described by a term which seems to correspond to our `Apocrypha,' as `Sepharim Genuzim ,'
`hidden books,' i.e., either such whose origin was hidden, or, more likely, books withdrawn
from common or congregational use. Although they were, of course, carefully distinguished from
the canonical Scriptures, as not being sacred, their use was not only allowed, but many of them
are quoted in Talmudical writings.17 In this respect they are placed on a very different footing
from the so-called Sepharim Chitsonim , or `outside books,' which probably included both the
products of a certain class of Jewish Hellenistic literature, and the Siphrey Minim, or writings of
the heretics. Against these Rabbinism can scarcely find terms of sufficient violence, even
debarring from share in the world to come those who read them.18 This, not only because they
were used in controversy, but because their secret influence on orthodox Judaism was dreaded.
For similar reasons, later Judaism forbade the use of the Apocrypha in the same manner as that
of the Sepharim Chitsonim . But their influence had already made itself felt. The Apocrypha,
the more greedily perused, not only for their glorification of Judaism, but that they were, so to
speak, doubtful reading, which yet afforded a glimpse into that forbidden Greek world, opened
the way for other Hellenistic literature, of which unacknowledged but frequent traces occur in
Talmudical writings.19
17. Some Apocryphal books which have not been preserved to us are mentioned in Talmudical writings,
among them one, `The roll of the building of the Temple,' alas, lost to us! Comp. Hamburger, vol. ii. pp.
66-70.
18. Sanh 100.
19. Comp. Siegfried, Philo von Alex. pp. 275-299, who, however, perhaps overstates the matter.
To those who thus sought to weld Grecian thought with Hebrew revelation, two objects would
naturally present themselves. They must try to connect their Greek philosophers with the Bible,
and they must find beneath the letter of Scripture a deeper meaning, which would accord with
philosophic truth. So far as the text of Scripture was concerned, they had a method ready to
hand. The Stoic philosophers had busied themselves in finding a deeper allegorical meaning,
especially in the writings of Homer. By applying it to mythical stories, or to the popular beliefs,
and by tracing the supposed symbolical meaning of names, numbers, &c., it became easy to
prove almost anything, or to extract from these philosophical truths ethical principles, and even
the later results of natural science.20 Such a process was peculiarly pleasing to the imagination,
and the results alike astounding and satisfactory, since as they could not be proved, so neither
could they be disproved. This allegorical method21 was the welcome key by which the Hellenists
might unlock the hidden treasury of Scripture. In point of fact, we find it applied so early as in
the `Wisdom of Solomon.'22
20. Comp. Siegfried, pp. 9-16; Hartmann, Enge Verb. d. A. Test. mit d. N., pp. 568-572.
21. This is to be carefully distinguished from the typical interpretation and from the mystical - the type
being prophetic, the mystery spiritually understood.
22. Not to speak of such sounder interpretations as that of the brazen serpent (Wisd. xvi. 6, 7), and of
the Fall (ii. 24), or of the view presented of the early history of the chosen race in ch. x., we may mention
as instances of allegorical interpretation that of the manna (xvi. 26-28), and of the high-priestly dress