Universality of God. malignant power-now single, now multiplied, now shadowy, now distinct, now ridiculous, and now sublime-had its root in the dark and solemn view of the perplexities in the moral government of the world, of which the first germs are seen in Malachi and Ecclesiastes. This Hebrew conception of the evil, the devilish, element in man and in nature is twofold. It is either of the accusing' spirit, that seizes on the dark and the trivial side of even the greatest and the best-or else of the 'hostile' obstruction that stands in the way of progress and of goodness. Round these two central ideas, of which the one has prevailed in the1 Hellenic and Latin, the other in the Semitic 2 and Teutonic forms of speech, have congregated all the various doctrines, legends, truths, and fictions which have so long played a part in the theology and the poetry alike of Judaism, Islam, and Christendom. The antagonism which had prevailed in the earlier 3 books of the Old Testament between Jehovah and the gods of the heathen world disappeared as the idea of the Divine Nature became more elevated and more comprehensive, and in its place came the antagonism between God as the Supreme Good, and evil as His only true enemy and rival— an antagonism, which, however much it may have been at times degraded and exaggerated, yet is in itself the legitimate product of that nobler idea of Deity. A profound detestation of moral evil, the abhorrence of those more malignant forms of it to which the language of Christian Europe has given the name of diabolical,' or 'devilish,' or 'fiendish,' is the dark shadow which precedes or accompanies the bright admiration of virtue, is the indispensable condition of the intense worship of the Divine Goodness. III. This leads us to a third doctrine of the Prophet Malachi, which serves as a starting-point for the questions which this particular epoch suggests for our consideration. It is the assertion--not new in itself, as we have already pointed out, but The Accuser-Slanderer-'Diabolus'-'Devil.' 2 The Enemy-Satan'-'Fiend.' Ewald, v. 184. new from the force and precision with which the truth is driven home of the absolute equality, in the Divine judgment, of all genuine and sincere worship throughout, the world. In rejecting the half-hearted and niggardly offerings of the Jewish Church, the prophet reminds his readers not only that their sacrifices are not needed by Him whom they seek to propitiate by them, but that from the furthest East, where the sun rises above the earth, to the remotest western horizon, where he sinks beneath it, the Eternal name, under whatever form, is great; that among the innumerable races outside the Jewish pale-not only in Jerusalem, but in every place over that wide circumference-the cloud of incense that goes up from altars, of whatever temple, is, if faithfully rendered, a pure, unpolluted offering to that Divine Presence, known or unknown, throughout all the nations of mankind.' It is a truth which met with a partial exemplification, as we shall see, in connexion with the great religious systems which, in the vacant space on which we are now entering, pressed upon the Jewish creed and ritual. It is a truth which was raised to the first order of religious doctrine by Him who declared that many should come from East and West, and sit down in 'the kingdom,' and by the disciples, who repeated it after Him almost in the words of Malachi, though without a figure, that: In every nation he that feareth 3 Him and 'worketh righteousness is accepted of Him;' and that not 'the hearers of the law, but the doers of the law, who have 'not the law, shall be justified.' It is a truth which, after a long period of neglect, and even of bitter condemnation, has become in our days the basis of the great science of comparative theology, and has slowly re-entered the circle of practical and religious thought. In the entire vacancy which occupies the annals of the Jewish nation after the times of Nehemiah there is one single Story of Relations to the Gentile world. incident recorded which exactly coincides with the contrast which Malachi draws between the degenerate Priesthood of his own day and the purer elements of the Gentile world. In that corrupt family of Eliashib, which occupied the High Priesthood, there was one deed at this time, darker than any that had preceded it-'more dreadful,' says the historian-who reports it in terms which seem almost the echo of Malachi's indignant language-than any which had 'been known among the nations, civilised or uncivilised, ' outside the Jewish pale.' His two sons both aimed at their father's office, which then, as often before and afterwards, was in the gift of the foreign Governor residing at Jerusalem. John was in possession. But Bagoses, the Governor, favoured Joshua.' The two brothers met in the Temple, and the elder, stung by jealousy, murdered the younger on the floor of the sanctuary. The Governor, filled with just anger, descended from his fortress-tower, like Lysias in later days, and burst into the Temple. The sacerdotal guardians endeavoured to resist the sacrilegious intruder, as he advanced reproaching them with the crime. But he thrust them aside and penetrated, it would seem, into the sacred edifice itself, where the corpse lay stretched upon the Temple pavement. 'What,' he exclaimed,' am I not cleaner than the dead carcase of him whom ye have murdered? The words of Bagoses lived in the recollection of those who heard them. They expressed the universal but unwelcome truth, Is not a good 'Persian better than a bad Jew?'-or, to turn it into the form of the indignant question of a great modern theologian, 'Who would not meet the judgment of the Divine Redeemer 'loaded with the errors of Nestorius rather than with the 'crimes of Cyril?' 2 304. 6 IV. It is in the light of this principle, clearly foreshadowed 1 Jos. Ant. xi. 7, § 1. For the possible connexion of this event with Malachi ii. 5-8, see Hitzig, Geschichte, 2 Milman's Hist. of Latin Christianity, i. 145. by the Evangelical Prophet of the Captivity, that we may proceed to ask the question, which naturally forces itself upon us, before we leave this period of the Jewish history: What traces were left upon it by the circumstances of the new sphere which had opened upon them through the connexion. of Israel with the Persian Empire? We have seen what elements in the development of the national religion were due to their stay in Babylon. We have now to ask what elements, if any, were added by the other forces brought into contact with them in the Eastern or Western world. sian Em pire. 1. The first influence to be considered in the retrospect of The Perthis period is the general effect of the Persian Monarchy on the manners and the imagination of the Jewish race. If, with all the alienation of exiles, almost of rebels, there had yet been an attraction for them in the magnificent power of the Babylonian Empire, there could not have been less in the forms, hardly less august, and far more friendly, that surrounded the successors of their benefactor Cyrus. We have seen how closely they clung to that protection; how intimate their relations with the Persian Governor, who resided almost within the Temple precincts; how complete his control over their most sacred functionaries; how the letters and decrees of its kings were placed almost on the level of their sacred books. From the exceptionally kindly relations. between the Court of Susa and the Jewish colony at this time it has come to pass that even to this day the King of Persia is the only existing2 Potentate of the world whose name appeals to the common sentiment as a Biblical personage. There is one writing of this period in which these relations are especially brought out. Even more than the Book of Job Neh. xiii. 4-9; Jos. Ant. xi. 7. 2 This was beyond doubt one main reason of the extraordinary interest manifested by the lower classes of England in the visit of the Shah of Persia in 1874. I may, perhaps, The Book is Idumæan, and the Book of Daniel Babylonian, is the Book of Esther; of Esther Persian. It is the one example in the sacred volume of a story of which the whole scenery and imagery breathes the atmosphere of an Oriental Court as completely and almost as exclusively as the Arabian Nights.' We are in the Palace at Susa. We are in that splendid hall of Darius, of which no vestige now remains, but which can be completely represented to our sight by the still existing ruins of the contemporary hall at Persepolis, that edifice of which it has been said that no interior of any building, ancient or modern, not Egyptian Karnac, not Cologne Cathedral, could rival it in space and beauty. The only feature found at Persepolis which was wanting at Susa was the splendid staircase- noblest example of a 'flight of stairs to be found in any part of the world.” All else was in Shushan the Palace fortress '-the colossal bulls at the entrance; the vast pillars, sixty feet high, along its nave; the pavement of coloured marbles, as the author of the Book of Esther repeats, as if recalling colour after colour that had feasted his eyes-'red, and blue, and white, and 'black'-and the curtains hanging from pillar to pillar, 'white and green and purple,' fastened with cords of white 'and purple.' There it was that, overlooking, from the terraced heights on which the hall was built, the plains of the Ulai, Ahasuerus, whose name was Grecised into Xerxes, gave, in the third year of his reign, a half-year's festival. There, in the gardens within the palace, on the slope of the palatial hill, was the banquet, like those given by the Emperor of China, to the whole population of the Province. Its local interest. 1 'Shushan the Palace 'is the form in Esther i. 2, Dan. viii. 1, as if it was the official name of the royal residence. The word (Bireh) is elsewhere only used for the Persian Governor's residence at Jerusalem-as (like the Prætorium in the Roman camps and provinces) each such residence was |