100 Howes, “‘Who Will Put My Soul?

’” OTE 27/1 (2014): 100-122

“Who Will Put My Soul on the Scale?”:

Psychostasia in Second Temple Judaism
LLEWELLYN HOWES, UNIVERSITY OF PRETORIA1
ABSTRACT
“Psychostasia” is the notion that a divine or supernatural figure
weighs and/or measures the souls of people when judging them. The
present effort represents the second of three articles on psychosta-
sia. The first article focused on the occurrences of psychostasia in
the OT.2 In the current article, attention is paid to the occurrences of
psychostasia in apocryphal and pseudepigraphical Jewish writings
from the Second Temple period, including the Qumran Scrolls. The
current purpose is firstly to determine whether or not the concept of
psychostasia was a recognised and recognisable feature of Second
Temple Palestinian Judaism. Allowing for a positive answer to the
latter, the second purpose of this article is to ascertain how the idea
of psychostasia was understood by Palestinian Jews of the Second
Temple period.

A THE CONCEPT OF “PSYCHOSTASIA”

“Psychostasia” is the academic term for the “weighing–of–the–soul” concept.3
Put differently, “psychostasia” is the umbrella term for the ancient notion that a
divine or supernatural figure judged ordinary people through weighing their
worth on scales. Although the “soul” is most frequently associated with this
concept in ancient literature, other items might also be weighed, like the
“heart” or the “spirit.” Regardless of the exact item being measured or
weighed, it was normally some or other symbol for a person’s inner being.4
This idea had its inception in Egyptian mythology. It is well–known that the
concept of psychostasia was an integral and widespread feature of Egyptian

1
This article is a research output from a doctoral dissertation that was completed
under the supervision of professor Andries G. van Aarde at the University of Pretoria:
Llewellyn Howes, “The Sayings Gospel Q within the Contexts of the Third and
Renewed Quests for the Historical Jesus: Wisdom and Apocalypticism in the First
Century,” (Ph.D. diss., University of Pretoria, 2012).
2
Llewellyn Howes, “Measuring and Weighing Psychostasia in Q 6:37–38: Inter-
texts from the Old Testament,” HTS 70/1 (2014), http:// dx.doi.org/10.4102/hts.
v70i1.1952
3
Samuel G. F. Brandon, “The Weighing of the Soul,” in Myths and Symbols: Stud-
ies in Honor of Mircea Eliade (ed. Joseph M. Kitagawa and Charles H. Long; Chi-
cago: Chicago University Press, 1969), 91.
4
Brandon, “Weighing,” 91.
 Howes, “‘Who Will Put My Soul?’” OTE 27/1 (2014): 100-122 101

thought.5 Yet, the earliest Egyptian texts about the afterlife, written during the
Old Kingdom period (2425–2300 B.C.E.), do not utter a single word on psy-
chostasia.6 In those texts, post–mortem judgment is described in terms of sym-
bolism and imagery taken from the earthly courtroom.
It is only during the First Intermediate period (2200–2050 B.C.E.), in the
ancient Egyptian writing Instruction for King Merikarē, that a new element is
added to the traditional imagery of a legal courtroom.7 According to this text,
the court proceedings would include the act of placing the good and bad deeds
of the individual being judged in two respective heaps. This was done so that
the deeds in each heap could be accurately measured. The fate of one’s judg-
ment would then depend on which heap contained more deeds, the good heap,
or the bad heap. Brandon argues that this new addition to court proceedings
was introduced in Egyptian myths about the afterlife because people generally
did not trust the earthly justice system.8 Accordingly, this act of measuring
good deeds against bad deeds ensured that the imagined legal proceedings
would be objective and impartial. People were not at the mercy of the super-
natural judge and his potential misgivings, preconceptions and partiality.
Rather, their own deeds and behaviour determined their ultimate post–mortem
fate.
The idea of “weighing” first appeared in the Middle Kingdom period
(2160–1580 B.C.E.) in a series of manuscripts known as the Coffin Texts.9 In
post–mortem judgment scenes, mention is made in passing of balances, scales,
and weights.10 It is only during the New Kingdom period (1580–1090 B.C.E.)
that the concept of psychostasia became full–blown in Egyptian mythology.
The Egyptian Book of the Dead (125) describes the final judgment as an act of

5
Birger A. Pearson, “The Pierpont Morgan Fragments of a Coptic Enoch Apoc-
ryphon,” in Studies on the Testament of Abraham (SBLSCS 6; ed. George E. W.
Nickelsburg; Missoula: Scholars Press, 1976), 249. See Brandon, “Weighing,” 91–99,
esp. 99.
6
See Brandon, “Weighing,” 94–96.
7
Brandon, “Weighing,” 96.
8
Brandon, “Weighing,” 96. See also Ronald A. Piper, “The Language of Violence
and the Aphoristic Sayings in Q: A Study of Q 6:27–36,” in Conflict and Invention:
Literary, Rhetorical and Social Studies on the Sayings Gospel Q (ed. John S. Klop-
penborg; Valley Forge: Trinity, 1995), 53–72. Peter Garnsey, Social Status and Legal
Privilege in the Roman Empire (Oxford: Clarendon, 1970). Cf. further Richard A.
Horsley, “Social Conflict in the Synoptic Sayings Source Q,” in Conflict and Inven-
tion: Literary, Rhetorical and Social Studies on the Sayings Gospel Q (ed. John S.
Kloppenborg; Valley Forge: Trinity, 1995), 45. Richard A. Horsley, Archeology,
History and Society in Galilee: The Social Context of Jesus and the Rabbis (Valley
Forge: Trinity, 1996), 120.
9
Brandon, “Weighing,” 96–97.
10
ECT, Spells 44, 335 and 452.
102 Howes, “‘Who Will Put My Soul?’” OTE 27/1 (2014): 100-122

weighing the hearts of the dead against Maāt on a pair of scales.11 For Egyp-
tians, the heart was more than just a vital organ. It was a cognisant entity that
acted on its own, sometimes even against its owner. Some described the human
heart as a little god that lived inside human beings.12 The heart contained a per-
son’s memory and intelligence, which is why it could act as a record of his or
her life on earth.13 More importantly, the heart symbolised the entirety of an
individual’s moral centre and censor.14 In Egyptian mythology, the goddess
Maāt, who personified Egyptian ethics and cosmology, was the daughter of the
sun–god Rē.15 She represented the Egyptian idea of cosmic and social order,
although the idea of cosmic order was ultimately personified by Rē himself. In
her distinctive role as representation of social order, Maāt was viewed as the
embodiment of “truth,” “justice” and “righteousness.”16 The Egyptian word
maāt could literally mean “truth,” “justice,” “righteousness,” “balance,” “cos-
mic law” or “order.”17 In essence, Maāt (as well as maāt with a small letter)
symbolised a criterion, benchmark or standard by which a person’s character
and conduct in this world could be measured.
Thus, the final eschatological judgment was seen as a process of meas-
uring and weighing a person’s moral worth. From the New Kingdom period
onwards, the concept of psychostasia gradually started replacing the idea that
post–mortem judgment was a judicial process comparable to an earthly court-
room. According to Brandon, this shift in emphasis is probably due to a grow-
ing need among Egyptians to emphasise the impartiality of eschatological
judgment.18 It is important to note, however, that the two different symbols of
eschatological judgment were never mutually exclusive. To the contrary, they
occasionally existed side by side in not only the same manuscripts (like the
Book of the Dead), but also the same passages (like the Instruction for King
Merikarē and the Papyrus of Ani 125).
The idea of psychostasia spread from Egypt to many other peoples and
religions of the time.19 Early Greek literature made regular use of the expres-
sion “weighing of the souls” to describe judgment.20 In the Iliad (22.179), for

11
Walter Wink, The Human Being: Jesus and the Enigma of the Son of Man
(Minneapolis: Fortress, 2002), 178. Geraldine Pinch, Egyptian Mythology: A Guide to
the Gods, Goddesses, and Traditions of Ancient Egypt (Oxford: Oxford University
Press, 2004), 27–28, 93, 160, 210.
12
Pinch, Egyptian Mythology, 59, 64.
13
Janell Broyles, Egyptian Mythology (MAW; New York: The Rosen, 2006), 31.
14
Brandon, “Weighing,” 92.
15
Pinch, Egyptian Mythology, 159.
16
Brandon, “Weighing,” 92.
17
Pinch, Egyptian Mythology, 159.
18
Brandon, “Weighing,” 98–99.
19
Brandon, “Weighing,” 99.
20
Wink, Human Being, 178.
 Howes, “‘Who Will Put My Soul?’” OTE 27/1 (2014): 100-122 103

example, Zeus is described as weighing the respective fates of Achilles and

Hector as they fight against the Trojans.21 In this scene, there are two notewor-
thy exceptions to the Egyptian understanding of psychostasia. Firstly, it is not
the hearts (or moral worth) of the Greek heroes that are weighed, but their indi-
vidual fates. Secondly, the Egyptian post–mortem judgment is replaced here by
a Greek notion of pre–mortem judgment. Hence, this depiction of psychostasia
concerns itself not with the eschatological judgment of the dead, but with the
destiny of the living in this world. This attests to the tendency in ancient litera-
ture to not only adopt the Egyptian notion of psychostasia, but to also adapt it
to their own particular needs. Thus, it would seem as though the symbolism of
psychostasia (including the concepts of weighing, measuring, balances and
scales) was easily taken over by others, but that the exact application of that
symbolism (including the time and nature of judgment, as well as the types of
items being weighed) was modified to fit existing ideas of divine and/or super-
natural judgment. This process of selective borrowing assured the successful
assimilation of the psychostasia concept by many other peoples and religions.
Despite such varied application, the purpose of the weighing action
remains the same in ancient literature: it was an impartial means by which
some or other divine or supernatural figure determined how people should be
judged.22 Similarly, in all ancient versions of psychostasia, the symbolism finds
expression in one of two ways. Either a representation of the individual under
examination is weighed (sometimes, but not always, against something else), or
a person’s good and bad deeds are weighed or measured against each other. A
more precise phenomenological description of the concept of psychostasia in
the history of different religions remains outside the scope of this article. Suf-
fice it to say, however, that this concept became very widespread in the ancient
world, and that it was commonplace in many cultures and religions by the turn
of the millennium. As such, it later became common practice in many religions,
including Islam, Zoroastrianism, Hinduism, Buddhism and medieval Christian-
ity, to describe impartial, post–mortem, divine judgment in terms of the
imagery of psychostasia.23
B APOCRYPHA
Non–canonical literature of the Second Temple period commonly use judicial
courtroom language and imagery in descriptions of God’s this–worldly and
other–worldly judgment.24 The analysis of such texts falls beyond the scope of

21
James V. Morrison, “Kerostasia, the Dictates of Fate, and the Will of Zeus in the
Iliad,” Arethusa 30/2 (1997): 276–296.
22
Brandon, “Weighing,” 99.
23
Brandon, “Weighing,” 109–110.
24
Some examples of such texts are: Wis 4:20; 11:8–10; 12:1–27; Sir 4:9; 5:5; 18:20;
41:2–3; EpJer 6:53–54, 64; Sg Three 3–5; 1 En. 40:7; 41:9; 45:6; 63:9–12; 65:6; 68:4;
69:29; 96:4; 97:4, 99:2; 100:11; 104:8–10; 2 En. 19:5; 34:1; 40:13; 41:2; 55:3; 62:3;
104 Howes, “‘Who Will Put My Soul?’” OTE 27/1 (2014): 100-122

the current investigation, which will rather focus exclusively on the concept of
psychostasia. This endeavour will commence with apocryphal literature of the
Second Temple period.
In 2 Esd 3:28–36,25 the author laments the fact that gentile nations like
Babylon prosper regardless of how sinful, godless, and wicked they are. Con-
versely, Israelites keep God’s commandments, living virtuous lives, but still
they suffer. This leads him to question the sapiential schema according to
which God always rewards the righteous and punishes the sinful. Whereas the
canonical book of Job addresses the theodicy question by comparing the lives
of individuals with that of Job, 2 Esd 3:28–36 addresses the same question by
comparing the lives of different nations with that of Israel. The pericope does
not explicitly say so, but the obvious undercurrent is a wish for justice within
the world, whereby people and nations are fairly and impartially judged by God
according to their deeds (cf. 2 Esd 4:18).26 It is within this literary context that
we find v. 34, and the following statement:27 “So weigh our sins in the balance
against the sins of the rest of the world; and it will be clear which way the scale
tips.” In this text, the item being weighed is not the “heart,” “soul” or “spirit,”
but the sins of the different nations. Also, the judgment referred to here is
apparently pre–mortem, and not post–mortem. Nevertheless, the purpose
remains the same, namely to ensure fair and impartial judgment by God (cf. 2
Esd 4:18).28
In ch. 4, the angel Uriel answers Ezra and explains that God will
produce justice for Israel at the apocalyptic judgment. Although God’s (pre–
mortem) judgment might seem unreasonable in this world, the future (post–
mortem, post–apocalyptic) judgment will be wholly fair and impartial. Ezra is

65:5–6; 66:2; 71:6, 8, 10; 72:4; Sib. Or. 1:274; 2:215–219, 233–251; Apoc. Zeph. 8:5;
4 Ezra 16:65; 2 Bar 13:8, 11; 19:1, 3; 31:6; 40:1; 44:4; 83:2–3; 84:1–2, 6–7; Apoc.
Ab. 24:7; 26:1–7; Apoc. Adam 3:16; 5:2–3; T. Ab. [A] 13:8; [B] 11:2, 5–8; T. Mos.
3:12; Jub. 4:22–23; 10:17; 31:32; Jos. Asen. 21:11–21; L.A.E. 32:2; 39:3; Ps.–Philo
11:2, 12; 19:4, 11; 22:6; 23:7; 24:3; 29:4; 32:8–9, 14–18; 62:10; Ps.–Phoc. 52; Pr.
Man. 5, 10; Pss. Sol. 5:4; 10:4; 17:43; Qumran Scrolls: 1 QM XI:16; XVII:2; 11Q13
II:13–14; 4Q157 1, ii:2; 1QpHab V:3–5; X:3–5; XII:5; 4Q171 IV:7–10; 4Q372 1:28;
4Q227 1:3; 4Q215 2, II:4—5; 4Q542 II:5, 12; 4Q381 31:5; 45:4; 76–77:8–13;
1QHXVII:14–15; XXV 5:10–13; 4Q511 1:4; 10:11; 18:8–10; III:3; 4Q418 126, II:3–
4; 4Q504 VI:2–8. In this article, all abbreviations adhere to the SBL Handbook of
Style.
25
Within 2 Esd, chs. 3–14 as an entity is sometimes also referred to as 4 Ezra. The
very same text is therefore referenced by both of the following designations: 2 Esd
3:28–36 and 4 Ezra 3:28–36. The current work conforms to the former referencing
convention.
26
Brandon “Weighing,” 98, 99, 110.
27
All translations of Jewish apocrypha are taken from the NEB.
28
Brandon “Weighing,” 98, 99, 110.
 Howes, “‘Who Will Put My Soul?’” OTE 27/1 (2014): 100-122 105

still not satisfied, and asks Uriel in v. 33 how long Israel must wait and suffer
in this world before God decides to introduce apocalyptic judgment. In vv. 36–
37, Uriel answers Ezra’s question about when the apocalyptic event will tran-
spire by quoting the archangel Jeremiel: “As soon as the number of those like
yourselves is complete. For the Lord has weighed the world in a balance, he
has measured and numbered the ages.” Thus, God weighs not only the deeds
and inner being of each individual, but He also measures the number of right-
eous individuals. According to this text, the exact number of people who will
be rewarded at the final judgment has been pre–ordained by God. Before this
number has not been achieved, the apocalyptic event will not take place. In 2
Esd, God is the one who judges, and the symbolism of “weighing” and “meas-
uring” is invoked in reference to both his this–worldly judgment (cf. 2 Esd
3:34) and his apocalyptic judgment (cf. 2 Esd 4:36–37).
The apocryphal writing Wisdom of Solomon is a prime example of how
wisdom and apocalypticism became integrated genres during the Second–Tem-
ple period. In vv. 15–20 of ch. 11, this writing describes how God, if He so
wished, could have punished the Egyptians with more than ten plagues, and
how God could have obliterated them with a single breath. Yet, God chose not
to do so, because it was not part of his plan. This latter idea is expressed in v.
20 with the statement: “. . . but thou hast ordered all things by measure and
number and weight.” In a word, the author expresses the belief that God’s
judgment against the Egyptians was measured. In vv. 21–26, the author contin-
ues to explain that God is powerful, and that He is in full control of his judg-
ment. If He shows mercy to a person or nation, it is because He loves his crea-
tion, and because He chooses to spare it.
It is within this context that the author says in v. 22: “. . . for in thy sight
the whole world is like a grain that just tips the scale.” The idea that, to God,
the whole world is merely a grain (of sand?) communicates his unfathomable
strength and power (cf. v. 2). The phrase “that just tips the scale” is unneces-
sary for the communication of this analogy. It is highly likely that this phrase is
introduced to the statement of v. 22 in order to allude to God’s judgment. This
understanding is reinforced by the conjunction δὲ, with which v. 23 begins.
After saying that the world is to God like a grain that tips the scales, v. 23
states: “But (δὲ) thou art merciful…” The mercy of God is therefore described
as the opposite of whatever is meant by “tipping the scale.” The most obvious
counterpart of God’s mercy is his judgment. Despite the exact nature of their
interrelationship, there is an astonishing number of Jewish texts – from the
29 30 31
OT, the Dead Sea Scrolls, other contemporary Jewish intertexts, and the

29
Gen 19:15–25; Exod 15:12–13; 20:5–6; 34:5–9; Num 14:11–19; Deut 5:9–10; 7:2,
9–11, 12; 13:17; 21:6–9; 32:43; Judg 1:24–25; 2 Sam 7:14–15; 24:14–15; 1 Kgs 3:6–
9; 1 Chr 16:33–34; 21:13–14; 2 Chr 1:8–12; 20:21–22; 30:8–9; Ezra 9:7–9; Neh 1:5–
11; 9:26–32; Pss 6:1–5; 9:11–20; 13:1–6; 18:20–25; 18:47–50; 21:7–13; 25:1–22;
106 Howes, “‘Who Will Put My Soul?’” OTE 27/1 (2014): 100-122
32
NT – that mention the words and/or concepts of “judgment” and “mercy” in
the same breath.33 The argument that the reference to a “scale” symbolises
God’s judgment is further supported by the literary context of ch. 11 as a
whole, which deals, overtly and directly, with the subject matter of God’s
judgment and mercy.34 The central point of vv. 15–26 is that God has the
power to exert judgment and/or show mercy whenever and however he pleases.
The same symbolism is expressed in Wis 12:26; only on this occasion in refer-
ence to God’s judgment in the world to come: “. . . but those who do not take
warning from such derisive correction will experience the full weight of divine
judgment.” Here, God’s other–worldly, post–mortem judgment is pertinently
mentioned, and the degree thereof expressed in term of weight. To be sure, this
ancient Jewish text uses each of the images of “measure,” weight” and “scale”
as a shorthand–symbol for God’s judgment, not only in this world, but also the
world to come.
We find a similar saying to the one in Wis (12:26) in the apocryphal
writing called the (Wisdom of Jesus ben) Sirach35 (5:6): “To him [meaning
God] belong both mercy and wrath, and sinners feel the weight of his retribu-
tion.” Also here, God’s judgment is pertinently mentioned, and the degree

30:9–10; 32:10; 36:5–6; 37:21–33; 51:1–4; 57:1; 59:1–17; 62:11–12; 67:1–4; 69:13–
29; 77:7–10; 78:38; 85:1–7; 86:13; 89:14, 19–37; 94:12–23; 98:1–3; 101:1; 102:10–
13; 103:1–18; 106:1–48; 109:1–31; 119:41–44, 57–64, 75–77, 121–125; 136:1–26;
143:12; Isa 9:17–21; 16:5; 27:11; 30:18; 47:6; 54:6–10; 60:10; Jer 3:12; 13:14; 16:5–
6; 21:7; Lam 3:26–36; Ezek 39:23–29; Dan 2:18; 9:4–19; Hos 1:6–7; 2:19; 12:6; Mic
6:8; 7:17–20; Hab 3:2; Zech 7:9.
30
1QS II:8–9, 14–15; IV:4–5; V:3–4; VIII:2; X:16, 20; XI:12–13; 4QSb 4:1–2; 1,
I:3; IV:1–3; 1 QM XVIII:11–13; 4QMa 8–10, I:1–6; 1QpHab VII:16; 4Q176 19–
20:1–4; 21:1–4; 11Q5 XVIII:16–18; XIX:3–5, 11; 11Q6 a:4–8; 4Q381 33:4–9; 4QHa
IV10–11; V:4–5, 11–12, 23; VI:1–7; VII:19–24; VIII:17; IX:29–33; X:24–25;
XII:30–32, 36–40; XIII:1–4, 21–22; XIV:9; XV:26–30, 35; XVII:3, 8–10, 14–15, 30–
31, 34; XVIII:5–9, 18, 29–32; XXI:10; 1QHb 1:1–2, 11; 4QHa 1:1–2; 7, I:21–23;
II:12–15; 4Q511 III:1–4; 4Q418 81:7–8; 4Q521 2, II:9; 4Q403 I:18, 23–27; 4Q405
23, I:12; 4Q434 1, I:1–8; 4Q502 16:1–2.
31
Tob 3:2; Wis 11:8–9; 12:22; Sir 5:6; 16:11–14; 35:19–20; Sg Three 1–27; 2 Macc
1:24; 7:35–38; 8:5; 1 En. 50:1–5; 60:25; 61:11; Sib. Or. 1:81–82; 4 Ezra 2:27–32;
7:45 [115]; 14:27–36; 2 Bar. 48:17–18; 61:6–7; 84:10–11; T. Lev. 15:2–4; T. Jud.
23:1–5; T. Zeb. 8:1–6; 9:1–9; T. Naph. 4:1–5; T. Gad 5:11; T. Ab. [A] 10:13–14;
12:1–18; 13:9–14; 14:1–15; T. Mos. 6:1–9; 11:17; Let. Aris. 207–209, 211–213; Jub.
1:20; 5:12–19; 10:1–6; 20:6–10; 23:22–23, 31; L.A.E. 27:1–5; Ps.–Philo 22:6; 51:5; 4
Macc. 8:14, 20–22; Pss. Sol. 2:6–10, 32–37; 4:24–25; 5:1–2; 8:23–34; 9:1–11; 10:1–
8; 15:10–13; 17:3, 9–10; 18:1–9.
32
Matt 12:7, 37; 18:23–35; Luke 1:71–80; 18:13–14; Rom 9:13–29; 11:30–36; 1
Cor 7:25; Heb 2:14–18; 4:11–16; 10:26–31; Jas 2:13; 3:17; 5:9–11.
33
Howes, “Sayings Gospel Q,” 258.
34
Cf. esp. Wis 11:8–10.
35
Also on rare occasions referred to as “Ecclesiasticus.”
 Howes, “‘Who Will Put My Soul?’” OTE 27/1 (2014): 100-122 107

thereof expressed in terms of weight. The present tense of this maxim implies
that this–worldly judgment is meant. Another saying from Sirach (37:8) uses
the same imagery in reference to God’s other–worldly judgment. After advising
his audience to be wary of a man who offers advice, the author says: “His
advice will be weighed in his favour and may tip the scales against you.” The
future tense implies apocalyptic and/or post–mortem judgment. Ancient people
saw the act of offering advice (with the right intention) as a virtue, which
explains why this act will be weighed in someone’s favour when the future
judgment takes place. However, if the one who received said advice ignores it,
and, in doing so, transgresses against God, the scales will be tipped against that
person when the future judgment takes place. The impact of the advice depends
on the reaction of the person who receives it, which is why the text says that it
may (or may not!) tip the scales against that person.
Sirach 47:23–25 explains the exile of Israel as the inevitable result of
her sins against God. Verse 24 starts with the statement: “Their sins increased
beyond measure, until they were driven into exile from their native land.”
Verse 25 reiterates the same idea in different words: “. . . for they had explored
every kind of wickedness, until retribution came upon them.” In this context,
the retribution can be nothing other than the exile itself. The mention of the
word “measure” implies that the sins of Israel were so numerous that no man
could measure it. The twofold use of the word “until” implies that God could
and did indeed measure Israel’s sins.36 The direct result of this measuring act
was God’s this–worldly judgment in the form of an exile. As with the other
apocryphal texts, Sirach uses the words “measure,” “weight” and “scale” to
speak about God’s judgment. Also like the other apocryphal works, the subject
of the judging action is consistently God, and the judgment in question happens
either within the confines of history, or thereafter.
There is one text in Sirach (9:14), however, that applies the language of
psychostasia to the moral judgment of one human being upon another: “Take
the measure of your neighbours as best you can, and accept advice from those
who are wise.” Like Sir 37:8, this text is about taking advice. Unlike the latter
text, however, this text has a human being, and not God, as the subject of
judgment. Although the word “judgment” is absent, to “take the measure of
your neighbour” certainly here implies judging his moral integrity and sapien-
tial expertise.
C PSEUDEPIGRAPHA
We now turn to pseudepigrapha of the Second Temple period. On more than
one occasion, Pseudo–Philo speaks of people’s sins “reaching full measure

36
Cf. also 2 Macc 6:14–16 and 4 Macc. 5:19–25.
108 Howes, “‘Who Will Put My Soul?’” OTE 27/1 (2014): 100-122

(against them).”37 Elsewhere, Pseudo–Philo (45:3) speaks of people’s sins

being “multiplied against them.” These texts suggest that people’s sins are
measured during their lives on earth, and that the sum–total will at some stage
be held against them.38 These notions are supported by Pseudo–Philo 33:3,
which describes the finality of death as a time or state during which “the meas-
ure and the time and the years have returned their deposit.” It is not absolutely
certain what the word “measure” refers to in this text. It could have something
to do with apocalyptic judgment, seeing as the subject matter of v. 2 is people’s
earthly deeds. However, it could just as well refer to the measured time span of
one’s life. The association in v. 3 of the word “measure” with the words “time”
and “years” strongly suggests the latter interpretation. Nevertheless, the use
here of the word “deposit” supports the deduction made above, that people’s
sins are measured during their lives on earth, and that the sum–total will at
some stage, whether it be in this world or the next, be held against them. The
noun “deposit” is repeated twice more in v. 3, and used in a similar fashion.
The idea that people “store up credit” with God, who measures and
counts people’s daily (good and bad) deeds is also expressed elsewhere by
Jewish texts, which tend to use words and terms like “account,” “credit,”
“debt,” “store up,” “record,” “count,” “write down,” “treasure in heaven,”
“heavenly tablets,” “heavenly book,” “preserved,” “kept” and “recompense” in
apocalyptic contexts.39 This idea is developed even further in some texts, which
declare that God “tests” people in their daily lives on earth in order to provide a
fair balance of good and bad deeds.40 Some light may further be cast by two
other texts from the same pseudepigraphical document.
In Pseudo–Philo 40:1, Jephthah asks the following rhetorical question to
his daughter after returning home from a victorious battle: “And now who will
put my heart in the balance and my soul on the scale?” Jephthah does not seem

37
Cf. Ps.–Philo 26:13; 36:1; 41:1; 47:9. All current translations of Jewish
pseudepigrapha are from James H. Charlesworth, Apocalyptic Literature and Testa-
ments (vol. 1 of The Old Testament Pseudepigrapha; Garden City: Doubleday &
Company, 1983) and James H. Charlesworth, Expansions of the “Old Testament” and
Legends, Wisdom and Philosophical Literature, Prayers, Psalms, and Odes, Frag-
ments of Lost Judea–Hellenistic Works (vol. 2 of The Old Testament Pseudepigrapha;
London: Darton, Longman & Todd, 1985).
38
Cf. also 2 Macc 6:14–16, 4 Macc. 5:19–25 and Pr. Man. 9–10.
39
Examples of some such texts are: 2 Esd 8:29–33; 16:64; Wis 1:9; 3:10; 4:6; Sir
3:14; 12:1; 27:16; 29:10–11; 1 En. 81:9; 96:4; 97:7; 98:5, 8; 100:7, 9, 10; 103:3;
104:7; 108:7; 2 En. 19:5; 40:13; 43:1; 45:2; 65:4; Sib. Or. 4:155; 2 Bar. 14:6–7;
48:14; 52:7; 59:2; 84:6; Jub. 5:15; 24:33; 30:20, 23; 31:32; 36:10–11; 39:6; Mart.
Ascen. Isa. 9:19–23; Jos. Asen. 11:10; 15:4; Qumran Scrolls: CD IV:5–6; 4QDb 18,
V:16; 4QDc 1, I:8; 1QH IX:25–26.
40
Cf. e.g. Wis 11:8–9; Ps.–Philo 40:5; T. Ab. 12:14; Qumran Scrolls: 1QS V:24;
1QM XVI:15; XVII:1–2, 8–9; 4QMa 11, II:12.
 Howes, “‘Who Will Put My Soul?’” OTE 27/1 (2014): 100-122 109

to associate this imagery with any kind of judgment. Instead, he seems to use it
as a metaphor for measuring his own joy, as the rest of v. 1 suggests: “And I
will stand by and see which will win out, whether it is the rejoicing that has
occurred or the sadness that befalls me.” Be that as it may, this text still illus-
trates familiarity with the imagery of weighing one’s “heart” and “soul” with
“balances” and “scales.” This imagery is indeed pertinently linked to God’s
judgment in Pseudo–Philo 63:4, where David explains the consequences of
killing Goliath: “And would the judgment of truth be placed in the balance so
that the many prudent people might hear the decision.” Whereas the first cluster
of texts from Pseudo–Philo made notion of a future judgment, during which
measured sins will be held against their perpetrators, the current text overtly
connects the imagery of “balances” with God’s this–worldly judgment.
The Sentences of Pseudo–Phocylides (9–21) exhorts the powers–that–be
to judge fairly and impartially. Words like “justice,” “injustice,” “just,” “judge”
and “judgment” permeate this pericope, occurring no less than 9 times, if com-
bined. In the midst of this exhortation (vv. 14–15), the following admonitions
appear: “Give a just measure, and an extra full measure of all things is good.
Do not make a balance unequal, but weigh honestly.” There is an outside
chance that these admonitions are speaking of honesty during everyday barter
exchanges, but given the subject matter of the literary context, this seems
unlikely. It is much more likely that, in this text, the phrases “make a balance
unequal”, and “weigh honestly” symbolise, respectively, unjust and just acts of
judgment by mortal judges. Likewise, the most natural reading of v. 14 is that a
judge should be fair and merciful in his judgments. Thus, images of “measure,”
“weight” and “balance” are used to symbolise the procedure of judicial judg-
ment. Unlike the other texts in this section, the subject of judgment is not God,
but a human judge.
One of the most direct and unambiguous references to psychostasia
appears in the Psalms of Solomon. The first three verses of the fifth psalm
praise God for his “righteous judgments” and mercy. Verse 4 continues with
this statement: “For an individual and his fate [are] on the scales before you; he
cannot add any increase contrary to your judgment, oh God.” In this sapiential
saying, images of psychostasia are straightforwardly, undeniably, and inextri-
cably linked to God’s judgment. The phrase “before you” also reminds one of
the courtroom.41 It is not clear from this quotation whether the reference is to
this–worldly or other–worldly judgment, but vv. 8–19 certainly suggest that the
former is in view here.42
Another pseudepigraphical writing that speaks just as openly and une-
quivocally about psychostasia is the apocalyptic work 1 Enoch.43 Enoch 41:1,
41
Howes, “Sayings Gospel Q,” 281–283.
42
Brandon “Weighing,” 99.
43
Brandon “Weighing,” 100.
110 Howes, “‘Who Will Put My Soul?’” OTE 27/1 (2014): 100-122

which forms part of the Similitudes of Enoch, says: “And after that, I saw all
the secrets in heaven, and how the actions of the people are weighed in the bal-
ance.” Clearly, the apocalyptic event during which God will judge the people
of this world is in view here. 1 Enoch 61:8–9 is just as unequivocal and
deserves to be quoted in full:
He placed the Elect One on the throne of glory; and he shall judge
all the works of the holy ones in heaven above, weighing in the bal-
ance their deeds. And when he shall lift up his countenance in order
to judge the secret ways of theirs, by the word of the name of the
Lord of Spirits, and their conduct, by the method of the righteous
judgment of the Lord of Spirits, then they shall all speak with one
voice, blessing, glorifying, extolling, sanctifying the name of the
Lord of the Spirits.

2 Enoch (44:5) continues in the same vein, and also deserves to be

quoted in full. The following quotation comes from manuscript J:
Because on the day of the great judgment [text missing]. Every
weight [text missing] and every measure and every set of scales will
be just as they are in the market. That is to say, each will be weighed
in the balance, and each will stand in the market, and each will find
out his own measure and each shall receive his own reward.

Like the previous text from 1 Enoch, this text from 2 Enoch has the
apocalyptic, future judgment of God in mind. What is interesting about this text
is that an overt association is made between the measuring of goods in the mar-
ketplace and the event of being measured at the future judgment. This associa-
tion implies that there was no contradiction in Jewish thought between the two
points of referral. In fact, in this text, the two ways of understanding the
imagery are deliberately combined in such a way that they complement one
another. 2 Enoch elaborates further in 49:2–3 and 52:15 (manuscript J):
And I make an oath to you – “Yes, Yes!” – that even before any
person was in his mother’s womb, individually a place I prepared
for each soul, as well as a set of scales and a measurement of how
long he intends him to live in this world, so that each person may be
investigated with it. [. . . ] For all these things [will be weighed] in
the balances and exposed in the books on the great judgment day.

Like the books of Enoch, the Apocalypse of Zephaniah also describes an

apocalyptic journey through heaven. In ch. 8, Zephaniah is surrounded by a
host of angels.44 Verse 5 has the following to say: “Now, moreover, my sons,
this is the trial because it is necessary that the good and the evil be weighed in a
balance.” Another work of this nature is the Book of the Apocalypse of Baruch,
The Son of Neriah, more commonly known as 2 Baruch. In ch. 41 of this work,

44
Pearson, “Pierpont Morgan Fragments,” 250–251.
 Howes, “‘Who Will Put My Soul?’” OTE 27/1 (2014): 100-122 111

Baruch asks about the ultimate fate of the proselytes, seeing as they lived in sin
before converting to Judaism.45 In v. 6, Baruch formulates the question like
this: “Their time will surely not be weighed exactly, and they will certainly not
be judged as the scale indicates?” In other words, Baruch is concerned that the
proselyte Jews’ former sinful lifestyles will be counted and weighed against
them at the final judgment. The use of the verb “judged” with the verb
“weighed” and the noun “scale” indicates a deliberate and necessary relation-
ship for the author between the final judgment and the imagery of psychostasia.
The most vivid and detailed description of psychostasia in Jewish liter-
ature of the Second Temple period, reminding one of the Egyptian Book of the
Dead, comes from the Testament of Abraham.46 The document describes the
scene of the final judgment in chs. 12–14 (Recension A). Because of its elabo-
rate description of psychostasia, as well as its testimony to how it was adopted,
understood and transformed by contemporary Jews, it is worthwhile to quote
significant portions from these chapters:
And between the two gates there stood a terrifying throne with the
appearance of terrifying crystal, flashing like fire. And upon it sat a
wondrous man, bright as the sun, like unto a son of God. Before him
stood a table like crystal, all of gold and byssus. On the table lay a
book whose thickness was six cubits, while its breadth was ten
cubits. On its right and on its left stood two angels holding papyrus
and ink and pen. In front of the table stood a light–bearing angel,
holding a balance in his hand. [On his] left there sat a fiery angel,
altogether merciless and relentless, holding a trumpet in his hand,
which contained within it an all–consuming fire [for] testing the
sinners. And the wondrous man who sat on the throne was the one
who judged and sentenced the souls. The two angels on the right and
left recorded. The one on the right recorded righteous deeds, while
the one on the left [recorded] sins. And the one who was in front of
the table, who was holding the balance, weighed the souls. And the
fiery angel, who held the fire, tested the souls. And Abraham asked
the Commander–in–chief Michael, “What are these things which we
see?” And the Commander–in–chief said: “These things which you
see, pious Abraham, are judgment and recompense. And behold, the
angel who held the soul in his hand brought it before the judge. And
the judge told one of the angels who served him, “Open for me this
book and find for me the sins of this soul.” [. . . ] And the sunlike
angel, who holds the balance in his hand, this is the archangel
Dokiel, the righteous balance–bearer, and he weighs the righteous

45
Albertus F. J. Klijn, “2 (Syriac Apocalypse of) Baruch (early Second Century
A.D.): A New Translation and Introduction,” in Apocalyptic Literature and Testa-
ments (vol. 1 of The Old Testament Pseudepigrapha; ed. James H. Charlesworth;
Garden City: Doubleday & Company, 1983), 633 n. 41b, c.
46
Brandon “Weighing,” 104–105. Pearson, “Pierpont Morgan Fragments,” 251–252.
112 Howes, “‘Who Will Put My Soul?’” OTE 27/1 (2014): 100-122

deeds and the sins with the righteousness of God. And the fiery and
merciless angel, who holds the fire in his hand, this is the archangel
Purouel, who has authority over fire, and he tests the work of men
through fire. And if he burns up the work of anyone, immediately
the angel of judgment takes him and carries him away to the place
of sinners, a most bitter place of punishment. But if the fire tests the
work of anyone and does not touch it, this person is justified and the
angel of righteousness takes him and carries him up to be saved in
the lot of the righteous. And thus, most righteous Abraham, all
things in all people are tested by fire and balance.47

Despite all the obvious images of both the judicial courtroom and psy-
chostasia, the idea that people build up credit with God during their daily lives
is also expressed in this passage. Particularly noteworthy in this respect are
words like “record,” “recompense” and “book.” Similarly, the idea that people
are “tested” also finds expression here.
D THE DEAD SEA SCROLLS
Our attention now turns to the Dead Sea Scrolls. Much of the rules and regula-
tions of this sectarian Jewish community are expounded in the Rule of the
Community. 1QS IX:12-26 deals particularly with the regulations for the so–
called Instructor. One of the tasks of this individual was to judge and determine
whether the community priests – often in the Dead Sea Scrolls referred to as
the sons of Zadok or the sons of justice – were righteous and virtuous enough
for their duty. It is in this context that we find the following text from the Rule
of the Community:
. . . .he [the Instructor] should separate and weigh the sons of Zadok
/ justice according to their spirits; he should keep hold of the chosen
ones of the period according to his will, as he has commanded; he
should carry out the judgment of each man in accordance with his
spirit.48

The last of the three instructions could be interpreted as referring either

to all community members or to the priests in particular. Regardless, it is clear
that this document understood the verb “weighing” as a shorthand for the con-
cept of “judging.” This could be seen as evidence of psychostasia being applied
to a process of moral judgment.
The sons of Zadok, in turn, formed part of the so–called Community
Council, which oversaw a number of community matters, including the imple-

47
T. Ab. 12:4–17; 13:10–14.
48
1QS IX:14–15; 4QSe III:10–12. All translations of the Dead Sea Scrolls are from
Florentino, G. Martínez, The Dead Sea Scrolls Translated: The Qumran Texts in
English: The Most Comprehensive One–Volume Edition of the Dead Sea Scrolls
Available (2nd ed.; Leiden: Brill, 1996).
 Howes, “‘Who Will Put My Soul?’” OTE 27/1 (2014): 100-122 113

mentation of “truth, justice, judgment, compassionate love and unassuming

behaviour” within the community.49 1QS VIII:3–4 describes this practice and
its purpose as follows: “. . . doing justice and undergoing trials in order to walk
with everyone in the measure of truth and the regulation of time.”50 In this way,
the implementation of justice and judgment filters down from the top of the
social hierarchy to the bottom. According to this text, the most important goal
of “doing justice” and “undergoing trials” is to ensure that the whole commu-
nity “walks in the measure of truth.” In other words, “truth” is something that
can be measured, and it is measured by means of a process of judicial judg-
ment. Thus, it would seem as though this community had adopted images from
psychostasia, and had applied them to their own internal juridical process.
Hence, words like “measure” and “weigh” were employed to express the pro-
cesses and acts of both moral and judicial judgment within the community. The
rationale behind this association is expressed clearly in 4Q424 3:4: “Do not
send the hard of hearing to investigate the judgment, for he will not weigh up
the men’s dispute.”
The words “measure” and “judgment” (repeated three times) appear
within the same literary context in 1QHa IV:1–6. Unfortunately, the text is
extremely damaged, making it impossible to determine either the larger literary
context or the specific internal relationship between the words in question.51
1QHa XI:27–29, on the other hand, has remained intact: “When the measuring
line for judgment fails, [. . . .] then the torrents of Belial will overflow their
high banks…” Here, apocalyptic judgment is delivered with the assistance of a
“measuring line.” The exact meaning of this metaphor is not entirely transpar-
ent. It could refer to a line of string or rope, used as a measuring implement
during construction, and functioning to ensure that walls and rows of bricks
were absolutely straight and level. It could just as easily refer to something else
entirely. The exact purpose of a “measuring line” is not as important for our
purposes as acknowledging the fact that a measuring implement of some kind
is linked to apocalyptic judgment. That this poem deals with and expounds a
future apocalypse should not be questioned. Hence, there is a slight notion in
this apocalyptic poem that the final judgment would involve some or other
measuring act.
These hints at the act of being measured at the final judgment find full
expression in a fragment from the poetic texts of the Dead Sea Scrolls: “And
with the scales of justice God measures all [text missing] he separates them in

49
1QS VIII:2.
50
1QS VIII:2; 4QSe II:10–11.
51
The same applies to 4Q434 1, I:5–11, where the words “judge” and “judgment”
occur together with the words “measure” and “scales.” Although more of the text is
available here, pieces of text crucial to our inquiry are missing.
114 Howes, “‘Who Will Put My Soul?’” OTE 27/1 (2014): 100-122

truth. He positions them and examines their delights.”52 The verbs “position”
and “examine” remind one of the judicial courtroom. Although the verbs of this
text are in the present tense, there should be no doubt that the future, apocalyp-
tic judgment is in view. The use of the present tense is probably explicable on
account of the statement’s gnomic nature. That futuristic judgment is meant is
made clear by vv. 6–8, which continue to describe the apocalyptic judgment:
[text missing] judgment to carry out vengeance on all the evildoers
and the visitation [text missing] to confine the wicked for ever and
to lift up the head of the weak [text missing] with eternal glory and
perpetual peace, and the spirit of life to separate [text missing].

The mention of “all” the evildoers, as well as the usage of words like
“for ever,” “eternal glory” and “perpetual peace,” leave no question marks
behind the exact meaning and intention of this passage. The description is of an
apocalyptic and universal judgment – one that will result in a new and ever-
lasting status quo. In v. 10, the text continues to describe this post–apocalyptic
condition with future tense verbs: “They will bow down the whole day, they
will always praise his name.” Thus, the community (or communities) repre-
sented by these Dead Sea Scrolls was familiar with symbols from psychostasia,
and applied these symbols, specifically, to describe not only judicial judgment
by men on earth, but also apocalyptic judgment by God in heaven.
E PSYCHOSTASIA IN SECOND TEMPLE PALESTINIAN JUDAISM
The significance of these Jewish texts depends to some degree on the date and
provenance of each of them. It is therefore worth our time to briefly look at the
date and provenance of each. The book of 4 Ezra, which constitutes chs. 3–14
of 2 Esdras, was probably written somewhere in Palestine, around 100 C.E., in
reaction to the fall of Jerusalem.53 The Wisdom of Solomon was almost cer-
tainly written somewhere in Egypt, likely Alexandria, and could have been
conceived at any stage between the second century B.C.E. and 70 C.E.. The date
and provenance of the Wisdom of Jesus ben Sirach (or Ecclesiasticus) have
been determined with a greater degree of confidence. Although the Greek
translation of this writing was made in Alexandria, the Semitic original was
composed in Judea, most probably in Jerusalem, during the second century
B.C.E. Even though some scholars have dated Pseudo–Philo to a time just after
70 C.E., it seems much more likely that it was composed in Palestine before the
Temple was destroyed, perhaps even as early as 135 B.C.E..54 Proposed dates
52
4Q418 126, II:3–4. Cf. also 4Q418 127:5–6.
53
Bruce M. Metzger, “The Fourth Book of Ezra (Late First Century A.D.) with the
Four Additional Chapters: A New Translation and Introduction,” in Apocalyptic Lit-
erature and Testaments (vol. 1 of The Old Testament Pseudepigrapha; ed. James H.
Charlesworth; Garden City: Doubleday & Company, 1983), 520.
54
Daniel J. Harrington, “Pseudo–Philo (First Century A.D.): A New Translation and
Introduction,” in Expansions of the “Old Testament” and Legends, Wisdom and Phil-
 Howes, “‘Who Will Put My Soul?’” OTE 27/1 (2014): 100-122 115

for the origin of Pseudo–Phocylides have varied widely, but the most probable
dating seems to be between 30 B.C.E. and 40 C.E..55 Conversely, there is wide-
spread agreement that its place of origin was Alexandria. Internal evidence
indicates that the individual Psalms of Solomon were most likely formulated
for the first time in Jerusalem, during the first century B.C.E..56
1 Enoch was familiar to the Qumran community, and was almost cer-
tainly composed in Judea.57 The same provenance probably applies to the
Similitudes of Enoch as well. Nevertheless, the Similitudes should be dated to a
period after 70 C.E., even if the rest of 1 Enoch predates the destruction of the
Temple.58 No measure of agreement exists regarding either the date or the
provenance of 2 Enoch.59 It could possibly predate 70 C.E., and might have
been written in Palestine, but neither of these claims can be made with any
degree of certitude, or even probability. The Apocalypse of Zephaniah was
probably written in Egypt, sometime between 100 B.C.E. and 175 C.E., with
slight internal evidence suggesting a date before 70 C.E..60 2 Baruch can be

osophical Literature, Prayers, Psalms, and Odes, Fragments of Lost Judea–Hellenis-

tic Works (vol. 2 of The Old Testament Pseudepigrapha; ed. James H. Charlesworth;
Darton, Longman & Todd: London, 1985), 299–300.
55
Pieter W. van der Horst, “Pseudo–Phocylides (First Century B.C. – First Century
A.D.): A New Translation and Introduction,” in Expansions of the “Old Testament”
and Legends, Wisdom and Philosophical Literature, Prayers, Psalms, and Odes,
Fragments of Lost Judea–Hellenistic Works (vol. 2 of The Old Testament Pseudepig-
rapha; ed. James H. Charlesworth; Darton, Longman & Todd: London, 1985), 567–
568.
56
Robert B. Wright, “Psalms of Solomon (First Century B.C.): A New Translation
and Introduction,” in Expansions of the “Old Testament” and Legends, Wisdom and
Philosophical Literature, Prayers, Psalms, and Odes, Fragments of Lost Judea–Hel-
lenistic Works (vol. 2 of The Old Testament Pseudepigrapha; ed. James H. Charles-
worth; Darton, Longman & Todd: London, 1985), 640–642.
57
Ephraim Isaac, “1 (Ethiopic Apocalypse of) Enoch (Second Century B.C. – First
Century A.D.): A New Translation and Introduction,” in Apocalyptic Literature and
Testaments (vol. 1 in The Old Testament Pseudepigrapha; ed. James H. Charlesworth;
Garden City: Doubleday & Company, 1983), 7–8.
58
Delbert Burkett, The Son of Man Debate: A History and Evaluation (Cambridge:
Cambridge University Press, 1999), 72. Mogens Müller, The Expression “Son of
Man” and the Development of Christology: A History of Interpretation (London:
Equinox, 2008), 337. See Howes, “Sayings Gospel Q,” 31–32. Contra Brandon
“Weighing,” 100.
59
Francis I. Andersen, “2 (Slavonic Apocalypse of) Enoch (Late First Century
A.D.): A New Translation and Introduction,” in Apocalyptic Literature and Testa-
ments (vol. 2 of The Old Testament Pseudepigrapha; ed. James H. Charlesworth;
Garden City: Doubleday & Company, 1983), 94–97.
60
Orval S. Wintermute, “Apocalypse of Zephaniah (First Century B.C. – First Cen-
tury A.D.): A New Translation and Introduction,” in Apocalyptic Literature and Tes-
taments (vol. 2 of The Old Testament Pseudepigrapha; ed. James H. Charlesworth;
116 Howes, “‘Who Will Put My Soul?’” OTE 27/1 (2014): 100-122

dated fairly accurately to the beginning of the second century C.E., and can be
placed somewhat confidently in Palestine.61 Recension A of the Testament of
Abraham was likely written in Egypt around 100 C.E..62 Lastly, it is widely
accepted today that all the Dead Sea Scrolls were composed before 70 C.E. at
Khirbet Qumran, which is on the north–western shore of the Dead Sea in
Judea.63
In order to establish whether or not the concept of psychostasia existed
in Palestine during the Second Temple period, it is necessary to carefully weigh
in the balance and narrow down our list of non–canonical Jewish sources. Only
those texts dating to a period before 70 C.E. should rightly be considered.
Moreover, the probability of Egyptian influence on local Jewish traditions
forces one to refrain from considering any texts that originated in Egypt,
regardless of their date of conception. Despite this cutback, we are still left with
four independent witnesses to a familiarity with the concept of psychostasia in
Palestine before the destruction of the Temple by the Romans. These witnesses
are Sirach, Pseudo–Philo, Psalms of Solomon, and the Dead Sea Scrolls.
Although these four witnesses most frequently describe God as the sub-
ject of judgment, the Rule of the Community also links images of psychostasia
with both moral and judicial forms of judgment. Sirach 9:14 also associates the
word “measure” with both mortal and moral judgment. Where God is the sub-
ject, the imagery and vocabulary of psychostasia are associated indiscrimi-
nately with either this–worldly or other–worldly judgment. Nevertheless, God’s
apocalyptic role as judge at the final judgment seems to be the preferred appli-
cation of the concept of psychostasia by these sources. If this evidence is com-
bined with evidence from the OT,64 we are left with a very strong cumulative
argument, emphatically confirming that the concept of psychostasia existed in
Palestine before 70 C.E.. The OT evidence, in fact, strongly suggests that this
concept was already a feature of Jewish mythology long before the birth of
Jesus. Brandon believes that the Jewish expression of the idea can be traced
back as far as the second century B.C.E..65
The texts that provide proof of familiarity with the concept of psy-
chostasia before 70 C.E. can all be placed either in Judea specifically or in Pal-

Garden City: Doubleday & Company, 1983), 500–501. Cf. also Pearson, “Pierpont
Morgan Fragments,” 250 n. 66.
61
Klijn, “2 (Syriac Apocalypse of) Baruch,” 616–617.
62
Ed P. Sanders, “Testament of Abraham (First to Second Century A.D.): A New
Translation and Introduction,” in Apocalyptic Literature and Testaments (vol. 1 of
The Old Testament Pseudepigrapha; ed. James H. Charlesworth; Garden City: Dou-
bleday & Company, 1983), 874–875. Brandon “Weighing,” 104.
63
Martínez, Dead Sea Scrolls, xlv–xlviii.
64
See Howes, “Measuring and Weighing,” 1-9.
65
Brandon “Weighing,” 99.
 Howes, “‘Who Will Put My Soul?’” OTE 27/1 (2014): 100-122 117

estine generally. It follows that there is no direct evidence of familiarity with

this concept in Galilee before 70 C.E.. This is to be expected, however, given
the general and pervasive scarcity of extant literature from Galilee for the time
before 70 C.E.. Two additional considerations support the likelihood that Gali-
leans were also familiar with the concept of psychostasia. The first is the his-
torical association of rabbinic Judaism with Galilee.66 Tannaitic literature, like
the Mishnah and Tosefta, apply images of psychostasia, similar to the ones
encountered above, to their descriptions of judgment scenes.67 Although these
texts are from a much later period, they do provide evidence of Galilean famili-
arity with the concept of psychostasia. Granted, this evidence is not determina-
tive, but it is, nonetheless, highly suggestive. The second consideration is much
more decisive. Galilee was completely destroyed and depopulated during the
Assyrian invasion, only to be repopulated by Judeans from the South during the
Hasmonean period.68 Some Judeans were still uprooting themselves and mov-
ing to Galilee at the turn of the millennium. Now, seeing as the great majority
of Galileans were ethnically and religiously Judean, it is extremely likely that
inhabitants of Galilee shared religious and mythological customs and traditions
with Judea, including the concept of psychostasia. If these Galileans were igno-
rant of certain Judean traditions, whether it be as a result of moving away or as
a result of intentional disregard, they could easily re–familiarise themselves

66
Richard A. Horsley, Galilee: History, Politics, People (Valley Forge, Pa.: Trinity,
1995), 94.
67
Cf. e.g. t. Qidd. 1:13–14 and t. Sanh. 13:3. See Ed P. Sanders, Paul and Palestin-
ian Judaism: A Comparison of Patterns of Religion (Philadelphia: Fortress, 1977),
128–147.
68
Seán Freyne, Galilee and Gospel: Collected Essays (WUNT 125; Tübingen: J. C.
B. Mohr, 2000), 11, 177, 179, 219–220. Markus Cromhout, Jesus and Identity: Re-
constructing Judean Ethnicity in Q (Eugene: Cascade, 2007), 234–235. See Zvi Gal,
The Lower Galilee during the Iron Age (ASORDS 8; Winona Lake: Eisenbrauns,
1992). Jonathan L. Reed, Archaeology and the Galilean Jesus: A Re–examination of
the Evidence (Harrisburg, Pa.: Trinity, 2000), 29–39. John S. Kloppenborg Verbin,
Excavating Q: The History and Setting of the Sayings Gospel (Minneapolis: Fortress,
2000), 215, 221–222. Mark A. Chancey, The Myth of a Gentile Galilee (Cambridge:
Cambridge University Press, 2002), 32–36, 43. Douglas R. Edwards, “Identity and
Social Location in Roman Galilean Villages,” in Religion, Ethnicity, and Identity in
Ancient Galilee: A Region in Transition (WUNT 210; eds. Jürgen Zangenberg, Harold
W. Attridge and Dale B. Martin; Tübingen: J. C. B. Mohr [Paul Siebeck], 2007), 359–
361. Carl E. Savage, “Supporting Evidence for a First–Century Bethsaida,” in Reli-
gion, Ethnicity, and Identity in Ancient Galilee: A Region in Transition (WUNT 210;
eds. Jürgen Zangenberg, Harold W. Attridge and Dale B. Martin; Tübingen: J. C. B.
Mohr [Paul Siebeck], 2007), 194–196. Milton Moreland, “The Inhabitants of Galilee
in the Hellenistic and Early Roman Periods,” in Religion, Ethnicity, and Identity in
Ancient Galilee: A Region in Transition (WUNT 210; ed. Jürgen Zangenberg, Harold
W. Attridge and Dale B. Martin; Tübingen: J. C. B. Mohr [Paul Siebeck], 2007), 143–
147.
118 Howes, “‘Who Will Put My Soul?’” OTE 27/1 (2014): 100-122

with such traditions during one of their pilgrimage visits to Jerusalem.69 Hence,
even though we have no literary proof that Galileans knew about psychostasia
before 70 C.E., the existence of such knowledge is extremely likely, given the
historical and archaeological information we have about the region.
F CONCLUSION
The concept of psychostasia was in all likelihood a recognised and recognisable
feature of Second Temple Palestinian Judaism. Although the imagery of psy-
chostasia could be employed to describe moral judgments by humans upon
other humans, or to symbolise earthly judicial proceedings, it was most com-
monly used to describe judgment by God. In both the sapiential and the apoca-
lyptic streams of Jewish tradition, psychostasia offered a means by which the
judgment of God could be explained more vividly. The apocalyptic literature
from Israel used images from psychostasia to describe either God’s this–
worldly or his other–worldly judgment. In the latter case, God was described as
judging individuals or nations in heaven at the end of history, which correlates
best with the original Egyptian descriptions of psychostasia.70 In the former
case, God was described as judging individuals or nations on earth within the
confines of history. In both cases, however, the judgment of God was part and
parcel of a universal apocalyptic event that brought finality, and that separated
the old era from the new era.71
The sapiential literature from Israel also used images from psychostasia
to describe either God’s this–worldly or his other–worldly judgment. The latter
usage was similar to the way in which apocalyptic literature applied this
imagery. The former use, however, differed from apocalyptic literature in that
it described God’s judgment of the individual within the causal schema of day–
to–day life. In other words, there was absolutely no indication that God’s
judgment (1) was part of a universal apocalyptic event (2) that brought any type
of finality (3) and separated an old era from a new era. Rather, the causal con-
sequences of daily choices was equated with the judgment of God.72 In both its

69
See Seán Freyne, Galilee, Jesus and the Gospels: Literary Approaches and
Historical Investigations (Philadelphia: Fortress, 1988), 178–187; 2000:130, 154.
Reed, Archaeology, 57–58. Cf. Luke 2:41, 44, as well as Josephus: Ant. 2.280;
17.254–258; 20.118, 123 and J.W. 2.237.
70
Brandon “Weighing,” 91–99.
71
Cf. Marcus J. Borg, Jesus in Contemporary Scholarship (Valley Forge: Trinity,
1994), 73. Dale C. Allison “Jesus and the Victory of Apocalyptic,” in Jesus and the
Restoration of Israel: A Critical Assessment of N. T. Wright’s “Jesus and the Victory
of God” (ed. Carey C. Newman; Carlisle: Paternoster / Downers Grove: InterVarsity
Press, 1999), 129. Dale C. Allison, Constructing Jesus: Memory, Imagination, and
History (Grand Rapids: Baker Academic, 2010), 32. See Howes “Sayings Gospel Q,”
55–59.
72
Brandon “Weighing,” 99.
 Howes, “‘Who Will Put My Soul?’” OTE 27/1 (2014): 100-122 119

apocalyptic and its sapiential application, the this–worldly judgment of God

was experienced only indirectly, as the consequences of something or someone
else. Nevertheless, God ultimately directed and controlled this process behind
the scenes.73 Thus, there was no conceptual contradiction between God’s judg-
ment and man’s judgment, seeing as the latter was a direct result of the former.
Being wronged by another individual ultimately stemmed from God’s judg-
ment of the one being wronged. The differentiations between the sapiential and
the apocalyptic applications of psychostasia became increasingly slimmer as
these genres moved closer to one another, ultimately becoming almost indistin-
guishable around the time of Jesus.
BIBLIOGRAPHY
Allison, Dale C. “Jesus and the Victory of Apocalyptic.” Pages 126–141 in Jesus and
the Restoration of Israel: A Critical Assessment of N. T. Wright’s “Jesus and
the Victory of God.” Edited by Carey C. Newman. Carlisle: Paternoster /
Downers Grove: InterVarsity Press, 1999.
_______. Constructing Jesus: Memory, Imagination, and History. Grand Rapids:
Baker Academic, 2010.
Andersen, Francis I. “2 (Slavonic Apocalypse of) Enoch (Late First Century A.D.): A
New Translation and Introduction.” Pages 91–213 in Apocalyptic Literature and
Testaments. Volume 1 of The Old Testament Pseudepigrapha. Edited by James
H. Charlesworth. Garden City: Doubleday & Company, 1983.
Borg, Marcus J. Jesus in Contemporary Scholarship. Valley Forge: Trinity, 1994.
Brandon, Samuel G. F. “The Weighing of the Soul.” Pages 91–110 in Myths and
Symbols: Studies in Honor of Mircea Eliade. Edited by Joseph M. Kitagawa and
Charles H. Long. Chicago: Chicago University Press, 1969.
Broyles, J. Egyptian Mythology. Mythology around the World. New York: The
Rosen, 2006.
Burkett, Delbert. The Son of Man Debate: A History and Evaluation. Cambridge:
Cambridge University Press, 1999.
Casey, P. Maurice. Jesus of Nazareth: An Independent Historian’s Account of His Life
and Teaching. London: T. & T. Clark, 2010.
Chancey, Mark A. The Myth of a Gentile Galilee. Cambridge: Cambridge University
Press, 2002.
Charlesworth, James H., ed. Apocalyptic Literature and Testaments. Volume 1 of The
Old Testament Pseudepigrapha. Garden City, N.Y.: Doubleday & Company,
1983.
_______, ed., Expansions of the “Old Testament” and Legends, Wisdom and
Philosophical Literature, Prayers, Psalms, and Odes, Fragments of Lost Judea–
Hellenistic Works. Volume 2 of The Old Testament Pseudepigrapha. London:
Darton, Longman & Todd, 1985.
Cromhout, Markus. Jesus and Identity: Reconstructing Judean Ethnicity in Q.
Eugene: Cascade, 2007.
73
Cf. e.g. Qumran Scroll 1QS X:17–18. Cf. P. Maurice Casey, Jesus of Nazareth:
An Independent Historian’s Account of His Life and Teaching (London: T. & T.
Clark, 2010), 289–290.
120 Howes, “‘Who Will Put My Soul?’” OTE 27/1 (2014): 100-122

De Buck, Adriaan and Sir Alan H. Gardiner. Egyptian Coffin Texts. Chicago:
University of Chicago Press, 1935-1947.
Edwards, Douglas R. “Identity and Social Location in Roman Galilean Villages.”
Pages 357–374 in Religion, Ethnicity, and Identity in Ancient Galilee: A Region
in Transition. Wissenschaftliche Untersuchungen zum Neuen Testament 210.
Edited by Jürgen Zangenberg, Harold W. Attridge and Dale B. Martin.
Tübingen: J. C. B. Mohr (Paul Siebeck), 2007.
Freyne, Seán. Galilee, Jesus and the Gospels: Literary Approaches and Historical
Investigations. Philadelphia: Fortress, 1988.
_______. Galilee and Gospel: Collected Essays. Wissenschaftliche Untersuchungen
zum Neuen Testament 125. Tübingen: J. C. B. Mohr, 2000.
Gal, Zvi. The Lower Galilee during the Iron Age. American Schools of Oriental
Research Dissertation Series 8. Winona Lake: Eisenbrauns, 1992.
Garnsey, Peter. Social Status and Legal Privilege in the Roman Empire. Oxford:
Clarendon, 1970.
Harrington, Daniel J. “Pseudo–Philo (First Century A.D.): A New Translation and
Introduction.” Pages 297–377 in Expansions of the “Old Testament” and
Legends, Wisdom and Philosophical Literature, Prayers, Psalms, and Odes,
Fragments of Lost Judea–Hellenistic Works. Volume 2 of The Old Testament
Pseudepigrapha. Edited by James H. Charlesworth. London: Darton, Longman
& Todd, 1985.
Horsley, Richard A. “Social Conflict in the Synoptic Sayings Source Q.” Pages 37–52
in Conflict and Invention: Literary, Rhetorical and Social Studies on the
Sayings Gospel Q. Edited by John S. Kloppenborg, Valley Forge: Trinity, 1995.
_______. Galilee: History, Politics, People. Valley Forge: Trinity, 1995b.
_______. Archeology, History and Society in Galilee: The Social Context of Jesus and
the Rabbis. Valley Forge: Trinity, 1996.
Howes, Llewellyn. “The Sayings Gospel Q within the Contexts of the Third and
Renewed Quests for the Historical Jesus: Wisdom and Apocalypticism in the
First Century.” Ph.D. diss., University of Pretoria, 2012.
_______. “Measuring and Weighing Psychostasia in Q 6:37–38: Intertexts from the
Old Testament.” HTS 70/1 (2014), http:// dx.doi.org/10.4102/hts. v70i1.1952.
Isaac, Ephraim. “1 (Ethiopic Apocalypse of) Enoch (Second Century B.C. – First
Century A.D.): A New Translation and Introduction.” Pages 5–89 in
Apocalyptic Literature and Testaments. Volume 1 of The Old Testament
Pseudepigrapha. Edited by James H. Charlesworth. Garden City: Doubleday &
Company, 1983.
Klijn, Albertus F. J. “2 (Syriac Apocalypse of) Baruch (early Second Century A.D.): A
New Translation and Introduction.” Pages 615–652 in Apocalyptic Literature
and Testaments. Volume 1 of The Old Testament Pseudepigrapha. Edited by
James H. Charlesworth. Garden City: Doubleday & Company, 1983.
Kloppenborg Verbin, John S. Excavating Q: The History and Setting of the Sayings
Gospel. Minneapolis, Minn.: Fortress, 2000.
Martínez, Florentino G. The Dead Sea Scrolls Translated: The Qumran Texts in
English: The Most Comprehensive One–Volume Edition of the Dead Sea Scrolls
Available. 2nd ed. Leiden: Brill, 1996.
Metzger, Bruce M. “The Fourth Book of Ezra (Late First Century A.D.) with the Four
Additional Chapters: A New Translation and Introduction.” Pages 517–559 in
 Howes, “‘Who Will Put My Soul?’” OTE 27/1 (2014): 100-122 121

Apocalyptic Literature and Testaments. Volume 1 of The Old Testament

Pseudepigrapha. Edited by James H. Charlesworth. Garden City: Doubleday &
Company, 1983.
Moreland, Milton. “The Inhabitants of Galilee in the Hellenistic and Early Roman
Periods.” Pages 133–159 in Religion, Ethnicity, and Identity in Ancient Galilee:
A Region in Transition. Wissenschaftliche Untersuchungen zum Neuen
Testament 210. Edited by Jürgen Zangenberg, Harold W. Attridge and Dale B.
Martin, Tübingen: J. C. B. Mohr (Paul Siebeck), 2007.
Morrison, James V. “Kerostasia, the Dictates of Fate, and the Will of Zeus in the
Iliad.” Arethusa 30/2 (1997): 276–296.
Müller, Mogens. The Expression “Son of Man” and the Development of Christology:
A History of Interpretation. London: Equinox, 2008.
Pearson, Birger A. “The Pierpont Morgan Fragments of a Coptic Enoch
Apocryphon.” Pages 227–257 in Studies on the Testament of Abraham. Society
of Biblical Literature Septuagint and Cognate Studies 6. Edited by George E.
W. Nickelsburg. Missoula: Scholars Press, 1976.
Pinch, Geraldine. Egyptian Mythology: A Guide to the Gods, Goddesses, and
Traditions of Ancient Egypt. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2004.
Piper, Ronald A. “The Language of Violence and the Aphoristic Sayings in Q: A
Study of Q 6:27–36.” Pages 53–72 in Conflict and Invention: Literary,
Rhetorical and Social Studies on the Sayings Gospel Q. Edited by John S.
Kloppenborg. Valley Forge: Trinity, 1995.
Reed, Jonathan L. Archaeology and the Galilean Jesus: A Re–examination of the
Evidence. Harrisburg, Pa.: Trinity, 2000.
Sanders, Ed P. Paul and Palestinian Judaism: A Comparison of Patterns of Religion.
Philadelphia: Fortress, 1977.
_______. “Testament of Abraham (First to Second Century A.D.): A New Translation
and Introduction.” Pages 871–902 in Apocalyptic Literature and Testaments.
Volume 1 of The Old Testament Pseudepigrapha. Edited by James H.
Charlesworth. Garden City: Doubleday & Company, 1983.
Savage, Carl E. “Supporting Evidence for a First–Century Bethsaida.” Pages 193–206
in Religion, Ethnicity, and Identity in Ancient Galilee: A Region in Transition.
Wissenschaftliche Untersuchungen zum Neuen Testament 210. Edited by
Jürgen Zangenberg, Harold W. Attridge and Dale B. Martin. Tübingen: J. C. B.
Mohr (Paul Siebeck), 2007.
Van der Horst, Pieter W. “Pseudo–Phocylides (First Century B.C. – First Century
A.D.): A New Translation and Introduction.” Pages 565–582 in Expansions of
the “Old Testament” and Legends, Wisdom and Philosophical Literature,
Prayers, Psalms, and Odes, Fragments of Lost Judea–Hellenistic Works.
Volume 2 of The Old Testament Pseudepigrapha. Edited by James H.
Charlesworth. London: Darton, Longman & Todd, 1985.
Wink, Walter. The Human Being: Jesus and the Enigma of the Son of Man.
Minneapolis, Minn.: Fortress, 2002.
Wintermute, Orval S. “Apocalypse of Zephaniah (First Century B.C. – First Century
A.D.): A New Translation and Introduction.” Pages 497–516 in Apocalyptic
Literature and Testaments. Volume 1 of The Old Testament Pseudepigrapha.
Edited by James H. Charlesworth. Garden City: Doubleday & Company, 1983.
122 Howes, “‘Who Will Put My Soul?’” OTE 27/1 (2014): 100-122

Wright, Robert B. “Psalms of Solomon (First Century B.C.): A New Translation and
Introduction.” Pages 639–670 in Expansions of the “Old Testament” and
Legends, Wisdom and Philosophical Literature, Prayers, Psalms, and Odes,
Fragments of Lost Judea–Hellenistic Works. Volume 2 of The Old Testament
Pseudepigrapha. Edited by James H. Charlesworth. London: Darton, Longman
& Todd, 1985.

Llewellyn Howes, University of Pretoria and 1 Dormus, 281 Acacia Street,

Blackheath, 2195. Email: llewellynhowes@gmail.com.