the-book-of-enoch-r-h-charles - Fallen Angels

Sect. IV] Chapter XC. 6-7 207
7. Yea., they cried to them, hut they did not hearken to what they
said to them, but were exceedingly deaf, and their eyes were very
Maccabean party—but that only after
much indecision (1 Maoo. 7"), because
the Maccabean movement put them in
strife with the high-priest of the time,
the legitimate and religious head of the
nation. By a member of this party the
present Dream- visions were written.
This is obvious from the doctrines of
the Resurrection, the final judgement,
and the kingdom of the Messiah whicli
he teaches, but especially from his
severe criticism on the moral and
ceremonial irregularities in the services
of the second temple (89") . To remedy
these abuses and defeat the schemes of
Antiochus the Chasids were ready to
sacrifice their lives, but all their efforts
were directed to one end only—the re-
establishment of the Theocracy and the
preparation for the Messianic kingdom
To the writer of the Dream-visions all
these hopes are bound up together with
the success of the Maccabean leader.
So long then as the Maccabean family
fought for these objects, so long they
carried with them the support of the
Chasids ; but the moment they laid
hands on the high-priesthood, from
that moment began the alienation of
the Chasids, which afterwards developed
into a deadly hostility. This hostility
of the Pharisees to Hyrcanus is attested
by their demand that the latter should
resign the high-priesthood (Ant. xiii.
10. 5), and the same demand is practically
made in the Pss. Sol. 17. The
writer who so severely criticized the
temple worship under the legiiiinafe
line of high-priests could not regard an
illegitimate holder of that office ai the
champion of the Theocracy. On this
ground, therefore, we hold that chapters
83-90 must Jiare heen written before
Jonathan's assumption of the high-
priesthood, 153 B. 0. This in itself
.
makes it impossible to identify the
' great horn ' with Hyrcanus—so Dill-
mann, Schiirer, and others, or with
Alex, Jannaeus— so Hilgenfeld, and we
shall find that the natural and unforced
interpretation of the text will confinn
the conclusion we have thus arrived at.
6. Behold (a). ' little '- 6-7.
Iiambs were borne by those white
sheep, &o, The ' white sheep ' are the
faithful adherents of the Theocracy
the ' lambs ' are the Chasids, a new
and distinct party amongst the Jews,
as we have above seen. Schflrer thinks
that it is only ' stubborn prejudice
which can prevent any one from seeing
that by the symbolism of the lambs the
Maccabees are to be understood'. It
seems, on the other hand, to be only
' stubborn prejudice ' that can hold to
such a view if the text is interpreted
naturally. By taking the lambs in
ver. 6 to symbolize the Chasids, every
difficulty is removed. In vv, 6, 7 we
have the unavailing appeals of the
Chasids to the nation at large: in
ver. 8 the destruction of one of them,
Onias III, by the Syrians ; and in
ver. 9 the rise of the Maccabees—the
horned or powerful lambs. If, with
Schiirer, the lambs in ver. 6 are the
Maccabees, what is to be made of the
horned lambs in ver. 9 ? Moreover,
though the lambs or Chasids did appeal
in vain to the nation, the Maccabees
did not. 7. Yea, they cried to
them (q). That is, the lambs cried to
the sheep, g
' But they (i. e. the sheep)
did not cry to them ', m ' but they
oppressed them ', t ' but they did not
hear them', B-ino 'but the sheep did
not cry to them'. Only q has here
preserved the text. Very exceed-
ingly. The text, which varies in
the different MSS., appears to be an
: