The books of the Apocrypha : $b their origin, teaching and contentsOesterley, W. O. E. (William Oscar Emil)
Religion
The books of the Apocrypha : $b their origin, teaching and contents
Oesterley, W. O. E. (William Oscar Emil)
Bible. Apocrypha -- Introductions
In Ecclesiasticus the prevalence of Sin in one and all is often
noted, and there is much said about its origin. Here Ben-Sira finds
a problem too difficult for him. He implies, though he hardly goes
so far as to make the definite assertion, that the origin of sin is
due to God (xxxiii. 13-15), but in one important passage he strongly
combats this (xv. 11-13). He traces it back to the fall of Eve,
but no farther. He speaks sometimes of Sin as originating within
man, sometimes as being external to him. Like the later Rabbis, he
becomes involved in inconsistencies as soon as he tries to construct
a working theory on the subject. In his teaching on the atonement for
sins he shows a great advance on the Old Testament, adding almsgiving
and fasting as means of atonement, and foreshadowing the idea that
Death also may be one. This last idea became of ever-increasing
importance with the growth in later Judaism of the belief in the
resurrection. There is little that calls for notice in Tobit except
a reference to the atoning efficacy of almsgiving; and nothing in
Judith, or the Additions to Daniel; but in the Prayer of Manasses we
find the thought that the Patriarchs were sinless—an idea developed
in the later Rabbinical Literature in connection with the “Treasury
of Merit” of the Fathers—and a deeper realization of sin than is to
be found in any other book of the Apocrypha. In 2 Maccabees there
is a strangely particularistic doctrine of retribution for Sin. The
teaching in 1 (3) Esdras and Baruch is that of the Old Testament,
but the doctrine as to the merits of the Fathers is expressly
repudiated in Baruch. 2 (4) Esdras is important; especially, again,
the Salathiel Apocalypse. Here the origin of sin is traced to Adam,
though its connection with him is not explained; but Sin is regarded
as universal, each man clothing himself with the evil heart. In the
Book of Wisdom there is a belief in an original state of good, which
is so decidedly contradicted by a later passage (xii. 10, 11) as to
emphasize belief in a different authorship for the two parts of the
book: on this point, as on the subject of Death, it is the first part
that is important for us, the second offers nothing new.
(_d_) _The Doctrine of Grace and Free-will._
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Elsewhere in the archive
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account