews" and "Judaism," came into prominence with Ezra, the scribe, called the Second Moses.\par 2. With him also rose the order of the scribes, who were the copyists, multipliers, and expounders of the sacred Scriptures, and the synagogues as places of worship and biblical instruction, and the council of the elders, which later became the Sanhedrin.\par 3. With him also came the revival of the law, the sanctity of the sabbath, the sanctity of the marriage relation, the permanent renunciation of idolatry by the Jews, and ever-increasing hopes of imn~ra1ity and of the coming of the Messiah.\par 4. The Judea of the restoration, after the Babylonian exile, was a small territory around Jerusalem, not as big as some of the counties of Texas, to be vastly enlarged under the Macca-bees.\par 5. Following the refusal to recognize the Samaritans as Jews, and the strict construction of the marriage law, arose the Samaritan temple on Mount Gerizim, which stood until destroyed by John Hyrcanus.\par 6. Judea was subject to Persia until annexed by Alexander the Great, 332 B. C.\par 7. After his death it was subject to Egypt, from 323 B. C. to 198 B. C.\par 8. The greatest events under the Ptolemies were the translation of the Hebrew Scriptures into Greek and the rise of Hellenism, distinguishing the Hebrews from the Hellenists.\par 9. From 1983. c. to 128 B. c. Judah was subject to the Seleucids of Antioch.\par 10. The events of this subjection were: First, the attempt of Antiochus IV, surnamed Epiphanes, to utterly destroy the Jews\rquote religion, bringing the kingdom of God into greater peril than ever in human history except in the days of Noah and in the days of Elijah when he stood alone against the world. Second, the heroic resistance of Mattathias and his five sons, John, Simon, Judas, Eleazar, and Jonathan, all of them dying violent deaths in the violent struggle, continued by John Hyrcanus, son of Simon.\par 11. In these Maccabean wars the following great results were obtained: (1) religious liberty by Judas Maccabeus; (2) political independence by his brothers Jonathan and Simon and by John Hyrcanus, son of Simon; (3) great expansion of the Jewish territory until it almost reached the old boundaries of David\rquote s kingdom\emdash this expansion included Samaria, Perea, Galilee, Gilead, Iturea, Idumea, and Philistia; (4) that Aristobulus, son of John Hyrcanus, was the first to put on the royal diadem; (5) in this period came to the front the three noted Jewish sects\emdash the Pharisees, the Sadducees, and the Essenes; (6) that a Jewish temple was established in Egypt, which lasted until A.D. 70, when the Jerusalem Temple was also destroyed.\par 12. The kings of the Asmonaean Dynasty were unworthy of their illustrious Maccabean ancestry.\par The foregoing remarks refer to the preceding chapters on the inter-biblical period, and we are now to consider the last section of the period, from 65 B.C. to the birth of Christ, in which Judea is subject to the Romans, and the Asmonaean Dynasty is succeeded by Herod, sometimes called the Great, an Idumaean, whose mother was an Arabian. The countries now to the front are Rome, Pontus under Mithridates, Parthia, which Rome never conquered, and the dying kingdoms of the Ptolemies and the Seleucids. Let us glance now for a moment at\par ROME\par At this time Rome, as a republic, had become utterly corrupt. Indeed, it was no longer a republic in any true sense. There is the distinction between a democracy and a republic. In a pure democracy the people rule directly; in a republic they rule representatively. The United States is a republic, ever approaching a democracy. The Baptist churches are the only pure democracies in the world. The Presbyterians have a republican form of government; they govern by representatives. The senate of Rome constituted its republican feature, and had become the most corrupt oligarchy in history. They appointed the proconsuls who governed all the provinces, except those ruled by military appointees of Caesar. The tribunes, elected by the citizens, constituted the only democratic element\emdash but the elections became a mere farce. The lands of Italy were now owned by a few corrupt landlords who used up the resources of the farms to support a vicious city life. The overwhelming majority of the inhabitants of Italy were slaves, captives of foreign wars, who tilled all the farms, built all the imposing edifices, constituted the entire class of mechanics, artisans, scribes, and domestics. These slaves were not of an inferior race, but were the nobles, patriots, the picked men and women of the conquered nations from all over the world, and in thousands of instances far superior to their masters in education and nobility. Thy had no legal rights. Their labor, their persons, their honor their lives, were absolutely at the disposal of their luxurious, and oftentimes vicious masters. The sturdy yoemanry had passed away. Those who were counted citizens, and could vote for the tribune, did not work, and lived on gratuitous distribution of rations and free shows. Whoever could most liberally supply them with "bread and circuses" could command their votes. Only by the spoils of conquered nations, or by the spoils of robbery of subject provinces could one have means enough to thus feed and amuse the pampered and fickle body of so-called Roman citizens. Goldsmith, in The Deserted Village, well says,\par \pard\li360\sb120\qj Ill fares the land to hastening ills a prey,\par Where wealth accumulates and men decay.\par \pard\sb120\qj About the beginning of our period, Cicero, the great orator, was consul exposing the Cataline conspiracy, in those famous orations which are studied as a preparation for college. Three men, by combination, controlled the world. This was the first Roman Triumvirate, that is, three-man power, or three-man government\emdash Julius Caesar, Gnaeus Pompey, and Publius Crassus. There were two formidable enemies of Rome at this time\emdash Mithridates, king of Pontus, and the Parthians from the shores of the Caspian Sea. Pompey conquered Mithridates, and also overthrew the last of the Seleucids at Antioch, winding up this division of the Greek Empire, and this brought him in touch with Judea. Pompey besieged and captured Jerusalem and pushed his way into the holy of holies, and was astounded at what he found. Tacitus tells what he found: "He found within no images of the gods, a vacant mercy seat, and an empty ark."\par Thus passed away the Asmonaean kingdom. The Jews never forgave this impiety of Pompey. While the Asmonaean kingdom passed away, members of the family yet remained for some years, with a kind of princely dignity. The Jews were more tolerant to Pompey\rquote s fellow triumvir, Crassus, who nine years later (54 B. c.), when governor of Syria, robbed the temple of all its treasures, amOunting in cash value to about $10,-000,000. A year later, 53 B. c., Crassus was defeated by the Parthians, his army annihilated, and himself slain at the battle of Carrhae. This downfall of Crassus the Jews interpreted as the vengeance of the Almighty for his robbery of the Temple. At any rate, this victory of the Parthians, 53 B. C., brought about two results:\par 1. It opened the way for them to come in touch with Judea, which I will tell about later.\par 2. It opened a way for the rupture between Caesar and Pompey (49 B.C.), the other triumvirs, and which led to the famous civil war which was settled at the battle of Pharsalia, in which Caesar with 22,000 of his veterans defeated and captured Pompey\rquote s army of 50,000 men. Caesar\rquote s grim old veterans were told that Pompey\rquote s legions were "city dandies," and hence were instructed to strike at their faces, since they prided themselves so much on their good looks that to hit at their prettiness scared them worse than to hit at their hearts.\par Pompey fled to Egypt, and was assassinated as soon as he stepped ashore. Caesar followed him, and was temporarily snared by the witchery of the famous Cleopatra. Caesar is now the ruler of the world.\par ESAU AND ISHMAEL ON THE THRONE OF JACOB.\par IN THE PERSON OF HEROD, THE IDUMARAN, WHOSE MOTHER WAS AN ARABIAN.\par In a former chapter was recounted the final conquest of Idumaea, or Edom, by John Hyrcanus, and its incorporation into Judea, thus forcibly uniting Jacob and Esau. Antipas, a shrewd and powerful Idumaean, was left as local governor of the conquered Edom. He left as his successor a greater and more unscrupulous son, Antipater. This Antipater had sided with Pompey against Caesar, but when he learned the result of the battle of Pharsalia, he flopped over to Caesar in the snap of the fingers. He hurriedly gathered an army and rushed to Caesar\rquote s help at Alexandria, where Caesar was having a time of it trying to conquer that great city, and so says Mime Rea:\par "The Iduinaean mouse helped the Roman lion, and the lion was grateful." On the rupture with Pompey, Caesar had released Aristobulus, one of the contesting Maccabees, and loaned him to legions to create a diversion in Judea against Pompey. Pompey\rquote s friends poisoned Aristobulus and executed his brother Alexander. Now, for the help rendered him at Alexandria, Caesar made Antipater a Roman citizen and procurator of Judea, Samaria, and Galilee. Hyrcanus II was made high priest and a Roman senator, and also was made hereditary ethnarch, that is, subordinate governor. Antipater at once began to advance his family, as fathers are wont to do. His son, Phasael, was made governor of Jerusalem, and his greater gon, known later as Herod the Great, then just twenty-five years old, was sent into Galilee to put down bands of desperadoes, robbers, and religious zealots, who as patriots, sheltered themselves in caves and warred against Rome.\par Many years ago Harper\rquote s Magazine gave a richly illustrated account of Herod\rquote s successful war against these devoted Jews, who so desperately resisted the Roman supremacy. From the mountain tops Herod let down huge boxes, as big as a flat car, by chains, filled with Roman soldiers, until they were just level with the mouth of the caves, and there, swung in the air, these grim Roman soldiers gained an entrance by desperate fighting, killing and capturing these so-called robbers. If they had succeeded they would have passed into history with the fame of William Tell, Sir William Wallace, or Francis Marion, and we must not think of these men as ordinary robbers. Barabbas, who was preferred to Christ, was this kind of robber\emdash not an ordinary highwayman\emdash and one of the apostles was Simon the Zealot. We may, therefore, understand why the Sanhedrin summoned Herod, in this case, to answer at its bar for murdering "free Jews," who counted themselves patriots, and why they later preferred Barabbas to Christ. The two so-called thieves crucified with Christ were also of this kind. When summoned to appear before the Sanhedrin, Herod came with an armed band and overawed the court. Only one member, Shammai, dared to move his condemnation, and before the motion could be put the weak old Hyrcanus, the high priest, the mere tool of Herod\rquote s father, adjourned the court. Soon after this Rome was turned into a bedlam by\par THE ASSASSINATION OF CAESAR IN THE ROMAN SENATE\par (March 15, 44 B.C.)\par Bedlam is the name for a madhouse. There was an old English madhouse called Bedlam, and ever since a madhouse has been called a bedlam. Sixty senators, led by Brutus and Cassius, participated in the murder of Caesar. Read Shakespeare\rquote s Julius Caesar, Froude\rquote s Sketch of Caesar, and Mommsen\rquote s History of Rome at this period. The senate was far more corrupt than Caesar. It was impossible, out of such material, to reconstruct a republic, and this led to the second Roman Triumvirate, to wit: Octavius Caesar, a nephew of Julius, and his adopted son, Mark Antony, and Lepidus. Antipater was raising an army to help Brutus and Cassius when, in 43 B. c. the Jews poisoned him. Herod, his son, would have followed his father\rquote s course, l~it at the famous battle of Philippi the incipient republic perished, where Octavius and Antony defeated Brutus and Cassius, who both committed suicide, as did the great Cato somewhat later, in Africa. Mark Antony also captured and slew Cicero, who also favored the republic, just as he was about to get into a boat to escape. There is a great painting of Cicero stepping out of his litter to meet his murderer.\par Herod now cajoled Mark Antony, who commanded in the East, and who against all Jewish accusations made both Herod and Phasael tetrarchs under the nominal sovereignty of the Maccabee, Hyrcanus II. This was 41 B.C.. Antigonus, the younger eon of Aristobulos and brother of Hyrcanus, claimed the throne, and was supported by the Parthians. They made him king, and upheld him in power for three years, 40 B.C., to 37 B.C., and for this time Judea was under control of the Parthians. With their help Antigonus, the last of the Asmonaean kings, captured Jerusalem and with it Phasael and Hyrcanus. He cut off the ears of Hyrcanus, the mutilation barring him from the priesthood, and sent him to Babylon. Phasael committed suicide; and Herod fled to Masada at the southern end of the Dead Sea, and left his women folk there with his brother Joseph, and he himself went first to Egypt, and then to Rome, telling how Antigonus welcomed the Parthians, the enemies of Rome, and so cajoling both Octavius and Antony, and by a decree of the senate was made king of Judea. Thus passed away the Asxnonaean line\emdash or Maccabee line\emdash and thus Herod, the descendant of Esau, whose mother was a descendant of Ishmael, takes his seat on the throne of Jacob. Herod returned with two Roman legions, and swelled the number to about 100,000 by enlisting renegade Jews, and besieged and captured Jerusalem on the twenty-sixth anniversary of its capture by Pompey. He also captured Antigonus, whom the Parthians had put in power, and sent him to Antony at Antioch, who executed him. Antony called him "Antigona," which is the female name for Antigonus. He thus changed his name to a woman\rquote s name because he cried and whined, but I have known some women who would neither whine nor cry. Antony executed him, and that was the first time in history that a sovereign of a nation suffered death under the ax of the Roman lictor.\par THE REIGN OF HEROD, 37-4 B.C.\par We now take up the reign of Herod from 37 B.C. to the birth of Christ. Before he captured Jerusalem he had married the beautiful Asmonaean princess, Mariamne, hoping to secure thereby the support of the favorers of the Maccabean line. The marriage was unfortunate for this beautiful woman, for she was persecuted by Herod\rquote s sister, Salome, and by Cypros, his Arabian mother. In the end\emdash for these two women never stopped\emdash Herod was induced to murder his beautiful wife, the only woman he ever loved\emdash and he married a great many women\emdash and later to murder his two sons by this wife. Remorse for murdering the woman that he loved kept biting him like an undying worm, and kept stinging him like a scorpion as long as he lived.\par Here we can do no more than summarize his reign.\par 1. When he captured Jerusalem he put to death forty-three members of the Sanhedrin, which had once summoned him to trial.\par 2. He made Ananel, an obscure Jew of Babylon, high priest, and when this raised a clamor he yielded and appointed the brother of his wife, Mariamne, a boy seventeen years of age, very popular and very much beloved of the people.\par 3. There was an appeal by the people, by the Maccabean women, to Cleopatra, who had completely ensnared Antony. Influenced by Cleopatra, Antony summoned Herod to appear before him at Alexandria, but having heard him, notwithstanding that Cleopatra was against him, he dismissed the charges against him, and added Coele-Syria to his kingdom. Nearly everybody would be willing to be put on trial if followed by such a verdict as that.\par 4. When on the death of Lepidus civil war was waged between the two remaining triumvirs, Herod sided with Antony, but the great sea battle at Actum decided the war in favor of Octavius, 31 B.C.\par 5. Herod instantly flopped over to the other side, sought Octavius in the Island of Rhodes, cajoled him, was confirmed in his kingdom, and in the next year Octavius enlarged his territory by adding Gadara, Hyppo, Samaria, and the seaports of Joppa, Anthedo., Gaza, and a place called Straton\rquote s Tower, which afterward became the Caesarea of the New Testament.\par 6. Soon after this, Herod, as I have said, put to death his wife, the beautiful Maccabean princess, and mother of two sons, 28 B. C., and one year later he executed her mother, Alexandra.\par 7. He began to Hellenize the country by erecting in Jerusalem a Grecian theater, and an enormous amphitheater, and instituted Grecian games and gladiatorial combats. He erected heathen temples in all the new cities that he built, particularly Caesarea and old Sainaria. Herod rebuilt that and called it Sebaste, in honor of Augustus. He erected a splendid palace in Jerusalem, whith we read about in the New Testament, and he also erected that famous tower of Antonia, which we also read about in the New Testament, and which commanded the approach of the Temple.\par 8. Feeling that he was hated of all men, he sought to regain popularity by the Roman method of free distribution of bread, and as this was in the time of both famine and pestilence, he did thereby regain much popular favor.\par 9. But his greatest exploit in this direction was the restoration and enlargement of the Temple built five centuries before by Zerubbabel. This mighty enterprise, far superior to either Solomon\rquote s Temple or the one by Zerubbabel, was commenced 20 B.C., and was not finally completed until A.D. 65, which was just five years before Titus destroyed it. This is the famous temple whose huge stones excited the wonder of the apostles, and called forth our Lord\rquote s great prophecy in Matthew 24-25, and which Christ twice purified, once at the beginning and once at the end of his ministry.\par 10. Herod murdered his two sons by Mariamne, where their mother before them had been murdered.\par 11. He was now the subject of a loathsome disease, somewhat like what we now call the bubonic plague. His life was miserable.\par 12. He put to death his son, Antipater, by his first wife Doris, which caused Octavius (now Augustus Caesar) to say, "It is safer to be Herod\rquote s swine than his son," for a superstition kept him from killing a hog.\par 13. In 4 B. c. he slaughtered the infants at Bethlehem, so graphically told in \cf1\ul Mat_2:16-18\cf0\ulnone , in an effort to destroy him who was "born King of the Jews," and for whom the angels sang their great Christmas hymn. His own death was as horrible as that of Antiochus Epiphanes, or that of his grandson, Herod, told about in Acts 12, who died eaten up by worms, while the word of God lived and prospered.\par HEROD\rquote S CHARACTER\par Just a glance at his character. He is not entitled to be called "the Great." He was a shrewd politician, easily cajoling greater men than himself, as he did Julius Caesar and Antony, and Augustus Caesar, and was never himself cajoled by Cleopatra, though she tried her best on him, and she did captivate Julius Caesar and Antony, though she failed when she tried her charms on Augustus Caesar. Herod wanted to kill her in the interest of Antony when she visited him some time before this near Jerusalem. And he doubtless regretted that he allowed his friends to over persuade him not to kill her. He was a fearless man, and a really great soldier.\par He was a great builder. Look at the great city he built up at the source of the Jordan. Look at the city of Samaria. Look at the city of Caesazea. Look at that great temple and the tower of Antonia. He was an unscrupulous murderer. He was not a persecutor of the Jews\rquote religion, like Antiochus Epiphanes, though he had no religion himself, and had no respect for any religion.\par My last remark is concerning his descendants mentioned in the New Testament. The tetrarch, Philip of \cf1\ul Luk_3:1\cf0\ulnone , the Archelaus of \cf1\ul Mat_2:22\cf0\ulnone , the Herod Antipas who murdered John the Baptist (\cf1\ul Mar_6:14\cf0\ulnone ) and who mocked Christ when sent to him by Pilate\emdash these were all his sons. The Herod who murdered James (Acts 12) was his grandson. The Drusilla who sat with Felix when Paul was tried (Acts 24), and the Agrippa and Bernice, before whom Paul appeared, were his great-grandchildren.\par QUESTIONS\par 1. Give the title and extent of the last section of the inter-biblical period.\par 2. Why may not these seven chapters constitute a full course on the inter-biblical pediod?\par 3. Classify the Jewish literature of the period.\par 4. Give a summary of the six preceding chapters.\par 5. What nations to the front in this last section of the period?\par 6. State the conditions at Rome at the beginning of this section.\par 7. Who constituted the first great Triumvirate at Rome?\par 8. What the results of the war with Mithridates?\par 9. Describe the end of the Seleucids\rquote Empire at Antioch and its effect on Judea.\par 10. When did Pompey capture Jerusalem?\par 11. Of what sacrilege was he guilty, and how does Tacitus describe what he found?\par 12. How many Jews did Pompey deport as slaves to Rome, and how did this possibly affsst the citizenship?\par 13. Who nine years later robbed the temple of all its treasures?\par 14. What the fate of the triumyir, Crassus, and what the two great results?\par 15. When and where was the issue between Caesar and Pompey decided, and what the fate of Pompey?\par 16. What the last division of this section of the inter-biblical period?\par 17. When Edom was incorporated into Judea, what Idumaean was made local governor?\par 18. Who his greater and more unscrupulous successor?\par 19. What the part played by Antipater in the war between Caesar and Pompey, and by what rapid change and help extended did he secure the friendship of Caesar?\par 20. State the honors conferred upon Antipater by Caesar.\par 2i. State how Antipater advanced his family.\par 22. What magazine a few years ago gave a richly illustrated account of Herod\rquote s war against the Galilean Jews, and how was the war conducted to a successful issue?\par 23. If these zealots and so-called robbers had been successful, with what illustrious names would they have been classified?\par 24. What the result of the Sanhedrin\rquote s summoning Herod to answer for destroying these Galileans?\par 25. What great event March 15, 44 B.C., converted Rome into a bedlam?\par 26. Give the names of the second Roman Triumvirate.\par 27. What four illustrious Romans opposed the Triumvirate?\par 28. When and where was decided the great issue between the Republicans and the Triumvirate?\par 29. What the fate of Brutus, Cassius, Cato, and Cicero respectively?\par 30. With what party did Antipater sympathize?\par 31. After the assassination of Antipater, how did Herod, who succeeded his father, cajole Mark Antony, and what honors were received?\par 32. Show how the Parthians came in touch with Judea, and whom they placed on the throne at Jerusalem.\par 33. When Antigonus became the governor of Jerusalem, what the resuit to the Herodian family?\par 34. By what experiment did Herod turn the scales? How did he conquer Jerusalem, and what the fate of Antigonus?\par 35. What the period of the reign of Herod?\par 36. Tell the story of Mariamne, his Maccabean wife, and of her two eons by Herod.\par 37. When Herod captured Jerusalem, how did he avenge on the Sanhedrin their once summoning him to trial?\par 38. Give the relations between Herod and Cleopatra, queen of Egypt.\par 39. When on the death of Lepidus civil war was waged between Octavius Caesar and Antony, with which side did Herod align himself?\par 40. What great sea battle decided the war in favor of Octavius, and what its date?\par 41. After this battle, how did Herod cajole Octavius and what new honors were conferred upon him?\par 42. How did Herod attempt to Hellenize the country?\par 43. By what two great expedients did Herod seek to placate the hatred of the people?\par 44. What loathsome disease now came upon him?\par 45. What remark was made by Augustus Caesar when Herod put to death his son Antipater, by his first wife Doris?\par 46. What his last murderous exploit, and where in the New Testament do we find an account of it?\par 47. Give a summary of Herod\rquote s character.\par 48. Give the proofs that he was a great builder.\par 49. Name his descendants and their part in New Testament history.\par \par \par } o_{\rtf1\ansi\ansicpg1252\deff0\deflang1033\deflangfe1033{\fonttbl{\f0\fswiss\fprq2\fcharset0 Arial;}} {\colortbl ;\red0\green128\blue0;} {\*\generator Riched20 5.40.11.2210;}\viewkind4\uc1\pard\sb120\qj\b\f0\fs22 Lesson # 7\par \pard\sb120\qc THE JEWS UNDER THE ROMANS AND HEROD\par 65 B. C.\emdash The Birth of Christ\par \pard\sb12