were purely Jewish. To this number belonged those who observed the Law (in whole or in part), and the various sects who rejected the doctrines of the Trinity and of the Incarnation of the Son of God. But even Gnosticism derived its principal elements from the synagogue. The tendency of that heresy, as a whole, was, as its name indicates, after "gnosis," or knowledge. The various speculative difficulties connected with the creation of the world, its government, and the relation of the Supreme God to it, were objects of inquiry to the various Gnostic sects. [Like the later Jewish mysticism, Gnosticism sprang from the contact of Judaism with the religious speculations of the farther East. Probably the mystical tendency found in Essenism a soil favourable to its growth and development. As the system itself was Jewish in origin, so the earliest representatives whose names have been handed down to us were Palestinians by birth. Thus the traditional founder of Gnosticism was a Samaritan, Simon of Gitta, who-since the time of Justin Martyr1-has commonly, but perhaps erroneously, been identified with the Simon Magus mentioned in Acts viii.2] Christian legends describe Simon as equally corrupt in practice and in doctrine, and mention Rome as the field of his labours. It seems not unlikely in itself that the impostor should have resorted to the capital, the more so as, according to the statements of contemporaries, all religious adventurers flocked to it to make religious capital of the corruption and superstition of the degenerate Romans.

The second heresiarch and leader of the Gnostics, to whom ecclesiastical history refers, was Menander, like Simon a Samaritan by birth. Under his auspices, and those of his successors, Gnosticism assumed more and more its definite shape. In general, that system had two great branches,— the one, in which the doctrine of emanation played an important part, and derived from Persian elements; the other, more dualistic (an attempt to combine theology with Platonism), and bearing traces of Alexandrian culture. In

1 Comp. Justin, Apol. i. 26; Dial. c. Tryph. 120.

2 Comp. Dict. Chr. Biog. iv. "Simon Magus."

like manner we may also, from a practical point of view, distinguish between the two branches of Gnosticism, which more or less enjoined or else opposed an observance of the law. This distinction led in turn to different modes of conduct, according as their knowledge (gnosis) of “the deep things" (the "depths" of the Book of Revelation) led them either into asceticism or into licentiousness, agreeably to their views of the character and authority of the law, and of the relation subsisting between a true Gnostic and the world around him. The ascetic sects found a point of internal connection, and gradually gave a peculiar shading to the whole system of theology. The licentious sects necessarily soon passed away, though not without inflicting serious injury. As the ascetic, so the licentious sects had their counterparts in Judaism. The latter, happily, were rare, and almost foreign excrescences, which manifested themselves more prominently in distant places, as in Persia and Arabia. However, the licentious Gnostics seem to have entangled some Jewish youths, partly by their peculiar mode of interpreting Scripture (which in many particulars resembled the Rabbinical), and still more, perhaps, by ministering to lust under the cloak of religion. Jewish history records an instance of this kind, details the Gnostic perversion of Scripture for the purpose of justifying their licentious practices, and adds the appropriate exclamation of horror on the part of a Rabbi when called to witness such a scene"And is it possible that such deeds are enacted by Jews!"

We shall, in conclusion, rapidly glance at the spread of the gospel amongst Jews and proselytes out of Palestine. History and legend are here unfortunately so frequently and closely intertwined, that it is next to impossible to indicate where the one ends or the other commences. Thus much only can be affirmed with confidence, that while St. Paul pursued his missionary labours, the other disciples were also engaged in the same blessed work. Mark is said to have carried the gospel to Egypt, Thomas to Parthia, and Andrew to Scythia, while Bartholomew planted the cross in India, by 1 Mid. Kohel. i. 8; comp. Grätz, iv. 100.

which, perhaps, the ancient Yemen may be meant. More trustworthy traditions speak of Philip in Phrygia. At the same time, other Jewish heralds brought the glad tidings to the benighted heathens, and with the simplicity and earnestness of a realising faith went forth to the ends of the then known world, with their lives in their hands. While multitudes of Jews and proselytes became obedient unto the faith, the needs of the dispersed of Israel were not forgotten by the apostles, and James addressed himself particularly to them in his Epistle. Little if any impression, indeed, appears to have been made on the Jews in Babylonia (meaning by this term the country between the Euphrates and Tigris). We have, however, abundant evidence that Osrhoëne and Armenia-countries in which the Jews were numerousreceived the Gospel at a very early period. Some of the churches in these lands date almost from the earliest periods of Christianity, and doubtless there were many of Jewish descent among the earliest converts. Thus even when the synagogue rejected Christianity and persecuted its disciples, the Lord left not Himself without witness among His ancient people.

CHAPTER V

INTERNAL HISTORY OF THE SYNAGOGUE FROM THE RETURN OF THE CAPTIVITY TO THE DESTRUCTION OF JERUSALEM

THE return from Babylon marked a new period in the history of the Jews. Many important changes had taken place in the political and religious condition of the nation. When Ezra attempted to reform the Jewish polity, he found his countrymen both ignorant and careless in religious matters. Elements were also at work within the community which did not give promise of good to the people generally. It was Ezra's first care, when undertaking the religious reformation of his brethren, to cause the whole of the Book of the Law to be read and expounded to the people. It was his desire that the restored Jewish commonwealth should rest upon a scriptural foundation. To enable him the more readily to carry out the needful measures, tradition affirms that he associated with himself in the spiritual government of the people a council of 120, consisting of prophets, elders, and scribes, or men learned in the law, which is known as the Great Synagogue. Considerable diversity of opinion exists as to the nature of this body, and the Talmudic notices about it are often inconsistent.1 Here it will be sufficient to say that probably this assembly represents rather a succession of men than one synod, the ingenuity of later times filling in with fictitious names a period of history which was in reality almost a blank. But the most important fact underlying these vague traditions is the growing influence of the scribes in the period extending from the days of Nehemiah

1 Comp. Life and Times, i. 94 f. [The very existence of the Great Synagogue has been disputed by some scholars; see Appendix II.]

to the troublous times of the Maccabees. How far they were at this time organised as a regular teaching body, we are unable to say.

Under the guidance of the scribes (Soferim), the traditions to which value was attached increased in number and authority. Hence numerous purely ceremonial ordinances were afterwards traced to this period. A few of them are even ascribed to the authority of Ezra himself,' although their character scarcely bears out these pretensions.

An important part of the functions of the scribes was that which concerned the study, arrangement, and interpretation of the sacred text. The duties connected with the public reading and exposition of the Scriptures naturally devolved upon the more learned, who, in any case, at a later period were regularly set apart for this purpose; and they appear to have delivered lectures or exhortations on stated days in the various synagogues which speedily sprang up throughout the length and breadth of the land. As the readers had mostly to translate the original text into the dialect of the people, to which they probably often added a brief exposition, the religious education of the people was almost entirely committed to them. The influence which they thus gained, the fact that, from the paucity of books and the general ignorance, the people depended entirely on this religious aristocracy, together with the growing tendencies of the age in that direction, contributed not a little to place religious eminence in mere knowledge and outward observances, without spiritual experience or love. It also laid the foundation of the exaggerated notions which both teachers and taught afterwards formed of the dignity of the Rabbi or teacher. Ordinarily, the various congregations met on Sabbaths, on Mondays, and Thursdays; on the latter occasions for the adjudication of causes according to the law of Moses, as well as for the reading and interpretation of the Bible. The principal teachers have left behind them one or more theological commonplaces, which are chiefly valuable as indicating the bearing of their theology and the direction of

1 Baba Kama 82a.