r
 
 U
 
 THE LIBRARY OF 
 
 BIBLICAL AND THEOLOGICAL LITERATURE. 
 
 EDITED BY 
 REV. GEORGE R. CROOKS, D.D., LL.D., 
 
 AND 
 BISHOP JOHN F. HURST, D.D., LL.D. 
 
 VOL. I. INTRODUCTION TO THE STUDY OF THE HOLY 
 
 SCRIPTURES. By Rev. Henry M. Harman, D.D. $4 00 
 
 II. BIBLICAL HERMENEUTICS. By Rev. Milton S. 
 
 Terry, D.D., LL.D., 3 00 
 
 III. THEOLOGICAL ENCYCLOPAEDIA AND METH- 
 
 ODOLOGY. By Rev. George R. Crooks, D.D., 
 LL.D., and Bishop John F. Hurst, D.D., LL.D., . 3 50 
 
 IV. CHRISTIAN ARCHAEOLOGY. By Rev. Charles W. 
 
 Bennett, D.D. With an Introductory Notice by Dr. 
 Ferdinand Piper. Revised by Rev. Amos William 
 Patton, D.D., 
 
 V. SYSTEMATIC THEOLOGY. Vol. I. By Rev. John 
 
 Miley, D.D., LL.D 3 00 
 
 VI. SYSTEMATIC THEOLOGY. Vol. II. By Rev. John 
 
 Miley, D.D., LL.D 3 00 
 
 " VII. HISTORY OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH. Vol. I. 
 
 By Bishop John F. Hurst, D.D., LL.D 5 00 
 
 " VIII. HISTORY OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH. Vol. II. 
 
 By Bishop John F. Hurst. D.D., LL.D., . . . 5 00 
 
 IX. THE FOUNDATIONS OF THE CHRISTIAN 
 
 FAITH. By Rev. Charles W. Rishell, Ph.D., . 3 50
 
 LIBRARY 
 
 OF 
 
 BIBLICAL AND THEOLOGICAL 
 
 LITERATURE. 
 
 EDITED BY 
 
 GEORGE R. CROOKS, D.D., 
 
 AND 
 
 JOHN F. HURST, D.D. 
 
 VOL I -INTRODUCTION TO THE STUDY OF THE HOLT 
 
 SCRIPTURES. 
 
 NEW YORK : EATON & MAINS 
 CINCINNATI: JENNINGS & PYE

 
 PUBLISHERS' ANNOUNCEMENT. 
 
 THE design of the Publishers and Editors of the BIBLICAL AND 
 THEOLOGICAL LIBRARY was declared, before either volume of 
 the series had appeared, to be the furnishing of ministers and 
 laymen with a series of works which should constitute a compen- 
 dious apparatus for advanced study on the great fundamental 
 themes of Christian Theology. While the doctrinal spirit of the 
 separate works was pledged to be in harmony with the accepted 
 standards of the Methodist Episcopal Church, it was promised that 
 the aim should be to make the entire Library acceptable to Chris- 
 tians of all evangelical Churches. The following works have 
 already appeared : 
 
 Harman INTRODUCTION TO THE STUDY OF THE HOLT SCRIP- 
 TURES. 
 
 Terry BIBLICAL HERMENEUTICS. 
 
 Bennett CHRISTIAN ARCHAEOLOGY. 
 
 Miley SYSTEMATIC THEOLOGY. 2 vols. 
 
 Crooks and Hurst THEOLOGICAL ENCYCLOPEDIA AND METH- 
 ODOLOGY. 
 
 Hurst HISTORY OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH. 2 vols. 
 
 Rishell FOUNDATIONS OF THE CHRISTIAN FAITH. 
 
 A few other works will follow these, in order to complete the 
 circle of fundamental theological science as originally contem- 
 plated by the Publishers and Editors. 
 
 The reception which has been accorded these works has been 
 so prompt, cordial, and sympathetic that the Publishers are led 
 to believe that the Christian public is satisfied that the pledges 
 made at the outset have been faithfully kept. 
 
 In every treatise in the future, as in those of the past, the 
 latest literature will be recognized and its results incorporated. 
 May we not hope that the same generous favor with which mem- 
 bers of all'evangelical denominations have regarded the undertak- 
 ing from the beginning will be continued throughout the series ?
 
 INTRODUCTION 
 
 TO THE 
 
 STUDY OF THE HOLY 
 SCRIPTURES. 
 
 VOL. I. OF THE LIBRARY. 
 
 BY 
 
 HENRY M. HARMAN, D.D., LL.D., 
 
 PROFESSOR OF GREEK AND HEBREW IN DICKINSON COLLEGE. 
 
 NEW YORK : EATON & MAINS 
 CINCINNATI : JENNINGS & PYE
 
 COPYRIGHT 1878, BT 
 
 db 
 New YORE.
 
 AUTHOR'S PREFACE. 
 
 IN the preparation of this volume I have relied upon orig- 
 inal sources of information. The edition of the Greek and 
 Latin Fathers which has been chiefly used is that of the Abb 
 J. P. Migne. From this nearly all the extracts from the Fa- 
 thers are taken. The originals of the most important passages 
 quoted are given at the foot of the pages. Other ancient au- 
 thorities, in nearly all instances, are also quoted from the orig- 
 inal authors. 
 
 For the Old Testament, in addition to the Hebrew text, my 
 principal aids have been Tischendorf s edition of the LXX, the 
 Targums of Onkelos and Jonathan ben Uzziel, Professor Lee's 
 edition of the Peshito-Syriac version of the Old Testament, 
 and Blaney's edition of the Samaritan Pentateuch. My chief 
 sources for ascertaining the correct text of the New Testament 
 have been the critical Greek texts of Tischendorf and Tregelles, 
 copies of the Vatican, Sinaitic, and Alexandrian Codices of the 
 New Testament, and the Peshito-Syriac version to which I 
 added, before the New Testament portion of the work had 
 passed through the press, Blanchini's edition of MSS. of the 
 Latin version of the fourth and fifth centuries, and Schwartze's 
 edition of the Memphitic (or Coptic) version of the four Gos- 
 pels, with readings from the Sahidic (or Theban) version. The 
 views of the Talmudists respecting the books of the Old Test- 
 ament I have given almost invariably from a German work 
 entitled Der Kanon des Alten Testaments nach den Ueberlie-
 
 8 AUTHOR'S PREFACE. 
 
 ferungen in Talmud und Midrasch, by Professor Dr. Julius 
 Fiirst, the distinguished Jewish rabbinical scholar. 
 
 I have taken special pains to secure the very latest critical 
 works on the New Testament, that I might present the most 
 recent views of the German critics, both evangelical and raticr?- 
 alistic. For example: I have used the Einleitung (Introduc- 
 tion) of Hilgenfeld, of the Tubingen school, published at the 
 close of 1874, and Mangold's edition of Bleek's Einleitung, pub- 
 lished in the early part of 1875. This Introduction is, however, 
 based upon that of no other writer, nor have I taken any one 
 as a model. 
 
 I am indebted to Drs. Crooks and Hurst, the projectors and 
 editors of the series of which the present volume is one, for the 
 careful revision of the manuscript, and for valuable suggestions, 
 which will, I am sure, add to the practical value of the work. 
 I have had their hearty co-operation during the enti r e progress 
 of my labors. 
 
 Marginal notes on the pages, and two copious indexes, one 
 of topics and the other of the authors quoted, wil 1 it is hoped, 
 facilitate reference. 
 
 The work is now offered to the public, with the earnest prayer 
 that it may contribute something to the knowledge of the Holy 
 Scriptures, and to the confirmation of Christianity as a Divine 
 Revelation, without whose light and power all our intellectual 
 progress and civilization will tend only to barbarism 
 
 DICKINSON COLLEGE, CARLISLE. PA. 
 Sept. 9, 1878.
 
 PREFACE TO THE FOURTH EDITION. 
 
 IN this edition of the " Introduction " I have examined, and 
 endeavored to show the falsity of, the theory of Graf, 
 Kayser, Wellhausen, Kuenen, and W. Robertson Smith, who 
 hold that the priestly laws of the middle books of the Penta- 
 teuch were not recorded until the period of the Babylonian cap- 
 tivity, and that they were completed about the time of Ezra. 
 
 When I discussed the genuineness of the Pentateuch, in 
 the first edition, the new critical opinions did not seem im- 
 portant enough to demand a separate refutation. Since that 
 time I have examined them again, and studied nearly the 
 whole Hebrew Bible with special reference to them. As a 
 result, it seems to me perfectly clear that the entire Penta- 
 teuch is older than any other part of the Old Testament ; I 
 have, therefore, no change of view to announce and no conces- 
 sions to make to the new critical school. 
 
 Large additions have accordingly been made in this edition 
 to the part relating to the Pentateuch. In other portions of 
 the book I have also added new matter and made some 
 abridgments and corrections. 
 
 DICKINSON COLLEGE, CARLISLE, PA., 
 January i, 1884.
 
 CONTENTS. 
 
 CHAPTER L 
 PRELIMINARY CONSIDERATIONS ... Page 24 
 
 Scope of the Investigation Divine revelation not Improbable Biblical criticism progressive 
 Difficulties in tbe Bible no sufficient ground of offence Two factors tbe divine and the 
 human, are to be recognised In the Bible Views of the early Church and of the Reformers 
 respecting the Inspiration of the Scriptures The extent of inspiration In the different books, 
 and the methods by which God communicated himself to the ancient prophets Proof of the 
 Inspiration of the Scriptures derived from the sublimity of their doctrines and the fulfilment 
 Of their prophecies The wonderful plan revealed In the Canon. 
 
 CHAPTER II. 
 THE CANON OF THE OLD TESTAMENT 33 
 
 The origin of the term Canon The catalogues of Melito, Ortgen, Hilary, Gregory Nazian- 
 zen, Eplphanlus, and Jerome The catalogues of Josephus, Philo, Jesus the son of Slracb, and 
 the Talmudlsts. 
 
 CHAPTER III. 
 THE HEBREW AND ITS COGNATE TONGUES 41 
 
 The Old Testament written chiefly In Hebrew, but also partly in Chaldee The origin of the 
 name Hebrew The regions In which the Hebrew, Punic, Syrian, and Chaldee languages flour- 
 ished, and the books and Inscriptions found therein The Arabic, Jthiopic, and Himyarttic 
 Some peculiarities of the Semitic languages The different periods of the Hebrew language The 
 means by which the knowledge of Hebrew has been preserved Some account of great modern 
 Hebraists, and a notice of some of the most Important grammars and lexicons of the Semitic 
 languages. 
 
 CHAPTER IV. 
 
 THE CONDITION OP THE TEXT OF THE OLD TESTAMENT HEBREW MANU 
 SCRIPTS 48 
 
 The loss of very ancient Hebrew MSS. A list of the oldest that have been preserved The 
 origin of the vowel points The conscientious labours of the Masoritea upon the Hebrew text. 
 
 CHAPTER V. 
 ANCIENT VERSIONS OF THE OLD TESTAMENT 50 
 
 1. THE SSPTUAGINT. Historical sketch of the origin of this version Character of the Septua- 
 glnt The text of the "eptuagint Editions of the Septuaglnt. 
 
 2. THE TARGUMS.-The Targums of Onkelos and Jonathan Ben Uzziel The Targum of 
 Pseudo-Jonathan The Targum of Jerusalem Editions of the Targums. 
 
 9. TH STRIAC TRANSLATION. 
 
 4. THB LATIN VERSIONS. The Itala Jerome's translation of the Old Testament- Revision 
 of this Latin version (Vulgate) by order of the Council of Trent. 
 
 5. EGYPTIAN TRANSLATIONS. The Coptic or Memphitlc, the Sahldic or Theban. 
 
 6. THE JETHIOPIC VERSION. 7. THE ARMENIAN VERSION. 8. THE GEORGIAN VXBSIOV. 
 9. THE GOTHIC VERSION. 10, THE SLAVONIAN VEHSION. 11. THE ARABIC VERSION. 12. Ta* 
 SAMARITAN PENTATEUCH AND ITS VERSIONS.
 
 12 CONTENTS. 
 
 CHAPTER VI. 
 
 GENUINENESS OP THE PENTATEUCH HISTORY OF VIEWS RESPECTING IT 
 DOCUMENT HYPOTHESIS VIEWS OF THE NEW CRITICAL SCHOOL. 66 
 
 Universally ascribed to Moses by the ancient Jewish and Christian Churches Its genuine- 
 ness first questioned by the Gnostics First seriously attacked about the time of the Reforma- 
 tionViews of Spinoza, Richard Simon, and Le Clerc Attack of Bolingbroke Defended by 
 Michaelis and Eichhorn Attacked by the Wolfenbuttel Fragmentists Other attacks upon the 
 Pentateuch Vater, De Wette Defence of the Pentateuch by Jahn, Rosenmuller, Sack, Graves, 
 and others The views of Herbst, Volney, Hartinann, Von Bohlen, Vatke, George, Gesenius, 
 and Stahelin Astruc's document hypothesis Von Lengerke's theory The views of Ewald, 
 Knobel, and Colenso Green's reply to Colenso Defence of the Pentateuch by Hengstenber*, 
 Havernlck, Keil, and others The theories of Schrader, Davidson, Bleek, and Fiirst The new 
 critical school : Graf, Kayser, Wellbausen, Kuenen, and W. Robertson Smith Opponents of 
 the new critical school : Noldeke, Riehm, Curtiss, Klostermann, Dillmann, Watts, Stebbins, and 
 Green The views of Delitzsch. 
 
 CHAPTER VII. 
 EXAMINATION OF THE DOCUMENT HYPOTHESIS 78 
 
 A discussion of the use of the divine names in Genesis and the first part of Exodus 
 Bleek's objection to statements in Exod. vi considered Various historical inaccuracies 
 alleged by Bleek considered The numbering of the children of Israel in the first chapter of 
 Numbers considered The building of the tabernacle The number of the firstborn males 
 among the children of Israel Bleek's objection to the chronological order of Num. ix, 1C,. 
 answered The alleged contradiction between Num. iv and viii, 34-2(5, considered. 
 
 CHAPTER VIII. 
 THE UNITY OF THE PENTATEUCH . . 95 
 
 A unity of plan throughout the whole Pentateuch The history sacred in character, and 
 generally limited to the chosen people Genesis an introduction to the other books Proof of 
 unity from connection of events. 
 
 CHAPTER IX. 
 
 THE ANTIQUITY OF THE ART OF ALPHABETICAL WRITING AMONG THE 
 HEBREWS, AND THE STATE OF THE ARTS AND SCIENCES IN GENERAL 
 IN THE MOSAIC AGE 99 
 
 Hieroglypbical writing in Egypt The Hebrew alphabet originated in Palestine Ancient 
 alphabetical writing among the Phoenicians Antiquity of the art of writing in Italy and Hin- 
 dostan Writing in Palestine before the time of Moses The Egyptians before the age of 
 Moses possessed a knowledge of those arts referred to in the Pentateuch. 
 
 CHAPTER X. 
 
 PROOF FROM INTERNAL EVIDENCE OF THE GREAT ANTIQUITY OF THE 
 PENTATEUCH 103 
 
 Internal evidence that no portion of the Pentateuch could have been written either during or 
 after the Babylonian captivity. This is evident from the phraseology that came into use 
 during the captivity, especially the names of months and measures, and the absence in the 
 Pentateuch of Chaldaisms which are found in the books written during and after the captivity 
 Internal proof that the whole Pentateuch is older than any other part of the Old Testament. 
 This is evident from the archaisms that pervade the entire Pentateuch. 
 
 CHAPTER XI. 
 
 THE PROBABILITY THAT MOSES, AS LEGISLATOR, WOULD HAVE WRITTEN 
 HIS LAWS, AND ALSO THE ANNALS OF THE HEBREW PEOPLE.. . . 114 
 
 Ancient testimony of heathen to the existence of Moses and his legislation The Egyptians 
 had a written code of laws before the time of Moses Every thing in Egypt in the courts of 
 justice was done in writing The lawgivers of antiquity wrote their laws Necessity that Moses 
 should write his laws.
 
 CONTENTS. 13 
 
 CHAPTER XII. 
 THE STATEMENT OF THE PENTATEUCH RESPECTING ITS ATTTHOB 117 
 
 It professes to be written by Moses The use of the third person by Moses has its analogies 
 in the histories of Xenophon, Caesar, and Josephus De Wette's objection to the Mosaic author- 
 ship answered. 
 
 CHAPTER XIII. 
 THE BOOK OF DEUTERONOMY 122 
 
 The charge of its contradicting the other books considered The impossibility of its being 
 forged at a late age Bleek's objection considered Internal evidence of its Mosaic author- 
 shipAdditions in Deuteronomy to the Mosaic history contained in the other books Modifica- 
 tions of previous legislation Concluding reflections. 
 
 CHAPTER XIV. 
 
 PROOF FROM INTERNAL EVIDENCE OF THE GENUINENESS OF THE PEN- 
 TATEUCH 133 
 
 The directions respecting the building of the Tabernacle written down at the time The laws 
 respecting leprosy were enacted in the desert The regulations respecting the Levites pertain to 
 the desert Regulations respecting the high priest's dress taken from Egypt The exact enumer- 
 ation of the Israelites, and the list of their encampments. 
 
 CHAPTER XV. 
 
 FALSITY OF THE THEORY THAT THE EARLY LEGISLATION OF THE PENTA- 
 TEUCH CONSISTED OF ONLY EXODUS xxi-xxm 142 
 
 The laws in Exod. xxi-xxiii are too meagre, and in parts too indefinite, to have been put into 
 operation without further legislation Examples of this Testimonies in Deuteronomy to 
 Levitical precepts found in the middle books of the Pentateuch The testimony of Hosea to a 
 large early code of divine laws given to Israel Discussion of Hosea viii, 12. 
 
 CHAPTER XVI. 
 
 EXAMINATION OF THE VIEWS OF THE NEW CRITICAL SCHOOL ON THE 
 PRIESTLY AND SACRIFICIAL SYSTEMS IN THE PENTATEUCH 148 
 
 The new critical school of Kuenen, W. Robertson Smith, and others asserts that in the original 
 Pentateuchal legislation all Levites could be priests, and that the restriction of the priesthood to 
 the sons of Aaron was the work of Ezra Examination of the Jewish history in the consideration 
 and refutation of this theory Proof that the sacrificial system of the middle books of the Pen- 
 tateuch is a part of the original legislation of Moses A consideration of the assertion of the 
 new critical school that the sacrificial system arose later and was not approved by the proph- 
 etsAn examination of Jer. vii, 21-23, and Isa. i, 11-14 General reflections upon the subject. 
 
 CHAPTER XVII. 
 THE ALLEGED TRACES IN THE PENTATEUCH OF A POST-MOSAIC AGE. 157 
 
 General reflections Examination of the alleged post-Mosaic traces No clear allusion in 
 Deuteronomy to any thing later than the Mosaic Age except in the last chapter. 
 
 CHAPTER XVIII. 
 THE SAMARITAN PENTATEUCH , 174 
 
 The origin of the Samaritans, and their relation to the Jews The Samaritan Pentateuch de- 
 rived from the ten tribes Its character. 
 
 CHAPTER XIX. 
 
 EXTERNAL EVIDENCE OF THE ANTIQUITY, AUTHORITY, AND INTEGRITY 
 OF THE PENTATEUCH FURNISHED BY THE SEPTUAGINT, EZRA, NEHE- 
 MIAH, AND THE PROPHETS 180 
 
 CHAPTER XX. 
 
 ALLUSIONS TO THE PENTATEUCH IN THE BOOKS OF PROVERBS AND 
 PSALMS. . . .191
 
 14 CONTENTS. 
 
 CHAPTER XXI. 
 
 TESTIMONIES TO THE EXISTENCE AND AUTHOKITY OF THE PENTATEUCH 
 FURNISHED BY THE HISTOBY IN THE BOOKS OP SAMUEL AND 
 KINGS 194 
 
 CHAPTER XXII. 
 TKACES OF THE PENTATEUCH IN THE BOOKS OF RUTH AND JUDGES. . . . 205 
 
 CHAPTER XXIH. 
 
 PROOF OF THE EXISTENCE AND AUTHORITY OF THE PENTATEUCH ns THB 
 BOOK OF JOSHUA 208 
 
 References in Joshua to Deuteronomy References in Joshua's acts to the Pentateuch 
 Historical facts the same in Joshua as in the Pentateuch The Levltical precepts in full force 
 In the age of Joshua Proof of the antiquity of the Book of Joshua. 
 
 CHAPTER XXIV. 
 
 REFLECTIONS ON THE REFERENCES TO THE PENTATEUCH IN THE WRIT- 
 INGS OF THE ISRAELITES IN THE POST-MOSAIC AGE 211 
 
 Impartiality of the Old Testament historians Bleek's unfair method of treating the eridenoo 
 for the early existence and authority of the Pentateuch His tacit admission of the existence 
 of the first four books in the time of the Judges Strength of the testimony of the Post-Mosaic 
 books. 
 
 CHAPTER XXV. 
 
 THE ALLEGED NON-OBSERVANCE OF PORTIONS OF THE MOSAIC LAW FOR 
 SEVERAL CENTURIES AFTER MOSES, CONSIDERED IN ITS BEARING UPON 
 THE GENUINENESS OF THE PENTATEUCH 213 
 
 Violation of laws no proof of their non-existence General compliance with the precept* 
 respecting the place of sacrifice Shiloh a sacred place No real violation of the precept enjoin- 
 ing the place of sacrifice Circumstances under which the Israelites could not comply with 
 Deut. xil, 11. 
 
 CHAPTER XXVI. 
 
 THE CREDIBILITY OF THE HISTORY IN THE PENTATEUCH, AND ITS BEAR- 
 ING ON THE MOSAIC AUTHORSHIP OF THE WORK 218 
 
 The Mosaic cosmogony compared with the cosmogonies of heathen religions The object of 
 Moses in his account of creation The Mosaic order of creation in harmony with science The 
 Ktruscan and Babylonian accounts of creation The comparatively recent origin, unity, and the 
 primitive seat of mankind The Mosaic account of the primitive condition of man agrees with 
 universal tradition The tradition of a deluge universal among the great races of mankind 
 The genealogy of the sons of Noah accordant with modern ethnology The story of Nimrod 
 Illustrated on monuments Confusion of tongues The gifts presented to Abraham in Egypt. 
 
 CHAPTER XXVII. 
 
 FURTHER CONSIDERATION OF THE CREDIBILITY OF THE HISTORY CON- 
 TAINED IN THE PENTATEUCH 229 
 
 The time between the Deluge and the building of the great Pyramid Indirect confirmation 
 of the account of the rebellion of the kings in Genesis xiv, found on Babylonian monuments 
 The exact knowledge of Egyptian affairs shown in the history of Joseph The increase of the 
 Israelites in Egypt considered Length of the sojourn in Egypt. 
 
 CHAPTER XXVIII. 
 
 THE CREDIBILITY OF THE HISTORY CONTAINED IN THE PENTATEUCH 
 CONCLUSION 243 
 
 Internal credibility of the history of the institution of the Passover The route of the Israel- 
 toe on leaving Egypt, and the exact knowledge of the author of the Pentateuch respecting
 
 CONTENTS. 15 
 
 tne Slnaltlc desert Topograpny of Moab correctly given In the story of Balaam Objections ot 
 Colenso to various parts of the Mosaic history considered The opinion of De Wette cononrn- 
 ing the miraculous features of the Pentateuch considered Colenso's general objection to the 
 miracles of the Pentateuch The author of the Pentateuch possessed of Intimate knowledge 
 of the affairs concerning which he wrote. 
 
 CHAPTER XXIX. 
 
 THE COMMAND TO EXTERMINATE THE CANAANTTES, AND THE GENERAL 
 SEVERITY OF THE MOSAIC SYSTEM ............................ 255 
 
 A divine order only could justify the extermination of the Cana&nltes The act In the dlv-ne 
 ctsltatlon the important point Not unusual for the innocent to suffer with the guilty God 
 frequently uses one nation as his instrument to punish other nations An even-handed Justice 
 shown both toward Israelites and Canaanltes The Mosaic system adapted to the Hebrew peo- 
 ple The comparative purity of the morality and the sublimity of the theology of the Penta- 
 teuch. 
 
 CHAPTER 
 
 THE TESTIMONY OF CHRIST AND HIS APOSTLES TO THB GENUINENESS o 
 THE PENTATEUCH ........................................... 258 
 
 Testimonies from the Gospels and Epistles. 
 
 CHAPTER XXXI. 
 THE EARLIER PROPHETS: THE BOOK OF JOSHUA ................... 259 
 
 Unity of the book The date and authorship of the book The historical credibility of Joshua 
 The history evidently contemporary The standing still of the ran and moon Probable ref- 
 
 erence to this miracle In Habukkuk. 
 
 CHAPTER XXXH. 
 THE BOOK OF JUDGES ............................................ 270 
 
 The unity of the book Date and authorship Not written later than the middle of the reign 
 of David Could not have been written before the time of Saul Conjectural emendation In 
 chap, xvili, 80 Davidson and Bleek on the date of Judges The character of its history 
 De Wette's admission respecting the genuineness of its history The views of Davidson and 
 Schrader. 
 
 CHAPTER XXXin. 
 
 THE BOOK OF RUTH ............................................. 275 
 
 Design of the Book Written to give the ancestry of David Its date Written probably In 
 the time of David Character of the narrative The history a beautiful picture of Hebrew life 
 Rabbinical view of the Book of Ruth. 
 
 CHAPTER XXXIV. 
 THE BOOKS OF SAMUEL ........................................... 377 
 
 Date and authorship -Written before the revolt of the ten tribes The Prophet Nathan prob- 
 ably the author The character of the history The opinions of modern critics concerning the 
 books Alleged contradictions Saul's appointment to meet Samuel in Gilgal Saul's Ignorance 
 of David's family considered Other alleged contradictions examined. 
 
 CHAPTER XXXV. 
 THE Two BOOKS OF KINGS ..................................... . 288 
 
 Sources and time of their composition Composed from contemporary historical documents 
 Credibility of the history In the Books of Kings Confirmation of the Books of Kings from 
 ancient monuments The Inscription on the Moabite stone Confirmation from Assyrian monu- 
 ments Mention of Pul, King of Assyria, by Berosua Capture of Samaria noted In the annai* 
 of Sargon Confirmation of an important part of Ilezeklah's history In the annals of Sennach- 
 erib The destruction of Sennacherib's army Merodacb-BaJadan in Assyrian Inscriptions- 
 Other confirmations of this history.
 
 16 CONTENTS. 
 
 CHAPTER XXXVL 
 THE BOOKS OF CHRONICLES 397 
 
 The date of their composition and their authorship Probably written in the time of Ear* 
 3xra probably their author Example of words common to Chronlci and Ezra The sources 
 of the history Ita credibility. 
 
 CHAPTER XXXVIL 
 THE BOOK OP EZRA 306 
 
 The unity of the book Its author The objections of modern critics to the natty of Bzr& 
 oonsldered The hypothesis of Kell The change of person no objection to Itt unity. 
 
 CHAPTER XXXVIH. 
 THK BOOK OP NEHEMIAH 312 
 
 The authorship and unity of the book Objection to Nehemiah's being the author of toe three 
 middle chapters considered These chapters evidently written by on eye-witness The whole 
 book, with the possible exception of chap, xil, 11, written by Nehemlah. 
 
 CHAPTER XXXIX 
 THE BOOK OP ESTHER 316 
 
 Credibility of the history The date and author Character of the book It has beat a ground 
 of offence to some Christian scholars. 
 
 CHAPTER XL. 
 THE POETICAL BOOKS OP THE OLD TESTAMENT 323 
 
 The poetry of the Hebrews : its rhythm and other peculiarities, 
 
 CHAPTER XLL 
 THE BOOK OP JOB 326 
 
 Composed of three parts: prologue, dialogue, and epilogue Integrity of the book Its 
 character and design Date of the composition and the author The language post-Mosaic 
 Not probable that Moses is the author Probably written In the time of Solomon The author 
 an Inhabitant of Southern Judea The tune in which Job lived uncertain Concluding re- 
 flections. 
 
 CHAPTER XLII. 
 THZ BOOK OP PSALMS 334 
 
 Consists of five divisions The superscriptions of the Psalms Opinions of modern critics 
 n the accuracy of the superscriptions David's authorship of certain Psalms denied by Bleek 
 The anonymous Psalms Psalms attributed to Asaph Psalms attributed to the sons of 
 Korah Authorship of other Psalms ORIGIN or THE COLLECTION or THE PSALMS Kell's 
 theory of the origin of the collection The singing of psalms a part of Hebrew worship A 
 collection in existence in the time of Hezeklah On what principle were the Psalms arranged ? 
 Tin INTEGRITY or THE PSALMS No proof that they have been altered. THK IMPRECATIONS 
 or THE PSALMS The imperative mode used for the future tense. 
 
 CHAPTER XLin. 
 THE BOOK OP PROVERBS 345 
 
 me book divisible Into four sections THE GENUINENESS or THE PBOTKRBS WHICH ABB 
 ATTRIBUTED TO SOLOMON The first and second sections especially considered Peculiarities of 
 the language of the Proverbs of Solomon Agur and Lemuel unknown. 
 
 CHAPTER XLIV. 
 
 THE BOOK OF ECCLESIASTES 349 
 
 The design of the book Schroder's explanation of Eccleslastes Date and authorship, 
 
 CHAPTER XLV. 
 
 THE SONG OP SOLOMON .' 353 
 
 Delltzsch's analysis of the song The author Its design Itt canonldty.
 
 CONTENTS. 17 
 
 CHAPTER XLVL 
 THE LAMENTATIONS OF JEREMIAH , _^. .... 058 
 
 Tbe author generally conceded to be the prophet Jeremiah. 
 
 CHAPTER XLVBL 
 THB PROPHETIC BOOKS 360 
 
 HKBRKW PROPHECY Use of the term prophet The schools of the prophet* Characteristic! 
 at the Hebrew prophets Symbolism of the prophets Views of the character of the prophecies 
 Bleep's view Reflections on the nature of some prophecies Conclusion respecting the fulfil- 
 ment of prophecy A CHRONOLOGICAL TABLK or THI HEBREW PROPHETS. 
 
 CHAPTER XLVIH. 
 THE BOOK OF THB PBOPHKT ISAIAH 364 
 
 The character of Isaiah's prophecy His personal history Time of his prophetic labours Sub- 
 jects of his prophecies Genuineness of the book considered Ancient testimonies thereto. 
 
 CHAPTER XLIX. 
 THE PROPHET JEKEMI AH 383 
 
 His personal history Kings of Jeremiah's time The genuineness of the prophecies of Jere- 
 miah, and the date of their deliverance Their collection and arrangement. 
 
 CHAPTER L. 
 
 THE BOOK OF THE PBOPHECY OF EZEKIEL 393 
 
 The person of the prophet The genuineness of the book considered. 
 
 CHAPTER LI. 
 THE BOOK OF DANIEL 3y(> 
 
 Written partly In Hebrew and partly in Chaldee, yet the work of one author, as now gen- 
 erally conceded Objections to its genuineness considered Proofs of its genuineness Ite 
 author not a mythical character Ezekiel's references to him Bleek's hypothesis. 
 
 CHAPTER LII. 
 THE TWELVE MINOR PROPHETS 423 
 
 HOSEA: The period of his prophetic labours The book may be divided Into two parts- 
 Date of composition. 
 
 JOEL: The date of his prophecy Its character. 
 
 AMOS : Date of his prophecies Their character. 
 
 OBADIAH: His prophecy Its character Its date. 
 
 JONAH : Character and design of the book Probably not written by Jonah It* 
 belongs to later Hebrew. 
 
 MICAH : His prophetic labours Date of his prophecy. 
 
 N AHUM : His prophecy Its date Style of the book. 
 
 HABAKKUK: His prophecy Date of its delivery. 
 
 ZEPHANIAH : His prophetic labours and prophecy Its date and character. 
 
 H AGGAI : His prophetic labours and the time of the deliverance of his propbtttas. 
 
 ZKCHABIAH: Genuineness of chapters Ix, zlv Character of the prophecy. 
 : Date of composition- -Character of the prophecy.
 
 18 CONTENTS. 
 
 [NTRODUCTIOiN TO THE BOOKS OF THE NEW TESTAMENT 
 
 CHAPTER I. 
 
 PRELIMINARY CONSIDERATIONS .................................. 448 
 
 Connection of the New Testament with the Old Written records necessary to perpetuate 
 Uhi 'Btianlty as a divine revelation. 
 
 CHAPTER H. 
 
 THE RAPID DIFFUSION OF CHRISTIANITY, AND THE NUMBER AND LITERARY 
 CHARACTER OF THE EARLY CHRISTIANS, AS BEARING UPON THE GENU- 
 INENESS OF THE NEW TESTAMENT HISTORY ............. ..... 450 
 
 Testimony of Tacitus and Pliny to the rapid spread of Christianity Evidence of the same 
 fact from the ActsThe testimonies of Irenseus, Tertullian, Bardesanes, Origen, and others- 
 Conversion of the Empire under Constantino Literary proficiency of the early Christians- 
 Notice of the most eminent Christian writers of the early centuries. 
 
 CHAPTER III. 
 
 DIFFUSION OF THE GREEK LANGUAGE IN THE ROMAN EMPIRE AT THE 
 CHRISTIAN EPOCH ........................................... 457 
 
 Diffusion of Greek In the times of Cicero and Juvenal Means by which It spread. 
 
 CHAPTER IV. 
 CHARACTER OF THE GREBE OF THE NEW TESTAMENT .............. 459 
 
 Grwk Dialects Characteristics of Hellenistic Greek New Testament Hebraisms. 
 
 CHAPTER V. 
 ANCIENT GREEK MANUSCRIPTS OF THE NEW TESTAMENT ........... 462 
 
 The Codes Sinaiticus, and other leading UNCIAL MSS. The most Important CURSIVE MSS. 
 
 CHAPTER VI. 
 ANCIENT VERSIONS OF THE NEW TESTAMENT ..................... 467 
 
 The Peshito Syriac The Philoxenian Translation The Jerusalem Syrtac THE LATIN VER- 
 SIONS or THE NKW TESTAMENT The Coptic, Memphitic, Thebaic, Bashmuric, JEthioplc, Gothic, 
 od Armenian versions. 
 
 CHAPTER VII. 
 EDITIONS OF THE GREEK TESTAMENT .................... . ....... 431 
 
 Early critical studies TISCHENDORI'TREGELLES. 
 
 CHAPTER 
 THE CANON OF THB NEW TESTAMENT ........................... 488 
 
 The Books of the New Testament Canon Times and occasions of their composition Refer- 
 ences to the books in early writers Justin Martyr's citations The Gospels and Epistles. 
 
 CHAPTER IX. 
 
 THE TESTIMONY OF THE EARLY CHURCH RESPECTING THE CANON OF THE 
 NEW TESTAMENT ............................................ 490 
 
 Canon of Muratori Canon of the old Latin version Tertullian and the Peshito-Syriac version 
 of Titus Flavlus Clemens, Irenaeus, and Origen Eusebius' list of Canonical book*-
 
 CONTENTS. 19 
 
 Canon of Cyril of Jerusalem, Athanasius, Gregory Nazianzen, Didymus, Ruflmis, Ambrose, 
 Chrysostom, Augustine, and Jerome The Canon of the Memphitic, Theban, JSthiopic, Armenian, 
 and Gothic versions. 
 
 CHAPTER X. 
 
 GENUINENESS OF CANONICAL BOOKS OF THE NEW TESTAMENT 500 
 
 The four Gospels Universal reception of the Gospels in the ancient Church External evi- 
 dence of the genuineness of the Gospels. 
 
 CHAPTER XL 
 THE TESTIMONY OF CELSUS TO THE GENUINENESS OF THE GOSPELS.. 518 
 
 Proof that cvisus hud before him all four Gospels Quotations from John In Celsus Celsut 
 attributes tbe Gospels to Cbrist's disciples. 
 
 CHAPTER XIL 
 
 TUB TESTIMONY OF THE HERETICS OF THB SECOND CENTURY TO OUB FOUR 
 GOSPELS 521 
 
 The Clementine Homilies The testimony of Marcion The testimony of Basllides The Ser- 
 pent brethren Reflections on the Gnostic testimony. 
 
 CHAPTER XIII. 
 
 EVIDENCE OF THE GENUINENESS OF THE GOSPELS FROM THEIR SUPER- 
 SCRIPTIONS 530 
 
 Superscriptions in tbe Codices Vaticanus and Sinaitlcus The Gospels had superscriptions ir 
 the second century Valuable testimony derived from Tertullian on this point Clementine 
 Homilies. 
 
 CHAPTER XIV. 
 THE GOSPEL ACCORDING TO MATTHEW 533 
 
 The person of the evangelist Statements of the early Church Fathers respecting this Gospel 
 Reception of Matthew's Gospel by early Jewish Christian sects Some critics favour a Greek 
 original Internal evidence that Matthew wrote for Jewish Christians Hilgenfeld's theory con- 
 sideredDate of its composition Testimony of Irenaeus, Clement, and Eusebius The views o 
 modern critics Tbe assertions of Strauss and Renan respecting interpolations groundless 
 Genuineness and character of this Gospel Its apostolic character The objections of De Wette 
 considered Bleek's opinion of Matthew considered. 
 
 CHAPTER XV. 
 THB GOSPEL ACCORDING TO MARK 553 
 
 The person of the evangelist Character of this Gospel Contains less matter than Matthew- 
 Its omissions of and additions to what Matthew contains Mark possessed independent sources 
 Bwald's theory of Mark's Gospel Genuineness and date of composition Place of composition 
 
 The integrity of Mark. 
 
 CHAPTER XVI. 
 THE GOSPEL ACCORDING TO LUKE 563 
 
 The person of the evangelist The author of the third Gospel and the Acts of the Apostles 
 evidently the same person Date of its composition Contents of Luke compared with those of 
 Matthew The design of Luke's Gospel The statement of Luke respecting the taxing under 
 Cyrenius, (chap, ii, 1, 2.) The statement of Luke respecting Lysanias The statement confirmed 
 by an inscription recently found near Baalbec. 
 
 CHAPTER XVII. 
 THE GOSPEL ACCORDING TO JOHN 579 
 
 The Apostle John Genuineness of the Gospel according to John Additional writers in the 
 early Church who received John's Gospel It was received by all parties in the Council of Nicaea
 
 20 CONTENTS. 
 
 4. D. 325 It was an authority In the Council of Sardlea (A. B. 347); In the Council of Ancyra, 
 n Galatia (A. D. 358) ; In the Council of Seleucia (A. D. 359) ; in the Council of Laodicea -Re- 
 Sections on the foregoing The unity of authorship of the Gospel and First Eplstlts of John- 
 Internal evidence that the fourth Gospel proceeded from John The Logos (Word) In John's 
 Gospel The term not necessarily from Philo, but rather Jewish The alleged discrepancy be- 
 tween Jobn and the other evangelists respecting the day of the month on which Christ was cru- 
 cified The rejection of John's Gospel by the Alogiahs Conclusion The time and plaw of It* 
 composition Synopsis of the Contents Integrity of this Gospel Opinions respecting chapter 
 xxl The account of the woman taken in adultery wanting in the most ancient MSS. and ver- 
 sionsThe account of the angel troubling the pool (chapter v, 3, 4) wanting in best MRS. and 
 some versions, and doubtless spurious. 
 
 CHAPTER XVIIL 
 APOCRYPHAL GOSPELS 627 
 
 The Protevangel of James and other apocryphal gospels Their legendary character. 
 
 CHAPTER XIX. 
 THE ACTS OF THE APOSTLES G30 
 
 Sources of this history Its credibility Paley's Horae Paullnae Baur's estimate of the Acts 
 Haur's theory of the purpose of the Acts examined Reproof of Peter by Paul explained Paul 
 the same, as exhibited in the Acts and In the Epistles Falsity of Baur's theory Other point* 
 of agreement In Acts and Epistles respecting Paul's teachings Luke's accuracy. 
 
 CHAPTER XX. 
 THE EPISTLES OP PAUL 644 
 
 The person of the apostle Paul's early history Attainments in knowledge, conversion, and 
 missionary Journeys The account of Paul's preaching and martyrdom given by Clement of 
 Rome Characteristics of Paul and his writings. 
 
 CHAPTER XXL 
 
 THE EPISTLE TO THE ROMANS G49 
 
 The persons addressed Place and time of its composition Its genuineness Its integrity. 
 
 CHAPTER XXII. 
 
 THE FIRST EPISTLE TO THE CORINTHIANS 653 
 
 The persons addressed Place and time of Its composition Its genuineness. 
 
 CHAPTER XXHI. 
 
 THE SECOND EPISTLE TO THE CORINTHIANS 057 
 
 Place and time of Its composition Genuineness of this epistle. 
 
 CHAPTER XXIV. 
 
 THE EPISTLE TO THE GALATIANS G."> ( J 
 
 The persons addressed Time, place, and occasion of the writing of It Genuineness. 
 
 CHAPTER XXV. 
 
 THJB EPISTLE TO THE EPHESIANS 662 
 
 The persons addressed Place and time of its composition Its genuineness. 
 
 CHAPTER XXVI. 
 
 THE EPISTLE TO THE PHILIPPIANS 671 
 
 Persons addressed Place and time of composition Its genuineness.
 
 CONTENTS. 21 
 
 CHAPTER XXVIL 
 THE EPISTLE TO THE COLOSSIANS 674 
 
 Place and time of composition Written daring Paul's first Imprisonment Oecolnenan of 
 this epistle. 
 
 CHAPTER XXVIII. 
 
 THE FIRST EPISTLE TO THE THESSALONIANS 678 
 
 The persons addressed Place and time of its composition Its genuineness. 
 
 CHAPTER XXIX. 
 
 THE SECOND EPISTLE TO THE THESSALONIANS 680 
 
 Place and time of its composition Its genuineness. 
 
 CHAPTER XXX. 
 THE PASTOBAL EPISTLES 683 
 
 Objections of Baur and Hilgenfeld to their genuineness Use of the term " gnosls " in Paul's 
 epistles References which agree with the practice of the apostolic age Objections drawn from 
 the style of these epistles Special objections to the genuineness of First Timothy Considera- 
 tion of chap, v, 14 Incidents noted in these epistles proof of their Pauline origin Paul's travel! 
 after his first imprisonment Bearing of Acts xx, 25 Passages suggestive of the genuineness 
 of these epistles. 
 
 CHAPTER XXXI. 
 
 THE FIRST EPISTLE TO TIMOTHY 691 
 
 The person of Timothy Ancient testimonies to the genuineness of this epistle. 
 
 CHAPTER XXXII. 
 THE SECOND EPISTLE TO TIMOTHY 693 
 
 Ancient testimonies to its genuineness It Is found in the Peshlto-Syriac version and in the 
 Canon of Muratoii. 
 
 CHAPTER XXXIII. 
 THE EPISTLE TO TITUS 694 
 
 Titus mentioned only by Paul Ancient testimonies to genuineness of this epistle. 
 
 CHAPTER XXXIV. 
 THE EPISTLE TO PHILEMON 696 
 
 The contents of the epistle, and the time of Its composition Its genuineness Its general 
 reception in the ancient Church Defended by Hilgenfeld. 
 
 CHAPTER XXXV. 
 THE EPISTLE TO THE HEBREWS 697 
 
 The persons addressed: The epistle not general, but addressed to some Church Not ad- 
 dressed to Palestinian Christians The author No mention of the author In the epistle itself 
 Opinions of the fathers upon its authorship Character of the epistle as bearing upon its author- 
 ship Bleek's objection to the Pauline authorship Peculiarities of style Most probably no* 
 written by Paul The time and place of its composition Written before the destruction of Jeru- 
 la'em, probably in Italy. 
 
 CHAPTER XXXVI. 
 THE CATHOLIC EPISTLES 707 
 
 TH GENERAL EPISTLK OF JAMES : Writer, Jameg the son of Alpheus Luke's notice of James 
 A cousin of Jesus, but called a brother GENUINENESS OF THK EPISTLK : Found in all the 
 ancient versions Views of the Fathers The opinions of Erasmus and Luther respecting this 
 epistle The ground of Luther's rejection of It Agreement between Paul and James Peculiari- 
 ties of James' language No reasonable doubt of its genuineness Hilgenfeld's objections from 
 Internal evidence considered Probably written between A. D. 60 and 63 at Jerusalem.
 
 22 CONTENTS 
 
 CHAPTER yxxyn. 
 THE EPISTLES OP PETER 718 
 
 Notices of Peter in the New Testament, in Clement of Borne, aad other early fathers Prob- 
 ble date of Peter's arrival in Rome His martyrdom there. 
 
 CHAPTER XXXVIH. 
 THJS FIBST EPISTLE GENERAL OF PETER 722 
 
 GENUINENESS or THK EPISTLE : This epistle universally acknowledged in the ancient Church 
 Alleged rejection of it by Theodore of Mopsnestla Modern objections to Its genuineness con- 
 sidered De Wette's objections Passages in 1 Peter supposed by De Wette to be borrowed from 
 Ephesians Time of composition The language used Suits the time of Nero HUgenfeld's date 
 absurd Written from Babylon, probably about A. D. 64. 
 
 CHAPTER XXXIX. 
 THE SECOND EPISTLE GENERAL OP PETER 734 
 
 THE GENUINENESS OF THIS EPISTLE: External evidence of its genuineness meagre Paul's 
 writings described in it as Scripture Quotations of Jude's Epistle Very few notices of the 
 Epistle in the Fathers Generally recognized as Peter's in the fourth century Not received 
 by the Syrian Christians The opinions of the reformers and modern critics respecting Its 
 genuineness. 
 
 CHAPTER XL. 
 THE EPISTLE OP JUDE 738 
 
 GENUINENESS or THE EPISTLE: Opinions of the Fathers Modern opinion The author's 
 statement respecting himself Quotation in Jude from apocryphal writings. 
 
 CHAPTER XLI. 
 THE FIRST EPISTLE GENERAL OP JOHN 741 
 
 ITS GENUINENESS: Universally received by the ancient Church Undoubtedly genuine 
 Spuriousness of chap, v, 7 Wanting in all the ancient MSS. and version!* Its first ap]aranoe 
 In the printed text of the Greek Testament. 
 
 CHAPTER XLII. 
 
 THE SECOND EPISTLE OF JOHN 746 
 
 Tax AUTHORSHIP OF THE EPISTLE: Ancient testimony to it Doubtless genuine. 
 
 CHAPTER XLIH. 
 
 THE THIRD EPISTLE OF JOHN 747 
 
 THE GENUINENESS OF THE EPISTLE : Generally acknowledged to be genuine. 
 
 CHAPTER XLIV. 
 THE APOCALYPSE 749 
 
 ITS LINGUISTIC CHARACTER: It abounds in Hebraisms and irregular constructions. THE 
 TIME OF ITS COMPOSITION : The testimony of the Fathers Probably written before the fall of 
 Jerusalem, and In the time of Nero The views of modern critics respecting the time of It* 
 composition. THE AUTHORSHIP OF THE APOCALYPSE Statement of the author Testimony of 
 toe early Church respecting its author Almost universally received in the second century 
 Not in the Peshlto Dionysius of Alexandria its first great opponent Writers who used it In 
 the fourth century Its rejecters Opinions of modern critics - Rejected as the work of the 
 Apostle John by Neander, Bleek, Lucke, and others Received as the Apostle John's by Giese- 
 ler -No sufficient reason for denying the apostolic origin of the Apocalypse Points of similarity 
 between the language of John in his Gospel and First Epistle and in the Apocalypse Nothing in 
 the Apocalypse at variance with the rest of the New Testament. CONTENTS OF THE APOCA* 
 Its general design Three views of its meaning.
 
 INTRODUCTION TO THE STUDY 
 
 OF THB 
 
 HOLY SCRIPTURES. 
 
 CHAPTER I. 
 
 INTRODUCTION INSPIRATION SUBLIMITY OF THE DOC- 
 TRINES OF SCRIPTURE THE WONDERFUL PLAN OF THE 
 
 SACRED CANON. 
 
 TT is our purpose, in the present volume, to examine the Genuine- 
 * ness, Credibility, Integrity, Language, Contents, and most import- 
 ant Ancient Versions of the Canonical Books of the Bible. An inquiry 
 of such a nature travels over a long period of human scope of tnyw- 
 history. We are to consider books extending through tl K atlon - 
 a period of more than fifteen hundred years, the earliest of which 
 appeared at the dawn of history, and the last were composed when 
 the Roman Empire and Pagan Civilization were at their zenith of 
 power. In the treatment of such a subject much depends upon 
 the frame of mind with which it is approached. If our speculative 
 system excludes from the universe an ever-living, free, supreme In- 
 telligence, the Creator and Preserver of all that is^ and acknowl- 
 edges nothing but unintelligent physical forces, upon whose play 
 all things depend, we are wholly unfit to deal fairly with the Sacred 
 Canon. For in such a case Revelation, Miracles, and Prophecies 
 are palpable absurdities, But Atheism can never be a positive af- 
 firmation ; and if the natural phenomena of the world furnished no 
 proof of a personal God, we could yet philosophically admit the 
 evidence which the facts of the Bible give of his exist- ^g r^^ ^ 
 ence. No real Theist can consistently deny the possi- compelled to 
 bility of revelation, with its accompanying proofs mir- ^itte^rev1ju 
 ides and prophecies and hence he is ever ready to tion - 
 listen to the evidence of the genuineness of documents th'at establish 
 them. Nor will he take offense at a written revelation, when he re- 
 flects that it is by means of books , in the order of Providence, that 
 mankind are instructed in the various affairs of the world.
 
 24 INTRODUCTION TO THE STUDY 
 
 Biblical Criticism, like all other branches of our knowledge, is pro- 
 gressive. The thorough study of Hebrew and its cognate languages, 
 of Attic and Hellenistic Greek, and of the general principles of phi- 
 lology ; the profound investigations into ancient history ; the discov- 
 ery of lost works and of ancient manuscripts of the Bible ; the exca- 
 vation of ancient ruins and the deciphering of ancient monuments ; 
 and a more thorough knowledge of the geography, natural histor/ 
 and customs of Palestine, derived from numerous modern Oriental 
 travelers, have all thrown great light upon the Holy Scriptures, and 
 in many instances have remarkably confirmed them. 
 
 The difficulties that frequently meet us in the Holy Scriptures 
 Difficulties to should neither surprise nor offend us. They arise part- 
 thetmdyofthe ty ^ rorn ^ e nature of the subjects treated, partly from 
 Bible. the foreign languages in which the Bible is written, and 
 
 partly from the imperfectly known habits of the people to whom 
 the various parts of Revelation were originally communicated. If 
 the Bible contained nothing that required deep study, it would have 
 but little attraction for us. As it is, all its practical parts are suffi- 
 ciently clear, while those of a more abstruse character exercise. out 
 thoughts, our patience, and our faith. And this holds true of the 
 physical world, in which, while it has pleased God to make plain tc 
 us what is most necessary, he has at the same time hidden much 
 from us, and given us a large field in which to develop, through 
 intense study, our intellectual powers, by solving the mysteries of 
 nature and discovering her laws. 
 
 TjgQjkctors are tobe recognised in the Bible the Divine and the 
 
 Human and it may not always be an easy matter to fix the limits 
 
 of each. " All Scripture is given by inspiration of God. and is prof- 
 
 itable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in right- 
 
 eousness." (2 Tim. Hi, 16.) Admitting this to be the meaning ol 
 
 the original, 1 it leaves undetermined what books constitute the Old 
 
 Testament, to which it obviously refers ; nor does it fix the extent 
 
 of their inspiration, or fairly include the New Testament. We ac- 
 
 cordingly find different views held by Christian scholars respecting 
 
 the exact degree of divine influence granted the sacred writers. 
 
 ^ " That the prophets and apostles taught under the influence of the\ 
 
 /Holy Spirit, was the universal belief of the ancient Church, founded! 
 
 \ in the testimony of Scripture itself. But this living idea of inspira- 
 
 1 The Greek is, irtiaa ypa^Hj dedirvEvaTOf nai u<j>6fafu>f, etc. As there is an omission 
 of tori, it has been disputed whether it is to be supplied before or after tieoirvcvorof 
 In the latter case the passage would be rendered, " All Scripture given by inspiration 
 of God is also profitable," etc. This is the rendering of the Peshito Syriac a-id 
 the Vulgate, and is the view of some eminent critics but the ical seems to forbid it.
 
 OF THE HOLY SCRIPTURES. 25 
 
 tion was by no means confined to the written letter The Belief of prim- 
 
 ... . T_ i Itlve Church In 
 
 Jews, indeed, had come to believe in the verbal inspira- inspiration of 
 
 tion of their sacred writings, before the canon of the New tne Scriptures. 
 Testament was completed, at a time when, with them, the living source 
 of prophecy had ceased to flow. . . . The fathers, however, in their 
 opinions respecting inspiration, wavered between a more and less 
 strict view. . . . All, however, insisted on the practical importance of 
 the Scripture, its richness of- divine wisdom clothed in unadorned 
 simplicity, and its fitness to promote the edification of believers." 1 
 
 Justin Martyr, speaking of the wonderful teachings of the Old 
 Testament, remarks : " Th_diyine plectrum, itself descending from 
 heaven, makes use of holy men, as a harp or lyre, to reveal to us 
 the knowledge of divine and heavenly things." 2 He seems, how- 
 ever, to have limited inspiration to what is religious, and necessary 
 to be known in order to salvation ; and while he expresses himself 
 strongly on the inspiration of the Old Testament, he believes also in 
 the inspiration of the New, especially of the evangelists. The views 
 of Irenaeus on the same subject were strict : " The Scriptures are, 
 indeed, perfect since they were uttered by the word of God and 
 his Spirit."' 
 
 Clement of Alexandria, speaking of the law and the prophets, re- 
 marks : " Justly could we call the apostles prophets and Testimony oi 
 
 righteous men, since one and the same Holy Spirit works Justln ' Clem - 
 . ent, Irenaeus, 
 
 in all of them. 4 Irenaeus speaks of Paul's frequent use and others. 
 
 rfhyperbata. " He attributes this peculiarity of Paul's style,".says Ne- 
 ander, " to the crowd of thoughts pressing for utterance from his ar- 
 dent mind," showing that he made a distinction between the divine 
 and the human element in inspiration. 
 
 Theophilus, bishop of Antioch, observes : " Respecting the right- 
 eousness which the law teaches, both the prophets and the gospels 
 are found to agree, because they all (the writers) spoke inspired by 
 the one Spirit of God." ' 
 
 Origen, the most illustrious scholar of the early post-apostolic 
 
 1 Hagenbach, Hist. Christian Doctrines, Smith's ed., vol. i, p. 87. 
 
 1 '\v' ai>rb TO &elov e| oiipavov nanov irXqicTpov, ibairep bp-ydvy Kitiapaf nvbc % Avpaf, 
 rolf duwfuf avdpdai xpupwov, rr/v ruv delay r/ftlv KOI ovpaviuv airoKaXvifa yvuoiv. 
 Cohort, ad Gracos, 8. 
 
 * Scripturae quidem perfects sunt quippe a verbo Dei et Spiritu ejus dicta. 
 Adver. ff&rct., ii, cap. xxviii, 2. 
 
 4 Upo^ffTOf yap apa Kai dutalovs elvai Tovf aKotrroTiovf Ayovref ev av diroipev, tvbf 
 cot TOV afoov tvepyovvroc Sta. TTUVTUV ayiov Kvivparor. Strom., liber v, cap. vi. 
 
 * 'Ert fop nai irepl dixaiotnv^ fa 6 vopos elptinev aKohov&a evplaKerai KCU TO T& 
 ^uv KOI TUV evayyeMav, f^eiv Sia TO rot>f irdvraf irvevitaro^opov; h>\ irveitftart 
 
 . Ad. Autolycum, liber iii, 12.
 
 26 INTRODUCTION TO THE STUDY 
 
 Church, remarks : " Certainly, the Holy Spirit inspired each one of 
 those holy men, whether they were prophets or apostles ; and that 
 there was not one spirit in the ancients and another in those who 
 were inspired at the coming of Christ, is most clearly proclaimed 
 in the Churches." 1 He also remarks: "All the Scriptures are in' 
 spired by the Holy Spirit." 2 
 
 Hagenbach remarks : " It appears that Origen, with all his exag- 
 gerated views of inspiration, also admitted that there were uninspired 
 passages in the Scripture, and thus distinguished between its divine 
 and human elements."* "In general," says Gieseler, "Origen ap- 
 pears to understand by inspiration, not the pouring in of foreign 
 thoughts, but an exaltation of the soul, whereby prophets were ele- 
 vated to the knowledge of the truth ; and this view was held fast in 
 the school of Origen." 
 
 Chrysostom, commenting on the Gospel of John, says : " Let us 
 
 \ no longer listen to the fisherman, or to the son of Zebedee, but to 
 
 the Spirit that knows the deep things of God, and strikes the apostle 
 
 !as a lyre. Forjie^will tell us n^thing^h^LisJiujnaii,^^ 
 to us of spiritual depths. "Yet when commenting on Matthew, he , 
 observeT: rt The evangelists are shown to disagree in many places ; 
 but this circumstance itself is the greatest proof of their truth. For 
 if they had accurately agreed in all things respecting times and 
 places, and in their very words, none of our enemies would have be- 
 lieved that they had not written from human concert. For they 
 would not have supposed that so much harmony grew out of the sim- 
 ple truth. But, as it is, the apparent disagreement in small things 
 frees them from all suspicion, and clearly vindicates the character of 
 the writers."* 
 
 Augustine compares the apostles to hands, which wrote what 
 
 1 Sane quod iste Spiritus unum quemque sanctorum, vel prophetarum, vel apos- 
 tolonim inspiravit, et non alius spiritus in veteribus, alius vero in his qui in adventu 
 Christi inspirati sunt, fuerit, manifestissime in ecclesiis praedicatur. Uepi Apjwv, 
 liber i, 4. 
 
 1 In Psalmos, 527. * Hist. Christ. Doct., vol. i, p. 91. 
 
 4 'Qf ovv oitxcTi TOV aTniuf, <A& TOV viov Ze(3cdaiov, dAAa roi ro ftd&ri TOV Qeov eld6 
 rof, TOV HvevjMTOf Ayu, ravnjv avanpovofitvov rrfv Twpav, dvTUf axovu/tev. Ov&r ya^ 
 iv&putuvov rjiiiv kpel, aW dirb TUV aflvaauv TUV irvevpariKuv. In Joan,, horn, i, 2, 
 
 * Tlo'kXaxov yap AiafuvovvTef e'teyxovTcu. Airo ptv oirv TOVTO fiiyiarov 'ely^ta Tij t 
 dAjftfe/af tarlv. Ei yap trdvra ovveQ&VTioav //era anptpetac, KOI ptxP 1 Kaipov, KO} ftfxp* 
 r6rro, KCU f^XP 1 pitluiTuv avruv, oifdelf av kiriorevae TUV c^iJpov, 6n fjtrj avveMdvTtf 
 iirb nw&rjKrif nvbf av&pwirtvTic typa^av anep typaipav ; oi> yap elvai r?jf drrAorj/rof TIJV 
 rorai)Tiiv ovpfyuvlav. Nvvi Se KCU. ti doxovaa tv (tiKpolf elvai iiattturin irdar/f aira^dr. 
 TCI aiiToiif viraiftlaf, KCU Aaftirpaf tfnip TOV rpotrov TUV ypa^dvTuv diroloytiTai -In 
 Mat., horn, i, 2
 
 OF THE HOLY SCRIPTURES. 27 
 
 Christ, the head, dictated. 1 He calls the holy Scriptures the ven- 
 erable writing of the Holy Spirit, and declares that he most firmly 
 believes that none of their authors has written any thing that is 
 erroneous.' 
 
 Jerome, while holding the inspiration of the Scriptures, did not 
 overlook the human element, and in commenting on Gal. v, 12, "I 
 would they were even cut off which trouble you," remarks : " Nor is 
 it strange if the apostle, as a man, and still shut up in a frail vessel, 
 and seeing another law bringing him into captivity, and or Jerome and 
 leading him into the law of sin, once uttered such Chrysostom. 
 language, into which we often see holy men fall." ' He also says he 
 finds solecisms and transpositions of words in the Epistles of Paul. 4 
 Theodore, the celebrated bishop of Mopsuestia, "assumed," says 
 Hagenbach, " different degrees of inspiration. He ascribed to Sol- 
 omon, not the gift of prophecy, but only that of wisdom, and judged 
 of the Book of Job and the Song of Solomon only from the human 
 point of view." * 
 
 Though the Reformers submitted in faith to the authority of Scrip- 
 ture as a divine revelation, they also had an unprejudiced regard to 
 its human side, taking a comprehensive view of inspiration, espe- 
 cially in its practical bearing. The Catholic Church in general 
 held firmly to inspiration. Luther's expressions on the inspiration 
 of the Scriptures were very strong. Among other things, he says 
 that we must look upon the Scripture " as if God him- Q{ Luther Me _ 
 self had spoken therein." Yet he seems to have con- lanchtnon.and 
 ceded historical contradictions between the Pentateuch 
 and Stephen's speech. Melanchthon, too, only claims freedom from 
 error in the apostles as to doctrine, but not in the application of 
 doctrine. Calvin also asserted in the strongest manner the divine 
 authority and inspiration of the holy Scriptures. 6 
 
 The question of the amount of divine inspiration in the Bible 
 is of a grave and important character, and here the words of the 
 poet are especially applicable, " The middle course is the safest." 
 
 1 Quando quidem membra ejus operata sunt, dictante capite. Cons. Evang. i, 35. 
 
 1 Soleis eis scripturarum libris qui jam canonici appellantur, didici hunc timorem 
 honoremque deferre ut nullum eorum auctorem scribendo aliquid errasse firmissime 
 ciedam. Epis. 82, cap. i, 3. 
 
 * Nee minim esse si Apostolus, ut homo, et adhuc vasculo clausus infirmo, videns- 
 que aliam legem in corpore suo captivantem se, et ducentem in lege peccati, seme] 
 fuerit hoc locutus, in quod frequenter sanctos viros cadere perspicimus. 
 
 4 Nos quoties cumque soloecismos aut tale quid annotavimvs, et cetera. Com* 
 nen. Epis. Eph., cap. Hi. 
 
 * Hist. Christ. Doctrines, vol. i, 321. 
 *Cf. ibid., vol. ii, pp. 240-243. 
 
 3
 
 28 INTRODUCTION TO THE STUDY 
 
 The theory of verbal inspiration in every part of the sacred Scrip- 
 tures would give them more sanctity and authority; but even if 
 we could determine with complete certainty the original reading in 
 every case, the mass of the Christian world who read the Scrip. 
 Amount of in- tures in translations would not be profited by verbal 
 inspiration. But it is very inconvenient to the bib- 
 lical interpreter, apart from its being in many cases useless, for it 
 compels him to reconcile every discrepancy, however trifling, and to 
 vindicate the grammatical accuracy of every word and sentence in 
 the sacred canon, which, in not a few instances, is a difficult task, 
 and rarely satisfies the candid reader. On the other hand, lax views 
 of inspiration may strip the Bible of a great deal of its authority as 
 a divine revelation, and resolve much of it into mere human opinion. 
 In considering the inspiration of the historical books of the Bible 
 we must carefully distinguish between the inspiration of the writers 
 and that of the speakers whose discourses are recorded. The book 
 may be inspired but not the speaker, or both speaker and writer 
 may be inspired. This remark applies with special force to the Book 
 of Job ; and if we allow this work to be genuine history in all its parts, 
 and that its author was guided by the divine Spirit to write accurate- 
 ly every speech made by Job and his friends, nevertheless all these 
 speeches might contain more or less false doctrine. 
 
 REQUIREMENTS OF THE CANONICAL BOOKS. 
 
 Respecting the kind and the amount of inspiration in the canon- 
 ical books, we must consider what the nature of each book requires. 
 In writing the Pentateuch, Moses would need inspiration in narrat- 
 
 . .. . ing the history of the world before his own times. If 
 Extentoflnapl- 
 
 ration needed he had written documents lying before him, or possessed 
 8e8 ' merely the traditions of his ancestors, he still needed a 
 divine guidance to enable him to distinguish true history. The 
 account of creation must have come to Moses or to some one of his 
 jancestors by divine revelation. As the founder of a religious sys- 
 tem for the most part new, and as a prophet, he required immediate 
 divine guidance. 
 
 ^"Yet there may have been some unimportant points, in which hej 
 followed his own judgment or the advice of friends. We find upon N , 
 fc certain occasion that Jethro, the father-in-law of Moses, visited/ 
 him, and, observing him sitting in judgment on small cases as well 
 as on large ones, he remarked, "The thing that thou doest is not( 
 good. Thou wilt surely wear away, both thou and this people that is 
 with thee for this thing is too heavy for thee : thou art not able to
 
 OF THE HOLY SCRIPTURES. 29 
 
 perform it thyself alone " He advised nim to appoint judges to de- 
 cide small controversies, while the most important causes should be 
 brought to Moses himself. This advice Moses followed. 1 
 y<The books of Joshua, Judges, Ruth, Samuel, Kings, Chronicles, 
 /Ezra, Nehemiah, and Esther, being merely historical in their char- 
 l acter, would require at most in their authors merely the divine 
 Vguidance to enable them to give a correct narrative of events. Ini 
 history of a merely civil, and, in some cases, of a religious char-i 
 acter, specific inspiration is not demanded, and a well-informed man t 
 could himself write it with sufficient accuracy. The Psalms being\ 
 of a doctrinal as well as of a devotional character, and some of them \ 
 being Messianic and prophetic, require full inspiration. 2 The ) 
 Proverbs of Solomon and the Book of Ecclesiastes, also, being doc-,/ 
 trinal, require inspiration. The question of the inspiration of the) 
 Book of Job and the Song of Solomon will be considered in the\ 
 introduction to these books. 
 
 The prophetical books of the Bible demand the highest degree of 
 inspiration, as their authors are not only teachers of Ail prophecy ;. 
 moral truth, but boldly predict the future, which none hSiH^inspi- 1 
 but the Omniscient God can clearly foresee. Gesenius ration, 
 defines the word x*3i, 3 vates, a prophet, one who, impelled by a di- 
 vine influence or by the divine Spirit, rebukes kings and nations, 
 and predicts future events. With the conception of a prophet, there 
 was also, primarily, connected the idea that he spoke not his own 
 thoughts, but what he received from God, and that he was the am- 
 bassador and interpreter of God ; as is evident from Exod. vii, i, 
 where God says to Moses : " I have made thee a god to Pharaoh ; 
 and Aaron thy brother shall be thy prophet." Here it is clear that 
 Aaron was to utter faithfully the words of Moses. 
 
 The divine communication was often made to the prophets in 
 a vision, which is called in Hebrew by the various names of nxio, 
 
 T - 
 
 nino, pin, rwn, jv-in, and hence the prophet is sometimes called 
 n;n, run, a seer, one who sees. God says : " If there be a prophet 
 among you, / the LORD will make myself known unto him in a vision, 
 and will speak unto him in a dream." Num. xii, 6. Visions of the 
 future condition of the Jewish and Christian Churches, and of the! 
 
 x See Exodus xviii, 13-26. 
 
 1 And BO Peter in the Acts (chap, i, 16) declares, in quoting Psalms bcix, cix, " The 
 Holy Ghost spake by the mouth of David. " 
 
 1 This word is derived from $23, Niphal H33 passive, which Gesenius defines, ta 
 tpeak under divine influence, the passive form being used because the prophets were 
 moved by a divine power.
 
 30 INTRODUCTION TO THE STUDY 
 
 different cities and nations standing in a close relation to the Israel- 
 ites, were presented to the prophets by the divine Spirit. The Apos- 
 tle John, after quoting a passage from Isaiah, remarks : " These 
 things said Esaias, when he saw his glory, and spake of him." Chap, 
 xii, 41. And the Prophet Daniel says : " I saw in the night visions, 
 and, behold, one like the Son of man came with the clouds of heaven, 
 and came to the Ancient of days, and they brought him near before 
 him." Chap, vii, 13. So also the Apostle John, as recorded in the 
 Apocalypse, saw in visions the overthrow of paganism, the final tri- 
 umph of Christianity, a general judgment, the punishment of the 
 wicked, and the future glory of the saints. To Moses, also, was ex- 
 hibited in vision the form of the tabernacle and its furniture. " And 
 look that thou make them after their pattern which was showed thee 
 [which thou wast made to s?e] in the mount." Exod. xxv, 40. The 
 prophets, we may suppose, would write down these wonderful vis- 
 ions in their own language. Nor need we be surprised if, in these 
 circumstances, their transitions are sometimes sudden, their style 
 abrupt, and their expressions occasionally ungrammatical. It is 
 impossible, in this ecstatic state, not to speak and write in a lofty and 
 symbolic style. The human spirit labours to give utterance to its 
 magnificent conceptions ; language is taxed to its utmost ; and the 
 mind, excited to the highest degree of tension, seizes upon what- 
 ever will express its deep emotions. In this way, perhaps, we may 
 account for the fact that the prophet Ezekiel is careless in his gram- 
 matical forms. He had more visions than any other prophet, and 
 was oftener in the ecstatic state. In this way, too, may be ex- 
 plained, in part at least, the irregularity of a part of the Greek of 
 the Apocalypse. 
 
 But it was not by vision only that God manifested himself to the 
 prophets of old. He "spake in divers manners." Heb. i, i. The spir- 
 it of Christ in the prophets predicted the future glory of Messiah's 
 kingdom, i Pet. i, n. In this case the very words may have been 
 inspired ; at least, the suggestions were communicated to the mind. 
 
 The inspiration of the apostles as evangelists consists principally in 
 inspiration of the Holy Spirit's bringing to their minds every thing our 
 the apostles. Saviour spoke to them, according to the promise he had 
 made to his disciples. John xiv, 26. Mark was very probably an eye- 
 witness of the scenes in our Lord's history, and a companion of Peter, 
 as the ancient Church testifies ; and Luke, the companion of Paul 
 wrote the history of Christ as it had been delivered to him by the eye- 
 witnesses of Christ's ministry. The inspiration of these two evangel- 
 ists, who were not apostles, we may suppose extended only so far as to 
 enable them to give a true account of the works and the teachings
 
 OF THE HOLY SCRIPTURES. 31 
 
 of Christ. In the evangelists, seeming discrepancies in minor points 
 may, after ail, grow naturally out of the reality of things ; but we are 
 not required to make the absolute correctness of the evangelists in the 
 most unimportant matters an article of faith, and to resort to far- 
 fetched explanations to reconcile every apparent discrepancy. The 
 Apostolical Epistles, teaching and discussing Christian doctrine, re- 
 quire inspiration to keep them free from all error. The Apocalypse 
 of John is principally a prophetic book, written at the command of 
 Christ, who revealed its contents to the apostle in visions. 
 
 The inspiration of the Bible is evident from its sublime doctrines 
 concerning God, the purity of its moral precepts, and ^11^^ of 
 
 from the wonderful fulfilment of its prophecies. The the inspiration 
 
 j r i i A -u 1. of the Bible ; 
 
 Bible presents to us a wonderful plan. Abraham, ongi- d 0ctrine8 , ettl . 
 
 nally an idolater, 1 is called out of Mesopotamia, and Ics ' prophetic 
 
 f , . ' fuimimente. 
 
 God promises him that in his seed shall all the families 
 
 of the earth be blessed. His posterity, after sojourning in Egypt 
 several centuries, are led out by Moses, who becomes their legislator 
 in the Sinaitic desert. Joshua brings the Hebrews into the promised 
 land, and establishes them there. The Almighty, later, sent prophets 
 among them at different periods to instruct and warn them, to en- 
 force the great principles of the Mosaic law, and to announce the 
 fate of the surrounding kingdoms and the coming of the Messiah. 
 
 The doctrine of the unity and the holiness of God is . 
 
 < The unity and 
 
 the fundamental doctrine proclaimed by Moses and the the holiness of 
 prophets. It came by divine revelation to Abraham. ( 
 The ancient world could never have discovered the unity of God; it 
 had not the wide view of the universe that we now have, in which 
 we see everywhere a unity of plan. Nor did Moses de- nan in Reve- 
 rive the doctrine from Egypt, for the ancient Egyptians lation - 
 were polytheists. And so far was the idea of the unity of God from 
 being original with the Hebrew people, that there were times when 
 nearly all of them relapsed into idolatry ; and it required the sever- 
 est chastisements from God, and his continual intervention through 
 prophets, armed with miraculous powers, to keep it alive among 
 them. 
 
 The religions of antiquity were characterized by the foulest su- 
 perstitions, and generally by the most revolting impurities and most 
 cruel rites, from which the religion of the Old Testament is entirely 
 free. Moses and the prophets inculcate, in the clearest and strong- 
 
 111 Your fathers dwelt on the other side of the flood [the river Euphrates] in old 
 time, even Terah, the father of Abraham, and the father of Nahor : and they served 
 other gods." Josh, xxiv, 2.
 
 32 INTRODUCTION TO THE STUDY 
 
 est manner, the holiness of God. Indeed, the legislation of Moses is 
 especially directed to this point. 
 
 The predictions of the Hebrew prophets, both in respect to a 
 Messiah and to the fate of cities and kingdoms contiguous to the Is- 
 raelites, and respecting the Hebrew people themselves, have no 
 parallel in history; and the number of these prophecies, and their 
 accuracy, entirely exclude the hypothesis of accident, or mere human 
 Hebrew inter- foresight. 1 We know that the ancient Jews explained the 
 tJte^Messianic prophecies which we consider Messianic in the same way 
 prophecies. that we do. This is evident from the Targums of On- 
 kelos and Jonathan Ben Uzziel. At the time predicted by the proph- 
 ets the Messiah appears in the land of Israel, teaching the most 
 sublime doctrines respecting God and his worship, and the noblest 
 precepts, which he beautifully illustrated in his holy, active life, es- 
 tablishing his claims as Messiah by the clearest proofs ; and having 
 been crucified as a sacrifice for the sins of mankind, he rises from 
 the dead and commissions his apostles to go into all the world and 
 preach the gospel to every creature, after which he ascends to 
 heaven. About thirty-seven years after he had been crucified, the 
 mass of the Jews still persisting in rejecting him, Jerusalem was de- 
 stroyed by the Roman army under Titus; the temple was laid in 
 ruins, according to the prediction of Christ ; and the Jews were scat- 
 tered to the four winds of heaven. In the meanwhile the religion of 
 Christ continued to spread rapidly ; and, after the fiercest conflict 
 with Paganism, in three centuries it became the religion of the Roman 
 Empire, is now the creed of the noblest part of the human race, and 
 gives strong indications of mastering the world. This great scheme 
 of revelation is without a parallel in the annals of our race. 
 
 When we see a plan running through the whole universe, both in 
 time and space, extending to the organization of the meanest insect, 
 it is difficult to believe that there is no plan in the moral world, no 
 provision for the redemption of the race. There must be a plan, 
 and Christianity is that plan, or there is none. 
 
 1 The only passage in the Koran resembling a prophecy is in chap, xxx : " The 
 Greeks have been overcome in the nearest part of the land ; but after their defeat 
 they shall overcome within a few years." "That this prophecy was exactly full 
 filled," says Sale, " the [Mohammedan] commentators fail not to observe, though they 
 do not exactly agree in the accounts they give of its accomplishment"
 
 OF THE HOLY SCRIPTURES. 33 
 
 CHAPTER II. 
 
 THE CANON OF THE OLD TESTAMENT. 
 
 A S early as the second century we find the phraseology u Old ' 
 *"* and " New Testament," employed to designate the Jewish and 
 the Christian revelations, 1 but its application to the Names deaig- 
 
 books of the Old and the New Covenant is first clearly *? gm ? < *t 
 
 lection of the 
 
 seen in Mehto, 2 Bishop of Sardis, in the last half of the sacred Writ- 
 second century, and in Origen 3 in the first half of the lng8 ' 
 third century. The term canon, 4 as applied to the sacred writings 
 of the Old and the New Testament, came into use near the middle 
 of the fourth century. 6 
 
 The earliest known catalogue of the books of the Old Testament 
 is given by Melito. In writing to Onesimus, he states that he had 
 made diligent inquiry to learn accurately the number and the order 
 of the ancient books. " Accordingly," says he, " having gone to the 
 East, and as far as the place where (these things) were preached and 
 done, and having ascertained accurately the books of the Old Testa- 
 ment, I herewith send them to you, of which these are the names : 
 Five Books of Moses Genesis, Exodus, Leviticus, Numbers, Deu- 
 
 1 New Testament, Justin, Dial, cum Tryp., sec. n, 12 ; New Testament and the 
 Old, Irenseus ad Hsere., liber iv, cap. 9 ; Old Testament and New, Clem. Alex. 
 Paed., liber i, cap. 7 ; Old and New Testament, Tertul., adver. Mar., liber iv, 
 cap. xxii. 
 
 * He speaks of a catalogue of the books of the Old Testament in Eusebius, Hist. 
 Eccles., liber iv. 26. 
 
 * Origen remarks on the manuscripts of the Old Testament, torn, xv, 14, on 
 Matthew. He also observes that the New Testament gives a Greek form to He- 
 brew names. On Joan, torn, ii, 27. 
 
 4 The principal definitions of this Greek word (/cavuv), given by Liddell and Scott, 
 are the following : i. A straight rod or bar ; 2. A rule or line used by carpenters 
 or masons. Metaphorically : I. A rule in a moral sense ; 2. In the Alexandrian 
 Grammarians, collections of the old Greek authors were called icavdvts, as being mod- 
 els of excellence, classics ; 3. In the Church, itavovcf were the books received as the 
 rule of faith and practice canonical Scriptures. 
 
 * The term canon is applied to the Holy Scriptures by Gregory Nazianzen, 1105 
 of his Works. Augustine speaks of the sacred writings as canonical books (canonici 
 libri) and canonical Scriptures (Scripturae canonicse). Epist. 82, 14, 22. Athanaslus 
 calls the Holy Scriptures, " Books that are canonical and believed to be divine." 
 E-bist 39. on the Passover. Jerome in various places speaks of a canon of Scripture
 
 84 INTRODUCTION TO THE STUDY 
 
 teronomy; Joshua Nave, Judges, Ruth ; Four Books of Kings, Two 
 Books of Chronicles, Psalms of David, Proverbs of Solomon (which 
 is also called Wisdom), Ecclesiastes, Song of Songs, Job; of the 
 prophets, Isaiah, Jeremiah ; of the Twelve Prophets in one book 
 Daniel, Ezekiel, Ezra." 1 We miss in this catalogue the Book of 
 Esther. In Ezra, Nehemiah is, no doubt, included, as Jerome in- 
 forms us that these two books were included in one volume, which 
 was called Ezra. 2 
 
 In the first half of the third century we have the canonical books 
 of the Old Testament as held by the learned Origen. " There are 
 twenty-two books," says he, " according to the Hebrews, correspond- 
 ing to the number of the letters of their alphabet." He then enu- 
 
 ^ , merates the various books, giving both the Hebrew and 
 
 Origen s cata- 
 logue of canon- Greek names: Five Books of Moses; Joshua; Judges 
 
 and Ruth in one volume among the Hebrews ; First and 
 Second Books of Kings in one volume, called Samuel with the He- 
 brews; Third and Fourth Books of Kings in one volume; Two Books 
 of Chronicles in one volume ; First and Second Ezra in one volume, 
 which they call Ezra ; Book of Psalms ; Proverbs of Solomon ; Eccle- 
 siastes; Song of Songs; Isaiah; Jeremiah, with Lamentations and 
 Epistle in one volume, which they call Jeremiah ; Daniel ; Ezekiel ; 
 Job; Esther; besides these, the Books of Maccabees, inscribed Sarbeth 
 Sarbane "EL. 3 This list is preserved by Eusebius (Eccles. Hist., book 
 vi, 25) from Origen's lost Commentary on the First Psalm. In this 
 catalogue the Twelve Minor Prophets, forming one book, are wanting. 
 This must have been an accidental omission on the part of Origen or 
 Eusebius, or in copying the latter; for Origen wrote a Commentary on 
 the Twelve (Minor) Prophets, of which only twenty-five books were 
 found by Eusebius. (Eccl. Hist., book vi, 36.) The Twelve Minor 
 Prophets, in one book, would make the number of the sacred books 
 twenty- two, and the Maccabees would not be in the canon. We 
 might suppose that the extract of Eusebius does not correctly rep- 
 resent the views of Origen. But, on the other hand, Origen quotes 
 2 Maccabees vii as Scripture, as follows : " But that we may also, 
 from the authority of the Scriptures, believe that these things are so, 
 hear how in the books of the Maccabees, where the mother of seven 
 martyrs exhorts one of her sons to endure the torments."* The books 
 
 'In Eusebius, Eccles. Hist., liber iv, 26. 
 
 "Apud Hebraeos Ezra Neemiaeque sermones in unum volumen coarctantui. 
 Preface to his translation of Ezra and Nehemiah. 
 
 * The name which Origen here gives the Maccabees is for the Hebrew tVDlB 
 bs "ODife, prince of the temple, prince of the children of God. 
 
 4 TTcpt Ao^wv, liber ii, cap. I, from the Latin version of Rufinus
 
 OF THE HOLY SCRIPTURES. 35 
 
 of Maccabees were regarded with great favour by some of the most 
 eminent of the earlier fathers, doubtless because they encouraged the 
 spirit of martyrdom. 
 
 The catalogue of Hilary, 1 Bishop of Poitiers, in France, is the 
 same as that of Origen, except that it includes the Twelve Minor 
 Prophets, and omits the Maccabees altogether ; but he remarks, 
 " Some add Tobias and Judith." He gives twenty books in all, ex- 
 eluding every Apocryphal book except the Epistle of Jeremiah. 
 Athanasius (f A. D. 373) gives us a catalogue of the books of the Old 
 Testament, in which he rejects from the canon the Book of Es- 
 ther, and adds to it, with the Lamentations, the Book of Baruch 
 and the Epistle of Jeremiah. 2 Cyril, Bishop of Jerusalem (f A. D. 
 386), states that the number of the books of the Old Testament is 
 twenty-two. His canonical books are the same as ours, except that 
 he adds to Jeremiah, with the Lamentations, the Book of Baruch and 
 the Epistle of Jeremiah. 3 
 
 Gregory Nazianzen (f about A. D. 390) omits from his catalogue 
 the Book of Esther, observing, however, that some add this to the 
 other books of the canon ; otherwise his catalogue does not differ 
 from ours, as his First and Second Ezra are doubtless Ezra and 
 Nehemiah ; and his Chronicles are, no doubt, our two Books of 
 Chronicles. 4 Epiphanius, metropolitan Bishop of Cyprus (f A. D. 
 402), one of the most learned men of his age, gives us the catalogue 
 of the books of the Old Testament in Jhe following order : Genesis, 
 Exodus, Leviticus, Numbers, Deuteronomy, Joshua the catalogue of 
 son of Nave (Nun), Job, Judges, Ruth, Psalms, First and Epipimnius. 
 Second Chronicles, First Book of Samuel or First of Kings, Second 
 Samuel or Second Kings, Third Book of Kings, Fourth Book of 
 Kings, Proverbs, Ecclesiastes, Song of Songs, The Twelve (Minor) 
 Prophets, The Prophet Isaiah, Jeremiah with Lamentations, Ezekiel, 
 Daniel, First Book of Ezra, Second Book of Ezra, and Esther.* We 
 have given but one name to each book, though wherever the Hebrew 
 name differs from the Greek Epiphanius gives both names. It will 
 be observed that there is no apocryphal book in this list, the Second 
 Ezra being put for Nehemiah. Nor do we miss any of our canonical 
 books. 
 
 Of all the fathers of the earlier Church Jerome was the greatest 
 Hebrew scholar, and the best versed in the literature of the Jews 
 
 'About A. D. 365, Prologue to the Book of Psalms. 
 
 1 Epistle 39, on the Feast of the Passover. 
 
 * Catechesis iv, de Decem Dogmatibus, cap. 35. 
 *Carminum, liber ii. 
 
 * Liber de Mensuris et Ponderibus, cap. 23.
 
 36 INTRODUCTION TO THE STUDY 
 
 His testimony as to the canon of the Old Testament is, therefore, very 
 valuable. In the preface to his translation of the two Books of Sam- 
 uel and of the two Books of Kings he furnishes a catalogue of books 
 of the Old Testament as arranged in the Hebrew Bible, giving both 
 the Hebrew and the Greek or Latin name of each. He gives, first, 
 Jerome's cata- the five Books of Moses, which he says are called To- 
 logue. RAH L AW The second division, he says, is that of the 
 
 PROPHETS, and he begins with Joshua the son of Nun. Next comes 
 the Book of Judges, with that of Ruth in the same volume. The 
 third book is that of Samuel, called First and Second of Kings with us. 
 The fourth book is that of Kings, contained in the third and fourth 
 volume of Kings ; fifth. Isaiah ; sixth, Jeremiah ; seventh, Ezekiel. 
 Then come the Twelve (Minor) Prophets. The third division, 
 says he, contains the 'Aytoypo^a, (HAGIOGRAPHA, Holy Writings]. 
 The first book is Job ; next, Psalms of David, in one volume ; three 
 books of Solomon, namely, Proverbs. Ecclesiastes, and Song of Songs ; 
 Daniel ; First and Second Chronicles ; Ezra ; and the ninth, Esther. 
 "Thus the books of the ancient law," says he, "are twenty-two: 
 five of Moses, eight of the Prophets, and nine of the Hagiographa ; 
 although some often insert Ruth and the Lamentations in the Hagi- 
 ographa, . . . and thus the books of the ancient law would be twenty- 
 four." 1 In this catalogue are all the books that we have in our 
 
 1 As the passage is of vast importance, we herewith give the full Latin text : 
 " Primus apud eos liber vocatur BRESITH (tPZIJ**O), quern nosGenesim dicimus. 
 Secundus ELLE SMOTH (mfcE rfc), qui Exodus appellatur. Tertius VAJEC- 
 RA (a"lp"n), id est, Leviticus. Quartus VAJEDABBER (Wl), quern Numeros 
 vocamus. Quintus ELLE ADDABARIM (&"n3"in nil*), qui Deuteronomium 
 praenotatur. Hi sunt quinque libri Mosi, quos proprie THORATH (tT"nn), id est, 
 legem appellant. 
 
 "Secundum Prophetarum ordinem faciunt ; et incipiunt ab Jesu filio Nave, qui 
 apud eos JOSUE BEN NUN (flS p SBm), dicitur. Deinde subtexunt SOPHTIM 
 (fi^ttDlO), id est, Judicum librum ; et in eumdem compingunt RUTH (mi), quia 
 in diebus judicum facta narratur historia. Tertius sequitur SAMUEL (i&OttO), 
 quern nos Regnorum primum et secundum dicimus. Quartus MALACHIM 
 (ttiSbfc), id est, Regum, quam MALACHOTH (rVOite), id est, Regnorum dicere. 
 Non enim multarum gentium regna describit ; sed unius Israelitici populi, qui trib- 
 ttbus duixlecim continetur. Quintus ISAIAS (m^En). Sextus JEREMIAS 
 (TPft-p). Septimus JEZECIEL (ipTm). Octavus liber duodecim Prophetaruin, 
 qui apud illos vocatur THARE ASRA (10 ^in). 
 
 " Tertius ordo 'Aytoypo^a possidet ; et primus liber incipit ab JOB (-T^K). 
 Secundus a David (nn), quern quinque incisionibus, et uno Psalmorum volumin* 
 comprehendnnt. Tertius est SALAMON (iTsis), tres libros habens : Prcverbia, 
 quae illi Parabolas, id est, MASALOTH (CnJEE) appellant ; Ecclesiasten, id est, 
 COELETH (nbnp); Canticum canticorum, quern titulo SIR ASSIRIM ("PtD 
 praenotant. Sextus est DANIEL (2SO3'!). Septimus DABRE AJAMIM 
 """C"!, id est, verba dierum, quod significantius XpoviKov totius divinse his
 
 OF THE HOLY SCRIPTURES. 37 
 
 present canon of the Old Testament, and no others ; Nehemiah 
 is included in Ezra, and the Lamentations are included in the 
 prophecy of Jeremiah. Jerome remarks on this catalogue: "What- 
 ever is outside of these must be placed among the Apocrypha. 
 Therefore Wisdom, which is commonly inscribed the ' Wisdom of 
 Solomon,' and the Book of Jesus the Son of Sirach, and Judith, and 
 Tobias, are not in the canon. The First Book of Maccabees I have 
 found in Hebrew. The Second Book is in Greek." 1 He observes, 
 in his preface to Jeremiah, that "The Book of Baruch has no exis- 
 tence among the Hebrews, and the spurious Epistle of Jeremiah I 
 have determined should be by no means commented upon."* 
 
 Furnished with this definite statement respecting the Hebrew 
 canon (the same as the present Hebrew canon) at the beginning 
 of the fifth century, and having seen the views of the most emi- 
 nent of the earlier Fathers upon the same subject, we naturally 
 turn to the celebrated Jewish historian, Flavius Josephus, born 
 four years after the ascension of Christ. As his father belonged 
 to the family of the priests, and as he himself was profoundly 
 learned in the antiquities of the Jews, he possessed every facil- 
 ity for making himself master of the history of the Jewish canon. 
 " For we have not," says he, " myriads of books, discordant and con^ 
 dieting, but only twenty-two books, containing the history of all time, 
 which are justly believed to be divine. Of these, five be- The Catalogue 
 long to Moses, which contain both the laws and the tra- of Josephus. 
 dition of the origin of man until his (Moses 1 ) death, a period little 
 short of three thousand years. From the death of Moses until the 
 reign of Artaxerxes, who was king of the Persians after Xerxes, the 
 prophets after Moses wrote in thirteen books the events of their own 
 times ; the remaining four books contain hymns to God and practical 
 duties for men. From Artaxerxes down to our own time every thing 
 has been written, but (this history) has not been deemed worthy of 
 
 tome possumus appellare. Qui liber apud nos Hapa^Enro/ievuv, primus et secundus 
 inscribitur. Octavus EZRAS (Kits), [Al. Elesdras], qui et ipse similiter apud 
 Graecos et Latinos in duos libros divisus est. Nonus ESTHER (inox). Atque 
 ita fiunt pariter veteris legis libri viginti duo ; id est, Mosi quinque ; Prophetarum 
 octo : Hagiographorum novem. Quamquam nonnulli RUTH (rn"l) et CINOTH 
 (M3^p) inter 'Aytoypa^a scriptitent, et libros hos in suo putent numero supputandos : 
 aw per hoc esse priscae legis libros viginti quattuor. 
 
 1 Quid extra hos est, inter uTroupvQa esse ponendum. Jgitur Sapientia, quae vulgo 
 Salomonis inscribitur, et Jesu filii Syrach liber, et Judith et Tobias et Pastor, non 
 rant in canone. Machabaeorum primum librum, Hebraicum reperi, secundus Grae- 
 cus est. 
 
 1 Libellum autem Baruch qui vulgo editioni Septuaginta copulatur, nee habetui 
 pud Hebneos, et Tl>n<3eirlypa$ov epistolam Jeremiae nequaquam censui disserendam.
 
 38 INTRODUCTION TO THE STUDY 
 
 equal confidence with our previous history on account of there not 
 having been an exact succession of prophets." 1 
 
 These twenty-two books of Josephus (the number of the letters of 
 the Hebrew alphabet) include, doubtless, after the five books of Moses, 
 the following : The writings of the prophets, in thirteen books, viz. : 
 Joshua; Judges and Ruth in one book; First and Second Samuel in one 
 book ; First and Second Kings in one book ; First and Second Chron- 
 icles in one book ; Ezra and Nehemiah in one book ; Esther ; Isaiah ; 
 Jeremiah, with Lamentations, in one book ; Ezekiel ; Daniel ; Twelve 
 Minor Prophets in one book ; and Job. The four books of hymns, 
 etc., are : Psalms, Proverbs, Ecclesiastes, and Song of Songs. This 
 list we have determined both from the twenty-two books of the 
 Christian Fathers, and from the character of the list given by 
 Josephus. 
 
 It will be observed that Josephus closes the canon of Scripture 
 in the reign of Artaxerxes Longimanus (B. C. 465-425), and assigns, 
 as the ground of the close at that period, that, after that time, there 
 was no exact succession of prophets. It would seem, then, that no 
 book, however excellent its doctrines or high its literary merit, was 
 ever admitted into the Jewish canon unless it was written, or at least 
 approved, by a prophet. Hence the Wisdom of Jesus the son of Si- 
 rach, though an excellent collection of moral precepts, and originally 
 written in Hebrew, never had a place in the canon. That the latest 
 books of the Old Testament canon (Nehemiah, Ecclesiastes, and Mal- 
 achi) were not written later, or at least only a little later, than the 
 reign of Artaxerxes Longimanus, we shall show in discussing them. 
 
 From the statement of Josephus we next turn to Philo, the learned 
 Jew of Alexandria (* about B. C. 20). This distinguished writer 
 attempted a philosophy of religion, in which he blended the doctrines 
 of Moses and the wisdom of the Greeks. It is interesting to inquire 
 what books of the Old Testament he received as of divine authority. 
 The catalogue ^ e ^ n( ^ ^ m speaking of those which Moses wrote.* He 
 of Phiio. characterizes him as king, legislator, and high priest, 
 
 1 Oil yap fivpiddef fitflXiuv eiffi nap' r^iv, aavpfyuvuv KOI paxofitvuv 6vo Sc u6va rrpbt 
 rolf eiKoot /3t/3A/o, TOV iravrbf exovra xpovov TTJV avaypa^rjv, TO. dmaiuf t>eZa ireniarev- 
 filva. Kal TOVTUV nlvre pv Ian ra Movafuf a Tovf re vopovf Trepiexu, KO.I rrfv rr/y av- 
 #pairoyoviaf Trapdiooiv, [tixP 1 T *>C OVTOV reXevrJjf OVTO( 6 xpovoe airofalirei rpia\i^iuv 
 IXiyov rwv. 'Afro 6e r^f MUVCTEWC Tefavrrjf fiixP 1 T ^f Apraffpfov TOV [tera Stpjiit 
 Hepouv ftaaihluf apxnti l ^ T Mutiff^v irpo^f/rai ra /car* avroiif 7r/>o^>?tvro avvtypa 
 yav tv rpiol Kfu deita /3t/3At'otf at 6e toiircu reaaapef vpvovs etf TOV &ebv not rolf av- 
 ^poTrotf \)-o-&T)Kat TOV fttov 7rept^ov(Ttv. 'A^o dc 'Apraffp^ow /<e^pt TOV ica&' 
 Xpovov yeypairTai yxv luaara- iriarfuf 66 oi>x 6/to/ac rj^iurai. Tolf irpb avTuv, AM rh 
 ytvO"dai TTJV TUV irpo^Tuv aKpiSrj diadoxnv- Contra Apion, liber i, 8 
 . . . raZf lepalf fii/3tol( . evveypa&ev. ii. 136.
 
 OF THE HOLY SCRIPTURES. 89 
 
 and attributes to him prophetic powers and divine inspiration/ In 
 quoting a passage from Joshua, he calls it " the oracle of the merciful 
 God." 8 He quotes Isaiah as one of the ancient prophets; s likewise 
 Jeremiah, with the remark, "as God, by the mouth of the prophet, 
 said,"* In the same style he quotes Hosea. 8 Besides these sacred 
 vrnters, he cites passages from Judges, i Samuel, i Kings, i Chronicles, 
 J )b, Psalms, Proverbs, and Zechariah. From the books of Moses he 
 has from eight hundred to a thousand quotations. He also speaks of 
 " laws and oracles uttered by inspiration through the prophets, and 
 hymns and the other (writings) by which knowledge and piety are 
 increased and perfected." 6 Here we have the threefold division of 
 the Old Testament, so common among the Hebrews. There is no 
 reason for supposing that Philo's canon differed from that of Josephus. 
 
 The next reference, in point of antiquity, to the canon of the Old 
 Testament, occurs in the prologue to the Greek translation of the 
 Wisdom of Jesus, the son of Sirach, of Jerusalem. In this prologue 
 the translator states that his grandfather, Jesus, having devoted him- 
 self to the " reading of the LAW, and the prophets, and the other 
 books of the fathers," 7 was led to write something of his own per- 
 taining to discipline and wisdom. In this statement we recognise 
 the threefold division of the canon. 
 
 The translator says that he himself went into Egypt in the (my) 
 thirty-eighth year, in the time of .(Ptolemy) Euergetes (B.C. 246-22 1), 
 and having acquired no small amount of knowledge, he translated 
 the work of his grandfather, Jesus the son of Sirach, from the He- 
 brew language. 8 And the imitations of the Hebrew language found 
 in the Greek translation show that the original was in Hebrew. 
 The grandfather probably wrote forty or fifty years before the trans- 
 lation was made. We cannot refer the original work to a period 
 much later than B. C. 290, for Sirach praises most extravagantly the 
 
 Aid r^f TtpoQjiTciaf daa JJ.T] hoyifffiif) KaTahappdverai 9-fairify . . . t/luaeuf 
 
 f. ii, 163. These numbers are according to Mangey's edition. 
 1 Aoytov TOV ifau deov. i, 430. *i, 681. * i, 576. *i, 350. 
 
 * No^ovf KOI "koyia. deaiua&evTa 6ia irpofyriTuv Kal {>/j.vovf /cat ra rIAAa olf fTtffTi^tj 
 tdi b>ae(3eia avvavf-ovTai /cat re'keiovvrai. De Vit. Cant., ii, 475, according to Man- 
 jjey's edition. 
 
 T Ta-y vcfiov KOI ruv TrpotjujTuv /cot ruv uA/luv trarptuv /3t/3A,/uv avtiyvuaiv. 
 
 Many suppose that Euergetes II. is referred to by the translator (B. C. 145-116), 
 and that the second Simon also, the son of Onias, is the high-priest praised by the 
 son of Sirach neither of which suppositions is probable, since, if a second Euer- 
 getes and a second Simon had been meant, the author would so have designated 
 them. The second Simon died about 195 B. C. The passage in Sirach has some- 
 times been translated, "In the thirty-eighth year of Euergetes," which can hardly 
 be correct. It should rather be, " In my thirty-eighth year."
 
 40 INTRODUCTION TO THE STUDY 
 
 high-priest, Simon, the son of Onias, who died at that time ; ' the lan- 
 guage he uses shows that Simon was already dead, and the eulogy 
 is that of an acquaintance and friend with whom he had been con- 
 temporary. 
 
 The Old Testament canon, as it existed among the Jews in the 
 early ages of Christianity, and the traditions respecting the various 
 books that compose it, are found in the Talmuds, The Rabbies of 
 the Talmuds divided the canon into twenty-four books, instead of 
 twenty-two, as given by Josephus and several of the most learned 
 Christian Fathers, as we have already seen, though Jerome also al- 
 ludes to the division into twenty-four books. " Whoever," says the 
 Talmud, "brings more than twenty-four Holy Writings into the 
 house (that is, into the canon), brings confusion into it."* These 
 twenty-four books are the same as the present Hebrew canon. The 
 first division, the mif\ (TORAH, LAW,) consisting of five books, is as- 
 
 Taimndic Can- cribed to Moses, with the exception of the last eight verses, 
 en * which, it is said, Joshua wrote.' Next follow the writings 
 
 of the EARLIER PROPHETS: The Book of Joshua, The Book of Judges, 
 The Book of Samuel, and The Book of Kings. 4 In the third di- 
 vision we have the three Prophets, Isaiah, Jeremiah, Ezekiel, and 
 the Twelve Minor Prophets, in one book, beginning with Hosea and 
 ending with Malachi. 6 The fourth division was called KETHUBIM by 
 the Hebrews (a word meaning simply writings), and Hagiographa 
 (Holy Writings) by the Fathers, and also by the Talmud, on the sup- 
 position that all the Kethubim were composed under the influence 
 of the Holy Spirit. 6 The tradition of the Talmud gives the follow- 
 ing books in this division : Ruth, Book of Psalms, Job, Proverbs, 
 Ecclesiastes, Canticles, Lamentations, Daniel, Esther, Ezra-Nehe- 
 miah, and Chronicles. 7 
 
 According to an ancient Jewish tradition, found in the Talmud, 
 a great council, consisting of one hundred and twenty members, 
 was established at Jerusalem after the return of the Jews from the 
 Babylonian captivity in the twentieth year of Artaxerxes Longi- 
 manus, B. C. 444, and continued a period of about two hundred and 
 fifty years, until the death of the high-priest Simon, B. C. 196." This 
 
 1 Chap. 50. 
 
 ' San., Shemot rabba, c. 41, quoted by Dr. Julius Fiirst, p. 3, Der Kanun dot 
 Alt. Test. 
 
 'Joshua wrote his book and eight verses which are in the Law Baba Batra.- 
 Fiirst, page 9. * Furst, pp. 10-14. 
 
 ' See Furst on the Canon nach den uberlef. in Talmud and Midrasch. 
 
 See Furst, p. 55. T Ibid., p. 59. 
 
 See in Talmud Baba Batra, and Furst, pp. 21-23.
 
 OF THE HOLY SCRIPTURES. 41 
 
 great council had charge of the sacred books of the Old Testament, 
 and the introduction of new ones into the canon when prophecy 
 had ceased would have been a matter of great difficulty. In 2 Mac- 
 cabees it is stated " that Nehemiah, having founded a library, col- 
 lected together those things pertaining to the kings and the proph- 
 ets, and those concerning David and the epistles of the kings con- 
 cerning offerings." 1 
 
 CHAPTER III. 
 
 THE HEBREW AND ITS COGNATE TONGUES. 
 
 Old Testament is written in Hebrew, with the exception of 
 about three fifths of the book of Daniel and one third of the 
 book of Ezra, which are written in Chaldee. Also in Jeremiah we 
 have a single verse in Chaldee (x, n). Hebrew was the language of 
 the Canaanites when Abraham sojourned among them, The Hebrew 
 from whom he learned it. His vernacular in Mesopo- language in 
 tamia was Aramaean." His descendants carried the He- 
 brew with them into Egypt, and brought it back to Palestine with 
 them. It was their vernacular until some centuries after the Baby- 
 lonian captivity, when it was wholly supplanted by the Chaldee, which 
 came gradually into use from the time of the captivity. It is impos- 
 sible to tell exactly how long before the advent of Christ the Chal- 
 dee, in use in his time, had become the prevailing tongue. 
 
 It is evident that the people of Canaan spoke the Hebrew lan- 
 guage, from the names of several places ; for example, "iao mp, city 
 of books; pix-^bo, king of righteousness. It is called (Isaiah xix, 
 
 T T 't- 
 
 is) the language of Canaan ; and after the ten tribes were carried 
 away captive by Shalmaneser, king of Assyria, it is called mirv, 
 
 Jews' language. The name Hebrew ("V3y) is given to Abraham 
 (Gen. xiv, 13), and Hebrews (D'-OJ?) to his descendants through 
 Jacob (Exod. ix, i). Some regard this name as derived from "oy, 
 beyond tk: river (Euphrates), the man from beyond the river \ 6 
 
 3i0Xio&T)Ki}v, eniovvfiyaye ra Trepl ruv (Saffiteav Kai irpotyTuv, xai 
 re rot Aavt<J, KOI etriaro^af pna&tuv, Kept avadefidruv . ii, 13. 
 
 " This is evident from Gen. xxxi, 47, where the name of the heap of stones called 
 15^3 (Galeed] by Jacob, is named KCfiinip "13^ ( Yegor Sahaduthd) by Laban the 
 Syrian, which is Aramaean.
 
 42 INTRODUCTION TO THE STUDY 
 
 Septuagint. 1 But in the Bible the name seems to be derived from "Oj> 
 (Eber), one of the ancestors of Abraham. Gen. x, 21 ; Num xxiv, 24. 
 From the Hebrew people the name of the language itself is derived. 
 
 The Hebrew is a branch of a family of languages generally called 
 Semitic, from Shem, the ancestor of the peoples using them. This 
 family embraces, besides the Hebrew, the Punic, spoken by the 
 Phoenicians and their colonies ; the Aramaean, spoken in Aram 
 of the Semitic (Syria and Assyria, Mesopotamia and Babylonia) in two 
 languages. dialects, the Syriac in the north and the Chaidee in 
 the south ; the Arabic, spoken originally in Northern Arabia, and 
 the Himyaritic in the south ; and the ^Ethiopic in Abyssinia. To 
 these branches of the Semitic family must be added the cuneiform 
 inscriptions on the monuments of Assyria and Babylon. 
 
 The Punic language, which differs but little from the Hebrew as 
 might be expected from Phoenicia lying on the borders of Canaan 
 exists, with the exception of a few passages in Plautus, only on 
 monuments. Nearly all these inscriptions were made between B. C. 
 100 and about A. D. 200.* The inscription on the sarcophagus of 
 Eshmunazar, king of Sidon, discovered near Sidon in 1855, is the 
 oldest known Phoenician writing, and is referred by Wuttke to about 
 the year 1000 B. C.' Others, however, make it three or four cen- 
 turies later. 
 
 Northern Aramaean, or Syriac, first becomes known to us in the 
 The Aramaean Syriac translation of the Bible in the second century, 
 languagee. and in the various writings of the Christians extending 
 from the second century to the thirteenth. Its most flourishing 
 period was from the fourth to the tenth century, during which time 
 the Syriac literature, embracing nearly all departments of knowledge, 
 was especially rich in works on theology, and particularly in Oriental 
 and ecclesiastical history. The works of Aristotle and other Greek 
 authors were translated into it. 4 It was spoken through the whole 
 country bounded on the west by the Mediterranean sea, on the north 
 and north-west by the Taurus mountains, on the east by the river 
 Tigris, and on the south by Palestine and Arabia. Its most flourish- 
 ing seat was Edessa. A corrupt form of Syriac is still spoken by 
 the Nestorian Christians of Oroomiah, Persia, and Koordistan. 8 
 
 ' Ewald (Ausf. Lehrbuch der Heb. Sprache, 8te ausg., p. 20) regards this view 
 u altogether uncertain. 
 
 * Gesenius, Monumenta Phoenicia, liber primus. 
 
 * Die Entstehung der Schrift, u. s. w., I band. Leipzig, 1872. 
 
 * Uhlemann, Introduction to his Syriac Grammar. 
 
 * See A Grammar of the Modern Syriac Language as spoken in Oroomiah, Pet 
 ia, nd Koordistan, by Rev. D. T. Stoddard, New Haven, Conn., 1855.
 
 OF THE HOLY SCRIPTURES. 43 
 
 The southern Aramaean, or Chaldee, is first found in the Books of 
 Daniel and Ezra, and is the language of the Targums. It was 
 spoken by the Jews in Palestine in the time of Christ. The Arabic 
 is the richest, the most flexible, the most difficult, and the most 
 widely diffused of all the Semitic tongues. It was first spoken in 
 northern Arabia, but does not appear as a written language until four 
 or five centuries after Christ. The Koran, written in the Koreish 
 dialect, spread the Arabic language far and wide with the conquests 
 of Mohammed in the seventh century, and with the subsequent prog- 
 ress of his system. The Arabic is the spoken or sacred language of a 
 population of over sixty millions in northern, and a portion of middle 
 Africa, and in western, and a part of southern, Asia. The Himyar- 
 itic language was spoken in southern Arabia before the time of Christ, 
 and even in the fourteenth century it had not died out in Yemen. 
 The Ethiopic, a branch of the Himyaritic, simpler in its structure 
 than the Arabic, and more closely allied to the Hebrew, continued 
 in general use in Abyssinia as a written language until the end of the 
 sixteenth century, when it was supplanted by the Tigre and Amharic 
 dialects. Besides the translation of the Bible in Ethiopic, there are 
 found, in this language, in European libraries (especially in Lon- 
 don), the Book of Enoch, the Ascension of Isaiah, and the fourth 
 Book of Ezra, besides many other unprinted works, as the spoils of 
 the expedition against King Theodore. 
 
 The Semitic languages have several peculiar features. The verb 
 stems almost invariably consist of three consonants with their vowels, 
 as : Sap (qatat], he killed. The modification of this primitive form, 
 by prefixing nun (j), gives it a reflexive, reciprocal, or passive sense, 
 as : SopJ (niqtat), to kill one's self, etc. ; by doubling the middle conso- 
 nant and making certain vowel changes, the verb ac- 
 
 " ,, Somepeculiart- 
 
 quires intensive force, as: >Bp \qittel), to massacre, to kill ties of the sem- 
 
 many ; by prefixing he (n) and modifying the stem, we 
 obtain a causative meaning ; as : Vtapn (kiqtfl}, to cause to kill ; by 
 prefixing nn (kith), with vowel changes, we have a reflexive sense ; 
 as : Sapnn (hithqattet), to kill one's self, etc. 
 
 These languages have only two tense forms, a preterit and a future, 
 sometimes called an imperfect. The future tense is sometimes used 
 for the subjunctive, the optative, and the imperative moods, and 
 also to express past time. Pronouns in the oblique cases are affixed 
 to the nouns, and in the accusative to verbs. Nouns placed before 
 other nouns that limit their meaning are said to be in the construct 
 state, and very often undergo change ; as : rrirv nan, devdr Yeho- 
 
 (word of Jehovah}, devdr, construct from ^31, ddvar. There are 
 4
 
 14 INTRODUCTION TO THE STUDY 
 
 no words compounded in part of prepositions, as in the European 
 languages. 
 
 The Semitic languages were originally written without vowel 
 points. In the Ethiopic, however, vowels are indicated by the 
 modification of the consonant forms. It has been estimated that 
 the Hebrew language, as found in the Bible, has about six thousand 
 words, which, of course, are but a portion of its entire ancient 
 treasures. The Arabic language contains about sixty thousand 
 words ; but the greater part of its roots are the same as those of the 
 Hebrew, and the language often furnishes valuable aid in under- 
 standing the Hebrew. The Aramaean is more closely allied to the 
 Hebrew than is the Arabic. 
 
 Gesenius acknowledges but two distinct periods in the biblical 
 Hebrew : the first, its golden age, extending to the end of the Baby- 
 lonian exile ; and the second, the silver age, from the close of the 
 
 The biblical ex ^ e to ^ e ^ mes ^ tne Maccabees, about B. C. 160.' 
 Hebrew lan- On the other hand, Ewald, the late distinguished Ori- 
 entalist, remarks, that " the Hebrew language, until the 
 end of the Old Testament, lived through three periods, into which 
 the whole history of Israel is divided." 11 His divisions are as follows : 
 i. The period extending from some time previous to Moses to the 
 age of the kings. 2. The period from the kings to the sixth or 
 seventh century before Christ. 3. From the Babylonian captivity 
 to the times of the Maccabees," when it was completely supplanted 
 by the Chaldee. 
 
 The Hebrew language, Ewald holds, seems to have suffered few 
 changes from the time of Moses until about six hundred years before 
 Christ, because the structure of the Semitic languages is somewhat 
 more simple, and therefore less liable to change, than that of lan- 
 guages of a greater development. The Hebrews were never long 
 subjected to peoples of a foreign tongue; they lived under their 
 own free constitution, mostly separated from other nations. Many 
 changes in the language, however, are not perceptible to us, because 
 it was punctuated according to a later standard. 4 The language, as 
 it is exhibited to us in the Pentateuch, is completely formed, and 
 subsequent ages could make but little improvement in it. The 
 square character, in which it is now written and printed, came 
 gradually into use, it would seem, some time after the Babylonian 
 captivity, and was brought home by the Jews returning from exile 
 
 ' Roediger's Gesenius' Heb. Gram., pp. 9, 10. 
 1 Ausf. Lehrbuch der Heb. Sprach., eighth edition, p. 23. 
 *See Ewald's Ausf. Lehrbuch der Heb. Sprach., pp. 23- 25. 
 Ibid., p. 23.
 
 OF THE HOLY SCRIPTURES. 45 
 
 along with the Chaldee ; ' so that about the time of Christ it had al- 
 ready supplanted the ancient Phoenician character. The latter, 
 however, is found on Maccabean coins of about B. C. 143. The 
 Samaritan characters were very similar to the Phoenician, but the 
 present Samaritans use characters in many respects different from 
 Phoenician. 
 
 A thorough acquaintance with the Hebrew language is very 
 valuable to the theologian, and to the biblical critic indispensable 
 The knowledge of the tongue has been preserved to 
 
 us in several ways: First, by tradition, handed down a knowledge of 
 
 , , , T , Hebrew. How 
 
 from generation to generation by learned Jews, who es- the language 
 
 tablished schools of learning, and wrote lexicons, gram- bas been P 1 ^ 
 
 &> served. 
 
 mars, and commentaries on their language ; second, by 
 
 the early translations of the Hebrew Scriptures, namely : the Sep- 
 tuagint, Targums or Chaldee translations, the Syriac, Vulgate, and 
 other versions ; and third, by the Arabic, one of the sister tongues 
 of the Hebrew, a living language, which confirms and illustrates our 
 traditional knowledge of the Hebrew. Besides these sources, the 
 analogy of languages and the study of the context often throw great 
 light upon difficult passages. 
 
 In the Middle Ages the Jews were almost exclusively the culti- 
 vators of Hebrew literature, and a Hebraist among the Christians 
 was rare. The revival of learning in Christendom, and the powerful 
 impulse given to the study of the Holy Scriptures by the Reforma- 
 tion, was felt in Hebrew philology. 
 
 John Reuchlin, Professor of Greek and Hebrew at Ingolstadt 
 (f 1522), was the father of Hebrew philology among Christians. 
 In the first part of the seventeenth century the labours of the two 
 Buxtorfs, father and son, Professors of Hebrew in Basel, in Hebrew 
 grammar, lexicography, and cognate subjects, form an epoch in 
 *vie history of the cultivation of the language. In the same century 
 we have in England the great Hebraists, Lightfoot, Walton, Castell, 
 Pococke, and Hyde. In the first half of the eighteenth century 
 Albert Schultens employed his profound knowledge of Arabic in il- 
 lustrating the Hebrew ; and since his time Hebrew lexicographers 
 and grammarians, in discussing the principles of the language, 
 avail themselves of the light afforded by the sister tongues. In the 
 same century we have, in Hebrew philology, the distinguished names 
 of John Henry Michaelis and John David Michaelis, Simonis, 
 and Dathe. In the present century the study of Hebrew has re- 
 
 1 Ongen, Jerome, and the Talmudists affirm this. 
 
 The author brought home from Nablus the present Samaritan alphabet.
 
 4b INTRODUCTION TO THE STUDY 
 
 ceived a new impulse through the labours of Gesenius, Ewald, Furst 
 Hupfeld, Rosenmtiller, Winer, Roediger, Lee, and others. In the 
 United States the language has been especially cultivated by Stuart, 
 Bush, Nordheimer, and Green. Nearly all the men who have been 
 distinguished as Hebrew scholars were skilled in most of its cognate 
 tongues. For acquiring a knowledge of Hebrew the grammars of 
 Gesenius (edited by Roediger, and translated Into English by 
 Conant), Nordheimer, Ewald, and Green, and the lexicons of Ge- 
 senius (translated by Robinson) and FUrst (translated into English 
 by Davidson) are the best. Gesenius, as a lexicographer, has no 
 superior. " He had," says Dr. Robinson, " the persevering industry 
 of the Germans and the common sense of the English." 
 
 In Fiirst's lexicon the accented syllable is marked, and such fre- 
 quent references are made to the explanations of the ancient Rab- 
 worka on the ^ es as might be expected from one who was a Rabbi 
 Hebrew lan- himself. The Concordance of the Hebrew and the Chal- 
 dee words of the Books of the Old Testament by Julius 
 Furst, 1 is of great value to the student of Hebrew, and is not only 
 a Concordance, but, to a great extent, a lexicon also. 
 
 For the study of Chaldee, Winer's Grammar of the Chaldee Lan 
 guage contained in the Bible and in the Targums, translated into 
 English by Professor Hackett, is the best. The Hebrew lexi- 
 cons contain the biblical Chaldee ; and for the Targums, the lexi- 
 con of Rabbi J. Levy is preferable to any other.' The definitions 
 are given in German, and the words are arranged alphabetically. 
 Also, for the biblical Chaldee, and for the dialect of the Baby- 
 lonian Talmud, the work of Samuel David Luzzatto, of Trieste, is 
 valuable. 
 
 The Chaldee, Talmudical, and Rabbinical Lexicon of John Bux- 
 torf extends over the Targums, the Talmuds, and the writings of the 
 ancient Rabbies in general. It was the product of thirty years' labor, 
 and contains two thousand six hundred and seventy-eight columns, 
 (two columns to the folio page,) and was published at Basel in 1640, 
 The definitions are in Latin. It is a great storehouse of Hebrew 
 learning, and is indispensable to the student of the ancient Jewish 
 writings. With all its great merits, however, it has some serious 
 defects. The words are not arranged alphabetically, but placed 
 under the roots from which they are supposed to be derived. The 
 
 1 The Latin title is, Librorum Sacrorum Veteris Testament! Concordantiae He- 
 braicae atque Chaldaicae, etc. It is printed on fine paper with clear type. Leip- 
 zig, 1840. 
 
 "Its title is, Chaldaisches Worterbuch iiber die Targumim und einen grosser 
 Theil des Rabbinischen Schrifthums, 2 vols. Leipzig, 1867, 1868.
 
 OF THE HOLY SCRIPTURES. 42 
 
 proper names are wanting. A reprint of the work was undertaken 
 at Leipzig in 1866 by the Jew Fisher, and published, with addi- 
 tions, in 1875, in 2 vols., 4to. 
 
 For the students of Syriac, the grammar of Uhlemann, translated 
 from the German by Enoch Hutchinson, with exercises Helpg for the 
 in Syriac grammar, a chrestomathy, and brief lexicon, study of syriac 
 will be found to be all that is desired. The lexicon of 
 Edmund Castell, with additions by Michaelis, in two parts, quarto, 
 Gottingen, 1788. is the best general Syriac lexicon. For the Pesh- 
 ito New Testament, Schaaf 's Lexicon, published at Leyden in 1709, 
 quarto, is the best. A small lexicon to the Peshito New Testament 
 is published by Samuel Bagster, London. To meet a felt want, 
 the preparation of a " Thesaurus Syriacus " has been undertaken 
 by Bernstein and others, the first volume of which, folio, was pub- 
 lished at Oxford in 1879, edited by R. P. Smith. 
 
 For the acquisition of Arabic, one of the best grammars is Cas- 
 pari's, translated into English, with additions, by W. Wright. Ewald 
 has also published a valuable Arabic grammar in Latin. The Ar- 
 abic grammar of Silvestre de Sacy, Paris, second edition, 1831, 
 stands very high. The Arabic-English lexicon of E. W. Lane, 
 when completed, will be the best lexicon, at least for English stu- 
 dents. Freitag's Arabic-Latin lexicon, in four volumes (of which 
 there is an abridgment in one volume), is the best yet published. 
 The Arabic-English and English-Arabic lexicon of Joseph Cata- 
 fago, bound in one volume, is too meagre in the Arabic-English 
 part to meet the wants of students. 
 
 For the Ethiopic language we have the grammar and the lexicon 
 of Job Ludolf, first published in 1661, and the recently published 
 grammar, chrestomathy, and lexicon of August Dillmann.
 
 4 INTRODUCTION TO THE STUD\ 
 
 CHAPTER IV. 
 
 THE CONDITION OF THE TEXT OF THE OLD TESTAMENT 
 HEBREW MANUSCRIPTS. 
 
 TT may seem strange that while we have Greek manuscripts of 
 * the New Testament fifteen hundred years old, 1 the most ancient 
 causes of the manuscr ip ts f tne Old Testament extant are scarcely 
 la* of Hebrew a thousand years old, and are few in number. The fol 
 lowing causes may be assigned for this disparity : 
 
 1. As the Christians made but little use of the Hebrew Bible, the 
 number of Hebrew manuscripts in existence from the third to the 
 tenth century was not one tenth, perhaps not one twentieth, of the 
 number of the Greek manuscripts of the New Testament ; conse- 
 quently the probability of their destruction was proportionately 
 greater than that of the New Testament manuscripts. 
 
 2. The Jews have had no permanent places of abode, but have 
 been wanderers upon the earth. This unsettled life has been unfa- 
 vourable to the preservation of their sacred writings, while the con- 
 vents of the Christians, existing from the early centuries of the 
 Church to the present day, have been safe depositories of the Christ- 
 ian Scriptures. The convent has proved the ark for the transmis- 
 sion of the ancient manuscripts to us.* 
 
 3. After the pointed Hebrew text had been established by the 
 Masorites, the Jewish rabbies destroyed those manuscripts which 
 were not conformable to this standard. This cause has been as- 
 signed by Walton, and is not without justification. 
 
 4. The custom that existed among the Jews of burying, with 
 distinguished teachers, their worn manuscripts. 
 
 The most ancient and valuable of the Hebrew manuscripts are the 
 following : 
 
 i. The manuscript that takes its name from Rabbi Aaron ben-Mose 
 ben-Asher, who lived at Tiberias in the tenth century. This is the 
 Best Hebrew best and most celebrated of all the codices of the Old 
 manuscripts. Testament, and is regarded both by the Karaites and 
 
 'Codex Sinai ticus and Codex Vaticanus were written about the middle of the 
 fourth century. 
 
 It will be remembered that Tischendorf found his famous Codex Sinaiticu^ at 
 the convent of Saint Catharine.
 
 OF THE HOLY SCRIPTURES. 49 
 
 the rabbles as a model codex of the Old Testament Scriptures, from 
 which the usual Masoretic text is printed. This manuscript is pre- 
 served at Bercea. 
 
 2. Codex of the Prophets, written A. D. 895, by Moses ben-Asher, 
 an inhabitant of Tiberias, a Karaite, is preserved in the synagogue 
 of the Karaites in Cairo. 
 
 3 Codex of the Later Prophets, of uncertain age, probably written 
 between trie seventh and the eleventh century. It wants the Masora. 
 This manuscript is preserved in the British Museum. 
 
 4. Two very ancient manuscripts are said to exist in Syria, one in 
 Damascus, and the other in a neighboring town, Gobar. 
 
 5. Codex Babylonicus Petropolitanus, containing the later proph- 
 ets, edited by Hermann Strack, Leipzig. Written, A.D. 916. 
 
 6. Several manuscripts in the collection of Kennicott, from eight 
 hundred to a thousand years old. 
 
 7. In De Rossi's collection of manuscripts are four that probably 
 belong to the ninth, tenth, eleventh, and twelfth centuries. 
 
 8. Manuscripts preserved at Odessa. In this fine collection of 
 Hebrew codices are some a thousand years old, and one of the 
 whole Bible written about A. D. 1010. 
 
 Several valuable manuscripts, now lost, were once quoted by 
 rabbies ; of these the most celebrated was that of Hillel, written 
 probably not earlier than the seventh century, as it seems to have 
 been furnished with the Masora. 1 Sixteen manuscripts of the 
 Hebrew-Samaritan Pentateuch, the oldest not later than the tenth 
 century, are described by Blaney in his Oxford edition of the 
 Samaritan Pentateuch, 1790 These manuscripts have no vowel 
 points. 
 
 A variety of readings is found in the Hebrew manuscripts, but 
 there is substantial agreement. Those prepared for the use of the 
 synagogue are the most correct. 
 
 In the time of Jerome (about A. D. 400) the Hebrew text was 
 still without vowels* and critical remarks, and this was also the case 
 at the time of the completion of the Babylonian Talmud, in the be- 
 ginning of the sixth century. The text was punctuated, and critical 
 remarks were made on the margin by the Masorites (traditionists, from 
 rniD-3, tradition), learned Jews, principally of the school of Tiberias, 
 
 'See Dr. Strack's Proleg. Critica in Vetus Testamentum Hebraicum, Leipzig 
 1873, of wnich we bave made great use. 
 
 1 The Phoenician, Syriac, Chaldee, and Arabic languages were anciently written 
 without vowels. The Koran originally had no vowels. Even the English language 
 has no complete vowel system, but the same vowel is differently pronounced in dif 
 ferent words.
 
 50 INTRODUCTION TO THE STUDY 
 
 after the beginning of the sixth century, and completed in the sev- 
 enth. The vowel' system is, accordingly, that which was in use in 
 Palestine, and is, no doubt, very accurate. So scrupulous were the 
 Masorites that they did not venture to change the text when they 
 had the best reason for believing it faulty, but they wrote without 
 vowels on the margin the word that should be read, and the vowels 
 belonging to it they gave to the word in the text. The marginal 
 reading is called Qeri, read, while the text is Kethib, written. 
 
 The Masorites spent a great deal of labour upon the text. They 
 computed the number of letters in each book, and gave the middle 
 letter, the number of verses of each book, and many other particulars. 
 The Talmudists give definite rules for the writing of manuscripts, 
 and the most strenuous care was taken to secure the greatest accuracy 
 in transmitting to posterity the sacred books of the Old Testament. 1 
 
 But in modern times we have had no such continued labours on 
 the text of the Old Testament as we have had on the New in the 
 critical editions of Griesbach, Scholz, Lachmann, and, above all, of 
 Tischendorf and Tregelles. Accordingly, the text of the Old Tes- 
 tament is not so definitely fixed as that of the New. 
 
 CHAPTER V. 
 
 ANCIENT VERSIONS OF THE OLD TESTAMENT. 
 I. THE SEPTUAGINT. 
 
 VTEXT in importance to the ancient Hebrew manuscripts for 
 ^ settling the original text are ancient versions; and when they 
 were executed at a period far earlier than that of the oldest existing 
 manuscript of the original they are of the highest value, for they 
 show, in not a few cases, how the original read at the time when they 
 were made, and they prove, by their agreement with the Hebrew, that 
 there has been no corruption of the sacred writings. The most an- 
 cient version of the Old Testament is \ht Alexandrian, generally called 
 the Septuagint, from its being claimed to be the work of seventy or 
 seventy-two men, who, it is said, translated the Hebrew into Greek. 
 A great deal of uncertainty rests upon the history of this version ; 
 TheSeptuagint ^ or l ^ e ^ est account respecting it appears in a docu. 
 ment professing to be written by a Greek at the court 
 
 'The Textus Receptus is printed from the text of the Masrritea, hence it if 
 lled the Masoretic Text.
 
 OF THE HOLY SCRIPTURES. 51 
 
 of Ptolemy Philadelphus (B. C. 285-247) in Alexandria, and id- 
 dressed to Philocrates. It is generally rejected as spurious. 1 
 
 According to the statement of this writing, the celebrated Athe 
 nian Demetrius Phalereus induced the Egyptian king, Ptolemy 
 Philadelphus, to have a Greek version made of the Jewish law books. 
 The king, first having secured the favour of the Jews by emancipa- 
 ting their countrymen who were slaves in Egypt, sent to Jerusalem 
 an embassy, in which Aristeas took a part, to request the high priest 
 to send him suitable men, acquainted with both Hebrew and Greek, 
 to make the translation. The high priest sent him the required men, 
 seventy-two, six from each tribe, with a Hebrew manuscript written 
 in letters of gold. They completed the translation in seventy-two 
 days, on the island of Pharos. Thereupon, Demetrius called togeth- 
 er the multitude of the Jews, and read the version in their presence 
 and in that of the translators. The translation met with universal 
 favour. Such is the substance of the statement of Pseudo-Aristeas, 
 and, if the writing were not a forgery, would be satisfactory. Yet 
 the principal points in the story are possibly true. 
 
 The next statement respecting the Septuagint is from Aristobulus, 
 an Alexandrian Jew of the second century before Christ, preserved 
 in Eusebius. 9 He states that the whole law was translated in the 
 time of Ptolemy Philadelphus, and that Demetrius Phalereus espec- 
 ially interested himself in the matter. Some, indeed, have called 
 in question the authority of Aristobulus, but probably without suf- 
 ficient ground. 
 
 The testimony of Philo, the Alexandrian Jew, is important, on ac- 
 count of his locality and his learning.* He states that Ptolemy Phila- 
 delphus sent ambassadors to the high priest and king of Judea one 
 man holding both offices requesting him to send to him interpret- 
 ers of the law. The Jewish high priest being delighted by the re- 
 quest, sent to the Egyptian king men of the highest repute among the 
 Hebrews, who, in addition to their Hebrew learning, had Tbe oplnlona 
 received a Greek training. The translators executed of Phiio, jose- 
 thei r work on the isle of Pharos. Philo also states, that enum toe sep- 
 
 " even to the present time, every year, a feast and an as- 
 sembly of the people are held on the island of Pharos, not of Jews 
 only, but of great multitudes of other people, who sail thither, honour- 
 ing the place where the translation was made." * 
 Josephus 6 gives a long account of the manner in which the version 
 
 1 Since the time of Hody, who showed the grounds of its spuriousness. He died 
 In 1706. 
 
 1 Prsep. Evan., xiii, 12. 3 He was born about 20 B. C 
 
 Vita Mosis, liber ii, 5-7. Born A. D. 37.
 
 52 INTRODUCTION TO THE STUDY 
 
 was made, agreeing in the main facts with the preceding state- 
 ments. 1 This translation was of only the Five Books of Moses ; and 
 Josephus expressly states, that " those who were sent to Alexandria as 
 interpreters gave him (the king) only the Books of the Law."" From 
 a statement of Aristobulus, it would appear that some part of the law 
 had been previously translated. It is to be regretted that what 
 professes to be a contemporary account of the origin of the Greek 
 version of the law has no good claim to genuineness ; yet the very 
 fact that Philo and Josephus follow it, shows that the writing of 
 Aristeas must contain the principal facts ; nor could a forged writing 
 have changed the existing tradition. Its object was to give it defi- 
 niteness and authority. 
 
 That the work was executed by seventy-two Jews may be correct, 
 though it seems improbable that such a large number should be 
 found either in Palestine or Egypt well skilled both in Hebrew and 
 Greek. The translators may have been Egyptian Jews, but we 
 have no proof that they really were ; for, though they were Pales- 
 tinians, they might have consulted their brethren of Egypt, who 
 would be supposed to be better acquainted with Greek ; and in this 
 way it may be explained that they translated thummim (trrpn) by 
 AhrjOeia, truth, the name given by the Egyptians to the image worn 
 by the Egyptian high priest. De Wette' rejects the account of the 
 translation having been made through the efforts of Ptolemy, and 
 attributes it to the Jews of Egypt, who wished to meet their own 
 wants a view which, though probable enough in itself, we cannot 
 accept, because it lacks historical evidence. 
 
 The translation of the Five Books of Moses was made, it would 
 seem, about B. C. 285, and the other books followed in the next 
 century and a half. The whole was completed, most probably, be- 
 fore B. C. 130, as the grandson of Jesus Sirach, in the Prologue 
 to his translation of the Wisdom of Sirach, apologizes for any de- 
 fects that his version of the Hebrew into Greek may contain, by 
 remarking " that the law itself, and the prophecies, and the rest 
 of the books, have no little difference when read in their own 
 language." 
 
 A. CHARACTER OF THE SEPTUAGINT. 
 
 The Greek of this version is the Common Dialect that prevailed 
 from the time of Alexander the Great. Executed at different times, 
 and by various authors, it exhibits different degrees of fidelity to tho 
 
 1 See Antiq., liber xii, cap. 2. f See the preface to his \ntiquitie*. 
 
 1 Einleitung, p. 94
 
 OF THE HOLY SCRIPTURES. 53 
 
 original. 1 The Pentateuch is the most faithfully translated, especial 
 care being devoted to it on account of the importance of the books. 
 The translation of Isaiah and of the Psalms is but indifferently done, 
 while that of Daniel was so bad that the early Church substituted 
 the translation of Theodotion for it. At the end of the Books of 
 Daniel Esther, Job, and Psalms, additions are made to the He 
 brew text. 
 
 The Septuagint had great authority in the early Christian Church, 
 and some of the Fathers regarded it as inspired. Among the Jews, 
 too, its authority about the beginning of the Christian The Septuaglnt 
 era was great. Philo uses it alone, and Josephus makes version in the 
 more use of it than he does of the Hebrew text. " In ^ C1 
 the synagogues of the Alexandrian, and especially of the Hellenistic, 
 Jews," says Bleek, " the sacred books were read almost exclusively 
 for a very long time in this translation, and explained according 
 to it.'" 
 
 Its authority and use at the time of Christ are shown from the fre- 
 quent quoting of it by the New Testament writers. 1 But few of the 
 Fathers were acquainted with Hebrew, and great use was made of the 
 Septuagint, upon which they mainly depended for their knowledge 
 of the Old Testament. To this version they appealed in their con- 
 troversies with the Jews ; and on this ground it gradually lost author- 
 ity with the latter, and began to be suspected as early as the second 
 century. 4 
 
 The Apocryphal Books of the Old Testament are bound up with 
 this version, which fact led some of the early fathers to quote some 
 of them as Canonical Scripture. 
 
 B. THE TEXT OF THE SEPTUAGINT. 
 
 It is to be regretted that the text of the Septuagint is still in an 
 unsettled state. We have had no very critical edition of it a work 
 greatly needed. Different Greek versions made subsequently have 
 
 'For difference of authors compare fi^rnabs, preserved as tyvhiantln in the Pen- 
 tateuch and in the Book of Joshua with d^60vXot as translated in the other books. 
 HOE) translated tj>aa6K throughout Chronicles ; in the other books irdax a - 
 Einleitung, p. 772. 
 
 1 It is well known that the apostles and evangelists do not always quote exactly 
 fiom the Old Testament, but often write according to the sense of the Hebrew or 
 of the Septuagint. In I Peter iv, 18, " If the righteous scarcely be saved," etc., 
 we have in the Septuagint the exact language of Prov. xi, 31. 
 
 *See Justin's Dial, cum Tryphone, c. 68, 71. In Megillath Taanith k is said 
 that darkness came over the world for three days when the version was made.
 
 54 INTRODUCTION TO THE STUDY 
 
 been more or less mixed with it. Of these versions, the most import- 
 ant are the following : 
 
 1. That of Aquila, who, according to Irenaeus 1 and others, was a 
 otter Greek Jewish proselyte (that is, a convert from Heathenism 
 rereion*. to Judaism^ born in Pontus, most probably in the first 
 part of the second century. This version, made for the Jews, who 
 preferred it to the Septuagint, was remarkably literal,* so that it not 
 unfrequently gave an obscure rendering. 
 
 2. The version of Theodotion, who, according to Irenaeus, was a 
 Jewish proselyte of Ephesus, living about the middle of the second 
 century. It appears to have been a revised edition of the Septua- 
 gint, as it took a middle course between the Septuagint and the 
 version of Aquila. The Greek version of Daniel used by the early 
 Christians was that of Theodotion. 
 
 3. The version of Symmachus, who was a Jew, possibly an Ebion- 
 ite, living about A. D. 200. This version was not so literal as those 
 of Aquila and Theodotion, on account of which it was praised by 
 Jerome. 
 
 Besides these versions, fragments of three other Greek translations 
 were used by Origen in his work on the Scriptures, and marked 
 fifth, sixth, and seventh, according to their position, the work of un- 
 known authors. 
 
 As the Septuagint had become greatly corrupted, either through 
 the carelessness of copyists or the daring spirit of those who either 
 added to, or took from, the text, to correct it according to their fan- 
 cies,' Origen, the greatest scholar of his age, undertook the task of 
 comparing the different Greek versions with the original Hebrew, in 
 columns, by the following method. He placed in the first column 
 the original text in Hebrew characters ; in the second, the Hebrew 
 text with Greek letters, giving the pronunciation of the Hebrew ; in 
 the third, the text of Aquila, as being next to the Hebrew in accu- 
 racy ; in the fourth, that of Symmachus ; in the fifth, the text of the 
 Septuagint ; and in the sixth, that of Theodotion. The work being 
 arranged, for the most part, in six columns, it was called Hexapla 
 (e|arrAd). In some parts the fragments of three other versions were 
 used, when, properly speaking, nine columns were formed. 
 
 T*)'.o HftTfl.pl ft. 
 
 Origen corrected the text of the Septuagint by means 
 of the other versions, principally, however, by means of Theodotion, 
 
 'Oj BeodoTluv fipprjvevacv t'Efaaiof KCU AxvAof 6 Hovrnbf, dfi^orrpoi ' ovdalot upo- 
 
 . Adver. ffareses, iii, 21. 
 
 * Take this as an example : tv nt^a/.aiu lurtaev 6 i?e6f avv rbv ovpavbv not ovv rip 
 . Gen. i, I. 
 'See Com. in Matt., torn. XT, 14, opp. iii.
 
 OF THE HOLY SCRIPTURES. 55 
 
 inserting from this version what was wanting, marking the insertion 
 with an asterisk and the name of the source, and allowing what was 
 not in the Hebrew to stand, but designating it with an obelus. This 
 great work was, most likely, never completed. Fifty years after the 
 death of Origen it was brought by Eusebius and Pamphilus from 
 its obscurity into the library of Pamphilus, at Csesarea in Palestine, 
 where Jerome found it and made use of it. Afterwards it is not 
 mentioned, and it has been supposed that it perished when the Arabs 
 captured and destroyed Caesarea, A. D. 653. Of this great work we 
 have only some fragments remaining, which are printed in the edi- 
 tions of Origen. It has been disputed whether the Hexapla and the 
 Tetrapla are different names for the same work. But, according to 
 Eusebius and Epiphanius, the Tetrapla contained simply the four 
 principal versions Septuagint, Aquila, Theodotion, and Symmachus 
 in four columns; and, according to some, Origen had executed 
 it as a special work, a synoptical edition of the four translations. 1 
 
 As the course pursued by Origen in supplementing the defects of 
 the Greek text by passages from the version of Theodotion had led 
 to new corruptions, through a careless use of his work, we find that 
 at the close of the third century Lucian, presbyter at Antioch, and 
 Hesychius, an Egyptian bishop, undertook the revision of the Sep- 
 tuagint. Each made a special recension, which circulated in his 
 own territory. Thus, as Jerome informs us, 2 there were three con- 
 flicting texts of the Septuagint that of Hesychius, in Egypt ; that 
 of Lucian, in use from Constantinople to Antioch ; and the Palestin- 
 ian Codices, elaborated by Origen, circulating in the intermediate 
 province. Our existing manuscripts of the Septuagint exhibit this 
 confusion, and it is difficult to say to which of the texts or recen- 
 sions existing in the time of Jerome our two oldest manuscripts of 
 the Septuagint the Codex Vaticanus and the Codex Alexandrinus, 
 are to be referred. 8 Under these circumstances the criticism of the 
 Septuagint is a difficult task. Bleek, however, believes that the form 
 of the two different texts presented by the Vatican and Alexandrian 
 Codices extends back beyond the time of Origen into the apostolic 
 age.* 
 
 'See Jerome's Preface to Chronicles. 'Preface to Chronicles. 
 
 1 The Codex Vaticanus belongs to the middle of the fourth century, and the Co- 
 dex Alexandrinus to the last part of the fifth century. The Codex Sinaiticus, be- 
 longing to the middle of the fourth century, contains only about twenty books oi 
 the Old Testament. 
 
 4 Einleitung, p. 787.
 
 56 INTRODUCTION TO THE STUDY 
 
 C. EDITIONS OF THE SEPTUAGINT. 
 
 The following are the most important editions of the Septua- 
 gint: 
 
 I. The Roman edition, published in 1587, folio, under the authority 
 of Pope Sixtus V. It was the joint work of several learned men, who 
 were engaged upon it nine years. It was based upon the text of the 
 Vatican Codex, the chasms in which were filled up from two other 
 manuscripts of less ancient date. The Vatican text is not, indeed, 
 always followed, but its orthography is changed into the usual Greek 
 forms, and the editors have sought to improve what they regarded 
 as faulty in the manuscript without always indicating their deviation 
 from it. Besides the text, the most remarkable readings have been 
 introduced from many other manuscripts, especially from the Medi- 
 cean, at Florence. 1 
 
 Upon this edition the following are based : 
 
 1. The London Polyglott, 1657, with various readings from the 
 Alexandrian Codex and from other manuscripts. 
 
 2. The edition of Lambert Bos, Franeker, 1709, with prolegomena 
 concerning the history and criticism of the Septuagint. Under the 
 text stand Greek scholia from the Roman edition, and various read- 
 ings from the London Polyglott. The text is not everywhere that 
 of the Roman edition, although Bos assures us that it is. 
 
 3. The edition of John Reineccius, Leipzig, 1730, second edition, 
 1 T57- The Roman text is accompanied by the most important 
 variations of the Alexandrian and other manuscripts. 
 
 4. The edition of Leander Van Ess, Leipzig, 1824, a copy of the 
 Roman text. 
 
 5. That of Constantine Tischendorf, two volumes. Leipzig, 1850, 
 fourth edition, 1869. This is a copy of the Vatican text, with the 
 various readings of the Alexandrian Codex, as well as those of 
 Ephraem, and of Frederico-Augustanus. This favorite edition con- 
 tains rich prolegomena, and at the end the Book of Daniel, ac- 
 cording to the Septuagint. 
 
 II. The edition of the Septuagint, by John Ernst Grabe, Oxford, 
 17071720, four volumes, folio. This generally follows the Alexan- 
 drian Codex. Grabe himself, who died in 1711, published only the 
 first and fourth volumes. The two intermediate volumes did not 
 appear until after his death. The second was published by Francis 
 Lee, and the third by an unknown editor, from the materials left by 
 Grabe. The editor does not follow the Alexandrian text exclu- 
 
 1 Bleek. Einleitung, p. 788.
 
 OF THE HOLY SCRIPTURES. 57 
 
 sively, but adopts the readings of other manuscripts of the Septuagint 
 where he regards them as more correct, and, like Origen, he gener- 
 ally supplies the omissions of the Septuagint from other translations. 
 The text of Grabe was printed by John J. Breitinger, (Professor at 
 Zurich,) 1730-1732, in four volumes, folio, with the removal, however, 
 of the typographical errors, and with the introduction into the text of 
 the changes considered necessary by Grabe in his prolegomena. In 
 all these editions the translation of the canonical Book of Daniel is 
 given according to Theodotion ; of the Alexandrian translation of 
 the book but a single codex is known, namely, that in the library 
 of Cardinal Chigi, at Rome. 
 
 For the criticism of the text of the Septuagint, rich materials are con- 
 tained in an edition of this version which was published in five volumes, 
 folio, in single parts, at Oxford, 1798-1827. The work was undertaken 
 by Robert Holmes, Professor of Theology in Oxford, who, Se p tuaglnt _ 
 at the time of his death, in 1805, had published only the edit, of Holme* 
 first part, containing the Pentateuch. The four remaining 
 volumes were published after the death of Holmes by James Parsons. 
 The fourth volume contained the book of Daniel both according to 
 Theodotion and the LXX. The text of the work is the Sixtine. 
 Under the text stand readings from many manuscripts, collated from 
 ancient writers and from the ancient translations of the Septuagint. 
 
 The remainder of the ancient Greek translations, excluding the 
 Septuagint, preserved to us, partly in the citations of the Church 
 Fathers, partly in the ancient manuscripts of the LXX, and partly in 
 the translations of some of the books, especially the Syrian, which 
 flowed from the Hexapla, have been published at different times. 
 We may especially mention Montfaupon's edition, Hexaplorum 
 Origenis Quae Supersunt, etc., two vols., folio, Paris, 1713. Fred- 
 erick Field has also undertaken a new edition of Origen's Hexapla. 
 The work is entitled, Otium Norvicense, sive tentamen de reliquiis 
 Aquilse, Symmachi, Theodotionis, e lingua Syriaca in Grsecam con- 
 vertendis, Oxford, 1864. There also appeared at Oxford, in 1867, 
 Origenis Hexaplorum Quae Supersunt ; sive veterum interpretum 
 Graecorum in totum Vet. Test, fragmenta. This work is not yet 
 completed. The remainder of the Hexapla is also found in the 
 edition of Origen's works, by Migne, Paris. 
 
 Of the Greek translations of the Old Testament there are several 
 Concordances and Lexicons. 
 
 i. The oldest is that of Conrad Kircher : Concordantiae V. T. 
 Grsecje Ebraeis vocibus respondentes rroXuxprjo-oi- Frankfort, 1607, 
 folio. This work is properly a Hebrew-Greek Concord- , 
 
 Conor rdances. 
 
 ance. The Hebrew words are arranged alphabetically,
 
 58 INTRODUCTION TO THE STUDY 
 
 and under them are placed the words employed by the Septuagint tc 
 express them. At the end is an alphabetical index. The passages 
 are also indicated where each of the Greek words is found in the 
 Apocrypha. 
 
 2. The work of Abraham Trommius : Concordantiae Graecaa ver 
 sionis LXX, etc. Utrecht, 1718. Two vols. folio. 
 
 3. That of John Chr. Biel : Nov. Thesaur. Phil. Sive Lexicon in 
 LXX, et alios interpretes et Scriptores Apoc. V. T. Haag, 1779- 
 1780. Three vols., edited by Mutzenbrecher. 
 
 4. The Concordance of John Fried. Schleusner: Nov. Thesaur 
 Phil. Crit. Sive Lexicon in LXX. Leipzig, 1820-1821. Five vols. 
 This work, though the best, has great defects, and in no way meets 
 the wants of our times. 
 
 5. Bockel, who died in 1854, commenced: Nova Clavis in Graecos 
 V. T., Interpretes, etc. 1 
 
 6. On the Apocryphal Books of the Old Testament there appeared 
 at Leipzig, in 1853, a work by Christ. Abr. Wahl, entitled Clavis 
 librorum Vet. Test, apocryphorum philologica. 
 
 2. THE TAR GUMS. 
 
 i. TARGUMS OF ONKELOS AND JONATHAN BEN UZZIEL. Next to 
 the Septuagint, in point of antiquity, are the Targums* (Chaldee 
 translations) on the Pentateuch and on the Prophets ; that on the 
 former by Onkelos, and that on the latter by Jonathan Ben Uzziel. 
 It is to be regretted that our information respecting the authors of 
 these translations is so meagre and uncertain. 
 
 According to the Talmud,* Onkelos was a proselyte, a contempo- 
 rary of the elder Gamaliel, the instructor of St. Paul. The ancient 
 book of Sohar makes him a disciple of Hillel and Schammai. 4 He 
 lived, accordingly, about the time of Christ or a little before. There 
 is no good reason for questioning the antiquity of this Targum. It 
 is reasonable to suppose that the books of Moses would first be trans- 
 lated into Chaldee, the language that prevailed in Palestine at the 
 time of Christ. Mention is made of a written (Chaldee) translation 
 of the book of Job, belonging *o the middle of the first century/ and 
 also of far older Targums, which would imply the greater antiquity 
 
 1 Bleek, Einleitung, pp. 787-792. 
 
 B^Ta'iaiPl, from G13"iri, translations, from which we have dragoman, an inter 
 preter. 
 
 1 Megilla, f. 3, c. I. Tosiphta Schabb., c. 8. 
 
 4 Ad Levit., xviii, 4. 
 
 * Tosefta Sabb., c. 14, etc., in Dr. Zunz's Gottesd. Vortrage der Judan, p. 63
 
 OF THE HOLY SCRIPTURES. 59 
 
 of Onkelos. The Targum of Onkelos is a plain, intelligible, and 
 generally very faithful translation ; in various passages, however, to 
 avoid anthropomorphisms, he uses " Memra," Wcrd, instead of Jeho- 
 vah himself. Two passages he refers to the Messiah : Gen. xlix, 10, 
 and Num. xxiv, 17. 
 
 Jonathan Ben Uzziel, the translator of the prophets,' appears to 
 have been contemporary with Onkelos, or to have lived a little later. 
 The rabbies relate that he was a disciple of the elder The Tar?ums 
 Hillel." In another Talmudic passage,* it is said that of onseios and 
 Jonathan, the son of Uzziel, wrote his paraphrase from the 
 mouth of Haggai, Zechariah, and Malachi. The Targum of Jonathan 
 differs from that of Onkelos in dialect and style, and in a freer trans- 
 lation of the text. The passages which he translates as Messianic 
 are numerous, and the most orthodox Christian commentator could 
 scarcely refer more positively to the Messiah. He has been sup- 
 posed, in several places, to quote Onkelos. 4 That Jonathan explains 
 so many passages as Messianic which were differently interpreted by 
 the Jews of the third * and subsequent centuries is a proof that his 
 translation could not have been made as late as the third century. 
 For the same reason it could not have been made in the second, 
 nor, perhaps, in the latter half of the first; for the continual appeal 
 made by the early Christians to the Messianic prophecies must have 
 led the Jews, so far as possible, to give a different explanation of 
 them. 
 
 The Targums of Onkelos and Jonathan, made at so early a period, 
 when the Hebrew language was well understood, are of great value 
 in explaining the Pentateuch and Prophets. 
 
 2. THE TARGUM OF PSEUDO-JONATHAN ON THE PENTATEUCH. 
 This Targum has been wrongly ascribed to the Jonathan who 
 translated the prophets. Antiquity knows nothing of a Targum on 
 the Pentateuch by Jonathan. The authors of the Jerusalem Tal- 
 mud * know nothing of a Targum of Jerusalem, but they speak of a 
 Targum of Palestine. Writers until the end of the fourteenth cen- 
 tury, however, very often mention the Targum of Je- TheTarjrumoi 
 rusalem ; and it is evident, from their quotations and the Jerusalem. 
 
 1 This includes Joshua, Judges, Samuel, and Kings. 
 
 *Baba Bathra, f. 134, c. I. ' Megilla, f. 3, c. I. 
 
 4 Targ. Judg. v, 26, quotes unchanged Targ. Deut. xxii, 5 ; Targ. 2 Kings xiv, 6. 
 almost unchanged, Targ. Deut. xxiv, 16 ; Targ. Jer. xlviii, 45, 46 is similar to Targ. 
 Num. xxi, 28, 29. 
 
 'Jonathan refers Isaiah lii. 13-liii to the Messiah, which the Jews of Origen's 
 time referred to themselves. 
 
 * The Jerusalem Talmud was comoosed in the latter part of the fourth centurv
 
 60 INTRODUCTION TO THE STUDY 
 
 clear testimony of several writers, that it embraced the whole Penta- 
 teuch. 1 Nor does it appear to have been confined to the Penta- 
 teuch ; for Dr. Zunz observes that the Targum of Jerusalem is 
 quoted by the rabbies of the Middle Ages as containing paraphrases 
 on the Judges, Samuel, and various prophets, from which he infers 
 that the Jerusalem Targum contained translations of all the Books 
 of the Old Testament.' He concludes that Pseudo-Jonathan is no 
 other than the Targum of Palestine or Targum of Jerusalem, of 
 which our existing Targum of Jerusalem is only a recension or 
 abridgment. He infers, on various grounds, that it was written in 
 the second half of the seventh century. Its language is a Palestin- 
 ian dialect of Aramaean, and it must have originated in Syria or Pal- 
 estine, perhaps in Caesarea, (on account of Num. xxiv, 19.) Its most 
 ancient title justifies this view. Its linguistic character differs 
 widely from that of Onkelos, but it is very similar in expressions, 
 style, and grammar to the Talmud of Jerusalem and the Targums 
 on the Hagiographa.* 
 
 3. THE TARGUM OF JERUSALEM. This Targum, as we have al- 
 ready seen, is an abridgment or recension of Pseudo-Jonathan. It 
 consists merely of fragments of the Pentateuch. 
 
 4. TARGUMS ON THE HAGIOGRAPHA. Targums or paraphrases 
 exist on all the books of the Hagiographa, with the exception of 
 Daniel, Ezra, and Nehemiah. The ground of this exception lies 
 in the books themselves, as they were in part originally written in 
 Chaldee. 
 
 The paraphrases of the Psalms, of Job, and of the Proverbs, which 
 we now possess, have the same linguistic character, and must, there- 
 fore, have been written at nearly the same time and in the same 
 country, perhaps Syria. The Targum on the Proverbs adheres quite 
 closely to the text, while that of the other two books is more peri- 
 phrastic. The Targum on Job is mentioned quite early, but that 
 on Proverbs bears traces of a later period. 
 
 The Targum on the books of Ruth, Esther, Lamentations, Eccle- 
 siastes, and the Song of Solomon, departs widely from the method of 
 a translation, and indulges in a free rhetorical style. The work was 
 executed by one author, and belongs to a period, very probably long 
 after that of the Talmuds. The erroneous opinion that Rabbi 
 Joseph, the blind, who died A. D. 325, was the author of the Targums 
 on the Hagiographa, was already refuted by authors of the thirteenth 
 century. On Esther there are two Targums. A Targum on the 
 Chronicles exists in two editions. 
 
 : Dr. Zunz, Gottesd. Vortrage, p. 66. 
 *Ibid., p. 79. 'Dr. ZUTIZ, p. 73.
 
 OF THE HOLY SCRIPTURES. 01 
 
 The Targum of Onkelos was first published, with the Hebrew text, 
 in Jarchi's Commentary, at Bologna, in 1482. Other editions followed 
 in the fifteenth and sixteenth centuries, and in the Bomberg Bibles, 
 published at Venice. 
 
 In the great Rabbinical Bibles published at Basel, by Buxtorf, in 
 1618, 3 vols. folio, republished in 1718, the Targums of Onkelos, Jeru- 
 salem, Jonathan Ben Uzziel, and Targums on the Hagiographa, are 
 inserted. The Targum of Onkelos was published -in the Paris and 
 London Polyglotts \n 1657. A critical dissertation on the Targum 
 of Onkelos was published in 1 830 at Vienna by Sam. Dav. ^^ edltlonfl 
 Luzatto. Winer published a work De Jonathanis in of Onkelos and 
 Pent. Parap. Chal. spec. I. Erl. in 1823. Jonathan was 
 published with the Hebrew text, Onkel., Targ. Jerus., and Rashi's 
 Commentary, by Asher Phorins, Venice, in 1590-1594. The Tar- 
 gums of Onkelos and Jonathan have been translated by Etheridge. 
 
 3. THE SYRIAC TRANSLATION. 
 
 This version of the Old Testament and the New, called the Peshito 
 -plain, literal, on account of its fidelity to the Hebrew and Greek 
 texts was made, most probably, in the second century. Ephraem, 
 the learned Syrian, who died A. D. 378, calls <t " our version, "'and 
 long before his time it had gained universal reception in the Syrian 
 Church. The New Testament, it seems, was translated into Syriac 
 about the same time as the Old. The version was already old in the 
 time of Ephraem, for some of its expressions were obscure to him. 3 
 
 The Syriac version of the Old Testament was made from the He- 
 brew text. Of this there is the strongest internal evidence. The 
 Targum of Onkelos seems to have been consulted in the translation 
 of the Pentateuch. Certainly there is a striking resemblance be- 
 tween much of the Syrian Pentateuch and Onkelos. The Peshito 
 version generally adheres closely to the Hebrew, and gives an excel- 
 lent rendering of the original. Occasionally, however, it favours some 
 of the readings of the Septuagint. It was, in all probability, executed 
 by several Jewish Christians. It extends over the canonical books 
 alone, and contains none of the additions to the Hebrew text found 
 in the Septuagint. The version was first published in the Paris, and 
 then in the London, Polyglott. The British Bible Society had an 
 edition of the Peshito Bible published for the use of the Christians 
 of Malabar, by Prof. Lee, who collated several manuscripts for the 
 purpose. It appeared in London, 1823, in 410. 
 
 1 Comment on i Sam. xxiv, 4. 
 
 ^ Wiseman's Horse Syriacte, p. 121.
 
 62 INTRODUCTION TO THE STUDY 
 
 4. THE LATIN VERSIONS. 
 
 As Christianity spread throughout portions of Italy in the first 
 century, and in Northern Africa, where Latin was used, certain- 
 ly as early as the second, it was to be expected that the Bible 
 would at a very early period be translated into Latin. We accord- 
 ingly find that a version in that language, called the Itala, was made 
 about the middle of the second century. 1 It was a translation of 
 the Old Testament from the Septuagint. In the time of Augustine 
 many translations of the Old Testament existed, but he preferred 
 the Itala to all others on account of both its close adherence to the 
 letter and the perspicuity of its language.' It was made from the 
 
 common text of the Septuagint, unaffected by the Hex- 
 The Itala. . 
 
 apla of Ongen. The great number of Latin versions 
 producing confusion, Jerome, after revising the text of the New Tes- 
 tament, undertook the revision of the Latin text of the Old Testa- 
 ment. His revision extended to nearly all the Old Testament books. 
 Of this work we have only the Psalter and the book of Job. The 
 greater part of the revision perished during his life. 
 
 While Jerome abode at Bethlehem he made a Latin translation 
 of the Old Testament from the Hebrew text during the years 
 392-405, a work of great merit. His profound knowledge of Hebrew, 
 derived from the rabbies, his acquaintance with previous versions, 
 and his critical judgment and carefulness, admirably fitted him for 
 his task. He did not translate the Bible in the order of the books 
 that compose it, but commenced with " Kings," for the reason, per- 
 haps, that he regarded these books as the less difficult to translate. 
 At first his work met with great opposition, as might have been ex- 
 pected from its many departures from the existing Latin versions ; 
 but it gradually came into use, so that in the seventh century its 
 authority was recognized by the Western Church, 1 and, 
 under the name of Vu] g ata . (Vulgate,) it is still consid- 
 ered by the Church of Rome as a standard authority. 
 In the course of a few centuries, however, the version of Jerome 
 was greatly corrupted by introducing into it passages from the Sep- 
 tuagint, and from the Latin translations which were in use before his 
 
 1 Tertullian, about A. D. 220, speaks of the Latin version. 
 
 1 Qui scripturas ex Hebraea lingua in Graecam verterunt, numerari possunt : La- 
 tini autem interpretes nullo modo. ... In ipsis autem interpretationibus Itala c 
 tens preferatur : nam est verborum tenacior cum perspicuitate sententiae. De Doc 
 lirist., liber ii, cap. xi, xv. Of the Itala some portions are extant. 
 
 1 The Septuagint is the authority in the Greek Church,
 
 OF THE HOLY SCRIPTURES. 63 
 
 time. Various attempts were made to improve the Vulgate. At 
 the beginning of the ninth century Alcuin, at the command ol 
 Charlemagne, made a revision of it. Also in the eleventh century 
 Lanfranc, Archbishop of Canterbury, and Cardinal Nicolaus, in the 
 twelfth century, undertook new revisions. 
 
 In 1546 the Council of Trent made the Vulgate the standard text 
 of the Bible, and declared that " in public lectures, disputations, in 
 preaching, and in expositions, it shall be held as authen- Recognition of 
 tic, and that no one shall dare or presume, on any pre- 
 text whatever, to reject it." 1 As the Council had de- Council, 
 clared the Vulgate to be authoritative, it was necessary that the 
 Council itself, or the Pope, should select one edition, or order anew 
 edition to be prepared, which should be the standard. The Pope 
 ordered 'a new revision, and in the preface to the Vulgate it is 
 stated that Pius IV. commissioned some of the most eminent car- 
 dinals and distinguished linguists to prepare an accurate edition 
 of the Latin Vulgate, by using the most ancient manuscripts, exam- 
 ining the Hebrew and Greek originals, and consulting the commen- 
 taries of the Fathers. Pius V. continued the work, but left it unfin- 
 ished, Sixtus V. ordered the work, at length finished, to be printed, 
 and when it came forth from the press it contained so many typo- 
 graphical errors that he determined to subject it to a new revision, 
 but was prevented by death from executing his design. Succeeding 
 pontiffs, on account of the shortness of their reigns, accomplished 
 nothing, and it was reserved to Clement VIII. to complete it, in the 
 beginning of his pontificate, in 1592." The subsequent editions 
 were reprints of this. The Old Testament Canon contains Baruch, 
 Judith, Tobias, Wisdom, Ecclesiasticus, and i and 2 Maccabees, 
 in addition to the Hebrew Canon, as determined by the Council of 
 Trent. The Vulgate of the Old Testament, in its present form, is 
 not a verv faithful translation of the Hebrew text. 
 
 5. EGYPTIAN TRANSLATIONS. 
 
 About A. D. 200 two Egyptian versions of the Bible, which are 
 partly still extant, were made. They were the Coptic or Memphitic, 
 in the dialect of Lower Egypt, and the Sahidic, in the dialect of 
 Upper Egypt. It is not certain which of these versions is the older. 
 The Old Testament of both is based on the Septuagint. 
 
 1 In publicis lectionibus, disputationibus, prasdicationibus et expositionibus pro 
 authentica habeatur, et ut nemo iliam rcjiccre quovis praetextu audeat vel prsesn 
 mat. Sess. iv, Dec. 2. 
 
 1 We have translated and abridged a part of the Latin preface.
 
 64 INTRODUCTION TO THE STUDY 
 
 6. THE ,ETHIOPIC VERSION. 
 
 The ^Ethiopians, or Abyssinians, have in their sacred language (the 
 Geez) a version of the whole Bible, made not later than the year 400. 
 The author is unknown. 1 The Old Testament appears to have been 
 translated chiefly from the Septuagint. 
 
 7. THE ARMENIAN VERSION. 
 
 Although Christianity was introduced into Armenia as early as 
 the second century, the Armenians had no version of their own un- 
 til Miesrob gave them an alphabet, and translated the Bible into 
 their language in the earlier part of the fifth century. He was 
 assisted in the work of translation by two of his disciples, Joannes 
 Ekelensis and Josephus Palnensis, who were sent to Alexandria 
 to acquire a better knowledge of Greek. Before this time "the 
 Syrian version of the Bible, the authority of which was recognized in 
 the Persian Church, had been used in Armenia, and hence an in- 
 terpreter was always needed to translate into the vernacular tongue 
 the portions of Scripture read in public worship." ' 
 
 The version of the Old Testament closely follows the Septuagint, 
 with the exception of the book of Daniel, the translation of which 
 was made from Theodotion. The text followed is a mixed one, 
 agreeing with none of our chief recensions. The charge that it has 
 been interpolated from the Peshito-Syriac is unfounded ; nor is it 
 certain that it was interpolated from the Vulgate in the thirteenth 
 century." 
 
 8. THE GEORGIAN VERSION. 
 
 In the sixth century the Georgians, after the example of the Ar- 
 menians, from whom they obtained the Scriptures, procured for 
 themselves a translation of the Bible. The New Testament was 
 translated from the original Greek, and the Old from the Septuagint 
 The authors are not known. 4 
 
 9. THE GOTHIC VERSION. 
 
 Ulphilas, Bishop of the Goths, invented for them an alphabet, and 
 translated the Bible* into their language soon after the middle of 
 
 'De Wette, p. 118. 
 
 'Neander, Hist. Christian Religion and Church, vol. ii, pp. 113, 114. 
 
 * De Wette, p. 120. * Ibid., p. iai. 
 
 Fragments of this version are still extant
 
 OF THE HOLY SCRIPTURES. 65 
 
 vhe fourth centary. " He is said, however, to have omitted the 
 books of the Kings, to which the books of Samuel, also, were then 
 reckoned, that nothing might be presented to foster the warlike spirit 
 of the Goths." ' 
 
 10. THE SLAVONIAN VERSION. 
 
 In the latter half of the ninth century Cyril translated the Holy 
 Scriptures into the tongue of the Slavonians. 
 
 II. ARABIC VERSIONS. 
 
 From R. Saadias Gaon, who lived in the first half of the tenth 
 century, we have an Arabic translation of the Pentateuch and of 
 Isaiah, of an explanatory, paraphrastic character, in harmony with 
 the Targums and the Rabbinical expositions. 
 
 There was a translation of the Pentateuch made by an African 
 Jew of the thirteenth century, published by Erpenius. 
 
 12. THE SAMARITAN PENTATEUCH, AND ITS VERSIONS. 
 
 The Samaritan Pentateuch, differing but little from that of the 
 Jews, and being at least twenty-three or four hundred years old, is 
 an independent witness to the integrity of the Hebrew text. Of the 
 Hebrew-Samaritan Pentateuch there are two versions. The one 
 which the Samaritans call Tarjfim, a species of Chaldee, differing, 
 as we find, from both the Chaldee of Onkelos and the Peshito-Syriac. 
 The high priest of the Samaritans informed me that it was made 
 about eighteen hundred years ago. 8 This statement seems probable, 
 the time coinciding very nearly with the age of the Targums of On- 
 kelos and Jonathan Ben Uzziel. The spread of the Chaldee lan- 
 guage through Palestine made all these versions necessary. The 
 Targum of the Samaritans follows closely their Pentateuch. Onkelos 
 may have been consulted in the translation, but it does not always 
 agree with him. 
 
 The Samaritans have also a version of their Pentateuch in Arabic, 
 made, as the high priest informed me, in the thirteenth century. It 
 is the opinion of some that the Samaritans had a Greek version of 
 their Pentateuch, as quotations of it, under the name rd Sa/zopem/rov, 
 in Greek, are found in some of the Fathers of the Church. But it 
 is doubtful that such a version ever existed, and the extracts may 
 have been simply the Samaritan readings translated into Greek. 
 
 1 Neander's Hist. Christian Religion and Church, vol. ii, p. 126. 
 
 1 See ray Journey to Egypt and the Holy Land in i86q, 1870. pp. 183-185.
 
 66 INTRODUCTION TO THE STUDY 
 
 CHAPTER VI. 
 
 GENUINENESS OF THE PENTATEUCH HISTORY OF VIEWS 
 RESPECTING IT DOCUMENT HYPOTHESIS VIEWS OF THE 
 NEW CRITICAL SCHOOL. 
 
 Founder of Christianity and his disciples, in common with the 
 * Tews of that period, assume the Mosaic authorship of the Penta- 
 teuch. 1 Philo* of Alexandria speaks of Moses as the writer of sa- 
 cred books : and Josephus ' attributes to him five books, and re- 
 marks : " He (Moses) gives them (the Hebrews) the laws * in a 
 book." " All things have been written as he left them : we have 
 added nothing to them for embellishment." The Talmudists * also, 
 speak of Moses as the author of the Pentateuch, with the exception 
 of the last chapter. And this has been the unanimous judgment of 
 the Jewish Church. The Fathers of the Christian Church attributed 
 the Pentateuch to Moses. Nor does the language of Jerome imply 
 any doubt upon this point : " Whether you regard Moses as the au- 
 thor of the Pentateuch, or Ezra as the restorer of the same work, I 
 do not object.'" Here Jerome, like many of the other Fathers of 
 the early Church, supposes that the books of Moses were lost in the 
 Babylonian captivity, and restored by Ezra. He intends to express 
 no doubt about Moses having been their original author. Occasion- 
 ally the voice of a Gnostic heretic was raised against the credibility 
 of the Pentateuch, or its Mosaic authorship. 
 
 In the eleventh century Isaac ben Salomo, a Jewish scholar, as- 
 serted that the passage in Gen. xxxvi, 31, concerning the dukes of 
 
 'From irtvrt,Jive, and rtvxt< a book, i) irevrdrcvxaf. The term is as old as the 
 first part of the third century, being used by Tertullian (Adv. Marcionem, i, 10), 
 and by Origen (In Joannem, torn, xiii, cap. 26). The names by which the differ- 
 ent books of the Pentateuch are called in English are taken from the Septuagint. 
 The following are Hebrew names, with the corresponding English ones : rP3XT3. 
 Bertthith (In the beginning), Genesis ; DIES ."ifcfl, Veelleh shemoth (And these are 
 the names), Exodus ; Kip" 1 "), Vayyikra (And he called), Leviticus ; "flntSi Bemidh- 
 tar (In the desert), Numbers; O'nmn nb, Elleh haddebarim (The?e are the 
 words), Deuteronomy. The English names from the Greek are expressive, but the 
 HebreTT are not, being generally the first words of the book. 
 
 Vita Mosis, ii, 136. 'Contra Ap., i, 442. * Liber IT 3, 3, 4. 
 
 * Baba Batra in Furst, Uber den Kanon, etc., pp. 8, 9. 
 
 *Sive Moysen dicere volueris auctorem Pentateuchi sive Ezram ejnsdem instan- 
 mtorem operis. non recuso. De Perpet. Virgin. Beat. Maria liber. 212.
 
 OF THE HOLY SCRIPTURES. 67 
 
 Edom and kings of Israel, was not Avritten until the time of Jehosh- 
 aphat. In the next century we find AbejLEy.ia. a learned rabbi, doubt- 
 ing the Mosaic authorship of a few passages in the Pentateuch, which 
 he seemed to regard as later additions to the original ; but he expresses 
 no doubt of the genuineness of the Pentateuch. He attributed Deut. 
 xxxiv to Joshua. At the beginning of the Reformation Carlstadt 
 thought the proposition that Moses was not the author of five books 
 could be maintained ; and he assigned as a reason that nobody but 
 a fool could believe that Moses wrote the last chapter of Deuteron- 
 omy, which gives an account of his own death. In the last half of 
 the sixteenth century, Masius, a Roman Catholic lawyer, D,,,,^ ln retar 
 in his Commentary on Joshua, denied that the Pentateuch tion to the Pen- 
 in its present form could have proceeded from Moses; but 
 he claimed that it is the work of Ezra, or some other inspired man. 
 Thomas Hobbes, an English deist, about 1650, remarks, in his "Levi- 
 atl an," that "the Pentateuch seems to have been written concern- 
 ing Moses rather than by Moses." About the same time Isaac Peyrere 
 asserted, on various grounds, that the Pentateuch could not be the 
 work of Moses. He supposed that Moses kept a journal of the Ex- 
 odus, of the journeyings in the desert, and of his legislation, to which 
 journal he prefixed a history of former times, and even of the time 
 before Adam. According to Peyrere these autographs of Moses per- 
 ished, and our books are extracts made at a far later period, and not 
 immediately from them in any case. 
 
 Spinoza, a Dutch Jew, in his Tractatus Theologico-Politicus, 
 A. D. 1670, endeavoured to show that the Pentateuch is not the work 
 of Moses. He adduced, in support of his view, several single pas- 
 sages, and the phenomena that pervade the whole work, especially 
 the fact that Moses is spoken of in the third person. He suspects 
 that our Pentateuch, as well as the other historical writings of the Old 
 Testament, in their present form, were composed by Ezra, who first 
 wrote Deuteronomy, and then the other four books, to which he at- 
 tached the former. In 1678 Richard Simon, a French critic of great 
 learning and acuteness, published a Critical History of the Old 
 Testament, in which he attributes the written composition of the 
 laws to Moses himself. The history of his times, he supposes, 
 Moses had written down by public annalists whom he appointed, 
 after the custom of the Egyptians. Out of the different writings of 
 these annalists, who worked without mutual connexion, and out of the 
 Mosaic Law Book, our present Pentateuch was composed. In 1685 
 John Le Clerc attributed the Pentateuch to an Israelitish priest, who 
 was sent back from Babylon by the Assyrian king, after the captivity 
 of the ten tribes, to instruct the colonists in the service of Jehovah-
 
 68 INTRODUCTION TO THE STUDY 
 
 But in his Commentary on Genesis, published in 1693, he retracted 
 his former view, and sought to vindicate for Moses the whole Pen- 
 tateuch, with the exception of a few interpolations, and to refute 
 the objections that had been made against its genuineness. He 
 maintained the opinion that Moses composed Genesis from written 
 documents, in which the patriarchs themselves had written the 
 events of their lives. Not long after this Anton Van Dale, a Dutch 
 scholar, again expressed the opinion that Ezra compiled the Penta- 
 teuch from the Law Book of Moses, and from other historical and 
 prophetical writings. 
 
 In England, in the first half of the eighteenth century, Lord Bo- 
 lingbroke attacked the whole Mosaic system with great virulence, 
 and intimated that the Pentateuch was forged in the time of the 
 Judges, 1 and lost during the Babylonian captivity. There were, 
 however, but a very few genuine scholars who doubted or disputed 
 the Mosaic authorship of the Pentateuch. Carpzov, who lived in 
 the first half of the eighteenth century, in his Introduction, made a 
 vigorous defence of the genuineness of the Pentateuch. John Gott- 
 fried Hasse, in a work published in 1785, took the ground that the 
 Pentateuch had been compiled, at the time of the exile, from ancient 
 monuments, partly Mosaic, which, however, were very much enlarged 
 and altered. He afterward changed this view, and held the Penta- 
 teuch to be the work of Moses, which, in the lapse of time, had re- 
 ceived only single glosses, additions, and supplements, until Ezra 
 finally gave it the finishing touch. 
 
 John David Michaelis, professor in Gottingen, one of the ablest 
 men and greatest scholars of his age, was of rationalistic tendencies ; 
 .. ,. M ~ nevertheless, in his Introduction, in 1 787, he defended the 
 
 Katlonaiisuo ^ t 
 
 defense of the Mosaic authorship of the Pentateuch (f m 1791). Johann 
 Pentateuch. Gottfried Eichhorn, Professor at Gottingen (* in 1752, 
 f in 1827), a man of vast erudition and great genius, was likewise a 
 -ationalist ; but he defended the genuineness of the Pentateuch in 
 nis Introduction, which appeared in 1782. He repeated this 
 defence in the second and third editions. " He rather turns the 
 opponents," says Havernick, " into contempt and scorn, than refutes 
 them." In his fourth edition, in 1823, he modified his views re- 
 specting the Pentateuch, but still held that the greatest part of it 
 was written by Moses himself, especially the laws, the whole of Levit- 
 icus, and the whole of Deuteronomy to the end of chap, xxxii ; that 
 the history of the march of the Israelites was composed by contem- 
 poraries of Moses ; that Genesis was compiled from old documents 
 
 'Leland. View of Deist. Writers, vol. ii, p. 371.
 
 01- THE HOLY SCRIPTURES. 09 
 
 written before the time of Moses; and that the whole Pentateuch 
 tvas collected and arranged in the interval between Joshua and Sam- 
 uel, and that afterward only single glosses were added. 
 
 The deism of England and France was propagated to a large ex- 
 tent in Germany in the latter part of the eighteenth woifenbuttei 
 century, and found a powerful support in the Wolfen- Fra *" nent8 - 
 buttel Fragments, written by Reimarus, and published by Lessing yi 
 1773 an d i?77- In these writings the genuineness of the Pentateuch 
 was violently assailed, 1 and the truth of divine revelation positively 
 denied. These writings threw Germany into a ferment, and the at- 
 tacks on the genuineness of the Pentateuch were renewed with great 
 vigour, and, indeed, are still kept up. 
 
 With the denial of divine revelation and its accompaniments, mir- 
 acles and prophecies, the genuineness of the Pentateuch could not 
 be long admitted, for the concession would draw after it a miracu- 
 lous history which no ingenuity or acuteness could explain on nat- 
 ural principles. 8 There are, however, some exceptional cases, in 
 which the genuineness of the Pentateuch is not fully acknowledged 
 on the part of those who have no such abhorrence of the supernat- 
 ural. Fulda in 1791, Corrodi in 1792, and Nachtigal somewhat 
 later, while denying the genuineness of the Pentateuch, attributed 
 some portion of it to Moses. 
 
 But the most elaborate attack on the genuineness ^of the Penta- 
 teuch was made by Vater in 1805. He sought to show vater and De 
 that it could not have been written either by Moses or Wette - 
 in the Mosaic age : that if any thing was written by Moses or in the 
 Mosaic age possibly only a few fragments at most it is not pre- 
 served in its original form. De Wette (f in 1849) followed Vater in 
 point of time, though he wrote quite independently of him, and pub- 
 lished the first part of his Introduction in 1806. He here wholly 
 denies the Mosaic authorship of the Pentateuch, and allows no por- 
 tion of it to be older than the age of David. 3 
 
 In the first part of the present century the genuineness of the 
 
 1 See Hengstenberg, Genuineness of Pentateuch. 
 
 9 Hence Strauss, to make way for his mythical treatment of the gospel history, 
 denied that any one of the Gospels was written by an eyewitness of Christ's life. 
 In his third edition of the Life of Jesus, he seemed disposed to abandon his ob- 
 jections to the genuineness of the Gospel of John, but resumed them again in his 
 fourth edition, principally, as he confesses, because "without them one could not 
 escape from believing the miracles of Christ." A great admission. 
 
 3 As De Wette may be considered a. representative of extreme negative criticism, 
 we shall consider his views more at large in the discussion of the genuineness of 
 the Pentateuch.
 
 70 INTRODUCTION TO THE STUDY 
 
 Pentateuch was vigorously defended by Kelle, Fritzsche, Jahn, Ro- 
 senmtiller, Hug, Sack, Graves, Meyer, and others. 
 
 Herbst, in his Introduction to the Old Testament, published after 
 his death, places the final revision of the Pentateuch, from the writ- 
 ings of Moses and other ancient monuments, in the age of David. 
 Bertholdt, in his Biblical Introduction, in 1813, holds that there is 
 much in the Pentateuch which is really from Moses, and that the 
 whole of it was collected and brought into its present form be- 
 tween the .beginning of the reign of Saul and the end of the reign 
 Voiney, Hart- ^ Solomon. Volney, in 1814, published the view that 
 
 manu, Von the Pentateuch, in its present form, was composed of 
 Bohlen. . . 
 
 genuine Mosaic documents, and writings of a later date, 
 
 by the high priest Hilkiah, in the time of King Josiah. The four 
 following writers have carried their doubts of, and hostility to, the 
 Pentateuch to an extreme point: Hartmann, in his work on the 
 Pentateuch, published in 1831, denies the existence of the art of 
 writing in the Mosaic age, and places the beginning of written com- 
 position in the age of Samuel. Von Bohlen, in 1835, published the 
 view that Deuteronomy is the oldest part of the Pentateuch, but 
 that this did not appear until the time of King Josiah, and the 
 entire Pentateuch not before the Babylonian exile. In the same 
 year Vatke and George published their opinions of the Pentateuch, 
 in which they both deny that Moses had any share in the composi- 
 tion of the work. 
 
 Gesenius, the celebrated Hebrew lexicographer and grammarian, 
 Gesenius and was, during the most of his life, an advocate of the late 
 staheiin. origin of the Pentateuch ; yet he seems to have finally 
 
 modified his opinion, for he expresses himself thus doubtfully in the 
 thirteenth edition of his Hebrew Grammar : " It is still a subject of 
 critical controversy whether the Pentateuch proceeded, entire or 
 in part, from Moses." 1 J. J. Staheiin, in his work published in 
 1843, refers the arrangement of the Pentateuch, in its present form, 
 to the age of Saul, and thinks it may be the work of Samuel or of 
 one of his disciples. 
 
 J. Astruc, a French physician and professor belonging to the 
 Document Roman Catholic Church, in his anonymous work pub- 
 hypothesis. K she'd in 1753 (Original Memoirs, which it appears that 
 Moses used in composing the Book of Genesis), first called atten- 
 tion to the divine names in different portions of the book, as fur. 
 nishing proof of different sources employed in its construction. 
 Astruc supposed that there were two principal sources an Elohim 
 (God) document and a Jehovah (Lord) document the elements 
 
 1 Leipzig, 1842,
 
 OF THE HOLY SCRIPTURES. 71 
 
 of which run through the whole. He supposed, that besides these 
 there were ten other documents, of which single frag- views of AS- 
 ments were introduced. Astruc held that from these truc - 
 twelve documents Moses composed the whole of Genesis by copy- 
 ing them into twelve separate columns, but that through the fault 
 of copyists some of the passages were afterward misplaced. 
 
 The views of Astruc at first attracted little notice, but the seed 
 sown yielded, in due time, a rich harvest of hypotheses. Eichhorn 
 conjectured, that at the basis of the Book of Genesis there lay two 
 principal ante-Mosaic documents, an Elohistic and a Jehovistic 
 the Elohistic document embracing also the first two chapters of Ex- 
 odus. He supposed that in some few instances other documents 
 were also used. Ilgen (f in 1834) asserted that Genesis is composed 
 of seventeen independent documents, which proceeded from three 
 different authors, a Jehovist, and a first and second Elohist. 
 
 Von Lengerke, in his investigations concerning the Pentateuch, 
 published in 1844, recognizes as the sources of the Pen- views of Len- 
 tateuch : i. A fundamental document written in the age l^ote^Grafl 
 of Solomon; 2. A later writing, that of the supple- and Noideke. 
 menter, composed in the first period of the Assyrian age, perhaps 
 under Hezekiah ; 3. The Deuteronomist, in the time of Josiah. 
 Henry Ewald, the great Orientalist, in his History of the Children 
 of Israel until the Time of Christ (1843-1853), gives in full his 
 opinion of the Pentateuch. He grants the existence of writing in 
 Egypt before the time of Moses, but attributes to Moses only a few 
 fragments of the Pentateuch, such as the Decalogue and some 
 short legal decisions, with a few songs, but no lengthy laws and 
 series of laws. Knobel, in his work on the Pentateuch and Joshua, 
 published in 1861, supposes that Moses taught his laws orally only, 
 and left to his successors the work of developing and recording 
 them. John William Colenso, Bishop of Natal, published, in 1862, 
 his estimate of the Pentateuch and Book of Joshua. 1 In this work 
 the author assails, principally from an arithmetical point of view, 
 the credibility of the history in the Pentateuch, and denies its 
 Mosaic authorship. Its publication produced a great sensation in 
 England and in the United States, principally on account of its au- 
 thor's rank as bishop in the Church of England. Professor Green, 
 of Princeton, wrote an able and scholarly reply to Colenso. In 
 1873 Colenso published his Lectures on the Pentateuch and the 
 Moabite Stone, in which he further develops his opinions. What 
 he calls the Elohistic narrative, or the original story of the exodus, 
 embracing about one fourth or one fifth of Genesis, about one third 
 1 Republished in New York in 1863.
 
 72 INTRODUCTION TO THE STUDY 
 
 of Exodus, no part of Leviticus, about one fourth of Numbers, and 
 only six verses of Deuteronomy, he thinks was written by Samuel. 
 He contends that the whole of Deuteronomy, with the exception of 
 six verses, was written by Jeremiah, and that the " priestly legisla- 
 tion," embracing one half of the Pentateuch, was written during the 
 Babylonian captivity and later. 
 
 Very able vindications of the Mosaic authorship of the Penta- 
 teuch have been put forth by Hengstenberg, Havernick, 1 Ranke, 
 Drechsler, M. Baumgarten, Keil, and others. 
 
 Schrader. in his edition of De Wette's Introduction, distributes 
 the Pentateuch among four successive writers : " the annalist," who 
 composed his work from written sources during the first seven 
 years of the reign of David; "the theocratic narrator," who wrote 
 between B. C. 975 and 950; "the prophetic narrator," who com- 
 bined and retouched these, B. C. 825-800 ; and the Deuteronomist, 
 a man inspired of God, who wrote the last book of the Pentateuch 
 not long before the eighteenth year of King Josiah, and edited the 
 whole Pentateuch. 
 
 Dr. Samuel Davidson holds that the Pentateuch bears marks of 
 having originated from an elder Elohist (who wrote in the time of 
 Saul), a junior Elohist (about B. C. 880), and a Jehovist (in the first 
 half of the eighth century before Christ). Besides these, there was 
 an editor of the whole work. The Pentateuch was completed in the 
 time of Manasseh, and the book found in the temple in the time of 
 King Josiah (2 Kings xxii) was our Pentateuch. Dr. Davidson be- 
 lieves that whole chapters in Exodus, Leviticus, and Numbers were 
 written by Moses. The theory of Dr. Davidson is substantially the 
 same as that of Hupfeld. ^ 
 
 Frederick Bleek, in his Introduction to the Old Testament, 9 holds 
 that the Pentateuch in its present form is not the work of Moses, 
 
 J although it contains a considerable number of chapters 
 
 Bleek's theory. . , . 
 
 t written by him ; but that it is based upon an Elohistic 
 
 history which extended from the creation to the conquest of Ca- 
 naan, written probably in the reign of Saul. The writer used the 
 term Elohim exclusively until the time that God revealed himself 
 to Moses as Jehovah (Exod. vi, 3), after which he employed the 
 term Jehovah. Documents, some of which were written during the 
 sojourn in Egypt, were used in the composition of the work. The 
 author of the first four books of the Pentateuch, nearly in their 
 present form, a Jehovist of the first part of the reign of David, 
 made the Elohistic history the basis of his own work. He did not 
 
 1 The Pentateuch Vindicated, etc., New York, 1863. 
 * Edited by Kamphausen, Berlin, 1870.
 
 OF THE HOLY SCRIPTURES. 73 
 
 always follow it, however, but incorporated into it new matter, 
 partly from written sources and partly from tradition. This recen- 
 sion included only a few verses of Deuteronomy, which arose in the 
 time of Manasseh, so that it formed apart of the Pentateuch found 
 in the temple in the time of Josiah. The author of Deuteronomy 
 was also the editor of the whole Pentateuch. 
 
 Fiirst 1 believes the Pentateuch to be composed of various docu- 
 ments, some of which were ante-Mosaic, but that the most were 
 
 composed in the Mosaic age, in great part by the law- 
 
 ,, I. c i ! Furst's theory, 
 
 giver himself; and that the last revision of the whole 
 
 Pentateuch and Joshua was made at the end of the period of the 
 Judges. Two writers figure in Furst's scheme : the " narrator " and 
 the " supplemental. " He attaches but little importance to the use 
 of the divine names in different portions of Genesis. 
 
 In 1866, Prof. K. H. Graf, of Meissen, in his discussion of The 
 Historical Books of the Old Testament, put forth the views of the 
 hypothesis that the Pentateuch and the earlier proph- QQl ^"Jjj 
 ets (Genesis 2 Kings), form one book. He supposes Pentateuch, 
 that a writer, the Jehovist, about B. C. 750, revised an older his- 
 torical work (the Elohist), which had been composed partly from 
 oral and partly from written sources. This revised work of the 
 Jehovist was an historical work rather than a law book. It con- 
 tained the most of Genesis, but lacked Exodus xii, 1-28, 43-51 ; 
 xxv-xxxi; xxxv-xl, the whole of Leviticus, about one half of 
 Numbers, and Deuteronomy i-xxx. 3 Toward B. C. 600, this work 
 was revised and continued by the Deuteronomist. About B. C. 450 
 the Pentateuch received its present form by the introduction of 
 the laws collected and arranged by Ezra ; or, rather, it received its 
 complete form immediately after Ezra. 4 He thinks that Ezekiel 
 wrote Leviticus xviii-xxiii, xxv, xxvi. He thus divides the Elohis- 
 tic document (Grundschrift) of the Pentateuch. After his atten- 
 tion had been called to the inconsistency of this proceeding, he 
 reconsidered the matter, and adopted the view that " The Elohistic 
 parts of Genesis are later than the Jehovistic parts." ! 
 
 Prof. Kayser, of Strassburg, in his Prae-Exilic Book of the Primi- 
 tive History of Israel and its Enlargements, finds, as the result of 
 his investigations, that there was a Pentateuchal document, the 
 Jehovist, written before the time of Amos, Hosea, and Micah, who 
 refer to it, but know nothing of the Elohist. Nor does the Deut- 
 eronomist, who lived in the time of King Manasseh or Josiah, 
 know any thing of the Elohist; he is acquainted with the Jehovist 
 
 1 See hi-, Geschichte der Biblischen Literatur, Leipzig, 1867. * Pp. in, 112. 
 
 "Ibid., p. 94. 4 Ibid., p. 75. 5 Wellhausen's Bleek, p. 161.
 
 74 INTRODUCTION TO THE STUDY 
 
 only. "The Deuteronomist," he says, l was also acquainted with 
 the Jehovistic law, Exodus xx-xxiii, xxxiv. The Elohim book 
 arose in the time of Ezra." ' The Jehovistic and Elohistic books 
 were united after the exile." 
 
 Prof. J. Wellhausen, in his additions to Bleek's Einleitung, 3 gives 
 his views of the composition of the Pentateuch, and refers to 
 previous discussions, in which he sets forth his views more at large. 
 His first document is the Jehovistic Book of History (J E), formed 
 from two sources, one of which (J) used the name Jehovah, the 
 other (E) Elohim. This book contained only very short laws 
 (Exodus xx-xxiii). To it was afterward *united Deuteronomy, 
 which was originally only a law book. At the same time the 
 whole Hexateuch (which altogether lacked Leviticus) was revised 
 from the standpoint of the Deuteronomist, least in Genesis, more 
 in Exodus and Numbers, and most in Joshua. Beside this com- 
 bination there stands independently also another historical and 
 legal work, the Codex of the Priests. Its foundation which ap- 
 pears almost pure in Genesis, but elsewhere is enlarged in the 
 most comprehensive manner through the labour of a whole school 
 is the book of the four covenants (Q), a work which presents the 
 laws in a strictly historical framework. The last editor of the 
 Hexateuch (R) combined the previous work with the Codex of the 
 Priests. This Codex is later than Deuteronomy. 4 Wellhausen 
 manifestly considers it largely the work of Ezra. 
 
 Abram Kuenen, Professor of Theology in the University of 
 Leyden, has, in different treatises, set forth his views of the Penta- 
 teuch. The work of Bishop Colenso, according to his confession, 
 seems to have influenced him. He observed that those portions of 
 the Pentateuch in which Colenso found the greatest difficulties had 
 been considered the oldest portions of the Pentateuch. He "grad- 
 ually reached the conviction that our criticism of the fundamental 
 document (Grundschrift of the Pentateuch) has stopped half way." * 
 
 In 1869-1870, Kuenen published in Dutch his Religion of Israel.* 
 His standpoint is naturalistic. " For us," says he, " the Israelitish 
 is one of those [principal] religions, nothing more, but also noth- 
 ing less." " Even though it be admitted that God may now and 
 then have suspended natural laws, no one has a right to assume for 
 that reason that this really took place among the Israelites.'" 
 
 1 Strassburg, 1874, p. 196. 9 Ibid., p. 143. 3 Berlin, 1878. 
 
 4 Wellhausen's Bleek, pp. 177, 178. 5 Ibid., p. 155. 
 
 6 Translated into English by Alfred Heath May, and published in London .md 
 Edinburgh, in 3 vols., 1874-1875. Republished without change in 1882-1883. 
 'Vol. i, p. 5. 8 Ibid., p. 21.
 
 OF THE HOLY SCRIPTURES. 75 
 
 Kuenen, with all his skepticism, admits some facts in' the Penta- 
 teuchal history. " We may not doubt," says he, " that the Exodus is 
 an historical fact. Independently of the authority of the Pentateuch 
 and the book of Joshua, it is proved by the testimony of the 
 prophets." 1 He grants that Moses was the leader of the Israelites 
 in Egypt and subsequently, and that he established the worship of 
 Jehovah in Israel. 
 
 Respecting the ten commandments, Kuenen remarks: " There is 
 no real obstacle to the supposition that they are derived from 
 Moses : on the contrary, their contents and arrangement are entirely 
 in accordance with the theory of their Mosaic origin." " " The tradi- 
 tion which ascribes them to Moses is worthy of respect on account of 
 its undisputed antiquity." " We acknowledge as a fact that Moses 
 in the name of Jahveh prescribed to the Israelitish tribes such a law 
 as is contained in the ten words." 3 "We are led," says he, "to 
 place the institution of the Sabbath in the Mosaic time.'" 1 He also 
 remarks : " From the Mosaic time downward there always existed 
 in Israel a worship of Jahveh without an image. Scarcely any tra- 
 dition of Hebrew antiquity is better guaranteed than that which 
 derives the ark of Jahveh from the lawgiver himself." 5 In Kuenen's 
 view, " Moses bequeathed no book of the law to the tribe of 
 Israel." ' " It is quite certain that nearly all the laws of the Penta- 
 teuch date from much later times." 7 " In the eighth century B. C. 
 but few laws and those, as we shall see further on, not even uni- 
 versally or in the same sense were ascribed to Moses, and carried 
 back to the sojourn in the desert of Sinai." ' " I have been led to 
 the conviction that the priestly legislation in Exodus and Numbers 
 was not brought to its present form until after the exile, and there- 
 fore in its entirety is younger than Deuteronomy. . . . The decrees 
 of the priestly laws were not made and invented during or after the 
 exile, but drawn up. Prior to the exile the priests had already de- 
 livered verbally what, with the modifications that had become neces- 
 sary in the meantime, they afterward committed to writing.'" 
 After the ten commandments, Kuenen seems to consider Exodus 
 xxi-xxiii, which he calls the Book of the Covenant, as standing next 
 in point of antiquity. 
 
 Kuenen divides the priestly laws of the middle books of the Penta- 
 teuch into three groups. The first embraces Leviticus xviii-xxiii, 
 xxv, xxvi. To the second group belong in great part the laws in 
 Exodus xii, xxv-xxxi, in Leviticus i-xvii, xxiv, xxvii, and most of 
 
 1 Vol. i, p. 117. 2 Ibid., p. 284. 8 Ibid., p. 285. 
 
 4 Ibid., p. 286. 5 Ibid., p. 289. "Vol. ii, p. 7- 
 
 7 Vol. i, p. 272. 8 Ibid., p. 139. 'Vol. ii, p. 96. 
 6
 
 76 INTRODUCTION TO THE STUDY 
 
 the priestly documents in Numbers, both the purely legislative and 
 the semi-historical. His third group is "usually closely united with 
 the older documents in three central books of the Pentateuch, and 
 cannot be separated from them without difficulty." 1 "The laws," 
 says he, "of the first and second groups, and the historical narra- 
 tives belonging to them, were written in Babylonia between the 
 years 538 and 458 B. C." * The author of the first group of 
 priestly laws wrote also the book of Elohistic History, the Book of 
 Origins. Genesis i, i-ii, 3, was, accordingly, written about the time 
 of Ezra ! It is clear that Kuenen considered the author of the 
 Elohistic narrative the inventor of the historical incidents. Deut- 
 eronomy, he holds, is a forgery of the seventh century before 
 Christ. 3 
 
 Prof. Smend, of Basel, asserts that the priestly laws of the Penta- 
 teuch were unknown to Ezekiel, and, therefore, had no existence 
 at the time. 4 Prof. W. Robertson Smith, in lectures on The Old 
 Testament in the Jewish Church, 5 puts into a popular form the 
 views of Graf, Wellhausen, and Kuenen on the Pentateuch. But, 
 at the same time, he widely differs from the naturalistic views of 
 these men in admitting a divine revelation as the basis of the Mo- 
 saic system. In short, he endeavours to breathe into the deathly 
 results of a rationalistic criticism the living spirit of divine reve- 
 lation. After the ten commandments, Prof. Smith recognizes as 
 most ancient Exod. xxi-xxiii, which he calls "the first legislation." 1 
 But he does not seem to think that these laws were written by 
 Moses, for he says : " Till we come to the book of Deuteronomy, we 
 find no statement that Moses wrote down more than the ten com- 
 mandments." ' He contends that " Deuteronomy was unknown 
 until long after the days of Moses." " It was not known to 
 Isaiah.'" But he does not believe in "the idea of some critics, 
 that the Deuteronomic Code was a forgery of the temple priests, or 
 of their head, the high priest Hilkiah.'" "It was of no conse- 
 quence to Josiah it is of equally little consequence to us to know 
 the exact date and authorship of the book. Its prophetic doctrine 
 and the practical character of the scheme which it set forth in 
 which the new teaching and the old Torah were fused into an in- 
 telligible unity were enough to commend it." 1 He regards "the 
 Levitical law as later than Ezekiel." 11 " The development of the 
 details of the [Levitical] system falls, therefore, between the time 
 of Ezekiel and the work of Ezra." 18 "It is for the historian to 
 
 1 Vol. ii, p. 150. * Ibid., p. 152. 8 Ibid., p. 19. 4 Com. on Ezek'fL 
 
 * D. Appleton & Co., New York, 1883. * Ibid., p. 316. 7 Ibid., p. 331. 
 
 8 Ibid.,p.354. 9 Ibid., p. 362. 10 Ibid., p. 363. " Ibid., p. 375. 12 Ibid., p. 384.
 
 OF THE HOLY SCRIPTURES. 77 
 
 determine how far the Levitical law is mere law, of which we can 
 say no more than that it was law for the Second Temple, and how 
 far it is also history which can be used in describing the original 
 sanctuary of the ark in the days of Moses." 1 
 
 The new theory has been decidedly opposed by Noldeke, who 
 in his work published in 1868 thinks that the laws in opponents of 
 Leviticus and the chapter on the tabernacle were written the theory of 
 in the ninth or tenth century before Christ; and that 
 the principal portion of the Pentateuch belongs to the earlier kings. 
 Riehm, in the Studien und Kritiken for 1868 and 1872, strongly op- 
 poses the new theory. Prof. Curtiss in his valuable work on The 
 Levitical Priests a tests the new theory, and finds it wanting respect- 
 ing the priesthood. Klostermann, in Delitzsch's Journal of Lutheran 
 Theology, 1877, refutes the theory that Ezekiel wrote Leviticus 
 xviii xxvi. Prof. August Dillmann, of the University of Berlin, in 
 his Commentary on Exodus and Leviticus, takes strong ground 
 against the new theory, and remarks: "That the priests of the 
 central sanctuary in ancient time wrote their laws is the most rea- 
 sonable supposition in the world. . . . That the laws relating to the 
 priesthood and divine service were not written down, or even made, 
 until the Babylonian Captivity, is absurd (Widersinnig)." ' It is 
 also opposed by Bredenkamp, 4 of Erlangen. Prof. Watts, of Belfast, 
 in his New Criticism, 5 has replied to Prof. W. Robertson Smith. 
 Dr. Stebbins, in A Study of the Pentateuch, reviews and decid- 
 edly condemns Kuenen's views in his Religion of Israel. 8 
 
 Prof. W. H. Green, of the Princeton Theological Seminary, pub- 
 lished in the Presbyterian Quarterly Review a masterly refutation 
 of Prof. W. Robertson Smith, which he enlarged and republished 
 in book form, with other kindred articles.' Prof. Delitzsch has 
 written against the new theory, but makes so many concessions to it 
 that he rather seems to favor it. 8 " He admits that ' the Mosaic 
 legislation had its history, and that the codification of its parts was 
 executed successively ' yea, that the process extended over a 
 thousand years." 9 
 
 1 The Old Testament in the Jewish Church, p. 384. 
 
 2 Edinburg, 1877. 3 Vorwort, Leipzig, 1880. 
 
 4 Gesetz und Propheten, 1881. 5 Second ed., 1882. 6 Boston, 1881. 
 
 1 New York, 1883. 
 
 8 His views are given by Joseph Cook in the N. Y. Independent, Sept. 15, 1881. 
 
 9 Prof. F. A. Cast, D.D., in the Reformed Quarterly Review for July, 1882. 
 This article and the one in the previous number of the Review by the same author 
 are very valuable, and give a comprehensive view of the theories respecting the 
 Pentateuch.
 
 78 INTRODUCTION TO THE STUDY 
 
 CHAPTER VII. 
 
 EXAMINATION OF THE DOCUMENT HYPOTHESIS. 
 
 TT is thus seen that the impugners of the Pentateuch regard it not 
 * as the work of Moses, but as a patchwork, a mosaic, of various 
 documents, written at different periods by various authors. Re- 
 specting the document hypothesis, we may remark, first of all, 
 that there is very little agreement, as we have already seen, among 
 the opponents of the genuineness of the Pentateuch in regard to the 
 number of the original documents, when they were composed, by 
 whom and from what sources, and when the final revision of the 
 whole was made. This want of unity in view is a strong proof that 
 their theories rest upon no solid basis of facts. One feature, how- 
 ever, stands out prominently in nearly all their theories : they de- 
 prive Moses, as much as possible, of all connexion with the 
 composition of the Pentateuch. 
 
 That part of the Pentateuch which the critical school, prior to 
 Graf, with great unanimity, called the fundamental document (Grund- 
 schrift) consisting of the Elohistic history in Genesis, and a large 
 part of the history and most of the laws in the middle books is 
 now pronounced by Graf and his school to be the latest of all. In 
 short, what former critics considered the foundation of the Penta- 
 teuchal edifice the new school declares to be the top. The new- 
 school, therefore, throws every thing into confusion. It affirms 
 that, prior to Ezra, the first chapter of Genesis and the first three 
 verses of the second had no existence, and that the history of 
 creation began with Gen. ii, 4. In this way, there is not a single 
 hint in Genesis that God created every thing in six days, in spite of 
 the fact that this is affirmed in the fourth commandment, Exodus 
 xx, 8-1 1, and that the Sabbath was ordained to commemorate the 
 divine rest after the six days' work of creation. If one can believe 
 that no Jewish historian until Ezra, a thousand years after Moses, 
 would write an account of the six days' work of creation, and that 
 previous to that time the account of creation begun in the following 
 manner : " And every plant of the field before it was in the earth," 
 etc., we do not envy him his judgment. Jeremiah quotes Gen. i 2 : 
 *' I beheld the earth, and, lo, it was without form, and void " (iv, 23). 
 The Hebrew is exactly that of Genesis (^31 inn). So also in Deut-
 
 OF THE HOLY SCRIPTURES. 79 
 
 eronomy and the earlier prophets, there are references to the 
 Elohistic history in Genesis, as we shall see. 
 
 The different names for the Divine Being Elohim, God, Jehovah 
 (properly Jahveti), and Jehovah Elohim (LORD God, Eng. Ver.) 
 found in different portions of the Book of Genesis furnish the original 
 ground for the decomposition of the Mosaic writings. In the other 
 books of the Pentateuch (with the exception of the first few chapters 
 
 of Exodus) the use of the divine names furnishes no . 
 
 Argument 
 
 support at all for the document hypothesis. But it against the 
 
 must be borne in mind that the hypothesis that one doc- document &y- 
 
 pothesis. 
 ument, or more, entered into the composition of the Book 
 
 of Genesis and into the first two chapters of Exodus, by no means 
 militates against the Mosaic authorship of the Pentateuch. That the 
 traditions of the Hebrew people would be written down during their 
 sojourn in Egypt, where they came in contact with a people who 
 were accustomed to write the annals of their kings, and to compose 
 works on science and religion, is highly probable. Joseph, who mar- 
 ried the daughter of Poti-pherah, priest of On, might have compiled 
 the annals of the Hebrews and the traditions respecting the deluge 
 and the antediluvian world. But those annals might have been very 
 defective, and have contained no account, or a very imperfect one, of 
 the work of creation, the order of which none but God could know. 
 The original document lying before Moses for we can scarce- 
 ly believe it at all probable that the Hebrews had two different 
 documents which related the history of the world from the creation 
 to the time of Moses may have been used by him in the composi- 
 tion of Genesis. In this way we might find in Genesis a narrator 
 (tht Elohisi), and an editor or reviser, the Jehovist (Moses). How- 
 far this is probably true must be determined from the phenomena 
 exhibited in the book. 
 
 In the account of creation, ending with the third verse of the 
 second chapter of Genesis, the Creator is called Elohim (God). 
 After this we have an enlarged account of the creation of the first 
 pair of the human race, the condition of the earth, the planting of 
 Eden, the fall of man and his expulsion from Paradise, ending with 
 the fourth chapter. In this historical sketch (with the exception of 
 the address of the serpent to Eve, and her reply, where Elohim (God) 
 is used) the name of the divine Being is Jehovah Elohim (Lord 
 God, Eng. Ver.). Such phraseology is found nowhere else, either in 
 Genesis or in any other book of the Bible. 1 At the end of the first 
 account of creation, and immediately preceding the more special 
 
 1 Everywhere else, if Jehovah God is used, it is in such form as this : Jehovah, 
 Cod of heaven.
 
 80 INTRODUCTION TO THE STUDY 
 
 narrative of a part of the divine work, we have the statement: 
 " These are the generations of the heavens and of the earth when 
 they were created, in the day that Jehovah God made the earth 
 Jehovah and anc * the heavens" (Gen. ii, 4). Now the question arises, 
 
 Eiowm con- whether this verse belongs to the first narrative of crea- 
 wdered. , 
 
 tion or to the description that follows. To refer it to 
 
 the latter would be unsuitable, for in this there is no consecutive ac- 
 count of creation, no mention at all of the making of the heavens 
 and of the earth. There appears, therefore, a good reason for re- 
 ferring it to the preceding account, to which it is altogether applica- 
 ble. But why was this verse (ii, 4) not placed at the very beginning 
 of Genesis ? For a very good reason ; since in that case it would 
 take away the sublimity and prominence of the declaration: "In 
 the beginning God created the heavens and the earth." How com- 
 paratively feeble, and almost awkward, would be such an arrangement 
 as this : " These are the generations of the heavens and of the earth, 
 when they were created, in the day that Jehovah God made the heav- 
 ens and the earth. In the beginning God created the heavens and the 
 earth." Fiirst refers verse ii, 4, to the preceding account of crea- 
 tion. 1 Further, the " and " (i) that follows the verse forbids the refer- 
 ence to what follows : "And every plant of the field," etc., ver. 5. 
 
 The next question is : Why does the narrator use, in the second 
 description, the combined names Jehovah Elohim ? Evidently to 
 show that Elohim. the general name for the divine Being, is the same 
 Jehovah 2 who manifested himself to the Hebrews in Egypt, and who 
 was in a special sense their God. We have already observed that 
 this form of blending the two names occurs nowhere else ; but very 
 frequently we find both names used in passages which obviously were 
 written by one author. Take as an example the Eighteenth Psalm 
 of David, in which several divine names Elohim, Eloah, El 
 (God), and Jehovah (Lord) occur without our being able to deter- 
 mine in most instances why one name should be preferred to the 
 other. In some cases there is a special fitness in using one in pref- 
 erence to another ; while in others no good reason can be assigned 
 for discriminating between them. We ourselves often use them pro- 
 miscuously. 
 
 1 Geschichte der Bib. Liter., vol. i, p. 69, note. I refer to Furst especially on ac- 
 count of his great knowledge of the Hebrew Bible, and from the fact that he is a 
 Rationalist, and treats the Hebrew Scriptures with great freedom, and cannot b 
 supposed to be biased in favour of any thing that may be considered orthodox. 
 
 4 The name mrP, Jehovah, should be written with different vowels, and pro- 
 nounced Jahvek, the future of the verb iTIH, (HavaK), to be, the Being -who wit' *e, 
 who will always exist, the Absolute Beinp. The Hebrews use the future tense to 
 indicate what is customary, permanent. y&< |jrii' ^riPS*, (God), are terms indic- 
 ative of might, power.
 
 OF THE HOLY SCRIPTURES. 81 
 
 In the very midst of the narrative of the creation and fall of man, 
 in which Jehovah Elohim (Lord God) is used, we find both the 
 serpent and the woman using Elohim. It would be unsuitable to 
 put the word Jehovah into the mouth of the serpent, and Elohim is 
 taken up from the serpent by Eve. This narrative most properly 
 belongs to Moses, the theologian and lawgiver, and stands most 
 intimately connected with his whole system. Nor do we think that 
 any historian of the creation, subsequently to the time in which 
 God revealed himself to Moses as Jehovah, would have omitted the 
 use of the latter august name. Nor is there any thing strange in 
 supposing that Moses should first give us a general con- Probability of 
 secutive history of creation, and then a more particular ^e^worcTje- 
 description of the important parts of it, especially when hovah. 
 the more particular account was so closely connected with the his- 
 tory that was to follow. 
 
 In the fourth chapter Jehovah (Lord) is everywhere used, ex- 
 cept in the twenty-fifth verse, where Eve says, on the birth of Seth, 
 " God hath appointed me another seed instead of Abel, whom Cain 
 slew." When Abel was born she said : " I have gotten a man 
 [through the aid of] Jehovah." We cannot assert, with any degree 
 of probability, why she used the one term for the divine Being in- 
 stead of the other. In the fifth chapter Elohim (God) is used, 
 with but one exception, where Jehovah occurs ; and in the sixth 
 chapter Elohim occurs eight times and Jehovah four times. In 
 verses five, six, and seven, Elohim and Jehovah stand in the closest 
 connexion. 
 
 The Statement in chap, vi, 2, " that the sons of God saw the daugh- 
 ters of men that they were fair, and they took them wives of all which 
 they chose," has no reference, as some have imagined, and even 
 Gesenius among the number, to the intercourse of angels with women. 
 Such an idea would have been abhorrent to all the religious views 
 of the Old Testament writers, and would require the clearest lan- 
 guage to establish it. Nor is the phrase D'ri^xn "J3, sons of God, ever 
 used in the Pentateuch for angels. It occurs a few times, prob- 
 ably in this sense, in the poetic book of Job (i, 6 ; ii, i ; xxxviii, 7),' 
 and in a very similar form and in a similar sense in Psalm 
 Ixxxix, 6. The passages in Job are referred to the angels by the 
 LXX. On the contrary, in Genesis xxviii, 12, where Jacob beheld in 
 a dream the angels of God ascending and descending upon the lad- 
 der extending from earth to heaven, they are called by a different 
 expression, D'Tl^x '3 x*7D, messengers of God. * But the phrase "' 
 
 'In this passage the article is omitted before Elohim. 
 2 Also in Gen. xxxii, i: " The angels of God met him."
 
 82 INTRODUCTION TO THE STUDY 
 
 of God" in Genesis vi, 2, must refer to the holy people of God upon 
 the earth. The Targums of Onkelos, Midrash, and Symmachus, 
 whom Fflrst follows, have sotis -of princes, or companions of distin- 
 guished ones. The LXX adheres closely to the Hebrew " sons of 
 God." In Exodus iv, 22, God calls Israel his son ; and in Hosea 
 i, 10, it is said, "Ye are the sons of the living God." 
 
 In the next two chapters (vii, viii), in which we have a descrip- 
 tion of the deluge, its subsidence, Noah's leaving the ark, and his 
 sacrifice to Jehovah, both Elohim and Jehovah are employed. In 
 some sections of the description of the deluge only one of the divine 
 names is found; in others, both occur : in one short section Elohim 
 alone occurs, and but once; while both names are found in the six- 
 teenth verse of chapter vii. 
 
 There are, it is true, some apparent indications of two separate 
 A rent in- accounts of the deluge, not in the use of the divine 
 dications of names merely, but also in the matter of the narrative 
 two accounts. itself . for wg ' find that whgn Elohim ( God ) commanded 
 
 Noah to build the ark, he ordered him to take into it two living 
 things of each kind, the male and the female ; but after the ark is 
 built, Jehovah commands Noah to take living things into the ark, 
 the unclean by twos, the male and his female, and the clean by 
 sevens, the male and his female. And it is said of clean beasts, and of 
 beasts that are not clean, and of fowls, and of every thing that creepeth 
 upon the earth, there went in two and two unto Noah into the ark, 
 the male and the female, as God had commanded Noah (verses 8, 9). 
 Again, after enumerating different kinds of living beings, without 
 discriminating between clean and unclean, it is added : " And they 
 went in unto Noah into the ark, two and two of all flesh, wherein is the 
 breath of life. And they that went in, went in male and female of" 
 all flesh, as God had commanded him ; and Jehovah shut him in " 
 (vii. 15, 1 6). We cannot suppose that the author of the Elohistic 
 portion knew nothing of the distinction between clean and unclean 
 though that has been asserted for this distinction is recognised 
 in the Elohistic portion (vii, 7-9). Respecting the apparent dis- 
 crepancy between the number of living things (by twos) that were 
 ordered to be taken into the ark when the command was given to 
 build it, and* the larger number of clean animals (by sevens) that 
 were directed to be taken into the ark after it was completed, it 
 may be observed that the first command was in general terms, but 
 when the ark was completed the numbers were more specifically 
 stated. And when it is said that the living things went into the ark 
 two and two, even in the section which closes with the name of Je- 
 hovah, it is difficult to think that there can be a real contradiction ;
 
 OF THE HOLY SCRIPTURES. 83 
 
 rather, the expression " two and two " indicates that they came in 
 pairs, without fixing the number of pairs of each kind, or discrimi- 
 nating between the clean and the unclean. 
 
 There is considerable repetition in the account of the deluge, and, 
 indeed, in other parts of the Pentateuch, which is not strange in a 
 work of so great antiquity. In fact, repetition is characteristic of 
 the poetry of the Hebrews, as well as of that of the ancient Egyp- 
 tians, whose poetry would naturally affect a prose writer like Moses, 
 skilled in their learning. Respecting the Egyptians, Wuttke re- 
 marks : " In poetical productions they loved the repetition of the 
 same thought in a different form, either to make it clearer or to give 
 it more emphasis." ' 
 
 In the subsequent parts of Genesis, Elohim is used in some 
 sections, Jehovah in others, while in some instances the two names 
 are inseparably connected. Some sections contain no divine name. 
 In the last chapters of Genesis, Elohim is almost universally used. 
 It was extremely natural, indeed, that Joseph, in his intercourse 
 with the Egyptians, should use Elohim, as they knew not Jehovah. 
 In some cases it is possible to assign a reason for the preference of 
 one divine name to the other; but in other cases it is impossible. 
 
 In the first two chapters of Exodus Elohim alone is used. In the 
 following chapter the Angel of Jehovah appears unto Moses in a 
 burning bush, proclaims himself as " I AM THAT I AM," and commis- 
 sions him to bring the Israelites out of Egypt. Here, and in the 
 subsequent chapters, the use of Elohim and Jehovah are so inter- 
 woven in the narrative that it is absolutely impossible to separate 
 them and assign them to different documents ; and in the sixth 
 chapter the Almighty reveals himself to Moses as JEHOVAH. 
 
 It would seem that the sacred historian, in the last chapters of 
 Genesis and in the first two chapters of Exodus, purposely kept the 
 name Jehovah in the background, that he might bring it forward 
 with more power and splendour in the divine manifestations to 
 Moses and the other Israelites, in the merciful and powerful deliver- 
 ance of the chosen people from Egyptian bondage, and in the estab- 
 lishment of a sacred covenant with them. 
 
 When God revealed himself to Moses as JEHOVAH he said, 
 " I appeared unto Abraham, unto Isaac, and unto Jacob Q^.g reve ia- 
 as El Shadday (God Almighty), but by my name JE- 
 HOVAH was I not known to them " (Exod. vi, 3). It is 
 not to be supposed from this declaration that the name was ab- 
 solutely unknown, but that its full import in redeeming power and 
 mercy had not been known to the patriarchs, but was now about to 
 be revealed gloriously in the redemption of Israel and in the es- 
 1 Geschichte der Schrift, p. 571.
 
 84 INTRODUCTION TO THE STUDY 
 
 tablishment of a new covenant. The Abrahamic covenant was the 
 revelation of El Shadday, not the fulness of divine mercy and good- 
 ness as exhibited in the import of the name Jehovah. 1 To the He- 
 brews names were of the deepest significance, and were sometimes 
 employed to express all that existed in the object to which they are 
 applied ; especially is this the case with the Divine Names. Thus 
 we find the Almighty declaring to the Israelites that he will send 
 his Angel before them. " He will not pardon your transgressions, 
 for my name is in him, "that is, my Godhead, Deity (and so Gesenius), 
 Exod. xxiii, 21. In Psalm liv, i, we have the following : "Save me, O 
 God, by thy name" that is, by the power and goodness that pertain to 
 thy name. And we have a similar analogy in the New Testament 
 (i Cor. i, 2 1 ), where St. Paul says, "The world by wisdom knew not 
 God " (9eoc). But nothing among the Greeks was more common 
 than the name 0OC" (God), yet its deep import, in the Christian 
 sense the attributes of the Deity, his relations to the human race, 
 and experimental religion were not known to the pagan world. 
 
 It is true that if the previous history of the Hebrews showed 
 that the name Jehovah was absolutely unknown to the patriarchs, the 
 revelation of it made to Moses would shine forth with more splendor, 
 as the orb of day without a preceding twilight. But we have posi- 
 tive proof that the word Jehovah existed among the Hebrews pre- 
 viously to the Mosaic period, and analogy is against the hypothesis 
 of its being absolutely new, for when God communicates himself to 
 men in revelation he employs terms already in use, and gives to 
 them a new and deeper meaning. 
 
 We are not to suppose, however, that the word Jehovah was 
 much used before the Almighty revealed himself to Moses. But 
 few names are found previously to this in which this one occurs. 
 We may mention Jochebed (whose glory is Jehovah), the mother of 
 Moses, and Rephaiah (whom Jehovah healed), the grandson of 
 Issachar. Subsequently to the Mosaic age the word is very often 
 found in proper names. 
 
 In the history of the Mosaic legislation the name Jehovah almost 
 everywhere prevails, and Elohim retires into the background. In 
 the history of Balaam, however, Elohim is frequently used, as being 
 more suitable in describing the acts of a prophet without the pale 
 of Israel ; yet to show that it was the true God with whom Balaam 
 had relations, Jehovah is occasionally used. 
 
 1 We have already remarked that this name, ffiiT, was in all probability pro- 
 nounced yahveh, the future of the verb mn, t be, The Absolute Being, The Eternal 
 Divine Essence. It is evidently a Hebrew word.
 
 OF THE HOLY SCRIPTURES. 85 
 
 After leaving the second chapter of Exodus we can find no sup- 
 port whatever for the document hypothesis in the use of the Divine 
 Names And if unity of authorship is to be denied to the subse- 
 quent part of the Pentateuch, it must be done on wholly different 
 grounds. So far as pertains to the Book of Genesis, the document 
 hypothesis by no means disproves the Mosaic authorship cf the 
 Pentateuch, since Moses in the composition of Genesis might 
 have made use of previously written memorials of his ancestors. 
 How far he may have done so we have no means of deter- 
 mining. The argument drawn from the divine names in favour of 
 the use of documents by Moses is by no means conclusive, and, 
 at most, would only prove that the memorials of but one annalist 
 had been incorporated into the book of Genesis. But if such 
 an ante-Mosaic history existed, what it embraced, and what its 
 primitive form was, cannot be determined. The whole Pentateuch 
 is uniform in its language ; the archaisms are found in Deuteronomy 
 as well as in Genesis ; and in Genesis itself we can find no parts 
 of which the phraseology belongs to an ante-Mosaic age. 
 
 It is no objection to the Mosaic authorship of the Pentateuch 
 that the laws of Moses are not arranged as methodically unmethodical 
 as are those of a well-digested code of a highly civilized arrangement 
 modern State. Moses had to legislate for a people so- objStion to 
 journing in the desert, and for them when they should Mosaic author- 
 enter the land of Canaan and live under altered circum- 
 stances. The laws were delivered in different parts of their jour- 
 neyings, and sometimes to meet the exigencies of particular cases. 
 History and legislation are combined ; and this is what might have 
 been expected in a work originating with Moses. Had the Penta- 
 teuch arisen subsequently to the Mosaic age, its form would have 
 been different the legislation pertaining to Israel in the desert 
 would naturally have been passed over as entirely belonging to the 
 past, or as being altogether unknown ; the laws would, probably, 
 have had a different form, resembling a well-digested code. Many in- 
 cidents are recorded which would otherwise have faded away in the 
 lapse of time. 
 
 The opponents of the genuineness of the Pentateuch endeavour to 
 point out contradictions in the history, and inconsis- supposed con- 
 tencies in some parts of the Mosaic legislation, together a 
 with repetitions and anachronisms, as affording proof tenoies. 
 that it could not have been written by Moses. But great caution is 
 necessary in considerations of such a nature, lest we find contradic- 
 tions and inconsistencies where none exist. Nor do we see how a 
 repetition of the same precept militates against the genuineness of the
 
 86 INTRODUCTION TO THE STUDY 
 
 Pentateuch ; for it is less likely that a subsequent collector or editor 
 of the Mosaic laws would repeat a precept than that Moses himself 
 would. And if in a few instances Moses does not observe the exact 
 order of time in his history and legislation, how can that be incon- 
 sistent with the genuineness of the Pentateuch ? We would not judge 
 after this manner in respect to the genuineness of any other bock. 
 
 Bleek thinks that Exodus vi, 2-12, in which Jehovah appears 
 unto Moses, makes the impression that then for \hzfirst time God 
 had revealed himself to Moses, when in fact he had already com- 
 missioned him to go to Pharaoh, and to bring Israel out of Egypt 
 (Exod. iii, iv). He also holds that Exod. vi, 28-vii, 7, which de- 
 scribes a revelation of God to Moses, has no indication that Moses 
 had already appeared .before Pharaoh. He thinks that in the 
 original narrative of the appearance of God to Moses, Exod. vi, 1-13 
 was immediately joined to Exod. ii ; that Exod. vii, 1-7 perhaps im- 
 mediately followed it, and that the rest was added at a later period 
 from oral tradition or from a written document. But portions of 
 these supposed later chapters (iii, iv, v), in which God reveals him- 
 self to Moses, and in which the Hebrew legislator appears before 
 Pharaoh, are referred to in the subsequent history. In Exodus 
 vii, 1 6, God commands Moses to say unto Pharaoh: "The Lord 
 God of the Hebrews hath sent me unto thee, saying, Let my people 
 go, that they may serve me in the wilderness ; and, behold, hitherto 
 thou wouldst not hear." In ch. iii, 18, God commands Moses and the 
 elders of Israel to go unto the king of Egypt, and to " say unto him, 
 The Lord God of the Hebrews hath met with us : and now let us 
 go, we beseech thee, three days' journey into the wilderness, that we 
 may sacrifice to the Lord our God." Again, in ch. v, i, it is stated that 
 Moses and Aaron went in and told Pharaoh, " Thus saith the Lord 
 God of Israel, Let my people go, that they may hold a feast unto me 
 in the wilderness." It is clear that chs. iii, 18, and v, i, are referred 
 to in ch. vii, 16. For if we reject iii, iv, and v, there is no instance in 
 which Moses requested Pharaoh to let Israel go to sacrifice to the 
 Lord in the wilderness; and the clause in ch. vii, 16, "and behold, 
 hitherto thou wouldst not hear," shows that this request had before 
 been made. And it suits the language much better to suppose 
 that Pharaoh had already considered the subject for some days, 
 than that it had been presented to him only on the previous day. 
 
 Also the language, " And the children of Israel did according to 
 the word of Moses ; and they borrowed of the Egyptians jewels of 
 silver, and jewels of gold, and raiment: . . . and they spoiled the 
 Egyptians " (xii, 35, 36), seems to refer to iii, 22. Certainly, it is 
 the same phraseology*.
 
 OF THE HOLY SCRIPTURES. 87 
 
 If Exodus iii, iv, and v are rejected from the original narrative, 
 then it contained no account of the calling of Moses to proofs of the 
 his great work. Such a narrative is inconceivable, for cal1 of Moses - 
 this was a great epoch in the history of Moses. These chapters con- 
 tain an account of the proofs which God gave Moses and the children 
 of Israel that he had sent him, and also of his arrival in Egypt from 
 Midian. They are necessary parts of the history. When Moses 
 and Aaron visited the children of Israel, and Aaron performed the 
 signs before them, they believed ; and when they learned that God 
 was about to deliver them, they worshipped him (iv, 30, 31). This 
 statement seems natural, for the Israelites, in their misery, would 
 gladly lay hold of whatever promised them any ground of hope. 
 But, on the contrary, when the demand made upon Pharaoh to let 
 them go had caused their burdens to be increased (ch. v), and Moses a 
 second time spoke to them of deliverance by the Lord, " they heark- 
 ened not unto Moses for anguish of spirit and cruel bondage " 
 (vi, 9). And this is what might have been expected. Disappointed 
 in their first hope, in the increase of their miseries they gave them- 
 selves up to despair. The whole history is consistent ; and the 
 silence in chapter vi about a previous appearance of Moses before 
 Pharaoh can by no means negative such an appearance. 
 
 The genealogy of Moses and Aaron (Exodus vi, 14-27) has fur- 
 nished ground of objection to the genuineness of the Genea i 0?y olt 
 Pentateuch. 1 And it must be acknowledged that the Moses and of 
 genealogy, in its form and position, is rather peculiar. 
 It is true, there is nothing strange in giving the names of the ances- 
 tors of Moses and Aaron, and also of those of the chief families of 
 Levi, but especially of the sons of Aaron, whose names afterward 
 appear in the Mosaic history in connexion with the priesthood. 
 Nor would a catalogue of the chief Israelites be out of place in the 
 history of the Exodus. The most peculiar and most unsuitable 
 part of the list is found in the verses (14 and 15) beginning with the 
 words, " These be the heads of their fathers' houses," and followed 
 with the names of the sons of Reuben and the sons of Simeon. 
 After this the families of Levi are given, ending with the remark : 
 "These are that Moses and Aaron." 
 
 The sons of Reuben and Simeon stand without any additions, just 
 as they are given in the list of the sons of Jacob who came down 
 into Egypt (Gen. xlvi, 9, 10). Not even the ages of Reuben and 
 Simeon when they died are stated ; while in the list of the ancestors 
 of Moses and Aaron, and their relatives, and the sons of Aaron and 
 his grandson, the ages of Levi, Kohath, and Amram, at the time of 
 'Bleek, among others, objects to the genealogy, p. 222.
 
 88 INTRODUCTION TO THE STUDY 
 
 their death, are given. The sons of Moses, on account of their being 
 of little importance in the history, are not named. This list con- 
 tains no one born later than the Mosaic period, and the fact that it 
 gives the ages of several at their death shows that it must have been 
 written down in the Mosaic time, or soon afterward. It seems not 
 improbable that Reuben and Simeon, and their sons (in vi, 14, 15). 
 have been interpolated from Gen. xlvi, 9, 10, just as we have in Matt, 
 xxvii, 35, " That it might be fulfilled which was spoken by the 
 prophet, They parted my garments among them, and upon my vest- 
 ure did they cast lots," interpolated from Psalm xxii, 18, or from 
 John xix, 24. On this hypothesis, "These be the heads of their 
 fathers' houses " (Exod. vi, 14) will refer to Moses and Aaron. 
 
 In Exod. xix, 22, it is said : " And let the priests also, which come 
 near to the Lord, sanctify themselves ; " and also in verse 24 : 
 " Let not the priests and the people break through." As Aaron and 
 his sons had not yet been consecrated to the priesthood, some have 
 thought that those passages in which priests are mentioned are an- 
 achronisms. But are we to suppose that the Israelites had no priests 
 before Aaron and his sons ? Did they live several centuries in 
 Egypt, among a people who had a powerful priesthood, without ever 
 having any priests themselves? Were they wholly without religion 
 in Egypt, no one sacrificing to Jehovah, nor making intercession for 
 the people? Such an idea is preposterous. It has been objected 
 that Exod. xxxiv, 23-26 is a repetition of Exod. xxiii, 17-19,' for 
 each of these sections contains the command that all male Israel- 
 ites should appear before Jehovah three times a year, and that the 
 blood of the Lord's sacrifice should not be offered with leaven, 
 " neither shall the sacrifice of the feast of the passover be left unto 
 the morning. The first of the firstfruits of thy land thou shalt bring 
 unto the house of the Lord thy God. Thou shalt not seethe a kid in 
 his mother's milk." But the precepts of the thirty-fourth chapter of 
 Repetition for Exodus were delivered when Moses went up to God in 
 emphasis. Mount Sinai a second time, to have renewed the tables 
 of stone which he had broken ; and under these circumstances some 
 of the precepts found in Exod. xxiii which God delivered to 
 Moses when he first went up to Mount Sinai are repeated for 
 emphasis. 
 
 In Exod. xxiii, 9, the precept, " Thou shalt not oppress a stranger : 
 for ye know the heart of a stranger, seeing ye were strangers in the 
 land of Egypt," is a repetition of Exod. xxii, 21. But in both cases 
 this precept stands connected with other benevolent precepts of a 
 different character; and its being twice given shows the stress that 
 1 By Bleek, pp. 218, 219.
 
 OF THE HOLY SCRIPTURES. 89 
 
 was laid upon it. The twentieth chapter of Leviticus has been re- 
 garded as scarcely anything more than a repetition of the eighteenth 
 of Leviticus ; but there is this important difference, that, while the 
 latter chapter merely sets forth the things prohibited, the former 
 contains the penalties annexed to the crimes. 
 
 In Numbers chapter xi there is an account of the sending of 
 quails to the Israelites, which were to last them a whole month. As 
 no mention is made that they were before sent, Bleek ' thinks that the 
 sending of these birds as stated in Exodus xvi never occurred, but 
 that the real event in Numbers xi had been erroneously supposed 
 to have occurred at the same time that manna was first given. But 
 the argument from silence is very delusive. Nor is there any thing 
 in the language to indicate that quails had never been sent before. 
 What excited the incredulity of Moses was, that God had promised 
 to feed all the people of Israel with flesh for a whole month. We 
 have no indication in Exodus xvi whether the quails were sent once 
 or several times. But how could the historian have made such a 
 blunder as Bleek thinks he did, when the history, whether we sup- 
 pose it written by Moses or not, shows such a minute knowledge of 
 events ? The lusting of the Israelites after flesh, the sending them 
 immense quantities of quails, the plague that broke out in conse- 
 quence of the murmuring against God, and the naming of the place 
 where they were encamped Kibroth hattaavah (the graves of lust) 
 all combine to make the narrative in Numbers xi salient and mem- 
 orable in the history of the exodus. The natural tendency, so far 
 from producing the account of the quails in Exodus xvi, would have 
 been to blot it out altogether. 
 
 Nor is there any good reason for supposing,* in the account of 
 Moses bringing water out of the rock, and calling the place Massah 
 (temptation, trial}, and also Meribah (strife, Exodus xvii, 1-7), that 
 two different occurrences are here blended into one, because in 
 Numbers xx, 1-13, on another occasion, when the people murmured 
 for the want of water, Moses smote the rock, and the waters gushed 
 forth, and the fountain was called the water of Meribah. In each 
 case there was Meribah or strife. But the fountain first named was 
 called Massah, and the other name, Meribah, was also given it at the 
 time of the occurence. But when the second fountain, called Mer- 
 ibah, was opened at Kadesh, the first named fountain, in Exod. xvii, 7, 
 was called by no other name than Massah, as is evident from Deut. 
 vi, 16 ; ix, 22 ; xxxiii, 8, where the fountain is so styled. How 
 could it be otherwise, if confusion was to be avoided? 
 
 In Numbers ix, 15-23, we have, in the particular account of the 
 'Page 219. "Against Bleek, pp. 219, 220.
 
 90 INTRODUCTION TO THE STUDY 
 
 cloud, and the appearance of fire that rested upon the tabernacle in 
 connexion with the journeyings of the Israelites, an amplification 
 of the statement in Exodus xl, 34-38, made when the tabernacle 
 was set up. The account in Num. ix was written at least a year 
 after that in Exod. xl ; for in the former it is stated, " whether il 
 were two days, a month, or a year, that the cloud tarried upon the 
 tabernacle." In these statements there is nothing inconsistent with 
 the Mosaic authorship of the Pentateuch. 
 
 The different names by which Moses's father-in-law seems to be 
 various names ca ^ e( i create a difficulty, though not of a serious nature 
 
 of Moses's fa- It seems best to regard Rasruel as the father-in-law of 
 ther-ln-law 
 
 Moses, and to suppose Jethro and Hobab to be his broth- 
 ers-in-law. The Septuagint renders the Hebrew jnn (translated fa- 
 ther-in-law in our version) by ya^/3p<5c, which means brother-in-law 
 and father-in-law. With this rendering brother-in-law all is easy. 
 Moses marries the daughter of Raguel, priest of Midian. About 
 forty years after this, when, we may suppose, Raguel was dead, Jethro 
 his son succeeded him as priest, and Moses, his brother-in-law, was 
 keeping his flocks (Exod. iii, i). Hobab, another brother-in-law of 
 Moses, visits him on his journey, as we find in Numbers x, 29. The 
 visit of Hobab to Moses mentioned in this last verse is evidently a 
 different one from that described in Exod. xviii as having been made 
 by Jethro, in company with the wife and the two sons of Moses. 
 The position of the account of this visit of Jethro to Moses has 
 given offense to some. It is stated (Exod. xviii, 5) that Moses was 
 encamped at the mount of God, which is the name given in Exodus 
 iii, i, to Horeb ; while in the beginning of the next chapter (xix) we 
 have an account of the arrival of the children of Israel in the desert 
 of Sinai, and of their encamping " before the mount," that is, Mount 
 Sinai. But it is by no means certain that the visit of Jethro is 
 misplaced, since it is not stated that Moses had already arrived at 
 Mount Sinai. In Exod. xvii, 6, while the Israelites were still at 
 Rephidim, God says unto Moses, " Behold, I will stand before thee 
 there upon the rock in Horeb ; and thou shalt smite the rock, and 
 there shall come water out of it, that the people mav drink. And 
 Moses did so in the sight of the elders of Israel." We have already 
 remarked that Horeb is called the mount, or mountain of God (Exod. 
 iii, i) ; and it is evident here that the Mount Sinai fron? which the law 
 was proclaimed is not intended, for it is stated that Moses led his 
 flock to Horeb. At Rephidim Moses was encamped near a mount- 
 ain or hill, for he says, " To-morrow I will stand upon the top of 
 the hill." Horeb was a range of which Sinai was a peak. 
 
 Bleek thinks that references are made, in the account of Jethro'?
 
 OF THE HOLY SCRIPTURES. 91 
 
 visit, to the tabernacle, which was not yet built. 1 His Bieek'e sharp 
 critical powers must here be sharp indeed ! It is stated criticism, 
 that Jethro " took a burnt offering and sacrifices for God : and Aaron 
 came, and all the elders of Israel, to eat bread with Moses' father- 
 in-law before God." Wherever sacrifice was offered, it was before 
 God. Already, in Exod. xvi, 9, Moses commands Aaron to say to 
 the whole congregation of the children of Israel, " Come near before 
 the Lord." Even in reference to Nimrod it is said, "He was a 
 mighty hunter before the Lord " (Gen. x, 9). We, as Christians, in 
 private and public, speak of coming unto or before the Lord. Nor 
 is there any necessary reference to the tabernacle in the language of 
 Moses, " The people come unto me to inquire of God." But even 
 if Moses had already arrived at Mount Sinai when Jethro visited 
 him it would create no difficulty, since Moses might prefer to record 
 it just before describing the arrival at Sinai, that he might not inter- 
 rupt the thread of events connected with that arrival. 
 
 In Exodus xxxiii, 7-11, it is said that " Moses took the tent (not 
 tabernacle, as in English version) and pitched it without the camp, afar 
 off from the camp, and called it the Tent of the Congregation. And 
 it came to pass that every one that sought the Lord went out unto 
 the tent of the congregation." It is evident that the tent here 
 spoken of was a different structure from the tabernacle which Moses 
 was commanded to have built. There can be no reasonable doubt 
 that it was the tent which Moses had brought up with him out of 
 Egypt, in which he had been living, and to which the people re- 
 sorted on important occasions to consult him, and from which or- 
 ders were issued. On the occasion referred to the people had 
 committed a great sin in worshiping the golden calf which Aaron 
 had made ; and, on account of this sin, Moses removes his tent 
 from among them, and God talks with him at the door of the tent, 
 far away from the sinful people. 2 God had very recently delivered 
 to Moses the ten commandments, with various other precepts, and 
 he now appears to Moses in his tent, thus showing to all Israel 
 that, while they have sinned, with Moses he talks face to face. 
 At the same time this tent was to serve as a temporary arrange- 
 ment until the great tabernacle, of which it was a type, should be 
 built. 
 
 The enumeration of the children of Israel in Numbers i, in con- 
 nexion with the statement of the amount of money re- Numbers ami 
 ceived and appropriated to the building of the taber- contributions 
 
 nacle (Exod. xxxviii, 25, 26), creates a difficulty. Ac- 
 
 1 Page 223. 
 
 * It is plain that the tent itself was no new contrivance, which removes Bleek's 
 Abjection that its institution appears too late. Pp. 223, 224.
 
 93 INTRODUCTION TO THE STUDY 
 
 cording to Exod. xl, 17, the tabernacle was set up on the first day of 
 theory/ month of the second year after the children of Israel had left 
 Egypt ; while the command to Moses " to take the sum of all the con- 
 gregation of Israel " was given on the first day of the second nwnth of 
 the second year after they had left Egypt (Num. i, i), just one month, 
 therefore, after the tabernacle was set up. Yet it is stated in Exod. 
 xxxviii, 25, 26 : " The silver of them that were numbered of the con- 
 gregation was a hundred talents, and a thousand seven hundred and 
 threescore and fifteen shekels, after the shekel of the sanctuary : a 
 bekah for every man, that is, half a shekel, after the shekel of the 
 sanctuary, for every one that went to be numbered, from twenty years 
 old and upward, for six hundred thousand and three thousand and 
 five hundred and fifty men." The largest portion of this silver was 
 employed in making sockets for the sanctuary and the vail (Exod. 
 xxxviii, 27, 28). The number of the Israelites here given is precise- 
 ly the same as that in Num. i, 46, and there can be no doubt that 
 both accounts refer to one enumeration ; the first giving merely the 
 result, and the second the particulars. For, apart from the fact that 
 the totals in both Exod. xxxviii, 26 and Num. i, 46 are the same, 
 it is exceedingly improbable that the children of Israel should be 
 numbered twice in a. few months. 1 The first enumeration was made 
 to ascertain the numbers in reference to the poll tax for the taber- 
 nacle and the marshalling of the armies : the second 'was made about 
 thirty-eight years after the first (Num. xxvi, 2-51) a short time 
 before the Israelites entered Canaan that the land might be di- 
 vided in proportion to the number of each tribe (Num. xxvi, 53-56). 
 These two were the only enumerations from the time the Israelites 
 left Egypt until they reached Canaan. 
 
 J. D. Michaelis seems to give the best solution of the difficulty 
 under consideration. "An exact enumeration," says he, "of six 
 hundred thousand men demands quite a long time, if all the names 
 are to be written down. It had proceeded so far before the build- 
 ing of the tabernacle that every male over twenty years of age was 
 compelled to report himself and pay his poll tax ; but in the second 
 month of the second year all these names were reduced to order, 
 and entered into a kind of register by Moses, Aaron, and the heads 
 of the twelve tribes ; and whoever in the former year had paid his 
 poll tax was regarded as living, though he had since died ; and who- 
 ever at that time was under twenty years of age, and had paid no 
 poll tax, was still considered under twenty. It is necessary to read 
 only Num. i, 2, 3, to see that the Israelites here are not simply num- 
 bered, but enrolled by name, and to each one a position is to be as- 
 
 1 Colenso absurdly supposes tkat here we have two separate enumerations.
 
 OF THE HOLY SCRIPTURES. 93 
 
 signed in the army, which had not been done when the poll tax was 
 paid." ' The Levites and the firstborn of the other tribes were num- 
 bered afterward. 
 
 Bleek thinks that the tabernacle could not have been built in so 
 short a time as eight or nine months, and that the date Bieek's dim- 
 in Exodus (xl, 17), where it is said that the tabernacle 
 was set up on the first day of the first month of the 
 second year, is placed too early." But we see no good reason for 
 this opinion. The people contributed so liberally of their means 
 that Moses commanded that no more work should be made " for 
 the offering of the sanctuary " (Exod. xxxvi, 5, 6). The material 
 was worked up by " Bezaleel and Aholiab, and every wise-hearted 
 man in whose heart the Lord had put wisdom, even every one 
 whose heart stirred him up to come unto the work to do it " (Exod. 
 xxxvi, 2). In the ardour of their first love, they laboured with very 
 great zeal and cheerfulness. 
 
 Further, the history of the building of the tabernacle, the numbering 
 of the children of Israel, and the position of their camps, are nar- 
 rated with such circumstantiality, and so many marks of truth, that 
 an error in the date of the erection of the tabernacle is inadmissible. 
 The number of the firstborn males among the children of Israel 
 from a month old and upward, omitting those of the Levites, is put 
 at twenty-two thousand two hundred and seventy-three (Num. 
 iii, 43). Michaelis computes that this gives one firstborn to every 
 forty-two males, which he regards as a proof that polygamy must 
 have been extensively practised by the Israelites in Egypt. For, 
 however many wives a man might have, and whatever number of 
 sons, but one of these could be his firstborn. Perhaps the edict of 
 Pharaoh to drown all the male children of the Israelites diminished 
 greatly the number of the firstborn males, and on account of the 
 great loss among the firstborn of Israel God may have smitten the 
 firstborn of the Egyptians as a penalty. 
 
 In the enumeration of the males of the tribe of Levi, from a month 
 old and upward, the whole number is stated to be twenty- Q Uestion of 
 two thousand (Num. iii, 39), while the sum of the three the firstborn 
 numbers (Num. iii, 22, 28, 34) is three hundred more. 
 But it has been supposed that the three hundred in excess were 
 themselves firstborn. As the whole number of the firstborn males 
 of the children of Israel belonged to Jehovah, those of Levi as well 
 as the rest, the actual substitute for the firstborn of Israel was the 
 sons of Levi diminished by the number of the firstborn. This left 
 
 1 From his German Annotations on Numbers, I. Giittingen und Gotha, I77 1 - 
 3 Pp. 224, 225.
 
 94 INTRODUCTION TO THE STUDY 
 
 the number of the firstborn ot Israel in excess of the Levites dimin- 
 ished by the firstborn, two hundred and seventy-three, redeemed 
 by paying five shekels apiece to Aaron and his sons (Num. iii, 
 46-48). 
 
 In Numbers ix, 12, it is said that the Lord spake unto Moses, and 
 gave him directions respecting the passover, in the first month of the 
 second year after they were come out of the land of Egypt ; while in 
 Numbers i, i, 2, the command to take the sum of the Israelites is given 
 on the first of the following month. Bleek l makes this want of exact 
 chronological order an argument against the genuineness of the 
 Pentateuch, though it is not easy to see its force. But Moses had 
 a good reason for his chronological arrangement. He tells us that 
 Jehovah had given directions in the first month of the second year 
 respecting the observance of the passover on the fourteenth day of 
 the month according to its rites. Here Moses evidently refers to 
 the precepts already given in Leviticus xxiii, 5-8, and to the fact 
 that the people kept the passover on the fourteenth of the first 
 month. But there were certain men who had been defiled by 
 the dead body of a man, so that they could not keep the passover, 
 and who made application to Moses and Aaron to have their seem- 
 ingly hard case considered. Moses made known their case to Je- 
 hovah, who directed that all persons who were unable to eat the 
 passover on the fourteenth day of the first month, on account of un- 
 cleanness or being on a journey afar off, should keep it on the four- 
 teenth day of the second month. It is evident, then, that these 
 unclean persons kept the passover on the fourteenth of this second 
 month, and this ninth chapter is the very place in which to insert 
 the events of that part of the second month. And, in order to de- 
 scribe what was to be done on that fourteenth day, the historian goes 
 back to relate the incidents that led to the observance of the pass- 
 over by some on that day. In the very next chapter (x, n) he 
 states that on the twentieth day of the second month of the second 
 year the Israelites left the wilderness of Sinai ; that is, a few days 
 after the unclean persons had eaten the passover. What can be 
 more natural than this chronological arrangement ? 
 
 The statements made in respect to the service of the Levites in 
 the tabernacle (Numbers iv, viii, 24-26) have been represented as 
 contradictory. In the former chapter they are to serve from thirty 
 years of age until they are fifty ; while in the latter passage their 
 time of service is from twenty-five until fifty. But the kind of ser- 
 vice in each case is different. In Numbers iv, the Levites who bore 
 the various parts of the tabernacle during the sojourn in the desert are 
 assigned to this work. They were between the ages of thirty and fifty, 
 
 1 Page 225.
 
 OF THE HOLY SCRIPTURES. 95 
 
 in the vigour of life, and were stiH to wander many years in the desert. 
 This was a special service which would terminate when the taber- 
 nacle had obtained a fixed locality after the conquest of Canaan. 
 But in Numbers viii, 24-26, those who are to serve from twenty-five 
 until they are fifty are said to " go in to wait upon the service of 
 the tabernacle of the congregation." Here the precept has no spe- 
 cial reference to time or place, but is in its highest sense general. 
 
 But, further, it is evident that the first of these precepts had its 
 origin in the desert ; and the second one, if originating in a period 
 subsequent to Moses, would have repealed the first, which would, in 
 all probability, have still been in existence. Can it be supposed for 
 a moment that a later law, for no assignable reason, and contradict- 
 ing the Mosaic regulation, was invented and attributed to Moses ? 
 
 
 CHAPTER VIII. 
 
 THE UNITY OF THE PENTATEUCH. 
 
 is a unity of plan pervading the whole Pentateuch, which 
 * shows that it is the work of one mind. 
 
 A collection of independent documents brought together would 
 have no unity nor coherence. The book of Genesis begins with the 
 creation of the world in six days, and contains a, brief history of 
 man's fall, his expulsion from the garden of Eden, the subsequent 
 history of the antediluvian world, the deluge, the preservation of 
 Noah and his family, the peopling of the earth by the sons of Noah, 
 the calling of Abraham, the principal incidents in his life and in the 
 lives of Isaac and Jacob and Esau, the selling of Joseph into Egypt, 
 and his exaltation there, which prepares the way for the removal 
 to Egypt of Jacob and his family. 
 
 The book of Exodus opens with a reference to Jacob's descent 
 into Egypt, and a sketch of the history of the oppression of the 
 Israelites, their deliverance from the Egyptians through -n,,, ,50,^,^0! 
 Moses, the divinely commissioned leader and lawgiver ; the Books of 
 the wanderings in the Desert, the giving of the law from B 
 Mount Sinai, the directions for building the altars of sacrifice and 
 the tabernacle, and various precepts. 
 
 The book of Leviticus is devoted to the services of the priests, 
 their duties, the law of sacrifices, and many other matters. The 
 book of Numbers opens with the enumeration of the children of Is- 
 rael, and contains both historical events and precepts. 
 
 In Deuteronomy, when the Israelites have arrived in the land of
 
 96 INTRODUCTION TO THE STUDY 
 
 Moab, near the close of the forty years wandering, Moses rehearses 
 their history from the time they left Horeb, and also repeats and en- 
 forces, and in some cases slightly modifies, precepts before delivered. 
 He also inculcates new precepts, some of which have especial refer- 
 ence to the Israelites when they shall have entered the land of 
 Canaan for example, the directions concerning war. He appoints 
 cities of refuge, gives directions respecting the setting up of stones 
 on Mount Ebal upon which all the words of the law are to be writ- 
 ten, pronounces the blessings that shall come upon the people if 
 obedient, and the curses that will overtake them if they are disobe- 
 dient. He at the same time predicts their disobedience. In con- 
 clusion, he teaches them a song, and pronounces a blessing upon 
 the different tribes of Israel. Nothing could be more suitable to the 
 position of Moses than this whole book, and it is throughout ex- 
 ceedingly natural. A chapter by a later hand, containing the death 
 of the great lawgiver, closes it. Without Deuteronomy the Mosaic 
 legislation would be incomplete. There is nothing in the ending 
 of the book of Numbers to indicate that it is the conclusion of the 
 laws of Moses. The whole spirit of Deuteronomy is Mosaic. 
 x~If we examine the Pentateuch more closely we shall find that it\ 
 ( is bound together by indissoluble connexions, and permeated with) 
 I the spirit of unity. 
 
 In the book of Genesis we have a connected history, in which the 
 sacred chanuv genealogies are carefully given, the age of the antediluvi- 
 ter of the hi- ans when the eldest son was born, and the length of their 
 lives. The same method is generally pursued in narra- 
 ting the history after the flood, down to the close of the book. No- 
 where in Genesis is the age of the father given when any of the daugh- 
 ters were born, and the names of the latter are rarely mentioned. 
 The history is evidently of a sacred character, written from a theo- 
 cratic standpoint. A standard of moral right, with which the' ac 
 tions of men are compared, and approved or condemned, is every- 
 where recognised in Genesis. The growing wickedness of the an- 
 tediluvian world, culminating in bringing down the wrath of Jehovah 
 upon it, and the pious exceptions, are prominently set forth by the 
 sacred writer. 
 
 With the exception of the peopling of the earth by the sons of 
 Noah, the history generally limits itself to the line of the chosen 
 people ; and other nations are noticed only in connexion with the 
 patriarchs, as we see in the account of the battle of the kings and 
 the destruction of Sodom and Gomorrah, with which Abraham and 
 Lot are historically related. 
 
 It is easy to see that the whole of Genesis is an introduction and
 
 OF THE HOLY SCRIPTURES. 97 
 
 preparation for the Mosaic Covenant contained in the fol- Genesis an in- 
 lowing books. The sanctification of the seventh day at Deduction, 
 the end of creation is intimately connected with the Jewish Sabbath. 
 The sacrifices of Abel, Noah, and Abraham, and the distinction 
 made between clean and unclean animals in the account of the pres- 
 ervation of living beings in the ark during the deluge, are intimately 
 related to the Mosaic institutions. The history of Joseph in Egypt, 
 though it seems to break the thread of patriarchal history, is, in 
 fact, a necessary part of that history, as it prepares the way for the 
 descent of Israel into Egypt. 
 
 Between Genesis and Exodus there is a close connexion. God 
 makes a covenant with Abraham, and promises him that his poster- 
 ity shall inherit the land of Canaan, and that in his seed shall all the 
 families of the earth be blessed. In Genesis, also, God declares to 
 Abraham that before his descendants shall come into possession of 
 that land, they shall be strangers in another, in which they com^^ j^ 
 shall serve and be afflicted, and that the " nation whom tween Genesis 
 they shall serve will I judge, and afterward shall come out and 
 with great substance. But in the fourth generation they shall come 
 hither again." Chap, xv, 13-16. Compare this with the afflictions of 
 the Israelites detailed in the first chapters of Exodus, and with xii, 40, 
 where it is said that the sojourning of the children of Israel in the land 
 of Egypt was four hundred and thirty years. The declaration made to 
 Abraham, being prophecy, was expressed in round numbers, while the\ 
 history gives the exact number. In Exodus xiii, 19, it is stated thatl 
 /Moses took the bones of Joseph with him ; for he had straitly sworn < 
 /the children of Israel, saying, God will surely visit you ; and ye shall j 
 \arry up my bones away hence with you." This refers to Gen. 1, 25. 
 
 In the third month after leaving Egypt the Israelites come to 
 Mount Sinai (Exod. xix, i, 2). There the Mosaic legislation prop- 
 erly begins with the delivery of the decalogue, the moral law, under 
 the most solemn and awe-inspiring circumstances. Then follow four 
 chapters of precepts ; after which instructions are given respecting 
 the making of the ark of the covenant, and the building of the taber- 
 nacle. These could not be made while the Israelites were travel- 
 ling, and as they were necessary in divine worship, the building of 
 them in this stage of the wandering is very appropriate. In the lat- 
 ter part of the same book we have a description of the dress of the 
 high priest, his consecration, and matters pertaining to his service. 
 All of this seems to be in the proper place. 
 
 I When the tabernacle had been built, and Aaron and his sons were 
 ready for the consecration to the divine service, Moses delivered pre- 
 cepts respecting the offerings to be made to Jehovah, and prescribed
 
 98 
 
 INTRODUCTION TO THE STUDY 
 
 the duties of the priests which occupy the most of the Book of 
 Leviticus. In the first part of Numbers we have an enumeration of 
 the people, to ascertain who are liable to military duties and to other 
 services. The remainder of the book is occupied with history and 
 precepts. That Moses, at the close of the forty years' wandering, 
 should have rehearsed the most important events in the history of 
 the Israelites, as we find in Deuteronomy, is quite natural. The ad- 
 ditional precepts which he inculcates for example, the directions for 
 carrying on war when they are about to enter the land of Canaan, 
 where they would have many wars to wage seem suitable to this 
 stage of the history ; and the earnest exhortation, and the deep so- 
 licitude of the lawgiver for the happiness of his people, are a fitting 
 close of his wonderful life. 
 /-But the connexion of the events of the Pentateuch is not the only 
 
 /proof of its unity. A stronger evidence is furnished by the uniform--. 
 
 City of language that pervades the whole five books, especially the \ 
 
 I archaisms which disappear in the subsequent books, even in those/' 
 
 \$o ancient as Joshua and Judges.
 
 OF THE HOLY SCRIPTURES. 99 
 
 CHAPTER IX.W-t 
 
 THE ANTIQUITY OF THE ART OF ALPHABETICAL WRITING 
 AMONG THE HEBREWS, AND THE STATE OF THE ARTS AND 
 SCIENCES IN GENERAL IN EGYPT IN THE MOSAIC AGE. 
 
 A S a preliminary to the discussion of the genuineness of the Pen- 
 *-*- tateuch, there arises the question of the antiquity of the art of 
 alphabetical writing among the Hebrews : for if it can be shown 
 that the- art was well known among that people in the Mosaic age, 
 the probability that their great lawgiver wrote his laws will be 
 very great. 
 
 Writing in hieroglyphics, which preceded alphabetical writing, 
 was known and practised in Egypt at a very remote period. The 
 sacred books of Thoth, the Egyptian Mercury or Hermes, were 
 written, in part at least, as early as the time of Suphis, (Cheops,) to 
 whom the books were attributed. 1 This Memphitic king, according 
 to Wilkinson, reigned about B. C. 2450. Numerous commentaries 
 were written on these sacred books of Thoth. " Papyri are of the 
 most remote Pharaonic periods, and the same mode of writing on 
 them is shown from the sculptures to have been common in the age 
 of Suphis, or Cheops, the builder of the Great Pyramid." 8 " Every 
 thing was done in writing."' They had decimal as well as duodec- 
 imal calculation, and the reckoning by units, tens, hundreds, and 
 thousands, before the pyramids were built. 4 Alphabetical writing 
 came into use several centuries later. " From the Pal- AJ habetlcal 
 estinians, the people near the Mediterranean Sea re- writing in 
 ceived their alphabet. The sounds of the alphabet itself, r 
 as it is known to us, suit well the general lingual characteristics of 
 the Semitics. It corresponds to their peculiarity, for it expresses 
 their inclination to gutturals, and the variety of their hissing or as- 
 pirated sounds. We can, therefore, assert with high probability that 
 its inventor was a Semitic" ' That the Israelites possessed alphabet- 
 ical writing when they went down into Egypt is quite evident, oth- 
 erwise they would have adopted the hieroglyphic system of the 
 
 1 See Wuttke, Geschichte der Schrift, u. s. w., vol. i, p. 557. 
 8 Wilkinson, Manners and Customs of the Ancient Egyptians, vol. ii, p. 98. 
 8 Ibid., p. 176. "Ibid., p. 178. 
 
 8 Wuttke, Geschichte der Schrift, u. s. w., vol. i, p. 720.
 
 100 INTRODUCTION TO THE STUDY 
 
 Egyptians. 1 The Phoenicians, who lived on the borders of Canaan, 
 and whose language was nearly the same as the Hebrew, possessed 
 writing at a very remote period. They attributed the invention of 
 their alphabet to Taut, their world-god. The sacred writings of the 
 Phoenicians, in which their cosmogony, the history of their gods and 
 heroes, natural events, and astronomical, astrological, and psycho- 
 logical doctrines were contained, were called Taut-writings. An- 
 tiquity mentions seven such writings.* 
 
 Among the ancient Phoenician writers, Mochus, mentioned by Jo- 
 sephus 8 as a writer of Phoenician history, may be named. Strabo 
 states, on the authority of the very learned Posidonius, that Mochus 
 lived before the Trojan war. 4 There was a very ancient tradition 
 among the Greeks that Cadmus, the founder of Thebes, brought six- 
 teen letters of the Phoenician alphabet into Greece. 6 On this point 
 we have the testimony of Herodotus, who states that " the Phoeni- 
 cians who came with Cadmus brought among the Greeks learning 
 and letters." " I myself," says he, " saw the letters of Cadmus in 
 the temple of the Ismenian Apollo, in Boeotian Thebes, engraved 
 upon three tripods."' The age of Cadmus was more ancient than 
 that of Moses. At all events it is certain that the Greek alphabet 
 was derived from the Phoenician. The letters speak for themselves. 
 
 Another proof of the great antiquity of the Phoenician, or Hebrew, 
 Autiqifltyofthe a ^P na bet is furnished by the linguistic researches in the 
 art of writing monuments of ancient Italy. Dr. Mommsen remarks : 
 " We must, both as regards Etruria and Latium, carry 
 back the commencement of the art of writing to an epoch which more 
 closely approximates to the first incidence of the Egyptian dog-star 
 period within historical times, the year 1322 B. C., than to the year 
 776, with which the chronology of the Olympiads began in Greece. 
 The high antiquity of the art of writing in Rome is evinced other- 
 wise by numerous and plain indications." 1 The alphabet came 
 from the Phoenicians through the Greeks. Writing in Hindoostan 
 furnishes another proof of the antiquity of the Semitic alphabet. 
 According to Max M tiller,* the Vedas were written B. C. 1200 or 
 1500. And it has been shown, upon the firm ground of palaeog- 
 
 1 Wuttke, Geschichte der Schrift, u. s. w., vol. i, p. 723. 
 
 8 Fiirst, Geschichte Bib. Lit., vol. i, p. 43. 8 Antiq., i, 18. 4 Lib. xvii, 757. 
 
 B So ancient was alphabetical writing considered to be, that it is attributed by 
 .dischylus (B. C. 450) to the god Prometheus (Prom. Desm., 460). 
 
 4 Lib. v, cap. 58. He also states that one of the tripods contained the inscrip- 
 tion: "Amphitryon, returning from the Teleboans, dedicated me." This would 
 be in the time of Laius, the fourth in descent from Cadmus. 
 
 7 History of Rome (translated by Dickson), vol. i, p. 224. 
 
 8 Lectures on the Vedas, vol. i, p. 13.
 
 OF THE HOLY SCRIPTURES. iul 
 
 raphy, by A. Weber, of Berlin, that the ancient Hindoo alphabet 
 was derived from the Semitic or Phoenician. 
 
 A proof of the existence of writing among the Canaanites, and 
 consequently among the Hebrews before the Mosaic Age, is the fact 
 that when Joshua subdued the land of Canaan he found a city there 
 called "i3D rvnp (Kirjath-sepher), city of the book or books. 1 That the 
 Israelites made use of writing in Egypt is shown by their officers 
 being called D'lBty (shoterim), scribes (Exod. v, 6-19), from "uat? 
 
 (shatar), to write. And in various places in the Pentateuch writing is 
 mentioned as practised by the Hebrews in the Mosaic age. 
 
 We may further remark that it is now generally conceded that 
 writing among the Semitics dates as far back as B. C. 2000. 
 
 Writing material was abundant in Egypt in the Mosaic age. When 
 the pyramid of Cheops was built papyri were used as Artotwritln ,, 
 writing material ; * they were made from a plant that inEgyptinthe 
 grew in lower Egypt. The papyrus employed for sacred 
 writings was about thirteen inches wide ; the length was from a few 
 inches to twenty, thirty, and even sixty feet. One piece in the 
 Museum of Turin is fifty-seven feet long, and another measures 
 one hundred and forty-four feet. 3 Skins of animals were also used 
 for writing at a very early period in Egypt. 4 " Records kept in the 
 temple," written upon skins, are mentioned in the time of the eight- 
 eenth dynasty, the age of Moses. 
 
 As numerous allusions are made in the Pentateuch to embroidery, 
 engraving on stone, and working in brass, silver, and gold, it is a 
 matter of great importance to ascertain from other sources what 
 was the condition of the sciences and arts in Egypt before and dur- \ 
 ing the time of Moses. 
 
 Astronomy and mathematics were cultivated by the Egyptians at j 
 a very remote period. The Egyptian priests devoted g^^g and 
 
 themselves ardently to astronomy, and computed the arts in ancient 
 
 Ejrypt* 
 length of the solar year with approximate correctness. 
 
 According to Biot's investigations, they made, upon accurate exam- 
 ination, a reform of their calendar about B. C. 1780. Moiris, or 
 Mares, a king of the twelfth dynasty (about B. C. 2000), is said to 
 have been the founder of geometry. The mathematical knowledge 
 of the ancient Egyptians was transferred to the Greeks through 
 Thales, Pythagoras, and Democritus, who were disciples of Egyp- 
 tian priests. 5 Even when the pyramid of Cheops was built, the' 
 decimal system was in use. 
 
 1 Josh, xv, 15, 16. 
 
 2 Wilkinson, Manners and Customs of the Ancient Egyptians, vol. ii, p. 98. 
 
 8 Wuttke, vol. i, p. 533. 4 Wilkinson, vol. ii, p. 99. 6 Wuttke, vol. i, pp. 568, 569.
 
 102 INTRODUCTION TO THE STUDY 
 
 Gold wire was employed B. C. 2000, and silver wire probably at 
 the same time, certainly not more than five hundred years later. The 
 ornaments in gold found in Egypt consist of rings, bracelets, armlets, 
 necklaces, earrings, and numerous trinkets belonging to the toilet, 
 many of which are of the time of Osirtasen I. and Thothmes III., 
 who lived about B. C. 2080 and 1460. Gold and silver vases, statues, 
 and other objects of gold and silver, of silver inlaid with gold, and of 
 bronze inlaid with the precious metals, were also common at the 
 same time. ' Signet rings were worn as early as the Mosaic age, and 
 even earlier. 
 
 Substances of various kinds were overlaid with fine gold leaf at a 
 very early period, even in the time of Osirtasen I., about B. C. 2000. 
 In the early age of Thothmes III. (about B. C. 1460) the people 
 were already acquainted with various methods of overlaying with gold 
 leaf, gilding, inlaying, and beating gold into other metals, previously 
 tooled with devices to receive it* The art of cutting glass was 
 known to the Egyptians of the most remote periods, hieroglyphics 
 and various devices being frequently engraved upon vases and beads. 
 The art of grinding glass was known and practised. For engraving 
 stone, emery powder and the lapidary's wheel were used. 8 The 
 Egyptians manufactured fine linen at a very early period. Striped 
 cloths were woven in Egypt in the age of the Pharaohs of the twelfth 
 (B. C. 2000) and the eighteenth (about B. C. 1460) dynasties. The 
 , ... hieroglyphics on obelisks and on other granitic monu- 
 
 Hleroglyphlcs. 
 
 ments are sculptured with a minuteness and finish which 
 are surprising, even if steel as highly tempered as our own had been 
 used. The hieroglyphics on the obelisks are rather engraved than 
 sculptured; and, judging from the minute manner in which they are 
 executed, we may suppose the Egyptians adopted the same process as 
 modern engravers, and that they even, in some instances, employed 
 the wheel and drill. 4 Mirrors of metal, chiefly copper, were used by 
 them. 
 
 It is not necessary to pursue this part of our subject any further. 
 Enough has already been said to show that the statements of the 
 Pentateuch respecting the arts employed by the Israelites in build- 
 ing the tabernacle, in making its utensils, and in adorning the priests, 
 together with the allusions made to gold and other ornaments, are 
 natural and credible, unless one can suppose that the Israelites, al- 
 though dwelling in close proximity to the Egyptians for centuries, 
 never learned any of their arts, and that no Egyptian artist ever 
 appeared among them. 
 1 Wilkinson, vol. ii, p. 140. 2 Ibid., p. 145. 8 Ibid., p. 67. 4 Ibid., pp. 156, 157.
 
 OF THE HOLY SCRIPTURES 103 
 
 CHAPTER X. 
 
 PROOF OF THE GREAT ANTIQUITY OF THE PENTATEUCH 
 FROM INTERNAL EVIDENCE. 
 
 INTERNAL EVIDENCE THAT NO PART OF THE PENTATEUCH COULD 
 HAVE BEEN WRITTEN DURING OR AFTER THE BABYLONIAN 
 CAPTIVITY. 
 
 '"PHAT the Hebrew language would undergo no change in its 
 vocabulary and syntax in nine or ten centuries, from the age of 
 Moses to the Babylonian captivity, is very improbable, Probability of 
 and unless we ignore all the teachings of history in sim- H^b^w^ian- 
 ilar cases it is certain on a priori grounds that the Hebrew Ruage. 
 language would be affected by coming into contact with the Chal- 
 dee during the Babylonian captivity. We accordingly find that 
 in many instances the later Hebrew differs from the earlier, that 
 the language of all the writers who lived during or after the 
 Babylonian captivity is colored to a greater or less extent by the 
 Chaldee ; and that the writers themselves give unmistakable evi- 
 dence of the age to which they belong. In proof and illustration 
 of these statements we cite the following words : 3'UX, Abib, is used 
 
 in Exod. ix, 31, and in Lev. ii, 14, for green ears. Four times in 
 Exodus and twice in Deuteronomy it takes the article with bnh, 
 
 hhodesh (month) prefixed, 3'3xn Bnh, hhodesh haabib, month of Abib 
 or greenness. The fact that Abib takes the article is a proof that it is 
 not a proper noun. It occurs nowhere except in the passages 
 named, and everywhere else in the Pentateuch the Hebrew months 
 are indicated simply as first, second, etc. But this Abib, the first 
 month of the Hebrew year, is called p'i, Nisan, in Neh. Later lan- 
 ii, i ; Esth. iii, 7; and in other books composed about found in the 
 the time of the Babylonian captivity, we have the proper Pentateuch, 
 names of some of the months. Thus, in i Kings vi, i, we have 
 "the month Ziv, which is the second month," and Ziv in verse 31. 
 In i Kings vi, 38, mention is made of " the month Bui, which is 
 the eighth month." In Ezra vi, 15, and in several passages in 
 Esther, the twelfth month is called Adar. In Zech. i, 7, the elev- 
 enth month is called Shebat ; and in vii, i, the ninth month is
 
 104 INTRODUCTION TO THE STUDY 
 
 named Chisleu j and in Neh. vi, 15, the sixth month is called simply 
 Elul. The most of these proper names came from the Chaldee. 
 
 vx, azar, to bind, and "iiix, ezor, a girdle, are found in later books 
 of the Bible, but nowhere in the Pentateuch. 
 
 D'23"nx and poim, darics, the name of a Persian coin that 
 came into use after the Babylonian captivity, is found in several 
 places in Ezra and Nehemiah. Why is it not found in the mid- 
 dle books of the Pentateuch if they were written after the 
 captivity ? 
 
 inx, with 3 prefixed, iruo, keehhadh, as one, together, occurs three 
 
 times in Ezra, and once in each of the books of 2 Chronicles, Ne- 
 hemiah, Isaiah, and Ecclesiastes, and nowhere else. 
 
 ETOjSx, elgablsh, hail, occurs three times in Ezekiel, and nowhere 
 else. A different word is used in the Pentateuch and other biblical 
 
 books. (&hchJ\J"^ 
 
 The phrase npx np 1 ?, layahh ishshah, to take a wife, is found in 
 
 /Genesis, Exodus, Leviticus, Deuteronomy, and most of the books 
 of the Bible, but in several passages in Ezra, Nehemiah, and 
 2 Chronicles the phrase ntfx xfrj, nasah ishshah, is used. It is, how- 
 eve.r, not used in the Pentateuch. It is difficult to think that if 
 Leviticus had been written in the time of Ezra and Nehemiah it 
 \vould not have contained this latter phrase. 
 
 03, barar, to separate, to select, to choose, and to be pure, occurs 
 
 thirty-four times in the Old Testament, generally in the later books, 
 but never in the Pentateuch. 
 
 rrya, birah, fortress, palace, or temple, is not found in the Penta- 
 teuch, but occurs in some of the books written after the Babylonian 
 captivity. 
 
 H3, bath, liquid measure, one tenth of a homer, and equal to the 
 ephah in dry measure, is nowhere found in the Pentateuch, and 
 appears to be of late origin. It occurs once in Isaiah, several 
 times in Kings and Chronicles, seven times in Ezekiel, and twice 
 in the Chaldee of Ezra. ~\fy, omcr, the tenth of an ephah, occurs 
 ten times in the Pentateuch, and nowhere else, ion, homer, a meas- 
 ure containing ten baths, occurs in the Pentateuch, Hosea, and 
 Ezekiel, while ib, kdr, the same measure, is never used in the Pen- 
 tateuch, but occurs several times in i Kings and 2 Chronicles, and 
 once in Ezekiel. Had the middle books of the Pentateuch been 
 written in the time of Ezekiel or Ezra, it is in the highest degree 
 probable that the word bath, and very likely also the word kdr, 
 would have been found in them.
 
 OF THE HOLY SCRIPTURES. 105 
 
 Sxj, to be defiled, to be polluted, occurs in Isaiah, Zephaniah, Lam- 
 entations, Malachi, Ezra, and Nehemiah, but nowhere in the Pen- 
 tateuch. It is evidently late Hebrew. 
 
 VJ, to exult, occurs forty-four times in the late books of the Old 
 Testament, but never in the Pentateuch. J*n, to fear, and n;*n, 
 fear, are not found in the Pentateuch, but in i Samuel, Joshua, 
 Psalms, Jeremiah, Proverbs, and three times in Ezekiel. 
 
 T2T is used fifteen times in the books of Kings, Chronicles, and 
 
 once in the Psalms for the holy of holies of the Jewish temple. Now, it 
 is very probable that if the middle books of the Pentateuch had been 
 written during, or after, the Babylonian captivity, they would have 
 contained this word, applied to the most holy place of the tabernacle. 
 p"i, watch tower, is used in 2 Kings, Jeremiah, and Ezekiel, and 
 
 nowhere else. 
 
 n:n, to murmur, and its derivatives are used thirty-five times in 
 
 the later books of the Old Testament, but never in the Pentateuch. 
 
 JOT, to appoint, is used twice in Nehemiah and once in the Hebrew 
 
 portion of Ezra ; and JOT, time, occurs once in Nehemiah, and in 
 
 Ecclesiastes and Esther. They are not found until the Babylonian 
 captivity, and doubtless came from the Chaldee. 
 
 1*31, to play, to sing, is used more than forty times, but not in the 
 Pentateuch, rw. to be rancid, occurs nineteen times, but is never 
 
 used in the Pentateuch. 
 }n, palate, occurs eighteen times in various books, including 
 
 Ezekiel. 
 
 D^n, to do violence, is found in several late books, but neither 
 
 word is found in the Pentateuch. 
 
 nlN3n nirr, Jehovah of hosts, or Jehovah God of hosts, is not found 
 in the Pentateuch, though it occurs in Jeremiah, Zechariah, Mal- 
 achi, and especially in Isaiah. 
 
 I'rnn, to be in a genealogical table, is found only in Num. i, 18. 
 Instead of this word, frrvnn is used twenty times in Ezra, Nehemiah, 
 
 and in i and 2 Chronicles. 
 
 3ro, a writing, or book, or prescript, is not found in the Pentateuch, 
 but occurs as Hebrew three times in Chronicles, four times in Ezra, 
 once in Nehemiah, and once in Ezekiel. It evidently, at the cap- 
 tivity, came from the Chaldee, which has a very similar form (^ns). 
 
 "1133, a cup occurs in several places in Ezra and in i Chronicles, 
 but not in the Pentateuch.
 
 106 INTRODUCTION TO THE STUDY 
 
 VS3, a young /ion, is found thirty-one times in the Old Testament, 
 but in no case in the Pentateuch. 
 
 D'uS, secret arts, magic arts (Exod. vii, 22; viii, 3, 14), and D'onS, 
 magic arts (Exod. vii, u), are found nowhere else in the Bible in 
 this sense, except in the Pentateuch, but in the later books different 
 words are used. 
 
 D'JsJD onS, show bread, is employed in Exod. xxxv, 13 ; xxxix, 36, 
 
 and without the article in xxv, 30. The same name also is found 
 in other books. But this bread is called twice in Chronicles and 
 once in Nehemiah fO^TH DnS, bread of the row, row bread. 
 
 n^JO, a roll of a book, occurs twenty-one times in the Old Testa- 
 ment, including four times in Ezekiel, but not in the Pentateuch. 
 
 nSJXO, turban, mitre, is found eleven times in Exodus and once 
 
 v v : 
 
 in Ezekiel, but nowhere else in the Old Testament. In some of 
 the later books TJjf is used in the same sense. 
 
 1 T 
 
 Di"O, high place, occurs more than fifty times in the Old Testa- 
 ment, but nowhere in the Pentateuch. It seems to have com.; 
 into use first when the Israelites occupied Jerusalem and other 
 high places. 
 
 TJ3, prince, leader, etc., is not in the Pentateuch, but occurs forty- 
 
 hvo times elsewhere, being found in Samuel, Kings, Job, Proverbs, 
 Isaiah, Jeremiah, Psalms, Nehemiah, Chronicles, and Daniel. 
 
 >'JJ, in Ezra iii, i ; Neh. vii, 73 ; Hiphil in Ezek. vii, 12, has the 
 singular meaning, to come. 
 
 D'J'^J, servants of the tabernacle, or temple, given to the Levites 
 to aid them, occurs eight times in Ezra, nine times in Nehemiah, 
 and once in i Chronicles. If the middle books of the Pentateuch 
 had been written in the time of Ezra and Nehemiah, it is in the 
 highest degree probable, if not certain, that this word would have 
 been used to designate the servants of the Levites. 
 
 ap, found only in the following form construct plural : 
 
 , burdens, a bearing of burdens, six times in Exodus, ana no- 
 where else. Outside of the Pentateuch different words are used 
 for burdens, Ssb and ^30. 
 
 r 
 
 po, or fJ3, prefect, ruler, gcn>ernor, is not in the Pentateuch, but in 
 Isaiah, Jeremiah, Ezekiel, Nehemiah, and Ezra, it is used for chief 
 officers among the Hebrews, just as N'feu, prince, is used in the mid- 
 dle books of the Pentateuch. Why, then, does not this late word or* 
 cur in the Pentateuch, if it belongs, in large part, to the time of Ezra ?
 
 OF THE HOLY SCRIPTURES. 107 
 
 ySDH, or ySo, Sela Petra (the Rock), is found in Judges i, 36 ; 
 2 Kings xiv, 17; Isaiah xvi, i, and perhaps xlii, n, for the well 
 known Idumean city Petra, but it is not found in the Pentateuch. 
 Is not this because the city had no existence when the Pentateuch 
 was written ? 
 
 lyD, to scatter and to shake, and its noun, rnyo and "\yD, storm, are 
 not found in the Pentateuch, but some of its forms occur in Kings, 
 Hosea, Amos, Isaiah, Psalms, Habakkuk, Ezekiel, Zechariah, and 
 Jonah. 
 
 "tab, king's scribe or secretary, also military tribune, and in Chron- 
 icles, Jeremiah, Ezra, and Nehemiah, it has the meaning of scribe, 
 one skilled in the law of Moses; but this participle does not occur 
 in the Pentateuch, which has the word "iBitf (from i3S7, to write), 
 officer, leader, magistrate, thirteen times. 
 
 iiy, to gird, occurs eighty-two times in the Hebrew Bible, but in 
 
 the Pentateuch only twice, in the poetical chapters, Gen. xlix and 
 Deut. xxxii. 
 
 "HJ7, omer, the tenth part of an ephah, occurs ten times in the Penta- 
 teuch, and nowhere else. 
 
 3"\p, Arabia, and "3"ij;, an Arabian, are not found in the Penta- 
 teuch. But the name of the country occurs in Isaiah, Ezekiel, and 
 2 Chronicles, while the name of the people occurs also in Isaiah, 
 2 Chronicles, and in Jeremiah and Nehemiah. Now, as the history 
 in the Pentateuch deals in genealogies and Gentile names, and', 
 as the largest portion of its history is transacted in Arabia, it isi 
 highly probable that if any large historical part of the work had 
 been written near the period of the captivity it would have cony 
 tained both the names for Arabia and Arab. 
 
 Bfas, to act proudly, to scatter, does not occur in the Pentateuch, 
 but in Jeremiah, Nahum, Habakkuk, and Malachi. 
 
 13, pure gold, is found in several late books, but not in the Penta- 
 teuch. 
 
 nns, governor, is found eleven times in Nehemiah, seven times in 
 Ezra, and also in Kings, Malachi, Ezekiel, Chronicles, Daniel, and 
 Esther. If any considerable portion of the Pentateuch had been 
 written about the time of the Babylonian captivity, is it not likely 
 that this word would have been found in it ? 
 
 ~n3, a male mule, is found fifteen times in the books of 2 Samuel, 
 
 i and 2 Kings, i and 2 Chronicles, Isaiah, Ezra, Nehemiah, and 
 Psalms, rms, a she mule, is found three times in i Kings. But 
 
 neither of these words occurs in the Pentateuch. Is it not, then, in 
 8
 
 108 INTRODUCTION TO THE STUDY 
 
 the highest degree probable that this hybrid had no existence when 
 the Pentateuch was written, or, at least, was not known in the regions 
 of Egypt l and Palestine ? 
 
 '3, beauty, splendor, is not found in the Pentateuch, but occurs in 
 Isaiah, Jeremiah, Ezekiel, 2 Samuel, and Daniel. 
 
 pnv, tsahhaq, to laugh, to make sport of, occurs twelve times in 
 Genesis, once in Exodus, once in Judges, and once in Ezekiel, but 
 nowhere else. Instead of this the later writers use a word easier 
 to pronounce, pni?, sahhaq, the X (ts) being exchanged for \0 (s). 
 
 pi'V, tsa'aq, to cry out, is found seventy-two times in the Old Test- 
 ament. Of these instances twenty-six are in the Pentateuch ; 
 the other form, p; f i, zaaq (the initial letter of which is more easily 
 pronounced), is used instead of pj'tf in the Pentateuch only twice, 
 but in the later books eighty-nine times. 
 
 ray, a he goat, is used in the Hebrew portion of Ezra as well as 
 
 in the Chaldee, in 2 Chron. xxix, 21, and in Daniel. It is found 
 nowhere else. But in the Pentateuch "liny and "vyl? are used for/ie 
 goat ; the latter word for the goat of the sin offering in Lev. ix, 3, 
 etc., in the same sense that Ezra uses Tav. If Ezra wrote the mid- 
 dle books of the Pentateuch, how is it that he did not insert for he 
 goat the word which he uses in his own book ? 
 
 bap, to receive, is found in Ezra, Proverbs, Job, Chronicles, and 
 Esther, but not in the Pentateuch. It is evidently from the Chaldee. 
 
 nnp to be dull, to be blunted, is found only in Jeremiah, Ezekiel, 
 
 and Ecclesiastes. 
 
 I'p, to lament, and nrp, lamentation, is found several times in 
 
 Ezekiel and in some other books, but nowhere in the Pentateuch. 
 thp, a curtain, occurs eleven times in Exodus, and twice in 
 
 Numbers, but nowhere else. 
 
 ivft, to listen, in Kal conjugation, Isaiah xxxii, 3, and Hiphil, to at- 
 tend, to hearken, occurs seven times in Isaiah, seven times in Jeremiah, 
 once in Hosea, once in Micah, twice in Zechariah, six times in the 
 Psalms, eight times in Proverbs, twice in Chronicles, once in Malachi, 
 once in Nehemiah, twice in Job, once in i Samuel, once in Canticles, 
 and once in Daniel. Now, as the precept to hearken, to give heed, 
 occurs often in the Pentateuch, it is in the highest degree proba- 
 ble that if any considerable portion of the Pentateuch had been 
 written in the period B. C. 700-400, it would have contained this 
 
 'A painting on an Egyptian tomb in the time of the eighteenth dynasty repre- 
 sents two white mules. Wilkinson's Egypt, by Birch, vol. i, p. 237.
 
 OF THE HOLY SCRIPTURES. 109 
 
 wok'd. Clearly, the word came into use after the Pentateuch was 
 written. 
 
 D'S:n, plural ofhll,f00t, signifies times in Exod. xxiii, 14; Num. 
 xxii, 28, 32, and nowhere else. The word in general use to ex- 
 press times, is O'Dj-'a, (beats). 
 
 PNBT, and pxty, to be secure, careless, are not in the Pentateuch, 
 but are found in eight of the later books. 
 
 ^Nty, to gape after, is not in the Pentateuch, but in several of the 
 later books. 
 
 I!', leaven, is found only in the Pentateuch, 
 tf, effusion, occurs in the Pentateuch alone. 
 
 Nity is used six times in Exodus and Deuteronomy, in the sense 
 of falsehood the only books of the Pentateuch in which it occurs ; 
 but in the later books it also occurs in the sense of vanity. 
 
 TDjy, in the sense diamond, occurs in Jeremiah, Ezekiel, and 
 Zechariah, but not in the Pentateuch. 
 
 \ytf, fine cotton, the Egytian shensh, is found twenty-two times in 
 the Pentateuch, and elsewhere but seven times. For this material, 
 yi3, byssus, is used in Ezek. xxvii, 16, four times in the Book of 
 Chronicles, and twice in Esther, but never in the Pentateuch. The 
 word is of Aramaean and late origin. Had the middle books of the 
 Pentateuch been written after the captivity, it would certainly have 
 contained this word. 
 
 sonn, a coat of mail, occurs only in Exod. xxviii, 32 ; xxxix, 23. 
 
 In the later books a different word, p"H?, or p~H?, occurring eight 
 times, is used, and mty in the Book of Job. 
 
 On the use of b, with nouns after verbs, Gesenius remarks: " Some- 
 
 : 
 
 times Hebrew writers, especially the later ones, who inclined to 
 Chaldaism, employ *? (the sign of the dative) incorrectly after 
 active verbs for the accusative, as in Chaldee, Syriac, and Ethiopia ; 
 for example, *"> npS, Jer. xl, 20 ; S ^DN, Lam. iv, 5 ; S :nn, Job v, 2 ; 
 compare i Chron. xvi, 37 ; xxv, i ; Psa. cxxxv, u, etc. [where the 
 same construction occurs]. Of such construction we know nothing 
 in the Pentateuch. 
 
 nto, a hundred, in its regular position stands before the noun in 
 
 the singular, as, rut? nxo, a hundred year (for years). "Rarely, and 
 only in the later books, is DNO put after a noun plural, as nxo D'Ji'En, 
 2 Chron. iii, 16; compare iv, 8; Ezra ii, 69; viii, 26," [in which 
 the same construction is found].
 
 110 INTRODUCTION TO THE STUDY 
 
 7T2K, a cubit, is placed after numbers above ten in the earlier He- 
 brew, but in the later we have also the plural cubits after large num- 
 bers, as Ezek. xlii, 2 ; 2 Chron. iii, 4.'' 
 
 In Ezekiel we find Chaldee plurals, j'3n, wheat (iv, 9), px, islands 
 
 (xxvi, 18); Chaldee infinitives, as vyi rrixero (xxxvi, 5 ; xvii, 9). 
 
 In Jeremiah there is one verse in Chaldee, and in Ezra there are 
 whole sections in the same language. 
 
 Taking into consideration all the peculiarities that distinguish' 
 
 conciusionthat tne Pentateuch from the books of the Bible written 
 
 the Pentateuch . , , , ... 
 
 could not have during or after the Babylonian captivity, it seems to us 
 
 durin W orafter c ^ ear b" impossible that any part of the Pentateuch 
 the captivity, could have been written during either of those periods. 
 In this view we have the support of the great Hebrew lexicogra- 
 pher, Gesenius, who belonged to the rationalistic school. In the 
 last edition * of his Hebrew Grammar, published a short time before 
 his death, he remarks : " The Old Testament writings which belong 
 to this second period, B. C. 536-160, and in all of which this Chal- 
 dee coloring appears, although in different degrees, are, the books 
 of Chronicles, Ezra, Nehemiah, Esther; the prophetical books 
 in of Jonah, Haggai, Zechariah, Malachi; of the poetic 
 bo o ks . Ecclesiastes, the Song of Solomon, and the later 
 Pentateuch. Psalms."* "In the Book of Job, Jeremiah, and Ezekiel 
 are found decided approaches to the Chaldaizing language of the 
 [this] second period." 4 Hje places the Pentateuch in the first.pjeriod 
 f Hebrew literature.* 
 
 -' 
 
 !; 
 
 INTERNAL EVIDENCE THAT THE PENTATEUCH IS OLDER THAN ANY 
 OTHER PART OF THE OLD TESTAMENT. 
 
 In the preceding discussion a considerable part of the linguistic 
 arguments that we adduced indicated not only that no portion of 
 the Pentateuch could be of as late origin as the Babylonian captiv- 
 ity, but also that the Pentateuch is older than any other part of the 
 Old Testament. That this is really the case can be made clear 
 from \.\\$.archaisms that pervade the whole Pentateuch. 
 
 The pronoun Kin, hit (/ie), throughout the Pentateuch is used as\ 
 Archaisms in common gender, and occurs one hundred and ninety- 
 provinz^ar- seven times as feminine, she or it. It is used for the 
 ly origin. feminine fifty-seven times in Genesis, eleven times in 
 Exodus, sixty-six times in Leviticus, twenty-seven times in Num-y 
 
 1 See Gesenius, sub voc., TOK- * Thirteenth, published at Leipzig, 1842. 
 
 Ibid., p. 9, German edition. 4 Ibid., p. 8. 
 
 ' Ibid. p. 7. We shall give his views on the Pentateuch more fully hereafter. 

 
 OF THE HOLY SCRIPTURES. Ill 
 
 bers, and thirty-six times in Deuteronomy. 1 The feminine pronoun 
 for she is NTI, hi. This latter form is everywhere used in the He- 
 brew Bible for the feminine, 2 except in the Pentateuch, where it 
 occurs only eleven times, its place being supplied, as we have al- 
 ready stated, by the masculine son, hu. The feminine form, N'n, hi, 
 occurs three times in Genesis, in Exodus not at all, six times in 
 Leviticus, twice in numbers, and not once in Deuteronomy. The 
 feminine form, K'n, fit, occurs twenty-nine times in Joshua, but fcon, 
 hu, never as feminine. In the Book of Judges, N'n, hi, feminine, 
 occurs twenty-two times, but wn, hu, never as feminine. The Chal- 
 dee, Syriac, and Arabic have distinct forms. 3 TK, these, occurs at 
 least eight times in the Pentateuch, but nowhere else except in 
 i Chron. xx, 8, taken, doubtless, from the Pentateuch. HT^n, this, 
 occurs twice in Genesis only. 
 
 The Hebrew word for boy is ~>yj, naar; feminine mpJ, naarah, 
 girl. The masculine, "U'3, naar, is used for the feminine twenty-one 
 times in the Pentateuch, eight times of them being in Genesis, and 
 thirteen in Deuteronomy. The feminine form, "njn, naarah, occurs 
 but once in the whole Pentateuch, and that in Deuteronomy. Out- 
 side of the Pentateuch, the masculine singular is never used for 
 the feminine. The masculine plural, D^yJ, is thought to be used for 
 the feminine in Ruth ii, 21 (Gesenius and Fiirst) ; and to include 
 young men and maidens, in Job i, 19. 
 
 ]")&, as a verb, to creep, or, as a noun, yv^', a creeping thing, occurs 
 twenty-six times in the Pentateuch, and is distributed through all 
 the books, except Numbers. Elsewhere it occurs but twice, once 
 in Psalm cv, 30, as an indirect quotation, in speaking of the plagues 
 
 1 We have carefully counted these instances from personal inspection. The 
 number is greater than we made it in first edition. 
 
 2 Gesenius (Heb. Lex.) remarks that JOH, hu, is used for the feminine in three 
 passages outside of the Peutateuch, namely, I Kings xvii, 15 ; Job xxxi, n ; Isa. 
 xxx, 33. But these passages do not really form an exception to our statement, 
 since in the first passage the Hebrew is evidently transposed : X\"ll K1H ?3NJ"11, 
 she and he did eat. The Massora has corrected this by putting the feminine form 
 first and the masculine second in the margin to be read. The passage in Job is 
 )iy JOH HST SO!"!. Here the masculine pronoun is used with a feminine noun, and 
 a feminine pronoun with a masculine noun. The Massora has corrected this in 
 the margin, and properly arranged the words. The Massora regards the passage 
 in Isaiah as an error, and has corrected it in the margin. 
 
 "The same as in Chaldee Kin, hu, KVT, hi; Syriac, 007- hu, 4^7, hi; Arabic, *> 
 . (J?,, kia, he, she.
 
 112 INTRODUCTION TO THE STUDY 
 
 of Egypt, and once in Ezek. xlvii, 9, which seems to be taken from 
 Genesis, nete, burnt offering, sacrifice, is found nearly fifty times in 
 Exodus, Leviticus, and Numbers, but nowhere else. Its plural is 
 used sixteen times, and almost entirely in Leviticus and Numbers. 
 Out of the Pentateuch it occurs but twice. 3t73, for V23, a lamb, 
 
 V V 
 
 occurs thirteen times in all the books of the Pentateuch except 
 Numbers. Elsewhere it does not occur. The feminine form, natco, 
 is found once in Leviticus. *7TU, a young bird, occurs nowhere in 
 the Bible, except once in Genesis and once in Deuteronomy. 1OT, for 
 male, occurs only in Exod. xxiii, 17; xxxiv, 23, and Deut. xvi, 16; 
 xx, 13. In the first three passages the word occurs in the command 
 that all the males should appear three times a year before Jehovah, 
 but in the last passage the subject is entirely different, and shows 
 that the Deuteronomist was not using the word, though antiquated, 
 merely because he was repeating the words of an old law. D*pn, a 
 living thing, is found twice in Genesis and once in Deuteronomy, 
 and nowhere else. "'SpJ, female, is found twenty-one times in all 
 the books of the Pentateuch, except Exodus. Elsewhere it is 
 met with but once, in Jeremiah. PUD, thorn bush, occurs four times 
 in Exodus and once in Deuteronomy, and nowhere else, ray bx ID^J 
 
 T- r '-v:v 
 
 to be gathered to one's people, occurs in Genesis, Numbers, and in 
 Deuteronomy. Elsewhere it is not found. 1 
 
 Some of the most important of these archaisms occur in those 
 Archaisms parts of the Pentateuch regarded by the impugners of 
 of U tbe lt penta^ * ts genuineness as the most recent, as well as in those 
 teuch claimed portions acknowledged to be primitive. 
 XtS'toteSe " The Pentateuch," says Gesenius, "certainly contains 
 most recent. some linguistic peculiarities which have the appearance 
 of archaisms. The words wn, he, and "U'J, young man, are still com- 
 mon gender, and stand also for she, young woman (about as the old 
 [German] Gemahl (husband) for Gemahlin (wife) ; and certain 
 harder forms," *) etc. 
 
 Now, it may be asked, In what way do those who deny the unity 
 and genuineness of the Pentateuch dispose of its archaisms ? Bleek 
 admits them, but thinks that other considerations outweigh them.* 
 But we regard such archaisms as we find in the Pentateuch to be an 
 irresistible proof that the entire Pentateuch is older than any other 
 
 1 A very similar phrase occurs in Judg. ii, 10, and 2 Kings xxii, 20 : "to gat)*er 
 one to his fathers" 
 
 'Thirteenth edition of his Hebrew Grammar. Leipzig, 1842, pp. 7, 8. 
 9 Einleitung, pp. 341, 342.
 
 OF THE HOLY SCRIPTURES. 113 
 
 portion of the Old Testament, and also a probable proof of the 
 unity of the whole of it. Schrader, in his additions to The Ration- 
 De Wette's Introduction, 1 attributes them to "a revision JJJJJ 8 of tre *J~ 
 of the text for the sake of producing uniformity" This chaisms. 
 view is wholly untenable. A revision that changes usual and mod- 
 ern forms into antiquated ones for the sake of uniformity would be 
 unnatural. For the natural tendency of a revision is to change the 
 most ancient forms into modern ones, which was done in the Samar- 
 itan Pentateuch, where the most important archaisms were changed 
 into modern forms ; for example, ^N into nSx; "tyJ in every instance 
 into m;?J; Kin into N'n, when the feminine gender 2 was to be 
 
 indicated. 
 
 Nor can we believe that the author of Deuteronomy, on the sup- 
 position that he was not Moses, but belonged to a quite late age, 
 would have inserted archaisms in order to make the work uniform 
 with the preceding books of the Pentateuch. For Deuteronomy is 
 written in a spirit so free and independent that its author has been 
 charged with contradicting the statements of the other books; cer- 
 tainly he does not slavishly follow them by giving historical events 
 exactly as the preceding books do ; and some of the laws of the 
 other books are modified in this. If the author of Deuteronomy 
 did not conform to the other parts of the Pentateuch in important 
 matters, why should he have accommodated himself to them in 
 minor ones, that is, those of verbal form ? 
 
 The archaisms of the Pentateuch not only furnish confirmatory 
 proof of its unity, but give the strongest evidence of its high an-; 
 tiquity, showing it to be the oldest writing of the Old Test- Archaisms 
 ament older than even the Book of Joshua. For x-in, provingunity 
 hu, is common gender all through the Pentateuch, meaning he or she 
 but in the Book of Joshua the distinct feminine form, NTI, ///, she 
 is invariably used for the feminine, occurring twenty-nine times. 
 This is important, for it separates the authorship of the Book o 
 Joshua from that of the Pentateuch, which some deniers of the gen 
 uineness of the latter refuse to do, and so get rid of the importan 
 independent testimony furnished by the Book of Joshua to the Pen 
 tateuch. But the Book of Joshua contains internal evidence o 
 
 1 P. 87, Berlin, 1869. 
 
 s We have found one instance in which the old form, Kin, is allowed to stand 
 for the feminine ; but this is in all probability a mistake of some transcriber. 
 3 -|]J3, boy or girl, in the Pentateuch, occurs but once in the Book of Joshua, and 
 
 as masculine. Joshua had but little need of it, nor does the feminine form, 
 occur in it.
 
 114 INTRODUCTION TO THE STUDY 
 
 having been written before the reign of David, for it is stated 
 (Josh, xv, 63) that the children of Judah could not drive out the 
 Jebusites.from Jerusalem, "but the Jebusites dwell with the chil- 
 dren of Judah at Jerusalem unto this day;" that is, when the book 
 was written. But David drove them out (2 Sam. v, 6, 7). The 
 archaisms of the Pentateuch prove something more than its high 
 antiquity. They furnish the most striking proof that the volume 
 of Moses has come down to us in its original form. 
 
 The two propositions on the antiquity of the Pentateuch which 
 we have discussed are entirely independent of its use and authority. 
 Had it been buried or forgotten from the time of Moses until Ezra, 
 the argument for its antiquity would not be affected. 
 
 CHAPTER XI. ^ 
 
 THE PROBABILITY THAT MOSES, AS LEGISLATOR, WOULD 
 HAVE WRITTEN HIS LAWS, AND ALSO THE ANNALS OF 
 THE HEBREWS. 
 
 TT may be taken for granted that Moses was the great legislator of 
 * the Hebrews, since the proof is so strong that it may be said to 
 have hardly ever been questioned. All the writings of the Jews, and 
 their oldest traditions, agree that Moses was their lawgiver ; and the 
 Egyptians, Greeks, and Romans held the same view. Manetho, an 
 Egyptian priest of Sebennytus, a man of great erudition, who wrote 
 in Greek, about B. C. 300, the Egyptian History from their sacred 
 writings, states that the Israelites left Egypt in the reign of Ameno- 
 phis, and that their leader, a priest of Heliopolis, by name Osarsi- 
 phus whose name was changed to Moses after he went over to the 
 Israelites gave them laws, for the most part contrary to the customs 
 of Egypt, enjoining upon them not to worship the gods, nor to ab- 
 stain from those animals held sacred in Egypt, but to sacrifice and 
 independent slaughter them all. 1 King Amenophis (Amunoph) is 
 testimony con- placed by Wilkinson at B.C. 1498-1478. Manetho's 
 History of the Dynasties has been remarkably confirmed 
 by the monuments of Egypt. Strabo, the great Greek geographer 
 (* about B. C. 65), in speaking of the Jews, remarks: "Moses, one 
 of the Egyptian priests, possessing a part of Lower Egypt, left there, 
 being disgusted with the existing institutions, and many, honouring 
 1 In Josephus against Apion, liber i, 460, 461.
 
 OF THE HOLY SCRIPTURES. 115 
 
 the Divinity, left with him. For he said and taught that the Egyp- 
 tians have not just conceptions of the Divine nature in representing 
 it by beasts and cattle ; nor have the Lybians ; nor have the Greeks 
 who represent it by human forms. For that only is God which em- 
 braces us all, both land and sea." 1 
 
 The Roman satirist Juvenal (about A. D. 100) speaks of "the 
 law, all which Moses delivered in the sacred volume." 2 " Moses,' 
 says Tacitus, 3 " gave the Jewish nation new rites contrary to those 
 of other men." 
 
 Writing, as we have already seen, was extensively practised in 
 Egypt long before the age of Moses. The oldest of the sacred 
 books of Thoth were composed at least as early as the building of 
 the great pyramid. 4 These books were partly of a religious and 
 partly of -a scientific character; or, rather, they constituted a system 
 of natural and revealed theology. They passed as a revelation. 
 The Egyptians " had a grand code of laws and jurispru- ^ WSSill<3i0ttieT 
 dence, known as the celebrated Eight Books of Hermes records among 
 (Thoth), which it was incumbent on those high priests 
 called ' prophets ' to be thoroughly versed in, and which the king, 
 who held that office, was also required and entitled to know." 6 The 
 great conqueror, Sesostris, published laws respecting the army. The 
 ancient Mnevis is said to have published laws which he pretended 
 were the commands of Thoth. The proceedings in the courts were 
 conducted in writing. Near the judge lay the eight books of law ; 
 the plaintiff was compelled to present his demand in writing, with an 
 exact statement of the attendant facts. 8 Contracts were made in writ- 
 ing; also terms of sale and service, where with us an oral agreement 
 would be sufficient. This was the custom in the time of the eight- 
 eenth dynasty, B. C. 1500. The priests wrote down the succession 
 of their kings, and engraved on stone the pious and memorable deeds 
 of their ancestors. They also wrote annals of the achievements of 
 their kings, and preserved them in the archives of the temples. In- 
 structive histories from their annals were read to their kings. The 
 priests of On (Heliopolis) enjoyed the reputation of having the 
 greatest knowledge of history. 7 The number of books possessed by 
 the ancient Egyptians was great. Books were gathered and piled up 
 in the temples and in the graves of their kings. In Memphis there 
 was a book temple in the sanctuary of Pthah. In Karnak, on the 
 
 1 Liber xvi, 760, 761. 
 
 2 Jus tradidit arcano quodcunque volumine Moses. Liber xiv, IOT, 102. 
 
 8 Hist., liber v, 4. 4 Wuttke, 557. 
 
 6 Wilkinson, Manners and Customs of Ancient Egyptians, etc., vol. ii, p. 226. 
 Wuttke, 574, 575. ' Wuttke, Geschichte der Schrift, u. s. w., p. 570.
 
 116 INTRODUCTION TO THE STUDY 
 
 monument of Osymandoa, the great King Rameses I. (who, accord- 
 ing to Seyffarth, was born B. C. 1730), there is found at Tepe a con- 
 secrated collection of books with the superscription, " Institute for 
 the Cure of Souls." Champollion discovered a library hall, the ori- 
 gin of which he places in the sixteenth century before Christ. 
 
 The preserved remains of the written monuments of Egypt are so 
 numerous that they surpass in number those of the Greeks and 
 Romans. They consist of many thousands of rolls of papyrus and 
 of inscriptions on stone. The Arabian physician and historian, Ab- 
 dallatif, who wrote about A. D. 1200, assures us in his Memorials of 
 Egypt, that if one could translate into a book merely the writings 
 found on the two largest pyramids, the translation would fill about 
 ten thousand leaves. 1 
 
 With the foregoing facts before us, the probability is strong that 
 Probability of Moses must have written his laws for the Hebrews ; and 
 written history the supposition is reasonable that he wrote the annals of 
 and law. the Hebrews of his own age, and of the age of his ances- 
 
 tors. There is no ground for the theory of those rationalists who 
 hold that Moses wrote little or nothing. We have already seen that, 
 according to Manetho, the Egyptian priest and historian, Moses was 
 originally a priest of Heliopolis, a town already in existence about 
 B. C. 2000, as the single obelisk standing in the center of the ruins 
 of the ancient city, bearing the name of Osirtasen I., clearly shows. 
 " It may be regarded as the unive'rsity of the land of Misraim : its 
 priests from the most remote epochs were the great depositaries of the- 
 ological and historical learning; and it was of sufficient political im- 
 portance to furnish ten deputies, or one third of the whole number, 
 to the great council which assisted the Pharaohs in the administra- 
 tion of justice." Herodotus remarks that the inhabitants of Heliop- 
 olis were regarded as the most learned of the Egyptians;* and 
 Strabo informs us that they pointed out to him the residences of 
 Plato and Eudoxus, who remained thirteen years with the priests. 8 
 
 Accustomed to law books in Egypt, and being educated in the 
 most learned city, whose priests were especially devoted to historical 
 investigations, and where he had often seen the annals of Egyptian 
 kings, it would be strange, indeed, if, as a lawgiver, Moses should 
 write no laws, and if with all his learning he should not do for his 
 ancestors and contemporaries what the Egyptian priests had done 
 for their countrymen, namely, give written history. During a period 
 of forty years he had ample opportunity to write his laws and the 
 annals of the Hebrew people. If Julius Caesar could write seven 
 books of Commentaries on the Gallic Wars, half the size of the Pen- 
 1 Wuttke, Geschichte der Schrift, u. s. w., p. 573. 2 Liber ii, 3. 3 Liber xvii, 29.
 
 OF THE HOLY SCRIPTURES. 117 
 
 tateuch, in the midst of his campaigns, which lasted nine years, 
 surely Moses, notwithstanding his numerous official duties, might 
 write twice as much in forty years. 
 
 Mohammed, too, the great Arabic legislator, wrote down his sys- 
 tem in the Koran, which is about the size of the Pentateuch, during 
 the period of twenty-three years, the last half of which was spent 
 in numerous wars. Moreover, writing was but little used in Arabia 
 before Mohammed's time. 
 
 Zaleucus, the celebrated Locrian lawgiver, wrote his laws (B. C. 
 660) ; and so did the distinguished Athenian lawgivers, Draco (B. C. 
 621) and Solon (B. C. 594). 
 
 But, further, a legislator in the position of Moses would have had 
 the strongest reasons for writing his laws. For many of his institu- 
 tions were entirely new, arrd others were modifications of previously 
 existing customs. A theology was to be inculcated wholly different 
 from that of the idolatrous nations in close contact with the He- 
 brews, and the entire system was to be maintained in opposition to 
 the public sentiment that everywhere prevailed. Without a written 
 revelation, to which they could refer as a standard, and which would 
 be a perpetual check to their idolatrous tendencies, there Probabillty of 
 would have been the greatest danger of the corruption Moses writing 
 of the system. What would have become of Christian- 
 ity itself if it had been handed down, for some centuries, by oral 
 tradition only, instead of having been committed to writing in the 
 first century ? 
 
 CHAPTER XII. 
 
 THE STATEMENT OF THE PENTATEUCH RESPECTING ITS 
 
 AUTHOR. 
 
 THAT Moses kept a record of his laws, and of the most impor- 
 tant events of the journey through the Desert, appears from va- 
 rious passages in the Pentateuch. In Exodus xvii, 14 it is said, in 
 reference to Amalek, " And Jehovah said unto Moses, Write this for 
 a memorial in the book (not in a book, as in the English version), 
 and rehearse it in the ears of Joshua : For (that) I will utterly put 
 out the remembrance of Amalek from under heaven." The infer- 
 ence to be drawn is, not that this writing was something unusual 
 and exceptional, but that the statement might seem to be so unim-
 
 118 INTRODUCTION TO THE STUDY 
 
 poitant that Moses would not think it necessary to write it in his 
 book ; for no one will pretend that Moses wrote every event of the 
 Exodus. He was to write it in the book of laws and records for 
 permanency and emphasis. In Exodus xxiv, 3, 4, it is stated: " And 
 Moses came and told the people all the words of Jehovah and all 
 the judgments, . . . and Moses wrote all the words of Jehovah, . . . 
 And he took (the) book of the covenant, and read in the audience 
 of the people." The book here referred to contained, evidently, all 
 the laws and precepts hitherto given to the people. Again, in Num- 
 bers xxxiii, 2, we read : " And Moses wrote their goings out accord- 
 ing to their journeys by the command of Jehovah." 
 
 The following commandment we find in Deuteronomy xvii, 18, 19 : 
 " And it shall be when he (the king) sitteth upon the throne of his 
 kingdom, that he shall write him a copy of this law in a book out 
 of that which is before the priests the Levites : and it shall be with 
 him, and he shall read therein all the days of his life; that he may 
 learn to fear Jehovah his God, to keep all the words of this law and 
 these statutes, to do them." 
 
 Reference is also made to the book of the law in Deuteronomy 
 xxviii, 6 1 : "Also every sickness and every plague which is not writ- 
 ten in the book of this law /' also in chap, xxix, 20, 21, 27 : " All the 
 curses that are written in this book ;" " All the curses of the cove- 
 References to nant l ^ at are written in this book of the law;" "To 
 theBookof the bring upon it all the curses that are written in this book." 
 
 LAW 
 
 Again : " If thou shalt hearken unto the voice of Jehovah 
 thy God, to keep his commandments and his statutes which are writ- 
 ten vet this book" (Deut. xxx, 10). " And it came to pass, when Moses 
 had made an end of writing the words of this law in a book, until 
 they were finished, that Moses commanded the Levites, which bare 
 the ark of the covenant of Jehovah, saying, Take this book of the 
 law, and put it in the side of the ark of the covenant of Jehovah your 
 God, that it may be there for a witness against thee " (Deut. xxxi, 
 24-26). 
 
 There is nothing strange in the mention of the book of the law in 
 
 the book itself ; the fact has its analogy in other writings. Thus, in 
 
 the Koran of Mohammed we ha>e the Koran named : " They to whom 
 
 we have given the book (of the Koran) ; " " Teach them the book 
 
 (of the Koran) ; " " The month of Ramadan (shall ye fast), in which 
 
 the Koran was sent down;" "This Koran could not have been 
 
 composed by any except God;" 1 "Verily if men and 
 
 genii were purposely assembled that they might produce 
 
 a book like this Koran, they could not produce one like unto it. ... 
 
 1 Sale's Kordn, chap, ii, chap. x.
 
 OF THE HOLY SCRIPTURES. 119 
 
 And we have variously propounded unto men in this Koran every kind 
 of figurative argument ; " and, " We send down of the Koran that 
 which is a medicine and a mercy unto the true believers." In other 
 passages are similar allusions. 1 Jesus the son of Sirach, the author 
 of one of the books of the Apocrypha, inserts his own name, near the 
 end of the last chapter but one of his work : " I, Jesus, the son of 
 Sirach of Jerusalem, have inscribed in this book instruction in wis- 
 dom and knowledge." 
 
 The statements in the-Perrtateuch respecting its authorship are in 
 every way worthy>ofcredit. If the Pentateuch was not written by 
 Moses, it is a forgery. The most of the declarations respecting the 
 Mosaic authorship are found in Deuteronomy. 2 If Moses did not 
 write that bopk, then it is a wicked fraud, and not " an innocent fic- 
 tion," as it has been called. The unity of the Pentateuch has been 
 pointed out, land in another place we will show that it belongs to 
 the Mosaic .age, so that the declarations in the book itself respect- 
 ing its authorship apply to the whole book. 
 
 It is objected that Moses, throughout the Pentateuch, is spoken 
 of in the third person : " Jehovah said unto Moses." But Moseg k _ 
 this usage i no real objection to the Mosaic authorship, inj? in the 
 
 , \ ,. , T i /- third person. 
 
 as can be shown from many analogies. Julius Caesar, 
 in his Commentaries on the Gallic Wars, always speaks of himself 
 in the third person, and it is impossible to ascertain from the phrase- 
 ology whether he wrote the work or not. Xenophon, in the Anaba- 
 sis, speaks of himself in the third person : " There was in the army 
 a certain Athenian, Xenophon, who accompanied the army neither 
 as a general nor a captain nor a private soldier; but Proxenos, an 
 old acquaintance, had sent for him." (Book iii, cap. i.) The same 
 form of speaking occurs in numerous other places. Likewise in the 
 Memorabilia (i, cap. iii, 9) he speaks of himself in the third per- 
 son : " Tell me, Xenophon, he said," etc. " And Xenophon replied." 
 Josephus, in his Jewish Wars, speaks of himself invariably 3 in the 
 third person, as for example : " Josephus, the son of Matthias, is ap- 
 pointed governor of the two Galilees," 4 and " it was reported that 
 Josephus died at the capture 6 (of the town)." 
 
 In Caesar's Commentaries, Xenophon's Anabasis, and in the Jew- 
 ish Wars of Josephus, the authors were prominent actors in the 
 history they were writing, and they viewed themselves as a part of 
 
 1 Sale's Koran, chap. xvii. 
 
 2 Bleek admits that Deut. xxxi, 9, probably attributes the whole of our Pentateuch 
 to Moses. Einleitung, p. 308. 
 
 3 1 have used the word " invariably," for I find no passage in the Wars in which 
 he speaks of himself in the first person. 
 
 4 Liber ii, cap. xx, 4. r> Liber iii, cap. ix, 5.
 
 120 INTRODUCTION TO THE STUDY 
 
 that history of which they were both the historians and spectators 
 In the same way Moses, as the lawgiver and leader of the Jewish 
 people, is the principal character in the whole history, and as a 
 historian he considers himself to be an objective part of the story 
 he is narrating, and, consequently, speaks of himself in the third 
 person. 
 
 It has been thought by some that the passage, " Now the man 
 Moses was very meek, above all the men which were upon the face 
 of the earth " (Num. xii, 3), is not such language as a writer would 
 use in reference to himself. But the Hebrew word uy, rendered 
 
 T T 
 
 here " meek " by our translators, is thus defined by Gesenius : " op- 
 pressed, afflicted, wretched, but every-where with the accessory idea 
 of humility, meekness ; i. e., the humble, the meek, who prefer to suffer 
 wrong rather than do wrong." (Heb. Lex.) Miriam and Aaron had 
 ^poken against Moses on account of the Ethiopian woman [Cushite, 
 Midianite] whom he had married; and they said, Hath the LORD 
 spoken only by Moses? hath he not also spoken by us? And the 
 LORD heard it, and his anger was kindled against them, and Miriam 
 became leprous. The object of the statement respecting Moses' 
 meekness is, apparently, to show that no one was farther removed 
 Meekness of from a revengeful spirit than himself, and that the pun- 
 ishment inflicted upon Miriam was not through any 
 resentment on his part. Perhaps an additional object was to show 
 that Miriam and Aaron presumed to speak against Moses because he 
 would not avenge an insult. There are times when men of the great- 
 est modesty and humility can speak in the strongest terms in self- 
 vindication and self-commendation : it is when they feel that gross 
 injustice has been done them, and that their very virtues have fur- 
 nished the occasion for their bad treatment. Under such circum- 
 stances there is a tendency to use language stronger than calm 
 reason would justify, and stronger than even personal friends would 
 employ. Was there ever a more egotistical speech made than that 
 of Demosthenes De Corona ? The occasion required it. St. Paul 
 was unquestionably a man of profound humility. He styles himself 
 " less than the least of all saints." (Eph. iii, 8.) But in spite of this 
 utterance he declares on another occasion : " For I suppose I was 
 not a whit behind the very chiefest apostles," (2 Cor. xi, 5). Could 
 Apparent in- we believe, if we had not the facts before us, that such 
 apparently contradictory statements could proceed from 
 the same man ? But the strong language of self-com- 
 mendation was called forth in vindication of his apostolic charac- 
 ter when that was assailed. How absurd is Dr. Davidson's exposi- 
 tion of this passage, that false apostles are here referred to !
 
 OF THE HOLY SCRIPTURES. 121 
 
 In cases like the present, criticism should be careful not to go 
 beyond proper bounds in determining from the critic's own subjec- 
 tive feelings, which vary in different individuals, what a man would 
 say in seeking utterances at variance with its standard of propri- 
 ety, and in denying that they were ever spoken at all. This is, in the 
 language of Merivale on another subject, " the last resource of the 
 morbid skepticism which cannot suffer any author to say more or 
 less than harmonizes with__it&- own gratuitous canons of historical 
 criticism." ' ^*~ 
 
 In the firstverse of the thirty-third chapter of Deuteronomy we 
 have the following statement: "And this is the blessing wherewith 
 Moses, the man of God, blessed the children of Israel." There is no 
 more Necessity of referring this to Moses than there is of attributing 
 to him the superscription of the ninetieth Psalm : " A prayer of Moses, 
 the man of God." The thirty-second chapter closes with the com- 
 mand of God to Moses to get up unto Mount Nebo and die there* 
 which properly finishes the book and the career of Moses. The 
 superscription to the thirty-third chapter is given to mark defi- 
 nitely that it belongs to him, and to distinguish it from the next 
 chapter, the last, which records his death, and belongs to a later 
 hand. 
 
 Against the Mosaic authorship of the Pentateuch it is urged by 
 De Wette that " it is nonsense to suppose that one man should have 
 created the epic-historical, rhetorical, and poetic styles of writing in 
 their whole extent, the three departments of Hebrew literature in 
 substance and spirit, and have left succeeding writers nothing to do 
 but to follow him." 2 In this statement there is a want of historical 
 accuracy, and a narrow view of the possible powers of the human 
 mind. Moses was not the creator of poetry, nor of his- Answer tothe 
 torical writing. Poetry 3 was in use among the ancient charges of De 
 Egyptians ; and the ancient priests of Heliopolis, 4 where ; 
 Moses was educated, were distinguished for their historical investiga- 
 tions. Poetical compositions are generally the first literary produc- 
 tions of a people, as we see among the Hindoos and Greeks. In 
 Pentateuch reference is made to those who speak in proverbs, 
 (the poets], Num. xxi, 27 ; " Israel sang this song," xxi, 17. Thus it is 
 evident that it was not Moses alone who possessed the poetic spirit. 
 All the poetry attributed to him in the Pentateuch amounts to only 
 three or four chapters, and it is not of that lofty style which char- 
 acterizes Isaiah, nor has it all the fullness of the Psalms. The his- 
 torical portions of the Pentateuch are marked by great simplicity, 
 
 1 Remarks on the Genuineness of Caesar's Commentaries on the Civil Wars. 
 History of the Romans under the Empire, vol. ii, p. 209, note. 
 
 *Einleitung, p. 268. 3 Wuttke, Geschichte der Schrift, p. 571. "Ibid., 570.
 
 122 INTRODUCTION TO THE STUDY 
 
 by an entire want of art, and abound in repetitions. Thus it is far 
 from being true that Moses " left succeeding writers nothing to do 
 but to follow him." 
 
 Moses was certainly a man of great intellectual power, and the 
 variety of his gifts can be determined only by history. Nor is his- 
 tory deficient in parallels to Moses, so far as the gifts of genius are 
 concerned. Julius Caesar was a truly wonderful man. " He was 
 at one and the same time a general, a statesman, a lawgiver, a 
 jurist, an orator, a poet, an historian, a philologer. a mathematician, 
 and an architect. He was equally fitted to excel in all, and has 
 given proofs that he would have surpassed almost all other men in 
 any subject to which he devoted the energies of his extraordinary 
 mind." 1 
 
 The natural endowments of Caesar seem to have been greater 
 than those of Moses. Will the narrow criticism of De Wette reject 
 the history of Caesar as unhistoric, and banish it to the regions of 
 the mythical ? 
 
 CHAPTER XIII. 
 THE BOOK OF DEUTERONOMY. 
 
 Fifth Book of Moses is placed by some of the opponents of 
 the genuineness of the Pentateuch as late as King Manasseh or 
 Supposed ai-Ru- J os ^ an > an( i ^ * s sometimes represented as contradicting 
 ment against parts of the previous history and legislation. The book 
 my ' is undoubtedly written in a free and independent spirit, 
 not with a slavish adherence to what precedes. This, however, is by 
 no means an argument against its Mosaic authorship, but rather in 
 favour of it ; for who would be bold enough to deviate in any degree 
 in such a work from the Mosaic history and laws ? But this does 
 not go to the root of the matter, for Deuteronomy professes to be 
 written by Moses; and if it is not his work it is an impious fraud, 
 and must have been executed under circumstances of peculiar 
 difficulty. For a Mosaic code of laws had (on this hypothesis) 
 1 Smith, Dictionary of Greek and Roman Biography, art. Caesar.
 
 OF THE HOLY SCRIPTURES. 123 
 
 been already long in existence, and been recognised as his, and 
 used by David and quoted by the Prophets. Can we, for impossibility 
 a moment, suppose that a newly written book, attributed of for gery. 
 to Moses, could have so deceived the whole Jewish people as to be 
 regarded as his real production, his final legislation, and his farewell 
 address ? Of all forged writings, codes of laws are the most difficult to 
 execute with success, for they are matters of the greatest notoriety 
 and of public inte^est^wirii5~^ T ritings of a private character, but 
 little known andrtn little public interest, may be greatly enlarged by 
 forgery. Bin the addition of Deuteronomy to the long well known 
 code of the law of Moses was clearly impossible. No one in his 
 senses could believe that such a document, originating with Moses, 
 had be'en buried for five or eight centuries, especially when it is 
 ordered -that when " he [the king] sitteth upon the throne of his 
 kingdom he shall write him a copy of this law in a book out of that 
 which is before the priests the Levites " (xvii, 18) ; and " when all 
 Israel is come to appear before the Lord thy God in the place which 
 he shall choose, thou shalt read this law before all Israel in their hear- 
 ing" (xxxi, n). Further : " Moses wrote this law, and delivered it 
 unto the priests the sons of Levi " (xxxi, 9). Can it be supposed 
 that a book thus submitted to the Levites by Moses, and ordered to 
 be read at one of the great festivals at the end of every seven years, 
 and of which the king was to obtain a copy for his guidance, should 
 be absolutely unknown for so many centuries ? For if this was in- 
 credible to the ancient Hebrews, they could never have believed 
 that the newly-forged book was written by Moses. Imagine the 
 effect that would have been produced in the Christian Church if a 
 fifth gospel, bearing the name of Peter or James, had been forged 
 five or eight centuries after Christ ! With what contempt it would 
 have been treated ! And it is expressly enjoined in this book : " Ye 
 shall not add unto the word which I command you, neither shall ye 
 diminish aught from it " (iv, 2). A similar prohibition is made in 
 xii, 32. 
 
 The Book of Deuteronomy bears the stamp of Moses in both its nar- 
 rative and legislative parts; and its exhortations also suit internal evi- 
 Moses in a striking manner. In a brief recapitulation of fai'c ^amhor 
 the history of the Israelites Moses moves with great ease ship, 
 and freedom, supplying incidents not found in the previous history. 
 A forger would not have ventured upon this, but would have made 
 up his sketch from known incidents; nor would he have dared to 
 depart in any degree from the Mosaic legislation lying before him. 
 
 Respecting this book, Bleek remarks : " It cannot escape the at- 
 tentive reader that the legislation in Deuteronomy differs greatly 
 9
 
 134 INTRODUCTION TO THE STUDY 
 
 from the earlier books, in language, representation, in its entire tone, 
 in the hortative, warning, and threatening character pervading the 
 whole book, and leads to the supposition of a different author from the 
 editor of the other books." ' This is an exaggerated statement ; but 
 that it should be partially true is natural. Is not Washington's 
 Farewell Address different from his messages to Congress? Is not 
 a pastor's farewell discourse different from his ordinary sermons? 
 Are we so well acquainted with Moses as to be able to know ac- 
 curately the style and language he would employ, what he would 
 say, and what he would not ? So far is this from being true that we 
 do not know in most cases what we ourselves would say under given 
 circumstances. It is a narrow and overweening criticism that un- 
 dertakes to determine what a writer or speaker should express on 
 any given occasion, and, finding the style and expressions different 
 from what was to be expected, declares the utterances spurious. In 
 different circumstances and on different subjects the style of the 
 same speaker or writer is often found to vary. Sometimes is this 
 so much the case that the address or writing would, on internal 
 grounds, be pronounced spurious if its genuineness were not estab- 
 lished by undoubted external evidence. 
 
 The blessings which Moses declares shall come upon the Israel- 
 ites if they are obedient, and the curses that are to overtake them if 
 they shall prove to be disobedient, are detailed at length in Deu- 
 teronomy chap, xxviii. In Leviticus xxvi, 3-45, we have similar 
 prophecies of the blessings and curses which may fall upon the 
 Israelites, so that in this respect there is not the slightest pretext 
 for pretending that Deuteronomy is different from Leviticus. The 
 resemblance is so strong between the two chapters that Bleek * de- 
 clares that the author of Deuteronomy wrote the chapter in Levit- 
 icus.' This is, no doubt, true, but not in Bleek's sense. 
 
 In regard to the language of Deuteronomy, we have already re- 
 Archaisms in marked that the archaisms peculiar to the first four 
 Deuteronomy, books of the Pentateuch run through this book. In 
 Deuteronomy, as well as in Numbers, Jericho everywhere has the 
 form NTT; but in Joshua it is always UVT, and in i Kings xvi, 34, 
 
 the form rim' is found. Horeb is used in several places in Deu- 
 i 
 
 teronomy, and Sinai but once (xxxiii, 2) ; but Horeb is also used in 
 Exod. iii, i, xvii, 6, xxxiii, 6 ; and it seems that the whole mountain 
 was called Horeb, and a particular summit Sinai (so Robinson and 
 Ftlrst) ; hence we have the expression :nna in Horeb. Deu-t. i, 6 
 
 1 Einleitung, p. 299. Einleitung, p. 312. 
 
 ' Dr. Davidson does not attribute Lev. xxvi, 3-45 to the author of Deuteronomy 
 but thinks the chapter in Deuteronomy an echo of that in Leviticus.
 
 
 OF THE HOLY SCRIPTURES. 125 
 
 Psalm cvi, 19. And the different meanings of the two words suit 
 this view : Horeb, waste, desert ; Sinai, rocky, jagged. In the nine- 
 teenth of Exodus Mount Sinai is spoken of as if it were a single 
 summit. But when Moses had reached the plains of Moab the single 
 summit had receded, and the general range and name presented 
 themselves to his view. 
 
 The stand-pointjj4rre~liulhoi r of Deuteronomy is evidently that of 
 one in the position of Moses on the plains of Moab. In chap, xi, 30, 
 it is stated respecting mountains Gerizim and Ebal : " Are they not 
 on the other side Jordan, by the way where the sun goeth down, in the 
 land of tire Canaanites, which dwell in the champaign over against 
 Gilgal, beside the plains [Heb. oaks'] of Moreh ? " This language 
 would be wholly unsuitable and false to one living in Palestine. 
 According to Dr. Tristram, Ebal and Gerizim and the opening of 
 the vale of Shechem ' can be seen from the top of Nebo. Phrases and 
 And we have no doubt that from other high points be- fng^n^y to P the 
 yond the Jordan, where Moses and the Israelites had Mosaic age. 
 been sojourning, the sun had been often seen to sink behind Ebal 
 and Gerizim. To a writer living after the conquest of Canaan 
 it was not at all necessary to state where Ebal and Gerizim are situ- 
 ated, for they are conspicuous mountains. The whole passage is 
 decidedly Mosaic. The cities of refuge east of the Jordan are said 
 to be toward the sunrising, which suits the position of Moses, but 
 would suit Palestine equally well. 
 
 Moses, in Deuteronomy i, 7, 19, 20, speaks of the mountain of the 
 Amorites (the central range of Palestine). Reference is made to 
 this in Num. xiii, 29 : " The Amorites dwell in the mountains." But 
 in the Book of Joshua the range is already called " the mountain of 
 Israel" (xi, 16). In Deut. iii, u, mention is made of Og, king of 
 Bashan, the remnant of the giants ; " Behold, his bedstead was a bed- 
 stead of iron ; is it not in Rabbath of the children of Ammon ? nine 
 cubits was the length thereof, and four cubits the breadth of it, after 
 the cubit of a man." This passage belongs most suitably to the 
 Mosaic age, and could not have been written after the time of David, 
 for we find in 2 Samuel xii, 26-31, that David took Rabbath of the 
 children of Ammon, and destroyed the inhabitants, and got great 
 spoil. Such an incident as this respecting the bedstead of Og would, 
 !n all probability, have faded away had it not been written down in 
 the Mosaic age. 
 
 The declaration that a Moabite shall never enter the congregation 
 of Jehovah (Deut. xxiii, 3) could not have been invented and at- 
 tributed to Moses in the age of David, or subsequently, as King 
 ' Land of Moab, p. 338.
 
 126 INTRODUCTION TO THE STUDY 
 
 David was the great-grandson of a Moabitass (Ruth iv). The pro- 
 hibition that the future king should " not multiply horses to him- 
 self, nor cause the people to return to Egypt, to the end that he 
 should multiply horses, forasmuch as the Lord hath said unto 
 you, Ye shall henceforth return no more that way " (xvii, 16), was 
 quite natural to Moses, who might fear that the Israelites would be 
 tempted to return to Egypt. But centuries afterward, when the 
 people had come to Canaan, there was no ground for this fear. 
 
 The precept not to abhor an Egyptian, " because thou wast a 
 stranger in his land " (Deut. xxiii, 7), differs from similar precepts in 
 the other books from its being special, "an Egyptian," but it is 
 very natural for Moses, who had left Egypt, to use it. In subse- 
 quent ages, however, other strangers had relations with Israel. 
 
 In Deut. xxviii, 68, it is said, " The Lord shall bring thee into Egypt 
 again with ships." From this Dr. Davidson infers that the passage was 
 written after the Egyptians had become a highly commercial people, 
 and, of course, long after Moses. But waiving the prophetical char- 
 acter of the passage, it does not say, in Egyptian ships. In the Mosaic 
 age the Phoenicians, living on the borders of Palestine, were the great 
 traders of the world. In chap, xxv, 17-19, special directions are 
 Proofs of Den- given to blot out the remembrance of Amalek from un- 
 ing > written 1 Tn ^ er heaven, when Jehovah shall have given Israel rest 
 timeof Moses, from their enemies, on the ground that he had smitten 
 the hindmost of the Israelites when they were faint and weary. 
 The charge is ended with the command : " Thou shalt not forget 
 it." Both Saul and David gained victories over the Amalekites, and 
 in the time of Hezekiah we find that five hundred men, sons of 
 Simeon, went to Mount Seir, and " smote the rest of the Amalekites 
 that were escaped, and dwelt there unto this day" (i Chron. iv, 
 41-43). After this nothing more is heard of the Amalekites. How 
 unnatural it would be for a writer, after they had been annihilated, 
 to represent Jehovah as commanding the Israelites " to blot out 
 the remembrance of Amalek from under heaven ; thou shalt not 
 forget it." 
 
 In the blessings pronounced upon the tribes of Israel (ch. xxxiii) 
 there is no indication that the prophetic utterances were made up 
 at a later period from the history of the tribes and put into the 
 mouth of Moses. The language is too indefinite. The blessing 
 pronounced upon Benjamin can have no allusion to the extension 
 of his border to Zion : " The beloved of the Lord shall dwell in 
 safety by him ; and the Lord shall cover him all the day long, and 
 he shall dwell between his shoulders" (xxxiii, 12). But little is said 
 respecting Judah ; and this would be inexplicable in a prophecy
 
 OF THE HOLY SCRIPTURES. 127 
 
 made up of Judah in the days of her kings. In Deut. xviii, 18, God 
 promises to raise up a prophet (^'^j), the singular If the passage 
 
 had been written in the time of the prophets with reference to them, 
 it strikes us that the plural, D'XDJ, would have been used. 
 
 The mention of the^Zanvzwntmft (Deut. ii, 20) indicates that the 
 book was written/alfan early period, as they must soon have faded 
 out of the minds of the Israelites. 
 
 The language in xi, 10, is extremely natural for one in the position 
 of Moses : y'For the land, whither thou goest in to pos- N O floating tra- 
 
 sess it, is/not as the land of Egypt, from whence ye came ditions out of 
 
 ., , . which Deuter- 
 
 out, Wxtiere thou sowedst thy seed, and wateredst it O nomy could 
 
 with thy foot, as a garden of herbs." Respecting some 
 of the details of the Israelitish history not found in the preceding 
 books, from what source could the author of Deuteronomy have 
 obtained them if he had written seven or eight hundred years 
 after Moses ? Are we to suppose that minute incidents in the 
 Mosaic history, not incorporated into the first four books of the 
 Pentateuch, had been floating about like sibylline leaves for cen- 
 turies ? It is incredible that there were historical sources for the 
 Mosaic history outside of the first four books, on which the author 
 of Deuteronomy could have drawn in the age of Josiah, or even 
 in that of David. When Luke wrote his gospel many writings on 
 the history of Christ had already appeared, but not a vestige of them 
 is found in the second century. Two or three hundred years after 
 Christ there was nothing authentic respecting him except what had 
 been written in the apostolic age. And that age, too, was one of 
 
 reat literary activity, and the highest interest was felt in every 
 thing pertaining to the Saviour. In the prophets, psalms, and histo- 
 rians of the Old Testament subsequently to the Mosaic age, the his- 
 torical references to that period are taken from the Pentateuch, and 
 from no other source. 
 
 If the historical additions to the Mosaic history that are given in 
 Deuteronomy are not from Moses, they are pure inven- Additions in 
 tions. The additions are the following: The repent- ^'ivSc ^ 
 ance of the Israelites after they had been defeated by the tory. 
 Amorites, "And ye returned and wept before the Lord " (i, 45) ; the 
 stay of the Israelites in Kadesh, " Ye abode in Kadesh many days " 
 (i, 46); the 'command, "Distress not the Moabites, neither con- 
 tend with them in battle : for I will not give thee of their land for a 
 possession " (ii, 9) ; the divine command to cross the Arnon and to 
 
 )egtn to possess the territory of King Sihon (ii, 24) ; and, what is 
 more important. " the space in which we came from Kadesh-barnea, 
 until \vc were come over the brook Zered, was thirty and eight
 
 128 INTRODUCTION TO THE STUDY 
 
 years ; until all the generation of the men of war were wasted away 
 from among the host " (ii, 14). In ch. i, 44 it is stated that the Amo- 
 rites chased the Israelites ; while in Num. xiv, 45, the Araalekitea 
 and the Canaanites are said to have smitten them ; but the Amo- 
 rites are doubtless included in the Canaanites. In x, i, 2, we have 
 two separate commands (Exod. xxv, 10, 16; xxxiv, i) blended 
 into one : " At that time the Lord said unto me, Hew thee two 
 tables of stone like unto the first, and come up unto me into the 
 mount, and make thee an ark of wood. And I will write on the 
 tables the words that were in the first tables which thou brakest, 
 and thou shalt put them into the ark." In the first-named passage in 
 Exodus the Israelites were directed to make an ark, in which " thou 
 shalt put the testimony which I shall give thee ; " while in the sec- 
 ond, Moses is directed to hew two tables of stone like the first. 
 These passages were evidently brought together by Moses for brev- 
 ity's sake. 
 
 The statement made by Moses respecting the appointment of 
 judges (Deut. i, 9-18) occurs between the command to leave Horeb 
 and the actual departure ; and he speaks of their having been con- 
 stituted "at that time." But in referring to Exod. xviii, it seems- 
 that Jethro advised their appointment when Moses was at the mount 
 of God ; yet they may not have been appointed immediately. 
 Again, in Deut. x, 8, Moses states : " At that time Jehovah separated 
 the tribe of Levi ; " but the stations of the Israelites, named in the 
 verses immediately preceding these words, had not been reached 
 when the tribe of Levi was consecrated to God. But Moses adds: 
 " And I stayed in the mount, according to the first time, forty days 
 and forty nights ; and Jehovah hearkened unto me at that time also, 
 and Jehovah would not destroy thee. And Jehovah said unto me. 
 Arise, take thy journey before the people, that they may go in and 
 possess the land." It appears, then, that Deut. x, 6, 7, has no con- 
 nexion with what follows. 
 
 In reciting the principal events of the history of the Israelites after 
 Exact time of they left Egypt, it is not to be expected that Moses 
 
 C SSSS t should state the exact time of the incidents on which 
 Deuteronomy, nothing depended; it is sufficient that he does not 
 contradict the previous history. But it must be observed that 
 thirty-eight years had elapsed since the events narrated in Exodus 
 and in a considerable portion of Numbers. Under these circum- 
 stances considerable latitude must be given to the phrase " at that 
 time," which seems to be used to indicate the comparatively short 
 period intervening between the departure from Egypt and the ar- 
 rival in Kadesh-barnea. For after thirty-eight years the incidents of
 
 OF THE HOLY SCRIPTURES. 129 
 
 the early wanderings in the desert seemed to Moses to have oc- 
 curred, as it were, in a unit, or in one period of time. 
 
 Respecting the deviations between Deuteronomy and the other 
 
 books of the Pentateuch, Dr. Davidson remarks : " We Davidson-"No 
 
 admit that there is no positivec^inlradiction between positivecontra- 
 
 i -^ ' 7~~^T i~ i r-. -i i- diction" can 
 
 them. This has been successfully made out by Stahelm be shown. 
 
 and Von 
 
 Respecting the legislation in Deuteronomy, it is to be observed 
 that it is partly affirmatory and partly supplementary ; but hardly 
 any part is revocatory. The ten commandments de- Legislation in 
 livered by Cod from Mount Sinai (Exod. xx) are re- Deuteronomy. 
 peated substantially in Deut. v, 6-21, with a reference to their orig- 
 inal delivery, " As Jenovah thy God hath commanded thee ; " " And 
 therefore, Jehovah thy God hath commanded thee to keep the Sab- 
 bath day." The legislation in Deuteronomy evidently presupposes 
 that of the preceding books. The supplementary legislation be- 
 came necessary in some cases from the changes that were about to 
 occur in the condition of the Israelites, in their transition from 
 wandering in the desert to the possession of the land of Canaan. 
 Of such a character are the directions for carrying on war (Deut. xx), 
 and the command to set up stones on Mount Ebal and to write on 
 them the words of the law, and to bless the people from Mount 
 Gerizim and to pronounce curses from Mount Ebal. 
 
 The modifications of the preceding laws are few. In Leviticus 
 xvii, 4-9, the children of Israel are commanded to offer sacrifice 
 only at the door of the tabernacle of the congregation. But in 
 Deut. xii, and in other passages, they are ordered, when they shall 
 have entered the land of Canaan, to offer sacrifice only in the place 
 " which Jehovah shall choose in one of thy tribes." 
 
 The prohibition against lending to poor Israelites upon usury 
 (Exod. xxii, 25, Lev. xxv, 36, 37) is expressed in general terms : 
 "Thou shalt not lend upon usury to thy brother: usury of money, 
 usury of victuals, usury of any thing that is lent upon usury." And 
 it is added : " Unto a stranger thou mayest lend upon usury " 
 (Deut. xxiii, 19, 20). It does not appear that this precept not to lend 
 on usury to the Israelites is a revocation of the similar ones in 
 Exodus and Leviticus not to lend to the poor Israelite upon usury. 
 For it would be the poor who would most likely borrow, as corpora- 
 tions, and large business establishments requiring capital, were un- 
 known. Indeed the precept is based upon the principle of benev- 
 olence, and no one would feel himself bound to lend to the rich. 
 In Lev. xxv, 35-37, it is said : " If thy brother be waxen poor, 
 1 Introduction, vol. i, p. 367.
 
 130 INTRODUCTION TO THE STUDY 
 
 and fallen in decay with thee ; then thou shalt relieve him : yea, 
 though he be a stranger, or a sojourner; that he may live with 
 thee. Take thou no usury of him, or increase : . . . Thou shalt 
 not give him thy money upon usury, nor lend him thy victuals for 
 increase." This is evidently a command to lend to the poor Isra- 
 elite without interest ; but in Deuteronomy there is no command to 
 lend at all. 
 
 In Deut. xvi, 16, it is enjoined that "three times in a year shall 
 all thy males appear before the Lord thy God, in the place which 
 he shall choose." This command, with the exception of the last 
 clause, is a repetition of that in Exodus xxiii, 14, 17, and xxxiv, 23. 
 The children of Israel are directed to bring their sacrifices to the 
 place which Jehovah shall choose out of all the tribes to put his 
 name there, and in that place only to offer their burnt offerings 
 (Deut. xii). It is given with special reference to their abode in 
 Canaan (chap, xii, i), while that in Lev. xvii, 3-5, to offer the sacri- 
 fices only at the door of the tabernacle of the congregation, refers to 
 the sojourn in the desert. 
 
 Dr. Davidson thinks, that by the expression in Deuteronomy, " the 
 Groundless place which the Lord your God shall choose out of all 
 supposition of your tribes to put his name there," Jerusalem, and not 
 the place where the tabernacle should happen to be, is 
 designated. 1 Of course, it is to him a proof of the late origin of 
 Deuteronomy. Even upon the supposition that Jerusalem is re- 
 ferred to in Deuteronomy, the proof of its Mosaic authorship would 
 not be invalidated, except in the opinion of those who deny that 
 Moses was endowed with a prophetic spirit. But the supposition 
 that the reference is to Jerusalem is destitute of all proof. For 
 when the land was subdued by Joshua the tabernacle of the con- 
 gregation was pitched at Shiloh (Josh, xviii, i), and to this place the 
 people went up to worship during the period of the Judges. " The 
 house of God was in Shiloh " (Judg. xviii, 31) ; " there is a feast of 
 the Lord in Shiloh yearly" (Judg. xxi, 19); "and this man went up 
 out of his city yearly to worship and to sacrifice unto the Lord of 
 hosts in Shiloh " (i Sam. i, 3) ; " and brought him unto the house of 
 the Lord in Shiloh" (i Sam. i, 24); and "so the people sent to 
 Shiloh, that (hey might bring from thence the ark of the covenant oi 
 the Lord of hosts, which dwelleth between the cherubim " (i Sam. 
 iv, 4). But Jeremiah furnishes the clearest proof that Shiloh was 
 the place chosen of the Lord before Jerusalem : " But go ye now 
 unto my place which was in Shiloh, where I set my name at the 
 first, and see what I did to it for the wickedness of my people 
 
 1 Page 363.
 
 OF THE HOLY SCRIPTURES. 131 
 
 Israel" (vii, 12).' Here is a clear reference to Deut. xii, n : "a 
 place which the Lord your God shall choose to cause his name to 
 dwell there." 
 
 The language of Deu^fonomy, frorrTrts indefiniteness, suits any 
 place, and contains/nothing inconsistent with a Mosaic Language of 
 origin ; mgreovef, it is referred to in several instances p^es ^^- 
 in thesubsequent history of Israel. For example, sale origin. 
 Joshua " made them hewers of wood and drawers of water for the 
 congregation, and for the altar of the Lord, even unto this day, in 
 the place which he should choose " (Josh, ix, 27). In Solomon's 
 prayer at the dedication of the temple we find an undoubted refer- 
 ence to Deut. xii, 5 : " Toward the place of which thou hast said, 
 My name shall be there " (i Kings viii, 29). 
 
 In connexion with the command to offer sacrifice only in the 
 place which the Lord should choose, it is said : " Ye shall not do 
 after all that we do here this day, every man whatsoever is right in 
 his own eyes " (Deut. xii, 8). Here Dr. Davidson supposes that 
 the author of Deuteronomy has transferred the existing state of 
 things at a late period to the Mosaic age." But this is an un- 
 founded supposition. If, however, it is to be referred to a period 
 later than the Mosaic age, the period of the Judges, when " every 
 man did that which was right in his own eyes " (Judg. xvii, 6 ; 
 xxi, 25), and not that of King Josiah, more than eight centuries 
 after Moses, would seem more suitable. But there is no necessity 
 to refer it to a post-Mosaic period at all. The disorderly state of 
 things grew out of the unsettled life of the Israelites before they 
 entered Canaan : " For ye are not as yet come to the rest and to the 
 inheritance which the Lord your God giveth you " (Deut. xii, 9). 
 
 In Lev. xvii, 3-7, the children of Israel are charged in the follow- 
 ing language : " What man soever there be of the house of Israel, 
 that killeth an ox, or lamb, or goat, in the camp, or that killeth it 
 out of the camp, and bringeth it not unto the door of the tabernacle 
 of the congregation, to offer an offering unto the Lord before the 
 tabernacle of the Lord ... to the end that the children of Israel 
 may bring their sacrifices, which they offer in the open field, even 
 that they may bring them unto the Lord, unto the door of the taber- 
 nacle of the congregation, unto the priest, and offer them for peace 
 offerings unto the Lord." In Deut. xii it is said, in respect to the 
 place which Jehovah should choose : " Thither ye shall bring your 
 burnt offerings, and your sacrifices, and your tithes, and heave offer- 
 
 1 " So that he forsook the tabernacle of Shiloh, the tent which he placed among 
 men ; . . . but chose the tribe of Judah, the Mount Zion which he loved." Psa. 
 Ixxviii, 60, 68. a Page 368.
 
 132 INTRODUCTION TO THE STUDY 
 
 ings of your hand, and your vows, and your freewill offerings, and 
 the firstlings of your herds and of your flocks : and there ye shall 
 eat before the Lord your God." Then follows the command not to 
 do as at present, " every man whatsoever is right in his own eyes." 
 In Lev. xvii the command has reference to the sacrifice of animals 
 only, while not a word is said in reference to tithes, heave offerings; 
 vows, freewill offerings, and the firstlings of herds and flocks, re- 
 specting which Deut. xii gives directions after the people shall have 
 entered the land of Canaan. 
 
 Respecting the legislation in Deuteronomy, we may ask, Who would 
 improbability venture to annul or modify any of the laws of Moses 
 of the annul- contained in the preceding books? Such abrogations 
 in"/ of laws of or modifications could come only from the lawgiver 
 Moses. himself. All additions to, or explanations of, the Mo- 
 
 saic legislation would have assumed the form of tradition, and would 
 not have been incorporated into the written code. This has been 
 actually the case with the oral tradition of the Jews, which they 
 pretend was handed down from Moses. They have never been bold 
 enough to incorporate it into the Pentateuch, but wrote it down in a 
 separate work, The Mishna, more than sixteen centuries after Mo- 
 ses. 1 The Roman Catholic Church has numerous traditions, but it 
 has never gone so far as to incorporate them into the New Testa- 
 ment. Nor have the Mohammedans inserted their numerous tradi- 
 tional precepts into the Koran. 
 
 Had the Pentateuch been revised by a late author, the supposed 
 Deuteronomist, for example, it must have presented a different as- 
 pect, and all the precepts bearing upon one subject would, in all 
 probability, have been brought together, and would not lie scattered, 
 as at present, in an undigested form, as they were delivered at dif- 
 ferent times. 
 
 Deuteronomy properly ends with chapter xxxii, 49-52, "Get thee 
 up into this mountain Abarim," etc. The blessing of Moses 
 (xxxiii) has the addition, " the man of God," which is foreign to 
 the rest of the Pentateuch. Chapter xxxiv shows itself to be quite 
 a late appendix, from another hand, after the tribes of Israel had 
 settled in Canaan. For it says the Lord showed Moses "all Naph- 
 tali, and the land of Ephraim, and Manasseh, and all the land of 
 Judah " (verse 2). This is very different from all the preceding 
 part of the book. The same may be said of the phrase, " And not 
 yet has there arisen a prophet in Israel like Moses " (verse 10), 
 which points to quite a late period. 
 
 1 The Mishna was written in its present form A. D. 219.
 
 OF THE HOLY SCRIPTURES. 133 
 
 CHAPTER XIV. 
 
 PROOF OF THE GENUINENESS OF THE PENTATEUCH FROM 
 INTERNAL EVIDENCE. 
 
 A S we find no sufficient ground for separating Deuteronomy from 
 ** the other books of the Pentateuch, and as all the five stand 
 closely connected, the question arises, Do we find, in any of the 
 books, portions bearing the strongest internal evidence of their 
 having been written by Moses ? For if it can be shown that Moses 
 actually wrote a considerable portion of the Pentateuch, the genuine- 
 ness of the whole will easily follow. 
 
 The instructions respecting the building of the ark, and especially 
 
 of the tabernacle, and the history of the execution of 
 
 ... . , Instructions 
 
 the work, contain every mark of having been written concerning the 
 
 durinar the sojourn in the desert, at the very time of p**f ldln & of tto 
 
 J / * tabernacle and 
 
 the occurrences. First, we have in Exodus (xxv-xxxi) ark belong to 
 minute directions given to Moses from God respecting l 
 the construction of the ark, the table of showbread, the garments of 
 Aaron and his consecration, and especially the tabernacle ; and he 
 is charged : " And look that thou make them after their pattern, 
 which was showed thee in the mount " (Exod. xxv, 40). In the 
 next place we have, in Exodus xxxvi-xl, a detailed account of the 
 work itself. All this would be unnatural in a post-Mosaic age. A 
 laboured description of the way the tabernacle is to be built, and a 
 tedious account of the execution of the work, are not to be thought 
 of in the ages later than Moses. The directions respecting its con- 
 struction seem to have been written before the tabernacle was erected, 
 and it appears that it was built in accordance with the written plan. 
 In this way it may be explained why we have both the directions 
 respecting the building and the history of its execution. 1 
 
 The laws relating to the leprosy (Lev. xiii, xiv, 1-32) were evi- 
 dently enacted and recorded in the desert, for we find special refer- 
 ence to the encampment of the Israelites': "He [the leper] shall 
 dwell alone ; without the camp shall his habitation be " (chap, 
 xiii, 46) ; " and the priest shall go forth out of the camp w (xiv, 3) ; 
 " and after that he shall come into the camp " (xiv, 8). That these 
 
 1 We have already shown the high state of art that existed in Egypt in the Mo- 
 saic age, thus refuting De Wette's objection to the Mosaic origin of the tabernacle.
 
 134 INTRODUCTION TO THE STUDY 
 
 laws have special reference to the desert appears also from their 
 being followed by laws upon the same subject that assume the living 
 of the people in houses in Canaan : " When ye come into the land 
 of Canaan, which I give to you for a possession, and I put the plague 
 of leprosy in a house of the land of your possession " (xiv, 34). 
 Also in Lev. xvi, 10, 21, 22, where it is stated that the scapegoat i? 
 sent into the wilderness (desert): "And the goat shall bear upon 
 him all their iniquities unto a land not inhabited : and he shall let 
 go the goat ' in the wilderness " (desert) ; ver. 22. Mention is also 
 made of the camp: "And afterward come into the camp;" and 
 " afterward he shall come into the camp." The incident related in 
 Lev. xxiv, 10-16, concerning the blasphemy of the son of the Israel- 
 itish woman whose father was an Egyptian, and the proceedings in 
 his case, bear the stamp of historical truth. 
 
 The Book of Numbers opens with an enumeration of the children 
 Enumeration of Israel in which we find the exact number of each of 
 of the Israel- the ten tribes and of the half tribes of Ephraim and Ma- 
 nasseh, with the omission of Levi (chap. i). We have in 
 the following chapter the position assigned the most of the tribes in 
 the line of march. All this, in its circumstantiality, bears marks of 
 having been written in the desert. In chapter iii an enumeration is 
 made of the Levites, and a statement is given of their respective 
 charges. Chapter iv gives specific directions concerning the parts 
 of the tabernacle to be borne by the men between the ages of thirty 
 and fifty in the families of the three sons of Levi. This regulation 
 pertained to the Levites only during the wanderings in the desert 
 and their entrance into Canaan. After the tabernacle had been 
 pitched in Shiloh, and the Levites settled in forty-eight cities, this 
 temporary arrangement certainly ceased. 
 
 The Levites, with the exception of those who bore the tabernacle, 
 entered the divine service when twenty-five years of age (Lev. 
 viii, 24). Such an arrangement as this, with all the attendant cir- 
 cumstances, could not have originated in an age subsequent to 
 Records made Moses, but bears every mark of having been adopted 
 clirrSwof tte on the J ourne y through the desert. The minute details 
 events. of the offerings brought before the Lord (chap, vii) 
 
 must have been recorded at the time they were made. The incident 
 
 , Azazel, rendered scapegoat in the English version, is most probably Satan, 
 as Hengstenberg understands it. Both Gesenius and Fiirst give it as an eril 
 demon. It may be Typhon, the evil being of the Egyptian mythology, equivalent 
 to Satan. The goat upon which were confessed the sins of the people was sent 
 away to 7TJCyi Azazel, in the desert, not so much as a sacrifice to this evil being as 
 an indication to whom evil belongs, and to give Satan his due.
 
 OF THE HOLY SCRIPTURES. 135 
 
 in Numbers ix, 6, 7, where certain men, denied by a dead body, are 
 kept back from observing the passover, and apply to Moses for re- 
 dress, bears every mark of being a genuine event recorded at the 
 time of its occurrence. 
 
 The law relating to the blowing of the trumpets in Numbers x 
 must also have been written in the desert, as the following language 
 shows : " When ye blow an alarm, then the camps that lie on the 
 east parts shall go forward. When ye blow an alarm the second 
 time, then the camps that lie on the south side shall take their 
 journey; they shall blow an alarm for their journeys." The re- 
 maining part of the chapter abounds in details indicative of contem- 
 porary history. The narrative respecting the man who gathered 
 sticks on the Sabbath day, and who was kept confined until the will 
 of God .respecting him was known, bears the stamp of truth. Nor 
 does the prefatory remark, "And the children of Israel were in the 
 desert, and found," etc., imply that the passage was written after the 
 Israelites had entered Canaan. It could certainly have been writ- 
 ten when they reached the land of Moab. 
 
 In Numbers xvii, 2, we have the following : " Speak unto the chil- 
 dren of Israel, and take of every one of them a rod according to the 
 house of their fathers, of all their princes according to the house of 
 their fathers, twelve rods : write thou every man's name upon his 
 rod." Here we have reference to an Egyptian custom, familiar to 
 Moses and to the other Israelites who had lived in Egypt. Wilkin- 
 son remarks: "When walking from home Egyptian gentlemen fre- 
 quently carried sticks, varying from three or four to about six feet in 
 length, occasionally surmounted with a knob imitating a flower. . . . 
 The name of each person was frequently written on his stick" ' 
 
 In Numbers xix we have an ordinance evidently written in the 
 desert : " Speak unto the children of Israel, that they bring thee a 
 red heifer without spot, . . . and ye shall give her unto Eleazar the 
 priest, that he may bring her forth without the camp ; " " afterward 
 he shall come into the camp ;" and " a man that is clean shall gather 
 up the ashes of the heifer, and lay them up without the camp in a 
 clean place." The reference here to the encampment of the Israel- 
 ites in the desert is obvious. The song sung by Israel, Num. xxi, 
 17, 1 8, " Spring up, O well," etc., evidently originated in the desert, 
 and was perhaps written at. the time.' 
 
 The customs and usages of ancient Egypt, as represented upon 
 her monuments belonging to the Mosaic age, show by their frequent 
 correspondence with the institutions of the Pentateuch that the 
 
 'Manners and Customs of the Ancient Egyptians, vol. ii, 346-348. 
 
 s Also the song in xxi, 27-30, was most probably written at the time of the events.
 
 136 INTRODUCTION TO THE STUDY 
 
 author of that work was not only thoroughly acquainted with 
 Egyptian cus- ancient Egypt, but that in all probability he had been 
 
 SLEET educated in that country. 
 
 of theauthorof The Abbe Victor Ancessi, in his treatise on L'Egynte 
 
 the Pentateuch , xf .. , . , 
 
 with ancient et Molse, shows so many points of correspondence 
 
 Egypt. between the mitre, the robe, and the breastplate of the 
 
 Jewish high priest, the material of the dress of the priests, the 
 garments of the Levites, and the sacrifice of doves 1 as described 
 Ancessi prov- ' in tne m iddle books of the Pentateuch, and the ar- 
 
 ing correspon- rangements of a similar nature found on the monu- 
 
 denc between c ,-, . . ... , . . 
 
 Jewish services ments of Egypt, that it is impossible to doubt that this 
 
 and similar ar- legislation originated in the desert during the Mosaic 
 
 rangements on , ' 
 
 Egyptian rnon- age. It is impossible that these pages [the pages of the 
 Pentateuch that describe the garments of the Hebrew- 
 priests and the sacrifice of doves], which are bound by bonds so close 
 and strong to the entire work of Moses, were not written immediately 
 after (au lendemain, on the morrmv) the Exodus and for a people 
 still full of the memory of Egypt. Moreover, these pages were 
 evidently dictated by a man who knew thoroughly the Egyptian 
 rites and customs, and who had been initiated into the ideas, tastes, 
 and arts of the most original civilization of antiquity. Now, in all the 
 history of Israel, only one considerable and influential man is found 
 in these conditions that is Moses. The only time when the organ- 
 ization of worship could take place was in crossing the desert. It 
 is useless to insist upon these two points. No one is allowed to call 
 them in question. It was, then, by Moses, and during the sojourn 
 of the Hebrews in the Peninsula of Sinai, that these pages were writ- 
 ten." 8 We may add that the pictures of the Egyptian arks on the 
 monuments sufficiently correspond with the description of the He- 
 brew ark of the covenant (Exod. xxv, 10-22; xxxvii, 1-9) to show 
 the pattern after which it was largely modeled.' 
 
 The foregoing facts prove conclusively that the priestly legislation 
 in the Pentateuch was largely affected by Egypt, and there is not a 
 vestige of Babylonian influence visible in its composition ; thus the the- 
 ory of Graf, Wellhausen, and W. Robertson Smith that the priestly 
 legislation was the work of Ezra, and possibly others during or after 
 the Babylonian captivity, carries its own refutation upon its very face. 
 
 1 The sacrifice of doves is mentioned in Lev. i, 14-17 ; v, 8. The English trans- 
 lation is partly erroneous. The dove's neck is to be wrung, but not separated 
 from the head. There are pictures on the Egyptian monuments in which the 
 priests are wringing the necks of the doves, but not separating them from the head. 
 
 * L'Egypte et Moise, par L'Abbe Victor Ancessi, Paris, 1875. 
 
 3 See pictures of the Egyptian arks in Kitto's Cyclopaedia of Biblical Literature, 
 and in M'Clintock and Strong's Cyclopaedia.
 
 OF THE HOLY SCRIPTURES. 137 
 
 The remark on the daughters of Zelophehad, and their inheritance, 
 found in Num. xxvii, 1-7, has all the marks of genuine history, and 
 was recorded, no doubt, at the time of the event. Chapter xxxiii 
 contains the journeys of the Israelites from the time they left Suc- 
 coth until they arrived in the plains of Moab ; and, from the nature 
 of the case, the narrative must have been written in the Mosaic age. 
 Besides, it is expressly stated : " Moses wrote their goings out ac- 
 cording to their journeys." 
 
 Even of those who deny the genuineness of the Pentateuch, there 
 are found some who admit that large portions of it were Bieek's conces- 
 written by Moses. Bleek thinks that large sections were scions onu^ 
 written either by Moses, or by some one in his age. aaio origin. 
 " Of this nature," he says, " are many laws which contain clear traces 
 of the Mosaic age, found especially in Leviticus, and also in Numbers 
 and Exodus, which refer to relations and circumstances that existed 
 only in the Mosaic age, when the people wandered in the desert and 
 were closely pressed together in camps or under tents a condition 
 of things which was entirely changed after the people took posses- 
 sion of the land of Canaan, and had settled in the towns and in the 
 open country." 1 Under this head he places the first seven chapters 
 of Leviticus, chapters xi-xvi, xvii, and Numbers xix. He evidently 
 regards Exodus xxv-xxxi, which contains the account of the build- 
 ing of the tabernacle and kindred matters, as having been written in 
 the Mosaic age. He also supposes three songs in Numbers xxi, 
 14, 15, 17, 18, 27-30, to have been written in the same period. 9 
 
 Bleek draws the following conclusions from the laws which he ac- 
 knowledges to have been written by Moses himself, or, sieek's con- 
 at least, in the Mosaic age: " i. Although it may be clusions - 
 supposed that the Pentateuch in its present form was not composed 
 by Moses, and that many single laws in it are the product of a later 
 age, yet the legislation contained in the Pentateuch, in its entire 
 spirit and character, is genuinely Mosaic. 2. Already in the Mosaic 
 age writing must have been in use among the Hebrew people ; for, 
 without it, such laws in such fulness would not have been written 
 down at that time. 3. In the Pentateuch (at least so far as the 
 three middle books are especially concerned) we stand in general 
 upon historical ground. As, indeed, in these laws the same relations 
 of the Israelitish people are presupposed which the historical part 
 of the Pentateuch brings before us, so do they serve to establish the 
 historical character of the Pentateuch in general.'" 
 
 Dr. Samuel Davidson also acknowledges that considerable por- 
 tion.s of the Pentateuch were written by Moses, or a contemporary. 
 ' Einleitung, p. 202. * Ibid., pp. 202-209. 'Ibid., p. 206-
 
 138 INTRODUCTION TO THE STUDY 
 
 He makes Moses the author in substance of Exod. xx, 2-14, and 
 xxi-xxiii, 19. Chapters xxv-xxxi, relating to the building of the 
 tabernacle, he looks upon " as originating with Moses, and as prob- 
 ably written down by him in its present state." 1 "Probably," says 
 he, "these are not the only legal prescriptions in Exodus which 
 Moses wrote." "Another portion," continues the same author, 
 M which seems to be Mosaic in its origin, and probably, too. in its 
 composition, is Lev. i-vii." Chapters xi-xvi,.and xvii with a slight 
 exception, he also refers to Moses, and thinks that xxiv, 1-9, was 
 probably written by him. 
 
 In Numbers he refers chapters i, ii, iv, x, 1-8, xix, to the Mosaic 
 age, and regards vi, 22-27, as probably belonging to the same period. 
 Also in Numbers xxi " three poems are referred to, or given, v/hich 
 belong likewise to the Mosaic age." "These," says he, "are not 
 the only parts of the three middle books of the Pentateuch writ- 
 ten by Moses ; but they are the most probable and perceptible ones. 
 Doubtless, single prescriptions are scattered here and there through- 
 out the present books which also came from Moses" pen The 
 
 germ and nucleus of the entire legislation contained in these three 
 books [Exodus, Leviticus, and Numbers] is Mosaic. Some parts he 
 wrote himself; others were probably written by a contemporary 
 under his direction, or with his sanction."' 
 
 The concessions of Bleek and Davidson are valuable, as coming 
 importance of from able critics who are not disposed to attribute to 
 Moses more than they can well avoid conceding. And 
 we remark that the former has evidently more confi- 
 dence in the Mosaic history than the latter. 
 
 In fact, no fair-minded critic can deny that large portions of 
 the Pentateuch came from Moses. With this solid foundation on 
 which to stand, we can fairly claim the whole Pentateuch to be his 
 work, a few passages possibly excepted, which we shall subsequently 
 consider. For we have already seen that there is a unity of plan 
 running through the whole of it, and that from Genesis to Deuter- 
 onomy it is pervaded by the same archaisms. There is no possibil- 
 ity of evading the genuineness of the Pentateuch, except by adopting 
 the document hypothesis. Now this can be applied with any show 
 of reason to the book of Genesis only, and breaks down altogether 
 when applied to the entire five books. 
 
 When we find in various parts of an ancient author such strong 
 
 ifet of inter- internal evidence as fixes the age of those parts, we 
 
 mil evidence, naturally attribute the whole work to the same age, even 
 
 where we do not discern the same internal evidence. For all parts of 
 
 'Introduction, p. 109. * Ibid., vol. i, pp. 109-112.
 
 mi 
 
 : 
 
 OF THE HOLY SCRIPTURES. 139 
 
 a work do not furnish us with criteria by which to determine the 
 age and the author. And if passages are discovered which might be 
 referred to a later age than that clearly indicated by other parts, we 
 still refer them to the age otherwise established. But if in a work 
 of such a character we find words, or even sentences, of a later pe- 
 riod, we regard them as interpolations, especially if they do not 
 constitute an integral and inseparable part of the whole. 
 
 These principles of criticism, we think, are just, and they should 
 be applied in the examination of the Pentateuch. 
 
 When it is once established that Moses wrote a portion of the laws 
 in the Pentateuch, it becomes probable that he wrote others also 
 which were of equal importance. In fact, during the period of forty 
 years, there was ample time to develop the whole legislative system 
 of the Hebrews ; and being familiar with the comprehensive legisla- 
 tion of the Egyptians, it was not to be expected that he would leave 
 a code of laws very imperfect, which would be the case if we deny 
 his authorship of any considerable part of the legislation in the 
 Pentateuch. 
 
 It would be unreasonable to suppose that a small body of laws 
 ritten down by Moses as having been delivered by God to him 
 the great legislator who was believed to be commissioned from 
 eaven would have received so many large additions. Whatever 
 ,ws Moses wrote would have had the greatest authority with the 
 ebrew nation, and would have been safely kept, and guarded 
 a sacred treasure, separate and distinct from all other laws, 
 ustoms and regulations lying outside of the written code would 
 preserved as oral tradition. This is precisely analogous to what 
 as actually occurred with Jews, Christians, and Mohammedans, 
 we have already shown. The history in the three middle books 
 f the Pentateuch is so interwoven with a great deal of the legis- 
 tion that it is impossible to separate them ; so that whatever es- 
 blishes the Mosaic authorship of the laws, at the same time estab- 
 ishes that of the history. And independently of this consider- 
 .tion, there are, as we have seen, portions of the history that bear 
 ternal marks of having been written in the Mosaic age. At all 
 vents, we are authorized to conclude that the Pentateuch origi- 
 ated with Moses. And to this view that distinguished orientalist 
 and liberal biblical critic, Roediger, accedes : " The point of com- 
 mencement for this period, and in general of the litera- concBicn of 
 
 of the Hebrews, must certainly be fixed as early as <<ur. 
 e time of Moses, even though we should regard the Pentateuch, in 
 its present structure and form, as modeled by a later hand." 1 
 
 1 Roediger's Gesenius' Hebrew Grammar, translated by Conant, p. Q. 
 10
 
 140 INTRODUCTION TO THE STUDY 
 
 It has been objected to the genuineness of the Pentateuch thai 
 its language does not differ as much from that of the later books of 
 the Old Testament as might have been expected. Dr. Davidson 
 says, there is no important difference between it and that of the 
 books written shortly before the return of the Israelites from the 
 Babylonian captivity; ' and he makes this a ground of objection to 
 the Mosaic authorship of the Pentateuch. But there is a glaring, 
 Anotherobjeo- P a ^P a ble inconsistency in his reasoning, for he acknowl- 
 tion of David- edges that whole chapters in the Pentateuch were writ- 
 ten by Moses. The language of these chapters does 
 not differ from that of the rest of the Pentateuch, nor does Davidson 
 attempt to show that it does. The argument drawn from the want of 
 greater difference between the language of the Pentateuch and that 
 of the later books is utterly worthless, so long as it is acknowledged 
 that any portion of the Pentateuch was written in the Mosaic age. 
 
 But analogies are not wanting. The Syriac language changed but 
 little from the second to the twelfth century of our era. Nor has 
 the written Arabic changed from the time of the composition of the 
 Koran, in the seventh century, to the present time. Upon this point 
 Ewald is certainly a competent judge. In speaking of the Arabic 
 language having been cultivated and used by a great number of 
 writers of all kinds, he remarks : " So that for nearly a thousand 
 years it has preserved in writings its purity and peculiar character 
 intact." 2 
 
 Between the Mosaic age and the time of David and Solomon, of 
 stability of the w ^ om we have some undoubted writings in many of the 
 oriental lan- Psalms and in the book of Proverbs, only four or five 
 centuries intervened. The Pentateuch should be com- 
 pared with these writings, and the difference, we admit, is not great. 
 But we must bear in mind that the Oriental tongues possess more 
 stability than the western, and that, as the books of Moses contained 
 the civil and religious code of the Israelites, they moulded and fixed 
 in a great degree the whole language, which was not, until a late 
 period, disturbed by foreign influence. It must also be remembered 
 that Moses wrote the Pentateuch without vowel points. These 
 points, and those indicating the doubling of the consonants, were 
 not written until about two thousand years after his time. Accord- 
 ingly, the changes that occurred in the vowels, and in the doubling 
 of the consonants, fail to be seeu on account of the language being 
 punctuated according to a later standard. 
 
 'Vol. i, p. 103. 
 
 *Ut per mille fere annos puritatem suam et indolem peculiarem integrain in 
 criptis conservarit. Proleg. to his Arabic Grammar.
 
 OF THE HOLY SCRIPTURES. 141 
 
 It has been urged against the Mosaic authorship of the Penta- 
 teuch that it gives but few incidents that occurred dur- Eeaaon gj vea 
 ing a period of nearly thirty-eight years, 1 the time in- for slight treat- 
 tervening between the first arrival of the Israelites in Ka- ment 
 desh-barnea (Num. xiii, 26), and their crossing the trook Zered 
 (Num. xxi, 12, 13; Deut. ii, 14). But this can afford no valid objec- 
 tion to the genuineness of these books. These thirty-eight years 
 are passed over slightly because little or nothing of a theocratic char- 
 acter intervened, and scarcely any laws were given during this period. 
 For the same reason several centuries from the death of Joseph in 
 Egypt until the birth of Moses are disposed of in a single chapter, 
 because there was nothing of a sacred character to relate. In the 
 same way Matthew, having given an account of the birth of Christ 
 (i, ii), in the very next chapter begins with the preaching of John 
 the Baptist, passing over a period of twenty-eight or twenty-nine 
 years in the life of the Saviour, evidently because there was nothing 
 of an official character to disclose. No one, so far as we know, has 
 ever objected to the genuineness of the Gospel of Matthew on this 
 ground ; it is, indeed, rather an argument in favour of its genuine- 
 ness. It is only apocryphal gospels that have attempted to fill up 
 the chasm left by Matthew and the other evangelists. Is not the 
 silence of the Pentateuch in reference to the history of the Israelites 
 during so many years an argument in favour of its Mosaic origin, or, 
 at least, of its genuine historical character? Two years had not 
 passed away, after leaving Egypt, when spies were sent to explore 
 Canaan. Upon their return and the giving of their report, the 
 people murmured against Moses and Aaron. The Israelites, on 
 account of their unbelief, were not allowed to enter the land of 
 Canaan, but were thrown back into the desert, and were com- 
 pelled to wander about for thirty-eight years, as if forsaken of Jeho- 
 vah. But if any thing of importance had occurred during the time 
 thus passed over in comparative silence, it would have found its 
 way into the history of the exodus in the same way as the other 
 events, whether the history were written down by Moses, or by some 
 one subsequently from tradition, or from documents belonging to 
 the Mosaic age. It cannot reasonably be supposed that this pe- 
 riod was passed over by the author of the Pentateuch from his ig- 
 norance of its history; for only on the supposition of ignorance 
 can this omission be an argument against the Mosaic authorship 
 of the Pentateuch. The knowledge which the author displays of 
 minute events in other places forbids it. In Num. xxx we have a 
 list of the encampments of the Israelites from the departure from 
 1 Bleek lays great stress on this, pp. 226, 227.
 
 142 INTRODUCTION TO THE STUDY 
 
 Egypt until their arrival in the plains of Moab. And in Deut. ii, 14, 
 the number of years passed over from Kadesh-barnea from their 
 arrival there it would seem until they came to the brook Zered, is 
 stated to be thirty-eight years. It is difficult to believe that a writer 
 acquainted with the exact time spent between these two points 
 the last of which is of little importance should know but little of 
 the history itself. The most of this period seems to have been, 
 spent at Kadesh-barnea, for Moses says, " Ye abode in Kadesh 
 many days." Deut. i, 46. 
 
 The Pentateuch was, very probably, revised by Moses a short 
 time before his death, and some passages were, perhaps, added to 
 what he originally wrote. 
 
 CHAPTER XV. 
 
 * 
 
 THE FALSITY OF THE THEORY THAT THE EARLY LEGISLA- 
 TION OF THE PENTATEUCH CONSISTED ONLY OF EXODUS 
 XXI-XXIII. 
 
 new school of skeptical critics contends that the early leg- 
 islation of the Pentateuch consisted only of Exodus xxi-xxiii ; 
 but an examination of these chapters shows that such a view is 
 wholly untenable. The injunctions in these chapters are of too in- 
 definite a nature, and too meagre, to have comprised all the early 
 legislation of the Pentateuch. 
 
 The law concerning involuntary homicide is of an indefinite and 
 
 IAW on invoi- obscure character, and needs further legislation : " He 
 
 untarv homl- . . . ,. 
 
 cide incom- that smiteth a man, so that he die, shall be surely put to 
 
 death - And if a raan lie not in wait ' but God deliver 
 tion. him into his hand ; then I will appoint thee a place 
 
 whither he shall flee" (xxi, 12, 13). A specific description of what 
 is to be decided as involuntary homicide is given in Num. xxxv, 
 22, 23, and Deut. xix, 4, 5. These passages supplement the pas- 
 sage in Exodus, while Num. xxxv, 13, 14, and Deut. xix, 7, 9, fix 
 the number of the cities of refuge to be appointed on each side of 
 the Jordan. 
 
 In the command to keep three feasts a year to the Lord, there is 
 an indefiniteness respecting them, and the paschal lamb is not men- 
 tioned, while the feast of the passover is called simply the feast Jf 
 unleavened bread. The language employed, "as I commanded you," 
 implies previous instruction, as we find it in Exod. xii, 15-27. In
 
 OF THE HOLY SCRIPTURES. 143 
 
 Lev. xxiii, 4-42, particular injunctions are given concerning all 
 these feasts, but most especially respecting the feast of Pentecost 
 and the feast of tabernacles. 
 
 In the three chapters of Exodus under consideration (xxi-xxiii) 
 the word priest does not occur, and there is no mention made of the 
 ark and of the tabernacle. In short, there is scarcely Measrre legis- 
 any provision at all for religious services. Is it likely 
 
 - . ious services 
 
 that the system of Moses, who was learned in the lore in Exod. xxi- 
 
 of Egypt and acquainted with its priestly system, would xxiii - 
 be so meagre and have nothing in it of a priestly nature? Such a 
 scanty legislation seems to be clearly contradicted by the history 
 of the Israelites immediately subsequent to Moses. For, to say 
 nothing of the history of the Book of Jpshua, which clearly estab- 
 lishes the authority of the Pentateuch, we find in Judg. xx, 27, 28, 
 the following statement : " The children of Israel inquired of the 
 LORD, (for the ark of the covenant of God was there [at Bethel] in 
 those days, and Phinehas, the son of Eleazar, stood before it in those 
 days)." Likewise in i Sam. i, 3, 9 ; ii, 13-16, 27-30, we find a 
 tabernacle, a priesthood, and sacrifices the two latter declared to 
 be of divine appointment. Had Moses nothing to do with these 
 arrangements? Kuenen acknowledges that the ark of Jehovah 
 came from Moses ' himself. Did he make no regulations respect- 
 ing it ? If he did, why should he not have recorded them ? 
 
 THE BOOK OF DEUTERONOMY BEARS WITNESS TO A MORE EXTEN- 
 SIVE LEGISLATION THAN EXODUS XXI-XXIII. 
 
 The entire skeptical school of critics, though they deny the 
 Mosaic authorship of Deuteronomy, grant that it was written be- 
 fore the Babylonian captivity, in the reign of Manasseh or Josiah. 
 In Deut. iv, 5, it is declared: "Behold I have taught you statutes 
 and judgments even as the LORD thy God commanded me," etc. 
 And after referring to the ten commandments, Moses adds: "And 
 the LORD commanded me at that time to teach you statutes and 
 judgments, that you might do them in the land whither ye go over 
 to possess it " (verse 14). It is possible that this verse might refer 
 only to Exod. xxi-xxiii. In x, 9, Moses refers to the tribe of 
 Levi having been set apart by Jehovah for his service: "The Lord 
 is his inheritance, according as the LORD thy God promised him." 
 Here it is evident that, at the time of the composition of Deuter- 
 onomy, there were regulations respecting the tribe of Levi and 
 their service, and that well known promises had been made to the 
 
 1 Religion of Israel, vol. i, p. 289.
 
 144 INTRODUCTION TO THE STUDY 
 
 tribe. It is most natural to suppose that these regulations and 
 promises were written just as we find them now in the middle books 
 of the Pentateuch. Again, respecting the priests and the Levites, 
 " The LORD is their inheritance, as he hath said unto them " 
 (xviii, 2). Where is this said except in Num. xviii, 20? In 
 Deut. xxiv, 8, it is enjoined, " Take heed in the plague of 
 leprosy, that thou observe diligently, and do according to all that 
 the priests the Levites shall teach you : as I have commanded them, 
 so ye shall observe to do." These regulations respecting the 
 leprosy are contained in Leviticus, embracing chapters xiii and xiv. 
 It is clear that when Deuteronomy was composed these chapters 
 had already been written, and ascribed to Moses. In Deut. 
 v, 2 ; xxix, i, reference is made to the covenant God established 
 with Israel at Horeb. At the end of Lev. xxvi it is said : 
 41 These are the statutes and judgments and laws which the Lord 
 made between him and the children of Israel in mount Sinai, by the 
 hand of Moses." Also the closing verse of the last chapter of Le- 
 viticus has a shorter but similar statement. The Mosaic legisla- 
 tion as far as Num. x, 12, was made in the wilderness of Sinai, 
 a prominent mountain in the range of Horeb. In Deut. xi, 6, 
 allusion is made to the destruction of Dathan and Abiram, whom 
 the earth swallowed up, " their households and their tents," etc. 
 Here we find reference to the rebellion against Moses and Aaron 
 in connection with the priesthood of Aaron, as described in Num. 
 xvi. In the rebellion of Korah, Dathan and Abiram were conspicu- 
 ous characters, who became a sign (Num. xxvi, 9, 10). 
 
 Korah is omitted in Deuteronomy, possibly because his children 
 perished not (Num. xxvi, n), while the families of Dathan and 
 Abiram did. Kayser says :" The Deuteronomist had manifestly 
 read nothing of Korah (in Num. xvi), otherwise he would not have 
 omitted him." 1 Yet he acknowledges that the author of Psalm cvi, 
 in which the same omission occurs, was acquainted with Korah's 
 rebellion. 2 
 
 In Deut. xx, 6: "And what man is he that planted a vine- 
 yard, and hath not yet eaten of it " (Heb., iV?n, hath profaned it) ? 
 we have a reference to Lev. xix, 23, in which the children of 
 Israel are forbidden to eat of the fruit of any tree which they may 
 plant until the fourth year. 
 
 Our new critics grant that the Deuteronomist was acquainted 
 with what they call the Jehovistic legislation and history, but 
 deny his knowledge of the Elohistic. Yet in Deut. x, 22, Jt 
 
 1 Vor-Exilische Buch, p. 132. * Ibid., p. 174.
 
 OF THE HOLY SCRIPTURES. 145 
 
 is said : " Thy fathers went down into Egypt with threescore and 
 ten persons." Now this refers to Gen. xlvi, 27, and , 
 
 r . i Refutation in 
 
 Exod. i, 5, both of which are Elohistic. 1 Here, Deuteronomy 
 again, we have a refutation of the theory that the * 
 
 history 
 Elohistic history in Genesis was written about the time was written in 
 
 c T-. Ezra's time. 
 
 of Ezra. 
 
 THE TESTIMONY OF HOSEA TO A LARGE WRITTEN CODE OF LAWS 
 THAT IN HIS AGE HAD BEEN ALREADY GIVEN TO ISRAEL. 
 
 This prophet, who flourished B. C. 785-725, bears witness to a 
 large written code of laws in the following language : 
 
 WWU irins 'mi'n 'an iVanJK, / wrote for him (Ephraim) multi- 
 
 T ; v T : T .. T : ... 
 
 tudes (numerous precepts) of my law; what a strange tiling were they 
 counted! .(viii, 12). The verb to write (sro) is in the future tense 
 (::rox), and '''were counted" is in the perfect. But the future tense 
 is often used for the past, 2 of which we have undoubted examples 
 in this prophet. " I will visit upon her the days of Baalim, wherein 
 she burned incense to them and decked herself with earrings," etc. 
 (ii, 13). In this passage " burned incense " is in the future hiphil, 
 and " decked " is the future vav conversive. " And I have re- 
 deemed them and they have spoken falsehood against me " (vii, 13). 
 Here " have redeemed " in the Hebrew is \\\<t future tense. "They 
 have sacrificed flesh for the sacrifices of mine offerings, and have 
 eaten them " (viii, 13). " Have sacrificed " is the future in the 
 Hebrew. " They sacrificed unto Baalim and burnt incense to grav- 
 en images" fxi, 2). "Sacrificed and burnt incense" are both in 
 the future* in the original. " I drew them with cords of a man" 
 (xi, 4). " Drew " is in ihzfutureia the original. In other passages 
 in this prophet the future tense in the Hebrew is used for the 
 present. s 
 
 Professor W. Robertson Smith translates the passage in Hosea as 
 follows : " Though I wrote to him my Torah in ten thousand precepts, 
 they would be esteemed as a strange thing." 4 ' But this w RobertS o n 
 translation is inadmissible, for there is no particle of Smith's incor- 
 
 . recttranslatiou 
 
 condition or contingency in the Hebrew text nothing O f passage in 
 
 to indicate a supposition. Such a method of translating Hosea - 
 
 the biblical Hebrew has no parallel in any other instance, and 
 
 1 Professor Smend acknowledges the reference to a former Elohist, Moses npud 
 Prophetas, p. 74. 
 
 This is a common construction in Arabic as well as in Hebrew, and abounds 
 in the Qoran. 
 
 3 The tense we call "future" is by some Hebrew grammarians called the "im- 
 perfect." 4 The Old Testament in the Jewish Church, p. 297.
 
 U6 INTRODUCTION TO THE STUDY 
 
 nothing but the requirement of a preconceived theory could induce 
 any one to think of such a version. If the prophet had expressed a 
 mere supposition he would have employed the particle DN, />, //", 
 although, before the verb "wrote/' just as in Isa. i, 18 : " Though 
 (DX, ini) your sins be as scarlet . . . though (ON, im) they be red like 
 crimson," etc.; and in Isa. x, 22. Or, possibly, the prophet might 
 have used "3 DJ, even if. 
 
 Nor do we see how the latter part of the passage can be rendered, 
 " They would be esteemed as a strange thing ; " for the tense 
 " counted," or " esteemed," imperfect in the Hebrew, and there is no 
 connective particle that can give it a future meaning. Professor 
 Smith renders m " ten thousand precepts," ' taking it for i3"|, which 
 is found in hardly a single instance in the books written before 
 the captivity and never as a construct "ten thousand of" in this 
 instance " ten thousand of my law." The Masorites have put the 
 vowels to the text, and given the reading on the margin which 
 makes the word read '3"^ multitudes of my law. And it is thus that 
 
 Gesenius defines it. The singular is thus used in Lev. xxv, 16, "mul- 
 titude of years." The Septuagint, the Targum of Jonathan Ben 
 Uzziel, the Peshito Syriac, and the Vulgate have either "multi 
 tude " or " multitudes " of my law. 
 
 Professor Smith's version of the passage does not make good 
 sense. For, in the first place, the prophet Hosea assumes that 
 Ephraim is a transgressor of the divine laws with which the tribe 
 was acquainted. Why, then, should he say, If I were to write for 
 him ten thousand precepts (or any great number) they would be 
 counted strange ? Is it more likely that a large body of laws would 
 be obeyed, rather than a small one? Would not a law of "ten 
 thousand precepts " really have astonished, and quite confounded, 
 Ephraim ? 
 
 In the next place, even according to Prof. Smith's translation, the 
 divine law consists of numerous precepts, and not simply of the 
 three chapters of Exodus which Prof. Smith recognizes as a written 
 code existing in Judah. 
 
 The translation, " I wrote," is the rendering of both the Targum 
 of Jonathan Ben Uzziel and the Peshito Syriac. De Wette trans- 
 lates the passage : " I am writing out for him many of my laws ; 
 how strange they have been considered." But, at the foot of the 
 page, he give also another way of translating it, namely, "I wrote." 
 Pusey in his " Commentary on the Minor Prophets," renders " I 
 
 1 He has evidently thus translated the word to show that "ten thousand pre- 
 cepts " would not be applicable to the Mosaic law, as being too large a number.
 
 OF THE HOLY SCRIPTURES. 147 
 
 write " in the sense that the law was written in the past, but is 
 still in force in the present. 
 
 In the verse immediately preceding the one under discussion, 
 Hosea says : " Because Ephraim has multiplied altars to sin, they 
 have become altars to sin." Then follows our text: "I wrote for 
 him the numerous precepts of my law [Torah], what a strange thing 
 were they counted ! " 
 
 That Hosea refers, in this passage, to the Mosaic law, is clear 
 from his using the word Torah, and from the fact that we know of 
 no other divine law that had been given to Israel. To Hosea - s refer _ 
 this law Hosea also refers in the following passages : ence to the 
 " Because thou [Israel, the ten tribes] hast forgotten 1 the Mosalc law ' 
 law [Torah] of thy God " (iv, 6). "They [Israel] have transgressed 
 my covenant and trespassed against my law [Torah]" (viii, i). 
 
 Prof Smend remarks on the passage: "The words of Hosea in 
 the eighth century [B. C.] prove that there were many written laws 
 among the Ephraimites, which were contained in one book or more, 
 and, although neglected, they were known to every body, and in the 
 judgment of the prophet they could claim obedience from all, as 
 they seemed to possess as much divine authority as if they had 
 been written by Jehovah himself." 2 Hosea thus refutes Kuenenrefut- 
 Kuenen, who says: "In the eighth century B. C. but ed by Hosea. 
 few laws. . . . were ascribed to Moses and carried back to the 
 sojourn in the desert of Sinai." 5 For we may ask, Who but Moses 
 gave these laws to the Ephraimites ? 
 
 1 Prof. Smith infers, from the fact that the law was forgotten, that it was not writ- 
 ten, but was merely the oral law ; just as if a -written law could not be forgotten ! 
 God says in Ezek. xxiii, 35 : " Because thou hast forgotten me." Similar is Hos. 
 viii, 14, and elsewhere. If Israel could forget his Maker, why could he not forget 
 a written law ? 
 
 2 Moses apud Prophetas, pp. 13, 14, Halis, 1875. 
 
 3 Religion of Israel, vol. i, p. 139.
 
 148 INTRODUCTION TO THE STUDY 
 
 CHAPTER XVI. 
 
 EXAMINATION OF THE VIEWS OF THE NEW CRITICAL SCHOOL 
 ON THE PRIESTLY AND SACRIFICIAL SYSTEMS IN THE PEN- 
 TATEUCH. 
 
 THE THEORY OF THE NEW CRITICAL SCHOOL CONCERNING THE 
 JEWISH PRIESTHOOD REFUTED BY FACTS. 
 
 A CCORDING to the new critical school, in the original legisla- 
 ^~*- tion of the Pentateuch, all the Levites were capable of becom- 
 ing priests, and " before the exile the high priest was looked upon 
 as the first among his equals." 1 But we find in Ezra i, 5 ; ii, 70, 
 the distinction between priests and Levites already existing when 
 Early distinc- Zerubbabel went up to Jerusalem, in accordance with the 
 priestsSS decree of Cyrus, about eighty years before Ezra went 
 vites. up to Jerusalem. At that time it is stated that certain 
 
 sons of the priests were unable to show their genealogy, that they 
 were put out of the priesthood as polluted, and that the governor 
 had forbidden them to eat of the most holy things until there stood 
 up a priest with Urim and Thummim. Here we have a refer- 
 ence to the regulation in Lev. xxii forbidding any one but the 
 priests to eat of holy things ; also to Num. iii, 10, respecting the 
 Aaronic priesthood ; and, finally, to the high priest with Urim and 
 Thummim, Aaron as named in Exod. xxviii, 30, and Eleazar in 
 Num. xxvii, 21. 
 
 Many of the priests and Levites who went up with Zerubbabel 
 are stated to be old men, and to have seen the first house (Ezra 
 iii, 12). Hence it is clear that it would have been impossible to 
 impose on them regulations that had not existed under the first 
 temple. 
 
 The number of the priests who went up with Zerubbabel to 
 Jerusalem is stated to be over four thousand (Ezra ii, 36-39). This 
 number of priests may seem to be too great for the whole number of 
 returning captives forty-two thousand three hundred and sixty. 
 But it must be remembered that many of the priests in the kingdom 
 of Israel in the time of Jeroboam left it for the kingdom of Judah. 
 Besides this, it is natural to infer that the priests would be espec- 
 
 1 Kuenen.
 
 OF THE HOLY SCRIPTURES. 149 
 
 idly anxious to return to their own country, to resume their sacred 
 functions. 
 
 In the sixth year of Darius (B. C. 515) about sixty years before 
 Ezra came up to Jerusalem when the new temple was dedicated, 
 it is said, " They set the priests in their divisions, and the Levites 
 in their courses, for the service of God which is at Jerusalem ; as it 
 is written in the book of Moses " (Ezra vi, 18). 
 
 Artaxerxes, in his decree in favour of Ezra, giving the Jews per- 
 mission to return to Jerusalem, speaks in two places of " priests 
 and Levites." Hence these two classes were already discriminated 
 before Ezra went up to Jerusalem. 
 
 Nehemiah, governor of Judah, in his book (chap, xii) gives an 
 account of " priests and Levites " who went up to Jerusalem with 
 Zerubbabel. It seems perfectly plain, then, that at least eighty 
 years before Ezra the distinction between priests and Levites was 
 clearly recognized. Nowhere does there appear a single trace of 
 dispute respecting priests and Levites ; their status appears already 
 fixed. No dissatisfaction on the part of the Levites appears. They 
 join heartily in the services and offer up prayers. 
 - But how could the Levites who were not descendants of Aaron 
 be deprived of the priesthood without provoking the bitterest op- 
 position ? Neither Ezra nor "Nehemiah gives us the slightest hint 
 of it; nor does Jewish tradition know any thing of it. In 2 Chron. 
 xxiii, 18; xxx, 27; and Neh. xi, 20, the priests are called "the 
 priests the Levites." In 2 Chron. xi, 14, it is said : " Jeroboam and 
 his sons had cast them [the Levites] off from executing the priest's 
 office." In 2 Chron. xxix, 5, the priests and Levites are addressed 
 as " Levites." From the first of these passages, if not from the 
 second, it could be easily inferred that all Levites are priests. In 
 Joshua the phrase " the priests the Levites " occurs twice in iii, 3, 
 and viii, 33, but never yet " priests and Levites." Both Chronicles 
 and Joshua discriminate clearly the priests from the Levites in 
 other passages. Joshua assigns the priests, the sons of Aaron, 
 thirteen cities (xxi, 4, 19). The account of the assignment of these 
 cities must antedate the Babylonian captivity. For, apart from the 
 arguments that may be advanced from the language of the book, 
 which no unprejudiced Hebraist can assign to the period of the 
 captivity, or later, some of the cities assigned by Joshua to the 
 Levites among the tribes of Israel, already in the time of Jeremiah, 
 no longer belonged to Israel. Jahazah (Josh, xxi, 36) is given to the 
 Levites, but in Jer. xlviii, 21, it belongs to Moab. Mephaath. (Josh, 
 xxi, 37) and Heshbon (Josh, xxi, 39) are also assigned to them. 
 But in the time of Jeremiah the first of these two cities belonged to
 
 150 INTRODUCTION TO THE STUDY 
 
 Moab (Jer. xlviii, 21), and the other also to Moab (xlviii, 3), and 
 already in the time of Isaiah (xv. 4). In Josh, xxi, 18, Anathoth is 
 assigned to the priests. This is confirmed by the statement of 
 Jer. i, i, that he was among the priests of that town. In the de- 
 scription of the dedication of Solomon's temple mention is made of 
 " the priests and the Levites " (i Kings viii, 4), the only passage in 
 this book where they are named together. 
 
 That the priesthood, in the original Mosaic law, was restricted 
 Original re- to the sons of Aaron is clear from i Sam. ii, 27, 28, 
 
 p'riSo? 'to where a man of God savs to Eli the P riest : " Thus 
 
 sonsof Aaron, saith the LORD, Did I plainly appear unto the house of 
 thy father, when they were in Egypt in Pharaoh's house ? And did 
 I choose him out of all the tribes of Israel to be my priest, to offer 
 upon mine altar, to burn incense, to wear an ephod before me ? and 
 did I give unto the house of thy father all the offerings made by fire 
 of the children of Israel ? " That Eli was a descendant of Aaron 
 through Ithamar appears from a comparison of i Chron. xxiv, 3 ; 
 i Sam. xxii, 20; and i Kings ii, 27. By "the house of thy father" 
 the descendants of Aaron alone can be intended. For there exists 
 not a vestige of proof that God appeared to Levi and gave him the 
 priesthood several centuries before the Exodus and the Mosaic legis- 
 lation. Nor could " the house of thy father " be one of the descend- 
 ants of Aaron, for, in that case, the LORD could not have spoken 
 to him in " the house of Pharaoh." The passage in Samuel under 
 consideration clearly refers to Exod. xxviii, i, 4; Num. xvi, 5; 
 xviii, i, 7; Lev. ii, 3, 10, etc. Also in i Sam. ii, 30, the declaration, 
 " I said indeed that thy house and the house of thy father should 
 walk before me forever," evidently refers to Exod. xxix, 9 : " And 
 the priest's office shall be theirs [Aaron and his sons] for a perpetual 
 statute." 
 
 In the Book of Deuteronomy the phrase " the priests the Levites" 
 occurs four times, and the phrase " the priests the sons of Levi " 
 twice. In Deut. xxvii, 9, it is said : " Moses and the priests the 
 Levites spoke unto all Israel, saying, Take heed and hearken, O 
 Israel ; this day thou art become the people of the LORD thy 
 God." It is very improbable that, by this language, " the priests 
 the Levites " means the whole tribe of Levi united with Moses in 
 speaking to " all Israel," of which the tribe of Levi was a part. 
 " The priests the Levites " is equivalent to Levitical priests. In 
 similar language Korah and his company are called " sons of Levi " 
 (Num. xvi, 6-8). They are named after the tribal head. When 
 first appointed the priests are often called *' Aaron and his sous " 
 (Numbers) for identification.
 
 OF THE HOLY SCRIPTURES. 151 
 
 In Deut. xxxiii, 8-10, in the blessing pronounced by Moses upon 
 Levi, it is said : " Thy Urim and thy Thummim belong to thy pious 
 one [literally, to the man thy pious one] (Aaron), whom thou didst 
 tempt in Massah, with whom thou didst strive at Meribah ; who 
 said to his father and to his mother, I have not seen him [them]; 
 and his brethren he did not recognize, and his sons he did not 
 know ; for they shall observe thy word and keep thy covenant. 
 They shall teach thy judgments to Jacob, and thy law to Israel: 
 they shall put incense before thee, and whole burnt offerings upon 
 thy altar." If we refer these priestly acts to the sons of Aaron, the 
 last noun before "they shall observe," etc., the passage is in per- 
 fect harmony with the Aaronic priesthood as laid down in the Pen- 
 tateuch. But it is contended that these priestly offices are attrib- 
 uted to the tribe of Levi, and not simply to the descendants of 
 Aaron. To this we reply, that what belongs to a part (Aaron and 
 his sons) may be ascribed to the tribe of which they form a part. 
 Thus in Psalm Ix, 7, it is said, " Judah is my lawgiver " (sceptre 
 Gesenius) ; that is, the king is of that tribe. In the same way, " the 
 sceptre shall not depart from Judah " (Gen. xlix, 10) naturally 
 means that the sceptre, the emblem of kingly power, belongs to 
 some individual or family of that tribe, and not to the whole tribe. 
 In the Athenian Senate the tribe out of which the presiding officer 
 was taken was called the "presiding tribe," not because the whole 
 tribe presided, but for the simple reason that the president was of 
 that tribe. Hence the language of Socrates: " I was Senator and 
 our tribe happened to be fat presiding (irQVTavevovaa) tribe." 1 
 
 In a similar manner, Malachi seventeen years after Ezra came 
 up to Jerusalem, when the distinction between priests and Levites 
 is acknowledged to have existed declares : " My covenant was 
 with him " (Levi). But "Ye [the priests] have corrupted the cov- 
 enant with Levi, saith the LORD of hosts " (ii, 5, 8). Here the cov- 
 enant with Aaron is called the covenant with the tribal head. 
 
 In Deut. x, 8, Moses says : At that time " the Lord separated the 
 tribe of Levi, to bear the ark of the covenant of the Lord, to stand 
 before the Lord to minister unto him, and to bless in his name, unto 
 this day." Here the offices of priests and Levites are blended. 
 To bless the people in the name of the Lord seems to have been 
 the prerogatives of the priests only. 2 
 
 In Deut. xviii, i, it is said: "The priests the Levites, all the 
 tribe of Levi, shall have no part nor inheritance with Israel : they 
 
 , cap. xx. 
 
 2 Prof. Curtiss, in his scholarly work oil the I.evitical Priests, clearly shows that 
 this was the office of the priests only.
 
 152 INTRODUCTION TO THE STUDY 
 
 shall eat the offerings of the Lord made by fire, and his inheritance " 
 (that is, what is offered to God). This language is applicable to 
 the priests only, who had a share of what was offered as sacrifice. 
 Besides this, the addition made to the words " the priests the 
 Levites," of "all the tribe of Levi," indicates that the priests do 
 not comprehend the whole tribe. Verse 3 describes the part of 
 the sacrificed animal which the priest shall receive. 
 
 In various passages in Deuteronomy the Levite is spoken of in 
 such a way as to show that he could not be a priest. The Levite is 
 to have a share of the tithes brought to the place which the LORD 
 should choose (Deut. xii, 1 2). Of the tithes laid up within the gates of 
 the Israelites at the end of every three years the Levite is to have 
 a share. In Deut. xxvi, 12, it is said : "When thou hast made an 
 end of tithing all the tithes of thine increase the third year, which is 
 the year of tithing, and hast given it unto the Levite, the stranger," 
 etc. According to Num. xviii, 21, 24, the tithes are given to the 
 Levites. No such provision is made for the priests. 
 
 The Levite is set forth in Deuteronomy as a proper subject of 
 charity, but the priests are never thus described. Besides, it is very 
 unlikely that, if all the Levites were priests, they would be called 
 by their tribal name, and not by their official name. Furthermore, 
 Deuteronomy requires the Israelites to offer sacrifice only in that 
 place which Jehovah should choose from among all the tribes (xii, 5, 
 11,14). In the same spirit Leviticus commands that the sacrifices shall 
 be offered only at the door of the tabernacle of the congregation 
 (xvii, 3-7). In Num. iv, 46-48, the number of the Levites from 
 thirty years of age to fifty who entered into the service of the taber- 
 nacle is eight thousand five hundred and eighty. Now, it is in the 
 highest degree improbable that Moses, or any one else, would 
 appoint all these Levites to be priests, to officiate at one sanctuary 
 alone. But if we are not to rely upon this large number, it is still 
 incredible, or, at least, highly improbable, that all the middleaged 
 male Levites would be made priests, to offer sacrifice at one taber- 
 nacle. 
 
 In Deut. x, 6, it is stated : " There Aaron died, and there he was 
 buried ; and Eleazar his son ministered in the priest's office in his 
 stead." This accords with the other books of the Pentateuch. 
 Aaron and Eleazar are the only priests definitely named in Deu- 
 teronomy, and the language certainly favors the view that Aaron had 
 been chief priest and head of the family of priests. In deciding 
 difficult matters of controversy, it is directed that they shall be 
 taken up to the place which Jehovah shall choose, to be decided 
 by the priests and the judge who shall be there. And it is added:
 
 OF THE HOLY SCRIPTURES. 153 
 
 "That the man that will do presumptuously, and will not hearken 
 unto the priest that standeth to minister there before the LORD 
 thy God, or unto the judge, even that man shall die " (Deut. xvii, 
 8-12). The naming of a single authoritative priest in the last 
 verse indicates that he is the high priest. 
 
 In the history of the Israelites subsequent to Moses we find sev 
 eral references to a high priest. In Josh, xx, 6, we have reference 
 to " the high priest " that shall be in those days. In Judg. xx, 27, 28, 
 we find Phinehas, the son of Eleazar, the son of Aaron standing 
 before the ark of the covenant. He was evidently high priest. In 
 2 Kings xii, 10, in the time of King Jehoash (B. C. 856), mention 
 is made of the high priest. In the time of Josiah (B. C. 624), it is 
 stated that the king commanded Hilkiah the high priest and the 
 priests of the second order, etc. (2 Kings xxiii, 4); and in chap, 
 xxv, 1 8, and in Jer. Hi, 24, Seraiah is chief priest and Zephaniah 
 the second priest. In the time of the prophet Haggai (B. C. 520), 
 we find that Joshua the son of Josedech is high priest (i, i, 12, 14; 
 ii, 2, 4). About the same time this Joshua is called high priest in 
 Zech. iii, i, 8; vi, n ; that is, about sixty years before Ezra came 
 up to Jerusalem from Babylon. It is evident, then, that the office 
 of high priest was no invention of Ezra. 
 
 According to i Chron. xxiv, the distinction of priests and Le- 
 vites evidently existed in the time of David, and is recognized in 
 various other passages in the two books of Chronicles. Ezekiel, in 
 his vision of the land of Israel, declares that " the priests the Levites, 
 the sons of Zadok, that kept the charge of my sanctuary, when the 
 children of Israel went astray from me, they shall come near to me 
 to minister unto me" (xliv, 15). Now, Zadok was a descendant of 
 Aaron through Eleazar (i Chron. vi, 3-8 ; Ezra vii, 1-5). 
 
 PROOF THAT THE SACRIFICIAL SYSTEM OF THE MIDDLE BOOKS OF 
 THE PENTATEUCH IS A PART OF THE LEGAL SYSTEM OF MOSES. 
 
 It has been asserted by the new critical school that the sacrificial 
 system of the middle books of the Pentateuch formed no part of 
 the original Mosaic code. The leading proof text in support of 
 this position is Jer. vii, 21-23 : "Thus saith the LORD of hosts, the 
 God of Israel ; Put your burnt offerings unto your sacrifices, and 
 eat flesh. For I spake not unto your fathers, nor commanded them 
 in the day that I brought them out of the land of Egypt, concerning 
 burnt offerings or sacrifices : but this thing commanded I them, 
 saying, Obey my voice, and I will be your God, and ye shall be my 
 people : and walk ye in all the ways that I have commanded you.
 
 154 INTRODUCTION TO THE STUDY 
 
 that it may be well unto you." It can be clearly shown that this 
 language does not necessarily mean that God absolutely said noth- 
 ing, and gave no commandment about burnt offerings and sacrifices. 
 In Gen. xlv, 8, Joseph in Egypt tells his brethren: "Ye did not 
 send me hither, but God." But according to Gen. xxxvii, 28, 
 Joseph's brethren sold him to the Ishmaelites who were going into 
 Egypt. Of course, the meaning is that Divine providence had 
 arranged his coming into Egypt. In the same manner, in Exod. 
 xvi, 8, Moses says to the Israelites " Your murmurings are not 
 against us, but against the LORD." Yet in the second verse of this 
 very chapter it is said : " The whole congregation murmured against 
 Moses and Aaron." Their murmurings against these leaders was 
 Refutation of nothing in comparison with their murmurings against 
 
 sceptical ob- God. Similar is the language of i Sam. viii, 7, where 
 
 jection to mid- _ , 
 
 die books of God says to Samuel, when the Israelites demanded a 
 
 Pentateuch. king: ''They have not rejected thee, but they have re- 
 jected me that I should not reign over them." But, in fact, they had 
 rejected Samuel. Again, in 2 Chron. xx, 15, Jehoshaphat is told by 
 the Lord: "For the battle is not yours, but God's; "that is, it 
 pertained more to God than to him. 
 
 There is one passage in the New Testament which is a striking 
 illustration of the language in Jeremiah. The apostle Paul 
 declares that " Christ sent me not to baptize, but to preach the 
 Gospel " (i Cor. i, 17). We might infer from this, not only that Paul 
 never baptized, but also that in his judgment baptism was not a 
 Christian ordinance, and from this we might conclude that between 
 him and the other apostles there was on this subject a radical dif- 
 ference. But the epistles of Paul refute such an inference. He 
 clearly means that the chief part of his mission was preaching. 
 
 The passage in chap, vii of Jeremiah, under discussion, shows 
 in the most striking language the superiority of obedience to the 
 Divine commands to sacrifices and offerings, and the utter worthless- 
 ness, and even hatefulness, of these forms, when those who offer are 
 polluted by crime. In the ninth verse of this chapter the prophet 
 asks : " Will ye steal, murder, and commit adultery, and burn 
 . . . incense unto Baal, and walk after other gods whom ye 
 
 superiority or 
 
 obedience to know not; and come and stand before me in this 
 house?" Also in vi, 20, it is said: "Your burnt offer- 
 ings are not acceptable, nor your sacrifice sweet unto me." In 
 the same spirit Samuel reproves Saul : " Hath the LORD delight 
 in burnt offerings and sacrifices, as in obeying the voice of the- 
 LORD? Behold, to obey is better than sacrifice, and to hearken 
 than the fat of rams " (i Sam. xv, 22). Furthermore, it is difficult
 
 ' OF THE HOLY SCRIPTURES. 155 
 
 to believe that Jeremiah did not recognize as Mosaic the sacrificial 
 and priestly system of the Pentateuch. The following passages 
 seem to make this matter clear : " For thus saith the LORD . . . 
 neither shall the priests the Levites want a man before me to offer 
 burnt offerings, and to kindle meat offerings, and to do sacrifice con- 
 tinually " (Jer. xxxiii, 17, 1 8) ; and, "Thus saith the LORD; If ye 
 can break my covenant of the day, and my covenant of the night, 
 and that there should not be day and night in their season ; then 
 may also my covenant be broken with David my servant, that he 
 should not have a son to reign upon his throne ; and with the Levites 
 the priests, my ministers" (xxxiii, 20, 21). 
 
 That the Book of Deuteronomy at least was recognized by Jere- 
 miah as proceeding from Moses is evident from the use Jeremiah'srec- 
 he makes of it. Nor is its existence in the time of Jere- S^Sta*!* 
 miah denied by the sceptical critics, 1 who identify it with Deuteronomy, 
 the Book of the Law found in the temple in the time of King 
 Josiah. Now, sacrifices and offerings are clearly enjoined in Deu- 
 teronomy. 
 
 As a further proof that God was not pleased with the sacrificial 
 system of the Israelites, the new school of critics appeal to Isa. 
 i, 11-14 : " To what purpose is the multitude of your sacrifices unto 
 me ? saith the LORD : I am full of the burnt offerings of rams, and 
 the fat of fed beasts ; and I delight not in the blood of bullocks, or 
 of lambs, or of he goats. When ye come to appear before me, who 
 hath required this at your hand, to trample [to profane Gesenius] 
 my courts ? Bring no more vain oblations \a lying sacrifice} ; in- 
 cense is an abomination unto me ; the new moons and sabbaths, the 
 calling of assemblies, I cannot away with ; it is iniquity, even the 
 solemn meeting. Your new moons and your appointed feasts my 
 soul hateth : they are a trouble unto me ; I am weary to bear them." 
 Now, in this list of observances which are declared an abomination 
 and not to be endured, are the " sabbaths." But even the new 
 sceptical school admits that the sabbath is a part of the Mosaic 
 system, it being one of the ten commandments. And if the pas- 
 sages on the feasts and sacrifices of the Jews quoted from Isaiah 
 prove that these institutions were not of divine authority, it is at the 
 same time proved that the sabbath is not a divine institution. But 
 this logic proves too much, and therefore proves nothing. The 
 verse following the passages quoted adds : " When ye make many 
 prayers, I will not hear." This might be quoted to prove that God 
 does not approve of prayer. But the explanation of the whole pas- 
 sage is easy : " Your hands are full of blood " (verse 15). The lan- 
 1 Colenso holds that Jeremiah wrote Deuteronomy.
 
 156 INTRODUCTION TO THE STUDY 
 
 guage of Isaiah creates no difficulty. It merely asserts strongly the 
 futility and hatefulness of rites and ceremonies when hypocrisy and 
 crimes pollute the observers of them. 
 
 The superiority of morality and piety to sacrifice, and the com- 
 parative insignificance of the latter, is emphasized by the prophet 
 Micah : " He hath showed thee, O man, what is good ; and what 
 doth the LORD require of thee, but to do justly, to love mercy, and 
 to walk humbly with thy God " (vi, 8). But if we press upon this lan- 
 guage closely the feast of the passover, and even the sabbath, may 
 be excluded from the list of requirements. 
 
 The Lord, in Isaiah, speaking of the sons of the stranger who 
 join themselves to him, says: " Their burnt offering and their sac- 
 rifices shall be accepted upon my altar" (Ivi, 7); and in Ix, 7, he 
 declares of the rams of Nebaioth : " They shall come up with ac- 
 ceptance upon my altar." 
 
 That sacrifices were acceptable to God appears from Mai. iii, 4 : 
 " Then shall the offering of Judah and Jerusalem be pleasant unto 
 the LORD, as in the days of old, and as in former years" 
 
 In i Sam. ii, 29, a man of God reproves Eli for the violation of 
 the law of sacrifice, declaring : " Thus saith Jehovah, . . . Where- 
 fore kick ye at my sacrifice which I have commanded in my habi- 
 tation ? " The divine authority of sacrifice is here recognized. 
 
 In Exod. xx, 24, standing in close connection with the ten com- 
 mandments, it is enjoined : " An altar of earth thou shall make unto 
 me, and shall sacrifice thereon thy burnt offerings, and thy peace 
 offerings, thy sheep and thine oxen : in every place where I record 
 my name, I will come unto thee, and I will bless thee;" lhal is, in 
 whatever place I shall appoint for worship and sacrifice. In Exod. 
 xxii, 20, it is declared : " He thai shall sacrifice to any god save to the 
 LORD only, he shall be utterly destroyed," which shows that sacri- 
 fices are to be offered unto Jehovah. In Exod. xxiii, 18, it is or- 
 dered : "Thou shall not offer the blood of my sacrifice with leavened 
 bread ; neither shall the fat of my sacrifice remain until the morn- 
 ing." Here we have regulations respecling sacrifice. Now our 
 new sceptical critics admit lhat Exod. xxi-xxiii was the first 
 legislation. 
 
 In concluding this subject we may remark, that as Moses found 
 the custom of offering sacrifices already in existence, it would be in 
 the highesl degree improbable lhat he should make no regulations 
 respecting the kind of sacrifices to be offered, the persons by whom 
 they were to be offered, and the time and place of their offering.
 
 OF THE HOLY SCRIPTURES. 157 
 
 CHAPTER XVII. 
 
 THE ALLEGED TRACES OF A POST-MOSAIC AGE IN THE 
 PENTATEUCH. 
 
 T^HAT the Pentateuch, though composed by Moses, should have 
 * suffered no interpolation whatever in the course of more than 
 three thousand years, is not very probable. We know that the 
 New Testament itself, though only eighteen centuries old, and very 
 widely spread by numerous manuscripts and several important ver- 
 sions having, in this respect, the advantage of the Pentateuch 
 has not wholly escaped interpolation. 1 Interpolations as glosses 
 most generally occur in the historical portions of a work, and mostly 
 at an early period of its existence, when more is known respecting a 
 subject than is recorded. But they rarely ever occur in the midst 
 of laws or general discussions. Frequent interpolations, of course, 
 weaken the authority of a document. 
 
 We can easily imagine that in a few instances explanatory re- 
 marks, and new names for obsolete ones, might have mnor and ac _ 
 
 been written on the margin of the Mosaic Pentateuch, cidentai inter- 
 
 T . , .. polations do 
 
 and afterward have been incorporated into the text, and notweakenau- 
 
 yet that they might be of such a nature as not to af- thorit y- 
 feet the general integrity of the text, or weaken in the least its 
 authority. 
 
 In the Septuagint we have two remarkable interpolations in the 
 Book of Joshua. When this leader of the Hebrews razed Jericho, 
 he pronounced a curse upon its rebuilder (Josh, vi, 26). The Sep- 
 tuagint adds to the Hebrew text the following: "And thus did 
 Hozan of Bethel. In Abiron his firstborn he laid its foundations, 
 and in his youngest surviving son he set up its gates." This is sub- 
 stantially taken from i Kings xvi, 34. Again, in Josh, xvi, 10, we 
 find it stated that the children of Israel " drave not out the Canaan- 
 ites that dwell in Gezer : but the Canaanites dwell among the 
 Ephraimites unto this day, and serve under tribute." But the Greek 
 version adds to the Hebrew text : " Until Pharaoh king of Egypt 
 came up and took it, and burnt it with fire, and killed the Canaan- 
 ites and Perizzites, and those who dwelt in Gezer, and Pharaoh 
 
 1 See Tischemlorf's eighth critical edition of Greek Testament.. The instances, 
 however, are few. John v, 4 ; vii, 53-viii, II, are instances.
 
 158 INTRODUCTION TO THE STUDY 
 
 gave it as a dowry to his daughter." This is manifestly taken from 
 i Kings ix, 16. 
 
 The alleged post-Mosaic passages of the Pentateuch, if real, do 
 not bring down the work in its present form if we except one or 
 two passages later than the age of Joshua. But in determining 
 what might have been written by Moses, and what could not much 
 The necessity depends upon our preconceptions. If we regard mir- 
 of proper pre- acles and prophecies as impossibilities, or violent im- 
 probabilities, in connexion with the Mosaic history, and 
 consider Moses as nothing more than a human legislator, we shall 
 be unable to form a correct judgment respecting the Pentateuch. 
 Under such misapprehensions, wherever we meet with the record 
 of miracles, we will conclude that this cannot be contemporary his- 
 tory, but only legend; and wherever we meet with prophecy, we 
 will immediately infer that the prophecies were written after the pre- 
 dicted events. To one holding these views, the genuineness of the 
 Pentateuch will be quite impossible. But the credibility of the 
 miraculous, as belonging to a different department of Christian the- 
 ology, we do not here discuss. 
 
 We have already seen, in the sketch which we have given of the 
 opinions respecting the Pentateuch, that it is a favourite idea with 
 the opponents of its genuineness that the whole five books passed 
 under the revision of some rtdacteur, or editor, who lived seven or 
 eight centuries after Moses. 
 
 But there seems to us a remarkable want of candour in those who 
 hold such an idea. For if they find some traces of a post-Mosaic age 
 in the Pentateuch, why can they not adopt the following hypothesis : 
 
 "We believe that the Pentateuch was substantially 
 Want of can- 
 dour in the op- written by Moses, but that it passed under the hands of 
 
 Mto e auamfaip a r ' e(tacteur some centuries after his time." Or could they 
 of the Penta- not even allow that it was revised by Joshua or Samuel ? 
 Instead of some such hypothesis as this, there seems to 
 be a studied effort on the part of not a few critics to avoid, as far as 
 possible, conceding the Mosaic authorship, from a fear, it would 
 seem, of the evangelical consequence of such a concession. 
 
 But the question, whether there are any interpolations or post-Mo- 
 saic passages in the Pentateuch, must be determined from the ex- 
 amination of the alleged instances. The first among these is Gen. 
 xii, 6: " And the Canaanite was then in the land." There is a sim- 
 ilar statement in Gen. xiii, 7 : " And the Canaanite and the Perizzite 
 dwelt then in the land." In reference to both of these passages the 
 inquiry arises, whether the language indicates that in the time of 
 Abram the Canaanites were living in the land, but were afterward
 
 OF THE HOLY SCRIPTURES. 159 
 
 driven out ; or that they were already in the land, having arrived 
 there before Abram? The latter seems to be the meaning; for 
 was it necessary for the historian to inform the Israelites that the 
 Canaanites once lived in Canaan, when everybody knew it ? But 
 it was not known, independently of the statements in Genesis, that 
 already, in the time of Abram, the Canaanite and the Perizzite were 
 in the land. The first of these passages stands in close connex- 
 ion with the promise made to Abram, " Unto thy seed will I give 
 this land," which at that time was held by the Canaanite. The 
 second passage seems to assign a reason why there was a strife be- 
 tween the herdmen of Abram's cattle and the herdmen of Lot's 
 cattle ; because the Canaanite and the Perizzite being in the land, 
 there was not room enough for the herds of both Abram and Lot. 
 The context would seem to indicate this. 
 
 In Gen. xiv, 14 it is stated that Abram pursued the kings unto 
 Dan. As there was in the northern part of Palestine a city (Laish) 
 to which the Danites gave the name Dan some time after the con- 
 quest of Canaan (Josh, xix, 47, Judg. xviii, 29), it has been thought 
 by many that the passage in Genesis must have been written after that 
 event. But it is very probable that the Dan in Genesis The location of 
 is a different place from that called Laish in Joshua Dan - 
 and Judges. In 2 Sam. xxiv, 6, mention is made of Dan-jaan, 
 which would show that this place was different from that called 
 simply Dan. Jerome remarks on the passage, "he pursued them 
 unto Dan," " to a town of the Phoenicians now called Paneas." J 
 And in his Onomasticon he says, " Dan is a small village four miles 
 from Paneas as you go to Tyre, which is so called to-day." From 
 this it appears that he believed in the existence of two Dans. Yet 
 in another place he says, that the Laish which the Danites took 
 is to-day called Paneas; and in still another, that it is situated 
 near Paneas. Dan existed in his time, as he tells us, and it 
 is now called Tell Kadi (hill of a Judge, or hill of Dan), and he 
 clearly distinguishes Paneas from this. The two places have been 
 clearly identified in modern times, and are two or three miles apart. 
 
 Fiirst, in his Hebrew Lexicon, under the word p gives Judge, 
 ruler, a Phoenician name of Eshmdn, or Pan, otherwise called [on 
 the coins of \y ^3, i. e., Paneas] Bal-inas, i. e., Ba'al Ya'an) n. p. of a 
 Sidonian-Phcenician city, situated on one of the sources of the Jor- 
 dan, in the valley 3invn*3, at a short distance from Paneas, called in 
 Hebrew |jr p [Dan-jaan], in Phoenician jjv Sys [Ba'al-ja'an], as the 
 deity worshipped there (Gen. xiv, 14). He defines \^_\^ Dan-jaan, 
 1 Questiones in Genesim.
 
 160 INTRODUCTION TO THE STUDY 
 
 Dan playing the pipe, as the proper name of Paneas, where \y 
 i. e., Pan, was worshipped in a grotto (2 Sam. xxiv, 6). 
 
 It is, therefore, in the highest degree probable that the Dan men- 
 tioned in Gen. xiv, 14 was a Phoenician town already existing in 
 the time of Abraham, or at least in the Mosaic age. 
 
 But the narrative in which Dan occurs bears every mark of antiq- 
 uity and accuracy, and such a blunder as making Abraham pursue 
 the kings to a Dan that was not so called until five or eight centu- 
 ries later is not to be thought of in such a connexion. In this part 
 of the history we have the name that Zoar bore previous to the 
 overthrow of Sodom : " And the king of Bela (the same is Zoar)." 
 The valley above the Dead Sea is called " The Vale of Siddim, 
 which is the Salt Sea " (ch. xiv, 3), a name found nowhere else, and 
 apparently the more ancient one. Mention is also made of Hazez- 
 on tamar, which in Joshua is called simply En-gedi, which is shown 
 in 2 Chron. xx, 2, to be the same. The description of the meeting 
 of Melchizedek with Abram is likewise highly indicative of early 
 times. Had the passage under discussion been written after the 
 Danites had captured Laish, and had the reference been to that 
 town, we should have expected to find the following : " Unto Laish, 
 the same is Dan." 
 
 In Gen. xxviii, 19, it is said that Jacob " called the name of that 
 place Bethel: but the name of that city was called Luz at the first." 
 But it is stated in Judges i, 23 : "And the house of Joseph sent to 
 descry Bethel : now the name of the city before was Luz." Here 
 No inconsist- tnere ^ s no difficulty at all, for, although Jacob in pass- 
 ency between ing; through the place called it Bethel, yet the Canaanites 
 the Bethel of "~ . , ... . ,, . T ., ,, 
 
 Genesis and would still continue to call it Luz, the old name, even 
 
 judges. if t hey knew that Jacob called it Bethel. When the 
 
 Israelites captured it, they simply gave it the name by which Jacob 
 had called it several centuries previously. 
 
 In Gen. xxxvi, 31, there occurs the following passage, which many 
 have regarded as having been written after Israel had kings : " And 
 these are the kings that reigned in the land of Edom, before there 
 reigned any king over the children of Israel." But in Gen. xxxv, n 
 God promises Jacob kings shall come out of his loins. God had 
 also said unto Abraham respecting Sarah (Gen. xvii, 16) : "She 
 shall be a mother of nations ; kings of people shall be of her." The 
 prophecy respecting Judah was : " The sceptre shall not depart 
 from Judah, nor a lawgiver from between his feet, until Shiloh come " 
 (Gen. xlix, 10), and this conveys the same idea of kingly power to be 
 possessed. At the birth of Jacob and Esau it was predicted, " The 
 elder shall serve the younger " (Gen. xxv, 23). Yet in the time of
 
 OF THE HOLY SCRIPTURES. 161 
 
 Moses Israel had not yet had a king, but had been in servitude in 
 Egypt; while Esau, the younger, had kings among his descendants. 
 
 It does not follow from the language of the passage that Israel 
 already had kings : this would be the inference if kings had not 
 been promised : but Moses, being well acquainted with the prom- 
 ises made the patriarchs, confidently expected kings, and viewed 
 them as a future reality. These considerations, of course, will have 
 no weight with one who believes that such promises were never 
 made to the patriarchs ; but he may still believe in the Mosaic 
 authorship of the Pentateuch, and regard the passage under consid- 
 eration as a later addition. 
 
 But the enumeration of the kings and the dukes of Edom (Gen. 
 
 xxxvi, 31-43) mav be made to Y ield a positive testi- Enumerat ion 
 
 mony to. the genuineness of the Pentateuch. The list of kingsates- 
 
 . , , , , , i , , , , timony to the 
 
 contains eight kings and eleven dukes, and the govern- genuineness of 
 
 ment appears to have been an elective monarchy, as in Pentate uch. 
 no instance does the son succeed the father. In the days of Moses 
 Edom had a king; for it is stated (Num. xx, 14) that Moses sent 
 messengers from Kadesh unto the king of Edom. And it had also 
 dukes, for in the song which Moses and the children of Israel sang 
 at the Red Sea, after the overthrow of Pharaoh, it is said : " Then 
 the dukes of Edom shall be amazed " (Exod. xv, 15) ; that is, when 
 they hear what Jehovah has done to Pharaoh. These dukes, at 
 least a great part of them, were contemporary with Moses, and lived 
 at the same time with one or more of the kings of Edom, and none 
 of them can well belong to a post-Mosaic period. Certainly, they 
 could not reach far beyond Moses, for they are too few. 
 
 In Gen. xxxvi, 9-19, there is given a list of the dukes of Esau 
 his grandchildren. This is followed by a list of important Horites, 
 the sons of Seir, whom the Edomites drove out, as is stated in Deut. 
 i 12. Then follow the names of the kings who reigned in Edom 
 before any king reigned over Israel ; and then come eleven dukes. 
 The Horites seem to have been driven out by the grandsons of 
 Esau, probably one hundred and fifty or two hundred years before 
 Israel entered Canaan. 
 
 Ki^ht elected kings, beginning with the subjugation of the Horites, 
 would extend to about the same period. There is a HadarandMo _ 
 strong probability, if not a certainty, that Hadar, the ses contempo- 
 eighth king, was a contemporary of the author of the r 
 Pentateuch, as no mention is made of his death ; while of the other 
 kings it is said that they died, and, what is remarkable, the name of 
 not only Hadar's wife, but of her mother and grandfather, is given. 
 This last is not done in the case of any other of these kings, and it
 
 1G2 INTRODUCTION TO THE STUDY 
 
 shows a more intimate acquaintance with the last of the eight ; and 
 such accurate knowledge Moses, being a contemporary, and in close 
 proximity with him, could have easily obtained. We know that 
 Hadar ' was not the last king of Edom, for mention is made of a 
 king of Edom in the time of Jehoshaphat (2 Kings iii), and of the 
 king's seed (i Kings xi, 14) in the time of Solomon. 
 
 The monarchy of the Edomites at the time of the composition of 
 the Pentateuch was elective,* certainly not hereditary ; but in the 
 time of David and Solomon it was hereditary : for when Joab 
 slew all the male Edomites, Hadad, of the king's seed, was raised 
 up to be an adversary of Solomon, doubtless by attempting to cause 
 a revolt of Edom from Solomon in favour of himself, the heir of 
 the throne of Edom. As Hadar belonged to an elective monarchy 
 a strong proof of his great antiquity and was evidently a con- 
 temporary of the author of the Pentateuch, we have another proof of 
 the very early composition of this work. Certainly, all the kings of 
 Edom in Gen. xxxvi, 31-39, lived before the time of Saul, and this fact 
 itself carries back the Pentateuch at least to the days of the judges. 
 But if the Pentateuch existed at that time, it must have been written 
 in the Mosaic age, for it could not have been composed in such an 
 age as that of the Judges. 
 
 The incident mentioned in chap, xxxvi, 24, in naming the Hc- 
 incidentai rites, "This was that Anah that found the warm springs 
 tfruity of the (English version erroneously, mules} in the desert, as he 
 Pentateuch. fed the asses of Zibeon his father," indicates such an 
 intimate knowledge of these early times as a late writer could not 
 have possessed. 
 
 The language employed by Joseph in his request to the chief 
 butler has been thought to indicate a post-Mosaic age : " For in- 
 deed I was stolen away out of the land of the Hebrews " (Gen. 
 
 1 It has been suggested against the genuineness of the Pentateuch that this Hadar 
 (called Hadad in I Chron. i, 50, 51) is the same that is mentioned as the adversary 
 of Solomon (i Kings xi, 14). But in Gen. xxxvi, 31, it is stated that the kings there 
 named reigned before there was any king in Israel ; therefore, before the time of 
 Saul. When Joab, in the time of David, slew all the males of Edom, Hadad, being 
 yet a little child, fled with others into Egypt about forty years before he became 
 the adversary of Solomon, Edom, in the meanwhile, being subject to the Jewish kings. 
 The Hadar in Genesis reigned instead of Baal-hanan, while the Hadad in I Kings 
 seems never to have reigned at all, as Edom continued subject to the Jewish monarrhs ; 
 and if he had, in whose stead would it have been ? The whole history of the Edom- 
 ites in the time of David and Solomon, as compared with the statement, in Genesis 
 xxxvi, 31-39, completely refutes the idea that the Hadar of Genesis is the same as 
 the Hadad of I Kings. 
 
 'This clearly appears from the list of the kings, Gen. xxxvi, 31-39.
 
 OF THE HOLY SCRIPTURES. 163 
 
 xl, 15). To object to this language on the ground that it supposes 
 that the children of Israel had already taken possession of Canaan, 
 is at least hypercritical. For " the land of the Hebrews " is equiva- 
 lent to " the land where the Hebrews dwell," as they were then 
 dwelling in the land of Canaan. Perhaps this appears more clearly 
 from the use of the article "the Hebrews." If we were to call 
 Frankfort-on-the-Main " the city of the Rothschilds," that would 
 simply mean that they were born or live there, not that the whole 
 city belongs to them, and that nobody else lives there. And we 
 may illustrate this usage from Scripture. God says to Abraham, 
 " Get thee out of thy country " (Gen. xii, i), that is, out of Mesopo- 
 tamia, though he owned little or none of it. And Jacob says to 
 Laban, " Send me away . . that I may go to my country," that is, 
 Canaan. (Gen. xxx, 25). 
 
 It has been contended by some that the passage, " And the chil- 
 dren of Israel did eat manna forty years, until they came Objection 
 to a land inhabited ; they did eat manna, until they ^cessation? 
 came unto the borders of the land of Canaan " (Exod. the manna, 
 xvi, 35), could not have been written by Moses, since the manna 
 did not cease until the children of Israel had crossed the Jordan 
 and encamped in Gilgal (Josh, v, 12). But it must be observed that 
 the Hebrew 1>', until, does not always mark a final limit, but occa- 
 sionally a first limit. We may say in English, "Farewell until we. 
 meet again ; " or in German, "Anf wiedersehen ; " or in French, "Au 
 rcvoir" But this does not imply that we have no concern afterward 
 about the person addressed. The passage in Exodus says not a 
 word about the cessation of the manna ; nor does it state definitely 
 how long it continued. But in Joshua v, n, 12, we have a very 
 definite statement : " And they did eat of the old corn of the land 
 on the morrow after the passover. . . . And the manna ceased on 
 the morrow after they had eaten of the old corn of the land ; neither 
 had the children of Israel manna any more ; but they did eat of the 
 fruit of the land of Canaan that year." If the passage in the Penta- 
 teuch respecting the continuance of the manna had been written 
 after the Mosaic age, it is natural to sup'pose that it would have 
 stated definitely where the manna ceased to fall. When Moses was 
 about to die, on the borders of the land of Canaan, the Israelites 
 had been fed with manna forty years, and he must have known that 
 the manna would cease upon their entering Canaan, so that he made 
 an indefinite statement respecting it, simply asserting that it con- 
 tinued to fall until the Israelites reached the borders of Canaan. 
 The Jordan could be called the border (nvp) of Canaan, just as the 
 Arnon, forming the boundary between the Moabites and the Amo-
 
 164 INTRODUCTION TO THE STUDY 
 
 rites, is called the border 1 of Moab (Num. xxi, 13). The seashore is 
 also called nyp, border of the sea (Josh, xv, 2). In the close of the 
 book of Numbers it is said : " These are the commandments and the 
 judgments, which the Lord commanded, by the hand of Moses, unto 
 the children of Israel in the plains of Moab by Jordan near Jericho.""* 
 In close connexion with the preceding statement respecting the 
 objection manna, it is said : " Now an omer is the tenth of an 
 Eation 6 of e P nah -" Tnis nas een thought to indicate a post- 
 sizeof omer. Mosaic age, inasmuch as it is an explanation. Some 
 critics have regarded the omer (Heb. "iny, Sept. gomor) to be the 
 name of a vessel, the same as the Arabic gomer, a cup. Both Gese- 
 nius and Fiirst define the word to mean both a measure and a sheaf. 
 This is a strange combination of meanings. The statement respect- 
 ing the size of the omer may have been made on one of two grounds 
 either because it was a measure previously unknown, or but little 
 known, to the Israelites ; and, therefore, Moses, in giving the Israel- 
 ites a command respecting the quantity of manna each one is to 
 gather, defines its capacity ; or because, being generally unknown in 
 the post-Mosaic age, it was added to the original account as an ex- 
 planation. No mention is made of the omer until the giving of the 
 manna; and, except in Exodus xvi, 16, 18, 22, 32, 33, 36, it is no- 
 where found in the Bible in the sense of a measure. 1 But the ephah^ 
 of which the omer is a tenth, occurs in various places from Exodus 
 to Ezekiel. Gesenius regards the word ephah (nD's) as of Egyptian 
 origin. Then, of course, it was already known to the Israelites, who 
 had come out of Egypt. And this seems to have been the standard 
 measure of reference in the Mosaic legislation, for we have numer- 
 ous passages 4 in which the tenth of an epJiah is expressed simply by 
 |VTOP, a tenth) and the omer is left entirely out of sight. This may 
 be illustrated by an analogous case. The shekel of the sanctuary, or 
 the holy shekel, seems to have been unknown previously to the exodus, 
 for Moses defines its weight : " Twenty gerahs (beans, kernels) shall 
 be the shekel " (Lev. xxvii, 25) ; and the number of gerahs to the 
 shekel cannot be regarded as the addition of a later age, for it seems 
 to occur nowhere out of the Pentateuch except in Ezekiel xlv, 12, 
 
 is here used for border. 
 
 1 In the account of the manna, it is stated that it resembled coriander seed. This 
 comparison was very natural, for, according to Pliny, the coriander was a noted 
 production of Egypt, and the Israelites who had come out of Egypt must have been 
 familiar with it. 
 
 * In Leviticus xxiii, and in a few other passages, it has the sense of sheaf, of 
 handful of grain. 
 
 4 Especially in Leviticus. See chaps, xiv, xxiii, ft a!.
 
 OF THE HOLY SCRIPTURES. 165 
 
 which is evidently based on passages in the Pentateuch. There is 
 no serious difficulty in supposing that the statement respecting the 
 size of the omer was really written by Moses. But if the explan- 
 atory remark was made in a post-Mosaic age, when the size of the 
 omer was generally unknown, it shows the antiquity of the account 
 of the manna. 
 
 The pot into which the omer of manna was to be put for a me- 
 morial is called r\JJi', which is found nowhere else in the Bible 
 
 T Tt 
 
 certainly a proof of the antiquity of the record. 
 
 The occurrence in the Pentateuch of the name Hebron, a cele- 
 brated city in Southern Palestine, has been thought by Difflculty con . 
 many to be post-Mosaic, since it is stated both in Josh, cerning He- 
 xiv, 15, and in Judg. i, 10, that, before the town was 
 captured by the Israelites, its name was Kirjath-arba. But it is evi- 
 dent that Kirjath-arba was not the most ancient name of the town ; for 
 it is stated immediately in connexion with this name Kirjath-arba (city 
 of Arba), " which Arba was a great man among the Anakim " (Joshua 
 xiv, 15). Now, in the days of Abram, there were no Anakim in He- 
 bron ; but Mamre the Amorite, brother of Eshcol and of Aner, dwelt 
 there, with whom Abram was confederate (Gen. xiv, 13). In Gen. 
 xiii, 18, it is called the "plain of Mamre, which is in Hebron." 
 Hence it is impossible that the town could have had the name of 
 Kirjath-arba in the time of Abram. But when Moses sent spies to 
 search out the land of Canaan they found the Anakim already in 
 Hebron. Consequently the name Kirjath-arba was given the city 
 some time between the age of Abraham and the exodus. Although 
 Abraham called the city Hebron (Alliance) in commemoration of 
 his alliance with Mamre, Aner, and Eshcol, and it was called Mamre 
 by others, yet the Anakim naturally changed the name to Kirjath- 
 arba, (city of Arba) after the name of a great man among them 
 But Hebron being the name by which Abraham and his descend- 
 ants in Egypt probably called it, the Israelites, after conquering it, 
 very naturally restored to it the old name, as in the case of Bethel. 
 That Hebron was already a town in the time of Abraham is evi- 
 dent; for it is stated in Num. xiii, 22, that Hebron was built seven 
 years before Zoan in Egypt, and we have proof that Zoan existed 
 as far back as the time of Abraham. In speaking of the great 
 temple of Zoan, Wilkinson ' remarks : " The temple not only bears 
 the names of kings of the twelfth and thirteenth dynasty [B. C. 
 2000] ; it existed, according to M. Mariette, in the time of the sixth " 
 [B. C. 2200]. What accurate knowledge is here displayed by the 
 author of the Pentateuch in the notice of the building of Hebron 
 1 Hand-book of Egypt, pp. 219, 220.
 
 166 INTRODUCTION TO THE STUDY 
 
 and Zoan the latter of which was one of the capitals of Egypt in 
 the days of Moses, and situated on the borders of Goshen ! And 
 who was so likely to possess this accurate knowledge as Moses, 
 skilled in all the wisdom of the Egyptians ? And in giving this exact 
 statement the place is called Hebron. Besides, the following is very 
 natural language if written by one outside of the Promised Land : 
 " Abraham buried Sarah his wife in the cave of the field of Mach- 
 pelah ' before Mamre : the same is Hebron in the land of Canaan " 
 (Gen. xxiii, 19). Also we have: "Kirjath-arba: the same is Hebron 
 in the land of Canaan " (ch. xxiii, 2). Outside of the Pentateuch it is 
 nowhere stated that Hebron is in the land of Canaan, for to writers 
 in Palestine the language would be unnatural, as everybody knew 
 where it was ; but it is called simply Hebron. In Num. xiii, 22, no ad- 
 dition is made to define its locality, for that is clear from the context. 
 
 In Numbers xxi, 14, mention is made of "the book of the wars of 
 Book of the Jehovah" which some think to be post-Mosaic. But 
 wars of Je- surely there was ample time before the death of Moses 
 for the composing and writing of a poem which would 
 give a sketch of the wars of Israel. The events to which allu- 
 sion is made in Numbers xxi, 14, 15, occurred six months or 
 more before the death of Moses, and they could easily have been 
 added to the book of the wars of Jehovah, and have been referred 
 to by Moses. The song sung by Moses and the Israelites on the 
 drowning of Pharaoh was incorporated into the Pentateuch (Exod. 
 xv, 1-19). We have also in Num. xxi, 27-30, a quotation from one 
 of the songs current in the last part of the Exodus, prefaced with 
 the following remark : " Wherefore the poets say, Come into Hesh- 
 bon, let the city of Sihon be built and established." 
 
 The reference to what is contained in the book of the wars of Je- 
 hovah is obscure, and the English translation of the passage is er- 
 roneous. The Hebrew may be rendered thus : 
 
 Vaheb (He took) in a storm 
 And the streams of the Arnon. 
 And the outpouring of the streams 
 Which turn to the dwelling of Ar; 
 And lie near the border of Moab. 
 
 The preceding quotations of poems in the Pentateuch, celebrating 
 the events of the exodus, give a strong confirmation to the Mosaic 
 history. 
 
 1 The cave of Machpelah, now covered by a mosque, is on the extreme east of 
 Hebron, which lies below in the valley, "before Mamre," or Hebron. See the 
 author's Journey to Egypt and the Holy Land, p. 134.
 
 OF THE HOLY SCRIPTURES. 167 
 
 Portions of the prophecy of Balaam (Num. xxiv) have been thought 
 by some to contain internal evidence of a post-Mosaic age. In 
 predicting the future power of Israel he says : " His king shall be 
 greater than Agag." This has been referred by a cer- Agagiagenerlc 
 tain class of critics, and even Bleek among them, to the title for Ama- 
 Agag mentioned in i Sam. xv, who was captured by l 
 Saul and slain by Samuel ; and consequently the prophecy was 
 composed not earlier than the reign of Saul. But there is strong 
 probability that Agag was the common title of the kings of Amalek, 
 and Gesenius give-s the word as the name of several of them. Fiirst 
 remarks, under JJX, Agag, " This name of the Amalekite kings may 
 
 have existed before the time of Samuel ; " and Josephus and Jewish 
 tradition explain Agagtte in Esther iii, i, as an Amalekite by birth. 
 There is nothing in the language to require a reference to the Agag 
 of Samuel. When the prophecy was delivered Amalek was called 
 the first of the nations. This was not true of the time of Samuel; 
 nor would there be much force in the declaration that the king of 
 Israel would be greater than Agag, if the king of that name de- 
 stroyed by Samuel be referred to. But there are portions of the 
 prophecy which carry us down to the Assyrian, Greek, and Roman 
 periods. For example : " The Kenite shall be destroyed until Asshur 
 [Assyria] shall carry thee away captive." Here we have a reference 
 to the times of Shalmaneser and Sennacherib : " And ships shall 
 come from the coast of Chittim [the regions of Greece] and afflict 
 Assyria, and shall afflict Eber " [the Hebrews]. Here we have ref- 
 erence to the overthrow of the great Asiatic power by Alexander 
 the Great (about B. C. 330), and the subversion of the Jewish State 
 by the Romans (A. D. 70). Was the prophecy of Balaam written 
 after all these events ? No one will assert that. The passages are 
 found in the Samaritan text, which cannot be later than B. C. 400, and 
 in the Septuagint B. C. 280, as well as in the common Hebrew text. 
 " These are the words which Moses spake unto all Israel beyond 
 ("O>p) Jordan in the wilderness " (Deut. i, r). Also in objection to 
 verse 5 : "Beyond Jordan, in the land of Moab." The ^^STjoU 
 opponents of the genuineness of the Pentateuch regard dan -" 
 this language as that of a writer whose standpoint is west of the Jor- 
 dan in the land of Canaan; for to such a writer only, they contend, 
 could the tract east of the river be called beyond Jordan. The real 
 question here is, Was the tract east of the river called by the Israel- 
 ites already, in the Mosaic age, beyond Jordan? This is in the high- 
 est degree probable, for the inhabitants of Canaan, even before the 
 time of Abraham, in all probability, called the region east of the Jor- 
 dan, beyond Jordan. Abraham, in adopting the language of the Ca-
 
 168 INTRODUCTION TO THE STUDY 
 
 naanites, would use the same phraseology. At all events, Abraham, 
 Isaac, and Jacob, had sojourned long enough in Canaan to give the 
 territory east of the Jordan the name beyond Jordan, and this phrase- 
 ology they would naturally carry with them into Egypt, and bring 
 back with them. Josephus calls the country beyond Jordan, Peraea ' 
 (from nepov, beyond}. And it is well known that Caesar* calls that 
 part of Gaul between Rome and the Alps " Hither Gaul," and 
 the part beyond the Alps " Farther Gaul," although to him, now 
 waging war in Farther Gaul, this latter region was really Hither 
 Gaul. 
 
 But, after all, it rs clear from various passages that the country 
 between the Jordan and the Mediterranean Sea was also called beyond 
 Jordan. In Deut. iii, 20, 25 ; xi, 30, "vy'3 has this meaning ; and in 
 Num. xxxii, 19, we have ^yi,from beyond, applied to both sides of the 
 Jordan : " For we will not inherit with them beyond Jordan and 
 farther, because our inheritance is fallen to us beyond Jordan east- 
 ward." Here the last word is added to distinguish the country 
 east from that west of the river. We also find the country west 
 of the Jordan called beyond Jordan in Josh, v, i ; xii, 7 ; xxii, 7. With 
 good reason, then, does Fiirst explain the phrase, p"vn "OJ7, beyond Jor- 
 dan, as used for both sides of the Jordan. He defines "oy as bank-land. 
 In view of these facts there is scarcely the shadow of an argument 
 against the genuineness of the Pentateuch from the use of the phrase, 
 "beyond Jordan." 
 
 In Deut. ii, 12, in reference to the children of Esau having dis- 
 Passages sup- possessed the Horites, it is said: They " dwelt in their 
 cate d a post! stea ^ i as Israel did unto the land of his possession, which 
 Mosaic age. the Lord gave iinto them" This passage has been sup- 
 posed by some to have been written after the children of Israel had 
 driven out the Canaanites. But it must be borne in mind that when 
 this language was attributed to Moses, the country east of the Jor- 
 dan had already been subdued, and given to Reuben, Gad, and to 
 the half tribe of Manasseh (Num. xxxii, 33), and Moses knew that 
 the Canaanites would also be dispossessed. But such language could 
 be used without any reference to the Canaanites, even if the con- 
 quests and inheritance of the Israelites had been limited by the 
 Jordan. But, further, there is no necessity for rendering the passage 
 in the absolutely past tense, for the preterite of the Hebrew is used 
 also for the present and the future.' The preterite and the future 
 
 1 Antiq., 636, et al. This was the common name of the trans- Jordanic territory. 
 
 * In his Commentaries. 
 
 *See Roediger's Gesenius, Heb. Gram., p. 224.
 
 OF THE HOLY SCRIPTURES. 169 
 
 being the only tenses in the language, are used in a wider sense than 
 the same tenses are in the western languages. Hence we can render 
 the passage, without doing violence to the original, thus : " As Is- 
 rael does to the land of his possession, which the Lord gives unto 
 them." 
 
 The following passage, also, has been thought to indicate a post- 
 Mosaic age: " Jair the son of Manasseh took all the country of Ar- 
 gob unto the coasts of Geshuri and Maachathi; and called them 
 after his own name, Bashan-havoth-jair, unto this day " (Deut. 
 iii, 14). In Judges x, 3, 4, mention is made of a Jair who judged Is- 
 rael twenty-two years, and who " had thirty sons that rode on thirty 
 ass colts, and they had thirty cities, which are called Havoth-jair 
 unto this day, which are in the land of Gilead." Some have supposed 
 that this Jair is the one mentioned in Deuteronomy, transferred by 
 mistake to the Mosaic age. So far as the genuineness of the Penta- 
 teuch is concerned, all that is necessary here is to show that the 
 statements respecting Jair in Deuteronomy are historical facts, be- 
 longing to the Mosaic age. 
 
 In Numbers xxxii, 40, 41, we find a confirmation of the passage in 
 Deuteronomy : " And Moses gave Gilead unto Machir The Jalrs in 
 the son of Manasseh ; and he dwelt therein. And Jair Judges and in 
 
 , . . . Joshua con- 
 
 the son of Manasseh went and took the small towns founded by 
 thereof, and called them Havoth-jair" (villages of Jair). false criticism. 
 In Joshua xiii, 30, after speaking of the inheritance which Moses 
 gave to the half tribe of Manasseh, it is added : " All the towns of 
 Jair, which are in Bashan, threescore cities." We also find in i Chron, 
 ii, 21-23, a confirmation of the passage in Deuteronomy, where it is 
 stated that Segub, a brother of Caleb, " begat Jair, who had three 
 and twenty cities in the land of Gilead. And he took Geshur, and 
 Aram, with the towns of Jair, from them, with Kenath, and the 
 towns thereof, even threescore cities." The Jair named in Judges 
 x, 3-5, who governed Israel, is evidently a different one from that 
 mentioned in the Pentateuch ; and there is nothing strange in there 
 being a second Jair, a descendant of the first mentioned, and bear- 
 ing his name. The villages possessed by Jair's sons (Judg. x, 4) are 
 called Havoth-jair; but it is not stated that they are so called for 
 the first time. 
 
 It is stated in Deut. iii, 14, that the villages are called " Bashan-ha- 
 voth-jair unto this day ." This expression, in several places Ob:)ection t 
 in Deuteronomy, is regarded by some as indicating quite the term "unto 
 a long period intervening between the events and the 
 time of the writer. But in every instance in Deuteronomy in which 
 " unto this day " is used, except the one relating to Havoth-jair.
 
 170 INTRODUCTION TO THE STUDY 
 
 twenty-eight years, at least, had elapsed. In the middle books of 
 the Pentateuch the phrase nowhere occurs. It is impossible for us 
 to fix the minimum interval to which the language can be applied. 
 In Joshua xxii, 17, it is used to express an interval of. apparently, 
 about eight years. 
 
 The only instance in which the use of the expression unto this day 
 can create any difficulty, is the passage to which we have already al 
 luded in Deut. iii, 14, that Jair called the villages "after his own 
 name, Bashan-havoth-jair, unto this day." In Numbers xxxii, 41 
 it is simply stated that he "called them Havoth-jair." It could not 
 have been more than a year, perhaps was less, after the conquest and 
 naming of these villages that the discourse in Deuteronomy was de- 
 livered, so that less than a year, in all probability, intervened respect- 
 ing which it is said that he called them " Bashan-havoth-jair unto this 
 day." But the passage simply means that Jair gave these villages his 
 own name, by which they are now called, the name having perma- 
 nently adhered to them. The improbability of this meaning cannot 
 be shown. 
 
 There is something apparently singular in the use of " unto this 
 day " in Gen. xix, 37, where it is said, " the same is the father of 
 the Moabites unto this day ; " and especially in Deut. xi, 3, 4, iu 
 which, after an enumeration of the mighty acts of God in punishing 
 the Egyptians, it is added, " how the Lord hath destroyed them 
 unto this day" The events to which reference is here made oc- 
 curred in the space of a month or two, and forty years before the 
 address of Moses was delivered ; and the phrase unto this day must 
 mean simply in time past, or in the time preceding this day. As Moses 
 wa3 about to leave the Israelites, he takes a survey of the affairs of 
 his people, describes the present condition of things, and is thus led 
 to use the expression " unto this day " in various places. 
 
 The directions respecting the future king of Israel (Deut. xvii. 
 14-20) have been regarded by some 1 as written after the people had 
 Objections a king, si nce it wa s contrary to the divine will that they 
 
 against the di- should have one, and according to i Sam. viii, 7, there 
 
 rections con- . . - T , 11- ir i 
 
 cerning future was a rejection ol Jehovah himself in asking for one. 
 
 kingof Israel. g ut th i s argument is utterly unsound. For it was 
 foreseen of God, and even promised, that kings should spring 
 from the posterity of Jacob; and Deuteronomy prescribes certain 
 regulations for the king that they might set over them. It may, 
 however, be objected that Deuteronomy, to be consistent with 
 i Sam. viii, 7, ought absolutely to have prohibited the Israelites 
 from having a king. But in this objection there would be no force, 
 1 Among others, by Bleek, p. 216.
 
 OF THE HOLY SCRIPTURES. 171 
 
 for God does allow them to have a king (i Sam. viii, 22). Is it not 
 the part of wisdom to make regulations for events that are certain 
 to arise ? And though it had been better had they never occurred, 
 yet, under the circumstances, the absolute prohibition would work 
 a greater evil. 
 
 But, further, the demand of the Israelites to have a king was a 
 rejection of Samuel, and also a rejection of Jehovah, who had ap- 
 pointed Samuel to be their judge. It was not inconsistent with the 
 Mosaic economy, and with the theocracy, to have a king subordinate 
 to God. For, had that been the case, God would not have granted 
 their request at all. The people sinned in rebelling against the ex- 
 isting arrangement and the appointed ruler, instead of waiting to be 
 directed by the Almighty. The Israelites, in Deuteronomy xvii, 15, 
 are charged : " Thou shalt in any wise set him king over thee, whom 
 the Lord thy God shall choose." We find this law complied with 
 by Samuel; and God chose Saul (i Sam. x, 24). Samuel also "told 
 the people the manner of the kingdom, and wrote it in a book, and 
 laid it up before the Lord." In this there seems to be Directions con- 
 
 a reference to the regulations in Dent, xvii, 14-20, re- cerning kings 
 
 r . . 111 1-111 based on cer- 
 
 specting the future king, and the language of the elders tainty of future 
 
 of Israel to Samuel, " Now make us a king to judge us facts - 
 like all the nations," is very similar to i Sam. viii, 5. 
 
 In Deut. xvii, 18, the future king is directed to "write him a copy 
 of this law in a book out of that which is before the priests the 
 Levites." Now, at whatever time this part l of Deuteronomy may 
 be supposed to have been forged, it must have been immediately de- 
 tected as spurious, since no former king would have known anything 
 of it, nor would it in former times have been in the ark. 
 
 But the legislation in this seventeenth chapter of Deuteronomy 
 presupposes that the shophet, judge , is the highest officer of the peo- 
 ple in the land of Canaan : " And thou shalt come unto the priests 
 the Levites, and unto t\\z judges that shall be in those days, and in- 
 quire " (ver. 9). In the regulations respecting the king it is en- 
 joined that "he shall not multiply horses to himself, nor cause the 
 people to return to Egypt, to the end that he should multiply 
 horses." The ground of this prohibition is given: "Forasmuch as 
 the Lord hath said unto you, Ye shall henceforth return no more 
 that way." This language is natural enough in Moses, for he might 
 fear a return to Egypt of the people who had just left it ; but in the 
 ages of the kings such a fear could not be entertained. In i Kings 
 iv, 26, we find that " Solomon had forty thousand stalls of horses for 
 
 1 It is generally conceded that the Book of Deuteronomy is from one author. 
 13
 
 172 INTRODUCTION TO THE STUDY 
 
 his cnariots." As he had no intention of conducting the people 
 back to Egypt, he, perhaps, considered himself justified ; and there 
 would be some ground for this view. In a similar manner we violate 
 the letter of the second commandment, which prohibits the making 
 of any image. But we take it in connexion with what follows, and 
 interpret accordingly: "Thou shalt not bow down to them nor wor- 
 ship them." Whence we infer that the making the image with no 
 idolatrous purpose is not sinful. He is further enjoined : " Neither 
 shall he multiply wives to himself, that his heart turn not away; 
 neither shall he greatly multiply to himself silver and gold." The 
 reason for the last prohibition doubtless was, that in such a case 
 he would impoverish the people ; but the obtaining of gold for the 
 enriching of his people might not be forbidden the king. 
 
 That Solomon departed from the Mosaic regulations in some 
 Solomon's de- things is not to be wondered at ; and, indeed, we are 
 
 MoSc e reR^i" inforraed that he built " a hj g h P lace for Chemosh, the 
 tions. abomination of Moab, . . . and for Moloch, the abomi- 
 
 nation of the children of Ammon " (i Kings xi, 7). But these de- 
 partures from Deuteronomy, and in part from the very fundamental 
 principle of the Mosaic religion, do not prove that Deuteronomy 
 had no existence in the age of Solomon. On the same principle, by 
 comparing the lives of some professed Christians with the New Test- 
 ament, we might infer its non-existence. But Solomon alludes to 
 Deuteronomy in his prayer at the dedication of the temple. (Com- 
 pare i Kings viii, 29 with Deut. xii, n). 
 
 But would any Israelite have forged the laws respecting the king 
 hundreds of years after Solomon, to condemn what he had done ? 
 The supposition is preposterous. 
 
 The objection j n Deut. xix, 14, it is enjoined, " Thou shalt not 
 
 from the prohl- . 
 
 bition against remove thy neighbour's landmark, which they of old 
 
 of* landmarks time have set in th * ne i nner i tance which thou shalt 
 considered. inherit in the land that the Lord thy God giveth thee to 
 possess it." Some have considered this as having been written 
 after the Israelites had fully settled in Canaan. But the word 
 D'jffio, rendered "they of old time," can be well translated "for- 
 mer ones." Is there any inconsistency in Moses giving a precept 
 of this kind to be observed by the Israelites in Canaan? And if 
 given, what form should it have ? Reference must be made to a 
 boundary already fixed, for the sin would lie in removing what had 
 formerly been established as a landmark. And it is expressly stated 
 in the passage, " In thine inheritance, which thou shalt inherit in 
 the land that the Lord thy God giveth thee to possess it." Is it 
 possible that a writer should contradict himself in the same passage.
 
 OF THE HOLY SCRIPTURES. 173 
 
 in one part using language indicating that Israel had long been in 
 Canaan, and in the other representing them as having not yet en- 
 tered the land, and giving directions how they should act when they 
 should enter it ? No writer, much less the author of Deuteronomy, 
 could be guilty of such stupidity. 
 
 The regulations respecting war in Deut. xx refer to the future of" 
 Israel, when they shall have entered the land of Canaan ; and there 
 is nothing in them that could not have been written by Moses. 1 
 
 In concluding this part of our subject we may remark, that if the 
 Pentateuch, comprising about one fourth of the Hebrew conclusion: no 
 Bible, and extending over a period of more than twenty- KJfSJ^ 
 five hundred years, had been composed centuries after Mosaic origin. 
 Moses, it would have contained numerous palpable references to 
 post-Mosaic times. On the contrary, however, we find no clear al- 
 lusion to anything of an age later than that of Moses; and the sup- 
 posed allusions of that nature, upon examination, disappear in every, 
 or in almost every, case. It is not inconsistent with the genuineness 
 of the Pentateuch to suppose, as we have before stated, that a few 
 interpolations have found their way into it, but of this we have proof 
 in hardly a single instance. The whole colouring and spirit of the 
 book is Mosaic. 
 
 1 Because in the Pentateuch nft\ seaward, is used for -west-ward, and fQJjJ, toward 
 the dry region, especially the southern part of Judah, for south, Robertson Smith 
 affirms that the Pentateuch was written in Canaan (p. 323). But suppose Moses 
 wrote or revised it in the lapd of Moab, what then ? The Mediterranean Sea was 
 west of him, and the south country of Judah was south of him. But how often are 
 words used in a sense different from their primitive force ! We can say of a Phil- 
 adelphia merchant, he ships his goods from Philadelphia to Pittsburg, just as if a 
 sea lay between the two cities. Herodotus (viii, 60) speaks of yoking up ships 
 {a.vaC,eiiyvvfi.L), that is, removing them. Did he think that ships were a species of 
 oxen?
 
 174 INTRODUCTION TO THE STUDY 
 
 CHAPTER XVIII. 
 
 THE SAMARITAN PENTATEUCH. 
 
 Samaritans at Nablus, 1 a remnant of the ancient sect of that 
 * name, have the Pentateuch in Hebrew, written in very ancient 
 irregular characters, and differing but little from the Pentateuch of 
 the Jews. In determining the value of the Samaritan Codex, and its 
 bearing on the genuineness of the Jewish Pentateuch, it is necessary, 
 first of all, to inquire, Who were the Samaritans? The most ancient 
 Origin of the account of the origin of this people is found in 2 Kings 
 Samaritans. xv'n, where it is stated that Shalmaneser, king of Assyria, 
 carried away Israel captive into Assyria (B.C. 721), "and placed them 
 in Halah and in Habor by the river of Gozan, and in the cities of the 
 Medes ; " and that " the king of Assyria brought men from Babylon, 
 and from Cuthah, and from Ava, and from Hamath, and from Seph- 
 arvaim, and placed them in the cities of Samaria instead of the 
 children of Israel : and they possessed Samaria, and dwelt in the 
 cities thereof." But it is not likely that the king of Assyria carried off 
 all the inhabitants. The remnant of the ten tribes was incorporated 
 with the colonists of the Assyrian king, and thus the Samaritans 
 became a mixed people. At first they knew not the God of Israel, and 
 lions were sent among them, which 'slew some of them (chap, xvii, 25). 
 Upon this the king of Assyria gave directions : " Carry thither one 
 of the priests whom ye brought from thence ; and let them go and 
 dwell there, and let him teach them the manner of the God of the 
 land " (ver. 27). " Then one of the priests whom they had car- 
 ried away from Samaria came and dwelt in Bethel, and taught them 
 how they should fear the Lord " (ver. 28). " They feared tho 
 Lord, and served their own gods, after the manner of the nations" 
 from which they had been taken. And when the Jews returned 
 from the Babylonian captivity, and were engaged in rebuilding the 
 temple, the Samaritans wished to take a part in it, coming to Ze- 
 rubbabel and to the chief of the fathers, saying: " Let us build with 
 you : for we seek your God, as ye do ; and we do sacrifice unto him 
 since the days of Esar-haddon [about B. C. 709] king of Assur, which 
 
 'In January, 1870, the author had an interview with the high-priest of the sect 
 at Nablus, and was told that they numbered one hundred and fifty. See the au- 
 thor's Journey to Egypt and the Holy Land, pp. 183-186.
 
 OF THE HOLY SCRIPTURES. 175 
 
 brought us up hither " (Ezra iv, 2). This request was promptly re- 
 fused, as the Samaritans were for the most part pure heathen ' and 
 worshipped false gods along with Jehovah. This rejection of their 
 offer seems to have been the source of their hatred of the Jews. 
 During the reign of Alexander the Great, Sanballst, whose son-in- 
 law, Manasseh, was a brother of Jaddus, high priest at Jerusalem, 
 obtained permission from the king, while engaged in the siege of 
 Tyre (B. C. 332), to build a temple for Samaritan worship on Mount 
 Gerizim. a This Sanballat executed with zeal. Afterward the Jews, 
 who had become obnoxious to their brethren in Jerusalem on ac- 
 count of their violations of law, took refuge among the Samaritans." 
 Josephus informs us that in the reign of Ptolemy Philo- Samaritans in 
 meter (B. C. 181-146) the Samaritans, who reverenced 
 the temple built on Mount Gerizim in the time of Alex- ter. 
 ander the Great, and the Jews had a disputation in the presence of 
 the Egyptian sovereign concerning the claims of their respective 
 temples, the Samaritans affirming that the temple on Gerizim was 
 built according to the Mosaic law. The Jews denied this, estab- 
 lishing from the law the priority of their own temple in Jerusalem, 
 and the succession of the high priests who had the charge of it; 
 and showing, also, that the kings of Asia had honoured the Jewish 
 temple when that on Gerizim had no existence. The king decided 
 the dispute in favour of the Jews, and put to death the Samaritan 
 disputants. 4 
 
 Jesus son of Sirach (about B. C. 180, or even earlier) expresses the 
 feelings of the Jews of that period toward the Samari- Testimony of 
 tans: "There are two nations with which my soul is Jesus son of 
 vexed, and the third is no nation those who dwell in 
 the mountain of Samaria, the Philistines, and the foolish people who 
 dwell in Shechem "* (Samaritans). 
 
 Josephus 8 observes that when the Jews were in prosperity the 
 Samaritans claimed relationship, affirming that they were Testimony of 
 of the family of Joseph ; but that when the Jews were Jose P llus - 
 in adversity the Samaritans denied any affinity with them, declar- 
 ing themselves to be foreigners who had migrated to Samaria. 
 And we accordingly find, that when the Jews were severely 
 persecuted on account of their religion by Antiochus Epiphanes 
 
 1 The heathen element predominated most strongly in the Samaritans. Heng- 
 stenberg and others have regarded them as purely heathen. In our visit to the 
 Samaritans we failed to distinguish any thing Jewish in their features. 
 
 1 Josephus, Antiq., book xi, 8, 4. 'Antiq., xi, 8, 7. 
 
 4 Antiq., xiii, cap. iii, 4. 'Cap. 1, 25, 26. 
 
 * Antiq., ix, cap. xiv, 3.
 
 176 INTRODUCTION TO THE STUDY 
 
 (B. C. 167), the Samaritans, to avoid similar treatment, informed 
 Antiochus, that although they kept the Jewish sabbath, and had 
 been offering sacrifices in the temple built on Mount Gerizim, this 
 edifice was nevertheless not sacred to the supreme God, but was 
 nameless, and that they were ready to dedicate it to the Grecian 
 Zeus. 1 The feeling of hostility on the part of the Jews toward the 
 Samaritans still existed in the time of our Saviour, as appears from 
 the New Testament, and in turn was resented by the Samaritans, 
 who still looked upon the Jews as heretics. In an interview with 
 the high priest of the Samaritans at Nablus, I asked him his opinion 
 respecting Judaism. He replied, that the " Hebrew prophets were 
 learned men, but not inspired ; that Solomon was the predicted 
 Shiloh, with whom the sceptre had left Judah, as that monarch had 
 ruined every thing by his course ; and that in many things the Jews 
 The author's act contrary to the divine law, and are a species of her- 
 
 interview with etics." He also stated that he expected a Messiah, and 
 the Samaritan , , . . .... ._ ... , 
 
 high priest based his expectation principally upon Deut. xviu, 15. 
 
 j t j s evident, then, that the Samaritans regard themselves 
 as the theocratic people, the regular successors to the ten tribes of 
 Israel. Thus they exclude the Jews, from the days of Solomon, 
 with whom the sceptre left Judah. It appears that they have never 
 received as canonical any part of the Old Testament except the 
 five books of Moses, which at present they hold as alone of divine 
 authority. Hippolytus remarks of the Samaritans : " They pay no 
 attention to the prophets, but only to the law given by Moses." 1 
 Origen observes, that they receive nothing more than the Pentateuch 
 of Moses. 4 Jerome had a copy of the Samaritan Pentateuch in his 
 own hands, for he has given us a reading which he found in it. 6 
 
 Now the question arises. From what source did the Samaritans de- 
 origtn of the " ve tne i r Pentateuch ? Did the priest appointed by the 
 Samaritan Assyrian king to instruct the new colonies in Samaria in 
 uch - the knowledge of the God of Israel (2 Kings xvii, 27) 
 make use of a copy of the Pentateuch which had been in use among 
 the ten tribes before they were carried away captive by Shalma- 
 neser? There is proof from the prophets that the Pentateuch was 
 known among the ten tribes, and the most natural supposition is, 
 that it was received from them by the Samaritans. The priest must 
 have had a book of the law out of which to instruct the colonists, 
 
 *Josephus, Antiq., xii, 5, 5. 
 
 'See the author's Journey to Egypt and the Holy Land, pp. 183-186. 
 Contra Haereses, liber ix, 30. 4 Com. on Joan, torn, xiii, 26. 
 
 * Samaritanorum Hebraea volumina relegens inveni Choi. Com. on Galatians, 
 liber ii, cap. iii.
 
 OF THE HOLY SCRIPTURES. 177 
 
 and the language of 2 Kings xvii evidently presupposes written 
 laws and statutes among them (ver. 34). Also in Ezra, chap, iv, 2, 
 the Samaritans assert that they have been sacrificing to the God 
 of Israel since the days of Esar-haddon, king of Assur (about 
 B. C. 700). They must have had a Pentateuch by which to make 
 this sacrifice. There is, accordingly, probability that their Penta- 
 teuch is considerably older than the date of the Babylonian captivity. 
 The irregular characters in which the Samaritans write their Penta- 
 teuch is a proof of its antiquity, as the square Hebrew characters 
 were introduced after the return of the Tews from Baby- , 
 
 . J : Antiquity of 
 
 Ion, though it appears that the irregular characters in the Samaritan 
 use previously to that event were continued to some c 
 extent down to the time of the Maccabees. But the Samaritan 
 characters differ much from those old Hebrew characters on the 
 coins of the times of the Maccabees, and from those of the Phoeni- 
 cians. It is probable that the Samaritan characters are older than 
 any Semitic characters found on monuments. The changes in the 
 Semitic alphabet going on in all directions made no change in the 
 Samaritan. We may conclude that the ancient Pentateuch, their 
 oldest literature, fixed their alphabetical forms. 
 
 We cannot, however, assert that the Samaritans, if they had not 
 already possessed a copy of the Pentateuch upon the return of the 
 Jews from the Babylonian captivity, would have failed to obtain it 
 from them. 
 
 Bleek admits that the worship oi Jehovah, established among the 
 Samaritans by the priest sent back by the king of As- Admission of 
 syria (2 Kings xvii, 27), was, without doubt, based upon Bleek - 
 the Mosaic law, though not upon the Pentateuch as we now have it; 
 and that, without doubt, the Samaritans, among whom the reforma- 
 tion of worship by Josiah extended, had heard of the discovery in 
 the temple of an authentic copy of the law, and that it is possible 
 that single chapters of it reached them. He thinks, however, it 
 more probable that the formal reception of the Pentateuch among 
 them in its present form, as an authentic codex of the divine law, 
 did not take place until after the Babylonian exile. 1 De Wette is of 
 opinion that the Samaritan Pentateuch was obtained from the Jews 
 when the Samaritans built their temple on Mount Gerizim, in the 
 time of Alexander the Great (about B. C. 330).* 
 
 The existence of a written code of the laws of Moses among the 
 
 ten tribes and Samaritans is fatal to the hypothesis of False hypothe- 
 
 the late origin of Deuteronomy, under Manasseh or Jo- ^ n of 
 
 siah. For the priest from among the ten tribes must onomy. 
 
 1 Pp- 337) 338. 2 Einleitung, p. 204.
 
 178 INTRODUCTION TO THE STUDY 
 
 have instructed the new colonists out of the Mosaic code, as it ex- 
 isted among his people, and the Samaritans could not have had 
 the book of Deuteronomy unless it had been already acknowledged 
 by the ten tribes of Israel ; for if the Jews had added this book to 
 the Mosaic code afterward, it would have been rejected by the Sa- 
 maritans as a forgery. 
 
 The fact of the existence of the Mosaic code among the ten tribes, 
 in connexion with the fact that one of the priests of those tribes 
 taught the new colonists the knowledge of the God of Israel, fur- 
 nishes a strong proof that the Samaritan Pentateuch has come down 
 from the ten tribes, and that in this form it existed in the time of 
 Solomon. This is, therefore, a valuable testimony to the existence 
 of the whole Pentateuch as early as the time of that monarch. The 
 hatred of the Jews by the Samaritans led the latter to reject every 
 thing that pertained to Judah alone. 
 
 But it does not follow that the Samaritan Pentateuch is of equal 
 Advantage of aut h r i tv w ^h tne Jewish. It was not to be expected 
 the Jewish that it would be preserved with all the care and accu- 
 1C ' racy with which that of the Jews has been preserved. 
 Preserved among a people of purer faith, of wider culture, and of 
 large numbers, the Jewish Pentateuch has had every thing in its 
 favour. 
 
 The agreement between the Samaritan Pentateuch and that of the 
 Septuagint, it seems to us, has been frequently overstated by schol- 
 ars. It is true that there are many passages in which the two agree 
 together, and differ from the Jewish Pentateuch : but in a far greater 
 Disagreement number of instances the Samaritan Pentateuch and that 
 
 between the o f the Septuagint differ from each other. Let us take, 
 
 SamantanPen- 
 
 tateuchandthe for example, the ten commandments. Where the Jewish 
 
 Septuagint. Pentateuch and the Septuagint have, "remember the 
 sabbath day to keep it holy," the Samaritan has, "keep the sabbath 
 day," etc. The command to honour father and mother is stated in 
 the same way in both the Jewish Pentateuch and the Samaritan; 
 but the Septuagint has, " that it may be well with thee . . . upon the 
 good land," etc. The sixth, seventh, and eighth commandments 
 stand in the same order in the Jewish and Samaritan texts, but are 
 differently arranged in the Septuagint. In the command not to 
 covet, both the Samaritan and the Septuagint have, in addition to 
 the things prohibited in the Jewish text, " his field ; " but the order of 
 the words is not the same. The Septuagint has, in addition to both 
 the Jewish and Samaritan texts, " nor any of his cattle." Also in the 
 fourth commandment, " Thou shall not do any work," the Samar- 
 itan and Septuagint supply the words " in it " to complete the sense.
 
 OF THE HOLY SCRIPTURES. 179 
 
 In chronology the Jewish Pentateuch differs widely from the Sep- 
 tuagint, but less from the Samaritan. Nor have we any proof that 
 the Samaritan Pentateuch has been interpolated from the Sep- 
 tuagint, or that the latter has been interpolated from the former. 
 Not only the difference between them, but the history of the text of 
 each of these copies, is inconsistent with such hypotheses. 
 
 In various places in the Samaritan Pentateuch we find explana- 
 tory remarks, taken from some other part of the book, 
 
 ' r Explanations 
 
 added. In the account of God's meeting Balaam (Num. in the samari- 
 xxii, xxiii), in several instances the angel of God is sub- 
 stituted for God himself. But what is most remarkable, the archa- 
 isms are almost invariably exchanged for later words. Matres lec- 
 tionis, especially i and ', with shurek and tsere and chirek, are used 
 oftener than in the Jewish Pentateuch, for the full method of writ- 
 ing generally characterizes a later period of the Hebrew language, 
 to which the Samaritans laboured to conform theirs. 
 
 But, upon the whole, the Samaritan Pentateuch agrees well with 
 the Jewish, and is an independent witness to its integrity. 
 
 Hengstenberg attaches but little value to the Samaritan Penta- 
 teuch as an auxiliary proof of the genuineness of the Jew- Hengsten- 
 ish, since he thinks it might have been obtained from the ber s' s opinion. 
 Jews after the Babylonian captivity, though he admits that the fact 
 of the reception of the Pentateuch among the ten tribes furnishes a 
 very probable proof that the Samaritan copy came down from them. 
 Nor do we see that Havernick makes any use of it in views o(Hav- 
 defence of the Mosaic origin of the Pentateuch. That emick and 
 the Samaritan Pentateuch has come down from the ten 
 tribes of Israel has been held by Morin, Houbigant, Capellus, Ken- 
 nicott, Michaelis, Eichhorn, Bertholdt, Stuart, and others. There 
 are a few readings in it that seem preferable to those of the Jew- 
 ish, but, taken as whole, the Samaritan Pentateuch is decidedly 
 inferior.
 
 180 INTRODUCTION TO THE STUDY 
 
 CHAPTER XIX. 
 
 EXTERNAL EVIDENCE OF THE ANTIQUITY, AUTHORITY, AND 
 INTEGRITY OF THE PENTATEUCH. 
 
 of the most convincing methods of establishing the Mosaic 
 origin of the Pentateuch is to show that it has existed ever 
 since the time of Moses, and that it has always borne his name. We 
 know that at the time of Christ all parties of the Jews in Palestine, 
 in Egypt, and in whatever parts of the world they were found re- 
 ceived the Pentateuch as the work of Moses. From this period we 
 shall trace back the Pentateuch to the age of Moses. 
 
 The first book of Maccabees, written about B. C. 100, states that 
 The books of in the persecution of the Jews by Antiochus Epiphanes 
 Maccabees. (about B. C. 170), if the book of the covenant was found 
 with any one he was put to death (i Mace, i, 57). Here the whole 
 Pentateuch is called the book of the covenant. Jesus the son of 
 Sirach (about B. C. 180 or earlier) speaks of the book of the cove- 
 nant of the most high God, the law which Moses commanded 
 (chap, xxiv, 23). Here, too, the reference to the Pentateuch is 
 obvious. 
 
 The Pentateuch, as we have already seen, was translated into 
 Greek about B. C. 280. This translation, forming a part of the 
 LXX. agrees remarkably with the Hebrew Pentateuch, and is the 
 most accurate part of the Greek version. The translators, because 
 of their reverence for the work of Moses, took no liberty with the 
 text. 
 
 The Pentateuch of the Samaritans agrees closely with the Jew- 
 Agreement of ish, and shows that no changes have been made in the 
 aid ^ewSh latter since tne Samaritan was taken from it. But the 
 Pentateuchs. Samaritan Pentateuch could not have been derived 
 from the Jewish later than B. C. 330, when Sanballat, with the per- 
 mission of Alexander the Great, built the Samaritan temple on 
 Mount Gerizim. For the Samaritans must have obtained it then, 
 even if they did not already possess it. 
 
 Since the school of Ezra made no changes in the Pentateuch 
 after B. C. 330, why should they have made any in it before ? Its 
 use for centuries, and its reputation as the work of Moses, rendered 
 it sacred in the eyes of the priests and scribes, and would naturally
 
 OF THE HOLY SCRIPTURES. 181 
 
 prevent it from being altered or enlarged. Even if any priest or 
 scribe had attempted such a thing, it is not to be supposed that the 
 mass of the priests and scribes would have consented to it. 
 
 Malachi, about B. C. 440, seventeen years after Ezra returned 
 from Babylon, exhorts the people: "Remember ye the MaiacWs rec- 
 law of Moses my servant, which I commanded unto him ^friy origin of 
 in Horeb for all Israel, with the statutes and judgments " Pentateuch, 
 (iv, 4). Here the prophet recognizes the Pentateuch of that day as 
 having been delivered in Horeb for all Israel, and not as something 
 recently contrived for the Jews only. In Malachi i, 7, 12-14, in 
 the offering of polluted sacrifices and blind and maimed animals, 
 there is a reference to Lev. xxii, 22, and Deut. xv, 21. In the with- 
 holding of the tithes (iii, 8) we have a reference to Lev. xxvii, 30; 
 Num. xviii, 21 ; Deut. xxvi, 12. In the Book of Nehemiah, B. C. 
 440, we find clear references to the Pentateuch: "And they spake 
 unto Ezra the scribe to bring the book of the law of Moses which 
 the LORD had commanded to Israel " (viii, i). Further, in verse 14, 
 we read : " And they found written in the law which the LORD had 
 commanded by Moses that the children of Israel should dwell in 
 booths in the feast of the seventh month." This has reference to 
 Lev. xxiii, 34, 42. Nehemiah does not seem to have had the least sus- 
 picion that this command, as well as the whole priestly system of 
 the Pentateuch, was an interpolation and forgery of Ezra. In the 
 prayer offered by the eight Levites there is a recapitu- Nehemiah and 
 lation of the Israelitish history and legislation of Moses J25 r "5JJlJ 
 in which there are references to all the five books of the of Pentateuch. 
 Pentateuch (ix, 6-35). Also in xiii, i, 2, passages are given which 
 it is said " they read in the book of Moses" the identical passages 
 of our present Pentateuch. 
 
 In the Book of Ezra it is stated that the Jews who went up with 
 Zerubbabel from Babylon to Jerusalem (B. C. 536) built an altar in 
 the latter city " to offer burnt offerings thereon, as it is written in the 
 law of Moses the man of God. . . . And they offered burnt offerings 
 thereon unto the LORD, even burnt offerings morning and evening. 
 They kept also the feast of tabernacles, as it is written, and offered 
 the daily burnt offerings by number, according to the custom, as the 
 duty of every day required; and afterward offered the continual burnt 
 offering, both of the new moons and of all the set feasts of the LORD 
 that were consecrated," etc. (iii, 2-5). Here the reference is to 
 Exod. xxix, 38, 39 ; Num. xxviii, 3, 4. The last clause of Ezra 
 iii, 4, is the exact language of the last clause in Lev. xxiii, 37. 
 These sacrifices were offered according to the Mosaic law about 
 eighty years before Ezra came up to Jerusalem. It is, therefore,
 
 182 INTRODUCTION TO THE STUDY 
 
 clear that he could have had nothing to do with the prescriptions 
 of the law concerning sacrifices. 
 
 Respecting Ezra himself, who went up to Jerusalem about 
 B. C. 457, it is said : " He was a ready scribe in the law of Moses, 
 which the LORD God of Israel had given " (Ezra vii, 6). " Ezra had 
 prepared his heart to seek the law of the LORD, and to do it, and 
 to teach in Israel statutes and judgments." He was a student in the 
 . . , law, not its author, nor its amender, nor one who had 
 
 c*zni & siuu6nit 
 
 not the author, incorporated traditions into it. The tradition of the 
 Jews knows nothing of Ezra's having written any part 
 of the law. " His merit is celebrated in these words : ' Ezra would 
 have been worthy of the law's being given through him if Moses 
 had not anticipated him.' ' 
 
 Haggai. In this prophet, who prophesied about B. C. 520, when 
 the Jews were rebuilding the temple, we find the following refer- 
 ence to the Mosaic law : " Ask now the priests concerning the law 
 [Tffra/i], saying, If one bear holy flesh in the skirt of his garment, 
 and with his skirt do touch bread, or pottage, or wine, or oil, or any 
 meat, shall it be holy ? And the priest, answered and said, No. 
 Then said Haggai, If one that is unclean by a dead body touch any 
 of these, shall it be unclean ? And the priests answered and said, 
 It shall be unclean " (ii, 11-13). ^ n tne ^ ast verse the reference is 
 to Num. xix, u : "He that toucheth the dead body of any man 
 shall be unclean," and to xix, 22 : "Whatsoever the unclean person 
 toucheth shall be unclean." 
 
 Zechariah. In this prophet, who was contemporary with Haggai, 
 Minute pro- we find references in xiv, 16, 18, 19, to the feasts of 
 ences* 3 to^the tabernacles, according to the law in Lev. xxiii, 34, 43, 
 Mosaic law. and Deut. xvi, 13; and in iii, 5, to the mitre upon the 
 head of the high priest, according to the arrangement in Exod. 
 xxxix, 28 ; Lev. viii, 9. 
 
 Ezekiel. This prophet, who lived in Chaldea during the first part 
 of the Babylonian captivity, makes frequent references to the Mo- 
 saic laws, and even to some of those very laws which the new 
 school of critics would have us believe Ezra, or the prophet himself, 
 wrote. In iv, 14, Ezekiel declares : " My soul hath not been pol- 
 luted : for from my youth up even till now have I not eaten 
 of that which dieth of itself, or is torn in pieces; neither came 
 there abominable flesh into my mouth." The "torn" refers to 
 Exod. xxii, 31; "that which dieth of itself" to Lev. xvii, 15; 
 and the " abominable thing " to Deut. xiv, 3 : in which passage?, 
 
 1 In Sanhedrim 2iband Yer Megilla i, 9 in Weber, System der Alt. Syn. PalaesL 
 Theologie, p. 2, Leipzig, 1880.
 
 OF THE HOLY SCRIPTURES. 183 
 
 it is forbidden to eat these things. In describing the right- 
 eous man, the prophet asserts that " he hath not come near to a 
 menstruous woman " (xviii, 6), in reference to Lev. xviii, 19, and 
 xx, 1 8 : "And hath not oppressed any, but hath restored to the 
 debtor his pledge, hath spoiled none by violence, hath given his 
 bread to the hungry, and hath covered the naked with a garment ; 
 he that hath not given forth upon usury, neither hath taken any 
 increase, . . . hath executed true judgment between man and man, 
 hath walked in my statutes, and hath kept my judgments, to do 
 truly; he is just," etc. (xviii, 7-9). Some of the foregoing prohibi- 
 tions and injunctions refer to Exod. xxii, 21, 22, 25-, 26 ; Lev. 
 xix, 15; xxv, 14; Deut. xv, 7, 8; xxiv, 12, 13. In chap, xx we 
 have a reference to God's revelation of himself to the Israelites in 
 Egypt : " I gave them my statutes, and showed them my judgments, 
 which if "a man do, he shall even live in them. Moreover also I 
 gave them my sabbaths. . . . But the house of Israel rebelled 
 against me in the wilderness : they walked not in my statutes, and 
 they despised my judgments: . . . then I said, I would pour out 
 my fury upon them in the wilderness, to consume them. ... Yet 
 also I lifted up my hand unto them in the wilderness, that I would 
 not bring them into the land which I had given them " (11-15), m 
 refence to Num. xiv, 28, 29. In the phrase, "Which, if a man do, 
 he shall even live in them," there is the language of Lev. xviii, 5. 
 The oath that the Israelites should be scattered among the 
 heathen, and dispersed through the countries, refers to Lev. xxvi, 33, 
 and to Deut. xxviii, 64; for in the former passage mi, to scatter, is 
 used, and in the latter }"3n, to disperse, both verbs being combined. 
 In xxii, 26, it is declared : " Her priests have violated my law 
 \ToraKh and have profaned mine holy things: they have put no 
 difference between the holy and profane, neither have they showed 
 difference between the unclean and the clean, and have hid their 
 eyes from my sabbaths, and I am profaned among them." Here 
 the prophet refers to the Torah (law), and to the ordinances 
 respecting things clean and unclean, as we find them in Lev. xxii. 
 In xxiv, 7, we observe a reference to the precept in Lev. xvii, 13, 
 where it is enjoined to pour out the blood, and to cover it with 
 dust. In the command not to exhibit signs of grief Ezekiei'srefer- 
 
 (Ezek, xxiv, 18-23), tne head is not to be uncovered, encestoLeviti- 
 
 " . . . , cus and other 
 
 and the lip is not to be covered (with hair), with parts of the 
 
 reference to Lev. x, 6, and xiii, 45. Pentateuch. 
 
 In xxxvi, 27, it is said : " I will cause you to walk in my statutes, 
 and ye shall keep my judgments and do them ; " and in verse 38
 
 184 INTRODUCTION TO THE STUDY 
 
 " the solemn feasts " are named. In xvi, 38-40, we find the follow- 
 ing : " I will judge thee as women that break wedlock and shed 
 blood are judged; . . . they shall stone thee with stones." In Lev. 
 xx, 10, and Deut. xxii, 22, nothing is said about the kind of death 
 the adulteress shall die. If, therefore, the precept in Leviticus is 
 later than the passage in Ezekiel, it is strange that the manner of 
 the death of the adulteress is left undetermined. 
 
 In chap, xliv, 6-8, in the prophet's vision of the house of the LORD 
 (B. C. 574), God directs him to say unto the house of Israel : " Let it 
 suffice you of all your abominations, in that you have brought into 
 my sanctuary strangers, uncircumcised in heart, and uncircumcised 
 in flesh, to be in my sanctuary, to pollute it, even my house, 
 when ye offer my bread [the name for sacrifice in Leviticus], the 
 fat and the blood, and they have broken my covenant because of 
 all your abominations. And ye have not kept the charge of mine 
 holy things." In these passages the reference is to Lev. xxi, 6-8; 
 iii, 16; xvii, n, where the bread of God and the fat and blood of 
 sacrifice are mentioned. These sacrifices are declared to be of 
 divine appointment. 
 
 In Ezekiel's description of the qualifications and duties of the 
 future priests (xliv, 15-31), we find a repetition of the regulations 
 for the most part in the Pentateuch. This proves his acquaintance 
 with those books. In some matters, however, Ezekiel departs from 
 the Pentateuchal regulations. This is not to be wondered at, in an 
 ideal state of the future, in which the Levites have a tract of land 
 nearly fifty miles by twenty (xlviii, 13) : Issachar bordering on 
 Simeon (verse 25), and Gad on Zebulun (verse 27). The city has 
 twelve gates. All these descriptions are contrary to the geograph- 
 ical location of the tribes, and in contradiction with the number of 
 gates which Jerusalem had. There are other descriptions of a simi- 
 lar unreal character. Was Ezekiel ignorant of the geography and 
 topography of Palestine ? Hardly. If, then, some of his regu- 
 lations are different from those of the Pentateuch, does that prove 
 his ignorance of it ? Certainly the returning exiles never dreamed 
 of fashioning their commonwealth after the ideal style of Ezekiel. 
 
 The Lamentations of Jeremiah. This book, written shortly after 
 the capture of Jerusalem by Nebuchadnezzar, contains several ref- 
 erences to the institutions of the Jews which are found in our Pen- 
 tateuch. " The ways of Zion do mourn, because none come to the 
 solemn feasts " (i, 4). Here the reference is to the appointed feasts 
 of the Pentateuch. " The heathen entered into her sanctuary whom 
 thou didst command that they should not enter into thy congrega- 
 tion " (i, 10). Here the reference is to Deut. xxiii, 3, where it is
 
 OF THE HOLY SCRIPTURES. 185 
 
 enjoined that " an Ammonite or a Moabite shall not enter into the 
 congregation of the Lord," etc. " The Lord hath caused the 
 solemn feasts and the sabbaths to be forgotten in Zion " (ii, 6). 
 " The law \^Torah\ is no more " (ii, 9). " Her Nazarites were purer 
 than snow" (iv, 7). The institution of the Nazarites is found in 
 Num. vi, 1-8. 
 
 The prophet Jeremiah. In this prophet, whose ministry extended 
 from B. C. 629 to 589, we find many references to a code of laws 
 corresponding to our Pentateuch, which were manifestly written. 
 " The priests said not, Where is the LORD ? and they that handle the 
 law \_ToraJi\ knew me not" (ii, 8). "I had put her [adulterous 
 Israel] away, and given her a bill of divorce " (iii, 8). This is 
 based on Deut. xxiv, 3, where a man may, under given Jeremiah . sref _ 
 circumstances, give his wife a " bill of divorce " and erences to the 
 dismiss her. " I beheld the earth, and, lo, it was without Pentateuch - 
 form, and void " (inii inn) (iv, 23). This is the exact language of 
 Gen. i, 2, and shows that Jeremiah had before him what is called 
 the Elohistic account of creation, and proves the falsity of the theory 
 that this part of Genesis was written after the captivity. 1 "Behold, 
 I will bring evil upon this people, . . . because they have not 
 hearkened unto my words, nor to my law, but rejected it " (vi, 19). 
 " How do ye say, We are wise, and the law \_Tora J i\ of the LORD is 
 with us? Lo, certainly in vain made he it; the pen of the scribes is 
 in vain " (viii, 8). Here it is evident that the reference is to the 
 written Torah (law). " Because they have forsaken my law \Torah\ 
 which I set before them" (ix, 13). "Cursed be the man that 
 obeyeth not the words of this covenant, which I commanded your 
 fathers in the day that I brought them forth out of the land of 
 Egypt, from the iron furnace, saying, Obey my voice, and do them, 
 according to all which I command you : so shall ye be my people, 
 and I will be your God : that I may perform the oath which I have 
 sworn unto your fathers, to give them a land flowing with milk and 
 honey" (xi, 3-5). 
 
 In this section we have a reference to the curse pronounced upon 
 those who do not obey the law, based on Deut. xxvii, 26. " The 
 iron furnace " is the exact language of Deut. iv, 20. "A land flow- 
 ing with milk and honey " is the language of the Pentateuch. 
 "Your fathers have not kept my law [Torah]" (xvi, n); "The 
 law shall not perish from the priest" (xviii, 18); "To walk in my 
 law which I have set before you " (xxvi, 4) : the combination of 
 
 'It is very probable that the phrase "When ye be multiplied and increased" 
 (Jer. iii, 16) refers to Gen. i, 28 : "Be fruitful and multiply," and to Gen. viii, 17- 
 both Elohistic passages.
 
 186 INTRODUCTION TO THE STUDY 
 
 these three passages shows that " the law " (Torah) is the law of 
 God in the hands of the priests, and that it is no new thing. " The 
 planters shall plant vineyards and profane " them (xxxi, 5) : here 
 we have a reference to Lev. xix, 23, where it is enjoined that when 
 the Israelites plant any kind of fruit trees, they shall not eat any of 
 the fruit for three years. Hence, " to profane a vineyard " is to eat 
 of its fruit. In xxxi, 31-33, God declares that he will make a new 
 covenant with the house of Israel different from the one he made 
 with them when he brought them out of Egypt. He further says 
 that he will write this new covenant upon their hearts, which shows 
 that the first covenant was written upon something else. 
 
 In xxxii, 8, Hanameel. the son of Jeremiah's uncle, addresses the 
 prophet, respecting a field in Anathoth : " The right of inheritance 
 is thine and the redemption is thine; buy it for thyself." This 
 passage refers to Lev. xxv, 25. in which it is stated : " If thy brother 
 be waxen poor, and hath sold away a part of his possession, and if 
 any of his kin come to redeem it, then shall he redeem that which 
 his brother sold." In xxxiv, 13, 14, the prophet speaks of the cov- 
 enant God made with the Israelites when he brought them out of 
 Egypt, in which a Hebrew slave is to be set free after six years' 
 servitude. This law is found in Exod. xxi, 2, and Deut. xv, 12. 
 " Neither have they feared, nor walked in my law, nor in my stat- 
 utes, that I set before you and before your fathers " (xliv, 10). " Nor 
 walked in his law, nor in his statutes, nor in his testimonies " 
 (verso 23). " A fire and a flame . . . shall devour the corner of 
 Moab, and the corner of the head of the tumultuous ones " 
 (xlviii, 45). Gesenius 1 rightly regards this passage as an imitation 
 of Num. xxiv, 17: "A scepter shall rise out of Israel and shall 
 smite the corners of Moab." 
 
 The prophet Isaiah. In the first chapter of this prophet, who 
 flourished B. C. 758-705, we find named, "sacrifices," "burnt ofter- 
 isatah's clear ^ n S s " "incense," "new moons," "sabbaths," "assern- 
 references to blies," " feasts," etc., as Jewish observances, doubtless 
 
 tbePentateuch. ., , . ,, _,. , , 
 
 the same as we have in our Pentateuch. They have 
 cast away the law [Torah] of the LORD of hosts " (v, 24). " Bind 
 up the testimony, seal the law [Torah] among my disciples " 
 (viii, 1 6). In these passages there is doubtless a reference to the 
 Pentateuch. In xxiii, 18, we have " splendid garments ;" that is, as 
 Gesenius " explains it, "The splendor of the sacerdotal vestments 
 handed down from antiquity." In xxiv, 5, we have the following: 
 " They have transgressed the laws, broken the everlasting covenant." 
 
 1 Heb. Lex., r\&, and Com. Samart. Pent. 2 See his Heb. Lex., sub
 
 OF THE HOLY SCRIPTURES. 187 
 
 " In that day shall the deaf hear the words of the book " (xxix, 18) ; 
 that is, as Gesenius understands it, " the book of the law." * We also 
 read : " Children that will not hear the law of Jehovah " (xxx, 9) ; 
 " seek ye out of the book of the LORD and read " (xxxiv, 16). The 
 reference here seems to be to the fact that Isaiah's prophecies form 
 a part of a collection of sacred writings. " Thus saith the LORD, 
 Where is the bill of your mother's divorcement whom I have put 
 away" (1, i) ? Here the reference is to Deut. xxiv, i, where the 
 law permits the husband to dismiss his wife with a bill of divorce. 
 Both in Deuteronomy and Isaiah the same phrase, rvirvo ISD is used, 
 
 the latter being written defectively without the i in Deuteronomy, 
 as might be expected from its being the earlier writing. rjj?t7, to dis- 
 miss, is used in both passages. 
 
 Nahum. In this prophet, who flourished about B. C. 630, we 
 find the following: "O Judah, keep thy solemn feasts, perform thy 
 vows" (i, 15). This language implies the divine institution of the 
 Jewish feasts, and refers to the regulations of the Pentateuch re- 
 specting vows. 
 
 Habakkuk. In this prophet (B. C. 625) there is a reference to 
 the Pentateuch in the following words: "The law [Torah] is 
 torpid " (i, 4). 
 
 Zephaniah. This prophet (B. C. 625) refers as follows to the law : 
 " Her [Jerusalem's] priests have polluted the sanctuary, they have 
 done violence to the law [Torah] " (iii, 4). 
 
 Joel. This prophet, who flourished about B. C. 880, makes sev- 
 eral references to the institutions of the Pentateuch. "The meat 
 offering and the drink offering is cut off from the house of the LORD; 
 the priests, the LORD'S ministers, mourn " (i, 9). " Sanctify a fast, 
 call a solemn assembly : gather the elders and all the inhabitants of 
 the land into the house of the LORD your God, and cry unto the 
 LORD" (verse 14). Again: "Blow the trumpet in Zion, sanctify a 
 fast, call a solemn assembly, gather the people, sanctify the congre- 
 gation, ... let the priests, the ministers of the LORD, weep between 
 the porch and the altar, and let them say, Spare thy people, O Lord " 
 (ii, 15-17). It is clear that Joel recognizes the divine authority of 
 the priests, and certainly approves of their services. "The meat 
 offering" (nrnp), and "the drink offering" ftp:)), are the words of 
 the Pentateuch. In Num. x, 2, 3, it is enjoined that "the calling 
 of the assembly " shall be made by blowing trumpets. 
 
 Micah. This prophet, who began to prophesy about B. C. 750, 
 makes several references to the Pentateuch. In chap, v, 6, 
 
 1 Heb. Lex., sttl> -|DD- 
 13
 
 188 INTRODUCTION TO THE STUDY 
 
 Assyria is coupled with the land of Nimrod in reference to Gen. x, 
 Micah's aiiu- ^~ I 2 ' anc ^ ^ n v *' 4' Miriam is named along with Moses and 
 sions to the Aaron. The following passage is evidently taken from 
 Numbers : " O my people, remember now what Balak 
 king of Moab consulted, and what Balaam the son of Beor answered 
 him from Shittim unto Gilgal " (chap, vi, 5). The passage, " He 
 hath showed thee, O man, what is good ; and what doth the Lord 
 require of thee, but to do justly, and to love mercy, and to walk 
 humbly with thy God " (chap, vi, 8), seems to be based upon the 
 following in Deut. x, 12 : " And now, Israel, what doth the Lord thy 
 God require of thee, but to fear the Lord thy God, to walk in all 
 his ways, and to love him, and to serve the Lord thy God with all 
 thy heart and with all thy soul." 
 
 The Prophet Amos, who flourished about B. C. 800, shows in va- 
 rious passages his acquaintance with the Pentateuch. In chap, i, n, 
 Reference of tnere * s a probable reference to Gen. xxvii, 41 : " Be- 
 Amos to the cause he [Edom] did pursue his brother with the sword, 
 and did cast off all pity, and his anger did tear per- 
 petually, and he kept his wrath for ever." Allusion is also made to 
 the forty years' wandering through the wilderness (chap, ii, TO). 
 There is a clear reference in chap, ii, n, 12, to the law in Num- 
 bers vi, 2-21 : "And I raised up of your sons for prophets, and of 
 your young men for Nazarites. . . . But ye gave the Nazarites wine 
 to drink." It was one of the requirements of the Nazarite that he 
 should drink no wine. " They have despised the law of the LORD, 
 and have not kept his commandments " (ii, 4). 
 
 " You only have I known of all the families of the earth " (Amos 
 Hi, 2) refers to Exodus xix, 5, and Deut. vii, 6. In "Bring youi 
 sacrifices every morning, and your tithes after three years " (chap. 
 iv, 4), we have a clear reference to Deut. xiv, 28 : " At the end of 
 three years thou shalt bring forth all the tithe of thine increase the 
 same year, and shalt lay it up within thy gates." In Amos we have 
 
 D^D' nj^W?, at the end of three days, literally. But Gesenius gives 
 i 
 
 several examples of the use of D'D", days for years, and translates the 
 passage : " After the end of three years" or, better, every three days 
 in bitter irony. In either case the reference would be to the law re- 
 quiring the bringing of tithes at the end of three years found only in 
 Deut. xiv, 28. " I have smitten you with blasting and mildew " 
 (chap, iv, 9), was a judgment threatened in Deut. xxviii, 22. Com- 
 pare " I have sent among you the pestilence after the manner of 
 Egypt" (chap, iv, 10), with Deut. xxviii, 60: "Moreover, he will 
 bring upon thee all the diseases of Egypt." In chap, v, 22, "Though
 
 OF THE HOLY SCRIPTURES. 189 
 
 ye offer me burnt offerings and your meatofferings, I will not accept 
 them ; neither will I regard the peace offerings of your fat beasts," 
 we have named various sacrifices enjoined in the Pentateuch. In 
 addition to these sacrifices we have in chap, iv, 5 : " Offer a sacrifice 
 of thanksgiving with leaven," in allusion to Lev. vii, 13. In chap. 
 iv, 4, the command is given to bring the sacrifice every morning, 
 thus referring to Num. xxviii, 3, 4. In ii, 7, " To profane my holy 
 name," we have a reference to Lev. xx, 3. In chap, viii, 5, the 
 new moon and the sabbath are mentioned as Israelitish institutions. 
 We have in chap, v, 25, 26, a reference to the idolatry of the Isra- 
 elites in the desert : " Ye have offered unto me sacrifices and offer- 
 ings in the wilderness forty years, O house of Israel. And ye have 
 borne the tabernacle of your king, even Chiun your idol, the star of 
 your god, which ye made for yourselves." 1 This language does 
 not imply that the Israelites in the desert had not a knowledge of 
 the true God, but simply that, while making sacrifices to the true 
 God and performing the external rites of worship, they combined 
 with it the idolatrous worship of Saturn, 1 whose image and taberna- 
 cle they carried with them in their wanderings. The whole history of 
 the Jews in the Pentateuch shows their frequent lapses into idolatry. 
 
 The knowledge of the Pentateuch which Amos displays is re- 
 markable, as he had received no training in the schools of the 
 prophets, but was simply " a herdman, and a gatherer of sycamore 
 fruit." "And the Lord took me as I followed the flock, and the 
 Lord said unto me, Go prophesy unto my people Israel " (chap, 
 vii, 14, 15). 
 
 Hosea. In this prophet, who began to prophesy about B. C. 785, 
 we find a considerable number of references to the Pentateuch. 
 The comparison of the children of Israel to a woman who leaves 
 her husband and goes after other men is a favorite simile with 
 Hosea to set forth the apostasy of Israel from the true God 
 and their devotion to idolatrous worship. For example : " The 
 land hath committed great whoredom, departing from the Lord " 
 (chap, i, 2); and "they have gone a whoring from under their 
 God" (chap, iv, 12). The simile is obviously based on the lan- 
 guage of the Pentateuch. In Exod. xxxiv, 15, it is said : " Lest 
 thou make a covenant with the land, and they go a whoring after 
 their gods, and do sacrifice unto their gods." Again, in Deut. 
 xxxi, 16 : "And this people will rise up, and go a -whoring after the 
 gods of the strangers of the land." 
 
 In the following passages we have a reference to the institutions 
 of the Pentateuch : " I will also cause all her mirth to cease, her 
 
 ] That Chiun means Saturn, see the Hebrew Lexicons of Gesenius and Fiirst.
 
 190 INTRODUCTION TO THE STUDY 
 
 feast days, her new moons, and her sabbaths, and all her solemn 
 feasts" (ii, u); "And I that am the Lord thy God from the land 
 of Egypt will yet make thee to dwell in tabernacles, as in the days 
 of the solemn feasts" (xii, 9). In the latter passage the reference 
 is to the feast of tabernacles, as enjoined in Lev. xxiii, 42, 43, in 
 which the people are to dwell in booths the only passage in the 
 Pentateuch in which the dwelling in booths or tabernacles is men- 
 tioned. This refutes the new school of Graf, Wellhausen, and 
 others, who hold that Leviticus was not written until the Babylonian 
 captivity, or even later. " Their sacrifices shall be unto them as 
 the bread of mourners ; all that eat thereof shall be polluted " (ix, 4). 
 In this passage there seems to be a reference to Deut. xxvi, 14. 
 In xi, 8, Admah and Zeboim are named from Gen. xiv, 2. In 
 chap, xii, 3, 4, we have a clear reference to the history in the Pen- 
 tateuch : " He [Jacob] took his brother by the heel in the womb, 
 and by his strength he had power with God : Yea, he had power 
 over the angel, and prevailed : he wept, and made supplication unto 
 him: he found him in Beth-el, and there he spake with us." This 
 is taken from Gen. xxv, 26; xxxii, 24-30; xxviii, 11-20. The 
 second of these passages in Genesis is Elohistic, the name of Elohim 
 (God} occurring twice in it. 
 
 But according to the new critical school of Kayser, Wellhausen, 
 Proof from HO- and others, the Elohistic portions of Genesis were written 
 tete a( origin t of about the *- ime - Ezra. Now, Hosea's reference to this 
 Genesis. Elohistic section is a palpable refutation of their theory. 
 
 In chap, xii, 12, we have a reference to Gen. xxix, xxx : " And Jacob 
 fled into the country of Syria, and Israel served for a wife, and for 
 a wife he kept sheep." In ix, 10, Hosea, speaking of Israel in the 
 wilderness, says : " But they went to Baal-peor, and separated them- 
 selves unto that shame ; and their abominations were according as 
 they loved." Here we have a clear reference to Num. xxv, in 
 which there is a description of the conduct of Israel, who " joined 
 himself unto Baal-peor," and of the calamities that overtook the 
 people, and of the promise to Phinehas of an everlasting priesthood. 
 The school of Wellhausen put this chapter of Numbers into the 
 Codex of the Priests, which, according to their theory, was written 
 about the time of Ezra. Could any refutation of this be clearer 
 than Hosea's reference to this very chapter? The Pentateuch is 
 clearly referred to in the passage, " Thou hast forgotten the law ' 
 [Torah] of thy God " (iv, 6). Schrader * acknowledges that Hosea 
 was acquainted with Genesis. 
 
 'On Hosea viii, 12, see p. 145. 
 
 *In his edit, of De Wette's Einleitung, pp. 316-318.
 
 OF THE HOLY SCRIPTURES. 191 
 
 CHAPTER XX. 
 
 ALLUSIONS TO THE PENTATEUCH IN THE BOOKS OP PROV- 
 ERBS AND PSALMS. 
 
 / Tlfi Book of Proverbs. From the character of the Book of the 
 *- Proverbs of Solomon we are not to expect any references to the 
 Mosaic history, but to the Mosaic. precepts. And such we Solomon's ai- 
 actually find. Compare, " Let not mercy and truth for- J^ 8 'Vre! 
 sake thee; bind them about thy neck" (chap, iii, 3); and cepts. 
 in reference to moral precepts : " Bind them upon thy fingers " 
 (chap, vii, 3), with Deut. vi, 8, " Thou shalt bind them for a sign 
 upon thine hand, and they shall be as frontlets between thine eyes;" 
 and also with Deut. xi, 18, and Exod. xiii, 19, upon which the pas- 
 sages from Proverbs are based. Compare, " My son, despise not 
 the chastening of the Lord, neither be weary of his correction ; for 
 whom the Lord loveth he correcteth, even as a father the son in 
 whom he delighteth " (chap, iii, n, 12), with Deut. viii, 5, "Thou 
 shalt also consider in thine heart, that, as a man chasteneth his son, 
 so the Lord thy God chasteneth thee." "A false balance is abomi- 
 nation to the Lord" (chap, xi, i) is obviously based on Deut. xxv, 
 13-16, "Thou shalt not have in thy bag divers weights, a great and 
 a small : . . . For all that do such things . . . are an abomination 
 unto the Lord thy God." "It is not good to accept the person of 
 the wicked, to overthrow the righteous in judgment " (chap, xviii, 5) 
 is said, very probably, in reference to Lev. xix, 15, and Deut. xvi, 19. 
 " Remove not the ancient landmark which thy fathers have set " 
 (chap, xxii, 28) refers to Deut. xix, 14, " Thou shalt not remove 
 thy neighbour's landmark, which they of old time have set in thine 
 inheritance, which thou. shalt inherit in the land that the Lord thy 
 God giveth thee to possess it." " He that by usury and unjust gain 
 increaseth his substance " (chap, xxviii, 8) has reference to the Mo- 
 saic law forbidding thg loaning of any thing upon interest (Deut. 
 xxiii, 19). " He that giveth unto the poor shall not lack" (chap, 
 xxviii, 27) seems to be based on Deut. xv, 7-10. "Add thou not 
 unto his [God's] words " (chap, xxx, 6) is derived from Deut. iv, 2, 
 and xii, 32. The prayer of Agur (xxx, 8, 9) appears to be founded 
 in part on Deut. viii, 8-17, where the Israelites are warned against 
 forgetfulness of God when their goods shall increase.
 
 192 INTRODUCTION TO THE STUDY 
 
 The Book of Psalms. The Psalms the earliest ' of which were 
 written about B. C. 1050 by David, and the last about B. C. 450 
 show an acquaintance on the part of their authors with the Penta- 
 teuch. No fair minded critic can deny our statement. The tes- 
 timony is altogether free from suspicion, and is of the most satis- 
 factory kind. Many of the Psalms furnish internal evidence of 
 the age in which they were written. They afford incidental 
 knowledge of the existing institutions in Israel, and refer to the 
 Mosaic history in the most natural way, and allude to the law, the 
 statutes, and the commandments, showing the existence of a Mo- 
 saic code which had a divine authority among them. All the ref- 
 erences to the Mosaic law and history prove that they were the 
 same that we now possess. In the very first Psalm, written, in all 
 probability, by David, the good man is represented as delighting 
 " in the law of the Lord ; and in his law doth he meditate day and 
 night." In Psalm xv, 5. we have a reference to the law prohibiting 
 lending on interest : " He that putteth not out his money to usury." 
 The eighteenth Psalm was undoubtedly written by David, and there 
 is a reference to him in the fiftieth verse. In verse 22 we have a ref- 
 erence to the Mosaic law, "For all his judgments were before me, 
 Psalms of Da- and I did not put away his statutes from me." In Psa. 
 
 feJrinTS'tS xxxiii 6 ~9 we have an allusion to Gen - > " B y the word 
 Pentateuch. of the Lord were the heavens made. . . . He spake, and 
 it was done; he commanded, and it stood fast." This Psalm, in all 
 probability, belongs to David. And in Psalm Ix, 7, which also be- 
 longs to him, we have a reference to Gen. xlix, 10: "Judah is my 
 lawgiver." Compare this with " The sceptre shall not depart from 
 Judah, nor a lawgiver from between his feet," etc. 
 
 In Psalm Ixxviii, attributed to Asaph, a contemporary of David, and 
 bearing internal evidence of belonging to that age, we have a sketch 
 of the history of the Israelites from the time that God visited them in 
 Egypt until David's reign. In the first part of this Psalm it is declared 
 that Jehovah "established a testimony in Jacob, and appointed a law 
 in Israel, which he commanded our fathers that they should make 
 them known to their children, . . . who should arise and declare them 
 to their children." Here we have a reference to the command which 
 God gave the children of Israel, recorded inDeut. vi, 7 : " And thou 
 shall teach them diligently unto thy children ; " and, " but teach 
 them thy sons, and thy sons' sons " (chap, iv, 9) ; " and ye shall teach 
 them your children " (chap, xi, 19). The command to teach the 
 children the law is found only in Deuteronomy^ and we thus have a 
 
 ' We must except from this statement the Ninetieth Psalm, which is attributed 
 to Moses.
 
 OF THE HOLY SCRIPTURES. 193 
 
 very old testimony to this book. In the history of Israel belonging 
 to the Mosaic age, it is evident that the author of the Psalm had the 
 Pentateuch before him. In describing the plagues of Egypt he has 
 in most cases used the very words of the Pentateuch. 
 
 In Psalm Ixxxix, 30, 31, it is said, in reference to David, in whose 
 age it was written, "If his children forsake my law, and walk not 
 in my judgments ; if they break my statutes, and keep not my com- 
 mandments." This evidently refers to a written Mosaic T 
 
 Israelitishhis- 
 code. Psalm xcix, which seems to belong to the time of tory exhibited 
 
 David, contains an allusion, after naming Moses, Aaron, * 
 and Samuel, to the Mosaic legislation : "He spake unto them in the 
 cloudy pillar : they kept his testimonies, and the ordinance that he 
 gave them." 
 
 Psalm cv contains a history of the Israelites from Abraham until 
 their settlement in Canaan. Here the history in the Pentateuch is 
 closely followed, and occasionally some of the facts are thrown into 
 a poetical form. All the parts of this Psalm stand closely connected, 
 and it bears a strong resemblance to Psalm Ixxviii, which evident- 
 ly belongs to Asaph, David's chief musician. The one hundred 
 and fifth Psalm, as far as the 22d verse, is a part of the Psalm of 
 which it is said, "Then on that day David delivered first (this) to 
 thank the Lord into the hand of Asaph and his brethren " (i Chron. 
 xvi, 7). The psalm in Chronicles also contains substantially the 
 96th Psalm. The last part of the 105 th was omitted on the occa- 
 sion as not being suitable to the purpose, and another substituted 
 in its place. Also Psalm cvi recapitulates the Mosaic history in 
 such a way, with so many particulars, as to show an acquaintance 
 with the Pentateuch. It belongs, most probably, to the age of 
 David. 
 
 In the references to sacrifices and offerings in the Davidic Psalms, 
 
 the terms employed, and the kinds of sacrifices and of- 
 
 f *.i ^ c ^u T> i_ T- References to 
 
 fenngs, are the same as those of the Pentateuch. For sacrifices and 
 
 example : " Sacrifice (mi) and offering (nms) thou didst off f to?s 8ame 
 
 J ^ - : ' 5 \ T . / ai . ln t j ie p t , u _ 
 
 not desire . . . burnt offering (nSiy) and j/tf^mV^rixBn) 1 tateuch. 
 hast thou not required " (Psa. xl, 6) ; and, " I will not reprove thee for 
 thy sacrifices nor thy burnt offerings" (Psa. 1, 8). We have already 
 referred to the Mosaic institutions mentioned in the Psalms. In the 
 Davidic Psalms we have, law (rnin, torah), statute (ph, a prescribed 
 statute] , judgment (DBtyo), and commandment (mxo), the identical terms 
 of the Pentateuch. In view of all these facts, how absurd is the re- 
 mark of Dr. Davidson 2 that the law, the statutes, judgments, testimonies 
 I The form in the Pentateuch is riNtan. 'Introduction, pp. 120, 121.
 
 194 INTRODUCTION TO THE STUDY 
 
 of the Lord, found in the Psalms, are general language, "referring 
 not so much to the injunctions peculiar to the Mosaic religion as to 
 the moral requirements which conscience, aided by the Spirit of 
 God, is able to apprehend." 
 
 But besides the references to the statutes and institutions of the 
 Pentateuch, we find the following in Psa. xl, 7 : " Lo, I come with 
 the volume of the book prescribed unto me." Gesenius understands 
 this volume to be the book of the law ; and it is difficult to refer it 
 to any thing else and make good sense. This psalm is ascribed to 
 David, and the inscription to the chief musician shows that it was 
 written before the exile. 
 
 , The examination of the Davidic Psalms establishes 
 
 Recognition of . 
 
 the Pentateuch the fact that the Pentateuch existed and was recognised 
 inDavid'stime. ^ thg agg of Dav id as containing the law of Moses and 
 the authentic history of the patriarchs and of the Mosaic times. 
 
 CHAPTER XXI. 
 
 TESTIMONIES FURNISHED BY THE HISTORY OF THE BOOKS 
 OF SAMUEL AND KINGS TO THE EXISTENCE AND THE AU- 
 THORITY OF THE PENTATEUCH. 
 
 "DEFORE giving the passages that refer to the institutions in the 
 *~* Pentateuch, we wish to direct attention to those which speak 
 of the book of the law, or to the written law of Moses. In the 
 charge which David, when about to die (about B. C. 1015), gives 
 his son Solomon, he refers to the Pentateuch in these words : 
 David's refer- " ^ nc * keep l ^ e charge of the Lord thy God to walk 
 ences to the in his ways, to keep his statutes, and his command- 
 ments, and his judgments, and his testimonies, as it 
 is written in the law of Moses" etc. (i Kings ii, 3). In 2 Kings 
 xvii, 34-37, we have the following reference to the Pentateuch: 
 "The law and the commandment which the Lord commanded 
 the children of Jacob, whom he named Israel ; with whom the 
 Lord had made a covenant. . . . And the statutes, and the ordi- 
 nances, and the law, and the commandment which he wrote for 
 you," etc. But the most important testimony to the Pentateuch 
 The "Book of is to be found in the discovery of the book of the 
 the Law." f aw ^ j n t h e temple in the eighteenth year of King 
 Josiah (about B. C. 624). It is stated in 2 Kings xxii that 
 when the Jewish temple was repaired by the pious Josiah, Hilkiah 
 the high priest found in it a book of the law, and gave it to Shaphan
 
 OF THE HOLY SCRIPTURES. 195 
 
 the scribe, who read it himself, and then read it to the king. The 
 Jewish monarch was so astonished at its contents that he rent his 
 clothes, and sent Hilkiah and others to inquire of the Lord for him, 
 " and for the people, and for all Judah, concerning the words of this 
 book that is found : for great is the wrath of the Lord that is kin- 
 dled against us, because our fathers have not hearkened unto the 
 words of this book, to do according unto all that which is written 
 concerning us." When the king's messengers came to Huldah the 
 prophetess she sent back word to the king: "Thus saith the Lord 
 God of Israel, Tell the man that sent you to me, ... I will bring evil 
 upon this place, and upon the inhabitants thereof, even all the 
 words of the book which the king of Judah hath read." This book 
 is called by the historian in the next chapter (xxiii, 25) " the law of 
 Moses." It is evident that Huldah the prophetess was already ac- 
 quainted with the book, and the king's language shows that his an- 
 cestors must have been acquainted with at least its purport, for he 
 supposes them guilty for not obeying it. He is not surprised at the 
 existence of such a book, but at its threatening contents. 
 
 This book of the law seems to have been the temple copy ; nor is 
 there anything strange respecting its former concealment or its dis- 
 covery. For fifty-seven years preceding Josiah's reign a fearful 
 apostasy existed in Judah. Manasseh, in whose steps Amon trod, 
 had reigned for fifty-five years. " He did that which was evil in the 
 sight of the Lord, after the abominations of the heathen, whom the 
 Lord cast out before the children of Israel. For he built up again the 
 high places which Hezekiah his father had destroyed ; and he reared 
 up altars for Baal, and made a grove [Astarte, or Venus], as did 
 Ahab king of Israel; and worshipped a'J the host of heaven, and 
 served them. And he built altars in the house of the Lord, of 
 which the Lord said, In Jerusalem will I put my name. And he 
 built altars for all the host of heaven in the two courts of the house 
 of the Lord " (2 Kings xxi, 2-5). 
 
 It is not strange, under such circumstances, that the book of the 
 law had been neglected, and its threats quite forgotten. V iewsofBieek 
 Both Bleek and Davidson concede that this copy of Davidson, and 
 the Mosaic law contained the Book of Deuteronomy. 
 Schrader, in his edition of De Wette's Introduction, thinks that the 
 book of the law found in the temple refers exclusively to Deuteron- 
 omy. This is not in the least probable, since the other books of 
 the Pentateuch, as he admits, were in existence at that time. The 
 threatenings of the book of the law referred to in 2 Kings xxii seem 
 to refer especially to Deut. xxviii, xxix. 
 
 After the book of the law was read to the king, he gathered all
 
 196 INTRODUCTION TO THE STUDY 
 
 the inhabitants of Jerusalem, and the prophets and priests, and read 
 the book to them also. He commenced a reformation in both 
 Judah and Samaria, and in the same year held a passover, such as 
 had not before been held either in the days of the judges or the 
 kings (2 Kings xxiii, 22). 
 
 In 2 Kings xxi, 7, 8, the writer states that in the declarations the 
 LORD made to David and Solomon he said, " If they will observe to 
 do according to all the law that my servant Moses commanded them." 
 
 We have already seen that in the times of David, and in the sub- 
 sequent ages, the book of the law of Moses is mentioned as an ex- 
 isting authoritative document. We have traced it from the times of 
 the Maccabees up to the time of David. We see no reason to doubt 
 that during all these ages it was the identical Pentateuch that we now 
 have. All the quotations from it and references to it show this fact 
 
 The next inquiry is, Does the history of the times from King 
 Josiah (when it is granted that a large part of the Pentateuch already 
 existed) back to David and Samuel indicate the existence and au- 
 thority of the Pentateuch ? This must be answered in the affirma- 
 tive, as the existing institutions and the references to the Pentateuch 
 show. .We may begin with the two books of Kings. In i Kings 
 i, 39, it is stated that " Zadok the priest took a horn of oil out of the 
 tabernacle and anointed Solomon." This holy oil of the tabernacle 
 and its uses are described in Exodus xxx, 23-30. In the command 
 given to slay Joab, who had been guilty of murder, it is said : " That 
 thou mayest take away the innocent blood " (chap, ii, 31), evidently 
 in accordance with Numbers xxxv, 33, "The land cannot be cleansed 
 of the blood that is shed therein, but by the blood of him that shed 
 it." In chap, iii, 15, mention is made of "the ark of the covenant 
 of the Lord," before which Solomon stood "and offered up burnt 
 offerings, and offered peace offerings." The sacrifices here named 
 are those of the Mosaic law ; and the " ark of the covenant of the 
 Lord " is the exact language of Deut. x, 8, and xxxi, 9, 25. In chapter 
 iv, 13, are mentioned " the towns of Jair the son of Manasseh, which 
 are in Gilead to him also pertained the region of Argob, which is 
 in Bashan, threescore great cities with walls and brazen bars," which 
 is manifestly taken from Numbers xxxii, 41, and Deut. iii, 4, 5. In 
 chap, vi, 12, God says to Solomon, " If thou wilt walk in my stat- 
 utes, and execute my judgments, and keep all my commandments to 
 walk in them," etc. Here the precepts of the Lord are expressed 
 in the very-words of the Pentateuch. Compare ver. 13, "And I will 
 dwell among the children of Israel, and will not forsake my people 
 Israel," with Exod. xxv, 8, "That I may dwell among them; " and 
 Deut. xxxi, 6, " He [Jehovah] will not fail thee, nor forsake thee."
 
 OF THE HOLY SCRIPTURES. 19? 
 
 In the temple which Solomon built to Jehovah we find the ar- 
 rangement of the sanctuary described in Exodus car- 
 
 r T i i TTT , , Parallel be- 
 
 ned out so far as it was applicable. We have within, a tweeu soio- 
 
 "most holy place." The same is found in Exod. mo ?\ temple 
 ' r and the sanc- 
 
 xxvi, 33, and Lev. xvi, 2. Compare "The whole altar tuarj in Ex- 
 that was by the oracle he overlaid with gold " with c 
 Exod. xxx, 3. "Thou shalt overlay it [the altar] with pure gold." 
 Also compare " And within the oracle he made two cherubim " (chap. 
 vi, 23), "And they stretched forth the wings of the cherubim, so that 
 the wing of the one touched the one wall, and the wing of the other 
 cherub touched the other wall ; and their wings touched one an- 
 other " (ver. 27) ; Exod. xxv, 20, and xxxvii, g. Solomon also made 
 a table of gold, upon which was placed the showbread (chap, vii, 48,) 
 which was required by Exod. xxv, 30. 
 
 In chapter viii, 2, we find that " all the men of Israel assembled 
 themselves unto King Solomon at the feast in the month Ethanim, 
 which is the seventh month." This was the feast of tabernacles, which 
 Moses commanded the children of Israel to keep in the seventh 
 month (Lev. xxiii, 34). " And the priests took up the ark " (ver. 3). 
 This was in accordance with Deut. xxxi, g. " And they brought up 
 the ark of the Lord, and the tabernacle of the congregation, and all 
 the holy vessels that were in the tabernacle, even these did the priests 
 and the Levites bring up" (ver. 4). The phrase, "tabernacle of 
 the congregation," is the one used in the Pentateuch. The priests 
 also brought the ark of the covenant into the most holy place. 
 
 " And I have set there a place for the ark, wherein is the covenant 
 of the Lord which he made with our fathers, when he brought them 
 out of the land of Egypt" (chap, viii, 21). This covenant of the 
 Lord here referred to by Solomon is evidently the book of the law of 
 Moses. It is " the book of the covenant " mentioned in Exod. xxiv, 7, 
 which Moses wrote and delivered to the priests (Deut. xxxi, 9). 
 In Deut. xxxi, 24-26, it is stated that when Moses had made an end 
 of writing the book of the law he commanded the priests to put it 
 in the side of the ark of the covenant; and thus there is no con- 
 tradiction of the statement (i Kings viii, 9) : " There was nothing 
 in the ark save the two tables of stone, which Moses put there at 
 Horeb," etc., in which we have a reference to the Mosaic origin cf 
 these tables as given in Exod. xxv, 16; xxxi, 18. 
 
 The language of Solomon in his prayer at the dedication of the 
 temple contains several quotations from the Pentateuch : ParaUel8 ^^ 
 
 Who "keepest covenant and mercy " (i Kings viii, 23), is tained in soi- 
 - . . _. omon's prayer, 
 
 the exact language of Deut. vn, 9. Compare When thy 
 
 people Israel be smitten down before the enemy, because they have
 
 198 INTRODUCTION TO THE STUDY 
 
 sinned against thee, and shall turn again to thee " (ver. 33), with Lev. 
 xxvi, 17, and Deut. xxviii, 25. " When heaven is shut up and there is 
 no rain, because they have sinned against thee," etc. (ver. 35), is of sim- 
 ilar import to Lev. xxvi, 19, and Deut. xxviii, 23. Compare " If there 
 be in the land famine, if there be pestilence, blasting, mildew, locust, or 
 if there be caterpillar " (ver. 37), with Deut. xxviii, 21, 22, 38. "For 
 thou didst separate them from among all the people of the earth, to be 
 thine inheritance, as thou spakest by the hand of Moses thy servant, 
 when thou broughtest our fathers out of Egypt " (ver. 53). Here it is 
 impossible to escape the similarity to Exod. xix, 5, " Then ye shall be 
 a peculiar treasure unto me above all people ; " and to Deut. xiv, 2, 
 " The Lord had chosen thee to be a peculiar people unto himself; ' 
 and to Deut. ix, 29, "Yet they are thy people and thine inherit- 
 ance." And when Solomon blessed the people, he said: "There 
 hath not failed one word of all his good promise, which he promised 
 by the hand of Moses his servant " (ver. 56). It is evident that 
 Solomon refers to ^.written history of the Mosaic legislation. Com- 
 pare " Israel shall be a proverb and a byword among all people ' 
 (chap, ix, 7), with " Thou shalt become ... a proverb, and a byword, 
 among all nations " (Deut. xxviii, 37). In " and they shall say, 
 Why hath the Lord done thus unto this land, and to this house ? 
 and they shall answer, Because they forsook the Lord their God, 
 who brought forth their fathers out of the land of Egypt," etc. 
 (chap, ix, 8, 9), we have almost the identical words of Deut. xxix, 
 24-26. " Three times in a year did Solomon offer burnt offerings 
 and peace offerings upon the altar which he built unto the Lord " 
 (chap, ix, ver. 25) : this seems to mean at the three great festivals 
 established in the Pentateuch. The passage xi, 2, refers to Exod. 
 xxxiv, 1 6, and to Deut. vii, 3, 4, in forbidding matrimonial alliances 
 between the Israelites and the heathen. This reference, however, 
 is made by the historian himself. 
 
 When the ten tribes revolted from under Rehoboam, and made 
 Jeroboam king (B. C. 975), the latter built Shechem, and endeavoured 
 to establish himself in his kingdom. But the greatest obstacle to 
 injunctions of the separate existence of the ten tribes was the religious 
 
 the Pentateuch ..... .. . ,. iL 
 
 held the Jews bond existing between all the tribes, especially the unity 
 *t time of T^- O f tne sanctuary. "And Jeroboam said in his heart. 
 
 Toll from R*- 
 
 boboam. Now shall the kingdom return to the house of David : 
 
 if this people go up to do sacrifice in the house of the Lord at 
 Jerusalem, then shall the heart of this people turn again unto their 
 lord, even unto Rehoboam king of Judah " (i Kings xii, '26, 27). It is 
 evident from this that Jeroboam regarded his people as feeling bound 
 to attend the great festivals at Jerusalem. Such a feeling of obliga-
 
 OF THE HOLY SCRIPTURES. 
 
 199 
 
 The calves at 
 Dan and Beth- 
 el imitations of 
 the Egyptian 
 Apis and Mne- 
 
 tion on the part of the rebellious tribes could spring only from an in- 
 junction in the Pentateuch, such as we find in Deut. xii, 5, 6, "But 
 unto the place which the Lord your God shall choose out of all your 
 tribes to put his name there, even unto his habitation shall ye seek, 
 and thither thou shalt come : and thither ye shall bring your burnt 
 offerings." " Whereupon the king took counsel, and made two calves 
 of gold, and said unto them, It is too much for you to go up to Jeru- 
 salem : behold thy gods, O Israel, which brought thee up out of the 
 land of Egypt. And he set the one in Bethel, and the 
 other put he in Dan " (i Kings xii, 28, 29). This was 
 a renewal of the worship of the calf (or Apis) by Aaron 
 and other Israelites, borrowed from Egypt. The an- 
 cient Egyptians worshipped Osiris, their great god, at V1S ' 
 Memphis, under the form of the sacred bull Apis ; and at Heliop- 
 olis, under that of the ox, Mnevis. Diodorus Sictilus tells us that 
 the worship of Apis arose in the idea that the soul of Osiris mi- 
 grated into this animal, and that through him Osiris continued to 
 manifest himself to man through successive ages. The Egyptians 
 had also figures of their gods, which " were only vicarious forms 
 not intended to be looked upon as real personages " (Wilkinson). 
 
 When Aaron instituted this worship in the desert, the intention 
 was to worship the golden calf as a symbol of Jehovah, as is appar- 
 ent from Aaron's declaration, "To-morrow is a feast of Jehovah." 
 Jeroboam had become well acquainted with the calf worship of 
 Egypt during his residence there (i Kings xi, 40), and the two 
 calves, in imitation of Apis and Mnevis among the Egyptians, were 
 intended to symbolize Jehovah. But there was a further object in 
 view. The Pentateuch commanded all the males to appear three 
 times a year at the great festivals before the Lord in one place, which 
 must have been inconvenient to many. Hence his language, *' It is 
 too much for you to go up to Jerusalem." To remedy this incon- 
 venience he set up hvo calves one in Bethel, and the other in Dan 
 to accommodate the people in Middle and in Northern Palestine. 
 In the institution of this worship he used the very language of Aaron 
 It was not necessary for Jeroboam to have but one place of worship, 
 for he had not the sacred ark of the covenant. 
 
 The author of 2 Chron. states : " The priests and the Levites that 
 were in all Israel resorted to him [Rehoboam] out of all their coasts. 
 For the Levites left their suburbs and their possession, and came to 
 Judah and Jerusalem : for Jeroboam and his sons had cast them off 
 from executing the priest's office unto the Lord " (chap, xi, 13, 14). 
 Jeroboam " made priests of the lowest of the people, which were not 
 of the sons of Levi" (i Kings xii, 31). The ground of his rejection of
 
 200 INTRODUCTION TO THE STUDY 
 
 the sons of Levi evidently was, because they could not be brought 
 to disobey the plain injunctions of the Pentateuch, the commands of 
 Jehovah, and to assist Jeroboam in his idolatrous worship. Rathei 
 than serve him they preferred to sacrifice all their possessions. Ac- 
 cording to 2 Chron. xi, 16, the pious Israelites from the ten tribes still 
 continued to come to Jerusalem to sacrifice to Jehovah. All this 
 presupposes the existence and authority of the Pentateuch. 
 
 " Jeroboam ordained a feast in the eighth month, on the fifteenth 
 day of the month, like unto the feast that is in Judah." He offered sac- 
 rifice on the altar in Bethel on this day of the eighth month, " which 
 he had devised of his own heart" (i Kings xii, 32, 33). According 
 to Leviticus xxiii, 34, the festival was to be kept on the fifteenth day 
 of the seventh month, so that Jeroboam changed only the month. 
 
 In i Kings xviii, 31, "Jacob, unto whom the word of the Lord 
 came, saying, Israel shall be thy name," we have a reference to Gen. 
 xxxii, 28. In the sacrifice offered by Elijah on Mount Carmel 
 (i Kings xviii, 33), it is stated that " he put the wood in order, and 
 cut the bullock in pieces." Here we find a compliance with Lev. 
 i, 5-8 : " He shall kill the bullock . . . and he shall flay the burnt 
 offering, and cut it into his pieces . . . and lay the wood in order 
 upon the fire." " And he [Elijah] went in the strength of that meat 
 Numerous par- forty days and forty nights unto Horeb the Mount of 
 
 a ' le k k***? 11 God " (chap, xix, 8). In Exodus this mountain is so 
 the books of the v 
 
 Kings and the called, and there is a parallelism in the passage to the 
 Pentateuch. fast Qf forty days and forty nights of Moses ( Exod 
 
 xxxiv, 28). "And Naboth said to Ahab, The Lord forbid it me, 
 that I should give the inheritance of my fathers unto thee " (chap. 
 xxi, 3). This is in reference to Lev. xxv, 23 : " The land shall not 
 be sold forever;" and to Num. xxxvi, 7 : "So shall not the inherit- 
 ance of the children of Israel remove from tribe to tribe." On this 
 ground Naboth refused to sell his vineyard to Ahab. 
 
 In the contrivance of Jezebel to effect the death of Naboth we 
 recognize the law of the Pentateuch : * " And set two men, son's of 
 Belial, before him, to bear witness against him, saying, Thou didst 
 blaspheme God and the king. And then carry him out, and stone 
 him, that he may die" (chap, xxi, 10). Compare with this, "Thou 
 shalt not revile God, nor curse the ruler of thy people " (Exodus 
 xxii, 28) ; and, " He that blasphemeth the name of the Lord, he 
 shall surely be put to death, and all the congregation shall certainly 
 stone him " (Lev. xxiv, 16). The law of Moses required at least 
 two witnesses to put any one to death (Numbers xxxv, 30; Deuter- 
 onomy xvii, 6). "And it came to pass in the morning, when the 
 
 1 Here we have proofs that the law of Moses had force among the ten tribes.
 
 OF THE HOLY SCRIPTURES. 201 
 
 meat offering was offered " (2 Kings iii, 20). Here we have an allu- 
 sion to the usual time of the morning sacrifice as prescribed in 
 Exod. xxix, 39, 40. " The creditor is come to take unto him my 
 two sons to be bondmen " (chap, iv, i). The law of Moses (Lev. 
 xxv, 39, 40) allowed debtors to be sold for their debts for a term of 
 years. In the case referred to the sons of the widow were de- 
 manded. " About this season, according to the time of life, thou 
 shalt embrace a son " (chap, iv, 16). This language, addressed by 
 Elisha to the Shunammite woman, is based on Gen. xviii, 10 : " I 
 will certainly return unto thee according to the time of life j and, lo, 
 Sarah thy wife shall have a son." " And there were four leprous men 
 at the entering in of the gate " (chap, vii, 3). The Mosaic law required 
 lepers to be excluded from the camp (Lev. xiii, 46). In accordance 
 with this law we find that these lepers did not go into the city to 
 announce to the king the flight of the Syrians, but called the porter. 
 
 In 2 Kings xii, 4, mention is made of " the money of every one 
 that passeth the account," that is, numbered, as prescribed in Exod. 
 xxx, 13, where every one that is numbered is required to pay half a 
 shekel for the service of the tabernacle. " The trespass money and 
 sin money was not brought into the house of the Lord : it was the 
 priests' " (chap, xii, 16). In the Mosaic laws respecting sin offering 
 and trespass offering the money paid was the property of the priests 
 (Lev. v, 15, 18; vii, 7; Num. xviii, 9). When Amaziah was con- 
 firmed in the kingdom of Judah (about B. C. 839), it is stated (chap, 
 xiv, 5, 6) that he put to death the servants who had slain " his fa- 
 ther. But the children of the murderers he slew not : according unto 
 that which is written in the book of the law of Moses, wherein the 
 Lord commanded, saying, The fathers shall not be put to death for 
 the children, nor the children be put to death for the fathers; but 
 every man shall be put to death for his own sin." This is the language 
 of Deut. xxiv, 16, and it is found nowhere else in the Pentateuch. 
 "And he sacrificed and burnt incense in the high places, and on the 
 hills, and under every green tree " (chap, xvi, 4). This is borrowed 
 from Deut. xii, 2. In chap, xvi, 15, Ahaz commands the priest to 
 offer upon the great altar " the morning burnt offering, and the 
 evening meat offering." These offerings were required by Exod. 
 xxix, 39-41- 
 
 In chap, xviii, 4, we have a reference to the history of the Penta- 
 teuch : " He [Hezekiah] brake in pieces the brazen serpent that 
 Moses had made : for unto those days the children of Israel did 
 burn incense to it." Its institution by Moses for the healing of the 
 Israelites is mentioned in Num. xxi, 9. In chap, xxi, 6, it is said that 
 Manasseh " observed times, and used enchantments, and dealt with
 
 202 INTRODUCTION TO THE STUDY 
 
 familiar spirits and wizards : he wrought much wickedness in the 
 Enchantments si 8 ht of the Lord to provoke him to anger-" The law 
 
 -conveying of of Moses absolutely forbade these things : " Neither shall 
 the ark of God- , . D 
 
 ye use enchantment, nor observe times. Regard not 
 
 them that have familiar spirits, neither seek after wizards, to be de- 
 filed by them " (Lev. xix, 26, 31). Very similar is Deut. xviii, 1012. 
 In the Second Book of Samuel we find several references to the 
 Pentateuch. It is said in chap, vi, 6, 7, that when the ark of God 
 was shaken, while it was conveyed, Uzzah put forth his hand to steady 
 it, and that God smote him and he died. This is in accordance with 
 the regulation of Moses, by which no one except Aaron and his sons 
 was allowed to touch the ark, upon the penalty of death (Num. 
 iv, 15). When David brought the ark of Jehovah to Jerusalem, he 
 placed it in the tabernacle, and offered burnt offerings and peace 
 offerings before the Lord (chap, vi, 17). These offerings were made 
 in accordance with the Pentateuch. In chap, vii, 6, God says : " I 
 have not dwelt in any house since the time that I brought up the 
 children of Israel out of Egypt, even to this day, but have walked 
 in a tent and in a tabernacle. 11 Tent and tabernacle are the words 
 of the Pentateuch expressing the sanctuary set up in the desert. 
 The tent was the covering placed over the tabernacle. 
 
 When David had been made king over Israel, in expressing his 
 
 gratitude to God he exclaimed : " Thou art great, O Lord 
 Language of . . . 
 
 David foundin God : for there is none like thee, neither is there any 
 
 Deuteronomy. God b es id es thee, according to all that we have heard 
 with our ears. And what one nation in the earth is like thy people, 
 even like Israel, whom God went to redeem for a people to himself, 
 and lo make him a name, and to do for you great things and terri- 
 ble, for thy land, before thy people, which thou redeemedst to thee 
 from Egypt, from the nations and their gods?" (2 Sam. vii, 22, 23). 
 This language is based on Deut. iv, 7, 32-35. In chap, viii, 3, it is 
 said that David smote the king of Zobah as he went to recover his 
 border at the river Euphrates. Here we have a reference to Gen. 
 xv, 18, where God promises to the seed of Abraham the land ex- 
 tending from the river of Egypt to the river Euphrates, and which 
 Israel had not yet possessed. In Nathan's parable to David of the 
 rich man who took the poor man's lamb, the Jewish monarch de- 
 clared that he should restore the lamb fourfold (chap, xii, 6). The 
 Mosaic law (Exod. xxii, i) required that four sheep should be given 
 for one that was stolen. The treatment that the king's wives should 
 receive for his crime (chap. xii. n) seems to refer to Deut. xxviii, 30. 
 In chap, xv, 24, Zadok, and all the Levites with him, are represent'^ 
 as bearing the ark of the covenant of God. This was in accordance
 
 OF THE HOLY SCRIPTURES. 203 
 
 with Num. iv, 15. Respecting the numbers of Israel, it is said: 
 
 " As the sand is by the sea for multitude " (chap. 
 
 \ rrM I Allusions in 
 
 xvn, n). This is based on Gen. xxn, 17. In chap, isamueitotne 
 
 xxii, 23, David says : " For all his judgments were be- Pentateuch - 
 fore me : and as for his statutes, I did not depart from them." 
 These laws are evidently the code of the Pentateuch. 
 
 We find also in First Samuel a considerable number of refer- 
 ences to either the language or institutions of the Pentateuch. 
 The very first part of the history in this book exhibits to us at 
 Shiloh the tabernacle of the congregation, in which was the ark of 
 the covenant, whither the people assembled to sacrifice to Jehovah 
 (about 1170 B. C). It is said (chap, i, 3) that Elkanah "went up 
 out of his city yearly to worship and to sacrifice to the Lord of hosts in 
 Shiloh." " Elkanah and all his house went up to offer unto the Lord 
 the yearly sacrifice and his vow" (chap, i, 21). This was evidently 
 the yearly passover, the chief of the three festivals of the Israelites, 
 which the males only were required to attend. Nor does the lan- 
 guage exclude the attendance of Elkanah himself at the other two 
 festivals. 
 
 In Hannah's prayer we find a reference to Deut. xxxii, 39, " The 
 Lord killeth and maketh alive " (chap, ii, 6). And in chap, ii, 2, 
 there is a probable allusion to Deut. iii, 24, and to xxvii, 4. In 
 chap, ii, 1 8, we find Samuel ministering to the Lord. Samuel 
 belonged to the tribe of Levi (i Chron. vi, 28, 34-38). And 
 in chap, ii, 22, it is stated that the women were assembled at 
 the door of the tabernacle of the congregation. This was the ar- 
 rangement existing in the time of Moses (Exod. xxxviii, 8). In i Sam. 
 ii, 27, 28, it is said, "And there came a man of God unto Eli, and 
 said unto him, Thus saith the Lord, Did I plainly appear unto the 
 house of thy father, when they were in Egypt in Pharaoh's house ? 
 and did I choose him out of all the tribes of Israel to be my priest, 
 to offer upon mine altar, to burn incense, to wear an ephod before 
 me? and did I give unto the house of thy father all the offerings 
 made by fire of the children of Israel ? " Here the reference to the 
 institutions of the Pentateuch is too plain to be mistaken. Compare 
 Exod. xxviii, i, 4; Num. xvi, 5; xviii, i, 7; Lev. ii, 3, 10, etc., 
 where all these things are mentioned. Compare " I said indeed 
 that thy house, and the house of thy father, should walk before me 
 for ever" (chap, ii, 30), with Exod. xxix, 9: "And the priest's office 
 shall be theirs [Aaron and his sons'] for a perpetual statute." 
 
 When the ark of God, carried away by the Philistines, brought 
 upon them disaster, and they became anxious about its return, they 
 concluded to restore it with a trespass offering, thus showing their 
 14
 
 204 INTRODUCTION TO THE STUDY 
 
 knowledge of such an offering among the Israelites as is prescribed 
 in the Pentateuch. Compare chap, vi, 3, with Lev. v, 15 
 
 The language of the Philistines upon the occasion shows a knowl- 
 edge of the facts of the Pentateuch : " Wherefore then do ye hard- 
 en your hearts, as the Egyptians and Pharaoh hardened their hearts ? 
 when he had wrought wonderfully among them, did they not let the 
 people go, and they departed ? " (i Sam. vi, 6). Compare chap, xiv, 
 32, 33, "And the people did eat them with the blood. Then they 
 told Saul, saying, Behold, the people sin against the Lord, in that 
 they eat with the blood," with Leviticus xvii, 10, " And whatso- 
 ever man there be of the house of Israel, or of the strangers that 
 sojourn among you, that eateth any manner of blood ; I will even 
 set my face against that soul that eateth blood, and will cut him off 
 from among his people." 
 
 " I remember that which Amalek did to Israel, how he laid wait 
 for him in the way, when he came up from Egypt " (chap, xv, 2). 
 Here the allusion is especially to Deut. xxv, 17. Before Saul 
 slaughtered the Amalekites he requested the Kenites to depart from 
 among them : " For ye showed kindness to all the children of Israel, 
 when they came up out of Egypt " (chap, xv, 6). In Judges i, 16, 
 it is stated that the children of the Kenite, Moses's father-in-law 
 went up with the children of Judah into the desert of Judah. From 
 this it appears that the Kenites were relatives of Moses, and are to 
 be identified with Jethro and Hobab, who paid him friendly visits 
 in the desert (Exod. xviii, 5-27 ; Num. x, 29-32). 
 
 " The Strength of Israel will not lie nor repent : for he is not a 
 man, that he should repent " (chap, xv, 29). This seems to repeat 
 Num. xxiii, 19: "God is not a man, that he should lie ; neither tue 
 son of man, that he should repent." " Sanctify yourselves, and come 
 with me to the sacrifice " (chapter xvi, 5). According to Exodus 
 xix, 10, for a meeting of a very sacred and solemn character the 
 children of Israel were required to sanctify themselves. " Behold, 
 to-morrow is the new moon, and I should not fail to sit with the 
 king at meat " (chap, xx, 5). The new moon was a festive day 
 according to Numbers x, 10. In chap, xxi mention is made of the 
 showbread before the Lord. This was an arrangement prescribed 
 in Exod. xxv, 30. "And Saul had put away those that had familiar 
 spirits, and the wizards, out of the land " (chap, xxviii, 3). This was 
 carrying out Exodus xxii, 18: "Thou shall not suffer a witch to 
 live." "And when Saul inquired of the Lord, the Lord answered 
 him not, neither bv dreams, nor by URIM, nor by prophets " (chap, 
 xxviii, 6). Here we have an allusion to the Mosaic appointment 
 (Num. xxvii, 21), where it is commanded respecting Joshua : " He
 
 OF THE HOLY SCRIPTURES. 205 
 
 shall stand before Eleazar the priest, who shall ask counsel for him 
 after the judgment of URIM before the Lord." In chap, xxx, 24, 25, 
 it is stated that David made it a statute and an ordinance for Israel 
 unto this day, that spoils should be equally divided between those 
 who fought and those who remained with the stuff. In this regula- 
 tion David seems to have had before his eyes the example mentioned 
 in Num. xxxi, 27, where no general precept was enjoined. 
 
 CHAPTER XXII. 
 
 TRACES OF THE PENTATEUCH IN THE BOOKS OF RUTH 
 AND JUDGES. 
 
 Book of Ruth. As the Book of Ruth contains but four 
 -L chapters, we are not to expect many references in it to the 
 Mosaic history and laws. 
 
 After Naomi and her daughter-in-law, Ruth, came to Bethlehem, 
 we find Ruth addressing Naomi in the following language : " Let 
 me now go to the field, and glean ears of corn after him in whose 
 sight I shall find grace " (chap, ii, 2). This she did upon gaining 
 her mother-in-law's consent, and the act was in accordance with the 
 Mosaic law : " And when ye reap the harvest of your land, thou 
 shall not wholly reap the corners of thy field, neither shalt thou 
 gather the gleanings of thy harvest. . . . thou shalt leave them for 
 the poor and stranger " (Lev. xix, 9, 10). We find the same precept 
 in Deut. xxiv, 19. 
 
 The redemption of land is referred to in chapter iv, 4 : "If thou 
 wilt redeem it, redeem it : but if thou wilt not redeem it, then tell me, 
 that I may know : for there is none to redeem it besides thee : and 
 I am after thee. And he said, I will redeem it ; " but subsequently 
 he declined. And when Ruth's near kinsman refused to redeem the 
 inheritance of Naomi's husband, Boaz, the next of kin, purchased it, 
 and remarked : " Moreover Ruth the Moabitess, the wife of Mahlon, 
 have I purchased to be my wife, to raise up the name of the dead 
 upon his inheritance, that the name of the dead be not cut off from 
 among his brethren," etc. (chap, iv, 10). Here we have a reference 
 to Deut. xxv, 5-10, in which are prescribed the regulations respect- 
 ing the marriage of a brother to his brother's childless widow, that 
 the name of the deceased brother "be not put out of Israel." 
 
 In chap, iv, n, 12, mention is made of Leah and Rachel, and of 
 Pharez and Tamar, from the Book of Genesis.
 
 206 INTRODUCTION TO THE STUDY 
 
 Book of Judges. The Book of Judges contains many allu- 
 sions to the Books of Moses. " And they gave Hebron unto 
 Caleb, as Moses said " (chap, i, 20). This is in accordance 
 with Num. xiv, 24, where God declares in respect to Caleb, 
 one of the spies who went to Hebron, " him will I bring into 
 the land whereinto he went ; and his seed shall possess it." The 
 same declaration is also made in Deut. i, 36. " I made you 
 to go up out of Egypt, and have brought you unto the land 
 which I sware unto your fathers; and I said, I will never break 
 my covenant with you ; and ye shall make no league with the in- 
 habitants of this land ; ye shall throw down their altars : but ye have 
 not obeyed my voice" (chap, ii, i, 2). In this passage we have a 
 reference to Gen. xvii, 7, in which God declares to Abraham that 
 his covenant with him shall be " for an everlasting covenant ; " to 
 Deut. vii, 2, "Thou shalt make no league [n*i3, covenant} with 
 
 them ; " and to Deut. xii, 3 : "Ye shall overthrow their altars, and 
 break their pillars." In chap, vi, 21, mention is made of unleavened 
 cakes, bread that was appointed in various parts of the Pentateuch. 
 Compare chap, vii, 3, where Gideon says to his host, " Whosoever 
 is fearful and afraid, let him return and depart early from Mount 
 Gilead," with Deut. xx, 8, where the following direction is given to 
 the officers, to be observed on the eve of a battle : " They shall say, 
 What man is there that is fearful and fainthearted ? let him go and 
 return unto his house." 
 
 When Jephthah was about to fight the children of Ammon, he 
 sends messengers to their king, to give him a summary of the most 
 important circumstances connected with the affairs of the children 
 of Israel and the children of Ammon (chap, xi, 14-26). This nar- 
 rative is evidently taken from the Pentateuch, for the points of co- 
 incidence are too numerous to be accidental. We have mention of 
 the Israelites coming to the Red Sea, just as we find in Numbers 
 xxxiii, 10 ; the arrival in Kadesh (Num. xiii, 26) ; the message sent 
 by the Israelites from that place to the king of Edom, " Let us 
 pass, I pray thee, through thy country " (Num. xx, 17), and the re- 
 fusal of the king of Edom; the compassing of the land of Edom, and 
 Quotations in the land of Moab, and the coming by the east side of the 
 
 X'tbelS land of Moab ( as we find Num> xxi ' 4> ") ; the P itchin 8 
 tateuch. on the other side of the Arnon, without entering Moab, 
 
 which is stated to have been on the border of the Arnon, just as we 
 read in Num. xxi, 13; the sending of a message to Sihon, king of 
 the Amorites, substantially as we find it in Num. xxi, 21, 22, and 
 his refusal to let Israel pass through ; his defeat, and the occupation 
 of his country by the Israelites, just as we find related in Numbers
 
 OF THE HOLY SCRIPTURES. 207 
 
 xxi, 21-25. Reference is also made to Balaam, the son of Zippor 
 (chap, xi, 25). 
 
 When the birth of Samson was predicted, Manoah's wife was 
 charged to " drink not wine nor strong drink, and eat not any un- 
 clean thing : for, lo, thou shalt conceive and bear a son ; and nc 
 razor shall come on his head : for the child shall be a Nazarite 
 unto God from the womb " (chap, xiii, 4, 5). Here we have an al- 
 lusion to the law of the Nazarite in Num. vi, 2-5, in which it is 
 enjoined that he shall drink no wine nor strong drink ; and that no 
 razor shall come upon his head. Then said Micah, " Now know I 
 that the Lord will do me good, seeing I have a Levite -j^ author O f 
 to my priest " (chap, xvii, 13). This language clearly Judges ac- 
 ! *u < *v : 4.1. V i v, 1 4.1 Quainted with 
 
 shows that the priesthood properly belonged to the the whole Le- 
 
 family of Levi, according to the Mosaic constitution, viticaiiaw. 
 " And the children of Israel arose, and went up to Bethel, and asked 
 counsel of God," etc. (chap, xx, 18) ; with this compare Numbers 
 xxvii, 21 : "He shall stand before Eleazar the priest, who shall ask 
 counsel for him after the judgment of Urim before the Lord." In 
 chap, xx, 26, we find the Israelites offering to Jehovah burnt offer- 
 ings and peace offerings, which were enjoined by the Mosaic law. 
 Mention is also made of the ark of the covenant of God (chap. 
 xx, 27), before which was standing Phinehas the son of Eleazar the 
 son of Aaron (ver. 28). In chap, xxi, 19, reference is made to "a 
 feast of the Lord in Shiloh yearly." This was, doubtless, the pass- 
 over. " In those days there was no king in Israel : every man did 
 that which was right in his own eyes " (chap, xxi, 25). The last 
 part of this verse seems to have been taken from Deut. xii, 8
 
 208 INTRODUCTION TO THE STUDY 
 
 CHAPTER XXIII. 
 
 PROOF OF THE EXISTENCE AND AUTHORITY OF THE PEN- 
 TATEUCH IN THE BOOK OF JOSHUA. 
 
 COME of the opponents of the genuineness of the Pentateuch as- 
 ** sume that the Book of Joshua belongs thereto, thus seeking to 
 get rid of the testimony furnished by it to the authority of the Mosaic 
 writings. But the archaisms of the Pentateuch disappear in Joshua, 
 showing that the latter was not written by the same author. 
 
 In the very first chapter we have a reference to the book of the 
 Beferences in ^ aw ^ Moses : "That thou mayest observe to do ac- 
 Josima to Deu- cording to all the law, which Moses my servant com- 
 manded thee. . . . This book of the law shall not be- 
 part out of thy mouth " (verses 7, 8). " The Lord your God, he is 
 God in heaven above, and in earth beneath " (chap, ii, n). This is 
 the same as Deut. iv, 39. In chap, iii the priests are represented as 
 bearing the ark of the covenant of God. This is in accordance with 
 the arrangement in Deut. xxxi, 9, 25. In chap v, 4-6 we have a 
 statement that all the men of war who came up out of Egypt per- 
 ished in the wilderness, in which Israel wandered forty years on ac- 
 count of their disobedience, " unto whom the Lord sware that he 
 would not show them the land which the Lord sware unto their 
 fathers." Here there is the clearest reference to the history in the 
 Pentateuch, especially to Num. xiv, 23, 33. 
 
 In reference to the king of Ai it is said, " And as soon as the sun 
 was down, Joshua commanded that they should take his carcass down 
 from the tree " (chap, viii, 29). So in reference to the five kings 
 (chap, x, 27), " And it came to pass at the time of the going down of 
 the sun, that Joshua commanded, and they took them down off the 
 trees." In both of these passages there is a reference to the com- 
 mand in Deut. xxi, 22, 23, where it is enjoined that if a man is hung 
 for a crime, " his body shall not remain all night upon the tree, 
 but thou shalt in any wise bury him that day." 
 
 In chap, viii, 30-35 we find that Joshua built an altar to Jehovah 
 on Mount Ebal : " As Moses the servant of the Lord commanded 
 the children of Israel, as it is written in the book of the law of Moses, 
 an altar of whole stones, over which no man hath lifted up any iron : 
 and they offered thereon burnt offerings unto the Lord, and sacrificed 

 
 OF THE HOLY SCRIPTURES. 209 
 
 peace offerings. And he wrote there upon the stones a copy of tfu 
 law of Moses, which he wrote in the presence of the children of Is- 
 rael. . . . And afterward he read all the words of the law, the bless- 
 ings and cursings, according to all that is written in the book of the 
 law. There was not a word of all that Moses commanded which 
 Joshua read not before all the congregation of Israel, with the women 
 and the little ones, and the strangers that were conversant among 
 them." The setting up of stones and writing upon them, the words 
 of the law, the building of an altar and the offering of sacrifice on it, 
 are prescribed hi Deut. xxvii, 1-8. The reading of the law before 
 all the people is enjoined in Deut. xxxi, 10-12. 
 
 Nothing can be clearer than the reference in the acts of Joshua 
 to the Pentateuch, especially Deuteronomy. In chap. Reference in 
 xi, 12, 15, 20, 23, respecting the extermination of the J^S?'^^ 
 Canaanites and the distribution of their lands among teuch. 
 the tribes of Israel, it is added, " as the Lord commanded Moses,' 
 a reference to Num. xxxiii, 52-54, Exod. xxxiv, n, Deut. vii, 2, 
 etc. " Only unto the tribe of Levi he gave none inheritance ; the 
 sacrifices of the Lord God of Israel made by fire are their in- 
 heritance, as he said unto them " (chap, xiii, 14). Here we have 
 a reference to the support of the Levites according to Num. xviii, 
 19-24. 
 
 The historical facts in chaps, xiii and xiv, in relation to the Mo- 
 saic times, are the same as those contained in the Penta- Historical facts 
 , T . . .. i u * j same in Joshua 
 
 teuch. In chap, xiv, 9, it is said : And Moses sware on ^ in the Peu . 
 
 that day, saying, Surely the land whereon thy feet have tateucn. 
 trodden shall be thine inheritance and thy children's for ever; be- 
 cause thou hast wholly followed the Lord." With this compare 
 Deut. i, 36, in reference to this same Caleb : " To him will I give 
 the land that he hath trodden upon, and to his children, because he 
 hath wholly followed the Lord." 
 
 The account of the daughters of Zelophehad (chap, xvii, 3, 4) 
 corresponds with Num. xxvii, 1-7. In chap, xx we have an account 
 of the appointment of the six cities of refuge, as directed by Moses, 
 to whom reference is made. Compare this chapter with Num. xxxv, 
 6, n, 14. In chapter xxi the Levites are assigned forty-eight cities 
 with their suburbs, as directed in Num. xxxv, 7. When the children 
 of Reuben, Gad, and the half tribe of Manasseh had assisted their 
 brethren in subduing the land west of the Jordan, they returned to 
 their tents at the request of Joshua. Afterwards they returned to the 
 Jordan, and built on its west side, where the children of Israel had 
 crossed, a great altar. The building of this altar gave much offence 
 to the children of Israel west of the Jordan, and they gathered them-
 
 210 INTRODUCTION TO THE STUDY 
 
 selves together at Shiloh to fight against the two tribes and a hall 
 that were regarded as rebels on account of this act. " Thus saith 
 the whole congregation of the Lord, What trespass is this that ye 
 have committed against the God of Israel, to turn away this day 
 from following the Lord, in that ye have builded you an altar, that 
 ye might rebel this day against the Lord. . . . And it will be, seeing 
 ye rebel to-day against the Lord, that to-morrow he will be wroth 
 with the whole congregation of Israel. Notwithstanding, if the land 
 of your possession be unclean, then pass ye over unto the land of the 
 possession of the Lord, wherein the Lord's tabernacle dwelleth, and 
 take possession among us : but rebel not against the Lord, nor rebel 
 against us, in building you an altar besides the altar of the Lord 
 our God." 
 
 The two tribes and a half immediately disclaimed any intention 
 of offering sacrifices upon this altar, as they had built it simply as a 
 witness between themselves and the other tribes of their right to par- 
 ticipate in the sacrifices and offerings, and as a pattern of the altar in 
 Shiloh. They said, " God forbid that we should rebel against the 
 Lord, and turn this day from following the Lord, to build an altar 
 for burnt offerings, for meat offerings, or for sacrifices, besides the 
 altar of the Lord our God that is before his tabernacle " (chap, 
 xxii). This satisfied the tribes west of the Jordan. 
 
 This history clearly shows that it was regarded as rebellion against 
 The Leviticai God to offer sacrifice anywhere except upon the altar before 
 force P in m ti f me ^ e tabernacle of the congregation. Accordingly, the pre- 
 of the Judges, cept in Lev. xvii, 3-5, 8, 9 which prohibits the offering 
 of sacrifice anywhere except at the door of the tabernacle of the 
 congregation had full force. 
 
 In the following passage there is a clear reference to the Penta- 
 teuch : " Be ye therefore very courageous to keep and to do all that 
 is written in the book of the law of Moses " (chap, xxiii, 6). The 
 threats in the last part of chap, xxiii are evidently taken from the 
 Pentateuch. The sketch of the history of the children of Israel and 
 of the patriarchs, in the first part of chap, xxiv, is the same as that 
 of the Pentateuch, and was evidently based on it. "And Joshua 
 wrote these words in the book of the law of God" (chap, xxiv, 26). 
 This book of the law is evidently our Pentateuch, for all the passages 
 in Joshua touching upon the Israelitish history are taken from it, or, 
 at least, accord with it, and in some instances actually refer to it. 
 Final proof of Tne Book ^ Joshua, which contains so many refer- 
 the antiquity of ences to the Pentateuch, must have been written before 
 the time of David, for it is said in chap, xv, 63, "A?- 
 for the Jebusites, the inhabitants of Jerusalem, the children of Judah
 
 OF THE HOLY SCRIPTURES. 211 
 
 could not drive them out : but the Jebusites dwell with the children 
 of Judah at Jerusalem unto this day." But David drove them out 
 (2 Sam. v, 6, 7). When Joshua was written the Canaanites were 
 still living in Gezer (chap, xvi, 10) ; but Solomon captured Gezer, 
 burned it with fire, and slew the Canaanites in it (i Kings ix, 16). 
 
 In this book Zidon is the conspicuous Phoenician city, for it is 
 calbd great Zidon (chap, xi, 8; xix, 28); while Tyre is only once 
 mentioned the city, the fortress of Tyre (chap, xix, 29). But in 
 the ages subsequent to David and Solomon Tyre held the first and 
 Zidon a secondary position. This is certainly a proof of the great 
 antiquity of the book. 
 
 CHAPTER XXIV. 
 
 REFLECTIONS ON THE REFERENCES TO THE PENTATEUCH 
 IN THE WRITINGS OF THE ISRAELITES IN THE POST- 
 MOSAIC AGE. 
 
 is no way of avoiding the force of the evidence in favour 
 * of the Pentateuch furnished in the post-Mosaic history of the 
 Israelites, except that of denying the credibility of this history. But 
 even in such case, the evidence afforded by the prophets and some 
 of the Psalms of David and Asaph remains untouched. 
 
 But the history of the Israelites in the Old Testament bears every 
 mark of truth, and it has been confirmed in many in- Impartialit of 
 stances by the monuments of Assyria. There is an im- Old Testament 
 partiality shown in the Old Testament narrative such as is 
 found nowhere else. The faults, vices, and even crimes, of the 
 greatest of the Hebrews are recorded by the impartial pen of the 
 historian, by whom their actions are weighed, and approved or con- 
 demned as they accord with or depart from the great principles of 
 the moral law, especially the Mosaic theological and ethical system. 
 Bleek treats the evidence furnished by the historical writers of the 
 Old Testament to the Pentateuch in a very slighting Existence of 
 
 manner. " As far as the historical books of the Old Pentateuch in 
 
 time of Judges 
 Testament are concerned, says he, " it is very difficult acknowledged 
 
 to determine definitely what belongs to the authors b y Bleek - 
 themselves of the books, and what belongs to the times and persons 
 whose history they relate. Especially in the discourses which the 
 actors deliver, it can seldom be maintained that the very words which 
 they used are given us, and it can easily be, that the writer has at- 
 tributed to persons of former times single expressions which have
 
 312 INTRODUCTION TO THE STUDY 
 
 been taken from the relations and representations of his own age." 1 
 This, he thinks, is true of the Book of Joshua, of Chronicles espe- 
 cially, and partly also of the Books of Kings. " In respect to the 
 Books of Judges and Samuel," he observes, " it has already been re- 
 marked, that the manner in which they speak of different altars that 
 were erected to Jehovah in different places without any indication 
 on the part of the writer that it was contrary to the law, and displeas- 
 ing to Jehovah, would be incomprehensible if, at the time of the orig- 
 inal authors of these books, the legislation in Deuteronomy had ex- 
 isted and had been acknowledged."* This is a tacit acknowledg- 
 ment that the other books of the Pentateuch were existing in the 
 age of the Judges. 
 
 Respecting the Psalms Bleek thinks that they do not furnish 
 much evidence for the Pentateuch, as it is for the most part un- 
 certain to what age they belong; at least, they furnish nothing that 
 refers to Deuteronomy. But there are Psalms which undoubtedly 
 belong to the age of David, and the remarks of Bleek are not to the 
 point. 
 
 In the prophets he finds general allusion to the Mosaic laws and 
 history, but no certain or probable reference to Deuteronomy. We 
 beg that these views of Bleek be compared with the instances we 
 have furnished of allusions to the Pentateuch, and quotations from it, 
 found almost everywhere in the other books of the Old Testament. 
 
 In regard to Deuteronomy, we have pointed out many references 
 to this book in the post-Mosaic history some of them of such a 
 character as are not to be evaded. For instance, when the historian 
 states (2 Kings xiv, 5, 6) that Amaziah (about B. C. 830) did not 
 slay the children of his father's murderers, on the ground that such 
 a proceeding was contrary to what was written in the book of the 
 law of Moses (in reference to Deut. xxiv, 16), and uses the very words 
 of the law (found only in Deuteronomy), "The fathers shall not be 
 put to death for the children, neither shall the children be put to 
 death for the fathers :" if the account of Amaziah is real history, 
 this king must have had the Pentateuch before him, of which Deu- 
 teronomy formed a part. And when we find that the priests " taught 
 in Judah, and had the book of the law of the Lord with them " (about 
 B. C. 912), it is real history or it is nothing. 
 
 It often happens that in relating the actions of men, their conduct 
 is based upon the Mosaic law in such a way that if the passages re- 
 ferring to that law be unhistorical, the history of which they form 
 an integral part must be rejected along with them. 
 
 In the allusions to the Pentateuch in Solomon's prayer at the 
 'Einleitung, p. 339. 'Ibid., p. 339.
 
 OF THE HOLY SCRIPTURES. 213 
 
 dedication of the temple, we have no reason to suppose that they 
 were not the real words of Solomon, but merely part Solomon's ded- 
 
 of a prayer made up by the historian after the man- i^tory prayer, 
 
 rt , T>I j-j j n 11 ..as given to 
 
 ner of the speeches in Thucydides and Sallust attnb- us: his exact 
 
 uted to him. In an age when writing was common, words - 
 and many of the Psalms were written, it is very probable that such 
 a prayer on so important an occasion was written down at the time. 
 The custom of making up speeches for historical characters was 
 foreign to the Hebrews. Even if the references in the post-Mosaic 
 writers to the Pentateuch were nothing more than the expressions 
 of the writers themselves, they would be of great value as showing 
 that, in their judgment, there was no period since Moses in which 
 the Pentateuch did not exist. 
 
 CHAPTER XXV. 
 
 THE ALLEGED NON-OBSERVANCE OF PORTIONS OF THE 
 MOSAIC LAW FOR SEVERAL CENTURIES AFTER MOSES, 
 CONSIDERED IN ITS BEARING UPON THE GENUINENESS 
 OF THE PENTATEUCH. 
 
 TF we find certain Mosaic institutions in the Pentateuch neglected 
 * by the Hebrews, it would be rash to infer from such neglect the 
 non-existence of such institutions. That wicked Hebrews would 
 violate the Mosaic code was to be expected. But even if we find 
 pious Israelites disregarding some of the Mosaic enactments, it af- 
 fords no certain ground for the conclusion that these enactments had 
 no existence. "Who doubts the piety of the Quakers? Yet with all 
 their Christian meekness and morality they reject baptism, which 
 is clearly enjoined in the New Testament. The Church of Rome 
 forbids the sacramental cup to the laity, contrary to the teachings of 
 the New Testament. The adoration of images, practiced to a great 
 extent in that Church, is also contrary to the precepts of Scripture. 
 In regard to the practice of Christian States, how violation of 
 widely do some of their laws differ from the docrines of th^there'is ! 
 Christ, especially the laws of divorce! The Mosaic reg- law. 
 illations requiring sacrifices to be offered at the door of the taber- 
 nacle of the congregation only (Lev. xvii, 3-9), and sacrifices and 
 other kinds of offerings to be brought to the place which Jehovah 
 should choose out of all the tribes, when the Israelites should have 
 settled in Canaan (Deut. xii, 5, n, 14, 18), seem to have been vio-
 
 814 INTRODUCTION TO THE STUDY 
 
 lated in various instances in the period intervening between Moses 
 and the building of the temple by Solomon. The apparent viola- 
 tion of these laws of the Pentateuch has led some to reject their 
 Mosaic origin. This has been especially the case with the precept 
 requiring the offerings to be brought to one place which Jehovah 
 should choose. But it must be observed that the precepts of the Pen- 
 General com- tateuch respecting the place of sacrifice were generally 
 piiance \vitu obeyed, even in the unsettled condition of Israel in the 
 to the place of days of the judges. From the days of Joshua to Sam- 
 sacrifice. ue ] j^g tabernacle of the congregation was pitched in 
 
 Shiloh, where ministering priests were found, and whither the Israel- 
 ites resorted to keep the great annual festival. Of this we have 
 already given ample proof. In the time of Joshua it was regarded 
 as treason to offer sacrifice anywhere except upon the altar before 
 the tabernacle of the congregation in Shiloh (Josh, xxii), and in no 
 instance was sacrifice offered in any other place. The holy place 
 (English version, sanctuary) mentioned in Joshua xxiv, 26, in which 
 stood an oak, was probably a spot that had become sacred, either in 
 the history of the patriarchs or during the conquest of Canaan, 
 when Joshua catne to Gerizim and Ebal. 
 
 In the history of the times of the Judges, we find in several in- 
 stances sacrifices offered to Jehovah in other places than Shiloh. 
 But the obvious reason for the offering of these irregular sacrifices 
 was the appearance of Jehovah in each place. It was in the taber- 
 nacle that Jehovah usually manifested himself to his people, and by 
 virtue of this the sacrifices were to be made, and the pious Israel- 
 ite might easily infer that such extraordinary appearances of God 
 away from the tabernacle justified, or even required, a sacrifice to 
 be offered upon the spot. Instances of this we find in the sacrifice 
 at Bochim (Judg. ii, 5), and in that offered by Manoah (xiii, 19). Still 
 further, we find a command of God to Gideon to throw down the 
 altar of Baal, and to build an altar to Jehovah, and to offer burnt 
 sacrifice (Judg. vi, 25, 26). 
 
 In Judges xx, 26, it is said that all the children of Israel, and all 
 the people, offered burnt offerings and peace offerings before Jeho- 
 vah at Bethel. But it is added in the very next verse, that " the 
 ark of the covenant of God was there in those days, and Phinehas, 
 the son of Eleazar, the son of Aaron, stood before it in those days." 
 It was the ark of God that was all important, and without this the 
 tabernacle was of little consequence. The children of Israel, it 
 would appear, brought the ark of God to Bethel, when they came 
 up to fight the Benjamites at Gibeah. It was placed at Bethel be- 
 cause that was not only a spot sacred in their history, but also con-
 
 OF THE HOLY SCRIPTURES. 215 
 
 venient to their encampment. Mention is also made (Judg. xxi, 4) 
 in connexion with the war against the children of Benjamin of 
 another offering at Bethel. 
 
 Shiloh was the seat of the tabernacle from the days of Joshua until 
 at least the death of Eli, when the ark of God was cap- swioh a sa- 
 tured by the Philistines. It is evident that Shiloh was cred place, 
 the place chosen of Jehovah for his worship. Hence the language 
 of Psalm Ixxviii, 60 : " So that he forsook the tabernacle of Shiloh 
 the tent which he placed among men; " and of Jeremiah vii, 12: 
 *' But go ye now unto my place which was in Shiloh, where I set my 
 name at the first, and see what I did to it for the wickedness of my 
 people Israel." In 2 Sam. vii, 6, God declares that from the time 
 that he brought the children of Israel up out of Egypt unto that day, 
 he had walked in a tent and in a tabernacle. About a hundred years 
 after the ark had been captured by the Philistines who kept it but 
 seven months, and sent it back to the Israelites it was brought 
 from the house of Abinadab to Jerusalem by David, and put in a 
 tent he had prepared for it. 
 
 In the beginning of Solomon's reign we find the tabernacle in 
 Gibeon (i Chron. xvi, 39 ; 2 Chron. i, 3). It is impossible to say how 
 long it had been there. During the one hundred years pause in flxed 
 
 from the death of Eli to the building of the temple by place for wor- 
 ,, . , - ... . . shipof Jehovah. 
 
 Solomon there was no fixed place for divine worship 
 
 the ark was in one place and the tabernacle in another. Shiloh had 
 been rejected, but Jerusalem was not yet selected and fully prepared 
 for the tabernacle and the ark. In this confused state it is said : " Only 
 the people sacrificed in high places, because there was no house built 
 unto the name of the Lord until those days " (i Kings iii, 2). 
 
 In the time of Samuel, after the capture of the ark by the Philis- 
 tines, we find that sacrifice was offered at Gilgal (i Sam. xi, 15). 
 Most probably the tabernacle of the congregation was then there. 
 
 Here the question arises how far were these practices contrary to 
 the commands of the Pentateuch ? Two Mosaic precepts bear upon 
 this point, the one in Lev. xvii, 3-9, requiring sacrifices to be offered 
 only at the door of the tabernacle of the congregation ; the other 
 in Deut. xii, enjoining them to be offered in the place which Je- 
 hovah should choose out of all the tribes. There seems to have 
 been a general compliance with the first of these precepts, and also 
 with the second while the ark and tabernacle remained NO real vioia- 
 at Shiloh. The principal reason for the command to ^^^ 
 offer sacrifice at the door of the tabernacle seems to place of sacn- 
 have been to prevent idolatry; for every offering made 
 there was presented to Jehovah, whose presence was manifested in the
 
 216 INTRODUCTION TO THE STUDY 
 
 tabernacle. Hence it is added : " That they may bring them unto 
 the Lord." That idolatry is the principal offence against which 
 provision is made, appears also from the language following the 
 precept, " And they shall no more offer their sacrifices unto devils, 
 after whom they have gone a whoring." Accordingly under these 
 circumstances sacrifices would naturally enough be offered to Jeho- 
 vah wherever he appeared to the Israelites. 
 
 In respect to the place chosen out of all the tribes to which alone 
 sacrifices should be brought, it is added, " When he giveth you rest 
 from all your enemies round about " (Deut. xii, 10). And this seems 
 to be a necessary condition : for it might be inconvenient, and even 
 impossible, to go up three times a year to some fixed locality, which 
 might be held by the enemies of Israel ; or the people might be ob- 
 structed in their attempts to leave home, or their presence might be 
 absolutely required there. In the age of Samuel the Israelites were 
 frequently engaged in war with the Philistines, and a portion of the 
 time, at least, they were completely in their power; for it is said 
 (i Sam. xiii, 19, 20), " Now there was no smith found throughout all 
 the land of Israel; for the Philistines said, Lest the Hebrews make 
 them swords or spears. But all the Israelites went down to the Phil- 
 istines to sharpen every man his share, and his coulter, and his axe, 
 and his mattock." Is it a matter of wonder, under these circum- 
 stances, that there was irregularity in the observance of the precepts 
 concerning sacrifice? What an overwhelming proof of the non- 
 existence of the Pentateuch among the Jews if we did not abso- 
 lutely know differently would the present violation on their part 
 of some of the fundamental laws of the Mosaic polity afford ? The 
 modern Jews do not slay the paschal lamb ; they offer no sacrifices 
 to God ; their males do not go up three times a year to Jerusalem ; 
 the Rabbies, their teachers, are not exclusively of the tribe of Levi, 
 to say nothing of other violations of the law. 
 
 The various parts of the Pentateuch are consistent respecting 
 the place of worship. After the ten commandments were given, it 
 was enjoined that the children of Israel should build an altar to the 
 Lord and offer sacrifices thereon, with the promise : " In every 
 place where I shall record my name [that is, shall appoint for 
 divine worship] I will come unto thee," etc. (Exod. xx, 24). Here 
 the place is left indefinite. But when the tabernacle had been built, 
 it was enjoined upon the Israelites to bring their offerings only to the 
 door of the tabernacle of the congregation (Lev. xvii, 3-9). And 
 when the Israelites were about to enter Canaan, they were directed 
 to bring their offerings in that land to the place which Jehovah 
 should choose (Deut. xii, 5, n, 14). This indicates that the tab-
 
 OF THE HOLY SCRIPTURES. 217 
 
 ernacle is no longer to be migrating, but to stand in a fixed locality. 
 The very existence of the ark of the covenant, which is acknowl- 
 edged to date from Moses, would seem to require one sole place of 
 worship and offerings. In Exod. xxiii, 14, 17, 19, a part of the 
 legislation acknowledged to be the oldest, the males are required to 
 appear three times a year before the Lord, and the Israelites to bring 
 the first of their firstfruits into the house of their God. This, too, 
 seems to look to one sanctuary. There is not the slightest hint 
 anywhere in the Pentateuchal legislation that the Israelites were at 
 liberty to sacrifice to God where they pleased. Unity of God, 
 unity of sanctuary, and unity of the people, are fundamental ideas 
 in the Pentateuch. There could be no surer method of leading 
 the people to idolatry than by allowing them to sacrifice on high 
 places where other divinities than Jehovah might be worshipped. 
 But when the sacrifices were offered at the door of the tabernacle 
 of the congregation, in which was the sacred ark, where Jehovah 
 manifested himself, idolatry was impossible. 
 
 It is incredible that after the temple had been built, and the 
 command to sacrifice only in the place which Jehovah should 
 choose was a standing precept in Dent, xii, 5, etc., the injunction 
 in Lev- xvii, 3-9, should have been invented and attributed to 
 Moses, especially as it is enjoined : " This shall be a statute to 
 them forever throughout their generations (verse 7). 
 
 The Hebrew prophets' recognize the temple in Jerusalem as the 
 sole place for the worship of Jehovah. Thus Joel (about B. C. 870), 
 " Jehovah dwells in Zion " (iii, 17). The temple is the place for 
 religious worship (ii, 15-17). "Jehovah shall utter his voice from 
 Jerusalem " (Amos i, 2). " The Lord from his holy temple " 
 (Micah i, 2). "The Lord of hosts dwelleth in mount Zion " (Isa. 
 viii, 1 8). " Shall worship Jehovah in the holy mount at Jerusalem " 
 (xxvii, 13). " For out of Zion shall go forth the law " (ii, 3). 
 Similar is Micah iv, 2. The calf worship, and the idolatry in gen- 
 eral, are condemned by the prophets (Hosea ii, 5-13 ; iv, 13 ; 
 x, 8, 15 ; xiii, 2; Amos iii, 14; Micah i, 7).' 
 
 The throwing down the altars of Jehovah among the ten tribes, 
 to which Elijah refers (i Kings xix, 14), indicates the hostility of 
 the worshipers of Baal to Jehovah, and has nothing to do with 
 the question of the legality of those altars.
 
 S18 INTRODUCTION TO THE STUDY 
 
 CHAPTER XXVI. 
 
 THE CREDIBILITY OF THE HISTORY IN THE PENTATEUCH 
 AND ITS BEARING ON THE MOSAIC AUTHORSHIP OF THE 
 WORK. 
 
 TF the Pentateuch was really written by Moses, we have in that fact 
 * a strong proof of the truth of the history in which he was the prin- 
 cipal actor, and which embraces about three fourths of the whole. 
 But we may reverse the argument, and affirm, that if we find numer- 
 ous internal marks of truth, a thorough knowledge of Egypt and of 
 the topography of those regions through which the Israelites jour- 
 neyed, and if the history in important particulars is confirmed by 
 external evidence ancient monuments, for example then we have 
 strong proof that the historian was contemporary with most of the 
 events which he relates, and was, in all probability, Moses. 
 
 The Pentateuch begins with the history of creation, and gives us 
 
 a cosmogony distinguished by a sublime simplicity dif- 
 The Mosaic cose . * . * . 
 
 mogony com- fenng widely from all the cosmogonies of the ancient 
 
 coamogontesof world - Jn the old cosmogony of India, Vishnu, as Brah- 
 heathen reiig- ma, creates the world in the following order: i. The 
 creation of intellect, or Mahat, which is also called the 
 creation of Brahma; 2. That of the rudimental principles; 3. The 
 creation of the senses; 4. Inanimate bodies; 5. That of animals; 
 6. That of divinities ; 7. That of man ; 8. A creation that possesses 
 both the qualities of goodness and darkness. Five creations are sec- 
 ondary and three are primary. But there is a ninth that is both 
 primary and secondary. 1 
 
 The demons were born from the thigh of Brahma. From his 
 mouth proceeded the gods. He formed birds from his vital vigour ; 
 sheep from his breast ; goats from his mouth ; kine from his 
 belly and sides; horses, elephants, deer, camels, mules, etc., from 
 his feet. From the hairs of his body sprang herbs, roots, and 
 fruits.* 
 
 There sprang from the mouth of Brahma beings especially en- 
 dowed with goodness ; others from his breast, pervaded with the 
 quality of foulness; others from his thighs, in whom foulness and 
 darkness prevailed; and others from his feet, in whom the quality 
 
 'Wilson. Vishnu Parana, pp. 36-38. "Ibid., pp. 40. 41-
 
 OF THE HOLY SCRIPTURES. 219 
 
 of darkness predominated. These were the four castes, Brahmans, 
 Kshetriyas, Vaisyas, and Sudras. 1 
 
 How far the views of Plato fell below the grandeur of the Mosaic 
 cosmogony appears from a passage in his Timseus. In his system man 
 is the primal creation, from which were derived the fowls of heaven 
 and the beasts of the field. "Birds," says he, "were derived from 
 men who were guileless, indeed, but frivolous and devoted to the 
 study of meteorology, believing in their simplicity that the proofs re- 
 specting these things were the most certain, on account of their be- 
 ing objects of sight. On the other hand, land animals and wild 
 beasts sprang from rnen who made no use of philosophy, and who 
 did not at all study the nature of the heavens on account of their no 
 longer using the cycles in their heads, but following the lower pas- 
 sions as their guides. From these pursuits their arms and heads 
 were drawn down toward the earth through a natural affinity," etc.* 
 
 In the history of creation we are not to expect anything more 
 than an epitome. As the Book of Genesis is an introduction to the 
 Mosaic dispensation, almost every occurrence is treated with brevity. 
 As it is not the object of Revelation to teach physical science but 
 theological and moral truth, we should expect the account of crea- 
 tion to be adapted to this purpose, and to be set forth in such lan- 
 guage as would be intelligible to the ancient Hebrews. That the 
 history of creation would be adapted to the conceptions and limited 
 faculties of the people might be inferred from God's general method 
 of teaching, in which language anthropopathic and anthropomorphic is 
 used in describing divine actions. 
 
 In fundamental principles there is no compromise in the Bible 
 but in matters of secondary importance there is an accommodation 
 in the Mosaic law to the condition of the Israelites. Respecting 
 their law of divorce our Saviour said, " Moses because of the hard- 
 ness of your hearts, suffered you to put away your wives." If the 
 law could be modified to suit their condition, so might the form of 
 the history of creation. 
 
 The fundamental idea in the Mosaic account of creation is, that 
 Jehovah God is the creator of all things in heaven, earth, and under the 
 earth. Here there is no room left for the operations of any othe: 
 god, and nature herself is shown to be a dependent creature of Jeho- 
 vah , consequently there is no place for idolatry. Subordinate to 
 this idea is the division of the work of creation into six periods of 
 one day each, on which was founded the Jewish Sabbath. 
 
 1 Wilson, Vishnu Purana, p. 44. 
 
 7 Timseus, 91. I make no reference to the Metamorphoses of Ovid, for in hi 
 time the writings of Moses were known to the Greeks and Romans. 
 15
 
 220 INTRODUCTION TO THE STUDY 
 
 The order of creation contained in the first chapter of Genesis 
 me Mosaic or- a g rees m lis general outline with the present state of 
 tier of creation geological science. After the creation of the heavens 
 with modern an d of the earth the Almighty created light. That light 
 science. existed at the earliest period of animal life is inferred 
 
 from the fact that the trilobites, belonging to the lower Silurian for- 
 mation, had perfect eyes. 
 
 The separation of the waters above the firmament from those be- 
 low the firmament was the work of the second day. Whatever view 
 be taken of the expression " waters above the firmament," it is evi- 
 dent that Moses knew the real source of rain. For it is said, 
 " There went up a mist from the earth, and watered the whole face of 
 the ground " (Gen. ii, 6). The separation of land and water, the 
 formation of continents, followed by the creation of grass, herbs, and 
 fruit trees, the work of the third day, are parts of geological history. 
 " The facts to be presented under the Silurian age," says Dana, 
 " teach that the great, yet unmade, continents, although so small in 
 the amount of dry land, were not covered by the deep ocean, but 
 only by shallow oceanic waters. They lay just beneath the waves, 
 already outlined, prepared to commence that series of formations 
 the Silurian, Devonian, Carboniferous, and others which was re- 
 quired to finish the crust for its ultimate continental purposes." 
 " The Azoic age in geology witnessed, with little doubt, the appear- 
 ance of the first continents, and, probably, of the first plants." 1 
 
 The creation of the sun, moon, and stars, on the fourth day, has 
 but little connexion with geology, and belongs rather to astronomy. 
 It seems strange that the sun, to us the great source of light and 
 heat, should not be created till the fourth day, while light itself was 
 created on the first day. Now no man of the Mosaic age, following 
 his own unaided reason or imagination only, would ever have hit 
 upon such an arrangement as we have in Genesis ; and in the present 
 state of physical science it is not so improbable as it seems at first 
 sight ; and in the future progress of science it may be rendered in 
 the highest degree probable on scientific grounds.* According to 
 modern science, the sun is a dark body surrounded by a luminous, 
 gaseous envelope. Thus while light (TIN) as a principle was cre- 
 
 1 Text Book of Geology, p. 77. 
 
 1 What appears in one age an absurdity, may in another age become the strong- 
 est proof of a statement or doctrine. Thus Herodotus (liber iv, 42), in relating the 
 circumnavigation of Africa from the Red Sea and returning through the Pillars of 
 Hercules to Egypt by order of Necho, says, "They told me what is not credible, 
 that while sailing around Africa they had the sun on their right hand. 1 ' But this 
 circumstance is to us a strong proof that the voyage was made.
 
 OF THE HOLY SCRIPTURES. 221 
 
 ated on the first day, it was not till the fourth that the sun, tne light- 
 holder (11^7) was created or arranged in its present form. Before 
 the creation of the sun the earth seems to have derived no heat 
 from any external source, but its surface was in all probability 
 \r armed from the internal heat. And this is supported by geology, 
 which shows us that in the earlier period of the earth's history no 
 climatic differences existed. Previous to the existence of the sun, it 
 cannot be said with certainty in what way the periods of day and 
 night were divided. We would, however, regard the light as located 
 in one part of the universe, and the same part of the surface of the 
 earth by its rotation brought alternately into light and darkness. 
 
 The work of the fifth day was the creation of the fishes of the sea 
 and the fowls of heaven, followed, on the sixth day, by the creation 
 of beasts, cattle and creeping things, ending in the formation of 
 man in the image of God. Now, in the geological series, the crea- 
 tion of fish preceded that of reptiles and mammalia, and man is the 
 last of the series. Here the Mosaic and the geological records 
 agree. 
 
 It seems best to take the word " day " in Genesis i, ii, for an in- 
 definite period of time. In Job xv, 32, and xxx, 25, day (m') is used 
 for the whole period of life. In the same way the Greeks use fyjepa, 
 day, and we employ it in the phrase " his day." 
 
 " The Etruscans relate that God created the world in six thousand 
 years. In the first thousand he created the heaven and the earth ; 
 in the second, the firmament; in the third, the sea and the other 
 waters of the earth ; in the fourth, sun, moon, and stars ; in the fifth, 
 the animals belonging to air, water, and land ; in the sixth, man alone. 
 The Persian tradition also recognizes the six periods of creation." 1 
 " The principal Babylonian story of the creation," says Smith, " sub- 
 stantially agrees, as far as it is preserved, with the biblical account. 
 According to it there was a chaos of watery matter before the crea- 
 tion, and from this all things were generated." Other "fragments 
 refer to the creation of mankind, called Adam, as in the Bible. 
 Another " fragment was supposed by Mr. Smith to relate to the 
 fall of man, and to contain the speech of the deity to the newly-cre- 
 ated pair. This, however, is extremely doubtful. The fragment is 
 in so broken a condition that almost any thing can be made out of it." " 
 
 But it is too early yet to attempt an elaborate reconciliation of 
 the Mosaic cosmogony with geology a science which is not much 
 more than half a century old, and is very imperfectly developed by 
 reason of the vast regions over which it extends. It has not yet 
 
 1 Dr. M'Caul, Mosaic Record of Creation. 
 
 3 George Smith's Chaldean Account of Genesis, by A. H. Sayce, p. ^2.
 
 222 INTRODUCTION TO THE STUDY 
 
 been surely determined relatively or absolutely when the various 
 orders of creation upon our planet first appeared. On the other 
 hand, it is not easy to determine how far the Mosaic account of the 
 creation was adapted to the conceptions of the Jews. 
 
 The recent origin of man is clearly shown from the biblical his- 
 tory ; and geology confirms it in a most striking manner by showing 
 the absence of human remains, and of any indication of human ex- 
 istence, except in the latest geological formations. Even those im- 
 plements found in certain parts of Europe cannot prove any great an- 
 tiquity for man, since we know not what length of time has intervened 
 between the deposition of the strata in which they are found and 
 the present age. Nor do we know what time has elapsed since those 
 animals disappeared with whose bones human remains are found, 
 even if we grant that these animals and men were contemporary. 
 
 A very high antiquity for the human race is inconsistent with the 
 general ascertained facts of geology. It was impossible that man 
 should be confined to one small territory for a long time, whether in 
 a savage or civilized condition ; for he roams over the earth, and 
 every-where leaves traces of his existence. It is not possible that 
 man should have existed in Europe thousands of years before he 
 made his way into Asia. But the human race, without doubt, had 
 its origin in Asia, and must soon have settled Egypt. Why then have 
 we not traces of man's existence in Asia and in Egypt of as early a 
 day as is alleged in behalf of the stone implements in certain parts 
 of Europe ? 
 
 According to Genesis, the primitive seat 1 of mankind was in West- 
 ern Asia, somewhere near the Tigris and the Euphrates, and from this 
 same region the sons of Noah after the deluge spread themselves 
 over the earth. And this is confirmed by the fact that the Indo- 
 Germanic languages (Sanscrit, Zend, Greek, Latin, Gothic, etc.) have 
 their origin in the region of Persia. 8 
 
 The unity of the human race is undoubtedly taught in Genesis 
 and anatomy and physiology furnish strong proofs of the truth of 
 this doctrine. 
 
 That man originally lived in a state of innocency and happiness, 
 rue Mosaic ao- from which he fell, as taught in Genesis, is a wide- 
 count of tne spread tradition. We find it described in the beautiful 
 primitive con- 
 dition of man poetry of Ovid, who speaks of it as the "Golden 
 
 universal ln Age," in which the earth yielded spontaneously her 
 diuon. fruits for the human race, and men observed justice 
 
 1 Sargon calls Elam the country of " the four rivers." A. H. Sayce, p. 84. 
 8 See Max Miiller's Science of Language, 234, et seq., and Humboldt's Cosmos, 
 vol. i, p. 15. 8 Metamorphoses, liber i, 80-112.
 
 OF THE HOLY SCRIPTURES. 223 
 
 and rectitude of their own accord, and were free from fear, as there 
 was no judge to inflict penalties. This age, according to the poet, 
 was followed by those of silver, brass, and iron. The ancient Greek 
 poet, Hesiod, 1 refers to the primeval condition of man, characteriz- 
 ing it as a " Golden Age," when men lived like gods, free from care, 
 and died as if overcome by sleep, and the earth yielded of her own 
 accord abundant fruits. " In the Zend Avesta, Yima, the first Iran'c 
 king, lives in a secluded spot, where he and his people enjoy unin- 
 terrupted happiness. Neither sin, nor folly, nor violence, nor pov- 
 erty, nor deformity has entrance into the region ; nor does the evil 
 spirit for awhile set foot there." "In the Chinese books we read, 
 that ' During the period of the first heaven, the whole creation en- 
 joyed a state of happiness : every thing was beautiful ; every thing 
 was good ; all beings were perfect in their kind ; . . . all things grew 
 without labour, and universal fertility prevailed.' The literature of 
 the Hindus tells of a ' first age of the world, when justice, in the 
 form of a bull, kept herself firm on her four feet ; virtue reigned ; 
 no good which mortals possessed was mixed with baseness; and 
 man, free from diseases,. saw all his wishes accomplished, and at- 
 tained an age of four hundred years.' In the earliest of the Persian 
 books the Fall would seem to be gradual ; but in the later writings, 
 which are of an uncertain date, a narrative appears which is most 
 strikingly in accordance with that of Genesis." 3 
 
 The longevity of the antediluvians has been regarded by some as 
 incredible. But the numbers bear no indications of The lon ~ eylt y 
 myth. The age of the antediluvians is given, the time of the antedi- 
 when the eldest sons were born, and when they died; 
 and these years are not put in round numbers as we would expect 
 in a myth. It is impossible for physiologists to disprove the possi- 
 bility of the antediluvians having reached the ages attributed to 
 them. There is no way of judging, & priori, how long any animal 
 may live ; and in the early period of man's existence various causes, 
 as climate and food, may have favoured longevity. But why may 
 not the Almighty have granted to man a great age at first for 
 the rapid increase of the race, and have shortened it afterward ? 
 That men do not reach an age of nine hundred years now is no 
 proof that they never did. Geology clearly shows the vast changes 
 that the physical and the animal world have passed through in their 
 history. " The great Haller, when led to speak on the subject, de- 
 clared the problem one which could not be solved, on account of the 
 absence of sufficient data ; while Buffon accepted the scriptural ac- 
 
 'Works and Days, lines 109-119. 
 
 'Hist. Illus. of the Old Testament, by Rawlinson and Hackett, pp. g-n.
 
 234 INTRODUCTION TO THE STUDY 
 
 count, and thought he could see physical reasons why life should in 
 the early ages have been so greatly extended." 1 Lord Bolingbroke, 
 in the last century, although he treated Moses and his history with 
 great contempt, yet allowed " that the lives of men in the first ages 
 of the world were probably much longer than ours."* Josephus, in 
 his Antiquities, in speaking of the great length of the lives of the an- 
 tediluvians, remarks : " All those who have written works on antiq- 
 uities, both the Greeks and the Barbarians, bear witness to my 
 statements. For Manetho, who wrote an account of the Egyptians, 
 and Berosus, who gave an account of the Chaldean affairs, and Mo- 
 chus, and Hestiaeus, and the Egyptian Hieronymus, who wrote an 
 account of the Phoenicians, agree with my statements. Hesiod, and 
 Hecataeus, and Hellanicus, and Acousilaus, and Ephorus, and Nic- 
 olaus, relate that the ancients lived a thousand years."* In the Hin- 
 du accounts of the early ages, men in the first period were free from 
 disease, and reached four hundred years. 
 
 What is most remarkable in the history of the antediluvian world 
 is its freedom from the mythical history of gods and demi-gods that 
 pervades the early records of other nations. In the Egyptian his- 
 tory, the reign of the gods and demi-gods extends over a period of 
 more than seventeen thousand years. 4 
 
 According to Genesis vii, viii, there was a universal deluge, which 
 The tradition swept off all men and every living creature upon the 
 
 of a deluge uni- f ace o f the earth and in the heavens except Noah and 
 versal among ., ,. . .... 
 
 the great races his family, and the living creatures that were with him 
 
 of mankind. j n t ^ e g^ jf ^ l?i accoun t were nothing more than a 
 tradition, it must be of great value. Its simplicity stamps it with 
 the seal of truth. It was to be expected that an event of this kind 
 would not be forgotten by the descendants of Noah. And we ac- 
 cordingly find among nearly all the nations of the earth a tradition 
 of a great deluge. 
 
 After giving the traditions of various riations respecting a deluge, 
 Professor Rawlinson remarks : " To conclude, therefore, that the 
 deluge, in respect of mankind, was partial, because some of the 
 great divisions of the human family had no tradition on the subject, 
 is to draw a conclusion directly in the teeth of the evidence. The evi- 
 dence shows a consentient belief a belief that has all the appear- 
 ance of being original and not derived among members of ALL the 
 great races into which ethnologists have divided mankind." ' Fran- 
 cois Lenormant concludes his investigations on the deluge with 
 
 1 Aids to Faith, Essay vi, sec. v. 
 
 9 Works, vol. iii, p. 244, in Leland's View of Deist. Writers, ii, 365. 3 Lib. i, 3, i). 
 
 4 Osburn's Mon. Hist. Egypt, p. 199. 6 Illust. of Old Test., p. 21, 22.
 
 OF THE HOLY SCRIPTURES. 225 
 
 the remark that he is in " a position to affirm that the account of 
 the deluge is a universal tradition in all branches of the human 
 family, with the sole exception of the black race. No religious or 
 cosmogonic myth possesses this character of universality. It must 
 necessarily be the reminiscence of an actual and terrible event which 
 made so powerful an impression upon the imaginations of the first 
 parents of our species that their descendants could never forget it." ' 
 A very ancient and remarkable account of a deluge has been 
 found on tablets in the ruins of Nineveh, belonging to the reign of 
 Assurbanipal, B. C. 670. The inscriptions on these tablets are sup- 
 posed to be copies of very ancient records. In this description Sur- 
 ippakite is directed by the Assyrian divinity to build a ship for him- 
 self, as he intends to destroy the sinner and life, and to preserve 
 in it "the seed of life, all of it, in the midst of the ship." He is 
 also instructed of what dimensions to build it. It was covered with- 
 out and within with bitumen. Surippakite is ordered to put into 
 this ship his grain, furniture, goods, wealth, woman servants, female 
 slaves, and young men. At the same time it is declared that the 
 beasts of the field shall be sent to him to be put into the ship. The 
 rain pours down from heaven for seven days. On the very first day 
 the ship is carried to Mount Nizir, where it rests seven days. First 
 a dove is sent forth from the ship, and, not finding any resting-place, 
 returns. Next, a swallow is sent, which also returns. Afterwards 
 there was sent forth a raven, which did not return. After the deluge 
 ceased Surippakite built an altar on the peak of the mountain, and 
 offered sacrifice to the gods." 
 
 " The inscription," says Mr. Smith, " gives seven days for the flood, 
 and seven days for the resting of the ark on the mountain ; while the 
 Bible gives the commencement of the flood on the seventeenth day 
 of the second month, and its termination on the twenty-seventh day 
 of the second month in the following year, making a total duration 
 of one year and ten days. . . . There is, again, a difference as to the 
 mountain on which the ark rested ; Nizir, the place mentioned in 
 the cuneiform text, being east of Assyria, probably between latitudes 
 35 and 36, while Ararat, the mountain mentioned in the Bible, was 
 north of Assyria, near Lake Van. 
 
 " In the account of sending forth the birds, there is a difference 
 in detail between the Bible and the inscriptions which cannot 
 be explained away ; this and other similar differences will serve to 
 show that neither of the two documents is copied directly from the 
 
 1 The Beginnings of History, pp. 486, 487. 
 
 2 We have abridged this statement from The Chaldean Account of Genesis, by 
 George Smith. Scribner, Armstrong, & Co., 1876.
 
 226 INTRODUCTION TO THE STUDY 
 
 other." 1 The simplicity of the biblical account, and the dates that 
 are given, stamp it as the original. 
 
 Osburn thinks he sees in the Egyptian nou or nA, which signifies 
 *' the primordial water," " the abyss," a reference to Noah, the name 
 of the divine impersonation of the annual overflow in the Egyptian 
 mythology being Nh or Nuh, the Hebrew nu or ru Noah. 1 
 
 After the description of the flood, we have an account of the 
 The genealogy peopling of the earth by the sons of Noah (Genesis x ). 
 of the sons of This genealogical table bears the stamp of truth, and 
 ant with mod- has been remarkably confirmed by modern researches, 
 emethnoiogy. Setting aside the cases where the ethnic names em- 
 ployed are of doubtful application, it cannot reasonably be ques 
 tioned that the author has, in his account of the sons of Japhet, clas- 
 sified together the Cymry or Celts (Gomer), the Medes (Madai), and 
 the lonians or Greeks (Javan), thereby anticipating what has become 
 known in modern times as ' the Indo-European theory,' or the essen- 
 tial unity of the Aryan (Asiatic) race with the principal races of Eu- 
 rope, indicated by the Celts and the lonians. Nor can it be doubted 
 that he has thrown together under the one head of 'children of 
 Shem,' the Assyrians (Asshur), the Syrians (Aram), the Hebrews 
 (Eber), and the Joktanian Arabs (Joktan), four of the principal races 
 which modern ethnology recognises under the heading of 'Semitic. 1 
 Again, under the heading of ' sons of Ham,' the author has arranged 
 'Cush,' i.e., the Ethiopians; Mizraim, the people of Egypt; Sheba 
 and Dedan, or certain of the Southern Arabs ; and ' Nimrod,' or the 
 ancient people of Babylon four races between which the latest lin- 
 guistic researches have established a close affinity. Beyond a ques- 
 tion, the tendency of modern ethnological inquiry has been to establish 
 the accuracy of the document called in Genesis the Toldoth Beni 
 Noah, or genealogy of the sons of Noah (chap, x), and to create a feel- 
 ing among scientific ethnologists that it is a record of the very highest 
 value ; one which, if it can be rightly interpreted, may be thoroughly 
 trusted, and which is, as one of them has said, ' the most authentic 
 record that we possess for the affiliation of nations.' " 
 
 In Genesis x, 9, 10, mention is made of Nimrod, a mighty hunter 
 The story of De f re the Lord ; and the beginning of his kingdom was 
 Nimrod uius- Babel, and Erech, and Accad, and Calneh, in the land 
 dent mona- of Shinar. " The four cities," says Bonomi, "which are 
 ments. recorded in Scripture to have been founded by Nimrod, 
 
 Babel, Erech, Accad, and Calneh, were all in the land of Shinar, the 
 
 1 Smith's Chaldean Account of Genesis, pp. 288, 289. 
 
 * Monumental History of Egypt, p. 240. 
 
 'Rawlinson and Hackett. Hist. 111. of Old Testament, pp. 21. 2ft
 
 OF THE HOLY SCRIPTURES. 227 
 
 southern part of Mesopotamia." 1 Bonomi gives a cut of a gigantic 
 figure of a man strangling a young lion, taken from the ruins of an- 
 ueut Nineveh. He believes this to be a representation of the mighty 
 'mnter Nimrod. According to Gen. x, 8 Nimrod was the son of 
 Cusli. " Recent researches in Mesopotamia," says Rawlinson, " have 
 revealed to us as the earliest seat of power and civilization in West- 
 ern Asia, a Cushite kingdom, the site of which is Lower Babylonia ; a 
 main characteristic of which is its possession of large cities, and 
 which even seems in an especial way to affect, in its political ar- 
 rangements, the number four. Babel, Accad, and Erech (or Huruk), 
 are names which occur in the early geographic nomenclature of this 
 monarchy. Nimrod is a personage in its mythology. The records 
 discovered do not, probably, mount up within some centuries of the 
 foundation of the kingdom ; but they present us with a picture in 
 perfect harmony with the scriptural narrative a picture of a state 
 such as that set up by Nimrod would be likely to have become two 
 or three centuries after its foundation." 5 
 
 In Gen. x, 1 1, it is said that " out of that land [Nimrod's kingdom] 
 went forth Asshur and builded Nineveh," etc. 8 "The recovered 
 monuments show that the Mosaical account is, in all respects, true. 
 The early Babylonians are proved to have been of an entirely dis- 
 tinct race from the Assyrians, whose language is Semitic, while that 
 of their southern neighbours is Cushite. A Babylonian kingdom is 
 found to have flourished before there was any independent Assyria, 
 or any such city as Nineveh." 4 
 
 In the first p.rrt of the eleventh chapter of Genesis we have an ac- 
 count of the confusion of tongues at Babel or Babylon. There is in 
 Abydenus, who wrote concerning Assyrian affairs, a passage that re- 
 fers to the building of the tower of Babel and the confusion of the 
 language of the builders : " There are some who say that the first 
 men, having sprung from the earth, and being puffed up on account 
 of their strength and size, and presuming to be superior to the gods, 
 raised a lofty tower where Babylon now stands; and when it was 
 approaching heaven the winds came to the assistance of the gods, 
 and threw down the tower about the builders. The ruins of this 
 tower are called Babylon. Men who had hitherto been of one 
 tongue received from the gods many languages."' 
 
 Nineveh and its Palaces, p. 45. 
 
 "Historical Illustrations of the Old Testament, pp. 30, 31. 
 
 'This is preferable to " he went forth to Assyria," as n local is not added to "nStot 
 and this is confirmed by the LXX, which has A.aoovp, the Targum of Onkelos, and 
 the Peshito-Syriac, which have the "Assyrian." 
 
 4 His. Illus., p. 33. "In Eusebius' Prsepar. Evan., ix. 14.
 
 228 INTRODUCTION TO THE STUDY 
 
 The story of the war of the giants against heaven, found in the 
 Greek and Roman mythology, probably grew out of the building 
 of the tower of Babel. A probable proof of the confusion of tongues 
 is furnished " in the character of the language which appears on the 
 earliest monuments of the country monuments which reach back 
 to a time probably as remote as B. C. 2300, and almost certainly 
 anterior to the date of Abraham. This monumental language is es- 
 pecially remarkable for its mixed character. It is Turanian in its 
 structure, Cushite or Ethiopian in the bulk of its vocabulary, while, 
 at the same time, it appears to contain both Semitic and Aryan 
 elements." ' 
 
 When Abraham visited Egypt (Gen. xii, 10-20) he found there a 
 king* (Pharaoh) and princes. He was presented with sheep, oxen, 
 asses, and camels, in addition to servants. In this list we miss 
 horses, which seem to have been introduced into Egypt a short time 
 before the Mosaic age (according to Wilkinson, vol. i, 386). But in 
 the age of Solomon horses were abundant in Egypt. How natural 
 it would have been for a writer subsequent to Moses to put horses 
 among the gifts made to Abraham in Egypt. The ass is the most 
 common animal in Egypt at the present day, and no doubt was 
 known there from the most ancient times ; and the same is true of 
 oxen. Sheep are represented in a tomb below the pyramids, dating 
 upward of four thousand years ago.' The camel also appears among 
 the gifts to Abraham. " It is remarkable," says Wilkinson, " that the 
 camel, though known in Egypt as early at least as the time of Abra- 
 ham, has never been met with, even in the latest paintings or hiero- 
 glyphics. Yet this does not prove it was even rare in the country ; 
 since the same would apply to fowls and pigeons, of which no in- 
 stance occurs on the monuments among the stock of the farm- 
 yard." 4 Camels are at present * employed in Egypt, and it is highly 
 probable that they were used from the earliest times as the great 
 means of commerce between Egypt and other countries separated 
 from it by deserts. 8 
 
 'Hist. Old Testament Illus., p. 28. 
 
 1 Phouro (Coptic), the king, the name given to the Egyptian monarchs from fh* 
 earliest times. 'See Wilkinson, vol. i, 166 
 
 4 Manners and Customs, etc., vol. i, 234. 
 
 "When in Egypt, in December, 1869, the author saw, a short distance nortl 
 of Cairo, a considerable number of camels coming from that city, and bound appar- 
 ently for Suez. 
 
 4 Brugsch, the great Egyptologist, remarks on a hieroglyphic inscription found 
 on a rock in Upper Egypt : " It confirms in a striking manner the account of thr 
 seven years' famine contained in the Bible " (Gen. xli, 54, el seq.).
 
 OF THE HOLY SCRIPTURES. 229 
 
 CHAPTER XXVII. 
 
 FARTHER CONSIDERATION OF THE CREDIBILITY OF THE 
 HISTORY CONTAINED IN THE PENTATEUCH. 
 
 'T V HE history of the patriarchs, as related in the Book of Genesis, 
 " is marked by simplicity, and by no means shows the conditions 
 and relations of a subsequent age extended to the past. In the case 
 of Abraham we have a striking instance of a custom different from the 
 Mosaic enactment; for Sarah, his wife, was his half-sister (Gen. xx, 12), 
 but such a union is forbidden by the law of Moses (Lev. xviii, 9). 
 No one of the Hebrews, in the Mosaic age or subsequently, in mak- 
 ing up a story, would have represented their great progenitor as liv- 
 ing in a relation condemned by Moses. Jacob had two sisters for 
 wives at the same time, which is forbidden in Lev. xviii, 18. 
 
 In connexion with the patriarchal history, the question arises, 
 Does the biblical chronology allow a sufficient interval ^g tlme be _ 
 of time to elapse between the deluge and the building tween the dei- 
 of the great pyramid for the settlement, the civilization, building of the 
 and the attainment of a high state of art at the latter great pyramid, 
 period ? The interval between the deluge and the birth of Abraham 
 varies with the text from which the chronology is calculated. If 
 taken from the Jewish Pentateuch, it is 292 years ; if from the Sa- 
 maritan, it is 942 years ; but if from the Septuagint, it is 1,172 years. 
 Now, it must be confessed that the numbers taken from the Jewish 
 Pentateuch are too small. The great pyramid was built about 2,450 
 years before Christ, about 100 years before the deluge, according to 
 the chronology of Usher. But if we suppose the sojourn in Egypt 
 to have been 430 years instead of 215, then the great pyramid must 
 have been built only a hundred years after the deluge, which is ex- 
 ceedingly improbable. Now, if we take the Samaritan Pentateuch 
 as authority, and allow but 215 years for the sojourn of the Israelites 
 in Egypt, we shall have the deluge B. C. 2936 ; or if the sojourn 
 in Egypt was 430 years, 1 then the deluge was B. C. 3151. The Sep- 
 tuagint gives us still more time, making the deluge either B. C. 3168, 
 or B. C. 3383.' 
 
 1 We decidedly prefer 430 years as the period of the sojourn in Egypt. 
 
 1 Both the Samaritan Pentateuch and the Septuagint say the sojourn in Egypt 
 and in the land of Canaan was 430 years (Exod. xii, 40), contrary to the Jewish 
 Pentateuch.
 
 230 INTRODUCTION TO THE STUDY 
 
 We confess we have but little confidence in any system of chro- 
 nology so ancient as the age of Abraham. For, in the first place, 
 several generations may have been omitted : e. g. t we find the name 
 of Cainan between Arphaxad and Salah in the Septuagint, which is 
 wanting in the Jewish and Samaritan Pentateuch, but is found in 
 Luke's genealogy of Christ. There are some striking instances of the 
 omission of generations in the Books of Chronicles. Matthew, in the 
 genealogy of our Lord, has done the same. In the next place, there is 
 great liability to corruption in the transmission of numbers. Menes 
 was the first king of Egypt ; but his age is very uncertain. Ac- 
 cording to Josephus he reigned 1,300 years before Solomon. Wil- 
 kinson is disposed to place Menes about 2700 B. C. Gliddon and 
 others adopt about the same date. But twenty-six* different dates 
 have been assigned to the age of Menes, ranging from B. C. 6467 to 
 B. C. 2182. We may assume B. C. 2700 as his most probable age; 
 and this date is not inconsistent with the chronology of either the 
 Samaritan or the Septuagint text. 
 
 In Genesis xiv there is an account of the rebellion of the kings of 
 - Sodom, Gomorrah, Admah, Zeboiim, and Bela, against 
 
 pom connr 
 
 mationsof the Chedorlaomer, king of Elam, and his three vassal kings, 
 SUJ^JJJJ! in which the former were completely defeated, and Lot 
 Ionian monu- was led away among the captives, but was rescued by 
 Abraham, who, with his confederate Amorites, com- 
 pletely routed the victorious kings. Here the question arises, Do 
 the recently discovered and deciphered monuments of Babylon give 
 any confirmation to this history ? The answer must be in the affirm- 
 ative. For while profane history contains no account of the events 
 here related, yet there are certain facts that confirm the history, 
 though indirectly. " The change in the position of Babylon, the 
 rise of the Elamites to power and pre-eminence, and the occurrence 
 about this time of Elamitic expeditions into Palestine or the ad- 
 jacent districts, are witnessed to by documents recently disinterred 
 from the mounds of Mesopotamia. The name, too, of the Elamite 
 king, though not yet actually found on any monument, is composed 
 of elements both of which occur in Elamite documents separately, 
 and is of a type exactly similar to other Elamitic names of the 
 period. To give the evidence more fully, it is stated in an inscrip- 
 tion of Asshur-bani-pal, the son of Esar-haddon, that 1,635 years be- 
 fore his own capture of Susa, or about B. C. 2286, Kudur-Nakhunta, 
 then king of Elam, led an expedition into Babylon, took the *owns, 
 plundered the temples, and carried off the images of the gods to 
 his own capital, where they remained to the time of the Assyriar. 
 
 1 Wuttke, p. 488.
 
 OF THE HOLY SCRIPTURES. 231 
 
 conquest. From Babylonian documents of a date, not much later 
 (B. C. 2200-2100), it appears that an Elamitic dynasty had by that 
 time been established in Babylonia itself, and that a king called 
 Kudur-Mabuk, an Elamite prince, who^ held his court at Ur, in 
 Lower Chaldea, carried his arms so far to the westward that he 
 took the title of ' Ravager of the West,' or ' Ravager of Syria,' a 
 title which is found inscribed upon his bricks. The element Kudur. 
 which commences the name of this prince, and also that of Kudur- 
 Nakhunta, is identical with the Hebrew Chedor ; while Lagamer is 
 elsewhere found as an Elamitic god, which is the case also with 
 Mabuk and Nakhunta. Thus Chedorlaomer (Kudur-Lagamer) is a 
 name of exactly the same type with Kudur-Nakhunta and Kudur- 
 Mabuk. Its character is thoroughly Elamitic, and it is appropri- 
 ate to the time at which the writer of Genesis places the monarch 
 bearing it." What a strong proof we here have of the reality 
 of the history in which Abraham occupies so conspicuous a place ! 
 Such a history as this must have been written down either in the 
 patriarchal age originally, or by some one in the position of Moses. 
 
 The cities of the plain, Sodom, Gomorrah, etc., must have stood at 
 the upper end of the Dead Sea; and Dr. Tristram 5 has recently discov- 
 ered the site of the ancient Zoar, in the ruins called Zi'ara, eight miles 
 east of the north-east end of the Dead Sea, on the mountain side. 
 
 In the supplication which Abraham makes to God in behalf of 
 Sodom, Professor Blunt * finds a remarkable undesigned coincidence 
 in the fact that Lot, who was the nephew of Abraham, dwelt in 
 Sodom, while he makes no petition for the other cities of the plain, 
 in which he did not feel the same deep interest. 
 
 In the blessing pronounced upon Esau it is said : " Behold, thy 
 dwelling shall be the fatness of the earth, and of the dew of heaven 
 from above " (Gen. xxvii, 39). Professor Palmer, who has recently 
 explored Edom, remarks on it : " The country is extremely fertile, 
 and presents a favourable contrast to the sterile region on the oppo- 
 site side of the 'Arabah. Goodly streams flow through the valleys, 
 which are filled with trees and flowers ; while on the uplands to the 
 east rich pasture-lands and corn-fields may every- where be seen."' 
 
 The history of Joseph in Egypt (Gen. xxxix-1) displays a most 
 accurate knowledge * of Egyptian affairs, and must have been writ- 
 ten by Moses,, or by some one in Egypt before the time of Moses. 
 
 1 Rawlinson, Hist. Illus. Old Testament, pp. 39, 40. 
 
 1 Land of Moab, pp. 341, 343. ' Scriptural Coincidences, p. 31. 
 
 * Desert of the Exodus, p. 362. 
 
 1 Bleek acknowledges the intimate acquaintance with Egyptian affairs here shown. 
 Einleitung, p. 265.
 
 232 INTRODUCTION TO THE STUDY 
 
 It is stated (Genesis xxxix, i) that Potiphar, captain of Pharaoh's 
 The story of guard, bought Joseph from the Ishmaelites. In the time 
 
 Joseph exact o f Joseph it is well known that the king of Egypt had 
 
 In Its picture * . &/ r 
 
 of Egyptian soldiers and officers. Slavery existed in that country at 
 
 OU8tom8 - a very early period. " The traffic in slaves," says Wil- 
 
 kinson, " was tolerated by the Egyptians." Potiphar, the name o/ 
 Pharaoh's officer, is a Coptic word, meaning belonging to the sun. 
 
 The narrative of the attempt made by Potiphar's wife on ihe chas 
 tity of Joseph shows that women were not excluded from the society 
 of men, as was the custom in some ancient countries. And this is 
 confirmed by independent testimony. " Men and women either sat 
 together, or separately, in a different part of the room." 1 
 
 Mention is made of the king's butler (cup-bearer), of the vine, 
 and of the pressing of grapes into Pharaoh's cup (chap, xl, i, 9-11). 
 " Some have pretended to doubt," says Wilkinson, " that the vine 
 was commonly cultivated, or even grown, in Egypt ; but the frequent 
 notice of it and of Egyptian wine in the sculptures, and the author- 
 ity of ancient writers, sufficiently answer those objections." 1 
 
 " And the birds did eat them (meats) out of the basket upon my 
 head" (chap, xl, 17). Here we have a reference to the Egyptian 
 custom of carrying baskets on the head. With this compare Herod- 
 otus' ' remark respecting the Egyptians : " Men carry loads on 
 their heads, women on their shoulders." Wilkinson * gives a cut 
 representing this usage of carrying bread in a vessel on the head. 
 
 In Pharaoh's dream seven fat cows come up from the Nile and 
 feed in a meadow; after which seven other cows that are lean come 
 up also from the Nile, and devour the fat ones (chap, xli, 1-4). In 
 the Egyptian mythology the cow was the symbol of the land of 
 Egypt. Isis "was the goddess of the earth, which the Egyptians 
 called their mother." According to Herodotus, ii, 41, " the image 
 of Isis was the form of a woman with the horns of a cow." The 
 cows, in the dream of Pharaoh, come up from the Nile, the source 
 of the fertility of Egypt. The figure is purely Egyptian. The cows 
 fed in a meadow, or, rather, in marsh-grass *nN, a Coptic word. The 
 stalks mentioned in the second dream had seven ears. This " was 
 one of the varieties of wheat in ancient Egypt. To interpret his 
 dream Pharaoh called in the sacred scribes and wise men, classes of 
 priests ; for the latter possessed all the wisdom of the Egyptians. 
 
 When Joseph was called from his dungeon by Pharaoh it is stated 
 that he shaved himself before appearing before Pharaoh. This was 
 the custom of the Egyptians. " Though foreigners who were brought 
 
 'Wilkinson, vol. i, 144. 'Ibid., vol. i, 45. 'Lib. ii, 35. 
 
 * Wilkinson, vol. i, 176. * Ibid., vol. ii, 39.
 
 OF THE HOLY SCRIPTURES. 233 
 
 to Egypt as slaves had beards on their arrival in the country, we find 
 that so soon as they were employed in the service of this civilized 
 people they were obliged to conform to the cleanly habits of their 
 masters ; their beard and heads were shaved. 1 In the honours be- 
 stowed upon Joseph by Pharaoh mention is made of the king's sig- 
 net-ring, a chain of gold for the neck, and garments of fine linen (or, 
 rather, of cotton). The articles here enumerated are known to 
 have been in use in Egypt long before the time of Joseph." 
 
 The name of the daughter of Potipherah, whom Pharaoh gave to 
 Joseph for wife, was Asenath, which means " she is of Neith, i. e., be- 
 longs to Neith, the Minerva of the Egyptians " (Gesenius). Pharaoh 
 gave Joseph the name Zophnath-paaneah, which is Egyptian, mean- 
 ing the salvation or saviour of the age, or the supporter or deliverer of 
 the age (Gesenius.) How could a Hebrew forger of a later age make 
 up all these Egyptian names ? 
 
 The wife of Joseph was the daughter of the priest of On s (or He- 
 liopolis), the priests of which were the most learned of the Egyp- 
 tians. The king thus bestowed upon Joseph the highest honour in 
 this matrimonial alliance. 
 
 In Genesis xlvi, 34, it is said that " every shepherd is an abomina- 
 tion unto the Egyptians." The ground of this feeling was the fact, 
 that they had been in subjection to the shepherd kings. " This do- 
 minion of the shepherd kings lasted upwards of half a century. At 
 length, about 1530 B. C., Amosis, the leader of the eighteenth dy- 
 nasty, . . . drove the shepherds out of the country." 4 Another rea- 
 son, however, may have been that shepherds killed and ate cows, 
 which were held sacred by the Egyptians. It has been thought very 
 improbable that Egypt should have been afflicted with such a famine 
 as is recorded in the history of Joseph. But as the fertility of Egypt 
 depends on the overflowing of the Nile, which is caused by the trop- 
 ical rains in the Abyssinian mountains, any large decrease in the 
 quantity of water would produce a famine. Hengstenberg * gives 
 several instances of terrible famines in Egypt since the time of Mo- 
 haramed, from several writers. Macrizi wrote a whole book on the 
 famines of Egypt. 
 
 In Gen. xlvii, 22, it is said, " Only the land of the priests (trjrlan, 
 rightly rendered priests} bought he [Joseph] not [for Pharaoh]; for 
 the priests had a portion assigned them of Pharaoh, and did eat their 
 portion which Pharaoh gave them : wherefore they sold not theii 
 
 'Wilkinson, Manners, etc., vol. ii, p. 327. *Ibid., etc. 
 ' On, or Heliopolis, existed as early as B. C. 2000. 
 * Wilkinson, Manners, etc., vol; i, 307, 308. 
 5 Die Biicher Moses und Egypten, 33-35.
 
 234 INTRODUCTION TO THE STUDY 
 
 lands." The priests of Egypt differed from those of the Hebrews in 
 respect to possessions and privileges. " The priests," says Wilkin- 
 son, 1 " enjoyed great privileges. They were exempt from taxes ; they 
 consumed no part of their own income in any of their necessary ex- 
 penses ; and they had one of the three portions into which the land 
 of Egypt was divided, free from all duties. They were provided for 
 from the public stores, out of which they received a stated allow ance 
 of corn, and all the other necessaries of life." In chap. 1, 2, 3, men- 
 tion is made of embalming Jacob, and in verse 26, of Joseph. This 
 was a well-known custom of the Egyptians. It is one of the most 
 certain facts of history that the Hebrews went down into Egypt, and, 
 after a sojourn of many years there, left the country for Canaan. 
 The history of Joseph gives the only explanation of an event that 
 would be otherwise inexplicable the entrance of the Hebrews into 
 Egypt. For the ancient Egyptians had an aversion to foreigners. 
 " They prevented all strangers from penetrating into the inteiior." 
 It was not till the sixth century before Christ that foreigners ac- 
 quired much knowledge of Egyptian affairs.* 
 
 The exact knowledge of Egyptian affairs and of the language (Cop- 
 tic) of the country possessed by the author of the Pentateuch cannot 
 be explained by supposed commercial relations 3 existing between 
 Egypt and Palestine centuries after Moses. We have commercial re- 
 lations with Europe and Asia, such as the Hebrew nation in the age of 
 David, and even in that of Solomon, never had, and yet how ignorant 
 we are of many of the customs of the Old World, notwithstanding 
 the number of travellers and books of travels. A writer six or eight 
 centuries after the time of Joseph, living in Palestine, would have 
 been under the necessity of reproducing the condition of things in 
 Egypt in the time of Joseph, and of learning the Coptic language. 
 But there is nothing in the history of Joseph to indicate a made-up 
 story, and the simplest explanation of the precise knowledge displayed 
 is, that it was written by Moses, or originally by some one living in 
 Egypt before his time. 
 
 In Exodus ii, 3, it is stated that the infant Moses was placed in an 
 The accuracy ar ^ (or boat) of papyrus daubed with bitumen and pitch. 
 
 of the Penta- it was customary in Egypt to make boats of papyrus 
 
 teucbinltsrec- , ,... . 
 
 ord of Egyptian and Wilkinson remarks : Nor can there be any doubt 
 
 usages. t ^ at pit cn was known in Egypt at that time [the time 
 
 of Moses], since we find it on objects which have been preserved ol 
 the same early date." 4 The Israelites during their bondage in 
 
 'See Wilkinson, vol. i, p. 319. *Ibid., vol. ii, 331. 
 
 De Wette would thus explain it. Einleitung, p. 264. 
 * Manners and Customs, vol. ii, 120.
 
 OF THE HOLY SCRIPTURES. 235 
 
 Egypt are represented as making brick under hard taskmasters, 
 who compelled them to furnish a fixed quantity of brick without 
 giving them straw with which to make them (Exod. v., 6-9, etc). 
 
 Bricks were made in Egypt as early, at least, as three centuries 
 before Moses, but most probably eight or ten centuries before him. 
 They were made both with straw and without it, and were unburnt. 1 
 The manufacture of them was a monopoly of the government. " To 
 meet with Hebrews in the sculptures," says Wilkinson, " cannot 
 reasonably be expected, since the remains in that part of Egypt 
 where they lived have not been preserved ; but it is curious to dis- 
 cover other foreign captives occupied in the same manner, over- 
 looked by similar ' taskmasters,' and performing the very same 
 labours as the Israelites described in the Bible ; and no one can 
 look at the paintings of Thebes representing brickmakers without 
 a feeling of the highest interest."' 
 
 We have already seen that the making of brick was a government 
 monopoly, and this corresponds well with the statement in Exodus, 
 that " Pharaoh commanded the taskmasters of the people and their 
 officers, saying, Ye shall no more give the people straw to make 
 brick," etc. (chap, v, 6, 7). 
 
 In the description of the plagues of Egypt we find an accurate 
 knowledge of the habits of that country. When the Nile was turned 
 to blood, " the Egyptians digged round about the river for water 
 to drink ; for they could not drink of the water of the river " (chap, 
 vii, 24). At present, the inhabitants of Egypt use the water of the 
 Nile, having filtered it. It is of an excellent quality. There is no 
 doubt that it was used from the most ancient times, as there is no 
 other source of supply. 
 
 In the plague of hail, " the flax and the barley were smitten ; for 
 the barley was in the ear and the flax was in flower. But the wheat 
 and the rye (spelt) were not smitten, for they were late " (chap. 
 ix, 31, 32). Wheat, barley, and flax were cultivated in Egypt from 
 the earliest times ; while Herodotus and Pliny speak of spelt as a 
 product of the country. The Nile reaches the height of its inundation 
 in the last of October. After this, wheat * and barley are sown, the 
 wheat requiring five months and the barley four for their growth 
 and ripening, so that in the month of February, about which time 
 
 1 Some Egyptian bricks containing straw we saw some years ago in Dr. Abbott's 
 collection. 
 
 * Manners and Customs, vol. ii, 195, 197. 
 
 'When in Egypt, in December, 1869, the author observed in the first part of the 
 month that the wheat had just appeared above the ground, while the barley was 
 well advanced. 
 1G
 
 236 INTRODUCTION TO THE STUDY 
 
 the plague of hail occurred, the barley was in the ear, but the 
 wheat was late, or not grown up. The minute exactness of the 
 statement shows that the writer was an eye-witness. For it would 
 never have entered the mind of a writer centuries afterward to give 
 such particulars rather, it would have been impossible for him to 
 do it. 
 
 In the description of the conflict between Moses, Aaron, and the 
 magicians of Egypt, it is stated that when Aaron threw down his 
 rod and h became a serpent, the magicians, having been sent for by 
 Pharaoh, did in like manner with their enchantments, and cast down 
 their rods, which became serpents, but Aaron's rod swallowed up 
 their rods (chap, vii, n, 12). Likewise in the account of the first 
 and the second plague it is added : " And the magicians did so with 
 their enchantments." In the third plague, however, they failed to 
 accomplish anything, and confessed in it the finger of God. It 
 was not to be supposed that the priests of Egypt would yield to the 
 superior power and authority of Moses, and lose their influence with 
 the people, without a violent struggle. They possessed all the learn- 
 ing of Egypt, and it may well be supposed that both the " wise 
 men " and " sorcerers " were priests; at least, that the sorcerers were 
 in their employ. We are not to suppose that the magicians of Egypt 
 possessed supernatural power, for it is said that they produced their 
 effects through enchantments (or secret, magical arts), a species of 
 legerdemain. If they had possessed supernatural power they might 
 have produced lice as well as frogs. 
 
 Aaron and the Egyptian priests are represented as having rods 
 This was an Egyptian custom. "When walking from home, Egyp 
 tian gentlemen frequently carried sticks " (Wilkinson). North- 
 west of Egypt, in Cyrenaica, there lived in ancient times the Psylli, a 
 people celebrated as serpent-charmers (Pliny, Nat. Hist., lib. 7, 2, 2). 
 Persons of similar skill have been found in modern Egypt. 1 Hassel- 
 quist states that the serpent-charmers of Egypt asserted that they 
 could turn a serpent into a stick, and compel it to lie as dead* This 
 throws light on one of the feats of the magicians. 
 
 Before considering the departure of the Israelites from Egypt, it 
 
 becomes proper to discuss the vexed question of their 
 The question 
 
 ef thegreatic- great increase in Egypt. The number of their males 
 S was about six hundred thousand (Exod. xii, 37). II 
 conaid- this number was not repeated, and if we had not the 
 
 number of each tribe, 3 and the sum total afterwards 
 
 given as six hundred and three thousand five hundred and fifty, we 
 
 1 See Lane's Modern Egyptians. 
 
 * In Hengstenberg's Die Biicher Moses und Egypten. * See Num. i-iv.
 
 OF THE HOLY SCRIPTURES. 237 
 
 might suppose that the text * had been corrupted. But with the facts 
 before us, it is difficult to see how the numbers are to be rejected. 
 
 In considering the question, two points are first to be determined : 
 the number of Israelites who went with Jacob down into Egypt, and 
 the duration of the sojourn there. In Genesis xlvi we have a list 
 embracing those who came with Jacob into Egypt, bearing every in- 
 dication of being the original family register from which the subse- 
 quent lists are in part taken, It is evident that this table was not 
 made up in a post-Mosaic age to give the names of the heads of 
 families that had become distinguished, since some persons in the 
 list are never mentioned afterward, most probably because they left 
 no families. 
 
 Objections have, indeed, been made to this genealogical record, 
 and to the statements it gives respecting the descendants Ob j ectlong to 
 of Jacob who came with him into Egypt. It is said that the list of Ja^ 
 " the sons of Israel carried Jacob their father, and their c 
 little ones, and their wives " (ver. 5), into Egypt. " His sons and his 
 sons' sons with him, his daughters, and his sons' daughters, and all 
 his seed, brought he with him into Egypt " (ver. 7). An enumeration 
 is given of these descendants, and it is added : " All the souls that 
 came with Jacob into Egypt, which came out of his loins, besides Ja- 
 cob's sons' wives, all the souls were threescore and six; and the sons 
 of Joseph, which were born to him in Egypt, were two souls ; all 
 the souls of the house of Jacob, which came into Egypt, were three- 
 score and ten " (verses 26-27). 
 
 There are several persons in this list who must have been born 
 after Jacob entered Egypt, and there is nothing surprising in the 
 statement that they came thither with Jacob, though not born till 
 some years afterward, when we reflect that Joseph's two sons, though 
 stated by the historian to have been born there, yet are said to have 
 come with Jacob into Egypt. It is evident that Hezron and Hamul, 
 sons of Pharez, were born there, and also that several sons of Benja- 
 min were born after Jacob went down into Egypt. For Benjamin at 
 that time was only about twenty-two or twenty-three years old, and ten 
 sons are given him (ver. 21). It is utterly incredible that Benjamin 
 at that time of life should have had so many sons, almost as many 
 as his father had in his whole life by all his wives ! a Four sons 
 are attributed to Reuben in the genealogy (ver. 9). It is probable 
 
 Both the Samaritan text and the Septuagint agree with the number about 
 600,000 (Exodus xii, 37). 
 
 ' Colenso, to make out his point, says that Benjamin was more than twenty-two 
 years old at that time, according to the story. " It is, therefore, quite possible.' 
 *ays he, " that he may have had ten sons, perhaps by several wives."
 
 5538 INTRODUCTION TO THE STUDY 
 
 that two of these were born in Egypt ; for about a year before he 
 came thither, or even less, he had but two, since he says after 
 the first sending of the sons of Jacob into Egypt for corn : " Slay 
 my two sons " (Gen. xlii, 37) ; if he had had more at that time he 
 would have named them. It is stated (chap, xlvi, 12) that Er and 
 Onan, sons of Judah, died in the land of Canaan, and it would seem 
 that Hezron and Hamul, his grandsons, are substituted for them in 
 the genealogical list. 
 
 The statement of the historian that the sons of Jacob brought 
 their little ones (*]&, little children, boys and girls, Gesenius) and wives 
 into Egypt, shows that the grandchildren of Jacob were little chil- 
 dren, and that the historian knew well the ages of the sons of Jacob, 
 their family affairs, and that several in his account, though said to 
 have come into 'Egypt with Jacob, were really born in Egypt. Quite 
 similar is the language of the Epistle to the Hebrews, that Levi 
 paid tithes in Abraham to Melchizedek, for he was in the loins of 
 Abraham when the patriarch met that distinguished priest. (Heb. 
 
 vii, 9 I0 )- 
 
 In like manner we could say of a family of French descent that 
 they came from France. In the Hebrew mind the idea of the son 
 existing in the father was deeply rooted. Jacob lived seventeen 
 years after his arrival in Egypt, and it is very probable that the 
 genealogical list gives the family history down to his death. It is 
 evident that the historian aimed to give the round number seventy, 
 which seems to have been sacred among the Hebrews, 1 and also to 
 show from what a small number the Israelites had grown to be so 
 great a nation ; as it is said in Deut. x, 22 : " Thy fathers went down 
 into Egypt with threescore and ten persons ; and now the Lord thy 
 God hath made thee as the stars of heaven for multitude." To this 
 number seventy, the wives of the sons of Jacob are to be added ; per- 
 haps, also, other women. It is not unlikely that there were slaves in 
 the household of Jacob, as we find that Abraham had three hundred 
 and eighteen in his (Gen. xiv, 14) ; so that it is impossible to fix the 
 whole number of the household of Jacob, though it must have num- 
 bered one or two hundred. 
 
 Respecting the length of the abode of the Israelites in Egypt, God 
 Lenjrm of the declares to Abraham : " Thy seed shall be a stranger in 
 stay in Egypt. a i an( j that is not theirs, and shall serve them ; and they 
 shall afflict them four hundred years ; and also that nation, whom 
 they shall serve, will I judge ; and afterwards shall they come out 
 with great substance. And thou shall go to thy fathers in peace ; 
 
 1 Hence Gesenius remarks : "D^WO, seventy, often as a larger round number 
 tVn. I, 3; Exod. xv, 27 ; xxiv, I ; Num. xi, 16,' tc.
 
 OF THE HOLY SCRIPTURES. 239 
 
 them shall be buried in a good old age. But in the fourth genera- 
 tion they shall come hither again." (Gen. xv, 13-16). If this language 
 does not refer to the sojourn of the Israelites in Egypt, and state that 
 that sojourn should last four hundred years (expressed prophetically 
 in round numbers), it is difficult to say what language would refer to 
 it. And this does not include the time that the patriarchs dwelt in 
 Canaan, for the declaration is made in reference to the seed of Abra- 
 nam, while he himself was to go to his fathers in peace. His seed 
 was to dwell in a land not their own, not Canaan surely, which had 
 been already promised to Abraham, but in the fourth generation 
 they were to come thither again (to Canaan). The fourth genera- 
 tion, standing in close connexion with the four hundred years, 1 de- 
 notes the same period of time. Gesenius remarks on the word 
 TH, a generation : " In the times of the patriarchs it was reckoned at 
 a hundred years " (Heb. Lex). So also Furst (Heb. Lex). 
 
 In Exodus xii, 40, the length of the abode in Egypt, as being his- 
 torical, is fixed with exactness : " Now the sojourn of the children 
 of Israel, which they sojourned a in Egypt, was four hundred and thirty 
 years." The Samaritan Pentateuch reads: "The sojourn of the 
 children of Israel and of their fathers, which they sojourned in the 
 land of Canaan and in the land of Egypt, was four hundred and 
 thirty years." The Septuagint has the following: "The sojourn of 
 the children of Israel, which they sojourned in the land of Egypt and 
 in the land of Canaan, was four hundred and thirty years." But the 
 addition, " in the land of Canaan," is utterly inconsistent with the 
 four hundred years during which the Israelites were to dwell in 
 Egypt (Gen. xv, 13), which number both the Samaritan and Greek 
 Pentateuch contain, in agreement with the Jewish. This period, 
 then, of four hundred and thirty years rests upon strong grounds, 
 and is a refutation of all the inferences and absurdities that Colenso 
 draws from the short sojourn of two hundred and fifteen years.' 
 
 The only difficulty in connexion with this period of four hundred 
 and thirty years is found in the fact that Moses and Aaron appear 
 
 1 This number, four hundred years, is found in the Jewish, Samaritan, and Gieek 
 Pentateuch of the LXX, the Targum of Onkelos, and in the Peshito Syriac. 
 
 * We have som,ewhat departed from the English version in this passage. ' The 
 sojourn which they sojourned" is the force of the passage confirmed by the LXX } 
 Peshito-Syriac, and the Vulgate. 
 
 'St. Paul (Gal. iii, 17), speaking of the covenant that God made with Abraham, 
 says that " the law, which was four hundred and thirty years after, cannot disannul " 
 it. But this period is incidentally mentioned, and the number of years taken from 
 the LXX used by Paul's readers forms no part of the argument. If St. Paul had 
 been questioned on the subject he would doubtless have answered that he hod ra 
 revelation on chronology.
 
 240 INTRODUCTION TO THE STUDY 
 
 to be the great-grandsons of Levi, and it would be difficult to make 
 Probable omto- ^ our generations extend over four hundred and thirty 
 sion or several years. But it is highly probable that several genera- 
 tions between Levi and Moses and Aaron have been 
 omitted. It is well known that Matthew, in his genealogy of our 
 Lord, omits several generations. In chapter i, 8, he says : " Joram 
 begat Ozias " (Uzziah), while in fact there were three kings between 
 these two; the order being, Joram, Ahaziah, Joash. Amaziah, Uz- 
 ziah (Ozias). In verse n he omits Jehoiakim after Josiah. In 
 i Chron. xxvi, 24, in reference to the regulations of King David, 
 it is said : " Shebuel, the son of Gershom, the son of Moses, was 
 ruler of the treasures." Here we have about a dozen generations 
 omitted between Shebuel and Gershom. Likewise in Ezra vii, 1-5, 
 we have six generations omitted between Meraioth and Azariah, 
 which are found in i Chron. vi, 6-9. 
 
 From Nahshon (mentioned Num. i, 7) to David (i Chron. ii, 
 11-15) there are five generations, running through a period of about 
 four hundred years. Now it is highly probable we might say cer- 
 tain that several generations have been omitted, as there would be 
 about eighty years to a generation if this were not the case. That 
 several generations have been omitted is rendered quite certain 
 from the fact that from Aaron to Zadok, who was priest in the time 
 of David, there were ten generations (i Chron. vi, 3-11), twice as 
 many as are given from Nahshon (in the time of Moses) to David. 
 That several generations have been omitted between Levi and 
 Moses and Aaron appears exceedingly probable from the fact that, 
 according to i Chron. ii, 18-20, Bezaleel, a contemporary with 
 Moses, mentioned Exod. xxxi, 2, was the seventh generation from 
 Jacob; and from i Chron. vii, 20-27, it would seem that there were 
 eleven generations from Jacob to Joshua. If, then, in one case we 
 find seven, and in another case eleven, generations, extending to the 
 time of Moses, it is difficult to think that Moses is only the fourth 
 generation from Jacob. 
 
 It is also evident from Num. iii, 19, 27, 28, that there must have 
 been several generations that have been omitted between Kohath and 
 Moses. For in the first of these passages it is said that the sons of 
 Kohath were Amram, Izehar, Hebron, and Uzziel ; and in the other 
 two that these sons gave the family names of Amramites, Izeharites, 
 Hebronites, and Uzzielites, and that the number of their males from 
 a month old and upward was eight thousand and six hundred. If 
 no links are omitted in the genealogy, then the male descendants of 
 the grandfather of Moses in the lifetime of the latter reached this 
 great number of eight thousand six hundred, which is utterly in
 
 OF THE HOLY SCRIPTURES. 241 
 
 credible, and would make the whole number of descendants seven- 
 teen or eighteen thousand. The historian could never have been 
 guilty of such an absurdity as this. Here the question arises, Be- 
 tween what names do the omitted generations occur ? As Kohath 
 has such a large number of descendants, the omitted generations 
 must be placed between him and Moses ; and as it is said that Amram 
 married Jochebed, his father's sister, daughter of Levi, born to him 
 in Egypt (Num. xxvi, 59), we are compelled to interpolate the miss- 
 ing links between Amram and Moses. Nor does the statement that 
 Jochebed bare to Amram Aaron and Moses negative it, for it is 
 said in Genesis xlvi, 15, " These be the sons of Leah which she bare 
 to Jacob" thirty-three, of whom only six were her own sons, and the 
 rest were her grandchildren and great grandchildren. In the same 
 way Matthew says, " Joram begat Ozias," although there were three 
 generations intervening, so that in fact Ozias (Uzziah) was Joram's 
 great-great-grandson. 
 
 Allowing an abode of four hundred and thirty years in fertile 
 Egypt, there is no difficulty in the biblical statement that the adult 
 males of the Hebrews amounted to about six hundred thousand. Pop- 
 ulation doubles every twenty-five years where there are no obstruc- 
 tions to its natural increase. On the supposition that the whole family 
 of Jacob that went into Egypt consisted of only eighty-two persons, 
 the lowest estimate, we should have at the end of four hundred and 
 thirty years a population of more than twelve millions. But if we 
 suppose the number eighty-two represents the number of the house- 
 hold of Jacob at his death, we should have more than seven millions 
 as the number of the Israelites at the time of the exodus. 1 But if 
 the abode in Egypt lasted but two hundred and fifteen years, and if 
 at the beginning of this period there were but eighty-two persons, 
 the whole number of the Israelites at the exodus would be only 
 thirty-one or thirty-two thousand.* And to reach the sum of two 
 millions, it was necessary that they should have numbered more 
 than five thousand when they went down into Egypt. 1 Although 
 population may for a considerable length of time double itself every 
 twenty-five years, yet it soon meets with checks that greatly retard 
 it, so that it is impossible to reach sure results. 
 
 Respecting the large numbers that left Egypt, about two millions 
 
 'On the supposition that population doubles every twenty-five years, we should 
 have the following formula for the whole number of Israelites at the end of 430 
 years, by dividing 430 by 25 = i7.2=the number of times the population would 
 double. 82X2"'*= 12,346,084. But if we count from the death of Jacob we shall 
 have for the whole number, 82X2 I6 '"=7, 706,032. 
 
 3i,773. '2.ooo,ooo-H2 t<t =5,i6i.
 
 242 INTRODUCTION TO THE STUDY 
 
 of souls, Rawlinson remarks : " They seem required by the general 
 tenor of the whole narrative, especially by the great unwillingness of 
 the Egyptians to let the people go, and by their power within little 
 more than a generation to conquer and occupy Canaan. In Ger- 
 many the best critics, including so subtle and little credulous a 
 writer as Ewald, accept them." 1 
 
 Respecting the great number of Israelites that left Egypt at once, 
 Professor Rawlinson well remarks : " It is certain migrations of 
 tribes quite as large as that of Israel is said to have been, have 
 from time to time taken place in the East, and, indeed, in the West 
 also. Such migrations have frequently been sudden. The emigrants 
 have started off with their women, children, and all their possessions, 
 on a certain day; they have traversed enormous distances, much 
 greater than the Israelites traversed, and have finally settled them- 
 selves in new abodes." He gives a striking instance of this.' 
 
 When the Israelites were about to leave Egypt, Moses, in accord- 
 The bestowal ance with a divine direction, ordered the Israelites to 
 
 of gift* upon as & o f the Egyptians jewels of gold, jewels of silver, and 
 the Israelites . , . / r ' / 
 
 by the Egyp- raiment, and they did so. And Jehovah gave the peo- 
 ple favour in the sight of the Egyptians, and they gave 
 these things unto them." In this passage we have departed from the 
 English version, but in so doing we have better expressed the force 
 of the Hebrew ; the verb ^xt?, to ask (rendered to borrow by our trans- 
 lators), is very often used in the Hebrew Bible, but rarely ever in 
 the sense to borrow. The Hiphil conjugation, S'Ntyn, to let ask, prop- 
 erly to offer willingly (Fiirst, Heb. Lex.), is translated to tend in our 
 version without any sufficient authority. This Hiphil form occurs 
 but twice in the Hebrew Bible in i Sam. i, 28 and in Exod. xii, 36. 
 In the former passage it has the sense of given freely, without any 
 expectation of return ; for Hannah says respecting Samuel, " I have 
 given him to Jehovah all his days." Here the meaning "lent" would 
 be improper. After the death of their firstborn the Egyptians were 
 exceedingly anxious to get rid of the Israelites, and would cheerfully 
 GIVE them almost any thing to effect this. "And the Egyptians 
 were urgent upon the people that they might send them out of the 
 land in haste; for they said, We be all dead men" (Exod. xii, 33). 
 Here the question arises, Did the Egyptians expect the Israelitet 
 
 1 In Modern Skepticism, p. 276. 
 
 1 " It was on the 5th day of January, 1771. the day appointed by the high priests 
 that Oubacha began his march with seventy thousand families. Most of the horde* 
 irere there assembled in the steppes, on the left bank of the Volga, and the -who!/ 
 multitude followed him." Hommaire de Hell. Travels, p. 227, E. T. in Modem 
 Skepticism.
 
 OF THE HOLY SCRIPTURES. 243 
 
 to return to Egypt ? We cannot answer this with certainty ; but it 
 is very probable that they became ultimately convinced that the 
 Israelites intended no return, and hence Pharaoh's obstinate refusal 
 to let them go. Certainly Moses did not promise Pharaoh that they 
 would return. It is evident, if the Egyptians did not expect the 
 Israelites to return, that there could have been no lending to the 
 Hebrews by them. 
 
 CHAPTER XXVIII 
 
 THE CREDIBILITY OF THE HISTORY CONTAINED IN THE 
 PENTATEUCH - CONCLUSION. 
 
 nPlIE passover of the Jews, instituted just before the Israelites left 
 
 Kgypt, in commemoration of the death of the firstborn of the 
 
 Egyptians and the passing over the preservation of the internal credi- 
 
 firstborn sons of Israel, is a striking proof of the truth of bllit y of the 
 
 j j 1 history of the 
 the events it commemorates. It was ordered : 1 his day institution of 
 
 shall be unto you for a memorial ; and ye shall keep it a the P assover - 
 feast to Jehovah throughout your generations : ye shall keep it a 
 feast by an ordinance for ever" (Exod. xii, 14). We accordingly 
 find the passover was kept on the fourteenth of the first month of 
 the second year after the Israelites left Egypt (Num. ix, 5) ; and when 
 Joshua entered Canaan he kept the passover on the fourteenth day 
 of the month (Josh, v, 10); and there is no doubt that the yearly 
 festival kept at Shiloh was the passover (Judges xxi, 19). When 
 King Josiah introduced important reforms in Judah and in a part of 
 Samaria, he kept the feast of the passover on a magnificent scale, 
 and it is said, " Surely there was not holden such a passover from 
 the days of the judges that judged Israel, nor in all the days of the 
 kings of Israel, nor of the kings of Judah " (2 Kings xxiii, 22). This 
 language implies that the passover had been kept in the days of the 
 judges and in those of the kings. 1 In commemoration of the pres- 
 ervation of the firstborn of the sons of Israel, all the firstborn males 
 
 1 Colenso absurdly derives the passover from the Canaanitish custom of making 
 their sons "pass over" to Moloch or Baal, the Sun-god ; and thus the Hebrew his- 
 torian has given a wrong origin to the festival in ascribing it to Jehovah's passing 
 over the firstborn of Israel. He supposes this festival was kept, after the example 
 of the tribes of Canaan, with human as well as animal sacrifices. But we have not 
 a particle of proof that the Canaanites had any great spring festival of the kind. He 
 utterly confounds two entirely different words, rCO^^pasach, to pass over, and "l^yni 
 hee-Ar, to make pass over, to offer (to Moloch, for example). Colenso's The Penta 
 teuch and the Moabite Stone.
 
 244 INTRODUCTION TO THE STUDY 
 
 of whatever kind were given to Jehovah, but the firstborn ass waa 
 to be redeemed with a lamb, or its neck was to be broken. The 
 firstborn of men were to be redeemed (Exod. xiii, 12, 13). 
 
 If we suppose that the feast of the passover was originated ages 
 after Moses, along with the book of Exodus, there would be the in- 
 superable difficulty of its being stated that Moses had instituted the 
 festival at the time of the exodus, and that he had expressly enjoined 
 upon the Israelites its annual observance. But how could a nation 
 be made to believe that they had kept such an observance from the 
 days of Moses, when they had never heard of it before ? But if we 
 are to suppose that the festival had been kept by the Israelites from 
 the earliest ages, it must have been for certain reasons. How, in that 
 case, could a new history make them believe that it was for a pur- 
 pose entirely different from what they for ages had supposed ? 
 
 It is generally conceded that the land of Goshen, where the Israel- 
 ites dwelt, was between the eastern branch of the Nile, the Pelusiac, 
 and the Red Sea. The LXX, which is of considerable authority in 
 Egyptian localities, renders Goshen by " Gesem in Arabia " (Gen. 
 xlvi, 34). At the time of Christ, the Greeks called that part of 
 Egypt between the eastern branch of the Nile and the Red Sea, 
 Arabia. According to Gen. xiii, 17, Goshen was near the Philistines. 
 As to the route ' of the Israelites, all that we can maintain with any 
 Route of the certainty is, that they left Rameses (a locality that is 
 exodus. nol identified) in Goshen, thirty or forty miles west of 
 
 Etham, on the borders of the desert, and that they crossed the upper 
 end of the Red Sea above Ghebel Attaka, probably not far from 
 Suez, and that they then most likely encamped by the Wells of 
 Moses* (Ayfln Mousa), probably so called from this circumstance 
 situated in the desert five or six miles south-east of Suez. After 
 
 'Some find a difficulty in Exodus xiii, 18, where, according to the English version, 
 " the children of Israel went up harnessed out of the land of Egypt." Colenso con- 
 tends that O^Tpfcn, rendered "harnessed," properly means "armed," and that it is 
 absurd to suppose that, if six hundred thousand Hebrews had been armed, they 
 would have been thrown into a panic at the sight of Pharaoh's army. The ancient 
 versions generally render B^STan armed. Gesenius gives it fierce, active, eager, 
 brave in battle ; ani, indeed, the word is used in the sense ready for battle, drawn 
 up in line, in seveial instances. It seems best to render the passage, "The chil- 
 dren of Israel, drawn up in regular order (as if for battle), went up out of the land of 
 Egypt." As they fought with the Amalekites within two months after leaving Egypt, 
 it is evident that they had at that time already obtained arms from some source. 
 
 1 Their first encampment after leaving Rameses was Succoth (Exod. xii, 37 ; Num. 
 xxxiii, 5), which was excavated early in 1883 and identified by M. Naville. The 
 names Pithom and Succoth (Pitum and Tliukuf) are found in combination on the 
 monuments of the place. It is situated about ten miles west of Lake Timsah, near 
 the Roman Heroopolis, and was evidently a store city, built by Israelites (Exod. i, li).
 
 OF THE HOLY SCRIPTURES. 245 
 
 this "they went out into the wilderness of Shur; and they went 
 three days in the wilderness, and found no water " (Exod. xv, 22). 
 With the exception of the Wells of Moses, the country east of the 
 Red Sea for many miles is a sandy desert. Professor Palmer re- 
 marks on the passage just quoted from Exodus, " I doubt if a more 
 suggestive description could possibly be given of this monotonous, 
 waterless waste, the only impressive feature of which is the long 
 ihur, or 'wall,' which forms its northern limit." 
 
 " The difficulty of providing water for the cattle by which they 
 were accompanied has proved a great stumbling-block to many ; but 
 this Mr. Holland has considerably lessened by a novel and ingenious 
 suggestion. He believes that, instead of being an incumbrance to 
 the movements of the host, the cattle were used as beasts of burden, 
 and that, in addition to the camp furniture, each carried its own 
 supply of water, sufficient for several days, in water-skins slung at 
 its sides, precisely as Sir Samuel Baker found them doing at the 
 present day in Abyssinia." 1 "And when they came to Marah, 
 they could not drink of the waters of Marah, for they were bitter." 
 On this Professor Palmer remarks : " Now the soil throughout this part 
 of the country being strongly impregnated with nairtin [native car- 
 bonate of soda, the nitre of the Bible], produces none but brackish 
 water ; and it is worth observing that the first of these springs with 
 which we meet, 'Ain Hawwdrah, is reached on the third day of our 
 desert journey to Suez." 
 
 They next " came to Elim, where were twelve wells of water, and 
 threescore and ten palm-trees." "Here, again," says Palmer, "our 
 own experience accords with that of the Israelites, for our next sta- 
 tion is in Wddy Gharandel, which contains a considerable amount 
 of vegetation, palm-trees in great numbers among the rest, and a 
 perennial stream." "And they removed from Elim, and encamped 
 by the Red Sea " (Num. xxxiii, 10). As the Israelites had wagons 
 and a great deal of baggage, there was but one route to the sea that 
 was practicable, by Wady Taiyebeh, from which " the coast is open 
 and passable ; and, moreover, the mouth of the valley affords a fine 
 clear space for their encampment by the sea," as Palmer clearly 
 shows ; and " the wilderness of Sin will be the narrow strip of desert 
 which fringes the coast south of Wddy Taiyebeh." 
 
 According to Palmer, the only practicable route from the encamp- 
 ment at the Red Sea to Mount Sinai was at that time Palmer's loca- 
 by Wady Feiran, in which he locates Rephidim. ' If," ? m ^0^ 
 says he, "we read the verse, (Exodus xix, 12), 'and 8ea - 
 they departed from Rephidim, and pitched in the wilderness of 
 1 The Desert of the Exodus, p. 225.
 
 246 INTRODUCTION TO THE STUDY 
 
 Sinai,' as implying a break in the march between Rephidim and the 
 Mount of the Law, we shall find that the natural route from Egypt 
 to Sinai accords exactly with the simple and concise account given 
 in the Bible of the exodus of the chosen people." 
 
 " In these- conclusions all the members of the expedition are 
 agreed. Mr. Holland, it is true, dissents upon one point, the posi 
 tion of Rephidim. ... In the main facts of the routes, however, and 
 in the identification of Jebel Musa with Mount Sinai, our investiga- 
 tions have led us to form one unanimous opinion. 
 
 " We are thus able not only to trace out a route by which the chil- 
 dren of Israel could have journeyed, but also to show its identity 
 with that so concisely but graphically laid down in the Pentateuch. 
 We have seen, moreover, that it leads to a mountain answering in 
 every respect to the description of the Mountain of the Law. The 
 chain of topographical evidence is complete." ' 
 
 Professor Palmer identifies Ras Susafeh, the magnificent bluff at 
 the north end of Jebel Musa, as the Mount of the Law. This bluff 
 fronts the great plain Er Rahah, and commands a view of its entire 
 extent. The plain, according to the measurements of Captain 
 Palmer, made on the spot, is large enough to accommodate two mill- 
 ions of human beings, allowing about a square yard to each one. 1 
 He found, also, numerous traditions among the Arabs of the Sinaitic 
 Peninsula respecting Moses and the other Israelites. The alleged 
 barrenness of the Arabian peninsula has been made an objection to 
 the history of the sojourn of the Israelites in the desert. But, apart 
 from the divine power that supported them in a miraculous way, 
 Palmer has found many indications that the peninsula was once far 
 more fertile than it is now. 
 
 The next station of the Israelites after leaving Sinai was Kibroth- 
 hattaavah, the graves of those that lusted. Palmer 
 
 1 DC u6Z l> SK*"* w 
 
 tion after sinai identifies this station with a place called by the Arabs 
 Erweis el Ebeirig, " covered with small inclosures of 
 stones. These are evidently the remains of a large encampment, 
 but they differ essentially in their arrangement from any others which 
 I have seen in Sinai or elsewhere in Arabia. . . . The remains ex- 
 tend for miles around, and on examining them more carefully dur- 
 ing a second visit to the Peninsula, with Mr. Drake, we found our 
 first impression fully confirmed, and collected abundant proofs that 
 it was in reality a deserted camp. The small stones which formerly 
 served, as they do in the present day, for hearths, in many places 
 still showed signs of the action of fire, and on digging beneath the 
 surface we found pieces of charcoal in great abundance. Here and 
 1 Desert of the Exodus, p. 228. * Ibid., pp. 99, 102.
 
 OF THE HOLY SCRIPTURES. 247 
 
 (here were larger inclosures marking the encampment of some person 
 more important than the rest, and just outside the camp were a num- 
 ber of stone heaps, which, from their shape and position, could be 
 nothing else but graves. The site is a most commanding one, and 
 admirably suited for the assembling of a large concourse of people. 
 
 " Arab tradition declares these curious remains to be ' the relics 
 of a large Pilgrim or Hajj caravan, who in remote ages pitched their 
 tents at this spot on their way to 'Ain Hudherah, and who were soon 
 afterward lost in the desert of the Tin, and never heard of again. 
 For various reasons I am inclined to believe that this legend is au- 
 thentic, that it refers to the Israelites, and that we have in the scat- 
 tered stones of Erweis el Ebeirig real traces of the exodus." ' 
 
 The next encampment was Hazeroth, which Palmer evidently 
 identifies with 'Ain Hudherah, one day's journey from pj.^^^ of 
 
 the place identified as Kibroth-hattaavah. The subse- identifying the 
 r *.t. . , . , j other stations, 
 
 quent stations, for the most part, have not yet been iden- 
 tified. "As the piece of country," says Professor Palmer, " north- 
 east of 'Ain Hudherah and south-west of the 'Azazimeh mountains 
 did not fall within our line of march, I cannot speak with certainty 
 as to the identification of individual stations; but I have no doubt 
 whatever as to the general direction of the Israelites' journey, and 
 believe that all, or at least a great portion, of the unidentified names 
 may be recovered in that district. Among them we notice Rissah, 
 Haradah, Tahath, which correspond in etymology with Rasa, 'Arabeh, 
 and Elt'hi. . . . Heshmonah, again, is undoubtedly identical with 
 Heshmon." 2 Ezion-geber was at the head of the Elanitic gulf. The 
 wilderness of Zin, Palmer locates in the south-east corner of the 
 desert Et Tih ; Kadesh he identifies with 'Am Gadis ; and thinks that 
 the name was applied to the whole adjacent region. 
 
 In Numbers xxii-xxiv we have an account of Balaam and Balak, 
 and their sacrifices to procure a curse upon Israel, in Topography of 
 which there is shown an accurate knowledge of the to- ^yentaTheato- 
 pography of the land of Moab. On this narrative Dr. ry of Balaam. 
 Tristram remarks : " Balak met the prophet at the banks of the Arnon, 
 the frontier of his kingdom (Num. xxii, 36). He then takes him to 
 Kirjath-huzoth, ' the city of streets ' (ver. 39), probably Kiriathaim, 
 and its high place, the top of Attarus, with its commanding prospect. 
 This is the first conspicuous eminence north of the Arnon. Then, 
 proceeding northward, the next day he brings him on to the high 
 places of Baal (ver. 41), or Bamoth Baal probably Baal-meon, evi- 
 dently, from its name, sacred to Baal, which was changed by the 
 Reubenites into Beth-meon (Num. xxvii, 38). This was the second 
 'Desert of the Exodus, pp. 212. 213. 'Ibid., p. 410.
 
 248 INTRODUCTION TO THE STUDY 
 
 position whence he had a commanding view of the future country 
 of Israel. Afterward they proceeded to Pisgah, or Nebo (chap. 
 xxiii, 14) ; and, finally, to the top of Peor, facing Jeshimon /. e., the 
 ridge north of Nebo and due west of Heshbon where there is a 
 group of ruins. Thus, with every reasonable probability, we have the 
 identification of the four sacrificial stations of Balak and Balaam." ' 
 Without giving any more particulars, we may remark that the 
 Topography of P entateucn displays an accuracy of topography which 
 the Pentateuch could have been obtained only from a. personal acquaint- 
 ance on the part of the historian with the regions of 
 the Exodus such an acquaintance as the Hebrew lawgiver pos- 
 sessed. In the ages subsequent to Moses, who among the Israelites 
 was intimately acquainted with all the localities of the Arabian 
 peninsula from the north end of the Red Sea to the mountains 
 of Moab? Does not the topographical exactness of the Anabasis 
 establish it as an accurate historical work, and prove that its author 
 must have accompanied the expedition of the younger Cyrus ? Cer- 
 tainly the geographical knowledge displayed in the exodus of the 
 Israelites shows that it is veritable history. 
 
 Near the close of the wandering of the Israelites, while they dwelt 
 someof Bishop in the land of Shittim, we find that "the people began 
 to commit whoredom with the daughters of Moab. And 
 they called the people unto the sacrifices of their gods : 
 and the people did eat, and bowed down to their gods " (Num. xxv, 
 i, 2). On account of these crimes the anger of the Lord was kin- 
 dled against Israel, followed by a plague in which twenty-four thousand 
 perished, and the order was given to the judges to slay all the men 
 who were joined to Baal-peor. As a punishment for the seduction 
 of Israel, Jehovah commanded Moses to take vengeance on the 
 Midianites. He accordingly warred on the Midianites, and slew all 
 their males, and at the command of Moses all the women that had 
 a carnal knowledge of men, and also the male children. This was 
 undoubtedly a severe sentence." The Midianites, however, were 
 not exterminated, as they became powerful enough afterward to 
 greatly afflict the Israelites. The victory over the Midianites was 
 gained without the loss of a single man among the Israelites (Num. 
 xxxi, 49), evidently through the providence of God, though Tacitus 
 speaks of the capture, by the Romans, of a fortified position in Ar- 
 menia in which all the men were slain, while the Romans lost not a 
 single man, and had very few wounded. 1 Strabo also informs us 
 
 1 Land of Moab, pp. 318, 319. 
 
 'This belongs t< 'ie general subject of the extermination of the Canaanites, which 
 will be hereafter co: sidered. 'Annals, xiii, 39. 
 
 co
 
 OF THE HOLY SCRIPTURES. 249 
 
 :hat in an invasion of Arabia by the Romans, in a pitched battle, 
 the latter slew about ten thousand Arabs, while they themselves 
 lost but two men. He attributes the great disparity in loss to the 
 unskillful use of arms on the part of the Arabs. 1 Had Colenso 
 known these historical facts he could scarcely have said that the 
 biblical statement, that not a man was lost in the conflict with the 
 Midianites, is "in utter defiance of reason and common sense," 1 
 even on his theory that no divine protection was afforded the Israel- 
 ites. He calculates, from the number of captured virgins, that the 
 Israelites must have slain in battle eighty-eight thousand warriors 
 a most unsafe estimate, as it is most likely many of the Midianite 
 men escaped while the women were captured. 
 
 Colenso has raised several questions respecting this history which 
 we have not yet touched. In Exodus xvi, 16, in re- other ^j^ 
 gard to the gathering of the manna, it is commanded, tiona made by 
 "Take ye every man for them which are in his tents." 
 From this he infers that the historian teaches that the Israelites 
 in the deserts had tents, and he calculates that two hundred thou- 
 sand tents wor.ld have been required to accommodate them ; but 
 he is utterly at a loss to conceive where the Israelites could have 
 obtained the tents, or how they could have transported them. 
 The statement that the Israelites dwelt in booths hd rejects as 
 untrue. The feast of tabernacles, or of booths, is enjoined in Levit- 
 icus xxiii, and it is stated, " That your generations may know that I 
 made the children of Israel to dwell in booths, when I brought them 
 out of the land of Egypt " (Lev. xxiii, 43). It is also enjoined in 
 Deut. xvi, 13, and is referred to in Zech. xiv, 16; Neh. viii, 1417. 
 
 But the expression, " Take ye every man for them which are in 
 his tent" (Exod. xvi, 16), does not prove that the children of Israel 
 generally had tents, for the Hebrew word ^nx, rendered tent, also 
 means dwelling, habitation^ people, race, family (see Gesenius and 
 Fiirst) ; so the passage means that the manna was to be taken to the 
 dwelling of each, whether a tent or a booth. The children of Israel 
 may have brought a considerable number of tents with them from 
 Egypt, or have made them soon afterward. As they were a pastoral 
 people, it is not likely that they were destitute of tents. 
 
 Colenso finds great difficulty in the statement that " Jehovah 
 spake unto Moses, saying, . . . gather thou all the congregation 
 together unto the door of the tabernacle of the congregation. And 
 Moses did as Jehovah commanded him ; and the assembly was 
 gathered together unto the door of the tabernacle of the congrega- 
 tion " (Lev. viii, 1-4). 
 
 'Lib. xvi, 781, 782. 'Lecture xvi. 218.
 
 250 INTRODUCTION TO THE STUDY 
 
 Here Moses is ordered to collect the whole assembly of Israel at 
 the door of the tabernacle of the congregation, to be present at the 
 consecration of Aaron and his sons. It was proper to extend this 
 invitation or command to the whole assembly, though it seems there 
 was no penalty for not complying with it, and most likdy it was not 
 expected that all, or even one fourth part, would appear. Nor is 
 it said that the whole congregation did so appear, but simply that 
 the assembly was collected at the door of the tabernacle of the con- 
 gregation. The command or invitation was to be carried out as far 
 as possible. How often do we find in our day notices of important 
 meetings to be held in a church which will scarcely accommodate 
 a thousand persons, where the public, consisting of many tens of 
 thousands, are invited to attend. The apostles were commanded 
 by our Saviour to go into all the world and preach the Gospel to 
 every creature, which was absolutely impossible, for they could not 
 reach the one hundredth part of mankind. They were to execute 
 the command as far as possible. 
 
 It is stated in the Gospel of Mark (i, 33), " all the city was gath- 
 Paraiiei ex- ered together at the door." But how was this possible? 
 n t ^ ie Gospel of Matthew it is said that there went out 
 
 Demosthenes, to John the Baptist " Jerusalem, and all Judea, and all 
 the region round about Jordan." But, notwithstanding this language, 
 it is not probable that one tenth of the people really went out to John. 
 The effect produced by our Saviour's raising Lazarus from the dead 
 called forth the remark of the Pharisees : " Behold, the world is 
 gone after him " (John xii, 19). Now, to say nothing about the 
 meaning "universe," which a6o\iw; had among the Greek philoso- 
 phers, how few, comparatively, among men had gone after Christ ! 
 But take a single example from a profane author. Demosthenes, 1 
 speaking of the times of Philip of Macedon, remarks : " The whole 
 world (ndoa i] oiicovpevri) was full of traitors," meaning the principal 
 portions of Greece only. 
 
 So much for the absurdity which Colenso finds in the statements 
 of the Pentateuch respecting the assembling of the congregation at 
 the door of the tabernacle. 
 
 In Deut. i, i, it is stated: "These are the words which Mose 
 spake unto all Israel ; " and in ch. v, i, " And Moses called all Israel 
 and said unto them." Here Colenso finds an absurdity, in suppos- 
 ing that the voice of Moses could reach all Israel ; and we confess 
 that if the statement had been that it reached every one of the chil- 
 dren of Israel so numerous were they the declaration would have 
 been incredible without supposing a miracle. What Moses said 
 1 De Corona, sec. 48.
 
 OF THE HOLY SCRIPTURES. 251 
 
 was addressed ft all Israel, whether they could hear him or not, and 
 those who coul'j not hear could easily learn from others who did ; 
 and Moses wrote it down for all. 
 
 In the command given to the priest respecting the burning of 
 the sacrifice without the camp, Colenso finds another The command 
 absurdity: "Even the whole bullock shall he [the JiJjJ 1 ^ 
 priest] carry forth without the camp unto a clean place, out the camp. 
 where the ashes are poured out, and bui i Mm on the wood with 
 fire " (Lev. iv, 12). Judging from the size of the camp, Colenso in- 
 fers that ' the offal of these sacrifices would have had to be carried 
 by Aaron himself, or one of his sons, a distance of six miles." 
 There is no need to suppose, as he does, that the priest had to carry 
 the offal on his back, or that he carried it at all. The Hebrew 
 word N'Virn means he (the priest) shall send forth, or cause to go 
 forth. We have no good reason for supposing either that the priest 
 himself carried out the offal, or that it had to be carried six miles. 
 We do not know how far the tabernacle was pitched from the border 
 of the camp. 
 
 Equally absurd rather more so are the remarks of Colenso re- 
 specting the distance to which the Israelites would have been com- 
 pelled to go to attend to the necessities of nature (Deut. xxiii, 
 12-14), f r tne camp to which reference is here made was but a part 
 of the host of Israel. For it is said when the host, mno, a single 
 camp (not all the hosts, camps), goes forth. The whole regulation 
 has reference to the Israelites when they shall have entered the land 
 of Canaan ; and we find a full account of the rules of war in Deut. 
 x;c, which no one can read without seeing that it refers to the Israel- 
 ites when they shall have settled in that land. 
 
 There is one peculiarity of Colenso which must be noticed. 
 Whenever any subject admits of different views or explanations, the 
 one which creates a difficulty or absurdity is almost invariably 
 adopted by him. No other document of either the ancient or 
 modern world would be treated in the same way. 
 
 If the Pentateuch was written by Moses, or even by one of his 
 contemporaries, the truth of the history in the last four ^3^,^ of 
 books follows as a natural consequence; and this con- DeWetteasto 
 sideration furnishes a ground of objection to its being 
 
 contemporary history in the eyes of those whose philo- Pentateuch 
 J i f ,' i TT considered. 
 
 sophic system admits of nothing supernatural. Hence 
 
 De Wette remarks : " If it is at least doubtful to the thinking intel- 
 lect that such miracles really occurred, the question arises whether 
 they did not so appear to the eye-witnesses and participants of the 
 history, or were supposed by the reporters to have occurred in a 
 
 17
 
 252 INTRODUCTION TO THE STUDY 
 
 natural way, but set forth in a poetic-miraculous light ? But this 
 must be denied as soon as the narratives are carefully considered. 
 For there is wholly wanting in them that credulous, poetic frame of 
 mind which would contain the key to the miraculous." 1 He fur- 
 thei observes : " It would be rash to conclude that these narratives 
 of miracles were absolute inventions. There lies at the bottom of 
 them a genuine historical tradition, which, united to certain signs, 
 and borne in the songs of the people, was transmitted orally. An 
 ideal poetical element blends itself with the real historical in the 
 traditions of the people, by which the tradition is gradually trans- 
 formed into the miraculous and the ideal. To effect this the songs 
 of the people especially contribute, which, in the bold lyric flight of 
 the imagination, represent in a supernatural light that which was 
 naturally worthy of astonishment and wonder, and these representa- 
 tions are easily misunderstood by a people believing in miracles." 1 
 If this statement of De Wette were correct, it would be strange that the 
 Mosaic history, with the exception of a few songs, is uniformly prose. 
 If it had been preserved as poetry, why should it not have been writ- 
 ten down as such, and so continued, like the historical Psalms ? " But 
 the largest portion of the Mosaic history could, from its very nature, 
 never have had a poetic form. If poetry had exaggerated the orig- 
 inal natural history, it is singular that an historian should have been 
 so ignorant of poetic usage and license as to take its exaggerations 
 for sober fact. 
 
 A great portion of the miraculous history of the Pentateuch is 
 sober truth or it is deliberate falsehood. Of this character are the 
 plagues of Egypt, especially the death of the firstborn of the Egyp- 
 tians, which are real history and supernatural, or they are fiction. 
 
 Colenso, in his view of miracles, goes beyond even De Wette. 
 coienao's gen- " The order," says he, " of this wondrous universe, so 
 
 erai objection manifold, so diverse, yet all tending to unity, to one 
 
 to the miracles . 
 
 of the Penta- great central Cause, a miracle, if really witnessed, would 
 
 teucn. be like a jarring discord in the midst of a mighty music 
 
 not a sign of the master-musician's presence, but a token that for 
 once he had failed to subdue the rebellious elements would, in 
 short, be simply frightful.'" What shall we say to a miracle's being 
 " a jarring discord in the midst of a mighty music ? " Is this world 
 nothing but harmonious music ? What shall we say of earthquakes 
 burying whole cities with thousands of human beings ; of inundations 
 laying waste vast tracts, and destroying human life ; of famines, pes- 
 
 1 Schroder's De Wettc's Einleitung, p. 257. 
 
 'Ibid., pp. 258, 259. * Psalm Ixxviii, for example. 
 
 4 Lectures on the Pentateuch, etc., p. 369. London, 1873.
 
 OF THE HOLY SCRIPTURES. 2o 
 
 cilences, tornadoes, sweeping away houses, and sending ships with 
 their precious freight beneath the waves of the deep ? Is all this 
 music in the ears and harmony to the eyes of Colenso ? To these 
 discordant and destructive forces add the passions of men, exhib- 
 ited in horrible wars and devastations. In the midst of such a 
 world as this, is an extraordinary display of omnipotent power in 
 punishing the wicked and delivering the good the manifestation 
 of the divine power and Godhead, the revelation of Jehovah to 
 man, a great light in the midst of moral darkness is all this noth- 
 ing but a jarring discord ? In the midst of the wrongs and the 
 darkness of the world, who has not felt as did Isaiah, and prayed, 
 " Oh that thou wouldest rend the heavens, that thou wouldest come 
 down ? " 
 
 Colenso seems to have but little faith in the miracles of Christ, 
 "whose doings, however," says he, "we now see but indistinctly 
 through the mists of those many years which had elapsed between 
 the time when Jesus lived on earth and the time when those narra- 
 tives were written." J In this course he is consistent, for a rejection 
 of the Pentateuch, with the divine authority of the Jewish religion, 
 must necessarily lead to the rejection of the authority of the Gos- 
 pels though Colenso professes to believe in Christ as the Saviour 
 of men. If the Christian religion was founded in miracles (and 
 Christ was the greatest of all miracles), is it not reasonable to sup- 
 pose that Judaism, its foundation, was also established by miracles ? 
 
 The only way in which the supernatural in the Bible can, with any 
 show of reason, be rejected, is by ignoring a personal Miracles not in- 
 God in nature, and reducing the whole universe to a SJ^SlSSiS 
 system of blind forces. If God has acted in creation, of a religion, 
 if man is his workmanship, revelation and redemption are highly 
 credible. In fact, creation is a miracle ; life is a perpetual miracle. 
 Struggle as we may, we can never get rid of the supernatural, with- 
 out a belief in which all religion is impossible." If there is anywhere 
 in the Bible a single prophecy, or a single miracle, then the chain of 
 purely natural causes is at once broken, and the whole series of bib- 
 lical prophecies and miracles becomes credible. The history of 
 aerolites furnishes a remarkable proof of the danger of rejecting 
 
 'Lectures on the Pentateuch, p. 376. 1873. 
 
 "John Stuart Mill takes decided ground against Hume's famous argument upon 
 miracles: "All, therefore, which Hume has made out and this he must be con- 
 sidered to have made out is, that no evidence can be sufficient to prove a miracle 
 to any one who did not previously believe the existence of a being or beings with 
 supernatural power, or who believed himself to have full proof that the character 
 of the Being whom he recognizes is inconsistent with his having seen fit to interfere 
 on the occasion in question." Logic, p. 376.
 
 254 INTRODUCTION TO THE STUDY 
 
 well-authenticated facts merely because they do not coincide with 
 our own experience. Writers in all ages had mentioned instances 
 of the fall of meteoric stones from the heavens, but down till the be- 
 ginning of this century all these accounts were treated as fables, as 
 the tales of the ignorant and the superstitious. 1 An d priori judg- 
 ment that stones do not fall upon the earth misled the whole scien- 
 tific world till a shower of stones fell at L'Aigle, in Normandy, in 
 1803. It was not testimony that misled the scientists, but a preju- 
 dice against the facts to which testimony was given. And may not the 
 whole rationalistic world be similarly deceived in the rejection of 
 the miracles of the Bible ? 
 
 In the case of the aerolites * one difficulty rather the principal 
 difficulty was to explain how they originated. To explain the 
 biblical miracles we have an adequate cause in the Deity, and a 
 sufficient reason for their performance in the fact that they were to 
 reveal the character and will of Jehovah in the midst of abounding 
 idolatry. 
 
 The history in the Pentateuch shows the most intimate acquaint- 
 
 , ance on the part of the writer with the events related. 
 The author of . 
 
 the Pentateuch Numerous particulars are given, which, had they not 
 
 mate "taowi" l)een recor ded at the time, must have faded away in the 
 edge of events lapse of ages. Objects seen at a distance present them- 
 selves to us only in great outline. Nowhere does the 
 author of the Pentateuch appear to write from conjecture, or to be 
 feeling his way in the dark, or to narrate from the report of others. 
 He ' everywhere shows himself the master of his materials. How 
 different it is with the great writers of the early Roman history in the 
 Augustan age ! Livy, in his Introduction, recognizes the fact that 
 the early history of Rome is embellished with fable. Nor does 
 he proceed far in his narrative before he says of a certain event, 
 "There are two different accounts respecting this." So in reference 
 to Romulus and Remus, he says, " There is a report." And when 
 he speaks of the oath which Hannibal when a boy took to cherish 
 hostility to Rome, he says, such is "the report." 
 
 When the Greek historian, Herodotus, is relating the history of 
 Cyrus the Great, he remarks that he could give three other accounts 
 
 1 " That arrogant spirit of incredulity which rejects facts without attempting to in 
 restigate them, is in some cases almost more injurious than an unquestioning cre- 
 dulity." Humboldt's Cosmos, vol. i, p. 123. 
 
 1 How easy it would be to disprove the reality of aerolites on Hume's principles ! 
 We [the great mass of men] have never seen stones fall from heaven, but we have 
 known men to lie. 
 
 Blunt, in his Scriptural Coincidences, gives a considerable number of undesigned 
 coincidences in the Pentateuch, establishing the truth of the history.
 
 OF THE HOLY SCRIPTURES. 255 
 
 of Mm. 1 How unlike is the language of the author of the Penta- 
 teuch ! There is the air of reality and naturalness in the books 
 of Moses, which impresses the reader with the feeling that he is 
 reading genuine history. 
 
 CHAPTER XXIX 
 
 THE COMMAND TO EXTERMINATE THE CANAANITES, AND 
 THE GENERAL SEVERITY OF THE MOSAIC SYSTEM. 
 
 (~\F "the cities of these people, which the Lord thy God doth 
 ^-^ give thee for an inheritance, thou shalt save alive nothing 
 that breatheth : but thou shalt utterly destroy them ; namely, the 
 Hittites, and the Amorites, the Canaanites, and the Perizzites, the 
 Hivites, and the Jebusites; as the Lord thy God hath commanded 
 thee : that they teach you not to do after all their abominations, 
 which they have done unto their gods; so should ye sin against the 
 Lord your God " (Deut. xx, 16-18). Similar commands are found 
 in other parts of the Pentateuch. 
 
 Now it must be observed that it is expressly said that the Ca- 
 naanites were to be exterminated on account of their A ^Y^Q order 
 wickedness. In Lev. xviii, after enumerating various only could jus- 
 abominable things to be avoided, it is added : " For all 
 
 these abominations have the men of the land done, which Canaanites. 
 were before you, and the land is defiled; that the land spew not 
 you out also, when ye defile it, as it spewed out the nations that 
 were before you." " Speak not thou in thine heart, after that the 
 Lord thy God hath cast them out from before thee, saying, For 
 my righteousness the Lord hath brought me in to possess this land : 
 but, for the wickedness of these nations the Lord doth drive them 
 out from before thee. Not for thy righteousness, or for the upright- 
 ness of thine heart, dost thou go to possess their land : but for the 
 wickedness of these nations the Lord thy God doth drive them out 
 from before thee " (Deut. ix, 4, 5). In accordance with these dec- 
 larations, it is said (in Gen. xv, 16) to Abraham, "The iniquity 
 of the A:norites is not yet full." 
 
 The children of Israel were warned that if they practised the 
 abominations of the Canaanites the land would vomit them forth 
 also, so that they had before them perpetually the proof of Jeho- 
 vah's hatred of sin in the extermination of the Canaanites, and an 
 example of what might be expected to overtake themselves if they 
 
 Liber i, 95.
 
 256 INTRODUCTION TO THE STUDY 
 
 forsook Jehovah and abandoned themselves to vice and cnme. 
 That the Almighty should send a plague upon a wicked city, and 
 The met, in a <H- destroy every living being in it, the old man with the 
 tbTIaf^rtaat i n ^ ant > involving all in one common ruin, would excite 
 point. no surprise. If a city or large community were sunk 
 
 by an earthquake on account of the crimes of its people, no one 
 would think that the destruction of the infants with their wicked 
 parents was inconsistent with the moral attributes of God. But, 
 instead of the pestilence or earthquake, suppose we substitute an 
 angel from heaven, there would still be no objection to the divine 
 goodness or justice on that score. Can we not substitute men in- 
 stead of an angel to accomplish the same work ? The great point is, 
 the act, not the agent. 
 
 In the extermination of the Canaanites the weakness and vanity 
 of their gods were clearly seen, and thus a powerful blow was given 
 to the whole system of idolatry. 
 
 Nothing but a divine command could authorize the Israelites to 
 Not unusual take possession of the lands of the Canaanites, and to 
 Sit"* ^^ destroy the inhabitants. Without this it would have 
 with the guilty, been robbery and murder. God alone has the right to 
 dispose of the lands and lives of nations. The destruction of the 
 ancient world by water, the overthrow of Sodom and Gomorrah, the 
 destruction of Korah and his company, with the women and chil- 
 dren, by the earth's opening her mouth and swallowing them up 
 on account of the rebellion against Moses, are examples of guilt 
 and punishment involving innocent children with guilty parents in 
 ruin. 
 
 But if we banish these examples to the region of the mythical 
 nothing is gained. For with our own eyes we see innocent children 
 suffer on account of the crimes and vices of their parents ; we be- 
 hold earthquakes and inundations, famine and pestilence, destroying 
 the good and the bad, the gray-headed sinner and the unsinning little 
 one. All this occurs in a world that God has constituted, the laws 
 of which he has established, the consequences of which laws he 
 must have foreseen. They are the divine acts. " Shall there be evil 
 in a city, and the Lord hath not done it? " (Amos iii, 6) Far morr 
 difficult is it to reconcile with the divine goodness the swallowing 
 up of whole towns by an earthquake than the extermination of the 
 Canaanites. The latter were cut off for their abominable vices 
 and crimes, while cities have been buried by earthquakes without 
 our perceiving that the inhabitants were worse than those of cities 
 exempt from such visitations. 
 
 In the affairs of this world Providence often employs one nation
 
 OF THE HOLY SCRIPTURES. 257 
 
 as the means of punishing another. The Jews them- g^ y^ one 
 
 selves were frequently punished for their sins by means nation aa his 
 
 . .. . T, Al ^ ., 111 Instrument to 
 
 of heathen nations. But the most striking and dread- punish other 
 
 ful example of this kind occurred in the destruction of 
 Jerusalem by the Romans, A. D. 70, and its utter demolition. 
 Thousands upon thousands fell by the pestilence, famine, and the 
 sword ; the old man and the infant perished alike in the general 
 overthrow. No man can read the Bible with any faith in its teach- 
 ings, and deny that this terrible calamity overtook the Jews on ac- 
 count of their great sins, especially their rejection of the Son of God. 
 Thus, while the Israelites were the punishers of the Canaanites, they, 
 in turn, were punished for their dreadful crimes by the Romans, the 
 executors of the divine decree. 
 
 The existence of evil, with its consequent woes, is a mystery which 
 no finite mind can solve; how to reconcile its existence with the at- 
 tributes of a Being infinitely wise and good has been the problem 
 of the ages. The rejection of revelation affords no relief, nor does 
 Atheism itself. 
 
 But not only towards the Canaanites is severity shown in the Pen- 
 
 tateuch, but also towards disobedient Israelites. As the 
 
 . ... An even-hand- 
 
 temptation to idolatry was very strong, and as it struck ed severity 
 
 at the very foundation of true religion, being nothing 
 less than treason against God, it was punished with and Canaan- 
 death. We have already seen that Korah and his com- 
 pany, for their rebellion against Moses, were swallowed up by the 
 earth ; and nowhere is any leniency shown towards transgressors. 
 But it must be observed that in that age of the world severe penal- 
 ties were more necessary than now to restrain men from crime, 
 especially from idolatry. The laws of Draco were written in blood, 
 and so were those of the twelve tables at Rome. In proportion as 
 nations become civilized, cultivated, and virtuous, they mitigate the 
 severity of their penal codes. The Mosaic system was not perfect, 
 but was adapted to the condition of the Israelites in TueMosaicsyB- 
 Palestine in that period of the world's history. Some tem adapted to 
 evils were tolerated because they were so deeply inter- 
 woven in the fabric of ancient society that their immediate eradica- 
 tion would have been impossible. Some of the Mosaic laws were 
 mitigations of existing evils. Respecting the Mosaic law of di- 
 vorce, our Saviour said to the Jews : " Moses, because of the hard- 
 ness of your hearts suffered you to put away your wives ; but from 
 the beginning it was not so." ' What Solon said of the code he had 
 given Athens is applicable to the Mosaic system, that it was not 
 
 1 Matt, xix, 8.
 
 258 INTRODUCTION TO THE STUDY 
 
 the best possible system, but the best the people were capable of re- 
 ceiving. To the same point is a remark of Mr. Jefferson, that if a 
 legislator cannot do all the good he could wish, he must do what 
 he can. But in fundamental principles there was no compromise in 
 the Mosaic system. 
 
 But, notwithstanding the severity of the penal code of Moses, 
 kindness to the poor and to strangers characterize his legislation in 
 a remarkable degree. 
 
 " There is a comparative purity in the theology and morality of 
 the Pentateuch, which argues not only its truth but its high original ; 
 for how else are we to account for a system like that of Moses in 
 such an age and among such a people ? how explain the fact that the 
 doctrine of the unity, the self-existence, the providence, the perfec- 
 tions, of the great God of heaven and earth should thus have blazed 
 forth (how far more brightly than even in the vaunted schools of 
 Athens at its most refined era!) from the midst of a nation ever 
 plunging into gross and grovelling idolatry ; and that principles of 
 social duty, of benevolence, and of self-restraint, extending even to 
 the thoughts of the heart, should have been the produce of an age 
 which the very provisions of the Levitical law itself show to have 
 been full of savage and licentious abominations ? " ' 
 
 CHAPTER XXX. 
 
 TESTIMONY OF CHRIST AND THE APOSTLES TO THE GENU- 
 INENESS OF THE PENTATEUCH. 
 
 Saviour and his apostles everywhere assume the Mosaic 
 authorship and the divine authority of the Pentateuch. Our 
 Saviour, in his controversy with the Jews, says : " For had you be- 
 lieved Moses, ye would have believed me : for he wrote of me. But 
 if ye believe not his writings, how shall ye believe my words?"* 
 How absurd this language would be, on the theory that the Penta- 
 teuch was written ages after Moses ! If you do not believe in a 
 work made up of traditions and myths in a late age and attributed 
 to Moses, how can ye believe in me and this language from him 
 who is the truth itself! 
 
 In various passages Christ speaks also of Moses as if he was the 
 author of the Pentateuch : " Have ye not read in the book of Moses, 
 
 1 Blunt, Scriptural Coincidences, pp. 104, 105. 'John v, 46, 47.
 
 OF THE HOLY SCRIPTURES. 259 
 
 now in the bush God spake unto him, saying, I am the God of 
 Abraham," etc. (Mark xii, 26}. " If they hear not Moses and the 
 prophets, neither will they be persuaded though one rose from the 
 dead" (Luke xvi, 31). "These are the words which I spake unto 
 you while I was yet with you, that all things must be fulfilled which 
 were written in the law of Moses" etc. (Luke xxiv, 44). " Did not 
 Moses give you the law? " (John vii, 19.) 
 
 The Apostle Peter, on the day of Pentecost, says : " For Moses 
 truly said unto the fathers, A Prophet shall the Lord your God raise 
 up unto you of your brethren, like unto me," etc. (Acts iii, 22). 
 
 The Apostle Paul, in his address to Agrippa, observes in respect 
 to his teaching : " Saying none other things than those which the 
 prophets and Moses did say should come " (Acts xxvi, 22). And in 
 Acts xxviii, 23, St. Paul expounded, " both out of the law of Moses 
 and out of the prophets." "For Moses describeth (Greek, writes} 
 the righteousness which is of the law, that the man which doeth 
 these things shall live by them " (Rom. x, 5). This refers to Lev. 
 xviii, 5, which St. Paul here declares that Moses wrote. " For even 
 unto this day, when Moses is read, the vail is upon their heart " 
 (2 Cor. iiij 15). 
 
 CHAPTER XXXI. 
 
 THE EARLIER PROPHETS. 
 
 FINDER this title (D'JWXI D\x':n) the second division of the He- 
 ^ brew Bible embraces Joshua (jnsnrr), Judges (o'aaw), two Books 
 of Samuel (SxiDty), and two Books of Kings 
 
 THE BOOK OF JOSHUA. 
 
 This Book, the next after the Pentateuch, is so called from 
 Joshua, the successor of Moses, and the leader of the Israelites in 
 the conquest of Canaan. It takes up the thread of their history at 
 the end of Deuteronomy, and continues it to the death of Joshua. 
 It may be appropriately divided into two parts. The first division, 
 containing chapters i-xii, gives an account of Joshua's conducting of 
 the Israelites into the land of Canaan, of the capture of Jericho, Ai, 
 the deception of Joshua by the Gibeonites and his league with them, 
 the defeat and slaughter of the armies of the kings of Jerusalem, 
 Hebron, Jarmuth, Lachish, and Eglon, and the capture and the exe- 
 cution of the kings themselves, of Joshua's building an altar on Ebal, 
 and inscribing on its stones a copy of the law of Moses, the capture
 
 260 INTRODUCTION TO THE STUDY 
 
 of Makkedah, Libnah, Lachish, Eglon, Hebron, and Debir, and the 
 conquest of southern Palestine. Besides these conquests it con- 
 tains a description of the defeat of the combined forces of the various 
 nations of Palestine at the waters of Merom, in the northern part of 
 the country. The second divison, containing chapters xiii-xxiv, 
 gives an account of the lands that still remained to be possessed 
 when Joshua was an old man, the allotments of the different tribes 
 and the boundaiies of their territories, the appointment of the cities 
 of refuge, and of cities for the priests and the other Levites, Joshua's 
 exhortation to the chiefs of the Israelites, his gathering of all the 
 tribes to Shechem, his address to them, and his death. 
 
 THE UNITY OF THE BOOK OF JOSHUA. 
 
 From the foregoing statement of the contents of the book of 
 Joshua it is seen that there is a connexion, though not always close, 
 between its various portions, and that the second division presupposes 
 the first. De Wette and others think they find contradictions be- 
 tween the first and second parts of the book, and between it and 
 Judges. But their view is a narrow one, and seems to have arisen 
 from a predisposition to make Joshua, to a great extent, mythical. 
 
 In chap, xi, 16, 17, it is stated that " Joshua took all that land, 
 Agreement be- the hills, and all the south country, and all the land of 
 ajncTaecond di- Goshen, and the valley, and the plain, and the mountain 
 visions. O f i sr ael, and the valley of the same; even from the 
 
 Bald Mountain, that goeth up to Seir, even unto Baal-gad in the val- 
 ley of Lebanon under Mount Hermon : and all their kings he took, 
 and smote them, and slew them." But in chap, xiii, when Joshua 
 was old and stricken in years, Jehovah says unto him, " There re- 
 maineth yet very much land to be possessed ... all the borders of 
 the Philistines, and all Geshuri, from Sihor, which is before Egypt, 
 even unto the borders of Ekron northward, which is counted to the 
 Canaanite : five lords of the Philistines; the Gazathites, and the 
 Ashdothites, the Eshkalonites, the Gittites, and the Ekronites ; also 
 the Avites : on the south, all the land of the Canaanites, and Mc- 
 arah that is beside the Sidonians, unto Aphek, to the borders of the 
 Amorites : and the land of the Giblites, and all Lebanon toward 
 the sunrising, from Baal-gad under Mount Hermon unto the enter- 
 ing into (until you come to) Hamath. All the inhabitants of the hill 
 country from Lebanon unto Misrephoth-maim, and all the Sido- 
 nians " (vers. 1-6). Yet these latter passages do not contradict the 
 former respecting the extent of the conquests of Joshua. The first 
 statement is a general one, and by no means asserts the entire con- 
 quest of the Philistines and most southern Canaanites. nor does it
 
 OF THE HOLY SCRIPTURES. 261 
 
 contain any reference to the subjugation of the most northern nations 
 of Palestine, which are named in the second part of Joshua as 
 unsubdued. 
 
 In the second part, the land to be possessed in the north extended 
 to Hamath on the Orontes, and Aphek (between Byblus and Baal- 
 bee), embracing the Sidonians and the Byblians (Giblites), whose land 
 the Israelites never possessed. In this same part, among the 
 Philistines unsubdued are mentioned Gazathites, Ashdothites, and 
 Gittites (Gathites). Now, in the first part we have an indirect con- 
 firmatory proof of this fact in chap, xi, 22, where it is stated that no 
 Anakim were left in the land of Israel except in Gaza, Gath, and 
 Ashdod a clear proof that the Israelites had not yet subdued these 
 cities of the Philistines. 
 
 In the account of the conquests of Joshua it is stated that he took 
 and destroyed Hebron and Debir (chap, x, 39) ; while in other apparent 
 ch. xv, 1317 it is said that Caleb drove from the former contradiction* 
 city the sons of Anak, and that Othniel took the latter. r 
 But here there is no contradiction ; for whatever is done by a sub- 
 ordinate can be said to have been performed by the commander-in - 
 chief himself. 
 
 In the list of the kings whom Joshua and the Israelites smote (chap, 
 xii, 9-24) are named the kings of Jerusalem, Gezer, Dor, and Me- 
 giddo places which, it seems, had not yet been taken (Josh, xv, 63 ; 
 xvi, 10 ; xvii, n, 12). But the kings of these towns, with the sur- 
 rounding small towns and villages, could have been killed and the 
 strongholds of the towns remained untaken, as we actually see in 
 the case of Jerusalem, respecting which it is said : " The children 
 of Judah had fought against Jerusalem, and had taken it, and smit- 
 ten it with the edge of the sword, and set the city on fire " (Judges 
 i, 8) ; but this was npt the stronghold of Zion, for it is stated in 
 Josh, xv, 63, that "the children of Judah," and in Judg. i, 21, "the 
 children of Benjamin," did not, or could not, drive out the Jebu- 
 sites from Jerusalem, "but they dwell there unto this day." But 
 David drove them out and took the stronghold (2 Sam. v, 6, 7). 
 
 As we find five kings coming forth to fight Joshua (ch. x, 5), so it is 
 not unlikely that the kings of those cities not captured by him 
 were slaughtered outside of the strongholds of their towns while de- 
 fending their positions, which, excepting the strongholds, fell wholly 
 into Joshua's hands (chap, xii, 7, 8). 
 
 The statement that Joshua burnt Hazor (ch. xi, u) is not incon- 
 sistent with the fact that we find, more than a century afterward, 
 Jabin, king of Canaan, reigning in Hazor (Judg. iv, 2), for there was 
 ample time for the enemies of Israel to recover it and to rebuild it
 
 262 INTRODUCTION TO THE STUDY 
 
 In Judges i we discover several events described which are already 
 Tbe statement re ^ ate ^ as having occurred in the time of Joshua, viz. : 
 tn Judg. i con- the capture of Hebron and Debir, with the attendant 
 circumstances. But these events related in Judges are 
 not to be regarded as having occurred after Joshua's death. It is 
 true, it is stated that after the death of Joshua the Israelites inquired 
 of Jehovah who should first go up to fight against the Canaanites 
 (ch. i, i). But after the account of the slaughter of the Canaanites 
 and the Perizzites, and the mutilation of Adoni-bezek, it is said, 
 " they (the Israelites) brought him to Jerusalem, where he died " 
 (Judg. i, 5-7). This statement presupposes that Jerusalem (with 
 the exception of the stronghold of Zion) was already in possession 
 of the Israelites, and it is followed with an account of its having 
 been already taken, to which are added other previous conquests. 
 This seems to us to be the most natural view. In Joshua we have 
 a full statement, while in the first chapter of Judges we have isolated 
 events, the order of which must be determined by Joshua. We can- 
 not regard Josh, xiii, 3 as contradicted by xv, 45-47 ; for the former 
 passage speaks of cities still in possession of the Philistines, while the 
 latter refers to some of these cities as belonging to the inheritance 
 of the tribe of Judah obtained by lot, but says not a word respecting 
 their having been already conquered. 
 
 It has been urged, in opposition to the unity of Joshua, that in the 
 Alleged differ- first twely e chapters the word cnt?, shebet, for tribe, pre- 
 vails while in the rest of the bo k n > matteh, is gener- 
 
 two divisions a iiy use( j to express the same thought. But nors, matteh, 
 of Joshua con- T - 
 
 udered. i s use d in Josh, vii, 18, in close connexion with cnt?, in 
 
 T 
 
 verse 16. In the first half of the book U357 occurs about fifteen 
 
 T- 
 
 times, and in the second half about seventeen times. In the second 
 part HDp occurs about fifty-three times. From such a use of words 
 no valid argument can be drawn against the unity of the book. 
 
 The word n j^>n~> division, is first found in Joshua, in which it 
 occurs twice in the first half of the book (chap, xi, 23; xii, 7), and 
 once in the second part (chap, xviii, 10). 
 
 It is not true, as is alleged by Davidson, that Moses is termed 
 servant of Jehovah in the historical sections only ; for in chap. 
 xiii, 8, which is geographical, in speaking of lands divided among 
 different tribes, it is added, "Even as Moses the servant of Jehovah 
 gave them." 
 
 That in the first division of the book \\izpriests are named without 
 any further designation, or with the simple addition the Levites, i. e., 
 Lei<itical priests, while in the second division (chap, xxi, 4, 10, 13, 19)
 
 OF THE HOLY SCRIPTURES. 263 
 
 they are called the sons of Aaron, is entirely natural and consistent. 
 For in the latter case the priests are especially discriminated from 
 the other Levites, because an account is given of the cities allotted 
 to the children of Merari, Gershon, and Kohath, to which latter 
 Aaron and his sons, the priests, belonged; to them thirteen cities 
 are assigned. 
 
 Dr. Davidson finds a difference of style between the first half of 
 the book and the second. In the second division there is a great 
 deal that is geographical, while the first part is entirely historical. 
 Is not this sufficient to explain any want of elegance met with in the 
 second part? Are geographical boundaries something to be rounded 
 off in beautiful periods ? Who looks for elegance in a description 
 of the lines and courses of a plot of land ? 
 
 In the account given of twelve stones being taken up from the 
 midst of the Jordan, where the priests' feet stood firm, go^^B^^g 
 and of the setting up of twelve stones in the river, objections con- 
 where the feet of the priests stood, Bleek thinks that & 
 two different narratives are blended into one ; or, what is more prob- 
 able, that the earlier account was revised. We can see no good 
 reason for either of these views. They appear to be arbitrary 
 conjectures. 
 
 The method pursued by Bleek in his treatment of this book is 
 exceedingly arbitrary. As he refers Deuteronomy to the time of 
 King Manasseh, every incident that has any relation to that book 
 is, according to him, an interpolation or addition to the original 
 form of the book of Joshua. In chapter viii, 30-35, we have an 
 account of Joshua's building an altar on Mount Ebal, on the stones 
 of which he writes the words of the law of Moses, and of his read- 
 ing the blessings and the cursings, as he had been commanded by 
 Moses in Deut. xxvii, 2-6, etc. Here, likewise, Bleek thinks there 
 is at least a partial interpolation. 
 
 It is true that this section could be omitted without interfering 
 with the thread of the narrative, but that is no proof of interpola- 
 tion, as such passages are found in almost all histories. 
 
 In the account given of the erection of an altar at the Jordan by 
 the two tribes and a half dwelling east of the river, and the circum- 
 stances connected with it, Bleek thinks that the story, by reason 
 of its reference to Deuteronomy, bears the stamp of a comparatively 
 late age. But the whole narrative is well connected and interwoven, 
 and must be wholly retained or wholly rejected. Can we suppose 
 that such a history in which nine and a half tribes were gathered 
 together to make war upon the rest of Israel for the erection of an 
 altar supposed to be treason against God is a pure myth ?
 
 264 INTRODUCTION TO THE STUDY 
 
 in a book like that of Joshua, wherein, from its brevity, much in 
 the history of the conquest of Canaan and in the life of the great 
 captain is of necessity omitted, we should not expect to find all parts 
 of the history dovetailed together. It is impossible, however, to 
 NO evidence maintain any hypothesis that would make the book a 
 to* ^uJ^n collection of fragments, or the work of a succession of 
 of fragments, revisers. Here we have no place for the Elohist and 
 the Jehovist. Schrader, indeed, in his edition of De Wette, very 
 fancifully distributes Joshua, as he does the Pentateuch, among the 
 annalistic, theocratic, and prophetic narrators, and the author of 
 Deuteronomy. Can we suppose that there were several histories 
 of the times of Joshua written in the period of the judges, when 
 there was but little literary activity among the people, or in the time 
 of Joshua himself? As for Schrader's hypothesis, it is impossible 
 to make any good sense out of it. For we cannot suppose that any 
 writer gave simply such an account as the annalist, the theocratic 
 or prophetic narrator of Schrader, presents us. Who can believe that 
 the book of Joshua, in the annalist, began with chap, iv, 15-17 : "And 
 the Lord spake unto Joshua, saying, Command the priests that bear 
 the ark of the testimony that they come up out of Jordan," etc. ? 
 
 THE DATE AND AUTHORSHIP OF THE BOOK. 
 
 There is nothing in the book that might not have been written 
 
 _, within twenty-five years after the death of Joshua, as 
 
 Written prob- J ' 
 
 ably within the latest recorded event is the expedition of the Dan- 
 
 yeanuifter the * tes a g a i nst Leshem (chap, xix, 47, 48) ; and the state- 
 death of Josh- ment that " Israel served the Lord all the days of Joshua, 
 and all the days of the elders that overlived Joshua, and 
 which had known all the works of the Lord that he had done for 
 Israel" (chap, xxiv, 31), does not carry us far beyond his time. It 
 is evident that it was written before the age of David and Solomon, 
 for it is said that " the Jebusites, the inhabitants of Jerusalem, the 
 children of Judah could not drive them out : but the Jebusites dwell 
 with the children of Judah at Jerusalem unto this day " (chapter 
 xv, 63). But David drove these Jebusites out of Jerusalem (2 Sam. 
 v, 6-9). Again, it is said that the Ephraimites " drave not out the 
 Canaanites that dwelt in Gezer: but the Canaanites dwell among 
 the Ephraimites unto this day, and serve under tribute " (chapter 
 xvi, 10). But in i Kings ix, 16, it is stated that "Pharaoh, king 
 of Egypt, had gone up, and taken Gezer, and burnt it with fire, and 
 slain the Canaanites that dwelt in the city, and given it for a present 
 unto his daughter, Solomon's wife." If the book of Joshua had been 
 made up of fragments written principally before the time of David
 
 OF THE HOLY SCRIPTURES. 265 
 
 and Solomon, but combined and edited subsequently to their time, 
 it is difficult to believe that those passages which speak of the Jeb- 
 usites as still dwelling in Jerusalem, and the Canaanites in Gezer, 
 would have been allowed to remain without remark. Nowhere in 
 Joshua is there the remotest allusion to any thing pertaining to the 
 times of the kings of Judah, or to the condition of affairs in the age 
 of the judges. Of this the most natural explanation is, that the book 
 was written in neither of those periods. 
 
 In Joshua x, 13, mention is made of the book of Jasher. As this 
 is also referred to in 2 Sam. i, 18, as containing the lamentation 
 of David over Saul and Jonathan, it has been thought by De 
 Wette that the Book of Joshua could not have been written before 
 the time of David. But the proper title of this quoted No alluslo 
 book is the "Book of the Upright" a book reciting the acts Joshua to the 
 of just men, not named after the author, for in that case ^^ s ^ r Je 
 the noun Jashar would not have had the article T^T?, Kings. 
 the Jashar, or, the upright. Gesenius understands it to be " a collec- 
 tion or anthology of ancient Hebrew poems, ... so called as cele- 
 brating the praises of upright men, or, perhaps, for some other cause " 
 (Heb. Lex.). Fiirst prefers to render it, "the Book of the Israelites, 
 i.e., national book," according to a tradition in the Talmud (Heb. 
 Lex.). It may, accordingly, have been a record of the actions 
 of pious Israelites, written in the age of Joshua and subsequently. 
 
 The numerous particulars given in various parts of the Book of 
 Joshua at least show that the author drew from original sources, 
 if he was not contemporary with the events he relates. 
 
 In reference to Rahab the harlot it is said, " she dwelleth in 
 Israel even unto this day " (chap, vi, 25), which most naturally 
 means that Rahab was still alive when the book was written. Re- 
 specting the Gibeonites who had deceived Joshua, it is said he 
 " made them that day hewers of wood and drawers of water for the 
 congregation, and for the altar of the Lord, even unto this day, in 
 the place which he should choose " (chap, ix, 27), which shows that 
 Jerusalem was not yet chosen. 
 
 From the brief manner in which Joshua pronounces a curse upon 
 the rebuilder of Jericho (vi, 26), it is evident that the prophecy was 
 v/ritten before the time of Ahab (918-897 B. C.), in whose days Hiel 
 rebuilt it (i Kings xvi, 34). 
 
 The language of Josh, v, i furnishes a probable proof that the 
 writer was among those who crossed the Jordan. When they " heard 
 that the Lord had dried up the waters of the Jordan from before the 
 children of Israel, until we were passed over" etc. In the margin, 
 however, D~O>% until they passed over, is written, and so the passage
 
 2G6 INTRODUCTION TO THE STUDY 
 
 is rendered by the Septuagint, Targum, and Peshito-Syriac, which 
 diminishes something of the force of the passage as it stands written 
 in the Hebrew text, but is not conclusive against it. 
 
 In the time of the composition of the Book of Joshua Zidon is 
 called "great Zidon" (Josh, xi, 8; xix, 28), and Tyre is of inferior 
 importance (Josh, xix, 29) ; but in the time of the prophet Joel 
 (B. C. 800) Tyre is of the first importance, and Zidon second (Joel 
 iii, 4) ; so also in the time of Isaiah (chap, xxiii). 
 
 In various parts of the Book of Joshua occurs the phrase " unto 
 this day." But this by no means indicates a long interval between 
 the events and the time of the writer, and it is used simply to de- 
 clare the facts or condition of things in the writer's time. 
 
 That Joshua was written before the Book of Judges is evident 
 Direct proof of from the fact that Judges begins where Joshua leaves off, 
 written before an( * recapitulates but few of the events recorded in the 
 judges. latter. In some instances there seems to be a quotation 
 
 of Joshua in the Book of Judges, and in other instances an abridg- 
 ment. As a general rule, in historical statements the circumstantial 
 account is the primitive one, while the shorter, or abridged form, is 
 later. For a subsequent writer, living far away in point of time from 
 the events, has nothing of his own to add, and he often satisfies him- 
 self with giving the substance of what is well known. As an exam- 
 ple of the quotation of Joshua in Judges, compare Josh, xv, 16-19 
 with Judges i, 12-15. Judges i, 19 is an abridgment of Josh, xvii, 
 15-18. Judges iii, 3 is an abridgment of Josh, xiii, 1-6. It is evi- 
 dent that Josh, xxiv, 28-31 is older than Judges ii, 6-9, for the last 
 verse of the former states that " Israel served the Lord all the days 
 of Joshua, and all the days of the elders that overlived Joshua, and 
 which had known all the works of the Lord, that he had done for Is- 
 rael." To this passage the author of Judges, living at a later period, 
 adds' "And also all that generation were gathered unto their fa- 
 thers : and there arose another generation after them, which knew 
 not the Lord, nor yet the works which he had done for Israel " 
 (Judg. ii, 10). 
 
 It seems very clear, where the same facts are related both in Joshua 
 and Judges, that in the former book the narratives are the originals, 
 from their being fuller, and standing in close connexion with each 
 other, while in the latter book they are comparatively isolated. 
 
 Respecting the authorship of the book it is impossible for us to 
 speak with certainty. We may, however, confidently 
 assert that it had not the same author as the books of 
 the Pentateuch. For xin, Au, which occurs nearly two hundred 
 times in the Pentateuch as feminine, meaning she, is never so used
 
 OF THE HOLY SCRIPTURES. 26? 
 
 in Joshua, but a separate form N'n, hi, is employed to designate this 
 gender, and occurs twenty times. In the Pentateuch the form of 
 Jericho is always in"v, Yerecho, occurring eleven times, while in 
 Joshua we have always the form irw, Yericho, occurring twenty- 
 seven times. In the Pentateuch, when the kingdom of Og or Sihon 
 is mentioned, it is roSnn, mamlakhah, but in Joshua it is noSoo, 
 mamlakhuth. There are some other words in which the Pentateuch 
 and Joshua differ. 
 
 It is expressly stated that Joshua wrote the words of the covenant 
 he made with the people in the book of the law of God (chap, xxiv, 
 25, 26). And there is nothing improbable in the supposition that 
 he himself wrote memoirs of his time. These, with the description 
 of the land given in a book (chap, xviii, 4-9), served as the basis of 
 the work, which was probably composed by Eleazar or Phinehas. 
 How far the book of Jashar was used it is impossible to say, as 
 there is but one reference to it (chap, x, 13). According to the 
 Talmud l the Book of Joshua was written by Joshua himself. To 
 this work Eleazar, the son cf Aaron, gave the conclusion, and Phin- 
 ehas afterwards added the last verse. Though placed at the head 
 of the prophets, it was still regarded as an appendage to the Penta- 
 teuch. 
 
 THE HISTORICAL CREDIBILITY OF JOSHUA. 
 
 The great outlines of the history must be undoubtedly true, it 
 written either in the time of Joshua or in the subse- The hlsto 
 quent age. In any event, the account of the settling of evidently con- 
 the Promised Land by the different tribes of Israel must 
 be true, as we know they conquered the country and divided it 
 among themselves. The numerous details given in various parts of 
 the history indicate that many of the events were committed to writ- 
 ing soon after they occurred, and must be matters of fact. 
 
 All through the history the Israelites are represented as being 
 directed by the Almighty, who aided them in their conquests. There 
 is nothing improbable in this, if we believe that God brought them 
 out of Egypt and led them through the desert ; it was but the com- 
 pletion of the exodus. 
 
 Dr. Davidson admits : " that Joshua led the Israelites into the 
 Promised Land after the death of Moses ; that he con- The 
 
 quered a great part of the territory belonging to the said by Dr. Da 
 
 ,. .. . . vldson to be 
 
 Canaamtes, and distributed it among the various tribes ; mythical, con- 
 
 that the tabernacle was set up at Gilgal and Shiloh ; and 8ldered - 
 
 that there were two distributions of territory, the former, of the con- 
 
 1 Fiirst, p. 10. 
 18
 
 268 INTRODUCTION 'lO THE STUDY 
 
 quered parts in the southern half of Palestine, and the second, of 
 other territory, cannot be disbelieved." 1 He, however, regards a 
 part of the history as mythical. He admits nothing miraculous in 
 the crossing of the Jordan by the Israelites ; " for an army," he tells 
 us, " could pass over the fords of Jordan without much difficul- 
 ty, apart from any marvellous interference of Jehovah." In proof 
 of this he cites the fact that the troops of David and Absalom 
 crossed it, where there is no allusion to anything miraculous (2 Sam. 
 xvii, xix). But the instances cited are not to the point, unless it can 
 be shown that these passages occurred at the same season in which 
 it was crossed by the Israelites. It is especially stated in the narra-* 
 
 (tive : " for Jordan overfloweth all his banks all the time of harvest ", 
 
 \Josh. iii, 15). 
 
 If the Jordan had been very low at the time, this fact might have 
 been attributed to Divine interposition, and the story might have 
 arisen that Jehovah dried up the waters. But how could the story 
 have arisen that the waters had been cut off. when, in fact, the Isra- 
 elites must have been, without the interposition of Providence, near 
 drowning in the passage at that season of the year ? How could the 
 story have arisen about the stones that were taken up from the Jor- 
 dan at the time, and deposited in Gilgal, for the perpetual memorial 
 of the drying up of the river ? 
 
 Dr. Davidson also rejects the account of the falling of the walls 
 of Jericho through the intervention of Jehovah. He thinks it was 
 captured in a natural way. How, then, did the circumstantial ac- 
 count of its overthrow by Jehovah arise ? The original account 
 must in that case have been entirely forgotten, and the present ac- 
 count have been a sheer fabrication. But it is not likely that the 
 capture of the first important city of Palestine should have been so 
 soon forgotten, and that a history of its capture entirely different 
 from that of the other cities should have been fabricated to take its 
 place. 
 
 In the description of Joshua's defeat of the hosts of the five kings 
 The standing ^ tne Amorites occurs an account of a remarkable 
 suiiof the sun miracle, the standing still of the sun and moon, which 
 seems to create great difficulty, and has given rise to 
 many discussions and conjectures: "Then spake Joshua to Jeho- 
 vah in the day when Jehovah delivered up the Amorites before the 
 children of Israel, and he said in the sight of Israel, Sun, stand thou 
 still upon Gibeon ; and thou, Moon, in the valley of Ajalon. And 
 the sun stood still, and the moon stayed, until the people had 
 avenged themselves upon their enemies. Is not this written in tae 
 
 1 Vol. i. p. 430. 

 
 OF THE HOLY SCRIPTURES. 269 
 
 book of Jashar (the Upright) ? So the sun stood still in the midst 
 of heaven, and hasted not to go down about a whole day. And 
 there was no day like that before it or after it, that Jehovah heark- 
 ened unto the voice of a man : for Jehovah fought for Israel " (chap, 
 x, 12-14). 
 
 In this passage all that precedes " is not this written in the Book 
 of Jashar ? " beginning with " sun, stand thou," etc., must be a quota- 
 tion from this poetical book. If nothing more than this poetical ex- 
 tract were given we might regard it as a bold figure, meaning nothing 
 more than that Joshua commanded the sun to stand still, that is, that 
 it should not go down until he had subdued his enemies, and that in 
 reality the sun seemed reluctant to set. And this might be con- 
 firmed by the song of Deborah (Judges v, 20) : " The stars in their 
 courses fought against Sisera." But the addition made by the sa- 
 cred historian renders such an explanation as this a difficult one : 
 " So the sun stood still in the midst of heaven, and hasted not to go 
 down about a whole day. And there was no day like that before or 
 after it, that Jehovah hearkened unto the voice of a man : for Jehovah 
 fought for Israel." In this remark there is nothing poetical, but the 
 historian tells us that the sun remained in mid-heaven about a whole 
 day. If the day was not lengthened, there was no place for this 
 remark. 
 
 To this passage there seems to be an allusion in the prayer of 
 Habakkuk, which refers to the wonders of the exodus : ^9,.^^ to 
 " The sun and the moon stood still in their habitation " this miracle in 
 (chap, iii, n). Yet it is remarkable that this stupendous 
 miracle is nowhere else referred to, either in the Old or in the New 
 Testament. This fact, however, is no sufficient cause for its rejec- 
 tion. The principal difficulty respecting the standing still of the 
 sun and moon seems to be, that under the circumstances no such 
 magnificent miracle was necessary. But here it must be confessed 
 that we have no means & priori of determining how far the Deity 
 would control natural laws for the salvation of his people. In 
 granting that Divine power assisted Joshua in the conquest of Ca- 
 naan, we cannot consistently stint this power, or subject it to arbi- 
 trary rules of our own. This would be as inconsistent as it is in the 
 case of Mr. Darwin, who, in creation, limits the Deity to the origina- 
 tion of a few primordial forms, into which he infused life. There 
 seems to be no middle ground between accepting the miracle, or 
 rejecting the account of it as an interpolation ; but of the latter 
 hypothesis we have no proof. 
 
 The language of Joshua addressed to the sun and moon has 
 nothing inconsistent with the truths of astronomy. We are not to
 
 270 INTRODUCTION TO THE STUDY 
 
 suppose that Joshua was acquainted with the true system of the uni- 
 verse, nor do we suppose that the historian had any such knowledge. 
 It made no difference to the Israelites whether the sun or earth 
 stood still, provided the day was lengthened. Even a modern as- 
 tronomer might use the language of Joshua, and the historian cer- 
 tainly, without inconsistency. 
 
 In the address of Joshua at Shechem he exhorts the people to 
 put away the gods which their fathers served in Mesopotamia and 
 in Egypt, and to serve the Lord (chap, xxiv, 14). This does not 
 imply that the people in the time of Joshua were idolaters, but it 
 warns them of the danger of relapsing into idolatry. And the an- 
 swer of the people clearly shows that they were not idolaters, for 
 they reply : " God forbid that we should forsake Jehovah to serve 
 other gods " (chap, xxiv, 16). This harmonizes with the statement 
 that " Israel served the Lord all the days of Joshua," etc. (ver. 31) 
 
 /\ s\4,*> 
 
 
 CHAPTER XXXII. 
 
 THE BOOK OF JUDGES. 
 
 HPHE Book of Judges (D'taaup) stands next in the Hebrew Canon. 
 It takes its name from its being principally occupied with the 
 history of those judges who ruled in the period between Joshua and 
 the Prophet Samuel. 
 
 Chapters i, ii, iii, 1-7, contain isolated events that occurred in the 
 history of the conquest of Canaan, in part a repetition of those in 
 Joshua, and also a general statement of the sins, the punishments, 
 and the deliverances of Israel in the days of the judges, which serves 
 as an introduction to the more special history of these times. The 
 next section (chapter iii, 8-xvi) embraces the names of thirteen 
 judges, raised up by Providence for the deliverance of Israel, and 
 gives a sketch of the history of the most conspicuous of them. The 
 last five chapters (xvii-xxi) relate several important events which 
 occurred in the times, of the judges, but which do not belong to the 
 thread of the narrative in the preceding chapters ;' viz., the affairs of 
 Micah, the capture of Laish by the Danites, the war between the 
 Benjamites and the other tribes of Israel growing out of the abuse, 
 t>y a band of Benjamites, of a concubine of a Levite, and the con- 
 trivance by which the Benjamites obtained wives from the other 
 tribes.
 
 OF THE HOLY SCRIPTURES. 271 
 
 THE UNITY OF THE BOOK. 
 
 There is no sufficient ground for assigning this book to several 
 authors, as some have done. It is evident that the main Not Uje 
 portion (chap, ii, 6-xvi) proceeded from one source ; for of several ao- 
 it narrates the history of the judges, in which we can see * 
 no diversity of authorship ; but, on the contrary, the ever-recurring 
 phrase, " The children of Israel did evil in the sight of the Lord " 
 (chaps, ii, n, iii, 7, vi, i), or with the addition of "again " to this 
 phrase (chapters iii, 12, iv, i, x, 6, xiii), points to one writer. In the 
 history of Samson (chapters xiii-xvi) we have a connected ac- 
 count, evidently written by one author. In fact, the main portion of 
 the book is quite closely connected together. The last five chap- 
 ters (chapters xvii-xxi), disconnected from the chapters preceding, 
 narrate events that belonged to the early part of the history of the 
 judges. In respect to the use of language in different parts of the 
 book, we may observe that ipo, mashakh, in the sense of to approach, 
 
 to draw near, seems to be found nowhere except in Judges iv, 6 and 
 xx, 37. The Niphal form of pyr, zaaq, to be gathered, occurs in Judg. 
 vi, 34, 35, and in xviii, 22, 23, iyn'T i3X, to be impeded of the right 
 hand, to be left-handed, Judges iii, 15 ; xx, 16 ; nowhere else. 
 And, as the events related in them belong to the early period of 
 the judges, and are described with so much vividness, there is no 
 reason for referring their composition to an age later than that of 
 the preceding chapters. This Bleek himself acknowledges. 1 
 
 Respecting the first part of the book (chapters i-ii, 5), there 
 is no good reason for attributing it to another author than that of 
 the middle portion. It begins with the statement, "Now after the 
 death of Joshua, it came to pass that the children of Israel asked 
 the Lord, saying, Who shall go up for us against the Canaanites 
 first to fight against them? And the Lord said, Judah shall go up," 
 etc. After this the chapter presents an account of conquests made 
 by Judah and Simeon, and also by Joseph ; and a statement is given 
 of the places from which different tribes of Israel were unable to 
 drive out the native inhabitants. Here it must be observed that 
 some of the incidents are also recorded in the Book of Joshua as 
 having occurred in his time, and it would seem best to suppose 
 that the achievements of Judah are referred to in a general way, 
 and that events which occurred both before and after the death 
 of Joshua are not always discriminated. 
 
 In the beginning of the next chapter it is stated that the angel of 
 
 1 Page 349.
 
 272 INTRODUCTION TO THE STUDY 
 
 Jehovah rebuked the Israelites for making a covenant with the Ca- 
 naanites, and not throwing down their altars; whereupon the Israel- 
 ites wept and sacrificed to Jehovah. This is a very suitable intro- 
 duction to the history that is to follow, which begins at the sixth 
 verse, with the statement, " And when Joshua had let the people go, 
 the children of Israel went every man unto his inheritance to possess 
 the land." This is followed by the statement that the people served 
 the Lord all the days of Joshua, and all the days of the elders that 
 outlived Joshua. Next we have an account of the death of Joshua, 
 and the remark that all that generation were gathered unto their 
 fathers. Another generation of men arises who know not Jehovah, 
 and they sin against him. We can find no sufficient proof from the 
 connexion of the history to justify the remark of Bleek, 1 that it is 
 not at all probable that the historian would have written, " Now after 
 the death of Joshua it came to pass " (ch. i, i) ; and afterwards, "And 
 Joshua the son of Nun, the servant of the Lord, died " (ch. ii, 8). 
 
 In chap, i, i, 2, it is said, " The children of Israel asked the Lord, 
 saying, Who shall go up for us against the Canaanites first, to fight 
 against them? And the Lord said, Judah shall go up." With this 
 compare, for a proof of sameness of authorship (xx, 18), "And the 
 children of Israel asked counsel of God, and said, Which of us shall 
 go up first to the battle against the children of Benjamin? And the 
 Lord said, Judah shall go up first." In both passages we have nSnna, 
 battechillah, first, in the sense of making a beginning the only pas- 
 sages in the Bible in which Gesenius so defines the word. 
 
 Criticism should be very careful not to lay down arbitrary laws in 
 caution need- determining the unity of authorship respecting books writ- 
 internal 6 'criu- ten at so ear ty an a 8 e f tne world, when we have no other 
 eta- works of the same period with which to compare them. 
 
 Even in regard to the finest productions of the age of Pericles in 
 Greece, and of Augustus in Rome, this caution is needed. What have 
 the first three chapters of Sallust's Jugurthine War to do with his 
 history ? yet who doubts the genuineness of those chapters ? The 
 search for separate and independent documents in the books of the 
 Bible seems to have become a passion with many of the German 
 critics, and it has been carried to a most ridiculous length. 
 
 THE DATE AND AUTHORSHIP OF JUDGES. 
 
 The Book of Judges bears internal evidence of being written be- 
 Not written fore the middle of the reign of David ; for in chap, i, 21 
 JSaJf^l ^ it is stated that "the children of Benjamin did not drive 
 miimof David. O ut the Jebusites that inhabited Jerusalem ; but the Jeb- 
 1 Einleitung, p. 345.
 
 OF THE HOLY SCRIPTURES. 273 
 
 usites dwell with the children of Benjamin in Jerusalem unto this 
 day." David, however, took the stronghold of Zion, and drove out 
 the Jebusites (2 Sam. v, 6-8). In Judges i, 29 it is said, " Neither 
 did Ephraim drive out the Canaanites that dwelt in Gezer, but the 
 Canaanites dwelt in Gezer among them." This could not have been 
 written later than the reign of Solomon, as it was during the time of 
 that monarch that Pharaoh, king of Egypt, captured Gezer, burnt it 
 with file, slew the Canaanites that dwelt in it, and gave it as a dowry 
 to his daughter, the wife of Solomon (i Kings ix, 16). 
 
 On the other hand, the book could not well have been written 
 before the time of Saul, or the first part of the reign could not have 
 of David, as there seems to be a comparison between {^o re t^f^e 
 the times of the kings and those of the judges in the of Saul, 
 phrase, " In those days there was no king in Israel ; every man did 
 that which was right in his own eyes " (chaps, xvii, 6 ; xxi, 25) ; or, 
 simply, " In those days there was no king in Israel " (chaps, xviii, i ; 
 xix, i). 
 
 In chapter xviii, 30 it is stated, " The children of Dan set up the 
 graven image (of Micah) : and Jonathan, the son of Con i ectural 
 Gershom, the son of Manasseh, he and his sons were emendation in 
 priests to the tribe of Dan until the day of the captivity chap- xviiit ' 
 of the land." The latter part of this verse has an important bearing 
 upon the date of the book ; for if the Assyrian captivity is referred 
 to, we shall be compelled either to treat the passage as an interpo- 
 lation, or to refer the composition of the whole to some time subse- 
 quent to that event, that is, after B. C. 721. Houbigant conjectured 
 that we should read, instead of ywn ni^J, captivity of the land, rn'^j 
 
 pixn, captivity of the ark, referring it to the capture of the ark of God 
 by the Philistines at the death of Eli. This conjecture is adopted 
 by Bleek and Davidson. The emendation gives a suitable meaning 
 to the passage, but we see no sufficient reason to adopt it. But 
 if the phrase jnacn m^J, captivity of the land, is to be received as the 
 
 true reading, the context forbids its reference to the Assyrian 
 captivity ; for the next verse, which is parallel and partly ex- 
 planatory of this, reads : " And they set them up Micah 's 
 graven image, which he made, all the time that the house 
 of God was in Shiloh." But, after the removal of the ark 
 from Shiloh, and 'its capture by the Philistines, Shiloh could 
 no longer be regarded as the house of God. Hence "the 
 captivity of the land " refers to the victory gained over the Isra- 
 elites by the Philistines, and the deplorable consequences to Israel 
 that followed it. And this is confirmed by Psa. Ixxviii, 60, 61 : " So he
 
 274 INTRODUCTION TO THE STUDY 
 
 forsook the tabernacle of Shiloh . . . and delivered his strength 
 into captivity." 
 
 Dr. Davidson remarks on chaps, i, ii, 1-5 that this section " has an 
 ^ inherently vivid character, which favours its composition 
 Bieek on the soon after the events described occurred." The same 
 date of Judge*. autnor re f e rs chapters xvii-xxi to the time of the kings, 
 " perhaps the reign of Saul, or the beginning of David's;" and, while 
 admitting that the middle portion (chaps, ii, 6-xvi) contains materials 
 as old as any other part of the book, and " that the constituent parts 
 are authentic records of a pretty early date," he thinks the compiler 
 of the whole work must be placed in the time of the later kings. 1 
 Bleek refers the composition of the book, as a whole, to the time 
 of the earlier kings. Schrader absurdly refers the final composition, 
 or present form of the book, to the close of the Jewish kingdom, 
 about B. C. 600.' 
 
 Respecting the authorship of Judges, nothing is known. The 
 Talmud, 1 most of the rabbies, as well as many Christian theologians, 
 attribute it to Samuel, and this is not at all improbable. 
 
 THE CHARACTER OF ITS HISTORY. 
 
 The Book of Judges bears every mark of being veritable history. 
 There is a vividness in many of its narratives that is rarely sur- 
 passed. What a natural picture we have in the nineteenth chapter, 
 in which the Jebusites are represented as still dwelling in Jerusalem ! 
 How many particulars are given which must have come from eye- 
 witnesses ! The song of Deborah, which celebrates the defeat of 
 Sisera by Barak, is acknowledged to be a composition belonging to 
 the time of the Judges. It is exceedingly spirited, and frequently 
 sublime ; and the vivid manner in which it sets forth in detail the 
 conflict with Sisera shows that it must have been composed, even 
 if not written, soon after the events described. 
 
 Even De Wette says of the history in the book : " Although the 
 Dewette'sad- narrative is partly interwoven with miraculous and 
 
 missions as to mythological traits, it bears the stamp, not only of a 
 
 the genuine- ' . 
 
 new of this genuine, not over-refined tradition of the people, but 
 
 even of a true historical transmission, and it gives us a 
 vivid picture of the condition and of the morals of the people in 
 those times."' " The descriptions of the book," says Dr Davidson, 
 4 are, commonly, natural and graphic, bearing on their face the im- 
 
 1 Page 466. Einleitung, p. 333. 
 
 * Baba Batra, i4b. Furst explains the Talmudic passage to mean that the Fropfai 
 Samuel edited the book from existing tingle narratives. Ueber den Kanon, p. ii. 
 4 Schrader's De Wette, p. 327. 

 
 OF THE HOLY SCRIPTURES. . 275 
 
 press of historical truth." ' But, notwithstanding this statement, he 
 finds mythological exaggerations in the history of Gideon and Sam- 
 son ; that is, the supernatural parts of the history are myths. But 
 would it not be absurd to suppose that the same writer who describes 
 so faithfully and minutely events in some chapters, should, in others, 
 give us so many myths when treating of the affairs of the same age, 
 with which he seems to be equally familiar ? Are we to reject every 
 thing superhuman in the history of the Israelites ? 
 
 Schrader thinks he finds repetitions and contradictions, and a dif- 
 ferent tone of representation, and a different economy, ^ oplnlon 0( 
 in various parts of the book. But the instances he cites Schrader as to 
 amount to little or nothing. He *inds a contradiction 
 between chapter i, 18, where it is stated that " Judah took Gaza with 
 the coast thereof, and Ekron with the coast thereof," and chapter 
 iii, 3, where " five lords of the Philistines " are mentioned as being 
 left unsubdued to prove Israel. It requires no deep investigation 
 to remove the scarcely apparent discrepancy ; for in the latter 
 passage reference is made to the nations left unsubdued at the death of 
 Joshua, which is perfectly plain from the latter part of the preceding 
 chapter; but the former passage (chap, i, 18) speaks of what was done 
 after the death of Joshua. 
 
 CHAPTER XXXIII. 
 
 THE BOOK OF RUTH. 
 
 HPH1S book, though placed in the Hagiographa, which is the fourth 
 * and last division of the Hebrew Bible, properly belongs to the 
 period of the Judges, in whose times the events described in it 
 occurred. 
 
 In the days of the judges of Israel, when there was a famine in 
 the land, Elimelech, of Bethlehem-Judah, his wife Naomi, and his 
 two sons, Mahlon and Chilion, went to sojourn in the land of Moab. 
 Upon the death of Elimelech his two sons marry women of Moab 
 Orpah and Ruth. After the death of her two sons, Naomi, with her 
 daughter-in-law Ruth, returns to Bethlehem. After this Ruth gleans 
 ears of corn in the field of Boaz, a relative of Elimelech. Boaz thus 
 becomes acquainted with Ruth, and finally marries her. Of this 
 inion is born a son, Obed, the father of Jesse, the father of David 
 chaps, i-iv). 
 
 1 Vol. i, page 469.
 
 27tt INTRODUCTION TO THE STUDY 
 
 DESIGN OF THE BOOK. 
 
 The book was evidently written to give the ancestry of David 
 and ends with the verse, " And Obed begat Jesse, and Jesse begat 
 David." To seek for any other design than this is useless. 
 
 ITS DATE AND AUTHOR. 
 
 It was probably written not later than the time of David. When 
 he had become king over Israel, and gained a great reputation, it 
 was natural that some one should write out his genealogy. Had 
 the book been written after his time, it is likely that Solomon, at 
 least, would also have been named. 
 
 The language of Ruth bears great similarity to that of the books 
 of Judges and Samuel ; yet there is a tendency in some instances 
 towards Aramaic forms. The addition of yodh (') to the second 
 person singular, preterit feminine, in the words "m^, 'fnr (chapter 
 
 iii, 3), and *r\23V? (chap, iii, 4), is Aramaic ; yet they may have been 
 very ancient forms, as we have the same ending to the personal pro- 
 noun, second person feminine (in Judg. xvii, 2), 'fix. The form s ->o#n 
 
 chap, ii, 8) is Aramaic. No stress is to be laid on the ending, nun 
 ({), second person, singular, future, in a few words, as it occurs in 
 i Sam. i, 14; and second person plural, future, masculine termina- 
 tion (p), occurs even in Genesis. Such forms are no proof of a late 
 stage of the language. 
 
 The phrase n'itn NKU, to take wives (chap, i, 4), though considered 
 
 T T 
 
 a late expression, is, nevertheless, found in Judges xxi, 23. 
 
 Bleek ' observes on the Aramaic forms, " that they are not of such 
 a nature that the age of the composition of the work can be deter- 
 mined from them with any degree of certainty." 
 
 If we were sure that no generations have been omitted between 
 Obed and Jesse, it would be easy to fix the narrative as belonging 
 to the times of the great-grandfather of David. But, as several gen- 
 erations between Hezron and Boaz are omitted (chap, iv, 18-21), a 
 similar omission may have been made between Obed and Jesse. 
 
 CHARACTER OF THE NARRATIVE. 
 
 The history of Naomi and Ruth, and the marriage of the latter 
 rue history a with Boaz, are given with great simplicity, and impress us 
 deeply with their truth. Nowhere can there be found 
 a more beautiful picture of the early country life of the 
 Hebrews. Few, indeed, have regarded the narrative as a fiction. 
 
 Page 356.
 
 OF THE HOLY SCRIPTURES. 277 
 
 And, indeed, what Hebrew would have thought of inventing the 
 story that the great king of the nation sprang in part from Moabite 
 blood ! 
 
 " The little book of the gleaner Ruth," says Humboldt, " presents 
 us with a charming and exquisitely simple picture of nature. Goethe, 
 at the period of his enthusiasm for the East, spoke of it ' as the love- 
 liest specimen of epic and idyllic poetry which we possess.' " 
 
 RABBINICAL VIEW OF THE BOOK OF RUTH. 
 
 " ' This book,' says tradition, ' on account of its contents would 
 never have been admitted into the Kethubim (Hagiographa), as it 
 contains no law, prophecy, or national history, were it not that the 
 object of its admission was to show forth the divine favour bestowed 
 upon Boaz for his liberality and benevolence, by making him the pro- 
 genitor of the royal house of David.' Tradition also held that the 
 history of the woman related in it is really true, genuine, and credible ; 
 that the Prophet Samuel, after he had written the Book of Judges, 
 composed this as a supplement, in order to describe the descent of 
 David, whom he had anointed king, and to remind him of the noble 
 simplicity of the morals of his ancestors. . . . And as the Psalter of 
 David stood at the beginning of the Hagiographa, the Book of Ruth 
 was prefixed to it as a prologue for the glorification of David." 1 
 
 CHAPTER XXXIV. 
 
 THE BOOKS OF SAMUEL. 
 
 two Books of Samuel, doubtless, originally formed but one* 
 and took the name of Samuel from his being the chief character 
 in the first part of the history. In the Septuagint they form the first 
 two of the four Books of Kings. From their character it is quite 
 evident that they must be separated from the two Books of Kings in 
 respect to date and authorship. 
 
 The books may be divided into three sections : the first em- 
 bracing the period of the administration of the Prophet MaybedW(l6d 
 Samuel (i Sam. i-xii) ; the second containing the his- into three seo- 
 tory of the reign of Saul (chaps, xiii-xxxi) ; the third Uon 
 containing the reign of David (2 Sam. i-xxiv). 
 
 1 Cosmos, voL ii, 415.' * Fiirst, Ueber den Kanon, pp. 62, 63. 
 
 * In the time of Origen they constituted one book among the Hebrews. In Ease- 
 bias, Hist. Eccles., vi 25.
 
 279 INTRODUCTION TO THE STUDY 
 
 DATE AND AUTHORSHIP. 
 
 The two Books of Samuel end with the last political act of David, 
 the numbering of the people. The Book of Kings opens with the 
 statement that " David was old and stricken in years," and bears 
 no necessary connexion with those preceding it. We have straight- 
 way an account of the installation of Solomon as king. Thus the 
 two Books of Samuel end with the official life of David, to which 
 point of time the historian brings down his narrative. 
 
 These books do not appear to be compiled from preceding ones, 
 and nowhere in them is there any reference to other historical 
 works, 1 quite unlike the two Books of Kings, in which we find it 
 stated, " And the rest of the acts of Solomon, and all that he did, 
 and his wisdom, are they not written in the Book of the Acts of Solo- 
 mon ? " (i Kings xi, 41.) " Now the rest of the acts of Rehoboam, 
 and all that he did, are they not written in the Book of the Chron- 
 icles of the Kings of Judah ? " (i Kings xiv, 29.) Besides these ref- 
 erences we find nine others in i Kings, and many such references in 
 2 Kings. These facts separate the two Books of Samuel from those 
 of Kings. 
 
 Nowhere in Samuel is there any reference to the Babylonian cap- 
 
 written before t ^ v * t Y or > indeed, to the removal of the ten tribes by 
 
 th revolt of Shalmaneser, nor even to the separation of the ten tribes 
 
 from Judah at the beginning of the reign of Rehoboam, 
 
 the successor of Solomon. 
 
 That we find in i Kings ii, 27-35 references to prophetic declara- 
 tions recorded in i Sam. ii, 31-35, iii, 11-14, 2 Sam. iii, 27-29, 
 and that in i Kings viii, 17-20 we find Solomon speaking of God's 
 declaration to David respecting a temple to be built by his son, re- 
 lated in 2 Sam. vii, furnishes no proof that the original history em- 
 braced a portion of i Kings, on which Bleek lays some stress. That 
 predictions are recorded by one writer, and their fulfillment by 
 another, presents no difficulty except to those who have no faith in 
 divine inspiration. The phrase " unto this day," occurring in vari- 
 ous places (as i Sam. v, 5, xxx, 25, 2 Sam. vi, 8), does not neces- 
 sarily imply a long period of time between the events and the 
 recording of them. 
 
 There is nothing in the books that points to a period later than 
 the first part of the reign of Solomon, or the close of that of David. 
 In this connexion the two following passages are to be considered : 
 " Beforetime in Israel, when a man went to inquire of God, thus he 
 spake, Come and let us go to the seer ; for he that is now called a 
 *The exception is a single reference to the Book of Jashar, 2 Sam. i, 18
 
 OF THE HOLY SCRIPTURES. 279 
 
 prophet was beforetime called a seer " (i Sam. ix, 9). " Then Achish 
 gave him (David) Ziklag that day ; wherefore Ziklag pertaineth unto 
 the kings of Judah unto this day" (chapter xxvii, 6). The first 
 of these passages affords no proof that the writer lived later than 
 the age of David. In i Sam. ix, 19 Samuel calls himself a seer; 
 but Nathan, a messenger of God contemporary with David, is 
 called a prophet (NOJ) (2 Sam. vii, 2); and in the superscription to 
 Psalm li. Gad, another contemporary with David, is also called a 
 prophet (N'^J) (i Sam. xxii, 5). The second of these passages, 
 respecting Ziklag, has been thought to indicate that the writer 
 lived not earlier than the reign of Rehoboam (about B. C. 975), 
 in whose time the ten tribes revolted. Both the Septuagint and 
 the Peshito-Syriac read : " Pertaineth to the king (not kings) of Ju- 
 dah," which might have been written in the time of David. But 
 if we abide by the Hebrew reading, the passage could have been 
 written in the beginning of Solomon's reign ; for we are under 
 no necessity of supposing that there is a reference in the passage 
 to the division of the Israelites after the time of Solomon into the 
 kingdom of Judah and the kingdom of Israel. The sacred histo- 
 rian states that Achish, the Philistine king, gave Ziklag to David, 
 which, though situated within the kingdom of Judah, and after- 
 wards assigned to Simeon (Josh, xix, 5), had not yet been possessed 
 by either of these tribes. When David received the town he had 
 been already anointed king, and he reigned " over the house of Ju- 
 dah " seven years and six months. The distinction between Israel 
 and Judah already existed in his time, and grew out of the fact that 
 David belonged to the tribe of Judah, over which alone he had first 
 ruled seven years and a half, during a part of which time Ish- 
 bosheth, the son of Saul, reigned over Israel. Even Schrader 1 re- 
 marks, " The designation of collective Israel as ISRAEL and JUDAH 
 (i Sam. xviii, 16, 2 Sam. xxiv, i), seems to belong to the time of 
 David (Davidisch)." It is, indeed, possible that the passage re- 
 specting Ziklag's pertaining to the kings of Judah unto this day may 
 be a later addition to the original text. 
 
 The passage, " she had on a long tunic, for thus do the virgin 
 daughters of the king wear (future, are accustomed to wear} robes ' 
 (2 Sam. xiii, 18), affords no proof whatever of a long time interven- 
 ing between the event and its recording. 
 
 Ewald places the composition of the books twenty or thirty years 
 after the death of Solomon, and Bleek * at a somewhat later period, 
 while Davidson ' prefers the reign of Asa, B. C. 940. It is natural 
 
 1 De Wette Schrader, p. 346. * Einl., p. 363. 'Intro., vol. i. p. 538
 
 280 INTRODUCTION TO THE STUDY 
 
 for us ro expect some reference in the Books of Chronicles to the 
 Books of Samuel in respect to the sources of the history of David, 
 and such reference there seems to be in i Chron. xxix, 29 : " Now 
 the acts of David the king, first and last, behold, they are written in 
 the Book of Samuel the Seer, and in the Book of Nathan the Proph- 
 et, and in the Book of Gad the Seer." Samuel, it seems, wrote the 
 hijtory of his own times, and so did Nathan and Gad afterwards. 
 Nathan, it is probable, survived David ; at least, he is mentioned in 
 the first chapter of i Kings. 
 
 It seems not improbable that Nathan wrote the two Books of Sam 
 
 The Prophet ue ^ ^ e was a contem P orarv f Gad the prophet, though 
 Nathan proba- younger, it would seem, and there was no good reason 
 '' why he should make any use of what Gad wrote. The 
 history of the time of Samuel he could have learned from the writings 
 of Samuel, or from those who were still living and had participated 
 in the events described in the first part of the book. On this sup- 
 position the work was written at the close of the reign of David or 
 at the beginning of that of Solomon. It bears no marks of having 
 been made up from the united writings of Samuel, Nathan, and Gad ; 
 yet in such case it would carry with it high authority. 
 
 According to the Talmud, Samuel wrote the work as far as the 
 account of his death. The rest of i Samuel, and the whole of 2 Sam- 
 uel, were written by Gad the seer and Nathan the prophet. 1 
 
 
 
 THE CHARACTER OF THE HISTORY. 
 
 The history is distinguished by simplicity, minuteness, and every 
 indication of fairness and truth. Its three great characters, Samuel, 
 Saul, and David, stand before us as real personages. In Samuel 
 we see the faithful, blameless servant of Jehovah, possessing great 
 power, yet never using it for his own selfish purposes. Saul every- 
 where appears as the fickle, rash king, always sinning and always re- 
 penting : David as a valiant warrior and just monarch, whose soul 
 can always be touched with pity, especially toward Saul and his 
 house. 
 
 Dr. Davidson, while acknowledging that the history in these books 
 Tbeopinionsof " has the stamp of truth upon it," nevertheless finds con- 
 tradictions in it ; and in 2 Sam. xxi-xxiv, he thinks there 
 is an historical basis, " altered and enlarged by the addi- 
 tion of legendary, miraculous, and improbable circumstances." 1 
 Here, again, his aversion to the supernatural appears; whatever 
 has that appearance must be banished to the region of myths ! As 
 
 ' FQrst. Ueber den Kanon p. 13. 'Vol. i, p. 521.
 
 OF THE HOLY SCRIPTURES. 281 
 
 fai as improbabilities are concerned, how many events of the most 
 improbable character occur everywhere in profane history ! 
 
 "The narrative," says De Wette, "in the second book especially, 
 bears a genuine historical stamp, and is drawn, if not from contempo- 
 rary memorials, yet from a very lively and faithful (only here and 
 there obscure and complicated) oral tradition, which, indeed, rests 
 partly upon memorials, proverbs, and important names. With the ex- 
 ception of some pieces of the nature of Chronicles, it is so rich in 
 living traits of character and descriptions, that in this respect it vies 
 with the best written historical compositions, and at times becomes 
 biographical ; the natural connexion of the events is also often very 
 satisfactory, though not set forth with sufficient clearness." ' Not- 
 withstanding these acknowledgments of the high historical charac- 
 ter of these books, De Wette and others think that they find incon- 
 sistencies and contradictions in them. These we shall briefly con- 
 sider in the historical order. 
 
 In i Sam. vii, 13 it is stated, "So the Philistines were subdued, 
 and they came no more into the coast (territories) of Is- A]lej . ed ^^ 
 rael; and the hand of the Lord was against the Philis- tmdictions ex- 
 tines all the days of Samuel." It has been objected that 
 this is inconsistent with the language of chap, ix, 16, "that he [Saul] 
 may save my people out of the hands of the Philistines: for I have 
 looked upon my people, because their cry is come unto me." But 
 the former statement, that the Philistines " came no more," obviously 
 refers to the period of Samuel's life official life, perhaps. In the 
 eighth chapter Samuel is spoken of as an 0/dma.n, and it is said that 
 he made his sons judges, and that their conduct was bad. After this 
 a king is promised who will deliver the people of Israel from the 
 Philistines. It seems that the inroads of the Philistines were made 
 during the administration of the wicked sons of Samuel. The state- 
 ments are sufficiently exact, except to a hypercritical spirit. 
 
 That Samuel, in accordance with a divine revelation, should anoint 
 Sa j il to be king over Israel (i Sam. ix, 15-17), has been considered 
 inconsistent with his being chosen by lot by the people, who had de- 
 manded a king. And, indeed, if Samuel had not been directed by a 
 divine communication in anointing Saul, and if Providence had not 
 controlled the lot so that it would fall upon Saul, the whole proceed- 
 ing would have been inconsistent and absurd. As God had acceded 
 to the demand of the people to have a king, there was nothing in his 
 making the selection inconsistent therewith. All this is, of course, 
 unsatisfactory to those who believe that no divine communication 
 was made to Samuel. 
 
 ' In Schrader's De Wette, p. 335.
 
 282 INTRODUCTION TO THE STUDY 
 
 In i Sam. x, 9-12, it is said that a company of prophets met Saul, 
 and that the Spirit of God fell upon him, and he prophesied ; from 
 which it became a proverb, " Is Saul also among the piophets? " 
 But upon another occasion we find Saul prophesying before Samuel, 
 and it is added, " Wherefore they say (will say, are accustomed to say), 
 Is Saul also among the prophets? (i Sam. xix, 24.) Here there is 
 no reason to suppose that in the judgment of the writer Saul proph- 
 esied for the first time, and that the adage then arose. If he proph- 
 esied a second time, as the history shows, it was quite natural that 
 \the_adage should be repeated. 
 In i Sam. x, 8, after Samuel has anointed Saul to be king, he tells 
 Baurs appoint- him: "And thou shalt go down before me to Gilgal; 
 
 SieMn"!*!? and Dehold J wil1 g down unto thee to off er bu t 
 *ai. offerings, and to sacrifice sacrifices of peace offerings : 
 
 ^ seven days shalt thou tarry, till I come to thee, and show thee what 
 thou shalt do." After this Saul is chosen by lot to be king, and, 
 - ! being sent for by men of Jabesh-gilead, east of the Jordan, to aid 
 . ' them against the Ammonites, he goes to their help, and defeats the 
 - Ammonites. After this Samuel says to the people, "Come and let us 
 .go to Gilgal to renew the kingdom there. And all the people went to 
 Gilgal ; and there they made Saul king before the Lord in Gilgal ; 
 and there they sacrificed sacrifices of peace-offerings before the 
 Lord " (chap, xi, 14, 15). It is very evident that Samuel's direction 
 to Saul after anointing him, to go down to Gilgal, where he would 
 make offerings and tell him what to do, has reference to the meeting 
 just mentioned, where Saul was made king. Nothing is said respect- 
 ing Saul's going first to Gilgal; this was not necessary; but if he 
 should do so, he was to tarry for Samuel seven days. 
 
 In the face of these facts it is not easy to see how De Wette can 
 make the following passage refer to chap, x, 8 : " And he (Saul) 
 tarried seven days, according to the set time that Samuel had ap- 
 pointed : but Samuel came not to Gilgal ; and the people were scat- 
 tered from him " (chap, xiii, 8). When this appointment was made 
 we know not ; but it would seem that seven days was the usual time 
 that Saul was to wait for Samuel. Saul had collected the army of 
 the Israelites at Gilgal, and the Philistines gathered together to fight 
 them. This was two years after Saul had been made king (chap, 
 xiii, i), and can have no reference to chap, x, 8. 
 
 While waiting for Samuel at Gilgal Saul forces himself to offer 
 sacrifices, for which he is censured by Samuel, who informs him that 
 his kingdom shall not continue. 
 
 In the fifteenth chapter Saul is sent to exterminate the Amalekites, 
 but failing to carry out fully the command, the word of the Lord
 
 OF THE HOLY SCRIPTURES. 283 
 
 comes to Samuel : " It repenteth me that I have set up Saul to be 
 king, for he is turned back from following me," etc. (chap, xv, n). 
 After this Samuel tells Saul : " For thou hast rejected the word of 
 the Lord, and the Lord hath rejected thee from being king over Is- 
 rael " (ver. 26). Here there is no inconsistency. In respect to the 
 former transgression the declaration was, *' Thy kingdom shall not 
 continue ; " while, on account of further disobedience, he is already 
 rejected from being king. This is something more than a repetition. 
 
 In the account given of David's going forth to meet Goliath, it is 
 stated that Saul inquired of Abner, " Whose son is this Saul's 
 youth ? " and that Abner replied, "As thy soul liveth, JJIf 
 O king, I cannot tell ; " and that, after David had re- considered, 
 turned to Saul with the head of the Philistine, he put the question to 
 him, " Whose son art thou ? " to which he replies, " I am the son of 
 thy servant Jesse the Bethlehemite (i Sam. xvii, 55-58). As the 
 house of his father was to be made free in Israel, it was important to 
 know this. It has been considered utterly incredible by some that 
 Saul should not have known whose son David was, when he had al- 
 ready played before him, having been sent to him by Jesse at Saul's 
 request. 
 
 It is true that it does seem singular that Saul, under the circum- 
 stances, should not have known David's father. But it may be ex- 
 plained by the consideration that the number of Saul's officers, ac- 
 quaintances, and visitors, must have been very great, and that it 
 might easily have happened that the name of David's father had es- 
 caped him at the time. How frequently it occurs that the names of 
 persons with whom we are acquainted escape the memory when they 
 have been some time absent from us. How many governors of States 
 remember the names of all the men who have been employed near 
 them, to say nothing of the Christian names of their fathers? With us, 
 to know the son is to know the surname of the father ; but with Saul it 
 was entirely different. Further, Saul, in his hypochondriacal state, 
 may have been subject to remarkable lapses of memory. But, if we 
 are to reject every thing as unhistorical which a priori was improb- 
 able, what havoc we will make of history ! How long David re- 
 mained with Saul on his first visit to him (i Sam. xvi, 21-23) ^ is i m ~ 
 possible to say, but probably it was but for a short time. It is said 
 that he became Saul's armour-bearer; but this may refer to what 
 happened subsequently to David's fight with the Philistine; for after 
 that event it is said that " Saul took him that day, and would let him 
 go no more home to his father's house " (chap, xviii, 2). In the ac- 
 count of David, previous to his fight with the giant, it is said, in 
 speaking of the three eldest sons of Jesse who followed Saul : " But 
 19
 
 >l INTRODUCTION TO THE STUDY 
 
 David went, and returned from Saul to feed his father's sheep at 
 Bethlehem " (chap, xvii, 15). 
 
 The Vatican copy of the Septuagint omits chaps, xvii, 12-31, 55-58, 
 and xviii, 1-5. This would icmove all difficulty by the omission 
 of the passage expressing Saul's ignorance of the name of David s 
 father. But we have no sufficient authority for the rejection of the 
 passages omitted in the Vatican copy of the LXX, as they are found 
 in the Peshito-Syriac version and in the Targum. That Saul on 
 two different occasions (i Sam. xviii, 10, n, xix, 10) hurled a jav- 
 elin at David, has in it nothing strange ; certainly nothing to lead 
 us to infer that it is the same event twice related. 
 
 In chap, xix, 2 Jonathan informs David of Saul's intention to kill 
 b aueeed ^ m but * n chap, xx, i, 2, when David declares that 
 contradiction* Saul is seeking his life, Jonathan says : " God forbid ; 
 thou shall not die : behold, my father will do nothing, 
 either great or small, but that he will show it me." These passages 
 De Wette regards as contradictory. But it must be remembered 
 that after Jonathan had communicated to David Saul's intention to 
 kill him, he remonstrated with his father against such an act, and 
 Saul swore that David should not be slain. It is true that after this, 
 when the evil spirit comes upon Saul, he again attempts to kill Da- 
 vid, but David escapes from him. Again Jonathan, in the second 
 instance, does not express himself very confidently, but declares 
 his intention to sound his father, and to communicate the result 
 to David. Jonathan would naturally have as good an opinion as 
 possible of his father, and think that, notwithstanding his bad con- 
 duct, he would yet, in his better moments, have some regard for his 
 oath. But suppose the two passages contain inconsistent senti- 
 ments is the same man always consistent with himself? 
 
 In i Sam. xxi, 10-15 \ xx "> x > ^ l5 sa ^ l ^ at David, for fear of Saul 
 fled to King Achish of Gath ; but that, becoming alarmed when his 
 warlike deeds were known to the king, he changed his behaviour and 
 feigned madness, and left, with the king's decided approval. The 
 superscription of the thirty-fourth Psalm confirms this : " A psalm of 
 David when he changed his behaviour before Abimelech, who drove 
 him away, and he departed." But after this, perhaps about four 
 years, David, with six hundred men and their families, goes to 
 Achish, king of Gath, who gives him Ziklag in which to dwell (chap, 
 xxvii). Why cannot both of these events be true ? In the first 
 instance it seems he was alone, and became alarmed ; he afterwards 
 took courage and went with his six hundred men. Who that should 
 read of an individual or of a company of soldiers playing the coward 
 one day in battle, but on another occasion acting with bravery,
 
 OF THE HOLY SCRIPTURES. :W.j 
 
 would ever imagine a contradiction or absurdity in the state- 
 ments ? 
 
 In chap, xxiv Saul, in seeking David in the wilderness of Engedi, 
 goes into a cave in which David lies concealed, and his skirt is cut 
 off by the latter. This is an entirely different event from that 
 described in chap, xxvi, where Saul, seeking David in the wilderness 
 of Ziph, encamps and goes to sleep with a spear stuck by his pillow, 
 which spear David carries away. 
 
 The death of Samuel is twice related in nearly the same words, 
 (i Sam. xxv, i, xxviii, 3). But the second statement, that he was 
 dead, is required, or, at least, is made appropriate, by the account 
 that follows of the raising of Samuel by the witch of Endor. 
 
 In 2 Sam. iii, 14 David says : " Deliver me my wife Michal, 
 which I espoused to me for a hundred foreskins of the Philistines." 
 This does not contradict what is in i Sam. xviii, 27, that David 
 brought two hundred foreskins of the Philistines to Saul for Michal, 
 for the contract which Saul made with him was to bring one hundred 
 foreskins of the Philistines (i Sam. xviii, 25). David modestly names 
 the smaller number. 
 
 Dr. Davidson finds a contradiction between i Sam. xv, 35 : " And 
 Samuel came no more to see Saul until the day of his death," and 
 i Sam. xix, 24: "And he (Saul) prophesied before Samuel." The 
 first of these passages Davidson renders : " Samuel did not see Saul 
 again till the day of his death." 1 But the proper rendering of n&n, 
 
 raah, in this passage is, to visit, to go to see, one of the meanings 
 given by Gesenius so the passage should be rendered, "And 
 Samuel visited Saul no more till the day of his death," which is not 
 contradicted by what is said of Saul's prophesying in the presence 
 of Samuel, for in that case Saul sought Samuel. 
 
 Dr. Davidson finds a contradiction in the lists of Saul's sons. In 
 i Sam. xiv, 49 we have Jonathan, Ishui, and Melchi-shua; but in 
 chap, xxxi, 2 it is stated that the Philistines slew Jonathan, Abin- 
 adab, and Melchi-shua. But it seems best to suppose that the first 
 list gives the sons of Saul at an earlier period of his reign, and that 
 Abinadab was born afterwards. Ishui is probably the same who was 
 afterward called Ishbosheth (man of shame), who alone of Saul'u 
 sons escaped death when the others were slain, and who ruled two 
 fears over eleven tribes in opposition to David 
 
 'Vol. i, p. 513.
 
 I8fl INTRODUCTION TO THE STUDY 
 
 CHAPTER XXXV. 
 
 THE TWO BOOKS OF KINGS. 
 
 '"PHE two Books of Kings, originally constituting but one 1 book, are 
 * so named from their embracing the history of the kings of Israel 
 and Judah. They cover a period of about four hundred and fifty 
 years, from the accession of Solomon to the throne of Israel to the 
 thirty-seventh year of the Babylonian captivity. 
 
 The whole history may be divided into three periods. The first 
 The history emDraces the reign of Solomon over a united Israel 
 divisible into (i Kings i-xi). The second contains the history of the 
 two separate kingdoms of Judah and of Israel, from the 
 revolt of the. ten tribes in the time of Rehoboam until these tribes 
 were carried away captive beyond the Euphrates by Shalmaneser, 
 king of Assyria (i Kings xii-xxii; 2 Kings i-xvii). The third pe- 
 riod embraces the history of the kingdom of Judah, from the time 
 of the captivity of the ten tribes to the thirty-seventh year of the 
 captivity of Jehoiachin, king of Judah, at Babylon, about B.C. 562 
 (2 Kings xviii-xxv). 
 
 SOURCES AND TIME OF THEIR COMPOSITION. 
 
 The history everywhere refers to written documents, which were, 
 doubtless, used by the author in the compilation of his work. At 
 the end of the reign of Solomon it is said : "And the rest of the acts 
 of Solomon, and all that he did, and his wisdom, are they not written 
 in the Book of the Acts of Solomon ? " (i Kings xi, 41.) In the sub- 
 sequent part of the history, after the Israelites had been divided into 
 the kingdoms of Israel and Judah, we have references both to " The 
 Book of the Chronicles of the Kings of Israel," and " The Book of 
 the Chronicles of the Kings of Judah." There are eighteen references 
 to the former book, and fifteen to the latter. 
 
 Here the question arises, Were these books " of Chronicles," to 
 which reference is made, records written during the reigns of the 
 
 kings of Israel and Judah, or were they historical works 
 Were these . } 
 
 books oontem- written by two private individuals at a late period of 
 
 w^^edl the Hebrew monarchy ? The last mention of " The 
 late penod? Book of the Chronicles of the Kings of Judah " occurs 
 
 'Origen in Euseb. Eccles. Hist., book vi. 25.
 
 OF THE HOLY SCRIPTURES. 287 
 
 (2 Kings xxiv, 5) in reference to Jehoiakim (about B C. 600), so 
 that, on the supposition that, "The Book of the Chronicles of the 
 Kings of Judah " was the work of a later writer, he must have lived 
 at the beginning of the Babylonian captivity. But this is inad- 
 missible, as there are indications in the Books of Kings that they are 
 composed of documents written at an early period. 
 
 In reference to the remnant of the people of the Amorites, Hit- 
 tites, Perizzites, Hivites, and Jebusites, it is said: "Upon these did 
 Solomon levy a tribute of bond-service unto this day" (i Kings 
 ix, 21). Here we have reference to a state of affairs, existing in the 
 time of Solomon, hardly applicable to the divided kingdoms of Judah 
 and Israel, and certainly inappropriate when the ten tribes had been 
 removed, and the remnant of the Canaanites in their territory were 
 no longer tributary to them. Again, in reference to the separation 
 of the ten tribes from Judah in the reign of Rehoboam, it is said : 
 " So Israel rebelled against the house of David unto this day " 
 (i Kings xii, 19). It is evident that this was written before the ten 
 tribes were carried away captive by Shalmaneser, since the language 
 was no longer applicable after that event. 
 
 Respecting the defection of the Edomites, it is stated : " Edom 
 revolted from under the hand of Judah unto this day " (2 Kings 
 riii, 22). It is evident that this was written before the Babylonian 
 captivity, otherwise the language would be inappropriate, as Judah 
 was then carried away captive. 
 
 In the description of Solomon's temple occurs the following: 
 " And they drew out the staves, that the ends of the staves were 
 seen out in the holy place before the oracle, and they were not 
 seen without : and there they are unto this day " (i Kings viii, 8). 
 But this language could not be used respecting the staves of the 
 ark when the temple had been destroyed by Nebuchadnezzar, 
 and all its sacred utensils had been removed; so that here, also, 
 we have proof that the account was written before the Babylonian 
 captivity. 
 
 As the author of the Books of Kings lived during the Babylonian 
 captivity, it might have been expected that he would have made 
 some change in passages no longer applicable to the condition of 
 the people in his time. But this he did not deem necessary, as the 
 altered circumstances were well known, and were not of such a 
 nature as to demand that he should change the language of the 
 original documents. 
 
 We cannot doubt that " The Book of the Chronicles l of the Kings 
 of Judah," and "The Book of the Chronicles of the Kings of Israel." 
 
 ' O-Qbtti tP??*n "nan *ICD. Book of tht Affairs of the Diys of the Kinf..
 
 2>* INTRODUCTION TO THE STUDY 
 
 were the annals of the respective kings of the two kingdoms written 
 down for the most part during the reign of each king. Such annala 
 are referred to in the book of Esther as being kept in the kingdom 
 of Persia : " He (Ahasuerus) commanded to bring the book of the 
 records of the Chronicles" (chap, vi, i). When these were read, 
 there was found recorded an important event in the reign of thi? 
 very king. 
 
 Among the Hebrews we first find mention of a recorder in 2 Sain, 
 nm mention v *"' x ^' wnere ^ ls stated that in the time of David, "]e- 
 ot a recorder hoshaphat the son of Ahilud was recorder." Mention 
 is also made of him in 2 Sam. xx, 24, and in i Kings 
 iv, 3. The same office in the time of Hezekiah was held by Joah 
 the son of Asaph (2 Kings xviii, 18, 37 ; Isaiah xxxvi, 3), and in the 
 time of Josiah by Joah, the son of Jehoaz (2 Chron. xxxiv, 8). Ge- 
 senius defines the word T3n, mazkir, (recorder, in English version), 
 " a recorder, register, i. q., historiographer, the king's annalist, whose 
 duty it was to record the deeds of the king and the events of his 
 reign. . . . The same office is mentioned as existing in the Persian 
 court, both ancient and modern " (Heb. Lex.). 
 
 It is true, we do not find any mention of a recorder in the kingdom 
 of Israel, yet it is probable that the Israelites would have such an 
 officer. But, independently of this, the history of Israel is so closely 
 interwoven with that of Judah, that the historiographer of the latter 
 kingdom would necessarily record a great deal of what occurred in 
 the kingdom of Israel. 
 
 Bleek does not favour the view that the Books of Kings were com- 
 viewsofBiee* P ose d fr m tne annals of the kings of Judah and Israel, 
 schrader, and written during their reigns. " To me it is very prob- 
 able," says he, " that what is cited under the titles of 
 The Chronicles of the Kings of Israel and of the Kings of Judah was 
 a larger work, which, for the most part, was not composed till a later 
 period, and written at once" ' This view has nothing in its favour, and 
 must be altogether rejected, as it is contradicted by the facts of the 
 case. Schrader,' while he supposes that the annals were used by 
 the composer of the Book of Kings in an edition not finished before 
 the death of Jehoiakim (2 Kings xxiv, 5), about B. C. 600, acknowl- 
 edges that '* it is very probable, if not certain, that a series of chap- 
 ters in them were written far earlier." 
 
 Dr. Davidson regards the work quoted by the author of Kings as 
 * made up, not long before the downfall of Judah, of materials and 
 monographs which had accumulated in the progress of time. It be- 
 gan before the commencement of the two kingdoms, and narrated 
 'Einleitung, p. 371. *In De Wette's Einleitung, p. 357.
 
 OF THE HOLY SCRIPTURES. 289 
 
 more or less fully the public acts of the kings and other leading per- 
 sonages. It was neither complete, nor alike valuable in all its parts. 
 Another source was oral tradition "* We have no reason to believe 
 that oral tradition was an element in the composition of the Books 
 of Kings. Are we to suppose that trustworthy traditions of events 
 unimportant, or even any tradition at all, existed centuries after the 
 events occurred? It is a convenient way to get rid of the super- 
 natural to suppose that all accounts of that nature have their origin 
 in traditional elements incorporated into real, sober history. 
 
 We, indeed, find in the Books of Kings events that are not of a 
 political character, but which belong to the theocracy, and accord- 
 ingly have a suitable place in the annals of the kings of Judah and 
 Israel; and we are, therefore, under no necessity of seeking outside 
 of these annals the sources of the history in the Books of Kings. 
 
 The author of the Books of Kings wrote, it would seem, or at least 
 finished his history, in the second half of the Babylo- probably writ- 
 
 nian captivity, as he states that Evil-merodach, king of te *P the seo- 
 
 ... ond half of the 
 
 Babylon, lifted up the head of Jehoiachin, king of Judah, Babylonian 
 
 out of prison, in the thirty-seventh year of his captivity, ca P tlYlt y- 
 treated him kindly, and supported him all his life (2 Kings xxv, 
 27-30). As no mention is made of the close of the captivity, it 
 cannot be doubted that that event had not yet occurred when the 
 author wrote. 
 
 It is impossible to say who was the author of the two Books of 
 Kings. Ancient Jewish tradition* attributed them to The author uu- 
 the prophet Jeremiah, which reference is followed by ^ovm. 
 most of the rabbies,- and many of the earlier Christian theologians, 
 and has been adopted by Havernick, but rejected by Bleek, Da- 
 vidson, and Keil. It is not, indeed, probable that Jeremiah was 
 alive when the incidents occurred which are recorded at the close 
 of the book, where it is stated that Jehoiachin was taken out of 
 prison at Babylon in the thirty-seventh year of his captivity, and 
 supported all his life by Evil-merodach (2 Kings xxv, 27-30), for at 
 this time Jeremiah would have been about ninety years of age. The 
 peculiar phraseology employed in the Books of Kings nowhere oc- 
 curs in Jeremiah. We, indeed, find that the history of the capture 
 of Jerusalem by Nebuchadnezzar (2 Kings xxiv, 18-20, xxv), is 
 nearly verbatim with that of Jer. lii. But this last chapter of Jere- 
 miah was not written by him, for at the close of chap, li it is added, 
 "Thus far are the words of Jeremiah." It was probably inserted 
 from the last book of 2 Kings. The author of these books doubt- 
 
 1 Introduction, vol. ii, p. 34. 
 
 *Baba Batra, 15 a, in Fiirst, Ueber den Kanon. p. n.
 
 290 INTRODUCTION TO THE STUDY 
 
 less belonged to the tribe of Judah. He was evidently a pious 
 man, and zealous for the worship of the true God, and probably en- 
 dowed with the prophetic spirit. 
 
 CREDIBILITY OF THE HISTORY IN THE BOOKS OF KINGS. 
 
 The history is distinguished for its fidelity and impartiality, which 
 are stamped on every page. Kings and the great men of Hebrew 
 history are weighed in the impartial balances of the divine law, 
 and justified or condemned according to their deeds. What but 
 the stern love of truth and justice could have induced the sacred 
 historian to describe the great crime of David and the apostasy 
 of Solomon, two of their mightiest monarchs ? 
 
 As the history was derived from contemporary annals, it rests 
 upon the surest basis of truth, and is acknowledged by skeptical 
 writers to be credible in a very high degree. " The genuine char- 
 acter of the books is well attested by internal evidence. . . . Though 
 the history is compendious and extract-like, it bears on its face the 
 stamp of fidelity." 1 
 
 A considerable number of the events recorded in these books re- 
 confirmation from monumental sources. The 
 
 oonflnnations 
 
 of the Books famous Moabite stone discovered at Dhiban, east of the 
 ancient monu- Jordan, in 1 868, by Rev. Mr. Klein, contains an inscrip- 
 ments. t j on j n Hebrew showing that it was erected about B. C. 
 
 900, by Mesha, king of Moab, in commemoration of his deliverance 
 from the Israelites. In 2 Sam. viii, 2 it is stated that David smote 
 Moab, and that the Moabites became his servants, and brought 
 gifts. How long this servitude lasted it is impossible to say, though 
 it is probable that it ceased immediately after the separation of the 
 ten tribes from Judah. It is certain that some time after this event 
 Moab came under the dominion of the kings of Israel, for it is stated 
 in 2 Kings i, i, "Then Moab rebelled against Israel after the death 
 of Ahab." We have also the further statement: "And Mesha king 
 of Moab was a sheepmaster, and rendered unto the king of Israel a 
 hundred thousand lambs, and a hundred thousand rams, with the 
 wool. But it came to pass, when Ahab was dead, that the king of 
 Moab rebelled against the king of Israel " (2 Kings iii, 4, 5). After 
 this statement we have an account of the attempt of Jehoram, king 
 of Israel, and successor to Ahab, to subdue Moab. For this pur- 
 pose he united with the king of Judah and the king of Edom. At 
 first the Moabites were defeated, and the king of Moab, in his distress, 
 offered his eldest son, who was to succeed him, as a burnt offering 
 open the wall. Upon this event the Israelites returned to their own 
 'Dr. Davidson, vol. ii, pp. 39, 40.
 
 OF THE HOLY SCRIPTURES. 291 
 
 land, and there was great indignation against them (2 Kings iii) 
 After this, it seems, the Moabites became independent. In com- 
 memoration of the deliverance of Moab, Mesha dedicated to the 
 god Chemosh the celebrated stone on which were inscribed his re- 
 markable achievements, of which we give the following : " I, Mesha, 
 am sor of Chemoshgad, king of Moab, the Dibonite. TnelngcrlptIOB 
 My father reigned over Moab thirty years, and I reigned on the Moabitc 
 ifter my father. And I erected this stone to Chemosh 
 it Korcha, [a stone of sajlvation, for he saved me from all despoilers, 
 and let me see my desire upon all my enemies. Now Om[r]i, king 
 of Israel, he oppressed Moab many days, for Chemosh was angry with 
 his l[a]nd. His son succeeded him, and he also said, I will oppress 
 Moab. In my days he said, [let us go], and I will see my desire on 
 him and his house, and Israel said, I shall destroy it forever. Now 
 Omri took the land Medeba, and [the enemy] occupied it [in his 
 days, and in] the days of his son, forty years. And Chemosh [had 
 mercy] on it in my days ; and I built Baal-meon, and made therein 
 the ditch, and I [built] Kirjathaim, for the men of Gad dwelt in 
 the land [Atar]oth from of old, and the k[ing of I]srael fortified 
 A[t]aroth, and I assaulted the wall and captured it." Mesha speaks 
 also of capturing Nebo : "And I took from it [the ves]sels of Jeho- 
 vah and offered them before Chemosh." 1 
 
 On this monument are found the following names, which also oc- 
 cur in the Hebrew Scriptures : Jehovah, Chemosh (the national god 
 of the Moabites), Mesha, Omri, Moab, Gad, Israel, Medeba, Ataroth, 
 Dibon, Baal-meon, Nebo, Jahaz, Beth-diblathaim, Aroer, Horonaim, 
 and Kirjathaim. 
 
 This shows a remarkable confirmation of the Scripture history, and 
 proves that the names we have in the Books of Kings have come down 
 to us in their integrity, and that they represent real persons and 
 places. 
 
 The monuments of Assyria, also, have furnished some remarka- 
 ble confirmations of the history in these books : " Sa- co^n^on, 
 maria is known to the Assyrians for some centuries from Assyrian 
 merely as Beth-Omri, ' the house ' or ' city of Omri ; ' monumento - 
 and even when they come into contact with Israelite monarchs of the 
 house which succeeded Omri's upon the throne, .hey still regard them 
 as descendants of the great chief, whom they view, perhaps, as the 
 founder of the kingdom. Thus the Assyrian records agree generally 
 with the Hebrew in the importance which they assign to this mon- 
 
 1 From the inscription on the Moabite Stone, as translated' and published by Chris- 
 tian D. Ginsburg, LL.D., London, 1871. Also Schlottmann and others have trans- 
 lated it.
 
 392 INTRODUCTION TO THE STUDY 
 
 arch, and especially confirm the fact (related in i Kings xvi, 24), 
 that he was the founder of the later Israelite metropolis, Samaria." 1 
 
 " Omri's son and successor, Ahab, is mentioned by name in an 
 Assyrian contemporary inscription, which, agreeably to the account 
 given in the First Book of Kings with respect to the place of his 
 ordinary residence (i Kings xviii, 46; xxi, i, 2), calls him 'Ahab 
 of Jezreel' . . . Among the confederate monarchs with whom he 
 leagued himself was the Damascene king, Benhadad, whom Script- 
 ore also makes Ahab's contemporary." 1 "The Assyrian monument 
 known as the ' Black Obelisk ' contains a notice of the Israelitish 
 monarch, Jehu, and another of the Syrian king who succeeded Ben- 
 hadad, Hazael." The reference to Jehu on the Assyrian monu- 
 ments is acknowledged by Schrader : " Tribute of Jehu, son of Omri. 
 The reference to Jehu, the successor of the rulers of the house of 
 Omri, is secured against all doubt by the simultaneous mention of 
 Hazael (in the cuneiform writing, Chaza'ilu) of Damascus." ' 
 
 In 2 Kings xv, 19 mention is made of the invasion of the land of 
 Mention of PUU Israel by "Pul, the king of Assyria." "Of this Pul," 
 king of Assyria, says Rawlinson, " the Assyrian records tell us nothing. 
 On the contrary, they in a certain sense exclude him, 
 since in the lists of the Assyrian monarchs who reigned about this 
 period . . . there is no mention of Pul, and no indication of any place 
 at which his reign can be inserted. ... In this silence of the Assyrian 
 annals with respect to Pul, we turn to the ancient historian of Meso- 
 potamia, Berosus, 4 and we find that we have not turned to him in 
 vain. Berosus mentioned Pul, and placed him exactly at this pe- 
 riod ; but he called him a ' Chaldean,' and not an ' Assyrian,' mon- 
 arch." 1 Rawlinson explains this by the fact that the king of the 
 great empire of western Asia at any time after the rise of the Assyr- 
 ian empire could be regarded as the " king of Assyria," as Nabopo- 
 lassar in 2 Kings xxiii, 29, and Darius Hystaspis in Ezra vi, 22. 
 
 In 2 Kings xv, 29 it is stated that " in the days of Pekah king of 
 Israel came Tiglath-pileser king of Assyria, and took Ijon, and 
 Abel-bethmaachnh, and Janoah, and Kedesh, and Hazor, and Gil- 
 ead, and Galilee, all the land of Naphtali, and carried them captive 
 to Assyria." Again, " And king Ahaz went to Damascus to meet 
 Tiglath-pileser, king of Assyria" (2 Kings xvi, 10). Here the history 
 of the monarchs of Israel and Judah touches the Assyrian history, and 
 finds abundant confirmation from the Assyrian monuments. " Tig- 
 
 1 Hist. Illus. Old Test., Rawlinson and Hackett, pp. 121, 122. 
 Ibid., pp. 122, 123. *De Wette Schrader, p. 320. 
 
 * He was born in the time of Alexander the Great. 
 *Hist. Illus Old Test., pp. 131, 132.
 
 OF THE HOLY SCRIPTURES. 293 
 
 lath-pileser relates, that about his fifth year (B. C. 741), being en- 
 gaged in wars in Southern Syria, he met and defeated a vast army 
 under the command of Azariah, king of Judah, the great monarch 
 whose host is reckoned in Chronicles at 307,500 men, and whose 
 military measures are described at considerable length (2 Chron. 
 xxvi, 6-15). Again, he relates that from his twelfth to his fourteenth 
 year (B. C. 734-732) he carried on a war in the same regions with 
 the two kings, Pekah of Samaria and Rezin of Damascus, who w'ere 
 confederate together, and that he besieged Rezin in his capital for 
 two years, at the end of which time he captured him and put him to 
 death, while he punished Pekah by mulcting him of a large portion of 
 hia dominions, and carrying off vast numbers of his subjects into cap- 
 tivity. It is scarcely necessary to point out how completely this ac- 
 count harmonizes with the scriptural narrative, according to which 
 Pekah and Rezin, having formed an alliance against Ahaz, and hav- 
 ing attacked him, Ahaz called in the aid of Tiglath-pileser, king of 
 Assyria, who ' hearkened to him, and . . . went up against Damascus, 
 and took it, and carried the people captive to Kir, and slew Rezin ' 
 (2 Kings xvi, 9); and who likewise punished Pekah by invading his 
 territory and carrying away the Reubenites, the Gadites, and half 
 the tribe of Manasseh (2 Kings xv, 29 ; i Chron. v, 6, 26), and settling 
 them in Gozan in the Khabour. Farther, Tiglath-pileser relates, 
 that before quitting Syria he held his court at Damascus, and there 
 received submission and tribute from the neighbouring sovereigns, 
 among whom he expressly mentions not only Pekah, of Samaria, but 
 " Yahu-Khazi (i. e., Ahaz), king of Judah." ' This illustrates the ac- 
 count bf Ahaz's visit to Damascus " to meet Tiglath-pileser " (2 Kings 
 xvi, 10). " The annals of Tiglath-pileser contain also some mention 
 of the two Israelite monarchs, Menahem and Hoshea." 
 
 " The capture of Samaria, and the deportation of its people by the 
 Assyrians, which terminated the reign of Hoshea, and Capture of Sa- 
 at the same time brought the kingdom of Israel to an ^an^S 
 end, is noticed in the annals of Sargon, who was Shal- sargon. 
 maneser's successor, and assigned by him to his first year, which was 
 B. C 722,721. Here, it will be observed, there is an exact accord be- 
 tween the Assyrian and Hebrew dates, the Hebrew chronology plac- 
 ing the fall of Samaria in the one hundred and thirty-fifth year before 
 the capture of Jerusalem by Nebuchadnezzar, which was in the eight- 
 eenth year of that king, or B. C. 586 (and B. C. 586-1-135 producing 
 B. C. 721). Again, Sargon relates that he carried away captive from 
 Samaria 27,280 persons; and he subsequently states that he trans- 
 ported numerous prisoners from Babylonia to a place ' in the land of 
 'Hist. Illus. Old Test., pp. 134, 135.
 
 294 INTRODUCTION TO THE STUDY 
 
 the Hittites,' which is probably Samaria, though the inscription is 
 not at this point quite legible (compare 2 Kings xvii, 24)." ' 
 
 In 2 Kings xviii, 7, 13-16 it is stated that Hezekiah, king of Judah, 
 rebelled against the king of Assyria, and served him not, and that in 
 the fourteenth year of Hezekiah, Sennacherib, king of Assyria, came 
 up "against all the fenced cities of Judah and took them." Heze- 
 kiah appeased Sennacherib by agreeing to pay him whatever he 
 might demand. Sennacherib appointed him to pay " three hundred 
 talents of silver and thirty talents of gold. And Hezekiah gave him 
 all the silver that was found in the house of the Lord, and in the 
 treasures of the king's house. At that time did Hezekiah cut off 
 the gold from the doors of the temple of the Lord, and from the 
 pillars which Hezekiah king of Judah had overlaid, and gave it to 
 the king of Assyria." " The annals of Sennacherib, son and suc- 
 Hezettah men- cessor of Sargon," says Rawlinson, " contain a full ac- 
 count f this campaign. 'Because Hezekiah, king of 
 
 osen- 
 nachertb. Judah,' says Sennacherib, ' would not submit to my 
 
 yoke, I came up against him, and by force of arms and by the might 
 of my power / took forty-six of his strong fenced cities, and of the 
 smaller towns which were scattered about I took and plundered a 
 countless number. And from these places I captured and carried 
 off as spoil 200,150 people, old and young, male and female, to- 
 gether with horses and mares, asses and camels, oxen and sheep, a 
 countless multitude. And Hezekiah himself I shut up in Jerusa- 
 lem like a bird in a cage, building towers round the city to hem 
 him in, and raising banks of earth against the gates to prevent 
 escape. . . . Then upon this Hezekiah there fell the fear of the 
 power of my arms, and he sent out to me the chiefs and the elders 
 of Jerusalem, with thirty talents of gold and eight hundred talents 
 of silver, and divers treasures, a rich and immense booty. . . . All 
 these things were brought to me at Nineveh, the seat of my govern- 
 ment, Hezekiah having sent them by way of tribute, and as a token 
 of submission to my power." The close agreement of these two ac- 
 counts is admitted on all hands, and is, indeed, so palpable that it 
 is needless to enlarge upon it here. The Assyrian monarch, with 
 pardonable pride, brings out fully all the details. . . . His main facts 
 are exactly those which the Jewish historian puts on record, the only 
 apparent discrepancy being in the number of the talents of silver, 
 where he probably counts the whole of the treasure carried off, 
 while the Hebrew writer intends to give the amount of the perma- 
 nent tribute which was agreed upon."" 
 
 After Hezekiah had paid tribute to Sennacherib, the Assyrian 
 1 Hist. Illus. Old Test., p. 138. f Ibid., pp. 142, 143.
 
 OF THE HOLY SCRIPTURES. 295 
 
 king sent a great force against Jerusalem, and a message to Hez- 
 ekiah. "And it came to pass that night, that the angel of the 
 Lord went out, and smote in the camp of the Assyrians a hundred 
 fourscore and five thousand : and when they arose early in the 
 morning, behold, they were all dead corpses " (2 Kings xix, 35). It 
 was also prophesied : " Behold, I will send a blast upon him," etc. 
 (chap, xix, 7). 
 
 Respecting this disaster, " the annals of Assyria are silent. Such 
 
 silence is in no way surprising. It has always been the 
 
 ' . Silence of As- 
 
 practice in the East to commemorate only the glories syrian annals 
 
 of the monarch, and to ignore his reverses and defeats, ^gtracuon 'ol 
 The Jewish records furnish a solitary exception to this Sennacherib's 
 practice. In the entire range of the Assyrian annals army< 
 there is no case where a monarch admits a disaster, or even a check, 
 to have happened to himself or his generals ; and the only way in 
 which we become distinctly aware from the annals themselves that 
 Assyrian history was not an unbroken series of victories and con- 
 quests, is from an occasional reference to a defeat or loss as sustained 
 by a former monarch." ' But in the account of Egypt by Herodotus 
 there seems to be a reference to the miraculous defeat of Sennach- 
 erib. In speaking of Sethon, a priest of Hephaestus, who made 
 himself king of Egypt, he remarks that he had offended the soldiers ; 
 and when Sennacherib, king of the Arabians and the Assyrians, 
 marched a great army against Egypt, Sethon in his distress, as the 
 soldiers would not aid him, resorted to the temple, where the god 
 appeared to him in a dream, and assured him he would suffer no 
 injury by going out to meet Sennacherib's army. He accordingly 
 set out for Pelusium with a force consisting only of traders, artisans, 
 and hucksters. When he had reached the place where Sennacherib's 
 army had encamped, the field-mice, during the night, had poured 
 forth like a stream over the army of the Assyrians, and had eaten up 
 their quivers, their bows, and the straps of their shields, so that on 
 the next day, being deprived of their arms, they fled, and many 
 of them perished. And now this king, in stone, stands in the temple 
 of Hephaestus, having a mouse in his hand, with the following inscrip- 
 tion : " WHOEVER BEHOLDS ME, LET HIM REVERENCE THE GODS " 
 (book ii, 141). In Egyptian mythology, the mouse seems to have 
 been the symbol of the silent destructive workings of divine Providence. 
 In 2 Kings xx, 12 mention is made of Merodach-Baladan, king 
 of Babylon. His name "appears in the Assyrian in- Merodach-Bai- 
 scriptions, and also in the famous document known as ^ n 
 the Canon of Ptolemy.' " In i Kings xiv, 25, 26 it is tions. 
 1 Hist. Illus. Old Test., p. 144.
 
 296 INTRODUCTION TO THE STUDY 
 
 stated, that " it came to pass, in the fifth year of King Rehoboara 
 that Shishak king of Egypt came up against Jerusalem : and he 
 took away the treasures of the house of the Lord, and the treasures 
 of the king's house he even took away all : and he took away all 
 the shields of gold which Solomon had made." Of this expedition 
 there is a notice "contained in an inscription erected by Shishak 
 (Sheshonk) at Karnak, which has been most carefully studied by 
 modern scholars, and may be regarded as having completely yielded 
 up its contents. This document is a list of countries, cities, and 
 tribes conquered in his great expedition by Shishak, and regarded 
 by him as tributaries. It contains not only a distinct mention of 
 4 Judah,' as a ' kingdom ' which Shishak had subjugated, but also a 
 long list of Palestinian towns." 1 
 
 Josephus states, that according to the Phoenician records, " the 
 temple in Jerusalem was built by King Solomon one hundred and 
 forty-three years and eight months before the Tynans founded 
 Carthage."* He also quotes the testimony of Dius, who wrote 
 of Phoenician affairs, that " when Solomon was king of Jerusalem 
 he sent riddles to King Hiram." 
 
 Respecting the Babylonian captivity Josephus quotes the testi- 
 mony of the Chaldean historian, Berosus, born in the time of Alexan- 
 der the Great, that Nabopolassar sent his son Nebuchadnezzar with 
 a great force when he had learned that the Jews had revolted, and 
 mastered them, and burnt the temple which was in Jerusalem, and 
 carried away all the people captive to Babylon ; and that the city 
 (of Jerusalem) was desolate for seventy years, until the time of Cyrus 
 the king of the Persians.' 
 
 Lynx-eyed, skeptical criticism can find but few contradictions in 
 the Books of Kings. In i Kings ix, 22 it is stated, that "of the 
 children of Israel did Solomon make no bondmen." But this docs 
 not contradict what is said in i Kings v, 13, 14: "And King Solo- 
 mon raised a levy out of all Israel ; and the levy was thirty thousand 
 men. And he sent them to Lebanon, ten thousand a month, by 
 courses ; " for this was but a brief service, somewhat like drafting 
 men into the army, or compelling them to work a certain number 
 of days on the public highways, as is often done, even in republican 
 governments. Nor is there any force in the indirect contradictions 
 sometimes alleged, nor have we space to pursue them. 
 
 'Hut lUas-Old. Test, p. 118. Against Apion, lib. i, 17. Ibid., 19.
 
 OF THE HOLY SCRIPTURES. 
 
 CHAPTER XXXVI. 
 
 THE BOOKS OF CHRONICLES. 
 
 HP HE two Books of Chronicles, called in Hebrew D'D'n n:n, dibhrl 
 hayyamlm, daily affairs, journal of affairs, originally made one 
 book. 1 In the Septuagint they are called TTapateindpeva, things omitted, 
 or supplemental. They are placed at the end of the Hebrew Bible, 
 but as the events related in them generally belong to the same age as 
 the Books of Kings, they appropriately follow those books, as in the 
 English version. 9 
 
 The first nine chapters contain the genealogies of the ancient 
 world as found in Genesis, beginning with Adam, and also those 
 of the Israelites in the times subsequent to the history in the Penta- 
 teuch, ending in the royal line with the sons of Elioenai (chapter 
 iii, 24), who lived after the return of the Jews from Babylon. In- 
 terspersed with these genealogies are historical incidents, and an 
 account of the temple service in Jerusalem. 
 
 The second division of the books begins with the death of Saul 
 and the accession of David to the kingdom of Israel, and ends 
 with the death of Solomon (i Chron. x-xxix; 2 Chron. i-ix). The 
 third division begins with the reign of Rehoboam, the successor 
 of Solomon, and embraces the history of the kingdom of Judah only, 
 and reaches to the proclamation of Cyrus for the rebuilding of the 
 temple in Jerusalem (2 Chron. x-xxxvi). 
 
 THE DATE OF THEIR COMPOSITION AND THEIR AUTHORSHIP. 
 
 As the history in these books ends with the proclamation of Cyrus 
 for the rebuilding of Jerusalem (2 Chron. xxxvi, 22, 23), ProbaWjwrit . 
 about B. C. 536, the books could not have been composed ten in the time 
 before that monarch's reign. The use of the Persian 
 word p'3Tix, adharkon, a daric, in i Chron. xxix, 7, shows that the 
 work could not have been composed before about B. C. 500, as darics 
 are said to have been first introduced by Darius about that time. 
 
 ! Origen (in Euseb., Hist. Eccles., vi, 25) speaks of Chronicles as making one book 
 in Hebrew. Jerome calls them the seventh book in the Hagiographa. Preface to 
 Samuel and Kings. 
 
 " Also in the Septuagint, Peshito-Syriac, and Vulgate.
 
 298 INTRODUCTION TO THE STUDY 
 
 Nor is it likely, if the books had been written in the Greek period 
 after Alexander the Great, that the word darics would have occurred 
 in it at all, especially as, according to Smith's Dictionary of Antiqui- 
 ties, "after the Persian conquest they were melted down and recoined 
 under the type of Alexander." 
 
 It has been thought by some that the genealogies in i Chron. iii, 
 19-24, reach down to the time of Alexander the Great, or even later; ' 
 but this view is destitute of any good foundation, for the list goes no 
 further than the sons of Hananiah, the son of Zerubbabel ; and there 
 is no proof that the subsequent names in the list were descendants 
 of the previous ones, but they are, rather, parallel genealogies. But 
 we are not compelled to rest on negative proof only, for we have 
 some of the persons whose names occur in the last part of the list 
 also in Ezra, who speaks of them as having gone up with him in the 
 reign of Artaxerxes. He mentions Hattush, one of the descendants 
 of David ; the sons of Shechaniah, and Elihoenai." Accordingly, 
 the genealogies in Chronicles do not come down later than the time 
 of Ezra, for Zerubbabel went up to Jerusalem in the beginning of the 
 reign of Cyrus, B. C. 536, and the grandchildren of Zerubbabel, men- 
 tioned in i Chron. iii, 19-21, would be the contemporaries of Ezra, 
 who went up to Jerusalem in the seventh year of Artaxerxes, about 
 B. C. 457 (Ezra vii, 6, 7). 
 
 There is nothing in these Books of Chronicles belonging to an age 
 later than that of Ezra, and this is a probable proof that they were 
 composed in his time. 
 
 Respecting the author of the books, Fiirst remarks that tradition 
 Ezra probably says that Ezra composed the first nine chapters ; and 
 the author. jf ne ^id tn j s> j t was f or an introduction to his Ezra- 
 Nehemiah ; that, respecting the written sources of the second part 
 (i Chron. x-xxix, 2 Chron. i-xxxvi), tradition is silent.* But if Ezra 
 wrote the first nine chapters, it is very probable that he wrote the 
 other part of Chronicles. 
 
 Some very able biblical critics regard Ezra as the author of the 
 Chronicles ; as Eichhorn, Havernick, Keil, Fttrst/ etc. And this 
 seems to us the best view. It is true, if Chronicles, Ezra, and Nehe- 
 miah were all written by one author, we should be compelled to 
 deny that Ezra was that author. But Nehemiah is plainly to be 
 separated from Ezra, as we shall see in the sequel. There is good 
 
 ' Dr. Zunz thinks that the Chronicles were composed about 260 B. C. Gottesdienst 
 Vortrage, p. 33. 
 
 * Ezra viii. 1-4. In I Chron. iii, 24 the last man whose sons are named is Eli 
 oenai, without the h. Ueber den Kanon, pp. 120, 122. 
 
 4 In his Geschich. Bib. Lit., voL ii, pp. 537, 538.
 
 OF THE HOLY SCRIPTURES. 298 
 
 reason for believing that Ezra wrote the book that bears his name ; 
 and the Chronicles and that book are closely connected, and share 
 the same spirit, and use the same style of language. 
 
 The last two verses of Chronicles are the same as the beginning of 
 Ezra, referring to the decree of Cyrus respecting the building of the 
 temple in Jerusalem. " The great affinity in language," says Keil, 
 " the frequent references made to the law in similar formulas ; the 
 predilection for extended descriptions of the proceedings at acts of 
 worship, along with the temple music and the songs of praise by the 
 Levites, in standing liturgical formulas; also the predilection for gene- 
 alogies and public registers all which are common to the two works 
 elevate this probability of common authorship into a certainty." ' 
 
 As examples of words common to both Chronicles and Ezra, may be 
 mentioned ~n'33, a cup, which occurs three times in Chronicles, and the 
 same number of times in Ezra ; nowhere else in this Examples of 
 sense, nzhs, a division of the Levites, is found twice in to r chrcmtei" a 
 Chronicles and once in Ezra; nowhere else in the Bible. and Ezra " 
 The peculiar phrase, combining three prepositions, piniD 1 ?"^, unto 
 
 afar off, is found only in 2 Chron. xxvi, 15, and in Ezra iii, 13. The 
 Hithpael form of 2"U, mjnn, to give willingly, to offer spontaneously 
 gifts to Jehovah, occurs in this sense only in i Chron. xxix, 5, 6, 9, 
 14, 17, and in Ezra i, 6, ii, 68, and iii, 5. Elsewhere the Hithpael 
 conjugation is used only in Judges v, 2, 9, 2 Chron. xvii, 16, in the 
 sense to volunteer for military service, and in Nehemiah xi, 2, in the 
 sense to offer themselves to dwell. The Hophal infinitive, iDin, in 
 the sense foundation (from no'), occurs only in 2 Chron. iii, 3, and in 
 Ezra iii, n. jyi'-n 1 ? nn 1 ? ton, to set one's heart to seek, is found in 
 
 I T I ' - 
 
 2 Chron. xii, 14, xix, 3, xxx, 19, and in Ezra vii, 10. The phrase 
 op: nioty:), expressed by name, based on Num. i, 17, is elsewhere found 
 
 only in i Chron. xii, 31, xvi, 41, 2 Chron. xxviii, 15, xxxi, 19, and 
 in Ezra viii, 20. There are other usages of language common to 
 Chronicles and to Ezra, but the examples given are the most strik- 
 ing, and of themselves furnish a highly probable proof of the identity 
 of authorship of these books. 
 
 There is no good reason for supposing that Chronicles and Ezra 
 originally formed one book ; for, in that case, we would not have the 
 same statement in the conclusion of Chronicles and in the beginning 
 of Ezra. The language of Chronicles, though coloured with Chaldee 
 bears no marks of being later than that of Ezra or Nehemiah. In 
 fact, the Chaldaisms, pi, time, and tthv, to rule, found in Ecclesiastes, 
 
 'Introduction, Clark's Pub., vol. ii, pp. 77, 78. 
 20
 
 300 INTRODUCTION TO THE STUDY 
 
 Nehemiah, and Esther, are wanting in Chronicles. The full method 
 of writing David, Tn, occurs in Ezra (chaps, iii, 10, viii, 20) as well 
 as in Chronicles, and furnishes no proof of the lateness of the book. 
 This full form is found even in the prophets Amos (chaps, vi, 5, 
 ix, u) and Hosea (chap, iii, 5). 
 
 THE PURPOSE OF THE AUTHOR. 
 
 As the Books of Samuel and those of Kings were already writ- 
 ten, the question arises, For what purpose did the author of Chron- 
 icles, whom we suppose to be Ezra, write ? to which the answer 
 must be given from the examination of the books themselves. 
 First of all, he intended to give the genealogies of the Israelites, 
 which were but partially found in the other books of the Hebrew 
 people ; and then to give a connected history from the death of 
 Saul to the proclamation of Cyrus for the rebuilding of the temple 
 in Jerusalem, limiting himself, after the separation of the ten tribes, 
 to the house of Judah, omitting much that was found in Samuel 
 and Kings, and interweaving new matter, especially in reference to 
 the armies of David, and the service of the priests and Levites in 
 the temple. 
 
 THE SOURCES OF THE HISTORY. 
 
 The author of Chronicles refers to various works treating of the 
 principal portions of the history over which his books extend, and 
 which he doubtless used in the composition of his own work. 
 
 The sources first named occur in i Chron. xxix, 29 : " Now the 
 acts of David the king, the first and last, behold, they are written in 
 the Book of Samuel the seer, and in the Book of Nathan the prophet, 
 and in the Book of Gad the seer." The word here rendered " book " 
 is properly " affairs " (o'-anV and it is very probable that our pres- 
 ent Books of Samuel are included in the reference, as they appear 
 to be original sources. Mention is also made of the Prophecy of 
 Ahijah the Shilonite, and the Visions of Iddo the seer, in addition 
 to the Book of Nathan the prophet, as sources for the history of 
 Solomon (2 Chron. ix, 29). Other sources for the history of other 
 kings are, the Book of Shemaiah the prophet, the Book of Iddo the 
 seer concerning genealogies (2 Chron. xii, 15), the Commentary of 
 the Prophet Iddo (2 Chron. xiii, 22), the Book of the Kings of Judah 
 and Ist-ael (2 Chron. xvi, 1 1 ; xxv, 26 ; xxviii, 26 ; xxxii, 32) ; the same 
 work or works referred to, as the Book of the Kings of Israel and 
 Judah (a Chron. xxvii, 7 ; xxxv, 27 ; xxxvi, 8) ; the Book of the 
 Kings of Israel (2 Chron. xx, 34; xxxiii, 18); the Commentary of 
 the Book of the Kings (2 Chron. xxiv, 27). Reference is also made
 
 OF THE HOLY SCRIPTURES. 301 
 
 to Isaiah the prophet (2 Chron. xxvi, 22) ; and to the vision of Isaiah 
 the prophet (chap, xxxii, 32). 
 
 There can be no reasonable doubt that the Books of the Kings of 
 Judah and Israel are the annals of those kingdoms which are referred 
 to in these books as the sources of the history. The Commentary 
 mentioned was, no doubt, the same as the annals of the kingdoms. 
 
 The question here arises, How far did the author of Chronicles 
 make use of our Books of Kings ? This question is not The Books of 
 
 easily answered ; for where the language is the same in Samuel and 
 
 . . Kings used by 
 
 Chronicles as that in Kings, the former may not be a quo- the compiler of 
 
 tation, but in both works the phraseology may have been 
 derived from a common source. It is evident that with the original 
 sources of the history of the kingdoms of Judah and Israel lying be- 
 fore the author of the Chronicles, there would be but little need of 
 using our Books of Kings, which, for the most part, are mere epit- 
 omes of the history. But in the arrangement of the materials, he 
 may, to a certain extent, have taken them as models. 
 
 Keil's opinion is, that " in the historical narratives which are com- 
 mon to the Chronicles and the Books of Samuel and Oplnlons of 
 Kings these canonical books cannot have been em- Keii, Bieek, 
 ployed. For in the parallel passages the Chronicles and 
 furnish a multitude of historical statements for which we seek in 
 vain in those books ; and they also differ often and in many ways 
 from the parallel accounts as regards the arrangement and succes- 
 sive order of the individual points of importance, and also follow 
 thoroughly a course of their own, both as to what they communicate 
 and as to what they pass over." ' 
 
 "We cannot doubt," says Bleek, 9 "that the author derived the 
 materials of his work, at least by far the greatest part, from written 
 sources from older historical works. In regard to the relation of the 
 Chronicles to our other Old Testament books, especially Samuel and 
 Kings, considering the age of the author of Chronicles, there can be 
 no doubt that he was acquainted with these books as writings pos- 
 sessing public authority, as elements of a canonical collection of 
 holy Scriptures; and we can presuppose as certain that he made 
 use of them for his work. It is in the highest degree probable that 
 he has once expressly cited the Books of Samuel, as nin bsiotf '13T. 
 
 T T I | 
 
 the affairs of Samuel the seer (i Chron. xxix, 29). The comparison 
 of the books themselves does not allow us to doubt that the author 
 really made use of those books, and that they were for him in many 
 things the chief source in his history of the kings." 
 
 1 Introd., voL ii, p. 63. In Clark's For. Theol. Libr. 'Einl., pp. 396, 397.
 
 802 INTRODUCTION TO THE STUDY 
 
 De Wette thus expresses his opinion: "That the accounts which 
 run parallel with those in the Books of Samuel and Kings were taken 
 from them the following considerations favour : The natural connex- 
 ion in which the earlier accounts stand with such as the Chronicles 
 have omitted ; . . . the originality of those accounts in comparison 
 with these in the Chronicles ; the certainty that the writer of Chron- 
 icles must have known the earlier books." To which Schrader 
 adds, as the special reason, " that the author of Chronicles has 
 incorporated into his work such sections as were written by the 
 author of the Books of Kings." 1 The first section which Schrader 
 gives in Chronicles as having been written by the author of the 
 Books :>f Kings is Solomon's prayer at the dedication of the tem- 
 ple (i Kings viii, 12-53; 2 Chron. vi). But are we to suppose that 
 Solomon's prayer was made up by the author of the Books of Kings ? 
 Is it not more reasonable to suppose that it was written down by 
 some one at the time it was delivered ? It is clear that the author 
 of Kings, in his history of Solomon, followed an original document, 
 for he says : " And the rest of the acts of Solomon, and all that he 
 did, and his wisdom, are they not written in the Book of the Acts 
 of Solomon ? " (i Kings xi, 41.) It is true, the writing to which ref- 
 erence is here made may have perished before the composition of the 
 Books of Chronicles, so that the author of this work took the prayer 
 of Solomon from the Book of Kings. The other instances of quota- 
 tion cited by Schrader have in them, sometimes, passages not found 
 in the Books of Kings, so that it is evident that the author had other 
 written sources to which he refers. The most reasonable of all the- 
 ories is, that the author of Chronicles used the Books of Samuel and 
 Kings, in addition to various other written sources. 
 
 CREDIBILITY OF THE HISTORY IN THE BOOKS OF CHRONICLES. 
 
 The principal portion of the history in Chronicles is the same as 
 that contained in the Books of Kings, and, accordingly, has all the 
 claims to be considered genuine history which belong to the nar- 
 ratives in the earlier books. And where the author of Chronicles 
 gives additional matter he refers us to the original sources whence 
 he evidently drew his information. 
 
 " The Chronicles," says Bleek, " in our century, have been the 
 t>epredationef subject of various investigations and lively disputes, 
 
 Jj mostly in respect to their relation to the other books of 
 modern Bkapti- the Old Testament (Samuel and Kings), and their his- 
 torical credibility."* Especially did De Wette attack 
 these books in 1806, and subsequently endeavoured to show, against 
 
 1 De Wette Schrader, p. 379. * Einleitung, p. 393.
 
 UF THE HOLY SCRIPTURES. 303 
 
 Eichhorn, that their author had no other early written sources ex- 
 cept Samuel and Kings, which he did not use faithfully or skil- 
 fully ; that he partly misunderstood them, and partly altered them 
 in an arbitrary manner, and made additions in the interest of the 
 priests and Levites. Against him, in 1819, wrote Dahler, to whom 
 Gramberg, a few years later, wrote a reply, denying all credibility to 
 the Books of Chronicles. On the other hand, the books have been 
 defended vigourously by Movers, Keil, Havernick, and others. De 
 Wette, in the fifth and sixth editions of his Introduction, softened and 
 modified his earlier views. 
 
 Schrader remarks that the author of Chronicles " did not use ex- 
 clusively our canonical Books of Samuel and Kings in Schrader er- 
 the composition of his history. This is evident from the amllied - 
 character of a great part of the accounts, peculiar to himself, which 
 are given by the author. The different sources quoted in these 
 Books of Chronicles lead to the same result." ' He also remarks : 
 " From a comparison of the parallel sections in Chronicles and in 
 the Books of Samuel and Kings two things follow : on the one hand, 
 that the author of Chronicles executed his work in accordance with 
 his sources, and in many instances adhered closely to the letter 
 of those sources; but, on the other hand, that he judged at the 
 same time that an elaboration, to a certain extent more free, and upon 
 the basis of the views of his own age, would not be unsuitable. 
 The same may be presumed for those sections and remarks which 
 assume a more independent position towards the parallel sections in 
 the other historical books. And a more close investigation thor- 
 oughly confirms this supposition. Among sections of the latter kind 
 we meet with such as excite just suspicion respecting their entire 
 credibility, and their having been derived from authentic sources : 
 partly, on account of their Levitical tendency ; partly, on account of 
 the improbability of their contents ; and, finally, on account of their 
 contradiction to the older, and, on this ground, generally more cred- 
 ible, accounts of the other books of the Old Testament. But we 
 likewise find, on the other hand, such as carry in their very face the 
 stamp of their being thoroughly historical, and are to be referred 
 either to a good memory or to old sources. The Chronicles are not, 
 therefore, to be at once rejected as an historical source. How far 
 their statements are to be taken as credible must, in every instance, 
 be separately investigated." 5 Such, then, is the present skeptical 
 view respecting these books. Negative criticism has a dogmatic in- 
 terest in reducing the historical credibility of the Chronicles to the 
 lowest point. De Wette confesses this when he says : "As the entire 
 'In De Wette's Einleitung, p. 380. "Ibid., pp. 375, 376.
 
 304 INTRODUCTION TO THE STUDY 
 
 Jewish history, on its most interesting and important side, namely, 
 that of religion and the manner of observing the worship of God, after 
 the accounts in the Chronicles have been put out of the way, . . . assumes 
 quite a different shape ; so, also, the investigations about the Pen- 
 tateuch take quite a different turn all at once; a multitude of trouble- 
 some proofs, difficult to put out of the way, that the Mosaic books wet t 
 in existence at an earlier time, vanish," etc.* 
 
 On the historical character of the Chronicles Dr. Davidson rc- 
 DfcTiuaon's ad- mar ks : " The general credibility of the writer's commu- 
 mission of the nications may be safely asserted. In many cases they 
 bimyorchron- can be confirmed by independent testimony. Thus the 
 
 victory of Asa over the Ethiopians, under Zerah [omit- 
 ted in Kings], is described in a manner accordant with the historical 
 relations of ancient Egypt. The Ethiopians marched from Egypt, 
 and thither they went back. Accordingly, it may be inferred that 
 this Ethiopian king possessed Egypt, and, therefore, that his territory 
 extended nearly to the borders of Palestine. Herodotus relates that 
 several of the Egyptian kings were Ethiopians. The successive and 
 minute details in the narrative are such as bear the stamp of his- 
 torical truth, not of fiction. . . . 
 
 "The invasion of Jerusalem by the Philistines and Arabians in 
 the reign of Jehoram (2 Chron. xxi, 16-19) [not mentioned in Kings] 
 is confirmed by Joel (chap, iii, 4-6). . . . 
 
 " The wars of Uzziah and Ahaz against the Philistines, as de- 
 scribed in 2 Chron. xxvi, 6, and xxviii, 18, agree with Isaiah xiv, 28. 
 etc., and Amos vi, 2." . . . Dr. Davidson, however, adds: "Yet it 
 must not be concealed that there are serious suspicions against his 
 accuracy in all places." ' 
 
 Bleek thinks that the statements of the Chronicles are sometimes 
 inexact, and remarks : " Where a comparison of the more ancient 
 canonical books, especially Samuel and Kings, is at our command, 
 we are bound to lay these at the foundation in forming our judg- 
 ment, and not to depart from them. But we are not at all justified 
 in regarding all things which the Chronicles contain, beyond what is 
 in these books, as unhistorical, or purely arbitrary changes or en- 
 largements, but we must consider them as having been derived by 
 the author of Chronicles from other old sources ; for the most part 
 from the same which were used for the Books of Samuel, and espe- 
 cially for those of Kings." ' 
 
 We have no good reason for questioning the fidelity of the author 
 of the Chronicles in any instance. He had before him the original 
 
 'In Kelt's Introduction, vol. ii, pp. 61, 82. 
 
 1 Ibid., pp. 105, 106. ' Einleitung, p. 400.
 
 OF THE HOLY SCRIPTURES. 305 
 
 documents for the history he narrates, nor can we see that he has 
 not fairly used them. We see no indications that he has magnified 
 the office of the priests. It was natural that the author, who was in 
 all probability a priest (Ezra), should interweave in his history- 
 some account of his professional brethren. How could one, writing 
 in the interests of the priests, use the following language : " For the 
 Levites were more upright in heart to sanctify themselves than the 
 priests " (2 Chron. xxix, 34) ? 
 
 The author of Chronicles has been charged with hatred towards 
 the kingdom of Israel. But this nowhere appears. The author ot 
 When Pekah, king of the ten tribes, slew a hundred Chronicles not 
 and twenty thousand men of Judah, and carried away a P arttaa11 ' 
 two hundred thousand captives, women, sons, and daughters, then 
 certain of the heads of the children of Ephraim refused to receive 
 the captives, but took them, " and with the spoil clothed all that 
 were naked among them, and arrayed them, and shod them, and 
 gave them to eat and to drink, and anointed them, and carried all 
 the feeble of them upon asses, and brought them to Jericho ... to 
 their brethren " (2 Chron. xxviii, 6-15). Could such a statement 
 respecting the treatment which the captive Jews received from the 
 ten tribes, especially from the Ephraimites, have sprung from hate ? 
 The numbers in the Books of Chronicles sometimes bear the marks 
 of exaggeration, and occasionally, also, are at variance ^j^vfxtiuiA 
 with those in Samuel and Kings. In other instances, numbers ID 
 however, the numbers in Chronicles are the smaller. 
 The book has, doubtless, suffered greatly from the errors of tran- 
 scribers, as there is always a great liability to mistake in copying 
 numbers ; and, when the error is once committed, it is continued in 
 each copy, as there is no check upon numbers. An error in the 
 spelling of a word is corrected from a previous knowledge of its or- 
 thography. A mistake in writing a word is often corrected from 
 the context. If we were sure that in the most ancient manuscripts 
 numerals were designated by letters the opinion of some ' the er-\ 
 rors in numbers could in some cases be easily explained. For beth \ 
 
 '(3), two, might be readily mistaken for kaph (2), twenty; and daleth. ) 
 (-\),four, for resh ("), two hundred. 
 
 ^ There are about thirty-five or forty statements in the Chronicles 
 
 1 Among others Dr. Davidson holds this view. But in Gesenius' Hebrew Gram- 
 mar, by Roediger, it is remarked : " This numeral use did not, according to the ex- 
 isting MSS., take place in the O. T. text, and is found first on coins of the Macca- 
 bees (middle of 2d cent. B. C.)." Prof. Conant's Trans., p. 17. But it must be ob- 
 erved that the oldest of the Hebrew MSS. are not more than a thousand years old, 
 and furnish no proof respecting the custom a thousand years before.
 
 306 INTRODUCTION TO THE STUDY 
 
 respecting either the age of the kings of Judah when they began to 
 reign, or the years of their respective reigns, and in every case, ex- 
 cept that of Ahaziah and Jehoiachin, the numbers correspond with 
 those in the Book of Kings. If the numbers in the primitive docu- 
 ments used by the author of Chronicles were exaggerated, he is not 
 responsible for it. But it is not at all probable that the most exces- 
 sive of these numbers were in the original text of Chronicles. For 
 how is it possible that the author of Chronicles could have supposed 
 that Asa's army was five hundred and eighty thousand (of Judah and 
 Benjamin) (2 Chron. xiv, 8), and that of Jehoshaphat, thirty or forty 
 years later, one million one hundred and sixty thousand, and that 
 forty or fifty years afterwards, when Amaziah numbered the forces, 
 the whole number of warriors in Judah and Benjamin was three hun- 
 dred thousand, and then shortly afterwards three hundred and seven 
 thousand five hundred, when there was no cause to make the increase 
 or diminution ? We cannot attribute such stupidity as this to th_ 
 author. A corruption of the original text in the excessive numbers 
 is the most reasonable explanation. 
 
 CHAPTER XXXVII. 
 
 THE BOOK OF EZRA. 
 
 'PHIS book is written partly in Hebrew and partly in Chaldee. 
 * The Chaldee portions are chaps, iv, 8-vi, 18 ; vii, 12-26 ; this last 
 part being the decree of Artaxerxes in favour of Ezra. The book is 
 so named on account of Ezra's being the principal character in it, 
 and perhaps also from his being its reputed author. It is separated 
 from the Book of Nehemiah not only in the modern editions of the 
 Hebrew Bible, but also in the Septuagint, the Peshito-Syriac, and 
 the Vulgate. 1 In the time of Origen* and Jerome,' Ezra and Ne- 
 hemiah formed one book. Although both Ezra and Nehemiah treat 
 or tne return of the Jews from the Babylonian captivity, there is no 
 good reason for uniting them together as if they were the product 
 of the same author, for Nehemiah is naturally separated from Ezra 
 by the very language with which it begins : " The words of Nehe- 
 miah, the son of Hachaliah." The second chapter of Ezra contains 
 
 1 In the Vulgate Nehemiah is also called the Second Book of Ezra. 
 In Eusebius, Hist Eccl., book vi, chap. 25. 
 
 * in preface to Samuel and Kings, Jerome, however, states hat Ezra was divided 
 Into two books [Ezra and Nehemiah] among the Greeks and Latins.
 
 OF THE HOLY bCRIPTURES. 307 
 
 a long list (seventy verses) of those who went up with Zerubbabel 
 from Babylon to Jerusalem, and a statement of their beasts of burden 
 and the contributions made for the building of the temple. This 
 list is given with but little variation in Nehemiah vii, 6-70. If Ezra 
 and Nehemiah were the work of a single author, or of a later editor, 
 who compiled the whole from existing documents (Ezra-Nehemiah), 
 what could have induced him to give this long list twice, and that v 
 too, with variations ? 
 
 The Book of Ezra naturally divides itself into two parts. The 
 first contains an account of those who went up to Jerusalem from 
 Babylon with Zerubbabel, in the beginning of Cyrus's reign, and the 
 rebuilding and the dedication of the house of God (chaps, i-vi). 
 The second division gives an account of the going up to Jerusalem 
 of Ezra and his companions in the seventh year of Artaxerxes, and 
 their acts after their arrival (chaps, vii-x). 
 
 THE UNITY OF THE BOOK AND ITS AUTHOR. 
 
 Skeptical critics, who, as far as possible, resolve the books of the 
 Old Testament into separate and independent documents, apply 
 the dissecting knife to Ezra. Thus Schrader attributes to Ezra that 
 portion of the book beginning with chap, vii, 27, and ending with 
 chap, ix, 15, in which Ezra speaks in the first person ; to Ezra he 
 also attributes the Chaldee document (chap, vii, 12-26). But chaps, 
 vii, i-n ; x, in which the third person is used, he thinks, did not, in 
 their present form, proceed from Ezra himself, but were composed upon 
 the basis of Ezra's notes by a later writer who, he supposes, wrote 
 the Book of Chronicles, and to whom he attributes also chaps, i, iii, 
 iv, 1-7, 24; vi, 14, 16-18, 19-22.' Respecting chaps, vii-x Bleek* 
 remarks : " The second part is in general, without doubt, composed 
 by Ezra himself, who, for the most part, speaks of himself in the first 
 person (chaps, vii, 27~ix). But even where he uses the third person, 
 as in the entire tenth chapter, and in the beginning of The objection* 
 this division (chap, vii, i-n), it can in no way be in- Jj, tto "J^SJ 
 ferred with any degree of certainty that Ezra himself did unity or Ezra 
 not write this part ; but rather, as chapter tenth stands consldered - 
 in close connexion with what precedes, there is the greatest proba- 
 bility that it was written by the same author. Likewise, it cannot be 
 well supposed that Ezra began his narrative with chap, vii, 27, and 
 it is also very probable that he would not have commenced it im- 
 mediately with the letter of Artaxerxes (chap, vii, 12-26) ; rather, he 
 would have prefixed to it an introduction, as we read in chap, vii, 
 t-io). Only it may be well supposed that it was retouched by a later 
 1 Einleitung, pp. 386, 388. * Ibid., pp. 384, 385.
 
 308 INTRODUCTION TO THE STUDY 
 
 hand." Accordingly, he does not think the statement respecting 
 Ezra, " he was a scribe skilled 'in the law of Moses," really proceeded 
 from him, nor Ezra's genealogy (chap, vii, 1-5). But why, Ezra 
 could not say that he was skilled in the law of Moses, and write his 
 own genealogy, is not easy to see. 
 
 We entirely agree with Bleek in the foregoing remarks, excepting 
 what he says about the retouching of this part of Ezra. It is, indeed, 
 utterly improbable that the book should have originally ended with 
 chapter ninth, containing the prayer of Ezra for those who had taken 
 strange wives, and should have given no account of the effect of that 
 prayer how that the Israelites assembled and solemnly pledged 
 themselves to put their strange wives away. 
 
 Since chaps, vii-x must be conceded to have been written by Ezra, 
 it remains to consider the first part (chaps, i-vi). As Ezra did not 
 go up to Jerusalem till the seventh year of Artaxerxes (about B. C. 
 458), he had no share in the transactions recorded in the first part 
 of the book, ending with the dedication of the temple in the sixth 
 year of Darius (B. C. 515), and the celebration of the passover 
 soon after (chap, vi, 15-22). Now, first of all, it must be observed 
 that the beginning of the second part of Ezra, opening with these 
 words, " Now, after these things, in the reign of Artaxerxes," natu- 
 rally refers to a preceding part. As he wrote an account of the sec- 
 ond company of exiles who returned to Jerusalem, it was quite 
 natural that he should write a sketch of the preceding company 
 that returned thither. When Nehemiah went up to Jerusalem he 
 found a list of those who first went up to the city, and incorporated 
 it into his book (Neh. vii, 5-73) ; this same list is found in Ezra ii. 
 Doubtless there was also a list of the vessels and other articles to be 
 used in the temple. There also existed the decree of Cyrus in favour 
 of the Jews, the letter of their enemies to Artaxerxes, and his com- 
 mand to cease building the temple, and the decree of Darius for its 
 rebuilding. These documents furnished Ezra with material for the 
 first part of his history. There may have been other written me- 
 morials ; besides, Ezra could have learned some things from old men 
 who, in their youth, had been eye-witnesses of the transactions de- 
 scribed. That the existing documents and memorials would be 
 combined into an historical form in the time of Ezra, rather than a 
 hundred years later if, indeed, they had any separate existence that 
 late is very probable. The history in the first part of Ezra is con- 
 secutive, and well connected with the second part. 
 
 But if Ezra did not write the first part of the book more than one 
 half of it why should a later writer have composed it and prefixed 
 it to Ezra's writing, and not rather have called it Zerubbabel, or by
 
 OF THE HOLY SCRIPTURES. 309 
 
 some other name? It could not be on account of its containing 
 but six chapters, since some of the minor prophets contain but two 
 or three chapters, and one of them has but a single chapter. Bleek 
 himself acknowledges "that the narrative has an altogether good 
 connexion and natural course, from the proclamation of Cyrus to the 
 exiles to return to their home, to the impediments which the adver- 
 saries of the Jews threw in the way of the rebuilding of the temple " 
 that is, from Cyrus to Darius Hystaspis. It is in the fourth chapter 
 that Bleek finds difficulties which he cannot solve on the hypothesis 
 that it was written by Ezra, or any one in that age. In chap, iv, 5-8, 
 it is stated that the people of the land " hired counsellors against 
 them (the Jews), to frustrate their purpose, all the days of Cyrus, 
 king of Persia, even until the reign of Darius, king of Persia. And 
 in the reign of Ahasuerus, in the beginning of his reign, wrote they 
 unto him an accusation against the inhabitants of Judah and Jerusa- 
 lem. And in the days of Artaxerxes, wrote Bishlam, Mithredath, 
 Tabeel, and the rest of their companions, unto Artaxerxes, king of 
 Persia. Rehum, the chancellor, and Shimshai, the scribe, wrote a 
 letter against Jerusalem to Artaxerxes, the king." After this the 
 letter to Artaxerxes is given, in which they speak against the build- 
 ing of the city of Jerusalem, and in reply Artaxerxes forbids the 
 building, whereupon the enemies of the Jews caused them to cease 
 from their work. It is added : " Then ceased the work of the 
 house of God which is at Jerusalem. So it ceased unto the second 
 year of Darius, king of Persia " (chap, iv, 24). 
 
 As there is no mention made of building the temple in the letter 
 to Artaxerxes and in his reply, but only of the building and fortify- 
 ing of Jerusalem, Bleek thinks that? the writer has made a mistake, 
 and referred difficulties in the way of the rebuilding of Jerusalem in 
 the times of Xerxes (B. C. 485-465), and in those of Artaxerxes Lon- 
 gimanus (B. C. 465-425), to the building of the temple which had 
 already been finished a considerable length of time. 1 In reply to 
 this, it must be remarked, that in the decree of Artaxerxes (Ezra iv, 
 19-22) there is no mention of the building of the walls of Jerusalem; 
 the language of the decree is as follows : " Give ye now command- 
 ment to these men [the Jews] to cease, and that this city be not 
 builded, until another commandment shall be given from me." It is 
 the city that he decrees shall not be rebuilt. How could Artaxerxes 
 Longimanus have decreed that Jerusalem should not be rebuilt, 
 when the temple had been rebuilt and dedicated fifty years before 
 he began to reign? If the Jews had been allowed to rebuild their 
 temple of course it was implied that they could build dwelling. 
 1 Einleitung, pp. 386, 387.
 
 310 INTRODUCTION TO THE STUDY 
 
 houses also, as a necessary accompaniment. It is not to be sup- 
 posed that they lived in Jerusalem a half century or more with- 
 out dwellings ; for, according to 2 Kings xxv, 8, 9, when Nebuchad- 
 nezzar captured Jerusalem, Nebuzar-adan, his captain, "burnt all 
 the houses of Jerusalem." The language of decrees is required to 
 be definite. If the temple of Jerusalem and its houses had been 
 rebuilt, the decree of Artaxerxes would have named walls specific- 
 ally. The decree of Artaxerxes was in answer to the letter of the 
 enemies of the Jews, who declared that the Jews are " building the 
 rebellious and the bad city, and have set up the walls thereof, and 
 joined the foundations." "We certify the king that, if this city be 
 builded again, and the walls thereof set up," etc. This language 
 implies that the Jews had but recently commenced the work, and it 
 is not appropriate to the times of Artaxerxes Longimanus. The 
 decree forbidding the building of the city, of course, forbade also 
 the construction of the temple. 
 
 Keil ' supposes that Ezra iv, 6-23 refers to the hostile attempts 
 Eeii's rapport- of the adversaries of the Jews under Xerxes and in the 
 *** first years of Artaxerxes Longimanus, and that it respects 
 
 " the building up of the city and its walls," agreeing in this respect 
 with Bleek. But the context, in addition to what we have already 
 said, refutes this view; for immediately after the decree of Arta- 
 xerxes it is added, that the adversaries of the Jews " made them to 
 cease by force and power. Then ceased the work of the house of 
 God, which is at Jerusalem. So it ceased unto the second year of 
 the reign of Darius, king of Persia " (chap, iv, 23, 24). It is difficult 
 to see how the decree of Artaxerxes, in virtue of which the work on 
 the temple ceased, was issued more than fifty years after the begin- 
 ning of the reign of Darius ! 
 
 When Nehemiah obtained from Artaxerxes Longimanus, in the 
 twentieth year of his reign, permission to go up to Jerusalem, and 
 to take a letter from him to the keeper of the king's forest, that he 
 might obtain timber for the wall of the city and for other purposes, 
 no objection was made, nor allusion to any decree by this king 
 forbidding the building of the wall, and that in a narrative giving 
 many particulars (Neh. ii). Between Cyrus and Darius but two 
 monarchs are known to history Cambyses and Smerdis who must 
 be the Persian kings during whose reign the building of the temple 
 was frustrated (Ezra iv, 5-7). The first of these is calle d Ahasuerus : 
 on which name Gesenius remarks, in reference to the present pas- 
 sage : " The order of time would require it to be understood of 
 Cambyses " (Heb. Lex.). In Daniel ix, i, Darius the Mede is called 
 1 Introduction, vol. ii, p. 102.
 
 OF THE HOLY SCRIPTURES. , 311 
 
 the son of Ahasuerus, where, according to Gesenius, Ahastierus 
 stands for Astyages. It is evident, then, that the name cannot be 
 restricted to the famous Xerxes. According to Gesenius the name 
 is the same as the modern Persian, lion king. Artaxerxes (chap, iv 
 7, etc.) is defined by Gesenius to be in this chapter Pseudo-Smerdis, 
 who not improbably took the name of Artaxerxes on his accession. 
 According to Gesenius, Artaxerxes means mighty king, and this title 
 could be easily applied to the kings of Persia, whom the Greeks 
 called the great kings. 
 
 There is no difficulty, then, in attributing the whole book to 
 Ezia, and there is nothing in it belonging to a later age. The change oi 
 It is no objection to its unity that Ezra begins the 
 sketch of himself in the third person (chap, vii, i-n), its unity, 
 and then in the first (chap, vii, 27~ix), and then changes to the third 
 (chap. x). An examination of the nature of the matter in each case 
 either justifies or requires this change. This change of person oc- 
 curs in other biblical writers. In the Book of Daniel, the unity of 
 which is acknowledged by the most skeptical, in the first part (chaps 
 i-vii, 14) Daniel speaks in the third person of himself, in the rest 
 of the book (chaps, vii, i5~xii) in the first person. We find Isaiah 
 speaking of himself in the first person in chap, vi of his prophecy, 
 but in the very next chapter he says : " Then said the Lord unto 
 Isaiah." Amos, in the beginning of the yth chapter of his prophecy 
 speaks of himself in the first person, but he changes it to the third 
 in the i2th and i4th verses: "Amaziah said unto Amos.". . . "Then 
 answered Amos." Any difference of style in the book is easily ex- 
 plained from its being partly made up of decrees, where, of course, 
 the phraseology is naturally different from Ezra's. 
 
 That the " kings of Persia " have this designation in Ezra is to 
 Schrader 1 a proof that the book in its present form is not older 
 than the time of Alexander the Great, as it presupposes that the 
 Persian empire had already fallen. According to this Ezra would 
 never himself have written, " Cyrus king of Persia," or " Darius king 
 of Persia," but simply " Cyrus the king," " Darius the king." But 
 the Book of Ezra uses both of these formulae. Isaiah, in the begin- 
 ning of his prophecy, speaks of having seen his vision " in the days 
 of Uzziah, Jotham, Ahaz, and Hezekiah, kings of Judah." Micah 
 tells us that the word of the Lord came to him " in the days of 
 Jotham, Ahaz, and Hezekiah, kings of Judah." Had the kingdom 
 of J udah already perished when they wrote ? Would it be improper 
 for a Canadian or an Irishman to write : Victoria, Queen of England ? 
 or even for a citizen of the United States to write: R. B. Hayes, 
 1 In De Wette's Eioleitung, pp. 391, 392.
 
 813 INTRODUCTION TO THE STUDY 
 
 President of the United States ? The Jews had been accustomed to 
 have kings of their own, and it was natural for them, while in subjec- 
 tion to foreign rulers, to name the country over which they ruled. 
 
 According to the Talmudists, 1 Ezra wrote the book that bears his 
 came, and this is the judgment of such critics as Havernick and 
 Keil, and we have already seen that it has everything in its favour. 
 
 CHAPTER XXXVIII. 
 
 THE BOOK OF NEHEMIAH. 
 
 '"PHIS book, so called from Nehemiah's being its chief character as 
 * well as its author, stands separate from the Book of Ezra in 
 the modern editions of the Hebrew Bible, in the Septuagint, in the 
 Peshito-Syriac, and in the Vulgate. 2 Unlike Ezra, it is written 
 wholly in Hebrew. 
 
 In the twentieth year of Artaxerxes Longimanus, Nehemiah, his 
 cupbearer, is deeply afflicted by the intelligence he has received of 
 the distressed condition of his countrymen in Judah, and obtains per- 
 mission from the king to visit Jerusalem and to rebuild it. After 
 this the book gives an account of the building of the wall of Jeru- 
 salem under his administration ; a list of those who went up to the 
 holy city with Zerubbabel ; an account of the solemn and important 
 religious services held there, and of the covenant made by the peo- 
 ple; a list of the chief men dwelling in Jerusalem, and of others 
 dwelling in Judah and Benjamin. This is followed by a list of the 
 priests and Levites who went up with Zerubbabel, and of the arrange- 
 ments made at the dedication of the wall. The book closes with a 
 statement respecting the correction of abuses by Nehemiah. 
 
 THE UNITY OF THE BOOK AND ITS AUTHOR. 
 The different parts of this book are well connected, and in the 
 Tbe parts of most f ^ ^ e connexion is very close, so that there is 
 the boot closely no room for the supposition that it is the work of more 
 than one author. In the first half (chaps, i-vii, 5) Ne- 
 hemiah speaks of himself in the first person, to which must be added, 
 as undoubtedly his, the list of those who went up to Jerusalem and 
 Judah at first, which carries us to the end of chapter vii. In chap- 
 
 1 Fiirst, Ueber den Kanon, p. 116. 
 
 'In the Latin Vulgate it is called both the Book of Nehemiah and Setond Book 
 tf Etra.
 
 OF THE HOLY SCRIPTURES. 313 
 
 ter viii Nehemiah retires, as it were, into the background, and Ezra 
 the priest comes into view ; his brethren, the Levites, take a promi- 
 nent part in the religious services, and the following chapter (ix) is 
 occupied with the prayer of certain Levites. In these two chapters 
 the name of Nehemiah occurs but once, and then in the third person. 
 There was no place for him in the performances. In the beginning 
 t f chapter x his name appears in the third person, first in the list 
 of those who were sealed. But in this very chapter, standing in close 
 connexion with what precedes, the first person plural is used in 
 such a way as to identify the writer with them. Take as an exam- 
 ple : " And we cast the lots among the priests," etc. ; " And that we 
 should bring the first fruits," etc. In chapter xi is an enumeration 
 of those who dwelt in Jerusalem and in other cities, in which there is 
 no place for the mention of Nehemiah, and accordingly his name is 
 not found. 
 
 In the first part of chap, xii is a list of priests who went up to Je- 
 rusalem with Zerubbabel. In the other portion the writer speaks of 
 himself in the first person, and so he does in the concluding chap- 
 ter. It is evident, then, that Nehemiah wrote at least The authorship 
 three fourths of the book, and the middle of it is the jj^jj 1 ^ 
 only part (with the exception of a few verses) that is doubtful, 
 denied to be his. As the very beginning of the book asserts its au- 
 thor to be Nehemiah (" The words of Nehemiah the son of Hacha- 
 liah"), which is confirmed by his writing for the most part in the first 
 person, none but the weightiest reasons should induce us to think 
 that about one fourth of the whole is an interpolation, and that in 
 the middle. 
 
 De Wette attributes to Nehemiah the first eight chapters. Schra- 
 der, then, taking up the subject, asserts that chaps, viii-x, 40, are an 
 interpolation, made by the author of the Books of Chronicles upon 
 the basis of contemporary notes; chap, xi, 3-36, Schrader thinks 
 may have been written by Nehemiah at least, that it belongs to his 
 time; chap, xii, 1-26, he thinks cannot be Nehemiah's, but that it 
 is quoted from annals referred to in verse 23; chap, xii, 27-42, he 
 concedes to Nehemiah ; chaps, xii, 43-xiii, 3, he supposes to have 
 been written by the author of Chronicles. The remainder of the 
 book (chap, xiii, 4-31) he attributes to Nehemiah. 1 This is, in- 
 deed, a fine specimen of critical dissection ! Bleek regards Nehe- 
 miah as the author of the first seven chapters, and of the last three, 
 with the exception of chap, xii, 1-26, which, in its present form 
 could not have been written by Nehemiah ; he denies also chap, 
 xii, 47, to be Nehemiah's. He supposes that originally the last three 
 1 In De Wette's Einleitung, pp. 389, 390.
 
 314 INTRODUCTION TO THE STUDY 
 
 chapters were joined to the first seven the work of NehemiaL and 
 
 that the three middle chapters were interpolated by a later hand. 1 
 
 Dr. Davidson's views are about the same * as those of Schrader. 
 
 Respecting the three chapters (viii, ix, x), which some deny to be 
 
 Nehemiah's, it must first of all be observed that such 
 
 me authorship an interpolation in the middle of a book is unnatural. 
 
 of Nehemih A verse or two might be written on the margin, and af- 
 oomudered. . , . 
 
 terwards incorporated into the text, but not whole 
 
 chapters. Large additions may be made to an original work as 
 a continuation. And, indeed, it is not likely that any one would 
 take the liberty of interpolating so largely the work of their re- 
 spected governor. But why should we suppose that the incidents 
 recorded in the three middle chapters formed no part of the genuine 
 narrative of Nehemiah ? They stand in close connexion with what 
 precedes. In chapter vii, 73, it is stated : " When the seventh month 
 came, the children of Israel were in their cities." In the very first part 
 of the next chapter (viii) Ezra reads the law of Moses to the assem- 
 bled crowd in Jerusalem on " the first day of the seventh month." In 
 the same chapter (viii, 14-18) it is stated that the Israelites dwelt " in 
 booths in the feast of the seventh month," beginning on the fifteenth 
 (Lev. xxiii, 39). And in the beginning of the next chapter (ix) it 
 is stated that the Israelites held a fast on the twenty-fourth " day of 
 this month " (the seventh), and the prayer offered on the occasion is 
 given. The end of this prayer is closely connected with the follow- 
 ing chapter (x). And in this chapter (x) the writer uses the first 
 person plural in such a way as to show that he was a participator in 
 the events. Now Nehemiah appears to have had a part in the 
 transactions narrated (viii, 9 ; x, i). The reading of the law of 
 Moses before the assembled crowd of Israelites after the wall of 
 Jerusalem had been rebuilt, and the grand celebration of the feast 
 of tabernacles, the solemn fast, and the covenant which the people 
 made to serve God (and Nehemiah appears among the covenanters), 
 would not have been omitted by him in the circumstantial narrative 
 of the events in the earliest part of his administration. 
 
 The minute particulars given in these three middle chapters 
 rhethreechaiv (viii-x) show that they were written down by an eye 
 wlitun byan witness. Even Schrader admits that they were com- 
 eye-witne. posed on the basis of notes made at the time. Tne 
 long prayer (chap, ix, 5-38) offered by eight Levites on the sol- 
 emn fast day was in all probability prepared for the great occa- 
 sion most likely written down and committed to memory. For, if 
 it had been extemporaneous, how could eight Levites (verse 5) have 
 1 Einleitung, pp. 382-384. 'Introduction, vol. ii, pp. 137-150.
 
 OF THE HOLY SCRIPTURES. 315 
 
 prayed it at once ? In its original form it was incorporated by Ne- 
 hemiah into his book, and thus has all the freshness and peculiari- 
 ties of the original author, and it would be absurd to look into it for 
 the style of Nehemiah. If it contained Nehemiah's peculiarities, 
 that would be fatal to its claim of being thoroughly genuine. 
 
 Further, there are certain linguistic peculiarities found both in the 
 middle section and in the undisputed part of the book. D'TIN, no- 
 bles, occurs as "their nobles," both in chap, iii, 5, and in chap, x, 29; 
 elsewhere but ten times in the Hebrew Bible, though the singular 
 
 form is used fifteen times. The word occurs nowhere in Ezra. 13ip, 
 
 ..." '^ 
 a dedicatory gift, occurs in this form in Nehemiah x, 35 and xiii, 31, 
 
 in the phrase " an offering of wood," and nowhere else in the Hebrew 
 Bible. Now, this is certainly very remarkable, and seems of itself 
 sufficient to establish the unity of authorship of these two parts of 
 the book, and hence the unity of the whole book. JBJD, appointed, 
 occurs in Neh. x, 35 and xiii, 31, and nowhere else, except Ezra x, 14. 
 
 Respecting chapter xii, 1-16 it is to be observed that the incor- 
 poration of such a list into the book by Nehemiah is al- The list in chap- 
 together appropriate, as its object was to give the names terx11 - 
 of the Levites who participated in the dedication of the wall of Je- 
 rusalem, of which we have an account in chapter xii, 27-47. Lists 
 are found in other parts of his work. In chapter vii. 5 Nehemiah 
 speaks of finding " a register of the genealogy of them which came 
 up at the first," which he gives (chap, vii, 6-73). In chap, xii, n 
 it is stated that " Joiada begat Jonathan, and Jonathan begat Jad- 
 dua." It has been alleged that this Jaddua is the same as the high 
 priest Jaddus, mentioned by Josephus (Antiq., xi, 8, 4, 5) as a con- 
 temporary with Alexander the Great (B. C. 332). Jaddus is the fifth 
 in descent from Joshua (Neh. xii, 10, n), who went up to Jerusalem 
 with Zerubbabel (Ezra ii, 2 ; Neh. xii, i) B. C. 536. The Jaddus 
 in Nehemiah might have lived as early as B. C. 400. In Nehemiah 
 xiii, 28, mention is made of a son of Joiada, who had married a 
 daughter of Sanballat. He, accordingly, was a brother of Jonathan, 
 the father of Jaddua, who might have been mentioned by Nehemiah, 
 and might have been erroneously made, by Josephus, a contemporary 
 of Alexander the Great. But it is best to regard the passage that 
 jpeaks of Jaddua as an interpolation his name at least. Jaddua is 
 also mentioned in chapter xii, 22 ; and it is stated that the priests 
 were recorded " to the reign of Darius the Persian," that is, either 
 Darius Nothus (B. C. 425-404) or Codomannus (B. C. 336-330). 
 
 It is not improbable that this passage is an interpolation, written 
 at first on the margin, and afterwards incorporated into the text- 
 21
 
 316 INTRODUCTION TO THE STUDY 
 
 Those who can think that whole chapters were at a late period 
 inserted in the book should have no difficulty in believing that 
 a few verses were added to the original text, giving some facts be- 
 longing to a later age. In chapter xii, 26 mention is made of 
 "the days of Nehemiah . . . and Ezra," and in verse 47 of the days 
 of Zerubbabel and Nehemiah. But these words could have been 
 written by Nehemiah after he had retired from the governorship 
 if not before, as they refer to \\\i> political life. When we find nearly 
 the whole of a work bearing internal evidence of having been written 
 in a certain age by a certain author, and at the same time discover 
 a few passages belonging to a later age, we, without hesitancy, con- 
 sider them to be interpolations. 
 
 The Book of Nehemiah bears every mark of having been written 
 by one who lived in the very midst of the events, which are described 
 with a particularity and vividness rarely found. 
 
 CHARACTER OF THE HISTORY IN BOOKS OF EZRA AND NEHEMIAH. 
 
 The historical character of these books is above all suspicion, 
 me Historical According to Ezra vi, 15, the house of God in Jerusalem 
 thT^ookfl un- was finished i n the sixth year of the reign of Darius, 
 doubted. This corresponds well with what we find in Zechariah 
 
 and Haggai ; for, according to the former, the foundations of the 
 temple were already laid in the second year of Darius' reign, but the 
 edifice was not yet finished (chapter iv, 9), though considerable 
 progress had been made at that time (Haggai ii, 3). Ezra, and the 
 prophets Haggai and Zechariah, his contemporaries, confirm each 
 other in other matters respecting Jewish affairs in their age. Nehe- 
 miah is praised by Jesus the son of Sirach (not later than about 
 B. C 200) for rebuilding the walls of Jerusalem and its houses 
 (chap, xlix, 13). 
 
 CHAPTER XXXIX. 
 
 THE BOOK OF ESTHER. 
 
 '"PHIS book takes its name from the Jewish maid called originally 
 * riDin, Hadhassah, but Esther ' after she became the wife of Ahas- 
 uerus (chap, ii, 7), as she is the principal character in the book. 
 
 1 Esther is the same as the Persian sitareh (star of good fortune) ; Zend., ttara ; 
 Greek, terftp; Latin, asttr; English, star. In Syriac, the star Venus. " This name, 
 therefore, was particularly appropriate to the character and circumstances of Es- 
 ther." Gesenius, Heb. Lex.
 
 OF THE HOLY SCRIPTURES. 317 
 
 The book relates that Ahasuerus, who reigned from India to Ethi- 
 opia, made a great feast in Shushan, the palace, and that when he 
 was merry with wine he ordered the queen Vashti to be brought 
 in, that he might show her beauty to his guests. Vashti, refus- 
 ing to comply with his request, is deposed from being queen, and 
 Esther (a Jewess, the cousin and adopted daughter of Mordecai) 
 is chosen in her stead. Haman, the king's prime minister, taking 
 UTnbrage at the want of respect shown him by Mordecai, obtains 
 the king's decree for the slaughter of all the Jews in the king- 
 dom. Esther obtains a counter decree. Mordecai is advanced to 
 the highest place of honour, and Haman is hung. The Jews slaughter 
 their enemies, and introduce the feast of Purim in commemoration 
 of their deliverance. The book closes with a description of the 
 greatness, of Ahasuerus. 
 
 CREDIBILITY OF THE HISTORY. 
 
 Serious doubts have been expressed, at different times, by scholars 
 of the credibility of the history contained in this book. Among 
 these may be named Semler, Oeder, Corrodi, Michaelis, Bertholdt, 
 De Wette, Gramberg, Vatke, Ewald, Bleek, and Davidson. It has 
 been defended by Eichhorn (not fully, however), Jahn, Rosenmiiller, 
 Baumgarten, Havernick, Keil, and others. The modern Jews hold 
 the book in high esteem, and Maimonides expresses the opinion 
 {hat in the days of the Messiah the prophets and the Hagiographa 
 will be done away, with the exception of the Book of Esther, which 
 is as endurable as the Torah and the oral law. The Jerusalem 
 Talmud says that eighty-five elders, among whom more than thir- 
 ty were prophets, ridiculed the introduction of the Purim festival, 
 through Esther and Mordecai, as an innovation against the law. 1 
 Julius Ftirst* shows that objections were made at an early period, 
 according to the Talmud, to inserting the Book of Esther in the 
 Canon. It appears, therefore, that the book did not stand very 
 high with the ancient Jews. But we are not aware that they ever 
 called in question the credibility of its history. 
 
 The book is not found in the catalogue of Melito,* bishop of Sardis, 
 in the second half of the second century. It is found in Not found in 
 the catalogue of Origen, 4 and in that of Jerome,' though J? ai l J l SfS! 
 omitted in a few of the catalogues of the earlier centu- tament canon, 
 ries. In modern times, Martin Luther * especially expressed his 
 
 1 Bleek, Einleitung, p. 405. Ueber den Kanon, pp. 106, 107. 
 
 'In Euseb., Hist. Eccl., book iv, 26. *Ibid., book iv, p. 25. 
 
 * Preface to Books of Samuel and Kings. * In Bleek's Einleitung, p. 406.
 
 818 INTRODUCTION TO THE STUDY 
 
 dislike of the Book of Esther, declaring that he wished that neithei 
 she nor her book had ever existed. Josephus, 1 in his Antiquities, gives 
 a very full account of Esther's history, drawn mainly from our present 
 book, and he remarks that " all the Jews who are in the world keep 
 these days (i4th and ith Adar) as festive, and send gifts to each 
 other." The festival is also referred to in 2 Maccabees xv, 36, as 
 "the day of Mordecai." 
 
 This book, in its Greek version, has additions and interpolations. 
 Mordecai's dream is prefixed to it; at the end twenty lines are 
 added. In the third chapter is inserted the decree of Ahasuerus, 
 and additional matter in chapters iv, v, and viii. The additions to 
 the Hebrew text are added at the end of the book in the Vulgate. 
 It is evident that they formed no part of it in the original Hebrew ; 
 for the Peshito-Syriac version, made from the Hebrew in the second 
 century of the Christian era, has none of them. 
 
 It is remarkable that the name of God nowhere occurs in the 
 me name of book, although there were several occasions on which it 
 6<xi nowhere might have been used. Mention is made of fasting 
 (chap, iv, 3, 16), and the sleeplessness of the king, which 
 leads him to have the records searched, and thus Mordecai is raised 
 to power (chap, vi, i-n). The writer must have recognized the 
 providence of God in this. But why did he refrain from using God's 
 name ? Riehm supposes that it was intentionally omitted, to guard 
 against its profanation at the Purim feast, as the author intended 
 the book to be read during those joyful festivities* (chap, ix, 22). 
 This seems to us quite probable ; at least, we know of no better rea- 
 son for the omission. 
 
 Various opinions have been held respecting the Ahasuerus of this 
 Abasuerus the book. The Septuagint and Josephus suppose him to be 
 abiy X or profane Artaxerxes, but the almost universal opinion among the 
 history. moderns is that Xerxes is intended. Accordingly, the 
 
 question arises whether the events related in Esther harmonize with 
 the known history of Xerxes. 
 
 In the second year of his reign Xerxes subdued the Egyptians who 
 had revolted, and in the fifth year of his reign he started on his ex- 
 pedition for the conquest of Greece, from which he returned within 
 the year. In Esther i, 3, 4, we find that Ahasuerus (Xerxes) made a 
 feast i* the /AfVv/year of his reign, that is, soon after his return from 
 Egypt, and before he started for Greece. In the tenth month of 
 the seventh year of his reign Esther is taken in to Ahasuerus in his 
 house royal (chap, ii, 16), that is, after his return from Greece. 
 Here there is nothing inconsistent with the history of XerxeA It is 
 1 Chap, xi, 6, 1-13. * In Bleek's Einleitung, p. 407.
 
 OF THE HOLY SCRIPTURES. 319 
 
 net surprising that the author of the book passes over events which 
 had no necessary connexion with his subject. According to Herod- 
 otus, (vii, 8), after Xerxes had subdued Egypt, in the second year of 
 his reign, he gathered together the Persian nobles, to consult them 
 about the expedition into Greece. This must have been in the 
 third year, and it explains the feast which lasted one hundred and 
 sighty days (chap, i, 4). 
 
 A difficulty meets us at the very threshold respecting the wives 
 of Xerxes. According to Herodotus (vii, 61 ; ix, 109) Amestris 
 was the wife of Xerxes, and from what he says in vii, 114 she evi- 
 dently outlived him. It is possible that this may be Vashti, the de- 
 posed queen, whose place Esther took ; or Vashti may have held 
 the position of a " secondary wife," or, at a later period, may have 
 been restored to the favour of Xerxes. We know too little about the 
 private relations of Xerxes to pronounce any positive judgment upon 
 the subject. 
 
 In giving the genealogy of Mordecai it is said that he was " the 
 son of Jair, the son of Shimei, the son of Kish, a Benjamite, who 
 had been carried away from Jerusalem with the captivity which had 
 been carried away with Jechoniah, king of Judah, whom Nebuchad- 
 nezzar, king of Babylon, had carried away " (chap, ii, 5, 6). It is 
 probable that Kish (from whom Mordecai was the fourth in descent) 
 was carried away captive from Judah by Nebuchadnezzar about a 
 hundred years before the reign of Xerxes, and for this reason the 
 author traces back the genealogy of Mordecai no farther than to him. 
 Certainly there is no necessity of inferring from the passage that 
 Mordecai himself was carried away in this captivity. 
 
 Bleek's first objection to the credibility of the history is the im-\. 
 possibility of supposing that a Persian despot, even if Bleek's objec-1 
 induced through a favourite to extirpate all the Jews, tlons to the ' 
 
 or 
 would publish the decree everywhere twelve months be- Esther. 
 
 forehand, and not merely secretly for the governors, but for the 
 people themselves. But may it not have been Haman's intention, 
 by giving notice so long beforehand of the intended slaughter, 
 that the Jews should abandon their property and fly for their lives ? 
 That this is not stated in the account, which is very circumstantial, 
 is no ground of objection, as the motives of actors in the world's 
 history are generally concealed. Even if the author of the Book of 
 Esther knew the real motive of Haman, which is not probable, ye: 
 he might have omitted to state it. There is no good reason for sup- 
 posing that the edict against the Jews applied to those in Judea, for 
 they are spoken of as " scattered abroad and dispersed among th 
 people " (chap, iii, 8).
 
 820 INTRODUCTION TO THE STUDY 
 
 Also the circumstance that the king should not revoke the blood; 
 edict, but give the Jews liberty to defend themselves, and that this could 
 have resulted in the slaughter of seventy-five thousand men, subjects 
 of the king, Bleek regards as incredible. Unnatural, too, he thinks it 
 to be that the king should, to gratify Esther, issue another edict allow- 
 ing the Jews to continue the slaughter of their enemies another day 
 in Shushan. But are the facts of history to be determined by supposed 
 probabilities ? Are there not various acts of Xerxes in his expedition 
 into Greece which are strange, and, to many persons, utterly incredi- 
 ble ? How many both in ancient and in modern times have disbe- 
 lieved and ridiculed the story that he cut a canal through the penin- 
 sula of Acte to avoid taking his fleet around Mount Athos ? ' How 
 many improbabilities crowd into the history of Napoleon ? How 
 strange this simple fact, that the king of Sweden was a Frenchman t 
 (Bernadotte). In respect to massacres, we have a remarkable (and 
 infamous) example in the massacre of about sixty thousand Protest- 
 ants in France on the night of St. Bartholomew. 
 
 Bleek also thinks it hard to believe that all Shushan should at one 
 time (chap, iii, 15), through Haman's edict, be thrown into so much 
 fear, and at another should have rejoiced (chap, iii, 15) on account 
 of Mordecai's. But Bleek misrepresents the passage, for it is not said 
 "<*// Shushan " in either place, but simply " Shushan." He also thinks 
 it improbable that the king should have issued a decree that every 
 man should rule in his own house ; and difficult and obscure that 
 Esther, as a royal spouse, should so long conceal her origin from the 
 court, the king, and Haman himself, as represented in the history. 
 But in matters of this kind we have no means of determining the 
 limits of possibility hardly those of probability. 
 
 The Book of Esther everywhere abounds with numerous particu- 
 
 Foroeoftnear- lars, dates, and names of persons, and there is but one 
 Kumenttbattbe ... . ... 
 
 book abounds possible conclusion it is genuine contemporary history, or 
 
 in detail*. // f s a fabrication. But it is difficult for us to suppose 
 that the book, considering the intimate acquaintance it shows with 
 Persian affairs, could have been fabricated after the fall of the Per- 
 sian empire (B. C. 330). Respecting its knowledge of Persian affairs, 
 Bleek remarks : " For its historical character the conspicuity of many 
 special traits seems to speak, especially the mentioning of many sin- 
 gle individuals otherwise unknown, the seven eunuchs, the seven 
 highest officers of Xerxes, the ten sons of Haman. The customs 
 ind institutions at the Persian court, in part at least, also appear to 
 be faithfully and vividly portrayed."' 
 
 1 There can be no reasonable doubt about the truth of this. Even Grote believe* it 
 1 E ; nleitung, p. 408.
 
 OF THE HOLY SCRIPTURES. 321 
 
 But on the supposition that Esther was written during the Persian 
 period, when the supposed events were recent, it is difficult to see 
 how the book could have imposed upon any considerable number of 
 Jews. 
 
 The strong proof of the historical character of Esther is fur- 
 nished in the universal observance of the festival of -me festival of 
 
 Purim (""3 lot) by the Tews (in accordance with its in- m ** at - 
 
 ..,.,, \ ,,- f testatlon of 
 
 stitution in this book), and so named from the casting of the train of 
 
 lots by Haman (chaps, iii, 7 ; ix, 24). We have already Bsther - 
 seen that Josephus speaks of the festival as kept by all the Jews in 
 the world, and it is still kept by them in commemoration of their 
 deliverance, just as we keep the Fourth of July in commemoration 
 f the declaration of our national independence. 
 
 If the book is not based on a real historical fact the rentarkable 
 deliverance of the Jews in the reign of Ahasuerus how was it possi- 
 ble for its author to make the Jews believe that such a deliverance 
 had been wrought for them, and that the feast of Purim was insti- 
 tuted at the time, and that they had kept it up to the period at which 
 the book was written ? 
 
 Kamphausen * refers with approbation to the opinion of Noldeke, 
 that the Book of Esther is a skilful romance, written to establish 
 and recommend to the Jews the celebration of the Purim festival, 
 which originally was a purely Persian feast. Fiirst seems inclined 
 to this view, for he says : " The festival may have been originally a 
 spring feast, which was borrowed from Persia " (Heb. Lex.). Truly 
 a strange notion, that the Hebrews, having so many festivals of their 
 own, should borrow one from the heathen who had made them cap- 
 tives, and that they should hold it near the time of the passover ! 
 Stranger still that the book which gave such a perverse account of 
 the origin of the festival should have made the whole Jewish people 
 believe that they were keeping Purim in commemoration of a great 
 national deliverance, when, in fact, they were doing nothing more 
 than observing a heathen feast ! To believe that the Jews were 
 thus deceived is more difficult than to believe the history in the 
 book. 
 
 Bleek thinks it not improbable that some historical fact lies at the 
 basis of the book, though it is uncertain what it is.* 
 
 THE DATE AND AUTHOR OF THE BOOK. 
 
 It is very probable that the book was written by a Jew at Susa 
 during the Persian dominion. The Persian and San- probawywrtt- 
 skrit words in it would indicate its Persian origin, and teQats sa - 
 'In Bleek's Einleitung, p. 407. *Ibid., p. 410.
 
 323 INTRODUCTION TO THE STUDY 
 
 the minute particulars given in the history show the proximity of 
 the writer to the events. 1 
 
 According to the Talmud,' the men of the Great Council wrot? 
 out (edited) the Book of Esther. Aben-Ezra and most of the rabbies 
 attribute it to Mordecai, in which belief many Christian theologians 
 follow them. But we have no probable proof of this, though it is not 
 to be altogether rejected. 
 
 CHARACTER OF THE BOOK. 
 
 Some Christian scholars, among whom is Bleek, take exception to 
 Esther on account of the spirit of revenge found in it. But its 
 admission into the canon was not based on its containing divine 
 revelation, or wholesome doctrine, or examples for our imitation, but 
 because it contains the history of a most remarkable deliverance 
 wrought out by Providence in behalf of Israel. 
 
 CHAPTER XL. 
 
 THE POETICAL BOOKS OF THE OLD TESTAMENT. 
 
 '"PHE poetical books include Job, Psalms, Proverbs, Ecclesiastes, 
 * Song of Solomon, and The Lamentations of Jeremiah, although 
 portions of others are poetical. But before discussing these books, 
 it is proper for us to consider Hebrew poetry. 
 
 THE POETRY OF THE HEBREWS. 
 
 The poetical element is deeply imbedded in the nature of man, 
 and exhibits itself in all stages of intellectual development, among 
 the barbarous as well as the most highly cultivated. Poetry is the 
 offspring of a vivid imagination and of deep emotion, and is closely 
 allied to eloquence. It is not surprising, then, that some of the 
 sacred writers, under the mighty influence of the d'vine Spirit, pour 
 forth the sublime doctrines of theology, the practical precepts of re- 
 ligion, and their joys and their sorrows, in the form of poetry ; 01 
 that the prophets, when the fall of empires and the glory of the Mes- 
 siah's kingdom were revealed to them in vision, should use in their 
 descriptions the loftiest poetical language. 
 
 1 Schrader refers the book to the Greek period, and this seems to be the view ot 
 Bleek. ' Baba Bat Furst, p too.
 
 OF THE HOLY SCRIPTURES. 323 
 
 The poetry of the Hebrews is thus of a peculiar and sacred char- 
 acter, and may be called epic, when it narrates the dealings of God 
 with his people, of which Psalm Ixxviii is an example ; or lyric, when 
 it expresses in song the religious experience of the writer, which is 
 the character of most of the Psalms; or didactic, when it inculcates 
 the duties of life, as the Books of Proverbs and Ecclesiastes; or dra- 
 matic, as it presents itself to us in the Book of Job; or elegiac, && in 
 the Lamentations of Jeremiah. 
 
 There is no metre, and rarely is there rhyme, in Hebrew poetry, 
 but " it is distinguished by a certain rhythmical adjust- ^an^jug^n^ 
 ment and distribution of the periods and single sen- of Hebrew po- 
 tences, and also by many peculiarities of idiom/, form, e 
 and meaning of words, grammatical constructions and inflections, 
 which are not usual in prose. This poetic diction is found not only 
 in the so-called poetic books of the Old Testament, but also in single 
 inserted sections in the historical books, and partly also in the pro- 
 phetic writings ; nevertheless, in the different books and sections 
 in various degree, and with a gradual transition into prose, so that 
 a very sharp distinction cannot be well made between poetry and 
 prose." ' 
 
 The rhythm of Hebrew poetry consists in a certain harmonious re- 
 lation of the parts or members of the single verses to each parallelism in 
 other, called the parallelism of members. This paral- Hebrew poetry, 
 lelism of members is divided by Bishop Lowth into the synonymous, 
 the antithetical, and the synthetical. The synonymous consists in re- 
 peating the thought of the first member in the second, or even in 
 several following members. Of this kind the simplest consists of two 
 members, of which the following are examples : 
 
 " How he had wrought his signs in Egypt, 
 And his wonders in the field of Zoan." 
 
 " He gave up their cattle also to the hail, 
 And their flocks to hot thunderbolts." 
 
 " Seek ye Jehovah while he may be found, 
 Call ye upon him while he is near." 
 
 The first two illustrations are taken from Psalm Ixxviii, which is 
 composed almost entirely of similar members; the third is taken 
 from Isaiah Iv, 6. 
 
 The second kind of parallelism is the antithetic, in which the second 
 member stands in contrast with the first. This kind of parallelism 
 
 1 Bleek, Einleitung, p. 8l.
 
 824 INTRODUCTION TO THE STUDY 
 
 abounds in the Proverbs, of which the following are examples from 
 
 ch. x, a, 7 : 
 
 ' Treasures of wickedness profit nothing, 
 But righteousness delivereth from death." 
 
 4 ' The memory of the just is blessedness, 
 But the name of the wicked shall rot'' 
 
 The third kind of parallelism is the synthetic, which consists of 
 several, and sometimes of many, members, closely connected to- 
 gether, and illustrating one subject. Of this kind the following is an 
 
 example : 
 
 " I have been young, and now am old ; 
 Yet have I not seen the righteous forsaken, 
 Nor his seed begging bread. 
 Every day he is merciful, and lendeth ; 
 And his seed is blessed." Psalm xxxvii, 25, 26. 
 
 In the first of these lines there is an antithesis between the past and 
 present, while in the two following pairs of lines the second line is an 
 enlargement of the thought in the first, and may be called synonymous. 
 
 The description of a virtuous woman in Proverbs xxxi, 10-31 is 
 an example of the synthetic parallelism, in which the members are, 
 for the most part, synonymous or antithetic parallelisms. 
 
 It often happens in Hebrew poetry that a single thought is expressed 
 in a single sentence, to which no other sentence, either synonymous 
 or antithetical, corresponds ; this may be termed simple rhythm ; as 
 
 " I am the man that hath seen affliction by the rod of his wrath." Lam. iii, L 
 
 What has been stated respecting Hebrew poetry has reference to 
 stanza* of the * ts ^ tca ^ classification. But although Hebrew poetry 
 number has no prosody, yet the members of the stanzas sometimes 
 
 have the same number of words, and form rhyme : 
 
 trwi 
 
 -Tl 
 
 " I was at ease, but he hath broken me asunder : 
 He hath also taken me by my neck, and shaken me to piece*," Job rri. IS. 
 
 rrajan 
 5! eirnn ID-** 13 
 
 " Adah and Zillah, hear my voice ; 
 Ye wives of Lamech, hearken unto my speech 
 For I have slain a man to my wounding, 
 And a young man to my hurt." Gen. iv, 23.
 
 OF THE HOLY SCRIPTURES. 
 
 1 -! 
 
 a* 
 
 " Doth the wild ass bray over his grass ? 
 Or loweth the ox over his fodder ? " Job vi, 5. 
 
 Sometimes the two poetic members are of unequal stanzaaof 
 length, as : 
 
 "von 
 
 " Ephraim is joined to idols : / 
 Let him alone." Hosea iv, 17. 
 
 At other times the harmony is expressed by four members of un- 
 equal length : 
 
 >rb 
 
 " For my life is spent with grief, 
 And my years with sighing : 
 My strength faileth because of mine iniquity, 
 And my bones are consumed." Psalm xxxi, IO. 
 
 In Habakkuk iii, 17, we have a stanza of six members: 
 
 " Although the fig tree shall not blossom, 
 Neither shall fruit be in the vines ; 
 The labour of the olive shall fail, 
 And the fields shall yield no meat ; 
 The flock shall be cut off from the fold, 
 And there shall be no herd in the stalls." 
 
 To this there are placed in antithesis, verses 18, 19: 
 
 " Yet I will rejoice in the Lord, 
 
 I will joy in the God of my salvation. 
 
 The Lord God is my strength, 
 
 And he will make my feet like hinds' feet, 
 
 And he will make me to walk upon mine high placem.'
 
 826 INTRODUCTION TO THE STUDY 
 
 CHAPTER XLI. 
 
 TH E BOOK OF J OB. 
 
 T^HIS boos, so named from its hero, is one of the most remarkable 
 A in the canon, and has given rise to much controversy respecting 
 its age, author, and object. It may be regarded as a sacred drama. 
 
 We have, first, the prologue ( chap, i, ii ) ; secondly, the dialogue 
 (chaps, iii-xlii, 6); lastly, the epilogue (xlii, 7-17). The prologue 
 The work dj- contains a brief sketch of Job, its chief personage, who 
 !j^diaiogu& * s re P resente d as a pious man, living in the land of Uz, 
 epilogue. blessed with sons and daughters, and very rich. Satan, 
 having obtained permission from God, destroys all Job's property, 
 kills his children, and smites him with sore boils. The dialogues 
 contain, first, the lamentation of Job over his calamities (chap. iii). 
 After this, the discussion on Job's character and the divine govern- 
 ment is conducted by him, Eliphaz, Bildad, and Zophar, in which 
 Job's three friends argue that his disasters are divine judgments for 
 his sins, while he vindicates himself, and maintains that the ways of 
 Providence are inscrutable (chaps, iv-xxxi). This is followed by the 
 speech of Elihu, who acts as mediator between Job and his friends 
 (chaps, xxxii-xxxvii). The four following chapters (xxxviii-xli), 
 with the exception of chap, xl, 3-5, contain the Almighty's descrip- 
 tion of his own power and works, and his expostulation with Job. 
 In chap, xl, 3-5, and in chap, xlii, 1-6, Job humbles himself before 
 God. 
 
 The epilogue contains God's reproof of Job's three friends, and his 
 command to them to offer sacrifice for their folly, because they had 
 not spoken right, as Job had ; also a statement of the great pros- 
 perity far greater than he had at first that Job enjoyed in his lat- 
 ter days. 
 
 INTEGRITY OF THE BOOK. 
 
 Objections have been tnade in modern times to the genuineness 
 Modern objeo- ^ certa i n parts of the book. Carpzov supposed that 
 UOM. while all the discourses were written down by Job 
 
 himself before the time of Moses, the prologue and epilogue were 
 added by Samuel. They have been rejected by Stuhlman, Bern- 
 stein, Knobel, and some others; but their genuineness is almost 
 universally conceded. The prologue is necessary for the under- 
 standing of the book, and without it Job's character and his
 
 OF THE HOLY SCRIPTURES. 327 
 
 peculiar afflictions would be unknown. Without the epilogue the 
 book would be incomplete, as it contains a vindication of Job, and 
 shows divine providence in bringing him safely through all his trials, 
 and making his latter end more glorious than the beginning. The 
 genuineness of both the prologue and the epilogue is conceded by 
 Schrader, 1 Bleek,* and Davidson.* 
 
 Some critics 4 have regarded chaps, xxvii, n-xxviii, 28 as a later 
 addition, but their genuineness is almost universally conceded by the 
 most recent critics. The description of the hippopotamus and the 
 crocodile (chaps, xl, i5-xli, 34) has been regarded by some critics' 
 as an interpolation, but its genuineness is conceded by Schrader 4 
 and Bleek. 7 
 
 The discourses of Elihu (chaps, xxxii-xxxvii) have The objections 
 been. rejected as spurious by many critics. They are genesis 0? the 
 characterized by De Wette* as "dull, tedious, artificial, discourses of 
 and obscure in their contents and in the mode of their 
 presentation." He also says that "they interrupt the connexion be- 
 tween the discourses of Job and those of God, and darken the contrast 
 in which they stand to each other ; that they anticipate what the lat- 
 ter discourses contain, even making them superfluous, while they offer 
 a solution of mysteries by reflection, which, according to the latter 
 discourses, is to be found in intuitive, believing resignation." 
 
 Elihu, it is true, is not mentioned among the friends of Job (chap, 
 ii, n); nor is he named at the end of the book where Job's three 
 friends are reproved and commanded by God to offer sacrifice 
 (chap, xlii,' 7-9). Job and the three friends are the principal person- 
 ages. Elihu, being a young man, is silent, until Job and his friends 
 have ended the discussion, when he speaks, reproving both parties. 
 He acted, in fact, as mediator, and, accordingly, it was not necessary 
 to consider at all what he said, when the decision is made at the 
 end (chap, xlii, 7-9) concerning the discussion. That Elihu's 
 speeches are interposed between Job's discourses and the Almighty's 
 answer does not in any degree imply their spuriousness. Every- 
 thing depends upon the taste of the writer. We are not aurhorized 
 to lay down rules in such matters, and demand that every genuine 
 drama or poem shall square exactly with our gratuitous canons. 
 
 We can by no means agree with De Wette respecting the dullness 
 oi the speeches of Elihu. They have no little merit, Quality of EII- 
 though as a whole they have scarcely the strength of hu ' 8 djscour8e - 
 the other addresses. But this may be what the author intended. 
 
 'De Wette Schrader, p. 549. *Pp. 660, 661. Vol. ii, pp. 200-202. 
 
 4 Eichhorn and others. ' Ibid. De Wette Schrader, p. 550. 
 
 ' Einleitung, p. 664. * De Wette Schrader, pp. 546 547.
 
 328 INTRODUCTION TO THE STUDY 
 
 Why should a young, rash man speak with all the power and wisdom 
 of mature years? Do all Shakspeare's characters speak with the 
 same force and wisdom ? Even if we grant that the speeches were 
 to set forth great principles, there is no reason for supposing that all 
 the interlocutors must speak with the same ability, whatever their 
 years or wisdom might be. 
 
 The linguistic peculiarities of Elihu's discourses afford no decisive 
 proof of having proceeded from another author than of the rest of 
 the book. 
 
 That Elihu calls Job by name, which is not done by any of the 
 other speakers, grows out of the nature of the case. For, as Elihu 
 acted as mediator between Job and his friends, it was necessary 
 for him to distinguish Job from them. We confess that we do not 
 see how the discourses of Elihu disturb the harmony of the book. 
 They do not break in as something foreign to the subject, and they 
 have, as far as we can see, the same style as the rest. The inter- 
 polation of six chapters (about one seventh of the whole) in the 
 body of such a work is extremely improbable, and such a view is not to 
 be adopted except for the most cogent reasons, which in the present 
 instance do not exist. The genuineness of the discourses of Elihu 
 has been denied by Stuhlmann, Bernstein, De Wette, Eichhorn, 
 Ewald, Hirzel, Knobel, Delitzsch, Schrader, Davidson, Bleek, and 
 others. On the other hand, their genuineness has been defended by 
 Jahn, Bertholdt, Rosenmflller, Staudlin, Umbreit, Koster, Stickel, 
 Herbst, Welte, Havernick, Schlottmann, Keil, and others. Bunsen 
 and Kamphausen have adopted the theory that these discourses were 
 inserted by the author himself as an addition after finishing the orig- 
 inal work. 1 
 
 THE CHARACTER AND DESIGN OP JOB. 
 
 Here the question arises, Are we to regard the whole history of 
 Job as entirely fictitious, the creation of the imagination of the au- 
 thor of the work, or altogether true, or as having merely a substratum 
 of truth on which the book is founded ? The last supposition seems 
 the only tenable one. 
 
 The assumption that the book throughout is a real history in- 
 Tbe Book of v l ves us i n difficulties. The discourses, in their present 
 Job hardly a form, are too elegant, studied, and poetical, ever to have 
 been delivered extempore. In the account of Job's pros- 
 perity in his latter days (chap, xlii, 12-17) the number of his sons 
 and daughters is the same that he had before his afflictions ; while 
 the number of his sheep, camete, oxen, and asses, is just double of 
 
 'In Bleek, p. 661.
 
 INTRODUCTION TO THE STUDY 329 
 
 what he had in the beginning. These numbers do not bear the 
 stamp of being real history, but, on the contrary, appear to be arti- 
 ficial. Nor can we accept as literally true the account of Satan's 
 presenting himself among the sons of God before Jehovah, and of 
 his obtaining from him permission to bring upon the holy servant 
 of God so many dreadful afflictions, to prove to Satan the sincerity 
 of Job's piety. But even if these things had occurred, no man could 
 have known them unless God had revealed them to him, which, 
 under the circumstances, is very improbable. 
 
 But the hypothesis that Job never existed which was the view 
 of one of the rabbies in the Talmud, of Theodore of Mopsuestia, 
 and of Le Clerc ' is to be at once rejected, for he is mentioned in 
 Ezekiel (chapter xiv, 14) : " Though these three men, Noah, Daniel, 
 and Job were in it, they should deliver but their own souls by their 
 righteousness, saith the Lord God," To refer in such language to 
 a fictitious character, and associate him with men who had a real 
 existence, is extremely unnatural. Besides, it is foreign to the char- 
 acter of the ancient Hebrews to invent fictitious personages, and 
 was not common even among the Greeks. 
 
 It is impossible for us to say with certainty how much of the his- 
 tory is real; but we may assume as true that Job was a man of 
 distinguished piety and virtue, an eminent citizen of the land 
 of Uz, who met with heavy calamities and afflictions, from which he 
 ultimately recovered. His friends, also, are most probably real 
 personages. According to the tradition of the Jews Job belonged 
 to the seven heathen prophets of primitive times, and among these 
 were his three friends, Eliphaz, Bildad, and Zophar. He is repre- 
 sented as a pious, generous man, and in many respects is said to 
 have stood even higher than the patriarch Abraham. 2 Bleek* re- 
 gards the book as resting on an historical basis, and even Schrader 4 
 thinks the matter of the book was derived from tradition. The 
 materials furnished the writer, either by tradition or written memo- 
 rials, were worked up into the present highly artistic and sublimely 
 poetical form. 
 
 The design of the author in writing it nowhere appears, either in 
 the prologue or epilogue, but must be inferred from a consideration 
 of the whole. From the prologue of the book we learn that Job 
 ' was perfect and upiight, and one that feared God and eschewed 
 e/il;" and in the epilogue it is stated "that the Lord turned the 
 captivity of Job . . . : also the Lord gave Job twice as much as he 
 had before." But nowhere is there assigned any reason for the great 
 
 1 Bleek, p 654. * Furst, Ueber den Kanon, p. 81. 
 
 'Einleitvmg, p. 655. * De Wette Schrader, p. 552.
 
 330 OF THE HOLY SCRIPTURES. 
 
 sufferings that God brought upon him. Yet the palpable infer- 
 ence is, that however much a good man may suffer, Providence 
 brings him safely through his afflictions, and in the end makes him 
 happier. 
 
 But it is also evident from the discourses that the author of Job 
 intended to refute the idea that a man's sufferings are necessarily the 
 result of his sins, and an indication of the Almighty's disp'.easure. 
 At the same time he inculcates God's sovereignty, the inscrutability 
 of his counsels, and the duty of implicit faith in him, and resignation, 
 without questioning or murmuring, to his providence. The author 
 does not deny that men are ever punished for their sins in this 
 world. This is evident from the language attributed to Job, in 
 which, in several places, the doctrine of retribution here is clearly 
 taught. See xxi, 17-20; xxvii, 13-23. 
 
 In the discussions in the book the question of retribution has 
 reference to the present life only. The doctrine of the soul's im- 
 mortality and future retribution is nowhere taught, 1 though it was 
 probably held by the author. 
 
 THE DATE OF THE COMPOSITION OF THE BOOK AND ITS AUTHOR. 
 
 Respecting the age in which the book was written, there has been 
 Date of com- a S reat diversity of opinion. Carpzov, Eichhorn, Jahn, 
 position un- Stuhlmann, and Bertholdt, supposed it was written be- 
 fore the time of Moses. The Talmud at one time as- 
 serts that it was written by Moses ; at another, that it was composed 
 by an Israelite, who returned to Palestine from the Babylonian cap- 
 tivity.* J. D. Michaelis and others attributed the book to Moses. 
 It has been referred to the age of David or Solomon by Luther, 
 Doederlein, Staudlin, RosenmUller. Welte, Havernick, Schlottmann, 
 and Keil. Others refer it to the seventh century before Christ, as 
 De Wette, Schrader, Gesenius, Umbreit, Ewald, Stickel, and Da- 
 vidson. 
 
 1 The passage, Job xix, 26, as it stands in the English version, refers to a resur- 
 rection, but it is not supported by the Hebrew, which reads : "I know that my 
 redeemer (goet) liveth, and at last he shall stand on the earth ; and after these things 
 have smitten my skin, shall this be ; in my flesh shall I see God, whom I shall be- 
 hold for myself, and my eyes shall see, and not a stranger." Here Job expresses 
 the conviction that God will vindicate him from all the charges of his friends, and 
 he had just before expressed the wish that his words were written in a book (for fu- 
 ture reference). This harmonizes with the close of the book, where God appears to 
 Job and vindicates him, and Job then says, " I have heard of thee by the hearing of 
 the ear, but now mine eye seeth thee." The Septuagint, Pe?hito-Syriac, and Targu-/ 
 refer the passage to a temporal restoration, which seems demanded by the context 
 
 * Furst, Ueber den Kanon, p. 80.
 
 OF THE HOLY SCRIPTURES. 331 
 
 No solid arguments can be found for either the pre-Mosaic cr the 
 Mosaic date. The language of Job clearly indicates a/0.r/-Mosaic age. 
 The archaisms of the Pentateuch do not appear in it. The lan g uage 
 
 N?n. masculine pronoun, he, which is found about two of Jobpost-Mo- 
 
 . sale, 
 hundred times in the Pentateuch as a feminine, meaning 
 
 the, occurs but once, as a mistake,' for XTI, the regular feminine. 
 This regular feminine occurs but eleven times in the whole Penta- 
 teuch, but occurs five times in the Book of Job. Sx, for rhx, thtsc^ 
 found in the Pentateuch, does not occur in Job. The names of 
 constellations and the mention of the Zodiac most probably belong 
 to a post-Mosaic time. 3 
 
 Nor is it at all probable that Moses would have written such a work, 
 which seems to contradict one of the leading ideas of the Mosaic 
 legislation, namely, that obedience to God is rewarded with temporal 
 blessings, and that disobedience is followed by the judg- Not probable 
 ments of heaven. Moses promised the Israelites that the* author of 
 if they were obedient, God would put upon them none Jb- 
 of the diseases of Egypt : " For I am the Lord that healeth thee " 
 (Exod. xv, 26). Besides this, Moses was too much employed with 
 his own legislation to engage in such a task. Further, the artistic 
 character of the poem seems clearly to indicate a date far later than 
 Moses. And between the time of Moses and that of David no one 
 would think of placing the authorship of such a book. We are 
 thus brought to the conclusion that we cannot attribute the compo- 
 sitian of Job to a period earlier than that of David, and few will re- 
 fer it to the time of the Babylonian captivity, or later. Accordingly, 
 we find that the supposed time of the composition fluctuates between 
 the reign of David and the Captivity. 
 
 The Book of Job seems to have been well known to Ezekiel the 
 prophet, and to his contemporaries, from the way in which he speaks 
 of Job (xiv, 14, 20). It is probable that Jeremiah made use of the 
 Book of Job. Compare Jer. xx, 14-18 with Job iii; Jer. xx, 7, 8 
 with Job xii, 4 and xix, 7 ; Lam. ii, 16 with Job xvi, % 10. There are 
 also other passages that are similar in both books. In Isaiah, com- 
 pare xix, 5 with Job xiv, n ; lix, 4 with Job xv, 35. In these pas- 
 sages there are close resemblances. We also find passages quite 
 
 1 Job xxx: II. The pronouns are transposed, &in, masculine, he, being put with 
 a i'eminine rr>un, and ?On, she, with a masculine noun. The Masorites have made 
 the correction in the margin. 
 
 >D3, Chesil, Orion; H^3, Kimah, Pleiades: 125 and tny, Ash, Wagon, tht 
 Great Bear; rril^, Mazzaroth, the Zodiac (chaps, ix, 9 ; xxxviii, 31, 32). The first 
 two constellations are found also in the prophet Amos (chap, v 8), and the last in 
 a Kings xxin, 5. 
 22
 
 332 INTRODUCTION TO THE STUDY 
 
 similar in Amos and in Job. But whether the prophets made use ol 
 this book, or the author of the book used their writings, cannot 
 be certainly determined, unless we find independent proof of the 
 priority of Job. 
 
 The most flourishing period of Hebrew poetry was the age of Da 
 Probably writ- v ^ an( * Solomon, and to the latter it seems most natural 
 ten in the one to refer this poem. This is confirmed by peculiarities of 
 language common to the Proverbs of Solomon and Job. 
 The verb oSy, alas, to exult, is found only in Job xx, 18 ; xxxix, 13, 
 and in Proverbs vii, 18. The noun niSanfi, guiding, steering, occurs 
 only in Proverbs (five times) and in Job xxxvii, 12. )3N is found in 
 Prov. xvi, 26 as a verb, and in Job xxxiii, 7 as a noun. It is found 
 nowhere else. T3, calamity, occurs three times in Job, and once in 
 Proverbs ; nowhere else. t;'t2b ND^, to crush in the gate, is found only 
 in Job v, 4 (Hithpael), and in Proverbs xxii, 22 (Piel). To drink 
 iniquity like water (Job xv, 16), to drink scorning like water (chap- 
 ter xxxiv, 7), like to drink violence (Prov xxvi, 6), a phraseology 
 which appears nowhere else. P^x, destruction, occurs three times in 
 Job, once in Proverbs, and once in Psalm Ixxxviii ; nowhere else. 
 iTKNn, deliverance, purpose, occurs six times in Job, four times in Prov- 
 erbs; elsewhere once in Isaiah, and once in Micah. There are some 
 other points of affinity in the language of these books. 
 
 In Job xxii, 24; xxviii, 16, mention is made of the gold of Ophir. 
 This reference is especially suitable to the age of Solomon (who 
 brought gold from Ophir), but could be also used for two or three 
 centuries after, as we find the same reference in Isaiah xiii, 12, and 
 in Psalm xlv, 9, but would not likely occur before the time of David 
 and Solomon. We may therefore conclude, with great probabil- 
 ity, that Job was written in the time of Solomon ; and the peace- 
 ful reign of that monarch afforded abundance of leisure for such a 
 work. 
 
 Respecting the author of the book and his native land, it is certain 
 The author an that he was an Israelite, dwelling, most probably, in 
 mhem nt Ju- Southern Judea. There is not the slightest proof of its 
 dea. having been written in any other language originally, 
 
 and afterwaids translated into Hebrew. 1 The local allusions refer 
 to a hilly country, a land of brooks that fail in dry weather, where 
 ice and snow are occasionally seen ; a tract through which the cara- 
 vans from Tema and Sheba (Sabaeans) passed, and were often disap- 
 pointed in finding that the brooks had become dry (Job vi, 15-20). 
 
 1 At the end of the Book of Job, in the Septnagint, it is said : " This is translated 
 from the Syriac book." But this remark at such a late period is of little or no value
 
 OF THE HOLY SCRIPTURES. 333 
 
 Reference is also made to the river Jordan (chap, xl, 23). The de- 
 scription of the behemoth (hippopotamus) and the crocodile (levia- 
 than) (chaps, xl, *5-xli, 34) shows that the writer must have visited 
 Egypt, and that these animals made upon him a deep impression, 
 from the fact that they were strange to him. 
 
 Job himself, the hero of the book, lived in the land of Uz, which 
 Gesenius locates " in the northern part of Arabia Deserta, between 
 Idumea, Palestine, and the Euphrates, adjacent to Babylon and the 
 Euphrates " (Heb. Lex.). 
 
 It is impossible to determine the age in which Job himself lived. 
 The absence of all reference to the Mosaic legislation The time in 
 in the discussions does not prove that the author of the J^ h m ^ 
 book placed him before the time of the Hebrew law- tain, 
 giver, since, though he lived after the Mosaic legislation, it would 
 have been improper to represent him and his friends, who were 
 without the pale of Israel, as discussing the principles of that legis- 
 lation, or drawing illustrations from it. Had he lived many centu- 
 ries before the author of the book but little would probably have 
 been known of his history, and he would not have been considered 
 of sufficient importance, or prominent enough in the public eye, to 
 be the hero of the story. Accordingly, we think it most likely that 
 he lived near the age of David, a short time before the author of the 
 book. We attach no importance to the statement at the end of the 
 book in the Septuagint, that his name was at first Jobab, the fifth ic 
 descent from Abraham. 
 
 CONCLUDING REFLECTIONS. 
 
 The Book of Job has been considered, in all ages of the Church, 
 as one of the most sublime of the Bible, and is sur- Gibbon's ac- 
 passed only by some of the grandest passages in Isaiah, ^"tbT^bHm- 
 and by the prayer of Habakkuk. Gibbon, speaking ityotjob. 
 of Mohammed's composition of the Koran, remarks : " His loftiest 
 strains must yield to the sublime simplicity of the Book of Job, 
 composed in a remote age, in the same country, and in the same 
 language." 1 It is evident that the utterances of Job's friends were 
 often wrong, for God is represented as finally reproving them on 
 account of their speeches, and even Job himself modifies, in some 
 of his later words, what he had before said. And although he 
 is commended at the close of the book for his teachings, yet God 
 demands of him: ''Who is this that hideth counsel (wisdom) by 
 
 1 Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire, vol. v. p. i ro. The passage is not 
 quit; correct respecting the language, as Job was written in Hebrew, and the 
 Koran in Arabic.
 
 334 INTRODUCTION TO THE STUDY 
 
 words wfthout knowledge ? " Job replies : " Therefoie I have ut 
 tered that I understood not." 
 
 The book has its value apart from its exalted poetical character, 
 as illustrating the inscrutable providence of God, and the delivery 
 of his people out of all their afflictions. 
 
 CHAPTER XLII. 
 
 THE BOOK OF PSALMS. 1 
 
 HPHIS book contains one hundred and fifty psalms of a highly de 
 
 * votional character, and expressive of deep religious experience, 
 
 The book di- su i ta ^le to all conditions of religious life, and without a 
 
 Tided into five parallel in the annals of religious literature. The whole 
 
 collection is divided \r\to five parts or books. The first 
 
 includes Psalms i-xli ; the second, Psalms xlii-lxxii ; the third, Psalms 
 
 Ixxiii-lxxxix ; the fourth, Psalms xc cvi ; the fifth, Psalms cvii-cl. 
 
 At the end of each of these parts is found a doxology, which is also 
 
 given in the Septuagint, of varying form, which was intended to mark 
 
 a division, after the manner of the five Books of Moses. The doxology 
 
 at the end of the first division is : " Blessed be the Lord God of Israel 
 
 from everlasting, and to everlasting. Amen, and amen " (Psa. xli, 13). 
 
 Of these psalms the superscriptions attribute seventy-three to 
 
 David ; twelve have the superscription, ^DxS, to or for Asaph, 
 
 .V i 
 where we are to understand that the preposition (?) indicates Asaph 
 
 as the author, in the same way that psalms are designated as having 
 been written by David (inS). Eleven are attributed in the same 
 way to the sons of Korah ; one of them (Psalm Ixxxviii), more spe- 
 cifically, to Heman the Ezrahite. One is ascribed to Moses, one to 
 Ethan the Ezrahite, two to Solomon, and fifty are anonymous. The 
 authors of our English version " have sometimes mistranslated the 
 titles of the psalms. 
 
 THE AUTHORITY OF THE SUPERSCRIPTIONS. 
 
 Many recent critics regard the superscriptions as possessing little 
 
 The orurin of or no authority. an ^ they attribute them, not to the au- 
 
 uw> niperscrip- thors, but rather to the collectors of the psalms. It is 
 
 "" not easy to determine, in every case, whether the super- 
 
 1 The Hebrew title is O^nR, tehillim, hymns, psalms. Septuagint, if/atyol, songt 
 twtg to a stringed instrument. 
 * The correct superscription is given in the margin when not given in the text
 
 OF THE HOLY SCRIPTURES. 835 
 
 scription was put there by the author of the psalm or not. 1 In ex- 
 amining the superscriptions contained in the Septuagint, we find 
 that of the seventy-three psalms attributed to David in the Hebrew 
 text, his name is omitted from five of them ; and that his name is 
 affixed to fourteen which are anonymous in the Hebrew text. Also, 
 the name of Solomon is omitted from the superscription of Psalm 
 cxxvii. With these exceptions, the same names stand in the Sep- 
 tuagint as are found in the Hebrew text. 
 
 When the Septuagint version was made, it is very evident that 
 some of the superscriptions had already become obscure, as is clear 
 from the manner in which they are translated; and this is a proof of 
 the antiquity of the superscriptions. 
 
 Gesenius remarks on the word n-SJob, to the chief musician, found 
 
 in the. superscription to fifty-three psalms : " This inscription is 
 wholly wanting in all the psalms of a later age, composed after the 
 destruction of the temple and its worship ; and its significance was 
 already lost in the time of the LXX." Accordingly, the su- 
 perscriptions to the psalms in which this word occurs must have been 
 affixed before the Babylonian captivity. In the superscription to 
 Psalm Ix, ascribed to David, it is stated that it was composed 
 " when he strove with Aram-naharaim (Syria of the rivers), and with 
 Aram-zobah, when Joab returned, and smote of Edom, in the Valley 
 of Salt, twelve thousand." It is evident that this superscription was 
 not taken from 2 Sam. viii, 13, for it is there said that David smote 
 in the Valley of Salt eighteen thousand ; nor was it taken from 
 i Chron. xviii, 12, for there the number is the same as in the pas- 
 sage in Samuel. The conclusion is, that the superscription must 
 have been affixed by David himself, or by some one soon after, 
 who had information independent of the Books of Samuel. 
 
 In the superscription to the seventh Psalm it is stated that David 
 sang it concerning the words of Gush the Benjamite. There is 
 no mention in the history of David of any one of this name, so 
 that the superscription must have been affixed when the affair that 
 gave rise to the psalm was still recent. 
 
 If the superscriptions had been affixed from mere conjecture, it is 
 probable that instead of fifty anonymous psalms, we The ro 
 would have none of that description. We might have acripttons not 
 expected that many of them would, in that case, have been oon * jcl 
 assigned to Solomon, while, in fact, but two bear his name. One is 
 ascribed to Moses, one to Heman, and one to Ethan, both Ezrahites. 
 
 1 Theodore of Mopsuestia (f 429) led the -way in the denial of the genuineness of 
 these inscriptions. Leontius **f Byzantiuir, liber iii, Adversus Incorrupticolas et 
 Nestor.
 
 836 INTRODUCTION TO THE STUDY 
 
 There is nothing in these psalms to lead any one to suppose that 
 they must have been written by these authors, and the names must 
 have been affixed, if not by the authors themselves, by some one, 
 on historical grounds. 1 
 
 " It is not improbable," says Bleek, " that the Hebrew poets 
 themselves, when they wrote and put into circulation their songs, 
 sometimes designated them with their names or the occasion of 
 tV-eir being written, as is altogether common among the Arabian 
 poets, and was, at least, very often the case with the Hebrew 
 prophets." 1 
 
 The question then arises, Is there internal evidence that the su- 
 opinions of perscriptions of some of these psalms are wrong ? Bleek 
 
 modem critics asse rts that in some cases they are evidently false, of 
 on the accu- * J 
 
 racy of the su- which he gives Psalms hx, cxxn, and cxhv as examples. 
 
 perscrlpUons. g ut j t j g nQt c j ear tQ ug that j) av jj was not t h e au thor 
 
 of these psalms. On the contrary, Psalm cxliv contains internal evi- 
 dence of having been written by David, as it is said in verse 10, 
 " Who delivereth David his servant from the hurtful sword ; " and 
 there is nothing in the psalm that conflicts with this view. Respect- 
 ing Psalm lix, it is stated that it was written " when Saul sent, and 
 they watched the house to kill him." This psalm is in every respect 
 suitable to the occasion with the exception of one word in the En- 
 lish version, " the heathen" The word D'iJ, goyim, rendered 
 *' heathen," has the accessory idea of enemies, oppressors. It is not 
 strange that David, when speaking of his enemies among the Israel- 
 ites, should speak also of wicked men in general. We would have 
 no good reason to expect that he would name Saul, whom he al- 
 ways treated mercifully. Nor do we see anything in Psalm cxxii 
 that might not have been written by David. Bleek also rejects, as 
 not belonging to David, Psalms xiv, liii, cviii, and cxxiv. Of these, 
 two contain the same passage, which might indicate their composition 
 during the Babylonian captivity, but may have no reference to that 
 event : " O that the salvation of Israel were come out of Zion ! 
 when the Lord bringeth back the captivity of his people, Jacob 
 shall rejoice and Israel shall be glad " (Psalm xiv, 7 ; liii, 6). Ai 
 botn of these psalms contain in their superscriptions the expression 
 " To the chief musician," they must have been written while the 
 temple was still standing; for Gesenius, with great propriety, refers 
 the psalms with this superscription to the period preceding the 
 captivity. The contents of the two psalms have no reference to the 
 Babylonian captivity, but to the general wickedness of men, and 
 
 'It is not likely that Moses himself would have added to his name "man of 
 God ;" this is not the usage in the Pentateuch. 'Page 617.
 
 OF THE HOLY SCRIPTURES. 337 
 
 the Psalmist prays for the salvation, the conversion, of the people, 
 which was to come forth from Mount Zion, where Jehovah especial- 
 ly dwelt in the tabernacle of Israel. The Psalmist uses Jacob and 
 Israel as synonymous, which he would not probably have done 
 had the nation already been divided into the kingdoms of Judah and 
 Israel. To bring back the captivity (not? 311?) does not always imply 
 the returning of a people to their native country, for it is said, " the 
 Lord turned the captivity of Job " (xlii, 10). Also in Hosea vi, u, 
 the phrase means to restore to prosperity and righteousness : " O Judah, 
 ne hath set a harvest for thee, when I return the captivity of my 
 people ; " and in Ezekiel xvi, 53, etc. 
 
 Bleek thinks that the following psalms, though attributed to 
 David in the superscriptions, were probably not written by him : 
 iv, xxiii, xxv, xxvi, xxviii, xxix, xxxi, xxxiv, xxxvii, xl, David's author 
 Iviii, -lix, Ixxxvi, ciii, cxxxi, cxxxiii, cxxxix, cxliii, and ^^ denied 
 cxlv. But there is no sufficient reason for denying byBieek. 
 these psalms to be David's. De Wette acknowledges as undoubted- 
 ly belonging to David, Psalms vi, viii, xv, xviii, xxiii, xxix, xxx, 
 xxxii, ci. Schrader questions the Davidic authorship of Psalm xxiii, 
 but he adds to De Wette's list, iii, vii, xi. Hitzig attributes to David 
 fourteen psalms, 1 and Ewald eleven. 9 No better proof can be fur- 
 nished of the arbitrary character of some of the German criticisms 
 than the fact that two of the psalms which Ewald attributes to David 
 are referred by Hitzig to the times of the Maccabees, about nine 
 hundred years later than David. 
 
 Dr. Davidson, while he rejects a part of the superscriptions to the 
 psalms, nevertheless remarks: "The best method of proceeding is 
 to assume the alleged Davidic authority till internal evidence proves 
 the contrary." ! 
 
 In Psalm li. after an earnest prayer for forgiveness of individual 
 sin, David is represented as praying : " Do good in thy good pleas- 
 ure unto Zion : build thou the walls of Jerusalem " (verse 18). It 
 is not necessary to suppose that this language is a proof that the 
 prayer was uttered about the time of the Babylonian captivity. For 
 the first part of the language was suitable in the age of David, 
 and the last may have been applicable also, for Jerusalem may not 
 have been completely walled in at this period of David's reign ; or 
 the language may be figurative, imploring a return of prosperity. 
 The last verse of the psalm speaks of the sacrifices in which God 
 would then delight. 
 
 1 Psalms iii, iv, vii-xiii, xv-xix. 
 
 ' Psalms iii, iv, vii, viii, xi, xviii, xix, xxiv, xxxii, ci, ex ; and xv, xxix he attrib- 
 utes to the time of Davi^. 'Vol. ii, p. 255.
 
 838 INTRODUCTION TO THE STUDY 
 
 Bleek, while acknowledging that David is the author of this psalm, 
 thinks that the last two verses were added at the time of the Baby- 
 lonian captivity. 1 If they necessarily refer to that period, we would 
 greatly prefer this view to the rejection of the psalm as David's. 
 
 In 2 Sam. xxii there is given a psalm as David's which is the 
 same as Psalm xviii, and has substantially the same superscription. 
 Also in t Chron. xvi, 7 a psalm is attributed to David that corre- 
 sponds in part to the first fifteen verses of Psalm cv, which is anony- 
 mous. We are, therefore, authorized in attributing to David the 
 whole of this psalm, which is anonymous. In 2 Sam. xxiii, i, David 
 is called " the sweet Psalmist of Israel." Here the foundation foi 
 our belief of his high poetic character is laid, and we can easily be- 
 lieve that he wrote a large number of psalms. 
 
 Respecting the anonymous psalms, De Wette remarks : " " Many 
 of the anony- of them may, indeed, belong to David and his contem- 
 moos psalms, poraries, but they cannot be ascertained with certainty. 
 It is probable that, in some instances, psalms appear as anonymous 
 which originally were united to one psalm, or more, that preceded, 
 and had a superscription giving the author. Psalms ix and x are 
 united in the LXX, and, probably, made but one originally.* 
 
 Twelve psalms are attributed to Asaph : Psa. 1, Ixxiii-lxxxiii. That 
 Psalms attrib- Asaph wrote psalms is stated in 2 Chronicles xxix, 30 : 
 oted to Aaaph. Hezekiah the king, and the princes, commanded the 
 Levites to sing praise unto the Lord with the words of David and of 
 Asaph the seer. And they sang praises with gladness." According 
 to i Chron. xvi, 5, Asaph was at the head of the singers in the time 
 of David. Schrader thinks 4 we cannot, with any certainty, ascribe 
 these psalms to Asaph, and Bleek is unfavourable to the genuineness 
 of any of them, and thinks that Psa. Ixxx, Ixxxi, Ixxxiii, and perhaps 
 Ixxxii, belong to a poet of the kingdom of Israel ; while Psalms Ixxiv- 
 Ixxvi, Ixxix, and perhaps the rest, belong to a Jewish poet near the 
 exile.* Dr. Davidson * thinks that Asaph wrote Psalm 1, and prob- 
 ably Ixxiii, but no more of those assigned to him. Keil attributes 
 seven of these psalms to the Asaph of David's time, and the remain- 
 ing five to later members of his family/ There are only two of these 
 psalms that cannot well be referred to the Davidic Asaph, Ixxiv and 
 Ixxix, which, from their allusions, seem to belong to a later age 
 than that of David or Solomon. They may, indeed, belong to 
 later Asaph 
 
 Ten psalms are attributed to the sons of Korah : xlii, xliv, xlv-xlix 
 
 1 Page 633. ' De Wette Schrader, p. 523. 
 
 * This was au ancient Jewish tradition. * De Wette Schrader, p. 523. 
 
 Page 620. 'Vol. ii, p. 258. * Introduction, voi. i. p. 460.
 
 OF THE HOLY SCRIPTURES. 339 
 
 Ixxxiv, Ixxxv, Ixxxvii. Psalm Ixxxviii is inscribed both P8alms attrib . 
 to the sons of Korah, and is also called the Psalm of uted to th 
 Heman the Ezrahite. The Korahites are mentioned in tamotlKan ^ 
 i Chron. ix, 19 as being keepers of the gates of the tabernacle in 
 the times of Samuel and David; also in 2 Chron. xx, 19, in the time 
 of Jehoshaphat, it is stated that the children of the Korahites stood 
 up to praise the Lord. It is thus impossible to fix the date of these 
 psalms. But it is probable that the earliest of theni was written in 
 the time of Solomon, and perhaps none of them later than the time 
 of Hezekiah. Psalm Ixxxv opens with the declaration : " Lord, 
 thou hast been favourable unto thy land : thou hast brought back 
 the captivity of Jacob." As this is directed to the chief musician, 
 indicating that the temple was standing, it is best to suppose that 
 there is no reference to the return from Babylon, but perhaps a de- 
 liverance from the Assyrian power in the time of Hezekiah. 
 
 Psalm Ixxii is inscribed to Solomon, but perhaps in this instance 
 the S is to be translated for, as the prayer seems to be Authorship of 
 made for Solomon, or rather, for him as a type of the other VS&B&. 
 Messiah, and it would seem by David, as at the end of the prayer it 
 is said : " The prayers of David the son of Jesse are ended." Psalm 
 cxxii is attributed to Solomon, and we see no reason to doubt it. 
 Psalm Ixxxviii is attributed to the sons of Korah, but it is afterwards 
 added in the superscription : '" A Psalm of Heman, the Ezrahite." 
 But Heman was one of the sons of Korah, as appears from i Chron. 
 vi> 33 : " Of the sons of the Kohathites ; Heman, a singer." Now 
 the sons of Korah were Kohathites (Exodus vi, 18-21). Heman is 
 mentioned in i Kings iv, 31 in connexion with Ethan the Ezrahite, 
 to whom Psalm Ixxxix is attributed : " He (Solomon) was wiser than 
 all men ; than Ethan the Ezrahite, and Heman," etc. Heman and 
 Ethan were, it appears, contemporaries of Solomon. There is no 
 good reason for denying to Heman the authorship of Psalm Ixxxviii, 
 nor to Ethan that of Ixxxix. It is true that the latter psalm repre- 
 sents the crown of David as cast down to the ground. But it is 
 very probable that this refers to the rebellion of Absalom, when 
 David fled from Jerusalem. 
 
 Psalm xc is attributed to Moses, and Bleek remarks : " There is 
 no sufficient ground for denying it to be his, and it certainly bears a 
 very ancient stamp." ' Of the fifty anonymous psalms David, no 
 doubt, wrote a considerable number, but it is difficult to decide how 
 many. Two of the Psalms, at least (cxxvi and cxxxvii), were 
 written after the Babylonian captivity. The Talmudists * call those 
 psalms which give neither the name of the author nor the occasion, 
 'Einleitung, p. 618. *Furst, Ueber den Kanon, etc., p. 73.
 
 840 INTRODUCTION TO THE STUDY 
 
 aim and end, orphans. They ascribed these psalms to various per- 
 sons ; among them to Adam, Moses, Abraham, Melchizedek, etc. ' 
 
 Hitzig, and a few other critics, have referred some of the psalms 
 to the period of the Maccabees. But such a date for any of them 
 is generally discarded. It has met with decided opposition from 
 Gesenius, and finds no sympathy with De Wette. The canon wan 
 closed long before the Maccabean age, and inspiration had ceased 
 On this subject Bleek well remarks : " In fact, there is no psalm in 
 our Psalter which on any sufficient ground can be placed later than 
 the time of Nehemiah, about 300 years before the age of the Macca- 
 bees, and but few bring us down so far as the age of Nehemiah." ' 
 
 ORIGIN OF THE COLLECTION OF THE PSALMS. 
 
 The first question that here arises is, Did our Book of Psalms take 
 its present form from successive additions at different times, or were 
 the Psalms collected at once, and formed into a book, as we now have 
 them? The question has been differently answered. Keil's view 
 ' s as ^ o ^ ows : " Our collection of the Psalms has been 
 
 theory 
 of theoriginof made at one time, and, it would seem, under the charge 
 
 lon ' of one man, on account of the principle, which is easily 
 recognized running through it, of internal and real affinity of the 
 Psalms, of resemblance in their subject-matter, and of identity in 
 tendency and destination. According to this real principle of re- 
 semblance and analogy in the individual songs, the first place in the 
 collection is allotted to the psalms of David and his contemporaries, 
 namely, Asaph and his choir, Ethan, Heman, and the other sons of 
 Korah, who were reckoned the creators and masters of psalmody. 
 Then, according to the prevalent use of the two divine names, Jeho- 
 vah and Elohim, which divides them into two classes, the psalms of 
 the master-singers were distributed into three books, so that ihejirst 
 book was the portion assigned to the Jehovah psalms of David ; the 
 second 'book to the Elohim psalms of the sons of Korah, of Asaph, of 
 David, of Solomon, and of some unknown authors ; and the third 
 book to the remaining psalms of Asaph and of the sons of Korah, 
 which are in part of a mixed character, that is, Jehovah-Elohistic. 
 and in part purely Jehovistic. . . . 
 
 ** The other part of the collection has been arranged according to 
 the same law, taking the order of time into account. In this way 
 the psalm of Moses (xc), as the oldest, has been placed at the head 
 
 'Ibid., 66. Furst, however, does not think that the Talmudists really supposed 
 that Adam wrote any of them, but that such an author would suit them. 
 
 * Einleitung, pp. 623, 624. Delitzsch is said to lean towards a Maccabean date 
 lor Psalms Ixxiv and Ixxix.
 
 OF THE HOLY SCRIPTURES. 341 
 
 of that collection followed by (a) a decade of anonymous psalms be- 
 longing to the period from Solomon's reign till the exile (Psa. xci-c) ; 
 (b) a series of songs of the age of the exile and on to Ezra (Psa. 
 ci-cxix); (c) the collection of pilgrim psalms (Psa. cxx-cxxxiv); 
 (</) the last group, temple and hallelujah psalms (Psa. cxxxv-cl)." ' 
 
 On the other hand, Bleek thinks the collection was formed at 
 different times : the first two sections (i-lxxii) before the Babylonian 
 captivity, and that the other three (Ixxiii-cl), most probably, were 
 added by Nehemiah." 
 
 Keil's view cannot, as a whole, be fully adopted ; and Bleek 's opin- 
 ion, so far as it acknowledges that a collection of psalms was made 
 before the Babylonian captivity, is, no doubt, true. To obtain a clear 
 view of the matter, we must advert to certain historical facts. 
 
 In i Chron. xv, 16-27 it is stated that David spake to the chief 
 of the Levites to appoint their brethren to be singers. We accord- 
 ingly find that Chenaniah was the leader of the singers. David ap- 
 pointed Levites, of whom Asaph was chief, to thank and praise the 
 Lord God of Israel, and delivered into the hand of The singing of 
 Asaph and his brethren first a psalm * to thank the Lord. ofHebrewwo* 
 The psalm is composed of Psalm cv, 1-15 ; xcvi, 1-9; ship. 
 a few verses of cvi, and a few from some other source. It is not 
 improbable that we have in i Chron. xvi, 7-36 but a part of all that 
 was sung on the occasion of David's bringing the ark of God into Jeru- 
 salem. Again, in the time of David, we find two hundred and eighty- 
 eight persons were instructed in the songs of the Lord, at the head 
 of whom were Asaph, Jeduthun, and Heman (i Chron. xxv, 6, 7). 
 
 When the temple was dedicated to Jehovah the Levites praised 
 the Lord, according to David's appointment, with instrum ents of 
 music (2 Chron vii, 6). Jehoshaphat also appointed singers unto the 
 Lord (2 Chron. xx, 21); and Jehoiada carried out the arrangement 
 made by David with respect to singing (2 Chron. xxiii, 18). A 
 more important passage still is 2 Chron. xxix, 30, in which it is 
 stated that " Hezekiah the king, and the princes, commanded the 
 Levites to sing praise unto the Lord with the words of David, and 
 tf Asaph the seer" 
 
 It is evident from the foregoing that David instituted the singing 
 of psalms as a part of divine worship, and that in the A collection in 
 
 time of Hezekiah there was a collection of the psalms, * teten < n> 
 
 the time ol 
 which at least embraced those of David and Asaph. Hezekiah. 
 
 At the end of the seventy-second Psalm it says: "The prayers 
 
 'Introduction to Old Testament in Clark's Foi. Theo. Lib., vol. i, pp. 464, 465. 
 
 *Einleitung, pp. 625, 626. 
 
 There is no word in the original corresponding to " psalm."
 
 342 INTRODUCTION TO THE STUD\ 
 
 of David the son of Jesse are ended." This is followed by eleven 
 psalms of Asaph. But David did not write all of these seventy-two 
 psalms, for seven of them are ascribed to the sons of Korah and one 
 to Asaph, and some are anonymous, though at least several of these 
 were in all probability written by David. 
 
 It is very probable that the statement, " The prayers of David 
 the son of Jesse are ended," was originally placed at the end of all 
 his collected prayers or psalms, if not by the author himself, by some 
 one soon after they were written, and that a part of them were re- 
 moved to their present position in the collection by the last collec- 
 tor and arranger of the Psalms, probably by Ezra or Nehemiah. 
 The psalms of the sons of Korah, and the one of Asaph, now found 
 in the first seventy-two psalms, were probably inserted by the final 
 collector. If the psalms of David found in the last part of the col- 
 lection had been composed subsequently to those in the first half 
 their position could be easily explained, but this is not probable. 
 
 Here the question arises, Upon what principles did the collector 
 on what prin- proceed in arranging the Psalms ? Keil states, as we 
 
 infai ins* ***- nave seen tnat tnose psalms of David in which the name 
 ranged? Jehovah predominates were placed in the first book, 
 
 while those in which Elohim predominates were put with similar 
 psalms in the second book, while the third book presents no uniform- 
 ity in respect to the use of the divine names. But Psalms Ixxxvi, 
 ci, ciii, cix, ex, cxxii, cxxiv, cxxxi, cxxxviii, cxl-cxlv, are ascribed 
 to David, and so is a part of cv, (i Chron. xvi, 7) ; and they are 
 either entirely or partly Jehovistic, and have been excluded from 
 the first book on some different ground from that of the divine 
 names. Of these psalms of David, cxxii, cxxiv, cxxxi, and cxxxiii are 
 songs of degrees, 1 and are placed with eleven other psalms bearing 
 a similar name. In some of the psalms of David, in the first part of 
 the collection, Elohim is found quite often. In those of Asaph the 
 name Jehovah generally prevails, and this is true of the psalms of 
 the sons of Korah. 
 
 If Jehovah were exclusively used in certain psalms, and Elohim in 
 others, there might have been some reason for arranging them with 
 reference to these names. But to determine the arrangement by 
 
 1 Different explanations have been given of this name. Gesenius thinks it most 
 probable that "the name refers to the peculiar rhythm obvious in some of them, by 
 which the sense advances by degrees, or steps, some words of a preceding clause be- 
 ing repeated at the beginning of the succeeding one, with additions and amplifica- 
 tion, to that the sense, as it were, ascends; e. g., Psa. cxxi : I. ' I will lift np mine 
 eyes unto the hills from whence cometh MY HELP. 2. MY KELP cometh from th 
 LORD. 3. He will not.' etc."
 
 OF THE HOLY SCRIPTURES. 343 
 
 considering whether Jehovah or Elohim is used the oftener in them 
 seems very artificial, and admits of serious doubt, and it seems im- 
 possible to state certainly the grounds of the classification in respect 
 to the most of them. 
 
 THE VARIOUS CLASSES OF PSALMS. 
 
 Almost every variety is found in the Book of Psalms : didactic 
 poems, as Psalms xxxvii, xlix, and 1 ; hymns, or songs of Great variety 
 p*aise to Jehovah, as viii, xix, civ; psalms of thanksgiv- tothepflal 
 ing, as xxxi\ , xcii, xcv, xcviii ; psalms of penitence, as xxxviii, li ; 
 historical psalms, as Ixxviii, cv ; Messianic psalms, as ii, xvi, xxii, xl, xlv, 
 Ixxii, ex. It is impossible to classify them very definitely, as many of 
 them are not limited to a single subject. 
 
 THE INTEGRITY OF THE PSALMS. 
 
 Bleek is of the opinion that some of the psalms underwent changes 
 at the hands of later poets, who revised, abridged, or enlarged them 
 to adapt them to the various relations of the people and to divine 
 service, just as we modify our hymns; and that, before the psalms 
 received their fixed form as a part of the canon, minor changes 
 were made in orthography and language. 1 
 
 That later poets revised the psalms is destitute of all proof, and 
 it is not natural to suppose that subsequent writers would alter the 
 language of David and other great poets, especially when no neces- 
 
 tsity existed for making changes. Nor do we see any proof that the 
 psalms have suffered much by the errors of transcribers. In 2 Sam. 
 xxii we have a psalm of David consisting of fifty verses. As the 
 books of Samuel were written in the age of Solomon, or soon after- 
 terwards, it is interesting to compare this early written psalm with 
 psalm xviii, in the collection, bearing the same inscription. The 
 difference between the two is but slight, and we have no reason to 
 suppose that greater changes occurred in the other psalms. 
 
 THE IMPRECATIONS IN THE PSALMS. 
 
 There are passages in the Psalms contrary to their generally edi- 
 fying character which are deemed inconsistent with the Examples of 
 teachings of Christ, and may be termed imprecatory, imprecation. 
 In Psalrn Iviii, 6-10 we have the following imprecation : " Break 
 their teeth, O God, in their mouth : break out the great teeth of the 
 young lions, O Lord, Let them melt away as waters. . . . The 
 righteous shall rejoice when he seeth the vengeance : he shall wash 
 his feet in the blood of the wicked, "etc. Again, in Psalm rxxxvii, 8, q, 
 'Einleitung, pp. 632-635.
 
 344 INTRODUCTION TO THE STUDY 
 
 written after the Babylonian captivity, occurs the following: "C 
 daughter of Babylon, who art to be destroyed; happy shall he be, 
 that rewardeth thee as thou hast served us. Happy shall he be, 
 that taketh and dasheth thy young children against the stones." 
 
 In Psalm Ixix David imprecates curses upon his enemies : " Pour 
 out thine indignation upon them, and let thy wrathful anger take 
 hold of them. . . . Let them be blotted out of the book of the liv. 
 ing, and not be written with the righteous." 
 
 Respecting these passages it must be observed that the impera- 
 i*e impreca- ti ve mood in Hebrew is often used for a simple future.' 
 MODS not upon "Break their teeth, O God," is equivalent to, "Thou 
 wilt break," etc. " Pour out thy wrath," for, " thou wilt 
 
 pour out thy wrath." Sometimes a verb in the future tense is un- 
 necessarily rendered by the imperative, and may be used to express 
 results prophetically. But, after making every allowance for the 
 Hebrew idiom, there will remain passages that contain imprecations 
 on the wicked, and the question arises, How far are they inconsist- 
 ent with the spirit of Christianity ? Under the old dispensation the 
 rule was " an eye for an eye, a tooth for a tooth ; " but our Savioui 
 teaches us to love and pray for our enemies, i. e., e^dpo/, private ene- 
 mies, not public foes. St. Paul on one occasion said to the high- 
 priest Ananias, "God is about to smite thee, thou whited wall' 
 (Acts xxiii, 3) ; and he writes, " Alexander the coppersmith did me 
 much evil: the Lord will reward him according to his work'* 
 (2 Tim. iv, 14). A Christian may heartily wish that the violators of 
 the great principles of morality and religion may in this world re- 
 ceive condign punishment. It is necessary to the existence and 
 well-being of society that the wicked should be punished, and a 
 Christian is not called upon to extend his benevolence so far as to 
 make laws a mere rope of sand. The pious Israelites of old, finding 
 themselves surrounded by powerful nations deeply sunk in idolatry 
 and crime, the deniers of the true God, and the oppressors of Israel 
 and having in their sacred books the account of the extermination 
 of the Canaanites by divine command for their crimes and abomi- 
 nable idolatries, would naturally wish and pray for the destruction of 
 those whose conversion to the true God and whose moral reforma- 
 tion they deemed hopeless. 
 
 Respecting the bitter language employed towards Babylon in 
 Psalm cxxxviii, it must be borne in mind that the Israelites had 
 spent there a severe captivity, and that Isaiah and Jeremiah had 
 predicted the judgments of God which would fall upon Babylon, and 
 her utter ruin. Under these circumstances, the author of the psalm, 
 1 See Roediger's Gesenius' Heb. Gram., pp. 232, 233.
 
 OF THE HOLY SCRIPTURES. 345 
 
 jpeaking of Babylon as " to be destroyed," pronounces the man happy 
 that will aid in blotting out all her inhabitants, young and old. But 
 with all these concessions to their genuine theocratic spirit, it is still 
 true that some of the passages in the psalms are not models for the 
 imitation of Christians. They belong to the old dispensation. 
 
 CHAPTER XLIII. 
 
 THE BOOK OF PROVERBS. 
 
 npHIS book, called in Hebrew ^BfD, 1 and bearing the superscription, 
 Proverbs of Solomon (noSi? "Styo), son of David, king of Israel, con- 
 sists of the short pithy sayings, the sage remarks, and the striking 
 comparisons of Solomon, to which, in the last two chapters, are added 
 the words of Agur and King Lemuel. 
 
 The first nine chapters treat of the blessings of wisdom and the 
 dangers of unchastity. The second section (chapters consists of four 
 x-xxiv) has the superscription, "The Proverbs of Solo- sec* 101 *- 
 mon," and contains moral and religious precepts and prudential 
 maxims. The third section (chaps, xxv-xxix) contains, as stated in 
 the superscription, the " Proverbs of Solomon which the men of 
 Hezekiah, king of Judah, copied out," and do not differ materially in 
 their character from the foregoing. The last section contains the 
 " Words of Agur, the son of Jakeh," the proverbs (chap, xxx) con- 
 sisting of moral and philosophical reflections ; and the " Words of 
 King Lemuel, the proverbs which his mother taught him," enjoining 
 upon him temperance and justice, and describing the qualities of a 
 virtuous woman (chap. xxxi). 
 
 THE GENUINENESS OF THE PROVERBS ATTRIBUTED TO SOLOMON. 
 
 That Solomon wrote Proverbs is expressly stated in i Kings 
 iv, 32: "He spake three thousand proverbs: and his songs were a 
 thousand and five." In the Book of Proverbs there are eight hun- 
 dred and forty-seven verses, which scarcely make so many proverbs. 
 It is exceedingly improbable that the Proverbs of Solomon would 
 soon perish, and thus there is presumptive proof of their genuine- 
 ness. Our collection does not contain one third of what he wrote, 
 and thus we have no reason to suppose that the proverbs of others 
 
 , Mashal, a similitude, an apothegm, a proverb, a poem. Septuagint, Tlapoi 
 n/o ; Vulgate. Proverbium.
 
 S46 INTRODUCTION TO THE STUDY 
 
 have been attributed to Solomon. Nor are these proverbs unworthy 
 of Solomon as a whole, nor do we find any among them that are un 
 suitable to him. And the very fact that the last two chapters in the 
 collection are attributed respectively to Agur and to Lemuel, shows 
 a clear discrimination in making the collection. 
 
 With characteristic skepticism, De Wette remarks on the Prov- 
 rtrst part of erbs : " It is nowhere said that the first collection was 
 genutaeiTsoi- ma de or caused by Solomon himself, and can by no 
 omon's. means be proved; but it certainly belongs to the most 
 
 flourishing period of Hebrew literature." Schrader observes : "In 
 justice, a large share in the composition of the Proverbs them- 
 selves especially in the collection (chaps, x-xxii, 16) which in gen- 
 eral contains the oldest proverbs must be conceded to Solomon. 
 It is probable that in the order of time these are followed by the 
 proverbs in chaps, xxii, i6-xxiv; xxv-xxix, next to which, in time, 
 stands the large section chaps, i, 7~ix, which, on account of its 
 relation to the Book of Job, and because in form and contents it 
 perceptibly departs from chaps, x-xx, 16, as well as from chaps. 
 xxv-xxix, is to be referred to a later period, perhaps to the seventh 
 century " (B. C). 1 The last two chapters, he thinks, belong to a 
 still later age. 
 
 Bleek's view is about the same. He regards chaps, x-xxii, 1-16 
 as in all probability the oldest collection, though he thinks that in 
 its present form it can hardly have proceeded from Solomon, but 
 doubtless contains many genuine proverbs of his ; and that to this sec- 
 tion, chaps, xxii, ly-xxiv, 22, and chap, xxiv, 23-34, have been 
 added. He confesses that it cannot be determined whether these 
 small sections were added, along with chap, xxv and the following 
 chapters, by Hezekiah's men, or were already found united to the 
 central section ; but in no event could they have been added later than 
 the time of Hezekiah : and that it cannot be clearly made out when 
 chaps, xxx and xxxi were added ; possibly by Hezekiah's men, though 
 probably at a later period, as were probably chaps, i-ix. This first 
 section of the book, he thinks, was composed by the last editor of 
 the book as a kind of introduction to the following proverbs of Solo- 
 mon, and that chap, i, 1-6 was written as a preface to the whole 
 book, especially to the proverbs of Solomon in it." 
 
 But we can see no good reason for denying to Solomon the author- 
 ship of the first twenty-four chapters that bear his name, or for sup- 
 posing that the proverbs which Hezekiah's men copied out (chaps. 
 xxv-xxix) as Solomon's were not all his. It is true, that if Hezekiah 'a 
 men had simply written down the proverbs which were floating among 
 1 DC Wette Schrader, p. 537. * Einleitung, p. 6<to.
 
 OF THE HOLY SCRIPTURES. 347 
 
 the people as Solomon's there would be ground to question their genu- 
 ineness. But the statement is, " These are also proverbs of Solo- 
 mon, which the men of Hezekiah, king of Judah, copied out." The 
 Hebrew, word rendered " copied out" is ipvyyrt, they transferred, tran- 
 scribed, from one book into another; Septuagint, eeypai/>av, they 
 copied. 
 
 We have already seen that Solomon spoke three thousand prov- 
 erbs (i Kings iv, 32). It is in the highest degree probable that he 
 wrote them down, otherwise such a large number of proverbs would 
 not have had definite form; and it is extremely unlikely that the 
 number would have been known if they had not been written. In- 
 stead of saying, he wrote them, it is said he spoke ("13^) them, indi- 
 cating that Solomon himself was their author. It is also said that 
 Solomon spoke of trees, etc., where we must understand that he wrote 
 of them. At all events, the language in Prov. xxv, i shows that the 
 men of Hezekiah transferred the proverbs in chaps, xxv-xxix from 
 a larger written collection. It is exceedingly improbable that the 
 first nine chapters of the book should have been written by the col- 
 lector of the proverbs, or editor, instead of Solomon, and that the 
 name of this Hebrew monarch should be placed at the head of them 
 when the collector himself in that case wrote about one third of the 
 whole, and that, too, when he has marked so carefully the source of 
 all the proverbs in the collection, attributing one chapter to Agur, 
 and another to King Lemuel. 
 
 The second division of the book begins with the superscription, 
 " The Proverbs of Solomon." This superscription may ^eg^,^ $, 
 seem superfluous when the fuller one was already stand- vision of UM 
 ing at the beginning of the book. But it is most likely l 
 that the superscription was placed at the head of the second division as 
 indicating a separate collection from the preceding, as many psalms 
 of David, standing in immediate connexion, have each a superscrip- 
 tion. The proverbs in the first section (chaps, i-ix) are principally 
 in a poetical point of view synonymous, while those in the second 
 division (chaps, x-xxiv) are generally antithetical. The last part 
 (chaps, xxii, i7~xxiv) of the second division is evidently intended 
 to go with the preceding, as belonging to Solomon; nor should the 
 last twelve verses be excluded from it as being the product of 
 icveral wise men, as it is unsuitable so to explain chap, xxiv, 23, but 
 rather, according to the English version, " These things belong to 
 the wise," i. e., are suitable for them. The preface to the Proverbs 
 (chap, i, 2-6) may have been written by Solomon himself. 
 
 De Wette remarks that " chapters i-ix, on account of their horta- 
 tory tone and their strict doctrine of chastity, are more suitable for 
 23
 
 343 INTRODUCTION TO THE STUDY 
 
 a trainer of youth, a prophet, or priest, than for a king like Solomon.' 
 Why such doctrines are unsuitable to a man of Solomon's wisdom 
 and virtues simply because he was a king it is not easy to see. It 
 was in the latter part of his life that he was led astray by idolatrous 
 women. And all history is full of instances in which preaching anc 
 practising are widely at variance. 
 
 There are certain peculiarities of language that characterize all 
 Peculiarities in the proverbs attributed to Solomon, and thus confirm 
 
 the language tne i r un i ty o f authorship : l 1 ) ion, lacking heart or under- 
 
 of the Solomon- - --, 
 
 ic Proverbs. standing, occurs in Prov. vi, 32 ; vii, 7 ; ix, 4, 16 ; x, 13, 21 ; 
 
 xi, 12; xii, ii ; xv, 21; xvii, 18 ; xxiv, 30. This phrase is found 
 nowhere else. Similar is the phrase nnun ion, to lack understanding, 
 found only in xxviii, 16. The phrase npS *)'Din, to increase learning, 
 occurs in Prov. i, 5 ; ix, 9 ; xvi, 21, 23 ; but nowhere else. ;na, in the 
 sense to reject, is found only in Prov. i, 25 ; iv, 15 ; viii, 33 ; xiii, 18 ; 
 xv, 32. D'jnn (plural of jno), strife, is found only in xviii, 19; 
 
 xxi, 9, 19; xxiii, 29; xxv, 24; xxvi, 21; xxvii, 15. DTT3, strife, 
 xviii, 18; xix, 13 ; and '^ T a , strife^ vi, 14, 19; x, 12, are found no- 
 where else, TiD ^Si, continual dropping, found only in xix, 13; 
 xxvii, 15. The phrase jn ann, to devise mischief, is found only in 
 iii, 29 (n;n, feminine); vi, 14; xii, 20; xiv, 22. There are other 
 peculiarities common to the different sections, but these are the 
 most important. 
 
 The thirtieth chapter is attributed to Agur and the thirty-first to 
 AgurandLem- King Lemuel. As the author of the other parts of the 
 net unknown. DOO k j s a real personage, there is no reason for supposing, 
 with some, that they are merely symbolical designations. But they 
 are persons otherwise unknown. 
 
 In almost every instance in the book the divine Being is called 
 LORD (Jehovah) ; in the few exceptions, Elohimj but in Agur's prayer 
 Eloah is once used (chap, xxx, 5). Keil assigns to Solomon chaps, 
 i-xxix ; Agur he regards as a real personage, but Lemuel he thinks 
 is a symbolical name. 1 
 
 Ancient Jewish tradition f assigned the collecting of all the prov- 
 erbs that bear the name of Solomon into our book to the men of 
 King Hezekiah, who were regarded as forming a literary society or 
 college. To this society it attributed the additions chaps, xxx, xxxi. 
 It regarded Agur as a symbolical name of a wise man of the time of 
 Solomon, the embodiment of the law and of wisdom ; and Lemuel 
 as the symbolic name of King Solomon. 
 
 'Introduction, vol. i, pp. 472, 477. 'Furst, Ueber den Kanon, pp. 75-78.
 
 OF THE HOLY SCRIPTURES. 349 
 
 CHAPTER XLIV. 
 
 THE BOOK OF ECCLESIASTES. 
 
 THIS back (called in Hebrew nSrtp, 1 Koheleth ; Sepruagint, 'E*Aij- 
 V V I 
 ffowmft ; Vulgate, Ecclesiastes, a preacher), purporting to be writ- 
 ten by the son of David, king of Jerusalem, is a dissertation upon 
 the unsatisfactory nature of all things human, and recommends the 
 enjoyment of the blessings of life. At the same time it earnestly 
 avows the importance of fearing God and keeping his command- 
 ments. The language is for the most part poetical and aphoristic, 
 resembling in style the Book of Proverbs, but sometimes it passes 
 over into prose. 
 
 The author opens the discussion with the exclamation, " Vanity 
 of vanities," and describes the ceaseless changes in all human af- 
 fairs (chap, i, i-n), and then describes his high position, and the 
 various ways in which he sought happiness without finding it (chap. 
 i, i2-ii). He asserts that for everything there is an appointed time, 
 enjoins the doing of good, and the enjoying of the fruits of one's la- 
 bour, affirming that men and beasts are exposed to the same calam- 
 ities (chap. iii). He next discusses the miseries of men, the advan- 
 tages of society, with a few remarks on other matters (chap. iv). 
 After this he gives religious precepts, and discourses on the vanity 
 of riches, and recommends eating and drinking and enjoying the 
 fruit of one's labour (chap. v). Next follow various remarks on 
 the miseries of man, in which is cited the case of one who cannot 
 enjoy his abundant wealth and honour (chap. vi). 
 
 In the following chapter (vii) the author gives utterance to prov- 
 erbs and moral precepts, inculcating moderation, and calling atten- 
 tion to the fact that sometimes the righteous man perisheth in his 
 righteousness, while the wicked man prolongs his life in wickedness. 
 In chap, viii he delivers some moral precepts, and declares that he 
 km ws that " it shall be well with them that fear God," but " it shall 
 not be well with the wicked." At the same time he asserts that 
 good men sometimes meet with the fate of bad men, and wicked 
 men attain what is due good men, and recommends that men shall 
 enjoy the good things of this life. 
 
 (from irjlj), to convoke), one addressing a publu asftmhly i preache*. The 
 noun is 'masculine, with a feminine termination.
 
 850 INTRODUCTION TO THE STUDY 
 
 In chap, ix he again reiterates the doctrine that things come alike 
 to all, whatever their moral character may be, and " that time and 
 chance happeneth to them all." In chap, x he delivers various 
 proverbs, and in chap, xi precepts, and exhorts the young man to en- 
 joy himself in his youth, but at the same time to remember that for 
 all these things God will bring him into judgment. He closes the 
 book by an exhortation to remember the Creator in the days of one's 
 youth, before the evil days come, and graphically depicts the miseries 
 of old age, and sums up, as the conclusion of all that he has said, 
 " Fear God and keep his commandments; for this is the whole duty 
 of man. For God shall bring every work into judgment, with every 
 secret thing, whether it be good, or whether it be evil." Jerome re- 
 marks that the Hebrews say this conclusion of Ecclesiastes saved it 
 from perishing with other writings of Solomon, a fate it would hav 
 deserved without it. 1 
 
 THE DESIGN OF THE BOOK. 
 
 It is clear from the author's conclusion that he has no intention to 
 Theauthomot i ncu ^ cate Atheism, Epicureanism, or the doctrines after- 
 an Epicurean wards held by the Sadducees. In his discussion ther; 
 is but little system, and he repeatedly returns to the doc- 
 trine that it is best to keep the commandments of God, to enjoy the 
 fruit of one's labour, and that all is vanity in this world, but at the 
 same time asserting man's responsibility to God for his actions. 
 
 Schrader gives the following account of the book : It " evidently 
 Schroder's ex- trans P rts us to a ^ me when the old Hebrew doctrine of 
 pianation of retribution, the old faith, in general, had already become 
 a subject of the strongest doubts, and when men, almost 
 despairing of any thing higher, believed that they could find in the 
 enjoyment of earthly things the satisfaction they sought, and the in- 
 ternal harmony they missed. The Book of Ecclesiastes unfolds to us 
 the picture of the discord in the soul of a pious man of this period 
 It transports us into the very midst of the surging conflict of 
 thoughts fighting each other. The ancient faith appears to struggle 
 with modern doubt for the mastery. But at last we see the former 
 gain the victory over the latter, while the author states the posi- 
 tion, as the sum of his discourse, 'Fear God, and keep his com- 
 mandments.' " The only exception that can be justly made to the 
 foregoing statement is, that we have no reason to suppose that skep- 
 ticism respecting the doctrine of divine providence and retribution 
 had become common, but, rather, that it was a growing tendency 
 vhich developed itself afterwards in the doctrine of the Sadducees. 
 1 Comment, on Ecclesiastes, in Jin. f De Wette Schrader, p. 541.
 
 DF THE HOLY SCRIPTURES. 
 
 DATE AND AUTHORSHIP. 
 
 f he superscription of the book is, " The Words of the Preacher, 
 the son of David, king in Jerusalem." And in chap, i, 12 the au- 
 thor jays, " I, the Preacher, was king over Israel in Jerusalem." Sol- 
 omon's name is not found in the book ; it might be supposed that 
 Solomon is not necessarily meant, and that the language " son ol 
 David " might be used to designate any of his descendants who 
 was king in Jerusalem. But the statement that he was " king over 
 Israel in Jerusalem," and that he was wiser than all those who had 
 preceded him in Jerusalem (chap, i, 16), suits Solomon only. 
 
 But here the question arises, Is the author's title, " son of David> 
 king in Jerusalem," a real or assumed one ? It was the x^ book ^^ 
 
 general opinion of the ancients that Solomon was really to lta composi- 
 
 ' tton than the 
 the author of Ecclesiastes. As m antiquity, says time of soio- 
 
 Ftirst, " a comprehensive wisdom superior to that of mon> 
 all other men is ascribed to Solomon only, it was natural that they 
 should refer this book of an unknown teacher of wisdom to Solo- 
 mon." ' " When, at a later period, the view had become established 
 that Solomon was not merely an assumed name, but was the real au- 
 thor of the work, the tradition was fixed that the college of Heze- 
 kiah edited and arranged the Book of Ecclesiastes, as it had before 
 the Proverbs and Song of Solomon. As we have seen in the case 
 of the Proverbs and the Song of Solomon, the reference here can be 
 to the last days only of this college, in the latest Persian period, be- 
 fore the founding of the Great Council ; and, especially, Ecclesiastes 
 appears to be the last book edited."' 
 
 The book was treated by Jerome as the work of Solomon, and this 
 was the prevailing opinion in the Christian Church until Believed by the 
 Grotius (f 1645) rejected it as a writing of Solomon, and 
 referred it to a later age on account of the peculiarities monian. 
 of its language. Modern critics, with but few exceptions, regard it 
 as the work of an author who lived after the Babylonian captivity. 
 Professor Stuart remarks with great propriety and truth, " The dic- 
 tic* of this book differs so widely from that of Solomon in the Book 
 of Proverbs, that it is difficult to believe that both came from the 
 same pen. Chaucer does not differ more from Pope than Ecclesi- 
 iastes from Proverbs. It seems to me, when I read Coheleth, that 
 it presents one of those cases which leave no room for doubt, so 
 striking and prominent is the discrepancy." 1 Hengstenberg and 
 
 1 Ueber den Kanon, pp. go, 91. Furst shows that there was a slight denarture 
 from this tradition, p. 91. 
 *Ibid., p. 91. 'On the Old Testament Canon, p. 139.
 
 So-3 INTRODUCTION TO THE STUDY 
 
 Keil refer the book to the age of Nehemiah and Ezra. Ewald re- 
 fers it to the last part of the Persian dominion ; De Wette ' and Bleek 
 to the last part of the Persian, or to the beginning of the Greek pe- 
 riod; while Kamphausen 1 fixes upon the third century before Christ 
 as the period in which it was probably written. 
 
 We think there can b"e but little doubt that it is the latest book 
 of the Canon, and could not have been written earlier than the time 
 of the prophet Malachi ; but in all probability it was written still 
 later. This is especially evident from the language, and also from 
 the tone of the Book. One of the most striking peculiarities of the 
 language is the frequent use of tf, abbreviated from T^X, who, which. 
 
 T -I 
 
 as a prefix to verbs. This usage was common in the Phenician lan- 
 guage and in the Rabbinical Hebrew, as appears from the Mishna 
 (about A. D. 219*), but rarely occurs in the Old Testament 4 outside 
 of the Book of Ecclesiastes and the Song of Solomon. 
 
 Its Chaldaisms point to a period subsequent to the Babylonian 
 
 Chaldalsms In ca P tivit y- ty* '/' vi 6 * ^ to cease > xii > 35 I|, ***, 
 Ecclesiastes. Hi, I ; ojna, sentence, viii, n ; r\l^, province, ii, 8; itso, to 
 
 prosper, x, 10; xi, 6; "it?3, explanation, viii, i; vhw, to rule, ii, 19; 
 
 ^ V "" T 
 
 viii, 9 ; jiaStf, ruling over, viii, 4, 8 ; "ypfl, strong, mighty, vi, 10 ; jj3F>, 
 to be made straight, i, 15 ; ^33, long ago, formerly, i, 10; iii, 15. Sev- 
 ewl of these words are also found in books written after the Baby- 
 lonian captivity. There are also other words indicating a late period. 
 
 In the Proverbs of Solomon Jehovah is the usual name for the 
 divine Being ; this word never occurs in Ecclesiastes, but instead 
 thereof Elohim, which is used/<?r/y times. It would seem that the 
 name Jehovah had at the time cf the composition of the book already 
 grown into disuse. 
 
 The age of the author of Ecclesiastes was one of despondency, not 
 the flourishing period in which Solomon reigned. It is not at all prob- 
 able that Solomon would speak of the oppression under the sun, in 
 which the oppressed had no comforter, and that he would say that 
 on the side of the oppressors was power (chap, iv, i), as this would 
 have been a reflection upon himself. It is evident that when the 
 book w"as written the Jewish temple had been already rebuilt, for the 
 author gives advice about going to the house of God (chap, v, i). 
 
 While we are compelled on strong internal grounds to decide 
 
 1 De Wette Schrader, p. 543. 
 Kamphausen's Bleek, p. 648. 
 
 " \t tint; time it received its present form, but it doubtless presents the state of the 
 Hebrew at an earlier period. 
 
 4 It occurs several times in Psalm cxxxvii, 8, 9, written after the captivity.
 
 OF THE HOLY SCRIPTURES. 353 
 
 against Solomon's being the author of the work, there is no one to 
 whom we can with any probability ascribe it. Professor Douglas, in 
 his additions to Keil's Introduction, makes a vigorous, but yet, we 
 think, unsuccessful effort to show that the book proceeded from 
 Solomon. 
 
 CHAPTER XLV. 
 
 THE SONG OF SOLOMON. 
 
 THE Hebrew title of this book is Song l of the Songs, which is Sol- 
 omon's (noSt? 1 ? iA D'Ti^n TKT), in which its authorship is cleany 
 
 ascribed to Solomon and the phrase " Song of Songs " means the 
 most beautiful of songs, i. e., the choicest of the songs, of Solomon. 
 
 The book consists of eight chapters, in which the deepest affections 
 of two persons of opposite sex are set forth in the strongest, most 
 beautiful, and often touching language, in the form of dialogues, 
 often accompanied with an exquisitely beautiful description of the 
 scenery in country life. 
 
 The book opens with a strong expression of love on the part of a 
 female for a shepherd, to which he replies in affectionate, laudatory 
 language. She answers in endearing words, to which he again replies 
 in terms of praise and appreciation. She then speaks of her own pre- 
 eminence and that of her lover, and he makes his address to her, to 
 which she responds (chaps, i, ii). In the following chapter (chap, iii) 
 she relates her search for her beloved, and the finding of him, after 
 which she describes him, and compares him to Solomon in his glory. 
 Her lover then answers (chap, iv), giving an exquisitely beautiful 
 description of his beloved, to which she makes a brief response. In 
 his dissatisfaction he seeks his beloved in the night, but before she 
 opens to him he withdraws, and while she is in pursuit of him the 
 watchmen smite her. She gives a beautiful description of his per- 
 son (chap v). In the following chapter a third person is introduced, 
 asking her where her beloved is gone, to whom she replies. After 
 this he gives a beautiful description of his beloved, in which she is 
 called a Shulamite, and prince's daughter. In replying to this, she 
 invites him to take a walk with her into the fields (chaps, vi, vii). 
 She expresses her deep affection for the object of her love. After 
 this she speaks of a little sister that hath no breasts, and refers to 
 Solomon's vineyard at Baal-hamon, and to her own vineyard, and 
 closes by exhorting her beloved to make haste (chap. viii). 
 
 1 Septuagint, 'Ao/za 'Aapdruv ; Vulgate, Canticum Canticorum.
 
 354 INTRODUCTION TO THE STUDT 
 
 Delitzsch regards the whole book as referring to the ardent affec 
 Deiitzach'san- ^ on ^ two ^ overs ^ or eac ^ other, beginning with their 
 
 of this first love, and extending to a period beyond their nup- 
 tials. He divides the whole into six acts, and each of 
 these again into two scenes : first, the mutual ardour of the lovers 
 (chaps, i, 2-ii, 7) ; secondly, their seeking and finding each other 
 (chaps, ii, 8-iii, 5) ; thirdly, the introduction of the bride, and the 
 wedding (chaps, iii, 9~v, i) ; fourthly, the love that was spurned, 
 but again won (chaps, v, 2-vi, 9) ; fifthly, how the charmingly beau- 
 tiful Shulamite, even as princess, preserves her simplicity and humil- 
 ity (chaps, vi, lo-viii, 4) ; sixthly, the visit of Solomon and of the 
 Shulamite to the house of the latter, and the confirmation of their al- 
 liance of love (chap, viii, 5-14). " This view," says Bleek, " presents 
 many difficulties and improbabilities." 1 Schrader divides the book, 
 in a somewhat different way, into five acts, in which he represents 
 the Shulamite as being in love with a shepherd, and Solomon ap- 
 pearing as his rival, but without gaining her affections. 1 But this 
 seems inadmissible, and it is better to regard the book as exhibiting 
 the love of but two persons for each other. 
 
 DESIGN OF THE AUTHOR. 
 
 Respecting the design of the author, the most discordant views 
 ?iews of the have been held. " The men of the Great Council," says 
 Fttrst, " and those who lived later in the Greek period, 
 cordant. explained the Song of Solomon in a symbolical or alle- 
 
 gorical manner, and thus it was saved for the Canon." ' " In the 
 on the Song of Solomon it is said, on the passage ' Thy 
 cheeks are comely with rows of pearls, thy neck with strings of pearls ; 
 we will make for thee golden chains with studs of silver : ' ' The rows 
 of pearls are the five books of the Law ; the strings of pearls are the 
 Prophets ; the golden chains are the Hagiographa ; and the silver 
 studs are the cantos of the Song of Solomon.' The song is also des- 
 ignated as the mystical, the excellent scroll."* 
 
 The Tar^um on this book, and many of the Jewish expositors, 
 supposed by explain the song as setting forth in an allegorical way 
 
 gome ancient t ne relation existing between God and the Hebrew 
 
 and modern . *_ 
 
 critics to be ai- people, in which the Shulamite maiden represents the 
 
 people of Israel, while her lover typifies Jehovah. Ori- 
 gen, in his Commentary on this book, remarks: "Understand that 
 the bridegroom is Christ, and that the bride is the Church, without 
 tpot or wrinkle." In this method of exposition he is followed 
 
 1 Einleitung, p. 645. *De Wette Schrader, p. 558. 
 
 1 Ueber den Kanon. p. 84. 4 Ibid., p. 85.
 
 OF THE HOLY SCRIPTURES. 355 
 
 by most of the ancient Christian expositors, and by many of the 
 moderns. 
 
 Respecting the symbolizing of the union of the soul with God by 
 means of the love existing between two persons of dif- g^g rea soni 
 
 ferent sexes, Professor Stuart remarks, " that extensive in Oriental u- 
 
 .... . , , f . . agetoranalte- 
 
 usage of a similar nature exists, and has for a long pen - goricai mter- 
 
 od existed, in the Oriental countries, e. g., among the P retatlon - 
 Persians, the Turks, the Arabians, and the Hindoos. In the Musnavi 
 of Jellaleddin, the poems of Jami, and above all in the Odes of Ha- 
 fiz are many productions apparently of an amatory nature, which 
 the Persians (there are some dissenters) regard as expressive of the 
 intercourse of the soul with God." ' 
 
 Lane, in his Modern Egyptians, gives some specimens of songs 
 sung by the dervishes of Egypt upon the festival of the birth of 
 Mohammed which have considerable resemblance to the Song of 
 Solomon, and are evidently intended to be of a highly devotional 
 character, however different they may seem to be from our taste and 
 sense of propriety. " I cannot entertain any doubt," says he, " as to 
 the design of Solomon's Song."' 
 
 According to Keil * the Song " depicts in dramatico-lyrical re- 
 sponsive songs, under the allegory of the bridal love of Solomon and 
 Shulamith, the loving communion between the Lord and his Church, 
 according to its ideal nature, as it results from the choice of Israel 
 to be the Church of the Lord. According to this, every disturbance 
 of that fellowship, springing out of Israel's infidelity, leads to an 
 ever firmer establishment of the covenant of love by means of Is- 
 rael's return to the true covenant of God, and this God's unchange- 
 able love." 
 
 Delitzsch rejects the allegorical character of the Song, and en 
 deavours to explain it with a reference to the history of critics who 
 the time. " Without Solomon's conscious aim, by the ^JJLfXto? 
 agency of the Holy Spirit it has taken such a form that protation. 
 the mystery of marriage sheds its rays upon us out of its ethereal 
 love, its crystal mirror." Bleek also denies the allegorical mean- 
 ing, and sees in the book nothing more than the expression of love 
 of persons of different sexes for each other ; * and Schrader holds 
 that it sets forth the glorification of true bridal love, exhibiting its 
 real character in every trial ; and, inasmuch as this tendency springs 
 from the spirit of the purest morality, it justly entitles the book to a 
 place in the canon without resorting to the allegorical exposition 
 which he thinks is devoid of all probability.* 
 
 J On the Old Test. Canon, p. j 70. * See his specimens in vol. ii, pp. 195-197. 
 * Introd., vol. i, pp. 503, 504. Einl., p. 643. *DeWette Schrader. p. 559,
 
 356 INTRODUCTION TO THE STUDY 
 
 It seems exceedingly improbable that the book would have been 
 admitted into the canon if it had not been deemed to be of an alle- 
 gorical character, setting forth the intimate relation existing between 
 Jehovah and his chosen people ; for it is in no sense historical, di- 
 dactic, or prophetic. A poem, however beautiful it may be, if it 
 aims at nothing higher than to set forth the mutual love of two per- 
 sons of different sex, has no place in the canon. In the Old Testa- 
 ment, the intimate relation existing between Jehovah and Israel ig 
 typified by the relation existing between husband and wife. But it 
 is true that the Song itself furnishes no key to its solution, and the 
 spiritual sense nowhere crops out. 
 
 THE AUTHOR OF THE SONG. 
 
 Schrader, while he denies that the poem was written by Solomon, 
 Opinions of grants that in its original form it was composed perhaps 
 modem critic*. j n t h e tenth century before Christ, but was afterwards en- 
 riched by additions. He is inclined to think that it had its origin 
 in the northern part of Palestine. 1 
 
 Bleek remarks, that " it may be supposed, with great probability, 
 that the book has one author, to which supposition the similarity of 
 character, representation, and language pervading the whole of it, 
 and the recurrence of so many individual references, lead. Single 
 passages clearly refer to Solomon and to his affairs in such a way 
 that it scarcely admits of a doubt that they were written in the age 
 and in the neighbourhood of this monarch. But these very passages 
 also make it in the highest degree probable that not Solomon him- 
 self is the author, but another poet, in the time and in the neigh- 
 bourhood of Solomon."* Davidson supposes, that although not writ 
 ten by Solomon, it appeared soon after his death. 1 
 
 Keil remarks, that the statement of the superscription, that Solo- 
 mon was the author of the book, "is thoroughly confirmed by the 
 predominant circle of imagery in the poem, and by its references to 
 matters of fact as well as by its language. The multitude of names 
 of plants and animals which occur in it nuts, aloes, cedar, cypress 
 vine, mandrakes, rose, camphire, frankincense, myrrh, spikenard, 
 cinnamon, lily; and, again, hinds of the field, lions, kids, doves, 
 leopards, mare, she-goats, young roes, gazelles, ewes, foxes, turtle; 
 as well as of other natural objects and products (ivory, marble, 
 sapphires, etc.), favour the belief that he was King Solomon, re- 
 nowned equally as a prolific composer of songs, and as an eminent 
 naturalist (i Kings iv, 32, 33)." 4 
 
 1 De Wette Schrader, pp. 560, 561. * Einleitung, pp. 644, 645. 
 
 ' Introduction, vol. ii, p. 414. *Vol. i, pp. 501, 502
 
 OF THE HOLY SCRIPTURES. 357 
 
 The ancient tradition ' of the Jews attributed the Song to Solo- 
 mon, and this has been the prevalent opinion, and there is no good 
 reason for denying that he was the author. It certainly was written 
 in the age of Solomon, to which there are the most evident allusions 
 (chajs. i, 5 ; iii, 7-11 ; viii, u, 12). 
 
 Respecting the language of the book, it is to be observed that it 
 nis some affinities with the Book of Proverbs; but at i n it* language 
 the same time it has in many places the shortened form, Uke P 10 "* 1 " 1 *- 
 v, v, from "ityx, characteristic of late Hebrew, but which was also 
 
 T - T -f 
 
 used sometimes at an earlier period, as we find it twice in the Song 
 of Deborah (Judges v, 7). D^s,tar& ) occurs in iv, 13 ; but this word 
 is also found in the Sanscrit, and furnishes no probable proof of the 
 late origin of the book. 
 
 ITS CANONICITY. 
 
 Some of the ancient Jews attributed a very high value to 
 Song. Rabbi Akibah remarked, " Far be it from us to Pound ^ the 
 suppose that any one in Israel ever doubted the holi- canon at an 
 ness of the Song, for the world was not worthy of the e 
 day on which the Song was given to Israel. Although all the Hagi- 
 ographa are holy, this Song is most holy."' In the Targum on this 
 Song it is stated that Solomon uttered it under the influence of the 
 Holy Spirit. 
 
 The book is found in the Catalogue of the Canonical Scriptures of 
 the Old Testament as given by Melito, 1 bishop of Sardis, in the lat- 
 ter part of the second century, and also in the catalogues of the 
 early Church. Origen and Jerome, however, following an old tra- 
 dition of the Jews, did not think the book should be read before one 
 is thirty years of age. 4 
 
 1 Furst, Ueber den Kanon, p. 86. 
 
 1 Fiirst, Ueber den Kanon, p. 83. Akibah lived in th first part '/f the second 
 century. 
 
 1 In Eusebius, Hist. Eccles., iv, 26. 
 'Fiirst, Ueber den Kanon, p. 83.
 
 358 INTRODUCTION TO THE STUDY 
 
 CHAPTER XLVI. 
 
 THE LAMENTATIONS OF JEREMIAH. 
 
 small poetical book, containing in the Hebrew Bible the 
 * simple inscription nD'x, (How?) so called because the book 
 begins with this word stands in the English version of the Bible, 
 in the Peshito-Syriac, and in the Vulgate, immediately after the 
 Prophet Jeremiah, from which it is separated in the Septuagint by 
 the Book of Baruch ; but in the Hebrew Bible it stands in the Hagi- 
 ographa just before the Book of Ecclesiastes. We introduce it here 
 on account of its poetical character. In the Septuagint it bears the 
 title, " Lamentations of Jeremiah " (Qpyvoi lepe/i/ov), and has the fol- 
 lowing prefatory remarks : " And it came to pass, after Israel had 
 been led away into captivity, and Jerusalem had been made desolate, 
 that Jeremiah sat weeping, and sung this dirge over Jerusalem, and 
 said." In the Peshito-Syriac it has the inscription, " Lamentation of 
 Jeremiah ;" in the Vulgate, "THRENI, that is, THE LAMENTATIONS OF 
 THE PROPHET JEREMIAH." It is called by Jerome "CINOTH " (nirp), 
 Lamentations. 
 
 It consists of five chapters. In the first the author pours forth, in 
 language deeply pathetic, his sorrow for the desolations and miseries 
 of Judah and Jerusalem on account of their sins. This mournful strain 
 he continues in the next chapter, in which he laments the destruction 
 of the temple ; and in the third he describes, in deeply touching terms, 
 his own sufferings and sorrows, and at the same time expresses hope 
 and confidence in God. After this he reverts to the calamities that 
 have overtaken Jerusalem, and prays for a restoration to the Divine 
 favour (chaps, iv, v). Although no mention is made of Nebuchad- 
 nezzar s having brought these calamities upon the land and the city, 
 yet the notices of the Egyptians and Assyrians, to whom the Jews 
 have submitted (chapter v, 6), and the nature of the calamities, 
 leave no doubt that the dreadful catastrophe was brought upon them 
 by Nebuchadnezzar when he destroyed the city and the temple, and 
 led the people away captive to Babylon. 
 
 The arrangement of the verses in the first four chapters is highly 
 n vereinca- arl ificial. The first two chapters contain each twenty - 
 uon highijar- two verses of about two lines each. The first of these 
 
 verses in each of the two chapters begins with ** (Aleph), 
 the first letter of the Hebrew alphabet ; the second with 3 (Beth) ; and
 
 OF THE HOLY SCRIPTURES. 3.59 
 
 the other successive verses with the successive letters of the alpha- 
 bet, ending with n (Tav). The third consists of sixty-six verses, aver- 
 aging each about two thirds of a line in length. The first, second, 
 and third verses begin severally with N (Aleph), the next three each 
 with 3 (Beth), and so on to the last three, which begin with n (Tav). 
 The fourth chapter contains twenty-two verses, each something more 
 than a line long, beginning with the successive letters of the Hebrew 
 alphabet. The fifth chapter contains twenty-two verses, arranged 
 without any reference to the order of the letters in the alphabet. 
 
 THE AUTHOR OF LAMENTATIONS. 
 
 We have already seen that the Septuagint attributes the book to 
 Jeremiah ; so does the Vulgate in nearly the same Ian- The book 
 guage. The most ancient Jewish tradition ' ascribes it ^^ 
 to the Prophet Jeremiah, and this has been the almost cient tradition, 
 unanimous opinion. In confirmation of the ancient tradition De 
 Wette remarks, that " we can appeal to its affinity in contents, 
 spirit, tone, and language " with the prophecy of Jeremiah. With 
 this judgment Bleek coincides." Schrader * thinks it very improbable, 
 if not impossible, that Jeremiah should have written it, alleging that 
 its author made use of Ezekiel (which statement admits of no proof), 
 and that chap, v, 7 contradicts Jer. xxxi, 29, 30, which is not true. 
 He supposes the book was written during the Babylonian captivity. 
 Josephus evidently refers to this book when, speaking of the death 
 of King Josiah, he observes : " Jeremiah, the prophet, wrote upon 
 him a funereal dirge, which is still extant." 4 But he is mistaken in 
 supposing that it was composed on the death of that monarch, 
 though it is stated in 2 Chronicles xxxv, 25 that Jeremiah lamented 
 Josiah. 
 
 The book has a freshness and vividness clearly showing that if 
 must have been written soon after the events of which it treats. 
 Bleek thinks it was composed before the final catastrophe, in the in- 
 terval between the surrender of the city and its destruction, while 
 Jeremiah was still in Jerusalem (Jer. xxxix, 14). On this point, 
 however, we are not certain. 
 
 1 Furst, Ueber den Kanon, p. 87. * Einleitung, p. 502. 
 
 De Wette Schrader, pp. 531, 533. ' Antiq., x, 5, I.
 
 300 INTRODUCTION TO THE STUDY 
 
 CHAPTER XLVII. 
 
 THE PROPHETIC BOOKS. 
 HEBREW PROPHECY. 
 
 \\ /"HEN Moses warned the children of Israel against false proph- 
 ^ ets and deceivers, he promised them, " The Lord thy God 
 will raise up unto thee a Prophet (NOJ) from the midst of thee, of 
 thy brethren, like unto me; unto him ye shall hearken" (Deut. 
 xviii, 15). This promise, although it has its highest fulfillment in 
 uaeoftheterm Jesus Christ, 1 the greatest of all prophets, yet furnishes 
 prophet. tne basis of the prophetic office among the Hebrews. 
 
 In Judges vi, 8, it is said " that the Lord sent a prophet unto the 
 children of Israel " the only mention of a prophet in this book. 
 The next use of the term prophet occurs in i Sam. iii, 20, where it 
 is said that all Israel "knew that Samuel was established to be a 
 prophet of the Lord." Mention is made of " a company of prophets " 
 in the time of Samuel (i Sam. x, 10). In the time of David we read of 
 " Nathan the prophet," " Gad the seer," and " Heman the seer." These 
 appellations are used indiscriminately (i Sam. ix, 9). In the time 
 of Jeroboam we find " Ahijah the prophet " (i Kings xiv, 2), " Iddo 
 the seer," (2 Chron. ix, 29), and " Shemaiah the prophet " (chaps, 
 xi, 2 ; xii, 15). Elijah, one of the most distinguished of the Hebrew 
 prophets, flourished during the reign of the wicked Ahab. He was 
 succeeded in the prophetic office by his disciple Elisha, almost as 
 celebrated as his master. The ministry of these two prophets ex- 
 tended from about B. C. 910 to B. C. 838. During their time refer- 
 ence is made to " the sons of the prophets " (i Kings xx, 35 ; 2 Kings 
 " 3> 5 7 15; iv, i, 38; v, 22; vi, i; ix, i), that is, "the disciples 
 The prophetic of the prophets," who appear to have established schools 
 for the training of young men in the law of Moses, and 
 if called of God to the extraordinary prophetic office, that they might 
 be suitable instruments in the hands of Providence for the execution 
 of their great mission. Among these prophets, Samuel, Nathan, Gad 
 (i Chron. xxix, 29), Shemaiah, Iddo (2 Chron. xii, 15), and Ahijah 
 (2 Chron. ix, 29), were writers. None of their works, however, are 
 extant, unless we except the Books of Samuel, which, in all prob- 
 ability, were, in their present form, composed by Nathan. Of 
 
 1 Acts iii, 22
 
 OF THE HOLY SCRIPTURES. 361 
 
 their prophecies we have but fragments in some of the hu.orical 
 books. It is very probable that their prophecies were of a local and 
 fragmentary character. 
 
 The most brilliant period of Hebrew prophecy extended from about 
 B. C. 880 to B. C. 430, daring which flourished, in order of time, 1 
 Jonah, Obadiah, Joel, Amos, Hosea, Isaiah, Micah, Nahum, Zeph- 
 aniih, Habakkuk, Jeremiah, Ezekiel, Daniel, Zechariah, Haggai, and 
 Malichi. We have extant writings from all of them with the prob- 
 able exception of Jonah.* It was during this period that the He- 
 brews came in contact with foreign nations, and their prophets, un- 
 der the influence of the Divine Spirit, often take a wider range and a 
 loftier flight, and predict the overthrow of the kingdoms hostile to 
 Israel, the judgments or blessings of God upon his chosen people, 
 and the glory of Messiah's reign. 
 
 The Hebrew prophets were distinguished by the purity of their 
 lives, self-denial, and zeal for Jehovah, which often Cbar&KteTiatiCM 
 brought upon them the wrath and vengeance of wicked of the Hebrew 
 and idolatrous kings. As a class, they had no parallel F 
 in other nations. They did not belong to any particular tribe or 
 family, but were selected by the Almighty himself as messengers, 
 to whom he communicated his will and purpose, principally in 
 visions. We sometimes find the prophets performing symbolic acts, to 
 impress more deeply upon the people their prophecies. Thus Ahijah, 
 in declaring unto Jeroboam that he should have ten tribes of Israel, 
 " caught the new garment that was on him, and rent it in twelve 
 pieces : and he said to Jeroboam, Take thee ten pieces : for thus 
 saith the Lord, the God of Israel, Behold, I will rend the kingdom out 
 of the hand of Solomon, and will give ten tribes to thee " (i Kings 
 
 xi, 3 30- 
 
 Isaiah, by way of illustrating his prophecy, was directed to call his 
 son " Maher-shalal-hash-baz," hasting to the prey, speeding symbolism oi 
 to the booty (chap, viii, i) ; and, to set forth God's judg- * prophet", 
 ment upon Egypt and Ethiopia he was commanded to walk naked 
 and barefoot, which he did for three years (chap, xx, 2-4). 
 
 Jeremiah was sent to the Euphrates to hide a girdle in the hole 
 of a rock, and long afterward he was ordered to get it again ; and, 
 having found it marred, it was made to represent the worthless con- 
 dition of Israel (chap, xiii, i-n). 
 
 For a sign to Israel Ezekiel was ordered to portray, by symbols, 
 the siege of Jerusalem, and to lie upon his left side three hundred 
 and ninety days, to bear the iniquity of the house of Israel ; also to 
 
 Some of them, however, were contemporary. 
 
 * We do not regard Jonah as the author of the book that bears his name.
 
 362 INTRODUCTION TO THE STUDY 
 
 lie upon his right side forty days, to bear the iniquity of the house 
 of Judah (chap, iv, 1-8). 
 
 To illustrate the treachery of Israel Hosea was thus commanded : 
 "Go, take unto thee a wife of whoredoms and children of whoredoms : 
 for the land hath committed great whoredom, departing from the 
 Lord " (chap, i, 2). Again : " Go yet, love a woman beloved of her 
 friend, yet an adulteress, according to the love of the Lord toward 
 the children of Israel," etc. (chap, iii, i). 
 
 The question here arises, Were these symbolic actions really per- 
 formed, or were they merely visions ? In some instances they were, 
 doubtless, real transactions, performed before the eyes of the peo- 
 ple ; in others, most probably, they were visions. According to 
 Bleek, 1 Kimchi, Aben Ezra, and Moses Maimonides, distinguished 
 rabbies, regarded the symbolical acts of the prophets as mere visions. 
 
 Respecting the character of the Hebrew prophecy, various opin- 
 ions have been held. The first view is that of Eichhorn, who 
 regarded nearly all the declarations in our prophetic writings which 
 refer to events in the immediate future as poetical descriptions of 
 events written after they had occurred. The absurdity of this view, 
 Bleek * remarks, is universally acknowledged, and needs no refuta- 
 tion. The second view is, that the prophecies are the products of 
 views of the tne numan wisdom, experience, and judgment of the 
 characterofthe prophets respecting human affairs the prediction of the 
 future from the past and present. The third view is, 
 that the prophecies are merely the purely human hopes and fears 
 of the prophets, which they uttered when guided by patriotism 
 and poetic imagination, without troubling themselves whether or not 
 they would be fulfilled. 
 
 These last two views are prevalent among rationalistic critics, and 
 are utterly at variance with the declarations of the prophets them- 
 selves, the teachings of the New Testament, and the wonderful 
 fulfilment of their prophecies, which confirm the evangelical view 
 expressed in the language of Peter : " The prophecy came not in 
 old time by the will of man, but holy men of God spake as they 
 were moved by the Holy Ghost" (2 Peter i, 21). 
 
 Bleek, while not adopting the last two rationalistic views, think* 
 
 they have a measure of truth, but not the whole truth, and that it 
 
 would be utterly false to consider the discourses of the propfceta 
 
 respecting the future as the product of the reflective understanding. 
 
 " Among the prophecies," says he, " which are preserved, there are 
 
 Bleek' Yiew manv respecting the genuineness of which there can 
 
 be no doubt, in which single future events are predicted 
 
 'Emleitung, p. 427. "Ibid., p. 431.
 
 OF THE HOLY SCRIPTURES. 363 
 
 with great confidence in such a way that it is clearly seen that in 
 the mind of the prophet no doubt existed respecting the certain 
 and exact fulfilment of his prediction, and that a higher confidence 
 directed him than any human insight and previous calculation could 
 have instilled into him." ' 
 
 It has sometimes been objected that some of the prophecies have 
 not been fulfilled. This is, to a certain extent, true ; for there are 
 prophecies respecting the universality of Christ's kingdom and the 
 conversion of the Jews to Christianity that have not yet been ful- 
 filled : but their accomplishment lies in the future, the fulness of 
 time having not yet come. It is also true that there are some 
 prophecies, whose fulfilment pertains to the past, which we cannot 
 prove to have been fulfilled, owing to our imperfect knowledge of 
 history. 
 
 But, further : it sometimes happens that a prophecy depends for 
 its fulfilment upon the conduct of the persons whose prosperity 
 or punishment is declared beforehand. Thus we find that God 
 announced the severe judgments that he would bring upon Ahab for 
 his wickedness; but Ahab, hearing them, repented in sackcloth; 
 upon which God said, " Seest thou how Ahab humbleth himself 
 before me ? because he humbleth himself before me I will not bring 
 the evil in his days : but in his sons' days," etc. (i Kings xxi, 
 21-29)." The most of the prophecies, however, are of an absolute 
 character; all the contingencies are foreseen, and the divine pur- 
 pose is declared without conditions and limitations. Of such a 
 character is the prophecy respecting the destruction of Babylon 
 (Isa. xiii, 19-22). 
 
 From the great number of prophecies which have been accurately 
 fulfilled the inspiration of the prophets is established, a^uston M 
 and we are authorized in concluding that all those to fulfilment of 
 prophecies still unfulfilled will receive their accomplish- F 
 ment in the future ; and that those which pertain to the past were 
 fulfilled, even in cases where the incompleteness of history renders 
 as incapable of proving it. 
 
 The language of the prophets is often of a sublime character, full 
 of bold imagery, and clothed in a poetic form, and is occasionally 
 obscure from its great condensation and abruptness. 
 
 1 Einleitung, p. 435. 
 
 *So of Nineveh : " Yet forty days, and Nineveh shall be overthrown ; " but tl* 
 people rfcpented, and the city was saved. 
 
 24
 
 364 INTRODUCTION TO THE STUDY 
 
 A CHRONOLOGICAL TABLE OF THE HEBREW PROPHETS. 
 
 Obadiah prdphesied in Judah About B. C. 880 
 
 Joel " " " " 870 
 
 Jonah " " in the kingdom of Israel and at Nineveh " " 825 
 
 Amos " " chiefly in the kingdom of Israel " " 795 
 
 Hosea " " 785-725 
 
 Isaiah " " in Judah * " 758-705 
 
 Micah " " " " 750-725 
 
 Nahum lived in the kingdom of Israel, and prophesied against 
 
 Nineveh " " 630 
 
 Zepbaniah prophesied in Judah " " 630 
 
 Habakkuk " " " 625 
 
 Jeremiah " " chiefly in Judah " " 628-587 
 
 Daniel " " in Babylon " " 603-538 
 
 Ezekiel " " in Chaldea, among the Jewish captives " " 595-574 
 
 Zechariah " " in Judah " " 520-518' 
 
 Haggai " " 520 
 
 Malachi " " " " 440 
 
 CHAPTER XLVIII. 
 
 THE BOOK OF THE PROPHET ISAIAH. 
 
 '"PHIS book is justly placed in the Hebrew Bible at the head of the 
 prophetic writings. Isaiah is the jropjst sublime, versatile, and 
 comprehensive of all the prophets. He rebukes the wicked, hypo- 
 critical Jews, exhorts them to repentance, and assures them of par- 
 don. In the boldest and most eloquent language he predicts the 
 overthrow and utter desolation of the great cities of the ancient 
 world, and portrays in the most graphic manner the sufferings and 
 The character- l ^ e S^ or y f tne future Messiah,* the universal extension 
 tetica of isa- of his kingdom, and the happiness of mankind under 
 his mild and beneficent sway; and in language of in- 
 comparable grandeur he sets forth the attributes and prerogatives 
 of Jehovah. Upon the whole, his prophecy is the most wonderful 
 book of the ancient world. 
 
 It bears the inscription : " The vision (pin, singular for plural, 
 visions) of Isaiah (<rr;w, Yeshayahu), 4 son of Amoz, which he saw 
 
 1 The book, however, which bears his name, was probably not written until a short 
 time before the Babylonian captivity. 
 
 "And perhaps also later. 
 
 'Jerome regarded Isaiah not as a prophet only, but also as an evangelist and 
 tpostte. Comment, on Isaiah. 4 " Help of Jehovah."
 
 OF THE HOLY SCRIPTURES. 365 
 
 concerning Judah and Jerusalem in the days of Uzziah, Jotham 
 Ahaz, and Hezekiah, kings of Judah." 
 
 Isaiah is mentioned in 2 Kings xix, where he consoles Hezekiah, 
 and assures him of deliverance from the king of Assyria, whose de- 
 feat he predicts. He appears, also, in the subsequent history of Hez 
 ekiah (2 Kings xx). 
 
 This book is referred to as a source for the history of Hezekiah 
 tinder the title of " The vision of Isaiah the prophet, the son of Amoz ' ; 
 (2 Chron. xxxii, 32). In addition to the book of prophecies Isaiah 
 wrote the life of Uzziah (2 Chron. xxvi, 22). From chaps, vii 3 ; viii, 
 3, 1 8, it appears that he was married, and had several children. He 
 dwelt, it would seem, in Jerusalem, and laboured for the welfare of the 
 people in the capital. Respecting the time and circumstances of his 
 death nothing is known with certainty. The ancient tra- personal his- 
 ditions of the Jews, followed by some of the early Chris- tory of Isaiah, 
 tian fathers, state that he was sawed to pieces by the wicked King 
 Manasseh, who made the streets of Jerusalem run with innocent 
 blood (2 Kings xxi, 16).' There is nothing improbable in this tra- 
 dition, and there seems to be a reference to it in the Epistle to the 
 Hebrews (chap, xi, 37), where, in speaking of the ancient saints, it 
 is said they "were sawn asunder." 
 
 It would seem, from chap, vi, that Isaiah was called to the prophetic 
 office in the last year of Uzziah's reign, to which the vision de- 
 scribed in that chapter most probably belongs. His prophetic office, 
 accordingly, extended from about B. C. 758, through the reigns of 
 Jotham, Ahaz, and at least fourteen years of that of Hezekiah 
 (2 Kings xviii, 13, etc.), embracing a period of forty-six years. We 
 have no evidence, except what Jewish tradition affords, that he lived 
 until the time of Manasseh. The reference to Isaiah as a source for 
 the history of Hezekiah can mean no other book than the one we 
 now possess, so that this reference furnishes no proof that Isaiah 
 outlived Hezekiah. But if the Jewish tradition be received as true, 
 his prophetic office was continued for sixty years or upwards. 
 
 The time of his prophetic labours embraced monarchs of widely 
 different characters, and periods of varied religious con- Tb6 ttme ^ 
 dition. The long reign of Uzziah was highly prosperous, Isaiah's pro- 
 and his fame spread far and wide (2 Chron. xxvi, 8, 15) ; phe 
 but in his last days he was afflicted with leprosy (2 Kings xv, 5 ; 
 2 Chron, xxvi, 21). Notwithstanding his pious disposition, the peo- 
 ple stilfburnt incense on the high places (2 Kings xv, 4). Jotham, 
 although an upright monarch, was not especially distinguished for 
 piety, and the people in his reign acted corruptly (2 Chron. xxvii, 2) 
 
 See a collection of these traditions in Gesenius' Com. on Isaiah, vol. i, pp. lo-iv
 
 860 INTRODUCTION TO THE STUDY 
 
 His successor, Ahaz, signalized his reign by abominable idolatries, 
 and the kingdom of Judah was brought low (2 Chron. xxviii). Hez- 
 ekiah, who succeeded him, was distinguished for piety and zeal in 
 the destruction of idolatry and in the promotion of the worship of 
 God (2 Chron. xxix). In the reign of this latter monarch Sennach- 
 erib, king of Assyria, invaded Judah, and took all its fenced cities, 
 and demanded and received tribute from its king. 
 
 The book contains sixty-six chapters, and falls naturally into three 
 parts. The first (chaps, i-xxxv) consists of rebukes of the children 
 of Judah, earnest exhortations to them, the prophet's call to his 
 sacred office, and prophecies respecting Judah, Israel, Moab, Edom, 
 Damascus, Babylon, Assyria, Tyre, Ethiopia, and Egypt. The sec- 
 Contenu of onc ^ P art ( c ^ a P s - xxxvi-xxxix) contains an account of 
 laaiah'g propb- the invasion of Judah by Sennacherib, (in the fourteenth 
 year of the reign of Hezekiah), the deliverance of Jerusa- 
 lem, the sickness and recovery of Hezekiah, the visit of the mes- 
 sengers of Merodach-baladan, king of Babylon, to him after his re- 
 covery, and Isaiah's prophecy to him of the Babylonian captivity. 
 The third part (chaps, xl-lxvi) contains long prophetic and horta- 
 tory discourses, in which the prophet predicts the return of the Jews 
 from the Babylonian captivity, encourages the people to trust in 
 Jehovah, and consoles them with the sure promises of Divine help. 
 He also describes prophetically the sufferings of the Redeemer 
 and the glory of his kingdom, and at the same time sets forth in 
 lofty language the attributes and prerogatives of Jehovah. This 
 division of Isaiah is called by the Germans " Book of Consolation " 
 (Trostbuch). 
 
 ATTACKS ON THE GENUINENESS OF PORTIONS OF ISAIAH. 
 
 Respecting the genuineness of the prophecies of this book no 
 doubt was expressed, so far as we know, in the ancient Jewish and 
 Christian Churches. Aben Ezra, a distinguished Spanish rabbi of 
 the twelfth century, was the first to intimate that the prophecies of 
 the last part of the book were written by King Jechoniah at the time 
 of the Babylonian captivity. 
 
 No attention, however, was paid to this intimation ; but about 1780 
 Koppe'i objeo- J- ** Koppe, Professor at Gottingen, made additions to 
 don*, the German translation of Lowth's Isaiah, in which 
 
 he opened the attack on the genuineness of a large portion of the 
 prophecies. Gesenius, the distinguished Hebraist of the rationalistic 
 school remarks on Koppe's criticism : " He first called attention to the 
 necessity of rejecting, on historical grounds, as the prophet's, many 
 parts of the collection. But as he went much too far in the separa-
 
 OF THE HOLY SCRIPTURES. 367 
 
 tion of connected wholes, and often proceeded in an arbitrary man- 
 ner his criticism lacks a firm support, and the collection appears to 
 him as a loose heap of dissevered fragments of different poets of dif- 
 ferent ages shuffled like cards in a game. However groundless this 
 appears upon closer examination, it has been implicitly followed by 
 several of the moderns." ' 
 
 Since that time rationalistic criticism, with one voice, has denied 
 the genuineness of the last part of Isaiah (chaps, xl-lxvi), and attrib- 
 uted it to an unknown prophet who lived at the time of the Baby- 
 lonian captivity. It has also assailed the genuineness of single 
 prophecies in other parts of the book. Eichhorn carried the hy- 
 pothesis of separate documents so far as to divide the book into 
 eighty- five oracles or fragments, which he attributed to very differ- 
 ent authors and times. This is an extreme to which the skeptical 
 criticism of the present time does not dare to go. 
 
 ANCIENT TESTIMONY TO THE GENUINENESS OF THESE 
 PROPHECIES. 
 
 The apocryphal writer Jesus, the son of Sirach, a man of learning 
 and great ability, who flourished in the beginning of the Q lnton o . 
 second or third century before Christ, thus bears his tes- sus, the son oi 
 timony to Isaiah and his prophecies : " Isaiah, the great 81raclu 
 prophet, faithful was he in his vision. In his days the sun went 
 back and prolonged the life of the king. He saw by a mighty spirit 
 the last times, and he comforted those who mourned in Zion. For- 
 ever he showed future things, and secret things before they came to 
 pass" (chap, xlviii, 22-25). I n this testimony there is an obvious 
 reference to the last great division of Isaiah (chaps, xl-lxvi). In 
 the Septuagint, completed in all probability before the middle of the 
 second century before Christ, all the prophecies of this book stand 
 under the name of Isaiah, and so they do in the Peshito-Syriac ver- 
 sion, and in the Latin Vulgate. 
 
 The distinguished Jewish historian, Josephus, born four years 
 after the crucifixion of Christ, speaking of a temple opinion of Jo. 
 built in Egypt by the Jew Onias, about B. C. 149, re- sep 11 "*- 
 marks : " The prophet Isaiah had predicted, about six hundred 
 years before, the building of this temple by a Jew '" (Isa. xix, 19). 
 He also states that God, " having moved the soul of Cyrus, caused 
 him to write to all Asia that CYRUS THE KING SAYS: 'Since 
 the supreme God has made me king of the inhabited earth, I am 
 persuaded that he is the being whom the nation of the Israelites 
 worship. For he predicted my name through the prophets, and 
 J Commentar vber den Jesaia, vol. i, p. 136. ' De Bel. Jud., vii, lot J.
 
 868 INTRODUCTION TO THE STUDY 
 
 that I should build his temple in Jerusalem in the land of Jude*. 
 These things Cyrus knew from his reading the book which Isaiah 
 left of his prophecies, two hundred and ten years before." 1 The 
 passages referring to Cyrus are chaps, xliv, 28; xlv, r. So, at least, 
 it is evident that Josephus recognised Isaiah as the author of the 
 last division of the book, as well as of the former part. He appears 
 to have had no suspicion that the latter portion belonged to the 
 Babylonian captivity. 
 
 Ancient Jewish tradition* attributed the whole book to Isa : ah, 
 and ascribed the editing of it to Hezekiah and his companions. 
 
 In the New Testament the whole book is attributed to Isaiah, and we 
 isaiah in New have quotations as the language of Isaiah in various places, 
 Testament. e g ? [ n Matt, iii, 3, from Isa. xl, 3; in Matt, iv, 15, from 
 Isa. ix, 1,2; in Matt, iv, 16, from Isa. xlii, 7 ; and in Matt, xiii, 14, our 
 Saviour quotes as the prophecy of Isaiah, chap, vi, 9, 10. Matthew 
 viii, 17, is a reference to Isa. liii, 4; Matt, xii, 17-20, is from Isa. x'ii, 
 13; Luke iv, 17-19, from Isa. xli, i, 2; John i, 23, from Isa. xl, 3; 
 and Acts viii, 28-35, is a reference to ^ sa - ^" 7> 8. St. Paul a!so 
 quotes as Isaiah's, in Rom. x, 16, 20, 21, Isa. liii, i, Ixv, i, 2. 
 
 Jewish history and tradition know no period when any of t'ie 
 prophecies in the Book of Isaiah were attributed to any oth;r 
 prophet; and the very fact that they are collected into one whole, 
 at the head of which stands the name of Isaiah, is a clear pro f 
 that the collector if the prophet himself did not arrange his proph- 
 ecies regarded them as belonging to him. There can be no dou >t 
 that a book of Isaiah's prophecies existed for more than a ce i- 
 tury before the Babylonian captivity. This book must have co i- 
 tained at least the greater portion of chaps, i-xxxix. If we are 
 now to suppose that the author of the last part (chaps, xl-lxvi) was 
 not Isaiah, but a prophet who lived at the time of the Babyloni.vn 
 captivity, how could it have come to pass that so great a prophet, 
 who wrote nearly one half of the book, the sublimest portion, should 
 have been wholly unknown, and that his work should have been 
 added to Isaiah, though before the captivity it had no existence? 
 Ezra doubtless made a collection of the canonical books, but how 
 could he have been deceived respecting a book written in, or so 
 near, his age ? 
 
 The violent improbability, if not impossibility, of the writings of 
 impossibility different prophets being blended together and attributed 
 nkrto^ dlD wriu to one au *hor, appears from the fact that the twelve 
 burs- minor prophets, though in ancient times contained in 
 
 a single book, were carefully separated and distinguished, though 
 1 Antiq., liber xi, I, I. * Furst, Ueber den Kanon, pp. 14-17.
 
 OF THE HOLY SCRIPTURES. 369 
 
 several of them are very small, Obadiah consisting of a single chap- 
 ter, and Haggai of but two. 
 
 There is no reason to doubt that the prophets themselves in- 
 scribed their names at the beginning of the books of their prophe- 
 cies, to give them authority among the people ; and it is difficult to 
 suppose that the last part of Isaiah (chaps, xl-lxvi), if it had been 
 written by another prophet, would have been left anonymous. 
 
 The position which the book of the prophecies of Isaiah holds 
 standing at the head of the prophets was assigned it by lsalah , a ^j. 
 the Masorites and the Spanish manuscripts, and also by tion among the 
 the Hebrews in the time of Jerome. 1 And David Kim- P ro P hecles - 
 chi, a celebrated rabbi (about A. D. 1200), remarks that in all good 
 manuscripts Isaiah stands before Jeremiah." Gesenius quotes a 
 passage from the Talmud in which it is stated that the rabbies give 
 the following order of the prophets : " Jeremiah, Ezekiel, Isaiah, 
 and the twelve minor prophets." The ground of this arrangement 
 of the Talmudists is stated to have been that they wished to place 
 Isaiah, which is so full of consolation, immediately after Jeremiah 
 and Ezekiel, who predicted so much concerning the destruction of 
 Jerusalem and the temple. Vitringa suspected that the arrangers 
 of the canon placed Jeremiah immediately after Kings, because the 
 last part of the latter book has much in common with this prophet. 
 In the German and Gallic manuscripts Isaiah stands after Jeremiah 
 and Ezekiel. 8 Upon the whole, no sound argument can be adduced 
 from the position of Isaiah in the canon in favour of the late origin 
 of the last part of the book. 
 
 AN EXAMINATION OF THE GENUINENESS OF THE DIFFERENT PARTS 
 OF THE BOOK, AND THE DATE OF THEIR COMPOSITION. 
 
 Rationalistic criticism is unable to do justice to the prophecies 
 of Isaiah ; for it allows no real divine inspiration, and limits the 
 prophet's vision by the natural horizon. All that transcends this is 
 pronounced spurious. Delitzsch well observes : " Modern criticism 
 finds itself hampered between two prejudices : there is views of De- 
 no real prophecy there is no rear miracle. This crit- lltzscn - 
 icism calls itself free, but upon closer examination it is found in a 
 dilemma. In this dilemma it has two magic words with which it 
 fortifies itself against every impression of historical evidence. As 
 it transforms the histories of miracles into traditions and myths, so 
 it either transforms the prophecies into predictions after thr events 
 (vaffcinia post eventuni), or brings the predicted events into such 
 
 'Preface to Samuel and Kings. *In Fiirst, Ueber den Kanon, p. 17. 
 
 * See Gesenius' Com. iiber Jesaia, vol. i, p. 23.
 
 870 INTRODUCTION TO THE STUDY 
 
 close connexion with the prophet that to foresee them did not re- 
 quire inspiration, but only combination." ' The Rationalists." know 
 exactly how far a prophet can see, and where he must stand to see 
 so far ; but we are not tempted to purchase this omniscience at the 
 cost of the supernatural. We believe in the supernatural reility of 
 prophecy, because history affords us irrefragable proofs of it, and 
 because a supernatural interference (cingreifen, grasping into) of God 
 in the interior and outward life of men still to-day occurs, and can 
 be tested. But this interference is of various kinds and degrees, 
 and likewise the distant view of the prophets is in proportion to 
 their gift (charisma) of very different degrees." 1 
 
 The first twelve chapters of Isaiah are undoubtedly genuine. Ge- 
 senius concedes their genuineness, with the exception of chapter vii, 
 1-16, and a few other verses. Knobel * remarks : " All the prophecies 
 contained in them are genuine." De Wette, 4 also, and Bleek,* con- 
 cede their genuineness. 
 
 The first chapter, which describes the thoughtlessness, hypocrisy, 
 and wickedness of the Jews, and the destruction of their cities and 
 the desolation of their country, seems to have been written by Isaiah 
 in the reign of Hezekiah, after the invasion of Judah by Sennach- 
 erib, as the condition of things seems especially to suit that period. 
 The prophet seems to have intended it as an introduction to his 
 prophecies. In chap, ii, 2-4 there is a Messianic passage, the same 
 as Micah iv, 1-3. As it stands in Isaiah distinct from the connexion, 
 and forms part of a connected prophecy in Micah, it is, most proba- 
 bly, a quotation in the former from the latter. 
 
 At the head of the second chapter stands the inscription, " The 
 Analysis of the word that Isaiah the son of Amoz saw concerning Judah 
 chapters. an( j Jerusalem." Chapters ii-iv contain threatenings of 
 God's judgments upon the people of Judah for idolatry, wickedness, 
 and pride, accompanied with the promise of future blessedness. 
 Gesenius refers these prophecies to the reign of Ahaz, in which 
 he is followed by some critics. Keil refers them to the time of 
 Jotham. And this seems to us the most probable. For if these 
 chapters do not belong to the reign of that monarch, it is difficult to 
 assign any to his time. Chapter v contains a parable of a vineyard, 
 addressed to Judah and Jerusalem, respecting Judah and Israel, 
 and ends with the denunciation of divine judgments upon the wick- 
 ed. This, also, probably belongs to the time of Jotham. Chapter vi 
 
 1 Commentar fiber den Jesaia, p. 83. Ibid., p. 409. 
 
 Der Prophet Jesaia, xxii. * De Wette Schrader, p. 423. 
 
 * Einleitung, p. 457. Bleek, however, excepts chap, ii, 2-4, which he thinks wa* 
 not written by Isaiah.
 
 OF THE HOLY SCRIPTURES. 371 
 
 contains the prophet's call to his holy office, in the last year of Uz- 
 ziah's reign. Chapter vii states, that in the days of Ahaz the kings 
 of Syria and Israel combined against the king of Judah, and that the 
 prophet predicted their defeat, giving Ahaz a sign, that a virgin 
 should conceive and bear a son who should be called "Immanuel." 
 Isaiah declares the impending judgments of God from the hands 
 of the Assyrians. Chapters viii-ix, 7, contain a prediction of the 
 overthrow of Damascus and Samaria by the Assyrians, and an ex- 
 hortation to trust in God. They also contain a prediction of the 
 Messiah's kingdom. The prophecy was in all probability delivered 
 in the time of Ahaz. Chapter ix, 8-x, 4 is a prophecy respecting 
 the destruction of Israel, delivered probably in the latter part of the 
 reign of Ahaz. Chapter x, 5-34 predicts the invasion of Judah by 
 the king of Assyria, and was probably written in the last part of the 
 reign of Ahaz. Chapters xi and xii predict the appearance of the 
 Messiah from the stem of Jesse, and his glorious reign over Jews 
 and Gentiles. 
 
 PROPHECIES CONCERNING FOREIGN NATIONS (XIII-XXIIl) GENU- 
 INENESS of xm-xiv, 23. 
 
 This section is a prediction of the overthrow and perpetual deso- 
 lation of Babylon, and the restoration of Israel. These prophecies 
 are denied to be Isaiah's by Gesenius, Rosenmiiller, De Wette, 
 Knobel, and Bleek, on the ground that the stand-point of the Baby- 
 lonian captivity is assumed in them. They attribute them to a 
 prophet living in the last part of the captivity. 1 But the inscription 
 attributes the section to Isaiah : " The burden (or oracle) against 
 Babylon which Isaiah the son of Amoz did see " (chap, xiii, i) ; and 
 this should not be rejected without the most cogent reasons. 
 
 That Isaiah would deliver a prophecy against the Assyrian power, 
 especially against Babylon, was extremely probable, as Reasons fortha 
 that power in his day had captured many cities of Judah, srenuineness. 
 and threatened Jerusalem (2 Kings xviii, i3~xix, 37) ; and, also, be- 
 cause the prophet had predicted to Hezekiah that the Jewish people, 
 with his treasures, should be carried away captive to Babylon. It 
 was especially proper that he should deliver a prophecy against 
 the oppressor of Israel. This probability is strengthened by the 
 fact that Isaiah delivered predictions against nations and cities far 
 less important than Babylon, and which had not such close relations 
 with the Hebrews. In the early part of Hezekiah 's reign the king 
 of Assyria had taken captive the ten tribes, and removed them to 
 
 1 Gesenius and Bleek acknowledge that the prophecy was written before the cap- 
 Tire of Babylon by Cyrus.
 
 372 INTRODUCTION TO THE STUDY 
 
 his dominions, and colonized their land with his own subjects, partly 
 from Babylon. 
 
 In the list of the foreign nations against which Isaiah directs his 
 prophecies, Babylon stands first. Then follow Moab, Damascus, 
 Ethiopia, Egypt, Babylon repeated, and Tyre. The Prophet Micah. 
 a contemporary of Isaiah, predicts that the inhabitants of Jerusalem 
 shall go to Babylon, and there be redeemed from their enemies 
 (Micah iv, 10). In the prophecy of Isaiah respecting Babylon, God 
 threatens to stir up the Medes against Babylon. The Medes were 
 then beginning to attract attention. Their revolt from the Assyrians, 
 soon after which they made Dejoces king, occurred, according to 
 Herodotus (i, 95-102), about B. C. 710, but according to Ctesias, 
 about B. C. 876. 
 
 If the prophecy had been written after the time of Cyrus, who cap- 
 tured Babylon, it would have been different, for Cyrus was the king 
 of Persia, and united the Medes to his kingdom. He is always 
 called in Scripture king of Persia (Ezra i, i ; iii, 7, etc.). Babylon, 
 though captured by Cyrus, was not destroyed, but afterward gradually 
 lost its splendour, so that about the time of Christ it had become a 
 great desert (Strabo xvi, 738). It cannot be said that the prophecy 
 was written after the event. The Prophet Jeremiah, about the be- 
 ginning of the Babylonian captivity, delivers a prophecy in two very 
 long chapters, in which he uses some of the very phrases employed by 
 Isaiah. (Compare Jer. 1, 39, 40, with Isaiah xiii, 19, 20, etc.). 
 
 The prophecy in Isaiah is brief and strong, altogether in the style 
 of Isaiah, and is, doubtless, the earlier one ; while that in Jeremiah, 
 from its extended form, is evidently the later. 
 
 The genuineness of the prophecy has been defended by Hengsten- 
 berg, Havernick, Keil, Delitzsch, and others. 
 
 Chapter xiv, 24-27 is a prophecy against Assyria, the genuineness 
 of which is acknowledged by Gesenius, De Wette, Knobel, and 
 Bleek. Chapter xiv, 28-32 is a prophecy against the Philistines, 
 delivered in the year that Ahaz died, warning them against rejoicing 
 on account of his death. Its genuineness is acknowledged by Ge- 
 senius, De Wette, and Knobel. Chapters xv, xvi contain prophecies 
 against Moab, threatening it with destruction. Gesenius thinks that 
 these two chapters were written by a contemporary of Isaiah, or by 
 an older prophet, and that the epilogue (chap, xvi, 13, 14) was writ- 
 ten by Isaiah. Bleek thinks the principal prophecy proceeds either 
 from Isaiah, or at least from some one in his time, and that the epi- 
 logue was added later. Also Knobel thinks chaps, xv and xvi belong 
 to a prophet older than Isaiah. But there is no good reason for de- 
 nying their genuineness. Chapter xvii, i-n is a prophecy against
 
 OF THE HOLY SCRIPTURES. 873 
 
 Damascus and Samaria, the genuineness of which is conceded by 
 Gesenius, De Wette, and other Rationalists. It belongs, probably, to 
 the first part of Hezekiah's reign. Chapter xvii, 12-14 is a prophecy 
 directed against the enemies of Judah, most probably the Assyrians. 
 It is undoubtedly genuine, and belongs most probably to the first 
 part of Hezekiah's reign. Chapter xviii contains a prophecy against 
 the Ethiopians, the genuineness of which is not denied by Gesenius 
 and De Wette. It belongs unquestionably to the time of Hezekiah. 
 Chapter xix is a prophecy against Egypt. Its genuineness is con- 
 ceded by Gesenius and De Wette, and Schrader remarks that " there 
 is no good reason for doubting the integrity of the prophecy." 1 
 Bleek also attributes it to Isaiah. 2 It belongs to the time of Heze- 
 kiah. Chapter xx relates a symbolic action performed by Isaiah in 
 the time of Sargon, king of Assyria, accompanied with a prophecy 
 that the king of Assyria would lead captive the Egyptians and 
 Ethiopians. It is undoubtedly genuine, and belongs to the time of 
 Hezekiah. Chapter xxi, i-io is a prophecy against Babylon, which 
 is denied by Gesenius, Knobel, and Bleek to be Isaiah's, and is 
 referred by them to a prophet living at the time of the Babylonian 
 captivity. Gesenius 3 and Knobel, 4 however, acknowledge that it 
 was written before the capture of Babylon by Cyrus. But there is no 
 sufficient ground for denying the prophecy to be Isaiah's. Chapter 
 xxi, n, 12 is an oracle respecting Dumah, an Ishmaelitish tribe in 
 Arabia. Gesenius, Knobel, and Bleek find no reason to deny its 
 genuineness. Chapter xxi, 13-17 is a prophecy concerning Arabia, 
 which Gesenius and Bleek find no good ground for denying to be 
 Isaiah's. Chapter xxii, 1-14 is a prophecy of the invasion of Judah 
 by Sennacherib, in the fourteenth year of Hezekiah's reign, and 
 it appears to have been delivered just before that event. There is 
 no dispute about its genuineness. Chapter xxii, 15-19 is a proph- 
 ecy against Shebna, who was over the treasury in the middle of 
 Hezekiah's reign. Chapter xxii, 20-25 is a prediction respecting Eli- 
 akim, who is to take the place of Shebna. Chapter xxiii predicts 
 the overthrow of Tyre. Rosenmtiller and Bleek deny the genuine- 
 ness of this prophecy, and attribute it to a prophet in the age of 
 Jeremiah. On the other hand, its genuineness is acknowledged by 
 such Rationalists as Gesenius 6 and Knobel;' and Schrader 7 declares 
 there are no sufficient reasons for its denial. The prophecy refers 
 either to the siege of Tyre by Shalmaneser (Josephus, ix, 14) for five 
 
 'De Wette Schrader, p. 418. * Einleitung, p. 460. 
 
 * Commentar fiber Jesaia, pp. 649, 650. * Der Prophet Jesaia, p. 148. 
 
 'Cornmentar \iber Jesaia, pp. 707-718. *Der Prophet Tes., pp. 165-170. 
 
 J De Wette Schrader, p. 419.
 
 374 INTRODUCTION TO THE STUDY 
 
 years, or to the thirteen years' siege by Nebuchadnezzar (Josephus, 
 x, n.) Chaps, xxiv-xxvii contain prophecies setting forth the judg- 
 ments of God upon the land, and assurances of Divine favour, and 
 exhortations to trust in God. In them there appear to be references 
 to Messianic times. These chapters are denied to be Isaiah's by 
 Gesenius, Knobel, and Bleek. 1 The first two refer it to the period of 
 the Babylonian captivity, while the latter thinks it probably belongs 
 to the age of King Josiah, or to the one immediately afterward. On 
 the other hand, the genuineness of the prophecy is defended by 
 Rosenmiiller,* Havernick, Welte, Drechsler, Keil, and Delitzsch. Keil 
 remarks that witness is given " to its genuineness by a multitude of 
 our prophet's peculiar and characteristic images, turns, and expres- 
 sions." There is nothing in it to indicate an age later than that of 
 Isaiah. 
 
 CHAPTERS XXVIII-XXXIII. 
 
 Gesenius remarks on these chapters: "The character of Isaiah's 
 Admission of style is clearly impressed upon the whole, and the pe- 
 Gcaenius. culiar range of thought and manner of representation ef 
 this prophet are so clearly found in them, that the reader who gives 
 any attention to the subject, and is not utterly destitute of all per- 
 ception of the peculiarities of language, cannot at all doubt the iden- 
 tity of the author of these chapters and chapters i-xii."* The author- 
 ship of this section is conceded by De Wette and Bleek, and, so far 
 as we know, it is universally acknowledged to belong to Isaiah.* 
 
 These chapters are referred by Gesenius to the period from the 
 sixth to the fourteenth year of Hezekiah. 1 hey treat of the Assyr- 
 ian invasion. Chapter xxviii is a prophecy against Ephraim and 
 Jerusalem, in which their vices are reproved, and judgment threat- 
 ened. Chapter xxix is a prophecy against Ariel (Jerusalem), fol- 
 lowed by the promise of returning happiness. Chapter xxx contains 
 a prophecy against those who look to Egypt for help against the 
 Assyrians, and it also promises future prosperity. Chapter xxxi 
 is also a prophecy against those who seek help in Egypt against the 
 Assyrians, and contains, likewise, an assurance of deliverance from 
 the Assyrians. Chapters xxxii and xxxiii contain prophecies, judg- 
 ments, and promises of future prosperity respecting various classes of 
 persons. Chapter xxxiv contains the judgments of God upon the 
 nations of the world, especially upon the Edomites. Chapter xxxv 
 describes the future prosperity of the people of God, and their final 
 
 1 Bleek, however, does not express himself with confidence. 
 'Scholia in New Test, voL ii, pp. 370, 371, 2d ed. * Com. uber Jesaia, p. 835. 
 4 Koppe doubted the genuineness of chap, xxx, 1-37, and Ewald objects to UM 
 genuineness of chap, xxxiii.
 
 OF THE HOLY SCRIPTURES. 375 
 
 deliverance from all their foes. Both chapters are denied to be 
 Isaiah's, and are referred to the Babylonian captivity by The conflicting 
 Gesenius, Rosenmuller, De Wette, Knobel, Bleek, and views of critics, 
 others. On the other hand, their genuineness has been advocated by 
 Caspari, Keil, Delitzsch, and others. Keil remarks that Caspari " not 
 only gi v es copious proofs that Jeremiah, Ezekiel, and Zephaniah had 
 read the prophecy against Edom in Isaiah xxxiv, and had adopted 
 thoughts, images, and expressions from it in several of their prophe- 
 cies; but, also, that he has thoroughly refuted the opinions adopted 
 in opposition, that either the author of Isaiah xxxiv had the chapters 
 of Jeremiah and Ezekiel in question floating before his mind's eye 
 (Ewald, Umbreit), or that passages bearing affinity to Isaiah xxxiv 
 had found their way by interpolation into Jeremiah 1 and li." 1 The 
 two chapters are closely connected, so that whatever establishes the 
 genuineness of one proves also that of the other. They contain 
 much of what is found in Isaiah xxxii, xxxiii, as Ewald concedes; 
 and there is no good reason for denying that they belong to Isaiah. 
 
 The second division of Isaiah is an historical section (xxxvi-xxxix), 
 containing an account of the invasion of Judah by Sen- The aeoond M , 
 nacherib, in the fourteenth year of the reign of Hezekiah, vision of Isaiah 
 and of Hezekiah 's sickness and recovery, concluded with 
 a prediction of the Babylonian captivity. 
 
 That Isaiah should write an historical section in the midst of his 
 prophecies is in accordance with his usage. We find historical 
 events in chapters vii and xx, and we know from 2 Chron. xxxii, 32, 
 that Isaiah wrote an account of Hezekiah. It is exceedingly im- 
 probable that Isaiah would fail to write in his prophecies such an 
 important event as the invasion of Judah and the threatened attack 
 on Jerusalem by Sennacherib, and a prediction of the monarch's de- 
 feat. In 2 Kings xviii, i3~xx, 19, we have this same history almost 
 verbatim, except that Hezekiah 's song of thanksgiving (Isa. xxxviii, 
 9-20) is wanting. Here the question arises, Was this section in Isaiah 
 taken from the Books of Kings ? or is the narrative in Isaiah the orig- 
 inal, and that in Kings the borrowed one ? or are both drawn from a 
 common source, the basis of the history in the Books of Kings ? 
 
 Gesenius 8 regards the narrative in Isaiah as derived from 2 Kings; 
 while Rosenmuller, 3 Knobel, 4 Keil, and others, think both Vlewg of Qeae . 
 
 narratives were derived from a common source. Delitzsch niusaad otnen 
 L i j & i . ._.,., ... , . . as to the sec- 
 
 holds that the narrative in Isaiah is the original, which O nd section of 
 
 tvas used in the composition of the Books of Kings. Isaiah. 
 
 ' Keil's IntrcxL voL i, pp. 318, 319. a Commen tar liber Jesaia, pp. 932-936. 
 'Scholia in Old Test, pp. 493,494, *Der Prophet Jesaia, pp. 255-257. 
 *Der Prophet Jesaia, pp. 372-374.
 
 3T6 INTRODUCTION TO THE STUDY 
 
 It is evident that the section in Isaiah could not have been de 
 rived wholly from the Books of Kings, for Hezekiah's song of thanks- 
 giving is wanting in them. 
 
 There can be no doubt that Isaiah wrote the four chapters undei 
 discussion. In Isaiah xxxvi, 2, it is said that " Rabshakeh stood 
 by the conduit of the upper pool in the highway of the fuller's 
 field." This same phrase occurs in chapter vii, 3, showing that they 
 proceeded from the same writer. In chapter xxxvii, 23, occurs 
 the phrase, " the Holy One of Israel," which is found also in the 
 passage, 2 Kings xix, 22, taken from Isaiah. This phrase is used 
 by Isaiah twenty-five times from the first to the fifty-fifth chapter. 
 But elsewhere it is found but five times in the whole Hebrew Bible, 
 and these in the Book of Psalms and in Jeremiah. Such an expres- 
 sion is foreign to the composer of the Books of Kings, and the pro- 
 phetic style of the section is inconsistent with his being its author. 
 
 Mention is made in Isaiah xxxvi, 22, of Joah, the recorder, in the 
 time of Hezekiah. The history of this king's reign was written 
 down in annals by this officer, and the compiler of the Book of 
 Kings made use of these annals and the history of Hezekiah in 
 our Book of Isaiah, when he narrated the most important events 
 in that monarch's reign. In this way it is easy to explain the devi- 
 ations in the two accounts. Nor has the account in Kings a decided 
 advantage over that in the prophet. Even if its text were preferable, 
 that fact would not prove its originality, since the last chapter of 
 Jeremiah, evidently taken from 2 Kings xxv, exhibits a better text 
 than the original. In the thirty-ninth chapter the Babylonian cap- 
 tivity is predicted, which forms a connecting link between the for- 
 mer and the latter part of Isaiah. 
 
 THE LAST GREAT DIVISION OF ISAIAH. (CHAPTERS XL-LXVI.) 
 
 This prophecy is naturally divided into three parts. The first 
 embraces chapters xl-xlviii, ending with the verse, " There is no 
 peace, saith the Lord, unto the wicked." The second includes 
 chapters xlix-lvii, ending with the same words. The third contains 
 chapters Iviii-lxvi, ending with language of similar import. 
 
 The first division (chaps, xl-xlviii) opens with the most beautiful 
 Anaiyuisof the an( ^ cneerm g words of hope and comfort for Jerusalem, 
 nret division of assuring her that her sins are forgiven. The prophet 
 then sets forth, in language of great sublimity, the attri- 
 butes of the Almighty. At the same time he speaks of the folly of 
 idolatry, and moves forward in his prophetic course to describe 
 God's servant (the Messiah) who shall instruct and redeem men, and 
 be '' a light of the Gentiles " (chaps, xl-xlii.) The prophet continues
 
 OF THE HOLY SCRIPTURES. 377 
 
 in a tone of affection for Israel, promises divine assistance, with 
 bitter sarcasm shows the folly of idolatry, and dwells upon the 
 sovereignty and goodness of God. He predicts the restoration of 
 the cities of Judah, and the rebuilding of the temple, in which con- 
 nexion he speaks of Cyrus as God's shepherd, and as upheld by him. 
 He dwells upon the sovereignty of God, and his mercy and goodness 
 to his people (chaps, xliii-xlv). He sets forth the foreknowledge 
 of God in declaring the future, and then speaks of the folly of idol- 
 atry, especially in reference to Babylon, upon which he announces 
 the judgments of God. He continues to speak of God's revelation 
 of future things from the beginning, in which he remonstrates with 
 his people, and declares his meicies toward them in ancient days. 
 The prophet concludes with the declaration that there is no peace 
 to the wicked (chaps, xlvi xlviii). 
 
 In the second part (chaps, xl'x-lvii) the prophet predicts that the 
 Messiah shall be the restorer oi Israel and the light of the Gentiles, 
 and assures the people of God's love to them, and that he will gather 
 them from all quarters of the world. He declares the sins of the 
 people to be the ground of their sufferings, and sets forth the provi- 
 dence of God, and promises salvation to the people (chapters 
 xlix-lii, 12). There follows next a prophetic description of the 
 wisdom, sufferings, and death of the Messiah 1 as the servant of the 
 Lord (chaps. Hi, i3~liii, 12). The prophet comforts the people of 
 God with the sure promise of divine aid, and consequent prosperity, 
 and exhorts them to seek his favour, that they may live. He also 
 reproves the idolatry of the people, the blind dogs and the dumb 
 watchmen of Israel ; yet the mercy of God is promised, while it is 
 declared that there is no peace to the wicked (chaps, liv-lvii). 
 
 In the third division (chaps. Iviii-lxvi) the prophet expostulates 
 with the people respecting their observance of the out- ^ thlrd ^ 
 
 ward ordinances of religion and their neglect of the vision of the 
 
 ,, , . .._, ... last section. 
 
 moral law, and promises prosperity if they are obedient. 
 
 He next proceeds to enumerate their transgressions (chaps. Iviii-lix). 
 After this he announces the glory of Israel in Messianic times ; at 
 the same time he sets forth the judgments of God, combined with a 
 sketch of his kindness to Israel (Ix-lxiii). He then expostulates 
 with God in reference to the condition of Israel, the desolation 
 
 1 This section is Messianic, and it is so explained by the ancient Targumist, Jon- 
 athan Ben Uzziel, and by many of the ancient Jewish commentators. This is the 
 only consistent view. It is not applicable to the prophets, to the pious Israelites, 
 or to the Jewish nation, none of whom can be the servant of the Lord. This serv- 
 ant is " to raise up the tribes of Jacob and to restore the preserved of Israel " (chap, 
 xlix, 6). He cannot, therefore, be the same as Israel, nor could a mere prophet do 
 his work.
 
 378 INTRODUCTION TO THE STUDY 
 
 of Judah and Jerusalem, and the ruins of the temple. He again 
 reminds the people of their wickedness, and predicts the glory of Is- 
 rael in future times, concluding with a threat of the punishment 
 of the wicked (chaps. Ixiv-lxvi). 
 
 GENUINENESS OF CHAPTERS XL-LXV1. 
 
 We have already remarked that rationalistic critics deny that this 
 division belongs to Isaiah, and that they attribute it to a prophet 
 Jiving at the time of the Babylonian captivity. 1 Its genuineness has 
 been defended by Jahn, Kleinert, Hengstenberg, Havernick, De- 
 litzsch, Alexander, and others. The unity of the division has been 
 established by Gesenius, Hitzig, and De Wette. In respect to the 
 style of this division, it must be confessed that in general it is more 
 flowing, and in some respects different from some of the earlier parts 
 of the prophecies of Isaiah, but not so different as to require a differ- 
 ent author. The discourses are generally longer and freer. 
 
 On the style of Isaiah, Ewald remarks : " This is the very founda- 
 tion of Isaiah's greatness, as it is generally one of those 
 Isaiah's style. . 3 . 
 
 things in which he stands out most pre-eminently, that 
 
 whatever may be demanded by the subject of which he treats, every 
 kind of discourse and every form of representation is ready at com- 
 mand." No man always writes in the same style; still less does one 
 Df great genius. But yet the matter and the phraseology of this 
 section bear some striking points of coincidence with the other parts 
 of Isaiah. What a close resemblance there is between the Messianic 
 descriptions in the eleventh chapter acknowledged to be Isaiah's 
 and some of the prophecies of the latter part of this section (chaps. 
 Ix-lxvi) ! The phrase, " the Holy One of Israel," occurs eleven 
 times in the first thirty-seven chapters of Isaiah, five times in the 
 first twelve, and fourteen times in chaps, xli-lx. But outside of 
 Isaiah it is found but six times, three of which occur in the Psalms, 
 two in Jeremiah, and the remaining one in 2 Kings xix, 22, taken 
 from Isaiah xxxvii, 23. This is very remarkable. Another peculiar- 
 ity of Isaiah is, that he uses *op, to call, or *opj, to be called, for simply 
 to be; e. g., chaps, i, 26 ; ix, 6 ; xxx, 7 ; xxxv, 8 ; xliv, 5 ; xlvii, 1,5; 
 xlviii, 8; Ivi, 7; Iviii, 12; Ix, 14, 18; Ixi, 3; Ixii, 12. In a similar 
 { sense itx', chaps, iv, 3 ; xix, 18 ; Ixii, 4. These peculiarities, running 
 through the whole book, are explained by Gesenius who denies 
 the genuineness of about one half of the book on the supposi- 
 
 1 Bleek supposes that chaps. Ivi, 9-lvii, IT were written before the exile ; and this 
 is the view of Ewald, who thinks that chap, liii, 1-12 is from an older prophet, and 
 chaps. Ixiii, y-lxvi, is a later supplement. Knobel seems favourable to the view that 
 this last section is a later addition.
 
 OF THE HOLY SCRIPTURES. 379 
 
 tion that the author of the later portion imitated the style of Isaiah. 
 or, what is more probable, that a later hand gave uni- Theory of 
 formity to the whole. 1 Both of these suppositions are ut- 
 terly unfounded, and in the highest degree improbable; division, 
 but one of them necessarily follows from the denial of the genuine- 
 ness of a larger portion of the book. Another peculiarity of Isaiah 
 is the use of "rajr, future of "rax, for the present, says, in the following 
 passages: chaps, i, n, 18; x, 8 ; xxxiii, 10 ; xl, i, 25; xli, 6, 21; 
 Ixvi, 9. In other passages, however, the present is used, as in other 
 prophets. D^xvxv, shoots, offspring, occurs in chaps, xxii, 24 ; xxxiv, i ; 
 
 T T:V 
 
 xlii, 5; xliv, 3; xlviii, 19; Ixi, 9; Ixv, 23; but nowhere else in the 
 whole Hebrew Bible, except four times in Job. ywy), thorn hedge, 
 occurs but twice in the Hebrew Bible, in the plural, Isaiah vii, 19, 
 and ia the singular, Isa. Iv, 13 ; JNJ, stock, Isa. xi, i ; xl, 24; once in 
 Job in the sense of stump, and found nowhere else ; D'D'"' l ?3% streams 
 of waters, Isaiah xxx, 25, xliv, 4, and nowhere else in j^gm^ ^ 
 the Bible. There are some other linguistic peculiarities cuiiarities of 
 common to the first and last parts of the book, which 
 may be alleged in proof of the unity of the whole, and, consequently, 
 that Isaiah is the author of the whole book. But those we have given 
 are the most striking. The latter part of Isaiah is free from Chal- 
 daisms," which would not be expected if it were written about the 
 time of the captivity, or still later. That the last division of Isaiah 
 should contain words not found in the other parts, is nothing more 
 than might naturally be expected. It has been alleged that the 
 stand-point of the last section (chaps, xl-lxvi) of Isaiah is the Baby- 
 Jonian captivity. But this is only in part true. For we find refer- 
 ence made to a state of things that does not suit the captivity. 
 
 Bleek thinks it in the highest degree probable that the section 
 Ivi, g-lvii, n, was written before the Babylonian captivity. This is 
 also the view of Ewald. Certainly the state of affairs described in 
 this section belongs to an age earlier than that of the captivity, and 
 may pertain to that of Isaiah. But why should this section be 
 wrested from the great mass of prophecy with which it is connected, 
 and be referred to a different age ? Why should it not have great 
 weight in determining the age of the whole division of the book ? 
 
 1 Commentar iiber den Jesaia . vol. ii, p. 29. 
 
 1 The Chaldee colouring appars in Nehemiah, Chronicles, in the prophets Eze- 
 kiel, Haggai, Zechariah, Malachi, in Ecclesiastes, and in some of the later Psalms 
 Ezra and Daniel are partly in Chaldee. There are some Chaldee words in Jere- 
 miah. *& 7^?^' * sa ' k"* 1 3' * s a Syriasm, as Psalm Ixxvi, 6, written before the cap- 
 Hvity. In chap liii, 10, vftft is also a Syriasm. 
 25
 
 880 INTRODUCTION TO THE STUDY 
 
 In chap, xl, 9 it is said : " O Zion, that bringest good tidings, get 
 thee up into the high mountain ; O Jerusalem, that bringest good 
 tidings, lift up thy voice with strength ; lift it up, be not afraid ; say 
 unto the cities of Judah, Behold your God! " This verse seems 
 clearly to convey the idea that Jerusalem and the cities of Judah 
 were still in existence, i. e., that the captivity had not yet occurred. 
 In chap, xliii, 22-24, God reproaches Israel for not offering sacrifices 
 to him. But this presupposes that the temple was still standing. 
 In chap. Ivi, 4-7, it is promised to the eunuchs that they shall have 
 a place in the house and within the walls of the Lord; and that 
 their buint-offerings and their sacrifices shall be accepted upon his 
 altar if they keep the sabbaths and do the Divine will r/hich shows 
 that the temple was still standing. 
 
 In chap. Iviii, 6, we find this interrogatory : " Is not this the fast 
 that I have chosen ? to loose the bands of wickednest, to undo the 
 heavy burdens, and let the oppressed go free, and that ye break 
 every yoke ? " The oppression which the Jews are here represented 
 internal evi- as exercising is not consistent with a state of captivity 
 
 dence against a t Babylon. Chapter lix describes a state of things 
 authorship dur- . .... .. . . ,, . 
 
 ing the captiv- scarcely consistent with the time of captivity. This is 
 
 lty> true, especially of verse 18, which refers to the judg- 
 
 ments which God is about to inflict for sins. In chap. Ixii, 6 it is 
 said, " I have set watchmen upon thy walls, O Jerusalem, which 
 shall never hold their peace day nor night." This is inconsistent 
 with the supposition that Jerusalem at that time was a waste. In 
 chap. Ixvi, 3, 4, we have allusions to sacrifices and to future judg- 
 ments that scarcely suit the captivity. Nor is it easy to see, if Jeru- 
 salem and the temple were in ruins, that it could be said : " A voice 
 of noise from the city, a voice from the temple " (verse 6). 
 
 But, on the other hand, it cannot be denied that there are several 
 passages in which the country and Jerusalem are represented as be- 
 ing desolate, and the sanctuary profaned. " The holy cities are a 
 wilderness, Jerusalem a desolation. Our holy and beautiful house, 
 where our fathers praised thee, is destined to be burnt " (Gesenius, 
 Heb. Lex.), (chap. Ixiv, 10, n). The English version represents the 
 burning as having already occurred. The phrase used, t?x nantyS rrn 
 destined to be burnt with fire, occurs also in Isaiah ix, 4, but nowhere 
 else. Also in chap. Ixiii, 18, it is said : " Our adversaries have trod- 
 den down thy sanctuary." 
 
 In the first place, it must be observed that Isaiah gives, in the first 
 chapter of his prophecy, a fearful picture of the desolations of Judah, 
 
 1 This is the proper rendering of the passage. The marginal reading in the En- 
 glish version is not admissible.
 
 OF THE HOLY SCRIPTURES. 381 
 
 which were to be brought upon it, or had already been inflicted in 
 the time of Hezekiah by Sennacherib. It is impossible to determine 
 how far the prophet may have reference to these calamities. But, 
 further, it is a peculiarity of the prophetic style that it often repre- 
 sents future events as already present or past. This grew out of the 
 fact that the prophecies were often communicated to the prophets in 
 visions, in which future events passed before their eyes as present 
 realities. We find many passages in illustration of this. In Isaiah 
 iii, 8, it is declared that "Jerusalem is ruined, and Judah is fallen." 
 It is not questioned that this was written by Isaiah, and Explanation of 
 yet its fulfilment was in the prophet's time still in the dlffl cuitteu. 
 future. Again, in xxi, 9 : " He answered and said, Babylon is fallen, 
 is fallen ; and all the graven images of her gods he hath broken unto 
 the ground." Here, in a prophecy which Gesenius admits was writ- 
 ten before the capture of Babylon, the city is represented as already 
 fallen. In a similar way the future Messiah is spoken of as already 
 born (Isaiah ix, 6). So in Isaiah's prophecy of the destruction of 
 Tyre, the city is represented as already laid waste (chap, xxiii, i). 
 
 In Jeremiah viii, 16, the prophet, in predicting the overthrow of 
 Judah and Jerusalem by the Chaldeans, represents their work as al- 
 ready done : " For they are come, and have devoured the land, and 
 all that is in it ; the city, and those that dwell therein." Again : 
 " Pour out thy fury upon the heathen that know thee not, and upon 
 the families that call not upon thy name : for they have eaten up 
 Jacob, and devoured him, and consumed him, and made his habita- 
 tion desolate " (chap, x, 25). Here the prophet calls for vengeance 
 upon men for acts which they are going to perform, which he repre- 
 sents as already done : for the context shows that the desolation of 
 Judah and Jerusalem was still in the future. 
 
 In Amos ix, n, it is predicted: "In that day I will raise up the 
 tabernacle of David that is fallen, and I will close up the breaches 
 thereof, and I will raise up his ruins, and I will build it as in the days 
 of old." When this prophecy was uttered the tabernacle had not yet 
 fallen, though its restoration is predicted. In Micah iv, 8, it is de- 
 clared, respecting the daughter of Zion : " Unto thee shall it come, 
 even the first dominion ; the kingdom shall come to the daughter of 
 Jerusalem." It could be naturally inferred from this that Judah had 
 no kings, but that the kingdom had been lost. Such, however, was 
 not the case in the days of Jotham, Ahaz, and Hezekiah, the contem- 
 poraries of this prophet. In view of these facts it is evident that the 
 references in Isaiah to some of the events or conditions of the coun- 
 try during the Babylonian captivity can furnish no conclusive proof 
 that the last division of Isaiah was written during that period.
 
 382 INTRODUCTION TO THE STUDY 
 
 By far the greatest part of the last division of Isaiah is Messianic , 
 at least, it treats especially of the future glory of Israel. Isaiah had 
 already predicted to Hezekiah the Babylonian captivity (Isaiah 
 xxxix, 6, 7 ; 2 Kings xx, 17, 18). The prophet Micah about the 
 same time foretells the captivity in Babylon and the return of the 
 people : " O daughter of Zion, . . . thou shall go even to Babylon 
 there shalt thou be delivered ; there the Lord shall redeem thee 
 from the hand of thine enemies " (chap, iv, 10). 
 
 If the prophecies of Isaiah had been generally confined to the im- 
 mediate future, we would expect little or nothing in refeience to the 
 deliverance from the captivity. But since he dwells in such glow- 
 ing language upon the Messiah's kingdom and Israel's future glory 
 it is but natural to expect the announcement of a return from Baby- 
 lon. His prediction of the captivity furnishes him the theme upon 
 which he enlarges. And, after all, he says but little about the return 
 from Babylon, but dwells rather upon a greater and higher deliver- 
 ance. " They shall repair the waste cities, the desolations of many 
 generations " (Isa. Ixi, 4), cannot be applied with any degree of force 
 to the return from Babylon. 
 
 In chaps, xliv, 28; xlv, i, Cyrus 1 is referred to as the prince who 
 is to rebuild the temple. He is called Koresh, the sun, but is not 
 spoken of as the king of any particular country, nor are his linea- 
 ments drawn. 
 
 We have another instance in which the name of the individual is 
 Prediction by predicted who is to accomplish a great work. In i Kings 
 specific names. x jij t 2> ft j s re l a ted that a prophet announced to the idol- 
 atrous altar of Jeroboam at Bethel : " O altar, altar, thus saith the 
 Lord, Behold, a child shall be born unto the house of David, Josiah 
 by name, and upon thee shall he offer the priests of the high places 
 that burn incense upon thee, and men's bones shall he burn upon 
 thee." This prophecy was fulfilled by King Josiah about three 
 hundred and fifty years after it was delivered (2 Kings xxiii, 
 15-20). 
 
 In different parts of the last division of Isaiah God represents 
 himself as announcing events before they come to pass (chaps, xli, 
 22-26; xliii, 9; xlv, 21 ; xlvi, 10; xlviii, 3-7), as a proof that he alone 
 is the true God. It is evident from this that the prophet regarded 
 himself as revealing the future, and not as simply announcing what 
 was before the eyes of all. 
 
 1 Josephus states that Cyrus read this prophecy in Isaiah respecting himself, and waj 
 induced by it to give the Jews permission to return to their own land. Antiq., xi, i, a. 
 The decree of Cyrus in favour of the Jews is most easily explained on the supposition 
 hat he had read this prophecy of Isaiah.
 
 OF THE HOLY SCRIPTURES. 883 
 
 It is very probable that Zephaniah (about B. .625) and Jeremiah 
 (B. C. 629-588) have both quoted the last division of Isalah quoted 
 Isaiah. (Comp. Zephaniah ii, 15 with Isaiah xlvii, 8, 10.) by some other 
 This latter prophet describes with withering sarcasm the B 
 folly of idolatry (chaps, xliv, 9-19; xlvi, i, 7). Jeremiah evidently 
 refers to these descriptions in chapter x, 3-15. Isaiah is, beyond 
 doubt, the great original. There are also other passages in Jeremiah 
 which, from their very character, seem to have been taken from 
 Isaiah (chaps, xl-lxvi). 
 
 If there were found a few passages in Isaiah that must of necessity 
 be referred to the time of the Babylonian captivity, we should prefer 
 to regard them as interpolations, rather than to reject the genu- 
 ineness of the last division of the book. But, happily, we are not 
 driven to this necessity. For we are not authorized to limit the 
 prophetic knowledge of Isaiah, nor have we any & priori method of 
 determining how far the Almighty would disclose to him the future, 
 nor how far he would assume the future as already present. 
 
 CHAPTER XLIX. 
 
 THE PROPHET JEREMIAH. ^ 
 
 TEREMIAH was the son of Hilkiah, of the priests in Anathoth, 
 J a city in the tribe of Benjamin, about three miles north-east of 
 Jerusalem. He began his prophetic labours while quite young (chap, 
 i, 6), in the thirteenth year of Josiah the son of Amon, king of Judah 
 about B. C. 629), and continued them until the eleventh year of King 
 Zedekiah, when the people of Jerusalem were carried away captive 
 to Babylon a period of about forty-one years. During the first 
 part of his ministry he lived in Anathoth, as appears from chapter 
 xi, 18-23. Here he purchased a piece of land (chapter personal histo- 
 xxxii, 6-15). At a later period he seems to have had a ry of Jeremiah, 
 permanent residence in Jerusalem, until the city was taken by the 
 Chaldeans. It appears that he was never married, as he gives us no 
 intimation of his having either wife or children; and he was com- 
 manded not to take a wife, nor to have sons and daughters in the 
 place, in view of the great calamities that were to befall the land 
 (chap, xvi, 2-4). In the time cf Zedekiah he was imprisoned and 
 thrust into a miry dungeon, from which he was liberated by order 
 of the king; though still confined to the court of the prison (chaps, 
 xxxvii and xxxviii).
 
 384 INTRODUCTION TO THE STUDY 
 
 When at length the city of Jerusalem was captured, Jeremiah, in 
 accordance with the command of Nebuchadnezzar, was released 
 from prison, and kindly treated by Nebuzar-adan, the Chaldean 
 general. Not long after this he went into Egypt, to Tahpanhes, with 
 A company of Jews (chaps, xlii-xliv). As we hear nothing of him. 
 it is uncertain whether he returned to Palestine or not, though it is 
 probable that he did. Of his death we have no record. 
 
 The ministry of Jeremiah extended over a period of great cor- 
 ruption and idolatry among the people of Judah. The fifty-five 
 years' reign of the wicked king Manasseh had sapped the founda- 
 tions of religion and morality. Amon, his successor, reigned two 
 years, and walked in the wicked course of his father. His suc- 
 Kings of Jere- cessor, the pious Josiah, in the thirteenth year of whose 
 miah's time, reign Jeremiah began to prophesy, manifested great zeal 
 in the service of God, and instituted important reforms : but the 
 good results of his efforts were in a great measure destroyed by the 
 wicked reigns of Jehoahaz and Jehoiakim, his successors. The 
 three months' reign of Jehoiaohin was also wicked, and at its close 
 he and all the chief men of Jerusalem, and the treasures of the city, 
 were carried away captive to Babylon. 
 
 Jeremiah's book furnishes us with so much personal history that we 
 have a clearer perception of his character than we possess of any 
 other Hebrew prophet. He is exhibited as a man of great religious 
 zeal, intrepidity, deep sympathies, and great fidelity, and as suffering 
 very harsh treatment from idolatrous princes for his reproofs. His 
 teachings are chiefly of a practical character. He rebukes the vices 
 and crimes of his age, and earnestly preaches repentance. We miss 
 in his book the sublime prophecies of Isaiah, and find but few 
 Messianic passages in it. 
 
 The book naturally falls into four divisions. In the first we have 
 His prophecy an account f the ca ^ f Jeremiah to the prophetic of- 
 bas four divto- fice, of his messages to the people, of his expostulations 
 with them, of his predictions of the divine judgments, a 
 sketch of his ministry among the people, and the capture of Jerusalem 
 (chs. i-xxxix). The second division (chs. xl-xlv) contains an account 
 of affairs after the capture of Jerusalem, and states that the leaders 
 of the Jewish people took all those who remained in Judah, with 
 Jeremiah and Baruch. and went down to Tahpanhes, in Egypt. It 
 also gives the prophecies of Jeremiah delivered there. Chapter xlv, 
 however, gives the words addressed by Jeremiah to Baruch in the 
 fourth year of Jehoiakim. The third division (chaps, xlvi-li) gives 
 the prophecies of Jeremiah respecting Egypt, the Philistines, Tyre 
 and Zidon, the Moabites, the Ammonites, Edom, Damascus, Elam,
 
 OF THE HOLY SCRIPTURES. 383 
 
 and Babylon. The fourth division consists of but one chapter (Hi), 
 giving an account of the reign of Zedekiah and the capture of Jeru- 
 salem by Nebuzar-adan, the treatment which the king received from 
 the Babylonian monarch, and the release of Jehoiachin from impris- 
 onment in Babylon. 
 
 THE GENUINENESS OF THE PROPHECIES OF JEREMIAH, AND THE 
 DATE OF THEIR DELIVERANCE. ' 
 
 The prophecies of Jeremiah are so interwoven with the events of 
 his life, and bear so strongly the stamp of his age, that -rueirgenajne. 
 the genuineness of but few of them has been questioned, ness generally 
 As Jeremiah began to prophesy in the thirteenth year 
 of the reign of Josiah, and continued in the prophetic office through 
 the eighteen remaining years of Josiah, the three months of Jehoahaz 
 (probably the same as Shallum, Jer. xxii, n), the eleven years of Je- 
 hoiakim, the three months of Jehoiachin, and the eleven years of 
 Zedekiah, the question arises, Under what reigns were the different 
 prophecies delivered? In many instances it is stated when they 
 were delivered, in others we have no guide but critical conjecture. 
 We are certainly justified in attributing to the eighteen years during 
 which he prophesied in the time of Josiah a considerable portion of 
 his prophecies. 
 
 We think it probable that the first seventeen chapters were deliv- 
 ered in the reign of Josiah. Certainly a large portion of them be- 
 longs to this period. The prophet relates in the first chapters the 
 particulars of his call to the prophetic office in the thirteenth year 
 of Josiah. In chap. Hi, 6 he states : " The Lord said also unto me in 
 the days of Josiah the king," etc. After this the name of no ruler 
 is mentioned throughout this section, and there is in it nothing un- 
 suitable to the reign of Josiah. In the time of this pious king the 
 prophet had protection even from wicked princes, and the men of 
 Anathoth alone were dangerous foes. This section contains no de- 
 nunciation of the king, but of the people. In the time of the subse- 
 quent wicked monarchs his difficulties with kings and princes begin. 
 In chap, xiii, 18, however, it is said: "Say unto the king and to the 
 queen, Humble yourselves, sit down : for from your heads shall come 
 down even the crown of your glory." This may seem to indicate that 
 the king and queen were to lose their position, and it may seem more 
 applicable to some other rulers than to Josiah and his queen. The 
 prediction might be considered as fulfilled by Josiah's death at 
 Megiddo. The language, however, may be applied not to any in- 
 dividual monarch, but, generally, to the overthrow of the Jewish 
 monarchy.
 
 386 INTRODUCTION TO THE STUDY 
 
 In these chapters the genuineness of chap, x, 1-16 is denied by 
 Objections of De Wette anci others, and the verses are attributed to a 
 DC wette and prophet living during the captivity, whom they suppose 
 to have written the last part of Isaiah. Bleek supposes 
 the section to be genuine, and thinks it belongs to the time of Zede- 
 kiah. 1 Verses 6-8, 10, are wanting in the LXX ; but this furnishes 
 no ground for their rejection. Verse n is in Chaldee, for which 
 it is difficult to assign a good reason. It must be acknowledged 
 that the sixteen verses under discussion strongly resemble the latter 
 part of the prophecies of Isaiah : but this is to be explained by Jer- 
 emiah's imitating Isaiah, not by a later prophet's retouching him. 
 In chapter viii nearly all verse 10, and the whole of verses n and 12 
 are omitted in the LXX ; but, although Hitzig regards them as super- 
 fluous, and as interrupting the connexion, there is no good reason for 
 their rejection. In chap, xi, verse 7, and nearly the whole of 8, are 
 omitted in the LXX, but there is no sufficient reason for their being 
 discarded from the text. Chap, xvii, 1-4, is wanting in the LXX, 
 but Hitzig considers it genuine. Certainly its omission there does 
 not justify us in throwing it out of the Hebrew text. Chapters 
 xviii, xix, contain an account of Jeremiah's being sent down to the 
 potter's house to see a work wrought on the wheels, which was 
 marred, and of Jeremiah's application of it to the house of Israel. 
 Chapter xx contains an account of Pashur's smiting Jeremiah when 
 he had heard the prophecy and the incidents that followed it. 
 These three chapters are closely connected, and belong, in all prob- 
 ability, to the time of Jehoiakim. Chapter xxi, i-io belongs to the 
 time of Zedekiah. Chapters xxi, n-xxii, 19 belong to the age of 
 Jehoiakim, for Shallum (Jehoahaz) had already been deposed and 
 carried into Egypt (chap, xxii, n), and the reigning monarch is ex- 
 horted to imitate the virtues of his father (Josiah, evidently), and 
 Times of writ- Jehoiakim is threatened with the burial of an ass all of 
 miab's 1 prop wll i ch point to the time of this monarch. Chapters 
 ecieu. xxii, 20-xxiii belong to the time of Jehoiachin (called 
 
 also Coniah and Jechoniah), for God threatens to deliver him up 
 to the Chaldeans (chap, xxii, 24-28). Chapter xxiv belongs to the 
 first part of Zedekiah 's reign, after Jehoiachin had been carried 
 away captive to Babylon. Chapter xxv was delivered in the fourth 
 year of Jehoiakim. A part of the i3th and the whole of the i4th 
 verse are wanting in the LXX. After the i3th verse there is no 
 longer a correspondence in the order of chapters between the He- 
 brew and the LXX. Chapter xxvii is attributed in the Hebrew text 
 to the beginning of the reign of Jehoiakim, but the contents clearly 
 
 1 Einleitung, p. 477.
 
 OF THE HOLY SCRIPTURES. 387 
 
 snow that it belongs to the time of Zedekiah, most probably to the 
 early part of his reign. 
 
 The Peshito-Syriac reads, " In the beginning of the reign of Zedc- 
 kiah, son of Josiah, king of Judah, came this word to Jeremiah from 
 the Lord." The Septuagint has simply, " Thus saith the Lord." The 
 present reading of the Hebrew 1 is evidently the error of a transcrib- 
 er, repeating at the head of this chapter the very words with which 
 the preceding chapter begins. In this chapter verses 7, 13, 17 are 
 entirely wanting in the LXX, and the last five verses are found 
 mutilated. Davidson* does not think the seventh verse genuine; 
 he also supposes 16-22 to be spurious, and a vaticinium ex eventu. 
 Hitzig 3 regards the Hebrew text in general as corrupt in this chap- 
 ter where it contains more than the LXX. De Wette thinks the 
 chapter revised by a later hand. 4 
 
 We cannot agree with these critics ; for the mere fact that some 
 of these verses are wanting in the LXX furnishes no sufficient proof 
 that they were wanting in the Hebrew text before the time of Christ. 
 The Septuagint has abridged the text. There is no Reply to Hitzig 
 doubt that the LXX sometimes took liberties with the and De Wette. 
 text; but this whole chapter is well connected, and Jeremiah's ad- 
 vice and prophecy are suitable to the occasion. But what motive 
 could a later writer have had to make the additions, some of which 
 enjoin upon the people obedience to Nebuchadnezzar? Certainly 
 this monarch, who overthrew the Jewish Commonwealth, was not 
 very popular with the Jews. Nor is there anything in this chapter 
 inconsistent with the style of Jeremiah. 
 
 Chapter xxviii belongs to the fourth year of Zedekiah, and xxix to 
 the first year of that monarch's reign. In chapter xxix nearly the 
 whole of verse 14, and all of 16-20, are omitted in the LXX. It. is true 
 that verses 16-19 do not seem to be suitable in a letter to the cap- 
 tives in Babylon, as they refer to the king (Zedekiah) and people 
 still remaining in Judah, for Nebuchadnezzar had not yet completed 
 the captivity of the Jews. But yet there were, perhaps, good rea- 
 sons for the insertion of these verses in the letter of Jeremiah ; for 
 the captives in Babylon declared that God was raising up for them 
 prophets in that city (verse 15). These false prophets, 6 no doubt, 
 proclaimed that God would restore the captives to their native land 
 Jeremiah, in reply to them, states that so far is this from being true, 
 
 1 In Kennicott and De Rossi's Hebrew Bible, MS. 224 has the reading Zcdekiab. 
 and in MS. 180 Jehoiakim is wanting. 
 
 Introduction, vol. iii, pp. 99, 100. 'Der Proph. Jer., pp. 2U-4T&. 
 
 4 De Wette Schrader, p. 431. 
 'In illustration of this see Jeremiah xxviii, 10, II.
 
 INTRODUCTION TO THE STUDY 
 
 that Zedekiah and those who remain in Judah will be also brought to 
 Babylon. It is very probable that the verses under consideration 
 were omitted by the LXX on account of their supposed irrelevancy. 
 
 De Wette argues that chapters xxvii-xxix were revised by a later 
 Another objeo- ^ an< ^> from the use of the short form of several proper 
 don to De names in them : rroT (Jeremiah), m3' (Jechoniah), 
 rrpiv (Zedekiah), without the ending, 1. But no solid 
 argument can be drawn from this in favour of a revisal of the chap- 
 ters. A short form for Jehoiachin (irnD, Coniafi) is found in Jer. 
 xxii, 24, 28. It is true that the shorter form for Jeremiah is used in 
 the later books of the Hebrew Bible, though the longer form occurs 
 in i Chron. xii, 13. For Zedekiah, the long form is used in this 
 very section in chapter xxix, 21, and is found in a later author, 
 2 Chron. xviii, 10. We have no reason to suppose that Jeremiah 
 always wrote his name in the same way; but even if he did, we do 
 not know that copyists would do so. Dr. Davidson thinks there are 
 some interpolations in the twenty-seventh chapter ; but on chapters 
 xxviii and xxix he remarks : " A regular glossing or working over 
 of the text either by the Deutero-Isaiah, or any other such person, 
 is hardly perceptible except to the eye of hypercriticism." ' 
 
 Chapters xxx, xxxi predict the restoration of Israel, and in chap. 
 xxxi, 31-34 there is a reference to the New Testament dispensation. 
 They were written, in all probability, about the time Zedekiah was 
 carried away captive to Babylon. Chapter xxx, 10, u is wanting 
 in the LXX. There is no reason to doubt the genuineness of the 
 passage. Chapter xxxii belongs to the tenth year of the reign of 
 Zedekiah, when the king of Babylon besieged Jerusalem. The next 
 chapter (xxxiii) belongs to the same period. It contains a Messianic 
 passage (verses 15, 16). Verses 14-26 are wanting in the LXX. 
 
 De Wette* thinks chapters xxx, xxxi, xxxiii were revised by a 
 later writer, who, he imagines, wrote the second part of Isaiah. 
 But Dr. Davidson supposes that the "Deutero-Isaiah had Jeremiah's 
 prophecies in view in different places, and copied various expres- 
 sions." It is difficult to see what purpose a later writer would have 
 in retouching Jeremiah. Nor is it at all probable that the learned 
 Jews would have made so free with the writings of the great prophet, 
 laaiahtheorig- There ^ s a considerable number of passages in Jeremiah 
 inai in parallel which strongly resemble Isaiah, especially in the three 
 chapters under discussion. And the question arises, 
 Which is the original ? This must be conceded to Isaiah, for the 
 passages in Jeremiah that bear such close affinity with the last part 
 of Isaiah are not in Jeremiah's style. 
 
 1 Introduction, voL iii, p. 101. * De Wette Schrader, p. 420.
 
 OF THE HOLY SCRIPTURES. 389 
 
 Chapter xxxiv belongs to the last part of the reign of Zedekiah 
 when Jerusalem was besieged. Chapter xxxv pertains to the reign 
 of Jehoiakim, but the year is not named ; and the following chapter, 
 xxxvi, records transactions that pertain to the fourth year of that 
 monarch's reign. 
 
 Chapters xxxvii, xxxviii relate events, especially those with which 
 Jeremiah was connected, in the last part of the reign of Zedekiah. 
 Chapter xxxix gives an account of the capture of Jerusalem in the 
 eleventh year of Zedekiah, and incidents following it. Verses 4-13 
 are wanting in the LXX. Chapters xl-xliv relate the events in 
 Judah after the capture of Jerusalem, and the migration of the chief 
 men, and all the remnant of the Jews in Judah, accompanied by 
 Jeremiah, to Tahpanhes in Egypt. They also contain the proph- 
 ecies there delivered by Jeremiah. Chapter xlv contains words of 
 consolation to Baruch, delivered in the fourth year of Jehoiakim. 
 Chapter xlvi, 1-12 contains a prophecy against Egypt and the army 
 of Pharaoh-necho, in the fourth year of Jehoiakim. Chapter xlvi, 
 13-26 is also a prophecy against Egypt, to which are added words 
 of consolation to Israel (verses 27, 28), delivered also, it would seem, 
 in the fourth year of. Jehoiakim. 
 
 Chapter xlvii is a brief prophecy against the Philistines. It was 
 delivered, the superscription states, " before that Pharaoh smote 
 Gaza " words which are wanting in the LXX. De Wette supposes 
 the inscription to be false, because the prophet threatens the Philis- 
 tines with destruction from the north, not from Egypt ' (verse 2). 
 It is very probable that the Philistines were threatened with destruc- 
 tion from the Chaldeans, and not from the Egyptians. The state- 
 ment of the superscription, Before that Pharaoh smote Gaza the 
 prophecy came to Jeremiah, is not false. Gaza, Askelon, and all 
 the Philistines were to be ruined; hence it is evident that Pharaoh's 
 smiting Gaza has nothing to do with the fulfilment of the prophecy. 
 Chapter xlviii contains a prophecy against Moab, in which a very 
 accurate knowledge of the geography of the country is shown. 
 Verses 45-47 are wanting in the LXX. Chap, xlix contains proph- 
 ecies respecting the Ammonites, the Edomites, Damascus, Kedar, 
 and Hazor (verses 1-33), and against Elam (verses 34-39). With 
 the exception of this last prophecy against Elam, belonging to the 
 first part of Zedekiah's reign, it is impossible to determine in what 
 reign Jeremiah delivered the prophecies in the last two chapters. 
 Chapters 1, li contain a very long and, in some respects, minute 
 prophecy against Babylon, in which her utter desolation is predicted, 
 and to be effected chiefly by the Medes. In chapter li, verses 45-48 
 1 De Wette Schrader, p. 428.
 
 390 INTRODUCTION TO THE STUDY 
 
 are wanting in the LXX. This prophecy was written in a book, and 
 sent, in the fourth year of the reign of Zedekiah, to Babylon by 
 Seraiah, who was commanded by Jeremiah to read it there, and then 
 to bind a stone to it, and to cast it into the midst of the Euphrates, 
 and to declare, " Thus shall Babylon sink and rise no more "(chapter 
 li, 59-64). 
 
 The genuineness of the prophecy in these two chapters has been 
 Objections to assailed by Eichhorn, Gramberg, Knobel, Ewald, and 
 genuineness, others. Davidson is inclined to think that it was not 
 composed by Jeremiah. But Hitzig remarks on this prophecy: "It 
 exhibits many traces of its genuineness and grounds for it. The use 
 of language (chapters 1, 16; li, i, 3, 7, 14, 45, 55) and the circle of 
 images (chapter li, 7, 8, 34, 37), as well as the style, especially in turns 
 like chapter li, 2, in the form of conclusion (chapter li, 57), and in 
 the informal dialogue (chapter li, 51), unmistakably betray Jeremiah. 
 This result is confirmed by chronological data. Assyria has fallen 
 (chap. 1, 1 8). Foreigners, the Chaldeans, have made an invasion into 
 the land of Judah which especially endangered the temple (chaps. 
 I, n, li, 51); the land has been pillaged, people have been carried 
 away from it (chap, li, 34), but Jerusalem is still inhabited (chap, 
 li, 35); and, what historically cannot now be otherwise, the present 
 king at Babylon is still Nebuchadnezzar" 1 (chapter 1, 17). He, 
 however, thinks the prophecy has been somewhat altered. De 
 Wette finds in the prophecy expressions and turns of thought char- 
 acteristic of Jeremiah, along with the peculiarities that belong to 
 the second part of Isaiah ; so that he suspects that a later author, 
 who, he supposes, wrote the second part of Isaiah, revised this proph- 
 ecy of Jeremiah." Why should he not rather have supposed that 
 Jeremiah imitated Isaiah ? 
 
 Bleek remarks on the prophecy, that if it is not genuine we must 
 suppose that some one " composed it in the name of Jeremiah, and 
 added the epilogue, that the prophecy might pass for that prophet's 
 which, in itself, is not probable. But in the contents themselves 
 are found indications that the prophecy was composed in Judea 
 itself, as the sanctuary still exists on Zion (chaps. 1, 5, li, 50), as well 
 as the city of Jerusalem (chap, li, 35). To the same effect do the 
 words (chap, li, 51), 'For strangers have forced themselves into the 
 sanctuaries of the Lord's house,' suit well the given date in Zede- 
 kiah's time, as then, after Jehoiachin's captivity, Nebuchadnezzar 
 had plundered the temple. But the words would not be applicable 
 after it had been entirely destroyed." 1 The expression, " vengeance 
 
 1 Der Prophet Jeremta, p. 391. * De Wette Schrader, pp. 428, 429. 
 
 "Einleitung, pp. 478, 479. ,
 
 OF THE HOLY SCRIPTURES. 301 
 
 of his temple " (chapters 1, 28, li, n), refers to the plundering of the 
 temple when Jehoiachin was led into captivity by Nebuchadnezzar 
 (2 Kings xxiv, 11-13). 
 
 We have, accordingly, all the proof of the genuineness and integ- 
 rity of this prophecy that we can reasonably demand Satisfactory 
 the positive statement that it was written by Jeremiah 
 (chap, li, 60), and numerous internal marks peculiar to tegrity. 
 Jeremiah, and allusions to a state of affairs in that prophet's time 
 which no longer existed a few years subsequently. It is difficult to 
 see how the prophecy could have been revised by a later hand with- 
 out obliterating many of the traces of Jeremiah's style and times, 
 and without introducing evidences of a later period. 
 
 The last chapter of Jeremiah (lii) describes the reign of Zedekiah, 
 the capture of Jerusalem and the events connected with it, and the 
 deliverance of Jehoiachin from imprisonment in Babylon. This 
 chapter, we hold, was not written by Jeremiah, both on account of 
 the words with which the preceding chapter closes, " Thus far are 
 the words of Jeremiah," ' and the statement that Jehoiachin was re- 
 leased from prison in the thirty-seventh year of his captivity, and 
 treated kindly all the days of his life. Had this been written by 
 Jeremiah he would have been ninety years old, or more ; but it is 
 not probable that he reached such an age. The chapter was added 
 by a later hand. 
 
 THE COLLECTION AND ARRANGEMENT OF THE PROPHECIES OF 
 
 JEREMIAH. 
 
 We find that in the fourth year of Jehoiakim the Lord commanded 
 Jeremiah to take a roll of a book, and to write in it all the words 
 that he had spoken unto him against Judah and against all the 
 nations up to that time. Baruch then wrote in a book the words 
 from Jeremiah, and read them to the people, after which the king 
 burnt up the book. Baruch took another roll, and wrote all the 
 words of the first roll, to which many similar words were added 
 (chapter xxxvi). 
 
 In this same year (fourth of Jehoiakim) mention is made of the 
 prophecies, "even all that is written in this book'," which is followed 
 by a list of the nations concerning which Jeremiah prophesied (chap. 
 xxv, 13). Some of these prophecies were r delivered at a later period, 
 but are here named in order to give a complete view. Reference is 
 again made in chapter xlv, i to Baruch's having " written these 
 words in a book at the mouth of Jeremiah in the fourth year of Je- 
 hoiakim." But this book contained none of the prophecies writter 
 1 These words are omitted in the LXX.
 
 392 INTRODUCTION TO THE STUDY 
 
 after the fourth year of that monarch. The long prophecy against 
 Babylon was written by Jeremiah himself (chap, li, 60) in a separate 
 book, and sent to Babylon. Baruch may have also written for Jere- 
 miah the last of his prophecies, as we find that he accompanied the 
 prophet into Egypt (chapter xliii, 6). 
 
 It seems rather singular that the prophecies of Jeremiah. with 
 The prophecies the exception of the first twenty chapters -are not al- 
 not to chronc wa y s arranged in the order of time in which they aie 
 logical order, delivered. Nor is the arrangement in the LXX, which 
 differs from the Hebrew text after chapter xxiv, in the order of time. 
 But, after all, there is not much disorder in the arrangement of the 
 prophecies and the events. Chapters xxiv-xxxix, with the exception 
 of chapters xxv, xxvi, xxxv, xxxvi, contain the prophecies delivered 
 and the events that occurred in the reign of Zedekiah. They end 
 with the capture of Jerusalem and the destruction of the temple in 
 the eleventh year of that monarch's reign, and are almost invariably 
 arranged according to the order of time. But it is not easy to de- 
 termine why the four chapters last named, belonging to the reign 
 of Jehoiakim, were inserted among those pertaining to the reign of 
 Zedekiah. Perhaps in the judgment of the arranger the matter 
 which they contain rendered their present position suitable. 
 
 Chapters xl-xliv, treating of affairs subsequent to the capture of 
 Jerusalem, stand in the right place. Chapter xlv, containing words 
 of consolation for Baruch, was added as an appendage to the proph- 
 ecies and history respecting the Jews. Though belonging to the 
 fourth year of Jehoiakim, it was judged better to put it here, rather 
 than to omit it altogether. The prophecies respecting foreign na- 
 tions (chaps, xlvi-li) are arranged together, and placed at the end 
 of Jeremiah's writings, as having no special relation to the events of 
 his times. Chapter Hi was added as an appendix by a later hand. 
 
 We have already seen that in several instances passages are found 
 in the Hebrew text that are wanting in the LXX. It is not easy to 
 Different be- explain this phenomenon. It would, indeed, seem prob- 
 i 5J able that the translators of the Hebrew text must have 
 had before them a Hebrew manuscript, which was some- 
 what different from our present masoretic text. But, at the same 
 time, we are not sure that they did not take liberties with the text. 
 On the other hand, we cannot doubt that when the canon was formed 
 by Nehemiah, our present Hebrew text of Jeremiah made a part of 
 it. If it could be supposed with any reason that Jeremiah published 
 two editions of his prophecies, one at Tahpanhes, in Egypt, and that 
 he returned to Jerusalem and published a second and enlarged one, 
 the basis of our present Hebrew text, and that the Greek version
 
 OF THE HOLY SCRIPTURES. 398 
 
 made from the former in Egypt, the difficulty would be in great 
 part removed. But even in that case it would seem singular that 
 the translators should not have obtained a Hebrew manuscript from 
 Jerusalem, the seat of Jewish authority and learning. Yet it is in 
 th highest degree probable that such manuscripts as were in au- 
 thority at Jerusalem were used by Hebrews in Egypt B. C. 200-150, 
 during which the Greek version of Jeremiah was probably made. 
 
 Movers, and some other critics, have a decided preference for the 
 text of the LXX, which Bleek, 1 upon the whole, favours. So, also, does 
 De Wette in the later editions of his Introduction. Havernick and 
 Keil most decidedly prefer the Hebrew text. Ewald and Schrader,' 
 while acknowledging that the Hebrew text is, in the main, the 
 more correct, yet think that in some instances the LXX has the bet- 
 ter reading. 
 
 For ourselves, we adhere to the Hebrew text, from which we see 
 no good reason to depart. Neither can it be done with safety. 
 
 CHAPTER L. 
 
 THE BOOK OF THE PROPHECY OF EZEKIEL. 
 
 THE PERSON OF THE PROPHET. 
 
 Prophet Ezekiel* lived and prophesied among the Jews who 
 * had been brought from Judea, in the captivity of Jehoiachin, by 
 Nebuchadnezzar, king of Babylon, and dispersed in different parts 
 of his dominions. He was dwelling in the land of the Chaldeans, 
 among the captive Jews, near the river Chebar, 4 when, in the fifth 
 year of the captivity of Jehoiachin, the heavens were opened to him, 
 and he saw visions of God, and the divine word was communicated 
 to him. His prophetic office continued about twenty-two years. 
 At least, his written prophecies extend over that period, as we find 
 that a divine communication was made to him as late as the twenty- 
 seventh year of the captivity (chap, xxix, 17). 
 
 But little is known of his personal history. His father was Buzi 
 
 1 Einleitung, p. 489. * De Wette Schrader, p. 435. 
 
 1 ,38fc|5TrP, whom God makes strong. 
 
 4 1^f , Chebar, is, doubtless, the same as "113n, Chabor, in 2 Kings xvii, 6, whither 
 the king of Assyria transported some of the Israelites ; the Chaboras of the Greeks 
 called Aborrhas by Strabo. It is a large river in Mesopotamia, flowing into the Eu 
 phrates at the ancient Circesium (Carchemish), the modern Kerkesiah. The rivei 
 is now called Khabur. It is about 180 miles from Babylon. Noldeke and Schradei 
 suppose Chebar to be a stream or canal of the Euphrates, not far from Babylon.
 
 894 INTRODUCTION TO THE STUDY 
 
 a priest, who is otherwise unknown to us. He was married, as men- 
 tion is made of the death of his wife (chap, xxiv, 18), who died in 
 the ninth year of the captivity. He had a house of his own in the 
 land of his captivity (chaps, iii, 24; viii, i). He probably began his 
 prophetic duties in the thirtieth year of his age 1 (chap, i, i). We 
 have no account of his death. 
 
 The book may be divided into five parts. The first (chapters 
 i-xxiv) contains prophecies respecting the children of Israel. The 
 second (chaps, xxv-xxxii) contains prophecies icspecting foreign na- 
 tions. The third (chaps, xxxiii-xxxvii) embraces oracles, principal- 
 ly respecting Israel. The fourth (chaps, xxxviii, xxxix) 
 gives the predictions of the prophet against Gog and 
 Magog. Theyf/M (chaps, xl-xlviii) describes the measuring of Je- 
 rusalem and the temple, the sacrificial offerings, the divisions of the 
 land among the different tribes of Israel, and kindred matters, which 
 were revealed lo the prophet in vision. 
 
 THE GENUINENESS OF THE PROPHECIES OF EZEKIEL. 
 
 The book of this prophet is of such a uniform and well-connected 
 character, and contains so many traces of the age of the prophet, 
 that the genuineness of the whole of it is acknowledged bj all critics, 
 with scarcely an exception. 
 
 " Ezekiel's prominent peculiarity," says De Wette, " is impressed 
 upon the book from beginning to end." Again he remarks: 'That 
 Ezekiel, who generally speaks of himself in the first person, wrote 
 down every thing himself, is subject to no doubt ; he, nevertheless, 
 appears not to have done this until late. Even the collecting of the 
 prophecies can be referred to him, especially as they are arranged 
 according to a definite plan."* Gesenius likewise gives his testi- 
 mony to the genuineness of the whole book when he says : " The 
 Book of Ezekiel belongs to that not very numerous class which from 
 De wette and the beginning to the end maintain a unity of tone, which 
 jrenutaraesBof * s evmce( ^ ky favourite expressions and peculiar phrases ; 
 Ezekiel. and by this, were there nothing else, every suspicion that 
 
 particular sections may be spurious ought to be averted."' The 
 learned sceptical Jew, Dr. Zunz, 4 stands alone in calling in question 
 the age of these prophecies, and in referring them to a period bor- 
 
 1 This seems to us to be the meaning of the words, " And it came to pass in the 
 thirtieth year," the same as in English, " in my thirtieth year," expressed by the LXX, 
 iv TV rptaoffTv T. The supposition that some unknown era is referred to from 
 which the thirtieth year is reckoned, is untenable. 
 
 * De Wette Schrader, pp. 444, 44- * In Keil, voL i, p. 362. 
 
 * Gottesdienst. Vortrage der Juden, pp. 157-162.
 
 OF THE HOLY SCRIPTURES. 395 
 
 dering on the time of the Persian Dominion. Definite special 
 prophecies are an offense to him. As his objections to the age of 
 these prophecies have found no response, it is unnecessary to enter 
 into a refutation of them. 
 
 In the arrangement of these prophecies the order of time is ob- 
 served, except in two instances, namely, the prophecy against Egypt 
 in the tenth year (chap, xxix, i), and that against the same land in 
 the twenty-seventh year (chap, xxix, 17-20). There is no reason 
 whatever for supposing that the prophecies of Ezekiel are historical 
 events thrown into the prophetic form. They bear every mark of 
 being genuine prophecies. " In the person of Ezekiel," says Keil, 
 " we meet with a character very decided and sharply marked, of 
 genuine priestly turn of mind, with rich endowments, with uncom- 
 mon imagination, with imposing energy, with a noble creative imag- 
 ination, and with powerful, burning eloquence." 1 
 
 The language of Ezekiel abounds in Chaldaisms, and he is often 
 careless in his grammatical forms. His prophetic style and imagery 
 were, no doubt, more or less modified by his new surroundings in 
 the land of Chaldea. He makes frequent use of the Pentateuch, 
 and in some instances imitates Jeremiah." A large part of his proph- 
 ecies are presented in visions ; and as he almost invariably gives the 
 date of these wonderful scenes, and the circumstances connected 
 with them, it is evident that he intended that they should be under- 
 stood as real events. We have no reason to question their truth. 
 
 In respect to the symbolical actions which the prophet in several 
 instances was ordered to perform, it is probable that they were really 
 performed by him in an outward way, in most cases as signs to the 
 people. We cannot doubt that the death of the wife of the prophet 
 was a reality, at which the prophet, as a sign to the people, was or- 
 dered not to weep, that they, too, should not weep at the loss of dear 
 relatives (chap, xxiv, 15-24). So the symbolical acts in chaps, iv, 
 v, xii, xxi, 6, 7, must be understood, in all probability, as having 
 been performed in the presence of Israelites in the captivity.* " An- 
 cient tradition," says Ftirst, " relates that the men of the great as- 
 sembly, i. e., the great Council of State, collected, arranged, and 
 edited the prophecies of Ezekiel. . . . The prophecies had for a long 
 time been collected, brought into chronological order, and reduced 
 
 1 Introduction, vol. i, p. 355, in Clark's Foreign Theological Library. 
 
 "Compare chap, xviii, 2 with Jer. xxxi, 29 ; chap, xxxiii, 7 with Jer. vi, 17, etc. 
 
 1 Bleek thinks that symbolical acts were not really performed by the prophet, as 
 they could not have been witnessed by those for whom they were intended. Ein 
 leitung, pp. 514, 515. This is not altogether true, for they were witnessed by a pan 
 of the community. No symbolical act is ever witnessed by all the people for whom 
 it is intended. 
 20
 
 S9C INTRODUCTION TO THE STUDY 
 
 to a whole. More than three hundred years passed away, during 
 Rabbinic views which Ezekiel was regarded as a holy book, belonging 
 of ExeMei. to t ne national writings. Then it was discovered, upon 
 closer examination, that its legal contents in the regulations of the 
 priests do not stand in harmony with the arrangements in the Penta- 
 teuch, and it was determined in the schools to withdraw the book, 
 as apocryphal, from public reading. Then came forward Chanania, 
 the son of Hezekiah, the son of Garon, a younger contemporary of 
 Hillel's, about the birth of Christ, and devoted himself most indus- 
 triously to the removal of the difficulty, until he succeeded." ' 
 
 CHAPTER LI. 
 
 THE BOOK OF DANIEL. 
 
 TN the Hebrew Bible this book stands in the Hagiographa be- 
 * tween Esther and Ezra. It derives its name from its author, Daniel, 
 who is its chief historical character, and whose prophecies it con- 
 tains. The author was carried away captive from Jerusalem to 
 Babylon in the third year of the reign of Jehoiakim, and continued 
 to occupy various positions of honour, and to receive divine com- 
 munications, until the third year of Cyrus (chap x, i), after which 
 we hear no more of him. The time of his death is uncertain. 
 
 The book is naturally divided into two parts : first, the historical, giv- 
 ing an account of important events at Babylon in the author's time 
 (chaps, i-vi); second, the prophetical, containing prophecies respect- 
 ing future empires, the Messiah's kingdom, and the resurrection of the 
 dead (chaps, vii-xii). 
 
 THE UNITY OF THE BOOK. 
 
 Eichhorn held that the book was composed by two authors, one 
 of whom wrote chaps, ii, 4~vi, and the other chaps, vii-xii with i-ii, 3. 
 Berthold was of the opinion that the different sections were written 
 at different times by nine authors. But the theory of a plurality of 
 authorship is now universally abandoned. 
 
 In chapters i-vii, i, Daniel speaks of himself in the third person, 
 
 Dnlty of an- Dut m tne rest of tne boolc in tne fi rst ' The reason for 
 utwihip. this difference of persons is obvious. The first part is 
 
 historical, in which it was necessary for the author to keep his sub- 
 jectivity out of sight, and to consider himself as one of the actor* 
 1 Ueber den Kanon, pp. 21, 3d.
 
 OF THE HOLY SCRIPTURES. 897 
 
 in the scene. In the last six chapters he speaks of himself in the 
 first person, because his prophecy is not historical. He describes 
 visions that appeared to himself alone. Here individuality and sub- 
 jectivity are conspicuous, and therefore the first person is altogether 
 appropriate. 
 
 It is true that the book is written partly in Hebrew, and partly in 
 Chaldee, but this does not militate against unity of authorship. The 
 Chaldee begins in chapter ii, 4, with the address that the Chaldeans 
 make to the king, and ends with chapter vii. But the first person 
 is used in this seventh (Chaldee) chapter and in the remaining chap- 
 ters, which are Hebrew. It is extremely improbable that a second 
 author, in taking up the first six chapters of the first part, should add 
 an additional chapter in Chaldee, and then finish the book in He- 
 brew. The second part of the book is, to a great extent, an en- 
 largement of some of the prophecies in the first, and refers to them. 
 The character of Daniel is the same throughout the whole book. 
 
 THE GENUINENESS OF THE BOOK. 
 
 It was the universal belief of the ancient Jewish and Christian 
 Churches that the book was written by Daniel, who lived during the 
 captivity at Babylon. Porphyry, a heathen philosopher belonging 
 to the school of the New-Platonists (f about A. D. 305), devoted 
 the whole of the twelfth book of his fifteen against Christianity, in 
 the attempt to show that this book is spurious, and that it was writ- 
 ten in the time of Antiochus Epiphanes (B. C. 175-164). Jerome 
 remarks on Porphyry, that he asserted that the author of the book 
 " did not so much predict the future as narrate the past ; that what- 
 ever he said up to the time of Antiochus Epiphanes contained true 
 history, but that his statements in reference to affairs beyond that 
 period, because he was ignorant of the future, are false. Eusebius, 
 bishop of Cesarea, in three books, Apollinarius, also, in one large 
 book, and before these, in part, Methodius, have answered him in 
 a very ingenious manner." 1 
 
 From the time of Porphyry we hear of no objections to the genu- 
 ineness of the book until Spinoza, a Dutch Jew of the The ^j^,,,,, 
 seventeenth century, gave expression to a suspicion that -"i Spinoza and 
 a writer later than Daniel wrote the first seven chapters 
 from the Chaldean annals. In the first part of the eighteenth cen- 
 tury a violent and elaborate attack was made on the genuineness of 
 the book by Anthony Collins,* an English Deist. In the latter part 
 
 1 Preface to his Commentary on Daniel. 
 
 * In The Scheme of Literal Prophecy Considered London, 1727. See Leland's 
 View of Deistical Writers, vol. i, p. 123.
 
 398 INTRODUCTION TO THE STUDY 
 
 of the same century the book was attacked by Corrodi, in which he 
 was followed by Eichhorn and Bertholdt, about the beginning of the 
 present century. These attacks have been continued by De Wette, 
 Bleek, Ewald, Lengerke, Hitzig, Bunsen, Davidson, 1 and others. On 
 the other hand, it has been vigorously defended by Hengstenberg, 
 Havernick, Herbst, Keil, Delitzsch, Auberlen, Stuart, and others. 
 
 THE EXISTENCE, AGE, AND COUNTRY OF DANIEL. 
 
 Before discussing the genuineness of the book, it is proper to 
 inquire into the existence, age, and country of Daniel. And here we 
 must observe that there is not the slightest reason for supposing 
 that Daniel is a mythical or poetical character. If a book is forged 
 in the name of a person, it shows that at the time of the forgery not 
 only was there no doubt of the existence of that person, but also that 
 he was a man of great reputation. Otherwise, there would be no 
 object in assuming his name. And to ascribe to him a different 
 character, or to locate him in a country or in an age different from 
 what tradition assigned him, would render the reception of the book 
 quite impossible. 
 
 We need not, however, rely wholly upon an a priori argument in 
 proof of his existence and reputation, for the prophet Ezekiel, who 
 lived in the first part of the Babylonian captivity, refers to him in 
 the following passages : " Though these three men, Noah, Daniel, 
 and Job, were in it, they should deliver but their own souls by their 
 righteousness, saith the Lord God " (Ezek. xiv, 14). Again he says 
 Ezekiers refer- (verse 20) : "Though Noah, Daniel, and Job, were in it," 
 encetoDanieu etc The placing of Daniel along with Noah and Job 
 would indicate that he lived in a time of great trial, and was dis- 
 tinguished for fidelity and righteousness, as were Noah and Job. 
 There is no reason for supposing that in the order of their names 
 there is necessarily a reference to the order of time in which they 
 lived. It was natural that Noah, their ancestor, distinguished for 
 righteousness, should stand first. Daniel stands next, not because 
 he preceded Job in time, but because he was Ezekiel's own country- 
 man; and Job was put last because he was a foreigner. In Ezekiel 
 xxviii, 3, in the midst of a long prophecy against Tyre, the following 
 occurs : " Behold, thou art wiser than Daniel; there is no secret that 
 they can hide from thee." When Ezekiel used this language, Dan- 
 iel, according to the book that bears his name, had been already in 
 Babylon eighteen years, and had obtained the highest celebrity. His 
 fame may have reached to Tyre when Ezekiel made the references ; 
 but there is nothing in the language indicating, in the slightest de- 
 In Introduction, 1863.
 
 OF THE HOLY SCRIPTURES. 399 
 
 gree, that Daniel was known in Tyre. Nor does the allasion require 
 it. as Ezekiel did not read his prophecy in that city ; at all events, 
 the fame of Daniel would reach that city as soon as the prophecy 
 would. Further, there was appropriateness in comparing the wis- 
 dom of Tyre with that of some living person. At the time when 
 Ezekiel spoke of the righteousness of Noah, Daniel, and Job, Daniel 
 had been already in Babylon twelve years, and had become renowned 
 for piety and wisdom. The passages cited from Ezekiel show that 
 Daniel was a man of great piety and wisdom, and well known to 
 Ezekiel's contemporaries. Now, if Daniel did not live during the 
 Babylonian captivity, to what period can we assign his history ? We 
 have a connected history of the Jews from the calling of Abraham 
 to the captivity at Babylon, and there is nowhere mentioned a man 
 of any eminence by the name of Daniel; he must, therefore, have 
 lived during the captivity. Ewald and Bunsen, however, suppose that 
 the Daniel mentioned by Ezekiel was, perhaps, a descendant of the 
 kingdom of the ten tribes, who lived at the heathen court in Nin- 
 eveh, and to whom prophecies respecting the kingdoms of the world 
 were attributed in a book written in the time of Alexander the Great, 
 or soon afterwards ; and that this book was used by the author of the 
 present Book of Daniel. Bleek justly rejects such a view as un- 
 grounded and improbable, and as increasing the difficulty of explain- 
 ing the origin of the book far more than diminishing it. 1 But Bleek's 
 own hypothesis is just as improbable. He supposes that Bieek'shypotu- 
 " Ezekiel was acquainted with an older writing which esl8 ' 
 treated of a Daniel as a man distinguished by legal piety and deep 
 wisdom, but in such a way that nothing definite appeared respecting 
 the age in which he lived. This book was, perhaps, lost at an early 
 period, during the Babylonian captivity or immediately afterwards ; 
 at least, it was no longer in existence at the time of the composition 
 of our Book of Daniel, [which Bleek thinks was written about B. C. 
 165] ; and thus nothing more definite than what was afforded by the 
 passages in Ezekiel was known to the author of our book and his 
 contemporaries." 1 He thinks this left the author of the book what 
 we may call a carte blanche, on which he could write whatever suited 
 his purposes respecting Daniel. 
 
 But it is in the highest degree improbable that, if there had exist- 
 ed among the Hebrews prior to the captivity a man so distinguished 
 as Ezekiel represents Daniel to be, there would have been no men- 
 tion made of him in the historical books treating of the affairs of the 
 Jews before the captivity. Nor is it probable that, if the biography 
 of such a man had been written, it would have been lost, as that 
 1 Einleitung, p. 613. Ibid., p. 612.
 
 400 INTRODUCTION TO THE STUDY 
 
 biography was the only history of the man. Memoirs and biog- 
 raphies in Jewish history were lost because the substance of them 
 was incorporated into permanent historical works, or because they 
 were of but little importance. Bleek acknowledges that the most 
 of those learned men who refer the composition of the book to a 
 later age, and do not accept its statements of particulars, assume 
 that Daniel and his three companions were historical persons, who 
 distinguished themselves through piety and wisdom in Babylon, and 
 obtained favour and consideration with the rulers of the land. 1 
 
 There is a Daniel mentioned in Ezra viii, 2 ; and in Nehemiah x 
 he is named with Hananiah and Azariah, though they do not stand 
 together. In Nehemiah viii, 4 Mishael occurs. But in Nehemiah x 
 we have Jeremiah, and Baruch, and Anathoth (which was also the 
 name of the town where Jeremiah lived). The occurrence of the 
 names of Jeremiah, and Baruch his secretary, and Anathoth, is just as 
 singular as that of Daniel and two of his companions. But, in fact, 
 there is nothing remarkable in it. For Nehemiah x contains more 
 than eighty names, among which there is no improbability that the 
 names of Daniel and some of his friends would be found. It is very 
 probable, indeed, that a considerable number of persons would be 
 named after Daniel and his companions, who were so distinguished 
 in Babylon. The suspicion of Bleek is utterly groundless, that the 
 author of the Book of Daniel borrowed the names of Daniel and his 
 companions who lived more than a hundred years earlier from 
 the Books of Ezra and Nehemiah. And Davidson supposes that 
 the author of Daniel had learned some particulars about these four 
 persons, who returned from Babylon in the time of Ezra and Nehe- 
 miah. Not only did the ancient Jewish rabbies never doubt the 
 existence of Daniel, but they compared him even to Moses. 2 
 
 Before presenting the arguments in favour of the genuineness and 
 authenticity of the book, we shall consider the 
 
 OBJECTIONS TO ITS GENUINENESS. 
 I. ITS POSITION IN THE CANON. 
 
 The Book of Daniel does not stand in the third division of the 
 Hebrew Bible, embracing the later prophets, but in the fourth divis- 
 ion, the ffagiographa, in which it forms the ninth book, and stands 
 between Esther and Ezra. Now, the opponents of its genuineness 
 hold that if the book had been written when the later prophets were 
 arranged, it would have been placed along with them in the third 
 
 1 Einleitung, p. 611. Davidson regards Daniel as " partly historical." 
 * Furs!, Ueber den Kanon, p. 103.
 
 OF THE HOLY SCRIPTURES. 401 
 
 division of the sacred canon, and not in tne fourth ; and its position, 
 therefore, must be owing to the lateness of its composition. 
 
 But here the question arises, whether the arrangement of the 
 books in the Hebrew Bible is the same now that it was when the 
 canon was originally formed in the time of Nehemiah, or possibly 
 soon after. We must answer this question in the negative. For 
 example in the time of Jerome the Book of Ruth was placed im- 
 mediately after the Judges, and the Lamentations were joined to 
 Jeremiah, though both of these books now stand in the Hagiographa, 
 which is the third division. Jerome, however, adds, that some put 
 them among the Hagiographa. In the time of Jerome the Hagiog- 
 rapha began with the Book of Job and ended with Esther ; now it 
 begins with Psalms and ends with Chronicles. In the time of Origen 
 (first half of the third century) Ruth was joined to Judges, and 
 Lamentations to Jeremiah, and Daniel stood between Jeremiah and 
 Ezekiel. Origen gives the books, he tells us, according to the 
 Hebrews. 1 
 
 Melito, Bishop of Sardis, who flourished in the last half of the 
 second century, tells us that he went to the East, where the history 
 in the Old Testament was transacted, and that he carefully ascer- 
 tained the number of the books of the Old Testament, and the order 
 in which they were arranged. In this catalogue he places Daniel 
 between the minor prophets and Ezekiel. 3 
 
 Josephus 3 distributes the sacred books into three divisions : the 
 Five Books of Moses; the writings of the Prophets, in thirteen books; 
 and the remaining four (of the twenty-two), containing praises to God 
 and the practical duties of men. It is evident, then, that in his time 
 the Book of Daniel stood among the Prophets. And this is confirmed 
 by Josephus' calling him Daniel the Prophet? Daniel is also called a 
 prophet in Matt, xxiv, 15, which may be considered, at least, a proof 
 that he was so regarded by Jews at the time of Christ. It would 
 seem, then, to be quite certain that in the interval between Josephus 
 (who died about A. D. 100) and Jerome (born about A. D. 345), the 
 learned rabbies of the school of Tiberias re-arranged the books of 
 the canon, and removed Daniel from the second division (of the 
 Prophets) and put him into the Hagiographa. Accordingly, in the 
 Talmudic tradition, 6 the visions of Daniel are not regarded as proph- 
 ecies, and in the Midrasch it is said " Daniel was no prophet, but 
 one who saw visions and revelations." At the same time rabbinical 
 tradition 8 declared that " respecting the seventy year-weeks, the ful- 
 
 1 In Eusebius, Hist. Eccles., lib. vi, cap. 25. * Ibid., lib. iv, cap. 26. 
 "Against Apion, i, 8. * Antiq., book, x, xi, 
 
 * Ueber den Kanon, p. 101. * Ibid., p. 104.
 
 402 INTRODUCTION TO THE STUDY 
 
 fitment of the ancient prophecies concerning the end of time, and 
 other things, he erred, and effected nothing." 
 
 The rejection of the Messiah by the Jews led them to declare the 
 seventy year-weeks of Daniel, which were to end with the cutting 
 off of the Messiah, as unfulfilled, and that Daniel had made a mis- 
 take. It is not strange, under these circumstances, that they de- 
 graded Daniel from the prophetic rank, and put his book into the 
 Hagiographa. 
 
 But suppose the book had been written in the time of Antiochus 
 Epiphanes (about B. C. 165), and received by the Jewish Sanhedrin 
 as a genuine work of Daniel, they would have immediately inserted it 
 vith the other prophets, as belonging to them, if they regarded Daniel 
 is a real prophet. But if Daniel was not regarded by the arrangers 
 of the canon in the time of Nehemiah as a prophet in the sense in 
 which they held the prophets Jeremiah and Ezekiel, they would, 
 probably, have put it into the Hagiographa, though acknowledging 
 the book to be genuine. But if Daniel had been written in the time 
 of Antiochus Epiphanes, it could not have been admitted into the 
 Hagiographa, for that division was already closed. 
 
 2. ALLEGED GREEK WORDS IN DANIEL. 
 
 In chap, iii, 5 ' occur the following names of musical instruments, 
 
 which are alleged to be of Greek origin : ovrp, qaythros; JO3D, sabbtka; 
 
 t - 
 
 |nr\JD3, pesantcrin ; maoiD, sumponeyah. On the hypothesis of their 
 
 Greek origin, the opponents of the genuineness of the book allege 
 that at the time of the Babylonian captivity it is unlikely that mu- 
 sical instruments with Greek names were found in Babylon ; and 
 consequently that the book must be referred to a period subsequent 
 to Alexander the Great, when Grecian learning was widely diffused 
 in the East. 
 
 The word Din'p is generally regarded as the Greek Kitiapif (or KI&O- 
 
 po), eithara, or harp, which was in use at a very early period among the 
 Greeks, and is found as the name of a musical instrument in Homer. 
 It is very probably Greek, although Strabo represents some one as 
 saying, "beating the Asiatic eithara." * . 
 
 *O3D is supposed by some to be from the Greek oapflvicri, but with- 
 
 i - 
 out reason. Ftlrst remarks that the word is " from the Aramaean, as 
 
 a Syrian invented it " (Heb. Lex). Liddell and Scott remark on 
 the Greek word aafiftvnij : " of barbarian origin, being, in fact, the 
 Syrian sabka with m inserted, as in ambubaia (from Syriac ab&bo> a 
 pipe)." Gesenius offers no objection to its Oriental origin (Heb 
 1 In verses 7 and 10 occurs the same list. " Lib. x. d7r.
 
 OF THE HOLY SCRIPTURES. 403 
 
 Lex.). Strabo ' speaks of the word as of foreign (i. e., Oriental) origin. 
 
 The next word, pruoa, has been generally supposed to be derived 
 
 1 1 1 -t 
 
 from the Greek i/jaArT/ptov, by changing the Greek A into the He- 
 brew J. Our translators render it psaltery. Pusey remarks : " The 
 psaltery, as described by St. Augustine, corresponds with the ' san- 
 tour, ; as recognized by Layard on the bass-relief of Babylon." The 
 word in Daniel and this " santour " were both probably derived from 
 the Greek ^a^rrigtov. The last of these four words, rnaoiD, is gen- 
 erally supposed to be from the Greek avfjufx^via, symphony, used in 
 Plato in the sense of musical concord, and in Aristotle for music, and 
 in the same sense in Luke xv, 25. In Polybius (who died about 
 B. C. 122) the word is used, in all probability, for a concert of mu- 
 sicians, in liber xxxi, 4. In the same author, liber xxvi, 10, the 
 word also occurs, but whether in the sense of a band of music or an 
 instrument it is not easy to determine. This latter passage, how- 
 ever, belongs to a lost book, and is taken from a late writer who 
 gives the substance of the remarks of Polybius on the conduct of a 
 certain individual. The fact that Luke uses it for music in gen- 
 eral, or a concert of musicians, renders it extremely improbable, in 
 connexion with other facts, that the word was used by the ancients 
 for a musical instrument until some centuries after Christ. The 
 form symphonia occurs in late Latin. 
 
 Gesenius regards the word as of Greek origin ; but Furst (Heb. 
 Lex.) gives the definition, Aram, fern., a double pipe, a bag-pipe. As 
 the Greeks, says he, themselves did not name the instrument so (ovp- 
 <f>cjvia), it may perhaps be Semitic, and come from |DO, a bag, Talm., 
 |30D, a reed. Or it may come, also, from ^0, reed. ' Bonomi 8 ex- 
 presses the conviction that the word under discussion is a genuine 
 Chaldee word, which he derives from "]DD, to lay, or lean. 
 
 There are, then, but two or three words at most that can, with any 
 probability, be referred to a Greek origin. Nor is it Greek namei 
 
 surprising that there should be found at Babylon two or for muslcal ta - 
 . , . * struments In 
 
 three musical instruments bearing Greek names as early Babylon. 
 
 as about six hundred years before Christ ; for the Greeks at a very 
 early period displayed their inventive genius in music, as well as m 
 other departments, and it is easy to see how their instruments of mu- 
 sic might find their way to Babylon. 
 
 " Long before the Greeks began to write history," says Brandis 
 " they had, as friends and foes, come into manifold contact with the 
 empire of the Assyrians. . . . The battle and victory of Sennacherib 
 in the eighth century B. C. over a Greek army which had penetrated 
 
 1 Lib - * 47 * Nineveh and its Palaces, p. 408.
 
 404 INTRODUCTION TO THE STUDY 
 
 into Cilicia is fully attested by a relation out of the Babylonian history 
 of Berosus. On the other hand, the extensive commerce of Greek 
 colonies must not unfrequently have led Greek merchants into As- 
 syrian territory." ' " The name of Javan, or Greece, occurs in the in- 
 scriptions of Sargon [B. C. 722-705] among those from whom he 
 received tribute. We know that articles of luxury formed part of 
 the tribute to Assyria."* "In the monuments even of Sennacherib 
 ' the Assyrian generals,' says Layard, are represented ' as welcomed 
 by bands of men and women, dancing, singing, and playing upon in- 
 struments of music. First came five men ; three carried harps of 
 many strings, which they struck with both hands ; a fourth played 
 on the double pipes, such as are seen on the monuments of Egypt, 
 and were used by the Greeks and Romans. . . . The fifth musician 
 carried an instrument not unlike the modern santour of the East.' " 
 
 Bonomi 4 gives various cuts representing the musical instruments 
 of the Ninevites, and compares them with those mentioned in the 
 Book of Daniel. He derives the names of the latter wholly from the 
 Semitic language. 
 
 De Wette acknowledges that, " of course, it is possible that Greek 
 instruments and their names could be known to the Babylonians." 1 
 And Rosenmiiller remarks : " Nothing prevents musical instru- 
 ments invented by the Greeks having been used among the Baby- 
 lonians." ' 
 
 In Genesis, in several places, there occurs the word BU^?3, pillegesh, 
 
 Greek words in a concubine, which, in all probability, was derived from 
 the Greek, TraAAa/u'c, na^Xaxr], 7rdA,Aa, as Fiirst believes, 
 and which Gesenius thinks may be true, as there is no word in the 
 Semitic from which to derive it. In Genesis xv, 17, we have T3 1 ?, 
 lappid, a torch, equivalent to the Greek Aa/iTro?. There is no verb 
 in the Hebrew language from which to derive T3 1 ?, and it has but 
 one cognate word. But the Greek Xapndq, AafiTradof, a lamp, from 
 Attytrrb), to shine, has a great number of cognate words, showing that 
 the Greek is the primitive, and the Hebrew word the derived, not 
 vice versa, as Gesenius and Ftirst think. 
 
 Now, will any one contend that, on account of one or two Greek 
 words in Genesis, this book was not composed until long after the 
 
 Babylonian captivity? Some think the word Ho-UN (Ezra i, o) 
 
 i- -\ 
 comes from the Greek KdpraMof. If this could be established, 
 
 would it prove that Ezra was not written until after the time of Alex- 
 ander the Great ? Why, then, should two or three Greek words in 
 
 1 In Pusey on Daniel, p. 31. * Ibid., p. 32. Ibid., pp. 32, 33. 
 
 4 Nineveh and its Palaces, London, 1857, pp. 405-409. 
 
 * Fourth edition of his Einleit. Scholia in Daniel
 
 OF THE HOLY SCRIPTURES. 403 
 
 Daniel, the names of musical instruments, which would travel with 
 the instruments themselves, be thought to indicate that the book 
 was written long after the Babylonia aptivity ? There is no Greek 
 colouring in the book, as we might have expected had it been writ- 
 ten in the time of the Maccabees. 
 
 3. THE SILENCE OF JESUS SIRACH. 
 
 The omission of Daniel in the list of the great men among the 
 Jews (chaps, xliv-1) given by the son of Sirach, has been urged by 
 some as an argument against the Book of Daniel being known to 
 him. But the argument a silentio is in many cases very delusive. 
 If applied either to sacred or profane history, it often leads to the 
 most fallacious results. If a writer professes to give a catalogue of 
 ail the .men who have distinguished themselves in any particular 
 department, then the omission of any distinguished name in that de- 
 partment may be considered as a probable proof that, in the judg- 
 ment of the writer, no such character existed. It would not be a 
 Positive proof, at all events, for there might be a lapse of memory 
 only. But this is not the case here* for the son of Sirach does not 
 profess to give a list of all the distinguished men of Israel. He be- 
 gins in the following manner : " Let us praise distinguished men, 
 even our fathers in their generation " (chap, xliv, i). Enoch is the 
 first name in his list. Noah, Abraham, Isaac and Jacob, Moses, 
 Joshua, and a few others of the early ages, follow. He altogether 
 omits Jephthah, Gideon, and Samson, all of whom were distinguished 
 men. He makes no mention of such later eminent Jews as Ezra or 
 Mordecai, and passes over Esther in silence, while he gives us 
 Zorobabol and Nehemiah. The remark of Bleek, that Ezra, per- 
 haps, would not have been passed over if his book at that time 
 (about B. C. 200-180) had formed a part of the canon, is entirely 
 groundless, as there can be no doubt that the Book of Ezra was 
 already in the canon, and that its author stood high. Omlaslon b _ 
 The history of Mordecai and Esther must have been the son of 
 well known to the son of Sirach. In chap, xlix, 10, the 
 son of Sirach mentions the twelve (minor) prophets. Bretschneider. 
 Hengstenberg, Havernick, and some others, regard this passage as 
 spurious. The passage certainly interrupts the connexion, and 
 makes the construction difficult. But we do not feel authorized to 
 pronounce it spurious. The son of Sirach, before he finishes his 
 list, goes back, and takes up Enoch again, and adds to his list Shem, 
 Seth, and Adam. The reason assigned by some for the omission of 
 Daniel is, that he lived at the Babylonian court, and did not labour 
 among the Jewish people.
 
 406 INTRODUCTION TO THE STUDY 
 
 But, further, some of the men in the list of the son of Sirach nevei 
 wrote anything. It is not their books that he is praising, but theii 
 deeds. If Daniel was a man of any eminence he could with pro- 
 priety have been placed in the catalogue though he had left no 
 writings. The omission of his name, therefore, on the part of the 
 son of Sirach, proves that no such character ever existed (if it proves 
 anything), in clear contradiction to Ezekiel. Suppose the son of 
 Sirach had praised Daniel without naming his book; this would 
 have been another testimony to his existence and character only 
 not a confirmation of the genuineness of his book. 
 
 4. ALLEGED HISTORICAL ERRORS. 
 
 It is contended by the impugners of the genuineness of the book 
 that it contains historical errors. If this charge were true, we are 
 not sure that it would prove the spuriousness of the book, though 
 it would prove that the author was not in every thing inspired, and 
 did not possess accurate knowledge on all the points of the history 
 which he wrote. We shall, however, show that thp charge of his- 
 torical errors is unfounded. In Dan. i, i, 2 we read, "In the third 
 year of the reign of Jehoiakim king of Judah came Nebuchadnezzar 
 king of Babylon unto Jerusalem, and besieged it. And the Lord 
 gave Jehoiakim king of Judah into his hand." In Jer. xxv, i we 
 read, "The word that came to Jeremiah concerning all the people 
 of Judah, in the fourth year of Jehoiakim, . . . that was the first 
 year of Nebuchadnezzar king of Babylon." According to the latter 
 passage, the first year of Nebuchadnezzar corresponds, in part at 
 least, with the fourth year of Jehoiakim ; and yet in the third year 
 of Jehoiakim Nebuchadnezzar is called king in our book, evidently 
 before he had mounted the throne. Hengstenberg, Havernick, and 
 Stuart pursue nearly the same method in removing the discrepancy ; 
 and, as it seems to us quite satisfactory, we will adopt it. Berosus, 
 the Chaldean historian (quoted by Josephus, lib. x, cap. xi), states 
 that when Nebuchadnezzar's father, Nabuchodonosor, [Nabopollas- 
 sar], heard that the governor whom he had set over Egypt and the 
 places about Ccele-Syria and Phoenicia had revolted from him, he 
 committed to Nebuchadnezzar his son some parts of his army, and 
 sent them against him. Nebuchadnezzar gave him battle, defeated 
 him, and recovered the country from under his subjection, and made 
 it a branch of his kingdom. About this time Nebuchadnezzar heard 
 that his father was dead, and, having settled the affairs of Egypt and 
 the other countries, as also those that concerned the captive Jews 
 and Phoenicians, and those of the Egyptian nations, and having com- 
 mitted the conveyance of them to Babylon to certain of his friends
 
 OF THE HOLY SCRIPTURES. 407 
 
 he went himself hastily with a few others over the desert to Babylon, 
 So he took upon him the management of public affairs, and of the 
 kingdom, which had been kept for him by one that was principal of 
 the Chaldeans, and he received the entire dominions of his father, 
 and appoinled that, when the captives came, they should be placed 
 as colonies m the most proper places of Babylonia. 1 The begin- 
 ring of this expedition was probably in the end of the third year ol 
 Jehoiakim (the same as Dan. i, i). In Jer. xlvi, 2 it is stated that 
 Nebuchadnezzar, in the fourth year of Jehoiakim, smote the army 
 of Pharaoh-necho, king of Egypt, which was by the river Euphrates, 
 in Carchemish. We may suppose that some months intervened be- 
 tween the setting out of the expedition of Nebuchadnezzar and the 
 defeat of the Egyptian army at Carchemish. Now, since Jehoiakim 
 had been set on the throne by the king of Egypt, there is nothing 
 improbable in the supposition that before attacking the Egyptian 
 army at Carchemish he besieged Jerusalem and carried away cap- 
 tives in the third year of Jehoiakim. This must have been one or 
 two years before he became king. And Berosus makes mention of 
 conquests made in Syria, and Jews taken captive by Nebuchadnezzar 
 before he became king, which confirms the date in Dan. i, i. The 
 remark of Bleek* is entirely false, that, according to Jer. xxxvi, 9, 29, 
 in the fifth year of Jehoiakim the Chaldeans had not yet come to 
 Jerusalem. For in verse 29 the reference to the coming of the 
 king of Babylon is not to his first, appearance in Jerusalem, when 
 Jehoiakim submitted to him, but to his entire overthrow of the 
 country : "The king of Babylon shall certainly come and destroy this 
 land, and shall cause to cease from thence man and beast," This refers 
 to the reigns of Jehoiachin and Zedekiah. It is not strange that 
 Nebuchadnezzar is called king in the lifetime of his father. He may 
 have been a co-regent with him ; but even if he were not, the title of 
 king could have been 'given to him by anticipation. We can speak 
 of General Washington's accompanying Braddock in his expedition 
 to Fort Du Quesne, though in fact he had not then attained the rank 
 of general. In the same way we could speak of President Grant's 
 campaign in the Wilderness. 
 
 And thus arises the apparent contradiction between Dan. ii, i 
 and i, 5, 18. In the first of these passages it is stated that the dream 
 of Nebuchadnezzar which Daniel interpreted occurred in the second* 
 year of the reign of that monarch. But according to the other pas- 
 sages Daniel was not brought in to appear before the king till the 
 
 1 This is the substance of the passage. We have omitted some words not relevant 
 to our purpose. * Einleitung, p. 601. 
 
 * Ewald supposes we should read twelfth instead of second.
 
 408 INTRODUCTION TO THL .STUDY 
 
 end of three years. As Nebuchadnezzar is called king in chap, i, i 
 by way of anticipation, the three years of Daniel's preparation to 
 appear before the king begin one or two years before the full sover- 
 eignty of Nebuchadnezzar. 
 
 In Dan. v, 31, after the death of Belshazzar, it is stated that 
 Darius the Median took the kingdom when he was about threescore 
 and two years old. Some have denied the existence of such a mon- 
 arch. But Gesenius well remarks on this monarch : " This was ap- 
 parently Cyaxares II., the son and successor of Astyages, and uncle 
 of Cyrus, who held the empire of Media between Astyages and 
 Cyrus, yet so that Cyrus was his colleague and viceroy; on which 
 Proof of exist- account he alone is mentioned by Herodotus " (Heb. 
 enoe of Darius. L ex .). Xenophon ' represents Cyaxares as succeeding 
 Astyages. There is no reason for supposing that this king is a fic- 
 tion of Xenophon. The passage in ^Eschylus (Persae, 765-768) con- 
 tains no probable reference to Darius. 
 
 Herodotus, Ctesias, Diodorus Siculus, Strabo, and Polyaenus, know 
 nothing of a king between Astyages and Cyrus. But, if the book 
 of Daniel be genuine and, in discussing this subject, no one has a 
 right to assume the contrary his testimony is worth more than all 
 these historians put together; and that he possessed accurate knowl- 
 edge of Babylonian affairs we shall show in another place. The 
 testimony of one credible eye-witness weighs more than that of a 
 dozen men who write from rumour. Daniel was upon the spot ; those 
 historians were remote. 
 
 But if no such king as Darius the Median ever existed, can we 
 believe that the author of the Book of Daniel, supposing it to have 
 been forged in the Maccabean times, would have introduced him ? 
 Is it characteristic of the writers of history, or even of novelists, to 
 introduce men as historical who, in the judgment of mankind, never 
 existed ? What would we think of even a novelist who should insert 
 a king of England between James II. and William, Prince of Orange ? 
 The fame of Cyrus, as the conqueror of Babylon, completely eclipsed 
 that of his predecessor, Darius ; for it spread all over the East and 
 the West. Daniel gives even the age of Darius upon his accession 
 to the kingdom, which, if it is not an attempt, without any assign- 
 able purpose, to deceive, is a mark of intimate acquaintance with the 
 monarch, or, at least, with his history. In the apocryphal addition 
 to Daniel, written probably about the time of the Maccabees, we 
 have this statement: "King Astyages was gathered to his fathers, 
 and Cyrus the Persian received his kingdom." Had Daniel been 
 
 1 Cyropaedia, book L Hengstenberg finds mention of this Darius in the Anne* 
 nian Chronicle of Eusebius.
 
 OF THE HOLY SCRIPTURES. 409 
 
 written in that age, it would, doubtless, have contained a very sim 
 ilar statement. 
 
 The account, in the third chapter, of Nebuchadnezzar's setting up 
 a golden image, and commanding every body to worship it, has been 
 severely criticised. The image is stated to have been sixty cubits 
 (about ninety feet) high, and its breadth six cubits (about nine feet), 
 These proportions, on the supposition that it was the Nebuchadnez- 
 figure of a human being, have been pronounced mon- zar ' 8lma e - 
 strous. It should have been at least fifteen or twenty feet in 
 breadth. But we know not what it was intended to represent. 
 The image may have stood upon a pedestal, and the whole height 
 may have been ninety feet, on which supposition all difficulty re- 
 specting the harmonious proportions of the figure vanishes. Nor is 
 there any reason for supposing that the image was of solid gold. 
 Wooden altars covered with gold are called golden by Moses. 
 Comp. Exod. xxxvii, 25 with xxxix, 38, etc. The conduct, too, of 
 Nebuchadnezzar, in requiring the Hebrew children to worship the 
 image, has been thought to be inconsistent with the toleration which 
 at that time was allowed all religions. But it must be borne in 
 mind that the king, while willing to tolerate the religion of the Jews, 
 expected from them an acknowledgment of his own. It was the ex- 
 clusiveness of their religion that excited his hatred. Judaism admit- 
 ted of no compromise. Other religions, without any sacrifice of 
 their principles, could acknowledge the claims of other gods, and 
 combine their worship with that of their own deities. It was the 
 same spirit of exclusiveness that brought upon Christianity so much 
 persecution in its early history. 
 
 The truth of the account of Nebuchadnezzar's insanity has been 
 called in question by some critics, especially on the Nebuchadnez- 
 ground of the silence of ancient history respecting it. zar>s Insanlt y- 
 But this silence can be easily explained. None of the other books 
 of the Old Testament make any mention of the latter part of the life of 
 Nebuchadnezzar. The historical books (with the exception of Ezra, 
 Nehemiah, and Esther, which treat of Jewish affairs in the Persian 
 dominion) extend only to the captivity. There was no occasion, 
 therefore, for these writers to refer to this event in the king's life. 
 The oldest of the Greek historians, Herodotus, does not give us the 
 history of Nebuchadnezzar at all. Of the Chaldean historians from 
 whom we may expect any information about this occurrence there 
 remain only Abydenus and Berosus. In Abydenus there is a pas- 
 sage in which Nebuchadnezzar is represented as ascending to the 
 roof of his palace, where he becomes inspired by some god, and de- 
 livers a prophecy, in which he announces calamity to his country
 
 410 INTRODUCTION TO THE STUDY 
 
 from the coming Persian mule. 1 From the language he uses he 
 seems to refer to his own madness and wanderings. Abydenus fin- 
 ishes the statement by saying, " Having predicted these things he 
 disappeared." 1 In the judgment of the ancients, there was a close 
 connexion between a prophetic spirit and madness. Respecting the 
 Chaldean historians, it must be observed that they had a natural 
 propensity to embellishment. It is not likely, therefore, that they 
 would relate anything that would detract from the greatness of their 
 kings. The remark of Rawlinson is appropriate here : * In the en- 
 tire range of the Assyrian annals there is no case where a monarch 
 admits a disaster, or even a check, to have happened to himself or 
 his generals." * 
 
 Nebuchadnezzar's disease was lycanthropy, of which several in- 
 stances are recorded in history. In the description of the king's 
 madness strong expressions are used, in accordance with the custom 
 of the Orientals ; but there is nothing to warrant us in believing that 
 he was metamorphosed into a brute. 
 
 The decree of Darius, that no man should ask a petition of any 
 god or man, except of the king, for thirty days (Dan. vi, 7, 12), is 
 considered by some as very improbable, since it would be a suspen- 
 sion of religious duties for the time. It has, however, been shown 
 that the kings of the Medes and Persians were worshipped as repre- 
 sentations and incarnations of Ormuzd; and Heeren remarks : " The 
 person of the king in Asiatic kingdoms is the centre about which 
 every thing moves. He is regarded not merely as ruler, but rather 
 as proprietor of land and people." Plutarch relates that it was a cus- 
 tom among the Persians " to honour the king, and to worship the 
 image of God, the preserver of all things." Curtius also says, "The 
 Persians worship their kings among the gods." That the Assyrians 4 
 really regarded their kings as incarnations of their divinity Omuud 
 is proved from the monuments of Nineveh discovered by Layard. 
 
 5. THE ALLEGED CLEARNESS OF ITS PROPHECIES OF EVENTS UNTIL 
 THE TIME OF ANTIOCHUS EPIPHANES, AND THE OBSCURITY OF 
 THOSE RESPECTING SUBSEQUENT ONES. 
 
 The prophecies of the Book of Daniel are represented by its op- 
 ponents as being remarkably definite respecting events until the 
 close of the reign of Antiochus Epiphanes (B. C. 164), after which 
 they are quite obscure. If this allegation were true, it would be 
 very far from proving what they allege, that the book was written 
 
 'Evidently Cyrus. "In Eusebius, Pnepar. Evang., liber ix, 41. 
 
 1 Hist Illus. Old Testament, p. 144. 
 
 'That Nineveh and Babylon were closely related in religious views will not b< 
 denied ; and what is true of Nineveh may be generally affirmod of Babylon.
 
 OF THE HOLY SCRIPTURES. 411 
 
 about the close of the life of that monarch. For we may state, in 
 reply, that Daniel's prophecies respecting events until the end of the 
 reign of Antiochus are not more definite thai, those of some other 
 prophets. Jeremiah predicted that the Babylonian captivity should 
 last seventy years (chaps, xxv, u, 12 ; xxix, 10). What more definite 
 than this ? Also, in reference to the destruction of Babylon he is very 
 definite, describing the manner of the capture of the city by the dry- 
 ing up of the Euphrates while her men were drunk (chaps. 1, 38 ; 
 li, 36, 39). With the exception of a few Messianic passages, there 
 is nothing definite after the times of the captivity Isaiah, too, is 
 very definite respecting Babylon (chap, xiii, 19-22), Also respect- 
 ing Ephraim he is explicit: "Within threescore and five years shall 
 Ephraim be broken, that it be not a people " (chap, vii, 8). He also 
 predicts the destruction of Moab in the most precise language : 
 " Within three years, as the years of a hireling," etc. (chap, xvi, 14) ; 
 the addition, "as the years of a hireling" is to show that it shall be 
 neither more nor less. And in chaps, lii, i3~liii, he foretells our 
 Saviour's history with great exactness. 
 
 But, further, the prophecies of Daniel extend beyond the time of 
 Antiochus Epiphanes, and some of them are very defi- Deflniteness 
 nite. Daniel predicts the establishment of the Messiah's 
 kingdom during the fourth empire (the Roman) (chap. anes. 
 ii, 44) ; that, after seventy weeks (of years), the vision and the proph- 
 ecy should be sealed up, (completed), reconciliation made for iniq- 
 uity, everlasting righteousness brought in, and the Most Holy 
 anointed; and that, from the going forth of the commandment to 
 restore and build Jerusalem to Prince Messiah, 1 the time should 
 be sixty-nine weeks (483 years). Could the Roman empire, in all 
 its grandeur and its wide dominion, and the establishment of the 
 Messiah's kingdom at a definite time during its existence, have 
 been foreseen by human wisdom even in the time of Antiochus 
 Epiphanes ? 
 
 PROOFS OF ITS GENUINENESS. 
 I. ITS ADMISSION INTO THE CANON. 
 
 It is an acknowledged fact that the Book of Daniel has been re- 
 vived by the Jews as a part of Holy Scripture ever since the time of 
 Christ. Of this we have historical proof. According to Josephus 
 the canon of Scripture was closed in the reign of Artaxerxes. He 
 says, " From the death of Moses till the reign of Artaxerxes, king 
 of Persia, who reigned after Xerxes, the prophets who were after 
 
 1 On these prophecies see especially Pusey on DanieL 
 
 27
 
 *12 INTRODUCTION TO TH STUDY 
 
 Moses wrote what was done in their time in thirteen books. It is 
 true, our history hath been written since Artaxerxes very particulaiiy, 
 but hath not been esteemed of like authority with the former by our 
 forefathers^ because tJiere hath not been an exact succession of prophets 
 since that time." ' Now, if the Book of Daniel had not been written 
 until about B. C. 164, four hundred years after the age of Daniel, 
 supposing him to have lived during the captivity, how could it have 
 found its way into the canon ? " The Wisdom of Sirach," written in 
 Hebrew not later than about 190 or 180 B.C., is a woik of great 
 merit, and stood high with the rabbies, but was never admitted into 
 the canon, "because," as Furst himself acknowledges, "the canon 
 at that time was already closed." 1 The First Book of Maccabees, 
 written also in Hebrew originally, about B.C. 120, a work of merit 
 and reliability, and the Book of Tobit, written earlier, were ex- 
 cluded from the canon. What was it, then, that gave Daniel its recep- 
 tion into the canon ? Evidently the belief that it was written by Dan- 
 iel, who flourished in the Babylonian captivity. The book professes 
 to have been written by him : " As for me Daniel," etc., chap, vii, 28 ; 
 "A vision appeared unto me, Daniel," chap, viii, i ; " I Daniel faint- 
 ed," etc., chap, viii, 27. If the book was not written by Daniel it is 
 a forgery, a downright fraud, in which the author lies for God, pre- 
 tending to have received revelations from God which he never re- 
 ceived, and to have seen visions that he never witnessed. In the 
 eyes of the Jews, and with all who have any moral sense, this was a 
 great crime. The Mosaic law is very severe upon this point : " The 
 prophet which shall presume to speak a word in my name which I 
 have not commanded him to speak, . . . even that prophet shall die " 
 (Deut. xviii, 20). It is evident that the whole Jewish people Sanhe- 
 impossibtiityof drimandall were deceived in the book if it be not gen- 
 forgery, uine. But how could they believe that the book had ex- 
 isted as a canonical work for four hundredycars, when it had just been 
 forged ? " The age of the Maccabees," says Havernick, " was one in 
 which Scripture learning already flourished." Not only does I. Macca- 
 bees mention the assembly of the scribes (awaywyj) ypafifJMreuv) chap, 
 vii, T2, but, also, the Book of Sirach praises the wisdom of the scribe 
 (o<xf>ia ypajti/iarewc), xxxviii, 24. How could these men be deceived 
 in such a plain case, if the book were a forgery? Accordin to 
 Bleek's view," the book was written in the time of Antiochus Epiph- 
 anes, to encourage the Jews to resist that tyrant, and to obey the 
 law of Moses, by the example of Daniel and his friends. But how a 
 book forged at that time, of which they had heard nothing before 
 
 'Against Apion book i, sec. 8. 'Ueber den Kanon, p. 130. 
 
 ' Einleitung, pp. 604, 605.
 
 OF THE HOLY SCRIPTURES. 413 
 
 could have nerved them to face death, is not easy to see. Martyrs 
 are not made by fairy tales. 
 
 Nowhere in the traditions of the Jews, as delivered by the Tal- 
 mudists, is there any intimation that even a doubt had been raised 
 about the book among their ancestors. Had doubts existed upon 
 the subject we should have heard of them, especially if the book had 
 originated in an age so late as that of the Maccabees. 
 
 2. THE TESTIMONY OF JOSEPHUS. 
 
 In reference to one's being anxious respecting the knowledge of 
 the future, Josephus says : " Let him be diligent in the reading of 
 the Book of Daniel, which he will find among the sacred writings"* 
 And he says further, respecting his writings : " From them we be- 
 lieve that Daniel conversed with God ; for he did not only prophesy 
 of the future, as did the other prophets, but he also determined the 
 time of their accomplishment." Again, in reference to certain ca- 
 lamities, he affirms : " Our nation suffered these things under Anti- 
 ochus Epiphanes, according to Daniel's vision, and what he wrote 
 many years before they came to pass. In the very same manner Daniel 
 also wrote concerning the Roman government, and that our country 
 should be made desolate by them. This man left in writing all 
 these things, as God had showed them to him ; insomuch that such 
 as read his prophecies, and see how they have been fulfilled, would 
 wonder at the honour wherewith God honoured Daniel, and may 
 thence discover how the Epicureans are in error who cast provi- 
 dence out of human life."" He also states that Alexander the 
 Great, after capturing Gaza., went up to Jerusalem, where he sacri- 
 ficed to God, and was shown the Book of Daniel, in which he pre- 
 dicted that one of the Greeks should overturn the kingdom of Persia. 
 Josephus also states that when Alexander was engaged in the siege 
 of Tyre, 1 he sent to the high priest of the Jews, requesting him to 
 send him an auxiliary force, and also provisions, which the high 
 priest refused to do, on the ground of sworn allegiance to Darius. 
 Arrian, who, about A. D. 150, wrote the history of Alexander the 
 Great, chiefly from documents written by the monarch's contempo- 
 raries, says, in speaking of Alexander's determination to make an ex- 
 pedition into Egypt, that " already the other parts of Syria, called 
 Palestine, had submitted to him," 4 except Gaza, which he took by 
 siege, Arrian, indeed, says nothing of Alexander's visit to Jerusalem, 
 and of his offering sacrifice to God there, which, though true, he 
 
 'Antiq., book x, chap, x, sec. 4. He was born A. D. 37. 
 Ibid., book x, chap, xi, sec. 7. 'Ibid.^ book xi, chap, viii, sec. 3-5. 
 
 * Lib. ii, cap. xxv.
 
 414 INTRODUCTION TO THE STUDY 
 
 may have omitted to mention from hatred of the Jews. 1 It is in it- 
 self eery probable that Alexander offered sacrifice at Jerusalem, for 
 it was his custom to offer sacrifice to all the gods to whose temples 
 he could get access. He made war upon the Tyrians because they 
 refused to admit him to sacrifice to Hercules.* But whether the 
 prophecies of Daniel were shown to Alexander or not, the passage 
 in Josephus furnishes a proof that the Jews believed that at that 
 time the book was already in existence, and, what is important, was 
 not kept secret. 
 
 3. THE LANGUAGE OF THE BOOK. 
 
 The language of the Book of Daniel exactly represents his age and 
 position. About two fifths of the book are Hebrew ; the remaining 
 three fifths are Chaldee. Its Hebrew is as pure as that of almost 
 any book of that age and of the immediately succeeding one. There 
 is no blending of the two languages. The first chapter, and the 
 first three verses of the second, are Hebrew. The Chaldee begins 
 at the fourth verse, where the Chaldeans are represented as speak- 
 ing in Aramaic (Chaldee), and ends with the seventh chapter. The 
 remaining five chapters are Hebrew. Now, if the book had been 
 written in the time of the Maccabees, nearly four hundred years 
 after the captivity, would its Hebrew have been so pure? The He- 
 brew language disappeared from general use a short time perhaps 
 something less than a century before the birth of Christ. In the 
 age of the Maccabees the Hebrew language was on the point of 
 being supplanted by the Chaldee, into which it gradually passed 
 over. But the Hebrew of Daniel contains no indications of its 
 Purity of Dan- being m a transition state. Also, the Chaldee of Daniel 
 lei's Hebrew is as pure as that of Ezra. The language of the book is 
 inexplicable on the supposition that it was written in 
 the Maccabean age ; but on the supposition that Daniel wrote the 
 book in the captivity at Babylon all is easy. He had acquired a 
 knowledge of Hebrew before he was carried away to Babylon, where 
 he became master of the Chaldee. We have in Ezra iv, 8-vi, 18, 
 and vii, 12-26, Chaldee sections chiefly decrees of Persian kings 
 from Cyrus to Artaxerxes the last not later than a hundred years 
 after Daniel wrote. With this Chaldee of the Persian court can be 
 compared that found in Daniel, which, if genuine, was used at the 
 same court about the same time. The result of the comparison is a 
 striking proof that the Chaldee of Daniel must belong to the same 
 age with that of Ezra, and, consequently, that the author of Daniel 
 
 'As Arrian was a Pagan, and as Christianity and Judaism were objects of hatred 
 to him, it is not surprising that he should pass over a recognition of Jehovah by 
 Alexander. * I.lber ii, cap. xvi.
 
 OF THE HOLY SCRIPTURES. 415 
 
 must have lived somewhere near Babylon during the captivity, or, at 
 least, not long after it. This is made still stronger by comparing the 
 Chaldee of Daniel with that of the Targums (Chaldee translations) 
 of Onkelos and Jonathan Ben Uzziel, written about one hundred and 
 fifty or two hundred years ' after the time of the Maccabees. 
 
 Respecting the peculiarities of the Chaldee of Daniel and Ezra, 
 and how it differs from that of the Targums, Dr. Pusey gives the 
 following excellent resumt of a critical discussion of this subject by 
 the Rev. Mr. M'Gill : ' 
 
 " i. In the Chaldee of Daniel and Ezra the stronger aspirate h is 
 used, where in the Chaldee of the Targums it is nearly effaced. 
 This occurs so manifoldly as evidently to involve a principle of lan- 
 guage. It is found in the characteristic letter of three conjugations; 
 in verbs, whose last letter it is ; in infinitives of derived conjugations ; 
 in the feminine of participles always in Daniel ; in adjectives usually; 
 in the emphatic form which in Chaldee represents the article ; in 
 the pronoun /, and three particles. All these peculiarities occur in 
 Ezra as well as Daniel, and with the remarkable agree- M>Gm on the 
 ment in both, that, although in a lesser degree, they do Chaideeof EZ- 
 use the later forms also. The language, then, was appa- 
 rently still in an unfixed state. They are not Hebraisms, because 
 many of the forms do not belong to Hebrew ; all occur in Samaritan. 
 It is a law of all languages, that gutturals weaken as time goes on. 
 
 " 2. Two conjugations, which still existed in the time of Daniel 
 and Ezra, were, the one mostly, the other wholly, effaced; and a 
 conjugation was formed unknown to biblical Chaldee. 
 
 " 3. A fuller orthography, implying a more prolonged pronuncia- 
 tion ot vowels (Daveed for David), has long been recognized as be- 
 longing to the later Hebrew of the Old Testament. The same dif- 
 ference, though more extensive, is observed between the biblical 
 Chaldee and the Targums. 
 
 " 4. There are forms in biblical Chaldee, common with Syriac, 
 which show that, at the time when it was written, the dialects of 
 Assyria and Syria, East and West Aramaic, were not so much sepa- 
 rated as in the time of the Targums. It is like the fusion of dialects 
 in Homer. Here, too, the Eastern Aramaic became softer in the 
 time of the Targums. 
 
 "5. This correspondence of the biblical Chaldee with the Syriac 
 best explains a form of the substantive verb (sinS, h instead of ' in 
 
 "TtT 
 
 the future) found only in biblical Chaldee, alike in Daniel and Ezra, 
 yet insulated from all other Semitic forms. 
 
 1 Onkelos and Jonathan flourished about the birth of Christ 
 * In Journal of Sacred Literature, Jan. 1861.
 
 *1G INTRODUCTION TO THE STUDY 
 
 " 6. Daniel and Ezra use unabridged, and so older, forms. 
 
 - 7. The biblical Chaldee has pronominal forms nearer the original 
 Semitic pronoun, and Daniel the older form of the two. 
 
 " 8. Other pronouns or particles are used in a form which ceased 
 to be used in the Targums. 
 
 "9. In regard to the use of , in the biblical Chaldee the older 
 uncontracted forms prevail; in the older Targums, the later con- 
 tracted forms; but there is considerable variety. In part, the bibli- 
 cal agrees with the Samaritan Chaldee. 
 
 " 10. In one word, haddabar, 'councillor,' there is probably a trace 
 of the article in its Hebrew form. . . . 
 
 "11. The Hebrew plural ending, im for in, occurs in two words 
 in Daniel, and in a third in Ezra. . . . 
 
 "12. According to the punctuation, there was a dual at the time 
 of the biblical Chaldee, which existed also in the Samaritan Chaldee, 
 but was lost in the time of the Targums. 
 
 " 13. There is a correspondence in other vowels between the bib- 
 lical Chaldee and the Hebrew, as distinct from the Targums, inex- 
 plicable except on the ground of a real, accurate tradition. 
 
 " 14. A letter (tf) seems to have, at least, become less used, be- 
 tween the times of biblical Chaldee and the Targums. 
 
 " It may be added, that even in the space of these six chapters of 
 Daniel there are a certain number of words which do not occur in 
 the Targums or Gemara; quite as many, or more, probably, than 
 would be found in any six chapters of any of the Hebrew historical 
 scriptures. They are not technical words, which there might not 
 be occasion to use elsewhere (as offices or dress or instruments, the 
 names of which were disused with the things) ; but ordinary words 
 of the language." 1 
 
 The phrase oyta Ditf, to publish a decree^ is common to Daniel and 
 
 Ezra; Bjr, to counsel, occurs in both books; likewise the Chaldee 
 form isn, they. The forms ^u in Ezra, and '^u in Daniel, meaning 
 a dunghill, are very similar. That sagacious critic, J. D. Michaelis, 
 regarded the peculiar Chaldee forms, which he considered Hebra- 
 isms, found in Daniel and Ezra, but wanting in even the oldest 
 Targums, as a proof of the genuineness of both these biblical books." 
 Nor can it be shown that the author of Daniel imitated Ezra; for 
 some of their forms are different. Also between Daniel and Ezekiel 
 there are points of resemblance ; e. g., 2in, in Piel, to make guilty 
 
 1 Daniel the Prophet, pp. 45-53. Dr. Pusey gives long notes, confiiming and H- 
 hutrating these statements. 
 'Chaldee Grammar, p. 25.
 
 OF THE HOLY SCRIPTURES. 417 
 
 is found only in Dan. i, 10, and in the form 3in, a debt^ only in Ezek, 
 xviii, i ; SSp, smooth, is found only in Ezek. i, J and in Dan. Resemblances 
 i .,,., TN f -i betweenDanlel 
 
 x, 6 ; and D^3H t?m, clothed in Itnen, in Dan. xu, 6, 7, and a nd Ezeidei. 
 
 in Ezek. ix, n, x, 2, etc. ; and in no other biblical writer. 
 
 We may conclude this part of our subject with a summary of the 
 linguistic argument: i. The purity of the Hebrew of Daniel, which 
 shows that the language could not belong to an age long posterior 
 to the captivity; 2. The correspondence of the Chaldee portion of 
 the book with the Chaldee of Ezra, which indicates its proximity to 
 the age of the captivity. 
 
 4. THE AUTHOR'S EXACT HISTORICAL KNOWLEDGE. 
 
 If the Book of Daniel was composed in the Maccabean age, we 
 may expect to find in it many historical errors. On the contrary, 
 we find an exact knowledge of history, and an acquaintance with 
 Persian customs and manners, which show the proximity of the 
 author to the events he relates. 
 
 It appears from Dan. v, 30, that Belshazzar was king in Babylon 
 when the city was captured by Cyrus. This statement, which was 
 formerly an objection to the historical veracity of the author of the 
 book, has proved to be a remarkable proof of his accuracy. For the 
 king of Babylon, Nabonidus, is represented as being shut up in the 
 city Borsippus ' when Cyrus captured Babylon. But a cylinder has 
 been discovered in Babylon, from which it is clear that Nabonidus 
 (or Labynetus, according to Herodotus) associated with himself his 
 son, Belshazzar, in the government.* This latter king was slain while 
 Nabonidus was in Borsippus. Accordingly, Smith, 1 in his list of 
 Babylonian kings, puts : " Belsaruzur (Belshazzar), son of Naboni- 
 dus, associated with his father on the throne." Nebuchadnezzar is 
 called Belshazzar 's father by the queen of Babylon ; but this need 
 create no difficulty, as the word father is used in such an indefinite 
 way as to express ancestor, author, or great officer. 
 
 In the account of Belshazzar's feast (chap, v, 1-4) it is stated 
 that the king commanded to bring the golden and silver vessels 
 taken from the temple at Jerusalem, that he and "his princes, his 
 wives and his concubines, might drink therein." In confirmation of 
 this usage of the Persians, different from that of the Greeks, we have 
 the following in Herodotus, v, 18: "It is customary with us Per- 
 sians, whenever we make a great feast, to bring in our concubines and 
 our wives to sit beside us" In chap, v, 30, Belshazzar is said to have 
 
 1 According to Berosus, in Eusebius' Praepar. Evang., lib. ix, 40. 
 *See Rawlinson's Illustrations of Old Testament, p. 181. 
 * Assyriar Discoveries, p. 445, made in 1873 and 1874.
 
 418 INTRODUCTION TO THE STUDY 
 
 been slain during the very night of the festivities. That the Baby, 
 lonians would indulge in such festivities is not improbable, from the 
 statement of Herodotus that they had laid up provisions for many 
 connraauonot years, and took no account of the siege (lib. i, 190, 191). 
 Daniel's state- According to Xenophon, Babylon was captured, and the 
 
 ment by tado- , ^ u_ > T u o 
 
 pendent an- king slam, in the night. In chap, vi, 8, 12, 15, mention 
 is made of the law of the Medes and Persians ; but in 
 the Book of Esther, written at a later period, and in reference to 
 later events, the phraseology is Persians and Medes Persians stand- 
 ing first, which is in accordance with the statement that Darius the 
 Mede was king during the events which Daniel relates, and with the 
 fact that in the time of Esther the Persians were the ruling power. 
 
 In Daniel vi, i, it is said that it pleased Darius to set over the 
 kingdom one hundred and twenty princes (satraps). Xenophon 
 states that while Cyrus was in Babylon " he determined to send 
 satraps to the conquered nations."" What Daniel attributes to 
 Darius, the vicegerent of Cyrus, was suggested by Cyrus himself, in 
 all probability, as the sovereign, or was their joint determination. 
 
 The account of the Magi could have been written only by one 
 most intimately acquainted with Persian affairs, as was the case with 
 Daniel. Indefiniteness respecting the classes, sects, and customs of 
 a country is always characteristic of those who write at a remote dis- 
 tance, either in time or space, from the objects of their description. 
 Daniel gives us, in chapter ii, 2, four classes of the Magi caste . 
 O'TDin, sacred scribes ; D'3J?x, magicians ; D'SBOO, sorcerers ; D^tso, 
 
 \|- T - - I . ! - 
 
 Chaldeans. In chap, ii, 27 we have also fs'^n, wise men ; and |"UJ, 
 diviners (astrologers). The investigations of Lenormant, the great 
 Assyriologist, have remarkably confirmed Daniel on the classes 
 of Magi. 
 
 No mention of prostration before the king when addressing him 
 is made by Daniel. According to Arrian, 3 Cyrus was the first king 
 who was honoured in that way. As the Persians regarded their 
 kings as the incarnation of Ormuzd, there was nothing strange in 
 worshipping them. In the Maccabean age, prostration before kings 
 had long been the custom. Could we have expected such exact 
 historical knowledge in a writer of that age ? 
 
 In Dan. ii, 5 ; iii, 29, Nebuchadnezzar threatens to make the 
 houses of those who do not comply with his demands dunghills 
 (sinks). The houses of Babylon were built of wwburnt brick, and 
 when demolished and made wet with rain they became miry sinks. 
 
 In Dan. iii, 6, Nebuchadnezzar declares that those who refuse tc 
 
 1 Cfropsedia, liber vii. 'Ibid, liber viii. 'Exped Alexand.. liber iv. i'
 
 OF THE HOLY SCRIPTURES. 419 
 
 worship his golden image " shall the same hour be cast Daniel corrob- 
 into the midst of a burning fiery furnace" In Jer. J5j byl S 
 xxix, 22, we have a clear instance of the same kind of worship, 
 punishment : " The Lord make thee like Zedekiah, and like Ahab, 
 iL'/wm the king of Babylon roasted in the fire." Now, the Persians were 
 fire-worshippers, and never punished criminals in this way; and we 
 accordingly find that, as soon as the government of Babylon passed 
 into the hands of the Medes and Persians, casting into a den of lions 
 is substituted for it (Dan. vi, 7). Here is an historical discrimina- 
 tion which, in all probability, would not have been found in a writer 
 of the Maccabean age, or even in any writer who was not personally 
 acquainted with the transactions. Even the ancient Greek historian, 
 Herodotus, 1 represents Cyrus the Great, a Persian fire-worshipper, 
 as burning Croesus a gross error, that has been ridiculed by the 
 critics. 
 
 In Daniel iv, 30, Nebuchadnezzar says : " Is not this great Babylon 
 that I have built for the house of the kingdom by the might of my 
 power, and for the honour of my majesty? " Nebuchadnezzar built 
 a new palace of great dimensions and beauty. To this palace, with 
 its environs, he here refers. The ruins of this second Babylon have 
 been discovered by Layard." This is another instance of historical 
 accuracy. There is a remarkable correspondence between Herod- 
 otus (lib. i, 195) and Daniel (iii, 21) in reference to Babylonian 
 dress. The former mentions garments reaching to the feet (trou- 
 sers), a linen over-tunic, and a cloak ; the latter mentions trousers, 
 a tunic, and a cloak. (The English version is here defective). 
 
 The author of the book shows an acquaintance with the religion 
 of Zoroaster. He represents Nebuchadnezzar as speaking (chap. 
 iv, 13, 17, 23) of watchers exercising a superintendence in the affairs 
 of the world. In the Bun-Dehesh, a commentary on the Zend- 
 Avesta, a passage is quoted from the latter in reference to the 
 watchers : " Ormuzd has set four watchers in the four quarters of 
 the heavens." Could we have expected this allusion from a forger 
 in Palestine in a later age ? 
 
 But to place the argument in proof of the genuineness of Daniel 
 drawn from its historical accuracy, in a clear light, it is Daniel com- 
 necessary to compare it with the writings of the Macca- tnTMaccabean 
 bean age. The absurdities of the Book of Tobit are writings. 
 
 Liber i, 86. 
 
 1 The name of Nebuchadnezzar has been found upon the brick (Layard's Nineveh, 
 roL ii, p. 138). Layard, in his second expedition to Nineveh and Babylon, says, in 
 reference to the bricks of the latter place, " They record the building of the city by 
 Nebuchadnezzar." P. 532.
 
 420 INTRODUCTION TO THE STUDY 
 
 known to every reader of the Apocrypha. No one would for a mo 
 ment compare this book with the Book of Daniel. Nor is the Book 
 of Judith much better. The great power ascribed in the Book of 
 Daniel to the Babylonian kings agrees remarkably well with what 
 we know of Oriental nations; but in the apocryphal addition to 
 Daniel, the Babylonians, in the affair of Bel and the Dragon are 
 represented as rising up against the king, and threatening him with 
 death if he does not deliver up to them Daniel, and thereupon he 
 accedes to their demand. The second and third Books of Maccabees 
 are of little historical value. The first Book of Maccabees is of great 
 value as an authentic history of the times of which it treats. It is 
 not, however, free from some gross errors. For example, in chap, i, 6 
 it states that Alexander the Great, upon his death, had called to him 
 the most distinguished of his servants, and divided his kingdom 
 among them, which we know to be false. In chap, viii, 7 it states 
 that the Romans took Antiochus the Great alive; but, in fact, they 
 never captured him at all. In chap, viii, 8 it is said they took from 
 him India, which, however, he never possessed. In chap, viii, 1 6 it is 
 stated that the Romans entrust their government to one man annu- 
 ally, who rules over the whole country, and everybody obeys him. 
 It is well known that they elected two consuls annually. We need 
 not cite other errors. Now, if an author about the time of the Mac- 
 cabees, writing of events that occurred and of customs that existed 
 in his own age and in the ages immediately preceding, has commit- 
 ted such errors, what would he have done had he attempted to de- 
 scribe Babylonian history and customs ? 
 
 5. OTHER ARGUMENTS IN PROOF OF THE GENUINENESS OF THE BOOK 
 
 The symbolic form of Daniel's prophecies suits well the place of 
 their delivery. In chaps, viii, 2, and x, 4, he represents river banks 
 as the scenes of his visions. This was very appropriate for a prophet 
 in Babylon, but not for one in Palestine. Daniel was familiar with 
 the Euphrates, Tigris, and other streams, either in the vicinity of 
 Babylon or not very remote ; and we find that the Deity usually 
 adapts himself to the conceptions and positions of the prophets in his 
 revelations to them. The imagery of Daniel's vision in the seventh 
 chaptei is nearly the same as that found on monuments in the ruins 
 of Nineveh. Daniel speaks of a lion that had eagle's wings, and of 
 a leopard that had four wings. Here we are strongly reminded of 
 the winged bull and other figures excavated by Layard. Nebuchad 
 nezzar's dream of the great image is in exact accordance with Baby- 
 lonian taste, for the Babylonians were remarkably fond of the gro- 
 tesque and the rude. " In his [Daniel's] strains," remarks Schlosser
 
 OF THE HOLY SCRIPTURES. 421 
 
 wno is no friend to Scripture, " a Chaldean and Babylonian style is 
 so conspicuous that it strongly expresses the character of the times 
 in which he lived." 
 
 The character of Daniel's prophecies suits his position. He was 
 engaged in the State affairs of the greatest nation of the Agreement be- 
 age. It is therefore very probable that he would be deeply c^cumstanoes 3 
 anxious to know what would be the fate of this kingdom and his work, 
 especially in relation to the influence it would have upon the chosen 
 people. Further, it is probable, unless we deny all prophecy, that 
 God would make known to him the future, and choose him for the 
 office which the history ascribes to him. 
 
 The Messianic character of the book is remarkable. Poverty of 
 ideas and want of comprehensive views of the Messiah's kingdom 
 mark the apocryphal writings. Daniel describes the four great king- 
 doms of the ancient world, and in his lofty flight passes rapidly to 
 the fifth kingdom, that of the Messiah, which should break in pieces 
 and consume all these kingdoms, and stand forever. In his descrip- 
 tion of the Ancient of Days he employs the most sublime imagery, 
 and represents myriads as gathered before him for judgment. Are 
 these lofty and pious conceptions consistent with base imposture ? 
 
 In i Maccabees ii, 49-60, it is stated that Mattathias, when about 
 to die, exhorted his sons to steadfastness in the law, by referring 
 them to many distinguished examples of obedience to God in time 
 of trial in different ages of the world. He names Abraham, Joseph, 
 Phinehas, Joshua, Caleb, David, and Elijah. Immediately following 
 these worthies, and in the same list, are the following, found in the 
 Book of Daniel : " Ananias, Azarias, and Mishael, by believing, were 
 saved from the flame. Daniel in his simplicity [innocency] was 
 saved from the mouth of the lions." Now, since the other names in 
 this list are selected from the written history of the Jews, it is very 
 probable that these last are also the names of distinguished Jews 
 occurring in written history. If it had been a floating tradition, it is 
 very improbable that it would have been cited. Mattathias died 
 about B. C. 166, and the first Book of Maccabees was written prob- 
 ably forty years later. Even if Mattathias did not use the examples 
 in Daniel attributed to him, the writer must have believed that the 
 Book of Daniel was then in existence, which is an important point. 
 
 Between B. C. 285 and 140 the entire Old Testament was trans- 
 lated into Greek. In this version (the LXX), Daniel was included. 
 The phrasej^AvyjtiaepTj/zwffewf, abomination of 'desolation, i Mace, i, 54, 
 was, in all probability, taken from Dan. ix, 27, in the LXX. These 
 facts themselves make it probable that the Book of Daniel existed 
 before the time of Antiochus Kpiphanes. In the third book of the
 
 433 INTRODUCTION TO THE STUDY 
 
 Sibylline Oracles, composed for the most part by an Alexandrian Je* 
 of the Maccabean age, according to the recent critical investigations, 
 there is an evident imitation of the Book of Daniel in several points. 
 This is another probable proof of the existence of our book before 
 the Maccabean age. 
 
 There is a striking difference between the book of Daniel and 
 Freedom or the the apocryphal writings in a point we think worthy of no- 
 prayers{n*he tice its freedom from prayers in the midst of narratives. 
 narrative. Tobit, i Maccabees, Judith, and, indeed, all the apocry- 
 phal books we know of no exception abound with prayers and 
 ejaculations. The Book of Esther, in Hebrew, contains no prayers; 
 but there is no want of them in the Greek version. In Daniel not 
 a word of prayer is mentioned as having been uttered by the Hebrew 
 children in the fiery furnace. In the Greek version, however, prayers 
 are put into their mouths. No prayers are ascribed to Daniel in the 
 lions' den. Had Daniel ' been written in the age of the apocryphal 
 writers, it would, in all probability, have abounded in prayers and 
 pious ejaculations. It is difficult to explain how the book could 
 have arisen in the age of such writers, at the time the Greek version 
 was made, and yet be wanting in the very additions characteristic of 
 the times. In several places in chap, ix Daniel uses the name mrr, 
 Jehovah; but there can be no doubt that already, before the age 
 of the Maccabees, the Jews had ceased to use that name, through a 
 superstitious reverence. 
 
 If the Book of Daniel was not written about the time of the cap- 
 tivity, then we have no authentic history of that period. But if any 
 events of importance occurred during that period any events of 
 the character of those in the book of Daniel they would, in all prob- 
 ability, have been written about that time. The history in Daniel 
 shows that God had not abandoned his people during the captivity, 
 and that the Divine interposition in their behalf prepared the way 
 for their return to their native land. 
 
 But we must not overlook the testimony of our Saviour and his 
 The testimony apostles to the book. He calls Daniel the prophet, and 
 hi apostles to re ^ ers to his prophecy concerning the abomination of 
 Daniel. desolation (Matt, xxiv, 15). The appellation our Sav- 
 
 iour gives himself, "Son of man," is taken from Dan. vii, 13. The 
 imagery in the Book of Revelation is partly borrowed from it ; and 
 Paul's description of the man of sin (2 Thess. ii) seems to have been 
 partly derived from it. The author of the Epistle to the Hebrews 
 refers to the Hebrew children in the fiery furnace and to Daniel in 
 the lions' den (chap, xi, 33, 34). 
 
 *The prayer oi Daniel in chap, ui is required by the circumsta/iceR.
 
 OF THE HOLY SCRIPTURES. 423 
 
 APOCRYPHAL ADDITIONS TO THE ORIGINAL TEXT OF DANIEL. 
 
 In the LXX we find several long additions to the Hebrew and 
 Thaldee text of Daniel. They consist of the Story of Susanna (sixty- 
 four verses), prefixed to the book, the Prayer of Azariah, and the 
 Thanksgiving Hymn of the three Hebrew children in the fiery fur- 
 nace (sixty-seven verses), inserted between the twenty-third and 
 twenty-fourth verses of chapter iii ; and the Story of Bel and the 
 Dragon (forty-two verses), placed at the end of the book. Fiirst re- 
 marks that these additions are found also in the Talmuds and in 
 the Midrash. ' From this he infers that they existed in Hebrew as well 
 as in Aramaic and Greek, and that to suppose that the Greek was their 
 oiiginal language is more than doubtful. 1 But it seems evident that 
 the Story of Susanna was originally written in Greek from the parono- 
 masia on a%ivw and O%I'<T, and Trptvov and npiacu. These additions 
 to the book of Daniel are totally destitute of authority. 
 
 CHAPTER LII. 
 
 THE TWELVE MINOR PROPHETS. 
 
 'TNHE twelve minor prophets are Hosea, Joel, Amos, Obadiah 
 Jonah, Micah, Nahum, Habakkuk, Zephaniah, Haggai, Zecha- 
 riah, and Malachi. Their works are small books, and, all com- 
 bined, do not fill as many pages as the Prophet Ezekiel. Several 
 of them contain each but two or three chapters ; and one of them, 
 Obadiah, but a single one. They stand in the third division of the 
 Hebrew Bible, embracing later prophets, immediately after Ezekiel, 
 in the order in which they stand in the English version. If the pas- 
 sage in Jesus Sirach * be genuine, they formed in his time one col- 
 lection. It is evident that in the time of Josephus they made one 
 book. In the canon of Melito ' and Jerome * they formed one book. 
 The ancient tradition of the Jews * relates that they were united into 
 one volume, because otherwise they might have been lost on account 
 of their being so small. For the most part they are arranged in the 
 order of time. 
 
 THE PROPHET HOSEA.* 
 
 This prophet exercised his ministry in the days of Uzziah, Jotham, 
 Ahaz, and Hezekiah, kings of Judah, and in the days of Jeroboam, 
 
 1 Ueber den Kanon, pp. 102, 103. "xlix, 10. 'In Euseb., Hist. Eccl., iv, 26 
 Preface to Samuel and Kings. * Fiirst, p. 28. ' Hebrew, join, Deli\-eratue
 
 4'^ INTRODUCTION TO THE STUDY 
 
 the son of Joash, king of Israel a period of not less than sixty years. 
 Nothing is known of his personal history. It is stated simply that 
 he was the son of Beeri. According to a tradition * of the Jews he 
 was a Reubenite, from beyond the Jordan. His prophecies were di- 
 rected principally to Ephraim and Samaria, and but occasionally to 
 Judah. He doubtless spent most of his time among the ten tribes, 
 and he speaks of " our king" when referring to one of these princes 
 (chapter vii, 5). It is not improbable that he was born in that 
 kingdom. 
 
 The book may be appropriately divided into two parts : First, the 
 symbolical actions of the prophet in entering upon his ministry 
 (chaps, i-iii) ; and, secondly, the prophecies respecting the ten tribes 
 chiefly, but also, in some instances, Judah (chaps, iv-xiv). 
 
 DATE OF COMPOSITION. 
 
 It cannot be certainly determined whether the prophecies were 
 written before a ^ w " tten at tne same time, or at different periods dur- 
 the fail of sa- ing the reign of the several monarchs whose names stand 
 at the beginning of the book. Yet it is probable that 
 they contain the substance of what the prophet at various times de- 
 livered orally, and that they were written down in their present form 
 near the close of his life. From the many exhortations addressed to 
 the ten tribes, and from the prophecy of the desolation of Samaria, 
 the book bears internal evidence of having been written before the 
 fall of Samaria (B. C. 721). It is evident that the first chapter was 
 delivered, and in all probability written, before the death of Zacha- 
 riah (about B. C. 772), the last king of the line of Jehu ; for in chap. 
 i, 4, Jehovah says, " I will avenge the blood of Jezreel upon the house 
 of Jehu." 
 
 Nowhere in the book is there any intimation that the house of 
 Jehu had already fallen, or that Samaria had been taken by the As- 
 syrian king. In chap, x, 14, it is said, "All thy fortresses shall be 
 spoiled, as Shalman spoiled Beth-arbel in the day of battle." But 
 this passage throws no light upon the time of the composition of the 
 book, for it is not certain that Shalman is the same as Shalmaneser, 
 and if it were we do not know which one is meant, as three Shalma- 
 nesers reigned between B. C. 860 and B. C. 722. The Beth arbel * 
 
 1 Jotham reigned sixteen years, and Ahaz sixteen ; and from the death of Jero- 
 boam II. to the death of Uzziah and the beginning of Jotham's reign, there were 
 twenty-five years ; which, added together, make a total of fifty-seven ; and, by al- 
 lowing one or two years in the reign of Jeroboam, and one or two in that of Hez- 
 ekiah, we have about sixty years. * Ueber den Kanon, p. 29 
 
 'Furst supposes this to be Arbela in Persia ; while Gesenius thinks it is probabb 
 Arbela in Galilee.
 
 OF THE HOLY SCRIPTURES. 425 
 
 spoken of is probably Arbela, near Gaugamela, in Persia. It is 
 probable that Hosea left the kingdom of the ten tribes, and came to 
 Judah, with his book of prophecies, some time before the capture 
 of Samaria. Hence it was preserved, and put among the other 
 prophets. 
 
 THE CHARACTER OF THE PROPHECIES OF HOSEA. 
 
 " The style of Hosea," says Keil, " is highly poetical, rich in bold 
 and powerful imagery, full of vigorous thinking and beautiful de- 
 lineation, yet often abrupt, bounding from one image to another, 
 and by no means free from difficulties and obscurities. The lan- 
 guage has many peculiar words and unusual constructions." 1 He 
 is also distinguished for directness, and for the practical charactei 
 of his teachings. 
 
 THE PROPHET JOEL. 1 
 
 Nothing is known of the personal history of this prophet. He 
 is simply called the son of Pethuel (chap, i, i). His prophecies are 
 directed to Judah and Jerusalem (chapters ii, i, 15, 17, 23, 32; iii, 
 i, 6, 8, 16-21), and, in all probability, he dwelt in Jerusalem. 
 
 The book is naturally divided into two parts. The first, embrac- 
 ing chaps, i, ii, 1-17, contains a description of the plagues that have 
 come upon the land of Judah, especially the plague of locusts, and 
 also an announcement of the judgments of the Almighty that are 
 about to overtake the people. The second part, embracing chaps, ii, 
 1 8 iii, contains promises of deliverance and prosperity to Judah, and 
 announces the blessings and judgments of God in Messianic times. 
 
 Two questions arise respecting the plague of locusts : Does the 
 prophet predict the plague, or does he describe it as Questions con- 
 already existing? Is the plague of locusts to be under- ^^, g of \^ 
 stood literally, or allegorically, for great armies of men ? costs. 
 Bleek remarks that Luther, Calvin, and most of the recent exposi- 
 tors, regard it as a description of a present plague, and that most 
 recent interpreters understand it of real locusts. Hengstenberg 
 regards it as prophetic and allegorical, as a " poetical description, 
 and not one of natural history : " a representation of destructive 
 invading armies, under the figure of devouring locusts. 
 
 The language used in the very beginning of the description indi- 
 cates that it is something already present : " Hear this, ye old men, 
 and give ear, all ye inhabitants of the land. Hath this been in your 
 
 'Introduction, vol. i, p. 371, in Clark's Foreign Theological Library. 
 1 Hebrew, J)K1' 1 , To -whom Jehovah is God.
 
 420 INTRODUCTION TO THE STUDY 
 
 days, or even in the days of your fathers? Tell ye your children 
 of it, and let your children tell their children, and their children 
 another generation. That which the palmer-worm hath left hath 
 the locust eaten," etc. (chap. i. 2-4). If it be conceded that the 
 plague is described as something present, it will follow that the 
 description is literal ; for no one would think of representing an 
 army of men who were laying waste the country and slaughtering 
 human beings as a swarm of locusts destroying all the vegetation, and 
 climbing up upon the houses, and entering in at the windows. But on 
 the supposition that the description is prophetic and allegorical, 
 there arises this difficulty, that it is too minute. Parables and alle- 
 gories never admit of minute application, and are expressed in gen- 
 eral terms. From chapter i, 20, it appears that a drought at the 
 same time had come upon the land. This must be taken literally, 
 and furnishes presumptive proof that the other is literal also. Some 
 of the verbs in the description are in the future tense ; but the 
 Hebrew often uses this tense for the present. The locusts are 
 called a nation ("u), but this word is used in various passages foi 
 "flights or troops of animals" (Gesenius). In chapter ii, 17, the 
 priests are exhorted to pray to the Lord to spare his heritage, that 
 the heathen may not use a song of derision against them. In chap, 
 ii, 19, God promises to send corn, wine, and oil to his people, and 
 no more to make them a reproach among the heathen. It is obvious 
 that the destruction of the country by the locusts would furnish the 
 heathen an occasion to revile the Israelites as being abandoned of 
 God, or to assert that he was unable to save them. 
 
 THE DATE OF THE PROPHECY OF JOEL. 
 
 There is nothing definite in the book respecting the age to which 
 written after ^ belongs. From the way in which Judah and Jerusa- 
 tbe revolt of lem are named, it is clear that it was written after the 
 separation of the ten tribes from the house of David 
 and while the temple was still standing (chapter ii, 17). Bunsen 
 places it as early as B. C. 950 ; and Hilgenfeld subsequently to the 
 return of the Jews from Babylon. These are the two extremes. 
 Schrader decides in favour of B. C. 870 as th e date of the prophecy. 
 He fixes upon this date for the following reasons : first, there is nc 
 mention made either of the Syrians (and, therefore, the prophecy is 
 earlier than 2 Kings xii, 17), or of the Assyrians (for this reason it is 
 previous to Amos), but simply of Phoenicians and Philistines (chap, 
 iii, 4; compare 2 Chron. xxi, 16), Egyptians and Edomites (chapter 
 lii, 19; compare 2 Kings viii, 20-22 ; xiv, 7), as people hostile to Is- 
 rael ; secondly, the institutions of the Mosaic law are presupposed:
 
 OF THE HOLY SCRIPTURES. 427 
 
 and, finally, Joel is imitated by Amos (compare Amos i, z with Joel 
 iii, 16).' On very similar grounds Keil * decides in favour of a date 
 between B. C. 877 and B. C. 847. 
 
 But it must be observed that it is impossible to determine on 
 internal grounds whether Amos has quoted Joel or Joel Amos; and 
 the fact that Joel does not speak of the Assyrians among the ene- 
 mies of Judah does not compel us to place him earlier than about 
 the middle of the eighth century before Christ, when the Assyrians 
 appeared as the enemies of Israel. In chapter iii, 4-8, the prophet 
 remonstrates with Tyre and Zidon and the coasts of Palestine (Phil- 
 istines), because they "have taken away my silver and my gold," 
 and carried into their temples "my goodly, pleasant things; " "The 
 children also of Judah and the children of Jerusalem have ye sold 
 unto the Grecians," etc. It is in the highest degree probable that 
 the prophet here refers to an irruption of the Philistines and others, 
 who broke into the house of King Jehoram and carried away all its 
 substance, "and his sons, also, and his wives" (2 Chron. xxi, 16, 17). 
 This was about B.C. 887. It seems that at the same time the Phil- 
 istines damaged the temple in Jerusalem, as not many years after- 
 ward mention is made of breaches in the house of the Lord (2 Kings 
 xii, 4-16). We may conclude that the book was written about B.C. 
 870. Bleek,* from certain resemblances it bears to Amos, places 
 it about B. C. 800. Fflrst places it B. C. 885.* 
 
 CHARACTER OF HIS PROPHECY. 
 
 On this point Bleek well remarks : " In a literary, poetical point 
 of view, Joel's prophecy belongs to the finest productions of Hebrew 
 literature. In florid, vivid description it is unsurpassed. Also in 
 respect to its prophetic, Messianic character it is important ; al- 
 though, of course, in this it stands somewhat behind the predictions 
 of many other prophets." 1 
 
 THE PROPHET AMOS.' 
 
 Of this prophet we know nothing more than what is derived from 
 his own writings. He informs us in the beginning of his prophecy 
 that he was one of the herdmen of Tekoa, 7 and that in the days of 
 Uzziah, king of Judah, and in those of Jeroboam, son of Joash, king 
 of Israel, two years before the earthquake, he received the oracles 
 
 1 De Wette Schrader, p. 454. Introd., i, p. 376, in Clark's For. Theo. Lib 
 * Einleitung, p. 530. * Ueber den Kanon, p. 30. 
 
 *Einleitung, p. 531. 'Hebrew, 01735, Borne. 
 
 Y A town about twelve miles south of Jerusalem, on the borders cf the Desert of 
 
 Tudea. 
 
 28
 
 428 INTRODUCTION TO THE STUDY 
 
 concerning Israel. He further tells us that he was no prophet, nor 
 the son of a prophet, but " a herdman and a gatherer of sycamore 
 fruit; and the Lord took me as I followed the flock, and the Lord 
 said unto me, Go, prophesy unto my people Israel " (chapter vii, 
 14, 15). While engaged in the prophetic office at Bethel, Amaziah, 
 priest of that place, sent a message to Jeroboam, king of Israel, that 
 Amos was conspiring against him ; at the same time he exhorted the 
 prophet to flee into the land of Judea and prophesy (chap, vii, 10-13). 
 It is probable that he soon afterward left for the kingdom of Judah, 
 where he doubtless wrote this book. Of his prophecies only the pas- 
 sages chaps, ii, 4, 5, vi, i, concern Judah and Jerusalem, his special 
 mission being to the ten tribes. 
 
 This book may be divided into two parts : the first (chaps, i-vi) 
 containing prophecies against various nations, and reproofs and ex- 
 hortations to Israel ; the second (chapters vii-ix) containing visions^ 
 setting forth the divine judgments upon Israel, and also Messianic 
 prophecies. 
 
 THE DATE OF THE PROPHECIES OF AMOS. 
 
 Amos states in the first verse that he received his oracles in the 
 days of Jeroboam, the son of Joash, king of Israel, and in the days 
 of Uzziah, king of Judah, two years before the earthquake. From 
 this it appears that he received his commission that year, but we are 
 unable to determine from it how long his ministry among the ten 
 tribes lasted, though it is probable that it was completed in that 
 single year. Jeroboam reigned from B. C. 825 to B. C. 784, and 
 Uzziah from B.C. 810 to B.C. 758. Internal evidence confirms the 
 superscription, for reference is made in chapter vii, 10 to Jeroboam 
 as a contemporary. In Zechariah xiv, 5 reference is made to the 
 earthquake in the days of Uzziah, king of Judah. According to the 
 tradition of the Jews, 1 the earthquake occurred in the twenty-seventh 
 year of the reign of Uzziah (about B. C. 783). As Jeroboam's reign 
 ended B. C. 784, it is obvious that we cannot place Amos later than 
 that date. Could we rest upon the Jewish tradition respecting the 
 year of the earthquake, the date of the prophecy could be fixed with 
 great accuracy at B. C. 785 ; but in the uncertainty of the tradition 
 we may place it about B. C. 795. 
 
 CHARACTER OF HIS PROPHECY. 
 
 Respecting the literary character of Amos, Bleek remarks : " His 
 language is poetical, even in narrating visions, but upon the whole 
 it is very plain, calm, measured. In general it is pure." 1 "Nowhere 
 
 'Fiirst, Ueberden Kanon, pp. 30, 31. Einleitung, p. 535.
 
 OF THE HOLY SCRIPTURES. 429 
 
 else, ' says Ewald, "in the prophets do we meet with images from 
 country life in such pure originality and loveliness, and in such in- 
 exhaustible fulness." 
 
 THE PROPHET OBADIAH. 1 
 
 Nothing of a personal character is known of this prophet. Ac- 
 cording to a tradition in the Talmud he was an Idumean who, at a 
 later period passed over to Judaism and became Ahab's steward, 
 and because he protected and supported a hundred prophets re- 
 ceived the prophetic gift. 2 This tradition seems to us to be of little 
 value. It is evident from his prophecy that he was a Jew, living in 
 Judah. 
 
 The prophecy consists of but a single chapter of twenty-one verses, 
 and is the smallest of the prophetic books. It is chiefly of a 
 threatening character, and is directed against the Edomites on ac- 
 count of their violence toward the children of Judah in the day of 
 calamity, when Jerusalem was captured. At the same time judg- 
 ment is declared against all the heathen; but salvation and restora- 
 tion are promised to the house of Jacob. Jacob and Joseph are to 
 consume Esau as stubble ; the children of Israel that have been led 
 away captive are to return, and deliverers shall stand on Zion to 
 judge the mount of Esau. 
 
 DATE OF THE PROPHECY. 
 
 It is difficult to fix the date of this prophecy, as we have to rely 
 altogether upon internal evidence of an obscure character; and 
 hence the greatest diversity of opinion respecting it exists among 
 biblical critics. In determining the age of Obadiah's prophecy, it is 
 necessary to consider what relation it bears to a very similar one in 
 Jer. xlix, 7-22, against Edom. From an examination of the proph- 
 ecy in both of these prophets it is evident that one of them has 
 copied the other. Which, then, is the original ? If Jeremiah is to 
 be so regarded, we have the singular spectacle of a prophet making 
 his appearance with a single chapter of matter, called a vision, prin- 
 cipally borrowed from a great prophet living just before him ! What 
 place could there be for him ! On the other hand, if Obadiah is the 
 original, there is nothing strange in Jeremiah's borrowing from him 
 in his own great prophetic book, just as he has borrowed from 
 Isaiah. Eichnorn, Rosenmtiller, Hengstenberg, Havernick, Caspari, 
 Keil, Kleinert, and others, are in favour of the originality of Oba- 
 
 ' ' Hebrew, n^??, Worshipper of Jehovah. * Furst, Ueber den Kanon, p. 32.
 
 3 INTRODUCTION TO THE STUDY 
 
 diah, while Bertholdt, Knobel, Hitzig, Bleek, and others, favour that 
 of Jeremiah. 
 
 The capture of Jerusalem to which Obadiah refers cannot be 
 that made by Nebuchadnezzar, for he carried away the people of 
 Jerusalem to Babylon. The language of the prophet refers to a very 
 different captivity : " The captivity of Jerusalem, which is in Seph- 
 arad, shall possess the cities of the south " (ver 20). This most 
 probably refers to the capture of the city in the reign of Jehoram 
 (about B. C. 887), when the Philistines and the Arabians made an 
 irruption into Judah and Jerusalem, and took captives, and carried 
 off valuable property (2 Chron. xxi, 16, 17). To this Joel seems to 
 refer (chap, iii, 4-6). He represents the children of Judah and 
 Jerusalem as sold to the Grecians. The captivity of Jerusalem in 
 Sepharad (Obadiah 20) a district in or about Asia Minor seems 
 to be that of a part of the people carried away at that time. 
 
 It seems best, then, to refer the plundering of Jerusalem, to which 
 reference is made in Obadiah, to the reign of Jehoram, and the 
 prophecy to the time immediately subsequent, or about B. C. 880. 
 If it be conceded that Jeremiah quotes Obadiah, it will confirm this 
 date. Hoffman and Delitzsch hold that Obadiah prophesied under 
 Jehoram, and he is placed by Keil ' in the same age (about B. C. 
 889-884). Hengstenberg, Havernick, and others, place him in the 
 reign of Uzziah. Aben Ezra, Luther, and many recent writers, in- 
 cluding Bleek, hold that Obadiah prophesied immediately after the 
 destruction of Jerusalem by Nebuchadnezzar. 
 
 THE BOOK OF JONAH. 3 
 
 It is stated in the beginning of this book that " the word of the 
 Lord came unto Jonah the son of Amittai." He is evidently the 
 same as " Jonah the son of Amittai the prophet, ... of Gath- 
 hepher," * who is mentioned in 2 Kings xiv, 25, in which it is stated 
 that Jeroboam II. (B. C. 825-784) restored the coast of Israel ac- 
 cording to the word of the Lord by this prophet. With the excep- 
 tion of this statement, all that we know about him depends on the 
 book that bears his name. 
 
 This prophecy contains an account of Jonah's being sent by the 
 Lord to preach to the Ninevites, his refusal to go, his taking ship for 
 Tarshish, the storm, his being thrown overboard by the sailors to 
 assuage it, his being swallowed by a sea monster, his restoration to 
 land, his obedience to the second summons to declare to the Nin- 
 
 1 Introduction, voL i, pp. 390, 391. * Hebrew, Wl" 1 , A dove. 
 
 "The same as Gittah-htpher (Josh, xix, 13), a city of Zebulun.
 
 OF THE HOLY SCRIPTURES. 431 
 
 evites that in forty days their city should be ovei thrown, their re- 
 pentance, and Jonah's anger. 
 
 CHARACTER AND DESIGN OF THE BOOK. 
 
 This book is wholly unlike any other book of the Old Testament 
 in its history, and in the singularity of Jonah's mission ; and it is ac* 
 cordingly not at all strange that it should give offence even to critics 
 who are not especially skeptical, and that the most widely diverging 
 views have been taken of it. Some few skeptics have produced two 
 heathen myths, those of Hesione and Andromeda, as parallels to 
 the account of Jonah being preserved in the belly of a fish, and 
 have supposed that some connexion exists between them and this 
 event in the life of Jonah. One of these is found in Ovid's Meta- 
 morphoses, xi, 211-220, and in Diodorus Siculus, iv, 42. The other 
 in Ovid's Metamorphoses, iv, 670-739, and is, perhaps, nothing more 
 than a variation of the preceding. But it is difficult to see what 
 connexion these myths have with the history of Jonah. The idea 
 that a Jewish writer would work up a heathen myth is so improbable 
 that it should be rejected at once. 
 
 Nor should the idea tnat the Book of Jonah is pure fiction find 
 much favour; as it was utterly foreign to the spirit of the ancient 
 Hebrews to invent such histories. De Wette ' observes, that " it is 
 probable that the material of the book was derived from ^00* of Jonah 
 the traditions among the people and the prophets; for DO notion, 
 narratives of that kind in antiquity were not pure inventions. But 
 whether real facts, and what ones out of the history of Jonah, lie at 
 the foundation of the book, cannot be shown either from the thanks- 
 giving hymn, chap, ii, z,ff., and from Tobit xiv, 4, or ascertained 
 by an arbitrary dissection of the materials." 
 
 Bunsen supposed that the thanksgiving hymn of Jonah (chapter 
 ii, 2-10) was a genuine production of that prophet, who composed it 
 upon his being saved from the sea ; and that this hymn, being mis- 
 understood, furnished the occasion for representing the history of 
 Jonah in the form in which we find it. Upon the basis of this song 
 Bunsen attempted to restore what he deemed to be the real facts, 
 though, as Bleek thinks, unsuccessfully. This latter writer, while ad- 
 mitting that the author of the book may possibly have found something 
 in tradition which he followed, yet, in denying that the book has an 
 historical aim, though a purely didactic one, seems to deprive it of all 
 historical foundation whatever." 
 
 "It is possible," says Davidson,* " that a true prophetic tradition 
 
 1 De Wette Schrader, p. 462. ' Einleitung, pp. 569-579. 
 
 ' Introduction, vol. iii, 279, 280.
 
 433 INTRODUCTION TO THE STUDY 
 
 n opinion of may lie at the foundation of the book. Jonah may have 
 prophesied to the Ninevites, and various particulars re- 
 specting his mission may either have been written by himself or 
 handed down orally. . . . We consider the much greater part of the 
 book fictitious. A historical germ formed the foundation on which 
 the writer worked." 
 
 The book has been held to be a didactic fiction by Semler, Herder, 
 Michaelis, Staudlin, and others. Hermann Van der Hardt, Less, 
 and others, regard the book as a historical allegory; while Jahn 
 and Pareau consider it a parable, and Gramberg and F. C. Baur, 
 a poetical myth ; and Abarbanel, in the fifteenth century, " relying 
 upon what is said of Jonah's falling asleep in the ship, wished the 
 narrative about the fish that swallowed him to be taken for a dream." 
 On the other hand, the book has been earnestly defended by Lilien- 
 thal, Hess, Ludervvald, Piper, Steudel, Sack, Havernick, Baum- 
 garten, Stuart, Delitzsch, Hengstenberg, Keil, and others. 
 
 Keil expresses himself strongly in favour of the historical charac- 
 ter of the book. " Its contents," says he, " are neither pure fiction, 
 allegory, nor myth ; nor yet a prophetic legend, wrought up poet- 
 ically with a moral or didactic aim, embellished into a miraculous 
 story, and mingled with mythical elements ; but, with all its miracles, 
 it is to be taken for a true history of deep prophetico-symbolic and 
 Defenders of tv pi ca l significance." 1 Delitzsch characterizes the book 
 the authentic- as " a confession of sin written down by the corrected 
 prophet under a deep feeling of shame and godly self- 
 denial, as he was moved by the Holy Spirit, which is incorporated 
 with the prophetic writings for this reason, that Jonah, prophesying 
 there in a manner contrary to his own wishes, was a type of Christ 
 who was to come, in and through whom alone believers, even of the 
 Old Testament age (Jonah iii, 5), have a share in grace." 1 
 
 The book was regarded by the ancient Jews and Christians as real 
 history. In the Book of Tobit, which was, in all probability, written 
 some centuries before Christ, and evidently in Hebrew, Tobit de- 
 clares that he believes "what the Prophet Jonah said concerning 
 Nineveh, that it shall be destroyed " (chap, xiv, 4) ; and again, re- 
 specting this city, "that certainly those things will come to pass 
 which Jonah the Prophet spoke " (chap, xiv, 8). 
 
 In the Targum of Jonathan Ben-Uzziel * on the Prophet Nahum, it 
 is said that Jonah the Prophet, the son of Amittai, prophesied against 
 Nineveh. Josephus 4 gives an account of Jonah, taken almost ex- 
 clusively from this book, and adds : " I have narrated the account 
 
 'Introduction, vol i, p. 395, in Clark's For. TheoL Lib. 'Ibid., p. 398. 
 'Made about the lime of Christ * Antiq., ix. TO.
 
 OF THE HOLY SCRIPTURES. 433 
 
 concerning him as I have found it written." In the time of the 
 Talmudists ' the book was regarded as historical. 
 
 The book does not profess to be written by Jonah. The first per- 
 son is nowhere used except in the psalm of thanksgiving. The lan- 
 guage of the book seems to belong to a quite late period. The use 
 of Vtf for law, which) in the phrase '0*7173, because of whom (chap, i, 7), 
 
 and in *Wa. on my account, belongs to late Hebrew. D^o, mandate, 
 ' > - ~ 
 
 decree (Jonah iii, 7), is from the Chaldee ; nrac, ship, is the same 
 as Syriac and Arabic ; 1220, to suffer shipwreck (chap, i, 4), is found 
 elsewhere in this sense (Ezekiel xxvii, 34; 2 Chronicles ^MXTVA 
 
 xx > 37) 5 "^yn, in the sense to remove (chap, iii, 6), be- the language 
 
 T T , of this book. 
 
 longs to late Hebrew, pno, a walk, way (chap. 111, 3, 4), 
 
 is also a late Hebrew word ; and rwnn, to think upon (chap, i, 6), is the 
 
 " t * 
 same as the Chaldee. But if the book was written by Jonah, it was 
 
 composed at least as early as about B. C. 825. The language seems 
 altogether inconsistent with such an early date, and would indicate 
 a period just before, or very soon after, the Babylonian captivity. 
 Respecting Jewish tradition in reference to the author of the book, 
 Fiirst remarks : " Since, with the exception of the inserted prayer, 
 nothing indicates that the prophet himself composed it as it for 
 the most part is only a narrative respecting Jonah in the Tal- 
 mudic period the question respecting its author was left altogether 
 nndecided."* 
 
 The writer's aim seems to be didactic: to show, first of all, the folly 
 of disobeying God when one is called to perform import- The writer's 
 ant work ; but especially to set forth in a conspicuous P'tfpose. 
 manner the greatness of the Divine mercy to all men who repent of 
 their sins, though they may not be of the covenant people. In con- 
 trast with this, the purpose is to show in a striking way the narrow- 
 ness of the soul of the prophet, who preferred that all the inhabitants 
 of this great city, the innocent with the guilty, should be cut off, 
 rather than that a doubt should be cast upon the reality of his 
 prophetic mission. 
 
 The tone of the book stands out in marked contrast with the nar- 
 row and exclusive spirit of the Jews, and approximates the liberality 
 of Christianity. It is difficult to see how the history of such a mis- 
 sion 3 to Nineveh could have arisen had it not been based upon a 
 well-authenticated fact. Nor would the book have been admitted 
 among the prophets if there had been any serious doubts about the 
 truth of that mission. We have still other grounds for holding fast 
 
 1 Ucber den Kanon, p. 33. a Ibid , p. 33. 
 
 *In Ezek. iii, 5, 6 there is a not improbable reference to this mission
 
 434 INTRODUCTION TO THE STUDT 
 
 to the reality of the mission of Jonah to the Ninevites. Christ refers 
 to this in such a way that he must have regarded it as a fact. " The 
 nen of Nineveh," says he, " shall rise in the judgment with this gen- 
 eration, and shall condemn it : because they repented at the preach- 
 ing of Jonah ; and, behold, a greater than Jonah is here." ' He says 
 further: "As Jonah was a sign to the Ninevites, so shall also the 
 Son of man be to this generation." * Or, as it stands in Matthew xii, 
 39. 40 . " There shall no sign be given to it, but the sign of the prophet 
 Jonah : for as Jonah was three days and three nights in the whale's 
 (tfjjrof, shark, whale, etc.) belly, so shall the Son of man be three days 
 and three nights in the heart of the earth." 1 
 
 THE PROPHET MICAH. 4 
 
 This prophet was a native of Moresheth, a town in Judah, about 
 thirty miles south-west from Jerusalem. He prophesied conceining 
 Samaria and Jerusalem in the days of Jotham, Ahaz, and Hezekiah, 
 kings of Judah. He seems to have spent his time for the most 
 part in Judah, but must have also visited the ten tribes when he de- 
 livered his prophecy respecting them. He is mentioned in Jeremiah 
 xxvi, 18 as " Micah the Morasthite," who prophesied in the days of 
 Hezekiah, king of Judah, respecting the utter desolation of Jeru- 
 salem. 
 
 Chapters i-iii contain prophecies directed to Samaria and Judah, 
 threatening them with the judgments of God on account of the sins 
 of the people. Chapters iv, v refer chiefly to the Messiah, and to 
 the prosperity of Israel under his reign. Chapters vi, vii describe 
 true religion, rebuke the wickedness of the people, and, at the same 
 time, encourage them to look to God for pardon. 
 
 THE DATE OF HIS PROPHECY. 
 
 Although Micah states that the word of the Lord carne to him in 
 the days of Jotham, Ahaz, and Hezekiah, it is not to be supposed 
 
 ' Matt, xii, 41. Luke xi, 32 has the same passage. ' Luke xi, 30. 
 
 'The passage in which mention is made of Jonah being in the whale's belly it 
 found only in Matt, xii, 40. In the allusion to Jonah it is omitted by Luke (xi, 30-33.) 
 Neander thinks that the reference in Matt, xii, 40 to the resurrection of Christ " is 
 quite foreign to the original sense and connexion of the passage, " and that " the 
 rerse in question is a commentary by a later hand." Life of Christ, pp. 245, 246, 
 M'Clintock and Blumenthal's Trans. It is true that the verse seems out of plact 
 but we have no sufficient authority for its rejection. 
 
 Who at Jehovah?
 
 OF THE HOLY SCRIPTURES. 435 
 
 ihzu the prophecies were written down at various times during a 
 Deriod of twenty-five or thirty years, but rather that his book gives 
 the substance of the prophecies which he delivered at different times 
 and afterward wrote down. Thus the question is, When did he 
 compose the book ? It must have been before the capture of Sa- 
 maria and the removal of the ten tribes ; for we find in chap, vi, 16 
 the complaint that " the statutes of Omri are kept, and all the works 
 of the house of Ahab." From the whole tone of the book it is evi- 
 dent that at the time of its composition Samaria was not yet cap- 
 tured. But this event occurred in the sixth year of the reign of 
 Hezekiah, B.C. 721. According to Jeremiah xxvi, 18 the prophecy 
 contained in Micah iii, 12, respecting the utter desolation of Jerusa- 
 lem, was delivered in the time of Hezekiah. The book, therefore, 
 must have been composed between the first and sixth year of the 
 reign of Hezekiah, B. C. 727-721. 
 
 Respecting the character of his prophetic style, Keil says: "The 
 prophetic discourse of Micah is like Isaiah's in the boldness and lofti- 
 ness of the thought; in the rounding off, the clearness and the liveli- 
 ness of the representation; in the wealth of imagery and compari- 
 sons (chaps, i, 8, 16 ; ii, 12, 13; iv, 9, 10, etc.), and other rhetorical 
 figures, such as individualizing, dialogue (chaps, vi, 1-8 ; vii, 7-20), 
 paronomasia, and play upon words (specially accumulated at chap, 
 i, 10-15). Yet he is distinguished from him by quick and sudden 
 changes from threatening to promise, and the reverse (chapters ii, 
 12, 13; iv, 9-14; vii, iiyff.) t which remind us of Hosea. The dic- 
 tion soars poetically, and is rhythmically rounded off; and the lan- 
 guage is classically pure." 1 
 
 THE PROPHET NAHUM. 1 
 
 The book bears the inscription, " The oracle respecting Nineveh ; 
 the book of the vision of Nahum the Elkoshite." Apart from his 
 prophecy nothing is known of him, and there has been a dispute even 
 respecting the place, Elkosh, where he was born ; some regarding it 
 as a town of Galilee ; others as the village El-Msh, near Mosul. 
 Jerome * mentions the ruins of a village in Galilee by the name of 
 Elcesi ('Pp^N), pointed out to him by a guide. Ftirst 4 remarks that 
 
 1 Introduction, vol. i, p. 405, in Clark's Foreign Theological Library. 
 
 f tt1H3, Consolation. 
 
 1 Preface to Nahum. He also remarks that some think that his father was El* 
 
 , who, according to the Hebrew tradition, was himself a prophet 
 4 Ueher den Kanon, p. 36.
 
 436 INTRODUCTION TO THE STUDY 
 
 the tradition that his birth-place, Elkosh, was Elcesi in Galike, and 
 not Elkesh on the eastern bank of the Tigris, has much in its favour ; 
 and that his abode was probably Capernaum (Kefar-Nachum), named 
 after the prophet. 
 
 The prophecy refers to one subject, the ruin of Nineveh. In pre- 
 paring the way for the prediction of its overthrow the prophet dwell? 
 upon the attributes of God that he is zealous and avengeth, reserv- 
 ing wrath for his enemies; irresistible in power; slow to anger, 
 good ; and a stronghold in the day of trouble. After this he proceeds 
 to describe the wickedness and corruption of Nineveh, and the 
 dreadful fate that awaits her on account of her wickedness (chaps. 
 i-iii). 
 
 DATE OF COMPOSITION. 
 
 It is clear from the language of the book that when it was com- 
 posed Nineveh was still standing. This great city, according to 
 Herodotus, was captured by Cyaxares and the Medes (chap, i, 106). 
 The following account of the capture and destruction of Nineveh is 
 given by George Smith: "A coalition of Necho, king of Egypt, 
 Cyaxares, king of Media, and Nabopolassar, king of Babylon, was 
 formed against Assyria, and the Medes and Babylonians, after de- 
 feating the Assyrian forces, laid siege to Nineveh. The lofty walls 
 of the city long resisted their efforts, but after two years there hap- 
 pened a great overflow of the Tigris, which swept away part of the 
 wall of the city. Through the breach the besiegers entered, on the 
 subsiding of the flood, and captured the city. The last king of As- 
 syria, finding his city was taken, made a pile of all his valuables in 
 the palace, and, setting fire to it, perished himself in the flames. 
 The city was now plundered and at once destroyed ; it did not 
 gradually decay, like Babylon, but from the time of its capture it 
 ceased to have any political importance, and its site became almost 
 forgotten." 1 This was about B. C. 607, as the reign of the last king 
 of Nineveh, as given by Smith, is B. C. 620-607.* 
 
 As the date of the prophecy cannot be later than B. C. 607, it 
 cannot be earlier than about B. C. 665. It is clear from Nahum iii, 
 8-n that Thebes (No) was already led away captive. In Smith's 
 translation * of the history of Assurbanipal from the columns of Nin- 
 eveh, this monarch states that in his second expedition to Egypt 
 and Ethiopia " the spoil, great and unnumbered, I carried off from 
 the midst of Thebes." His history is recorded from B. C. 67 1 to 
 
 'Assyrian Discoveries, 1873, 1874, pp. 93, 94. *Ibid., p. 447. 
 
 'Ibid., p. 329.
 
 OF THE HOLY SCRIPTURES. 43? 
 
 B. C. 645 ; and as he made many expeditions to different nations, 
 this second expedition to Egypt and Ethiopia was in all proba- 
 bility about five years, or something more, from the beginning of his 
 reign. 
 
 THE PROPHETIC STYLE OF THE BOOK. 
 
 It is distinguished for beauty, originality, regularity and purity of 
 diction, and belongs to the very best class of the prophetic writings. 
 
 THE PROPHET HABAKKUK. 1 
 
 The title of the book is, "The Oracle which Habakkuk the 
 Prophet saw." Nothing is known of the personal history of this 
 prophet, and his name nowhere occurs in Jewish history 2 outside 
 of his book. In his prophecy he gives us no information respecting 
 himself. 
 
 The book consists of two parts a prophecy, and a prayer, or psalm. 
 The prophetic part is in the form of a dialogue between Jehovah and 
 the prophet, in which the wickedness of men and the holiness of 
 God are discussed. In this prophecy the Jews are threatened with 
 destruction from the Chaldeans (chaps, i, ii). The prayer or psalm 
 is a sublime description of the exhibition of divine power in the 
 fcxodus of the Israelites (chap. iii). In its grandeur and beauty it 
 t surpassed by nothing in the Old Testament. 
 
 THE DATE OF THE DELIVERY OF THE PROPHECY. 
 
 As Habakkuk announces that the Chaldeans are to be raised up 
 against the Jewish people an event which was so strange as to be 
 incredible it is clear that at the time of this announcement the 
 Chaldean power was not at all threatening, and that Babylon was a 
 secondary power in the Assyrian dominion. Since the Chaldeans 
 were to be raised up in the lifetime 3 of the prophet's contempo- 
 raries, the prophecy was probably written twenty or thirty years 
 before the captivity of Jehoiachin, about B. C. 620 or 630. Flirst 
 remarks that the Talmudic tradition placed the beginning of the 
 
 >5n, Embrace. 
 
 2 In the superscription to the Apocryphal story of Bel and the Dragon, in the 
 Codex Chisi of the LXX, and ia the Syrian-hexapla version made from it, it is 
 stated that Habakkuk was of the tribe of LevL In this Apocryphal story an angel 
 is represented as taking Habakkuk by the hair of his head, and transporting him 
 to Babylon, to aid Daniel. All of these statements are equally unfounded. 
 
 8 This must be the meaning of the expression, " I will work a work in your 
 days."
 
 438 INTRODUCTION TO THE STUDY 
 
 prophecies of Habakkuk in the latter part of Manasseh's reign 
 (B. C. 645-641).' Bleek" refers the prophecy to the reign of Jehoi- 
 akim (B. C. 610-599). He thinks the last chapter may have been 
 written somewhat later than the prophecy. De Wette 8 thinks that 
 chapter i, 5, etc., points certainly to the reign of Jehoiakim, and that 
 chapter iii does not demand a later date. We see no good reason for 
 supposing that chapter iii was written at a later period than chapters 
 i and ii. 
 
 THE PROPHET ZEPHANIAH. 4 
 
 This prophet delivered his oracles, as he himself informs us, in 
 the days of Josiah, son of Ammon, king of Judah, whose reign falls 
 B. C. 641-610. He was the great-grandson of Amariah, who was 
 the son of Hezekiah (chap, i, i). According to a Jewish 6 tradition 
 this Hezekiah was no other than the distinguished Jewish king. 
 And this would seem probable from the fact that the name stands 
 back as far as the fourth generation. There is no reason for this 
 except the hypothesis that this ancestor was a man of distinction. 
 Certainly he belonged to the tribe of Judah, and most probably 
 lived in Jerusalem. 
 
 The prophecy opens with the denunciation of terrible judgments 
 from God upon Judah and Jerusalem for idolatry and universal 
 wickedness (chaps, i, ii, 3). Severe judgments are next denounced 
 upon the Philistines, Moabites, Ammonites, Ethiopians, and Assyria 
 and Nineveh (chap, ii, 4-15). After this the prophet returns to Je- 
 rusalem, and describes the wickedness of the people, prophets and 
 priests and closes with promises of happiness to Israel in the future, 
 in which he evidently refers to Messianic times (chap. iii). 
 
 THE DATE OF THE COMPOSITION OF THE PROPHECY. 
 
 According to a tradition of the Jews,' Zephaniah prophesied in 
 the time between B.C. 627, before the reform of divine worship had 
 been made by Josiah, when the book of the law was discovered in 
 the temple, and B. C. 621, when that reformation of worship was 
 completed. De Wette T refers the prophecy to the first years of Jo- 
 siah 's reign. Bleek thinks that it was composed probably before the 
 eighteenth year of that monarch's reign, as there is no mention in it 
 of the reforms instituted by him." 
 
 1 Ueber den Kanon, p. 30. Einleitnng, p. 545. 
 
 ' la D* Wette Schrader, p. 470. *n^DS, Wham Jekwak prvttcta 
 
 In Foist, Ueber den Kanon, p. 38. Fursf, p. 38. 
 
 ' Page 473. Page 548.
 
 OF THE HOLY SCRIPTURES. 439 
 
 According to 2 Chron. xxxiv, 3, Josiah began his reforms in his 
 twelfth year. And it would seem from chap, i, 4, where it is stated 
 " I will cut off the remnant of Baal from this place," that Josiah had 
 already begun his reforms. In chap, i, 8 it is said, " I will punish 
 the king's children." This, in all probability, refers to the sons of 
 the reigning monarch, and to them as already born. But as Josiah 
 vas only eight years old when he began to reign, it is not probable 
 that he had sons before he was more than twenty years of age. 
 Upon the whole, we think the prophecy was written some time 
 before the eighteenth year of Josiah's reign, or about B. C. 630. It 
 is evident from the prophecy of the destruction of Nineveh that 
 that city was still standing. But Nineveh was destroyed B. C. 607.' 
 
 CHARACTER OF THE PROPHECY. 
 
 It is by no means distinguished for boldness and originality. In 
 the prophecy of the desolation of Nineveh Nahum had already led 
 the way. Some of Zephaniah's descriptions, as chapters ii, 14, 15, 
 iii, 1 6, 17, are borrowed from, or based on, Isaiah. It occasionally 
 contains paronomasias. Its language, however, is pure. Bleek re- 
 marks that the prophecy is remarkable for containing a prediction 
 of the conversion of the heathen nations, even of those who execute 
 the divine judgments upon Israel. 2 
 
 THE PROPHET HAGGAI. 3 
 
 This prophet states very definitely that the word of the Lord 
 came to him on the first day of the sixth month of the second year 
 of the reign of Darius (Hystaspes), B. C. 520. All the other dates 
 which he gives for the divine communications belong also to the 
 second year of the reign of Darius. Apart from this book, our 
 prophet is mentioned in Ezra v, i, 2 as prophesying to the Jews 
 while they were rebuilding the temple, after the return from Baby- 
 lon in the second year of Darius, and as helping Zerubbabel and 
 Joshua in their work. 
 
 The book consists of four communications made by the prophet 
 in the second year of Darius; the first to the people, declaring 
 that the failure of their crops is owing to their having failed to 
 rebuild the house of the Lord, and that the pleasure and presence 
 of Jehovah will attend them in performing this work. The second 
 
 1 The last king of Nineveh, Assurebil-ili, reigned from B. C. 620-607. See Smith's 
 Assyrian Discoveries, 1873, 1874, p. 447. 
 * Einlcitung, p. 549. 
 3 ^3> Festive.
 
 440 INTRODUCTION TO THE STUDY 
 
 communication, made likewise to the whole people, in which they 
 are assured that this second temple, though inferior in splendour to 
 the first, shall have greater glory than it, and that Jehovah will shake 
 all nations, and the most excellent of the nations 1 shall come (to it), 
 and the house shall be filled with glory. The third communication 
 is addressed to the priests, in which it is declared that the unclean- 
 ness of the people is the ground of the failure of their crops. The 
 fourth communication is made to Zerubbabel, in which God de- 
 clares that he will overthrow the kingdoms of the earth, but prom- 
 ises that Zerubbabel shall be made as a signet, by which the Jewish 
 governor seems to be a type of Christ. 
 
 THE PROPHET ZECHARIAH. 
 
 This prophet calls himself the son of Barachiah, the son of Iddo. 
 It is clear from Neh. xii, 16 that he was a priest, and that he went 
 up from Babylon to Jerusalem with Zerubbabel. In Ezra v, i, 2 
 he is mentioned as prophesying along with Haggai, and aiding in 
 the rebuilding of the temple. In this passage he is called simply 
 the son of Iddo. This is done either for brevity, or, what is more 
 probable, because his father was already dead when Ezra wrote, and 
 his grandfather was his nearest living ancestor. He states in the 
 beginning of his prophecy thftt the word of the Lord came unto 
 him in the eighth month of the second year of Darius. Besides 
 this, he gives two other dates of divine communications the twenty- 
 fourth day of the eleventh month, in the same year (chap, i, 7), 
 and the fourth day of the ninth month of the fourth year of Darius 
 (chap, vii, i). He was a young man (i>'J) when called to the pro- 
 phetic office (chap, ii, 4). 
 
 This book may be appropriately divided into four sections. The 
 first (chaps, i-vi) contains eight visions, setting forth the provi- 
 dence of God and his special care over Israel. The design here is, 
 to encourage the Jewish people to rebuild the temple and Jerusalem, 
 and to inspire them with hope for the future. The second section 
 (chaps, vii, viii) contains no visions, but abounds in exhortations to 
 perform the practical duties of religion, and gives promises of future 
 happiness and prosperity to the Jews. The third section (chaps, 
 x-xi) contains prophecies pertaining chiefly to Israel. In chap, is, 
 9, 10 the Messiah is promised. The fourth section (chap, xii- xiv) con- 
 
 1 The English version of Hag. ii, 7, is not borne out by the Hebrew, which is 
 literally, " And they shall come, the excellent of the nations." There seems to ha 
 no direct reference to the Messiah in this passage. 
 !"P"!C*' IVhom Jehovah remembers.
 
 OF THE HOLY SCRIPTURES. 4-il 
 
 tains prophecies respecting Judah and Jerusalem and the Messiah's 
 kingdom, and the judgments that shall overtake the enemies of Jeru- 
 salem. 
 
 GENUINENESS OF CHAPTERS IX-XIV. 
 
 In modern times the genuineness of chapters ix-xiv has been vio- 
 lently assailed, and they have been attributed by the most of their 
 impugners to two different writers, living at different periods before 
 the Babylonian captivity. Some, indeed, have placed them in the 
 time of Alexander, others in that of the Maccabees. 
 
 The first doubt, so far as we know, about the genuineness of 
 chapters ix-xi was expressed by an Englishman, Joseph Mede, in 
 the seventeenth century, on the ground that the passage in chap, 
 xi, n, 12 is quoted in Matt, xxvii, 9, 10 as the language of Jere- 
 miah, and because the three chapters out of which the quotation is 
 made are closely connected. He accordingly attributed them to 
 Jeremiah. In the next century Whiston and other Englishmen 
 followed him ; and they in turn were succeeded by Doderlein, who 
 attributed the six chapters (ix-xiv) to that prophet. Since Q . 
 that time many German scholars, relying upon internal Mede,whiston, 
 grounds, have refused to attribute these last six chap- andothers - 
 ters to Zechariah. Among these may be named Bertholdt, Eich- 
 horn, Rosenmuller, Hitzig, Ewald, Knobel, Bunsen, Bleek, and 
 Schrader. On the other hand, the genuineness of these chapters 
 has been defended by Koster, Jahn, Hengstenberg, Havernick, 
 Keil, Stahelin, and others. De Wette, in the first three editions of 
 his " Introduction," denied their genuineness, but in the fourth and 
 subsequent editions he acknowledged it. Schrader holds that chaps 
 ix-xi belong-to a prophet in the first half of the eighth century B. C., 
 and that chaps, xii-xiv fall in the period immediately preceding the 
 Babylonian captivity. To about the same periods they are assigned 
 by Bleek and others. 
 
 In respect to chaps, ix-xi, it is urged that they must have been 
 composed when both the kingdoms of Judah and Israel still existed 
 in contiguity as parts of the covenant people, 1 and when the people 
 still stood under the dominion of kings ; and that chap, xi, 8 seems 
 to refer to times of anarchy following the death of Jeroboam II. in 
 Israel. In chap, ix, 13 it is said, "When I have bent Judah for me, 
 filled the bow with Ephraim," etc. ; and in chap, x, 6, 7, " I will 
 strengthen the house of Judah, and I will save the house of Joseph. 
 They of Ephraim shall be like a mighty man," etc. ; and in chap, 
 xi, 14, " Then I cut asunder mine other staff, even Bands, that I 
 might break the brotherhood between Judah and Israel." But it 
 1 So Bleek, Einleitung, p. 559.
 
 442 INTRODUCTION TO THE STUDY 
 
 cannot be shown from these references to Judah and Israel that the 
 prophecy was written before the ten tribes were carried away into 
 captivity (B. C. 721); for there is no reference to these tribes as be- 
 ing in Palestine, or to their capital, Samaria. On the contrary, it 
 would appear from chap, x, 6 that the house of Joseph had already 
 gone into captivity; and the same may be said respecting Ephraim 
 in the following verses (7, 8). In the passage, " I will cut off the char- 
 iot from Ephraim, and the horse from Jerusalem " (chap, ix, 10). ref- 
 erence is made to the peaceable reign of the Messiah, whose kingdom 
 shall extend "from the river to the ends of the earth." The other 
 reference to Judah and Ephraim (chap, ix, 13) is also prophetic. 
 
 Jeremiah uses the following language: "Behold, the days come, 
 saith the Lord, that I will sow the house of Israel and the /louse of 
 Judah with the seed of man," etc. (chap, xxxi, 27); and, "Behold, 
 the days come, saith the Lord, that I will make a new covenant with 
 the house of Israel, and with the house of Judah" (chap, xxxi, 31). 
 But notwithstanding these references to the house of Israel, the ten 
 tribes, had gone into captivity more tha.. a hundred years before 
 this. In Jer. xxxi, 18-20 there is a still clearer illustration of the pas- 
 sages in Zechariah under discussion : " I have surely heard Ephraim 
 bemoaning himself ... Is Ephraim my dear son ? is he a pleasant 
 child ? " In spite of this, he had long since gone into captivity. 
 
 In Obadiah 18 it is said: "And the house of Jacob shall be a 
 internal evt- fi re i ana " the house of Joseph a flame." Notwithstanding 
 dence of genu- this reference to the "house of Joseph," Bleek and 
 Schrader think that Obadiah was written after the de- 
 struction of Jerusalem by Nebuchadnezzar. The reference to Judah 
 and Israel, in chap, xi, 14, refers apparently to a historical fact. In 
 chap, ix, 5 it is said, " the king shall perish from Gaza ; " but this 
 does not imply a period preceding the Babylonian captivity, for 
 when Alexander the Great laid siege to Gaza, about two hundred 
 years after the time of Zechariah, the city was governed by a eunuch 
 named Batis. 1 The Hebrew word fn, king, often means the ruler 
 of a single city, a satrap, or a petty despot. 
 
 Hamath is also mentioned in chap, ix, 2, and although it may 
 have been destroyed centuries before the time of Zechariah (Isa 
 xxxvi, 19), yet it is evident that it was afterward rebuilt, for it is men- 
 tioned by Jeremiah (chap, xlix, 23) as being inhabited in his time. In 
 chap, xi, 8 it is said, " Three shepherds also I cut off in one month " 
 Bleek supposes the reference here to be to three kings : Zachariah, 
 the son of Jeroboam II., who reigned six months; Shallum, who 
 reigned one full month (2 Kings xv, 8-15); and some unknown 
 1 Arhan's Expedition of Alexander, lib. ii, 25.
 
 OF THE HOLY SCRIPTURES. 443 
 
 asurper, who may have maintained his authority for only a few 
 weeks. But it could not be well said that three were cut off in one 
 month, for Menahem, who succeeded Shallum, reigned ten years, 
 and ye have no right to interpolate another king without a particle 
 of proof of his existence. The three shepherds may not have been 
 kings at all, but prophets which Gesenius seems to prefer. Bleek's 
 argument from this passage in favour of the composition of chapters 
 ix-xi in the time of King Menahem J is utterly groundless. 
 
 Respecting chapters xii-xiv, it is conceded by Bleek and Schrader 
 that they were composed after the death of king Josiah (B. C. 610), 
 to whose death there is a clear reference in chap, xii, n : "In that 
 day shall there be a great mourning in Jerusalem, as the mourning 
 of Hadadrimmon in the valley of Megiddon." In illustration of this 
 see 2 Kings xxxiii, 29, 30; 2 Chron. xxxv, 24. 
 
 It is clear, then, that we cannot place the last three chapters of 
 the book earlier than about B. C. 600, or near the beginning of the 
 Babylonian captivity. But it is difficult to believe that these chap- 
 ters were written then, for there is no mention made of the Chal- 
 deans, who were on the point of destroying Jerusalem. The Book 
 of the Prophet Jeremiah is full of predictions belonging to that time 
 respecting the destruction of the city by the Chaldeans. It is next 
 to impossible to believe that these chapters synchronize with any of 
 those belonging to Jeremiah. Nor can we suppose that they were 
 written during the Babylonian exile, or that they could have been 
 written long posterior to the captivity. Consequently, the age of 
 Zechariah, or that immediately succeeding, is the only one to which 
 the chapters in question belong. 
 
 It is true that we find in the last division certain predictions re- 
 specting the captivity of Jerusalem. But the entire description is 
 totally unsuitable to the destruction and captivity of Jerusalem by 
 the Chaldeans; for it refers to times long subsequent to that event, 
 and is closely connected with the advent of the Messiah. 
 
 If this last section belongs to Zechariah, it will be difficult to be- 
 lieve that chapters ix-xi belong to an earlier author, and have been 
 interpolated into the book of Zechariah 's prophecies. In the dis- 
 puted sections of these prophecies there is no mention of a king as 
 ruling over Judah; on the contrary, the reference is either to a 
 prince of Judah (chap, ix, 7), or to governors of Judah (chap. 
 x 5> 6 ); from which the probable inference is, that when the 
 prophecies were composed there was no king in Judah. 
 
 It has been objected that the style of the second part (chaps, 
 rx-xiv) is different from that of the first (chaps, i-viii). Symbols, it is 
 
 1 Einleitung, p. 559. 
 29
 
 444 INTRODUCTION TV* THE STUDY 
 
 true, are used in chaps, i-v, but not in chaps, vi, vii which shows 
 there is not uniformity in the first part. But from the very nature of 
 the case, we are not to expect the same kind of style in the first part, 
 Difference in * n wn ^ c ^ tne people ar ^ personally addressed, and in 
 ityie easily ao- the second, which is for the most part prophetic. The 
 prophet was a young man when he wrote the first part 
 (chap, ii, 4), but the latter portion may have been written at a late 
 period in life, when his style had greatly changed. 
 
 There are, indeed, certain peculiarities common to both the ac- 
 knowledged and the disputed parts of the book. The phrase 
 2KTO> -c;'0. from passing over and returning, is found both in chaps 
 
 vii, 14 and ix, 8. It occurs nowhere else, except in Ezek. xxxv, 7, 
 where it wants the mem (o), from. The eye, as the symbol of divine 
 providence, is used in chap, iv, 10 and chap, ix, i, "Jehovah's eye is 
 upon men, and upon all the tribes of Israel" (Gesenius). Not very 
 different is, " I have seen with my eyes " (chap, ix, 8), with reference 
 to Jehovah. In chap, ii, 10, " Sing and rejoice, O daughter of Zion," 
 occurs, and in chap, ix, 9 the very similar language, " Rejoice great- 
 ly, O daughter of Zion ! shout, O daughter of Jerusalem ! " is found. 
 
 The external evidence for the genuineness of the whole book is 
 Exceedingly strong. It is attributed to Zechariah in the Septuagmt 
 |nd in the Peshito-Syriac, as well as in the Hebrew Bible ; and it is 
 (trong external very difficult to see how these chapters (ix-xiv) could 
 have been attributed to Zechariah as the canon was 
 formed in the time of Ezra and Nehemiah if they had 
 not been written by him ; for it is probable that not more than 
 eighty years intervened between the time of the composition of 
 chapters i-ix and the formation of the canon; and as Zechariah 
 was a young man when he wrote these chapters (see chap, ii, 4), it 
 is likely that he lived until within x forty or fifty years of the time 
 when the collection was made. How, under such circumstances, 
 could prophecies written from one to three centuries earlier than the 
 time of Zechariah have been attributed to him? It would be the 
 patching of a piece of old cloth on a new garment. 
 
 Nor does the ancient tradition of the Jews give us the slightest 
 hint that a doubt had been raised respecting the genuineness of the 
 chapters now disputed. Respecting them Ftirst remarks : " The TaU 
 mudic period did not recognise these six chapters as different from 
 the first, although the peculiarity in language and turns of expres- 
 sion, and the absence of visions and symbols, clearly enough pointed 
 to it. On the contrary, the peculiarity of this part was described 
 as a prophecy delivered after the exile, referring to Messianic times. 
 Holding fast the conviction that also this part, in form and contents
 
 OF THE HOLY SCRIPTURES. 445 
 
 jo different, had proceeded from our Zechariah, they referred its 
 contents partly to the affairs of the Jews during the first rulers after 
 Alexander, and partly to a still later Messianic time, as the prophetic 
 foresight was never doubted. This Talmudic method of exposition 
 the better national expositors at that time followed." 1 
 
 CHARACTER OF THE PROPHECY. 
 
 This prophet, although charged by Schrader 9 with "a want of 
 originality of thought and freshness and power of diction," has 4 in 
 fact, a great deal of originality, both in his conceptions and manner 
 of representation. The last six chapters contain many Messianic 
 passages. The ancient rabbies complained of the obscurities of his 
 visions ; ' and it must be acknowledged that the complaint is not 
 without ground. "The language," however, "is formed upon good 
 classical models, and is almost free of Chaldaisms." 
 
 THE PROPHET MALACHI. 
 
 This is the last of the prophets of the Old Testament. Nothing 
 is known of him apart from his book of prophecies. The name 
 OxSo, Malachi, according to Gesenius, is apocopated from rfON^o, 
 
 T t - , . " .1 ' T -I ( - 
 
 " Messenger of Jehovah." In the LXX the book bears the title, 
 " MaAo^fac 1 ; " but in the text, instead of " by the hand of Malachi," 
 it is "by the hand of his angel" (or messenger). In the Peshito- 
 Syriac the inscription is, "The prophecy of Malachi the prophet," 
 an<I the name is retained in the first verse. In the Vulgate it stands, 
 " The prophecy of Malachi," and in the text the proper name is re- 
 tained, " by the hand of Malachi." In the Targum of Jonathan Ben- 
 Uzziel it is said, " by the hand of Malachi, by which name Ezra 
 the scribe is called." Accordingly, Jerome 4 remarks : "JThe_ He- 
 brews think that Malachi is Ezra the priest." On this prophet Furst * 
 remarks: "Tradition had related so little of his personality that at 
 one time he was identified with Mordecai, at another with Ezra; 
 nevertheless, the general judgment was that Malachi was not to be 
 taken as an appellation (or title), but as a proper name, . . . and 
 that he prophesied at the same time with Haggai and Zechariah in 
 the second year of the reign of Darius, B. C. 464." 
 
 There_is no reason to doubt that Malachi was the real name of 
 the prophet ; and this is the view, as Bleek observes, of by far" the 
 greater^ numb'er of expositors. It is true the book gives nothing 
 
 1 Ueber den Kanon, p. 45. De Wette Schrader, p. 476. 
 
 3 Furst, Ueber den Kanon, p. 43. 
 * Prologue to Malachi. Ueber c?en Kanon, p. 47.
 
 446 INTRODUCTION TO THE STUDY 
 
 but his bare name. But the same is also true of the prophecies of 
 Obadiah^and Habakkuk, whose books give us their names simply 
 But this^is no ground for doubting that they are real names. 
 
 The book may be divided into six ^ sections. The first (chapter 
 i, 2-5) declares God's love of Jacob and hatred of Esau. The second 
 (chaps, i, 6-ii, 9) censures the priests for their bad conduct. The 
 rt/r// (chap, ii, 10-16) rebukes those who separated themselves from 
 their Israelitish wives, and formed matrimonial alliances with heathen 
 women. The fourth (chaps, ii, i7~iii, 6) declares that God will send 
 the Messenger of the Covenant to purify the sons of Levi, and that 
 he himself will judge the wicked. The^f/M (chap, iii, 7-12) rebukes 
 the people for not bringing the tithes appointed by the law, and 
 promises them a blessing if they bring them. The sixth (chaps. 
 iii, i.3-iv, 6) rebukes the people for asserting that it is useless to 
 serve God, and declares that God will certainly reward the righteous 
 and punish the wicked, and exhorts the people to obey the law of 
 Moses. God promises to send Elijah the prophet to restore affec- 
 tion between parents and children, that the earth may not be cursed. 
 
 DATE OF COMPOSITION. 
 
 It_js evident from various passages (chaps, i, 7, 10; ii, 13 ; iii, 
 i , ip) that the temple was already rebuilt and divine worship estab - 
 lislred wheji the book was written. It is assigned by Schrader to 
 the interval between the first and second visit of Nehemiah to Jeru- 
 salem, between B. C. 433 and 424. It is placed in the time of Ne- 
 hemiah 's second visit by Vitringa, Eichhorn, Bertholdt, Rosenmiiller, 
 Hengstenberg, Havernick, and Keil. By Davidson it is referred 
 to the interval between B. C. 460 and B. C. 450. Ewald places it 
 shortly after the labours of Ezra. 
 
 The ancient common tradition of the Jews related that Malachi 
 was a contemporary of Zechariah and Haggai ; but there was also 
 an old tradition that he was the latest of the prophets, and that 
 when he prophesied the temple had been already for a long time re- 
 stored. With Malachi, Zechariah, and Haggai, it was held that the 
 prophetic spirit departed from Israel. 3 
 
 Bleek remarks : " It is probable that the book was written dur- 
 ing the governorship of a predecessor of Nehemiah. As, in all 
 probability, Nehemiah made the collection of the prophets, our book 
 can in no event fall in a later period; on the contrary, on account 
 
 1 De Wette and Hengstenberg divide it into tix sections ; Bleek into five ; Ewald. 
 Havernick, and Keil into three. 
 1 FQrst, Ueber den Kanon, pp. 47, 48.
 
 OF THE HOLY SCRIPTURES. 447 
 
 of its reception into the collection it is probable that it was com 
 posed somewhat earlier." 1 
 
 The principal reasons for referring the book to the age of Nehe 
 mialTafe the following': MaTachi censures the same abuses that Ne- 
 herniah does in his thirteenth chapter, in which he relates his admin- 
 istration of affairs on his second visit to Jerusalem (about B. C. 434). 
 The abuses consisted of neglect of payment of tithes for the support 
 of the priests and Levites (Mai. Hi, 8-10; Neh. xiii, 10-12); matri- 
 monial alliances of the Jews, especially of the priests, with foreign 
 women (Mai. ii, 10, n; Neh. xiii, 23-30), etc. As these abuses 
 were corrected by Nehemiah, B. C. 434, it seems best, upon the whole 
 to refer the composition of the book to about B. C. 440. 
 
 CHARACTER OF THE PROPHECY. 
 
 Malachi is distinguished by a practical spirit, that strives to meet 
 the wants of the times and to correct abuses rather than to soar aloft 
 in magnificent descriptions of the Divine Majesty and in glowing 
 pictures of the future. He abounds in dialogue, and is by no means 
 devoid of force. De Wette, notwithstanding his unfavourable re- 
 marks, acknowledges that " injlelivery, rhythm, _an_d images, Malacjii 
 does not quite unsuccessfully emulate the old prophets." 
 
 Einleittung, p. 567, * De Wette Schrader, p.
 
 443 INTRODUCTION .TO THE STUDY 
 
 INTRODUCTION TO THE BOOKS OF THE NEW TESTAMENT. 
 
 CHAPTER I 
 
 PRELIMINARY CONSIDERATIONS. 
 
 HPHE Old Testament, with its sublime Monotheism, was the posses 
 * sion of the Jewish people alone, whose mission it was to preserve 
 the knowledge of the true God in the midst of pagan darkness, to 
 announce through their prophets the advent of the Messiah, and to 
 prepare the way before him. The fundamental truths of Judaism are 
 eternal, and suited to man in all conditions, in all stages of devel- 
 opment, and in every part of the earth, while its civil and ceremonial 
 laws, being, to a large extent, of a local ' character, cannot be ob- 
 Jndaismneow- served among all nations ; and on this ground alone 
 sariiy local. Judaism can never become a universal religion.* For 
 this reason it was necessary that the system of Judaism should be 
 modified, enlarged, and adapted to the wants of all men. This was 
 done by our Lord Jesus Christ, the promised Messiah, who appeared 
 among the Jewish people in the fullness of time, and became the 
 author of a New Covenant, in the provisions of which all nations 
 are embraced. If our Saviour had been a legislator, in the strict 
 sense of the word, it would have been proper, and even necessary, 
 that he, like Moses, should have himself given to men a written sys- 
 tem. But our Lord's mission was to redeem men rather than to legis- 
 late for them ; in short, he was the beginning of a new moral crea- 
 tion the spiritual life of the world. 
 
 But, further, the system of Christianity was not completed until 
 Christ rose from the dead and ascended to heaven ; and before these 
 events the history could not be fully written. Our Saviour, for the 
 establishing of his divine mission and unfolding his system, selected 
 the apostles as the witnesses of his wondrous life, his death, resur- 
 
 'The precept in Exodus xxiii, 17, and especially in Deut. xvi, 16, "Three times 
 in a year shall all thy males appear before the Lord thy God in the place which he 
 (hall choose," cannot be observed by all men everywhere. 
 
 'Jews are found in almost every part of the world, but it is a well-known fact 
 Coat there are parts of the Mosaic system which they do not and cannot keep.
 
 OF THE HOLY SCRIPTURES. 449 
 
 rertion, and ascension to heaven. He trained them for their special 
 work ; filled them with the divine Spirit, which was to bring to their 
 remembrance all things which he had said; and endowed them with 
 miraculous powers to establish the truth of their teaching. 
 
 From the very nature of the revelation and history it was not 
 proper, or, humanly speaking, possible, for Christ himself to write the 
 system of his religion. Had all his moral precepts been written by 
 himself we would have a rigid form one possibly more complete in 
 some respects, but one which would impart no more life. In the his- 
 tory and teachings of Christ, as we possess them in the four Gos- 
 pels, moral precepts are often delivered in connexion with histor- 
 ical incidents, and are thus made clearer and more lifelike. 
 
 It is very evident that the account of the teaching and acts of 
 Christ,, though at first delivered orally, could not be writtenrecowto 
 
 transmitted to posterity in its integrity without being necessary for 
 
 , . the perpetua- 
 
 recorded in the apostolic age or soon afterward. Writ- tion of chris- 
 ten documents were necessary to the continued exist- tiaait y- 
 ence of Christianity as a divine revelation, and if we have sufficient 
 proof that the mission of Christ in the world was of divine appoint- 
 ment there is the highest probability, a priori, that God in his provi- 
 dence would provide for the transmission of the revelation to future 
 generations. 
 
 But, independently of these considerations, it is in the highest de- 
 gree probable that the appearance of such an extraordinary char- 
 acter as Christ, and the wide diffusion of his religion, would call 
 forth writers of his history at a very early period, especially in an 
 age of so much intellectual culture and literary activity. 
 
 We would also expect that there would be a history written of the 
 Acts of the Apostles after Christ left the world, and that the apostles 
 would write important letters upon various occasions. Accordingly 
 we are not surprised that we have so much history belonging to the 
 apostolic age, of the founding of Christianity by Christ and his apos- 
 tles, and so many apostolic epistles ; but we rather wonder that wt 
 have not more.
 
 4M) INTRODUCTION TO THh b'lUDY 
 
 CHAPTER II. 
 
 THE RAPID DIFFUSION OF CHRISTIANITY, AND THE NUM- 
 BER AND LITERARY CHARACTER OF THE EARLY CHRIS- 
 TIANS, AS BEARING UPON THE GENUINENESS OF THE 
 NEW TESTAMENT WRITINGS. 
 
 TT is very evident that the wider the diffusion of Christianity in the 
 apostolic age, and in the ages immediately succeeding the greater 
 the number of Christians, and the higher the culture of many of 
 them the stronger does their testimony become in favour of writings 
 universally admitted by them to be genuine. 
 
 The Roman historian Tacitus (born about A. D. 61) bears wit- 
 Testimony of ness to the fact that Christianity originated with Christ, 
 JreSnS *f was wi dely diffused, and had many converts. In de- 
 Christianity. scribing the burning of Rome which was attributed 
 to Nero in A. D. 64, he remarks that Nero, in order to put an 
 end to the rumour that he had himself set the city on fire, "ac- 
 cused and inflicted the severest punishments upon men whom, hated 
 on account of their crimes, the populace called Christians. The 
 author of this name was Christ, who in the reign of Tiberias was 
 put to death by Pontius Pilate, the procurator. The deadly super- 
 stition, checked for awhile, again broke forth not only through Judea, 
 the source of this evil, but through the city (Rome) also, where all 
 things wicked or shameful from every quarter meet and are prac- 
 tised. At first, therefore, those were arrested who acknowledged 
 (that they were of that sect) ; then, through their information, a vast 
 multitude were convicted, not so much on the charge of burning 
 (Rome), as of hatred of the human race." 1 
 
 The younger Pliny, who governed Bithynia, A. D. 111-113, a 
 
 Teatimonr of R man province near the Black Sea, not much less than 
 
 puny in hteiet- a thousand miles from Jerusalem, found the Christians 
 
 in great numbers in his province, concerning whom he 
 
 gives an account in his ninety-seventh Epistle, addressed to the 
 
 1 Auctor nominis ejus Christus, Tiberio imperitante per procuratorem Pentium Pi- 
 latum supplicio affectus erat: repressaque in praesens exitiabilis superstitio rursus 
 :rumpebat, non modo per Judaeam originem ejus mali, sed per urbemetiam, quocuncU 
 undique atrocia aut pudenda confluunt, celebranturque. Igitur primo correpti, qui 
 fatebantur, deinde, indicio eorum, multitudo ingens, haud perinde in crimine inceu- 
 dii, quam odio humani generis, convicti sunt. Annalium, lib. xv, cap. xliv.
 
 OF THE HOLY SCRIPTURES. 451 
 
 Emperor Trajan. The number of Christians in his province can be 
 inferred from the following language : " Many of every age, of every 
 rank, of both sexes also, are summoned, and will be summoned, to 
 trial. For not only through the cities, but also through the villages 
 and the fields, has the contagion of this superstition spread, which, 
 it seems, can be checked and corrected. It is, indeed, very evident 
 that the temples, which were almost entirely forsaken, begin to be 
 frequented, and the appointed rites, that had for a long time been 
 neglected, to be resumed, and victims everywhere are sold, of 
 which hitherto purchasers were rarely found." 1 The testimony of 
 these two heathen writers certainly shows that even in the apostolic 
 age, and in the time immediately subsequent, Christianity was pro- 
 fessed by multitudes in various parts of the Roman Empire. 
 
 From the Acts of the Apostles and their epistles it is evident that 
 in their age Christianity was very widely diffused and The 8pread ot 
 had many converts. In Acts iv, 4, not long after the Christianity as 
 
 c r r-1. *i. rv r 11 T noted ln the 
 
 crucifixion of Christ, the number of his followers in Je- Acts of the 
 rusalem is stated to be about five thousand. In Acts vi, 7 A P stles - 
 it is said that " the number of the disciples multiplied in Jerusalem 
 greatly ; and a great company of the priests were obedient to the 
 faith." In Acts xxi, 20 James says to Paul, "Thou seest, brother, 
 how many myriads of the Jews there are who believe." In the 
 apostolic age Churches were established " throughout all Judea, and 
 Galilee, and Samaria " (Acts ix, 31). Christians were also found in 
 Damascus, Antioch, the principal cities of Asia Minor, various cities 
 in Macedonia, at Corinth, and in Rome. The history of the planting 
 of the early Church is only partially recorded in the Acts. 
 
 Justin Martyr, about the middle of the second century, declares : 
 " There is not, indeed, a single race of men, either of Testimony ot 
 Barbarians or of Greeks, by whatever name they may be j[||jf "th^r 'fa! 
 called, whether dwellers in wagons, or who have no there, 
 houses, or who as nomads dwell in tents, among whom prayers and 
 thanksgivings are not offered to the Father and Creator of the uni- 
 verse in the name of the crucified Jesus." 1 Irenseus, bishop of 
 
 1 Multi enim omnis aetatis, omnis ordinis, utriusque sexus etiam, vocantur in per- 
 iculum, et vocabuntur. Neque enim civitates tantum, sed vicos etiam atque agros 
 perstitionis istius contagio pervagata est : quae videtur sisti et corrigi posse. Certe 
 satis constat, prope jam desolata templa coepisse celebrari, et sacra solennia diu in- 
 termissa repeti, passimque venire victimas, quarum adhuc rarissimus emptor invenie- 
 batur. Lib. x, Epistola xcvii. 
 
 * Ovdf ev yap 5?,uf earl TO ytvof av&punuv, tire /3ap(3dp<jv, SITE 'Efarjvuv, elre dnXuf 
 uriviovv bvdfian irpooayopevopevav, f) a[tao3luv y aoinuv Kahov/tevuv, y ev onevaif 
 v, O'MOVVTOV, ev bif (jtij 8ia rov bvofidTOs TOV OTavpu&EVTOf'lritjov EVXCU KOI b*> 
 TV Ilarpt /cat IX'Juyrjj ruv bXuv yti-ovrai. Dialogus cum Trypho., cap. 117.
 
 453 INTRODUCTION TO THE STUDY 
 
 Lyons (A. D. 177-202), speaks of Churches founded in Germany, in 
 Spain, among the Celts, in the East, in Egypt, in Libya, and in the 
 middle of the world ' (Judea). 
 
 Tertullian, presbyter of Carthage, about A. D 200, asks : " In 
 whom else have all nations believed but in Christ, who has already 
 come ? " He enumerates Parthians, Medes, Elamites, inhabitant? 
 of Mesopotamia, Armenia, Phrygia, Cappadocia, Pontus, Asia, Panv 
 phylia, Egypt, of Africa beyond Cyrene. and Rome. Also various 
 nations of the Getuli, many in the confines of the Moors and the 
 borders of Spain, various tribes of the Gauls, parts of the Britains 
 inaccessible to the Romans, portions of the Sarmatians, Dacians, 
 Germans, Scythians, and of many hostile races, and of many prov- 
 inces and islands unknown to the Romans, which could not be enu- 
 merated.* " If," says he, " we wished to act the part of open ene- 
 mies, not that of concealed avengers only, would we lack numbers 
 and forces ? " Again he says : " We are of yesterday, and we have 
 filled everything you have, your cities, your islands, citadels, free 
 towns, your courts of justice, your very camps, tribes, decades, the 
 palace, the senate, the forum ; we have left you your temples only. 
 We can count your armies; in one province the Christians will out- 
 number them." 4 
 
 In his book to Scapula, in speaking of the Christians, he asks : 
 " What will you do with so many thousands of human beings, so 
 many men and women, of every age, of every dignity, who present 
 themselves to you ? How many fires, how many swords, will you 
 need? What will Carthage herself suffer, decimated by you, when 
 each one will then recognise his own relations and his own com- 
 panions ? " * etc. In this same book he also says " Although we 
 compose so great a multitude of men, being almost the greater part 
 of each State, we pass our time in quietness and sobriety." ' That 
 the Christians were numerous in Northern Africa about A. D. 200 
 appears from the fact that at the synod held at that time by Agrip- 
 pinus, bishop of Carthage, seventy bisJwps were present from Africa 
 and Numidia.' 
 
 Bardesanes, a distinguished Christian scholar of Edessa, about 
 A. D. 160-170, exclaims, "What, then, shall we say respecting the 
 new race; of ourselves who are Christians, whom in everv country 
 
 Contra Haereses, lib. i, cap. x, sec. 2. f Adversus Judaeos, cap. vii. 
 
 * Apologeticus, cap. xxxvii. * Ibid. 
 
 Lib. Ad Scapulam, cap. v. * Ibid., cap. ii. 
 
 * Cyprian speaks of this council in Epist. Ixxi, and in others. The number of the 
 bishops is given by Augustine, De Unico Baptismo contra Petilianum, lib. unus, 
 cap. 13. The reference in Gieseler's History of the Church is wrong.
 
 OF THE HOLY SCRIPTURES. 453 
 
 and in every region the Messiah established at his coming ? " He 
 speaks of Christians in Judea, Gallia, Parthia, Media, Persia, and 
 among 'he Geli and Cashani. 1 Christianity was " established a* 
 Edessa as early as the middle of the second century." 5 Christians 
 were quite numerous in Northern Arabia in the middle of the third 
 century, and Churches were, doubtless, there established as early as 
 the second century. 8 
 
 In the middle of the third century there were in the city of Rome 
 *' forty-six presbyters, seven deacons, seven sub-deacons, forty-two 
 acolytes ; exorcists, readers, with the janitors, fifty-two ; widows, 
 with those in straitened circumstances, more than fifteen hundred, 
 all of whom the grace and goodness of God supports." * The mem- 
 bers are represented as " innumerable," and as having wealthy per- 
 sons among them. 6 The number of the Churches was probably 
 forty-six, which was the number of the presbyters, as each presbyter. 
 it seems, had charge of one single Church. 
 
 Origen, in his work against Celsus, written about A. D. 245, speaks 
 in various places of the great number of Christians in Testimony of 
 his time. He represents the gospel as " having con- ri s en - 
 quered all Greece, and the greater part of the Barbarians, and as 
 having brought over many myriads of souls to the worship of God 
 in the manner prescribed by it." ' 
 
 The number of the Christians in the Roman empire in the begin- 
 ning of the fourth century may be inferred from the let- other testi- 
 ter of Jovius Maximinus Agustus to Sabinus, in which ^pidtpreadof 
 he states : " Our emperors Diocletian and Maximian, Christianity. 
 our fathers, when they saw that almost all men, having abandoned the 
 worship of the gods, had united themselves to the nation of the Christians, 
 rightly ordained that all men who had departed from the worship of 
 the same immortal gods should be recalled to the worship of the gods 
 by manifest chastisement and punishment." 1 Arnobius, who wrote 
 about A. D. 300, represents the whole world as filled with the religion 
 of Christ* 
 
 About A. D. 324 Christianity became the State religion under 
 Constantine, and paganism gradually declined, and a hundred years 
 
 Cureton's Spicilegium Syriacum, Bardesan, p. 32. 
 Gieseler's Church History, vol. i, p. 118, Eng. Trans. 
 Eusebius, Hist. Eccles., lib. vi, 33, 37. 
 
 ' In the letter of Cornelius, bishop of Rome, to Fabius, bishop of Antioch, in Eu- 
 ebius' Hist. Eccles., lib. vi, cap. 43. * Ibid. 
 
 ndtn?f (ikv 'EAAddof km. irAefov dc 1% fiappapov knparriae, KOI /Aertirolijae (tvptaf 
 *af V^d f. r. X. Lib. i, 27. T In Eusebius, Hist Eccles., lib. ix, 9. 
 
 s Unde tarn brevi tempore totus mundus ista religione completus est. . . . ? Ad- 
 versus Gentes, lib. i, cap. 55.
 
 454 INTRODUCTION TO THE STUDY 
 
 later had almost disappeared. Gibbon estimates the population of 
 the Roman empire to have been one hundred and twenty millions in 
 the age of Claudius Caesar. 1 Merivale computes it to have been 
 eighty-five millions in the reign of Augustus.* The fact that pagan- 
 ism was extirpated without any great difficulty after the time of Con- 
 stantine is a strong proof that great multitudes of Christians must 
 have been found in most parts of the empire; and it is not improb- 
 able that the Christian population was nearly one half that of the 
 whole empire just before Christianity was made the religion of the 
 State by Constantine. 
 
 In respect to the literary character of the Christians of \hzfirst 
 uterary profl- three centuries, it is to be observed that in no age, how- 
 earty T cnri^ ever cultivated, are the masses of the people highly edu- 
 uims. cated. But the very fact that very many of the early 
 
 Christians had been brought up in heathenism, and abandoned it for 
 the new faith in opposition to all their former prejudices and in the 
 very face of so many temporal disadvantages, is a strong proof of 
 their intelligence and strength of mind, as well as of their piety. 
 
 Merivale well observes that Paul's " converts were among the 
 wise and prudent, as well as among the impulsive and devout. I 
 reject, then, the notion, too hastily assumed, too readily accepted 
 from a mistaken apprehension of the real dignity of the gospel, that 
 the first preaching of the faith was addressed to the lowest, mean- 
 est, and least intelligent the outcasts and proletaries of society. 
 Many reasons, I am convinced, might be alleged for concluding that 
 it was much the reverse. As regards the Christian Church at Rome 
 at least the direct statements of the apostle himself, the evidence of 
 existing monuments of antiquity, inferences of no little strength 
 from the records of secular history, and inferences not lightly to be 
 rejected from the language and sentiments of contemporary heathen, 
 all tend to assure us that it embraced some devoted members, and 
 attracted many anxious inquirers, amidst the palaces of the nobles, 
 and even in Caesar's household." 1 
 
 From the very beginning Christianity made a conquest of a con. 
 siderable number of learned men and philosophers, who adorned 
 the annals. of the early Church by their talents and learning. Quad- 
 Literary com- ratus and Aristides, learned Christians of Athens, pre- 
 Joto! sented apologies of their faith to the Emperor Hadri- 
 an, A. D. 126. Agrippa Castor, a very learned man, 
 wrote an able refutation of Basilides about A. D. 135. In the 
 
 1 Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire, vol. i, p. 53. 
 
 1 History of the Romans under the Empire, vol. iv, p. 343. 
 
 * Conversion of the Roman Empire, Lecture iv, pp. too, 101.
 
 OF THE HOLY SCRIPTURES. 455 
 
 first part of this century must be placed the remarkable Epistle to 
 Dbgnetus, one of the finest productions of early Christianity. To 
 the first half of the second century belong the Expositions of the 
 Oracles of the Lord, by Papias, bishop of Hierapolis. Here be- 
 longs Justin Martyr, a distinguished writer, who had been a heathen 
 philosopher. He wrote his first Defence of Christianity about A. D. 
 139; the Second Apology, his Dialogue with Trypho the Jew, and 
 other works, at a later period. Hegesippus, about A. D. 170, wrote 
 five books of Ecclesiastical Events. Athenagoras, a Greek philos- 
 opher, about A. D. 170, wrote a Defence of the Christians (rrpsafleia 
 nepl -&v Xpmavwv), and a work on the Resurrection of the Dead. 
 About the same time Tatian, the Assyrian, a disciple of Justin Mar- 
 tyr, wrote an Oration against the Greeks and a Harmony of the 
 Four Gospels. About 160-170 Bardesanes, a very learned Christian 
 of Edessa, wrote voluminous works. 
 
 Melito, bishop of Sardis, and Apollinaris, bishop of Hierapolis, 
 about A. D. 1 70, were the authors of many works in vindi- other e&rl 
 cation or explanation of Christianity. Theophilus, bishop Christian writ- 
 of Antioch (A. D. 169181 or 183), was the author of a 
 work in three books addressed to Autolycus, a heathen, in defence of 
 Christianity, "in which," to use the language of Neander, "he dis- 
 plays great erudition and power of thought." He also wrote other 
 works. Philip, bishop of Gortyna, in Crete, and Modestus (161-192) 
 wrote against Marcion. Apollonius, a senator of Rome in the reign 
 of Commodus (A. D. 180-192), gave the senate an account of his faith 
 in a remarkable volume. Irenaeus, bishop of Lyons (A. D. 177-202), 
 was a man of learning and ability. He wrote five books against 
 Haereses, besides other works. 
 
 In the last half of the second century we find at Alexandria, in 
 Egypt, Pantasnus, a Stoic philosopher, the first eminent teacher of 
 the catechetic school of that city, and the author of many commen- 
 taries on the Holy Scriptures; and Titus Flavius Clemens, president 
 of the catechetic school (about A. D. 191-202), the author of several 
 important works on Christianity. In the latter part of the second, 
 and in the first part of the third, century, there flourished at Carthage 
 Tertullian, a voluminous Christian writer, a man of great learning, 
 eloquence, and profundity. In the middle of the third century 
 there lived in the same city the distinguished Christian, Cyprian, 
 who wrote many small works. 
 
 In Palestine (about A. D. 230), we find Julius Africanus, the first 
 Christian chronographer. In the latter part of the second, or begin- 
 ning of the third, century, Minucius Felix, a distinguished Roman 
 advocate, wrote a dialogue between a Christian and a. heathen, in
 
 456 INTRODUCTION TO THE STUDY 
 
 which he defends Christianity with great spirit. In the first half ol 
 the third century flourished Hippolytus, 1 the author of many works 
 on Christianity. To this period belongs the greatest philosopher, 
 and one of the greatest scholars, of the ancient Church, the profound 
 Origen, born about A. D. 185, died A. D. 254. He wrote numer- 
 ous works on the Scriptures and on theology. Among the learned 
 Christian writers of this period may be named Dionysius, bishop of 
 Alexandria about the middle of the third century; Methodius, in 
 the last half of this century, in Western Asia ; and Gregory, bishop 
 of Neo-Caesarea, about the middle of the century. 
 
 Arnobius, of Sicca, in Northern Africa about A. D. 300 wrote a 
 writers of the work in seven books against the Gentiles, in which he 
 fourth century, displays great acuteness, elegance, and power. About 
 the same time the eloquent Lactantius wrote, in Nicomedia, his 
 work on Christianity. About the beginning of the fourth century 
 Pamphilus, presbyter of Caesarea, in Palestine, founded in that 
 city a valuable public library, chiefly of ecclesiastical authors, and 
 was himself a writer. In the first forty years of the fourth century 
 flourished Eusebius, the father of ecclesiastical history, and bishop 
 of Caesarea, in Palestine. He was a man of immense erudition, and 
 the author of numerous works.. 
 
 It is not necessary to name any of the later fathers of the Church 
 or other writers of the first three centuries, or to mention the distin- 
 guished learned men who wrote little or nothing. In every age 
 the number of writers is small in comparison with the number of 
 learned men who publish nothing. They are deterred from writing 
 by diffidence, by the dislike of the manual labor necessary, and by 
 other causes. Who can doubt that there were many learned men in 
 the first three centuries of the Church, of whom we know nothing? 
 Arnobius (about A. D. 300) speaks of men of great genius who had 
 embraced the Christian faith orators, grammarians, rhetoricians, 
 lawyers, physicians, and philosophers." 
 
 Who can doubt the ability of such men as composed the ancient 
 Church to distinguish and transmit to posterity the genuine writings 
 of the apostles and their companions ? 
 
 Probably bishop of Portus Romanus, near the mouth of the Tiber. 
 * Quod tarn magnis ingeniis praediti oratores, grammatici, rhetores, consult! jurii 
 ac medici, philosophise etiam secreta rimantes, magisteria haec expetnnt spretis qui- 
 bus panlo ante fidebant ? Adversus Gentes lib. ii. cap. v.
 
 OF THE HOLY SCRIPTURES. 4o7 
 
 CHAPTER III. 
 
 THE DIFFUSION OF THE GREEK LANGUAGE IN THE RO- 
 MAN EMPIRE AT THE CHRISTIAN EPOCH. 
 
 A S the books of the New Testament are written in the Greek l 
 *~^ language, it is an interesting question, To what extent was this 
 language used in the Roman empire at the time of Christ ? 
 
 The wide diffusion of the Greek language as early as B. C. 61, 
 appears from a passage of Cicero's Oration for the Poet Diffusion of 
 
 Archias, written at that time. " For if any one supposes." the Gre ? k l ~ 
 
 rr guage In the 
 
 says he, "that less fame is derived from verses written times of cicero 
 in Greek than from those in Latin, he is greatly mistaken ; and Juvenal - 
 because Greek a literature is read in nearly all nations Latin literature 
 is confined within its own limits, certainly narrow." 
 
 The celebrated Roman satirist, Juvenal, contemporary with the 
 apostles, thus expresses himself respecting the Greek language : 
 " Every thing is done in Greek. In this language they fear ; in this 
 they pour forth their wrath, their joys, their sorrows ; in this, all the 
 secrets of their breasts." ' 
 
 Various causes conspired to spread widely the Greek language. 
 Greece at a very early period planted colonies in South- Meansbywhich 
 ern Italy and in Southern Gaul, in the islands of the J^a^btcame 
 ^Egean Sea, on the shores of the Black Sea, and in vari- widely spread. 
 ous parts of Asia Minor. At a later period the conquests of Alex- 
 ander the Great in Asia and in Africa (B. C. 334-323) disseminated 
 widely the Greek language and literature. Plutarch remarks, that 
 "he founded above seventy cities among the barbarous people, and 
 sowed Asia with Greek troops." He also founded Alexandria in 
 Egypt, which became a famous seat of Greek learning. Seleucus, 
 a successor of Alexander, in his extensive empire in Central and 
 Western Asia, followed Alexander's policy in Hellenizing his domain. 
 " We find him founding, in almost every province, Greek or Mace- 
 
 1 The Gospel of Matthew has been generally supposed to have been originally 
 written in Hebrew. 
 
 'Quod Gneca leguntur in omnibus fere gentibus, Latina sui? inibus, exiguis sane, 
 continentur. 
 
 'Omnia Grsece. 
 
 Hoc sermone pavent, hoc iram, gaudia, causas, 
 Hoc cuncta affundunt, animi secreta. Sat. vi, 186-180,
 
 458 INTRODUCTION TO THE STUDY 
 
 donian colonies, which became so many centres of civilisation and 
 refinement." The splendid productions of the Grecian intellect in 
 the ages of Pericles, Plato, and Demosthenes, carried with them the 
 Greek language to the most distant lands. Young men from all sec- 
 tions of the world resorted to Athens to study her literature and her 
 philosophy, and, on returning home, brought with them the language 
 and letters of that intellectual metropolis. 
 
 " It is a just though trite observation," says Gibbon, " that victo- 
 nous Rome was herself subdued by the arts of Greece. Those 
 immortal writers, who still command the admiration of modern 
 Europe, soon became the favourite object of study and imitation 
 in Italy and the western provinces." ' The prevailing language in 
 Palestine in the time of Christ was Aramaean, sometimes called 
 Syro-Chaldee, but it was in fact Chaldee rather than Syriac,* the 
 Hebrew having ceased to be a living language a century or more 
 before that epoch. 
 
 Nevertheless, the Greek language appears to have made consider- 
 able progress in some parts, at least, of the Holy Land, about the 
 time of Christ. Josephus speaks of Gaza, Gadara, and Hippus as 
 Greek cities.* He calls Caesarea the largest city of Judea, and rep- 
 resents it as inhabited principally by Greeks. 4 Dora, on the sea- 
 coast south of Carmel, was inhabited chiefly by Greeks. 6 It appears 
 from Acts vi, 9 that the Libertini, Alexandrians, and other foreigners, 
 had synagogues in Jerusalem ; and it is quite certain that they used 
 the Greek language, at least those from Alexandria and Cyrene. 
 
 It cannot be inferred from Acts xxi, 39-xxii, 2 that the crowd in 
 Jerusalem could have understood St. Paul if he had addressed them 
 in Greek instead of Hebrew. They had expected an address in 
 Greek, which the larger portion of them would not understand, but 
 when they heard him using the Hebrew tongue, which they could 
 understand, " they kept the more silence." Josephus, in describing 
 the efforts made by Titus to induce the Jews to surrender after he 
 
 1 Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire, vol. i, 46. 
 
 ' The translation of the five books of Moses by Onkelos, and that of the propheti 
 by Jonathan Ben-Uzziel, into Chaldee (Targums), for the use of the Jews in Pales- 
 tine, about the time of Christ, shows that this was the common language. And we 
 find in the New Testament several Chaldee expressions, indicating the general use of 
 that language in Palestine. In the garden of Gethsemane Christ says, Abba (o/3/3. 
 Chaldee. 2, abba). Father (Mark xiv, 36). On a different occasion, Talitha 
 cwni (TaXttfo natp, Chaldee, or, perhaps, Syriac, "Wp fittl^p), Maid, Arise (Mark 
 v, 41). Again. Ephphatha (Aramaean, from ntlB), (Mark vii, 34). Golgotha (Chal- 
 dee, !{l!.3ia), (Matt, xxvii, 33). Aceldama (Chaldee, KJJH ^pH), (Acts i, 19). Mas 
 tn-atha (Chaldee, StflH ^Q), (i Cor. xvi, 22). 
 
 'Antiq., xvii, n, 4. *Wars, iii, 9, i. 'Antiq., xix, 6, 3.
 
 OF THE HOLY SCRIPTURES. 459 
 
 had brought the standards into the sacred enclosure belonging to the 
 temple, remarks : " Titus, having stationed the interpreter near him, 
 which (or what), indeed, was a sign of his being victor, first began to 
 speak." 1 
 
 As the writings of the New Testament were intended for a world- 
 wide circulation, it was proper that the books should be written in 
 that language which was the most widely diffused, and at the same 
 time was the richest and most philosophical of human tongues. Yet 
 as Christianity was first proposed to the Jewish people, there is noth- 
 ing improbable in the supposition that one or more of its writings 
 might have been originally composed in their vernacular. Whether 
 or not this was really the case must be determined by evidence, the 
 consideration of which belongs to another part of our subject. 
 
 CHAPTER IV. 
 
 THE CHARACTER OF THE GREEK OF THE NEW TESTAMENT. 
 
 rO obtain a clear view of this subject, it is proper to consider the 
 most important dialects of the Greek language, the countries in 
 which they were spoken, and the elements that entered Importantdla . 
 into the formation of the language in which the New lects or the 
 Testament was written. The most ancient dialect of Greekton & ue - 
 the Greek with which we are acquainted is the Ionic, the language 
 of the earlier inhabitants of Attica, who were called lonians. They 
 spread over the northern parts of the Peloponnesus, occupied the 
 Cyclades, and colonized a portion of Asia Minor. Homer and 
 Hesiod are the earliest representatives of this dialect. In the fifth 
 century before Christ Herodotus and Hippocrates wrote in it. The 
 Doric dialect was used in the Peloponnesus, and in the Dorian col- 
 onies in Asia Minor, Italy, and Sicily. The great lyric poet Pindar 
 wrote in it about B. C. 500. The ^Eolic prevailed in Boeotia, Thes- 
 saly, and in the ^olian colonies in Asia Minor. In this dialect the 
 lyrical poetess Sappho wrote, about B. C. 600. 
 
 As Athens was the great centre of political power and attraction 
 during a great part of the fifth century before Christ, " all the dia- 
 lects met there, and the Athenians culled from each of them such 
 fcrms and expressions as were calculated to add strength and ele- 
 gance to their own Ionic idiom. This confluence of dialects pro- 
 
 1 Ttrof . . . rov tppiivea rrapaaramftevuf, bnep r/v TeKprjpiov rov uparelv irpurof fjp!;- 
 aro \iyeiv. Wars, lib. vi, 6, 2. This clearly shows that Titus spoke to the Jevrs bt 
 an interpreter, and that the mass did not understand Greek. 
 30
 
 400 INTRODUCTION TO THE STUDY 
 
 duced the Attic dialect, technically so called. In point of develop- 
 ment and richness of literature this stood at the head of all the Greek 
 dialects. The natural consequence of such pre-eminence was, that 
 Greeks from all the tribes repaired to Athens to obtain a finished 
 education. . . . Now persons from whatever part of Greece, edu- 
 cated at Athens, would by preference use the dialect of Athens 
 And it is not difficult to understand that their example would natu- 
 rally be followed by their kinsmen, pupils, friends, and dependents." ' 
 
 In the Attic dialect wrote the great philosophers Plato and Ans- 
 totle ; the historians Thucydides and Xenophon ; the tragic writers 
 ^Eschylus, Sophocles, and Euripides ; the comic writer Aristoph- 
 anes ; the orator Demosthenes, and various others, who flourished 
 in the fifth and fourth centuries before Christ, and have made that 
 period of Grecian history forever illustrious. The great writers in this 
 dialect spread it far and wide, and gave it the mastery over the others. 
 "After the freedom of the Greeks had been destroyed by Philip, king 
 of Macedon, the Attic dialect came to be the common written language. 
 As it extended not only over all Greece, but also over the Macedonian 
 provinces of Syria and Egypt, it lost much of its peculiar stamp by 
 the introduction of foreign forms and words, and it then received the 
 name of the common, or Hellenic, language, T\ KOIVT), or 'EAA,?/vt7/ did- 
 teitTos. It was used, e. g., by Apollodorus, Diodorus, and Plutarch." ' 
 
 It appears that the language of the Athenians could be generally 
 understood by the Macedonians, and as the latter had no literature, 
 the colonies founded by Alexander and his successors naturally re- 
 ceived their literature from Athens; and thus the Attic dialect, used 
 so extensively, assumed before the time of Christ the form called 
 "common." 
 
 This common Greek, when used by the Jews, assumed the form 
 characteristic! ca ^ ec ^ Hellenistic, from the name Hellenists, given to 
 Df Hellenistic those Jews who spoke that language (Acts vi, i). It 
 abounds more or less in Hebrew and Aramaean idioms, 
 and in words used in new senses from the fact that they are em- 
 ployed to express new ideas. In this idiom the Septuagint and the 
 apocryphal books of the Old Testament are written, and // is the 
 vehicle which the writers * of the New Testament used wherewith to f /' 
 a permanent form to the great truths revealed in the gospel. 
 
 1 Sophocles, in the Introduction to his Lexicon of the Greek of the Raman and 
 Byzantine Period. Boston, 1870. 
 
 * Kuhner, Dialects of the Greek Language, in his Grammar, p. 14. 
 
 ' Matthew's Gospel, according to the ancients, was originally written in Hebrew 
 (or, rather, Aramaean). Some have thought that the Epistle to the Hebrews was 
 orirrinnllv written in the same language.
 
 OF THE HOLY SCRIPTURES. 461 
 
 As the Greek language was of heathen growth, it sometimes lacked 
 words wherewith to express clearly the ideas of the Christian reve- 
 lation. Hence the New Testament writers were compelled to give 
 to some of the words of the language novel meanings. It is true 
 that the translators of the Old Testament had already led the way 
 by rendering into Greek the moral and religious truths of the Old 
 Covenant. But their vocabulary was not extensive enough to express 
 cijarly and appropriately all the truths of the New. 
 
 That the writers of the New Testament should, to a considerable 
 extent, use Hebrew and Aramaean modes of thought and expression 
 was to be expected, from the fact that all of them, except Luke, had 
 had a Hebrew education ; and although his education may have been 
 originally Greek, yet his study of the Old Testament, and his inti- 
 macy with Hebrews, would be likely to impart something of a Ht 
 brew cast even to his mode of writing. 
 
 As examples of Hebraisms or Aramseisms may be named, Aa/tt- 
 
 Bdveiv TrpoffWTTov, from the Hebrew D'JD Nth, to accept one's 
 
 T T Examples ol 
 
 person; (fyreiv tyvxfiv, from t?3J t?p3, to seek one's life; o0e- New Testament 
 
 , , v T 'i . Hebraisms. 
 
 M\\ia. afasvai, to forgive sin (debt), from the Aramaean 
 
 join p3jy, to release, or forgive debt or sin (so the Targum of Onkelos 
 on Gen. iv, 13) ; yeveadai davdrov, to taste death, to die, from the Ara- 
 maean 3JT'3 D>'0, to taste death, to die (Targum of Jerusalem on Deut. 
 xxxii, i ) ; noietv eteog \ivra, nvog, to sho^t> compassion or kindness to any 
 one, from the Hebrew oj ion nc?; T ; aprov 0ayetv, to take a meal, from 
 the Hebrew on 1 ? SDN; alfia K%eeiv, to pour forth blood, to kill, from 
 m ;|3&y, to shed blood, etc. 
 
 The New Testament writers also imitated the Hebrew in the use 
 of the preposition iv, in, for 3 (beth), with, in, etc., in many instances 
 in which the proper rendering is with. As the Hebrew language is 
 simpler in its structure than the Greek, co-ordinating rather than 
 subordinating its sentences, and uses but few partic T es, we find that 
 in these points the sacred writers have a/so imitated the Hebrew.
 
 4G2 INTRODUCTION TO THE STUDY 
 
 CHAPTER V. 
 
 ANCIENT GREEK MANUSCRIPTS OF THE NEW TESTAMENT. 
 
 r pHE autographs of the New Testament writers appear to have 
 1 perished at quite an early period. Whether any of them 
 reached the third century, is very doubtful. Tertullian, indeed 
 (about A. D. 200), appeals against heretics to the autographs of 
 Paul's Epistles as still existing in different Churches. 1 But as 1 er- 
 tullian wrote at Carthage, the value of his testimony respecting 
 autographs in European and Asiatic Churches is not very great; 
 yet there is nothing improbable in the statement. 
 
 In the Apostolic Age the most common writing material was the 
 Egyptian papyrus, although parchment was also in use. John, in 
 his Second Epistle, speaks of writing with paper (dta xdprov) (ver 
 1 2), and Paul directs Timothy to bring with him the books (rd 
 properly paper books), but especially the parchments (r 
 skins, parchments). 2 Tim. iv, 13. It is natural to suppose that short 
 epistles would be written upon papyrus, and large and very important 
 works on parchments. Which of these materials was most used by 
 the New Testament writers cannot be determined. Numerous 
 copies of the original manuscripts were very soon made and spread 
 over the Christian world, and the frequent handling and copying of 
 these manuscripts, especially if they were of papyrus, must have 
 contributed to their destruction. 
 
 The Emperor Constantine soon after A. D. 330 gave directions 
 to Eusebius to have fifty copies of the Divine Scriptures executed 
 upon skins in the highest style of the calligraphic art for the use of 
 the Churches in Constantinople." After this period it appears to 
 have been quite common to use parchment in copying the Holy 
 Scriptures. 
 
 " In the fourth century," says Tischendorf, " the more durable 
 parchment was preferred to the papyrus, and of such writings [of 
 *he New Testament] on parchments, executed in the fourth, fifth, 
 and sixth centuries, we possess, though mostly of small compass, 
 still more than twenty, to which some thirty belonging to the seventh, 
 
 1 " Run over the Apostolic Churches in which still the chairs themselves of the 
 Apostles preside in their places, in which their vety original letters are read," etc. 
 Lib. De Praescrip., cap xxxvi. 
 
 1 De Vita Constantini, lib. iv, cap. xxxvi. /
 
 OF THE HOLY SCRIPTURES. 463 
 
 eighth, and ninth centuries, are to be added." He also adds : 
 " The entire Greek Literature, which consists of so many hundred 
 works, has not by far the tenth part of the manuscripts of the highest 
 antiquity to exhibit, which the Greek New Testament alone pos- 
 sesses." l 
 
 The oldest manuscripts of the new Testament are written in 
 uncial letters (from uncia, an inch], which for the most part are 
 Greek capitals. There is nothing to indicate the beginning or end 
 of a word. 
 
 The uncial letters were employed until the ninth century, when 
 they were gradually changed into the cursive letters which were 
 commonly in use in the tenth century. The first manuscript in 
 cursive letters with which we are acquainted was written A. D. 890. " 
 Scrivener gives catalogues of sixty-one uncial and six hundred 
 and forty-two cursive MSS. of the Gospels; fourteen uncial and 
 two hundred and fifty-two cursive of the Acts and Catholic Epis- 
 tles; twenty-two uncial and two hundred and ninety-five cursive 
 of Paul's epistles ; five uncial and one hundred and eleven cursive 
 of the Apocalypse ; three hundred and thirty-nine Evangelistaria. 
 and eighty-two Lectionaries of the Praxapostolos. 3 
 
 Dean Burgon sent Scrivener (July, 1883) a catalogue "of about 
 three hundred additional MSS. of the New Testament or portions 
 thereof deposited in European libraries, but hitherto unknown to 
 scholars, which must hereafter be examined and collated by com- 
 petent persons." 4 It must be borne in mind that Latin versions 
 of the New Testament were almost exclusively used in Western 
 Europe from the early centuries of Christianity, which explains 
 the fact that we have not a still greater number of Greek manu- 
 scripts. 
 
 Of the UNCIAL manuscripts we name, as most important : 
 
 CODEX SINAITICUS (&*). 
 
 This important Codex, containing the entire New Testament, a 
 part of the Old, the complete epistle of Barnabas in Greek, and a 
 part of the Hermse Pastor, was discovered in the convent of St. 
 Catharine, on Mount Sinai, in February, 1859, by Tischendorf. 
 
 In 1862 Tischendorf published a magnificent fac-simile edition 
 of this Codex in four volumes, from type made for the special pur- 
 
 1 Haben Wir den achten Schriftext cler Evangelisten und Apostel ? p. 9. Leip- 
 zig, 1873. 
 
 a Hug, Einleitung, Erst. Theil., 4te Aufl., p. 212. 
 
 8 Introd. Crit. New Test., p. 307, 3d ed., 1883. 4 Ibid., pp. ix, x.
 
 464 INTRODUCTION TO THE STUDY 
 
 pose. The Codex is written on fine parchment with four columns 
 on a page, without division of word, accents, or breathings. It 
 contains the sections of Ammonius and the canons of Eusebius. 1 
 Tischendorf brings cogent reasons for referring it to tfie middle of 
 the fourth century. And Tregelles remarks: "It appears undoubt, 
 edly to belong to the fourth century." It is now in St. Petersburg, 
 the property of the Emperor of Russia. 
 
 In 1863 Tischendorf published the New Testament portion of the 
 manuscript, line for line and page for page, and in 1865 there was 
 published in Leipzig, by Brockhaus, " Novum Testamentum Graecae 
 ex Sinaitico Codice," etc., with Prolegomena by Tischendorf. 
 
 As the first letters of the Roman Alphabet had been already ap- 
 propriated to the oldest codices of the New Testament, Tischen- 
 dorf designates this Codex by the first letter of the Hebrew al- 
 phabet, Aleph (). 
 
 CODEX ALEXANDRINUS (A). 
 
 This celebrated Codex, now found in the British Museum, was 
 once in possession of Cyril Lucar, at one time Patriarch of Alexan- 
 dria, and afterwards of Constantinople, and was presented by him 
 to Charles I., in 1629. 
 
 "The portion containing the New Testament is a volume meas- 
 uring somewhat more than ten inches wide and fourteen inches 
 high. The material is thin, fine, and very beautiful vellum, often 
 discolored at the edges, which have been injured by time, but more by 
 the ignorance or carelessness of the modern binder, who has not always 
 spared the text, especially at the upper-inner margin. The manu- 
 script is written in a light and elegant hand in uncial letters. These 
 letters at the end of a line are often very small, and much of the 
 writing is very pale and faint ; each page contains two columns of 
 text. In the margins, to the left hand, the Eusebian canons are 
 noted throughout the four Gospels, as well as the larger sections 
 into which these books were anciently divided." f There is no reg- 
 ular division of words. 
 
 From the commencement of the volume, about twenty leaves are 
 wanting, so that of Matthew's Gospel we have only what follows 
 xxv, 6. In the Gospel of John two leaves are missing, which con- 
 tained the text from vi, 50 to viii, 52. From the Second Epistle 
 to the Corinthians, three leaves are absent, leaving a hiatus from 
 chap, iv, 13 to xii, 7. All the rest of the New Testament is quite 
 ent're. The Codex is referred by Tischendorf to the last part of 
 
 1 Tischendorf is positive that they are not from the original scribe. 
 * Cowper's edition of the Cod. Alex. Introduction.
 
 OF THE HOLY SCRIPTURES. 46* 
 
 century, and by Tregelles to the middle of the fifth century 
 or a little later. 
 
 The New Testament portion of the Codex was published in fac- 
 simile by C. G. Woide, in 1786, in folio, accompanied with admi- 
 rable prologomena and notes. In 1860 B. H. Covvper published a 
 beautiful edition of the New Testament from this Codex. The 
 trustees of the British Museum have ordered the publication of 
 a facsimile of this Codex, of which two volumes in folio have al- 
 ready appeared. 
 
 CODEX VAT1CANUS (B). 
 
 This Codex, so called from the celebrated Vatican Library at 
 Rome, where it is found, contains all the New Testament, with the 
 exception of Heb. ix, i^-xiii, the Epistles to Philemon, the Pastoral 
 Epistles, and the Apocalypse. It is a quarto volume of one hun- 
 dred and forty-six leaves, bound in red morocco, ten and a half 
 inches high, ten broad, and four and a half thick. It is written on 
 fine thin vellum, with three columns on a page. There is no space 
 left between the words, but all the letters in a line have the appear- 
 ance of forming a single word. 
 
 Hug refers the Codex to the first part of the fourth century.' 
 Tischendorf refers it to the fourth century, and remarks : " It 
 scarcly differs in age from the Codex Sinaiticus." 
 
 Cardinal Mai published an edition of this manuscript in 1857 and 
 in 1859; the second edition is an improvement on the first. In 
 1867 Tischendorf published, at Leipsic, a new quarto edition of this 
 famous Codex, in which he corrected more than 400 errors of the 
 editions of Cardinal Mai. 
 
 CODEX EPHRAEMI RESCRIPTUS (C). 
 
 This manuscript, found at present in the Imperial Library of 
 Paris, " is a most valuable palimpsest containing portions of the 
 Septuagint version of the Old Testament on 64 leaves, and frag- 
 ments of every part of the New on 143 leaves, amounting on the 
 whole to less than two thirds of the volume. . . . The ancient 
 writing is barely legible, having been almost removed about the 
 twelfth century to receive some Greek works of St. Ephraem, tlu 
 Great Syrian Father." 1 It is written on vellum with one column on 
 
 1 The manuscript breaks off in the midst of this verse. The manuscript, how- 
 ever, contains the rest of the New Testament by a later hand. 
 
 2 Einleitung, Erst. Thiel., 4te Auf., p. 238. 
 
 3 Scrivener, pp. 117, 118, 36 ed., 1883.
 
 4Q6 INTRODUCTION TO THE STUDY 
 
 a page. Tischendorf ascribes it to about the middle of the fifth cen- 
 tury. He published in 1 843 a facsimile edition of the New Testament 
 portion. 
 
 CODEX BEZAE GRAECO-LAT1NUS (Z>). 
 
 This Codex is now found in the University Library at Cambridge, 
 England. It was presented to the university in 1581 by Theodore 
 Beza. It is a quarto volume, in vellum, 10 inches high by 8 broad, 
 containing 414 leaves, with one column on a page, the Greek text 
 and its Latin version being parallel. There are on every page 33 
 lines of unequal length called ori%oi, being the earliest manuscript 
 thus written. 1 
 
 The following is a specimen of its lines (ari^oi) translated into 
 
 English : 
 
 Then shall the kingdom of heaven be likened unto 
 
 Ten virgins, who, taking 
 
 Their lamps, 
 
 Went forth to meet the bridegroom 
 
 And the bride (Matt, xxv, i). 
 
 This Codex contains * the Gospels and the Acts of the Apostles. It 
 is assigned by Tischendorf to about the middle of the sixth century. 
 To this century Tregelles also ascribes it, and remarks, it " is of 
 great value, in spite of its peculiarities and interpolations." It 
 was edited by Kipling in 1793, and more recently with great care 
 by Scrivener. 
 
 CODEX CLAROMONTANUS (D). 
 
 This Codex is now found in the National Library at Paris. "It 
 belongs," says Tregelles, "apparently to the sixth century: it .con- 
 tains all the fourteen Pauline Epistles in Greek and Latin." 
 
 CODEX LAUDIANUS (E). 
 
 This Codex contains the Acts of the Apostles in Latin and Greek. 
 It is referred by Tischendorf to the last part of the sixth century, 
 and Tregelles thinks it probably belongs to that century. It is 
 found in Oxford. 
 
 CODEX ROSSANENSIS. 
 
 This Codex contains the Gospel of Matthew entire and that of 
 Mark as far as the middle of the last chapter. It belongs to the 
 sixth century. It was discovered at Rossanos, in Calabria, in the 
 spring of 1879 by O. V. Gebhardt and A. Harnack. 
 
 CURSIVE MANUSCRIPTS. 
 
 Of the numerous manuscripts in the cursive characters, we name 
 as most important : 
 
 1 Scrivener, pp. 120, et seq., 3d ed., 1883. 'Not entire.
 
 OF THE HOLY SCRIPTURES. 4G7 
 
 CODEX BASILIENSIS (l). 
 
 This Codex is found at Basel. It contains all the New Testament 
 except the Apocalypse ; but is of importance in its text in the Gos- 
 pels only. It belongs to the tenth century. 
 
 CODEX COLBERTINUS (33). 
 
 This Codex is found in the Imperial Library at Paris. " The most 
 important in its text of the Cursive copies of the New Testament," 
 says Tregelles, " all of which, except the Revelation, it contained ; 
 but now it is defective in several places, and throughout is much in- 
 jured. Of the eleventh century." 
 
 CODEX LEICESTRENSIS (69). 
 
 This Codex belongs to the Town Council of Leicester. It is of 
 the fourteenth century. It contains nearly all the New Testament. 
 
 CODEX TISCHENDORFII ACTORUM (6l). 
 
 This Codex is now in the British Museum. Collated by Tregelles 
 and Scrivener. It is considered a valuable manuscript. 
 
 Many of the Uncial manuscripts contain mere fragments of the 
 New Testament. Tischendorf has especially distinguished himself 
 in collecting and publishing the most valuable of them, in his " Monu- 
 menta Sacra Inedita," seven volumes of which appeared in 1855-70. 
 
 CHAPTER VI. 
 
 ANCIENT VERSIONS OF THE NEW TESTAMENT. 
 THE PESHITO SYRIAC. 
 
 '"PHE most important of the ancient versions of the New Testament 
 -*- is that called The Peshito 1 Syriac. Syriac, at the Christian 
 epoch, and for centuries later, was the language of the region north 
 of Palestine, extending from the north-eastern coast of the Mediter- 
 ranean Sea to the river Tigris, embracing, as its chief seat, Northern 
 Mesopotamia, of which the most important city was Edessa. 
 
 Now as Christianity was firmly established in this city as early as 
 
 the middle of the second century, if not earlier, it is extremely 
 
 probable that, with its introduction, the New Testament would b 
 
 translated into the language of that city and region. It is a well- 
 
 'The name Peshito, from peshat, means simple, plain, correct > Chaldee, the same.
 
 40$ INTRODUCTION TO THE STUDY 
 
 known fact that our modern missionaries as soon as possible trans- 
 late the New Testament into the language of the people to be 
 Christianized. Nor was the usage different in ancient times. What 
 strengthens the great probability that a Syriac version of the New 
 Testament was made as early as about A. D. 150, is the fact that 
 we find a flourishing Syriac literature at Edessa soon after that time 
 Bardesanes, ' a distinguished Christian writer, who flourished at 
 Edessa about A. D. 160-170, in the reign of Abgar Bar Manu, 
 wrote many volumes in Syriac, among them a " Book of the Laws of 
 Countries," 1 mentioned by Jerome, and quoted largely by Eusebius 
 as a work on " Fate." He composed also in Syriac " a hundred and 
 fifty Psalms, elegantly versified." Jerome remarks that the follow- 
 ers of Bardesanes translated his works into Greek. " If their power 
 and elegance," says he, " are so great in a translation, how great 
 they must have been in the original ! " 
 
 It is not easy to believe that Syriac literature, with so much ele- 
 gance, began with Bardesanes, and we are, therefore, authorized in 
 believing that the Syriac version of the New Testament could have 
 been made at least a fourth of a century before his time. With the 
 foregoing facts before us, we cannot, with any probability, refer the 
 earliest Syriac version to a period later than the middle of the 
 second century. 
 
 The strong probability of this early date of the translation is ren- 
 dered quite certain by the fact that the Olvi Testament was trans- 
 lated into Syriac about that time, since it is quoted both by Melito ' 
 (A. D. 170) and Origen 4 (A. D. 200-254); and no one will suppose 
 that Christian scholars would translate the Old Testament into 
 Syriac before the New. Hegesippus (about A. D. 170) appears to 
 have been acquainted with a Syriac version of the Gospel of Mat- 
 thew. For Eus*ebius states that this writer " introduces some things 
 both from the Gospel according to the Hebrews, and from the 
 
 1 Epiphanius says that " he was skilled in two languages, both the Greek dialect 
 and the language of the Syrians." Haeresis LVI. 
 
 1 The original work, long lost, was brought from the Syrian convent in the desert 
 of Nitriae, in Egypt, to England in 1843, and translated into English, and published 
 by Cureton in 1855 In this book it is stated: "But as yesterday the Romans 
 took Arabia, and abrogated all their ancient laws." This occurred in the time d 
 Marcus Aurelius, and fixes the age of the work. 
 
 1 In commenting on Gen. xxii, 13, Melito says, instead of " KarexOpfvof TUV 
 Kiparuv (caught by the horns) both THE SYRIAC and the Hebrew read, /cpe^evof, 
 (hanging by the horns). In Routh's Reliquiae Sacrae, vol. i, p. Il8, from two Vat. 
 manuscripts. 
 
 4 In various places in his Hexapla, as 'O Zvpof, (the Syriac ;) on Gen. iv, I, 4 l 
 nii, 7. etc.
 
 OF THE HOLY SCRIPTLRES. 469 
 
 Syiiac (Gospel), and especially from the Hebrew dialect " It 
 seems improbable that by "the Gospel according to the Hebiews 
 and the Syriac," one single form or version of the Gospel is in- 
 tended. Eusebius must have known that there was a Syriac trans- 
 lation of all the universally acknowledged books of the New Testa- 
 ment, and that by his expression the Syriac translation of Matthew's 
 Gospel would be understood. 
 
 The Peshito version is quoted by Ephraem, the Syrian (f A. D. 378). 
 It was universally circulated among the Syrians in his time, and 
 accordingly he speaks of it as our version, which he would scarcely 
 have done had it not then obtained general authority. Besides, it 
 has been shown by Wiseman that many expressions in it were either 
 unintelligible to Ephraem, or at least obscure. * This affords 
 strong proof of its high antiquity. The traditions of the Syrian 
 Church attribute the translation to Achseus, a disciple of the Apostle 
 Thaddeus. The version is one of the best and most valuable that 
 have ever been made, and expresses faithfully the original Greek. 
 It cannot be determined whether it is the work of a single trans- 
 lator, or of several. 
 
 The Peshito version contains all the books of the New Testament 
 except the Second Epistle of Peter, the Epistle of Jude, the Second 
 and Third of John, and the Apocalypse. It first became known to 
 Europeans in 1552, when Ignatius, Patriarch of Antioch, sent to Pope 
 Julius III., in Rome, Moses of Mardin to present his confession of 
 faith, and to superintend the printing of the Syriac New Testament 
 in Europe. Accordingly, the version was printed in Vienna, in 1555, 
 from two ancient manuscripts, under the superintendence of the 
 Austrian chancellor, Albert Widmanstadt, and Moses of Mardin, at 
 the expense of King Ferdinand I. In this edition there are want- 
 ing Second Peter, Jude, Second and Third John, and the Apoca- 
 lypse. 3 Subsequently various editions of this version were printed 
 in different parts of Europe. 
 
 The Second Epistle of Peter, that of Jude, and Second and Third 
 John were published at Leyden, in 1630, by Edward Pococke from a 
 Syriac manuscript found in the Bodleian Library. The Apocalypse 
 was published by Louis De Dieu, at Leyden, in 1627, from a Syriac 
 manuscript, quite modern, found in the London Library. 
 
 'E/s re row ai>' 'E/3po/ovf ""EvayyeMov KOI TOV 2vpta/co, /cm Idluy tit rrfa *E/3pat'dof 
 dta/frcTou nva ri-drjaiv. Hist. Eccles., iv, c, 22. Hug supposes the reference to bo 
 to the Syriac translation of the Gospel. Einleitung, Erst. Theil, p. 317. Vierte 
 Auflage. 
 
 8 Wiseman's Horse Syriacse, p. 121. 
 
 8 A copy of this first edition, bearing date, Vienna, 1555, lies before me.
 
 470 INTRODUCTION TO THE STUDY 
 
 In 1708 and in 1717 Leusden and Schaafs editions of the Peshito 
 were published at Leyden. The second of these editions is espe- 
 cially excellent. Schaff published, in 1708, ' the best Lexicon of the 
 Peshito that has yet appeared. In these editions Second Peter, 
 Jude, Second and Third John were inserted from the texts of Po- 
 cocke and Louis De Dieu. 
 
 In 1816 the British Bible Society published an edition of the 
 Peshito New Testament, under the supervision of Dr. Buchanan and 
 Professor Lee, with the Eastern Church lessons noted in Syriac. 
 The British Bible Society published another edition of this ver- 
 sion in 1826,* a very superior one, with vowel points, 410., for the 
 Oriental Christians, as it is stated on the title-page, and corrected 
 according to Old Syriac manuscripts. Both of these editions con- 
 tain in the text of Pococke and L. De Dieu the five books wanting 
 in the Peshito. 
 
 In 1828 Samuel Bagster published both in his Polyglot, and 
 also in a small octavo volume, the Peshito, with vowel points. It 
 includes every one of our New Testament books, and in the Syriac 
 preface to the small octavo edition it is stated : " This edition has 
 been printed from the sacred books of the New Testament in Syriac, 
 which were published by Albert Widmanstadt, and Moses of Mardin, 
 and by Louis De Dieu, and Edward Pococke." So far as we have 
 compared this edition with that published by the British Bible So- 
 ciety in 1826 we find scarcely any difference whatever in the text. 
 Bagster has also published " Gutbir's Lexicon Syriacum," con- 
 taining all the words, except the proper names, in the Syriac Testa- 
 ment. 
 
 The American missionaries in Oroomiah published in 1846 the 
 Peshito New Testament, with a modern Syriac translation standing 
 opposite to it. The Peshito has been translated into English and 
 published in the United States by Dr. Murdock. 
 
 Among the oldest manuscripts of the Peshito Syriac Testament 
 may be named two in the British Museum, one bearing the date of 
 A. D. 468;' the other was written at Bethkoki in A. D. ;58. 
 " There is a Syriac manuscript of the Gospels in the Vatican, writ- 
 ten at Edessa, in Mesopotamia, bearing the date corresponding to 
 A. D. 548, and one in the Medicean Library, dated A. D. 586." 
 
 William Cureton found among the Syriac manuscripts brought 
 
 I This appears to be the date in the copy before us. 
 
 * That is the date it bears ; but as we have not that of 1816 we cannot tell whether 
 there is any difference of text 
 
 I 1 saw this in the British Museum about ten years ago. 
 4 W. W. Wright's Appendix to Seller's Bib. Herra
 
 OF THE HOLY SCRIPTURES. 471 
 
 from the Nitrian desert by Archdeacon Tattara, in 1842, for the 
 British Museum, " remains of a very ancient recension of the four 
 Gospels in Syriac, hitherto unknown in Europe," which he pub- 
 lished, accompanied with an English translation, in 1858. These 
 fragments are written in the Estrangelo characters, and contain 
 nearly three fourths of each of the Gospels of Matthew and Luke, 
 about one third of the Gospel of John, and the last four verses of 
 Mark's Gospel. 1 1 this recension the order of the gospels is, Mat- 
 thew, Mark, John, Luke. 
 
 Cureton refers the fragments to the middle of the fifth century. 
 In comparing some years ago a part of this Syriac text with Bag- 
 ster's edition of the Peshito, we satisfied ourselves that it is less 
 elegant than the Peshito, and that it is probably an older version. 
 Tischendorf places the Syriac version, of which these fragments 
 form a part, about the middle of the second century, and the Pe- 
 shito at the end of that century. Tregelles also regards these frag- 
 ments as belonging to a version older than the Peshito. This is 
 also the opinion of Ewald. 
 
 Cureton believes that the Gospel of Matthew in this recension is 
 based on the Syro-Chaldee gospel of that evangelist. But after a 
 careful comparison of Cureton's text with the Peshito and the Greek, 
 we satisfied ourselves that Cureton's text is taken from the Greek 
 Matthew. Prof. Wright, of the University of Cambridge, England, 
 a few years ago, printed for private circulation a hundred copies of 
 other " fragments of the Curetonian (Syriac) gospels " in Estrangelo 
 characters, namely: Luke xv, 22-xvi, 12; xvii, 1-23; John vii, 
 37-viii, 19. The account of the woman taken in adultery (vii, 
 53-viii, 12) is wanting in this section. 
 
 The Peshito version, as it stands in the most ancient extant man- 
 uscripts, is an important witness in settling the text of the New 
 Testament, and a critical edition based upon a collation of its old- 
 est existing manuscripts would be a work of great value, and is 
 much needed. 
 
 THE PHILOXENIAN TRANSLATION. 
 
 This Syriac version of the New Testament takes its name from 
 Philoxenus, or Xenaias, Bishop of Mabug, (or Hierapolis,) in Syria, 
 (A.D. 488-518,) in whose time the translation forming its basis was 
 made by Polycarp, his country bishop, in A.D. 508. G. H. Bern- 
 stein gives substantially as the result of his inquiries respecting the 
 subsequent revision of this version the following statement : Thom- 
 as of Charkel lived at the end of the sixth or at the beginning of 
 the seventh century, and was Bishop of Mabug, from which as an
 
 472 INTRODUCTION TO THE STUDY 
 
 exile he sought Egypt, and while living at Alexandria, in the convent 
 of the Antonians, he devoted himself most assiduously to forming anew 
 and improving the Syriac Philoxenian translation of the New Test- 
 ament. In carrying out this work he corrected, as accurately as 
 possible, the Philoxenian version upon the authority of the best 
 Greek manuscripts, and restored it to the fidelity of the original 
 Greek. This copy he wrote out with great care, and again revised 
 it and gave it to the public, 1 A.D. 616. Bernstein* thinks that he 
 has found in Codex Angelicus, at Rome, the original Philoxenian 
 version that lay at the foundation of the revision of Thomas of 
 Charkel. Mangold, however, thinks that in this Bernstein is mis- 
 taken. This version contains all the books of the New Testament 
 except the Apocalypse. 
 
 This so-called Philoxenian translation is extremely literal, and its 
 author has often sacrificed the Syriac idiom to a rigid adherence to 
 the Greek text. But on this very ground it is a valuable testimony 
 to the state of the Greek text A.D. 500-600. 
 
 The four gospels of this version, accompanied by a Latin transla- 
 tion, were published in two volumes by Professor White, at Oxford in 
 1778, the Catholic Epistles in one volume in 1799, the Acts and the 
 Epistles of Paul in one volume in 1803. The last two volumes also 
 contain a Latin translation of the text. G. H. Bernstein published, 
 at Leipsic, in 1853, a beautiful edition of the Gospel of John in the 
 version of Thomas of Charkel, based on White's edition, corrected 
 by two old manuscripts, the Florentine and the Vatican. The text 
 is printed with vowels, and the points kushoi and rucoch from a Vati- 
 can manuscript. 
 
 THE JERUSALEM SYRIAC. 
 
 This is a partial lectionary of the gospels found in the Vatican 
 Library, which Adler discovered, and of which he published speci- 
 mens. It is written in the Aramaean dialect, similar to that of the 
 Talmud of Jerusalem. The manuscript the only extant one of 
 the version according to the superscription, was written in a con- 
 vent at Antioch in 1030. It was made from the Greek in the fifth 
 or sixth century, though possibly later. 
 
 THE LATIN VERSIONS OF THE NEW TESTAMENT. 
 THE ITALA. 
 
 As in the apostolic age, the Latin language was the vernacular of 
 Italy, and was used extensively in Northern Africa, as appears from 
 
 1 De Charklen, N. T. Trans. Syriaca, p. 9. 
 
 9 Das Heil. Evang. des Johan Ryrisch, pp. 25-29.
 
 OF THE HOLY SCRIPTURES. 473 
 
 the fact that Tertullian at Carthage (A.D. 193-220) and Cyprian in 
 the same city (about A.D. 250) both wrote in that language, and as 
 Christianity extensively l prevailed in that region as early as the sec- 
 ond century, it is very probable that a version of the New Testa- 
 ment would be made into Latin as early as A.D. 150. Accordingly, 
 we find Tertullian in his treatise on " Monogamy," written about 
 A.D. 210 or 215, referring to a Latin version of the New Testament 
 as being already in use : " As it has gone into use either by an in- 
 genious or plain mistranslation of two syllables, st dormierit vir 
 cjus, we must know that it is clearly not thus in the original Greek." ' 
 Tertullian objects to referring it to the future. 
 
 In the time of Augustine (about A.D. 400) this early Latin trans- 
 lation had already exhibited so many variations in its manuscripts 
 as to present the appearance of different versions, of which fact 
 Augustine complains.* Among the Latin texts of the time, he de- 
 clares his preference for the Itala, as adhering more closely to the 
 words of the original, and as expressing the sense clearly. 4 
 
 The extant Latin manuscripts belonging to the times preceding 
 Jerome's revision of the text, or, indeed, to a later period, unaffected 
 by that version, exhibit great diversity. 
 
 " When, however, the several codices," says Scrivener, " of the 
 version or versions antecedent to Jerome's version came to be stud- 
 ied by Sabatier and Blanchini, and through their labors to be placed 
 within the reach of all scholars, it was soon perceived that with 
 many points of difference between them, there were evident traces 
 of a common source from which all originally sprung." * 
 
 Augustine evidently uses " Itala " to qualify " interpretatio," " the 
 Italian interpretation," and which appears to have been both of the 
 Old and New Testaments. But here the question arises, Was this 
 Itala the original Latin version made in the second century, or was 
 it a recei sion of that translation ? It seems at present to be the 
 prevailing opinion of biblical critics that the oldest Latin version of 
 the New Testament was executed in Northern Africa about the 
 middle of the second century. The character of this version is to 
 
 'About A.D. 200 a synod was held under Agrippinus, Bishop of Carthage, which 
 consisted of seventy African and Numidian Bishops. 
 
 * Sciamus plane non sic esse in Graeco authentico, quomodo in usum exiit per 
 duarum syllabarum aut callidam aut simplicem eversionem : si dormierit vir ejus, 
 etc., cap. XI. The Greek is noifi^Gri, if he has slept, (died,} l Cor. vii, 39. 
 
 'Doct. Christ. Lib. II., cap. XI-XV. 
 
 4 In ipsis autem interpretationibus, Itala caeteris praeferatur nam est verborum 
 lenacior cum perspicuitate sententise. Ibid. 
 
 Intro, to Crit. N. Test., p. 339, 3d ed., 1883.
 
 474 INTRODUCTION TO THE STUDY 
 
 be determined from the writings of Tertullian and Cyprian at Car- 
 thage, who used it. 
 
 In proof of its African origin, Scrivener remarks that, " On the 
 ground of internal evidence, Wiseman has made out a case, which 
 all who have followed him, Lachmann, Tischendorf, Davidson, Tre- 
 gelles, accept as irresistible; indeed, it is not easy to draw any other 
 conclusion from his elaborate comparison of the words, the phrases 
 and grammatical constructions of the Latin version of Holy Scrip- 
 ture, with the parallel instances by which they can be illustrated 
 from African writers, and from them only." ] 
 
 Ronsch, who has paid especial attention to the subject, declares 
 it as certain, " That the peculiarities of language of the numerous 
 extant fragments of the Itala belong to the African diction, and 
 must have sprung up upon the soil of (proconsular) Africa.'" He 
 supposes that the name Itala was given to this old Latin version 
 because it was not made in the elegant language of the Roman 
 capital, but in the Italian provincial language, the common Latin. 
 He, nevertheless, thinks the conjecture of Wordsworth, that the 
 Itala appears to have been an Italian recension of the old African 
 version, to be worthy of regard. 3 
 
 The Codex Brixianus of the sixth century is regarded by Tre- 
 gelles as "specially the Italian recension of the old (or African) 
 Latin." In all probability Augustine designates by Itala a Latin 
 recension of the old version made in Italy. Bleek regards it as 
 so called because it was in use in Upper Italy when it received its 
 form. 4 
 
 Among the most important manuscripts of the old Latin version 
 of the New Testament may be named : 
 
 Codex Vercellensis, edited by Irici, and also by Bianchini. Ac- 
 cording to Tischendorf it belongs to century IV. (a). 
 
 Codex Veronensis, edited by Bianchini. It belongs to cen- 
 tury V. (6). 
 
 Codex Colbertinus, edited by Sabatier. (*). 
 
 Codex Cantabrigiensis, belonging to the sixth century. (</). This 
 is called by Tregelles, Codex Bezae. 
 
 Codex Palatinus, edited by Tischendorf. It belongs to century 
 V. (4 
 
 Codex Brixianus, a revised Latin text, edited by Bianchini. It 
 belongs to century VI. (/). 
 
 1 Tntrod. to the Criticism of the New Test., p. 341. 
 a Quoted by Hilgenfeld, Einleitung, pp. 798, 799. 
 In Hilgenfeld, ibid. 
 4 Einleitung, A. T., p. 795.
 
 OF THE HOLY SCRIPTURES. 475 
 
 Codices, formerly Corbeienses, now Petropolitani (f. 1 et ^ r .*), 
 edited by Bianchini and Sabatier; mixed in text. 
 
 Codex Claromontanus, now Vaticanus, of century V, edited by 
 Mai; a mixed text. (ti). 
 
 Codex Vindobonensis, of century V or VI, parts of Mark and 
 Luke, (f) 
 
 Codex Bobbiensis, now Taurinensis, of century V. (A). 
 
 JEROME'S REVISION. 
 
 In the last part of the fourth century the distinguished scholar 
 Jerome made a revision of the Latin translation of the New Testa- 
 ment. In the year 392, in speaking of his work, he says : " 1 
 brought the New Testament into accord with the original Greek." ' 
 In his dedication to Damasus, prefixed to the gospels, Jerome 
 says : " The four gospels have been revised by collating old Greek 
 manuscripts. That they might not depart much from the usage of 
 the Latin reading, we so modified them with our pen that we cor- 
 rected only those passages which seemed to change the sense, and 
 allowed the rest to remain as they were." ! Jerome's translation of 
 the Old Testament and revision of the New are the basis of the 
 Vulgate. The most valuable manuscript of his edition is the Codex 
 Amiatinus, written about A.D. 541. It has been published by Tis- 
 chendorf. Tregelles has made it the basis of his Latin version 
 printed in parallel columns with his Greek Text. 
 
 THE COPTIC VERSIONS OF THE NEW TESTAMENT. 
 
 The Coptic language, which sprang from the language of the 
 ancient Egyptians, was used by the Christians in Egypt, from the 
 beginning of the second century after Christ until the seventh, in 
 speaking and writing, and especially in translating the Holy Scrip- 
 tures. The names Coptus, Copii, and Coptitse, as well as the Aigup- 
 tos of the Greeks, take their origin without doubt from the most 
 ancient name of this country, very often found on the hieroglyphic 
 monuments, Kahi-Ptah (the land of the God Ptah).' Of the Coptic 
 language there are three dialects: The Theban (or Sahidic), of 
 Upper Egypt, the Memphitic, of Lower Egypt, and the Bashmuric,' 
 which seems to have been used in some part of the Delta. 
 
 1 Novum Testamentum Gnecae fidei reddidi. De viris Illus.. cap. 135. 
 
 * Quatuor Evangelia Codicum Graecorum emendata collatione, sed veterum 
 Quae ne multum a lectionis Latinse consuetudine discreparent, ita calamo temperavi- 
 mus ut his tantum, quae sensum videbantur mutare, correctis, reliqua manere pater- 
 emur ut fueranL 
 
 * Uhlemann, Linguae Copticse Grammatical 
 
 4 Uhlemann derives the name from Bash Mareia (Mdpeta, Mapewrtf, the name 
 of lakes near Alexandria). 
 81
 
 476 INTRODUCTION TO THE 
 
 Christianity was introduced into Egypt as early is the last part 
 of the first century. According to an ancient tradition, the evan- 
 gelist Mark founded the Church in Alexandria, which in the second 
 century was in a most flourishing condition. From this center 
 Christianity must have soon spread to the adjoining regions of 
 Egypt. " But although the Gospel," says Neander, " early found 
 its way into the parts of Lower Egypt inhabited by Graecian and 
 Jewish colonies, yet it would not be so easy for it to penetrate 
 thence into Middle, and particularly into Upper Egypt ; for it 
 those parts the foreign Coptic language, the dominion of the priests, 
 and the old Egyptian superstition stood in the way. Yet a perse- 
 cution of the Christians in Thebais under Septimius Severus (A D. 
 193-211) proves that Christianity had already made progress in 
 Upper Egypt as early as the last times of the second century." 1 
 
 It is not in the least degree probable that the Egyptian Christians 
 would long remain without versions of the Holy Scriptures, the 
 New Testament especially, in their vernacular dialects. Hence it 
 is highly probable that their principal versions, the Memphitic and 
 Sahidic, were made at the end of the second century or in the be- 
 ginning of the third. 
 
 That the Christians of Middle Egypt had a version of the New 
 Testament in Coptic in the second half of the third century appears 
 from the life of St. Anthony. This hermit, born near Heracleia, in 
 Middle Egypt, A.D. 251, "could not bear to learn letters," as 
 Athanasius informs us, but gave attention when a boy to the read- 
 ing of the Scriptures in the churches, and at the age of eighteen or 
 twenty he was so affected at hearing read in the church Christ's 
 advice to the rich young man (Matt, xix, 21) that he immediately 
 left the church and disposed of all his real and personal estate for 
 the benefit of others. That this reading of the Scriptures was in 
 Coptic is clear from the fact that St. Anthony made an address to 
 the monks in that language, but spoke to the Greek philosophers 
 through an interpreter. St. Anthony's dialect was probably Mem- 
 phitic. 
 
 THE MEMPHITIC VERSION. 
 
 This version takes its name from Memphis, the chief city of the 
 region in which the most polished dialect of the Coptic (or Egyp- 
 tian) was used. In 1716 David Wilkins, a Prussian, published, at 
 Oxford, the Coptic New Testament in the Memphitic dialect from 
 the Bodleian manuscripts, compared with others at Paris and the 
 Vatican, accompanied with a Latin translation. This Latin version, 
 
 1 History of the Church, vol. i, p. 83.
 
 OF THE HOLY SCRIPTURES. 477 
 
 though highly creditable to Wilkins, as a pioneer in this department 
 has not been highly commended by the best Coptic scholars. 
 
 In 1846-47 M. G. Schwartze, Professor of Coptic in the University 
 of Berlin, published at Leipsic the four gospels of the Memphitic 
 version, with the title of " QUARTUOR EVANGELIA IN DIA- 
 LECTO LINGUAE COPTICS MEMPHITICA PERSCRIPTA 
 AD CODD. MS. COPTICORUM IN REGIA BIBLIOTHECA 
 BEROLINENSI ADSERVATORUM NEC NON LIBRI A 
 WILKINSIO EMISSI FIDEM," etc., in 2 vols. 4to., with beauti- 
 ful type. The text is based on six codices, transcribed by Petraeus 
 in 1622, from copies of the tenth century and later. Professor 
 Schwartze places below the text a collation of his Memphitic read- 
 ings from manuscripts and from Wilkins along with the readings of 
 the critical Greek texts of Tischendorf (1841) and Lachman (1842). 
 He also introduces readings from the Sahidic (or Theban) version. 
 Of the Sahidic readings he generally gives a Latin translation, but 
 he translates only portions of the Memphitic text. For critical pur- 
 poses this edition of Schwartze is the most valuable work yet pub- 
 lished on the Egyptian versions of the four Gospels. After 
 Schwartze's death Paulus Boetticher published at Halle, in 1852, 
 the Acts of the Apostles and the Epistles of Paul in the Memphitic 
 dialect. The text is based on the authority of four codices. No 
 translation or commentary accompanies the text, and the editor 
 satisfies himself with noting at the foot of the page the variations of 
 his manuscripts. 1 The Memphitic version contains a large number 
 of Greek words. It is a faithful translation of the original Greek. 
 
 THE THEBAIC (OR SAHIDIC) VERSION. 
 
 This version is named after Thebes, the chief city of the region 
 in which it was used. It is of about the same age as the Mem- 
 phitic (about A. D. 200), and, like that version, it contains numer- 
 ous Greek words, which we would not have expected in an Upper 
 Egypt version. 
 
 Of this version of the New Testament only fragments remain, of 
 which the published portions are found almost exclusively in the 
 following works : 
 
 Appendix ad Editionem Novi Testamenti Graeci e codice MS. 
 Alexandrino a Carolo Godofredo Woide descripti, in qua contin- 
 entur fragmenta Novi Testamenti Juxta interpretationem dialecti 
 superioris ^Egypti, quae Thebaidica vel sahidica appellatur, e codd. 
 Oxoniensibus maxima ex parte desumpta cum Dissertatione de 
 
 1 Of Boetticher's edition we have been able to obtain only the Acts of th* 
 Apostles.
 
 78 INTRODUCTION TO THE STUDY 
 
 Versione Bibb. ^Egyptica quibus subjicitur codicis Vaticani Colla- 
 tio. Oxonii, 1799. Fol. 
 
 Fr. Miinter. Commentatio de indole versionis Sahidicae Novi 
 Testamenti. Accedunt Fragmenta Epistolarum Pauli ad Timc- 
 theum in membranis Sahidicis musei Borgiani Velitris, Havniae< 
 1784. 
 
 Mingarelli, Egyptiorum codicum Reliquiae Venetiis in Biblio 
 theca Naniana asservatae. Fasc. I, et II, Bononiae, 1785. 
 
 Georgi. Fragmentum Evangelii St. Johannis Graeco-Copto-The- 
 baicum sseculi IV., etc. Romae, 1789. This fragment contains 
 portions of John vi, vii, viii, in the Greek and Thebaic in parallel 
 columns. The section containing the account of the woman taken 
 in adultery (vii, 53-viii, n) is wanting both in the Greek and The- 
 baic of this old fragment * belonging to the fourth or fifth century 
 as viii, 12 joins on to vii, 52. 
 
 BASHMURIC VERSION. 
 
 This version is based on the Thebaic, and appears to have been 
 made about A.D. 300. It is of but little importance. Only small 
 fragments of this version are extant. They were published by En- 
 gelbreth : Fragmenta Basmurico-Coptica Veteris et Novi Testa- 
 menti, Havniae, 1811. 
 
 THE -lETHIOPIC VERSION. 
 
 Christianity was introduced into ^Ethiopia (or Abyssinia) in the 
 first half of the fourth century, by Frumentius, who became Bishop 
 of Auxuma* (Axum). It is therefore very probable that the trans- 
 lation of the Bible, at least that of the New Testament, was made 
 soon after this period into the vernacular of the country, the Geez, 
 or Ethiopic, language. Chrysostom, about A.D. 400, speaks of 
 the Ethiopians as possessing a translation of the Gospel of John, 1 
 which naturally implies that they had a translation of other sacred 
 Scripture. This translation is not a valuable one. " In fact," says 
 Scrivener, "the version is so tautological, confused, and unequal in 
 style (that of St. Paul's Epistles in particular often degenerating 
 into a paraphrase), that some have thought our present text to be a 
 compound of two several translations, and even Tregelles supposes 
 that ' there was originally one version of the Gospels, afterward 
 
 1 This fragment lies before me. 
 
 1 Neander's History of the Church, vol. ii, pp. 119, 120. 
 
 * The Syrians, Egyptians, Indians, Persians, Ethiopians, and countless othei 
 naiions have translated into their tongue the doctrines introduced by this out 
 John). Horn, in Joan
 
 OF THE HOLY SCRIPTURES. 479 
 
 compared with Greek manuscripts of a different class; and the 
 manuscripts in general bearing proofs of containing a text modified 
 by such comparison ; while others contain throughout conflate 
 readings.' " 
 
 The New Testament in this version (with the exception of the 
 thirteen epistles of Paul) was first published at Rome by native 
 editors in 1548, the thirteen epistles of Paul in the following year. 
 ' In Walton's Polyglot the New Testament was reprinted with 
 many faults, and an unusually bad Latin translation by Dudley Lof- 
 tus, from which Mill and his successors derived their various read- 
 ings. C. A. Bode published a new or revised version of the ^Ethi- 
 opic New Testament given in the Polyglot (Brunswick, 1753). 
 . . . Lastly, in 1826-30 in London, Th. Pell Platt, A.M., edited for 
 the British and Foreign Bible Society, ' Nov. Testament . . . ythi- 
 opice, ad codicum manuscriptorum fidem.'" 
 
 THE GOTHIC VERSION. 
 
 In the third century of the Christian era the Goths, belonging to 
 the Germanic family, invaded the Roman Empire. One part of 
 them settled in Moesia a region along the Danube, now embraced 
 in Servia and Bulgaria and obtained the name of Moeso-Goths. 
 During some of their incursions they captured many Christians, and 
 among them some persons of the clerical order. These captured 
 Christians remained among them and laboured as zealous mission- 
 aries. A Gothic bishop is mentioned as being present at the Coun- 
 cil of Nicaea, A. D. 325. Ulphilas, who belonged to a Cappado- 
 cian family, was consecrated bishop of the Goths at Constantinople 
 in A.D. 348, and became their apostle. " When the Christian 
 Goths were oppressed by a persecution, he led a great multitude of 
 them into the habitation about Nicopolis in Moesia, which Constan- 
 tius had assigned them (355), where, after inventing the Gothic 
 alphabet, he translated the Bible into Gothic " (Gieseler). Philos- 
 torgius, about A.D. 425, says that Ulphilas " translated into their 
 (the Goths) language all the Scriptures except the Books of Kings " 
 (Samuel and Kings). 
 
 The Gothic language belongs to the Germanic family of languages, 
 and Bopp remarks : " I believe I am reading Sanscrit when I read the 
 venerable Ulphilas ; his language holds, so to speak, the middle 
 ground between Sanscrit and German." 1 
 
 1 Introd. to the Text. Critic, of New Test., pp. 409, 410, 3d ed., 1883. 
 
 2 Ibid., p. 410. 
 
 3 Introduction to the Gothic Language in J. P. Migne's edition of Ulphilas's 
 Translation.
 
 180 INTRODUCTION TO THE STUDY 
 
 The Gothic language flourished but for a short time. In Moesia 
 it was blotted out by the torrent of new people that poured in upon 
 the regions of the Danube ; and in the western regions of Europe 
 it disappeared under the influence of the Latin. 
 
 The Gothic version was made from the original Greek text, "the 
 authority of which nearly all agree that Ulphilas most scrupulously 
 follows, rendering it word for word." 1 It is, accordingly, a valuable 
 witness to the condition of the Greek text in the middle of the 
 fourth century. The version, however, suffered some corruptions 
 from Latin sources during the occupancy of Italy by the Goths in 
 the fifth century. Of the manuscripts containing fragments of this 
 version, the most important is the Codex Argenteus, written on pur- 
 ple vellum, in letters of gold and silver, near the end of the fifth, or 
 beginning of the sixth, century in Italy, when the Goths dwelt there. 
 It is now in the University of Upsal. It contains fragments of the 
 four Gospels in the order, Matthew, John, Luke, Mark. 
 
 The Codex Carolinus, rescript, was written about A.D. 500. It 
 contains a part of Paul's Epistle to the Romans. 
 
 The Ambrosian Codices, five in number, are in Milan. They con- 
 tain fragments of thirteen Epistles of Paul (not Hebrews). They 
 also belong to about A.D. 500. 
 
 The best and most complete edition of the Gothic version is that 
 of H. C. De Gabelentz and J. Loebe: Ulfilae Vet. et Nov. Testamenti 
 versionis Gothic ae Fragmenta super sunt, Leipsic, 1843. 
 
 In J. P. Migne's edition of the Christian Fathers, vol. xviii, this 
 edition of Gabelentz and Loebe is found accompanied with a Latin 
 translation, Prolegomena, Gothic Grammar, and Glossary. 1 It con- 
 tains about one fourth of Matthew's Gospel, nearly all Mark's, 
 about three fourths of Luke's, and two thirds of John's, parts of all 
 of the thirteen Epistles of Paul, amounting to about two thirds of 
 their contents, but no part of the Acts of the Apostles, the Epistle 
 to the Hebrews, the seven Catholic Epistles, or the Apocalypse. 
 
 THE ARMENIAN VERSION. 
 
 Christianity was introduced into Armenia as early as the second 
 century. In the time of Diocletian, King Tiridates was won over 
 to the Christian cause. " The old religion," says Neander, " not- 
 withstanding this event, still continued to maintain itself in many 
 of the Armenian provinces. In the beginning of the fifth century, 
 Miesrob, who had once been the royal secretary, having devoted 
 
 ' Gabelentz and Loebe's edition, Prolegomena. 
 
 * This edition now lies before me from the Dickinson College Library.
 
 OF THE HOLY SCRIPTURES. 481 
 
 himself wholly to the service of religion, disseminated Christianity 
 still more widely in countries to which it had not penetrated, by 
 taking up his abode in those regions as a hermit. Up to this time 
 the Syrian version of the Bible, the authority of which was recog- 
 nized in the Persian Church, had been used in Armenia; and hence 
 an interpreter was always needed to translate into the vernacular 
 tor.gue the portions of Scripture read at the public worship. Mies- 
 rob gave his people an alphabet, and translated the Bible into their 
 language." 1 
 
 The version was accordingly made in the first part of the fifth 
 century. In the execution of the version from the original Greek, 
 Miesrob was assisted by Moses Chorenensis and Joseph and Eznak, 
 who brought Greek manuscripts from the Council of Ephesus, 
 A.D. 431. 
 
 The best edition of this version is that of Zohrab, published in 
 1789, on the basis of a Cilician Codex, compared with twenty others 
 of the New Testament. His Biblia was published at Venice in 
 1805. Zohrab does not acknowledge any systematic corruption of 
 the Armenian from the Latin Bible, and remarks that only one of his 
 eighteen copies of the First Epistle of John contains chap, v, ver. 7.* 
 Zohrab's edition of 1805 was used by Tregelles, through the assist- 
 ance of Dr. Charles Rieu. 8 
 
 Other versions of the New Testament were made at later periods, 
 but they are of but little value as witnesses to the ancient text of 
 the New Testament. 
 
 CHAPTER VII. 
 
 EDITIONS OF THE GREEK TESTAMENT. 
 
 A S the originals of the New Testament books must have been 
 "** often copied, it is highly probable that in some instances the 
 copies taken were not exact, and that slight errors crept into them. 
 These copies in turn were at different times copied, and if faithfully 
 executed, must have perpetuated these errors. But as some slight 
 mistakes were likely made in these second copies, it is easy to see 
 that in less than fifty years after the books of the New Testament 
 were written, various readings must in all probability have arisen. 
 
 1 History of the Church, vol. ii, pp. 113, 114. 
 
 * Scrivener, p. 408, 3d cd. 
 
 1 Tregelles' Introductory Note to his Crit. Ed. New Testament.
 
 482 INTRODUCTION TO THE STUDY 
 
 The number of these different readings were naturally increased 
 with the number of the copies and with the lapse of time. 
 
 In some instances, a word or sentence written on the margin of a 
 manuscript, as a suggestion or correction, would likely be incorpo- 
 rated into the text by a transcriber. Some transcribers would think 
 that certain words were improperly spelt, and in attempting to cor- 
 rect them, in some cases, they themselves committed errors. ThU 
 was the natural course of things, and could have been prevented 
 only by a perpetual miracle, for which there was no necessity. The 
 only instances in which no variety of readings exists in ancient 
 writings are those in which but a single copy exists, and the text 
 from this very fact is made more or less uncertain. 
 
 There can be no doubt that the followers of Mohammed espe- 
 cially venerated the Koran, and yet different readings in it soon 
 presented themselves. " Already in the twelfth year of the Hegira," 
 says Tischendorf, " when Abu Bekr had the different elements of 
 the Koran collected, so many different readings were found, that he 
 divided them into five classes. The consequence was that disputes 
 very soon broke out among the Arabic scholars respecting the gen- 
 uine text of their prophet. How was the matter decided ? Twenty 
 years later the Calif had a standard copy established, and all diverg- 
 ent copies destroyed. This conduct was at least worthy of the 
 sword to which Mohammedanism owed its victories." : 
 
 But what strong testimonies we have to the integrity of the New 
 Testament ! Versions made from the original Greek in the second, 
 third, and fourth centuries in widely distant lands, and which are 
 still in existence. Manuscripts going back to the fourth, fifth, and 
 sixth centuries; the extant works of Christian writers who, in all 
 parts of the Roman Empire, from the middle of the second century, 
 made the most extensive use of the New Testament, and give us 
 numerous quotations. All these witnesses testify to the same great 
 truths, and their divergences from each other are generally of small 
 moment ; and from the comparison and combination of the whole 
 testimony we can, in almost every instance, detect the specific errors 
 of each witness, and fix with a wondeiful degree of exactness the 
 contents of the original documents for which they are vouchers, 
 For the integrity of what writing of tne Augustine age have we so 
 many witnesses? 
 
 That great scholar and critic, Richard Bentley, thus gives his 
 testimony upon the essential agreement of the Greek manuscripts of 
 
 1 Haben Wir den achten Schriftext der Evangelisten und Apostel? Leipzig, 
 t873, P- 15-
 
 OF THE HOLY SCRIPTURES. 483 
 
 the New Testament : " The real text of the sacred writers does not 
 now (since the originals have been so long lost) lie in any manu- 
 script or edition, but is dispersed in them all. 'Tis competently ex- 
 act, indeed, in the worst manuscript now extant; nor is one article 
 of faith or moral precept either perverted or lost in them, choose as 
 awkwardly as you will, choose the worst by design out of the whole 
 lump of writings." ! Bentley's remarks, made more than one hun- 
 dred and fifty years ago, respecting the Greek manuscripts of the 
 Ne\\ Testament, are true now with our enlarged knowledge of them. 
 
 The Greek New Testament was first printed by Cardinal Ximenes 
 in his Polyglot, but as he deferred its publication until the whole 
 of his Polyglot should be finished, the Greek Testament published 
 at Basel, in February, 1516, under the supervision of Erasmus, an- 
 ticipated it. It was accompanied with a Latin translation. In 
 1519 he published a second edition, and a third in 1522, in which 
 he introduced i John v, 7. Soon after the first edition appeared, 
 the Complutensian Polyglot was published by Cardinal Ximenes. 
 The fourth edition of Erasmus followed in 1527, and his fifth and 
 last in 1535. 
 
 " Erasmus's materials," says Tregelles, " were but few in com- 
 parison with those which have been since available for purposes of 
 criticism ; they were also comparatively modern."* 
 
 In the years 1546 and 1549 Robert Stephens printed at Paris two 
 beautiful small editions of the Greek Testament, and in 1550 ap- 
 peared his folio edition, in the margin of which were given various 
 readings from manuscripts, which had been collated by his son, 
 Henry Stephens. The editions of 1546 and 1549 had contained a 
 text blended from the Complutensian and Erasmian ; in the folio 
 Erasmus was almost exclusively followed. 3 On the readings in this 
 folio edition Tregelles says : " This was the first collection of various 
 readings of any extent; and it was at least suggestive of what might 
 be done by means of manuscripts in emending the text of the Greek 
 Testament." 
 
 Theodore Beza succeeded Robert Stephens as an editor of the 
 Greek Testament. He published five editions in 1565, 1576, 1582, 
 1589, and 1598. He mostly followed the text of Stephens. 4 Beza's 
 text was during his life in very general use among Protestants ; they 
 seemed to feel that enough had been done to establish it, and they 
 relied on it as giving them a firm basis.* 
 
 1 Remarks on Free Thinking in Scrivener, p. 7. 
 
 7 Account of the Printed Text of the New Test., p. 28. 
 
 ' Tregelles' Account of the Printed Text, p. 30. 
 
 4 Tregelles, p. 33. * Ibid.
 
 *54 INTRODUCTION TO THE STUDY 
 
 The celebrated printers at Leyden, the Elzevirs, issued their first 
 edition of the Greek Testament in 1624. " The editor, if any," 
 says Tregelles, " is wholly unknown ; it is probable that the printers 
 took the third edition of Robert Stephens as their basis, introducing 
 merely a few changes, which they considered to be corrections, and 
 using for this purpose a copy of one of Beza's editions." " In 1633 
 the publishers themselves brought out their own second edition, 
 which is considered their best ... A high ground is assumed as to 
 the text which is thus presented. The reader is told, ' Thou hast 
 the text now received by all, in which we give nothing altered or cor- 
 rupted ' (Textum, ergo habes, nunc ab Omnibus receptum, etc.). From 
 this expression in the preface has arisen the phrase, ' Textus Re- 
 ceptus,' as applied to the text of the Greek Testaments in common 
 use, on the supposition that they were accurate reprints of the Elze- 
 vir editions.'" 1 
 
 In 1707 John Mill published an edition of the Greek Testament, 
 with various readings from manuscript versions and fathers, a work 
 upon which he spent thirty years. He did not form a new text, but 
 simply used the third edition of Stephens, correcting the errata. 
 
 Dr. Edward Wells published a Greek Testament, with an English 
 translation, notes, and a paraphrase at Oxford in separate parts, 
 from 1709 to 1719. 
 
 The celebrated Richard Bentley made elaborate preparations for 
 issuing a critical edition of the Greek Testament, and in 1720 he 
 " issued his proposals for his Greek and Latin New Testament, 
 accompanied by the last chapter of the Revelation, as a specimen." 
 This contemplated great work was never completed. 
 
 John Albert Bengel published at Tubingen, in 1734, his edition ol 
 the Greek New Testament. The critical apparatus was, for the 
 most, taken from Mill. 
 
 John J. Wetstein published at Amsterdam, in 1751 and 1752, an 
 edition of the Greek Testament in two vols., accompanied by Pro- 
 legomena, in which he pointed out the manuscripts, versions, and 
 fathers by whose aid the text of the New Testament may be 
 revised. 
 
 J. J. Griesbach issued at Halle, in 1774-75, his edition of the 
 Greek New Testament in three volumes. He afterward combined 
 tne first two volumes embracing the Gospels and Acts into one, 
 for convenience, and published it at Halle in 1777, to which the 
 edition cf the Epistles and Apocalypse of 1775 forms the second 
 part. 
 
 Tregelles remarks on Griesbach : "With him, in fact, texts which 
 1 Tregelles, p. 35.
 
 OF THE HOLY SCRIPTURES. 483 
 
 might be called really critical begin ; so that if any one wished tc 
 give the results of critical inquiries, as applied to the common text, 
 he would begin with that formed by Griesbach." l 
 
 C. F. Matthaei published at Riga, in twelve volumes, 1782-88, the 
 New Testament in Greek and Latin. J. M. Scholz published an 
 edition of the Greek Testament at Leipsic, 1830-1836, in two vol- 
 umes, in the preparation of which he made extensive travels for the 
 collection and collation of manuscripts. 
 
 In 1831 Carl Lachmann issued at Berlin a small edition of the 
 Greek Testament. It was the result of close and careful study for 
 five years. He sought to carry out the idea of Bentley, to present 
 the text of the New Testament as it originally stood in the oldest 
 witnesses. Respecting him, Tregelles affirms : "The first Greek 
 Testament, since the invention of printing, edited wholly on ancient 
 authority, irrespective of modern traditions, is due to Charles Lack 
 mann" a 
 
 A larger edition of Lachmann's Greek Testament was published, 
 with the aid of P. Buttmann, in two volumes, 1842, 1850, at Berlin. 
 
 We now come to the most distinguished of the critical editors 
 of the Greek Testament, CONSTANTINE TISCHENDORF. 
 This eminent scholar published the first edition of his Greek Testa- 
 ment at Leipsic, in 1841, a small 8vo. He gives us a text of his 
 own, in which, however, for the most part, he adheres to the text of 
 Lachmann. Tischendorf also superintended three editions of the 
 New Testament, which were published at Paris in 1842. In 1840, 
 and subsequently, he visited the Libraries in Paris, England, Hol- 
 land, Switzerland, and Italy to collect materials for his critical edi- 
 ditions of the Greek Testament. 
 
 In 1844 he visited the monasteries of the East in quest of manu- 
 scripts of the sacred Scriptures. 
 
 In 1849 Tischendorf published at Leipsic his second edition of 
 the Greek Testament, in which he gives the text, as he supposes it 
 ought to stand, the result of the labors of previous collators and of 
 his own. He also at various times issued other editions. 
 
 In 1859, the same year in which he discovered the Codex Sinaiti- 
 cus, he published what he calls his " Seventh larger critical 
 edition." 
 
 In 1864 Tischendorf began his eighth and last large critical edi- 
 tion, the first volume of which, containing the four Gospels, was 
 published in 1869 at Leipsic ; and the second, containing the rest 
 
 1 The Printed Text of the Greek Testament, p. 82. 
 *Ibid, p 113.
 
 48 INTRODUCTION TO THE STUD\ 
 
 of the Greek New Testament, appeared in the same city in 1872 
 As Tischendorf died in 1874, the Prolegomena, 1 which were to form 
 the third volume, were not completed. 
 
 Tischendorf lays down the following principles for the formation 
 of his text, which Tregelles quotes with approbation : " The text is 
 only to be sought from ancient evidence, and especially from Greek 
 manuscripts, but without neglecting the testimonies of versions and 
 fathers. Thus the whole conformation of the text should proceed 
 from the evidences themselves, and not from what is called the 
 received edition." In the Introduction to his eighth larger critical 
 edition Tischendorf declares his adherence to the idea of Richard 
 Bentley, which was followed by Lachmann, to establish the text from 
 the few oldest manuscripts, confirmed by the authority of some of the 
 oldest versions, especially the Latin, and by the testimonies of the fa- 
 thers in all cases, and to give a subordinate authority to the codices. 
 
 The eighth critical edition of Tischendorf s Greek Testament is 
 furnished with extensive critical apparatus in the form of readings 
 from the oldest Greek manuscript versions, and citations from the 
 early fathers, upon the basis of which he rests his critical text. 
 
 This edition of Tischendorf s places before us the text of the 
 New Testament in a very accurate form, such as it was known to the 
 lathers of the second and third centuries, and must present to us a 
 very exact copy of the writings of the New Testament as delivered 
 by its different authors. 
 
 Tischendorf also rendered great services to the Christian world 
 by publishing various ancient codices of the New Testament, arid 
 by thus placing the grounds of the authority of our Greek Testa- 
 ment within the reach of all scholars. 
 
 In the same rank with Tischendorf as a critical editor stands the 
 Englishman Samuel Prideaux Tregelles, inferior to him, perhaps, in 
 learning, but not in critical ability and acumen. 
 
 This distinguished scholar published, in 1844, a Greek text of the 
 Book of Revelation from ancient authorities, with an English trans- 
 lation, and announced his intention of editing the Greek Testament 
 with various readings. In executing this work he has adopted the 
 following plan : 
 
 " I. To give the tex* of the New Testament on the authority 
 of the ancient witnesses, manuscripts, and versions, with the aid of 
 the earliest citations, so as to present, as far as possible, the text 
 best attested in the earlier centuries. 
 
 " II. To follow certain proofs, when obtainable, which carry us 
 as near as possible to the Apostolic Age. 
 
 1 Dr. Gregory, of Leipzig, is preparing for publication the Prolegomena.
 
 OF THE HOLY SCRIPTURES. 487 
 
 ' III. So to give the various readings as to maice it clear what Is 
 the evidence on both sides ; and always to give the whole of the 
 testimony of the ancient manuscripts (and of some which are later in 
 date but old in text) of the versions as far as the seventh century, 
 and the citations down to Eusebius inclusive." J In carrying out this 
 plan, Tregelles most laboriously collated manuscripts, examined 
 ancient versions, and studied extensively the patristic writings. 
 
 The first part, containing Matthew and Mark, was published in 
 1857; the second part, containing Luke and John, appeared in 1861; 
 the Acts and Catholic Epistles in 1865; the fourth part, embracing 
 Romans, First and Second Corinthians, Galatians, Ephesians, Philip- 
 pians, Colossians, and First and Second Thessalonians, appeared in 
 1869; the fifth part, containing the Epistle to the Hebrews, First 
 and Second Timothy, Titus, and the Epistle to Philemon, were pub- 
 lished in 1870; the sixth part, containing the Apocalypse, appeared 
 in 1872. 
 
 Parallel with the Greek text, Tregelles gives the Latin version 
 of Jerome from the Codex Amiatinus, written about A.D. 541. 
 
 The protracted illness and the death of Tregelles prevented him 
 from completing his work, and the seventh part, containing " Prole- 
 gomena and addenda and corrigenda," was compiled and edited bv 
 F. J. .A. Hort, D.D., and A. W. Streane, A.M., and published in 
 1879* after the death of Tregelles. The whole work makes a quarto 
 volume of 1070 pages, besides Prolegomena of xxxii pages, and is 
 published in London by Samuel Bagster & Sons. In every respect 
 this edition of Tregelles is worthy of the highest praise. It is to be 
 icgretted, however, that his death prevented his publishing a revised 
 edition of the whole work. Codex Sinaiticus is not used until near 
 the close of John's Gospel. 
 
 A later critical text of the Greek of the highest value has been 
 prepared by Drs. Westcott and Hort, with an Introduction by Dr. 
 Philip Schaff. Harper & Brothers, New York, 1881. 
 1 Introductory notice to his critical edition.
 
 488 INTRODUCTION TO THE STUDY 
 
 CHAPTER VIII. 
 THE CANON OF THE NEW TESTAMENT. 
 
 canonical books of the New Testament, as held by all 
 bodies ' of Christians, with the exception of some individuals, 
 however, are the following: The four Gospels of Matthew, Mark, 
 The books of Luke, and John ; the Acts of the Apostles, written by 
 the New Testa- Luke ; fourteen Epistles of Paul one to the Romans, 
 
 two to the Corinthians; to the Galatians, Ephesians, 
 Philippians, and Colossians, each one ; to the Thessalonians, and to 
 Timothy, each two; one to Titus and one to Philemon, and an 
 Epistle to the Hebrews; the General Epistle of James, two General 
 Epistles of Peter, one General Epistle and two small Epistles of John, 
 the General Epistle of Jude, and the Book of Revelation. 
 
 The foregoing is the order of the books in the English version. 
 But Tischendorf and Tregelles, in their critical editions of the Greek, 
 follow another order, the same as that of the Vatican* manuscript, 
 of the fourth century, and the Alexandrian, of the following century. 
 After the four Gospels and the Acts of the Apostles, they arrange 
 the other books thus: The Epistle of James, two Epistles of Peter, 
 three of John, one of Jude, the Epistle of Paul to the Romans, the 
 two to the Corinthians, the Epistles to the Galatians, Ephesians, 
 Philippians, Colossians, the two to the Thessalonians, the Epistle to 
 the Hebrews, the Epistles to Timothy, the one to Titus, that to Phil- 
 emon, and the Revelation. It must be acknowledged, however, that 
 our present canon of the New Testament was not universally re- 
 ceived, in all its parts, in the first three centuries after the apostolic 
 age, as there were doubts about the Epistles of James and Jude, the 
 Second Epistle of Peter, the Second and Third of John, and aboflt 
 he authors of the Epistle to the Hebrews and of the Revelation. 
 
 The books that compose our canon of the New Testament were 
 Times and oo- w " tten i > n a ^ probability, between A. D. 50 and 90.* 
 casions of their They were called forth on various occasions, to meet the 
 
 wants of the infant Church. Some were written origi- 
 nally for some particular society, and others for the whole Church. 
 
 1 The ancient Syriac version, the Peshito, however, wants the Second Epistle of 
 Peter, that of Jude, Second and Third John, and the Revelation. 
 The Vatican MS., however, does not extend farther than Hebrew* ix, 14. 
 It is probable that the so-called Second Epistle of Peter was written later.
 
 OF THE HOLY SCRIPTURES. 489 
 
 Luke dedicates his Gospel and the Acts of the Apostles to Theoph- 
 ilus, though, doubtless, intending them for general circulation. But 
 even the writings which were addressed to special societies would 
 soon be copied and circulated throughout the Christian world. And 
 St. Paul himself, near the close of his Epistle to the Colossians, re- 
 quests, "And when this epistle is read among you, cause that it be 
 read also in the Church of the Laodiceans ; and that ye likewise read 
 the Epistle from Laodicea." 
 
 Clement of Rome, in his Epistle to the Corinthians, written in the 
 latter part of the first century, refers to Paul's first B^^,,^ to 
 epistle ' to them, and from the way he speaks of matters* the books in 
 mentioned in that epistle it is evident he had a copy of early 
 it before him. He also had before him the Epistle of Paul to the 
 Romans, the Epistle to the Hebrews," and in all probability the 
 Gospels of Matthew 8 and Luke. 4 
 
 In the Epistle of Barnabas, written most probably in the last part 
 of the first* century, there is a passage quoted, found in Matt, 
 xxii, 14, with the remark, as it is written* This is the formula with 
 which the Jews quoted the Old Testament Scriptures, and it is prob- 
 able that the Gospel of Matthew was already arranged along with 
 other sacred books in use in the Christian Church. 
 
 The Epistle of Polycarp to the Philippians, written soon after the 
 martyrdom of Ignatius, and therefore somewhere between A. D. 107 
 and 1 1 6, contains references to various books of the New Testament, 
 though not specified by name, except where he speaks of Paul's 
 Epistle to the Philippians. Besides this reference we find the exact 
 language used in Matt, xxvi, 41 and Mark xiv, 38, and a passage 
 from Acts ii, 24. He introduces a passage from i Corinthians with 
 the remark, "As Paul says." We also find a reference to Paul's 
 Second Epistle to the Corinthians, the Epistle to the Ephesians, 
 First Epistle to Timothy, the First of Peter, and First of John. Be- 
 sides the passage mentioned as being found in Matthew and Mark, 
 there seems to be an evident quotation from Matthew's report of the 
 sermon on the mount. From this it will appear that Polycarp must 
 have had a collection of New Testament writings consisting of at least 
 eight books. There is a clear reference to such a collection where 
 he says, " I trust ye are well exercised in the holy writings, as in 
 these Scriptures it is said, Be ye angry and sin not, and, Let not the 
 
 1 Sec. 47. ' Sec. 36 refers to Heb. i, 3, 4 ; sec. 17, to Heb. iii, 2 and xi. 
 
 'In sec. 46, to Matt, xviii, 6. 4 In sec. 13 the reference is to Luke vi, 36-38. 
 
 * Hilgenfcld places it about A. D. 97. 
 
 * " Many arc called, few are chosen." The Greek in Matthew and Barnabas ii 
 the same.
 
 490 INTRODUCTION TO THE STUDY 
 
 sun go down upon your wrath." Here he quotes Eph. iv, 26 as a 
 part of Holy Scripture. 
 
 Justin Martyr, about A. D. 139, in his first Apology for the 
 jiminMartyrt Christians, states that they were accustomed to meet 
 citation*. on t he day of the sun, so called, when The Memoirs 
 of the Apostles, or the writings of the prophets, are read as long as 
 time allows." 1 He had just before remarked, " For the apostles, in 
 the memoirs composed by them, called Gospels, have delivered that 
 Jesus, having taken bread and given thanks, commanded them, say- 
 ing, ' Do this in remembrance of me,' " etc. In his Dialogue with 
 Trypho the Jew, written soon afterwards, he describes the Gospels 
 more accurately, as "written by the apostles and their companions."* 
 In his first Apology he gives quotations from all four of our Gospels 
 mostly from Matthew and Luke. There is no doubt that the apos- 
 tolic Epistles had been already collected, but, probably, they were 
 not read as regularly as the Gospels in the public assemblies. 
 
 About A. D. 140 Marcion, a noted heretic, made a collection of 
 sacred Scriptures for his own use, embracing an abridged editioa of 
 Luke's Gospel, and ten Epistles of Paul, some of which he mutilated 
 These books he took from the canon in use in the Christian Church 
 Epiphanius * charges him with arranging the Epistles in a different 
 order from that in which they stood in the Christian collection. In 
 the latter part of the second century it appears that the sacred 
 books formed two divisions, The Gospels (TO. kvayyeXiita) and The 
 Epistles (rd anoaroXcKd).* Tertullian speaks of Gospels (evangelia), 
 and Apostles (apostoli}.' 
 
 CHAPTER IX. 
 
 THE TESTIMONY OF THE EARLY CHURCH RESPECTING THB 
 CANON OF THE NEW TESTAMENT. 
 
 earliest known catalogue of the books of the New Testament 
 * is the fragment in Latin, commonly called the Canon of Mura- 
 tori, from its discoverer, a distinguished Italian antiquarian, who 
 Canon of MU- found it in the Ambrosian Library in Milan, and pub- 
 rmtort - lished it in 1740. The fragment itself contains inter- 
 
 nal evidence that it was written soon after the middle of the second 
 century. In speaking of Hermas, the author of the fragment re- 
 
 'Sec. 67. 'Sec. 103. *Adversus Haereses, lib. i. torn, iii, hares xlii, 373 
 4 Ircnaens, lib. i. 3. 6. * Adversus Praxeam, cap. xv.
 
 OF THE HOLY SCRIPTURES. 491 
 
 marks that he wrote the (work called) Pastor very recently, in our 
 times (jtuperrime nostris temporibus), in the city of Rome, while his 
 brother Pius sat as bishop of the Church in the city of Rome. The 
 date of the episcopate of Pius is variously stated, some placing it 
 A. D. 127-142, others 142-157. If we take the latest date, and sup- 
 pose that Hermas wrote about A. D. 150, the Canon of Muratori 
 was written about A. D. 160; otherwise it could not be said that he 
 wrote very recently (nuperrime). After the lapse of ten years, we can 
 scarcely say that the late civil war in the United States was very re- 
 cently waged. The fragment, though abounding in blunders of 
 transcribers, is sufficiently clear in the most important points, and, as 
 there can be no doubt that it is a genuine document, it has been 
 almost universally deemed to be of great value. 
 
 The first part of the Canon from the destruction of one leaf or 
 more of the MS. is wanting. It begins with the words, quibus 
 tamen interfuit etita posuit : " at which he was, nevertheless, present, and 
 thus stated." These words evidently refer to Mark's Gospel, for the 
 canon immediately adds : " the third book of the Gospel is according 
 to Luke," after which it places the fourth Gospel as that of John. 
 The Acts of the Apostles it ascribes to Luke, and states that Paul 
 wrote two Epistles to the Corinthians ; that next he wrote to the 
 Ephesians, then to the Philippians, Colossians, and Galatians in or 
 der, then two Epistles to the Thessalonians, also to the Romans in 
 the seventli place. It names two Epistles to Timothy, one to Titus, 
 and one to Philemon, and ascribes the Apocalypse to John, and also 
 attributes to him the First Epistle which now bears his name, a part 
 of which it quotes, and names two (other) Epistles as his, and as- 
 cribes one to Jude. In this list we miss the Epistle to the Hebrews, 
 the Epistle of James, and the two of Peter. It says : " The Apoc- 
 alypse of John and of Peter only we receive, which some of us are 
 not willing should be read in the Church." It is doubtful whether 
 this refers to the Revelations both of John and Peter, or to the lattei 
 alone. There is an obscure reference to the Wisdom of Solomon, 
 though it is not easy to see why that book should be named. In 
 the imperfect state of this " Canon " no valid objection can be made 
 against the omitted books, as it is well known that the First Epistle 
 of Peter was universally received in the early Church. There can 
 be no doubt that the Gospel of Matthew stood first in this " Canon," ' 
 aj it was always placed first by the ancients. 
 
 1 The Canon of Muratori has been at different times published. The best edition 
 is that of Dr. S. P. Tregelles, who published a facsimile of it in 1867, made from the 
 original in the Ambrosiar. Library in Milan, which he accompanies w'th a critical 
 commentary. This edition lies before me.
 
 493 INTRODUCTION TO THE STUDY 
 
 The Latin version of the New Testament, sometimes called the 
 Th books ac- Itala, made about the middle of the second century, 
 cording to the mos t probably in Northern Africa, contained the four 
 
 Itala version, 
 
 Tertuiiian, and Gospels, Acts of the Apostles, thirteen Epistles of Paul, 
 the Epistle to the Hebrews, the Epistle of Jude, the First 
 Epislle of Peter, the First of John, and probably the other two, and 
 the Apocalypse. These books were received by Tertuiiian, who 
 flourished in Northern Africa, A. D. 193-220, and they doubtless 
 were found in the old Latin version to which he refers ' as being in 
 use in his time. The Epistle to the Hebrews he thinks was written 
 by Barnabas ; a the Apocalypse he attributes to the Apostle John.* 
 He speaks of the First Epistle of John, by which he implies the exist- 
 ence of at least one other. 4 But we can find in his works no reference 
 to the Second Epistle of Peter, and it is probable that it was not re- 
 ceived by him. Nor do we find any very probable reference to the 
 Epistle of James. Whether it was received by him or not is diffi- 
 cult to say. In the ancient MSS. of the Old Latin version, preceding 
 that of Jerome, all our Books of the New Testament are found, either 
 entire or in fragments. But we canrot assert with safety that the 
 earliest Latin version originally contained the Second Epistle of Peter 
 and the Epistle of James. The earliest Syriac version of the New 
 Testament, the Peshito, made in all probability about the middle of 
 the second century, contains all our canonical books, with the ex- 
 ception of the Second Epistle of Peter, the Epistle of Jude, Second 
 and Third of John, and the Apocalypse. 
 
 The canon of Titus Flavius Clemens, president of the catechetical 
 canon or Titus sc hl of Alexandria (A. D. 191-202), embraced the four 
 Fiavius cie- Gospels, Acts of the Apostles, tfiirteen Epistles of Paul,* 
 the First Epistle of Peter, the First Epistle of John, the 
 Epistle of Jude, and the Apocalypse, which he attributes to John,' 
 doubtless meaning the apostle. It is evident from his language that 
 he knew, at least, of one other Epistle of John, for he quotes the First 
 as his larger epistle. 7 We can find no certain reference to the 
 Epistle of James. Of the Second Epistle of Peter we discover not 
 a vestige. We find no reference to the Epistle to Philemon, but 
 this is not surprising, as he had no occasion to quote it. 
 
 Cyprian, bishop of Carthage (about A. D. 250), uses all our books 
 except Hebrews, 2 Peter, 2 and 3 John, and Jude. His canon dif- 
 fers but little, if any, from that of Tertuiiian. 
 
 1 Liber de Monogamia, cap. xi. * Liber de Pudicitia, cap. xx. 
 
 J Advers. Marc., lib. iii, cap. xiv. 4 De Pudicitia, cap. xix. 
 
 8 The Epistle to the Hebrews is included in these. 
 Stromatum, lib. vi, 13. 'Ibid., ii, IS-
 
 OF THE HOLY SCRIPTURES. 493 
 
 From the works of Irenaeus, bishop of Lyons (177-202), it is evident 
 that his canon consisted of the four Gospels, the Acts of 
 the Apostles, twelve Epistles of Paul, First Epistle of 
 Peter, First and Second of John, and the Apocalypse, which he ascribes 
 to " John, the disciple of the Lord." ' Besides these books, he has a 
 probable reference to the Epistle to the Hebrews. 8 He makes no 
 reference to the Epistle of Philemon, which is not strange ; none 
 that is at all probable to the Second Epistle of Peter, or to the Epistle 
 of Jude, but gives one passage from the Epistle of James. 3 
 
 In the first half of the third century flourished Origen first at 
 Alexandria, in the catechetical school, and afterwards as presbyter in 
 Caesarea Palestinse one of the greatest and most learned Christians of 
 the earlier centuries. It is interesting to inquire what was his canon 
 of New Testament Scripture ? The canon of Origen embraced the 
 four Gospels, of Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John, the onsen's can- 
 Acts of the Apostles, 4 at least thirteen 6 Epistles of Paul, on - 
 the First Epistle of John, the First of Peter, the Epistle of James, 
 and the Apocalypse, which he ascribes to the Apostle John. He 
 speaks of the Second Epistle of Peter as being doubted, as well as 
 the Second and the Third of John ; ' and although he makes no use of 
 these three Epistles, nor of Jude's, so far as we can see, yet in the 
 "seventh Homily on the book of Joshua, he remarks, "Peter also 
 sounds the two trumpets of his Epistles; also James and Jude." 1 
 
 Eusebius, the learned Church historian, bishop of Csesarea Pales- 
 tinae from about A. D. 315 until 340, gives a catalogue The canon ^ 
 of the books of the New Testament in the following cording to EU- 
 language : " First must be placed the holy quaternion 8 
 of the Gospels, which the book of the Acts of the Apostles follows; 
 after this are to be placed the Epistles of Paul ; after which we are 
 confidently to admit the reputed First Epistle of John, and likewise 
 that of Peter. After these are to be placed, if it seem proper, the 
 Apocalypse of John, concerning which we will state the opinions at 
 the proper time. And these are acknowledged. Of the disputed 
 books, yet well known to the most, is the so-called Epistle of James, 
 the Epistle of Jude, and the Second Epistle of Peter, and those 
 which are called the Second and Third of John, whether they belong 
 to the evangelist, or to some one of the same name. 
 
 1 Contra Hsereses, lib. v, cap. xxvi, I. f lbid., lib. ii, cap. xxx, 9. 
 
 1 Cap. ii, 23 in Contra Hsereses, lib. iv, cap. xvi, 2. 
 
 4 Which he ascribes to Luke Horn, vii, in lib. Josh. 
 
 Although Origen at different times quotes the Epistle to the Hebrews as Paal's, 
 yet at other times he doubts its Pauline origin. Eusebius, Hist. Eccles., vi, cap. xxv, 
 We do not find any mention that Origen makes of the Epistle to Philemon. 
 
 *In Eusebius, Hist. Eccles., vi, xxv. T In the Latin translation of Rufinus
 
 494 INTRODUCTION TO THE STUDY 
 
 "Among spurious writings are to be reckoned the book of the Act\ 
 of Paul, and the book called the Shepherd, and the Revelation oj 
 Peter. Besides these, the reputed Epistle of Barnabas, and the so- 
 called Doctrines of the Apostles. And besides, as I said, the Apoca- 
 lypse of John, if it seem proper, which, as I said, some reject, but. 
 others reckon as genuine among the acknowledged books. Already 
 some have reckoned among these (the spurious) The Gospel accord- 
 ing to the Hebrews, with which those Hebrews who have accepted 
 Christ are greatly pleased. All these might be classed as disputed 
 writings. Nevertheless, we have made the list of these books, as 
 being necessary, distinguishing the Scriptures that are true, genuine, 
 and acknowledged, according to the tradition of the Church, from 
 those writings which are different from these, which are not in the 
 New Testament canon, but are also disputed, yet known to the 
 most of the ecclesiastical writers. In this way we can know both 
 these books themselves, and those which are produced by the her- 
 etics in the- name of the apostles, whether as containing Gospels of 
 Peter, and Thomas, and Matthew, or of some other apostles, or as 
 containing the Acts of Andrew and John, and of the other apostles, 
 none of which has any one in the succession of ecclesiastical writers 
 deigned to mention in his writings. The character of the style also 
 differs widely from apostolic usage, and the purpose and scope of the 
 things contained in them, diverging as widely as possible from true 
 orthodoxy, clearly show that they indeed are the fictions of heretical 
 men. Wherefore they are not to be reckoned among even spurious 
 writings, but are to be rejected as altogether absurd and impious." 1 
 
 Such was the state of the canon when Eusebius wrote his Church 
 History, a short time before the Council of Nicsea. 
 
 Cyril, bishop of Jerusalem (A. D. 351 and later), states that the fol- 
 lowing books compose the canon of the New Testament: The four 
 Gospels, the Acts of the Apostles, seven Catholic Epistles of James, 
 and Peter, John, and Jude, and fourteen Epistles of Paul. He con- 
 siders no other books of authority.* He makes no mention of the 
 Apocalypse. 
 
 The great theologian, Athanasius, bishop of Alexandria (A. D. 328 
 
 The canon ao- anc * ^ ater ) * n n ' s thirty-ninth Festal Epistle, gives the fol- 
 
 em-ding to Atb- lowing catalogue of the New Testament books: Fout 
 
 Gospels, according to Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John; 
 
 the Acts of the Apostles, the seven Epistles called Catholic, of the 
 
 apostles, viz., one of James, two of Peter, three of John, one of Jude. 
 
 Besides these, fourteen Epistles of Paul, arranged in the following 
 
 order: the first to the Romans, then two to the Corinthians, after 
 
 1 Hist. Eccles., lib. iii, cap. xxv. 'Catechesis iv, *ec. xxnrf-
 
 OF THE HOLY SCRIPTURES. 495 
 
 these (one) to the Galatians, Ephesians, Philippians, and Colossians, 
 two to the Thessalonians, the Epistle to the Hebrews, two to Tim- 
 othy, one to Titus, and, last, one to Philemon, and the Apocalypse 
 of John. "These are the fountains of salvation, so that whoever 
 thirsts may fill himself with the oracles contained in them. In U.ese 
 only is the doctrine of piety taught. Let no one add to them, or 
 take any thing away from them." 1 
 
 Gregory Nazianzen, who flourished in Cappadocia in the latter 
 half of the fourth century, gives the canon of the New Testament, 
 in which he enumerates the four Gospels, Acts of the Apostles, and 
 fourteen Epistles of Paul. He remarks that some assert that the 
 Epistle to the Hebrews is spurious, but that in this they are mis- 
 taken. Of the Catholic Epistles, says he, some say that seven, others 
 that only three, viz., one of James, one of Peter, and one of John, 
 ought to be received. Some, says he, accept the Apocalypse of 
 John, but the most assert it to be spurious. 3 
 
 Didymus (f 396), head of the catechetical school of Alexandria, 
 in addition to the books of the canon everywhere recognised, makes 
 use of the Epistle of James, the Second Epistle of Peter, that of 
 Jude, and the Apocalypse. 
 
 Rufinus, of Aquileia in Northern Italy, who flourished in the lat- 
 ter half of the fourth century and in the beginning of the fifth, gives 
 the following list of the books of the New Testament : " Four Gospels 
 of Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John ; the Acts of the Apostles, which 
 Luke wrote ; fourteen Epistles of the Apostle Paul, two of the Apostle 
 Peter, one of James, the brother of the Lord, and apostle ; one of 
 Jude, three of John, and the Apocalypse of John. These are the 
 books which our fathers included in the canon, and from which they 
 wished the principles of our faith to be established." 3 
 
 The canon of Ambrose, bishop of Milan in the latter part of the 
 fourth century, embraced, as appears from his works, ^^ ^^ ^ 
 the four Gospels, Acts of the Apostles, at least thirteen Ambrose and 
 Epistles of Paul, two Epistles of Peter, First John, .and Chry8M 
 the Apocalypse, which he ascribes to John the evangelist. 4 
 
 A question has been raised about the genuineness of this epistle, which is muti- 
 lated. There are, however, no valid grounds for doubting' its genuineness. Fr'>n 
 examining the works of Athanasius, we find that he uses all the books of our pres- 
 ent New Testament canon, except the Second and Third Epistles of John and the 
 Epistle to Philemon, which there was no occasion to quote. 
 
 " Carminum, lib. ii, lines 290-318. 'Commentaries in Symbol. Apostol., sec. "7 
 
 4 We have r.ot been able to find any reference in his undoubted works 10 James's 
 
 Epistle, or Jude's or Second and Third John, or Philemon. There was no occasion 
 
 to quote Philemon. It is very probable that the omitted Epistles were received by 
 
 him.
 
 i96 INTRODUCTION TO THE STUDY 
 
 The Canon of Hilary, bishop of Pictavi (Poitiers), in western 
 Gaul, in the middle of the fourth century, embraced 
 the four Gospels, Acts of the Apostles, at least thirteen 
 Epistles of Paul (the Hebrews being ascribed to him), two Epistles 
 of Peter, the First Epistle of John, and the Apocalypse. He man- 
 ifestly regards this last book as belonging to the Apostle John. We 
 do not find any mention of the Epistle to Philemon, nor of Second 
 and Third John, which is not strange, considering their brevity. 
 We have been unable to find any reference to the Epistle of James. 
 The Canon of Ephraem ' the Syrian, who flourished about the 
 The canon of m iddle f l ^ e fourth century, embraced the four Gos- 
 Ephraem the pels, the Acts of the Apostles, twelve Epistles of Paul 
 (including the Epistle to the Hebrews), the Epistle of 
 James, two Epistles of Peter, First and Second John, Jude, and the 
 Apocalypse; of this last book he quotes* as John's a part of chap, 
 i, 7. It thus appears that his canon included more books than the 
 Peshito version which omitted Second Peter, Jude, Second and 
 Third John, and the Apocalypse. Though we have not found any 
 quotations from the Epistles to Titus and Philemon, we do not 
 doubt that they formed a part of Ephraem's Canon. 
 
 Titus, bishop of Bostra, in Arabia, soon after the middle of the 
 fourth century, in his work against the Manichaeans uses our four 
 
 Gospels, the Acts of the Apostle, the Epistle of Paul 
 Canon of Titus. f _ . . . 
 
 to the Romans, the two to the Corinthians, the one to 
 
 the Ephesians, to the Colossians, and the Epistle to the Hebrews. 
 In his oration on the Palm Branches, he also uses the two Epistles to 
 Timothy, and the Epistle to the Philippians. He doubtless received 
 the other 8 books of our canon, which he had no occasion to quote 
 in the two named works, which contain about one hundred pages. 
 
 The Canon of Methodius, bishop of Patara in Lycia, and after- 
 ward of Tyre (martyred A. D. 311), as appears from his " Convivium 
 Decent Virginum" which Neander regards as " the most important 
 canon of Meth- and authentic of his extant writings," contained the four 
 Gospels, Acts of the Apostles, Paul's Epistle to the 
 Romans, the two to the Corinthians, those to the Ephesians, Gala- 
 tians, Philippians, Colossians, i Thessalonians, the two Epistles to 
 Timothy, Hebrews, and the Apocalypse. In some other small 
 works, published as his, we find a reference to the Epistle to Titus, 
 First Epistle of Peter, and probably the First of John. 
 
 1 The edition of Ephraem's works, which we consulted, in the Astor Library, 
 New York, is that published in Rome in six volumes, folio, 1732-46. Three of 
 the volumes are in Syriac and Latin, and three in Greek and Latin. 
 
 J Ib., vol. iii, p. 146, in the Greek. 3 The Apocalypse might possibly be an exception.
 
 OF THE HOLY SCRIPTURES. 497 
 
 The canon of the celebrated John Chrysostom, first deacon v then 
 presbyter, at Antioch in the latter part of the fourth century, after- 
 wards bishop of Constantinople (398-407), was as follows, in his 
 own language : " The books of the New Testament are, the fourteen 
 Epistles of Paul, the four Gospels, two belonging to the disciples of 
 Christ, John and Matthew, two of Luke and Mark, one of whom was 
 a disciple of Peter, and the other of Paul. For the first two (evan- 
 gelists) were eye-witnesses of Christ's life, and associated with him. 
 The other two (evangelists) delivered to others what they had re- 
 ceived from them (Peter and Paul), the Book of the Acts, belonging 
 to Luke, who related the transactions, and of the Catholic Epistles 
 three." 1 These three are, the Epistle of James, the First of Peter, 
 and First of John, which we find quoted in his works. His canon is 
 the same as that of the Peshito-Syriac version, omitting Second 
 Peter, Second and Third John, Jude, and the Apocalypse. 
 
 From the canon of Chrysostom we pass to that of Epiphanius, the 
 learned metropolitan bishop in the island of Cyprus in the last part 
 of the fourth century. His canon, as is seen from his works, cer- 
 tainly contained all our canonical books, with the possible, but not 
 probable, exception of Jude and the Third Epistle of John.* 
 
 We pass next to the celebrated Augustine, bishop of Hippo Re- 
 gius, in Northern Africa, from about 395 until 430. In The ^^ re _ 
 his work on Christian Doctrine (lib. ii, cap. viii) he gives ceived by AU- 
 the following list of the canonical books of the New Tes- s 
 tament : " Four Gospels, according to Matthew, Mark, Luke, and 
 John ; fourteen Epistles of Paul to the Romans, two to the Corin- 
 thians, to the Galatians, to the Ephesians, to the Philippians, two to 
 the Thessalonians, to the Colossians, two to Timothy, to Titus, to 
 Philemon, to the Hebrews ; two of Peter, three of John, one of Jude, 
 and one of James ; the Acts of the Apostles in one book, and the 
 Apocalypse of John in one book." 
 
 From Augustine we turn naturally to Jerome, the greatest biblical 
 scholar in the early Church. Born at Stridon, on the The canon of 
 border of Hungary, about A. D. 340, he studied at Rome, Jerome - 
 
 : *E<m 6e ical rjjf Kaivijs (Aiatfj/Kiyc) j3f/3/Ua, ai 'E^taroArtt at deKartaaapef Tiavhov, 
 ra 'Evayye'Xta TO. rtaaapa, 6vo fiev rtiv fia&qT&v TOV Xpiarov, 'luavvow, icai Man?a/ov, 
 tfo <5e AOVKU KOI MU/SKOU. 'Cv 6 fiev TOV Tlerpov, 6 6e TOV IlatiAov yeyovaai fia&ijTal 
 Oi uev yap uvTOKTat fyaav yeyevTipevoi, xal avyyevopevoi T(j5 XpiaTtf). 'Oi fo Trap' IKEI- 
 suv TU eneivuv Jtadefd/uevot elf erepovf i^T/veyKav KOI TO TUV TIpdi-suv 6e pi/3)i.lov, teal 
 UVTO Aoi>/3 laToprjaavTOf Ta yevo/jsva, KO,I TUV KadohiKuv 'Kinarohal ipelf. Synopsii 
 of Holy Scripture, vol. vi, Migne's edition. 
 
 * We have one probable reference to Jude in Adversus Hceres., lib. i, torn, iii, 
 xlii Haeres. We find no reference to the Third Epistle of John, which there was no 
 occasion to quote.
 
 498 INTRODUCTION TO THE STUDY 
 
 and, after spending a considerable number of years in different parts 
 of Gaul and Italy, he left for the East about 385, wheie he spent the 
 rest of his life, principally at Bethlehem, in Palestine, dying there 
 A. D. 420. The statement of a scholar of such learning and exten- 
 sive travels respecting the canonical Books of the New Testament 
 must be of great value. In the Introduction to his Commentary on 
 Matthew he gives an account of the origin of the four Gospels of 
 Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John, which he regards as the only au- 
 thentic histories of Jesus Christ. In his work on illustrious men 
 he attributes the Acts of the Apostles to Luke, the companion of 
 Paul. To Paul he ascribes one Epistle to the Romans, two to the 
 Corinthians, one to the Galatians, one to the Ephesians, one to the 
 Philippians, one to the Colossians, two to the Thessalonians, two to 
 Timothy, one to Titus, and one to Philemon. But the Epistle to 
 the Hebrews is not believed to be his, he says, on account of its dif- 
 ference of style and language, but is supposed to belong either to 
 Barnabas, according to Tertullian, or to the evangelist Luke, accord- 
 ing to some, or to Clement, afterwards bishop of the Roman Church, 
 who, they say, arranged and adorned in his own language the 
 thoughts of Paul. 
 
 Of James he remarks, that " he wrote one epistle only, which, it 
 is asserted, was published by some one else under the apostle's name, 
 notwithstanding it has gradually obtained authority in the course of 
 time." Respecting Peter, he remarks : " He wrote two epistles which 
 are called catholic, the second of which is denied by most persons 
 to be his, on account of its style being different from that of the first 
 epistle." He states that the Epistle of Jude is rejected by most per- 
 sons, because its author makes use of testimony in it from the apoc- 
 ryphal Book of Enoch. He adds: "Nevertheless, it has deserved 
 authority from its antiquity and use, and is reckoned among the 
 sacred Scriptures." He attributes to the Apostle John one epistle, 
 " which is approved by all the ecclesiastical writers and learned 
 men," but says that the Second and Third of John are asserted to 
 belong to John the presbyter of Ephesus. To the Apostle John he 
 ascribes the Apocalypse. 1 
 
 The canon in ^ tnese testimonies to the canon of the New Testa- 
 
 the older ver- ment may be added that furnished by the Memphitic (or 
 
 Coptic), Theban (or Sahidic), ^thiopic, and Armenian 
 
 versions* of the New Testament. The two Egyptian versions, Mem- 
 
 1 Liber de Viris Illustribus. 
 
 ' The Gothic version was made in the fourth century by Ulfilas. Of this version 
 fragments of the four Gospels and thirteen Epistles of Paul have been found and 
 published. Whether Ulfilas translated the whole of the New Testament is uncertain.
 
 OF THE HOLY SCRIPTURES. 490 
 
 phitic and Thebun, were made about the beginning of the third cen- 
 tury. The first of these contained all the books of our present 
 canon, and so, doubtless, did the other, though there have been no 
 remains of Titus and Philemon found in it. The Ethiopia and Ar- 
 menian versions, made in the fourth century, contained all our pres- 
 ent canon. 
 
 In concluding this part of our subject we may remark, that while 
 the genuineness and authority of some of the less important book 
 of oui present canon were at various times called in question by 
 Christian scholars, we have at the same time seen, that from the mid- 
 dle of the second century downwards, the most of our sacred writ 
 ings, embracing the most important, namely, the four Gospels, the 
 Acts of the Apostles, thirteen Epistles of Paul, the First Epistle of Peter, 
 and the First ofJohn,viz\Q. received everywhere throughout the Chris- 
 tian world without any doubt respecting their genuineness and au- 
 thority. Such a universal reception, so close to the apostolic age, 
 furnishes an incontrovertible proof of the genuineness of these writ- 
 ings. Numerous passages from these books are interwoven in the 
 discourses and discussions of the fathers of the Church from the last 
 half of the second century downwards, forming an integral part of 
 their principles arid arguments. Great use was also made of the 
 Epistle to the Hebrews and the Apocalypse ; but the Second Epistle 
 of Peter, the Epistle of James, and that of Jude, were little used in 
 the first three centuries after the apostolic age. 1 
 
 1 The Second Epistle of John is rarely quoted. It consists of but thirteen verse* 
 and there was hardly any occasion to use it ; still less to quote the Third.
 
 500 INTRODUCTION TO THE STUDY 
 
 CHAPTER X. 
 
 GENUINENESS OF CANONICAL BOOKS OF NEW TESTAMENT 
 THE FOUR GOSPELS. 
 
 Y\ 7"E have already seen that the four Gospels of Matthew, Mark, 
 ^ Luke, and John were everywhere received throughout the whole 
 universal re- Christian world, forming a part of all the early versions 
 to^Gtos^teta of the New Testament, from the old Latin version and 
 the Church. the Peshito-Syriac of the middle of the second century 
 to the Armenian and Gothic in the fourth; that they were ac- 
 \nowledged to be the works of the authors whose names they 
 bear, and are quoted as containing the authentic history of Jesus 
 Christ by all the Christian writers throughout the world, from Justin 
 Martyr (about A. D. 140) to Jerome and Augustine (about A..D. 
 400). Such unanimity upon a subject of deepest interest, which at- 
 tracted a world-wide attention, is of itself a strong ground for belie! 
 that we possess in these four Gospels the genuine history of Christ, 
 delivered by two of his apostles and two of their companions. If 
 these four documents contained nothing but ordinary history, this una- 
 nimity of testimony would be considered as absolutely conclusive, 
 and no further consideration of the subject would be deemed neces- 
 sary. But as these books, if genuine, establish the title of Jesus 
 Christ as the Messiah, and his right to the homage and obedience 
 of mankind, men are disposed to ask for stronger testimony to 
 establish their genuineness than they would demand to support the 
 claims of ordinary history. It must be acknowledged, however, that 
 the truth of Christianity does not depend upon the genuineness of 
 the Gospels, and that the universally acknowledged apostolic Epis- 
 tles would establish the fundamental doctrines of Christianity, espec- 
 ially the resurrection of Jesus Christ, which, in fact, stands inde- 
 pendent of even their testimony. But without these Gospels we 
 would have no authentic history of the Founder of Christianity, and 
 the system would be mutilated. 1 
 
 In presenting the external evidence of the genuineness of the 
 Gospels in a more definite and specific manner, we may begin with 
 the learned Church historian, Eusebius, bishop of Caesarea Palestine, 
 1 It must, however, be observed that the fact of the reception of our Gospels in 
 the apostolic age, or immediately afterward, would show that they were regarded 
 as containing the authentic history of Christ, and their authority would be of great 
 value, even though not written by those whose names they bear.
 
 OF THE HOLY SCRIPTURES. 501 
 
 who wrote his history of the Church a short time before the Council 
 of Nicaea, which was held A. D. 325. Eusebius had the External evi- 
 advantages of the library of ecclesiastical writers which 'genmnenessof 
 his friend Pamphilus had collected at Csesarea. Many the Gospels. 
 of these writings are lost, especially many of those belonging to the 
 first part of the second century, whose testimony to the genuineness 
 and authority of the four Gospels would be of the greatest value; 
 among these lost writings may be named, The Defense of Christian- 
 ity, by Quadratus ; the Refutation of Basilides, by Agrippa Castor; 
 and Papias's ' Exposition of the Oracles of the Lord. We cannot for 
 a moment suppose that the testimony of the early writings that have 
 been lost was adverse to the authority of our Gospels. For had this 
 been the case, we should certainly have heard of it from some source, 
 and in all probability from Eusebius himself, whose statements, based 
 upon his thorough knowledge of the history of the early Church, is, 
 to a great extent, a reflection of, if not a substitute for, these early 
 writings that are lost. 
 
 In giving a list of the books of Scripture undisputed, Eusebius re- 
 marks : " First must be placed the holy quaternion of the Gospels." 2 
 He also states : " Of all the apostles of the Lord, Matthew and John 
 alone have left us memoirs ; and tradition says, they wrote from ne- 
 cessity : for Matthew, having before preached the gospel to the 
 Hebrews, when he was about to depart to other people, having de- 
 livered in his native tongue the Gospel according to him, by this 
 writing he supplied the want of his presence to those whom he was 
 leaving : and Mark and Luke, having already published the Gospels 
 according to them, they say that John, who had the whole time 
 preached the gospel without writing, finally wrote on the following 
 account : The three Gospels that have already been described hav- 
 ing been spread abroad among all men, and known to John himself, 
 they say that he bore witness to their truth, but affirming that they 
 lacked only an account of those things done by Christ at the beginning 
 of his ministry. And the statement is true." 3 He speaks also of 
 the Gospel of John as being " uncontradicted," and received by the 
 whole Church, and that " it was rightly placed the fourth in order 
 after the other three, by the ancients." The testimony of Eusebius 
 is stronger from the very fcict that he expresses doubts concerning 
 some of the other books of our canon. 
 
 We next refer to the testimony of Origen, who flourished in the 
 first half of the third century. In his Commentary on Test j mony of 
 Matthew he observes : " As I have learned by tradition Oripen. 
 
 1 He, however, in a preserved fragment, as we shall see, speaks of the Gospels of 
 Matthew and Mark. Hist. Eccles., lib. Hi, cap. xxv. 3 Ibid., cap. xxiv. 4 Ibid.
 
 303 INTRODUCTION TO THE STUDY 
 
 respecting the four Gospels, which also alone are uncontrxdicted in the 
 Church of God under the heavens? that the Gospel according to Matth- 
 ew, once a publican but afterwards an apostle of Jesus Christ, was 
 written first, being delivered by him to the Jewish believers, composed 
 in the Hebrew language. The second is that according to Mark, 
 who composed it according to Peter's instructions. Wherefore, in 
 his Catholic Epistle he acknowledged him to be his son, saying, in 
 these words : ' She who in Babylon is elected with you, saluteth 
 you, and Mark, my son.' The third is, that according to Luke, (the 
 Gospel commended by Paul), which he wrote for those who were of 
 the Gentiles. Lastly, that according to John." ' It will be remem- 
 bered that Origen, also, had doubts respecting some of the other 
 books of the canon, which fact makes his testimony stronger re- 
 specting the Gospels. 
 
 Tertullian, presbyter of Carthage, who flourished in the latter part 
 Twtimony of of the second century and in the beginning of the third, 
 Tertuiiian. j n defending, against Marcion, the Gospel of Luke, which 
 the heretic had abridged and adopted, remarks : " If it is evident 
 that that is more true which was first, that that is first which was 
 from the beginning, that what was from the beginning was from the 
 apostles, certainly, in the same manner, it will be evident that what 
 has been held sacred in the Churches of the apostles was delivered 
 by the apostles. ... I say, therefore, that not only in those Churches 
 which were founded by the apostles, but in all those which hold 
 communion with them, this Gospel of Luke, which we are especially 
 defending, existed from its first publication. The same authority of 
 the apostolic Churches will defend the other Gospels also, which we 
 accordingly have through these Churches, and according to them 
 I mean the Gospels of John and Matthew and it may be also af- 
 firmed that what Mark published is Peter's, whose interpreter he 
 was; for also they are accustomed to ascribe to Paul Luke's Digest 
 (Gospel)." 8 It is evident from this passage that Tertullian was fully 
 assured that our Gospels had been authorities in the Churches from 
 their first publication, and he could have had no difficulty in ascer- 
 taining the facts in the case. 
 
 The testimony Clement, the learned instructor in the catechetical 
 
 of clement of school of Alexandria, a man of extensive travels, who 
 
 flourished in the last part of the second century and in 
 
 the beginning of the third, delivers the following concerning the four 
 
 1 The Greek is, Ilrpi TUV rearjupuv 'EvayyeMuv, u KOI pbva. uvavrlpprira tarti* ei> TJJ 
 virb rnv ovpavbv 'KuKfajoip rof> Qenv. 
 
 8 This passage is preserved in Euseb., Hist. Eccles.. lib. vi, cap. xxv, from Ori- 
 gen's Commentary on Matthew. The first part of that work is lost. 
 
 3 Adversus Marcionem, lib. iv, cap. v.
 
 OF THE HOLY SCRIPTURES. 503 
 
 Gospels : " Those Gospels which contain the genealogies (Matthew 
 and Luke) were written first. The Gospel according to Mark had 
 its origin in the following manner: When Peter had preached the 
 word publicly in Rome, and had proclaimed the Gospel through the 
 influence of the Spirit, many who were present besought Mark, as 
 he had followed Peter for a long time, and remembered the things 
 which he had said, that he would write them down, and accordingly 
 he composed the Gospel, and delivered it to those who wished it. 
 When Peter became aware of this, he attempted neither to prevent 
 him nor to encourage him. Finally, John, perceiving that corporeal 
 things are related in the Gospels, being urged by his friends, and 
 being inspired by the Spirit, he composed a spiritual Gospel." Eu- 
 sebius prefaces this quotation from Clement's lost work, "YnoTvn&aeig, 
 with the remark: "In these same books Clement delivers the tradi- 
 tion of the oldest presbyters respecting the order of the Gospels in 
 this manner." ' 
 
 Irenseus, bishop of Lyons in Gaul (A. D. 177-202), delivers the 
 following testimony respecting the Gospels : " Matthew, Testimony oi 
 indeed, among the Hebrews, delivered in their own dia- Irenaeus. 
 lect the writing of the Gospel, while Peter and Paul were preaching 
 the gospel at Rome and founding the Church. After their depar- 
 ture, Mark, the disciple and interpreter of Peter, himself wrote and 
 delivered to us the things preached by Peter. And Luke, the fol- 
 lower of Paul, delivered in a book the gospel preached by him 
 Afterwards John, the disciple of the Lord, who also leaned upon his 
 breast, also himself published his Gospel while he abode in Eph- 
 esus of Asia." s He also declares, that "there are but four Gospels, 
 nor can there be fewer than these. For since there are four quarters 
 of the world in which we live, and four universal winds, and the 
 Church is spread over all the earth, and the pillar and support of the 
 Church is the gospel and breath of life, naturally it (the Church) 
 has four pillars, blowing from all quarters immortality, and impart- 
 ing new life to men." 8 
 
 This language of Irenaeus shows that our four Gospels were alone 
 received, and it entirely excludes all apocryphal Gospels, as having 
 no authority in the Church. It has, indeed, been said 4 that the 
 idea of four quarters of the world was something so important and 
 fixed with Irenaeus that he thought there should be four Gospels to 
 correspond ro it. But this would be to reverse the natural order of 
 things, for the number four is in no respect a sacred or peculiar 
 number, and four quarters of the world and four winds suggested 
 
 1 Hist. Eccles., lib. vi, cap. xiv. 9 Adversus Haereses, lib. iii, cap i. 
 
 8 Ibid., lib. iii, cap. xi, 8. ' l!y Schenkel.
 
 504 INTRODUCTION TO THE STUDY 
 
 themselves obviously from the fact that there were no moie nor less 
 than four Gospels a reason for which fact he was anxiously seeking. 
 Had there been five Gospels, Irenaeus might have found a reason 
 for this in the fact that the Pentateuch, the foundation of the old 
 dispensation, consists of five books. Had there been three Gospels, 
 he might have illustrated it by the fact that God is revealed as a 
 trinity in Father, Son, and the Holy Spirit. Had there been two, it 
 had its analogy in there being two great classes for whom they were 
 intended, Jews and Gentiles. Had there been but one Gospel, he 
 might have explained it as indicating the Divine unity against the 
 paganism of the ancient world! 1 
 
 f -The testimony of Irenaeus is the more valuable from the fact that 
 ''the early part of his life was spent in Asia Minor, and that he was 
 acquainted with Polycarp, 2 a disciple of the Apostle John, and, 
 doubtless, with others who knew that apostle. 
 
 Tatian the Syrian, who had been a disciple of Justin Martyr, left 
 
 . Rome after the death of his master (about A. D. 1615)1 
 Dlatessaron of v ' 
 
 Tatian the Syr- and founded a heretical sect in Mesopotamia. He com- 
 posed, as Eusebius 1 informs us, a combination and col- 
 lection of the Gospels, he knew not how, which Tatian called The 
 Diatessaron (made of four). It, consequently, must have been 
 composed of our four Gospels. Epiphanius remarks on him, " It is 
 said that The Diatessaron was composed by him, which some call 
 (the Gospel) according to the Hebrews." 4 Theodoret, bishop of 
 Cyrrhus in Syria (about A. D. 423-457), relates, in speaking of 
 Tatian : " He composed the Gospel which is called Diatessaron, by 
 cutting out the genealogies and whatever else shows that the Lord 
 sprang from the seed of David according to the flesh. Not only did 
 those who belong to his party use it, but also those who follow the 
 apostolic doctrine, not knowing the mischievous character of the 
 composition, but in a very simple way using the book as an epitome. 
 I found more than two hundred of these books held in honor in our 
 Churches, all of which I removed, and substituted for them the 
 Gospels of the four evangelists.'" Barsalibi, bishop of Amida, in 
 Mesopotamia, in the twelfth century, states that Tatian, the dis- 
 ciple of Justin Martyr, composed one Gospel -from the four, which 
 
 1 Jerome remarks that the four Gospels had been predicted long before He ex- 
 plains the four faces of the cherubim in Ezekiel i to refer to the four Gospels: the 
 face of a man represents Matthew's Gospel ; the face of a lion, Mark's ; the face of 
 Ihe ox (or calf), Luke's ; the f.ice of an eagle, John's Gospel. Comment, in Matt. 
 
 'Epistle to Florinus. 3 Hist Eccles., lib. iv, cap. 2Q. 
 
 4 Haereses, lib. i, torn, iii, Haeresis xlvi. 
 
 * Haeret. Kabul. Compend., lib. i, cap. xx.
 
 OF THE HOLY SCRIPTURES. 505 
 
 he called Diatessaron. Saint Ephraem wrote comments on this 
 book, and followed the order of the Diatessaron. 1 According to 
 Barsalibi, the Diatessaron began thus : " In the beginning was the 
 word." This Commentary of Ephraem, preserved in the Armenian 
 language, was translated into Latin by J. B. Aucher in 1841. An 
 improved translation of the Commentary was published by Georgius 
 Moesinger, in Venice, 1876. 2 Tatian shows, by quoting in his 
 Oratio Ad Graecos, John i, 3 (sec. 19), and i, 5 (sec. 13), that he ac- 
 knowledged the fourth Gospel. Further, it is clear that he considered 
 the four Gospels alone as containing the authentic history of 
 Christ. 
 
 Theophilus, bishop of Antioch (A. D. 169-180), speaks of the 
 inspiration of the Gospels, 3 and quotes Matthew, Luke, and John 
 (by name). 
 
 The Canon of Muratori states that the third Gospel is that of 
 Luke, and the fourth is that of John. The first part of the canon 
 is lost, but no one doubts that its first and second Gospels were 
 those of Matthew and Mark. 
 
 The next witness for the four Gospels is Justin Martyr, the phi- 
 losopher, the first of whose extant works, the Apology, Justin Martyr 
 addressed to Antoninus Pius, was written about A. D. as a witness. 
 138 or 139," at any rate not later than 147. Justin Martyr 
 in his Apology says that Christ was born a hundred and fifty 
 years before ; but this may be in round numbers. In speaking of 
 the rebellion of the Jews against the Romans under Barchocheba^, 
 an impostor, he remarks : " In the Jewish war that has just now (y\ v) 
 been made." 5 This war was fought for three years, and was ended 
 A. D. 135. If Justin wrote A. D. 138 or 139, the expression "just 
 now " (vvv) would be appropriate, being but three or four years after 
 the event, but wholly unsuitable A. D. 147, twelve years after. 
 
 He already speaks of the heretic Marcion, but this furnishes no 
 valid proof that Justin wrote later than A. D. 139, as it is well known 
 
 1 Assemanni Bib. Or., vol. i, p. 57. 
 
 * A copy of this work lies before me. There can be no doubt that it is the 
 genuine Commentary of Ephraem on the Diatessaron. For it corresponds to the 
 ancient description of it. It is an epitome of our four Gospels, and lacks the 
 genealogies, both of which facts Theodoret, who had seen the work, states. It 
 begins, as Barsalibi says : "In the beginning was the word." Like the old Cure- 
 Ionian Syriac, it joins the last part of John i, 3, to verse 4. In the same manner 
 I find Tatian ends John i, 3, in his Oratio Ad Graecos. 
 
 3 Ad Autolycum, lib. iii, 12. 
 
 4 Gieseler assigns it to A. D. 138 or 139 ; Volkmarand Hilgenfeld, to A. D. 147, 
 
 6 'Ev TO) vvv yeyevrjfiEvu' lovdalK.^. TTO/^U. Apologia, sec. 31.
 
 vi'i INTRODUCTION TO THE STUDY 
 
 that Marcion appeared about that time, with his heresy, at Rome, at 
 which city Justin in all probability wrote the Apology. Justin, liv- 
 ing at such an early age, is an important witness for the genuineness 
 and authority of the Gospels. In speaking of the Lord's supper, he 
 remarks : " The apostles, in the Memoirs composed by them, which are 
 called Gospels, have thus delivered that Jesus commanded them, 
 when he had taken bread and given thanks, saying: 'Do this in 
 remembrance of me,' " ' etc. 
 
 In his description of Christian worship he states : " All who dwell 
 in the cities, or in the country, collect together on the day called 
 Sunday, and the Memoirs of the apostles and the writings of the 
 prophets are read as long as time allows," * etc. 
 
 In his Dialogue with Trypho the Jew, written a few years later 
 than the first Apology, Justin more accurately describes the Gospels : 
 " In the Memoirs, which, I say, were composed by his (Christ's) apos- 
 tles and their companions, (it is stated) that sweat, as great drops of 
 blood, fell from him as he prayed, and said, If it be possible, let this 
 cup pass from me." 3 After quoting both from Matthew and Luke 
 on the miraculous conception and the birth of Christ, he adds : " As 
 those who have related 4 all things concerning our Saviour Jesus 
 Christ teach, whom we believe." 
 
 There can be no doubt that the Gospels to which Justin refers as 
 being written by the apostles and their companions, and read on 
 Sunday in the public assemblies of the Christians, were the very 
 Gospels that we now have, bearing the names of Matthew, Mark, 
 Luke, and John. The first Apology of sixty pages contains about 
 forty passages, or about fifty-five verses, mostly from Matthew and 
 Luke from Matthew especially and one from John. Some of them 
 may have been taken from Mark, but it is impossible to determine 
 this with certainty, as none of them are peculiar to that evangelist-. 
 But, from the language used by Justin respecting the evangelists, 
 there could not have been less than two who were companions of the 
 apostles ; and as the Gospel of Mark was certainly one of the four 
 in use in the age of Justin, there can be no doubt that it was in his 
 collection. In speaking of baptism and regeneration, he remarks: 
 " For Christ said, If you be not born again, you cannot enter into 
 
 1 'Ot yap airdorofan kv Tolf yevo/ivotf vrr' aiiruv uiro/ivijpovevpaoiv, & Kufalrai *E. 
 3JAta, oOrwf irapt6uKav hreru^ai avroif rov 'Ii/aotJv, K. r. X. Apologia, sec. 66. 
 
 * Tjj TOV iJ/Uov Xf yofitvg Tiptp? nuvruv Ka.ro, irdfaif ff aypoif fievdvruv eiri r6 avrb <rt 
 vtf.evotc ytverat, itdi ra &iropvriiiove\ipara r&v un-oerroAuv f/ ru ovyypd^ara ruv Tpo0r/ 
 rCtv uvayiyvutsKtrai ftt%ptc ey;fpZ. Apj'logia, I, sec. 67. 
 
 *'Ev yap rolf &iroftvi]/jun>tv/taoi & ^l/J,i i>trb ruv uitoaro'Xuv avrov KCU, ruv k\elvoi 
 TapatuAovtfflffavruiv avvrerdx^tu, f. ^ Sec. 103. 
 
 4 '\irouvtinovevaavTt(. Apologia, I, sec. 33.
 
 OF THE HOLY SCRIPTURES 507 
 
 the kingdom of heaven. And that it is impossible for those jnce born 
 to enter the wombs of their mothers is evident to all." ' This pas- 
 sage, from its singularity, was evidently taken from John's Gospel. 1 
 In this first Apology of Justin every other passage respecting the 
 history of Christ is taken from our canonical Gospels, and there is 
 not a trace of any other source for the history of Christ. Hence, 
 apart from the peculiarity of the passage, the probability would be 
 very great that it was taken from some one of our received Gospels. 
 
 The quotations of Justin are not always exact, but the sense is the 
 same as that in the evangelists. As several evangelists have often 
 nearly the same passages, he sometimes combines them. His quo- 
 tations of the Septuagint of the Old Testament are scarcely more 
 exact than those from the New Testament. In most cases he seems 
 to have quoted from memory. But the very fact that his quotations 
 from the Gospels are not always exact, is a proof that these pas- 
 sages are genuine, and have not been tampered with by transcribers, 
 to conform them to the New Testament text. 
 
 In his Dialogue with Trypho the Jew, held at Ephesus shortly 
 after A. D. 135," but not written down until some years later, Justin 
 quotes about thirty passages from Matthew and Luke, and one from 
 John's Gospel, in which the Baptist says, "I am not the Christ."* 
 In arguing with a Jew, Justin was led to quote the Old Testament 
 more frequently than the New. In quoting a passage from Matthew 
 he prefaces it with the statement : " And it is written in the Gospel." ' 
 He calls these Gospels "the Memoirs of the apostles;" 8 "Me- 
 moirs written by the apostles and their companions." 7 There is a 
 clear reference to Mark's Gospel in the statement that " Christ 
 changed the names of the two sons of Zebedee, and called them 
 Boanerges, which is, Sons of Thunder." This, he states, is written " in 
 the Memoirs of him " 8 (Christ). Mark, it must be remembered, is 
 the only evangelist who relates the giving of this name to the sons 
 of Zebedee. In the account of Christ's baptism, he remarks : " And 
 a voice at the same time came from heaven, which is also uttered by 
 David when he speaks as of his person (Christ) what the Father 
 was about to say to him : Thou art my Son ; this day have I begot- 
 
 1 In sec. 61, from John iii, 3-5. 
 
 1 Hilgenfeld, in his Einleitung (Leipzig, 1875), acknowledges that Justin here use* 
 John's Gospel. 
 
 * This date is to be inferred from the beginning of the Dialogue, in which Trypho 
 tells Justin that he is a Hebrew of the circumcision who has fled from the war/j. 
 n*-w (vvv) finished, that is, the war stirred up by Barchochebas, A. IX 132-135. 
 *Sec. 88. 5 Sec. 100. 6 Sec. 101. 
 
 7 Sec. 103. 8 Sec. 106. 9 Chap. iii, 17. 
 
 33
 
 608 INTRODUCTION TO THE STUDY 
 
 ten thee. 1 But the language of Matthew is: This is my beloved 
 Son, in whom I am well pleased." It seems clear that Justin, in ar- 
 guing with the Jew, wished to bring the language in the Gospel as far 
 as possible into harmony with the declaration of the Psalm/ 
 
 Hilgenfeld 3 acknowledges that Justin used our four Gospels, and 
 that they were used in divine service, but thinks that he also made 
 use of the older Acts of Pilate and an uncanonical Gospel. But Jus- 
 tin made no use of the Acts of Pilate ; he simply states : " And that 
 these things were done you can learn from the Acts that were made 
 (written) in the time of Pontius Pilate." 4 
 
 Strauss acknowledges that Justin made use of the Gospels of 
 Matthew, Mark, and Luke, but thinks that he may have also used 
 an edition of the Hebrew Gospel. He denies that Justin used 
 John's Gospel. b 
 
 The testimony of Justin Martyr to the apostolic origin, the use, and 
 the authority of our four Gospels, is of the highest im- 
 
 Importance of 
 
 Justin Martyr's portance. He was a Platonic philosopher, converted 
 to Christianity in the first part of the second century. 
 He had visited Ephesus and Rome, and was evidently well ac- 
 quainted with the affairs of the Church. Can we suppose that a man 
 of his character would not inform himself of the origin of the Gos- 
 pels? His statement that they were written by the apostles and 
 their companions could not have been a mere guess. For how could 
 he determine, & priori, whether the apostles or their companions 
 wrote, or some of each class ? If he had nothing but conjecture 
 to follow, he would in all probability have ascribed all the Gospels 
 to apostles, the witnesses of the teaching and acts of Christ. We 
 learn from him that our Gospels were read in the Christian assem- 
 blies on Sunday, along with the writings of the Jewish prophets. This 
 custom was, doubtless, universal. Hegesippus, a Church teacher 
 of Jewish origin, made a journey to Rome, whither he arrived under 
 Bishop Anicetus (A. D. 157-161). On the way thither he conferred 
 with many bishops, and in his Memoirs of the Church (in five 
 books) he states that " in each succession (of bishops) and in every 
 city (the doctrines) are just such as the law and the prophets 
 
 1 Dialogue with Trypho, sec. 88. 
 
 * There is no need of resorting to the account of Christ's baptism in the Gospel 
 of the Ebionites, as it stood in the fourth century. For Lactantius (A. D. 314) 
 quotes the passage in the same form (Div. Inst., B. iv, cap. xv, i) as Justin. 
 
 * Einleitung, pp. 65-67. Leipzig, 1875. 
 
 4 Kai ravra bn yiyove, ivvaa&e ftadelv kit TUV em Tlovrfov TltbuTov yevoptvuv UK- 
 Tuv. First Apology, sec. 35. 
 
 * Das Leben Jesu, pp. 56-67. Leipzig, 1874.
 
 OF THE HOLY SCRIPTURES. 509 
 
 and the Lord teach" l There can be no doubt that by the teaching of 
 the Lord, Hegesippus refers to the reading of the Gospels in the 
 Churches along with the law and the prophets. He thus confirms 
 the statement of Justin, already alluded to, respecting the use of our 
 Gospels. 
 
 In speaking of chastity as taught by our Lord, Justin remarks ; 
 " There are many men and women, sixty and seventy value of Ju- 
 years of age, who became disciples of Christ in early tin's testtmony- 
 youth (* nai6()v), and continue incorrupt. And I declare that among 
 every race of men I can show such persons. For what shall we say 
 of that countless multitude of men who have been converted from a 
 licentious life and have learned these things ? " a Justin, then, knew 
 many who had been converted to Christianity in the last part of the 
 first century, when the Apostle John s was still alive. At Ephesus 
 he must have seen many who had been acquainted with that apostle. 
 If the Gospel of John had not been acknowledged in that Church at 
 that time, can we believe that Justin would have accepted it as an 
 apostolic Memoir of Christ ? There were in Justin's time, in all 
 probability, some few Christians who had known Peter and Paul. Cer- 
 tainly there were many who had known those who were acquainted 
 with the apostles, and with Mark and Luke. How could the Chris- 
 tians everywhere, in the time of Justin, be deceived respecting the 
 genuineness of the four Gospels ? One thing seems completely cer- 
 tain that Justin knew that these Gospels had come down from the 
 times of the apostles as writings composed by them and their com- 
 panions. Had it been otherwise, many of the Christians of his day 
 could have informed him that all the Gospels were introduced into 
 the Church long after the death of Peter and Paul, which occurred 
 about seventy years before Justin wrote his first Apology. Would 
 it be a difficult matter now to ascertain, apart from all documents, 
 whether the Methodist Episcopal Church had any book of Dis- 
 cipline in the year 1800? We could ascertain that from living 
 testimony ; and although we would be informed by the living voice 
 that the Discipline has been repeatedly changed by the authority of 
 the General Conference, we would also learn that the Articles of 
 Religion in it have always been the same from the organization of 
 the Church. 
 
 Before the converts to Christianity were baptized, Justin tells us 
 " they are persuaded and believe that the things taught and said by 
 us are true, and they profess to be able to live according to them." 4 
 In the catechetical instructions given to the new converts the origin 
 
 'In Eusebius, Hist. Eccles., lib. iv, xxii. 2 Apology, sec. 15. 
 
 8 The Apostle John died about A. D. 98. 4 Apology, sec. 61.
 
 510 INTRODUCTION TO THE STUDY 
 
 and authority of the Gospels must have been a subject of the deepest 
 importance. 
 
 We have already cited the testimony of Tertullian who flourished 
 Testimonies of at Carthage in the last part of the second century and in 
 otter fathers the beginning of the third -to the fact that our Gospels 
 ted ' were written by Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John ; and 
 that Luke's Gospel, from its first publication, had been known in all 
 the apostolic Churches, and in the Churches in communion with 
 them, and that the same authority of the apostolic Churches would 
 defend the other Gospels. 1 
 
 We have also adduced the testimony of Clement of Alexandria 
 who flourished in the last part of the second century and in the first 
 part of the third that he had made inquiry respecting the origin of 
 the Gospels, and had learned from the oldest presbyters f hat those 
 Gospels which contain the genealogies were written first ; after which 
 he relates the circumstances under which he had learned that Mark 
 and John were written.* 
 
 Important, also, is the testimony of Irenaeus to the fact that there 
 were but four Gospels, those of Matthew, Mark, Luke and John, re- 
 specting the writing of which he gives some particulars. 3 Irenaeus 
 spent the early part of his life in Asia Minor, was acquainted with 
 Polycarp, a disciple of St. John, and was bishop of Lyons, A. D. 
 177-202. He evidently knew many persons who were acquainted 
 with the Apostle John, and his testimony on this account is ex- 
 tremely valuable, especially respecting John's Gospel. 
 
 We have also seen that in the Canon of Muratori (about A. D. 160) 
 the third Gospel bears the name of Luke and the fourth that of John ; 
 and there is no doubt that the first and second were those of Matth- 
 ew and Mark. To these we must add the testimony of the Pe- 
 shito-Syriac, made, doubtless, as early as A. D. 150, in which the 
 four Gospels are attributed to Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John. All 
 these witnesses, in combination with the testimony of Justin Martyr, 
 living so near the apostolic age, furnish an incontrovertible proof 
 that these Gospels came down from the apostolic age, and that they 
 have the strongest claims to be accepted as the genuine produc- 
 tions of those whose names they bear. 
 
 Between the close of the apostolic age (about A. D. 97) and the 
 
 Testimony of ^ me of J ust i n Martyr (A. D. 130-166) flourished several 
 
 ftptaiasgiven Christian writers, whose works, with the exception of a 
 
 few fragments, are lost. Papias, bishop of Hierapolis 
 
 whom Irenaeus and Jerome represent as a hearer of John, though 
 
 1 Adversus Marcionem, lib. iv, cap. ii, v. 
 
 * In Eusebius, Hist. Eccles., lib. vi, cap. xiv. 3 Contra Hsereses, lib. iii, cap. i
 
 OF THE HOLY SCRIPTURES. 5H 
 
 according to the statement of Eusebius he was but a hearer of John 
 the presbyter, of Ephesus wrote in five books " Expositions of the 
 Oracles of the Lord." In a fragment preserved by Eusebius, Papias 
 states that John the presbyter, who was acquainted with the apos- 
 tles, said " that Mark, being the interpreter of Peter, wrote down ac- 
 curately what things he remembered, not, indeed, in the order in 
 which the things were said or done by Christ ; for he neither heard 
 the Lord nor was he his companion, but afterward he was, as I said, 
 ac .ittendant upon Peter, who preached the doctrines of the Gospel 
 as circumstances required, not making, as it were, a systematic ar- 
 rangement of the Lord's discourses. Mark, accordingly, committed 
 no mistake in writing some things just as he remembered them." 
 Respecting Matthew, Papias remarks : " Matthew wrote the oracles 
 in the Hebrew dialect ; every one explained them as he could." 
 
 Papias took especial pains to collect facts respecting the teachings 
 of the apostles from those who knew them. " For if any one who 
 had been an associate of the elders met me I inquired of him about 
 the statements of the elders what Andrew, or Peter, or Philip, or 
 Thomas, or James, or John, or Matthew, or any other of the Lord's 
 disciples, said ; and what Aristion and the presbyter John, disci- 
 ples of the Lord, say. For I did not think that books benefitted me 
 so much as what I derived from the living voice of surviving men." ' 
 
 The statement made by Papias from John the presbyter, that 
 Mark did not write "in order the things that were said Awronginfer- 
 or done by Christ," has been made a ground of inference 
 by some a that Mark's Gospel, in its present form, did not 
 proceed from that evangelist, but that it is a reconstruction of the 
 original work. But it is evident that Papias is speaking of Mark's 
 Gospel as known to him a short time before the middle of the sec- 
 ond century, which was demonstrably our present Gospel of Mark. 
 He clearly knew nothing of a remodelling of it. Nor did Eusebius, 
 nor any one else among the ancients. Mark's Gospel is shorter than 
 any of the others; it contains no genealogy, and begins with the 
 preaching of John the Baptist. It may have been on these grounds 
 that the presbyter John thought Mark had not written the sayings 
 and doings of Christ in order. Mark must have greatly abridged 
 the discourses of Christ, and the accounts of his actions as delivered 
 by Peter. But can we suppose for a moment that Mark, who was a 
 companion of the apostles and a preacher of the gospel, would have 
 written an account of Christ's sayings and doings without observing 
 any order ? Can we imagine a Gospel written by him in which the 
 
 1 In Eusebius, Hist. Eccles., lib. iii, cap. xxxix. 
 1 First inferred by Schleiermacher.
 
 512 INTRODUCTION TO THE STUDY 
 
 preaching of the Baptist is put at the end, the crucifixion in the mid 
 die, and the resurrection in the beginning ? 
 
 We have seen that Papias states that " Matthew wrote the oracles 
 Bcnieiennach. ^ ^fy ia ) in ^ e Hebrew dialect." From this Schleier- 
 rV inference macher concluded that Matthew's Gospel originally con- 
 tained only the discourses of Christ. But there is no 
 necessity for limiting rd X6yia (the oracles) to discourses. In the. 
 New Testament X6yta (oracles) is used in Acts vii, 38 ; Rom. iii, 2 , 
 Heb. v, 12 ; i Peter iv, 1 1, in the sense of Scriptures, or divine rev- 
 elations. In Polycarp's Epistle to the Philippians ' the phrase " oracles 
 (rd A6ym) of the Lord " is used for New Testament Scriptures with- 
 out respect to discourses. In the Epistle of Clement of Rome to the 
 Corinthians 1 " the oracles (rd Aoyta) of God " are put in apposition 
 with " the holy Scriptures " of the Old Testament. Irenaeus, bishop 
 of Lyons, uses the phrase Kvpiaicd &6yia (oracles of the Lord) for 
 the New Testament.* 
 
 Sophocles remarks on the passage in Papias respecting Matthew's 
 Gospel, it " implies that when Papias wrote, the Gospel of Matthew 
 was regarded as a sacred book."' It would have been impossible 
 to give the discourses of our Saviour without historical facts, for fre- 
 quently the discourses grow out of the historical facts. 
 
 In the Gospel used by the Ebionites, mentioned by Epiphanius in 
 the last half of the fourth century, historical matter was largely in- 
 corporated. Epiphanius calls it Matthew's Gospel adulterated and 
 mutilated, and it is in the highest degree probable, if not completely 
 certain, that this Gospel and our Matthew were originally identical. 
 Epiphanius states that the Gospel of the Ebionites commenced in 
 the following way : " It came to pass in the days of Herod the king 
 of Judea, that John came baptizing with the baptism of repentance in 
 the river Jordan," etc.* Hilgenfeld well remarks that " all Christian 
 antiquity knows nothing of the mere collection of the discourses of 
 Christ. . . . Not a mere collection of discourses, but a com- 
 plete Gospel, Papias states, to have been written in Hebrew by 
 Matthew." 6 
 
 Eusebius does not state whether Papias made any remarks re- 
 specting Luke and John. There may have been no occasion for 
 Papias to refer to them. He does not say that Matthew wrote one 
 Gospel and Mark another; that is taken for granted; and he states 
 
 'Sec. 7. 'See. 53 ; and in the same sense in sec. 19. 
 
 Contra Haereses, lib. i, cap. viii ; the Old Testament may be here included in 
 the phrase. 
 
 * Greek Lexicon of the Roman and Byzantine Periods. Boston, 1870. 
 H.-eresis, xxx, cap. xiii. Einleitung, pp. 456, 457.
 
 OF THE HOLY SCRIPTURES. 513 
 
 only the source of Mark's information, and the language in which 
 Matthew wrote. 
 
 The testimony of Papias, living just after the apostolic age and 
 acquainted with the companions of some of the apostles, is very 
 valuable. 
 
 In the Epistle 1 of Pol/carp to the Philippians we find many ex 
 tracts from the New Testament, and several that appear Q UOlations 
 
 to be from some of our Gospels. " The spirit is willing, from the G 08 - 
 .... . ..,_., pels In Poly- 
 
 but the flesh is weak, m section 7, is, in the Greek, the carp and ciem- 
 
 exact language of Matthew xxvi, 41 and Mark xiv, 38. entof Itome - 
 In section 2 he says, " remembering what the Lord said when he 
 taught : Judge not, that ye may not be judged; Forgive, and it shall 
 be forgiven unto you ; Be ye merciful, that mercy may be shown to 
 you ; With what measure ye measure, it shall be measured to you 
 again ; and that, Blessed are the poor, and those who are persecuted 
 for righteousness' sake, for theirs is the kingdom of God." The first 
 of these precepts is the exact language of Matthew vii, i. The sec- 
 ond 2 is the sense of Matthew vi, 14 and Mark xi, 25. The third is 
 the substance of Matthew v, 7. The fourth is the exact language of 
 Luke vi, 38, with the exception that EV (with) is omitted, and the in- 
 dicative is used in that Gospel. The last part of Polycarp's extract 
 is, for the most part, the exact language of Matthew v, 3, 1 1. In sec. 
 6 he says : " If therefore we pray the Lord to forgive us, we ought 
 also to forgive," which clearly refers to the Lord's prayer, as recorded 
 in Matt, vi, 12, and in Luke xi, 4. 
 
 In the Epistle of Clement of Rome to the Corinthians, written not 
 later than A. D. 96, we have several extracts from the Gospels. In 
 speaking of dissensions and severing the members of Christ, he says : 
 " Remember the words of our Lord Jesus ; for he said, Woe to that 
 man ! better would it have been if he had not been born, than ';hat 
 he should offend one of my elect , better would it be for him if a 
 millstone were hanged about his neck, and he were drowned in the 
 sea, than to offend one of my little ones." * The former part of these 
 extracts of Clement is from Matthew xxvi, 24, respecting Judas, and 
 the latter part substantially from Matthew xviii, 6. Both Matthew and 
 Clement have KaraTTovri^ea^ai (to be drowned in the sea) ; Mark and 
 Luke, in the parallel passages, have each a different word. 1 think 
 there can be no doubt that Clement took the word from Matthew, 
 
 1 This Epistle was written not later than A. D. 115, as Poly carp refers to a lettei 
 from Ignatius to him, which he in turn had sent to the Philippians, sec. 13. But 
 the martyrdom of Ignatius did not occur later than A. D. 115. 
 
 2 AQievai, to remit, is used both in Polycarp and in the Gospel. 3 Sec. 40.
 
 514 INTRODUCTION TO THE STUDY 
 
 as it occurs nowhere else in the New Testament except twice in 
 Matthew. 
 
 In another place he says : " Especially remembering the words of 
 the Lord Jesus, which he spoke when he was teaching clemency and 
 long-suffering ; for thus he said : " Be ye merciful, that ye may ob- 
 tain mercy ; Forgive, that it may be forgiven you ; As ye do shall it 
 be done to you ; As ye gr e, so shall it be given to you ; As ye judge, 
 so shall it be judged for you ; As ye show kindness, so sh.-ill kind- 
 ness be shown to you ; With what measure ye mete, it shall be meas- 
 ured to you.' " These precepts are found either literally or sub- 
 stantially in the Gospels, and there can be no doubt that Clement 
 quoted them from memory, blending together what is said by the 
 evangelists. 
 
 Clement quotes, in some instances, the Old Testament just as in- 
 accurately as he does the Gospels. Immediately preceding these 
 extracts he quotes Jeremiah, prefacing the extract with, " The Holy 
 Spirit says," " Let not the wise man glory in his wisdom, nor the strong 
 man in his strength, nor the rich man in his riches; but he that 
 glorieth, let him glory in the Lord, to seek him and to do judgment 
 and righteousness." * The latter half of this quotation is wrongly given, 
 for Jeremiah's language is : " But let him who glorieth glory in this, 
 to understand and to know that I am the Lord, who doeth (showetli) 
 mercy, and judgment, and justice upon the earth : because in these 
 things is my delight, saith the Lord." ! In quoting Ezekiel, he says, 
 the Almighty declared with an oath : " For as I live, saith the Lord, 
 I do not wish the death of the sinner as (his) repentance.'"* But 
 the last clause of it in Ezekiel is : " That the wicked turn from his 
 way and live." ' The beautiful passage * on the omnipresence of 
 God he spoils by the incorrect way in which he quotes it. In one 
 place he blends together two passages from two different prophets. 
 In the face of these facts, the statement of Renan, that the pas- 
 sages in the Epistle of Clement could not have been taken from our 
 Gospels because they do not exactly agree with them, is utterly 
 unfounded, and could have sprung only from ignorance or the Trant 
 of candour. 
 
 The language of Polycarp and Clement implies that the Churches 
 to which they wrote possessed the same teachings of Christ that 
 they themselves had. How otherwise could these fathers admonish 
 the Churches addressed, by exhorting them to " remember " the 
 words of Christ? But the very supposition that the Churches every- 
 
 1 Sec. 13. Ibid. 
 
 3 Septuagint, Jer. ix, 23, 24. This version was used by the early Church. 
 
 4 Sec. 8. 5 xxxiii, n. Psa. cxxxix, 7-10, in sec. 28.
 
 OF THE HOLY SCRIPTURES. 515 
 
 where had the same precepts of Christ implies that they were con- 
 tained in a common written form, i. e., in the Gospels. 
 
 In the Epistle of Barnabas, written in all probability in the last 
 part of the first century, we find an evident reference Tegtlmonieg of 
 to at least one of our Gospels, in the language that Je- Barnabas and 
 sus Christ " came not to call the righteous, but sinners, ^ na 
 to repentance." In Matt, ix, 13 and Mark ii, 17 this passage is found 
 without the addition of the words " to repentance," which, how- 
 ever, are added in Lake v, 32. But an evident quotation of Matt. 
 xxii, 14 occurs in section 4 of this Epistle. " Let us take heed, there- 
 fore, lest by chance we may be found, as it is written, Many are 
 called, but few are chosen." ' Volkmar, Strauss, and Hilgenfeld 
 contend that the words in Barnabas were not taken from Matthew, but 
 from the apocryphal Fourth Book of Ezra, where it is said, " Many 
 have been created, but few will be saved." In Matthew the declara- 
 tion," Many are called, but few are chosen," stands at the close of the 
 parable of the king who made a marriage for his son. The invited 
 guests having rejected the invitation, the king sent and collected a 
 miscellaneous party, among whom was a man without a wedding gar- 
 ment, who was cast out. Here the words are exceedingly appro- 
 priate. The language which Barnabas uses immediately preceding 
 the quotation from Matthew indicates that he had that Gospel in his 
 mind : " Let us take heed lest, relying upon the fact that we are 
 called, we may fall asleep in our sins, and the wicked prince, obtain- 
 ing the mastery over us, may shut us out from the kingdom of the 
 Lord. Still also think of that point, my brethren, when ye see that 
 after such great signs and wonders have been done in Jsrael 
 they have been thus forsaken." Then follow the words under con- 
 sideration : " Let us take heed lest we may be found, as it is written, 
 Many (are) called, but few (are) chosen." The whole tenor of the 
 section is, that we must devote ourselves as Christians wholly to God. 
 What has all this to do with the Fourth Book of Ezra ? 
 
 It cannot be doubted for a moment that the words in Barnabas un- 
 der discussion came from Matthew. But did the author of the Epistle 
 forget the source of the words, and, thinking that they belonged to 
 
 1 The Greek of Barnabas is, npoae^UjUev pqiTOTe, d>f yiypairrat, TTO/I^OI 
 YOI 6e eK%KToi evpf&uftev. Matthew has, IIoA/lot elatv n^r/Tol, 6/Uyot <5e exTiexToi, ex- 
 actly the same as Barnabas, except that the latter omits eiaiv (are), which is not quite 
 suitable in the quotation. In section 16 in Barnabas there is a reference to the de- 
 struction of Jerusalem : " And still I will speak to you concerning the temple, how 
 the miserable men, being deceived, trusted in the house, and not in their God," etc. 
 Clemen* of Alexandria in several places quotes the Epistle as that of Barnabas. It 
 must, indeed, have come down from the first century. Hilgenfeld places it about 
 A. D. 97. Einleitung, p. 38.
 
 51G INTRODUCTION TO THE STUDY 
 
 the Fourth Book of Ezra, did he add, as it is written ? How could 
 he forget the connection in which the words stand in Matthew? Did 
 the author of the Epistle attribute more authority to the apocryphal 
 Book of Ezra ' than to the Gospel of Matthew ? Why should he not 
 have quoted that Gospel with the formula with which the Scripturen 
 of the Old Testament were quoted? We have already seen that 
 Polycarp, in the beginning of the second century, quotes writings of 
 Paul as " holy Scripture." Barnabas appears also to have been 
 acquainted with the Gospel of John. He speaks of "Abraham's 
 having foreseen in spirit the Son," in reference to John viii, 56 : 
 " Abraham rejoiced to see my day," etc. There are some other pas- 
 sages that may have been taken from John ; for example, that in 
 which he represents the brazen serpent set up in the wilderness as a 
 type of Christ. The phrase, " the only and true God," seems to be 
 taken from John xvii, 3. 
 
 ' In the Epistles of Ignatius, written (if genuine) not later than 
 The patsMges '^" " IX 5' ^ cre are several passages evidently taken 
 quoted by ig- from the Gospels. But as these Epistles have been 
 thought by many to have been interpolated, we content 
 ourselves with a few references to some of our Gospels found in two 
 of the three undoubtedly genuine and uncorrupted Epistles to Poly- 
 carp, to the Ephesians, and to the Romans published by Cureton 
 from a very ancient Syriac MS. from the Nitrian desert : "Be wise 
 as the serpent in every thing, and innocent as the dove," ' etc., found 
 only in Matthew x, 16. " The bread of God I seek, which is the flesh 
 of Jesus Christ, and his blood I seek, a drink which is love incor- 
 ruptible.'" With this compare John vi, 54, 55: "Whoso eateth 
 my flesh and drinketh my blood hath eternal life ; . . . For my flesh 
 is meat indeed, and my blood is drink indeed." 
 
 In the Epistle to Diognetus, one of the finest remains of Christian 
 The Epiatie to antiquity, in which the Christian life is described with 
 Diotrnptus. great truthfulness and beauty, and which must have 
 been written in the last part of the first century or in the beginning 
 of the second, there are several passages which seem to refer to ex- 
 pressions of Christ in some of our Gospels. " The Christians hold 
 together (preserve) the world." With this compare the passage. 
 " Ye are the salt of the earth," found only in Matt, v, 13. The au- 
 thor of the Epistle tells us that Christ has commanded us " not to be 
 anxious about raiment and food." With this compare Matt, vi, 25 : 
 "Be not anxious about your life, what ye shall eat, or what ye shall 
 
 1 The time of the composition of Fourth Ezra is uncertain ; it was probably 
 written some years before the Epistle of Barnabas. 
 
 'Epistle to Polycarp. 'Epistle to the Romans.
 
 OF THE HOLY SCRIPTURES. 517 
 
 drink ; nor yet for your body, what ye shall put on. Is not the life 
 moie than meat, and the body than raiment ? " Similar is Luke 
 xii, 22, 23. In the Epistle and in these two Gospels the same word, 
 ueptjtivav, is used to express anxious thought ; Tpofifi, meat, is the word 
 here employed in the Epistle in common with these two Gospels. 
 For " raiment," svSvaiq is used in the Epistle, and evdvpa in the Gos- 
 pels. In section 4 he speaks of the Jews forbidding any thing good to 
 ba done on the Sabbath day, evidently with reference to Matt, xii, 12. 
 " To whom he (God) sent his only begotten Son," rov vldv rdv juovo- 
 yev*] here is evidently a reference to the writings of the Apostle 
 John. For he alone of the New Testament writers calls Christ " the 
 only begotten Son of God," and he does this four times in his Gospel 
 and once in his First Epistle." 1 Christians "are not of the world," 
 the exact phrase that is found in John xvii, 16. 
 
 In the last two sections of this Epistle Christ is called the Logos (or 
 Word] who has appeared to men, with evident reference to John. 
 The Gospels are also mentioned in the following passage : " The fear 
 of the law is celebrated, and the grace of the prophets is known, and 
 the faith of the Gospels is established, and the tradition of the apos- 
 tles is kept, and the grace of the Church leaps." It must, however, 
 be observed that a doubt has been raised respecting the genuineness 
 of these last two sections. 
 
 In the Teaching of the Twelve Apostles, a small Greek work be- 
 longing to the close of the first century, or to the very beginning of 
 the second, we find a considerable number of references to the 
 Gospel of Matthew, and some to that of Luke. The Lord's prayer 
 is the exact form of that in Matthew, except "debt" for "debts." 
 It contains, however, a doxology wanting in the best texts of Matth- 
 ew. The phrase, "To compel one to go a mile" (Matt, v, 41), is 
 found in this work. The verb dyyapevw, to compel, is found in the 
 New Testament only in this passage and in Matt, xxvii, 32, and 
 in Mark xv, 21, and outside of the New Testament it is exceedingly 
 rare. There are in the work references also to Luke vi, 28, 30. It 
 also refers, manifestly, to a written Gospel: "As the Lord com- 
 manded in his Gospel." "As ye have (it) in the Gospel." "As ye 
 have (them) in the Gospel of our Lord." 
 
 In the recently discovered Apology of Aristides for the Christians 
 presented to the Emperor Hadrian (A. D. 126) the written Gospel 
 history is referred to in the following language : "The fame of whose 
 (Christ's) coming, it is possible for you to know from that which is 
 called among them (the Christians) the evangelical, holy writing, if 
 you read (it), O King." 
 
 1 Whatever establishes the genuineness of the First Epistle of John establishes 
 that of the Gospel of John also, for they manifestly had the same author.
 
 518 INTRODUCTION TO THE STUDY 
 
 CHAPTER XL 
 
 THE TESTIMONY OF CELSUS TO THE GENUINENESS OF THH 
 
 GOSPELS. 
 
 A LITTLE after the middle of the second century, 1 probably 
 ** between A. D. 160 and 170, Celsus, a heathen philosopher, at- 
 tacked Christianity with great acuteness and virulence, in a work 
 which he entitled, Aoyo? AA?;0jfr (A True Discourse). The cele- 
 brated Christian philosopher, Origen, about A. D. 247, wrote a full 
 reply to this work in eight books, from which we derive our knowl- 
 edge of the work of Celsus, unfortunately lost. 
 
 The testimony of such a man respecting the books considered sa- 
 cred by the Christians is very valuable. And it is highly satisfactory 
 to find that Celsus was acquainted with our Gospels, and regarded 
 them as constituting, in the judgment of the Church, the authentic 
 history of Jesus Christ ; he himself says, that they were written by 
 Christ's disciples. 
 
 Origen remarks, that Celsus made extracts from the history in 
 Proof that cei- the Gospel according to Matthew respecting Jesus' going 
 him ^i^four down in *- Egypt," and that he also took from this evangel- 
 Qospeia- ist, and perhaps from the other Gospels, the statement 
 
 that a dove descended upon Christ when he was baptized by John.' 
 Celsus also referred to the star that appeared at the birth of Christ, 
 and the visit of the Magi, as recorded in the Gospel of Matthew.* 
 He commented on the statement, found only in Matthew, that an 
 angel rolled away the stone from the sepulchre of Christ.* He refers 
 to Matt, xxvi, 39 in these words : " O Father, if it be possible that 
 this cup may pass by;"* also to the darkness and earthquake 7 that 
 occurred at Christ's death, the latter circumstance found in Matthew 
 only (xxvii, 51). 
 
 In the following passage he refers to the Gospels of Matthew and 
 
 'The work, as is evident from certain passages, was written during a persecution 
 of the Christians ; and, accordingly, it is placed by Neander in the reign of Marcus 
 Aurelius (A. D. 161-180); by Lardner, about A. D. 176. Keim, who has attempted 
 * restoration of the work, places it A. D. 178; Gieseler, about A. D. 150. Origen 
 says that Celsus lived in the time of Hadrian (A. D. 117-138), and later. He speaks 
 of him, in the preface to his work, as being long since dead (ij&it unl rrd^ai ve/cpoj)- 
 
 'Contra Celsum, i, 38. 'Ibid., {,40. * Ihid. 
 
 Ibid., v. 58. Ibid., ii, 24. T Ibid., ii 50,
 
 OF THE HOLY SCRIPTURES. 519 
 
 Luke : ' Tnose who wrote the genealogies dared to assert that Jesus 
 descended from the first man and from the Jewish kings." 1 It is 
 Luke that carries back the genealogy of Christ to the first man 
 (chap, iii, 38), and Matthew who traces his descent from King David 
 through the Jewish kings (chap, i, i). Celsus also refers to the mi- 
 raculous conception of Christ,' related in Matthew and Luke. He 
 notices the precept, 3 " Unto him that smiteth thee on the one cheek 
 offer also the other " (Luke vi, 29 ; Matt, v, 39) ; also, that " no man 
 can serve two masters," or, as he represents it, " the same man cannot 
 serve several masters," 4 in reference to Matt, vi, 24, Luke xvi, 13. 
 
 It is also clear that Celsus had before him John's Gospel, as he 
 asks, "What kind of fluid was it that flowed from the Quotatlona 
 body (of Christ) when he was crucified ? Was it such as from John in 
 
 Oplsiis 
 
 flows from the blessed gods ? " B in reference to John 
 xix, 34. He also asks of Christ, " What honourable or wonderful 
 thing in deed or word hast thou performed, although they called 
 upon thee in the temple to furnish some clear proof that thou wast 
 the Son of God ? " * This obviously refers to John x, 23, 24 : " And 
 Jesus walked in the temple in Solomon's porch. Then came the 
 Jews round about him, and said unto him, How long dost thou make 
 us to doubt? If thou be the Christ, tell us plainly." Origen re- 
 marks that Celsus also " quoted from the Gospel, that when he 
 (Christ) had risen from the dead he showed the signs of his punish- 
 ment, and his hands as they had been pierced." ' This manifestly re- 
 fers to John xx, 25-27. Origen observes that Celsus, quoting the 
 Gospel, reproaches Jesus with the vinegar and gall " That he was 
 exceedingly eager to drink, and did not endure his thirst as a com- 
 mon man often endures it." 1 This evidently refers to John xix, 28, 
 where our Saviour says, " I thirst." None of the other evangelists 
 make any mention of his being thirsty. Matthew uses " wine mingled 
 with gall; " the other evangelists have "vinegar." Celsus evidently 
 combined the accounts of several evangelists. 
 
 Celsus states, " Some narrate that two angels came to the sep- 
 ulchre of Jesus; others narrate one."' On which Origen remarks, 
 " He had observed, I think, that one angel is mentioned by Matthew 
 and Mark, but two by Luke and John." It seems very probable 
 fron: this passage that Celsus had before him all our Gospels. He 
 also commented on the passage, "It is easier for a camel to go 
 through the eye of a needle than for a rich man to enter into the 
 kingdom of God" " (Matthew xix, 24 ; Mark x, 25 ; Luke xviii, 25). 
 
 1 Contra Celsum, ii, 32. 'Ibid., i, 32. ' Ibid., vii, 25. 4 Ibid., viii, a, 3. 
 
 Ibid., ii, 36. 'Ibid., 5,67. T Ibid., ii, 59. * Ibid., ii, 37. 
 
 * Ibid., v, 56. Ibid., vi. 16.
 
 520 INTRODUCTION TO THE STUDY 
 
 It is certain that Celsus was acquainted with Matthew, Luke and 
 John, and it is highly probable from his work that he was acquainted 
 with Mark. As the four Gospels in the age of Celsus were always 
 associated together, there is no doubt that he was familiar with this 
 Gospel. 
 
 Celsus not only refers to these Gospels as having authori'y in the 
 oeisos attrfb- Church, and as the source for the history of Christ, but 
 SuTciuSt^ he attributes them to the disciples of Christ. " Being 
 disciples. able," says he, "to say many things and true concerning 
 the affairs of Jesus, and not similar to those written by the disciples of 
 Jesus, I willingly omit them." ' It is evident that he means, by " the 
 disciples of Jesus," the apostles and their companions ; and, indeed, 
 he seems to have included Mark and Luke under the term disciples, 
 perhaps because it was believed that they wrote under the guidance 
 of Peter and Paul. Celsus nowhere expresses a doubt that the Gos- 
 pels were written by those whose names they bear. He everywhere 
 supposes that they proceeded from those intimately connected with 
 Christ. 
 
 Again, he says that " the disciples of Jesus, having nothing to 
 urge in a very evident matter, hit upon this the assertion that he 
 foreknew all things." * He here refers to the disciples having aban- 
 doned Christ when he was arrested, and the predictions of Christ in 
 the Gospels that they would do this. Celsus here assumes that the 
 accounts in our Gospels came from the disciples. He further says, 
 that " the disciples wrote such things concerning Jesus as an excuse 
 for what happened to him." ' 
 
 The Jew in Celsus closes his arguments with these words : " These 
 things, then, (we have produced) against you from your own writ- 
 ings, on account of which we need no other witness ; for you fall by 
 your own hands." 4 It is very evident from this that our Gospels 
 were regarded as the fundamental documents of Christianity, the 
 overthrow of which would be the subversion of Christianity itself. 
 If Celsus could have seen any way in which he could attack the 
 apostolic origin of the Gospels he certainly would not have failed to 
 do it, as it would have given him the greatest advantage in attacking 
 the history of Christ, and he shows himself everywhere ready to take 
 any advantage in the discussion of the truth of Christianity. From 
 all this it is evident that the genuineness of our Gospels was so 
 
 1 It is absurd to suppose that, if Celsus could have refuted the apostles on any 
 points, he would have refrained fron doing it Origen regards it as an " oratorical 
 trick' (ii, 13). Mi, 15. 'ii, 16. 
 
 4 Toiira f&v olw v/tlv tn ruv vfttrtpuv avyYpafqtdTuv, if olf ovievof 4/tAov 
 v' avrol yap iavroif TrepnrdrTeTe. ii, 74..
 
 OF THE HOLY SCRIPTURES. 521 
 
 universally acknowledged, that it would have been considered the 
 greatest folly to question it. 
 
 Celsus alleges that some of those who believe m Christ, like those 
 who through a drunken fit lay hands on themselves, have changed the 
 original written form of the Gospels three and four times, and oftener, 
 and moulded it so that they might ward off objections. To which 
 Origen answers : " I do not know of any others who have changed 
 the Gospel except the followers of Marcion, of Valentinus, and, I 
 think, those of Lucan." 1 
 
 CHAPTER XII. 
 
 THE TESTIMONY OF THE HERETICS OF THE SECOND CEN- 
 TURY TO OUR FOUR GOSPELS. 
 
 THE CLEMENTINE HOMILIES. 
 
 HPHIS heretical work, written by a philosophically-educated man, 
 * at Rome, in the reign of Marcus Aurelius, (A. D. 161-180),* 
 sets forth Ebionistic views of Christ. The author represents him- 
 self as Clement, who was bishop of Rome in the last part of the 
 first century. He visits the East, where he makes the acquaintance 
 of the Apostle Peter, by whom he is converted to Christianity. 
 Peter, accordingly, is the hero of the book, and Paul, without being 
 directly named, is depreciated. It consists of twenty homilies. It 
 contains numerous extracts from the Gospel of Matthew, some 
 from that of Luke, several from that of Mark, and some from the 
 Gospel of John. 
 
 As a specimen of Matthew, we find : " For he (our Lord) said thus . 
 * Heaven and earth shall pass away, but one jot or one tittle shall not 
 pass from the law.' " From Luke we have the following: "For the 
 Master himself, when he was nailed to the cross, prayed to his Father 
 to forgive his murderers their sin, saying, ' Father, forgive them their 
 sins, for they know not what they do.' " ' In the statement that Christ 
 was tempted by the devil forty days,* there is a reference to Luke iv, 2 
 and Mark i, 13; and in the passage in which Christ said, " Hear, 
 Israel ; the Lord thy God is one Lord," * we have a clear reference 
 to Mark xii, 29. The principal passage from the Gospel of John is 
 the following : " Whence our Master, when they asked him concern- 
 
 1 ii, 27. * This is the date assigned by Hilgenfeld, Einleitung, p. 43. 
 
 * Epistle of Peter to James ii. * Clementine Homilies, xi, 2<x 
 
 * Homily, xix, 2. 'Ibid., iii, 57.
 
 523 INTRODUCTION TO THE STUDY 
 
 ing the man who was blind from his birth and had recovered his sight 
 from him Did this man sin or his parents, that he was born blind? 
 he answered, Neither has this one sinned nor his parents, but that 
 through him the power of God might be manifested, healing the sins 
 of ignorance." ' There is no possibility of mistaking here the refer- 
 ence to the ninth chapter of John's Gospel. 
 
 Hilgenfeld " acknowledges that the Clementine Homilies make use 
 of our four Gospels, though he thinks that one apocryphal Gospel, 
 at least, is also used, which is very probable, though it is very clear 
 that our four Gospels are the principal sources from which the au- 
 thor derives the teachings of Christ. 
 
 THE TESTIMONY OF VALENTINUS AND HIS FOLLOWERS. 
 
 This distinguished heretic a native of Egypt, who, according 
 from to Irenaeus, made his appearance in Rome in the time 
 of Blsh P Hyginus, about A. D. 140 flourished in the 
 fathers. time of Pius, and remained till the time of Anicetus ' 
 
 (about A. D. 157). He died about A. D. 160 in Cyprus. Irenaeus 4 
 shows how the Valentinians (with whom he doubtless includes the 
 head of the school, Valentinus) attempted to bring the first chapter 
 of John's Gospel into harmony with their system. He represents 
 them beginning as follows : " John, the disciple of the Lord, wishing 
 to speak of the genesis of all things, predicates," etc. 
 
 In the Philosophoumena, or Refutation of All Heresies, a work of 
 Hippolytus, belonging to the first half of the third century, we have 
 an account of the system of Valentinus, in which he says : " There- 
 fore all the prophets and the law spoke from the Demiurgus, a fool- 
 ish god, themselves fools, knowing nothing; for this reason the 
 Saviour says, All those who came before me are thieves and rob- 
 bers," ' almost the exact words of John x, 8. Tischendorf, in his 
 eighth critical edition of the Greek Testament, adopts the reading : 
 " All who came are thieves and robbers." But Tregelles gives in 
 his critical edition, " All who came before me are thieves and rob- 
 bers ; " and this is supported, among other authorities, substantially 
 by Clement of Alexandria" (about A. D. 200). Valentinus also 
 made use of Luke's Gospel. "Jesus," says he, "was born of the 
 Virgin Mary, according to that which has been said: 'The Holy 
 
 1 Homily, xix, 22. A complete edition of the Homilies was published by Dressel, 
 Gottingen, 1853. 'Einleitung, p. 43. "Eusebius, Hist. Eccles., lib. iv, cap. xi. 
 
 *AdversusHaeresis,lib.i,cap.viii,5. Philosophoumena.lib.vi, 35, Paris ed., 1860. 
 
 '" All who [were] before the coming of the Lord are thieves and robbers." Stro 
 mata, lib. i, cap. xvii. Valentinus in the Pistis Sophia, adjudged to him, uses 
 John iv.
 
 OF THE HOLY SCRIPTURES. 523 
 
 Spirit shall come upon thee,' [the Spirit is (the) Wisdom,] ' and the 
 power of the Highest shall overshadow thee : ' the Highest is the 
 Demiurgus : ' wherefore that which is born of thee shall be called 
 holy' " It is very clear that here we have reference to Luke i, 35. 
 Gieseler observes: "It is remarkable that Valentinus not only re- 
 ceived the New Testament, but made constant allegorical use of it 
 in his system." * Tertullian remarks : * " For if Valentinus is seen * to 
 use the entire instrument (New Testament) with an intellect not less 
 acute than that of Marcion, he did violence to the truth. . . . Mar- 
 cion made havoc of the Scriptures ; but Valentinus spared them." 
 
 Respecting the source from which the early Christian writers ob- 
 tained their knowledge of the system of Valentinus him- 8ources of our 
 self, and his expositions of Scripture, it must be borne in knowledge of 
 mind that this distinguished heretic wrote hymns, dis- 
 courses, and letters, some of which are quoted by Clement of Alex- 
 andria. Irenaeus tells us that he met with the memoirs of some of 
 those who called themselves disciples of Valentinus, and with some 
 of these disciples themselves, whose views he learned. Many of 
 these men were taught by Valentinus himself. As he had hardly been 
 dead twenty years when Irenaeus wrote, they were fully compe- 
 tent to give the doctrines of their master. Irenaeus ' seems to have 
 derived his account of the doctrines of Valentinus and his disciples 
 chiefly from Ptolemaeus, one of the most distinguished men of the 
 school. This eminent Valentinian * quotes John i, 3 : " All things 
 were made by him (the Saviour), and without him nothing was 
 made; " which he refers to an "apostle." He also quotes a part 
 of Matt, xii, 25, with the remark, " the Saviour said." 
 
 Heracleon, whom Clement of Alexandria calls " the most distin- 
 guished man of the school of Valentinus," T wrote a Com- Tegtlmony of 
 mentary on the Gospel of John, fragments of which are Heracleon, a 
 introduced into Origen's Commentary on that book. Valen 
 Heracleon was compelled to resort to forced expositions to bring 
 the Gospel into harmony with his system, and nothing but the apos- 
 tolic origin of that Gospel could have induced him to comment on 
 it, He appears to have attributed the Gospel to the Apostle John ; 
 for Origen 8 remarks, that " he affirmed that the words, ' No man hath 
 
 ' Philosophoumena, lib. vi, 35. * Church History, vol. i, p. 134. 
 
 1 De Prsescrip., cap. xxxviii. 
 
 4 Videtur (is seen) has this meaning in Adversus Marcionem, lib. iv, cap. ii ; Ad- 
 rersus Praxeam, cap. xxix ; Apologetics, cap. xix, etc. 
 
 * See the Prooimion to his First Book against Haereses. 
 
 * Epistle to Flora, in Epiphanius, Haeresis xxxiii, 3. T Stromata, lib. iv, cap. 9, 
 Tom. vi, 2. 
 
 34
 
 524 INTRODUCTION TO THE STUDY 
 
 seen God at any time,' and those which follow, were not spoken by 
 the Disciple but by the Baptist." Clement of Alexandria ' speaks 
 of Heracleon's Commentary on Luke xii, n, 12, from which it would 
 appear that he wrote a Commentary on that Gospel also. This 
 eminent Valentinian flourished, it seems, between A. D. 150 and 180. 
 and his Commentary was probably written some time in 160-180: 
 for Origen states" that he was said to be an acquaintance (yvwpt- 
 *of) of Valentinus (who died about A. D. 160) ; and Irenaeus, in 
 his Second Book * against Hsereses, written about A. D. 180 or ear- 
 lier, makes mention of him. It is clear from passages in Irenaeus 
 that the Valentinians used our four Gospels, along with other books 
 of the New Testament, and Valentinus himself has been seen mak 
 ing use of both Luke and John ; and it is clear from the language of 
 the early fathers that he received also the writings of the other two 
 evangelists. 
 
 THE TESTIMONY OF MARCION. 
 
 Marcion, a native of Sinope, in Pontus, another distinguished 
 heretic of the early Church, made his appearance about A. D. 138 
 or 140, and inculcated his strange system, of which the fundamental 
 idea was, that the Author of creation, who was also the Author of the 
 Jewish dispensation, is a different Being from that God who is re- 
 vealed by Christ ; that the former is the Author of an evil system, 
 while the God of Christ and Christianity is the Good Being. He, 
 Tbe teaching accordingly, rejected the Old Testament and a large 
 of Marcion. portion of the New. Irenaeus remarks of him, that he 
 taught, that " From that Father, who is superior to the God who 
 is the maker of the world, Jesus having come into Judea in the 
 times of Pontius Pilate, the governor, who was procurator of Tibe- 
 rius Caesar, he manifested himself in the form of a man to those who 
 were in Judea, abolishing the law and the prophets, and all the 
 works of that God who made the world, whom he also called Cos- 
 tnocrator, (world-ruler). Besides abridging that Gospel which is ac- 
 cording to Luke, and removing from it all the passages concerning 
 the generation of the Lord, and removing also much of the doctrine 
 of the Lord's discourses in which Jesus is very clearly described as 
 declaring his Father to be the creator of this universe, Marcion per- 
 suaded his disciples that he was more veracious than those apostles 
 who delivered the Gospel. In a similar manner he mutilated the 
 Epistles of the Apostle Paul taking away whatever was clearly said 
 by the apostle concerning the God who made the world since he id 
 the Father of our Lord Jesus Christ and removing whatever the 
 
 1 Stroraata, lib. iv, cap. q. 'In Joan, torn, ii, 8. *Cap. iv. i.
 
 OF THE HOLY SCRIPTURES. 525 
 
 apostle quoted and taught from the prophecies that predict the com- 
 ing of the Lord." 1 
 
 Marcion cut off the first two chapters of Luke's Gospel, and com- 
 menced his Gospel with the words : " In the fifteenth year of Tibe- 
 rias Caesar." He did not, however, after this beginning, follow Luke 
 closely, but omitted some things and added others." This Gospel of 
 Luke (thus abridged), and ten Epistles of Paul (more or less muti- 
 lated), constituted his sole canon of Scripture. 8 That Marcion 's 
 Gospel was an abridgment of that of Luke, and, accordingly, that 
 the latter is the original, is now conceded by rationalistic critics, 4 
 though boldly denied by some of them until a comparatively recent 
 date. 
 
 Here the question arises, Did Marcion know any thing of the other 
 Gospels of our canon, and if he did, what was his opin- Marcion's 
 ion of them ? Tertullian remarks that Marcion, " having {^Jj* 8 ^ 
 found that Paul, in his Epistle to the Galatians, censures pels, 
 even the apostles themselves because they did not walk uprightly 
 according to the truth of the Gospel, and that he at the same time 
 accuses certain false apostles of perverting the truth of the Gospel, 
 he (Marcion) strives to overturn the authority of those Gospels 
 which are theirs (propria), and are published under the name of 
 apostles, or also of apostolic men, that he, indeed, may confer upon 
 his own the credit which he takes from them.'" From this it ap- 
 pears that Marcion regarded the Gospels of Matthew, Mark," and 
 John, to which the language of Tertullian applies, as having been 
 written by men under the influence of Jewish prejudice. But since 
 Luke was the companion of Paul, who was the Apostle of the Gen- 
 tiles, and who would be considered the most free from Jewish prej- 
 udice, his Gospel was regarded by Marcion as giving a more correct 
 history of the acts and teachings of Christ than the other three. In 
 accordance with these views he received ten Epistles of Paul ; not 
 entire, however. Tertullian addresses Marcion " as having dared 
 to destroy the original documents of Christ's life, and as rejecting 
 what he formerly believed, as Marcion confesses in a certain Epistle, 
 and which his followers do not deny."' "If the Scriptures," says 
 
 ''Contra Hsereses, lib. i, cap. xxvii. 
 
 'See Epiphanius, Haeresis xlii ; Tertullian, Adversus Marcionem, iv, cap. ii. 
 
 3 Epiphanius, ibid. 
 
 * Hilgenfeld, Einleitung, p. 49, 1875. Baur, while conceding the priority of Luke's 
 Gospel, nevertheless thinks that the Gospel of Marcion contained some readings 
 more original than those of our Canonical Text. Die Drei Erst. Jahr., p. 75. 
 
 * Adversus Marcionem, lib. iv, cap. iii. 
 
 * It is to be borne in mind that Mark was supposed to have written his Gospel 
 from the preaching of Peter. T De Carne Christi, cap. ii.
 
 KM INTRODUCTION TO THE STUDY 
 
 Tertullian, " which oppose your opinion, you had not either rejected 
 or corrupted, the Gospel of John would have confounded you." ' 
 Epiphanius * relates of Marcion, that when he went to Rome he asked 
 the presbyters to explain to him the meaning of Matt, ix, 16, 17, which 
 shows his acquaintance with that Gospel. There can be no doubt 
 that Marcion was acquainted with our four Gospels, and that he re- 
 garded them as written by apostles or their companions. In select- 
 ing the Gospel of Luke, along with a part of Paul's Epistles, he 
 shows that he regarded that Gospel as the writing of the companion 
 of Paul. 
 
 THE TESTIMONY OF BASILIDES. 
 
 This eminent gnostic, the chief seat of whose activity was Alex- 
 andria, flourished, according to Clement ' of Alexandria, in the time 
 of Hadrian (A. D. 117-138), and lived till the time of the elder An- 
 toninus (Pius). A. D. 138. Nearly coinciding with this is the state- 
 ment of Jerome, 4 that his death * occurred during the war of the 
 Romans with Barchochebas (132-135). 
 
 He wrote twenty-four books on the Gospel ; an effort, in all prob- 
 ability, to bring the teachings of the Gospel into harmony with his 
 system, which he pretended to have derived from Glaukias, the in- 
 terpreter of Peter.' Hippolylus 7 states that Basilides and Isodorus. 
 his genuine son and disciple, say that Matthias communicated to 
 them orally secret doctrines which he learned by private instruction 
 from the Saviour. At all events, Basilides claimed an oral tradition 
 from the apostles as the basis of his system, and made use of Script- 
 ure to prove it. Basilides wrote his expositions about A. D. 120 or 
 125, and was refuted by Agrippa Castor about A. D. 135 in an able 
 work which was extant in the time of Eusebius." Of this work of 
 Basilides, Clement * of Alexandria quotes the twenty-third book un- 
 der the title of " Expositions." It is evident from this title and from 
 the extracts which Clement gives on the punishment of Christians 
 who bear testimony for Christ, that the work was principally an ex- 
 position of the New Testament Scriptures in accordance with his 
 
 1 De Carne Christi, cap. iii. * Hseresis xlix. 
 
 ' Stromata. vii, cap. xvii. * De Viris Illus. Agrippa. 
 
 'This depends upon the reading moritus, died, instead of moratus, lingered cr tar- 
 ned, for the MSS. fluctuate between these two readings. But the Greek of the pa- 
 age, which is probably more ancient than any Latin MS., has " died." The sense 
 of the passage requires the reading moritus, died, as there would be no propriety in 
 saying that Basilides was lingering in the war of Barchochebas. 
 
 * So states Clement of Alexandria, Stromata, lib. vii, cap. xvii. 
 
 1 Philosophoumena, lib. vii, sec. 20. * Hist. Eccles. lib. iv, cap. viL 
 
 *Sromata, lib. iv, cap. xii. 

 
 OF THE HOLY SCRIPTURES. 527 
 
 doctrines, and that it was not a Gospel that he had himself written. 1 
 Gieseler well observes that these twenty-four-books " may have also 
 been called his Gospel." a 
 
 This distinguished Gnostic quotes the Gospels of Luke and John. 
 Hippolytus, in describing the system of Basilides, says : Quotations 
 "Sinca it was impossible for him to say that an emana- 
 tion froii a non-existing God was something not exist- ides, 
 ing, (for Basilides very much shuns and dreads the substances of the 
 things that have been generated by emanation ; for what emanation 
 was necessary, or what matter must be presupposed, that God may 
 form the world as the spider spins its thread, or as mortal man takes 
 and forms brass, wood, or any other material ?) but he says, he 
 (God) spoke and it was done ; and this is that which was spoken by 
 Moses, as these men say : ' Let there be light, and there was light.' 
 Whence, says he, did the light originate ? From nothing. For it is 
 not written, he i says, whence, but this only, from the voice of the 
 speaker. But he who speaks, he says, was not ; nor was the thing 
 spoken. The seed of the world, says he, was formed from non-ex- 
 isting things, the word that was spoken, ' Let there be light,' and this, 
 says he. is that which is said in the Gospels : ' That was the true light 
 which lighteth every man that cometh into the world?" The Greek 
 text here and in John i, 9 is exactly the same, and there is no ques- 
 tion that it came from the Gospel of John. But the Tubingen 
 school of rationalists are unwilling to admit that Basilides himself 
 quoted this passage for that would prove that the Gospel of John 
 was in existence at an earlier period than they concede. They 
 would have us believe that it was likely a disciple of Basilides who 
 makes this quotation. There is, however, no ground for doubt upon 
 the subject. For Hippolytus, when he introduces the passage from 
 John, is giving the fundamental part of the system of Basilides. He 
 is not talking about the theories of the disciples, nor about the school 
 of Basilides, but concerning Basilides' system. With the exception 
 of the son of Basilides, Isodore, who was also his disciple, we know of 
 no eminent man belonging to his party. To guard against any mis- 
 understanding, Hippolytus frequently states, " he (Basilides) says." 
 It is the doctrines of Basilides that he professes to give. What 
 right have we to suppose that he is giving the views of any other 
 person than the one he names ? 
 
 ' Basilides uses the term gospel (ebayythiov) for the Christian revelation : * he 
 preached the gospel to the Archon of the Hebdomas," etc. Philosophoumena, vii, 
 sec. 26. When Origen states that " Basilides dared to write a gospel and to put hio 
 own name to it " (Homily i, on Luke), it must have been this work ; we know of no 
 other. "Church History, vol. i, 134. 'Philosophoumena, lib. vii, 22.
 
 538 INTRODUCTION TO THE STUDY 
 
 There is no doubt that Hippolytus had before him the work of 
 Basilides in twenty-four books, which is quoted by Clement of Alex- 
 andria some time after A. D. 192, and Hippolytus lived in the first 
 half of the next century. But even if it had been lost in the time 
 of Hippolytus, there was still in existence the refutation of it by 
 Agrippa Castor, from which he could have learned the real system 
 and arguments of Basilides. How absurd would be the supposition, 
 of Hippolytus leaving the arch heretic, and hunting up some ob- 
 scure follower of his, and calling a refutation of him a refutation 
 of Basilides. Imagine an eminent theologian writing professedly 
 against the system of Calvin, and quoting some obscure Presbyterian 
 minister, using this language, he (Calvin) says ! " It is true, Hippo- 
 lytus sometimes refers to the followers of Basilides as holding the 
 same views as their master, but nowhere does he appear to infer the 
 doctrines of the master from the teachings of the disciples. If a 
 theologian were to attack John Wesley's doctrines of the Witness of 
 the Spirit and Christian Perfection, and after quoting various pas- 
 sages from him should add, and this is what the Methodists assert- 
 who would suppose, for that reason, that he had not quoted Wesley, 
 but had quoted his followers ? Baur, 1 in his account of Basilides, 
 gives his system from Hippolytus, whose authority he deems of great 
 value. Hippolytus also gives another passage as quoted by Basilides, 
 which is evidently from John ii, 4: "That every thing, says he 
 (Basilides), has its own time the Saviour shows, saying, ' My hour 
 has not yet come.'"* 
 
 Basilides also quotes Luke i, 35 : " This is, says he (Basilides), 
 
 other passages that wl " ch nas been sa ^> ' The Holv Ghost shall come 
 quotedby Baa- upon thee,' which, coming from the Sonship through the 
 boundary of the Spirit to the Ogdoas and the Hebdomas 
 unto Mary, ' and the power of the Highest shall overshadow thee,' 
 which is the power of separation," 1 etc. Basilides, as it appears 
 from Hippolytus, also made use of several of the Epistles of Paul, 
 so that there is nothing strange in his making use of the Gospels. 
 Baur fully concedes the early age of these distinguished Gnostics. 
 " The most reliable witnesses," says he, " respecting the origin of 
 Gnosticism agree that the founders of the Gnostic heresies appeared 
 in the age of Trajan and Hadrian. Basilides lived about the year 
 125 in Alexandria. Valentinus, about the year 140, went from Alex- 
 andria to Rome. About the same time came thither also Marcion 
 
 Die Drei Ersten Jahrhunderte, pp. 205-213. 
 Philosophoumena, vii, 27. 
 
 Ibid.. viL 26. Baur uses this statement in his account of Basilides, evidently re- 
 garding it as a genuine doctrine of Basilides.
 
 OF THE HOLY SCRIPTURES. 539 
 
 of Sinope, in Pontus, the period of whose activity in Rome is placed 
 in the years 140-150."' 
 
 The testimony of Basilides to the Gospels of Luke and John is ex- 
 tremely valuable, as during the early part of his life Value of ^ 
 he was a contemporary of the Apostle John, and must testimony of 
 have known persons acquainted with some of the apos- Basmdes - 
 ties. Scarcely less important is that of Valentinus to the Gospels 
 of Luke and John, and the statement of Tertullian that he received 
 the entire New Testament. 11 
 
 THE NASSENI OPHITES, OR SERPENT BRETHREN. 
 
 This was a very old heretical sect, dating as far back at least as 
 the beginning of the second century. Their system was nearly allied 
 to that of the Valentinians. They were divided into various sub- 
 sects. " One of them looked for the sophia [wisdom] in the serpent 
 of Genesis, and hence the name of the whole party " (Gieseler). A 
 quite full account is given of these heretics in the Philosophoumena 
 of Hippolytus. Their system is simpler than that of the Valen- 
 tinians, and is doubtless older. 
 
 These heretics, as they are described by Hippolytus, make great 
 use of the Gospel of John ; sometimes they give extracts j im used by 
 from Matthew, and they perhaps used Luke. 3 But the the OpWtes - 
 uncertainty, whether Hippolytus is giving the views of the Ophites 
 of his own time (about A. D. 200-250), and their way of quoting 
 Scripture, or the doctrines of the earlier members of the sect, is 
 great ; and this uncertainty deprives their testimony of much of its 
 value. Yet the comparatively simple form in which their system 
 presents itself in Hippolytus renders it probable that it belongs to 
 the first half of the second century. The Perates and Sethians, 4 as- 
 sociated with the Ophites, make references in their principles to 
 Matthew and John. 
 
 REFLECTIONS ON THE GNOSTIC TESTIMONY. 
 
 What De Groot says respecting the use of the New Testament in 
 general by the Gnostics, holds especially good of their use of the 
 four Gospels. They would never have thought of appealing to these 
 Gospels if they "had not possessed in the universal conviction of 
 Christians a sacred authority. For the Gnostics sought to gain for 
 theii peculiar medley of heathenism and Christianity admission into 
 
 1 Die Drei Ersten Jahrhunderte, p. 196. 
 
 * That is, as it was received by Tertullian himself. 
 
 'Philosophoumena, lib. v, sees. 1-18. * Ibid., lib. v, sees. 19-22.
 
 530 INTRODUCTION TO THE STUDY 
 
 the Christian community. This medley they called Gnosis; and, in 
 order to give it a Christian colouring, they pretended to have re- 
 ceived it as a secret doctrine of the Lord out of the mouth of the 
 Apostle Matthias, or of a disciple of the apostles Glaukias, for ex- 
 ample, or Marianne, or Theodades. In order to secure for this pre- 
 tence the appearance of truth, they took writings universally ac- 
 knowledged and possessing authority, and explained them in such a 
 way that the same doctrine might seem to be found in them that 
 they pretended to have received from an apostle, or the disciple of 
 an apostle." 1 In leaving the Gnostic testimony to the Gospels, we 
 may use the language of Irenaeus : " So great is the certainty re- 
 specting the (four) Gospels, that even the heretics themselves testify 
 to them, and each one of them, starting out from these (Gospels), 
 endeavours to establish his own doctrine " " 
 
 CHAPTER XIII. 
 
 EVIDENCE OF THE GENUINENESS OF THE GOSPELS FROM 
 THEIR SUPERSCRIPTIONS. 
 
 A LL the ancient manuscripts of the four Gospels contain super- 
 ** scriptions ascribing them respectively to Matthew, Mark, Luke, 
 and John. There are said to be five hundred Greek manuscript 
 copies of John, in all of which the superscriptions attribute the Gos- 
 pel to that apostle. We suppose the number of MSS. of the other 
 Gospels to be about the same. 
 
 In the two most ancient MSS. of the Greek New Testament the 
 superscriptions Codex Vaticanus and the Codex Sinaiticus both belong- 
 vtn2 < !5i in S to the middle of the fourth century, the superscriptions 
 sinaiticus. to the Gospels stand in the simplest form : Kara Mafltfatov 
 (According to Matthew) ; Kara Map/sov (According to Mark) ; KOTO 
 Aovicav (According to Luke) ; and Kara luawijv (According to 
 John). Cyprian, a Latin writer and bishop of Carthage (about 
 A. D. 250), uses the phraseology : " Cata Matthaeum ;" ' " Cata Lu- 
 cam ; " " Cata Marcum ; " * " and Cata Joannem ; " ' showing that 
 thus the superscriptions stood in the Greek, or at least in his Latin 
 
 1 Basilides am Ausgang der Ap. Zeit, p. 34. 
 
 'Tanta est autem circa Evangelia haec finnitas, ut et ipsi haeretici testimonium 
 reddant eis, et ex ipsis egrediens unusquisque eorum conetur suam confirmare doctri- 
 nam. Contra Haeres., lib. iii, cap. xi, 7. 'Testimon., lib. i, cap. xii. 
 
 'Lib. ii, cap. viii. Lib. iii, cap. xxii. Ibid., cap. xxiv.
 
 OF THE HOLY SCRIPTURES. 53i 
 
 version. There can be no doubt that the Greek MSS. of the Gos- 
 pels in the latter part of the second century bore similar superscrip- 
 tions. Irenaeus (177-202) speaks of the Gospel according to Matth- 
 ew? the Gospel according to Luke? and the Gospel according t 
 John? In the same way Clement of Alexandria, in the latter part 01 
 the second century, speaks of the Gospels according to Matthew, 4 
 Mark,' and Luke." 
 
 That our Gospels had titles prefixed to them in the second cen- 
 tury appears from the language of Tertullian (about me Gospels 
 A. D. 200). In writing against the heretic Marcion, hadsuperscrip- 
 
 lions In the 
 
 who appeared in Rome about A. D. 140, and abridged second cen- 
 Luke's Gospel, he remarks : " Marcion ascribes his Gos- tury ' 
 pel to no author, just as if it was not lawful for him to affix a title 
 to that whose body itself he had considered it no crime to destroy. 
 And I could here take my stand, and contend that a work should 
 not be acknowledged which does not show its face, which exhibits 
 no firmness, that inspires you with no confidence from the fulness 
 of its superscription and the due profession of the author." ' From 
 this, it is clear that Tertullian deemed it of great importance that 
 books like our Gospels should present their authors' names on their 
 very faces, to give them authority. He had just before spoken of 
 our four Gospels as belonging to Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John. 
 As Tertullian used the Latin version of the New Testament, we 
 are authorized in inferring from his language that in this version the 
 names of the evangelists were prefixed to the Gospels. It may be, 
 also, inferred that he knew of no copies of our Gospels in any lan- 
 guage without the authors' names attached. 
 
 In the Peshito-Syriac version of the second century these Gospels 
 are ascribed to Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John. We g uper8cr iptions 
 have no knowledge of any ancient versions, or any Greek in the syrtac 
 MSS. of the four Gospels, in which they are not ascribed ' 
 to the evangelists whose names they now bear. But how could such 
 a unanimity of superscriptions, both in MSS. and versions, exist, 
 unless they all had been derived originally from Gospels having 
 the superscriptions of Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John? If the 
 original manuscript of each Gospel had not been inscribed to a 
 known author, all the copies of these original Gospels would have 
 been destitute of the names of the authors, and the MSS. that have 
 come down to our age would exhibit to a greater or less degree the 
 anonymous character of the ancient copies. The early Christians 
 
 'Haereses, lib. i, cap. xxvi 'Ibid., cap. xxvii. 'Lib. iii, cap. ii, sec. 9. 
 
 *Stromata, lib. i, cap. xxi. * In Eusebius's Hist. Eccles., lib. vi, cap. xiv. 
 
 'Stromata, lib. i, cap. xxi. * Adversus Marcionem, lib. iv, cap. ii.
 
 532 INTRODUCTION TO THE STUDY 
 
 were unable to come to an agreement respecting the author of the 
 Epistle to the Hebrews which is anonymous in the most ancient 
 Greek MSS. but no such uncertainty respecting the authors of 
 the Gospels anywhere appears. It cannot be for a moment supposed 
 that the early Christians would have unanimously accepted Gospels 
 the credibility of which depended greatly upon their authors, without 
 knowing that the authors were either apostles, or men of repute who 
 were companions of the apostles. 
 
 But the question still remains, Did the evangelists themselves at- 
 Did the evan- tach their own names to the Gospels, or did the Christian 
 ta^uwjjxcri 18 soc ^ et ^ es to which they were originally addressed, and, 
 oons? in the case of Luke's Gospel, the individual to whom it 
 
 was sent ? It is not necessary to suppose that it was done by the 
 evangelists themselves. Histories of so much importance must have 
 been delivered by Matthew, Mark, and John to the Churches with 
 which they were connected, or in which they especially laboured. 
 These societies, receiving the Gospels from the hands of their authors, 
 would naturally affix the authors' names to them. The Gospel of 
 Luke, delivered in person, or sent to Theophilus, was known to be 
 the writing of Luke ; all the copies of that Gospel would have the 
 name of Luke affixed as the authority for the history. Nor could 
 these Gospels ever have been received, either in the apostolic age 
 or in that immediately succeeding it, if their accounts of Christ's 
 acts and doctrines had not corresponded with those delivered by 
 the apostles and other eye-witnesses of Christ's life. How could 
 the Gospel of Matthew have passed for his in the Christian com- 
 munities which he taught unless its accounts coincided with what 
 Matthew had taught orally? In that case what possible motive 
 could there be to forge a Gospel in his name ? 
 
 Respecting the Gospel of Mark, there is no good reason why the 
 ancient Church did not attribute it to Peter, a celebrated apostle, 
 directly, instead of attributing it to his associate, except the fact that 
 Peter did not write it. The Gospel of Luke rests on grounds pecul- 
 iar to itself, which we will consider in the proper place. The Gos- 
 un- pel of John we will find to be authenticated by the tes- 
 e'or the ti mon y f elders at Ephesus and by strong internal 
 church. evidence. And it must be observed, that forgeries of 
 
 writings in the names of the apostles or apostolic men were unknown 
 to the earliest age of the Christian Church. That age was too full of 
 spiritual life, too much absorbed with the realities of the history of 
 Christ and the apostles, too near the events, to think of counterfeit- 
 ing the sacred oracles. But to put forth Gospels under the as- 
 sumed names of apostolic men, instead of attributing them to the
 
 OF THE HOLY SCRIPTURES. 533 
 
 apostles themselves, would be to unite amazing stupidity with 
 wicked fiaud. 
 
 The most remarkable instance of forgery in the history of Chris- 
 tianity is that of the Clementine Homilies, written in the -j^ ciemen- 
 second half of the second century. This heretical work tine Homilies, 
 professes to be composed by Clement, bishop of Rome, in the first 
 century, in which the pretended author is converted by the preach 
 ing of Peter, and by him appointed his successor in the episcopacy. 
 It is dedicated to James, bishop of Jerusalem, who is earnestly 
 charged to reveal its contents to no Gentile, but only to those of 
 his own countrymen after they had been fully tested. In this way 
 the forger guarded against the objection to the genuineness of the 
 book derived from its late appearance. The letter forged in the 
 name of Christ, and which is represented as being sent by him to 
 Abgarus, king of Edessa, is first given by Eusebius 1 in the fourth 
 century, and was not fabricated earlier, in all probability, than the 
 last part of the second century. From the consideration of the ex- 
 ternal testimony to the genuineness of the Gospels collectively, we 
 proceed to consider them individually. 
 
 CHAPTER XIV. 
 
 THE GOSPEL ACCORDING TO MATTHEW. 
 THE PERSON OF THE EVANGELIST. 
 
 '"PHE author of this Gospel, one of the twelve apostles of Christ, 
 * was a collector of taxes (reAwv^c) when summoned to the apos- 
 tleship. In Matt, ix, 9 he is called Matthew, but in the parallel 
 passages (Mark ii, 14, Luke v, 27) he is called Levi. But there can 
 be no reasonable doubt that Matthew and Levi are the same person ; 
 and in the lists of the apostles (Matt, x, 2-4, Mark iii, 16-19, Luke 
 vi, 14-16, Acts i, 13), the name of Matthew appears, but that of Levi 
 is not found. Yet Levi must have been an apostle, as we can hardly 
 suppose that Christ called him (Mark ii, 14, Luke v, 27) for any 
 other purpose. Some of the other apostles had more than one 
 name, as Simon, named also Peter; Lebbeus, surnamed Thaddeus, 
 and in Luke vi, 16, called Judas. Little is known respecting Matth- 
 ew. Eusebius represents him as labouring among the Hebrews, and 
 writing his Gospel when about to leave them for other people. 1 
 1 Hist. Eccles., lib. i, cap. xiii. * Ibid., lib. iii, cap. xxiv.
 
 534 INTRODUCTION TO THE STUDY 
 
 STATEMENTS OF THE EARLY CHURCH FATHERS RESPECTING THIS 
 
 GOSPEL. 
 
 The earliest statement respecting the authorship and original Ian 
 Papua on uw guage of this Gospel is that of Papias, bishop of Hierap- 
 
 MMUww*sao* olis in the first half of the second century. He says that 
 pel. " Matthew wrote the oracles in the Hebrew dialect ; every 
 
 one interpreted them as he could." ' It is clear from this language 
 that the Gospel was not, in the time of Papias, used in the Hebrew 
 form, but that he speaks of what occurred when the Gospel was first 
 written : " Every man translated the Hebrew as well as he could." 
 
 Irenaeus states that " Matthew, among the Hebrews, published a 
 Mention of Gospel in their own dialect." * Origen states that Matth- 
 e w published his Gospel, composed in the Hebrew lan- 
 guage, for Jewish believers.' Eusebius affirms that 
 Matthew, having preached the Gospel to the Hebrews, 
 when he was about to depart to other people, delivered them the 
 Gospel according to him in their own dialect, to supply the want of 
 his presence. 4 
 
 Eusebius, in speaking of the Ebionites, some of whom, he says, 
 believed in the miraculous conception of Christ, while others of them 
 denied it, remarks : " They made use of that Gospel only which is 
 called according to the Hebrews, and took little account of the oth- 
 ers." ' He also observes that Hegesippus quotes some things from 
 the Gospel according to the Hebrews, and from the Syriac Gospel.* 
 Whether he means by the Syriac Gospel the Peshito version, or not, 
 cannot be determined. Eusebius relates a report that the Christian 
 philosopher, Pantaenus of Alexandria (about A. D. 190), went as a 
 missionary to India, where it was said he found the Gospel accord- 
 ing to Matthew written in the Hebrew language (which the Apostle 
 Bartholomew had left with the Christians to whom he had preached), 
 preserved to that time.' 
 
 Jerome says that Matthew, first in Judea, on account of those of 
 Jerome'i testi- l ^ e c i rcurnc ision who had believed, composed the Gos- 
 monjtoiutui- pel of Christ in the Hebrew characters and language. 
 It is not quite certain who afterward translated it into 
 Greek. " Furthermore, the Hebrew text itself is preserved until this 
 day in the library at Caesarea, which Pamphilus, tne martyr, very 
 
 obv 'E0paKi Aiahiiuu TO "Mryia owryp&tyaro. 'Hpft^vevae <T awni 
 wf f}6vvaro iKoarof. Eusebius, Hist. Eccles., lib. iii, cap. xxxix. 
 'Contra Hzereses, lib. iii, cap. i. *In Eusebius, Hist. Eccles., lib. vi, cap. xxv 
 * Ibid, lib. iii, cap. xxiv. ' Ibid., lib. iii, cap. xxvii. 
 
 *Tbid., lib. iv, cap. xxii. ' Ibid., lib. v, cap. x.
 
 OF THE HOLY SCRIPTURES. 535 
 
 industriously formed. An opportunity for copying it was afforded 
 me by the Nazaraeans, who make use of this book, in Beroea, a city 
 of Syria : in which it is to be observed, that wherever the evangelist, 
 either in his own person or in that of our Lord and Saviour, uses 
 the testimonies of the ancient Scriptures, he does not follow the au- 
 thority of the Septuagint, but the Hebrew, of which these are two 
 instances : ' Out of Egypt have I called my Son; ' and, ' For he 
 ?hill be called a Nazaraean.' " Jerome also remarks, in comment- 
 ing on Matthew xii, that the Gospel which the Nazaraeans and the 
 Ebionites use he had recently translated from the Hebrew language 
 into Greek. He adds that very many call it the original text of 
 Matthew." 
 
 Origen remarks on the Ebionites : " The Jews who have received 
 Christ are called Ebionites," 3 of whom there are two classes, " those 
 who believe that Jesus was born of a virgin as we do, and those who 
 believe that he was not so born, but as the rest of men."' " They 
 observe," says he, " the law of their fathers." 6 It is clear from this 
 that he includes in the term Ebionites the Nazaraeans of Jerome. 
 Irenaeus * states that the Ebionites made use of the Gospel accord- 
 ing to Matthew only. It is quite certain that he refers to the He- 
 brew text of that Gospel. 
 
 Epiphanius of Cyprus, a master of five languages, including He- 
 brew, (in the latter half of the fourth century), remarks Epiphanius's 
 on the Ebionites : " In the Gospel among them called 
 ' according to Matthew ' (not entire, but adulterated and pel- 
 mutilated, and this they call the Hebrew Gospel), it is said there was 
 a man by the name of Jesus, and he was about thirty years of age, 
 who chose us. And coming into Capernaum, he entered into the 
 house of Simon, surnamed Peter, and having opened his mouth, he 
 said : Passing along the Sea of Tiberias, I chose John and James, 
 sons of Zebedee, and Simon, and Andrew, and Thaddeus, and Simon 
 Zelotes, and Judas Iscariot, and I called thee, Matthew, sitting at 
 the custom-house, and thou didst follow me. I therefore wish you 
 to be twelve apostles for a testimony for Israel. And John was bap- 
 tizing, and there went forth to him the Pharisees and were baptized, 
 and all Jerusalem. And John had a garment of camel's hair, and a 
 
 1 Liber de Viris Illustribus, Matthaeus. 
 
 ' In Evangelio, quo utuntur Nazaraeni et Ebionitae (quod nuper in Graecum de 
 Hebraeo sermone transtulimus et quod vocatur a plerisque Matthaei authenticum), etc. 
 
 1 Contra Celsum, lib. ii, cap. i. They were so called on account of their poverty, 
 from the Hebrew V"^' e h on i P oor > or *hey gave themselves the name from theii 
 being poor in spirit (Matt, v, 3). * Contra Celsum, lib. v, cap. Ixi. 
 
 *Ibid., lib. ii, cap. i. 'Contra Haereses, lib. iii, cap. xi, sec. 7.
 
 336 INTRODUCTION TO THE STUDY 
 
 leather girdle about his loins, and his meat was wild honey, the taste 
 of which was that of manna, like a honey-cake baked in oil." On 
 this Epiphanius observes : " That they might forsooth convert the 
 word of truth into a lie, and instead of locusts (dvpidwv) make it 
 cakes in honey " (vKpJoc tv /ieAm.) " The beginning of the Gos- 
 pel among them is, that ' It came to pass in the days of Herod, king 
 of Judea, that John came baptizing with the baptism of repentance 
 in the river Jordan. He was said to be of the family of Aaron the 
 priest, the son of Zechariah and Elizabeth, and all veent forth to 
 him.' And to omit much that it gives, it adds: 'When the people 
 were baptized, Jesus also came and was baptized by John. And 
 when he came up from the water the heavens were opened, and he 
 saw the Holy Spirit of God in the form of a dove descending and 
 entering into him. And a voice came from heaven, saying, Thou 
 art my beloved Son, in thee I am well pleased: and again, This 
 day have I begotten thee. And immediately a great light shone 
 around the place, which John having seen, says to him, Who art 
 thou, Lord ? And again the voice from heaven says to him, This 
 is my beloved Son in whom I am well pleased. Then John, falling 
 down before him, said, I beseech thee, Lord, baptize thou me. 
 But he forbade him, saying, Suffer it, because thus it is proper that 
 every thing should be fulfilled." 
 
 Epiphanius also remarks, that " Cerinthus and Carpocrates, making 
 Further testi- use * '^is same Gospel of Matthew with them, wish to 
 mony of Epi- prove from the genealogy in the beginning of the Gospel 
 that Jesus was born from the seed of Joseph and Mary. 
 But the Ebionites aim at the opposite of this. For cutting off the 
 genealogies from Matthew, they begin, as I said before, saying, that, 
 it came to pass in the days of Herod, the king of Judea," ' etc. He 
 also states that they call the Gospel according to Matthew, " Ac- 
 cording to the Hebrews;" "for to speak the truth, Matthew alone, 
 of the New Testament writers, made an exposition of the Gospel 
 in the Hebrew language and characters."* Respecting the Naza- 
 raeans, he states : " They have the Gospel according to Matthew 
 very complete in Hebrew. For it is certain that among them this 
 is still preserved, as it was written originally, in the Hebrew language. 
 But I do not know whether they took away the genealogies which 
 extend from Abraham until Christ." * 
 
 Theodoret, bishop of Cyrrhus, in Syria (about A. D. 423-45 7 ), 
 speaks of two classes of Ebionites, one of which held that Christ was 
 the son of Joseph and Mary, and received the Gospel according tc 
 the Hebrews only. To this class belonged Symmachus, who trans- 
 
 1 Adversus Hareses, xxx, 13, 14. * Ibid., cap. Hi. * Ibid., xxix, cap. ix.
 
 OF THE HOLY SCRIPTURES. 537 
 
 lated the Old Testament from Hebrew into Greek. The othej class 
 of Ebionites, he says, affirmed that Christ was born of a virgin , they 
 made use of the Gospel according to Matthew only, kept the Sab- 
 bath according to the Jewish law, and observed Sunday in like man- 
 ner as the Christian Church. To these he adds the Nazaraeans 
 Jews who honour Christ as a just man, and make use of the Gospel 
 called "according to Peter." 9 
 
 From the foregoing extracts from the early Christian writers, it 
 appears evident that they were unanimous in the belief Qon^ngjong 
 that Matthew wrote his Gospel originally in Hebrew, fromtheabove 
 As they were using the Greek text of Matthew, their 
 natural tendency would have been to regard that as the original, and 
 the Hebrew Gospel used by Jewish heretics as a Hebrew translation 
 and recension of the Greek. Their unanimity respecting a Hebrew 
 original must, therefore, have been derived from a primitive tra- 
 dition. Though this Gospel was said to have been composed in 
 Hebrew, it was in fact, as Jerome, 8 who translated it, informs us, 
 " written in the Syro-Chaldee 4 language, but with Hebrew charac- 
 ters." We have also seen that Jerome in one place declares the 
 Hebrew Gospel to be the original Gospel written by Matthew ; & in 
 another, that it is called by most the original text of our Matthew ;* 
 and in another, he terms it the Gospel according to the Hebrews, ac- 
 cording to the apostles, or, as most assert, according to Matthew? 
 
 It is clear, from Jerome's account of this Gospel, that it generally 
 coincided with our Matthew. It contained the pas- Force of the tea- 
 sages, " Out of Egypt have I called my Son," and " He ^^Tand *5 
 shall be called a Nazarene," " found in the second chap- Epiphanius. 
 ter of our Matthew. And Jerome speaks of the reading Judae, as 
 found " in the Hebrew text itself" (chap, ii, 5), not Judseae." As this 
 Gospel contained the second chapter, it had in all probability the 
 first. Had it lacked this chapter, Jerome could not have failed to 
 
 1 Haeret. Fabul. Comp., lib. ii, I, 2. 
 
 * The Gospel according to Peter is mentioned by Serapion, bishop of Antioch, 
 about A. D. 200. He read the book, and found most of its contents accorded with 
 the true doctrines of Christ ; some things, however, were of a different character. 
 It appears to have been a recension of the Gospel according to the Hebrews. Se* 
 
 pion's account of it is given by Eusebius, Hist. Eccles., lib. vi, cap. xii. 
 
 1 In Evangelio^MJt/a Hebraos, quod Chaldaico quidem Syroque sermone, sed He- 
 oraicis litteris scriptum est. Advcrsus Pelagianos, lib. iii, 2. 
 
 4 This was the vernacular language of the Jews in Palestine at the time of Christ 
 It is called in the New Testament 'Eftpalari, Hebrew, because spoken by the Hebrews 
 
 *De Viris Illustribus, cap. iii. 'Comment, in Matt, xii. 
 
 * Adversus Pelagianos, lib. iii, 2. De Viris Illustribus, cap. iil 
 
 'Comment in Matt. ii.
 
 m INTRODUCTION TO THE STUDY 
 
 notice the fact. We have also seen that Hegesippus 1 quoted the 
 Gospel according to the Hebrews. When Irenaeus* states that the 
 Ebionites make use of the Gospel according to Matthew only, we are 
 to understand him as meaning the whole Gospel, in Hebrew, doubt- 
 less. And this corresponds with what Epiphanius ' relates, that Ce- 
 rinthus retained the first two chapters of Matthew's Gospel. We 
 have also seen that Theodoret 4 speaks of two classes of Ebionites, 
 one of which used the Gospel of Matthew only, and the other the 
 Gospel according to the Hebrews. This last work must have been 
 a modified Gospel of Matthew ; another form of it was the Gospel 
 of Peter, used by Nazoraeans (Nazaraeans). 
 
 Epiphanius, in his account of the Nazaraeans already given, states 
 that they have the Gospel according to Matthew in Hebrew very 
 complete, but that he does not know whether they removed the first 
 tvo chapters or not. The ignorance of Epiphanius upon this point 
 arose from the fact that he lived in the Island of Cyprus, while the 
 Nazaraeans flourished in Syria. But his want of information upon 
 this point is supplied by Jerome, who gives extracts from the second 
 chapter, and knows nothing of the elision of the first. 
 
 We have, however, seen that Epiphanius states that the Ebionites 
 had cut off the first two chapters of Matthew. This was, doubtless, 
 done to accommodate that Gospel to their doctrine that Christ was 
 the son of Joseph and Mary. But what number of them did this 
 we cannot determine ; yet it is likely that it was but a small portion. 
 The Gospel of Matthew, from which Epiphanius says the Ebionites 
 cut off the first two chapters, was probably a Greek recension of 
 Matthew, used by the Ebionites in Cyprus, where he says members 
 of that sect were found, 6 and from whom there is no doubt that he 
 obtained the copy which he describes. 
 
 That his copy was a Greek recension is very likely from the fact 
 that he says the Greek word dAcp/dac, locusts, in Matthew iii, 4, was 
 changed into ^yKpuJac," cakes made with oil and Jioney. This is further 
 probable from its being extremely unlikely that the Syro-Chaldee 
 language, in which Jerome's copy was written, was used in Cyprus. 
 And the inference is in the highest degree probable that the two 
 chapters of Matthew were elided only in the Greek recension of the 
 work. To this it must be added that Epiphanius alone among the 
 ancients speaks of the elision of these two chapters by the Ebionites, 
 It also appears, from Epiphanius's account of the mutilated Gospel 
 
 ' In Euseb., Hist. Eccles., iv, 22. He lived about 150-170. * Lib. iii, cap. xi, sec. i. 
 'Hxresis, xxx, 14. 4 H*ret Fabul., lib. ii, I, 2. *Haeresis, xxx, 18. 
 
 These two words sounded nearly alike ; written in English characters, they are 
 ikridas. locusts; eitkridas, cakes made with oil and honey.
 
 OF THE HOLY SCRIPTURES. 539 
 
 of Matthew, that it had some passages from Luke's Gospel It con- 
 tained additions and explanations. 
 
 The substantial agreement of our Greek Gospel of Matthew with 
 rhe Hebrew Gospel used by the various heretical Christian sects 
 among thr Jews, in all probability from the last part of the first cen- 
 tury, certainly from the middle of the second to the fifth century, 
 shows that they had a common origin. The extracts from the He- 
 brew Gospel given by the early fathers show that our Matthew, in 
 comparison with it, is the original. 
 
 In an ancient translation of a part of Origen's Commentary on 
 Matthew, 1 respecting chap, xix, 16-22 it is stated : " It is A quotation 
 
 written in a certain Gospel which is called according to by origen from 
 
 . . the Gospel ao- 
 
 the Hebrews, if it pleases any one to accept this, not as cording to the 
 
 an authority, but for the illustration of the subject be- HebrewB - 
 fore us : One of the rich men said to him, Master, what good thing 
 must I do that I may live ? He said to him : Man, observe the laws 
 and the prophets. He answered him : I have observed them. He 
 said to him : Go sell all which thou hast, and distribute it among the 
 poor, and come, follow me. But the rich man began to scratch his 
 head, and it did not please him. And the Lord said to him : How 
 dost thou say, I have kept the law and the prophets ? since it is writ- 
 ten in the law, thou shalt love thy neighbor as thyself, and behold 
 many of thy brethren, the sons of Abraham, are covered with ordure, 
 dying with hunger, and thy house is full of many good things, and 
 nothing goes from it to them," etc. In the account of the appear- 
 ance of Christ after his resurrection, it is stated in this Gospel : " But 
 when the Lord had given the napkin to the servant of the priest, he 
 went to James, and appeared to him, for James had sworn that he 
 would not eat bread from that hour in which he had drank the Lord's 
 cup until he should see him rising from among those who sleep,"" 
 etc. It is evident that both of these narratives are an enlargement 
 of our Gospel of Matthew. The passage in the Gospel according to 
 the Hebrews, quoted by Epiphanius,* " His (John the Baptist's) meat 
 was wild honey, of which the taste was that of manna," is a gloss on 
 the passage in our Matthew Origen gives the following passage 
 from this same Gospel: " My mother, the Holy Spirit, took me just 
 now by one of my hairs, and carried me away to the great Mount 
 Tabor." 4 
 
 In the account of our Saviour's healing the withered hand of a 
 man in the synagogue, Matt, xii, several particulars are added in the 
 Gospel used by the Nazaneans and Ebionites : " I was a stone mason, 
 
 'Tomus xv, 14. * De Viris Illustribus, cap. ii. 
 
 "Hseresis, xxx, 13. 4 Comment, in Joannem, torn, ii, c 
 
 35
 
 540 INTRODUCTION TO THE STUDY 
 
 obtaining my living by my hands; I beseech thee, Jesus, to restore 
 me to health, that I may not disgracefully beg my bread." ' In the 
 account of the baptism of Christ in the Hebrew Gospel, we have 
 already seen that several incidents are added to those we have in 
 the Greek Matthew. 
 
 The additions to our Greek Matthew, some of which are probably 
 as old as the middle of the second century, indicate that the original 
 Matthew is at least as ancient as the last part of the first century. 
 But the Gospel according to the Hebrews cannot be put on a par 
 with our Matthew, as is evident from the passages that we have 
 ad- given from it. Strauss* himself concedes that our Greek 
 Matthew is the more original work. It is to be observed 
 pel- that the differences between our Matthew and the He- 
 
 brew Gospel are made prominent by the early Christian writers, while 
 there was but little occasion to notice their general agreement, which 
 must have been quite close, otherwise no one could have supposed 
 that the Hebrew Gospel had the same origin as the Greek Matthew 
 
 Hilgenfeld thinks that the basis of our Greek Matthew was a Gos 
 HUgenfeid's P e ^ wr i tten originally in Hebrew, before the destruction 
 theory of the of Jerusalem, but enlarged and revised soon after that 
 Greek Matth- event, and, in its present form, adapted to the Gentile 
 ew - Christians; and that this original Hebrew Gospel was 
 
 closely allied with that used by the Nazaraeans. He refers to a state- 
 ment of Nicephorus patriarch of Constantinople in the last part of 
 the eighth and in the first part of the ninth century that the Gospel 
 of Matthew contains twenty-five hundred lines, and the Gospel ac- 
 cording to the Hebrews twenty-two hundred lines, making the matter 
 in the latter three hundred lines less than in our Gospel of Matthew. 
 But this statement is worthless, for Nicephorus also says that the 
 Acts of the Apostles contain twenty-eight hundred lines, three hun- 
 dred more than Matthew, when in fact they contain only about one 
 hundred and fifteen more. He also states that Mark's Gospel con- 
 tains two thousand lines, four fifths as much matter as Matthew's, 
 whereas on the basis of Matthew it should have been about fifteen 
 hundred and fifty, about two thirds of Matthew. Nor do we know 
 to what recension of the Hebrew Gospel Nicephorus refers. The 
 recension of the Hebrew Gospel which Epiphanius had lacked the 
 first two chapters, and seems to have been a Greek version. This 
 recension is very likely the one which Nicephorus says contained 
 twenty-two hundred lines.* 
 
 1 In Jerome's Comment in Matt, xiL * Das Leben Jesu, p. 50. Leipzig, 1874. 
 ' If Nicephorus had before him this Gospel in Hebrew, though containing as mncb 
 matter as our Matthew, it would have occupied less space in that language.
 
 OF THE HOLY SCRIPTURES. 54} 
 
 It is in the highest degree improbable that, if the Greek Gospel 
 of Matthew contained a great deal more matter than Not likely that 
 
 the Hebrew Gospel of the Nazaraeans, Jerome, who * d * Mc ?**Jf* 
 r . . made by the 
 
 translated it into Greek, would have failed to notice the translator of 
 fact. But would the translator of the Hebrew Gospel Matthew - 
 have dared to make large additions of his own to the work of an 
 apcstle of Christ ? Yet, if he was bold and unscrupulous enough to 
 do this, the fraud would have been soon detected, for both before 
 and many years after the destruction of Jerusalem there were many 
 Jewish Christians acquainted with the Hebrew (Syro-Chaldee) lan- 
 guage, as well as Greek, holding fellowship with the Gentile Chris- 
 tians. In the many translations made of the New Testament books 
 in the early ages, in no instance did the translator add new mattei 
 to the Greek text. 
 
 Nor could the Greek text of Matthew have been enlarged without 
 the additions becoming known ; for the Christian Church in the last 
 part of the first century was widely diffused over the Roman empire, 
 and many copies of the Gospel of Matthew must have been made. 
 No one could alter all these manuscripts, or even a large portion of 
 them ; and, besides, the result would have been that we would now 
 have no uniform text of this Gospel. On the contrary, there is a re- 
 markable agreement among the numerous manuscripts and versions, 
 showing that they are all the derivations of a single manuscript. 
 
 The reception of the Gospel of Matthew by the various Christian 
 sects among the Jews affords strong proof that it came Early reception 
 
 down from the apostolic age, and was regarded as a f Matthew's 
 
 Gospel by Jew- 
 work that had apostolic sanction. Epiphanius states ish Christian 
 
 that the heretic Cerinthus, in the last part of the first sects " 
 century, made use of the Gospel of Matthew, retaining, also, the first 
 two chapters, and endeavouring from their genealogy to establish his 
 doctrine that Jesus was the son of Joseph and Mary. 1 We have 
 also seen that Hegesippus, about the middle of the second century, 
 quoted the Gospel according to the Hebrews ; and in the account he 
 gives of the testimony of James, bishop of Jerusalem, he attributes 
 to him language almost identical with Matt, xxvi, 64." James says : 
 " Why do ye ask me concerning Jesus, the Son of man ? He is even 
 sitting in heaven on the right hand of great power, and will come in 
 the clouds of heaven." 1 
 
 Here the question arises, Why did the sects of Jewish believers in 
 
 1 Haeresis xxx, 14. 
 
 'Similar is Mark xiv, 62. Hegesippus also quotes, "Blessed are your eyes whicb 
 see, and your ears which hear," etc.. Matt, xiii, 16, in Photius, Codex ccxxxii. 
 'In Eusebius, Hist. Eccles., ii, 23.
 
 313 INTRODUCTION TO THE STUDY 
 
 the second century, and subsequently, receive the Gospel of Matthew 
 only ? The most natural answer to this question is, Because Matth- 
 ew laboured especially among the Jewish people of Palestine, and 
 wrote his Gospel in their vernacular, Syro-Chaldee, for their instruc- 
 tion. Nor is there any d priori improbability that Mattliew would 
 write his Gospel in that language, especially since it was composed 
 before the destruction of Jerusalem, when the Jews in Palestine weie 
 still intact. If Matthew confined his apostolic labors to Palestine, 
 where he must have used the Syro-Chaldee language, it is exceed 
 ingly improbable that he could have composed a Gospel in Greefc. 
 
 Josephus states that he first wrote his History of the Jewish 
 The example Wars m ^ s vernacular tongue (Syro-Chaldee), and after- 
 of Josephus ward translated it into Greek for the benefit of other 
 nations. ' Why should not Matthew have written his 
 Gospel in the same language ? But though written originally in He- 
 brew, it would soon be translated into Greek, to insure it a more ex- 
 tended circulation. This version was made so early that the name 
 of the translator, it seems, was unknown to the writers of the second 
 and subsequent centuries. 
 
 But it may be asked, Why did not the translator of the Gospel of 
 Matthew in the Peshito-Syriac version, executed about the middle 
 of the second century, make his version from the Hebrew, or, rather, 
 Syro-Chaldee, text of Matthew, instead of making it from the Greek, 
 as he evidently did, especially as the Syro-Chaldee was closely allied 
 to the Syriac ? To which we would answer, that at that time the 
 Hebrew Gospel was used only by the sects of the Jewish Christians 
 not recognized by the great body of the Church as orthodox, and 
 it had already received some additions, while the Greek Matthew 
 was everywhere used in the Gentile Church as the authoritative 
 text. 1 
 
 But, notwithstanding the unanimous testimony of the ancient 
 some critic* m Church ^ at Matthew wrote originally in Hebrew, some 
 favour of a eminent modern critics have decided in favour of a 
 "^ Greek original. Among these are Lardner, Hug, De 
 Wette, Bleek, and Tischendorf. Our Greek Matthew shows an ac- 
 quaintance with the Septuagint, but does not always follow it; in 
 some instances it adheres to the Hebrew when that version departs 
 frcm it. It is clear that the author of this Gospel was acquainted 
 with Hebrew. 
 
 1 Bellum Judaicum, Prooernium. This Syro-Chaldee text is lost 
 
 'The following is the subscription to Matthew's Gospel in the Peshito-Syriac rer- 
 
 rion : " The end of the Holy Gospel, the preaching of Matthew which he published 
 
 in Hebrew, in the land of Palestine."
 
 OF THE HOLY SCRIPTURES. 543 
 
 The manner in which the quotations from the Old Testament are 
 made furnishes, however, no proof that our Greek Matthew is not a 
 translation. In Matt, ii, 15 the translator could not have followed 
 the LXX without destroying the very sense in which the evangelist 
 uses the passage, " Out of Egypt have I called my Son ; " for that 
 version has, " I called his children out of Egypt." In quoting Isa 
 xlii. 1-3 in chap, xii, 18-20, the words of the LXX are but partly 
 used; while chap, xiii, 14, 15 is the exact language of Isaiah vi, 9, 10 
 in the LXX. It is not easy to explain this. 
 
 The Gospel of Matthew bears internal evidence of having been 
 written for the Jewish Christians especially. The main mternai proof 
 
 purpose of the author is to show that Jesus Christ is the that Matthew's 
 ,, . , , . , , , ~ , , Gospel was de- 
 
 Messiah promised in the Old Testament; and he ac- signedforJew- 
 
 cordingly gives the genealogy of Christ as far back as 
 Abraham. In about eleven places he refers to incidents in the his- 
 tory of Christ as being fulfilments of the Old Testament prophecies, 
 besides those passages in which he represents Christ himself as re- 
 ferring to them. In his Sermon on the Mount Christ contrasts his 
 own teaching with that of Moses, which is rarely done in the other 
 evangelists. To the Jews he says : " Think not that I am come to 
 destroy the law, or the prophets : I am not come to destroy, but to 
 fulfil. For verily I say unto you, Till heaven and earth pass, one jot 
 or one tittle shall in no wise pass from the law, till all be fulfilled " 
 (chap, v, 17, 18). In a Gospel addressed to Jewish Christians these 
 passages in our Lord's discourses are naturally recorded, but in one 
 addressed especially to Gentile Christians they could, with propriety, 
 be omitted, though Luke xvi, 17 has a similar passage to Matthew 
 v, 17, 1 8. Nor does the evangelist anywhere attempt to explain the 
 customs of the Jews which is very natural on the supposition that 
 this Gospel was intended for Jewish readers, but quite strange if it 
 was designed for Gentile Christians. 
 
 Utterly untenable is the position of Hilgenfeld, 1 that our Matthew 
 is the Hebrew Gospel of that evangelist, enlarged and Huge^e^., 
 adapted to the Gentile Christians. Would such a re- theory ocnaid- 
 viser have allowed such a passage as this to stand : e 
 " Think not that I come to destroy the law, or the prophets : I am 
 not come to destroy, but to fulfil. For verily I say unto you, Till 
 heaven and earth pass, one jot or one tittle shall in no wise pass from 
 the law, till all be fulfilled " (chap, v, 17, 18). Nor is the command 
 of Christ to his apostles, " Go not into the way of the Gentiles, 
 and into any city of the Samaritans enter ye not : but go rather to 
 the lost sheep of the house of Israel " (chap, x, 5, 6), adapted to 
 'Einleitung, pp. 457-497. Leipzig, 1875.
 
 544 INTRODUCTION TO THE STUDY 
 
 Gentile Christians. Wholly unsuitable, also, for these Christians ia 
 *he language Christ addressed to the Syrophenician woman (chap. 
 xv, 26). The references made to the Old Testament prophecies 
 would not be so appropriate if addressed to Gentile as to Jewish 
 Christians. Nor is there the least probability that all these refer- 
 ences were not found l in the Hebrew Gospel, for Jerome states that 
 the Gospel of the Nazaraeans had the two references in the second 
 chapter to the Old Testament : " Out of Egypt have I called my 
 Son ; " and, " He shall be called a Nazarene." 
 
 There are, it is true, two parables referring to the rejection of the 
 Jews and the calling of the Gentiles: that of the vineyard (chap. 
 xxi, 33-43), and that of the marriage of the king's son (chap, xxii, 
 2-14). Also the declaration, "That many shall come from the east 
 and west, and shall sit down with Abraham, and Isaac, and Jacob, 
 in the kingdom of heaven : but the children of the kingdom shall 
 be cast out into outer darkness" (chap, viii, u, 12), refers to the 
 same events. But it was to be expected that Christ would make 
 declarations of this kind, and the denial of them is a rejection of his 
 foreknowledge. Nor are they inappropriate in a Gospel addressed 
 to Jewish Christians especially. The command given the apostles tc 
 preach the Gospel to all nations (chap, xxviii, 19, 20) rises above the 
 particularism of the Jews, and is perfectly in keeping with the great 
 designs of the Founder of Christianity. But such outcroppings of 
 the intended universality of Christianity were to be expected even in 
 a Gospel designed especially for Jewish Christians. 
 
 THE DATE OF THE COMPOSITION OF MATTHEW'S GOSPEL. 
 
 The oldest testimony upon this point is that of Irenjeus (about 
 rwtimony of A. D. 1 80), who states that "among the Hebrews Matth- 
 ew published in their own dialect a written Gospel when 
 Peter and Paul were preaching the Gospel in Rome and founding 
 the Church."* Respecting the time when Peter arrived in Rome we 
 know nothing, and the time of the arrival of Paul in that city is to 
 be determined from his history in the Acts of the Apostles. This 
 event most critics place in A. D. 60-63, an d Paul's death about A. D. 
 67 or 68. If the statement of Irenaeus is correct, the Gospel must 
 have been written during this interval, somewhere between A. D 60 
 and 68. Clement * of Alexandria says that it was the tradition of 
 
 1 Against Hilgenfeld. 
 
 * 'C fu v Si) Martfatof kv roif 'Efipoloif Ty idlp diaXeur^ avruv, ntu Tpafrjv f&jvtyitn 
 'EvarytMov, rov Utrpov xai row Ilavtov ev 'Pufty tvayyeXt^ofihiuv net QcpeAurivTu* 
 rip 'EKK/Jioiav. Contra Haereses, lib. iii, cap. i, sec. I. 
 
 In Eusebius, Hist. Eccles., lib. vi. 14. He was a teacher in the Catechetical 
 School of Alexandria, A. D. 190-202.
 
 OF THE HOLY SCRIPTURES. 545 
 
 the most ancient presbyters that the Gospels containing the geneal- 
 ogies were written first. Eusebius ' states that Matthew wrote for 
 the Hebrews his Gospel when about to leave for other people. 
 There is nothing very definite in respect to time in these last two 
 statements. 
 
 There can be no doubt that the Gospel of Matthew is the oldest 
 of the four. "All considerate inquirers," says the skep- views of mod- 
 tical critic Keim, " agree in the admission that the Gos- ern criacs - 
 pel of Matthew was written about the time of the destruction oJ 
 Jerusalem. . . . Preponderating are the indications that it originated 
 before this destruction." He fixes upon the year A. D. 68," about 
 two years before that catastrophe. 8 Hug, 4 De Wette, 6 and Ewald * 
 place it before the destruction of Jerusalem ; and Bleek 7 in the year 
 of the destruction, but before it rather than after it. 
 
 Baur supposed that our Matthew is a revision of the Hebrew Gos- 
 pel, or Gospel of Peter, made during the second Jewish war (A. D. 
 132-135), and adapted to general circulation by slight modifications, 
 but, upon the whole, reproducing the evangelical history with great 
 fidelity. His latest view substantially was that our Gospel is a revis- 
 ion of the Gospel written in Greek, of a strictly Jewish cast, by the 
 Apostle Matthew between A. D. 50 and 60, but which received 
 small additions, about ten years later, to adapt it to universal cir- 
 culation. 8 
 
 Strauss 9 thinks that our Matthew was formed by successive addi- 
 tions, based possibly upon the original Gospel, which may have pro- 
 ceeded from an apostle, and finished at a quite late period. 
 
 Renan regards our Matthew as having its origin in " the discourses 
 of Jesus collected by the Apostle Matthew," and seems to think 
 that it was written before the destruction of Jerusalem ; and that not 
 without reason it bears the title : " The Gospel according to Matth- 
 
 1 Euseb., iii, 24. 'Geschichte Jesu, pp. 24, 25. Zurich, 1873. 
 
 ' Keim, however, regards the parable of the marriage of the king's son (chap, xxii, 
 2-14) as not belonging to the original Matthew, but added about A. D. 100. He 
 thinks that Christ could not have spoken this parable, because it too clearly predicts 
 the overthrow of the Jewish State. But if this addition had been made when tb 
 Gospel had already been in circulation forty years, the section would have been want- 
 ing in most of the MSS. which is not the case. He also thinks chapter xxiv, 14 a 
 uiter addition. 
 
 'Einleitung, Zweiter Theil, 8-13. Einleitung, p. 2OO. 
 
 Die Drei Ersten Evangel., u. s. w., p. 89. Gottingen, 1871. 
 
 ' Einleitung, von Mangold, pp. 318, 319. Berlin, 1875. 
 
 'He regards the Gospel of Matthew " as relatively the most genuine and the most 
 reliable source of the Gospel history.' Kirchengeschich. der Drei Erst. Jahr., p. 25 
 
 Das Leben Jesu, p. 50. Leipzig 1874.
 
 546 INTRODUCTION TO THE STUDY 
 
 cw." He thinks, also, " that beyond doubt at a very early period ' 
 the discourses of Jesus were written in the Aramaic language, a% 
 likewise, were his remarkable deeds recorded. He supp ises, how 
 ever, that in the course of time this Gospel received some additions 
 and suffered some changes. 1 
 
 It is clear from Matthew xxiv that this Gospel was written before 
 the destruction of Jerusalem, and has been preserved intact. Foi 
 the form in which Christ predicts the destruction of that city, con 
 netting apparently* the future judgment closely with it, and the 
 highly figurative and indefinite manner in which it is expressed, are 
 conclusive proofs that it was neither made up after the event, nor in 
 the least degree moulded by it. 
 
 It seems proper in this place to consider the assertion of Strauss 
 AS to alleged and Renan, that this Gospel received considerable addi- 
 interpoiations. tions to its original matter at various times. In proof 
 of this assertion not a particle of evidence is furnished. In the first 
 place, it is contrary to general usage. Who supposes that Xeno- 
 phon's Memoirs of Socrates received important additions from later 
 hands ; or that his Anabasis has been largely interpplated ; or the 
 History of Herodotus ? To interpolate an author is a fraudulent 
 act ; but wjiat shall we say of the frequent interpolation of the 
 writings of an apostle by Christians ? We do not charge the Mo- 
 hammedans with corrupting the Koran. 
 
 But even if a few so-called Christians were unscrupulous enough 
 to interpolate the Gospel, it is impossible that such interpolations 
 should escape detection. For immediately after the publication of 
 the Gospel many copies of it would be disseminated among the 
 Christian Churches in all parts of the Roman empire, and but few 
 copies could receive the same interpolations. The result would be 
 that the ancient manuscripts and versions would present a great 
 variety of texts, from which it would have been impossible to fix with 
 any certainty the original text. But we have no such disagreement 
 of manuscripts and versions, but a wonderful harmony. 
 
 The very form in which we have the Gospel shows that it has not 
 been made up of heterogeneous elements, but that it is a well ar- 
 ranged history of Christ. Let any one compare it with the Gospel 
 according to the Hebrews, with which it was closely connected and 
 he will see at once in what condition our Matthew would have been 
 had it received additions to its original form. 
 
 The Hebraisms of this Gospel show that it must have been written 
 
 1 Vie de Je"sus, Introduction. Paris, 1867. 
 
 ' We say apparently, for we do not think that Christ intended that, whatever the 
 
 apostles may have thought at the time.
 
 OF THE HOLY SCRIPTURES. S47 
 
 by one whose vernacular was Hebrew or Syro-Chaldee, and if inter- 
 polations were made in it, they must have come from persons of 
 similar education. But after the close of the first century the 
 Jewish believers in the Church were not numerous. Further, each 
 of our evangelists has his peculiarities stamped upon his Gospel. 
 The foregoing observations are applicable in nearly their whole 
 extent to all four Gospels. We are authorized to conclude that 
 Matthew wrote his Gospel in the Syro-Chaldee language in Palestine 
 some time between A. D. 60 and 67 most likely in the earlier part 
 of this period and that it was soon afterward translated into Greek, 
 and has come down to us in its integrity. 
 
 The only known instance in antiquity of the denial of the gen- 
 uineness of this Gospel is that of Faustus, an African _ . 
 
 r ausLUs & re* 
 
 bishop of the Manichaeans (about A. D. 400), a man of JecterofMatth- 
 natural shrewdness, but destitute of culture. Augustine e 
 says that this man " published a volume against the true Christian 
 faith and catholic truth." In promoting his heresy he denied the 
 genuineness of this Gospel, declaring that the use of the third per- 
 son by the evangelist, when speaking of Matthew (ix, 9), is incon- 
 sistent with the author's being Matthew. 1 Such an argument shows 
 the ignorance of the man or his want of candour. 
 
 THE GENUINENESS AND CHARACTER OF THE GOSPEL OF 
 MATTHEW. 
 
 We have seen the strength of the external evidence showing that 
 this Gospel proceeded from Matthew. Now, the question arises, Is 
 there any thing in the Gospel itself inconsistent with its apostolic 
 origin ? It would be a singular, and, we may add, a sad, spectacle 
 if a Gospel, received everywhere throughout the Christian world 
 from its first publication without doubt as the work of the Apostle 
 Matthew, should, after the lapse of eighteen centuries, be discovered 
 to have originated from no apostle at all. What documents be- 
 longing to antiquity, either of a sacred or profane character, could 
 we in that case receive with any confidence ? The unanimous judg- 
 ment and testimony of the ancient world respecting matters of fact 
 should command our belief and trust ; otherwise, we are driven to 
 universal skepticism. 
 
 But the examination of the contents of this Gospel reveals nothing 
 inconsistent with the claim that it is from Matthew, the apostle of 
 Christ. It clearly sets forth the original, sublime, distinctive, and 
 incisive doctrines of Christ, and relates his godlike acts with fresh- 
 ness and simplicity of language, always maintaining the apostolic 
 1 In Augustine. Contra Faustum. lib. vii, cap. L
 
 548 
 
 IN 1 KODUCTION TO THE STUD* 
 
 dignity, and avoiding every thing of a trivial character. The Sermon 
 on the Mount bears upon it the stamp of the originality of Christ, 
 and nowhere else in the evangelical history have we such a full and 
 clear statement of Christ's doctrines. But in spite of the high char- 
 acter of this Gospel, and the universal testimony borne to it by ar 
 tiquity, doubts have been raised by some critics in modern times 
 respecting its having originated from Matthew. 
 
 De Wette, who in some respects may be called the chief ot skep- 
 Doubts of late ^ cs ' can ^ nc ^ notn i n i n ^ e account that the evangelist 
 critics consid- states respecting Matthew (ix, 9) that would lead us to 
 infer that he is the author of the Gospel. It is true 
 that in that passage he speaks simply of his being a tax-gath- 
 erer, and being called to follow Christ. Whether he should 
 say more than this was a matter of taste. In the Memoirs of Soc- 
 rates, written by his disciple, Xenophon, but little is said of the au- 
 thor, and nothing to connect him with the composition of the book ; 
 and when he describes himself in the Anabasis, 1 not the least hint is 
 given that -he wrote the work. De Wette thinks that an eye-witness 
 De wette's ob- ^ ^ e ^ e ^ Christ would not have passed over his min- 
 ection con- istry in Jerusalem, which is related by John. The pas- 
 sage, " How often would I have gathered thy children to- 
 gether, even as a hen gathereth her chickens under her wings, and ye 
 would not ! " (Matt, xxiii, 37) clearlv shows that our evangelist knew 
 that Christ had exercised his ministry also among the people of Je- 
 rusalem. In not describing our Saviour's earlier visits to Jerusalem, 
 and his ministry there, our evangelist does not stand alone. The 
 same omission occurs in Mark and Luke. Luke, however, mentions 
 a visit which our Saviour made to Martha and Mary (chap, x, 38-42) ; 
 and on another occasion he speaks of our Saviour being in a vil- 
 lage of the Samaritans, with his face set as if he was going up to Je- 
 rusalem (chap, ix, 53) ; and of his " journeyings towards Jerusalem " 
 (Luke xiii, 22). He also says: "As he went to Jerusalem " (chap. 
 xvii, n). Although our Saviour's abode was in Galilee, where he 
 chiefly exercised his ministry, there can be no doubt that, as a Jew, he 
 obeyed the law and went up to Jerusalem to the great festivals, dur- 
 ing which he exercised his ministry in that city. But the fact is, 
 that our evangelist devotes about one third (the last) of his Gospel to 
 Christ's teachings, acts, and the closing events of his earthly career 
 in Jerusalem. Matthew knowing that the most important events in 
 the life of our Lord occurred at Jerusalem, at the end of his mis- 
 sion, may have deemed it unnecessary to give the visits of Christ to 
 that city, since it was not his design to write a full history of the 
 1 Book iii, chap, i, scr. j.. etc.
 
 OF THE HOLY SCRIPTURES. 54<j 
 
 Redeemer. The same reason may have governed Luke 1 in writing 
 his Gospel; and Mark also, unless we regard him as imitating 
 Matthew. 
 
 The only way in which the omission of Christ's earlier visits ''o 
 Jerusalem could militate against the evangelist being an eyewit- 
 ness of Christ's life, would be to show that he knew nothing about 
 them. But that supposition is refuted by the Gospel itself, and is 
 utterly incredible when we consider the early period at which it was 
 written. Luke, who assures us that he had " perfect understanding 
 of all things from the very first," as they were delivered by the eye- 
 witnesses of Christ's life (chap, i, 2, 3), also passes over the early 
 visits to Jerusalem. Now, the Gospel of John beautifully supple- 
 ments the first three, and is confined almost entirely to the narration 
 of Christ's teachings and acts at Jerusalem and in its vicinity. 
 There can be no doubt that John intended it to be the comple- 
 ment of the other Gospels. 
 
 De Wette also objects that Matthew does not always follow the 
 order of time in his narration of Christ's discourses. Anot her objec- 
 But it is clear that our evangelist does generally follow tion by De 
 the order of time, and if any incidents seem to be out 
 of natural connexion, that fact can furnish no valid objection to the 
 apostolic origin of the Gospel. 8 As our Saviour inculcated the same 
 lessons in different places', the evangelist may not in every instance 
 have accurately discriminated the occasions, after the lapse of many 
 years. Christ promised the apostles that the Father would send 
 them the Holy Spirit to bring to their remembrance whatever he 
 had said unto them, but this did not necessarily imply the exact 
 order of time in which each thing was said. In the observance of 
 the chronological order of events Matthew is more accurate than 
 either Luke or Mark. Yet it must be observed that the evangelist 
 may not have cared to observe closely the exact order of time. But 
 we are not sure that Matthew has at all failed in this particular. It 
 is easy to infer from some preconceived theory that certain events 
 and teachings should stand in a different connexion from that in 
 which they appear, but we have no sufficient proof that they are 
 wrongly placed. 
 
 It has also been alleged that our evangelist does not describe 
 
 1 It is exceedingly probable that Luke, when he wrote, had not seen Matthew's 
 Gospel. According to Irenaeus' statement, when Matthew wrote Luke must have 
 been at Rome, where he wrote about the same time, or soon after. Mark was evi- 
 dently acquainted with our Matthew. 
 
 ' Even the most famous of modern biographers do not always observe the ordei 
 of time.
 
 550 INTRODUCTION TO THE STUDY 
 
 events with all the clearness and vividness that might be expected 
 Another mod- ^ rom an e y ew i tness - But the power of describing events 
 em criticism in a vivid manner is not possessed by all. Further, 
 ew ' some narrators almost invariably go into all the de- 
 tails of a subject, while others are content to touch upon the most 
 important points. It is very evident that, in the limited space to 
 which Matthew confines himself, he could not give a great number 
 of particulars. Yet it is to be observed that in his delineations he is 
 generally more original than Luke. 
 
 In his account of the miracle of the feeding of five thousand men 
 with a few loaves and fishes (chap, xiv, 15-21) he states that Christ 
 commanded the multitude to sit down on the grass. This language 
 probably indicates an eyewitness. The mention of grass is wanting 
 in Luke. 1 Matthew is more specific than the other evangelists in 
 stating that there were five thousand fed, besides the women and 
 children. In chap, xiii, i he gives a very exact statement, wanting 
 in Mark and Luke " the same day." But it must be observed the 
 greatest part of Matthew's Gospel is occupied with the discourses of 
 Christ, and, consequently, there are not so many occasions on which 
 the evangelist could give particulars. 
 
 Bleek does not attribute our Gospel to the Apostle Matthew, nor 
 Bieek'B opin- does ne inform us who he thinks wrote it, except that it 
 lonor Matthew is not the work of an apostle. He remarks : "It holds 
 red * a lower position than the Gospel of John, but in general 
 it stands in the same rank with that of Luke, and in its essential 
 contents for the Christian faith it remains permanently a credible 
 and important source." 4 Undoubtedly the early composition of our 
 Gospel, and its universal authority at the close of the apostolic age 
 and afterward, show that it contains the history of Christ as deliv- 
 ered by the eyewitnesses of his life, whoever may have been the 
 author. But we cannot allow the opinion of Bleek * to weigh much 
 against the unanimous judgment of antiquity beginning with that 
 of Papias, in the first part of the second century that Matthew the 
 apostle wrote it; and the testimony of antiquity is accepted by the 
 great mass of modern scholars. 
 
 1 Mark speaks of the green grass ; John, of much grass ; John was an eyewitness , 
 Mark, if not an eyewitness, may have derived his account from Matthew. 
 
 * Einleitung, by Mangold, p. 332. 
 
 * Even Hilgenfeld acknowledges that our Gospel has the genuine writing of tha 
 apostle Matthew for its foundation, written A. D. 60-70, which was revised imme- 
 diately after the destruction of Jerusalem. Einleitunsj. p. 197. Leipzig, 1875.
 
 OF THE HOLY SCRIPTURES. 551 
 
 CONTENTS OF THE GOSPEL OF MATTHEW. 
 
 This Gospel opens with the genealogy of Christ, from Abraham 
 to Joseph the husband of Mary, and gives an account of the mirac- 
 ulous conception and birth of our Lord. This is followed by the 
 visit of the Magi to the infant Saviour ; the attempt of Herod to 
 murdei him; the flight of Joseph and Mary with the child into 
 Egypt ; the slaughter of the infants by Herod ; the return of the fam- 
 ily from Egypt, and their settlement in Nazareth (chaps, i, ii). John 
 preaches repentance and baptizes the people in the Jordan. Christ 
 is also baptized by him ; fasts for forty days in the desert of Judea, 
 and is tempted by the devil, who is vanquished. After this Christ 
 goes into Galilee, preaching everywhere the kingdom of God, and 
 performing all kinds of miracles for the relief of men. He calls 
 Peter, Andrew, James, and John to be his disciples. Great crowds 
 follow him (chaps. Hi, iv). He delivers the Sermon on the Mount, in 
 which he sets forth the moral and religious principles of his king- 
 dom, partly in contrast with the Mosaic system (chaps, v-vii). He 
 heals a leper, restores to health by a word the centurion's servant 
 sick of the palsy, cures Peter's mother-in-law, and casts out devils. 
 To a scribe wishing to follow him he declares he has not where to 
 lay his head. He rebukes the winds and the seas. In the coun- 
 try of the Gergesenes he casts out of two men devils, whom he 
 suffers to enter into and destroy a herd of swine (chap. viii). He 
 heals a man sick of the palsy, and declares his power on earth to 
 forgive sins. He calls Matthew to be his disciple, declares that 
 he came not to call the righteous, but sinners, to repentance, and 
 justifies his disciples in not fasting. He heals a woman who had an 
 issue of blood, restores to life the daughter of a ruler, gives sight 
 to two blind men, and speech to a dumb man possessed of a devil 
 (chap. ix). He instructs and sends forth his twelve apostles to 
 preach to Israel (chap. x). John sends two of his disciples to Christ 
 to ascertain whether he is the Messiah. He tells them to tell John 
 what they have seen and heard. He characterizes John, and up- 
 braids the cities where most of his own mighty works had been done, 
 proclaims the intimate relations existing between himself and his Fa- 
 ther, and invites the weary and heavy-laden to come to him and 
 find rest (chap. xi). Christ justifies his disciples in plucking and 
 eating corn on the Sabbath day, then heals the withered hand of 
 a man on the Sabbath, and justifies the action. The Pharisees take 
 counsel to destroy him, and he withdraws. He casts the devil out 
 of a man blind and dumb, who speaks and sees. The Pharisees 
 charge Jesus with casting out devils through the prince of the devils.
 
 552 INTRODUCTION TO THE STUD\ 
 
 whereupon he declares that there is no forgiveness for blasphemy 
 against the Holy Ghost, rebukes the people for their wickedness, de- 
 scribes their miserable condition, and affirms that his disciples are 
 his nearest kindred (chap. xii). The parables of the sower, tares, 
 and hidden treasure are delivered. The people are astonished at 
 Christ's doctrines (chap. xiii). 
 
 Herod beheads John, on hearing which Christ departs to a desert 
 place, where he feeds five thousand men with a few loaves and fishes. 
 The disciples in crossing the Sea of Galilee meet a storm, in the 
 midst of which Christ appears walking on the water, and rescues 
 them. On arriving at the west coast of the sea, he heals many. He 
 rebukes the hypocrisy of the Pharisees for laying great stress on 
 minor matters, while they violate the great moral principles of the 
 law. He shows what things defile a man, goes into the region of 
 Tyre and Sidon, heals the daughter of a woman of Canaan, and re- 
 turns to Galilee, where he heals many that are afflicted, and feeds 
 four thousand men with a few loaves and fishes (chaps, xiv, xv). 
 
 Christ rebukes the Pharisees and Sadducees, who demand a sign 
 from heaven, warns the disciples to beware of the leaven of these 
 men, commends Peter, upon his expressing faith in his divine char- 
 acter, and foretells his own death and resurrection at Jerusalem. 
 He also shows how he is to be served, and declares that he will re- 
 ward every one according to his works (chap. xvi). He is trans- 
 figured. He heals a lunatic, and pays tribute (chap. xvii). He 
 teaches humility and the duty of forgiveness, treats of marriage, in- 
 structs a rich man how to be made perfect, declares the difficulty of 
 a rich man entering the kingdom of God, and makes large promises 
 to those who have forsaken all for him (chaps, xviii, xix). The 
 parable of the labourers in the vineyard is given. Christ rebukes 
 the mother of Zebedee's children for asking great honour for her 
 two sons, and heals two blind men near Jericho (chap. xx). 
 
 Christ makes a triumphal entry into Jerusalem. He drives out of 
 the temple the sellers and buyers, and overthrows the tables of the 
 money changers. He curses a fig tree. In the temple the chief 
 priests and the elders dispute with him respecting his authority. 
 He relates the parables of the householder and of the king's son, 
 silences the Herodians who question him respecting paying tribute 
 to Caesar, refutes the Sadducees, who deny the resurrection, points 
 out the two great commandments, and tests his disciples respecting 
 their knowledge of himself (chaps, xxi, xxii). Christ warns his disci- 
 ples against the practices of the Pharisees, upon whom he pronounces 
 woes, and remonstrates pathetically with Jerusalem (chap, xxiii). 
 He foretells the destruction of Jerusalem and the great calamities
 
 OF THE HOLY SCRIPTURES. 553 
 
 that shall precede it, and also his coming to judgment, and exhorts 
 his disciples to be faithful. He delivers the parables of the ten 
 virgins and the talents, and describes the judgment of the world 
 (chaps, xxiv, xxv). 
 
 The Jews consult to put Christ to death. He is anointed by a 
 woman at Bethany. Judas agrees with the chief priests to betray 
 him for thirty pieces of silver. Christ eats the passover with his 
 disciples, and afterward goes with them to the garden of Geth- 
 semane. He suffers agony in the garden ; he is betrayed by Judas, 
 arrested, and brought before Caiaphas, the high priest, who examines 
 him he is declared worthy of death, and insulted. Peter denies him 
 (chap. xxvi). He is brought before Pilate, who, though declaring 
 him innocent, delivers him to the Jews to be crucified. A descrip- 
 tion follows of the crucifixion and the events connected with it. 
 
 Christ is buried in the tomb of Joseph of Arimathsea, and a guard 
 of soldiers is stationed at the tomb (chap, xxvii). An account of his 
 resurrection, his appearance to his disciples, and the commission 
 which he gives them to preach the gospel to all the nations (chap 
 xxviii) closes this Gospel. 
 
 CHAPTER XV. 
 
 THE GOSPEL ACCORDING TO MARK. 
 THE PERSON OF THE EVANGELIST. 
 
 TPHE author of the second Gospel is the " John, whose surname was 
 Mark," to the house of whose mother Peter went when released 
 from prison (Acts xii, 12). From this it appears that he was a resi- 
 dent of Jerusalem, and that his mother was a Christian. He first 
 appears as the companion of Paul and Barnabas in their missionary 
 journey from Antioch to Seleucia, Cyprus, and Perga in p ere onai hi* 
 Pamphylia, where he left them, and returned to Jerusa- toryof Mart. 
 lem (Acts xii, 25; xiii, 5, 13; xv, 38). He also accompanied Bar- 
 nabas to Cyprus (Acts xv, 39). This is the last mention of him in 
 the Acts. In Paul's Epistle to the Colossians, written at Rome 
 about A. D. 62, it is said : " Mark, the cousin (dverf>i6$) of Barna- 
 bas, saluteth you " (chap, iv, 10). This relationship, in all probability, 
 explains the partiality of Barnabas for him (Acts xv, 37-39). Ako 
 in the Epistle to Philemon, written at Rome about A. D. 62, Mark 
 sends salutations (verse 24). It is, therefore, evident that Mark was 
 at Rome while Paul was a prisoner there. Peter, also, in his First 
 Epistle, speaks of " Mark, my son," by which term he seems to desig.
 
 554 INTRODUCTION TO THE STUDY 
 
 nate our evangelist as his spiritual son. This Epistle was written 
 from Babylon, where, according to Josephus, a multitude of Jews 
 lived/' It would seem that our evangelist was at that time with 
 Peter in Babylon. It is not improbable that, after Paul wrote to the 
 Colossiaris and Philemon, Mark left Rome for the East, and joined 
 Peter in the region of Babylon, and then accompanied him to P.ome, 
 where they arrived probably some time during A, D. 64-67. Petet 
 was evidently acquainted with Mark (Acts xii, 12). That Mark 
 piobably left Rome for the East appears from Colossians iv, 10, 
 where Paul, speaking of him, says: "Touching whom ye received 
 commandments; if he come unto you, receive him." Eusebius re- 
 marks: "They say that Mark first established Churches in Alexan- 
 dria itself."* He seems to place his death in the eighth year of Nero's 
 reign * (about A. D. 62), as he says that Annianus succeeded him as 
 bishop at that time. But this date of Eusebius is too early. Epipha- 
 nius * says that Mark, after he had written his Gospel, was sent into 
 Egypt by Peter. Jerome calls him the first bishop of the Church in 
 Alexandria- 
 It appears from Papias that he was not an eye-witness of the life 
 of Christ ; it is not improbable, however, that he saw Christ during 
 some of the Lord's visits to Jerusalem. But from the facts that he 
 was living in Jerusalem a few years after the crucifixion of Christ, 
 and that he returned there some years after he had accompanied 
 Paul and Barnabas on their missionary tour to Cyprus (Acts xiii, 
 5, 13), and that he was intimately associated with the apostles and 
 other eyewitnesses of the life of Christ, he had the finest opportunity 
 to become thoroughly acquainted with the Lord's history and doc- 
 trines. Indeed, in the circle in which Mark moved the works and 
 teachings of Christ were subjects of daily discussion among the eye- 
 witnesses of his wonderful history. 
 
 CHARACTER OF THIS GOSPEL. 
 
 The Gospel of Mark does not contain more than two thirds the 
 contains leas arnount f matter found in Matthew. The principal 
 
 matter than omissions are the genealogy and birth of Christ, and the 
 
 events connected with his infancy, contained in Matth- 
 
 ew's first two chapters ; the Sermon on the Mount (Matt, v-vii) ; 
 
 jyv 'lovdaiuv. Antiq., xv, 22. The time of which he here speaks was 
 about B. C 40. About A D. 30 or 40 there were also many Jews in Babylon. 
 Antiq., xviii, cap. ix. This Babylon was on the Euphrates, about the site, it seems, of 
 the ancient city. There is no good reason for supposing Babylon in I Pet. v, 13 to 
 be the mystic name for Rome. 
 
 * Hist. Eccles., lib. ii, ca?. xvL ' Ibid., ii, 24. * Hseresis, li, 6.
 
 OF THE HOLY SCRIPTURES. 55.3 
 
 the larger portion of Christ's address to the twelve apostles, when 
 he sent them to preach (Matt, x) ; the parable of the king who took 
 account of all his servants (Matt, xviii, 23-34) ; the parable of the 
 householder and his vineyard (Matt, xx, 1-16) ; that of the marriage 
 of the king's son (Matt, xxii, 1-14); nearly all Matthew xxiii. and all 
 xxv. On the other hand, he furnishes us with some particulars not 
 found in Matthew or Luke, among which may be mentioned the ac- 
 count of Christ's restoring sight to a blind man at Bethsaida (chap 
 viii, 22-26), found in no other Gospel ; the mention of hired servants 
 in connexion with Zebedee (chap, i, 20); the uncovering (digging 
 up) of the roof to let down the man sick of the palsy (chap, ii, 4) ; 
 Christ's grief for the hardness of the hearts of the people (chap, 
 iii, 5) ; Christ's surnaming Simon, Peter, and calling James and John 
 Boanerges, sons of thunder (chap, iii, 16, 17); the attempt to ar- 
 rest Christ on the ground that he was not in his right mind (chap, 
 iii, 21 ) ; the parable of the seed and the blade (chap, iv, 27, 28) ; the 
 " shining " of our Saviour's garments when he was transfigured, " so as 
 no fuller on earth can white them " (chap, ix, 3) ; the displeasure of 
 Christ when his disciples rebuked those who brought young chil- 
 dren to him (chap, x, 13, 14) ; the statement that the rich man came 
 running, and kneeled down to Christ (chap, x, 17) ; the name of the 
 blind beggar Bartimeus, at Jericho (chap, x, 46) ; the names of the 
 apostles who asked Christ respecting the destruction of the temple 
 (chap, xiii, 3); the definite sum, three hundred pence (chap, xiv, 5); 
 the statement respecting a young man with a " linen cloth cast about 
 his naked body " (chap, xiv, 51, 52). In chap, i, 35, Mark says that 
 Christ rose up a " great while before day," in which he corrects the 
 statement of Luke iv, 42, " When it was day; " of Simon, he adds : 
 " the father of Alexander and Rufus " (chap, xv, 21). 
 
 These facts sufficiently show that, although Mark made great use 
 of Matthew, following him, indeed, as an authority, yet magp^^ 
 he possessed independent sources of his own for the his- sources used 
 tory of Christ. 1 And he is thus a valuable witness to b 
 the a.thority of Matthew's Gospel. Although his connexion with 
 Peter was so intimate, be adheres closely to the truth of history, 
 even when it reflects severely upon that great apostle: " But he be- 
 gan to curse and to swear, I know not this man," etc. (chap, xiv, 71). 
 The passage in Matt, xvi, 18: " Thou art Peter, and upon this rock 
 I will build my church," which tends to glorify Peter, is omitted by 
 Mark, when relating the incidents with which it stands connected 
 (chapter viii, 30, 31), but our Saviour's rebukr of him is recorded 
 (verse 33). 
 
 1 Hilgenfeld concedes that he is not a m :re abbreviatorof Matthew. Einl., p. 516. 
 36
 
 556 INTRODUCTION TO THE STUDY 
 
 It is very probable that Mark had, also, before him the Gospel of 
 Luke, but it does not appear that he made much use of it. I. ia 
 clear that Mark wrote his Gospel for Gentile Christians, for we find 
 nim making explanations that would have been unnecessary in writing 
 foi Jewish believers : "And when they saw some of his disciples eat 
 bread with defiled, that is to say, with unwashed hands, they found 
 fault. For the Pharisees and all the Jews, except they wash their 
 hands oft, eat not, holding the tradition of the elders. And when 
 they come from the market, except they wash, they eat not. And 
 many other things there be, which they have received to hold, as the 
 washing of cups, and pots, brazen vessels, and of tables " (chap, vii, 
 2-4); "because it was the preparation, that is, the day before the 
 sabbath " (chap, xv, 42). 
 
 Ewald's theory of the origin of Mark's Gospel is complex and pe- 
 Ewaid's theory culiar. He supposes, first, a brief evangelical history ; 
 of this Gospel, secondly, a collection of the discourses of our Saviour 
 made by Matthew, though not entirely void of narrative matter : 
 third, a Gospel written by Mark. This last Gospel, he supposes, 
 was in some way blended with the two preceding works, soon after 
 it was composed, and thus a complete Gospel of Mark was formed, 
 but by whom is uncertain. This last work still passed for the Gos- 
 pel of Mark, as the basis of the work was his. The oldest form in 
 which this complete Gospel existed, unknown from history, is that 
 in which it lay before the author of our present Matthew, and which 
 was largely used by him. Luke also possessed it, in a still more 
 complete form than we have it now. In the course of time this Gos- 
 pel lost considerable portions, so that we do not now possess it com- 
 plete. 1 For such a theory as this there is not the least probability, 
 nor a particle of historical evidence.* 
 
 Mark does not always observe the order of time found in Matthew. 
 Chapter v is placed too late. 
 
 THE GENUINENESS OF THE GOSPEL OF MARK, AND THE DATE OF 
 ITS COMPOSITION. 
 
 The first witness we have to the genuineness of Mark's Gospel is 
 Te*inny of Papias,* bishop of Hierapolis in the first half of the see- 
 the faiaers. on( j century. He informs us that John, the presbyter, a 
 
 1 Die Drei Erst. Evang., pp. 57-78. 1871. 
 
 1 That Mark's Gospel cannot be a combination of other Gospels is evident from 
 certain peculiarities it has. Tlopevofiai, to go, occurs twenty-nine times in Matthew 
 forty-nine times in Luke, and in John sixteen times. But nowhere in Mark except 
 m the spurious addition, chap, xvi, 9-20. 
 
 1 In Eusebius, Hist. Eccles., lib. iii, cap. xxxix.
 
 OF THE HOLY SCRIPTURES. 551 
 
 contemporary of the apostles, stated that Mark wrote from the 
 preaching of Peter, whose interpreter he was. A similar statement 
 is made by Clement ' of Alexandria, by Irenaeus,' Tertullian, 3 Origen, 1 
 and the fathers in general. This Gospel was universally ascribed to 
 the Mark mentioned in the Acts and in several apostolic Epistles, 
 Nowhere do we find a single dissenting voice in the ancient Church. 
 In the judgment of antiquity respecting its author, modern critics, 
 with rare exceptions, concur. De Wette 6 concedes, without any hesi- 
 tancy, that its author is Mark. Bleek observes : " There is no suffi- 
 cient ground for denying it to be the composition of the John Mark 
 to whom the universal tradition of the Church ascribes it. Much 1 
 rather does this supposition find its confirmation in several circum- 
 stances." * Renan T considers our Mark to be based on a collection 
 of anecdotes and personal instructions which Mark wrote from the 
 recollections of Peter. He supposes some additions were afterward 
 made to it. 
 
 Respecting the time of its composition the earliest testimony is 
 that of Irenaeus (about A. D. 1 80), who states that after Early evidence 
 the departure of Peter and Paul, Mark, the disciple and M to date - 
 interpreter of Peter, also himself having written down the things 
 preached by Peter, delivered them to us. 8 By departure (e^odof) he 
 evidently means death. These two apostles suffered martyrdom un- 
 der Nero about 67 or 68, so that, according to Irenaeus, this Gospel 
 must have been published some time after A. D. 67 or 68. Clement 
 of Alexandria (about A. D. 190 or 200) states that Mark undertook 
 the writing of his Gospel at Rome at the request of many Christians, 
 with the knowledge of Peter, who in no way interfered with it.* But 
 Clement does not say that it was finished and published during Pe- 
 ter's life ; so that there is no real discrepancy of time between him 
 and Irenaeus. The statement of Clement, as Eusebius informs us, 1 * 
 was derived from the most ancient presbyters. To the statements 
 of Irenaeus and Clement respecting the date of the composition of 
 this Gospel De Wette offers no objection. 11 According to Clement 
 of Alexandria Mark wrote his Gospel, as he had learned from the 
 most ancient presbyters, after Matthew and Luke. 
 
 I In Eusebius, Hist. Eccles. , vi, cap. xiv. * Lib. iii, cap. i. 
 
 *Advers. Marcionem, iv, cap. v. * Eusebius, Hist. Eccles., vi, cap. xxv. 
 
 *Einleitung, p. 203. 'Einleitung, pp. 334, 335. T Vie de Jesus, p. 54. 
 
 * Lib. iii, cap. i, i. ' Eusebius, Hist. Eccles., vi, cap. xiv 
 
 II Eusebius also states : " They say that Peter gave his authority to this Gospel, 
 and approved of its being read in the Churches." He also states that Clement makes 
 this historical relation, which, he says, is confirmed by Papias, ii, 15. It is possible 
 that, in this statement, he has blended what Clement says with accounts from other 
 sources. " Einleitung, p. 206-
 
 558 INTRODUCTION TO THE STUDY 
 
 Bleek places the composition of Mark after Matthew and Luke, 
 
 ~. _, some time after the destruction of Jerusalem, and thinks 
 Modern critics * 
 
 ts to the date it probable that it was preceded by the Gospel of John, 
 1)0 ' since Mark in some places seems to have used the Gos- 
 pel of this apostle. 1 But this is contrary to the testimony of an- 
 tiquity and to the position the Gospel of John holds in the canon in 
 all the Greek manuscripts and in the Peshito-Syriac version, in all of 
 which it stands after the other three. No one would have thought 
 of placing John after Mark had not the latter preceded it in time ol 
 composition. 
 
 Hilgenfeld places its composition soon after A. D. 81, in the first 
 part of Domitian's reign, "when Mark, if still alive, must have been 
 very old, so that it is possible that the Gospel was called according 
 to Mark from him as its voucher, rather than its real author. But 
 in no event was it, indeed, forged."* But what probability is there 
 that Mark would not write until fifteen or twenty years after Peter's 
 death ? But, even if written at about A. D. 85, we have no reason 
 for supposing that Mark was too old then to write it himself. The 
 first mention of him is in Acts xii, 12, 25 ; in the latter passage it is 
 stated that Paul and Barnabas brought Mark with them from Jeru- 
 salem to Antioch. This was about A. D. 44, when he may not have 
 been more than twenty-four years old, so that, in A. D. 85, he would 
 be no more than sixty-five, not too old to write a Gospel. 
 
 We have already seen that Mark states that Simon, who bore our 
 Saviour's cross, was " the father of Alexander and Rufus " (chap. 
 xv, 21). It appears that these were Christians well known when Mark 
 wrote. Now we find in Paul's Epistle to the Romans, written about 
 A. D. 58, Rufus mentioned as a Roman Christian : " Salute Rufus 
 chosen in the Lord " (chap, xvi, 13). The reference to Rufus in Mark 
 is quite natural, if he wrote shortly before the destruction of Jerusa- 
 lem, but would not be if he had written long after that event.* 
 
 There is nothing in Christ's prophecy concerning the destruction 
 of Jerusalem (chap, xiii) to indicate that this catastrophe was already 
 past. On the contrary, as given in Mark, it is strikingly similar to 
 Matt xxiv, which was evidently composed before that event. Upon 
 
 1 Einleittmg, p. 333. 1 Einleitung, pp. 517, 518. Leipzig, 1875. 
 
 1 It is hardly necessary to refute the absurd statement of Keim (Geschichte Jeso. 
 p. 37), that Mark's Gospel was written about A. D. 120 ! Papias in the first half 
 of the sacond century, as we have already seen, states that the Presbyter John, n 
 contemporary of the apostles, said that Mark wrote from Pc-ter's preaching. But 
 according to Keim, in the time of the Presbyter John this Gospel had no existence 
 but arose in the next century, in the very time of Papias ! This is free thinking in 
 the literal sense of the word '
 
 OF THE HOLY SCRIPTURES. 55i) 
 
 the whole, we may conclude that our Gospel was composed some time 
 in A. D. 65-69. 
 
 THE PLACE OF THE COMPOSITION OF THIS GOSPEL. 
 
 As we have already seen, Clement states that Mark wrote at Rome, 
 and this is implied in the language of the ancient fathers, that he 
 wrote from the preaching of Peter, as it was the universal tradition 
 that the last part of Peter's life was spent at Rome. And that this 
 Gospel was composed there would seem probable from internal 
 grounds. 1 We find in it several Latin words and phrases, e. g., <we- 
 wvAdrwp ^executioner (chap, vi, 27) ; Troiijoai rb ticavov, to do the sufficient, 
 Latin, satisfacere, to satisfy (ch. xv, 15) ; KSVTVQIUV, centurion (ch. xv, 
 39, 44, 45). There are other Latin words in this Gospel ; but, belong- 
 ing also to some of the other Gospels, even to Matthew, no special 
 stress is to be laid upon them. Nor do we think those we have 
 adduced have any great weight in proving that the book was writ- 
 ten at Rome. The mention of the Roman Christian, Rufus, is most 
 naturally explained by the supposition that the Gospel was written 
 there. 
 
 At the end of this Gospel in the Peshito-Syriac version it is writ- 
 ten : " The end of the holy Gospel, the preaching of Mark, which he 
 spoke and published in Latin in Rome." But the Gospel was cer- 
 tainly written in Greek ; at least, we have no proof that it ever had 
 a Latin original. 
 
 De Wette," Bleek,* and Hilgenfeld * favour the original appearance 
 of this Gospel in Rome. 
 
 THE INTEGRITY OF MARK. 
 
 The last twelve verses (chap, xvi, 9-20) of this Gospel offer an in- 
 explicable phenomenon, whether we consider their his- The last twelve 
 tory, their connexion with the rest of the Gospel, or the versefl - 
 peculiar character of the text. We find that they have no place in 
 the two oldest Greek manuscripts of the New Testament, the Codex 
 Vaticanus and the Codex Sinaiticus, both written about the middle 
 of the fourth century. These two manuscripts end with the words : 
 "For they were afraid." They are wanting in the Latin Codex Bob- 
 bicnsis of the fifth century, in old manuscripts of the Armenian 
 version, and in some of the manuscripts of the ^Ethiopic version. 
 
 1 It is probable that Mark interpreted Peter's preaching into Latin for the Roman 
 people. 
 
 De Wette thinks the passage in Mark respecting a woman putting away her lu 
 band (chap, x, 12) presupposes the Roman law of divorce. Einleitung, p. act. 
 
 P. 335- 4 Pp. 516, 517-
 
 OUO INTRODUCTION TO THE STUDY 
 
 Tischendorf observes : " The scholia of very many manuscripts 
 bear witness that the Gospel of Mark ended at verse nine in the more 
 ancient and (as many add) in the more accurate copies." ' 
 
 According to Eusebius, " This section is not found in all the copies 
 of Mark's Gospel. For the accurate copies contain the end of the 
 history, according to Mark, with the words of the young man who 
 appeared to the woman and said to them, ' Fear not, ye seek Jesus 
 of Nazareth,' and with the following words which he adds, ' and 
 having heard, they fled, and said nothing to any one, for they were 
 afraid.' In this way end nearly all the copies of the Gospel according 
 to Mark."' 
 
 Gregory, bishop of Nyssa, in the latter part of the fourth century, 
 observes : " In the more accurate copies the Gospel according to Mark 
 ends with the words, ' For they were afraid.' In some copies these 
 words are added : ' Having risen early the first day of the week, he 
 appeared first to Mary Magdalene, out of whom he had cast seven 
 devils.' " Of great importance is the testimony of Jerome, who, in 
 speaking of verses 9 and 10 of the last chapter, observes : " Either 
 we do not receive the testimony of Mark, which is found in few Gos- 
 pels, nearly all the Greek manuscripts lacking this section at the end of 
 the chapter, ... or we must reply," etc. 4 Also, Victor of Antioch, 
 about A. D. 400, remarks that in most copies the last part of the 
 sixteenth chapter, beginning with the ninth verse, was not found.* 
 Tischendorf remarks that " these last verses are recognized neither 
 in the sections of Ammonius, nor in the canon of Eusebius." 
 
 On the other hand, the verses in question are found in the Codex 
 Ephraemi of the fifth century, in the Alexandrian manuscript of the 
 last part of the same century, in twelve uncial manuscripts extend- 
 ing from the sixth to about the tenth century, and " in the cursive 
 copies that have been collected." They are also found in the Peshito- 
 Syriac * version of the second century, in copies of the old Latin, in 
 the Latin Vulgate, and in the Memphitic, Gothic, 7 and ^Ethiopic ver- 
 sions, and possibly in the Thebaic. The igth verse is quoted by Ire- 
 naeus (about A. D. 180) : " In the end of his Gospel Mark says : ' And 
 
 1 Editio O^ava Critica Major, Lipsise, 1869, p. 404. 
 
 * Quaestiones Ad Marinum. * In Christ! Resurrectionem, Orat. iL 
 
 4 Aut enim r n recipimus Marci testimonium, quod in raris fertur evangeliis, am- 
 nibus Graeciae libris pene hoc capitulum in fine non habentibus. Epistola cxx, ad 
 Hedibam, cap. iiL In Tregelles' Printed Text, etc., p. 248. 
 
 In Cureton's Fragments of the Gospels in Syriac belonging to the fifth century 
 verses 17-20 of the last chapter of Mark are found. 
 
 T The Gothic is defective on these verses ; it contains verses 9-11, and ends with 
 iLe first part of verse 12, M But after this." It doubtless contained originally the 
 rent of the verses.
 
 OF THE HOLY SCRIPTURES. 561 
 
 indeed the Lord Jesus, after he had spoken unto them, was received 
 up into heaven, and sits on the right hand of God.'" It is uncer- 
 tain whether Celsus had the disputed verses in his copy of Mark." 
 
 The next question is, What light does the text of the verses in dis- 
 pute throw upon the subject ? First of all, we are struck The ]ast versei 
 with the incongruity between the contents of these verses andthepreced- 
 and the statement in the seventh verse: "Tell his dis- ^^^^ 
 .iples and Peter that he goeth before you into Galilee: there shall 
 ye see him, as he said unto you." This refers to Christ's promise : 
 " But after that I am risen, I will go before you into Galilee " (Mark 
 xiv, 28). But in the last verses of Mark there is no account of 
 Christ's appearing to the disciples in Galilee in fulfilment of the 
 promise, or the declaration of the angel, that they should see him in 
 Galilee. This is certainly strange if Mark wrote these last verses. 
 Among the signs, which Christ is represented as promising as the 
 attendants upon believers, are the following : " They shall take up 
 serpents, and if they drink any deadly thing it shall not hurt them." 
 Here great stress is laid upon mere external advantages, as the pre- 
 rogatives of believers indiscriminately. This language was hardly to 
 be expected from Christ. 
 
 But is the circle of words used in this section the same that is 
 found in the body of Mark's Gospel? Here the an- The last verses 
 swer is decidedly in the negative. We shall give the SJ*^** 
 results of the investigation we have made with the as- Mark's Gospel, 
 sistance of Schmidt's Greek Concordance. In Mark xvi, 2, " the 
 first day of the week " is called rq \iiq, TUV aa(3(3dr(>)v, literally, " the one 
 of the Sabbaths " (weeks), used Hebraistically ; but in the section 
 under discussion, it is Trporn/ aappdrov, " first of week." In this sec- 
 tion we find tueivT), that, used for she; KKEIVOI, those, for they; lVotf, 
 for them, the word occurring five times. But Mark never uses the 
 word thus in his genuine Gospel, but always employs it as a demon- 
 strative ' qualifying a noun expressed. Hopeveadai, to go, occurs three 
 times in this section, but in the genuine Gospel never. This is very 
 remarkable, as the word occurs twenty-nine times in Matthew, forty- 
 nine times in Luke's Gospel, and sixteen in John's Gospel. In verse 
 10 the disciples of Christ are called "Those who were with him," 
 which is contrary to the usage of all the Gospels, as they term them 
 ttadrjTai, learners: it is rather in the style of Xenophon. Geoopai, to 
 see, to behold, occurs twice in this section, but nowhere in the genuine 
 Gospel, but four times in Matthew, three in Luke, and seven in John. 
 
 1 Contra Haereses, lib. iii, cap. x, sec. 6. * See Origen Contra Cel., ii, 59, 70. 
 
 one instance, however, Mark, for emphasis, uses inelvo after the neuter article 
 with the participle (chap, vii, 20).
 
 562 INTRODUCTION TO THE STUDY 
 
 In this sect'on of Mark it is used quite classically. IIapa*oA.ow9ew, in 
 the sense to accompany* occurs in verse 17 of this section, but is found 
 nowhere in the Gospels except in Luke's preface to his Gospel, to fol- 
 Imv up closely* to give diligent heed to* a thing. And in this sense it is 
 found in i Tim. iv, 6 and 2 Tim. iii, 10. The word is found nowhere 
 else in the New Testament. The word used in the New Testament, 
 to follow, to accompany, simply, is daoAovtfew, which is found nine- 
 teen times in Mark, twenty-five in Matthew, seventeen in Luke, and 
 nineteen in John's Gospel. Kvptof, Lord, is twice used historically 
 for Jesus in this section, which Mark, in his genuine Gospel, never 
 does. Wherever he employs the word it is the language of some 
 one else that he is relating. In speaking of Christ, Mark always 
 calls him Jesus, using the word nearly ninety times. The other 
 evangelists use it a still greater number of times. Nor does Matthew 
 ever in his own person call Christ Lord. Luke and John, however, 
 do in some instances. 
 
 All the foregoing linguistic peculiarities of the section seem to 
 prove conclusively that it was not written by Mark. To these con- 
 siderations, if we add the fact that it seems incongruous with what 
 precedes, and that it is wanting in the most ancient manuscripts of 
 
 _ , _. the Gospel, nothing remains but the conclusion that 
 
 Conclusion as 
 
 to the last Mark did not write it. It was most probably added to 
 the Gospel in the first century, upon what authority we 
 do not know. The Gospel terminates abruptly at the 8th verse of 
 chapter xvi, without giving the appearances of Christ already fore- 
 told. It is incredible that the evangelist should have left his Gos- 
 pel intentionally in that condition. Something must have interrupted 
 him before completing it, or the manuscript must have lost the con- 
 cluding verses of the original. No one would have thought of muti- 
 lating the Gospel, and the absence in it of the appearances of Christ 
 led some one to add some of them from reliable sources. The ap- 
 pearance to Mary Magdalene appears to have been taken from John 
 xx, 11-18; that to two persons who went into the country, from 
 Luke xxiv, 13-31 ; the appearance to the eleven (in Jerusalem), 
 from Luke xxiv, 33, etc. 
 
 The two great recent critical editors of the Greek Testament 
 Tischendorf and Tregelles, leave it out of their texts, as not be 
 longing to the original Gospel of Mark. Tregelles remarks, how - 
 ever: "I thus look on this section as an authentic anonymous 
 addition to what Mark himself wrote down from the narration of 
 St. Peter." 1 
 
 Among those who favour the genuineness of the disputed sec don 
 1 On the Printed Text of the Greek Testament, p. 250.
 
 OF THE HOLY SCRIPTURES. 563 
 
 are, R. Simon, Mill, Wolf, Storr, Matthaei, Eichhorn, Hug, De Wette ; 
 Bleek, Olshausen, Ebrard, and J. P. Lange. Among those opposed 
 to the clairj of its genuineness may be mentioned Griesbach, Cred 
 net, Wiesler, Norton, Reuss, Neudecker, Ewald, and Mangold. 
 
 CHAPTER XVI. 
 
 THE GOSPEL ACCORDING TO LUKE. 
 THE PERSON OF THE EVANGELIST. 
 
 OF Luke, the author of the third Gospel, but little of a personal 
 character is known. In Paul's Epistle to the Colossians, writ- 
 ten at Rome some time after A. D. 60, he says, " Luke, the beloved 
 physician, greets you" (chap, iv, 14). In the Epistle to Philemon, 
 written about the same time and at the same place, he speaks of 
 Luke as one of his fellow-labourers, greeting Philemon. Writing to 
 Timothy from the same place somewhat later, he says, " Only Luke 
 is with me" (2 Tim. iv, n). Irenseus speaks of Luke as the con- 
 stant companion of Paul, and his co-labourer. 1 
 
 Eusebius states that Luke was a native of Antioch, and a physician 
 by profession." The same statement is made by Jerome.* Notices con- 
 It appears both from the Epistles of Paul and from the *in8H*- 
 Acts of the Apostles as he uses the term " we " that he was a 
 companion and assistant of Paul for a long time. From several of 
 Paul's Epistles, already quoted, it is clear that Luke remained some 
 years in Rome after that apostle arrived there (about A. D. 60 or 
 62). It is uncertain when and where he died. Jerome * says " that 
 he was buried in Constantinople, to which city his bones were brought 
 along with the remains of the Apostle Andrew in the twentieth year 
 of Constantius " (about the middle of the fourth century). But he 
 does not state where he died, and it is not likely that if he had been 
 originally buried in Rome his bones would have been removed from 
 such a splendid city. He may have left Rome after the death of 
 Paul 
 
 Luke was evidently a man of fine Greek culture, as his writings 
 show. It is probable that he was of heathen extraction, as his name * 
 
 'iii, cap. xiv, I. 'Hist. Eccles., lib. iii, cap. iv. 
 
 1 De Viris Illustribus, cap. vii. Jerome, however, says he was of Antioch (Anti- 
 Dchenus), but does not state in the passage whether he was bora there or not, 
 *IbicL, cap. vii. * Aov/caf, a contraction of the Latin Lucanus.
 
 564 INTRODUCTION TO THE STUDY 
 
 would indicate, but whether he was a proselyte to Judaism before 
 embracing Christianity cannot be determined. 
 
 He was every way qualified to write the history of Christ and his 
 Qualifications apostles. Brought up in the great literary city of An- 
 of Luke as a tioch, led by his very profession to be a close observer 
 and to form scientific habits, an extensive traveller, foi 
 years a companion of the Apostle Paul, associating with apostles 
 and others who were eyewitnesses of the life of Christ, and he 
 himself having spent about two years in Jerusalem ' and in other 
 parts of Palestine, where flourishing Christian Churches had been 
 established, many of whose members had themselves seen and heard 
 Christ less than thirty years before, how was he not fully competent 
 to write the history of the Founder of Christianity and the Acts of 
 his Apostles, especially in Jerusalem and in the chief places of the 
 Roman empire ? 
 
 THE AUTHOR OF THE THIRD GOSPEL AND OF THE ACTS OF THE 
 APOSTLES EVIDENTLY THE SAME PERSON. 
 
 The author of the Gospel sets forth the circumstances under which 
 he writes, and the sources of his information. " Since, indeed," says 
 he, " many have undertaken to arrange a narrative of those things 
 which are most firmly believed among us, as those who from the be- 
 ginning were eyewitnesses and ministers of the word delivered them 
 to us, it seemed good to me also, having traced up every thing ac- 
 curately from the beginning, to write them for you in regular order, 
 most excellent Theophilus, that thou mayest know the certainty of 
 the things in which thou hast been instructed " (chap, i, 1-4). In 
 the beginning of the Book of the Acts of the Apostles, the author 
 says: "The first treatise I have made, O Theophilus, concerning 
 Clear proofs of a ll things which Jesus began both to do and to teach 
 this identity. unt ji tne ^ay j n w hi c h he was taken up, after he through 
 the Holy Spirit had given commands to the apostles whom he had 
 chosen " (chap, i, 1-2). It is evident from this, latter passage that 
 the author of the Acts also wrote the Gospel addressed to Theophilus, 
 who appears to have been a distinguished Gentile Christian. The 
 author states in the preface to his Gospel that he derived his infor- 
 mation from the eyewitnesses and ministers of the word, and that he 
 had traced up the history from the beginning. It is clear from this 
 that the preface refers to the sources for the history of Christ, and 
 has no reference to the sources for the history of the apostles. For 
 
 'In Acts xx, 5-xxviii, the writer, by using the plural " we " and " us," shows that 
 be accompanied Paul to Jerusalem and to Rome. Paul and Luke abode in Pales- 
 tine at least two years. Acts xxiv, 27.
 
 OF THE HOLY SCRIPTURES. 565 
 
 'the eyewitnesses and ministers of the word," are those who were the 
 eyewitnesses of Christ's life, and the preachers of his doctrines and 
 acts. The history of the actions of the apostles the author derived 
 partly from those who were themselves the chief actors in the scenes, 
 and partly from his own personal knowledge as a companion of the 
 Apostle Paul. 
 
 That the author of the Acts was the companion of Paul appears 
 from Acts xvi, 10-17 and xx, 5~xxi, 18 ; xxvii, xxviii. Luke unque- 
 The writer uses the first person plural for the first time 
 when Paul is at Troas. 1 After Paul " had seen the vis- panion. 
 ion, immediately we endeavoured to go into Macedonia, assuredly 
 gathering that the Lord had called us for to preach the Gospel 
 unto them " (chapter xvi, 10). The writer accompanies Paul to 
 Philippi, and speaks of the party there in the first person plural : 
 "The same followed Paul and us" (chap, xvi, 17). After the ar- 
 rest of Paul and Silas at Philippi, the first person plural does not 
 again appear until about six years afterward, when Paul, pass- 
 ing through Macedonia on his way to Jerusalem, is accompanied 
 by several fellow-travellers, who, "going before, tarried for us at 
 Troas. And we sailed away from Philippi," etc. (chapter xx, 5, 6). 
 After this we find that the writer continues to use the first person 
 plural until he arrives with Paul in Jerusalem, and they visit James 
 (chap, xxi, 18). In the account of the charges brought against Paul 
 at Jerusalem, and his defence, there is no place for the historian to 
 introduce himself, and, accordingly, the first person plural disap- 
 pears until Paul has appealed to Csesar, when he again appears in 
 the history : "And when it was determined that we should sail into 
 Italy, ... we launched, ... we touched," etc. This use of the first 
 person plural is continued until Paul arrives in Rome, in whose com- 
 pany the writer places himself by remarking : " When we came to 
 Rome " (chap, xxviii, 16). 
 
 It is to be observed that the first person plural ceases first at 
 Philippi, and that when, six years afterward, this same person in com- 
 pany with Paul leaves Philippi, the use of the " we " is resumed (comp. 
 Acts xvi, 17 with xx, 5, 6). Is it not clear from all this that the au- 
 thor of the Acts was the companion of Paul during a great part of 
 his travels ? 
 
 Here the question arises, Who is this companion of the apostle, the 
 author of the Book of Acts, and also of the third Gospel? Now we 
 know that Luke was Paul's fellow-labourer, and it appears from the 
 Epistles of Paul, already quoted, that Luke was with him at Rome 
 
 1 Alexandria-Troas, a city on the coast of the Trojan Plains, about seven miles 
 south-east of Tenedos. See Strabo, lib. xiii, 581-616.
 
 56G INTRODUCTION TO THE STUDY 
 
 some time after A. D. 60. About this time also the companion of Paul 
 in his travels was in Rome, as appears from the Acts, so that it is clear 
 that Luke may have been that companion. Nor is there any thing in 
 the Epistles of Paul, either of a positive or negative character, incon- 
 sistent with the hypothesis that Luke was this fellow-traveller. We 
 have seen that in three Epistles of Paul, written from Rome after hit 
 arrival there, he calls " Luke the beloved physician " (Col. iv, 14), lis 
 4 fellow-labourer " (Phil. 24), and speaks of him as the only person 
 ivith him (2 Tim. iv, n). Paul and the writer of the Acts, as appears 
 from his use of the first person plural, first met at Troas, and trav- 
 elled together as far as Philippi, a distance of about one hundred and 
 fifty miles. After this short acquaintance with Paul he does not 
 meet him again until about six years later, when at Philippi he joins ' 
 Paul, accompanies him to Jerusalem, and afterward to Rome. Dur- 
 ing both of these periods, when the writer (Luke) was with the apos- 
 tle, the latter addressed no Epistles to the Churches. Is it, then, strange 
 that he does not mention Luke except in some of the Epistles writ- 
 ten from Rome ? It is true that Paul wrote 2 Corinthians from 
 Macedonia, after he had become acquainted with Luke, but the 
 apostle does not give the names of any persons who salute the Corin- 
 thians, but in a general term he says, " All the saints salute you." 
 Bleek supposes that Timothy was the writer of the sections in 
 which the first person plural is used, but this is refuted by 
 the history itself, in which the " we " and the " us " exclude 
 him. In chap, xx, 4-6 it is stated : " There accompanied him (Paul) 
 Sopater, son of Pyrrhus, of Bercea ; and of the Thessalonians, Aristar- 
 chusandSecundus; and Gaiusof Derbe, andTimotheus; and of Asia, 
 Tychicus and Trophimus. These, going before, tarried for us at Troas. 
 And we sailed away from Philippi," * etc. Here the party to which 
 Timothy belonged stands in contrast with the " us " and " we." 
 After Paul, Silas, and Timothy leave Philippi and pass through Mace- 
 donia as far as Berea, Paul leaves his two companions and passes 
 by Athens on his way to Corinth, where they afterward join the 
 apostle, who labours there a year and a half; and in his two Epistles 
 to the Thessalonians, written from Corinth, Silvanus (Silas) and Tim- 
 
 1 It is not improbable, however, that the author of the Acts may have seen Paul in 
 ihe visit tc Macedonia a few months before (Acts xx, 1-3). 
 
 ' We follow here the eighth critical edition of Tischendorf s Greek Testament, 
 which is supported by the Codices Vaticanus and Sinaiticus, the oldest texts. Tre- 
 pelles, in his critical edition, retains &xpir^fA.oiaf, "as far as Asia," but puts it in 
 brackets. In the fifth verse, " these going before " is, in Tischendorf s edition, ofaoi 
 <ft irpoeW6vrt( ; in Tregelles, the same, except that he has irpoo- instead
 
 OF THE HOLY SCRIPTURES. 567 
 
 othy are named with himself as addressing them. But in Acts 
 xvii-xix the writer, in speaking of Paul, Silas, and Timothy, does 
 not use the first person plural ; hence Timothy cannot be included 
 in the "we "in other parts of the book. Besides, the account of 
 Paul's labours in connexion with those of Silas and Timothy is, for 
 the apostle's sojourn of eighteen months in Corinth, exceedingly 
 meagre. This is hardly consistent with the supposition that Tim- 
 othy wrote memoirs of the apostolic labours in those regions which 
 were made the basis of his history by the author of the Acts. We also 
 find the missionary journey of Paul and Timothy through Phrygia 
 and Galatia as far as Troas despatched in a few verses (chapter xvi, 
 4-8). Of this journey it seems that Timothy wrote no memoirs. 
 But how minute is the history into which the " we " enters ! How 
 circumstantially is the voyage to Rome described! No one can 
 doubt that the writer was in the very midst of the scenes. Nor do 
 we find any mention of Timothy as having accompanied Paul to Je- 
 rusalem, and yet a less important man, Aristarchus, is named as sail- 
 ing away with Paul from Csesarea (chap, xxvii, 2). 
 
 It is quite certain, then, that Timothy was not with Paul at Jeru- 
 salem, and must be excluded also in this case from the "we." 
 
 Equally untenable is Schwanbeck's hypothesis that Silas is the writ- 
 er who speaks in the first person plural. He is first men- glla3 not ^ 
 tioned in Acts xv, 22, along with Judas, as "chief men eluded in the 
 among the brethren ; " it is not likely that he furnished 
 this statement. In the missionary journeys made by Paul and Silas 
 we can find nothing to indicate that the latter wrote memoirs of 
 them. We find no indications that he was with Paul on his last 
 journey to Jerusalem and voyage to Rome. In none of the Epistles, 
 written from Rome by Paul after his arrival, is there any mention of 
 Silas (or Silvanus). But the idea that the author of the Acts found 
 memoirs of the labours of Paul and his companions, and struck out 
 the first person plural in some places, and allowed " we " and " us " 
 to stand in others, in such a way that readers for more than seven- 
 teen centuries have supposed it to be the author of the book who 
 thus speaks, is incredible. All this done, too, in such a manner that 
 after the " we " disappears from the history, after six years, it ap- 
 pear again on the stage ! Nor is it to the point to assert that in 
 the Middle Ages writers sometimes incorporated into their books 
 fragments from other authors without adapting them to the rest of 
 their work. The first century was far removed in its literary char- 
 acteristics from the Middle Ages. Where can we find such usage 
 as this in the apostolic age ? Who doubts that Herodotus and 
 Strabo, when they say " we " in their histories, actually describe 

 
 5G8 INTRODUCTION TO THE STUDY 
 
 what they themselves heard, saw, or did? Or are we to suppose 
 that they are silently inserting the documents of others ? 
 
 Hilgenfeld acknowledges that the sections in which 4 we " occur* 
 The actaowi- were written by Luke, in which he says Overbeck agrees 
 
 HUpSnteia M with him< But then he makes the author of the Acts a 
 to the "we." different person from Luke. But the most complete 
 refutation of the theory that the author of the sections in which the 
 writer uses the first person plural is another person than the authoi 
 of the Acts and the third Gospel, is furnished by the unity of the 
 book of Acts and the entire similarity of language in it and the 
 Gospel. 1 As examples of the peculiar use of words in these books 
 may be noticed if 6(J6c, the way, used for the Christian religion. Acts 
 ix, 2; xix, 9, 23; xxii, 4; xxiv, 14, 22. Such a use of the word as 
 this is found nowhere else in the New Testament. 'Odwdopai, to 
 be in pain, occurs in Luke ii, 48; xvi, 24, 25, and in Acts xx, 38; 
 nowhere else in the New Testament. 'Ojut^ew, to converse with, oc- 
 curs only in Luke xxiv, 14, 15 ; Acts xx, n ; xxiv, 26. 'Qfiodvfiao'ov, 
 of one accord, is found eleven times in the Acts, from chaps, i, 14 to 
 xix, 29 ; nowhere else except Romans xv, 6. In giving the name 
 similarity of of a person, the usage in Acts is to add bvdpan, by 
 ^u^^oospei name J this occurs twenty-one times, from chaps, v, i to 
 and the Acts, xxviii, 7. In the Gospel of Luke it is used five times. It 
 is a peculiarity of the Acts that an adjective has frequently a negative 
 particle prefixed to assert strongly the opposite : ov jifirptwc, not moder- 
 ately, chap, xx, 12; OVK dAtyoc, not a little, chaps, xii, 18; xiv, 28; 
 xv, 2; xvii, 4, 12; xix, 23, 24; xxvii, 20; ov rroAAoi, not many, Luke 
 xv, 13 ; Acts i, 5 ; ov TroAv, not long, Acts xxvii, 14; ov fiaKpdv, not far, 
 Luke vii, 6; Acts xvii, 27; OVK. ao^/ioc, not undistinguished, chap. 
 xxi, 39 ; ov% T\ TV%ovaa, not a chance or common thing, Acts xix, 1 1 ; 
 xxviii, 2. After the verb elnov, to say, the dative case is used with 
 scarcely an exception in Matthew and Mark, and in John with but 
 few exceptions, without a preposition, but in the Gospel of Luke and 
 in the Acts a very common usage is to put "no6q after it with the ac- 
 cusative. KaroyyeAAw, to announce, is used ten times in Acts iv, 2- 
 xxvi, 23 ; but only seven times in all the rest of the New Testament. 
 EvAo/Sj/f, pious, devout, found in Luke ii, 25 ; Acts ii, 5 ; viii, 2 , xxii, 12 ; 
 nowhere else in the New Testament. EvayyeAt<VM, to preach tht 
 Gospel, occurs ten times in Luke and fifteen times in Acts; it is 
 found once in Matthew ; nowhere else in the Gospels, though in 
 other books of the New Testament. Tg kxpy&vq, on the next day, Luke 
 xiii, 33; Acts xx, 15; with fjpepa expressed, Acts xxi, 26. This 
 
 1 Lekebusch devotes more than forty pages of his work, Die Composition und 
 Entstehung der Apostel Geschichte, in illustration of this point
 
 OF THE HOLY SCRIPTURES. 5C9 
 
 usage is found nowhere else in the New Testament. 'Evto^vw, to 
 strengthen, found only in Luke xxii, 43, and in Acts ix, 19. Mev ovv, 
 occurs twenty-five times in all parts of the Acts, once in Luke, and 
 five times only in all the rest of the New Testament. 
 
 A peculiarity of the language of Acts and of the Gospel of Luke is 
 the use of the accusative with the infinitive after yevero, it came to 
 pass, e. g., syevero . . . dtaTropeveo'&ai avrdv Siaa-nopifiw . Luke vi, i ; 
 vi, 6 ; xvi, 22 ; Acts iv, 5 ; ix, 3, 32, 37, 43 ; x, 25 ; xiv, i ; xxi, i, 5 . 
 xxii, 6 ; xxvii, 44; xxviii, 8, 17. Outside of these two books, this con- 
 struction seems to be found only in Mark ii, 23. Winer ' regards this 
 construction as an imitation of the Hebrew 'm, and it came to pass. 
 The use of rov with the infinitive to express a purpose, as, siof\\&e 
 rov pelvai avv OWTOIC, he came in to remain with them (Luke xxiv, 29), 
 occurs both in the Gospel of Luke and in the Acts; and Winer 4 ob- 
 serves, " This construction is especially peculiar to Luke (and Paul)." 
 
 The foregoing are but a portion of the linguistic peculiarities ol 
 the Gospel of Luke and of all parts of the Acts, running through the 
 sections in which the first person plural " we " and " us " occur. 
 They establish the unity of the authorship of the Acts beyond any 
 doubt, and at the same time show that the author of the Acts was 
 also the author of the Gospel, and that he was a companion of Paul, 
 and spent about two years in Jerusalem and in other parts of Pales- 
 tine, was acquainted with the Apostle James and many others who 
 had seen and heard Christ, and that his Gospel rests upon the most 
 solid foundation as an authentic history of Jesus Christ. 
 
 Lekebusch truly observes that "an unprejudiced critic must be 
 
 fconvinced that through the entire Acts of the Apostles, 
 
 . The opinion of 
 
 land partly also through the Gospel (of Luke) in general, Lekebusch and 
 the same kind of language and method of representation ! 
 runs, and therefore our book, independent of written sources in gen- 
 eral, is an original work that has flowed from a single pen. For 
 when the same expressions everywhere recur, when a great series of 
 words which appear only in the Gospel and in the Acts, or at least 
 comparatively very seldom in the rest of the New Testament writ- 
 ings, uniformly recur in all parts ; if definite forms of words, pecu- 
 liarities of connexion, construction, and phraseology, even entire sen- 
 tences, recur in the different sections, we can no longer think of a 
 composition of pre-existing written documents belonging to different 
 authors ; and it is established ' without doubt that we must consider 
 our writing as the work of one author who has impressed upon it a 
 definite style and literary stamp." (Zeller)." 
 
 'New Test. Diction., 339, Eng. Trans. 'Ibid., 341. 
 
 'Die Composition und Entstehung der Apostel Geschichte, Gotha, 1854, p. 79.
 
 570 INTRODUCTION TO THE STUDY 
 
 Ewald ' also expresses his conviction that Luke was the author ol 
 
 (both the third Gospel and the Acts; that he was the companion of 
 
 Paul, and is included in the " we" and "us " of the writer of the 
 
 Acts. Similar are the views of Schneckenburger, Meyer, Kloster- 
 
 mann, Holtzmann, and Mangold. 
 
 Re*nan has expressed himself very clearly on the same side. " In 
 Tba opinion of respect to Luke," says he, " there is little possible 
 itfnan. doubt. The Gospel of Luke is a regular composition 
 
 based upon previous documents. It is the work of a man who se- 
 lects, prunes, combines. The author of the Gospel is certainly the 
 same as that of the Acts of the Apostles. Now the author of the 
 Acts appears to be a companion of St. Paul, a title which perfectly 
 suits Luke. I know that more than one objection can be made to 
 this reasoning ; but one thing, at least, is beyond doubt, that the au- 
 thor of the third Gospel and of the Acts is a man of the second 
 apostolic generation, and that is sufficient for our object." 1 
 
 In the ancient Church there never was any doubt that Luke, the 
 /companion of Paul, wrote the third Gospel. We have already seen 
 the testimonies of Irenaeus, Clement of Alexandria, Tertullian, Ori- 
 gen, and others, upon this point. We have also seen that Marcion. 
 about A. D. 138 or 140, abridged this Gospel, and made it, along 
 with ten of Paul's Epistles which he selected and more or less cur- 
 tailed his Canon of Scripture. It is very evident that he selected 
 the Gospel of Luke because it was well known that this evangelist 
 was a companion of Paul. No other reason can be assigned for his 
 preference. 
 
 In all the ancient manuscripts, in the ancient versions, this Gos- 
 pel bears the name of Luke. In the Canon of Muratori (about A. D. 
 160) it is attributed to Luke the companion of Paul. Its genuine 
 ness is in every respect entirely unassailable.' 
 
 THE DATE OF ITS COMPOSITION. 
 
 We have already seen that Clement of Alexandria states that the 
 Ancient teti- ^ os P e l s which contain the genealogies were written first, 
 moniesMtotne which fact he had learned from the most ancient pres- 
 
 4&t6 
 
 byters. Irenaeus states that Luke wrote after the de- 
 parture of Peter and Paul, by which he seems to refer to the death 
 of these apostles. It does not appear that Luke, when he wrote, 
 was acquainted with the Gospel of Matthew, which was written some 
 time after A. D. 61. As Matthew was written in Syro-Chaldee in 
 
 1 Die Drei Erst Evang. und Apostel Geschichte. Zweite halfte, pp. 30-47 
 
 1 Vie de Jesus, p. xlix. Paris, 1867. 
 
 Even De Wette concedes its genuineness without hesitancy.
 
 OF THE HOLY SCRIPTURES. 571 
 
 Palestine, and Luke was at Rome about that time, it is easy to see 
 how the Gospel of Matthew would be unknown to him if he wrote 
 soon after that apostle. 
 
 In his preface Luke speaks of the attempts of many to set forth a 
 regular history of the teachings and actions of Christ. But Matthew 
 in all probability is not included among them. He clearly states 
 that he had derived his materials from the eyewitnesses of Christ's 
 life, and makes no reference to information derived from written 
 documents, of which he stood in no special need. 
 
 As the Acts of the Apostles ends with the statement concerning Paul 
 that he " dwelt two whole years in his own hired house, -me opinions of 
 and received all that came in unto him, preaching the modern critics 
 kingdom of God, and teaching those things which con- ast< 
 cern the Lord Jesus Christ, with all confidence, no man forbidding 
 him," it was generally inferred that the Acts must have been written 
 at the end of those two years, otherwise no good reason could be as- 
 signed for the abrupt termination of the history in that way. The 
 Gospel must, in that case, have been written still earlier. Distin- 
 guished modern critics do not generally coincide in that view. De 
 Wette, 1 Bleek," and Lekebusch, 8 place it after the destruction of Je- 
 rusalem. Re*nan remarks : " The date of this Gospel can be deter- 
 mined with sufficient exactness from considerations drawn from the 
 book itself. The twenty-first chapter of Luke, inseparable from the 
 rest of the work, was certainly written after the siege of Jerusalem, 
 but not very long after." 4 
 
 Ewald 6 places this Gospel a little after A. D. 75 ; Baur, some time 
 after A. D. 70.' On the other hand, Tholuck 7 thinks it was prob- 
 ably written by Luke while with Paul in Jerusalem and Csesarea 
 (about A. D. 58-60). Ebrard* places it at the end of A. D. 63 ; ' 
 Olshausen, before A. D. 66. 
 
 The probabilities seem decidedly in favour of a date preceding the 
 
 1 P. 208. * Einleitung, p. 320. ' Apostelges., p. 422. 
 
 * Vie de Jesus, pp. xlix, L * Die Drei Erst. Evang. Zweite Halfte, p. 47. 
 
 ' Die Drei Erst. Jahrhund., p. 73. T Glaubwiird. Evang. Geschich., p. 139. 
 
 Wissen. Kritik. der Evang. Geschichte, p. 1,038. 3te Auflag. 
 
 Hilgenfeld places the Gospel near the end of the first centuiy ; Keim about 100 
 or later ; Zeller some time in A. D. 110-130. Hilgenfeld and Zeller perhaps, also, 
 Keim thus deny that Luke, the companion of Paul in the Acts, wrote this Gospel 
 But we have already shown that the uniformity of language in the Gospel, and in all 
 parts of the Acts, demonstrate that the author of the Gospel was this companion. 
 How could Marcion, about A. D. 138 or 140, have selected this Gospel as contain- 
 ing the most authentic teachings of Christ, if it had not come into existence until 
 100-130 in his own lifetime ? About the same time it was used by Justin Martyr 
 as having been written by a companion of the apostles. 
 
 OT * 
 
 Oi
 
 572 INTRODUCTION TO THE STUDY 
 
 written before destruction of Jerusalem, most likely during the ira- 
 the fall of Je- prisonment of Paul in Rome about A. D. 63. It is very 
 probable that Luke collected materials for his Gospel 
 and the first part of the Acts while he was with Paul in Jerusalem 
 and Csesarea (about 58-60). 
 
 Luke must have written down the incidents when they occurred, 
 and the speeches when made, as recorded in Acts xx, 5-xxviii; es- 
 pecially the incidents in chaps, xxvii and xxviii. And this was done, 
 in all probability, with the intention of writing the Acts of the Apos- 
 tles in connexion with the history of Christ. Now what motive could 
 there be for the postponement of the publication of the history of the 
 Apostles, especially as he had already written a large portion of it ? 
 And no reason can be assigned why Luke should conclude the his- 
 tory of Paul at the end of his two years' imprisonment without stat- 
 ing whether he was released, or making any reference to the result 
 of his appeal to Caesar. Of course, the composition of the Gospel 
 preceded that of the Acts. Nor is there any thing in the Gospel of 
 Luke that requires it to be placed after the destruction of Jerusa 
 lem. Luke speaks in his preface of many persons having attempted 
 to write the history of our Lord ; but this does not necessarily imply 
 that more than thirty years had elapsed since the manifestation of 
 Christ. It would be strange, indeed, if a considerable number of 
 persons had not within that period written of these wonderful events 
 which had occurred within their own time, especially in an age of 
 so much literary activity. 
 
 In Christ's prophecy concerning the destruction of Jerusalem, it 
 is said the Jews " shall be led away captive into all nations : and 
 Jerusalem shall be trodden down of the Gentiles, until the times of 
 the Gentiles be fulfilled " (chap, xxi, 24). But this is scarcely more 
 definite than what is found in Matt, xxii, 7, in the parable of the 
 marriage of the king's son : " He (the king) sent forth his armies, 
 and destroyed those murderers, and burned up their city." Similar 
 also is Matt, xxi, 41. Luke also represents Christ as weeping over 
 Jerusalem when he drew near and beheld the city, and as uttering 
 the prediction that Jerusalem would be utterly destroyed by her 
 enemies (chap, xix, 41-44). Are these tears and this prophecy 
 Luke's own manufacture ? 
 
 Matthew also states that Christ foretold, " There shall not be left 
 here one stone upon another that shall not be thrown down " (chap. 
 xxiv, 2). But there is nothing in Luke respecting the Romans, no 
 allusion to the city's having been already taken ; but, on the contrary, 
 there are passages in Christ's teachings, as recorded by him, which 
 would have required an explanation from the evangelist, if he had
 
 OF THE HOLY SCRIPTURES. 575 
 
 written only a few years after the destruction of Jerusalem passages, 
 indeed, that he would never then have written unless constrained 
 by the force of truth. For after Christ predicts his own coming in 
 glory, with its attendant circumstances, he adds : " Verily I say unto 
 you. This generation shall not pass away, till all be fulfilled " (chap. 
 xxi, 32). It is to no purpose that Hilgenfeld tells us that a genera- 
 tion may be seventy ' years ; for Christ says, this generation, the people 
 now living. Parallel with this, and explanatory, is Luke ix, 27 : 
 " But I tell you of a truth, there be some standing here which shall 
 not taste of death till they see the kingdom of God." And we find 
 that the evangelists do give explanations of Christ's sayings that 
 were misunderstood or needed explanation. As examples, may be 
 cited John ii, 21 ; xxi, 22, 23 ; Mark iii, 30. 
 
 The Gospel of Luke was most probably written at Rome. Je- 
 rome," however, says that he composed it in the regions of Achaia 
 and Boeotia. But the lateness of xnis testimony destroys much of 
 its value.* 
 
 CONTENTS OF LUKE COMPARED WITH THOSE OF MATTHEW. 
 
 The Gospel of Luke is about a hundred verses longer than that of 
 Matthew. The chief additions to what we have in the natter in Lute 
 latter evangelist are the following: An account of the not in Mattb- 
 birth of John the Baptist; several particulars respecting 
 the birth of Christ and his circumcision in the temple ; incidents 
 that occurred when he was twelve years of age ; the date at which 
 John the Baptist commenced his ministry; the age of Christ at his 
 baptism ; his descent from Adam (chaps, i, 5-iii, 2, 23-38) ; the in- 
 dignation of the people in the synagogue of Nazareth against Christ, 
 and their attempt to destroy him ; his casting a devil out of a man 
 in the synagogue (chap, iv, 23-30, 33-36) ; the raising of the widow's 
 son at Nain (chap, vii, 11-17); several particulars respecting the 
 anointing of Christ by a woman (chap, vii, 36-50) ; the casting of 
 seven devils out of Mary Magdalene (chap, viii, 2) ; Christ's rebuke 
 of James and John, who wished him to call down fire from heaven 
 upon the Samaritans who would not receive him on his way to 
 Jerusalem (chap. ix. 52-56); the sending of seventy disciples to 
 
 ' Herodotus says : Tfnee generations of men are a hundred years " (ii, 142). 
 Thucydides seems to 'have held the same view (i, 14). Matthew reckons not gteatly 
 different, the step from father to son, fourteen generations from the Babylonian cap- 
 tivity to Christ (i, 17). ' Comment, in Mat Prologus. 
 
 "The superscription to this Gospel in the Peshito-Syriac version is, " The Holy 
 Gospel, the preaching of Lake, the evangelist, which he spoke and published in 
 Greek in great Alexandria '*
 
 574 INTRODUCTION TO THE STUDY 
 
 preach (chap, x, 1-20) ; the parable of the good Samaritan (chap, x 
 30-37) ; the account of Martha and Mary (verses 38-42) ; the de- 
 scription of the foolish rich man (chap, xi, 16-21); the statement 
 respecting the slaughtering of the Galileans by Pilate, and the killing 
 of eighteen men by the falling of the tower at Siloam, and the infer- 
 ences to be drawn from the occurrences (chap, xiii, 1-5) ; the parable 
 of the barren fig tree ; the releasing of a woman from an infirmity of 
 eighteen years' standing (chap, xiii, 6-17); Christ's advice to men 
 when bidden to a festival to take the lowest seats, and when making 
 a feast to call in the poor, the maimed, and the blind ; the parable 
 of the builder and the war-making king (chap, xiv, 7-14; 28-33); 
 the parable of the lost pieces of silver ; of the prodigal son (chap. 
 xv, 8-32) ; the parable of the unjust steward (chap, xvi, 1-12) ; the 
 rich man and Lazarus (chap, xvi, 19-31); the healing of ten lepers 
 by Christ on his way to Jerusalem (chap, xvii, 11-19) ; the importu- 
 nate widow, the Pharisee and Publican (chap, xviii, 1-14) ; Zaccheus 
 the publican; the lamentation of Christ over Jerusalem when he 
 comes within sight of the city, and his prediction of its utter destruc- 
 tion (chap, xix, 2-9, 41-44) ; the widow's mite (chap, xxi, 2) ; the strife 
 of the apostles at the last supper respecting the pre-eminence, and 
 Christ's rebuke of them (chap, xxii, 24-32) ; Christ's address to the 
 women while he was on the cross (ch. xxiii, 28-31) ; the penitent thief 
 (chap, xxiii, 4043) ; several particulars respecting the resurrection 
 of Christ, especially his appearance to two of the disciples on their 
 way to and at Emmaus, and to the eleven at Jerusalem, and his as- 
 cension to heaven (chap. xxiv). 
 
 The principal omissions in Luke of what is found in Matthew are 
 Matter not in tne following: The visit of the Magi; the flight of Jo- 
 Luke, but in seph and Mary with the infant Saviour into Egypt ; the 
 slaughter of the infants (chap, ii) ; the sermon on the 
 mount (chaps, v-vii), though the greatest part of this is found scat- 
 tered through Luke, and a large portion is contained in chapter vi, 
 20-49 '> ^e parable of the tares ; the treasure hid in a field ; the 
 net cast into the sea (Matt, xiii, 24-30, 36-50) ; the storm at sea in 
 which the disciples are in great danger, and in the midst of which 
 Christ comes to them walking upon the water (Matt, xiv, 20-33) 5 
 the complaint made against the disciples for eating with unwashed 
 hands, and Christ's rebuke of the hypocrisy of the Jews ; the healing 
 of the daughter of the woman of Canaan (chap, xv, 1-28) ; Christ's 
 promise to Peter, "Upon this rock I will build my church," etc. (chap. 
 xvi, 18, 19) ; the tribute money paid by Christ (chap, xvii, 24, 27); 
 the parable of the king and his servants (chap, xviii, 23-35) 5 nearlv 
 all Christ's remarks on marriage (chap, xix, 3-12) ; the parable of the
 
 OF THE HOLY SCRIPTURES. 575 
 
 vineyard (chap, xx, 1-16) ; the parable of the ten virgins (chap, xxv 
 1-13) ; the description of the last judgment (chap, xxv, 31-46) ; the 
 watch placed at the sepulchre of Christ (chap, xxvii, 62-66) ; the 
 report of the Jews that the disciples stole away Christ's body while 
 the guards slept ; the appearance of Christ to the eleven disciples in 
 Galilee (chap, xxviii, 11-18). 
 
 THE DESIGN OF LUKE'S GOSPEL. 
 
 Luke himself, in the preface, states his purpose in writing the Gos 
 pel; that Theophilus might know the certainty of the things in which 
 he had been instructed. At the same time it cannot be doubted 
 that Luke intended his Gospel for general circulation as an authen- 
 tic history of Christ. 
 
 The early fathers regarded Luke as writing the Gospel preached 
 by Paul. But whatever influence this apostle had over considered by 
 him, and however intimate they were, Luke did not de- ^f ^Pauline 
 rive the material of his narrative from Paul, although he Gospel, 
 doubtless obtained from him many facts for the Book of Acts. Paul's 
 account of the institution of the sacrament of the Lord's supper 
 (i Cor. xi, 24, 25) corresponds more closely with the account in 
 Luke (chap, xxii, 19, 20) than either with that of Matthew or Mark. 
 
 In Luke xxi, 24, in reference to the destruction of Jerusalem, it is 
 said that it " shall be trodden down of the Gentiles until the times 
 of the Gentiles be fulfilled." Quite similar to the latter part of this 
 is Romans xi, 25 : " Until the fulness of the Gentiles be come in." 
 
 Baur, in accordance with his theory of irreconcilable differences 
 between Peter and Paul respecting the law of Moses, as- Baur's theory 
 serts that Luke's Gospel shows "its Pauline character, refuted, 
 in knowing nothing of the identity of the doctrine of Jesus with the 
 law and with the Old Testament, as it is maintained in the Gospel 
 of Matthew." 1 But in the sermon on the mount in Matthew, Christ 
 revokes the teachings of Moses in various passages. Also in Matt, 
 viii, it, 12, it is declared that "many shall come from the east and 
 west, and shall sit down with Abraham, and Isaac, and Jacob, in the 
 kingdom of heaven. But the children of the kingdom shall be cast 
 out into outer darkness." The parables in Matt, xxi, 33-43, and in 
 sxii, 1-14, refer to the rejection of the Jews and the calling of the 
 Gentiles. Christ, in Matt, xi, 13, says: "For all the prophets and 
 the law prophesied until John," which clearly indicates a change of 
 dispensation. But the most complete refutation of Baur and his fol- 
 lowers is Luke xvi, 17: " It is easier for heaven and earth to pass 
 
 'Die Drei Erst. Jahr., p. 74. Dritte Ausgabe Tubingen,
 
 57G INTRODUCTION TO THE STUDY 
 
 than one tittle of the law to fail." ' How closely does this resemble 
 Matt v, 17, 18! 
 
 Baur also represents Luke as depreciating the other apostles, espe- 
 cially Peter, to make Paul more prominent. But this charge is ut- 
 terly groundless. Luke, it is true, omits the declaration of Christ to 
 Peter, " Upon this rock I will build my church," etc. (Matthew xvi, 
 18, 19). But Mark, the intimate friend and companion of Peter, also 
 omits this passage. Did he do this to depreciate Peter? Luke, how- 
 ever, gives Peter's confession of faith in Christ, and omits a passage 
 which is depreciatory of Peter, but which is found both in Matthew 
 and Mark : " Get thee behind me, Satan," says Christ to Peter. Both 
 Matthew and Mark state that Peter, when he denied Christ, " began 
 to curse and to swear." Luke omits this, but hardly to detract from 
 Peter. He also omits what is recorded by Matthew (xiv, 28-31), 
 Peter's beginning to sink into the sea for want of faith. Nothing 
 but the most obstinate prejudice can charge Luke with an intention 
 of detracting from Peter. 
 
 THE STATEMENT OF I.UKE RESPECTING THE TAXING UNDER 
 CYRENIUS (CHAP. II, I, 2). 
 
 "And it came to pass' in those days, that there went out a decree 
 from Caesar Augustus, that all the world should be enrolled. And 
 this enrolment was first made when Cyrenius was governor of Syria." 
 
 It appears from Tacitus that Augustus Caesar had written with his 
 The census own hand in a book " the number of citizens and allies 
 in pn> in arms, how many fleets he had, how many kingdoms, 
 
 fane authors, provinces, tribute, or revenues," * etc. Cassiodorus, 1 in 
 the sixth century, states that " in the times of Augustus the Roman 
 world was divided into domains, and described by a census." Sui- 
 das states that " Augustus Caesar, the emperor, selected twenty of 
 the best men, and of the best character, and sent them over all the 
 land of his subjects, by whom he made a census, both of men and 
 property," 4 etc. Dion Cassius, who wrote of Roman affairs in the 
 
 1 This is the reading of the Vatican, Sinaitic, and Alexandrian Codices, of the 
 Peshito-Syriac version, old Latin MSS. of fourth and fifth centuries, Merophitic 
 ibout A. D. 200, and also of the Gothic, and it appears to be found in all the man- 
 ascripts and versions. How futile it is, then, for Baur and Hilgenfeld to pre- 
 fer a reading which, instead of " the law," substitutes " my words," referring mem 
 to Christ, which, they say, Marcion had. But as Marcion rejected the Old Testa- 
 ment, he could not allow the text in Luke to stand, but must have altered it, or 
 dropped it, as he did other parts of Luke which did not suit him. 
 
 * Cum proferri libellum reci tarique jussit . . . quantum civium sociorumque in ar- 
 ais : quot classes, regna, provinciae, tributa, aut nectigalia, etc. Annal., lib. i, cap. xi 
 
 * Variarum. liber iii, epistola lii. 4 Article, '
 
 OF THE HOLY SCRIPTURES. 57? 
 
 first part of the third century, states that Augustus, for the purpose 
 of raising revenue, " sent men to take a census (a7roypai/>o|tivovc) of 
 the property of individuals and of the cities." ' There can, then, be 
 no doubt that Augustus Caesar took a census of the empire, and it 
 is very probable, independent of Luke's authority, that a census of 
 Judea was taken in the latter part of the reign of Herod the Great, 
 About the time that Christ was born. Herod, having marched an 
 army into Arabia to redress injuries he had received from plunderers. 
 was SD misrepresented to Augustus that, Josephus says, the emperor 
 vrote him a bitter letter, the substance of which was that " he had 
 brmerly treated him as a friend, but now he will treat him as a 
 subject." a After this Herod sent splendid gifts to Augustus, which he 
 sent back to Herod without taking any notice of them, 8 " and he 
 was compelled to submit to all the injuries which he (the emperor) 
 offered him." Sometime after this, and about the date when Christ 
 was born, we find Josephus stating, " that the whole Jewish nation took 
 an oath that they would assuredly bear good-will to Caesar, and to 
 the king's estate, but these men (the Pharisees) did not take the 
 oath, being over six thousand, and they were fined by the king." 4 
 
 Two points, then, seem clearly established, that Augustus took a 
 census of the empire, and that about the time Christ was born there 
 was a registration of the Jewish people proceeding from him. 
 
 The next point to be considered is, in what way Cyrenius (Quiri- 
 nius) was related to it ? After the banishment of Arche- j^ relatlon ol 
 laus, ethnarch of Judea, Samaria and Idumea (about Cyrenius to the 
 A. D. 6), Judea became a Roman province, and was an- c 
 nexed to Syria, and Cyrenius was sent as governor of Syria, and took 
 a census of the whole province. This census was made, according 
 to Josephus, in the thirty-seventh year after the battle of Actium ' 
 (B. C. 31), consequently A. D. 6 or 7. It is to this census that Luke 
 refers in Acts v, 37 : " After this man rose up Judas of Galilee in the 
 days of the taxing " (census). To this man, also, Josephus refers as 
 attempting to raise a sedition among the Jews during the census of 
 Cyrenius. He calls him Judas the Galilean, and Gaulanite.' 
 
 It is very evident, then, that Luke was acquainted with this cen 
 sus, and it is also clear that he does not refer to it in his pro rrende 
 Gospel (chap, ii, 2). The most natural rendering of the ing of chapter 
 passage is : " This census was the first of Cyrenius, the ' 
 
 'Lib. Ivi, cap. 28. *Antiq., xvi, 9. *Ibid. 
 
 4 Flavrof yovv row loviaiKov peflaiuoavTOf 61' bpnuv r) [tqv eirvofjaat Kaiaapi, <u rofy 
 irpdypaai, bide ol avdpe? OVK ufioaav, ovref {itrep tl-aKiox&iei' Kal airrav, 
 aiTiEUf tyifituaavTof xpf>P aalv - Antiquities, lib. xvii, cap. ii, 4. 
 *Antiq., xviii, cap. ii, i. *Ibid., xviii, cap. i, I, 6.
 
 578 INTRODUCTION TO THE STUDY 
 
 governor of Syria." 1 From this it is evident that Luke regards the 
 census made at the birth of Christ as being earlier than that made 
 after the banishment of Archelaus. But was Cyrenius governor of 
 Syria at the birth of Christ ? Augustus Zumpt, in his list of the gov- 
 ernors of Syria, which Merivale adopts in his History of the Romans 
 under the Empire,* makes Cyrenius (Quirinius) proconsul of Syria 
 twice; first, from B. C. 4 to i, and from A. D. 6 to n. He was thus 
 proconsul or governor of Syria for the first time about the time of 
 Christ's birth. At all events there is nothing improbable in Cyre- 
 nius having been associated with Saturninus, or some other procon- 
 sul, in enrolling the Jewish people at the time of the birth of Christ, 
 although he may not have been governor at that time, just as we 
 might speak of President Grant's capture of Vicksburg. 
 
 Tholuck * proposed to translate the irpUTrj, first, before, and render 
 the passage : " This census was made before Cyrenius was governor of 
 Syria." This use of np&Tij for Trprfrepa, is not without examples. So 
 translated it would distinguish the census at the birth of Christ from 
 the well-known one that occurred about ten years later. But this 
 rendering of the passage is not to be favoured, since it is not quite 
 natural, though it is adopted by so great a scholar as Ewald. 4 
 
 The chief point in the history is the fact of the census at the time 
 of Christ's birth. Less important is the officer who had charge of 
 it But there is no reason to question the accuracy of Luke upon 
 this point. The accurate knowledge which he shows every-where in 
 the Acts respecting Greek and Roman history and geography is very 
 remarkable, and should inspire us with confidence in his statements, 
 though unconfirmed by other testimonies. 
 
 THE STATEMENT OF LUKE RESPECTING LYSANIAS. 
 
 In Luke iii, i, in a statement of the different rulers who held office 
 in the fifteenth year of Tiberius Caesar, when John the Baptist began 
 to preach, it is added : " And Lysanias being the tetrarch of Abi- 
 lene." Josephus mentions a Lysanias, tetrarch of Abilene, put to 
 death about B. C. 36 by Antony to gratify Cleopatra.* But he names 
 no Lysanias as tetrarch about the time that Christ began his minis- 
 try, and Strauss has regarded this second Lysanias of Luke as a fie- 
 tion. A few years ago, however, an inscription was found neai 
 Baalbec, "containing a dedication of a memorial tablet or statue 
 
 1 The Greek is, 'Awn; &iroypa^)f kyhitro Ttpun} fiyefunevovrof riff Zvpiaf Kvpyviot. 
 Vol. vi, 261. ' Glaubwiirdig. der Evan. Gesch., pp. 178-188. Zweite Auflag 
 He translates, " This census took place much earlier than the time when Qui- 
 rraius was governor " Geschich. Christus und sein. Zeit, p. 205. 
 Antiq., xv, cap. iv, I.
 
 OF THE HOLY SCRIPTURES. 579 
 
 to ' Zenodorus, son of the tetrarch Lysanias, and to Lysanias, hei 
 children ' by (apparently)," says Rawlinson, " the widow of the first 
 and the mother of the second Lysanias. Zenodorus was already 
 known as having succeeded the first Lysanias in his government. 
 It is thus clear that there were, as previously suspected, two persons 
 of the name, a father and a son, and there is not the slightest reason 
 for doubting St. Luke's statement, that the latter was tetrarch of 
 Abilene in the fifteenth of Tiberius." 1 Renan," while remarking 
 that the mention of Lysanias by Luke may be an error, yet says, 
 " The accuracy of the evangelist on this point can be defended." 
 The Lysanias of Luke is, doubtless, the ruler of that name men- 
 tioned by Josephus, who states that Claudius Caesar " bestowed upon 
 Agrippa the tetrarchy of Philip, and Batanaea, and gave him also 
 Trachonitis with Abila (Abilene). This had been the tetrarchy of 
 Lysanias." 1 
 
 CHAPTER XVII. 
 THE GOSPEL ACCORDING TO JOHN. 
 
 
 JOHN the beloved disciple was a son of Zebedee, and, it would 
 J seem, a younger brother of James, as he is, with scarcely an ex- 
 ception, named after James. 4 It appears from a com- Notlce80f John 
 parison of Matthew xxvii, 56 with Mark xv, 40, that his in the New 
 mother was Salome. When called by Christ at the be- rfest * ment - 
 ginning of his ministry to follow him, John was engaged in fishing in 
 the sea of Galilee, with his brother James and his father Zebedee 
 (Matt, iv, 21 ; Mark i, 19). As mention is made of their hired serv- 
 ants (Mark i, 20), it appears that they conducted the fishing business 
 on quite a large scale, and they may have possessed considerable 
 property. Our Saviour gave him and his brother James the name of 
 Boanerges Sons of Thunder on account, it is to be supposed, of 
 their demonstrative power and impetuosity. 6 He was one of the three 
 
 1 Prof Rawlinson's Lecture on Modern Scepticism, pp. 301, 302. He refers to 
 Kraft's Topografie Jerusalem*. Inscrip. 29. 
 
 'Vie de J4sus, Ixxxiv. He refers to Mission de Phe*nicie, p. 317, etc. 
 *Antiq., xx, cap. vii, I. 
 
 * This James was put to death by Herod Agrippa about A. D. 45. Acts xii, 3. 
 
 * Their wish to have fire called down from heaven upon the unkind Samaritani 
 (Luke ix, 54 may bt cited as an instance of this.
 
 580 INTRODUCTION TO THE STUDY 
 
 disciples who enjoyed the greatest intimacy with Christ. In company 
 with Peter and James he witnessed his transfiguration ; in his agony 
 in the garden of Gethsemane Jesus had with him Peter, James, and 
 John only. It is very probable that John was one of the two disci- 
 ples mentioned in John i, 40. He sat next to Christ at table, and 
 was said to lean upon his bosom or breast (John xiii, 23, 25 ; xxi. 20), 
 and is called the disciple whom Jesus loved (John xiii, 23 ; xix, 26: 
 xx, 2 ; xxi, 7, 20). He is, doubtless, the disciple who followed Jesus 
 after his arrest, and went into the palace of the high priest, and 
 brought in Peter (chap, xviii, 15, 16). He was at the cross when 
 Christ was crucified (chap, xix, 35), and took the mother of Jesus 
 thence to his own home (chap, xix, 27). After the resurrection of 
 Jesus he appears in the Acts of the Apostles in the account of the 
 healing of the lame man by Peter and himself (chaps, iii, iv), and in 
 the mission to Samaria, to which Peter and himself were sent. After 
 preaching the Gospel to a large portion of the Samaritans, they both 
 returned to Jerusalem (chap, viii, 14-25). After this John disap- 
 pears from the Acts. From Paul's Epistle to the Galatians it is seen 
 that when that apostle visited Jerusalem about A. D. 52 John was 
 still there, and he is classed with Peter and James " as being con- 
 sidered pillars " (chapter ii, 9) in the Church. When Paul went to 
 Jerusalem about A. D. 58, in company with Luke, they went in unto 
 James (Acts xxi, 18), but no mention is made of John. This, how- 
 ever, does not prove that he was not in Jerusalem still less that he 
 was not in Palestine. 
 
 John probably left Palestine and took up his abode in Ephesus a 
 irenseus's ao- snort ^ mQ before the Jewish war. For it is not at all 
 unt of the likely that he was in Ephesus while Paul abode there 
 Apostle John. ^ A D 54 _ 57 ) It j s the unanimous testimony of the 
 
 early Church that John spent the last part of his life at Ephesus, and 
 this testimony is of such a character that there can be no doubt re- 
 specting the fact. 
 
 Irenaeus, bishop of Lyons (A. D. 177-202), born, in all probability, 
 about A. D. 130, in Asia Minor, speaks of the testimony of the " pres- 
 byters in Asia who had associated with John, the disciple of the Lord," 
 and states that John remained in the Church at Ephesus until the times 
 of Trajan as a true witness of the tradition of the apostles. 1 This em- 
 peror began to reign A. D. 98. In his Epistle to Florinus, Irenaeus 
 states : " When I was yet a boy I saw thee in Lower Asia with Poly- 
 carp, behaving splendidly in the royal court, and endeavouring to 
 gain his approbation^ For I remember the things that happened 
 then better than those which have occurred recently. For whai we 
 1 Contra Haereses, lib. ii, cap. xxii, 5 ; iii, cap. iii, 4.
 
 OF THE HOLY SCRIPTURES. 581 
 
 learn in boyhood, growing up along with the soul, becomes one with 
 it, so that I can name both the place in which the blessed Polycarp 
 sat and discoursed; his going out and his coming in ; the charac- 
 ter of his life, and the form of his person, and the addresses which 
 he made to the people ; how he related his intercourse with John and 
 with others who had seen the Lord , how he repeated their words, and 
 what things he had heard from them concerning the Lord, both con 
 cerning his miracles and his doctrine, as Polycarp had received them 
 from the eyewitnesses of the word of life all these things he related 
 in harmony with the Scriptures." 1 Irenaeus also states that Poly- 
 carp was appointed bishop of Smyrna by the apostles. 8 Also in his 
 letter to Victor, the Roman bishop, he says that Polycarp had lived 
 in intimacy with John the disciple of our Lord.* Irenseus further 
 states :" There_are_ some who heard from him (Polycarp) that John 
 the disciple of the Lord, having gone to bathe in Ephesus, and seeing 
 Cerintrms within, he leaped forth from the bath without bathing, but 
 exclaimed, Let us fly, lest the bathing-room fall upon us, since Ce- 
 rinthus, the enemy of the truth, is within. "* Even if the incident 
 never occurred, it shows at least that as early as the middle of the 
 second century it was notorious that the Apostle John had lived at 
 Ephesus. 
 
 Another most important witness to the fact that the Apostle John 
 spent the latter part of his life in Ephesus is Polycrates, An account of 
 bishop of that city in the last part of the second century. John by Poiy- 
 In a letter which he wrote to Victor, bishop of Rome, 
 (about A. D. 190 or 195), on the celebration of the passover, he says : 
 " For in Asia great lights have gone out. . . . Also John, wholeaned\ 
 upon the breast of the Lord, who was a priest wearing the mitre, a \ 
 martyr and a teacher this one sleeps in Ephesus." ' Polycrates, in j 
 this epistle, says, " I have been in the Lord sixty-five years." By 
 this we are probably to understand that he was made a disciple in 
 infancy, and the number expresses his age at the time of writing. 
 He must, accordingly, have been born about A. D. 125 or 130. He 
 also states that seven of his relatives had been bishops, some of whom 
 he had succeeded. It seems quite clear from this that he must have 
 known persons who were acquainted with John, and, as the apostle's 
 grave was in the city, there could be no mistake about the matter, 
 nor could John the presbyter be confounded with the Apostle John 
 by a bishop at Ephesus in the second century. 
 
 Clement of Alexandria, who flourished in the latter part of the 
 
 'In Euseb., Hist. Eccl., lib. v, cap. xx. * Contra Haer.. lib. iii, cap. 3. 
 "In Euseb., Hist. Eccl., lib. v, cap. xxiv. 4 Contra Haer., lib. iii, cap. 3, sec. A- 
 1 In Eusebius, Hist. Eccles., lib. v, cap. xxiv.
 
 382 INTRODUCTION TO THE STUDY 
 
 second century and in the beginning of the third, states that " John 
 Notices of the the apostle returned from the isle of Patmos to Ephesua 
 KenJ 0h ^J after the death of the tyrant," ' and he relates an inci- 
 origen. dent in the life of the apostle which occurred in a town 
 
 near Ephesus, and was carefully transmitted. 
 
 Origen also states that John abode in Asia, and died in Ephesus.* 
 At the end of the Gospel of John, in the Peshito-Syriac version, is 
 the superscription : " The end of the holy Gospel, the preaching of 
 John the evangelist which he published in. Greek in Ephesus." This 
 testimony is valuable as coming from a version of the second century 
 used in Northern Syria and Mesopotamia, regions not remote from 
 Ephesus. 
 
 Ltitzelberger, in 1840, in his attack on John's Gospel, denied that 
 The silence of this apostle spent the latter part of his life in Asia Minor, 
 regariuoJUffi basin g tne denial upon the silence of Ignatius in epis- 
 considered. ties in which a reference to John was to be expected, if 
 he had lived there, especially in Ephesus. But the argument a silen- 
 tio is often a very delusive one, and avails nothing in opposition to 
 strong positive testimony. The Epistles of Ignatius have themselves 
 been a subject of much controversy, and they exist in a shorter and 
 in a longer text in Greek. Cureton translated and published, from an 
 ancient Syriac text brought from the Nitrian desert in Egypt, three 
 Epistles of Ignatius to Polycarp, the Ephesians, and the Romans 
 in a form still shorter than the shortest Greek text. These three 
 epistles, in their shortest text, as they appear in the Syriac, Cureton 
 thinks are the only genuine Epistles of Ignatius, and in this judgment 
 he is most probably correct. 
 
 The only one of these Epistles from which any reference to the 
 Apostle John could be expected is that to the Ephesians, as this 
 apostle had died there fifteen or twenty years before the epistle 
 was written. But there is no reference in it to any apostle,' though 
 Paul labored there for three years. But why, in an epistle of two 
 or three pages, hastily written, should he refer to the Apostle John? 
 It was hardly to be expected in an epistle to Polycarp, bishop ot 
 Smyrna, who had been a hearer of John, that he should allude to 
 this fact. 
 
 In the epistle to the Romans Ignatius says : " I do not charge 
 you, like Peter and Paul, who are apostles." But this does not indi- 
 cate that Paul had been in Rome, for the language could be ex- 
 plained very naturally as referring to Paul's Epistle to the Romans 
 But as Peter addressed no epistle to the Romans, the inference 
 
 auopevof nMioiof, What rid man is saved? xlii. 
 'In Euseb., Hist. Eccles., iii, I. 'The Greek text, however, refers to PauL
 
 OF THE HOLY SCRIPTURES. 583 
 
 would be that he preached to them. There is in the epistle of Ig 
 natius nothing to indicate that these two apostles had suffered mar- 
 tyrdora at Rome. Yet how natural for him would be the language : 
 " I am coming to Rome to die for the name of Jesus Christ, as Peter 
 and Paul did." Does the absence of all reference to their martyr- 
 dom in Rome prove that it never occurred ? 
 
 GENUINENESS OF THE GOSPEL ACCORDING TO JOHN. 
 
 We have already seen that Eusebius and Origen knew of no op- 
 position to the Gospel of John, and with the exception of the small 
 party of Alogians at Thyatira about A. D. 180, it was received by 
 the whole Church throughout the ancient world as the undoubted 
 writing- of that apostle, the beloved disciple who leaned upon the 
 bosom of the Lord. 
 
 No doubt was expressed respecting the genuineness of this Gospel 
 until the year 1792, when an English deist by the name Modem attacks 
 
 of Evanson attacked it with feeble arguments. About ontnegenuine- 
 
 . ... . _ ness of John's 
 
 the same time doubts respecting it arose in Germany. Gospel Bret- 
 
 But the first systematic and able attack was made by 
 Bretschneider, a German theologian, in Latin ' in 1820. He was an- 
 swered by several German scholars, whose vindication of the gen- 
 uineness of this Gospel seemed entirely satisfactory. On this point 
 Tholuck remarks : " The conviction of the genuineness of the Gos- 
 pel of John in the consciousness of all German theologians took only 
 the so much deeper root, after Bretschneider left the field with the 
 confession that he was vanquished; and nowhere, perhaps, except 
 in the Introduction of Dr. De Wette, was there still heard an echo 
 of doubt." 1 
 
 In 1835 Strauss, in his Life of Jesus, resumed and sharpened the 
 arguments that had been used by Bretschneider, and as- strauss, Lut- 
 sailed this Gospel. But in the third edition of his Life SjSK'Xt 
 of Jesus he acknowledged that through the many re- pel- 
 plies that had been given, especially by Meander and De Wette, " he\ 
 had again become doubtful respecting his doubts of the genuineness of .' 
 this Gospel." In the fourth edition, however, he retracted this con-' 
 fession, and returned resolutely to his doubts, principally as he him- 
 self confesses, because "without them one could not escape from 
 believing the miracles of Christ." In his Life of Jesus for the Ger- 
 man people, published in 1864, he still denies the genuineness of 
 this Gospel, and greatly approves of Baur's views. Strauss' attack 
 was followed by that of Liitzelberger in 1840, who asserted that this 
 
 'Probabilia de Evang. et Epp. Joannis Apos., etc. 
 
 1 Glaubwiirdigkeu Evang. Geschichte, Zweite Aufl., 1838, 
 
 pp. 267, 268.
 
 584 INTRODUCTION TO THE STUDY 
 
 Gospel was written at Edessa A. D. 130-135. In the following yeai 
 Schwegler assailed it, and referred its composition to about 150. In 
 1844 it was assailed by Baur, who places its origin in Asia Minor 
 or in Alexandria, perhaps, about 170. In the following year Zel- 
 ler published his views, in which he declared his agreement with 
 Baur. 
 
 Hilgenfeld 1 also denies its genuineness, and assigns it to 130-140, 
 So does Volkmar, who places it about 155, and Scholten 1 about 150. 
 Keim* supposes that it was composed probably about 130. A few 
 German scholars adopted what Bleek calls the Hypothesis of Sep- 
 aration (Theilung's hypothese), that is, they distinguish in this Gos- 
 pel a genuine historical element which they separate from the un- 
 historical. To this class belong Weisse, Schweizer, Schenkel, and 
 Re"nan. 
 
 It must be observed that the opponents of the Gospel of John be- 
 The defenders long chiefly to the Tubingen school, at the head of 
 
 neSTjohTs which stood Baur - But this Gospel has not lacked able 
 Gospel. defenders not only among the evangelical theologians* 
 
 but also among those of the sceptical school. Of those who have 
 written in defence of this Gospel since the attack of Bretschneider 
 in 1820, may be named Stein, Calmberg, Hemsen, Crome, Hauff, 
 Hug, Eichhorn, Bertholdt, Schott, Credner, Lilcke, Tholuck, Ebrard, 
 Bunsen, Bleek, Ewald, Mayer, Luthardt, Hengstenberg, Norton, 
 Baumgarten, Schleiermacher, Neander, Hase, Tischendorf, Riggen- 
 bach, De Groot, Oosterzee, Fisher, and Beyschlag. 
 
 De Wette, in the preface to the fifth edition of his Introduction to 
 the New Testament, written in 1847, about two years before his 
 death, remarks : " It will be found that in respect to the Gospel of 
 John I have placed myself still more than formerly upon the side of 
 its defenders, although I am still far from the confidence of my 
 friend Bleek." 4 This is a valuable testimony from so able and 
 sceptical a critic, who was by no means inclined toward orthodoxy. 
 
 In speaking of the attacks that have been made upon the genuine- 
 ness of the fourth Gospel, De Wette remarks : " They have been es- 
 pecially directed against the external testimony in its favour. On 
 the one hand, the witnesses have been regarded with sceptical 
 eyes, and spitefully criticised; on the other, there have been de- 
 manded older and more definite witnesses than could be justly ex- 
 pected. In this respect our Gospel does not stand worse, indeed 
 better, than the first three, and than the writings of Paul." * 
 
 1 EinL, p. 738. Leipzig, 1875. * Die alt. Zeugnisse, u. s. w., by Manchot. p. 186 
 ' Geschich. Jesu, p. 41. 1873. * Einl., besorgt von Messner und Lunemarn. 1860 
 * Einleitung, p. 223.
 
 OF THE HOLY SCRIPTURES. 585 
 
 The Gospel of John is especially obnoxious to a certain class of 
 critics on account of its profound spiritual character, and because it 
 sets forth so clearly the divinity of Christ. To others, it is offensive 
 because, if genuine, it establishes the miracles of Christ since they 
 are related in that case by an eyewitness and overthrows their pan- 
 theistic conceptions of the universe. 
 
 The theory of the assailants of John's Gospel, that it was written 
 sometime during A. D. 125-170, is, in view of the facts Untenablen es8 
 of the case, the most preposterous that has ever been of the sceptical 
 advanced in the annals of historical criticism. For it is 
 an >n disputable fact, that in the last quarter of the second century 
 thi Gospel was received throughout the whole Christian world as 
 th" undoubted writing of the Apostle John. How could this have 
 cotne to pass had it not come down from the last part of the first 
 century ? Could a Gospel written within the lifetime of many in the 
 Church in the last quarter of the second century be everywhere re- 
 garded as the work of the Apostle John who had been dead for three 
 fourtl s of a century or more ? When three Gospels had already been 
 in use in the Church, and read every Sunday in the Christian assem- 
 blies, how could a fourth one have been added long after the death 
 of its supposed author, and a Gospel, too, that seemed to be at vari- 
 ance with the others ? Could the intellectual and the learned men 
 of the Church thus be imposed upon, and would the illiterate have 
 submitted to the innovation ? We all know what opposition the 
 masses now make to even a few changes in the translation of the 
 Bible. 
 
 The Alogians, a small party at Thyatira toward the end of the 
 second century, in rejecting this Gospel, assigned it to the The account of 
 heretic Cerinthus, 1 who lived in the first century, and was 
 a contemporary of the Apostle John. How easily they 
 would have triumphed if they could have shown that this Gospel 
 came into existence after the death of John ! Had it been written 
 in the second century they could have easily known it. Celsus, the 
 learned and bitter opponent of Christianity, who wrote about A. D. 
 160-170, was, as we have already seen, acquainted with our Gospel, 
 whi:h then bore already the name of John. Now, if this Gospel had 
 made its appearance even in the earliest part of the second century, 
 there must have been many who knew the fact, and from whom he 
 could have learned it. In this case how he would have triumphed 
 over the Christians, and told them that one of the chief Gospels, so 
 far from giving apostolic testimony to Christ, was not written till its 
 supposed author had been dead twenty-five or fifty years ! Yet he 
 1 Epiphanius, Haeresis li, 3.
 
 586 INTRODUCTION TO THE STUDY 
 
 speaks of the Gospels as written by the disciples of Christ, by which 
 term he meant apostles. 
 
 Even Re"nan remarks, respecting the date of this Gospel: "One 
 n6 's ad- tn i n S at l east > I regard as very probable that the book 
 mission as to was written before the year 100 ; that is, at an epoch when 
 the synoptic Gospels had not yet a full canonical author- 
 ity. If written after this date, it is inconceivable that the autbor on 
 this point should have broken loose from the outline of the Memoirs 
 of the Apostles. For Justin, and it seems for Papias, the synoptical 
 outline constitutes the true and only outline of the Life of Jesus. 
 A forger, writing toward the year 120 or 130 a fancy Gospel, would 
 have satisfied himself with treating the received version in his own 
 way, as do the apocryphal Gospels, and he would not have so com- 
 pletely destroyed what were regarded as the essential lines of the 
 life of Jesus." ' Truly the forger of this book, if a forgery, in the 
 second century, pursued a most astonishing course, and it is more 
 astonishing that he should succeed in it ! 
 
 Heracleon, a celebrated Valentinian, who was said to have been 
 John' G i an acc l uamtance f Valentinus, wrote a Commentary on 
 is quoted in the John's Gospel about A. D. 170, which is quoted in sev- 
 second century. eral p | aces by Qrigen in his Commentary on that Gospel, 
 as we have already seen. It appears from an expression of Hera- 
 cleon's that he attributed the Gospel to a disciple of Christ. Now 
 what could have induced this eminent heretic to write a Commen- 
 tary on this Gospel, and to attempt to explain it so as to bring it into 
 harmony with his system (a process often requiring a forced con- 
 struction), except its apostolic origin and its authority in the Church ? 
 He must have known that it was written in the first century, and 
 that it was considered the undoubted work of an apostle of Christ. 
 Not only did Heracleon, but the Valentinians in general, use this 
 Gospel in the second half of the second century. 
 
 Theophilus, who became bishop of Antioch in A. D. 169, wrote 
 Testimony of tnree books to Autolycus on the resurrection of the 
 Theophiins. dead, about 180. Speaking of the Word (Arfyof) he says : 
 " Which the holy Scriptures, and all those who are inspired by the 
 Spirit, teach us, among whom John says, ' In the beginning was the 
 Word, and the Word was with God. . . . and the Word was God; all 
 things were made by him" * etc. This Theophilus, bishop of the 
 great city of Antioch, was a man of great learning and profound 
 thought, and he must have known whether the Gospel of John was 
 genuine or not. It is very probable that he was born as early as A. D. 
 no or 120. He had been converted from heathenism, and must 
 ' Vie de Je*sus, Ixxv-vi * Lib. ii. 22.
 
 OF THE HOL\ SCRIPTURES. 587 
 
 have examined carefully the Gospels which he places along with the 
 prophets. 1 He calls John's Gospel inspired. Can we believe that 
 the great Christian Church at Antioch, which must have been in 
 communion with that of Ephesus and with other important Christian 
 Churches, and its learned bishop, were all, in the middle of the sec- 
 ond century, when John had been dead only about fifty years, de- 
 ceived in their belief of the genuineness of this Gospel ? Further, 
 when Theophilus became bishop of Antioch (A. D. 169) there were 
 doubtless some whose memory reached back to the year 100; quite 
 a large number, whose parents were the contemporaries of St. John 
 in the latter part of his life, and knew when he wrote the Gospel. 
 
 From Theophilus we pass to a witness still more important, Ire- 
 naeus, bishop of Lyons in Gaul, A. D. 177-202. What The valuable 
 makes the testimony of this able and learned man so testimony of 
 valuable is the fact that the early part of his -life was l 
 spent in Asia Minor, and that he had been taught in his youth by 
 Polycarp, the disciple of the Apostle John. Of the teachings of Poly 
 carp he retained in after life the most distinct recollection, espec- 
 ially what Polycarp had heard from John and others who had seen 
 the Lord respecting his miracles and doctrines, " all of which Poly- 
 carp related agreeable to the Scriptures."* 
 
 Irenaeus states : " John the disciple of the Lord, who also leaned 
 upon his breast, he himself also published his Gospel while he abode 
 in Ephesus in Asia." 1 Now it is evident that Irenasus had the best 
 opportunity to ascertain the fact, if such, that John wrote the Gospel 
 winch bears his name. He was a hearer of Polycarp, as we have 
 seen, and there were many others in Asia Minor, with whom Ire- 
 naeus was acquainted, who had associated with John. This appears 
 clear from the nature of the case, and from his remark, "And all the 
 elders who in Asia had associated with John the disciple of the Lord 
 testify," 4 etc. There can be no doubt that when Irenseus states 
 that John published his Gospel in Ephesus, he bears witness to what 
 he had learned from Polycarp and the elders who had known John. 
 Suppose Irenaeus had asserted that the fourth Gospel was not writ- 
 ten by John, or had expressed doubts about it, would not the adver- 
 saries of this Gospel have declared that this was conclusive proof 
 against its genuineness ? Must not, then, his testimony in its favour, 
 and the confidence with which he uses it as the production of the 
 beloved disciple of Christ, be the strongest proof of its genuineness ? 
 
 Polycarp remained bishop of Smyrna until he died a martyr's death 
 about A. D. 167. About 160 he visited Rome and had a conference 
 
 'iii, 12. * In the Epistle to Florinis before quoted- 
 
 1 Contra Hsereses, Hi, I. 4 Ibid., ii, cap. xxii, 5. 
 38
 
 563 INTRODUCTION TO THE STUDY 
 
 with the bishop Anicetus of that city respecting the passovei. Now 
 if Polycarp had not acknowledged the fourth Gospel as that of John 
 the Churches in Asia, that of Rome, and of other cities, must have 
 known the fact, and the authority of this Gospel being rejected by 
 this eminent disciple of John, it could not have been received as the 
 undoubted work of the beloved disciple. But the fact that Irenaeus, 
 who was taught by Polycarp, received this Gospel, is a proof that it 
 was acknowledged by Polycarp. 
 
 In the letter addressed by the Churches of Lyons and Vienna in 
 Gaul to the Churches of Asia and Phrygia (A. D. 177), describing the 
 martyrdom of their members, they say : " That was fulfilled which 
 was spoken by our Lord, that ' The time will come in which every one 
 that killeth you will think that he doeth God service.'" This is 
 an evident quotation of John xvi, 2. Pothinus, their bishop, ninety 
 years of age, had died in the persecution, and Irenaeus had been 
 their presbyter. 
 
 Polycrates, bishop of Ephesus, in an epistle on the observance 
 other ancient ^ l ^ e passover, addressed to Victor, bishop of Rome, 
 
 testimonies to and to the Church of that city, written about A. D. 190 
 
 the genuine- , ,. , . ,, ., , c .. 
 
 nees of John's r I 95i speaks of keeping the day of the passover 
 
 Qos P eL on the i4th, according to the Gospel," and of " having 
 
 perused all holy Scripture." In speaking of John he says: "And 
 John, who leaned on the breast of the Lord." It is in the 
 highest degree probable that this phraseology was taken from the 
 Gospel of John : " who also leaned upon his breast " (chap, xxi, 20) ; 
 "that one thus leaning upon the breast of Jesus " (chap, xiii, 25). 
 Except in John's Gospel, this phraseology is found nowhere in the 
 New Testament. When Polycrates wrote this letter he tells us that 
 he had been a Christian sixty-five years, so that his memory of 
 Christian affairs must have extended back as far as A. D. 140. Seven 
 of his relations had been bishops, some of whom he says he suc- 
 ceeded in Ephesus. Now he must have known some in the Ephe- 
 sian Church who were acquainted with the Apostle John, and a few, 
 probably, whose memories went back to the time when the Gospel 
 was written. He speaks also of many bishops whom he had called 
 together and met.* Is it possible that the canon of Polycrates, 
 which must have been that of the Ephesian Church of which he was 
 bishop, did not include John's Gospel ? Polycrates says he had read 
 all the holy Scripture, and speaks of what is in accordance with the 
 Gospel, probably that of John. If the Church of Ephesus in the 
 second century received the fourth Gospel as the work of the Apostle 
 John, it must be genuine. If the Church of Ephesus did not receive 
 'In Eusebius, Hist. Eccles., v, cap. X. 'Ibid., v, cap. xxiv
 
 OF THE HOLY SCRIPTURES. 589 
 
 It in the second century, they in all probability would not have re- 
 ceived it in the third, for the tradition that it was not written by 
 John could not easily have been obliterated. 
 
 Irenseus speaks of the whole Church as refreshed by four Gospels, 
 and Origen (186-254) says the four Gospels are received by the 
 Church under heaven ; and there is not a vestige of proof that the 
 great Church of Ephesus did not receive the fourth Gospel as the 
 work of John. Had the Ephesian Church rejected this Gospel, or 
 attributed it to any other than John, the Christian writers of the 
 second and two following centuries could not have failed to notice 
 the rejection, just as Epiphanius did in the case of the Alogians in 
 the comparatively obscure town of Thyatira; and Polycrates and 
 others, in discussing the passover, would, in all probability, have 
 brought out the fact. 1 If this Gospel had not been received in the 
 Ephesian Churclvimmediately after the death of John, if not before, 
 it could not have been received by the neighbouring Churches 
 of Asia Minor. Irenseus, as we have already seen, states that John 
 published his Gospel at Ephesus, and as he spent the early part of 
 his life in the region of Ephesus, he must have known that the Ephe- 
 sian Christians received this Gospel as John's, otherwise he could 
 not have stated that this apostle had delivered it to them. 
 
 In the Canon of Muratori (written at Rome about A. D. 160) it is 
 stated : " The fourth Gospel is that of John, one of the Tegtlmony ^ 
 disciples. When his fellow-disciples and his bishops the canon of 
 urged him to write, he said to them, Fast with me to-day 
 until the third day, and whatever shall be revealed to each, we will 
 relate to each other. In the same night it was revealed to Andrew, 
 one of the apostles, that John should write every thing in his own 
 name in the presence of all of them as witnesses." * In this canon it 
 is also said : " Why therefore is it strange if John so confidently ad- 
 
 2 Since writing the above we have found positive proof for what we have argued 
 in the text, that may be thus shown : Polycrates names along with himself, as followers 
 of the Apostle John in keeping the I4th Nisan, Polycarp of Smyrna, Thraseas, 
 bishop of Eumenia in Phrygia, Bishop Sagaris, Melito of Sardis, and Papirius (Eu- 
 sebius, Hist. Eccles., lib. v, cap. xxiv). Hippolytus (A. D. 200-250) says the observers 
 of the 1 4th Nisan "agree in other matters with all those things which have been de- 
 livered to the Church by the apostles" (Philosoph., lib. viii, sec. 1 8). Epiphanius 
 (A. D. 367-402) says of this same sect, " These hold everything as the Church (holds) 5 
 they receive the prophets, apostles, and evangelists" (Haeresis 1). Of course, then 
 they received John's Gospel. Theodoret remarks on them : " They say that the 
 Evangelist John, when preaching in Asia, taught them to observe the I4th day " 
 (Haeret. Fab. Comp., lib. iii, cap. iv). 
 
 QUARii EVANGELIORUM IOHANNIB EX DECIPOLIS. cohortantibus condescipulis 
 et eps suis dixit conieiunate mihi. Odie triduo et quid cuique fuerit reuelatnra
 
 590 INTRODUCTION TO THE STUDY 
 
 duces the particulars even in his epistles, saying in respect to him- 
 self, What we have seen with our eyes, and heard with our ears, and 
 our hands have handled, these things we have written to you. For 
 he not only professes to be an eyewitness, but also a hearer and a 
 writer in order of all the wonderful things of the Lord." ' 
 
 The particulars thus given respecting the origin of John's Gospel 
 are valuable as coming from such an early writer, and one likely to 
 obtain accurate information, as Rome was a place much visited from 
 all parts of the world. As mention is made of the Apostle Andrew 
 in the account of John's writing, it would seem that the Gospel was 
 written probably twenty years before the close of John's life, as it is 
 not likely that Andrew was alive long after that time. 
 
 The particulars given in the canon concerning John's Gospel do 
 not indicate that it had already enemies against whom it was to be 
 defended as has been asserted.' For the canon "gives particulars 
 about Luke's Gospel also, and states that he had not seen the Lord 
 in the flesh. Doubtless many particulars were given respecting the 
 Gospels of Matthew and Mark, of which all is lost except a few clos- 
 ing words on the latter. 
 
 When this canon was written there were in the Roman Church, 
 beyond all doubt, some whose membership and memory dated as far 
 back as the last part of the first century. The testimony borne by 
 this canon to the First Epistle of John, and perhaps to his others, is 
 also very valuable in connexion with the genuineness of the Gospel. 
 
 Clement of Alexandria states that " John, last of all, perceiving 
 Testimonies of that physical things were related in the Gospels, and 
 rom<j?and otbl being urged by his acquaintances and inspired by the 
 era. Spirit, wrote a spiritual Gospel." ' Jerome gives an ac- 
 
 count of the writing of John's Gospel quite similar to that in the 
 Canon of Muratori, which he remarks " ecclesiastical history re- 
 lates." 4 Apollinaris, in the second passover controversy, about A. D. 
 170, remarks respecting his opponents : " They say that the Lord ate 
 the paschal lamb with his disciples on the fourteenth day of the 
 month, but that he suffered on the great day of the feast of unleav- 
 ened bread, and explain Matthew as so saying as they think, but their 
 
 alterutrum nobis eunarremus eadem nocte reuelatum Andrea ex apostolis ut re- 
 cognis centibus cunctis lohan-nis suo nomine cuncta discriberet. Et ideo licit uaria 
 inculis euangeliorum libris principia doceantur. 
 
 1 Quid ergo minim si Johannes tarn constanter sincula etiam in epistulis suis pro 
 ferat dicens in seme ipsu Quae vidimus oculis nostris et auribus audiuimus et manus 
 nostrae palpauerunt haec scripsimus uobis sic enim non solum uisurem sed auditorem 
 sed et scriptorem omnium mirabilium domini per ordinem profetetur. 
 
 'By Mangold and Hilgenfeld. 'In Eusebius, Hist. Eccles., T!, 14. 
 
 * Pref. Comment in Mat.
 
 OF THE HOLY SCRIPTURES. 591 
 
 new is not in accordance with the law, and the Gospels, according 
 *o them, appear to be at variance with each other." 1 He manifestly 
 refers to John, as compared with the other Gospels, which shows that 
 nis opponents as well as himself musl^ have received that Gospel. 
 He also speaks of Christ's side having been pierced, out of which 
 flowed water and blood, in reference to John xix, 34, and it is, there- 
 fore, evident that he received it as authentic history. 
 
 We have already seen that the Clementine Homilies (about A. D. 
 r6o or 170) make use of John's Gospel, and that about the same 
 time Tatian, who had been the disciple of Justin Martyr, not only 
 makes use of this Gospel, but he formed a Harmony or Combination 
 of this Gospel and the other three. It was evidently used by Athe- 
 nagoras* (about A. D. 177), who speaks of all things having been 
 created by the Logos (or Word), and of the Father's being in the 
 Son, and the Son in the Father (in reference to John i, 1-3 ; xvii, 
 21-23). About the same time, or rather earlier, it was quoted as an 
 apostolic document by Celsus, the bitter writer against Christianity. 
 It was known to the heretic Marcion (about A. D. 140), was quoted 
 by Valentinus (about 140), and by Basilides (about 120 or 125) as one 
 of the Gospels. 
 
 About the middle of the second century arose in Phrygia, in Asia 
 Minor, a fanatical sect of Christians that made pretensions to ex- 
 traordinary spiritual gifts. They were called Montanists, from Mon- 
 tanus of Pepuza, who " in an ecstatic state began to announce that 
 the Paraclete [Comforter] had imparted itself to him for the purpose 
 of giving the Church its manly perfection " (Gieseler). It is very 
 evident that the term Paraclete (which Montanus professed to be) 
 was derived from John's Gospel, in which Christ promises to send 
 the Paraclete (Comforter) (chaps, xiv, 16, 26; xv, 26; xvi, 7). This 
 shows that in Phrygia, about 150 or 160, the Gospel of John was most 
 probably regarded as an authentic record of Christ's teaching. 
 
 Justin Martyr, in his First Apology,' addressed to the Emperor 
 Antoninus Pius about A. D. 138 or 139, uses John's Gos- Quotations oi 
 pel. In speaking of baptism and regeneration, he says : 
 " For Christ said, Unless you are born again, you cannot 
 enter the kingdom of heaven ; because it is evident to all that it is 
 impossible for those once born to enter the wombs of their mothers." 
 Here the reference to John iii, 3, 4 is obvious, and shows that Justin 
 regarded this Gospel as an authentic source for the history of Christ. 
 Justin says of Christ : " And the Logos (Word) is the Son, who in a 
 certain way being made flesh, became man. 4 The Logos (Word) is 
 
 'Chron. Pascn., in Migne's ed. Pat., torn. 5, pp. 1297-1300. 
 *Legatio Pro Christianis, sec. 10. *Sec. 61. *Sec. 32.
 
 692 INTRODUCTION TO THE STUDY 
 
 the first begotten of God." ' It is clear that these passages are based 
 on John i, i, 14. 
 
 In his Dialogue with Trypho the Jew, written about A. D. 150, he 
 also uses John's Gospel. In speaking of John the Baptist, he repre- 
 sents him as confessing, " I am not the Christ,"" which is found only 
 in John i, 20. Hilgenfeld does not deny that Justin used John along 
 with the other three Gospels. We have already seen Justin stating 
 that the Gospels, or Memoirs of the Apostles, " written by the Apos- 
 tles and their companions," were read every Sunday, along with the 
 prophets, in the Christian assemblies. From this language it is clear 
 that two of the evangelists were apostles, of whom the author of the 
 fourth Gospel must have been one. But it may be asked, Why did 
 not Justin make greater use of John's Gospel ? To which it may be 
 answered, It did not suit his purpose as well as the other Gospels. 
 He says to the authorities he addresses : " That we may not appear 
 to deceive you, we thought it proper to mention some of the doc- 
 trines delivered by Christ himself. . . . The discourses made by him 
 are short and concise, for he was no sophist, but his word was the 
 power of God." * After this he gives many of Christ's precepts, taken 
 mostly from Matthew and Luke, for John was not suitable to his 
 purpose, as it contains longer discourses of a philosophical nature. 
 He uses John, however, when speaking of the incarnation of the 
 Logos, of baptism, and regeneration. In his Dialogue with Trypho 
 the Jew he quotes the Old Testament chiefly, but he has also some 
 passages from the first three Gospels, especially Matthew, and one 
 from John, giving the confession of the Baptist to which we have 
 referred. The Gospel of John was not adapted to his purpose 
 in this discussion. Nevertheless, Justin has many passages, as 
 Professor Semisch shows, which are formed on the basis of John's 
 Gospel. 
 
 Justin was of Neapolis (Nablus) in Palestine ; he visited Rome, as 
 appears from a passage in his Apology, and Ephesus, where he held 
 his Dialogue with Trypho the Jew. We are unable to say when he 
 attached himself to the Church; he had formerly been a heathen 
 philosopher. It is not improbable that he united with the Church 
 as early as A. D. 130. When he was at Ephesus, about A. D. 135 or 
 140, there must have been a considerable number of Christians who 
 had been acquainted with John (John died there about forty years 
 before), some, doubtless, whose recollection went as far back as 
 A. D. 80, about the probable date of the composition of this Gospel. 
 When he visited Rome, about A. D. 140 or earlier, there must have 
 been some Christians there whose recollection went back as far as 
 1 Sec. 21. 'Sec. 88. * First Apol., sec. M.
 
 OF THE HOLY SCRIPTURES. 503 
 
 A. D. 70 or 80. Justin had the best opportunity to know whether 
 .he Gospel of John was genuine or not. 
 
 In the ancient Syrian Church, whose chief seat was Edessa, in 
 Mesopotamia, we have a most valuable testimony to Test1monj of 
 John's Gospel in the Peshito version of the New Testa- theancientver 
 ment, executed as early as the middle of the second cen- 9 
 tury in all probability, if not earlier. The superscription to tne 
 fourth Gospel in this version is: "The holy Gospel, the preaching 
 of John the evangelist, which he spoke and published in Greek in 
 Ephesus." 
 
 The most ancient Latin version of the New Testament, made about 
 the middle of the second century, and used in Northern Africa es- 
 pecially, contained the fourth Gospel, which it attributed to John, 
 and placed immediately after that of Matthew, as being an apostolic 
 work. 
 
 Tertullian, at Carthage, in the last part of the second century and 
 in the first part of the third, is also a witness to the authority of 
 John's Gospel in the North African Church. He observes that the 
 authority of the apostolic Churches will defend Matthew and John, 
 as well as Luke. It is clear from his remarks that he had no doubt 
 that the Gospel of John had been in the Church ever since the death 
 of that apostle. 
 
 We have already referred to the testimony of Clement of Alexan- 
 dria, who flourished in the last part of the second and ^ force o{ 
 in the beginning of the third century, to John's having Clement's tea- 
 written his Gospel at the request of his friends. His in- 
 formation was derived from the oldest presbyters, as Eusebius states 
 in giving the passage. He was instructed by Pantaenus, who was 
 said to have heard some who had seen the apostles. On Clement, 
 Neander remarks : " He convinced himself of the truth of Chris- 
 tianity by free inquiry, after he had acquired an extensive knowledge 
 of the systems of religion and the philosophy of divine things known 
 at his time in the cultivated world. This free spirit of inquiry, 
 which had conducted him to Christianity, led him, moreover, after 
 he had become a Christian, to seek the society of eminent Christian 
 teachers of different tendencies of mind in different countries. He 
 informs us that he had had various distinguished men as his teachers : 
 an Ionian in Greece ; one from Coele-Syria ; one in Magna Graecia 
 (Lower Italy), who came originally from Egypt ; an Assyrian in 
 Eastern Asia (doubtless Syria) ; and one of Jewish descent in Pales- 
 tine." ' All this was before he was instructed by Pantaenus. As 
 Pantsenus left Alexandria for India about A. D. 180, Clement must 
 'Church Hist., vol. i, 691. Torrey's translation.
 
 694 INTRODUCTION TO THE 
 
 have received instructions from him some time before that period 
 He was instructed in Southern Italy, Greece, Eastern Asia (Syria), 
 and Palestine, before he came to Egypt. These travels may be 
 placed about A. D. 170, or earlier. The testimony of such a man 
 respecting John's Gospel is very valuable, for he must have met with 
 some whose membership in the Church dated back to the time of 
 John's death. 
 
 In the Epistle to Diognetus, written probably in the beginning of 
 the second century, there are some passages, as we have already 
 seen, taken from John's Gospel. One, at least, in the Epistle of Ig- 
 natius to the Romans, published from the Syriac by Cureton, written 
 about 115. Likewise in the Epistle of Barnabas, belonging probably 
 to the last part of the first century, are also expressions that appear 
 to have been taken from John's Gospel. 
 
 In the Testament of the Twelve Patriarchs, a work written by a 
 other ancient Christian in the last part of the first century, or in the 
 testimonies. beginning of the second, are several references to John's 
 Gospel. In the Testament of Benjamin (chap, iii) Christ is called 
 " the Lamb of God and the Saviour of the world," from John i, 29 ; 
 iv, 42. In Levi xiv Christ is " the light of the world given to en- 
 lighten every man," a reference to John viii, 12 ; i, 9. " Then Abra- 
 ham shall rejoice," Levi xviii, in reference to John viii, 56. l "The 
 Spirit of truth bears witness to all things and accuses all," Judah xx, 
 in reference to John xv, 26; xvi, 8. " Until the Most High send us 
 salvation in the visitation of the only begotten Son," Benjamin ix, 
 in reference to the writings of John, especially the Gospel. 
 
 At the end of the works ol Clement of Alexandria there are about 
 twenty-two pages of Greek, entitled, " Extracts from the writings of 
 Theodotus and from the doctrine called Oriental belonging to the 
 times of Valentinus." Neander calls this epitome : " A document 
 of the highest authority in relation to the Gnostic systems. It is, 
 perhaps, the fragment of a critical collection, which Clement had 
 drawn up for his own use during his residence in Syria" 1 (about 
 A. D. 170). In this work there are about twenty-five passages from 
 John's Gospel ; sometimes they are quoted with the remark the 
 Saviour, the Lord, or the apostle says. The various sects of the ser- 
 pent worshippers also made great use of this Gospel in the last half 
 of the second century, and probably in the first half. 
 
 We have thus seen that the Gospel of John was universally re- 
 ceived in the Christian Church throughout the world, in the last half 
 of the second century, as the work of the Apostle John, and was 
 
 1 The same verb (aydttMOfuu) is used both in John and in this Testament. 
 1 Church Hist, vol. i, 693.
 
 OF THE HOLY SCRIPTURES. 595 
 
 very generally received by the heretics themselves as an author- 
 ity. Now, how could this reception of the Gospel as the ooneiugtonfrom 
 work of the beloved disciple of Christ have been unani- ancient testimo- 
 rnous l within fifty years of his death, if it had not been 
 really written by him ? But, further, the testimonies to this Gospel 
 go back to the beginning of the second, if not to the close of the first, 
 Century, so that it certainly made its appearance very soon after the 
 death of John, though in all probability before that event. 
 
 To the external proofs of the genuineness of the fourth Gospel 
 already given, we add the following : Apelles, a heretic of the last 
 half of the second century, a disciple of Marcion, taught that " Christ, 
 having risen after three days, showed himself to his disciples, and 
 exhibited the prints of the nails and of his side " (Philosophoumena, 
 lib. vii, sec. 38), from which it is evident that he used John's Gospel 
 as an authority. The sect of Montanists, which arose in Phrygia 
 about the middle of the second century, received the same Gospels 
 with the rest of the Christians (Philosophoumena, lib. viii, sec. 19; 
 Epiphanius, lib. ii ; Haeresis xlviii). Praxeas, who came from Phrygia 
 to Rome in the last part of the second century, received John's 
 Gospel, as is evident from the manner in which Tertullian replies to 
 him (Adversus Praxeam). Noetus of Smyrna, a Partripassian (about 
 A. D. 230), evidently received John's Gospel, as appears from the 
 answer given him by Hippolytus. Crllistus of Rome (about A. D. 
 ?oo) quotes John xiv, 10 as an authority.* Urban, bishop of Rome 
 (about A. D. 225), quotes John xx, 22, 23. The learned Hippolytus 
 (about A. D. 200-250) received John's Gospel. Novatian, presbyter 
 of Rome (A. D. 250-275), in his work on the Trinity, makes exten- 
 sive use of John's Gospel. Victorinus, bishop of Petavio (Pettau) 
 in Upper Pannonia (Hungary) in the last part of the third century, 
 quotes the fourth Gospel as John's. Firmilian, bishop of Caesarea 
 in Cappadocia, in his Epistle to Cyprian (about A. D. 255), quotes 
 John xvii, 24; xx, 23, 25. Methodius, a man of great learning, 
 bishop of Patara and Olympus in Lycia (in Asia Minor), and after 
 ward of Tyre in Phoenicia, in the last half of the third century, use& 
 John's Gospel. Lactantius, the celebrated Christian writer in Nico- 
 inedia (in Asia Minor) (about A. D. 314), quotes as John's, John i v 
 1-3 ' Gelasius, of Cyzicus, states that the Nicene Council (which 
 was held A. D. 325) expressed through Hosius, bishop of Cordova 
 in Spain, its views respecting the divinity of Christ, beginning with 
 the first verse of John's Gospel, and that a philosopher, in replying, 
 
 1 Of course we except the obscure sect of Alogians at Thyatira about A. D 
 170-200, of whom we shall speak in the future. 
 * Philosophoumena, lib. ix, sec. 12. *Divin. Instit., lib. iv, cap viii
 
 596 INTRODUCTION TO THE STUDY 
 
 also quoted John's Gospel. 1 Athanasius, who was present at the 
 Council, states that the bishops quoted for the divinity of Christ 
 John x, 30. This great theologian asks his opponents whether they 
 believe the Son when he says, " I and my Father are one " (John 
 x, 30) ; and, " He that hath seen me hath seen the Father " (John 
 xiv, 9) ? Certainly, they would say, we believe him, since thus it if 
 written. 1 - There appears to have been no doubt expressed '*n the 
 Council respecting the apostolic origin and authority of John's Gos- 
 pel. Marcellus, bishop of Ancyra in Galatia (about A. D. 330), 
 quotes John i, i, with the remark : " John, the holy apostle and dis- 
 ciple of the Lord." 1 In the council held at Sardica, A. D. 347, 
 we find that the bishops in their confession of faith quote John i, 3 ; 
 x, 30; xiv, io. 4 The Council of Ancyra, in Galatia (semi-Arian), 
 collected from seven provinces (A. D. 358), quotes, in its decrees, 
 the first part of John's Gospel as what the Apostle John delivered.' 
 Basil of Ancyra, and Georgius of Laodicea, members of this Coun- 
 cil, and their associates, in their confession of faith, in various pas- 
 sages use John's Gospel as an authority.* In the decree of the 
 Council held A. D. 359, at Seleucia in Asia Minor, it is stated : " We 
 also believe in the Holy Spirit, which our Lord and Saviour Jesus 
 Christ called the Paraclete (Comforter), having promised that after 
 his departure he would send this to the apostles." This passage 
 manifestly refers to John xiv, 26 as an authentic declaration of Christ. 
 This document is signed by forty-three bishops, and among them we 
 find bishops of Phrygia, Lycia, Lydia (including the bishop of Phila- 
 delphia), and Mytilene, places lying in the region of Ephesus. T In 
 the decrees of the Oriental Council, held (about A. D. 363) at Laod- 
 icea, about a hundred miles from Ephesus, the Gospel of John forms 
 a part of the canon of Scripture." The reception of John's Gospe' 
 by all parties in the general Council of Nicsea, in which the divinity 
 of Christ was discussed and adopted as an article of faith a doc- 
 trine that finds such strong support in this Gospel shows the deep 
 conviction of its apostolic authority in the whole Church. The 
 recognition of this Gospel as John's in all the regions about Ephe- 
 sus, where the apostle spent the last part of his life and died, gives 
 the assurance that it really proceeded from him. For how, other- 
 wise, could its genuineness have been universally acknowledged in 
 the first half of the fourth century through all these regions ? The 
 
 1 Historia Concilii Nicaeni, lib. ii, cap. xii, xvii. 
 
 Athanasius. Epistola ad Afros Episcopos, sees. 6 and 7. 
 
 In Eusebius, Hist Theol., lib. ii, cap. xi. * In Theodoret, Eccles. Hist., lib. ii 
 
 Epiphanius, Haeresis liii, cap. ii-xi. * Ibid., cap. xii-xxii. 
 
 T In Epiphanius, Haeresis liii, cap. xxv, xxvi. * Photius, Syntag. Can., tit ui.
 
 OF THE HOLY SCRIPTURES. 597 
 
 Alogians of Thyatira, who rejected this Gospel and the Apocalypse, 
 were very obscure ; the name of not a single member of the sect 
 has come down to us. In the councils of the Church no representa- 
 tive of the Alogians appears. It is difficult to say how long the sect 
 lasted. Nothing more clearly shows the ignorance or the reckless- 
 ness of the sect than their attributing this Gospel to the heretic 
 Cerinthus, whose doctrine concerning the person of Christ was so 
 entirely different from that set forth in the Gospel of John. 
 
 u 
 
 THE UNITY OF AUTHORSHIP OF THE GOSPEL AND FIRST EPISTLE 
 
 OF JOHN. 
 
 Tnat the fourth Gospel and the First Epistle of John had the 
 same author is entirely certain. In comparing the two The similarity 
 
 works, the identity of authorship strikes us like a sen- between fourth 
 
 J l . , Gospel and the 
 
 sation ; and a minute examination of their contents in- First Epistle of 
 
 delibly fixes conviction. That able but sceptical critic, John ' 
 De Wette, remarks upon this subject : " So much is certain, that 
 both writings, this Epistle [of John] and the fourth Gospel, proceed 
 from the same author; for both bear the most definite stamp of rela- 
 tionship, as well in style as in conceptions ; both impress upon the 
 reader the same charm of a kind nature." 5 He gives the following 
 instances of similarity of style in both : "noidv rrjv d^^siav, to do the 
 truth, i John i, 6; John iii, 21 : OVK eanv fj dkrjdeia Iv nvi, the truth 
 is not in any one, i John i, 8 ; ii, 4 ; John viii, 44 : e rfjg dkrjdeias 
 elvat, to be of the truth, i John ii, 21 ; John xviii, 37 : rov titafiokov 
 dvai, to be of the devil, i John iii, 8 ; John viii, 44 : etc rov deov elvat, 
 to be of God, i John iii, 10; iv, i ; John vii, 17 ; viii, 47 ; e rov KOO- 
 pav elvai, to be of the world, i John iv, 5 ; John viii, 23 ; iic rov KOO- 
 uov XaXdv, to speak of the world, i John iv, 5, is similar to John iii, 31, 
 IK -n/f 77/5- hatelv, to speak of the earth : kv avr& pevofiev, Kal avrbq ev 
 fywv, we remain in him, and he in us, \ John iv, 13, the same phraseology 
 as John vi, 56 ; xv, 4 : iv rq OKOTia, ev rw (fx^ri neotnaretv, in the dark- 
 ness, in the light to walk, i John ii, n ; i, 6, 7 ; John viii, 12 ; xii, 35 : 
 yiv&atew rdv #edv, or %piar6v, to know God, or Christ, i John ii, 3, 4, 
 13, 14; iv, 6-8; v, 20; John xvi, 3 ; xvii, 25 : ri\v i/w\7p> kavrov-ii$i- 
 vat, to lay down his life, i John iii, 16 ; John x, 1 1, 17, 18 ; xv, 13 : a/iap- 
 riav \%KW, to have sin, i John i, 8 ; John ix, 41 ; xv, 22, 24 ; xix, ir : 
 s%eiv WT)V atawov, or rr\v a>7/v, to have eternal life, or life, i John 
 iii, 15; v, 12; John iii, 15, 36; v, 24, 39, 40; vi, 40, 47, 54: /*ra- 
 Safaeiv ka TOV tiavdrov dc; rrjv farjv, to pass from death unto life, i John 
 iii, 14; John v, 24: vticdv rdv /COCT/ZOV, to overcome the world, i John 
 
 1 Einleitung, p. 396.
 
 598 INTRODUCTION TO THE STUDY 
 
 v, 4 ; John xvi, 33 : /ioprvpfov Ao^/3dvv, to receive testimony, i John 
 v, 9; John iii, n, 32; v, 34: alpeiv rr)v afiapriav, to take away sin, 
 i John iii, 5 ; John i, 29. There is a peculiarity in John's writings 
 which De Wette notices, the union of an affirmative and a negative : 
 " We lie, and do not the truth," i John i, 6 ; " He confessed, and did 
 not deny," John i, 20. Compare also i John i, 5, 8; ii, 4, 10, 27, 28, 
 with John i, 3; iii, 20; v, 24; vii, 18; xvi, 29, 30. 
 
 These are only a portion of the similar passages found in the Epis- 
 tle and Gospel, which De Wette * gives in proof of identity of author- 
 ship of the two writings. Nothing more clearly shows the value of 
 the testimony furnished by the Epistle to the genuineness of the 
 Gospel, and the desperate straits of the impugners of this Gospel, 
 than the denial of their unity by some of the ablest opponents of 
 the former, including Strauss and Hilgenfeld. 
 
 Nowhere in the ancient Church do we find a single doubt respect- 
 First Epistle i n this Epistle ; it was never attributed to any other 
 of John never than the beloved disciple who wrote the Gospel.* It was 
 toe ancient used by Polycarp * a disciple of John about A. D. 115. 
 church. Eusebius states that Papias, who lived in Asia Minor in 
 
 the first half of the second century, and is called by Irenaeus a 
 hearer of John, " made use of testimonies from the First Epistle 
 of John." 4 Nor could Eusebius be mistaken in this matter, for he 
 had before him the work of Papias ; and the peculiar style of John's 
 Epistle, even though unnamed, is easily recognized wherever quoted. 
 
 This Epistle in the Peshito-Syriac version, and in the Canon of 
 Muratori, is attributed to the Apostle John, and it formed a part of 
 the earliest Latin version. It is quoted by Irenaeus as the writing 
 of John the disciple of the Lord ; * also by Clement * of Alexandria, 
 and Tertullian 7 of Carthage, as John's. It is attributed to John by 
 Origen,* and Eusebius ; ' and Jerome remarks that it " is approved of 
 by all ecclesiastics and learned men." 1 
 
 1 Einleitung, p. 396. 
 
 1 It is well known that the Alogians rejected both the Gospel of John and the 
 Apocalypse. But Epiphanius was uncertain whether or not they rejected the Epis- 
 tles of John. " Perhaps," says he, " also the Epistles they rejected (rd^a <fc *ai rdf 
 tirioTofaif irapcupdhXeiv), for these also agree with the Gospel and with the Apoca- 
 lypse." Hseresis li, cap. xxxiv. 
 
 1 Polycarp's words are : Ildf -yap of av fa) 6po?.oyy 'Irjaovv Xpiarbv tv aapul eA^Xt- 
 Atvat avrixoiarof ean, "For every one who does not acknowledge that Jesus Chrisl 
 tas come in the fiesh is antichrist" Epist. to Philippians, 7. This is almost the 
 exact language of I John iv, 2, 3. * Hist. Eccles., lib. iii, xxxix. 
 
 * Contra Haereses, iii, cap. xvi, sec 5. * Stromata, iii, cap. vi, etc. 
 
 T Lib. de Praescrip., cap. xxxiii. *In Euseb., Mist. Eccles., vi, 2j 
 
 Hi, 25 M Lib. de Viris Illus , cap. ix
 
 OF THE HOLY SCRIPTURES. 599 
 
 That the author of this Epistle was an eyewitness of the life of 
 Christ is stated in the clearest manner in the beginning: "That 
 which was from the beginning, which we have heard, which we have 
 seen with our eyes, which we have looked upon, and our hands have 
 handled, of the word of life; for the life was manifested, and we 
 nave seen it, and bear witness, and show unto you that eternal life 
 which was with the Father, and was manifested unto us." The writer 
 characterizes himself as bearing witness to his contemporaries of 
 what he saw and heard. If this language does not imply an eyewit- 
 ness, what would? 
 
 The author of the Epistle being an eyewitness of Christ's life, and 
 the unity of authorship of the Gospel and Epistle resting upon the 
 clearest evidence, it follows that the author of the fourth Gospel was 
 an eyewitness of the life of Christ ; and all antiquity, as we have al- 
 ready seen, attributed both the Gospel and the Epistle to the Apostle 
 John, the last surviving apostle of Christ. All the ancient Greek 
 MSS. of this Gospel (about five hundred in number) attribute it to 
 John, which shows that this was the superscription of the earliest 
 manuscripts. 
 
 The adversaries of this Gospel, being hard pressed by the external 
 evidence in its favour, take refuge in the supposed silence of Papias 
 respecting it. But we do not know that Papias was silent as his work 
 is lost. It is true that Eusebius adduces no quotation We do not 
 from him on John's Gospel, but the fact that Papias made JSJJJSdM 
 use of testimonies from the First Epistle of John gives not say. 
 indirect evidence for the Gospel. We do not know that Papias was 
 discussing the Gospels in general at all. Eusebius states that he re- 
 marked that Matthew wrote originally in Hebrew, and Mark from 
 the instructions of Peter. There was no reason why he should have 
 given any particulars about John's Gospel, for that evangelist spent 
 the last part of his life not more than a hundred miles from the town 
 of which Papias was bishop, and the facts pertaining to that Gospel 
 were well known in the region of Papias. Eusebius does not tell us 
 whether Papias made any statement about Luke, nor was it neces- 
 sary that Papias should, as Luke himself, in the preface to his Gospel, 
 gives the source of his information. Eusebius does not state whether 
 Papias used the Epistles of Paul ; is that an argument against their 
 genuineness ? 
 
 Tischendorf, 1 however, is of the opinion that we have proof that 
 
 Papias did bear testimony to John's Gospel. He finds this proof in 
 
 the Prologue to the Gospel of John in a Latin manuscript of the 
 
 Vatican, which is very ancient : " The Gospel of John was published 
 
 1 Origin of the Four Gospels, p. igg.
 
 COO INTRODUCTION TO THE STUDY 
 
 and given to the Churches by John while still living in the body, as 
 Papias, of Hierapolis, a dear disciple of John, related in the last of 
 his five books." ' We confess our inability to determine what value 
 should be given to this document. 
 
 Irenaeus remarks, that the presbyters, in speaking of different condi- 
 tions of the redeemed in heaven, say that " on this account the Lord 
 said: 'In my Father's (house) are many mansions.'" Here is a 
 clear reference to John's Gospel (chap, xiv, 2), with which these 
 presbyters were acquainted, and which they acknowledged as an au- 
 thentic history of Christ. But who were these presbyters that thus 
 used John ? Irenaeus answers that by calling them " the disciples of 
 the apostles " (oi TrpeoflvTepot TO>V aTrotrroAwv na&rfrcu). In this class 
 he may have included Papias, though it is not improbable that Ire- 
 naeus may have derived his information from the work of Papias. 
 
 INTERNAL EVIDENCE THAT THE FOURTH GOSPEL PROCEEDED 
 FROM THE APOSTLE JOHN. 
 
 If the fourth Gospel is the work of the Apostle John several things 
 
 _ . . , must accord with that fact. i. The author must show 
 Points of the 
 
 internal evi- his acquaintance with the Hebrew, or with the Aramaic 
 language ; at least, he must give no proof of his ignorance 
 of it. 2. He must not betray any ignorance of the topography of the 
 regions of Christ's ministry, or of the customs of the Jews at that 
 period. 3. There should be some indications in the narrative that 
 the author was, or may have been, an eyewitness of the life of Christ. 
 
 Now these conditions are fully satisfied in this Gospel. But, fur- 
 ther, we find some particulars in the narrative of such a peculiar na- 
 ture that it is clear the author of the Gospel was an eyewitness of 
 the scenes described. 
 
 The author shows his knowledge of Hebrew by the translation 
 John shows m he has given of Zechariah xii, 10 (in part) in chapter 
 taowtedjre' of x * x ' 3? : " They shall look on him whom they pierced," 
 Hebrew. which could not have been taken from the Septuagint, 
 
 nor from the Targum of Jonathan ben Uzziel, in neither of which 
 is there any thing to correspond to the Hebrew ipi, to pierce. He ap- 
 
 1 Evangelium lohannis manifestatum et datum est ecclesiis ab lohanne adhuc in 
 corpora constituto, sicut Papias nomine Hierapolitanus, discipulus lohannis cams, 
 in exotericis id est in extremis quinque libris retulit. Patrum ApostoL Opera. Leip- 
 zig, 1875. The editors of this work think the passage spurious. 
 
 * The Greek in Irenaeus (lib. v, xxxvi, sec. 2) is, h> rolf rov Trarpfy pov jiovaf flvau 
 tro?.JLdf, in those of my Father are many mansions. The Greek in John xiv, 2 is, 
 h> ry oiKia TOV narpoc pav ftoval irohXul eiaiv, in the house of my Father are many 
 mansions. The word (tovaL (mansions), occurs nowhere in the New Testament ex- 
 cept in John's Gospel, and was rarely used in this sense outside of it
 
 OF THE HOLY SCRIPTURES. G01 
 
 pears also to have based the passage (chap, xii, 15) upon the Hebrew 
 text of Zechariah ix, 9. In other passages he follows the LXX. He 
 also shows his knowledge of Hebrew or Aramaic by giving the orig- 
 inal and its translation into Greek : Rabbi, master (chap, i, 38) ; Mcs- 
 tt'as, Christ (ver. 41) ; Cephas, a rock (ver. 42) ; Siloam, sent (chap, 
 ix, 7). He gives the Hebrew or Aramaic word for Aftfoarpwrov 
 {Pavement), Gabbatha (chap, xix, 13), and the meaning of the He- 
 brew Rabbouni, master (chap, xx, 16). Bethesda, the name he givei 
 a pool with five porches in Jerusalem (chap, v, 2), meaning House of 
 Mercy, is a regular Aramaic name. As Aramaic expressions, we may 
 name yswodai dai'drov, to taste death, (chap, viii, 52) ; the use of oitav. 
 tiaXifa in a moral sense, to give offense (chaps, vi, 61 ; xvi, i) ; otypa- 
 yi&iv, in the sense to confirm, approve (chaps, iii, 33 ; vi, 27). Evreu- 
 $v not evrevdev, hence and hence (chap, xix, 18), for on this side and on 
 that, is in imitation of the Hebrew n-TDi nio. The phrase 6 op^wv 
 TOV Koopov TOVTOV, the prince of this world, for Satan (chap, xii, 31), 
 is Rabbinical.' 
 
 The sense in which the author uses 0fc>f, light, OKoria, darkness, <*ap, 
 flesh, TTvevfia, spirit, is decidedly Jewish. The illustrations drawn 
 from a shepherd and his flock (chap, x, 1-29), and from living 
 waters (chaps, iv, 10; vii, 37, 38), are also Jewish. The author's 
 references to the Old Testament, especially to the prophecies per- 
 taining to the Messiah and his times, are what was to be expected 
 from a Christian who had been brought up in Judaism. He uses the 
 word law in several places (chaps, x, 34 ; xii, 34 ; xv, 25) for the 
 Old Testament in general, which no one but a Jew would have done. 
 
 The author is well acquainted with the customs of the Jews. He 
 speaks of the passover (chap, ii, 13, etc.) ; the feast of tabernacles 
 (chap, vii, 2); the feast of dedication in winter (chap, x, 22); and 
 the day of preparation (before the sabbath) (chap, xix, 14, 31, 42) ; 
 their purifications (chaps, ii, 6 ; iii, 25 ; xviii, 28) ; and the penalty 
 of excommunication from the synagogue (chap, ix, 34). He knows 
 in what period of time the temple was built (forty-six years) (chap, 
 ii, 20) ; and that Annas was the father-in-law of Caiaphas a (chap, 
 xviii, 13). 
 
 The author also shows an exact acquaintance with the Samaritans 
 In the account of the interview of Christ with the woman of Samaria 
 at Jacob's well, she says : " I know that Messiah cometh. When he 
 
 1 Lightfoot, in commenting on John xii. 31, adduces a considerable number of pas- 
 sages from the ancient Rabbles in illustration of this usage. 
 
 * In John xi, 51 it is stated that Caiaphas was high priest that year that is, the 
 year in which Christ was crucified. This does not imply that the high priest was 
 changed every year, but simply that Caiaphas was high priest at that time
 
 602 INTRODUCTION TO THE STUDY 
 
 is come, he will tell us all things " (chap, iv, 25). There can Ix; no 
 doubt that the Samaritans of that age expected a Messiah, for the 
 high priest of that people at Nablus, about six years ago, stated to me 
 that he expected a Messiah. 1 He based his expectation chiefly upon 
 Deuteronomy xviii, 18. This was, doubtless, a traditional doctrine, 
 and it is not to be supposed that if the ancient Samaritans had held 
 no such view the moderns would have taken it up. The Samar- 
 itan woman also said to Christ : " Our fathers worshipped in this 
 mountain, and ye say, that in Jerusalem is the place where men 
 ought to worship " (chap, iv, 20). Here the woman refers to the 
 controversy between the Jews and Samaritans respecting the proper 
 place of divine worship. The Samaritans, in rejecting all the Old 
 Testament except the Pentateuch, deprived the Jews of every proof 
 that Jerusalem was the place where worship should be offered. They 
 also changed " Ebal " to " Gerizim " in their Pentateuch, so as to 
 make the latter the place in which Moses commanded that an altar 
 should be built and offerings made (Deut. xxvii, 48). On Gerizim 
 to which the Samaritan woman refers, " in this mountain," close to 
 Jacob's well the Samaritans had a temple built in the time of Alex- 
 ander the Great, which was destroyed by John Hyrcanus * (B. C. 129). 
 The high priest of the Samaritans told me that he regarded Gerizim 
 (Nablus) as the place where worship should be rendered, and that 
 he considered the modern Jews as a species of heretics, acting in 
 many things contrary to the law. How accurate, then, is the ac- 
 count of this people and their relations to the Jews, given by the au- 
 thor of the fourth Gospel ! 
 
 In the controversy between the Jews and Samaritans Christ de- 
 cides in favour of the Jews, and declares : " Ye (Samaritans) wor- 
 ship ye know not what : we (the Jews) know what we worship ; for 
 salvation is of the Jews " (chap, iv, 22). It is very clear that Christ 
 recognizes the authority of the Jewish dispensation in using "we," 
 and that he has no reference to a small portion of the Jews who 
 were spiritual. In short, there is not the slightest trace of Gnosti- 
 cism in the passage.* When Christ says, " Salvation is of the Jews," 
 the context requires the meaning tc be : " Salvation pertains to and 
 proceeds from the Jews." 
 
 The author of the fourth Gospel shows an accurate knowledge of tht 
 country in which Christ exetcised his ministry. The statement in 
 chap, iv respecting Jacob's well, close to Mount Gerizim, and close by 
 
 1 See my interview with the high priest of the Samaritans at Nablfls, in my Jour 
 ney to Egypt and the Holy Land, pp. 183-186. 
 1 Josephus, Antiq., b. xiii, chap, ix, sec. i. 
 1 Hilgenfeld's exposition of the passage is very arbitrary. 

 
 OF THE HOLY SCRIPTURES. 603 
 
 Sychar, 1 or Shechem, near a parcel of ground that Jacob gave to his 
 sou Joseph, and on the way from Judea into Galilee, is Top0 g- a pij lcal 
 very accurate. The answer of the Samaritan woman, accuracy of tha 
 "the well is deep," is also accurate, for it is not less than 
 seventy-five feet ' in depth. East of the well, close to it, and lying 
 but little lower than it, is a valley running north and south, which 
 was set in wheat when the writer was there, and from time immemorial 
 has been, doubtless, sowed with this grain. This very field may have 
 suggested the beautiful language of Christ : " Say not ye, There are 
 yet four months, and then cometh harvest ? behold, I say unto you, 
 Lift up your eyes, and look on the fields ; for they are white already 
 to harvest " (chap, iv, 35). 
 
 In chap, ix, 7 our Saviour says to the blind man, " Go, wash in the 
 pool of Siloam." Of this pool Josephus speaks : " The valley called 
 that of the Cheesemakers, which, we said, separates the ridge of the 
 upper city from the lower ridge, extends down to Siloam, 3 for thus 
 we called the fountain, which was large and sweet." 4 We found this 
 fountain just where Josephus locates it, at the end of the valley di- 
 viding Jerusalem. 
 
 In chap, xi, 18 it is said : " Now Bethany was nigh unto Jerusalem 
 about fifteen furlongs off." When in Palestine we made an estimate 
 of the distance of this village from Jerusalem, and found it about 
 one mile and three fourths to St. Stephen's gate in the east wall.* 
 In chapter xviii, i it is stated that " Jesus with his disciples went 
 out beyond the brook Cedron * (Kidron), where was a garden." 
 In speaking of the Mount of Olives, Josephus remarks : " It lies 
 east of Jerusalem, from which it is separated by a deep ravine, which 
 
 'This form of the name, instead of Sv^ep, Sychem (in Acts and often in LXX), 
 'S.iKipa, Sikima, as it was sometimes called, may have been a provincialism with the 
 Jews of Galilee, or it may have been derived from "l|2.>9, sheker, falsehood, given 
 the place in contempt. Beelzebub was changed into Beelzebul, for example. It is, 
 however, possible that the village Askar, not far from the well, on the shoulder of 
 Ebal, may be intended. 'As we found by trial. 
 
 * John and Josephus in this passage use exactly the same word Sdadfi. 
 4 Bel. Jud., lib. v, cap. iv, I. 
 
 * Fifteen Greek furlongs make three thousand and thirty yards. 
 
 The reading in chap, xviii, i is not uniform in the MSS. Tischendorf adopts 
 rot) Kedpov, from the Codex Sinaiticus, and Tregelles TUV Kldpuv, from Codex Vat- 
 icanus. We would prefer the Alexandrian Codex, which gives rov Kedpuv. The 
 Tariations in the MSS. arose from the copyists' ignorance of the Hebrew name of the 
 brook, Y!"np, qidron (turbid), which they mistook for the plural of the Greek 
 xtipog, a cedar, and, consequently, they sometimes inserted a plural article before it, 
 as it is also written in I Kings xv, 13. Josephus writes it in the singular, Kedpuv, 
 Kedpuvof. There is no proof that the author of the fourth Gospel supposed th 
 brook was named after cedar trees. 
 39
 
 604 INTRODUCTION TO THE STUtrv 
 
 is called Cedron ' (KetJpwv)." In one place he calls it a brook 
 (xeifiappof), just as in John. Cedron occurs nowhere else in the 
 New Testament. Just east of the dry bed of the Kidron, at the foot 
 of the Mount of Olives, the garden (Gethsemane) into which our 
 Saviour went is still pointed out. 
 
 In chap, iii, 23 we have the statement : " And John also was bap- 
 tizing in Enon near to Salim, because there was much water (viara 
 troAAd, many waters or fountains) there." Enon is a Chaldee word, 
 pry, meaning fountains. To this Enon (or, rather, ^Enon) Jerome 
 
 refers : " ^Enon, near Salim, where John baptized, as it is written 
 in the Gospel according to John (chap, iii, 23) ; and, until the pres- 
 ent time, the place is shown, eight miles to the south of Scythopolis, 
 near Salim and the Jordan." * 
 
 In chapter vi, 19, in speaking of the disciples crossing the north 
 end of the Sea of Galilee, from the eastern shore to Bethsaida on the 
 western, it is stated: "When they had rowed about twenty- five or 
 thirty furlongs " that is, about three miles, or three and a half " they 
 see Jesus walking on the sea." When he enters the ship, "immedi- 
 ately the ship was at the land whither they went " (verse 21). The 
 Sea of Galilee is not more than six or seven miles in width in its 
 widest part, and the whole distance that the disciples rowed in 
 crossing could not have been more than four miles. It is clear from 
 this that the author of the fourth Gospel was well acquainted with 
 this sea. 
 
 It is a remarkable fact that nowhere in this Gospel does Tiberias, 
 John's notice on tne Sea of Galilee, occupy any prominence, being 
 of Tiberias. mentioned only once (chap, vi, 23) as the place from 
 which boats had come. The natural explanation is, that during the 
 ministry of Christ it was a place of no importance, as it was founded 
 by Herod Antipas, who was banished A. D. 39. Tiberias was, how- 
 ever, a place of great importance during the Jewish war, and for sev- 
 eral centuries subsequently. How natural it would have been for a 
 forger in the second century to make Tiberias prominent in Christ's 
 history ! In several places in this Gospel mention is made of Cana 
 of Galilee (chaps, ii, i, n ; iv, 46 ; xxi, 2). This is to be identified 
 with the modern village, Kefr Kenna, containing about six hundred 
 inhabitants, situated about five miles north-east of Nazareth, on the 
 road to Tiberias, and to other points on the coast of the Sea of Gal- 
 ilee. We passed by this place in 1870 on the way from Tiberias to 
 
 ' Bellum Jud., lib. v, cap. ii, sec. 3. 
 
 1 Onomasticon. This work was originally written by Eusebius (who was bishop 
 of Cesarea in Palestine,) and was translated into Latin, with additions, by Jerome, who 
 spent a large portion of his life in Bethlehem, in Palestine, where he died.
 
 OF THE HOLY SCRIPTURES. 60$ 
 
 Nazareth, and found in it the remains of a church. Willibald 1 
 (A. D. 722) visited it on his way from Nazareth to Mount Tabor, 
 md states : " A large church stands there, and near the altai is still 
 preserved one of the six vessels which our Lord commanded to fill 
 with water to be turned into wine." The village is mentioned by 
 Ssewulf" (A. D. 1102) as the Cana of Galilee, six miles north-east of 
 Nazareth, where Christ turned water into wine. When our Saviour 
 was on the way from Jerusalem to Capernaum, he was found at Cana 
 (chap, iv, 46) where he was visited by the nobleman whose son 
 was sick which lies on the way from Nazareth to Capernaum. The 
 Cana suggested by Robinson, eleven miles north of Nazareth, is 
 wholly unsuitable to some statements in this Gospel, as well as to 
 some passages in Josephus.* " The Greek Christians of Palestine," 
 says Dr. Zeller, " never doubted the identity of Kefr Kenna with the 
 Cana of the Gospel. " 4 
 
 In chap, xi, 54 it is said that Jesus departed from the vicinity of 
 Jerusalem, and " went unto a country near to the desert, Christ's visit to 
 into a city called Ephraim." This Ephraim is stated by Ep&raim. 
 Jerome 5 to be five miles east of Bethel, with which place it is con- 
 nected by Josephus," who remarks that Vespasian captured " Bethel 
 and Ephraim, small towns." It was about ten miles from Jerusalem, 
 and near the desert. Respecting this small place, then, our evan- 
 gelist is exact. 
 
 In chap, i, 28 the best MSS., supported by the Peshito-Syriac, 
 read: "These things were done in Bethany beyond Jordan, where 
 John was baptizing." The English version here has Bethabara, but 
 Bethany has been received into the text by both Tischendorf and 
 Tregelles. Nothing is known of this place beyond the Jordan. No 
 one in his right mind can suppose that the evangelist has transferred 
 the Bethany, which he himself tells us is about fifteen furlongs from 
 Jerusalem (chap, xi, 18), to the country beyond the Jordan ! 
 
 The author of the fourth Gospel, in every instance in which he can / 
 be tested, shows a most accurate knowledge of the regions where" 
 Christ exercised his ministry; such knowledge as could have been 
 possessed alone by one living in that country, unless we are to sup- 
 pose that the author, if a forger, went to Palestine purposely to study 
 the country and to mark the distances of places, with a view to de- 
 ceive ! But all his geographical statements are too natural to have 
 been the result of design ! 
 
 1 Early Travels in Palestine, Bonn's edition, p. 16. f Ibid., p. 47. 
 
 * See the discussion of this subject in my Journey to Egypt and the Holy Lftnd, 
 pp. 205-207. * In Explorations of Palestinian Society. 
 
 * Onomasticon. Bellum Jud., lib. iv, cap. ix sec. 9.
 
 606 INTRODUCTION TO THE STUDY 
 
 THE EVANGELIST GIVES MANY PARTICULARS THAT COULD HAVE 
 COME ONLY FROM ONE WHO WAS PRESENT AT THE SCENES 
 DESCRIBED. 
 
 He names definitely, " the next day " (chap, i, 35) ; " about the 
 Passages sag- tentn hour " (ver. 39) ; six water pots and the contents of 
 gestinganeye- each (chap, ii, 6) ; the definite number of years during 
 which the Jews said the temple was building (ver. 20) , 
 the hour of the day (about the sixth) when Jesus sat upon the well 
 (chapter iv, 6) ; the time Jesus staid among the Samaritans (two 
 days) (ver. 49) ; the hour at which the fever left the nobleman's son 
 (ver. 52) ; that the pool of Bethesda had five porches ' (chap, v, 2) ; 
 that the impotent man had been afflicted thirty-eight years. The 
 account of the man who was born blind, and to whom sight was 
 given by Christ, and the questions of the Pharisees and the answers 
 (chap, ix), could have been written only by an eyewitness. The 
 evangelist gives many particulars respecting the resurrection of 
 Lazarus which indicate an eyewitness. He gives the name of the 
 high priest's servant* whose right ear Peter cut off (chap, xviii, 10). 
 He states the weight of the myrrh and aloes brought by Nicodemus 
 for the burial of Christ (chap, xix, 39). He gives particulars respect- 
 ing the grave-clothes after Christ's resurrection (chap, xx, 5-7) ; the 
 distance that the disciples dragged the net (chap, xxi, 8) ; and the 
 number of fishes that were in it (ver. n). 
 
 We find also other evidence that the author of this Gospel was an 
 other evidence e y ewitness of the life of Christ. In chap, i, 14 he says : 
 that John was " And we beheld his glory, the glory as of the only begot- 
 ' ten of the Father." In chap, xix, 35, after the statement 
 that one of the soldiers pierced the side of Christ, out of which there 
 immediately came blood and water, the evangelist adds : " And he 
 who has seen it, has borne testimony to it, and his testimony is true, 
 and that one knows that he speaks the truth that ye may believe." 
 This language points out the writer himself as the eyewitness of what 
 he describes. The use of the perfect tense has seen (Swpa/icwf) and 
 has borne testimony (/ic^aprvp^dce) shows that the witness was still 
 living when the Gospel was written ; and the declaration that the 
 one who has seen it, and borne testimony to it, knows that he speaks 
 the truth, is fully conscious of it, implies the writer himself. Nor is 
 this inference weakened by the fact that the witness is called *- 
 
 1 They were, of course, destroyed with Jerusalem, A. D. 70. 
 
 1 He says (chap, xviii, 15), in speaking of Peter and himself, " That disciple (him- 
 self) was known unto the high priest." How natural, then, that he should know tha 
 name of the servant from his having visited the house, in all probability.
 
 OF THE HOLY SCRIPTURES. 607 
 
 *of, that one. That 1/ceZvof, that one, can be used by a speaker 
 or writer as referring to himself, is clear from another passage in this 
 Gospel. When our Saviour asked the man to whom he had given 
 sight if he believed on him, and he answered, " Who is he, Lord, 
 that I may believe on him ? " Christ said to him : " Thou hast both 
 seen him, and he who is talking with thee is that one" (sKEtvog) (chap. 
 ix, 37). Here Christ, who is speaking, calls himself that one (EKSIVOS) 
 of course, John could do the same. 9 
 
 In several places in this Gospel mention is made of the disciple 
 whom Jesus loved (chaps, xiii, 23 ; xix, 26 ; xx, 2 ; xxi, The author of 
 
 7, 20), and it is stated that "this is the disciple that tes- ~ 
 
 cb 
 
 tifieth of these things, and wrote these things: and we xxi, 24. 
 
 know that his testimony is true " (chap, xxi, 24). The whole of this 
 twanty- fourth verse, at least the last part of it, "and we know that 
 his testimony is true," was in all probability written by elders of the 
 Church at Ephesus as an attestation to this Gospel, before it was 
 sent abroad into the Churches; and, at the same time, the name of 
 John was, doubtless, prefixed to it. It would have been unsuitable 
 for the evangel :st to say of himself: " We know that his testimony 
 is true." Certain it is, indeed, that this verse, at all events, testifies 
 to the fact that this Gospel was written by the beloved disciple. And 
 this testimony refers to the entire preceding Gospel, and forbids the 
 idea that the twenty-first chapter is an addition to the original ac- 
 count. Nor has there ever been a copy of John's Gospel found 
 without this chapter. 
 
 But there remains the question, Was this beloved disciple John ? 
 This must be answered in the affirmative, as no other Wag John th 
 disciple satisfies all the requirements of the case. Three beloved disci- 
 of our Saviour's disciples Peter, James, and John were p 
 the most intimate companions of their Master. These he took 
 with him to be the witnesses of his transfiguration (Matt, xvii, i ; 
 Mark ix, 2 ; Luke ix, 28) ; and to be his companions while in his 
 agony in the garden of Gethsemane (Matt, xxvi, 37). On another 
 occasion, " he suffered no man to follow him save Peter, James, 
 and John" (Mark v, 37). It was these three disciples who asked 
 
 1 The Greek is, Kanelvof oldev bn a>.r)&r) /Ifyet, and that one knows that he says t\t 
 truth. 
 
 'In the clouds of Aristophanes, when Strepsiades, having gone upon the roof of 
 the school of Socrates, is setting fire to it, one of the scholars inquires: "Who is 
 setting fire to our house ? " To which Strepsiades answers : " That one (tmvof) whose 
 cloak you stole." But it was the cloak of Strepsiades himself that had been stolen ; 
 so that he calls himself ciceivof, just as John does. It is to no purpose that Hilgen- 
 feld objects that this is comedy ; for it is Greek, and very good Greek, too, expressed 
 In the clearest manner.
 
 008 INTRODUCTION TO THE STUDY 
 
 Christ privately concerning the destruction of the temple (Mark 
 xiii, 3). 
 
 The beloved disciple who wrote the fourth Gospel could not be 
 James, for he was killed by Herod about twelve years after the cru- 
 cifixion of Christ (Acts xii, 12). Nor could it have been Peter, for 
 the beloved disciple is distinguished from him (John xiii, 23, 24) ; so 
 tb->* John alone is the remaining intimate companion who could have 
 written the fourth Gospel. 1 The ancient Christian Church never 
 doubted that the beloved disciple was John, who leaned upon the 
 breast of Christ. Polycrates, bishop of Ephesus in the last part of 
 the second century, and Irenaeus and Origen speak of it as a well- 
 known fact. 
 
 It has, however, been objected, that it seems improper for John to 
 designate himself as the disciple whom Jesus loved, as this is a re- 
 flection on his associates. But even supposing that it was not in good 
 taste for him to do so, does that prove that he never did it ? How 
 many things have been done in what is called " bad taste " by the 
 greatest and holiest of men ! Paul tells us that he withstood Peter 
 "to the face, because he was to be blamed" (Gal. ii, n). Why 
 might not John do something for which he could be blamed ? How 
 far a writer may speak of the intimate relations existing between 
 himself and eminent men, or even speak in commendation of him- 
 self, is a matter of taste. St. Paul declares that he " laboured more 
 abundantly than they (apostles) all " (i Cor. xv, 10) ; and " I suppose," 
 says he, " that I was not a whit behind the very chiefest apostles " 
 (2 Cor. xi, 5). 
 
 But it is by no means clear that there is any impropriety in John 
 speaking of himself as the disciple whom Jesus loved. The Gospel 
 and the First Epistle of John reveal to us a deep moral and re- 
 ligious nature, and a most affectionate disposition. Is it not, then, in 
 the highest degree probable that Christ especially loved him ? It is 
 clear from the other Gospels, as we have already seen, that he was 
 one of the favourites of Christ. He does not say in his Gospel that 
 Jesus loved him more than the other disciples, though this might be 
 inferred. He makes his statements on this point with a great deal 
 of delicacy. But, further, when John wrote his Gospel, all the other 
 disciples, except Andrew, 1 it seems, were dead. What impropriety 
 
 1 The hypothesis has been proposed by Lutzelberger that Andrew was the be- 
 loved disciple. But it is evident from the Gospels that Andrew was not one of the 
 intimate disciples of Christ, and John i, 40 seems to distinguish him from the au- 
 thor of the Gospel, for one of the two disciples named is Andrew, and the other ap- 
 pears to be John. 
 
 According to the Canon of Muratori, Andrew was still alive when John wrote 
 his Gospel.
 
 OF THE HOLY SCRIPTURES. 609 
 
 was there in his speaking, then, of the love his Saviour had for him ? 
 To illustrate this from mere human relations : suppose any one in 
 writing his autobiography, when his mother was dead, and all his 
 brothers and sisters, too, in calling to mind the deep affection of his 
 mother for him, should state, "I was a favourite child of my mother," 
 could he be justly censured by any one ? Further, John nowhere 
 makes himself prominent in his Gospel. He nowhere gives his 
 name ; but Peter here, as well as in the other Gospels, is the prom- 
 inent disciple, and exhibits the same traits of character as we find in 
 them ; and this is a proof of the true historical character of John's 
 narrative. 
 
 It is a remarkable fact, and can be explained only on the supposi- 
 tion that the Apostle John is the author of this Gospel, that John 
 the Baptist is everywhere called simply John. In this Gospel his 
 name occurs nineteen times. In Matthew he is seven times called 
 John the Baptist, in Mark four times, and in Luke four times. But 
 it was quite natural in John the evangelist to make no distinction 
 between Johns, as he knew but one of that name, the Baptist. 
 
 The chief objection brought against the fourth Gospel is, that the 
 picture it gives of the person of Christ, the method of cwef objection 
 
 his teaching, his long discourses and their contents, are to John's GOS. 
 
 pel as a de- 
 different from what we find in the other three Gospels, iineation of 
 
 There is in this objection just truth enough to present an Chriat - 
 apparent difficulty, which, however, disappears upon careful reflection. 
 In the first place it is to be observed, that there is no reason to 
 suppose that the first three Gospels give an exhaustive view of the 
 person and teachings of Christ, since but one ' of the authors of them 
 was an eyewitness of the acts of Christ, and heard his discourses. 
 \Ve, indeed, find several events in the Gospel of John which must 
 have occurred, but are not recorded in the other Gospels, especially 
 our Saviour's visits to Jerusalem* at the great festivals. In that| 
 city he must have performed miracles, taught, and been drawn intoj 
 controversies with the Jews, just as is recorded in John's Gospel., 
 The statement of the ancient Church is, no doubt, correct, that John/ 
 wrote last of the evangelists, and to supply the omissions of the others. 
 It is certain that he was acquainted with the other Gospels, and that 
 his Gospel supplements them. 
 
 As the first three Gospels set forth the teachings of Christ chiefly 
 in parables, and his numerous miracles all of which are easily trans- 
 Mark also may have been present at some of the scenes he describes. 
 1 Christ's teaching in Jerusalem is implied in Matt, xxiii, 37 : ' O Jerusalem, Jeru- 
 salem, . . . how often would I have gathered thy children together," etc. It seems also, 
 from Luke xi. 51 xiii- 22, and xvii, n, that Christ sometimes went up to Jerusalem-
 
 010 INTRODUCTION TO THE STUDY 
 
 mitted to others, and well adapted to the purposes of instruction, 
 but do not enter deeply into Christ's relation to his Father, or to his 
 followers the Gospel of John, in supplying the omissions of the 
 other three, and in rarely touching the same points, naturally appears 
 different from them. This Gospel, it is true, relates, in common 
 with them, the baptism of Christ, and the incidents connected with 
 his crucifixion and resurrection, which are events that could not be 
 omitted in any history of our Lord. 
 
 The relation that John bears to Christ resembles that of Plato to 
 Socrates ; he is emphatically the philosophical evangelist. The 
 representations given of Socrates by Xenophon and Plato seem to 
 be different, and Bleek well observes : " Some have held the two 
 to be irreconcilable, and that for the most part Xenophon "s represen- 
 tation of Socrates is alone true, and they have deemed the Socrates 
 of Plato to be purely a creature of his imagination. The one-sided- 
 ness of this view has been acknowledged in more recent times ; for 
 if Socrates had appeared as a teacher merely in the way in which 
 he appears in Xenophon, if the speculative element was not really 
 in him as Plato represents it to be, it would be difficult to compre- 
 hend how from him several highly speculative philosophical schools 
 could have proceeded. Rather, each of the two representations 
 gives us Socrates only on definite sides, the union of which affords 
 us a more complete picture of him. But if a human philosopher 
 like Socrates, in his appearance, has exhibited so many traits that 
 two of his intimate disciples could give representations of their mas- 
 ter so different, and which, apparently, have so little in common, yet 
 are true, this is still more conceivable of Christ, of him who must 
 necessarily present in his person and life a still richer fulness, since 
 he was to be the Redeemer of men of the most varied individualities. 
 It is, therefore, to be taken for granted that we shall naturally find 
 that, even of his more intimate disciples, one has more fully compre- 
 hended and appropriated one side of his character and the method 
 of his operation, while another has the other side." ' 
 
 fWe may observe that, as the light of the sun, reflected from differ- 
 ;nt bodies, gives us different kinds of light, all of which exist in the 
 sun, so we have from the different evangelists different reflections of 
 the person of Christ, which, combined, give us a complete image of 
 him. 
 
 But there are not wanting in the other Gospels evidences of 
 similarities be- the same person and character that we find in the Christ 
 
 SHbe othS of J hn ' How like J hn is the followin g passage : " All 
 evangelists. things are delivered unto me of my Father : and no man 
 
 'Einleitung, by Mangold, pp. 224, 225.
 
 OF THE HOLY SCRIPTURES. 611 
 
 knoweth the Son, but the Father ; neither knoweth any man the Fa- 
 ther, save the Son, and he to whomsoever the Son will reveal him " 
 (Matthew xi, 27) ; similar to this is Luke x, 22. Of like import is the 
 language of Christ to Peter, when the latter acknowledged him as 
 the Christ, the Son of the living God: "Blessed art thou, Simon 
 Bar-jona : for flesh and blood hath not revealed it unto thee, but my , 
 Father who is in heaven " (Matt, xvi, 17). The language of Christ 
 in Matt, xxviii, 18, "All power is given unto me in heaven and in 
 earth," is quite similar to that in John iii, 35, "The Father loveth 
 the Son, and hath given all things into his hand." Our Lord's argu-/ 
 ment in refuting the Sadducees, that because God calls himself the 
 God of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob, and not being the God of the dead 
 but of the living (Matt, xxii, 32 ; Mark xii, 26 ; Luke xx, 37, 38), there- 
 fore they live unto Him, is of a highly metaphysical character, equal 
 to almost any thing of the kind we find in John. The question our 
 Saviour put to his hearers, " If David call him (Christ) Lord, how is 
 he his son?" (Matt, xxii, 45), is also of a metaphysical character. 
 
 The Gospel of John, it is true, sets forth the divinity of Christ 
 clearly and strongly, yet it does not contradict what is taught in the 
 other Gospels, as* may be inferred from passages already quoted. 
 The power of forgiving sins that Christ claimed and exercised (Matt, 
 ix, 2-6; Mark ii, 5-10; Luke v, 20-24) implies his divinity. The 
 Tubingen school of critics, the chief opponents of John's Gospel, 
 acknowledge the Apocalypse to be the writing of John, and in this 
 the divinity of Christ is strongly asserted. 1 The Apostle Paul asserts 
 the same doctrine in the undisputed Epistle to the Romans, 9 to say 
 nothing of his other Epistles. But as Paul was at various times in 
 the company of the apostles, and knew many who were acquainted 
 vith Christ, it is not to be supposed that in fundamental principles 
 here was a difference between him and the others. He must have 
 known what Christ said of himself. 
 
 The main question, however, in respect to the discourses of Christ 
 as recorded by John is, Are they related as they were Does John re- 
 delivered by Christ, or did John cast them into his own Slrirt? 1 ^ 
 mould ? and is it not possible that after the lapse of many courses, 
 years he may have attributed to Christ, in some instances, what was 
 the result of his own experience and reflection ? It must be ac- 
 knowledged that there is a greater liability in men to forget dis- 
 courses than to forget remarkable works. What the eyes behold is 
 
 * For example, " I am Alpha and Omega, the beginning and the ending, saith the 
 Lord, which is, and which was, and which is to come, the Almighty " (chap, i, 8 
 see also chaps, v, 8-14 ; xvii, 14 ; xxii, 13). 
 
 ' "Christ, who is God over all blessed for ever" (chap, ix, 5).
 
 C12 INTRODUCTION TO THE STUDY 
 
 more deeply fixed than what the ears hear. The miracles of Christ 
 must have been indelibly impressed upon John's mind for all time. 
 But as the discourses of Christ grew out of certain miracles or im- 
 portant events, it is not at all likely that his words, in substance at 
 least, faded from the beloved disciple's mind; and it is not neces- 
 sary to suppose that John has always given the Saviour's exact lan- 
 guage as spoken in Aramaic. That John should intentionally make 
 Christ utter merely his ideas is inconceivable. Our Saviour prom- 
 ised to send the Holy Spirit to bring to the remembrance of the 
 apostles all that he had said unto them (John xiv, 26). 
 
 We have already remarked on the striking similarity of language 
 and conception between the First Epistle of John and his Gospel, 
 which is to be explained, not by supposing that he attributes his ideas 
 to Christ, but that the doctrines of the Saviour, in the form in which 
 they are presented in the Gospel, produced upon John the deepest 
 impression, moulding his thoughts, and, to a certain extent, their form. 
 The Epistle is the reflex of what he learned from Christ. The phil- 
 osophical and deeply spiritual truths of Christ's teaching found in 
 the nature of this apostle a sympathetic response. We have every 
 reason to believe that the discourses of Christ, as well as his acts, have 
 been related with great fidelity by this evangelist. It is not improb- 
 able that, at a very early period, he made notes of our Saviour's dis- 
 courses, and perhaps, also, of our Saviour's acts. 
 
 A proof of the historical character of the remarks of Christ is found 
 in the obscure references which he makes to his crucifixion and res- 
 urrection : " Destroy this temple, and in three days I will raise it up " 
 (chap, ii, 19). The Jews supposed the reference was to their tem- 
 ple; but the evangelist remarks, "He spake of the temple of his 
 body." " And I, if I be lifted up from the earth, will draw all men 
 unto me" (chap, xii, 32). "This," remarks the evangelist, "he 
 said, signifying what death he should die." Of an obscure nature, 
 also, without the subsequent history, is the remark: "And as Moses 
 lifted up the serpent in the wilderness, even so must the Son of man 
 be lifted up " (chap, iii, 14). Christ obscurely refers to his crucifix- 
 ion and resurrection when he says : " I lay down my life, that I might 
 take it again " (chap, x, 17). He also hints at his resurrection and 
 ascension in these words : " What and if ye shall see the Son of man 
 ascend up where he was before ? " (chap, vi, 62). If the passages re- 
 ferring to Christ's crucifixion and resurrection had been invented, 
 or if his genuine expressions on this subject had passed through one 
 or two hands, they would have assumed a more definite form. In the 
 other Gospels Christ is represented as foretelling his death and resur 
 rection with more precision (Matt, xvi, 21 ; Mark viii, 31; Luke ix, 22^
 
 OF THE HOLY SCRIPTURES. 618 
 
 A proof of the genuineness of the discourses of Christ may be 
 drawn from the fact that the impression made by them is Marks of gen- 
 given, and the misunderstanding of them in several in- ulnenessintha 
 . / . ., .... N reports of tha 
 
 stances is stated (chaps, vn, 33-36; via, 21, 22, etc.). discourses of 
 
 This, however, will appear more clearly from the consid- Christ by John, 
 eration of the discourses themselves, which will be found to contain^?" JL 
 nothing unsuitable for Christ to have taught, and, at the same time,^" ~'~ 
 to bear internal marks of genuineness. Chapter iii contains a '.on- 
 versation of our Saviour with Nicodemus, a ruler of the Jews, in 
 which he sets forth the spiritual nature of his kingdom, and teaches 
 the doctrine of the new birth. That a Jewish ruler should come 
 secretly to Christ by night, for fear of the Jews, to learn his doc- 
 trines, is not at all incredible. Nicodemus declares his conviction 
 that Christ is a teacher sent from God, and he was doubtless anxious 
 to know what was the nature of the kingdom that Christ was about 
 to set up. In opposition to Jewish expectation, Christ assures him 
 that his kingdom is spiritual, to enter which it is necessary to be 
 born again. The short, pithy form in which Christ teaches regener- 
 ation accords with his general method of teaching in the other Gos- 
 pels. Regeneration is taught by the apostles in the Acts and in the 
 Epistles, and the doctrine must have been derived from Christ him- 
 self. In Matt, xviii, 3 Christ says: " Except ye be converted, and 
 become as little children, ye shall not enter into the kingdom of 
 heaven." 1 
 
 The conversation of Christ with the woman of Samaria at Jacob's 
 well has in it all the marks of genuineness, and contains the pro- 
 foundest passage in the New Testament (chap, iv, 24). The con- 
 troversy with the Jews in chap, v grew out of our Saviour's healing 
 the impotent man on the Sabbath day, to which they took exception ; 
 and the whole discussion is perfectly in keeping with the character 
 of Christ, and that of his Jewish adversaries. The profoundly spir- 
 itual, and, at the same time, metaphorical, discourse of Christ in chap- 
 ter vi, grew out of his feeding about five thousand men with a few 
 loaves and fishes, also recorded in the other Gospels. The multi- 
 tude having been fed, it was natural that some of them would follow 
 Christ for the loaves and fishes. These he rebukes, and exhoits to 
 labor for the meat that perisheth not. This has the genuine stamp 
 of Christ's teaching, as appears from the other Gospels. This is fol- 
 lowed by the statement that Christ is the bread of life, etc. How 
 natural and connected the discourse is, and how natural was the ef- 
 
 1 Strauss, to get rid of the testimony of Justin Martyr to John's Gospel, supposes 
 that this father, when he gives John iii, 3, had in mind Matt, xviii, 3. In that case 
 he must have considered Matthew and John to be identical on this point.
 
 G14 INTRODUCTION TO THE STUDY 
 
 feet of his spiritual teaching, which sifted them. " From that time 
 many of his disciples went back, and walked no more with him " 
 (chap, vi, 66). In Christ's discussion with the Jews in chapter viii 
 it is clear that his words are really given, for in several instances the 
 Jews put upon them a construction different from their true meaning 
 (vers. 22, 33, 57, etc.). The healing of the blind man in chapter ix, 
 and the discussion thereon, has all the marks of reality, and must 
 have been recorded by an eyewitness. 
 
 In chap, x Christ puts forth the parable of a shepherd, which the 
 evangelist states " they " did not understand, whereupon Christ de- 
 clares himself to be the door and shepherd of the sheep. This 
 method of teaching by parable is very similar to what is found in 
 the other Gospels, especially the parable of the sower (Matt, xiii, 
 3-23; Mark iv, 3-20; Luke viii, 5-15), in which, doubtless, the 
 sower represents Christ himself. In chapters xiii, 3i-xvii the evan- 
 gelist gives us our Saviour's last discourse with his disciples at sup- 
 per on the night of his betrayal. This address, or rather conversa- 
 tion, did not require more than a half hour for its delivery, at any 
 rate. That such a discourse should be delivered to the disciples was 
 exceedingly appropriate, and quite necessary. This, it is true, pre- 
 supposes that the Saviour knew that it was his last meal with them 
 a supposition we are authorized to make from the general statements 
 of the Gospels. 
 
 In the very midst of this discourse our Saviour says, " Arise, let us 
 go hence " (chap, xiv, 31) ; but yet there is no indication that Christ 
 left the room. It appears that he made an attempt to start, but, 
 without really leaving, he continued the discourse. But how unnat- 
 ural it would have been for any one in making up a speech to insert 
 these apparently useless words in the midst of it ! 
 
 In two instances the evangelist does not distinguish clearly between 
 the language of the Baptist and his own. In chapter i, 15, in the 
 midst of a description of the glories of Christ, he declares : " John 
 bare witness of him, and cried, saying, This was he of whom I spake, 
 He that cometh after me is preferred before me ; for he was before 
 me." Heie end the words of the Baptist, which are thrown in par- 
 enthetically, and the evangelist resumes the interrupted thread: 
 "And of his fulness have we all received, and grace for (upon) 
 grace," etc. Any one examining this and the two following verses 
 will see clearly that the evangelist could never have intended them 
 to be understood as the words of the Baptist. In chapter iii, 27-30, 
 ending it would seem with the words, " He (Christ) must increase 
 but I must decrease," the evangelist gives another testimony of the 
 Baptist to Christ; but the following verses (31-36), not separated
 
 OF THE HOLY SCRIPTURES. 615 
 
 from the preceding ones, do not suit the Baptist, but appear to be 
 a commentary of the evangelist upon his testimony. In the written 
 language of the moderns the use of quotation marks enables us to 
 distinguish accurately between what the writer says in his own per- 
 son, and what he introduces as a quotation from another. But as 
 these marks were not in use when the evangelist wrote, the language 
 quoted can be determined from the context only, which, in some 
 cases, it may be difficult to do. 
 
 THE LOGOS (WORD) IN JOHN'S GOSPEL. 
 
 In the very first verse of his Gospel John tells us that " In the be- 
 ginning was the Logos, and the Logos was with God, The term" LO- 
 and the Logos was God." And in verse 14 he states SnecesaarS 
 that " the Logos (Word) was made flesh, and dwelt among from Phiio. 
 us." The question here arises, Is this doctrine consistent with the 
 apostolic origin of the Gospel ? This must be answered in the af- 
 firmative. Even if the idea of the Logos came originally from the 
 Greeks, and was unknown to the Jews of Palestine, the long abode 
 of John in Ephesus among cultivated Greeks must have made him 
 familiar with it, as it appears in the writings of the Alexandrian 
 Jew, Philo (* about B. C. 20) ; for it is not at all probable that the 
 Gospel of John was written before A. D. 80. But it is not at all 
 necessary to attribute to Philo the origin of the expression used by 
 the evangelist. A foundation was already laid in the Old Testament 
 for the doctrine of the Logos, or Word, possessing the attributes of 
 divinity. When God promises to send his angel before the Israel- 
 ites, he warns them not to provoke him, " for my name (divinity) is 
 in him" (Exod. xxiii, 21). In the Book of Proverbs we find wis- 
 dom personified (chap, i, 20-33), especially in chapter viii, where she 
 represents herself as being from everlasting, present at the creation ; 
 "and I was daily his delight, rejoicing always before him." In the 
 apochryphal writer, Jesus the son of Sirach (chap, xxiv), wisdom is 
 personified, and in the Wisdom of Solomon, wisdom is hypostasized 
 and clothed with attributes (vii, 22). 
 
 In the Targum of Onkelos on the Pentateuch, made into Chaldee 
 about the time of Christ for the use of the Jews of Palestine, we find 
 KTTO, Memra (Word, Logos), used for a divine personage, especially 
 to avoid an anthropomorphism, as, " They heard the voice of The 
 Memra (The Word) of Jehovah God walking in the garden (Gen. 
 iii, 8) ; or an anthropopathism, as, " Jehovah repented through his 
 Memra ( Word) that he had made man upon the earth " (Gen. vi, 6). 
 Buxtorf remarks on xno'D, Memra, "The Targumist (Onkelos) is ac- 
 customed to use this divine name (Jehovah) by means of The Memra
 
 616 INTRODUCTION TO THE STUDY 
 
 of Jehovah, as the evangelist John says, 6 A,6yof" (The Word)/ 
 The second definition given of Memra by Rabbi Levy is, "The Wora 
 considered as a person, especially '*! fcOD'o (Memra of Jehovah], the 
 Word of God, for The Being (Wesen), the Personality of God, 6 A6- 
 yof " (The Logos).* 
 
 In the face of these facts it is not necessary to resort to PHlo to 
 explain the Logos of John's Gospel. Further, John's conception jf 
 the Logos is entirely different from that of Philo. In Philo the of- 
 fice of the Logos is " to fill up the chasm between the pure Being 
 and the real world, to make possible the creation of the world, and 
 the influence of God upon it ; and, at least, where the Greek element 
 in his philosophy prevails, the Logos is regarded as a relatively inde- 
 pendent personality, as a second God (6 tfedf 6 devrepoc), while the 
 formula of the Gospel (6 Aoyof <7dp eyevero, i. e., the Word was made 
 man) can designate only the realization of the divine idea in a man. 
 This difference of the conception of the Logos in the evangelist and 
 in Philo is, in its ultimate ground, the consequence of a profound 
 difference in their conceptions of God."" 
 
 De Groot well observes that in the system of Philo the idea of the 
 Logos becoming incarnate would have been as absurd as the conver- 
 sion of light into darkness, truth into falsehood ; and that John set 
 himself in opposition to the spirit of the age in his doctrine of the 
 incarnate Word. 4 It is evident, then, that Justin Martyr and other 
 fathers of the second century derived their doctrine of the incarna- 
 tion of the Logos from John, an apostolical authority without whicn 
 they would not have ventured upon the bold assertion that the Logos 
 became incarnate. Also in the Apocalypse (chap, xix, 13) Christ is 
 called the Word (Logos) of God. It must be observed, in conclu- 
 sion, that John uses the term Logos only in the introduction, and 
 that he never represents Christ as calling himself by that title. 
 
 THE ALLEGED DISCREPANCY BETWEEN JOHN AND THE OTHER 
 EVANGELISTS RESPECTING THE DAY OF THE MONTH ON WHICH 
 CHRIST WAS CRUCIFIED. 
 
 The evangelists unanimously agree that Christ was crucified on 
 the day before the Jewish Sabbath, but it has been disputed whether 
 this was the i4th or i5th of the month Nisan the day before, or the 
 first day of, the feast of the Passover. It appears from the first three 
 Gospels that Christ ate the passover on the evening preceding 
 
 1 Rabbinical and Talmudical Lexicon, col. 125. 
 
 2 Chaldaisches Worterbuch, Zweiter Band, p. 32. 
 
 8 Wittichen, on John's Gospel, pp. 13, 14, (German edition.) 
 4 Basilides, Als Erster Zeuge, u. s. w., p. 125.
 
 OF THE HOLY SCRIPTURES. 617 
 
 the day on which he was crucified (Matt, xxvi, 17-29, Mark xiv 
 12-25; Luke xxii, 7-20). In the statement made by these evan- 
 gelists there is no reference to Christ's anticipating the regular day 
 of the eating of the passover the evening of the i4th day of Nisan 
 and eating it on the i3th. 
 
 John states that "before the feast of the passover, when Jesus 
 knew that his hour was come that he should depart out John ^ ^ 
 of this world unto the Father, having loved his own compared with 
 which were in the world, he loved them unto the end. 
 And during supper, the devil having now put," etc. (chap, xiii, i, 2). 
 It is very probable that the supper here referred to is the paschal 
 supper, since it stands in close connection with the words " before 
 the passover." If it was one day before the passover, it is very likely 
 that John would have so stated it. As the other evangelists had 
 given an account of the celebration of the passover by Christ and his 
 disciples, John may have thought that it was unnecessary to relate it. 
 In John xviii, 28 it is stated : u And they themselves (the Jews) went 
 not into the judgment hall, lest they should be defiled ; but that they 
 might eat the passover." If we are to understand by eating the pass- 
 over eating the paschal lamb, we shall find John in contradiction 
 with the other evangelists, unless we suppose that Christ anticipated 
 that observance by one day. But there is no necessity for so inter- 
 preting the language of John, as the passover festival lasted seven 
 days (Exod. xii, 15, 19; Lev. xxiii, 34-36). According to Num. 
 xxviii, 1 8, 19, on the first day of the passover festival (the fifteenth 
 day of the month) " two young bullocks and one ram, and seven 
 lambs of the first year " were to be offered to Jehovah, in addition 
 to which other offerings were to be made on that day. These offer- 
 ings of the day following the evening on which the paschal lamb was 
 eaten, and called by the Rabbies Chagiga, may be referred to by 
 John in the phrase, " that they might eat the passover." In this way 
 Dr. Lightfoot, Tholuck, Hengstenberg, Olshausen, and others under- 
 stand the passage, in proof of which reference is made to 2 Chron. 
 xxx, 22, where, in speaking of the passover, it is said: "And they 
 did eat throughout the feast seven days, offering peace-offerings,'' 
 etc. This view can be supported also by Deut. xvi, 2 : " Thou shalt 
 therefore sacrifice the passover unto the Lord thy God, of the flock 
 and the herd," etc. Here " to sacrifice the passover " means not 
 only the paschal lamb, but the offerings of the subsequent days. 
 Consequently, " to eat the passover " may refer to the eating of the 
 offerings during the festival. 
 
 Further, the defilement contracted by entering the judgment hall 
 of Pilate (about the same as entering the house of a heathen) needed
 
 618 INTRODUCTION TO THE STUDY 
 
 not to have lasted longer than sunset of that day, 1 so that after that 
 time they could have eaten the paschal lamb, if they had not already 
 done so." In view of this fact, John can scarcely refer to eating the 
 paschal lamb on the eve of that day, but the offerings on that day. 
 
 John also states that the day on which our Saviour was crucified 
 Meaning of the " was the preparation of the passover, and about the sixth 
 Preparation^ nour " (chap, xix, 14), in which he carefully states the 
 the passover. time of the event. But what is the meaning of the phrase : 
 irapaoKEvr) TOV Trdoxa, preparation of 'the passover ? llaQaonevri, prepa- 
 ration, occurs six times in the Gospels, three of which are found in 
 the first three, in which it unquestionably means the day before the 
 Jewish sabbath (Friday), (Matt, xxvii, 62 ; Mark xv, 42 ; Luke 
 xxiii, 54). It is also clear that John uses the word in chap, xix, 31, 
 " Because it was the preparation," and also in verse 42, " Because 
 of the Jews' preparation," in the sense of Friday, or the day before 
 the sabbath. With these facts before us, it is most natural to inter- 
 pret John xix, 14, " It was the preparation of the passover," in the 
 same way the preparation, or Friday, during the passover which 
 harmonizes completely with the other Gospels. Josephus * also calls 
 Friday preparation, and there is not a particle of proof that the Jews 
 ever called the day before a festival preparation. In the spurious 
 epistle of Ignatius to the Philippians 4 the phrase, odpfiarov TOV Troo^a, 
 sabbath of the passover, and in the Ecclesiastical History 6 of Soc- 
 rates the phrase, rd od0(3arov -775- eopr%, sabbath of the feast, are sim- 
 ilar in construction to the preparation of the passover. 
 f But here arises the question, Would the Jews have condemned 
 NoUmprobabie Christ to death on the first day of the great festival of_J 
 that our Lord the passover ? It is difficult to say what bitter hate an<? 
 death on a feast a blind zeal for the honour of Jehovah would not do. 
 *** Many things occur in the world's history which, in them- 
 
 selves, are very improbable, but are made certain by testimony. We 
 cannot conceive how the first three evangelists could have repre- 
 sented Christ as being crucified on the day following the paschal 
 supper, had it not been really so. They were too intimately ac- 
 quainted with the facts to make a mistake on such a point as this 
 Even on the supposition that they had no sure evidence to guide 
 them, they were too intimately acquainted with Jewish customs to 
 assign the condemnation and crucifixion of Christ to the first day 
 of the passover, if it had been abhorrent to the custom of their na 
 tion to condemn any one to death on that day. It must be espe- 
 
 'This defilement the Jews term tf\^ JjIStt. an ablution performed in the daytime 
 See Lightfoot on John xviii, 28. * This is clear from Lev. xxii, 6, J. 
 
 * Antiq., xvi. 6, 2. * Cap. xiii. lab. v, 22.
 
 OF THE HOLY SCRIPTURES. 619 
 
 daily borne in mind that Christ was brought before the high priest 
 Caiaphas early in the morning, and that he was delivered to death 
 and executed by Pilate and the Roman soldiers, who were heathen. 
 
 That criminals might be condemned to death and executed on a 
 feast day appears evident from ancient Jewish authorities. Tholuck 
 gives the following passages bearing on this point: " The Sanhedrim 
 assembled in the session-room of the stone chamber from the time 
 of the morning offering to that of the evening, but on the sabbaths 
 and feast days they assembled themselves within Vn?, which is the lower 
 wall, which surrounded the greater, in the vicinity of the for* court of 
 the women." ' " An elder who does not subject himself to the judg- 
 ment of the Sanhedrim shall be taken from the place where he lives to 
 Jerusalem, shall be kept there until one of the three feasts, and shall be 
 killed at the time of the feast, for the reason stated Deut. xvii, 13."" 
 
 Nor could John be ignorant of the time at which Christ was cru- 
 cified, whether it was the day after the paschal supper or not ; so that 
 it is difficult to see how any real discrepancy can exist between him 
 and the other evangelists on this point. And if a writer of the sec- 
 ond century, or even in the latter part of the first, without apostolical 
 authority, had written this Gospel, he would have taken especial care 
 to adhere closely to the letter and apparent facts of the other Gospels. 
 
 In connection with this subject is \htpassover controversy that arose 
 in the last half of the second century. Polycrates, bish- The passover 
 op of Ephesus, Polycarp, bishop of Smyrna, and others, ^^"anctent 
 kept the i4th of Nisan as the passover festival, while the church, 
 great mass of Christians kept a Friday in commemoration of Christ's 
 death, and the following Sunday in commemoration of his resurrec- 
 tion, without regard to the day of the month. Polycrates states that 
 the Apostle John also kept the i4th Nisan. 3 "In the Christian as- 
 semblies," says Gieseler, 4 " the Jewish passover was at first kept up, but 
 observed with reference to Christ, the true passover (i Cor. v, 7, 8)." 
 On the other hand, Neander thinks that " in the Churches in Asia 
 Minor the Christians who followed the Johannean tradition went on 
 the supposition that the i4th day of Nisan ought to be regarded as 
 the day of Christ's passion." ' 
 
 If we suppose, in opposition to what we have already argued, that 
 John's Gospel indicates that Christ was crucified on the i4th Nisan, 
 which is the view of Neander, Bleek, and others, and that he cele- 
 brated the passover a day earlier than the regular time, and that the 
 
 'Gemara Tr. Sanhedrim, chap. x. 
 
 "Mischna Sanh., x, 4, in Tholuck's Commentary on John, Krauth's translation. 
 'In Euseb., Hist Eccles., lib. v, cap. xxiv. 4 Church Hist , vol. i, pp. 166, 167 
 * General Church History, p. 2q8. 
 40
 
 620 INTRODUCTION TO THE STUDY 
 
 Christians of Asia Minor, with the Apostle John, observed 'ihe i4th 
 day, the question arises, How does this affect the genuineness of 
 John's Gospel ? To which we answer, It does not affect it at all ; for 
 we do not know whether the Christians'of Asia Minor kept the i4th 
 in commemoration of Christ's crucifixion, or because on that day he 
 had eaten his last passover with his disciples, or because it was the 
 regular passover day. 
 
 The only way in which John's observance of the i4th Nisan as a 
 passover festival would apparently stand in contradiction to the 
 fourth Gospel is by supposing that the lat ter places the crucifixion 
 of Christ on the i4th Nisan, and that the festival kept by the Apostle 
 John on the i4th was in commemoration of the eating of the paschal 
 lamb by Christ on that day. But neither of these suppositions is es- 
 tablished, and if both were true, the practice of John would not be 
 necessarily in conflict with the fourth Gospel. For, on his coming 
 from Palestine to Ephesus, some time after A. D. 60, and finding the 
 Churches in that city and vicinity, founded by Paul and his asso- 
 ciates, celebrating the i4th of Nisan as the time of the last paschal 
 supper of Christ, he would naturally unite with them in celebrating 
 the regular passover day. Or are we to suppose that he would have 
 insisted upon their keeping the i3th? It is clear from the New 
 Testament that the apostles laid little stress on festive days. 
 
 THE REJECTION OF JOHN'S GOSPEL BY THE ALOGIANS (ALOGl). 
 
 Toward the end of the second century there arose in Thyatira, a 
 small town in Asia Minor, a party who distinguished themselves by 
 the rejection of both the Gospel and Apocalypse of John, and are 
 called Alogi (Alogians) by Epiphanius, in the last part of the fourth 
 century, because they rejected the Logos ( Word] proclaimed by John.* 
 
 It is, doubtless, to this same party that Irenaeus refers in the fol- 
 Tbe Alogian lowing language : " Others that they may make void the 
 joim^caas^ gift of the Spirit, which in the most recent times accord- 
 oy party spirit, ing to the pleasure of the Father has been shed upon the 
 human race do not admit that form (of manifestation) which is ac- 
 cording to the Gospel of John, in which the Lord promised that he 
 would send the Paraclete (Comforter), but at the same time they 
 reject both the Gospel and the prophetic spirit " * (Paraclete). 
 
 1 This party received John's Gospel See p. 589. 'Haeresis, li, cap. iil 
 
 ' Alii, vero at donam Spiritas frustrentur quod in novissimis temporibus secundura 
 placitum Patris effusum est in humanum genus, illam speciem non admittunt, qua 
 est secundum Joannis evangelium, in qua Paracletum se missurum Dominus pro- 
 misit ; sed simul et evangelium et propheticum repellunt Spiritum. Contra Haereses 
 lib. iii, cap. xi, q.
 
 OF THE HOLY SCRIPTURES 621 
 
 Hippolytus, it seems, wrote against this sect in his work entitled, 
 A.TToAoy/a v:rep rov Kara ludvvrjv evayyeXiav teal A?To:aAi>t/>ef, A 
 Defense of the Gospel according to John and the Apocalypse. These 
 Alogians were violent opponents of the Montanists who laid claim 
 to extraordinary spiritual powers, based chiefly on the gift of the 
 Paraclete promised in John's Gospel and of the Millenarians, who 
 derived their chief support from the Apocalypse; and it seems that 
 they were led to reject these two important works of John in order 
 to take away the very foundation of the doctrines of their adver- 
 saries. The sect was obscure, and neither Origen nor Eusebius 
 makes any mention of it. As far as we know, the Alogians were the 
 only opponents of John's Gospel. They alleged no want of evidence 
 for its apostolic origin, but represented it as being at variance with 
 the other Gospels, and attributed it to Cerinthus, a noted heretic in 
 the last part of the first century, which fact is a strong proof that 
 this Gospel belongs to the first century. Nor can the Tubingen 
 school, the chief modern opponents of John's Gospel, consistently 
 lay any stress on its rejection by the Alogians, as they also rejected 
 the Apocalypse, which these sceptics defend as the writing of the 
 Apostle John. 
 
 CONCLUSION. 
 
 Re"nan remarks on this Gospel : " Every one who will undertake 
 to write the life of Jesus without a fixed theory respect- R( s nan . 8 w h 
 ing the relative value of the Gospels, allowing himself estimate of the 
 to be guided only by the feeling of the subject, will be fourUl Gospel> 
 led in many cases to prefer the narrative in the fourth Gospel to that 
 of the synoptics. The last words of the life of Jesus, in particular, are 
 explained only by this Gospel ; several facts respecting the Passion, 
 unintelligible in the synoptics, assume in the narrative of the fourth 
 Gospel probability and possibility." ! Upon the discourses of Christ 
 in this Gospel he does not set much value, and considers them to be 
 for the most part, the views of the evangelist put into the mouth of 
 Christ. This Gospel, he thinks, was written in the last part of the 
 first century by some one in the circle of John's followers in Asia 
 Minor, who has given in the name of his master a free edition of it." 
 
 But why should the evangelist profess that he was an apostle, if he 
 was not? If he derived his history of Christ from John, why should 
 he not have so stated it, just as Luke states the sources of his Gospel ? 
 Mark, according to the testimony of the ancients, derived the mate- 
 rial of his narrative from the preaching of Peter, yet the name of 
 Peter was never prefixed to it. Re'nan concedes that the Gospel 
 and the First Epistle of John have the same author, and in each the 
 1 Vie de J6sus, p. bcxvii. * Ibid.. Ixvii
 
 622 INTRODUCTION TO THE STUDY 
 
 author professes to be an eyewitness of Christ's life, so that if John, 
 or at least an apostle, was not their author, both works are forgeries. 
 But if any one during the lifetime of John had written a Gospel in 
 the name of that apostle, he would certainly have disclaimed its au- 
 thorship; and after his death such a work could not have been suc- 
 cessfully forged in his name, for it would have been well known that 
 John wrote no Gospel. And in order that such a work should meet 
 with any favour whatever, it would have been necessary that it 
 should set forth the Gospel as preached by John, and in that case 
 what could a forger accomplish by his spurious production ? It is, 
 indeed, clear that our Gospel could never have been composed from 
 mere tradition, as its statements are too definite to have proceeded 
 from any one except an eyewitness. Re"nan thinks highly of the nar- 
 rative portion of John, as we have seen, but does not attribute a high 
 value to the discourses. But the discourses are so blended with, and 
 so arise out of, the narrative portion, that it is difficult to separate 
 them. The idea of a Christian in that age making discourses for 
 Christ, especially different in style from what is contained in the 
 other Gospels, is absurd. It is well known that the Apocryphal 
 Gospels adhere closely to the history of Christ as contained in our 
 Gospels, and rarely attribute any saying to him not found in them. 
 
 Neander truly remarks on this Gospel: "It could have emanated 
 Estimates of ^ rom none other than that ' beloved disciple ' upon whose 
 Neander, cred- soul the image of the Saviour had left its deepest im- 
 press. So far from this Gospel having been written by 
 a man of the second century (as some assert), we cannot even imag- 
 ine a man existing in that century so little affected by the contra- 
 rieties of his times and so far exalted above thenc. Could an age in- 
 volved in perpetual contradictions, an age of religious materialism, 
 anthropomorphism, and one-sided intellectualism, have given birth 
 to a production like this, which bears the stamp of none of these de- 
 formities ? How mighty must the man have been who, in that age, 
 could produce from his own mind such an image of Christ as this ? 
 And this man, too, in a period almost destitute of eminent minds, 
 remained in total obscurity ! Was it necessary for the master-spirit, 
 who felt in himself the capacity and the calling to accomplish the 
 greatest achievement of his day, to resort to a pitiful trick to smug- 
 gle his ideas into circulation ? " 
 
 Credner, a distinguished German Rationalist, truthfully and beau- 
 credner'B tea- ^^^X savs respecting this Gospel : " If we had been left 
 any to the without any historical testimonies respecting the author 
 ioapeiof John. o ^ ^ f ourt jj Gospel, who is not named in the writing 
 
 1 Life of Christ, translated by M'Clintock and Blumenthal, pp. 6, 7.
 
 OF THE HOLY SCRIPTURES. 623 
 
 itself, yet from internal grounds lying in the Gospel itself from the 
 nature of the language ; from the freshness and vividness of the nar- 
 rative ; from the accuracy and definiteness of its statements; from 
 the peculiar manner in which the Baptist and the sons of Zebedee are 
 mentioned ; from the enthusiastic love and fervour which the writer 
 shows toward Jesus; from the irresistible charm which is diffused 
 over the whole Gospel history written upon a definite plan ; from the 
 philosophical reflections with which he begins the Gospel we would 
 be led to the result that the author of such a Gospel can be a Pales- 
 tinian only, can be an immediate eyewitness only, can be an apostle 
 only, can only be a favourite of Jesus, can be that John only whom 
 Jesus held captive by the entire heavenly charm of his doctrine." ' 
 
 It is pleasant to see that great Orientalist and biblical scholar, 
 Ewald, with his strong tendencies to free-thinking, whose criticism 
 on the Old Testament is often so destructive, defending the genuine- 
 ness and the historical character of this Gospel with so much confi- 
 dence and earnestness. " That the Apostle John," says he, " is really 
 the author of this writing, and that no other can have composed it 
 than that one to whom it has ever been attributed, can neither be 
 doubted nor denied; rather, from every direction to which we may 
 look, every ground, every indication, and every mark, conspire to 
 forbid any such doubt (of its genuineness) ever seriously arising." 2 
 
 In concluding this part of our subject, we may remark that the 
 combined evidence, external and internal, in favour of the genuine- 
 ness of the fourth Gospel is well nigh overwhelming. It bears upon 
 its very face the impress of truth and of its apostolic origin, and has 
 ever been regarded as one of the great bulwarks of Christianity. It 
 has commanded the admiration of the profoundest men in all ages 
 of the Church, whose theology it has contributed so much to mould. 
 
 THE TIME AND PLACE OF ITS COMPOSITION. ^6~ 
 
 The position of this Gospel in all the ancient Greek manuscripts, and 
 in the early Peshito-Syriac version, shows that it was writ- Jobn , a G( _, 
 ten after the other three, as no other reason can be as- written after 
 signed for its standing in the fourth place, and this con- *' 
 elusion is confirmed by the testimonies of the second century. 1 
 
 It would also appear that it was written after the other Gospels, 
 from the fact that it supplements them. But as the Gospels of Mark 
 and Luke were written a short time before the destruction of Jeru- 
 
 1 Einleitung in Das Neue Testament. Erster Theil, p. 208. Halle, 1836. 
 "Die Johannischen Schriften, p. 43. Gottingen, 1861. 
 
 *Tertullian, however, places John immediately after Matthew, doubtless becacse 
 be was an aposth. in which he follows the old Latin version.
 
 624 INTRODUCTION TO THE STUDY 
 
 salem, it is in the highest degree probable that this Gospel was writ- 
 ten after that event. 
 
 There is nothing in the Gospel itself to fix its date. The state- 
 ment, " There is (Zariv) at Jerusalem ... a pool . . . having five 
 porches " (chap, v, 2), does not necessarily imply that Jerusalem was 
 still standing, for the pool itself is not likely to have been destroyed 
 with the city, though the porches were in all probability. John, in- 
 deed, speaks of the pool and porches as he knew them, and it is not 
 at all likely that he visited the city after its destruction. Nor do 
 the passages: " Bethany was nigh unto Jerusalem " (chap, xi, 18), 
 and " Where was a garden " ' (chap, xviii, i), imply that these places 
 no longer existed. In fact, they were not destroyed with Jerusalem 
 as far as we know. The language indicates simply the state of things 
 contemporaneous with the events without reference to the present. 
 
 It is clear that John wrote his Gospel after he had left Palestine ; 
 for he speaks of the customs of the Jews in such a way as no one 
 would likely do who was living there at the time of writing ; " There 
 was a feast of the Jews" (chap, v, i) ; " The passover, a feast of the 
 Jews " (chap, vi, 4) ; " After the manner of the purifying of the Jews " 
 (chap, ii, 6) ; also the statement about the pool and its porches 
 (ch. v. 2), and the distance of Bethany from Jerusalem (ch. xi, 18). 
 But it is impossible to determine how long after the destruction of 
 Jerusalem this Gospel was written. John, according to Irenasus a 
 valuable witness on this point lived till about A. D. 98, and we may 
 suppose that he wrote the Gospel about A. D. 80, when he still en- 
 joyed a vigorous life. 
 
 CONTENTS. 
 
 This Gospel opens with an introduction on the dignity of the per- 
 synopsisofthe son of Christ, followed by the testimony of John the 
 contents of Baptist, and various particulars respecting the way in 
 ^ Jpe which several of Christ's disciples became acquainted 
 with him (chap. i). Then follow the marriage feast in Cana of Gal- 
 ilee, and the conversion of water into wine ; Christ's visit to Jerusa- 
 lem, and his conversation with Nicodemus (chaps, ii, iii). His in- 
 terview with the woman of Samaria at Jacob's well, and his return to 
 Galilee, and his healing of the nobleman's son (chap. iv). He goes 
 up to Jerusalem, where he heals a sick man on the Sabbath, which 
 cure gives rise to a controversy between him and the Jews (chap. v). 
 He crosses the Sea of Galilee, and feeds five thousand men with a 
 few loaves and fishes, and holds a discussion with the Jews on his 
 
 'The garden still remains: it must, however, have been greatly injured in the 
 destruction of Terusalem.
 
 OF THE HOLY SCRIPTURES. 625 
 
 being the bread of life (chap. vi). Christ goes up to Jerusalem at 
 the feast of Tabernacles, where he disputes with the Jews (chaps, 
 vii, viii). Then come an account of Christ healing a man blind 
 from his birth (chap, ix) ; the parable of the shepherd and the sheep, 
 and his disputation with the Jews (chap, x) ; the death and the res- 
 urrection of Lazarus, and the effect upon the Jews (chap, xi) ; the 
 anointing of Christ by Mary at Bethany ; his triumphant entrance 
 into Jerusalem. He hints at his death, and utters various moral 
 and divine truths (chap. xii). While at supper, he washes his dis- 
 ciples' feet, to teach them humility, and predicts that one of them 
 shall betray him, indicating by a sign to John that it is Judas, who im- 
 mediately leaves (chap, xiii, 1-30). Christ utters his last discourses 
 with his disciples (chaps, xiii, 3i-xvii). We next have his arrest in 
 the garden, and trial before Annas, Caiaphas, and Pilate ; he is con- 
 demned to death ; a description of the crucifixion (chaps, xviii, xix) ; 
 his resurrection and appearance to his disciples (chap. xx). He after- 
 ward appears to them at the Sea of Galilee, enjoins upon Peter to feed 
 his lambs and sheep, and predicts that apostle's death (chap. xxi). 
 It is thus seen that comparatively few of Christ's miracles are re- 
 corded. No account is given of his cleansing the lepers, or casting 
 out devils. On the other hand, John alone records Christ's raising 
 of Lazarus from the dead, which was a most important event in 
 Christ's life, the culmination of his miracles. It brought on the 
 crisis which led to his crucifixion. Its absence from the other Gos- 
 pels is to be explained by their omission of Christ's ministry at Jeru- 
 salem at the time. 
 
 Although John wrote, it would seem, to supplement the other Gos- 
 pels, he had at the same time a higher object ; and while stating that 
 Christ performed many other works, he remarks : " But these are 
 written, that ye might believe that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of 
 God ; and that believing ye might have life through his name " (ch. 
 xx, 31). 
 
 INTEGRITY OF JOHN'S GOSPEL. 
 
 This Gospel seems appropriately to conclude with the last quoted 
 words. Hence a very large number of critics, including opinions re- 
 Neander, De Wette, Liicke, and Bleek, regard chap, xxi specting chap, 
 as added by a later hand. Neander remarks : " The ac- 
 count in this chapter (xxi) was in all probability received from John's 
 own lips, and written down after his death by one of his disciples." 1 
 Ewald thinks that John wrote his Gospel, ending with chapter xx, 
 about A. D. 80, and in this condition it remained ten years or more. 
 As the report had already spread that Jesus had told John he should 
 1 Life of Christ, p. 434. M'Clintock and Blumenthal's Translation.
 
 626 INTRODUCTION TO THE STUDY 
 
 not die, the apostle was anxious before he died to correct the error, 
 and his friends accordingly assisted him in adding chapter xxi as an 
 appendix to the Gospel which had not yet been put into circulation. 
 In this chapter the error was corrected. Ewald thinks it very closely 
 resembles in style the preceding twenty chapters. 1 Hengstenberg 
 believes that chapter xxi was written by John, while Olshausen, 
 Tholuck, Godet, and others attribute to John the whole chapter with 
 the exception of the last two verses (24, 25) ; and this seems to 
 be the correct view. Chapter xxi, 24 states : " This is the disciple 
 which testifieth of these things, and wrote these things," etc. It is 
 difficult to see how it could be said that " this disciple wrote these 
 things," when they had been written by another hand. 
 
 The particulars given in this chapter forbid the supposition that 
 it could have been written by any one but an eyewitness (chap. xxi). 
 It is found in all the ancient manuscripts and in all the ancient ver- 
 sions of this Gospel, which is a conclusive proof that it was originally 
 published in this form. Had the addition been made after the Gospel 
 had been put into circulation, chapter xxi would have been wanting 
 in some ancient manuscripts and versions. The last two verses, 
 however, were probably added by the Ephesian Church as a testi' 
 mony to the Gospel before it was published. 
 
 It is very probable that John intended to close his Gospel with 
 the end of the twentieth chapter ; but before publishing it, he con- 
 cluded to add the last chapter to correct the inference that had been 
 drawn from a remark of Christ to him, that he should never die. In 
 like manner, Paul's Epistle to the Romans finds a suitable close with 
 chapter xv, the next chapter being an appendix. 
 
 The section (chaps, vii, 53-viii, n) containing an account of the 
 Tbeaccountof woman taken in adultery formed no part of the original 
 the woman ta- Gospel of John. It is wanting in the oldest two Codices, 
 
 ken In adul- 
 tery wanting the Vaticanus and Sinaiticus, and also in the Alexan- 
 taaome MSS. drian; 2 j n t h e Peshito-Syriac version, as well as the Mem- 
 phitic, 11 Theban, Gothic, and Armenian, 4 and in Latin MSS. of the 
 fourth, fifth, and sixth centuries. It was unknown to Origen, who, 
 in commenting on John, connects chap, vii, 52 with chap, viii, 12. 
 It appears to have been unknown also to Tertullian. 6 The critical 
 editors, Tischendorf and Tregelles, omit the section in their editions 
 of the New Testament. In fact, the connexion is broken by this 
 section. Nevertheless, the incidents related in it appear to be real, 
 
 1 Die Johan. Schriften, pp. 54-57. * It is first found in Codex Bezae 
 
 ' In Memphitic MSS. of Wilkins. Schwartze remarks, " This narrative is want- 
 ing in the Memphitic and Sahidic versions. 
 
 1 Edition of Zohrab. ' De Pudicitia. cap. vi.
 
 OF THE HOLY SCRIPTURES. 627 
 
 and the conduct attributed to Christ bears the stamp of his charac- 
 ter. The source of the narrative is uncertain. Eusebius remarks 
 that Papias, in his work, gave an account of a woman who was ac- 
 cused before the Lord of many sins, which the Gospel according to 
 the Hebrews contains. 1 It is not improbable that this was origi- 
 nally the same incident that is now contained in the section under 
 discussion. 
 
 The account of an angel troubling the pool (ch. v, 3, 4), beginning 
 with the words, " Waiting for the moving of the water," ^m^i troubling 
 is not fou nd in Codices Vaticanus and Sinaiticus, and the pool (chap, 
 in some other very ancient MSS. ; in most of the MSS. T ' 
 of the Memphitic a and Sahidic versions, and in some very ancient 
 Syriac fragments of the Gospels published by Cureton ; and the sec- 
 tion is accordingly omitted by Tischendorf and Tregelles, who have 
 the following text : " There is in Jerusalem at the sheep (gate) a 
 pool which is called in Hebrew Bethesda, 3 having five porches. In 
 these were lying a multitude of sick, blind, lame, withered. There 
 was a certain man there who had been sick thirty-eight years. Jesus 
 seeing him lying," etc. The additional words found in manuscripts 
 and versions, including the English, were in all probability written 
 upon the margin of some manuscripts at a very early period as an 
 explanation of the healing properties of the pool. The text is far 
 better without this addition. With the exception of the two sections 
 named, and xxi, 24, 25, we have the Gospel as originally delivered 
 by John. 
 
 CHAPTER XVIII. 
 
 APOCRYPHAL GOSPELS. 
 
 TN the ancient Christian Church, from the last part of the second 
 * century, there are occasional references to uncanonical Gos- 
 pels, generally called Apocryphal, containing matters pertaining 
 to the evangelical history. From the Apocryphal Gospels, however, 
 we must exclude the Syro-Chaldee Gospel used by the Nazarenes, 
 very often called the Gospel according to the Hebrews, since, as Je- 
 rome testifies, this was nearly the same as our Matthew, probably 
 OL mere revision of it. From this was derived the Gospel of Peter, 
 
 1 Hist Eccles., lib. iii, cap. xxxix. Reference is also made to this narrative in 
 Constitutions Apost, lib. ii, cap. xxiv, written near the end of the third century. 
 
 1 Schwartze, in his edition of the four Gospels, in the Memphitic dialect, says this 
 passage is wanting in the Memphitic and Sahidic versions. * Tischendorf
 
 628 INTRODUCTION TO THE STUDY 
 
 which is mentioned by Serapion, bishop of Antioch, as being used in 
 the Church at Rhossus, in Cilicia, at the end of the second century. 
 He says that the most of its contents were in accordance with the 
 true doctrines, but some things in it were of a different character. 1 
 
 The Protevangel of James, professing to be written by him, con- 
 The Proteran- tains a description of the grief of Joachim and Anna on 
 gel of James, account of their being childless, and the subsequent birth 
 of Mary, the mother of Jesus, her early life, her deliverance for safe 
 keeping to Joseph, the birth of Christ in a cave in the region of 
 Bethlehem, the visit of the Magi, and the star that appeared at his 
 birth, Herod's command to slaughter the infants, and its execution, 
 Elizabeth with John (the Baptist) escapes to a mountain, while 
 Zachariah, the father of John, refusing to give Herod any informa- 
 tion respecting him, is slain by Herod's servants. The narrative is 
 decked off with miraculous legends. The Greek text, in which it 
 was originally written, has been published by Tischendorf. 1 
 
 There is no proof that Justin Martyr had any acquaintance with 
 this Protevangel. For the reference which he makes to Christ hav- 
 ing been born in a cave in the suburbs of Bethlehem * was in all 
 probability derived from tradition, as Samaria was his native place 
 Nor does the Protevangel say that Christ was born in the suburbs of 
 Bethlehem, though it mentions the cave. 
 
 It seems probable that Clement 4 of Alexandria was acquainted 
 with it, as he gives one of its statements respecting Mary, with the 
 remark, " some say," yet it is not at all certain that he refers to this 
 work. Origen also refers to it, 6 and Epiphanius * has a passage from 
 it, to which he prefixes the remark: "For if both the history of 
 Mary and traditions say that it was announced," etc. Gregory of 
 Nyssa* says: "I have heard of a certain apocryphal history," etc., 
 in which he refers to the narrative concerning Mary, found partly at 
 least in this Protevangel. These seem to be about all the references 
 made to it in the first four centuries. It never had any authority in 
 the Church. It appears to have been written about the middle or 
 near the end of the second century, and is undoubtedly a spurious 
 production. 8 
 
 1 In Eusebius, Hist. Eccles., lib. vi, cap. 12, Origen also refers to this Gospel in 
 Comment, in Matt, torn, x, sec. 17. 
 
 * In the Evangelia Apocrypha, pp. 1-50, republished since Tischendorf s death. 
 Leipzig, 1876. 'Dialogus cum Tryphone, 78. 
 
 'Stromata, vii, cap. rvi. "Comment, in Matt, torn, x, 17. 
 
 * Hseresis Irei*, sec. v. ' Oratio in Diem Natal. Christi 
 
 8 The recently discovered fragments of the Gospel of Peter, belonging evidentl' 
 to the first half of the second century, is a forgery in the name of Simon Peter tfc 
 support the views of the Docetists. It is manifestly based upon our four Gospels^ 
 but the facts are embellished.
 
 OF THE HOLY SCRIPTURES. 629 
 
 THE GOSPEL ACCORDING TO THE EGYPTIANS. 
 
 This Gospel is first mentioned by Clement of Alexandria in the 
 last part of the second century. He refers to some sayings of Christ, 
 and remarks : " I think they are found in the Gospel according to 
 the Egyptians. For they say that the Saviour himself said," ' etc. 
 after which he gives some expressions not found in our Gospels. In 
 another place, quoting a passage that the heretic, Cassianus, attrib- 
 utes to Christ, he remarks : " In the first place we have not this ex- 
 pression in the four Gospels delivered to us, but in that which is ac- 
 cording to the Egyptians." 8 It is also mentioned by Origen as a 
 Gospel rejected by the Church.' It was mystical, and in all prob- 
 ability composed in Egypt about the middle of the second century, 
 or perhaps as early as A. D. 125. It never had any authority in the 
 Church. 
 
 Among other Apocryphal Gospels may be named that of Thomas 
 in Greek and Latin, treating of the early history of Christ and the 
 flight into Egypt. It was written very probably about the middle 
 of the second century. The Gospel of Pseudo-Matthew in Latin, 
 containing matters pertaining to Mary, her parents, and the child- 
 hood of Jesus. "It was not written till several centuries after Christ. 
 The Gospel concerning the Nativity of Mary in Latin, of uncertain 
 age. The Arabic Gospel of the Infancy, not written until several cen- 
 turies after Christ. The History of Joseph the Carpenter in Latin, 
 translated from the Arabic, written several centuries after Christ. The 
 Acts of Pilate in Greek (Part I), which gives an account of the pro- 
 ceedings before Pilate respecting Christ, and is a vindication of the 
 Saviour's character. The book was probably written in the fourth 
 century. The Acts of Pilate (Part II) in Greek, treating of ChrisVs 
 sufferings and resurrection. The Gospel of Nicodemus (Part II), or 
 The Descent of Christ into Hades. This is a continuance of the 
 two preceding books, and was probably written in the fourth or fifth 
 century. To these we may add : The Epistle (in Latin) of Pontius 
 Pilate to the Emperor Tiberias, respecting Christ. The Report of 
 Pontius Pilate concerning our Lord Jesus Christ sent to Augustus 
 Cabsar in Rome (written in Greek). The Report of Pontius Pilate, 
 tne Governor of Judea, sent to Tiberias Caesar in Rome. The Pun- 
 ishment of Pilate (in Greek). The Death of Pilate, who condemned 
 Jesus. The Narrative of Joseph of Arimathea. The Vindication 
 of the Saviour. 4 
 
 It must be observed that these " Apocryphal Gospels " abound in 
 
 'Stromata, lib. iii, cap. ix. 'Ibid., cap. xiii. *Homilia i, in Lucara. 
 
 ' All the foregoing have been published by Tischendorf.
 
 630 INTRODUCTION TO THE STUDY 
 
 the most glaring errors, absurdities, and ridiculous legends, and are 
 not to be named with our four Gospels. Bleek truly says respecting 
 them : " No single one of these writings has any historical value. 
 So far as they do not agree with the contents of the canonical writ- 
 ings, they are not derived from historical tradition, but are at least 
 generally arbitrary inventions, the unhistorical character of which 
 strikes us at once, partly representing the Redeemer in a manner 
 distorted, and entirely unworthy of him; but they exhibit very 
 clearly to us the value and the historical character of our canonical 
 Gospels." l 
 
 Great liberties have been taken with the MSS. of these Apocryphal 
 Gospels, and the texts differ widely in many instances, and this shows 
 that but little importance was attached to them. 
 
 CHAPTER XIX. 
 
 THE ACTS OF THE APOSTLES. 
 
 TT 7"E have already seen a that Luke is the author of the Acts, as 
 * * well as the Gospel which bears his name, and that to him both 
 works were assigned by the unanimous judgment of antiquity. We 
 have also seen that there are peculiarities of language pervading the 
 whole, which establish the unity of the entire Book of Acts, and show 
 it to be the work of one author. 
 
 The book may be appropriately divided into two sections. The 
 first, embracing chapters i-xii, contains an account of the selection 
 of Matthias to take the place of Judas, the descent of the Holy 
 Spirit upon the apostles on the day of Pentecost, their ministry, es- 
 pecially that of Peter and John, in Jerusalem (chaps, i-v) ; the selec- 
 tion of seven deacons, the arrest of Stephen, his Address to the San- 
 hedrim, and his martyrdom (chaps, vi, vii) ; the ministry of Philip, 
 Peter, and John in Samaria, the conversion of the Ethiopian eunuch 
 (chap, viii) ; the miraculous conversion of Saul while on his way to 
 Damascus, his preaching in that city and escape from it, his visit to 
 Jerusalem and Tarsus, and the prosperity of the Church (chap, ix, 
 1-31) ; Peter's ministry at Lydda and Joppa ; his preaching the Gos- 
 pel at Cesarea to Cornelius the centurion, who is the first convert 
 from the Gentiles. Peter, on returning to Jerusalem, is blamed by 
 those of the circumcision for eating with the uncircumcised. He 
 defends himself by relating his vision at Joppa and the circumstances 
 1 Einleitung, pp. 381, 382. 'In discussing Luke's Gospel.
 
 OF THE HOLY SCRIPTURES. 631 
 
 of Cornelius's conversion (chaps, ix, 32-xi, 18); the preaching of 
 the gospel by believers dispersed from Jerusalem, to Jews only, as 
 far as Phenice, Cyprus, and Antioch ; the bringing of Saul from 
 Tarsus to Antioch by Barnabas ; the sending of relief by the disciples 
 in Antioch to the brethren in Judea during the famine ; the martyr- 
 dom of the Apostle James by Herod, the imprisonment of Peter, his 
 release by an angel, and the miserable death of Herod (chapters 
 xi, ig-xii). 
 
 The second section, embracing chapters xiii-xxviii, is chiefly occu- 
 pied with the ministry of the Apostle Paul. This apostle and Bar- 
 nabas, being sent forth from Antioch, preach the gospel in Cyprus, 
 where Sergius Paulus, the proconsul of the country, is converted. 
 After this they preach the Gospel in Antioch, in Pisidia, Iconium, 
 Lystra,. Derbe, and Perga, and return to Antioch (chaps, xiii, xiv). 
 The question, Whether the Gentile Christians are bound to keep the 
 law of Moses, is discussed by the apostles and brethren in Jerusa- 
 lem, and decided in the negative (chap, xv, 1-35). Paul and Silas 
 visit the Churches in Syria and Cilicia. Paul visits Derbe and Lys- 
 tra ; at the latter place he finds Timothy, whom he takes with him 
 on a missionary tour through Phrygia and Galatia, and arrives at 
 Troas, from whence Paul sets out for Macedonia, and preaches in 
 Philippi, passes through Amphipolis and Apollonia, and proclaims the 
 gospel in Thessalonica and Berea. He leaves Macedonia for Athens, 
 and preaches at the Areopagus in that city (chaps, xv, 36-xvii.) 
 Paul visits Corinth. Incidents of his ministry in that city (ch. xviii.) 
 Paul's ministry in Ephesus and the uproar made there by the makers 
 of silver shrines for Diana (chap. xix). He passes over into Mace- 
 donia, visits Greece, returns through Macedonia, and sails away 
 from Philippi, and lands at Troas, where he preaches. On his way 
 to Jerusalem Paul visits Miletus, where he addresses the elders con- 
 vened from Ephesus. Sailing from Ephesus, he touches at Tyre, 
 and afterward sails to Cesarea, from whence he goes up to Jerusa- 
 lem and visits James, who advises him respecting conformity to the 
 law of Moses (chaps, xx-xxi, 25). Chapters xxi, 26-xxvi give a de- 
 tailed account of the persecutions of Paul by the Jews in Jerusalem, 
 his addresses to them, his imprisonment in Cesarea, his address to 
 Agrippa and Festus, and his appeal to Caesar to get rid of his Jewish 
 enemies. In the two following chapters (xxvii, xxviii) there is a de- 
 scription of Paul's voyage to Rome, his shipwreck, but safe arrival 
 in the city, and his preaching there.
 
 033 INTRODUCTION TO THE STUDY 
 
 THE SOURCES OF THIS HISTORY. 
 
 Luke possessed ample opportunity to become intimately ac- 
 quainted with the history he relates. We have already seen that as 
 a companion of Paul in the latter part of the Acts, he describes 
 what he saw and heard. He spent about two years in Jerusalem 
 with Paul, 1 became acquainted with James * and the elders in Jerusa- 
 lem, many of whom were eyewitnesses of what occurred in the ear 
 liest stage of the progress of Christianity. His long intimacy with 
 the apostle to the Gentiles enabled him to ascertain Paul's whole 
 history as a persecutor of the Church, and as its zealous defender. 
 Under these circumstances, written sources were not necessary. It 
 is quite certain, however, that the Epistle addressed by the apostles 
 and the rest of the Christians in Jerusalem to the Gentile Christians 
 (chap, xv, 23-29) has been incorporated substantially in its original 
 form. 
 
 THE CREDIBILITY OF THE HISTORY IN THE BOOK OF ACTS.. 
 
 The Acts of the Apostles is one of the most authentic books in ex 
 Paiey's HOT istence. It everywhere shows that its author possesses 
 Paulino. t h e mos t exact knowledge respecting the affairs of the 
 Greeks and Romans, the early Christian Church, and the geography 
 of the extensive region over which Paul traveled. A remarkable 
 confirmation of its history is furnished by the Epistles of Paul. 
 
 In the last part of the last century Dr. Paley published his cele- 
 brated work, Horae Paulinae, or The Truth of the Scripture History 
 of St. Paul Evinced. On this subject he remarks in his evidences 
 of Christianity : " Between the letters which bear the name of St. 
 Paul in our collection, and his history in the Acts of the Apostles, 
 there exist many notes of correspondence. The simple perusal of 
 the writings is sufficient to prove that neither the history was taken 
 from the letters, nor the letters from the history ; and the undesign- 
 cdness of the agreements (which undesignedness is gathered from 
 their latency, their minuteness, their obliquity, the suitableness of 
 the circumstances in which they consist to the places in which those 
 circumstances occur, and the circuitous references by which they 
 are traced out) demonstrates that they have not been produced by 
 meditation, or by any fraudulent contrivance. But coincidences, 
 from which these causes are excluded, and which are too close and 
 numerous to be accounted for by accidental concurrences of fiction. 
 
 'Actsxxi, 17; xxiv, 27; xxvii, I, etc. 
 
 Chapter xxi, 18. Luke came to Jerusalem with Paul about twenty-seven yean 
 after the crucifixion of Christ
 
 OF THE HOLY SCRIPTURES. 633 
 
 must necessarily have truth for their foundation." Paley's work, re- 
 ferred to above, shows these undesigned coincidences between the 
 Acts and the Epistles of Paul in a most masterly manner, proving 
 the truth of Paul's history with a force almost equal to a mathemat- 
 ical demonstration. Yet the impugners of the Acts, found chiefly 
 in the Tubingen school, so far as we know, take no notice of Paley's 
 work. This perhaps may be explained by a remark of Bunsen (him- 
 self a German) : " Modern criticism has been left to the Germans, 
 for whom reality has no charm." 1 "What they know how to handle 
 best is thought, the ideal part of history ; what is farthest from their 
 grasp is reality." 1 
 
 Baur, the head of the Tubingen school of extreme rationalists, re- 
 gards the Acts of the Apostles " not as a purely historical ^^^ g^ 
 writing, but only a representation following a definite mate of the 
 tendency," the peculiar object of which was the solution 
 of the question, In what relation did the Apostle Paul stand to the 
 older apostles? He thinks that the original doctrine of Paul is 
 found in the Acts only in a modified form, that is, it yields too much 
 to the Jewish Christians. Speaking of Paul, Baur remarks : " When 
 we compare the description which the Acts of the Apostles gives of 
 his character and deportment, with the picture with which his per- 
 sonality presents itself to us in his own writings, nothing is more 
 striking than the great contrast in which the Paul of the Acts stands 
 toward the Paul of the Pauline Epistles. And as he, according to 
 the Acts of the Apostles, made concessions to the Jewish Christians, 
 which he, according to the principles proclaimed by himself in the 
 most decided manner, cannot possibly have made, so, on the opposite 
 side, the Acts present Peter in a light in which we can no longer 
 recognize him as one of the chief representatives of Jerusalem Jewish 
 Christianity."* That is, manifestly, Peter is not Jewish enough. 
 
 Baur's theory rests upon the assumption that there was an irrecon- 
 cilable difference between the doctrines of Paul and Baur's theory 
 Peter respecting the observance of the Jewish law, and t the^l'ctB 
 the nature of Christ that early Christianity was of an examined. 
 Ebionitish cast. If we are to believe Baur, the Acts of the Apostles 
 was written to bring into harmony the Churches founded by Peter 
 and those founded by Paul. It is clear, then, that his theory requires 
 that the Acts should have been written a considerable length of time 
 
 1 In speaking of the Apostolical Constitutions. 
 
 * Hippolytus and his Age. Both of these passages I have taken from Tregelles* 
 Canon of Muratori, pp. 66, 67 
 'Die Drei Ersten Jahrhunderte, pp. 126, 127, Dritte Ausgabe. Tubingen, 1863
 
 034 INTRODUCTION TO THE STUDY 
 
 after the death of these apostles. On the contrary, it is probable 
 that the Acts were written in their lifetime. 
 
 But Baur can be completely refuted from those very Epistles of 
 Paul that he acknowledges, viz., Romans, i and 2 Corinthians, and 
 Galatians. 
 
 What, then, is the testimony of Paul respecting the relations ex- 
 isting between himself and Peter ? " When they saw that 
 terbypaulex- the gospel of the uncircumcision was committed untc 
 ied ' me, as the gospel of the circumcision was unto Peter 
 
 (for he that wrought effectually in Peter to the apostleship of the 
 circumcision, the same was mighty in me toward the Gentiles) ; and 
 when James, Cephas [Peter], and John, who seemed to be pillars, 
 perceived the grace that was given unto me, they gave to me and 
 Barnabas the right hands of fellowship ; that we should go unto the 
 heathen, and they unto the circumcision." (Gal. ii, 7-9). Do we 
 see here any indication of hostility between Peter and Paul, or any 
 manifestation of a difference of doctrine ? It is true, he afterward 
 states that Peter was to be blamed because, before certain persons 
 had come from James, " he did eat with the Gentiles : but when 
 they were come, he withdrew and separated" himself, fearing them 
 which were of the circumcision. ... I said unto Peter before them 
 all, If thou, being a Jew, livest after the manner of the Gentiles, and 
 not as do the Jews, why compellest thou the Gentiles to live as do 
 the Jews-?" (chap, ii, 12, 14). It appears evident from this that 
 Peter did associate with the Gentiles, and did not feel himself under 
 obligation to observe the rites of the Mosaic law. But in the present 
 instance, through fear, he did not adhere firmly to his principles. 
 Now, as far as Peter is concerned, we find nothing in the Acts 
 inconsistent with what is here stated respecting him. We find 
 in Acts x, xi, 1-18, that he goes to the heathen, Cornelius, and 
 preaches the Gospel to him and his household. But does Paul mean 
 to say that Peter was accustomed to enjoin upon the Gentiles the 
 observance of the Mosaic law ? That is impossible under the cir- 
 cumstances. For it is inconceivable that Peter should think that 
 he, himself a Jew, was free from the rites of the Mosaic law, but that 
 the Gentiles were subject to them ! All that can be intended by 
 Paul is that Peter, through fear, did not carry out his principles; and 
 that the example he was setting by his timidity made the impression 
 that it was necessary for the Gentiles to live in accordance with the 
 Mosaic law in order to be in full fellowship with the Jewish Chris- 
 tian Church. Hence there is no discrepancy between what Paul 
 here states of Peter, and what the latter himself says in Acts xv, 10 
 respecting the enjoining of the law of Moses upon the converts from
 
 OF THE HOLY SCRIPTURES. 635 
 
 among the Gentiles : " Now therefore why tempt ye God, to put a 
 yoke upon the necks of the disciples, which neither our fathers nor 
 we were able to bear?" We hear nothing of any dispute between 
 Peter and Paul afterward. Peter's " error," says Olshausen, " was 
 a purely personal one, by which his official character as an apostle 
 is not in the least compromised." ' Nowhere in the Acts is there 
 any thing inconsistent with what is otherwise known of Peter, or that 
 is at variance with his apostolical character. 
 
 Respecting the Apostle Paul, the assertion of Baur is utterly false, 
 that his Epistles present him in a different light from his Paul the same 
 conduct as set forth in the Book of Acts. In Gal. ii, 3 ^e^Acte^ 
 he says : " But neither Titus, who was with me, being a t&e Epistles. 
 Greek, was compelled to be circumcised." The inference to be 
 drawn from this is, that if he had been a Jew it might have been 
 necessary to circumcise him. When, therefore, we are informed in 
 the Acts (xvi, 1-3) that Paul took Timothy, whose mother was a 
 Jewess, and his father a Greek, and circumcised him on account of 
 the Jews, there is no violation of the principles announced by Paul 
 respecting circumcision. 
 
 When Paul, on the completion of this missionary tour, returned to 
 Jerusalem, he found a report among the Jews that he taught all of 
 their nation who were "among the Gentiles to forsake Moses, saying 
 that they ought not to circumcise their children, neither to walk after 
 the customs." Therefore, on the advice of James and the elders, he 
 took four men who had a vow upon them, and purified himself along 
 with them, being " at charges with them." Is there any thing in his 
 Epistles inconsistent with this conduct ? On the contrary, is not 
 the language which he uses indicative of just such a course of con- 
 duct ? " And unto the Jews I became as a Jew, that I might gain 
 the Jews ; to them that are under the law, as under the law, that I 
 might gain them that are under the law" (i Cor. ix, 20). "I am 
 made all things to all men, that I might by all means save some " 
 (i Cor. ix, 22). 
 
 Paul, it is true, in writing to the Galatians, says : " If ye be circum- 
 cised, Christ shall profit you nothing. For I testify again to every man 
 that is circumcised, that he is a debtor to do the whole law. Christ 
 is become of no effect unto you, whosoever of you are justified by 
 the law; ye are fallen from grace " (Gal. v, 2-4). It must be borne 
 in mind that Paul charges the Galatians with departing from the 
 great doctrine of justification by faith, and with seeking salvation 
 through the observance of the Mosaic law. If they therefore relied 
 upor circumcision for salvation, it is evident that Christ was useless 
 
 1 Comment on Galatians. 
 41
 
 636 INTRODUCTION TO THE STUDY 
 
 to them. But the practice of circumcision, without attributing to it 
 any efficacy, could not in the least degree impede their salvation, 
 and Paul was ready to accede to its performance in obedience to 
 custom, when no importance was attached to it by the person cir- 
 cumcised. Paul also tells them that in seeking salvation through 
 circumcision it was necessary also to keep the whole law, of which 
 circumcision is but a part. Just as a man baptized into the Chris- 
 . tian faith takes upon him the observance of all the precepts of 
 Christ. In Acts xviii, 18, mention is made of Paul having shorn his 
 head in Cenchrea, as he had a vow. This was in obedience to the 
 Mosaic law. 
 
 The passage concerning the circumcision of Timothy (Acts xvi, 
 1-3), to which we have already referred, the passage on the purifica- 
 tion of Paul in the temple (chap, xxi, 24, 26), already noticed, and the 
 vow and shaving of Paul's head, are the only passages in the Acts 
 in which his conduct in respect to the Mosaic law is at all shown. 
 /"^ Peter preaches the Gospel to the Jews, and first opens to the 
 I improbability of Gentiles the door of admission into Christianity, and op- 
 Baur'fj theory. p Oses t h e putting of the yoke of the law upon the necks 
 of Gentile converts. In the council, however, in which Peter speaks, 
 the decision is given by James. The views of Peter and Paul are 
 never brought together. They hold no discussion concerning the 
 obligations of the Mosaic law. We cannot tell from the Acts whether 
 either Peter or Paul favoured the circumcision of Jewish Christians 
 In the twenty-eight chapters of this book we have only two or three 
 incidental passages which give us any information at all respecting 
 Paul's relation to the law, and but one from Peter respecting the re- 
 lation of the Gentile Christians to it ; and that, too, in a book written, 
 according to Baur, for the express purpose of showing how Paul 
 stood toward the older apostles, and to reconcile the two great par- 
 ties, Pauline and Petrine, in the Church ! Wonderful, indeed, that 
 the Christian Church for nearly eighteen centuries could not dis- 
 cover this fact in the plain narrative of Luke ! It required the trans- 
 cendent genius of Baur to make this brilliant discovery, and even 
 after it is made it requires a peculiar kind of genius to see it. Alto- 
 gether diff'/ent in this respect from other discoveries, which strike 
 us at once with so much force that we are surprised that we had 
 never thought of them ourselves. 
 
 Even if two or three passages had been found in the Acts in which 
 a dogmatic interest is discernible, the credibility of the great body 
 of the history would be scarcely affected by the fact. But no such 
 passages are found, and everywhere in the history we see truth and 
 candour, and are deeply impressed with the reality of this wonderfuJ
 
 OF THE HOLY SCRIPTURES. 637 
 
 narrative of the founding of Christianity by the apostles after the 
 resurrection and ascension of their Divine Master. 
 
 We have already observed that the conduct of Paul toward the 
 Jews in the Acts is in perfect keeping with his own other coinct- 
 declaration : " Unto the Jews I became as a Jew, that I dences - 
 might gain the Jews " (i Cor. ix, 20). He adds : " To them without 
 law .... as without law, that I might gain them that are without 
 law " (i Cor. ix. 21). With this compare his conduct at the Areop- 
 agus of Athens, where he begins his discourse with heathenism, and 
 advances by a beautiful gradation to the great principles of Chris- 
 tianity (Acts xvii, 16-34). His whole discussion at the Areopagus, 
 and his remarks to the heathen at Lystra, are in entire accordance 
 with the sentiments which he utters respecting the heathen, in Rom. 
 i, 19, 20. 
 
 The great doctrine of justification by faith which Paul sets forth in 
 his Epistles, the Acts also represent him as teaching (chaps, xiii, 39 ; 
 xvi, 31; xxvi, 18). We have already remarked that the author of 
 the Acts shows a most exact knowledge of Jewish, Greek, and Roman 
 affairs. In the Acts the Sadducees appear as the chief opponents of 
 the apostles, since the doctrine of the resurrection was especially 
 obnoxious to that sect of the Jews. In the Gospels, however, where 
 the resurrection is not so clearly preached, the Pharisees are the 
 chief adversaries of Christ, because he exposed their hypocrisy. 
 
 The character Luke attributes to the Athenians, "For all the 
 Athenians, and strangers who were there [in Athens], spent Hlstorical ac . 
 
 their time in nothing else, but either to tell or to hear curacyof Luke 
 
 i it / i \ r- iiT-v illustrated, 
 
 some new thing (chap, xvn, 21), is confirmed by De- 
 mosthenes, who represents them as going about inquiring: " Is there 
 any thing new ? " ' In chap, v, 37 it is stated that Judas of Galilee 
 rose in the days of the taxing, and drew many people after him, and 
 that he perished, and his followers were dispersed. This man is 
 also mentioned by Josephus as Judas the Gaulanite, who resisted the 
 payment of taxes to the Roman in the time* that Cyrenius was 
 governor of Syria. In chapter xi, 28, 29 it is stated that a prophet 
 named Agabus predicted that there would "be great dearth (Atjuof, 
 famine) throughout all the world : which came to pass in the days 
 of Claudius Caesar. Then the disciples, every man according to his 
 ibility, determined to send relief unto the brethren which dwelt in 
 Judei." Josephus, in speaking of events which occurred about the 
 sixth or seventh year of Claudius Caesar (about A. D. 46), says : " It 
 happened that the great famine occurred throughout Judea, during 
 which Queen Helene purchased corn at great expense from Egypt, 
 1 Philippic i, IO. * Antiq., xviii. cap. i, I.
 
 638 INTRODUCTION TO THE STUDY 
 
 and distributed it among the needy, as I before said." ' In chapter 
 xii, 1-3 it is stated that Herod the king killed James the brother of 
 John with the sword, and imprisoned Peter also, with the intention 
 of killing him, since he saw that the murder of James pleased the 
 Jews. About A. D. 37 Herod obtained the provinces, Abilene, 
 Batanaea, Trachonitis, and Auranitis. Claudius added Judea and 
 Samaria. These possessions he held for about three years, until his 
 death. 1 In chapter xii, 21-23 it is stated that in Caesarea, " upon a 
 set day, Herod, arrayed in royal apparel, sat upon his throne, and 
 made an oration unto them. And the people gave a shout, saying, 
 It is the voice of a god, and not of a man. And immediately the 
 angel of the Lord smote him, because he gave not God the glory : 
 and he was eaten of worms, and gave up the ghost." Josephus' de- 
 scription is very similar. He states that Herod was celebrating 
 games in honour of Claudius Caesar in Caesarea, and that on the 
 second day of the festival, early in the morning, clad in a robe made 
 entirely of silver, of wonderful workmanship, he went into the thea- 
 ter, and the first rays of the sun reflected from the silver dazzled 
 fearfully the beholders. Immediately the flatterers cried out from dif- 
 ferent sides, calling him a god, adding : " Be thou gracious unto us, 
 even if up to the present time we have feared thee as a man, yet for 
 the future we acknowledge that thou art superior to a mortal nature." 
 The king did not rebuke them, nor did he refuse the impious flat- 
 tery. A little after this, looking up, he observed an owl sitting on a 
 cord above his head. He immediately perceived that this was a 
 messenger of evil, and he was seized with heart-piercing pain. Im- 
 mediately the pain in the bowels that began with violence continued 
 to increase. Looking at his friends, he says : " I, your god, am now 
 summoned to die, my fate immediately refuting the false language 
 in which you just now addressed me," etc. After five days he died 
 of this pain in the abdomen.* 
 
 Luke is here confirmed by Josephus in very remarkable manner 
 in all essential points, and his exact knowledge is shown in the fact 
 that Herod was king over Judea but three years, a reign that might 
 have been easily misplaced. 
 
 In chap, xiii, 7 it is stated that Sergius Paulus was proconsul of the 
 island of Cyprus. Here is another instance of Luke'i 
 
 Other oonflr- J * , 
 
 mation of the accuracy ; for in the distnbution of the Roman prov- 
 Aete nM of 0f the ^ nces as ma de by Augustus, Cyprus was retained by the 
 Apostles. emperor, and the governor of that province was a pro- 
 
 1 Antiq., xx, cap. v, 2, and xx, cap. ii, 5. 
 
 'Josephus states that Herod died in the third year of his reign over all Judea 
 (A. D. 44). Antiq, xix, cap. viii, sec. 2 *Ibid-
 
 OF THE HOLY SCRIPTURES. 639 
 
 praetor. But Augustus afterward took Dalmatia from the Senate, 
 and gave to it Cyprus J and Gallia Narbonensis. Cyprus, then, as 
 belonging to the Senate,* was governed by a proconsul (dvtfr'Trarof), 
 as stated by Luke. And on a coin 3 struck in the time of Claudius 
 Caesar, the governor of the island of Cyprus is called dvtfvrraToc, the 
 very word used by Luke. In chapter xvi, 14 mention is made of 
 " Lydia, a. seller of purple, of the city of Thyatira." "The dyeing 
 trade had flourished from a very early period, as we learn from 
 Homer, in the neighbourhood of Thyatira, and is permanently com- 
 memorated in inscriptions which relate to the ' guild of dyers ' in 
 that city, and incidentally give a singular confirmation of the verac- 
 ity of St. Luke in his casual allusions. "* In chap, xvi, 12 it is said 
 that " Philippi (is) the first city of this part of Macedonia, a colony." 
 Augustus " presented it with the privileges of a ' Colonia,' with the 
 name ' Col. Jul. Aug. Philip. ' ' In chap, xvi, 16 mention is made 
 of a place of prayer (Trpotrev^, oratory) on the river side. By the 
 decree of the city of Halicarnassus the Jews were authorized " to 
 build proseuchoz (oratories) on the sea-shore, according to the cus- 
 tom of their fathers." ' The locating of these oratories near the 
 water was for the purpose of ablution. 
 
 In chapter xvi, 27 the keeper of the Philippian prison is about to 
 commit suicide under the impression that the prisoners had fled. 
 " By the Roman law the jailer was to undergo the same punishment 
 which the malefactors who had escaped by his negligence were to have 
 suffered." ' In verse 35 it is stated : " The magistrates sent the ser- 
 geants; " but the latter word in the original is paj3dov%ot, lictors, 
 well known Roman officers. The same word is also used in verse 38, 
 but nowhere else in the New Testament. 
 
 In chap, xvii, 23 St. Paul speaks of an altar at Athens with the in- 
 scription : "To THE UNKNOWN GOD." Pausanias, who wrote his 
 Description of Greece in the last half of the second century, in speak- 
 ing of temples in the vicinity of the Piraeeus, the chief harbour of 
 Athens, remarks : " There are altars both of the gods that are named 
 and those that are unknown." ' The word in Luke and in Pausanias 
 is the same, tZyvoxrrof, (unknown). Paul says, " As I was passing 
 through and beholding the objects of your worship, I found an altar 
 with this inscription," etc. That is, As I was coming up from the 
 Piraeeus, and passing through the midst of your altars and temples, 
 I found an altar dedicated to the UNKNOWN GOD. It is not neces- 
 
 1 Dion Cassius, lib. liii, 12. * Strabo, lib. xvii, c. 840. 
 
 "See this inscription in Conybeare and Howson's Life and Epistles of St. Paul. 
 4 Conybeare and Howson. * Smith's Geographical Dictionary, Art, PhilippL 
 
 *Antiq., lib. xiv, cap. x, 23. ' Conybeare and Howson. *Lib. i, cap i. A.
 
 640 INTRODUCTION TO THE STUDY 
 
 sary to suppose that there was but one such altar, for it did not suit 
 the purpose of Paul to allude to more tnan one. In chap, xviii, 2 
 it is remarked, that when Paul came to Corinth, he " found a certain 
 Jew named Aquila, born in Pontus, lately come from Italy, with his 
 wife Priscilla, because that Claudius had commanded all Jews to 
 depart from Rome." This banishment of the Jews from Rome is 
 confirmed by Suetonius, who, in speaking of Claudius, says : " He 
 banished from Rome the Jews, who, with Chrestus (Christ) their 
 leader, were constantly creating disturbances." 
 
 In chap, xvii, 12 it is said that " when Gallio was the deputy (&vQv. 
 Traroc, proconsul) of Achaia, the Jews made insurrection with one 
 accord against Paul, and brought him to the judgment seat." The 
 statement of Luke that this officer was a proconsul 'is confirmed by 
 Strabo and Dion Cassius. Achaia, embracing the Peloponnesus, 
 and Southern Greece as far as Thessaly, is the seventh in the 
 list of provinces governed by proconsuls, according to the former.* 
 And Dion Cassius* remarks that Hellas (Achaia) belonged to the 
 people and the Senate, and was, of course, governed by a proconsul. 
 That the proconsul should have resided in Corinth was quite natural, 
 as it was both a splendid city and nearly in the centre of the province. 
 The proconsul Gallio, here mentioned, was probably a brother of 
 the philosopher Seneca, who, in Epistle 104, speaks of Gallio having 
 had a fever in Achaia. In chap, xxi, 39 Paul declares that he is "a 
 Jew of Tarsus in Cilicia, a citizen of no mean city." This was no 
 idle boast of the apostle, for Strabo remarks : " So much zeal is dis- 
 played by the men of this place (Tarsus) in the study of philosophy 
 and the whole remaining circle of learning, that they have surpassed 
 both Athens and Alexandria, and every other place that can be 
 named, in which schools and vocations of philosophers have ex- 
 isted." * Antony rewarded it for its attachment to Caesar "with mu- 
 nicipal freedom and exemption from taxes. . . . Augustus subse- 
 quently increased the favours previously bestowed upon Tarsus, 
 which on coins is called a ' libera civitas ' ' 6 (a free city). We have 
 no proof, however, that this highly favoured city was endowed with 
 P.oman citizenship. Paul's father, or some other ancestor, must have 
 obtained the privilege, which enabled him to declare that he \va 
 born in the possession of it. 
 
 In chap, xxi, 38 the chief captain asks Paul : " Art thou thai 
 Egyptian, which before these days madest an uproar, and leddes* 
 
 'Claudius, cap. xxv. "Lib. xvii, 840. 
 
 ' Lib. liii, 12. Also Tacitus speaks of Achaia and Macedonia being governed k 
 B proconsul. Annal., lib. i, cap. 76. 
 * Lib. xiv, 673. * Smith's Dictionary of Classical Geography.
 
 OF THE HOLY SCRIPTURES. 641 
 
 out into the wilderness four thousand men that were murderers ? " 
 Josephus, in speaking of deceivers and robbers in the earlier part 
 of the administration of Felix, says : " At this time a man came from 
 Egypt to Jerusalem professing to be a prophet, advising the multi- 
 tude to go to the Mount of Olives." Josephus further states that he 
 declared that at his command the walls of Jerusalem would fall 
 down, by which they would enter the city, and that Felix with his 
 troops attacked the Egyptian and his party, killed four hundred, and 
 took two hundred alive. 1 In his Jewish Wars" he represents this 
 Egyptian false prophet, as he calls him, leading around from the 
 desert to the Mount of Olives thirty thousand men. This number 
 seems to be an exaggeration or a corruption of the original text. The 
 general statements are in remarkable harmony with Luke. 
 
 In the last part of the Acts we find Ananias, high priest of the 
 Jews (chaps, xxiii, 2; xxiv, i). According to Josephus, still other con- 
 he was the son of Nebedseus, and seems to have been LOkevl^accu- 
 made high priest about A. D, 48,' and we find him still racy, 
 living about the beginning of the Jewish war, 4 so it is certain that 
 he was high priest when Paul was on his last visit to Jerusalem (about 
 A. D. 60-62). 
 
 At this visit we also find that Felix is the governor, which state- 
 ment accords with what is related in Josephus. He appears to have 
 been sent from Rome as governor of Judsea, Samaria, Galilee, and 
 Petrsea, about A. D. 51. He was succeeded by Porcius Festus * 
 (A. D. 62), who is mentioned in Acts (xxiv, 27; xxv, i, 4, etc.). 
 Luke states that the wife of Felix was Drusilla, a Jewess. Josephus 
 confirms this, and gives several particulars concerning her. 8 
 
 It is stated that as Paul " reasoned of righteousness, temperance, 
 and judgment to come, Felix trembled " (chap, xxiv, 25). The life 
 of this man shows that there were special reasons for trembling, as 
 Drusilla, with whom he was living as his wife, had been induced by 
 him to leave her former husband. Tacitus speaks of him as noted 
 for all kinds of cruelty and lust. 7 We find also in the last part of 
 this book mention made of King Agrippa (chap's, xxv, i3~xxvi). 
 This Agrippa was the son of the Herod whose death is related in 
 Acts xii, 21-23. He is mentioned in various places by Josephus, 
 and in connexion with Festus, and is called king by him. Josephus 
 states that he built for himself a splendid house in Jerusalem. 1 
 In company with Agrippa, Bernice is mentioned (Acts xxv, 13; 
 
 ' Antiq., xx, cap. viii. 6. * Lib. ii, cap. xiii, 5. 'Antiq., xx, cap. v, 2. 
 
 4 Lib. ii, cap. xvii, 6. * Antiq., xx, cap. viii, 9. *Ibid., xx, cap. vii, I, 3. 
 
 T Antonius Felix, per omnem saevitiam ac libidinem, jus regium servili ingemo ex- 
 ercuit. Hist, lib. v, 9. * Antiq., xx, cap. viii, II.
 
 642 INTRODUCTION TO THE STUDY 
 
 xxvi, 30). This Bernice was a sister of King Agrippa, and also at 
 a later period visited Jerusalem. 1 After Paul had been shipwrecked 
 at Melita (Malta), he left in a ship of Alexandria and landed in 
 Italy at Puteoli (Acts xxviii, n, 13). Puteoli was the great port 
 of trade with Alexandria in Egypt. 1 Here, too, Luke's knowledge 
 is exact. 
 
 Of all the numerous statements of Luke in the Book of Acts, there 
 Apparent mis- is only one that can be charged with inaccuracy the 
 in^the ^cto remarks of Gamaliel in the Sanhedrim respecting Theu- 
 eonsidered. das : " For before these days rose up Theudas, boasting 
 himself to be somebody ; to whom a number of men, about four 
 hundred, joined themselves: who was slain; and all, as many as 
 obeyed him, were dispersed " (chap, v, 36). Josephus mentions a 
 Theudas, a magician, who persuaded the greatest multitude to take 
 up their possessions and follow him to the river Jordan. " For he 
 said that he was a prophet, and that he would divide the river by 
 his command, and give them an easy passage through it. By saying 
 these things he deceived many." He also states that the procurator 
 " sent a squad of horsemen after them, which, falling upon them un- 
 expectedly, slaughtered many of them, and captured many alive. 
 They take Theudas himself alive, cut off his head, and bring it to 
 Jerusalem." 1 This occuried while Fadus was procurator of Judea, 
 about A. D. 45, so that it is not possible that Gamaliel, about A. D. 
 33, can have referred to this man. The only way in which Luke 
 can be charged with error is to suppose that he put into the mouth 
 of Gamaliel this statement, forgetting at the time that Theudas lived 
 about twelve years later. But this is inadmissible, especially as 
 Gamaliel says : " After this man rose up Judas of Galilee in the 
 days of the taxing, and drew away much people," etc. This oc- 
 curred A. D. 6-8, and is recorded, as we have already seen, by Jose- 
 phus. How was it possible for Luke to make such a mistake as to 
 place Theudas forty years or more too early ? The Theudas of Jo- 
 sephus played his part about fifteen years before Luke, with Paul, 
 visited Jerusalem, and his acts must have been fresh in the minds of 
 all. It is not at all strange that Josephus should omit the Theudas 
 mentioned by Gamaliel, as he had only four hundred followers, 
 who dispersed after he was slain. But the Theudas of Josephus 
 was a far more important character. Respecting the Theudas of the 
 Acts, Dr. Robinson remarks: " He is probably to be placed during 
 the interregnum immediately after the death of Herod the Great, 
 when Judea was disturbed by frequent seditions. See Josephus. 
 
 'Antiq., xx, cap. vii, 3 ; and Wars, ii, cap. xv, I. 
 
 'Sirabo, lib. xvii, 793. He calls the town Dicaearchia. * Antiq., xx, cap. , I*
 
 OF THE HOLY SCRIPTURES. C43 
 
 Antiq., xvii, x, 2-10. . . . Some hold Theudas to have been, under 
 another name, either the Judas or the Simon of Josephus, (Antiq., 
 xvii, x, 5, 6)." ' Paley observes : " It is proved from Josephus that 
 there were not fewer than four persons of the name of Simon within 
 forty years, and not fewer than three of the name of Judas within 
 ten years, who were all leaders of insurrections." a 
 
 Upon the whole, it is far more probable that there were two lead- 
 ers of insurrections by the name of Theudas, than that Luke should 
 have made a mistake in this matter, as we have seen that he every- 
 where shows such accurate historical knowledge. Nor does Luke, 
 in fact, need the testimony of Josephus, which we have seen in such 
 a striking manner confirms his statements. The fairness, candour, 
 and accuracy of Luke appear on every page of the Acts. As it is, 
 however,. Luke and Josephus strongly corroborate each other. 
 
 The statement respecting Stephen, that immediately after his speech 
 before the Sanhedrim he was assaulted, cast out of the city, and stoned 
 to death, without any vote of condemnation by the Sanhedrim, or any 
 sentence from the governor, who alone had the power to inflict the 
 death penalty, has been thought to create a difficulty. But it is not 
 necessary to suppose that the members of the Sanhedrim committed 
 the murder, though they doubtless connived at it. In fact, however, 
 the killing of Stephen was a great deal like a case of lynching in our 
 country, when an enraged mob, thinking that the process of law is 
 too slow, and the punishment of the criminal too uncertain, inflict 
 summary punishment themselves. 
 
 Equally accurate are the geography and topography of Luke. H$ 
 knows the distance of the Mount of Olives from Jerusalem a Sab* 
 bath day's journey (chap, i, 12). He is acquainted with the Beauti4 
 ful gate of the Temple (chap, iii, 10) ; knows there is a street in Da- 
 mascus called Straight s (chap, ix, 1 1) ; is familiar with the Areopagus 
 at Athens (chap, xvii, 19-34), and is acquainted even with Appii 
 Forum and the Three Taverns (chap, xxviii, 15). But we have 
 touched upon a few points only, for the whole book teems with ac- 
 curate geographical and topographical knowledge, and indicates that 
 its author must have been a careful and extensive traveler. 
 
 When we add to the foregoing proofs of credibility, the evidence 
 furnished by numerous passages in the Epistles of Paul, many of 
 them undesigned coincidences, the resulting evidence in proof of 
 the historical truth of the Acts is overwhelming. And this same 
 
 1 Greek Lex. of New Testament : Theudas. * Evidences of Christianity. 
 
 ' We traversed the whole length of this street, which extends more than a mile 
 from wall to wall through the old city of Damascus, of which it is the only straight 
 street.
 
 644 INTRODUCTION TO THE STUDY 
 
 well informed, careful, and conscientious historian wrote also the 
 third Gospel, in which he informs us that he " had perfect under- 
 standing of all things from the very first " (chap, i, 3). 
 
 Chrysostom, bishop of Constantinople about A. D. 400, makes a 
 The strange re- stran g e remark in the beginning of his Commentary on 
 mark of chry- the Acts, written in that city : " To many both this book 
 and its author are unknown." He means, probably, many 
 in Constantinople and at that time ; yet, even with this limitation, the 
 statement is doubtless an exaggeration. Irenseus, bishop of Lyons, 
 A. D. 177-202, makes great use of the Acts, especially in his third 
 book against Heresies. In one instance he quotes it nine times on 
 a single page. It was also used by Clement of Alexandria in the 
 last part of the second century, and about the same time by Ter- 
 tullian at Carthage. It appears, also, to have been used by Polycarp 
 in the Epistle to the Philippians. 1 In the subsequent centuries it 
 was used everywhere in the Christian world as an undoubted au- 
 thority. It is true, it was not so much quoted as the Gospels which 
 contain the teachings of Christ himself. 
 
 The five books containing the history of Christ and his apostles 
 are the foundations of the Christian faith, and with the acknowledg- 
 ment of their genuineness the truth of Christianity necessarily fol- 
 lows. The Epistles of the apostles establish the same historical facts 
 respecting Christ and his apostles, and set forth the great doctrines 
 of the Founder of Christianity as developed and explained by his 
 chosen messengers. 
 
 T 
 
 CHAPTER XX. 
 
 THE EPISTLES OF PAUL. 
 THE PERSON OF THE APOSTLE. 
 
 HIS great apostle to the Gentiles, who wrote at least thirteen 
 Epistles of the New Testament Canon, and who in natural 
 ability and culture was superior to all the other apostles, was born 
 at Tarsus (Acts xxii, 3), the most important city of Cilicia," highly 
 
 1 "Having loosed the pains [w<5h>af] of death" (Actsii, 24). " Having loosed the 
 pains [w&vizf] of Hades." Sec. I. Teaching of the Twelve Apostles alludes to it. 
 
 Terome says (Com. in Philem.) that he had heard the story (fabulam, fable) that 
 the parents of the Apostle Paul were of the region of Giscalis in Judea [in Northern 
 Palestine], and when the whole province was destroyed by the Romans, and the 
 Jews were scattered over the world, they went to Tarsus accompanied by Paul, who 
 was then a young man. This story is manifestly false, as it contradicts the apostle
 
 OF THE HOLY SCRIPTURES. 645 
 
 distinguished for its intellectual culture, and for the freedom and 
 privileges that had been conferred upon it by Mark Antony and 
 Augustus Caesar. 
 
 Paul himself tells us that he was of the tribe of Benjamin, circum- 
 cised the eighth day, and of the sect of the Pharisees Paul's personal 
 (Philippians iii, 5). It does not appear by what means h 1 * 101 "?. 
 his father, or some other ancestor, obtained the rights of Roman 
 citizenship, in the possession of which the apostle was born (Acts 
 xxii, 28). He acquired in his youth the art of tent-making, by which 
 we find him supporting himself while at Corinth (Acts xviii, 3). 
 
 The Jews regarded it of high importance that every boy she .Id 
 learn some trade ; hence the proverb among them : " Whoever 
 teaches his son no trade, teaches him to steal." He received his 
 training, in Jerusalem, having been instructed by Gamaliel, a cele- 
 brated rabbi (Acts xxii, 3), grandson of the famous Hillel. It is 
 uncertain how old he was when put under the instructions of Ga- 
 maliel. It is said that Jewish boys commenced the study of the 
 law when twelve years of age. But we cannot determine whether 
 Paul was so young when sent from Tarsus to Jerusalem to pursue 
 the study of the law under Gamaliel. Nor do we know when he 
 finished his rabbinical education. 
 
 The apostle was well acquainted with Syro-Chaldee, the vernacu- 
 lar language of Palestine, as we find him addressing a Attalnmento ^ 
 crowd at Jerusalem in this tongue, called Hebrew (Acts Paul in knowi- 
 xxii, 2). He was proficient in Greek, for he addressed 
 at the Areopagus the Athenians there assembled. The Hebrew of 
 the Old Testament he doubtless studied with Gamaliel in connexion 
 with the study of the law. It is impossible to state with any cer- 
 tainty the extent of his Greek culture, though it probably was con- 
 siderable. At the Areopagus he quotes the Greek poet Aratus (Acts 
 xvii, 28). In i Corinthians xv, 33, is a quotation from Menander, 
 and in Titus i, 12 he gives a quotation from Epimenides of Gnossus 
 in Crete. It is not improbable that Paul was in Jerusalem during 
 some part of Christ's ministry there, and that he saw the Redeemer. 
 This seems to be indicated in 2 Corinthians v, 16 : "Though we 
 have known Christ after the flesh, yet now henceforth know we him 
 no more." 
 
 We first meet with him, under the name of Saul, in the account of 
 the stoning of Stephen, where he is called a young man at whose 
 
 himself (Acts xxii, 3), and is inconsistent with the facts of history, as Giscala did not 
 surrender to the Romans until a short time before the destruction of Jerusalem, 
 which was A. D. 70. In De Viris Illustribus he states that he was of Giscalis, as U 
 he did not regard it as a fable.
 
 646 INTRODUCTION TO THE STUDY 
 
 feet the witnesses laid down their clothes. Immediately after this he 
 Paul's omver- appears as a bitter persecutor of the Church, and sets out 
 for Damascus with letters from the high priest to the 
 synagogues in Damascus authorizing him to bind and bring from 
 that city to Jerusalem the followers of Christ (Acts ix, i, 2). When 
 he draws near to Damascus Christ appears to him, strikes him to the 
 earth blind, remonstrates with him, and commissions him to preach 
 the Gospel to Jews and Gentiles. After three days' blindness, he 
 receives sight when Ananias lays hands on him, after which he is 
 baptized, and preaches Christ in the synagogues at Damascus (Acts 
 ix, 3-20; xxii, 4-16; xxvi, 10-20; Gal. i, 12-16, etc.). The Jews 
 lying in wait to kill him, he escapes and goes into Arabia, and re- 
 turns to Damascus. Three years after his conversion (about A. D. 
 38) he goes up to Jerusalem to see Peter, with whom he remains 
 fifteen days, and sees James also (Gal i, 17-19; Acts ix, 26, 27). 
 While remaining in Jerusalem he preaches the Gospel, and, his life 
 being thereby endangered, he is sent to Tarsus (Acts ix, 29, 30). A 
 few years later Barnabas brings him from Tarsus to Antioch, and he 
 is sent along with Barnabas from Antioch to Jerusalem with alms 
 Paul's mission- f r tne relief of the necessitous Christians during the 
 ary journeys, famine (about A. D. 45). After returning from this mis- 
 sion, through the suggestion of the Holy Spirit, he is sent by the 
 Church at Antioch, in company with Barnabas, upon a missionary 
 tour, and visits Seleucia and Cyprus. After the conversion of the 
 proconsul of the island, Sergius Paulus, he is called Paul, the name 
 by which he calls himself in all his Epistles. Jerome ' supposes that 
 he assumed the name of Paul (or Paulus) from the name of this pro- 
 consul whom he had brought over to the Christian faith. This may 
 be the real ground of the change, though it admits of no proof. 
 After this he visits Perga, Antioch in Pisidia, Iconium, Lystra, 
 Derbe, and returns to Antioch from his mission. When the dispute 
 arose at Antioch respecting the observance of the Mosaic law, he and 
 Barnabas were sent to Jerusalem to consult the apostles and elders. 
 This was Paul's third visit to Jerusalem, to which he refers in Gala- 
 tians ii, i : " Then fourteen years after I went up to Jerusalem with 
 Barnabas." If we count these fourteen years from the visit he made 
 three years after his conversion, this third visit occurred about A. D. 
 52. After this mission Paul preaches the gospel at Antioch, and 
 in company with Silas he preaches through Syria and Cilicia, Derbe, 
 Lystra, Phrygia, and the region of Galatia; he visits Philippi, where 
 he preaches the gospel, is imprisoned, and miraculously delivered. 
 He passes through Amphipolis and Apollonia, and comes to Thes- 
 1 De Viris Illus. Paulus.
 
 OF THE HOLY SCRIPTURES. 647 
 
 salonica, where he preaches, and leaves for Berea, where he also pro- 
 claims the gospel, and comes to Athens, where he preaches at the 
 Areopagus. From Athens he passes over to Corinth, where he pro- 
 claims the gospel for eighteen months, and writes the two Epistles 
 to the Thessalonians about A. D. 54. He next visits Ephesus, sails 
 for Csesarea, and goes up to Jerusalem ; returns to Antioch, and 
 passes over Galatia and Phrygia, and comes to Ephesus, where he 
 preaches the gospel for two years and three months. While here 
 he writes his First Epistle to the Corinthians. About A. D. 58 he 
 leaves Ephesus for Macedonia, where he writes the Second Epistle 
 to the Corinthians, and visits Greece, especially Corinth, in which 
 city he writes the Epistle to the Romans. 
 
 On his journey to Jerusalem he calls at Miletus, where he ad- 
 dresses the assembled elders of the Ephesian Church, sails for 
 Csesarea, and goes up to Jerusalem. Here he is arrested, and de- 
 tained in custody about two years. He appeals to Caesar, is ship- 
 wrecked on the voyage to Rome, but finally reaches the city about 
 A. D. 6 1 or 62. Here he preaches the gospel for two years in his 
 own hired house, and writes the Epistles to Philemon, to the Colos- 
 sians, to the Ephesians, and to the Philippians. 
 
 At this point the history of Paul, as recorded in the Acts, ends, 
 and the question arises, Was he released at the end of j^^ reported 
 the two years ? and if so, where did he preach, and where of the later his- 
 and how did he finish his career? It appears from 
 Philippians ii, 24, " But I trust in the Lord that I also myself shall 
 come shortly," that Paul was expecting a release at the time of writ- 
 ing, which must have been at the end of two years, from the manner 
 in which he speaks of the effect of his preaching (chap, i, 12-14). 
 
 In the Canon of Muratori, written at Rome about A. D. 160, men- 
 tion is made of " Paul's setting out from the city [Rome] for Spain." 
 This is valuable testimony to the release and departure of Paul. 
 Clement of Rome, in his Epistle to the Corinthians, written not later 
 than A. D. 96, in speaking of Paul, says : " He taught the whole 
 world righteousness, and having gone to the bound of the west (iirl rd 
 repfia r^g dvoeoog), 1 and having borne witness before rulers, he thus 
 left the world," etc. This comes from the bishop of Rome, who was 
 doubtless acquainted with Paul, and is of the highest value. By 
 :< the bound of the west," to which Paul traveled, Spain is in all 
 probability meant. No writer at Rome could call that city " the 
 bound of the west." If Paul preached in Western Europe, he must 
 
 1 This is the exact Greek of the passage, as published by Tischendorf in the fac- 
 simile of the MS. of the Epistle, and it is confirmed by the recently discovered copy 
 of the Epistle in Constantinople, published by Bryennius, sec. 5.
 
 G48 INTRODUCTION TO THE STUDY 
 
 have been released from the confinement in Rome described at the 
 end of the Acts. 
 
 In 2 Timothy iv, 16 Paul says : " At ray first answer (dfroAoyta, de- 
 fence) no man stood with me, but all men forsook me." It is evi- 
 dent that this arraignment of the apostle, in which he declares, " I 
 am now ready to be offered, and the time of my departure is at 
 hand " (2 Tim. iv, 16), is different from any appearance of his before 
 Nero during the first imprisonment at Rome, for Timothy was then 
 with him (Philippians i, i). Also the direction to Timothy, "The 
 cloak that I left at Troas with Carpus, when thou comest, bring with 
 thee, and the books, but especially the parchments" (2 Tim. iv, 13), 
 indicates in all probability that, not long before, Paul had left these 
 articles there, and that he must have been released from his first 
 imprisonment. We may, therefore, safely conclude that the apostle 
 was released from his first imprisonment, and visited Spain, Mace- 
 donia, and Asia Minor. In Romans xv, 24 he speaks of visiting 
 Rome on his way to Spain ; and in Philippians ii, 24 he says : " I 
 trust in the Lord that I also myself shall come shortly." It would 
 be most natural to suppose that he visited Spain first, and afterward 
 went to Macedonia and Asia Minor. But the order in which he 
 visited these places we cannot determine. 
 
 Caius, presbyter of Rome about A. D. 200, says, in writing to 
 Paul's death. Proclus : "I can show the monuments of the apostles 
 [Peter and Paul]. For if you are willing to go out to the Vatican, 
 or take the road to Ostia, you will find the monuments [tombs] of 
 those who founded this Church." Jerome states that Paul was be- 
 headed at Rome in the fourteenth year of Nero's reign (A. D. 68) 
 and buried in the road to Ostia,* situated at the mouth of the 
 Tiber.* Eusebius also states that Paul was beheaded when brought 
 the second time before Nero. 4 
 
 The oldest and most trustworthy account of St. Paul outside of 
 the New Testament is found in the Epistle of Clement of Rome to 
 the Corinthians (written A. D. 93-96), to which we have already re- 
 ferred : " On account of envy Paul received the reward of his 
 patience : seven times was he in bonds, he was an exile, he was 
 stoned, and having been a preacher in the east and in the west, he 
 received the honourable renown of his faith ; and having taught the 
 
 'In Eusebius, Hist Eccles., lib. ii, cap. xxiv. *De Viris Illus. Paulas. 
 
 "About one and a quarter miles from tne wall of Rome now stands the splendid 
 Basilica of Paul. Under this Church are said to be the remains of St. Paul, with 
 the exception of the head, which is said to be in the Lateran. We observed on thj 
 road to the Basilica an inscription stating that here Peter and Paul, going to mar- 
 tyrdom, separated. * Hist. Eccles., lib. ii, 22, 25.
 
 OF THE HOLY SCRIPTURES. 649 
 
 rhole world righteousness, and having gone to the bound of the 
 west, and borne witness before rulers, he thus departed from the 
 world, and went to the holy place, having become the greatest ex- 
 ample of patience." * Clement evidently refers to the martyrdom of 
 Paul, since before speaking of him he says : " The greatest and the 
 most faithful pillars have been persecuted, and suffered even unto 
 death." a It is also very likely that Paul suffered at Rome or in its 
 vicinity, otherwise we should not in all probability have the particu- 
 lars of his history in Clement. Even the skeptical Baur remarks : 
 " That Paul died there [in Rome] as a martyr can be regarded as 
 an historical fact." ! 
 
 The Apostle Paul is distinguished for profundity, for a firm adhe- 
 rence to great principles, for a broad catholicity, for tolera- otaTaKtKtistloa 
 tion in things non-essential, and for great practical wis- of Pauiandhis 
 dom. His extraordinary natural gifts were all sanctified 
 by the divine Spirit and consecrated to Christ. His writings are dis- 
 tinguished for their variety, depth, and breadth. All the great doc- 
 trines of theology, of experimental religion, and our duties to God and 
 man, are set forth in them with great power. Everywhere his Epistles 
 are permeated with the spirit of Christ, exhibiting a richness, a fulness, 
 and at the same time a conciseness, unparalleled except by the great 
 Master himself. We are continually impressed with the deep con- 
 viction of his rich experience and earnestness and his universal love 
 
 ^P 
 * 
 
 CHAPTER XXI. 
 
 THE EPISTLE TO THE ROMANS. 
 THE PERSONS ADDRESSED. 
 
 Epistle is addressed " To all that be in Rome, beloved of 
 God, called to be saints " (chap, i, 7). The Church in that city 
 embraced both Jews and Gentiles. In chap, ii, 17 the writer says: 
 " Behold, thou art called a Jew, and restest in the law," etc.; and in 
 chap, xi, 13 he says: " For I speak to you Gentiles; inasmuch as I 
 am the apostle of the Gentiles, I magnify my office." And in other 
 parts of the Epistle we find references to both Jews and Gentiles. 
 The Jews at that time appear to have been numerous in Rome. 4 
 
 'Sec. 5. 
 
 * We have followed here the Constantinople text, as the Alexandrian is defective. 
 'Baur's remark we take from Bleek's Einleitung by Mangold, from Baur's Panliu 
 (2), i, p. 245. 
 4 Horace (Sat. i, 9, 70) refers to them as being in Rome and well-known.
 
 650 INTRODUCTION TO THE STUDY 
 
 Claudius Caesar banished ' them from that city ; but in the time of 
 Nero, when Paul arrived there, they had evidently returned, for he 
 called together the chief of them." ' 
 
 It is not known by whom the gospel was first preached in Rome, 
 probabieorigin * l * s nowever > not improbable that some Jews from Rome 
 at the church at Jerusalem on the day of Pentecost, converted by the 
 preaching of Peter, returning to the Roman metropolis, 
 founded a Christian Church there. In this Epistle the apostle speaks 
 of the Roman Christians as follows : " I thank my God through Jesus 
 Christ for you all, that your faith is spoken of throughout the whole 
 world " (chap, i, 8), and declares that he had often purposed to come 
 unto them (chap, i, 13). The Church there was evidently established 
 at a very early period. Tacitus, in speaking of the Christians when 
 Rome was burnt during the reign of Nero (A. 0.64), says that they 
 were "a vast multitude." 1 
 
 PLACE AND TIME OF ITS COMPOSITION. 
 
 It is certain that St. Paul wrote this Epistle at Corinth during his 
 written at oor- second sojourn in that city. He speaks of Gaius as his 
 tath - host (chap, xvi, 23) ; and we find in i Corinthians i, 14 
 
 that Gaius was a Corinthian Christian who had been baptized by 
 Paul. He also names Erastus (chap, xvi, 23) as " the chamberlain 
 of the city," that is, Corinth, and with this agrees his statement, 
 " Erastus abode at Corinth " (2 Tim. iv, 20). He commends unto 
 the Roman Christians Phebe, a servant of the Church at Cenchrea 
 (about nine miles from Corinth), and requests them to receive her 
 as becometh saints. These references show that Paul was at Corinth * 
 when he wrote. He also states that he is about to set out for Jeru- 
 salem to take to the poor saints in that city the contributions from 
 Macedonia and Achaia (chap, xv, 25, 26), which not only shows 
 that the apostle was in the region of Corinth when he wrote, but in- 
 dicates the time of writing, as we find in the Acts that Paul imme- 
 diately before starting for Jerusalem spent three months in Corinth, 
 and then passed through Macedonia (Acts xx, 2-6). Now this was 
 Paul's second sojourn in Corinth, and accordingly the Epistle was 
 written about A. D. 58 or 59. 
 
 THE GENUINENESS OF THIS EPISTLE. 
 
 Respecting the genuineness of this Epistle there is no dispute. It 
 is one of the Epistles that even the Tubingen school acknowledge 
 
 1 Acts xviii, 2 ; Suetonius, cap. xxv. * Acts xxviii, 17. AnnaL, lib. XY, cap. xliv. 
 4 At the end of the Epistle in the Peshito-Syriac version it is stated that it was 
 written at Corinth.
 
 OF THE HOLY SCRIPTURES. 6ol 
 
 to have been written by Paul. It was also universally received by 
 the ancient Church as an undoubted writing of that apos- universal no- 
 lle and was evidently used by Clement J of Rome in the toowiedgraent 
 
 . of the genuine* 
 
 first century, and by Polycarp, a disciple of the Apostle ness of into 
 
 John. It is quoted as the divine word, about A. D. E P tatle - 
 180, by Theophilus, bishop of Antioch,' and in the Epistles written 
 by the Churches of Lyons and Vienna to the Churches in Asia Minor 4 
 (A. D. 177) there is an exact quotation of Romans viii, 18. About 
 the same time Irenseus quotes this Epistle as having been written by 
 Paul tD the Romans.* 
 
 Clement of Alexandria, in the last part of the second century, in 
 quoting this Epistle, says : " Paul, in the Epistle to the Romans, 
 writes," " etc. Also Tertullian, at Carthage (about A. D. 200), uses 
 the Epistle as the writing of the Apostle Paul.* It was quoted by 
 the heretic Basilides * about A. D. 125, and formed a part of the 
 canon of Marcion (A. D. 140). The Epistle was written for Paul 
 by Tertius (chap, xvi, 22), and was sent to the Romans no doubt by 
 Phebe, who is commended to the Roman Christians (chap, xvi, i, 2). 
 We do not perceive any special design in the Epistle, except to set 
 forth the great doctrines of the Gospel to the Roman Christians, and 
 to inform them of the apostle's desire and intention to visit them 
 and preach the Gospel to them. 
 
 CONTENTS. 
 
 The apostle expresses his earnest desire to see the Christians at 
 Rome, and preach to them the gospel which is able to save all men. 
 He portrays the crimes and vices of the pagan world, and represents 
 the heathen as inexcusable in their sins, as God has manifested him- 
 self to them in the works of nature and in conscience, and sets forth 
 the divine retributive justice in rewarding virtue and punishing vice 
 among all men, affirming that both Jews and Gentiles are guilty 
 before him (chaps, i-iii, 20). Sinners can be justified only through 
 the propitiatory sacrifice of Christ. In illustration of this the justifi- 
 cation of Abraham by faith is cited, and also the language of David 
 (chaps, iii, 2i-iv). The blessed results of justification by faith in 
 Christ are peace and joy in the Holy Spirit (chap. v). The neces- 
 
 1 The doctrine of justification by faith and not by works in sec. 32 of Clement's 
 Epistle is based on Rom. iii-v. Sec. 35 refers clearly to Rom. i, 32. 
 Compare Polycarp's Epistle, sec. 6, with Rom. xiv, 10, 12. 
 Ad Autolycum, lib. iii, 14, in which he refers to Rom. xiii, 7, 8 ; also in i, 14 h 
 refers to Rom. ii, 6, 8. 4 In Eusebius, Hist. Eccles., lib. v, cap. i, et aL 
 
 Contra Hsereses, lib. iii. cap. xvi, 3. Stromata, lib. iii, cap. xi, etc. 
 
 T Adversus Gnosticos Scorpiace, cap. xiii, xiv, and elsewhere. 
 8 In Hippolytus, Ref. Hseres., lib vii, 25. 
 42
 
 652 INTRODUCTION TO THE STUDY 
 
 sity of leading a holy life, and of not making the doctrine of justifica- 
 tion by faith a license for sin, is then set forth (chaps, vi, vii). The 
 happy condition of those who are redeemed through Christ and 
 walk after the Spirit is next described (chap. viii). The rejection oi 
 the mass of the Jews for their unbelief has parallels in their ancient 
 history, and God has always had a faithful people among them. The 
 divine sovereignty is illustrated in the history of Pharaoh. The 
 Jews will ultimately embrace Christianity (chapters ix-xi). The 
 previous part of the Epistle is doctrinal. This is followed by a sum- 
 mary of our duties to God, to our fellow-men in general, and to our 
 rulers (chaps, xii, xiii). Advice is given respecting those who have 
 weak consciences (chaps, xiv, xv, 4). 
 
 The apostle offers a prayer, and delivers an exhortation to the 
 Roman Christians, refers to his widely-extended ministry, and de- 
 clares the intention of visiting them at a future day, but that he is 
 immediately going up to Jerusalem to convey contributions to the 
 poor saints in that city (chap, xv, 5-33). The Epistle closes with 
 an appendix of salutations (chap. xvi). 
 
 INTEGRITY OF THE EPISTLE. 
 
 There can be no doubt that the entire Epistle was written by Paul. 
 
 Did the Epistle ^ ne ^ ast two cna P ters > ^ seems, were rejected by Mar- 
 end with chap- cion, for Origen, in commenting on chapters xvi, 25-27, 
 remarks : " Marcion, by whom the evangelical and apos- 
 tolical writings have been interpolated, cut off this chapter entirely 
 from this Epistle ; and not only did he cut off this, but also from that 
 passage where it is written, Whatever is not of faith is sin, he cut 
 off every thing to the end ; " * that is, he cut off the last two chapters. 
 Baur, also, and Schwegler and Zeller deny the genuineness of these 
 two chapters. But their Pauline origin is acknowledged by Hilgen- 
 feld. 1 They are found in the oldest extant Greek MSS., the Vatican, 
 Sinaitic, and Alexandrian ; in the Peshito-Syriac, the Memphitic, 
 the ^thiopic, Armenian, and Gothic * versions. It is evident from 
 an examination of the Epistle that it could not have originally ended 
 with chapter xiv, and the last two chapters bear the Pauline stamp, 
 and contain several undesigned coincidences, which Paley shows in 
 his Horse Paulinse. We do not know of any critical editor of the 
 New Testament who rejects these two chapters, or has any suspicion 
 of their genuineness. For such suspicion no grounds exist. 
 
 1 This passage we have given from the Latin translation of this Commentary 
 The Greek is lost. * Einleitung, 322, 323. 
 
 1 Parts only of the two chapters are found in the Gothic, which is but fragmentary
 
 OF THE HOLY SCRIPTURES. 653 
 
 This Epistle is, perhaps, the grandest of all the writings of St. Paul 
 The First Epistle to the Corinthians can alone be compared with it. 
 It is a great treasury of the sublime doctrines, duties, and privileges 
 of Christianity. 
 
 CHAPTER XXII 
 
 THE FIRST EPISTLE TO THE CORINTHIANS. 
 
 THE PERSONS ADDRESSED. 
 
 /CORINTH, on a narrow isthmus between the Saronic and Corin- 
 ^ thian Gulfs, was founded at a very early period, most probably 
 by the Phoenicians. Possessing great facilities for commerce, it be- 
 came a splendid city, and at the time it was destroyed by the 
 consul Mummius (B. C. 146) was "the richest in .Greece, and 
 abounded in statues, paintings, and other works of art." It was 
 called by Cicero "the light of all Greece." 1 After having been 
 thoroughly destroyed, it remained in ruins for about a century, until 
 Julius Caesar sent thither a colony (B. C. 46), and about a hundred 
 years later, when visited by the Apostle Paul, it had again become 
 an important city. Strabo visited it, and in his description, written 
 about A. D. 20, he represents it as situated at the foot and on the 
 north side of a peak (or hill Acrocorinthus) something more than a 
 third of a mile in height.' 
 
 The Church in this city was founded by Saint Paul, who came 
 here from Macedonia and Athens about A. D. 52, and The foundation 
 preached the gospel at least a year and a half, assisted ^m^corin" 
 by Timothy, Silas, and others (Acts xviii, 1-18). The twan Church. 
 Christian society was large, and composed almost entirely of Gentiles 
 (Acts xviii, 6, 8). 
 
 About three years after the apostle had left the Corinthian dis- 
 ciples he was informed that there were divisions among them, and 
 that various abuses had crept into the Church. In the time inter- 
 vening between Paul's preaching and the writing of the Epistle, 
 A.pollos, an Alexandrian Jew, eloquent and mighty in the Scriptures, 
 Having received full instruction on Christian doctrine at Ephesus, 
 went to Corinth and preached the gospel. In the illustration of 
 Christianity he probably drew largely on the Greek philosophy of 
 Alexandria, and highly delighted the intellectual Corinthians. Some 
 of his hearers preferred him to Paul ; others, especially such as had 
 come over to Christianity from Judaism, preferred Peter, as being 
 1 Pro Lege ManiL, sec. iv. * Lib. viii, 370.
 
 654 INTRODUCTION TO THE STUDY 
 
 an original apostle of Christ, and denied the apostleship of Paul. 
 The most, however, doubtless adhered to Paul. Still others, attach- 
 ing no importance to any Christian teacher, satisfied themselves with 
 the doctrines of Christ, which had been delivered to them without 
 any exposition from human authority. This seems to have been the 
 real state of the case. The apostle does not charge them with grave 
 errors in departing from the great doctrines of the Gospel, but with 
 creating divisions in the Church. 
 
 It appears from chap, vii, i that the Corinthians had already writ- 
 ten to Paul concerning certain matters, so that he had reasons of a 
 most urgent character for writing to them. 
 
 PLACE AND TIME OF ITS COMPOSITION. 
 
 The Epistle was evidently written at Ephesus, near the close of the 
 
 apostle's ministry of twenty-seven months in that city 
 Notices In the , \ , T-V T,- 
 
 Acts or Paul's (Acts xix), about A. D. 57 or 58. Various references in 
 
 the E P istle compared with the Acts determine this place 
 and this time. In the Epistle (chap, xvi, 8) th'e apostle 
 says: "I will tarry at Ephesus until Pentecost." In harmony with 
 this as the place of writing is : " The Churches of Asia salute you " 
 (chap, xvi, 19). In chapter xvi, 2-6 the apostle gives directions re- 
 specting contributions for the poor at Jerusalem, stating that if it 
 is proper he himself will go to Jerusalem along with the persons 
 appointed to take the contributions to that city; and that he will 
 pay the Corinthians a visit when he passes through Macedonia. In 
 chap, iv, 17 he tells the Corinthians that he has sent Timothy unto 
 them ; and in chap, xvi, 10 he gives directions, if " Timotheus come, 
 see that he may be with you without fear." We find in Acts xix, xx 
 that St. Paul, a short time before he left Ephesus, sent Timothy into 
 Macedonia, and then went through it himself to Corinth, where he 
 remained three months, and then returned through Macedonia, and 
 went up to Jerusalem. It appears from Acts xviii, 26 that Aquila 
 and Priscilla were at Ephesus during the apostle's abode in that 
 city ; and with this harmonizes the salutation : " Aquila and Pris- 
 cilla salute you much in the Lord " (chap. x?i, 19). It would seem 
 that it was about one year before the beginning of Paul's ministry at 
 Ephesus that Apollos, having come to Ephesus and received full 
 instruction in Christianity, went to Corinth, where he preached the 
 gospel (Acts xviii, 24~xix, i). 
 
 In chapter v, 9 the apostle refers to a former Epistle addressed to 
 the Corinthians, which is no longer extant. It is very probable that 
 the matter discussed was not of a general nature, and that the two 
 subsequent Epistles of Paul, which we now have, so completely cov-
 
 OF THE HOLY SCRIPTURES. 655 
 
 ered the ground that the first Epistle had no further interest, and, of 
 course, would naturally perish. 
 
 CONTENTS OF THE EPISTLE. 
 
 The apostle reproves the party spirit and dissensions of the Co- 
 rinthian Christians, and justifies himself in not dealing in Greek wis- 
 dom when he preached among them. He affirms that this wisdom 
 cannot lead men to God ; but that the gospel he preached was ac- 
 companied by the divine Spirit, and by miraculous power ; and that, 
 further, the natural man is incapable of understanding spiritual 
 truth (chap. ii). He charges the Corinthians with being carnal, 
 since party spirit prevails among them, and affirms that himself and 
 Apollos are merely ministers of the word, and that it is God who 
 gives success. He shows them that, after all, the various ministers of { 
 the gospel are theirs, and vindicates his apostolic authority, and 
 speaks of his persecutions and sufferings for the sake of Christ, and 
 declares that he is their father in the gospel (chaps, iii, iv). From 
 the vindication of his apostolic authority he passes to the correction, 
 of abuses in the Church, and censures severely the crime of one's 
 having his father's wife, and states how they should deal with such a 
 member, at the same time exhorting them to be holy in life, and to 
 associate with no bad man professing the religion of Christ (chap. v). ? 
 He disapproves of Christians going to law with each other. He 
 declares that the unrighteous shall not inherit the kingdom of God, 
 and warns them against impurity (chap. vi). He discusses marriage, 
 which he declares in some cases is necessary, but in the present state 
 of the Church has many inconveniences (chap. vii). He explains 
 that an idol is nothing, yet it is not advisable to eat meat sacrificed 
 to idols when it would offend weak brethren (chap. viii). He affirms 
 that it is right that the ministers of the gospel should be supported, 
 but that he has not availed himself of that privilege, and that he had ; 
 laboured solely for the cause of the gospel, becoming all things to 
 all men (chap. ix). He warns them against sin from the examples 
 of Jewish history, and cautions them against taking a part in idol- 
 atrous sacrifices, and eating any thing sacrified to idols when it would 
 give offence (chapter x). He gives directions respecting women 
 keeping their heads covered during divine service, and condemns the 
 ray in which they celebrate the communion (chap. xi). He dis- 
 cusses the various offices in the Church, which are constituted for 
 the general good (chap. xii). He gives a description of love, without 
 which he declares every other gift is useless, and while every thing 
 else passes away, faith, hope, and love remain, but the greatest of 
 these is love (chap. xiii). He adds directions respecting the manner
 
 656 INTRODUCTION TO THE STUDY 
 
 in which the spiritual gifts, especially that of tongues, are to be used 
 (chap. xiv). The apostle enumerates the testimonies to the resur- 
 rection of Christ, which he declares to be the vital fact in the religion 
 of Christ, and discusses the resurrection of the dead from natural 
 analogies, and exhorts them to steadfastness (chap. xv). In the con- 
 cluding chapter (xvi) Paul counsels them concerning collections, 
 and promises to visit them some time after Pentecost ; gives direc 
 tions also about the reception of Timothy, their treatment of the 
 house of Stephanus, and other matters, and sends greetings. 
 
 GENUINENESS OF THIS EPISTLE. 
 
 Concerning the genuineness of this Epistle there never has been 
 Ancient testf- any doubt. Even the Tubingen school of critics ac- 
 moniea. knowledge it to be Paul's. It is referred to by Clement 
 
 of Rome in his Epistle to the Corinthians, written A. D. 93-96, less 
 than forty years after the apostle wrote it. " Take into your hands," 
 says he, " the Epistle of the blessed Paul the apostle. What did he 
 first write concerning you in the beginning of the gospel ? In truth, 
 he wrote to you in a spiritual way respecting himself, and Cephas, 
 and Apollos, on account of your having, even then, shown your par- 
 tisan feelings," ' etc. It is also quoted as Paul's by Polycarp : " Do 
 we not know that the saints shall judge the world ? as Paul teaches." ' 
 Irenaeus frequently quotes it, and in several places attributes it to 
 Paul.* It is quoted by Athenagoras 4 (about A. D. 177) as the writing 
 of the apostle. Clement of Alexandria 5 quotes it as the First Epis- 
 tle of Paul to the Corinthians. So does Tertullian.' In the Epistle 
 to Diognetus it is cited : " The apostle says." * It is also referred to 
 in several places in the Second Epistle to the Corinthians. The 
 undoubted genuineness of this Epistle is of the highest importance, 
 as Paul, who had been in the company of the apostles, states the ap- 
 pearances of Christ to the apostles and others after his resurrection ' 
 (chap, xv, 4-8). 
 
 In importance of doctrine this Epistle stands next to that to the 
 Romans, and the description of love (chap, xiii) is the finest passage 
 on that subject in the New Testament. 
 
 1 Sec. 47. Sec. H ; compare with this I Cor. li, 2. 
 
 1 As in Contra Haereses. lib. iii, cap. xviii, 3 ; lib. w, cap. xii, 2 ; cap. XT, a. 
 
 * De Resur. Mortuorum, cap. xviii. * Paedag. i, cap. vL 
 *Prascrip. xxxiii T Sec. xiL 
 
 * The skeptical Keim of Zurich, in his Life of Jesus of Nazareth, bases the resui 
 rection of Christ upon the testimony of Paul in this chapter (XT).
 
 OF THE HOLY SCRIPTURES. 657 
 
 CHAPTER XXIII. 
 
 THE SECOND EPISTLE TO THE CORINTHIANS. 
 THE PLACE AND TIME OF ITS COMPOSITION. 
 
 '"P'HIS Epistle. was certainly written from Macedonia. In chapter 
 * ii, 13 the apostle speaks of having gone into that country; also 
 in chap, vii, 5. In chapter ix, 2 he says, in speaking of the benevo- 
 lence of the Achseans, " for which I am boasting of you to them of 
 Macedonia, that Achaia was ready a year ago." This clearly shows 
 that he wrote in Macedonia. From references which the apostle 
 makes to the First Epistle it is clear that the Second was written not 
 long after the First. It is seen in Acts xix, xx, i, 2, that after Paul 
 left Ephesus he passed through Macedonia on his way to Corinth. 
 While in Macedonia he writes this Epistle, in which he informs the 
 Corinthians that he is on the point of visiting them (chaps, xii, 
 14, 20, 21 ; xiii, i). He refers to the troubles which he had in Asia 
 (chap, i, 8, 10), alluding to the uproar in Ephesus just before he left 
 the city (Acts xix, 24-41). Thus it is clear that it was written about 
 six months after the First Epistle, about A. D. 58 or 59. 
 
 Paul appears to have sent his first Epistle to the Corinthians by 
 Titus (2 Cor. viii, 16-18), who returned to him in Macedonia from 
 them, and reported the condition of the Corinthian Church, and the 
 good effect the First Epistle had had on them (2 Cor. vii, 6-16). 
 Upon the receipt of this information Paul writes this second letter, 
 to console them, and to prepare the way for his coming, and at the 
 same time to urge them to have their contributions ready. Although 
 especially addressed to the Corinthians, it includes " all the saints 
 that are in all Achaia " (chap, i, i). 
 
 CONTENTS. 
 
 The apostle rejoices in the consolation he receives from God in 
 trouble, by which he is enabled to comfort others who are in trouble, 
 affirming that both his sorrows and joys contribute to their salvation. 
 He also refers to his sufferings in Asia and his deliverance from death. 
 He rejoices in the testimony of a good conscience, and declares that 
 it had been his intention to pass through Corinth on his way to 
 Macedonia, but that he had deemed it best for them that he should 
 not come. He describes the sorrow with which he wroti the First
 
 658 INTRODUCTION TO THE STUDY 
 
 Epistle, and exhorts them to forgive and comfort the excommuni- 
 cated person. He speaks of his disappointment in not finding Titus 
 at Troas. His preaching, while it saves some, is resisted by others 
 (chaps, i, ii). The apostle declares that he needs no epistles of com- 
 mendation to them, as they are the Epistles of Christ, written by the 
 Holy Spirit, through the ministration of the apostle, and describes the 
 glorious ministration of the Spirit, by comparing it with the Mosaic 
 dispensation (chap. iii). He gives a description of his preaching 
 and sufferings for the Gospel, and declares his longing after eternal 
 life, and speaks of his faithful discharge of his apostolic duties, and 
 his earnest efforts to bring men to Christ. He describes at length 
 his varied experience, placing in striking contrast its different shades 
 (chaps, iv, v, vi, 1-13). He exhorts them not to be unequally yoked 
 together with unbelievers, but to purify themselves from all sin. He 
 asserts strongly his integrity and his affection for them, and declares 
 how he was comforted when Titus returned from them and informed 
 him of the good effect of his letter (chap, vi, 14 vii). He reminds 
 them of the liberality of the Macedonians, and of the example of 
 Christ, who became poor for us, and exhorts them not to fall short in 
 their contributions in aid of the poor. He informs them that he 
 has sent Titus to conduct the collection, and also another brother, 
 whose praise in the gospel is in all the Churches. He expresses 
 confidence in their liberality, and encourages them to give liberally, 
 as it will redound to their advantage, and cause others to be grateful 
 to God and to pray for them (chaps, viii, ix). He vindicates, against 
 his enemies, his conduct and preaching. He expresses a jealous fear 
 lest they should be corrupted from the simplicity of the Gospel, and 
 enters into a full vindication of his apostolic character, recounts his 
 labours, and declares that he is not a whit behind the chief apostles. 
 He states that he was caught up into Paradise, and heard things net 
 to be uttered; and, that he might not be exalted above measure, a 
 thorn was put into his flesh (chaps, x, xi, xii, 1-12). He declares 
 that he exhibited among them the signs of an apostle ; that now he 
 is coming to them for the third time, and that he will not be burden- 
 some to them. He expresses a fear that he will not find them such 
 as he would wish them to be, and exhorts them to examine them- 
 selves and prepare for his coming, as he will not spare the guilt y 
 (chaps, xii, ij-xiii).
 
 OF THE HOLY SCRIPTURES. 059 
 
 GENUINENESS OF THIS EPISTLE. 
 
 There is no dispute ' concerning the genuineness of this Epistle ; 
 it is acknowledged even by the Tubingen school. It was every- 
 where received by the early Church as the writing of Paul. It i3 
 called the Second Epistle of Paul to the Corinthians by Irenaeus, 1 
 by Clement * of Alexandria, by Tertullian, 4 by the Peshito-Syriac, 
 and the Canon of Muratori. 
 
 The Epistle is full of personal allusions, and bears the undoubted 
 stamp of Paul's character. It is not equal to the first in sublimity 
 and grandness of conception, but is almost wholly occupied with the 
 relations existing between the apostle and the Corinthians. 
 
 CHAPTER XXIV. 
 
 THE EPISTLE TO THE GALATIANS. 
 
 THE PERSONS ADDRESSED. 
 
 f~* ALATIA, called also Gallo-Graecia by Strabo, derived its name 
 ^ from the Gauls, 6 who settled in that region in the third century 
 before Christ. It was situated near the middle of Asia Character of 
 Minor, having Bithynia and Paphlagonia for its northern the population 
 boundary ; Phrygia for its western ; Lycaonia for its 
 southern ; and Pontus and Cappadocia for its eastern. Strabo states 
 that of " the Galatians there are three nations, two of them called 
 after the name of their leaders, Trocmi and Tolistobogii; and the 
 third named from the nation among the Celts, Tectosages." * Jerome 
 states in his time : " The Galatians excepting the Greek, which all 
 the East speaks have nearly the same language T which the Treviri * 
 have." * There can be no doubt that the most of them understood 
 Greek, so that there could have been no difficulty either in preach- 
 
 1 From this remark Bruno Baur is ever an exception, as he denied the genuine- 
 ness of all the writings of the New Testament. He must not be confounded with 
 C. F Baur, a man incomparably his superior. 
 
 1 Contra Hsereses, lib. iii, cap. vii, i. He quotes it as Paul's, lib. ii, cap. xxx, 7 : 
 1 For the Apostle says in the Second Epistle to the Corinthians," iv, cap. xxviii, 3. 
 
 *"The Apostle in the Second to the Corinthians." Stromata, iv, 16. 
 
 * De Pudicitia, cap. xiii. * Gauls were called Galatae by Strabo. * Lib. xii, 566. 
 f Jerome could speak from his own personal knowledge, as he had spent consid- 
 erable time at Treviri (Trdves), and afterwards traveled through Galatia. 
 
 * In Northern Gaul, the chief city of which district in modern times is called 
 TnWes. 'Comment, in Galat., lib. ii, cap. iiL
 
 660 INTRODUCTION TO THE STUDY 
 
 ing or writing to them in that language. It appears also that "as 
 early as the time of Augustus many Jews lived in Galatia, to whom 
 the emperor granted a letter of protection." These Jews, then, and 
 others who doubtless adhered to them, would naturally be first ad- 
 dressed, and the converts from among them would form the nucleus 
 of the Church, which had already become very powerful in that re- 
 gion in the first part of the second century. 1 
 
 Paul and Timothy preached the gospel to the Galatians about 
 The origin of ^' ^- S 2 (Acts xvi, 6). About three years later the apos- 
 ibe Gaiatian tie passes through the country of Galatia and Phrygia 
 strengthening the disciples (Acts xviii, 23). These are 
 all the references to the Galatians in the Acts. In the First Epistle 
 to the Corinthians (chap, xvi, i) Paul states that he had " given 
 order to the Churches of Galatia " respecting a collection. The First 
 Epistle to the Corinthians was written about A. D. 58, and Paul 
 refers here to his visitation of the Galatians about three years earlier, 
 which was his second missionary tour through that country. 
 
 It seems from chapter iv, 8 that the greatest part of the Gaiatian 
 Church were converted Gentiles : " When ye knew not God, ye did 
 service unto them which by nature are no gods." The Epistle is 
 addressed to no particular society, but in a general way " unto the 
 Churches of Galatia," because, doubtless, the converts were scattered 
 in small towns and villages. 
 
 TIME, PLACE, AND OCCASION OF THE WRITING OF THE EPISTLE. 
 
 It is altogether probable that Paul wrote this Epistle after his sec- 
 ond visit to the Galatians, as he says, " Ye know that through weak- 
 ness of the flesh I preached the Gospel unto you at the first' 
 (chap, iv, 13), which implies that he had preached to them a second 
 time. This second visit was made about A. D. 55, beyond which the 
 Epistle must be placed. Paul's language indicates that but a few 
 years had elapsed since they were converted : " I marvel that you 
 are so soon abandoning for another gospel him who called you by 
 the grace of Christ " (chap, i, 6). 
 
 In discussing the doctrine of justification by faith the apostle 
 gives some of the same illustrations that he uses in the Epistle to tne 
 Romans. In both we find that he dwells upon the justifying faith 
 of Abraham. Now, it is very natural, in writing on the same sub- 
 ject at the same time, to use very similar arguments and illustrations, 
 modified only to meet some specific differences. As the Epistle to the 
 Romans was written during Paul's visit to Corinth (Acts xx, 3), 
 about A. D. 58 or 59, it is probable that the Epistle to the Galatiang 
 1 As appears from an Epistle of Pliny.
 
 OF THE HOLY SCRIPTURES. 661 
 
 was written at the same place and about the same time. But upon 
 these points there is no certainty nor high probability to be derived 
 from internal or external evidence. 
 
 Respecting the occasion upon which it was written, it is evident from 
 the Epistle itself that Judaizing teachers had appeared The occasion of 
 
 among the Galatians after the apostle left them, and very * he E P tetle the 
 
 . , ... . havoc made by 
 
 positively asserted that it was necessary to salvation to the teachers of 
 
 observe the rite of circumcision, and to keep the law of Judalsm - 
 Moses. It would seem that these teachers, at the same time, declared 
 that Paul was not an original apostle, that he was not an eyewitness 
 of the life of Christ, and had received authority from the Church 
 alone to preach, and was merely a subordinate teacher. The Epistle, 
 accordingly, is devoted chiefly to a vindication of his independent 
 apostolic authority, and a defense of the great doctrine of justification 
 by faith. 
 
 CONTENTS. 
 
 The apostle severely reproves the Galatians for departing from 
 the gospel which he had preached among them, and he pronounces 
 every one accursed who shall preach a different one. He affirms 
 that he received his gospel immediately from Jesus Christ, and that 
 he did not go up to Jerusalem until three years after his conversion, 
 and saw there of the apostles only Peter and James. He gives an 
 account of another visit to Jerusalem fourteen years later, when 
 he had an interview with James, Cephas, and John, who extended to 
 him the right hand of fellowship, and approved of his labor among 
 the Gentiles. He states that at Antioch he reproved Peter for in- 
 consistency in his conduct respecting the Jews and Gentiles, and at 
 the same time he sets forth the doctrine of justification by faith in 
 Christ without the works of the law (chaps, i, ii). He remonstrates 
 with the Galatians, and charges them with beginning in the Spirit 
 and finishing with the flesh. He shows that Abraham's justification 
 by faith was prophetical, and typical of the justification of the Gen- 
 tiles by faith in Christ ; that the law is our schoolmaster to bring 
 us to Christ, who hath freed us from the law's curse, and that now we 
 are no longer under a schoolmaster, or under bondage, but are the 
 sons of God, in proof of which God has given us his Holy Spirit. 
 He reminds them of their former ardent affection for him. Under 
 the allegory of the two sons of Abraham, Ishmael by a bondwoman, 
 Agur, and Isaac by a free woman, Sarah, he shows that the children 
 of the Sinaitic covenant (Agur) are in bondage, while the children of 
 the free woman, the faithful in Christ, belonging to the heavenly 
 Jerusalem, are free. He exhorts them to stand fast in this liberty 
 which Christ has given them, and affirms that in relying upon cir-
 
 662 INTRODUCTION TO THE STUDY 
 
 cumcision for salvation they receive no benefit from Christ, and are 
 bound to keep the whole law. He warns them not to use their 
 'iberty for an occasion to serve the flesh. He affirms that " Thou 
 shall love thy neighbor as thyself " is the sum of the law. He gives 
 a list of the deeds of the flesh, and of the fruits of the Spirit (chaps, 
 iii, iv, v). 
 
 Paul exhorts the spiritual to restore any one overtaken in a fault, 
 and admonishes them to bear each other's burdens, warns them 
 against self-conceit, and exhorts them not to be weary in well-doing. 
 He tells them that those who wish to have them circumcised wish 
 thereby to escape persecution, but do not themselves keep the law. 
 He prays that he may glory in nothing but Christ crucified, affirm- 
 ing that nothing avails but a new creature (chap. vi). 
 
 THE GENUINENESS OF THE EPISTLE. 
 
 That St. Paul wrote this Epistle is undoubted, and its genuine- 
 Acknowledged ness * s acknowledged by the Tubingen school. It was 
 by the TQbin- universally attributed to Paul by the ancient Church. 
 L It is quoted by Irenaeus J as Paul's, by Clement * of Alex- 
 andria, and by Tertullian ;' it is found in the Canon of Muratori, and 
 the Peshito-Syriac version, and was used by Marcion. The Epis- 
 tle everywhere shows the genuine apostolic spirit and the peculiar- 
 ities of Paul. It is important for its defence of the great doctrine of 
 justification by faith. 
 
 * 
 
 T 
 
 CHAPTER XXV. 
 
 THE EPISTLE TO THE EPHESIANS. 
 
 THE PERSONS ADDRESSED. 
 
 HE Epistle bears the inscription, " To the Ephesians ;" and in the 
 most of the MSS. the reading is, " To the saints who are in Eph- 
 not esus." Tregelles has adopted, " in Ephesus " in his text, 
 an( j Tischendorf inserts it in brackets (verse i), and re- 
 marks that he concludes it did not come from Paul. In the Codex 
 Vaticanus of the middle of the fourth century the superscription is, 
 ' To the Ephesians;" but in the first verse " in Ephesus" is want- 
 ing. In the Codex Sinaiticus, of the same age, " in Ephesus" is also 
 wanting in the first verse, though the Epistle has the superscription, 
 "To the Ephesians." The first verse in these two most ancient 
 
 1 Contra Hxreses, lib. iii, cap. vi, 4 ; cap. vii. 2. He also quotes it in other places 
 * Stromata, lib. iii, cap. xv. * De Praescrip,, cap. vi
 
 OF THE HOLY SCRIPTURES. 663 
 
 Codices is : " Paul, an apostle of Jesus Christ by the will of God, to 
 those who are saints, 1 and to the faithful in Christ Jesus." Origen ' says 
 that he found in the Ephesians only the expression, " To the saints 
 who are " (ro?c ayloiq rolg ovm), and he asks, if it is not redundant, 
 what does it mean ? From which it is clear that in his MSS. Ephe- 
 sus was wanting in the first verse of the Epistle. 
 
 Basil the Great, of Cappadocia, about the middle of the fourth 
 century, in writing against Eunomius, remarks : " When he (Paul) 
 wiote to the Ephesians as being truly united by knowledge to him 
 who exists (rw Svri, the self -existent JBeing), in a peculiar way he called 
 them existing (avrovc flvrac), saying : ' To the saints who are, and to 
 the faithful in Christ Jesus.' For thus those who were before us 
 have delivered it, and we have found it in the ancient copies." 1 It 
 is evident, then, that while the superscription was, " To the Ephe- 
 sians," Ephesus was not in the text of the old MSS. ; at least, it was 
 wanting in many of them, and we have already seen that it is want- 
 ing in our two most ancient Codices * belonging to the age of Basil. 
 
 Tertullian says : " The Epistle which we have with the title To the 
 Ephesians, the heretics have, To the Laodiceans. " Again, Tertulllan on 
 he remarks : " This Epistle we have through the integ- the differences 
 rity of the Church sent to the Ephesians, not to the Laodi- 
 ceans; but Marcion preferred to change its title, as if he was also a 
 very industrious investigator in this matter. But titles are of no im- 
 portance, since, when the apostle wrote to certain persons, he wrote 
 to all." * It is clear, then, that Marcion 's Epistles had the inscrip- 
 tion : " To the Laodiceans." It is to be observed that Tertullian 
 does not charge Marcion with altering the reading " Ephesus " into 
 " Laodicea " in the first verse. Nor does he say that " in Ephesus " 
 was found in the text of the MSS. in use in the Church. Had Mar- 
 cion altered " in Ephesus " into " in Laodicea," Tertullian would 
 have said so, and would not have satisfied himself with remarking 
 that "Titles are of no importance." 
 
 It is not easy to see, in a matter like this, how Marcion could have 
 aided his heretical doctrines by changing the superscription from 
 " Ephesus " into " Laodicea," and he must therefore have found MSS. 
 with the latter superscription. It accordingly appears that the Greek 
 
 The Greek is, rotf dyiotf rolf abat, To the saints who are, or are existing very 
 awkward Greek and English without some word indicating place. 
 
 a Kramer's Catena, in Tregelles' Greek Text. * Lib. ii, cap. xix. 
 
 4 Ephesus is, however, written on the margin by a later hand 
 * Ecclesise quidem veritate epistolam istam ad Ephesios habemus emissam, non ad 
 Ldodicenes; sed Marcion ei titulum aliquando interpolare gestiit, quasi et in isto 
 diligentissimus cxplorator. Nihil autem de titulis interest, cum ad omnes Apostclu* 
 scripserit, dum ad quosdam. Adversus Marcionem, lib. v, cap. xvii.
 
 664 INTRODUCTION TO THE STUDY 
 
 MSS. of the second and third centuries, and many of those of the 
 fourth, named in the first verse neither Ephesus nor any other place. 
 On the other hand, as the two most ancient Codices have the super- 
 scription " To the Ephesians," and as in the Peshito version and 
 in the Canon of Muratori it is supposed to be addressed to the 
 Ephesians, the mass of the Greek MSS. in the earliest centuries 
 must have had this superscription, and doubtless from the super- 
 scription in the course of time Ephesus was inserted in the first verse 
 of the Epistle. It is also quoted by the ancient fathers as the Epis- 
 tle to the Ephesians. 
 
 But the great difficulty in the way of supposing the Epistle to have 
 been written especially to the Ephesians lies in the absence of any 
 reference to Paul's having laboured among them, and in the statements 
 of the writer : " Wherefore I also, after I heard of your faith in the Lord 
 Jesus, and love to all the saints, cease not to give thanks for you," 
 etc. (chap, i, 15) ; and " If you have heard of the dispensation of 
 the grace of God which is given me to you- ward " (chap iii, 2). It 
 is difficult to see how this language is consistent with Paul's having 
 preached the gospel among the Ephesians for more than two years 
 previous to his writing. In his Epistles addressed to the Corin- 
 thians, Galatians, Philippians, and Thessalonians, he refers to his 
 having preached to them. 
 
 But as Marcion's copies had the inscription " To the Laodiceans," 
 Thesuperecrfp- an( * as ^ l - ^ au ^ * n l ^ e Epistle to the Colossians gives a 
 tion "To the charge not only that the Epistle should be read in the 
 gome ^ncient Church of the Laodiceans, but also that the Epistle from 
 copies. the latter should be read by the Colossians, the Epistle 
 
 to the Laodiceans must be Paul's Epistle addressed to them, and 
 which was to be brought from them. No other explanation seems 
 admissible. Now, this Epistle to the Laodiceans must have been an 
 important one, otherwise the apostle would not have ordered it to be 
 read in the Church of the Colossians. Laodicea was the most im- 
 portant city in that region, and Colossae was comparatively small, 
 and it is, accordingly, difficult to see how the Epistle to this Church 
 should have been allowed to perish, while that to the unimportant 
 Colossae should have come down to us. Even Paul's Epistle to 
 Philemon, consisting of a single chapter, has been preserved. We 
 do not know that any Epistle of Paul's to any Church or imp^itant 
 individual Christian ever perished, except one written to the Corin- 
 thians on some matter which, in all probability, was so completely 
 covered by the two existing Epistles as to render it useless (i Cor. 
 v, 9)- 
 
 There is a striking resemblance between this Epistle and that to
 
 OF THE HOLY SCRIPTURES. 665 
 
 the Colossians, and it is very likely that the condition of the 
 Churches in Laodicea and Colossae was very similar, as they were 
 not more than twelve miles apart, and a quite close connexion seems, 
 from what Paul says in the Epistle to the Colossians, to have existed 
 oetween them (chaps, ii, i ; iv, 16). 
 
 But if the Epistle had been sent especially to the Laodiceans, it is 
 not easy to see how the inscription " To the Ephesians " should have 
 been so general in the ancient Church, and why the apostle did not 
 insert the name " Laodicea " or " Laodiceans " in the text, just as he 
 has inserted the name of the Churches addressed in his other Epis- 
 tles. Archbishop Usher suggested that the Epistle is .^ Eplgtte 
 encyclical, and that it was directed to several Churches, in most probably 
 Asia Minor; that for this reason the place for the name 
 of those addressed was left vacant, to be filled up by the different 
 Churches in which it was read. This is very probable, and implies 
 that Tychicus, with whom the Epistle was sent, had several copies 
 with him, or that copies were made at Ephesus, through which Tychi- 
 cus would naturally pass on his way to Laodicea and Colossae. But, 
 then, in speaking of the Epistle, to whom would the early Churches 
 and writers say it was sent ? Most naturally, to the chief city of all 
 that region, Ephesus. Paul's Second Epistle to the Corinthians is 
 addressed to " the Church of God which is at Corinth, with all the 
 saints which are in all Achaia." Notwithstanding this, the Epistle is 
 always spoken of as addressed to the Corinthians. The Ephesians 
 would naturally put their own name at the head of the Epistle, and 
 from this great city numerous copies would be spread over the. Chris- 
 tian world, bearing the inscription " To the Ephesians." As we have 
 already said, the name Ephesus in the course of time passed from the 
 superscription into the text. 
 
 We have already seen that the copies of this Epistle which Mar- 
 cion had were inscribed " To the Laodiceans." Now, as pro^^ ,. 
 Marcion was of Sinope in Pontus, a city a hundred miles gin of Mard- 
 nearer to Laodicea, a large city, than to Ephesus, it is 
 very probable that his copies came originally from the former city, 
 to which a copy had been brought by Tychicus, and in this way they 
 had the inscription To the Laodiceans. It also appears that among 
 the heretics in general, as we have seen, the Epistle bore the title, 
 " To the Laodiceans." Hug, Olshausen, Neander, and Bleek, regard 
 the Epistle as encyclical. It was not originally intended for a very 
 wide district, as the apostle states that Tychicus, who was sent with 
 this Epistle and that to the Colossians, will give the readers of the 
 Epistle information respecting him. The encyclical character of the 
 Epistle is seen in the fact that no persons in any particular Church
 
 666 INTRODUCTION TO THE STUDY 
 
 ire mentioned, just as in the general Epistle " To the Churches of 
 Galatia." It is evidently addressed to Gentile Christians. 
 
 THE PLACE AND TIME OF ITS COMPOSITION. 
 
 It appears from chaps, iii, i ; vi, 20, that Paul was a prisoner 
 written when w ^ en ne wrote this Epistle, and it is highly probable that 
 Pauiwuaprte- it was written about the same time as the Epistle to the 
 Colossians, as there is a striking similarity between the 
 two. Neander well observes : " Let us remember that Paul, when 
 he wrote this Epistle, was still full of those thoughts and contempla- 
 tions which occupied his mind when he wrote the Epistle to the 
 Colossians ; thus we can account for those points of resemblance in 
 the second, which was written immediately after the first. And 
 hence it is also evident that of these two, the Epistle to the Colos- 
 sians was written first, for the apostle's thoughts there exhibit them- 
 selves in their original formation and connexion, as they were called 
 forth by his opposition to that sect whose sentiments and practices 
 he combats in that Epistle." ' Now, it appears from internal evidence 
 that the Epistle to the Colossians was written at Rome during Paul's 
 first imprisonment about A. D. 63, so that the Epistle to the Ephe- 
 sians was written at the same place and about the same time. 
 
 CONTENTS. 
 
 The apostle thanks God for the privileges enjoyed in the Gospel 
 through the divine predestination, and declares that he ever gives 
 thanks and prays for those to whom he writes, that God may enable 
 them to see the riches of the Gospel, and the greatness of its power 
 as displayed in God's raising Christ from the dead and exalting him 
 to heaven (chap. i). He reminds them of what they once were, when 
 dead in sins, but now he declares they have been saved by grace 
 through faith in Jesus Christ, who is our peace, and has broken down 
 the middle wall of partition between Jews and Gentiles, and that 
 they are no longer strangers, but fellow-citizens with the saints. He 
 declares that a dispensation of the gospel has been committed to 
 him, to whom it was revealed that the Gentiles should be fellow- 
 heirs and partakers of the blessings of the gospel, which it is his 
 mission to preach among the Gentiles. He prays that they may be 
 fully established in grace, and be enabled to know fully the love, and 
 to be filled with the fullness, of God (chaps, ii, iii). 
 
 He exhorts them to walk worthy of their high vocation, in lu- 
 mility, love, and unity, and speaks of the various officers in th^ 
 Church appointed by Christ for its edification and unity. He 
 
 'Planting and Training of the Christian Church, p. 329, Ryland's Translation.
 
 OF THE HOLY SCRIPTURES. 667 
 
 exhorts them to live not as other Gentiles, in blindness and lust, but 
 to put on the new man of righteousness and holiness ; to be truthful, 
 angry without sin, honest, chaste in conversation ; to lay aside all bit- 
 terness, anger, and evil speaking, and to walk in love, and purity of 
 life, redeeming the time ; to be sober, to praise God in sacred songs, 
 and to be thankful. He illustrates the relation existing between 
 husbands and wives by that which exists between Christ and his 
 Church, describes the mutual duties of parents and children, of serv- 
 ants and masters, and exhorts the saints to put on the whole armor 
 of God, which he describes, that they may master their spiritual 
 foes. He asks their prayers for him in his bonds, and informs them 
 that he has sent Tychicus, who will give them information respecting 
 his affairs, and closes by invoking upon them the divine blessing 
 (chaps, iv-vi). 
 
 THE GENUINENESS OF THIS EPISTLE. 
 
 It was never doubted by the Ancient Church that this Epistle was 
 written by Paul. It is used by Polycarp in his Epistle -n 
 
 to the Philippians, 1 is quoted as Paul's Epistle by Ire- ness of E P he - 
 nseus,' by Clement of Alexandria, 3 by Tertullian, 4 and is edged by on- 
 attributed to Paul in the Canon of Muratori, and in the clent Chnrth - 
 Peshito-Syriac version, and was received by Marcion under the title 
 of the Epistle to the Laodiceans. 6 It was quoted by Basilides" 
 (about A. D. 125), and by Valentinus 7 (about A. D. 140). Irenseus af- 
 firms that the Valentinians " say : Paul very evidently has often 
 named these ^Eons, and has also observed their order, speaking as 
 follows : ' Throughout all ages, world without end ' ' * (Ephesians 
 iii, 21). 
 
 But notwithstanding the universal reception of this Epistle as 
 Paul's in the ancient Church as far back as the beginning Modern doubtg 
 of the second century at least, its genuineness has been of its genuine- 
 assailed by a few critics in quite recent times. Schleier- D 
 macher, in his lectures, first expressed a doubt upon this point, by 
 
 ' By grace ye are saved " (xaptrl tart aeauaftivot), sec. I, the exact language of 
 Ephesians ii, 5. In sec. 12 Ephes. iv, 26 is quoted as holy scripture. 
 *Lib. ii, cap. ii, 6 ; lib. v, cap. ii, 3. 
 
 Cohortatio ad Gentes, cap. ix. In Strom., lib. iv, cap. viii, he quotes it as the 
 Epistle to the Ephesians. 4 Adversus Marcionem, v, cap. xi, xvii, xviii 
 
 ttx'd., cap. xvii. 
 
 " He (Basilides) says, as it is written : ' By revelation the mystery was made known 
 to me.' " In Hippolytus, RefuL Omnium Haer., vii, 26. The exact language in 
 Greek of Ephes- iii, 3. T Ibid., vi, ii, 34. 
 
 "Contra Hsereses, lib. i, cap. iii, i. They found the JSons in Aiuvef, " agis" of 
 
 the apostle. 
 
 43
 
 C68 INTRODUCTION 1O THE STUDV 
 
 conjecturing that a companion of Paul wrote it accoiding to his 
 suggestions. After this De Wette expressed his doubts respecting its 
 genuineness ; and in the last edition of his Introduction to the New 
 Testament he gives great emphasis to them. First of all, he regards 
 this Epistle as written in imitation of that to the Colossians, and 
 thinks it unworthy of an apostle to copy himself. He remarks : " In 
 comparison with the Epistle to the Colossians and other Epistles of 
 Paul, the style is not Pauline, as it is verbose, poor in thought, and 
 too loose, being overloaded with parentheses and appositions which 
 destroy the connexion. There are also departures from his style in 
 words and expressions, as well as many things in thoughts, dogmas, 
 and method. Strongly, indeed, against these grounds of doubt 
 stands the recognition of this Epistle by the Church, as well as the 
 opposition of most biblical critics. Moreover, though not written 
 by the apostle himself, yet by a gifted disciple of his, it still belongs 
 to the apostolic age." ' The genuineness of the Epistle is denied 
 by Schwegler, Baur, Ewald, and Hilgenfeld.* Baur and Hilgenfeld 
 place it in the first half of the second century; Ewald supposes it 
 was written by a disciple of Paul upon the basis of the Epistle to the 
 Colossians between A. D. 75 and 80. Mangold observes that, since 
 " it is impossible to withdraw one's self from the full impression of 
 the Pauline spirit which speaks from both Epistles (Ephesians and 
 Colossians), recently on this ground Reuss, Klopper, Schenkel, and 
 Hofmann have defended the genuineness of both Epistles." ' 
 
 There can be no doubt whatever from the very early testimonies 
 Modern doubta to this Epistle that it was written in the first century. 
 ^ Nor can there be any reasonable doubt that it was writ- 
 ten by the Apostle Paul. Can we believe that a disciple of his could 
 have written such a composition, exhibiting the power, grasp, and 
 peculiarities of this apostle ? Or, if he had been able, that he would 
 have so far forgotten his duty to the apostle, to truth, and to God, 
 as to forge it in the name of this great teacher of the Gentiles ? And 
 what could be the object of such a forgery? So far as the setting 
 forth of doctrines, or any polemic purpose, is concerned, the Epistle 
 to the Colossians would have answered it. Neander well remarks : 
 " The similarity of the two Epistles (the Epistle to the Colossians 
 and the so-called Epistle to the Ephesians) is of such a kind, that we 
 see in it the work of the same author, and not an imitation by anothei 
 hand." 4 
 
 'Einleitung, edited by Messner and Lunemann, Berlin, 1860, pp. 318, 319. 
 
 ' Hilgenfeld places it nofcfang before A. D. 140. Einleitung, p. 680. Leipzig, 1875 
 
 "Additions to Bleek's Einleitung, p. 535. Berlin, 1875. 
 
 4 Planting and Training of Ihe Christian Church, p. 329, Ryland's translation.
 
 OF THE HOLY SCRIPTURES. 669 
 
 The words which De Wette gives as not Pauline, upon examina- 
 tion, are found void of any special significance, and in gtrlklng Paul . 
 
 some instances his list is absolutely erroneous. On ine words and 
 . . , - - , j , i T- i- phrases In thl& 
 
 the other hand, we often find words in the Ephesians Epistle. 
 
 some of which never, and others rarely, occur except in the recog- 
 nized writings of Paul. In chap, vi, 20 Paul, speaking of the Gospel, 
 says : " For which I am an ambassador," etc., and in 2 Cor. v, 20, 
 M We arc ambassadors for Christ." The word rrpeff/Jevw, to be an am- 
 bassador^ occurs nowhere else in the New Testament. In Ephesians 
 v, 8 we ha^ e " children of light " (reicva ^WTOC) ; and in i Thess. 
 v, 5 "sons of light" (yloi 0a)rJf), and in Rom. xiii, 12 "armour of 
 light " (rd orr^a TOI> 0wroc). It is easy to see that such phrases as 
 these show the same writer. The saints are nowhere else called " the 
 children " or " sons of light," with the exception of Luke xvi, 8, and 
 John xii, 36. HQoeTOifidfa, to prepare before hand, is found only in Rom. 
 ix, 23, and in Ephesians ii, 10. 'Ave^t^vmorof, unsearchable, is found 
 only in Romans xi, 33, and in Ephesians iii, 8. 'Avae0aA<Moo/i<M, to 
 sum up, to bring together, is found only in Romans xiii, 9, and in 
 Ephesians i, 10. Ilpoaayary^, access, occurs only in Romans v, 2, 
 Ephesians ii, 18, and iii, 12. 'T7repj3aAAw, to surpass, is found only in 
 2 Cor. iii, 10; ix, 14, and in Ephesians i, 19 ; ii, 7 ; iii, 19. iKipwmf, 
 blindness, hardness of heart, is found in Rom. xi, 25, and in Ephesians 
 iv, 18; elsewhere in the New Testament only in Mark iii, 5. A&TI-* 
 $va), to speak the truth, occurs only in Galatians iv, 16, and in Eph. 
 iv, 15. Appa/tov (Heb. p'3i^), pledge, earnest, is found only in 2 Cor. 
 i, 22; v, 5, and in Ephesians i, 14. nopopytfw, to make angry, is 
 found only in Rom. x, 19, and in Ephesians vi, 4. Meradidw/w, to 
 impart, occurs in Rom. i, 1 1 ; xii, 8 ; i Thess. ii, 8 ; and in Eph. 
 iv, 28; nowhere else except in Luke iii, n. "Tta&eaia, adoption, 
 Ephesians i, 5, is found nowhere else except in Romans and Gala- 
 tians. npoopiiw, to determine before hand, is found in Ephesians i, 
 5,11; Rom. viii, 29, 30 ; i Cor. ii, 7 ; elsewhere only in Acts iv, 28. 
 Mvemv TToiov/j,at, to make mention of, occurs only in Rom. i, 9 ; i Thess. 
 i, 2 ; Phil. 4, and in Ephesians i, 16. HeTToidTjois, confidence, is found 
 only in 2 Corinthians, Philippians iii, 4, and Ephesians iii, 12. 'Trrep 
 eKTrepiaoov, superabundantly, found only in i Thess. iii, 10 ; v, 13, and in 
 Ephesians iii, 20. Evwdta, sweet smell, is found only in 2 Corinthians 
 ii, 15 ; Philippians iv, 18, and in Ephesians v, 2. In Acts xxviii, 20, 
 Paul speaks at Rome of being bound with a single chain (TT)J> S&uoiv 
 TavTTjv, this chain); and in Ephesians vi, 20, he says, " I am an am- 
 bassador in a chain (iv aXvaei). Everywhere else in the New Testa- 
 ment, except in 2 Tim. i, 16, and in Rev. xx, i, the plural, 4Av<r?, 
 chains^ is used. It must be borne in mind that all the circumstances
 
 670 INTRODUCTION TO THE STUDY 
 
 of the case point to the composition of this Epistle during the apos- 
 tle's first imprisonment at Rome. The examples \ve have given do 
 not, however, exhaust the subject. 
 
 It must also be observed that the Epistle contains Hebraisms, just 
 Hebraiana in as we would expect from Paul. As examples, we have, 
 thtoBpistie. rsKva ipyT/f, children of wrath, chap, ii, 3 ; TCKVO ^wrdf, 
 children of light, chap, v, 8 ; viol 1% d-rreideias , sons of disobedience, 
 chap, ii, 2 ; vlot T&V dvtfpwTrwv, sons of men, chap, iii, 5. We have 
 also seen that dppa/Jwv (Heb. \\i~\y), pledge, is used in chap, i, 14. 
 
 De Wette notices, as not Pauline, the omission of a verb of com- 
 mand before Iva ^o/3^rot rdv dvdpa, that she reverence her husband (chap. 
 v, 33) ; but a similar omission occurs before Iva. not kv rainy, K. r. A., 
 that ye abound in this grace also (2 Cor. viii, 7). Also, Iva, followed 
 by the optative mood, De Wette thinks not Pauline. But there is 
 only one ' passage of this kind in the Ephesians (chap, i, 17), and in 
 this the optative is properly used after a prayer. "Iva (that, in order 
 that) is followed in every other instance, twenty-two times in Ephe- 
 sians, by the subjunctive. 
 
 In Ephesians iv, 27 and vi, n, the arch-enemy of mankind is 
 called the Devil, (Atdj3oAof) ; but in Romans, First and Second 
 Corinthians, First and Second Thessalonians, he is called Satan 
 (SaravdV), eight times in all. In First Timothy both words are 
 used, which is the usage of Matthew, Luke, and John. In Second 
 Timothy and Titus, Diabolos, devil, alone occurs. Satan is a He- 
 brew word meaning adversary, and was doubtless the word Paul 
 would use in addressing his countrymen ; but in addressing Gentiles, 
 he would naturally use Diabolos,' a Greek word meaning slanderer. 
 Now, as the Epistle to the Ephesians is addressed to Gentiles, it was 
 highly proper that the latter word should be employed. 
 
 This Epistle is not simply an elaboration of that to the Colossians ; 
 but while most of its ideas and words are such as are found in that 
 and the other Epistles of Paul, they are not slavishly followed, and 
 new thoughts and different words are introduced as occasion de- 
 mands. All this bespeaks Paul as its author. 
 
 Hilgenfeld ' regards the expressions "fulness of time" (irMiptqM 
 TWV /rtup&v), and the fulness (TrA^pupo) of him who filleth all in all " 
 (i, 10, 23), as belonging to the period of Gnosticism. But how does 
 Hilgenfeld know that Gnosticism had no existence as early as A. D. 
 63 or 64 ? But what has the " fulness " (TrA^pw/io), of which Paul 
 
 'In the other passage noticed by De Wette, both Tiscbendorf and Tregelles 
 have introduced the subjunctive mood, 6$ (chap, iii, 16), from the best MSS. 
 
 * Diabolos is the Greek translation of Satan in various passages of the LXX ; a? 
 Zech. iii, i, ; Job i, 6, 7, 12. *Einl?itung, p. 679
 
 OF THE HOLY SCRIPTURES. 071 
 
 speaks, to do with the Pleroma (fulness) of the Gnostics ? Paul, in 
 Epistles which Hilgenfeld acknowledges to be his, speaks of the 
 " fulness (pleroma) of time," Gal. iv, 4 ; " fulness (pleroma) of the 
 Gentiles, (Romans xi, 25) ; " fulness of the law " (chap, xiii, 10). 
 Why might he not also speak of the fulness of God as he does in 
 Colossians (chap, ii, 9), and as John speaks of the fulness (pleroma) 
 of Christ (John i, 16) ? 
 
 There is a peculiarity of Paul, noticed by the acute Paley, 1 a spe- 
 cies of digression which he calls "going off at a word," Cbamcterlsae 
 and which he adduces as an argument for the genuineness digressions in 
 of this Epistle. In 2 Corinthians ii, 14 Paul speaks of 
 God's manifesting " the savour of his knowledge." This leads him 
 to comment on "savour." In 2 Cor. iii, i he asks: "Do we need 
 epistles of commendation to you ? " He then starts off to discuss 
 " living epistles" In 2 Cor. iii, 13 he says, Moses " put a vail over 
 his face." This leads him to a discussion of the blindness of the 
 Israelites. In accordance with this peculiarity, we find the apostle in 
 Ephesians iv, 8 saying: "When he ascended up on high, he led 
 captivity captive, and gave gifts unto men." This leads him to 
 speak immediately of Christ's ascension and descension. In chap, 
 v, 13, speaking of things " made manifest by the light" he starts off at 
 light into a digression. Upon the whole, we may safely rest in the 
 belief of the genuineness of this Epistle. 
 
 CHAPTER XXVI. L 
 
 THE EPISTLE TO THE PHILIPPIANS. 
 
 THE PERSONS ADDRESSED. 
 
 , an important city of Macedonia, was named after Phil- 
 ip, the father of Alexander the Great. It was anciently called Cre- 
 nides," "Place of Fountains," " from the numerous streams in which 
 tbe Angites has its source." The old city was enlarged by Philip 
 after the capture of Amphipolis, Pydna, and Potidsea, and fortified 
 to protect his frontier against the Thracian mountaineers.' ' The 
 haven of the town was Neapolis, situated about ten miles distant, at 
 the mouth of the Angites on the Thracian sea. It was at this place 
 that Paul landed on his way to Philippi (Acts xvi, n). Augustus 
 presented Philippi with the privileges of a colony, with the name 
 "Col. Jul. Aug. Philip." 
 
 1 In his Hone Paulinse. * Stribo, vii, 331. 'Smith's Diet of Class, Geoc.
 
 672 INTRODUCTION TO THE STUDY 
 
 About A. D. 52 Paul and Silas visited this place and preached the 
 Paul's g 5 P e l- Among their converts was Lydiu. Paul having 
 
 to Philip- cast the spirit of divination out of a Pythoness, and her 
 masters seeing that there was no further hope of gain 
 from her profession, brought the apostle and Silas before the magis- 
 trates, as being troublesome persons. At the command of these 
 officers, Paul and Silas were severely beaten, thrust into the inner 
 prison, and their feet made fast in the stocks. An earthquake in 
 the night shook the foundations of the building, and immediately all 
 the doors were opened, and every one's bands loosed. The keeper 
 of the prison was converted and baptized. The officers, learning 
 that Paul and Silas were Romans, became alarmed, and begged them 
 to leave. Soon after this Paul and Silas left the city for Amphipolis 
 (Acts xvi, 12-40). The Philippian Church was composed almost 
 entirely of Gentile Christians. It seems that no synagogue had been 
 established there, as there is mention merely of an oratory (Trpoaev^) 
 on the river side (Acts xvi, 13). 
 
 THE PLACE AND TIME OF COMPOSITION. 
 
 It is clear from several passages in the Epistle that it was written 
 writtendurtmr ^Y -^ au ^ when imprisoned in Rome. In chap, i, 7 he 
 Paul's impri*. speaks of being in bonds ; and in chap, i, 13 he says : 
 " So that my bonds in Christ have become manifest in 
 the whole palace, and all other places." In chap, iv, 21 he says: 
 " All the saints salute you, but especially they who are of Caesar's 
 household." 
 
 In the Acts of the Apostles we find but two long imprisonments 
 of Paul : the one at Caesarea (Acts xxiii, 33~xxvi) , and the other a* 
 Rome (Acts xxviii, 20-30). Now the salutation from "Caesar's 
 household " clearly shows that he was imprisoned at Rome, and not 
 at Caesarea, when he wrote the Epistle. 
 
 It would appear also from his language (chap, i, 13) that Paul had 
 already been in Rome a considerable time, and from chap, ii, 23, 24, 
 that he wrote near the end of his two years' confinement, as he 
 expects a decision of his case soon, and trusts that he will shortly 
 come to the Philippians. We may, therefore, conclude that thr 
 Epistle was written at Rome near the end of his first ' imprisonment 
 in that city, about A. D. 63. 
 
 It does not suit the facts in the case to suppose that the Epistle was written when 
 Paul was brought before Nero the second time. Then he was left alone, and when 
 he wrote Second Timothy, expecting to depart from the world soon, only Luke was 
 with him (chap, iv, n, 16). But when he wrote the Philippians Timothy was with 
 him (Phil, i, T). Besides, he expected soon to be released (Phil. ii. 24).
 
 OF THE HOLY SCRIPTURES. 673 
 
 CONTENTS. 
 
 The apostle expresses his deep affection for the Philippians, hia 
 joy in their fellowship, and his confidence that God will synopsis of 
 complete the work begun in them. He informs them CovSan ^- 
 that his imprisonment has contributed to the progress of the gospel, 
 and led others to preach Christ. He prays that Christ may be mag- 
 nified whether by his life or death, and expresses a desire to depart 
 and be with Christ, which is better for himself, but not expedient for 
 them, and he therefore concludes that he will still live. He exhorts 
 them to live in accordance with the gospel, and teaches them hu- 
 mility by the example of the Saviour, who, though equal with God, 
 assumed the form of a servant, and submitted to the death of the 
 cross. He exhorts them to persevere in the work of their salvation, 
 and to be blameless in their lives. He hopes to be able to send 
 Timothy to them shortly, and himself to come soon. He tells them 
 that he had sent Epaphroditus, who had been dangerously sick, and he 
 exhorts them to receive him with kindness and honour (chaps, i, ii). 
 
 He warns them to beware of evil doers and of the concision (cir- 
 cumcision thus disparagingly called), affirming that he himself is a 
 genuine Jew, but counts all his Jewish privileges as naught for the 
 knowledge of Christ, and is pressing forward to the goal of the 
 Christian course, the attainment of a glorified state with Christ. He 
 exhorts them to steadfastness in the Lord, to rejoice, to make their 
 wants known by prayer, and to meditate upon all that is lovely and 
 excellent, and to hold fast what they have received. He expresses his 
 joy that they are again mindful of him in his affliction, although they 
 lacked opportunity to contribute of their means. He states, how- 
 ever, that he has learned to accommodate himself to circumstances. 
 He refers to the fact that more than once when he was in Thessa- 
 lonica they ministered to his necessities. He acknowledges the 
 receipt of gifts from them through Epaphroditus, and closes with 
 salutations (chaps, iii, iv). The reception of gifts from the Philip- 
 pians was the occasion of the writing of the Epistle. 
 
 GENUINENESS OF THE EPISTLE. 
 
 This Epistle was universally received by the ancient Church as 
 the writing of Paul. Polycarp, in his Epistle to the Quotations 
 Philippians, says that Paul, being absent from them, wrote from ^e E PI- 
 to them. 1 Chap, ii, 6 of Philippians is quoted in the Epis- there and early 
 tie of the Churches of Lyons and Vienna to those of c 11 " 1188 - 
 
 'He uses kniaroXai (plural); but the plural is sometimes used for the singular, 
 tingle Epistle, sec. 3.
 
 671 INTRODUCTION TO THE STUDY 
 
 Asia Minor 1 (about A. D. 177). It is quoted as Paul's by Irenaeus, 
 by Clement * of Alexandria, by Tertullian, 4 and by the heretic Mar- 
 cion. It is found in the Peshito-Syriac version, and in the Canon 
 of Muratori. Its genuineness has been assailed by Baur, Schwegler, 
 and Hitzig. De Wette remarks : " The genuineness of this Epistle 
 seems to be raised above all doubt."* Even Hilgenfeld, of the 
 Tubingen school, defends it. " The genuineness of the Epistle to 
 the Philippians," says he, " has therefore not been really refuted. 
 In this Epistle we have the dying song (schwanengesang, swan-song) 
 of Paul."* It is so fully attested, and bears such strong internal 
 evidence of being the writing of Paul, that it needs no defense. The 
 Epistle was conveyed to the Philippians by Epaphroditus (chap, ii, 
 28, 29). 
 
 CHAPTER XXVII. 
 
 THE EPISTLE TO THE COLOSSIANS. 
 THE PERSONS ADDRESSED. 
 
 is mentioned by Herodotus T as a large city of Phrygia 
 The younger Cyrus halted here* seven days when on the ex- 
 of GO- pedition against his brother Artaxerxes, and it is de- 
 scribed by Xenophon as large and prosperous.* It was 
 situated on the Lycus, a branch of the Maeander, about twelve miles 
 east of Laodicea. About the time of Christ it had become an un- 
 important town.* 
 
 It appears from chapters i, 4, ii, i, that Paul had never visited 
 Colossae ; at least, that he did not found the Church there. The 
 Colossians received the Gospel from Epaphras, who is highly com- 
 mended by Paul (chap, i, 7), and was with him when he wrote the 
 Epistle. N The apostle was evidently led to write to them by the 
 report of their condition which he had received from Epaphras. It 
 appears from the Epistle that they were in danger of being led away 
 by false philosophy. The Church in this town was composed, no 
 doubt, almost exclusively of Gentiles. 
 
 1 In Eusebius, Hist. Eccles., v, a. Contra Haereses, iv, cap. xviii, 4. 
 
 * Paedag., i, cap. yi * De Resurrectione Camis, cap. xxiii, 
 
 Einleitung, p. 334. Einleitung, p. 347, Leipzig, 1875. 
 
 T Tii, 30. $ Anab., i, cap. 2. 'Strabo, xii, 576-578.
 
 OF THE HOLY SCRIPTURES. 675 
 
 PLACE AND TIME OF COMPOSITION. 
 
 It is clear from chapter iv, 3 that the apostle when he wrote was 
 imprisoned, and it seems from various circumstances that ^rittendQriug 
 it was his first imprisonment in Rome. We find Timothy Paul's first im- 
 with him (ch. i, i), who was not with him at Rome when p 
 he was brought a second time before Nero (2 Tim. iv, 16) ; nor is it 
 likely that Timothy was with him when he was imprisoned at Csesarea. 
 But he was with Paul in hisjirst imprisonment in Rome (Phil, i, i). 
 When Paul wrote this Epistle Demas was with him (chap, iv, 14) ; but 
 when he was brought before Nero the second time Demas forsook 
 him (2 Tim. iv, 10). In the Epistle there are also named Onesimus, 
 Aristarchus, Mark, Epaphras, and Luke (chap, iv, 9-14). When 
 Paul wrote the Epistle to Philemon there were with him Onesimus 
 (verse 10), Epaphras, Mark, Aristarchus, Demas, and Luke (verses 
 23, 24). It is evident from the preceding facts that this Epistle was 
 written about the same time as the Epistle to the Philippians and 
 that to Philemon. Now the letter to the Philippians was written in 
 the latter part of Paul's first imprisonment in Rome, and the Epistle 
 to Philemon shortly before Paul's liberation from that imprisonment, 
 as appears from his direction to Philemon to prepare him a lodging 
 (verse 22). We may, therefore, conclude that the Epistle to the 
 Colossians was written near the close of Paul's first imprisonment in 
 Rome, about A. D. 63. It was sent to the Colossians by Tychicus 
 (chap, iv, 7). 
 
 CONTENTS. 
 
 The apostle expresses the deep interest which he feels in the 
 Colossians since he heard of their faith, prays for their progress in 
 the knowledge of God, that they may fully perform his will, and 
 that they may be supported by the power of the gospel. He sets 
 forth the attributes, the prerogatives, and the redeeming work of 
 Christ, and exhorts them to steadfastness. He declares that, a dis- 
 pensation of the gospel is committed to him, and that he is labour- 
 ing to perform its duties (chap. i). He expresses his deep anxiety 
 for them, and for others who have not seen him, that they may be 
 comforted, united in love, and attain a full understanding of the 
 gospel, and be established in it. He warns them against being de- 
 ceived by philosophy, and assures them that they are complete in 
 Christ, and have obtained through him the forgiveness of sins. He 
 also warns them against attaching importance to mere outward ob- 
 servances, and against being beguiled into a mere human system of 
 religious worship (chap. ii).
 
 876 INTRODUCTION TO THE STUDY 
 
 He urges them to set their affections upon things above, to live in 
 purity, to be humble, meek, long-suffering, and to abound in love. 
 He gives directions to wives, husbands, children, fathers, servants, 
 and masters. He exhorts them to continue in prayer, and to pray 
 that he may be successful in preaching the gospel, and to conduct 
 themselves with wisdom toward those without. He tells them thai 
 he has sent Tychicus and Onesimus, who will inform them respect- 
 ing his affairs. He sends salutations, orders this Epistle to be read 
 to the Church of the Laodiceans, and that theirs shall be read to 
 the Colossians, and sends a charge to Aristarchus (chap, iii, iv). 
 
 GENUINENESS OF THIS EPISTLE. 
 
 This Epistle was universally received by the ancient Church as a 
 re- wr iti n g f the Apostle Paul. It was received also by the 
 
 oeived by an- heretic Marcion (about A. D. 138) ; it is used by Justin 
 Martyr 1 (about A. D. 150), by Theophilus 8 of Antioch 
 (A. D. 180). It is quoted as Paul's by Irenaeus,' by Clement 4 of 
 Alexandria, and by Tertullian.* It is ascribed to Paul in the ancient 
 Peshito version and in the Canon of Muratori. " The Epistle," says 
 De Wette, " has always belonged to the universally acknowledged 
 writings. Only in the most recent time has it been doubted, never- 
 theless, on insufficient grounds." ' 
 
 The genuineness of the Epistle has been attacked by Mayerhoff, 
 Attacks upon Baur, Schwegler, and Hilgenfeld/ The last critic thinks 
 genuineness of it strange that Paul "should not have personally known 
 the Church at Colossse as well as that at Laodicea " 
 (Col. i, 4, 8, 9; ii, i), since he twice passed through Phrygia (Acts 
 xvi, 6 ; xviii, 23). But Laodicea and Colossae were in Southern 
 Phrygia, if they were, indeed, included in that country at all. North- 
 ern Phrygia was bounded on the east by Galatia, and on the west by 
 Mysia. In Acts xvi, 6, 7 it is stated that Paul and his companions 
 "were forbidden of the Holy Ghost to preach the word in Asia, 
 after they were come to Mysia, they assayed to go into Bithynia : but 
 the Spirit suffered them not." Let any one now take Kiepert's map 
 of the Roman empire, and he will find that Paul's route was far away 
 from Liodicea and Colossse. In his second journey, it seems ; he 
 
 1 Justin calls Christ " The firstborn of every creature " (irpuroTOKOf ndarif 
 (DiaL cum Tryph., cap. 85), the exact language of Col. i, 15. Expressions of a 
 limilar kind Justin uses in cap. 84 and 100. 
 
 *Ad Autolycum, lib. ii, 22; he calls Christ "The firstborn of every creature" 
 
 'Contra Haereses iii, cap. 14, I. 4 Stromata, vi, cap. viii, etc. 
 
 * Adversus Marcionem, lib. v, cap. xix. * Einleitung, p. 307. 
 
 'Einleitung, 659-669, Leipzig, 1875.
 
 OF THE HOLY SCRIPTURES. 677 
 
 followed the same route, for the author of Acts says he was " strength- 
 ening the disciples " (Acts xviii, 23). But, according to the New 
 Testament geography, Asia and Phrygia were two separate districts 
 (Acts ii, 9, 10 ; xvi, 6, 7) ; and in the Apocalypse which the Tubingen 
 school acknowledge to be the work of the Apostle John Laodicea is 
 addressed as one of the Churches of Asia (chap, i, iv; iii, 14), where 
 Paul was forbidden to preach (Acts xvi, 6). Colossae was about 
 twelve miles east of Laodicea, and an unimportant place ; and as 
 the Apostle Paul did not preach in Laodicea it is not likely that he 
 preached at Colossae. Hence the statement in the Epistle to the 
 Colossians, that the Churches of Laodicea and Colossse were person- 
 ally unknown to the apostle (chap, i, 4, 8, 9 ; ii, i), is established 
 by independent proof. 
 
 Hilgen.feld also objects that the order of the words, " Where 
 there is neither Greek nor Jew " (chap, iii, 1 1), is not ac- migenfeid's 
 cording to the usage of Paul, who puts Jews first. But objections, 
 in some of the instances in which Paul puts the Jews first, the nature 
 of the case demanded it, as the gospel was first offered to the Jews. 
 And in almost any case it was natural for a Jew to put his country- 
 men first. It must also be borne in mind that in the Churches at 
 Rome and Corinth, to which the Epistles were addressed in which 
 Jews are named before Greeks, there were many Jews, while it is 
 probable that there were but few at Colossae. But in the same 
 verse (chap, iii, 1 1) it is added " circumcision nor uncircumcision,"the 
 first of which refers to Jews. But further, in the Peshito-Syriac, it is 
 "Jew and Gentile," and in the Armenian and ^Ethiopic, "Jew nor 
 Greek." It is not, however, improbable that late in life, when the 
 apostle had become accustomed to the Greeks, and Christianity had 
 taken deep hold of them, he may have put them first. Certainly one 
 word put in a different order from that in which the apostle had 
 been accustomed to put it, can furnish no proof of the spuriousness 
 of the Epistle. 
 
 Hilgenfeld thinks he finds in the Epistle traces of Gnosticism, 
 which indicate a post-apostolic age. But these traces are merely im- 
 aginary. The " fulness " of which the apostle speaks (chap, i, 19 ; ii, 9) 
 is not the fulness (Pleroma) of the Gnostics. In various places in 
 his undisputed Epistles, as has already been shown, Paul uses the 
 word fulness {Pleroma) in reference to Jews (Rom. xi, 12), to Gen- 
 tiles (chap, xi, 25), the law (chap, xiii, 10), time (Gal. iv, 4). In our 
 Epistle the "fulness " refers to Christ (chap, i, 19), to the Godhead 
 (chap, ii, 9). In John's Gospel the word is used in-reference to 
 Christ (chap, i, 16). 
 
 There are personal allusions in the Epistle of such a character
 
 678 INTRODUCTION TO THE STUDY 
 
 , , that they are sufficient of themselves to show its Pauline 
 
 Personal alln- * 
 
 tanabyPauiin origin. It appears from chap, iv, 12 Epaphras was witn 
 j Epistle. p au i ) and we nn d Epaphras also with him when he writes 
 to Philemon (ver. 23). Onesimus is mentioned in chap, iv, 9 as a faith- 
 ful and beloved brother, and one of the Colossians. Archippus is 
 exhorted to take heed to the ministry which he has received of the 
 Lord (chap, iv, 17). This shows that Archippus was of Colossae 
 Accordingly, when the apostle writes to Philemon and Archippus, 
 we clearly see that the former was also of Golossae, to -vhich city 
 Onesimus also belonged. In chap, iv, 10 we find Aristarchus with 
 Paul ; and he is with him also in Philemon 24. And it appears 
 Irom Acts xxvii, 2 that Aristarchus went with Paul to Rome, where 
 he appears in this Epistle. In chap, iv, 10 Mark is called Barnabas' 
 cousin. Could we expect such intimate knowledge as this of any 
 one after the apostolic age ? And does not this explain Barnabas' 
 predilection for Mark (Acts xv, 37-39) ? Luke and Demas appear 
 with Paul, both in Colossians iv, 14 and in Philemon 24. Hil- 
 genfeld acknowledges the Epistle to Philemon to be Paul's, and that 
 to the Colossians is so interwoven with it as to show that it must be 
 a genuine apostolical production, the coincidences evidently being 
 undesigned. 
 
 In the Epistle it is ordered that it shall be read in the Church of 
 Laodicea after it had been read to the Colossians (chap, iv, 16). 
 What object could a forger have to give such an order as this, unless, 
 forsooth, he wished to hit upon the most certain way of having his 
 forgery detected ? for when, on this supposition, the Epistle was pro- 
 duced, forty or fifty years after the death of the Apostle, it must 
 have borne its spurious character upon its very face, inasmuch as it 
 had never been read in those Churches. 
 
 The Epistle everywhere bears the genuine Pauline stamp, which 
 commends it to every one whose mind is open to truth. 
 
 CHAPTER XXVIII. 
 
 THE FIRST EPISTLE TO THE THESSALONIANS. 
 THE PERSONS ADDRESSED. 
 
 'T'HESSALONICA was beautifully situated at the head of the Ther- 
 * maic gulf, in Southern Macedonia. The town was at first called 
 The city of Therme, from the hot springs in that region. According 
 to strabo, it was rebuilt by Cassander, and called after his
 
 OF THE HOLY SCRIPTURES. 679 
 
 wife, Thessaionica, the daughter of Philip. It is called by him the 
 metropolis of Macedonia. 
 
 " The present appearance of the city, as seen from the sea, is de- 
 scribed by Leake, Holland, and other travelers as very imposing. 
 It rises in the form of a crescent up the declivity, and is surrounded 
 by lofty whitened walls, with towers at intervals. . . . The port is still 
 convenient for large ships, and the anchorage in front of the town is 
 good. These circumstances in the situation of Thessaionica were 
 evidently favorable for commanding the trade of the Macedonian 
 Sea." f The population of the modern city, Salonica, is about 75,000. 
 
 Thessalonka was first visited by St. Paul about A. D. 52. At 
 that time it contained many Jews, who had a synagogue, in which 
 Paul for three sabbaths preached Christ as the Messiah with partial 
 success. But though the number of Jewish believers was not large, 
 a great multitude of devout Greeks and many noble women be- 
 lieved. But the unbelieving Jews, moved with envy, created a 
 great disturbance in the city, and the brethren sent away Paul and 
 Silas by night into Berea (Acts xvii, 1-9). It is clear, then, that the 
 mass of the Christians to whom Paul addressed his two Epistles 
 were Greeks. 
 
 PLACE AND TIME OF THE COMPOSITION OF THE FIRST EPISTLE. 
 
 As the apostle, on account of the uproar in Thessaionica, left the 
 brethren very suddenly, and without imparting to them written from 
 all the instruction desirable, and fearing that their trials O 01111 * 11 - 
 might discourage them, he wrote to them this Epistle soon after his 
 departure, and on his arrival in Corinth. In the address to the 
 Church, Silvanus (Silas) and Timothy are associated with the apostle 
 (chap, i, i), which fact shows that the Epistle was written after Silas 
 and Timothy had arrived at Corinth from Macedonia (Acts xviii, 5). 
 The manner of discussion and the allusions in the Epistle clearly 
 indicate that it was written soon after Paul's arrival in Corinth, about 
 A. D. 52. 
 
 CONTENTS. 
 
 The apostle declares that he is grateful to God on their behalf, 
 and that he prays for them, remembering their devotion to Christ. 
 He reminds them of their election, which was shown by the miracu- 
 lous power that attended his preaching among them, and how they 
 received the word in much affliction, and became an example to 
 others of Christian faith and hope. He reminds them of the shame- 
 ful treatment he had received at Philippi, of the honest and sincere 
 manner in which he had preached the gospel at Thessaionica, of the 
 *vu, 330, Epit. 21 'Smith's Classical Geography.
 
 680 INTRODUCTION TO THE STUDY 
 
 deep lovt he bore them, and of the manner in which he had sup- 
 ported himself. He calls to their minds that the sufferings brought 
 upon them by their countrymen are similar to the sufferings of the 
 followers of Christ in Judea from the Jews. 
 
 He expresses his anxiety to see them, and states that he had sent 
 Timothy from Athens to visit them, and that he had great joy when 
 he had received from him a favourable report of them. He declares 
 that he ever prays to see them, and that God may cause them to 
 abound in love and establish them in holiness. He exhorts them to 
 cultivate brotherly love, and in every respect to perform their duty; 
 not to grieve immoderately for the dead, since they shall be raised 
 to a glorious resurrection at the coming of Christ, who will appear 
 suddenly. He accordingly exhorts them to be watchful, and also to 
 hold in honour their spiritual teachers, and closes by giving them 
 various admonitions. 
 
 THE GENUINENESS OF THE EPISTLE. 
 
 This Epistle was universally received as the writing of Paul by the 
 Quoted by the ancient Church. It is quoted as Paul's by Irenaeus, 1 
 early fathers, by Clement of Alexandria,* and by Tertullian. 1 It was 
 received by the heretic Marcion, and is probably quoted in the 
 Epistles of Clement of Rome and Polycarp, and is contained in the 
 Peshito-Syriac version, and in the Canon of Muratori. Its genuine- 
 ness was attacked by Baur, but is defended by Hilgenfeld, 4 and 
 conceded by De Wette.* 
 
 1 
 
 CHAPTER XXIX. 
 
 THE SECOND EPISTLE TO THE THESSALONIANS. 
 PLACE AND TIME OF ITS COMPOSITION. 
 
 T appears that the statement in the First Epistle to the Thessa- 
 lonians respecting the second coming of Christ had produced a 
 Probably writ- great excitement among them, and it is very probable it 
 ten at corintn. j e( j to SO nie extravagant conduct, such as we have seen 
 among the Millerites of our time. The apostle writes chiefly to 
 assure them that Christ's coming is remote, and that a great apos- 
 tasy is first to take place in the Church. Now, as the First Epistle 
 was written during the first part of Paul's sojourn in Corinth, which 
 lasted eighteen months, it is probable that this was written within a 
 
 'v, cap. vi, i. 'Paedag., i, cap. v, vi. De Resur. Came, cap. xxir 
 
 *Einleitung, p. 236-247, Leipzig, 1875 * Einleitung pp. 277-279.
 
 OF THE HOLY SCRIPTURES. 681 
 
 year later, at the same place, about A. D. 53, and with this place and 
 time agrees the fact that Silvanus (Silas) and Timothy are associated 
 with Paul in addressing the Church (ch. i, i). It is certain from Acts 
 xviii 5, and from i Thess. i, i, that Silas and Timothy were with Paul 
 at Corinth, and it seems that these were not found togethei after 
 Paul left Corinth and went up to Jerusalem (Acts xviii, 18-22). 
 
 CONTENTS. 
 
 The apostle thanks God and glories in the progress which the 
 Tliessalonians are making in the Christian virtues, and in their patient 
 endurance of affliction from the wicked, who shall be punished at the 
 coming of Christ. This event, however, he assures them is not at 
 hand, and that there will be, first, a great apostasy in the Church, and 
 that the man of sin, exhibiting himself as God in the temple of God, 
 shall first be revealed ; that this wicked personage, by lying wonders, 
 will deceive those who love not the truth. He expresses confidence 
 in them, and exhorts them to steadfastness. He also asks their 
 prayers, and is confident they will perform what he commands. He 
 reminds them of the manner in which he conducted himself when 
 among them, and gives directions respecting the treatment of the 
 disorderly and disobedient. 
 
 THE GENUINENESS OF THIS EPISTLE. 
 
 This Epistle, equally with the first to the Thessalonians, was uni- 
 versally acknowledged by the ancient Church as the writing of the 
 Apostle Paul. It is quoted as the apostle's by Irenseus, 1 Clement 1 
 of Alexandria, and by Tertullian.* It is in the Peshito-Syriac, and 
 in the Canon of Muratori, and was received by Marcion. Justin 
 Martyr 4 clearly refers to this Epistle when he speaks of " The man 
 of sin," (6 -n/c dvojutac dvtfpwTroc), and " The man of apostasy," (6 rifc 
 dirooTaoiag cvflpomoc). 
 
 In modern times the genuineness of this Epistle has been almost 
 universally acknowledged. Its genuineness has, indeed, migenfeid's 
 been attacked by Schmidt, Kern, Baur, and very recently JJJSJJeSjJ^J 
 by Hilgenfeld,' who thinks that it was written by a conser- tus Epistle, 
 vative of the school of Paul in or near Macedonia in the last time of 
 Trajan (98-117), that is, forty or fifty years after the death of Paul. 
 It h difficult to see how an Epistle forged at that time could have 
 met with universal reception, and especially how it could have im- 
 posed upon the large Church in the important city of Thessalonica. 
 
 "Lib. iv, cap. xxvii ; lib. v, cap. xxv, i. 'Stromata, v, cap. iiL 
 
 "Advers. Marcion., v, xvi ; De Resur. Car., xxiv. *Dial. cum Tryph., 33, IIC. 
 1 Einleitung, pp. 642-652, Leipzig, 1875.
 
 G83 INTRODUCTION TO THE STUDY 
 
 We have already seen that it was accepted as Paul's by the heretic 
 Marcion of Pontus, who made havoc of the Scriptures. As he ap- 
 peared in Rome as early as A. D. 138, it is impossible that an Epistle 
 which came into circulation but twenty years earlier could have been 
 received by him as Paul's. Hilgenfeld thinks he finds traces of 
 Gnosticism in the Epistle in the working of " the mysterj of iniquity," 
 (ch. ii, 7), and in the idlers and busybodies (ch. iii, n), whom he re- 
 gards as " common vagabonds, agents of a heresy ! " It certainly in- 
 dicates a mind of remarkable acuteness and perversity to see in those 
 who would not work the agents of a heresy ! Nor is Hilgenfeld less 
 perverse in his judgment when he sees in " the mystery of iniquity," 
 Gnosticism ; for this heresy never sat in the temple of God, but 
 was scattered abroad outside. " The man of sin " is, to some extent, 
 based on the prophecy of Daniel (chap, xi, 36-45), but the apostle 
 goes far into the future. It does not appear that the author of the 
 Epistle was acquainted with the Apocalypse, so that no argument 
 from any such acquaintance can be adduced against its early com- 
 position. Hilgenfeld alleges that in 2 Thess. ii, 13; iii, 3, 5, 16, 
 Lord (t>ptof) is used for God, not for Christ ; while in the genuine 
 writings of Paul, wvptof (Lord) for God stands only in quotations 
 from the Old Testament. But in 2 Cor. viii, 21, "Providing for 
 honest things, not only in the sight of the Lord, but also in the sight 
 of men," Lord appears to refer to God the Father, and probably to 
 him is the reference in the preceding verse. And in Phil, ii, 24, 
 where Paul speaks of trusting in " the Lord," the reference may be 
 to the Father. Perhaps, also, the reference is the same in Philemon 
 20, and 2 Cor. iii, 17 : " Now the Lord is that Spirit." But it is 
 not at all certain that in the passages in 2 Thessalonians to which 
 Hilgenfeld refers, vptof (Lord) is used for the "Father." 
 
 Equally unsuccessful is Hilgenfeld in showing that the passage, 
 " That our God would count you worthy of this calling " (T% K^rjae. 
 14$) (2 Thess. i, n), is not Pauline, as the apostle in his genuine writ- 
 ings knows nothing of a calling still in the future for Christians, but 
 only as something that is past. But in what way is the language in- 
 consistent with Paul's usage ? He prays that God would count the 
 Thessalonians as having proved themselves, by their conduct, worthy 
 of the high privileges to which they have been called. The apostle 
 in i Cor. vii, 20, certainly uses the word Khrjffis (calling) in the sense 
 of vocation : " Let every man abide in the (same) calling (*A^<7ff) 
 wherein he was called." It may be used in the sense of vocation 
 in Phil, iii, 14 : " The prize of the high calling," etc. Hilgenfeld 
 understands the passage, 2 Thessalonians i, n, to refer to the call to 
 martyrdom, a usage of the word, he says, not found before the sec-
 
 OF THE HOLY SCRIPTURES. 683 
 
 ond century. But there is certainly no reference in the text to 
 martyrdom. The fact is, there is no well-grounded objection to 
 the genuineness of the Epistle. Its Hebraisms showt hat it was 
 written by a man whose education must have been largely Jewish. 
 Even the skeptical DeWette admits it to be genuine. 1 
 
 In chap, ii, 2, the apostle exhorts the Thessalonians not to be " soon 
 shaken in mind, or be troubled, neither by spirit, nor by word, nor 
 by letter, as from us, as that the day of Christ is at hand." By this 
 the apostle means, that no report of remarks by him, or anything 
 purporting to be written by him, shall be accredited if it teaches that 
 the day of Christ is at hand. It is not to be inferred from this that 
 any one had forged an Epistle in the name of Paul, and sent it to 
 the Thessalonians, for that, under the circumstances, is very improb- 
 able, and. Paul could not have failed to notice it, and brand it as it 
 deserved. They had drawn the inference from Paul's first letter, 
 and, perhaps, from supposed remarks of his, that the coming of Christ 
 was near. 
 
 CHAPTER XXX. 
 
 THE PASTORAL EPISTLES. 
 
 THE so-called Pastoral Epistles embrace the two of Paul to 
 Timothy, and his Epistle to Titus. The term " Pastoral " has 
 been given them because they treat largely of the qualifications and 
 duties of Christian ministers or pastors. Among the duties of the 
 minister, the inculcation of sound doctrine is enjoined, and the 
 avoidance of " foolish questions and genealogies," and " Jewish 
 fables," and " contentions and strivings about the law," as unprofit- 
 able and vain. The apostle lays especial stress upon the practical 
 duties of religion, and the maintenance of a holy life. 
 
 These Epistles bear marks of belonging to a late period in the 
 
 apostle's life, but there is nothing in them that carries us Objections of 
 
 . . ^ ,. T. j TT-i e i j Baur and Hll- 
 
 beyond the apostolic age. Baur and Hilgenfeld imagine ge nfeid to their 
 
 they see in these Epistles references to heresies that did genuineness, 
 not exist till near the middle of the second century. Both of these 
 rationalistic critics refer " oppositions of science falsely so cilled " 
 (i T'VD. vi, 20) to the heresy of Marcion, who set the gospel in op- 
 position to the law. Critics of the stamp of Baur and Hilgenfeld 
 can find almost any difficulty they seek. Marcion taught that the 
 creation and the Jewish dispensation did not proceed from the 
 
 Einleitung, pp. 277-279. 
 44
 
 684 INTRODUCTION TO THE STUDY 
 
 supreme God revealed by Christ, but from an e\ il being But the 
 form in which Marcion set forth his doctrine could be scarcely called 
 " gnosis" knowledge, science, the word used in i Timothy vi, 20. On 
 Marcion Neander ' remarks : " The opposition between friVrif \Jaitti\ 
 and yvuoi$ [knowledge], between an exoteric and an esoteric Chris- 
 tianity, was among the marked peculiarities of the other Gnostic sys- 
 tems; but in Marcion 's case, on the contrary, who adhered so 
 closely to the practical Apostle Paul, no such opposition could pos 
 sjbly be allowed to exist." 
 
 But the term " gnosis," knowledge, is used in various places in un- 
 uaeofthetenn l uest; i one d Epistles of this apostle. " Knowledge," says 
 gnosisinPaura he (the gnosis), "puffeth up," but love buildeth up (i Cor. 
 viii, i) ; again he speaks of the " shining of knowledge " 
 (the gnosis) ( 2 Cor. iv, 6). It is very probable that the passage under 
 discussion refers to the opposition of philosophy to Christianity. The 
 heathen philosophers and other men of culture had systems which 
 they supposed rested on the deductions of the intellect, and these 
 were put in opposition to Christianity, just as in modern times panthe- 
 ism, and certain cosmical and materialistic systems, are set in opposi- 
 tion to it. In like manner the apostle warns the Colossians against 
 being led astray " by philosophy and vain deceit according to the doc- 
 trine of men " (chap. ii. 8). The " genealogies," to which reference is 
 made, were evidently Jewish, and it is clear that the heretical teach- 
 ers spoken of in i Tim. i, 7 were not Marcionites, as they desired to 
 be "teachers of the law." In i Timothy iv, 1-3, the apostle says: 
 " Now the Spirit speaketh expressly, that in the latter times some 
 shall depart from the faith, giving heed to seducing spirits, . . . for- 
 bidding to marry," etc. It is perfectly gratuitous in Hilgenfeld to 
 refer the heresy which forbids marriage to Saturninus in the second 
 century, and then to draw the inference that the Epistle was not 
 written until after that heresy arose. Now, although the apostle 
 speaks of what is in the future, the germs of the error rejecting 
 marriage were already in existence, and had been developed, out- 
 side of the Church at least, in the apostolic age, since it is well 
 known that the Jewish Essenes f in the time of Christ rejected mar- 
 riage, as did the Therapeutae in Egypt.' Nor is it, indeed, strange 
 that some Christians, through incorrect ideas of purity and a rigid 
 asceticisir., should have fallen into the error of condemning marriage 
 even as early as the apostolic * age. 
 
 1 General Church History, voL i, p. 460. 
 
 Josephus, Antiq., xviii, cap. i, 5 ; Bel. Judic., ii, 8, 2. * Philc, ii, 478, 481. 
 
 * The declaration in the Epistle to the Hebrews, " Marriage is honourable in all * 
 fchap. xiii, 4), would seem to imply that some were doubting it
 
 OF THE HOLY SCRIPTURES. 685 
 
 The reference in i Tim. v to the provision made by the Church 
 for the support of widows does aot indicate a post-apos- other nf&m 
 tolic age, as we find such provision was made for them ences in agree- 
 in the very infancy of the apostolic Church (Acts vi, i). 
 
 Nor do we find any thing in 2 Timothy indicating a post- ticeof theapo*- 
 
 K . tollo Church. 
 apostolic age. And in the Epistle to ritus the warning 
 
 is not to give heed to " Jewish fables " (chapter i, 14), and to 
 " avoid foolish questions, and genealogies, and contentions, and striv- 
 ings about the law " (chap, iii, 9). Such a warning as this would 
 have been hardly necessary in a more advanced stage of Christian- 
 ity in the second century. Timothy was in Ephesus when the two 
 Epistles were addressed to him (i Tim. i, 3 ; 2 Tim. i, 16-18; 
 iv, 19), and the warning against heretical teachers is in perfect har- 
 mony with Paul's address at Miletus to the elders assembled from 
 Ephesus. " For I know this, that after my departure shall grievous 
 wolves enter in among you, not sparing the flock " (Acts xx, 29). 
 But the fact that i Timothy and the Epistle to Titus recognize 
 
 but two orders of ministers, namely, bishops, or presby- 
 
 Utu6r prool OT 
 
 ters, and deacons, is a strong proof that they belong to an apostolic or 
 the first century. 1 In i Timothy iii the qualifications lgln ' 
 of bishops and deacons are described, but there is not a word about 
 presbyters ; but in chap, v we have ruling presbyters, who are evi- 
 dently the same as bishops. Likewise, the bishop in Titus i, 7 is the 
 presbyter of chap, i, 5. This identity of bishop and presbyter cor- 
 responds with what we find in Acts xx, 17, 28, where the presbyters 
 of the former verse are called bishops in the latter. But in the early 
 part of the second century, if not earlier, the bishop was distin- 
 guished from the presbyter, as we find in the Epistle of Ignatius to 
 Polycarp, bishop of Smyrna (written about A. D. 115), where we 
 have " the bishop, and the presbyters, and the deacons." 3 
 
 That Paul should write Epistles, instructing Timothy and Titus, 
 in matters pertaining to their ministry and Church offices, is not in 
 the least improbable. In i Cor. xii, 28 he -speaks of various offices 
 in the Church, and in Acts xx, 28 he speaks of bishops or overseers 
 in the Church. 
 
 It has been objected to the genuineness of these three Epistles, that 
 their style is different from that of the universally ac- Objection* to be 
 knowledged Pauline writings. And it must be acknowl- JJJJSSSE 
 edged that this is quite true, and there is reason for it; torai Epistles. 
 for the apostle is not writing to Christian Churches, but to individ- 
 
 1 In 2 Timothy the orders of ministers are not discussed. 
 
 ' In Cureton's Syriac text of the Epistles, shorter than the shortest Greek text { it 
 may, therefore, be assumed to be free from interpolations.
 
 086 INTRODUCTION TO THE STUDY 
 
 uals, upon subjects different from any that had before engaged his 
 pen. In writing upon the same subjects, it is natural to expect the 
 ideas, language, and the author's manner of presentation to be sub- 
 stantially the same. But when the subject is changed, the thoughts, 
 language, and method of discussion are very naturally different. 
 Who would expect a philological dissertation to be similar in 
 thought and style to a biography, or an essay on moral obligation ? 
 A.nd how different in style is Paul's Epistle to Philemon, which Hil- 
 genfeld acknowledges to be genuine, from the Epistle to the Ro- 
 mans! In the latter there are about thirty words found in no 
 other Epistle of Paul, waiving that to the Hebrews. What a string of 
 unusual words do we find in Romans i, 26-31, where the apos- 
 tle is describing the crimes of the Pagan world ! The list of new 
 words in i Timothy i has its parallel in the first chapter of the Epis- 
 tle to the Romans. 
 
 The chief objections to the Pastoral Epistles have been brought 
 special objec- against the genuineness of the First Epistle to Timothy. 
 Sine^eJo? It has been thought strange that Paul, in writing to this 
 First Timothy intimate companion and friend, should say respecting 
 his apostleship : " I speak the truth, 1 and lie not " 
 (chap, ii, 7). Paul on several other occasions uses the phrase, " I 
 lie not" (Rom. ix, i ; 2 Cor. xi, 31 ; Gal. i, 20). In the first of 
 these passages he uses the expression in reference to his sincere 
 sorrow for the unbelief of the Jews, where it scarcely seems neces- 
 sary. But are we competent to determine exactly what Paul would 
 write, and what he would not ? In speaking of his apostleship to 
 Timothy, he declares the absolute certainty of his mission, not for 
 Timothy only, but for the teachers of all time. 
 
 In chap, iv, 12 the apostle charges Timothy: "Let no man de- 
 spise thy youth." Now, as Timothy at the time he was thus ad- 
 dressed could not well have been less than thirty-five * years of age, the 
 term " youth " has been thought inapplicable to him. But among both 
 Greeks and Latins the term youth (veonjs, youth ; vedvioKos, young 
 man ; juventus^tfa/'/fcy juvenis, a young man) was applicable to every 
 man between twenty and forty years of age* In the same wide applica- 
 tion can the phrase " youthful lusts " (vfiwreptKo? km&vfjuas) in 
 2 Tim. ii, 22 be taken. 
 
 1 The addition, " in Christ," is wanting in the best MSS. 
 
 * The First Epistle to Timothy was, in all probability, written about A. D. 65 or 66 
 About fourteen or fifteen years previous to this Paul found him at Lystra, and nvada 
 him his companion in his missionary tour (Acts xvi, 1-3). Now, supposing that at 
 this time he was about twenty or twenty-two years of age, he would be about thixtv 
 five when the apostle wrote to him. 
 
 1 See Liddell and Scott's Greek Lexicon, and Andrews' Latin Lexicon.
 
 OF THE HOLY SCRIPTURES. 68? 
 
 In i T imothy v, 18 the writer states that the Scripture says, Thou 
 shalt not muzzle the ox that treadeth out the corn ; and The Qy^^g, 
 the labourer is worthy of his reward. The last passage is founded on 
 the exact language of Luke x, 7. But no well founded 
 objection can be urged against the Pauline origin of the Epistle on 
 this ground, as it is most probable that Luke's Gospel was written 
 four or five years before the death of Paul. But even if it was not, 
 the apostle could have derived the passage from Luke himself, if 
 from no other source, just as he gives in i Cor. xi, 24, 25 the ac- 
 count of the institution of the sacrament by Christ, substantially in 
 the language of Luke xxii, 19, 20. It is not necessary to extend 
 the quotation following " the Scripture says " (chap, v, 18) beyond the 
 passage from the Old Testament ; and our Lord's declaration, " The 
 labourer is worthy of his hire, "may be severed from the preceding, and 
 stated independently. 
 
 The First Epistle to Timothy was first attacked by Schleiermacher, 
 Its genuineness was doubted by Neander, 1 and denied by Bleek.* 
 These critics, however, acknowledge the genuineness of the Second 
 Epistle to Timothy, and the Epistle to Titus. De Wette * regards 
 the three Epistles as inseparably connected together in language 
 and ideas, and denies the genuineness of all three. They are re- 
 jected by Baur, Schwegler, Hilgenfeld, Ewald, and some others. 
 On the other hand, the genuineness of all three has been defended by 
 Bertholdt, Hug, Heydenreich, Baumgarten, Bottger, Wieseler, Wies- 
 inger, Delitzsch, and others. All three Epistles were universally re- 
 ceived in the ancient Church, and De Wette admits that, apart from the 
 fact that they were rejected as a whole or in part by the heretics, 
 and that they were not in the collection of Marcion, who probably 
 had a dogmatic interest in the matter, " they are not less attested by 
 external testimonies than the other Epistles of Paul." 4 
 
 If the Epistles contain such marks of unity of authorship as show 
 them to have been written by a single individual and this appears 
 to be the real state of the case then the doubts that have been 
 raised on internal grounds respecting the First Epistle to Timothy, 
 may be dispelled by the internal evidences furnished by the other 
 fu'ff Epistles in proof of their Pauline origin. 
 
 De Wette complains of the difficulty of making the historical inci- 
 dents, to which reference is made in the Epistles, harmonize with 
 the facts of the apostle's life. And on the supposition that Paul 
 suffered martyrdom at Rome at the end of his two years' imprison- 
 ment, descri-bed in Acts xxviii, 16-31, there is no suitable place in 
 
 1 Planting and Training of the Church, pp. 338, 339. 
 
 *Einleitung. pp 565-578. 'Einleitung, pp. 337-339. 4 Einleitung, p. 340.
 
 888 INTRODUCTION TO THE STUDY 
 
 the life of the apostle for the insertion of the Epistles, and the 
 events of which they speak. But we have already seen in the sketch 
 of his life that he must have been released from this imprisonment, 
 and have visited Spain, and in all probability Macedonia, Asia Minor, 
 incidentanoted and some other places, in the three or four years interven- 
 
 IQ these ^Epia- j n g between his first imprisonment and his final airest 
 tbfcir Pauline and martyrdom. We have seen that Clement of Rome 
 
 in the first century, testifies that Paul travelled to 
 the bound of the West, and the Canon of Muratori, written at Rome 
 soon after the middle of the second century, speaks of Paul setting 
 out from the city for Spain. Now, if these Epistles can be brought 
 into harmony with what was most probably the history of Paul 
 after his release from the first imprisonment at Rome, we shall 
 have no slight proof of their genuineness. And here it must be ob- 
 served, that it is altogether probable that Paul would address Epistles 
 to individuals or Churches during the three or four years subsequent 
 to his release from imprisonment in Rome. In the twelve years pre- 
 ceding his release he wrote ten. 
 
 In the Epistle to the Philippians, written during his first imprison- 
 ment at Rome, the apostle says, " I trust in the Lord that I also my- 
 Paui's towels se ^ sna ^ come shortly " [to you] (chap, ii, 24); and in writ- 
 after his first ing, during the same imprisonment, to Philemon of Co- 
 
 lossae, he directs him " prepare me also a lodging " (ver. 
 22). From these passages it is evident that St. Paul expected to be re- 
 leased from his imprisonment, and to visit the Philippians and Colossi- 
 ans. In accordance with this, in his First Epistle to Timothy, he tells 
 him : " As I commanded thee to remain in Ephesus, when I was 
 setting out for Macedonia" (chap, i, 3). This must refer to what took 
 place after his release from imprisonment, for there is no place for 
 it befoic that time. In 2 Timothy iv, 13 he mentions his having 
 left a cloak at Troas ; and in verse 20 he states that he left Trophi- 
 mus at Miletus, sick. Both of these incidents must have occurred 
 after the release from the first imprisonment. In respect to Trophi- 
 mus, we find that he accompanied Paul on his last visit to Jerusalem 
 (Acts xx, 4; xxi, 29). It is not at all probable that Trophimus ac- 
 companied Paul when he sailed for Rome (Acts xxvii, 2) ; and, even 
 if he did, Paul could not have left him at Miletus, for the vessel 
 did not touch at that port (Acts xxvii, 4-7). From the preceding 
 facts it is evident that Paul after his release visited Asia Minor 
 and Macedonia, as he had intended. In 2 Tim. iv, 20 he states 
 that Erastus remained at Corinth ; and it is probable, from the 
 connection in which Erastus stands with Trophimus, that the apos- 
 tle left him in Corinth. In the Epistle to Titus the apostle states
 
 OF THE HOLY SCRIPTURES. 689 
 
 that he left him in Crete, from which it appears that Paul was in 
 that island after his release from imprisonment. He requests Titus 
 to meet him in Nicopolis, where he has determined to winter 
 (chap, iii, 12). This Nicopolis was situated in the southern part of 
 Epirus, on the coast of the Ionian sea, a little north of the entrance 
 to the Ambraciot gulf. Strabo states that it was founded by Augus- 
 tus Caesar. 1 Paul's journey to Crete and his wintering in Nicopolis 
 must be referred, also, to a time subsequent tc his release from im- 
 prisonment. It is, indeed, quite clear that the incidents related in 
 the Epistles occurred subsequent to the apostle's release. 
 
 From the foregoing facts, it seems highly probable that Paul after 
 his release visited Crete, and afterward Miletus (and probably 
 Colossse, and not unlikely Ephesus), Troas, Macedonia, Corinth, 
 and spent the following winter in Nicopolis. It is very probable that, 
 while on his way through Macedonia to Nicopolis, he wrote the 
 First Epistle a to Timothy ; that to Titus he may have written in 
 Asia Minor. After his arrival in Rome, and while in bonds (about 
 A. D. 68), a short time before his execution, he wrote the Second 
 Epistle to Timothy, as appears from chap, i, 16, 17 ; iv, 6, 7. 
 
 We have already seen that Titus was to meet Paul at Nicopolis ; 
 and, accordingly, we find that the apostle, writing from Rome to Tim- 
 othy, says that Titus has departed unto Dalmatia (2 Tim. iv, TO), 
 which lay along the east coast of the Adriatic Sea, about two hundred 
 and fifty miles northwest of Nicopolis. Now, this latter town is on 
 the way from Crete to Dalmatia. 
 
 It is impossible to determine whether Paul, after his release from 
 imprisonment, went first into Spain * or not. But the remarks of 
 the apostle in his last Epistle, just before his martyrdom, that he had 
 left Trophimus at Miletus sick, and the direction to Timothy to 
 bring the cloak that he had left at Troas with Carpus, would seem to 
 indicate that no great length of time had elapsed since he was in 
 \sia Minor. 
 
 In Acts xx, 25 Paul, in addressing the overseers of the Church of 
 Ephesus assembled at Miletus, says : " And now, be- Beamurof Acts 
 hold, I know that ye all, among whom I have gone xx, 26 on tnis 
 preaching the kingdom (of God), shall see my face no ajP8runi 
 more." This might be explained by supposing that Paul, though he 
 visited Miletus after his release from imprisonment, did not go to 
 
 1 Lib. vii, 324. 
 
 1 In chap, i, 3 he speaks of ' ' setting out for Macedonia " as something past. 
 
 1 In Rom. xv, 24 he declares his intention to visit Rome on his way to Spain. 
 And it would seem most natural to suppose he would go there from Rome, and not 
 return to Asia Minor first and go to Spain afterward. But it might be inferred from 
 Phil. ii. 24 and Philem. 22, that he went to Asia Minor first
 
 690 INTRODUCTION TO THE STUDY 
 
 Ephesus ; but such explanation would not be natural, and there can 
 be no doubt that Paul expected, if he should not be put to death at 
 Jerusalem, to go to Rome (Acts xix, 21), and he felt assured that he 
 would not come back to the region of Ephesus. In the address to 
 the Ephesian elders, he also says : " I go bound in the Spirit unto 
 Jerusalem, not knowing the things that shall befall me there : save 
 that the Holy Ghost witnesseth in every city, saying that bonds and 
 afflictions abide me " (chap, xx, 22, 23). Olshausen well remarks 
 on verse 25 : " The apostle here expresses merely a private opinion, 
 and by no means intimates that he was led to it by the unerring 
 Spirit of God." ' But in the Epistle to the Philippians (ch. ii, 24), he 
 expects to come shortly to them ; and in the Epistle to Philemon at 
 Colossae he tells Philemon to prepare a lodging for him. Now, in 
 going to Colossae from Rome, the most direct way was through 
 Ephesus. And it must be remembered that both of these Epistles 
 were written at Rome after the address in Acts xx was delivered, and 
 their genuineness is acknowledged even by Hilgenfeld. 
 
 Among the passages in these Epistles, which no forger in all prob- 
 sug- ability would ever have written, and which therefore are 
 ^cr P roo ^ s of their genuineness, the following may be men- 
 these Epistios. tioned : " Lay hands suddenly on no man, neither be par- 
 taker of other men's sins : keep thyself pure. Drink no longer water, 
 but use a little wine for thy stomach's sake and thine often infirmities. 
 Some men's sins are open beforehand, going before to judgment, 
 and some men they follow after," etc. (i Tim. v, 22-25). The inser- 
 tion of the passage, " Drink no longer water, but use a little wine," 
 etc., in the very midst of a passage enjoining care in ordaining men 
 to the ministry, seems very odd, and yet we think it can be readily 
 explained. When he exhorts to "lay hands suddenly on no man," 
 Timothy's emaciated frame comes vividly before the apostle, sug- 
 gested by the " hands,"and he straightway throws in the admonition re- 
 specting the use of wine, and continues with his reflections on ordina- 
 tion. But what forger would ever have pursued such a course as this ? 
 
 In 2 Timothy i, 5 the apostle says to Timothy : " When I call to 
 remembrance the unfeigned faith that is in thee, which first dwelt 
 in thy grandmother Lois, and in thy mother Eunice," etc. No one 
 could thus have written of the piety of Timothy's mother and grand- 
 mother, and have given their names, except some one who, like Paul, 
 had been for a long time intimate with Timothy. Nor is there the 
 slightest reason why a forger should have invented these names. In 
 a Tim. iv, 13 he directs Timothy : " The cloak that I left at Troas 
 with Carpus, when thou comest, bring with thee, and the books, but 
 1 Commentary on Acts.
 
 OF THE HOLY SCRIPTURES. 691 
 
 especially the parchments." What could have induced a forger to 
 write such a passage as this ! If he was trying to imitate Paul, he 
 certainly would not have written it, for the apostle in no other Epis- 
 tle has given any such directions. In this Epistle various particulars 
 are given in respect to Paul's friends, and the air of reality is so 
 impressed upon the whole as to exclude the idea of forgery. 
 
 The Epistle to Titus contains specific directions respecting indi- 
 viduals, and bears the stamp of reality. Paul directs Titus to meet 
 him in Nicopolis, as he has determined to winter there. No reason 
 could be assigned for a forger's introducing this town, which is men- 
 tioned nowhere else in the New Testament. 
 
 w 
 
 CHAPTER XXXI. 
 
 THE FIRST EPISTLE TO TIMOTHY. 
 
 THE PERSON OF TIMOTHY. 
 
 E first meet with this eminent companion of St. Paul in Acts 
 xvi, i, 2, where he is called a disciple of good repute, the 
 son of a Jewish woman, a believer in Christ, but of a Greek father. 
 He appears to have been dwelling in Lystra when Paul met him. 
 On account of the Jews, Paul circumcised him, and took him with 
 him in his missionary tour through Phrygia and Galatia to Troas, and 
 thence to Philippi, Amphipolis, Apollonia, Thessalonica, and Berea, 
 where Paul left him and Silas, and went to Athens (Acts xvii). Here 
 Timothy came to Paul, who sent him back to Thessalonica (i Thess. 
 iii, 2), from which city he came to Corinth and joined Paul, and was 
 with him when he wrote the two Epistles to the Thessalonians 
 (i Thess. i, i ; 2 Thess. i, i). Two or three years later we find him 
 with Paul at Ephesus (Acts xix, 22), from whence he was sent into 
 Macedonia, and to Corinth, it seems, with the First Epistle to the 
 Christians of that city (Acts xix, 22; i Cor. xvi, 10). Somewhat 
 later we find him with Paul when he writes the Second Epistle from 
 Macedonia to the Corinthians (2 Cor. i, i), and it is probable that 
 he was with the apostle when, during his three months' sojourn in 
 Corinth, he wrote the Epistle to the Romans (Acts xvi, 21). He 
 accompanied Paul into Asia (Acts xx, 4, 5), where it is probable that 
 he left ' the apostle, who went up to Jerusalem. Some time after the 
 
 1 It is not probable that Timothy went up to Jerusalem with Paul. At least, it is 
 very improbable that he was with the apostle when he sailed from Caesarea for Rome, 
 as Luke makes no mention of him, while he names Aristarchus, a man of less note, 
 as sailing with Paul (Acts xxvii, 2).
 
 C92 INTRODUCTION TO THE STUDY 
 
 apostle's arrival in Rome he was joined by Timothy, whose name is 
 associated with Paul's in the Epistles addressed to the Philippians, 
 Colossians, and to Philemon. He appears at one time to have been 
 imprisoned, probably at Rome, as the author of the Epistle to the 
 Hebrews speaks of his being set at liberty (chap, xiii, 23). Euse- 
 bius ' says, it is related that Timothy was the first bishop of Ephtsus. 
 Rut Jittle is known of him after he disappears from the Acts. 
 
 CONTENTS. 
 
 After the salutation, the apostle informs Timothy that he had re- 
 quested him to abide in Ephesus for the purpose of charging that 
 sound doctrines be taught and heresies avoided. He refers to him- 
 self as having been a persecutor, and to his call to the ministry as an 
 example of the divine mercy, for the benefit of others. He exhorts 
 Timothy to perseverance in the faith. He directs that prayers be 
 offered for all men, especially for those in authority, declaring that 
 God wills the salvation of all through the Gospel of Christ, of which 
 he has been made a minister. He gives directions respecting the 
 deportment of women (chaps, i, ii). 
 
 He describes the qualifications of bishops and deacons, and the 
 conduct required of their wives. He expects to come shortly to see 
 Timothy, but writes in order that, if he does not come, Timothy 
 may know how to conduct himself; at the same time he speaks of 
 the great mystery that is found in the gospel system (chap. iii). He 
 foretells through the Spirit the coming apostasy and the heresies in 
 the Church, instructs Timothy in the duties of personal religion, in 
 the treatment of elders and widows, and enjoins caution in ordaining 
 men to the ministry (chaps, iv, v). He also describes the duties of 
 servants to their masters, exhorts Timothy to withdraw from those 
 who teach any thing contrary to the doctrines of Christ, points out 
 the fatal consequences of a love of money, exhorts Timothy in the 
 most solemn manner to be faithful to warn the rich against trusting 
 in their riches, but to charge them to trust in God, to be rich in 
 good works, and benevolent, and he concludes by warning Timothy 
 against the pretences of a false science. 
 
 ANCIENT TESTIMONIES TO THE GENUINENESS OF THIS EPISTLE. 
 
 Polycarp, in his Epistle to the Philippians, quotes chap, vi, 7 : 
 
 Poir ire- "Knowing therefore that we brought nothing into the 
 
 MDUS, and oth- world, nor can we carry any thing out."* It is attributed 
 
 to Paul in the Peshito-Syriac version, and in the Canon 
 
 1 Hist Eccles., lib. iii, cap. iv. * Sec. 4.
 
 OF THE HOLY SCRIPTURES. 693 
 
 ot Muratori. Irenaeus gives a part of chap, vi, 20, with the remark, 
 " Paul well says." ' He -also quotes a part of chap, i, 9 ' and chap, 
 ii, 5.* It is ascribed to Paul by Clement of Alexandria,* and by 
 Tertullian, 6 and nowhere do we find a doubt of its Pauline origin in 
 the Church. Theophilus, bishop of Antioch, quotes (about A. D. 
 180) chap, ii, 2, "That we may lead a quiet and peaceable life," 
 which he prefaces with the remark " The divine Scripture com- 
 mands." ' It is well known that the heretic Marcion rejected this 
 Epistle, but on dogmatic grounds in all probability. It is found in 
 all the ancient versions. " T 
 
 CHAPTER XXXII. 
 
 THE SECOND EPISTLE TO TIMOTHY. 
 
 CONTENTS. 
 
 apostle expresses his ardent affection for Timothy, and his 
 - strong desire to see him, and speaks of his sincere faith, which 
 was also in his mother and grandmother. He exhorts him to stir 
 up the gift that is in him, and not to be ashamed of the testimony of 
 the Lord and his prisoner. He refers to the revelation and power of 
 the gospel, of which he is a minister and apostle to the Gentiles, 
 and expresses his confidence in God, exhorts Timothy to fidelity in 
 doctrine, in faith and love, and complains that all those of Asia have 
 turned away from him, with the exception of Onesiphorus, upon 
 whose family he invokes the divine blessing (chap. i). He exhorts 
 Timothy to fidelity in his work by various considerations, and refers 
 to his own sufferings for the sake of the gospel, and at the same time 
 urges him to shun youthful lusts, to attend to the practical duties of 
 religion, avoiding foolish and unlearned questions, and to conduct 
 himself with gentleness toward the enemies of the truth, that they, 
 perchance, may be saved (chap. ii). 
 
 He describes the persons who shall appear in the last days, ex- 
 horts Timothy to follow the doctrines he has learned from him, com- 
 mends to him the inspired Scriptures, reminding him of his own 
 afflictions and persecutions at Antioch, Iconium, and Lystra, and 
 
 11, cap. xiv, 7. * iv, cap. xvi, 3. ' v, cap. xvii, I. * Stromata, ii, cap. vi, XL 
 *Adversus Marcionem, v, cap. xxi. Liber de Praescrip., cap. xxv. 
 * Ad Autolycum, iii, 14. The Greek is exactly the same as is used in i Timothy 
 
 II, a, and is quoted by him after reference to prayers for rulers. 
 
 1 1n the Memphitic, Thebaic Gothic, Armenian, and ^Ethiopia, besides the 
 
 Peshito-Syriac.
 
 094 INTRODUCTION TO THE STUDY 
 
 how the Lord had delivered him (chap. iii). In view of the fact 
 that the time will come when sound doctrine will not be endured, 
 he gives Timothy a solemn charge respecting preaching, declares 
 that his departure is at hand, and that he is ready to be offered, that 
 he has been faithful, and that a glorious reward awaits him, and 
 urges Timothy to come shortly to him as only Luke is with him, 
 He gives him various directions, speaks of his first defence (before 
 Nero), and states that the Lord stood by him though men had for- 
 saken him, and is confident respecting the future. He closes with 
 salutations and greetings, and urges Timothy to come to him before 
 winter (chap. iv). 
 
 ANCIENT TESTIMONIES TO THE GENUINENESS OF THE EPISTLE. 
 
 The Epistle is found in the Peshito-Syriac version, and in the 
 round in the Canon f Muratori. It is quoted as Paul's by Irenaeus, 1 
 peshito-syriac as his Second Epistle to Timothy by Clement * of Alex 
 version, etc. andria> and is attributed to Paul by Tertullian.* Origen, 
 in commenting on Matthew xxvii, 9, remarks : " As Jannes and 
 Jambres resisted Moses is not found in the public Scriptures, but in 
 an obscure book with the superscription: 'The book Jannes and 
 Jambres; 1 from this circumstance some have dared to reject the 
 [Second] Epistle to Timothy as containing matter of a secret char- 
 acter, but they were not successful." With this exception, it does 
 not appear that any doubt was expressed by the ancient Church re- 
 specting its Pauline origin. It is found in all the ancient versions. 
 
 CHAPTER XXXIII. 
 
 THE EPISTLE TO TITUS. 
 
 THE PERSON OF TITUS. 
 
 "PHE name of this companion of Paul occurs nowhere in the Acts * 
 of the Apostles, and our information respecting him is derived 
 solely from the Epistles of Paul. 
 It is stated in Galatians ii, 3 that he was a Greek, and therefore 
 
 'iv, TO, n, in lib. iii, cap. xiv. "Stromate, i, cap. xi. 
 
 ' Adversus Marcionem, lib. v, cap. xxi. Lib. de Praescrip., cap. xxv. 
 
 4 In Acts xviii, 7 mention is made of Justus, to which some ancient MSS. prefix 
 T/rof or T/rtof, making it Titus or Titius Justus. Tischendorf has introduced T 
 nof lowarof (Titus Justus) into the text There is no reason to suppose, with some, 
 that this is the same person as Titus ; for Paul took Titus with him to Jerusalem 
 (Gal. ii, i) before he preached in Corinth, and made the acquaintance of Justus, who 
 Uved there.
 
 OF THE HOLY SCRIPTURES. 695 
 
 there was no necessity for his circumcision. Paul in his Epistle to 
 him calls him his " genuine son after the common mug men> 
 faith," from which it is not improbable that he was tioned only in 
 converted by means of the apostle. 1 We first meet P^' 8 ^ 184168 - 
 with him as the companion of Paul on his visit to Jerusalem (Gal. 
 ii, i), which is probably the same visit mentioned in Acts xv, 2. 
 About seven years after this Titus brings to Paul in Macedonia in- 
 telligence of the condition of the Church at Corinth, whither Paul ap- 
 pears to have sent him (2 Cor. vii, 5-16; xii, 18). Soon after this 
 the apostle sends him with the Second Epistle to the Corinthians, 
 and directs him to assist them in making a collection for the poor 
 saints in Jerusalem (2 Cor. viii, 6-19). From Paul's Epistle, it ap- 
 pears that after the apostle's release from the Roman imprisonment 
 he took Titus with him to Crete, where he was directed by Paul to 
 ordain elders in every city (Titus i, 5). He was also directed to 
 meet the apostle in Nicopolis (ch. iii, 12). A short time before Paul's 
 martyrdom, he went to Dalmatia (2 Tim. iv, 10). Paul calls him 
 his " partner and fellow helper" (2 Cor. viii, 23). 
 
 Eusebius states that " it is related that Titus was bishop of the 
 churches of the island of Crete." * 
 
 CONTENTS. 
 
 Paul begins the Epistle with a declaration of his apostleship, and, 
 Sn addressing Titus, states that he left him in Crete to set things in 
 order, and to ordain elders in every city. He describes the qualifica- 
 tions of elders, or bishops, and their duties. He quotes the language 
 of one of the poets of Crete (Epimenides) in attestation of the bad 
 character of the Cretans, and exhorts Titus to rebuke them sharply, 
 and not to give heed to Jewish fables and the commandments of 
 men who turn from the truth. He affirms that, while to the pure all 
 things are pure, to the unbelieving nothing is pure, and while they 
 profess a knowledge of God, in works they deny him (chap. i). He 
 gives directions respecting the conduct of aged men and women, and 
 the duty of the latter to the youth of their sex. He commands hi*ri 
 to exhort the young men to be sober-minded, and to show himself 
 a pattern in works, doctrine, and speech, to exhort servants to be 
 faithful to their masters, and to adorn their profession. He re- 
 minds Titus that the gospel of Christ teaches us holy living, and 
 Lhat we are to look for the glorious appearance of the Saviour, 
 who gave himself to redeem and purify us unto himself as a pecu- 
 
 'Paul calls Timothy his "genuine son in the faith," though it does not appeal 
 that Timothy was converted through Paul's instrumentality. 
 1 Hist. Eccles., lib. iii, cap. iv.
 
 690 INTRODUCTION TO THE STUDY 
 
 liar people (chap. ii). He exhorts him to inculcate obedience to 
 rulers, and the performance of religious duties in a spirit of meek 
 ness, and to remind his flock that they themselves were once dis- 
 obedient, living in lusts and malice, but have been redeemed through 
 Christ, not by righteous deeds, but through the divine mercy and the 
 regeneration of the Holy Spirit, that they might be heirs of eterna 1 ; 
 life. He lays stress on good works, and enjoins Titus to avoid fool 
 ish questions, contentions, and strivings about the law, and to reject 
 a heretic after the first and second admonition. He requests Titus to 
 meet him at Nicopolis, and gives him several directions, sends a sal- 
 utation, and asks him to greet those that love them (chap. iii). 
 
 ANCIENT TESTIMONIES TO THE GENUINENESS OF THIS EPISTLE. 
 
 Clement of Rome, in the Epistle to the Corinthians, appears to 
 ctemwit and have used this Epistle in the phrase, " Ready for every 
 other fothwt. gO()( j wor k/' 1 The Epistle is quoted as Paul's by Ire- 
 naeus, 1 by Clement of Alexandria, 1 and by Tertullian. 4 It is con- 
 tained in the Peshito-Syriac version, and in all the other ancient ver- 
 sions, and in the Canon of Muratori. Nowhere in the ancient Church 
 do we hear a doubt of its genuineness. Jerome states that it was 
 received as Paul's by Tatian, 6 the founder of a heretical school, who 
 had at an earlier period been a disciple of Justin Martyr. 
 
 CHAPTER XXXIV. 
 
 THE EPISTLE TO PHILEMON. 
 
 PHILEMON was a fellow labourer of Paul, living at Colossae." 
 A His slave, Onesimus, having run away and come to Rome, he is 
 there converted to Christ through the instrumentality of Paul. The 
 apostle sent him back to Philemon with this Epistle, in which Paul, 
 with great tact, delicacy, and genuine Christian sympathy, intercedes 
 for Onesimus: "Whom," says he, "I have begotten in my bonds" 
 
 1 Titus iii, I in sec. 2 of Clement. The Greek is the same in both, with the ex- 
 ception of tif in Clement for irpof in Titus. * Lib. i, cap. xvi, 3 ; iii, cap. iii, 4. 
 
 1 Whom (the Cretan prophet) Paul mentions in his Epistle to Titus, thus saying 
 A prophet of their own said thus, The Cretans are always liars, etc. Strom., i, xnr. 
 
 * Adversus Marcionem, v, cap. xxi ; Lib. de Anima, cap. xx. 
 Prologue to the Epistle to Titus. 
 
 This appears from the fact that Paul, in his Epistle to the Colossians, sends a 
 message to Archippus (chap, iv, 17); and in this Epistle Archippus is associated 
 with Philemon in the address (chap, i, 2.)
 
 OF THE HOLY SCRIPTURES. 697 
 
 (verse 10). " For perhaps he therefore departed for a season, that 
 thou shouldst receive him forever ; not now as a slave, but above a 
 slave, a brother beloved, especially to me, but how much more unto 
 thee, both in the flesh and in the Lord ? If thou count me there- 
 fore a partner, receive him as myself," etc. (15-17). 
 
 The Epistle was written during Paul's first imprisonment in Rome 
 (about A. D. 63), as is evident from verse 10, and from a compari- 
 son of those who were with Paul at the time (23, 24), and those who 
 were with him when he wrote the Epistle to the Colossians (i, 7; 
 iv, 12, 14). 
 
 THE GENUINENESS OF THIS EPISTLE. 
 
 This Epistle is found in the Peshito-Syriac version, and in the Canon 
 of Muratori, and was received by Marcion. 1 It is contained in the an- 
 cient Memphitic, Thebaic, Gothic, ^Ethiopic, and Armenian versions. 
 We have not been able to find that it was quoted by Irenaeus or 
 Clement of Alexandria, which is not surprising when we consider 
 its brevity, and that it does not contain important doctrine, and 
 is wholly of a private character. It is, however, referred to by Ter- 
 tullian a as an Epistle of Paul. Jerome remarks that some " affirm 
 that the Epistle to Philemon is either not Paul's, or if it is, it con- 
 tains nothing which can edify, and that it has been rejected by very 
 many ancients, inasmuch as it is written for the purpose of recom- 
 mending, not teaching. On the other hand, those who defend its 
 genuineness say that it would never have been received in the whole 
 world by all the Churches, unless it was believed to be the apostle 
 Paul's." 1 It is evident that these doubts grew out of the private 
 character of the writing. In modern times the genuineness of the 
 Epistle has been doubted by Baur, but defended by Hilgenfeld. 4 
 I)e Wette well remarks, "Its genuineness is not to be doubted."* 
 
 CHAPTER XXXV. 
 
 THE EPISTLE TO THE HEBREWS. 
 THE PERSONS ADDRESSED. 
 
 TN the most ancient MSS. of the New Testament this Epistle has 
 * the simple inscription, " To HEBREWS," and its contents show 
 that it is addressed to Christians of the Hebrew race, The Epistle not 
 and is intended to set forth the temporary character ^drewed b ^ 
 of the Levitical priesthood, and of the sacrificial institu- some Church. 
 
 1 Tertullian remarks that " the shortness of this Epistle enabled it to escape the 
 falsifying hand of Marcion." Adversus Marcionem, lib. v, cap. xxi. 'Ibid. 
 
 *Introd. to Philemon. * Einleitung, pp. 328-331. Einleitung, pp. 304, 305
 
 G98 INTRODUCTION TO THE STUDY 
 
 tions of the Mosaic law, and to prove that the ceremonial law was to 
 end with the appearance of Christ, who is made a priest forever after 
 the order of Melchizedek. Hence it is clear that the great design 
 of the Epistle is to establish Jewish Christians in the faith of the 
 gospel, and to render them impregnable to the assaults of their un- 
 believing countrymen. But here the question arises, Is the Epistle 
 addressed to a specific part of the Jewish Christians, or to the be- 
 lievers in general among the Hebrews? To this it must be an- 
 swered, That while the general contents, being an exposition of the 
 Levitical system, are well suited to all Jewish Christians, there are 
 some passages which indicate that the Epistle was written to Jew- 
 ish Christians of a particular place. For we find the writer "at the 
 conclusion of the Epistle making the following statement : " Know 
 ye that our brother Timothy is set at liberty ; with whom, if he come 
 shortly, I will see you." The latter part of this verse forbids the 
 supposition that the Epistle is a general one. Also the statement : 
 " But call to remembrance the former days, in which, after ye were 
 illuminated, ye endured a great fight of afflictions ; partly, whilst ye 
 were made a gazing-stock both by reproaches and afflictions; and 
 partly, whilst ye became companions of them that were thus used. 
 For ye had compassion on those in bonds (roZf tteff/atotf), 1 and took 
 joyfully the spoiling of your goods," etc. (chap, x, 32-34), seems to 
 refer to a definite community of Christians. But what community 
 Not addressed was ^ s -? Bleek thinks the Epistle was intended for the 
 to Palestinian Jewish Christians of Palestine. But in that case we 
 would expect it to have been written in the Aramaic 
 language, the vernacular of Palestine at that time, and not in elegant 
 Greek. The readers addressed had derived their knowledge of the 
 doctrines of Christ from the apostles, or from others who had heard 
 Christ, for in speaking of salvation the writer says, " Which at the first 
 began to be spoken by the Lord, and was confirmed unto us by 
 them that heard him," etc. (chap, ii, 3, 4). Now, as our Saviour 
 lived and taught in Palestine, and as this Epistle was written scarcely 
 more than thirty years after the crucifixion of Christ, there must 
 have been many still living who had seen and heard him, to whom 
 the language of the Epistle was inapplicable. In chap, vi, 10 the 
 readers are addressed as having ministered to the saints, and as still 
 engaged in that work. But nowhere in the New Testament are the 
 Palestinian Christians distinguished for ministering to the saints. 
 On the contrary, they themselves were to a considerable extent the 
 objects of charity, and we find St. Paul making collections for them, 
 
 1 This is the reading which both Tischendorf and Tregelles have adopted iti *hei 
 critical editions of the Greek Testament.
 
 OF THE HOLY SCRIPTURES. 699 
 
 and going up to Jerusalem with the proceeds (Rom. xv, 25). Mace- 
 donia and Achaia were distinguished for their liberality (Rom. 
 xv, 26; i Cor. xvi, 15; 2 Cor. ix, 2). Further, as the Palestinian 
 Churches were under the immediate direction of the apostles of 
 whom Matthew and John remained in Palestine until a late period, 
 and James (probably an apostle) presided in Jerusalem it would 
 have been improper for the writer of the Epistle to the Hebrews, 
 who ws not an apostle, 1 to address these Churches. Untenable, 
 too, is the hypothesis of Ebrard, that " the Epistle was intended for 
 a limited circle of neophytes in Jerusalem, who had become timor- 
 ous lest they should be excluded from the temple worship, threat- 
 ened to withdraw themselves from Christianity (chap, x, 25), and 
 were therefore taken anew under instruction, for whose instruction 
 the Epistle to the Hebrews was to form a sort of guide." 5 There 
 is nothing in the Epistle to authorize this view, and the objections 
 that lie against the hypothesis of its being addressed to Palestinian 
 societies lie with equal or greater force against this. 
 
 Wieseler, Kostlein, Hilgenfeld, 8 and some others, think the Epistle 
 was addressed to the Jewish Christians of Alexandria, but Bleek is 
 of the opinion that these Christians were in no special danger of 
 relapsing into Judaism from any strong attachment to the Jewish 
 service. He remarks that the Alexandrian Church teachers know 
 nothing of its having being originally written for their society, but 
 suppose it was intended for the Palestinians. 4 
 
 And here it must be observed that we know nothing of the found- 
 ing of a Christian Church in Alexandria in the first part of the apos- 
 tolic age, and we have, therefore, no ground for supposing that the 
 Epistle was directed to a Christian society in that city. Various 
 other places have been suggested as the original destination of the 
 Epistle, but without sufficient ground. It is probable that it was 
 originally sent to a community consisting chiefly of Hebrew Chris- 
 tians in the region of Asia Minor, or Greece, but most likely in the 
 former.* 
 
 THE AUTHOR OF THE EPISTLE. 
 
 Neither in the Epistle itself, nor in the superscriptions of the most 
 ancient Greek copies, is the name of the author found. It is quoted 
 
 1 This will be made highly probable when we discuss the authorship of the Epistle 
 
 * In Olshausen's Comment., Kendrick's translation. 
 
 "Einleitung, pp. 385-387. *Einleitung, p. 611. 
 
 * In chap, xiii, 23 the writer expects, in the company of Timothy, if he come 
 shortly, to see his readers, which would seem to indicate that they lived in the sphere 
 of Timothy's labors. 
 
 45
 
 700 INTRODUCTION TO THE S1UDY 
 
 as Paul's by Clement of Alexandria. 1 He also says that " the Epis- 
 N> mention of tie to the Hebrews is Paul's, written to the Hebrews 
 tte Eptetie iu * n ^ e Hebrew language, and that Luke eagerly trans- 
 it, lated it, and gave it to the Greeks ; on which account 
 the translation of this Epistle and the Acts show the same style." 
 That the name of the Apostle Paul is not written at the head of it is 
 natural ; for he says that " in writing to the Hebrews, who had a 
 prejudice against him and suspected him, he very prudently did not 
 turn them away from it by putting his name to it." ' 
 
 Eusebius speaks of a book of Various Discussions written by Ire 
 opinions of the naeus, " in which he mentions the Epistle to the He- 
 tt^authore^p brews," * and gives extracts from it. The expression in 
 of the Epistle. Irenseus, " By the word of his power," 4 seems borrowed 
 from Heb. i, 3. We can find no other probable reference in him to 
 the Hebrews. This is remarkable, as his quotations of nearly all 
 the recognized Epistles of Paul are very numerous in his great work, 
 AGAINST HERESIES, and it is very likely that he did not receive the 
 Epistle as Paul's. Tertullian of Carthage says that this Epistle bore 
 the superscription of Barnabas, and " certainly," says he, " it has 
 a better reception among the Churches than the apocryphal book of 
 the Shepherd " * (Hermas). He then proceeds to quote it as the 
 writing of this companion of Paul, and gives what we have in He- 
 brews vi, 4, 6-8, so that there can be no doubt about the identity of 
 the Epistle. Eusebius remarks that Origen, " in his Homilies on 
 this Epistle, makes the following statement : ' The style of the Epis- 
 tle to the Hebrews has not the rustic language of the apostle, who 
 acknowledged that he was " rude in speech," that is, in style ; but 
 that this Epistle, in the arrangement of its expressions, is purer 
 Greek every one capable of judging of differences of style would 
 acknowledge. But, on the other hand, that the thoughts of the 
 Epistle are admirable, and not inferior to the acknowledged apos- 
 tolic writings this also every one would concede to be true who 
 carefully reads the apostolic writings.' After this he adds: 'In 
 giving my opinion, I would say that the thoughts are the apostle's, 
 but the style and composition are those of some one who has related 
 vhat the apostle said, and, as it were, has written down, as scholia, 
 
 1 Strom a ta, vi, cap. viiL 
 
 * This account of the Epistle as given by Clement is taken from the last work of 
 Clement (TTorviroawf) by Eusebius in his Hist. Eccles., vi, cap. xiv. 
 
 * v, cap. xxvi. * Contra Haereses, lib. ii, cap. xxx, 9. 
 
 * Exstat enim et Barnabae titulus ad Hebraeos, adeo satis auctoritatis viro, ut quern 
 Paulas juxta se constituent in abstentiae tenore. . . . Et utique receptior apud EC. 
 desias Epistola Barnabae illo apocrypho Pastore Moechorum. Lib. de Pudicitia, 
 cap. xx.
 
 OF THE HOLY SCRIPTURES. 701 
 
 the things said by his instructer. If, then, any Chnrch holds this 
 Epistle as Paul's, let it be honoured also for this. For not thought- 
 lessly have the ancients handed it down as Paul's. But who wrote 
 the Epistle the truth God (only) knows. The account that has 
 come down to us is that, according to some, Clement, bishop of 
 Rome, wrote the Epistle ; according to others, Luke, who wrote the 
 Gospel and the Acts.'" Eusebius himself says : "There are four- 
 teen Epistles of Paul evident and certain. But it is not right to be ig- 
 norant of the fact that some have rejected the Epistle to the Hebrews, 
 affirming that it is denied by the Roman Church to be Paul's." 11 
 
 Dionysius, bishop of Alexandria about the middle of the third 
 century, in an Epistle to Fabius, bishop of Antioch, in 0^^,, b _ 
 describing a persecution of the Christians, says : " The Dionysiua of 
 brethren got out of the way and retired, and took joy- Mfa 
 fully the spoiling of their goods, like those to whom Paul bears tes- 
 timony." ' This passage is found in Heb. x, 34, so that he recognizes 
 Paul as the author of the Epistle. In the writings of Cyprian, bishop 
 of Carthage, about the middle of the third century, there are numer- 
 ous quotations from the larger Epistles of Paul, and a considerable 
 number from his smaller Epistles, except Titus and Philemon, but 
 we cannot find a vestige of the Epistle to the Hebrews, of which the 
 only satisfactory explanation is, that Cyprian did not regard it as 
 Paul's. According to Photius, 4 both Irenaeus and Hippolytus affirmed 
 that this Epistle is not Paul's. 
 
 Hilary, bishop of Poitiers in Gaul in the middle of the fourth cen 
 tury, makes use of the Epistle to the Hebrews. In commenting on 
 Psalm xiv, he quotes Hebrews xii, 22, as the language of Paul. In 
 other places he gives his quotations from this Epistle as the language 
 of the " apostle." There is no doubt that he recognized the Epistle 
 as Paul's. According to Hilary, the Arians alleged in support of 
 their views " that which Paul said to the Hebrews " (ch. i, 4).' But it 
 is uncertain whether they quoted it as Paul's, though this is probable. 
 
 Ambrose, bishop of Milan in the last part of the fourth century, 
 makes use of the Epistle to the Hebrews, which he calls Quoted by An*. 
 " Scripture ; " ' he quotes xii, 6, with the remark, " The bTO8e - 
 holy apostle says; " 7 chap, x, 31, with the words, "The holy apostle 
 says * chap, xii, n, with, "The blessed apostle says."' There 
 
 3 In Hist. Eccles., lib. vi, 25. Ibid., iii, 3. 
 
 * Ibid., vi, cap. xii. Photius, in the ninth century, says that Caius, presbyter of 
 Rome (about A. D. 200), they affirm, did not receive this Epistle as Paul's (Co- 
 dex 48) ; and he states that Hippolytus (about A. D. 225) did not accept it as Paul's 
 (Codex 121). 4 Codex ccxxxii. *De Trinitate, lib. iv, n, 'Epistle xlhi. 
 T Sermo xliv. * Ibid., xxvi. * Ibid., xiiL
 
 70 o INTRODUCTION TO THE STUDY 
 
 is no doubt that by this language he means Paul, for it is in this 
 way that he often quotes Paul's Epistles. 
 
 Jerome remarks on the Epistle to the Hebrews, " It is not be- 
 other ancient Heved to be his (Paul's) on account of its difference of style 
 tesumonte* an( j language, but to belong, according to Tertullian, either 
 to Barnabas, or, according to some, to the evangelist Luke, or to Clem- 
 ent, afterward bishop of the Roman Church, who, they say, was 
 Pa-il's assistant, and that he arranged and ornamented the thoughts 
 of the apostle in his own language ; or, indeed, that Paul, because 
 he was writing to the Hebrews, did not prefix hi3 name to the Epistle 
 on account of their dislike of him. As a Hebrew he had written 
 in Hebrew, that is, in his own language, most eloquently, so that 
 those things which had been eloquently written in Hebrew were 
 more eloquently translated into Greek, and this appears to be the 
 cause why it differs from the other Epistles of Paul." ' Augus 
 tine, bishop of Hippo, in northern Africa, attributes the Epistle 
 to Paul.* Chrysostom, archbishop of Constantinople, received the 
 Epistle as Paul's, and wrote a Commentary on it. The Epistle 
 is found in the ancient Peshito-Syriac version, made about the mid- 
 dle of the second century, and its admission into that version is 
 sufficient proof that it was regarded either as the writing of Paul,* 
 or of some one that stood in close relations to an apostle. It was 
 also included in the Memphitic, Thebaic, ^Ethiopic, and A rmenian 
 versions. In the Canon of Muratori there is no mention of the 
 Epistle to the Hebrews.* But no great importance is to be attached 
 to this omission, as the canon is imperfect. It is evident that the 
 Epistle must have been well known at Rome in the second century, 
 as it is used by Clement of that city in his Epistle to the Corinthians.' 
 
 From the foregoing history of the Epistle in the first four centuries, 
 it is seen that the weight of evidence is in favor of its having origi- 
 nated, either directly or indirectly, from the Apostle Paul. 
 
 CHARACTER OF THE EPISTLE AS BEARING UPON ITS AUTHORSHIP. 
 
 The name of Paul is inserted in the very beginning of all his ac- 
 omtesionof tne knowledged Epistles, and if that to the Hebrews is his, 
 author's name. ne departed from his custom in not inserting his name, 
 
 1 De Viris Illus. Paulus. f De Doctrina Christiana, lib. ii, cap. viii, 73. 
 
 * Bagster*s edition of the Peshito has Paul's name at the head of this Epistle. But 
 whether the ancient copies contained this superscription is uncertain. 
 
 'The Canon mentions an Epistle to the Alexandrians, forged in the name oi 
 Paul, in aid of the heresy of Marcion, and rejected by the Church. But it is clcai 
 that this could not be the Epistle to the Hebrews, as some have conjectured. 
 
 'Compare sec 36 of the Epistle with Hebrews i, 3, etc.
 
 OF THE HOLY SCRIPTURES. 703 
 
 and that, too, without assigning a reason; for we cannot suppose 
 that the author of it was either unknown, or wished to be, to those 
 to whom he especially wrote, for he says: "Pray for us. ... But 
 I beseech you the rather to do this that I may be restored to you 
 the sooner 1 ' (chap, xiii, 18, 19); and he also says he will see them 
 in company with Timothy if he come shortly (chap, xiii, 23). 
 
 T>.5 statement in chap, ii, 3, that the doctrine of Christ "was con- 
 firmed to us by them that heard him," might possibly, though not 
 certainly, apply to another than Paul, to whom Christ appeared in 
 person, and who was commissioned by Christ to preach the gospel, 
 which he tells us he did not receive " of man, neither was I taught 
 it, but by the revelation of Jesus Christ" (Gal. i, 12). 
 
 Bleek argues against the Pauline origin of the Epistle from sup- 
 posed inaccuracies in the statements respecting the Bieek's objec- 
 Jewish tabernacle and temple service in chap. ix. The p^uVeautiio^ 
 statement that the holy of holies had a golden altar of ship, 
 incense (chap, ix, 4) (English version, golden censer} is not to be 
 understood of an altar standing within the most holy place, but, as 
 argued by Ebrard, 1 and explained by Robinson (New Test. Lex.), 
 though standing in the outer sanctuary, it " is here reckoned to the 
 inner sanctuary, as standing directly before, and pertaining to, the 
 ark " (Exod. xl, 5). There is no reason for supposing, with Bleek, 
 that the author of this Epistle appears to assume that the arrange- 
 ments in the temple rebuilt by Herod were the same as in the orig- 
 inal service instituted by Moses. The author refers to the ar- 
 rangements in the original tabernacle because they were of divine 
 appointment. 
 
 Respecting the style and language of the Epistle, it must be ac 
 knowledged that the former is more elegant than that of peculiarities of 
 Paul in his other Epistles, and that the Greek is purer. Styl6f 
 Nor have we any good ground for supposing it to have been orig- 
 inally written in Hebrew or Aramaic, as there is no indication 
 whatever in the Epistle itself that it is a translation ; and, as we have 
 already indicated the high probability that it was not addressed to 
 the inhabitants of Palestine, no just reason existed for its composi- 
 tion in any other language than Greek. The writer of the Epistle 
 almost invariably follows the Septuagint in quoting the Old Testa- 
 men*, and in this respect differs from Paul. There is also a marked 
 difference in the manner of quoting the Old Testament in this Epis- 
 tle from that which is used in the acknowledged Pauline writings. 
 In the Epistles to the Romans, Corinthians, and Galatians, the stand- 
 ing formula in quoting the Old Testament is: "As it is written,'" 
 ' Commentary on Hebrews. * Used about nineteen times by Vaul
 
 704 INTRODUCTION TO THE STUDY 
 
 and sometimes: "For it is written." 1 Nowhere in the Epistle ti 
 the Hebrews does its author quote the Old Testament in this way, 
 but he introduces the passages with the remark : " Wherefore as the 
 Holy Ghost saith " (chap, iii, 7) ; or "the Holy Ghost is a witness " 
 (chap, x, 15) ; or "he saith " (chap, viii, 8); and " one in a certain 
 place testifieth " (chap, ii, 6). 
 
 These are some of the points of difference from Paul's usual slyJc 
 which many thoroughly evangelical critics have regarded as suffi- 
 cient proof that he was not the author of the epistle. Much can 
 be said on either side. Some have suggested Luke, but there is not 
 likeness enough to his style to render that probable ; still more im- 
 probable is the supposition that the Epistle was written by Clement 
 of Rome, as his style is entirely unlike that of the Hebrews, and the 
 Epistle is used by him. If the Epistle ascribed to Barnabas is 
 genuine, that would exclude him from the number of possible au- 
 thors, as the same writer could not have written both. It is very 
 probable, however, that Barnabas is not the author of the Epistle 
 attributed to him, and he might have written the Epistle to the 
 Hebrews. Silas (or Silvanus) was an intimate and prominent com- 
 panion of Paul, and, as far as we know, may have been its author. 
 Apollos was suggested by Luther, and this view is favoured by 
 Tholuck, Credner, Bunsen, Bleek," Hilgenfeld,* and others. Apol- 
 los is described in Acts xviii, 24 as a " Jew born at Alexandria, an 
 eloquent man, and mighty in the Scriptures." After becoming fully 
 acquainted with the doctrines of Christianity, "he mightily con- 
 vinced the Jews, and that publicly, showing by the Scriptures that 
 Jesus is the Christ " (Acts xviii, 28). We find that he preached the 
 gospel with great success at Corinth, and a party in the Church in 
 that city called themselves by his name (i Cor. i, 12; iii, 4-6). It 
 is evident that such a man as this might have written the Epistle, 
 although there is little or nothing in it that shows its author to have 
 been an Alexandrian. It may be doubted, too, whether, if the Epis- 
 tle had been written by an Alexandrian of the school of Philo, the 
 allegorical method of interpreting the Old Testament would not 
 have been pursued to a greater extent. We find in this Epistle the 
 pnrase, " to taste of death," put for " to die " (chap, ii, 9). This is an 
 Aramaic phrase, and occurs once in each of the Gospels, but nowhere 
 else in the New Testament except in this passage. It seemb to us 
 very improbable that an Alexandrian Jew would have used it. 
 
 Accordingly, we are unable to fix, with certainty, upon the author 
 of the Epistle. He must have been a man who stood high in the 
 Christian Church, otherwise it is not likely he would have addressed 
 'Used about eight lines by Paul. a Einleitung, pp. 603-607. ' Ibid, pp. 386-388.
 
 OF THE HOLY SCRIPTURES. 705 
 
 guch a writing to Hebrew Christians. He was also a friend and ac- 
 quaintance of Timothy (chap, xiii, 23). No one meets all the con- 
 ditions of certain authorship* but Paul, despite variations from his 
 usage, makes the nearest approach to it. 
 
 THE TIME AND PLACE OF ITS COMPOSITION. 
 
 The Epistle was evidently written before the destruction of Jeru- 
 salem, as there are clear references to the temple service written before 
 as still existing. "For if he (Christ) were on earth, he the destruction 
 should not be a priest, seeing that there are priests that 
 offer gifts according to the law " (chap, viii, 4). This shows the 
 existence of the temple service. In reference to the Jewish sacri- 
 fices, the author remarks : " For then would they not have ceased to 
 be offered ? because that the worshippers once purged should have 
 no more conscience of sins. But in those sacrifices there is a re- 
 membrance again made of sins every year" (chap, x, 2, 3). It is 
 clear from this that when the Epistle was written sacrifices were still 
 offered. Reference to the temple service as still existing are also 
 found in chaps, ix, 6,7, 25; xiii, 10, n. Had the Jewish temple 
 been already destroyed ' when the Epistle was written, the author 
 could not have failed to notice the fact, just as the author of the 
 Epistle of Barnabas does," and to draw from it an argument in proof 
 of its temporary character. 
 
 The antiquity of the Epistle may be also argued from the state- 
 ment that Timothy has been set at liberty (chap, xiii, 23), and also 
 from its being used by Clement of Rome * in his Epistle to the Co- 
 rinthians, written in the last part of the first century. 
 
 The composition of the Epistle is placed by Bleek * about A. D. 
 68, 69 ; by Wieseler and Hilgenfeld, 64-66 ; De Wette, Dates of lta 
 65-67 ; Tholuck, 63-67 ; Bunsen, 66 or 67. It is impos- composition 
 sible to determine the exact year, but it may be assigned 
 to the interval between A. D. 63 and 68. 6 Respecting \heplace of 
 its composition, it is difficult to reach any conclusion. 
 
 The salutation, " They of Italy greet you " (chap, xiii, 24), fur- 
 nishes no certain clue to the place. It is probable, however, that 
 the language indicates " those who are in Italy," and thus the writer 
 would appear to have been somewhere in Italy at the time. If 
 Timothy had been imprisoned in Rome, it was very natural that the 
 author, in writing to a Christian community somewhere in Asia 
 
 1 The temple was destroyed in the capture of Jerusalem in the summer of A. D. 70. 
 *Sec. xvi. i, 2. 'In sec. 36. * Emleitung, p. 616. 
 
 It is ridiculous to find Volkmar placing it A. D. 116-118 ; and Keim referring 
 it to the first part of the second century.
 
 700 INTRODUCTION TO THE STUDY 
 
 Minor or in Greece, acquainted with Timothy, should inform them 
 of his release (chap, xiii, 23). 
 
 CONTENTS. 
 
 The author sets forth the dignity of Christ, the importance of 
 giving heed to his teachings, his incarnation, priesthood, the danger 
 oi unbelief, and the grounds of confidence in God through the priest- 
 hood of Christ. He argues the perpetual priesthood of Christ from 
 his being a priest after the order of Melchizedek, and affirms the 
 ability of Christ to save for ever all who come to God through him 
 (chaps, i-vii). He shows that the old covenant was to be abolished, 
 and a new one to be substituted in its place, and that the institu- 
 tions, especially the sacrificial rites of the old covenant, are typical 
 of the new and of the sacrifice of Christ for the sins of men (chaps, 
 viii-x, 1 8). He exhorts his readers to steadfastness in the faith, and 
 warns them against apostasy. He sets forth the power of faith from 
 examples in the Old Testament, exhorts believers to fidelity, and 
 contrasts the privileges of the new dispensation with [those of the 
 old (chaps, x, ig-xii). He closes with an exhortation to the per- 
 formance of the practical duties of the religion of Christ (chap. xiii). 
 
 THE CHARACTER AND VALUE OF THE EPISTLE. 
 
 The Epistle is an able exposition of the symbolical character of 
 Contains apo*. rnany of the institutions of the Mosaic covenant, their 
 toiio doctrines, defects and temporary duration, the change of the Mo- 
 saic priesthood and the law, the new covenant, the dignity, efficacy, 
 and permanency of the priesthood of Christ. 
 
 It contains, too, the genuine apostolic doctrines. It must, there- 
 fore, be regarded as a valuable witness to the facts lying at the 
 basis of Christianity, and to its primitive truths. Thus we have 
 Christ's descent from Judah (ch. vii, 14); the holiness and harm- 
 lessness of his character (chap, vii, 26) ; his agony in the garden 
 (chap, v, 7); his suffering outside of Jerusalem (chap, xiii, 12); his 
 resurrection (chap, xiii, 20) ; his ascension to heaven (chaps, i, 3 ; 
 iv, 14, etc.); and the performance of miracles by the first teachers 
 of Christ's doctrines who had been his hearers (chap, ii, 4).
 
 OF THE HOLY SCRIPTURES 707 
 
 CHAPTER XXXVI. 
 
 THE CATHOLIC EPISTLES. 
 
 Catholic Epistles, 1 so called from their being general in their 
 character, and not addressed to special communities, are seven 
 in number, namely : the Epistle of James, the two Epistles of Peter, 
 the Epistle of Jude, and the three Epistles of John. 
 
 THE GENERAL EPISTLE OF JAMES. 
 THE PERSON OF THE WRITER. 
 
 The author styles himself " James, a servant of God and of the 
 Lord Jesus Christ " (chap i, i). And the question arises, Wrlter _j 
 Which of the persons of that name, prominent in the the son of AI- 
 New Testament, is the author of this Epistle ? We find p 
 among the apostles two persons of the name of James; one the son 
 of Zebedee, and brother of John (Matt, x, 2 ; Mark iii, 17 ; Luke 
 vi, 14; Acts xii, 2 ; the other the son of Alpheus (Matt, x, 3 ; Mark 
 iii, 18; Luke vi, 15), called also "the Less" (Mark xv, 40). The 
 first of these, the son of Zebedee, was put to death by Herod about 
 twelve years after the crucifixion of Christ (Acts xii, i, 2). It is by 
 no means likely that he was the author of the Epistle. After his 
 death we find, in the history in the Acts, and also in Galatians ii, 9 ; 
 i Cor. xv, 7, a very prominent man among the apostles by the name 
 ot James, and it has been greatly disputed whether he is one of the 
 twelve apostles, the son of Alpheus, called also James the Less, or one 
 of the brothers of Christ, called James, mentioned in Matt, xiii, 55 ; 
 Mark vi, 3. ' In Galatians i, 19 Paul mentions having seen at Jeru- 
 salem James, the Lord's brother. 
 
 The most satisfactory way to determine who the James is that 
 is so prominent in the Church at Jerusalem after the Luke's notices 
 martyrdom of James, the son of Zebedee (Acts xii, i, 2), of "James." 
 is to trace his continuous history through the Gospel of Luke and 
 the Acts o the Apostles the work of one author, Luke, who spent 
 two years in Jerusalem (about A. D. 59-61), and visited James, and 
 must, therefore, have been well acquainted with him. 
 
 Now, in his Gospel, Luke mentions only two persons by the name 
 
 'And so called by Eusebius, Hist. Eccles., ii, cap. xxiii. The title "Catholic," 
 universal does not suit Second and Third John
 
 708 INTRODUCTION TO THE STUDY 
 
 of James, one of whom he puts among the twelve apostles, and asso 
 ciates with John (chap, vi, 14; ix, 28, 54), and whom he calls the 
 son of Zebedee (chap, v, 10) ; the other, James the son of Alpheus, 
 whom he also mentions as one of the twelve apostles (chap, vi, 15). 
 He names among the apostles Judas the brother of James (chap. 
 vi, 1 6), and mentions Mary the mother of James (chap, xxiv, 10). 
 This James is, doubtless, the apostle who was the son of Alpheus. 
 
 If we now take up the Acts of the Apostles, we shall find in the 
 list of the apostles, who assembled in the upper room in Jerusalem 
 after the ascension of Christ, James associated with Peter and John, 
 and James the son of Alpheus (chap, i, 13). We next find mention 
 of both in Acts xii, where it is stated that Herod killed James the 
 brother of John with the sword, and that when Peter was released 
 from prison, he said, " Go show these things unto James, and to the 
 brethren." This, it seems, must have been the surviving apostle of 
 this name, as the historian before mentions no other to whom the 
 reference can be made. 
 
 In the assembly of the apostles and elders in Jerusalem a few 
 years after, when the question whether the laws of Moses were bind- 
 ing upon Gentile Christians was considered and answered, James, 
 after Peter, addresses the assembly, and gives the decision. Can 
 we doubt that this is the same James with whom Luke has already 
 made us acquainted ? And who but an apostle would have taken it 
 upon himself to address that assembly, and to deliver that important 
 decision? When Paul visited Jerusalem (about A. D. 38) he tells 
 us : " Other of the apostles saw I none, save James the Lord's brother " 
 (Gal. i, 19). This language very naturally includes James in the 
 number of the apostles, and the designation, " the Lord's brother," 
 is given to distinguish him from James the son of Zebedee, who at 
 that time was still living. But in writing after the death of James 
 the son of Zebedee he mentions James without any other designation 
 (i Cor. xv, 7 ; Gal. ii, 9), by which he appears to name* an apostle. 
 
 According to Hegesippus Clopas was the brother of Joseph. 1 In 
 A cousin of Je- J onn x i* 2 5 Mary, the sister of the mother of Jesus, is 
 u, but called called the wife of Clopas ; but Clopas and Alpheus are 
 regarded as two different ways of writing in Greefc the 
 
 Hebrew 'S^n, 1 Chalephay, so that James the son of Alpheus is the 
 
 'In Eusehius., Hist. Eccles., Hi, cap. xi 
 
 1 The LXX., in writing Hebrew proper names, either altogether omit the guttura* 
 sound of Cheth (H) initial, as 'AyyoZof (Haggai) for ^3rl (Chaggay), or render the 
 Cheth by Chi (x), as ^e/3pwv for 11"Qn. In two instances, at least, Cheth final i 
 converted into the Greek Kappa (AC), viz. : TOO, ra^in (Gen. xxii, 24) ; and HS^- 
 aatu (Nehemiah iii, 6). In Clopas the Cheth is changed into Kappa in Greek
 
 OF THE HOLY SCRIPTURES. 709 
 
 son of Clopaw, and accordingly a cousin * of Christ. That an apostle 
 thus nearly related to Christ should be called his brother is not 
 strange, since Lot is called Abram's brother (Gen xiv, 16), when in 
 fact he was Abram's brother's son (Gen. xi, 27). In Genesis xiii, 8, 
 Abram says to Lot, We are brothers (adetyoi, in LXX). Robinson 
 gives us the second definition of d<feA$6c, " a kinsman, a relative, in 
 any degree of blood" (Lex. New Test. Greek). 
 
 If there had been in the Church a prominent uterine brother of 
 Christ named James, the designation, " the Lord's brother," would, 
 in all probability, have referred to him ; but in the absence of proof 
 of the existence of such a brother, and as we find an apostle of that 
 name a cousin of Christ, it is not difficult to believe that he may 
 sometimes have been called by the honourable designation, " the 
 Lord's brother." 
 
 Hegesippus," who in the last half of the second century wrote of 
 the affairs of the Church, speaks of James the brother of the Lord, 
 called the Just, who received with the apostles the government of 
 the Church in Jerusalem, and suffered martyrdom before the destruc- 
 tion of the city. He does not state whether this James was an 
 apostle. Also, Josephus * mentions James the brother of Jesus, who 
 was called Christ, and his martyrdom. 
 
 In the Gospel according to the Hebrews, which is of considerable 
 authority in Jewish-Christian affairs, James the Just appears as one 
 of those who sat at the table with the Lord before his crucifixion, 
 and to whom he appeared after his resurrection. From this it seems 
 that he was regarded as an apostle. In a fragment of Papias, Mary, 
 the wife of Cleophas or Alpheus, appears as the mother of James, 
 bishop and apostle. 4 Clement * of Alexandria regarded James the 
 Just, bishop of Jerusalem, as an apostle. This was also the view of 
 Jerome," and of Chrysostom, it would seem. 7 On the other hand, 
 Origen 8 distinguishes James the brother of the Lord (Matt, xiii, 55), 
 afterward bishop of Jerusalem, from James the Less, an apostle. 
 
 Among the moderns, Bleek ' regards James the brother of the 
 Lord as no apostle. This view is favoured by Neander 10 and De 
 Wette," and adopted by Hilgenfeld. 1 " On the other hand, Hug " 
 
 ' That the mother of James the Less, or son of Alpheus, was the sister of Mary 
 the mother of Jesus, appears from a comparison of John xix, 25 ; Matt, xxvii. 56 
 and Mark xv, 40. * In Eusebius, Hist. Eccles., lib. ii, cap. xxiii. 
 
 'Antiq., xx, cap. ix, I. *In Patrum Apostol. Opera, Leipzig, 1875. 
 
 * In Eusebius, Hist. Eccles., lib. ii, cap. L * De Viris Illus. Jacobus. 
 'Comment, in Gal. i, 19. "Comment, in Matt, xiii, 55. 
 
 Einleitung, 624-627. l * Planting and Training of the Church, pp. 350-354 
 11 Einleitung, p. 367. " Einleitung, 520-527. " Einleitung, vol. ii. 445.
 
 710 INTRODUCTION TO THE STUDY 
 
 regards James the brother of the Lord and James the son of Alpheua 
 as one person, who is placed among the brothers of Jesus in Matthew 
 xiii, 55. Schneckenburger has also advocated the hypothesis of 
 one James, while Wieseler distinguishes between James the brother 
 of the Lord and the apostle of that name. 
 
 GENUINENESS OF THE EPISTLE. 
 
 The writer styles himself " James, a servant of God, and of the 
 Tnto Eptstie Lord Jesus Christ." This modest title for one who was 
 found in an- bishop of Jerusalem, and, in accordance with what we 
 
 dent versions, i 11 
 
 have argued, also an apostle, impresses us at once with 
 the genuineness of the Epistle. 
 
 It is contained in the Peshito-Syriac version, where it bears the 
 inscription, " The Epistle of James the Apostle." It is also found 
 in the Memphitic, Thebaic, ^Ethiopic, and Armenian versions, but is 
 wanting in the Canon of Muratori. In the Epistle of Clement of Rome 
 to the Corinthians there seem to be some references to this Epistle. 
 The allusion to the double-minded man (dlifwxof) in Clement, and the 
 statement that Abraham was called the friend of God, and the refer- 
 ence to Rahab (sees. 10-1 2), seem to be based on James i, 8 ; ii, 23, 25. 
 In Hermas, the Pastor, a work written not later than the middle of 
 the second century, we find a reference to James iv, 7 : "It is possi- 
 ble to wrestle with the devil, but it is not possible to conquer him. 
 For if you resist him, he will fly confounded from you." ' Irenasus * 
 quotes (chap, ii, 23) : " Abraham believed God, and it was imputed 
 unto him for righteousness, and he was called the friend of God." 
 In Clement of Alexandria we can find no certain use of this Epistle. 
 Eusebius, however, states, that Clement made short expositions of 
 Jude and the rest of the Catholic Epistles,* which, of course, includes 
 James. There is no certain reference in Tertullian * to this Epistle, 
 nor can we find a trace of it in Cyprian (about A. D. 250). 
 
 Origen, in commenting on John viii, 24, remarks : " For if faith is 
 James died by meant, but without works, such a faith is dead, as we 
 ori*en. read in the Epistle that bears the name of James. " * With 
 
 this exception, we cannot find a trace of this Epistle in the numer- 
 ous quotations of the New Testament in Origen's Commentary on 
 John, nor do we find a single one from this Epistle in his Commen- 
 tary on Matthew. But in his Commentary on the Epistle to .he 
 
 1 Mandata.xii, cap. v. 'Lib. iv, cap. xvi, 2. 'In Hist. Eccles., vi, cap. xir. 
 
 4 " Whence," says he, " was Abraham counted the friend of God," etc. It is prob- 
 able that Tertullian had in his mind James ii, 23, although in Isaiah xli, 8 God 
 lays, " Abraham my friend." *Tom. xix. 6.
 
 OF THE HOLY SCRIPTURES. 711 
 
 Romans, which exists only in the Latin version of Rufinus, the 
 Epistle of James is twice quoted in chap, v, once as the language of 
 James the brother of the Lord, and in the other instance as that of 
 the Apostle James. 1 But Rufinus does not profess to follow closely 
 the original text of Origen, and states in the preface that the Com- 
 mentary on the Romans has been interpolated. In this case, the 
 quotations from James prove nothing. Also in the Latin translation 
 of Origen's Homilies on Exodus and Leviticus, by Rufinus, James 
 iv, 7, i, 8, and v, 14 are quoted as the language of the apostle James. 
 But here it is impossible to determine what belongs to Origen him- 
 self. It seems very probable that he attached but little importance 
 to the Epistle. 
 
 Eusebius, speaking of James, remarks : " The first of the Epistles 
 called Catholic is said to be his. But it must be known Eusebius and 
 
 that it is spurious (vodeverat),* since not many of the Jerome's opin- 
 
 * Ions as to the 
 
 ancients have mentioned it ; nor that called the Epistle authenticity of 
 
 of Jude, which is also one of the seven called Catholic. "^P 18 " 6 - 
 Nevertheless, we know that these also, with the rest, are received as 
 canonical 8 in most Churches." 4 In another place he puts it among 
 the disputed writings" (A.vri^ey6fievai) . 
 
 Jerome, speaking of James, bishop of Jerusalem, whom he con- 
 siders to be the cousin of Christ, says : " He wrote only one 
 Epistle, which belongs to the seven Catholic Epistles, and which 
 is asserted to have been put forth by some one else under his 
 name, but has gradually obtained authority in the course of 
 time." ' It would seem from this that he was not quite sure of its 
 genuineness. 
 
 Didymus, who was head of the Catechetical School of Alexandria 
 in the last part of the fourth century, wrote an exposi- An exposltlon 
 tion of this Epistle, which he attributed to the Apostle of James by 
 James. It was received by Athanasius, 7 Gregory Nazi- yml 
 anzen," Cyril" of Jerusalem, Chrysostom, 10 Augustine, 11 and Epipha- 
 nius, 18 but was rejected by Theodore " of Mopsuestia. But even those 
 
 1 He also gives some other passages from James, without naming the source. 
 
 * The word has the meaning, to be spurious and to be deemed spurious. But the 
 context requires the first meaning, since it expresses the judgment of Eusebius. 
 
 1 The Greek is dedijfioatevptvaf, to be of a public character, and is defined by Soph- 
 jclcs, canonical. (Greek Lex., Rom. and Byzant. Periods). 
 
 I Hist. Eccles., ii, cap. xxiii. * Ibid., iii, cap. xxv. * De Viris Illus. Jacobus 
 7 In Vita Antonii he quotes James i, 15 20, " As it is written," and chap, v, 13, 
 
 with the same formula in the Epistle to Marcellinus. * 1105. 
 
 Catechesis iv, De Decem Dogmatibus, xxxvi. I0 Synopsis of Sacred Scriptures. 
 
 II De Doctr. Christ, lib. ii, cap. viii, 13. w Hseresis Ixxvii, sec. 37. 
 "Leontius Byzant., Contra Nestor et Eut., iii, 14.
 
 712 INTRODUCTION TO THE STUDY 
 
 fathers who accepted it made but little use of it. We have found no 
 extracts from it in the works of Ambrose and Hilary, though it is 
 possible that they may have quoted it. At the time of the Refor- 
 mation Erasmus expressed himself skeptically concerning it, and Lu- 
 opinion enter- ^ er remarks on it : '* This Epistle of St. James, although 
 
 of tois it wa s rejected by the ancients [this remark, as we have 
 
 EpistlebyEras- , , . , n i T j 
 
 mus and m- already seen, is only partially true], I commend, and con- 
 sider good, for the reason that it lays down no human 
 doctrine, and rigorously follows the law of God. But that I may 
 give my own opinion without injury to any one, I do not regard it 
 as the writing of an apostle ; and this is my reason : In the first place, 
 because, in palpable contradiction to St. Paul and all the other 
 Scriptures, it attributes justification to works, and says : Abraham 
 was justified by his works when he offered up his son, whereas St. 
 Paul, on the contrary, teaches (Rom. iv, 2, 3) that Abraham was 
 justified without works. . . . But this James does nothing but ad- 
 here to the law and its works, and blends things in such a confused 
 way, that it seems to me he was a truly pious man who composed 
 some sentences from a disciple of the apostles, and put them upon 
 paper. Or perhaps it is an extract from his preaching, written down 
 by some one else." Again, in his Preface to the New Testament he 
 says : " The Epistle of St. James is really an Epistle of Straw (eine 
 rechte stroherne epistel) in comparison with them (in comparison 
 with the writings of John, Paul, Peter), for it contains nothing of an 
 evangelical stamp." l 
 
 This assertion of Luther, that the doctrine of justification by 
 The ground of works, as set forth in this Epistle, flatly contradicts Paul, 
 uon^JS^ who teach es that we are justified by faith, is not well 
 considered. founded. Paul, in his Epistle, discusses the question of 
 pardon and justification of the sinner before God, and shows that 
 forgiveness is to be obtained only through faith in our Lord Jesus 
 Christ. But he clearly implies, as the fruit of this faith, a full com- 
 pliance with the moral law, a complete surrender of the soul to 
 Christ, and he has not the least reference to a dead, inoperative 
 faith. 
 
 The question which James proposes is : " What doth it profit, my 
 brethren, though a man say he have faith, and have not works ? Can 
 faith save him ? " Can any one suppose for a moment that Paul 
 would have answered that a dead faith, followed by no compliance 
 with the moral law, would save a man ? Who insists more earnestly 
 than he upon the importance of a full obedience to the moral law ? 
 
 'These passages from Luther's works are quoted by De Wette (Einleitung, 
 PP- 374 375)< from whom we have borrowed them.
 
 OF THE HOLY SCRIPTURES. 713 
 
 He declares that God "will render to every man according to his 
 deeds " (Rom. ii, 6), and warns us against the idea of living in sin 
 that grace may abound (Rom. vi). How clearly does he contrast 
 the holy virtues of the spiritual life, the fruits of the Spirit, with the 
 works of the unregenerate man (Gal. v, 19-23), and that, too, after 
 contending in the strongest manner for the doctrine of justification 
 by fiith ? Now Paul certainly would have assented to the doctrine 
 of tnis Epistle : " Faith, if it hath not works, is dead, being alone." 
 James contends that faith is to be proved by works (chap, ii, 18); 
 Abraham was justified by faith at first, and afterward by complying 
 with the divine command to offer up Isaac. His faith, without obe- 
 dience, would have profited him nothing. Here Paul and James would 
 certainly agree. These two teachers set forth the different sides, or 
 the two opposite poles, of the same great truth. How strongly does 
 Paul exhibit the two apparently opposing doctrines of divine sov- 
 ereignty and free-will, even in the same verse uttering truths appar- 
 ently contradictory : " Work out your own salvation with fear and 
 trembling : for it is God who worketh in you both to will and to do 
 of his good pleasure " (Phil, ii, 12, 13). 
 
 In fact, James does not at all discuss the question how a sinner 
 
 shall obtain forgiveness, but how a Christian shall live. , 
 
 Agreement be- 
 
 The spirit which James condemns is, as Neander well tweenPauiand 
 observes, that "which substituted a lifeless, arrogant Jame8- 
 acquaintance with the letter for the genuine wisdom inseparable 
 from the divine life which prided itself in an inoperative knowledge 
 of the law, without paying any attention to the practice of the law 
 which placed devotion in outward ceremonies, and neglected that 
 devotion which shows itself in works of love," a habit of mind which 
 attached especial importance to faith in Jehovah and in the Messiah, 
 but "which left the disposition unchanged." 1 
 
 It is but a small portion of James that touches upon justification, 
 and there is no reason for supposing that the Epistle has any refer- 
 ence to Paul's doctrine of justification by faith. In fact, it is in- 
 fended for another class of persons. His address is " to the twelve 
 tribes who are in the dispersion, greeting," while Paul's Epistles 
 were for the most part directed to Gentile Christians. And this 
 fact, that the Epistle is addressed to Jewish believers only, accounts 
 for its having been but little known among the Gentile Christians in 
 the first two centuries of the Church. 
 
 There is nothing in the Epistle inconsistent with the supposition 
 that it was written by James, who confined his labors to Jerusalem. 
 
 1 Planting and Training of the Christian Church by the Apostles, p. 358, Ryland's 
 Translation.
 
 714 INTRODUCTION TO THE STUDY 
 
 Indeed, the whole tone indicates a person in the position of James. 
 It is in Greek, but this is not strange when we remember that it was 
 addressed to Jewish believers in Christianity disperred through the 
 world, many of whom would not have understood the Aramaic, the 
 vernacular of Palestine. The Greek is quite good, better than might 
 have been expected from one in James' position, though it is not 
 improbable that he may have obtained assistance in its composition. 
 It is possible, too, that he may have been brought up in the use of 
 Greek in some part of Palestine. 
 
 He uses the phrase, " Lord of Sabaoth," once (chap. v. 4), which 
 no one but a Jew would be likely to use, and which occurs 
 Peculiarities of e l sew ^ ere ^ n ^ e New Testament only in a quotation 
 James 1 lan- from the Old (Romans ix, 29). He makes great use of 
 the Old Testament, refers to the early and latter rain 
 (chap, v, 7) characteristic of Palestine, and to the fountains of sweet 
 and of bitter water (chap, iii, 1 1) peculiar to the same region. All this 
 indicates a Jew of Palestine. He modestly styles himself ' the 
 servant of God and of the Lord Jesus Christ," which is, however, not 
 inconsistent with his being an apostle, as Paul so styles himsell 
 (Phil, i, i). 
 
 There is no good reason for doubting the genuineness of the 
 NO reasonable Epistle, which has been defended by Bleek l and Ne- 
 ^nuineneJof an( ^ er * as belonging to James, who is distinguished in 
 James. the Acts, and appears prominent in the Epistle of Paul 
 
 to the Galatians. De Wette remarks that doubts on dogmatic 
 grounds were raised against the Epistle at the time of the Refor- 
 mation. But since its [supposed] contradiction of Paul has been 
 removed or softened, "its genuineness is almost universally ac- 
 knowledged." * The genuineness of the Epistle is denied by Hilgen- 
 feld, who refers its composition to the time of Domitian * (A. D. 
 81-96). 
 
 But the traces of an age subsequent to the time of James are by 
 no means clear, or even probable. Hilgenfeld follows 
 
 objection from Zeller in maintaining that James ii, 12, "Blessed is the 
 dnce oonsid- man that endureth temptation, for when he is tried, he 
 ere<L shall receive the crown of life, which the Lord hath 
 
 promised to them that love him," is based on Rev. ii, 10, " Be thou 
 faithful unto death, and I will give thee the crown of life;" and as 
 the Apocalypse was not written earlier than A. D. 68, the Epistle 
 must have been written after the death of James. But it by no 
 means follows that the phrase, " the crown of life," was borrowed 
 
 1 Einleitung, pp. 638-643. * Planting and Training, pp. 357-367. 
 
 * Einleitung, p. 374. * Einleitung. pp. 540-542.
 
 OF THE HOLY SCRIPTURES. 715 
 
 from the Apocalypse. Nothing was more common in the ancient world 
 than the bestowal of crowns, of gold 1 and of other material, as marks 
 of honor, both in Athens and in Rome. To this prize of honor we 
 find various references in the apostolic writings. Paul speaks of those 
 who strive " to obtain a corruptible crown ; but we an incorruptible" 
 (crown) (i Cor. ix, 25). What is this but a crown of life? In 2 Tim. 
 iv, 8 he speaks of " the crown of righteousness." In i Peter v, 4 we 
 nave " the unfading crown of glory." James has, instead of " right- 
 eousness" and " glory," " life " (" the crown of life "), and this, forsooth, 
 he must have borrowed from the Apocalypse, though " crown " is 
 one of the most common words in the New Testament.* Equally 
 unnecessary is it to refer the " firstfruits "in this Epistle (ch. i, 18) to 
 Rev. xiv, 4, where mention is made of " the firstfruits " "unto God 
 and to the Lamb," since Paul in various places speaks of" firstfruits," 
 in the sense si spiritual ingatherings ; as "the firstfruits of Achaia " 
 (Rom. xvi, 5) ; " If the firstfruits be holy," etc. (chap, xi, 16). He 
 also calls Christ " the firstfruits of them that slept " (i Cor. xv, 20). 
 The Epistles to the Romans and to the Corinthians were written be- 
 fore A. D. 60, from some of which James might have derived the 
 idea of a " crown of life " and " firstfruits," though it is not likely 
 they were borrowed from any New Testament writer. But if the 
 coincident phrase and word in James and in the Revelation are to 
 be considered original only in one of them, and borrowed in the 
 other, why may not the author of the Revelation have borrowed 
 them from James ? 
 
 There seems to be a clear indication in the Epistle that it was 
 written before the destruction of Jerusalem, " For the James 1 Epistle 
 coming of the Lord draweth nigh " (chap, v, 8). Like- 2S,X2 
 wise the words, " Ye have condemned, ye have murdered * Jerusalem, 
 the Just One, and he does not resist you " (ch. v, 6), clearly refers to 
 the condemnation and crucifixion of Christ, for which the Jews had 
 not yet suffered, which shows that Jerusalem had not yet been de- 
 stroyed ; so in Acts xxii, 14 Christ is called " the Just One; " also in 
 Acts iii, 14. Nor is there anywhere in the Epistle any indication 
 leading to a date subsequent to the martyrdom of James. The as- 
 sertion of Hilgenfeld that James ii, 6, 7 ; v, 6, presupposes that ju- 
 dicial sentences had already been pronounced upon Christians, as 
 
 1 The classical scholar will call to mind the Oration of Demosthenes on the Crown. 
 Among the Romans the mural, civic, obsidional, and triumphal crowns were be- 
 stowed. 
 
 * In Rev. ii, 10 " the crown of life " is promised by Christ to those who are " faithful 
 onto death ; " but in James i, 12 to those who love the Lord, and which may refei 
 to God the Father, as in James v, 10, 11. 
 46
 
 716 INTRODUCTION TO THE STUDY 
 
 such, is destitute of all probability; and equally groundless is his 
 statement, that such sentences were not pronounced upon Chris- 
 tians before the time of Domitian, for Nero punished them as incen- 
 diaries. James ii, 6, 7 has reference simply to the oppression of the 
 poor by the rich, especially before courts of justice, as any one may 
 see by referring to the passage. The rich, too, were generally reject- 
 ers of Christ, while the believers were mostly from the poor. Chap- 
 ter v, 6 refers, as we have already stated, to the condemnation and 
 crucifixion of Christ. 
 
 Nor did Nero punish Christians only as incendiaries, since Tacitus 
 states respecting their conviction and punishment : " They were con- 
 victed not so much on the charge of burning (Rome) as on account 
 of their hatred of the human race." 1 This hatred of the human 
 race was their contempt for the gods of the pagan world, and for the 
 abominable rites connected with pagan worship. 
 
 THE TIME OF ITS COMPOSITION. 
 
 We have already referred to the proofs that this Epistle was writ- 
 ten before the destruction of Jerusalem, and as James suffered mar- 
 tyrdom a few years before the destruction of that city, the Epistle 
 was most probably written some time before A. D. 64, but the pre- 
 cise date cannot be determined. 
 
 The Epistle would seem to indicate that Christianity had already 
 The Epistle been in existence for a considerable number of years, 
 tabiilmnent 6 ^ an ^ there seems no good reason to refer it, as Neander 
 Christianity, does, to a " tuae preceding the separate formation of 
 Gentile Christian Churches, before the relation of Gentiles and Jews 
 to one another in the Christian Church had been brought under dis- 
 cussion," ' that is, before the Jerusalem Council, held about A. D. 50. 
 There is no good ground, however, for placing it with Bleek " at 
 A. D. 63, 64. The reference made in chap. ii,'7 to blaspheming Christ 
 does not imply that the followers of Christ were already called Chris- 
 tians, as the phrase, " by which ye are called " * is very similar to the 
 construction in Acts xv, 17, "upon whom my name is called." 
 
 1 Hand perinde in crimine incendii, quam odio humani generis, convicti sunt 
 Annalium. lir.. xv, cap. xliv. 
 
 1 Planting and Training, etc., p. 363. * Einleitung, p. 632. 
 
 4 The Greek in James ii, 7 is rt> naTdrv bvopa TO tmitXii&lv e$' tipd?, the honorable 
 name -which is called upon you, based on the Hebrew, " J)? ^ft" **?W. m y name is 
 called upon any thing, L e., my name is given to it, it is called mine, implying prop 
 erty. relation," etc. (Gesenius, sub voce fc^p?). Thus the passage refers to their be- 
 ing the people of Christ, not necessarily implying that they were called Christ tarn
 
 OF THE HOLY SCRIPTURES. 717 
 
 The place in which the Christians assembled for worship is called 
 in chap, ii, 2 a synagogue. But this does not imply that the Jewish 
 believers were not yet separated from the unbelievers in worship. 
 James simply calls the Christian assembly by the same name as the 
 Jewish. Just as the Greeks gave to the Christian assembly the name 
 ccclesia, which had denoted an assemblage of citizens in Athens for 
 political purposes. The Epistle was probably written between A. D. 
 50 and 63, undoubtedly at Jerusalem, where James lived at that 
 time, and long before. 
 
 CONTENTS. 
 
 The author exhorts his readers to rejoice in the midst of divers 
 temptations, insists upon unwavering faith and confidence in God, 
 the Giver of all good, enjoins upon them to bridle the tongue, 
 to be doers of the word, and not hearers only, and shows them in 
 what true religion consists (chap. i). He warns his readers against 
 showing partiality to the rich, urges them to keep the whole moral 
 law, especially the royal law to love one's neighbour as one's self, and 
 shows that men are not justified by faith only (chap. ii). He next 
 discusses the importance of bridling the tongue (chap. iii). He shows 
 that lust is the cause of war, denounces the friendship of the world, 
 recommends humility, submission to God, exhorts them to resist the 
 devil, to draw nigh unto God, and to purify themselves. He warns 
 them against evil speaking, and the sin of presuming upon the future 
 (chap. iv). He describes wicked rich men and their impending 
 punishment, and exhorts the brethren to be patient until the coming 
 of the Lord. He warns them against swearing, dwells upon the 
 efficacy of prayer, and points out the deep importance and glorious 
 result of converting a sinner from the error of his way (chap. v). 
 
 CHARACTER OF THE EPISTLE. 
 
 From the foregoing synopsis, it will be seen that the Epistle is of 
 an eminently practical character, avoiding the discussion of profound 
 theological truths, and insisting upon the necessity of possessing the 
 spirit of the Gospel, and practicing its precepts. It everywhere 
 breathes the spirit of deep piety and resignation to God.
 
 718 INTRODUCTION TO THE STUDY 
 
 I 
 
 CHAPTER XXXVII. 
 
 THE EPISTLES OF PETER. 
 THE PERSON OF THE APOSTLE. 
 
 N the Gospels, and in the first part of the Acts, Peter appears as the 
 most prominent apostle. He was of Bethsaida (John i, 44), a 
 town on the west coast of the Sea of Galilee, and a fisherman by oc 
 cupation (Matt iv, 18; Mark i, 16 ; Luke v, 3, 4). He was brought 
 by his brother Andrew to Christ at the very beginning of the Lord's 
 ministry. To his original name of Simon Christ added that of 
 Cephas (N3O, Kepha), an Aramaic word meaning Rock, of which the 
 Greek is Petros, Peter* After this introduction to Christ Peter still 
 pursued his former vocation, and we find that when, at the Lord's 
 command, he had cast his net into the sea, and caught a great muU 
 titude of fishes though he had toiled all the previous night and 
 taken nothing he threw himself down at the knees of Jesus, saying, 
 " Depart from me; for I am a sinful man, O Lord." To this Christ 
 replied, " Fear not ; from henceforth thou shalt catch men." After this 
 he left all and followed him (Luke v, 4-11). He became one of the 
 most intimate disciples of Christ. We find him with James and John 
 on the Mount of Transfiguration, and in the garden of Gethsemane. 
 He showed his zeal for his Master, when arrested in the garden, by 
 drawing his sword and cutting off the right ear of the servant of the 
 high priest (John xviii, 10). He was always ready to proclaim his 
 faith in Christ. When many disciples left Jesus, he put the question 
 to the twelve : " Will ye also go away ? " to which Peter promptly 
 answered : " Lord, to whom shall we go ? Thou hast the words of 
 Giving of P&. eternal life " (John vi, 67, 68). Upon another occasion, 
 ter'g surname. w hen Christ asked his disciples : "Whom say ye that I 
 am ? " Peter answered : " Thou art the Christ, the Son of the living 
 God." In the Saviour's reply to this, he declares : " I say also unto 
 
 'SD^S, Kepka, is used in the Targums of Onkelos and Jonathan Ben Uzziel (Chal- 
 dee versions of the chief portions of the Old Testament, made about the time of 
 Christ) in the sense of a rock or ledge of rocks in Num. xx, 8-1 1 ; Judges vi 20 ; 
 i Sam. xiv, 4 ; Jer. xlix, 16, etc. ; and in the sense of sea toast (rock bound) in Gen. 
 xxii, 17, etc. ; but nowhere that we have been able to find does it occur in the sense 
 of a piece of rock or a stone in these Targums. In translating Kepha into Greek it 
 was necessary to employ the word Petros (Peter), the masculine form, from the fem- 
 inine Uirpa, as the feminine form is unsuitable for the name of a man.
 
 OF THE HOLY SCRIPTURES. 719 
 
 thee, That thou art Peter, and upon this rock I will build my 
 Church ; and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it. " In the 
 vernacular language of Christ (the Aramaic), N3O, Kepha, was used 
 both for Peter and for the rock on which the Church was to be 
 built. " I say also unto thee, That thou art Kepha, and upon this 
 Kepha I will build my Church," etc. It is clear that our Saviour 
 indulges in a paronomasia? and affirms he will build his Church upon 
 him, the rock ; but not in such a way as to exclude the other apos- 
 tles, who, if they had not at that time such a strong faith as Peter 
 had, yet afterward attained it, and entered as foundation stones into 
 the Christian edifice. Hence the language of Paul : " Ye are built 
 upon the foundation of the apostles and prophets, Jesus Christ him- 
 self being the chief corner stone " (Eph. ii, 20). Also in the Apoca- 
 lypse it says : " The wall of the city had twelve foundations, and in 
 them the name of the twelve apostles of the Lamb " (xxi, 14). Christ 
 also promised to give him the " keys of the kingdom of heaven " with 
 plenary powers" (Matt, xvi, 19). Accordingly, we find that he 
 opened the kingdom, that is, first preached the gospel to Jews and 
 Gentiles (Acts ii, 14-36; x). 
 
 But notwithstanding his strong faith and ardent zeal, the fear of 
 death so far prevailed over him that in the palace of the high priest, 
 after the arrest of Christ, he thrice denied his knowledge of his 
 Master, and at his third denial he began to curse and to swear 
 (Mark xiv, 66-71). At Christ's appearance to his disciples at the 
 sea of Galilee (John xxi), he charged Peter to feed his lambs and 
 his sheep, and at the same time he predicted his death by cruci- 
 fixion. 7 
 
 After the ascension of the Lord, in the first general assembly of 
 believers in Jerusalem, Peter calls attention to the ne- Peter the lead . 
 cessity of appointing an eyewitness of the life of Christ eraftsr Christ's 
 to take the apostleship of Judas. On the day of Pente- a 
 cost he preaches the gospel to the Jews of Jerusalem. Subse- 
 quently to this he heals a lame man, and preaches to the assembled 
 crowds ; he rebukes the hypocrisy of Ananias and Sapphira ; he is 
 
 'Paronomasias are not unknown to the Old Testament. In Gen. ix, 27 : "God 
 hall enlarge (^1, yaphf) Japhet " (flQ^, yepheth, enlargement). So in Isa. v, 7 
 " An J he waited for fi^"]? (tsedhaqah, righteousness), and behold there was HJ552 
 [fte'aqah, outcry, violence), etc. Of course, the language of Christ addressed to Peter 
 is figurative. On this rock, not bishops or popes, but the Church, was to be built. 
 A foundation rock is dissimilar from the building, and it stands alone. Peter had 
 no successors. And it must be observed that this language was addressed to Ptet 
 in possession of strong faith in Christ. 
 
 *This seems to be the import o r *ohn *xi. 18.
 
 720 INTRODUCTION TO THE STUDY 
 
 imprisoned with the other apostles, but is released by an angel. At 
 a later period he and John were sent by the apostles to Samaria, 
 where he came in contact with Simon the Magician. In his travels 
 ne comes to Lydda, where he heals Eneas sick of 'he palsy. At 
 Joppa he raises Dorcas from the dead. Here he has a vision, in 
 which the calling of the Gentiles is foreshadowed, and he is directed 
 by the Spirit to go to Cornelius, a heathen at Caesarea, and preach 
 the gospel to him, which opens the door of salvation to the Gentiles. 
 Herod arrests and imprisons him, with a view of putting him to death, 
 but an angel sets him at liberty. At the council in Jerusalem he 
 expresses himself decidedly against putting the yoke of the Mosaic 
 law upon the neck of Gentile believers (chap. xv). This is his last 
 appearance in the Acts of the Apostles. He is mentioned by Paul 
 several times in his Epistle to the Galatians, as being either at Je- 
 rusalem or Antioch, but the incidents given respecting him do not 
 extend beyond the fifteenth chapter of the Acts. 1 At the close of 
 his First Epistle he sends a salutation from the Church at Babylon, 
 on the Euphrates, from which it appears that he was once there. 
 
 Outside of the New Testament, the oldest notice of Peter occurs 
 Notices of Peter i n the Epistle of Clement of Rome to the Corinthians, 
 in the Fathers. wr itten sometime in A. D. 93-96. After remarking that 
 the most righteous and faithful pillars of the Church had been per- 
 secuted and suffered unto death, he says, " Let us place before our 
 eyes the good apostles. Peter, on account of unjust jealousy, endured, 
 not one, nor two, but many sufferings, and thus, having borne testi- 
 mony, he went to the place of glory that was due him." 1 From this 
 it is clear that he suffered martyrdom ; and as Clement afterward, in 
 the same connection, speaks of the martyrdom of Paul, and names 
 no other apostle, it is not improbable that Peter suffered at Rome, 
 where Paul was martyred, or in its vicinity. 
 
 The next reference to the martyrdom of Peter occurs in Dionys- 
 Notices of re- ius, bishop of Corinth (about A. D. 170), who remarks 
 lD i!S in his E P istle to the Romans that " Petei and Paul 
 and others. visited Corinth and Italy, taught and suffered as martyrs 
 at the same time." He also speaks of the Roman and Corinthian 
 Churches as having been planted by Peter and Paul.* Irenaeus 
 (about A. D. 1 80) speaks of Peter and Paul as preaching the gospel 
 in Rome, 4 and founding a Church there. Caius, a Roman presby- 
 
 1 In GaL ii, n, " But when Peter was come to Antioch," etc., refers to what trans- 
 pired when Paul and Barnabas were in that city (Acts xv, 35). The supposed in- 
 consistency of Peter referred to by Paul (GaL ii, I '-14) we considered in discussing 
 the Acts of the Apostles. Sec. 5, in Const text 
 
 'In Eusebius, Hist Eccles., ii, cap. xxv. *iii, cap. i, i.
 
 OF THE HOLY SCRIPTURES. 721 
 
 ier (about A. D. 200), is the next witness respecting Peter. In a 
 book written against Proclus, the leader of the sect of the Cataphry- 
 ges, he says : " I can show you the monuments of the apostles. For 
 if you wish to go out to the Vatican, or to the road to Ostia, you will 
 find the monuments [tombs] of those who founded this Church." ' 
 Tertullian of Carthage (about A. D. 200) states that Peter and Paul 
 left the Romans the gospel sealed with their own blood,* and that 
 here Peter was made like the Lord in suffering. 1 
 
 Origen, who flourished in the first half of the third century, re- 
 marks : " Peter appears to have preached the gospel in Pontus, Galatia 
 and Bithynia, Cappadocia, and in Asia, to the Jews of the dispersion. 
 Finally, being in Rome, he was crucified head downward, he him- 
 self having preferred to suffer in this way." 4 
 
 Jerome states, that after Peter " had been bishop of the Church 
 in Antioch, and had preached the gospel among the dis- p,^^ ^^ 
 persed Jews, who had believed, in Pontus, Galatia, Cap- of Peter's arri- 
 padocia, Asia, and Bithynia, he went in the second year 
 of the Emperor Claudius (A. D. 43) to Rome, to vanquish Simon 
 Magus, and he held there the Sacerdotal Chair for twenty-five years, 
 until the last year of Nero, that is, the fourteenth (A. D. 68), by 
 whom he was crucified and crowned with martyrdom, his head 
 being downward and his feet upward, declaring that he was unworthy 
 to be crucified in the same way as his Lord. . . . He was buried at 
 Rome in the Vatican, near the Triumphal Way." ' But it is impos- 
 sible to reconcile this episcopacy of twenty-five years at Rome with 
 probabilities and facts. 
 
 About A. D. 51, 52 Peter is still at Jerusalem, Antioch, or their 
 vicinity (Acts xv : Gal. ii, i, n), so that it is impossible Peter probably 
 for him to have gone to Rome in the second year of four years in 
 Claudius (A. D. 43). After Peter left Antioch Jerome 
 states that he preached the gospel in Pontus and the adjacent re- 
 gions before going to Rome. And it appears that the First Epistle 
 of Peter was written at Babylon, or in its vicinity (chap, v, 13) ; so that 
 he must have visited that region of country before going to Rome. 
 In the Epistles of Paul, written from Rome after his arrival there, 
 about A. D. 62, there is no mention of Peter, nor any in the Epistl* 
 to the Church in that city, written about A. D. 58. 
 
 'In Eusebius, Hist. Eccles., ii, cap. xxv. "Adversus Marcionem, iv, cap. . 
 
 * Liber de Prescript., cap. xxxvi. 
 
 4 In vol. iii, Commentary on Genesis in Eusebius, Hist. Eccles., iii, cap. i. 
 
 * Liber de Viris Illustribus. Petrus. In the Chronicon of Eusebius it is stated 
 that Peter was bishop of the Church at Rome for twenty-five years, but this is in the 
 I*tin versior to which the translators made additions.
 
 722 INTRODUCTION TO THE STUDY 
 
 It seems probable that Peter did not reach Rome until after A D. 
 64, and that he was crucified there A. D. 67 or 68. There is no 
 good reason for doubting the fact of his martyrdom at Rome, as the 
 tradition goes back, as we have already seen, to the second century, 
 when the Roman Church had not yet laid claim to her lofty prerog- 
 atives ; nor would the. tradition of his martyrdom in that city have 
 been universal in the earlier centuries if it had not rested upon an 
 historical basis. The truth of the tradition is conceded by Gieseler/ 
 is considered most probable by Neander, 1 deemed an historical fact 
 by Bleek, 1 improbable by De Wette, 4 and, though rejected by Baur, 1 
 is accepted by the skeptical Hilgenfeld.* 
 
 T 
 
 CHAPTER XXXVIII. 
 
 THE FIRST EPISTLE GENERAL OF PETER. 
 THE PERSONS ADDRESSED. 
 
 HE Epistle is addressed to the " strangers scattered throughout 
 Pontus, Galatia, Cappadocia, Asia, and Bithynia, elect accord- 
 ing to the foreknowledge of God," etc. By " the strangers of the 
 dispersion " (Traperrt^juotf 6iaanopd$) he does not mean Christian 
 believers of the Jewish race especially, as we might suppose, but 
 Christians in general, dispersed strangers, having no country they can 
 call their own. The language was originally applied to the dispersed 
 Jewish people. That the persons addressed were Christians from 
 among the Gentiles chiefly appears from chaps, i, 14, 18; ii, 10, 
 
 iv, 3, 4- 
 
 THE GENUINENESS OF THIS EPISTLE. 
 
 The writer styles himself " Peter, an apostle of Jesus Christ," and 
 to him the Epistle was universally attributed by the ancient Church. 
 
 It was evidently used by Polycarp, the disciple of the Apostle John, in 
 the following words : " In whom ye believe, not having seen, yet believ- 
 ing, ye rejoice with joy unspeakable and full of glory." 1 It was used 
 by Hernias " (about A.D. 140) and by Papias of Hierapolis in the first 
 
 1 Church History, vol. i, p. 8l. 2 Planting and Training, pp. 377-381. 
 
 3 Einleitung, p. 654. 4 Einleitung, p. 377. 
 
 5 Die Drei Ersten Jahrhunderte. Dritte Ausgabe, 142. 
 
 ' Einleitung, p. 624. Clement of Alexandria remarks : " They say, indeed, that 
 when the blessed Peter saw his wife led away to be put to death he was delighted 
 on account of her calling and return home, and, addressing her by name, he ear- 
 nestly exhorted her, Remember the Lord (Strom, vii, cap. xi). From this it appears 
 that Peter at that time was in some place well known to Clement. 
 
 1 Epistle to the Philippians, sec. I. 8 Vis., iii, n.
 
 OF THE HOLY SCRIPTURES. 733 
 
 half of the second century. 1 It was contained in the Peshito -Syriac 
 version, made about the middle of the second century. It is quoted 
 as Peter's by Irenaeus," by Clement * of Alexandria, and Tertullian 4 of 
 Carthage. Origen remarks that " Peter has left one acknowledged 
 Epistle." * Eusebius, in his Catalogue of the Books of the New Testa- 
 ment, remarks that the "First Epistle of Peter is to be received." ' 
 It was received as Peter's by Cyprian T of Carthage, Hilary 8 of 
 Poitiers in Gaul, by Ambrose 9 of Milan, by Athanasius, 10 This Epistle 
 
 by Gregory Nazianzen," Didymus " of Alexandria, Chrys- J ^ rv ^ J ^- 
 
 J J knowledged In 
 
 ostom, Augustine, Jerome, and rheodoret. It was the ancient 
 
 admitted into all the ancient versions of the New Testa- Cnurcn - 
 ment. 17 It is not, however, found in the Canon of Muratori ; but no 
 stress is to be laid upon this, as the Canon is imperfect. 
 
 Nowhere do we find a single instance in which the Epistle was 
 rejected; for the statement of Leontius of Byzantium, Alleged rejeo- 
 that Theodore of Mopsuestia rejected the Epistle of JJeotoe" It 
 James, and successively the other Catholic Epistles," Mopsuestia. 
 does not make it certain that he rejected the First Epistle of Peter, 
 and in itself it is very improbable. It is true that the language most 
 natujally means that he rejected all seven. But is it likely that a 
 man of his ability and learning, who certainly received John's Gos- 
 pel, would have rejected his Epistle, so intimately connected with 
 that Gospel, and concerning which, so far as we know, a doubt had 
 never been raised ? If we feel authorized in excepting the First 
 Epistle of John from the general statement, we may except the First 
 Epistle of Peter also. Theodore, doubtless, rejected the Second 
 
 1 According to Eusebius (Hist. Eccl., iii, cap. xxxix), who had his work before him. 
 1 Lib. iv, cap. ix, xvi ; lib. v, cap. vii. " Strom., iii, cap. xviii ; Paedag., iii, cap. xiL 
 
 * Ad versus Gnosticos Scorpiace, cap. xii. * In Eusebius, vi, 25. 
 
 * Ibid., iii, cap. xxv. 
 
 ' Epistola Ad Fortunatum, cap. ix. In his book (De Zelo et Livore) he quotes 
 i Peter v, 8, with the remark, " According to what the Apostle Peter in his Epistle 
 advises," etc. * Psalm li. 
 
 * He quotes I Peter i, 18, 19 with the remark, " Peter in his Epistle says," etc. 
 Comment, in Luc., lib. vii, 117. 10 Oratio ii, Contra Arianos. "Carmina. 
 
 19 Enarratio in i Peter. lf Synopsis Sac. Scrip. M De Doc. Christ, ii, 8. 
 
 16 De Viris Illustribus. Petrus. u Demons, per Syllogismos. 
 
 " We cannot speak with certainty of the Gothic version, as it has not come down 
 to us entire. 
 
 M Speaking of the rejection by Theodore of the book of Job, referred to by James, 
 Leontius remarks : At' tf\> airiav aitr^v re olfiat, rov pEyakov 'laicufiov TIJV kmarotef* 
 KCU rtif ^fw " UAAWV O7roypvrret xa#oAt/cdf (Adversus Incorrup. et Nestor, lib. 
 iii, 14. De Wette had before him the Latin translation of these words, and he ob- 
 serves on them : " It does not clearly lie in these words that Theodore of Mopsuev 
 tia rejected the Epistle." Einleitung, p. 386.
 
 724 INTRODUCTION TO THE STUDY 
 
 Epistle of Peter, that of Jude, and the Second and Third oi 
 John. 
 
 Further, Theodoret was the enthusiastic disciple of Theodore, 
 and most probably reflected his master's opinions on the Canon, and 
 he quotes * the First Epistle of Peter with the remark : " The divine 
 Peter says in his Catholic [Epistle] that Christ suffered in the flesh ' 
 (chap iv, i). He likewise quotes as his the First Epistle of John, 
 but nowhere does he quote the Epistle of James by name,* nor do we 
 find in him a vestige of Second Peter, the Epistle of Jude, and Second 
 and Third of John. 
 
 It must be borne in mind that the charge brought against Theodore, 
 of rejecting the Catholic Epistles, comes from his bitter enemy, 
 who charges him, as another Marcion, with not being satisfied in 
 attacking the Old Testament only, but with making attempts upon 
 the New. It is not likely that he discriminated very nicely in his 
 remarks respecting Theodore. The Second Epistle of Peter, whether 
 genuine or not, bears testimony to the existence and authority of the 
 First (2 Pet. iii, i). 
 
 If we examine the contents of this Epistle, we find that it bears the 
 Modern objec- apostolic stamp, contains nothing unworthy of an apostle, 
 utaTnestTcon- notn i n g belonging to a later age, and it impresses us at 
 idered. once with its genuineness. With the facts before us it 
 
 is not easy to see how a doubt respecting it could ever arise. But, 
 in spite of the strong external and internal evidence in its favor, 
 its genuinenesss has been called in question by some modern critics. 
 Semler first denied its immediate composition by the apostle. He 
 was followed by Cludius, who in the first part of the present cen- 
 tury rejected its Petrine authorship, and attributed it to some one be- 
 longing to the school of Paul. De Wette, in the various editions of 
 his Introduction, expressed himself with more or less doubt respect- 
 ing it. Its genuineness is denied by Baur, Schwegler, and Hilgen- 
 feld. 
 
 To begin with De Wette : this skeptical critic grants that the 
 Epistle belongs to the apostolic age, on the ground of the expecta- 
 tion expressed in it of the speedy end of all things (chap, iv, 7), and 
 that it was written during Nero's persecution of the Christians. This 
 is, indeed, highly probable, and is fully consistent with its genuine- 
 ness. 
 
 1 Demons, per Syllogismos. 
 
 1 There is one passage that looks as if it came from James iv, 8 : " I have said. 
 Draw nigh to me, and I will draw nigh to you," though there are passages in the Old 
 Testament in which we are exhorted to draw nigh unto God. The first Epistle oi 
 John and First of Peter are quoted by Theodoret in several places.
 
 OF THE HOLY SCRIPTURES. 725 
 
 The following are his objections : " It does not exhibit a definite 
 peculiarity, like the works of John and Paul. Not only De wette's ob- 
 are there found reminiscences of passages of the Pauline J 60110118 ' 
 Epistles, the reading of which by the author is doubtless to be pre- 
 supposed, but also his conceptions and language are essentially 
 Pauline. To this is to be added that the writer does not master 
 with freedom and ease, as his own property, the thoughts with which 
 he is occupied, but handles them with some uncertainty. The 
 improbability that the Apostle Peter would put himself into such de- 
 pendence upon Paul, and especially that he could have been ac- 
 quainted with Paul's later Epistles, and even the spurious Epistle to 
 the Ephesians, establishes a strong suspicion respecting the genu- 
 ineness of the Epistle, to which, however, all antiquity bears testi- 
 mony." 1 
 
 We scarcely know how to characterize the foregoing statements of 
 this able but skeptical critic. To say the least, they are mere as- 
 sumptions. This Epistle has an individual stamp of its own, which 
 scarcely any one can fail to see, and which no one would confound 
 with the Pauline type. Its vigorous, earnest style reflects the char- 
 acter of Peter as he appears in the New Testament history. There 
 is nothing improbable in the supposition that Peter may have seen 
 some of Paul's Epistles, but that he leans upon them is manifestly false. 
 There is nothing inconsistent with the dignity of the apostles in quot- 
 ing each other's expressions, as it is well known was done by the He- 
 brew prophets. 4 But we must say that we are not convinced that Peter 
 has used the writings of Paul. Respecting the Epistle to the Ephe- 
 sians, De Wette has no sufficient grounds for pronouncing it spuri- 
 ous. But if he insists upon this, why can he not adopt the more sen- 
 sible hypothesis in that case, that the author of the Epistle to the 
 Ephesians made use of the First Epistle of Peter, which he concedes 
 to have been written before the destruction of Jerusalem ? 
 
 It is, indeed, true, that there are a few thoughts and words in this 
 Epistle of Peter similar to some found in the writings of Paul and 
 James, and this was to be expected ; for the germs of the apostolic 
 doctrine are found in the discourses of Christ, which were the com- 
 mon property of them all. Now, it is certainly natural to suppose 
 that the different apostles, in developing the thoughts of Christ, 
 would touch each other at some points. Peter and James had been a 
 long time together discussing the same great principles. Is it strange, 
 then, that there should be something in common with them when 
 
 'Einleitung, pp. 381-386. 
 
 'As an instance of this quoting, compare Isa. ii, 2-4 with Micah iv, 1-3 i these 
 prophets were contemporary.
 
 726 INTRODUCTION TO THE STUDY 
 
 they write ? Paul, also, was in the company of the apostles and theii 
 companions, and there must have been a community of sentiment 
 and thought, to a considerable extent at least. 
 
 Let us, then, consider the passages in this Epistle which De 
 Wette and some others think are based on the Ephe- 
 
 106 P&S8Ag6S 
 
 in i Peter sup- sians, because they are the only ones ' that would create 
 wette to to an y difficulty. For the other Epistles of Paul (to the 
 
 borrowed from Romans, Corinthians, and Galatians) which might be 
 supposed to have furnished the basis, at least a hint, foi 
 some of the thoughts and expressions in this Epistle, were written, in 
 all probability, six or seven years before the First Epistle of Peter, 
 while that to the Ephesians was written, perhaps, not more than one 
 or two years earlier. Still, even in this case, there would be a possi- 
 bility that the Epistle might have been seen by Peter before he 
 wrote. 
 
 In the very beginning Peter declares to the Christians addressed 
 that they "are elected according to the foreknowledge of God," 
 while Paul, in Ephesians, declares that God " has chosen us in him 
 before the foundation of the world " (chap, i, 4). But the same idea 
 occurs in the Epistle to the Romans (chap, viii, 28, 29). Was Peter, 
 indeed, dependent upon Paul for the doctrine of the foreknowledge 
 of God and the election of Jews and Gentiles? This we cannot 
 believe. Peter, in the Acts (ii, 23), represents Christ as having 
 " been delivered by the determinate counsel and foreknowledge * 01 
 God." Peter was the apostle who first preached the gospel to the 
 Gentiles ; and, after his speech in the Council at Jerusalem (Acts xv), 
 James says: "Simon hath declared how God at the first did visit 
 the Gentiles to take out of them a people for his name." What is 
 this but election ? And what was more natural than that Peter, in 
 addressing Jewish and Gentile believers, should speak of their elec- 
 tion independently of what Paul had written ? 
 
 Peter has, " Blessed be the God and Father of our Lord Jesus 
 Christ " (chap, i, 3). Paul has, " Blessed be God, even the Father 
 of our Lord Jesus Christ " (2 Cor. i, 3). Similar is Ephesians i, 3. 
 But the P hrase "Blessed be the Lord God" (evX^yijrd^ vp/o? 6 
 deof), very similar to the one in Peter and Paul, is based on an Old 
 Testament formula, nfrr ^na (Gen. ix, 26 ; xxiv, 27 ; Ezra vii, 27. 
 etc.) ; so that Peter did not borrow this phrase from Eph i, 3 Even 
 
 'If there had been passages in the Epistle based on Cclossians and Pbilippians, 
 the same difficulty would have presented itself, as these Epistles were written aboul 
 the same time as Ephesians. 
 
 1 The same word, irpdyvuatf, occurs both in this passage in the Acts rxl TO I Pet 
 i. 2, but nowhere else in the New Testament.
 
 OF THE HOLY SCRIPTURES. 727 
 
 if he borrowed it from Paul, he could have taken it from 2 Cor. i, 3 
 In i Peter ii, 18 we have : " Servants, be in subjection to your mas- 
 ters with all fear ; not only to the good and gentle, but also to the 
 froward." In Ephesians : " Servants, be obedient to them that are 
 your masters according to the flesh, with fear and trembling, in sin- 
 glenesss of your hsart, as unto Christ" (chap, vi, 5). In the first 
 passage the Greek is, ol okerot, vnoraoaofiKvot kv Karri </c/3a> rote de- 
 , K. r. A. In the second, ol dovhoi, vnaKovers rolg Kara adqita 
 <t>6f3ov, K. T. A.. It is thus seen that there is only one word 
 in the Greek common to both passages. If the author of the Epistle 
 under consideration had ever read this passage from Paul, is it likely 
 that, in writing on the same subject, he would have hit upon a single 
 word only of it, and that, too, in a different case ? Besides, the ideas 
 are only in part the same. 
 
 In chap, iii, i, Peter says : "Likewise, ye wives, be in subjection 
 to your own husbands ; that if any obey not the word, other passages 
 they also may without the word be won by the conversa- expired- 
 tion (deportment) of the wives." In Ephesians v, 22, 23 we find : 
 " Wives, submit yourselves unto your own husbands, as unto the 
 Lord. For the husband is the head of the wife, even as Christ is 
 the head of the Church," etc. Peter continues his remarks about 
 wives in chap, iii, 2-6, in which there is nothing common to him with 
 Ephesians. There is nothing common to the latter Epistle and that 
 of Peter, except "Wives be in subjection to your own husbands." 
 in the former the Greek is : al yvvalne^ rolg Idiots dv6pdocv (viro- 
 raaaofievai to be supplied.) In the latter it is: yvvatKe$ v-noTaa- 
 ?6fiKvat rolf avdpdoiv. Peter gives as the reason for the subjection 
 of wives to husbands, and their correct deportment, that their hus- 
 bands may be won over to the gospel by the godly example of the 
 wives. Paul enjoins upon the wives subjection to their husbands, as 
 to the Lord, even as Christ is the head of the Church ; and as the 
 Church is subject to Christ, so must wives be to their husbands. 
 Now, in respect to the Greek common to both passages on the sup- 
 position that Peter wished to enjoin subjection of wives to husbands 
 what other Greek could he have used ? Twrj is the only word in 
 prose Greek for wife, and avrjp ' is the only word in the New Testa- 
 ment used for husband. To express subjection, the word used in the 
 New Testament is vTrordaffd), occurring thirty-eight times. But the 
 general meaning of yvv^, rendered wife, is woman; and dvijp, ren- 
 dered husband, strictly means man, so that another word was neces- 
 sary to make the meaning definite, Mioc, (nvn. Let any one attempt 
 to put into different English the phrase: " Wives, be subject to your 
 
 * FOCTJC for husband rarely occurs in prose Greek, the common word being di%>
 
 728 INTRODUCTION TO THE STUDY 
 
 husbands." We have no synonyme for wife, nor for husband, and 
 the effort would be difficult. "Ye younger, submit yourselves to the 
 elder, and all of you put on humility toward each other, 1 for God 
 resisteth the proud," etc. (chap, v, 5). The nearest approximation 
 to this in Ephesians is, " Being subject to each other in the fear of 
 Christ " (chap, v, 2).' There is no probable reference in the former 
 passage to the latter. 
 
 We have thus considered the passages adduced to show that the 
 author of the Epistle was acquainted with the Epistle to the Ephe- 
 sians, and have found no probable proof of such acquaintance ; 
 although, as we have already remarked, there is no improbability in 
 the supposition that Peter may have seen some of the earlier Epis- 
 tles of Paul, perhaps, also, that of James. But we must reject as des- 
 titute of proof, and, under the circumstances, as rather improbable, 
 the claim that the author had ever seen the Epistle to the Ephesians, 
 and thus the only ground at all plausible for the rejection of this 
 Epistle of Peter is taken away. 
 
 The genuineness of this Epistle is vitally connected with the time 
 rue time of the ^ ^ ts c " 1 ? 08 !^ 011 - Schwegler, Baur, and Hilgenfeld 
 composition of refer its composition to the period of the persecution of 
 eter> the Christians under Trajan, about A. D. 113. Hilgen- 
 feld contends that the references in the Epistle to the persecution 
 of the Christians lead to that date. But the persecution of the Chris- 
 tians by Nero, about A. D. 64, to which Eichhorn, Hug, De Wette, 
 Neander, and Ewald refer the allusions to sufferings, is to be ac- 
 cepted as the only one that fully accords with all the facts of the 
 case. 
 
 In chap, i, 6 the persons addressed are represented as suffering 
 various trials ; and in chap, iv, 1 2 they are exhorted : " Beloved, be 
 not surprised at the calamity (irvp&ois, burning) among you which 
 is happening for your trial, as if a strange thing were befalling you." 
 To which is added : " But rejoice, inasmuch as ye are partakers of 
 Christ's sufferings ; that when his glory shall be revealed, ye may be 
 glad also with exceeding joy. If ye be reproached for the name of 
 Christ, happy are ye. ... But let none of you suffer as a murderer, 
 or as a thief, or as an evil doer, or as a busybody in other .men's 
 matters. Yet if any man suffer as a Christian, let him not be 
 
 1 The Greek of this clause is, Tldvref 6e aXXfjXoif TTJV raneivo^poavvriv lyxo/u/to. 
 oatr&e, the reading adopted by both Tischendorf and Tregelles, and which is the 
 reading of the Vatican, Sinaitic, and Alexandrian Codices, and of the Peshfto-Syr- 
 iac, Memphitic, and Armenian versions. De Wette has viroraoo^pcvoi in his text. 
 The omission of this takes away his chief ground of reference in this passage tt 
 Ephesians v, 21.
 
 OF THE HOLY SCRIPTURES. 729 
 
 ashamed ; but let him glorify God on this behalf" (verses 13-16). In 
 chap, ii, 12 the writer represents the Gentiles as speaking "against 
 them as evil doers." Again he says, in respect to their former 
 wicked lives : " They (the Gentiles) think it strange that ye run not 
 with them to the same excess of riot, speaking evil of you " (chap. 
 iv, 4). 
 
 From this it would appear that the cause of their sufferings was 
 the false charges brought against them by their heathen neigh- 
 bours charges that originated in deep hatred of the Christians for 
 their rejection of paganism, with all the splendid festivals connected 
 with pagan worship. Under these circumstances the populace might 
 rise up at almost any time against the Christians, and visit upon them 
 terrible suffering, or bring them before the magistrates, and demand 
 the infliction of punishment upon them as violators of the laws. All 
 this could take place without the issuing of an edict by a Roman 
 emperor, and without the prosecution of the Christians as such on 
 the part of the Roman governors. And something similar occurred 
 at Rome in the time of Nero. This wicked ruler, to destroy the 
 rumour that he himself had set fire to Rome, attributed it, as Taci- 
 tus tells us, to a class of persons, " whom, hated for their crimes, 
 the populace called Christians." Tacitus at the same time informs 
 us that the punishment inflicted upon them was not so much on the 
 charge of burning Rome as on account of their hatred of the human 
 race, 1 that is, their contempt of paganism, which, as Christians, they 
 felt and showed. It is clear, then, that they suffered as Christians ; 
 yet Hilgenfeld has the coolness to tell us that in this Epistle " the per- 
 secution under Nero cannot be intended, because in it the Roman 
 Christians only were persecuted, and indeed as incendiaries ; accord- 
 ingly, on account of a definite crime of which they were accused. 
 In our Epistle, on the contrary, the Christians as such (w? Xpiona- 
 voi) are oppressed and ill-treated on account of their conduct in 
 general, which was sought to be rendered suspicious as illegal and 
 immoral " (c KaKonoioi)* 
 
 But how does Hilgenfeld know that the persecution under Nero 
 was limited to the Roman Christians? Is it not in itself Tbe ^^ glTen 
 
 very probable that the example set by Nero would be by HiiRenfeid 
 
 ... . . , , Improbable, 
 
 followed by the pagans in various parts of the empire r 
 
 Suppose the Sultan of Turkey should institute a persecution of the 
 Christians at Constantinople, how soon the example would be foi- 
 lowed in the empire where the Mohammedans are in the ascen- 
 dency . Suetonius, in describing the times of Nero, says : " The 
 
 1 Haud perinde in crimine incendii quam odio human! generis, convicti stmt. An- 
 *al., lib. xv, cap. xliv. ' Einleitung, p 638, 639.
 
 730 INTRODUCTION TO THE STUDY 
 
 Christians, a race of men of a new and wicked superstition, were 
 punished." ' It is evident from his language that they were punished 
 as Christians, nor does he limit this persecution to Rome 
 
 It does not appear from the Epistle of Peter that legal investiga- 
 Languageused ^ ons an< * P ersecut i n s were instituted against the Chris- 
 mite the time tians as such ; and in this respect the state of things to 
 which reference is made in the Epistle is more suitable 
 to the latter times of Nero (about A. D. 64 and after) than to the 
 latter times of Trajan (A. D. 112 and after), when Pliny, as governor 
 of Pontus and Bithynia, punished them on account of their Chris- 
 tian profession, even when he had ascertained that they were guilty 
 of no crimes. 1 The Epistle of Peter is addressed to the Christians 
 of five provinces, of which Pliny, about A. D. 111-113, governed 
 but two, Bithynia and Pontus. The other three were then under 
 governors respecting whose treatment of the Christians we know 
 nothing. Yet this Epistle represents the Christians of the five prov- 
 inces suffering the same afflictions with the rest of the world (chap, 
 v, 9), and makes no discrimination respecting provinces. This does 
 not suit well the time of Pliny's governorship. Merivale remarks, 
 respecting the reply of Trajan to Pliny : " Trajan carefully limits his 
 decision to the particular case and locality.'" 
 
 While we thus think it highly probable that the Epistle was written 
 about A. D. 64 or 65, during the persecution under Nero, the refer- 
 ences in it might suit some other persecution, not instituted by civil 
 authority, but rather an outburst of pagan fanaticism against the 
 Christians, such as is sometimes known in modern times in Moham- 
 medan lands. The references to persecutions occupy but a small 
 portion of the Epistle. Nor does it appear that there were many 
 cases in which the Christians addressed were suffering the death 
 penalty. 
 
 tXHilgenfeld supposes the Epistle was written at Rome,* about 
 Hiigenfeid's A. D. 113, by a Christian of that city, during the perse- 
 date absurd. cut ; on O f tne Christians of Bithynia and Pontus (de- 
 scribed by Pliny the Younger, in his Epistle to Trajan *), to strengthen 
 them in their sufferings. That is, the Epistle was forged in the 
 name of the Apostle Peter, about forty-five years after his death, and 
 was everywhere received throughout the provinces of Asia Minor. 
 Its universal reception in these provinces is certain. For we find 
 
 'Nero, cap. xvi. *See Epistle xcvii of Pliny to Trajan. 
 
 * History of the Romans under the Empire, voL vii, p. 292. 
 
 4 In this case it would be astonishing that the forger did not represent it as written 
 from Rome, where it was well-known that Peter spent the last days of his life, in- 
 stead of from the obscure Babylon. 5 Epistola xcvii. 

 
 OF THE HOLY SCRIPTURES. 731 
 
 mat it was used by Polycarp, bishop of Smyrna, a disciple of the 
 Apostle John (in his Epistle, written about A. D. 115); by Papias, 
 bishop of Hierapolis in Phrygia ; was attributed to Peter by Irenaeus, 
 bishop of Lyons (A. D. 177-202), who spent the earlier part of his 
 life in Asia Minor; and it was admitted into the Peshito-Syriac ver- 
 sion of the New Testament (made about A. D. 150), used in an ad- 
 jacent region. The fact of its admission into this version is of great 
 value, as the Second Epistle of Peter, that of Jude, the Second and 
 Third of John, and the Apocalypse, were never received into it. We 
 also know that it was received without doubt all through the ancient 
 Christian world. 
 
 Now, it is clear that the Christians of Asia Minor, as early at least 
 as A. D. 115, accepted this Epistle as that of Peter, and if it was 
 forged about that time and sent to them they must have believed 
 tnat Peter was still living, though Clement of Rome had already 
 stated in his Epistle to the Corinthians, written in the last part of the 
 first century, that he had died as a martyr. This is, indeed, incredi- 
 ole. Or did the suffering Christians of the time of Pliny's governor- 
 ship believe that Peter foresaw their sufferings, and to meet their case 
 wrote the Epistle and delivered it to Silvanus to keep for forty or 
 fifty years, until the emergency for which it was written should arise, 
 when he was to deliver it to them ? But this supposition is equally 
 incredible with the former. It accordingly follows that it was written 
 in the lifetime of Peter, and to this result internal evidence con- 
 ducts us. In chap, iv, 7, it is said, " But the end of all things is at 
 hand," which indicates that the Epistle was written before the de- 
 struction of Jerusalem. We find in various places indications that 
 the persons addressed had been living at one time in paganism, and, 
 consequently, that they belong to the apostolic age. " Not fashion- 
 ing yourselves according to the former lusts in your ignorance," is 
 the language of chap, i, 14. Again : "Who in time past were not a 
 people, but are now the people of God " (chap, ii, 10). " For the 
 time past of our life may suffice us to have wrought the will of the 
 Gentiles," etc. (chap, iv, 3). Another indication of its belonging to 
 the apostolic age is to be found in the way in which the writer speaks 
 of Church officers. "The elders who are among you," says he, 
 " I exhort, who am also an elder and a witness of the sufferings of 
 Christ. . . . Feed the flock of God which is among you," etc. (chap. 
 v, i, 2). From this it is clear that the distinction between the bishop 
 as presiding presbyter and the other presbyters was not yet made. 
 This pertains to apostolic times. 
 
 The modest way in which Peter styles himself simply a " fellow- 
 presbyter " and a witness of the sufferings of Christ, is a mark of 
 47
 
 732 INTRODUCTION TO THE STUDY 
 
 genuineness. Who in the second century would have put such lan- 
 guage as this into the mouth of this great apostle ? No reason can 
 be assigned for the forgery of such a document, especially while 
 Peter was still living. Nor is it easy to see how it could have been 
 so skilfully executed as to deceive all antiquity, in which no vestige 
 of suspicion appears. The Epistle was sent to the Churches through 
 Silvanus, a former companion of Paul, as appears from its close 
 Paul and Silas had preached the gospel in Galatia and the neigh- 
 bouring regions about A. D. 52, before which time it is probable that 
 few Christians were found there. The apostle himself states the 
 design of his writing: " By Silvanus, a faithful brother unto you as I 
 suppose, I have written briefly, exhorting and testifying that this is 
 the true grace of God wherein ye stand." Neander well observes 
 that the teachers of certain errors " accused Paul of falsifying the 
 original Christian doctrine, and had appealed to the authority of the 
 elder apostles in behalf of the continued obligation of the Mosaic 
 law. Peter availed himself of the opportunity for addressing these 
 Churches, in order to establish them in the conviction that the doc- 
 trine announced to them by Paul and his disciples and companions, 
 of whom Silvanus was one, was genuine Christianity." 1 
 
 The genuineness of this Epistle has also been acknowledged by 
 Hug, Schleiermacher, Bleek, and others. Ewald supposes that the 
 Epistle was composed by Silvanus under the instructions of Peter. 
 Renan thinks it was written a short time before Nero's persecution, 
 and that Peter in its composition availed himself of the assistance 
 of Silvanus ; and De Wette remarks : " The hypothesis of its com- 
 position by an assistant in the name and with the knowledge of Peter, 
 we leave undecided." * 
 
 Nothing has been adduced by the sceptical school to cast suspi- 
 cion upon this noble document, and it has come down to us attested 
 in the strongest manner as the product of the eminent apostle and 
 eyewitness of the life of Christ. 
 
 PLACE OF COMPOSITION. 
 
 The place of its composition is determined from the salutations 
 
 The Eptetie near tne enc * : " ^ ne Church that is at Babylon, elected 
 
 written from together with you (?i kv Ba/3vA>w 0vveAm;), saluteth 
 
 you ; and so doth Marcus my son." The word *.Aj7<rfa, 
 
 Church, is wanting in the Greek MSS. It is found, however, in the 
 
 Codex Sinaiticus ; the Peshito-Syriac, the Vulgate, and the Armenian 
 
 versions also contain the word for Church. Neander thinks that 
 
 instead of " Church " we are to understand Peter's wife, but it seem* 
 
 1 Planting and Training, p. 374. ' Einleit ung, p. 386.
 
 OF THE HOLY SCRIPTURES. 733 
 
 improbable that he should speak of her as a fellow-elect in Babylon. 
 and it seems best to supply eKK^Tjaia (Church). 
 
 It is clear from this salutation that the Epistle was written in 
 Babylon, or, at least, in its vicinity. But the question as to what 
 Babylon is intended has been much disputed. Yet we can hardly 
 suppose that a native of Palestine, or one living in Western Asia, 
 could mean by this name any other place than the well-known city 
 of Babylon on the Euphrates. 1 In the apostolic age a considerable 
 number of Jews were found at this ancient site. 9 Some of the an- 
 cients, as well as of the moderns, regard Babylon as a symbolical 
 name for Rome. It is true that Rome in the Apocalypse is called 
 Babylon, but that is a book of symbols ; and in an Epistle of a plain 
 practical nature, written before the Apocalypse, such a name fo/ 
 Rome is extremely improbable. The symbolical exposition was 
 quite natural for those fathers who held that Peter was for many 
 years bishop of the Roman metropolis, from which it was to be ex- 
 pected that the Epistle would be written. 
 
 The Epistle was sent, as already stated, to the Christians of Asia 
 Minor by Silvanus (Silas). There is nothing improbable sent by SIITO- 
 in the supposition that he was with Peter at Babylon nus - 
 A. D. 64 or 65, as he no longer appears as the companion of Paul after 
 A. D. 57. From the salutation, it seems that the Evangelist Mark 
 was also with Peter. In this there is nothing strange, as Mark was 
 an acquaintance of his, and Paul, in his Epistle to the Colossians 
 (about A. D. 63 or 64), speaks of the possibility of Mark's coming to 
 them, and gives directions respecting him (chap, iv, 10). In Paul's 
 Second Epistle to Timothy (about A. D. 68) Mark is spoken of as 
 being in the East (chap, iv, n). It is, therefore, very probable that, 
 about A. D. 63 or 64, Mark visited Colossse and the adjacent re- 
 gions, then went to Babylon to see Peter, and made known to him 
 the affairs of the Churches in Asia Minor, upon the receipt of which 
 information the apostle addressed his Epistle to these Churches. 
 
 CONTENTS. 
 
 Peter reminds his readers of their election to the privileges of the 
 gospel, of the glorious inheritance awaiting them through the resur- 
 rection of Christ, speaks of their trials and consolation, refers to the 
 fact that the redemption through Christ was predicted by the proph- 
 ets, exhorts them to holiness of life, and affirms the permanency of tin* 
 divine word (chap. i). He counsels them to lay aside malevolent 
 
 ' Babylon, now old Cairo, on the Nile, a little south of the modem Cairo, is not to 
 be thought of. *As we have before seen.
 
 734 INTRODUCTION TO THE STUDY 
 
 feelings, deceit, and evil-speaking, and to grow up a spiritual people 
 He also reminds them of their high privileges, enjoins upon them 
 obedience to rulers, to honour all men, to love the brotherhood, to 
 fear God, and to honour the king. He gives directions to servants, 
 and encourages his readers by the example of Christ to be patient 
 under bad treatment (chap. ii). He describes the duties of wive^ 
 and husbands, exhorts his readers to unanimity, to affection for each 
 other, to pity and courtesy, to avoid returning evil for evil, to do 
 good, and to follow peace. He encourages them in their suffering 
 for righteousness' sake, exhorting them to have a good conscience, 
 and to be able lo give a reason for their hope, and refers to the 
 suffering of Christ for our sins, his preaching to the spirits in prison, 
 who were disobedient in the time of Noah, and alludes to the symbol 
 of baptism (chap. iii). He urges them to purity of life, sobriety, 
 watchfulness, and prayer, to cultivate love, hospitality, and to be 
 faithful ministers of the divine gift, and stewards of the grace of God. 
 He encourages them to endure their trials, but warns them not to suffer 
 as evil-doers, and counsels them to have confidence in God (chap- 
 ter iv). He gives directions to the presbyters respecting the feeding 
 of the flock of God, encouraging them by the reward they shall 
 receive ; inculcates the obedience of the younger to the elder, hu- 
 mility, trust in God, sobriety, vigilance, resistance to the devil, re- 
 minding them that God will perfect, establish, strengthen, and settle 
 them ; and assures them that it is the true grace of God in which 
 they stand. He concludes by sending salutations, and telling the 
 brethren to greet each other with a kiss of charity (chap. v). 
 
 CHAPTER XXXIX. 
 
 THE SECOND EPISTLE GENERAL OF PETER. 
 THE PERSONS ADDRESSED. 
 
 '"PHE Epistle is addressed " to them that have obtained like pre- 
 * cious faith with us through the righteousness of God, and our Sav- 
 iour Jesus Christ," which shows that it is an encyclical Epistle; yet in 
 chap, iii, i the writer states, " This second Epistle, beloved, I now 
 write unto you, in which I stir up your pure minds by way of re- 
 membrance." 
 
 CONTENTS. 
 
 The writer reminds his readers of the high privileges which they 
 enjoy in the gospel, and enumerates the virtues which they are to
 
 OF THE HOLY SCRIPTURES. 735 
 
 cultivate, and which will insure them admission into the eveilasting 
 kingdom of Christ. He states that he is soon to put off his earthly 
 tabernacle, assures them of th6 truth of the gospel, affirms that he 
 was a witness of the transfiguration of Christ, and directs them to 
 give heed to the inspired prophecies of the Old Testament (chap. i). 
 He describes a class of arrogant, covetous, licentious heretics, who 
 are to appear in the Church, and sets forth the certainty of their fate 
 from God's punishment of sin in the past history of the world. He 
 points out the dreadful state of those who, once being saved from sin 
 through Christ, have again turned to their iniquities (chap. ii). He 
 describes a class of scoffers who will appear in the last days, and 
 ask, Where is the promise of Christ's coming? He attributes the 
 conduct of such scoffers to their voluntary ignorance. He declares 
 that God is long-suffering toward men, but that Christ will certainly 
 come to judgment. He affirms that all things shall be dissolved, 
 but that new heavens and a new earth are expected, wherein dwell- 
 eth righteousness. In view of these things he exhorts his readers to 
 diligence and steadfastness, and refers to the difficulties in Paul's 
 Epistles touching these matters (chap. iii). 
 
 THE GENUINENESS OF THIS EPISTLE. 
 
 The writer of the First Epistle styles himself simply " Peter an 
 Apostle of Jesus Christ; " in this he styles himself "Simon Peter," 
 and refers to his being with Christ, and hearing the voice, " This is 
 my beloved Son, in whom I am well pleased," when he was with 
 him in the Mount of Transfiguration, which he calls " the holy 
 mount." In chap, i, 14 he refers to Christ's foretelling his death, 
 which he says is near. In this there seems to be a reference to 
 John xxi, 1 8, 19. In chap, iii, i he states that this is his Second 
 Epistle to his readers. We have already seen that this Epistle, from 
 the first verse, seems to be a general one, while the first is directed 
 to the Churches in certain provinces of Asia Minor. 
 
 Between chapters ii, iii, 1-3, of this Epistle and that of Jude there 
 similarity be- * s a Vei 7 striking resemblance. The most of the dis- 
 
 tweenpassaRes tineuished modern critics regard Jude as the original. 
 
 of Second Peter .. 
 
 and the Epistle The allusions in Jude to the Old Testament and to 
 
 angels seem more natural than they do in Second Peter. 
 And if we look at the matter in the light of probabilities, it is far 
 more probable that Jude should be the original than Second Peter, 
 for if the latter had been already written, there would have been 
 no need of Jude's single chapter, for it was substantially found in 
 Second Peter. But in the latter the similar passages are simply
 
 736 INTRODUCTION TO THE STUDY 
 
 indirect paraphrased quotations. The false teachers who have al 
 ready appeared in Jude are predicted in Second Peter, and after- 
 ward described in such a way as to make it appear that they had 
 already come upon the stage (chap. ii). It is not probable that 
 Peter would have followed Jude in this way. If we look at the 
 style of the two Epistles attributed to Peter, we find that the Gre;k 
 of the Second is more elegant than that of the First. 
 
 Cureton has translated from the Syriac, and published in English, 
 an oration of Melito the philosopher, addressed to An- A re f erence to 
 toninus Caesar. This Melito was bishop of Sardis about second Peter 
 A. D. 160-170. In this work occur the following pas- 
 sages, in which the Second Epistle of Peter seems to have been in 
 the mind of the writer. " At another time there was a flood of 
 waters, and all men and living creatures were destroyed by the mul- 
 titude of waters, and the just were preserved in an ark of wood by 
 the ordinance of God. So also it will be at the last time; there 
 shall be a flood of fire, and the earth shall be burnt up together with 
 its mountains, and men shall be burnt up together with the idols 
 which they have made, and with the graven images which they have 
 worshipped ; and the sea, together with its isles, shall be burnt," ' 
 etc. 
 
 If this is a genuine oration of Melito and the probabilities seem 
 in its favour the passage is the first probable reference to Second 
 Peter, in which alone of the New Testament writings the doctrine of 
 the destruction of the earth by fire is found. Yet it must be remem- 
 bered that the Stoics taught that the world was destined to be de- 
 stroyed by a vast conflagration. And it is possible that the idea in 
 the oration of Melito may have come from that source, though it is 
 more probable that it came from Second Peter. 
 
 Origen, in commenting on the book of Joshua, says, " Peter sounds 
 the two trumpets of his Epistles." 9 But in Eusebius he says : " Peter 
 left one acknowledged Epistle ; let it be granted (that he left) a Sec- 
 ond, for it is a matter of doubt"' (d^>t)3dAAT<M). The Epistle is 
 placed by Eusebius among the disputed books. 4 
 
 It was received as Peter's by the following writers of the fourth cen- 
 ttecognized tury : by Athanasius,* archbishop of Alexandria ; Epipha- 
 fue fouruioeoi n i us * metropolitan bishop of Cyprus ; Ambrose,' bishop 
 U"7. of Milan ; Hilary," bishop of Poitiers in Gaul ; Cyril ' 
 
 ' Spicileg. Syriacum, p. 51. " Horn, vii, in the translation of Rufinus into Latin. 
 1 In his Commentary on Psalm i, preserved by Eusebius, vi, cap. 25. * iii, 25 
 * Oratio i, Contra Arianos, sec. 16. * Haeresis, Ixvi, 64. 
 
 ' Comment, in Epist. ad Philip., cap. i. Lib. i, 18, De Trinitate. 
 
 I'atechesis iv De Decem Dojjmatibus. wcxvi.
 
 OF THE HOLY SCRIPTURES. 73? 
 
 bishop 01 Jerusalem ; Gregory Nazianzen,' who, however, remarks 
 that some thought but one Epistle of Peter should be received ; Ma- 
 carius, 2 the Egyptian ; and by Didymus of Alexandria, who quotes, 
 "Until the day dawn and the day star arise in your hearts " (chapter 
 i, 19), as from the Second Epistle of Peter. 
 
 It was received by Augustine 4 (about A. D. 400) ; and Jerome, 
 of the same age, remarks that " Peter wrote two Epistles which are 
 called Catholic ; of which the second is denied by most persons to 
 be his, on account of its style differing from that of the First Epistle." * 
 It was not received as canonical by Chrysostom, 8 bishop of Constan- 
 tinople ^about A. D. 400). And Cosmas Indicopleustes (about 
 A - D - 535) states that only three Catholic Epistles, that of James, one 
 of Peter, and one of John, were found among the Syrians. 7 
 
 This Epistle obtained a very general recognition among the 
 writers of the fourth century, although they made little use of it. 
 Though not found in the early Peshito-Syriac version, nor in the 
 old Latin version, it was incorporated into the versions of the third 
 and fourth centuries, namely : the Memphitic, Thebaic, ^Ethiopic, 
 and Armenian.* 1 At the time of the Reformation its genuineness 
 
 was denied by Calvin and Erasmus, at a later period by 
 
 _, . , ; . . , , . Tbe opinions of 
 
 Grotius; and in recent times it has been rejected by the reformers 
 
 Semler, Credner, De Wette, Huther, Neander, Bleek, a ^ of m d 
 
 critics fis to LD6 
 
 Ewald, Hilgenfeld, and others. On the other hand, genuineness of 
 the genuineness of the Epistle has been defended by "" 
 Michaelis, Hug, Pott, Heydenreich, and others. It is written with 
 a great deal of vigor, and its moral and religious doctrines har- 
 monize with those of the apostles, as set forth in their undoubted 
 writings. This is especially true of the first chapter, which contains 
 a list of the virtues to be added to faith in order to secure admission 
 into heaven. There is one subject the consummation of all things 
 respecting which it sets forth doctrines peculiar to itself. It rep- 
 resents the heavens and the earth as reserved unto the day of judg- 
 ment, in which " the heavens being on fire shall be dissolved, and 
 the elements shall melt with fervent heat " (chap, iii, 12). Bertholdt 
 regarded the Epistle as genuine with the exception of chapter ii, 
 
 1 Carmmum, lib. i, ii. a Homily xxxix. 
 
 8 Lib. i, xxviii, De Trinitate. At the end of the short exposition of Second Peter 
 by him found in a Latin translation, it is stated, " We must not be ignorant of the 
 fact that this Epistle has been falsified (falsatam esse), which, although in public 
 use (publicetur), is nevertheless not in the Canon." These words appear to bave 
 been added by the translator. * De Doctr. Christ., lib. ii, cap. viii. 
 
 "Da Vir. Illus. Petrus. "Synop. Scrip. Sacr. T Topog. Christ., lib. vii 
 
 8 It was, no doubt, the Gothic version, but it is not found in the fragments of thai 
 rrrsion that have reached us.
 
 738 INTRODUCTION TO THE STUDY 
 
 while Ullmann held to the Petrine origin of chaptei i only. But 
 no good ground exists for making any such distinction ; the whole 
 must be ascribed to one author. 
 
 T 
 
 CHAPTER XL. 
 
 THE EPISTLE OF JUDE. 
 THE PERSON OF JUDE. 
 
 HE writer of the Epistle styles himself " Jude the servant of 
 Jesus Christ, and brother of James." But the question is, 
 whether he is the apostle of that name, the brother of James (Luke 
 vi, 16; Acts i, 13), or a uterine brother of Christ (Matt, xiii, 55)? 
 By the writer calling himself the brother of James, we naturally 
 infer that he means the well-known James, bishop of Jerusalem 
 in the apostolic age, in which case his apostleship would depend on 
 that of James, and stand or fall with it. Yet this inference is not 
 certain. 
 
 Respecting the field of labour of the Apostle Jude nothing is known; 
 and but little is known respecting Jude the brother of Christ (Matt, 
 xiii, 55). It would seem that the latter remained in Judea, as the 
 Emperor Domitian summoned his grandchildren, and made inquiry 
 of them respecting their descent from David. 1 
 
 CONTENTS. 
 
 The Epistle is addressed to the saints in general, and consists of 
 but a single chapter, of twenty- five verses, and is directed against a 
 certain class of ungodly men who are turning the grace of God into 
 lasciviousness, and " denying the only Lord God, and our Lord 
 Jesus Christ." He refers to God's retributive justice in the punish- 
 ment of disobedient Israel, of rebellious angels, and of the wicked 
 men of Sodom and Gomorrah. He gives a vivid figurative descrip- 
 tion of these corrupt men who have crept into the Church, and rep- 
 resents them as speaking evil of dignities, while Michael the arch- . 
 angel did not use reproachful language toward the devil. He says 
 that Enoch prophesied of these men, and of the Lord's coming to 
 judgment. He affirms that the apostles of Christ foretold these las- 
 civious mockers. He exhorts his readers to build themselves upon 
 their most holy faith and keep themselves in the love of God, gives 
 'According to Hegesippus, in Eusebius* Hist. Eccles., iii, cap. xx.
 
 OF THE HOLY SCRIPTURES. 739 
 
 them directions respecting the saving of sinners, and closes with an 
 ascription of praise " to the only wise God our Saviour." 
 
 THE GENUINENESS OP THE EPISTLE. 
 
 The Epistle is not found in the Peshito-Syriac version of the 
 second century, but it is included in the Canon of Mu- opinions of the 
 ratori. We find no use of it made by Irenseus, but it is tothera - 
 quoted by Clement ' of Alexandria, and by Tertullian * of Carthage, 
 as the Apostle Jude's. Origen says : " Jude wrote an Epistle of a 
 few lines, but filled with words powerful in heavenly grace." ' He 
 supposes its author was a brother of Christ. He also says : " If any 
 one would also admit the Epistle of Jude, let him see," 4 etc. It ap- 
 pears that Origen had no doubt that the Epistle was written by Jude 
 the brother of Christ, but the question was, its canonical authority. 
 In the Latin translation of Origen on the Romans, Jude is quoted as 
 an apostle. It is very improbable that Origen thus distinguished 
 him ; it is rather the designation of Rufinus, the translator, who took 
 liberties with the text. 
 
 Eusebius places the Epistle among the disputed books.* He re- 
 marks that it is one of the seven Epistles called Catholic, and that 
 not many of the ancients have mentioned it. "We nevertheless 
 know," says he, " that also these (the Epistles of James and Jude), 
 along with the rest, have been publicly read in most Churches." ' It 
 is contained in the Canon of Cyril T of Jerusalem (about A.D. 350) ; 
 a passage from it is given substantially by Athanasius." It is in the 
 Canon * of Gregory Nazianzen (about A. D. 375), who, however, re- 
 marks that some do not receive it. ao It was received by Didymus " 
 of Alexandria and Rufinus ia of Aquileia in the last half of the fourth 
 century. 
 
 Jerome remarks " on Jude : " He left a short Epistle, which is one 
 of the seven Catholic Epistles. And because testimony from the 
 
 "' ' For I wish you to know,' says Jude, 'that God once having saved the people 
 out cf Egypt,' " etc. (ver. 5). Paedagogi, iii, cap. viii. Also, in reference to certain 
 heresies he says : "I think Jude spoke prophetically concerning these and similar 
 heresies, ' Likewise also these filthy dreamers,' " etc. (ver. 8). Stromata, iii, cap. ii. 
 
 'De Cultu Foem., lib. i, cap. iii. 'Comment, in Matthaeum, tomus x. 
 
 4 Ibid., tomus xvii, 30. Both of these passages we have taken from the Greek text 
 of Origen. 5 Hist. Eccles., iii, cap. 25. 'Ibid., ii, cap. 23. 
 
 T Catechesis iv, De Decem Dogmatibus, xxxvL Comment, in Psalmum, 149 
 
 Carminum, lib. i. w Idem., lib. ii. " He wrote an exposition of it. 
 
 tt Commentarium in Symb. Apostol., 37. " Lib. de Viris Illus. fuilaa.
 
 740 INTRODUCTION TO THE STUDY 
 
 apocryphal Book of Enoch is used in it, it is rejected by very many 
 persons ; nevertheless, it has acquired authority by antiquity and use, 
 and is reckoned among the sacred Scriptures." It was not, how- 
 ever, received by Chrysostom. 1 
 
 The Epistle, though not found in the ancient Syriac version, was 
 contained in the Memphitic, Thebaic, .^Ethiopic, and Armenian ver- 
 sions, and in all probability in the old Latin version, as the Epistle 
 is attributed by Tertullian to Jude the apostle. 
 
 The Christian writers of the early centuries made little use of 
 Modem opin- this Epistle, a fact readily explained by its brevity. 
 lon - Luther judged it to be of little value, and this was 
 
 also the opinion of Grotius, Michaelis, and Schleiermacher. De 
 Wette* attributes it to Jude the brother of the Lord, not to the apos- 
 tle of that name. Neander 8 is also inclined to attribute the Epistle 
 to the same Jude, and to him it is confidently ascribed by Bleek. 
 Hilgenfeld denies that it was written either by Jude the apostle, 01 
 by the brother of the Lord of that name, and refers its composition 
 to a period not earlier than A. D. 140." De Wette * observes that 
 most critics recognize the Epistle as genuine. 
 
 The author does not profess to be an apostle, styling himself 
 Jude's account simply a servant of Jesus Christ, and brother of James ; 
 of himself. an( j n j s i an g ua g e seems to exclude him from the number 
 of the apostles : " But, beloved, remember ye the words which were 
 before spoken by the apostles of our Lord Jesus Christ ; how they 
 told you there should be mockers in the last time." This language 
 also indicates that the Epistle was written after the death of at least 
 most of the apostles. 
 
 Now, the very fact that the author does not wish to pass for an 
 apostle, and intimates that the apostolic age was quite past, takes 
 away from the Epistle all suspicion of forgery. Nor is there any thing 
 in it that might not have been written by Jude the brother of the 
 Lord, who was no apostle. 
 
 But there is a grave objection to its being regarded as the writing 
 Quotations in of the Apostle Jude. In verses 14, 15 he quotes the 
 
 Eplstleof Jude t-lT.ir-r.i-T- L 
 
 from apocrj- apocryphal Book of Enoch, written about the time of 
 ohai writtoga. Christ, as a genuine production: "And Enoch also, the 
 
 1 Synopsis Scrip. Sac. 
 
 3 Einleitung, pp. 407-409. 3 Planting and Training, etc., p. 398. 
 
 4 Einleitung, pp. 642-648. 'Einleitung, pp. 739-744. 9 Einleitung, p. 410 
 
 'This book of Enoch has in modern times been found in the Ethiopic language, 
 and was translated into English and published by Dr. Laurence in 1821. In 1853 
 the celebrated Ethiopic scholar, Dillmann, published a Gernan translation of the 
 book, with explanations.
 
 OF THE HOLY SCRIPTURES. 741 
 
 seventh from Adam, prophesied of these, saying, Behold the Lord 
 cometh with ten thousand of the saints, to execute judgment upon 
 all," etc. Tertullian uses the fact that Jude has quoted this book 
 as a proof of its prophetic character. 1 
 
 In verse 9 the Epistle says : " Yet Michael the archangel, when, 
 contending with the devil, he disputed about the body of Moses, 
 slurst not bring against him a railing accusation, but said, T.ie Lord 
 rebuke thee." Here the writer quotes an apocryphal book called 
 ' AvdXri^ Mwvaewf (The Ascension of Moses), as is evident from the 
 following passage of Origen, in which, speaking concerning the seduc- 1 
 tion of Eve by the serpent, he remarks : " Concerning which, in the 
 Ascension of Moses which little book the Apostle 2 Jude mentions 
 in his Epistle Michael the archangel, disputing with the devil about 
 the body of Moses, says, That the serpent inspired by the devil was 
 the cause of the sin of Adam and Eve." 3 
 
 THE TIME OF ITS COMPOSITION. 
 
 It is probable that the book was written a few years after the de- 
 struction of Jerusalem, as the Epistle itself indicates that the apos- 
 tolic age was past. But there is nothing in it to indicate that it was 
 written in the second century, as the men against whom the Epistle 
 is directed are found in the Church itself, not, as the heretics of 
 the second century, outside of the Church. Heretical teachers are 
 referred to, both in the Apocalypse and in some of the later Epistles 
 of Paul. 
 
 Credner and Ewald place its composition about A. D. 80 ; Bleek 
 a short time before the destruction of Jerusalem. 
 
 CHAPTER XLI. 
 
 THE FIRST EPISTLE GENERAL OF JOHN. 
 
 '"PHIS is one of the seven Catholic Epistles, and is addressed to no 
 
 * particular Church, but is rather of an encyclical character. The 
 
 writer clearly sets forth the design of his writing : " These things 
 
 1 De Cultu Foem., i, cap. iii. 
 
 " This is the Latin translation of Rufinus, and the title Apostle was doubtless 
 given by the translator, as Origen, in his Greek Commentary on Matthew, says that 
 this Jude was one of the brothers of Christ mentioned in Matt, xiii, 55. 
 \ax&v lib. iii, cap. ii, sec. i.
 
 743 INTRODUCTION TO THE STUDY 
 
 have I written unto you that ye may know that ye have eterna. 
 life, and that ye may believe on the name of the Son of God " (chap. 
 v, 13). It is possible that the writer may have had in his mind 
 some of the corrupters of the true doctrine concerning Christ, espec- 
 ially Cerinthus, when he wrote : " This is he who came by water and 
 by blood, Jesus Christ; not by water only but by water and by 
 blood " (chap. v. 6). 
 
 Cerintnus appeared in Asia Minor in the last part of the first cen- 
 tury, and taught " that Jesus was not born of a virgin, but was the 
 son of Joseph and Mary, born like all the rest of men, and became 
 more just and wise (than they). And after his baptism the Christ 
 came down into him from the power above the universe, in the form 
 of a dove. And then he proclaimed the unknown Father, and per- 
 formed miracles; and at last the Christ flew away from Jesus, and 
 Jesus suffered and rose again, but the Christ remained impassible, a 
 spiritual being." ' In opposition to this John declares that Christ 
 passed through baptism and through death. But in the passage: 
 " Every spirit that acknowledgeth that Jesus Christ has come in the 
 flesh is of God ; and every spirit that does not acknowledge Jesus' 
 is not of God " (chap, iv, 2, 3), there seems to be a simple reference 
 to the reception or rejection of Christ. 
 
 The main purpose of the Epistle is to enforce practical piety ; the 
 n purpose of censure of heretical doctrines occupies a subordinate 
 una Epistle. position. The attempt of Hilgenfeld to find in it traces 
 of the gnosticism of the second century is an entire failure. He 
 says that the writer (chap, iii, 9) uses the gnostic expression (nreppa 
 (seed). Now, 'it is true that the Valentinians, who derived their 
 tenets from Valentinus (after A. D. 140), and were refuted by Ir- 
 enaeus (about A. D. 180), did use the word in about the same sense 
 as John, but it is ridiculous to suppose that the author of the Epistle 
 derived the word from them, especially as they made great use of 
 John's Gospel, and doubtless used the Epistle also. 
 
 ITS GENUINENESS. 
 
 We have already seen, in discussing the genuineness of John 9 
 Foiiy accepted Gospel, that this Epistle was everywhere used by the 
 by the cbnreh. ear jy Church from the first part of the second century 
 and was found in all the ancient versions of the New Testament. 
 Nowhere does there appear a doubt of its having been written by 
 
 1 Hippolytus, Hares. Omnium Confutatio, lib. vii, 33. 
 
 1 We follow the critical text of Tischendorf and Tregelles, and omit Xptortor I* 
 , " Christ having come in the flesh."
 
 OF THE HOLY SCRIPTURES. 743 
 
 the Apostle John. It bears the clearest internal evidence of having 
 proceeded from an eyewitness of the life of Christ, and from the 
 author of the fourth Gospel. 
 
 THE TIME OF ITS COMPOSITION. 
 
 As the Apostle John spent the latter part of his life at Ephesus 
 where he died in the beginning of Trajan's reign (about A. D. 98), 
 the Epistle must have been written before that time, though it is 
 impossible to say how long. It was probably written between A. D. 
 80 and 90; but we cannot determine whether before or after the 
 author wrote his Gospel. 
 
 CONTENTS. 
 
 The author begins by declaring that the manifestations of Christ, 
 which have been the objects of his senses, he proclaims to his read- 
 ers, that they may share with him a divine fellowship, and that their 
 joy may be full. He affirms that God is light, and that our profes- 
 sion of communion with him while we walk in darkness is false ; 
 but that by walking in the light we have communion with him, and 
 are cleansed from sin through Christ. We deceive ourselves by 
 denying that we are sinners, and make God a liar ; but by confessing 
 our sins we shall find forgiveness and deliverance (chap. i). 
 
 He states that Christ is our advocate with God, and the propitia- 
 tion for the sins of all men, and that our knowledge of Christ is shown 
 by our obedience to him. He lays great stress upon love, without 
 which we cannot enjoy the light. He describes the different classes 
 of the saints to whom he writes, warns them against the love of the 
 world, refers to antichrists, and presupposes on the part of his 
 readers a divine guidance, and exhorts them to continue in the truth 
 that they may have confidence at Christ's coming (chap. ii). 
 
 He reminds them of their high privileges and glorious hopes, and 
 urges them to holy living. He gives the characteristics of the 
 sinner and the saint, makes love a prominent trait of the latter, and 
 affirms that he who hates his brother is a murderer. He insists 
 upon practical benevolence as a test of our love to God, and relig- 
 ious acts, not mere words. He shows that a good conscience is the 
 ground of confidence toward God. The keeping of his command- 
 ment, to believe in Christ and love each other, gives us confidence 
 in prayer. God's spirit in us is the proof of his presence (chap. iii). 
 
 He exhorts them to try the spirits, affirming that their acceptance 
 or rejection of Christ is the test of their truth, or falsehood. He re- 
 minds them that their victory over the unbelieving men of the world 
 is of God; and affirms that those who are of God hear him (the 
 writer) : hvt those who are not, hearken not. He exhorts them to
 
 744 INTRODUCTION TO THE STUDY 
 
 love each other, as love is the test of their knowing God, and de- 
 clares that perfect love casts out all fear (chap. iv). 
 
 Those who have faith in Christ are born of God, and love him 
 and Christ. To love God is to keep his commandments, which are 
 not oppressive. He affirms that our faith in Christ is the victory 
 over the world ; that Christ came by water and by blood, and that 
 there are three that bear witness, the Spirit, the water and the blood ; 
 that we ought to receive God's testimony concerning his Son >a 
 whom we have eternal life. He says that his design in writing is that 
 they may believe in Christ and have eternal life. He expresses con- 
 fidence in the efficacy of prayer, speaks of a sin unto death, and af- 
 firms that while the whole world lies in wickedness, they who are 
 born of God are kept from sin and from Satan, and that the Son ot 
 God has given them understanding to know Christ, who is the true 
 God and eternal life (chap. v). 
 
 THE GENUINENESS OF CHAP. V, 7. 
 
 "For there are three that bear record in heaven, The Father, the 
 Chapter v, 7, Word, and the Holy Ghost j and these three are one" 
 spurious. The a bove is the reading of the English version, based 
 on the received text, but the verse is certainly spurious, as it is 
 wanting in the three most ancient MSS. of the New Testament, the 
 Codices Vaticanus, and Sinaiticus of the middle of the fourth cen- 
 tury, and the Alexandrinus of the latter part of the fifth century, 
 and in the Peshito-Syriac of about the middle of the second cen- 
 tury. If we begin with chapter v,6, we read as follows in the Codex 
 Vaticanus, and in this very ancient version : " This is he who came 
 by water and by blood, Jesus Christ, not by water only, but by water 
 and by blood. And it is the Spirit that beareth witness, for the 
 Spirit is truth ; because there are three that bear witness, the Spirit 
 and the water and the blood, and the three are for (agree in) one. 
 If we receive the testimony of men," 'etc. The verse under con- 
 sideration is wanting, also, as Tischendorf informs us, in all the 
 Greek MSS. except two, one of the sixteenth century, the other, a 
 Greek-Latin, of about the fifteenth century. It is wanting in the 
 Peshito-Syriac, as we have already seen, and in the Memphitic, 
 Thebaic, Armenian, and ^Ethiopic versions; and in the Codrs 
 
 1 The text of Tischendorf and Tregelles, which gives substantially ti< eding of the 
 three most ancient MSS., is : " Otr6f tanv 6 tX&uv <Jt' Worof /coi dWwK/r^-otJf Xpr- 
 r6f ovu tv T Wort (iftvov AAA* tv r Man nal tv r$ alftarr KCU ri> weHu* ^riv ri 
 paprvpovv, 6n rd irvcvpd karw ^ d^ifdeia. on rpelf elalv 61 itapmaouvrtc, T* wcvfta 
 *tu rb t(5up nal TO ol/ui, KOI ol rpelf eir TO tv tlaiv. Cod. Sinai t. a-uu trvrfymro/ Wtet 
 ; the Cod. Alex, does the same, and has irvetiiian instea* uc rd*T< in
 
 OF THE HOLY SCRIPTURES. 745 
 
 Amiatinus of Florence, of the sixth century, containing Jerome's 
 Latin version. 
 
 Not only is the authority of MSS. and versions opposed to the 
 genuineness of the verse, but Tischendorf remarks : " It is likewise 
 condemned by all the Greek Fathers, who cultivated letters in the 
 first ten centuries after Christ and later. But the interpolation is a 
 Latin one, although it remained unknown to the most ancient and 
 the most celebrated Latin Codices and Fathers themselves, nor was 
 it published by Jerome. It seems first to have made its appearance, 
 according to the testimony of the Speculum, rather in the fourth 
 than in the fifth century, although in these centuries, and also after- 
 ward, there were many, as Augustine and Jerome, as Leo the Great 
 (f 461 ; he copied the whole context of John, in his celebrated Epis- 
 tle to Flavian, read in the Council of Chalcedon) and Facundus 
 (t about 570), who condemned the text by their silence. It is an 
 error of an exceedingly grave character, if any persons, because the 
 Church of Christ teaches the doctrine of the Holy Trinity, have 
 thought that they should especially depend upon these words foisted 
 upon John." 1 Tregelles remarks : " The more ancient Latin Codices 
 do not contain these words. They were first inserted on the margin 
 of Latin Codices, and afterward in the text." 
 
 In the first printed text of the Greek New Testament, published 
 in 1514 as a part of the Complutensian Polyglot, i John y^ ap _ ear . 
 v, 7 was inserted. The famous Erasmus then inquired ance of this 
 
 of Stunica by what authority the editors had inserted pr^ed text of 
 
 that verse, " and whether they really had MSS. so differ- the Greek Test- 
 
 , _ ,..-,, ,-i ament. 
 
 ent from any that Erasmus himself had seen : to this the 
 
 answer was given by Stunica, ' You must know that the copies of the 
 Greeks are corrupted ; that ours, however, contain the very truth.' " 
 Erasmus omitted the verse in the first two editions of his Greek 
 Testament; but in his third edition, published in 1522, he inserted 
 the verse, since, he said, it was contained in a Greek MS. found 
 among the English, that by so doing he might avoid calumny.* After 
 this it made its appearance in " the editions of Robert Stephens, 
 1546-1569 ; in the editions of Beza, 1565-1576. From them it passed 
 over into the editions of the Elzevirs " (Tischendorf). 
 
 1 From the Latin of his Eighth Critical Edition of the Greek Testament 
 'Tregelles, Account of the Printed Text of the New Testament, pp. 9, NX 
 1 He states that he suspects that this verse in the Greek Codex has been inserted 
 to conform it to the Latin Codices, and yet, to avoid calumny, he inserts it No 
 wonder he had not courage enough to embrace the Reformation.
 
 74G INTRODUCTION TO THE STUDV 
 
 CHAPTER XLII. 
 
 THE SECOND EPISTLE OF JOHN. 
 
 T^HIS Epistle contains but thirteen verses, and, according to the 
 * English version, it is addressed to " the elect lady." Neander 
 and Bleek take the Greek word, *vpto, rendered lady, for the proper 
 name of the woman, Kuria, in English Cyria, which De Wette fa- 
 vours. Robinson observes that the name was not " unusual among 
 the Greeks " (Greek Lexicon). This view seems quite probable, as 
 it is likely the woman's name would be given, as the man's name 
 (Gaius) is given in the Third Epistle. The writer expresses his 
 love for her and her children as possessors of the truth, and his joy 
 in finding them walking in the truth, and urges upon them the duty 
 of loving each other, and walking after the commandments of God. 
 He warns them against deceivers, who do not acknowledge that 
 Christ has come in the flesh, and affirms that the only way to possess 
 the Father is to abide in the doctrine of the Son. He warns them 
 against receiving into their house or imploring God's favour upon 
 those who teach a different doctrine. He has much to write, but 
 prefers to speak face to face, as he expects to come shortly to her. 
 
 THE AUTHORSHIP OF THE EPISTLE. 
 
 This Epistle was, doubtless, written by the Apostle John, as it 
 bears the genuine impress of his writing ; nor does the fact that the 
 writer calls himself simply " The elder " militate against the apos- 
 tolic authorship. 
 
 Irenaeus * quotes verse 1 1, with the prefix : " For John, the disciple 
 of the Lord, says." Clement of Alexandria quotes i John v, 16, 17 
 with the remark : " And John is seen to show in the larger Epistle 
 that there are different kinds of sins." 1 This shows that he recog- 
 nized at least two Epistles of John. Tertullian, discussing long 
 quotations which he had taken from the First Epistle of John, speaks 
 of thsm as what John asserts in his " First Epistle " (inpriina quidem 
 Epistola *), which shows his knowledge of one other at least. Cyprian 
 quotes numerous passages from the First Epistle of John ; he tuvet 
 quotes it, however, as the First Epistle, but speaks of it as his Epistle 
 
 1 Contra Hsereses, lib. i, cap. xvi, 3. f Stromata, ii, cap. rr. 
 
 * Liber de Pudicitia, cap. xix.
 
 OF THE HOLY SCRIPTURES. 747 
 
 nor does he give any hint of another. Dionysius, bishop of Alexan 
 dria about the middle of the third century, speaks of a Second and a 
 Third Epistle ascribed to the Apostle John. 1 Origen, after remarking 
 that the Apostle John left one Epistle of a very few lines, adds: 
 " Let it be granted (that he left) a Second and a Third ; for all do not 
 affirm that these are genuine, but both of them are not of a hundred 
 lines.'" Eusebius, after stating that the First Epistle of John was ac- 
 knowledged without dispute, both by the Christians of his time and 
 by the ancients, says: "But the remaining two are disputed." 1 
 
 In the Canon of Muratori two Epistles of John are recognized, of 
 which one is our First Epistle, from which a part of the first verse is 
 given. It is very probable that the other is our present Second Epis- 
 tle. This Epistle, and also the Third of John, are wanting in the 
 ancient Syriac version ; nor were they received by the Syrian 
 Church in the first half of the sixth century, according to the testi- 
 mony of Cosmas Indicopleustes who flourished at that time. It is, 
 however, found in the Memphitic, Thebaic, ^Ethiopic, and Armenian 
 versions. Jerome remarks that the Second and Third Epistles of 
 John "are asserted to be those of the presbyter John, of whom another 
 tomb is shown, even to-day, at Ephesus, although some suppose that 
 both monuments belong to the same John the evangelist.'" 
 
 The Epistle was not in the canon of Chrysostom, but it formed a 
 part of that of Cyril of Jerusalem, of Rufinus, of Epiphanius, and of 
 Augustine. Its genuineness is acknowledged by Bleek and Neander 
 and favoured by De Wette. 
 
 CHAPTER XLIII. 
 
 THE THIRD EPISTLE OF JOHN. 
 
 address of this Epistle is: "The elder to the beloved 
 Gaius." Several persons of this name are mentioned in the 
 Acts of the Apostles (xix, 29; xx, 4), and in the Epistle to the 
 Romans (xvi, 23), and in the First to the Corinthians (chap, i, 14). 
 The same person is referred to in the two passages of Paul's Epis- 
 tles ; and it appears that he lived at Corinth. Another Gaius was 
 of Derbe, and a third is called a Macedonian. But it is not prob- 
 able that any of these is the Gaius here addressed, who probably 
 lived in Asia Minor not very far from Ephesus. 
 
 1 In Eusebius, Hist Ecclcs., vii, cap. xxv. * Ibid., vi, cap. xxv. 
 
 'Ibid., iil, cap. xxiv. *Dr Viris Illustribus. Joannes, 
 
 48
 
 748 INTRODUCTION TO THE STUDY 
 
 The apostle having learned of the piety of Gaius, and the hospi- 
 tality he had shown to Christian missionaries, who were of the Jewish 
 nation it would seem, writes the Epistle to him to express his 
 hearty approval of his conduct. He prays that the prosperity and 
 health of Gaius may be equal to his piety. He states that, notwith- 
 standing the fact that he had written to the Church to aid the Chris- 
 tian missionaries, Diotrephes not only does. not receive them, but 
 also speaks evil of him, and prevents those willing to do this service 
 and casts them out of the Church. 
 
 He exhorts Gaius not to imitate the evil but the good, affirming 
 that he who does good is of God, but that the evil doer has not seen 
 God. He observes that all men and the truth itself bear witness to 
 Demetrius, to which testimony he adds his own. He adds that he 
 has many things to write, but is not willing to put them upon paper, 
 as he expects to see Gaius shortly, and closes with salutations. 
 
 THE GENUINENESS OF THE EPISTLE. 
 
 The Epistle bears the impress of John's style, and, doubtless, 
 was written by him. Though not found in the Peshito-Syriac ver- 
 sion, it was nevertheless incorporated into the Memphitic, Thebaic 
 ^Ethiopic, and Armeniaji versions. It is also found in the canon of 
 Cyril, Rufinus, and Augustine, though it had been placed among the 
 disputed writings by Origen and Eusebius. Gregory Nazianzen 
 reckoned it among the canonical books, though he says that some 
 acknowledge but one Epistle of John. 
 
 Its genuineness is acknowledged by Bleek, 1 and favoured by 
 Neander * and De Wette.* ( We have not been able to find extracts 
 from it in the Fathers of the first three centuries after Christ ; but 
 this is not at all surprising when we remember its brevity, and the 
 fact that it was addressed to a private individual. 
 
 The principal source of doubt respecting the Second and Third of 
 John's Epistles arose from his styling himself " The elder," and from 
 the fact that they were excluded from the Syriac version, and because 
 they had been doubtless but little read in the earliest Church, as 
 being private letters, and had been seldom or never quoted by the 
 earliest ecclesiastical writers. 
 
 Einleitung pp. 696, 697 , * Planting and Training, etc., pp. 409, 410 
 
 1 Einleitung, pp. 403, 404.
 
 OF THE HOLY SCRIPTURES. 749 
 
 CHAPTER XLIV. 
 
 THE APOCALYPSE. 
 
 T^HIS book, which closes the canon of Holy Scripture, is almost 
 * wholly unlike any other of the New Testament. No part of 
 the Bible is so highly symbolical ; it abounds in the most striking 
 and awful imagery. Nothing can be more sublime than the descrip- 
 tion of our Saviour in the opening chapter ; and the mighty events 
 in the history of the Church are set forth in symbols and language 
 of almost equal sublimity. Even the addresses to the seven 
 Churches, which, of course, are didactic, assume an earnest and 
 lofty tone. John reaches the loftiest heights without effort. He 
 borrows, it is true, a part of his imagery from the Hebrew prophets, 
 but he by no means slavishly copies them ; in some respects he sur- 
 passes them. His descriptions are more lifelike and more terrible. 
 He carries us to the throne of God, shows us the eternal, the mag- 
 nificent court of heaven, the glorified saints, and the forces and 
 weapons which the Almighty employs in the destruction of his foes. 
 But amid all the storms of divine wrath, amid thunderings and earth- 
 quakes, he never loses sight of God's people ; he represents them as 
 secure. 
 
 This divine panorama, beginning with the appearance of Christ in 
 a glorified state, unfolds the mighty conflict waged for centuries be- 
 tween Christianity and paganism, resulting in the complete over 
 throw of the latter, and closes with the resurrection of the dead, 
 eternal judgment, and the creation of a new heaven and a new 
 earth wherein dwelleth righteousness. 
 
 ITS LINGUISTIC CHARACTER. 
 
 The linguistic character of the book is remarkable. It has 
 more Hebraisms and irregular constructions than any Nnmerons Hfr , 
 other in the New Testament. The following are exam- braimnsof UM 
 pies of Hebraisms : OZf tdo&rj avrol^ aducfjaai TT)V y^v, A P caI yp". 
 K. r. X. (chap, vii, 2), literally, to whom it was given to them to hurt the 
 earth, the relative and the personal pronoun, both used for the iela- 
 tive simply ; "Ov apitiuijoat avrdv ovdei^ WVVOTO, which no one was 
 able to number // (chap, vii, 9) ; ^v oi)6ei<; dvvarai KXelaai abrjv, 
 which no one is able to shut /'/ (chap, iii, 8) ; &v b dpid/idg ovrwv, 
 of which the number of them (chap, xx, 8). That these construe-
 
 750 INTRODUCTION 1O THE STUDY 
 
 tions are Hebraistic there can be no doubt ; compare for example ; 
 
 ra~l.pT itftf, which its seed in //, for wherein is its seed (Gen. i, 12). 
 i- * -i 
 
 Hebraistic also is the construction, "OTTOV ^ ywr) icd&ijTai en* avruv, 
 where the woman sitteth upon them (chap, xvii, 9), for whereon the 
 woman sitteth. The following passage is to be explained as Hebra- 
 istic : Kal 8rav S&aovai . . . neoovvTai . . . -rrpoaKw^ffovot . . . |3aAo0i 
 " And when the living creatures will give glory and honour and thanks 
 to him that sitteth upon the throne, to him that liveth for ever and 
 ever, the four and twenty elders will fall down before him that sit- 
 teth upon the throne, and they will worship him that liveth for ever 
 and ever, and they will cast their crowns before him " (chap, iv, 
 9, 10). To indicate what is customary, the Hebrew language uses 
 the future tense, showing that the state or action is so, not only now, 
 but will be for the future. Hence the passage indicates what is 
 continually done in heaven. 
 
 The use of the participle is peculiar; instead of its being con- 
 Pecuiiaritteain strue d with a finite verb, it sometimes stands absolute in 
 the use of the the nominative form : %<&>, holding in his right hand ; 
 
 ), a sword proceeding from his mouth (chap. 
 
 i, 16) ; &ii TOV &p6vov Kadrjpevos, one sitting on the throne (chap, iv, 2), 
 etc. We are strongly inclined to regard this construction as He- 
 braistic. For a similar use of the participle compare Ecclesiastes 
 i, 4 : N3 ini ^?rt in, one generation goes, another comes. *O M*#a)A 
 ital ol (fyyeAAot abrov -no^e^aat pera TOV dpdKovrof, 1 Michael and his 
 angels to fight (were to fight, foughi) with the dragon (chap, xii, 7). 
 The construction of the infinitiveffoAe/iJ)(7<M, to fight, with the nomina- 
 tive, seems to be without a parallel in Greek,* but it is clearly He- 
 braistic, and the verb flvat is to be supplied before it. Compare m- 
 nifej6, whatto do, whatis to do(z Kings iv, 13)? 'JjnBrfnSrWV.y^UwiJ 
 to save me, that is, he is to save me, does save me (Isa xxxviii, 20) ; and 
 ttriim* 1 ?, not to drive out, did not drive out, or could not drive out 
 (Judges i, 19). Quite similar is the construction, fj k^ovoia airruv 
 adticfiaai, their power to hurt (chap, ix, 10). 
 
 Exceedingly harsh and irregular is the following passage : 'Ev 
 fytepais 'Avre/Trof 6 fidprvf ftov b mor6$ pov, 6$ aTTSKravdr] Trap' 
 Srcov b aa.ra.vat; icaroiitei (chap, ii, 13), in the days Antipas my faithful 
 martyr, who was slain among you where Satan dwelleth. Here we 
 must supply the verb to be or to live, to agree with Antipas. The con- 
 struction is probably Hebraistic, as the verb to be is often omitted in 
 the Hebrew language where it is required in Greek, and especially in 
 
 'The text adopted by Tregelles ; Tischendorf omits rvS before 
 * Different is the emphatic abrdf with an infiniti.
 
 OF THE HOLY SCRIPTURES. 751 
 
 English. 'Arrd 6 t5v Kal 6 fp> ical b epftopevos, From him who is, and 
 who was, and who is to come (chap, i, 4). Here we would expect the 
 genitive after and ; it is probable, however, that the phrase 6 6>v was 
 regarded as indeclinable. 'O VIKWV, 66>aw ovrw na&iaai /*er' pov t 
 *. T. A< , The one who conquers^ to him will I give to sit down with me, etc. 
 (chap, iii, 21), is obviously an anacoluthon. Anomalous is the con- 
 necting of the present and the future tense by at: "Ep^ojuat ooi 
 cat h,ivr\<jM TJjfv kvxviav aov, K. T. A., I am coming to thee quickly, and 
 will remove thy candlestick (chap, ii, 5). 
 
 There are some other irregularities, but not of so striking a char- 
 acter. But, after all, the most of the language is as regular in its 
 construction as it is in the other books of the New Testament, and 
 scarcely less so than in some parts of Thucydides. 
 
 THE TIME OF ITS COMPOSITION. 
 
 Irenaeus, bishop of Lyons (A. D. 177-202), is the first writer who 
 bears testimony to the time of the composition of the Moft probably 
 Apocalypse : " For had it been necessary," says he, " that written in the 
 his name (the name of the Apocalyptic beast) should be 
 clearly announced at this present time, it certainly would have been 
 proclaimed by him who saw the Apocalypse. For it was seen not 
 a long time ago, but almost in our own generation, at the end of the 
 reign of Domitian." 1 According to this statement, the book was 
 written about A. D. 95, as Domitian 's reign extended from A. D. 81 
 to 96. This testimony is valuable from the fact that Irenseus spent 
 the early part of his life in Asia Minor, and was acquainted with 
 Polycarp, a disciple of John. Yet Irengeus may have obtained no 
 traditional knowledge upon the subject, and may have determined 
 the time by critical conjecture. 
 
 Clement of Alexandria, president of its catechetical school (A. D. 
 191-200), states that John "returned to Ephesus from the island 
 Patmos, when the tyrant was dead." 8 He does not state what tyrant, 
 and yet it is probable that by this term he designates the emperor 
 who was pre-eminently the tyrant, Nero, But if Domitian is the 
 tyrant to whom Clement refers, then the return of John from Patmos 
 could not have been earlier than the close of the year 96, as Do- 
 mitian was assassinated in September of that year. John probably 
 did not live more than two or three years after his return, as Ire- 
 naeus states that he lived until the times of Trajan, whose reign 
 began A. D. 98. Nor is it probable that he survived long after the 
 beginning of this monarch's reign, as at this time he must have been 
 between ninety and one hundred years of age. 
 
 'Lib v, cap. xxx, sec. 3. *Lib. Quis Dives Salvetur, cap. xliL
 
 752 INTRODUCTION TO THE STUDY 
 
 Now, the incidents that Clement relates of John, after the return 
 Nero identical from Patmos to Ephesus, cannot well be crowded intc 
 mentioned!)/ two or tnr ee years, and some of them do not suit a man 
 Clement. o f his age at that time. Clement states that after John 
 returned to Ephesus from Patmos he went by invitation to the 
 a^ighbouring nations, where he appointed bishops and organized 
 Churches, and while engaged in this work he saw a young man of 
 fine form and mien, whom he intrusted to the bishop of the place, to 
 be trained in Christianity, after which the apostle departed to Ephe- 
 sus. "The presbyter, having taken home the young man intrusted 
 to him, nourished, kept, cherished, and finally instructed him." But 
 after he had bapti/ed the young man, he somewhat relaxed his dili- 
 gent care of him. In the course of time the young man is corrupted 
 by some of his own age, whom he forms into a band of robbers, 
 and becomes their leader. John visited the bishop, and demanded of 
 him the ward he had committed to him. The apostle was informed 
 that the young man was dead to God and had become a robber, 
 upon which, exhibiting strong marks of grief, John borrowed a horse 
 and went in pursuit of him, and was conducted by a guide to his 
 abode. The young man is brought to a knowledge of his guilt, 
 weeps bitterly, and is restored to the Church. 1 
 
 It seems utterly impossible, at least very improbable, that all this 
 could have occurred after the year 96, and that John at his great 
 age should have travelled on foot through the regions adjacent to 
 Ephesus. Hence we are led to infer that his return from Patmos 
 must have been years earlier, and that the tyrant to whom Clement 
 refers was Nero. 
 
 Origen, in commenting on Matt, xx, 23, remarks : " The king of 
 the Romans, as tradition teaches, condemned John, who bore testi- 
 mony on account of the word of truth, to the island of Patmos. 
 John shows the following things concerning his own testimony, not 
 stating who condemned him, affirming in the Apocalypse : ' I John, 
 who am your brother,' etc., . . . and it appears that he saw the 
 Apocalypse in the island."' From this it seems that Origen was 
 not certain what emperor had banished John to Patmos. 
 
 Tertullian of Carthage, speaking of the sufferings of Peter and 
 Paul at Rome, says : " Where the Apostle John, alter he had been 
 thrown into boiling oil and received no injury, is banished to an 
 
 1 We have abridged Clement's account, which he calls " no fable, but a real nar- 
 rative respecting John the Apostle." Quis Dives Salvetur? cap. xlii. Clement as 
 early as A. D. 170 or 175 travelled extensively in western Asia and in southern Europe, 
 and in various places he had Christian teachers. The narrative bears the stamp oi 
 troth. * Tomus xvi. 6.
 
 OF THE HOLY SCRIPTURES. 733 
 
 island." 1 It would seem from the context that Tertullian referred 
 the banishment to the time of Nero. No reliance is to be placed 
 upon the statement that John was thrown into boiling oil. Had it 
 been true, we doubtless would have heard of it from some other 
 writers. 
 
 Eusebius, speaking of the persecution of the Christians by Do- 
 
 mitian, remarks : " At this time it is reported (Karevei 
 
 , , \ i i , Mention ot the 
 
 Aoyo?, the story goes) that the Apostle, and at the same time of banisn- 
 
 time evangelist, John, being still alive, was condemned entb y Eu *>- 
 to dwell in the island Patmos on account of his testimony rome. 
 to the divine word." 5 
 
 Epiphanius in the last half of the fourth century states that John 
 returned from Patmos in the time of Claudius Caesar ' (A. D. 41-54) 
 Jerome says that " John wrote the Apocalypse when banished to the 
 island Patmos by Domitian, who, after Nero, stirred up a second 
 persecution in the fourteenth year of his reign." 4 
 
 The titlepage of the Apocalypse in the Syriac version states that 
 the book was written in Nero's time.* The value of this testimony, 
 however, is diminished by the fact that the present version of the 
 Apocalypse in Syriac does not belong to the Peshito, but to the 
 Philoxenian version, made about A. D. 500. 
 
 There is nothing satisfactory in the foregoing statements of the 
 early fathers respecting John's banishment, yet the most of the tes- 
 timony points to the reign of Domitian as the period during which 
 John's abode in Patmos occurred, and consequently when the book 
 was written. But internal evidence points rather to the latter part 
 of Nero's reign as the time of its composition (about A. D. 68). The 
 author himself states that he was in the island called Patmos for 
 the word of God and for the testimony of Jesus (dia rdv Adyov TOV 
 Qeov Kal dta TT/V jwaprvpmv 'Irjaov) (chap, i, 9). The inference to be 
 drawn from this is, that he either took refuge there to escape his 
 persecutors, or was banished there. It is true that if Patmos had 
 been a populous island at the time we might suppose that he went 
 there to preach the gospel. But it is incredible that John would 
 leave the populous cities to preach the gospel in an island that must 
 have been but sparsely populated. From this passage we infer that 
 the book was written during a persecution of the Christians, and 
 there are other passages that indicate the same thing. 
 
 1 Ubi Apostolus Joannes, posteaquam, in oleum igneum demersus, nihil passus eat, 
 in insulam relegatur. Prsescrip., cap. xxxvL * Hist. Eccles., in, cap. xviii. 
 
 1 Haeresis li, cap. 12. * De Viris Illus. Joannes. 
 
 * " The revelation that was made to the Evangelist John from God in the isle of 
 Patmos. to which he was banished by Nero Caesar." Bagster's Edition.
 
 7o4 INTRODUCTION TO THE STUDY 
 
 During the first century there were but two persecutions of any 
 note, those of Nero and Domitian. Under the reign of 
 
 prot>- 
 
 ability of the one of these Caesars, our book, in all probability, had 
 SKSSpS its origin. Respecting the persecution of Nero, Neander 
 in the time of remarks : " This persecution was not, indeed, in its im- 
 mediate effects, a general one ; but fell exclusively on 
 the Christians in Rome, accused as the incendiaries of the city , /e* 
 what had occurred in the capital could not fail of being attended 
 with serious consequences, affecting the situation of the Christians, 
 whose religion, moreover, was an unlawful one, throughout all the 
 provinces." 1 In reference to Domitian 's reign, he remarks: "The 
 charge of embracing Christianity would, in this reign, be the most 
 common one after that of high treason (crimen majestatis). In 
 consequence of such accusations many were condemned to death, 
 or to the confiscation of their property and banishment to an 
 island.'" The declaration made to John, " Thou must prophesy 
 again before many peoples, and nations, and tongues, and kings " 
 (chap, x, n), is more suitable to John in the time of Nero than at 
 the close of the reign of Domitian, when John was very old, and had 
 but two or three years to live. 
 
 " Rise, and measure the temple of God, and the altar, and them that 
 written before wors ^P therein. But the court which is without the 
 the destruction temple, leave out, and measure it not; for it is given 
 of Jerusalem. Q ent j les . an( j the noly city shall tney trea( j 
 
 under foot forty and two months " (chap, xi, i, 2). It seems clear 
 from this passage that the Jewish Temple was still standing when 
 the book was written ; but the Temple perished when Jerusalem was 
 taken by Titus, A. D. 70. With this passage compare Luke xxi, 24 : 
 " And Jerusalem shall be trodden down of the Gentiles, until the 
 times of the Gentiles shall be fulfilled." 
 
 In the description of the great whore who had corrupted the earth, 
 sitting upon a beast with seven heads, the angel declares : " The 
 seven heads are seven mountains [the seven hills on which Rome 
 stood], on which the woman sitteth. And there are seven kings : 
 five are fallen, and one is, and the other is not yet come ; and when 
 he cometh, he must continue a short space. And the beast that 
 was, and is not, even he is the eighth, and is of the seven, and goeth into 
 perdition" (chap, xvii, 9-11). With the data here furnished, we 
 are able to determine approximately the time of the composition of 
 the book. Five kings of Rome are fallen ; these would be Julius 
 Caesar, Augustus, Tiberius, Caius Caligula, and Claudius. "One 
 is," that is Nero ; " the other has not yet come ; and when he cometh, 
 'Church History, voL i, 95 'Ibid., p. 96.
 
 OF THE HOLY SCRIPTURES. 755 
 
 fie must continue a short space ;" that is Galba, who reigned but 
 seven months. " And the beast that was, and is not, even he is the 
 eighth, and is of the seven, and goeth into perdition." This seems 
 to refer to Nero, who was expected to reappear upon the stage of 
 the Roman world. Tacitus remarks : " About the same time 
 (A. D. 70) Achaia and Asia were troubled by a false alarm, as if 
 Nero [who had been dead about two years] was about to make hi* 
 appearance. Various were the reports concerning his death, and 
 for this reason many pretended that he was alive, and not a few 
 really believed it." ' " Let him that hath understanding count the 
 number of the beast ; for it is the number of a man ; and his num- 
 ber is six hundred and threescore and six" (chap, xiii, 18). Ir- 
 enaeus* suggests names, the letters of which will make 666, among 
 which he gives AATEINO2 (LATINOS), which is favoured by 
 Bleek. 3 But it is stated that the number of the Apocalyptic beast 
 is the number of a man, and therefore it is better to suppose, with 
 Fritzsche, Benary, Hitzig, Reuss, Stuart, and Mangold, that Nero is 
 intended, whose name in Hebrew, jiiJ iDp, KESAR NERON, makes 
 666 ; thus : p=ioo ; D=6o; 1=200 ; ^=50 ; 1=200 ; 1=6 ; 2=50. This 
 would add something to the proof that the book was written in Nero's 
 reign. 
 
 Here the question arises, What light does the linguistic charactei 
 of the work throw upon the time of its composition ? The style ** 
 The Greek of John's Gospel is more regular and freer 
 from Hebraisms than is that of the Apocalypse. To the 
 hypothesis, which we hold, that both books proceeded from the 
 same author, this difference of style offers no objection, but is easily 
 explained, if we suppose the Apocalypse to have been composed 
 in Nero's reign. This being the earlier work, gives us a style and 
 language in which the Hebrew idiom * still cleaves to the author ; 
 while the Gospel, written probably fifteen or twenty years later, 
 exhibits a higher degree of Grecian culture, the result of a long 
 abode in Ephesus. But on the hypothesis that both books were 
 written by the same author about the same time, the difference of 
 language is not so easily explained. The composition of the book 
 is placed in the time of Galba (A. D. 68-69) by Lilcke,* De Wette,' 
 
 ' Sub idem tempus Achaia atque Asia falso exterritae, velut Nero adventaret ; vario 
 sup -it exitu ejus rumore, eoque pluribus vivere earn fingentibus credentibasqae. Hist 
 lib. ii, cap. 8. 
 
 He gives ETAN6AS, AATEINO2, and TEITAN. Lib. v, cap. xxx, sec. 3. 
 
 *Einleitung, p. 715. 
 
 4 It is probable that John left Palestine some time before the Jewish war, perhaps 
 about A. D. 65-67. * Die Offenbarung des Johannes, p. 840. * Einleitung, p. 416.
 
 756 INTRODUCTION TO THE STUDY 
 
 Neander, 1 Ewald, and Gieseler; 1 in the time of Nero by Professor 
 Stuart ;' in A. D. 68-70 by Bleek ; * at the end of 68 or beginning of 
 69 by Hilgenfeld.* Hengstenberg * and Ebrard T place it near the 
 end of the reign of Domitian (95-96). But as the book was written 
 in the midst of the persecution of the Church, it is best to place its 
 composition not later than the first part of A. D. 63, as Nero died in 
 the June of that year. Although I have been led to this conclusion 
 I am fully aware of the force of the arguments for the Domitian date, 
 and confess that the evidence for either view is far from conclusive 
 
 (/ THE AUTHORSHIP OF THE APOCALYPSE. 
 
 "The Revelation of Jesus Christ, which God gave unto him, to 
 show unto his servants things which must shortly come to pass; 
 and he sent and signified it by his angel unto his servant John: 
 who bare record of the word of God, and the testimony of Jesus 
 Christ, whatever he saw " (chap, i, i, 2). Such is the statement of 
 the author respecting himself. He further states : " I John, who 
 also am your brother, and companion in tribulation, and in the 
 kingdom and patience in Jesus, was in the isle that is called Pat- 
 mos, for the word of God and for the testimony of Jesus," * . r. A. (ch. 
 i, 9). The last part of this verse refers to the testimony the author 
 bore to the truth of Christianity as an eyewitness of the sufferings 
 and glory of Christ. In the words, " his servant John : who bore tes- 
 timony to the word of God," etc., we think there is a designation 
 of the Apostle John. And who but an apostle would take it upon 
 himself to 'address the Churches in Asia in such an authoritative 
 tone, to chasten and to rebuke them ? Could John the presbyter, to 
 whom some have ascribed the book, be expected during the lifetime 
 of the Apostle John to do this ? * But little, indeed, is known of this 
 John, and nothing to indicate such a position as the author of this 
 book held, to whom it is said, " Thou must prophesy again before 
 many people, and nations, and tongues, and kings " (chap, x, n). 
 
 It might be supposed that John would not have inserted his name 
 in the book, as he has not done it in his Gospel, nor in his Epistles 
 Yet he clearly indicates that he is the author of the Gospel by stat- 
 ing, " And he that saw it bare record, and his record is true," etc, 
 
 'Planting and Training, pp. 397, 398. 'Church History, vol. i, p. 97. 
 
 "Commentary on Apocalypse, voL i, p. 274. *Einleitung, p. 723. 
 
 * Einleitung, p. 447. Die Offenbarung Johannes, p. 30. 
 T Wissenschaft. Kritik. der Evang. Geschichte, p. 1241. 
 
 * We have followed the critical Texts of Tischendorf and Tregelies. 
 
 * If the book had been written before the arrival of the Apostle John in Ephesut 
 Jhis objection to its having been composed by the presbyter would be invalid.
 
 OF THE HOLY SCRIPTURES. 757 
 
 (chap, xix, 35). Prophets and the writers of Epistles insert their 
 names in their works. In this statement, however, we must except 
 the Epistle to the Hebrews and the Epistles of John, which are 
 anonymous. On the other hand, the writers of sacred history omit 
 their names in their works. We should, therefore, look for the 
 name of the author in the Apocalypse, because it is both epistolary 
 and prophetic. 
 
 THE TESTIMONY OF THE EARLY CHURCH RESPECTING ITS AUTHOR. 
 
 Justin Martyr, in his Dialogue with Trypho the Jew, written 
 about A. D. 150, supports his millenarian views by unanimous 
 quoting the Apocalypse : " Since also among us a certain ^ tl ^ es fll ^ 
 man by the name of John, one of the apostles of Christ, centuries, 
 in the revelation made to him, prophesied that those who believe in 
 our Christ will spend a thousand years in Jerusalem." 1 Irenseus, 
 bishop of Lyons (A. D. 177-202), referring to the kings of the Ro- 
 man empire, says : " John the disciple of the Lord in the Apocalypse 
 showed," etc.* Clement of Alexandria quotes the Apocalypse with 
 the remark, "As John says in the Apocalypse." 1 Tertullian ot 
 Carthage, of nearly the same age (about A. D. 200), remarks: "The 
 Apostle John in the Apocalypse describes a sword proceeding from 
 the mouth of God." 4 
 
 Eusebius states that Theophilus, bishop of Antioch (A. D. 169- 
 180), wrote a work "with the title Concerning the Heresy of Her- 
 mogenes, in which he made use of testimonies from the Apocalypse 
 of John." 4 He also says that Melito, bishop of Sardis (about A. D. 
 169), wrote a work On the Devil and the Apocalypse of John.* 
 
 Apollonius (about A. D. 190), in a work against the Montanists. 
 " makes use of testimonies from the Apocalypse of John, and relates 
 that a dead man in Ephesus had been raised to life through the 
 divine power by this same John." 7 He must have ascribed the book 
 to the Apostle John, as we can hardly suppose he would have attrib- 
 uted to any other the power to raise the dead. 
 
 In the account of the sufferings of the Christian martyrs of Lyons 
 and Vienna, written by Christians of those cities to the Christians 
 of Asia and Phrygia (about A. D. 177), we have the following ref- 
 erences to the Apocalypse : " That the Scripture may be fulfilled, 
 
 1 Koi kneilq KCU Trap' jy/utv avqp rtf y bvopa 'Iwdvvi/f, elf ruv airoardXuv ro Xpurroti, 
 h> &iroKaM>if>ei yevopivy ai>r^> x^ ia & r f fot^ffetv kv 'lepovoaXrifi rovf T$ finertpv 
 wurrttiaavrac npoeffirevoe. Sec. 8l. 
 
 *Lib. v, cap. xxvi, I. 'Strom., vi, cap. xiii. 
 
 4 Adversus Marc., iii, cap. xiv. * Hist. Eccles., iv, cap.-xxiv. 
 
 s Ibid., iv, cap. xxvi. T In Eusebius, v, cap. xviii
 
 738 INTRODUCTION TO THE STUDY 
 
 He that is unjust, let him be unjust still 1 (Apoc. xxii, n); "follow- 
 ing the Lamb wherever he goes " (chap, xiv, 4). 
 
 Cyprian of Carthage (about A. D. 250) in various places quotes 
 the Apocalypse.* Origen (about A. D. 230) exclaims : " What shall 
 I say concerning John, who leaned upon the breast of Jesus, and 
 who left one Gospel, acknowledging that he was able to write so 
 many that not even the world could contain them ? He also wtott 
 the Apocalypse" etc.* 
 
 Hippolytus (about A. D. 240), according to Jerome, wrote a com- 
 mentary on the Apocalypse, and in his Refutation of all Heresies 
 attributes the Apocalypse to John.* On his Cathedra, discovered in 
 1551 (belonging probably to the sixth century), is inscribed as one 
 of his works : ATroAoyfo V7rp TOV Kara 'Idtdvvifv ivayyeMav xai OTTO- 
 Kakvrpeug, A Defence of the Gospel of John and the Apocalypse* In 
 the Canon of Muratori (about A. D. 160) it is stated : "We receive 
 the Apocalypse of John." 
 
 The Apocalypse, however, was not received into the Peshito- 
 Not m the Syriac version of the second century, though Hug has 
 Peuhito-syriac attempted to show ' that this version originally contained 
 the Apocalypse, and that in the fourth century it was 
 gradually left out of the books composing it. He refers to the fact 
 that the Syrian writer, Ephraem (about A. D. 350), quotes the Apoca- 
 lypse, which he contends Ephraem could not have done unless the 
 book had been translated into Syriac, as he did not understand 
 Greek. 7 But inasmuch as Ephraem took with him in his travels a 
 Greek interpreter, it by no means follows that he could not trans- 
 late a few passages in the Apocalypse, or in any other book of the 
 New Testament. How many men there are who can read foreign 
 languages, but can not speak them with any degree of fluency ! But 
 it is not easy to believe that if the Apocalypse had originally formed 
 
 1 In Eusebius, v, cap. L 
 
 * Lib. de Opere et Eleemos., xiv ; Lib. de Bono Patientire, xxi. 
 
 *T/ del irepl TOV avairta6vTQf Xeyeiv em ro <rrij&o{ TOV 'lijffoii, 'ludwav. . . . ' 
 A <u TTJV 'AiroKdXwftiv. . . . In Eusebius, Hist. Eccles., vi, 25. 
 
 * Page 392. * See Gieseler, Church History, voL i, pp. 225, 236. 
 Einleitung, Vierte Auf. Erst Theil., pp. 306-308. 
 
 ' Theodoret states that Ephraem had not enjoyed a Greek education (Hist. EccL, 
 lib. iv, cap. xxvi), and similar is the statement of Sozomen (Hist. Eccles., lib. Hi, 
 cap. xvi). On the other hand, Photius asserts that Ephraem was not meanly edu- 
 cated in the Greek language (vaiievdelf At KOI TTJV 'EXXr/va yhuaoav OVK &yevvuf). 
 Codex ccxxviiL Assemani affirms that Gregory of Nyssa, Amphilochins in his life 
 of Basil, Metaphrastes in his life of Ephraem, and all the Syrians, show that Ephraem 
 was acquainted with Greek, and that his knowledpi of this tongue u evident from 
 his writings. Bibliotheca Orientalis, torn, i, p. 55 ; from the Feabody Library, Bait
 
 OF THE HOLY SCRIPTUK S. 759 
 
 a part of the Peshito version, it would have been left out at a subse- 
 quent time. It, indeed, seems strange that the Apocalypse, which 
 we have seen was so well attested in the second century, formed no 
 part of this version which belongs to the centurj . Nor is it easy to 
 explain the omission. It is, however, possible, that the authors of 
 the version were strong opponents of the Millenarians, who derived 
 th?ir chief support from the Apocalypse, and that they feared the 
 translation of that book would disseminate the Millenarian doctrine 
 among the Syrian Churches. 1 It would appear from Eusebius that 
 Caius, presbyter of Rome (about A. D. 200), attributed the Apoca- 
 lypse to Cerinthus : " But Cerinthus," says Caius, " who by means of 
 Revelations, as having been written by a great Apostle [John ?], by 
 feigning wonderful things as having been shown him by angels, in- 
 troduces them to us, affirming that after the resurrection the king- 
 dom of Christ will be upon the earth," etc.* 
 
 The Alogians (about A. D. 180) attributed both the Gospel of 
 John and the Apocalypse to Cerinthus, who flourished in the last 
 part of the first century. 8 From the foregoing testimonies it is seen, 
 that until the middle of the third century the testimony to the 
 Apocalypse as the work of the Apostle John is almost unanimous. 
 This is of the highest importance; and the testimony of Justin andlre- 
 nseus is especially valuable, as the Dialogue of the former, in which 
 the Apocalypse is ascribed to the Apostle John, was held in Ephe- 
 sus about fifty years after the death of John ; and Irenaeus was born 
 in Asia Minor, and lived there about A. D. 150,* and was acquainted 
 with Polycarp. According to the testimony of Andreas in the last 
 part of the fifth century, Papias, bishop of Hierapolis, also received 
 the Apocalypse. 
 
 The first important opponent of the apostolic origin of the book 
 was Dionysius, bishop of Alexandria (A. D. 248-265). DionyslU8 j^ 
 
 In his work on the Promises he gives the unfavour- doubter of its 
 
 i_i e c i j ^i. genuineness, 
 
 able views of some of his predecessors concerning the 
 
 Apocalypse, and then states his own opinions. He affirms that the 
 book is covered with such a thick veil that he cannot penetrate its 
 meaning, yet confesses that it may have a sense too deep for 
 
 1 In illustration of (his, we may cite what Philostorgius (about A. D. 425) says of 
 U 16 las, bishop of the Goths: " He translated into their language all the Scriptures, 
 excepC, indeed, the Kings [two Books of Samuel and two of Kings], since they con- 
 tain a history of wars, and the (Gothic) nation is fond of war, and needs rather a 
 bridle upon their propensity to war-than a spur to it." Eccles. Hist., lib. ii, 5. 
 
 * Hist. Eccles., iii, 28. 
 
 * Epiphanius, after speaking both of the Gospel and the Apocalypse, sayi : " They 
 (the Alogians) affirm that these do not belong to John, but to Cerinthus." Haer., li, 3 
 
 * At a later period he was bishop of Lyons.
 
 760 INTRODUCTION TO THE STUDY 
 
 him. He grants that the book was written by a John, bjt not the 
 apostle of that name, since the style of the Apocalypse differs from 
 that of the Gospel and the Epistles of that apostle. He thinks the 
 book was written by the presbyter John of Ephesus. The acute 
 objections of this bishop have furnished the staple for the subse- 
 quent attacks on the Apocalypse. 
 
 The opposition of Dionysius to the Apocalypse evidently, in part 
 causes of the at least S rew out of his relations to the Chiliasts. A 
 apposition of sensual Chiliasm was prevailing in the province of Ar- 
 
 Dionysius* 
 
 senoe, the bishop of which was Nepos. So far did the 
 Chiliasts carry their fanatical views, that whole Churches separated 
 themselves from communion with the mother Church at Alexandria. 
 Dionysius refuted them. It would be very natural for him to de- 
 grade, as much as possible, the book which was the chief support of 
 the sect that had given him so much trouble. 
 
 Eusebius, of Caesarea Palestine, the Church historian, who flour- 
 Theopinionsof * slie d * n the ^ rst P art of tne fourth century, doubts the 
 others of the apostolic origin of the Apocalypse. " After these (canon- 
 ical Scriptures)," says he, " is to be placed, if thought fit, 
 the Apocalypse of John, concerning which, at the proper time, we 
 will explain the (various) opinions." Again, "besides these, as I 
 said, if it is thought fit, (let) the Apocalypse of John (be added), 
 which some, as I said, reject, but others place among the acknowl- 
 edged Scriptures." ' It appears from the foregoing quotations that 
 the criticism of Dionysius perplexed him. 
 
 About the middle of the fourth century the Apocalypse is quoted 
 as an authority by Athanasius ; * it is ascribed to John the evangelist 
 by Gregory * of Nyssa, by Ambrose 4 of Milan, by Didymus * of Alex- 
 dria, by Epiphanius * of Cyprus, and by Basil the Great T of Cappa- 
 docia, and was contained in the canon of Rufinus ' of Aquileia, 
 
 ' Hist. Eccles., iii, cap. xxv. *Oratio i, Contra Arianos, n. 
 
 'In quoting Apoc. iii, 15, he says, " I heard the Evangelist John in hidden things, 
 saying," etc., in Suam Ordinationem. Also in Com. in Psalm, he quotes the Apoc- 
 alypse as John's, cap. x. 
 
 4 He observes, "John the evangelist says there was a red horse upon which the 
 Lord was sitting." De Trinitate, cap. xxvii. 
 
 * He remarks, "John the theologian said in the Gospel, . . . but in the Apocalypse, 
 1 He who is, and who was,' " etc. De Trinitate, lib. i, cap. xv. 
 
 Haeresis li, cap. xxxiv. It is omitted in the Canon of Scripture of the Council 
 of Laodicea (about A. D. 363). 
 
 T He quotes, as belonging to the Evangelist, passages from John's Gospel, and 
 adds, "And in the Apocalypse, 'He who was, and who is,"' etc., after which he 
 gives passages as Paul's, from which it is clear that he ascribes it to the Evangelist. 
 Adversus Eunomium, lib. iv, sec. I. 'Comment, in Symb. Apostolic., 37.
 
 OF THE HOLY SCRIPTURES. 761 
 
 These six writers flourished in the last half of the fourth century. 
 Abut the same time it is quoted as an authority by Macarius.' 
 The distinguished biblical scholar, Jerome, who flourished in the 
 last part of the fourth century and in the beginning of the fifth, 
 ascribes the Apocalypse to the Apostle John.* About the same time 
 it was received as canonical by Augustine. 3 It is attributed to the 
 Apostle John by Cyril 4 of Alexandria (A. D. 412-444). It was con- 
 tained in the Memphitic, Thebaic, ^Ethiopic, and Armenian versions, 
 and in all probability in the Gothic.' Although not found in the 
 Peshito-Syriac version, it is quoted as canonical Scripture by 
 Ephraem " the Syrian (f 378). On the other hand, it is omitted in 
 the catalogue of Cyril T of Jerusalem (about A. D. 350). Gregory 
 Nazianzen (in the last half of the fourth century) omits the Apoca- 
 lypse in his canon of Scripture, and remarks after naming the seven 
 Catholic Epistles : " You have them all. If there is any (book) 
 besides these, it is not genuine." ' In another place, however, he 
 says : " Some receive the Apocalypse of John as genuine, but the 
 most affirm it to be spurious."' 
 
 Chrysostom, archbishop of Constantinople (about A. D. 400), 
 omits the Apocalypse in his canon of Scripture. 10 He omitted by 
 had previously been presbyter at Antioch, and his canon ChryuoBtom. 
 of Scripture is accordingly that of the Syrian Church, which received 
 only three Catholic Epistles, and rejected the Apocalypse. 
 
 The Apocalypse, it appears, was rejected by Theodoret, bishop 
 of Cyrrhus, in Syria (about A. D. 420-457), as we have found no 
 reference to the book in his voluminous writings. 11 In his canon he 
 
 1 Ilomil. xxx. 
 
 I De Vins Illus. Joannes. ' De Doctrina Christ., lib. ii, cap. viii. 
 
 * " The wise John testifies to the Son that he was without beginning in time : ' In 
 the beginning was the Word ;' saying, after these things, ' He who was, and who 
 is,'" etc. (Apoc. i, 8). Hepl "Ayiaf *<u 'O/ioov aiov Tptddof. Dialog, ii. 
 
 * Of this version no part of the Apocalypse is preserved. 
 
 * On Ephraem, Assemani remarks : " In this language (the Syriac) the holy doc- 
 tor quotes the Apocalypse of John as a part of canonical Scripture " (In hoc ser- 
 mone citat s. doctor Apocalypsim Joannis tanquam canonicam Scripturae partem). 
 Bibliotheca Orientalis, torn, i, p. 141, from the Peabody Library, Baltimore. 
 
 T Catechesis, iv, De Decem Dogmat., xxxvi. 
 
 Carminum, lib. i, 261, 262. "Ibid., lib. ii, 1104, "05. 
 
 M Synopsis Scrip. Sac. In the Lexicon of Suidas (in its present form not earlier 
 than al/out A. D. 1100) it is stated at the end of a short article on the Apostle John : 
 "Chrysostom receives his three Epistles and the Apocalypse." But this statement, 
 contradicting Chrysostom himself, is of no value, and is out of place. It appears to 
 have been inserted to claim his testimony to the Second and Third John, and the 
 Apocalypse rejected by him. 
 
 II In the index to his works at the end of the fifth volume (Migne's edition) it U 
 stated, " Nowhere does Theodoret make use of the Apocalypse on the Song of Sol
 
 762 INTRODUCTION TO THE STUDY 
 
 seems to have followed the Syrian Church. Nicephorus, patriarch 
 of Constantinople (A. D. 806-815), places the Apocalypse among the 
 disputed writings. 1 
 
 In concluding the ancient testimonies concerning the book, we 
 
 Mas* ot an- must l a Y stress upon the fact that the great mass of 
 
 dent testdmo- them is decidedly favourable to the apostolic origin, and 
 
 that the chief opposition to it sprang from dogmatic 
 
 grounds. 
 
 " At the period of the Reformation," says De Wette, " doubts re- 
 optatons held s P ectin g the apostolic origin of the Apocalypse gen- 
 by modern rait- erally again awoke with criticism, and Erasmus, Carl- 
 apMtoUo 1 ori- stadt, Luther, and Zwingle expressed themselves either 
 gin of Apoca- by hints or decidedly against it.'" De Wette denies 
 that the Apocalypse is the work of the Apostle John, on 
 the ground that in its style and contents it differs greatly from the 
 Gospel and Epistles of that apostle. He affirms that nothing need 
 prevent our acceding to the ancient* opinion that another John, 
 the so-called presbyter, is the author, provided we place the com- 
 position of the writing and his authority in the Churches of Asia 
 Minor, presupposed according to chapters ii, iii, before the abode 
 of the Apostle John in that country. 4 
 
 Quite similar are the objections of Lticke to the apostolical origin 
 John the pre- of the book : " The difference of language in the Apoca- 
 M^the'^autoor lyP se an d ^ n tne remaining writings of John in the New 
 byLucke. Testament is so great, of such an individual and mental 
 character in short, a difference of individual genius in the similar 
 original use of the New Testament Greek that even if we should 
 grant that John's circle of words is not foreign to the author of the 
 Apocalypse, nevertheless, the identity of its author with that of the 
 Gospel and Epistles, especially of the First Epistle, can in no way 
 be maintained, but the contrary is in the highest degree probable." 1 
 Again, " If all critical experience and rules in such literary questions 
 do not deceive us, then it is as firmly established that the evangel- 
 ist and the author of the Apocalypse are two different Johns, as it 
 is in the very similar problem of the Epistle of the Hebrews, that 
 the Apostle Paul did not write it." 
 
 Bleek remarks : " The Apocalypse, indeed, exhibits many resem- 
 blances to the other writings of John, as well in the manner of pres- 
 
 omon, where, in accordance with his hypothesis, he coald hare done so to a very 
 great extent, as in Psalm xlv ; nor where the place seemed to require it, as i, 1217, 
 Corutrning Heaven and the Church" 
 
 1 Qua Scrip. Canon. 'Einleit., p. 430. 
 
 1 Dionysius of Alexandria and Eusebius alone favoured this view, as it appears 
 * Einleitung, pp. 420-423. * Die Offenbarung des Johannes, p. 680.
 
 OF THE HOLY SCRIPTURES. 763 
 
 entation as in style and use of language ; yet this is shown more or less 
 in single points only, while on the other hand, in its entire character 
 there is manifested a great difference, and such as can scarcely be 
 explained on the supposition of identity of authorship." 1 He re- 
 gards John the presbyter as most probably its author.* 
 
 Neander expresses himself as follows : " We cannot acknowledge 
 the Apocalypse as the work of the Apostle " (John), and after dis- 
 cussing the question, whether it was not written by John the pres- 
 byter, of Ephesus, he says: "It is, then, more probable that the 
 author, a disciple of John, by some circumstance unknown to us, 
 having devoted himself to write on a subject, which he had received 
 mediately or immediately from the Apostle, thought himself justi- 
 fied [!] in introducing John as the speaker." ' Ewald also favours the 
 view that John the presbyter wrote the book. 
 
 On the other hand, Gieseler, who is inferior to none of these men 
 in learning and critical ability, and who is also a man Qle9elerfavouri 
 of great candour, remarks : " I cannot, however, bring the apostolic 
 myself to refuse to the Apostle John the authorship of 
 this book. The author designates himself as the Apostle ; the oldest 
 witnesses declare him to be so. Had the book been forged in his 
 name thirty years before his death, he would certainly have contra- 
 dicted it, and this contradiction would have reached us through 
 Irenaeus from the school of John's disciples. On the contrary, the 
 later contradictions of the apostolic origin proceed from doctrinal 
 prepossessions alone. The internal difference in language and mode 
 of thought between the Apocalypse which John (whose education 
 was essentially Hebrew, and his Christianity Jewish-Christian of the 
 Palestinian character) wrote, and the Gospel and Epistles which 
 he had composed after an abode of from twenty to thirty years 
 among the Greeks, is a necessary consequence of the different re- 
 lations in which the writer was placed, so that the opposite would 
 excite suspicion. There is much at the same time that is cognate, 
 proving continuousness of culture in the same author." 4 
 
 That the apostolic John is the author of the Apocalypse has been 
 held by Eichhorn, Hug, Bertholdt, Guericke, Stuart, Hengstenberg, 
 Auberlen, Ebrard, Bohmer, Lange, Hase, Luthardt, and others, and 
 we confess that we see no good reason for rejecting this view. We lay 
 no stress upon the fact that the Tubingen * school acknowledges the 
 
 'Einleitung, p. 724. ' Ibid., p. 727. 
 
 * History of the Planting and Training of the Christian Church, vol. i, 396, 397. 
 4 Church History, American Edition, p. q7. 
 
 Baur, Kirchengeschichte der drei ersten Jahrhunderte, pp. 146-148, Dritte An*- 
 gabe. Hilgenfeld, Einleitung, pp 407-452. 
 
 49
 
 764 INTRODUCTION TO THE STUDY 
 
 apostolic origin of the Apocalypse, since they do this that they may 
 the more readily attack the genuineness of John's Gospel from its 
 difference of style. 
 
 The only plausible ground on which the apostolic origin of the 
 NO sufficient Apocalypse can be denied is its difference in style and 
 reaaon for de- language from the Gospel and Epistle of John. By t 
 E^orifriTof this is very unsafe ground, especially as the Apocalypse 
 tueApocaiypee. was wr itten probably fifteen or twenty years earlier 
 than these other works, and the subject is entirely different. Who 
 would expect to find the poems of a distinguished author similar to 
 his prose writings ? The Apocalypse is a prophetic book. Its vis- 
 ions are of the grandest, and often of the most terrible, character. 
 It is impossible for a writer, in such an ecstatic state, not to speak 
 and write in a lofty and symbolic style. The human spirit labours to 
 give utterance to its magnificent conceptions; language is taxed to 
 its utmost, and the mind, excited to the highest degree of tension, 
 lays hold upon whatever will express its deep emotions. And it 
 must be borne in mind that John wrote in the very midst of his 
 awful visions. Had years elapsed before he wrote them down, the 
 style and language would probably have been different. How un- 
 like, too, is the language of Christ when predicting the destruction 
 of Jerusalem (Matt, xxiv ; Mark xiii ; Luke xxi) and that which he 
 generally employs! 
 
 Nor can it be urged with any force against the apostolic origin of 
 the Apocalypse, that its tone is not that which we should expect from 
 the loving John, who dwells in the Gospel so much upon the love of 
 Christ, and so rarely upon Christ's sterner attributes. The occasion 
 of his writing was different. In the Gospel he discusses the pro- 
 found internal relations existing between Christ and his Father, and 
 between Christ and his followers. The discourses of our Lord that 
 bear upon the subject he gives in their fulness. These are the rays 
 of divine truth which he perfectly reflected, while the other evangel- 
 ists reflected other rays. 
 
 When John wrote the Apocalypse, it was a time of bitter persecu- 
 tion. The power of the Roman empire was arrayed against Chris- 
 tianity; the sword was drawn against the Church. To meet this 
 terrible memy, Christ is represented as a mighty conqueror, before 
 whom every foe is prostrated, and the power of the world brought to 
 naught. Nor let it be said that this last representation of Christ is 
 inconsistent with his character as drawn in the Gospels, nor that 
 John in his different writings is inconsistent with himself; for souls 
 the most amiable are frequently the most severe when once aroused. 
 The divine goodness itself, when it has been repeatedly spurned
 
 OF THE HOLY SCRIPTURES. 765 
 
 Decomes implacable and our Saviour, in the very midst of dis- 
 courses full of benevolence and goodness, declares : " Upon whom- 
 soever this stone [himself] shall fall, it will grind him to powder " 
 (Matt, xxi, 44; Luke xx, 18). Is there any thing in the description 
 which John gives in the Apocalypse at variance with what he gives 
 in his Gospel ? In the latter it is said : " The hour is coming, in the 
 which all that are in the graves shall hear his voice, and shall come 
 foith- they that have done good, unto the resurrection of life ; and they 
 that have done evil, unto the resurrection of damnation " (chap, v, 
 28, 29). 
 
 But if the addresses to the seven Churches are the real words of 
 Christ, if the visions are not the offspring of John's imagination, 
 then we should expect in the Apocalypse a different presentation of 
 divine truth from what John himself might have given. Very dif- 
 ferent was the case when he wrote the Gospel ; from the multitude 
 of Christ's discourses and acts he could select those that best suited 
 his taste or purpose, and fill up what had been left incomplete in 
 Christ's history by the other Evangelists. In the Apocalypse he 
 delivers all the messages to the Churches ; he is ordered to write 
 what he sees. Little room is left for the display of his subjectivity. 
 
 But notwithstanding the difference of style between the Apoca- 
 lypse and the Gospel and Epistles of John, we shall polnts ^ gto 
 find, upon a close scrutiny of the former, a great deal iiarity between 
 that is decidedly Johannean, and which may, after all, o^john^Go^ 
 render the apostolic origin of the book highly probable pel and that of 
 from internal evidence. The verb viicpv, to conquer, to 
 overcome, occurs in the Apocalypse sixteen times ; in the first Epistle 
 of John six times ; in the Gospel of John once ; in all the rest of 
 the New Testament but four times. 'Apvfov, lamb, occurs twenty-eight 
 times in the Apocalypse ; it is found once in John's Gospel and no- 
 where else ; but djuvoc, lamb, occurs twice in John's Gospel, and twice 
 in all the rest of the New Testament, and one of these is a quotation 
 from the Old Testament, which the Ethiopian eunuch was reading. 
 Maprvpia, testimony, occurs nine times in the Apocalypse,_/"<?#r/?<f times 
 in the Gospel of John, and seven times in his Epistles ; in all the 
 rest of the New Testament, seven times. Ai^>{jv, to thirst, is used in a 
 spiritual sense at least twice in the Apocalypse, three times in John's 
 Gcspel, and once in Matthew's Gospel. In a physical sense, nine or 
 ten limes in all the New Testament. In Apocalypse xxii, 17 it is 
 said: " And let him that is athirst come, and take the water of life 
 freely." With this compare John vii, 37 : " If any man thirst, let 
 him come unto me and drink." There is no other passage in the 
 New Testament like these two. " Behold. I stand at the door, and
 
 766 INTRODUCTION TO THE STUDY 
 
 knock : If any man hear my voice, and open the door, I will come 
 in to him, and will sup with him, and he with me " (Apoc. iii, 20). 
 With this compare John xiv, 23 : " If a man love me, he will keep 
 my words : and my Father will love him, and we will come untc 
 him, and make our abode with him." "Unto him that loved us 
 and washed us from our sins in his own blood " (Apoc. i, 5). There 
 is no passage in the New Testament which so strikingly resembles 
 this as First John i, 7 : " The blood of Jesus Christ his Son cleans- 
 eth us from all sin." " And he was clothed with a vesture dipped 
 in blood, and his name is called The Word (Logos) of God " (Apoc. 
 The verbal pe- *ix, 13)- Christ is nowhere else in the New Testament 
 <*****<* called "The Word " (Logos), except in John's Gospel. 
 In Hebrews iv, 12, " For the word of God is quick and powerful," 
 etc., the reference is not to the personal Word, Christ, but to divine 
 truth in its all-searching power. "Behold, he cometh with clouds; 
 and every eye shall see him, and they also which pierced him " 
 (Apoc. i, 7). In this passage there is a reference both to Zechariah 
 xii, 10, and to John xix, 34, 37, where it is stated that one of the 
 soldiers pierced the side of Christ, and that the Scripture saith: 
 "They shall look on him whom they pierced." Both in Apocalypse 
 i, 7 and in John xix, 37, it-eKevrrjoav, they pierced, is used, which is 
 a correct translation of the Hebrew ijTi, in Zechariah xii, 10, but is 
 the translation of neither the LXX nor the Targum of Jonathan 
 Ben Uzziel. Now the use of this same word for pierced, both in 
 the Gospel and in the Apocalypse, is no slight proof of identity of 
 authorship. " Who bare record of the word of God, and of the 
 testimony of Jesus Christ," etc. (Apoc. i, 2); with this compare 
 John xix, 35, where, speaking of himself, the author says : "And he 
 that saw it bare record, and his record is true." 'AA,Tf9iv6$, true, 
 occurs ten times in the Apocalypse, eight times in John's Gospel, 
 four times in his First Epistle ; elsewhere in the New Testament, 
 five times only. 
 
 It is a peculiarity of John to state his propositions affirmatively, and 
 at the same time to deny their contraries. Thus respecting the 
 Baptist : " And he confessed, and denied not " (John i, 20). " God 
 is light, and in him is no darkness at all " (i John i, 5). "We lie, 
 and do not the truth " (verse 6). This method of statement espec- 
 ially abounds in his First Epistle. 1 Nor is this peculiarity of John 
 wanting in the Apocalypse : " For my name's sake hast laboured, and 
 hast not fainted ;" " Thou holdest fast my name, and hast not denied 
 my faith " (chap, ii, 3, 13). "I will not blot out his name out of 
 
 1 For this peculiarity, common to the Gospel and Epistle, see the proofs of th* 
 Identity of authorship of both in The Genuineness of John's Gospel
 
 OF THE HOLY SCRIPTURES. 767 
 
 the book of life, but I will confess his name before my Father," etc 
 (chap, iii, 5). " And hast kept my word, and hast not denied my 
 name " (verse 8). "Which say they are Jews, and are not, but do 
 lie " (verse 9). "That thou mayest be clothed, and that the shame 
 of thy nakedness do not appear " (verse 18). 
 
 There is nothing in the doctrines of the Apocalypse at variance 
 with the other writings of John, or with the rest of the Nothin ~ ^^ 
 New Testament. Although the writer is manifestly of doctrine of the 
 the Jewish race, and seems warmly attached to his people, 
 
 there is rothing of an exclusive nature in the book, and therestof New 
 he represents, in addition to those saved from the tribes 
 of Israel, a " great multitude which no man could number, of all 
 nations, .and kindreds, and people, and tongues" (chap, vii, 9). 
 
 In the description of the New Jerusalem he states that in the 
 foundations of its walls are " the names of the twelve apostles of the 
 Lamb " (chap, xxi, 14). That Paul is not included in this list shows 
 no hostility toward him on the part of the writer, as the original 
 apostles were twelve in number. Besides this, in a book, the num- 
 bers of which in most cases are artificial, no stress is to be laid upon 
 the number twelve. 
 
 In the description of the hundred and forty-four thousand saints 
 in heaven, it is said: "These are they which were not defiled with 
 women, for they are virgins (ovroi daiv ot fiera yvvaiKwv OVK ifio- 
 kvvdrjoav napdevfa yap elaiv) (chap, xiv, 4). We are not to under- 
 stand by this that the writer attached great importance to celibacy, 
 or that he made it necessary to salvation, for the meaning is as well 
 expressed by Robinson : " For they are virgins, that is, chaste, pure, 
 free from all whoredom and uncleanness as the symbols of idolatry." 
 (Greek Lexicon). It is, indeed, clear that the author of the book 
 held the marriage relation as holy, otherwise he would not have 
 represented the union of Christ and his Church under the figure of 
 a marriage (chap, xix, 7-9). 
 
 In concluding this part of our subject we may ask, Who but the 
 Apostle John could have written the sublime book ? We have no 
 reason to suppose that the pre sbyter John was capable of it. John 
 the Apostle, if we are to judge from the Gospel which he wrote, was 
 competent for the task. His appreciation and appropriation of the 
 profound discourses of Christ shows his mental power. Minds that 
 make great use of symbols and imagery are often incapable of deep 
 and philosophical reflection; but profound intellects can, if they 
 wish, employ bold imagery and striking symbols.
 
 768 INTRODUCTION TO THE STUDY 
 
 CONTENTS OF THE APOCALYPSE. 
 
 The book opens with the statement that it is a revelation from 
 God, made by his angel to John while in Patmos. After greeting 
 the seven Churches of Asia, John gives a sublime description of 
 Christ, who appears to him and directs him to write to seven Churches 
 in Asia, namely, unto Ephesus, Smyrna, Pergamos, Thyatira, Sardis, 
 Philadelphia, and Laodicea (chap. i). The two following chapters 
 contain the messages to these Churches, in which they are praised or 
 censured according as they have fulfilled or neglected the require- 
 ments of the Gospel. 
 
 John describes the throne of God, its occupant, the twenty-four 
 elders, the four cherubim, and the worship rendered to the Almighty 
 in heaven, which he beholds in the Spirit (chap. iv). He describes 
 the book with seven seals in the right hand of Him who sits upon the 
 throne, which no one could open and read, or look upon. Weeping 
 on this account, he is checked by one of the elders, and assured that 
 the Lion of the tribe of Judah is able to open the book. He there- 
 upon describes the Lamb, who. takes the book, and is worshipped 
 by the host of heaven (chap. v). The opening of six seals of the 
 book by the Lamb, and the events that followed, are portrayed 
 (chap. vi). Four angels hold the four winds of heaven, to prevent 
 their hurting the earth before seals are set upon the servants of God. 
 He gives the number one hundred and forty-four thousand as re- 
 deemed from among the tribes of Israel, after which he describes an 
 innumerable host of the redeemed of all nations standing before the 
 throne and worshipping God. Their happy condition is described 
 (chap. vii). An angel offers incense with the prayers of the saints. 
 Seven angels with seven trumpets are prepared to sound. Great 
 disasters follow the successive soundings of six of these trumpets 
 (chaps, viii, ix). An angel with a little book in his hand comes 
 down from heaven, and swears that time shall be no longer. John, 
 as commanded, takes the little book out of the angel's hand, and 
 devours it (chap. x). 
 
 The prophesying of the two witnesses, and the events connected 
 with their ministry, follow. The seventh angel sounds, and the king- 
 doms of the world are converted to Christ ; God is praised in heaven 
 (chap. xi). An account is given of the birth of the man-child who 
 is to rule the nations. A description follows of the war in heaven 
 and the defeat of Satan, who, being cast out upon the earth, perse- 
 cutes the pious children of the mother of the man-child (chap. xii). 
 A description is given of the beast with seven heads and ten horns to 
 whom the dragon gives his seat and power and also of a second beast
 
 OF THE HOLY SCRIPTURES. 769 
 
 that slays all who refuse to worship him (chap. xiii). A hundred 
 and forty-four thousand saints stand with the Lamb on Mount Zion. 
 An angel proclaims the everlasting gospel ; a second angel an- 
 nounces the fall of Babylon, and a third the punishment of those 
 who in any way acknowledge the beast. Those who die in the Lord 
 are pronounced happy. The reaping of the harvest of the earth is 
 described (chap. xiv). Seven angels have the seven last plagues. 
 A description is given of those who have gained the victory over the 
 beast. One of the four cherubim gives seven vials full of divine 
 wrath to seven angels (chap. xv). John describes the pouring out 
 of the vials of wrath by the seven angels, and the disasters that 
 follow (chap. xvi). He describes the great whore, her crimes, 
 and the kings who shall destroy her. He states that she repre- 
 sents the city (Rome) that rules over the earth (chap. xvii). The 
 fall of Babylon is announced. What she now is and what she 
 shall be are described. The marriage of the Lamb is announced. 
 The angel refuses to be worshipped. Christ is described as a war- 
 rior engaged in battle with the kings of the earth and their armies. 
 The beast and the false prophet are captured and punished, and 
 the remnant of Christ's foes are slain by the sword (chaps, xviii, xix). 
 Satan is bound for a thousand years, and cast into the bottomless 
 pit, during which time the martyrs reign with Christ. Satan is let 
 loose, deceives the nations, and gathers them to battle. They are 
 consumed, and the devil is cast into the lake of fire. The dead 
 are raised, stand before God, and are judged (chap. xx). A de- 
 scription is given of the New Jerusalem that descends from heaven, 
 and also of the happy condition of God's people, and the misery of 
 the wicked and unbelieving (chaps, xxi, xxii, 1-5). The things in 
 this book are affirmed to be true, and the man is pronounced blessed 
 who keeps them. John is commanded not to seal up the prophecy 
 of the book, as the time is at hand. Those who keep the command- 
 ments of God are pronounced happy. Jesus affirms that he is the 
 author of these messages to the Churches. He gives a general in- 
 vitation -to partake of the waters of life freely, and utters a warning 
 against adding to or taking away from this book of prophecy. He 
 affirms he will come quickly (chaps, xxii, 6-21). 
 
 THE DESIGN OF THE APOCALYPSE. 
 
 The design of the revelation contained in the book is stated to 
 be: "To show unto his servants things (3-, what things) 
 which must shortly come to pass ' ? (chap, i, i). It ap- 8l n - 
 pears from various parts of the book (chaps, i, 9; ii, 10; iii, 10; vi, 
 9, 10, n) that it was written in a time of a general persecution of
 
 770 INTRODUCTION TO THE HOLY SCRIPTURES. 
 
 the Church, which must have come from Rome, and to this source 
 it is manifestly attributed in chap, xviii, 24. 
 
 As the persecution of the Christians before Nero had been chiefly 
 instigated by the Jews, and was generally of a local character, this one 
 proceeding from the head of the empire in Rome, would be naturally 
 followed in the provinces, and must have excited strong fears in the 
 minds of many believers that their religion would be crushed by the 
 enormous power of the Roman Government. To console them, and 
 to assure them of the utter overthrow of paganism, the defeat of 
 Satan and his allies, the complete triumph of Christianity, the reward 
 of the faithful followers of Christ and the punishment of the wicked, 
 was the object of the writing. In regard to these points no difference 
 of opinion need exist. 
 
 In other respects, however, great diversity of views prevails in the 
 Three views of interpretation of the book, which have been reduced 
 its meaning. to t ^ rgg i ea( j^ n g classes. The first view regards the 
 Apocalypse as containing a compend of the history of the Church 
 and of the world, even to isolated events, until the coming of Christ. 
 
 The second does not acknowledge the divine origin of the vision of 
 the author of the Apocalypse, but supposes that he describes in the 
 form of a vision only the fears and the hopes of his time respecting 
 Rome, Jerusalem, and the immediate completion of the kingdom of 
 God. This view is held by Bleek, Ewald, De Wette, and Lticke, who 
 deny the apostolic origin of the book. 
 
 The third view acknowledges that the prophecies in the Apoca- 
 lypse were given of God, and that they refer to the future develop- 
 ment and completion of God's kingdom, but do not give a detailed 
 history of the future, but only the great epochs and moving forces of 
 the development of that kingdom in its relation to the kingdom of 
 the world. This view is held by Hofmann, Hengstenberg, Ebrard, 
 Auberlen, and Luthardt. 1 With these should be classed Moses Stuart. 
 
 The view of the second class we instantly reject in acknowledging 
 the apostolic origin of the book ; and that of the first has no solid 
 basis, and admits of no probable defence, and has given rise to the 
 wildest speculations. The view of the third class of expositors is 
 the only tenable one. Of this class, Professor Stuart and Auberlen 
 are among the' very best. 
 
 ' Auberltn, Der Prophet Daniel und die Offenbarung Johannis, pp 369-434, 
 Dritte Auflage. Bleek's Einleitung by Mangold, p. 703.
 
 INDEX OF TOPICS. 
 
 Acts of Solomon, 
 
 Book of, 286. 
 Acts of the Apostles, 
 
 accuracy of historical allusions in, 637. 
 
 apparent error in, regarding Theudas, 642. 
 
 author of. 631. 
 
 Baur's theory of the purpose of, 633. 
 
 nn-ysostom's opinion concerning, 044. 
 
 contents of, 631. 
 
 credibility of history in, 632. 
 
 geographical accuracy of, 643. 
 
 Paley's Horas Paulinae upon, 632. 
 
 Paul's character the same as exhibited in 
 
 Acts and in Epistles, 635. 
 reproof of Peter by Puul explained, 634. 
 sources of the history in, 632. 
 theological difference between Peter and 
 
 Paul, none recorded in, 636. 
 pie version, 64, 478. 
 
 > 
 
 a generic title for Amalekite kings, 167. 
 Ahasuepus, 
 
 probably identical with Xerxes, 318. 
 Alexander the Great, 
 
 hellenized the nations he conquered, 457. 
 Alogians, 
 
 reject John's Gospel, 585, 620. 
 Alphabetical writing. 
 
 Israelites possessed it when they went down 
 into Egypt, 99. 
 
 originated among Palestinians, 99. 
 
 proofs of the early existence of, among the 
 
 Hebrews, 101. 
 Ann os, 
 
 date of his prophecy, 428. 
 
 literary style of, 428. 
 
 personality of, 428. 
 Antediluvians, 
 
 their longevity not mythical, 223. r 
 
 Apocalypse, 
 
 authorship of, 758. 
 
 Church fatlier-s, quotations from, relative 
 to authorship of, 759. 
 
 contents of, 770. 
 
 doubts, early, as to its genuineness, 761. 
 
 general design of, 769. 
 
 harmony of its doctrines with rest of New 
 Testament, 705. 
 
 imagery of, borrowed from Daniel, 422. 
 
 John the Presbyter not its author, 763. 
 
 linguistic character of, 749, 755. 
 
 linguistic similarity of John's Gospel and 
 the Apocalypse, 765. 
 
 meaning, three views of its, 770. 
 
 modern scholars, opinions of, as to its au- 
 thorship, 762. 
 
 omitted from various canons and versions, 
 788,781. 
 
 peculiarities of, in use of participle, 750. 
 
 peculiarity of contents, 749. 
 
 sublimity of, 749. 
 
 time of composition, 751. 
 
 written before, downfall of Jerusalem, 754. 
 
 written in times of persecution, 754. 
 Apocrypha. 
 
 absurdities of. 420. 
 
 additions to Daniel in, -123. 
 
 bound up with Septuaglnt, 53. 
 
 Apocryphal Gospels, 
 absurdity of, 621. 
 
 Gospel according to the Egyptians, 629. 
 Gospel according to the Hebrews, 62?. 
 Gospel of Peter, 627. 
 not received in early Church, 503. 
 Protevangel of James, 628. 
 various other, 02'J. 
 
 Apologists of Christianity, 
 
 early, literary competency of, 454. 
 Apostles, 
 
 inspiration of, 30. 
 
 selected and trained by Jesus, 449. 
 Apostolic Kpistles, 
 
 established fundamental doctrines of Chris- 
 tianity, 500. 
 
 Aquila's version, 
 of Old Testament, 54. 
 
 Arabic language, 
 
 helps to its study, 43, 47. 
 
 spread by the Koran, 43. 
 
 unchanged since composition of Koran, 140. 
 Arabic versions, 65. 
 Aramaean' languages, 42. 
 Archaisms, 
 
 in Deuteronomy, 124. 
 
 in the Pentateuch, 110, 112. 
 
 prove the unity of the Pentateuch, 113. 
 
 rationalistic treatment of, 1 13. 
 Ark, 
 
 directions for its construction, 1*3. 
 Armenian version, 64, 4tiO. 
 Arts and sciences, 
 
 in ancient Egypt, 101. 
 Assyrian monuments, 
 
 confirmed Bible account of conquests of 
 Tiglath-Pileser, 2'.. 
 
 confirm record of greatness of Omri, 291. 
 
 mention Aha/, Jehu, Hazael, Uezin, Mena- 
 hem, and other kings, .'J92, 295. 
 
 record capture of Samaria, 293. 
 
 record dealings of Sennacherib with Heze- 
 
 kiah, 293. 
 Authors of Gospels, 
 
 men of repute, 531. 
 
 Baalam's prophecy, 
 
 evident antiquity of, 167. 
 Babel, 
 
 confusion of tongues at, 227. 
 Babylonian dress, 419. 
 Babylonian monuments, 
 
 confirm the Bible history of "cities of the 
 
 plain," 230. 
 Babylonian tradition 
 
 of creation, 221. 
 Haruch, 
 
 copies Jeremiah's prophecies, 391. 
 Bashmuric version, lis. 
 Bethany, 603. 
 
 Bethany beyond Jordan, 577. 
 Bethel, 157.
 
 772 
 
 INDEX OF TOPICS. 
 
 ' Beyond Jordan," 167. 
 Biblical criticism, 
 
 progressive, 24. 
 Bishop and presbyter, 
 
 identity of, in apostolic Church, 685. 
 Book of Acts of Solomon, 286. 
 Book of Chronicles, 
 
 of Kings of Israel, 286. 
 
 of Kings of Judab, 286. 
 Book of the Upright, 265. 
 Book of the Wars of Jehovah, 166. 
 Books of Moses, 
 
 contents of, 95. 
 Brahma, 
 
 Indian account of his creation of the world, 
 
 218. 
 Bricks, 
 
 early made in Egypt, 235. 
 
 Caesar, Julius, 
 
 his versatility, 122. 
 Csesarea, 
 
 inhabited by Greeks, 458. 
 Cana of Galilee, 604. 
 Canaanites, 
 
 God commands their extermination, 255. 
 Canon, 
 
 of Ambrose, 495. 
 
 of Athanasius, 494. 
 
 of Augustine, 497. 
 
 of Chrysostom, 495. 
 
 of Cyril, 494. 
 
 of Eusebius, 493. 
 
 of Irenaeus, 493. 
 
 of Jerome. 497. 
 
 of Muratori, 490. 
 
 of Origen, 493. 
 
 of Titus Flavius Clemens, 492. 
 
 origin of term, 33. 
 Canon of the New Testament, 488. 
 
 according to the Itala version, 492. 
 
 not all universally received in first three 
 centuries, 488. 
 
 testimony of early Church respecting, 490. 
 
 testimony of Tertullian concerning, 492. 
 Canon of the Old Testament, 33-41. 
 
 according to Josephus, 38. 
 
 according to Philo, 39. 
 
 according to the Talmud, 40. 
 
 according to various fathers of the Church, 
 88-89. 
 
 alluded to by Jesus, son of Sirach, 39. 
 
 Hebrew, its arrangement by the rabbis of 
 
 Tiberias, 401. 
 Canonical books, 
 
 requirements of, 28. 
 Catalogue, 
 
 of Athanaslus, 35. 
 
 of Cyril, 35. 
 
 of Kpiphanius, 35. 
 
 of Gregory Nagtanzen, 35. 
 
 of Hilary, 35. 
 
 of Jerome, 36. 
 
 of Josephus, 37. 
 
 of Melito, 33. 
 
 of Origen, 34. 
 Catholic Epistles, 701. 
 Oedron, 
 
 brook, 603. 
 Celsus, 
 
 acknowledges apostolic origin of the Gos- 
 pels, 520. 
 
 unintentionally supports the genuineness 
 
 of the Gospels, 518. 
 
 Cerinthus, 
 
 his heresy, 742. 
 Chaldaisms, 
 
 of the later Hebrew prophets, 415. 
 Chaldee language, 43. 
 best helps in its study, 46. 
 spoken by the Jews in time of Christ, 43. 
 that of Daniel and Ezra differs from that of 
 
 the Targums, 415. 
 Chedor-laomer, 
 
 origin or type of his name, 231. 
 Christ, 
 
 advent of such a character would naturally 
 
 call forth historians, 449. 
 reason for his not writing his own religion, 
 
 448. 
 Christianity, 
 
 became the State religion under Constan- 
 
 tine, 453. 
 its rapid diffusion testified to, 
 
 in the Acts of the Apostles, 451. 
 by Bardesanes, 452. 
 by Cornelius, 453. 
 by Justin Martyr, 451. 
 by Origen, 453. 
 by Pliny, 451. 
 by Tacitus, 450. 
 by Tertullian, 452. 
 
 written records necessary for its perpetua- 
 tion, 449. 
 Christians, 
 
 early literary proficiency of, 454. 
 portraitures of, by Tacitus and Pliny, 450. 
 Christian writers, 
 
 of first four centuries, 455. 
 Chronicles, Books of the, 
 author of, not a partisan, 305. 
 contents of, 297. 
 credibility of. 302. 
 depreciation of, by sceptics, 302. 
 Ezra probably their author, 298- 
 genealogies in, 297. 
 historical character of, 303. 
 numbers exaggerated in, 305. 
 originally one book, 297. 
 purpose of, 300. 
 sources of, 300. 
 
 written in same style as Book of Ezra, 299. 
 written in time of Ezra, 297. 
 Chronological table, 
 
 of Hebrew prophets, 304. 
 Chronology, 
 
 differences of, between Hebrew, Samaritan, 
 
 and Septuagint Pentateuchs, 179. 
 early, untrustworthy, 230. 
 Church, primitive, 
 
 able to transmit to posterity genuine writ- 
 Ings of the apostles, 457. 
 believed in inspiration of the Scriptures, 25. 
 Cities of the plain, 
 their location, 231. 
 Clementine Homilies, 521. 
 
 history of, 533. 
 Codices, 
 
 Codex Alexandrinus, 464. 
 
 Codex Anirelicus, 474. 
 
 Codex BasiJlensis, 4C7. 
 
 Codex Bezne Graeco-Latinus, 466. 
 
 Codex Bohbiensis, new Taurinensis, 475. 
 
 Codex Brixianus, 474. 
 
 Codex ( antabrigfensis, 474. 
 
 Codex Claromontanus, now Vatfcanus, 466, 
 
 475. 
 
 Codex Colbertinus, 467, 474. 
 Codex Kptiraemi Kescriptus, 485. 
 Codex Laudiamis, 466. 
 Codex Leicestrensis, 467.
 
 INDEX OF TOPICS. 
 
 773 
 
 Codices, (contimu-il.) 
 
 Codex Palatinus, 474. 
 
 Codex Sinaiticus, 4(i3. 
 
 Codex Tischendorfli Actoruin, 467. 
 
 Codex Vaticanus, 4(55. 
 
 Codex Vercellensis, 474. 
 
 Codex Veronensis, 474. 
 
 Codex Vindobonensis, 475. 
 
 Codices Petropolitani, formerly Corbeien- 
 
 ses, 475. 
 Colossse, 
 
 city of, 674. 
 Coloseian Church, 
 
 composed largely of Gentiles, 674. 
 
 founded by Epaphras, 674. 
 
 Colossians, Epistle to the, 
 
 attacks upon its genuineness, 676. 
 
 Hilgenfeld's objections to, 677. 
 
 modern criticism upon, unreasonable, 677. 
 
 no traces of Gnosticism in, 677. 
 
 Pauline origin of, 678. 
 
 personal allusions in, by Paul, 678. 
 
 received by the ancient Church, 676. 
 
 synopsis of contents of, 675. 
 
 to be read to the Laodiceans, 676. 
 
 written during Paul's first imprisonment 
 
 in Rome, 675. 
 
 Confusion of tongues, 227. 
 Constant! ne, 
 
 orders flfty copies of Scriptures to be made 
 
 on parchment, 462. 
 Coptic language, 
 
 in three dialects, 475. 
 
 Coptic versions of the New Testa- 
 ment, 475. 
 Corinth, 
 
 Church founded in, 653. 
 
 city of, 053. 
 Corinthians, First Epistle to the, 
 
 author of, 65fi. 
 
 contents of, (555. 
 
 genuineness of, 656. 
 
 persons addressed in, 653. 
 
 time of composition of, 654. 
 
 written at Ephesus, 654. 
 Corinthians, Second Epistle to the, 
 
 addressed to all Achaia, U57. 
 
 author of, 657. 
 
 contents of, 657. 
 
 genuineness of, 650. 
 
 place and time of composition, 657. 
 Cosmogony of India, 
 
 compared with that of Moses, 218. 
 Creation, 
 
 Babylonian account of, 221. 
 
 Etruscan traditions concerning, 221. 
 
 Hindoo theory of, 218. 
 
 hypotheses of, in modern science, 220. 
 
 Mosaic account reconcilable with modern 
 science, yet adapted to Jewish pre-con- 
 ceptions, 222. 
 
 Persian traditions concerning, 2S1. 
 
 Plato's theory of, 219. 
 Criminals, Jewish, 
 
 sometimes put to death on feast-days, 618. 
 Critical School, The New, 
 
 views of, 66, US. 
 
 on the Pentateuch, 73. 
 Criticism, 
 
 biblical, progressive, '-4. 
 
 minor interpolations do not weaken au- 
 thority, 157. 
 
 necessity of proper pre-couceptions on the 
 
 part of critics, 15<3. 
 Crucifixion of Christ, 
 
 date of, 616. 
 
 Cursive letters, 463. 
 Cursive manuscripts, 
 
 the most important, 466. 
 Cyrus, 
 
 mentioned prophetically in Isaiah, 382. 
 
 Dan, 
 
 city so named, 159. 
 Daniel, 
 
 acquainted with religion of Zoroaster, 419. 
 
 carried into captivity, 396. 
 
 Christ and his apostles refer to him as a 
 prophet, 422. 
 
 esteemed a prophet by the Jews of the time 
 of Christ, 401. 
 
 exact historical knowledge of, 417. 
 
 Ezckiel's references to, 3'J8. 
 
 no other eminent man of the same name, 
 400. 
 
 no reason for supposing him to be a myth- 
 ical character, 398. 
 
 personal history of, credible and probable, 
 398. 
 
 personality of, 396. 
 
 silence of Jesus Sirach concerning, 405. 
 
 testimony of Josephus concerning, 413. 
 Daniel, Book of, 
 
 admission of, into the canon, 411. 
 
 agreement between Daniel's circumstances 
 and his book, 421. 
 
 alleged Greek words in, 402. 
 
 alleged historical errors of, 406. 
 
 alleged obscurity of later prophecies in, 410. 
 
 ancient behalf in its genuineness, 3117. 
 
 apocryphal additions to original text, 423. 
 
 Darius's decree ordering the worship of 
 himself, 410. 
 
 Darius the Mede no fiction, 408. 
 
 descriptions of dress in, agree with the 
 monuments, 419. 
 
 disparaged by Jewish rabbis because of 
 the fulfilment of its prophecy in Christ's 
 coming, 401. 
 
 divided into historical and prophetic sec- 
 tion* 396. 
 
 genuineness of, assailed by critics in an- 
 cient and modern limes, 3117, 400. 
 
 imagery of, borrowed by St. John, 
 
 imagery of, similiar to that found on Nine- 
 vite monuments, 420. 
 
 impossibility of forgery of, 412. 
 
 language of, 414. 
 
 minute historical statements of, confirmed 
 by independent authorities, 418. 
 
 Nebuchadnezzar's history, as regarded in, 
 supported by Babylonian legends and 
 monuments, 40!), 419. 
 
 Nebuchadnezzar's image as described in, 
 409. 
 
 no prayers in, 422. 
 
 partly written in Hebrew and partly in 
 
 Chilldec, 397. 
 
 phrase "son of man" adopted by ('In is', 
 
 422. 
 
 proofs of its genuineness, 111. 
 purity of its Hebrew and Chaldee, 41 4. 
 
 resemblances of, to Book of E/ekiei, 417. 
 
 shown lo Alexander lh<- (ireat, 413. 
 
 similarity of its Chalilee to that of Ezra, 
 415. 
 
 singular position of, in the canon. 400. 
 
 social customs described in, verified by in- 
 dependent testimony, II 1 .). 
 
 unity of authorship of. -'i'.iii. 
 Darius, the Mede, 
 
 tils existence proved, 408. 
 David, 
 
 appointed singers, 341. 
 
 high poetic character of, 338.
 
 774 
 
 INDEX OF TOPICS. 
 
 David, (continued.) 
 
 instituted singing of psalms :i> a part of 
 
 divine worship, 301. 
 not the author of all the first seventy-two 
 
 psalms, 342. 
 
 Deluge, 
 
 indications of two accounts of, 82. 
 
 period between it and the building of the 
 
 great pyramid, 229. 
 remarkable account of, found on tablets in 
 
 ruins of Nineveh, 225. 
 traditions of, universal, 224. 
 
 Dens of lions, 419. 
 Deuteronomy, the Book of, 122. 
 
 archaisms of, 124. 
 
 contains additions to other Mosaic history, 
 127. 
 
 differences in its style to be expected, 124. 
 
 directions in, concerning future king of Is- 
 rael, 170. 
 
 exact time of incidents related not to be 
 expected in, 128. 
 
 genuineness of, its undigested form an 
 evidence of, 132. 
 
 impossibility of its forgery, 123. 
 
 internal evidence of Mosaic authorship of, 
 123. 
 
 rts entire spirit Mosaic, 9C. 
 
 legislation in, 129. 
 
 Mosaic origin, its language not inconsist- 
 ent with, 131. 
 
 presupposes previous legislation, 131. 
 
 prohibition in, of the removal of land- 
 marks, 172. 
 
 proofs that it was written by Moses, 126. 
 
 similar in ethics to rest of Pentateuch, 130. 
 
 supposed argument against, 122. 
 
 synopsis of its contents, 95. 
 
 the Pentateuch incomplete without, 96. 
 
 traditions, none floating, out of which it 
 could have been compiled, 127. 
 
 " unto this day," objection to the term, 169. 
 
 written from Moses's geographical stand- 
 point, 125. 
 
 written in Mosaic age, 125. 
 Devil and Satan, 
 
 in Paul's writings, 670. 
 Difficulties, 
 
 in Bible study, 24. 
 Document hypothesis, 70. 
 
 examination of the, 78. 
 
 if proved, does not disprove Mosiac author- 
 ship of Pentateuch, 79, 85. 
 
 indications of two accounts of the deluge, 
 82. 
 
 origin of, 78. 
 
 Ebal, Mount, 
 
 law written on, 209. 
 Ebionites, 
 
 mutilate Matthew's Gospel, 512, 538. 
 Ecclesiastes ; or, The Preacher, 
 
 authorship of, 851. 
 
 Chaldaisms in, 352. 
 
 contents of, *3. 
 
 date of the composition of, 351 . 
 
 design of, 350. 
 
 Elohistic. 352. 
 
 punx>rts to be written by a sou of David, 
 349. 
 
 religious teaching in, 349. 
 
 written in an age of despondency, 352. 
 Edessa, 
 
 Syriac literature flourishes there in second 
 
 century, 468. 
 
 Editions of Greek New Testament, 
 481. 
 
 Edom, 
 
 an elective and hereditary monarchy, Itfci. 
 enumeration of its kings a proof of genu- 
 ineness of Pentateuch, 161. 
 extreme fertility of, 231. 
 
 Egypt, 
 
 art of writing in during the Mosaic age, 
 
 bricks early made in, 235. 
 hieroglyphics, 102. 
 
 Israelites, remarkable increase of, in. 236. 
 monuments of, attest biblical accuracy, 235. 
 sciences and arts in ancient Egypt, 101. < 
 
 Egyptian customs, 
 
 accurately described In story of Joseph, 
 
 232. 
 Egyptian idolatry, 
 
 imitated by Jeroboam, 199. 
 Egyptian priests, 
 
 privileges of, 234. 
 Egyptians, 
 
 bestow gifts on departing Israelites, 242. 
 Egyptian translations, 63. 
 Elohim, 
 
 Joseph's use of, 79. 
 
 places where used, 79-81. 
 
 used exclusively in first two chapters M* 
 
 Exodus, 79. 
 Elohim and Jehovah, 79. 
 
 propriety observed in alternating ti*sse 
 
 terms in Genesis, 80. 
 Enon, 576. 
 Enumeration, 
 
 of Israelites, 91, 92, 134. 
 
 of Levites, 93. 
 Epaphras, 
 
 founder of the Colossian Church, 646. 
 Ephesians, Epistle to the, 
 
 an encyclical letter, probably, 662-666. 
 
 certainly written by Paul, 668. 
 
 charged with being a mere copy of Colos- 
 sians, 668. 
 
 contents of, 666. 
 
 difficulties in supposing it written by Paul 
 to the Church in Ephesus, 664. 
 
 genuineness of, acknowledged by ancient 
 Church, 667. 
 
 Hebraisms in, C70. 
 
 Marcion's copies of, addressed "to the La- 
 odiceans," 664. 
 
 modem doubts of its genuineness, f>C>7. 
 
 riot simply an elaboration of Colossians, 
 670. 
 
 Pauline digressions in, 671. 
 
 Pauline words and phrases in, 669. 
 
 persons addressed in, 662. 
 
 written shortly after Colossians, 666. 
 
 written while Paul was a prisoner, 666. 
 Ephraim, 
 
 city of, 605. 
 Epistles, 
 
 catholic, 701. 
 
 pastoral. 683-706. 
 
 Pauline, 644. 
 Esther, Book of, 
 
 contents of, 817. 
 
 historical character of, attested by the ob- 
 servance of the festival of Purlin, 321. 
 
 improbable, but not incredible. 317, 319. 
 
 Mordecai the probable author of, 322. 
 
 name of God nowhere mentioned in, 318. 
 
 cot found in all catalogues of Old Testa- 
 ment, 317. 
 Ethiopic language, 43. 
 
 helps for its study, 47. 
 
 its literature, 43.
 
 INDEX OF TOPICS. 
 
 775 
 
 Ethnology, 
 
 accordant with the genealogy of Noah's 
 sons, 226. 
 
 Etruscan legends, 
 
 of creation, 221. 
 Evangelists, 
 
 their disagreement a proof of general truth- 
 fulness, 26. 
 
 Evidences, 
 
 of biblical inspiration, 31. 
 
 Exode, 
 
 independent accounts of, 114. 
 route of, clearly identified by modern trav- 
 ellers, 244. 
 traces of, at Kibroth-hattaavah, 246. 
 
 Exodus, Book of, 
 
 account of the building of the tabernacle 
 
 given in. 92. 
 
 connects closely with Genesis, 07. 
 contents of, 95. 
 
 :iln}{y of Moses and Aaron peculiarly 
 given in, 87. 
 
 genuineness of chapters iii-v, 87. 
 internal evidences of the genuineness of, 
 
 188. 
 
 numbering of the children of Israel in, 91. 
 repetitions in, for emphasis, 88. 
 Ezekial, 
 
 his symbolical actions really performed, 
 
 895. 
 individuality of, stamped upon all his 
 
 writings, 394. 
 personal history of, 393. 
 wonderful gifts of, 3!)5. 
 Ezekiel, Book of the Prophet, 
 arranged chronologically, 395. 
 contents of, 394. 
 
 genuineness of, beyond dispute, 394. 
 Jewish traditions of its revision, 395. 
 language of, abounds In Chaldaisms, 395. 
 Ezra, 
 
 probable author of Chronicles, 298. 
 Ezra, Book of, 
 
 affinity of its language to that of Chron- 
 icles, 299. 
 
 historical character of, 316. 
 its unity, 307. 
 
 once united with Nehemiah, 306. 
 probably written by Ezra, 308. 
 
 Fathers, Christian, 
 
 value of their testimony, 499, 509. 
 Feasts and sacrifices, 
 
 In tabernacle and temple similar, 197. 
 Forgeries, 
 
 unknown to the early Church, 532. 
 Furnace, 
 
 nery, a frequent mode of punishing in 
 
 Babylon, 419. 
 Fire worshippers, 419. 
 
 Galatia, 
 
 character of its inhabitants, > 
 
 origin of the Church there, GUI. 
 Galatians, Epistle to the, 
 
 contents of, 661. 
 
 genuineness of, 0(12. 
 
 occasion of writing of, 661. 
 
 persons addressed in, 661. 
 
 time and place of composition of, 660. 
 Genealogy, 
 
 in Chronicles, 297. 
 
 of Christ, as given by Luke, 570. 
 
 of Christ, as given by Matthew, 536, 543. 
 
 Genealogy, (continued.) 
 of Mordecai, 319. 
 of Moses and Aaron, 87. 
 of Noah's sons, accordant with modern 
 
 ethnology, 2~6. 
 omissions of, for generations, usual, 240. 
 
 Genesis, 
 
 an introduction to the Mosaic covenant, 96. 
 
 antiquity of, incidentally proved, 159. 
 
 Coleno's objections to, 249. 
 
 connects with Exodus, 97. 
 
 document hypothesis of the origin of, 78, 79. 
 
 enumeration of Edomite kings a proof of its 
 
 genuineness, 161. 
 indications in, of two accounts of deluge, 
 
 82. 
 its history of creation differs from all other 
 
 accounts, 218. 
 
 rationalistic treatment of archaisms of, 1 13. 
 sacred character of history in, 96. 
 synopsis of contents of, ':>">. 
 the terms Elohim and Jehovah in, 79. 
 
 Georgian version, 64. 
 Gethsemane, 604. 
 Gnosis, 
 
 Paul's use of the term, 684. 
 Gnosticism, 
 
 no traces of, in Colossians, 677. 
 Gnostics, 
 
 accepted our Gospels as a sacred authority, 
 529. 
 
 sought admission into the Christian com- 
 munity, 530. 
 Gospels, Apocryphal, 627. 
 
 Gospels, The F >ur, 
 
 external evidence of their genuineness, 
 
 500, 501. 
 if genuine, establish Jesus' title as Messiah, 
 
 500. 
 only Gospels universally received in early 
 
 Church, 503. 
 quoted by Basilides, 526. 
 (i noted by Gnostics, 5-^7. 
 quoted by Marcion, 524. 
 quoted by Serpent Brethren, 529. 
 quoted by Valentinus, 522. 
 read on Sundays in Christian assemblies, 
 
 508. 
 
 reasons for writing each of the, 502. 
 truth of Christianity does not depend on 
 
 the, 500. 
 
 universal reception of the, 500. 
 Gothic version, 64, 479. 
 Grammars, 
 
 the best Hebrew, 46. 
 Greek influence, 
 
 on Babylon culture, 403. 
 Greek language, 
 .Eollc dialect, -1.-.9. 
 Attic dialect, Kill., 
 diffusion of, in Roman Empire, 457. 
 Doric dialed, 450. 
 Hellenistic dialect, 460. 
 Ionic dialect, I.V.). 
 means by which it spread, 4."7. 
 partly prevalent in Palestine in Christ's 
 
 day, 458. 
 
 used In Jerusalem synagogues, 458. 
 why New Testament was written in, 4.")!). 
 Greek literature, 
 
 read in nearly all nations in the apostolic 
 
 age, i:,;. 
 
 Greek words, 
 in Daniel, 403. 
 in Genesis, 404.
 
 776 
 
 INDEX OF TOPICS. 
 
 Habakkuk, Book of the Prophet, 
 contents of, 437. 
 date of delivery of prophecies of, 438. 
 
 Hadap, 
 
 not to be confounded with Hadad, 162. 
 Haggai, Book of the Prophet, 
 contents of, 440. 
 
 Hagiography, 36, 40. 
 
 Hebraisms, 
 
 in Matthew, 547. 
 
 in New Testament Greek, 461. 
 
 in the Pauline Epistles, 670. 
 Hebraists, 
 
 German, English, and American, 45. 
 Hebrew language, 
 
 ancient characters of the, 45. 
 
 cultivated almost exclusively by Jews in 
 the Middle Ages, 45. 
 
 dead iu time of Christ, 458. 
 
 destruction of early MSS. in, 48. 
 
 imperative mood often used for a simple 
 future in, 344. 
 
 list of most valuable MSS. in, 48, 49. 
 
 MSS., none very ancient extant in, 48. 
 
 not liable to change, 44. 
 
 periods of the, 44. 
 
 probability of change in the, 103. 
 
 simpler in its construction than Greek, 461. 
 
 sources of acquaintance with, 45. 
 
 square characters of the, 44. 
 
 the language of the Canaanites, 41. 
 
 the language of the Old Testament, 41. 
 
 varieties of, 42. 
 
 Hebrew philologists, 45, 46. 
 Hebrew poetry, 
 
 characteristics of, 323. 
 Hebrew prophets, 
 
 chronological table of, 364. 
 Hebrew Scriptures, 
 
 lack of modern critical labors upon, 50. 
 Hebrews, Epistle to the, 
 
 anonymous in the most ancient Greek 
 MSS., 532. 
 
 apostolic doctrines In, 706. 
 
 conjectures as to date of its composition, 
 7u5. 
 
 contents of, 706. 
 
 impossibility of fixing on author of, 704. 
 
 local not general, 698. 
 
 no mention of the author in the, 700. 
 
 not addressed to Palestinian or Alexan- 
 drian Christians, 698, 699. 
 
 objections to Pauline origin of, 703. 
 
 opinions of the Fathers on its authorship, 
 700. 
 
 probably addressed to Jewish Christians in 
 Asia Minor, 699. 
 
 reasons for believing it to have originated 
 at least indirectly from Paul, 702, 705. 
 
 reasons for crediting It to Apollos, 704. 
 
 reasons for crediting it to Barnabas, 704. 
 
 style, peculiarity of its, 708. 
 
 style, purity of its, 700. 
 
 value of, 706. 
 
 written before the destruction of Jerusa- 
 lem, 705. 
 
 Hebron, city of , 166. 
 Heliopolis, 
 
 a depository of ancient learning, 115. 
 Hellenistic Greek, 
 
 characteristics of, 460. 
 Heresies, 521-530, 585, 586. 742. 
 Heretics, 
 
 testimony of, to the four Gospels 521. 
 Hexapla, 54. 
 
 Hieroglyphic -writing, 
 
 in Egypt, 102. 
 Hobab, 
 
 his relationship to Moses, 90. 
 Horeb, Mount, 90, 124. 
 Hosea, 
 
 personality of, 424. 
 Hosea, Book of the Prophet, 
 
 contents of, 424. 
 
 date of composition of, 424. 
 
 poetical style of, 425. 
 Human race, 
 
 unity of, 222. 
 Hyperbaton, 
 
 Paul's frequent use of, 25. 
 
 Indo-Germanie languages, 
 
 originated in Western Asia, 222. 
 Inspiration, 
 
 degrees of, 27-30. 
 
 evidences of, 31. 
 
 human element in, 27. 
 
 verbal, held by Jews, and some of the early 
 
 Fathers, 28. 
 Interpolations, 
 
 minor, do not weaken authority, 157. 
 Isaiah, 
 
 personal history of, 365. 
 Isaiah, Book of the Prophet, 
 
 analysis of its chapters, 370. 
 
 analysis of third section of, 376. 
 
 ancient testimony to its genuineness, 367. 
 
 Chaldaisins not found in latter part of, 379. 
 
 contents of, 864. 
 
 explanation of difficulties in, 381. 
 
 genuineness of chapters xi to Ixvi, 378. 
 
 historical portion of, 366. 
 
 internal evidence against authorship of, 
 during the captivity, 380. 
 
 last division, genuineness of, denied by 
 rationalistic school, 367. 
 
 last division, largely Messianic, 382. 
 
 last division, not written during the Baby- 
 lonian captivity, 381. 
 
 most wonderful book of ancient world, 3C4. 
 
 predictions of restoration of Judab, 377. 
 
 predictions of the rebuilding of the temple, 
 377. 
 
 prophecies of, concerning Cyrus, 382. 
 
 prophecies concerning foreign nations, 371. 
 
 prophecies concerning the Messiah, 311. 
 
 prophecies relating to King Josiah, a hun- 
 dred and fifty years before his reign, 382. 
 
 purity of its style, 368. 
 
 quoted by Jeremiah and Zephaniah, 383. 
 
 quoted in New Testament, 308. 
 
 rationalistic criticism unable to do it jus- 
 tice, 369. 
 
 second division of, historical, 375. 
 
 when written, 365. 
 Israel, 
 
 to be governed by kings, 160. 
 
 warned against false prophets, 360. 
 Israelites, 
 
 enumeration of, 91, 92, 134. 
 
 increase of, reasons for, 241. 
 
 in Egypt, 237-241. 
 
 in Egypt, length of stay, 238. 
 Itala version, 62, 472, 492. 
 
 proof of its African origin, 474. 
 
 Jacob, 
 
 explanation of discrepancies, 288. 
 
 his family discrepancies in list of, 237. 
 Jairs, 
 
 in Judges and Joshua, 169.
 
 INDEX OF TOPICS. 
 
 777 
 
 James, General Epistle of, 
 
 addressed to Jewish believers, 713. 
 agreement of, with the writings of Paul 
 
 1 13. 
 
 early doubts of authenticity of. Til. 
 genuineness of, T14. 
 its author, James, son of Alpheus, TOT. 
 not circulated among Gentile Christians of 
 
 the early Church, T13. 
 not received by Erasmus or Luther, 712. 
 peculiarities of style of, T14. 
 quoted by early fathers. Til. 
 written before destruction of Jerusalem 
 
 T16. 
 
 James, son of Alpheus, 
 author of Epistle of James, TOT. 
 bishop of Jerusalem, 7'09. 
 cousin of Jesus, an actual, T09. 
 identical with " the Lord's brother," T09. 
 surnamed "the Just," and " the Less," TOT, 
 
 was he an apostle ? T09. 
 James, son of Zebedee, 
 his earjy death, TOT, 708. 
 
 Jashur, (see Book of the Upright.) 
 Jehoiada, 
 
 carried out musical arrangements of Da- 
 vid, 341. 
 Jehoshaphat, 
 
 appointed singers unto the Lord, 341. 
 Jehovah, 
 
 especially the God of the Hebrews, 80. 
 
 God reveals himself to Moses as, 86. 
 
 no fixed place to worship in the time of 
 David, 215. 
 
 probability of Moses using the term, 81. 
 
 the term, used alternately with Elohim, 
 65,80. 
 
 use of both terms Jehovah and Elohim 
 
 no proof of the document theory., 82-84. 
 Jeremiah, 
 
 character of, 384. 
 
 commanded by God to write his proph- 
 ecies, 391. 
 
 credited with the composition of the Books 
 of Kings, 289. 
 
 death of, not recorded, 384. 
 
 personal history of, 383. 
 
 prophesied in a period of great corruption 
 
 and idolatry, 384. 
 Jeremiah, Book of the Prophet, 
 
 collection and arrangement of prophecies 
 in, 391. 
 
 contents of, 384. 
 
 dates of the deliverance of prophecies in, 
 38r>. 
 
 few Messianic prophecies in, 384. 
 
 four divisions of, 384. 
 
 genuineness of, 385. 
 
 Hebrew text of, and Septuagint, differ, 392. 
 
 its imitation of Isaiah, 886-388. 
 
 last chapter of, appended by a later hand, 
 
 passage in, doubted by modern critics, 
 
 386-390. 
 prophesies of, not in chronological order, 
 
 SlWa 
 
 shortening of proper names, 388. 
 Jericho, 
 
 falling of its walls, 268. 
 Jeroboam's idolatry, 
 
 proves that the Mosaic law was held sacred 
 
 in his day, 198. 
 Jerome, 
 
 erudition of, 62. 
 
 gradual corruption of his version, 62. 
 
 his revision of Old and New Testament, 62. 
 
 Jerome's revision, 4T5. 
 Jerusalem, 
 
 destruction of, by the Romans, a punish- 
 ment for its sins, 25T. 
 the council at, to guard sacred books, 40. 
 Jerusalem Syriae version, 4T2. 
 Jethro, 
 
 relationship of, to Moses, 90. 
 Jews, 
 
 modern, violate Mosaic law, 216. 
 Job, 
 
 his existence verified by the mention of 
 
 his name in Ezekiel, 329. 
 traditionally one of the seven heathen 
 
 prophets of primitive times, 329. 
 Job, Book of, 
 
 a sacred drama, 326. 
 
 author of, probably an inhabitant of south- 
 ern Judea, 332. 
 contents of, 326. 
 date of composition of, 330, 332. 
 design of, 329. 
 
 divides Into prologue, dialogue, and epi- 
 logue, 326. 
 Elihu's discourses in, rejected by some 
 
 critics, 32T. 
 
 genuineness of prologue and epilogue con- 
 ceded by critics, 32T. 
 
 no reason assigned in, for Job's great suf- 
 ferings, 329. 
 not history, 328. 
 probably written in the time of Solomon, 
 
 332. 
 
 sublimity of, 333. 
 supposed by some to have been written by 
 
 Moses, 330. 
 
 value of teachings of, 334. 
 written in a post-Mosaic age, 331. 
 Joel, Book of, 
 
 character of prophecy in, 426. 
 
 date of prophecy, 426. 
 
 personal history of the prophet unknown, 
 
 425. 
 
 plague of locusts in, to be literally under- 
 stood, 425. 
 
 resemblance to Amos, 426. 
 John, First Epistle General of, 
 chapter v, T, spurious, T44. 
 contents of, T43. 
 design of, T06. 
 genuineness of, 598, T42. 
 time of composition of, T43. 
 John, Gospel according to, 
 
 alleged discrepancy between John and 
 other evangelists respecting date of 
 Christ's crucifixion, 016. 
 ancient testimony in its favor, 586. 
 authenticity of chapter v, 3, 4, 62T. 
 authenticity of chapters vii, 53-viii, 11, 626. 
 authenticity of chapter xxi, 626. 
 author of, acquainted with Hebrew lan- 
 guage, 600. 
 
 author of, acquainted with Samaritans, 601. 
 author of, familiar with Jewish customs, 
 
 602. 
 authorship of, indicated throughout the 
 
 book, (iOT. 
 
 Canon of Polyerates, which must have 
 been that of Ephesian Church, included 
 it, 588. 
 
 correctness of the reports of Christ's dis- 
 courses in, 011-613. 
 
 delineation of Christ in, apparently differ- 
 ent from that, of other Gospels, tki'.l. 
 estimates of, by modern critics of various 
 
 schools, 621. 
 
 genuineness of, received by early Church, 
 583.
 
 778 
 
 INDEX OF TOPICS, 
 
 John, Gospel according to, (continued.) 
 
 integrity of, 625. 
 
 internal evidence that it proceeded from 
 John, 600. 
 
 modern attacks on its genuineness, 583. 
 
 passages in, suggesting an eye-witness, 606. 
 
 quoted by the Fathers, 5!>1. 
 
 rejected by Alogians. 585, 620. 
 
 relation of, to Passover controversy, 619. 
 
 sceptical theory concerning, untenable, 585. 
 
 similarity of John and the other evangel- 
 ists, 611. 
 
 synopsis of contents of, 624. 
 
 term Logos in John's Gospel and Philo, 
 615. 
 
 testimony of Canon of Muratori concern- 
 ing, 589. 
 
 time and place of its composition, 623. 
 
 topographical accuracy of, 603. 
 
 written by the author of the First Epistle 
 of John, 595. 
 
 John, Saint, 
 
 account of, by Polycrates, 581. 
 
 anecdotes of, related by Clement, 752. 
 
 author of the Apocalypse, 756. 
 
 banishment of, to Patmos, 752. 
 
 Irenseus's account of, 580. 
 
 peculiarities of literary style of, 765, 766. 
 
 personal history of, 579. 
 
 return of, from Patmos after Nero's death, 
 751. 
 
 was the beloved disciple, 607. 
 John, Second Epistle of, 
 
 authorship of, 746. 
 
 opinions of Church Fathers concerning, 747. 
 
 to whom addressed, 746. 
 
 John, the Presbyter, 762, 763. 
 
 John, Third Epistle of, 
 contents of, 748. 
 genuineness of, 748. 
 personality of Gaius, 747. 
 
 Jonah, Book of, 
 
 character and design of, 431, 433. 
 conjecture of critics concerning, 431. 
 contents of, 430. 
 
 mission of Jonah to Nineveh real, 434. 
 peculiarities of language of, 433. 
 regarded by Jews and early Christians as 
 real history, 432. 
 
 Jonathan ben Uzziel 
 
 personality of, 58. 
 Jordan, 
 
 crossing of the, by Israelites, 268. 
 
 use of the phrase, " beyond Jordan," 164. 
 
 Joseph, 
 
 his story an exact picture of Egyptian cus- 
 toms, 232. 
 
 Joshua, Book of, 
 
 account in, of the falling of the walls of 
 Jericho, 268. 
 
 authorship of, 267. 
 
 contents of, 259. 
 
 credibility of, 267. 
 
 crossing of the Jordan, as related in, 268. 
 
 date and authorship of, 261. 
 
 difference in literary style of the two divis- 
 ions of, 261. 
 
 evidently written before Judges, 266. 
 
 no contradiction between its two divisions, 
 296. 
 
 not a collection of fragments, 264. 
 
 not written by the same author as the Pen- 
 tateuch, 266. 
 
 Pentateuch, the existence and authority of, 
 confirmed in, 208. 
 
 proof of antiquity of, 210. 
 
 Joshua, Book of, (continvM.) 
 references to, in Deuteronomy, 206. 
 standing still of sun and moon, as related 
 
 in, 268. 
 unity of, 260. 
 Judaism, 
 
 necessarily local, 448. 
 Jude, 
 
 personal career of, 738. 
 Jude, Book of, 
 
 author of, does not claim to be an apostle, 
 
 740. 
 
 contents of, 738. 
 date of composition of, 741 . 
 modern criticism upon, 740. 
 quotations in, from apocryphal writings, 
 
 740. 
 
 various opinions of Christian fathers con- 
 cerning the genuineness of, 739. 
 
 Judges, Book of, 
 
 apparent contradictions in, harmonized, 
 
 275. 
 
 authorship of, 374. 
 begins where Joshua leaves off, 266. 
 contents of, 270. 
 corroborates Pentateuch, 210. 
 credibility of its history, 274. 
 date of, 274. 
 
 mainly written by one author, 271. 
 not written before the time of Saul, 273. 
 unity of, 270. 
 written before the middle of David's reign, 
 
 Kings, Books of, 
 
 annals of the respective kings, 288. 
 
 author of, unknown, 289. 
 
 credibility of, 290. 
 
 documents referred to throughout, 286. 
 
 history in, confirmed by ancient monu- 
 ments, 290. 
 
 history in, confirmed by Phoenician records, 
 280. 
 
 history in, confirmed by that of Berosus, 
 296. 
 
 history in, distinguished by fidelity and im 
 partiality, 290. ~ 
 
 history in. may be divided into three pe- 
 riods, 286. 
 
 originally one book, 286. 
 
 source of, 286. 
 
 when written, 287, 289. 
 
 Lamentations, Book of, 
 contents of, 358. 
 Jeremiah, author of, 359. 
 versification of, artificial, 358. 
 
 Landmarks, 
 
 removal of, 172. 
 Language of Deuteronomy, 
 
 proves a Mosaic origin, 131. 
 
 Languages, 
 
 Arabic, 43. 
 
 Aramaean, 42. 
 
 Chaldae, 43, 415. 
 
 Ethiopic, 43. 
 
 Greek, 457. 
 
 Hebrew, 42. 
 
 Indo-Germanic, 222. 
 
 Oriental, stability of, 140. 
 
 Punic, 42. 
 
 Syriac, 47. 
 Latin versions, 
 
 numerous and conflicting, 62. 
 
 the Itala has preference over the other, 62. 
 
 the origin of Vulgate, 62.
 
 INDEX OF TOPICS. 
 
 779 
 
 Latin versions of the New Testa- i 
 ment, 472. 
 
 Law of Moses, 
 
 adapted to Israelites, 257. 
 
 concerning lepers, 133. 
 
 divine authority of, 28. 
 
 non-observance of, no proof of its non-ex- 
 istence, 213. 
 
 observed in time of Jeroboam, 198. 
 
 observed in time of Judges, 210. 
 
 severity of, 28, 257. 
 
 violated by modern Jews, 216. 
 
 written on Mount Ebal, 209. 
 Legislation, 
 
 in Deuteronomy, 129. 
 Leprosy, 
 
 laws respecting, written in desert, 133. 
 Levitical precepts, 
 
 in force in time of Judges, 210. 
 Leviticus, 
 
 contents of, 95. 
 
 records made at time of occurrence of the 
 
 events, 133. 
 Lexicon's, 
 
 best Hebrew, 46. 
 Literary proficiency, 
 
 of the early Christians, 454. 
 " Logos," 
 
 used by Philo, 587. 
 Longevity, 
 
 of the antediluvians not mythical, 223. 
 Luke, Gospel according to, 
 
 contents of, 573. 
 
 date of composition of, 570. 
 
 depreciates none of the apostles, 576. 
 
 design of, 575. 
 
 language of, similar to that of the Acts, 569. 
 
 matter in Luke not in Matthew, 573. 
 
 matter in Matthew not in Luke, 574. 
 
 no doubt in ancient Church as to its author, 
 570. 
 
 statement of, respecting Lysanius, 578. 
 
 statement of, respecting taxing under Cy- 
 renius, 577. 
 
 written before the fall of Jerusalem, 5,2. 
 Luke, Saint, 
 
 author of third Gospel and of Acts of the 
 Apostles, 564. 
 
 his accurate knowledge of Greek and Ro- 
 man history and geography, 578. 
 
 his personal history, 563. 
 
 qualifications as a writer', 564. 
 
 unquestionably Paul's travelling compan- 
 ion, 505. 
 
 Maccabees, 
 
 Scripture learning flourished under the, 412 
 Mnecabees, Books of, 
 
 contain absurdities, -120. 
 
 in favour with some early Fathers, 35. 
 Mai, 
 
 publishes Codex Vaticanus, 465. 
 Malachi, Book of, 
 
 character of prophecy, 447. 
 
 contents of, 446. 
 
 date of, 446. 
 
 questions as to the identity of its author, 
 
 446. 
 Manna, 
 
 cessation of the, 163. 
 Manuscripts, 
 
 easily destroyed, 462. 
 
 uncial, 463. 
 
 ancient, many still existing, 462. 
 
 cursive, 466. ' 
 50 
 
 Mark, Gospel according to, 
 
 brevity of, 554. 
 
 character of, 551. 
 
 date of composition of, 557. 
 
 derived from independent sources, 555. 
 
 Ewald's complex theory of, 556. 
 
 genuineness of, 556. 
 
 integrity of, 559. 
 
 last tvyelve verses of, not genuine, 559. 
 
 omissions of, 554. 
 
 place of composition of, 559. 
 
 use of " Lord," " Christ," and other phrases 
 in, 562. 
 
 written after the Gospels of Matthew and 
 Luke, 55T. 
 
 written for Gentile Christians, 556. 
 
 written originally in Greek, 559. 
 Mark, Saint, 
 
 personal history of, 553. 
 
 wrote at Peter's dictation, 502. 
 
 Masorites, 
 
 their labours, 49. 
 Matthew, Gospel according to, 
 
 chronological order more clearly observed 
 in, than in Luke or Mark, 549. 
 
 Church .Fathers agree that Matthew was 
 author of, 534. 
 
 contents of, 551. 
 
 date of composition of, 544. 
 
 designed especially for Jewish Christians, 
 544. 
 
 doubts of late critics respecting, consid- 
 ered, 548. 
 
 early reception of, by Jewish Christian 
 sects, 541. 
 
 genuineness of, 547. 
 
 Greek original of, some modern critics fa- 
 vour a, 542. 
 
 Greek version of, everywhere received in 
 the early Christian Church, 542. 
 
 Hebraisms of, show that its author's ver- 
 nacular was Hebrew or Syro-Chaldee, 547. 
 
 internal evidence that it was designed for 
 Jewish Christians, 543. 
 
 interpolations in, alleged, 546. 
 
 matter in Luke not in Matthew. 573. 
 
 matter in Matthew not in Luke, 574. 
 
 mutilated by the Ebionites, 534. 
 
 oldest of the four Gospels, 545. 
 
 written originally in Hebrew, 534-537. 
 
 Matthew, Saint, 
 
 his personal history, 533. 
 Medes and Persians, 
 
 flre-worshippers, 419. 
 
 laws of, 418. 
 
 Memphitic version, 476. 
 Meribah and Massah, 89. 
 
 Messianic prophecies, 
 
 fulfilment of, 32. 
 Micah, Book of, 
 
 character of its style, 435. 
 
 date of prophecy, 435. 
 Midianites, 
 
 slaughter of, 248. 
 Minor prophets, 423. 
 Miracles, 
 
 conceivable as the foundation of a relig- 
 ion, 253. 
 
 general objections to, 252. 
 Mishna, its date, 132. 
 Moab, 
 
 topography of, correctly given in story of 
 
 Balaam, 247. 
 Moabite stone, 290.
 
 780 
 
 INDEX OF TOPICS. 
 
 Monuments, 
 
 Assyrian, corroborate Kings and Chroni- 
 cles, 292. 
 
 Babylonian, confirm Bible narrative, 2-30. 
 
 Egyptian, explain customs mentioned in 
 Genesis, 235. 
 
 Mordecai, 
 
 genealogy of, 319. 
 
 probable author of Esther, 322. 
 
 Mosaic account of creation, 
 compared with that of Plato, 219. 
 compared with that of the Hindoos, 218. 
 in harmony with modern science, 220. 
 
 Mosaic history, 
 
 sacred character of, 96. 
 Mosaic law, 
 
 adapted to the Israelites, 257. 
 
 equally severe to idolaters and disobedient 
 Hebrews, 257. 
 
 its non-observance no proof of its non-ex- 
 istence, 213. 
 
 severity of, 28, 257. 
 
 written on Mount Ebal, 209. 
 Moses, 
 
 author of Pentateuch, 114. 
 
 author of Psalm xc, 339. 
 
 genealogy of, 87. 
 
 had ample time to write laws and annals, 
 116. 
 
 his father-in-law known by various names, 
 90. 
 
 independent testimony concerning, 114. 
 
 meekness, reports his own, 120. 
 
 probability of his having written history 
 and laws, 114, 116. 
 
 record of his law kept by himself, 117. 
 
 versatility of, 122. 
 Mount Ebal, 
 
 the Law of Moses written upon, 209. 
 Music, 
 
 in temple worship, 341. 
 Mythology, Greek and Roman, 
 
 traces of Mosaic history in, 228. 
 
 Nahum, Book of, 
 
 date of its composition, 436. 
 
 prophecies concerning Nineveh, 436. 
 
 prophetic style of, 437. 
 Nathan, 
 
 probable author of Books of Samuel, 280. 
 Nebuchadnezzar, 
 
 farly history of, 406, 407. 
 
 polden image of, 409. 
 
 insanity of, 409. 
 
 palace of, 419. 
 Nehemiah, Book of, 
 
 author of. obtains permission to visit and 
 rebuild Jerusalem, 312. 
 
 contents of, 312. 
 
 doubts concerning authorship of chapters 
 viii ix, x, 312. 
 
 historical character of, 316. 
 
 unity of, 312. 
 
 written by Nehemiah, 313. 
 
 written wholly in Hebrew, 312. 
 Nero, 
 
 blames Christians for firing Rome, 450. 
 
 exported to reappear, 755. 
 
 his name answers to the number six hun- 
 dred and sixty-six, 755. 
 
 persecution of Christians during his reign, 
 
 754. 
 Nimrod, 
 
 story of, illustrated on ancient monuments, 
 
 226. 
 
 Nineveh, 
 
 really visited by Jonah, 434. 
 Noah's sons, 
 
 their genealogy, 226. 
 Numbers, 
 
 contents of, 98. 
 
 enumeration of the Israelites in, 134. 
 
 Meribah and Massah, 89. 
 
 miraculous supply of quails mentioned in, 
 
 Obadiah, Book of, 
 
 date of, 429. 
 
 personal history of its author unknown, 429. 
 
 resemblance of, to Jeremiah, xlix, 17-52, 
 
 429. 
 
 Omer, size of, 164. 
 Omri, 
 
 mentioned in Assyrian inscriptions, and on 
 
 the Moabite stone, 292. 
 Onkelos, 58, 
 Oriental languages, 
 
 stability of, 140. 
 Origin of man, 
 
 recent, 222. 
 
 Papyrus, 
 
 the most common writing material in the 
 
 apostolic age, 462. 
 Parchment, 
 
 used in the apostolic age, 462. 
 
 after fourth century, commonly used in 
 
 copying Scriptures, 462. 
 Passover controversy, 619. 
 Passover, Feast of, 
 
 credibility of history of, 243. 
 Pastoral Epistles, 
 
 absurdity of theory of forgery of, 690. 
 
 apostolic origin, proofs of, 684. 
 
 doubts of genuineness of, 684. 
 
 genuineness, inherent proof of, 690. 
 
 historical incidents referred to in, 688. 
 
 likelihood of Paul writing such epistles, 
 685. 
 
 objections drawn from style of, 685. - 
 
 Pauline origin, proofs of, 688. 
 
 special objections to First Timothy, 686. 
 
 unity of authorship, proofs of, in, 687. 
 
 universally received in early Church, 687. 
 Patmos, 
 
 Saint John banished to, 753, 754. 
 Patristic views of inspiration, 24-27. 
 Paul, Saint, 
 
 apparent inconsistencies in his statements, 
 120. 
 
 attainments of, in knowledge, 645. 
 
 characteristics of, 649. 
 
 conversion of, 646. 
 
 his traveling companion, 565. 
 
 his use of terms " devil " and " Satan," 670. 
 
 his use of the term "gnosis," 684. 
 
 imprisonments of, 672. 
 
 later history of, 647. 
 
 missionary journeys of, 646. 
 
 personal history of, as given in Acts and 
 epistles, 635, 644. 
 
 reproof of Peter by, explained, 634. 
 
 travels of, after his first imprisonment iu 
 Rome, 688. 
 
 use of hyperbaton by, 25. 
 
 visit of, to Philippi, 672. 
 Pauline digressions, 671. 
 Pauline epistles, 644, 672, 683. 
 Pauline phraseology, 669, 670.
 
 INDEX OF TOPICS. 
 
 781 
 
 Pentateuch, 
 
 accuracy of, proved by Egyptian monu- 
 ments, 234. 
 
 allusions to, in the Books of Proverbs and 
 Psalms, 191. 
 
 antiquity of, proved by account of Edom- 
 ites, 102. 
 
 apparent contradictions in, 93. 
 
 arrangement of laws in, unmethodical, 85. 
 
 attacked by Colenso, 249. 
 
 attacked in the Wolfenbiittel Fragments, 
 69. 
 
 author of, had an intimate knowledge of 
 events narrated, 254. 
 
 authority of, indicated in Books of Samuel 
 and Kings, 196. 
 
 authorship of, its own statements concern- 
 ing, worthy of credit, 118. 
 
 authorship of modern skepticism regard- 
 ing, 67. 
 
 authorship of, Mosaic, 66, 85, 258. 
 
 chronological difficulties of, 93. 
 
 contents of, 95. 
 
 credibility of the history in the, 218. 
 
 defended by certain rationalists, 68. 
 
 divine authority of, assumed, 258. 
 
 document hypothesis of, its origin, 78. 
 
 enumeration of Edomite kings, a proof of 
 genuineness of, 161. 
 
 external evidence of the antiquity, author- 
 ity, and integrity of, 180. 
 
 falsity of the theory that the early legisla- 
 tion of the Pentateuch consisted only of 
 Exodus xxi-xxii, 142. 
 
 Genesis and Exodus closely connected, 97. 
 
 genuineness of, evidenced by genealogies 
 and lists of kings, 158, 159. 
 
 genuineness of. evidenced by slight treat- 
 ment of unimportant years, 141. 
 
 genuineness of, internal evidences of, 133. 
 
 Hebrew, advantage of, over Samaritan 
 Pentateuch, 178. 
 
 historical facts in, correspond with those 
 in Joshua, 209. 
 
 history in, closely interwoven with its leg- 
 islation, 139. 
 
 history in, credible, 218. 
 
 history in, natural order of, 97. 
 
 history of creation in, diffei's from all other 
 accounts, 218. 
 
 history of views respecting it, 66. 
 
 interpolations in, conceded to be few and 
 slight, 142. 
 
 king of Israel, directions in, concerning, 
 168. 
 
 laws of, improbability of their modifica- 
 tion, 132. 
 
 laws of, interwoven with history in, 139. 
 
 laws of, recognized by Jezebel, 200. 
 
 Mosaic authorship of, acknowledged by 
 Peter and Paul, 259. 
 
 Mosaic authorship of, assumed, 258. 
 
 Mosaic authorship of, want of candour in 
 its opponents, 155. 
 
 Moses's meekness, as recorded is, reported 
 by himself, 120. 
 
 Moses undoubtedly the author of, 66, 85, 258. 
 
 no contradiction between Deuteronomy and 
 other books, 129. 
 
 no portion of it of post-Mosaic origin, 170. 
 
 not written by the author of the Book of 
 Joshua, 316. 
 
 objections to, based on its explanation of 
 the size of an omer, 164. 
 
 objections to, based on the time of the ces- 
 sation of manna, 160. 
 
 older than any other part of the Old Testa- 
 ment, 110. 
 
 origin of the word Pentateuch, 66. 
 
 parallels between history in, and the his- 
 tory in the Books of the Kings, 200. 
 
 Pentateuch, (continued.) 
 
 passages in, supposed to indicate a post- 
 Mosaic age, 1(>5. 
 
 phrase, " unto this day," as used in, 169. 
 
 probably revised by Moses shortly bef< ire 
 his death, 153. 
 
 post-Mosaic age in the, alleged traces of a, 
 157. 
 
 proof of the great antiquity of, 103. 
 
 proof of the existence and authority of, in 
 the Book of Joshua, 208. 
 
 quoted by David, 202. 
 
 quoted by Solomon, 198. 
 
 rationalistic critics, concessions of, con- 
 cerning, 137. 
 
 rationalistic treatment of archaisms in, 60. 
 
 references in, to Moses in third person, 
 120. 
 
 references in, to the Book of the Law, 1 19. 
 
 reference to, in Joshua's acts, 203. 
 
 referred to by the "Greater" and the 
 " Lesser " Prophets, 180-190. 
 
 repetition in, for emphasis, 88. 
 
 repetitions, frequent, in, 83. 
 
 Samaritan, scant agreement between, and 
 that of the Septuagint, 178. 
 
 Samaritan versions of, 65, 174. 
 
 statement of the Pentateuch concerning its 
 author, 117. 
 
 tabernacle, account of, as given in Mosaic 
 age, 133. 
 
 terms Elobimand Jehovah, as used in, 05. 
 
 testimony by the history of the Books of 
 Samuel and Kings to the existence aud 
 authority of the Pentateuch, 194. 
 
 topography of, accurate, 248. 
 
 traces of, in Book of Ruth, 205. 
 
 unity of its plan, 95, 138. 
 
 use and authority of, throughout post-Mo- 
 saic age, 180. 
 
 various difficulties in, answered, 90. 
 
 various styles of, 94. 
 
 wonderful elevation of its theology, 258. 
 
 Persecution of Christians, 
 by Nero, 450, 754. 
 under Domitian, 754. 
 under Trajan, 451. 
 
 Persians, 
 
 regarded their kings as the incarnation of 
 
 Ormuzd, 418. 
 
 their relations with the Medes, 418. 
 their traditions of creation, 221. 
 the sexes mingled at their feasts, 417. 
 
 Peshito version, 
 
 contains possibly to a great extent the 
 original Syro-Chaldee text of Matthew's 
 Gospel, 471. 
 
 first known to Europeans in sixteenth cen- 
 tury, 469. 
 
 its antiquity and value, 469. 
 
 late valuable printed editions, 470. 
 
 most ancient manuscripts of, 470. 
 
 of Old and New Testaments, 61. 
 
 Peter, First Epistle General of, 
 addressed to Gentiles chiefly, 722. 
 contents of, 733. 
 doubtless written by Peter, 732. 
 Hilgenfeld's theory of, absurd, 729. 
 improbability of its rejection by Theodore 
 
 of Mopsuestiu, 72.'!. 
 objections to, of modern critics considered, 
 
 passages in, said to be borrowed from Paul 
 and James, 725, 728. 
 
 sent Uy Silvanus, 733. 
 
 written from Babylon, 732. 
 
 written, probably, during persecutions un- 
 der Nero, 729. '
 
 782 
 
 INDEX OF TOPICS. 
 
 Peter, Saint, 
 
 characteristics of, 719. 
 
 his crucifixion in Rome, A.D. 67 or 68, 721. 
 
 notices of, In the writings of the Fathers, 
 
 720, 721. 
 
 personal history of, 718. 
 probably four years in Rome, 721. 
 tomb pointed out in A.D. 200, 721. 
 
 Peter, Second Epistle General of, 
 contents of, 734. 
 doubts of reformers and modern critics as 
 
 to its genuineness, 737. 
 hardly noticed by the Fathers, 736. 
 persons addressed In, 734. 
 recognized in the fourth century, 736. 
 resemblance of, to Jude, 735. 
 written in more elegant Greek than the 
 
 First Epistle, 736. 
 
 Plagues, 
 
 narrative in Genesis correspondent with 
 
 Egyptian customs, 285. 
 of locusts, 425. 
 
 Plato's cosmogony, 
 
 compared with that of Moses, 219. 
 Philemon, Epistle to, 
 
 cause of writing of, 696. 
 
 date of, 697. 
 
 genuineness of, 697. 
 
 opinions of the Fathers concerning, 697. 
 Philippi, city of, 671. 
 
 Paul's visit to, 672. 
 
 its Church composed of Gentiles, 672. 
 Philippians, Epistle to the, 
 
 assailed by modern sceptics, 674. 
 
 genuineness of, 673. 
 
 synopsis of contents of, 673. 
 
 written during Paul's first imprisonment 
 
 in Rome, 672. 
 Philistines, 
 
 familiar with history of Israel as recorded 
 
 in the Pentateuch, 204. 
 Philoxenian translation, 471. 
 Phoenicians, 
 
 Books of Kings confirmed by their records, 
 286. 
 
 mention of Solomon's temple by their his- 
 torians, 296. 
 Poetry of the Hebrews, 
 
 parallelisms in, 323. 
 
 poetical books, in the Old Testament, 322. 
 
 poetry quoted in the Pentateuch, 166. 
 
 rhythm of, 323. 
 
 stanzas in, of same number of words, 324. 
 Population of Roman Empire, 
 
 in age of Claudius Cspsar, 464. 
 
 in time of Augustus, 454. 
 Predictions, 
 
 by specific names. 382. 
 Presbyter and bishop, 
 
 identity of, in apostolic Church, 685. 
 Priests, 
 
 among the Israelites previous to time of 
 
 Moses and Aaron, 88. 
 Primeval condition of man, 
 
 according to the 
 ancient Persian books, 223. 
 Chinese classics, 223. 
 classical poets, 222. 
 Hindoo literature, 223. 
 Zendavesta, 223. 
 Prophets, Heathen, 
 
 the seven, of primitive times, 329. 
 Pro) hets, Hebrew, 
 
 characteristics of, 861. 
 
 chronological table of, 364. 
 
 Prophets, Hebrew, (continued.) 
 earlier, 259. 
 false, 360. 
 
 impossibility of blending writings of, 368. 
 language of, sublime, 363. 
 manner of inspiration of, 29. 
 predictions without a parallel, 32. 
 schools of, 360. 
 symbolic actions of, 362. 
 
 Prophecies, Biblical, 
 
 communicated in visions in which future 
 events passed before the eyes of prophets 
 as present realities, 381. 
 
 exactly fulfilled, 32. 
 
 many preseiTed, respecting the genuine- 
 ness of which there can be no doubt, 362. 
 
 respecting the universality of Christ's king- 
 dom and the conversion of the Jews not 
 yet fulfilled, 363. 
 
 some dependent upon circumstances, others 
 unconditional and limitless, 363. 
 
 spoken of as being fulfilled, yet in the fu- 
 ture, 381. 
 
 Prophecy, 
 
 furnishes an argument for the existence of 
 
 God, 382. 
 
 Hebrew, characteristics of, 360. 
 most brilliant period of, 361. 
 various views of its character, 362. 
 
 Proverbs, Book of, 
 
 Agur and Lemuel, mentioned in, unknown, 
 345. 
 
 consists of four sections, 345. 
 
 copied out by the men of Hezekiah, not col- 
 lected, 347. 
 
 genuineness of, 345. 
 
 Jehovistic. 345. 
 
 one third of Solomon's proverbs not in our 
 collection, 345. 
 
 peculiarities of language of Solomon's prov- 
 erbs, 345. 
 
 scepticism as to its authorship, 345. 
 
 written by Solomon, 345. 
 
 Psalms, 
 
 authority of their superscriptions. 334. 
 
 Book of, divided into five parts, 334. 
 
 Book of, its arraagement, 340. 
 
 classes, various, of the, 343. 
 
 collection in existence in time of Heze- 
 kiah, 341. 
 
 divided by some critics into Jehovistic and 
 Elohistic sections, 340, 342. 
 
 doxology at end of each division, 334. 
 
 exhibit Israelitish history and customs, 101. 
 
 fifty anonymous, 335. 
 
 how many were written by David, 336, 337, 
 338. 
 
 Imprecations in the, 338, 343. 
 
 integrity of the, 343. 
 
 none written later that Nehemiah, 340. 
 
 origin of the collection of the Book of, 340. 
 
 Psalm li, not necessarily written as late as 
 Babylonian captivity, 337. 
 
 some passages in, not models for the imita- 
 tion of Christians, 3.v>. 
 
 some superscriptions obscure, 335. 
 
 sung in Hebrew worship, 341. 
 
 superscription "to the chief musician," 
 not found in Psalms composed after 
 Babylonian captivity, 335. 
 
 ten attributed to the sons of Korah, 339. 
 
 twelve attributed to Asaph, 338. 
 
 Pul, King, 
 
 mentioned by Berosus, 292. 
 Punic language, 4?. 
 Punishment, 
 
 methods of, in Babylon, 418.
 
 IXDEX OF TOPICS. 
 
 783 
 
 Purim, Feast of, 
 
 attests historical character of the Book of 
 Esther, 321. 
 
 Raguel, 
 
 his relationship to Moses, 90. 
 Recorder, 
 
 first mentioned in David's time, 288. 
 Resurrection of Jesus Christ, 
 
 established independently of testimony of 
 
 the evangelists, 500. 
 Revelation, 
 
 not an impossibility-, 23. 
 Romans, Epistle to the, 
 
 contents of, 651. 
 
 genuineness of, 650. 
 
 integrity of, 652. 
 
 persons addressed in, 649. 
 
 time of its composition, 650. 
 
 written at Corinth, 650. 
 Rome, 
 
 probable origin of the Church there, 650. 
 
 subdued by the arts of Greece, 458. 
 Ruth, Book of, 
 
 contents of, 275. 
 
 date and author of, 276. 
 
 events of, occurred in time of Judges, 275. 
 
 its beauty, 277. 
 
 its design, 276. 
 
 rabbinical estimate of, 277. 
 
 Sabbath, 
 
 Christians accustomed to meet on " the day 
 
 of the sun," 490. 
 Samaria, 
 
 capture of, recorded in Assyrian inscrip- 
 tions, 293. 
 Samaritan Pentateuch, the, 174. 
 
 disagreement between, and the Pentateuch, 
 
 178. 
 Samaritans, 
 
 animosity of Jews to, 175, 176. 
 antiquity of the characters in the Samari- 
 tan Pentateuch, 177. 
 author's interview with the highpriest of 
 
 the modern sect, 170. 
 
 dispute of, with Jews concerning the tem- 
 ple, 175. 
 origin of, 174. 
 
 Pentateuch used by, 65, 174. 
 temple built by, under Sanballat, 175. 
 their worship of Jehovah based on the Mo- 
 saic law, 177. 
 Samuel, Books of, 
 
 alleged contradictions in, examined, 281. 
 
 character of the history of, 280. 
 
 date and authorship of, 278. 
 
 have genuine historical stamp, 281. 
 
 originality of. 278. 
 
 used in the compilation of the Chronicles, 
 
 301. 
 
 were originally but one book, 277. 
 Saul quotes the Pentateuch, 171. 
 Sciences and arts, 
 
 in ancient Egypt, 101. 
 Scriptures, 
 
 atheists unfit to deal fairly with, 23. 
 
 human and divine factors in, 24. 
 
 n-iid iu the services of the primitive Church, 
 
 too. 
 
 studied carefully under the Maccabees, 412. 
 Semitic languages, 
 
 are simple in structure, 44. 
 five branches of, 42. 
 peculiar features of, 43. 
 
 Sennacherib, 
 
 the miraculous destruction of his army re- 
 ferred to in Herodotus, 295. 
 
 Septuagint, 
 
 authoritative at time of Christ, 53. 
 
 character of, 52. 
 
 criticism of, a difficult task, 55. 
 
 editions of Holmes and Parsons, 57. 
 
 most important editions of, 56. 
 
 origin of, 50. 
 
 recensions of, in third century. 55. 
 
 text of, in an unsettled state, 53-55. 
 
 two remarkable interpolations in the Book 
 of Joshua, 157. 
 
 version in the early Church, 53. 
 Shiloh, 
 
 a sacred place, 215. 
 Siloam, 
 
 pool of, 575. 
 Sinai, Mount, 
 
 a single summit of the mountainous group 
 called Horeb. 124. 
 
 identification of Jebel Musa with, 246. 
 
 identification of Ras Susafeh with "the 
 Mount of the Law," 246. 
 
 Sinaitie peninsula, 
 
 thoroughly explored by Professor Palmer, 
 
 245. 
 topography of, correctly given in Exodus. 
 
 Slavonian version, 65. 
 Solomon, 
 
 his dedicatory prayer given in ais exact 
 
 words, 213. 
 
 his departure from Mosaic regulation-, !C9. 
 no reason to doubt his authorship of the 
 
 Song of Solomon, 357. 
 not the author of Ecclesiastes, 351. 
 quotes the Pentateuch, 198. 
 undoubtedly the author of the Proverbs 
 
 attributed to him, 346. 
 "Solomon, Book of Acts of," 286. 
 Solomon, Song of, 
 a dialogue, 353. 
 an allegorical poem, 354. 
 analysis of, 354. 
 attributed to Solomon by ancient tradition, 
 
 357. 
 
 contents of, 353. 
 design of, 354. 
 
 oriental usages present reasons for an al- 
 legorical interpretation of, 325. 
 quest-ions concerning the canonidty of. : >"'7. 
 similar sacred songs sung by the dervishes 
 
 of Egypt, 325. 
 
 written in Solomon's age, 357. 
 " Son of Man," 
 
 praise taken from Daniel, 422. 
 Sun, 
 
 standing still of, recorded in Joshua, 'MS. 
 standing still of, referred to in Habit Kkuk. 
 
 H0. 
 Superscriptions, 
 
 of the (iospels, an evidence of their ^-nii- 
 
 iricnrss, .>'!<>. 
 of the Psalms, modern criticisms on ;n -ir 
 
 accuracy, .'Mi. 
 Symbolic actions of the prophets. 
 
 395. 
 Symmachus, 
 
 his version of the Old Testament, 54. 
 Syriac language, 
 extent of, 4-J. ir,; . 
 helps for its study, 47. 
 literature, richness of, 42.
 
 784 
 
 INDEX OF TOPICS. 
 
 Syriac language, (continued.) 
 little changed for centuries, 140. 
 translation of Old and New Testaments 
 into, 61. 
 
 Syriac literature, 
 
 flourished In second century, 468. 
 Syriac version, 
 
 probable antiquity of, 468. 
 Syro-Chaldee language, 458. 
 
 Tabernacle, 
 
 difficulty concerning its building, 93. 
 directions for its building, 133. 
 located in Shiloh, 130. 
 services in, similar to those of Solomon's 
 temple, 198. 
 
 Talmudic canon, 40. 
 
 Targums, 
 
 of Jerusalem, 60. 
 
 of Jonathan, characteristics and value of, 
 
 59. 
 
 of Onkelos, its intelligibility, 59. 
 later editions of, 61. 
 of Pseudo-Jonathan on Pentateuch, 59. 
 on the Hagiographa their various styles, 
 60. 
 
 Temple, Second, 
 
 construction of, 308. 
 Temple, Solomon's, 
 
 its arrangement a proof of the existence of 
 Moses's law, 197. 
 
 Its building mentioned in Phoenician rec- 
 ords, 296. 
 
 parallel between It and the sanctuary in 
 Exodus, 197. 
 
 services similar to those of tabernacle, 198. 
 
 singing at, 341. 
 Testament, New, 
 
 introduction to, 448. 
 
 origin of the term, 33. 
 
 references to, in early writers, 489. 
 
 times and occasions o'f composition, 488. 
 
 why written in Greek, 459. 
 Testament, Old, 
 
 Concordances of, 57. 
 
 Greek translations of, 57. 
 
 impartiality of its history, 211. 
 
 its purpose, 448. 
 
 origin of the term, 33. 
 
 versions, list of, 50-65. 
 
 Syriac translation of, 458. 
 TetrVipla, 55. 
 
 Thebaie (or Sahadie) version, 477. 
 Theists, 
 
 cannot deny possibility of written revela- 
 tion, 23. 
 Theodotion's version, 
 
 of Old Testament, 54. 
 Thessalonians, First Epistle to, 
 
 contents of. 079. 
 
 genuineness of, 680. 
 
 misconception of Paul's meaning in, 680. 
 
 quoted by Fathers, 680. 
 
 written from Corinth, 679. 
 Thessalonians, Second Epistle to, 
 
 contents of, 681. 
 
 Hebraisms in, 683. 
 
 Hilgenfeld's doubts concerning, stated and 
 considered, 681. 
 
 probably written from Corinth, 680. 
 
 received by ancient Church, 681. 
 Thessalonica, 
 
 city of, 678. 
 
 date of Paul's visit to, 679. 
 
 Thomas of Charkel, 
 
 his diligence in improving the Syriac 
 Philoxenian translation of the New Tes- 
 tament, 472. 
 Tiberias, 
 
 John's neglect to notice it, an evidence of 
 
 the antiquity of his Gospel, 604. 
 TiYnothy, 
 
 bishop of Ephesus, 692. 
 
 his personal history, 691. 
 
 Timothy, First Epistle to, 
 
 allusions in, to Timothy's youth, 686. 
 contents of, 692. 
 date of writing of, 686, note, 
 doubts of genuineness of, 686. 
 rejected by Marcion, 693. 
 testimony of early Fathers to its genuine- 
 ness, 692. 
 
 Timothv, Second Epistle to, 
 contents of, 693. 
 
 found in all ancient versions, 694. 
 Tisehendorf, 
 
 publisues/ac-8fmtfe edition of Codex Sinait- 
 
 icus, 463. 
 publishes corrected edition of Codex Vat- 
 
 icanus, 465. 
 
 publishes Monumenta Sacra Inedita, 467. 
 Titus, Epistle to, 
 contents of, 695. 
 universally received, 696. 
 Tobit, Book of, 
 
 absurdities of, 420. 
 Traditions, 
 
 of the confusion of tongues at Babel, 227. 
 
 of the creation, Babylonian, 221. 
 
 of the creation, Etruscan, 221. 
 
 of the creation, Hindoo, 218. 
 
 of the creation, Persian. 221. 
 
 of the deluge, found on tablets in the ruins 
 
 of Nineveh, 225. 
 of the deluge, universal, 224. 
 of the fall, 203. 
 
 of the golden age, Chinese, 223. 
 of the golden age, Greek and Latin, 222. 
 of the. golden age, Hindoo, 228. 
 of the longevity of the ancients, 223, 224. 
 Tregelles, 
 
 his rank as a critical editor, 487. 
 Trent, Council of, 
 
 order the revision of the Vulgate, 63. 
 Tyre, 
 
 its relation to Zidon, 266. 
 prophecies of its overthrow, 373. 
 
 Uncial letters, 468. 
 Uncial manuscripts, 
 
 description of the most important, 463. 
 
 number of, 463. 
 Unity of God. 
 
 revealed by inspiration, 81. 
 Unity of the Pentateuch, 95. 
 Upright, Book of the, 265. 
 
 Vatican Manuscript, 
 
 order of books in, 488. 
 Versions of New Testament, 
 
 ,Kili in] iir. 759. 
 Armenian, 761. 
 Bash m uric, 759. 
 Coptic, 756. 
 Gothic, 760. 
 1 1 a hi, I ; -.'. 
 
 Jerome's revision, 475. 
 Jerusalem Syriac, 472. 
 Meuiphitlc, t57.
 
 INDEX OF TOPICS. 
 
 7*5 
 
 Versions of New Testament, (cont'd.) 
 
 Peshito Syriac, 467. 
 
 Philoxenian translation, 471. 
 
 Thebaic or Sahidic, 758. 
 Versions of Old. Testament, 
 
 JSthiopic, 64. 
 
 Arabic, 05. 
 
 Armenian, 64. 
 
 Egyptian, 63. 
 
 Georgian, 64. 
 
 Gothic, 04. 
 
 Greek, 54. 
 
 I lulu. 02. 
 
 Samaritan Pentateuch, 65. 
 
 Septuagint, 50. 
 
 Slavonian, 65. 
 
 Syriac, 61. 
 
 Targums, 58. 
 
 Vulgate, 62. 
 
 Visions of Prophets, 30. 
 Vowel points, 
 
 not originally used in Semitic languages, 
 44. 
 
 their introduction into Hebrew, 140. 
 Vulgate, 
 
 gradually corrupted, 62. 
 
 made the standard by the Council of Trent, 
 63. 
 
 origin of, 62. 
 
 various revisions of, 63. 
 
 Wars of Jehovah, Book of, 166. 
 Wisdom of Jesus Siraeh, 
 
 its date, 39. 
 
 omission of Daniel from the list of distin- 
 guished men in, 405. 
 
 WolfenbiJutel Fragments, 69. 
 
 Writing, 
 
 alphabetic, 99, 101. 
 
 antiquity of the art of alphabetical, 100. 
 
 in Egypt in the Mosaic age, 101. 
 
 on papyri. 462. 
 
 on parchment, 462. 
 
 Xerxes, 
 
 probably identical with Ahasuerus, 318. 
 
 Zeehariah, 
 
 his personal history, 440. 
 Zeehariah, Book of, 
 
 contents of, 441. 
 
 genuineness of chapters ix to xiv, 441. 
 
 strong external evidence of genuineness 
 Of, 444. 
 
 style of language, 445. 
 
 style of thought, 445. 
 
 variation in style of, accounted for, 444. 
 
 Zephaniah, 
 
 his personality, 438. 
 
 Zephaniah, Book of, 
 character of prophecy, 439. 
 date of, 439. 
 
 Zidon, 
 
 its relations to Tyre, 268, 
 
 Zoar, ancient, 
 
 its site, 231. 
 Zoroaster, 
 
 religion of, 410.
 
 INDEX OF AUTHOKS QUOTED. 
 
 Abarbanel, 
 
 on the Book of Jonah, 432. 
 A ben Ezra, 
 
 his doubts concerning the Mosaic author- 
 ship of portions of the Pentateuch, 67. 
 on the authorship of the last part of the 
 Book of Isaiah, 3iiO. 
 
 Abydenus, 
 
 his reference to the Tower of Babel, 227. 
 Agrippa Castor, 
 
 refutes Basilides, 454. 
 Alexander, (of Princeton,) 
 
 his criticisms on Isaiah xl to Lxvl, 378. 
 Ambrose, 
 
 canon according to, 495. 
 
 receives the First and Second Epistles of 
 
 Peter, T23, 736. 
 quotes the Apocalypse, 760. 
 Andreas, 
 
 on the reception of the Apocalypse in the 
 
 fifth century, 759. 
 Apelles, 
 
 quotes John's Gospel as an authority, 95. 
 Apollonius, 
 
 quotes the Apocalypse of John, 757. 
 Aristides, 
 
 writes in defence of Christianity to the 
 
 Emperor Hadrian, 454. 
 Aristobulus, (in Eusebius,) 
 
 his account of the Alexandrian version, 51. 
 Arnobius, 
 
 on the early increase of the Christians, 453. 
 Arrian, 
 
 says Cyrus was the first king honoured by 
 
 prostration, 418. 
 Assemam, 
 
 on Ephraem's knowledge of Greek, 758, 
 
 note. 
 
 on the views of Ephraein the Syrian as to 
 ., the authorship of the Apocalypse, 761, 
 
 note. 
 Astruc, 
 
 on the "document hypothesis," 70. 
 Athanasius, 
 
 his catalogue of the books of the Old Testa- 
 ment, 35. 
 
 canon according to, 494. 
 receives both Epistles of Peter, 723, 736. 
 quotes the Apocalypse as an authority, 760. 
 quotes John's Gospel in proof of the divin- 
 ity of Christ, 600. 
 Auberlen, 
 
 defends the authenticity of the Book of 
 
 Daniel, 398. 
 acknowledges St. John as the author of the 
 
 Apocalypse, 763. 
 
 his theory of the prophecies of the Apoc- 
 alypse, 770. 
 
 an authority on the Apocalypse, 770. 
 Augustine, 
 
 on literal inspiration, 26. 
 on the perspicuity of the I tula version, 62. 
 on the canonical books of the New Testa- 
 ment, 497. 
 
 Augustine, (continued.) 
 
 acknowledges the genuineness of both the 
 
 Epistles of Peter, 723, 737. 
 makes no mention of 1 John v, 7 745. 
 receives the Second and Third Epistles "f 
 
 John, 747, 748. 
 regards the Apocalypse as canonical, 701 
 
 Bardesanes, 
 
 his testimony to the spread of Christianity. 
 453. 
 
 Barnabas, (Epistle of,) 
 
 quotes from our Gospels, 515. 
 Basilides, 
 
 his exposition of the New Testament, 526. 
 valuable testimony to the authenticity of 
 
 the Gospels, 529. 
 
 quotes the Epistle to the Romans, 651. 
 Basil of Ancyra, 
 
 uses John's Gospel as an authority, 601. 
 Basil, (the Great,) 
 
 Epistle to the Ephesians, 653. 
 quotes the Apocalypse, 762. 
 Baumgarten, 
 
 defends the Book of Jonah, 432. 
 Baur, 
 
 on the date of the composition of Luke's 
 
 Gospel, 571. 
 thinks Luke's Gospel Pauline In character, 
 
 575. 
 
 his attack on John's Gospel, 584. 
 his estimate of the Acts of the Apostles, 
 
 663. 
 on the purport and bearing of the Pastoral 
 
 Epistles, 083, 684. 
 
 on the martyrdom of Peter at Rome, 722. 
 denies the genuineness of the First Epistle 
 
 of Peter, 724. 
 on the date of the First Epistle of Peter, 
 
 728. 
 
 acknowledges the Apostle John as the au- 
 thor of the Apocalypse, 768. 
 Benary, 
 
 on the meaning of the number Six hundred 
 
 and sixty-six, 755. 
 Berosus, 
 
 mentions Pul. 292. 
 his account of Nebuchadnezzar, 406. 
 records Babylonian conquest of Syria, 407. 
 Bertholdt, 
 
 on the authorship of the Pentateuch, 70. 
 on the authorship of the Book of Daniel, 
 
 396, 398. 
 his objections to part of the prophecy of 
 
 Zechariah, 441. 
 
 on the date of Malachl's prophecy, 447. 
 his defence of John's Gospel, 584. 
 acknowledges the Apostle John as the au- 
 thor of the Apocalypse, 763. 
 Beza, 
 
 his Greek Testament contains 1 John v, 7 
 
 745. 
 Bleek, 
 
 on the use of the Septuaglnt version bv 
 Hellenistic Jews, 53.
 
 INDEX OF AUTHORS QUOTED. 
 
 787 
 
 Bleek, (continued.) 
 
 on the antiquity of the Vatican and Alex- 
 andrian Codices, 55. 
 
 on the compilation of the Pentateuch, 72. 
 
 on supposed inconsistencies in Genesis, 
 Exodus, Leviticus, and Numbers, 86-92. 
 
 on the directions to the Israelites concern- 
 ing their future king, 168. 
 
 on the Samaritan religion, 177. 
 
 on the early existence of the Pentateuch, 
 211, 212. 
 
 on the erection of twelve stones in , the 
 Jordan, 263. 
 
 on supposed interpolations in Joshua, 2C3. 
 
 admits that the last chapters of Judges were 
 composed at an early date, 271. 
 
 refers Book of Judges to the time of the 
 earlier kings, 27 i. 
 
 on the forms of language in the Book of 
 Until, 276. 
 
 on the value of the Books of Kings, 288. 
 
 on the materials of the Books of Chron- 
 icles, 301. 
 
 on the relation of the Books of Chronicles 
 to the other books of the Old Testament, 
 302. 
 
 thinks the statements of Chronicles some- 
 times inexact, 304. 
 
 his remarks on the composition of the Book 
 of Ezra, 307. 
 
 on supposed historical blunders in Ezra, 
 30&. 
 
 on the alleged incredibility of Esther's his- 
 tory, 319. 
 
 on the misrepresentations regarding Es- 
 ther, 320. 
 
 on the historical character of the Book of 
 Esther, 320. 
 
 on the historical basis of fact in the Book 
 of Esther, 821. 
 
 on Job's prologue and epilogue, 327. 
 
 on the habit of Hebrew poets to give names 
 to their songs, 336. 
 
 Psalms rejected by, as not belonging to 
 David, 336. 
 
 thinks certain Psalms attributed to David 
 probably not written by him, 337. 
 
 on Psalm ii, 338. 
 
 holds Asaph not to be the author of any 
 Psalms, 338. 
 
 considers Moses the author of Psalm xc, 
 339. 
 
 thinks no Psalm should be placed at a later 
 date than the time of ISiehemiah, 340. 
 
 Infers that the collection of Psalms was 
 formed at different times, 341. 
 
 thinks that some of the Psalms were revised 
 by later poets, 343. 
 
 admits that a large portion of the Proverbs 
 are undoubtedly Solomon's, 346. 
 
 refers Ecclesiastes to the Persian or Greek 
 period, 352. 
 
 disapproves of Delitxsch's divisions of the 
 Song of Solomon, 354. 
 
 denies an allegorical meaning in the Song 
 of Solomon, 355. 
 
 does not believe Solomon to be the author 
 of the Song of Solomon, 35(i. 
 
 on the authorship of Lamentations, 3110. 
 
 on the date of the composition of Lamenta- 
 tions, 300. 
 
 on the genuineness of various disputed 
 sections of Isaiah. 364-378. 
 
 attacks the Book of Daniel, 398. 
 
 on the inferences deducible from Ezekiel's 
 mention of Daniel. 399. 
 
 on the omission of Ezra by Jesus Sirach, 
 405. 
 
 on the " plague of locusts," in the proph- 
 ecy of Joel" 425. 
 
 on character of the prophecy of Joel, 427. 
 
 Bleek, (continued.) 
 
 on the prophecy of Amos, 428. 
 
 on the date of Obadiah's prophecy, 430. 
 
 on the prophecy of Jonah, 431. 
 
 on the date of Habakkuk's prophecy, 438. 
 
 on the date of ZephaniahV prophecy, 439. 
 
 his objections to part of prophecy of Zech- 
 ariaJ?, 441, 442. 
 
 on the date of Zechariah's prophecy, 443. 
 
 on allusions in Zech. xi, 8 444. 
 
 on Zech. xii-xiv, 444. 
 
 thinks Malachi the real name of the proph- 
 et so-called, 446. 
 
 on the date of Malachi's prophecy, 447. 
 
 holds the Gospel of Matthew to have been 
 originally written in Greek, 542. 
 
 on the date of the Gospel of Matthew, 545. 
 
 thinks Mark unquestionably the author of 
 the Gospel of Mark,. 557. 
 
 on the date of the Gospel of Mark, 558. 
 
 holds that the Gospel of Mark originally 
 appeared in Rome, 559. 
 
 on the question, \V;is Timothy Paul's com- 
 panion in travel J 5(jti. 
 
 on the date of the Gospel of Luke, 571. 
 
 on the genuineness of John's Gospel, 584. 
 
 believes John xxi to be a late addition, 625. 
 
 on the value of the apocryphal Gospels, 630. 
 
 on the persons addressed in the Epistle to 
 the Hebrews, 698. 
 
 his objections to the Pauline authorship of 
 the Epistle to the Hebrews, 703. 
 
 on date of the Kpistle to the Hebrews, 705. 
 
 thinks James, the brother of the Lord, was 
 not an apostle, 709. 
 
 defends the Epistle of James, 714. 
 
 refers the cum position of James' Epistle to 
 A.D. 63, 64716. 
 
 on the crucifixion of Peter at Rome, 722. 
 
 acknowledges the genuineness of the First 
 Epistle of Peter, 732. 
 
 rejects the Second Epistle of Peter, 739. 
 
 acknowledges the [genuineness of the Sec- 
 ond and Third Epistles of John, 747, 748. 
 
 on the meaning of the mystical number 
 Six hundred and sixty-six, 755. 
 
 on the date of the Apocalypse, 756. 
 
 does not regard John as the author of the 
 Apocalypse, 762. 
 
 his theory of the meaning of the Apoca- 
 lypse, 770. 
 
 Bo'hmer, 
 
 accepts the Apostle John as the author of 
 the Apocalypse, 763. 
 
 Boling broke, 
 
 attacks the Mosaic writings, 68. 
 of the great length of human life in the 
 early ages, 224. 
 
 Bonomi, 
 
 reproduces a Ninevite picture of Nimrod, 
 
 227. 
 on the musical instruments of the Nine- 
 
 vites, 404. 
 
 Brandis, 
 
 on the contact of the Greeks with the As- 
 syrians, -in:;. 
 
 Bredenkamp, 
 
 opposes the new theory of Graf, 77. 
 
 Bretschn eider, 
 
 makes a systematic attack on the Gospel of 
 
 John, 583. 
 Buffon, 
 
 on the prolonged life of the patriarchs, 224. 
 Bunsen, 
 
 attacks the Bonk of Daniel, 398. 
 
 on Ezekiel's mention of Daniel, 399. 
 
 on Jonah's thanksgiving hymn, 431.
 
 788 
 
 INDEX OF AUTHORS QUOTED. 
 
 Bu risen, (continued.) 
 
 on the date of the prophecy of Joel, 426. 
 objects to part of the prophecy of Zechari- 
 uh. 441. 
 
 Caius, 
 
 on the graves of Peter and Paul, 648, 722. 
 attributes the Apocalypse to Cerinthus, 759. 
 
 Callistus of Rome, 
 
 quotes John's Gospel as an authority, 595. 
 Calmberg, 
 
 defends John's Gospel, 584. 
 Calvin, 
 
 on the divine authority of the Scripture, 27. 
 Carlstadt, 
 
 on the authorship of the Pentateuch, 67. 
 Carpzov, 
 
 defends the genuineness of the Penta- 
 teuch, 68. 
 
 on the composition of the Book of Job, 326. 
 Caspari, 
 
 his criticism on Isaiah xxxlv, xxxv, 375. 
 
 on the originality of Obadiah, 429. 
 Cassiodorus, 
 
 on the taxing under Cyrenius mentioned in 
 
 Luke's Gospel, 576. 
 Cerinthus, 
 
 his heretical doctrines, 742. 
 Chrysostom, 
 
 on disagreements of the evangelists, 26. 
 
 on the inspiration of St. John, 26. 
 
 canon according to, 497, 723. 
 
 his strange remark concerning the Book of 
 Acts, 644. 
 
 rejects Second Peter, 737. 
 
 omits the Apocalypse from his canon, 761. 
 Cicero, 
 
 on the diffusion of the Greek language, 457. 
 Clement of Alexandria, 
 
 on the equal inspiration of both Testa- 
 ments, 25. 
 
 his statement regarding the Gospels, 502, 
 503. 
 
 his notice of the Apostle John, 582. 
 
 his testimony to John's Gospel, 590. 
 
 quotes the Epistle to the Romans, 651. 
 
 quotes the First Epistle of Paul to the Co- 
 rinthians, 656. 
 
 quotes the First Epistle of Peter as his only 
 , - Epistle, 723, 737. 
 
 quotes Jude's Epistle, 739. 
 
 alludes to the Second Epistle of John, 746. 
 
 on John's return from Patmos, 751. 
 
 relates anecdotes concerning Saint John, 
 
 regards the Apostle John as the author of 
 
 the Apocalypse, 757. 
 Clement of Rome, 
 
 his quotations from the Gospels, 513. 
 
 his reference to the martyrdom of St. Paul, 
 649. 
 
 refers to the First Epistle to the Corinthi- 
 ans, 656. 
 
 his notice of Peter, 720, 731. 
 Colenso, 
 
 his estimate of the Pentateuch and the 
 Book of Joshua, 71. 
 
 on the Pentateuch and the Moabite Stone, 
 71. 
 
 his objections to the accounts of the tent- 
 life of the Israelites, 249. 
 
 on the size of the Israelitlsh camp. 251. 
 
 his objections to miracles, 252. 
 Collins, Anthony, 
 
 attacks the genuineness of the Book of 
 Daniel. 397. 
 
 Corrodi, 
 
 on the authorship of the Pentateuch, 69. 
 his attack on the Book of Daniel, 398. 
 
 Cosmas Indieopleustes, 
 
 on the canonicity of the three Catholic 
 Epistles, 737, 738. 
 
 Council of Aneyra, 
 
 quotes John's Gospel, 596. 
 Council of Seleueia, 
 
 quotes John xiv, 26 5%. 
 
 Council of Trent, 
 
 makes the Vulgate the standard version ot 
 the Bible, 63. 
 
 Cowper, 
 
 on Codex Alexaudrinus, 464. 
 Credner. 
 
 his testimony to John's Gospel, 584. 
 
 on the date of Jude's Epistle, 741. 
 Crome, 
 
 defends John's Gospel, 584. 
 Cureton, 
 
 discovers ancient recension of Gospels in 
 Syriac, 471. 
 
 on Peshito version of the New Testament, 
 471. 
 
 his translation of Melito's oration, quoted, 
 
 734. 
 Curtius, 
 
 on the respect of the Persians lor their 
 
 kings, 410. 
 Cyprian of Carthage, 
 
 regards the First Epistle of Peter as au- 
 thentic, 723. 
 
 his views of Second Peter, 737. 
 
 quoted the Apocalypse, 758. 
 Cyril of Alexandria, 
 
 attributes the Apocalypse to John, 761. 
 Cyril of Jerusalem, 
 
 on the number of the canonical books, 35. 
 
 the canon according to, 494. 
 
 his views of the Epistles of Peter and Jude, 
 700, 739. 
 
 on John's Epistles, 748. 
 
 Dana, 
 
 on the order of the creation, 220. 
 David Kimehi, 
 
 on the Book of Isaiah, 369. 
 Davidson, 
 
 on the Elohistic and Jehovistic originals 
 of the Pentateuch, 72. 
 
 admits that there are no positive contra- 
 dictions in the Pentateuch, 12!). 
 
 on the phrase, " Moses, the servant of Je- 
 hovah," 262. 
 
 alleges difference in style between the flrst 
 and second parts of the Book of Joshua, 
 MB. 
 
 rejects the account of the falling of the 
 walls of Jericho, 268. 
 
 regards part of Joshua as mythical, ~'6-\ 
 
 on the date of composition of the Book of 
 Judges, 274. 
 
 concedes that the Book of Judges bears the 
 impress of historical truth, 275. 
 
 on the historical accuracy of the Books of 
 Samuel, 280. 
 
 on the contradictions in First Samuel, 285. 
 
 on contradictions in list of Saul's sons, 285. 
 
 on the historical accuracy of the Books of 
 Kings, 289. 
 
 on the date of composition of the Books of 
 Samuel, 299. 
 
 admits the general credibility of Chron- 
 icles, 304.
 
 INDEX OF AUTHORS QUOTED. 
 
 789 
 
 Davidson, (continued.) 
 
 his suspicion of inaccuracy in parts of 
 
 Chronicles, 304. 
 on the prologue and epilogue in the Book 
 
 of Job, 32?. 
 thinks that the Davidio. authority of most 
 
 of the Psalms should be assumed, 337. 
 thinks Asaph probably the author of Psalms 
 
 I and Ixxiii, 338. 
 
 on the authorship of Solomon's Song:, 356. 
 his criticism on Jer. xxvii, xxviii, xxix, 1, 
 
 and li, 387, 388, 390. 
 his attack on the Book of Daniel, 398. 
 on the prophecy of Jonah, 432. 
 on the date of the prophecy of Malachi, 447. 
 
 De Groot, 
 
 on the Logos in John's Gospel, 616. 
 Delitzseh, 
 
 his view of Song of Solomon, 351. 
 
 rejects the allegorical meaning of Solo- 
 mon's Song, 355. 
 
 his criticisms on Isa. xxxiv. xxxv, xxxviii, 
 and xl-lxvi, 375-31'S. 
 
 defends the Book of Daniel, 398. 
 
 on the date of the prophecy of Obadiah, 430. 
 
 considers Jonah a type of Christ, 432. 
 
 his defence of the Book of Jonah, 432. 
 Demosthenes, 
 
 uses expressions similar to those in the 
 
 Gospels, 250. 
 De Wette, 
 
 rejects the accepted account of the origin 
 of the Septuagint. 52. 
 
 on the authorship of the Pentateuch, 70, 121. 
 
 on the Samaritan Pentateuch, 177. 
 
 on miracles, 251. 
 
 on the contradictions in the Books of Josh- 
 ua and Judges, 260. 
 
 on the date of the Book of Joshua, 265. 
 
 admits the genuineness of the Book of 
 Judges, 274. 
 
 on alleged inconsistencies in the Books of 
 Samuel, 281. 
 
 maintains that the writer of the Books of 
 Chronicles must have been familiar with 
 earlier writings, 302. 
 
 his attack on the Books of Chronicles, 303. 
 
 modified his earlier views concerning 
 Chronicles, 303. 
 
 on the discourses of Ellhu in the Book of 
 Job, 327. 
 
 thinks many anonymous Psalms may have 
 been written by David, 338. 
 
 rejects the period of the Maccabees as be- 
 ing the date of any Psalms, 340. 
 
 thinks the first collection of Proverbs not 
 made by Solomon, 346. 
 
 refers Ecclesiastes to the Persian or Greek 
 period, 352. 
 
 on the authorship of the Lamentations of 
 Jeremiah, 35!). 
 
 on the genuineness of the first twelve chap- 
 ters of Isaiah, 370. 
 
 acknowledges the genuineness of Isa. xiv, 
 28-32, /evil, 1-11, xviii, xxiv, xxvii, 372, 
 373. 
 
 his criticisms on Isa. xiv-xxvii, xxxiv, 
 xxxv, and xl-lxvi, 374-378. 
 
 his criticisms on Jer. x, 1-16, xxvii-xxix, 
 xlvit, 386-389. 
 
 en Ezekiel's chief peculiarity, 394. 
 
 his attack on the Book of Daniel, 308. 
 
 admits that Greek musical instruments 
 could be known to the Babylonians, 404. 
 
 on the Book of Jonah, 431. 
 
 on the date of the prophecy of Habakkuk, 
 438. 
 
 on the date of the prophecy of Zephaniah, 
 439. 
 
 De Wette, (continued.) 
 
 defends Zechariah ix-xiv, 441. 
 
 on the character of the prophecy of Mala- 
 chi, 447. 
 
 thinks Matthew's Gospel had a Greek orig- 
 inal, 542. 
 
 on the date of Matthew's Gospel, 545. 
 
 says that Matthew disregards the order of 
 time in his narrative, 549. 
 
 considers Mark to be the author of the 
 Gospel bearing his name, 557. 
 
 thinks Mark's Gospel originally appeared 
 in Home, 559. 
 
 on the date of Luke's Gospel, 571. 
 
 his defence of John's Gospel, 584. 
 
 doubts the genuineness of the Epistle to 
 the Ephesians, 068. 
 
 considers the genuineness of the Epistle to 
 the Philippians to be beyond doubt, 674. 
 
 admits the genuineness of the Epistle to 
 the Colossiaus, tiHi. 
 
 his difficulties in regard to the Pastoral 
 Epistles, 687'. 
 
 considers the genuineness of the Epistle 
 to Philemon not to be doubted, 697. 
 
 on the reasons for the rejection of James' 
 Epistle by the Reformers, 714. 
 
 doubts the tradition of Peter's martyrdoia 
 in Rome, 722. 
 
 his doubts concerning the First Epistle of 
 Peter, 725. 
 
 on the date and composition of First Peter, 
 728, 732. 
 
 attributes Jude's Epistle to Jude the broth- 
 er of the Lord, 740. 
 
 on the " elect day," 710. 
 
 on the genuineness of Third John, 748. 
 
 on the position of the Reformers as to the 
 
 authorship of the Apocalypse, 762. 
 Didymus, 
 
 canon according to, 495. 
 
 regards the First Epistle of Peter as au- 
 thentic, 723. 
 
 quotes the Second Epistle of Peter and 
 Jude, 737, 739. 
 
 quotes the Apocalypse as an authority, 760. 
 Diodorus Siculus, 
 
 on the worship of Apis, 199. 
 Dion Cassius, 
 
 on the taxing under Cyrenius mentioned 
 
 in Luke's Gospel, 576. 
 Dionysius, 
 
 on the life and death of Peter and Paul, 
 720. 
 
 on the Second and Third Epistles of John, 
 747. 
 
 opposes the apostolic origin of the Apoca- 
 lypse, 759. 
 Doderlein, 
 
 on the prophecy of Zechariah, 441. 
 Douglass, (Professor,) 
 
 tries to prove that Ecclesiastes were written 
 by Solomon, 353. 
 
 Ebrard, 
 
 on the date of Luke's Gospel, 571. 
 declares John to be the author of the Apoc- 
 alypse, 584. 
 
 on the prophecies of the Apocalypse, 770. 
 Eckermann, 
 
 on the authorship of the Pentateuch, 70. 
 Eiehhorn, 
 
 defends the genuineness of the Penta- 
 
 l, Mich, 68. 
 
 on Klohistir, and Jehovistie documents, 71. 
 on the division of the Book of Isaiah into 
 
 fragments, 367. 
 on the authenticity of Jer. 1, li, 390.
 
 790 
 
 INDEX OF AUTHORS QUOTED. 
 
 Eichhorn, (continued.) 
 
 his theory regarding the Book of Daniel, 
 396,398. 
 
 on the originality of Obadiah, 429. 
 
 objects to part of the prophecy of Zecha- 
 riah, 441. 
 
 on the date of the prophecy of Malachl, 447. 
 
 defends the Gospel of John, 584. 
 
 on the time of the composition of First 
 Peter, 728. 
 
 declares John to be the author of the Apoc- 
 alypse, 763. 
 
 Ephraem the Syrian, 
 quotes the Apocalypse, 758. 
 
 Epiphanius, 
 
 his catalogue of the canonical books, 35. 
 New Testament canon according to, 497. 
 bis remarks on the Ebionite Gospel of 
 
 Matthew, 535. 
 
 bis views on Peter's Epistles, 736. 
 receives the Second Epistle of John, 747. 
 on the date of John's return from Patmos, 
 
 753. 
 
 ascribes the Apocalypse to John the Evan- 
 gelist, 760. 
 
 Erasmus, 
 
 denies the genuineness of Second Peter, 
 737. 
 
 bis reasons for inserting in his Greek Tes- 
 tament First John v, 7745. 
 
 doubts the apostolic origin of the Apoca- 
 lypse, 762. 
 
 Eusebius, 
 
 records Melito's catalogues of the canoni- 
 cal books, 33. 
 
 on Hegesippus's acquaintance with a 
 Syriac version of Matthew, 468. 
 
 New Testament canon according to, 493. 
 
 makes mention of a copy of Matthew's 
 Gospel written in Hebrew, 534. 
 
 on the date of Matthew's Gospel, 545. 
 
 on the composition of the Gospel of Mark, 
 555. 
 
 hts statements regarding Luke, 563. 
 
 says Paul was beheaded by Nero, 648. 
 
 regards the First Epistle of Peter as au- 
 thentic, 723. 
 
 on Clement's views of the Catholic Epistles, 
 736. 
 
 on Second Peter, 736. 
 
 places Jude among the disputed books, 739. 
 
 on the standing of John's Epistles, 747. 
 
 on John's banishment to Patmos, 743. 
 
 quotes Theophilus, Meliro, and other early 
 Christian writers, on the Apocalypse of 
 John, 757. 
 
 doubts the apostolic origin of the Apoca- 
 lypse, 760. 
 Evanson, 
 
 his attack on John's Gospel, 583. 
 Ewald, 
 
 traces three periods of biblical Hebrew, 44. 
 
 on the authorship of the Pentateuch, 71. 
 
 on the remarkable increase of the Israel- 
 ites In Egypt. 242. 
 
 on the date of the composition of the Books 
 of Samuel, 299. 
 
 attributes eleven Psalms to David, 387. 
 
 refers Ecclesiastes to the period of Persian 
 rule, 352. 
 
 his criticisms on Isaiah xxxiv, xxxv, 341. 
 
 on the style of Isaiah, 379. 
 
 bis criticism on Isaiah Ivi, 9-lvii, 1 1-^79. 
 
 bis criticism on Jeremiah 1, li, 390. 
 
 bis attack on the Book of Daniel, 398. 
 
 on Ezekiel's mention of Daniel, 399. 
 
 on the character of the prophecy of Amos, 
 429. 
 
 Ewald, (continual.) 
 
 his objections to part of the prophecy of 
 Zechariuh, 441. 
 
 on the date of Malachi's prophecy, 447. 
 
 on the date of Matthew's Gospel, 545. 
 
 his theory concerning Mark's Gospel. 557. 
 
 on the similarity of language in Luke's 
 Gospel and the Acts of the Apostles, 570. 
 
 on the date of Luke's Gospel, 571. 
 
 his defence of John's Gospel, 584. 
 
 on the date of First Peter, 728. 
 
 credits Silvanus with the composition of 
 First Peter, 732. 
 
 rejects Second Peter, 736. 
 
 on the date of Jude's Epistle, 741. 
 
 on the date of the composition of the Apoc- 
 alypse, 756. 
 
 believes that John the presbyter wrote the 
 Apocalypse, 763. 
 
 regards the Apocalypse as not inspired, 770. 
 
 Faeundus, 
 
 condemns First John v, 7745. 
 Firmilian, 
 
 quotes the Gospel of John, 595. 
 Fisher, 
 
 defence of John's Gospel, 584. 
 
 Fritzsehe, 
 
 on the number of the Apocalyptic beast, 
 755. 
 
 Fulda, 
 
 on the authorship of the Pentateuch, 69. 
 
 Furst, 
 
 on the authorship and revision of the Pen~ 
 
 tateuch, 72. 
 renders the " Book of Jashur " the " Book 
 
 of the Israelites," 265. 
 his remarks on Ezra, 298. 
 considers the Purim festival a Persian feast, 
 
 821. 
 thinks the Song of Solomon symbolical or 
 
 allegorical, 354. 
 
 on the traditional history of Ezekiel, 39.V 
 on Greek words in the Book of Daniel, 402. 
 on the time of the closing of the Hebrew 
 
 canon, 412. 
 
 on the Book of Jonah, 433. 
 on the birthplace of the Prophet Nahum, 
 
 436. 
 on the disputed chapters of the prophecy 
 
 of Zechariah, 445. 
 
 Gelasius, 
 
 on the reception of John's Gospel by the 
 
 Nicene Council, 595. 
 George, 
 
 on the authorship of the Pentateuch, 70. 
 Georgius of Laodicea, 
 
 quotes John's Gospel, 596. 
 Gesenius, 
 
 his definition of X'23, 29. 
 
 on the golden and silver ages In biblical 
 Hebrew, 44. 
 
 on the origin of the Pentateuch, 70. 
 
 his remarks on the word "generation," 
 239. 
 
 on the Book of Jashur, or, the Upright, 
 265. 
 
 on Cambyses and Smerdis, 810. 
 
 on the location of Uz, 833. 
 
 on the phrase, " to the chief musician," 335. 
 
 thinks that none of the Psalms were writ- 
 ten In the Mawibean age, 340. 
 
 on Koppe's criticism of Isaiah, 366. 
 
 on the order of the propheto, 369.
 
 INDEX OF AUTHORS QUOTED. 
 
 791 
 
 Gesenius, (continued.) 
 
 on the genuineness of the first twelve chap- 
 ters of Isaiah, 370. 
 
 refers Isaiah ii-iv to reign of Ahaz, 370. 
 
 on the genuineness of Isaiah xiv, 24-32 ; 
 xv, xvi, xvii, 1-11372, 373. 
 
 his criticisms on Isaiah xiv-xxyii, xxviii- 
 xxxiii, xxxiv, xxxv, xxxviii, xl-lxvi, 
 372-380. 
 
 on the unity of tone maintained by Eze- 
 kiel, 394. 
 
 on Greek words in the Book of Daniel, 402. 
 
 his remarks on Darius the Mede, 408. 
 
 on the " plague of locusts " in the prophecy 
 of Joel, 42(3. 
 
 on Zechariah xi, 8443. 
 
 on the " eye," used as a symbol in Zech- 
 ariah iv, 10, ix, 8444. 
 
 on the name " Malachi," 445. 
 Gibbon, 
 
 on the sublimity of Job, 333. 
 
 on the population of the Roman empire, 
 454. 
 
 on the subjugation of Rome by the arts of 
 Greece, 458. 
 
 Gieseler, 
 
 on Origen's views of inspiration, 26. 
 
 on the Serpent Brethren, 529. 
 
 concedes the truth of the tradition of the 
 martyrdom of Peter at Rome, 722. 
 
 on the date of the composition of the Apoc- 
 alypse, 756. 
 
 favours the apostolic origin of the Apoca- 
 lypse, 703. 
 
 Goethe, 
 
 on the Book of Ruth, 277. 
 Graf, 
 
 opponents of the theory of, 77. 
 Gram berg, 
 
 denies all credibility to the Books of Chron- 
 icles, 303. 
 
 on Jeremiah 1, li, 390. 
 
 regards the Book of Jonah as a poetical 
 myth, 432. 
 
 Green, (Professor,) 
 replies to Colenso, 71. 
 refutes Robertson Smith, 77. 
 
 Gregory Nazianzen, 
 
 his catalogue of canonical books, 35. 
 
 New Testament canon according to, 495. 
 
 receives the First Epistle of Peter as genu- 
 ine, 723. 
 
 receives Peter's Second Epistle, but ex- 
 presses doubts, 736. 
 
 receives the Epistle of Jude, 739. 
 
 places the Third Epistle of John among the 
 canonical books, 748. 
 
 omits the Apocalypse from his canon, 761. 
 
 Gregory of Kyssa, 
 
 ascribes the Apocalypse to Saint John, 760. 
 Grotius, 
 
 on the date of Ecclesiastes, 351. 
 
 rejects Ecclesiastes as a writing of Solo- 
 mon, 351. 
 
 rejects Peter's Second Epistle, 737. 
 
 rejects the Epistle of June, 'i'io. 
 Guerieke, 
 
 attributes the Apocalypse to the Apostle 
 John, 768. 
 
 Hagenbaeh, 
 
 on the early Christian view of inspiration, 
 
 25. 
 
 quotes Origin on inspiration, 26. 
 quotes Theodore on inspiration, 27. 
 
 Haller, 
 
 on the ages of the antediluvians, 223. 
 Hartmann, 
 
 on the composition of the Pentateuch, 70. 
 Hase, 
 
 defends the apostolic origin of John's Gos- 
 pel and the Apocalypse, 584. 
 
 Hasse, J. G. , 
 
 his contradictory views regarding the Mo- 
 saic origin of the Pentateuch, 68. 
 Hasselquist, 
 
 on the serpent-charmers of Egypt, 236. 
 Hauff, 
 
 his defence of John's Gospel, 584. 
 Haverniek, 
 
 on Eichhorn's criticisms, 68. 
 
 attributes the authorship of the Books of 
 
 Kings to Jeremiah, 289. 
 vigorously defends the Books of Chronicles, 
 
 303. 
 
 criticises Isaiah xl-lxvi, 378. 
 defends the Book of Daniel, 398. 
 on the originality of Ubaciiah, 429. 
 on the date of Obadiah's prophecy, 430. 
 defends the Book of Jonah, 432. 
 defends Zechariah ix-xiv, 441. 
 on the date of Malachi's prophecy, 447. 
 Heeren, 
 
 on the reverence felt by the Asiatics for 
 
 their kings, 410. 
 Hegesippus, 
 
 refers to the reading of the Gospels in the 
 
 service of the primitive Church, M>. 
 on the examination of the grandchildren 
 of Jude, the brother of Christ, by Domi- 
 tian, 738. 
 Hemsen, 
 
 defends John Gospel, 584. 
 Hengstenberg, 
 
 on the value of the Samaritan Pentateuch, 
 
 179. 
 refers Ecclesiastes to the age of Ezra ;m<i 
 
 Nehemiah, 351. 
 
 his criticism on Isaiah xl-lxvi. 378. 
 defends the Book of Daniel, 
 on alleged historical errors in the Book of 
 
 Daniel, 400. 
 on the "plague of locusts" mentioned in 
 
 Joel's prophecy, -l~~>. 
 on the originality of Obadiah, -1211. 
 on the date of Obadiah's prophecy, 430. 
 defends the Book of Jonah, i 
 defends the authenticity of Zechariah ix- 
 xiv, 441. 
 
 on the date of Malachi's prophecy, 449. 
 defends John's Gospel, 584. 
 on the date of the composition of the Apoc- 
 alypse, 756. 
 
 on the authorship of the Apocalypse, 763, 
 Heraeleon, 
 
 his commentary on the Gospel of St. John, 
 
 523, 580. 
 Herbst, 
 
 on tbe revision of the Pentateuch, 70. 
 defends the Book of Daniel, 398. 
 Herder, 
 
 regards the Book of Jonah as a tlrtion, 432. 
 Hermas, the Pastor, 
 
 ignores Second Pt'tiT, 735. 
 Herodotus, 
 
 on Cyrus the Qreal 
 
 refers to the great defeat of Sennacherib, 
 
 US. 
 
 mentions nveral Kgyptlun kings who were 
 Ethiopians :;m.
 
 792 
 
 INDEX OF AUTHORS QUOTED. 
 
 Herodotus, (continued.) 
 
 records the subjugation of Egypt by Xerxes, 
 
 319. 
 
 on Babylonian dress, 419. 
 on the capture of Nineveh, 434. 
 Hesiod, 
 
 on the Golden Age, 223. 
 Hes, 
 
 defends the Book of Jonah, 432. 
 Heydenreich, 
 
 defends the genuineness of Second Peter, 
 
 T37. 
 Hilary, 
 
 bis catalogue of sacred Scriptures, 35. 
 receives both Epistles of Peter, 723, 736. 
 Hilgenfeld, 
 
 on the date of Joel's prophecy, 426. 
 
 his acknowledgment respecting Justin 
 
 Martyr, 508. 
 
 on the Clementine Homilies, 522. 
 on the Greek original of Matthew's Gospel, 
 
 540. 
 on alleged additions to Matthew's Gospel, 
 
 543. 
 
 on the daw of Mark's Gospel, 558. 
 thinks Mark's Gospel originally appeared 
 
 in Rome, 559. 
 
 on the authorship of the Acts of the Apos- 
 tles, 568. 
 denies the genuineness of Johu's Gospel, 
 
 584. 
 on the language of the Epistle to the Ephe- 
 
 slans, 670. 
 on the First Epistle to the Thessalonlans, 
 
 680. 
 on the Second Epistle to the Thessalonians. 
 
 682. 
 on i-eferences in the Pastoral Epistles to 
 
 existing heresies, 681. 
 on the origin of James ii, 12714. 
 on the bearing of James Ii, 6, 7 ; v, 6 714. 
 on the judicial punishment of the early 
 
 Christians, 715. 
 accepts the tradition of Peter's martyrdom 
 
 at Rome, 722. 
 
 denies the genuineness of First Peter, 724. 
 on the persecution of the early Christians, 
 
 729. 
 on the date and authorship of First Peter, 
 
 730. 
 
 rejects Second Peter, 737. 
 thinks there are traces of Gnosticism in 
 
 First John, 742. 
 
 on the date of the Apocalypse, 756. 
 Hippolytus, 
 
 on the Samaritan Scriptures, 175. 
 receives John's Gospel, 595. 
 on the doctrines of Cerinthus, 742. 
 attributes the Apocalypse to John, 758. 
 Hitzig, 
 
 attributes to David fourteen psalms, 337. 
 refers some psalms to the period of the 
 
 Maccabees, 340. 
 
 his criticism on Isaiah xl-lxvi, 378. 
 his criticism on Jeremiah xxvii, 1, and Ii, 
 
 390. 
 
 attacks the Book of Daniel, 398. 
 objects to portions of Zechariah's prophecy, 
 
 on the number of the Apocalyptic beast, 755. 
 Hobbes, 
 
 on the authorship of the Pentateuch, 67. 
 Hoffman, 
 
 on the date of Obadiah's prophecy, 432. 
 Holland, 
 
 his conjecture as to the mode of supply 
 ing the Israelites in the desert with water, 
 245. 
 
 Holtzmann, 
 
 on the identity of authorship of Luke's 
 Gospel and the Acts of the Apostles, 570. 
 
 Hug, 
 
 on date of Codex Vaticanus, 465. 
 
 believes that Matthew's Gospel w;:s origi- 
 
 nally written in Greek, 542. 
 on the date of Matthew's Gospel, 545. 
 defends John's Gospel, 584. 
 believes the allusions in First Peter to the 
 
 sufferings of Christians to refer to their 
 
 persecution under Nero, 728. 
 acknowledges the genuineness of First Pe- 
 
 ter, 732. 
 defends the genuineness of Second Peter, 
 
 737. 
 attempts to show that the Syriac version 
 
 originally contained the Apocalypse, 758. 
 defends the apostolic origin of the Apoca- 
 
 lypse, 763. 
 
 Humboldt, 
 
 on the Book of Ruth, 277. . 
 
 Huther, 
 
 rejects Second Peter, 737. 
 
 Ignatius, 
 
 testimony of his Epistles to the Gospels, 
 516. 
 
 Ilgen, 
 
 declares Genesis to be a compilatiou, 71. 
 
 Irenaeus, 
 
 on the divine origin of the Holy Scriptures. 
 
 25. 
 
 on Paul's frequent use of uyperbaton, 25. 
 on the early spread of 'Jie Gospel, 452. 
 canon according to. 4!M. 
 testifies in favour of the authenticity of the 
 
 Gospels, 503. 
 says that Matthew's Gospel was originally 
 
 written in Hebrew, 534. 
 on the date of Matthew's Gospel, 54-1. 
 on the date of Mark's Gospel, 557. 
 on the personal history of Luke, 563. 
 on the date of Luke's Gospel, 570. 
 his testimony respecting the Apostle John, 
 
 580. 
 his testimony respecting John's Gospel, 
 
 587. 
 
 quotes the Epistle to the Romans, 651. 
 acknowledges the authenticity of the Sec- 
 
 ond Epistle of Paul to the Corinthians, 
 
 659. 
 declares the Epistle to the Gnlatians to 
 
 have been written by Paul, 6t>3. 
 on the Epistle to the Hebrews, 694. 
 asserts that Peter and Paul preached the 
 
 Gospel In Rome, 720. 
 quotes the First Epistle to Peter, 723, 731. 
 refutes the Valentinians, 742. 
 quotes Second John 11 as having been 
 
 written by the Apostle John, 746. 
 on the date of the Apocalypse, 751. 
 suggests names, the letters of which will 
 
 make the number Six hundred and sixty- 
 
 six, 755. 
 attributes the Apocalypse to the Apostle 
 
 John, 757, 759. 
 Isaac ben Salomo, 
 
 denies the antiquity of Gen. xxxvi, 3166. 
 
 Jahn, 
 
 on Isaiah xl-lxvl, 378. 
 
 regards the Book of Jonah as a parablw 
 
 432. 
 defends the genuineness of Zech. Ix-xiv, 
 
 441.
 
 INDEX OF AUTHORS QUOTED. 
 
 793 
 
 Jerome, 
 
 acknowledges the human element in in- 
 spiration, 2V. 
 
 his catalogue of the canonical books, 36. 
 on the conflicting texts of the Septuagint, 
 
 DD 
 
 on the authorship of the Pentateuch, 66. 
 
 treats Ecclesiastes as the work of Solomon, 
 351. 
 
 in his canon makes of the twelve minor 
 prophets one book, 423. 
 
 on the birthplace of the Prophet Nahum, 
 436. 
 
 on the Prophet Malachi, 446. 
 
 on the canonical books of the New Testa- 
 ment, 49", 498. 
 
 on_the Hebrew origin of Matthew's Gospel, 
 
 on the Ebionites, 537. 
 
 his testimony to John's Gospel, 590. 
 
 on the beheading of Paul at Rome, 648. 
 
 on the Epistle to the Hebrews, 702. 
 
 on the episcopacy and death of Peter at 
 
 Rome, 721. 
 
 on Peter's Epistles, 723, 737. 
 receives Jude's Epistle, 739. 
 condemns First John v, 7, by silence, 745. 
 attributes Second and Third John to the 
 
 Presbyter John, 746. 
 states that John was banished to Patmos 
 
 by Domitian, 753. 
 attributes the Apocalypse to the Apostle 
 
 John, 761. 
 
 Jesus, Son of Sirach, 
 
 his catalogue of the Hebrew canon, in the 
 
 prologue of the Greek translation, 39. 
 omits Daniel from his list of great men, 
 
 405. 
 
 Jonathan ben Uzziel, 
 
 Messianic allusions in his Targum, 59. 
 Josephus, 
 
 his catalogue of the Old Testament Scrip- 
 tures, 37. 
 
 his account of the Alexandrian version, 51. 
 
 on the Mosaic authorship of the Penta- 
 teuch, 66. 
 
 on the Samaritans, 175. 
 
 on the great age of the ancients, 224. 
 
 on the date of the building of Solomon's 
 Temple, 296. 
 
 credits Esther's history, 318. 
 
 supposes Ahasuerus to be Artaxerxes, 318. 
 
 on the Book of Isaiah, 367. 
 
 on the Book of Daniel, 401. 
 
 counts the twelve minor prophets as one 
 book, 423. 
 
 on the Book of Jonah, 432. 
 
 on Greek cities, 458. 
 
 his account of Herod's death, 638. 
 Jovius Maximinus Augustus, 
 
 his testimony to the number of Christians, 
 453. 
 
 Justin Martyr, 
 
 on the inspiration of the Old Testament, 25. 
 on the early increase of the Christians, 
 
 451. 
 
 his testimony for the four Gospels, 505. 
 quotes John's Gospel, 51)1. 
 attributes tin 1 Ai>oe,alypse to the Apostle 
 
 John, 757, ;.">!>. 
 
 Juvenal, 
 
 asserts that the Greek was the prevailing 
 language of his time, 457. 
 
 Kampnausen , 
 
 his theory of the origin of the Pentat< -udi. 
 72. 
 
 Kamphausen, (continued.) 
 
 considers the Book of Esther to be a skil- 
 ful romance, 321. 
 
 believes Ecclesiastes to have been writtei 
 
 in the third century B. C., 352. 
 Keil, 
 
 on the affinity of the language of Chroni- 
 cles and that, of Ezra, 299. 
 
 on the historical narratives in Chronicles 
 and the Hooks of Samuel and Kings, 801. 
 
 on the hostility to the Jews in the time of 
 Xerxes, 310. 
 
 attributes seven psalms to Asaph, 338. 
 
 believes the Psalms to have been collected 
 together at one time by one man, 3l(i. 
 
 on the arrangement of the Psalms, 342. 
 
 assigns to Solomon Proverbs i-xxix, 348. 
 
 refers Ecclesiastes to the age of Ezra and 
 Nehemlah, 352. 
 
 on the Song of Solomon, 355. 
 
 refers Isaiah ii-iv to the reign of Jotham, 
 370. 
 
 his criticisms on Isaiah xxxiv, xxxv, and 
 xxxviii, 375. 
 
 on the character of Ezekiel, 395. 
 
 in defence of the Book of Daniel, 398. 
 
 on the style of Hosea, 4~>r>. 
 
 on the originality of Obadiah, 429. 
 
 on the date of Obadiah 's prophecy, 430. 
 
 defends the Book of Jonah as a true his- 
 tory, 432. 
 
 on the style of Micah, 435. 
 
 defends Zechariah ix-xiv, 441. 
 
 on the date of Malachi's prophecy, 447. 
 
 Keinn, 
 
 on the date of Matthew's Gospel, 545. 
 Kleinert, 
 
 on Isaiah xl-lxvi, 344. 
 
 on the originality of Obadiah, 429. 
 
 Klosterman, 
 
 on the identity of authorship of Luke's 
 Gospel aud the Acts of the Apostles, .".70. 
 Knobel, 
 
 maintains the genuineness of the first 
 
 twelve chapters of Isaiah, 370. 
 acknowledges the genuineness of Isaiah 
 
 xiv, 24-32372. 
 refers Isaiah xv, xvi, to an older prophet, 
 
 372. 
 his criticisms on Isaiah xiv-xxvii, xxxiv, 
 
 xxxv, and xxxviii, 374, 375. 
 on Jeremiah 1. li. 3'.io. 
 disputes the genuineness of portions of 
 
 Zechariah, 441. 
 Koppe, 
 
 attacks the genuineness of Isaiah's proph- 
 ecy, 3tili. 
 Koran, The, 
 
 asserts its own verbal inspirati. >n, i is. 
 Koster, 
 
 maintains the genuineness of Zechariah 
 
 ix-xiv, 441. 
 Kuenen, 
 
 on the ten commandments, 75. 
 
 divides priestly laws into three groups, 75. 
 
 refilled by Hosea, 117. 
 
 Lactantius, 
 
 quotes from the fourth Gospel, as the work 
 
 of Hie .Apostle John. .V.Ci. 
 Lardner, 
 
 believes tiiat Matthew's Gospel was origi- 
 nally written in (.reek. M-J. 
 Lane, 
 
 on Hie resemblance r.f certain Kiryptian 
 .-Mugs to Hie Sonir of Solomoi'.
 
 794 
 
 INDEX OF AUTHORS QUOTED. 
 
 Lange, 
 
 defends tbe apostolic origin of the Apoca- 
 lypse, 763. 
 
 Layard, 
 
 on Assyrian music, 404. 
 
 Le Clerc, 
 
 attributes the Pentateuch to a captive 
 
 priest, 67. 
 on Job, 339. 
 
 Lekebusch, 
 
 on the similarity of language of Luke's 
 Gospel, and that of the Acts of the Apos- 
 tles, 509. 
 
 on the date of Luke's Gospel, 571. 
 
 Lengerke, 
 
 attacks the Book of Daniel, 398. 
 Lenormant, 
 
 investigations on the deluge, 225. 
 Leontius of Byzantium, - 
 
 on the rejection by Theodore of Mopsuestia 
 
 of the Catholic Epistles, 723. 
 Leo the Great, 
 
 rejects First John v, 7 745. 
 Less, 
 
 regards tbe Book of Job as an historical 
 
 allegory, 432. 
 Liddell, 
 
 on Greek words in the Book of Dantel, 402. 
 Lilienthal, 
 
 defends the historical character of the Book 
 
 of Jonah, 432. 
 Livy, 
 
 on the fabulous character of the early his- 
 tory of Rome, 254. 
 
 Lueke, 
 
 defends John's Gospel, 584. 
 on the date of the Apocalypse, 755. 
 denies the apostolic origin of the Apoca- 
 lypse, 763. 
 Luderwald, 
 
 defends the Book of Jonah, 432. 
 Luthardt, 
 
 defends John Gospel, 584. 
 defends the apostolic origin of the Apoca- 
 lypse, 763. 
 Luther, 
 
 concedes historical contradictions in the 
 
 Bible, 27. 
 on the date of the prophecy of Obadiah, 
 
 430. 
 
 on the Epistle of James, 711. 
 declares the Epistle of Jude to be of little 
 
 value, 740. 
 
 doubts the apostolic origin of the Apoca- 
 lypse, 762. 
 
 Lutzelberger, 
 
 attacks John's Gospel, 582. 
 
 Macarius, 
 
 receives Second Peter, 737. 
 
 quotes the Apocalypse as an authority, 761. 
 M'Caul, 
 
 on the Etruscan views of creation, 221. 
 M'Gill, 
 
 on Daniel's use of Chaldee, 415. 
 Manetho, 
 
 his account of Moses, 114. 
 Mangold, 
 
 on the identity of authorship of Luke's Gos- 
 pel and the Acts of the Apostles, 570. 
 
 on the number of the Apocalyptic beast. 
 
 Mareellus, 
 
 quotes the fourth Gospel as the work of 
 John, 596. 
 
 Mareion, 
 
 heretical views of, 524. 
 Masius, 
 
 denies that the Pentateuch was written by 
 Moses, 67. 
 
 Mayer, 
 
 writes in defence of John's Gospel, 584. 
 Melanehthon, 
 
 on inspiration, 27. 
 Melito, 
 
 his catalogue of the Books of the Old Tes- 
 tament, 33. 
 
 on the position of the Book of Daniel, 401. 
 alludes to the twelve minor prophets as 
 
 one book, 423. 
 
 alludes to Second Peter, 736. 
 wrote a book on the Apocalypse of John, 
 
 757. 
 Merivale, 
 
 on morbid scepticism, 121. 
 
 on the population of tbe Koman Empire, 
 
 454. 
 
 on St. Paul's converts, 451. 
 on persecution of early Christians, 730. 
 Methodius, 
 
 quotes John's Gospel, 595. 
 Meyer, 
 
 on the Identity of authorship of Luke's 
 
 Gospel and the Acts, 570. 
 Michaelis, 
 
 defends the Mosaic authorship of the Pen- 
 tateuch, 68. 
 on Num. i, 92. 
 
 on Chaldaisms found in the Book of Dan- 
 iel, 416. 
 on the fictitious character of the Book of 
 
 Jonah, 432. 
 
 defends Second Epistle of Peter, 737. 
 rejects the Epistle of Jude, 740. 
 Mohammed, 
 
 prophecies concerning the Greeks, 32. 
 asserts the verbal inspiration of the Koran, 
 118. 
 
 Muller, (Max,) 
 
 on the Persian origin of the Indo-Germanic 
 
 languages, 222. 
 Muratori, (Canon of,) 
 
 account of, 490. 
 
 receives the Gospels of Luke and John as 
 the third and fourth, the two others be- 
 ing presupposed, 491. 
 
 receives the Acts of the Apostles, 491. 
 
 enumerates as canonical thirteen Pauline 
 Epistles, a letter of Jude. and two Epistles 
 and the Apocalypse of John, 491, 598, 659, 
 662, 667, 674, 676, C80, 681, 692, 694, 696, 
 697, 739, 747, 758, 761. 
 
 omits the Epistles of James and Peter and 
 the Epistle to the Hebrews, 491, 702, 710, 
 723, 735. 
 
 Nachtigal, 
 
 on the authorship of the Pentateuch, 69. 
 Neander, 
 
 on Irenaeus's views of inspiration, 25. 
 
 states that the Syrian version was used in 
 the Armenian Churches, 64. 
 
 on the value of the fourth Gospel, 584. 
 
 thinks that John xxi was probably re- 
 ceived from John's own lips, 625. 
 
 on the date of the Epistle to the F.phesians, 
 666.
 
 INDEX OF AUTHORS QUOTED. 
 
 795 
 
 Neandar, (continued.) 
 
 on the similarity of the Epistles to the 
 Ephesians and Colossians, 668. 
 
 on the teachings of the Apostle James con- 
 cerning faith und works, 704. 
 
 defends the Epistle of James, 705. 
 
 on the date of the Epistle of James, 707. 
 
 considers the tradition of Peter's martyr- 
 dom at Rome probable, 71 3. 
 
 on the time of the composition of First Pe- 
 ter, 728. 
 
 on "the Church that is at Babylon, ' 732. 
 
 rejects Second Peter, 737. 
 
 attributes the Epistle of Jude to Jude, the 
 brother of the Lord, 740. 
 
 on the meaning of nvpia, as used in Second 
 John 1740. 
 
 acknowledges the genuineness of the Sec- 
 ond Epistle of John, 747. 
 
 favours the genuineness of the Third Epis- 
 tle of John, 748. 
 
 on the persecution by Nero, 754. 
 
 on the persecution under Domitian, 754. 
 
 on the date of the Apocalypse, 756. 
 
 denies the apostolic origin of the Apoca- 
 lypse, 703. 
 
 JMieephorus, 
 
 places the Apocalypse among the disputed 
 writings, ioy. 
 
 Noetus, 
 
 receives John's Gospel as genuine, 595. 
 Noldeke, 
 
 on the origin of the Pentateuch, 71, 77. 
 
 opposes the new theory, 77. 
 
 Novation, 
 
 quotes John's Gospel extensively, 595. 
 
 Ocsterzee, 
 
 on John's Gospel, 581. 
 
 Origen, 
 
 declares the inspiration of both Testa- 
 ments, ~.V 
 
 not an advocate of literal inspiration, 26. 
 
 his catalogue of the canonical books, 34. 
 
 acknowledges the canonicity of the Books 
 of the Maccabees, 35. 
 
 his Hexapla, 54. 
 
 on the Samaritan Scriptures, 176. 
 
 on the position of the Book of Daniel, 401. 
 
 on the great number of the early Chris- 
 tians, 453. 
 
 his commentary on Matthew, 501, 539. 
 
 his reply to Celsus, 518. 
 
 on the Hebrew origin of Matthew's Gospel, 
 534. 
 
 on the Ebionites, 535. 
 
 on the Apostle John, 582. 
 
 on Marcion's rejection of the last two chap- 
 ters of Romans, 652. 
 
 on the Epistle to the Hebrews, 700. 
 
 quotes from the Epistle of James, 709. 
 
 records the martyrdom of St. Peter, 720. 
 
 acknowledges the genuineness of the First 
 Epistle of St. Peter, 723. 
 
 refers to two Epistles of Peter, 736. 
 
 refers to the Epistle of Jude t 740 
 
 on the genuineness of the Second and 
 Third Epistles of John, 747, 748. 
 
 on the banishment of the Apostle John to 
 
 Patmos, 752. 
 
 asserts that the Apostle John wrote the 
 Apocalypse, 758. 
 
 Osburn, 
 
 on the Egyptian " nou," 226. 
 Ovid, 
 
 on the Golden Age, 223. 
 .51 
 
 Paley, 
 
 notices coincidences between the Acts of 
 the Apostles and Paul's epistles, o33. 
 
 Palmer, (E. H.,) 
 
 on the brackish water at Marah, 245. 
 
 on the wilderness of Shur, 245. 
 
 his experience in the Sinaitic desert ac- 
 cords with that of the Israelites, 245. 
 
 follows the Israelitish route from the Red 
 Sea to Mount Sinai, 245. 
 
 identifies Mount Sinai, 246. 
 
 discovers the remains of a large encamp- 
 ment at Erweis el Ebeirig, 246. 
 
 quotes an Arab legend referring to the stay 
 of the Israelites at Erweis el Ebeirig, 247. 
 
 Papias, 
 
 his testimony as given In Eusebius, 510. 
 on the authorship of Matthew's Gospel, 534. 
 quotes from First Peter, 722, 731. 
 receives the Apocalypse, 759. 
 
 Pareau, 
 
 considers the Book of Jonah a parable, 430 
 Pausanias, 
 
 on the gods of the Athenians, 639. 
 Peyrere, 
 
 on the origin of the Pentateuch, 67. 
 
 Philo, 
 
 his catalogue of the sacred books of the 
 
 Hebrews, 38. 
 
 his account of the Septuagint, 51. 
 speaks of Moses as the writer of the sacred 
 
 books, 06. 
 
 Philostorgius, 
 
 on the suppression of portions of the Holy 
 Scriptures, 759, note. 
 
 Photixis, 
 
 asserts that Ephraeto was not meanly edu- 
 cated in the Greek language, 758, note. 
 
 Piper, 
 
 defends the Book of Jonah, 432. 
 
 Plato, 
 
 his theory of the development of animals, 
 
 219. 
 Pliny, 
 
 on coriander seed, 161, note. 
 
 on the great number of Christians, 451. 
 
 on the persecution of Christians, 730. 
 Plutarch, 
 
 on Persian customs, 410. 
 
 on Alexander's conquests in Asia, 457. 
 Polycarp, 
 
 quotes from some of the Gospels, 513. 
 
 quotes from the First Epistle to the Corin- 
 thians, 656. 
 
 quotes from First Peter, 722, 728. 
 Polycrates, 
 
 his account of the Apostle John, 581. 
 
 his testimony to John's Gospel, 588. 
 Porphyry, 
 
 declares the Book of Daniel to be spurious, 
 
 397. 
 Pott, 
 
 defends the genuineness of the Second 
 
 Epistle of Peter, 737. 
 Praxeas, 
 
 receives John's Gospel as genuine, 595. 
 Pseudo-Aristeas, 
 
 his history of the Septuagint, 51. 
 
 Quadratus, 
 
 writes an " Apology " for the Christian re- 
 ligion, 454.
 
 INDEX OF AUTHORS QUOTED. 
 
 Rawlinson, (George,) 
 
 on the traditions of a golden age. --'*. 
 
 on the universality of the traditions of a 
 
 deluge, 225. 
 
 on biblical and modern ethnology, 226. 
 on the early Cushite kingdom, 227. 
 on the migration of tribes, 242. 
 on the great increase of the Israelites in 
 
 Egypt, 242. 
 on Pul, 292. 
 
 on the Assyrian records, 292. 
 on the annals of Sennacherib, 294. 
 
 Renan, 
 
 thinks additions were made to Matthew's 
 
 Gospel, 544. 
 on the Identity of authorship of Luke's 
 
 Gospel and the Acts of the Apostles, 570. 
 on the date of Luke's Gospel, 57 1. 
 on the date of John's Gospel, 586. 
 bis high estimate of John's Gospel, 621. 
 on the date and authorship of First Peter, 
 
 732. 
 
 Reuss, 
 
 on the number of the Apocalyptic beast, 
 755. 
 
 Riggenbaeh, 
 
 on John's Gospel, 584. 
 Robinson, 
 
 on the frequency of the proper name Kuria 
 among the Greeks, 746. 
 
 Rosenmuller, 
 
 his criticisms on Isaiah xxiii, 20-25, xxxiv, 
 
 xxxv, xxxviil, 373-375. 
 on Greek musical instruments used by 
 
 Babylonians, 404. 
 cm the originality of Obadiab, 429. 
 objects to part of the prophecy of Zecha- 
 
 riah, 441. 
 
 on the date of Malachi's prophecy, 447. 
 Rufinusof Aquileia, 
 
 on the books of the New Testament, 495. 
 designates Jude as an apostle, 739. 
 receives the Second and Third Epistles of 
 
 John, 747, 748. 
 receives the Apocalypse as canonical, 760. 
 
 Sack, 
 
 defends the Book of Jonah, 432. 
 Schleiermacher, 
 
 defends John's Gospel, 584. 
 
 doubts the genuineness of the Epistle to 
 the Ephesians, 667. 
 
 acknowledges the genuineness of First Pe- 
 ter, 732. 
 
 rejects the Epistle of Jude, 740. 
 Schnecken burger, 
 
 on the unity of authorship of Luke's Gos- 
 pel and Acts, 570. 
 Schott, 
 
 defends John's Gospel, 584. 
 Schrader, 
 
 on the document hypothesis, 72. 
 
 on the Book of Joshua, 264. 
 
 refers the composition of the Book of Judges 
 to the close of the Jewish kingdom, 274. 
 
 on the authorship of the Books of Chroni- 
 cles, 302. 
 
 his remarks on the Books of Chronicles, 303. 
 
 on the authorship of Nehemiah, 813. 
 
 on the prologue and epilogue in Job, 327. 
 
 does not ascribe any psalm to Asaph, 338. 
 
 concedes a large share of the Proverbs to 
 Solomon, 346. 
 
 on the religious doctrine of Ecclesiastes, 
 350. 
 
 his divisions of the Song of Solomon, 354. 
 
 Schrader, (continued.) 
 
 on the character of the Song of Solomon, 
 
 355. 
 thinks Solomon was not the author of tha 
 
 Song, 356. 
 
 on the authorship of Lamentations, 359. 
 his criticism on Isaiah xxiii, 373. 
 finds repetitions and contradictions in the 
 
 Book of Judges, 375. 
 on the date of Joel's prophecy, 426. 
 his objections to Zechariah ix-xiv, 441 
 on Zechariah ix-xi, xii-xiv, 442. 
 on the date of Zecharlah's prophecy, 443. 
 on the date of Malachi's prophecy, 446. 
 
 Sehwegler, 
 
 assails John's Gospel, 584. 
 assails First Peter, 724. 
 on the date of the composition of First Pe- 
 ter, 728. 
 
 Scott, 
 
 on the Greek in the Book of Daniel, 402. 
 Scrivener, 
 
 enumerates cursive and uncial manuscripts, 
 
 on Codex Ephraemi Rescriptus, 465. 
 
 Semler, 
 
 on the character of the Book of Jonah, 
 
 432. 
 
 on the authorship of First Peter, 724. 
 rejects Second Peter, 737. 
 
 Simon, (Richard,) 
 
 on the origin of the Pentateuch, 67. 
 Smend, 
 
 on the priestly laws of the Pentateuch, 76. 
 
 Smith, (George,) 
 
 on the Chaldean account of Genesis, 221. 
 on the Babylonian story of the creation, 
 
 221. 
 
 on the Assyrian account of the deluge, 225. 
 on the capture of Nineveh, 436, 437. 
 
 Smith, (Robertson,) 
 
 incorrect translation of passage in Hosea, 
 145. 
 
 Smith, (William,) 
 
 on the versatility of Julius Caesar, 122. 
 Solon, 
 
 his code of laws, 257. 
 Sophocles, 
 
 his remarks on what Papias wrote, 512. 
 Sozomen, 
 
 asserts that Ephraem the Syrian was igno- 
 rant of Greek, 758, note. 
 Spinoza, 
 
 on the authorship of the Pentateuch, 67. 
 
 objections to the Book of Daniel, 397. 
 
 Stahelin, (J. J.,) 
 
 on the arrangement of the Pentateuch, 70. 
 defends Zechariah ix-xiv, 441. 
 
 Staudlin, 
 
 on the fictitious character of the Book of 
 
 Jonah, 432. 
 Stein, 
 
 defends John's Gospel, 584. 
 Stephens, (Robert,) 
 
 Inserts First John v, 7, in his Greek Testa- 
 ment, 745. 
 Steudel, 
 
 defcr-is the Bock of Jonah, 432. 
 Strabo, 
 
 on Moses, 1 14. 
 
 on the zeal for teaming exhibited In Tar- 
 sus, 640.
 
 INDEX OF AUTHORS QUOTED. 
 
 79? 
 
 Btrauss, 
 
 on the genuineness of the Gospels, 69. 
 
 nis acknowledgment respecting Justin, 508. 
 
 on the language in which Matthew's (Jos- 
 pel was originally written, 540. 
 
 m alleged additions to Matthew's Gospel, 
 545. 
 
 his views of John's Gospel, 583. 
 Stuart, (Moses,) 
 
 on Ecclesiastes, 351. 
 
 defends the Book of Daniel, 398. 
 
 defends the Book of Jonah, 432. 
 
 on the number of the Apocalyptic beast, 
 755. 
 
 places the composition of the Apocalypse 
 in the time of Nero, 750. 
 
 defends the apostolic origin of the Apoca- 
 lypse, 763. 
 
 Suetonius, 
 
 on persecution of early Christians, 729. 
 Suidas, 
 
 on the taxing under Cyrenius mentioned 
 
 by Luke, 576. 
 Swa'nbeek, 
 
 refers Ihe "we" sections of the Acts to 
 Silas, 567. 
 
 Tacitus, 
 
 on the Mosaic law, 114. 
 
 witnesses to Christianity, 450. 
 
 on the taxing under Cyrenius mentioned 
 by Luke, 570. 
 
 on the conviction of Christians as incendi- 
 aries, 716, 729. 
 
 on the popular expectation of the reap- 
 pearance of Nero, 755. 
 Talmuds, 
 
 their catalogue of holy writings, 40. 
 
 account of Onkelos, 58. 
 
 account of Jonathan ben Uzziel, 59. 
 
 credit Moses with authorship of Penta- 
 teuch, 6G. 
 Tertullian, 
 
 on the spread of Christianity, 452. 
 
 appeals against heretics to autographs of 
 Paul's epistles, 462. 
 
 on the authenticity of Luke's Gospel, 502. 
 
 on Valentinus, 523. 
 
 on the authorship of the Epistle to the Ga- 
 latians, 662. 
 
 on the title of the Epistle to the Ephesians, 
 003. 
 
 on the martyrdom of Peter and Paul at 
 Rome, 721. 
 
 quotes from First Peter, 723. 
 
 ignores Second Peter, 734, 735. 
 
 quotes from Jude's Epistle, 739. 
 
 on Jnde's quotation from Enoch, 740. 
 
 alludes to the First Epistle of John, 746. 
 
 on the persecutions of the Apostle John, 
 752. 
 
 attributes the Apocalypse to the Apostle 
 
 John, 757. 
 Theodore of Mopsuestia, 
 
 on degrees of inspiration, 27. 
 
 on Job, 332. 
 
 his rejection of the Catholic Epistles, 723. 
 Theodoret, 
 
 on the Ebionitos. 536. 
 
 on the First Epistle of Peter, 723, 724. 
 
 on the ignorance of Greek of Ephraem the 
 Syrian, 758. 
 
 rejects the Apocalypse, 761. 
 Theophilus, 
 
 en the inspiration of the Prophets and the 
 Goapelc, 25. 
 
 on Gospel of John, 586. 
 
 Theophilus, 
 
 quotes from Epistle to Romans, 651. 
 quotes from the Apocalypse of John, 757. 
 Tholuek, 
 
 on the date of Luke's Gospel, 571. 
 on the genuineness of John's Gospel, 584. 
 Tisehendorf, 
 
 on the use of parchment and papyrus, 462. 
 on the large number of ancient sacred 
 
 manuscripts existing, 463. 
 on date of Codex Sinaiticus, 464. 
 on date of Codex Alexandrinus, 465. 
 on date of Codex Vaticanus, 465. 
 on date of Codex Ephraemi Rescriptus, 465. 
 on date of Codex Bezae Graeco-Latinus, 
 
 460. 
 
 on date of Codex Laudianus, 466. 
 on date of Syriac version, 471. 
 his critical edition of the Greek Testament, 
 
 522. 
 
 on the Greek original of Matthew's Gos- 
 pel, 542. 
 
 on Mark's Gospel, 560. 
 on John's Gospel, 584. 
 on First John iv, 2, 3742. 
 on First John v, 7744, 745. 
 on Apocalypse xii, 7750. 
 on Apocalypse i, 9756. 
 Tregelles, 
 
 on date of Codex Sinaiticus, 464. 
 
 on date of Codex Alexandrinus, 465. 
 
 on date of Codex Laudianus, 466. 
 
 on date of Codex Claromontanus, 466. 
 
 on date of Codex Bezae Graeco-Latinus, 
 
 466. 
 on date and importance of Codex Colberti- 
 
 nus, 437. 
 
 on date of Syriac version, 471. 
 liis plan in editing the Greek Testament, 
 
 487. 
 his critical edition of the Greek Testament, 
 
 522. 
 
 on First John iv, 2, 3742. 
 on First John v, 7744, 745. 
 on Apocalypse xii, 7750. 
 on Apocalypse i, 9756. 
 Tristram, 
 
 on Balaam and Balak, 247. 
 
 UJphilas, 
 
 his reasons for not translating fie Books of 
 Samuel and Kings into the Gothic lan- 
 guage, 65. 
 Urban, 
 
 quotes John's Gospel, 595. 
 Usher, 
 
 holds the Epistle to the Ephesians to hav 
 been encyclical, 665. 
 
 Valentinus, 
 
 quotes Luke's Gospel, 522. 
 
 gives valuable testimony to the Gospels, 
 
 522. 
 Van Dale, 
 
 attributes the Pentateuch to Exru, us. 
 Van der Hardt, (Hermann. i 
 
 regards Hie Honk of Jonah as an historical 
 
 allegory, i-'i-'. 
 Vater, 
 
 on the authorship of the Pentateuch, 69. 
 Vatke, 
 
 on the authorship of the Pentateuch, 70. 
 Victorinus, 
 
 quotes the Fourth Gospel as John's, 696. 
 Vitringa, 
 
 on the arrangement of the canon, 369. 
 
 on the date of Malachi's prophecy, 447,
 
 798 
 
 INDEX OF AUTHORS QUOTED. 
 
 Volkmap, 
 
 denies the genuineness of John's Gospel, 
 584. 
 
 Volney, 
 
 on the authorship of the Pentateuch, 70. 
 
 Von Bohlen, 
 
 on the authorship of the Pentateuch, 70. 
 
 Von Lengerke, 
 
 on the sources of the Pentateuch, 71. 
 
 Wellhausen, 
 
 on the Pentateuch, 74. 
 Whiston, 
 
 doubts the genuineness of Zechariah's 
 
 prophecy, 441. 
 VVilkinson, 
 
 on the Eight Books of Hermes, 115. 
 
 on the temple of Zoan, 162. 
 
 on the character of Egyptian worship, 199. 
 
 on the use of horses and camels in Egypt, 
 
 Wilkinson, (continued.) 
 
 on the making of bricks by Egyptian cap- 
 lives, 235. 
 
 on habits of Egyptian gentlemen, 236. 
 Wilson, 
 
 on Indian cosmogony, 218. 
 
 on Brahma, the creator, 218. 
 
 on the origin of castes, 219. 
 
 Wolfenbuttel Fragments, 69. 
 Wuttke, 
 
 on repetition in Egyptian poetry, 83. 
 
 Zeller, 
 
 on the identity of Kefr Kenna with Cana 
 
 of the Gospel, 605. 
 on the origin of James ii, 12714. 
 Zunz, 
 
 on the antiquity of the Targum of Pseudo- 
 Jonathan, 60. 
 Zwingle, 
 
 expresses doubts of the apostolic origin o< 
 the Apocalypse, 762.
 
 te 
 
 T 
 VA55 
 
 THE LIBRARY 
 UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA 
 
 Santa Barbara 
 
 THIS BOOK IS DUE ON THE LAST DATE 
 STAMPED BELOW. 
 
 Series 9482
 
 A 000 994 797 9