CORNELL 
 
 UNIVERSITY 
 
 LIBRARY 
 
Cornell University Library 
 BS475 .B47 1908 
 
 Biblical introduction ,,;, .fi'l.iSiiimiKmlii *" 
 
 Clin 
 
 3 1924 029 272 477 
 
Cornell University 
 Library 
 
 The original of this book is in 
 the Cornell University Library. 
 
 There are no known copyright restrictions in 
 the United States on the use of the text. 
 
 http://www.archive.org/details/cu31924029272477 
 
A BIBLICAL INTRODUCTION 
 
A BIBLICAL 
 INTRODUCTION 
 
 BY 
 
 W. H. BENNETT, M.A., D.D., Litt.D. 
 
 SOMETIME FELLOW OF ST. 'joHn's COLLEGE, CAMBRIDGE; PEOFKSSOU OF OLD 
 TESTAMENT EXEGESIS, HACKNEY AND NEW COLLEGES, LONDON 
 
 AND 
 
 WALTER F. ADENEY, M.A., D.D. 
 
 PRINCIPAL OF LANCASHIRE COLLEGE, MANCHESTER 
 
 WITH A CONCISE BIBLIOGRAPHY 
 
 FIFTH EDITION 
 
 NEW YORK 
 
 THOMAS WHITTAKER INC. 
 
 PUBLISHERS 
 
Fir^t PuHisUd .... O^''^"- '^2 
 
 Second Edition, Revised . May W 
 
 f::: Edition. Revised . F^^'T ''^ 
 
 Fo^tU Edition. R^sed. M.^^ '^^ 
 
 Fifth Edition ^""' ' ^ 
 
PREFACE 
 
 This volume is intended for a handbook of Biblical 
 Introduction— dealing with such questions as the date, 
 authorship, composition, analysis, and contents of the 
 several books — for those who are unacquainted or 
 only slightly acquainted with the original languages of 
 the Bible and the technicalities of criticism. The 
 authors have been anxious to include all matters of 
 importance, to state the prevalent views concerning 
 them, and to do so at sufficient length to make them 
 intelligible. Necessarily, therefore, many details of 
 analysis and criticism have had to be omitted, and 
 many theories held by only a few scholars have had 
 to be ignored. Not only did considerations of space 
 require these omissions, but it was important that 
 the student should not be so bewildered by a crowd of 
 details and conflicting theories as to be unable " to see 
 the wood for the trees." Hence, only an outline of 
 arguments and specimens of evidence are given, and it 
 must not be supposed that an exhaustive proof is offered 
 of the positions maintained. Similarly the authorities 
 referred to are merely a representative selection. Care 
 has been taken to secure that the information given 
 should be accurate and recent. 
 
 In the Old Testament, the critical position is, 
 speaking roughly, that identified in this country with 
 Professors Cheyne, Driver, Ryle, G. A, Smith, etc.; 
 
vi BIBLICAL INTRODUCTION 
 
 and generally assumed by the writers on O.T. subjects 
 in Dr. Hastings' Bible Dictionary} Brief notes as to 
 the light thrown by Assyrian, Babylonian, and other 
 inscriptions on the history of Israel have been added 
 to the passages of the historical books which they 
 illustrate. Under each book, or— where the present 
 books are collections of eariier works — under each 
 section, some account is given of its use in the New 
 Testament; this account, however, is -not exhaustive. 
 The references to Driver's Introduction are to the Sixth 
 Edition ; but, except where specially stated, the numbers 
 of the pages are those of the Fifth and earlier editions, 
 which are given in brackets [ ] in the text of the 
 Sixth. Special attention is called to the explanation 
 of symbols and technical terms on pp. 15 ff., 24 f, 32, 
 62 n. 
 
 With regard to the chapters on the New Testament, a 
 brief description of the patristic writers cited will be 
 found in an appendix ; for a fuller account the reader is 
 referred to Professor Charteris' Canonicity. The scheme 
 of chronology adopted in the New Testament period is 
 that which until recently has been almost universally 
 accepted, that followed in the main by Schiirer, Light- 
 foot, Hort, etc. Recently Harnack, McGiffert, and 
 others have argued -for an earlier dating of the chief 
 events in St. Paul's life, and of the writing of his 
 epistles. In an important article on "Chronology" in 
 the new Bible Dictionary, the writer, Mr. C. H. Turner, 
 has demonstrated the impossibility of these early dates. 
 There is still some uncertainty; but the variation is 
 
 ^The widespread acceptance of such views, even outside the ranks of 
 Q.T. scholars, may be illustrated by the advocacy of the non-historical 
 character of fonah by the late Dr. R. W. Dale in the Exfositor of July, 
 
PREFACE vi: 
 
 only a matter of about five years, and the relative 
 distinctions of dates remain unchanged. Under these 
 circumstances it seems wisest to adhere to the generally 
 accepted chronology, though with the proviso that it is 
 not certain, and might perhaps be shifted back one or 
 two years, as Mr. Turner suggests. 
 
 Each of the authors is solely responsible for his own 
 share of the book. 
 
 This account of Biblical criticism is published in 
 the faith that "Any criticism of the human element 
 in the Bible, which makes it more truly human, more 
 analogous to the workings of the human spirit other- 
 where, tends without question to enhance our sense of 
 its reality and worth." ^ The authors of this volume 
 trust that it may help its readers to a truer understand- 
 ing of the sacred Scriptures, and to a fuller appreciation 
 of their unique importance ; and may confirm them in 
 the evangelical recognition of the supreme authority of 
 the Bible as interpreted and applied by the Holy Spirit 
 for the spiritual life. 
 
 » Canon Illingworth, Personality, etc., p. i86. 
 
PREFACE TO THE SECOND EDITION 
 
 In preparing the Second Edition' some corrections and 
 references to recent criticism have been made in the 
 body of the text ; the Bibliography has been brought 
 up to date ; and three short Appendices have been 
 added. 
 
 The authors wish to thank correspondents who have 
 pointed out misprints and suggested emendations, and 
 their acknowledgments are specially due to Rev. Prof. 
 A. S. Peake, M.A. 
 
 The modification of the title-page makes it necessary 
 to state here that Professor Bennett is responsible for 
 the sections on the Old Testament and Apocrypha, 
 pp. 1-274, 474-481 ; and Principal Adeney for the 
 sections on the New Testament, pp. 275-470, 481-485. 
 
 PREFACE TO THE THIRD EDITION 
 
 Besides additions to the Bibliography and minor 
 changes, parts of the sections on " Samuel," pp. 89, 90, 
 on "Hebrew Poetry," pp. 149, 151, 152, on "The 
 Synoptic Problem," pp. 316-327, and on the "Fourth 
 Gospel," pp. 334-340B, have been revised. 
 
TABLE OF CONTENTS 
 
 t'AGB 
 
 Preface . . . . . v 
 
 OLD TESTAMENT 
 
 CHAPTER I. 
 
 Introductory to Old Testament . . . s 
 
 I. MSS. and Versions; 2. External Evidence. 3. History 
 of Criticism. 4. Canon. 
 
 chapter ii. 
 Earlier Historical Books — Genesis to Kings . .15 
 
 I, Alphabetical Table of Terms and Symbols. 2. Methods 
 of Composition. 3. Earlier Theories. 4. Current Documentary 
 Theories. 5. Methods of Analysis. 6. Limitations of Analysis. 
 7. General Table of Analysis. 8. Sketch of Argument. 
 9. Argutaent from Historical Situation. 10. Argument 
 from Theology. 11. Argument from Literary Parallels. 
 12. Linguistic Argument. 13. Argument from Mutual Relations 
 of Documents. 14. J. 15. E. 16. JE. 17. D. 18. JED. 
 19. H. 2Q. p. 21. Completion of Pentateuch. 22. Mosaic 
 Elements. 23. Genesis. 24. Exodus. 25, Leviticus. 
 26. Numbers. 27. Deuteronomy. 28. Joshua. 29. Judges. 
 30. Ruth. 31. Samuel. 32. Kings. 33. Teaching of 
 Historical Books.. 
 
 CHAPTER III. 
 
 Later Historical Books— Chronicles to Esther . 107 
 
 I. Titles, Divisions, and Mutual Relations of Chron.-Ezra- 
 Neh. 2. Date and Authorship of Chron.-Ezra-Neh, 3. Sources 
 of Chron. 4. Contents of Chron. 5. Historical Character and 
 Teaching of Chron, 6. Use of Chron. in N.T. 7. Sources of 
 Ezra-Neh. 8. Historical Accuracy of Ezra-Neh. 9. Contents 
 of Ezra-Neh. 10. Esther. 
 
X BIBLICAL INTRODUCTION 
 
 CHAPTER IV. 
 
 FAGB 
 
 The Poetical Books . . • . . "3 
 
 I. Job. 2. Psalms. 3. Proverbs. 4. Ecclesiastes. 5. Song 
 of Songs. 
 
 CHAPTER V. 
 
 Isaiah-Daniel . . . ... 171 
 
 I. Our Book of Isaiah, with General Analysis. 2. Isaiah 
 i.-xxxv. 3. Isaiah xxxvi.-xxxix. 4. Introduction to Isaiah 
 xl.-lxvi. 5. Isaiah xl.-lv. 6. Isaiah Ivi.-lxvi. 7. Jeremiah. 
 8. Lamentations. 9. Ezekiel. lO; Daniel. 
 
 CHAPTER VI. 
 The Book of the Twelve Prophets . . . 234 
 
 I. Introductory. 2. Hosea. 3. Joel. 4. Amos. 5. Obadiah. 
 6. Jonah. 7. Micah. 8. Nahum. 9. Habakkuk. 10. Zephaniah, 
 II. Ilaggai. 12. Zechariah L-viii. 13. Zechariah ix,-xiv. 
 14. Malachi. 
 
 CHAPTER VII. 
 
 Apocrypha, Pseudepigrapha, and some other Jewish 
 Literatuke not included in the Protestant 
 Canon . . . ... 268 
 
 I. Apocalypse of Baruch, including Epistle of Baruch. 
 2. Ascension of Isaiah. 3. Assumption of Moses. 4. Baruch, 
 Book of. 5. Daniel, Song of the Three Children, Bel and the 
 Dragon, Susanna. 6. Ecclesiasticus. 7. Enoch, Book of. 
 8. Enoch, Book of the Secrets of. 9. I. or III. Esdras. 
 10. II. or IV. Esdras. 11. Esther. 12. Jeremiah; Letter 
 of 13. Josephus. 14. Jubilees, Book of. 15. Judith. 
 16. i. Maccabees. 17. ii. Maccabees. 18. iii. Maccabees. 
 19. iv. Maccabees. 20. Manasseh, Prayer of. 21. Philo. 
 22. Psalms of Solomon. 23. Sibyllines. 24. Testament of 
 the Twelve Patriarchs. 25. Tobit. 26. Wisdom of Solomon. 
 
TABLE OF CONTENTS xi 
 
 NEW TESTAMENT 
 Introductory . . . . 
 
 PACE 
 
 27S 
 
 CHAPTER I. 
 The Synoptic Gospels . . ... 277 
 
 I. The Gospels. 2. Matthew. 3. Mark, 4. Luke, 
 
 CHAPTER II. 
 
 The Synoptic Problem . . ... 316 
 
 I. Resemblances. 2. Differences. 3. Proposed Explanations. 
 4. Probable Conclusions. 
 
 CHAPTER III. 
 
 The Fourth Gospel . . ... 328 
 
 I. Authorship and Historicity. 2. Time and Place of Writing. 
 3. Contents. 4. Characteristics. 
 
 CHAPTER IV. 
 
 The Acts of the Apostles . . , . 341 
 
 I. Authorship. 2. Historicity. 3. Date. 4. Contents. 5. Aim 
 and Characteristics. 
 
 CHAPTER V. 
 The Pauline Epistles— First Group . . . 349 
 
 I. The Thirteen Epistles. 2. The Thessalonian Christians. 
 3. I Thessalonians. 4. 2 Thessalonians. 
 
 CHAPTER VI. 
 The Pauline Epistles— Second Group . , 361 
 
 I. The Church at Corinth. 2. The Question of a Lost 
 Epistle. 3. I Corinthians. 4. 2 Corinthians. J. Galatians. 
 6. Romans. 7. Characteristics of the Group. 
 
387! 
 
 xii BIBLICAL INTRODUCTION 
 
 CHAPTER Vir. 
 The Pauline Epistles— Third Group— The Epistles 
 Written in Prison . • • ■ • 
 
 The Place and Time of Imprisonment. I. Colossians. 
 2. Philemon. 3. Ephesians. 4. Philippians. 5. Characteristics 
 of the Group. 
 
 CHAPTER VIII. 
 
 Fourth Group— The Pastoral Epistles . , ' i . 406 
 
 I. The question of genuineness. 2. i Timothy. 3. 2 Timothy. 
 4. Titus. . i 
 
 CHAPTER. IX. '. 
 
 The Epistle to the Hebrews . ■ . . .421 
 
 I. Who was the Author— Paul, Luke, Clement, Apollos, ' 
 Barnabas? 2. Date and Place of Writing. 3. The Church 
 Addressed. 4. Occasion of Writing. 5. Contents. 6. Argument. 
 
 CHAPTER X. -M i' 
 
 General Epistles '. . . . . 434 
 
 I. James. 2. I Peter. 3. 2 Peter. 4. Jude. J. I John. 
 6. 2 John. 7. 3 John. 
 
 CHAPTER XL 
 
 The Revelation . . . ... 460 
 
 I. Apocalyptic Literature. 2. Authorship and Origin. History 
 of Criticism, Date. 3. Contents. 4. Structure and Interpreta- 
 tion, 
 
 APPENDICES 
 
 A. Early Witnesses to New Testament Writings. 469 
 
 B. Hammurabi (Amraphel) . , . . 471 
 
 C. Wisdom Literature . . ... 472 
 
 D. The Recent Criticism of the Book of Jeremiah 473 
 
 List of Books 
 
 iNDltX . 
 
 474 
 
 486 
 
BIBLICAL INTRODUCTION 
 
 CHAPTER I. 
 INTRODUCTORY TO OLD TESTAMENT 
 
 1. MSS. and Versions I 3. History of Criticism 
 
 2. External Evidence I 4. Canon 
 
 I, Text, MSS., and Versions.— The main authorities for 
 the text are the Hebrew MSS., le. the Masoretic Text, and 
 the Septuagint. Apart from a papyrus fragmisnt of the first 
 century a.d, containing the Ten Commandments, and the 
 recently reported discovery of a Pentateuch codex dated 
 A.D. 734,1 the oldest Hebrew MSS. are the Pentateuch, 
 c. A.D. 840, in the British Museum ; and the Prophets, dated 
 by its own scribe a.d. 916, now at St. Petersburg. The 
 oldest MS. of the whole O.T. mentioned by Ginsburg was 
 written c, a.d. 1330. 
 
 The various readings are comparatively unimportant, and 
 tjie substantial agreement of so mtoy MSS. confirms the 
 statements that, long before a.d. 800, the accurate transmission 
 of the Hebrew Text had been safeguarded by a number of 
 ingenious and efficacious devices. The present consonantal 
 text was probably fixed, and as it were stereotyped, during the 
 first three centuries after Christ. The vowel-points were 
 added later. The "Square Hebrew," however, of our MSS. 
 
 * Pp. I f,. Dr. Norbert Peter's monograph on the Papyrus Nash. 
 
 B 
 
2 BIBLICAL INTRODUCTION 
 
 and printed copies is really the Aramaic script adopted by 
 the Jews some time after the Exile. The character previously 
 used by Israelite writers was that of the Moabite stone. 
 Moreover, in the ancient writings themselves the use of weak 
 consonants for vowels only occurs to a very limited extent. 
 Thus our present pointed text has been obtained from the 
 original, by transcription from the old into the square Hebrew, 
 by the insertion of weak consonants to do duty as Vowels, 
 and by the addition of vowel-points. The comparative 
 uniformity of existing MSS. suggests that, at some stage 
 in the formation of the text, the editors constituted one 
 MS. an archetype for subsequent copies, and suppressed all 
 the earlier MSS. which differed from it. The margins of our 
 MSS. and some other Jewish' authorities preserve a number 
 of comparatively unimportant various readings, besides those 
 obtained by a comparison of the MSS. themselves. 
 
 The Samaritans have MSS. of the Pentateuch in a form 
 of the old Hebrew character; it is claimed that some of 
 these belong to the first four centuries of the Christian 
 era. The differences between these MSS. and those of the 
 Masoretic edition do not substantially affect the text. 
 
 The other main authority is the Septuagintor Greek version, 
 which was made at Alexandria at different times by various 
 translators. The Pentateuch was probably translated in the 
 reign of Ptolemy II. (Philadelphus), B.C. 285-246, and the 
 prologue to Ecclesiasticus shows that a Greek trans'latioii of 
 the Law, the Prophets, and other books existed in b.c. 130. 
 The Septuagint was probably completed before the Christian 
 era, but we do not know the exact date. This version is 
 extant in numerous MSS., apparently all derived from 
 Christian sources; the oldest and most important are the 
 Vatican and Sinaitic,! which also contain the N.T. The 
 differences of reading discovered by comparing the MSS 
 of the Septuagint with each other and with those of thei 
 Hebrew Text are numerous and important. ' 
 
 Probably the Targums, or oral Aramaic translations given 
 1 BX, fourth century a.d. There are earlier fragments in papyri. 
 
EXTERNAL EVIDENCE 3 
 
 in the synagogues after the reading of the Hebrew Scriptures, 
 leJdsted in a kind of oral edition at the beginning of the 
 Christian era; but the extant Targums were not committed 
 to writing till a much later date. 
 
 The Babylonian Targums, that of the Law named after Onkelos, that 
 ■ of the Prophets after Jonathan ben tjzziel, belong to the second and third 
 centuries A.d. The Palestinian Targums, viz., the two on the. Law, the 
 Jerusalem Targum and that of Pseudo-Jonathan, and the rest are later, 
 
 Greek translations by Symmachus, Aquila, and Theodotion 
 were made in the second century a. d. With the exception of 
 •Theodption's IDaniel only fragments are preserved. 
 
 The Old .Latin Version, second century a.d., was made 
 from the Septuagint, which also largely iniluenced the Peshito 
 or Syriac Version, second or third century. . Jerome's Vulgate, 
 c. A.D. 400, is a very thorough revision of the Old Latin 
 Version from the Hebrew original. 
 
 2. Erternal Evidence.^ — As the external evidence concern- 
 ing the date and authorship of the books of the O.T. inostly 
 refers to the whole collection, it is convenient to give a sketch 
 of it here. The oldest MSS. of the Hebrew Text show us 
 that the Hebrew Text now current, from which E.Vi is 
 translated, was known about a.d. 800-1000, i.e., that all the 
 books of the O.T. were then extant in their present form. 
 The oldest MSS. of the LXX. show us that they were all 
 extant in substantially ^ their present form about a.d. 300-400. 
 Further, the accounts given of the Synod of Jariinia show 
 that all the books existed at the close of the first century 
 A.D., and the numerous quotations in the N.T. mostly agree 
 either with the LXX. or the Hebrew Text, from which we 
 infer that the books quoted in the N.T. existed then in sub- 
 stantially the same form as that in which they are found 
 in the LXX. and the Hebrew. These books comprise all the 
 O.T. except Joshua, Judges, Chronicles, Canticles, Ecclesiastes, 
 Mzra, Nehemiah, Esther, Obadiah, Zephaniah, Nahuni.^ 'S\xAa 
 
 ' On Internal Evidence see chap. ii. § ii. 
 
 ' The differences are appreciable. 
 
 8 Westcott, Bible in the Church, p. 43. 
 
4 BIBLICAL INTRODUCTION 
 
 and Josephus confirm our inference as to the books used in 
 N.T., and enable us to extend it to the other books of O.T., 
 with two possible exceptions, Ecdesiastes and Canticles. 
 
 We can add from Philo, Joshua, fudges, and Chromcles. 
 Josephus' history shows his acquaintance with all the historical 
 books. In his account of the Scriptures i he states that there 
 are only twenty-two sacred books : the five books of Moses, 
 thirteen books by the prophets containing the history from 
 Moses to Artaxerxes, and four books containing hymns to 
 God and practical directions to men. The thirteen are 
 perhaps : (i) foshua, (2) fudges and Ruth, (3) Samuel, 
 (4) Kings, (5) Isaiah, (6) feremiah and Lamentations, 
 (7) Ezekiel, (8) The Book of the Twelve Prophets, 
 (9) Chronicles, (10) Ezra and Nehemiah, (11) Esther, 
 (12) Daniel, (13) fob: and the four. Psalms, Proverbs, 
 Canticles, Ecdesiastes.^ 
 
 It would, however, be quite possible to reckon Ruth and 
 Lamentations as separate books, to place Job and Lamenta- 
 tions among the four, and extrude Ecdesiastes and Canticles^ 
 
 There is no certain trace in Josephus of his acquaintance 
 with these two books, and his list and classification do 
 not prove that he was acquainted with them. Perhaps this 
 master of craft and subtlety was intentionally ambiguous in 
 view of the conflicting views of the Rabbis. 
 
 The fact that the LXX. contains all the O.T, shows that 
 all the books were written before the LXX. was completed, 
 i.e., according to common opinion, before the beginning 
 of the Christian era. Unfortunately this opinion, though 
 probably correct, is not at present susceptible of fornjal 
 proof. 
 
 The prologue to the Greek translation of Eeclesia^ticus 
 speaks of "the Law and the Prophets arid the other books" 
 as known to the author, a passage which shows that the Law 
 and the Prophets and some other sacred books were known to 
 
 * Contra Apian, i. ,7-9. 
 ' Buhl, Canon, p. 19. 
 
 * Griitz op. Buhl, p. 19. 
 
'■■ EXTERNAL EVIDENCE , 5 
 
 the translator, B.C. 130, and probably to his grandfather, the 
 author, b.c. 180 j but the'yi by no means prove that the 
 Hagiographa or Kethflbhim, the third and latest section of 
 the Hebrew Canon, then included all the books which it 
 ultimately embraced. On the contrary, the list of worthies, 
 xliv.-xlix. implies the author's acquaintance with all the books 
 of the "Law" and the "Prophets" j but, of the Hagiographa, 
 only Chronicles, Ezra, Nehemiah, and Psalms are referred to. 
 
 The story that the Law was translated into Greek by 
 ,seventy4W0 Jews^ for Ptolemy (Philadelphus),'B;C. 284-246, 
 is extant in a letter, the Epistle- of the Pseudo-Aristeas, which 
 is perhaps as old as B.C. 200; if so, the main fact, the 
 translation of the Law into Greek c, B.C. 250, may probably 
 be accepted; and we have external evidence of the existence 
 of the complete. Pentateuch at that date.^ 
 
 The Satnaritans possess ancient Hebrew MSS. ' of the 
 Pentateuch in a modification of the old Hebrew character. 
 Probably the Samaritans obtained and accepted the' Penta- 
 teuch not long after their establishment of a schismatic 
 Judaism. This was certainly not earlier than the reforms 
 of Ezra and Neheaiiah, i.e. 444. Our information concern- 
 ing the history of the Samaritans is too fragmentary 'atad 
 ambiguous to enable us to fix exactly the date at -which 
 they 'received the Pentateuch; but it points to the existence 
 of the Pentateuch before b.c. 300. 
 
 Thus the evidence outside of the O.T. itself shotirs that the 
 Pentateuch was in existence before b.c. 300 ; Joshua, Judges, 
 Samueli Kings, Isaiah, Jeremiah, Ezekiel, the Book 'of thb 
 Twelve Prophets, Chronicles, Ezra, Nehemiah, and Psalms 
 before B.C. 180 j the rest of the O.T. before the beginniftg 
 of the Christian era. The proof, however, is not quite 
 absolute from external evidende alone in the case of Ecclei 
 siastes and Canticles: But, even as a matter of external 
 evidence, these two books could not be much later. 
 
 ' Hence the title Septuagint. 
 
 * Buhl, p. no. 
 
 ' Some probably as old as A.D. 400. 
 
6 BIBLICAL INTRODUCTION 
 
 The LXX. and the Hebrew Text have reached as along 
 independent lines of transmission. The differences between 
 them, though numerous and important, do not seriously affect 
 O.T. history, and teaching. This agreement shows us that 
 pur O.T. existed substantially as we now have it before the 
 Christian era.^ 
 
 External evidence as to authorship is necessarily slighter 
 and less definite. A reference to a book is proof of its 
 existence at the tiijie when the reference was made, and 
 fixes a limit to the period within which it can have been 
 composed.' But a statement as to authorship merely conveys 
 the opinion of the person who makes it, and when he lived 
 centuries after the book was written his opinion carries little 
 weight, unless it can be shown — not merely assumed — that he 
 connects with the book through a satisfactory series of inter- 
 mediate authorities. Revelation, of course, might have given 
 N.T. writers direct information on such subjects, or our Lord 
 might have made statements as to the date and authorship of 
 the Jewish Scriptures part of His message to the world. But 
 neither Christ nor the inspired writers declare- that such-matters 
 are part of the Revelation made by Him or through them. : 
 
 Our Hebrew and Greek MSS. show that in N.T. times 
 the books already bore their present titles, and they are 
 referred to under these titles in the N.T. and elsewhere. 
 But such references are not equivalent to expressions of. 
 opinion as to authorship. For instance, "Matthew says, 
 etc." merely means to-day "The First Gospel says, -etc. "; 
 the personal; name "Matthew" is used as a title for the 
 book, without any intention of stating a conviction as to 
 authorship. Thus Calvin .does not hold 2 Peter to be the 
 work of the; apostle, but expressly justifies the ■ referring to, 
 it as "Peter,", because he believes it to be consistent with 
 his teaching.2 Similarly, Origan says of the Epistle to the 
 
 ^ The additions in the LXX. do not afifect this evidence. 
 
 » So Dr. Currey writes in the S.P.C.K. commentary on Ecclesiastes, 
 1878 : " Commentators have in general spolsen of the contents of this book 
 as the words of Solomon, without intending thereby to express any precise 
 opinion of its author.ship and date." 
 
EXTERNAL EVIDENCE 7 
 
 Hebrews that " God only knows who wrote it," yet in his 
 writings he freely quotes it as " Paul's." ^ Hence unless 
 a writer ' or speaker inakes it clear that he is intending to 
 state an ''authoritative judgment' as to the authorship of a 
 book, quotations from "Moses," or "David," or "Kings" 
 merely mean that the passages are taken from the books 
 bearing these titles. Our leading authorities are for the 
 most • part singularly wanting in explicit statements as to 
 the authorship of O.T. books. The N.T. lays little stress 
 upon; authorship ; in the majority of its quotations it does 
 not think it worth while to mention any author's name; 
 it is not careful to confine the term "David" to Psalms 
 bearing Davidic titles, but extends it to the anonymous 
 Psalms ii. and xcv.^ In some cases the authors' names 
 connected with quotations in the N.T. differ from the titles 
 of the O.T. books from which they are taken.^ 
 
 It is not that the N^T. writers intended to give an inspired 
 contradiction of the O.T., but that they were indifferent, 
 and did not claim to deliver inspired messages on these 
 subjects. 
 
 The most explicit statement is the well-known Talmudic 
 passage, which probably represents the current opinion of the 
 Rabbis at the beginning of the Christian era.* It runs as 
 follows:^ — "But who wrote (the books of the Bible)? Moses 
 wrote his i own book (and) the section about Balaam, and Job. 
 Joshua wrote his own bodk and (the last) eight verses of the 
 Pentateuch. Samuel wrote his own book (and) the books 
 
 ^ e.g., Againsi Celsus, chap. liii. 
 
 ' Acts iv. 25 ; Heb. iv. 7. 
 
 ' In Mark i, 2, 3, R.V;, Mai. iii. i, + Isaiah xL 3 is quoted as 
 "written in the, prophet Isaiah"; in Matt, xxvii. 9, Zech. xi. 12, 13 
 are referred to as "spolcen by Jeremiah the prophet"; probably elsewhere 
 the ndmis of authors of quotations have been inserted by scribes, much as 
 references are written or printed in English Bibles. Thus the name 
 Y Daniel " given in Matt. xxiv. ij is absent from Mark, R.V., and Luke ; 
 and "Jeremiah " is omitted by some authorities in Matt. ii. 17. 
 
 * Babylonian Talmud, Baba Bathra, f. 14 b. Though this edition of 
 the Talmud was composed about a.d. 500, the passage, in question is a 
 "baraitha," or early tradition from the age of the Mishna, i.e., the second 
 century A. D/ Buhl, Ca«c», p. 5. ' 
 
8 BIBLICAL INTRODUCTION 
 
 of Judges and Ruth; David wrote the book of Psalms by 
 the ten venerable elders, Adam the first man, Melchizedek, 
 Abraham, Moses, Haman, Jeduthun, , Asaph, and the three 
 sons of Korah. Jeremiah wrote his own book, the books 
 of Kings and Lamentations. Hezekiah and his friends (wrote 
 the books included in) the mnemonic book Y.a.M.Sh.a.Q., i.e., 
 Isaiah {YeshaydM), Proverbs {MesMltm), Canticles {Shir 
 hash-Shtrim), and Ecclesiastes {Qohekih). The Men of the 
 Great Synagogue (wrote the books included in) the mnemonic 
 word HaNDaG, «>., Ezekiel (ye Hezkel), the Twelve (Neb- 
 hitm), Daniel, and Esther. Ezra wrote his own book and 
 continued the genealogies of the books of Chronicles down 
 to his own times. . . . But who completed them (the books 
 of Chronicles) ? Nehemiah ben Hachaliah." 
 
 Clearly, " wrote " cannot be used here of the literary com- 
 position of our present books. The Book of Joshua narrates 
 the death of Joshua; the Book of Samuel narrates the whole 
 reign of David, while Samuel died before his accession. The 
 Great Synagogue, if it existed at all, was a post-ejdlic institu- 
 tion, and the Talmud could not mean that Amos and Hosea 
 were post-exilic. Note, too, that David's " writing " of the 
 Psalms does not exclude " ten venerable elders " from a share 
 in the work. The inevitable conclusion is that when the Jews 
 of our Lord's time spoke of anyone "writing" a book, they 
 used the term in a very elastic sense; either of preparing 
 the final editioli which took its place in the Canon, or of 
 having some connection with the book, as being its hero, 
 and the author of part of its contents. Similarly, although 
 Eccliis. xliv.-xlix. implies that, in the author's time, the 
 books of the Law and the Prophets bore their present titles, 
 it does not assert that the persons mentioned in the titles 
 were the literary authors, of the books in their present form^ 
 Even Philo and Josephus, who dilate on Moses' gifts as a 
 legislator, and speak of him as prophesying his death and. 
 burial, lay little stress on his actual Uterary authorship. 
 
 There is a story in Fourth Esdras, c. a.d. go-ioo, that the 
 Law was burnt, and that Ezra was inspired to dictate afresh 
 
GENERAL COURSE OF CRITICISM 
 
 ninety-four books to five scribes, seventy of which were 
 reserved for scholars and twentj'-four published.^ This strange 
 legend seems to point to a tradition of an extensive post-exilic 
 revision of the Law and the rest of the O.T. 
 
 Thus the external evidence as to authorship shows- that the 
 books of the O.T. had their present titles at the beginning 
 of the Christian era, and that the Law and the Prophets 
 (including Joshua to 2 Kings, less Ruth) had such titles 
 about B.C. 200 ; and that the Pentateuch existed in its present 
 form c, B.C. 300. Further, Moses and' others nanied in such 
 titles are often spoken of as in some sense authors of the 
 books to which their names are attached, but the extant 
 evidence suggests that they may not always have been credited 
 with the literary authorship of these books in their present 
 form. Otherwise, our authorities seem to have had' no in- 
 formation on the subject but that given by the titles and 
 other contents of- the O.T. Practically, therefore) we are 
 left to determine the date and authorship of the books from 
 the same evidence. - 
 
 3. The General Course of Criticism. It follows, from what 
 has been maintained in the section on External Evidence, 
 that there, is nothing to show either that Jewish views as to 
 date and authorship were based on any careful and thorough 
 investigations, or even that their statements are intended to, 
 ascribe Uterary authorship to the persons whose names they 
 use as titles of books. The Pentateuch, for instance, might 
 be called the Law of Moses, and carry bis authority, even 
 if it was not composed by him ; it represented his, teaching 
 and his spirit. Thus^ the criticism of our books had not 
 really begun when the Church took over the O.T. from the 
 Synagogue. With the books, the Church, also took the titles, 
 and , the loose understanding that the personal titles were, 
 as far as possible, to be interpreted as ascriptions of author-, 
 ship. .With. slight exceptions, there was no inquiry into the 
 
 }. jdv. 19-48 ; the book is called 2 Esdras in tbe English version of the 
 Apocrypha. The twenty-four published books are probably those of the 
 O.T., Which were often reckoned as twenty-four. 
 
10 BIBLICAL INTRODUCTION 
 
 evidence of date and authorship. The intellect of Christian 
 scholars was preoccupied with the Canon and criticism of 
 the N.T., and with the construction of a system^ of theology.' 
 Meanwhile, popular usage hardened into definite and rigid 
 shape the traditional views taken over from the Rabbis. 
 Lapse of time gave the authority of prescription to what 
 had merely been accepted by an otiose assent; and, through- 
 out the Middle Ages, the cruel weight of ecclesiastical 
 intolerance effectually crushed any movement to reopen a 
 question which both the Church and the Synagogue, were 
 supposed to have settled. Nevertheless, here and there, a 
 passage of a father, like Theodore of Mopsuestia, or of a 
 Rabbi, like Ibn Ezra, shows that the objections to the 
 traditional views were patent to .competent scholars who were 
 also independent thinkers. 
 
 The Reformation promised, at first, to liberate criticism; 
 Luther and Calvin were the pioneers of modern biblical 
 criticism; they set aside traditional views on some points 
 connected with the Apocrypha and minor O.T. books. But 
 history repeated itself, the Protestant leaders were mainly 
 occupied with the revolution in Church gove'rnrnent , and 
 the reconstruction of theology. The traditional views which 
 the Primitive Church had accepted by otiose assent from the 
 Rabbis, the Protestants again accepted, with little change,, 
 from the Church of Rome. About this period, and before 
 and after, Spinoza, Grotius, and others, besides the great 
 reformers, made beginnings of O.T. criticisin in various 
 directions; but there was no comprehensive or thorough 
 investigation into the date and authorship' of the respective 
 books. The movement towards inquiry was checked, and, 
 in the absence of any emphatic challenge, it, came to be 
 supposed that the traditional views were part of the, body 
 of Christian truth, which Protestants held in common' with' 
 the Church of Rome. 
 
 It was only towards the close of the last century that the 
 principles of the Reformation began to be systematically 
 applied to O.T, criticism. Since then, the question of the 
 
GENERAL COURSE OF CRITICISM ii 
 
 * 
 date, authorship, etc., of all the. books of the O.T. has been 
 carefully examined. The process has been long, laborious, and 
 difficult, and is by no means completed. Two special causes 
 have added to the difficulty, (i) In most cases, and till 
 recently in all cases, the scholars engaged in this task were 
 trained to take the traditional views for granted, and to assume 
 that they were always supported by conclusive evidence. 
 When a scholar was engaged in a fresh and independent 
 examination of some one subject, on all other subjects he 
 was almost obliged to assume the traditional views, which 
 had moulded all his habits of thought on the O.T. Hence 
 the first solutions proposed often blend the assumptions of 
 tradition and the results of criticism in the most curious 
 fashion. (2) On the other hand, it was soon discovered that, 
 in many cases, the strong evidence supposed to support the 
 older views simply did not exist; and that what seemed to be 
 evidence was often quite irrelevant. Hence there arose a 
 tendency to reject both views and evidence in too wholesale 
 a fashion. For these two reasons results have had to be 
 revised and reconsidered again and again. But there are 
 signs that something like finality is being reached as to the 
 main facts ; although- in dealing with a very ancient lilierature 
 chiefly by internal evidence, results must always be approxi- 
 mate, there will always be a broad margin of ■ uncertaiiity, 
 within which different scholars will arrive at different results. 
 
 There has also been a third difficulty. Naturally, anxiety 
 has been felt lest the processes and results of criticism should 
 weaken the authority of the Bible, a!nd undermine the founda- 
 tions of essential Christian doctrines. Now, however, the 
 new positions have met with widespread acceptance for more 
 than a generation, and experience shows that ministers and 
 Christians generally hold such positions without losing any- 
 thing of their fulness of spiritual life, or of their zeal and 
 success in the service of their Master. 
 
 In many respects, especially in the Prophetical Books, 
 criticism has substantially confirmed traditional views; in 
 many other matters those views have been considerably 
 
12 BIBLICAL INTRODUCTION 
 
 modified, or even entirely set aside. The general result, 
 however, tends not to weaken, but to strengthen, the spiritual 
 authority and value of the Old Testamerlt. 
 
 The very general statement given above would apply to. almost all 
 schools of criticism. Some scholars, however, believe that the ultimate 
 results of criticism will be much mor6 in accordance with traditional views 
 than the position taken in the O.T. section of this book. Cf. Preface and 
 Appendix on Literature. ' 
 
 4. Canon. — The idea of a Canon, or collection of books 
 distinguished from all others by Unique inspiration and 
 religious authority, -was fully established among the. Jews 
 before' the beginning of the Christian era. Yet there was 
 not unanimity as to the exact list of canonical booksi The 
 Hebrew collection of sacred books was less numerous.Jhan 
 that used by Greek-speaking Jews. Even amongst Palestinian 
 Jews , the canonicity of Ezekiel, Ecclesiastes, Ruth, Esther, 
 Proverbs, and Canticles was still discussed; in the first century 
 A.D. But the Synod of Jamnia, c. a.d. 90, seems to have 
 fixedtthe Canon of the Hebrew O.T. as we now have it; 
 and this Canon was confirmed by the Mishna, c, a.d. 200. 
 The O.T. as pubhshed, so to speak, by the Masoretic editors, 
 not earlier than about a.d. 150, and as printed in our Hebrew 
 Bibles, consists of three parts :—!- : > 
 
 (i.) Tordh^ or Pentateuch, 
 (ii.) NebMUm, or Prophets. 
 
 (a) NebMim RVshMm, or First Volume of the 
 
 Prophets, Joshua, Judges, Samuel, Kings. 
 ((5) NebM'im 'AMronim, or Second Volume of the 
 Prophets,! Isaiah, Jeremiah, Ezekiel; and the 
 1 , Twelve. 
 
 (iii.) KefhMMm, or Hagiographa, Chronicles, Psalms, 
 Job, Proverbs, Daniel, Ezra, and Nehemiahj 
 and the five festival rolls, or Megilloth, Ruth, 
 Canticles, Ecclesiastes, Lamentations, and Esther. 
 
 1 Another, less probable, explanation of (a) and {b) is "earlier" and 
 " later prophets. 
 
CANON 13 
 
 This grouping is recognised in the N.T. in the frequent 
 references to "the Law and the Prophets," ^ and once to 
 "the Law of Moses, the Prophets, and the Psalms." ^ 
 Similarly the , prologue to Ecclesiasticus speaks of the Law, 
 the Prophets, and, the other books of our fathers, i Thus the 
 two first sections of the Canon, the Law and the Prophets, 
 seena fully accepted in their present form before B.C. 130, and 
 almost certainly before B.C. 200, The canonical status of 
 the Pentateuch is implied in Chronicles, B.C. 300-250; the 
 priestly code became canonical under Ezra and, Nehemiah.; 
 the kernel of Deuteronomy under Josiah., 
 
 So far we have been dealing with the Canpn , of the 
 Palestinian Rabbis. Although the canonicity of some of 
 our O.T. books was matter for discussion, no serious attempt 
 seems to have been made to include in the Jewish Canon any 
 books not contained in our O.T. The Alexandrine and other 
 Hellenistic Jews, however, had a wider canon, including, in 
 addition to all the books of our O.T., our Apocrypha, viz., 
 the additions to Esther, the additions to Daniel {i.e., the Song 
 of the Three Holy Children, Susanna, and Bel and thfc 
 Dragon), Barueh, the Epistle of Jeremiah, the Prayer of 
 Manasses, Esdras, i and 2 Maccabees, Ecclesiasticus, and 
 the Wisdom of Solomon, Judith, and Tobit. 
 
 Although we have no early express statements that the 
 Hellenistic Jews had this wider canon, two considerations 
 point to its existence: (i.) In the existing MSS. of the 
 Septuagint the Apocrypha are not collected in a final 
 appendix, but are distributed amongst the other books 
 as if of equal authority. Although all these MSS. are 
 Christian, the arrangement is probably borrowed from the 
 Hellenistic Jews, (ii.) The Apocrypha were often included 
 in the Christian Canon. Now Christian scholars who refused 
 to accept any but our O.T. books, did so on the authority 
 of the Palestinian Jews. Probably, therefore, those who 
 accepted a wider canon also followed Jewish authority — in 
 this case, the opinions and customs of the Hellenistic Jews. 
 1 Matt. vii. 12, etc. ' Luke xxiv. 44. 
 
14 BIBLICAL INTRODUCTION 
 
 With slight exceptiohs the books of the Palestinian Ganon 
 have been universally received by the Christian Church.^ 
 
 Christendom h^s never arrived at any unanimous decision 
 as to the canonicity of the O.T. Apocrypha. In the Patristic 
 period and throughout the Middle Ages, there were scholars 
 who preferred the Palestinian Canon ; but popular usage and 
 Church authority adopted the wider Canon of the Septuagint.^ 
 
 At the Reformation the Protestant Churches practically 
 limited their O.T. to the Palestinian Canon, but at the Council 
 of Trent, in 1546, the Church of Rome authoritatively 
 accepted the Canon of the Vulgate, which includes the bulk 
 of O^T. Apocrypha.' ' The Greek Church arrived at a similar 
 decision at the Synod of Jerusalem in 1672,* 
 
 ^ Some Syrian authorities omitted Chronicles, Ezra and Nehemiah, 
 Esther and Job ; and the canonicity of Esther was hot fully acknowledged 
 even in the fourth century A.D.; Athanasius and Gregory Nazianzen both 
 omit it from their lists. — Buhl, O.T. Canon, Eng. tr., pp. 53, JS. 
 
 ' Jerome attempted to limit the O.T. to the Palestinian Canon, but the 
 Council of Carthage, held in a.d. 397, accepted the Apocrypha as well. 
 
 ' «.«,,' the' additions to Daniel and Esther, Baruch, the Letter of 
 Jeremiah, i and 2 Maccabees, Judith, Tobit, Ecclesiasticus, and Wisdom. 
 
 ' Buhl, p. 65. It seems, however, that the decision has not determined 
 the practice of the Greek Church; "the current of Greek opinion" is 
 said to favour the Hebrew or Protestant Canon. Cf, Smith's Bible 
 Dictionary, Canon. The Book of £nocA,see p. 270, is quoted as Scrip- 
 ture in Jude 14 f. ; .,,,.• 
 
CHAPTER 11. 
 
 EARLIER HISTORICAL BOOKS 
 GENESIS TO KINGS 
 
 I. Alphabetical Table of Terms 
 
 15. E. 
 
 and Symbols, 
 
 16. JE. 
 
 2. Methods of Composition., 
 
 17, t). 
 
 3. Earlier Theories. 
 
 18. JED. 
 
 4. Ciirrent Documentary 
 
 19. H. 
 
 Theories. 
 
 20. P. 
 
 5. Methods of Analysis. 
 
 21. Completion of Pentateuch, 
 
 6. Xcimitations of Analysis. 
 
 22. Mosaic Elements, 
 
 7. General Table of Analysis. 
 
 23. Genesis. 
 
 8. Sketch of Argument. 
 
 24. E^odiis. 
 
 9, Argument from Historical 
 
 25. Leviticu^. 
 
 Situation. 
 
 26. Numbers. 
 
 10. Argument from Theology, 
 
 27. Deuteronomy, 
 
 II. Argument from Literary 
 
 28. Joshua. 
 
 Parallels. 
 
 29^ Judges, 
 
 12, Linguistic Argument. 
 
 30, Ruth,i _ 
 
 13. Argument from, Mutual Rela- 
 
 , 1 31, Samuel, 
 
 tions ^of Documents. 
 
 32. Kings. 
 
 14. J. ■ ,:; :"," 
 
 33, Teaching of Historical Books 
 
 I. Alphabetical Table of Terms and Symbols, — 
 
 v4,iDillmann's symbol for P. 
 
 ■^J II ;, ji 11 ,E. ; 
 
 Sookofthe Covenant, Exodus xx-xxiii., §§5, 15, 
 
 Book of the Four Covenants, Wellhausen's title for the 
 
 Priestly Code. 
 C, Dillmann's symbol^ for J, 
 
 ' Ruth is included in this chapter in order to follow the arrangement of 
 the English Bible ;■ it is doubtful whether it can be called " earlier." 
 
 IS 
 
i6 BIBLICAL INTRODUCTION 
 
 D, either the Kernel of Deuteronomy, or the Deuteronomic 
 
 material generally, or in any particular book, §§ 17. 27- 
 
 D\ the Kernel of Deuteronomy. 
 
 D"^, D^, Deuteronomic material later than D^. 
 
 Da., Kittel's symbol for a History of David, identified by 
 Budde with J. 
 
 Deuteronomy, Kernel of, see Kernel of EJeuterpnomy. 
 
 Deuteronomic, applied to material in the Kernel of Deu- 
 teronomy, or more widely to material in the style of 
 Deuteronomy, for which " Deuteronomistic " is some- 
 times used. - 
 
 Deuteronomic Epitome, the abstract of an earlier source 
 made by the Deuteronomic author of Kings, §32. 
 
 Deuteronomist, Author of Deuteronomy, or of D'*, etc. 
 
 Deuteronomistic, see Deuteronomic, 
 
 2?/. = D2orR°. 
 
 E, the Elohist Prophetic Document, or its author, § 15. 
 E'^, earliest stratum of E. 
 
 E\ E\ later strata of E, 
 
 El, symbol used in this work for the narratives concerning 
 
 Elijah and Elisha, § 32. 
 Elohist, used by earlier critics for the author of all the 
 
 Elohistic material in the Hexateuch, i.e., P + E; by 
 
 later critics for E, §§ 3, 15. 
 Elohist, First or Earlier, title given to P by critics who 
 
 supposed it to be the earliest document of Hexateuch. 
 Elohist, Later or Second, title given to E by critics mentioned 
 
 above. 
 Elohistic Prophetic Document, E, § 15. 
 Grundschrift, name given to the Elohistic material, P + E, 
 
 of the Pentateuch, as the framework of the whole, § 3. 
 H, Law of Holiness, P^, § 19. 
 Hexateuch, Hex., Pentateuch + Joshua. 
 Holiness, Law of, see Law of Holiness. 
 /, the Jehovistic Prophetic Document, or its author, § 14. 
 J^, earliest stratum of J. 
 PP, later strata of J. 
 
METHODS OF COMPOSITION 17 
 
 JE, the document obtained by combining J and E, § 16. 
 JED, the document obtained by combining JE and D, 
 
 §.i8., 
 Je, Kittel's symbol for a History of David mainly identified 
 
 by Budde with J. 
 Jehovistic Prophetic Document, J, § 14. : - 
 Kernel of Deuteronomy, the contents of the first edition of 
 
 Deuteronomy, D'^, § 17. 
 Law 0/ JlotinesSj heviticns xviL-xxvi., H or P^, § 19. 
 -P, either the Priestly Code, or any material by priestly 
 
 writers, § 20. 
 ^^the Law of Holiness, H, § 19. 
 P^, the Priestly Code proper. 
 P^,P\P*, later additions to the Priestly Code. 
 Priestly Code, Y\ § 20. 
 Prophetic Documents, J and E. 
 Q, Wellhausen's, symbol for P^. 
 1 M, editor, or matter added by an editor. 
 R°, editor who added D to JE, or matter composed by 
 
 him, § 17. 
 R^'^, editor who conibined J and E, or matter added by 
 
 him, § 16, 
 E^, editor who combined JED and P, or; later priestly 
 
 editors. who supplemented the Pentateuch and' other 
 , historical books, § 21. 
 , ^, Kittel's symbol for a history of Saul, mainly identified 
 
 by, Budde with J, § 31. 
 SS, Kittel's symbol for a history of Saul, miainly identified 
 
 by Budde with E2,i§ 32. 
 
 ' 2. Methods of Composition. — A history of ancient times 
 is' the last stage of a process by which it is connected with ■ 
 the events it describes. The intervening links are, amohgsti 
 other things, the effects of these events, riionuments and 
 inscriptions, and earlier histories. In a first-class history 
 we have the result of careful study of these authorities j 
 the author combines information from various sources, and 
 c 
 
I?. BIBLICAL INTRODUCTION 
 
 reconstructs the nature, sequence, and relation of events; 
 he also adds notes which give references to, and extracts 
 from his authorities. The text is the homogeneous work 
 of a single mind, and rests priitiarily: on the authority of 
 the author; its accuracy depends partly 'on that of his sources, 
 partly on his industry, honesty, intelligence, and imagination. 
 The. notes enable the reader to test the judgment, of the 
 modern historian by the statements of' the ancient authorities. 
 In our O.T. books this advanced form of history has not yet 
 been reached. They stop short at a much earlier, stage, and 
 are roughly equivalent to the notes of suchi a work without 
 the text. There were early souirces, the documents in which 
 tradition was first written down, or the contemporary account 
 of events. Later writers utilised these in primitive fashion. 
 In the ancient East custom and tradition wei'e supreme.; when 
 once a story had taken shape, its general form and, in a 
 measure, even its words were sacred.^ Yet, from time to 
 time, Israelite scholars were inspired- to attempt a fuller and 
 more spiritual treatment of the annals of the. chosen people. 
 A modern author tries to be original in method^ and language 
 — in the text of ; his works, but not in his notes;, there he 
 is most anxious to reproduce his authorities as accurately 
 as i possible. The ancient historian reproduced and supple- 
 mented; he did not write a new work of his own. He 
 used an ancient book as a groundwork, into which he 
 inserted his new material ; he retained time-honoured phrases, 
 and interwove sentences and paragraphs from his sources 
 with each other, and with connecting inatter and other 
 additions of his own, into a most remarkable literary /mosaic. 
 In the course of this process he expressed his conception 
 of the course of. events, and -his judgment on. history; he 
 omitted objectionable passages, or accommodated them to 
 the better taste and higher spiritual feeling of later times,;; 
 he explained, illustrated, expanded, or moralised,,, T.jIf P, 
 
 ^ In the same way children resent any departure from the faniiliar forin 
 of a favourite story, and many people have a predilection for narratives 
 "in the words of Scripture itself "—preferably the A.V, ., . i 
 
EARLIER THEORIES 19 
 
 modern historians, he exercised his judgment and' imagina- 
 tion as to what, in the nature of things, must have happened, 
 and supplemented or even corrected the earlier narrative 
 accordingly. Nevertheless, he retained as many arid as 
 extensive verbatim extracts as possible j he was not writing 
 a new book of his own, but preparing a new edition of 
 the old history. Thus a comparison of the Synoptic Gospels 
 shows that Matthew and Luke largely consist of matter ' 
 extracted verbatim from older sources, and in Tatian's 
 Diatessaron a continuous narrative is constructed by piecing 
 together extracts from the four Gospels. Similarly, Chronicles 
 is an intricate combination of sections frOm the earlier 
 historical books with the author's additions. Several verses 
 in Judges i. occur in different parts of Joshua. But this 
 method of using verbatim extracts from earlier works is 
 riot confined to cases. where the same passage is stiir found 
 in two O.T. books. A careful examination of the books 
 we are now dealing with shows that they are made up of 
 extracts from earlier works, which are only preserved so 
 far as they are contained in our present books. By using 
 this method the authors, or rather editors, have done us 
 much better service than if they had rewritten the history 
 in modern fashion. For the statements in these books, we 
 have not merely the authority of late editors, but of one or 
 more earlier sources. ■ 
 
 _ 3. Earlier Theories. — We have only space to state briefly 
 the chief types of these theories, and here and there to give* 
 some slight indication of the grounds on which they have been 
 advocated or rejected. 
 
 (a) Authorship by Moses, Joshua, Samuel, and the Prophets, — 
 This view, though supported by niany other arguments, practi- 
 cally rests on the supposed consensus of opinion of the 
 Rabbis and the early Church. It contains an important 
 element of' truth. The Pentateuch is Mosaic, inasmuch as 
 it rests on the authority of Moses, and has its roots in his 
 work and teaching. Its laws were promulgated by the Jewish 
 
20 BIBLICAL INTRODUCTION 
 
 leaders, and accepted by the people, because they were rightly 
 believed to be in accordance with the revelation made to, 
 him. It is not improbable that the prophets had a share 
 in composing, editing, and preserving the sacred records.- 
 But there is no appreciable evidence that Moses, Joshua, or 
 Samuel actually wrote the Pentateuch or the Books of Joshua,,. 
 Judges, or Samuel, or that the prophets composed the Book, 
 of Kings.i The contents of the Pentateuch naturally suggested . 
 the use of the phrases, " Law ^ of Moses," or " Book of the 
 Law of Moses," as titles of the Pentateuch. When once 
 these titles were established, they were sure to be interpreted 
 as implying that the Pentateuch, as a literary composition,: 
 was the personal work of Moses. On the other hand, the 
 editors who gave the Pentateuch and the Books of Joshua 
 and Samuel their present form, included in these works the 
 accounts of the deaths of Moses, Joshua, and Samuel j 
 respectively. This fact shows that it was neither intended 
 nor expected that they would be regarded as literary com- 
 positions by these three great leaders. A careful examination 
 of the historical books shows that, they contain material from 
 sources belonging to different, ages, and that much of their 
 contents must be later than the times of the leaders whose 
 names they bear. Hence tke claims of Samuel and Joshua 
 to authorship even of parts of books are not strorigly urged j 
 and almost all critics admit that the Pentateuch contains an 
 appreciable amount of editorial additions made long after 
 the Mosaic Age. A very large portion of the Pentateuch, 
 forming the basis of the work, is still ascribed to Moses by 
 some scholars; but the tendency of criticism is to minimise 
 the Mosaic elements. 
 
 (b) Th^ Older Documentary Theory.— Tas, modern criticism 
 of the historical books starts with the publication in 1753, by 
 
 " Cf. Ch. i. \ 2, External Evidence. 
 
 2 T8rah,oi which word "law" is an unsatisfectory equivalent. Torah 
 was originally used of any instruction on religious matters, whether given 
 by pnes or prophet. In its earlier uses it is more akin to- " revelation " 
 than to law. 
 
EARLIER THEORIES 21 
 
 * 
 Astruc, a French physician, of his Conjectures sur les mimoires 
 originaux dont il paroit que Moyse s'est servi pour composer 
 le livre de la Genese. Noticing that the divine name Elohim 
 was used throughout some sections of Genesis, and the 
 divine name Jehovah throughout others, he analysed the book 
 into two main sources, the Elohistic and the Jehovistic, and 
 ten minor sources, consisting chieiiy of fragments. Moses, 
 according to Astruc, arranged this material in four columns, 
 the contents of which were afterwards rewritten as a con- 
 secutive work.^ 
 
 (c) The Fragmentary Theory? — The attack on the unity 
 of the Pentateuch 'was not long confined to Genesis. The 
 analysis into sources was carried to extremes, and it was 
 maintained that the whole Pentateuch was a compilation 
 from a large number of more or less independent fragments. 
 The numerous resemblances between the Pentateuch and 
 Joshua were observed, and the two books were ascribed to 
 the same author.^ This analysis excluded the possibility 
 of the Mosaic authorship of the Pentateuch as a whole. 
 
 (d) The Supplement Theory^ — The permanent elements of 
 the Fragmentary Theory were the assertion of the composite 
 character of the whole Pentateuch, of its close corirlection 
 with the Book of Joshua, and the consequent denial of its 
 Mosaic authorship. But criticism soon returned to the lines 
 indicated by Astruc. Though a section might not connect 
 with what went before and after, it was seen to connect 
 with a series of similar sections throughout the Pentateuch 
 and Joshua. Deuteronomy was soon seen to be substantially 
 independent. The rest proved to be compiled from older 
 documents, often interwoven, especially in the narrative 
 sections, in a very intricate fashion. For this compilation 
 Astruc's analysis into a main Elohistic document and a 
 main Jehovistic document was accepted, and extended to 
 
 ' HOLZINGER, p. 41. 
 
 ' Geddes, 1792; Vater, 1802-1805. 
 
 " Geddes, ap. Addis, Documents, etc, I. xxiv. 
 
 * STAHELtN, 1830 J EWALD, 183I ; TUCH, 1838. 
 
22 BIBLICAL INTRODUCTION 
 
 the whole Hexateuch.i outside of Deuteronomy.'' The 
 Elohistic document was clearly the framework of the whole 
 book, into which the other material had been fitted. Hence 
 it was naturally supposed that this framework was the older 
 book, and that the Jehovistic material had been added by 
 a later editor to supplement the original text. Because of 
 the use of the Elohistic material as a framework, it has 
 often been called the " Grundschrift " or "Fundamental 
 Document." Ewald called it "the Book of Origins." 
 
 4. Current Documentary Theories. 
 
 (a) Completion of the Analysis. — Further examination 
 showed that the Elohistic material had been taken from 
 two separate documents, the Priestly Code» and the Elohistic 
 Prophetic Narrative;* and that, although the Priestly Code 
 had been used as the framework of the Pentateuch, the other 
 material had not been composed to supplement it, but had 
 been taken from independent documents. Further analysis 
 has been occupied with the detailed division of the books 
 between the several documents, and in showing that the 
 main documents are themselves composite, especially that 
 ^the Priestly Code may be divided into the older Law of 
 Holiness^ and the more recent Priestly Code proper^; and 
 that the documents of the Hexateuch extend into Judges, 
 Samuel, and Kings. 
 
 As the result of this long investigation there is substantial 
 agreement on the following points : — 
 
 The Pentateuch is compiled from four main documents: 
 the two Prophetic Documents, the Jehovistic (J), using 
 
 ' «.«,, Pentateuch .+ Joshua. 
 
 " There are small sections of the composite work in our book of Deut. 
 See on Deut. 
 
 ' P, called at one time the First Elohist by those who regarded it as the 
 older of the two. 
 
 * E, similarly sometimes called the Second Elohist. The analysis of 
 the Elohistic material into these two documents was made by Hupfeld, 
 1853, but had been suggested by Ilgen, Addis, I. xxviii. 
 
 « H or Pi. 6 p3_ 
 
CURRENT DOCUMENTARY THEORIES 23 
 
 Jihovah in Gen., the Elohistic (E), using Elohm. in 
 Gen. j the Priestly Code (P), using Elohim in Gen. ; the 
 bulk of Deuteronomy (D). 
 
 Tne Priestly Code includes an earlier work, the Law of 
 Holiness (H), Lev. xvii.-xxvi. There are post-exilic elements 
 in the Hexateuch. 
 
 ■ Josiah's law-book was an early edition of Deuteronomy, 
 and was composed not very long before its publication in 621. 
 
 The Prophetic Documents, J and E, are older than 
 Deuteronomy. 
 
 The detailed analysis, as far as the division into P, D and 
 the combined JE are concerned. 
 
 The following points, however, are still matters of con- 
 troversy : — 
 
 The relative age of D and P ; whether the Priestly Code, 
 as a whole, apart from editorial additions, is post-exilic 
 and later than Deuteronomy, or pre-exilic and earlier than 
 Deuteronomy. 
 
 The relative age, mutual relationship, dates, and place of 
 composition of the Prophetic Documents, J and E. 
 
 The detailed analysis of passages containing material 
 from J and E into the portions belonging to J and E 
 respectively. 
 
 The presence of the same docurnents in the Hexateuch 
 and in Judges, Samuel, and Kings. 
 
 The process by which J, E, and D were combined. 
 
 The analysis of the four main documents into earlier 
 sources and later additions. 
 
 The tinie and mode of separation of Joshua or its contents 
 from the rest of the Hexateuch. 
 
 (b) The Theory of the Pre-exilic origin of the Priestly 
 Code. — Of the above points of difference, that concerning 
 the age of the Priestly Code divides the critics who accept 
 the analysis of the Hexateuch into two schools. A minority, 
 including very distinguished scholars,^ maintain that the Law 
 
 > DiLLMANN, KiTTBL, BaUDISSIN, eto. 
 
24 BIBLICAL INTRODUCTION 
 
 of Holiness may include elements as old as Moses, and the 
 bulk of the Priestly Code was composed before Deuteronomy.* 
 But it is admitted that the Law of HoUness, though contain- 
 ing material older than the rest of the Priestly Code, was 
 itself compiled during the Exile,^ and that the Code icontains 
 post-exihc material. But those who regard P as post-exilic 
 jvould admit that it is largely based on pre-exihc customs 
 and ritual, perhaps partly preserved in writing. Hence the 
 difference between the two schools is not so striking as it 
 seems at first sight. According to the one, P is pre-exilie 
 with post-exilic additions ; according to the other, P is post- 
 exilic, using pre-exilic sources. Both views would be included 
 in the formula — P is a combination of pre-exilic and post-exilic 
 material. , 
 
 (c) The Theory of the Post-exilic origin of the Priestly 
 Code? — Arranging the four main documents in the order 
 J, E, D, P.* 
 
 As this is the theory followed throughout the present work, 
 it is explained here in a tabular form, and a sketch of the 
 arguments in its favour, and some further details are given 
 in later sections. According to this theory, the Hexateilch 
 is the final result of a long development, during which its 
 material passed through the following stages :— ^ 
 
 (i.) The events of early Israelite history, the work and 
 words of Moses, primitive Israelite customs, traditions, and 
 documents. 
 
 (ii.) The compilation, c. 800-650, of the two Prophetic 
 Documents, J and E, which include, inter alia, the earliest 
 extant edition of the Law (the Book of the Covenant, Exodus 
 xx.-xxiii.), and some early poems. 
 
 ^ According to Dillmann and NoLDEKE, c. 800. 
 
 " Dillmann, Num., etc., 645 ff. 
 
 =" Gkaf, Wellhausen, Kuenen, Stade, etc. ; Driver, etc. This 
 is often called the Grafian Theory, and is held by the majority of recent 
 scholars. 
 
 * The priority of J to E is not an essential feature of this theory. 
 
 ' For the sake of clearness, the analysis of J, E and the later additions 
 to D and P are not represented in this table ; cf.\(^ 14-20. 
 
METHODS OF ANALYSIS 25 
 
 (iii.) The combination of J and E into a single work JE, 
 f. 650-600. 
 ' (j + E) RJ« = JE.i 
 
 (iv.) The Kernel of Deuteronomy, D, published in 621, 
 compiled somewhat earlier. Second Edition of the Law. 
 
 (v.) Combination of JE and D into a single work before 
 the end of the Exile. 
 
 (JE + D)R'i = JED. 
 
 (vi.) Compilation of the Law of Holiness, H or P', Lev. 
 xvii.-xxvi., etc., between 621 and the end of the Exile. Third 
 Edition of the Law. 
 
 . (vii.) Compilation of the Priestly Code, P, and the in- 
 corporation with it of the Law of Holiness, after the Exile; 
 published by Ezra and Nehemiah in 444. Fourth Edition 
 of the Law. 
 
 (viii.) Combination of JED and P, and exclusion of 
 Joshua or its, contents,^ thus forming our Pentateuch, 
 Fifth and Final Edition of the Law, and Book of Joshua, 
 shortly after 444. 
 
 (JED + P) RP = Pentateuch + Joshua. 
 
 5. Methods of Analysis. — We have seen that the use of 
 the divine name Jehovah in some sections of Genesis, and 
 Elohim in others, afforded a clue to the composite character; 
 of the Pentateuch. This feature, however, is only one of 
 many. There is a multitude of abrupt transitions, repetitions, 
 contradictions, diiferences of style, theological standpoint, and 
 historical situation, which are inexplicable on the theory that 
 the Pentateuch \% a single consecutive work; but which are 
 perfectly intelligible when we recognise that it is coinpiled 
 from independent documents. It will be convenient to describe 
 the analysis under three headings : — 
 
 (a) The Legal Codes. — Most of the legislation is contained 
 
 ^ i.e., the composite work JE includes matter from J and E combined 
 by a Redactor! W', who added necessary connecting matter, and otherwise 
 modified his sources. The other equations are to be interpreted in the 
 same way. ^ ^f- \\ 2i> z8. 
 
26 BIBLICAL INTRODUCTION 
 
 in three separate codes : The Book of the Covenant, Exodus 
 XX. 24-xxiii. 19 j The Kernel of Deuteronomy, Deuteronomy 
 v.-xxvi.; The Laws of the Priestly Code, the bulk of 
 Exodus xxv.-xl.,i Leviticus, Numbers i.-x., etc. , Here 
 large blocks of material have been inserted whole. Thp 
 differences between these codes show that they must have 
 been composed at different times and under very different 
 circumstances. Already, therefore, it is clear that at least 
 three documents were used in the compilation of the Pen- 
 tateuch. 
 
 (b) Complete Sections.— k^Qxi from these codes, the com- 
 posite character of the work is shown by the marked 
 differences between consecutive sections. Take, for in- 
 stance, the two accounts of the Creation, Genesis i. i-ii. 4a 
 and ii. 4b-25. They differ in style: the former is a carefully 
 ordered, almost scientific statement, arranged in formal 
 schedules of the same type, with recurring formulae; the 
 latter is a graphic popular narrative; each has its own 
 vocabulary and 1 idioms. They differ in theological stand- 
 point: the former takes great trouble to avoid every 
 appearance of anthropomorphism, the latter is frankly 
 anthropomorphic; the interests of the former are cosmic, 
 it is concerned with earth and heaven and all life, the 
 latter thinks only of an inland province — nothing is said 
 of fishes; the moral of the former is the observance of 
 the Sabbath sanctioned by the divine example, that of the 
 latter, the sanctity of marriage as sanctioned by primitive 
 usage. Moreover, the two accounts contradict each other. 
 In the former the animals are first created, and then 
 Elohim, by a single utterance, creates mankind in two 
 sexes; in the latter a man is first formed, then the animals, 
 then a woman. 
 
 In Exodus, Numbers, Joshua, Judges, Samuel, and Kings 
 
 there are consecutive sections which present similar contrasts. 
 
 It is extremely difficult to suppose that a single author, 
 
 writing a single consecutive work, wrote first in one style' 
 
 ' The main exception is Exodus xxxi. i8b-xxxiv, 28. 
 
METHODS OF ANALYSIS 27 
 
 and then in another. Here again we trace compilation from 
 independent documents. 
 
 A comparison of such sections, in style, theological stand- 
 point, and historical situation, with each other and with the 
 three codes shows that they fall into three series, one of 
 which connects with the Book of the Covenant, another with 
 Deuteronomy, and a third with the Laws of the Priestly Code. 
 Moreover, the sections connecting with the Book of the 
 Covenant can again be divided into two series. Thus our 
 analysis has discovered the four main documents : two con- 
 necting with the Book of the Covenant, these are J and E ; 
 the Kernel of Deuteronomy, and connected passages, D; and 
 the Priestly Code, P. 
 
 (c) Single Sections compiled from two or more Documents, — 
 Further, however, what seems, at first sight, a single bon- 
 secutive narrative of one event proves to be a combination 
 of two or more independent accounts of that event. Here! 
 again the composite character of such sections is shown 
 by differences of style, etc., by abrupt transitions, and by 
 repetitions and contradictions. The following is the analysis 
 of the account of the Flood. The sections in ordinary type 
 are from P.; those in italics from J; those in small capitals 
 were added by the editor, who combined the two : — 
 
 "And the Lord said unto Noah, Come thou and all thy 
 fymse into the ark; for thee have I seen righteous before me 
 in this generation. Of every clean beast thou shalt take to 
 thee by sevens, the male and his female : and of beasts that 
 are not clean by two, the male and his female. Of fowls also 
 of the air by sevens, the male and the female ; to keep seed 
 alive upon the face of all the earth. For yet seven days, and 
 I will cause it to rain upon the earth forty days and forty 
 nights; and every living substance that I have made will I 
 destroy from off the face of the earth. And Noah did according 
 unto all that the Lord commanded him. 
 
 "And Noah was six hundred years old when the flood of 
 waters was upon the earth. 
 
 "And Noah went in, and his sons, and his wife, and his 
 
28 BIBLICAL INTRODUCTION 
 
 sons' wives with him, into the ark, because of the waters of the 
 flood. Of clean beasts, and of beasts that are not clean, and 
 of fowls, and of everything 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. And 
 
 it came to pass after seven days, that the waters of the flood 
 were upon the earth. 
 
 " In the six hundredth year of Noah's life, in the second 
 month, the seventeenth day of the month, the same day were 
 all the fountains of the great deep broken up, and the windows 
 of heaven were opened. 
 
 " And the rain was upon the earth forty days and forty 
 nights. 
 
 " In the selfsame day entered Noah, and Shem, and Ham, 
 and Japheth, the sons of Noah, and Noah's wife, and the 
 three wives of his sons with them, into the ark; they, -and 
 every beast after his kind, and all the cattle after their kind, 
 and every creeping thing that creepeth upon the earth after 
 his kind, and every fowl after his kind, every bird of every 
 sort. 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 the Lord shut him in. And the flood was forty 
 DAYS UPON THE EARTH; and' the waters increased, and bare up 
 the ark, and it was lifted up above the earth. 
 
 " And the waters prevailed, and were increased greatly upon 
 the earth ; and the ark went upon the face of the waters. And 
 the waters prevailed exceedingly upon the earth; and all the 
 high hills, that were under the whole heaven, were covered. 
 Fifteen cubits upward did the waters prevail; and the moun- 
 tains were covered. And all flesh died that moved upon the 
 earth, both of fowl, and of cattle, and of beast, and of every 
 creeping thing that creepeth upon the earth, and every man : 
 
 " All in whose nostrils was the breath of life, of all that was 
 in the dry land, died. And every living substance was destroyed 
 which was upon the face of the ground, both man, and cattle. 
 
METHODS OF ANALYSIS 29 
 
 and the creeping things, and the fowl of the heaven ; and 'they 
 were destroyed from the earth: and Noah only remained alive, 
 and they that were with him in the ark. 
 
 "And the waters prevailed .upon ithe earth an hundred and 
 fifty days. And God remembered Noah, and every living 
 thing, and all the cattle that was with him in the ark : and 
 God made a wind to ;pass over the earth, and the waters 
 asswaged ; the fountains also of the deep and the windows of 
 heaven were stopped. 
 
 "And the rain from heaven was restrained ; and the waters 
 returned from off the earth continually : 
 
 "And after the end of the hundred and fifty days the waters 
 were abated. And the ark rested in the seventh month, on 
 the seventeenth day of the month, upon the : mountains of 
 Ararat. And the waters decreased continually until the tenth 
 month : in the tenth month, on the first day of the month, 
 were the tops of the mountains seen. 
 
 "And it came to pass at the end of forty days, that Noah 
 opened the window of the ark which he had made; and he 
 sent forth a raven, which went forth to and fro, until thie 
 waters were dried up from, off the earth. Also he sent forth 
 a dove from him, to see if the waters were abated from off 
 the face of the ground; but the dove found no rest for the 
 sole of her foot, and she returned unto him into the ark, 
 for the waters were on the face of the whole earth : then he 
 put forth his hand and took her, and pulled her in unto him • 
 into the ark. And He stayed yet other seven days ; and again 
 he sent forth the dove out of (he ark ; and the dove came in 
 td him in- the evening; and, lo, in her mouth was an olive 
 leaf pluckt off: so Noah knew that the waters were abated 
 from off the earth. And he stayed yet other seven days ; and 
 sent forth the dove ; which returned not again unto him any more, 
 
 "And it came to pass in the six hundredth and first year, in 
 the first month, the first of the month, the waters were dried 
 up from off the earth : 
 
 " And Noah removed the covering of the ark, and looked', and, 
 behold, the face of the grouni was dry. 
 
30 BIBLICAL INTRODUCTION 
 
 "And in the second month, on the seven and twentieth day 
 of the month, was the earth dried." (Genesis vii. i-viii. 14.) 
 
 The composite character of this narrative is seen : (i.) from ' 
 repetitions ; as to the entering in to the ark, the rising of the- 
 flood, the perishing of all hving creatures, and the drying' 
 of the earth ; (ii.) from contradictions ; in P we have periods ■ 
 of 150 days, in J of 40 and of 7 ; in P there are pairs of 
 all the kinds of animals, in J sevens of the clean, pairs 
 of the unclean. Moreover, the P passages present the 
 characteristics of P, and thus connect with the rest of that 
 document. They fit into its scheme of exact chronology; 
 they give a quasi-sCientific account on a cosmic scale, the 
 great deep is broken up below, and heaven opened above; 
 there is no anthropomorphism; we have the divine name' 
 Elohim, and P's favourite formulae, " after his kind," " beast, 
 cattle, creeping thing, fowl, bird," etc. On the other hand,> - 
 in J we have graphic popular narrative, e.g., the picturesque 
 episode of the dove ; anthropomorphism, the Lord, i.e. Jehovah, 
 shuts up the ark ; the divine name Jehovah, etc. In several 
 instances the P paragraphs interrupt the connection between 
 the J paragraphs, and vice vers&. The phrases in small 
 capitals are assigned to the editor, because they do not 
 seem to belong to their immediate context, and yet find 
 no place in the other document. 
 
 Similar composite narratives and groups of laws occur in 
 other books. ., 
 
 Thus, apart from the question of date and authorship, , 
 analysis is able to divide the Hexateuch into the four main 
 documents, J, E, D, P; the exact, division, however, of J 
 and E being often difficult and uncertain. A similar analysis', 
 can be niade of Judges, Samuel, and Kings. ^ 
 
 6. Limitations of Analysis.— The reader will have gathered 
 that the task pf, analysing the historical books into th^ earliei^. 
 
 documents from which they were compiled is a difficult one 
 
 by no njeans so impossible as it seems at first sight, but 
 * See §j 29-32, . 
 
LIMITATIONS OF ANALYSIS 31 
 
 • 
 still sufficiently serious to tdx the ■ resources of criticism tO' 
 
 the utmost. Moreoveti though most useful and interesting 
 results aire obtained, the task can be only imperfectly fulfilled, 
 and the analyses given here and elsewhere are not put forward 
 as being aic'curate and complete in every detail. The main 
 documents have certain characteristics, and portions contain- 
 iilg these, and all that obviously belongs to such portions, may 
 be confidently assigned to given sources. But there is a 
 certain amount of- neutral material which might have been 
 written in any period ; it is natural to assign such to the same 
 source as its context, and yet it may have been borrowed 
 from an earlier document, or added by a later editor. To 
 take a practical illustration : when a section is • assigned ^ 
 to R° or p, all that is meant is that the Deuteronomic , 
 characteristics are fouiid in the passage and not those of 
 the, other sources. Hence it is mainly Deuteronomic, but 
 may includ.e phrases or sentences borrowed frorn, earlier 
 sources ;; or, again, information or , laws obtained by the , 
 D^Uterpnomist from earlier sources, but ej^pressed in his 
 own language. On the, other hand, a passage may be 
 assigned to JE, without, any inteiition of excluding the 
 possibility that , some neutral matter not essential 1;o , the 
 original context may contain additions by later editors. , In 
 some cases a later writer, either unconsciously or as a 
 matter of literary taste,^ imitated the style of an earlier 
 document.^ It is r ofte;! difficult to distinguish such imita- 
 tions from the original, especially when they are largely made 
 up of quotations from the document imitated. 
 
 In the analyses given in the following sectionSj space and 
 clearness have necessitated > the omission of many details. 
 
 .' H: , ,~ , 
 
 ' This kind of uncertainty is specially common as to parts of sections 
 whicii are substantially Deuteronomic, because they make large use of 
 earlier material; the work of the Priestly writers is more easily and 
 certainly distinguished. 
 
 ° As modern schola,rs write Ciceronian Latin. The Hebrew editors, etc. 
 no more intended or expected their compositions to be taken for the work 
 of the Jehovist or the Deuteronomist, than the '■ author of a Latin essay 
 to-day expects his essay to b,e ascribed toCicero. 
 
 ' e.g., the Deuteronomic passages in Chronicles.. 
 
32 
 
 BIBLICAL INTRODUCTION 
 
 The origin of the longer sections has, been given; the. 
 presence in such sections of phrases and verses from other; 
 sources has been indicated, where they contained anything 
 important, either critically, historically, or in its hearing on 
 the immediate context, otherwise such , minutiae of, analysis 
 have been ignored. Phrases, etc. have usually been assigned 
 to the same source as their context, when it is not clear that 
 they belong to other sources, attention being called to any .; 
 uncertainty where, important questions are involved. In this , 
 way it is hoped that the reader will be able to obtain an 
 accurate conception of the analysis as a whole, without being, 
 bewildered by a multiplicity of detail. 
 
 7. Sketch of Analysis.— The following table is intended 
 to serve as a rough diagram of the contents and distribution 
 of the main sources of the Hexateuch. For the sake of 
 simplicity, where the bulk of a chapter belongs to One 
 source and a few verses to another, the chapter is reckoned 
 to the main source. For the more detailed and exact ' 
 analysis see "Contents" in §§ 23-32. Genesis xiv. and Deuter- 
 onomy jbodi., xxxiii. are omitted, as not belonging to the 
 main sources. The division of J, E, D, and P iiito various 
 strata is ignored. Sporadic editorial additions, i.e.j those 
 which do not amount to a continuous revision, are also 
 ignored \ — 
 
 PandJ 
 Combined 
 
 Genesis 1-13, 15-19. 
 
 P and J E 
 Combined 
 
 Genesis 20-50. 
 
 Exodus, 1-24. 
 
 Numbers 11-16, 20, 21, 32, 
 
 Joshua 22. 
 
 Judges 20, 21. 
 
 P 
 
 Exodus 25-31, 35-40. 
 
 Leviticus, 
 
 Numbers i-io, 17-19. 25-31, 33-36. 
 
SKETCH OF, THE ARGUMENT 
 
 33 
 
 P and JED ' 
 ^ Combined 
 
 Deuteronomy 34. 
 Joshua 13-21. 
 
 JED 
 
 Joshua i-ii. 
 (Judges 2-8, 10-15.) 1 
 
 JE 
 
 Exodus 32-34. 
 Numbers 22-24. 
 (Judges 9, 16-19.)! 
 (i. andii. Samuel.)!^ 
 (i. Kings I, 2.)i 
 
 J 
 
 Judges I. 
 
 E 
 
 Joshua 24.3 
 
 (i. Kings 20, 22.) 1 
 
 (ii. Kings 3?, 7,9'. 10')' 
 
 D 
 
 Deuteronomy 1-31. 
 Joshua 12 and 23. 
 
 Deuteronomic 
 Compilation 
 
 from 
 Older Sources 
 cf. JE and E 
 
 i. and ii. Kings. 
 
 8. Sketch of the Argument for the post-exilic date of P 
 and the order J and E, D, P. In the previous section we 
 described the kind of evidence by which the composite 
 character of the Hexateuch is established; we have now 
 to show how the dates of the documents are determined. 
 The arguments, alike for the analysis and for the theory of 
 the dates and order of. the documents, are cumulative. They 
 
 ! The identification of the sources of Judges 2-21 and Samuel, and 
 Kings with J and E is doubtful. 
 
 * Except poems and some other additions, 
 » Edited by RO- 
 
34 BIBLICAL INTRODUCTION 
 
 do not form a chain, which is worthless if one link is broken; 
 they are rather like an array of pillars supporting a roof — 
 the roof will stand, even though some of the pillars are 
 weak or rotten. These arguments fall into five groups, 
 which partially overlap: (i.) Historical Situation; (ii.) 
 Theological Standpoint; (iii.) Relation to other O.T. 
 Literature; (iv.) Vocabulary and Style; ^v.) Mutual Rela- 
 tion of the Documents. These will be dealt with more 
 fully in separate sections, but it may be useful to take a 
 general view of them here. 
 
 (i.) Historical Situation. — J and E imply the historical 
 situation of the Early Monarchy; D that of the Later 
 Monarchy, connecting especially with the reforms of Josiah; 
 P that of the exilic or post-exilic period, connecting especially 
 with the reforms of Ezra and Nehemiah. 
 
 (ii.) The Theological Standpoint of each agrees with what 
 we know of the theology of the period of its historical 
 situation. 
 
 (iii.) Relation to other O.T. Literature. — J and E have 
 points of contact with the hterature before c. 650; D with 
 the literature between c. 651 and the close of the Exile; P 
 wilh the literature during and after the Exile. D is unknown 
 before the Later Monarchy ; P before the Exile. 
 
 (iv.) Style and Vocabulary. — The style and vocabulary of 
 each is that of the period to which it is assigned by its 
 historical situation. 
 
 (v.) Mutual Relation of the Documents. — J and E together, 
 D, P represent three ascending stages of development; and 
 P implies the prior existence of D, and D that of J and E. 
 
 9. Argument from the Historical Situation.— The laws in 
 the Book of the Covenant (JE) are addressed to a people 
 cultivating the land, and living in houses ;i hence this code 
 was compiled after the settlement of the Israelites in Canaan. 
 It contemplates a more settled state of society than that 
 ^ Exodus xxl. 6, xxii. j. 
 
THE HISTORICAL SITUATION 35 
 
 described in Judges, and therefore belongs to the Monarchy. 
 It also recognises a multiplicity of sanctuaries, and lays no 
 stress either on ritual or on any official priesthoodi Thus we 
 read in Exodus xx. 24-26 : 
 
 "An altar of earth thou shalt make unto me ... in every 
 place where I record my name I will come unto thee and 
 I will bless thee." 
 
 The places referred to where Jehovah recorded His name 
 are the' holy places, Bethel, Beersheba, Gilga-1, etc., con- 
 secrated by the appearances of Jehovah to the patriarchs, 
 which are known in history as the " high places." ^ In 
 these matters the Book of the Covenant reflects the practice 
 of the time of the Judges and the Early Monarchy,, when 
 sacrifices were performed not only by priests, but by patri- 
 archs,^ heads of families,' judges,* and kings j^ not merely 
 at the Tabernacle or the Temple, but at many places,^ 
 especially, as Kings tells us repeatedly, at the high places.'^ 
 The leaders and teachers of this, period and the early writers, 
 seem, quite unconscious that they are transgressing any law; 
 the adverse comments on their behaviour come from later 
 writers. Thus, in these and other ways, the historical situation 
 implied by the Prophetic Documents is that of the Early 
 Monarchy, 
 
 Two chief points in thei laws of Deuteronomy are : (a) 
 the limitation of sacrifice to a single sanctuary, which is 
 therefore the only legitimate temple of Jehovah, and (f) the 
 limitation of the^ priesthood to the Levites. As we have 
 just seen, there are no traces of such limitations under the 
 earlier kings. But Amos, Hosea, and Micah. attack the 
 
 1 Bethel, Gen. xxviil 19, Hos. x. IJ ; Beersheba, Gen, xxi, 33, Amos 
 V. S; Gilgal, Joshua iv. 20;v. 13 ff., Amos iv. 4. ■ - 
 
 " Jacob, Gen. xxxiii. 20. - , 
 
 ' Manoah, Judges xiii. 19 ; Jesse, i Sam. xx. 29. 
 
 * Gideon, Judges vL 24. 
 
 ' Saul, I Sam. xiv. 35 ; Solomon, r Kings iii. 4. 
 
 " Ophrah, Judges vi. 24; Ebenezer and Ramah, I Sam, vii, 9, 17; 
 Gilgal, I Sam. xi. 15 ; Gibeon, i Kings iii. 4, etc, 
 
 ' I Kings XV. 14, etc. 
 
$6 BIBLICAL INTRODUCTION 
 
 high places and their priests on account of immorality 
 and superstition.! Hezekiah made an attempt to suppress 
 the high places. " Isaiah's teaching as to the inviolability 
 of Zion and the deliverance from Sennacherib enhanced the 
 prestige of the Temple. Josiah's suppression of the high 
 places was suggested by a law-book found in the Temple. 
 This book was read by Shaphan to himself, and to the king, 
 and read through publicly by the king to the people. Clearly 
 the book was much shorter than our Pentateuch; but may 
 very well have been an early edition of Deuteronomy; For 
 the main object of Josiah's reforms, the establishment of the 
 Temple as the only legitimate sanctuary of Jehovah, is one of 
 the chief themes of Deuteronomy, and most of the details of 
 his reformation are based upon laws in Deuteronomy.^ 
 
 The northern kingdom had disappeared, and any point 
 of Josiah's dominions lay within easy reach of Jerusalemj 
 so that it seemed that a single sanctuary might sufiSce for 
 the wants of the whole community. Thus the historical 
 situation implied in Deuteronomy is that of the times of 
 Josiah, the close of the Jewish Monarchy. 
 
 One distinctive feature of the Priestly Code is the limitation 
 of the priesthood to the house of Aaron, the establishment 
 of a dynasty of supreme pontiffs or high priests, and the 
 assignment to the non-Aaronite Levites of the menial duties 
 of the Temple service. There is no trace of this distinction 
 between priests and Levites in Deuteronomy, or in the 
 account given by Kings of Josiah's reforms, or in the 
 prophecies of Jeremiah,* or in any earlier documents. 
 But Ezekiel confines the priesthood to the priests of the 
 Temple at Jerusalem, and degrades the priests of the high 
 places, i.e., the rest of the Levites, to the position of menial 
 
 > Hos. X. 8 ; Amos iv. 4 f. ; Mic. i. 5 f. 
 " 2 Kings xviii. 4. 
 
 ^ o fl' '^-^ ^'°^^ ^^™- *~^ ''^'^ ^^"'- ^"' l-'6 ; 8, 9 with Deut. xviii. 
 6-8 (the discrepancy is quite intelligible on practical grounds, and the 
 author of Kings seems conscious of it) ; 24 with Deut. xviii. 11. 
 
 * Jeremiah speaks of "the priests, the Levites" (xxxiii. 18), and other 
 places. ' 
 
THE THEOLOGICAL STANDPOINT 37 
 
 * 
 attendants. 1 Although, according to this arrangement, the 
 priests were only a single clan of the tribe of Levi, it is 
 stated that over four thousand priests returned after the 
 Exile, but only seventy-four Levites.^ Later on Ezra had 
 great difficulty in inducing any Levites to accompany him 
 to Jerusalem.^ Naturally the subordinate position assigned 
 to them by Ezekiel had slight attractions. In this and in 
 other matters, and especially in the account of the work 
 of Ezra and Nehemiah, we see that the historical situation 
 implied by the Priestly Code is subsequent to the time of 
 Ezekiel, and is that of the period after the Exile, and that 
 this code is to be identified with the Law which Ezra brought 
 to Jerusalem.* In every way the laws of the Priestly Code 
 point to a time when the Temple, its services and priesthood, 
 were the chief national institutions, and the main concern of 
 the Jews. This was the case after the Exile, but not before. 
 
 10. Argument from Theological Standpoint. — There are 
 special difficulties in the application of this argument; the 
 line of development of Israelite theology is not fully deter- 
 mined, and chronological landinarks a.re, more difficult to 
 find in the case of doctrines than in the more coiicrete 
 matters of temple and priesthood. Yet some points are 
 clear, and make for the theory now being explained. The 
 frank anthropomorphisms of J, and in a less degree of E, 
 would naturally indicate an early stage in the religion of Israel ; 
 and the stress laid in these documents upon the dramatic 
 interest of the narratives points to their proximity to the primi- 
 tive tradition. Thus and otherwise the theology of J and E 
 is consistent with a date in the Early Monarchy, or even earlier. 
 
 ^ Ezek. xliv. 10-16. ^ Ezra ii. 36-40. ' Ezra viii. 
 
 * e.g., after the Exile there were no Jewish kings till the Maccabees, 
 and the head of the community was the High Priest ; so in the Priestly 
 Code the greatest possible emphasis is laid on the supreme position of the 
 High Priest, while the king is ignored. In Neh. viii. 18, the Feast of 
 Tabernacles is kept for eight days, in accordance with Lev. xxiii. 39 
 (P), as against the seven days of Deut. xvi. 13-lS. In Neh. x. 37 f., 
 the people pay tithes to the Levites, and the Levites to the priests in 
 accordance with Num. xviii. 20-26. The Deuteronbmic arrangements for 
 tithes are quite different. 
 
38 BIBLICAL INTRODUCTION 
 
 As Deuteronomy provides for a single sanctuary and a 
 single priestly tribe, so it also asserts expressly and em- 
 phatically the unity of the Godhead: "Hear, O Israel, thy 
 God, Jehovah, is one God." ^ This express statement is the 
 natural sequel to the attack of Amos, Hosea, Isaiah, and 
 Micah upon the popular worship of Jehovah as one among 
 many gods, and prepares the way for the detailed exposition of 
 /fnonotheism in Isaiah xl.-lv. 
 
 Similarly there are many features in the Priestly Code 
 which are best explained by assigning it to the post-exilic 
 stage of Israelite religion, «.^., the scrupulous avoidance of 
 all anthropomorphism, the numerous traces of systematic 
 thought and method in the priestly versions of the narratives, 
 the stress on the "holiness" of Israel, and the practical 
 application of the principle to an elaborate system of minute 
 external observances.^ 
 
 II. Argument from Literary Parallels. — Points of contact 
 with J and E are found in the prophets of the eighth ceiitury.' 
 Hdsea refers to Jacob's wrestling with the angel ; * Amos 
 and' Isaiah to the Overthrow of Sodom and Gomorrah;^ 
 Micah to "the land of Nimrod," and to the history of Balaam 
 aridBakk.8 ' ' 
 
 On the other hand, documents before c. 680-630^ afford 
 no evidence that their authors were acquainted with Deuter- 
 onomy, or P. 
 
 ' Deut. vi. 4. , 
 
 ' Early ritual is often elaborate, aiid so far the priestly ritual might be 
 early, and- doubtless is partly based on primitive custom. But we know 
 that enthusiasm for ritual was rife and increasing after the Exile, and, the 
 spiritual and scientific treatment of the subject points to the later date. 
 
 ' Of course, points of contact between two documents are evidence 
 of the date of the one document only when the date of the other is 
 known. So that for this purpose we can only use passages whose dates are 
 fairly certain. 
 
 * Gen. xxxii. 22-32 ; Hos. xii. 2-6. 
 
 ° Gen. xix.; Isaiah i. 9; Amos iv. ,11. 
 
 ° Mic. V. 6, vi. 1-8 J Gen. x. 8, 9; Num. xxii.-xxiv, 
 
 ' Approximate limits to the date of Deuteronomy as composed shortly 
 before 621, 
 
LITERARY PARALLELS 39 
 
 * 
 
 This statement would be challenged by some, space does not allow us 
 to deal with it in detail j but as the treatment of ^the argument from 
 literary parallels is very difficult, and needs much discrimination, it may 
 be as well to say a few words on the subjecty in order to show what is the 
 point at issue. Parallels between the Pentateuch and early literature are 
 often cited as arguments against this theory, although they are quite irrele- 
 vant for some such reasons as the following : — 
 
 (i.) Only references in early literature to characteristic features of 
 Deuteronomy and P could be used as arguments against the current 
 (Grafian) theory ; for that theory holds that J and E were early, at any rate 
 in their original form, and that D and P also use earher material, and that 
 many of the customs and rites dealt with were much more ancient than 
 these documents. Hence it is quite consistent with the Grafian theory 
 that early literature should refer to J and E and to some matters foiind 
 in D and P, and that sacrifices, feasts, etc. dealt with in D and P should 
 have existed long before the dates assigned to these documents. 
 
 (ii.) M^ny alleged parallels are entirely irrelevant, and are only such as 
 must naturally exist between works in the same language, by authors of 
 the same race, acquainted with the history and literature, customs and, 
 traditions which were earlier than both of them. Thus we should not 
 maintain that the parallels between J and E, and Amos, Hosea, and 
 Micah are necessarily proo^ that , the prophets were acquainted with 
 those documents. 
 
 (iii.) In considering two sirnilar passages, A and B, there are at least 
 three possible explanations of their resemblaiice; A may be dependent 
 on B, or B on A, or both A and B may be dependent on something 
 prior to both of them. A critic with a theory — and everybody starts 
 with a prepossession in fevour of some theory— is tenipted to take for 
 granted that the relation of the parallel passages is in accordance with 
 his theory. If he holds that B is older than A, it seems to him that 
 A is so obviously depeiident on B, that this dependence proves the 
 early date of B. But, ag a ruley it is very difiicult to determine whichi 
 of two similar passages is dependeiit on the other. Qften the question 
 can only be settled by our knowledge that one passage is taken from 
 an earlier work than the other; and where we. do not possess such 
 knowledge- the priority is quite uncertain, and a comparison of the 
 passages yields little or no evidence as to the date of the documents 
 m' which they occur. ' 
 
 (iv. ) When a body of literature is known to belong to a certain period, 
 and a document has numerous parallels to this literature, it probably belongs 
 to die same period. It may be an earlier work used by the authors of 
 the literature in question, or a later Work which has used this literature;' 
 but it is easier to verify or eliminate these- possibilities than to decide 
 between the alternatives' in the previous paragraph. 
 
 (v. ) Where a work is known to be composite, a literary parallel to one 
 section afibrds no direct-.evidence of the date of other sections."-, 
 
 ^ These considerations have to be borne iii mind in studying the various 
 attempts to show that the complete Pentateuch was known to almost all 
 b.T. writers. For instance, it is for these reasons that Lex Mosaica, 
 though a very useful and interesting study of the literary relations of the 
 Pentateuch, affords no real evidence against the Grafian theory. 
 
40 BIBLICAL INTRODUCTION 
 
 But Deuteronomy is very closely connected by numerous 
 points of contact with the literature of the close of the 
 Jewish monarchy and the beginning of the Exile. The 
 parallels with Jeremiah are so strikirig that the prophet 
 has sometimes been credited with the authorship of 
 Deuteronomy. Investigation does not confirm this im- 
 pression, but the resemblance shows that Deuteronomy 
 and the prophecies belong to the same period, e.g., the 
 term, " the Priests, the Levites " — unknown to earlier 
 literature — is characteristic of both and of Ezekiel. Again 
 the Book of Kings assumed its present form during this 
 period. In the editorial notes the editor writes from the 
 Deuteronomic standpoint that the Temple is the only 
 legitimate sanctuary. Also Deuteronomy exercises a very 
 marked influence on exilic and post-exilic literature. 
 
 The Law of Holiness, tt or P', is even more closely 
 qonnected with Ezekiel xl.-xlviii. than Deuteronomy wjth 
 Jeremiah. Although it is not likely that Ezekiel compiled 
 this code, its editor probably belonged to the same priestly 
 circle, so that the code may be assigned to about the beginning 
 of the Exile. 
 
 Tbe characteristics of the Priestly Code proper, P or P=, 
 have affinities with the earlier, and influence the later post- 
 exilic literature. The distinction between the priests, the 
 sons of Aaron, and the Levites— a special feature of P — 
 fipt appears in Ezekiel xliv., where the prophet ordains that 
 the jiriesthood is to be confined to the Jerusalem Levites 
 of the house of Zadok, and that the other Levites, the 
 priests of the high places, are to be degraded to the level 
 of menial attendants. In the Priestly Code the claims of 
 the Levites to rank with the Jerusalem priests, the fact that 
 their position was a menial one to which they had been 
 degraded, are entirely forgotten, and their ministry is held 
 to be a long-established privilege. Evidently a considerable 
 interval separated the Priestly Code from Ezekiel.i Numbers 
 
 » Cf. J 9. 
 
THE LINGUISTIC ARGUMENT 41 
 
 ♦ 
 xvi., q.v. (Korah, Dathan, and Abiram), was unknown in its 
 present form to the authdrs of Deuteronomy xi. 6, Psalm cvi. 
 17 (post-exilic), who speak of Dathan and Abiram, without 
 Korah. Chronicles is acquainted with the legal institutions, 
 etc. of all the documents of the Hexateuch, and thus affords 
 conclusive evidence that our Pentateuch and Joshua existed, 
 substantially in their present form, before B.C. 300-250. 
 
 12. The Linguistic Argument. — A fiafeful examination of 
 the lists in Driver's Introduction, in the articles in Hastings' 
 Bible Dictionary, etc. will show that, not only in subject 
 matter, but also in vocabulary and idiom, Deuteronomy 
 rtes'embles' Jeremiah, and P resembles the exilic and post- 
 eidlic literature. Thus JE and D agree with the earlier 
 literature in preferring the longer form 'dnokhl for the personal 
 pronoun " I," while P agrees with the later literature in pre- 
 ferring the shorter ^dni. 
 
 The use in the Pentateuch (not in Joshua) of forms which 
 elsewhere are exclusively masculine, for both masculine and 
 feminine, is not a proof of antiquity, but due to the fact 
 that the text of the Pentateuch has been treated differently 
 from that of the other books. In some MSS. the usage is 
 found outside the Pentateuch.^ 
 
 13. Argument from the Mutual Relations of the Docu- 
 ments. — An examination of the documents shows that they 
 are arranged by our theory in the natural order of de- 
 velopment, that J and E are the most primitive, H and 
 P the most mature, and that D occupies an interme- 
 diate position. Thus' J and E take little interest in ritual, 
 which occupies much of the attention of D and H, 
 and is almost the sole interest of P. In J and E any 
 Israelite may be a priest; in D the priesthood is confined 
 to the Levites ; in H, the Levites are not named, the 
 priests are the "Sons of Aaron," and the high priest first 
 
 ' Driver's Leviticus, pp. 25, 26. 
 
42 BIBLICAL INTRODUCTION: 
 
 appears j ' in P the exceptional sanctity and authority, of 
 the priests as compared with the Levites, and of the high 
 priest as compared with the priests, are further elaborated 
 and emphasised. Agaiiij as to the slaughter of animals for 
 food and sacrifice, in J and E, animals may be killed, and 
 sacrifices offered anywhere; in D they may be slaughtered 
 anywhere, but only sacrificed ,at the " place which Jehovah, 
 chooses,"* i.e., the Temple. Similarly, as we pass from 
 J and E to D and P, the feasts become more riumerous, 
 and are kept for a longer time,' and with a more precise 
 ritual. SOy too, the provision made for the priests and; the 
 Temple grows as we pass from J and E,.to D, and: then to 
 P. J and E provide for firstfruits and firstlings,* and for 
 tithes in. connection with the Temple at Bethel.^ Deuter- 
 onomy defines the tithes, a yearly tithe, to be spent in 
 sacrificing and feasting at the Temple at Jerusalem, and 
 a tithe, to be taken every third year, and given, to the poor 
 and the Levites.« The Priestly Code assigns the tithes to 
 the Levites, and a tenth of them to the priests ; gives thirty- 
 five citifes to the Levites and thirteen to the priests, and also 
 gives to the priests the firstfruits, firstlings, most .of the 
 sacrifices and offerings, and a poll-tax of half a shekel.'' 
 Many similar illustrations might be given of the way in which 
 the documents taken in the order J and E, D, P present 
 corisecutive stages in the natural moyementof national life. 
 Moreover, the literary relationship between the documents 
 
 ' No doubt each of the different priesthoods at Jerusalem and else- 
 where always had a chief priest as a necessary practical arrangement, 
 but the recognition of the high priesthood, as a' special divine instilsution 
 of exceptional sanctity,- first appears in H, unless, indeed, the passages 
 referring to a high priest are among the additions made to H by P, 
 
 ^ Deut. xii. 
 
 2 Deut. xvi. ^13-15 first directs that Tabernacles shall be observed 
 seven days ; P adds an eighth day, Num. xxix. 35. P also introduces the 
 41 east of Trumpets and the Day of Atonement, Lev. xxiii, 
 
 * Exodus xxii. 29 f. « Gen. xxviii. 22, E. 
 
 « xiv. 22-29, xxvi. 12-15. 
 
 Joshu^a^'^r '^' ""'^' ^''' ^' "™-' ^'""- "•■ "™- ='"^-» 
 
JUD^AN PROPHETIC DOCUMENT 43 
 
 • 
 is in favour of this order.^ The numerous parallels between 
 the Book of the Covenant, JE, and D and P (especially H) 
 are best accounted for by supposing that D and P knew 
 JE. The shorter and simpler code in JE cannot be a 
 selection from the larger and more elaborate D and P. 
 The historical retrospects in Deuteronomy are largely a cento 
 of material from JE.^ 
 
 The parallels between D and P, however, may perhaps be 
 explained by supposing that both D and P used the same 
 earlier material.. It is doubtful whether, as a matter purely 
 of literary dependence^ it can be shown that P was acquainted 
 withD.8 
 
 . 14. The Judeean Prophetic Document, J. 
 
 (a) Analysis. — J was compiled from older documents and 
 traditions, which soinetimes contradicted each other. From 
 these contradictions J is sometimes* analysed into earUer 
 documents and additions by the compiler of J. Thus J 
 has been separated into an older work J', c. 850, and 
 other material added c. 650, J". Thus° the narratives of 
 the Creation and the Fall are given to J', and that of Cain 
 andAbeLtoJ'. 
 
 (b) Place of Composition. — The emphasis on the sojourn- 
 irigs of Abraham at Hebron, and the interest in Judah in 
 Genesis — according to' J, Judah is the firstborn — and similar 
 
 ' Cf., however, pp. 39 ff. Although the dependence of th? other sources 
 on J and E seemS' absolutely certain, and' the relation of D and P to 
 each other and to J and E seems to imply the priority of D, morp 
 uncertainty attaches to the appUcation of this piece of evidence than 
 to ' some others, especially as regards the relation of D to P. 
 
 ' i. 6-iii. 29, ix. 6-x. 11, cf. the tables. ^ Driver's Introduction, 
 pp. 73, 80. Chapters i.-iv., if not part of Josiah's law-book, were added 
 soon after. 
 
 ' Such acquaintance is shown, however, according to our theory, from 
 other evidence. 
 
 * The different elements are denoted by J', J", etc.; the editorisil 
 matter by J or RJ. 
 
 ° e.g.. Ball's Genesis in Dr. Paul Haupt's Sacred Books of O.T, 
 and Polychrome Bible. , 
 
44 BIBLICAL INTRODUCTION 
 
 features suggest that J was compiled in Judah.^ Some, 
 however, have held that J or its original edition was compiled 
 in the northern kingdom.^ 
 
 (c) Z>«fe.— Priority to Deuteronomy gives us a date before 
 621 j the earliest possible date would be the final establish^ 
 ment of the Monarchy under David, c. 1000 ; but the dates 
 assigned to J usually lie between 900 and 650. The religious 
 attitude suggests the period of prophetic activity which began 
 with Elijah, and was later on represented in Judah by the 
 prophets of the eighth century rather than a less advanced 
 age. If J is used throughout Samuel, we have further evidence 
 that the document is later than the events recorded in that 
 book, though it probably contains much older material. 
 
 J is dated thus: Addis, I., Ixxxii. 850-750; Cornill, J' 850, J* 
 700; Driver, p. 118, "early centuries of the monarchy"; Halipt, 
 etc., J" 850, J' 650; Kautzsch, 850; Konig, p. 206, "after 
 David " ; Kuenen, J ' 800, J ' 650 ; Wellhausen, History of Israel, 
 p. 13, "in the course of the Assyrian period." All the above dates 
 are approximate. Gunkel, p. Ixiv., dates J in ninth century. 
 
 (d) Contents. — J forms a quasi-anecdotal history of Israel 
 and its ancestors from the Creation to thei Conquest, perhaps 
 to the death of David. It is found in Genesis, Exodus, 
 Numbers, Deuteronomy xxxiv., Joshua, Judges, and perhaps 
 Samuel. The editor incorporated some laws, e.g.. Exodus 
 xxxiv. ip-27, and ancient lyrics, e.g., the blessing of Jacob, 
 Genesis xlix.^ 
 
 (e) Characteristics. — J uses Jehovah in Genisis, prefers the 
 name Israel for the patriarch, calls the sacred mountain 
 Sinai, and the inhabitants of Palestine Canaanites. He 
 delights in etymologies of personal and place names. J's 
 narratives are graphic, popular, and dramatic; they are told 
 for the interest of the stories. At the same time, the religious 
 sense of the narrator is quick to seize and set forth moral 
 and spiritual teaching, yet not so as to mar the picturesque 
 charm of his prose poems. The theology is primitive in 
 
 1 DiLLMANN, p. 626; Driver, "relatively probable," p. 116 1 
 Haupt, ' Kuenen, p. 230. » Probably. 
 
THE EPHRAIMITIC DOCUMENT 45 
 
 * 
 
 its frank anthropomorphism and other matters, yet somewhat 
 advanced in its deliberate and conscious monotheism and 
 its teaching that suffering is the consequence of sin. As 
 to worship, J speaks of the high places, of sacred trees, 
 without any consciousness of their being illegitimate. 
 
 15. The Ephraimitic Prophetic Document, E. 
 
 (a) Analysis. — E also has been analysed into various strata, 
 E', E=, E3, cf. on Date.. 
 
 (b) Place of Composition. — E, or, at any rate, its original 
 edition E', was compiled in the northern kingdom. It is 
 specially interested in Joseph, the ancestor of Ephraim, and 
 in the Ephraimitic hero, Joshua. Reuben, which belonged 
 to the northern kingdom, is the firstborn of Israel. If there 
 is a later stratum E'', it probably originated in Judah. 
 
 (c) Relative Age of J and E. — J is usually '^ regarded as 
 the older. Its anthropomorphism and its theology generally 
 seem the more primitive, while E's theory of the origin and 
 meaning of the name Jehovah,^ its avoidance of that name 
 in Genesis, its conception of Abraham as a prophet, and 
 its use of earlier works, such as the Book of the Wars of 
 Jehovah, point to a somewhat advanced stage of religious 
 reflection on custom and tradition. A few scholars, however, 
 regard E as the earlier.^ Some again hold that E used J 
 or J'.* If the analysis of J and E into strata is accepted, 
 the problem of priority becomes very complicated. But we 
 may say that primitive elements are more conspicuous in J, 
 and later developments in E. 
 
 (d) Date, — As an Ephraimitic work, E, or at any rate its 
 original edition E', must have been compiled some time 
 before the Fall of Samaria, 721, i.e., not later than 750; 
 and if it is later than J, and refers to Elisha, it cannot be 
 
 ' CORNILL, J", KAUTZSCH, KUENEN. 
 
 * Exodus iiL 14, IS- 
 
 ' DiLLMANN, £tc. Some of the passages cited by him as evidence of 
 the late date of J are referred by others to J ° or RJ». 
 
 * KOBNBN, p. 248, 
 
46 BIBLICAL JNTRODUCTION 
 
 much earlier. Similar considerations to those which affect 
 J have led most critics to date E, or E', between 850 
 and 750. 
 
 E is dated thus: Addis, I„ Ixxxii. SSO-JSO', Corni.ll, E' 750, E' 
 650; Driver, p. 1 1 8, "early centuries of the monarchy ; Haupt, etCi, 
 E'7S0, £=650; Kautzsch, 775 ; Konig, p. 205, " period of the Judges " ; 
 Kuenen, p. 248, E' 730, E= 650. Gunkel, p. Ixiv., dates E B.C. 800-750. 
 
 (e) Contents. — E is a history of Israel, similar to, but more 
 systematic than J, beginning with the incident of Abraham 
 and Abimelech in Genesis xx., and extending certainly to the 
 close of Joshua, and perhaps as far as the Elisha narratives 
 in Kings. It also incorporates ancient poems, e.g., some 
 of the Balaam oracles, and laws, e.g., the Book of the 
 Covenant.^ 
 
 (f) Characteristics. — '& partially agrees with J in the 
 following points: Its narratives still show a popular interest 
 in the story as a story, but there are more formal and obvious 
 signs of didactic purpose; according to E, also, high places 
 and sacred trees were a legitimate feature of Israelite, religion. 
 But E uses Elohim (in Genesis), not Jehovah ; Jacob rather 
 than Israel; Horeb, not Sinai; Amorites, not Canaanites. 
 The sacred pillar, or ma({eba, occurs frequently in his 
 narrative. Anthropomorphism, if not entirely absent, is 
 far less marked than in J. God reveals Himself in dreams, 
 or through angels ; He acts through them, or by means, 
 hke Moses' rod, which do not attribute to Him ordinary 
 human acts, such as the walking, sewing, shutting of a 
 door, etc., found in J. In other ways, too, the conscious 
 formulating of religious truth seems more advanced, e.gi, 
 the express' condemnation of idolatry is constantly in the 
 writer's mind: Jacob buries the family idols ;2 the first 
 commandment forbids the making of idols ; ^ Joshua induces 
 the people to put away their idols.* If the Book of the 
 Covenant and connected sections were included by E in 
 his work, it shows a more direct interest in social order 
 than J. 
 
 > Probably, cf. on Num. xxiii. f.; Exodus xx. ff. 
 » Gen. XXXV. 4. ' Exodus xx. 3. * xxiv, 14. 
 
COMBINED PROPHETIC DOCUMENT 4; 
 
 * 
 
 16. The Combined Prophetic Document, JE. 
 
 (a) Analysis. — The combination of J and E was a proces$ 
 the work of a school ; but it is no longer possible to disr- 
 tinguish its stages. 
 
 (b) Place of ComposUion. — Judah. 
 
 (c) Date.—'YMxs process is, of course, later than the last 
 editions of J and E, used in the compilation, i.e., probably 
 after 650. It is difficult to fix the later limit, J and E 
 seem to have been known separately to D', and can perhaps 
 be traced later; but it does not follow that J E was compiled 
 after D'. At first, especially amongst the more conservative, 
 the older separate works would retain their authority, while 
 JE was ignored as a modern innovation.^ Some passages 
 assigned to R'° the editor who combined, J and E, are 
 so much in the style of the Deuteronomic editors, D' or 
 R", that it is often difficut to say whether a passage Belongs 
 to R'° or R°. Hence it has been suggested that R° and 
 R'^ are identical, i.e., that two stages of the development, 
 J + E = JE, JE + D = JED, may be replaced by the single 
 stage J + E + D. But the close interweaving of J and E, 
 and the ease with which D can be separated from them, 
 negative this view. The resemblance shows that J and E 
 were combined during the period dominated by the influence 
 of Deuteronomy. Yet, in spite of resemblances, JE is com- 
 paratively independent of D', and has by no means broken 
 loose from the primitive ideas of religion and history to the 
 same extent as D'. The combined document JED was 
 probably compiled during the Exile. Hence a pre-exilic 
 date, 650-586, seems suitable for JE. 
 
 JE is dated: Cornill, 650-621 j Driver, p. 109, about the eighth 
 century; Haupt, c. 640; Kautrsch, c. 650; Kuenen, p. 249, "close 
 of the seventh or opening of the sixth century." 
 
 (d) Method of Combination.' — It is possible that R'^ used 
 other documents besides J and E. Which editor first in- 
 cluded in his work any given lyric, or other section, not an 
 integral part of the main sources, is often very difficult to' 
 determine. 
 
48 BIBLICAL INTRODUCTION 
 
 R'° combined his materials with great care and skill,' so 
 that it is often quite impossible to disentangle* them with 
 any confidence. The way in which P and J are combined 
 in the account of the Flood also illustrates the combinatioii 
 of J and E, except that the latter are the more ingeniously 
 and intricately interwoven. E.""s general principle was to 
 make up his narrative of sections taken unaltered from the 
 sources, 1 but much has clearly been omitted. It is seldpin 
 that a narrative can be resolved into two parallel accounts, 
 each complete in itself. Where the sources were virtually 
 identical, repetition has been avoided by omitting material 
 from one of them. Much has probably been cut, out, that 
 seemed unedifying in the light of the fuller revelation of 
 the Deuteronomic age. Moreover, there are additions ; in 
 piecing together the docurnents,- connecting phrases were 
 often necessary, and the redactor has modified and inserted 
 to suit the ideas and teaching of his times. There is a 
 certain amount of material clearly not Deuteronomic, and 
 more closely united with J and E passages than the 
 Deuteronomic^ additions usually are, arid yet more akin to 
 Deuteronomy than to the more primitive J and E. Such 
 additions are probably R'^, though perhaps some of them 
 might be assigned with equal reason to the final, editors of 
 J and E. Of course, R'^ was not careful to see that editorial 
 insertions in J were in J's style, and in E in E's style, but 
 sometimes uses J words and. phrases in his additions to E 
 passages, and vice versA. Hence the work of this editor has 
 seriously added to the difficulty of separating J and E, and 
 also accounts for the sporadic occurrence of J characteristics 
 in sections clearly belonging taE, and vice vers&. 
 
 17. 'Deuteronomic Material, D, 
 
 (a) Analysis. — The contents of Josiah's law-book are 
 denoted by D or D', and the later additions to this 
 document, and the insertions in Joshua, Kings, etc. made 
 by editors writing in the style and spirit of D, are denoted 
 by W, D=, D^, etc. 
 
DEUTERONOMIC MATERIAL 49 
 
 « 
 
 (b) Placfi of Composition,— T^TsxQ earlier portions were com- 
 posed in Judah, the later in Babylonia. 
 
 (c) Date. — Josiah's law-book was composed some time 
 before its publication in 621, and some time^ after J and 
 E, upon which it is dependent, and also, after the prophets 
 of the eighth century. The latter know nothing of Deuter- 
 onomy, while Deuteronomy gives practical effect to their 
 attack on the high places by limiting sacrifice i to the 
 Temple. Further, the attempt to give exclusive rights to 
 a single sanctuary is more probable after the fall of the 
 northern kingdom. The Temple might serve the small 
 area of the southern kingdom. Thus everything points to 
 a date between 722 and 621. The anti-prophetic policy 
 of Manasseh and the almost entire absence of literature 
 belonging to his reign, c. 698-643, would account for the 
 lack of any traces of the existence of Deuteronomy between 
 70Q-621. 
 
 D' is dated thus ; Addis, ii. g, 701-621 ; Cornill, " shortly before 
 621"} Driver, p. 87, in Sixth Edition, text and note, "not later 
 than the reign of Manasseh," "the century before 621 " ; Kautzsch, 
 c. 628; Konig, p. 217, "soon after 722"; Kuenen, p. 220, "Josiah's 
 reign"; Wellhauseu, History, p. 13, "close of Assyrian period." 
 
 D°, etc., /.e.,i the additions made to D' in Deuteronomy, 
 and the insertions by Deuterpnomic editors in Joshua- 
 Kings belong substantially to the period between 621 an^i 
 the close of the Exile. In the Deuteronomic edition of 
 the Book of Kings, ^ the last event mentioned is the release 
 of Jehoiachin by Evil-Merodach in 561. The post-exilic 
 additions to Joshua-Kings mostly bear the staihp of P, 
 not of D. Chronicles, naturally, contains material borrowed 
 from or in imitation of Deuteronomy. 
 
 D» is dated thus: Cornill, Second Half of Exile j Haupt, 560-540; 
 Kautzsch, 561-538 
 
 (d) Contents. — D' certainly contained Deuteronomy xii.- 
 xxvi., probably v.-xi. and xxviii., less probably ii-iv.* To 
 
 '»'.«., our present bqpk. r » 
 
 • As to these passsjges see § 27 on Deuterpnomy. Later editorial 
 insertions are not taken into account, 
 
 £ 
 
so BIBLICAL INTRODUCTION 
 
 IX' are assigned all of Deuteronomy i.-xxx. which does 
 not belong to D', a very small amount of material in 
 Genesis, Exodus, Numbers, and Samuel, and considerable 
 portions of Joshua, Judges, arid Kings.^ 
 
 (e) Characierisiics.— The Deuteronomic writers compose 
 codes, exhortations to obedience; they provide earlier 
 history with chronological framework and religious comment; 
 only in Kings do they themselves write history. The historical 
 retrospects in Deuteronomy are mere abstracts from JE, 
 and are only introduced as a setting for the laws and ex- 
 hortations. The Deuteronomic narratives in Joshua merely 
 adapt JE to the Deuteronomic theory of the history that 
 Joshua carefully observed the Law of Moses, i.e., Deuter- 
 onomy, and completely conquered Canaan, and cleared it 
 of its inhabitants. 
 
 D, like E, uses the names Amorite and Horeb. Favourite 
 phrases are " God of Israel," " Thy God," also perhaps found 
 in R'^. Its main theme is the purification of worship by the 
 suppression of the high places, by making the Temple the 
 only sanctuary of Jehovah, and by doing away with idols, 
 ma((ebas, and all the paraphernalia of superstition. But it 
 also enacts laws in favour of the social equity and benevo- 
 lence inculcated by the prophets, and foririally recognises 
 the prophetic order. 
 
 1 8. The Deateronomic History and Laws of Israel, JED. 
 
 (a) Analysis. — D°, considered in the previous section, 
 might be divided into: (i.) additions made to D' before 
 it was combined with JE; (ii.) additions made to JTE and 
 D in the process of combination ; (iii.) additions made to 
 the threefold work JED after the combination had been 
 effected. R° is often appropriately used aUke for (ii.^, and 
 for the Deuterpnomic editor who inserted (ii.).^ R", like 
 
 ' D' is used here for all Deuteronomic material later than D '. 
 " (iOi ("■)• (iii-) can only be distinguished rarely and partially, so that 
 R° and C are often used as equivalent. 
 
HISTORY AND LAWS OF rSRAEI. , 51 
 
 R^, stands for a school and a process, but the different stages 
 and hands are only very imperfectly determined. 
 
 (b) :Place of Composition} Babylonia. 
 
 (c) i?3/«.i— The Exile. 
 
 (d) Scape and Method.— The portion of JE extending from 
 the Creation to the close of Numbers was only slightly 
 modified by R°. At this point he inserted the Deuteronomic 
 Code and its connected exhortations. Possibly the Book of 
 the Covenant originally occupied the place of Deuteronomy, 
 and was transferred by R° to its present position in the 
 account of the sojourn at Sinai.^ Another interesting 
 suggestion is that for a time two editions of Deuteronomy 
 were current, one consisting of xii.-xxvi. with v.-xi. for an 
 'introduction, and the other of xii.-xxvi. with i. i-iv. 40 
 for an introduction. If so, part of R^'s work was the 
 fusion of these two editions. He also added to D' other 
 material, either his own or borrowed. He dealt very freely 
 with Joshua, providing it with an ample framework which 
 gave a view of the history very different from that of JE. 
 But, ait the same time, he retained so much of jE unaltered, 
 that JE's view is still plain, namely, that the land was 
 only partially conquered, and that the inhabitants were not 
 extirpated. 
 
 It is not certain that the Deuteronomic edition of Judges- 
 Kings* should be reckoned as entirely one with that of 
 JED. If JE extended to the times of Elisha, it seems 
 probable that it was. If the documentary connection 
 between the Hexateuch and these later books is confined 
 to the use of J' in Judges i.,, it' seems more likely that 
 the editing of JED and that of the Deuteronomic editions 
 of Judges-Kings were two independent pieces of work, 
 though carried' out 'by the same school. Even in this latter 
 case R° is a sufficiently elastic symbol to be used for the 
 
 .^ Cf. (b), (c) of previous section. Kuenen, pp. 270 f., admits that 
 R° may be post-exilic, but regards an exilic date as more probable. 
 " KuENBN, p. 258. 
 'Here and 'elsewhere, Judges-Kings does not include Ruth, 
 
52 BIBLICAL INTRODUCTION 
 
 editor of Judges^Kings and for his insertions, etc. Ir 
 Judges and Kings he supplies a framework and religious 
 comments; his contributions in Samuel are much slighter. 
 R° may also have omitted portions of JE as unedifying, 
 may possibly have had access to the separate J and E, 
 and restored sections omitted by R'^. Possibly, too, R° is 
 responsible for the insertion of some of the poems. 
 
 19. The Law of Holiness, H or P'. 
 
 (a) Analysis and Contents. — In addition to Leviticus xvii.- 
 xxvi., portions of Leviticus xi., etc. have been assigned to 
 H. This document was a compilation from older codes, 
 and either H or some of its sources seems to have been 
 dependent on the Book of the Covenant. H, as we now 
 have it, contains additions made by the editor who in- 
 corporated it in the Priestly Code, and perhaps by others. 
 
 (b) Date and Place of Composition. — H has points of 
 contact both with D" and the Priestly Code, but is very 
 closely connected with Ezekiel xl.-xlyiii. Though not 
 composed by that prophet, it probably emanated from 
 the priestly circle to which he belonged. Like Ezekiel 
 xl.-xlviii., it forms an intermediate stagfe between D' and 
 the Priestly Code, -and - was compiled in Babylonia during 
 the Exile, Its sources were pre-exilic, and may be in part 
 older than D'. ' 
 
 H or P ' is dated ; Comill, second half of the Exile ; Driver, pp! 
 138, I43i shortly before the Exile, H was known by Ezekiel; HauptJ 
 Sacred Books of O.T., 570; Holzinger, pp. 447 f., immediately aftei 
 the Exile, in Babylonia; Kautzsch,'c, 561 ; Kuenen, p. 276; tbwards tlje 
 'end of the Exile. " , . ! 
 
 (c) Charactmstics.—'H. seeks to secure th3.t Israel shall 
 be "holy," i.e., that condition and conduct shall be worthy 
 of the people's unique relation to Jehovah. It therefore 
 lays down rules for ceremonial purity and moral life.- Its 
 keynote is the root QDSh underlying the Hebrew wbrds 
 translated "holy^" "holiness," "sanctity." These words 
 
THE PRIESTLY CODE S3 
 
 occur with special frequency in H, and the reason for 
 demanding "holiness" is again and again expressed in the 
 phrases, "I am Jehovah," "I am Jehovah, youf God," 
 etc., and is expressed fully in Leviticus xi. 45, " I am 
 Jehovah, who brought you up out of the land of Egypt, 
 that I might be your God; ye shall therefore be holy, for 
 I am holy." H agrees with D' against P": (i.) in making 
 no mention of the inferior order of the priestly tribe — the 
 Levitesj (ii.) in insisting, expressly and with great emphasis, 
 on the limitation of sacrifice to a single sanctuary, which P' 
 takes for granted ; (iii.) in legislating expressly for the people 
 settled in Canaan. 
 
 Although tie headings connect H with Moses and Sinai, there is no 
 attempt, as in P', to write from the standpoint of the camp in the 
 wilderness. Thus Leviticus xxv. 29, "If a man sell a dwelling-hoiise' 
 in a walled city," y^ Deuteronomy xxii. 8, "When thou buildest ,a 
 new house, then thou shalt make a battlement for thy roof." Both 
 jiass^es takfe for . granted city-life in Palestine. In parts D ' writes 
 as if on the eve of the conquest, but takes no trouble tp maintain this 
 standpoint. 
 
 But H agrees with P', against D', in its interest in manifold 
 details concerning sacred acts, persons, places, times, and in- 
 struments, i.e., those specially connected with the external 
 observances of religion. 
 
 zo. The Priestly Code, P, incorporating the Law of 
 Holiness, H. 
 
 (a) Analysis. — P is commonly used for the whole of the > 
 composite 'document, which includes . (i.) H or P'; (ii.) the 
 Priestly Code proper, or P°; (iii.) later additions, P^ or P". 
 As P° itself is partly based on earlier documents, it is often 
 difficult to. say whether a particular passage which seems 
 earlier than the time of compilation of P° belongs to one, 
 of the sources of P°, or to H. 
 
 (b) Mode of Composition.— \t is commonly held that P' 
 was composed independently of H, and that the. two were 
 subsequently united. Possibly, however, the author of P' 
 
54 BIBLICAL INTRODUCTION 
 
 made H the nucleus of his work.i Additions were further 
 made to H + P= by later writers, and also, of course, by the; 
 editor who combined them. i 
 
 (c) Date and Place of Composition?^'?'' was composed in^ 
 Babylonia after the Exile and before the mission of Ezra to 
 Jerusalem in 458; after the Exile, because there are no traces^ 
 of its special characteristics in history or literature before 
 this period, and because it marks an advance on Deuter- 
 onomy, Ezekiel, and H; before Ezra's mission, because it 
 is part of the Law promulgated by him.^ H and P= were 
 also combined in Babylonia before 458, as H seems to have 
 formed part of the Law promulgated by him in 444, and it 
 seems scarcely likely that he combined H and P' between 
 458 and 444. It is a natural supposition that Ezra was 
 either the author of P', or the editor who combined H 
 and P°j but it is nothing more.* Later additions to P as 
 a separate work must have been made in Judah between; 
 444 and 400. 
 
 According to Addis, I., Ixxxiii., P» about the time of Ezra; Cornill, 
 P° c. 500, union of P' and P° before 458; Driver, p. 129, P» "belongs 
 approximately to the period of the Babylonian captivity " j Haupt, P ' 
 c, 500; Holzingcr, p. 442, P° the very beginning of the fifth century 
 at latest, p. 453, H and P° united, in Babylonia, before 458; Ezra 
 had no hand either in the compilation of P°, or in its union with H ;,, 
 Kautzsch, P' c. $00, united with H, c. 458 ; Kuenen, p. 303 f., P" 
 500-475 ; Gray, Num., -p. xxxi., dates Ps (P»), c. 5cia 
 
 (d) Contents, — P is a code in the form of a constitutional 
 history of Israel; a collection of laws and precedents, with 
 the circumstances under which they were instituted. It begins 
 with the Sabbath, as sanctioned by the example of God at thfr 
 
 ''■ I have not noticed this suggestion elsewhere, but it is so obviousithat 
 it must have been made before, and set aside on account of the inany 
 diiEculties it involves. It does not seem, however, out of the range of' 
 possibility. 
 
 * For H see previous section. 
 
 ■ Cf. §§ 8-13. 
 
 ' We can scarcely suppose with Meyer, Entstehung, etc., that the 
 phrase, "scribe (sSpHer) of the Law," is intended to mean "author Ot 
 the Law.". 
 
THE PRIESTLY CODE 55 
 
 Creation, and follows the course of events to the division of 
 Ganaan amongst- the tribes by Joshua. It includes a large 
 part of Genesis, the greater part of Exodus,. Numbers,, aiid 
 Joshua xiii.-xxii.„all Leviticus, and. a few verses at the close of 
 Deuteronomy- and in Joshua i.-xi.^ 
 
 i In Judges-Kings there are a small series of passages written 
 under the influence of P, while Chronicles, might be described 
 as the priestly substitute for Joshua-Kings. ; ^-' 
 
 (e) Characteristics.'^ — There is a. large number' of wordsj 
 phrases, and idioms found only or chiefly in P, or in P and 
 Ezekiel and post-exilic literature. 
 
 P, often like Haggai and Zechariah, denotes the months by numiers 
 instead of names ; it follows the post-exilic usage of writing dnf almost 
 always for "I," whereas in pre-exilic works 'anoMht is as common: or 
 commoner, so in JE. 'Edd, in the sense of assemily, is almost, if not 
 entirely,- confined to P and post-exilic writers; 'eduth, testimony, of 
 the tables of the Law, occurs only in P,r etc..) cf. table in Driver, 
 pp. 123 ff. 
 
 It is fond of repeating the same formtilse agaiil and again 
 in the same or successive sections, and has " all the technical 
 verbosity of legal documents. 
 
 Thus in Genesis i., " Evening and morning were the — "> day," "And 
 God saw that it was good," etc. ; m Genesis v., "And — lived — years 
 and begat — " etc.; in Numbers vii., ^'Oii the — day—: his oblation was^" 
 etc.; but cf. Amos i. . 
 
 P" gives the laws with the circumstances of their origin, and 
 with an account of the first.instances of their observance. Thus, 
 as the laws for the high priesthood are regarded as resting on 
 the authority of Moses, they are given as addressed to Aaron, 
 and we are told how they were carried out in the first instance 
 by Aaron. In the same way the laws for the Temple and its 
 furniture are given as addressed to the Israelites in the 
 wilderness by Moses, and we are told how they were 
 obeyed in the construction of the Tabernacle. All this 
 represents a bond^ fide belief that the principles of the laws 
 for the priesthood and the Teiiiple were Mosaic, and that 
 
 » cj: § 20. 
 
56 BIBLICAL fNTRODUCTION 
 
 the period immediately after the Exodus furnished precedents 
 for some such laws. P' considers each law, etc. as an entirely' 
 liew. revelation at the time at which it is recorded. Thus 
 in' Exodus vi. 2-12 the Divine Name, Jehovah, is a new 
 revelation ; consequently it is never used in Genesis. Again' 
 sacrifices, the distinction of clean and unclean animals and 
 meats, etc. were new revelations, and unknown before Moses; 
 Hence in P the patriarchs do not sacrifice, although they: do 
 in JE ; and P's account of the Flood ignores the distinction 
 made by J between clean and unclean animals. 
 
 P follows J in speaking of the mount of the Law as Sinai. 
 While P' shares with H and Ezekiel their interest in the 
 buildings, furniture, services, and priesthood of the Temple, 
 and in ceremonial observances generally, it introduces several 
 new features, e.g., the distinction between priests arid Leyites,^ 
 and the Day of Atonement,^ which is completion of a system 
 of graduated sanctity, teaching its climax in a single point, 
 temporal sanctity in the Day of Atonement, local sanctity 
 in the Holy of Holies, personal sanctity in the high priest. 
 P° takes the greatest pains to avoid anthropomorphism. 
 Further, P" closely resembles Chronicles in its love of 
 system and statistics; it provides the Pents-teuch yrith a, 
 complete and consecutive chronology and set of genealogies, 
 and gives in detail the specifications of the Ark and the" 
 Tabernacle. ,/ 
 
 \ 21. The Completion of the Pentateuch, and the earlier 
 Historical Books. 
 
 . (a) Jvrm of JED and P before Comhination.^^i J^ only 
 extended to the death of Joshua, then JED and ;the , Deuter- 
 onomic edition of Judges-Kings were separate from the be- , 
 ginning, and there is no reason why a Deuteronomic editor 
 
 ''^ A development from Ezekiel xliv. 10-16. In Ezekiel the status of 
 the Levites is > a degradation, newly ordained" on account of their share 
 in tjie corrupt worship of the high places ; in P° the status is an old- 
 established privikge. 
 
 "^ Leviticus xvi., also a development from Ezekiel xlv, 18^20, who 
 appoints two similar days. 
 
COMPLETION OF THE PENTATEUCH 57 
 
 should have separated the Joshua sections from the rest of 
 JED. But if JE extended to the times of Elisha, JED 
 might include the whole Deuteronomic history, as a single 
 work from the Creation to the fall of the Monarchy. This 
 long book would naturally be divided into sections, and 
 the death of Moses would be a suitable close for the first 
 of these. 
 
 Again P extended to the death of Joshua, but since it 
 was promulgated -as the Law of Moses,^ the Joshua sections 
 may have been separated before the promulgation. 
 , Thus, when- R^" set to work to combine JED and P', 
 either (i.) the Joshua sections had already been separated 
 from either or both documents; or (ii.) both documents 
 still included the Joshua sections, and JED may have also 
 contained the Deuteronomic edition of Judges-Kings. 
 
 (b) Method. — If the Joshua sections had already been 
 severed from JED and P, the Pentateuchal sections could 
 be at once combined, and the result would be substantially 
 our Pentateuch. Otherwise R"" himself may have separated 
 the Joshua sections from either or both of his documents ; 
 or he may have combined JED and P, both containing 
 Joshua sections, thus compiling the Hexateuch. 
 
 R"" used P as a framework, into which he fitted the sections 
 of JED. He probably omitted parts of JED, and perhaps 
 restored ' passages omitted by R° or R'^ , Otherwise he 
 combined his material in the sarhe way as R-'% R°. An 
 example of his method has already been given in §5. 
 
 If R'"s work was the Hexateuch, Joshua was separated 
 from the Peiitateuch somewhat later. It seems more likely 
 that Joshua was compiled from the Joshua sections of JED 
 and P by another editor, who made JED the framework. 
 
 ' Assuming that the description of the Code in Ezra-Nehemiah as the 
 Law of Moses is'not — as in tne 'account of Josiah's reforms in Chronicles 
 — merely.due to the chronicler. ,,i) )i 
 
 ' R"" = the editor, who, writing under the influence of P, added P 
 to JED. 
 
 ' J, E, and JE probahly continued to exist as separate works after their 
 contents were included in JE and JED. 
 
58 BIBLICAL INTRODUCTION 
 
 In Judges-Kings the priestly editors had no completfe 
 parallel priestly history to combine with the Deuterojnoinie 
 history. These, books; as we have them are substantially 
 the work of the Deuteronomic editors:; the priestly editors 
 added comparatively Httle, and that little ' consists chieiy 
 of small changes and insertions. The real priestly version: 
 of the history is Chronicles. Also some further additions, 
 were made to the Pentateuch after JED and P were com- 
 bined. The final stage was the division of the Pentateuch 
 into five books. 
 
 (c) Date and Flace of Composition. — ^It has sometimes been 
 supposed that Ezra's law-book was the complete Pentateubh 
 which had been compiled in Babylonia before 458. But; the 
 reading and exposition of the Pentateuch would scarcely have 
 been accomplished even in the eight days devoted to Ezra's 
 law-book, and it would : have severely taxed the ingenuity 
 of the Levites to explain orally the many- contradictions, 
 obscurities,, and abrupt transitions of the Pentateuch. The 
 Priestly; Code,, even including H, was a fairly conseciitLve 
 and consistent work, which lent itself to such treatment. 
 
 Hence the combination of JED and P was probably some- 
 what later than the promulgation of P in 444. It is usually 
 dated ajjout 400.^ There was every reason for amalgamating 
 the two works at onca Side by side, as separate books, they 
 seemed to compete for the title of Law of Moses ; their com- 
 bination prevented any such controversy. 
 
 The work of the other priestly editors — the severance or 
 formation of Joshua, the' priestly- additions to Judges--Kings, 
 the further additions to the Pentateuch^— lies between 400' 
 and. 300, the date at which external evidence* shows the 
 complete Pentateuch to have been in existence. Somewhere- 
 about this time the Pentateuch was divided into five books. 
 
 Even, after this we know from the. LXX. and the; historyi 
 of the LXX. text that a number of small changes were made 
 
 ;, ; 1 KUBNEN, p. 3Q3 f., CORNILL, KAUTZSCH. 
 
 ' Cf, chap. i. § 2. 
 
MOSAIC MATERIAL IN PENTATEUCH 59- 
 
 # 
 in the Pentateuch and the historical books, but we have 
 now reached a point at which the, work of the editor can 
 no longer be distinguished from that of the copyist, and 
 higher passes into textual criticism. 
 
 The Pentateuch, in its final form, was called the Law, 
 Tbr&, and later, "the five-fifths of the Law."i The title 
 "Pentateuch" or " five -volumed " was given to it by 
 Greek writers, from whom it passed into Latin and other 
 languages. 
 
 22. Mosaic Material in the Pentateuch.^- We have seen 
 that all the main documents rest on older sources, and that 
 those used by D and P are not confined to J and E. It seems 
 extremely probable, if not certain, that these earlier sources 
 contained matter which, originated with, or received the 
 sanction of Moses. Even where a law as it stands was 
 clearly addressed to the Israelites of the Monarchy, it may be 
 an adaptation or translation, so to speak, of a Mosaic lawj to 
 suit the needs of later times, an application of a principle 
 laid down originally by Moses. A Mosaic element in the 
 Pentateuch is as probable as DaYidic poems in the Psalter ; 
 but in both cases we have no criteria which enable us 
 to identify this element with any definiteness or certainty. 
 Many Israelites, at certain periods, regarded Moses rirach as 
 Christians regard Christ, as the supreme authority for, rehgious 
 truth. All that was irnplied by or deduced from the teaching' 
 of Moses Was held to be Mosaic, just as we call all that is 
 implied by or deduced from the teaching of Christ, Christaant 
 The usage is natural and justifiable in both cases. Moses' 
 position in Israelite religion was, of course, only similar, and 
 not strictly parallel to the relation of Christ to Christianity ; 
 yet the Pentateuch is Mosaic as the final product of a processi. 
 which owed its first impulse, its direction and character to 
 
 M,OSeS. "' ,1 ■' 'V' ' , , '' '•;' '•.;; ' , , , ■ :'' t 
 
 1 HamishsM h^meshl hcU-tM, 
 
6o BIBLICAL INTRODUCTION 
 
 23. Genesis. 
 
 (a) Ttile.— In the Hebrew Ber'eshUh, "In the beginning," 
 /.«., the opening word of the book; in the LXX. and Vulg., 
 and from them in other versions, Genesis " origin," because it 
 describes the origin of the world. 
 
 (b) Contents and Archmology. — i, i-ii. 4a, P's account of, 
 the Creation, as the Institution of the Sabbath, ii. 4b-25, J's 
 account of the Creation, " God " = R"", in " Lord God." 
 
 Narratives of the Creation, mostly with some parallels to the above, are 
 found amongst most races ; but naturally the closest parallels are found 
 amongst the Semites. Parallel to P, we have the Assyrian and Babylonian 
 narrative preserved on seven (?) tablets. ^ The Creation starts from chaos' 
 and proceeds by stages, presenting similarities of language and ideas with 
 Genesis i., but loses itself in a contest between Merodach and Tiamat, 
 and gives full play to polytheist mythology. A parallel tp the Sabbath 
 has been seen in the fact that amongst the Assyrians certain acts, were for- 
 bidden on the 7th, 14th, 2ist, 28th of each month.' 
 
 J's account shows traces of being based on ancient Semitic tradition, 
 but no close parallel to it Has yet been published. 
 
 iii., iv., J, The Fall, Cain and Abel, Cainite Genealogies, 
 Lamech. 
 
 The elements in the story of the Fall — supernatural serpents ; forbidden 
 food, the eating of which brings disaster ; and sacred trees — are familiar 
 features of all folklore. The sacred tree and the demon serpent figure 
 constantly, but for the most part separately, on Assyrian monuments and 
 geriis. It is doubtful, however, whether the colossal winged Assyrian 
 bulls with human faces were called Kiruhu ; and, even if they were, 
 whether they are connected with the Cherubim. There are Phoenician 
 sculptiires which show griffins guarding a sacred tree. There seems ho 
 real parallel to the Fall, the resemblance between the Babylonian legends 
 of Adapa, the progenitor of mankind, and Genesis iii. being probably 
 fortuitous, Adapa forfeits immortality by following advice to avoid eating 
 certain food. 
 
 The names in the genealogies are sometimes identified with those of 
 Babylonian gods. 
 
 ; v., P; except 29 = 7. The Sethite genealogy, Seth to Noah. 
 Enoch. 
 
 ^ Records of the Past, New Series, i^ 122 ff. {cf. 147 ff.), also preserved, 
 by Berosus ; of, the Non-Semitic account vi. 109, which has points of 
 contact with P. , 
 
 « Tiamat; cf. the tehdm, EV. "deep." 
 
 • Davis, Gen,, etc, p. z^. 
 
GENESIS 6i 
 
 * 
 
 The genealogy Kenan to Lamech is another version of the Cainite 
 genealogy Cain to Lamech. The numbers differ considerably in the 
 Hebrew, the Sam. Pent., and the LXX. 
 
 vi. 1-4, J, The Marriage of the " Sons of God," atigels, to the 
 daughters of men. vi. 5-viii., Pj except vi, 5-8; vii. 1-5, 
 7-10, 12, 16^, 17, 22/j viii. 2b, 3a, 6-12, 13(5, 2o-22=J, 
 The Flood. 
 
 The Babylonian epic on the adventures of Gilgames contains an 
 episode, in which Xisuthros tells how he escaped the Flood. The god Ea 
 warned him that the other gods were about to send a Flood, and bade him 
 build a ship. Xisuthros did so, dimensions, etc., are given ; it was pitched, 
 etc.; and had storeys and a window. Xisuthros brought in his family, 
 slaves, and cattle. The Flood came, lasted seven days, and drowned all 
 mankind except those in the ship. The ship grounded on a mountain. 
 Xisuthros sent out in succession a dove, a swallow, and a raven. The 
 dove and the swallow came back, but the raven waded. When Xisuthros 
 saw this, he left the ship with the rest, built an altar, and, offered sacrifice. 
 The gods smell the sweet savour, and swarm like flies to the sacrifice. 
 Those who sent the Flood are angry because some have escaped, but Ea 
 pacifies them, and Xisuthros and his wife are rendered immortal. 
 
 This account has some features in common .with. P, some with J, A 
 fragment of a different Babylonian version has been found ; and another 
 version was preserved by Berosus. ^ Traditions of great floods are also 
 found amongst most races. 
 
 ix. 1-17, P, The Rainbow. • 
 
 In the Babylonian Deluge story allusion is made to " the bow of Ishtar," 
 which may be the rainbow. 
 
 ix. 18-27, Ji Curse of Canaan. 
 
 ix. 28-x., Pj except x. 8-19, 21, 25-30 = }. Noah's De- 
 scendants. 
 
 xi. 1-9, J, Tower, of BabeL 
 
 xi. 10-26, P, Genealogy from Shem to Terah. 
 r xi. z7,-xii., J; except xi. 27, 31/, xii. 4^, S, xiii. 6, ii^ = P, 
 Abram and Lot, Migration to Canaan, Visit to Egypt, Separa- 
 tion. ., 
 
 xiv., Unknown Source, Abram and Melchizedek. 
 
 ' The inscriptions show that most, if not all the names in verse I are 
 those of actual places and persons ; that Babylonia and other powers to 
 
 • SCKKADEE, Cuneiform Inscr., etc, Eng. Trans,, i. 53, Records of the 
 Past. 
 
62 BIBLICAL INTRODUCTION 
 
 the east of Syria had dealings with Palestine in very early times, earlier 
 than any date which might be fixed for Abraham; and that Elam was 
 supreme in Western Asia at a period which might very well coincide with 
 that of Abraham. But the inscriptions do not mention Abraham or 
 Melchizedek,! or any campaign which can be that of this chapter. iThe 
 Tel-elrAmarna tablets show that Jerusalem was known as Uru-salim 
 about B.C. 1300-1400. In a letter to the King of Egypt, the ICiiig of 
 Jierasalem writes, ".Neither my father nor my motherappointed me in this 
 place. The strong arm of the king inaugurated me iii my father's 
 territory,"^ a curious coincidence with the "without father, without 
 .mother " of HebrewST-nothing more. See Appendix B. 
 
 Differences of style, etc., show that this chapter stands alone, and does 
 not belong to any of the main documents of the Hexateuch. It has no 
 connection with any context either in P or J ; this fact, and certain 
 peculiarities of style show that it was inserted by a late editor, after the 
 combination of JED and P ; but the chapter may be based on an ancient 
 narrative, or. it may have been compiled in Babylon during or after the 
 Exile, on the basis of those ancient archives, then complete and well 
 known, whose fragmentary relics alone, are now available. Verses i8-r20 
 maybe ati interpolation. It is, curious that the number, 318, of Abram'» 
 slaves, in verse 14, is the sum of the numerical values of the consonants 
 of Eliezer, xv. 2, etc, the only male slave of his mentioned by name. 
 
 XV., JE, Promise to Abram of an heir whose seed shall 
 inherit Canaan. 
 
 xvi., J; except la, 3, 15/ = ?, Birth of Ishmael. 
 
 xvii., P, Institution of CirGumcision. 
 
 xviii. f., J; ex^epi xi'x. 29 = P, Promise of Isaac, Sodom 
 and Gomorrah, Lot. 
 
 XX, fF., Ej excepf xxi. 1-5 = P*; xxi, 6b, 7, 33, xxii. 
 20-24 = J; XX. 18, xxii. 14-18 = R^^, Abraham, .Sarah, and 
 AbimeleCh, Birth of Isaac, .'Sending away of Hagar and 
 Ishmael, Sacrifice of Isaac. 
 
 xxiii., P, Death of Sarah, Precedent as to sale of land. 
 
 xxiv., J, Eliezer, Rebecca, and Isaac. 
 
 XXV. 1-18, P; >except j-6, 11^, i8 = JE, Death and 
 descendants of Abraham and Ishmael. : 
 
 XXV. 19-34, J; except 19/, 26i5 = P, Birth of Esau and 
 Jacob, Birthright sold. - . 
 
 xxvi. 1-33, J,; pxc&pi 1-5 (parts of), 13, iS^R'^ Isaaq and 
 Abimelech. 
 
 xxvi. 34, 35, P, Esau's Wives. 
 
 » WiNCKLBR, p. 303. • Mostly; so elsewhere. 
 
GENESIS 63 
 
 * 
 
 xxvii. "f., JE; ex^Jil xxvvi. ^6-xxviii. 9 = P, Blessing of 
 Jacob and Esau, Esau's Wives, Jacob's Flight, His Dream 
 at Bethel. 
 
 ■ xxix. i-xxxii. I, JE; except xxix. 24, 281?, 29, xxxi. 
 i8* = P, Jacob and iLaban. 
 
 xxxii. 2-xxxiii., JE; except xxxiii. i8a = P, Jacob and 
 Esau. 
 
 xxxLv. (constructed -on a J basis by a later, probaily priestly, 
 writer\ Dinah, Sack of Shechem. 
 
 XXXV. i-2,2a, E; except 9-13, iS = P, 21, 22« = J, Jacob at 
 Bethel, Death of Deborah and Rachel. 
 
 XXXV. 22b-xxxvii. r, P; except xxxvi. 3 1-39 = J, Family 
 of Jacob, Death of Isaac, Descendants of Esau, Princes of 
 Edom. 
 
 xxxvii. z-36, JE; except 2a = P, Joseph and his Brethren. 
 
 xxxviii., J, Judah and Tamar. 
 
 xxxix.-xlviii., JE; except xli. 46, xlvi. 6-27, xlvii. ^b, 6d, 
 7-11, 27/, xMii. 3-7 = P, Joseph in Egypt, Brethren and 
 Jacob come thither. , 
 
 (Egyptian papyri (give a story In which an elder brother, his wife, and a 
 younger..brother play the parts of Eptiphar, his wife, and Joseph, 
 
 xlix. \^2i. The Blessing of Jacob, 
 
 Ail ancient lyric, incorporated either by J or RJ^, Both Judah, 10, and 
 Joseph, 26, are spolien of as royal tribes, which might be possible in 
 ^a poern of the time of David or Solomon, but would-be more natural 
 after Jeroboate ; ' on the" other hand, there is no hint that Levi is a 
 sacerdotal tribe, hence the Blessing was composed before 621. It is 
 probably based on much older poems. Verse 28 = R, , 
 
 Addis, 878-857, J ; Cornill, after Jeroboam, before 850, J ; Dillmann 
 and Driver, p. 17, Reign of David or Sdlomon, J ; Kautzsch, Reign of 
 David ; Kuenen, p. 240, tenth or ninth century ; Gunkel, c. 1000-7-950. 
 
 xlix. 29-l.j J; except xlix 29-33, ^' i2/ = P; /. i5-z6 = E, 
 Death of Jacob arid Joseph. 
 
 (c) Use in N.T. — ^Chapter ii. 24 is used by our Lord to 
 enforce the sanctity of marriage (Matt: xix. 5), and by St. Paul, 
 in Eph. v. 31, as la reason for conjugal affection 'arid a symbol 
 of the relation of Christ and the Church, and, in i Cor.vi. 16, 
 to Show the heiriousness of 'fornication, Chapter xv. 6, 
 
64 BIBLICAL : INTRODUCTION 
 
 Abraham's faith is used in Rom. iv. 3, Gal. iii. 6, Jas. 11. .23. 
 There- are other quotations and numerous references to the 
 history, especially to show that the promises made to the 
 patriarchs are fulfilled in Christ, and that the freedom of 
 God's election is illustrated by the choice of Jacob rathqr 
 than Esau. 
 
 24. Exodus. 
 
 (a) Title. — In the Hebrew Bible, Wielleh Shemoth, hora. 
 the opening words ; LXX., Vulg., and other versions, Exodus, 
 as narrating the departure of the Israelites from Egypt. 
 
 (b) Archceology. — No reference has yet been found to the 
 Exgdus in the monuments. From considerations as to where 
 it would best fit in to what we know of Egyptian history, the 
 Exodus has been placed in various periods, and numerous 
 Egyptian kings have figured at different times as the Pharaohs 
 of the Oppression or the Exodus. Attempts are also made 
 to combine the Biblical chronology, which, however, affords 
 no clear or certain data, with that of Egypt, which is also 
 only approximately known. The results are naturally unsatis- 
 factory. Popular handbooks often refer to Rameses II., 
 c. 1300, as the Pharaoh of the Oppression, and his son 
 and successor, Merenptah II., as the Pharaoh of the 
 Exodus.^ But this is only one of many possible theories, 
 and the discovery of an inscription of Merenptah's, in 
 which he claims to have subdued Israelites in Syria, renders 
 it less probable than some others. 
 
 (c) Contents. 
 
 , i.,JEj (?;««// r-7 = P, Oppression in Egypt. 
 
 ii. 1-22, JE, Youth of Moses. 
 
 ii. 23-vi. 27, JE; except ii. 23^, vi. 2-27 = ?, Call of 
 Moses, Mission of Moses and Aaron to the Israelites and 
 Pharaoh, Genealogy of Moses and Aaron. 
 
 vi. 28-xi. (xii. 29 f., JE), JE; except vi. 28^, vii. 1-13, 19- 
 22,* via. 1-3, 12-15, «'^- 8-12, xi. 9/ = P, Ten Plagues. \ 
 
 1 So Savce, Higher Criticism, pp. 237 ff., mainly because Rameses II. 
 is known from Egyptian inscriptions to haye built Pitbpm. (Exodus i. 11, ) 
 
EXODUS i i 65 
 
 301. i-xiii. 16, Pj excepi xit. 29-39, 42 — JE; xii\ 21-27, 
 xiit. 3-16 = R°, Institution of Passover. 
 
 xiii. 17-XV. 21, JE; excepi xiii. 20, xiv. 1-4, 8^, 15-18; 
 2ijf:, * 26-29* = P, Red Sea. 
 
 XV. 1-19, Moses' Song of Triumph; a lyric inserted by E 
 or R-"^. It is later than the Conquest, 1 7, but may rest on a 
 more ancient, possibly even Mosaic basis. 
 
 XV. 20-xvii., JEj except leui. 1-3, 6-24,* 31-36, xvii. i* = 
 P, Marah, Manna, Quails, Water from the Rock at Massah- 
 Meribah, Amalek. 
 
 For the Quails, here P, cf. the fuller story in Numbers xi., J ; for the 
 Water from the Rock, here JE, cf. Numbers xx. 1-13, P. 
 
 xviii., E, traces of J or R^^ in if., gff., Jethro. 
 
 xix. i-xx. 21, JE; except i, 2a = F, and traces, 6, etc., of BP 
 or R^ in xx. 2-17, The Ten Commandments given from 
 Sinai. 
 
 The Decalogue, xx. 2-1 7; is generally held to have been incorporated in 
 E ; but' the substance is older than E, and may have been taken from the 
 tables of stone in' the" Ark. Addis dates the Decalogue in the eighth or 
 seventh , century. , Cf. Deuteronomy v. 6-21. , 
 
 From xix. i onwards, the scene of the rest of Exodus, the whole of 
 Leviticus, and Numbers i. l-x. 10 is SINAI. 
 
 XX. 22-xxiii. 19, The Book of the Covenant. 
 
 The Book of the Covenant, cf. §§4-16, is generally held to have been 
 infcorporated in E,. or ipos^ibly by RJ^ in JE ; it was edited in various ways 
 before and at the time of its incorporation. It is an ancient code of social 
 law and ritual, probably not older than the monarchy, but at least as old 
 as the earliest editions of J and E. Many of the laws it contains may be 
 much older still.: ; 
 
 xxiii. 20-33,' E ; fi«^(!^/22^-2Sa, 3^^-33 {against intercourse 
 with the Canaanites) = R°, Promises of Blessing if the Law is 
 observed. 
 
 xxiv. if., Qff., J (or E'), Moses, Aaron, Nadab, Abihu, etc., 
 see Jehovah. : , : ;. 
 
 xxiv. 3-8, RJ^ (or E or E"), Covenant, with sacrifice, to 
 observe the Book of the Covenant. ■ . 
 
 xxiv. i2fF. (i8a/3b, xxxi. i8b), E (or E' or E°), Moses in the 
 Mountain forty days. 
 
66 BIBLICAL INTRODUCTION 
 
 xxiv. 15-xxxi., V ; .except xxiv. i&a ^b, xxxi. ,i8^= E, Moses 
 in the Mountain, receives instructions for the Tabernacle and 
 its appurtenances, and for the vestments and consecration of 
 the priests, Aaron and his sons. 
 
 xxxii.-xxxiii., JE, Golden Calf. 
 
 xxxiv. ,1-28, J, with editorial additions, a code parallel to 
 E's Decalogue and Book of the Covenant. 
 
 Written, according to the narrative — here, probably, RJ^ — on tht 
 tables of stone, which replaced those broken by Moses. The writing, 
 however, is quite different from that on the first tables. 
 
 xxxiv. 29-xl., P, Moses descends from the Mountain, and 
 carries out the. instructions given in xxv.-xxxi. 
 
 The narrative here is mostly obtained from the instructions by altering 
 the tenses. The LXX. text differs widely from the Hebrew, especially jn 
 the order, cf. Driver, 37 f. 
 
 (d) Use in N.T. — There are numerous references to the 
 history, especially in the historical retrospects in Acts and 
 Hebrews J and to the Laws, especially the Decalogue. St. 
 Paul uses, as illustrations of God's free election, the reference 
 to Pharaoh in ix. 16, and xxxiii. 19, ^ Romans ix. 15, 17. 
 
 25. Leviticus. 
 
 The scene of the whole book is SINAI. 
 
 (a) 7iV/«. -^Hebrew, WayyiqrS, froin the opening wordj 
 LXX., Leuitikon; Vulg., and other versions, Leviticus, as 
 containing the Levitical laws. 
 
 (b) Analysis.— I'nQ whole book is Priestly Code, in- 
 corporating the Law of Holiness, in xvii.-xxvi., etc. , 
 
 (c) Contents. — i-x.. The Sacrifices. 
 
 xi., Clean and Unclean Animals (? H). 
 
 Cf. Deuteronomy xiv. 3-20. , ; 
 
 xii., Purification after Childbirth, 
 xiii. f., Leprosy. ,, 
 
 XV., Sexual Uncleanness. 
 xvi., Day of Atonement. 
 
NUMBERS -67 
 
 Law of Holiness, xviu-xxvi. 
 
 x\^i., Lawpf Slaughter; at the Tabernacle only, 
 xviiil, Unlawful MarriageSj etc. 
 xix, f., Various Laws. 
 xxi. f., Cleanness of Priests, Sacrifices, 
 xxiii., Feasts. 
 xjdv., Various Laws. 
 XXV., Sabbatical Year, Jubilee. 
 
 xxvi., Exhortation to keep the preceding laws, enforced 
 by promises and threats. 
 
 xxvii., Vows and Tithes. 
 
 Verse 34 may have been added by the editor who divided the Pentateuch 
 into five books, as a suitable conclusion for Leviticus, Kuenen, p, 341, cf. 
 Numbers xxxvi, 13. 
 
 (d) Use in N.T. — There are references to some of the 
 laws; xviii. 5 is quoted Rom. x. 5, Gal. iii. 12; xix. 2, 
 "Be ye holy, because I am holy," etc., i Pet. i. 16; xix. i8, 
 "Thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself," Matt. xix. 19, 
 Rom. xiii. 9, etc. ; cf. xxvi. 12, 2 Cor. vi. 16. 
 
 26. Numliers. 
 
 (a) Title. — In Hebrew, according to Jerome Wayyeddbber, 
 the opening word, but in the MSS. and printed editions 
 BeMidbar = " in the wilderness of," a word in the first 
 verse, which would serve to describe the position of the 
 Israelites during the events narrated in the book; LXX., 
 Arithmoi, Vulg. Numeri, English versions. Numbers, because 
 the book contains the enumerations of the Israelites. 
 
 , (b) Contents. — i. i-x. 10, P, At Sinai, First Census of the 
 Israelites who left Egypt, Duties of the Levites, Laws of the 
 Nazarites, etc.) Oiferings for. the Tabernacle, Laws as to the 
 Levites, the. Passover, Second Passover, Silver Trumpets, etc. . 
 
 X. 11-28, P, Departure from Sinai, Order of, March. 
 , X. 29-xii., JE, Hobab asked to. remain with Israel, 
 Departure from Sinai, Quails, Seventy Elders who prophesy, 
 Miriam and Aaron muririur against Moses, Miriam's Leprosy. 
 
68 BIBLICAL INTRODUCTION 
 
 In xi. two entirely independent stories, that of the Quails and that 
 of the Seventy Elders, are curiously combined. Apart from editorial 
 additions, the story of the Quails belongs to J, that of the Elders 
 to E or possibly to RJ^. There is a brief reference to the Quails in 
 P, Exodus xvi. 13, before the arrival at Sinai. 
 
 xiii. f., P; except xiii. 17^-20. 22/:, 27-31, 32,* 33, xiv. 
 1-4,* 8/, 11-25, 39-45 =/£, Spies, Evil Report of all but 
 Caleb and Joshua, Discouragement of the People, All but 
 Caleb and Joshua to die durijig forty years; wandering in 
 the Wilderness, The People seek to enter Canaan, but are de- 
 feated at Hormah. 
 
 XV., P, Various Laws, Stoning of the Sabbath Breaker. 
 
 xvi. la, 2-1 1, 16-24, 35-50,^ xvii. = P, Korah and the 
 Levites attempt to exercise priestly functions, and are con- 
 sumed by fire from Jehovah, Plague, Aaron's rod buds 
 as a token of the exclusive right of the ZewVw to the 
 Priesthood. 
 
 An earlier Priestly Narrative, in which Korah's fate enforced the 
 rights of the whole tribe of Levi as against the other tribes, xvi. 3, 
 xvii., has been modified to enforce the claims of the house of Zadok 
 or Aaron, as in Ezekiel and P, against the I^evites, xvi. 8-10. ' 
 
 xvi. lb, 12-15, 23-34 = JE, The Reubenites, Dathan and 
 
 Abiram, rebel against Moses j the earth opens and swallows 
 
 them up with their fa,milies. 
 
 The authors of Deuteronomy xi. 6 and Psalm cvi 17 were acquainted 
 with a story concerning Dathan and Abiram, biit not Korah or On. 
 In xxvii. 3, P, Korah is mentioned, without any reference to Dathan, 
 etc. The name of On, who is only mentioned in xvi. i, should probably 
 be omitted as due to a corruption of the text through the accidental 
 repetition of some of the consonants. Korah has been introduced into 
 verses 24, 27, and 32 by the editor who combined JED and P in xvi, 
 
 xviii. f., P, Tithes and other Dues of the Priests and 
 Levites, The Water of Separation for purifying anyone' Who 
 has touched a corpse. " ' ' 
 
 XX. f., JE; except XX. 1-13,* 22-29, *'*^" ioy- = P» Death 
 of Miriam, Water from the Rock at Meribah, Death of 
 Aaron, Israel defeats Arad and the Canaanites at Hormah, 
 Brazen Serpent, List of -Halting Places, Overthrow of Sihon 
 and Og. 
 
 ' E.V. xvi. 36-50, xvii. i-i3=Heb. xviL 1-28, 
 
NUMBERS 
 
 .69 
 
 For the Water from the Rock at Meiibah, here P, cf. the parallel 
 Danative in JE, Exodus xvii, 1-7, at Hassah-Meribab, before the arrival 
 at Sinai. 
 
 The incident at Honnah, xxi. 1-3, is probably J», cf. the parallel 
 in Judges i, I7=J'; also xiv.. 45, probably E, and r)euteronomy i. 44, 
 probably based on E. The List of Halt&ig Places, xxi. 12-20, is an 
 older document incorporated ,by E or R-"^. All the poems in xxi. 
 may be. from the, "Book of the Wars of Jehovah" mentioned; in 
 verse 14, which may also be the source of other poems in the historical 
 biooksj nothing more is known of this; work. : According to Addis and 
 others, the poem in xxi, 27 ff. is a composition of the ninth century 
 in which the Israelites celebrated their conquests in Moab. Heshbon, 
 the city of Sihon, is here (verse 30) amongst the Moabite cities which had 
 l^een sacked. If so, Sihon is \is!c^^ Moabite king, and "to Sihon, king 
 9/ the Amorites," in verse 29, is an editorial .addition. The Conquest of 
 Ofe in'33 ff. was not originally part of the same stOry as the Conquest 
 of Sihon, but was added by RJ^ or R°- n; :■'! ; . 
 
 xxii. ff., JE,* Balak and Balaam. 
 
 The following more detailed analysis is somewhat uncertain, especially 
 as to the passages assigned to J ; — 
 
 
 xxii! 
 
 xxiii. 
 
 xxiv. 
 
 p 
 
 I 
 
 
 
 -, J;.; 
 
 22-2S . 
 
 
 1-19 
 
 E 
 
 8-21*35-41* 
 
 1-26 
 
 
 -•:je . 
 
 2-7 ... '„;' 
 
 27-30 
 
 as 
 
 ' R 
 
 ':..- . 
 
 
 20-24 
 
 In xxiy. 20-24 "Assyria " is sometimes taken literally, anS R will 
 be RJ^; br "Assyria" may be the Seleucid kingdom of Syria, in whiiji 
 case the addition , must have Iseen made in the Greek period. Apart 
 frojnj this and other editorial additions, the oracles uttered by Balaam 
 belong to the early monarchy, perhaps to the period of David and 
 Solomon. Their unqualified exultation in the strength and glory of 
 Israel reflects a period of great national prosperity, and xxiv. 17 f. 
 may refer lo the Conquest of Edom and Moab by David._ The silence 
 as to Judah suggests composition in Northern Israel. Some critics, e.^., Von 
 Gall (quoted Gray, Num., p. 314), regard all the poems as post-exilic. 
 
 XXV. 1-5, JEj the Moabites corrupt Israel. 
 
70 BIBLICAL INTRODUCTION 
 
 XXV. 6-18, P, Phihehas slays an Israelite chief, and a noble 
 Midianite woman whom he had taken into his tent. 
 
 Cf. Ezra's attack upon marriage with foreigners. 
 
 xxvi.-xxxi., P, Second Census— of the children of those who 
 left Egypt, the latter having all perished except Joshua and 
 Caleb,! Law of Inheritance of Females, Joshua Mgses' suc- 
 cessor, Laws of Sacrifices at the Feasts, i etc., and of Vows, 
 Defeat and Exterminatiori of the Midianites, Division of the 
 Spoil between Israel and the Tabernacle. 
 
 xxxii., 1-38, Constructed by a priestly writer on the basis of a 
 JE narrative. The allotment of Eastern Palestine to Gad 
 and Reuben. '' ' 1 , . ■ - 
 
 Half Manasseh in 33 is an editorial addition, as in Joshua xxii.,; which 
 is, .a. very similar document, possibly by the same hand. In Numbers, 
 htiwever, the order is Gadites and Reubenites ; ' in Joshua, Reuberiites 
 and Gadites. 
 
 xxxii. 39-42, 1; except i,o=='5J^, The Conquest of Gilead by 
 the Manassites, Machir, Jair, and Nobah. 
 
 In 1-38, Moses gave Gilead to Gad and Reuben ; here he gives it to 
 Machir the Manassite. The verses were probably originally connected 
 with Judges i. 
 
 xxxiii. i-49, Compiled from the combined PJED, List' of 
 the Halting Places during the Wandering. , ^ , 
 
 If, as seems to be the case, verse 2 states that this list was written by 
 Moses, it is probably an independent summary of the history of, the 
 Wandering, and came into the hands of a late editor, who gave it this 
 heading and added it to the Pentateuch. Verse 2, however, may mean 
 that the list was based on some document or documents attributed; to 
 Moses, possibly PJED, or JED. 
 
 xxxiii. 5o-}pcxvi.., P, Jehovah instructs Moses concerning f;he 
 Borders of the Promised Land, the Princes who, are to divide 
 it amongst the People, the Levitical Cities, th6 Cities of 
 Refuge,, arid the Law of Murder. Moses lays down a law 
 as to the Marriage of Female Heirs. 
 
 Kuenen, p. 341, Addis, etc., regard xxxvi. 13, as .added.by the editor 
 who divided the Pentatench into five books, as a suitable conclusion for 
 
 * Moses is overlooked. 
 
 * Except in I, possibly filtered by an editor. 
 
DEUTERONOMY 71 
 
 Numbersi Since, however, it is immediately contradicted by Deuteronomy 
 i. I, wliich. that editor must have had under consideration, there is less 
 difficulty in supposing that it is P's conclusion of his legislation, imitated 
 by the editor who added Leviticus xxvii. 34. 
 
 (c) Use in N. T. — In addition to references to the history, 
 2 Timothy ii. ig is perhaps suggested by the LXX. of xvi. 5, 
 " God knows them that are His," i.e., the faithful, in contrast 
 to Korah and his company. 
 
 27. Deuteronomy, cf, §§ 1-18, especially §§ 17 f. 
 
 (a) T'zV/^.-T-Hebrew, ^Ellek had-Debharim, the opening 
 words ; also spoken of as Mishneh, because regarded as a 
 recapitulation of the laws in the previous books; similarly, 
 LXX., Deutermomion, the Second Law; hence Vulg. Deut- 
 eronomium ; and E.V. Deuteronomy. 
 
 (b) Analysis. — Chapters i-xxx, consist of the various strata 
 of.D, incorporating material borrowed by the Peuteronomic 
 writers from J and E or JE; with slight additions by the 
 priestly writers; The analysis of xxxi.-xxxiy. will be given 
 under the various sections. 
 
 (c) Contents, — i. i-iv. 40, First introductory Historical 
 Retrospect and Exhortation. 
 
 Based on E or JE, by a different hand from xii.-xxvi., and added to 
 Josiah's law-book after its publication, but before it was combined with 
 JE. The archseoldgical details as to the original inhabitants of Canaan, 
 ii. 10 ff., io-23, are obvious additions, probably itiarginal notes by a 
 reader, which have slipped into the text. The exhortation, iv. 9-40, is 
 sometimes (Cornill, Addis, etc.) ascribed to a different author to the rest 
 of this introduction. 
 
 iv. 41 flf.. Cities of Refuge, E of Jordan. An isolated fragment, quite 
 unconnected with its context. It is a correction of xix. 9, which directs 
 the establishment of three cities at once, three more will be appointed if 
 the territory of Israel is increased. Who composed these verses, and why 
 they were placed here, is a mystery. They may be by a Deuteronomic 
 writer to supplement xix. 9, or by a priestly writer to conform to P's pro- 
 vision of six cities of refuge. 
 
 iv. 44-49, Introductory Statement of the occasion on which 
 
 the Deuteronomic Laws were promulgated. 
 
 Probabty the original heading of Josiah's law-book, although either 44 
 or the whole paragraph is held by some to be a later addition. _ The para- 
 graph may have been the introduction to an edition containing iv. 44- 
 
72 BIBLICAL INTRODUCTION 
 
 v.-xi:, Hortatory Introduction to the Deuteronomic Code, 
 including a Second Edition of the necalogue, Exhortations 
 to obey the Law, to avoid idolatry, and to have no dealings 
 with the idolatrous Canaanites. These exhortations are en- 
 forced by appeals to their experience of the rewards; of 
 obedience, and the punishment of rebellion during the 
 Wanderings. . 
 
 In v.-xxvi., the mode of address varies, sometimes the second person 
 singular, " thou shall," is used ; sometimes the plural, "ye shall-' ; sp.me- 
 times the third person singular, "a man shall." Attempts have been 
 made ^ to use these as criteria of different sources. 
 
 Chapters v.-xi. may either be part of the original law-book; so Addis, 
 ii. i'i, Driver, p. 87, Konig, p. zio, Marti (Kautzsch, Bide/), Kyle (Hast- 
 ings' JSiiie Dictionary), Steuemagel; or composed .later than xii.-xxyi., 
 but by the same author, Kuenen, p. 212 ; op they may be a later addition 
 by a different author, Cornill, Holzinger, p. 275, Wellhausen, History, 
 
 P- 369. 
 
 D borrowed the Decalogue, v. 6-21, either from JE or E, or, like E, 
 may have known it as an . independent document ; he edited, it in Ms 
 characteristic style and spirit, cf. Exodus xx. The historical references in 
 v.-xi. are to JE or to the separate E. ' ; 
 
 Chapter x.l-9 (ib), (The writing of the second set pf tables of stoncj 
 the command to make the Ark, the setting apart of the tribe of Levi), in- 
 terrupt the obvious connection between ix. 29, and x. 16' or 11, and are 
 probably a later addition. Versesi 6 f. have no coimection witlj i-S, 8, 9, 
 and are utterly "out of place. They are often regarded as a piece of jet- 
 sam and flotsam from E, which, by some'strange misadventure, has drifted 
 on to an alien shore, cf. E's list of halting places in Numbers xxi If so, 
 the reference to Elea^ar is an addition of a priestly editor, for, vrith the 
 very doubtftil: exceptions of this passage, and Joshua xxiv. 33,' neither J 
 nor E refer to Eleazar or Phinehas. : , 
 
 Chapter xi. 29 f. are also an addition by the Deuteronomic author of 
 Joshua viii. 30-35. 
 
 Xll.-XXVr., The Deuteronomic Code* (containing the 
 laws on which JosiaWs reforms, 621, were based). 
 
 ^ Especially by Stark and Steuemagel, as criteria of authorship, 
 by which v.-xxvi. may be resolved into earlier sources. The differ- 
 ences may very well indicate the presence of ea:rlier material and later 
 additions, but scarcely enable us to determine the literary history of these 
 chapters. 
 
 "^ Verse 10 is clearly written with reference to ix. 29, but it may be the 
 work of an editor who tried to, mend the confasiou caused by the intro- 
 duction of X. 1-9. 
 
 ' y.o., also probably by a priestly editor. 
 
 ' For Contents see next page. 
 
DEUTERONOMY = i 73 
 
 ' These chapters, like v.-xi.,' have been analysed into, earlier sources, 
 whose distinctive marks are the singular and plural foraig of address ■; but 
 this i^naiysis has met with little acceptance. The Code is an amended 
 and expandeci edition of the JE laws,' the Book ' of the Covenant and 
 the Decalogue, etc.;^ some, laws it repeats^ either verbatijn ,or with 
 explanations and slight modifications, «.^. , the Decalogue; some it 
 omits, e.g.. Exodus xxi. i8-xxiL 15, the compensation' to be given for 
 injuries ; ^and! some it; expands, or, corrects, e.g., the single verse, 
 Exodus xxii. 20, prohibiting the worship of strange gods, is expanded 
 into a long paragraph, Deuteronomy xvii. 2-7, Specifying the sun, nioon, 
 and stars as " other gods," and appointing the procedure to be observed in 
 dealing with their worshippers. Again, the law limiting sacrifice, Deuter- 
 onomy xii. is a correction of Exodus xx. 24., which permits sacrifice 
 at many sanctuaries. Also, the Code introduces many new laws, e.g., those 
 limiting the priesthood to the tribe of Levi. For various, other details see 
 under the separate sections. 
 
 xii. i-xiv. 21,, The, worship of Other Gods and the use 
 of Foreign Superstitious Customs to be avoided by confining 
 sacrifice to One Sanctuary, Animals may be slaughtered any- 
 where, Practices, etc. which are to be avoided, Punishment 
 of those who observe or encourage such practices, List of 
 Animals which may and may not be eaten. 
 
 This latter list, xiv, 3-21, agrees almost exactly with Leviticus xi. 2-23, 
 which is probably H. Apparently the list was older than both D and H, 
 and was used by both. The list is sometimes regarded as a later addition 
 tp.p', .i _ 1, 1^ , . ,, ^ , . , 
 
 xiv, 22-xv., Tithes and Year of Release,.-: ' . 
 
 xvi. i-i 7, Yearly Feasts. :;t. :-,. 
 
 xvi. i8-xvii. 13, La.w Courts. , 
 
 The sections prohibiting the use of Asheras and Majjebas, the offering 
 of Unsuitable isacrifices, xvi. 22-xvii, I, have no connection with the con- 
 text, and must be misplaced. , , , 
 
 ?cvii. 14-19, .Law for the King. 
 
 xviii. 1-8, Provision for the Levites. 1 ■- - 
 
 xviii. 9-22, Prophets, How to distinguish the True from the 
 False. 
 
 xix. i-xxiii. i, Laws concerning Murder, Cities of Refuge, 
 Landmarks, Perjury, War, Authority of Parents, etc.. Benevo- 
 lence to Fellow-countrymen, Judicial procedure as to charges 
 of Unchastity, etc. ; , : . 
 
 ' See above on v.-xi. ' See Table in Driver, p. 68. 
 
74 BIBLICAL INTRODUCTION 
 
 xxiii. .2-xxv., Laws as to the: exclusion of members of 
 neighbouring tribes from the Assembly, Runaway slaves not 
 to be sent back, Interest, Vows, Divorce, Provision for the 
 Po6r, Punishments, Marriage with Deceased Brother's Wifej 
 etc.. Curse on Amalek. 
 
 xxvi., Firstfruits, Tithe in Third Year, Closing Exhortation. 
 
 . Although the main section of D' closes here, probably xjcriii. also 
 belongs to that document. 
 
 xxvii., The Law, i.e., D', to be written on stones, and set up 
 on Mount Ebal; also an altar to be set up on Mount Ebal, 
 and curses to be proclaimed. 
 
 This chapter, which breaks the connection between xxvi. and xxviii., is 
 a series of later additions. Verses 9 f. may be the connecting link between 
 xxvi. and xxviii., ue., D', if xxviii. is D', if not by the'Deuteronomic 
 editor who added xxviii. Verses 1-8, 11-13 are closely connected with 
 xi. 29 f. and Joshua viii. 30-35, and are by the same hand or hands. 
 Verses 6 f. which order the erection of an altar cannot have been 
 originally written by a Deuteronomist, because they, at any rate, seem 
 to contradict the Law of the One Sanctuary. As Shechem lay between 
 Ebal and Gerizim, they may be a fragment ' of E, to which I-5, 8 
 have been added as a kind of correction. Verses 14-26, of which 
 Joshua viii. 30-35 take no notice, and wliich are not Deuteronomic in 
 style, must be a very late addition. 
 
 xxviii., D', The Rewards of Obedience, and the Punisfe- 
 ment of Disobedience. 
 
 Ascribed to D' by Addis, Driver, p. 67, Kuenen, p. 124, Marti, Ryle, 
 etc.; to a later Deuteronomic writer by Cornill, p. 21 f., Wellhausen, 
 p. 369, etc. If D', there are later additions. 
 
 xxix. f., An Exhortation to Obedience, enforced by Promises 
 and Threats. 
 
 A later Deuteronomic addition, differing somewhat in style from I) 'j 
 also XXX. i-io presupposes the Exile. 
 
 xxxL, Parting Words of Moses to Israel, Joshua, and the 
 Levites. Moses finishes, 9, 24 f, writing "the words of this 
 law," i.e., D, "in a book," and bids the Levites put the book 
 by the side of the Ark. 
 
 A series of later additions. Verses 1-8 connect closely with i.-iv. 
 and with the Deuteronomic verses in Joshua i., ahd are probably by 
 the same hand. If i.-iv. is accepted as D ', these verses will be D '. 
 Verses g-13, the direction to read the Law, at the Feast of Tabernacles, 
 
>< DEUTERONOMY 75 
 
 in the Year of Release; may beD '. The references to Joshua, 14 f., 23, 
 are probably E, edited by a Deuteronomie writer. In (a) 16-22 (?JE, 
 so, Addis, Kuenen, p. 256) (b) 24-30 we have two separate introductions 
 to the-.So«^ of Moses. In 24 ff. Steuernagel proposes to read "Song," 
 shSrdiot"'L3.yi," tSrd. 
 
 xxxii. 1-43, Song of Moses, setting forth Jehovah's love to 
 
 His people, their apostasy from their Rock; Jehovah, to other 
 
 gods, their punishment and ultimate restoration. 
 
 An independent poem. Nothing in the poem itself stiggeststhat it 
 was composed by Moses; It looks back to a period of great national 
 prosperity, accompanied by an outburst of the worship of other gods. 
 Israel is oppressed by a nation, which is soon to be punished for its 
 harshness ^o, God's people. There are points of contact with Jererniah, 
 Ezeidel, and' II. Isaiah ^ which suggesta date either just before or at the 
 beginning of the Exile; so Addis, Driver, p. 89, Konig, p. ^24, all 
 three with some hesitation, Kue;ien, p. 256, etc. ; or even at, the end 
 of the Exile or later ; so Cornill, Steuernagel, etc. If, however, Addis 
 and ' Kuenen are right in ascribing xxxi. 14-22 to JE, and therefore 
 regarding the Song as part , of JE, we must either date JE in the 
 Exile, or, more probably, place the Song before 650, regard the 
 oppressor as the Assyrian, and suppose that the parallels to Jeremiah, 
 Ezekiel, and II. Isaiah are partly accidental, partly later- additions, 
 i)illmann, p. 394, considers that the Song was coniposed c. 800, and 
 included in J. It is more likely that it was included in" JED by its 
 compiler or a later editor. , , 
 
 Xxxii. 4:4, Subscription to' the Sonjg. 
 
 xxxii. 45-47, Closing Exhortation. ' ^ ■ .! ' 
 
 Deuteronomie, D ' or later. = . . s • 
 
 ■ xxxii; 48-52, P, Command to MoseS to ascend Mount 
 Nebo, to die. ' 1 
 
 xxxiii., Blessing of Moses, A series of oracles on the 
 
 tribes, like the Blessing of Jacob. 
 
 There is nothing in the poem to suggest Mosaic authorship. Verses 
 4 f., " Moses commanded us a laW," etc., and the "he said"s which 
 introduce each oracle in 7-25, indicate that it was written on the. basis 
 of ancient oracles ascribed to looses.. Simeon has disappesured, Reuben 
 is at its last gasp, Judah is in distress, and the Blessing prays that he may 
 he reunited to his people ; but Levi flourishes as a priestly tribe,' Beiyamin 
 dwells in safety, Joseph epjoys an exuberant prosperity, Gad is powerful 
 and warhke, and the other northern tribes are flourishing. ■ Possibly 
 some J of the' oracles retain features which were no longer found in the 
 position 1 of the, tribes where ; the Blessing was compiled, and the orficle 
 on Levi may be a later addition. But the general character of the 
 poem shows that' it was written by a native of the northern kingdom, 
 
 1 Cf. 39, Isa. xli. 4, xlviii. 12, xlv. 5 ; jj, Jer. v. 28 j 41, Ezek. 
 zzi. gi. 
 
76 BIBLICAL INTRODUCTION 
 
 when that state was at the height of its power and prosperity, and 
 when the northern kingdom was regarded 'as the true Israel, from wnicn 
 Judah had no right to hold aloof. A curious feature is the apparent 
 grouping of Benjamin with the northern tribes. The conditions, are 
 held to point either to the time of Jeroboam I., so DiUmann, .p. 415, 
 Driver, Deuteronomy i.l. ; or to that of Jeroboam II., so Add^,.C^ormll, 
 Kuenen, Steuernagel. It has also been dated in the period of the Judges, 
 Koriig, p. 202, but this is improbable. _ _ .,; , 
 
 Its northern origin suggests a connection with E, so Corjiill and 
 DiUmann. There is little to show in which document or edition of 
 the Pentateuch it was first included, but the absence of Deuteronomio 
 or priestly glosses points to its haying belonged to jE or E. 
 
 Steuernagel regards 2-5, 26-29 as a post-exilic psalm, ^nd ga, 10 as an 
 addition, earlier than P. 
 
 xxxiv., P. j except ib-'], 10 = JED, 11 I = R°j Death and 
 Burial of Moses. 
 
 {ij Use in N.T. — Deuteronomy is used in several import- 
 ant passages, especially in our Lord's utterances, and in 
 Romans and Hebrews. Owing to its didactic form, it lent 
 itself to i quotation; and in.it, as in II. Isaiah, O.T. Revelation 
 prepares the way for, and, in a measure, anticipates the gospeK 
 The three O.T. quotations used by Christ at the; temptation 
 are Deuteronomy vi. 13, 16, viii. 3. The "fifst of all the 
 commandments. . . . Hear, Israel, the Lord our God- is 
 one Lord, and thou shalt love thp Lord thy God, etc.," 
 Mark xii. 29 f., etc., the opening clause of the Shema at 
 Jeireish Confession of Faith, is froin Deuteronomy vii 4, 5. 
 On the other hand, the Law of Divorce, of which Jesus said, 
 " For the hardness of your heart he wrote you this precept," 
 Mark x. 5, etc., is from Deuteronomy xxiv. i. The promise 
 of xviii. 18, that God would raise up prophets for His people, 
 is specially apphed to Christ in Acts iii. 22, vii. 37. In 
 Romans X. 6-9, what is said in praise of the Law in Deu^ 
 teronomy XXX. 12 ff., is applied to Christ; cf. also Romans x. 
 19, xi. II, xii. 19, XV. 10, with Deuteronomy xxxii. 21, 35, 43. 
 Hebrews i. 6, "Let all the angels of God worship him," is 
 from the LXX. of Deuteronomy xxxii. 43, and the description 
 of the scene at Sinai, in .Hebrews xii. 18 if., is from Deuter- 
 onomy iv. II f., V. 23-26. Cf. Deuteronomy xjcv. 4, "Thou 
 shalt muzzle the ox, etc.," with i Corinthians ix. 9, i Timothy 
 V. 18. 
 
JOSHUA -jj 
 
 28. Joshua. 
 
 (a) Title. — The book is named after the main character in 
 the narrative, not after the author. 
 
 (b) Arclimology?- — The Exodus itself cannot be brought 
 directly into relation with what is known from the inscriptions 
 of the history of Egypt and Palestine; but the narratives of 
 the Conquest may be in some measure related to extra- 
 Biblical information. Our data are fairly numerous. It is 
 true that, individually, many of them are uncertain, especially 
 as to the reading and meaning of names j and may be irre- 
 levant ; and that they are often very difficult to reconcile 
 either with each other, or with even the oldest Biblical narra- 
 tive. Yet taken together they, at any rate, help to limit the 
 number of. possible theories. 
 
 There are (i.) a number of apparent references to the 
 presence of Israelites in Palestine extending from about B.C. 
 1500 to about B.C. 1200. If these are to be trusted, they 
 seem to indicate either that the Exodus took place very early 
 before 1500; or that it took place after 1200, and that in 
 Genesis the narratives of the Patriarchs refer either to chiefs 
 of tribes, or to tribes themselves; or that only a portion, of 
 the Israelites went down to Egypt, while the rest remained in 
 Canaan. The references are as follows : — 
 
 At Karnak, in a list of Caiiaanite towns conquered by 
 Thothmes III.,^ we find the names ol Jacob-el and Joseph-el, 
 apparently implying a long prior occupation of the district by 
 the tribes pf Jacob and Joseph. 
 
 Erom the archives of Amenophis IV., the Tel-el-Amarna 
 tablets, we learn that in his reign, ^ Southern Palestine (and 
 perhaps also Northern*) was being invaded by the Hdbiri. 
 A theory has been advanced, and has met with some support, 
 
 * <5C § 24 (b). For some of the following references I am indebted to 
 an unpublished paper by Dr. Skinner, Presbyterian Coll., Camb, 
 ' 1481-1449, Petrib, Egypt, iL 29. 
 ? Petrie, Egypt, ii. 205, B.C. 1383-1365. 
 * WiNCKLBR, p. 143, the rendering is uncertain at present. 
 
78 BIBLICAL INTRODUCTION 
 
 that these are the Hebrews. ^ The term " Hebrew," however, 
 might include Moab, Ammon, and Edom. 
 
 In the inscriptions of Seti I. and Rameses 11.,^ a name 
 which is read as Asher occurs as the name of a district,, in 
 about the region assigned by the Book of Joshua to the tribe 
 of Asher.* 
 
 In an inscription of Merenptah II.,* he claims to have sub- 
 dued Israelites in Palestine. ' 
 
 But (ii.) another line of argument also points to a late date 
 for^the Conquest. In all the narratives, the deliverance at the 
 Red Sea is regarded as the end of all difficulties with Egypt. 
 None of the accounts of the whole period, including the 
 Wandering, the Conquest, the Judges, Saul and David, hint 
 at the presence of Egyptian armies or officials in the Sinaitic 
 Peninsula, or in Palestine. Hence we ought to be able to. fix 
 the Exodus at the beginning of a period of, at the very least, 
 two hundred years, during which Egypt left Palestine entirely 
 to itself. Such a period is difficult to find. Thothmes I.^ 
 overran the hill-country of Palestine, and advanced the 
 Egyptian frontier to the Euphrates ; his successor, Thothmes 
 11.,^ claims dominion over Syria; the next king, Thothmes 
 III.,' subdued Palestine and Syria in a long series of cam- 
 paigns ; his successor,. Amenophis III., also fought in Syria; 
 The Tel-el-Amarna tablets seem to show that under the next 
 king, Amenophis IV., the Egyptian dominion in Palestine 
 was lost for a time, but it was recovered by Rameses I. and 
 Seti 1,8 and the next king, Rameses II.,' fought many cam- 
 paigns in Syria. His successor, Merenptah II., claims 
 
 1 'IbhH. 
 
 * BrU. Mus. Catalogue, 1366-1333-1300. 
 ' MttLLER, Asien und Eurojitn, p. 237. 
 
 • Petrie, Effjiyt, i. 251,' b.c. 1208, onward; Brit. Mas. Catalogue, 
 1300-1266. 
 
 " Id., ii. 64, B.c. 1541-1516; Brit. Mas. Catalogue, 1633-1600.. > 
 
 « Id., ii. 73> 1516-1503; -S"'. •^«". Catalogue, 1600. 
 
 ' Id., ii. 100, 1503-1449 ; Brit. Mus. Catalogue, about r6oo. 
 
 ' Id., i. 251, 1328-1327-1275 ; Brit. Mus. Catalogue, 1400-1 366-1333. 
 
 » Id., i, 251, 1275-1208; Brit, Mus. Catalogue, 1333-1300. 
 
JOSHUA 79 
 
 • 
 successes in Syria, and Rameses III.' also fought in Syria. 
 After liis death, Egypt seeijis to have lost Syria, and the 
 Egyptian annals record no invasion of Syria, until the reign of 
 Shishak I.,^ the contemporary of Jeroboam I. As the 
 Exodus can scarcely have taken place two hundred years 
 before Thothmes I., it seems necessary to place it some time 
 after the death of Rameses III. 
 
 It may also be noted that the Tel-el-Amarna tablets and 
 other inscriptions show that Palestine had existed for many 
 centuries as a collection of tribes and city states, as Joshua 
 found it at the Conquest. 
 
 (c) Analysis.— The history of the Book of Joshua is some- 
 what different from that of the rest of the Hexateuch, and 
 presents soijie problems not yet solved. The groundwork 
 is not P as in the first five books, but JED ; the combination 
 of P and JED in. the Pentateuch and in Joshua was probably 
 by different hands j R° has dealt much more freely with his 
 JE material in Joshua, than in the earlier sections. His work 
 in some parts seems to amount to a rewriting of the history 
 on the basis of JE, rather than ' a mere addition of editorial 
 matter. Hence sections which, as they stand, are W may 
 often be based upon and include JE material, which can 
 no longer be separated with any certainty. Similarly, it is 
 probable that P, in his account of the territories of the 
 tribes, makes use of older sources. The conception Of 
 the Conquest as effected by united Israel, in a single war, 
 under Joshua, which is absent ^ from J, is apparently found 
 in E, and was developed and systematised in- part perhaps 
 by RJ=, but more thoroughly by R°, Hence there is some- 
 times a difference of opiiiion as to whether a passage belongs 
 to E, R^^ or R° Probably R° comprises material from at 
 least two hands. The characteristic idea introduced by 
 R° is that Joshua and Israel carefully observed the Law 
 of Moses, i.e., D', during the Ufa of Joshua and those of 
 his contemporaries who survived him. 
 
 * Brit. Mus. Catalogue, about 1200. 
 " Brit. Mus, Catalogue, 966-933. ^ Cf. oa Judges i. 
 
80 BIBLICAL INTRODUCTION 
 
 (d) Conienfs.^L-XlL, The Conquest. 
 
 i. i-viii. 29, JE; Sxcep/ i. 3-9, 11^-18, ii. loff., in. 7, 
 10^, iv. 12, 14, 21-24, "V. I. 4/.* »«'• 25->* iS*^.* 'f?^. 18, 
 24(5, 27, OT«. i/,* 27 = R°; and Hi. 4. ^z*- lo^'.* "^3. 19.^ 
 0. 6if:, 10/, vi. 23^, wV. I, 24** = R'" or P, Directions 
 for crossing the Jordan, Spies and Rahab, Crossing of the 
 Jordan, Circumcision of the People, "The Captain of the 
 Army of Jehovah," Fall of Jericho, The unsuccessful; i attack 
 on Ai, Achan, Fall of Ai. • 
 
 Chapter v. 13-15, "The Captain of the Army of Jehovah,'' has no 
 connection with the context, and may be a fragment of an unknown source 
 used by JE, or J or E. Traces of late language, e.g. " Prince," ^ may be 
 due to editors, or the fragment may have been given its present form and 
 inserted in the Hexateuch by a late editor. 
 
 viii. 30-35, R°, Altar on Mount Ebal, Blessings and 
 
 Curses. 
 
 Cf. on Deuteronomy xi. 29 f., xxvii. 1-8, 11-13, where instructions are 
 given for the ceremony here performed. Deuteronomy xxvii. apparently 
 gives directions for two separate acts, the erection of an altar and the 
 inscription of D ' on stones ; Joshua seems to comtine the two into 
 the erection of an altar on which D ' is inscribed. Joshua viii. 30-35 
 may be by a later writer who misunderstood Deuteronomy; both may 
 be by the author of Deuteronomy xxvii., who may have intended the 
 passage as to the inscription as an interpretation of that about the 
 altar, which he took from an older source, and shaped our present 
 passage accordingly. 
 
 ix. i-x. 27, JE; except ix. if., ga, 10, 24/., zii^, x. 8,1 
 
 iqb, 25 = R°; ix. ISC, 17-21, 23^, i^afifX. 27^^* = R'"or P,- 
 
 League with the Gibeonitesi Battle of Bethhoron, Sun and 
 
 Moon stand still. 
 
 The Book of Jashar, cited in x. 12 f., is mentioned in 2.Samuel i. 18 as 
 containing David's Lamentation over Saul and Jonathan, and in, the, 
 original text ' of I Kings viii. 12 as containing the short poem uttered' 
 by Solomon. It must have been a collection of poems compiled during 
 the monarchy. "Jashar" means upright ; it may be used, like Jeshurun,^ 
 ffa'r Israel ; or it may be a collective teirm foi: heroes. In the original' 
 poem' the words about the sun and moon were figurative, like "thel 
 stars in their courses fought against Sisera" in the Song of Deborah,^ 
 Judges V. 20. ' ■ .1 
 
 X. 28-xii., R°; except xi. i, 4/, 7/* = JE, Summary of 
 
 > .S-ar,E.V. "Captain." 
 
 ' As indicated by the LXJC. (verse 53). 
 
:;' if. JOSHUA; : ^ St 
 
 Joshua's campaign in the South, Defeat of Jabin, King of 
 Hazor,' Defeat of the Anakim, Brief account of the Districts 
 Conquered, List of Conquered Kings. 
 
 In X. 28-39, 43 I^° probably bad, a JE basis. The passage is sometimes 
 described as JE, with additions by R° 
 
 , Xlll.-icXI., DivisipN OF THE, Land. . : 
 
 P 's account of the territories of the tribes has been compiled from con- 
 flicting sources, one of which may have been JE, and' haS suffered from 
 textual corruption. The lists of names are often confused and inconsistent. 
 Many of the J passages in these chapters occur in Judges i. ' - '' 
 
 xiii., F; exteJ>i'i'=]E, 13 = J, 2^12 = R°, Territories of the 
 Eastern Tribes. ' 
 
 xiv., i-s, P, Introduction to account of the Territories of 
 the Western Tribes. ■ ' 
 
 •xiv. 6-15 R°, Hebron given to Caleb. ,11 
 
 J! Sometimes ascribed to JE. The discrepancy with xi, 21 probably 
 indicates, at any rate, a JE basis. , , 
 
 , ,xv., P; excejit 14-19, 63 = J, Territory of Judah. 
 
 ., xvi. {., P ; except xvi. . iff,, 9, xvii. li, 2 *, 8,, 9* — JE ; 
 
 xvi. 10,. xvii. 1 1-18 = J, Territories qf Ephraim and Western 
 
 Manasseh. 
 
 xviii. i-io,. JE; except i=?Bj 3,* 7=?R° Introduction to 
 the account of the Territories of the Remaining Seveii 
 Tribes. , , , , , ; ,, 
 
 : xviii. 11-28, P; except iih) = JE, Territory of Benjamin. 
 
 xix.-xxi., P; except xxi. ^iff.=W; xix. 9 = JE; xix. 
 
 47 = J j ^'^- 49/ = E, Territories of Simeon, Zebulunj 
 
 Issachar, Asher, Naphtali, Dan and Joshua ; Cities of Refuge ; 
 
 Levitical Cities. , ' ' 
 
 In XX, vv. 4G. and 6b, which are omitted by the LXX., are a very 
 late addition to the text, modelled on Deuteronomic passages after the 
 manner of similar sectionsiof Chronicles, 
 
 xxii,, R""*; except 1-8 = R°, Return of Reuben, Gad and 
 
 Eastern Manasseh to the East of Jordan, Erection of an 
 
 Altar in Gilead by Reuben and Gad. 
 
 Verses 9-36, in their present form, were compiled by a late priestly 
 writer, like Ju;dges xxi,, Cf. on Numbers xxxii,, , , There was an older 
 basis, probably JE, for this section ; but the compiler has dealt with it so 
 freely that the original narrative cannot be reconstructed. " Half Man- 
 asseh " here, as in Numbers xxxii,, is an editorial addition. 
 
 C 
 
82 BIBLICAL INTRODUCTION 
 
 '• xxiii., R", Farewell Speech of JoshiJa.' ' 
 xxiv., E; except lib, 13, 31, and a few phrases = '^ 'i i6a, 
 
 33 = R'', Farewell Speech of Joshua. 
 
 Verse 33 is generally given to E, cf. on Deiiteronomy x. 6. • 
 
 (e) Wse in N.T.—Ta&io. are references to the history, 
 
 especially Rahab and the Fall of Jericho. Cf. also i. 5, with 
 
 Hebrews jdii. 5. 1 
 
 29. Judges. , I 
 
 (a) W/e.-^Kehxev! shophetim; ,ren,de?'ed by hXK. .Kritai ; 
 by Vulg. Zt'&er Judicum or Judiaim ; by EV.. Judges.. , . This 
 title was given because the narratives are chiefly conceJeed 
 with the "Judges" or rulers in Israel, before the kings. , ■:■, 
 
 (b) Analysis. — The , framework of the bogk ,is due . to 
 Deuteronomic editors, so that it once existed in a Deut- 
 eronomic edition, to which priestly writers- made further 
 additions. The Deuteronoihic work maMe use of • eariier 
 material, which is often supposed to have been a section of 
 JE, compiled from J and E.^ In order to recognise the 
 doubt which still remains as to the identification of this 
 matter with JE, it is denoted in the sketch of contents by 
 (JE). 
 
 On the understanding that the identification of the sources 
 and early edition of Judges With J, E,_and JE is probable 
 rather than certain, the history of the composition of the 
 book may be summarised as follows^ : — 
 
 During the monarchy, c. 850-700, two independent writers 
 (J) and (E), made collections of the narratives concerning the 
 Judges. Both Contained accounts of Ehud, Gideon and 
 Abimelech, Jephthah, the Migration of the Danites, and the 
 Outrage , at Gibeah. One narrative (? J) containe|d also a 
 narrative of the war with Jabin, and the story of Samson; 
 the other narrative (? E) ; contained also the stories of Der 
 borah and Barak, and of Samuel. These were combined, into 
 a pre-Deuteronomic Book of Judges (JE), about 650. (JE) 
 
 1 BUDDE, Moore. " Substantially as Badde. 
 
)) r 
 
 JUDGES^ '• ! ,83 
 
 may have included the , accounts of the ." Minor Judges," 
 Tola, Jair, Ibzan, Elon, Abdon, from (J) or (E) or else- 
 where. During the Exile (JE) was edited by a Deuteronomic^ 
 editor, R°, who added a system of chronology, and the story 
 of bthniel, and interpreted the book so as to illustrate the 
 Deuteronomic doctrine^ of the connection between national 
 righteousness and national prosperity. -He omitted J's history 
 of the Conquest, i. i-ii. sj the story pf Abimelech, ix., the 
 Death of Samson, xvi., the Migration of the Danites, and the 
 Outrage at Gib^a|i, xvii,-xxi., as unsuitable to his purpose. 
 R^'s Judges ma;^ have 'extended to i Samuel xii. ; but on the 
 other hand, both JE and JED may have been continuous 
 works fromj^ the Creation to the end of their narrative. If so, 
 we can scarcely speak of pre-Deuteronomic and D.euteronomic 
 Books of Judges, they were merely yet unseparafed portions 
 of the continuous works. [r./in ,| 
 
 (JE) continued to exist after the compilatipn.of jthe Deuter- 
 onomic Judges, and a post-exilic ^ editor, R^, restored the 
 portions omitted by R°, editing them after hi^own fashion. 
 The ground for supposing that these sections were omitted 
 by R° is that they bear no traces of Deuteronomic style, and 
 do not fit into the Deuteronomic framework.' The accounts 
 of the Mirior Judges may have been added by R'n 
 
 (c) Chronology and History. — The preponderance in the 
 dates of Judges, and of the history of Moses and Samuel of 
 the number "forty'" and its multiples and fractions^ shows 
 that the system of chronology has been constructed on the 
 basis of reckoning forty years to a generation. Probably this 
 chronology is due to the author who states that 480' years 
 elapsed between the Exodus and the building of Solomon's 
 Temple; the period was made up of twelve generations of 
 forty years each. We have thus to consider the chronology of 
 Judges in connection with that of the whole period of 480 
 years. The data may be arranged as follows : — 
 
 ' Not necessarily the same as RO in the.Hex^teuchand elsewhere. 
 ^ Not the :R', of lihe Pentateuch. ,.,, , , 
 
84 
 
 BIBLICAL INTRODUCTION 
 
 i^' Periods otiisidi the Book of Judges. 
 
 ^ ■ '■ : 
 
 Moses . 
 
 40 
 
 
 Joshua. 
 
 X 
 
 
 * * 
 
 * 
 
 
 Eli . 
 
 40 (Heb,) 20 (LXX.) 
 
 
 Samuel 
 
 y 
 
 
 Saul . 
 
 z 
 
 
 David . 
 
 40 
 
 
 Solomon ^ . 
 
 4 
 124 + x + y + z 
 
 
 or 
 
 'udges. 
 
 104 + x + y + z 
 
 (}i) The Greater J 
 
 
 Qthniel 
 
 
 . 40 
 
 Ehud 
 
 
 . 80 
 
 Barak 
 
 
 . .40 
 
 Gideon 
 
 
 .40 
 
 Jephthah 
 
 
 . . 6* 
 
 Samson' 
 
 
 . . 20 
 
 , 226« 
 
 (iii) The Peribds of Oppression. 
 
 
 Cushan-rishathaim 
 
 . 8 
 
 Eglon 
 
 • 
 
 .18 
 
 Jabin 
 
 • • 
 
 . . 26 
 
 Midianites . 
 
 • 7 
 
 Ammonites. . 
 
 . 18 
 
 
 
 71 : 
 
 The 4a years oppression of the Philistines, xiii. 1, is cleilrly synchronous 
 with the 20 years of Samson + the 20 years (LXX.) of Eli, and is there- 
 fore not to be reckoned, . ; , , 
 
 (iv) Minor Judges. 
 
 
 Tola . 
 
 .23 
 
 Jair . . 
 
 . . 22 
 
 Ibzan 
 
 . 7 
 
 Elon 
 
 . 10 
 
 Abdon 
 
 . . 8 
 
 
 70 
 
 If Abimelech's 3 years be added we get 73 years. 
 
 * Before Building of Temple, 
 a LXX., Vat., etc., 60, 
 
 * Oi without Jephthah, 22a 
 
JUDGES 85 
 
 • 
 
 The sum of i.-iv. is S34 + x + y + z if the Philistine 
 oppression and the reigns of Abimelech and Saul are; in- 
 cluded, and if forty yedrs' (Hebrew Text) are given to .Eli. 
 But the Philistine oppression should be omitted ; ''■ Abimelech 
 and Saul were probably left out , of the reckoning as illegiti- 
 mate, and the synchronism of the Philistine oppression with 
 Samuel and Eli requires us to accept the LXX. number 
 20 for Eli. Thus the whole period from the Exodus to 
 the Temple works out at 471+x + y. As x + y,, the head- 
 ships of Joshua and Samuel must have occupied much 
 more than nine years, this result is strikingly at variance 
 with the 480 years of "^Kings. The easiest solution is to allow 
 Joshua and Samuel the usual 40 years each, and to suppose 
 that R° omitted (iii.) from his reckoning on the assumption 
 that the judgeships were continuous. Thus we get 
 471 + X + y -71 =471 -^ 40 -1-40 -71 = 480, 
 and the R° chronology of Judges agrees with the R" period in 
 Kings. ' ' 
 
 Either then we may omit the Minor Jddges as outside of 
 the original scheme of chronology, and added by R^ to supply 
 Judges for the interregna of the oppressions,^ on the theory 
 that as soon as one judge died, he was always immediately 
 succeeded by another. Or we may omit the oppressions, 
 and suppose that each oppression was reckoned to the reign 
 of the following judge; On the former theory, the twelve 
 generations are Moses, Joshua, Othniel, Ehud, Barak, Gideon, 
 Jephthah, Samson, Eli, Samuel, David, Solomon. 
 
 The date of the building of the Temple is about 970, 
 .which, according to R°, gives us 1450 for the Exodus, 
 apparently much too early; c/. % 28 (b). 
 
 (d) Greek Versions.— There are two separate' versions, 
 one represented by most of the uncials, the other by various 
 cursives, etc., and by Lucian's recension. 
 
 ' See above. 
 ' The discrep 
 ' the text. 
 ' Apart from Aquila, Symmachus, and Theodotion, 
 
 ' The discrepancy of a year will be due to some error in the transmission 
 of the text. 
 
86 BIBLICAL INTRODUCTION 
 
 {e) Cdntefits.-4.. i-ii. 5, "i; except ifla 4, 8/i 18, «. 1-5 
 
 = R'', Conquest of Canaan. 
 
 ■ Not a sequel to the Book of Joshua, but a parallel accounJ, much 
 of which has already . been given in that book. Verses II-IS, 21, 
 27 f., 29, 34=Joshua xv. 14-19. 63, xvn. 11 ff., xvi. IP, xix._ 47 
 (LXX ) Either T gave no account of Joshua or of the combined 
 action of all Israel, and only narrated the conquests of single tribes 
 or of groups of tribes ; or J narrated the doings of Joshua and united 
 Israel up to the battle of Beth-horon, and then, as here, the conquests 
 of single tribes, etc. Possibly the editor who prefixed," After the death 
 of Joshua " has removed Joshua's name from the paragraph on Ephraim 
 and Manasseh. ■ . 1 j j • T-n\ 
 
 ■This is one of the sections supposed to have been included in (JE), 
 removed by R°.and replaced by R'"' 
 
 II. 6-XV. Deuteronomic Book of Judges. 
 . ii. 6-iii. 6, R° on a basis of E, with additions by R''. In- 
 troduction, explaining that the Israelites suffered defeat and 
 oppression because they worshipped " other gods," but were 
 delivered by judges because Jehovah had compassion on their 
 misery. 
 
 iii. 7-1 1, R", Othniel delivers from Cushan-rishathaim. 
 
 iii. 12-30 (JE); except i2-i5«, 3o = R°, Ehud delivers from 
 Eglon. 
 
 iii. 31, R^, Shamgar ben-Anath kills 600 Philistines. 
 
 The absence of R° formula shows that this was not in R°'s Judges. 
 Shamgar is ignored in iv. I. The name was obtained from v. 6, the Song 
 of Deborah, and was perhaps inserted to make up twelve judges, after 
 excluding Abimelech. 
 
 iv. f. (JE) ; including an ancient poem, the Song of Deborah, 
 V. 2-3ia, and additions of W, viz., iv. iff., 23/, v. ^ib; 
 and 'SJ, viz., v. i, Deborah and Barak deliver frorn Jabin and 
 Sisera. , ' 
 
 The Song is almost universally accepted as a contemporary poem,, 
 possibly by Deborah herself. The absence of any traces of Deuteronomic 
 revision, and the presence of some words and idioms apparently character- 
 istic, of post-exilic Hebrew, suggest that this poem was iiot included either 
 in (JE) or the Deuteronomic Judges, but was preserved either inde- 
 pendently or in Some collection of poems, and was inserted here by 
 R'' after a revision necessitated by the fact that many words and idioms 
 had become obsolete. Owing to the joint effect of the extreme antiquity 
 of the poem and of the attempt at revision, parts of it are unintelUgible, 
 t-g-, 14a. This Song is often considered to be the oldest extant piece of 
 tiebrew literature, e.g. , No wack. 
 
 ' R"" has, substituted Benja;mites for Judahites. 
 
, ■[' RUTH , ' 87 
 
 • 
 vi. ff. 0E)j exi:ejif vt. i-j, vh't. 2'jb, 28, 33j^ = R°, and 
 editorial additiofis by R'', Gideon delivers from the Midianites. 
 
 Two stories are combined : in one (J ?), Gideon is instructed by the 
 Angel of Jehovah, the princes of Midian are Zebah and Zalmunna, 
 and Gideon sets up an ephod-idol at Ophrah ; in the other (E ?), 
 Jehovah speaks to. him in the night, i.e., in a dream, he destroys the 
 altar of Baal and the Asherah, and the princes of Midian are Oreb 
 and Zeeb. 
 
 ix. (JE) ; omitted by R", restored by R^, Abimelech. 
 
 X. 1-5, Either (JE), omitted by R°, restored by R''; or first 
 added by R^, Two " Minor Judges," Tola .and Jair. 
 
 X. 6-xii. 7 (JE); except x. 6-16,* xii. T^R", Jephthah 
 
 delivers from the Arnmonites. , 
 
 The account of Jephthah's negotiations with the king of the Ammonites, 
 xi. iz-28, does not belong to (J) or (E), but to one of the editors, perhaps 
 
 xii. 8-15, Same source as x. 1-5, Three "Minor Judges," 
 Ibzan, Elon, and Abddn. 
 
 xiii. ff. (J); except xiii. i, ocv. 2o = R°, and editorial addi- 
 tions ol R"^, Sa,ipson and the Philistines. 
 
 xvi.-ixxi., Sections or (JE), Omitted by R°, Restored 
 AND Edited by R^ 
 
 xvi. (J), Samson and Delilah, His Captivity and Death. 
 
 xvii. f. (JE), Micah's Idols, Migration of the Danites. 
 
 xix. (JE), Outrage at Gibeah. 
 
 XX. f., R^ on basis of JE, War of the other Tribes agajnst 
 
 Benjamin to .punish the Outrage. Wives provided for the 
 
 surviving Benjamites. 
 
 These chapters are compiled from the older story in the same fashion as 
 Joshua xxii., perhaps by the same hand. 
 
 (f) Use in N.T, — Tl^ere are three or four references to the 
 history. ' "' , 
 
 30. Ruth. 
 
 (a) Authorship, Date, and Object.— Tor author's name is 
 entirely unknown. ' The iiidications of time are conflicting. 
 The post-exilic origin of the genealogy, iv. 8-22, is shown by 
 its use of some of the formulae of the Priestly Code j but, as 
 
88 BIBLICAL INTRODUCTION 
 
 these verses are a later addition,^ this does' not show that the 
 rest of the book— to which we may now confine ourselves— is 
 post-exilic. 
 
 The language has points of contact with the pre-exilic 
 literature,^ but also with post-exilic books ; moreover, there 
 are Aramaisms. 
 
 The customs connected with the marriage of a GoeP with 
 his kinsman's widow are spoken of as obsolete *; and differ 
 from those prescribed in Deuteronomy xxv. 5-10. 
 
 The mention of David in iv. 17, shows that it is not earlier 
 than his reign. 
 
 The book is not included in the historical books, or first 
 section of the " Prophets " in the Hebrew Canon, but is 
 placed amongst the " Hagiographa," as one of a group of Five 
 Megilloth or Rolls. 
 
 Upon these facts the following conflicting views have beeri 
 based : — 
 
 (i.) The book was written before the Exile out of interest in 
 the family history of David, and perhaps also to inculcate 
 marriage with a kinsman's widow.^ The Aramaisms are due 
 to use of dialect, except in iv. 7, which is a gloss. This view 
 removes the statement that the custom was obsolete. The 
 differences from Deuteronomy^ show that the latter was not in 
 existence, and that therefore our book is earlier than b.c. 621. 
 As LXX. places Ruth after Judges, it is suggested — not very 
 plausibly — that Ruth was originally an appendix to Judges, 
 and was afterwards removed into the Hagiographa. 
 
 (ii.) The book is a post-exilic work based on a pre-exilic 
 narrative.^ This view would explain the mixture of styles. 
 
 (iii.) The book is a post-exilic work, written as a protest 
 
 ^ Bertholet, Driver, etc., etc. 
 
 ' The early portions of Samuel, Kings, etc. 
 
 ' R.V.," near kinsman." 
 
 • ," This was tAe citsiom in former time in Israel," iv. 7, 
 
 ^Driver. 
 
 ' Cf. also Deuteronomy xxHi. 3. 
 
 ' KONIG. 
 
SAMUEL 89 
 
 against the prohibition of mixed marriages by Ezra and Nehe- 
 miah.i The classical vocabulaiy and idioms are due to the 
 author's^ 'familiarity with Samuel, Kings, etc., whose style and 
 spirit he imitated; but the Aramaisms, etd, betray the post- 
 exilic origin. The custom of marriage with a near kinsman 
 was obsolete ; and the writer, who was not in sympathy with 
 Deuteronomy, describes it according to popular recollection, 
 and not in terms of the law in Deuteronomy. The position 
 in the Hagiographa points to a post-exilic origin. 
 
 In any case there is, doubtless, a historical basis ^; some 
 connection of David with Moab seems indicated by his com- 
 mitting his father and mother to the protection of the king of 
 Moab. 8 Whenever the book was written, the author would 
 not have invented a Moabite ancestress for David, he must 
 h*ire had the authority of an accepted tradition. David's 
 genealogy is used in those of Christ, 
 
 31. Samuel. 
 
 (a) Title and Divisions. — Hebrew and R.V., Samuel; LXX., 
 /. and a. Kings ; Vulg. and A. V. combine the two titles ; all 
 with reference to the contents. Our two books originally 
 formed a single book, and are so treated in the closing 
 Masoretic notfe, and were so regarded by the Jews in the time 
 of Origen. The division is first found in the LXX., from 
 which it passed into the Vulg. and other versions, and into 
 the printed editions of the Hebrew Text.* 
 
 (b) Analysis and Composition. — Samuel, also, is compiled from 
 older sources ; apart from the poems, there are repetitions, and 
 diversities of style and standpoint ; notably, a series of dupli- 
 cate narratives; e.g., Saul is twice made king, I. x. 24, xi. 15 j 
 and twice spared by David, I. xxiv., xxvi.; and Goliath is twice 
 slain, I. xvii., II. xxi. 19. The material may be grouped thus : — 
 , A. Primitive Narratives, dealing with Saul and David, 
 
 1 Bertholet ; Chbynb, Origin of Psalter, p. 306 ; Coenill ; 
 Kautzsch, Bibel; Kaysbr-Marti, p. 208; Smend, A, T. Theol., 
 
 p. 409; NOWACK. 
 
 ' Bbrtholet, Konig, Budde (af. Cornill), see in Ruth a section of 
 the Midrash used by the Chronicler. ' I Samuel xxii. 3 f. 
 
 ♦ Cornill, Kirkpatrick, Ginsburg, 43, 953. 
 
90 biblical; introduction 
 
 Saul's first appearance, I. ix. i, to iSblomon's accession, 
 I Kings i. ii.; characterised by a human interest in life and 
 a graphic style. They show moral and spiritual feeling, but 
 are rather descriptive than didactic, and thus resemble the 
 Pentateuchal J, to which Budde, etc., ascribe them. Kittel,'; 
 etc., derive them from S, a history of Saul, and /(., a history 
 of David, both of the tenth century, and perhaps by the same 
 author, and -Da., a somewhat later history of David. In these nar- 
 ratives the monarchy is regarded with approval as a gift of God. 
 
 B. Secondary Early Narratives, and C, Deuterommk 
 Additions. The remaining material includes variants of A 
 derived from early tradition, dealing with Samuel, Saul, the 
 Ark and David; the list of ministers, II. viii. i6 fF., having 
 been added as a conclusion of this series. Budde ascribeS| 
 many sections to the Pentateuchal E', E= j and Kittel ascribes 
 some (mostly Ark stories) to the Pentateuchal E, and others 
 to SS, an Ephraimite history of Saul and Samuel, c. B.C. 750. 
 
 Many sections are ecclesiastical and didactic, magnifying 
 Samuel and the prophets, and regarding the monarchy as an 
 injurious ; concession to an unwarrantable demand. Here' 
 Dt additions are present. 
 
 It is doubtful how much is to be ascribed to B and how 
 much to C. Driver, etc., regard both B and C as mostly 
 pre-Deuteronomic, though including much that was written 
 B.C. 750-600 under the same influences as those which pro- 
 duced Deuteronomy; while H. P. Smith regards B and C as 
 Deuteronomic on older sources. 
 
 D. Later Additions, slight traces of influence of Priestly 
 Code, and additions from various sources. 
 
 The above analysis implies pre-Deuteronomic sources or', 
 editions, Deuteronomic, and Final Editions. Perhaps the 
 Dt Editor omitted II. ix.-xx., etc., and these sections were 
 restored jjy the Final Editor (so Budde), 
 
 Probably i Samuel i.-xii. formed part of the (JE) and 
 
 i 
 
 ^ In Kautzsch, Bibel; H. P. Smith, International Com,, pyes a 
 
 similar analysis, referring most of Samuel to tiuo ma.in sources— SI (parly 
 
 Monarchy), Sm (Exile oi: later), whose contents are roughly those of 
 
 Budde's J and E. 
 
SAMUEL 91 
 
 • 
 R'' Books of. Judges. Samuel's Farewell Speech, xii., was 
 probably E's conclusion of the history of Samuel, corres- 
 ponding to the Farewell Speech, Joshua xxiv., with which E 
 concludes the history of Joshua. , The chronological state- 
 ments in I. iv. 18, and perhaps also in vii. 2, belong to the 
 R" system of dates. In the sketch of contents, both Budde's^ 
 and Kittel's analyses are given ; omitting, however, many details 
 of the analysis.^ 1 
 
 (e) Contents.-^First Samuel. 
 
 I-XII., Samuel, Eli, and Saul. 
 
 i. (E°), SS, Samuel born and given to Jehovah. 
 
 The ordinary Hexateuch symbols J, E, etc., give Budde's analysis; 
 SS, etc.— for the meaning of which see above — give Kittel's ; where only 
 one symbol, etc., is given, Biidde and Kittel agree. 
 
 ii. i-io, Song of Hannah. 
 
 According to Budde, post-exilic addition, so also Cheyne, Psalter, 
 pi 57> "probably"; Kittel, addition from unknown source; Cornill and 
 Driver, under the monarcKy. The Song is not appropriate to the occasion, 
 which is only touched upon in passing and in most general terms in Sb- 
 Verse 10 implies either the present or past existence of the kingdom. In 
 style and spirit the Song has much in common with psalms often regarded 
 as post-exilic. It is a national lyric, celebrating some national deliver- 
 ance. 
 
 ii. ii-iii. (E°), SS; except that ii. 27-36 in both, and Hi. 
 11-14 in Budde ='&P, Samuel announces the Doom of Eli's 
 Family, on account of the Wickedness of his Sons. 
 
 iv.-vii. I (E*), E; except iv. \?>bji, 22, vi. 15, 17, i8a = R, 
 Ark lost at Ebenezer, its Wanderings amongst the Philistines, 
 its Restoration to Israel. 
 
 vii. 2-viii. (E°) ; except the" 20 years" of vii. 2 = R° ; Kittel, 
 vii. 2-17 = R°*, viii.=SS, Repentance of Israel, Victory over 
 the Philistines at Ebenezer, Request for a King. 
 
 ix.-x. 16 (J), S, Samuel anoints Saul. 
 
 X. 17-27 (E=), SS; except 25-27 = Ri= {Budde), R {Kittel), 
 Saul chosen by lot. 
 
 xi. (J); except \2f.=Ji^^; S, except 12-15 = R, Saul's 
 Victory over the Ammonites. 
 
 ^ In Dr. Haupt's Sacred Books of the Old Testament. •■ 
 
 ' Brackets are used, as in Judges, to indicate thaj; the identification 
 of the sources with J, E, and JE is doubtful. 
 
92 BIBLICAL INTRODUCTION 
 
 xii. (E=), with small additions by R°.j Kitkl, R^ Samuers 
 Farewell Speech. 
 
 XIII.-XXI., David, Saul, Samuel. ' 
 
 xiii. f. (J), S j except xiii. i, R; 8-iS'(J»), Rj 19-22 (J"), 
 R ; xiv. 47-51, R° j also 52 is R in Kittel, Victories of Saul 
 and Jonathan over the Philistines, etc. 
 
 Eitiier we have, in xiv. 47-51, as above, a conclusion of the history of 
 Saul by R"^, who regarded his legitimate reign as concluded at this point; 
 in the next chapters he is deposed by Samuel, and David is anointed king. 
 Or, this is the conclusion of the history as given in one of the, ancient 
 sources, and is placed here by R°. 
 
 XV. (E'); except 24-31, 34/ = (5"), SS, Saul rejected for 
 sparing the Amalekite King. 
 
 xvi. 1-13, Post-exilic Editor, Samuel anoints David. 
 
 xvi. 14-23 (J), Da., David as Saul's Harper and Armour- 
 bearer. 
 
 xvii.-xviii. 5 (E')j except xvii. 12, \2„ post-exilic, xviii. 5 = J; 
 SS, except 12a, 15 = R, David and Goliath. 
 
 LXX. Bjietc, omit xvii. 12-31, 38b, 41, 48b, 50, 5S-xviii. 5, probably 
 to avoid the contradictions arising from the attempt to treat this and, 
 the preceding passage as parts of one continuous narrative. The alternar 
 tive advocated by Robertson Smith, Old Testament, etc., p. 121 ff. and 
 Cornill, p. loi, H. P, Smith, etc., that these passages are additions to 
 the text, introduced from some lost history of David, seems less likely. 
 
 xviii. 6-30 (J); except 6a a*, bfi, 12-19 = (E'); ^-'^■•i except 
 6aa* = R, 12-19, 28-3o = SS, Saul's Jealousy, David Saul's 
 Son-in-law. 
 
 LXX. B, etc., omit 17-X9, 29b, 30 and smaller fragments ; cf. above, 
 
 xix. (E') ; except i8a/S-24, post-exilic; SS, except 3, 18- 
 24 = i?, Temporary Reconciliation, New attempts on David's 
 Life by Saul, David flees to Samuel. 
 
 xx.-xxi. I (J); except 4-17, 40-42 = R'^; Da., except 4-10, 
 12-17=?, 40-42 = R, David's Covenant with Jonathan. 
 
 xxi. 2-10 (E'), SS, David at Nob. 
 
 xxi, 11-16, Budde, post-exilic ; Kittel =i, David at Gath. 
 
 xxii.-xxv. (J); except xxii. 19, xxiii. i4b-i8 = (E")j xxii. 5, 
 post-exilic, xxiv. 21-2330, xxv. i = RJ^; Da., except xxii. =SS, 
 xxiii. 6, 14-18, xxv, i = R, David at Adullam, Massacre. of 
 
iSAMUEL 93 
 
 « 
 
 the Priests at Nob, David at Keilah and Ziph, spares Saul 
 at Engedi, Nabal. 
 
 xxvi. (E'), SS, David spares Saul in thfe Wilderness i of 
 Ziph. 
 
 xxvii.-xxxi. (J)' except xocviii. 3 = R°, xxviii. i6_^ = R'^; 
 Da., except xxviii. 3, 17/ = R, David tributary to Achish, 
 Philistine Campaign against Saul, Saul and the Witch of 
 Endor, David's Feud with the Amalekites, Defeat and Death 
 of Saul, 
 
 xxviii. 3-25 should come after xxx. 
 
 Second Samuel, 
 
 I.-VIII., David's Reign. 
 
 i.-iv. (J) J except i, 6-1 1, 13-16 = (E'), it. loa, ii = R°j Da., 
 
 excepti, (5-i6 = SS, i. 5, it. loa, 11, lii. 30, iv. 4 = R, it. 13-16, 
 
 Hi. 2-5 =?, Lament over Saul and Jonathan, David reigns at 
 
 Hebron, Ishbaal at Mahanaim, Civil War between them, Abner 
 
 and Ishbaal murdered. 
 
 The Lament is generally ascribed to David. On the Book of Jashar 
 see §(28(1?), Ishbosheth is a corruption of the more accurate Ishbaal, jE.V, 
 Eshbad, preserved in l Chronicles viii. 33, ix. 39 ; cf. Mephibosheth, ix. ' 
 
 v. (J); except 4/ = R°j Da., except 3, 6-16 = Je., 4f. = R, 
 
 David King over All Israel, Capture of Jerusalem, Alliance 
 
 with Hiram, Victories oyer the Philistines. 
 
 . According to Budde, numerous passages in. {.-viii., xxi.-xxiv. have 
 been transposed from their, original position. 
 
 vi. (J), Je., Ark brought to Zion. 
 
 ,,vii. (E°);. R° on basis of Je., David forbidden to build the 
 Temple,' but promised a Permanent Dynasty. 
 
 viii. (J)j except 1-7 = R°; iij^ = R^; Kittel, R(?), David's 
 
 Victories over Moab, Syria, and Edom. 
 
 - Verses I4b-l8 are evidently the conclusion of a history of David's 
 reign, Cornill suggests that they were composed to replace ix.-xx. by 
 an editor who considered the latter chapters damaging to David's reputa- 
 tion. • It may, however, be the conclusion of one of the older narratives of 
 the reign of David. 
 
 IX.-XX., David's Court and Family History, 
 ■ ..Budde (J); except xii. 7/, io^ = R°, xiv. isff-> xvl' 2/^* 
 "Levites" and "Covenant," xx. 23-26, post-exilic glosses. 
 
94 BIBLICAL' INTRODUCTION 
 
 Kittel, Je,; except xiL \6ff.,xii. 24* "LeiHies" and 
 " Covenant" = 'K or glosses. 
 
 ix., Meribbaal and Ziba. 
 
 Mephibosheth is a correction for the more accurate Meribbaal, preserved 
 in 1 Chronicles viii. 34, ix, 40 ; cf. on Ishbaal, i.-iT. . 
 
 X. ff., War with Ammon and Syria j Uriahj Bathsheba. 
 
 xiii.-xix., Absalom, Tamar and Amnon, Exile and Return, 
 Revolt, Defeat and Death, David's Return, Meribbaal and 
 Ziba. 
 
 XX., Sheba's Revolt. 
 
 In XX. 23-26 we have the formal close to this account of David's 
 reign. 
 
 XXI.-XXIV., Appendices. ' ' 
 
 xxi. 1-14 (J) ; except in 2/ the words between "sat'd Unto 
 
 them" and "what shall I ^(?" = R'=j Kittel=?, R in 2/. as 
 
 'above. To avert the famine caused by Saul's attempt to 
 
 massacre the Gibeonites, seven of Saul's descendants are 
 
 handed over to the Gibeonites, who hang them. 
 
 This incident, no doubt, took place at the beginning of David's reign, 
 Budde transposes the section, and places it before the first Meijbbaai 
 narrative, viii., to which it would form a suitable introduction. 
 
 xxi. 15-22 (J), Da., Feats of David's Heroes against the 
 
 Philistines, Elhanan kills Goliath of Gath. 
 
 Budde places this section after v. 25. It is in apparent contradiction 
 with the narrative of David and Goliath (E'), SS. The text of verse 19 is 
 corrupt, but the reading of i Chronicles xx. 5, " the brother of Goliath," 
 seems an obvious correction.^ ICittel, Budde, etc. read "Elhanan ben-Jair 
 the Bethlemite." ,,,).'. 
 
 xxii., Budde, late post-exilic addition; Kittel=}, 'i = R; 
 
 Psalm xviii. 
 
 Probably, like most of the poemS in the hist6rical books, inserted from 
 a collection of poems ; in this case, either from the Palter, or ftbm 
 one of the earlier collections which were incorporated, in the Psalter. 
 The heading is the, , same as in the Psalter, . The differences between 
 this chapter and, the Psaliii are textual, not editorial, and are similar 
 in character and extent to those found between the texts of a chapter 
 of the Greek text, in two MSS., belonging to quite different groups, ,The 
 section xxii, l-xxiii, 7 interrupts the connection, 
 
 ^ Imitated here by A,V., one of the places, where the anxiety of A.V, 
 to harmonise inconsistent passages overcomes its usual deference to the 
 Masoretio Text. V" 
 
' KINGS 95 
 
 ♦ 
 
 Him. i-f, Budde, late fost-exilic ■ addition ; Kitiel-}, the 
 
 heading by R, Last Words of David. 
 
 A'p'oem describing the character 'and blessedness of an ideal king, and 
 th^ hateful character and certain doom of the wicked. Budde's and Kjttel's 
 view is that of Cornill, p. 108. Cheyne, Psalter, 205 f., assigns it to the 
 
 , Exile. ■''" ■ ■ r .■] ^ ... , ,. ,,,. 
 
 x3ciii. 8-|3'9 (J), Da;; David's Heroes and their' Feats. 
 
 Placed by Budde* with xxi. 1 5-Z2, of which it is the cb'ntinuation, after 
 V. 25. •■ , . " • '■ 
 
 xxiv. Q) ; \Kitte/='f, Census punished by Plague, which, is 
 
 stayed by sacrifiee on the site of the future Temple. 
 
 Closely connected with xxi. 1-14, and placed by Budde between viii. 
 andxxi. I. In, L Kings, chaps, i f. are practically the conclusion of the 
 Book of Samuel j cf, thereon in Kings. 
 
 (e) Use in N.2. — ;There are a few reference? to the history'; 
 among them, our Lord's appeal (Matthew xii. 3 ff.) to 
 Abimelech's gift of the shewbread to David, I. xxi., as a 
 justification of the disciples plucking corn on the Sabbath. 
 The promise to David's dynasty, II. vii. 14, "I will be to 
 him a father, and he shall ,b,e to me a, son," is applied to 
 Christ (Hebrews i. 5.) 
 
 32. Bangs. i , 
 
 (a) Title and Z>im'sio»s.:^lIehTew and R.V., i. and ii. 
 Kings ; LXX,, iii. and. iv. Kings ; Vulg. and A.y. combine 
 both forms of the titles, Originally a single book; the 
 division was made by the LXX., from which it found its way 
 into the other versions and the printed editions of the 
 Hebrew.i^. , 
 
 (h) Analysts, and Composition. — Up to a certain point Kings 
 presents the same phenomena as the previous books. There 
 are qbvious traces of pre-Deuteronomic sources, of Deuter- 
 onomic njaterial, and of later post-exilic additions ; and it is 
 clear that an edition of Kings was included in the great 
 Deuteronomic history or series of histories, Genesis-Kings,* 
 compiled during or soon after the Exile. 
 - Gn the Oth6r hand. Kings diifers ini important respects frOm 
 
 * GiNSBURCJ, pp. 4S, 953. ' Ruth; as always, excepted. 
 
96 BIBLICAL INTRODUCTION 
 
 the preceding books, (i.) The Deuteronomic material is ajuch 
 more extensive than in Samuel, (ii.) Whereas in Judges, and 
 Samuel, the work of R° was confined in each case to re- 
 editing a pre-Deuteronomic book, possibly a section of JE; in 
 Kings, R° had no siich earlier edition to work upon, but himr 
 self compiled the book from various sources. , (iii.) J and E, 
 if present in Kings at all, i. supply only a small portion of the 
 material ; and the main source or sources are a work or works 
 constantly cited as "The Book of the Acts of. Soloiftop," 
 "The Book of the Chronicles? of the Kings of Judah," and 
 "The Book of the Chronicles of the Kings of Israel." 
 
 Our book is clearly later than the release of Jehoiacjiin, 
 561 8 j but probably not much later, for this sectiori is the 
 conclusion of the author's work, there is nothing extant which 
 can be a Sequel by the same hand; the insertion of this 
 section shows the author's anxiety to bring his work up to 
 date, and seenis to be the last important event knoWn to hitii 
 when he wrote. On these and other grounds, the extant 
 edition of Kings may be assigned to the second half of the 
 Exile,* or to a date soon after the Exile.. • ' 
 
 But the work of the exilic or post-exilic Deuteronomist to 
 whom we owe Kings, was merely that of an editor, who 
 brought stn earlier R° book up to date, and co-oMinated it 
 with the 'Deuterphomic editions of Genesis-Kings. Apart 
 from xxiii. 26— xxy. 30, which were added by the later 
 Deuteronomist, the rest of the book, in substance, was the 
 work of an earlier Deuteronomist, writing soon after 621, 
 possibly towards the close of Josiah's reign, or in that of 
 Jehoiachin. ' This earlier R°, the real author of Kings, writes 
 from the standpoint of the Jewish monarchy, as still existing, 
 and existing alone; e.g., II. xvii. 18, 21-23.^ So, too, the 
 phrase "unto this day" is used in R"' passages, in a way that 
 
 ' Seeonl. 1. f., II. xx. fif. 
 ' Of course; not our " Chronicles.'' 
 
 ' II. XXV. 27-30. ' ' , ' ' 
 
 ♦ Apart from insertions: by , post-exilic editors, see on I. 13, etc., which 
 did not substantially alter the book. 
 
 ' Verses 19 f.., which interrupt the connection, are a later insertion. 
 
KINGS '-'■'■ §7 
 
 shows that " this day " was a time when, the Jewish monarchy 
 still existed.^ . - 
 
 ; Amongst other material, the Deuteronomic authors furnished 
 the introductory and closing formulae to the various reigns, 
 including the judgment on the character of the kings ; and also 
 a series of references to the sinful toleration of the high placesy 
 obviously written from the standpoint of Deuteronomy.' The 
 scheme of chronology and the synchronisms between the 
 reigns of Jewish and Israelite kings are commorlly ascribed 
 to the later RP, because they are sometimes at variance with 
 the history, as given in the body of the book,^ i.e., as com- 
 piled by the earlier R°. The R° authors will have found 
 their data^ — the lengths of the reigns — in the older sources. 
 
 The main sources used by R° were the " Books " referred to' 
 above. Those dealing with Solomon and the kings of Judah, 
 or even all three "Books," may be sections of one work. 
 These books are not supposed to have, been the official annals 
 of the two kingdoms, but compilations frpm those annals. 
 The material apparently derived froiti the " Books " had 
 neither the dry matter-of-fact character nor the cautious 
 reserve of official archives j and shows a special interest in 
 ritual and the Temple. 3 If the "Book" on Judah was used 
 for the reign of Hezekiah, and possibly even for that of 
 Jehoiachin,* it must have been compiled ill Hezekiah's, or 
 even in Jehoiachin's reign. The latter seems impossible, it is 
 too near to the latest possible date for the pre-exilic R°, and is 
 also excluded by the absence of traces of Deuteronomic in- 
 fluence from the 'material supposed to be derived from the' 
 " Books." Hezekiah's reign Would not be an improbable date 
 for the "Book of the Chronicles of the Kings of Judah," and 
 if the other two " Books " are not sections or variant titles for 
 parts of the same work, they may be earlier; but as they 
 
 ' il. viii. 22, xvi. 6. ' 
 
 ' CORNILL, p. Ii6, Wellhausen, Composition of the Hexatmchi 
 
 P» 3P0- ;■■';.. '■' '\ ' ='-:>•■' ii, ! ' 
 
 ' Unless the sections dealing with the latter are from another source. 
 * So KamphAusen in Kautzsch, BibeU- • ■ ■•- ' 
 
98 BIBLICAL INTRODUCTION 
 
 seem to have been very similar in character, not much earher. 
 Early documents, J or an early history of David, E, ninth 
 century. prophetic narratives of Northern Israel are also dis- 
 tinguished, and apparently were not parts of the " Books." 
 
 If the "Book of the Chronicles of the Kings of Judah" is referred to 
 the reign of Hezekiah, II. xxiv. S> which cites it for Jehoiakim, is 
 either a mistaken imitation by the later R° of the formula of the 
 earlier R°, or the "Book" itself was supplemented and used by the 
 exilic R°. One is tempted to suggest that the- "Acts" and the two 
 "Books" were a Deuteronomic work or works used by the later R°. , 
 
 Strictly speaking, our book does not state that the "Acts" and 
 "Books" are the authorities for its statements, but refers the reader 
 to them for further information ; but, doubtless, as is generally taken 
 for granted, the work or works in question were one of the chief 
 sources used by the author of Kings. The sections of Kings derived 
 from the "Books" are sometimes spoken of as the "Epitome," and, 
 of, course, owe their present form to the selection and arrangement made 
 by the pre-exilic R°- 
 
 (c) Chronology. — The duration of the reigns of the kings 
 of Israel and Judah furnishes two sets of data for the 
 chronology, and the synchronisms bring the two into 
 relation with each other. The two sets of data, however, 
 are prim& fade inconsistent, e.g., the period from the 
 accession of Athaliah and Jehu to the fall of Samaria 
 is 165 years according to the Judahite reigns, but 143 
 years 7 months according to the Israelite reigns. While, 
 according to the Assyrian dates, the interval must have 
 been less than 132 years. By a free use of co-regencies 
 between father and son, and of other uncertain elements 
 in the data — such as whether the year of a king's death 
 counts both to him and his successors — these, or any, dis-, 
 crepancies may be harmonised. But it is scarcely worth 
 while to take the trouble, for Kings affords further evidence 
 of what has already appeared in Judges, namely, that the 
 Deuteronomic chronology is partly controlled by a priori 
 theories. I. vi. i states that 480 years elapsed from the 
 Exodus to the building of the Temple; the Judahite reigns, 
 etc. give 480 years from the building of the Temple to the 
 Return ; 1 the total Israelite reigns amount to 242 years, which 
 
 ' An argument for the post-exilic date of the later R°- 
 
i KINGS ^ '99 
 
 may reasonably be corrected to 240 years, the half of 480. 
 Evidently sets of twelve and six generations of forty years 
 each. The discrepancies wheh the two Sets of data are closely 
 compared may be due to the fact that one or other of the 
 editors overlooked the fact that, owing to the adjustment of 
 the figures to his theory of six and twelve generations, his 
 sum would not "prove." Nevertheless for Kings, W pro- 
 bably had accurate data, and has riot seriously departed from 
 them.i 
 (d) Contents and Archceology. 
 
 First Kings. 
 I., II., Conclusion of the History of David, Adonijah's 
 Conspiracy, Solomon Anointed, Death of David," Execution of 
 Adonijah, Joab, and Shimei, Banishment of Abiathar. 
 
 With the exception of ii. 27, a later addition, and ii. It-ii, wljich has 
 been edited by R°, chapters i., ii. are the conclusion of the early, history of 
 David, which Budde ascribes to J ; «/. § 31, 
 
 III.-XI., Solomon. 
 
 iii., Pharaoh's Daughter, Solomon's Choice and Judgment. 
 
 Pre-Deuteronomic ; excejit 2.f. , 14/! = R°., How far the pre-Deuter- 
 onomic sections in iii.-xi. come from the Book of the Acts of Solomon, 
 xi. 41, or from "prophetical narratives," is matter of controversy. 
 
 iv. 1-14, Solomon's Ministers, Splendour, and Wisdom. 
 
 Substantially pre-Deuteronomic. 
 
 V. is-ix. 9, The Temple — Treaty with Hiram and other 
 Preparations, its Building. Palaces, Pillars, Furniture, etc. 
 Jehovah appears again to Solomon. 
 
 Pre-Deuteronomic groundwork, to which the following are the chief 
 additions: R°, vi. i (later), 7, 11-13, «'»»'• 1-9,* 14-66,* ix. r-g; late 
 priestly writers, " the Most Holy Place," in vi. 16, vii. 48-50, mii, laa, 
 2aa,4from " And the Tent of Meeting," J, "the Most Holy Place" in 6. 
 LXX. omits "the Tent of Meeting, and all the holy vessels that were 
 in the Tent," in v. 6 ; its reading in 12 probably shows that the original 
 cited this verse from the Book of Jashar, cf, on Joshua x, 12 j Ixx.; places 
 13 f. after 53. 
 
 ix. lo-x., Cession to Hiram, Acquisition of Gezer, Corvee, 
 
 Qommerce, Queen of Sheba, Splendour and Power, 
 
 Substantially pre-Deuteronomic, from various sources. 
 
 ''■ Cf," Chronology " in Hastings' Bible Dictionary, and Wkllhadsen, 
 Composition of Hexateuch, p, 300, Benzinger, Kings, xviii,-xxi. 
 
lOO BIBLICAL INTfJ-ODUCTION 
 
 xi., Solomon's Harem, Worship of Strange Gods, Adver- 
 saries and Death. i 
 
 Detiteronomic ; excepi 14-28, 40, taken from one of the pWer sources. 
 
 XII.-XVI., Jeroboam to Ahab. , 
 
 xii. 1-31., Division into Two Kingdoms, under Rehoboam 
 and Jeroboam. i . : ! 
 
 Pre-Deuteronomic ; except iA-Tfi—'^, 
 , xii. 32^xiii., Mission of Anonymous Prophet to Jeroboam at 
 Bethel, the Prophet's Disobedience and Death. 
 
 Post-exilic addition, Benzinger, etc. ; ' 
 
 xiv, 1-20, Abijah pronounces the Doom of Jeroboam and 
 his House, Death, of Jeroboam. , , ■. -,' 
 
 Deuteronomic. . , 
 
 xiv. 21-31, Rehoboatn, Shishak. 
 
 Pre:Deuteronomic; ,«a:«/; the formulae. Shishak, c. 966-933, in his 
 inscription in the temple of Amon at Karnak states that he captured cities 
 both in Judah and Israel. 
 
 XV. f., Abijah, Asa, of Judah j Nadab, Baasha, Elah, Zimri, 
 Omri, Ahab, of Israel. 
 
 Deuteronomic epitome from the " Book of the Chronicles " ; xvi. 2-4, 
 perhaps composed by VP , or even later. 
 
 In the Assyrian inscriptions, Omri is mentioned as paying tribute to 
 Asurnazirpal in 876 ; Israel is often spoken of as the " House of Omri " ; 
 Ahab is mentioned in a list of Syrian kings whom Shalmaneser II. claims 
 to have defeated at Karkar on the Orontes in 854. 
 
 On the Moabite Stone, Mesha, King of Moab, tells how Omri oppressed 
 Moab, and how, under him (Mesha), Moab, by the grace of Chemosh,, re- 
 covered its independence, and captured many towns from Gad. This 
 narrative is the sequel to ii. ICings iii., or vice versa, 
 
 XVII. — Second Kings. XIII. — Elijah and Elisha. ' 
 In these chapters, the, bulk of the narratives concerning Elijah and 
 Elisha are referred to ninth century prophetical docunieiits of the Northern 
 Kingdom, denoted below by El. Other long and graphic accounts of thie 
 Wars of Israel and Syria, and the overthrow of the House of Omri, aire 
 referred to another northern document, perhaps the Hexateuchal E.^ 
 
 xvii. if.. El., Elijah — Famine, Cherith, Zarephath, Victory 
 
 over Baal at Carmel, Theophany at Horeb, Calling of EUsha; 
 
 XX. (E), Ahab's Victories over Benhadad. 
 
 The account of the anonjjmous prophet, 13 f., 22, 28, 3S-43i is' re- 
 garded by Wellhausen, Benzinger, and Kamphausen as a later addition, 
 according to the latter, post-exiUc. 
 
 1 So Kamphausen; Benzinger, xx., xxii., 9th cent. hist, of Ahab. 
 
' ■ KINGS ( roi 
 
 ' nd., El. ; 'excepl 266-26 = R°, Naboth's Vineyard, 
 xxii. 1^38 (E), Ahab and Jehoshaphat at Rambth Qjjead, 
 Micaiah's Warning, Death of Ahab. 
 ; xxiij '39tS4> Jehoshaphat \pf Judah, Ahaziah of Israel, 
 j, . Deuterpnomic epitome from the "Bgpks of the Chronicles." ;, , 
 
 . Second Kings. , 
 
 ij, .Ahaziah's Sickness and, Death, Elijah-calls down Fire 
 
 from Heaven. ^ , ■ ' , ' ■ -, . 
 
 Verses I, i8, belong to the Deuterqnomic epitome ; 2-17 are held to be 
 a late pbst-exilic addition on an earlier basis; Benzinger, 2-4, ija^ 
 El., 5-16 belong to tiine of earlier R°. 
 
 ii., El., Elijah's Ascension, Elisha succeeds him. 
 
 This chapter and the succeeding sections of El., dealing with Elishaj 
 pr^obably belong to a document, different from, but aUied to the document 
 from which the earlier sections dealing with Elijah, , were taken. 
 
 iii. (E) ; excepf i ff. = R°*, War of Jehoram, Jehoshaphat, 
 and the King of Edom against Moab. Q^ on I. xv.f. 
 
 iv.-vi. 23, El., Elisha's Miracles — Widow's.Oil, Shunamitess, 
 Death in the .Pot, Feeding a Multitudej Naaman, Gehazi, 
 Floating Axe-head, Syrian Army beguiled into Samaria and 
 ifeleased. .',■,:,',:;-.;■ . ,-.':■' ' ; ■ 
 
 , vi, 24-vii., (E), Benhadad besieges Samarfa, Famine, De- 
 liverance foretold by Elisha, Flight of the Besiegers. „, 
 
 yiii;. 1-15, El., Elisha commends the Shvinainitess to the 
 king, and anoints Hazael. 
 
 viii. 16-29, Jehbfam and Ahaziah of Judah. 
 
 Deuteronomic epitome. 
 
 Ix. f. (E); except ix. 7-100, 14, 150, 29, «■. 28-31 = R°; x, 
 
 ^2-^6 = Deukronomt'c epitome, Jehu slays Jeihoram, Ahaziah, 
 
 and Jezebel, becomes king, and massacres the family of Ahab 
 
 ai^d the Tiy:orshippers of Baal, Victories of Hazael, Jehu'j? 
 
 reign and death. 1 
 
 From the Blaqk Obelisk of Shalmaneser IL, King of Assyria, now in 
 the British Museum, we learn that Shalmaneser defeated Hazael in 842, 
 and that Jehu sent tribute to the Assyrian king, which is depicted on it. 
 
 xi.-xiii. 13, Athaliah's Usurpation, Athaliah slain and Joash 
 
 of Judf^h crowned, Reign of Joash, Repair of the Temple, 
 
 Joash of Israel. 
 
I02 BIBLICAL INTRODUCTION 
 
 Deuteronomic compilation from " Books of the Chronicles," and par- 
 haps other older sources, e.g., in xi. I3-I8a. The identity , of xiii. 12 £, 
 with xiv. IS f., is duie to some accident, perhaps connected with the 
 successive editings. ■• ' '' 
 
 xiii. 14-21, El.; 22, 24 f.,* Pre-Deuteronomic ; 23, R", 
 Death of Elisha, Hazael's Victories and Death, Victories of 
 Joash. 
 
 XIV.-XXV., Closing Period of the Monarchy. 
 
 xiv. f., Amaziah of Judah, joash of Israel defeats Amaziah, 
 Jeroboam II. of Israel, Azariah (Uzziah) of Judah, Zechariah, 
 Shallum, Menahem of Israel ; Invasion of Pul, King of Assyria, 
 to whom Menahem pays tribute ; Pekahiah and Pekah of 
 Israel ; Tiglath-Pileser, King of Assyria, carries captive Galilee 
 and Gilead ; Jotham of Judah. 
 
 Deuteronomic epitome, in which xiv. 5 t and the framework, etc. of the 
 formulae are' added by the compiler. 
 
 Pul was the founder of a new Assyrian dynasty, who assumed the' title 
 of Tiglath-Pileser III., 745-727. His inscriptions record campaigns ,in 
 Phoenicia, Syria and Palestine, tribute paid by Azariah of Judah, Rezin of 
 Damascus, Menahem of Samaria. 
 
 xvi. f., Ahaz of Judah; Ahaz attacked by Pekah and Rezin, 
 purchases the aid of Tiglath-Pileser, who attacks Damascus 
 and Israel ; Hoshea of Israel, Siege of Samaria by Shalmaneser 
 IV., Fall of Samaria, Captivity of Israel; Settlement of Eastern 
 Tribes in the territory of Israel. 
 
 Deuteronomic epitome, in which xvii. 7-41 is an epilogue to the history 
 of Israel by the Deuteronomic editors. 
 
 The Assyrian inscriptions record Tiglath-Pilesei's subjugation of Syria 
 and Israel, the deportation of Israelites to Assyria, the annexation of part 
 of the territory of Israel, the murder of Pekah by his subjects, the appoint- 
 ment of HosheS by TiglathiPileser, to whom his nominee paid tribute, 
 also how Sargon II.,, 722-705, took Samaria, and carried the Israelites 
 away captive in 722. 
 
 xviii. ff., Hezekiah — Suppression of the High Places, Fall of 
 
 Samaria, Deliverance from Sennacherib, Illness and Recovery, 
 
 Embassy of Merodach Baladan. 
 
 Deuteronomic compilation from older sources, in which xviii, /ib-l, 12, 
 etc. are additions of the editors. The prophecies, xix. 21-28, 32-734, are, 
 according to Driver, p.. 187,. unquestionably Isaiah's, and, if so, may have 
 been borrowed by the editor from an early collection of Isaiah's writings. 
 Cheyne and. Duhm deny that they are Isaiah's; if so, they will; be late 
 additions to Kings. The section xviii. V;-xx, ig has been borrowed 
 from hejs with some abridgment by the author of Isaiah xxxvi-xxxiii. 
 
THE HISTORICAL BOOKS 103 
 
 The ■ events in xx. i-rg, Illness, Embassy, took place before those of 
 xviii' f- ,. ■ 
 
 An inscription of Sennacherib tells how he defeated the Egyptians at 
 Eltekeh, laid waste Judah, carried off more than 200,006 captives and 
 much spoil, and received tribute from Hezekiah. Naturally,: he does not 
 mention the catastrophe which befell his army ; but, on the other hand, 
 he does not claim to have taken Jerusalem. The Babylonian Chronicle 
 states that S, was assassinated by his son. 
 
 xxi.-xxiv. Si Manasseh, AmoW; Josiah — Repair of Temple, 
 Discovery of the Law, Suppression of the High Places, 
 Passover, Defeat by Pharaoh Necho at Megiddo, Death. 
 Jehoahazj Jehoiakim.. 
 
 For the most parti a firee composition by the author of Kii^s, i.e., 
 the earlier Deuteronomic editor who had access to contemporary in- 
 formation for this' period. The " Book of the Chronicle," however, 
 is still cited for all these kings, except Jehoahaz, so that some use 
 was made ofthat authority, although some or all of the references are 
 the work of a later editor. The speech of Huldah, xxii. 15-20, is 
 regarded as the work of the later Deuteroiiomic editor, substituted for 
 a parallel section in the first edition of, JCings; xxiii. ztf. is from the 
 same hand. If the work of the earlier Deuteronomic editor concluded 
 withjosiah's Reformation, xxUi. 26-xxivJs must be ascribed to the later 
 editor. 1 
 
 xxiv. 6-xxv., Jehoiachin, First Captivity of Judah j Zedekiah, 
 Fall of Jerusalem, Final Captivity of Judah; Release of 
 Jehoiachin. 
 
 Composed by the later Deuteronomic editor. The editor of the Book 
 of Jeremiah has borrowed, with slight changes, xxiv. li-xxv. 21, xxv. 
 2J-ya=Jeremiak Hi. 1-27, 31-34. Nebuchadnezzar's numerous inscrip- 
 tions are taken up, with his buddings and offerings in Babylon, and do not 
 record his campaigns in Judah. 
 
 (d) t/se in N. T. — There are a few references to the history, 
 
 especially to Solqnion, Elijah, and Elisha. 
 
 33. Teaching of the Historical Books. 
 
 {^History. — The crucial events and main lines of the 
 History of Israel — the Exodus, the Conquest, the establishmentj 
 development, and fall of the Monarchy— are guaranteed by the 
 internal evidenfce of the narratives, and from the time of Ahab,i 
 by the witness of the monuments and by secular literature. 
 
 ^ Before Ahab, we have direct evidence from the monuments as to 
 isolated events, and constructive evidence bearing on the history generally ; 
 but from the renewal of the Assyrian advance westward, about the time of 
 Ahab, we have a fairly continuous Assyrian and Chaldean history running 
 parallel to, and on the whole confirming the history in Kings. 
 
I04 BIBLICAL INTRODUCTION 
 
 This history obvioiisly serves for warning and example ; its 
 lessonSj are mostly pointed out by the prophets. Also, in con- 
 junction with the prophetical writings, our books record the 
 discipline by which God educated Israel, and the providential 
 dealings by which He prepared the way for Christ. 
 
 (b) Symbolic Narraiives.—Qome, however, of the narratives 
 are' not generally accepted as literal history. Genealogies, etc., 
 especially in Genesis, are often supposed to give tribal history 
 and state tribal relationships in terms of the individual and 
 the family. If this is the case, we merely lose one kind of 
 information and gain another. In other cases, as in the 
 chapters on the Creation, the Fall, the Flood, etc., the narra- 
 tive is commonly held to be a kind of parable or allegory, 
 rather than actual history. Again, when we recognise that we 
 have parables and not history, we incur no loss of spiritual 
 teaching ; we change the form in which the lessons are taught, 
 and perhaps even add to their force and significance. Some 
 of the deepest and strongest religious experiences express 
 themselves, consciously or unconsciously; through the dramatic 
 picturesqUeness of > parable and ' allegory. It was so' with 
 Christ. In many ways, neither biography nor autobiography 
 are so impressive or convincing as the symbolic narrative. 
 The latter is the more candid and faithful, and by its means 
 the' seer can set forth the truth he has learnt from his personal 
 experience, without the limitations and obscurities of a personal 
 narrative. Much of the gospel is set forth iri such parables 
 as the Prodigal Son, which have ever been mighty to convince 
 and save. How many Church histories, how many biographies 
 of eminent divines would we not gladly sacrifice rather than 
 lose the Pilgrim's Progress i The great revelations which 
 came to primitive Israel naturd,lly found expression in such 
 narratives. They may not be literal history, but they none the 
 less bear true witness that, in those far ofif days, God spoke to 
 man, arid man heard, and, in some measure, understood. 
 
 (c) The Selection and Transmission of the Narratives. — Our 
 narratives, whether historical or symbolical, are the .'survivors 
 of a much more numerous company. They are extant through 
 
THE HISTORICAL BOOKS 105 
 
 a spiritual survival of ,the fittest*, as thg conquerors in a, 
 Spiritual: struggle for existence. Im the long process of re- 
 peated editingS) inspired men were guided to choose the goocj 
 and reject the evil, and the inspired Church • within the nation 
 was guided. to acpept and canonise the results of ;their labours. 
 Thus it is that we have the noble and sirnple narratives of the 
 Old Testament instead of the immoral and grotesique legends 
 of polytheism. And where something is. preserved the teach- 
 ing of which was not accurate in the light of a fuller revela- 
 tion, thci editors have been careful to place some better 
 expressions; of the truth in the sanae context. Thus our 
 narratives not only set forth, historically or symbolically, the 
 experiences of the man or generation -with which they origir 
 nated, but also . of countless subsequent generations who re- 
 iterated and accepted them. They stand in our Bible, 
 because the spiritual truths they set forth have been recog; 
 nised again and again by the; hearts and consciences of men. 
 As our own hearts respond to them, we share a, fellowship of 
 man with God, which began when these stories were first told, 
 before the beginnings of history, and has continued ever 
 since. 
 
 (d) The Law. — In many respects the social legislation re- 
 presents a higher ideal than any Christian state or Church has 
 ever seriously attempted to realise. The land laws, for in- 
 stance, seek to provide every Israelite family with an indepen- 
 dent means of livelihood. In other matters, many provisions 
 which are not according to present Christian standards, never- 
 theless marked a distinct advance in justice and humanity. 
 Thus slavery is permitted, but each successive code seeks to 
 improve the condition of slaves. Similarly, ritual regulations, 
 which do not appeal to us, suitably expressed the religious 
 feelings of their times, and replaced others of a lower order. 
 Even the multiplicity and minuteness of the Priestly Code 
 testify to a profound conviction of the reality of the relations 
 between Israel and Jehovah, and to the urgent necessity that 
 the nation should be in right relations to its God. With 
 certain necessary modifications, we may apply to the laws of 
 
io6 BIBLICAL INTRODUCTION 
 
 the Priestly Code what Canon Illingworth says of ethnic ritual. 
 We should not speak of the Levitical regulations as " puerile," 
 or even " human enough," though there is a large human 
 element; but if the ethnic rituals witness to the reality of 
 religion, the Pentateuchal legislation bears more forcible and 
 convincing testimony. The passage runs as follows : — " The 
 ritual regulations of India, Persia, Babylon, Egypt, speak foi 
 themselves. They are obviously human enough ; minute, 
 excessive, often puerile. Yet there is something behind 
 them ; they labour to formulate something other than them^ 
 selves, a power, an order, an authority, of which man is 
 vaguely, but really conscious, and which he craves to have 
 translated into words that he can understand. We turn with 
 impatience from the endless pages of the religious law-books 
 of the world ; but their very mass is an indication- of the 
 divine superintendence which they symbolise; an effort to 
 express the sense of infinite obligation, by the accumulation 
 bf infinitesimal rules." ^ 
 
 , * Personality, pp, 169 £ 
 
CHAPTER HI. 
 
 LATER HISTORICAL BOOKS 
 CHRONICLES TO ESTHER 
 
 Titles, Divisions, and Mutual 
 Relations of Chron.-Ezia- 
 Neh. 
 
 Date and Authoiship of 
 Chron. -Ezra-Neh. 
 
 Sources of Chron. 
 
 Contetats of Chron. 
 
 5. Historical Character and 
 
 Teaching of Chron. ; 
 
 6. Use of Chron. in N.T. 
 
 7. Sources of Ezra-Neh. 
 
 8. Hist. Accuracy of Ezra-Neh. 
 
 9. Contents' of Ezra-Neh. 
 10. Esther. 
 
 I. Titles, Divisions, and Mutual Belations of Olironicles- 
 Ezra^HTehemiali. — Similarity of. style and spirit, the identity 
 of the end of Chronicles with the begitining of Ezra,^ and 
 the fact that Chronicles ends in the middle of a sentenpe,'- 
 show that Chronicles, Ezra, and Nehemiah once formed a 
 single work. Our English versions follow the Vulg. and 
 LXX. in placing Chronicles after Kings, and beftire Ezra 
 and Nehemiah — the natural order as Ezra-Nehemiah is the 
 sequel to Chromcles. In the Masoretic lists and in the 
 Spanish MSS., Chronicles stands at the beginniiig and Ezra- 
 Neheiiliah at the end of the Hagiographa; in the Talmud, 
 most German MSS. and the early printed editions, Chronicles 
 stands at the end Of the Hagiographa, immediately' after Ezra- 
 Nehemiah.^ Apparently, wheh the division was made, it was 
 intended to place Ezra-Nehemiah in the Canon, and exclude 
 
 ^ ii. Chron. zxxvi. 22 f. = Ezra i. 1-33. 
 
 ' Verse 23b |3 (Chron.) is the first half of the second sentence in 
 verse 3 (Ezra). 
 
 ' GiNSBURG, Introductiqn, pp. 6 ff, ; article " Chronicles," Dr. 
 Hastings' Bibh Dictionary. 
 
 107 
 
io8 BIBLICAL INTRODUCTION 
 
 Chronicles, as a superfluous and inferior variant of Kings. 
 The ragged end, so to speak, left to Chronicles, points to the 
 same conclusion. But after the Hagiographa were otherwise 
 complete. Chronicles was added, sometimes at the beginning, 
 sometimes at the end. After this addition Chronicles still 
 formed one, and Ezra-JSTphemi^h . another single book; the 
 present division into i. and ii. Chronicles, Ezra, and Nehemiah 
 is due tothej^XX., in so,me[ MSS. pf, which, JipwQver, Ezra 
 and Nehemiah still make up one book, Esdras B. 
 
 The HebreW title of Chronicles is Dibhrihay-Yamhn, 
 or "Annals"; whence E.V., Chronicks> The LXX. is 
 Ta Fdraleipomena, usually explained as "the things 
 passed over," i.e., m Samuel and Kings ; whence 'Vulg. 
 Paraleipomenon. Ih Hebrew and E.V. , th^ other ^ two 
 books are styled , Ezra and Nehemiah, originally Ezira- 
 Nehemia|i went by the name Ezra; when they jwrere divided 
 Nehemiah was a natural title for the second book. The Vulg. 
 styles them i. and ii. Esdras; the LXX., either Esdras B* (as 
 one book) or Esdras B and Nehemiah. 
 
 The iii. Esdras of the LXX. and Vulg., the i. Esdras of 
 the English Apocrypha, is a variant edition of our Ezra; see 
 Chapter on the Apocrypha. > i 
 
 ; 2. Date and Authorship of Chronicles-Ezra-Neliemiali. — 
 
 The author's name is unknown ; his, interest in the Levite^ 
 and the; Temple music suggests that ,he belonged to one of 
 th^ Levitical choirs.;. The contents of the work< show that, it 
 is considerably later than Ezra and Nehemiah, 458-432. 
 Neliemiah xii. lof. inentions Jaddua, high priest in the time 
 of lAlex^-nder, the Great, f-, 330. In i. Chronicles iii. 24, the 
 genealogy of David extends, according to the Hebrew Text, 
 tp the sixth, according to the LXX., Syriac, and Vulg., to the 
 eleypiith I generation after ; ^erubbabel, i.e., to c. 350 or to 
 c. 200. On the other hand, there is no trace either of the 
 sufferings or triumphs of ^ the Maccabean period, c. 170-140. 
 
 1 To be carefull)^ distinguished from the " Chronicles." cited in Kings. 
 
 •''''' In Lagarde's Luciank Text as Esdras' A. ' '' ' 
 
SOURCES OF CHRONICLES 109 
 
 * 
 Heiice the date is usually fixed as 300-250. The style and 
 language are consistent with this date, and with the reference 
 to the book in Ecclesiasticus^ xlix. 13. 
 
 ., 3. Spjurces ; of Chronicles. — Chronicles cites a number of 
 /authorities; (i.) "The Book of the Kings of Judah and 
 Israel," for Asa, II. xvi. 11, Amaziah, II. xxv. 26, Ahaz, II. 
 xxviii. 26; (ii.) "fhe Book of, the Kings of Israel and 
 Judahj" ifbr Jotham, Jpsiah, and Jehpiakimj (iii.) "The 
 Acts of the Kings of Israel," for Manasseh, II. xxxiii. 18; 
 (iv.) " The Words qf Samuel the Seer," for David, I. xxix. 
 29 ; Xv.) " The Words of Nathan the Prophet," for David, I. 
 xxix. 29, Solomon, II. ix. 29; (vi.) "The Words of Gad 
 the Seer," for David, I. xxix. 29; (vii.) "The Words of 
 Shemaiah the Prophet and of Iddo the Seer," for Rehoboam, 
 II. xii. 15; (viii.) "The Words of Jehu ben-Hanani," for 
 Jehoshaphat, II. xx. 34 : (ix.) " The Words of the Seers,"^ for 
 Manasseh, II. xxxiii. 19; (x.) "The Vision of Iddo the Seer," 
 for Solomoii, II. ix. 29; (xi.) "The Vision of Isaiah the 
 Prophet," for Hezekiah, II. xxxii. 32 ; (xii.) "The Midrash of 
 the Book of Kings,"^ for Joash, II. xxiv. 27; (xiii.) "The 
 Midrash of the Prophet Iddo," for Abijah, II. xiii. 22 ; (xiv.) 
 "The Acts of Uzziah, written- by Isaiah the Prophet,"- for 
 Uzziahy II. xxvi. 22; (xv.) "The Prophecy of Ahijah the 
 Shilonite," for Solomon, II. ix. 29. 
 
 (i.), (ii.), (iii.), and perhaps (xii.) are variant titles of the 
 same work ; most pr all of (iv.)-(xi.), (xiii.)-(xv.) are the titles 
 of sections of this work, a section being cited by the liame of 
 the best known prophet of the period it describes. Thus 
 "The Words of Jehu ben*Hanani" were "inserted in the 
 Book of the Kings of Israel,", and "The Vision of Isaiah" is 
 said to be in "The Book of the Kings of Judah and Israel."* 
 
 ^ (. B.C. 180. 
 
 " So LXX., A. v., R.V. Mg. ; Hebrew and R.V. Text "Hozai"; 
 KiTTEL, Dr. Haupt's Sacred Books of O.T., reads " Hpzayw," his seers, 
 with BUDDE. , j; , 
 
 • i.e., an edition supplemented by edifying illustrative narratives. 
 II. XX. 34, xxxii. 32. 
 
no BIBLICAL INTRODUCTION 
 
 As much jof the material in Chronicles is identical with 
 parts of Kings, this "Book of the Kings " may be our Kings. 
 But Chronicles states that this " Book. " contained certain in- 
 formation, which is not found in Kings. Hence it is com- 
 monly Supposed that this " Book" was a Midrash oir expansion 
 of our Kings, and that perhaps the " Midrash " made use of 
 the sources of our Kings. There seems no reason to suppose 
 that Chronicles made use of any pre-exilic sources, with the 
 possible exception of Kings, and some genealogical archives. 
 Chronicles has borrowed, more or less, directly or indirectly, 
 from the Pentateuch, Joshua and Ruth; but chiefly from 
 Samuel and Kings.^ There are also excerpts from the Psalter. 
 
 4. Contents of Okronicles.^ 
 
 First Chronicles. 
 
 I.-IX. Genealogies. 
 
 i.-ii. 1 7, Adam to David. 
 
 Compiled from Genesis, Numbers, Joshua, i. Kings, and Ruth, unless 
 the genealogy in Ruth isftom the source of ii. S-12. 
 
 ii. 18-55, ^h-i Calebites, their Settlements. 
 
 Kittel refers 25-33, 42-45. 49 to a source older than the Midrash ; 
 </: §S(b). 
 
 iii.. The DavidicDynasty from David to Anani; 17-24= C/4. 
 
 Aijani was apparently the head of the House of David in the ;time pf 
 the Chronicler. Verses 1-16 compiled from ii. Samuel and Kings, 
 
 iv, 1-23, Ch,i Other Judahite Clans, their Settlements, -^.^ 
 
 Kittel refers 1-20 to an older source ; 5^. on ii. 18-55. 
 
 iv. 2it-itZ> Simeonite Clans, Settlements, and Conquests, 
 
 25-27. 34-43 =(^h. 
 
 Verses 24, 28-33 compiled from Genesis, Exodus, Numbers, and Joshua 
 xix. ; most of the rest referred by Kittel to older source. 
 
 v., Ch., Clans, Settlements, Conquests, and Captivity of 
 Reuben, Gad and Eastern Manasseh. . 
 
 vi. 1-15, Ch., High-priestly dynasty from Aaron to the 
 Captivity. 
 
 ' Cf, Contents. ' 
 
 ' Longer passages, peculiar to Chron. in substance as well as form, are 
 denoted \rj Ch.; Shorter- ftagmentsy in passages compiled from Genesis- 
 Kings, are not indicated unless specially important. 
 
CONTENTS OF CHRONICLES iii 
 
 Some of the names also occur in the earlier historical books. Kittel 
 refers J-lJ to an older source. 
 
 vi. 16-48, Ch,^ Genealogies of Heman, Asaph, and Ethan, 
 the traditional ancestors of the Levitical choirs. 
 
 vi. 49-53 = 4-8, Ch., High-priestly dynasty from Aaron to 
 Solomon. . . 
 
 vi. ij^-^s. = Joshua xxi.\^-T,(), Priestly anfi Levitical Cities. 
 
 vii., Ch., Clans of Issachar, Benjamin, Naphtali, Manasseh, 
 Ephraim, Asher. 
 
 Kittel refers 14-19, 2rb'-24 to older source. 
 
 viii., Ch., Clans of Benjamin, Descendants of Saul. 
 
 Kittel considers viii., which is avariant of vii. 6-12, as a later,addition. 
 §uch passages may, however, be additions made by the Chronicler himself 
 to the material he obtained from his main source. 
 
 ix., Ch.y Chief families, Priests, Levites, Gate-keepers at Jeru- 
 salem after the Return, Saul's Descendants. 
 
 Verses i f. =Ezra ii. 7o=Nehemiah vii. 73a, xi. 3b; 3-i7a— Nehemiah 
 jcL 4-l9a ; 35-44, Saul's descendants, is repeated from viii. 29-38. 
 
 X.-XXIX., David. 
 
 X. f. =/. Samuel xxxi., ii. Samuel v. 1-3, 6-10, xxiii. 8-39; 
 except x: 13/, xi. 10, 41^-47 =C/%., Saul's Death, David's 
 Accession and Capture of Jerusalem, His Heroes. 
 
 Kittel refers xi. 4ib-47 to older source. 
 
 xii. = Ch., Warriors who came to David at Ziklag aiid at 
 Hebron. 
 
 xiii. f. = H. Samuel vi. i-ii, v. 11-23; except xiii, 1-5,* 
 xiv. 17= Ch., Unsuccessful attempt to bring the Ark to 
 Jerusalem, Hiram, David's Sons, Victories over the Philistines. 
 
 XV. f., Ch., The Ark brought to Zion. 
 
 Based oh ii. Samuel, vi. 12-20, fragments of which are reproduced 
 in XV. 2S-xvi. 3, 43. The psalm in xvi. is compiled from Psalms cv, 1-15, 
 xcvi. 1-13,* cvi. I, 47 f. 
 
 xvii.-xx. = «V. Satkuel vii.f., x., x(. j, xii. 26, 30/, xxi. 
 18-22, Nathan's Prophecy, Wars , with Ammonites, etc., 
 David's Ministers, aiid Heroes^ 
 
 xxi.-xxii. I, Census, consequent Pestilence, stayed by 
 
 sacrifice at; Araunah's Threshing-floor, 
 
 A much altered, edition of ii. Samuel xxiv. Satan,, and not Jehovahj 
 tempts David to number Israel ; Levi and Benjamin are not numbered. 
 Instead of buying the threshing-floor and the oxen for fifty shekels of 
 
112' BIBLICAL INTRODUCTION 
 
 silver, he buys " the place " (of the threshing-floor) for six hundred shekels 
 of gold. 
 
 xxii'. 2-xxix., C/5., Ifistruetions to Solomon as to the 
 Building of the Temple, Organisation, etc. of the.Levites, 
 Priests, Singers, Gate-keepers, the Army, and the ;rribes. 
 Instructions to Solomon and Israel as to the Temple, 
 Offerings of the people for the Temple, David's Thanks- 
 giving, Solomon anointed King, David's iDeath. 
 
 Second Chronicles. 
 I.-IX., Solomon. 
 i. 1-13, Sacrifice, Dream and Choice at Gibeon. 
 Revised edition of i. Kings iii. 4-13, introducing the "Teiit of 
 
 Meeting." 
 
 i. 14-17 = «. Kings X. 26-29, Horses and Chariots. ' 
 Kings states that Solomon made silver to be as stones in Jerusalem, 
 Chronicles expands this to silver and gold. 
 
 ii.-vii.. Building and Dedication of the Temple. 
 
 A very much expanded version of L Kings v.-ix. ; chapters ii., iii., 
 V. 11-13, vi. 12 f., 40-vii. 6, ii-iS are almost entirely the work of the 
 Chronicler. He introduces the Levites and singers, and the courses of 
 the priests, V. II f., andthe , keeping of the Feast (Tabernacles) on the 
 eighth day, according to the Priestly Code. 
 
 viii. i.=i. Kings ix. 'i-of., \i-xi.; except viii. 12-16,* and 
 many small additions to ix. = Ch., Organisation of the King- 
 dom, Queen of Sheba. 
 
 In i. Kings ix. 10 f. Solomon gives cities to Hiram ; in Ch. viii. 2, 
 which corresponds to it in the arrangement of material, Hiram gives cities 
 to Solomon. . • i 
 
 X. -XXXVI., Division of the Two Kingdoms to the 
 Restoration. 
 
 X. &.=i. Kings xii. 1-24, xiv. 25-28, 21 / except xi. s-xii. i, 
 xii. 2d-8'= Ck, Rehdboata. 
 
 The CA. sections enumerate R's buildings, the migration of the Levites 
 to Judah, R's family, and the warning of Shemkiah. 
 
 'idii. 1 L = i. Kings xvi I /., i;^, Ahijah. 
 
 xiiL 3-22, Ck, Abijah's Victory over Jeroboam. 
 
 ' Abijah' is a bad king iii Kings. ! 
 
 xiv. i-xv. 15, CA., Asa — Suppression of the High Places, 
 iJefeat' of Zerah the Ethiopian, Prophecy of Azariab ben 
 
CONTENTS OF CHRONICLES 113 
 
 Portions of i. Kings xv. 8-12 are reproduced in xiv. 1-5. Zerah is 
 sometimes identified with Osorkon II., King of Egypt, who claims to 
 have made a successful campaign in Palestine, c. 866. Kittel refers xiv. 
 8 f.,* II, 12a to older source. Oded, xv, 8, for Azariah ben Oded is 
 due to a corruption of the text. 
 
 XV. i6-xvi. t = i. Kings XV. 13-22, Asa — Maachah deposed, 
 High Places not suppressed, Alliance with Benhadad against 
 Israel. 
 
 xvi. 7-14, Ch., Asa — Prophecy and Imprisonment of 
 Hanani, Disease and Death: of Asa. 
 
 Fragments of i. Kings xv. 23 f. in xvi. izff. ^ . 
 
 xvii., Ch., Jehoshaphat — Itinerant Priests and Levites teach 
 the Law, Peaceful Prosperity. 
 
 Kittel refers " sent " in 7, and 8b, 9 to older source. 
 
 xviii. =/. Kings xxii. 2-35^, Jehoshaphat and Ahab at 
 Ramoth Gilead. 
 
 Verses i f., mainly Ch. 
 
 xix.-xx. 30, Ch., Jehoshaphat — Prophecy of Jehu ben 
 Hanani, Priests and Levites as JudgSs, Invading Ammonites, 
 Moabites, etc. exterminate one another while the Levitical 
 choirs sing praises. 
 
 XX. 31-37, Jehoshaphat — Summary, Alliance with Ahaziah, 
 Loss of Navy. 
 
 Based on i. Kings xxii, 41 ff., 48 f. ; the condemnation of the alliance 
 with Israel, and the prophecy of Eliezer are Ch. 
 
 xxi. =/. Kings xxii. 50, ii. Kings viii. 17-22, 24a; except 
 2-4, 10b- 20= Ch., Jehoram. 
 
 Ch. sections include Jehoram's Massacre of his Brethren, Elijah's writ- 
 ing to Jehoram, and the Misfortunes of Jehoram, 
 
 xxii. 1-9, Ahaziah, 
 
 Based on, and partly extracted from ii. Kings viii, 24-x. 
 
 xxii, lo-xxiii,, Athaliah. 
 
 Revised edition of ii. Kings xi. 1-20, e.g., the Levitical temple-guard 
 of the Chronicler's times is substituted for the foreign mercenary body- 
 guard of the Davidic kings. ' 
 
 xxiv., Joash. 
 
 Revised and expanded edition of ii. Kings xi. 2I-xii., e.g., the Apos- 
 tasy of Joash, and the Martyrdom of Zechariah are Ch. 
 
 xxv,=;V. Kings xiv. 2-14, 17, 19/, except S-iia, 12-16 = 
 
 Ch,, Amaziah. 
 
 Ch. sections include Dismissal of Israelite Mercenaries at the bidding 
 of a Man of God, and Amaziah's Apostasy rebuked by a Prophet. 
 
 I 
 
114 BIBLICAL INTRODUCTION' 
 
 xxvi., Ch.; except x-\ = ii. Kings dciv. zi f., xv. 2/, and 
 20-23 include fragments of xv. ^ff-, Uzziah. 
 
 Ch. portions include the Mission of'Zechariah, Uzziah's Victories, His 
 Intrusion into the Temple. Kittel refers 6, 8a, 9 f. to older source. 
 
 xxvii. = a. Kings xv. 33-34, SS^i 38 ; except ib, 3^-7 = Ch., 
 Jotham. 
 
 Kittel refers 4 fif., Buildings and Wars to older source. 
 
 xxviii., Ahaz. 
 
 Revised and expanded edition of iij Kings xvi. Ch. adds the Mission 
 of Oded, Release of Judahite captives, Invasions by Edomites and 
 Philistines, etc. 
 
 3cxix.-xxxii., Hezekiah. 
 
 Revised and expanded edition of ii. Kings xviii.-xx. Ch. minimises 
 the part played by Jsaiah ;, and inserts profuse details as to Temple ritual, 
 Levites and singers. Kittel' refers xxxii. 30, as far as " David," to older 
 source. 
 
 xxxiii. 1-20 = «. Kings xxi. i-io, 18; except ii-ig = Ck, 
 Manasseh. .; 
 
 Chi section, con tains M.'s Captivity, Repentancej and Buildings. i 
 
 xxxiii. 21-25, Amon. > 
 
 Expanded from ii. Kings xxi. ig-24. 
 
 xxxiv. f., Josiah. ; ■:, - ,- 
 
 Revised and expanded edition of ii. Kings xxiii-xxiii. 30. Ch. adds, 
 an express statement that Hilkiah found the law-book, xxxiv. 14, repeated 
 identifications of the law-book with the Law of Moses, profuse details as to 
 ritual, priests, Levites and singers, Josiah's neglect of the message sent to 
 him from God through Pharaoh Necho, xxxv. 21 f. 
 
 xxxvi. 1-2 1, Jehoahaz, Jehoiakim, Jehoiachiiij Zedekiah. 
 Compiled from ii. Kings xxiii. 30-xxv. 21. Ch. introduces a reference 
 to Jeremiah, xxxvi. 12. 
 
 xxxvi. 22 i.—Ezra i. 1-33, The Decree of Cyrus. 
 
 5. Historical Character and Teaching of; Chronicles. — The 
 
 Chronieler's selection and statement of history were intended 
 to enforce, in the inost emphatic way, the teaching he had 
 most at heart.i He wished to give object lessons in the 
 observance of the Law. The Law, he held, was not observed 
 
 ' The Chronicler and the author of his main source, the Midrash on 
 Kings, were of the same mind and temper, so that in speaking, of the 
 Chronicler, we include the author of the Midrash. But the dependence of 
 Chron. on this source shifts the responsibility for narratives not found in 
 Genesis-Kings from the author of the canonical book to his authority. 
 
THE TEACHING OF CHRONICLES 115 
 
 before David, or in that product of schism and treason, the 
 Northern kingdom. Hence he confines his history to the 
 Davidic monarchy, even at the expense of sacrificing the 
 history of Elijah and Elisha. He describes David, Solomon, 
 Jehoshaphat, Hezekiah, and Josiah as worshipping with a full 
 accompaniment of ritual, priests, Levites and choirs, and 
 according to the laws of the complete Pentateuch; for he 
 assumed that what was binding in his own day must have 
 been observed by the good kings. The Chronicler was 
 anxious to teach that virtue and vice invariably meet ' with 
 their due ; Kings had not always recorded the sins which in- 
 volved a disastrous close' to the reigns' of good kings, or the 
 misfortunes which punished the wickedness of bad kings; 
 The Chronicler, as far as his source perthitted, supplied these 
 defects.^ ' 
 
 As far as possible, hothing is told of the good kings^ 
 which would weaken the force of their good examples. Thus 
 the incidents Of Uriah and Bathsheba, of Amhon, Tamar, 
 and Absaloih, are entirely omitted. The ' Chronicler also' 
 exalts his heroes by giving them large armies, great wealth' 
 and spleridour 2 ; and shows' a fondness' 'for statistics and 
 genealogies. 
 
 Professor Sayce writes thus ^ : " The consistent exaggera- 
 tion of numbers on the part of the Chronicler shows us that 
 from a historical point of view 'his unsupported statements' 
 rhust be received with caution. But they do not justify the' 
 accusations of deliberate fraud and ' fiction 'which have been 
 brought against him. What they prove is that he did not' 
 possess that sense of historical exactitude which we now" 
 demand from the historian. He wrote, in fact, with a didactic" 
 and not with a historical purpose. That he should have used 
 the framework of history to illustrate the lessons he wished to 
 draw was as much an accident as that Sir Walter Scott should 
 
 ' Cf. Contents on ii.,;Ghron. xxjv. f,, Joash and Amaziah, andxxxv. 
 21 f. on Josiah. 
 
 "^ Cf. Contents on II. i: 14-17, Solomon; 
 • ^4f'*»' CnV., 1894,' pi 464. 
 
Ii6 BIBLICAL INTRODUCTION 
 
 have based certain of his novels on the facts of mediaeval 
 history. He cared as little for history in the modern 
 European sense of the word as the Oriental of to-day, who 
 considers himself at liberty to embellish or modify the narra- 
 tive he is repeating in accordance with his fancy or the moral 
 he wishes to draw from it." 
 
 In considering the value of Chronicles, we must deal 
 separately with the different kinds of material. 
 
 (a) Material taken from Genesis-Kings, etc. — Chronicles 
 preserves an alternative text, which sometimes gives the better 
 reading. 
 
 (b) Material from Older Sources.— li Kittel is right in 
 assigning certain passages ^ to a source older than the Midrash, 
 we possess in Chronicles some fragments of information, e.g., 
 as to the Invasion of Zerah, not given in Genesis-Kings, but 
 derived from early, perhaps pre-exilic sources. 
 
 (c) Narratives not traceable earlier than the Midrash of 
 Kings. — Narratives whiqh give no indication of early origin 
 rest simply on the unsupported testimony of a document 
 composed from 700 to 300 years later than the events 
 described. For the teaching .-of (fl)i (fi), {c) see chapter ii., 
 
 §33- 
 
 (d) Narratives of Earlier Events in Terms of the Institutions 
 and Ideas of the Chroniclef's Own Times. — ^Here an example, 
 was set which is constantly iniitated; teachers and preachers 
 often seek to make a Biblical narrative more impressive by, 
 telling the story as if the event had happened in the nine- 
 teenth century. Probably Chronicles was very useful in this way 
 to the Jews of the period. To us this material is valuable 
 as revealing the, .institutions and ideas of the Chronicler's , 
 time; the comparison with Kings enables. us to contra,st the 
 Jewish community with ancient Israel. Moreover the utter-, 
 ances ascribed by Chronicles to its characters often contain 
 most useful and suggestive teaching ; they were the expression 
 of deep and real experience, and they still help to renew and 
 express such experience. 
 
 1 Not found m, 'Gen, -Kings. Cf. Contents on I. iy., vi. f., II. xiv., xviL 
 
SOURCES OF EZRA-NEHEMIAH 117 
 
 « 
 
 6. XJs6 of Chronicles in N.T. — It is possible that some 
 of the persons in Luke's genealogy, iii. 2b f., are identical 
 with persons mentioned only in I. iii. 19-22. Matthew ix. 36 
 is more closely parallel to ii. Chronicles xviii. 16, peculiar 
 to Chronicles, than to Numbers xxvii. 1 7 or Ezekiel xxxiv. 5 ; 
 but it may have been suggested by either of the latter, or 
 may be simply the current form of a popular figure. The 
 "Zachariah, son of Barachiah, whom ye slew between the 
 sanctuary and the altar" (Matthew xxiii. 35)^ is identified 
 with the Zachariah, the son of Jehoiada, whose martyrdom 
 in the Temple court is related in II. xxiv. 21, and nowhere 
 else. Otherwise there is nothing in the N.T. to show that any 
 of its writers were acquainted with Chronicles. 
 
 7. Sources of Ezra-Nehemiah, — Ezra vii. 27-ix. are in 
 the first person, and are derived from memoirs composed 
 by Ezra ; other passages in Ezra-Nehemiah may be based on 
 these memoirs.'' Nehemiah i.-vii. 5 and xi.-xiii. (in part) 
 are in the first person, and are derived from memoirs 
 compiled by Nehemiah; other passages in Nehemiah may 
 be based on these memoirs.^ Both sets of memoirs may 
 be dated c. 430. Ezra iv. 8-vi. 18, vii. 12-26, which are in 
 Western or Palestinian Aramaic, are taken from another 
 source, which may be dated c. 450.^ Ezra-Nehemiah also 
 contains a series of official documents : the Decree of 
 Cyrus, Ezra i. 1-4; Letters between Rehum and Artaxerxes, 
 iv. 7-23 J Letters between Tattenai and Darius, v. 6-vi. 12; 
 Artaxerxes' Firman to Ezra, vii. 11-26. The authenticity of 
 these documents is matter of controversy.* Ezra iv. 7-23 is 
 out of place, and belongs to the building, not of the Temple, 
 but of the walls. Probably, as in Chronicles, the Chronicler 
 did not compile Ezra-Nehemiah from the original sources, 
 
 ' Also Luke xi. 51, where the father's name is omitted. The first hand 
 of Cod. Sin. omits it in Matt.j and Jerome states that the Nazarene Gospel 
 had "son of Jehoiada" in Matt, (Tisch.) 
 
 ^ Cf. Contents. ' Kautzsch, Cornill. 
 
 * They were rejected by Kosters, Het Hirstel, etc., German Trans,, 
 but are accepted by Kautzsch, and with the exception of i. 1-4 by Meyer, 
 EntsUhung, etc. 
 
ii8 BIBLICAL INTRODUCTION 
 
 but revised a compilation already made.i possibly a portion 
 of the same work, parts of which are referred to as the 
 Pook of Kings," etc., or the " Midrash of the Book of 
 Kings," etc. 
 
 8. Historical Accuracy of Ezrar-Nehemiali.— It has been 
 maintained^ that the Chronicler, or one of his authorities, has 
 entirely misunderstood the course of the history on two 
 main points. 
 
 (a) The Return and Building of the Temple. — There was, it 
 is said, no Return in 538 ; there was no attempt to rebuild the 
 Temple till the time of Haggai and Zechariah, 520 ; and the 
 Temple was rebuilt by the Jewish community left behind in 
 Palestine, when the bulk of the population were carried away 
 captive in 586. The main argument for this view is that 
 Ilaggai and Zechariah make no reference to any Return, or to 
 any previous work towards the building of the Temple. The 
 treatment of the history in Kings by the Chronicler or his 
 source, weakens the authority of the statements in Ezra i.-vi. 
 Yet the silence of Haggai and Zechariah does not seem con- 
 clusive disproof of statements made even as late as 250. 
 There would still be, one would suppose, a substantially 
 accurate tradition as to the origin of the Temple and the 
 Jewish community. 
 
 Cheyne's Introd. to Isaiah, xxxviii. £, substantially adopts Kosters' view. 
 G. A. Smith, in a careful discussion of the subject in Book of the Twelve, 
 p. 204 ff., concludes that the Return took place in 537, and that the Jews 
 who returned rebuilt the Temple, and probably made some beginning 
 immediately after the Return. Meyer, Entstehung, combats Kosters' 
 view at length, and it has also been rejected by Kuenen and Wellhausen 
 (ap. Meyer). Many critics, however, who accept the Return, maintain 
 that no attempt was made to rebuild the Temple before 520. 
 
 (b) The Date of Ezra's Mission.^-li is also maintained' 
 that Ezra's mission and reforms took place -^ not, as the 
 Chronicler represents, in 458, before Nehemiah's first term 
 of office, but — either in Nehemiah's second term of office, 
 
 1 Cf. Cornill', p. 135. 
 
 ' KosTBRS, Het Herstel, etc., German Trans. 
 
 • Kosters, etc. 
 
CONTENTS OF EZRA-NEHEMIAH 119 
 
 * 
 
 432 ; or even in the seventh year of Artaxerxes II., 398. The 
 different sections of Nehemiah have to be re-arranged and 
 Ezra vii.-x. is placed , immediately before Nehemiah ix., x. 
 These views have met with little acceptance. 
 
 9. Contents of Ezra-Nehemiab. 
 
 Ezra. 
 I.-VI. Return, Rebuilding of Temple. 
 i., CA., Decree of Cyrus, Return. ' 
 
 CA. is used, as in Chronicles, for matter composed by the Chronicler, 
 or by the author of his late post-exilic Midrashic source. 
 
 ii.-iii. 1 = Nehemiah vii. 6-vm. ia, Statistics of those who 
 
 returned under Cyrus, their gifts to the building of the 
 
 Temple. 
 
 In Nehemiah vii. 5, Nehemiah states that he found this list in a book ; 
 possibly a contemporary record. Ch, has repeated it here from Nehemiah 
 vii. , and, in a most curious fashion, has utilised Nehemiah vii. 73b, viii. 
 la, the opening verse of the account of the promulgation of the Law, as 
 the opening verse, Ezra iii. I, of the account of the laying of the founda- 
 tion stone of the Temple. Kosters holds that this list does not refer to a 
 Return under Cyrus, but is a census of the population in the time of Ezra- 
 Neheraiah, and that the book in which it was found was Ezra's Memoirs. 
 There are numerous variations, especially as to names and numbers, in the 
 three texts of this list, Ezra ii. ; i. or iii. Esdras v. ; Nehemiah vii. 
 
 iii.-iv. 5, Ch., Altar of Burnt Offering, Feast of Tabernacles, 
 Foundation Stone, Opposition of Samaritans. 
 
 iv. 6 f., Complaints made against the Jews to Xerxes and 
 
 Artaxerxes. ' ' 
 
 The text is probably corrupt ; the verses were used by Ch. or his source 
 as an introduction to the next section. 
 
 iv. 8-23, Aramaic Source, Letters between the Persian 
 Governor and Artaxerxes. 
 
 Out of place here, belonging properly to the end of interval between 
 the arrival of Ezra and that of Nehemiah. 
 
 iv. 24-vi. 18, Aramaic Source, Rebuilding and ; Dedication 
 
 of the Temple, Letters between the Persian Governor and 
 
 Darius. , . , _ 
 
 iv. 24 is the continuation of iv. 5, and is probably Ch, 
 
 vi. 19-22, Ch., Passover.' 
 Darius is styled " King 0^ Assyria" 
 
I20 BIBLICAL INTRODUCTION 
 
 VII.-X. Mission of Ezra. 
 
 vii. i-ii, Ch., Introductory Abstract 
 
 vii. 12-26, Aramaic Source, Firman of Artaxerxes to Ezra. 
 
 vii. 27-ix., Ezrds Memoirs in the First Person, Thanks- 
 giving to God for Firman, Ezra's Companions, Journey, 
 Attempt to suppress Intermanriage with Foreigners. 
 
 X., Ezra's Memoirs, edited by Ch., Conclusion of account of 
 Attempt to suppress Intermarriage with Foreigners. 
 
 Though ix. and x. are essentially one narrative, x. changes to 'Csxz third 
 person, probably because Ch. has recast this portion of Ezra's Memoirs. 
 
 Nehemiah. 
 
 i.-vii. 5, NehemiaKs Memoirs in the First Person, 
 Nehemiah's Mission, Rebuilding of the Walls, in spite of 
 the Opposition of the Samaritans and their allies, Measures 
 for the Relief of Debtors. 
 
 vii. 6-viii. xd.^Ezra ii.-iii. 1, q.v. 
 
 vii. 73b-x., Ezra's Memoirs recast by Ch., Promulgation of 
 the Law, and Covenant to observe it. 
 
 The Law was probably the Priestly Code ; cf, chapter i. §§ tg f. 
 
 xi.. Migration from the country to Jerusalem, Location of 
 
 the Clans in Jerusalem and the country. 
 
 An official list, part of which is given in i. Chronicles ix. 1-17. It 
 is freely edited by Ch. from a list, which probably belonged to Neheihiah's 
 Memoirs, and followed viL 5. 
 
 xii. 1-26, Ch., Chiefs of the Priestly and Leviticar Clans. 
 Note the reference to Jaddua, High Priest under Alexander, in 22, and 
 to a "Book of Chronicles" ' in 23. 
 
 xiii 27-43, Nehemiah's Memoirs in the First Person, with 
 additions by Ch., Dedication of the Walls. 
 
 xii. 44-xiii. 3, Ch., Provision for Priests and Levites, 
 Extrusion of Foreigners. 
 
 xiii. 4-31, Nehemiah's Memoirs in the First Person, 
 Nehemiah's Return to Artaxerxes, and Second Term of 
 Office, Expulsion of Tobiah the Ammonite from the Temple,' 
 Provision for Levites and Singers, Safeguarding . the Sabbath, 
 
 * Sepher Dibhrl hay ■ Ydmlm. 
 
ESTHER 121 
 
 Renewed Attempt to suppress Intermarriage with Foreigners, 
 Expulsion of a grandson of the High Priest, who was son-in- 
 law of San ballat.^ 
 
 10. Esther. 
 
 (a) DaH and Authorship. — The local colouring suggests 
 
 that the author lived in Persia, nothing else is known of him. 
 
 The alDsence of any reference to the book in Ecclesiasticus 
 
 points to a date not inuch earlier than b.c. 200, and this 
 
 conclusion is confirmed by the language ; its linguistic 
 
 affinities are with Danielj Chronicles and post - Biblical 
 
 Hebrew, and there are Aramaisms. 
 
 Esther is ascribed to the earlier Greek period by Adeney, Exp. Bible, 
 p. 353, Cheyne, Encycl. Brit., Driver, etc; to a later date by Cornill, 
 (. B.C. 130, Kautzsch, c. B.C. 150, Wildeboer, after B.C. 135, and Siegfried. 
 
 (b) Canonicity. — The canonicity of Esther was contested 
 amongst the Jews, even apparently after the Synod of Jamnia, 
 c. A.D. go, for the book is absent from the list of books of 
 the Jewish O.T. obtained by Melito, Bishop of Sardis, 
 A.D. 150-175.2 The exaggerated enthusiasm of later Rabbis, 
 t.g., Maimonides,^ for the book suggests an uneasy conscious- 
 ness of its lack of full authority. The Church, like the 
 Rabbis, hesitated over Esther; even as late as the fourth 
 century, Athanasius and Gregory Nazianzen do not include 
 the book in the Canon. Its position was doubtful in the 
 East throughout , the Middle Ages;* but in the West its 
 acceptance by the Council of Carthage, a.d, 397, assured 
 its position till the Reformation. Luther, however, spoke of 
 the book as "judaising" and "containing many heathenish 
 improprieties," and said he wished it did not exist. 
 
 (c) The Greek Esther. — In the LXX. there are numerous 
 late interpolations, designed to remedy supposed defects in 
 religious and other matters, e.g., in these additions "God" 
 
 ^ For teaching see chapter ii. § 33. There is no trace of ■ Ezra- 
 Nehemiah in N.T. 
 ' Ens. Hist. iv. 26. 
 
 • The Law and Esther will survive all the rest of the O.T. 
 
 * Rejected by Nicephorus Callistus, A.D. 13J3. Westcott, Biblt in 
 the Church, 227. 
 
122 BIBLICAL INTRODUCTION 
 
 and "Lord" occur frequently, and Mordecai offers a long 
 
 prayer. 
 
 ■(d) Contents and Historicity.— In spite of the general 
 
 accuracy in details, etc. of local colouring, the book is 
 
 commonly regarded as a kind of parable or allegory, with 
 
 a certain basis of fact, rather than as exact history.^ 
 
 Difficulties have been found in the way in which the 
 
 fact of Esther and Mordecai being Jews is in one place 
 
 represented as known, and in another supposed to be 
 
 concealed, and in the extraordinary character of the edicts 
 
 for the extermination first of the Jews and then of their 
 
 enemies, and in many other features of the story. These 
 
 difficulties do not seem to furnish a formal proof that the 
 
 narrative is not historical in its main outlines. On the other 
 
 hand, the probable composition of the ; book in the . Greek 
 
 period, and the absence of any corroborating references to 
 
 the events narrated, make its substantial historicity uncertain. 
 
 For instance, Mordecai and Esther are not m,entioned in Ecclus. 
 xliv.-xlix. 
 
 It is doubtful whether the Feast of Purim originated as 
 our book states. No Persian word Purim is known in the 
 sense of lots ; but there was a Persian feast Farwardigan, 
 and the Phrouraia or Phrourdaia of some MSS. of the 
 LXX.' has been tbought to identify Purim with this feast. 
 Moreover, Mordecai and Esther are the_ names of the well- 
 known Ba.bylonian gods Ma^rduk, or, Merodach, and Ishtar. 
 Accordingly it has been suggested ' that the original basis 
 of the book is a Babylonian myth, which had been connected 
 with the Persian feast, which was originally Babylonian. . This 
 view might explain the entire ab.s,ence of any Jewish divine 
 name— God is never mentioned-^and the hesitation of the 
 Jews ^s to the canonicity of Esther. But so : startling a 
 theory will hardly be accepted till there is further evidence 
 for it.* 
 
 ' Driver, KpNio, Wildbbobr, etc, 
 
 * The Sinaitic has Phrouraia. 
 ' Jensen, ap. Wildeboer. 
 
 * There are no quotations from Esther in N.T. 
 
CHAPTER IV. 
 THE POETICAL BOOKS 
 
 I. Job. 2. Psalms. 3. Proverbs. 4. Ecclesiastes, 
 5. Song of Songs. 
 
 I. Job. Cf. Appendix C on Wisdom. 
 
 (a). The Historical JSasis.— The view that the bookj as a 
 whole, was a historical record of things said and done, was 
 widely held amongst jews and Christians up till and even after 
 the Reformation. Yet it was denied by a rabbi, whose opinion 
 — that Job never existed, and was merely a parable — is pre- 
 served in the Talmud, by Maimonides, and by Theodore of 
 Mopsuestia, c, a.d. 440, who held that Job existed, but that 
 the Book of Job was a fiction, and a wicked slander on the 
 character of the Patriarch. Luther recognised a historical 
 basis, but denied that the book was exact history. The 
 existence of Job is supported by the references in Ezekiel 
 xiv. 14, 20,1 and by the improbability that both the hero and 
 his story were pure inventions. But the whole character of 
 the book shows that the traditional material has been freely 
 used as the setting of a didactic colloquy, which is partly 
 paralleled by Plato's Dialogues^ The modern view is well 
 expressed by Keil,^ when he says that the book is "old 
 legend wrought up and sustained throughout with poetic 
 freedom." 
 
 The suggestion that the Prologue and Epilogue are taken 
 from an old prose history of Job has met with some support.* 
 The apparent inconsistency between these sections and the 
 
 ' The only references outside of the Book of Job. There is nothing to 
 connect our Job with the Job of Gen. xlvi.. 13 ; where, moreover, Jashub 
 should be read with LXX. and Num. xxvi. 24, Ball, S.B.O.T, 
 
 " O.T, Introd., English Trans., i. 485. » DuHM. 
 
 123 
 
124 BIBLICAL INTRODUCTION 
 
 rest of the book would be partly explained, if we supposed 
 that the author felt bound to conform to established tradition, 
 especially with regard to the happy ending. Otherwise we 
 have no data for determining the form in which the story was 
 known to Ezekiel or the author of the Book of Job. 
 
 The names of persons and places, as far as they occur 
 elsewhere, belong to Edom or the neighbouring desert.^ 
 Probably, according to the ancient tradition, Job was a 
 wealthy and pious Edomite, who was grievously afflicted, and 
 afterwards restored to prosperity. 
 
 An apocryphal appendix to the LXX. identifies Job with 
 Jobab ben-Zerah, king of Edom,^ a conjecture suggested by 
 the similarity of the names ; states that the book was trans- 
 lated, whether into Greek or Hebrew is not clear, from the 
 Syriac, and that Uz was on the borders of Edom and Arabia. 
 It makes Zophar king of the Minaei, an Arabian tribe. 
 
 (b) Date and Authorship. — The author's name is quite un- 
 known ; all existing evidence is opposed to the suggestion 
 that either Job or Moses wrote the book. 
 
 The date has to be determined by internal evidence, which 
 has been variously interpreted. 
 
 (i.) The Exile is very widely accepted as the period when 
 the book, or its original edition, was composed,^ a view 
 supported by many important considerations. 
 
 (i) The formal discussion of the consequences of the 
 doctrine of the divine righteousness as applied- to the deal- 
 ings of God with the individual, does not appear to have 
 begun much before the Exile. An early stage of the dis- 
 
 ^ Ua, Irani, iv. 21 ; Eliphaz and Teman, Gen. xxxvi. II, 42 P, Jer. 
 xlix. 7, etc. ; Shuhite may connect with Shuah, one of the sons of Abra- 
 ham by Keturah, sent away by him eastward, Gen. xxv. 2, 6, JE. 
 Naamah can scarcely be the town in the south of Judah, Josh. xv. 41. 
 The mention of Naamah as the wife of a Cainite Lamech, suggests the 
 existence of a Kenite clan of that name ; the meaning of the word — 
 pleasant — makes it probable that it was commonly in use both for persons 
 and places. ^ Gen. xxxvi. 33, P. , 
 
 ,, ' Chetne, yb*, etc., 67, 73 f., Davidson, Driver, Konig, and^ 
 DiLLMANN, immediately before the Exile ; but in Introduction to Isaiah, 
 III, Cheyne writes, »-i! Job xiv. 11, " the speeches in Jpb are very much 
 more probably post-Exilic." 
 
JOB 125 
 
 • 
 cussion is found in Habakkuk, Jeremiah, and Ezekiel, who 
 deal briefly with the difSculty of the prosperity of the wicked,^ 
 while the latter discusses at length the question of visiting the 
 sins of the fathers on the children. ^ On the other hand, the 
 author of Job seems entirely ignorant of the explanation of 
 the sufferings of the righteous by the doctrine of Vicarious 
 Atonement given in Isaiah liii. and other Servant-passages. 
 Hence, the Book of Job will be later than Ezekiel, but not 
 later than Isaiah liii. ; i.e., unless Isaiah liii. is post-exilic, the 
 Book of Job is exilic. 
 
 (2) There are numerous parallels with Jeremiah,' Lamenta- 
 tions, Isaiah xl. ff., and contemporary literature ; but there is 
 the usual difficulty in determining whether the parallels in- 
 dicate literary dependence, or merely authorship in the same 
 periodr a.nd under similar circumstances ; and, if there is de- 
 pendence, which parallel is dependent on the other.^ Also 
 the date of the parallel is often uncertain. The parallels 
 between Job and the Servant of Jehovah are also striking j 
 both are lepers, innocent sufferers, who are restored and re- 
 warded. Job xxviii. on Wisdom, g.v., seems earlier than 
 Proverbs i-ix. 
 
 (3) The references to ruin and captivity seem reminiscences 
 of a recent calamity,* possibly the Captivity of Israel, more 
 probably that of Judah. 
 
 (4) Ezekiel xiv. 14, 20 show that the story of Job was in 
 men's minds about the time of the Exile,- but do not suggest 
 that Ezekiel knew our book. But the intercession ascribed 
 to Job in the Epilogue may have been suggested by these 
 verses. 
 
 (s) The Aramaisms and Arabisms of the book are perhaps 
 best explained by an exilic date.^ 
 
 ^ Hab. i. 13, Jer. xii. i. 
 
 ^ Jer. xxxi. 29; Ezek. xviii, 
 
 ' Cf. iii., Jer. xx. 14 ff., ^ note on latter ; vi. 15, Jer, xv. 18; xix. 7, 8; 
 Latii. iii. 6-9; ix, 8, Isa, xliv. 24; xiii. 28^ Isa, 1. gj xv. 35, Isa. lix, 4; 
 xxvi. 12 f., Isa, li, g; xxx. 21, Isa. Ixiii. 10. 
 
 * iii. 18-20, vii. I, ix. 24, xii. 6, 17, xxiv, 12, 
 
 " Cheynb, lob, etc., 99, 293 f. 
 
126 BIBLICAL INTRODUCTION 
 
 (li.) A post-exilic origin has also met with much acceptance,* 
 arid is supported by the following considerations : — 
 
 (i) If Job in any way stands for Israel, the assertions of 
 innocence point to a date after 400. 
 
 (2) The parallels with Isaiah liii., etc., if the Servant- 
 passages are post-exilic. 
 
 (3) The use of Psalm viii. S in vii. 17 f., if Psalm viii. 
 is post-exilip, as Cheyne.^ 
 
 (4) Job XV. 7 f. is said to be clearly dependent on Proverbs 
 viii. 22 ff., especially 25.^ 
 
 (5) Elsewhere Satan only occurs in post-exilic literature.* 
 Other views are far less probable. 
 
 (iii.) The ascription to Job or Moses, or Mosaic or pre- 
 Mosaic times is due to a confusion between the period of the 
 patriarch Job and of the author of the book. The scene being 
 laid in Edom in patriarchal times, express allusions to the 
 law and literature of Israel are avoided, and God is usually 
 spoken of as Elohim; but, as we have seen, the book 
 constantly betrays acquaintance with the ideas and cir- 
 cumstances of the later monarchy, and most probably of 
 the Exile.5 
 
 (iv;) The age of Solomon has commended itself to many 
 scholars ^ on account of the parallels to Davidic Psalms, and 
 to Proverbs i.-ix., etc.; supposed by them to be Solomonici 
 and the alleged dependence of Amos, Isaiah, and other pre- 
 exilic literature on Job.^ But the Psalms and thei sections in 
 Proverbs which have most in common with Job are probably^ 
 
 JCheynb, cf. above, Cgrnui;, r. b.c. 250, Duhm, Kautzsch, f. 
 B.C. 332?, Kayser-Marti, p. 191, between Zechariah and Chroiiides, 
 Smend. 
 
 ^ Psalter, 201, Babthgen, about the time of the Exile. 
 
 ^ So CoRNiLL, who regards Prov. i.-ix., q.v,, as late post-exilic. 
 
 * Zech. iii. I f., Ps. ci^. 6, i. Chron. xxi. i. 
 
 ■^ For the value of the Talmudic statement that Moses wrote the. 
 "section about . . . Job" see p. 8. 
 
 ' Luther, Dblitzsch, etc., ap. Cornill. 
 
 ' Cy: ix. 8 f., Am. iv. 13, v. 8 ; xii. 15, Am. ix. 6 ; xviii. 16, Am. ii, 9; 
 XXX. 31, Am, viii. lo; xiv. II, Isa. xix. 5. 
 
JOB 127 
 
 post-exilic, and, in the case of the other parallels, the depen- 
 dence, if any, is as, or more likely to be on- the side of Job. 
 
 (v.) A date about the time of Isaiah is suggested by the 
 view that the Captivity which forms the background of the 
 book is that of Samaria.^ While this view is not impossible, 
 it seems disproved by the arguments for an exilic or post-exilic 
 date. 
 
 (c) Integrity. — The main difficulties arise from an apparent 
 inconsistency between the different parts of the book.^^ 
 
 The Prologue supplies an explanation of Job's sufferings— 
 that they are to test his righteousness— which does not seem 
 to harmonise with the poems.^ On the whole, however, the 
 poems presuppose the Prologue.* 
 
 The Epilogue seems to spoil the whole book by re- 
 habilitating the very doctrine which the book was written 
 to disprove. Job, restored to health and prosperity, and 
 living to a good old age, would have been a triumphant 
 example of the doctrine that, sooner or later, the righteous 
 were rewarded in this life. Possibly, however, the author felt 
 it necessary to assert the final bliss of the righteous, even at 
 the cost of apparent inconsistency.^ 
 
 The Elifau speeches, though still defended by some dis- 
 tinguished critics,^ are generally regarded as a later addition,^ 
 intended to correct what was regarded as, the undue emphasis 
 oh' certain aspects of truth. Elihu is never mentioned else- 
 where; no notice is taken of his argument by Job or by 
 Jehovah ; his speeches interrupt the connection between 
 
 ' NOLDEKE, Mkrxv .HiTZiG, Reuss, Ewald, under Manasseh, ap. 
 Cornill. _ •.,,,,,. 
 
 ^ On shorter doubtful passages see Contents /ar«'w. 
 
 2 Cf. Teaching, ii. ' " 
 
 ' The Prologue is regarded as later addition by Konig, possibly from a 
 prose work on Job ; but is accepted' by most critics. Cheyne is doubtful, 
 p. 66f. 
 
 ^ Cheyne, p. 6g, Epilogue by an editor, based somewhat carelessly 
 on the Prologue. Duhm derives both from an ancient populat work. 
 
 » BuDDE, Cornill] - : ,' . . . ;. 
 
 7 Baethgen, Cheyne, Driver " all but certain," Dillmann, Duhm;'- 
 Konig, Siegfried, Strack, etc. 
 
128 BIBLICAL INTRODUCTION 
 
 Job's appeal to the Almighty, xxxi. 35, and Jehovah's 
 answer, xxxviii. i ; although his contribution is not mere 
 repetition, it adds hardly anything to the argument against 
 Job. Dr. A. B. Davidson writes : ^ " T^he difference " 
 between the views of Elihu and those of the three friends 
 "does not amount to much, and is apt to be exaggerated." 
 "So far as Elihu's relation to the three friends is concerned, 
 it is not easy to find any great difference between his concep- 
 tion and theirs, or almost any difference whatever in principle.'' 
 The style of the Elihu speeches differs in many ways from, 
 and has seemed to many scholars ^ very inferior to, that of the 
 rest of the book. The two last objections might be met by 
 supposing that this section was added by, the author in his 
 later years.^ 
 
 The speeches of Jehovah have been doubted as a whole,* 
 but unless the original book is cut down to the speeches of 
 Job and his friends, the utterances of Jehovah seem necessary 
 to the plan of the work. The descriptions of Behemoth and 
 Leviathan, xl. is-xli., are more often regarded as additions j 
 the style seems inferior to that of xxxviii. f.^ 
 
 Duhm, in the Kurzer Handkommcntar, ascribes the Prologue and 
 Epilogue to the close of the Monarchy ; the discussion between Job and 
 his friends and the speeches of Jehovah to c. 500-450 ; the Elihu speeches 
 by a much later writer. There are also many other additions. 
 
 (d) Text. — The obscurities and other difficulties of the 
 Hebrew text, and the fact that the LXX. text is very different 
 and much shorter, indicate that many glosses and corruptions 
 have crept in. Various attempts have been made to recon- 
 struct the original readings by the use of the versions, and by 
 the application of theories as to metre, but none have met 
 with much acceptance.* 
 
 1 Pages xliv., xlii. ' Cheyne, RbnAN, ap, Cheyne.' 
 
 ' Kamphausbn and Mbex, ap. Cornill, 
 
 * Cheyne, p. 69. 
 
 » KoNiG, Siegfried ; Driver is inclined to reject xl." 15-24. 
 
 ' The most important are Bickell, Carmina V.T., tr. in Dillon's 
 Sceptics of O, T. ; BuDDE, Hiob' j Merx, Dai GedUht von Hiob. ; Sieg- 
 fried, S.B.O.T, 
 
JOB ,129 
 
 (e) Contents. — I.-II., Prologue. 
 
 Satan' is permitted by God to test Job's righteousness by 
 depriving liim of his wealth and of his children, and by 
 afflicting him with a loathsome disease. Job remains faithful. 
 His three friends ccJme to comfort him.^ 
 
 III.-XXXI., Job and his Friends Discuss the Probl3em 
 OF THE Relation of Suffering and Sin. 
 
 iii. Job, — He curses the day of his birth and longs for 
 death." 
 
 iv., V. EUphaz, — Job's complaint seems to reproach Godj 
 but, in any issue between God; and man, man must be in the 
 wrong. Job, being human, must have sinned. His calamities 
 are chastisements, • sent for his good. If he submits , and 
 repents he will be restored, to, great prosperity, and die in 
 a good old age. 
 
 vi., vii. Job. — Renewed complaint and prayer for death. 
 Job is innocent, his friends have interpreted him harshly and 
 unfairly. If he has sinned, let God remove his sin and 
 pardon him. 
 
 Siegfried regards vii. l-io, thfe brevity and weariness of ■life, as editorial. 
 
 viii. Bildad, — God deals with men according to their deserts; 
 such is the tradition of the fathers. Job's sons must have 
 perished for their sins, and if Job w«re righteous, God would 
 restore him to prosperity. 
 
 ix., X. Job. — Still lamenting and longing for death. Job dis- 
 claims any controversy with God, he is too helpless in spite of 
 his innocence. But, as a fact, God does not deal with men 
 according to their deserts ; good and bad alike suffer, or God 
 "shines on the counsel of the wicked." Job appeals to Him 
 to explain the mystery. 
 
 xi. Zophar. — Would that God would make Job see his sins, 
 as God sees them. Job is really suffering less than he de- 
 serves. Prosperity will follow repentance. 
 
 xii.-xiv. Job. — He claims to be as wise as ,his friends, their 
 traditional doctrines are either commonplaces or " maxims of 
 ashes." The wicked prosper; the righteous suffer. Let God 
 • Qf..p. 127. » Cf. Jer.xx. 14-18. 
 
 K 
 
I30 BIBLICAL INTRODUCTION 
 
 meet him as an equal, and, convince him of sin. If there 
 were any prospect of vindication and renewed happiness, he 
 would wait patiently for it, even in Sheol, if compensation in a 
 future life were possible.^ 
 
 Siegfried treats xii'. 4-xiii. I, God's power in Nature and Providence, 
 as editorial ; xiii. 2 connects closely with xii. 3 ; xii. 9-12, which s^enj to 
 confirm Zophar's estimate of traditional wisdom, are also omitted by 
 Cornill. 
 
 Siegfried also regards xiv. I f., xiii. 28, xiv. 5, 7-12, 14, l8-22 (a didactic 
 poem on the brevity and misery of life, and the certainty of death, parallel 
 to vii. l-io), as a later addition. 
 
 : XV. Eliphaz. — Job's arguments are blasphemous quibbles, 
 most discourteous to older and wiser men. All are guilty 
 before God. By a detailed picture E. shows that the wicked 
 do not prosper, but suifer calamity, and perish miserably. 
 ' xvi., xvii. Job. — Condemned by God and man^ Job protests 
 that he is an innocent man delivered up to the wicked. He 
 must die, but he has a witness in heaven. God knows his 
 innocence. His sufferings are a marvel to the righteous, who 
 yet persevere, like Job himself. His only hope is in death — a 
 barren hope. 
 
 xviii. Bildad. — Calamity dogs the steps of the sinner; his 
 name and family are cut off (like Job). 
 
 xix. Job. — Overwhelmed by God's wrath, forsaken and 
 despised by God and man. Job appeals to his friends for pity. 
 Yet he is confident that, even after death, his Vindicator" 
 (God) will estabhsh his innocence, and he will see God, /.c, be 
 restored to happy fellowship with Him, 25-27. 
 
 For a discussion of the very obscure passage, 2^-11, see Davidson's 
 Job, C.B.S. 291 ff. The Hebrew Text, as it stands, has, by the application 
 of somewhat unfair pressure, been interpreted to mean that Job expects to 
 be vindicated by God and restored to His favour before death. Cf. the 
 alternative renderings: "I shall see God— in my flesh," A.V., "from 
 my flesh," R.V., " without my flesh," B.V. Mg. Siegfried obtains from 
 LXX., etc. a reconstruction of the text, which makes the reference to 
 a resurrection definite and certain; but he regards the passage as a later 
 addition. Cheyne, Origin of Psalter, 442, regards the text of the passage 
 as corrupt. 
 
 XX. Zofihar. — If the sinner prospers, it is only for a time; 
 he is quickly overtaken by misery and shame (like Job). 
 
 1 xiv. 13-15. R.V. s Go'il. 
 
JOB ,131 
 
 joA. Job. — Not so; is it indeed the rule that calamity and 
 sudden death overtake the sinner, 16-18? Far from it; the 
 wicked live prosperously to a good old age; they see the 
 prosperity of their children j they are honourably buried ; and 
 men honour them both in life and after death. If their children 
 suffer, what is that to thein ? " 
 
 A.V. takes 16-18 as a statement; "it is the rule." But this contradicts 
 the argument of the context. Siegfried also takes it as a statement, 
 and r^ards it as an interpolation. 
 
 xxii. Eliphaz.^—Qo& cannot afflict for selfish ends of His 
 own, but only in the interests of justice. Sin must be the 
 reason of Job's suffefings, doubtless the cruelty and oppression, 
 for which Job's wealth and, power would give him opportunity. 
 Let him repent, amend, and prosper. 
 
 Hitherto Job's guilt has only been implied, now he is expressly charged 
 with specified crimes. 
 
 xxiii., xxiv. Job. — He longs for access to God, that he may 
 
 prove his innocence, and learn the reason of God's dealings, 
 
 and why, in spite of his innocence, he is afflicted as by a 
 
 blind Fate. In the world, might and fraud reign, the poor are 
 
 oppressed by the rich, the workers by their employers. Criifie 
 
 is rampant, and the wrongdoer goes unpunished till he dies, 
 
 like other men. 
 
 xxiv. 18-21', the doom of the wicked, are supposed to be a state- 
 ment, by Job, of the views he is refuting. Siegfried regards 13-21 
 as an addition. 
 
 XXV. Bildad.^-'WhsX is sinful ma:n before God ? 
 
 xxvi.-xxxi. Job. xxvi. i-xxvii. 6. — Job acknowledges the 
 infinite power of God, and again protests his innocence, 
 
 xxvii, 7-23. — Tke inevitable doom of the wicked and his 
 family, , 
 
 As this passage expressly contradicts Job's main ;position, it is probably 
 not part of his speech. Its teaching is that of Job's friends, and it may be 
 altogether or in part either a misplaced speech of Zophar,^ who has no 
 speech in the third set, ot a later addition.^ 
 
 ' Ctiwn^T!., Job and Solomon, 38, 114. 
 
 ' KONIG, SiBGFKlED, Smend, Strack, etc. Budde and Cornill 
 defend the originality bf the ascription to Job, and explain thus: As 
 the friends know so well the fate of the sinner, let them take warning, 
 for they are behaving wickedly. 
 
132 BIBLICAL INTRODUCTION 
 
 xxviil- — A didactic poem in piraise of Wisdom. 
 
 The earliest or, at any rate, the most primitive of the great O.T. 
 passages on .Wisdom. As yet, Wisdom is not personified. It Is com- 
 monly explained as a further illustration by Job of the mystery _ of 
 God's ways, but its calm, didactic tone is out of place at ' the crisis 
 of his agony, and it is probably a later addition;^ perhaps an independent 
 poem inserted here to secure its preservation.^ , :\i, . i,;i: 
 
 xxix.-xxxi. Job.—^e meets . the definite accusations' of 
 Eliphaz in xxii. by a detailed statement of the innocence 
 and benevolence of his prosperous life, which he contrasts 
 with his present misery, 
 
 XXXII.-XXXVII., The Elihu Speeches. 
 
 Job's friends having been silenced, Elihu, a. yoilnger man; 
 comes forward to set both parties right, to refute Job by argu- 
 ing the friends' case more efficiently than they have donfe 
 themselves; or, as we might say, modern thought comes to the 
 rescue of traditional wisdom. His contribution, however, 
 is substantially a repetition of the friends' speeches. He 
 asserts that suffering is due to sin, and. that Job is presump- 
 tuous ip questioning Qod's doings. The special features of 
 his speeches are (i.) his i'eply to job's complaint that God 
 does not answer him ; God speaks to men in dreams and by 
 angels,* or prayer (as in Job's case) is left unanswered, because 
 of the pride of man*; (ii.) the stress laid on the disciplinary 
 value of suffeiring.^ The concluding picture of the majesty of 
 God, partly anticipates the speeches of Jehovah.^ 
 
 XXXVIII. i-XLII. 6, The Speeches OF Jehovah AND 
 Job's Submission,. 
 
 Jehovah shows that Job had spoken presumptuously, by 
 describing His wonderful works in Nature, especially, the horse, 
 the hippopotamus (behemoth), and the crocodile {Jeviathan)i 
 Job acknowledges his presumption.^ 
 
 1 DuHM, Siegfried, Smbnd, A.T. Theol.,io!&. ,. ■ 
 
 2 Similarly Cntnv^, Job, etc, 94. But Budde and Cornill defend the 
 passage. The author of Job may have written xxviii. independently, 
 and have sacrificed dramatic effect to his desire to use the poem as an 
 illustrative parallel; but it can hardly have been written as an integral part 
 of the book. ° xxxiii. 14-23. * xxxv. 12. 
 
 '^ xxxiii. 14 d., xxxvi. 7 S., ^ v. 17 ff. " Cf. p. 127. ^ Pf. P-. I2,3. 
 
JOB »33 
 
 .XLIL 7-17, Epilogue. ' 
 
 , Jehovah declares that the friends , " have not spoken of me 
 the thing that' is right, ^s my servant Job hath," but they may 
 be forgiven, if Job prays for them. Job is restored to health, 
 and to greater prosperity ; than that which he formerly en- 
 joyed.i ' 
 
 {^Teaching. — The main subject of the book is the relation 
 of suffering and sin. According to popular Jewish theology, 
 all suffering was punishment ; a righteous: moral government 
 of the world was fully manifested in the present life ; happi- 
 ness and prosperity, loss and suffering were meted out in 
 exact proportionto men's virtues and vices. This doctrine is 
 denied (i.) by the picture of an exceptionally good man, 
 beggared and bereaved, tortured by loathsome disease; (ii.) 
 by Job's description of the prevalence in the world of un- 
 merited suffering and: unpunished sin, by the friends' failiire 
 to prove him mistaken, and by the explicit statement of God 
 that Job is right and the friends wrong. ' 
 
 This denial of' the popular doctrine leaves us face to face 
 with .the problem of the compatibility of evil and suffering 
 with the Divine Righteousness. It is not clear what solution, 
 if any, the author prdposes. 
 
 (i.) The Speeches of Jehovah suggest that we are to regard 
 the problem as an insoluble mystery. If we cannot under- 
 stand God in Nature, we must be still more incapable of 
 fathoming the mysteries of His moral government of His 
 creatures. Job's speeches, however, lead us to expect some- 
 thing more practically useful. 
 
 (ii.) The Prologue explains Job's sufferings as a test of his 
 righteousness. Assuming that the Prologue is by the author 
 of the poem; it is difficult to believe that this is put forward as 
 an adequate explanation of the unmerited suffering of the' 
 world. The author might perhaps intend to illustrate one 
 way in which a good man's sufferings might be explained with- 
 out supposing him guilty of secret sin. 
 
 (iii.) Job expresses a desperate hope^ that his innocence 
 
 * Cf. p. 127. - " iiv. 13 ff., xvii. 13 ft, xix. 25 ff., cf. Contents. 
 
134 BIBLICAL INTRODUCTION 
 
 may be vindicated and he restored to happy fellowship with 
 God in a future life. The author may have intendisd to 
 suggest that the solution might possibly be looked for in 
 that direction, but compensation in a future life is only A 
 possible hope, hot a certain conclusion. 
 
 (iv.) Job's piety and fortitude in his affliction — he denies 
 that God's; righteousness is manifested, but always believes 
 Him righteous — ^are doubtless intended for an example.^ 
 
 (v.) The literary power of the book suggests that the author 
 has not merely worked out a didactic theme, but has rather 
 depicted the tragic consequences of the popular doctrine of 
 retribution, using the deeper mysteries of evil, of Nature, and 
 Providence, to illustrate his main subject. The author's pre- 
 meditated intention to teach may not go beyond the denial of 
 exact retribution in this life. 
 
 Hebrew theology was primarily concerned with the nation ; 
 doubtless the Book of Job shows us the difficulties in which 
 this theology was involved when it turned from the nation to 
 the individual. But, without regarding Job as a mere per- 
 sonification of Israel, we may suppose that the sufferings of 
 the restored Jews, in the days of their devoted adherence to 
 the Law, raised difficulties as to the old doctrine of retribu- 
 tion, even as applied to the nation. The author probably has 
 the nation in mind, as well as the fate of the individual. , 
 
 , ,(g) Use in N,T> — It is remarkable how little use is made of 
 this book in N.T. " The patience of Job '' is mentioned in 
 James v. ii, and there are a few parallels, which might be 
 coincidences.^ Apart from these, the only quotation is v. 13 
 in i. Corinthians iii. 19, ''For it is written. He that taketh the 
 wise in their craftiness." But for this last it would be possible 
 to argue that , the N.T. writers were riot acquainted with the 
 Book of Job,- 
 
 2. Psalms. 
 
 (a) TTie Arrangement of the FsalteK—The following table 
 shows the arrangement of- the Psalter in the Hebrew Text and 
 
 * Davidson, x'xvi. 
 
 ,'1 Phil., i, 19a, however, is identical with Job xiii, i6a, LXX, 
 
PSALMS' 135 
 
 in the Septuagint. In both it is arranged in five books, each 
 concluding with a doxology. The difference of numbering 
 in the two texts is due to the fact that in four instances a 
 single psalm in one text forms two in the other, thus : — 
 
 Hebrew, ix. + x. = LXX., ix. 
 „ cxiv. + CXV. = „ cxiii. 
 „ cxvi. = „ cxiv. + cxv. 
 
 „ cxlvii. = „ cxlvi. + cxlvii. 
 
 The LXX. contains an additional psalm, ipurporting to be 
 written by David, in the first person, to celebrate his victory 
 over Goliath. 
 
 In the table the numbers Showing ,- the frequency of 
 occurrence of the Divine Names are taken from Lowe 
 and Jennings on the ,;Psalms I. xxvii. ; they exclude cases 
 where Elohim occurs in phrases which do not admit of the 
 use of Jehovkhs e.g., " thy Godi" 
 
 The names, etc, to the left hand are the names of persons, 
 apparently authors, mentioned in the "titles. The figures ■ in 
 itaUcs refer to the LXX., and the names in italics are names 
 occurring only in the LXX., either in that particular bbok 
 or part of a book, or in the Psalter as a whole. Where the 
 number of a psalm occurs against two different names, the 
 title, mostly in LXX.j gives both names. '; i 
 
 Book I. 1-41, l-4o. 
 Jehovistic, Jehovah 272, Elohim 15. 1 
 
 Anonymous 
 
 i;2 
 1,Z 
 
 
 10 
 
 
 33 
 
 
 David 
 
 
 3-8,9 
 
 
 11-32 
 
 
 34-41 
 
 
 
 3-8,9 
 
 
 10-31 
 
 32 
 
 35-40 
 
 Book II. 4,2-72, Ji.1-71. • 
 
 Elohistici Jehovah 30, Elohim 164. 
 
 Anonymous 43 66, 67 71 
 
 65 
 David Si-65 68-70 
 
 JjB 60-64 66,67-69 70 
 
136 BIBLICAL INTRODUCTION 
 
 Book II. — continuedi • ; 
 
 Sons of Korah 42 44-49 
 
 Jfl 43-4S 
 
 Asaph.-- 50 
 
 Solomon ,1 72 
 
 71 
 Sons of Jonadab and 1 kq 
 
 of the first caftijies f 
 
 -The concluding doxology is followed by a subscription: "The prayers 
 of David the son oTiJesse are ended," ' '• / • 
 
 Book III. 73-89, 7S-88. 
 Psalms 73-83 are Elohistic, 84-89 Jehovistic. ' .1 
 
 David 
 
 
 86 
 86 
 
 i ' ■■■' 
 
 
 Sons of Korah 84,85 
 
 
 87,88 
 
 
 
 8S,81t 
 
 
 86,87 
 
 
 Asaph 
 
 73t83, . 
 
 
 
 
 Ethan 
 
 
 
 
 89 
 
 88 
 
 Jeduthun 
 
 77 
 
 76 
 
 
 '1 ■ ; 
 
 
 Heman 
 
 
 
 87 
 
 
 
 Book IV. 90^106, 89-106. 
 
 Jehovistic. 
 
 
 Anonymous 
 
 9h 92, 93-99, 100 
 
 
 102 104, 105, 106 
 
 
 91 99 
 
 
 101 
 
 104, 105 
 
 David 
 
 
 lOI 
 
 103 
 
 
 
 90 92-98 , 
 
 100 
 
 m,ios 
 
 
 Moses 
 
 •90 
 
 89 . , 
 
 
 
 , i^ ■ ' 
 
 Book V. 107-150, 106-151. 
 
 Jehovistic, except that cviii.-lyii. 7-11 +lx. 5-12 is Elohistic, 
 and Elohim is used absolutely in cxliv. 9. 
 Anonymous 107 111-121 123 125, 126 
 
 106 110-iso, isi, iss 1^4, m,m 
 
 David 108-110 122 124 
 
 107-109 ,- IS3 
 
 Solomon 127 
 
' i ' > PSALMS* ; -137 
 
 Book V. —continued. 
 
 Anohymous 128-130 '132 134-136,137; 
 
 1S7-1S9 ISl 1S3-,1S5 
 
 David ,, 131 133 138-14S 
 
 '.: , ;!; , ISO, ISS 136,137-144 
 
 Anonj^ous 146 147 148,149,150 
 
 David , 1$1 
 
 tlaggaiandX^^, ij^^ijfi^ij^ 143/iBO 
 
 Zecha,riah J 
 
 Psalms 120-134 have 'the title "Song of Ascents," and 
 Psalms 13s, 146-150 begin and end with "Praise ye the Lord," 
 "Hallelujah." ' 
 
 (b) The Growth of the Psalter.^— The table in § i contains 
 the chief data for determining the history of the Psalter. Our 
 Psalter is the final edition of the Canonical Temple hymn- 
 book;' other collections of hymns may have been used at 
 the Temple later on, but they were not combined with the 
 Psalter. ' Such a national collection of sacred song must have 
 connected with individual psalms through a series of earlier 
 and shorter collections. The compiler of a hymn-book 
 may either rearrange earlier collections according to some 
 principle, authorship, subject, metre, etc., or he may simply 
 combine previous collections; or he may partly follow one 
 method, and partly the other. In most modern hymn- 
 books the hymns are arranged according to subjects, and 
 aiford no evidence of the history of previous collections 
 from which the hymns are derived. But sometimes a 
 supplement is added without ' altering the arrangement of 
 the earlier collection, e.g., two or three such supplements 
 have been added to Sankey's Hymn-book, and th'e arrange- 
 ment of the latest' edition reveals the history of the gradual 
 growth of the book to its present form. 
 
 ' Similarly the present arrangement of the contents of the 
 Psalter shows that the Psalter is the result of a process of 
 aggregation, -by which, earlier collections were combined and 
 supplemented^ without any extensive rearrangement of their 
 contents. 
 
138 BIBLICAL mXRODUCTION 
 
 The Psalter is not arranged according to authorship as 
 indicated in. the titles, for the Davidic psalms are distributed 
 through the five books ; nor according to subject matter, for 
 psalms' on similar topics aire often found far apart, separated 
 by others which deal with' very different topics. An attempt 
 has sometimes been made to show4hat the present arrknge- 
 ment is, in a fashion, based upon subject matter; but its 
 advocates often' rely on niechanicil similarity of diction, 
 e.g., xxxiv. and xxxv. have been supposed to be placed 
 together ;because they are the only psalnis which mention 
 the Angel of the Lord.. It is much more likely that these 
 psalms were found side by side in an earlier collection, and 
 the similarity is due to their composition by the same author 
 or during the same period.- 1 ' 
 
 ' We may therefore examine the present arrangement of the 
 Psalter to see what evidence it affords of its growth from earlier 
 collections. , , ' ; ■ , 
 
 The fact that the Jehovistic psalms are npt all in. one 
 collection, nor all the Elohistic .all in, another, shows that 
 the present grouping has not been arranged by a final editor 
 according to the Divine Names, but has been taken over 
 by him. from earlier collections. Hence we may conclude 
 that Book I., Book II., Ixxiii.-lxxxiii., Ixxxiv.-lxxxix., Book 
 IV. + Book V. are earlier tollections.i ,_-- 
 
 Hence, again, the books are not wholly, at any rate, 
 divisions made by the final editor, but correspond to earlier 
 collections. ; i , , , , , ■ , , 
 
 ; The Elohistic character of Bpok II. and of Ixxiii.-lxxxiii. is 
 due to an editor; the Jehovistic psa,lms xiv., xl. 13-17 are 
 found in II. and III. as liii. and Ixx. with Jehovah changed 
 to Elohim; such phrases as "God thy Qod," "Elohim 
 Sabaoth," i.e., " God Sabaoth," are obtained by altering the 
 Jehovah in "Jehovali, thy God," "Jehovah Sabaoth" to 
 Elohim-, I Since, however,, fhis Elohistic editor did not venture 
 
 ' They may have been modified by addition, omission, etc. , The 
 reasons for combining IV. and V. and for separating Ixxxiv.-lisiEiiix. 
 from them will appear later. : _ , ,. 
 
PSALMS 139 
 
 to tnrfke a sirailaf' revision of Book I. as a whole, the latter 
 
 must have been already firmly established. 
 
 The Elohistic section II. + Ixxiii.-lxxxiii. is plainly a com- 
 bination of three smaller collections: (i.) a Davidic ' hymn- 
 book, li.-lxxii., to which the doxology, and the siibscription, 
 "The prayers of David, the son of Jesse, are ended," originally 
 belonged; (ii.) the hymn-book of the Korahite temj)le choir, 
 xlii.-xlix. ; (iii.) the hymn-book of the Asaphite temple choir, 
 1., Ixxiii.-lxxxiii. (i.) is probably the oldest of these collections. 
 
 The Jehovistic appendix, Ixxxiv.-lxxxix., is a later Korahite 
 hymn-book. 
 
 Books' IV. and V. are very similar, and there is no reason 
 for a division at cvi., since cvii. is the sequel to cvi. Hence 
 
 IV. and V. were one collection, and the doxolOgy at the 
 end of Cvi. cannot be, like the other doxologies, the con- 
 clusion of an earlier collection. The different Divine Names 
 show that IV. and V. were not edited by the editor of II. ; 
 the subscription to II., "the prayers of David are ended," 
 shows that that editor was not acquainted with IV. and V., 
 in which several psalms are ascribed to David.^ Moreover 
 cviii. is made up of sections of two Elohistic psalms, and 
 retains the editorial Elohim, hence the editor of IV. and 
 
 V. or one of his predecessors was acquainted with the 
 Elohistic collection. On these and other grounds IV. and 
 V. are later than II. and III. . 
 
 The absolute date of these collections is difficult to fix ; the 
 most probable conclusions are as follows. In I., i., ii., anony- 
 mous both, in LXX. and Hebrew, were prefixed by the final 
 editor as a suitable introduction to the complete Psalter. The 
 Davidic group, iii.-xli. is the earliest. .Temple hymn-book. 
 The Uterary parallels in some of the Psalms suggest that the 
 collection was made after the Exile,^ perhaps in connection with 
 the organisation of the Temple services by Ezra and Nehemiah.* 
 
 ^ Unless indeed all these titles wereadded after the collection IV. -I- V. 
 was' compiled. 
 , ' Individual psalms, of course, may be much earlier. 
 
 • Robertson Smith, Old Testament in the Jewish Church, and 
 edition, p. 221. 
 
140 BIBLICAL INTRODUCTION 
 
 The Elohistic section, as later than I., will also be later than 
 Nehemiah, a conclusion supported by the fact that in Nehe^ 
 miah vii. 44 there is only one Temple choir, the sons of 
 Asaph,^ whereas before the compilation of this sectionj,the 
 Korahite choir had been formed. On the other hand, this 
 section was compiled before the time of the Chronicler, 300- 
 250, for Chronicles names three choirs, Asaph, Heman, and 
 Ethan or Jeduthun." ■ 
 
 The Jehovistic appendix., Ixxxiv.-lxxxix., to II. and IIL, is 
 somewhat nearer to the Chronicler. , It marks the transition 
 from Korah to Heman and Ethan, by combining Koia,hite 
 psalms with' one headed Ethan, and another, , in LXX., 
 Heman.^ . , . !,,t j > 
 
 • Hence IV. and V. are later than the Chronicler. The 
 presence in them of Maccabaean psalms indiqates a date in, 
 that period. 
 
 The history of the Psalter may therefore be summarised 
 thus : — I 
 
 ' (i.) It includes very early material, but no date Can be fixed, 
 even approximately, as. that at which the most ancient eleiment^ 
 of the Psalter were composed. But the stages of its compila- 
 tion which we are able to trace belong to the period after the 
 Exile. . , , ' 
 
 ■ (ii.) The earliest collection is the Davidic hymn-book, iii.- 
 xli,, compiled about the time of Nehemiah. V 
 
 (iii.) Later on, three other collections were formed, another 
 with the title David, and two belonging to the Temple choirs, 
 Asaph and Korah. These three were combined by an Elo- 
 histic editor, ,,, ./ , " ' '. 
 
 (iv.) Another Korahite collection was made,' and added to 
 the Elohistic section. . 
 
 '' Neh. xi. is not fjart of Nehemiah's Memoirs, but only based upon 
 them ;.,the tl^reefpM division in xi. 17, is not found in the LXX. 
 
 '''i; Ch'ron. vi'. 31 (F., xxv. i. The Chronicler describes the past iij. 
 terms of the institutions of his own times. ' "■"' 
 
 . ° If these positions are correct, the "Jeduthun" of Ixxii., Heb; and 
 LXX., may be a later insertion. 
 
PSALMS ' i *14X 
 
 (v.) The collection IV. + V. was made, also from earlier 
 collections, cxx.-cxxxiv., cxlvi.-cl., etc. 
 
 (vi.) The final editor combined I., II. + III., and IV. + V. ; 
 and prefixed i., ii., not later than about B.C. 132 (the date of 
 the Prologue to Ecclesiasticus). 
 
 This view of the growth of the Psalter, and the arguments 
 by which it is sustained, are substantially those of Robertson 
 Smith.i We can only notice four of the objections to this 
 view ; only the third and fourth are serious. 
 
 (i.) That the Canon was closed in the reign of Artaxerxes I. 
 But the weight of evidence, both internal and external, is 
 decisively against this view. Josephus seems to have held 
 some such theory ^j but his view is merely a deduction from 
 insufficient and misunderstood data. We also read in ii. 
 Maccabees ii. 13,^ that Nehemiah established a library con- 
 taining " books concerning the kings and prophets, and those 
 of David, and kings' letters concerning ofierings," but this 
 does not show that the Canon Or the Psalter were closed in 
 Nehemiah's time.* Moreover, ii. Maccabees is a very doubt- 
 ful authority. The fact that the Samaritans only received the 
 Pentateuch makes it improbable that the full O.T. Canon had 
 been authoritatively established in Nehemiah's time. 
 
 (ii.) The translator of Ecclesiasticus, writing in B.C. 132, 
 refers to a Greek- translation of "the Law, the Prophecies, 
 and the rest of the books." The third class probably includes 
 the Psalter, and it has been argued that if the Psalter was 
 translated into Greek in 132, it must have been completed at 
 a touch earlier date. But collections of psalms may have 
 been translated into Greek long before the Psalter was com- 
 pleted. The Greek editions of Daniel and Esther were 
 supplemented after they had been translated, even without 
 
 ' Op. cit. Lect. vii,, similarly CoRNlLL. Cheyne holds that the 
 Psaltfer was completed before e.g. 142, and that the collections II. +111;; 
 IV. + v., were both formed in the Maccabsean period. CORNILL thinks 
 the Elohistic section received its Elohistic revision some tiine after the 
 collection was formed. 
 
 '= Against Apion, i. 8. " Probably written before A.D. 70. 
 
 • Buhl, English Trans., 10. 
 
142 BIBLICAL INTRODUCTION 
 
 any Hebrew authority for the additions j a fortiori the Greek 
 edition of the national hymn-book would be readily enlarged 
 to conform with the latest Hebrew edition. 
 
 (iii.) We have seen that the doxology, cvi. 47 f., at the close 
 of IV., was added by the final editor; but in i. Chronicles 
 xvi. 8-36, we find a psalm made up of cv. 1-15, xcvi. i, etc., 
 and cvi. i, 47 f. This acquaintance of the Chronicler with 
 the doxology seems to show that the Psalter was completed 
 before he wrote. Numerous answers have been given to this 
 objection ; (a) that the doxology was a part of the psalm as 
 an independent poem^; this is not likely; (b) that the 
 doxology was composed by the Chronicler, and borrowed by 
 the. editor of the Psalter 2; (c) that i. Chronicles xvi. 8-36, 
 is a very late addition to Chronicles. 
 
 (iv.) If, as Gratz and Cheyne maintain, Maccabsean psalms 
 are found in all the sections of the Psalter, either the collec- 
 tions are more recent, or the editors have interfered with thera 
 much more extensively than Robertson Smith supposed.' 
 
 The last two objections suggest, as an alternative theory, 
 that the stages of the growth of the Psalter were as given 
 above, but that a Psalter in five books was compiled before 
 Chronicles, i.e., c. 300, and that later additions were freely 
 inserted at such points as seemed suitable. 
 
 (c) Date and Authorship of Individual Psalms. — We have 
 three kinds of evidence : titles, position in the Psalter, internal 
 evidence. For the titles see (d), where it is maintained that 
 they afford us little help. For position in the Psalter, see (a) ; 
 we may be able to say that certain psalms are older than 
 Nehemiah, and that all are older than b.c. 132, but cannot be 
 much more definite. The internal evidence as to pre-exilic, 
 Davidic, and Maccabsean psalms is considered in (d), (e); 
 otherwise internal evidence does not carry us far. Many of 
 the Psalms are short devotional poems, presupposing no special 
 
 1 ROBBRTSON Smith, O.T., etc., 196. 
 
 ' CoRNiLL, p. 225. Similarly, Cheyne suggests that the doxology was 
 one in use at the Temple services, and therefore known alike to the 
 Chronicler and the editor of the Psalter. 
 
 ' Cf, (e) Maccabsean Psalms. 
 
PSALMS ^143 
 
 historical situation, expressing sentiments common to devout 
 believers in all ages, written in a style vyhich — allowing for the 
 editing inevitable in a hymn-book in current use, and for the 
 imitation of older styles by late scholars — might be used at 
 any time from Isaiah to the Maccabees. 
 
 The history of the Psalter renders it probable that a very large 
 proportion of the Psalms, especially in II.-V,, are post-exilic, 
 and that many in II. and III. belong to the period of Nehe- 
 miah or somewhat later, and that most of the contents of IV, 
 and V. are later still. The contents of many of the Psalms 
 confirm such conclusions ; they express the anxious piety of a 
 poor and suffering people; whose main interest is the Temple 
 and the Law. 
 
 (d) The Titles, Davidic and prerExilic Psalms. — In attempt- 
 ing to use the titles as evidence for authorship, we meet with 
 many difficulties. Probably the oldest titles did not originally 
 denote authorship. Apparently the ".David,"i "Asaph," 
 " Korah " psalnjs are taken from collections bearing those 
 titles. When the snialler collections were merged in larger 
 ones, the origin of the individual psalms was shown by pre- 
 fixing, the title of the collection to each psalm taken from it. 
 But the titles "Asaph," "Korah" probably meant that the 
 collections were the hymn-books of these choirs. So the title 
 "David" given to iii.-xU., h.-lxxii., doubtless indicates some 
 connection with David or his dynasty, but not necessarily 
 authorship by David. , 
 
 In most of the Davidic psalms, the internal evidence, as far 
 as it goes, is unfavourable to Dayidic authorship ; and, with 
 the exception of xviii., never amounts to anything like a proof 
 of authorship by David. The notes of time, place, and 
 circumstance, where there are any, do not point to David 
 or his times, and the contents do not suggest the David of 
 the- Book of Samuel. As to style, before we can apply this 
 criterion, we must have a fairly large group of psalms, 
 certainly David's, before we know what his style was. We 
 
 ^ i.e., iii.-xli., li.-lxxii. ; the case is different with the other Davidic 
 psalms. N.B.^In the title of xxxiv., Abimelech is a mistake for Achish. 
 
144 BIBLICAL INTRODUCTION 
 
 have no such group. In the Lament over Saul and Jonathan, 
 the absence of any religious element in dealing with so 
 solemn a theme is in marked contrast with the deeply religious 
 character of the psalms ascribed to David. 
 
 These facts render it difficult to believe that the Davidic 
 collections consist to any great extent of psalms written ' by 
 David or in his time. Nevertheless, the tradition that David 
 was a poet, and specially interested in sacred music, is early 
 and persistent^ ; probably he composed psalms, some of which 
 are preserved in I. and perhaps II., disguised by a long 
 process of editing. 
 
 The evidence for Davidic authorship is strongest for xviii., a 
 thanksgiving for success in war, which might well have been 
 written by the victorious poet-king.^ 
 
 Pre-exilic psalms will most probably be found in the Davidic 
 collections, those mentioning the king seem to presuppose the 
 existence of the pre-exilic kingdom, i.e., ii., xviii;, xx., xxi., 
 xxviii., xlv., Ixi., Ixiii., Ixxii. ; but the king in some of these 
 may be borrowed from a pre-exilic model, or may be an 
 archaic ideal, or even, as has been suggested, a Greek or 
 Maccabsean king, or some of these psalms may be purely 
 Messianic. 
 
 Outside of I. and II. the title David is probably due to 
 conjecture. There has always been a tendency to ascribe 
 anonymous psalms to David, The LXX. ascribes to him 
 many psalms, which are anonymous in the Hebrew, while 
 some of the "Davidic" psalms in V. are anonymous in some 
 of the best MSS. of the LXX. Later on " David "becomes 
 a title for the complete Psalter. N.T. quotations which 
 connect a name with a psalm, invariably quote it as " David," 
 
 ^ i. Sam. XVI. i8, Saul's minstrel ; ii. Sam. i., the Lament over Saul 
 and Jonathan ; iii. 33, Lament for Abner ; vi. S, plays before Ark ; xxii., 
 author of Psalm xviii, ; xxiii. 1^7, last words .of, PavM,; Am. yi.. J, 
 David inventor of musical,, instruments. As Sam. is composite, the 
 passages cited show the tradition in existence at diffcirent times. ' 
 
 '^ So Babthgbn, KoNiG, ScHULTZ, etc. ; other psalms often ascribed 
 to David by modern critics are iii. , iv., vi.-xii. , xv.,xix. 1-6, xxiv. 7- 10, xxix., 
 xxxii. But, according to Cheynb, Introduction to Isciiah, 171, "no part 
 of the Psalter has yet been shown to have a pre-exilic basis." 
 
PSAtMS 145 
 
 even when' if is anonymous both in the Hebrew and the 
 LXX., e.g., ii. in Acts iv. 25. 
 
 Hence the chief use of titles is to enable us to trace earlier 
 collections. 
 
 (e) MaccabcRan Psalms. — From the time of Theodore of 
 Mopsuestia ^ thfere have been critics, including Calvin, who: 
 have held that the historical situation, implied in! some of 
 the Psaims is that of the Maccabsean period.^ The psalms 
 most often ascribed to this period are xliv., Ixxiv., bcxix., 
 Ixxxiii. In these psalms the Jews are suffering criiel perse- 
 cution, the Temple has been defiled, and the synagogues 
 burnt, 'there is no projihet* Yet the Jews maintain' their 
 innocence,' they are persecuted on account of their faithfulness 
 to Jehovah.* The only corresponding events known to 'us in 
 O.T. times is the attempt df Antiochus Epiphanes to suppress 
 Judaism, in the course of which he tortured and massacred 
 many faithful Jews, sacked Jerusalem, and polluted thq 
 Temple. The persecution was checked, Jerusalem recovered, 
 Ike Temple, purified and reconsecrated, and • Judsea rendered 
 independent .by the revolt of the Maccabees. , As an Elohistic 
 revision of these psalms occurs in H. + (ni.), and Robertson 
 Smith attributes this revision to a pre-Maccabaean editor, he 
 rejects the Maccabsean date for xliv., Ixxiv., Ixxix., and 
 suggests that a similar persecution may have taken place 
 under Artaxerxes Ochus, f. 350. Cheyne, 1891,^ regard,ed' 
 Ixxiv. and Ixxix. as Maccabsean,, but his analysis of Isaiah^ 
 led him to accept the view tjiat such a persecution took 
 place under Ochus, and to cpniieqt Ixxjy. ;an4 Ixxixj with 
 that persecution. ' - , : 
 
 Another group of psalms often regarded as Maccabsean 
 
 ID. a.p. 428. 
 
 * For a stateme-t of the views of older critics see Appendix I. to 
 Cheyne's Origin of Psalter. Amongst later, Cornill and Baethgen 
 reM)gnis^! laa Maccabasan, xliv., Ixxiv., Ixxix., Ixxxiii.; and Baethgen 
 adds ii;,' Ixix., ex., cxlbc., "most probably," and Ixxv., cii., cviii., 
 cxliv., "possibly.", 1 
 
 ' Ixxiv. 7, 8, 9, Ixxix. I, , * xliv; 17-22, Ixxix. 2, Ixxxiii 3, 4. . , 
 
 * Origin of Psalter. • Introduction, 1895. , , 
 
146 BIBLICAL INITRQDUCTION 
 
 comprises ex., cw., arid cxviii. ex., gives a picture of a priest- 
 king, after the order of Melchisedecj le.,' not in the Jegitii 
 mate line of sucaession, which exactly, describes the ppsitipn 
 of the Maccabsean priest-kings, the first of whom waSfgimo,?to 
 142^135. As the first four -verses,' neglecting opening, formi^liae, 
 begin with SA, M, Ayin, 4?; some have seen in; jiti an acrostic 
 on his, name J, but the, attempts :to fit the pther thrqe initials,; 
 Aleph, Y, M, into the acrostic have not been siiccpssful. ; ■ .,,.■ 
 , cxvl, pxviii. celebrate a. successful war, in which t}i,ei leaders, 
 have, been the house of Aaron, to which. the Maccabeesj 
 belonged. . ', ; : ■ li'-.'i ,■',> .n-.liu-j 
 
 If any of these are Maccabsean, it is prpls^ble ,tha,t o.ther 
 psalms, which do .not clearly reflect their, histprij^al situation,, 
 also ;belpng to that period. We, should, naturally expect tp 
 find most of these:. in: IV. and V.-^ ii.i ; . - ;,;;.! 
 
 Some ofhthe; objections to the existence of Maccabs^ 
 psalms have been dealt with , already,^ viz., .the alleged prior 
 clpsing of the Canon and of the Psajter. Others are: — , 
 
 (i.) That ais Maocabfeari psalms must have been comppsed 
 shortly' before the closing of the Psalter, the names of the 
 authors would ha\^e bee-ri known, and' given in the titles., 
 But the anonymity of most of the later psalms shows that 
 it was not the custom to affix- the author's name to productions 
 known to be recent. 
 
 (ii.) It is asserted that the Maecabaean period was not one 
 of literarjr activity. This assumes the point at issue. More- 
 over Daniel is now-assigned to this- period, and Ecelesiasticus 
 to a slightly earlier date, 'f. B.C. 180! ^ : 
 
 (iii.) The language of most of the psalms supposed to be 
 Maccabseari is said to be -too classical for so late a period, 
 but the fragments of the Hebrew original of Ecclesiasficus 
 show that Tvriters of the period imitated, classiqal Hebrew with 
 tolerable success. .' , > 
 
 These objections are not sufficient to prove that there arei 
 
 ' Chbynb, Origin of Psalter, 1891, accepted 26, -viz., 20, 21, 33, 
 44, 60, 6i, 63,74, 79, 83, loi, S08, iis-nS, I3S"'I38, HS-'So- 
 
 ^ Cf. oa. Growth of Psalter. -, - .., ■ 
 
PSALMS? p : :: > 147 
 
 no 'Maceabsean psalms j in the case of those mentioned; abpvei; 
 the internal evidence is strongly in favour of a Maccabsean 
 origin; others probably belong to the same period, but, it, is 
 difficult to identify them. 
 
 (f) Use in M.T.; Messianic /!ra//«f. ^- As i," David" and, "son 
 of David" were synonymous with the promised Deliverer of 
 Israel, and " David " became a title of the Psalter, the N.T. 
 freply uses the Psalms, as describing, the character and ex- 
 perience of the Messiah. Messianic psalms may be divided 
 into!'^ . ' ■ 
 
 (i.) The Righteous King; ii. 7, "Thou art my Son, etc.," is 
 applied to Christ, Acts xiii. 33, Hebrews i. S, v. 5 ; also, "Thy 
 throne, God, etc.," xlv. 6, in Hebrews i. 8, 9; ex., with its 
 king, who is also priest after the order of Melchisfedec, is 
 applied to Christ in Hebrews v.-x., Matthew xxii.- 44,- etc., 
 " If David call him Lord, et&," Acts ii. 34 f., and i. Corinthians 
 XV. '25.1 ■ - , 
 
 (ii.) The Innocent Sufferer ; " My God, my God, why hast 
 thou forsaken me," Matithew xxvii. 46, etc., is from xxii. 'i ; 
 xxii. 18, "The casting of lots " is applied to the Passion, John 
 xix. 24 j xxxi. 5, in Luke xxiii, 46, aiid xxxiv. 20 in John xix. 36.^ 
 
 (iii.) The Typical Man; viii., the divinely appointed relation 
 of Mankind to Nature and the Angels, is applied to Christ, 
 Matthew xxi. 16, Hebrews ii. 6, 7, i. Corinthians xv. 27, 
 
 (iv.) The Perfect Believer; xvi. 8-10, "Thou wilt' not leave 
 my soul in hell, etc.," was applied to the Resurrection by St. 
 Peter' at Pentecost, ahd by St.' Paul at Antioch in' Pisidia, 
 Acts ii. 25 ff., xiii. 35.8 ;> ;.' ; 
 
 The Psalter possesses a special Messianic character as con- 
 taining some of the loftiest and purest ideals, and most exalted 
 anticipations of O.T. religion, in some of which, at any rate, 
 
 * Cf. also ii. I, Acts iv, 25; xyiii, 49, Rom. xv. 9. Other psalms 
 sometimes included in this class are xx., xxi., xl., Ixi., IxxiL, Ixxxix. 
 
 ^.Cf, also xxii. 22, Heb. ii. 12 ; xxxv. 19 and Ixix. 4, Johii xv. 23 ; xli, 
 9, John xiii., iS^ of Judas ; Ixix. 9, John ii,. 17, Rom. xv. 3 j Ixix. 23, R,om. 
 xi 9 f. ; Ixix. 25, Acts i. 20, of Judas, , 
 
 • Cy. also xl. 7, Heb. x. 5-7- 
 
148 BIBLICAL INTRODUCTION 
 
 the aiitEors' consciously express expectations whose complete 
 fulfilment lay beyond their own horizon.^ - < . ' 
 
 (g) Contents and Teaching. — As these are too rich and varied 
 to admit of detailed treatment, the Psalms have been arl-anged 
 in groups. But a; single psalm often touches on Several 
 subjects, so that the classification is only roughly actiirate. 
 
 I,, The appeal of the. sufferer for deliverance. 
 
 (i.) The appeal of Israel against her oppressoifs, 44, 60, 74, 
 
 94, 129-132, 137. ^ ^ : . , Ji ;;..., 
 
 (ii.) The appeal of the suffering saint — the Israelitet or 
 Isra,el-^agaij}st the oppression of sinners, mostly eitljer ;the 
 Gentiles, or, the, Jews who ally themselves with,theni.; Such 
 alliances are known.between Jewish, nobles and the Samaritans 
 iri the time of Nehemiah, and between the hellemising Jews 
 ^d; the Greeks in the time of Antiochiis Epiphanes, land 
 doubtless existed at other times, 3-5, 7, 10^14, 17, 22a,^ 26- 
 28. 31. 35. 41-43. S3-S9. 62. 64. 69-71. ^9b,' 109, 120, 123, 
 
 I40-143> ■• ,,. .- . , .,, ;■ , . - .,,, ; , ^ .. 
 
 ;(iiL) The appeal of the sufferer for .deliverance, 6, 39, 40, 
 6t, 63, 86, 88, 90, 102. -i, : 
 
 (iv.) The appeal of the smner for mercy, 25, 38,, 51. 
 
 II„ Praise and Thanksgiving. 
 
 (i.) For the actual or prospectiyei deliverance of the righteous 
 and punishment of the wicked, , the speaker being still in the 
 shadow of recent trouble, 9, 16, 21, 22b,* 23, 30, 32, 36,, 52, 
 75. "6, 124, 138. ,, ', ■ 
 
 , (ii.) Cpnfideijt prayer ^nd; praise, and expressions of confi- 
 dent faith. There is a tone of unclouded brightness about 
 
 ^,Cf. also X. i, Rom. iii. 14 ; xiv. =liii., Rom. iii. 10-18 ; xix. 4,'b'om. 
 X. 18; xxiv. I, i. Cor. x. 26; xxxii. i, Rom. iv. 7, 8; xxxiv. 12 f.,: i.i Pet. 
 iii. 10 f. ; xxxvi. i, Rom. iii 18 ; xliv. 22, Rom. viii. ,36 ; Ii. 4,;Rom. iii, 
 4 ; Ixviii. 18, Eph. iv. 8 ; Ixxxii. 6, John x. 34 ■ Ixxxix. 20, Acts xiii. 22 j 
 xc. 4, ii. Pet. iii. 8; xci. 11 f., Matt. iv. 6, Temptation; xciv. 11, i. Qor. 
 iii. 20 ; xcv. 7 ff., Heb. iii. 7 ffi ; xcvii. 7," liel). i. 6 j.Cii. ''25 f., HeU L 
 lof. ; civ. 4, Heb. i. 7) cix. 8, Acts i. 20, Judas; cxii. 9, ii. Cor. ix. 9; 
 cxvi. 10, ii. Cor. iv. 13; cxvii. i, Rom. xv.' 11 ; cxviii. 6, Heb. xiii. 6; 
 cxviii. 22, "Tiie stone whicli the builders rejected'"'; Matt, xxii 42^. etCj 
 Acts iv. II, i. Pet. ii. 7 ; cxI. 3, Rom. iii. 13. 
 
 " Verses l-ai, * Verses 38-51. > * Verses 22-31/ ^ > 
 
PSALMS; .1^9 
 
 these psalms. Many are expressly national, and some cele- 
 brate the triumph of Israel over its enemies, 2, 20, 24b",i 34, 
 46-48, soa,2 65-68, 76, 84, 8s,;9i, 92, 95, loi, 103, 108, no, 
 III, 113, 115, 117, ii8, i2r, 122, 125, 128, 134, 144, 146, 
 150. ' ' ' ■ 
 
 (iii.) Praise of God in Nature and Providence, 8, iga,^ ig, 
 93, 104, 107, 145-147. 
 , (iv.) Praise of the Law, 19b,* 119. 
 
 (v.) Praise of Zion, 87. 
 
 ill.. Historical Retrospects, 78, 81, 893,' 105, 106, ir4, 
 
 135. 136. , _ 
 
 IV., Exposition of the Doctrine of Rewards and Punish- 
 ments, parallel to Proverbs, i, 15, 24a,^ 37, 49, 5ob,^ 112. 
 
 v., Discussion of the apparent failure of Divine Justice, 
 parallel to Job, 73. 
 
 VI., Marriage Ode, 45. 
 
 VII., Eulogy of a King, 72. 
 
 Probably when 45 and 72 were included in the complete 
 Psalter, a spiritual or Messianic interpretation had been given 
 to them. It is often supposed that in most of the psalms 
 which use the first person singular the speaker is the com-- 
 munity — a view supported by the long and. widespread use 
 of the Psalter, in public worship. Yet such psalms would 
 be based on personal experience, since the Psalter has also 
 proved to be a perfect manual of private devotion. • . 
 
 (h) J^orm of Hebrew Poetry. — A priori probability and the 
 tendency to equal, length in corresponding lines suggests an 
 original regular metre ; ^ but, so far, all that has been estab- 
 lished is a certain correspondence of sense, and, in a less 
 degree, of form, called parallelism. The unit of Hebrew 
 verse is usually a couplet, less often a triplet, and occa- 
 sionally a set of four, five, or six lines. The correspondence 
 of sense between two members of a couplet is of the most 
 varied description. < , 
 
 Each of the two members may express the same or a very 
 
 ' Veises 7-10. ^ Verses 1-15. ' Verses 1-6. * Verses 7-14. 
 ' Verses 1-37. * Verses 1-6. ' Verses 16-23. ^ Cf, p. 151, 
 
iSo BIBLICAL INTRODUCTION 
 
 similar idei, in Which case we have synonymous parallelism, 
 
 ie:g., Psalm Ixix. 8, 
 
 " r am hiecome a stranger unto my brethren, 
 . , ; , , And an alien unto my mother's children.' 
 
 Sometimes the two members express contrasted truths, 
 which both illustrate the same general principle, in which 
 case we have antithetic parallelism, e.g.. Psalm xxxii. lo, , 
 
 " Many sorrows shall be to the wicked-: , 
 
 But he that trusteth in the Lord, mercy shall compass him about. "» 
 
 Sometimes the second member of, a couplet merely pom- 
 
 pletes or supplements the sense of the first, in which case 
 
 we have synthetic parallelism, e.g.. Psalm ii. 6, 
 
 " Yet I have set my king 
 Upon my holy hill of Zion." 
 
 Such couplets are only distinguished from prose by the 
 context, and, perhaps, by a certain similarity of length and 
 sound between the two members ; the general rhythm of a 
 psalm would guide a singer or punctuator in dividing a verse 
 intd its two hailves. 
 
 The subdivisions of these kinds of parallelism have been 
 variously named by different scholars. Two striking peculiar- 
 ities are : (i.) the actual repetition of a phrase from ^a) in 
 (b), e.g., Psalm xcvii. 5, 
 
 " The hills melted like wax at the presence of Jehovah, 
 At the presente of the Lord of the whole earths" 
 
 and (ii.) the implied repetition of a word or phrase from (a) in 
 
 (b), «.^i, Psalm xviii. 41, 
 
 " They cried; but there was none to save ; 
 Even unto Jehovah, but he answered them not." 
 
 ^ Two common forms of the relation of the two members (a), (b) of a 
 couplet in antithetic pair^Uelism may be illustratedimathematicaUyi 
 We may have — 
 
 (a) A is equal to B. 
 
 (b) A is liot equal to -B, e.g., Proiiferbs-xvi. lo, 
 
 "A divine sentence is in the lips of the king : 
 Or ap-ain ^^^ mouth shall not transgress in judgment," 
 
 (a) A=B. : 
 
 (b) -A= -B, e.g.. Proverbs XV. 18, 
 
 "A wrathfiil man stirreth up contention : 
 • • ■ i But he that is slow to anger appeaseth strife." 
 
PSALMS 
 
 151 
 
 Correspondence of form- naturally arose out of that of 
 sense, and sometimes, as we have seen, was accepted as a 
 substitute for it, though, as a rule, there is a relation of 
 sense between the twp members , of. such couplets, which 
 prOdiiCes Hie feeling of balance or' parallelism. The con- 
 nection of form and sense is best illustrated by Psalm xix. 7-9, 
 where there is a correspondence of " noun to noun, verb to 
 verb, adjective to adjective." 
 
 "The law 
 
 The testimony 
 . The precepts 
 
 The commandment 
 
 The fear 
 
 The judgments 
 
 of Jehovah is perfect, 
 of Jehovah is sure, 
 of Jehovah are right, 
 of Jehovah is pure, 
 of Jehovah is clean, 
 of Jehovah are true, 
 
 restoring 
 
 making wise 
 
 rejoicing 
 
 enlightening 
 
 enduring 
 
 righteous 
 
 the soul ; ' 
 the simple;,' 
 the heart ; 
 the eyes ; 
 for ever ; 
 altogether," 
 
 In triplets and larger groups of lines the different kinds 
 of parallelism are variously combined in much the sanie 
 way as the rhymes in the various stanzas of English poetry. 
 In the same psalm the parallelisms may be of different 
 kinds, but there is a tendency either to use lines' of about 
 the same length throughout a psalm br strophe, or else to 
 arrange the lengths on sorrie regular principle. The con- 
 clusion of strophes is often indicated by a refrain, #.^.', 
 Psalm xlvi. 7, 1 1, 
 
 " Jehovah Sabaoth is with us ; 
 The God of Jacob is our refuge." 
 
 The psalmists occasionally composed alphabetic acrostics ; 
 the mpst striking is cxix., which consists of twenty-two six- 
 linpd, strophes. In each strophe each of the six lines begins 
 with the same letter : in the first strophe with Aleph, in the 
 second with. Beth, etc. Hence in the English versions each 
 strophe is headed with the name or symbol of its Hebrew 
 letter..^ Qther raore or less perfect alphabetic acrostics are 
 ix. -t-x., XXV.,, xxxiv., x^xvii.,, pxi., cxii., cxix., cxlv. Psalm ex. 
 h?,s ,b^en,read as an; acrostic on Simon the Maccabee.^ 
 
 Numerous attempts have been made to discover regular 
 metre with feet, etc., reckoned' by syllablesj words, quantity, 
 
 1 C/.{a). 
 
iS<2 BIBLICAL INTRODUCTION 
 
 and especially accents. No theory has yet been generally 
 
 accepted. 
 
 See W. H. Cobb, A Criticism of System of Hebrew Metre, Clarendon 
 Press, 1905. 
 
 Many poems occur in the Historical and Poetical Books.' 
 
 3. Proverbs. 
 
 (a) Composition, Date, and Authorship. — Proverbs in many 
 ways resembles the Psalter. It is a collection of collections 
 of short poems, assigned by headings to different authors ; the 
 tendency has been to give the titles Solomon and David -to the 
 complete books, because these two kings were typical replre- 
 sentatives of the wisdom and psalmody of Israel. Just as 
 the Psalter contains two earlier collections with the title 
 "David," separated by, psalms with other titles; so here 
 there are two earlier collections with the title " Solomon," 
 separated by proverbs ascribed to "the Wise." These facts 
 suggest that Proverbs and the Psalter had siniilar histories. 
 
 Thus Proverbs, as the national storehouse of proverbial 
 wisdom, would be likely to receive additions as long as 
 Hebrew was a living language, or at any rate till some edition 
 of it had been current long enough to receive a canonical 
 status. The production of a new collection of proverbs in 
 Ecclesiasticus instead of an enlarged edition 'of our book 
 shows that the latter was completed some time before b.c. 
 200. 
 
 , According to the analogy of the titles in the Psilter 
 and elsewhere, the headings may have been added by late 
 editors. The prologue, " Proverbs of Solomon, etc.," i. 1-6, yti& 
 probably prefixed by the compiler of the last edition* ; neitiier 
 here nor in x. i, xxv. i, netici the title imply that all the pro- 
 verbs were composed by Solomon. 
 
 So far, we may place the final editing of Proverbs at sOme 
 date between the formafiori of the last collection and f. B.C. 
 250. We have therefore to see within what limits we caii; fix 
 
 ' Cf. Lamentations, pp. 212 f., and Proy,-,.pp. 152, 136, 
 " But XXX. f., may have been added later still. 
 
PROVERBS ^ , J53 
 
 the ;dates of these collections. The degree of certainty attain- 
 able is lessened not only by the presence of proverbs much 
 older than the collections in which they 'starid^ but also by the 
 probability that some proverbs were inserted and others 
 brought up to date even after a collection had been formed 
 and a title prefixed to it. 
 
 The following table states a forrn of the prevalent view as 
 to Proverbs ; titles in inverted commas : — 
 
 A, i. 1-6, Prologue by final editor referring to the book as 
 
 "J'roverbs of Solomon." 
 
 B, i. 7-ix., Late addition, placed at the beginning as suitable 
 
 introduction. 
 
 C, X, i-xxii. i6, " Solomon," oldest main collection. 
 
 D -and E, xxii. 17-xxiv. 22, "the Wise"; and xxiv. 23-34, 
 "the Wise," two appendices to C, combined with it 
 before the other parts of the book were added. 
 
 F, xxv.-xxix., " Solomon, copied out " by the " Men of 
 
 Hezekiah," second main collection, added to CDE 
 as supplenieht. 
 
 G, H, and I, xXx,, "Agur"j xxxi. 1-9, "Leiliuel" xxxi.; 
 
 10-31, three appendices, the two former post-exihc, the 
 last perhaps pre-exilic. 
 
 Thus C is commonly regarded as the oldest cojlection, 
 though some^ would assign the priority to F. 
 
 C is often^ assigned to the early monarchy, to which period 
 it must, of course, belong if it is older than F, and if the title 
 which assigns F to the time of Hezekiah is correct. Very 
 many of the proverbs in C imply the historical situation of 
 -the period.; the king is' spoken of with, respect and apprecia- 
 tion,^ the general situation seems one of settled order and 
 rribderate prosperity, such as prevailed in the IsraeUte states 
 before the social evils denounced by Amos, Hosea, and Isaiah 
 cariie to a head. A contentious woman is one of the most 
 serious troubles of life. 
 
 ^ e.g., A. B. iDAviDSON, Encycl. Brit.' 
 
 ' Davidson, Encycl. Brit.; Cjisyhr,/o6, etc., p. ^33, 
 
 ' xvi. lO-IS, xix. 12, XX. 8, 26, 28, xxi. i. 
 
154 BIBLICAL ■ rNTRODUCTION 
 
 On the other hand there are features which seerti to belong 
 to a later! period.^ It is strange that we find no traces of the 
 fierce polemic i of the prophets against Baal-worship and 
 idolatry; : Even if the collection was- formed before ; these 
 controversies arose, would it have passed through them un- 
 altered? Again, advanced ethics need not be a sign of a late 
 date, benevolence arid pity, within limited circles,' have always 
 been popular; but such sayings as ' : ' ' .' 
 
 , "Jehovah hath made everything for its own end: 
 
 Yea, even the wicked for the day of evil " (xvi. 4), 
 and . 
 
 " The spirit of man is the lamp of Jehovah," 
 
 " Searching all the innermost parts of the belly " (xx. 27), 
 point to a period when long reflection had been devoted fo 
 the problems . of theology and the spiritual life. They may, 
 however, have been added after the collection was formed. 
 
 The almost uniform use in ,C of couplets in antithetic 
 parallelism is not n,ecessa,rily due tp the compiler, but may 
 be due to a traditional convention. The repetitiori^ of the 
 same or part of a proverb in dififerent places ^- indicates that _C 
 was compiled from earlier smaller collections,. 
 
 If the heading xxv. i is accepted, the appendices D, E 
 to C might naturally, but not necessarily,^ be placed between 
 C and the tinie of Hezekiah. These appendices would very 
 well reflect the vice, extravagarice, and oppression of the 
 eighth century. Repetitions occur* in D, E, which also 
 repeat parts of proverbs from C* The introduction to t), 
 iCxu. 17-21, resembles i. 1-6, and may also have been added 
 by the final editor. . 1 
 
 The heading of F, "These also are the Proverbs of 
 Solomon, which the. men of Hezekiah ... . copied out," 
 would be a most satisfactory pivot for the criticism, of 
 Proverbs, , if it could be certainly relied on, It gives us a 
 
 1 CORNILL, post-exilic. . ■■ i- ; 
 
 " e.^., xiv. I2=xvi. 25, CHBarNB, yin.}, etc., 133, enumerates nineteen 
 instances. . '• , . ' 
 
 " F may have existed long before its combination With CDE. 
 * e.g., xxiii, l7a=XMV. la, ' e.g., xxlv. 20b='xiii. gb. 
 
' PROVERBS '^ ISS 
 
 date for F, and as the "also" implies another collection, 
 which ■ can scarcely be other than C, it shows that C is 
 still older. If F is the older collection, the heading will 
 still be later than C, and therefore not contemporary, but 
 the work of the editor who combined CDE and F, who 
 may be the final editor. The Chronicler mentions no such 
 literary activity on the part of Hezekiah, though we might 
 ejcpect that he would have done so, if this heading lay 
 before him.^ The proverbs in F imply less settled and 
 prosperous times than those in C, and the king or ruler 
 is sometimes spoken of as an oppressor.^ The collection 
 may reflect the troubled days when Samaria was tottering 
 to its fall, and Jerusalem was expecting to share its fate. 
 Yet the evils dwelt on are rather those of a society under 
 an iniquitous government, which uses part of the people as 
 instruments of its oppression ; and the contentious woman is 
 still prominent. We do not seem to be on the verge of great 
 catastrophes. The antithesis between the righteous and the 
 wicked, and the qualities assigned to them remind us of 
 post-exilic psalms, and the references to the law suggest a 
 post-exilic date.' Cheyne, however, regards F: as of the 
 age of Hezekiah, or, at any rate, pre-exilic,* and Driver* 
 writes: "The title (xxv. i), the accuracy of which there is 
 no reason to question." 
 F also repeats proverbs or parts of proverbs- from C.® 
 The three concluding appendices, Agur, Lemuel, and the 
 Capable Woman, are generally, regarded as post-exilic' 
 Agur's meditation on the Divine Transcendence belongs 
 to a very late period of Jewish theology.* His quaternions 
 
 ' CORNILL, " e.g., xxix. 2. 
 
 ' jcxviii. 4-9i xxix. i8, the passages do not seem to be additions, and to 
 render (M ' ' instruction " or " revelation " is hardly in accordance with the 
 concrete, practical nature of the proverbs in this section. 
 ' * /oS, etd, pp. r4S-l49 ; cf. Origin of Psalter, pp. 409, 457. 
 
 ' Introduction, p. 383, similarly Nowack, p. xxvii. 
 
 ' Cheyne, _/oi, etc., p. 143, enumerates 11 cases. 
 
 ' Driver, p. 382, "doubtless." 
 
 * XXX. 5-9 almost reads like a marginal gloss, the protest of a pious 
 reader, who prayed that he might be kept from such dangerous speculations 
 as those of Agur. 
 
156 BIBLICAL INTRODUCTION 
 
 remind one of similar groups in the ' rabbinical sayings in 
 Pirq^ Abdth. The few verses addressed to Lemuel contain 
 striking Aramaisms. " 
 
 A post-exilic date is suggested for "the Capable Woman "* 
 by its being an acrostic — the other O.T. acrostics ^ are, as 
 far as we know, post-exilic — and by its position in the book' 
 Otherwise the quiet, prosperous circumstances implied in this 
 picture of a strenuous housewife might be those of the early 
 monarchy. The language of the poem would be consistent 
 with such a date. 
 
 The date of A and B, which are probably by the final 
 ■editor,* is another crucial point of the criticism of Proverbs. 
 Their similarity to Deuteronomy has led many to place them 
 in^ the closing period of the Jewish monarchy; But other 
 considerations point to a post-exilic date;* the personification 
 of Wisdom is a great -advance on Job xxviii., and is closely 
 akin to Ecclesiasticus xxiv. and the Wisdom of Solomon ; the 
 account of the divine working in Creation and Providence 
 is an advance on Genesis i. The elaborate structure of some 
 of the sentences, especially in ii.,^ suggests the influence of a 
 knowledge of Greek.^ 
 
 Thus the general conclusion indicated is that the complete 
 work is post-exilic, not later' than c. B.C. .250 ; and that 
 probably C and perhaps F were compiled before the Exile, 
 and A'V B after the Exile.^ 
 
 When we come to the contents of these . collections, we 
 
 ^ ' Esheih hayil, for which there is no English equiyaleni • "Virtiious 
 Woman " quite mislfeads the reader, to whom it suggests al pee of vices, 
 especialljyt one particular vice, and not the active, succes .'1 well-doing 
 denoted by the Hebrew. "Excellent Woman " has "a-so been well 
 suggested. 
 
 ^ Pages 151 f. . ' But see p. 153. , ^ So Coknill, etc. 
 
 _ . " A. B. Davidson, EncyU. Brit.; Driver; Chkyne, viijob, etc., 
 p. 168, but cf. below. , 
 
 ° So CoRNiLL ; Cheyne, Founders, etc. , p. 340 ; Kautzsch, Bibel, 
 ii. 212; KoNiG, Smend, p. 5,10, 
 
 ' Sometimes spolcen of as^ a single sentence. ' , 
 
 ^ The dependence of i.-^ix. on Job, and of Job on i.-ix., have teen 
 asserted with equal positiveness ; c/i p. 132. ' 
 
 ^ According 'to Wildebber', the book was compiled at the beginiiing 
 '■df the Greek period ; the older collections at the close of the Persian 
 period. So Toy; but xxx., xxxi., second century. ; 
 
' : PROVERBS -157 
 
 raise the -question of the share of Solomon in the book. 
 Solomonic ; proverbs and Davidic psalms present very similar 
 problems. Both are supported by ancient tradition ; ^ are 
 very probable when all the evidence has been considered, 
 and are naturally, to be. looked for in the oldest collections 
 hearing the names of David and Solomon. But in ileither 
 case is it likely that even the oldest collection is wholly or 
 substantially David's or Solomon's, and definite criteria for 
 Solomonic proverbs are more entirely absent than for 
 Davidic Psalms. ' The contents of C suggest that, the 
 compiler , was rather , a man in rrioderate circumstances 
 moving in middle-class society than a magnificent and 
 luxurious king surrounded by a splendid codrt. Sayings 
 of 1 Solomon would reach such an editor, but are not now 
 distinguishable from his other material. , Where the evidence 
 is so vague, critical opinion naturally varies widely. Professor 
 A„ B. Davidson writes ^ of Proverbs: "Much" in the book 
 " may be referred to the age. of Solomon, particularly the 
 sayings in chapters x.-xxii., though much even in this division 
 may be later " ; on the other hand, a distinguished critic denies 
 Solomon any share in Proverbs.* 
 
 (b) Texf.^—The LXX. differs very widely from the Hebrew ; 
 it makes numerous additions, some of which are also found in. 
 the Vulgate or Syriac. For instance, after vi, 6-8, which 
 commend the ant as an example, the LXX. adds a Similar 
 passage on the bee. The order of some sections is different, 
 the most important change being the insertion of xxx. 1-14 
 (part Of Agur) between xxiv. aa and 23; and xxx. 15-xxxi. 9 
 (rest of Agur, and Lemuel), between xxiv. 34, and xxv. i^ 
 This arrangement .indicates that the three appendices G, H, I 
 were combined with the rest of the hook in- different ways by 
 different editors. , ' f^ ■■ 
 
 ! The headings, x. i, "Proverbs of Solomon," xxiy. 2.3, "These 
 
 ' L Kings iv. 32. 
 
 ' Jod, C.B.S., p; 'ix. j Strack speaks of C as substantially (iii^flA/zVyS) 
 Solomonic. 
 
 • Smend, A.T. Theol., p. 510 n., "Mit den kanonisehen'Proverbien 
 hat Salerno fteilich niclits zu thun." •! 
 
IS8 BIBLICAL INTRODUCTION 
 
 also are of the Wise,"^ xxx. i, " Words of Agur,'' qtc, xxxi. i, 
 "Words /of Lemuel," etc., are omitted, in order that, the 
 " Proverbs of Solomon " in i. i, may be understood to extend 
 to the whole book. , . 
 
 (c) Contents.— rl. 1-6, General Heading. 
 
 " The Proverbs of Solomon, the son of David, King , of 
 Israel," and statement of purpose of book. ; i 
 
 I. 7-IX., In Praise OF Wisdom, 
 
 Chiefly iil couplets and synonymous parallelism, 
 
 i. 7-vii., A series of didactic poems, mostly beginning. ," My 
 son," exhorting the reader to practise virtues and avoid vice, 
 and thus follow wisdom. 
 
 viii., ix., Wisdom invites men to her banquet ; warns them 
 against folly. Wisdom as God's agent in creation and provi- 
 dence, i 
 
 X. i-XXII. i6, "The Proverbs of Solohon."" 
 
 A collection of miscdlaneous aphorisms on life and con- 
 duct, for the most part secular rather than distinctly re- 
 ligious; almost entirely in couplets, and chiefly in antithetic 
 parallelism. '■•■ , 
 
 XXII. 17-XXIV. 22, "The Words of the Wise."? 
 
 xxii. 17-21, Purpose of collection, stated in first person by 
 compiler. . 
 
 xxii. 22-xxiv. 22, A similar collection to x.-xxii. i6j 'The 
 grouping of the lines^ is very varied, from couplets to a set^of 
 eight clauses, but quatrains are most frequent. The parallel- 
 ism is chiefly synonymous. 
 
 , xxiv. 23-34,. "These also are the sayings of 1 the Wise."* 
 Appendix to above, including '' the Parable of the Sluggard" 
 Grouping of lines varied, parallelism synthetic or synonymdusi 
 - XXV. -XXIX., "Proverbs OF Solomon." > 
 
 "These also are the Proverbs of Solomon, which the men 
 of Hezekiah, king of Judah, copied out.?' Another.' similar 
 
 ' Replaced by an exhortation similar to xxii. 17. 
 
 ' This heading is omitted by LXX, and Syt. 
 
 ' xxii, 17., ; . . . 
 
 * UCX. omits and replaces by a hortatory clause like xxii, 17, .j 
 
PROVERBS 'ISP 
 
 collection J couplets preponderate, but both grouping of lines 
 and parallelism are varied. 
 
 XXX., "The Words of Agur, the Son of Jakeh, the 
 Oracle."^ . , , : ^ 
 
 iNothing is' known of Agur, the name may be symbolic, 
 ".hireling" or "collector of wisdom/'* 
 
 A series of epigrams, from two ' to ten lines each, on the 
 Divine Transcendence, four wicked generations, four insatiable 
 things, four wonderful things, four intolerable things, four 
 things .that are little but wise, four stately things, ictci 
 
 XXXI. r-9, "The Words of. King Lemuel,. "» 
 
 " The oracle which his mother taught him." 
 
 Nothing is known of Lemuel, possibly a symbolic name, 
 " belonging to ;God;" Unless it is thought necessary to claim 
 every verse, of the book for Solompij, there is no ground for 
 identifying either A.gur or Lemuel with the Wise. King. , 
 
 Warnings against debauchery and injustice. 
 
 XXXL 10-31, The Capable Woman. 
 
 An alphabetic acrostic, chiefly in couplets, an^i synonymous 
 parallelisrn ; in praise of the capable woman. . ^ 
 
 (d) Teaching. — The general, theme of Proverbs is t;he 
 practical advantage of industry and prudence, honesty and 
 godliness. The problems of Job are ignored, as they niostly 
 are in Ecclesiasticus, probably not because they, were still 
 unknown, but because they ^ere not urgent at the times and 
 under the circumstances when the collections were compiled. 
 The Proverbs state practica,! truths of average life, and copi- 
 fortable, prosperous men of a, practical turn of mind s have . a; 
 gift for ignoring bqth speculative difficulties and 1 exceptional 
 suffering. Proverbs also ignores polygamy,* and, so far, may 
 be said to praise monogamy. The great passage on Wisdom ^ 
 
 < ~ ■ ^ . . , . i : ■ ' , ■ . \ >\', 
 
 ' So R.Vi Text, R.Vl Mg., "burden"; others propose "of Massa," 
 understanding Massa as a proper name,, possibly a district of .Arabia. 
 LXX. omits XXX. i. „ . , 
 
 . ? "Ithiel" and "Ucal" should not be taken as proper ,pames, but 
 translated as R.,V.,Mg., ! ; :; ... , , ;, 
 
 '.R.V., pr, as R.V.,.Mg., .Jj^muel„king of Massa. , LXX,, omits. 
 
 • Sometimes regarded as evidence of post-exilid loriging " viii. f. 
 
leo BIBLICAL INTRODUCTION 
 
 is the basis of the doctrine of the Divine Wisdomj as an^ 
 almost personal manifestation of God in His working; it is 
 also one of the most striking O.T. statements of God's 
 creative and providential activity. ■'■'■■• 
 
 (e)' Use in iV:.r.— The " Whom the Lord ilovethi, He 
 chasteneth," of Hebrews xii. 5 f,, is fromiii. 11 f.;' the "eheerfiir 
 giver,"! of ii. Corinthians ix. 7, is a reminiscence of xxii. 8, 
 LXX.2 The description of Christ as " the. Wisdom of God^'^ 
 prepared the way for the later identification of Christ with 
 "Wisdom," which made the statement that God' created 
 Wisdom* a proof text of Arian polemics^ 1 ' 
 
 4. Ecciesiastes. 
 
 (a) ySrV/e.'-— The Hebrew title Qoheteth has been variously 
 interpreted. It is a derivative of qahal, ah assembly, and is 
 in form an active feminine participle, " tone who calls' or 
 addresses an assembly." It has been takeii (i.) as agreeing 
 with Wisdom understood, but i. 12, " I, Qoheleth, was king," 
 shbws'that it refers to Solomon ; therefore we should adopt 
 (ii.) that the feminize form is used, as in Arabic,^ for a repre- 
 sentative character, so LXX. and Vulg. " Ecciesiastes," Luth. 
 "Prediger," A. R. "preacher," R. Mg. "great orator."^ Less 
 probable explanations are "bollector (of wise sayings)," "caller 
 of assemblies," "debater."'' Unsuccessful attempts ' have 
 been made to show that Qoheleth is a cryptogram for 
 Solomon. 
 
 (b) Date and Auihorskip.-^'Yhe language belongs to the 
 latest stage of biblical Hebrew; Aramaic words are used.' 
 The vocabulary and idioms have much in common with the 
 
 1 l\aphv5lrrj)v. . ; < 1 
 
 ' Cf. also iii. 34, Jas. Iv. 6, i. Pet. v. 5 ; xi. 31, i. Pet. iv. 18 ; xxv. 21, 
 Rom. xii. 20 ; xxvi. 1,1, ii.Pet. ii. 22. ' i. Cor. i. 24. 
 
 * viii. 22, LXXv; Heb. qanani, A. R. " possessed," R. Mg. "formed.'! 
 ' Palmer, Arab. Gram., p. 53. 1 
 
 * dy. ' the ' masc. names Sdphereth^ssx'&i^ (femi.), Mokheretlt=%^et 
 (fem.), Ezraii. 55 ff. ' PLUMPTREi ■ 
 
 " e.g., z'»?o«, " time," only elsewhere in O.T., in Neh,, Esther, and the 
 Aramaic: section of DanieU. 1 ; 
 
ECCLESIASTES . i6i 
 
 post-biblical Hebrew of the Mishna, etc.^; some idioms in 
 constant use in biblical Hebrew are rarely or never used.^ A 
 more or less considerable influence of Greek upon the language 
 of Qoheleth has been maintained by some scholars,^ but denied 
 by Cheyne. The language points to a date in the Greek 
 period, or, at the earliest, at the end of the Persian period. 
 
 The historical situation is not clearly defined, but we gather 
 that the Jews are oppressed by the officers of an alien govern- 
 ment.* Such a state of affairs points either to the close of 
 the Persian period, or to the times when the Ptolemies and 
 Seleucids in turn ill-used the Jews, before the revolt of the 
 Maccabees. 
 
 On the other hand, neither the situation implied nor the 
 depressed tone of the book suit the stirring period of the 
 Maccabees. 
 
 It has been maintained * that the version found in MSS. of 
 the LXX. is that of Aquila; but, in any case, the history of 
 the LXX. is too little known to afford much help in fixing the 
 date of this book. 
 
 The theology of the book also points to a late post-exilic 
 date. The temple worship is assiduously observed, but a time 
 has come when men can regard it with a languid approval 
 which affords them little comfort. The eager enthusiasm and 
 fierce controversy of Ezra's time seem long since to have died 
 away, and something of the well-bred indifference of the 
 Sadducee has crept over men's souls. This again would suit 
 the Greek period. 
 
 Qoheleth has parallels with Greek philosophy,^ which are 
 
 ' e.g., Ifhhar, "already" (seven times), nowhere else in O.T., but used 
 in Hishna ; and the use of she and shel, alone ot with prepositions, for the 
 Heb. 'dsher. 
 
 " With three exceptions, the Peri with Simple Waw is used for the 
 Imperf. with Waw Consec. 
 
 ' GrItz, etc., ap. Cheyne, ybi, etc, p. 260; Tylek, Wildbboer. 
 An example is the alleged use oi yapheh, "fair," in the ethical sense of 
 KoKhi, especially in the phrase tdbh 'dsher ydpheh, v. 17, "good which is 
 fair," said to equal the KoXds Kir/aBoi, * V. 8f. 
 
 ° Gratz, rejected by Dillmann ; ap. Wildeboer, 
 
 • Plomptre, Eccl. etc. ; Tyler, 
 
i62 BIBLICAL INTRODUCTION 
 
 sometimes supposed to indicate dependence, either on 
 Epicurus, as is suggested by the numerous statements that 
 the only attainable happiness lies in the reasonable enjoy- 
 ment of the good things of this life ; or on the Stoics, whose 
 doctrine of recurring cycles is parallel to i. 2-1 1, and of 
 Determinism to iii. j or on Heraclitus ^ in such passages as 
 iii. 1-8. Certainly the book has much of the Stoic temper, 
 and less than the Stoic faith, and the many parallels are most 
 easily explained by some influence, direct or indirect, of 
 Greek thought, but it might not be impossible to explain 
 the book as an independent development of Hebrew thought.^ 
 
 Whilej therefore, the possibility of a date at the close of the 
 Persian period^ cannot be positively excluded^ the weight of 
 the evidence is in favour of about B.C. 200.* 
 
 It follows that the ascription to Solomon,^ like that of the 
 book of Daniel to Daniel, is a mere literary form, which the 
 author is not very careful to maintain.^ But although, with 
 few exceptions,^ the Solomonic authorship was universally 
 accepted till towards the end of last century, even in 1881 
 Dean Plumptre wrote, " No one now dreams of ascribing it to 
 Solomon." ^ There are still, however, some works in circula- 
 tion which maintain the traditional view.^ 
 
 ' Pfleiderek, ap. Wildbboer. 
 
 ' Cheyne, _/ffi5, etc., 271, "I do not see that we must admit even a 
 vague Greek influence." Dillon, Sceptics of O.T,, sees Buddhist in- 
 fluence in xii. 7, the reabsorption of the spirit into the Divine. 
 
 ' So EwALD, Delitzsch, ap. Cheyne, Keil, Eng. Trans., i. 518, 
 
 C. B.C. 444. 
 
 * Cheynb, Job, etc., p. 271, CoRNiLL, Driver, Kayser- Marti, 
 p. 191, Kautzsgh, Bibel, c. B.C. 250?; Plumptre, Smend, AT. Thiol.,, 
 Greek period, p. 526, Tyler, Konig, Alex. Jannseus, B.C. 104-78; 
 Gratz, Herod the Great, B.Ci 39-4. 
 
 " Solomon is not named, but the wise, wealthy son of David, king over 
 Israel in Jerusalem, can be no one else. 
 
 ' i.g., the phrase "all," i.e., apparently, all the kings of Israel "that 
 were before me in Jerusalem," i. 16, ii. 7, 9- 
 
 ' Luther, Grotius, etc., ap. Plumptre, p. 23. 
 
 ' Eccl. p. 21, cf. Oxford Helps, "The book was formerly supposed to 
 have been written by Solomon." 
 
 ' Principal Douglas in notes inserted in his translation of Keil's 
 Introd., 1871; Rev. W. T. Bullock, m,a., in the Speaket't Com- 
 menthry. 
 
SONG OF SONGS • 167 
 
 wider and deeper than we are sometimes taught; its logical 
 sequel is the sacrifice of Christ. 
 
 (f) Use in N.T. — There is no evidence that any N.T. writers 
 were acquainted with Ecclesiastes, unless we accept Dr. Paul 
 Haupt's suggestion that "Luke xii. 22-34 , . . (like Psalm 
 cxxvii.) is evidently directed against Ecclesiastes." ^ 
 
 (g) Canonicity. — The right of Ecclesiastes to a place in the 
 Jewish canon was long contested, but was ofBcially conceded 
 by the Synod of Jamnia, a.d. 90. The church, as in many 
 other matters, simply adopted the decision of the. Rabbis. 
 
 5. Song of Songs. 
 
 (a) Date and Authorship. — The title, " The Song of Songs, 
 which is Solomon's," may merely mean that it is about 
 Solomon ; if it is intended to assert authorship, it is merely 
 a late conjecture suggested by the contents, like so many of 
 the Psalm titles. Solomonic authorship is now very generally 
 rejected. The language has some striking characteristics of 
 the latest period of Hebrew,^ which point to a date at the 
 close of the Persian period, or even later.' 
 
 These linguistic peculiarities, however, are often explained 
 by supposing that Canticles was written in the dialect of 
 Northern Israel. The mention of Tirzah, the capital: of that 
 kingdom, before Omri built Samaria,* has also been held to 
 support a pre-exilic date. There is every probability that the 
 language of Northern Israel had dialectic peculiarities, but 
 there is not sufficient evidence to establish the unlikely theory 
 that these peculiarities coincided with those of the latest stage 
 of the Hebrew language. These are entirely absent from the 
 one O.T. document, which certainly belongs to Northern 
 
 '^ Johns Hopkins Univ. Circ, No. 89. 
 
 * The use of the prefix sh for 'dsher, of Shel; the occurrence of the 
 Persian /an/«J, park, iv. 13, cf. Neh. ii. 8, Eccl. ii. 5; and of 'appirydn, 
 perhaps = Greek fhoreion. 
 
 ' BuDDB, 2nd or 3rd century B.C. ; Cheynk, Founders O.T. Crit., 
 p. 351 f.; CORNILL, not earlier than Persian period ; Kautzsch, B.C. 332?; 
 KoNiG, early post-exilic period ; Steack, Persian period. 
 
 * vi. 4, ^ L Kings xvi. 23 f., also mentioned in ii. Kings xv. 14, 16, 
 
i68 BIBLICAL INTRODUCTION 
 
 Israel, the Book of Hosea. The significance of Tirzah-^ 
 pleasantness — would suggest its use as a type of beauty; 
 Tirzah is used as a woman's name in the Priestly Code,^ and, 
 if Tirzah be the flourishing modern town of Tulluzah,^ it may 
 have been important enough in the post-exile period to be 
 coupled with Jerusalem. 
 
 (b) Canonidty. — ^The status of Canticles was matter of con- 
 troversy amongst the Jews until the Synod of Jamnia, a.d. 90, 
 when it was definitely received into the Canon. Yet, even in 
 the second century, parts of it were trolled out^ in the wine- 
 shops as drinking songs. The Church, as usual, endorsed the 
 decision of the Rabbis. There is no doubt that it became 
 caijonical alike among Jews and Christians on the understand- 
 ing that it was to be used as an allegory. The heading in the 
 Peshitto Syriac, "Wisdom of Wisdoms," points to this view of 
 the book. The defenders of the dramatic theory justify its 
 inclusion in the Canon as a panegyric on virtuous love. 
 
 The book is not referred to in the N.T. 
 
 (c) Contents and Interpretation.— C&nticles contains a collec- 
 tion of poems concerning the mutual affection of two lovers- 
 It has been variously understood as :-— 
 
 (i.) An Allegory; among the Jews, Of Jehovah's love for 
 Israel, by Christians of Christ's love for His Church, as in the 
 headings in A.V.* There is no reason to suppose that the 
 original author intended the book for an allegory. 
 
 (ii.) A Drama ; with a full equipment of dramatis personse, 
 lovers, ladies of the harem, first and second citizens, villagers, 
 etc. This theory has been held in different forms, of which 
 there are two chief varieties, (i) The drama depicts the 
 loves of Solomon and one of his queens^* the Shulamite, 
 .Solomon assuming, at times the character of a shepiherd. 
 Thus, i. i-iii. s, Courtship; iii. 6-v. i, Marriage; v. 2-vi. 9, 
 
 ^ Num. xxxvi. II, etc. 
 
 = G. A. Smith, Hist. Geog., p. 355. 
 
 8 Trdllert, BuDDE, Cant, x., quoting Tosephta Sanhedrin xii. 
 
 " Keil, O.T. Introd.,'E,ag. Tians., i. 503, 
 
 ' Delitzsch. 
 
SONG OF SONGS * 169 
 
 Domestic DifSculties; vi. lo-vii. 9, Mutual Satisfaction j vii. 
 lo-end, the Shulamite takes Solomon to visit her home and 
 family. (2) The drama has three main characters, the Shula- 
 mite, a shephisrd, to wh&m she is betrothed, and Solomonj 
 who attempts to win Tier affections.^ Thus, i. i-vii. 9, the 
 Shulamite, in the harem, combats the persuasions of Solomon 
 and his womenfolk by the help of her reminiscences of her 
 shepherd lover ; vii. lo-viii. 4, Final Rejection of Solomon iii 
 favour of the Shepherd; viii. 5-14, Happy Reunion of the 
 Shulamite and the Shepherd. 
 
 According to this view, the book is in praise of pure 
 conjugal affection. 
 
 (iii.) An Epithalamium ; the book is a collection of songs, 
 connected with a Syrian custom, called the " King's Week." 
 During the first week after marriage the bride and bridegroom 
 play at being king and queen, and are addressed as such by a 
 mock court, in a series of songs similar to those of Canticles. 
 Thus Canticles would contain a specimen of the cycle of 
 songs used at a seven days' village feast in honour of a 
 peasant bride and bridegroom, the latter being addressed as 
 " Solomon," the type of a splendid and powerful king. 
 
 Earlier critics had suggested that the book was a collection 
 of songs, but this particular view originated in J. G. Wetz- 
 stein's accounts of the custom sketched above. It was 
 accepted and developed by Carl Budde in various articles, 
 and in his commentary on Canticles in the Kurzer Hand 
 Comm. zum A.T. ; it has been adopted by Cornill, Kautzsch, 
 etc. 
 
 One objection to (ii.) and (iii.) — the absence of headings is 
 not serious. We might perhaps have expected headings to 
 songs constituting a collection, and should certainly , look for 
 some equivalent of our list of dramatis personae, stage direc- 
 tions, etc., in the " Book of the Words " of a drama. Yet, in 
 the present instance, their absence is not difficult to under- 
 stand; they were probably removed when it was decided that 
 
 * Adenby, Davidson, Driver, Konig, Smith, W.R., etc., following 
 
 EWALD. 
 
I70 BIBLICAL INTRODUCTION 
 
 the book was to be regarded as an allegory. But in spite of 
 the ingenuity devoted to the interpretation of the book as 
 a drama, there is a conspicuous absence of what we should 
 call dramatic — the story does not tell itself at all clearly. The 
 dramatic theory moreover is not supported by any parallels in 
 ancient Jewish literature. On the other hand, Budde's theory 
 (iii.) affords an adequate explanation of the facts. Possibly, 
 however, \the cycles of songs used at village nuptials were 
 supposed to tell some traditional story concerning Solomon. 
 We need not suppose that actors assumed parts, the village 
 chorus spoke in turn for different personages, bride, bride- 
 groom, etc. Moreover, the compiler of Canticles may have 
 been acquainted with and used different cycles of songs, so 
 that our book may be a combination of two or more such 
 cycles, or more probably one cycle has been amplified from 
 others. 
 
CHAPTER V. 
 ISAIAH-DANIEL 
 
 1. Our Book of Isaiah, with 
 
 General Analysis. 
 
 2. Isaiah i.-xxxr. 
 
 3. Isaiah xxxvi.-xxxix, 
 
 4. Introduction to Isaiah xl,- 
 
 Ixvi. 
 
 5. Isaiah xI.-1t. 
 
 6. Isaiah Ivi.-lxvi. 
 
 7. Jeremiah. 
 
 8. Lamentations. 
 
 9. Ezekiel. 
 10. Daniel. 
 
 I. Our Book of Isaiah, with General Analysis. — Our 
 present Book of Isaiah is quoted in N.T. times under the 
 title "Isaiah," but it is not certain that this necessarily 
 means that the whole book throughout was written by Isaiah. 
 The earliest trace of the existence of our book in its present 
 form is the statement in Ecclesiasticus xlviii. 23-25 that 
 Isaiah "comforted them that mourned in Zion,^ etc." The 
 book falls into five main sections : (a) i.-xii. ; (b) xiii.-xxiii. ; 
 (c) xxiv.-xxxv. ; (d) xxxvi.-xxxix. ; (e) xl.-Ixvi. The present 
 arrangement suggests that (a), (b), (c) are separate collections 
 of Isaianic prophecies, based on earlier collections, with 
 additions. As some of these additions, in each case, are 
 post-exilic, (a), (b), (c), as they stand, are post-exilic; (d) is 
 an appendix, added by an editor who combined (a), (b), (c), 
 therefore also post-exilic. Chapters xl. ff. (e) " Second Isaiah '' 
 is a collection of exilic and post-exilic prophecies ; apparently, 
 in the time of the author of Ezra, i.e., the Chronicler, this 
 collection was not attributed to Isaiah. Both collections, 
 i.-xxxix. and xl.-lxvi., were completed after the Exile, the 
 exact date depends on the view taken of the date of the 
 latest sections contained in each. It cannot be earlier than 
 ' Isaiah xl. I. 
 171 
 
172 BIBLICAL INTRODUCTION 
 
 c. 400. The final combination of i.-xxxix. and xl.-Ixvi. was 
 
 probably accidental. In some lists Isaiah stands after 
 
 Jeremiah, Ezekiel. If Isaiah i.-xxxix. were immediately 
 
 followed by the anonymous book xl,-lxvi., the combination 
 
 of the two, under the title Isaiah, would be inevitable. Cf. 
 
 Zechariah. 
 
 GENERAL ANALYSIS 
 
 (Arranged accotding to Authorship). 
 Isaiah i.-xxxix. 
 " First Isaiah." 
 (Sections not by Isaiah in Italics.) 
 i.-xi. 9, Judah, Ephraim, Syria, and Assyria. 
 xi. io~xiv. 23, First Group of Later Additions, 
 xiv. 24-xxiii., Oracles on the Nations (including, however, 
 the oldex fragments in xv., xvi., and the post-exilic xxi. i-io). 
 xxiv.-xxvii., Second Group of Later Additions. 
 xxviii.-xxxii., Chastisement by and Deliverance froni 
 Assyria. . , 
 
 xxxiii.-xoMcv.^ Third Group of Later Additions, 
 xxxvi.-xxxix., Historical Appendix, 
 
 Isaiah xl.-lxvi. 
 "Second Isaiah." 
 xl.-lv., "Deutero-Isaiah," Exilic, with Servant passages, 
 xlii. 1-4 (5-7), xlix. 1-6 (7-13), I. 4-9 (10, 1,1), Hi. 13- 
 liii. 12. 
 
 Ivi.-lxvi., " Trito-Isaiah" a Collection of post-exilic prophe- 
 cies. 
 
 2. Isaiah L-xxxv. 
 
 '' (a) Isaiah and His Teaching. — Isaiah ministered at 
 Jerusalem, of which he was probably a native. He was 
 married, and two sons were bom to him during his 
 ministry. He ministered for more than forty years, from 
 his call in the year when King Uzziah died, c. 740, till 
 after the retreat of Sennacherib in 701, so that he was 
 born under Uzziah, began his ministry as a young man, 
 
ISAIAH I.-XXXV, ^ 173 
 
 and continued it to old age. The story of his martyrdom 
 under Manasseh cannot be traced beyond the second century 
 A.D. Like Elisha and Jeremiah, he sought to control the 
 home and foreign policy of the government; during part 
 of Hezekiah's reign he was the chief power in the state, 
 and probably Hezekiah's reformation was inspired by him. 
 He protested steadily, but without effect, against foreign 
 alliances, whether with Assyria against Syria and Israel, or 
 with Egypt against Assyria. Like Amos, Hoseaj and Micah, 
 he denounced' the faith in assiduous and often superstitious 
 and even idolatrous worship as a substitute for a moral life^ 
 and righteous government, and foretold the ruin Of Israel 
 and the chastisement of Judah, but a pious remnant of 
 the latter should be saved. These doctrines were specially 
 emphasised by the names of his sons, " Maher-shalal-hash- 
 baz," " Hasten booty, speed spoil," and " Shear-jashub," "A 
 remnant shall return." When it seemed that Jerusalem must 
 be sacked, Isaiah assured Hezekiah that God would save 
 His chosen city. Isaiah followed Amos in recognising 
 God's control of foreign nations as well as His special 
 interest in Israel, one application being that Assyria was 
 the rod used by God to chastise His people, and that 
 Assyria's delusion that it conquered by its own power would 
 be severely chastised. 
 
 Isaiah goes far. towards a formal statement of monotheism; 
 he speaks of idpls as 'eltlim, "nonentities," aiid emphasises 
 Jehovah's holiness, i.e., His unique deity, and 'His glory, i.e., 
 His manifestation in Nature. ^ 
 
 His practical teaching is largely summed up in his own 
 words ; 
 
 " In returning and rest shall ye be saved ; 
 In quietness and confidence shall be your strength."' 
 
 Whether Isaiah's teaching included the glowing pictures 
 of the Messianic King, the Messianic Era, and of universal 
 
 ' e.g., chapter i. He does not expressly attack the high places. 
 ' ii. 8, 20, vi., and the favourite phrase, "the Holy One of Israel." 
 ' XXX. 15, ^. vU. 4, 9. 
 
174 BIBLICAL INTRODUCTION 
 
 devotion to Jehovah,^ is a question on which critics are 
 divided. At present there is no decisive proof that such 
 ideas formed no part of Isaiah's teaching. 
 
 An important feature of his ministry was his formation of 
 a group of disciples, to whom he devoted himself, when 
 further public testimony seemed useless.^ Isaiah's prophecies 
 can be distributed with, approximate certainty between four 
 periods : ihe years before the Syro-Ephraimitic War ; the 
 Syro-Ephraimitic Warj the last years of the northern 
 kingdom; the revolt against Sennacherib and deliverance 
 from him. To us this deliverance is so supremely important, 
 that it seems the natural and necessary occasion for most 
 x)f the prophecies referring to Assyria; but the scantiness 
 of our data leaves it possible that other crises seemed 
 equally important to those who lived through them. Sub- 
 ject to this doubt we may group the acknowledged sections 
 thus':— 
 
 (i) Before the Syro-Ephraimitic Crisis, ii. s-iv. i, iv. 2-6, 
 V. 1-24, vi., ix. 8-x. 4 (-t-v. 25-30). 
 
 (2) In connection with that Crisis, vii. i-ix. 7, xi. 1-9,* 
 xvii. i-ir. 
 
 (3) In connection with the Fall of Samaria, xxviii. 1-6. 
 
 (4) Sargon's Invasion, 711, xx. 
 
 (5) In connection with Sennacherib, i., x. 5-24, xiv. 24-27, 
 28-32, xviii., xxii., xxiii.,* jcxviii. 7-29, xxix., xxx., xxxi. 
 
 (6) Later, ii. 2-4,* xxxii.* 
 
 . (7) Uncertain, mostly 723-701, xv.,* xvi.,* xvii. 12-14, xix.,* 
 xxi. 13-17.* 
 
 (b) Historical Circumstances. — Isaiah's earlier ministry prob- 
 ably coincided with the last years of Hosea, cf. Amos (b), 
 Hosea (b). The position which Israel had attained under 
 Jeroboam II. was already seriously impaired, but Judah still 
 enjoyed great prosperity. This was threatened by the joint 
 attack of Rezin and Pekah, against whom Ahaz secured the 
 
 ^ ii. 2-4, ix. 2-y, xi, l-g, xix. 16-25, xxxii. f. 
 
 » viii. 16-18. • Cf. Contents. * If Isaiah's. 
 
ISAIAH I.-XXXV. I7S 
 
 « 
 help of Assyria. Israel was invaded in succession by Tiglath- 
 Pileser III., Shalmaneser IV., and Sargon II. ; the, last named 
 took Samaria in 722-1; in 720-19 he marched through 
 Philistia and defeated the Egyptians at Raphia; later on he 
 settled colonies from the East in Samaria, and in 711 he 
 invaded Palestine and took Ashdod. Sargon, in his later years, 
 and his successor Sennacherib had to suppresSj by arduous 
 wars, the attempts of Merodach-Baladan to establish an in- 
 dependent empire at Babylon. After Sennacherib's accession 
 Judah joined in a confederacy, under the headship of Egypt, 
 against Assyria; Sennacherib invaded Palestine, defeated the 
 Egyptians at Eltekeh, and devastated Judah. When Jerusalem 
 was at its last extremity, Sennacherib's army perished by divine 
 judgment, and he retreated to Assyria. For a time Judah saw 
 no more of the Assyrians, but Hezekiah's successor, Manasseh, 
 became tributary to them. 
 
 (c) Contents. 
 
 I. i-XI. 9, First Group of Isaiah's Prophecies, 
 Judah, Ephraim, Syria, and Assyria. 
 
 i.. General introduction. 
 
 I, The title to this collection. 
 
 Editorial, the words " concerning Judah and Jerusalem " show that the 
 collection to which this title was prefixed did not include the Oracles on 
 foreign nations, and was, substantially, our i.-xi. 
 
 2-31, Judah reduced to the last extremity by invasion, be^ 
 cause of ingratitude to Jehovah. Forgiveness is not to be 
 obtained by sacrifices, but by repentance and amendment. 
 The doom of the impenitent The purified city. 
 
 This invasion has been identified with the attack of Pekah and Rezin 
 upon Ahaz, or with Sennacherib's invasion in 701. The chapter may be 
 used as an introduction, because of its representative character. It 
 is probably a compilation; 27, 28, may be a post-exilic summary of 
 what precedes ; 29-31 are a detached fragment of an early Isaianic 
 utterance 
 
 ii.-v.. Minor collection with title, 
 ii. I, Jerusalem, its judgment and final destiny, 
 ii. 2-4, Jerusalem, the centre of revelation for all nations in 
 the Messianic Era of universal peace. 
 
176 BIBLICAL INTRODUCTION 
 
 Occurs also as Micah iv. 1-3. Probably Isaiah did not borrow from 
 Micah, nor Micah from Isaiah, but either both from an older prophet,^ or 
 the section may be a post-exilic insertion in both Micah and Isaiah.' Or 
 an editor of one of the books may have inserted it from the other.' 
 
 ii. 5-iv. I, The doom of all that is " high and lifted up," be- 
 cause of the oppressions of the rulers and the wanton luxury 
 of their women. 
 
 As Judah enjoys great prosperity, this section is earlier than the Syro- 
 Ephraimitic War, i.e., c. 736.* , 
 
 iv. 2-6, The Remnant restored to a purified Jerusalem. 
 Parallels with post-exilic literature suggest that the section is wholly 
 (Cheyne) or partly (Dillmann) post-exilic. 
 
 V. 1-7, The barren vineyard laid waste. 
 
 8-24, Woes against sinners. 
 1-24 parallel to previous section, and so c. 736. 
 
 25-30, Misplaced fragment. 
 
 Probably, on account of refrain 2Sb, conclusion of ix. 8-x. 4,' where it 
 seems required. 
 
 vi., Isaiah's call, "in the year that King Uzziah died," 
 c. 740, Vision of Jehovah and the Seraphim. Commission to 
 apparently fruitless ministry. The Remnant (?). 
 
 The chapter may have been committed to writing later on. The last 
 clause, "so the holy seed is the stock thereof," is rejected by some.' If 
 omitted, the ruin is complete and finkl, there is no remnant. 
 
 vii. i-ix. 7, Narratives and utterances connected with the 
 war with Syria and Ephraim, c. 734. 
 
 vii.,^ Isaiah tries to dissuade Ahaz from alliance with 
 Assyria, the birth of Immanuel a sign of the ruin of Syria 
 and Ephraim, Assyria will become the scourge of Judah. 
 
 8b, " Ephraim shall be broken within 65 years, etc., is a later gloss.' 
 
 viii. 1-4,* Isaiah's son, Maher-shalal-hash-baz, a sign of the 
 ruin of Samaria and Damascus. 
 
 viii. S-iS) Jehovah punishes by an Assyrian invasion. 
 
 ' Driver, etc., ap. Cheynk, Introd. to Isaiah, p. 13. 
 ' Cheyne, Isaiah, Polychrome Bible, p. 147. 
 
 ' So apparently Duhm, i.l., who thinks the pass^e composed by 
 Isaiah in his old age, 
 
 ■* Possible editorial additions are ii. S) 6a, 2o-22, Jii. 10, II, 19-23 (list 
 of toilette articles), 25, 26. 
 
 ' Cheyne, Duhm, H. G. Mitchell. • In third person. 
 
 ' Cheyne and Duhm reject 21-25. ' Ch> viii, in first person. 
 
ISAIAH I.-XXXV. 177 
 
 viii. r6-i8, Isaiah is to await the fulfilment of his warnings. 
 
 viii. 19-ix. 7, In the last extremity deliverance, comes 
 
 through the " Wonderful Counsellor, Mighty God, Everlasting 
 
 Father, Prince of Peace." 
 
 viii. 19-ix. J, is obscure, and is probably a disconnected fragment with 
 editorial additions. Cheyne^ concludes that Hackmann is probably right 
 in regarding the Messianic passage ix. 2-7 as post-exilic.^" 
 
 ix. 8-3C. 4 ( + v. 25-30), a poem in five strophes, with re- 
 frains, on the doom of Ephrairh, before 735, 
 
 ix. 15, 16, X. 3, may.be glosses.' 
 
 X. 5-3,4, On Assyria and Judah. 
 
 X. 5-27, Doom of Assyria, the axe with which Jehovah 
 hewed, because it boasted itself against Him. 
 
 X. 28-34, Picture of the dismay caused by the advance of 
 
 the Assyrians, , 
 
 ; The former refers to Sennacherib's, 701, or some earlier Assyrian 
 invasion; the latter to either, or to the, fears inspired by the Fall of 
 Samaria, 722.^ 
 
 xi. 1-9, The Righteous King, or Messiah, in whose time 
 
 even the wild beasts will be at peace with man and his 
 
 domestic animals. 
 
 May be referred to c, 734, like ix. 2-7, which it resembles, or, if 
 regarded as the sequel to the preceding section, to the same period as x. 
 According to Cheyne, post-exilic." 
 
 XI. lo-XIV. 23, First Group of Sections not by Isaiah. 
 xi. 10-16, The exiles of Israel and Judah will be again 
 
 united into a single people, will return, and conquer the 
 
 neighbouring tribes. 
 
 This passage, which implies that Judah as well as Israel has been carried 
 away captive, is often placed during^ or after' the Exile. 
 
 ' Inirod., p. 45, 
 
 ' Q'. § on Teaching of Isaiah, p. 172; cf. Kayskr-Marti, A.T. 
 Theol, IIS, 183 fF. 
 
 ' DuHM, Cheynb, Mitchell j Duhm and Cheyne read x. 4a, "Beltis i 
 has, sunk down, Osiris is broken, and under the slain they fall," which 
 Cheyne regards as a gloss. 
 
 * Cheyne, Duhm, and Mitchell reject 10-13, 16-27, 33, 34- 
 
 • Polychrome Bible. ' Kautzsch, Bibel. 
 
 f Cheyne, Polychrome Bible, and Mitchell, cf. Skinner, 
 
i^fS BIBLICAL INTRODUCTION 
 
 The teference to " the Rabt of Jesse " suggests that it was written as an 
 appendix to the preceding. 
 
 xii., : Psalm of praise, appended as Epilogue to the First 
 Collection of Isaiah's prophecies. 
 
 Very generally ^ regarded as post-exilic on account of close resemblance 
 t*3 late Psalms and other pdst-exilic literatnire. 
 
 xiii. i-xiv. 23, Introduction to Isaiah's Oracles against the 
 Nations j Fall of Babylon, Restoration of the Jews, Descent of 
 the King of Babylon into Sheol. , ' 
 
 The Israelites in exile, the captives of Babylon, aik tb be lestored after 
 the capture of Babylon by the Medes,^ a situation which -implies composi- 
 tion during the Exile.' 
 
 , XIV. 24-XXIII., 18, Second Group of Isaiah's Prophe- 
 cies. OraCles AGAINST THE Nations. 
 
 xiv. 24-27, Assyria to be destroyed in Judah. 
 
 Perhaps the cbdcllision of x. S^IS, if so, 722-701. 
 
 xiv. 28-32, Philistines to be destroyed by Assyria; ' '"■ 
 
 The title, "In the year that King Ahaz died," is probably editorial,, 
 aft'd the brieakiftg of the; rdd, which raised the hopes of the Philistines,' 
 was the death of an Assyrian king, either Shalmaneser' IVi, 722, oi: 
 Sargon, 70S' 
 
 XV., xvi., Moa,b, a description, on the whole syndpathetic, 
 of the desolation of Moab and its cities by an invader. 
 The Moabite fugitives are recomrnended to make their peace 
 with Judah and take refuge there. 
 
 These chapters have numerous parallels with Jeremiah xlviii., and are 
 similar in style to the Song in Numbers xxi. 27-30. As they are not 
 in the style of Isaiah, it is commonly supposed that both Isaiah ahd 
 Jeremiah adapted an earlier prophecy, possibly written Wheai Moab 
 was threateped by Jeroboam II. In xvi. 13, 14 Isaiah, announces the 
 fulfilment in the near future of the time of writing, i.e., before one of 
 the Assyrian invasions. - - ■ ; •■' 
 
 Gheyne, Folythrome Bible, regards the sectioii in its present form, as 
 post-exilic, hesitates whether to ascribe the original to 72? -Or ,S,?9r. 
 Isaiah's share, his additions to an older poem, or fragments of his used by 
 a later writer, are dated 711 ; xvi. 14 is the only part prinjigd as Isaiah's.) 
 
 : xvii. i-i I, Ruin of Damascus and Samaria. / 
 Period of Syro-Ephraimitic War, c. 734. According to Cheyne and- 
 Duhmj 7 f. , an addition ; Skinner, an addition by Isaiah. ,1 
 
 xvii. 12-14, The Assyrian invasion, a tempest- which shall ' 
 suddenly pass away. 
 
 Which invasion uncertain, Cheyne, 723. T' ^^ 
 
 ^ Lists in Cheyne, Introduction, 59, Driver, 200. 
 
 " xiii. 17, xiv. 2-4, ' Driver, Introduction, 201 £ 
 
ISAIAH I.-XXXV. ifg 
 
 xviii., The overthrow of the Assyrians announced to the 
 
 Ethiopian ambassadors to Assyria, f. 701. , 
 
 Cheyne and Duhm regard % " At that time Ethiopia shall be offered at 
 Zion to Jehovah," as post-exilic; 
 
 xix., Egypt, 1-15, Jehovah stirs up civil war, makes the 
 
 rulers mad, dries up the Nile, and delivers the land to a 
 
 "hard lord." := ,. 
 
 . The "hard Idtd" is coikmonly regarded as an' Assyrian conqueror, and 
 the passage has been connected with the defeat of the Egyptians by, 
 Sargon in 720 ; with,Sargon's war against the Syrian allies of Egypt in 
 711 ; with Sennachelib's de/^at of the Egyptians at Eltekeh, 701 ; with 
 Esarhaddon's conquest of Egypt, 672. There is nothing, however, in 
 the passage ■ its61f ' \.o Suggest Assyria or the imminence of a foreign 
 invasion. Jehovah Himself turns the natural blessings of Egypt, its 
 king,'-' rulers, and ■ the Nile,' into cursesj '-the ' " hard lord !' is probably 
 a 'native tyrant. ; Such might naturally be 'an utterance of Isaiah, after 
 the retreat of Sennacherib . seemed to, have put an end to Assyrian 
 invasions ; Egypt might be safe fretn thi' Assyriatts, and yet hot escape 
 chastisement.' ,1,1':" ; k, ,, , 
 
 16-25, The Conversion of , Egypt, i Egypt hpmbled under 
 the hand of Jehovah, will stand in awe of Judah. Thejre 
 shall be- ih; Egypt five, cities, one. Ir-ha-heres,' which, shall 
 speak the language 6f. Canaan; also an altai: and pillar 
 (maggeba) to , Jehovah. The Egyptians shall worship JBim. 
 Verses 23-25 rank Egypt and Assyria with Israel as the 
 Chosen People; "Whom Jehovah Sabaoth shall bless, .saying, 
 Blessed .b,e Egypt my people, tad Assyria the work of my 
 hands, and Israel mirie inheritance."/ 
 
 Of this wonderful prophecy, Robertson Smith, wrote : "Never had the 
 faith of prophet soared so high, or approached so, near to the conception of 
 a universal religion, set free from' every trammel of national individuality " ; 
 and,. "The allusion to the consecrated ma59eba is quite inconsistent with a 
 date subsequent to the reformation of Josiah, and. the accepance of the 
 Deuteronornic law of worshu)."^ His judgnient. in favour of Isaiah's 
 authorship of this section is' still strongly supported.' But there are serious 
 difficulties, in the .style and langaage ; in; thet cpiitrast between the attitude 
 towards I%ypt and Assyria here and in, the rest of Isaiah and pre-exilic 
 prophecy generally ; arid in the appalfent i/eferendes to Jewish iioloriies iii'- 
 Bgfpt a,nd to the' tefftpM' of ©Bias.' I -Thii' temple was erected in the,nome 
 of Heliopolis (City of the Sun), and in the neighbourhood of a .Tenrpleof. 
 
 ■• Cheyne atid buhill regard'the section- tiS post-6xilio. " .>■: ' ...,-; ' 
 
 ^ Prc^Aeis, iSg^, pp. 336, 436. 
 
 * e.g., by tiRivKtt; 264, 'BrtLikAiiN, A.T. Thiol.^' tfiij Gd'the 
 (KAuTZscH, Bibel); and, ap. Cheyne, 109, Cornill, KueneNj and 
 Stade. 
 
I So BIBLICAL INTRQDUCTION 
 
 the- Sun, c. l6p. Hence Duhm dates this passage c. 150, and expkins 
 Assyria of the Greek kingdom of Syria, ^ Cheyne, assigns the passage to 
 275 (?), in the reign of Ptolemy Philadelphusi and many others" regardthe' 
 passage as post^exilic. If so, the superstitious use of the majfeba had long 
 been forgotten, and the term is used in a symbolic sense. ■ ,! : ^: 
 
 ix., In the year 711, when Sargon's general took Ashdod, 
 Isaiah is commanded to go iiaked and/barqfopt three years as 
 a sign of the captivity of Egypt and Ethiopia. 
 
 xxi. i-io, Lament over the imminent sack of Babylon by 
 the Medes and'Elamites. 
 
 Sometimes coniiected with the captures of Babylon by the Assyrians 
 from Merodach-Baladaain the time of. Isaiah, but the section presupposes 
 the situation towards the close, of the^ Exile, and may be assigned to that, 
 period,' , , 
 
 xxi. II, 12, Two obscure verses connected with Edom 
 (Seir), possibly a sequel to the preceding; Eddm, which 
 prospered under the ; Chaldaeans, being anxious as to the- 
 consequences of the Fall of Babylon. 
 
 xxi; 13-17, Ruin of the Dedanites and Kedarenes (Arabian 
 tribes). '' ■ '■ 
 
 Often connected with one of other of the Assyrian invasions) Diihni:: 
 connects with the rest of the chapter ; Cheyne regards 16, 17 as Isaiah's, , 
 711, to which later passages, 604-561, have been prefixed. 
 
 xjdi. 1-14, The Valley of "Vision, Jerusalein is besieged aftdr; 
 the defeat' of the army, Jehbvah calls to penitence, but m'eri 
 sought tb drown care in debauchery; "Let us eat and'driilk, 
 for to-morrow we die." Such sin must be punished with death.: 
 
 Probably to be connected with Sennacherib's siege in 701, and not with' 
 Sa;rgon's campaign in 'jw. It may have been ' purely predictive at the 
 outset of the revolt against Sennacherib, or may have been Uttered during • 
 the war, before Hezekiah had accepted Isaiah's teaching, or may be a 
 retrospect, a judgment after the danger was over on the conduct and 
 temper of the people during the war. 
 
 , xxii. 15-25, Shebna, the steward, probably a partisan of 
 
 the Egyptian party, is to be replaced by Eliakim, whose 
 
 subsequent fall is also predicted. 
 
 Connected with the crisis in 701 ; 24 f,, and perhaps 19-23 may be later, 
 than 15-18. 
 
 ' So substantially, Hitzig, followed by Geiger and Merx (Cheyne, 
 Introd., p. 109 n.). 
 
 '^ e.g., GiiiTZ (ap. Chevne,. I.e.), ,Kayser-Marti, 115, Kellnbe, 
 " Un-IsaianicJ" MiTCH)?LL, SiqNNBR "proltably," Smend, A.T. Thiol,, 
 210. 4^ section 2 (a). ' ' * Dkiver, 205. 
 
ISAIAH I.-XXXV. i8i 
 
 • 
 
 xxiii., Tyreis to be overthrown, tut restored after seventy 
 
 years, to trade for the benefit of Jehovah and his people. 
 
 Verses 1-14 may be connected with the siege of Tyre by Shalmaneser 
 IV., 727-722, or with Sennacherib's campaign in Phcehieia, 701. Verse 13, 
 if read as in R.V., might refer to one of the captures of Babylon by the 
 Assyrians, 710 and 703, but the text is probably corrupt. Cheyne regards 
 it as a late section on an Isaianic basis, and Duhm connects it with the de- 
 vastation of Phoenicia by Artaxerxes III., c. 349, the subject being origin- 
 ally Sidon, for which Tyre was substituted by an editor. Verses 15-18 are 
 probably post-exilic. 
 
 XXIV.-XXVII., Second Group of Sections, not by 
 Isaiah, Anonymous; Post-Exilic Apocalypse concerning 
 THE Last Things. 
 
 xxiv,, Earth and heaven are involved in one common shock 
 of doom, the City of Confusion is singled out for special 
 judgment, the praises of the righteous are heard from the 
 ends of the earth. 
 
 XXV. i-xxvi. 6, The thanksgiving of Israel for the overthrow 
 of the City of Confusion and of Moab, and for the conse- 
 quent salvation of God's people. 
 
 xxvi. 7-19, Prayer of God's people for protection and 
 deliverance in evil times. 
 
 xxvi. 20-xxvii. 13, Out of the present trouble, and out of 
 
 the distress which has befallen Israel on account of its sins, 
 
 shall issue the ruin of Israel's oppressors and the restoration 
 
 of God's people. 
 
 It is generally recognised ^ that, witjj the possible exception of Isaianic 
 fragments borrowed by the author, these chapters are not the work of 
 Isaiah. Here, as in Micah iv.-vii., compared with Micah i.^ii., the im- 
 pression made is quite different from that produced by the admitted 
 writings^ of the prophet, Isaiah's utterances reflect at every turn the 
 actual circumstances of his tinne; here we are in a differeiit world from 
 that of Palestine in the eighth century B.C. Isaiah was concerned with 
 Judah and Israel, and their neighbours and enemies ; here we have a 
 judgment embracing earth and heaven. Assyria was not a city state, 
 and certainly Isaiah never speaks of it as such ; here the oppressor is 
 a great city, possibly Babylon.'' In spite of a number of resemblances, 
 
 1 The chief exception is an able monograph by W. E. Barnes, "An 
 examination of the objections brought against the genuineness of Isaiah 
 xxiv.-xxvii.," Cambridge, 1891. Cf. Driver, 207, Chbyne, Introd., 
 147 ff. ' ' ■■,,..' 
 
 ^ XXV. 2, xxvi. 5, perhaps also xxiv. 10, the City of Confusion here is 
 sometimes understood of Jerusalem, Skinner. 
 
i82 BIBLICAL INTRODUCTION 
 
 due to literary use of the actual writings of Isaiah, the, genei^l style 
 is different from that of Isaiah. . - ... 
 
 It is probable that a poem consisting of xxiv., xxv. 6-8, xxvi. 20-xxvii, 
 I, xxvii. 12, 13, has been expanded by the insertion of the, songs of thanks- 
 giving, xxv. i-S, 9-12, xxvi, ir6, xxvii. 2-6 ; of the prayer and meditar 
 tion, xxvi. 7-19 ; and of the obscure passage xxvii. 7-H.^ ,' . 
 
 These chapters presuppose the imminence of far-reaching political 
 changes which might be expected to bring deliverance to Israel, possibly 
 through much loss and suffering^ and ruin to its enemies. Such a situa- 
 tion existed, in a measure, towards the close of the Exile ; or, -more 
 exactly, in the time of Haggai and Zechariah^; or, probably during the 
 earlier stages of Alexander's attack oji the Persian enipire. THis^ section 
 has been referred to each of these periods. The Exile' is suggested by the 
 identification of the "city" with Babylon. But the vague, yet detailed 
 apocalyptic picture ^points to a later date ; Babylon was not destroyed by 
 Cyrus, and the Jews still looked forward to its ruin in the time ' of 
 Zechariah.* If the "city" is not Babylon, but either Jerusalem or a 
 symbolic city suggested by Babylon, we might follow Cheyne in assigning 
 this section to the eve of Alexander's conquest of Persia. Duhm connects 
 it with the siege of Jerusaletn by Antiochus Sidetes, soon after the 
 accession of John Hyrcanus, 129. The "city" is Samaria,, fjestroyed by 
 John Hyrcanus, ' ' ^ 
 
 The apocalypse is remarkable as containing some of the most striking 
 of the O.T. passages suggesting a resurrection of the dead and an eternal 
 life. In xxv. 8," " He hath swallowed up death for ever," implies that in 
 the Messianic era, Israelites will never die, while xxvi. 19 points to a 
 resurrection of dead , Israelites. Universalism finds striking expression in 
 the statement ' that Jehovah Sabaoth will prepare a feast for all nations in 
 Zion, and there destroy the veil that is spread over them. 
 
 XXVIII.-XXXII., Third Group of Isaiah's Prophecies, 
 xxviii., xxix., The Fall of Ephrairii a warning to the 
 priests, prophets, and rulers of Jerusalem of the disasters by 
 which their, sin will be punished. (The dependence of the 
 former on inspiration.'^) Ariel, i-^-, Jerusalem, is besieged, but 
 her foes vanish like chaff. The prophets are useless, the 
 people only offer lip-service, and are slaves to tradition. 
 Lack of faith will be put to shame by the glories of the 
 Messianic era.* . ' 
 
 These chapters are compilations ; they are parallel to the other pro- 
 phecies, to which they might almost serve as a summary. As a whole, 
 they connect with, the period when Judah was., planning to revolt against 
 
 ' So Chbynb and Duhm, cf. Skinner, Isaiah, p. 203. 
 ^ Hag. ii. 6-9, 20-23, Zech. i. 11-17. ' So Kellner. 
 
 * Zech. V, 5-1 1. The section is referred to this period by Dillmann. 
 ' Quoted in i. Cor. xv. 54, and Rev. vii. 17. " xxv. 6, 7. 
 
 ' xxviii. 23.-29, if not a later addition, may imply that a fortiori states- 
 men need inspired guidance, 'xxix. 15-34. 
 
ISAIAH I.^XXXV. 183 
 
 Sepiiacherib, relying qn. help from ESfP't i.e., c.^foz. x;;viii. 1-6 may 
 have been composed jiist before the Fall of Saniaria, arid afteryvar^s 
 utilised as an introduction. On the' other hand, xxviii. 1-6, has been held 
 to determine the date of the whole series of prophecies,^which have been 
 therefore assigned to c. J22. The Messianic picture xxix. 16-24 is often 
 regarded as post- exilic' 
 
 XXX., xjpci., A cqliectipn of prophecies on the folly and sin 
 of alliance with Egypt, with which have been combined an 
 apocalyptic picture of the, regeneration of Israel and the re- 
 newal of Nature in the Messianic era, * and two sections ' on 
 the deliverance of Israel from Assyria. 
 
 The interest in the Egyptian alliance connects with the eve of Senna- 
 cherib's invasion, J62. Duhm and Mitchell" regard xxx. 18-26, and 
 Cheyne and Eellner 18^33 as post-exilic. Cheyne also rejects xxxi, 
 5-9- ■ , ;, 
 
 xxxii., A picture of the Righteous King, the spiritual re- 
 generation ,an(l material prosperity of the, Messianic age, into 
 which is inserted a warning to the ladies of Jerusalem,*. 
 
 Driver regards this chapter as a sequel to the preceding, i.e., c. 702 ; 
 Duhm regards it as mostly Isaiah's, and partly, at any rate, the work of his 
 old age. Cheyne and Cornill treat it as .post-exilic. 
 
 'XXXIII.-XXXV., Third Group of Sections not by 
 Isaiah. 
 
 xxxiii., An Apocalyptic Psalm, in which the Jews, in their 
 distress, look forward to deliverance and the establishment 
 of a Messianic King, who shall reign in peace at Jerusalem. 
 
 The style, the apocalyptic character, the description of Zion as righteous, 
 and as the "city of sacred, feast" or "feasts,"' the parallels with late 
 psalms, all point to a post-exilic date.' Driver, however, still' refers it to 
 the point in Sermaoherib's invasion, at which, having accepted tribute 
 from Hezekiah, he made fresh demands on him, thus breaking a covenant.' 
 
 xxxiv., The Doom of Edom, when Jehovah chastises the 
 riatioris. 
 
 The singling put of- Edom as a special object of divine justice began 
 with the hostility of Edom to the Jews at the Fall of Jerusalem. Hence 
 this section is exilic or post-exilic' 
 
 iCheynb, Dtij^M (Maccahaean)., Mitchell. Cheyne also rejects 
 xxviii. 5, 6, 23-29, xxix. 5, 7, 8, II, 12. ' xxx. 18-26. 
 
 ' XXX. 27-33, '^y^^- 5-9. * 9-14- " Verses J, 20. 
 
 ' Cheyne, Duhm, c. 162, Cornill, Kayser-Marti, p. iij. 
 
 ' 213, cf. ii. Kings xviii, 13-27. * Verse 8. 
 
 ' Driver towards closs of Exile qn account of parallels with Isaiah 
 xl. ft, etc.; so Cornill, Cheyne, 400 or later. 
 
i84 BIBLICAL INTRODUCTION 
 
 XXXV., The wilderness is turned into a fruitful, well-watered 
 garden, through which, by a holy way, the exiles return to 
 Zion. 
 
 Probably sequel to xxxiv. by same author. The parallels with Isaiah 
 xl. ff. may point to a similar date or to dependence on exilic literature. 
 
 (d) Use in N.T. — The coiiimission' to harden the people's 
 hearts, vi. 9 f., was a favourite quotation of our Lord's, 
 Matt. xiii. 14 f., Mark iv. 12, Luke viii. 10, John xii. 40, 
 Acts xxviii. 26 f. The LXX. of vii. 14 is quoted in Matt, 
 i. 23, Luke i. 31, "A virgin shall conceive," etc. ; also i. 9 in 
 Rom. ix. 29; viii. 12 f. in i. Peter iii. 14 f. ; viii. 17 f. in 
 Heb. ii. 13 f ; ix. i f. in Matt. iv. 15 f. ; x. 22 i. in Rom. 
 ix. 27 f; xxii. 13 in i. Cor. xv. 32; xxviii. 11 in i. Cor. 
 xiv. 21 ; xxviii. 16 in Rom. ix. 33, x. 11, i. Peter ii. 6; xxbc. 10 
 in Rom. xi. 8; xxix. 13 in Matt, xv. 8 f., Mark vii. 6 f. ; 
 xxix. 14 in i. Cor. i. 19. 
 
 3. Isaiah xxzvi.-zxxiz. 
 
 The Historical Appendix to the Collection, i-xxxv. — An 
 account of Sennacherib's invasion, Hezekiah's sickness and 
 recovery, and Merodach-baladan's embassy. It is chiefly taken 
 from ii. Kings xviii. 13-xx. 19, q.v. The main differences are 
 the omission of ii. Kings xviii. 14-16 (Hezekiah's submission) 
 and the insertion of Hezekiah's prayer (xxxviii. 9-20). 
 
 The dependence on Kings is shown by the following facts ; 
 the collection to which the appendix is added contains sections 
 much later than the final compilation of the Book of Kings ; 
 the peculiarities of the appendix are best explained by 
 supposing it a secondary work based on Kings, which it 
 partly abridges, partly distorts,^ and partly follows in the 
 form and with the additions due to the Deuteronomic editor 
 of Kings. 
 
 Hezekiah's prayer is the psalm' of a sufferer who has 
 recovered from dangerous illness. The heading, where we 
 
 ^ e.g., xicxviii. ail, 22=ii. Kings xx. 7, 8 is unintelligible as it stands in 
 Isaiah, and has been misplaced through the insertion of Hezekiah's prayer. 
 The two ''had saids" of E.V. are harmonising mistranslations. The 
 verbs are the same as in Kings. ' ■' 
 
INTRODUCTION TO XL.-LXVI. 185 
 
 should read "Miktam of Hezekiah," and the reference to 
 stringed instruments,^ show that the poem has been taken 
 ■from a collection of psalms, to the editor of which the 
 ascription to Hezekiah is probably due. The language and 
 ideas are similar to those of Job and late psalms, and the 
 poem is probably postexilic.^ Dillmann, however, defended 
 the authorship by Hezekiah. 
 
 4. Introduction to xl.-lxvi. 
 
 (a) Composition of xl.-lxvi. — A variety of evidence shows that 
 these chapters are not the work of Isaiah, and do not belong 
 to his age, and that, with small and doubtful exceptions, 
 no part of them is earlier than the close of the Exile. 
 The Historical Appendix would be intended to close the 
 collection of Isaiah's prophecies, as a similar appendix does 
 that of Jeremiah. Hence the editor who added it did not 
 know xl. flf. as Isaiah's. These chapters are anonymous, 
 they have no heading ascribing theni to Isaiah. Ezra i. i f.* 
 refer to Isaiah xliv. 28, but state that Cyrus acted according 
 to a prophecy of Jeremiah, and do not mention Isaiah. 
 So that the author of Ezra knew Isaiah xliv., but not as 
 Isaiah's. Moreover Jeremiah and Ezekiel in deahng with 
 the Exile and Restoration do not mention any prophecies 
 of Isaiah on the same subject. 
 
 The historical situation presupposed in many sections, is 
 clearly that of the Exile, and in others apparently still later.* 
 On the other hand, there is nothing to suggest that the 
 author is living in Isaiah's time. Isaiah constantly betrays 
 his interest in the people and circumstances of his own 
 time, in Hezekiah, Pekah, and Rezin, in Judah, Ephraim, 
 Syria, Assyria, and Egypt. In xl. £f. all these have dis- 
 appeared, Assyria and Egypt are only referred to as matter 
 of ancient history. It is not that the chapters j>^«(//rf the 
 ruin of Jerusalem and the Exile and Return. They assume 
 that Jerusalem is in ruins and the Jews in Exile, and describe 
 
 ' Verses 9, 20, ' Cheynb, Duhm, Mitchell. 
 
 * 300-250. * Cf. on xl,-xlviii,, xlix,-lv., Iv.-Ixvi. 
 
i86 BIBLICAL INTRODUCTION 
 
 the Return as iriiminent. They would have beem unin- 
 telligible to Isaiah and his contejmporaries. Professor G. A. 
 Smith writes ' ; " It will perhaps startle some to hear John 
 ■Calvin quoted on behalf, of the exilic. date of these prophecies. 
 But let us read and consider this statement -of his:: 'Some 
 regard must be had to the time when this prophecy was 
 uttered; for since the rank of the kingdom had been obliterated, 
 and the name of the royal family had become mean and con- 
 temptible, during the captivity in Babylon', it might seem as if 
 through the ruin of that family the truth of God had fallen 
 into decay, and therefore he bids them contemplate by faith 
 the throne of David, which had been cast down.' "^ 
 
 The theology of xl. ff. is different and more advanced 
 than that of Isaiah. Isaiah's theology is subordinated to 
 his practical message, but xl. ff. dwell on the transcendental 
 attributes of God; they substitute the Servant of Jehovah 
 for the Messianic Kingj and, in some sections, represent- the 
 Jews ' not, as in Isaiah, hof)elessly lost in sin, but as charged 
 with a spiritual mission to the Gentiles. 
 
 The evidence of style and language is also strongly against 
 authorship by Isaiah, and in favour of exilic or post-exilic 
 dates for the various sections. These chapters only resemble 
 the actual prophecies of Isaiahy as a later work would 
 necessarily resemble a well-known classic of earlier times 
 on a similar' subject. They are influenced in the same way 
 by Jeremiah. On the other hand, most of the characteristic 
 terms, phrase?, and idioms used by Isaiah are either absent 
 from or very rare in xl. ff., and vice versd these chapters 
 introduce a' new vocabulary and style of their own.* 
 
 \ Isaiai,, vol. u. , pp. n f. , ' Calvin on Isaiah Iv. 3. 
 
 ' Only two or three illustrations can be given, e.g. , eltlim, " nonentities," 
 of idols, occiirs seven times in i.-xxxi. , and nevw in xl. ff., though it 
 would have been most useful in the polemic a'gainst idols. : On the other 
 hand, 'apA, "also" occurs twenty-two tiines in xl.-xlviii., neveir in uiif 
 disputed portions of Isaiah. Of course, the force of such items of evidence 
 is cumulative, and ' can only be appreciated if carefully and exhaustively 
 studied. See Cheyne, Introduction to Isaiah ; Driver, Introduction, 
 pp. 225 ff., Isaiah ("Men of the Bible"); and Skinner, Isaiah xl.-lxvi., 
 pp. xxxix. ff. ' ' ' 
 
INTRODUCTION TO XL.-LXVI. rS; 
 
 The integrity of xl. ff. is still matter of controversy. Driver 
 stilP states that 'f These chapters form a continuous pro- 
 phecy," and apparently maintains unity of authorship, but 
 admits that "The literary unity of Isaiah xl.-lxvi. is undoubtedly 
 imperfect, especially in its later chapters: naturally the whole 
 will not have been delivered by the prophet continuously." 
 But the tendency of criticism is against the integrity,: which, 
 even apart from the possible insertion of earlier material, is 
 often denied,' Cornill ascribes xl.-lxii. to the same author, 
 xl.-xlviii. before the Exile, xlix.rlxii. after. He regards Ixiii.- 
 Ixvi. as, at any rate, in their present form, by another author. 
 Duhm regards xLr-lv.,* "Deutero-Isaiahi" as a single work with 
 which the Servant poem, an independent post-exilic work, 
 c. SCO, has been interwoven; lvi.-lxvi., " TritoTsaiah,'' is 
 another single work, c. 444. Cheyne regards xl.-xlviii.^ as 
 exilic, xlix.-lv.' as a post-exilic appendix to it, the indepenident 
 Servant poem being interwoven with the complete work ; lvi.- 
 lxvi. is a. collection of prophecies, 450-350. Th^ clearest W3.y 
 of stating the facts bearing on integrity has seemed to be to 
 deal with sections separately. At present, evidence and dis- 
 cussion point to the conclusion that xl.-rlv,^ are exilic, th^ 
 Servant passages an independent exilic or pogt-ejcilip poem, 
 and Ivi.-ixvi., in spite of some serious difficulties, a collection 
 of post-exilic passg,ges by different authors. Such reasons for 
 this view as space permits will be found in connection with the 
 separate sections. 
 
 (b) Historical Circumstances of Isaiah 'xl,~lxvi. — These 
 chapters in their different sections are referred to various 
 dates between Manasseh, c. 695, and Alexander the Great, 
 333, but chiefly to c. 549-432. During 549-538 Jerusalem 
 and the Temple were in ruins, and the bulk of the people 
 exiles in Babylonia. After {he overthrow of the Babylonian 
 empire by Cyrus, which was clearly threatened after 549, 
 Judjea and the Jews; became subjects of Persia, j there w^s, s( 
 
 ^ Sixth Edition, pp. 230, 244. 
 
 ' G. A. Smith, Isaiah, xl, ff., p. 2a 
 
 * Less Servant passages. 
 
i88 BIBLICAL INTRODlJCTION 
 
 Jewish community in Judaea,^ which rebuilt the Temple, but 
 had to maintain a constant struggle with physical disadvan- 
 tages and unfriendly neighbours. It seemed as if the Jews 
 would be absorbed in the neighbouring tribes, and the worship 
 of Jehovah be degraded to the level of and combined with 
 that of "other gods." Nehemiah and Ezra secured the 
 distinct existence of the community and its religion, by build- 
 ing the walls of Jerusalem, and separating the Congregation 
 of Israel from the Samaritans and their Jewish allies. The 
 Persian government was usually favourable to the Jewish 
 worship of Jehovah, but local officials were sometimes hostile, 
 and in 350-345, under Artaxerxes Ochus, the Jews were dis- 
 affected, and the Persians oppressed them — probably also at 
 other times.'' 
 
 5. Isaiah zl.-lv. Duhm's Deutero-Isaiah. 
 
 (a) Contents. 
 
 xl., xli., Promise of the Return of the Exiles, guaranteed by 
 the unique deity of Jehovah,, which is manifested in Nature 
 and Providence, and especially in the victorious advance of 
 Cyrus, because Jehovah raised him up and announced his 
 coming beforehand. 
 
 xlii. 1-9, First Servant Passage, — The meek and gentle 
 Teacher of the Law as the Restorer of Israel. 
 
 Duhm and Cheyne regard only 1-4 as part of the original poem 
 According to Cheyne, 5-7 is an editorial link connecting the Song on 
 the Servant with the prophetic framework. 
 
 xlii. lo-xlviii., Further exposition of themes of xl. f.. De- 
 liverance for Israel, by the free grace of Jehovah, through 
 His Messiah, Cyrus; Judgment on Babylon, Vindication of 
 Jehovah's unique deity as above, Humiliation of the gods of 
 Babylon. 
 
 Later insertions, according to Duhm and Chejme, are two sections on 
 idolatry, xliv. 9-20, xlvi. 6-8, and the series of passages in xlviii., which 
 address Israel as treacherous, apostate, and unbelieving, viz., l"", 2, 4, S*"* 
 7I', 8''-io, 11'', leb-ig, 22. The harsh and unqualified censure of these 
 verses is very different from the sympathetic and encouraging attitude of 
 the rest of xl.-xlviii. 
 
 ^ Cf. on Ezra. . 
 
 ' Cf. "Historical Circumstances" in § § on Jeremiah, Ezekiel, Haggai, 
 Zechariah, Malachi. 
 
■ ISAIAH XL.-^Vi: 189 
 
 • 
 
 xlix. 1-6 (7-13)1 Second Servant Passage. — The Prophet not 
 
 only to Israel, but also to the nations. (The agent at first 
 
 (Jespised, then honoured, of the gloqous restoration of, Israel.) 
 
 Verses 7-13 are sometimes regarded as part of the Servant poem ; 7-12 
 form one of Cheyne's " links." 
 
 xlix. 14-I. 3, Jehovah dispels doubt and depression by 
 assurances of His power and set purpose to deliver Israel. 
 
 1. 4-9 (1°} ^i)) Third: Servant Passage, The persecuted 
 Prophet, who shall be vindicated and avenged. (The Servant's 
 patience an example.) 
 
 Verses 10, ii another "link," an application to later times, Cheyne; 
 similarly Duhm and Skinnen _ 
 
 h. i-lii. 12, Exultant lyrics on the imriiinent restoration of 
 JerusalenL from its- ruin and the departure of the captives from 
 Babylon.- . - ' . '•''■■'.:.. 
 
 Duhm and deyne regard; Ui 15, 16 j lii, 3-6 as insertions. 
 .,lii,,,i3-liii. 12, Fourth Servant Passage, The despised 
 Martyr and His reward. Atonement for Israel. . j 
 
 liv., Iv;, The future glories of Zion contrasted with her ruin 
 and humiliation. Appeals to the, peoplaio accept, ithe certain 
 deliverance. , . ,■ . ,1 .: :.;i[ 
 
 (b) Date and Authorship of xl.-xMii. {apart from Servant 
 Passages),-~I\x\5: ss.c'&.ovi is generally assigned toihe dose'of 
 the Exile. Those addressed are exiles in Babylonia,* to whom 
 a speedy return through then desert to Jerusalem is promised.^ 
 Jehovah has raised up Cyrus, already a mighty conquerorj: 
 and , about to overthrow , Babylon, 'release /the ■■ exiles; and 
 rebuild Zion ; and its Temple.^ The situation, thus pre- 
 supposed points to a. date between, the cdhquest of Media 
 by Cyrus in 549, and his capture of Babylon in 538; The 
 author probably wrote, in Babylonia.* His name is quite 
 unknown; ^ § 4. < ;' i ; 
 
 ' xlii. 22, xliii. 14. 
 
 ^ xl. i-ii, xliii. 1-7, 19, xlviii. 20, 21, 
 
 ' xli. 25, xliv. 24-xlv. 3, xivi. 1-5, 10, I'l, xlvii., xlviii. i^. ' 
 
 * Ewald and Bunsen ascribed xl.-lxvi. to a Jew writing in Egypt, ^nd 
 others to d'Jew in Judaea, Skinner, Isaiah xl.-lxvi., -f. 1. Vim-om, Jesdia, 
 p. xviii., assigns xl.-Iv. (apart from Servant Passages) 'tb a Jew in Northern 
 Phoenicia. . , . ' 
 
150 BIBLICAL INTRODUCTION 
 
 (c) Teathingqf xl.-xMii. (apart from S&r^ant Passagis).— 
 Confronted with' the magnificent worship of the Babylonian 
 gods, who, it might be supposed, had given victory to their 
 worshippers, the Jews needed to be reassured as to the 
 power of Jehovah. Hence a formal assertion and proof of 
 tHe unique, deity, of Jehovah as Creator and Governor of 
 the world.^ This proof rests partly on Jehovali's arinounce- 
 ment of the coming conquests of Cyrus, and is given as an 
 assurance of the deliverance frohi Babylon. Cyrus is His 
 Messiah,^ and Israel His Servant.^ , The result of the work 
 of Cyrus will be the recognition of Jehovah as the, one true 
 God by all nations.* , • 
 
 , ,,(d,) Use in N.T. of xl.-xlvUi.--^:A..'^ii is applied to Johii 
 the Baptist in Matthew iii. 3, Mark i. 3, John i. 23, Luke iii. 3-6} 
 and xl. 8 is quoted in i. Peter i. 24 f. ; xl. 13 f.in Romtos 
 3d. 34 f. and i. Corinthians ii. 16; and xlv. 23 in Romans xiv. ii. 
 
 (e) Date and Authorship, etc. of'xlix.-lia. {apart frOfn 
 Servant ' Passages).-^Prim& facie these' sections seem to iffiply 
 the same historical situation as xl.-xlviii., to which they seem 
 a natural sequel. Judah is still desolate,' and a return of the 
 exiles ^ is promised. 
 
 Comill^ explains the acknowledged break at the end of 
 xlviii. by regarding xlix.-lxii. as a sequel written later on in 
 Palestine by the same author 5 while Duhm treats xl.-lv. as 
 a .single work; Unless the Servant passages are a later 
 insertion, after xlix.-lv. had been; added to xl.^ilviii., 'Xl.-^lv. 
 is, .obviously a single work; two different authots would 
 scarcely have utilised the; Servaiit poem so similarly and so 
 harmoniously.' Differences of jsubjecti such as the absence 
 from. these, chapters of express references to Cyrus, Babylbn, 
 and the contrast between Jehovah and. idols,: do not 
 necessarily imply a distinct work. Nevertheless Cheyne .iii 
 
 1 xl., xli. 2i-2g, xliv., xly. ,1-3, xlviii. 1-8. '. , 
 , " xlv. I. * xlv. 4, etc, 
 
 * xiv. 6, I4tf7;i ,'i " xlix. 19, 11. 3, Ii. 17-lii, 2. 
 
 .V'xlis- 22-a6,> li> 111, (gloss according, to Chayne), Hi. iiL (understood 
 of Babylon), Iv, 12. ' Page 157 i. 
 
ISAlAH XL.-LV. 191 
 
 * 
 
 the' Palychro'me Isaiah follows Kbsters ih adopUflg 'a vlfew' 
 similar to that of Kuenen's, which he expressly rejected itl 
 his Introduction} and regards' xlix.-lv. as post-exilic, arid 
 apparently the Servant passages as later insertions still. If 
 such' a view is adopted, the desolation of Zion is the meari 
 estate Of Judaih after the Retuirn, and the exiles are those 
 who still remained in Babylon. Certainly Zion is addressed 
 rather as a city in distress, but still actually existing, than 
 as ruined and uninhabited. Cheyiie excludes authorship 
 by the author of xL-xlviiL by suggesting, doubtfully, the 
 date 432. 
 
 The teaching of these sections is substantially included in; 
 that of xli-xlviii., the tendency is, however, to dwell on the 
 secular dominion rather' than the spiritual influence of Israel^ 
 and Uv. t^ speaks of the "servants" instead Of the "Servant 
 of Jehovah." ' "■ ■ " 
 
 In N.T. liL 5 is quoted in Roihans ii. 24 ; lii. 7 in Romans 
 X. 15 j lii. II in- ii. Corinthians ■ vi. 17; the promise made to 
 the restored Jerusalem in.liv. 1 is' applied to the heavenly 
 Jerusalem in Galatians iv< 27 J liv. 13 is quoted in John vL 45; 
 Iv. 3 in Acts xiii. 34. ' ■ - , , ;; 
 
 (f) The Servant of Jehovah, xlii. 1-4 (5-9), xlix. *-6 (7-13), 
 /. 4-9 (ro, ii), liii fx,-liii. 12. ^ < ■■. 
 
 A certain connection can be shown between these sections 
 and their contexts, as may be gathered from the difference' of 
 opinion as to whether the Verses in brackets • belong to the' 
 Servant passages, or to the main portion of xl.-lv., or are 
 editoriallinks composed to connect the Servant passages with' 
 the context. Yet these passages standout from the surround- 
 ing material j the connection would be improved, arid the 
 whole Wotild be more homogeneous if they were Removed. 
 Elsewhere the Servatit is clearly a title for the actual Israel, 
 there is scarcely an approach to personification; here the 
 Servant is either, an ideal; person, or,, even if still. Israel, .Israel 
 personified as a teacher and prophet of Revelation, arid a 
 
 ' 1895, ' The verses in brackets are perhaps secondary •ycf. (a). ■ 
 
192 BIBLICAL JNTROPUCTION 
 
 martyr (? for the world). The ministry to all nations, and the 
 vicarious atonenient of the sufferings of the righteous ^ are 
 characteristic of these sections. 
 
 ; The contrast has been explained as follows : (i.) The author 
 used an earher poem, , possibly composed by himself; (ii.) the 
 sections were written in the ordinary way as part of 
 xlviii.-lv., and the contrast is a Uterary device of the author to 
 produce a dramatic effect; (iii.) the sections are parts of a 
 separate poem, which were combined by an editor with, the 
 rest of xlviii.j-lv. ; .: 
 
 The Servant in these passages has been explained as Israel 
 personified, either actual, purified, or ideal, or the righteous 
 kernel of the .people, or the genius of the nation; as describ- 
 ing or based upon the experiences of Jeremiah, of some post- 
 exilic scribe, or some other martyr ; as personifying the 
 prophetic order; or as a prediction of a future Prophet or 
 Redeemer.; In any case, ,the prophecy received its only 
 adequate fulfilment in Christ;, as Prof. G. A. Smith writes i- 
 "We . .;. assert what none but| prejudiced Jews have ever 
 denied, that this great prophecy-. . . was fulfilled in One 
 Person, Jesus of Nazareth, and achieved in all its, details^ by; 
 Himalpne."^ ,';■<:_)>'. , .^ , ',•• 
 
 If these sections are from an independent poem, theServaint. 
 would seem to be a person; the picture can scarcely be a 
 mere description ^ of past history, though some features may be 
 borrowed from the experiences of a prophet, possibly Jereriiiah 
 or even the author himself. But if the sections were written 
 at the same time and by the same author as their context, the 
 Servant will rather be Israel, in some sense,, as elsewhere in 
 3d.-lv.9 - 
 
 In N.T., the Servant is constantly identified with Christ; 
 cf. xlii. 1-4 with Matt. xii. 17-21 ; xlix. 6 with Acts xiii. 47; 
 Iii. 15 with Rom. xv. 21 ; liii. i with John xii. 38,; Rom. x. 16; 
 
 1 xlii. r, 4, xlix! 9, liiii 5-12. 2; Isaiah xl.-lxvi., p. 267. 
 
 ' ZiuxBATHtKeilinschnften und das AT^, p. 384, suggests that some 
 features are from Babylonian texts in which the ki:^, suffering from 
 disease or misfortune, is spoken of in mythological terms as the Servant 
 of the Deity. , ; i , : 
 
ISAIAH LVI.-LXVI. 193 
 
 liii. 4 with Matt. viii. 17, i. Peter ii. 24 flF. ; liii. 7 f. with Acts 
 viii. 32 f.; liii. 12 with Luke xxii. 37, Heb. ix, 28.^ Cf. also 
 xlix. 8 with ii. Cor. vi. 2. 
 
 6. Isaiah IvL-lxvi (Duhm's Trito-Isaiah.) 
 
 Ivi. 1-8, Proselytes and Eunuchs to be admitted to the 
 privileges of Jehovah's people, on condition that they observe 
 the Sabbath ; " for my house shall be called a house of prayer 
 for all peoples."^ More exiles shall yet return. 
 
 The existence of the Temple and the implied return of some exiles 
 point to a post-exilic date. The keen interest in the Sabbath has no 
 parallel in xl.-lv., but may connect with Nehemiah's enforcing of the 
 observance of the Sabbath.' If so, we may date c. 444.* 
 
 Ivi. 9-lvii., Denunciation of the Jewish rulers, and of the 
 immoral superstitions of their neighbours, promise of ultimate 
 forgiveness and deliverance to the humble and penitent. . 
 . The references to rulers and worship at high places point to composition 
 in Palestine. The parallels in the earlier prophets to these pictures of 
 government and religion have often led to the conclusion that Ivi. g-lvii. 
 II or 13 is borrowed from a pre-exilic prophet.^ Cheyne, however, 
 points out that the picture suits equally well the low material and spiritual 
 state of. the Jews before the reforms of Nehemiah,' and his examination of 
 the language and the literary parallels leads him to assign Ivi, g-lvii. 13a 
 to that period, the idolaters being the Samaritans.' He regards I3b-2i 
 as a later work by a different author. 
 
 Iviii., The True Fast and the True Sabbath. 
 
 The marks of time in this chapter are not decisive, but its position in 
 the book, and the parallels to Ivi. 1-8 and Zechariah vii. 1-14 point to a 
 post-exilic date. 
 
 lix. i-i5a, Denunciation of the Jews, followed by their un- 
 reserved confession of sin. 
 
 Here again lix. 3-15 is often regarded as pre-exilic^; the section 
 implies at least autonomy in Judah, and cannot well be exilic. The social 
 wrong-doing is similar to that denounced by Isaiah and Jeremiah. But the 
 best parallel is to Nehemiah's confession on behalf of Israel, and to the 
 confession of the congregation under Ezra and Nehemiah,' and points to a 
 date in that period.'" 
 
 ' Mark XV. 28 is a, misreading. 
 
 ° Quoted Matt. xxi. 13, Mark xi, 17, Luke xix. 46. 
 
 = Neh. X. 31, xiii. 15-22. * So Chbyne. 
 
 " RyssBL (Kautzsch), Cornill, p. 160, Drivek, p. 244, "It is 
 generally allowed . . . that they were written originally in the age of 
 Jeremiah." ' So also Skinner. ' So Duhm. 
 
 'Driver, p. 244, "generally allowed." 
 
 " Ezra X. 2, 13 ; Neh. i., ix. 2, 33. 
 M Chbynk, Duhm; Skinner, post-exilic, 3-8, are perhaps an addition. 
 
194 BIBLICAL INTRODUCTION 
 
 lix. isb-2i, Jehovah puts oh the Armour of Righteousness 
 to deliver Israel. In verse 2 1, His Spirit and Revelation shall 
 always abide in Israel. 
 
 Parallel to Ixiii. 1-6 ; Cheyne, r, 432, verse 21 an addition. Verses 7 £ 
 are quoted Romans iii. 15 ff. 
 
 lx.-lxii., The wealth and power, the splendour and glory of 
 Zion, when Jehovah raises her from her low estate. 
 
 This section is like xl.-xlviii. in style and spirit, but resembles xlix.-lv. 
 still more closely.. It might possibly be a detached portion of either 
 poem. But, though the situation described may be explained as that 
 of the Exile, it is more natural to understand that Zion and the Temple 
 are actually in existence.-' The desolation refers to the poverty-stricken 
 state of the meagre population before the coming of Nehemiah. More- 
 over, the tendency to revel in pictures of material wealth and power 
 has developed beyond that of xlix.-lv. Hence Cheyne regards lx.-lxii. as 
 composed under the influence of xlix.-Iv.; Ixi., 1-4 and Ixii. i being imita- 
 tions of the Servant passages, and Ixi 10 a separate prophecy to be placed 
 at the end as "Zion's Response." 
 
 In N.T. Ixi. I f., " The spirit of the Lord is upon me," etc., is applied 
 to Christ in Luke iv. 18 f. 
 
 Ixiii. 1-6, Vengeance on Edom. 
 
 Parallel to lix. I S ff. , and xxxiv. ; probably connects with some catastrophe 
 which befell Edom after the Exile.' 
 
 Ixiii. 7-lxiv., Israel, in deep distress, and acknowledging its 
 sin, recalls Jehovah's former goodness, and appeals to Him to 
 renew His mercy. He is their Father, their Redeemer, before 
 Him they are as clay in the hands of the potter. It is He 
 who has caused them to err, and hardened their hearts. None 
 have called on His name, because He hid His face from them, 
 and delivered them into the power of their guilt.^ City and 
 Temple are in ruins, will He not relent ? 
 
 The statement* that the holy .cities and Zion are a desolation, that 
 the Temple has been burnt, seems to shoyir that these chapters are exilic, 
 The situation implied is similar to that in Lamentations, only there is 
 no mention of a captivity, and the tone is less submissive. It might have 
 been written in Judah towards the close of the Captivity. But Ixiii. i8 
 states that God's people had only possessed the land, or, it may be, Zion, 
 a little while, which would not apply to' 586. We know of no later 
 occasion within the possible dates, when the Temple was burnt ; but 
 our information is so scanty that such a catastrophe might have happened, 
 and left no clear trace in history. Cheyne mentions as suggested occasions 
 of these disasters, the persecutions of AntiochUs Epiphanes and the period 
 of distress before the coming of Nehemiah, but maintains that this burning 
 must have taken place under Artaxerxes Ochus, c. 350. Duhin explains 
 
 1 Ixii. 9, 10. ' Cheynb, 432?. ' Ixiii. i6 f. * Ixiv, la 
 
ISAIAH LVI.-LXVI. 19S 
 
 « 
 
 the desolation of city and temple as the abiding result of the sack in 586, 
 the new city and temple being ignored as beneath notice. Even if exilic, 
 the section is so different in spirit from xl.-lv., that they can scarcely be by 
 the same author. In N.T. Ixiv. 4 is quoted in i. Corinthians ii. 9. 
 
 Ixv., JehoVah inaugurates new heavens and a new earth, and 
 a new dispensation in Jerusalem, from which superstitious 
 idolaters (? the Samaritans) shall be excluded, whOe His 
 servants shall prosper. 
 
 Often, but improbably, held to be the answer to Ixiii. y-lxiv. The 
 chapter seems to belong to a time when the opposition of parties within the 
 community passed finally into formal division into distinct bodies. It may 
 very well connect with the final severance under Ezra and Nehemiah of the 
 congregation from the Samaritans and their adherents.' 
 
 In N.T, Ixv. I is quoted Romans x. 20 f, 
 
 Ixvi. 1-5,^ Another contrast of the true worship with super- 
 stition, introduced by the declaration that Jehovah needs no 
 earthly Temple.^ 
 
 Either a warning to the Jews not to attach too inuch importance to the 
 restored Temple ; or a protest against the building of any temple, perhaps 
 a polemic against Haggai and Zechariah ; or, much more probably, a pro- 
 test against an early unrecorded proposal to build a schismatic Samaritan 
 temple, connecting, as 3-5 shows, with the same crisis as Ixv., perhaps at a 
 later stage.* 
 
 In Acts vii. 49 f., Ixvi. i, " What house would ye build," etc., is used 
 by Stephen, defending himself against a charge of saying that Jesus would 
 destroy the temple, to show that the Most High dwelleth not in temples 
 laid with hands. His indignant audience seem to have at once cut short his 
 speech. 
 
 Ixvi. 6-24, Jerusalem exalted, the nations chastised, those 
 still in exile brought home, and in 23 f., the regular observance 
 of new moons and sabbaths by all mankind, the carcases of 
 sinners burning publicly for ever. 
 
 The climax of Ixv. -Ixvi. 5 and of the same period ; 21 f. may be 
 an addition.' Verse 24, the germ of the doctrine of Gehenna, the place 
 of the lost, is referred to in Mark ix. 43 f., "If thy hand offend thee," 
 etc. 
 
 7. Jeremiah. 
 
 (a) The Prophit. — There is no doubt of the genuine connec- 
 tion of the bulk of the book with Jeremiah.* He belonged 
 
 ' Cheyne. ' To which Cheyne adds 17, l8a. 
 
 • Cf. John iv. 24. 
 
 • Cheyne, 432?; Duhm; Meyer, Entstehung desjudenihums, p. 89. 
 » Duhm, Cheyne, Skinner. 
 
 ^ For critical questions see (c) Composition and (e) Contents under the 
 several sections. 
 
196 BIBLICAL INTRODUCTION 
 
 to a priestly family at Anathoth, three miles north of Jeni' 
 salem, but he exercised his ministry in the capitq.1. He 
 remained unmarried, at the command of Jehovah. In the 
 thirteenth year of Josiah,,62 6, while still young, he was called 
 to be a prophet.^ Hence he was born under Manasseh, and 
 grew up under the reaction against Isaiah's teaching. Ap- 
 parently this reactionary worship had established its claim to 
 represent the ancient faith of Israel^ and was generally upheld 
 by the authorities in church and state, for Jeremiah is usually 
 hostile to all authorities, princes, prophets, and priests. His 
 earlier ministry and that of Zephaniah were doubtless among 
 the influences which led to the reforms of Josiah and the 
 establishment of Deuteronomy. From 621 to 608, Jeremiah, 
 most exceptionally, may have been in sympathy with the 
 ruling powers. But Josiah's defeat and death at Megiddo 
 must have seemed the divine repudiation of Deuteronomy 
 and Jeremiah. The Egyptian party, also that of religious 
 reaction, regained its supremacy at the appointment of 
 Jehoiakim by Necho, and, with brief exceptions, retained it 
 to the close of the monarchy. Throughout this period 
 Jeremiah defied princes, priests, and prophets aUke. He did 
 his best to baflSe the pro-Egyptian policy of the government, 
 to purify social life and the administration of justice, and to 
 reform religious faith and worship, but with little external 
 success. As his hopes of winning the people dwindled, his 
 threats of punishment hardened into the unqualified predic- 
 tion of the ruin ahke of Temple and city. He was universally 
 unpopular ; the people, misapplying Isaiah's teaching, clung to 
 the Temple, as the infallible palladium of the city. When 
 Jeremiah foretold its ruin, he barely escaped with his life. At 
 another time, his opponents replied to his threats by beating 
 him and putting him in the stocks. In Jehoiakim hirnself, the 
 prophet found an able and determined opponent, but Zedekiah 
 was a helpless tool in the hands of the stronger party. Jere- 
 miah, on the one hand, and the princes of the Egyptian party 
 with their hireling priests and prophets, on the other, struggled 
 
 ' i.i xvi. 2. 
 
JEREMIAH 197 
 
 fiercely for the control of the king. His conscience inclined 
 him to Jeremiah, but his cowardice decided in favour of the 
 princes. As Judah became committed to the hopeless contest 
 with Nebuchadnezzar, Jeremiah proclaimed the success of 
 the enemy, urged the king to submit, and declared that safety 
 could only be found in deserting to the besiegers. He was 
 imprisoned as a traitor, and was only saved by the tardy 
 interference of the king from being starved to death. Re- 
 leased by the Chaldeans, after the sack of the city^ he threw 
 in his lot with the Jews left in Judah, but was carried down by 
 them to Egypt. When we last read of him, he is still engaged 
 in' his life-long task of rebuking and threatening his fellow- 
 countiymen. There are conflicting traditions as to his death ; 
 TertuUian ^ states that the Jews in Egypt stoned him to death,, 
 which seems very probable. According to the Jews he 
 escaped to Babylon and died there.^ 
 
 (b) Historical Circumstances. — Under Manasseh, Judah was 
 subject to Assyria. But, about the time when Jeremiah began 
 his ministry, 628, western Asia was overrun by Scythian 
 hordes. These served the prophet in his early utterances, as 
 the original of the invader from the north, who should be 
 the instrument of Jehovah's chastisement of his people. 
 Assufbanipal, the last great Assyrian king, died in 626. From 
 that date the power of Assyria dwindled rapidly; the Syrian 
 states and Israel had been crushed; so that Judah was for a 
 time the strongest power in Palestine, and Josiah extended his 
 authority over part of Ephraim. Meanwhile Babylon was 
 aggrandising itself at the expense of Assyria, but its claim to 
 supremacy was challenged by Pharaoh-Necho, who marched 
 through Palestine on his way to the Euphrates. Josiah 
 opposed him, and was defeated and slain at Megiddb, 609. 
 Later on Necho deposed Jehoahaz, and made Jehoiakira 
 king. Thus for a time Judah was entirely controlled by the 
 
 1 Adv. Gnost, f. 8. , 
 
 * The ascription to Jeremiah of Deuteronomy, Kings, certain Psalms, 
 etc., rests on no good evidence. Jeremiah has often been held to be the 
 original of the picture of the suffering Servant of Jehovah, Isaiah liii 
 
198 BIBLICAL INTRODUCTION 
 
 Egypftian anti-prophetic party. It was probably 'after Nineveh 
 had been captured, and the Assyrian empire overthrown by the 
 Medes and Babylonians, c. 606, that Necho was defeated by 
 Nebuchadnezzar at Carchemish in 605, and thenceforward 
 western Asia lay at the disposal of the conqueror, who soon 
 estabhshed his authority in Palestine. Yet the tact of 
 Jehoiakim enabled him to retain his throne and persist in a 
 pro-Egyptian policy, even while professing loyalty to Babylon. 
 He died; just in time to escape the vengeance of Nebuchad- 
 nezzar, but his son and successor, Jehoiachin, and the best 
 of the population were carried away captive. Although hisi 
 successor, Zedekiah, Jehoiakim's brother, was the nominee of 
 Nebuchadnezzar, he either could not or would not control the 
 party of revolt against Babylon. The disloyalty of Judah pro- 
 voked a fresh Chaldean invasion and; siege of Jerusalem; 
 Pharaoh Hophra advanced to its relief, but retreated,; the 
 siege, which had been raised for a time, was resumed, the 
 city taken and sacked, the king with his court and most of the 
 people carried away captive. The attempt to form a new 
 community was frustrated by the murder of Gedaliah, a 
 Jewish prince acting as governor for the Chaldeans ; and 
 most of the remaining Jews fled to Egypt. There is evidence 
 that Nebuchadnezzar invaded Egypt, c. 568, at the beginning 
 of the reign of Amasis. 
 
 (c) Composition. — In the fourth year of Jehoiakim, Jeremiah 
 dictated to Baruch all his prophecies against Israel, Judah, 
 and the nations. The roll on which Baruch wrote this record 
 was burnt by the king next year, but Jeremiah dictated its 
 contents afresh to Baruch, who wrote them on a secondi 
 roll, " and there were added besides unto them many like 
 words.'"- These rolls were the first two editions of our 
 book, which no doubt includes the bulk of their contents. 
 We have thus the testimony of the book itself that the 
 earliest document which can have been used in its com- 
 position was written from the prophet's recollection of his 
 utterances, which were largely supplemented at the time of 
 
JEREMIAH 199 
 
 * 
 writing. Utterances of ah earlier date are thus extant in- 
 the form they assumed in the fifth year of Jehoiakim. The 
 book referred to in xxx. i may have heSn written as an 
 appendi*ito Baruch's roll, possibly also by Baruch.^ We 
 can only determine the contents of Baruch's roll by ascer- 
 taining the dates of the several prophecies, which, cannot, 
 always be done with confidence. Portions; of course, may 
 have been omitted in process of ieditihg. r , , 
 
 But our book is not a collection of Jeremiah's prophecies, 
 but a rough equivalent of what we should call "The Life, 
 Times, and Works of Jeremiah." It is nowhere stated that, 
 the narratives it contains were written by Jeremiah, nor, for 
 the most part, is there anything to suggest, that they were. 
 On the other hand, they are evidently, in the main, the 
 work of a well-informed contemporary, very probably the 
 prophet's secretary, Baruch. ■ In adding these narratives to 
 his roll, he probably also added Jeremiah's later prophecies, 
 partly from the prophet's notes,; partly frorn ,his. own re- 
 miniscences. The dependence on the Book of Kings in 
 its final,, form, and the probable presence of post-exilic 
 material, show that our book did not take its present shape 
 till after the Exile. The imperfect chronological arrangement 
 shows that the editors did not allow the contents of Baruch's 
 roll to remain together in their original form. Cf. Appendix D. 
 
 (d) Hebrew ani Greek Editions. — The LXX. differs very 
 widely from the Hebrew Text, There are numerous variations, 
 transpositions, omissions, and additions, It is commonly 
 stated that there are about 2700 words contained in the 
 Hebrew and not in the LXX. The most important omissions 
 are: x. 6-8, Unique Supremacy of Jehbvah; xxxiii. 14-26, 
 The Branch, and the Covenant with the Levites and David; 
 xxxix. 4-13, Fall of Jerusalem; xlviii, 45 f.. On Heshbon, in 
 Oracle on Moab; lii. 28-30, Statistics as to captives. 
 
 The Utterances on the Nations are inserted in the middle, 
 after xxv. 13, as in Isaiah and Ezekiel, instead of almost at 
 
 1 This verse is rejected by Giesebrecht, but accepted by Rothstein 
 (Kautzsch) and Cornill, 
 
20O BIBLICAL INTRODUCTION 
 
 the end, chh. 46-49. They are also arranged in the order, 
 Elam, Egypt, Babylon, Philistines, Edora, Ammon, Kedar^ 
 DamascuSj Moabj instead of the order of the Hebrew 
 Text, Egypt, Philistines, Moab, Ammon, Edbm, ^Damascus, 
 Kedar, Babylon. In minor variations the correct text is r to 
 be found sometimes in the one edition, sometimes in the 
 other; but the longer passages absent from the LXX. are 
 probably editorial additions in the Hebrew Text. They do 
 not show that such editoriar expansion continued after the LXX, 
 was translated, but only that when that translation was made,' 
 at least two very different editions of the book were still current. 
 
 (e) Contents. 
 
 I.--VI., Originally Composed in the Earlier Part of 
 Josiah's Reign, c. 628-621. 
 
 i.. Thirteenth Year of Josiah, 628. Jeremiah's Gall to the 
 prophetic office, to which God appointed him before his 
 birth. His mission "to pluck up, break down, destroy, arid 
 overthrow ; to build and plant." Visions of Almond Tree, 
 suggesting by paronomasia God's watchfulness; and of 
 Seething Caldron symbolising a Northern Invader. The 
 prophet will be in opposition to kings, princes, and priests, 
 and will not be crushed by them. 
 
 ii., Jerusalem and Israel, once devoted to Jehovah, have 
 Ungratefully deserted Him, being less faithful than the Gentiles 
 to their false gods. They have intrigued with Egypt and 
 Assyria. All classes, kings, princes, priests, prophets, and 
 people, are guilty. 
 
 iii. i-s, Idolatry and foreign intrigues punished by drought ; 
 will not the people repent ? Cf. iii. ig ff. 
 
 iii. 6-18, Time of Josiah. Judah did not take warning 
 
 by the fate of Israel, but surpassed her in wickedness. 
 
 Invitation to Israel to repent. Lost ark not to be replaced, 
 
 verse 16. Promise of reconciliation of Judah and Israel at 
 
 Jerusalem, whither all nations will gather to worship Jehovah, 
 
 17 f. 
 
 Interrupts the connection between verses 5 and 19. Giesebrecht 
 connects 6-13 with ig-iv. 2 ; 14-18 being « later insertion, 14-16 from 
 
JEREMIAH 20I 
 
 # 
 
 some other prophecy of Jeremiah. Verses 17 £ late gloss, Cornill, 
 Giesebrecht, Cheyne;' Smend' rejects 16-18, and understands iii. as 
 predicting the final ruin of Judah, and the restoration of Israel. 
 
 iii. 19-iv. z, Penitent Israel shall be accepted by Jehovah. 
 
 iv. 3-vi. 30, Description, interspersed with appeals to the 
 
 Jews to repent, of a terrible invasion by a northern people, 
 
 as a punishment of the guilt of all classes, in spite of their 
 
 assiduous sacrifices to Jehovah. , 
 
 Referring priginally to the Scythian inroads c. 628, but perhaps adapted 
 to the Babylonians when the earlier prophecies were rewritten m the fifth 
 year of Jehoiakim, xxxvi. 32. 
 
 VII.-X., The Beginning of Jehoiakim's Reign, 608. 
 
 No danger seems imminent; which suits the situation after the sub- 
 niission to Pharaoh Necho, and before his defeat at Carchemish ' by 
 Nebuchadnezzar. Cf. also vii. and xxvi. i 
 
 vii. 1-28, Jeremiah is commanded to stand at the gate 
 of the Temple, and appeal to the people to repent. Unless 
 they reform social wrongs and forsake the superstitious 
 worship of the Queen of Heaven and "other gods," 
 neither the sanctity of the Temple nor their many sacrifices 
 to Jehovah will protect them. The Temple at Jerusalem will 
 perish as did that at Shiloh. " But they will not hearken unto 
 thee." 
 
 vii. 29-viii. 3, Because the Jews have sacrified children in 
 the Valley of the son of Hinnom, the land shall be laid 
 waste, the valley choked with corpses on which the birds 
 and beasts shaiU feed ; the bOnes of the dead shall be exposed 
 before the sun, moon, and stars, which they worshipped, and 
 the living shall long for death. Cf. xix. 3-19. 
 
 viii. 4-ix. 22,' Lamentation over Judah, its obstinate sin 
 and sure punishment, by failure of crops, by invasion, the 
 ruin of the cities,* the death or ca,ptivity of the people. 
 _ ix. 23-26;^ 23 f. is a proverbial maxim; man should glory 
 not in strength or riches, but in God's goodness and righteous- 
 ness. 25 f. threaten Egypt, Judah, and their neighbours with 
 punishment; because they are uncircumcised in heart. 
 
 ' Introduction to Isaiah, p. 11. ' A.T. Tkeol., 237. ^ Heb. 21, 
 * viii. 13, 16, ix. II, l6, 21, 22. ' Heb. 22-25. 
 
202 BIBLICAL INTRODUCTION 
 
 23-26 interrupt the connection between 22 and x. 17, and were rejected 
 by Kuenen,^ but are probably genuine, but misplaced.'' 
 
 X. 1-16, The contrast between Jehovah, the one tru6 God, 
 Creator and Ruler of the Universe, and the idols of the 
 Gentiles. 
 
 Interrupts the connection between 22 and x. ij ; parallel to and prob- 
 ably dependent on Isaiah xl. 19-22,. etc., often regarded as exilic or post- 
 exilic' Verse n is in Aramaic, and is probably a later gloss. 
 
 X. 17-25, Conclusion of viii. 4-ix. 22. 
 
 Verse 25, which implies that Judah is already desolate, may have been 
 added by Jeremiah later.* 
 
 XI.-XX., Originally composed in Jehoiakim's Reign.* 
 
 xi. 1-17, The prophet recalls his zeal for God's covenant 
 with Israel — probably Deuteronomy ^ — denounces the failure 
 of the people to observe it, and threatens them with punish- 
 ment. 
 
 xi,.i8-xii. 6, Jeremiah's priestly kinsmen at Anathoth to be 
 punished because they persecuted him. 
 
 xii. 7-17, Judah raided by her neighbouns (7-13),, who will 
 be punished with exile, but restored if they adopt the religion^ 
 of Israel (14-17). 
 
 Often connected with the raids of the " bands " of Chaldseans, Syrians, 
 Ammonites, and Moabites, about the ninth year of Jehoiakim, c. 600.' 
 Jeremiah's authorship of 14-17 has been challenged.' For the restoration 
 of Moab and Ammon, 5/; xlviii. 47, xlix. 6; also xlix. 39 (Elam). 
 
 xiii. i-i I, The ruin of Judah symbolised by a girdle spoilt 
 by being buried near the Euphrates. 
 
 xiii. 1 2-1 7, All Classes of the people shall be filled with the 
 wrath of God„hke a bottle with wine, 
 
 xiii. 18, 19, Lament over the king, the queen^tnother, and 
 the desokte land. 
 
 Probably referring to the captivity of Jehoiachin, a youth of eighteen, 
 whose mother, Nehushta, is mentioned ii, Kings xxiv. 8, 12. 
 
 xiii. 20-27, The ingrained sin of Jerusalem — "Can the 
 Ethiopian change his skin, or the leopard his spots ? " — 
 punished by shame and ruin. 
 
 1 Ap. GlKSEBRECHT, i. I. ' GlESEBRECHT, CORNILL. 
 
 ' GiBSEBRECHT, CoRNiLL, ROTHSTEIN, (KSutzsch), who also regard 
 II as a still later addition. Cheynb, Origin of the Psalter, p. 333. 
 * CoRNiLL, glossi ' For the most part. • ii. Kings xxiii. 3, 
 ' ii. icings xxiv. 2. ^ Stade, ap. Gibsbbrecht, 
 
JEREMIAH 203 
 
 • 
 xiv. i-xvii. 18, On the occasion of a drought, Jeremiah 
 announces that the people will be consumed by the sword, by 
 famine, and by pestilence ; the rest will go into captivity. 
 Appeals for mercy are r^eated and rejected, " Though Moses 
 and Samuel stood before Me, yet My mind could nofc be 
 towards this people." Prophets who contradict Jeremiah/shall 
 be punished. Jeremiah complains of his unwelcome message 
 and the- ill-will it excites, and is repeatedly encouraged. He 
 must not marry or take part in any festivity. 
 
 Verses xv, 11-14, xvi. 14-16, interrupt the context, xv. 13 £ being 
 borrowed from xvii. 3 f,, and xvi. 14 f. from xxiii. 7 f. Similarly xvi. 
 18-21 is wholly or partly a misplaced fragmentj and xvii. k-I3j at any 
 rate, out of; place.' . 
 
 xvii. 19-27, The observance of the Sabbath, the condition 
 of national salvation. r 
 
 The parallels to Nehemiah xiii. IJ fE, the interest in the Sabbath, and 
 in sacrifices are unusual in Jeremiah," The style, however, is either 
 Jeremiah's or modelled on xxii. i ff.,' cf, too Ezekiel xx. 21, 24. 
 
 xviii.-xx., The Potter a type of the Divine Sovereignty. 
 God's threats or promises conditional on perseverance in sin 
 or righteousness. The doom of Israel. Plots against Jeremiah. 
 He prays for the punishment of his persecutors. The breaking 
 of a potter's earthern vessel,' which cannot be mended, a 
 symbol of the irrevocable ruin of Judah.* Jeremiah addresses 
 the people at the Temple, and is beaten and put in the stocks 
 by Pashhur, whose punishment will be, that he and all the 
 Jews who survive the sack of Jerusalem will be carried to 
 Babylon. Jeremiah again prays for the punishment of his 
 persecutors,' and curses the day of his birth. 
 
 Cf. Job iii. 1-10 with which xx. 14-18 will have some literary connec- 
 tion, probably Job is dependent on Jeremiah. Stade and Dillmann* 
 regard xx. 14 ff. as a later addition. Davidson, however, seems to 
 consider xx. 14 ff. independent of Job, and therefore the original. 
 
 1 GiBSEBRKCHT. 
 
 ' ROTHSTEIN (Kautzsch), CORNILL, GlESEBRECHT, KAYSER-MARTI,' 
 
 p, 157, Chkynb, Introd. to Isaiah, p. 312, "post-exilic." 
 
 ' GlESEBRECHT, " Gut jeremianisch ist, doch ist es mbglich, dies mit 
 
 Kuenen aus absichtlicher Imitation zu; erklaren " ; Driver, p. 242, " The 
 
 style is thoroughly that of Jeremiah." 
 
 * xix. 3-9, I lb- 13, which are largely based on vii. 32-viii. 4, ii. Kings 
 
 xxi. 16, xxii. 10-13, *rs held by Giesebrecht to be a later insertion. 
 " Ap. KONIG, 
 
204 BIBLICAL INTRODUCTION 
 
 XXI.--XXIX., Passages of Various Dates. 
 
 xxi. 1^10, During the last siege, 588, Zedekiah sends to ask 
 Goncerning the fate of the city, Jeremiah replies that the city 
 will be taken, sacked, and burnt, and that the only way of 
 escape is desertion to the Chaldeans. 
 
 xxi. ii-xxii. 9, Appeal to the court, "the house of the king 
 of Judah" to rule justly a.s the condition of national salvation.! 
 
 iThis passage and the sections to xxiii. 8 :are commonly considered 
 a collection of prophecies uttered originally at diffpreut times, and com- 
 bined soon after the captivity of Jehoiachih, e. 597. 
 
 xxii. 10-30, Judgments on Shallum.Qehoahaz), Jehoiakiin, 
 and Coniah (Jehoiachin), f. 597. 
 
 xxiii.. Denunciation of shepherds, /.«., princes, priests, and 
 especially prophets, including a promise of good shepherds, 4, 
 and of the righteous Branch (gemah) of David, under whom 
 judah and Israel shall be restored 5-8, cf. xxxiii. 14-16. 
 
 Probably under Jehoiakim. 
 
 xxiv., Jeconiah (Jehbiachin) and his fellow captives sym- 
 bolised by a basket of good figs, but the Jews left in Judah 
 by a basket of bad figs. 
 
 Early in Zedekiah's reign. 
 
 XXV., Fourth year of Jehoiakim, First of Nebuchadrezzar, 
 605. The Jews are to be subdued, and their land laid waste 
 by "my Servant Nebuchadrezzar" and the Chaldseans, because 
 they refused to listen to the appeals of the prophets. They 
 shall serve Babylon seventy years, then shall Babylon be 
 punished, 11-14. All nations shall drink the cup of God's 
 wrath. Last of all Sheshach (/.«., Babylon) shall drink, 26b. 
 
 26b is firobably a later gloss." Giesebrecht, also, considers 11-14, 30-38 
 later additions, verse 13b is clearly a gloss. 
 
 xxvi., " In the beginning of the reign of Jehoiakim," Jere- 
 miah threatens that the Temple, like that at Shiloh, will be 
 destroyed, is accused of blasphemy, but rescued by his friends 
 among the princes. Cf. vii.-x. 
 
 xxvii.-xxix., Jeremiah's Controversy with the Prophets. 
 The prophets, especially Hananiah, encouraged rebellion 
 against Babylon, and contradicted Jeremiah's threats. Death 
 
 I Cf, xvii. 19 ffi " RoTHSTBiN (Kautzsch), Cornill, etp. 
 
JEREMIAH 205 
 
 • 
 
 of Hananiah. Jeremiah and the prophets in exile, who 
 
 supported Hananiah, denounce each other by letter. ' 
 
 xxvii. 3, 4, xxviii. i show that this controversy took place in the eaflier 
 years of Zedekiah's reign, and that Zedekiah should be read for Jehoiakim 
 in xxyii. i. 
 
 XXX-XXXIII., Prophecies of Restoration. 
 
 These are combined with a narrative referring to events "in the tenth 
 year of Zedekiah," 588, during the last siege'; xxxiii. is expressly dated 
 in this period, to which xxx., xxxi. may alsd be assigned. The narrative 
 and the compilation of the section will be the work of the editor. The 
 Jeremianic origin of the prophecies in these chapters has been contested. 
 According to Smend,' xxx. f. presuppose the post-exilic historical situation, 
 and are dependent on II. Isaiah, e.g. , " Jacob, my servant." ' Giesebrecht 
 ascribes comparatively little to Jeremiah.* Doubtless editorial additions' 
 have given a post-exilic or exilic colouring to these chapters, otherwise 
 they are substantially Jeremiah's.^ 
 
 XXX., When calamity has shown that foreign alliances and 
 all human help are useless, Jehovah, Himself will deliver His 
 people, bring them back to their own land, and set over them 
 " David, their king," i.e., a prince of the House of David. 
 
 Verses 10 f., apparently dependent on 11. Isaiah,' or vice versa, are 
 rejected by Comill, also 22-24. Verses 23 f., at least, are out of place. 
 
 xxxi., Ephraim and Judah shall be reconciled at Zion,, and 
 
 share the renewed mercy of Jehovah. God will make a new 
 
 covenant with them, whereby each will be directly taught of 
 
 Him, and there will be no need of human teachers. 
 
 Two passages are often held to be later additions ; 35-37, Israel shall 
 abide while sun and moon'endure, in which 35 is in the style of II. Isaiah, 
 cf. Isaiah 11. IS ^ ; and 38-40, the future dimensions of Jerusalem, which is 
 certainly out of place here.' 
 
 xxxii. (narrative, 6-25 in first person), During the last siege; 
 Jeremiah buys a field at Anathoth, as a sign that the Jews will 
 return from exile to occupy their old inheritance. 
 
 » xxxii. I. " A.T. TheoU, pp. 239 ff. » xxx. 10. 
 
 * Only xxxii. 6-l7a, 24-44 are actually Jeremiah's, while xxxi, 2-6, 
 15-20, 27-34, xxxiii. I, 4-13 are the reminiscences of Baruch ; the rest is 
 due to later editors. ' See below. 
 
 ' Driver (apparently), Cprnill, Konig, Kayser-Marti, 1x5, 
 RoTHSTEiN (Kautzsch). 
 
 ' Cf. Isaiah xli. 13, xliii. 5, xliv. 2, 
 ' CoRNiLL, Giesebrecht. 
 
 • RoTiisTBiN (Kautzsch), Giesebrecht, 
 
266 BIBLICAL INTRODUCTION 
 
 Verses 17-23,'tlie somewhat abstract introduction to Jeremiah's prayer, 
 may be a later addition.^ 
 
 3«xiii. 1-16, Renewed promises of restoration, and of the 
 Branch (gemah) of David. 
 
 The form of this section seems affected by the actual experiences of the 
 Captivity, especially in 11-14. Verses 14-16 are chiefly a repetition of 
 xxiii. 5 f., but here it is Jerusalem and not the Branch which is named 
 "Jehovah our Righteousness." 
 
 xxxiii., 17-26, The House of David and the Levites shall 
 
 remain and flourish, as long as day and night endure. 
 
 This section is not in the LXX., and the keen interest in the Levites 
 has no parallel elsewhere in the book ; hence the verses are probably an 
 addition.^ 
 
 XXXIV., XXXV., Utterances on Specified Occasions. 
 
 xxxiv., During the Last Siege, Zedekiah, after the Fall of 
 the City, will be taken to Babylon, but his Mfe will be spared, 
 1-7. The nobles to be punished, because when the siege was 
 raised for a time, they re-enslaved the Jews whom they had 
 emancipated. 
 
 XXXV., " In the days of Jehoiakim." The Jews put to shame 
 by the loyalty of the Rechabites to their tribal customs. 
 
 About 597, the Rechabites being probably driven into the city by the 
 troubles at the end of Jehoiakim's reign. 
 
 XXXVI.-XLV., A History of Jeremiah. 
 
 xxxvi., Fourth. Year of Jehoiakim, 605. One roll of Jere- 
 miah's prophecies burnt by the king, and another written. 
 
 xxxvii.-xxxix., Jeremiah, arrested as a deserter, during the 
 temporary raising of the last siege, is beaten and imprisoned. 
 He persists in urging the king to submit, and the people to 
 desert, is thrown into a muddy oubliette, but released by Ebed- 
 melech, repeats his prophecies to the king, and is kept in 
 prison till the sack of the city, when he is released by the 
 express orders of Nebuchadrezzar. Ebed-melech is -promised 
 his life. 
 
 Verses xxxix. I, 2 are taken from ii. Kings xxv. 1-4 (Jeremiah lii, 4-7); 
 and 4-13 fiom ii. Kings xxv. 4-12 (Jeremiah lii. 7-16) ; 4-13 are not in the 
 UCX., and are probably a later addition. 
 
 1 ROTHSTEIN (Kautzsch), CORNILL, GlESEBRECHT. 
 
 ' ROTHSTEIN (Kautzsch), CORNILL, GlESEBRECHT J and, DRIVER, 
 
 p, 247, " the majority of recent critics." 
 
JEREMIAH 207 
 
 m 
 xl.-xliv., Jeremiah is released from among the captives, and 
 joins Gedaliah, the new governor of Judah. Gedaliah is 
 murdered by Ishmael. Jeremiah is rescued from Ishmael 
 by Johanan, and carried, against his will, into Egypt, where 
 he denounces the worship of the Queen of Heaven by the 
 exiles, and foretells the ruin of Egypt and the refugees. 
 
 xlv., " Fourth Year of Jehoiakim," Baruch is promised that 
 his life shall be spared'. i 
 
 XLVI.-Li., Prophecies against Foreign Nations. 
 
 The prospect of a Chaldiean invasion after the Battle of Carchemish, 
 60s, probably furnished Jeremiah with an occasion for dealing with foreign 
 nations. - 
 
 Smend^ and Kayser- Marti ' deny the Jeremianic authorship of this 
 section. Smend considers that the prophet who was so preoccupied 
 with the sin and doom of Judah could not have exulted in a national 
 Judaistic spirit over the ruin of foreign nations. Some use, however, 
 may have been made Of Jeremianic material. Giesebrecht, however, holds 
 that Jeremiah delivered a series of utterances on foreign nations ; assigns 
 xlvii., xlix. 7-1 1 to Baruch's reminiscences; and thinks that xlvi. 2-12, 
 Egypt, rests on a Jeremianic basis ; elsewhere anything of Jeremiah's is 
 editorially disguised beyond recognition. 
 
 xlvi., Egypt, On the eve of the Battle of Carchemish, 605, 
 Pharaoh Necho's defeat is foretold, 1-12; and, after the 
 defeat, the conquest of Egypt, and its ultimate restoration, 
 13-26. 
 
 Verses 27 f. =xxx. 10 f. are an insertion. 
 
 xlvii., The Philistines spoiled by the Chaldaeahs. 
 
 According to I "before Pharaoh smote Gaza," which, however, LXX^ 
 omits. Probably 605. 
 
 xlviii., Moab and its cities are doomed. 
 
 Parallel to Isaiah xv., xvi,, q.v. 
 
 xlix. 1-6, Ammon, its captivity and restoration. 
 
 xlix. 7-22, Edom, its mountain strongholds to be sacked by 
 the nations. 
 , xlix. 23-27, Fall of Damascus. 
 
 Amosaic, 23b = Isaiah Ivii. 20; 24b = Isaiah xiii. 8; 25= Isaiah xxii, if.} 
 26=1. 30; 27=Amos i. 14. We know nothing that suggests that Damascus' 
 was within the range of Jeremiah's political interests. The section is, 
 however, accepted by Comill. 
 
 xlix. 28-33, Kedar and Hazor, Nomad tribes of Arabia, 
 1 A.T. Theol., pp. 238 f. » Ibid., p. 115. 
 
2o8 BIBLICAL INTRODUCTION 
 
 xlix. 34-39, Elam, its doom and restoration. 
 Verse 34, not in LXX., assigns this passage to the beginning of 
 Zedekiah's reign. 
 
 1., li., Babylon, A prophecy or series of prophecies, exulting 
 
 over the miserable ruin of Babylon, as a punishment for her 
 
 ill-treatment of the Jews. The Jewish exiles are urged, to 
 
 flee from the doomed city. A note, li. 59-64, is added, 
 
 stating that Jeremiah wrote the doom of Babylon in a book, 
 
 and gave it to Seraiah, Zedekiah's chamberlain, to take to 
 
 Babylon, read it there, tie a stone to it, and throw it iftto 
 
 the Euphrates. This book is probably intended to be 
 
 identified with 1., li. Chapter li. ends: "Thus far are the 
 
 words of Jeremiah." 
 
 These chapters are generally regarded as exilic, with post-exilic 
 additions. The historical situation is that of the Exile. The Jews 
 are in Chaldea,^ the Temple and Jerusalem in ruins,* Bjbylon is 
 menaced by a confederation of nations, led by the Medes.' The 
 religious situation, too, is not that of Jeremiah. He is overwhelmed 
 with the sense of Judah's sin and its punishment by Nebuchadrezzar, 
 the Servant of Jehovah. Here, the situation is that of U. Isaiah; 
 Judah's sin is forgotten, Judah's suffering, and the sin and chastisement 
 of Babylon for destroying Jerusalem occupy the writer's mind.* Much 
 of the section is borrowed from the, rest of the book and from other 
 literature, after the manrier of other secondary passages in Jeremiah.* 
 Except for such borrowing, the style is not that of Jereihiah. 
 
 LIT., Historical Appendix. 
 
 An account of the Fall of Jerusalem, and the release of 
 Jehoiachin from prison. 
 
 Verses 1-27, 31-34=11. Kings xxiv. i8-xxv. 21, xxv. 27-30, from 
 which they are taken. Verses 28-30 are absent from the LXX. 
 
 (f) Teaching. — Jeremiah repeats the protests of his pre- 
 decessors against social wrong,^ superstitious and idolatrous^ 
 worship, at the high places ^ and elsewhere, and the com- 
 bination of external devotion to Jehovah with a selfish, 
 immoral life ; ' and, like them, he announces the ruin and 
 restoration of Judah and Israel, and the ultimate universalism 
 
 11.8,33,11.6,45; M. 28, li. II, so£ 
 
 > 1. 9, 41-43, li. II, 27 f. * 1. 20, IL 10, 33-44. 
 
 "1. 40-46 = xlix. 18, vi. 22-24, *li^- 19-21; li. 15-19=1. l2-l6j 
 
 cf. 1. 39 with Isaiah xiii. 21 i, ' xxii. 3, vii. 5-7, 
 
 ' ii. 20, 27, iii. 13. ' xvii. 2. 
 * vi. 20, vii. 21 ff. 
 
• JEREMIAH 209 
 
 » 
 of true religion.^ The exact relation of Jeremiah to Deuter- 
 onomy v.-xxvi. is a difficult problem. Its ordinances seek 
 to realise Jeremiah's ideals, and his teaching must have 
 favoured its acceptance and subsequent observance; indeed, 
 in xi.^ he appears as its champion. The release of Jewish 
 slaves brought- about by Jeremiah during the last siege was 
 in accordance with a law . borrowed by. Deuteronomy from 
 the older codeSi^ But Jeremiah's later teaching goes beyond 
 Deuteronomy. Indeed the prestige which Josiah's reforms 
 gave.' to the Temple as the only legitimate sanctuary of 
 Jehovah helped the people to harden their hearts against the 
 prophet's teaching. The people appealed against him to a 
 written law, "We are wise, arid the law of Jehovah is. with us," 
 but he replidd, "The false pen of the scribes hath wrought 
 falsely.-"* We need not suppose that Jeremiah refers to 
 Deuteronomy;? but it is clear that the written law had 
 assumed a form against which the prophet was compelled 
 to protest, and that editors were already busy expanding 
 and interpreting its. contents. His experience of the use- 
 lessness of any written law as the basis of the covenant 
 between Jehovah and Israel led him to the great utterance, 
 xxxi. 31-37, which is one of those in which O.T. Revelation 
 most nearly anticipates the Gospel of Christ, and according 
 to which God's covenant with His people does not rest on 
 written law, on a prophetic order or a priesthood, but on the 
 spiritual fellowship of the believer with God. The same 
 truth is illustrated by Jeremiah's isolation. In him the 
 antagonism of the inspired prophets to the prophetic order 
 and the priesthood reached its climax. He is, after Christ 
 Himself, the great example that Divine Revelation often 
 comes as a protest against the traditional teaching of con- 
 stituted authorities. 
 
 In dealing with eclecticism,- tooi Jeremiah follows in the 
 footsteps of his predecessors, but the issue is more clearly 
 
 ..i.iu. ly.ff. » (y: Contents i. 1. 
 
 ' Cf. xxxvt. 13, 14 with Exodus xxi. 2, Deut. xv. 12. 
 • viji. 8. ' Wbllhausbn, History of Israel, 403 n. 
 
 P 
 
2IO BIBLICAL INTRODUCTION 
 
 stated. The people worshipped the heavenly bodies; and Other 
 deities, yet they could say "I am not defiled, I have not gone 
 after the Baalim," and- saw no reason why they should not 
 appeal to Jehovah for help in time of trouble.^ By his 
 demonstration of the folly and; sin of asssociating "other 
 gods " with Jehovah, Jeremiah prepared the way for the 
 explicit statement of monotheisni. 
 
 Moreover, Jeremiah stands out as a great example of 
 personal religion, in his unflinching proclamation of an un- 
 popular message, in his sympathy and intercessions for his 
 people, in his earnest pleading with God, and in his, sub- 
 mission to the Divine will. 
 
 (g) Use in N.T. — Our Lord's phrase, "den of thieves," 
 Matthew xxi. 13, etc., is from vii. 11; " Rachel weeping for 
 her children," Matthew ii. 18, from xxxi. 15 ; the great passage 
 on the New Covenant, xxxi. 31-37, is; applied to Christianity 
 in Hebrews viii. 8-12, x. 16 f., Romans' xi. 27, and probably 
 suggested the phraSe " new covenant " in the words of institu- 
 tion of the Lord's Supper. Cf. also ix. 24 and i. Corinthians i. 
 31, ii. Corinthians x. 17, There are also' numerous parallels 
 in the Apocalypse. 
 
 8. Lamentations. 
 
 (a) Title, Date, and Authorship. — In the; Hebrew text, the 
 heading is simply 'EkhA, the opening word of the book ;, in 
 the LXX., Threnoi or Threnoi HieremipUf amd in the Vulg. 
 Threni, hence our Lamentations. The ' LXX. and Vulg. 
 represent the Hebrew Qtndth="'Ls.mentsX\pns" by which 
 name, the book is referred to in the Talraud, etc. 
 , In ii. Chronicles xxxv. 25 we read that "Jeremiah composed 
 a lamentation for Jpsiah, which, was uttered by all the male 
 and female singers in their lamentations {qinoth) over Josiah 
 unto this day, and it became a custorn, in Israel, and 
 behold they {i.e., the lamentations of th«^ ,smgers, inpluding 
 that of Jeremiah) are written in (the Book of) Lamentations " 
 (^al haq-qtndtH).^ This passage evidently refers to Lamenta- 
 
 ' ii. 23, 27, * Substantially as Kautzsch ; cf. R,V. ' 
 
LAMENTATIONS 211 
 
 • 
 
 tions ; it has been held to claim the whole book for Jeremiah, 
 but, if the rendering given above is correct, it merely states 
 that the book includes a lamentation by Jeremiah. 
 
 In the Hebrew Canon, Lamentations is one of the Five 
 HoWs, Megiliof A, and is included in the Hagiographa, but the 
 LXX. places it after Jeremiah, and prefixes a statement that 
 "After Israel was carried' away captive, and Jerusalem laid 
 waste, Jeremiah sat weeping, and lamented this lamentation 
 over Jerusalem." The Old Latin, Vulgate, and Syriac versions, 
 the Targum and the Talmud follow Chronicles and the LXX. 
 in ascribing tjie book to Jeremiah. The contents show clearly 
 that Chronicles is wrong in describing, the book as a lamenta- 
 tion over Josiah ; it is, as the LXX. perceives, a lamentation 
 over the Fall of Jerusalem in 586. Yet we have the joint 
 testimony of Chronicles and the LXX. to the authorship of 
 the whole or part of the book by Jeremiah. 
 
 But, though there are parallels to the style and teaching of 
 Jeremiah, and various passages seem to have been written 
 by an eye-witness,; a comparison of the book with Jeremiah's 
 prophecies suggests that the tradition of his authorship is an 
 unsound conjecture. He was a prisoner during the sack of 
 the city, and aftei: his release he actively co-operated in the 
 attempt to reorganise the Jewish community. Jeremiah, who 
 had a very poor opinion of Zedekiah, would hardly have 
 spoken of him as ".The breath of our nostrils, the anointed 
 of Jehovah ... of whom we saidj Under his shadow we 
 shall live among the nations." ^ We miss, toOj any adequate 
 parallel to Jeremiah's emphatic and repeated assertion that the 
 ruin of Judah was the punishment of the sin of a/l classes of 
 the community, Jeremiah included priests and prophets in 
 his denunciation, but he would scarcely have laid the whole 
 responsibility upon them.^ 
 
 But as each of the five chapters is a separate poem, it is 
 still possible that one or more of them may be the work of 
 
 * iv. 20. :, , - 
 
 ' " It is because of the sins of her prophets, and the iniquities of hei 
 priests," iv. 13. 
 
212 BIBLICAL INTRODUCTION 
 
 Jeremiah. The vivid descriptions of the sa,ck of Jerusalem in 
 ii. and iv. show that these chapters were written soon after the 
 event by an eye-witness. Similar characteristics suggest a 
 like origin for v. ; but the fact that v. is the only one of the 
 four, poems, not an acrostic, points to a different authprj 
 unless, indeed, the author had collected twenty-two suitable 
 sentiments, but never found opportunity to shape them into 
 ah acrostic. The different character of the acrostics in i., and 
 iii.'^ may point to a different authorship. Moreover i. and 
 iii. are said to be dependent on iL and iv., and other exilic 
 literature, and therefore to be later. Though they seem to 
 imply an exilic date, they aire often regarded as post-exilic. 
 
 (b) Qinah Metre. — This book furnishes; the most striking 
 example of the Hebrew elegiac or Qinah metre, according 
 to which each of the two or more parallel members is divided 
 into two unequal parts, the former being, the longer. This 
 arrangement gives the lines a sort of "dying fall" suited to a 
 melancholy subject, e.g. : 
 
 ^ , f All her gates are desolate, 7"| 
 ■ ■* \ — vher priests sigh ; 6 1 Hebrew , 
 
 / Her virgins are afflicted, 6 f Syllables. 
 I , "^ I — bitter is she. 3J 
 
 Chapters i.-iv. of this book are written in this metre. 
 The English translation can only partially represent this 
 peculiarity, and it is not strictly adhered to in the Hebrew, 
 possibly in some measure through later modifications of the 
 text. A good illustration of the metre may be seen in 
 Dr, Skinner's translation^ of Ezekiel xix. 2-9. 
 
 (c) Contents.' — i., Th6 miserable condition of Jerusalem. 
 An alphabetic acrostic, following the usual order of the letters in the 
 
 Hebrew alphabet. A single verse is given to each letter, and each verse 
 contains three lines of Qinah metre, the first of which begins with the 
 characteristic letter. 
 
 ii., The ruin and sack of Jerusalem. 
 
 An acrostic, exactly resembling i., except that it has the order Pe, 
 'Ayin, instead of the usual order 'Ayin, Pe. 
 
 iii., The community, speaking mostly in the first person 
 ' See Contents. ' Ezekiel, p. 109. 
 
EZEKIEL 213 
 
 * 
 
 singular "I," meditates on its sin and suffering, and on its 
 hopes of deliverance from God. 
 
 An acrostic, exactly resembling ii. , except that each of the three Qinah 
 lines allotted to each letter begins with that letter, and each line is reckoned 
 as a separate verse ; cf. Psalm cxix. 
 
 iv., The sack of Jerusalem, concluding with the doom of 
 Edom,'arid the assurance that Zion's punishment is ended. 
 
 An alphabetic acrostic, resembling ii. and iii. in' having the unusual 
 order Pt, -Ayin. A single verse is given to each letter, and each verse 
 contains, ia;« lines of QtTiah metre, the first of vfhich begins with the 
 characteristic letter. 
 
 v., The miserable tondition of Jeriisalem and the Jews. 
 
 The poem contains 22 verses, the number of letters in the Hebrew 
 alphabet ; but it is not an acrostic. Neither is it in the Qinah metre ; but 
 consists of couplets in synonymous parallelism,^ 
 
 The book is not used in the N.T. , 
 
 9. Ezekiel. 
 
 (a) Date and Authorship. — The ascription of this book to 
 Ezekiel is generally accepted,^ and there is no serious doubt 
 as to the authorship of any considerable passage.* . The 
 ministry of Ezekiel falls between 592 and 570, and the 
 book must have been compiled towards its close. Our 
 knowledge of Ezekiel is derived from the book itself j he 
 is not mentioned elsewhere in O.T. 
 
 Ezekiel, the son of Buzi, was a priest who was carried 
 captive with Jehoiachinj* 597 ; five years later he was called 
 to be a ptophet. This fact, together with the authority with 
 which he speaks and the deference shown him, suggests that 
 he was no longer in his first youth, and this view is confirmed 
 by his familiarity with priestly ritual, probably acquired as an 
 officiating priest at the. Temple. During his last ten years at 
 Jerusalem, Jehoiakim was supporting the reaction from the 
 Deuteronomic legislation, and the. revival of earlier customs, 
 in the teeth Of strenuous and persistent opposition from 
 
 . ' See Psalms. 
 
 " The attempts of Geiger, Seinecke, Zunz, etc. to assign the book 
 to the post-exilic period have met with no success, and need not be 
 considered. 
 
 ' The most important later addition is xxvii. 9b-25a. See Contents. 
 
214 BIBLICAL INTRODUCTION 
 
 Jeremiah. Our book shows a large acquaintance and sympathy 
 with the teaching of Jeremiah ; probably in these last years at 
 Jerusalem, Ezekiel was a disciple of the older prophet. 
 
 In Babylonia he was settled iii a colony of exiles at Tel 
 Abib, by the river Chebar.^ Both place and river are un- 
 known. His ministry began in 592; in his account of it, 
 it is often difficult to distinguish narratives of real events 
 from descriptions of symbolic figures; but the following 
 facts seem fairly certain. The Jewish exiles at Tel Abib 
 formed a community by themselves, enjoying a kind of 
 municipal self-government, with elders of their own. The 
 prophet, with his wife, lived in his own house; his prophetic 
 status was recognised, and the elders used to come to his 
 house to consult him.^ Like Jeremiah, he had a more 
 favourable opinion of the Jews in captivity than of those 
 left in Judah.' Yet he also resembled Jeremiah in his 
 opposition to the general social and religious feeling of the 
 community amongst whom he ministered, so that he occupied 
 a position of isolation and antagonism towards his hearers 
 similar to that of the older prophet at Jerusalem. So, too, 
 the message of Ezekiel's earlier ministry, 592-586, was the 
 same as Jeremiah's, the punishment of the sin of Judah 
 by the overthrow of the state and the captivity of the 
 people. Towards the close of this period Ezekiel's wife 
 died.* There is no mention of any children. The prophet's 
 bereavement happened about the beginning of the last ■ siege 
 of Jerusalem by Nebuchadnezzar, and marked the close of 
 hiis earlier public ministry. During this period, prophecies 
 are dated in the fifth, sixth, seventh, and ninth years of the 
 captivity of Jehoiachin. But he seems* not to have spoken 
 in public froin the commencement of the siege in the ninth 
 year, till the news of the fall of Jerusalem reached him at the 
 close of the eleventh year.^ Prophecies concerning Egypt 
 were written during the interval.'^ , 
 
 ^ iii. 15. ' viii. I, xiv. i, xx. i. 
 
 * xxiv. 16-18. ' Cf. xxiv. 27 and xxxiii. 22. 
 
EZEKIEL • 215 
 
 * 
 
 The fall of Jerusalem fulfilled the earlier predictions of 
 Ezekiel, and, no doubt, as in the case of Jeremiah, led to 
 a fuller recognition of his prophetic authority. He resumed 
 his ministry with a new and happier message^the coming 
 restoration of the Jews. According to the dates given, this 
 period of his work was short, and was succeeded by a long 
 interval of silence ; there is no date between the twelfth 
 and the twenty-fifth year.^ During this interval his faith in 
 the coming restoration had grown so strong, that, at its close, 
 for the benefit of the Jews after they should have returned 
 to the Holy Land, he composed specifications for a new 
 Temple, directions for its services, and a constitution for the 
 state. 
 
 Probably he himself collected and arranged his prophecies 
 in their present form not long afterwards. 
 
 We gather from xxxiii. 30-33 that Ezekiel's preaching was 
 popular, but ineffective; thus, verse 32, "Thou art unto them 
 as a very lovely song of one that hath a pleasant voice . . . 
 for -they hear thy words, but do them not." Yet they grew 
 tired of his elaborate symbols, " Ah, Lord Jehovah ! they say 
 of me. Is he not a speaker of parables ? "^ 
 
 The references to the prophet's lying on his side for 390 
 days have led to the suggestion that he was subject to some 
 form of catalepsy, as a divinely appointed means of inspira- 
 tion, but this and most of the other symbolic actions are 
 purely figurative descriptions.^ 
 
 (b) Historical Circumstances. — See Jeremiah, with whom 
 Ezekiel was contemporary. No change in the general political 
 situation took place in the interval between the Fall of Jeru- 
 salem and the close of Ezekiel's ministry. 
 
 (c) Contents. 
 
 I.-XXIV., Sin of Judah and its Punishment. 
 i.-iii. 21 (Fifth Year,* fourth month, July 592), The 
 prophet's call. Theophany, a living chariot, a confusion of 
 
 ' xxxii, 17 and xl. I. ^ xx, 49. 
 
 ' The theory of catalepsy was suggested by Klostermann ; against it see 
 Skinner's Ezekiel, p. 55. * From Jehoiachia's captivity. 
 
2i6 BIBLICAL INTRODUCTION 
 
 living creatures, wheels, hands, wings, faces, and eyes ; above 
 them a firmament, above that a visioii of a great sapphire, 
 that seemed like a throne, and upon the throne there seemed 
 to be the vision of a man. Ezekiel is sent to rebellious Israel; 
 swallows the roll of a book, is to be a watchman to warn each 
 individual. 
 
 ill. 22-27, Second appearance of the Glory of Jehovah, 
 renewed commission. 
 
 iv. 1-3, Siege of Jerusalem symbolised by a drawing on a 
 tile, and by an iron pan. 
 
 iv. 4-17, Length and distress of siege symbolised by time 
 spent (figuratively) by the prophet without moving, and by 
 repulsive food eaten (figuratively) by him. 
 
 v.. Burning of Jerusalem, massacre of part of population, 
 and grievous captivity of the rest symbolised by burning, 
 smiting with a sword, and blowing away of hairs. 
 
 vi., vii., Ruin of the people and the land, especially of the 
 mountains, which were the scenes of idolatry. 
 
 viii. (Sixth year, sixth ^ month, September, 591), Vision of 
 idolatrous worship in the Temple, the " Image of Jealousy," 
 Animal Worship, Weeping for Tammuz, Sun Worship. 
 
 ix.-xii., Destruction of Jerusalem. A man clothed in linen, 
 with a writer's inkhorn, sets a mark on the forehead of the 
 saints, and sends destroying angels to slay the rest. The 
 glory of Jehovah, with its chariot of Cherubim, as in i., 
 appears in the Temple ; fire from it is scattered over the city. 
 The glory of Jehovah departs from the Temple and the jiity 
 by the eastern gate. 
 
 Punishment of unjust rulers. 
 
 Restoration and purification of the Jews already in exile. 
 
 The captivity symbolised by the prophet's removal with his 
 goods, by his taking food with quaking. 
 
 Assurance that these threats will be speedily fulfilled. 
 
 xiii., Denunciation of prophets and prophetesses, who, un- 
 commissioned by Jehovah, claim to speak in His name, saying 
 "Peace, where there is no peace," contradicting Ezekiel's 
 ^ LXX. (followed by many), 5th, August. 
 
EZEKIEL 217 
 
 threats, and supporting the people with false hopes, as they 
 might daub a wall with untempered mOrtar. 
 
 xiv. i-x I, Rebuke of those who consult the prophet, while 
 tiiey " take idols unto their heart." 
 
 xiv. 12-23, A guilty land' should not be saved because 
 Noah, Daniel, and Job dwelt within it ; mUch less Jerusalem, 
 where only the dregs of the people are left. 
 
 XV., Jerusalem, always a worthless vine, now half burnt, is to 
 be burnt altogether. 
 
 xvi., Jerusalem's persistent sin and certain doom described 
 under the figure of a foundling, taken to wife by Jehovah ; she 
 proved faithless and was punished. 
 
 xvii., Zedekiah, the vine grown from a shoot of a cedar, the 
 Davidic dynasty, planted by an eagle, Nebuchadnezzar, is to be 
 carried captive, because he broke his oath of allegiance to 
 Babylon, and revolted to another eagle, the king of Egypt. 
 But Jehovah will plant another shoot of the cedar, which will 
 itself become a great cedar. 
 
 xviii., The Doctrine of Retribution. No one will suffer for 
 the sins of his father, but will be punished for his own sins. 
 The penitent sinner shall live, the backsliding saint shall 
 die. 
 
 xix., Dirge for Judah and her princes, Jehoahaz and Jehoia- 
 chin, under of the figures of a lioness and her whelps, and a 
 vine and its branches. 
 
 XX. 1-44 (Seventh year, fifth month, tenth day, August, 
 590), In Egypt, in the Wilderness, in the Holy Land, Jehovah 
 spared Israel in spite of its utter wickedness, " for His Name's 
 sake, that It should not be profaned in the sight of the 
 nations." For the same reason, though the Jews are still 
 given over to sin. He will chasten, purify, and restore them. 
 
 XX. 4S-xxi. 17, Ruin of Jerusalem and the Holy Land under 
 the figures of a conflagration and a sword. 
 
 xxi. 18-27, Symbolic narrative setting forth imminent ruin 
 of Jerusalem ; the king of Babylon, marching towards Pales- 
 tine, casts lots as to whether he shall attack Jerusalem or 
 Rabbath Ammon; the lot falls on Jerusalem. 
 
2i8 BIBLICAL INTRODUCTION 
 
 xxi. 28-32, The doom of Ammon, 
 
 Probably a later passage,, placed Jiere, and not amongst the Oracles on 
 the Nations because of the previous reference to Ammon. The "sivord" 
 hei-e is sometimes understood as that of Jehovah^ and sometimes as that 
 of Ammon.' 
 
 xxii.. The total depravity of the people, especially the 
 princes, prophets, and priests. 
 
 xxiii.. The alliances of Samaria and Jerusalem with foreign 
 powers, and the consequent idolatry, corruption, and ruin 
 described under the figure of the career of two sisters, Oholah 
 and Oholibah, whom Jehovah married, but they were faithless 
 to him, with many lovers. 
 
 pholah and Oholibah are both based on ^Ohel, tent ; but their exact sense 
 is doubtful.' They are sometimes explained as contrasted; Oholah =^«r 
 tent, having a (sacred) tent of her own, i.e., self-chosen and illegitimate 
 worship; Qholibah = ife^' (Jehovah's) tent is in her, i.e., the Temple, as the 
 one divinely appointed sanctuary. But the chapter suggests no contrast, 
 and it is better to take the names as synonymous; Oh61ah=tent; Oholi- 
 bah = tent-in-her ' ; both referring to the high places and their corrupt 
 worship. 
 
 xxiv. 1-14 (Ninth year, tenth month, tenth day ; beginning 
 of final siege of Jerusalem, January, 587), Jerusalem, besieged, 
 figured as a rusted caldron, full of meat, boiling on the fire. 
 
 xxiv. 15-27, Ezekiel's wife dies; he is forbidden to mourn 
 aloud, as a sign that the Jews will be dumb with anguish when 
 they learn the fate of Jerusalem. 
 
 XXV.-XXXIL, Oracles against Foreign Nations. 
 
 XXV., Ammon, Moab, Edom, and the Philistines. 
 
 xxvi.-xxviii, 19, Tyre. Tyre destroyed by Nebuchadrezzar; 
 the princes of ;the sea, with whom she has traded, lament oyer 
 her; her wealth and ruin figured by the wreck of a great 
 merchant ship ; the pride of the Prince of Tyre in wisdom and 
 commerce ; he was " wiser than Daniel," " the anointed 
 cherub ... in Eden, the garden of God ... and upon the 
 holy mountain of God " ; yet he perishes miserably. 
 
 xxvii. 9b-2Sa is apparently an interpolation ; it interrupts the context ; 
 the rest of the chapter describes a ship. These verses describe the trading 
 city and its customers ; so Bertholet. 
 
 xxviii. 20-23, Zidon. 
 
 1 Bertholet. ' Davidson, Skinner, etc. 
 
 * The i being an old construct ending. 
 
EZEKIEL 219 
 
 •' 
 
 xxviii. 24-26, Israel, restored and delivered from neigh- 
 bours, who are " pricking briers " and " grieving thprns," shall 
 
 dwell securely. 
 
 These verses would naturally conclude the section on foreign nations ; 
 they may have stood originally after xxxii. ; or xxv. -xxviii. dealing with 
 more immediate neighbours formed a separate section. 
 
 xxix.-xxxii., Egypt. 
 
 xxix.,1-16 (Tenth year, tenth month, twelfth day, January, 
 586), Pharaoh, the proud river dragon, destroyed; Egypt, 
 desolate forty years, is afterwards restored as "the basest of 
 the kingdoms." 
 
 xxix. 17-20 (Seven-and-twentieth year, iirst month, first day. 
 April, 570), Note to the previous prophecy, added by Ezekiel, 
 Nebuchadrezzar is to be compensated for his unsuccessful 
 thirteen years' siege of Tyre by the conquest of Egypt. 
 
 xxix. 21, The revival of Israel. 
 
 This verse may be the conclusion of xxix. 1-16, or of 17-20 ; in the 
 latter case it gives the last words of the prophet. 
 
 XXX, 1-19, and 20-26 (Eleventh year, first month, seventh day, 
 April, 586), Egypt to be conquered, its cities sacked, its king 
 overthrown, and the people carried captive by Nebuchadrezzar. 
 
 xxxi. (Eleventh year, third month, first day, June, 586), The 
 
 overthrow of Pharaoh under the figure of the cutting down of 
 
 a great cedar. 
 
 Instead of " the Assyrian was a cedar " in verse 3, Asshur 'erez, read 
 " Te'asshur," a rare name for a species of cedar ; '«r«, cedar, is a gloss. ' 
 
 xxxii. 1-16 (Twelfth 2 year, twelfth month, first day, March, 
 584). The nations lament over the ruin of Egypt. 
 
 17-32 (Twelfth year, twelfth month,' fifteenth day, March, 
 584), Dirge over Pharaoh and his army, who descend into 
 Sheol to join Asshur and the other oppressors of Israel. 
 
 Chapters xxix.-xxxii. were uttered either during or soon after the siege 
 of Jerusalem, 588^586, when the party opposed to Jeremiah and Ezekiel 
 hoped that the intervention of Egypt would avert the doom which those 
 prophets had pronounced against Judah. 
 
 1 Cf. Davidson, and Skinner. 
 
 ' Syr., LXX. A., eleventh, March, 585. ' '' '• 
 
 ' The month is not given in the Hebrew Text, perhaps because this 
 
 prophecy was given in the same month as the preceding. LXX. -adds 
 
 "in the first month," in which case the chronological order requires us ta 
 
 accept the reading " eleventh year " in verse I, , 
 
220 BIBLICAL INTRODUCTION 
 
 XXXIII.-XXXIX., Prophecies of Restoration. 
 
 ' (After the Fall of Jerusalem.) 
 xxxiii. 1-9, The prophet as watchman. 
 
 Parallel to iii. 16-21. 
 
 xxxiii. 10-20, The penitent sinner shall be saved, and the 
 backsliding saint shall perish. 
 
 Parallel to xviii. 
 
 xxxiii. 21-33 (Eleventh^ year, tenth month, fifth day, 
 January, 585), Ezekiel hears of the Fall of Jerusalem. The 
 remnant in Judah denounced for immorality, the exiles be- 
 cause, they enjoy hearing Ezekiel, but do not act according to 
 his message. 
 
 xxxiv., Former rulers have been evil shepherds, now 
 Jehovah will shepherd His people, and give them for a 
 shepherd His servant David, i.e., a prince o^ the Davidic 
 dyuEisty. 
 
 XXXV., xxxvi., Edom and other intruders into the Holy Land 
 shall be driven out ; and, for His name's sake, Jehovah will 
 restore His people, and make the land populous and fertile. 
 The people shall receive a new heart and a new spirit. 
 
 xxxvii. 1-14, The revival of the people under the figure of 
 the resurrection of an army of dry bones. 
 
 xxxvii. 15-28, The reunion of Judah and Ephraim under 
 " David my servant." 
 
 xxxviii. i-xxMx. 24, The prince of Rosh, Meshech and 
 Tubal, namely, Gog of the land of Magog,, is moved, in the 
 distant future, to lead the far-off nations against restored 
 Israel. He and his hordes are annihilated, and the name of 
 Jehovah finally vindicated before all nations. 
 
 Gog, Magc)g, Rosh, Meshech, and Tubal are alike unknown ; cf. Gen. x. 2. 
 
 xxxix. 25-29, Brief summary of the promises of restoration, 
 
 by way of conclusion to this group of prophecies, ending, 
 
 " Neither will I hide my face any more from them, for I ha.ve 
 
 poured out my spirit upon the house of Israel, saith the Lord 
 
 Jehovah." 
 
 ^ So Syr. and some Hebrew MSS.^ leaving six months for the news 
 to reach Babylonia; the ordinary Hebrew Text has "twelfth," leaving 
 eighteen months, which is too long. ' ^^ > 
 
EZEKIEL . 221 
 
 XL.-XLVIII., The Constitution of Restored Israel. 
 
 xl.-xliii. 12 (xl. I, Five-and-twentieth year, beginning of 
 the year, tenth day, April, 572), The Temple. The glory 
 of God, described in chapter i., re-enters by the east gate, by 
 which it departed.^ r 
 
 xliii. 13-27, The Altar. 
 
 xliv., The ministers of the Temple. The Levites who had 
 been priests of the high places ar§ degraded to the inferior 
 position of temple-servants, and the priesthood is confined to 
 the sons of Zadok, the Levites of the Temple, 
 
 xlv, 1-8, The lands of the Priests, Levites, and Prince. 
 
 xlv. 9-xlvi. 24, The sacrifices, for which the Prince provides 
 out of his revenue, 
 
 xlvii. 1-12, A river from the Temple makes all the land 
 fertile, except the inarshes left to provide salt. 
 
 xlvii. 13-xlviii. 35, The extent of the Holy Land — 
 Palestine, west of Jordan — and its division between the 
 twelve tribes, the Priests, the Levites, and the Prince, The 
 twelve gates of the city named after the twelve tribes. 
 
 (d) Significance of the Book of Ezekiel. — Ezekiel represents 
 a transition and a compromise; the transition from the ancient 
 Israel of the Monarchy to Judaism; and the compromise 
 between the ethical teaching of the prophets and the popular 
 need for ritual. When Ezekiel left his native land, he was 
 old enough to carry with him the memory of the old order 
 and its traditions; he was young enough to adapt himself 
 to the conditions of the new order, which was to be so 
 powerfully ' influenced by his ministry. He also marks the 
 transition from the prophet to the scribe or theologian ; he 
 not only announces the Divine Revelation, but also discusses 
 the relations of its various truths. Moreover in this book 
 we see prophetic utterance passing into literary composition. 
 The older prophets were first of all preachers, their books 
 are merely records of their preaching, often collected and 
 arranged . by others. But, although Ezekiel also was ,a 
 preacher, and his book represents his utterances, yet it is 
 ' X. 18-22. 
 
222 BIBLICAL INTRODUCTION 
 
 a cal-eful piece of literary work, and much of it, especially 
 xl.-xlviii., was originally composed in writing. 
 
 Chapters xliii. i8-xlv. 8 are a connecting link between 
 Deuteronomy and the Priestly Code. Deuteronomy speaks 
 of " the priests, the Levites," and Deuteronomy xviii. provides 
 that, since the high places are to be suppressed, the Levites 
 who had been priests of the high places may come to 
 Jerusalem and share the functions and revenues of the 
 Temple priesthood. Ezeldel directs that the Levites of 
 the high places shall be degraded into an inferior order 
 subordinate to the priesthood, which is confined to the 
 Levites of the house of Zadok, i.e., the Jerusalem priest- 
 hood, afterwards styled "Sons of Aaron." ^ This is the basis 
 of . the sharp distinction in the Priestly Code between the 
 priests, or "sons of Aaron," and the Levites. 
 
 The period of transition lent itself to compromise. The 
 earUer prophets laid almost exclusive stress on the moral 
 and spiritual life, and emphatically condemned formal and 
 superstitious- worship, virtually disparaging all ritual. Yet 
 fixed religious observances were still necessary for the people. 
 In Deuteronomy the teaching of the prophets is combined 
 with reforms in ritual. But this initial compromise was 
 inadequate and indefinite, and the combination of the 
 moral and spiritual teaching of i.-xxxix. with the ritual 
 system of xl.— xlviii. was the formal recognition that Judaism 
 was to be based on the ritual tradition as well as on the 
 revelation made to the pre-exilic prophets. 
 
 (e) 77ie Teaching of Ezekiel. — In matters of doctrine, 
 Ezekiel chiefly expresses more clearly and formally the 
 teaching of his predecessors. "While the substance of 
 these chapters [i.-xxxix.] presents no single element which 
 may not be traced in the Writings of earlier prophets, there 
 is none which does liot receive a more distinct intellectual 
 expression in the hands of Ezekiel." ^ The denunciation 
 of foreign alliances, the doom of Israel and Judah on 
 
 ' Perhaps including others besides Zadokites. 
 
 » Skinner, art. "Ezekiel," Dr. Hastings' Bible Dictionary. 
 
EZEXIEL '• 223 
 
 account of the vice and cruelty of the governiftg classes, 
 the future restoration, and the Messiah as a Davidic prince, 
 are all part of the message of earlier prophets. 
 
 But Ezekiel is chiefly dependent on Jeremiah. Both were 
 able to look forward from the punishment inflicted upon the 
 Jews by the Fall of Jerusalem to the new-life of the Restora- 
 tion, of which they write more fully and definitely than 
 their predecessors. Ezekiel endorses Jeremiah's wholesale 
 condemnation of the prophets, priests, and princes of their 
 time. Ezekiel, too, utters no condemnation of Nebuchad- 
 rezzar and Babylon. Moreover the younger prophet further 
 develops Jeremiah's teaching on individual religion ; his 
 prophetic ministry is partly pastoral, he is a watchman for 
 every siiigle soul.^ In the famous eighteenth chapter he 
 traverses the primitive theological application of 'heredity, 
 and declares that a man is noi punished for his father's 
 sin ; that each is judged, not only according to his own 
 doings, but according ' to his moral condition at the time 
 of judgment. His teaching as to a new heart and a Hew 
 spirit ^ is an echo of Jeremiah's New Covenant. ■ 
 
 The more characteristic features of Ezekiel's teaching are ;— 
 
 (i.) The Divine Transcendence ; Jehovah touches Jeremiah's 
 mouth, but Ezekiel multiplies elaborate syrnbols to suggest his 
 vision not of Jehovah, but of the glory of God. 
 
 (ii.) Jehovah restores the Jews "for His name's, sake," 
 because His reputation is bound up in the eyes of the 
 world with ;their prosperity. Israel has no claim but the 
 divine election; the people has been evil from the beginning.^ 
 
 (iii.) Chapters xxxviii., xxxix., with their picture of the 
 heathen armies under Gog gathered together to perish in 
 an attack on Jerusalem, probably , suggested ^ the similar 
 apocalyptic visions in; Joel and the Appendix to jZechariah,^ 
 
 (iy.) The ordinances of xl.-xlviii. involve the. principle of 
 graduated sanctity of religious persons, places, things, ; aiind 
 
 ^ iii, 16-21, xyxiii. 1-9. ' xi. 19. ' xxiii. ' 
 
 ♦ The germ of the idea is perhaps found in Zeph. iii. 8. 
 
224 BIBLICAL INTRODUCTION 
 
 times, afterwards developed and systematised in the Priestly 
 Code. 
 
 (f) The Relation of xl.-xlviii. to the Law of Holiness, see 
 chapter ii. §19. 
 
 (g) Canonicity. — It is stated that, on account of the marked 
 differences between many ordinances in Ezekiel and the 
 corresponding laws in the Pentateuch, there was some ques- 
 tion of excluding Ezekiel from the Jewish Scriptures ; but, at 
 the beginning of the Christian Era, Hananiah ben Hezekiah 
 shut himself up with 300 measures of lamp-oil, and reconciled 
 theim. J ., 
 
 (h) Use in the New Testament, — Much of the imagery of 
 the Apocalypse is derived , from this book.; also, possibly, 
 the description of Christ as the Good Shepherd^; other- 
 wise the traces of this book in N.T. are very few and slight. 
 
 10. Daniel. 
 
 (a) Date and Authorship — It is not clear that the author in- 
 tended this book to be received as the work of Daniel himself. 
 The narratives, are in the third person, and each of the two 
 halves of. the apocalyptic section is introduced by a verse in 
 the third person.^ Nor does the constant use of " I, Daniel," 
 in this section, necessarily involve a claim that the rest of 
 chapters vii.-xii. was actually written by Daniel. The literary 
 method which secures dramatic effect by speaking in the name 
 of some well-known character, has always been familiar. It is 
 used in EcclesiasteSj where the author speaks in th^ character 
 of Solomon, "I, the Preacher, was king over Israel in Jeru- 
 salem" ^ ; knd it is the conventional form of apocalyptic litera- 
 ture. We have no clear evidence as to whether the convention 
 was generally understood by the author's contemporaries. 
 
 The general character of an apocalypse is that the author 
 places in the mouth of some ancient worthy a history of 
 events up to the author's own time, followed by a description 
 of God's judgment on the wicked and deliverance of His 
 
 1 Cf, !^xxiv. with John z. 16, Hebrews xiii, 20, L Peter ii, 25. 
 ' vii. I, X. I. ' »• 13- 
 
DANIEL 225 
 
 * 
 
 people. , In Daniel vii.-xii. we have . four historical sketfches, 
 each of which ends with the persecution of the Jews' by 
 Antiochus Epiphanes. His: ruin and death, which are an- 
 nounced in general terms, seem to be still future. The last 
 and fullest sketch of the history i is followed by an account 
 of the resurrection and' judgment. - Similarly, but with less 
 details, Nebuchadnezzar's dream of the Great Image an- 
 nounces the establishment of the Kingdom of God as the 
 immediate sequel to the Greek dominion in. Egypt and Syria.^ 
 
 In view of '.these facts^ ■■ the book is , commonly dated 
 between the desecration of the Temple, i68, and the death of 
 Antiochus, 164. If we deduce from viii. 14, "The sanctuary 
 shall be cleansed,"^ that the reconsecration of the Temple in 
 1 65-had already taken place, we are shut up to, the close of 
 165 or the beginning of ,164.* 
 
 This, conclusion is confirmed by a wealth of evidence,' 
 external and internal. While there is no trace, of the. existence 
 of the book before 168, its influence from; that time ion ward is: 
 very marked./ Thus there is no mention of Daniel in the 
 great list of Jewish worthies, EcClesiasticus xliv.-l, c. 200, 
 which, moreover, says " Neither was there a man born like 
 unto Joseph"^; thbugh as a Jew in high office at a foreign 
 court, and as an interpreter! of dreams, Daniel was very like 
 Joseph. On the other hand a section of the Sibylline, verses, 
 dated about B.C. 140, refers to the "ten horns," ^ and, 
 i. Maccabees, c. b.c. 100, refers to :the Fiery Furnace and 
 the Den) of: Lions. : I 
 
 In the Hebrew ' Canon, Daniel is not placed among the 
 Prophets, but in the Hagiographa, the latest section of the 
 Canon) although Haggai, Zechariah, and Malachi, who were 
 later than the time at which Daniel is desfcribed as living, are. 
 placed among the prophets.; Either the Jews did not. regard; 
 
 1 x.-xii. iS I " -; ■; ^ 'A. i^. 
 
 ^ Wenifdaq qodhesh, R.V;;Mg,i justified. .Sevan thinks that .the vague- 
 ness of this prediction shows that the event had not yet taken place, 
 
 * CoRNiLL, Kautzsch, KoNiG, Strack, after 168 ; Driver, 168 ot 
 167. ,, ' xlix. Ij. ' 
 
 ' Bbvan, cf. vii. 7, 20, 24, with Sibyllines tlL, 3S8 ff. 
 
226 BIBLICAL INTRODUCTION 
 
 the book as prophetical, or it was considerably later than 
 Malachi, c. 4-44. ' 
 
 The language also points to a late date. For the most part 
 the Hebrew is fairly correct; the author, doubtless, was a 
 scholar, who wrote in a classical style. But here and there 
 he betrays himself by using the vocabulary of Chronicles, or 
 of post-biblical Hebrew.^ The appearance of Greek words, 
 especially the late Greek o-u/ic^wvta,* E.V. dulcimer, points 
 to the Greek period rather than to the Exile. The recently- 
 discovered fragments of the original Hebrew of Ecclesiasticus 
 show that a very fair imitation of classical Hebrew was written 
 in the Greek period. , 
 
 The author shows an intimate acquaintance with the times 
 of Antiochus Epiphanes, but makes serious mistakes about 
 Nebuchadnezzar and the Fall of Babylon, and the early 
 Persian Empire. Belshazzar was neither the son, nor of 
 the family of Nebuchadnezzar. "He had disappeared from 
 history when Cyrus entered Babylonia . . . Cyrus entered 
 Babylon in peace . . . and the Babylonian king was not 
 slain." "'Darius the Mede' is a reflection into the past of 
 Darius, the son of Hystaspes," i.e., history not only tells us 
 nothing of any " Darius the Mede," but his existence in the 
 position assigned to him by our book is entirely inconsistent 
 with what history does tell us of that period. On these and 
 other grounds Professor Sayce concludes that "The story 
 of Beishazzar's Fall is not historical, in the modern sense 
 of the word history," and that "The name of Darius and 
 the story of the slaughter of the Chaldseah king go together."' 
 
 The statement of Josephus* that the High Priest Jaddua 
 presented the Book of Daniel to Alexander the Great is from 
 the narrative of Alexander's visit to Jerusalem, which is 
 generally regai'ded as untrustworthy. ; 
 
 The date of the LXX. is too uncertain to be used as an 
 
 argument for the early existence of our book. 
 
 1 Bevan, 28 ff. 
 
 ' iii. 4 sQinponyi, R.V. Mg. bagpipe. 
 
 ^ The Higher Criticism and the Monuments , 1 894, pp. 5^4-53 '• 
 
 ' Antt. xi., 8, 5. 
 
DANIEL 227 
 
 * 
 
 (b) Historical Circumstances. — At the close of^.the Greek 
 period, Judaea was a province of the Seleucid kingdom of 
 Syria. Antiochus IV. Epiphanes, 175-164, tried to hellenise 
 the Jews, and met with some success.^ In 175 he deposed 
 the High Priest Onias III.,^ and replaced him by his hellenis- 
 ing brother Jason. In 168 Antiochus set on foot a fierce 
 persecutibn to induce the Jews to relinquish circumcision and 
 the observance of the Sabbath. He attempted to destroy all 
 copies of the Law.^ In this persecution many Jews sufifered 
 martyrdom, with great heroism. At his command there was 
 set up on the altar of burnt offering at the Temple, "the 
 abomination of desolation "* — a heathen altar or idol. In 
 167 began the revolt of the Maccabees, in 166 Judas Macca- 
 bsSus occupied Jerusalem, and in 165 reconsecrated the 
 Temple about three years ^ after its pollution; In 164, 
 Antiochus Epiphanes died, leaving- Judas still in possession 
 of Jerusalem. 
 
 (c) Daniel. — Probably the narratives in i.-vi. are based on 
 some older work or on popular tradition, no trace of which; 
 however, is found except in Ezekiel xiv. 14, 20, where Daniel 
 is coupled with Noah and Job, and in Ezekiel xxviii. 3, where 
 he is referred to as a typical wise man; " Behold," says Ezekiel 
 to the prince of Tyre, "thou art wiser than Daniel." Apparently 
 the prophet is referring to some ancient Israelite sage. As he 
 wrote these verses shortly before the Fall of Jerusalem, 586, 
 and Daniel did not begin his public career till the second year 
 of Nebuchadnezzar, c. 603, the story of Daniel as known to 
 Ezekiel must have been entirely different from that told in our 
 book. According to i. 4 Daniel was a youth at the time ^ ; he 
 is also represented as surviving the Fall of Babylon, 536, so 
 that in 586 he can scarcely have been more than thirty-six.^ 
 
 1 xi. 32. " ix. 26. ' Cf. viL 25, ix. 26, 27, xi. 28-32. 
 
 * i. Mace. i. 54, Daniel xi. 31, xii. 11. " vii. 25, etc. 
 
 ° The notes of time in chapters i. and ii. are difficult to reconcile with 
 each other, but the events in chapter ii. must be understood as happening" 
 pot more than a year after those of chapter i. 
 
 ' Rev. J. E. H. Thomson, author of the Pulpit Commentary Vaniel, 
 has furnished me with a curious parallel to the supposed mention by 
 
228 BIBLICAL INTRODUCTION 
 
 (d) Language.— ThQ section iL 4-vii. ,28 is in Aramajc. 
 The; comparison of this section with the rest of the book 
 does not suggest any satisfactory reason why part should 
 have been written -in Hebrew and part iri Aramaic. Why, 
 for instance, should the Chg-ldsean king speak to the Chaldseans 
 in Hebrew in ii. 3, be answered by thern in Aramaic in 
 ii. 4b, and the rest of the narratives, conversations included, 
 be given in Aramaic ? Why, again, should the vision in vu., 
 in the first year of Belshazzar, be, in Aramaic, and the very 
 similar vision in viii., in .the same king's third year, be in 
 Hebrew? The, variety of language certa,inly does not dis' 
 tihguish parts intended for the learned from those addressed 
 to the common people, nor is it arranged according to the 
 nationality of, speakers or hearers. The least difficult ex-: 
 planation is that of Lenormant, adopted ,by Bevan.^ It is 
 suggested that part of the Hebrew of Daniel was lost, and 
 the gap was filled up from an Aramaic translation or Targum. 
 That the Aramaic section concludes" with the end of, a 
 division, of the book, raises no difficulty; but it cannot be 
 a mere accident that the Aramaic section begins immediately 
 after the statement, "Then spake the ChaldEearis to the king 
 in Aramaic." Perhaps the editor who used an Aramaic 
 document to 1 supply the gap in the Hebrew did not simply 
 fill in just what was wanting in the Hebrew,, but sacrificed 
 a portion of the Hebrew to avoid an abrupt and unexplained 
 transition from Hebrew to Aramaic ; ii. 4a was the latest point 
 in the Hebrew at which Aramaic could be. introduced for the 
 firs,t time with any apparent fitness. . 1 
 
 , The, book must haye assumed its bi-lingual form at a very 
 
 Ezekiel of a contemporary in the same breath wifh ancient worthies. 
 At ifamily worship, the night after the Disruption, Dr. Hamilton; of 
 London, read Hebrews xi., and, in concluding, added to the list of the 
 Scriptural heroes the names of the leading Disruption worthies. At 
 the utmost, however, such parallels only show that it is possible that 
 Ezekiel was speaking of a young contemporary, not that it is probable. 
 
 Persons of the name Daniel are also mentioned in i, Chron. iii. 1, 
 a son of David, by the wise; w,oman Abigail, Ezra viii. 2, Neh. x. 6, 
 they can have nothing to do eithei; with Ezekiel's Daniel,, or the subject of 
 our book. ^ Page 27. 
 
DANIEL 229 
 
 early date, since the LXX. was clearly translated from a 
 MS. in which ii. 4-vii. 28 was iii Aramaic and the rest in 
 Hebrew.! - 
 
 (e) The Greek Daniel, — Both in the LXX. andin Theodo- 
 tion, c. A.D. 180, the book is expanded by the insertion of 
 the Prayer of Azariah and the Song of the Three Children, 
 and by the addition of the narratives of Susanna, and of Bel 
 and the Dragon, of which Daniel is the hero.^ 
 
 In the Greek Bible of the Christian Church,^ Theodotion's 
 translation displaced that of the Seventy. 
 
 (f) Contents. 
 
 I.-VL, Narratives in the Third Person. 
 
 Daniel and his companions fed on pulse. ■ Nebuchadnezzar's 
 dream of the Great Image. The Fiery Furnace. Nebuchad- 
 nezzar's dreani of the Great Tree hewn down, foreshowing 
 his madness. Belshazzar's Feast. Daniel in the Den of 
 Lions. ■ 
 
 VII.-XII., Visions in the First Person.* 
 
 vii.,^ The Four Beasts, i.e., the Babylonian, Median, 
 
 Persian, and Greek Empires. The fourth beast has ten 
 
 horns, i.e., ten successive' kings. A little horn, i.e., Antiochus 
 
 Epiphanes, comes up, before which three of the ten horns, 
 
 i.e., three of his predecessors or rivals, are plucked up. The 
 
 little horn persecutes the saints, i.e., the persecutions of the 
 
 Maccabaean period. The "Ancient of Days " destroys the 
 
 Fourth Beast and takes away the power of the other three, and 
 
 gives dominion over the earth to a Man; i.e., Israel. 
 
 "Oni3 like unto a Son of Man," i.e., human in contrast to the beasts 
 which symbolise the Gentile, Kmpires. .Q'., the use of "Servant of 
 Jehovah" for Israel in Isaiah xliv. 21, etc. The "One like unto a 
 Son of Man," to whom dominion is given in 14, must equal "the 
 people of the saints of the Most High," to whom dominion is given 
 in 27, in the explanation of the vision. This view' is quite consistent 
 with the use of "Son of Man" in N.T. for Christ; N.T. regularly 
 applies to Christ what is said of Israel in O.T., «.^., Matt. ii. ,15 and 
 Hosea xi. i. The view, however, that our phrase refers to a personal 
 Messiah, has been accepted by Ewald.' 
 
 1 Ebvan, 28. ' Cf. chap, vii., \ 5. ' e.g., ih AB, ■ , 
 
 * In vii. I, X. I, introductory verses, Daniel is spoken of in the third 
 person. ^ Cf, the Dream in ii. ' Ap. Bevan, 118. 
 
230 BIBLICAL INTRODUCTION 
 
 viii., The Ram "and the He-Goat. A Ram with two horns, 
 the Medo-Pefsian Empire ^ is overthrown bj? the Greeks under 
 Alexander." The horn of the He-Goat is replaced by four 
 horns, the kingdoms of Alexander's successors.* From one 
 of the four horns, i.e., Syria, arises a little horn, i.e.., AntiochuS 
 Epiphanes, who sacks the Temple, and stops the Daily 
 Sacrifice. The desolation of the Temple to last 2300 morn- 
 ings and evenings, i.e., 1150 days, three years, and a fraction. 
 The explanation is given by the Angel Gabriel. 
 
 ix.. After confession and prayer by Daniel, Gabriel appears 
 and tells him that* "From the going forth of the promise 
 to people and to build Jerusalem," i.e., the promise to 
 Jeremiah at the time of the Fall of Jerusalem,^ "until an 
 Anointed One, a Prince,"^ i.e., either until Cyrus,'^.or until 
 there is again a High Priest actually officiating ^ "(there are) 
 seven weeks," i.e., 49 years; about the time of the captivity, 
 " and for sixty and two weeks it shall be peopled and buUt," 
 and after the sixty-two weeks " the Anointed One shall be 
 cut off . '.■ . and the: city, and the sanctuary shall go to 
 ruin," i.e., 434 years after the Return, the High Priest will 
 be slain or. removed — the reference is perhaps to Onias HI. 
 deposed early in the reign of Antiochus Epiphanes^and 
 the city and Temple sacked. " The covenant . shall be 
 annulled for the many during one week," ' i.e., seven years, 
 perhaps referring to the unsettlement and laxity preceding 
 the persecutions, "and during half a week," i.e., three years 
 and a half,!" "sacrifice and oblation shall cease, and instead 
 thereof (there shall be) abominations set up." Afterwards the 
 desolator, Antiochus, is to be destroyed. 
 
 1 20. ^21. * 22. 
 
 * The translation quoted here is BBVA^I's, p. 161. 
 
 " Jer. XXX. 18-22. ' Mashlah Nagtdh. 
 
 ' Isaiah xlv. I. 
 
 8 Bleek, etc., ap. Driver, Bevan. 
 
 ' R.V., "He shall make a firm covenant with many for one week," 
 perhaps referring to Antiochus and the Hellenising party among the Jews. 
 
 ^i" Cf. the three years and a fraction, viii. 14, and the "time, times, and 
 half a time," xii. 7. 
 
; ' DANIEL 231 
 
 « 
 
 The explanation just given would not be borne out by an exact 
 chronology, from the destruction of Jerusalem, 586, to the reconsecration 
 of the Temple by Judas MaccabaauSj 165, is only about 421- years. But 
 such absence of mathematical accuracy is unimportant in an apocalypse, 
 where numbers are not determined' nrerely by arithmetic, but also by 
 symbolism: and theology, '^ Moreover, an exact knowledge of chronology 
 was rare and difficult for the ordinary Jew, and there is no reason to 
 suppose that the author of this book was an expert in the subject. All 
 attempts to find in these figures a prediction of the precise date of the 
 crucifixion are shipwrecked on similar difficulties. An inaccuracy which is 
 natural and harmless in a symbolic apocalypse, would be fatal to a predic- 
 tion supposed to guarantee Christianity by foretelling the exact time of the 
 death of Christ. ' 
 
 Cf. Sevan and J. E. H. Thomson, Daniel, Pulpit Commentary, 
 
 x.-xii., An abstract of the history of the East frdm the time 
 of "Darius the Mede," narrated to Daniel by "One like the 
 similitude of the sons of men," in the interval between the 
 narrator's conflicts with the prince, or guardian angel of 
 Persia, in which the narrator was aided by Michael, the 
 guardian angel of the Jews. No names of persons are given, 
 and with some exceptions, places are described and not 
 named. In spite of the obscurity of this method, and the 
 scantiness of information as to the East in this period, we 
 are able to recognise in xi. a tolerably accurate sketch of the 
 history of the Persian and Greek empires in Egypt and Syria, 
 between V. 536 and the time of Antiochus Epiphanes. The 
 latter half of the chapter, or more, is taken up with a more 
 detailed account of the feign' of Antiochus Epiphanes, 
 specially dwelling on his intrigues with Hellenising Jews, 
 and his profaning the sanctuary, stopping the iregular burnf- 
 bffering, and setting up the abomination "that maketh deso- 
 late."^ The account of his doings concludes ^' Tidings from 
 the East and North shall trouble him : and he shall go forth 
 with ^reat fury to destroy and utterly to make away many. 
 He shall plant his pavilions between the sea and the glorious 
 holy mountain" — definite details, followed by the vague, 
 general statement^' yet he shall come to his end, and none 
 shall help him.''^ 
 
 ^ The 490 years are probably 7 times Jeremiah's 70 years, 
 ' xi. 30 1 " xi. 45. 
 
232 BIBLICAL INTRODUCTION 
 
 The lapse fram details to generalities seems to show that, at the time of 
 writing, the death of Antiochus had not yet taken place. 
 
 As we know no events towards the close of AntiBchus' reign correSi 
 ponding to xi.. 40-453, Bevan thinks they are a prediction of what the 
 author expected to happen. But, "at the time of the end" in 40, is 
 scarcely sufficient indicatibn of the transition from narrative to prediction. 
 The tenor and tone of 40 ff. is just the same as that of the preceding 
 sections. It is also difficult to regard it as a risumi of Antiochus' reign, 
 or as a recurrence to the events of 168, already referred ;to in 29 ff. The 
 difficulty may arise from our imperfect knowledge of the' history, or from 
 some corruption of the text, e.^., 40-45 may have been originally indepen- 
 dent, parallel to and not a sequel of the preceding. . "In 45, Theodotion 
 has, " He shall come as far as his portion," ^ instead of " he shall come to 
 his end." 
 
 . , The last chapter tells how Michael, the prince,, or guardian 
 angel of Israel, delivers the people. There is a resurrection 
 of 5 the dead to rewards and punishments. The tribulation 
 lagts for "a time, times, and half, a tirne," «.if., three years, and 
 a halfj 01 1290 days, also about three years and, a half, from 
 the stopping ,pf the, daily sac);ifice. Arid "Blessed. is he that 
 \!Sfaiteth" forty-five- . days longer, "and cometh to the 1335 
 days.-"2" , .. .' ■ ■ 
 
 , (g) Teaching.— rT\i& characteristic function of the, apocalypse 
 is to state the divine judgment on history, to trace the, course 
 of events as the wqrking out of ,God's purposes for His.peoplCj 
 and to announce the vindication of God's moral government 
 of the world in z. day of reward arid retrib}J|;ion., "Vas 
 narratives must, have- served to - steel tjie Jews , to ■ endure, 
 torture and death fqr their, faith. The, part played by angels 
 is similar to that in Ze.chariah, but here twO; angels, Gabriel 
 and Michael, are named;^ and there are " princes " or guardian 
 apgels of j different natipijs,* :Daniel also contains the most 
 e;xplicit passage*; in P-T, as to a r^urrection; just and, unjust 
 alike , are to be raised ;froin jthp dead, the, on^ to be re- 
 warded, the other to, be punished. The resurrection is partial, 
 
 ' ' ?ws iJ,ip6vs airoO. ' 
 
 ' ' Cf. alsotiie 1156 days of 'viii. 14-; the reason and significance bf the 
 slight differences in the number of days cannot now be explained. ! j,: 
 
 ' viii. 16, A. 13, 21, xii. i. 
 
 * Persia, X. 13; Greece, x. 20; the fews, x.i 21.. 
 
 » xii. 2. 
 
DANIEL 233 
 
 " many . . . shall awake " ; perhaps the silence as to Gentiles 
 shows that the author is only thinking of the Jews; the 
 resurrection is to an eternal life in the kingdom of God 
 on earth. Yet these limitations are more apparent than real. 
 There are points in O.T. Revelation where Israel almost 
 becomes a term for. regenerate, mar^kind, and, in the Messianic 
 pictures of the future earth,' is' transformed to heaven. 
 
 (h) Use in the New Testament. — Much of the imagery of 
 the Apocal3?pse is, borrowed from Daniel. Perhaps the N.T. 
 phrase, "Son of Man," was first suggested by viij 13, though, 
 on the one hand, the phrase, in a less special use, is common 
 in Ezekiel; and, on the other, it may have reached the 
 N.T. through the Book of Enoch. This verse is alluded to 
 Mark xiii. 26, etc., and in Mark xiii. 14 the phrase "abomina- 
 tion of desolation "1 is applied to sornething in connection 
 with the last siege of Jerusalem. The description of the Man 
 of Sin, ii. Thessalonians ii. 4, may be partly suggested by 
 xi. 36. In Hebrews xi. 33 f. Daniel is alluded to in the clause, 
 "stopped the mouths of lions," and the Three Children in 
 " quenched the , power of fire." 
 
 ' ' ■ ' ix. 27. 
 
CHAPTER VI. 
 THE BOOK OF THE TWELVE PROPHETS 
 
 1. Introductory.. 
 
 2, Hosea, 
 3- Joel. 
 
 4. Amos. 
 
 5. Obadiah, 
 
 6. Jonah. 
 
 7. Micah. 
 
 8. Nahum. 
 
 9. Habakkuk. 
 
 10. ZephaniaK. 
 
 11. Haggai, 
 
 12. Zechariah i.-viii. 
 
 13. Zechariah ix.-xiv. 
 
 14. Malachi. 
 
 1. Introductory. — These books are usually known as the 
 " Minor Prophets," because they are shorter than the pre- 
 ceding; but Ecclesiasticus, Josephus, and some of the 
 Rabbis and Fathers, who reckon them as a single book, 
 speak of them as "the Twelve" or "the Twelve Prophets," 
 or "the Book of the Twelve Prophets,"^ and the use of the 
 latter title has been revived by Professor G. A. Smith. The 
 Jewish custom of reckoning the number of O.T. books as 
 twenty-two or twenty-four implies that " the Twelve " were 
 reckoned as a single work. Probably it was formed in- 
 dependently as a separate collection, completed not later 
 than B.C. 200^; and passed through one or more earlier 
 editions, Zech. ix.-xiv. and Malachi being added after the 
 rest of the books had been collected. 
 
 The LXX. places the first six in the order : Hosea, Amos, 
 Micah, Joel, Obadiah, Jonah ; the last six in the same order as 
 the Hebrew. Probably the order represents the chronological 
 theories of different editors. 
 
 2. Hosea. 
 
 (a) Date and Authorship. — Our only source of information 
 
 1 TA AaideKaTrpSipriToi'. 
 
 ' On account of Ecclesiasticus xlix. 10 
 
 2M 
 
HOSEA J235 
 
 is the book itself. According to i. i, Hosea the son of Beeri 
 ministered in the reigns of Uzziah, Jotham, Ahaz, and 
 Hezekiah of Judah, and Jeroboam II. of Israel, i.e., between 
 c. 778 and c. 695, and between c. 783 and c. 743. Internal 
 evidence approximately confirms this statement. Moreover, 
 the prosperity of Israel is no longer at its height, as in Amos ; 
 but the series of disasters which culminated in the Fall of 
 Samaria have begun. Henpe Hosea is somewhat later than 
 Amos, i.e., c. 745-735 ; his ministry probably began about 
 the close of the reign of Jeroboam II., continued under 
 his successors, and ended before the attack of Pekah and 
 Rezin on Ahaz, and the carrying captive of Galilee and 
 Gilead by Tiglath-Pileser, to which events there is no 
 reference. 
 
 Hosea was doubtless a citizen of the northern kingdom ; 
 riotice " our king " '•, of the king of Israel. Hosea?s call to 
 the prophetic office perhaps came through his family troubles. 
 His wife, who had borne him two sons and a daughter, left 
 him for another man. This experience may have brought 
 home to him the corrupt state of the people.^ Eventually 
 the prophet bought his wife back again, and received her into 
 his house. 
 
 Critical questions are confined to the interpretation of i.-iii. 
 and the authenticity of certain passages, especially xiv. ; see 
 Contents* The lack of orderly sequence shows that the book 
 cannot have been compiled by the prophet himself, unless it 
 has since suffered much at the hands of editors. 
 
 (b) Historical Circumstances. — Hosea's ministry seems to 
 have been the iminediate sequel of that of Amos.' The 
 Assyrians, under Tiglath-Pileser til., began to harass Syria 
 towards the close of Jeroboam's reign. Jeroboam's son, 
 Zachariah, after a reign of ' six months, was murdered by 
 Shallum; Shallum, a month later, by Mehahem. Menahem 
 is mentioned in an Assyrian inscription as tributary to Assyria. 
 He reigned ten years; his son, Pekahiah, after a reign of two 
 years, was murdered by Pekah. Even this meagre statement 
 ^ vii. 5. ' See on i.-iii. " See Amos, (b). 
 
236 BIBLICAL INTRODUCTION 
 
 confirms the pictures of anarchy and confusion drawn by 
 Hoseai The corruption of the prosperous days of Jeroboam 
 II. blossomed into open vice and crime in the disastrous reigns 
 of his Successors. ' . , ! 
 
 (c) Contents. — i.-iii., By divine command Hosea marries an 
 immoral woman,' Gomer, who bears him two sons, Jezreelj 
 Lo-ammi (not my people), and a daughter, Lo-ruhamah (not 
 pitied). She left him to live an immoral life; he bought her 
 back, and took her home, where he kept her in seclusion. 
 Gomer and her children are types of Israel, -its infidelity to 
 Jehovah, whom it forsookfor the Baahm, and its punishment, 
 and ultimate forgivengss. 
 
 iii. 3b is obscure, and its text -uncertain ; it probably means that Hosea 
 would not associate with Gomer, so that she would be deprived of all 
 conjugal privileges, with a view to her reformation, just as (see following 
 verses) -Israel was to' be deprived of all the privileges of rlational life, for 
 the same purpose. These chapters have been interpreted as being (i.) a 
 literal account of Hosea's actual experiences ; ,(ii. ) purely allegorical, as it 
 Jehovah had said to Hosea : Imagine silch dealings between yourself and 
 an unfaithful wife as. symbolising ray dealings with Israel ;, (iii.) founded on 
 fact, e.^.j Hosea's vvife having proved unfaithful, he is led to testify against 
 the vice of his times, and feels that he was ' as di-vinely led to his un- 
 happy marriage' for this- purpose, as if he ^ had received an ■ actual divine 
 command. • 
 
 Passages contrasting JudaH with Israel, <.^., i. 7, iv. 15, xi. 12b, and, 
 less frequently, other references to Judah, e.g., vi. 11, viii, 14, are supposed 
 to be ^additions by later Jewish editors, Probably Israel should be read for 
 Judah in v. 10, 12, 13, 14.' 
 
 Similar vieWs are held by some '^ as to the passages promising restora- 
 tion to Israel, e.g., i. .10, II, ii. 6, 7, 14, 16, 18-23, '"■ Si v- 15-vi. 3,, xL 
 8b, ga, 10, II, xiv.' 
 
 iv.-xiii.. The vice and imniorality of Israel,, especially of the 
 
 priests and rulers, combined with the immoral and superstitious 
 
 worship of Jehovah g.t the high places,* wiU bring Israel to 
 
 irre'ifocable ruin, in spite of attempts ,tq conclude alliances 
 
 with Egypt and Assyria.* Israel shall be carried captive to 
 
 Egypt and Assyria.® Jehovah's love is shown in Sis yearning 
 
 ^ NowACK, Minor Prophets; , ,,; , : : ,j, 
 
 ^ e.g., Cheyne. regards i., 10, II, iij. S, V. lS-vi.4, xiv. as addition^.., .^; 
 ' See below on xiv. , . , , 
 
 * iv. 12 ff., viii. 5 £, ixl 15, x. S, 15, xii. 11, ' : 
 
 ■• vii. r, viii. 9, xii. i, ' '■ . 
 
 « ix. 3, 6, X. 6, xi. S. 
 
JOEL ^37 
 
 over Israel, His reluctance to chastise His people, and by His 
 repeated appeals to them through His prophets.^ 
 
 For suspected passages, see on i.-iii. and xiv. 
 
 xiv., Appeal for repentance, and promise of forgiveness and 
 restoration., 
 
 Cheyne'' rejects this chapter, chiefly because it "is. akin both in 
 language and imagery, and in ideas to writings of the age which begins 
 with Jeremiah." But G. A. Smith unhesitatingly accepts xiv. as by 
 Hosea, though probably not the latest of his utterances preserved in our 
 book. The list given in connection with i.-iii., and the fact that the last 
 we hear of Gomer is that she is still under the protection of Hosea, show 
 that the idea of .restoration runs through the whole book. It is more prob- 
 able that it was a favourite idea of Hosea, than that editors have so 
 systematically and successfully interwoven it with his utterances. The 
 parallels with Jereniiah and later writings may be due to their dependence 
 on Hosea ; Jeremiah especially makes large use of Hosea. 
 
 ,(d) Significance of JIosea.^-H.osea. endorses Amos' protest 
 against the divorce of external devotion from morality, and 
 sums up such teaching in our Lord's favourite quotation^ : "I 
 desire mercy, and not sacrifice; and the knowledge of God 
 more than burnt offerings" — a verse which also, includes 
 another characteristic doctrine of Hosea, the necessity of 
 the knowledge of God, i.e., intelligent religion and spiritual 
 experience. Hosea first, as Isaiah and Jeremiah later on, 
 denounces foreign alliances. Like Amos, he attacks the 
 high places, and further specifically denounces idols,* The 
 emphasis laid on Jehovah's love for Israel, illustrates the 
 prophet's intense love for his country, and his deep distress 
 at her coming ruin. 
 
 Other quotations in N.T. : i. lo, ii. 23, Romans ix. 25, 26; 
 X. 8, Luke xxiii. 30 ; xi. i, " I called my son (Israel) out of 
 Egypt," applied to Christ, Matthew ii. 15; xiiL 4, i. Corin- 
 thians XV. 55 f., " O death, where is thy sting? etc." 
 
 3. Joel. 
 
 (a) Daie and Authorship . — Nothing is known of the. author 
 beyond his name "Joel, the son of Pethuel," or as the LXX^ 
 
 * V. 15-vi. 6, vii. I, xi. l-ii, xii, 6. 
 
 " Introduction to 1895 edition of W. R, Smith's Prophets of Israel, 
 p. xix. 
 
 • vi. 6 ^ Matt. ix. 13, xii. 7. * iv. 17, viii. 4, xiii. 2, xiv, 8, ' 
 
238 BIBLICAL INTRODUCTION 
 
 Syr,, and some other versions have it "Bethuel" ; and, what 
 may be gathered from the book itself, that he was a Jew,; 
 probably of Jerusalem, and possibly a priest. 
 
 As in the case of Zechariah ix.-xiv., the notes of time have 
 been very differently interpreted. Some regard Joel as the 
 earliest of the prophetical books, and assign it to the early 
 part of the reign of Joash of Judah, c. 830 j but the general 
 opinion inclines more and more to a post-exilic date. The 
 main points, capable of opposite interpretations, are as 
 follows : (i.) Joel makes no reference whatever to the Syrians, 
 Assyrians, or Clialdseans. These nations figure constantly 
 in history and prophecy from the time oi Ahaz and Amos 
 till the Exile. Even later Zechariah is still interested iii 
 Babylon. This silence points to a date before Ahaz or 
 after Zechariah. (ii.) Joel mentions neither king nor princes, 
 but, in their stead, elders and priests are prominent.^ This 
 has been explained of the minority of Joash, when Jehoiada 
 the piriest controlled the government of Judah,^ but agrees 
 better with the post-exilic period when there was no king, and 
 the high priest was the chief Jewish authority, (iii.) Egypt; 
 and Edom are denounced for shedding " innocent blood " in 
 Judah.^ This has been connected with Shishak's invasion in 
 the reign of Rehoboam, and the revolt of Edom under Jeho- 
 ram, the grandfather of Joash. But these events were remote 
 in the time of Joash; hatred of Edom is a constant note of 
 post-exilic literature; the mention of Egypt 'may be a literary 
 reminiscence of the condemnation of Egypt by the older 
 prophets ; or may refer to the Ptolemies, (iv.) Joel presents 
 a remarkable number of parallels with other O.T. literature. 
 Either Joel is a very early and popular book, constantly used 
 by writers from Amos to Malachi ; or he is a very late author, 
 who made large use of his predecessors. Each of the two 
 views has been strongly held, but the latter, is the more 
 probable. The easy and classical style of Joel is best under- 
 stood as that of an accomplished student of earlier literature.* 
 
 > i. 9, 13, 14, ii. 17. ^ "• Kings xii. 2. ' iii. 19. 
 
 * G. Gray, Expositor, September, 1893; Driver, C.B.S., Joel, etc., 
 pp. 19 ff. 
 
JOEL 339 
 
 Thus the less decisive notes of time point, on the whole, to 
 the period after the Exile ; and this '• date is conclusively con- 
 firmed by the following considerations ; the mention of the 
 Greeks,! the entire silence as to the nlorthern kingdom, and 
 the use of the term " Israel" in the post-exilic sense of Judah 
 as representing the chosen people ^ ; the description of God's 
 people as' " scattered among the nations," who have " parted 
 my land '' between them^ ; silence as to idolatry, and anxiety 
 for the regular maintenance of the Temple services, which 
 priests and people do their best to maintain.* 
 
 This last point suggests a date subsequent to the reforms of 
 Ezra and Nehemiah; otherwise the evidence is not definite 
 enough to enable us to assign' th^ book to any precise date. 
 Driver* inclines to a date shortly after Haggai and Zechariah 
 i.-viii.' 
 
 (b) Historical Circumstances. — The plague of locusts, which 
 was the occasion of this book, occurred at some time in the 
 Persian period'' when the Temple services were carefully 
 observed, and when the Jews had suffered from border raids 
 of their neighbours. 
 
 (c) Contents. — i. i-ii. ii, The prophet describes a plague of 
 locusts, which afflicted Judah in his time, which he regards 
 partly as a " Day of, Jehovah," or special divine judgment ; 
 partly as a warning of a " day " yet to come, which he 
 depicts, under the figure of a yet more terrible visitation of 
 locusts. , 
 
 Some regard the section as altogether a figurative description of a great 
 invasion, either actual or predicted ; others, as altogether a prediction 
 either.of an actual plague of locusts, or of a future judgment. 
 
 ii. 12-17, Exhortation to repentance. 
 
 ii. 18-27, Fertile seasons to be restored to penitent Israel. 
 
 ii. 28-32, Universal outpouring of the Spirit. 
 
 1 iii. 6. 
 
 ^ Cf.\x. 23, with ii. 27 ; iii. i with iii. 2 ; and iii. i6b with iii. i6a, 17. 
 
 ' iii. 2. * i. 9, 13 ; ii. 14. " C.B.S., p. 25. 
 
 ' Konig assigns Joel to the end of Josiah's reign, when Judah suflfered 
 at the hands of the Egyptian king, Pharaoh Necho. Rothstein assigns i., 
 ii. to the minority of Joash, iii., iv. to the period after the e'kile. 
 
 ' Cf. ^ 11-14. 
 
240 BIBLICAL INTRODUeTION 
 
 iii-t The'nations gath6re.d in the Valley of Jehoshaphat 
 ("Jehovah judges.-'?) to ,b0, Judged.; Special punishment of 
 Tyre, Zidon, Philistiaj , Egypt, and.Edom for wrongs, done,,tPi 
 Judah. . Judah and Jerusalem ■delivered arid purified, aiidj 
 established in permanent, prosperity. ... ,. 
 
 {A)' Significance of Jofl, and use in iV; 7!— ^Thp, apocalyptic 
 vision of the last sectio.n is diependent on Ezekiel xxxviii., 
 xxxix., and rnay underlie Zechariah xii.T-xjv. and. Isaiah xxiy.- 
 xxvii. Note also the absence of any Davidic IVIessiah; Jehovah 
 Himself intervenes. . ,,,'., ;,, . 
 
 Most striking is the passage which furnished Peter with his 
 text on the Day of Pentecost,^ " Afterwards will \ pour out 
 my Spirit upon all flesh j^ your sonS; and daughters, shall 
 prophesy, your old men shall dream dreams, your young 
 men shall see visions : even hpon the slaves, both men 
 and women, will I pour out my Spirit in ;those days,'' This 
 passage is akin to Jergmiah's New Coyenapt written in every 
 heart.^ , , , 
 
 4. Amos. ' ' ■'•'■ 
 
 (a) Date and Authorship. — Nothing is known eicept what 
 inay be learnt from the book itself According to i. i, Ambs ^ 
 was a herdsman of Tekoa in the reigns of Uzziah of Judah 
 and Jeroboam II. of Israel, i.e., between <^. 778 and c. 736, 
 and between c. 783 a!nd c. 743, and prophesied concerning 
 Israel, "two years before: the earthquake." In vii. 14 Arnos 
 repudiates .any connection with the guilds of professional 
 prophets, and styles himself " a herdsman and i. ^dresser of 
 sycamore trees." The contents of the book quite agree 
 with these statements. We further ; learn * that Amos 
 appeared at the temple at Bethel, probably at a festival, 
 denounced Jeroboam, and was driven away by the priest 
 Amaziah. 
 
 Amos' ministry to Israel, and the mention of sycamores, 
 
 ' ii. 28 ; Acts ii. 17-21, cf. Romans x. 13. 
 ' Jeremiah xxxi. 31 ff., cf. Ezekiel xxxvi. 26, 
 
 • i.e., 'AmSs; the father of Isaiah was 'Am6{. 
 
 • vii. 10-17, 
 
AMOS 241 
 
 not found at the Judsean Tekoa, have led to the suggestion 
 that he belonged to some Tekoa in the northern kingdom; 
 but Tekoa here is Tekoa in Judah,^ six miles south of 
 Bethlehem. " Herdsman "^ denotes keeper of a peculiar 
 breed of sheep. His second occupation and the lack of 
 sycamores at Tekoa show that he led his flocks some distance 
 from home. Nothing more is known about the earthquake ^ ; 
 but the power of Jeroboam seems at its height, so that the 
 book may be dated c. 750, some little time before the close of 
 the reign. 
 
 Critical questions merely concern sections of the book ; see 
 below on ii. 4, 5. 
 
 The book may have been compiled by thg prophet hirnself, 
 or by one of his disciples. 
 
 (b) Historical Circumstances. — Under Uzziah and Jeroboam, 
 Judah and still more Israel enjoyed a great revival of power 
 and prosperity,* which, however, as we learn from the pro- 
 phetical books, was accompanied by social corruption and 
 the oppression of the poor and helpless. The formation 
 of great estates resulted in the growth of a landless, pauper 
 class. Yet the worship of Jehovah was carried on with 
 great splendour and assiduous devotion at many sanctuaries, 
 and Jeroboam had been encouraged in his successful wars 
 by Jonah ben Amittai, whom Kings recognises as a true 
 prophet. 
 
 The revival of Israel was due to two causes : the power of 
 Damascus had been broken by the Assyrian kings, Ramman- 
 nirari III. and Shalmaneser III., etc., 811-767; and the 
 Assyrians did not push their advantages further, but, for th« 
 time, allowed Jeroboam to reap the fruits of their victories. 
 Amos' ministry, however, immediately preceded the accession 
 of Tiglath-Pileser III., 745, who resumed the forward move- 
 ment of Ass3Tia in South Western Asia. 
 
 (c) Contents. — L i-ii. 3, Oracles against Damascus, . the 
 Philistines, Tyre, JEdom,' Ammon, and Moab,. They will be 
 
 ^ Cf. i. 2, vii. 12. ' NSqed. 
 
 • Cf. Zech. xiv. 5. * ii. Kings xiv. 23-29. 
 
 R 
 
242 BIBLICAL INTRODUCTION 
 
 punished for their sins against Israel and against each other | 
 i. II, 12 (Edom) may be an interpolation. 
 
 ii. 4-5, The Doom of Judah. 
 
 This section with the other references to Judah, i. 2, " from Zion," 
 vi. I, ix. II, 12 are sometimes held to be interpolations, partly because 
 the prophet elsewhere seems exclusively interested in Israel. 
 
 ii. 6-16, The Doom of Israel for vice, oppression of the 
 poor, and the silencing bf true prophets. 
 
 iii.-vi. enlarge upon the theme of the previous section. 
 Prophecy has its adequate cause, Jehovah's communications 
 to His servants.! The high places. Bethel, Gilgal, Beersheba,^ 
 arid their splendid worship is rejected by Jehovah,' because 
 combined with cruelty and vice.' Jehovah will not deliver 
 them in His " Day," but chastise them by a cruel invader who 
 will carry them captive beyond Damascus.* 
 
 The doxologies to God as Creator and Ruler, iv. 13, v. 8, 9, ix, 5, 6, 
 may be interpolations ; they are parallel in style and ideas to II. Isaiah, 
 and interrupt the context. 
 
 vii. 1-9, Visions of locusts, fire, Jehovah vyith a plumb-line 
 symbolise the ruin of Israel. 
 
 vii. 10-17, Amos at Bethel. 
 
 viii., Vision of a basket of suriimer fruit, symbolising the 
 speedy decay of Israel. 
 
 ix. 1-7, Vision of Jehovah at the altar, inflicting chastise- 
 ment, from which there is no escape.^ _ , 
 
 ix. 8-15, The Restoration of Israel after its purificatioii. 
 
 These verses are often regarded as a later addition, because they 
 contrast with the unqualified ' predictions of ruiii'iri' the rest bf the 
 book ; because "the fallen tabernacle of David " implies the fall of 
 tbe dynasty, 586 ; because of the hostile reference ,tp, the jenmant 
 of Edom, and other points of contact with exilic and post-exilic 
 literature. Dr. Driver,- however, still assigns them to Amos, with some 
 hesitation'," 
 
 (d) Significance of Amos, and Use in N. T. — Apart from 
 
 fragments ii) later works, AmQS is the earliest prophet whose 
 
 words are extant in writing. He also first indicates the 
 
 ' iii. 1-8. 2 iv, 4i V. 5. ' v. 18-27. 
 
 * V. 18, 27, vi, 14, ' '- ■ ° On ix, 5, 6 see on iiL-vi. '■ 
 
 ° C.B.S., Joel and Amos, 119 ff ; the section is rejected by Cheyne and 
 
 G, A, Smith, Amongst other suspected passages are i, 9, 10, iii, 14 b, 
 
 V. 13-15, 26, vi. 2, 9, 10, viii, 6, 8, 11, 12, 13, 
 
OBADIAH , 243 
 
 severance between true prophecy and the prophetic order 
 which is conspicuous in Jeremiah and Ezekiel. But his 
 most important characteristic is that he strikes the keynote 
 of , eighth century prophecy. Popular faith dwelt on the 
 privileges of the Chosen People, and trusted that Jehovah, 
 if honoured by adequate external rites, would always be 
 the Champion of Isra:el. Amos insists on the responsibility 
 of being God's people: "You only have I known of all 
 the families of the earth: therefore will I visit upon yoti 
 all your iniquities." To a cruel and selfish people, however 
 externally devout, " The Day of Jehovah is darkness and 
 not light." 1 God is a moral being, and requires above 
 all else personal and social morality in His people. Acts 
 vii. 42 f. appeals to v. 25 f. as a proof of the ingrained 
 depravity of Israel, and Acts xv. 16 f. quotes LXX.^' of 
 ix. 1 1 f. as a prediction of the universality of the gospel. 
 
 5. Obadiah. ' ' 
 
 (a) Dafe and Authorship. — Nothing is known of Gbadi^h. 
 As to the book, three things are clear ; the utterance on Edom 
 in Jeremiah makes use either of verses 1-9 or of the original 
 i^pon which they are based ^; 10-14 refer to the Fall of Jeru^ 
 salem, 586; 1-9 and 15-21 refer to two quite different situa-i 
 tions, and are probably of different origin. 
 
 It is not clear whether 10-14 is to be connected with' 1-9 
 or with 15-21 \ nor is the Jeremianic authorship of Jeremiah 
 xlix. 7-22 universally accepted.* . ; 
 
 The most pi;ob^ble account of the composition of the book 
 is as follows : — 
 
 Verses 1-9 contain an ancient pre-exilic oracle on Edom, 
 the occasion of which cannot be determined; verses 10-21 
 are exilic. There may also be later additions. 
 
 2 Reading 'adam, " Man," for Edom. 
 
 ' I ''-4= Jeremiah xlix. 14-16; S=Jeremiah 9; i;/; also 6 with Jeremiah 
 10", and 8 with Jeremiah 7. 
 * <^., not by Giesebrecht, 
 
244 BIBLICAL INTRODUCTION 
 
 So substantially G. A. Smith, The Twelve, ii. 172. Orelli, etc., regard 
 the book as a single pre-exilic work. Wellhausen, on the other hand, 
 regards both sections as post-exilic. Sepharad, v. 20, has been identified 
 with Saparda in Babylonia (Schrader), a view consistent wifh an exilic 
 date ; and with Saparda in Bithynia or Galatia (Cheyne, Sayce, Higher 
 Criticism, etc. , 483), a view requiring a post-exilic date, as these countries 
 were not held by Assyria or Babylon, but formed part of the Persian 
 Empire ; LXX. has Ephratha for Sepharad, and the text of 19, 20 is 
 much corrupted. Volck dates in reign of Joram of Judah. 
 
 (b) Contents. — 1-6, 8, 9, Proud Edom to be destroyed by 
 the nations. 
 
 7, Edom is driveh out of her territory by treacherous allies. 
 Probably a later addition referring to the occupation of Edom 
 by Nabatean Arabs in the post-exilic period. 
 
 10-14, Edom exults over the Fall of Jerusalem, and assists 
 the invaders. 
 
 15-21, In the day of Jehovah, when He deals with all the 
 nations, Edom is utterly destroyed by Israel, which re-occupies 
 all its former territory, including Edom. 
 
 Obadiah is not quoted in N.T, 
 
 6. Jonahs 
 
 (a) Date and Authorship. — The book of Jonah is anony- 
 mous, and makes no statement as to its date; It is a narrative 
 about Jonah, and does not profess to have been written by 
 him. Jonah ben Amittai, the subject of the narrative, is only 
 mentioned elsewhere in O.T. in ii. Kings xiv. 25, "He [Jero- 
 boam II., c. 783-743] restored the border of Israel from the 
 entering in of Hamath unto the sea of the Arabah, according 
 to the word of Jehovah, the God of Israel, which he spake 
 by the hand of his servant, Jonah ben Amittai, the prophet, 
 which was of Gath-hepher " [a border town of Zebulun ; 
 Joshua Jdx, 13]. . 
 
 The story is vivid and detailed, , and if it were a simple 
 narrative of facts, we might suppose that it was written, at 
 any rate, on Jonah's authority, and while the experience was 
 still fresh in his memory. Accordingly the editors of the 
 Book of the Twelve Prophets ^ place the book fifth. 
 
 But the internal evidence shows that the book is much later,. 
 1 See § I, 
 
JONAH • 245 
 
 certainly post-exilic. It has been assigned to various dates in 
 the Persian and Greek periods, i.e., between B.C. 536 and B.C. 
 ISO. 
 
 The idiom and vocabulary of the book are those of the 
 latest period of O.T. Hebrew; and it has a marked affinity 
 with Ecclesiastes, c. B.C. 250, and contains many Aramaic 
 words. 
 
 The book has many parallels with post-exilic literature. 
 The statement that God made the sea and the dry land, i. 9, 
 is probably a reminiscence of Genesis i. 9, where the same 
 y^ord yabbashA is used. The prayer or psalm, ii. 2-10, is mainly 
 a cento of phrases from the Psalms, and partly from post- 
 exilic psalms, such as cxlii. 
 
 Compare also 
 
 Verse 2 = Psalms xviii. 5, 6, cxx. I. 
 
 Verse 3b = Psalm xlii. 7b. 
 
 Verse 4a = Psalm xxxi. 22a, Lamentations iii. S4b. 
 
 Verse Sa = Psalms xviii. 4, Ixix. i, cxvi. 3. 
 
 Verse 7a = Psalm cxlii. 3a. 
 
 Verse 9 = Psalms iii. 8, 1. 14. 
 
 And iii. 9, "Who knoweth if God will turn and repent," with Joel ii. 14, 
 "Who knoweth if he will turn and repent." In iv. 2, "A gracious God, 
 merciful, slow to anger, and of great kindness, and repentest thee of the 
 evil," is probably based on Exodus xxxiv. 6 ; cf. Joel ii. 13, Psalms Ixxxvi. 
 15, ciii. 8, which are based on the same passage. 
 
 Although there are many vivid details, they are such as 
 might be suggested by. ordinary experiences, a storm at sea, 
 or exposure to the sun; there are none of those casual 
 allusions to time, place or person, which we expect in a 
 man's account of his own experiences; we are not told the 
 name of the king of Nineveh, nor anything about the route 
 from the great fish to that city. 
 
 Moreover the phrase " king of Nineveh " was nevei- used of 
 the Assyrian kings, and its use, together with iii. 3, " Nineveh 
 was an exceeding great city," implies that the Assyrian empire 
 had long since passed away. 
 
 Budde has suggested that the book is an excerpt from the Midrash or 
 free expansion of the Book of Kings, which is commonly assumed as the 
 main source of Chronicles. 
 
246 BIBLICAL INTRODUCTION 
 
 (b) Con/enis.^onah attempting to escape from the mission 
 to Nineveh is swallowed by a great fish. He is released; 
 preaches at Nineveh, the people repent and are forgiven, 
 at which he is angry, and is rebuked by Jehovah. 
 
 The Psalm ii. 2-lo is sometimes supposed to be a later addition. 
 
 (c) Significance of the Book of Jonah, and use in N.T. — The 
 book is commonly regarded as an allegory or parable. Prof. 
 G. A. Smith writes^: "Nor does this book . . . claim to be 
 real history. On the contrary, it offers us all the marks of the 
 parable or allegory ... we really sin against the intention of 
 the author, and the purposes of the spirit which inspired him, 
 when we wilfully interpret the book as real history." 
 
 Our Lord's casual references^ neither state nor imply that 
 the book is history. Again, Prof. G. A. Smith writes * : " We 
 do not believe that our Lord had any thought of confirming 
 or not confirming the historic character of the story. His 
 purpose was purely one of exhortation, and we feel the 
 grounds of that exhortation to be just as strong when we 
 have proven the Book of Jonah to be a parable. Christ is 
 using an illustration : it surely matters not whether that illus- 
 tration be drawn from the realms of fact or of poetry." 
 
 The book represents the broader spirit of post-exilic 
 Judaism, it protests against the narrow exclusiveness which 
 culminated in Pharisaism, by teaching that the Gentiles 
 might repent and be forgiven; it prepared the way for the 
 doctrine of universal salvation by faith, and connects the 
 great prophets with Christ. 
 
 The book also furnishes a most conspicuous example of the 
 conditional character of prophetic prediction j promises might 
 be forfeited by backsliding, threats might be averted by re- 
 pentance. Jonah states most categorically,* " Yet forty days, 
 and Nineveh shall be overthrown"; but the people repent, 
 and God does not overthrow the city. 
 
 * The Twelve, ii. 498-500,. 
 
 ' Matthew xii. 39 ff., xvi. 4, Luke xi, 29 fT. 
 ' The Twelve, ii. 508, and c' context 
 
 * iii. 4. 
 
MICAH , 247 
 
 7. Micab. 
 
 (a) Date and Autkorship.—KtcQx&ag to i. 1 Micah pro- 
 phesied in the reigns of Jotham, Ahaz, and Hezekiah, c. 740 
 to c. 69 s; and Jeremiah xxvi. 18 f. quotes iii. 12 as having 
 been uttered in the reign of Hezekiah, and as having led 
 the king to repentance. Chapters i.-iii. clearly belong to 
 the period of the Fall of Samaria; iv.-vii. are the subject 
 of much controversy. Cheyne 1 writes : " It is becoming 
 more and more doubtful whether more than two or three 
 fragments of the heterogeneous collection of fragments in 
 chapters iv.-vii. can have come from" Micah. G. A. Smith, 
 however, challenges this statement,^ and calls attention to 
 recent monographs^ which defend the substantial integrity 
 of the book. It is difficult to resist the impression that 
 there is a marlced contrast in style and thought between 
 i.-iii. and iv.-vii., which suggests a diiferent age and author 
 for the latter section.; but it is equally difficult to estimate 
 the evidential value of such an impression. See further 
 Contents on the several sections. 
 
 Micah is styled "the Morasthite," * probably as belonging 
 to the " Moresheth-gath " of i. 14, which Jerome identifies 
 with a " Morasthi " existing in his time to the east of 
 Eleutheropohs, i.e., in the Shephelah, or low hills on the 
 western outskirts of Judah. 
 
 (b) Historical Circumstances. — The beginning of Micah's 
 ministry has been placed as early as the reign of Ahaz, 
 c. 736, and its close as late as that of Manasseh, i.e., 
 after c. 695. His ministry may have been either an 
 immediate sequel to that of Hosea, covering the reigns of the 
 last kings of Israel, or it may have partly coincided with and 
 partly extended beyond the last half of Isaiah's ministry, thus 
 covering the reign of Hezekiah and the accession of 
 Manasseh. For these periods see Hoseaj (b), and Isaiah. 
 
 1 Introd. to W. R. Smith's Prophets, xxiii. 
 
 » Tht Twelve, I. xxiv. 
 
 ' By WiLDBBOER, Von Ryssbi., and Elhoest. 
 
 * Both in i, I and Jer. xxvi, 18, "Micaiah the M." in some texts, 
 
248 BIBLICAL INTRODUCTION 
 
 (c) Contents.— i.-m., Doom of Samaria and Jerusalem for 
 the sins of the nation, especially social wrongs conimitted 
 by the rulers, whose bribes are accepted by priests arid 
 prophets, and the idolatrous worship of the high places. 
 
 The prophecy of restoration, ii. 12 f., interrupts the conneetion, and 
 is generally held to be out of place,^ and by many to be a post-exiHq 
 addition,^ parallel to sections of II. Isaiah. - • ■ ' , , i 
 
 The threats against Samaria' seem to fix the date of i. before -its 
 capture, 722 ; but, as a document, at any rate, it may l(ave been written 
 about that date. An Assyrian inscription affords some slight ground for 
 doubting whether Samaria was destroyed after this capture,* if not ■ the 
 chapter may be later. 
 
 Chapters ii., iii. show no consciousness of imminent danger, and belong 
 to some period after 722, when the fear of an immediate Assyrian advance 
 had died away, and there seemed no prospect of any speedy renewal of the 
 Assyrian invasion. 
 
 iv. i-s, Jerusalem the centre of Revelation for all nations 
 in the Messianic Era of universal peace. 
 
 Cf. on Isaiah ii. 2-4' with which 1-3 is nearly identical. 
 
 iv. 6-v. 15, Deliverance of the nation, after the capture 
 of Jerusalem and the carrying captive to Babylon, by a 
 Righteous Ruler from Bethlehem, who shall lay waste 
 Assyria. God will deliver the land from superstition, arid 
 enable it to dispense with horses, chariots, and fortresses. 
 
 This section is a compilation of separate fragments, some of which are 
 not Micah's. The references to the Assyrians may well be Micah's, 
 written perhaps at the time of Sennacherib's invasion. The " Babylon" 
 clause in iv. 10 is generally held to be a later addition. Nowack accepts 
 only iv. 9 f. (except the Babylon clause), 14, v. 9-13 as Micah's. 
 
 vi. i-vii. 6, Jehovah's controversy with Israel ; His demand 
 for "mercy and not sacrifice" illustrated by Balaani's answer 
 to Balak. Fraud in business to be punished by bad seasons. 
 Persecution of the righteous, and utter social depravity. 
 
 The picture in vii. 1-6 seems too dark for the reign of Hezekiah, 
 and these verses are often referred to the reign of Manasseh, with, 
 which vi. 1-8 may be connected by the reference to child sacrifice.* 
 Even if written under Manasseh, the author may still be Micah ; but ,the 
 difference of style and thought rather points to a different author. 
 
 ?, Driver, G. A. Smith, Steiner, etc. ■:'. 
 
 ' Chbyne, Wellhausen, Nowack. ' i. i, 6. 
 
 * Samsimuruna in Sennacherib's inscription, Taylor Prism, KeLLNER'S 
 Isaiah, 34, is sometimes identified with Samaria. 
 
 ^ vi. 7, vii. 2, cf. ii. Kings xxi, 6, 16 j but Ahaz also practised child 
 sacrifice, ii. Kings xyi. 3. . 
 
MICAH i ; i » 249 
 
 vii. 7-20,: Zion is suffering for sin; yet confidently expects 
 from God pardon and deliverance, victory and universal 
 dominion. 
 
 According to G. A. Smith,' "a Psalm composed of little pieces 
 from various dates," from before the Fall of Samaria, 722, to soon 
 after the Exile. Others also think that the references to Assyria, 
 Gilead, and Bashan best suit a date not long before Nehemiah.? Driver, 
 on the other hand, inclines to assign the passage to Micah in the time 
 of Manasseh.' 
 
 (d) Significance of the Book of Micah, and Use in N.T. — 
 
 The book, both in i.-iii. and elsewhere, insists, on the leading 
 
 themes of Amos, Hosea, and Isaiah, the protests against 
 
 the high places and their corrupt rites,* against social wrong, 
 
 sanctioned by the ministers of religion.^ Even if vi. 1-9 
 
 be a later passage, in which these doctrines are more 
 
 thoroughly thouglit out and carefully formulated, it, at any 
 
 rate, furnishes an eloquent and explicit statement of the 
 
 demand of eighth century prophecy for a moral life and 
 
 spiritual religion rather than external ritual. " Wherewith 
 
 shall I come before Jehovah, and bow myself before the 
 
 high God? shall I come before Him with burnt offerings, 
 
 with calves of a year old? Will Jehovah be pleased with 
 
 thousacids of rams, or with ten thousands of rivers of oil? 
 
 shall I give my firstborn for my transgression, the fruit of 
 
 my body for the sin of my soul? He hath shewed thee, 
 
 O man, what is good; and what doth Jehovah require of 
 
 thee, but to. do justly, and to love mercy, and to walk 
 
 humbly with thy God?"^ The wrongful accumulation of 
 
 great estates is specially mentioned as a flagrant social 
 
 evil.^ Micah, like most of the canonical prophets, is in 
 
 antagonism to the prophetic order.^ If iv. and v. are 
 
 Micah's, or even of the reign of Manasseh, we have an 
 
 early suggestion of the apocalyptic visions of the last things, 
 
 * The Twelve^ i. 374. 
 
 ' Wbllhausen, Nowack. 
 
 ' 313, quoting Elhorst in support of the view. 
 
 1. 1-9, V. 12-14. 
 
 6 ;; 
 
 ^ vi. 6-8, cf, Psaliri 1, 8-15, probably post-exilic 
 ' ii. 1-3, ' iii. S-ii. 
 
250 BIBLICAL INTRODUCTION 
 
 connected in v. 2 with the personal deliverer, the Messiah. 
 In V. 10-14, with its condemnation of horses and chariots, 
 images and Asherim, we have a parallel to Deuteronomic 
 passages.^ Again, vii. 8--20, with its confession of sin, and 
 confidence in the pardoning love of God to the penitent, its 
 tender passion of prayer, is one of the passages in which 
 O.T. Revelation culminates, and most nearly anticipates the 
 evangelical teaching of the gospel. 
 
 Micah V. 2 is appealed to in Matthew ii. 6 as an 
 authority for the statement that the Messiah is to be born 
 at Bethlehem.2 
 
 8. Nahum. 
 
 (a) Date and Authorship. — In i. i Nahum is styled "the 
 Elkoshite," which probably means " man of Elkosh." Elkosh 
 is unknown, but there are various conjectures. Jerome men- 
 tions " Helkesei " in Galilee, and Capernaum ( = village of 
 Nahum) seems to connect Nahum with Galilee. If so, he 
 was a northern refugee in Jerusalem. Epiphanius, c. AiD. 360, 
 locates Elkosh in the south of Judah. Some moderns find 
 Elkosh in the modern Alkush, two days' journey to the north 
 of the site of Nineveh, thus making Nahum an Israelite 
 captive in Assyria. 
 
 The book was written between the sack of No-Amon, the 
 Egyptian Thebes, c. 663, which it describes, and the Fall of 
 Nineveh, c. 606, which it predicts. The precise date is un- 
 certain. Perhaps the vivid pictures of imminent ruin reflect 
 the last agonies of Assyria, in the period just before the fall of 
 its capital. 
 
 (b) Historical Circumstances. — This period coincides with 
 the latter years of Josiah's reign, after the Deuteronomic re- 
 formation had secured comparative purity of life and worship, 
 and after the retreat of the Scythians had left Judah a breath- 
 ing space of peace and prosperity. 
 
 For 663-621 see § 10. 
 
 ^ Deut. xvi. 21, 22, xvii. 16 •,,.cf, Hosea iii. 4. 
 » Cf. John vil 42, 
 
HABAKKUK ,251 
 
 (c) Contents. — i., Psalm describing a Theophany in which 
 Jehovah destroys the enemies of His people. 
 
 Cheyne^ and others regard i. as post-exilici Bickell, G. B. Gray, etc., 
 find in it a mutilated and distorted alphabetic acrostic. Some emendatioti 
 is necessary, especially in 11-15, where the present text requires ''thee" 
 to stand for Judah and Assyria alternately in a most impossible fashion. 
 
 ii., iii., Description of the siege and sack of Nineveh. 
 ii. 2 is either a gloss or should be taken with i, 
 
 (d) Significance. — ^Nahum, like Habakkuk, is remarkable 
 for the absence of any reference to the sin of Judah. Judah, 
 the righteous sufferer, is contrasted with its wicked oppressor. 
 This attitude may be due to the Deuteronomic reformation, or 
 Nahum and Habakkuk may represent a school of prophets 
 in partial opposition to Jeremiah and the main line of 
 prophecy. 
 
 Nahum is not quoted in N.T. 
 
 9. Habakkuk. 
 
 (a) Bate and Authorship. — Nothing is known of Habakkuk, 
 except what may be gathered from this book. 
 
 The LXX. ascription of "Bel and the Dragon" to Habakkuk; the 
 account in "Bel, etc.," of an angel carrying Habakkuk by his hair from 
 Judah to Babylon, to give his dinner to Daniel in the lion's den ; and the 
 information, given by Epiphanius, are unhistorical. The statement that 
 Habakkuk was a Levite is a deduction from the presence in the book of a 
 Psalm with the musical directions of the Levitical choir. 
 
 The description of the Chaldssans^ shows that the book 
 was written when they were a prominent power, i.e., , after the 
 revival of the Chaldsean empire in 625, and before the Fall of 
 Babylon in 536, probably before the Fall of Jerusalem in 586. 
 The exact date depends on the interpretation of the book,^ If 
 the oppressor of Israel is the Assyrian, the date would be 
 before the Fall of Nineveh, c. 625-607 ; if the Egyptian, 
 between Pharaoh Necho's victory at Megiddo and his defeat 
 at Carchemish, c. 606 ; if the Chaldaean, after the deportation 
 of Jehoiachin, c. 597-586. 
 
 Even if i, 5-1 1 is omitted (so Nowack, see below) there is still 
 sufScient ground for regarding Habakkuk as a contemporary of Jeremiah. 
 The book reflects the conditions of the closing years of the Jewish 
 monarchy. 
 
 ^ Intred. to Isaiah, ^, liz. ' i. J-Il, • 9ee below. 
 
252 BIBLICAL INTRODUCTION 
 
 (b) Historical Circumstances. — Cf. Jeremiah. 
 
 (c) Contents. — i., ii., The Vindication of Judah and the 
 Punishment of its Oppressor. 
 
 The statement of contents depends upon the interpretation. We give 
 the three main views with an analysis according to each. 
 
 (a) Judah's sin will be punished by the Chaldasans, who in their turn 
 will be punished.' 
 
 i. 1-4, Social corruption of Judah, in which the righteous Jew, 9add}q, 
 is oppressed by the wicked Jew, rasha'. 
 
 5^11, The destructive might of the Chaldseans, who are raised up to 
 punish the wicked Jews. 
 
 12-17, Appeal to Jehovah against the unmeasured cruelty of the 
 Chaldeans, the wicked, rasha, who are even less righteous, yaddlq, than 
 the Jews. 
 
 ii. 1-4, Deliverance promised. 
 
 S-20, Woes against the Chaldseans for their cruelty, debauchery, and 
 idolatry. 
 
 This view takes the text just as it stands, but involves the following 
 difficulties: The "wicked" is in one place a, portion of the Jews, in 
 another, the Chaldasans ; i. 5-1 1 breaks the connection ; in i. 6 the 
 Chaldaeans are a new power to be raised up ; in ii. 5-20 the oppressors 
 are spoken of as well kijown and of long standing. 
 
 ((3) Nothing is said of the sin of Judah ; the prophet dwells on the 
 wrongs done to Judah and other nations by the Chaldseans, and announces 
 the coming chastisement of the oppressor, i. 5-n is either a later 
 addition," or to be placed before i. 1-4.' 
 
 [i. S-ll, Chaldsean oppression.] 
 
 i. 1-4, Social disorder in Judah, sufferings of the righteous, jaddtq, 
 Jews, at the hands of the wicked, rasha', Chaldeans. 
 
 5-1 1, Interpolated expansion of the picture of Chaldsan cruelty. 
 
 12-17, Appeal against the wicked Chaldseans on behalf of the righteous 
 Jews. 
 
 ii. 1-4, Deliverance. 
 
 5-20, Woes against the Chaldseans. 
 
 The chief objection to this view is that i. J-II neither furnishes a suit- 
 able exordium, nor seems a probable interpolation. 
 
 (7) Nothing is said of the sin of Judah, the prophet dwells on the 
 wrongs inflicted either by the Assyrians* or by the Egyptians.' The 
 oppressor in his turn is to be punished by the Chaldaeans ; i. 5-1 1 is to be 
 placed after ii. 4. 
 
 i. 1-4, Sufferings of the righteous Jews at the hands of the wicked 
 Assyrians or Egyptians. 
 
 12-17, Appeal against the wicked oppressor on behalf of the righteous 
 Jews. 
 
 ii. 1-4, Deliverance. 
 
 i. S-ll, Through the prowess of the Chaldseans. 
 
 ii. S-20, Woes against the oppressor, Assyrian or Egyptian. 
 
 I ,So Driver, Davidso;^, and most critics. '^ Wellhausbn, eta 
 > GiESBBRECHT, etc. ' * SuDDE, etc " G. A, Smith. 
 
ZEPHANIAH 253 
 
 The chief objections to thisi yiew are the difficulty of accounting for the 
 transposition of i. S-l ' j ^^d the absence of any mention of the Assyrians 
 or Egyptians. The part or whole of ii. 9-20 is considered by Kuenen, 
 eta, not to be Habakkuk's. 
 
 iii., A psalm provided with heading, " Prayer of Habakkuk," 
 etc., and subscription as in the Psalter. 
 
 iii. 2-15, Theophahy in which Jehovah delivers His anointed 
 — the people Israel-^from the wicked. ; ■ 
 
 16-19, Expression of faith in the depths of affliction. . 
 
 The heading and subscription suggest that iii. was taken from a collec- 
 tion of Psalms, and that the ascription to Habakbuk i^ a conjecture of an 
 editor. The term "anointed" mashtai- for Israel seems post-exilic, in 
 pre-exilic literature mdshiafy is the actual kmg. Hence Cheyhe and others 
 regard iii. as post-exilic, 
 
 (d) Significance , and use in N.T. — Habakkuk, like Nahum,; 
 emphasises not Judah'ssin, but the contrast between righteous 
 Judah and her wicked oppressor, an attitude very different 
 from that of Isaiah and Jeremiah. In iii. 17 f. the spirit of 
 trustful acceptance of suffering finds its supreme expression itii 
 " Though the fig tree shall not blossom ... yet will I rejoice 
 in Jehovah." 
 
 Paul in Romans i. 17 and Galatians iii. ir, uses ii. 4 in the 
 LXX. form, " The righteous shall live by faith ; " the Hebrew 
 is rather, " by faithfulness." Cf. also Hebrews x. 37, ,38 ; also 
 i. 5 with Acts xiii. 41. , , , , ; 
 
 10. Zephaniah. 
 
 (a) Date and Authorship. — The opening yerse describes the 
 book as " The word of Jehovah which came unto Zephaniah, 
 the son of Cushi, the son of Gedaliah, the son, of Amariah, 
 the son of Hezekiah, in the days of Josiah, the soil of 
 Amon, Hng of Judah." The contents confirm this statemefit, 
 and the picture of social and religious corruption suggests 'k' 
 date before the reforms of Josiah, i.e., 639-621. Probably 
 Hezekiah is the king, and the genealogy is given i'n- ordfer" to 
 introduce the name Of this distinguished ancestor. ' ' ' 
 
 (b) Historical Circums'ttinces. — The efforts of Isaiah and 
 Hezekiah for purity of life and worship were followed by 
 a reaction under Manasseh and. Amon. During the minority 
 
254 BIBLICAL INTRODUCTION 
 
 of Josiah, the prophetic party, under Zephaniah and his 
 younger contemporary, Jeremiah, were gathering strength for 
 a new movement, which culminated in the reforms of Josiah. 
 Abroad the Assyrian empire was in the throes of dissolution, 
 Egypt was not formidable, and the minor Syrian states were 
 left to their own devices. Western Asia, however, was subject 
 to the ravages of Scythian hordes, who reached the frontiers 
 of Egypt. 
 
 (c) Contents. — The book is occupied with the Doom! of 
 Judah and Jerusaleih and all nations in the Day of Jehovah. 
 
 i., Judah and Jerusalern are punished for corrupt worship,^ 
 social injustice,^ and disbelief in a living God, they " say in 
 their heart, Jehovah will do neither good nor evil." 
 
 ii.. Doom of Philistines, Moab, Ammon, Ethiopians, and 
 Assyria. , - , 
 
 ■ iii. i-i3,Doorn of Jerusalem and all nations. Deliverance 
 of a purified remnant, "a humble and poor people'' in Jferu- 
 salem. 
 
 iii. 9, 10 are perhaps a later addition. Doubts have also been raised as 
 to every verse in ii, and iii., especially ii. 8-il (Moab aftd Aminpn) and 
 iii. 8-20. 
 
 iii., 14-20, A post-exilic lyric in the style of Second Isaiah, 
 
 celebrating the restoration of the exiles to Zidn, and the 
 
 Divine Presence in their midst. 
 
 (d) Significance. — Zephaniah is a link between Isaiah and 
 Jeremiah. In the gathering of the nations for destruction,' 
 we have the gerrn of the apocalyptic visions of later prophets. 
 
 There is no quotation from Zephaniah in N.T. 
 
 1 1. Haggai. 
 
 (a) Dcite and Authorship. — The book contains foujr utter- 
 ances, each separately ascribed to Haggai, and dated in the 
 seicond year of Darius (i.e., Darius I., Hystaspis), B.C. 520J 
 on the ist of the sixth, the 21st of the seventh, and (the last 
 two) on the Z4th of the ninth month, i.e., about September 
 to December, Probably -they were committed to > writing 
 about the time of delivery. .The book frames, these utter- 
 
 ' i. 4-6. ^ i. 9. " iii. 8. 
 
HAGGAI 255 
 
 ances in a very brief narrative, and. Haggai is spoken of 
 throughout in the third person ; > it may have been compiled 
 by the prophet himself, or by one of his hearers. In 
 addition to the facts recorded of Haggai in this book, 
 Ezra v. i, vi. 14 tell us that he, with Zechariah, persuaded the 
 Jews to rebuild the Temple. . , 
 
 (b) Historical Circumstances. — Sixteen years before, after 
 the ca.pture of, Babylon by Cyrus, paany Jews returned ^ to 
 Judah, and settled there as subjects of Persia, under the 
 Davidic Prince,, Zerubbabel, and the High Priest, Joshua, 
 They were harassed by hostile neighbours, who induced 
 Cyrus to forbid , the building of the Temple, ,, after the, 
 foundations had been laid- The recent; accession , of 
 Darius I. h^eld out prospects of a change of the Persiaii 
 policy in Judah, while numerous revolts raised hopes of 
 great internal changes issuing in the full deliverance of 
 IsraeL 
 
 (c) Contents. -^'Yb& First Utterance, i. I'-ii, urged them 
 to rebuild the Temple, which they had neglected for their 
 own houses. A recent drought had been sent as a punish- 
 ment. 
 
 A short narrative, i. 12-15, tells us that three weeks .later 
 the Jews iinder Zerubbabel and Joshua set, to work on, the 
 Temple. 
 
 The Second ; Utterance, . ii. 1-^9, promises that the new 
 Temple, enriched with the wealth of the Gentiles, and blessed 
 with peace, shall be more gloripus .than Solomon's. 
 
 The Third Utterance, ii. 10-19, teaches that their neglect 
 of the Temple tainted and blasted all their life, but that they 
 will be blessed for their new zeal. 
 
 The Fourth Utterance, ii. 20-23, announces that, in 
 the approaching overthrow of the nations of the earth, 
 Zerubbabel will be the favoured and protected Servant of 
 Jehovah- 
 
 (d) Significance and Use in N-T.^-Tha new energy which' 
 Haggai inspired was a necessary preliminary to the work 
 
 ' But cf. chapter on Chroh., Ezra, and Neh. 
 
2S6 BIBLICAL INTRODUCTION 
 
 of Ezra and Nehemiah. Haggai and Zechariah, § 12, must 
 be reckoned amongst the founders of Judaisni. Hebrews^ 
 xii. 26 quotes ii. 6, the "shaking "of all things. 
 
 12. The Prophecies of Zechariah, Zechariah i.-Tiii.i 
 
 (a) Date and Authorship. — These chapters contaih a series 
 of Utterances, each separately ascribed to Zechariah, and 
 dated from the second year of Darius (?'.«., Darius I., 
 Hystaspis), B.C. 5S0, the eighth month, about August, to the 
 fourth year of Darius, B.C. 518; the 4th day of the ninth 
 month, -about September.' The first person' is used freely 
 throughout, and all the evidence shows that the'se chapters 
 were composed' by Zechariah himself soon a:fter the latest 
 of the prophecies. In addition to the' facts recorded of 
 Zechariah here, Ezra v. i, vi. 14 tell us that he, with Haggai,- 
 persuaded the Jews to rebuild the Temple. ' 
 
 {^Historical Circumstances. — As the prophecies 'of 
 Zechariah were Uttei-ed within a few inohths of those of 
 Haggai, the historical circumstances are substantially the same:' 
 
 (c) Contents. — Second Year of Darius, eighth month 
 (August, 520). 
 
 i. 1-6, Appeal to the fulfilment of ancient prophecy. 
 
 Second Year of Darius, eleventh month, 24th day (Novem- 
 ber, 520). 
 
 i. 7-17, Vision of Angelic Hotsemen, who report that the 
 shaking announced in Haggai ii. 20-23 has not taken place. 
 Promise of great prosperity to' Jerusalem. 
 
 i. 18-21, Vision of Four Smiths, wht)- file away the Four 
 Horns, which had scattered Judah. The horns and' smiths' 
 are nations, not to be more exactly defined. ' ' 
 
 ii. i"5. Vision 'of' Man with Measuring-lfne, forbidden to 
 draw any fixed limits for the future city. 
 
 it. 6-\T,, Exilic Lyric on the Restoration of the Jews. 
 
 The situation is that of the Exile ; the ideas and style resenitle 
 II. Isaiah. 1 The lyrie was either used -by Zechariah or, inserted, by an 
 editor, as a, suitable, expansion, of the teaching of the preceding vision. . 
 
 iii., Vision of the High Priest, accused by Satan, but purl- 
 
THE PROPHECIES OF ZECHARIAH ,257 
 
 fied, acquitted, and honoured by Jehovah. The Branch or 
 Messiah, i.e., Zerubbabel. 
 
 iv., Vision of the Seven -branched Candlestick supplied 
 with oil from the Two Olive Trees, symbolising the grace 
 given to the Jews [? through Zerubbabel and Joshua to build 
 the Temple], 
 
 iv. 6-10 interrapts the context, and seems to belong to an earlier 
 stage of the building of the Temple than November, 520, Probably 
 an earlier utterance of Zephariah placed here, at or after, the compilation 
 of the book, 
 
 V. 1-4, Vision of the Flying Roll, which carries a destroying 
 curse to sinners. 
 
 V, 5-1 1, Vision of Wickedness — as a Woman — shut up 
 in an ephah-measure, carried away to the land of Shinar 
 (Babylon), 
 
 vi. 1-8, Vision of the Four Chariots, which go through the 
 earth to execute God's judgrnents. 
 
 vi. 9-1 5, The Crowning of the Messianic Prince, the 
 Branch, Zerubbabel. 
 
 The text, as it stands, rgfers 11-13 to Joshua, and makes him "the 
 Branch"; but the plural "crowns," II, and the "both," 13 show 
 that two- persons were originally referred to. The "Branch" elsewhere, 
 Jeremiah xxiii. 5, 6, xxxiii. 15, 16, is. a Davidic prince, specially 
 Zerubbabel, Zechariah iii. 8 ; and the builder of the Temple is 
 Zerubbabel, Zechariah iv. Hence the text has been reconstructed, and 
 is translated, G. A. Smith, Twelve Prophets, ii. 308 and note : " Thou, 
 shalt . , , make a crown, and set it on the head of [Zerubbabel] , . . and 
 he shall wear the royal ihajesty and sit and rule upon his throne, and 
 [Joshua] shall be priest on his right hand, and, there will be a counsel 
 of peace between the two of them," 
 
 This utterance, which regards the building of the Temple as still 
 future, is probably out of place here, and was delivered before the 
 preceding prophecies. 
 
 Fourth Year of Darius, ninth month, 4th day (September, 
 518V , , 
 
 vii. 1-7, Shall fasts continue? Unreal fasts. 
 
 vii. 8-14, The former.ruin of Israel the punishment of 
 oppression. 
 
 viii. 1-17, The future happiness and pea,ce Of Jerusalem. 
 
 viii, 18-23, The abolition of fasts. All nations shall 
 worship at Jerusalem. 
 
2S8 BIBLICAL INTRODUCTION 
 
 (d) Significance and Use in iVi T.— ^Zechariah was com- 
 missioned to enforce the lessons and continue the work 
 of the older prophets. They and their hearers had passed 
 away, but the Word and purpose of God remained.' 
 Zechariah has reminiscences of his predecessors; his 
 formula, "And he said unto me, What seest thou? And 
 I said," is found in Amos vii. 8, viii. 2, Jeremiah i. 11, 13; 
 and his message, " Execute true judgment, and show mercy 
 and compassion every man to his brother; and oppress not 
 the widow, nor the fatherless, the stranger, nor the poor," 
 is an echo of the teaching of the great pre-exilic prophets.^ 
 But in Isaiah's time sacrifices were offered as a substitute 
 for righteousness, and the prophets were indifferent to or 
 even denounced ritual arid sanctuary. Now the best hopes 
 for social righteousness lay in devotion to the Temple, hence 
 Zechariah is zealous for it and its priesthood. The older 
 prophets had announced that the sin of Israel must be 
 punished by the overthrow of the nation. Zechariah knows 
 that the Jews ai-e still sinful, but this sin may be purged 
 away by the destruction of individuals, by the removal of 
 wickedness and the purification, of the people.^ The ancient 
 hope of deliverance through the house of David revived 
 and fastened itself- on Zerubbabel;* this Messianic hope 
 connects itself, as of old, with victory over the Gentiles, 
 but also with the homage of the Gentiles to Jehovah at 
 Jerusalem,' which shall be "the city of truth'' and the 
 temple hill " the holy mountain " ; and " there shall sit in 
 the streets of Jerusalem old men and women, each with 
 staff in hand because of great age; and the streets of 
 the city shall be full of boys and girls playing in the 
 streets thereof,"* and all this is to be brought about, "Not 
 
 ^ i. 4-6, vii. 7. 
 ^ ,€f. also ii. 13 with Zeph. i. 7 ; viii. 3 with Isaiah i. 26; viii. 18-23 
 
 with Isaiah ii. 1-4, Micah iv. 1-3. , 
 
 s 
 
 111., 
 
 ^ See above on vi. 11- 1 3. 
 
 • ii. ri-13, viii. 18-23. 
 
 • viii, 4, S- 
 
ZECHARIAH IX.-XIV. 259 
 
 by might, nor by power, but by my Spirit, saith Jehovah 
 Sabaoth." 1 
 
 In Zechariah, however, Hebrew prophecy begins to lose 
 its sense of immediate communion with God; the prophet 
 receives his messages through visions and angels ; and it is 
 Satan who denounces the sin of Israel, symbolised by the 
 filthy garments of the High Priest. 
 
 Zechariah viii. 9-12 repeats the teaching of Haggai i. i-ii, 
 ^ii. 15-19, that indifference to the rebuilding of the Temple 
 brought calamity, especially failure of crops and vintage. 
 The unwelcome peace among the nations, i. 11, is a reference 
 to the shaking of the nations in the interests of Israel promised 
 in Haggai ii. 6, 7, 21. Another parallel with post-exilic litera- 
 ture is the denunciation of the sham fast in vii. 5 as compared 
 with Isaiah Iviii.^ 
 
 The N.T. contains only a few traces of these chapters, 
 chiefly in the Apocalypse. 
 
 13. Zechariah ix-xiv. 
 
 (a) Date and Authorship. — Owing to the accident that 
 Zechariah xi. 13 is quoted in Matthew xxvii. 9 as from 
 Jeremiah, criticism early ^ suggested that these chapters were 
 not the work of Zechariah. Apart from this, there are many 
 striking differences between the two parts of the book, which 
 show that they are not by the same author. 
 
 In i.-viii., the Sections have headings specifying the date 
 and author — Zechariah ; Zechariah speaks in the first person ; 
 almost every paragraph has numerous points of contact with 
 B.C. 520-518. There are many visions, in which angels play 
 an important part. 
 
 In ix.-xiv., either there are no headings, or, if there are, 
 they are silent as to date and authorship; the author rarely 
 speaks in the first person. Where he does, it is not^ as in the 
 
 ' iv. 6, cf. Isaiah xxxi. 3, " The Eg5'ptians are men, and not God ; and 
 their horses flesh, and not spirit." 
 ' Dated by Cheyne, b.c. 450-444. 
 • Joseph MLedk, 1632. 
 
26o BIBLICAL INTRODUCTION 
 
 first part, in, his own, but in some symbolic character, e.g.; the 
 Good Shepherd; there are no points of contact with B.C. 
 520-518, but rather with other periods (see below); there 
 are neither visions nor angels. 
 
 There are also diversities of vocabulary, style, and ideas. 
 
 Criticism started with an attempt to ascribe these chapters 
 to Jeremiah; i.e., also to assign, them to the period b.c, 
 626-586. They are certainly not by Jeremiah, nor do they 
 belong to his period, but some critics still regard them, as pre- 
 exihc. Ephraim, ix. 10, Assyria, x. 10, Damascus, ix. i, and 
 Hamath, ix. 2, are spoken of as in existence, which seems to 
 imply a date before the Fall of Samaria, b.c. 722. The carry- 
 ing away, of captives from Gilead, x. 10, has been connected 
 with the captivity of Gilead by Tiglath-Pileser, ii. Kings xv. 
 29. The "three shepherds cut off in one month,", Zechariah 
 xi. 8, have been explained of ii. Kings xv. 13-15, where 
 Zechariah and Shallum perish in a short time, the third 
 shepherd being some unknown pretender. The necessity for 
 this sheer conjecture shows that there is, no real, connection 
 between the two passages. On these and similar grounds the 
 whole or part of ix.-xi. with xiii. 7-9 are sometimes referred 
 to the last days of the kingdom of Israel ; and xii.-xiv. (less 
 xiii. 7-9) to the last days of the kingdom of Judah, for the 
 mourning in xii. 1 1 is often understood of the mourning for 
 Josiah, ii. Chronicles xxxv. 24, 25. 
 
 But, on the whole, a closer examination of this appendix 
 shows that both sections are post-exilic, at any rate in their 
 present form. In ix. 13, Greece is mentioned as the great 
 enemy of the Jews, and the Greeks first became a great 
 neighbouring power after the conquests of Alexander, b.c. 333. 
 The idea of the Messianic King as Prince of Peace, ix. 9, 
 would be very remarkable in a pre-exihc work dealing with 
 the impending ruin of Israel and Judah. The idea is even 
 more developed than in Isaiah x. 6, often regarded as^ post- 
 exilici 
 
 From xii. onward, the marks of post-exilic authorship are 
 numerous and convincing. In xii. i Israel stands for Judah; 
 
ZECHARIAH IX.-XIV. -aei 
 
 the importance given to " the house of Levi " by being placed 
 side by side with "the house of David," xii. 12, 13, reminds 
 us of the exalted position of the priesthood after the exile ; 
 the. utter contempt poured upon prophecy, xiii. 2-6, suggests 
 a late period when genuine prophets had ceased to appear ; 
 xiv. is an apocalypse of an advanced type ; the importance 
 attached to the Feast of Tabernacles, xiv. 16, to the sanctity 
 of pots and bells, xiv, 20, 21, to the absence of foreigners 
 from the Temple, xiv. 21,, and the universal observance of 
 Jewish feasts by Gentiles, point to the ritual of the pmst-exilic 
 period. 
 
 Hence ix.-xiv.'is, as a whole, post-exilic. The reference to 
 Greece, ix. 13, points to a date in the Greek period, after 
 ^•c- 333, for at any rate a part of the chapters. Some, how- 
 ever, obtain an earlier date by attributing this reference to an 
 editor. 
 
 Thus the appendix belongs either to the Persian or Greek 
 periods but its exact date or dates cannot be certainly fixed ; 
 nor can we be sure whether ix.-xii with xiii. 7-9, and 
 xiL-xiv. (less xiii. 7-9)' are by the same or by two different 
 authors. ' ■ - '■ 
 
 ■ Hence Ephraim and Joseph are only used in a quasi- 
 symbolic sense, Judah and the restored Jews claim to re^^ 
 present Ephraim and Joseph, just as they appropriate the term 
 Israel. Assyria is either used as a geographical term, or 
 applied to the Greek kingdom of Syria. The later applica- 
 tion was very natural, seeing that " Syria " is simply a Greek 
 contraction for "Assyria." These usages can be paralleled 
 from Ezra vi. 22, Judith i. i. .: 
 
 , Probably the appendix, together with the equally anonymous 
 "Malachi," was placed, because of its anonymity, at the end 
 of the Book of tfie , Twelve Prophets, i.e., after Zechariah ; 
 and thus came to be written consecutively with Zechariah and 
 included under the same title. 
 
 (b) Historical Circumstances. — For Persiajci period see § ii 
 Haggai; for Greek period see chapter v. § 10, (b)j cf. Contents 
 below. 
 
262 BIBLICAL INTRODUCTION 
 
 (c) C!?«/e«/j.—IX.-XI. with XIII. 7-9. 
 
 ix. 1-8, The Temple protected when Phoenicia and Philistia 
 are devastated. A remnant of the Philistines converted. 
 
 ix. 9-17, The Messianic King brings peace and prosperity 
 to Israel by giving victory over the Greeks. 
 
 X., Victory and restoration for Judah and Ephraim. 
 
 xi., with xiii. 7-9, In a time of calamity the people were 
 oppressed by their rulers or " shepherds " ; the prophet repre- 
 senting Jehovah "cut off three shepherds in one month" and 
 undertook to rule the people, "feed the flock," with two 
 staves, " Grace " and " Union," ^ symbolising the covenant 
 of Jehovah with man and the union of Judah and Israel. 
 But, saith the prophet, " I was weary of them, and they also 
 loathed me." He relinquished his task,; broke his staves, and 
 received for his hire thirty shekels, the price of a. slave, which 
 he cast into the Temple treasury.^ Then Jehovah delivers 
 over His people to a good-for-nothing' shepherd, who neglects 
 and devours the flock, and is punished. Then the prophet, 
 " my shepherd, the man that is my fellow, saith Jehovah 
 Sabaoth,"i is slain and the flock scattered; finally, a thiid 
 part of the people are purified and reconciled to God. 
 '. The action is synlbolic, the prophet representing in turn 
 very different actors in an apocalyptic drama, first Jehovah, 
 then the worthless shepherd, then the faithful shepherd who 
 is -martyred., 
 
 XII. i-XIII. 6, XIV. 
 
 xii. i-xiii. 6, Siege of Jerusalem by Geiitiles allied with 
 Judah; the assailants are discomfited, Judah is reconciled 
 to Jerusalem; both are delivered, Judah first, that Jerusalem 
 may not be puffed up. The city mourns for a martyr, whom 
 it has put to death ; and is purified by a fountain opened for 
 
 1 So G. A. Smith, Book of the Twelve Prophets; A.V., R.V. 
 "Beauty," "Bands.", • ,, 
 
 ' '" In xi. 13 read "treasury" 'Sfariox "yaiiex" ySfir with G. A. SMITH, 
 etc. ' "■ ' 
 
 » A.V. "idol," R.V., G. A. Smith, "worthless," xi. 17. 
 
ZECHARIAH IX.-XIV.' 263 
 
 sin and uncleanness, and by the cutting off of idols, prophets, 
 and the unclean spirit. 
 
 xiv., Another siege of Jerusalem by the Gentiles; the city 
 is actually taken and sacked; when Jehovah appears upon the 
 Mount of Olives, which splits asunder, and the Jews escape 
 through the chasm. Living waters flow east and west from 
 the city, and the rest of' the land becomes a plain. The 
 besiegers are destroyed. The remnant of the Gentiles shall 
 go up every year to worship Jehovah at the feast of Taber- 
 nacles, and if they neglect will be punished with plagues. 
 Everything in Jerusalem, down to the pots, shall be holy. 
 
 If we translate with R.V. text, "Judah also shall fight against 
 Jerusalem," we must suppose that verses 13 and 14, which in any case 
 interrupt the context, have either beentransferred here from the beginning 
 of xii., or have been added by an editor to connect xiv. and xii., cf. G. A. 
 Smith, i. 1. Driver takes the rendering of R.V.Mg., "Judah shall fight 
 at Jerusalem,'.' but even this is quite alien to the context 
 ( 
 
 (d) Significance and Use in N. T. — In Zechariah ix.-xiv. 
 passages of ancient prophecy may be embedded, but 
 we are niostly in the region of the apocalyptic visions of 
 later Judaism. In the picture of the future, Judah and 
 Jerusalem, and the Temple, the circumstances of the writer's 
 own time, are strangely blended with vast armies of all nations 
 attacking the Holy City, with supernatural plagues and trans^^ 
 formations of mountain and rivers, with vague symbolism of 
 shepherds, and with the phantoms of dead peoples and 
 empires, Ephraim and Assyria., This cpnfusion of symbols 
 from all sources, makes it difficult to discover any certain 
 indications of the actual conditions of the author and his 
 times. The martyr of xii. 10 and perhaps also of xiii. 7 
 did not necessarily belong to the author's own time, , but 
 may have been someone whose death burdened the con- 
 science of Israel for many generations ; perhaps the innocent 
 sufferer whose fate suggested Isaiah Uii. 
 
 Yet xii. 2, 7, xiv. 14 indicate a time of estrangement 
 between Jerusalem and the house of David on the one 
 hand, and the rest of Judah on the other; and xiii. r-6 
 
264 BIBLICAL INTRODUCTION 
 
 shows the prophetic order in the last stage ofdecaiy; the 
 "wounds" in 6 were perhaps sel&mutilations connected, with 
 superstitious ritual. 
 
 The Messianic pictures become more detailed and ex- 
 plicit. The post-exilic type of saint was the humble, .pious, 
 God-fearing njan, the 'dnl ; so, ix. 9, the King comes to 
 Zion "vindicated and victorious, meek and riding upon an 
 ass."i In xii. 8, "The house of David shall be as God.'' 
 
 The overthrow of the Gentiles and their homage to Jehovah 
 are still dwelt on, but with the grimness of apocalypse; the 
 heathen hosts moulder into rottenness as they : stand j . the 
 survivors are compelled by dread of drought to be regular 
 attendants at the Feast, of Tabernacles, xiv. 12-19. < 
 
 Finally the ethical zeal for righteousness connects itself, 
 after the manner of the Pharisees, with the ceremonial clean- 
 ness of material objects, bells, bowls, and pots, xiv. 21. ,r. 
 
 The clause in xii. i, "Jehovah which stretcheth forth the 
 heavens, and layeth the foundation of the earth," is a favourite 
 formula of II. Isaiah. ^ The fountain 'opened for uncleanness, 
 the streams issuing from Jerusalem, and the transformation of 
 the land, are based upon simikr pictures in Ezekiel.^ 
 
 The picture of the Meek King, ix. 9, riding on the ass,' 
 is applied to Christ entering Jerusalem, Matthew xxi. 5, 
 John xii. 15. The thirty pieces of 'Silver thrown to the 
 potter, xi. 13, are applied to Judas' thirty pieces given for 
 the potter's field, Matthew xxvi. 15, xxvii; 9, 10. Cf. also 
 xii. 10, "They shall look ilnto me whom they have pierced," 
 with Johri xix. 37; and xiii. 7, "I will smite the shepherd,"' 
 etc, with Matthew xxvi. 31, Mark xiv. 27. 
 
 14. MalachL 
 
 (a) Date and Authorship. — The book is anonymous. 
 "Malachi," which means "my messenger" or "my angel," 
 
 ' * So G. A. Smith ; R.V. , " just and having salvation j ' lowly," etc. 
 '' xl.' 22, xlii. 5, etc. ■ ,; I : 
 
 ' xxxvi. 25, xlvii. 1-12, cf, Joel iii. 18. , ■' 
 
MALACHI 265 
 
 is a title prefixed by an editor, to wliom it was suggested 
 by the "my messenger" of iii. i.^ ., 
 
 The book is clearly; connected with the; reforms of Ezra 
 and Nehemiah, b.c. 458-433. Two mairi features of those 
 reforms were the provision for the maintenance of the services 
 of the Temple, and the prohibition of marriages with 
 foreigners ; and the Book of Malachi is devoted , ,to the 
 advocacy of these two objects. Opinion is divided as to, 
 the '■ exact date. The book may have been issued before 
 the first arrival of Nehemiah, B.C. 458, or before the 
 promulgation of the Priestly Code in b.c. 444, and may 
 thus have prepared the way for the reforms ; or it may 
 have been issued after b.g, 444,. or even after I^ehemiah's 
 final departure from Judah, some time after b.c. 433, and 
 may have served to overcome the reluctance 0/ the Jews 
 to fully accept and maintain the new dispensation. The 
 fact that the book has' points of contact with' Deuteronomy, 
 Ezekiel, and the Law of HoUness,^ rather than with the 
 later portions of the Priestly Code, points to a date previous 
 to the promulgation of the latter. 
 
 (b) Historical Circumstances. — Malachi falls in a part of 
 the Persian period, the reigtl of Artaxefxes Longimanus, 
 464-424, when the Persian government was favourably dis- 
 posed to the Jews. Before the first arrival of Nehemiah, 
 however, the condition of Judaea was very unsatisfactory. 
 The Temple had been completed, but its completion had 
 not been followed by the prosperity promised by Haggai 
 and Zechariah;- people and priests alike Were careless about 
 the services, and entangled in marriages and^ other relations 
 with heathen and half heathen; neighbours ; there was danger 
 lest the worship of Jehovah' should be degraded to the level 
 
 . ^ male'.akM; the;w,o^d,in i.-i is taken as. a title- by the LXX., which, 
 however, read niate^dkhS, "his messenger," and by the Targum of 
 Jonathan. -This view was adopted by Calvin, who has been followed 
 by most recent critics. < Some, however, still ,regard Malachi as a proper 
 name. Cf., however, the designation of Haggai as the "messenger" of 
 Jehovah in Haggai i. 13. 
 ^ Lev. xvii.-xxvi. 
 
266 BIBLICAL INTRODUCTION 
 
 of heathen religions, and confused and blended with the 
 worship of other gods. These dangers were averted by 
 Ezra and Neheiiiiah. Nehemiah used his authority, as the 
 representative of the Persian King, to establish the Priestly 
 Code as the Law of the Jews, to put an end to marriages 
 with foreigners, to make a sharp and permanent division 
 between the Jewish community and its neighbours, and to 
 make adequate provision for the Temple sei-vices; 
 
 (c) Contents. — i. 1-5, Edom's ruin a proof of Jehovah's love 
 to Israel. ' ■ ' 
 
 i. 6-ii. 9, Neglect of the Temple services by priests and 
 people. 
 
 ii. 10-16, Jewish wives divorced to make room for foreign 
 
 women. 
 
 Verses II, 12 break the connection, and may be a later addition; see 
 G. A, Smith, i. 1. 
 
 ii. 17-iii. 6, The sudden coming of Jehovah's messenger to 
 purify priests and people. 
 
 iii. 7-12, Fertility will reward the due payment of tithes and 
 offerings. 
 
 iii. 13-iv. 3, Prosperous sinners will come to niin, and 
 suffering saints will be delivered. 
 
 iv. 4—6, Elijah the Forerunner. 
 
 (d) Significance and Use in N.T. — 'The form of the book 
 is an argument against those who are prepared to justify 
 themselves, e.g., " Ye have wearied Jehovah with your words. 
 Yet ye say, Wherein have we wearied Him?"^ It is, a 
 manifesto on behalf of earnest and pious Jews alike against 
 the self-satisfied indifference to true religion of the ruling 
 classes, the priests and the people generally, and against 
 the despondency of those who thought that the prosperity: 
 of wicked oppressors showed that God had deserted His 
 own cause and those who were ifaithful to it* Here, as in. 
 Haggai and Zechanah, zeal for holiness and righteousness^ 
 goes hand in hand with zeal for the Temple. The devotion' 
 
 ^ ii. 17. 
 
MALACHI 26^ 
 
 and enthusiasm of the party represented by this book made 
 the reforms of Ezra and Nehemiah possible. 
 
 Two details may be noticed. The Davidic Messiah does 
 not appear ; but a messenger, a new Elijah, is announced, who 
 shall prepare the way for Jehovah and His Day of Judgment. 
 In a most remarkable passage the Writer seems to recognise 
 the Gentile worship of their gods as worship paid to Jehovah, 
 " For from the rising oif the sun even unto the going down of 
 the same my name is great among the Gentiles ; ' iand in every 
 place incense is offered unto my name, and a pure offering; 
 for my name is great among the Gentiles." ^ 
 
 In the New Testament, St. Paul uses i. 2 to illustrate the 
 doctrine of divine election ^ ; and the prediction of Elijah the 
 Forerunner is applied to John the Baptist.^ 
 
 In Mark i. 2 a quotation from Malachi iii. i is included in a 
 quotation from " Isaiah the prophet." 
 
 M. 11 R.V. Text. = Rom. ix. !>, 
 
 ' Matt. xvi. 14, xvii. 1-13, Mark i. 2-4, etc 
 
CHAPTER VIL 
 
 APOCRYPHA, PSEUDEPIGRAPHA, AND 
 
 SOME OTHER JEWISH LITERATURE NOT 
 
 INCLUDED IN THE PROTESTANT CANON i 
 
 1. Apocalypise of Baruch, includ- 
 ;' ing Epistle of Baruch. 
 
 2. Ascension of Isaiah. ' i 
 
 3. Assumption of, Moses. 
 
 4. Baruch, Book oi, 
 
 5. Daniel, Song of the Three 
 
 Children, Bel and the 
 Dragon, Susanna. 
 
 6. Ecclesiasticus. 
 
 7. Enoch, Book of. 
 
 8. Enoch, Book of the Secrets of. 
 
 9. I. or III. Esdras. 
 
 10. II. or IV. Esdras. 
 
 11. Esther. 
 
 12. Jeremiah, Letter of. 
 
 13. Josephtis. ' 
 
 14. Jubilees, Book of. ' 
 
 15. Judith. 
 
 16. i. Maccabees. 
 
 17. ii. l^accah^es. 
 
 18. iii. Maccabees. 
 
 19. iv. Maccabees. 
 
 20. Manasseh, Prayer of. 
 '21.' Philo. 
 
 22. Psalms of Solomon. 
 
 23. Sibyllines. 
 
 24. Testament of the Twelve 
 
 Patriarchs. 
 
 25. Tobit. 
 
 26. Wisdom of Solomon. 
 
 1. Apocalypse of Baruch. — Extant in Syriac version of 
 Greek version of the original Hebrew; written by unknown 
 Pharisaic authors, c. a.d. 70-130. Apocalypse of the history 
 from the time of Baruch to the Last Days, and the Reign of 
 Messiah, put into the mouth of Baruch. It has much in 
 common with ii. or iv. Esdras, and includes what was known 
 as the Epistle of Baruch. 
 
 2. Ascension of Isaiah. — Extant in Latin and Ethiopian 
 versions of the original Greek, consists of a Jewish, possibly 
 pre-Christian account of the sawing asunder of Isaiah, with 
 
 > (y. Chapter I. § 4 on the Canon. 
 26S 
 
APOCRYPHA 2§9 
 
 Christian additions, containing Isaiah's vision of the Seven 
 Heavens, with a prologue and epilogue. The combination 
 may be dated c. a.d. too. 
 
 3. Assumption of Moses. — Extant in Latin version of 
 Greek version of Aramaic or Hebrew (Charles) original, 
 written by a Zealot or Pharisee, c. a.d. 1-50. Only part is 
 extant, viz., an Apocalypse of the history from the time of 
 Moses to the Last Days, when Jehovah shall manifest Him- 
 self to restore the theocracy. The lost portion, only known 
 from the Fathers, contained an account of the end of Moses, 
 and was Jude's ^ authority for the dispute over the body of 
 Moses. 
 
 4. Baruch, Book of. — Extant in LXX. and dependent 
 versions. A combination of at least two independent works, 
 (a) i.-iii. 8, Confession of the sins which led to the Captivity, 
 with historical introduction, apparently dependent on Daniel 
 ix., or vice versd, written in Hebrew, assigned to various dates 
 from B.C. 320 to A.D. 70. (b) iii. g-v., Praise of Wisdom, and 
 Consolations for the Exiles, written in Greek after a.d. 70. 
 
 Marshall, Hastings' Bible Dictionary, holds that iii, g-iv. 4, the Praise 
 of Wisdom, was written in Aramaic. 
 
 5. Daniel, the Song of the Three Children, Bel and the 
 Dragon, Susanna. — The Greek Daniel contains these three 
 and other additions. Bel and the Dragon, and Susanna in 
 many MSS. and editions of the LXX. are given separately. 
 The Dragon story of the former, and the Song exist in 
 Aramaic, otherwise these three additions are only found in 
 Greek, in which language they were probably composed, the 
 Aramaic being not the original but a translation. In LXX., 
 Bel and the Dragon bears the title, " From the prophecy of 
 Ambakoum (Habakkuk), Son of Jesus, of the tribe of Levi." 
 These additions may be dated between B.C. 160 and the 
 Christian Era. 
 
 6. Ecclesiasticus or Wisdom of Jesus ben Sirach. — Extant, 
 as a whole, in LXX. and allied versions, of a Hebrew original, 
 
 ' Verse 9. 
 
270 BIBLICAL INTRODUCTION 
 
 of which xxxix; i5:r.xlix. ii, and other portions, have been 
 recently discovered. Composed about B.a i8o by Jesus ben 
 Sirach, and translated into Greek by his grandson about 
 B.C. 130. A second and larger Book of Proverbs. 
 
 7. Enoch, Book of. — Extant entire in Ethiopic version j in 
 part, in Greek version of Hebrew or Aramaic original. Con- 
 sists of five books, which may be five separate works, the 
 second is certainly by a different hand from the rest. The 
 second book, a. Vision of Heaven and Hell, and of the 
 Judgment by the Messiah, the Son of Man, variously dated 
 from B.C. 95 to A.D. 70.'- The rest contains the Fall of the 
 Angels, Enoch's Journeys through earth and heaven, a 
 Treatise on Astronomy, two Visions of the Flqod, , and two 
 Apocalypses of the history from Adam to the establishment 
 of Messiah's kingdom, and is variously dated from B.C. 160 
 to B.C. 105. It is quoted as Scripture in Jude 14 f. (?),and 
 Barnabas iv. 3, xvi. 5. 
 
 8. Enoch, Book of the Secrets of. — Extant in a Slavonic 
 version, made known to Western Europe for the first time 
 in 1896, by the translation of W. R. Morfill, edited with 
 Introduction and Notes by R. H. Charles. According to 
 Mr. Charles, this book was written in Egypt, in Greek, 
 A.D. r-50, but embodies fragments of an older Hebrew 
 work. It contains Enoch's journey through the Seven 
 Heavens ; God's description to Enoch of the Creation, the 
 Fall of the Angels, the Fall of Adam ; Enoch's Translation, 
 and his tettiporary return to instruct his sons. In spite of its 
 similarity to the Book of Enoch, it is a distinct work. 
 
 9. I. Esdras {E. V. and LXX?) or III. Esdras ( F«/^., Sixth 
 Article, and early English Bibles) ; often the Greek Esdras.— 
 A Greek edition of Ezra (order, of sections altered), ii. 
 Chronicles xxxv. f. (Josiah-Zedekiah), Nehemiah vii. 73- 
 viii. 13 (Promulgation of the Law), with an original section, 
 iii. I -v. 6, describing Zerubbabel's victory in a contest of wit 
 
 ' Konig, Cornill, etc. regard this section as a Christian document. 
 ' Esdras A, but in Laoariie, Luc: Text, Esdras B. 
 
JOSEPHUS 271 
 
 before Darius, and its reward in the Return of the Jews. 
 Either compiled from the Greek of the: LXX., or by a 
 Greek writer who translated freely from the Hebrew ; 
 iii. i-v. 6, in any case, composed in Greek. Used by 
 Josephus, and may be dated e.g. 170-100, 
 
 10. II. Esdras (Eng. Apoc), or IV. Esdras (Vulg.).i — 
 Extant in Latin, Syriac, Ethiopic, Armenian, and Arabic 
 versions of a Greek original. The original work, iii.-xiv., 
 is closely connected with the Apocalypse of Baruch, and 
 was perhaps known as the Apocalypse of Ezra; it was 
 written by a Palestinian Jew, c. a.d. 81-96, and contains 
 discourses and visions given to Ezra by an angel, and an 
 account of the rewriting of the O.T. by Ezra. Some of 
 the visions are symbolic . apocalyptic statements of history, 
 in the manner of Daniel and Revelation. Chapters i. f., 
 XV. f. are much later additions of little interest. 
 
 11. Esther. — The Greek Esther contains a speech and 
 prayer of Mordecai, two letters of Artaxerxes to the 
 provinces, a prayer of Esther and other additions, not 
 found in the Hebrew, which were composed in Greek, 
 c. B.C. 300-100. 
 
 12. Jeremiah, Letter of, — In many MSS. of LXX., and 
 in Vulg. and English Apocrypha given as Baruch vi. A 
 polemic against idolatry, purporting to be a letter from 
 Jeremiah to the exiles at Babylon, cf. Jeremiah xxix. 10, 
 written in Greek, c. b.c. 200 — Christian Era. 
 
 13. Josephus. — Born a.d. 37, diedV. 103, a Jewish priest, 
 who cornmanded the forces in Galilee during the revolt, but 
 was taken prisoner by the Romans, and became a protege 
 of Titus. Besides an autobiography, works On the Jewish 
 War, and Against Apion, hd wrote, in a.d. 95, the Antiquities, 
 a history of the Jews from the Greatioh to the outbreak of 
 
 ' In some Latin MSS., ii. Esdr. i. f. =ii. Esdras, ii. Esdras lii.- 
 xiv. =iv. Esdras, ii. Esdras xv. f. =v. Esdras. THACKERAY, art. 
 "II. Esdras," Hastings Bible Dictionary, 
 
272 BIBLICAL INTRODUCTION 
 
 the Jewish Waf. The older history is almost entirely derived 
 from the O.T., and adds little or nothing that is trustworthy. 
 His accounts of the Jews and their literature were intended 
 to make ks favourable an impression as possible upon .Gentile 
 readers. He wrote in Greek, also in Aramaic, which he trans- 
 lated into Greek. 
 
 14. Jubilees, Book of, or Leptogenesis, "Little Genesis" 
 etc. — Extant in an Ethiopic version of a Greek version, of a 
 Hebrew or Aramaic original ; fragments of a Latin version also 
 exist. Written towards the beginning: of the first century a.d. 
 A Midrash^ on Genesis i.-Exodus xiv., arranged according to 
 Jubilees, or periods of 49 years.^ The history purports to have 
 been revealed to Moses by an angel during- his stay in the Mount, 
 
 15. Judith, Book of,— Extant iri the LXX., etc. of a 
 Hebrew or Aramaic original, composed by a Palestiriiah 
 Jew, c. B.C. 150-100. Narrates ' how Judith delivered the 
 Jews who had' returned from the Exile, by cutting off the 
 head of Holofernes, the general of an invading army sent 
 by Nebuchadnezzar, King of Assyria. 
 
 16. I. -Maccabees. — Extant in the LXX., etc. of a Hebrew 
 original, composed by a Palestinian Jew, c. B.C. 100-70. 
 A most valuable history of the Maccabees from the accession 
 of Antiochus Epiphanes, 175, to the murder of Simon, 135. 
 
 1 7. II. Maccabees. — A Greek work, preserved in the LXX,, 
 variously dated from B.C. 125 to a.d. 70. There are two 
 introductory letters, containing legends about Jeremiah, etc.; 
 but the bulk of the book from ii. 18 is an abridgement of an 
 earlier work by Jason of Cyrene, c: b.c. 150. The work is a 
 history of the Jews from the accession of Seleucus IV., 187, 
 to the death of Nicanor, 161. It is very inferior as history 
 to i. Maccabees. ' 
 
 18. III. Maccabees,— A Greek work, by an Egyptian Jew, 
 preserved in the LXX., variously dated from b.c. ioo-a.d. 100, 
 
 ' Edition supplemented by illustrative narratives,- etc, 
 ' Not 50 as in the FenlateuCh, 
 
SIBYLLINE POEMS ^^^ 
 
 A legend of the miraculous deliverance of the Temple, and 
 also of Jewish captives at Alexandria, from Ptolemy IV., e.g. 
 222-204. Its only connection with the Maccabees is the 
 name and its position in the LXX. 
 
 19. IV. Maccabees. — A Greek work, preserved in the 
 LXX,, composed c. a.d. 30-70. Uses an incident from ii. 
 Maccabees as the text of a sermon on the Supremacy of 
 Reason, at one time wrongly ascribed to Josephus. 
 
 20. Manasseh, Prayer of. — A Greek work, contained in 
 some MSS. of the LXX., variously dated from B.C. 200 to the 
 beginning of the Christian Era or later. Purports to be the 
 prayer mentioned II. Chronicles xxxiii. 18. 
 
 21. Fhilo. — Born c. B.C. 20, died after a.d. 40. A Jewish 
 philosopher of Alexandria, who sought to combine and 
 harmonise tlie teaching of the Pentateuch with Greek philo- 
 sophy. He wrote in Greek a long series of works which 
 constitute an allegorising commentary on the Pentateuch, 
 and also various philosophical treatises. Some of them are 
 only extant in Latin translations. 
 
 22. Psalms of Solomon. — Eighteen poems, composed in 
 Hebrew or Aramaic, by a Palestinian Jew, partly after 
 Pompey's capture of Jerusalem in B.C. 63, partly after his 
 death in b.c. 48 ij preserved in a Greek translation in some 
 MSS. of the LXX., but not included in the Vulgate or the 
 English Apocrypha. The poems are partly general and 
 didactic, but chiefly consist of praise, prayer, and lamenta- 
 tion concerning contemporary events, and include a glowing 
 description, xvii., of the reign of Messiah. 
 
 23. Sibylline Poems. — Numerous poems, purporting to be 
 Sibylline oracles, circulated in the Roman empire; many of 
 these were composed by Jews and Christians, in order to 
 propagate their own doctrines under the authority of the 
 
 ^ Both events are referred to in these psalms in terms which imply that 
 they were recent. The language is symbolic, and gives no names, but the 
 reference to Pompey's death is quite clear. 
 
274 BIBLICAL INTRODUCTION 
 
 ancient Sibyl. The extant twelve books, in Greek, are a 
 medley of Jewish and Christian fragments of various dates, 
 in which are embedded some relics of older Gentile poems. 
 The Jewish portions — iii. 97-820, written under Ptolemy VII., 
 c. B.C. 140, iii. 36-92, c. B.C. 40, iv. (probably Jewish), c. a.d. 
 80, V. (in part), first century a.d., xi.-xiv., much later — contain 
 polemics against polytheism and apocalyptic visions of history, 
 the Day of Judgment, and the world-wide dominion of Israel 
 and the Messiah. 
 
 24. Testament of the Twelve Patriarclis. — A Greek work, 
 composed by a Jewish Christian, c. a.d. 70-130, perhaps on 
 the basis of an older Jewish work in Hebrew. It purports to 
 be the last words of the twelve sons of Jacob. Each gives 
 Midrashic ^ history of himself, a discourse on some moral 
 topic, such as Envy or Simplicity, and apocalyptic history 
 and prophecy. 
 
 25. Tobit, Book of. — A Greek work, composed, probably 
 in Assyria, between B.C. 200-20. The Hebrew and Aramaic 
 editions are probably versions of the Greek, A religious 
 romance, inculcating obedience to the Law, and the burial 
 of the dead. The scene is laid in Assyria under Sennacherib 
 and his predecessor and successor. Tobit is an Israelite 
 captive. The archangel Raphael heals Tobit's blindness, 
 and obtains for his sori Tobias the hand of Sarah, daughter 
 of Raguel, in spite of the demon Asmodeus. It contains a 
 brief apocalyptic poem put into the mouth of Tobit. 
 
 26. Wisdom of Solomon. — A Greek work, composed in the 
 first century B.C. by an Alexandrian Jew, preserved in the 
 LXX. An essay on Wisdom as the divine agent in creation and 
 in the providential government of the world, as illustrated by 
 the history of Israel, and in the spiritual discipline of man. 
 As combining O.T. teaching with that of Greek philosophy, 
 it is closely allied to Philo's works, and has sometimes been 
 ascribed to that philosopher, but wrongly. 
 
 ' See p. 272 n. 
 
THE NEW TESTAMENT 
 
 INTRODUCTORY 
 
 The New Testament — literally the new Covenant, as that 
 part of the Bible which deals with the covenant predicted by 
 Jeremiah,^ and introduced and confirmed by Jesus Christ^ — 
 contains the especially Christian scriptures, although, from the 
 first, Christianity has claimed the Jewish scriptures, and al- 
 though the N.T. writers repeatedly appeal to them as inspired 
 authorities, and for the proofs they afford of the Christian 
 teachings. The contents of the N.T. consist of records of 
 the life, death, and resurrection of Jesus Christ ; a historical 
 account of the early churches and of the missionary work of 
 some of their leaders; a number of letters to churches and 
 individual persons, treating of the profoundest question of 
 religious truth, but also devoting much attention to practical 
 duties and Church administration, and abounding in expres- 
 sions of affectionate interest; and lastly, standing quite by 
 itself, the Apocalypse, with its mysteries of strange symbolism. 
 
 It was only in course of time that all these books were 
 united in one volume. First we meet with a collection of 
 the gospels, called " The Gospel," then with St. Paul's epistles, 
 called "The Apostle." By degrees the other books were added. 
 
 Two influences in particular helped to settle the canon of 
 the N.T. The first was the use of certain books in public 
 worship, since it was necessary to determine which books were-, 
 to be so employed. The second was the call to refute erro. 
 neous opinions by appeal to primitive authority. In early 
 
 ' Jer, xxxi. 31 £F. 
 
 ' Mark xiv. 24 ; Heb. vii. 22 ; viii. 6 ff, 
 
 875 
 
276 BIBLICAL INTRODUCTION 
 
 times people of peculiar views made their own selections. 
 
 Thus the extreme Paulinists following Marcion only used 
 
 eleven books — a mutilated edition of Luke and ten of St. 
 
 Paul's Epistles.i On the other hand, some of the Jewish 
 
 Christians rejected the Pauline Epistles and Acts, but received 
 
 the " Gospel according to the Hebrews." 
 
 Meanwhile the main body of Christians was feeling its way 
 
 towards the canon we now possess, guided by two principles — 
 
 apostolic authorship, and traditional acceptance in the oldest 
 
 and principal Churches. 
 
 Harnack holds that this canon was deliberately formed between A.p. ijo 
 and 170, because there is no sign of it in Justin Martyr at the earlier date, 
 while a little after the later date Irenseus is found appealing to most of 
 our N.T. books as authorities, and quoting Ihem freely on the evident 
 assumption that they are familiar to his readers. _ Dr. Sanday considers 
 that this hypothesis involves too sudden a movement for Irenaeus to be 
 making his appeals in full , assurance that they. will be understood and 
 admitted. History knovifs of no such formal settlement of the canon. 
 
 By the end of the second century most of our N.T. books 
 were recognised and appealed to as authorities, though the 
 Western Churches were slow to accept Hebrews and the 
 CathoUc Epistles (except i John and Jude, of which they show 
 no doubts), and the Eastern Churches were slow to accept 
 Revelation and some of the Catholic Epistles. 
 
 By the end of the third century even these books on the 
 margin of the canon were generally accepted. After this we 
 come to the direct testimony of the MSS., the oldest of which 
 date from the fourth century* 
 
 * Omitting I and 2 Timothy, Titus, and Hebrejvs — ascribed by many 
 to the apostle. 
 
CHAPTER I. 
 THE SYNOPTIC GOSPELS 
 
 1. The Gospels. | 3. Mark. 
 
 2. Matthew. | 4. Luke. 
 
 I. Tlie Gospels. 
 
 a. The Word Gospel. — The word gospel, meaning " glad 
 tidings,"'- was not used as the title of the four books to 
 which it is attached in our N.T. when those books wctc 
 written. In early times it was confined to the message 
 of redemption in Jesus Christ which was preached by our 
 Lord Himself and His disciples.^ But inasmuch as the 
 message is really presented most fully and clearly in the 
 story of the life of Christ, when that story was written, out 
 it came to be regarded as a narrative of the gospel. Still, 
 as there could be but one gospel in the primary sense of 
 the word, the several narratives would not be regarded as 
 so many gospels, but only as so many accounts of the gospel. 
 Therefore when the word was first attached to them it 
 retained its reference to the glad tidings which had been 
 preached, and meant that the one gospel was set forth in 
 each of these books. For this reason we read of "the 
 gospel of God," ' with reference to its source — God revealing 
 the good news, and "the gospel of Christ"* with reference 
 to its contents — the gospel telling about Christ, but never 
 of the gospel of Matthew, the gospel of Mark. The men 
 
 2 This must be the case in Mark i. I, the word gospel there not 
 describing the book, but the message of good news, as the added phrase 
 " of Jesus Christ " shows. 
 
 ' Rom. XV. 16. ^ i. Cor. ix. 12, 
 
 277 
 
278 BIBLICAL INTRODUCTION 
 
 to whom the books were ascribed had to be connected with 
 them in some other way. This seems to be the explanation 
 of the fact that the titles appear as " the gospel according to 
 Matthew," "the gospel according to Mark," etc.,i i.e., Matthew's 
 version of the gospel, Mark's version, etc. The books only 
 came to be known as gospels in the second century. 
 
 As far as it can be traced the word " gospel" is first given 
 to a written account of the life of Christ in the time of 
 Marcion (c. a.d. 140).^ Justin Martyr, writing to the Roman 
 Senate, the members of which knew nothing of the Christian 
 books, refers to the gospels as " the Memoirs . of the 
 Apostles";^ but he notes that they are "called gospels."* 
 
 b. The Four Gospels. — Many attempts were made to set 
 forth the story of Christ even before our Third Gospel 
 was written;' and several more were made during the 
 next half century. Harnack has constructed a list of 
 twenty gospels, concerning which some information has 
 been preserved, while many others have fallen out of notice. 
 
 Harnack's list is as follows : — 
 
 1-4. The canonical gospels. 
 
 5. The gospel according to the Hebrews. 
 
 6. The gospel of the Twelve Apostles, 
 
 7. The Peter gospel. 
 
 8. The Egyptian gospel. 
 
 9. The Matthias gospel. 
 
 10. The Philip gospel. 
 
 11. The Thomas gospel. 
 
 12. The Protevangelium of James. 
 
 13. The Acts of Pilate (gospel of Nicodemus), 
 
 14. Basilides' gospel. 
 
 15. Valentinus' gospel. 
 
 16. Marcion's gospel. 
 
 17. The gospel of Eve. 
 
 18. The gospel of Judas. 
 
 19. The writing, Vhva M.a,plas (also the "Great and little questions erf 
 
 Mary"). 
 
 20. The gospel TEXaticrews.'' 
 
 ^ Karct, MaOSatov, etc. 
 
 ' Tertullian, Jdv. Marcion, iv. 2. 
 
 *• ra aTofij/TjfjLoi'e&ra tSiv &Troinh\tiiP. 
 
 * d /caXeirai eiayy^KM, Apol. i. 66, 
 
 ' See Luke I i. 
 
 ' ChronologU, pp. 589-651. 
 
THE GOSPELS 2^9 
 
 Some few of these books may have been independent 
 of the N.T. gospels; but, as far as can be discovered, 
 most of them were late apocryphal works, either directly 
 based on the canonical gospels, or relying on legends and 
 imaginative materials of a manifestly unhistorical character. 
 The gospel according to the Hebrews is the only one that 
 was at all generally received and relied upon in the main 
 body of the Church in addition to our four gospels. The 
 question then arises, how was it that these four were selected 
 for especial honour, and they alone admitted into the canon 
 when it was formed ? The answer is that they were regarded 
 as of apostolic authority, two of them being ascribed to 
 apostles (Matthew and John), and two to companions of 
 apostles (Mark the companion of Peter, Luke the companion 
 of Paul). Other gospels claimed apostolic authority, but the 
 claim was rejected as unauthentic. Then several of the 
 gospels early put into circulation were tainted with Jewish 
 or gnostic views, and only received among the separated 
 bodies in which those views were cherished, their "heresy" 
 condemning them in the eyes of Catholics. Marcion's gospel 
 was a mutilation of our Luke, especially adapted to the views 
 of the Marcionites. When this was not the case, the triviality, 
 the absurdity, the manifestly legendary character of other 
 gospel writings were signs of their untrustworthiness as 
 historical records. Undoubtedly the sobriety and truthful- 
 ness of our gospels, their own inherent worth, in addition 
 to the apostolic traditions, commended them to use in the 
 churches above their rivals. It is a noteworthy fact that 
 nearly all the references to sayings and doings of our Lord 
 in the writings of the early Fathers can be traced to our 
 N.T. gospels, though often not in verbal agreement with 
 them. 
 
 c. Early Testimony to the Gospels. — Eusebius when sorting 
 out the universally received books of the canon, in distinction 
 from those which some have questioned, writes : " And here 
 among the first must be placed the holy quaternion of the 
 gospels." {H.E., iii. 25.) The gospel according to the Hebrews 
 
28o BIBLICAL INTRODtFCTION 
 
 he places among the disputed books. He only mentions the 
 
 apocryphal gospels to reject them. , 
 
 Eusebius is' especially important for the early authorities— now lost /to 
 us^which he cites in witness of N.T. books. But here an important 
 question has been raised by the author of Supernatural Religion.' Are 
 we to infer that when Eusebius does not give us the testimony of a 
 certain author to any book of the N.T.j that author must .have known 
 nothing about it ? The author of Supernatural Religion answered in the 
 affirmative, and argued accordingly from ' ' the silence of Eusebius " that 
 the four gospels were not all known in the first half of the second century, 
 because Eusebius does not give the witness of writers of that period. But 
 Bishop Lightfoot replied with crushing effect, showing the utter fallacious- 
 ness of this style of reasoning. It implies: (i) that if Eusebius does 
 not cite a writer's testimony, that writer, did not leave any testimony; 
 and (2) that if the writer did .not quote a N.T. book, he must have 
 been ignorant of that book. Thus it is argued that Hegesippus did not 
 know our gospels because Eusebius does not quote any , testimony to 
 them from that author, whom, however, he quotes for other purposes,' 
 and therefore proves himself to know ; that Papias did not know Luke 
 or John because , Eusebius only quotes what, he says about Matthew, 
 and, Mark, etc. Now the argument turns entirely oh the purpose of 
 Eusebius. In describing this he discriminates, saying of the disputed 
 books that he will indicate what church writers have "made use of" 
 them, while he only promises to give, concerning the undisputed, any 
 information that has been "made about them,"^ i.e., any historical 
 statements or anecdptes about them. Thus, for example, Clement R. 
 definitely names our i Corinthians j Justin Martyr cites from our gospels 
 under the name, " Memoirs of the Apostles " ; Theophiliis of Antioch is 
 the first writer to quote the gospel according to St. John by name ; IrenKUS 
 cites Acts as Luke's, and cites all St. Paul's epistles except Philemon, yet 
 Eusebius reproduces none of these testimonies, and for the simple reason 
 that it did not come within his announced plan to do so. The books 
 referred to were not disputed, and the references gave no specific in- 
 formation about them. So in the case of Papias he only cites certain 
 statements about two gospel writings ; he does not say what gospels 
 Papias tised, for the gospels were undisputed, and -therefore he only, 
 collected anecdotes and historical statements about them. But in the 
 case of disputed books Eusebius follows a different course, collecting 
 all the evidence for the use of them that he cati lay hands on. The 
 author of Supernatural Religion replied to Dr. Lightfoot to the effect 
 that the omissions in Eusebius referred to above might be due to over- 
 sight on his part. That is most improbable, for Eusebius was scholarly 
 and thorough ; nobody who knew Ireiiseus's, writings — and Eusebius 
 certainly knew them — could fall to observe that Father's many quotations 
 from St. Paul's epistles. Yet Eusebius never appeals to the testimony 
 of them. This could not be owing to oversight. But further, if Eusebius 
 had been so careless with the testimony of Irenaeus to St. Paul, he might 
 have been equally careless in the case of testimony of Papias to Luke 
 
 ^ tIv^s rCiv Karb. ;^p(5j'0i/s iKKhrqijLaffriKCoy trvyypa^^ojv diroiais K^pijVrai 
 T&v dvTLKeyofiiifOJVy tIvh re irepl r&v ^ydicLff^Kcav Kal ofioXoyovfi^vtav 
 ypa<pwy Kal Sera irepl r&v /t^ rowirav airfiis ctpTjTaU — H.E., iii. 3. 
 
THE GOSPELS 2|i 
 
 or John. Thus the argument from " the silence of Eusbbius " falls to 
 the ground, 
 
 Clement bf Alexandria, Origan, and TertulHan ' were familiar 
 with our four gospels, frequently quoting and commenting on 
 all of them. Irensus (a.d. i8o) not only knows and quotes 
 the four gospels, but introduces quaint, fantastic arguments to 
 prove that they must be just four, no more and no less.^ The 
 very absurdity of his reasoning testifies to the well-established 
 position attained in his day by the four to the exclusion of all 
 others. Irensus's bishop was Pothinus, who lived to the age 
 of 90, and Irenssus had known Polycarp in Asia Minor. 
 Here are links of connection with the past that go back 
 beyond the beginning of the second century. Thus Irenaeus's 
 testimony to the gospels is exceptionally significant. The 
 Muratorian Fragment testifies directly to Luke and John, 
 and indirectly to the other two gospels, as it begins with 
 words that evidently refer to Mark,^ and introduces Luke as 
 "the third gospfel." The gospels are found in the Peshitto and 
 other early Syriac versions probably of the second century. 
 
 Then the recently recovered Diatessaron of Tatian comes 
 iri to show that all four gospels were acknowledged and their 
 position well enough established for this harmony to be made 
 from them for use in public worship, probably at Edessa, 
 during the second century. 
 
 The Diatessaron.* — The finding of this book is one of the most im- 
 
 ^ TertuUian even refers to a Latin version known to himself and his 
 readers. This carries us back beyond his time. 
 
 ^ "It is not possible that the gospels can be either more or fewer in 
 number than they are. For since there are four zones of the world in 
 which we live, and four principal winds, while the church is scattered 
 throughout all the world, and the pillar and ground of the church is the 
 gospel and , the spirit of life, it is iitting that she should have four pillars, 
 breathiilg out immortality on every side, and vivifying men afresh." Adv. 
 Haer. , iii. 9, 8. 
 
 ' "Quibus tamen interfuit et ita posuit," a remark coming just before the 
 mention of St. Luke's gospel, that seems clearly to point to St. Peter as one 
 who had taken part in the events recorded, and so to the gospel commonly 
 held to be derived from his teaching. 
 
 ^ The word Diatessaron may be taken in its literal translation, "by 
 means of four, " as meaning that which is constructed out of four documents ; 
 but more probably it just means "a Harmony," being derived from the 
 idea of the four parts in music. 
 
282 BIBLICAL INTRODUCTION 
 
 portant literary discoveries of the century. It was well known that Tatian 
 the Assyrian, a disciple of Justin Martyr, had written a Harmony of the 
 gospels — either in Greek or Syriac, we do not know which — ;for several 
 allusions tp it were found in ecclesiastical writers, ' but the work itself had 
 been lost sight of till it was brought to light in our own day. Dionysius- 
 Bar-Salibi \ob. 1207) mentions that Ephraem the Syrian, a .deacon of 
 Edessa, wrote a commentary on Tatian's Diatessaron. An Armeniai) 
 version of that commentary was published by the monks of St. \sxixco, near 
 Venice, out of which Zahn endeavoured to reconstruct the original text. 
 Meanwhile an Arabic MS. of the Diatessaron itself was lying unnoticed 
 in the Vatican library. The publication of Zahn's work led Agostino 
 Ciasca, one of the guild of writers at the Vatican, to turn his attention to 
 the subject. From the Visitor Apostolic of the Catholic Copts he obtained 
 another Arabic MS., and this he published in the year 1888, accompanied 
 with a Latin translation. The Arabic has since been translated into 
 English.'^ The author of Supernatural Religion had maintained that ,the 
 Diatessaron was too ancient to have been constructed out of our gospels ; 
 but now we have it before us we see that most certainly this was the case. 
 It begins with the prologue from John, aiid as it proceeds with the narra- 
 tive it pieces together extracts from each of the four gospels. It is to be 
 observed that it omits our Lord's genealogies, which we have in Matthew 
 and Luke, probably from a gnostic objection to allow any human relation- 
 ship.' 
 
 Thus bgfore the end of the second century we see our 
 gospels accepted in Rome (the Muratorian Fragment), in Gaul, 
 and also in Asia Minor (Irenseus), in Africa (TertuUian 
 and the Old Latin version), in Egypt (Clement), in Syria 
 (Tatian, the Diatessaron, and the Syriac versions). Still more 
 ancient testimony is forthcoming, though it becomes less 
 distinct as we push the inquiry further back to times of 
 comparative obscurity. There is good reason to believe that 
 Justin Martyr used the gospels we have in our N.T. under ihe 
 title of Memoirs of the Aj>ostles. Writing to the Roman 
 Senate, which knew nothing of the Christian books, and re- 
 porting a discussion with a Jew, he naturally uses a descriptive 
 periphrasis, but, as we have seen, he states that they were 
 called gospels. Nearly all the many sayings and incidents 
 
 ' Tke Doctrine of Addai, xxxv, 15-17 ; EnsEBius, H.E., iv. 29, 
 Epiphanius, Haer., xlvi. i, Theodoret, Haer., i. 20, etc 
 
 2 The Earliest Life of Christ, etc., by Rev. Hamlyn Hill, whose 
 translation from the Latin was collated with the Arabic by Dr. G. 
 Buchanan Gray, of Mansfield College. 
 
 ° Haknack is of opinion not only that the Diatessaron presupposes 
 our gospels, but that it bears traces of having been based on a still earlier 
 harmony of them. — Chronologic, p. 435 (2). 
 
THE GOSPELS 283 
 
 from the life and teaching of Christ which he mentions are to 
 be found in our gospels, and when he gives any that are not in 
 our gospels he does not attribute these to the Memoirs. 
 
 The following are Justin's statements not found in our gospels : — That 
 Jesus was born in a cave; that the Magi came from Arabia; that Herod 
 killed all the children in Bethlehem; that Jesus made ploughs and yokes; 
 that at His baptism a fire was kindled in the Jordan, and a voice then said, 
 " Thou art my son, this day have I begotten thee." ^ 
 
 Now it has been objected that Justin's quotations do not verbally 
 coincide with corresponding passages in our gospels. But then his quota- 
 tions from the LXX. are equally loose, and there we know what authority 
 he is following. In the case of the O.T. he combines two or three passages 
 in a single paragraph, and he quotes the same passage twice with different 
 variations from the original on each occasion. ^ Evidently then he quotes 
 from memory, and without, taking care to be verbally accurate. This 
 was the custom with citations made in the primitive ages before the N.T, 
 books had been reckoned of canonical rank, and while tradition was 
 still fresh enough to allow literature not to be regarded as of para- 
 mount importance. Moreover, it is to be observed that the discovery of 
 the Diatessaron removes all question as to Justin's use of our gospels, for 
 since Tatian was a disciple of Justin's, it is inconceivable that he should 
 have worked on quite different gospels from those of his teacher, while 
 each held the gospels he used to be the books of primary importance. 
 
 Then Papias knew at least Mark and a Hebrew Matthew.* 
 The evidence of the Apostolic Fathers is more difficult to 
 disentangle. None of them name the gospels or cite them 
 with verbal exactness. It has been suggested that "The 
 Shepherd of Hermas " abounds in references to the four 
 gospels,* but the mystical imagery of that book is too obscure 
 for this to be maintained with assurance. In the " Epistle of 
 Barnabas" there are several passages that coincide more or less 
 closely with Matthew, and once the author uses the technical 
 expression for inspired Scripture "it is written" for a saying 
 that we have in Matthew : " As it is written, many are called, 
 
 ^ This last statement is in the MS. D of Luke. Possibly Justin had a 
 similar text. The other statements may have come down in tradition ; or 
 they may have been found in some other gospel, and if so, most likely in 
 the gospel according to the Hebrews. 
 
 ^ It has been pointed out that some of his O.T. quotations are more 
 accurate. These are firom the Psalms, the exact words of which are better 
 known owing to the use of them in public worship. 
 
 ' EnsEBius, H.E., iii. 39. To be considered later with reference to 
 e£^ch of these gospels. 
 
 * Taylor, The Witness of Hermas to the Gospels. 
 
284 BIBLICAL INTP.ODUCTION 
 
 but few are chosen." (Barnabas iv. 14. cf. Matthew xxii. 14.) 
 
 Clement R. gives several of our Lord's sayings which come 
 
 very near to Matthew— nearer than to Luke, but not verbally 
 
 coinciding. Resch has suggested that he had one of the 
 
 sources of our gospels, while Dr. Sanday inclines to regard 
 
 the quotations as drawn from some notes for catechumens, 
 
 based on our gospels or on Matthew's collection of the sayings 
 
 of Christ. 
 
 Clement writes: "Most of all remembering the words of the Lord 
 Jesus which He spake, teaching forbearance and longsuffering : for thus 
 He spake ; Have mercy, that ye may receive mercy : forgive, that it may 
 be forgiven to you. As ye do, so sliall it be done to you. As ye give, so 
 shall it be given unto you. As ye judge, so shall ye be judged. As ye 
 shew kindness, so shall kindness be shewed unto you. With what measure 
 ye mete, it shall be measured withal to you." (Clement R., i Corinthians 
 xiii.) It is evident that this is not an exact quotation from Matthew, 
 though it comes nearest to that gospel. In particularit is to be observed 
 that while Clement gives us the two sayings of Matthew vii. I, "Judge 
 not, that ye be not judged: and with what measure ye mete, it shall be 
 -measured unto .yoii," he has the first in a different form : "As ye judge, 
 so shall ye be judged," and he inserts another saying between this and the 
 second one in Matthew, viz., "As ye shew kindness, so shall kindness be 
 shewed unto you." The/o^w of the concluding sayings seems to echo the 
 form in St. Luke's version (vi. 36-38). We know that Clement quotes loosely 
 from memory, because this is his habit with the O.T.' Possibly, therefore, 
 he does so here with Matthew, and perhaps also Luke. But we cannot 
 cite him with assurance as a witness tp those gospels, as it is quite jjossible 
 that he is using some other document containing the sayings of Christ. 
 
 The case of the DidacM is similar. Five times the author 
 quotes sayings of Christ as given "in the gospel," but in his 
 priinitive age that phrase was not used for any book, and it 
 must mean the preaching of the glad tidings. These sayings 
 can all be traced to Matthew and Luke.^ 
 
 The Lord's prayer is given almost verbally as in Matthew ^ 
 (Didach} viii. 2). 
 
 The saying, "Give not that which is holy unto the dogs" 
 
 ' e.g., compare Clement, i Cor. iii. i withDeut. xxxii. 15 ; i Cor.vK\\. 2 
 with Ezekiel xxxiii. II. I Cor. xxix. 2, 3 seems to be a combination of 
 Numb, xviii. 27, Deut. iv. 34, and 2 Chron. xxxi. 14. 
 
 ^ Harnack is decidedly of opinion thait the author used both Matt, 
 and Luke. Chronologie, p. 435. 
 
 ' The only variations are iv tQ oipa,v$ for (y rats oipavoh, IkBira for 
 iXOiru, d.tj>LeiJ,ep for A^^Kaficv, t^v <i0eiX^v for ri dtpeiK-^fiara, and in the 
 doxology, which is later than the original text of Matthew. 
 
MATTHEW Z&5 
 
 {Didachl ix. 5) agrees verbally with Matthew vii. 6. Still 
 these are utterances of Christ that might well be kept in their 
 exact form in other lists of Logia. There is one saying which 
 is not to be found in any of our gospels, viz., " It hath been 
 also said concerning this matter, Let thine alms drop like 
 sweat into thy hands, so long as thou knowest not to whom 
 thou givest." {Didachi i. 6.) On the whole we may conclude 
 that these allusions to sayings of Christ in the ApostoUc Fathers 
 render it highly probable that Matthew, and also, though less 
 assuredly, Luke, were used by them, and that even if that were 
 not the case, the collections of sayings quoted are seen to be 
 so near to our gospels as to be themselves partial confirma- 
 tions of the historicity of those documents. 
 
 2. Matthew. 
 
 a. The Apostle Matthew. — This apostle, also known as 
 Levi the son of Alphseus,! was the collector of customs 
 at Capernaum, whom Jesus called as he sat at his work by 
 the entrance to the city, and who made a feast in honour of 
 our Lord, to which he invited his fellow tax-collectors in the 
 neighbourhood. Forsaking his lucrative office to follow 
 Christ, he became one of the Twelve, but he did not 
 emerge into sufficient distinctive activity during our Lord's 
 lifetime to have any further doings of his noted down in 
 the gospels. According to a late tradition he preached for 
 fifteen years in Judsea, and then ministered in Parthia or 
 Ethiopia.^ The interesting part of this tradition is the 
 connection of his name with a ministry to the Jews. The 
 early references to his literary work point in that direction. 
 
 b. St.. Matthew's Hebrew Work. — It is repeatedly asserted by 
 early Church writers that Matthew wrote his gospel in Hebrew. 
 But the earliest reference to his work — that of Papias-r- 
 describes it as Logia, a word which seems to indicate sacred 
 sayings, "oracles," rather than historical narratives. That 
 such a work may have contained connecting historical matter 
 
 ' Compare Mark ii. 14 and Luke v. 27 with Matt. ix. 9. 
 " See EusBBius, H.E., iii, 24 ; Socrates, H.E., i. 19. 
 
286 BIBLICAL INTRODUCTION 
 
 is very probable, and there is reason to believe that this was 
 
 the case with St. Matthew's book. Still the reference to the 
 
 Sebrew language and the use of the title Logia furnish two 
 
 reasons for supposing that Papias cannot be referring to our 
 
 gospel, and that we have here some earlier work consisting 
 
 chiefly of sayings of Christ.^ 
 
 Papias writes: "Matthew then composed the Logia in the Hebrew 
 tongue, and every one translated them as he was able." ' His stetement 
 of the translating in the past tense — " every one translated" — seems to 
 suggest that this troublesome process with its varying results was no 
 longer necessary, because the work was now rendered in Greek. 
 Irenifius writes: "Matthew among the Hebrews published a gospel 
 in their own language." (Adv. Haer.,\\\. I.) Origen says in his account 
 of the gospels: "The first was written by Matthew, once a publican, 
 afterwards an apostle of the Lord, and delivered to the Jewish beUevers 
 composed in the Hebrew language."' (Eusebius, H.E., vi. 25.) Eusebius 
 himself tells us that " Matthew having first preached to the Hebrews, 
 when he was about to go to other people, delivered to them in their. own 
 language the gospel according to him." {H.E., iii. 24.) Lastly we have 
 Jerome writing : ' ' Matthew, also called Levi, who from being a publican 
 became an apostle, first wrote a gospel of Christ in Judssa and in Hebrew 
 letters and words [Uteris verbisque) for the benefit of those of the circum- 
 cision who beUeved. Who afterwards translated it into Greek is not quite 
 certain." (De Vir. III. , 3.) He adds that he himself had seen it, and that 
 the Nazarenes who had a , copy of the original in the library of Pamphilus 
 at Csesarea allowed hini to transcribe it. He had previously stated that 
 when at Beroea he had translated the gospel according to the Hebrews 
 which the Nazarenes and Ebionites used into Greek and Latin. Further, 
 both Eusebius and Jerome state that Pantsenus found in India the gospel of 
 Matthew which was written in India, and Jerome adds that Pantsenus 
 brought it to Alexandria. 
 
 The case is very complicated ; but the following facts seem 
 to come out of it : (i) It is impossible to resist the wide- 
 
 } Dr, Lightfoot urged that the word Logia could be used for the gospel, 
 because it stands for the O.T. Scriptures. But when it is so used, it can 
 best be understood as indicating the Divine utterances in the Law or 
 through the Prophets, rather than the very books of the O.T. (See 
 Acts vii. 38 ; Rom. iii. 2.) So it could be applied to inspired Chris- 
 tian teaching in Heb. v. 12, and even to the utterances of Christian 
 prophets in i. Peter iv. II. It is most improbable that so early as 
 Papias it would be applied to a historical .record. Greek writers use the 
 word for the Pagan and Sibylline oracles. In the LXX. it is the trans- 
 lation of tB'n, the High Priest's breastplate, with a reference to its use in 
 divination. 
 
 ^ MoT^aios fiiv o^v "E^paidi. Sia\iKT<ji rd, \6yia trvveypA^j/aTO. 'H/J/tiifew* ■ 
 S'airi, lis ^v Svmrbs Ikoo-tos. — Eusebius, H.B,, iii. 39. 
 
 ' ypililHiiny 'E/SpaiVois avvTerayiiiivoy. 
 
MATTHEW #87 
 
 spread and quite uncontradicted statements that Matthew 
 wrote in Hebrew — this may be the sacred language, or the 
 writers may mean the current language of Palestine, Aramaic. 
 (2) Most of these writers appear to identify Matthew's work 
 with the original of our Matthew. (3) None of them assert 
 that they saw the Hebrew gospel to which they refer except 
 Jerome, and he adds that he translated it into Greek and 
 Latin. But this implies that it could not have been the 
 original of our Matthew, since the Greek Matthew and its 
 Latin versions were already familiar to Jerome. Moreover, 
 extracts from the gospel according to the Hebrews have 
 been preserved, and these are manifestly not taken from 
 our Matthew ; ^ most Of them have a late and apocryphal 
 character. It looks as though there were a double confusion 
 here. First Papias' statement is assumed to apply to our 
 Matthew. Then the well-known gospel according to the 
 Hebrews is also assumed to be the Logia to which Papias 
 referred. Its late apocryphal character, however, proves that 
 this cannot be the case. In point of fact we have three 
 works : (i) Papias' Logia, which is St. Matthew's real Hebrew 
 work ; (2) our Greek Matthew ; (3) the gospel according to 
 the Hebrews. This last was the book which Jerome saw 
 and translated, and which came in course of time to be 
 mistaken for St. Matthew's Logia, though it was a less reliable 
 worL 
 
 c. Authorship and Composition. — Now the question arises, 
 what is the relation of the first two of these works to one 
 another ? Is our Matthew simply a translation of the Logia 
 to which Papias referred? That appears to have been 
 assumed in the early Church; but it cannot be the case. 
 For one thing, a complete gospel, with its account of the 
 birth, life, death, and resurrection of Christ, would scarcely 
 have such a title. But the conclusive objection is that the 
 work is manifestly not a translation from the Hebrew, but 
 a work originally composed in Greek. The style and con- 
 
 ' See Resch, Agrapha, pp. 322-342. 
 
288 BIBLICAL INTRODUCTION 
 
 struction demand that verdict. In particular, quotations from 
 
 the O.T. are taken from the LXX. 
 
 This is not the case universally. Those quotations which Matthew has 
 in common with one or both of the other synoptics are taken from the 
 LXX.; but those which are found only in Matthew appear to be translated 
 direct froin the Hebrew, a fact which points to a literary connection 
 between the gospels, to be considered in the next chapter. But all the 
 proofs of that connection, which is in Greek, indicate that our Matthew is 
 not a translation from Hebrew, especially if, as will appear later, Matthew 
 is in part founded on Mark, certainly from the first a Greek book. 
 
 On the other hand, the large amount of space devoted to 
 the teachings of Jesus in Matthew shows that this subject 
 was especially important in the estimation of the author. 
 The probability is that the source from which he drew his 
 information concerning it was no other than the Logia. If 
 our Matthew was largely dependent on that work, absorbing 
 perhaps the greater part of it, this gospel would naturally 
 come to be closely associated with St. Matthew's Hebrew com- 
 pilation in the minds of its readers. It is possible to hold 
 that Matthew himself wrote the second book, in the Greek, 
 as well as the Hebrew Logia. But if we come to see in 
 our study of the synoptic problem that Mark was used as 
 the groundwork of the gospel, this hypothesis is not probable. 
 We cannot suppose that Matthew, an apostle and an eye- 
 witness, would resort to Mark, whose information was derived 
 second-hand. Still St. Matthew's name came to be naturally 
 attached to the gospel, since it contains so much of his 
 writing in the reports of our Lord's discourses — its most im- 
 portant contents. 
 
 d. Date and Place of Origin. — It has been argued that this 
 gospel was written subsequently to the destruction of Jeru- 
 salem (a.d. 70) on the ground that it contains references to 
 that event (e.g., xxii. 7), and also predictions of the coming of 
 the Son of Man in the generation then living (x. 23, xvi. 28). 
 But these are all sayings of Christ, and the argument goes on 
 the assumption that our Lord could not have foreseen or fore- 
 told the events predicted in them. Now later versions of 
 Christ's teaching may indicate a consciousness of subsequent 
 events on the part of the writers and editors. But the lan^ 
 
MATTHEW 289 
 
 guage in Matthew is quite general. A comparison with Luke 
 helps us here, (i) The eschatological discourse in Matthew 
 contains a veiled allusion to an approaching desecration de- 
 scribed in words from' Daniel as " the abomination of desola- 
 tion," with a parenthetic remark, " Let him that readeth 
 understand." 1 This points to a time before the event had 
 made the meaning clear, but when hints were already to be 
 seen, i.e., at the time of the outbreak of the war. That a 
 more distinct statement was natural after the siege of Jeru' 
 salem is evident from St. Luke's version of the discourse.^ 
 (2) The blending of the second coming of Christ with the 
 destruction of Jerusalem also points to the earlier time. 
 Accordingly we are led to a date a little before a.d. 70. We 
 have no indication of the place where the gospel was written, 
 except that it was not written in Palestine, which it describes 
 as "that land "8 (ix. 26, 31). The author is writing for Greek- 
 speaking Jews, who need the interpretation of Hebrew words. 
 Thus he interprets "Imma:nuel" (i. 23), "Golgotha" (xxvii. 
 33), and the words of Christ's prayer (xxvii. 46). 
 
 e. Contents. ; 
 
 (i) Preparation, i. — iv. 11. ■ 
 
 i. i-i 7, Genealogy from Abraham. :, 
 
 18-25, Announcement concerning Jesus to Joseph. 
 
 ii. 1-12, The birth of Jesus and the' visit of the Magi. . 
 
 13-23, Flight into Egypt, massacre of the Bethlehem 
 infants, and settlement in Nazkreth. ,. ;, 
 
 iii. 1-12, The work of John the Baptist. 
 
 13-17, The baptisrri of Jesus. 
 
 iv. i-i r. The temptation. 
 
 (2) The Beginning of the Ministry, iv. 12-25. 
 
 12-25, The commencement of our Lord's ministry in Galilee; 
 the call of the four fishermen ; Jesus preaching and healing. 
 
 ^ This is just the same in Mark xiii. 14, showing that one gospel used the 
 other, or that they had a, common source. ^ ggg ^^j^g j^j^j, ^q^ Never- 
 
 theless inost recent scholars date it after a.d. 70. Some lime seems to 
 be required for the development of its didactic treatiherit of the Logia as 
 though for use among catechumens; e.g., compare the. more elaborate 
 explanatory Beatitudes of Matt. v. 3-12 with the simpler and probably 
 earlier forms m Luke vi. 20-23. But it coiitd ^Ow well be dated later 
 than the following decade, » ij yij iKelv-rj. Weiss suggests Ephesus, 
 
290 BIBLICAL INTRODUCTION 
 
 (3) The Sermon on the Mount, v.-vii. 
 V. 1, 2, Introductory description. 
 3-1 2, The Beatitudes. 
 
 13-16, The disciples as salt and light. 
 
 17-20, Jesus fulfiling the law, and expecting higher righteous- 
 ness than that of the scribes and Pharisees. 
 
 21-48, The new teaching concerning murder and hatred, 
 adultery and lust, swearing, revenge. 
 
 vi. 1-18, Against hypocrisy in almsgiving; in prayer— 
 with the opposite example of the Lord's Prayer; in 
 fasting. 
 
 19-34, Against the worldhness of Mammon worship, and 
 anxiety for material things ; Nature teaching tirust in God; 
 the call to seek first His kingdom. 
 
 vii. i-s, Judging and censoriousness forbidden, 
 
 6, Discrimination to be observed in communicating the 
 treasures of the kingdom. 
 
 7-12, Encouragements to prayer. 
 
 13, 14, The two ways. 
 
 15-23, False prophets, and how to detect them. 
 
 24-29, The two houses ; and the effect of the discourse on 
 the people. 
 
 (4) The Ministry at Capernaum and by the Lake, viii,-xiv, 
 viii.; 1-4, Cleansing of a leper. 
 
 5-13, Cure of the servant of a centurion at Capernaum. 
 
 14-17, Cure of Peter's wife's mother. 
 
 18-22, Two would-be disciples discouraged. , 
 
 23-27, The storm calmed. 
 
 28-34, The two Gadarene demoniacs cured, and the herd 
 of swine perishing in the sea. 
 
 An instance of Matthew's couples ; Mark has one demoniac (v. 2). 
 
 ix. 1-8, Cure of the sick of the palsy. 
 
 9, Call of Matthew from the place of toll. 
 
 10-13, Christ sitting at table with publicans and sinners. 
 
 14-17,: Ch^rist's disciples accused of not fasting; His de; 
 fence of them. 
 
 18-26, The cure of the woman who touched Jesus' garment, 
 
::<;;i MATTHEW I T: ;f ^291 
 
 and the raising to life of the daughter of the ruler of the 
 synagogue. 
 
 27-31, Two Wind men receive their sight.' 
 
 32-34, A dumb man cured ; Jesus accused of working in 
 league with the prince of the demons. , 
 
 35-x. I, Jesus' cornpassion for jhe multitude. 
 
 X. 2-xi. I, The twelve apostles ; and the charge to them. 
 
 xi. 2-19, Opinions about John and Jesus. 
 
 20-24, , Lament overChorazin, Bethsaida, and Capernaum. 
 
 25-30, Thanksgiving for the revelation to babes, and invita^ 
 tion to the heavy-laden. , ■: ■ ■, 
 
 Note the peculiar Johannine style h,ere. 
 
 xii. 1-8, The disciples pliicking ears of corn on the Sabbath, 
 and Christ's defence of them. , , ^ 
 
 9-21, Jesus curing the man with the withered hand on .the 
 Sabbath day; His mission of mercy predicted by Isaiah. 
 
 22-37, Cure of a blind and dumb demoniac; the charge of 
 Satanic influence ; blasphemy against the Spirit. ■ -, 
 
 38-42, Seeking after'a sign. 
 
 43-45, The house swept and garnished. 
 
 46-50, Who are Christ's mother and His brethren ? 
 
 xiii. 1-52, A group of parables about the kingdom^the 
 sower, the tares, the mustard seed, leaven, the treasure hid in 
 a field, the pearl of great price, the net ; concluding with the 
 well-furnished scribe. ' ' 
 
 53-58, Jesus in His own country. 
 
 xiv. 1-12, The murder of John the Baptist. 
 
 13-21, The feeding of the five thousand. ,^ ' 
 
 22-33,- Christ and Peter walking on the sea/ 
 
 34-36, Heahng the sick in Gennesaret. 
 
 (5) Retirement to Remote Districts and more Private Ministry, 
 xv.-xviii. 
 
 XV. 1-20, Objection to the disciples npt washing cere- 
 moniously ; answered by Christ. 
 
 21-28, The Canaanite woman, 
 
 29-39, The feeding of the four thousand. , 
 
 : Many take this as another version of the feeding of the S,Qoo (Schleiei- 
 roacher, Neander, Wendt, Weiss, IJeyschlag, Holtzmahii, &c.). 
 
202 BIBLICAL INTRODUCTION 
 
 xvi. I- 1 2, The SaddUcees seeking a sign; leaven of the 
 Pharisees and Sadducees. 
 
 13-28, Peter's confession of Christ, and His first prediction 
 of His death. 
 
 xvii. 1-13, The transfiguration. 
 
 14-23, The lunatic boy ; Christ's second piediction of His 
 betrayal arid death. 
 
 24-27, The shekel in the fish's mouth. 
 
 xviii. 1-14, On the treatment of children, and Christ saving 
 the lost sheep. 
 
 15-35, Treatment of an offending brother; the limits of 
 forgiveness and the parable; of the wicked servant. 
 
 (6) Jesus east of the Jordan, xix., xx. 
 xix. 1-12, Jesus forbidding divorce. 
 13-15, Jesus blessing children. 
 
 16-22, The young man who refused to give up all for Christ. 
 
 23-xx. 16, The difficulty of a rich man entering the king- 
 dom ; and the parable of the labourers. 
 
 17-28, Christ's third prediction of His death, followed by 
 the request of the mother of Zebedee's children. 
 
 29-34, The two blind men of Jericho. 
 
 Another of Matthew's doublets. Cf. Mark x. 46 ; Luke xviii. 35. 
 
 (7) The Last Days in Jerusalem, xxi.-xxv. 
 
 xxi. 1-17, The triumphant entry; the cleansing of the temple. 
 
 18-22, The withered fig-tree and the power of faith. ■ 
 
 23-32) Christ challenged for His authority.; His reply 
 challenge. 
 
 33-46, The parable of the vineyard. 
 
 xxii. I -1 4, The marriage feast. 
 
 I S-46, Questions to entrap Christ : (a) the Pharisees' and 
 the Herodians' question on the lawfulness of paying tribute 
 to Caesar; (j8) the Sadducees' question on marriage and the 
 future life ; (y) the lawyer's question on the commandments ; 
 (S) Christ's question about David's son. 
 
 xxiii. 1-12, On not seeking the chief places. 
 
 13-36, Denunciation of the Scribes and Pharisees. 
 
 37-39, Lament over Jerusalem. 
 
 xxiv., Apocalyptic prediction of the coming woes, and warn- 
 ings to escape. 
 
MATTHEW * 293 
 
 XXV., Parables of judgment — the ten virgins; the talents; 
 the sheep and the goats. 
 
 (8) The Passion, Death, and Resurrection of Jesus, xxvi.-xxviii. 
 
 xxvi. 1-5, Decision of the council about the arrest of Jesus. 
 
 6-13, The woman with the cruse of ointment. 
 
 14-16, Judas' bargain to betray Christ for money. 
 
 17-3S) The Passover, the indication of the traitor, the 
 Lord's Supper, and the warning of Peter's denial. 
 
 36-56, Jesus in Gethsemane, betrayed and arrested. 
 
 57-68, The trial before Caiaphas. 
 
 69-75, Peter's denial of Christ. 
 
 xxvii. I, 2, Jesus delivered to Pilate. 
 
 3-10, Judas' repentance and suicide. 
 
 1 1-3 1, Jesus tried by Pilate ; the release of Barabbas ; Jesus 
 mocked. 
 
 32-56, The crucifixion and death of Jesus. 
 
 57-61, Joseph of Arimathsea and the burial of Jesus. 
 
 62-66, Pilate grants a guard for the tomb. 
 
 xxviii. T-io, The women at the sepulchre; the angel; Jesus 
 meeting them. 
 
 11-15, The guard bribed to keep silence. 
 
 16-20, Jesus meeting the eleven in Galilee; His com- 
 mission to them to evangelise the world. 
 
 The originality of the Trinitarian baptismal formula (xxviii. 19) is 
 open to question, because (i) it is without parallel in the teachings of 
 Jesus ; (2) even St. Paul's most Trinitarian formula (2 Cor. xiii. 14) is 
 less advanced ; (3) all other references to Christian baptism in the N.T. 
 give the name of Christ only, ndt the Three Persons of the Trinity ; 
 (4) this clause is omitted in all Eusebius's quotations of the passage 
 earlier than the Council of Nicffia. These facts throw doubt on it, 
 although it has all the best MSS. authority and its essential ideas are 
 not beyond other teachings of Jesus in the synoptics.' 
 
 f. Characteristics, — This gospel is more Hebraistic than the 
 
 other synoptics : (i) In language the Greek follows Hebrew 
 
 idioms more closely. Thus here we have the expression "the 
 
 kingdom of heaven," while not only in the other gospels, 
 
 but everywhere else in the N.T. we read "the kingdom of 
 
 God," an instance of the Jewish reluctance to use the name 
 
 of God. Quotations frpm the O.T., not found in the parallel 
 
 gospels, are made direct from the Hebrew, not taken from the 
 
 LXX. (2) The standpoint of the writer and the atmosphere 
 
 ' See CoNYBEARE, Zeilschrift N. T., etc., 1901, p. 275 flf. 
 
294 BIBLICAL INtRObUCTION 
 
 of his ideas are largely Jewish. While St. Luke traces the 
 genealogy of Christ back to Adam, in our gospel it com- 
 mentes with Abraham ; and the names are arranged in three 
 groups of fourteen {i.e., 3 of twice 7 — both sacred numbers in- 
 the O.T.), an arrangement not adopted in Luke. Then our 
 Lord's most explicit statements on the authority of the Law 
 appear only in this gospel. It is here only that We read "I 
 did not come to destroy the Law, but to fulfil it" (Matthew v. 
 17^), followed by a severe condemriation of anyone who 
 breaks the smallest of the commandments. Matthew only 
 gives in the commission to the Twelve the direction,," Go not 
 into any way of the Gentiles, and enter not iixtoany city of the 
 Samaritans: but go rather to the lost sheep of the house of 
 Israel" (x. 6, 7); in the conversation with the Canaanite^ 
 woman, the sentence, " I was not sent but unto the* lost sheep 
 of the house of Israel" (xv. 24); and after our Lord's descrip- 
 tion of the scribes ^nd Pharisees as sitting in the seat of 
 Moses, the remarkable direction, " All things therefore 
 whatsoever they bid you, these do and observe." (xxiii. 3.) 
 Jerusalem is the holy city (iv. 5, xxvii. 53). Lastly the 
 author frequently quotes the O.T., especially prophecies, the 
 fulfilment of which he sees in Christ. ' 
 
 On the other hand it is far from the standpoint of the 
 extreme Judaisers, St. Paul's opponents, :,«'.£., the party of 
 Jamesj for it has strong words in condemnation of the Jews, 
 and definite commendations of the Gentiles. Matthew ;alone 
 gives the account of the hbmage of the Gentiles in the visit 
 of the Magi to the infant Christ (ii. 1-12). In this gospel we 
 have warm praise of a Roman centurion's faith, with the com- 
 ment, " Verily I say unto you, 1 have not found so, great faith, 
 no, not in Israel. ' And I say unto you, that many shall come 
 from the east and the west, and shall sit down with Abraham, 
 and Isaac, and Jacob, in the kingdom of heaven : but the sons 
 of the kingdom ^ shall be cast forth into the outer .darkhesSi 
 
 '"Luke xvi. 17'is parallel to what follows in Matt., but much briefer. 
 ' A more Hebraistic designation thaii Mark's " Syro-Phoenician." 
 ■■' Note' the Hebraism dfji^riOT — "sons of the kingdow." ■; 
 
MARK « 295 
 
 etc." (viii. 10-12.) Matthew gives the parable of the vine- 
 yard with the concluding words, "Therefore say I unto you, 
 the kingdom of God shall be taken away from you, and shall 
 be given to a nation bringing forth the fruits thereof" (xxi. 43); 
 and he ends his gospel with the words of the great commission 
 to " Make disciples of all the nations." (xxviii. 19, 20.) • 
 
 Pfleiderer holds these two positions to be absolutely contradictory, and 
 he would explain the phenomena on the hypothesis that the gospel 
 was originally a strongly Jewish writing, and that Pauline and anti- 
 Jewish ideas were brought into it' by the insertion of certain sentences 
 later when it fell into the hands of some editor of the opposite school 
 to that of its author.^ But this is to ignore the purposely paradoxical 
 methods of Christ's preaching. There is no real contradiction between 
 the two sets of sayings. Each represents a phase in our Lord's teaching. 
 His immediate mission was to Israel, and so was that of the Twelve ; He 
 claimed the spirit of the law, and developed it. But it is a denial of the 
 N.T. portrait of Christ to assert that the world-wide aims of the gospel 
 were not in the mind of its Founder. 
 
 3. Mark. 
 
 a. St Mark the Evangelist. — John Mark was the son of 
 one of the N.T. Marys — probably a woman of some position, 
 as the Jerusalem Church met in her house (Acts xii. 12)— 
 and a nephew of Barnabas (Colossians iv. 10.) It has 
 been suggested that he was the young man whose presence 
 in the garden he mentions so curiously (Mark xiv. 51, 52) ; 
 but, as far as we know, he was not a personal follower of 
 our Lord. Still he was one of the early Christians at 
 Jerusalem, for he was there during the famine (a.d. 45-6); 
 and Barnabas, who came up to the city with Saul carrying 
 presents from Antioch, took him to the Syrian capital on 
 the return journey. He accompanied these two on what 
 is called St. Paul's "First Missionary Journey,", but left 
 them at Perga, in Pamphylia, when the apostle determined 
 to extend it beyond the Taurus Mountains. Since St. Paul 
 was annoyed at this action — though, as Professor Ramsay 
 shows, it was not altogether unreasonable^ — and refused to 
 have him on the next journey, Barnabas took him to. his 
 
 ' Urchristenthum, pp. 540; 541. 
 ' St. Paul the Traveller, p. 90, 
 
296 BIBLICAL INTRODUCTION 
 
 own home in Cyprus (xv. 39). We have no account of 
 his subsequent movements. According to tradition .he was 
 the founder of the church at Alexandria.^ His evangelistic 
 work in Egypt may have occupied the interval between 
 A.D. 50 and A.D. 62. Near the latter date we find him 
 with St. Paul at Rome (Colossians iy. 10), a fact showing the 
 apostle to be reconciled to him, and honoured as a " fellow 
 worker.'' (Philemon 24.) In i Peter he appears as an intirnate 
 disciple of St. Peter, for that apostle calls him " My son " 
 (v. 13). 
 
 b. Mark and Peter. — It has been common to treat the 
 second gospel as virtually Peter's. The reason for doing so 
 is that several writers of very early dates associate the name 
 of Peter with Mark in connection with it, telling us that 
 Mark wrote what he had heard Peter teach. The chief 
 witness is Papias, who gives us his information on older 
 authority, ascribing it to the elders from whom he had 
 learnt. Other authorities are Irenseus, Clement of Alexan- 
 dria, Tertullian, and Origen. Justin Martyr refers to the 
 " Memoirs of Peter " when giving a statement found in Mark 
 iii. 17.^ 
 
 Papias writes: "And the Elder said this also: Mark, having become 
 the interpreter {epfiTiyem-^s) of Peter, wrote down accurately everything 
 that he remembered, without, however, recording in order {oi nivToi rA^a) 
 what was either said or done by Christ. For neither did he hear the 
 Lord, nor did he follow Him ; but afterwards, as I said, ~he attended 
 Peter, who adapted his instructions to the needs of his hearers, but 
 had no design of giving a connected account of the Lord's words (X/r/i^r)' 
 So then Mark made no mistake, while he thus wrote down some things as 
 he remembered them ; for he made it his own care not to omit anything 
 that he heard, or to set down aiiy false statement therein." (Eusebius, 
 H.E., iii. 39. ) One or two questions arise here : ( i ) In what sense 
 was Mark an inUrpnler of Peter ? Possibly the reference is simply 
 to his work as a catechist explaining the discourses to the hearers. But 
 the usual sense of the word would point to linguistic interpretation. This 
 is how it is employed by St. Paul when referring to the unknown tpngues. 
 (i Corinthians xiv. 28.) Therefore the meaning may be that Mark, who 
 had Hellenistic connections, e.g. with Barnabas, translated Peter's Aramaic 
 utterances into Greek.' (2) What does, Papias mean by saying that 
 
 1 EusKBros, H.E., ii. l6. " Tryph. 106. 
 
 ' Not lyiUin ; Greek would be used for religious instruction at Rome in 
 these time?. See Swete, St. Mark, xijt, xx. 
 
MARK ^97 
 
 the, gospel was "not in order"? This may refer to a break with 
 chronology, and Lightfoot suggested that Papias had in mind John's 
 order, which is different in many respects, from Mark's.' But it may 
 be that Papias meant that this gospel was not a systematic history, not 
 a complete biography, but a book, the contents of which were selected 
 with a view to the profit of the readers.^ 
 
 Irenaeus writes : " Matthew also issued a written gospel among the 
 Hebrews in their own dialect, while Peter and Paul were preaching at 
 Rome, and laying foundations of the church. After their departure {(^odov), 
 Mark, the disciple and interpreter of Peter, delivered to us in writing 
 the things that had been preached by Peter (rd, iwh IHrpov KTipv(r<r6fieva)," 
 {Adv. ffaer.f iii. i.) Possibly Irenseus is dependent on Papias ; but he adds 
 to what we have from Papias the statement that the gospel was written 
 after the death of Peter and Paul, and he more definitely fixes the form of 
 the source as what Peter preached. 
 
 Of Cltiment of Alexandria, Eusebius says : " In the same books 
 Clement has given a tradition concerning the order of the gospels 
 which he had received from the presbyters of old [AviicaBev), and which 
 is to this effect : He says that the gospels containing the genealogies 
 were written first ; that the occasion of writing the gospel according to 
 Mark was this : Peter having publicly preached the word at Rome, 
 and having spoken the gospel by the Spirit, many present exhorted Mark 
 to write the things which had been spoken since he had long accompanied 
 Peter, and remembered what he had said ; and that when he had composed 
 the gospel, he delivered it to them who had asked it of him. Which 
 when Peter knew, he neither forbad nor encouraged it." (Eusebius, H.E., 
 vi. 14.) Here we may notice that Clement relies on tradition from elders 
 of a long time back. Agreeing with Papias and Irenasus in the main, 
 he contradicts the latter in one respect, viz. , in dating the composition 
 of the gospel during the lifetime of Peter, while Trenseus sets it after 
 Peter's death. Irenteus is more definite, and probably it is he who is 
 correct. Then Origen says : " Mark wrote it as Peter directed him " (ws 
 IIet/)os i^T]yi]aa,TO aiircj)), thus supporting Clement (Eusebius, H.E., 
 vi. 25); and TertuUian says: "The gospel published by Mark may be 
 called Peter's, whose interpreter (interpres) Mark was." {Adv. Marcion, 
 iv. 5. ) Moreover, this ancient testimony is without contradiction. 
 
 c. Genuineness and Historicity. — Pfleiderer, while accepting 
 St. Mark as the author of our gospel, denies his connection 
 with St. Peter partly on the ground that the .gospel contains 
 miracles, of which the apostle, an eye-witness, of course knew 
 nothing.' This is high-handed criticism indeed. The most 
 conclusive evidence is to be set aside, because it does not 
 agree with the non-miraculous theory of the universe. Only 
 
 ' Essays on Supernatural Religion, p. 165. 
 ' See SwETB, XX , xxi. 
 • Urchristenthum, p. 414. 
 
298 BIBLICAL INTRODUCTION 
 
 a disciple of Hume could admit such an argument. But 
 another point of Pfleiderer's has been perceived by many. 
 The gospel has riot the aspect of discourses, because it is 
 almost confined to narrative matter. Now it may well be 
 allowed that Mark, when sitting down to the task of writing 
 his gospel, did not confine himself exclusively to what he 
 had heard Peter utter in public preaching. Besides, what 
 he had learnt in this way would be used by him as material 
 for a composition in his own words and style. Certainly 
 the gospel does not consist merely of a reporter's notes of 
 sermons. We need not demand that it , should, , in order, 
 satisfy the requirements of the patristic statements about it. 
 And then it is reasonable to think that Peter, did repeat, many 
 stories of his Master's life. That would be a very real way 
 of preaching Christ, the best way for making Christ known. 
 A brief notice of one of his sermons which is given in Acts 
 represents him as saying that Jesus " went about doing good " 
 (Acts X. 38), a phrase just on the lines of the gospel according 
 to St, Mark, which would serve well as a summary of that 
 gospel. Then it has been objected that the phrase "not in 
 order " does not apply to Mark, which is the most orderly 
 of the gospels, and which is chronologically arranged. But 
 the expression may mean, "not as a set historical compositipn," 
 and further, in point of fact it is not entirely chronological. 
 For example, it gives five occasions of offence to the Jewish 
 authorities on the part of Jesus in immediate succession 
 (ii. i-iii. 6). It is hardly likely that they occurred thus 
 closely together ; possibly we have here the grouping in oiie 
 of Peter's sermons on the subject. 
 
 We cannot reasonably dOubt that our Mark is the book 
 to which the patristic references apply. It was well known 
 to Irenaeus as one of the four gospels, and his frequent citations 
 remove all doubt oh the point as far as he is concerned. 
 But Irenseus's Mark cannot be other than Papias's Mark, 
 though probably it has undergone re-editing. The connection 
 of time, locality, and association between the two Fathers is 
 too close. Probably our gospel was one of Justin Martyr's 
 
MARK ^299 
 
 Memoirs of the Apostles, for Justin gives words that occur in 
 Mark only.^ Possibly it was known to Hermas.^ 
 
 ^ Date and Place of Origin, and Destination. — As we do 
 not know the date of St. Peter's death, neither the statement 
 of Irensus nor that of Clement will help us much in fixing 
 the date of this gospel. Still, since it is probable that St. Peter 
 was living at least as late as the Neronian persecution, and since 
 it is also probable that Irensus is right, and that St. Mark did 
 not write down his recollections of the apostle's preaching till 
 that was completed, it is not likely that the gospel was composed 
 before about a.d. 65. At all events it must have been after 
 Colossians, which was written when Mark was with Paul at 
 Rome, for there is no indication in the epistle of his being 
 with Peter also then. Peter's coming to Rome therefore must 
 be later than 62, and the reports of the preaching some time 
 after that. On the other hand, as in the case of Matthew, 
 probably.we should not assign the gospel to a time subsequent 
 to the destruction of Jerusalem. The same argument from 
 the contrast with the reference to that event in the apocalyptic 
 discourse applies here also.* Moreover, if Mark was used as 
 a basis of Matthew, it must be earlier. Thus we come back 
 to about A.D. 65 or at latest 66. There is no reason to deny 
 the ancient tradition that it was written in Rome. It contains 
 several Latinisms.* Evidently it was intended for Gentiles 
 who were not familiar with Jewish customs, for it explains some 
 of those customs, e.g., the custom of Purification (vii. 4). 
 
 e. Contents. 
 
 (i) Introduction, i. r-i3- 
 
 i. 1-8, The mission of John the Baptist. 
 
 9-13, The baptism and temptation of Jesus. 
 
 (2) Early Ministry in Galilee, i. 14-iii. 12. 
 
 '' ^ ToS'poavepyh, 8 i(TTiy viol ^povrrls, in Trypk, io6, and there attributed 
 to the Memoirs of Peter is only found in Mark iii. 17 (though with the 
 spelling poavTipyh). 
 
 2 See Taylor, Witness of Hermas, p. 5 ff. 
 
 ' See page 289. 
 
 * e.g., Latin words — drivipcov, Kevrvplav, KoSpdi'Trj!, Kpd^aTTOs, \eyitiy, 
 ^i<rT7js, cfweKovKaroip ; and such phrases as /ca/cwi Ix""'''^^! i'^X^''''^^ ^X"- 
 
300 BIBLICAL INTRODUCTION 
 
 i. 14-28, Commencement of the ministry; preaching in the 
 synagogue at Capernaum ; demoniac cured: 
 
 29-34, Cure of Peter's wife's mother, followed by m^ny 
 miracles of healing. 
 
 35-45, A leper cleansed. 
 
 ii. i-iii. 6, Successive grounds of offence ; (a) claim to for- 
 give sins when curing a paralytic ; (J3) eating with publicans 
 and sinners after the call of Levi; (7) permitting the disciples 
 not to fast ; (8) permitting the disciples to break the Sabbath 
 by plucking corn; (e) Jesus Himself breaking the Sabbath in 
 curing a man with a withered hand on that day. 
 
 iii. 7-12, Jesus with the multitudes by the seaside. 
 
 (3) More advanced Galilean Ministry, iii, 13-vii. 23, 
 
 This is characterised by fuller teaching on the manner in which the 
 kingdom comes, and by greater wonders. 
 
 iii. 13-19, The call of the Twelve. 
 
 20-30, Jesus accused of alliance with Satan; His answer; 
 the unpardonable sin. 
 
 31-35, Christ's mother and His brethren. 
 
 iv. 1-34, A group of parables about the kingdom: the 
 sower, the lamp, seed growing automatically, the mustard 
 seed. 
 
 The " seed growing automatically " is only in Mark. 
 
 35-41, The Storm calmed. 
 
 v. 1-20, The Gerasene demoniac and the swine. 
 
 21-43, The cure of the woman who touched Christ's gar- 
 ment, and the raising of Jairus's daughter. 
 
 vi. 1-6, Jesus rejected at Nazareth. 
 
 7-13, The mission of the Twelve. 
 
 14-29, The murder of John the Baptist 
 
 30-44, The feeding of the five thousand. 
 
 45-56, Christ walking on the sea ; His return to Genngsaret ; 
 many cures. 
 
 vii. 1-23, Defilement from within, not from without. 
 
 (4) Retirement before Opposition, and Further Teaching of the 
 Select Few, vii. 24-ix. 
 
MARK 301 
 
 vii. 24-37, The Syro-Phoenician woman j the deaf mute. 
 
 viii. 1-2 1, The feeding of the four thousand; leaven. 
 
 22-26, A bUnd man at Bethsaida seeing men as trees. 
 
 This incident and that of "the deaf mute" (vii. 24-37) only i° Mark. 
 
 27-ix. I, Peter's confession at Cssarea, and Christ's first 
 announcement of His death. 
 
 ix. 2-32, The transfiguration; cure of the lunatic boy; 
 Christ's second announcement of His death. 
 
 33-5°j The example of the little child, and the evil of 
 causing a little one to stumble. 
 
 (s) Christ in Fercea, x. 
 
 X. i-io, Jesus forbidding divorce. 
 
 13-16, Jesus blessing children. 
 
 17-22, The young man who refused to give up all for Christ. 
 
 23-31, The difficulty of a rich man entering the kingdom, 
 
 32-45, Christ's third prediction of His death, followed by the 
 ambitious request of Zebedee's sons, and His announcement of 
 His mission to serve, and to give His life a ransom for many. 
 
 46-52, Bartimsus at Jericho cured of his blindness. 
 
 (6) TTie Last Days in Jerusalem, xi.-xvi. 
 
 xi. i-ii. The triumphant entry. 
 
 12-26, The withered fig tree, the cleansing of the temple, 
 the power of faith, and the duty 6f forgiveness. 
 
 27-33, Christ challenged for His authority; His reply 
 challenge. 
 
 xii. i-i 2, The parable of the vineyard. 
 
 13-40, Questions to entrap Christ : (a) the Pharisees' and 
 Herodians' question on the lawfulness of paying tribute to 
 Caesar; (;8) the Sadducees' question on marriage and the 
 future life; (y) the scribe's question on the commandments; 
 (S) Christ's question about David's son, and warning against 
 the scribes. 
 
 41-44, The widow's mites. 
 
 xiii.. Apocalyptic predictions of coming woes, and warnings 
 to escape. 
 
 xiv. I, 2, Decision of the council about the arrest of Jesus. 
 
 3-9, The woman with the cruse of ointment. 
 
302 BIBLICAL INTRODUCTION 
 
 10, II, Judas bargaining to betray Jesus for money.; 
 
 12-31, The Passover, the indication of the traitor, the Lord's 
 Supper, and the warning of : Peter's denial. , , /;, 
 
 32-52, Gethsemane, the betrayal,. and the arrest. , 
 
 53-65, The trial of Jesus before theicouncil. 1 
 
 66-72, Peter's denial of Christ. j 
 
 XV. 1-15, The trial before Pilate and the release of 
 Barabbas. , , ;.u, .. 
 
 16-20, The mockery. . ;: 
 
 21-47, The crucifixion, death, and burial, of Jesus. 
 
 xvi. 1-8, The women at the empty tomb. ., , . 
 
 9-20, Appendix with summary of resurrection appearances. 
 
 The Concluding Section. — This section (verses 9-20) is bracketed by 
 Westcott and Hort, and is -rejected by many critics as not a part of 
 the original text.' The reasons for that judgment are both documentary 
 and intrinsic : (l) Documentary. The section is not founii in the two 
 oldest MSS. (N and B). An old Latin MS. k.and some Armenian and 
 .^Ethiopian MSS. are also -wanting in it. Eusebius and Jerome both 
 say that it was absent from many MSS., and Dr. Hort "suggests that 
 perhaps Eusebius rested on the authority of Origen in his doubts con- 
 cerning the passage. The " Eusebian canons " ^ end at verse 8. .. Neither 
 Justin Martyr nor Clement of Alexandria make any reference to 'the 
 contents of these verses. (2) Intrinsic. The most serious objections arise 
 from a consideration of the verses themselves : (a) We meet with several 
 words not usual in Mark. Thus iKetvos occurs five times in this short 
 sectioii in an unusual sense, without any emphasis; wopeiofuu occurs 
 three times, though it is used nowhere else in : the gospel ; and iSedOti 
 twice. (^) Verse 18 contains marvels that suggest a later age. (7) Mary 
 Magdalene is introduced with a description identifying her as one "from 
 whom He had cast out seven devils" (verse 9) ; and yet she had already 
 appeared twice before in the narrative , (xv. 47, xvi. l). , Surely this 
 fact alone must suggest that we have here an alien document. (S) Jesus 
 is seen in Jerusalem ; but according to the earUer narrati-ve the ;angel 
 bade the disciples go to Galilee to meet Him. That a few verses after that 
 statement He should be described as manifesting Himself to one of the 
 women who heard it on the very same morning, without' any explanation 
 of the change of place, is improbable, (e) Then the whole structure of 
 the passage is unlike Mark. In place of the full graphic style, of the 
 gospel we have bald summaries of events. But when we examine these 
 summaries, we find that they add nothing to our knowledge. They could 
 all have been based on the other gospels. 
 
 Verse 9 rests -on John xx. 14 and Luke viii. 2, 
 
 Verses 9, 10 are a natural inference. ■. !' 
 
 Verses 12, 13 are an abridgment of the Emmaus incident of Luke 
 
 ' The Eusebian canons are parallel lists of passagjes in' the three gospels 
 constructed for cross reference, in the form of a harmony. 
 
MARK . 303 
 
 XXIV. 13-35. The expression, "in another form," is suggested by the 
 fact that the two disciples did not recognise the Risen Christ. 
 
 Verse 14 could be founded on Luke xxiv. 36-43, or on John xx. 26-29. 
 
 Verse 15 reminds us of Matthew xxviii. 19. 
 
 Verse 16 has no parallel in the gospels, but it has a late character. 
 Jesus never required baptism as a condition of salvation. 
 
 Verses 17 and 18 also read like late legendary matter. 
 
 Verse 19 points to St. Luke's account of the ascension. 
 
 Verse 20 is a summary of the history in Acts.' 
 
 With these objections against it, although nearly all the MSS. contain 
 the passage, it must be held to be not original.* A. few later MSS. 
 have another ending, viz. : "And they reported briefly to Peter and 
 those in his company all the things cominanded. And after these things 
 Jesus Himself also sent forth through them from the east even to the 
 west the holy and incorruptible message of eternal salvation." This 
 is evidently a late conclusion, added to round off the work. Certainly 
 the gospel did not end originally at verse 8. No one would finish with the 
 Greek words, i^op^oSvro ydp. Even the MS. B, which has neither con- 
 clusion, leaves a blank space between these words and the beginning 
 of Luke. We must consider, then, that the original conclusion Was early 
 lost, perhaps the final page accidentally, torn out of the autograph, 
 
 f. Characteristics. ■^'&t. Mark's style is essentially graphic. 
 He, more than either of the other two synoptic authors, writes 
 like an eye-witness. This suggests his fidelity in reproducing 
 St. Peter's vivid impressions. He has an eye for the concrete. 
 He loves colour, and sees it {e.g., vi. 39.) So freshly does 
 he realise his narrative, that at times he gives us the sharp 
 abruptness of the original dialogue in startling fashion, as 
 for instance, "What is this? A new teaching! With authority 
 he commandeth even the unclean -spirits," etc. (i. 27., R.V.). 
 His language, though not so Hebraistic as Matthew, is still 
 much influenced by Hebrew phrases. 
 
 Especially note the use of iyhero, for "it came to pass''; the idiom 
 Si5o Sio for " two by two," similarly avjuirbaits, a\iii.Tr,baui., Trpatrial wpaaial ; 
 the simple linking together of sentences with "and," instead of by the 
 varied connections of classic Greek. 
 
 The gospel omits the narratives of the infancy, only briefly 
 
 ' The result of this analysis is against accepting Mr. Conybeare's 
 suggestion that the passage was written by Aristion, on the authority 
 of an Armenian MS. (a.d. 986), which assigns it to the presbyter Arision, 
 Papias describes Aristion as an immediate disciple of our Lord. (Eusebius, 
 H.E., iii. 39.) Would such a man make a mere summary of statements in 
 the gospels, many of them second and third hand statements ? 
 
 ^ The integrity of the passage was vehemently defended by Dean 
 Burgon, On the last twelve verses of St, Mark, 
 
304 BIBLICAL INTRODUCTION 
 
 touches on the temptation, arid is chiefly devoted to the 
 active works of Jesus in His Galilean ministry. It gives 
 much less space to the teaching of Christ than Matthew 
 and Luke, and it dwells at length on the miracles, devoting 
 special attention to those that concern demoniacal possession. 
 
 4. Luke. 
 
 a. Si. Luke the Evangelist. — It appears from Colossians iv. 
 14 that St. Luke was a Gentile, as his name is not included in 
 the list of " those of the circumcision." From the same pas- 
 sage we learn that he was a physician. The ftiention of his 
 nanie here and in Philemon 24, shows that he was with St. 
 Paul during at least part of the first imprisonment at Rome. 
 The only other occasion in which his name occurs in the N.T. 
 is at 2 Timothy iv. 11, where we find him again with the 
 apostle, this time during the second imprisonment,^ and as 
 the only faithful attendant after all others had forsaken Paul. 
 Thus we discover his close relations with the apostle. Then, 
 granting that he was the author of the passages in Acts, 
 written in the first person plural,^ we are able to carry our 
 
 ■ information further back. There we learn that he accom- 
 panied the apostle from Troas to Philippi, when St. Paul 
 made his first journey in Europe (Acts xvi. 10-17). '^^^ 
 resumption of the narrative in the third person implies that 
 the apostle left him at Philippi. About six years later Paul 
 was again at Philippi, and there he again met Luke, who then 
 travelled with him to Jerusalem — as the resumption of the 
 "we" narrative implies (xx. 5-xxi. 18); he also accompanied 
 the apostle in the voyage to Rome, sharing tlie experience of 
 the shipwreck at Malta on the way. An ancient legend' re- 
 presents him as a painter. His symbol in Christian Art is the 
 ox or the calf. 
 
 b. Authorship of the Gospel. — From the second century 
 downwards the third gospel was assigned to Luke. There is 
 
 ^ i. e. , on the hypothesis that 2 Timothy belongs to a second imprison- 
 ment. See chapter viii. ^ See page 342. 
 
 2 First found in Theodore, a reader at Constantinople in the sixth 
 cenlwy. Mignb, Pair, Gr., lixxvi. 165. 
 
' : i LUKE 30s 
 
 no evidence to indicate that this claim was ever disputed. 
 No other name was ever proposed. The : first references to 
 St. Luke's name as that of the author of the gospel are in 
 Irenffius and the Mura,iortan Fragment. Then we haVe 
 Clement of Alexandria, Tertullian, etc., writing of the gospel 
 as Luke's. 
 
 Thus Irenseus writes : "Luke, also, the companion of Paul, recorded 
 in a book tlie gospel preached by him" i^Adv. Haer;, iii. i; see also a 
 fuller account in iii. 14).. Here jwe have ;tiie , ea.rliest .reference to 
 the relation of St. Paul ,to the third gospel. Undoubtedly it obtained 
 authority in the churches owing to the connection of PaUlwith Luke, as 
 the second gospel obtained it through Peter's relations with Mark, so that 
 all four gospels were accredited; with apostolic authority. But we cannot 
 regard the cases as parallel, seeing that Paul was not, like Peter, a witness 
 Of the events of our Lord's life and work, and the preface to the third 
 gospel shows that its author sought information from eye-witnesses. The 
 gospel can only be traced to St. Paul in the spirit of it.' 
 
 The Muratorian Fragment has the phrase, "The third book ef the 
 gospel, that according to Luke.'"' For the ■ testimony of Clement of 
 Alexandria, see Eusebius, S.E.,-n, 14; for Tertullian's, see Adv. Marcion, 
 iv. 2 and 5; for Origen's, see Eusebius, H.E., vi. 25, etc. ^ . - 
 
 c. Genuineness. — There C9.n be np doubt that the references 
 of Irenseus and later fathers to St. Luke are directed to' our 
 gospel; the citations prove it. We cannot go further back 
 with the name, but the very fact that so; obscure' a person is 
 unanimously indicated speaks for genuineness. There would 
 be no motive to select a scarcely known personage for the 
 purpose of pseudonymous writing. And the history of the 
 gospel itself is older than these references. It is used in 
 Tatian's harmony, as we can iipw see for oiirselves.' There- 
 fore it niust have been recognised and read in the churches of 
 3yria soon after the middle of the second century. The 
 presence of it in the Peshitto witnesses' to the same fact, It 
 seems to have been one of the " Memoirs of the Apostles " 
 tised by Justin Martyr. 
 
 ^ When St. Paul says " My gospel" {e.g., Rom, ii. 16), he cannot mean 
 our third gospel or any other written narrative. Any idea of the kind is 
 an anachronism. The reference must be to the message he delivered, the 
 good tidings he proclaimed, especially to righteousness and life in Christ, 
 through the cross, and by faith. 
 
 ^ In barbarous Latin-^TERTIQ EUANGELII LIBROM SBCUNDO LUCAN, 
 
 ' See The Earliest Life of Christ, ete, 
 
 X 
 
3o6 BIBLICAL INTRODUCTION 
 
 Thus Justin mentions several facts only found in this gospel, e.g., 
 "Elizabeth as the mother of the Baptist, the sending of Gabriel to Mary, 
 the census under Quirinius, there being no room in the inn, Jesus' ministry 
 beginning when He was 30 years old, His being sent by Pilate to, Herod, 
 His Jast cry, ' Father, into thy hands I commend my spirit '" ( I Apol. xxxiv. ; 
 Tryph., Ixxviii., Ixxxvi., c, oiii., cv., cvi.).^ 
 
 Celsus must have known the third gospel, as he refers to the 
 
 genealogy representing Jesus as, descended from the first man 
 
 (Origen, Con. Cels. ii. 32). In the epistle of the churches of 
 
 Lyons and Vienne there is a quotation from this gospel.^ 
 
 It also seems to have been referred to in the Clementine 
 
 Homilies, commented on by Heracleon, and known to 
 
 Basilides and Valentinus. It may be referred to by Hermas,* 
 
 but we cannot trace it with confidence to any of the Apostolic 
 
 Fathers, though it seems to have been known to the author of 
 
 the Didachi.^ Its private dedication suggests that it was not 
 
 at first iritended for the churches, and this fact may account 
 
 for its not being so much used in the earliest times as 
 
 Matthew. Harnack now pronounces decisively in favour oif 
 
 St. Luke's authorship of the gospel, and Ramsay is continually 
 
 accumulating evidences of St. Luke's correctness as a historian. 
 
 d. Marciotfs Gospel. — The most important testimony to 
 
 the antiquity of our third gospel is to be found in the use of 
 
 it by Marcion. This great reformer and heretic came to 
 
 Rome about a.d. 140, with a N.T. of his own selection, 
 
 Consisting of , one gospel and ten epistles. The title of the 
 
 gospel giyes us no indication of its authorship, as Marcion 
 
 simply calls it "the gospel of the Lord" or "the gospel of 
 
 Christ." But an examination of its contents, most of which 
 
 pan be recovered from Tertullian, shows that it was founded 
 
 on Luke. \ 
 
 Baur held that Marcion's gospel was the original, a Pauline gospel, 
 which the writer of Luke had softened down to suit Catholic ideas ; but 
 ^his opinion once held by the Tiibingen School was given up by Baur's 
 successor, Hilgerifeld, who showed that Luke was the original. Ritschl 
 too contended for the priority of' Luke, which is now generally admitted. 
 None of the fathers mention Marcion's gospel as used by any but his own 
 
 1 Plummer, InUrnat. Crit. Com., St. Luke, p. xv. 
 
 » See EusEBius, H:E.,v. I, compared with Luke i. 6, 67. 
 
 » See Tavlob, The Wittuss of Bermas, p. 34. ' * xvL I, 
 
LUKE : •' 307 
 
 fqllowers. Its omissions an(};alterations canbe perfectly .accounted for; 
 as made in order to bring the gospel into harmony with Marcion's teach- 
 ings. Thus Luke i. and ii. with the accounts of the infancy, and' the 
 genealogy and the temptation from chapters iii. and iv., are omitted as in- 
 consistent with Marcion's docetism. For Luke xiii. 28, instead of " Abra- 
 ham, Isaac, and Jacob," we have "the righteous" ; and at xvi. 17, Marcion's 
 gospel reads^ " It is easier for heaven and earth, the law and the prophets, 
 to fail than one tittle of the word of the Lord" — alterations made to suit 
 his gnostic anti-Judaism. 
 
 e. The Preface. — Luke opens with an elaborate dedication 
 to a person of high rank — as the title "most excellent" in- 
 dicates^ — bearing the name Theophilus. We have nc means 
 of knowing who this man was, but it is not probable that the 
 name is fictitious, to designate "the pious reader." The title 
 of rank is against that idea. In this dedication the evangelist 
 states both the occasion which led him to write the gospel, 
 a.nd the method he pursued in preparing himself for the task. 
 He tells us that many had taken in hand to draw up a narra- 
 tive " of the gospel occurrences." There is no ground for the 
 assumption that either Matthew or Mark is here ' referred to. 
 The surprising thing is that even as early as St. Luke's time 
 there were already many attempts at the writing of gospels. 
 St. Luke does not directly condemn these attempts, or profess, 
 as is' sometimes assumed, to correct and supersede them. The 
 form of his language only implies emulation to follow the 
 example of others, with an excuse for writing in that example. 
 Still the tone and spirit of the preface do certainly suggest a 
 depreciatory regard for the earlier attempts. The expression 
 "taken in hand " implies as much; and the indefinite " rnany" 
 without giving any names — as though he had said "gospels by 
 the cart-load" — also suggests that no high value was set on 
 the works. Still more, St. Luke's careful declaration of his own' 
 method of work cannot but suggest his belief that no such, 
 pains had been taken by his predecessors. He here inforins, 
 us first that the narrative is to deal with what had been 
 received frorn "eye-witnesses and'ministers of "the vyord "— i 
 people who had seen the events described, and had themselves 
 
 * Strictly speaking it belongs to a man of the. Equestrian Order. See 
 Ramsay, .S/, 'i^i)!«/f etc., p. 388 (i), • 
 
508 BIBLICAL INTRODUCTION 
 
 taken part in them. These must be disciples who accom- 
 panied our Lord on Tlis travels. Then he says he "traced 
 the course of all things accurately from the first," a claim to 
 diligent searching and careful observation, the conscientious 
 work of a trained and disciplined mind. There is no excuse 
 for doubting St. Luke's good faith, when he comes thus before 
 us claiming our confidence in him as a trustworthy historian. 
 
 It is true St. Luke's words do not necessarily imply that in every case 
 he took his facts from the lips of the witnesses. The phrase, "as they 
 delivered (ira/)^5oirac) them unto us," Svould apply to tradition. But the 
 whole passage shows that the author took pains to obtain the most accurate 
 information, and he was contemporary with many of the witnesses. He 
 does not say Whether he received his information orally or in writingt' 
 We shall see in ,the next, chapter :that he used written material, and that, 
 these were not all first hand. What he assures us is that he was careful 
 to get what had been testified to by' the men who: took part in the events 
 recorded, ,,, ; 
 
 The Difficulty of the Census. — St. Luke tells us that a decree went 
 out from Csesar Augustus for a universal census ; that the first census took 
 place when Quirinius was goyejr'nor of Syria; that every one went to his 
 own city for this object ; and that thus Joseph and Mary went up to 
 Bethlehem (ii. 1-4). Several objections have beeii raised againkt these 
 statements, (i) Herod in^as reigning as- king, and his subjects would, not 
 come into a Roman census. (.2) A Roman census goes by households, not^ 
 by family relations and pedigrees. (3) No census of the Roman 'enipire' 
 occurred at the time when Jesus was born, thought there was a census 
 under Quirinius in A.D. 6. (4) Quirinius was not governor of Syria when 
 Jesus was born ; his administration was from A.D. 6 to 9, andQuinctilius 
 Varus was then governor of Syria. These difficulties have been consider- 
 ably , lightened by recent researches. ■. The following points may now be,, 
 urged in defence of. St. Luke's correctness; — (l) In the year 8-7 B.C., 
 Augustus wrote a letter to Herod informing hini that -whereas he had 
 regarded him hitherto as a friend, henceforth he would treat, him as a 
 subject. From that time Herod's dominions would be an integral part' of 
 the Roman empire. (2) Herod would administer' the census oin Jewish 
 lines to conciliate his people. ('3) Doouments recently discovered in Egypt 
 have made, it clear that periodical enrolments were carried on, in that 
 province every fourteen years, and working back from those tliat are 
 referred to in' these records, we come to the year 8-7 B.C. for one of these 
 Egyptiati censuses. It is likely enough that the letter to Ilerod would be 
 followed by the extension of the census to Palestine, and thus a little later 
 than in Egypt. But the; rievi Diclidnary of the Bible on independent 
 grounds fixes the year. 6 B.C. for the birth of Jesus, which ' exactly cpineides 
 with ithis date of the census. (4) St. Luke does not upe the substantive 
 "governor" 6t" legate" {riye/id>v), but the verb in the participle; "acting' 
 as leader" (■^■'/e/juu'eiovTos). Now it is , known' [that before the. death,, of 
 Herod, Quirinius was engaged in a war among the Taurus mountains,' 
 that affected the foreigri relations. of Syria. Professor Ramsay argiies that 
 it is the military position of Quirinius' that is referred to by St. Luke. 
 
LUKE • 309 
 
 Mommsen argued that Quirinius was twice legate of Syria on the 
 evidence of an anonyiirtous marble inscription found in the Tiber in the 
 year 1 764, which records the career of & high officer who twice governed 
 Syria in the time of Augustus, though his name has not been preserved. 
 It is difficult to find a time when Quirinius could have held the legate's office 
 twice. Professor Ramsay assigns the first governing' to the military 'posi- 
 tion he held in the war.^ At all events St. Luke's historicity is considerably 
 vindicated. 
 
 f. Date and Place of Origin. — The gospel must have been 
 written before Acts, as it is referred to in that work. (Acts 
 i. 1, 2.): If therefore Acts were written at the time when 
 the history of it ends (a.d. 62), Luke would be earlier than 
 that date. But there is no reason to assign the later work 
 to the time when the events in the narrative cease, and 
 there are strong reasons for giving both Acts and the gospel 
 a later date. If St. Luke used Mark,^ the latest date for Mark 
 must precede the earliest for Luke. Then a comparison of Luke 
 with the other two synoptics shows that while they seem to 
 have been written bisforfe the destruction of Jerusalem, the Third 
 Gospel was written after that event. In our Lord's apocalyptic 
 discourse in place of obscure allusions to "the abomination 
 of desolation," etc. with the writer's comment, " Let him 
 that readeth understand," we have a clear description of 
 the siege and its issue. (Luke xxi. 20, 24.) And further, 
 while the final judgment is associated with the doom of 
 Jerusalem in the other synoptics, in Luke it is distinguished 
 from the local event, and a vague interval placed between 
 the; two in the statement, " And Jerusalem shall be trodden 
 down of the Gentiles, until the times of the Gentiles be 
 fulfilled." (Luke xxi. 24.) On the other hand, if St. Luke 
 wrote the gospel, we cannot assign to it a very late date, 
 for even if he lived to a great age, it is not likely that 
 he would have postponed so important a work to the end 
 of his life.' And then it precedes Acts. Perhaps the nearest 
 we can come to the date is to suggest about a.d. 75, There 
 
 ^ See Ramsay, Was Christ born at Bethlehem ? 
 ' See next chapter. 
 
 ' The case of St. John with his reflective gospel is quite different, and 
 by contrast confirms &ie earlier date of Luke. 
 
3IO BIBLICAL INTRODUCTION 
 
 is no evidence concerning the place of origin. St. Luke's <:on- 
 nection with iPhilippi suggests that city, 
 
 g. Contents. 
 
 (i) Preface, i. 1-4. 
 
 (2) The Infancy, i. 5-ii. 
 
 i. 5-25, Prediction of the birth of John the Baptist. 
 
 26-38, The annunciation. .! 
 
 39-56, Mary's visit to Elizabeth ; i^z Magnificat. • >; 
 
 57-80, Birth of John the Baptist; Zacharias' psalm of 
 praise. 
 
 ii. 1-7, The birth of Jesus. 
 
 8-20, The shepherds and the angels. • < 
 
 21-40, The circumcision and dedication of Jesus j Simeon 
 and Anna. 
 
 41-52, The boyhood of Jesus ; visit to the Temple. 
 
 (3) The Preparation, iii.-iv. 13. ' ; 
 
 iii. 1^22, The ministry of John the Baptist and his baptism 
 of Jesus. ' 
 
 23-38, Genealogy. 
 
 iv. 1-13, The temptation. 
 
 ^) Galilean Ministry, iv. 14-ix. 50. 
 
 iv. 14-30, Commencement of preaching; rejection at 
 Nazareth. 
 
 31-44, Jesus at Capernaum; deliverance, of . demoniac; 
 cure of Peter's wife's mother; other miracles and preaching. 
 
 v. i-ii, The miraculous draught of fishes and the call of 
 Simon. 
 
 12-16, A leper cleansed. 
 
 1 7-vi. 1 1, Grounds of offence : (a) Christ's claim to forgive 
 sins when curing a paralytic; (y8) call of Levi, and Christ 
 eating and drinking with publicans and sinners; (7) Christ's 
 disciples not fasting ; (6) the disciples plucking corn on the 
 Sabbath; ;(e) Jesus curing a man's withered hand on the 
 Sabbath. 
 
 vi. 12-19, The appointment of the Twelve, and the coming 
 together of the multitude for healing. 
 
 20-49, The sermon in the plain ; (a) Beatitudes and woes-^; 
 
LUKE • 3" 
 
 (/8) the duty of forgiveness and mercy; (y) against fault-find^ 
 ing , (S) two houses. 
 
 vii. i-io, Cure of a centurion's servant at Capernaum. 
 
 11-17, Raising of the son of the widow at Nain. 
 
 i8-3S, John the Baptist's question; Christ's ahfewer ; and 
 descriptions of John and of the age that rejected both Christ 
 and John. 
 
 36-soj The penitent ; parable of two debtors. 
 
 viii. 1-3, The ministering women. 
 
 4-18, Parables of the sower and the lamp. 
 
 19-21, Christ's mother and His brethren. 
 
 22-25, The storm calmed. 
 
 26-39, The demoniac and the swine. 
 
 40-56, The cure of the woman who touched the border of 
 Christ's garment, and the raising of the ruler's daughter. 
 
 ix. 1-6, The mission of the Twelve. 
 
 7-9, Herod's perplexity. 
 
 10-17, Christ feeding the multitude. 
 
 18-27, Peter's iconfession, followed by Christ's first an- 
 nouncement of His death. 
 
 28-45, Transfiguration, followed by the cure of a lunatic 
 boy, and Christ's second announcement of His death. 
 
 46-48, Ambition rebuked from the example of a child. 
 
 49! S°j John rebuked for rebuking an unattached believer. 
 
 (S) Later Ministry, chiefly outside Galilee, ix. 51-xix. 28. 
 
 ix. 51-56, Jesus rejected by the Samaritans. 
 
 57-62, Discouragements of discipleship. 
 
 X. 1-16, Mission of the seventy with lament over the cities 
 of Galilee. 
 
 1 7-24, Return of the seventy and Christ's thanksgiving. 
 
 25-37, The lawyer's question and the parable of the Good 
 Samaritan. 
 
 38-42, Mary and Martha. 
 
 xi. 1-13, The Lord's prayer and' lessons on prayer. 
 
 14-26, Jesus charged with alliance with Beelzebub; His 
 reply. 
 
 27, 28, The woman who blessed Christ's mother. 
 
312 BIBLICAL INTRODUCTION 
 
 29-36, On seeking a sign 5 the lamp arid > the buskel. f ; ,. ; 
 
 37-54, Denunciation of Pharisees and lawyers. ,■ 
 
 xii. 1-12, Leaven of the Pharisees; confidence in God; 
 blasphemy against the Holy Spirit. < •■ 
 
 13-21, Covetousness; the rich fool. < 
 
 22-34, Anxiety allayed. 
 
 35-59, Watchfulness and diligence; signs of the times. 
 
 xiii. 1-9, The meaning of calamities ; the fruitless figtree. 
 
 10-17, An infirm woman cured on the Sabbath. 
 
 18-21, The mustard seed and the leaven. 
 
 22-35, Gentiles coming in place of Jews; lament over 
 Jerusalem. 
 
 xiv. 1-6, Lawfulness of healing on the Sabbath, in the case 
 of a man with dropsy. 
 
 7-14, On taking the lowest place, and inviting the poor for 
 guests. 
 
 15-24, The parable of the supper. 
 
 25-35, Counting the cost. 
 
 XV., Parables of the lost sheep, the lost piece of silver, the 
 prodigal son. 
 
 xvi. 1-13, The unrighteous steward; the use and abuse of 
 mammon. 
 
 14-18, The law not to fail. 
 
 19-31, The rich man and Lazarus. 
 
 xvii. 1-4, Occasions of stumbling; the offending brother. 
 
 5-10, Faith and service. 
 
 11-19, The ten lepers. 
 
 20-37, The kingdom of heaven now in our midst; the 
 coming days of the Son of man. 
 
 xviii. 1-8, The unjust judge. 
 . 9-14, The Pharisee and the publican in prayer. 
 
 15-17, Jesus blessing little children. 
 
 18-30, The young ruler. 
 
 31-34, Jesus d^lares that He is now going up to Jerusalem 
 to suffer and die. 
 
 35-43, The blind beggar at Jericho cured. 
 
 xix. i-io, Zaccheeus: the publican. 
 
LUKE *3i3 
 
 11-28) The parable of the pounds. 
 
 (6) The Last Days in Jerusalem, xix. ag-xxiv. 53. 
 
 xix. 29-40, The triumphant entry. 
 
 41: -48, Jesus weeping over Jerusalem, and cleansing the 
 Temple. 
 
 XX. 1-8, Christ's authority challenged; His question on the 
 baptism of John. 
 
 9-18, The parable of the vineyard.' 
 
 i9-47> Questions to entrap Christ: (a) The scribes' and 
 priests' question about tribute to Caesar : (/3) the Sadducees' 
 question about marriage and the resurrection ; (y) Christ's 
 question about David's son. 
 
 xxi. 1-4, The widow's mites. 
 
 5-38, Warnings of the destruction of the Temple; the siege 
 and destruction of Jerusalem; the times. of the Gentiles; the 
 final coming of the Son of Man. 
 
 xxii. 1-6, Judas covenants to betray Jesus. 
 
 7-23, The Passover and the Lord's Supper. 
 
 24-38, Ambition rebuked; Peter warned; all to be pre- 
 pared. 
 
 39-53) The agony on the Mount of Olives.; the betrayal. 
 
 54-65, Jesus arrested; Peter denying his Master; Jesus 
 mocked. ■ 
 ? 66-74, Trial before the elders. 
 
 xxiii. 1-25, Jesus before Pilate; sent to Herod; again 
 before Pilate. 
 
 26-31, Simon of Cyrene ; the lament of the daughters of 
 Jerusalem. 
 
 32-49, Jesus crucified with two malefactors; death of 
 Jesus. 
 
 50-56, Joseph and the burial of Jesus. 
 
 xxiv. 1-12, The women at the tomb; Peter also there. 
 
 13-35, The journey to Emmaus. 
 
 36-43, Jesus appearing to His disciples, and eating fish 
 before them. 
 
 44-49, His final commission. 
 
 So-S3> The Ascension. 
 
314 BIBLICAL INTRODUCTION 
 
 h. Characteristics. — Luke is written in better Greek style 
 than the Other synoptic gospels. The Preface is the best 
 Greek in the N.T. The hymns in the earlier chapters, 
 however, are thoroughly Hebraistic in style as well as 
 thought, a clear sign that the evangelist did not compose 
 them himself, but that he tiransferrfed' them to his pages in 
 the form in which he found therri. The construction of 
 the gospel differs fron? Mark in allowing more space to 
 the teachings of Jesus, as is the case with Matthew alsoj 
 but frequently it differs from Matthew in placing more of 
 the sayings of Christ in direct connection with the events 
 which furnished the occasion for uttering them — Matthew 
 having more blocks of sayings without intermediate narrative. 
 Thus the sayings of Matthew's " Sermon on the Mount " are 
 distributed over two or three portions of the narrative in 
 Luke. Like Matthew, and unlike Mark, Luke has an account 
 of the infancy of Christ, which is much fuller in the third 
 gospel than in the first; and the association of John the 
 Baptist's birth is here introduced. Luke has a considerable 
 section of history and some most important teaching 
 belonging to the later part of our Lord's ministry, largely 
 in Perea and by the Jordan, which is not found in the 
 other synoptics — that containing the parables of the lost 
 sheep, the lost coin, the prodigal son, the -unrighteous 
 steward, the rich man and Lazarus, the unrighteous judge, 
 the Pharisee and the publican, the incident of the ten lepers, 
 etc. This indicates some special source of his own. 
 
 The aim and purpose of the gospel, as the author indicates 
 in his preface, is to give a connected account of the life' and 
 teachings of Christ. It has been asserted that he has 
 manipulated his materials under the influence of a doctrinal 
 bias, and this in two directions: (i) Ebionite. St. Luke shows 
 especial sympathy for the poor, as for example his version 
 of the Beatitudes with corresponding woes for the rich 
 (vi. 20-26) and the parable of Dives and Lazarus indicate. 
 His gospel contains our Lord's sternest denunciations of 
 the abuse of wealth. (2) Pauline. Many phrases in Luke 
 
LUKE ^315 
 
 resemble phrases in St. Paul's writings.^ The Pauline 
 
 liberalism is repeatedly manifested, and the richness of the 
 
 doctrine of grace illustrated. Yet we cannot deny that all 
 
 the facts were found by St. Luke in the reports of the 
 
 work and teaching of Christ that came into his hands, 
 
 though he naturally looks, at, thqm in his own way. Nor 
 
 are these two elements contradictory, as their titles might 
 
 suggest. Certainly the gospel, is not anti-Jewish in the 
 
 narrow sense of the term. 
 
 The early narratives commend O.T. piety ; Jesus is known as the Son 
 of David (xviii. 38, xx. 41) ; salvation is iirst for Israel (xiii. 16, xix. 9); 
 and the apostles are for the twelve tribes of Israel (xxii. 30).' 
 
 Other characteristics that have, been observed .in this gospel 
 are (i) the importance attached to prayer both in the example 
 of Christ and iri His teaching on the subject, (2) the joyous 
 tone that pervades the narrative, ahd the scope it gives for 
 expressions of praise and thanksgiving, (3) the admirable narra- 
 tive, style, and character painting, as iT\. |Zacbarias, Anna, 
 Zacchasus, Herod Antipas, (4) the writer's care to note the 
 course of historical development — seen for instance in the 
 way he marks the end of the Galilean ministry, and the 
 successive stages of the journey up to Jerusalem, (5) his fond- 
 ness for domestic scenes, such for example as. the, anecdote of 
 .Mary and Martha.' .,:(,,-• 
 
 Blass holds that St. Luke issued two editions of his gospel — the first, 
 represented by the accepted text, for Palestine readers ; the second, when 
 at Rome, represented by the MS. D, for western readers.* 
 
 ' Compare LukB iv. 32 with I Cor. ii. 4 ; vi. 36 with 2 Cor. i. 3 ; 
 vi. 39 with. Rom. ii. 19; vi. 48, with I Cor. iii. 10; vii. 8 with Rom. 
 iii. j; viii. 12 with l Cor. i. 21 and Rom. i. 16; viii. 13 with 
 
 1 Thess: i. 6 ; X. 7 with i Tim. v. 18; x. 8 with i Cor.' x. 27; 
 X. 16 with I Thess. iv. 8-; x. 20 with Phil. iv. 3 ; xi. 7 with Gal. iv. 17 ; 
 xi. 29 with I Cor. i. 22 ; xi. 41 with Tit. i. 15 ; xii. 35 with Eph. vi. 14 ; 
 xii. 42 with .1 Cor. iv. 2 ; xiii. 27 with 2 Tim. ii. ig ; xviii. i with 
 Col. i. 3, 2 Thess. i. 11, and Gal. vi. 9-; xx. 16 with Roml ix. 14, 
 xi. u, Gal. iii. 21;. xx. 22, 25 with Rorn. xiii. 7; xx. 35 with 
 
 2 Thess. i. S ; xx. 38 with Rom. vi. . 11 and Gal. ii. 19 ; xxi. 23 with 
 I Thess. ii. 16 ; xxi. 24 with Rom. xi. 25 ; xxi. 34 with i Thess. v. 3-5 ; 
 xxi.. 36 with Eph. vi. 18 ; xxii. 53 with Col. i. 13. — See Plummer, xlv. 
 
 * See Wbiss, AT. T. Introd., Up. 2qS. . .-;[.. 
 
 * See Plummer, p. xlviii. 
 
 * Philology of the Gospels, chap. ix. 
 
CHAPTER 11. 
 THE SYNOPTIC PROBLEM 
 
 I." Resemblances. I 3. Proposed Explanations. 
 
 2. Differences. | 4. Probable Conclusions. 
 
 The first three gospels are often called "the synoptics "^ 
 from the fact that they take a common view of the life and 
 teaching of Christ, in contrast with St. John's very different 
 treatment of the subject j and the synoptic problem arises 
 from the complications of their mutual relationship. If they 
 invariably followed the same lines we should naturally infer, 
 either that they were derived entirely from one or more 
 comttion sources, or that they were dependent one upon 
 another; arid if they moved in quite distinct planes we 
 should reckon them to be independent and separate narra- 
 tives. But the peculiar difficulty of the problem is found in 
 the fact that neither of these characteristics is to be observed 
 in them uniformly throughout. For a time two or all three of 
 them will run in closely parallel lines ; then for no reason that 
 we can easily discover one will suddenly branch off into a region 
 of its own, to return to its companions later on, in the same 
 sudden style. Or all three will diverge for a time arid go their 
 own way, and then reunite either at the same place or one 
 after the other. 
 
 While these variations necessarily complicate the problem^ 
 they supply us with hints concerning the composition of the 
 gospels which, when followed up, may lead to luminous con- 
 clusions. Thus the result of the study of the synoptic 
 problem will be to take us a stage back towards the actual 
 * From iTOr and Stj/is, 
 316 
 
THE RESEMBLANCES ,31? 
 
 events by introducing us to the original sources in which the 
 evangelists found the materials for their books. We have to" 
 notice, therefore, both the resemblances and the differences, 
 and then, if possible, to account for them and discover what 
 they imply. 
 
 I. The Kesemljlances. 
 
 These may be observed in the following particulars. : — , 
 
 a. A Common Flan. — After separate accounts of the infancy 
 of Jesus in Matthew and Luke, Mark joins them, and then all 
 three give the ministry of John the Baptist, followed by the 
 baptism and temptation of Jesus, and the commencement of 
 His ministry. From this time they rigidly confine their atten- 
 tion to scenes in the north, although St. John is able to 
 describe niuch that happened in Judaea and Samaria, More- 
 over, they are most explicit with regard to the first year of our 
 Lord's public work, hurrying over the later times till they 
 come to the last week, where all three of them enter iiito the 
 fulness of the details. 
 
 b. A Common Sekdion of Incidents. — Although our Lord's 
 public ministry probably occupied over" two years, during 
 which time He would have said and done many things not 
 recorded in any of our gospels — as an appendix to the fourth 
 gospel recognises (John xxi. 25) — the synoptics concur in 
 giving us many incidents in common. They do not record 
 more incidents than could have been included in a few weeks 
 if they all had happened together; how is it then that they 
 accept so many of the same incidents out of the immense 
 number that filled the whole period over which their narratives 
 are spread ? 
 
 If we reckon the incidents to be 88,^ we find therii dis- 
 tributed as follows ;^ 
 
 In all three gospels . . .42 
 
 In Mark and Matt. . . .12 ■ 1 
 
 In Mark and Luke . ,,•.,• 5 
 
 In Matt, and Luke . ..12 
 
 I 1 
 
 Common Incidents . , •ji. 
 > This is a slight modification Qf Dr. Davidson's reckoning 
 
3i8 BIBLICAL INTRODUGTION 
 
 Only in Mark . . - • 3 
 
 Only in Matt. . . . . S 
 
 Only in tuke ' . . . . 9 
 
 Exclusive Incidents . ,1.7, 
 
 Total . 88' , ; 
 
 Thus we have nearly half the total number of incidents in 
 each of the synoptics, 7 1 shaded by at least two gospels, and in 
 Mark only three which are not also found in one or other of 
 the companion gospels. Can this be accidental? 
 
 c. Similar Groups of Scenes. — We often meet with the 
 same succession of detached events in two or all three of 
 the synoptics, the same selection of incidents which Iwere 
 separated by intervals of time. "■ 
 
 For example, the cure of the paralytic, the call of Levi, the question 
 of fasting in all three (Matthew ix. 1-17 ; Mark ii, 1-22; Luke v. 17-39) J 
 the cornfield incident and the cure of the withered hand — events separated 
 by a week (Matthew xii. 1-21 ; Mark ii. 23-iii. 6 ; Luke vi. i-n) ; Jesus 
 feeding the multitude, and walking on the sea, Peter's confession and the 
 transfiguration and following events (Matthew xv. 32-xvii. 23 ; Mark viii. I- 
 ix. 32, and also Luke ix. 10-45). The third evangelist omits the walking 
 on the sea, but he too brings the transfiguration incident next to St. Peter's 
 confession, and yet he tells us that there was an interval of eight days 
 between them. Can it be accidental that all three synoptic writers do this, 
 that all of them are silent on the occurrences of that week of travel at a most 
 critical time ? Still more striking is the way in Which the death ofjohrf 
 the Baptist is introduced alike by Matthew and Mark (Matthew xiv. 3 ; 
 Mark vi. 17). In neither case does this appear where the account of 
 John's work is given, but in both cases it is brought in later, paVentheti-. 
 cally, to explain Herod's terrors. Thus, we read in each of these gospels 
 that; the king hearing the fame of Jesus, said He was John risen from the 
 dead, "for Herod" had arrested John, and so on, with the ghastly narra- 
 tive of the murder, in. iboth. cases introduced by way of explanation with 
 the word "for" (yap). It is , impossible to regard this coincidence as 
 accidental. 
 
 d. Verbal. Agreement.- — There are many insta.nces, in which 
 the gospels agree quite verbally. This is most frequently the 
 case in the reiports of sayings of Jesus, as might be expected. 
 But it is also found in narrative passages where the words 
 employed are not of vital importance. A striking kind of 
 coincidence is that in which quotations from the O.T. are 
 found in two gospels with the same variations from the 
 
 LXX ■ ! .. . -: .i.{ I > 
 
THE DIFFERENCES .319 
 
 Matthew iii. 3, Mark i, 3, and Luke iii. 4 have a quotation from 
 Isaiah xl. 3, in which they agree word for word, though at the end they 
 depart from the Greek text they are citing— all three having " His paths " 
 Tctf Tpl^ovs airrov, while the LXX., correctly following the Hebrew original, 
 has " the paths of our God " {rits rpipovs roC Oeou tiimuv).. Dr. Abbott has 
 drawn out a careful analysis of tiie verbal identities and variations in 
 Matthew xxi. 33-44, Mark xii. I'-II, Luke xx. 9-18.' Similar results 
 will be obtained if we make , other comparisons. Take for instance 
 Matthew ix. 1-8, Mark ii. 1-12, Luke v. 17-26. Coming to verse 5 in 
 Mark we find that they verbally agree except that Matthew and Luke 
 have eTira (in Luke etTrev) for Mark's X^-yei, a change of no significance, 
 the words having the same meaning ; that Matthew adds, "be of good 
 cheer" (Gd/xrei), and that Luke omits JesUs (0 'lijirous), and substitutes 
 the less Hebraistic "man" {&vBpiinre) for the "son" {riKvov) in Matthew 
 and Mark. That is to say, except for Matthew's striking addition, " be 
 of good cheer !" we have none but alterations such as editors make. In 
 verse 5 Matthew reads like an abbreviation of Mark ; except that he has 
 softened the text by inserting ' ' for " {jdp), every word in Matthew is also 
 in Mark. Turning to Luke we find him word for word as Matthew, 
 except that he has not included Matthew's added word "for," but has 
 added "thee " (trot), and in one case changed the order of another word to 
 suit this addition (placing iroi; after its substantive). Then at verse 10 in 
 Mark we have a parenthetic construction that is repeated in both the 
 parallels, and the phrases are verbally identical, except that Matthew, 
 according to his method, adds a word {rire) to make the style more 
 srtiooth ; and that Luke has one synonymous word variation {dTev agairi 
 for \^ei). 
 
 2. The Differences. 
 
 If we only had the agreements to consider, there would 
 not be much difficulty in arriving at a satisfactory solution 
 of the synoptic problem. But now we are confronted with 
 equally striking differences, and these too have to be accounted 
 for. 
 
 a, Accounts of Different Events. — We scarcely need to 
 explain the fact that some gospels give us incidents that 
 are not recorded in other gospels. That is not a , difficult 
 position to face. The surprise is that there are so few cases 
 of splitary narration. 
 
 b. Differences in the Several Accounts of the Same Events. — 
 Occasionally the variations are too serious to be set down to 
 editorial liberty in dealing with the same materials. For 
 instance, while Luke gives a full and detailed narrative of 
 the birth of Christ, with clear statements about the life 
 
 » See Encycl. Brit., art. "Gospels." 
 
320 BIBLICAL INTRODUCTION 
 
 of Mary and Joseph in Nazareth before that happened, 
 Matthew betrays no knowledge that they had ever been to 
 Nazareth before the return from Egypt, when they would 
 have gone back to Bethlehem if they had hot heard about 
 Archelaiis, information which induced them to avoid his 
 territory and led to their settling iri Nazareth, which city the 
 evangelist here introduces for the first time into his narrative, 
 saying of Joseph, "And being warned of God in a dream, 
 he withdrew into the, parts of Galilee : and came and dwelt 
 in a city called Nazareth : that it might be fulfilled which 
 was spoken by the prophets," etc. (Matthew ii. 23.) Then 
 Matthew and Luke give the accounts of the second and 
 third temptations in different order. (Matthew iv. 5-1 i ; 
 Luke iv. 6-12.) The greater part of Luke's version gf 
 Matthew's Sermori on the Mount (Matthew v. 1) is given 
 as spoken on a level place ("and He came down and 
 stood on a level place " (Luke vi. 1 7) — no real contradiction, 
 but a variation). Luke's version of the Beatitudes reduces 
 the number, omits the more spiritual attributes, and is 
 followed by corresponding denunciation — three important 
 differences from Matthew's. (Luke vi. 20-26 ; Matthew 
 v. 3-12.) Other sayings from the Sermon on the Mount 
 appear in various parts of Mark and Luke.^ Matthew 
 (xiii. 53-58) and Mark (vi. 1-6) give the visit of Jesus 
 to Nazareth and His rejection some way oii in His ministry 
 after work in Capertiaum, etc. ; Luke (iv. 16-3P) at the 
 very commencement,' and as the occasion of His going 
 down to Capernaum', apparently for the first time, for he 
 adds, "And He came, down to Capernaum, a city of Galilee''^ 
 (verse 31). We cannot suppose therh different visits, for the 
 surprise at the carpenter's son, the proverb about the prophet 
 not' being honoured in his own country, the failure to work 
 miracles, etc. occur in the ' other two gospels accounts just 
 
 ^ In Mark iv. 24. Following Matthew's consecutive order, we have 
 passages scattered over Luke as follows : Luke vi. 20-26 ; xi. 33 ; xiv. 34, 
 3S; xvi. 17; xiij 57-591; xvi. 18; vi. 29, 30; vi., 27,28, 32^36, jixi. 2-4 ;> 
 ™. 33, 34; xi- 34-36; xvi. 13 J xii. 22-31; vi. 37-42 — with additions; 
 3d. 9-13 ; vi- 3' < ''i"- 23i 24 ; vi. 43-4S J vi. 46 ; xiii. 26, 27 ; vi. 47-49. 
 
PROPOSED EXPLANATIONS '321 
 
 as in Luke. Then Mark (x. 46) and ■ Matthew (xx. 29) have 
 the cure of Bartimseus on the departure from Jericho j but 
 Luke (xviii. 35 ; xix. i) at the entrance into the city. Con- 
 siderable variations occur in the resurrection incidents. In 
 particular we have to notice that Matthew and Mark know of 
 no appearances in Jerusalem/ and only represent that the 
 disciples must go to Galilee to see Jesus ; but Luke gives 
 accounts of appearances in and near Jerusalem. Then 
 we have Matthew's curious couples : two demoniacs (Matt, 
 viii. 28) — Mark (v. 2) and Luke (viii. 27) have but one; 
 two blind men at Jericho (Matt. xx. 30. cf. Mark x. 46, Luke 
 xviii. 3s) j the ass as well as its colt brought for the use of 
 Jesus, and the garments laid on both. (Matt. xxi. 7, cf. Mark 
 xi. 7, Luke xix. 35). 
 
 c. Verbal Differences. — These are most striking where the 
 general resemblance is most close. In the passages which we 
 compared above, viz., Matthew ix. 1-17, Mark ii. 1-23, Luke 
 V. 18-39, '^^ saw some curious verbal modifications where the 
 sentences ran close together. But in those very passages there 
 are sentences which totally differ. 
 
 Mark ii. i is quite different from the parallels in Matthew and Luke. 
 Verse 2 is not represented at all in the other gospels ; at verse 3 we 
 have great variation ; verse 4 is not represented in Matthew : in Luke 
 it is represented with variations ; verses 6 and 7 are represented by 
 variations ; verse 8 is nearer to Luke than to Matthew, or than Matthew is 
 to Mark ;^ verses 11, 12, 13 are also represented with great variations. 
 
 3. Proposed Ezplauations. 
 
 The history of the synoptic problem reveals the greatest 
 divergence of view as to the probable solution of it. Happily 
 in recent years those divergences have been narrowing, and 
 a nearer approach to a general agreement on the question 
 has been arrived at among critical students of the gospels. 
 The proposed hypotheses group themselves in three classes : 
 (i) Oral tradition; (2) earlier sources in writing; (3) mutu^ 
 dependence. The theory of oral tradition dispenses with all 
 
 ^ i.e., on the understanding that Mark xvi. 9-20 is not a part of.ffie 
 original gospel. See page 302. "fi- ' ' 
 
 ' e.g., both have iTri-yvaii, while Matthew has Ibiiv, and both a form 0/ 
 the word SiaXoYifo/mt. 
 
 Y 
 
322 BIBLICAL INTRODUCTION 
 
 idea of literary connection between the gospels, taking their 
 agreements to come from the fixing of the very words of 
 tradition, after the methods of rabbinical teaching common 
 among the Jews at the time when they were written, while 
 of course it easily accounts for the variations in the text. 
 The 'second hypothesis — that of earlier sources— looks for 
 these in the allusions of Patristic writers, such as Papias' 
 reference to Matthew's Logia, and in the results of an' analysis 
 of the gospels. The theory of mutual dependence is of 
 course based upon the latter process. According to this 
 theory the earhest gospel was used by its two successors, 
 or by the third only through the medium of the second. 
 It is evident that these theories admit of indefinite modifica- 
 tion and also of combination. It is quite legitimate to argue 
 that all three processes were followed — that traditions were 
 followed by the writers, that there were earlier documents 
 which they employed, that they used one another's works. 
 
 It is no longer possible to accept Chrysostom's comforting suggestion 
 that the ^reements between the evangelists prove their truthfulness and 
 the divergences their independence. The problem is too complicated 
 for that ready solution. Augustin held that each evangelist worked on 
 the production of his predecessor, and in particular that Mark was an 
 abridgment of Matthew. The latter position is impossible. Where they 
 are on the same ground, Mark is fuller than Matthew. In the eighteenth 
 century, in Germany, Lessing from the world of literary criticism suggested 
 that the gospel according to the Hebrews lay behind our gospels. His idea 
 was taken up by N.T. students, and Eichhorn proposed a primitive Syro- 
 Chaldaic gospel as the basis. Then Marsh, an. Englishman, pointed out 
 coincidences in the Greek that demanded an original in that language, 
 with arguments which convinced Eichhorn, who now modified his theory, 
 and added that a Greek translation of his Syro-Chaldaic gospel was in 
 the hands of our evangelists. In the year 1818 Gieseler, oh a suggestion 
 of Herder, worked out the theory that there was an oral primitive gospel 
 in Aramaic (the modern name for Eichhorn's , Syfo-Chaldaic language), 
 i.e., a fixed tradition in set words, which' had been put into Greek by 
 St. Paul,' and afterwards changed in various ways by the other apostles'. 
 Matthew and Mark represent the later apostolic, gospels, while Luke 
 comes nearer the early Pauline form of it. The great theologian 
 Schleiermacher,, perhaps the ino5t influential theologian of the century, 
 proposed a more scientific theory:, (i) The basis of Matthew was an 
 Aramaic collection of the sayings of Christ, the Logia described by 
 Papias. (2) Our Mark was founded on an earlier work by St. Mark, the 
 "Primitive Mark" (Urmarkus, of which much has since been heard 
 
 \ Hence the expression "my gospel," said to be used of this very book. 
 
PROPOSED EXPLANATIONS 323 
 
 in later criticism). (3) Luke was founded on a series of small frag- 
 ments. Credner followed, proposing as the basis of our gospels two 
 documents — ^^the Logia and the Primitive Mark ; and Ewald carried the 
 analysis on further, elaborating a succession of writings in as rnany as 
 nine stages, the last of which is represented by our gospels. This may be 
 regarded as the first period of the history of tlie problem in modem times. 
 The second period opens with the work of Baur ("epoch-making," it 
 has been repeatedly called). The " tendency " criticism of the Tubingen 
 School, inaugurated by Baur, and carried out in some of its details by 
 Schwegler and Zeller, treats the gospels as artificial products of theological 
 prepossessions in which the history is warped and coloured to suit the ideas 
 of the writers. Matthew and Luke represent the opposition of primitive 
 apostolic, Christianity and Paulinism, but weakened and modified by the 
 introduction of other elements, Matthew coming from a Petrine source, 
 and Luke being founded on Marcion's gospel, which was strongly anti- 
 Jewish. Mark stands last as mediator, an entirely neutral gospel. This 
 extreme position came to be discredited within the school itself. It is 
 impossible to hold it now. Still Pfleiderer in our own day represents its 
 characteristics to some extent. Mark he takes to be the earliest gospel, 
 and a genuine work of the man whose name it bears — a great admission 
 firOm a leader of the more radical criticism. Luke comes next, founded 
 on Mark, but altering it to suit Pauline universalism ; while Matthew comes 
 last, based on Mark and Luke, and also on some strongly Jewish book, 
 probably The Gospel according to the Hebrews?- 
 
 Pfleiderer introduces us to the period of contemporary criticism. This 
 is marked by an abandonment of the more extreme negative positions and 
 a remarkable drawing together of the radical and conservative schools on 
 ground which secures at least the substantial historicity of the gospels. 
 Among the more recent continental writers the following are especially 
 noteworthy :— 
 
 Reuss.^ — The two primitive writings named by Papias — "The Primitive 
 Mark " and the "Logia" — are the basis of the gospels. Our Mark 
 is based on the ' ' Primitive Mark " ; our Matthew on the Canonical 
 Mark and the Logia ; Luke on Matthew and special sources of his 
 own. 
 Weiss.' — First there is the Logia, which contains incidents as well 
 as sayings. Mark is based on' Peter's preaching and the Logia; 
 our Matthew on Mark and the Logia ; Luke on Mark, the Logia, 
 and other sources. 
 Holtzmann.* — First we have two primitive sources — an original Mark 
 and the Logia, Matthew and Luke are both based on the two 
 primitive sources, but with the use of additional materials. Later 
 Holtzmaun has agreed that our third gospel drew on our first gospel, 
 Jiilicher." — The earliest works are our Mark and the Logia of Matthew, 
 Both Matthew and Luke use these ; but they both also use other 
 sources. He discusses two hypotheses, (l) Was Mark acquainted 
 with the book of the sayings of Jesus ? His answer is that probably 
 
 ^ Urchristenthum, pp. 359-443. 
 
 2 Hist, of N.T. (Eng. Trans.) pp. 175 ff. 
 
 ' Introd., English trans., vol. ii,, pp. 203-239, 
 
 • EinUitung, pp. 340-367. ° Einleiiung, pp. 207-227. 
 
324 BIBLICAL INTRODUCTION 
 
 Mark knew it, and that its existence was the reason why he did not 
 himself supply his own version of the teaching of Jesus, but that 
 he did not make much use of it. (2) Was Luke dependent on 
 Matthew ? The answer is that if Matthew was the earlier book, 
 probably Luke would have seen it. But he did not make much 
 use of it. In his fifth and sixth editions Julicher argues that Mark 
 knew the Aramaic Logia, but that Matthew and Luke used a 
 - . Greek translation. 
 
 Zahn.'— Matthew's Hebrew gospel comes first (c. A.D. 62), Mark 
 follows {c. 67), Luke's gospel comes next [c. 75), and finally the 
 Greek Matthew ((T. 80). 
 
 Among English writers the following may be noticed : — 
 
 Bishop Westcott — In his work on the gospels supporting the theory of 
 oral tradition and documentary independence, 
 
 Abbott.'' — By a comparison of the three gospels a common narrative 
 liiay be extracted. This is called "the triple tradition." 
 
 Salmon.' — (i) There was one common narrative. (2) This must have 
 been in writing, not a merely oral tradition. (3) It was in Greek. 
 (4) It came so near to Mark that we may regard it as our Mark, 
 though slight editorial alterations must be allowed for. Then there 
 was Matthew's Logia. Matthew and Luke are based on these two 
 works, but with other sources also. The difference in the nan'atives 
 of the infancy, etc., shows that they were independent of one 
 another. 
 
 Sanday.* — Accepts Mark and the Logia as the chief authorities ; but he 
 points out the probability of .other sources being used by the writers 
 of the first and the third gospels, who sometimes prefer these to 
 Mark and the Logia in parallel passages. This accounts for their 
 very different versions of some incidents and sayings of Christ. 
 
 Recent investigations haye revived the question as to whether an Aramaic 
 document was used by all three evangelists. In this way the appearance 
 of synonymous words in the three gospels ^ may be accounted for, and so 
 too perhaps some discrepancies. Resch maintains that there must have been 
 an Aramaic document behind Mark ; and Professor Marshall has advocated 
 a common Aramaic original ; So has Dr. Abbott. 
 
 4. Probable Conclnsions. 
 
 This narrowing of the issues as the result of recent criticism 
 in various schools is not a little significant. Certain results 
 may be regarded as fairly established. Others are coining out 
 with increasing clearness. The following points seem to be 
 settled with tolerable unanimity : — 
 ' (a) Tfte Priority of Mark to the other Two Synoptics and its 
 
 1 Einhitung, vol. ii., pp. 158 ff. " Encycl. Brit., art. "Gospels.'' 
 s Introd., Lectures yiii, andix. * D.B.^^, art. "Gospels." 
 ' e.g.^ Kpdpparoi' iri Mark ii. 11 ; kXIvtiv in Matthew ix. 6; KKtvlSioy 
 in Luke y, 24, for the paralytic's mattress. 
 
PROBABLE CONCLUSIONS ' 32S 
 
 Employment in the Construction of both Matthew and Luke. — ■ 
 An important factor of the case is the almost complete absorp- 
 tion of Mark in the other two' gospels. This can be accounted 
 for thus. Matthew comes first and takes a large slice of Mark. 
 Luke follows quite independently, and' takes his large slice. 
 The natural result is that they partly agree and partly differ 
 in their selection, so that while they have a considerable 
 amount of cornmon material from Mark, they each have 
 extracts exclusively their own ; but between them they appro- 
 priate nearly the, whole of Mark. But why not, put it the 
 other way, and take Mark as a compilation from the other 
 two synoptics ? For one thing , because Mark is a fresh, 
 vigorous, rugged composition, while the other synoptics are 
 smoother in style. It bears on the face of it a character of 
 individuality and original force. Moreover^ the difficulty ' of 
 producing the result as suggested by this alternative would be 
 insuperable in the cases where the three gospels verbally 
 agreei bedause it is found that, though they aire often' only 
 loosely parallel, whenever Matthew and Luke verbally agree 
 on a sentence that is also in Mark, that gospel also verbally 
 agreeing. This would be inevitable if both took frqm Mark. 
 But in this opposite case, i.e., supposing Mark to be based on 
 the two others, the difficulty of picking out the ■ verbal agree- 
 ments of Matthew and Luke, and reproducing them in 
 Mark would be insuperable ; and if successfully accomplished, 
 it would spoil Mark's freshness and power of narration. Ber 
 sides, it is unreasonable to suppose it would- ever 'be attempted. 
 We start with Mark, the genuineness of which is . now 
 generally conceded. Certain points at which Mark differs 
 from the others suggest that if had beeri re-edited before it 
 was used for Matthew and Luke. There is no need to call 
 in the . hypothesis of a primitive Mark. Its own fresh char- 
 acter ik against that hypothesis, and its close resemblance to 
 so much of what is cornmon in Matthew and Luke renders 
 it needless.^ ' ' ' ■ ■ ■ -,,;,,,,;; 
 
 ' Dr. Abbott has shown that Matthew and Luke used a revised edition 
 of Mark, the Canonical Mark being more ancient. ,., , 
 
326 BIBLICAL INTRODUCTION 
 
 b. An Original Collection of Sayings of Christ. — Many 
 sayings of Christ are found in Matthew, and Luke which are 
 not in Mark. This applies both to parables and to strings of 
 utterances, making up the twelve sections referred to above.^ 
 It is generally agreed that this source is Matthew's Logia, des- 
 cribed by Papias. But it must have been translated into Greek 
 to allow of verbal identities in the Greek renderings of sayings of 
 Christ.'^ And yet it must, also have been known in the original 
 Hebrew or Aramaic to account for variations iq the translation. 
 
 Of course some other collection of the sayings of Christ might have 
 served ; but the presumption is in favour of Matthew's Logia. We know 
 from Papias that such a book^ existed ; the apostolic 'authorship virould give 
 it authority ; and the unanimous ascription of the first gospel — which con; 
 tains most of our teachings of Christ — to that apostle associates his name 
 with it from very early times, and is a presumption that he was in some 
 way connected with it. . , 
 
 c. Certain Other Sources Unknown to Us. — These are 
 required for both the infancy narratives and the resurrection 
 narratives,' Neither of those narratives are in Mark; nor 
 could either have been in the Logia, because if either had 
 been, then the authors of both the first and the -third gospels 
 using that ' document would have seen it, and would have 
 avoided' great divergences between their accounts.' . 
 
 Moreover, St. Luke's authority for the large , section of the 
 Perasan teaching that is peculiar to nis gospel could scarcely 
 have been the Logia, or thp first gospel, which. gav& so much 
 space to the teachings of Jesus, would not have omitted it 
 In his preface St. Luke leads us to suppose ; that, he had a 
 number of sources. 
 
 Two other likely conclusions may be briefly noticed: 
 (i) Probably Mark knew the Logia. This will account for his 
 close agreement with Matthew aind Luke in so , many of his 
 reports of the sayings of Christ. (2) Probably Mattheiivr and 
 Luke were quite independent of one another. The differences 
 where they part from Mark and the. Logia, as in the infancy 
 and resurrection narratives, pointtp this conclusion, 
 
 But while these results may be considered as fairly settled, 
 
 1 Page 317. _ 
 
 ' ^ See the rare word eVioiVios in both Matthew's and Luke's versions of 
 the Lord's prayer. ' Mentioned on page- 2SS. , , 
 
PROBABLE CONCLUSIONS ♦sa; 
 
 some very perplexing questions remain open to speculation. 
 The question of an Aramaic original, behind all the gospels 
 and other than the Logia, is still obscure. It looks as though 
 this might account for curious merely verbal differences. 
 And then there is the question how far the evangelists who 
 used the Logia kept closely to the text of it, or how far 
 that may have been modified before it reached their hands.^ 
 It is scarcely to be supposedfthat, a document written by 
 one of the Twelve Apostles would be so freely handled 
 as the divergences suggest.- Thus, for example, the two 
 accounts of the Beatitudes are so very different, that we 
 cannot believe both evangelists took them from the same 
 original. If they did, which is closest to that original ? If 
 Matthew's version is most cbrrect, we must suppose that 
 Luke deliberately emptied it of its spiritual wealth of ex- 
 pression, and reduced it to a more secular form, which 
 would be quite contrary to his character as a historian, 
 and utterly unlike what his preface leads us to expect. 
 But if Luke's is the original version, and the writer of the 
 first gospel expanded it to the proportions now found in 
 that work, we appear to have the evangelist improving on 
 the Master — ari impossibility. We seem thus led to the 
 conclusion that there was more than one collection of Logia 
 of' Christ in the early Church.' This is only what- we might 
 naturally expect Perhaps the mistake has beeniin attributing 
 too much in Luke to Matthew's Logia. Luke's parallel 
 sayings in divergent form could be more reasonably attributed 
 to some other collection. We 'must still admit Mark and 
 the Lo^d as the main sources. But probably more weight 
 and scope should be allowed to the special sources of Luke. 
 Finally, the contact of the evangelists with traditions and living 
 witnesses would lead them to modify what reached them in 
 written sources. 
 
 In spite of the difficulties that still beset the problem, 
 we may be thankful that the progress '' made- towards a 
 solution has gone far to establish the historicity- of the 
 synoptic records. . 
 
 ^ As Wernle argues. 
 
Chapter hi. 
 THE FOURTH GOSPEL 
 
 . I. Authorship and Historicity. ] 3. Contents. 
 
 2. Time and Place of Writing. | 4. Characteristics. 
 
 I. Autliqrsliip and Historicity. , 
 
 We cannot speak of the authenticity or geniiineness of the 
 gospels in the sense in which we apply those words to the 
 epistles, because all four of these works a.re anonymous. 
 The titles which they bear in our Bibles, were not originally 
 attached to, them, and in; 'the text itself there is, no direct 
 claim to authorship. ;Matthew and Mark am perfectly im^ 
 personal. Luke, in its preface^ contains some personal 
 statements, by the writer, * but without a hint as to ' his 
 name. In John" we have several statements that point 
 pretty clearly to the identification of the writer. Still he 
 is not named, and it is possible to hold as some have done, 
 either (i) that "the beloved disciple" was not St. John, or 
 (2) that "the; beloved disciple," though ' allowed to be St.' 
 John, is . nob claimed by the book itself as its author. These 
 are questions to be examined on their merits apart from ideas 
 of pseudonymity or forgery. Nevertheless the historicity of 
 the gospel is closely bound up with the authorship. To 
 establish the tradition that the Apostle- John wrote it is to 
 vindicate its essential historicity. 
 
 ■ a. The- Witness of Antiquity. — The gospel was certainly 
 known and used in the Church soon after the beginning of 
 
 32S 
 
AUTHORSHIP AND HISTORICITY '329 
 
 the second century, and we have statements attributing it to 
 the Apostle John as early as the middle of that century. 
 
 Moreoveir the Eucharistic prayers in the Didachi are very 
 Johannine, though we cannot be certain that they are based 
 on the gospel {Didachl 9). The gospel was in the ancient 
 Syriac and in the old Latin of North Africa by the end of the 
 second century. 
 
 (i) For the antiquity of the gospel we have some important new 
 evidence furnished in our own age. The recovery of the Refutation ' of 
 all Heresies by Hippolytus enables us. to see in that book two quotations 
 from the gospel in gnostic writings cited by Hippolytus. Referring to 
 Valentinus {c. A.D. 135) he writes: "Therefore, says he, the Saviour 
 says : All who have come before me are thieves and robbers," plainly 
 taken from John x. Z (Ref. Haer., vi. 30); and referring to Basilides 
 (c.K.T). 133-4): "And this he says is what is said in the gospels; The 
 true light which, enlighteneth every man was coming into the world," 
 jvhich'is John. i. ,9 {Ref. Haer., vii. 22); and again also referring to 
 Basilides: "And that each thing, he says, has its own seasons, the 
 Saviour is a sufficient witness, when He says. My hour is not yet come," a 
 saying found only in John ii. .4 {R,ef. Haer., vii. 27).' : 
 
 From. the internal evidence, of his writings it becomes increasingly 
 probable that Justin Martyr knew our gospel — though probably he did 
 not include it among his 'iMJemoirs of the Apostles. Thus in his 
 account of baptism he writes, "For Christ also said, Except ye be born 
 again ye shall in no wise enter into the kingdom of heaven" — a slight 
 variation of John iii. 3 (i Apol. 6l).^ Then the recent discovery of 
 Tatian's Diatessaron makes it .certain that its author had the fourth gospel. 
 He begins with the prologue and weaves the contents of the gospel into 
 his composite narrative. Possibly i?apias knew our gospel, for Irena?us 
 gives an explanation of the phrase, "In my father's house are many 
 mansions" (John xiv. 2), by "the presbyters," among whom he seems to 
 include Papias {Adv. Haer., v. 36). Certainly he knew the companion 
 writing, I.John, for Eusebius tells us that he "used testimonies from the 
 first Epistle of John" {H.E., iii. 39). Further, the recent vindication of 
 the Ignatian epistles' enables us to use their evidence, and also that of 
 Polycarp's.epistle,! which stfinds or falls with them. .Now these works 
 are..saturated wit^ Joliannine ideas, andipbrases.;'' . 
 
 ^ It is idle to assert that. Hippolytus may. have, been citing writings 
 of the later followers of these gnostics. The repeated "he says" (0i/iri) 
 in the singular forbids that interpretation. 
 
 ^ Justin MAEXYRfs evidence is thoroughly discussed andi vindicated by 
 Ezra Abbotj Authorship of the Fourth Gospel. , , . 
 
 ^ By Lightfoot and.Zahn; their genuineness isaccepted by Harnack. 
 
 * e.g. , ' ' Recover yourselves in' faith, ' which is the flesh of the tord, and 
 in love which is the blood of Jesus Christ "( 7>a//. 8); " Living water " 
 {Rom. 7); "Children of light" {Phil. 2); Christ as the "Word" 
 {Mag. 8) ; " The door, of thp Father " {Phil. 9). Polycarp quotes I John 
 iv. 3 {Ad. Phil. vii. I), 
 
330 BIBLICAL INTRODUCTION 
 
 (2) For the association of St. John's name with the, gospel, 
 the eariiest witness is Theophilus of Antipch (a.d. 170), who 
 writes, "John says : In the beginning was the Word, and the 
 Word was with God" — and more from the same passage in the 
 gospel (^ii. Autolyc. 22). Later fathers, TertuUian, Clement A., 
 Origen, etc., all ascribe the gospel to John. Polycrates of 
 Ephesus (a.d. 190), referring to John, says: "He whp: rested 
 on the bosom of the Lord" (Eusebius, H.E., iii. 31-'). In 
 the Muratorian Fragment the gospel was attributed to John. 
 But the most important witness is Irenaeus, for that father tells 
 us that he has distinct memories of Polycarp, whp was a 
 disciple of John. Writing to Florinus, he says : " For I: saw 
 thee, when I was still a bpy in Lower Asia, in company with 
 Polycarp, while thou wast faring prosperously, in the royal 
 court, and endeavouring to stand well with 'him. For I 
 distinctly remember the incidents of that time better than 
 events of recent occurrence ; fpr the lesspns received in child- 
 hood, growing with the growth of the soul, become identified 
 with it, so that I can describe the very place in which the 
 blessed Polycarp used to sit when he discoursed, and his 
 goings out and his comings in, and his manner of life, and his 
 personal appearance, and the discourses which he held before 
 the people, and how he would describe his intercourse with 
 John and with the rest who ha3 seen the Lord, and how he 
 would relate their words. And whatsoever things he had 
 heard from them about the Lord, and about his miracles, and 
 about his teaching, Polycarp, as having received them' from 
 eye-witnesses of the life of the Word, would relate altogether 
 in accordance with the Scriptures. To these discourses I 
 used to listen at the time with attention by God's, mercy which 
 was bestowed upon rne, noting thern down, not on paper, but in 
 my heaif t ; and by the grace of God I constantly ruminate upon 
 them faithfully" (Eusebius, H.E., v. 20). Now Irenaeus is 
 unhesitating in holding that the apbstle John wrote the fourth 
 gospel. It is difficult to think that he was mistaken. 
 
 ' Ililgenfeld' admits that this is' dti allusion to John xiii. 25. . . 
 
AUTHORSHIP AND HISTORICITY 331 
 
 b. Internal Evidence. — The supreme Spiritual worth of the 
 gospel speaks for its apostolic origin. At all events it justifies 
 its veracity, for the book exalts, the idea of truth, and sternly 
 denounces falsehood. The verse xxi. 24 is perhaps to be 
 regarded as external evidence, the testimony it may be of the 
 Ephesian elders. At all events, it is very ancient^ — it is found 
 in all good copies ; and it formally authenticates the book. 
 There is also a definite claim to veracity in xix. 35. But who 
 is the writer making this claim ? It seems clear that he is the 
 same as the beloved disciple ; the anonymous reference to 
 that disciple can only be satisfactorily explained on the 
 hypothesis that he is the author. Certainly the claim is for 
 one of the inner circle of Christ's disciples. Peter is named 
 repeatedly as a different person. James, the brother of John, 
 is not named ; but he died too early. The almost certain 
 inference is that the allusion is intended to point to 
 John.i , 
 
 We may take it then, that, though not in so many words, 
 yet really and distinctly, the gospel claims to come from the 
 apostle John, and the ancient attestation appended tO: it is 
 intended to support and confirm his authority. 
 
 Further, when we come to details, we see a convergence of 
 signs that point in the same direction. It is common to 
 indicate this in four nairro'wing circles : — (i) The author 
 was a Jew. He quotes the O.T. as frequently as Matthew, 
 generally from the LXX., but on two or three occasions 
 translating directly from the Hebrew where the LXX. had 
 diverged. ^ His construction is Hebraistic, with simple 
 sentences linked together by the word "and." He fre- 
 quently gives us the Hebrew a//.ijv, and he ernploys: such 
 Hebraisiiis as "son of perdition," "rejoice with joy," ; etc. 
 Then he shows familiarity with the feasts and with Jewish 
 manners generally. • ■ 
 
 ^ The suggestions of Andrew and Nicodemus for "the beloved disciple " 
 are quite unsupported by evidence. 
 
 ' -^ e.g., John.xiii. 18, follows the Heb. " has lifted up his heel," though 
 the LXX. reads "multiplied tripping with the heel." 
 
332 BIBLICAL INTRODUCTION 
 
 ■ Thus he is acquainted with details of the Tabernacles (e.^., vii. 37); 
 the water pots, for cleansing (ii. 6) ; the question of purifying (iii. 25) ; the 
 Jews' purification of themselves before the Passover (xi. 55) ; then: fear of 
 defilement on entering ^the ' Proetorium (xviii. 28). The same familiarity 
 with Jewish Customs -is seen in the relation of the Jews to, the Sama.ritans 
 (iv..9), the idea of the soul's pre-existence and sin (ix. 2), the objection to 
 let the bodies remain on the crosses on -the Sabbath (xix. 3 1'). 
 
 The mention of the Jews as foreigners (ii. 6, 13 ; v. I ; vi. 4) is no 
 objection if John is writing for Gentiles. 
 
 (2) The author was a Palestinian. He shows his know- 
 ledge of quite out-of-the-wa>y places such as Cana of Galilee, 
 Bethany beyond Jordan, Sychar, ^ the exact situation of 
 Jacob's well, with the Samaritan holy mountain, Gerizim, 
 close at hand, and the cornfield in full view. He knows 
 many details about Jerusalem — indeed his knowledge of that 
 city and its neighbourhood is quite exceptional. 
 
 Thus he knows the interinitteht springs (v. 2), the' pool of Siloam 
 (ix. 7), Solomon's porch (x. 23), the number of stadia between Jerusalem 
 and IBethany (xi. 18), the Valley of the Kidron and the Garden of 
 Gethsemane (xviii. i), Gabbatha (xix. 13), Golgotha (xix. 17).'* 
 
 (3) The author was conternporary with the events described, 
 His treatment of the Messianic ideas of the time suggests 
 this. He shows how the expectation of the Messiah was 
 shared by the Samaritans,. and he distinguishes "the. prophet " 
 (i. 21, 25; vi, 14.J vii; 40) from the Christ, although, Christian 
 teachers soon 'became accustomed; to recognise both, in our 
 Lord. And then on the negative side the evidence is also 
 for his being of this early period. He makes no reference 
 to the great gnostic heresies of the second century. Many 
 of his phrases were used by the teachers of those systems, 
 and he would, have guarded against such use; of them, had .he 
 known of the possibility of it. 
 
 (4) The author writes as an eye-witness. Four times the 
 claim, is made by him, or for him, viz., in i. i4;'xix. 35; 
 xxi. 24; and i John i. x, for the epistle was certainly writfen 
 
 .1 Identifiecl with As^ar by the " Palestine Exploration Fund." 
 ^ Professor Sanday has shown the absurdity of the theory that St. John 
 might have "got up" his knowledge of the" locality from "geography 
 books," by exhibiting the meagreness of such 'books even for iniportant 
 parts of the empire [Expositor, March, 189^). 
 
AUTHORSHIP AND HISTORICITY 333 
 
 by the author of the gospel. The vivid details of the gospel 
 suggest the eye-witness. 
 
 In particular consider the narrative of the loaves and fishes, with 
 St. Philip's place in it, etc. (vi. 5, 9, 15, 23), and the many notes of time 
 {e.g., i. 29, 35, 43 ; ii. I ; iv. 43, 52 ; vi. 22 ; xi. 6, 7 ; xii. I, 12 ; xiii. i ; 
 XX. i), even hours of the day (iv. 6 ; xiii. 30 ; xviii. 28). Moreover the 
 author knows and understands the feelings of the disciples. 
 
 Whein we put all this together we canriot fail to see that the 
 gospel is amply attested as a genuine work justly ascribed to 
 the apostle John. It would seem that such evidence could 
 scarcely be disturbed by the most serious objections. 
 
 c. Objections. — The gospel was received in the early 
 Church with practical unanimity. The only exceptions are 
 with some people whom Iren^us mentions without naming 
 them,^ and an obscure party in the second century whom 
 Epiphanius, writing in the fourth century, describes under 
 the nickname of the " Alogi," probably the same people 
 Irenseus referred to. He tells us that they rejected both 
 the gospel and the Apocalypse, attributing them to Cerinthus, 
 the heretic. But their reasons were evidently doctrinal, such 
 as objections to the " logos " doctrine.^ 
 
 But during the present century a number of objections have 
 been raised, and various hypotheses proposed. The principal 
 difficulties may be briefly epitomised as follows : — 
 
 (i) Inconsistency with the character of St. John. In the 
 synoptics he and his brother are "Boanerges" (Mark iii. 17), 
 and they evince a passionate and somewhat narrow-minded 
 disposition ; ^ but in- the fourth gospel " the beloved disciple " 
 has quite another disposition. This is a very feeble objection. 
 It allows no room for the softening and mellowing of character. 
 Besides, it assumes that if Jesus especially loved any disciple, 
 that disciple must have been of a gentle disposition. 
 
 (2) Inconsistency with the Apocalypse. This is more" 
 serious. As early as the third century Dionysius of 
 
 ' Adv. Haer., iii. 11. 
 
 2 Epiphanius, iKzer.,!. 1. To these may be added an obscure "Gaius." 
 
 P See, for instance, Mark ix. 38 ff. j Luke ix. 54, 55, 
 
334 BIBLICAL INTRODUCTION 
 
 Alexandria pointed out the great difference between the 
 style of the two works, and deduced the conclusion that 
 the Apocalypse must have been written by some other 
 John.^ The grammatical forms of the gospel are in good 
 Greek; but those of the Apocalypse are most erratic, so 
 much so, that "the grammar of the Apocalypse" has a 
 chapter assigned to it in books of N.T. grammar. And 
 while the gpspel is liberal in tone, the Apocalypse has 
 statements more in accordance with Judaistic Christianity. 
 So strong are these divergences, that it is generally admitted 
 that St. John could not have written the Apocalypse after writ- 
 ing the gospel. It is possible to think of the Apocalypse 
 as composed before his residence in Ephesus and the gospel 
 many years later, when his associations with Greek civilisation 
 as well as the growth of his own Christian experience may 
 have much changed his thought and language.^ But if the 
 same man did not write both books, it is a question whether 
 we should not follow Dionysius and assign the Apoca- 
 lypse to some other writer.^ 
 
 (3) Inconsistency with the synoptics. This is pointed 
 out in a number of instances. Thus the synoptic accounts 
 represent the scene of Christ's ministry as wholly in Galilee, 
 till at the very last He goes up to Jerusalem to die; but 
 John contains descriptions of several visits to Jerusalem 
 and public teaching in that city. No doubt it is the fact 
 that the three earlier gospels give us the ministry in the 
 north, perhaps resting on a Galilean tradition ; yet incidentally 
 they admit that Jesus had been to Jerusalem by recording 
 His lament over Jerusalem, where He says, " HoW often 
 would I have gathered your children, etc. ; but ye would 
 not." (Matthew xxiii. 37 ; Luke xiii. 34, 35.) The best MSS. 
 
 The parables of the good Samaritan (Luke x. 30-37), and the Pharisee 
 and the publican (Luke xviii. 9-14), indicate Jerusalem associations. 
 
 • See EusEBius, H.E., vii. 25. 
 
 " That depends on the date of the Apocalypse, which will be considered 
 further on. ' 
 
 ' For a full discussion of this point see Reynolds, Pul. Com., John, 
 
AUTHORSHIP AND HISTORICITY ?J5 
 
 The message to the owner of the ass's colt at Bethphage, by the Mount 
 of Olives, implies that this man was a friend of Jesus. (Mark xi. 3. )^ 
 
 of Luke iv. 44 read : " He was preaching in the synagogues of 
 Judsea." 
 
 Then it is said that the synoptics aiiow but little more 
 than one year for our Lord's ministry; but John gives 
 three years. Now the article on "Chronology" in the new 
 Dictionary of the Bible shows that though Luke seems to 
 think of but one year, Mark requires two, and John gives 
 no more than two. So this difficulty vanishes. Next it is 
 pointed put that while the synoptics show Jesus taking the 
 last Passover' at the usual Jewish date of that feast, John 
 seems to treat the Passover as not due till the evening of the 
 day on which Jesus was crucified.^ 
 
 Further, we miss all signs of progressive development in the 
 teaching; e.g. in the synoptics Jesus veils His messiahship at 
 first ; it is only confessed by St. Peter at Cssarea after the 
 public work in Galilee is over, and even then Christ will 
 not have it proclaimed. (Mark viii. 27-30.) But in John 
 it is admitted from the first, even virtually proclaimed by 
 the Baptist.^ But the gravest diflSculty remains to be con- 
 sidered. Our Lord's method of teaching is completely 
 changed in the fourth gospel, Instead of picturesque parables 
 and pithy proverbs, we have long discourses and arguments. 
 
 ^ But when Dr. Sanday points to the Mary and Martha incident in 
 Luke X. 38-42 as evidence qf a synoptic reference to Jud^a, is he .not 
 begging the question? The narrative in Luke by itself would rather 
 point to Galilee — except that it follows the parable of the good Samaritan. 
 The Bethany residence of the sisters depends on the identification of the 
 anointing in Mark xiv. 5-g with Mary the sister of Lazarus in John xii. 8. 
 See Sanday, Criticism of the Fourth Gospel, p. 147, 
 
 ^ For the synoptic date see Mark xiv. 12 j Matthew xxvi. 17; and 
 especially Luke xxii. 7 ; and for John's date, John xiii. I, 29 ; xviii, 28 ; 
 xix. 14, 31, 42. Three methods of reconciliation have been proposed : 
 (i) That Christ anticipated the feast. The synoptic references exclude 
 this. (2) That John refers to the whole week of the festival, most of 
 which was still future, under the names "Passover" and "Feast," the 
 " Preparation" being taken as the Jewish name for Friday. (3) That the 
 eating of the lambs was not got through on the Passover night, so many 
 had to be prepared. 
 
 ■ John i. 29, 41, 49 ; iv. 26, etc. 
 
336 BIBLICAL INTRODUCTION 
 
 Then, while' in the synoptics Christ is practical and occupied 
 with others, in Johri He is theological, transcendental, and 
 occupied with His own person and relation to (jod. It is 
 something, however, to have it proved that the essential 
 truths taught by Christ are the same in all four gospels. ^ 
 
 d. Probable Solution. — The weighty evidence fo'r the 
 antiquity and Johannine authorship still stands, arid that 
 too cannot be lightly set aside, although sometimes it is 
 ignored when the difficulties are under discussion. While 
 accepting the tradition on this evidence, and assigning the 
 gospel to St. John, we ihay still allow considerable scope 
 to two considerations : (i) It must be conceded that St. 
 John reproduced his memories after long meditation and 
 frequent use of them in teaching as they shaped themselves 
 in the forms of his own thought. This is apparent from 
 the fact that the language and style are exactly the same 
 in sayings of Christ, in sayings of John the Baptist, in 
 comments of the evangelist, and in the first epistle of Johh.^ 
 We must attribute this unique and easily recognisable 
 Johannine style to St. John hirriself thi^otighout. That neSd 
 not trouble us if we remember that " the letter killeth,'' 
 while it is "the Spirit" that "giveth life." (2) Possibly we 
 should go further, and allow that St. John may have written 
 the work through one of his disciples, who would be re- 
 sponsible for the signs of Greek culture it contains, while 
 the substance of the incidents and teaching was contributed 
 by the apostle himself. 
 
 Pfleiderer holds that the book does not belong to historical works 
 at all, but must be. classed with Hellenistic doctrinal productions, as 
 " the. richest fruit of the development of the Hellenistic doctrine found 
 in the Hebrew."' 
 
 ^ Demonstrated both by Wendt and Beyschlag. 
 
 " e.g. , for similarities between John the Baptist and the evangelist see 
 i. 15-18 and iii. 27-36 ; and for similarities between Christ and the 
 evangelist see iii. 11-21. In the one case John's words, in thf other 
 Christ's words, blend imperceptibly with' the evangelist's. 
 
 • UrchrisUnthum, pp, 695-7S6, 
 
• CONTfiNTS -' *337. 
 
 Oq the other hand, Weizsacker allows the gospel to contain genuine, 
 historical reports of the sayings and deeds of Christ ; and although he does 
 not admit that it comes directly from John, he attributes it to a Johanniiie- 
 School at Ephesus.' . ,'..'•• 
 
 Holtzmann denies the apostolic authorship,^ ascribing it to a Christian 
 Jew of the dispersion ; and so does Jiilicher, who;regards the gospe] as "a 
 philosophic fiction " with a religious tendency, of the third generation.' 
 A similar position is taken byf'Abb^ Loisy.^ Schmiedel' rejects it as 
 entirely unhistorical." , ■ ■ 
 
 Harnack formerly took a middle course. He regarded Johii the elder 
 as the author, but allowed that this man. obtained his information from the 
 apostles.* But in his later work. What is Christianity? this position appears, 
 to be abandoned. Mc-Giifert ascribes the gospel to J6hn the elder;' and' 
 Dr. Stodaly allows the possibility that' John the elder was the beloved 
 disciple and author of the gospel, who had' taken tlie'place of John the 
 son of Zebedee, as James the brother of the Lord had taken the place of 
 the other son of Zebedee. This view would fall in with a statement 
 attributed to Papias, in a fragment published by Dfe Bopr,^ that , both jthe 
 sons of Zebedee were "slain by the Jews." But if that is correct, how 
 comes it that neither Eusebius nor any other ancient writer , refers toiit? 
 It is without confirmation till the ninth century — in Georgius Hamartalus. 
 Still, while the total silence' of the intermediate ages is a greit difficulty/ 
 on the other hand many of the objections to the gospel as ascribed- to 
 the son of Zebedee would be lessened, and its authority as the work of 
 an intimate disciple vindicated, if we cqtild accept this view, towards 
 which there is a distinct movement in the present day." 
 
 Wendt finds refuge in a divided authorship, holding that an original 
 document by the apostle John has been adopted, worked over, and added 
 to by a later writer. His ingenious theory has not obtained much sup- 
 port ; the unity of style throughout is too marked. 
 
 There is a growing tendency to agree with Harnack in attributing the 
 gospel to Joh5 the elder. This maybe done while admitting that it Was 
 written by an eye-witpess, John the elder being the beloved disqiple. It isi 
 rernarlcable that the beloved disciple does not appear till towards the end ■ 
 of the book, and then as a friend of the High Priest. The statement^ 
 attributed to Papias; by George '■'i\^t, Sinner. '"that John'^as well as his 
 brother Jaihes was killed by the Jews seems to mdicate that the' apostle 
 was martyred, and probably at Jerusalem. A later generation may have 
 confused the name of John the elder with Johii the ajlostle. This is im- 
 
 ' Apostolic Age, Engfish trans., vol. ii., pp. 206-226. 
 
 = EinUitung,^^. 453-465- " , 
 
 ' Einhitung, p. 258. . ., , ' 
 
 • Le Quatrihnc Evangije, pp. 1-143. ' 
 ' Encyc. Bib,, "John, son of Zebedee." 
 
 • Ckronologie, pp. 651-680. 
 
 '' Apostolic Age,t^'^. tdd-bii. ' , 
 ^ Texte V. Untersuch, v. 2, p. 170. 
 
 • See Sanday, Tif Criticism of the Fourth Gospel, p. 253. 
 
33? BIBLICAL INTRODUCTION 
 
 material, if it is allowed that the beloved disciple-an 6ye-witness-H:oin- 
 posed the book. The Tohannine authorship of the^ gospel has obtained 
 iabstantial support from Lightfoot, Reynolds, etc. , and it xs more recently 
 defended by Zahn,^ Drummond, and Sanday. 
 
 Si Time amd Place of Writing. 
 
 Even extreme criticism has continually receded in its asser- 
 tions concerning the date of the gospel. 
 
 The Tiibingen date (a.d. 160-170) of Baur and Schwegler is now no 
 longer maintained by any. Zeller retreated to 150, Pfleiderer to 140, 
 Hilgenfeld to 130-140. Jiilicher dates it soon after lOO, Harnack 80-110. 
 An exact date cannot be fixed. 
 
 3. Contents. 
 
 a. Introduction, i. 1-18. 
 
 The Word with God; manifested (i) in creation, (2) in 
 prophecy, (3) in the light within, (4) in the Incarnation. 
 
 b. Before the First Passover; the Baptist and Chris fs early 
 Galilean Ministry, i. 19-ii. 12. 
 
 i. 1 9-34, Jqhn's testimony to Christ. ! 
 
 35-51, John's disciples passing over to Jesus. 
 
 ii. 1-12, The marriage a,t Cana; Jesus at Capernaum. 
 
 c. 27ie Year from the First to the Second Passovers; 
 Christ's Work in Jerusalem, Judaa, Samaria, and Galilee, 
 ii. 13-V. 47. 
 
 ii. 13-25, Jesus at the Passover; purging the temple. 
 
 iii. 1-2 1, Nicodemus and the new birth. 
 
 22-36, jesiis in Judaea; John at ^Erion; his testimony to 
 the superiority of Jesus. 
 
 iv. 1-26, The woman of Samaria and living water. 
 
 27-42, Our Lord's ministry in Samaria. 
 
 43-54, Jesus a second time at Cana; cure of the Capernaum 
 nobleman's son. .1 , / 
 
 V. 1-9, Jesus at a feast in Jerusalem ; cure of the infirm 
 
 man. 
 
 ' &»/«/««^, vol. ii., pp. 445 ffi 
 
CONTENTS >:. 339 
 
 10-18, The Jeyrs complain of Sabbath-breaking. 
 
 19-47, Christ's reply; His claim to give life from the 
 dead; testimony of the Scriptures to Christ, who is sent by 
 the Father. 
 
 d. The Year from -the Second Passover to the Third ; 
 Jesus in Galilee, then in Jerusalem and the South Country, 
 vi. i-xi. 57. 
 
 vi. 1-15, Christ feeding the multitude; attempt to make 
 Him a king. 
 
 16-21, Walking on the sea. 
 
 22-59, Christ the bread of life; eating His flesh and drjr^k- 
 ing His blood. 
 
 60-71, Many disciples leaving at the hard saying. 
 
 vii. 1-13, Search for Jesus at the Feast of Tabernacles. 
 
 14-24, Jesus at the feast; charged with demoniacal pos-, 
 session. 
 
 25-36, Attempt to seize Him and kill Him. 
 
 37-44, Invitation to all who thirst. 
 
 45-52, The officers, overawed, refuse, to arrest Chrjstj 
 Nicodemus claims justice for Him. 
 
 [vii. 53-viii. II, The woman taken in adultery.] 
 
 This passage is not found in the best MSS., and' it is rejected by 
 biblical critics as not part of the gospel. Still it is very ancient,^ and 
 very Christ-like. Probably it embodies a genuine tradition, and perhaps 
 it is taken from some lost gospel. Blass ascribes it to a second edition 
 of Luke, prepared by that evangelist." . ■■ 
 
 viii. 12-30, Contest concerning the claims of Christ. ' 
 
 31-59, The Jews no longer Abraham's children ;' Christ's 
 claim to pre-existence rejected. 
 
 ix. 1-12, Cure of the blind man at the Pool of Siloam. 
 
 13-41, Discussion with the Pharisees about this c«r^ ha,ying 
 been on the Sabbath day. 
 
 X. 1-2 1, The good shepherd. 
 
 1 In the western text, D, etc. 
 
 ' gee Blass^ rhilology of the Gosfels, p. 163. 
 
340 BIBLICAL 'INTRODUCTION 
 
 22-39, At the Feast of the Dedication; the' Jews attempt 
 to stone Jesus. > 
 
 40-42, Jesus beyond the Jordan. 
 
 xi. 1-46, The raising of Lazarus. 
 
 47-53, On the advice of Caiaphas, the Council propose, to 
 put Jesus to death. 
 
 54-57, Jesus in retirement at Ephraim. 
 
 e. The Last Days at Jerusalem, xii.-xiii. 
 xii. 1-8, Mary anointing the feet of Jesus. 
 9-1 1, The notoriety of Lazarus. 
 
 12-19, The triumphant entry. 
 
 20-363, Greeks desiring to see Jesus; His premonition of 
 death ; the voice from heaven. 
 
 36b-5o, Jesus in retirement ; on believing or rejecting 
 Christ. 
 
 xiii. 1-20, At the Passover; Jesus washing His disciples' 
 feet ; the lesson about humility. 
 
 2 1-30, The traitor pointed out. 
 
 31-38, Christ to be glorified in death; Petei: warned. 
 
 f. Tfm Last Discourse and Prayer, xiv.-xvii. 
 
 xiv., Seeing. the Father; the promise of the Comforter; 
 Christ's peace. : ; 
 
 XV., The true vine; the new commandment. 
 
 xvi.. The Spirit of truth; the little while; concluding 
 assurances. 
 
 xvii., Christ's prayer of intercession. 
 
 g. The Arrest, Trials, Crucifixion, and Resurrection, 
 xviii.-xxi. 
 
 xviii. i-i r, The betrayal and arrest in the garden. 
 12-27, Trial before Annas and Caiaphas; Peter's denial, 
 28-xix. 16, Trial before Pilate,' and condemnai:ibh. 
 xix. 17-30, Crucifixion and death of Jesug, 
 31-37, The spear-thrust, 
 
CONTENTS •340A 
 
 38-42, The burial. 
 
 XX. 1-18, Mary Magdalene at the tomb, and m'eeliing 
 Jesus. 
 
 19-23, Jesus appearing to His disciples. 
 
 24-31, Thomas' doubt; his faith on seeing Christ; other 
 signs. 
 
 xxi. 1-14, Appearance by the sea of Galilee. 
 
 15-23, Christ's questions for Peter. 
 
 24, 25, Appended notes of verification. 
 
 4. Characteristics. 
 
 The fourth gospel opens with an introduction, simple in 
 phrase but profound in meaning, which identifies the Word 
 with Christ, and traces the manifestations of the Word down 
 to the Incarnation. 
 
 ' ' The Logos " (6 Myos) was a title familiar to Alexandrian Jews from 
 its prominence in the writings of Philo, who had derived it from the 
 Stoics, and used it in the sense given to it by those earlier philosophers as 
 the Divine Reason, So close was the communication between Alexandria 
 and Ephesus, we cannot doubt that the appearance of the term in our 
 gospel is derived from Philo. But this applies to the title itself, rather 
 than to its meaning. St. John understands it as meaning Word, not 
 Reason, and uses it in harmony with Palestinian Jewish thought, rather 
 than in the Alexandrian way. Thus old rabbinical teachings about the 
 Memra, "the Word of the Lord," which was almost taken to be a 
 person and a mediator between God and the world in later Judaism, 
 is echoed in John's doctrine of the Logos. But this, in turn, is based 
 on the O.T. teaching about the Word of the Lord. But John gives it 
 quite a new form in applying it to Christ. The chief differences between 
 John and Philo may be stated as follows : — 
 
 (1) Philo's Logos is Reason ; John's is Word. 
 
 (2) ,, „ impersonal; ,, a Person. 
 
 (3) ,, „ not incarnate ; ,, incarnate. 
 
 (4) ,, „ not the Messiah ; ,, the Messiah. 
 
 St. John, or his editor, tells us distinctly that his object in 
 writing is to induce faith in Christ (xx. 31). To that end 
 no doubt he selects incidents and teachings that bring our 
 Lord's Divine nature into view. He also sets forth those 
 teachings of Christ which reveal the deeper experiences of 
 the human soul in relation to Christ — the new birth, the 
 
340E BIBLICAL INTRODUCTION 
 
 living water, the light, the heavenly bread, reaching a climax in 
 the utterances about eating the flesh and drinking the blood 
 of the Son of Man. At the same time he shows how Christ's 
 work was carried on in the midst of a conflict with error and 
 direct opposition. We see throughout the darkness contending 
 with the light, but not able to suppress it. It is characteristic 
 of John that even the last conflict, in the passion and death of 
 Christ, is described as a glorification. St. John gives no account 
 of the infancy, the temptation, most of the Galilean ministry, 
 the Lord's Supper, .the agony in the garden; but it is probable 
 that he knew one or more Of the earlier gospels, and left those 
 works to tell their own tale. It was early recognised as the 
 " Spiritual Gospel." Yet it is singularly definite and vivid. 
 
CHAPTER IV. 
 THE ACTS OF THE APOSTLES 
 
 I. Authorship. 
 z. Historicity. 
 3. Date. 
 
 4. Conteiits. 
 
 5. Aim and Characteristics. 
 
 I. AuthorsMp. 
 
 This book was unanimously ascribed to St. Luke by the 
 early Church, and accepted as the work of that writer in all 
 subsequent ages until the rise of modern criticism. 
 
 a. Internal Evidence. — It is beyond question that the 
 author of the third gospel was the author of Acts. Both 
 begin with an introdilction addressed to Theophilus, and Acts 
 refers to the gospel as "the former treatise." A similar style 
 is to be traced through the two works. If therefore we have 
 seen reason to accept the Lucan authorship of the third 
 gospel, that is a justification for attributing Acts also to Luke. 
 Then Acts has characteristics of its own which well accord 
 with this judgment. It is very Pauline in tone, and a con- 
 siderable portion of it is devoted to an account of the 
 apostle's journeys, so that we may be sure that it was written 
 by one of his friends. 
 
 b. Testimony of Ancient Writers. — -The book is acknow- 
 ledged as Luke's in writings dating soon after the middle 
 of the second century. Irenseus thus acknowledges it, and 
 it is ascribed to Luke in the Muratorian Fragment. 
 
 For Irenseus's statements see Ad'V. Haer., iii. 14, I ; 15, I. Acts was 
 known to the author of the letter of the Churches at Lyons and Vienne, 
 who cites St. Stephen's dying words, though without naming his authority 
 (Eusebius, H.E., v. 2). There is reason to think it was known to 
 Justin Martyr, though he does not expressly cite it (I. Apol., 49 ; Tryph., 
 20, 68, I i8)i The Ads of Paul and Thicla, though an apocryphal work, 
 must be ascribed to the second century, and it makes use of Acts. It is 
 needless to cite later testimony. Acts is in the Peshitto and the Old Latin 
 versions. 
 
 341 
 
342 BIBLICAL INTRODUCTION 
 
 c. Authorship of the Sections in the First Person. — Without 
 any explanation or introduction tlie author passes into the use 
 of the first person plural with the pronoun "we" in three 
 sections of his book, viz., xvi. io-i8j xx. 5-xxi. 18; xxvii. i- 
 xxviii. 16. The narratioh of these portions begins at Troas and 
 goes on to Philippi. It returns on the occasion of St. Paul's 
 second visit to Philippi, and accompanies him to Jerusalem. 
 There it disappears, but it is resumOT^£pr the apostle's voyage 
 from Jerusalem to Rome. Thus, it would.seem, St. Paul met 
 the author at Troas, took him to Philippi, and left him there ; 
 picked him up again on his return to Philippi, and had his 
 company to Jerusalem, and again after the Cassarean im- 
 prisonment for the journey to Rome. The- most probable 
 explanation is that St. Luke was the companion on , these 
 occasions, and Professor Ramsay suggests with some proba- 
 bility that he was a native of Philippi, and the "man of 
 Macedonia " who appeared to St. Paul in his night visions^ 
 at Troas, perhaps after conversation with the apostle the 
 previous evening.^ An alterna,tive is that St. Luke here inserts 
 sections of some writing by another person, and the names 
 of Silas and Timothy have been proposed. Neither will 
 fit the circumstances : (i) Silas was with the apostle at 
 Philippi; but he disappears after this first visit to Europe, 
 and we have no reason to suppose he was with St. Paul 
 in his later journeys. (2) Timothy was with the apostle 
 later ; but then he is named in the " we " sections as a 
 third person. Besides, it is quite contrary to St. Luke's literary 
 method to introduce some other writer without a word of 
 explanation. We know he had many sources for his gospel; 
 probably it was the same with Acts. Yet he treats no other 
 portions of his materials in this way. He was far too skilful 
 an author to lapse into so crude and clumsy a method. There 
 is no reason to deny these sections to Luke, who, we know, 
 was with ,St. Paul at Rome. (Colossians iv. 14.) It is natural 
 to suppose that he accompanied the apostle on his voyage 
 
 * St. Paul, pp. 200-205, 
 
HISTORICITY "343 
 
 thither. Thus Paul indirectly confirms Luke's statements. 
 Moreover the style of these fragments agrees with Luke's style 
 elsewhere. 
 
 2. Historicity.' 
 
 Difficulties as to the historicity of Acts have been suggested 
 on a variety of grounds : 
 
 a. Inconsistency with the Theory of a Doctrinal Schism in 
 ,the Church. — This was Baur's great objection. Starting with 
 
 the theory of bitter antagonism between St. Paul and the 
 Twelve Apostles, and maintaining that this antagonism 
 corresponded to two totally dififerent conceptions of Christian 
 truth, this critic and his followers regarded Acts as a fancy 
 picture in which the rigour of Paul's anti-Judaism and the 
 strictness of the older apostles' Judaism are both softened 
 down to agree with later Catholic unity. But it is now 
 seen that the Tiibingen school grossly exaggerated the 
 difference between the two lines of Christian teaching. 
 Galatians, in which Baur thought he found the strongest 
 evidences of divergence, really testifies to the essential agree- 
 ment between Peter and Paul, both in accepting liberal views 
 with regard to the Gentiles ^ and in recognising one another's 
 claims.^ 
 
 b. Contradictions to St. Paul's Statements of Fact. — It 
 must be allowed that the difficulties which present themselves 
 in this relation are not a little puzzling. The chief points 
 come out of a comparison with Galatians where St. Paul 
 describes his visits to Jerusalem. It will be best to reserve 
 them for consideration when we are studying that epistle.' 
 
 c. Comparison with Josephus. — This is made in two 
 opposite ways. It is said that the author of Acts used 
 Josephus,; and therefore must be much later than St. Lukej it 
 is also said that he is inconsistent with Josephus — and there- 
 fore is not worthy of credit. But surely these two objections 
 cannot both be maintained at the same time. If our author 
 
 * See Gal. ii. 3, 12. ^ See Gal. i. 24, ii. 9. ' See chapter vi 
 
344 BIBLICAL INTRODUCTION 
 
 used Jo'sephuS he would not be likely to contradict his 
 authority ; if he contradicted Josephus that would be a sign 
 of independent authorship — unless we say he used the Jewish 
 historian carelessly, which would be contrary to what, the pre- 
 face to the gospel justifies us in expecting. 
 
 (1) The first point is one of verbal resemblances, and can only be discussed 
 at length with an elaborate comparison of "Greek words. Writers of the 
 same period, in the same country, with the same culture, dealing with his- 
 torical events that sometimes coincide, might naturally hit upon the same 
 terms. It is to be noted that the comparison is with words and phrases, 
 not whole sentences. , > 
 
 (2) The second point comes up especially in the report of Gamaliel's 
 speech, where we read of the insurrections, first of Theudas, and then of 
 Judas of Galilee (Acts v. 36, 37). Now according to Josephus the insurrec- 
 
 ' tion of Theudas took place under Cuspus Fadus at least ten years later 
 - than the period of Gamaliel's speech, and long after that df Jiid'as.' ' But 
 since St. Luke wrote later than the time of Theudas he may have known of 
 his name and misplaced it in Gamaliel's speech. We must remernter that 
 he was not a Palestinian. Still such a blunder*would tend to discredit his 
 accuracy as a historian. It is quite possible that there was some other 
 insurgent named Theudas to whom the speech of Gamaliel refers, for we 
 know there were many risings iii these troublesome times." At all events 
 it will not do to say that the author of Acts drew his information fiom 
 Josephus, and then disarranged it when quoting from memory, for he tells 
 us that Theudas had a following of 400 meil, a detail not in Josephus. It 
 has been suggested that St. Luke wrote the book in his old age after 
 having read Josephus. That is at least possible, if he was quite a young 
 man virhen he attached himself to St. Paul. 
 
 d. Differences between the Earlier and the Later Parts of 
 Acts,—'Va& Pauline part is more easily accepted beca,use of 
 the closer connection of its author with the events he narrates; 
 and recent archseological discoveries, go far to vindicate St. 
 Luke's accuracy as a historiarj in this, section of his work.* 
 
 But such a vindication must also help to establish all he 
 writes. , Moreover, the earlier portion contaitis evidences of 
 its own genuineness in the picture of the Church at Jerusalem 
 that it contains. St. Peter's speeches have a very primitive 
 
 ' Auti XX. V. I. Vet it is curious that Josephus mentions' this earlier 
 insurrection after that of Theudas, .though at the same time recognising its 
 prior' occurrence — a fact that has encouraged the suggestion that the order 
 in Acts results firom a cursory glance at Josephus; This is too small a 
 point to prove dependence on Josephus. See HeadiiAM, neivi Bible. £>ic.^ 
 "Acts." 
 
 ' There were three pretenders named Judas, and four named Simon. 
 See Lightfoot on Acts in Smith's B.B.*. 
 
 3 See Ramsay, St. Paul, etc., passim. 
 
CONTENTS "345 
 
 christology, and their references to the death of Christ contain 
 no hint of the sacrificial efficacy of that event which is so 
 prominent in St. Paul. ^ 
 
 3. Date. 
 
 The concluding verses have given rise to the idea that Acts 
 was written at or before the close of St. Paul's imprisonment 
 there described. But it must come after the third gospel, 
 and that we have seen was written after the destruction of 
 Jerusalem (a.d. 70). When we allow time for collecting 
 materials after writing the gospel, we cannot well fix the date 
 before a.d. 80. There is no necessity to fix it much later. 
 
 4. Contents. 
 
 a. The Church at Jerusalem, i. i-viii. la. 
 
 i. i-ii, Introduction; the apostoUc commission; the 
 ascension. 
 
 12-26, Choice of a new apostle. 
 
 ii. 1-13, The gift of the Spirit with the tongues. 
 
 14--42, Peter's speech at Pentecost. 
 
 43-47, The brotherhood of the enlarged Church. 
 
 iii. i-io, Cure of a lame man. 
 
 11-26, Peter's speech on this occasion. 
 
 iv. 1-22, Peter and John before the Couticil. 
 
 23-37J Dismissal and return to the Church; the generosity 
 of the brotherhood. 
 
 V. i-ii, The lie of Ananias and Sapphira, and their death. 
 
 12-16, Miracles of healing. 
 
 17-32, Second imprisonment of Peter and John, 
 
 33-42, GamaUel's advice. 
 
 vi. 1-7, The appointment of the seven, 
 
 8-15, Stephen's ministry and arrest. 
 
 vii. 1-53, Stephen's defence. 
 
 54-viii. la, Stephen's martyrdom. 
 
 b. Spread of Christianity in Judaa and Samaria, viii. i b- 
 
 xi. 18. 
 
 ' Spitta endeavours to trace two documents underlying Acts, especially 
 in the earlier part, one of which he attributes to Luke. :Etit why not 
 regard both as sources used by Luke? Probably he consulted niaiiy 
 authorities. 
 
34<5 BIBLICAL INTRODUCTION 
 
 viii. ib-3, The Church scattered by persecution. 
 4-13, Philip in Samaria ; Simon Magus. 
 14-25, Visit of Peter and John to Samaria. 
 26-40, Philip and the Ethiopian. 
 ix. 1-25, Coriyer^ipn of Paul. 
 26-31, Paul at Jerusalem. 
 
 32-43, Peter at Joppa and Lyddaj raising of Tabitha. 
 X., Peter and Cornelius; Peter's trance; his speech at 
 Caesarea. 
 
 xi. 1-18, Peter's explanation at Jerusalem. 
 
 c. Spread of Christianity in Phosnida, Cyprus, and Antioch, 
 xi. 19-xii. 25. 
 
 xi. 19-30, Those scattered by the persecution carrying the 
 gospel abroad. 
 
 xii. Herod's persecution ; murder of James ; Peter's third 
 imprisonment and escape ; death of Herod. 
 
 d. Paul's First Missionary Journey; associated with 
 Barnabas, xiii. i-xv. 35. 
 
 xiii. 1-3, The missionary dedication of Barnabas and Paul 
 by the Church at Antioch. 
 
 4-12, Journey through Cyprus. 
 
 13-52, At Antioch in Pisidia; Paul's speeeh, in the 
 synagogue ; turning to the Gentiles. 
 
 xiv. 1-7, Preaching at Iconium, and driven out of the 
 town. 
 
 8-28, Cure of a lame man at Lystra; Paul stoned. 
 
 XV. I-3S, The Jerusalem Church Council on the question 
 of the circumcision of the Gentiles. 
 
 e. Paul's Second Missionary Journey; accompanied by 
 Silas, XV. 36-xviii. 22. 
 
 XV. 36-xvi. 5, Visit to the churches founded during the 
 first journey. 
 
 xvi. 6-40, Paul crosses to Europe; imprisoriment at 
 Philippi; conversion of the jailor. 
 
 xvii. 1-15, At Thessalonica and Beroea. 
 
 16-34, At Athens; speech at the Areopagus. 
 
 xviii. i-i7i At Corinth; brought before Gallio. 
 
AIM AND CHARACtERISt^ICS 347 
 
 18-22, Paul travels by Ephesus and Cssarea to Antibch. 
 
 f. Paul's Third Missionary Journey, xviii. 23-xxi. 16. 
 23-28, Paul revisiting Galatia and Phrygia; Apollos at 
 
 Corinth. 
 
 xix., Paul at Ephesus ; the riot. 
 
 XX. 1-6, Journey to Macedonia and Greece. 
 
 7-1 2, Paul at Troas ; Eutychus' fall, and restoration. 
 
 13-38, Journey to Miletus; Paul meets the elders of 
 Ephesus there. ' ■ 
 
 xxi. 1-16, Voyage to Tyre and Csesarea. 
 
 g. Paul's Arrest at Jerusalem, Imprisonment at Ccesarea, 
 and Voyage to Rome, xxi. I'j to the end. 
 
 xxi. 17-26, Paul with the Jerusalem Church. 
 
 27-40, The Jews try to kill Paulj He is rescued and 
 conveyed to the castle. 
 
 xxii. 1-2 r. Speech before the Jews at Jerusalem. 
 
 22-30, Paul with the chief captain. 
 
 xxiii. i-10, Paul before the council. 
 
 11-35, Taken to Csesarea. 
 
 xxiv., Paul before Felix. 
 
 XXV., xxvi., Paul before Festus; appeal to Caesar j speech 
 before Agrippa. 
 
 xxvii., Voyage and shipwreck. 
 
 xxviii. i-io, Paul at Melita. 
 
 11-16, Journey to Rome. 
 
 17-31, Paul expounds his gospel at Rome. 
 
 5. Aim and Characteristics. 
 
 In his preface St. Luke states his aim, or rather illustrates 
 it from the commission to the apostles, viz., to show the 
 ever-widening circles of the spread of Christianity (i. 8). 
 It will be observed that he carries this intention into effect ; 
 the plan of the book shows us first the Jerusalem Church, 
 then the Judaean evangelisation, next that of Samaria, after 
 this the great advance into the Gentile world, beginning 
 with Antioch, the centre of Gentile missionary work, and 
 going on with the journeys of St. Paul, the great evangelist 
 
348 p BIBLICAL INTRODUCTION 
 
 of the Gentiles, until he is seen planting the gospel in RoHie, 
 the head city of the world. But while this is the first object 
 aimed at, it would seem that the author's ultimate design 
 is to commend the gospel to his readers by exhibiting its . 
 gracious aspects and its great fruitfiilness, He seems 
 especially to have the Roman world in view. Roman 
 officials invariably appear in a. favourable light, military 
 officers especially so ; and this is in marked contrast with 
 the fierce antagonism of the Jews and their leaders, from 
 whom in every case the persecution of the Christians arises 
 ^excepting in one or two instances of riots among pagan 
 mobs, on the incitement of men actuated by trade interests. 
 This conciliatory treatment of the Roman world constitutes 
 the book in a sense an Apologia. But there is no reason 
 to question the truthful character of the narrative on th^t 
 account. It was calumny and misunderstanding that first 
 prejudiced the pagan world against the Church. A "plain, 
 unvarnished tale " was the best way to preyent the growth of 
 senseless prejudices. 
 
CHAPTER V. 
 THE PAULINE EPISTLES: FIRST GROUP 
 
 I. The Thirteen Epistles. I 3. I Thessalonians. 
 
 ii The Thessalonian Christians. | 4. 2 Thessalonians. 
 
 I. The Thirteen Epistles, 
 
 'Thirteen epistles are commonly ascribed to St. Paul. A 
 feiurteenth — the epistle to the Hebrews, which bears the 
 apostle's name in its title in our English Bibles — is now 
 almost universally considered to be the work of some other 
 author.^ These books naturally fall into four ' groups, deter- 
 mined both by their characters and contents, and by the 
 periods when they were written. The works of St. Paul — 
 at all events those that have been preserved to our own 
 day — ^are not distributed evenly over the apostle's career. 
 Supposing his conversion to have occurred about a.d. 35, 
 we have eighteen years before the first epistle was written. 
 Then come four literary periods : — 
 
 M'rst' A.D. 53, I and 2 Thessalonians. 
 
 Second, a.d. 57, 58, i and 2 Corinthians, Galatians, 
 Romans. 
 
 Third, a.d. 62, 63, Ephesians, Colossians, Philemon, 
 Philippians. 
 
 Fourth. A.D. 65, Titus, i and 2 Timothy, i.e., if we admit 
 
 the genuineness of the pastoral epistles, or of portions of 
 
 them. 
 
 ' The fall titles of the N.T. books in our English Bibles are quite 
 late in their origin. They are not found in the oldest MSS., which 
 give much shorter titles, and therefore they cannot claim any authority. 
 In the text itself the epistle to the Hebrews does not claim to be written 
 by St. Paul. Since no author's name appears in it, the question as to 
 who wrote it, which will be considered later on, does not affect its 
 genuineness. 
 
3SO BIBLICAL INTRODUCTION 
 
 These datei are most of them only approximate. But when once the 
 general scheme of chronology which they follow is accepted, they fall 
 into their places with sufficient accuracy to exclude more than about 
 a year's variation either forward or backward. Specific questions con- 
 cerning the dates of the several books will be considered as they arise. 
 In other schemes of chronology these epiStlesJstill preserve their relative 
 positions but little altered. They are arranged by Harnack ^ as follows : — 
 
 48/9 (47/8),' 1 and 2 Thessaloiiians. r. •' '.' ^-''J J ' J ■' .1 '*lfr; 
 S3 (52), I Corinthians, Galatians. 
 53 (52), Early autumn, 2 Corinthians. 
 
 53/54, Romans. ' :, 1 • ■ ' ' ' - . 
 
 57-59 (56-58)) Colossians, .Philem'on, Ephesians (if genuine), Philip- 
 pians. 
 
 59-64, Genuine Pauline elements of the pastpral epistles. 
 
 Certain CQiijmon' characteristics may be traced with more or 
 less distinctness through all the Pauline epistleis. They are 
 real letters, impressed with the personality of the writer, taking 
 cognizance of the circumstances of the people to whom they 
 are directed; in form opening with the style of address 
 current at the time, though enriched with deeper meaning, 
 and closing as a rule with personal salutations ; in spirit 
 breathing a warmly affectionate feeling for the readers, and 
 a deep, passionate concern for the issues at stake. At the 
 same .time they all deal with matters of religion, varying in 
 ■ relative proportion, but still, in nearly every case discussing . 
 doctrinal points, describing processes of spiritual experience, 
 and giving direct advice on practical questions. It -inay, be 
 said that St. Paul created this style of literature; — since been 
 imitated by Cyprian, rdn61on, and others — in which the mpst 
 serious religious truths anji the most momentous actions of 
 life are discussed in lettersl^ 
 
 St.- Paul was in, the habit of dictating his letters to an 
 amanuensis, possibly owing to weakness of eyesight, or per- 
 haps because the rough w6rk of his handicraft rendered his 
 fingers unapt at holding the pen. .^Jn Romans xvi. 22' the 
 
 1 Chronologie, pp. 233-239. 
 
 ° The great originality of this kind of literature has been put forward as 
 an argument against the early date of, the Epistle of St, James, because if: 
 that is earlier than the. first of St. Paul's japistles, St. James must be, 
 credited with the invention. But that epistle roust be considered befoje 
 we yield the point. 
 
THE PAULINE EPISTLES 351 
 
 amanuensis, who gives his name as Tertius, appends. his own 
 greeting. The apostle emphasises the fact that he writes the 
 short personal letter to Philemon with his own hand (Phile- 
 mon 19), and in appending a postscript to the epistle to the 
 Galatians (vi. 11-18) he calls attention to the large size of his 
 letters in comparison with his secretary's neat handwriting. 
 From 2 Thessalonians iii. 1 7 we learn that it was the apostle's 
 custom to authenticate his letters by adding a few words him- 
 self. In this case it is a salutation followed by the final 
 benediction (verses 17, 18). So the apostle points out that he 
 writes i Corinthians xvi. 21-24, and Colossians iv. 18, in his 
 own hand. Possibly — as Weiss suggests— the .doxology in 
 Romans (xvi. 25-27), the final benediction in Ephesians 
 (vi. 23, 24), the greetings in Philippians (iv. 21-23), and 
 perhaps 2 Corinthians xiii. 12-14, and 1 Timothy vi. 20, 21, 
 were written by St. Paul himself. It was often the practice of 
 the apostle to associate his travelling companions and fellow 
 missionaries with himself in his writing {e.g., 1 Thessalonians 
 i. I ; 2 Thessalonians i. 1, etc.). But he soon relapsed into 
 the first person singular, and he always wrote on his own in- 
 dividual apostolic authority. 
 
 Besides these thirteen epistles there is reason to believe that 
 St. Paul wrote others that have been lost. Two in particula" 
 are directly alluded to — one epistle to the Corinthians earlier 
 than our i Corinthians (mentioned in i Corinthians v. 9), and 
 one to the Laodiceans (mentioned in Colossians iv, 16), 
 Probably the extant epistles contain fragments of lost epistles. 
 In particular Romans xvi. appears to be part of an epistle to 
 Ephesus,^ and there is reason to believe that 2 Corinthians 
 consists of two epistles— in whole or part — run together.^ 
 On the other hand it can scarcely be supposed that any large, 
 important epistle has been lost. In all probability such a 
 work would have left traces in early Church history. The 
 most ancient writers who quote from St. Paul with acknow- 
 ledgement only cite what is in our N.T. 
 
 Of our thirteen epistles nine are addressed to churches, four 
 2 ^ 1 See pages 379, 380. ^ See page 368. 
 
3F2 BIBLICAL INTRODUCTION 
 
 to individual men. Of the nine to churches some are sent to 
 single communities, e:g., Romans; others are for a group of 
 churches, e.g., Galatians, probably Ephesians, and also in a 
 measure 2 Corinthians, which, though primarily to Corinth, is 
 also directed to " all the saints that are in the whole of 
 Achaia" (2 Corinthians i. i). Letters to churches were to 
 be read to all the members. This is apparent throughout. 
 It is expressly stipulated with regard to the first written letter 
 (i Thessalonians V. 27). Of the four epistles to individual 
 men three are of a pastoral character, and therefore essentially 
 of public interest to the churches (i and 2 Timothy and 
 Titus). One is a wholly private and personal letter (Phile- 
 mon). 
 
 2. The Thessalonian Christians. 
 
 The two epistles to the Thessalonians are evidently 
 addressed to the same community, consisting of the converts 
 whom St. Paul had won on the occasion of his first visit to 
 Europe, when, crossing over the sea from Troas and landing at 
 Neapolis, he had first visited Philippi, and then directed his 
 course southwards to Thessalonica. This cityr— the modern 
 Salonica — situated at the north-east corner of the Thermaic 
 Gulf, was the capital of one of the Roman divisions of 
 Macedonia, a large place containing a considerable industrial 
 population, and some thousands of Jews who had an im- 
 portant synagogue there. According to his custom, the 
 apostle first preached to the Jews; after his third Sabbath 
 visit to the synagogue, being rejected by his own people, he 
 turned to the Gentiles. '. _. 
 
 It has been objected that such a church as the epistles concern conl3 
 not have been formed in so short a time. But this is to overlook the fed 
 that the apostle may have stayed some weeks or even months longer 
 preaching among the Gentiles. Acts xvi. 4 seems to imply as much. From 
 this verse we gather that there were a few Jew converts, but that the 
 majority were Greeks^ i.e., Greek-speaking Gentiles. By race these 
 people were of the solid, reliable Thracian race' — they had been wor- 
 shippers of idols ( I Thessalonians i. 9). It is interesting, to iind that the 
 apostle found his most loyal converts aniong these worthy people. ■ In 
 particular there were men already "God-fearing" [(re§oii.ivav, Actsxyiii 4), 
 
 * See Renan, St, Paul, chapter vi. 
 
I THESSAIIONIANS 353 
 
 i.e., in a measure proselj^es, brought to reverence the God of the Jews, 
 and also a number of women of the wealthier classes, who afterwards 
 contributed to the maintenance of the apostle.' 
 
 A riot stirred up by the Jews cqmpelled tlje apostle to leave 
 the city suddenly, perhaps bound over by the authorities to 
 absent himself. 
 
 3. 1 Thessalonians. 
 
 a. Genuineness. — This epistle is growing in favour and 
 general acceptance. Baur rejected it, but his successor, 
 Hilgenfeld, accepts it. Its genuineness has also been allowed 
 by critics of such diverse schools as Pfleiderer, Holtzniiann, 
 Davidson, Harnack, Jxilicher, Zahn, Bacon. The external 
 testimony is as good as could be expected for so short a work. 
 It is in Marcion's canon of St. Paul's epistles (c. a.d. 140), 
 and is quoted by Fathers of the second century, and it is 
 in the earliest versions of the N.T., also dating from the 
 second century. 
 
 No certain allusion to this epistle can be found in the apostolic fathers ; 
 but that is the case with most of the epistles. They were not ■ collected 
 into a volume, or widely known at the early date of these witnesses. 
 Neither does their high authority seem to have been then recognised. 
 Still Ignatius may have known our epistle. His Ephesians x. I suggests 
 I Thessalonians v, 1 7 ; compare also his Epistle to Polycarp i. 3. Perhaps 
 his Philippians ii. I alludes to I Thessalonians v. 5.' The Testimony of 
 the Twelve Patriarchs, Levi. 6, seems to allude to I Thessalonians vi. l6. 
 
 Irenseus is the first to quote the epistle by name (Con. Haer., v. 6. 
 If=l Thessalonians v. 23). See also v. 30. 2. At the end of the first 
 century, Clement of Alexandria makes use of it {Paed., v. 19 ; Strom., 
 i. g. 53). So does Tertullian {De. lies. Cam., c. 24). The epistle is 
 recognised in the Muratorian Fragment, and it is found in the Old Latin 
 and Syriac versions. 
 
 The internal evidence in favour of it is strong. It bears 
 the stamp of the apostle's earnest, affectionate character, and 
 it fits well into the circumstances under which it was written. 
 In particular, the reference to some Christians at Thessalonica 
 who had died points to a very ancient date. The brethren were 
 
 ' See Ramsay, St. Paul the Traveller, etc., p. 227. 
 
 * In regard to this last comparison it has been objected that the word 
 J' unceasing " is not represented in the Syriac version of Ignatius. That 
 is no valid objection, , as it is now known that in the Syriac form the 
 Ignatian letters are quite mutilated and abbreviated. 
 
354 BIBLICAL INTRODUCTION 
 
 disappointed and disconcerted by the occurrence, apparently 
 having supposed that Christ's near advent was not to be 
 preceded by the death of any of His people. This is a 
 delusion that could only have been entertained in a very 
 early stage of a church's existence. The need the apostle 
 found for dispelling it and conaforting those who were troubled 
 by it starnps the epistle as most primitive. 
 
 (i) It was objected by Baur that the epistle lacked Pauline doctrinal 
 statements. But this fact only points to its antiquity, before the rise 
 •of the great contest with Judaisers, or it may be accounted for by the 
 (fact that this contest was not , known at Thessalonica. And the very 
 simplicity of the epistle makes for its genuineness. There was no motive 
 for forging it. (2) ii. 16 has been referred to the destruction of Jerusalem 
 (a.d. 70). It is too general to be forced to such an application. (3) 
 Apparent inconsistencies with Acts have been pointed out. But similar 
 and even greater difficulties are felt with Galaliaus, which is accepted, and 
 it is therefore not necessary to discuss- them here.^ (4) A more serious diffi- 
 culty may be felt in the time which seems to have been required for the 
 growth and development of the Church. But in epochs of religious revival 
 life moves fast, and events follow one another rapidly. , The reference to 
 deaths will not allow of much time. Some must have occurred in the 
 course of nature before long. ' ' ' ' ' 
 
 b. Place, Date, and Circumstances of Origin, — By com- 
 paring Acts xvii. and xviii. with our epistle we can settle 
 these points with tolerable accuracy, St. Paul had left 
 Timothy and Silas in Macedonia (Acts xvii. 14) when he 
 went on with other friends to Athens, whence he sent 
 back a request that they should follow him (verse 15). 
 They did not reach him until he had passed on to Corinth. 
 (Acts xviii. I and 5.) They are with him when he writes 
 the epistle (i Thessalonians i. i), Timothy having just arrived 
 (iii. 6). 
 
 It would seem, however, from this epistle that Acts is not perfectly 
 accurate on one point. St. Paul here says that he thought it well to 
 be left at Athens alone, and that he sent Timothy to Thessalonica 
 (i Thessalonians iii. i, 2), who had since returned (verse 6). This, 
 however, is a minor point. Possibly Timothy had met the apostle 
 earlier than St. Luke supposed, and had been sent back, or possibly 
 he had been of those who accompanied St. Paul to Athens, though 
 St. Luke, knowing h^ was at Thessalonica a little later, had concluded 
 that he had remained iii Macedonia. 
 
 ^ For a discussion of these points the reader is referred to Jowett, 
 'Epistles of St. Paul to the Thessalonians, etc. Third edition, pp. 4-17. 
 
1 THESSALONIANS ^SS 
 
 Thus we find the epistle was written from Corinth on the 
 occasion of the apostle's first visit to the city (probably in 
 A.D. 53). The reason for writing it is found in the coming 
 of Timothy with news from Thessalonica. The apostle 
 wished to encourage his friends whom he had left so 
 abruptly, to help them with practical advice as to their 
 conduct in daily life, and especially to relieve them from the 
 perplexity occasioned by the: death of some of their brother- 
 hood. 
 
 c. Contents. — The epistle opens with a salutation, including 
 Silvanus and Timothy with himself in the message of greeting 
 (i. I). 
 
 . i. 2-10, Thanksgiving and congratulation. The gospel has 
 borne good fruit in Thessalonica, the fame of which extends 
 through Macedonia and Achaia, and beyond. 
 
 ii. 1-12, Reminiscences of the apostle's ministry, at 
 Thessalonica, its boldness (verse 2), its purity (verse 3), 
 its honesty (verses 4-6), its gentleness (verses 7, 8), its 
 gratuitousness — the missionaries supporting themselves by 
 manual labour (verse 9), their blameless example (verse 10), 
 and their affectionate, fatherly treatment of their converts 
 (verses II, 12). 
 
 ii. 13-16, Thanksgiving again for the way the Thessalo- 
 nians received the gospel as the word of God, and con- 
 gratulations on their endurance of persecution from the 
 Jews. 
 
 ii. 17-20, The apostle's eager desire to see his friends. But 
 he is hindered by Satan. : 
 
 " Satan hindered" This might refer to some illness {e.g., 2 Corinthians 
 xii. 7) ; but more likely St. Paul alludes to Satan as a ruling power of evil 
 working through adverse circumstances, as in a magisterial order excluding 
 the apostle :from' Macedonia. 
 
 iii. i-ro, As St. Paul could not go himself, he had sent 
 Timothy who had returned with cheering news. 
 . iii. 11-13, The apostle still prays that God will direct his 
 Way to the Thessalonians, that he may establish their hearts 
 unblameable in holiness. 
 
3S6 BIBLICAL INTRODUCTION 
 
 iv. 1-8, The apostle encourages obedience to the precepts 
 preached, and adds an exhortation against uncleanness. 
 
 iv. 9-12, Exhortation to quiet work. 
 
 iv. 13-18, Explanation of the state of the blessed , dead. 
 The Thessalonians, surprised that some of their number had 
 died before Christ came a second time, feared they would 
 miss the joy of the Parousia. It will not be so. On the 
 contrary the dead in Christ will rise and see Christ before 
 the Christians who are on earth at the time will have that 
 privilege. Then the living Christians will be caught up in 
 the clouds, and join them. 
 
 At this time St. Paul expected to be of the living at the Parousia. Later 
 he gave up the expectation, and anticipated death for himself. (2 Corintiiians 
 V. I ; Philippians i. 21.) 
 
 v. 1-3, The sudden coming of the Lord. 
 
 V. 4-1 1, Call for watchfulness and sobriety with the hope of 
 the salvation through Christ who died for us. 
 
 V. t i-2 2, Various exhortations, first to treat the leaders of 
 the Church well, and to live in peace together, and then con- 
 cerning specific Christian duties. 
 
 Note in particular: (i) Verse 12, no titles are given. We 
 have no mention of bishops, elders, or deacons by name 
 in any of these early epistles. But the verse seems to 
 point' to Church officers. (2) Verses 19, 20 refer to the 
 prophetic gifts. They are not to be checked or despised, 
 but tested, and what is proved to be good, held to, 
 
 V. 23-28, Final commendations and exhortations. . 
 
 The epistle is simple and practical in character. Nevertheless it 
 indirectly indicate.s the following ideas: The Divinity of Christ (i. I, 
 10; iii. II, 12; v. 28); His death (ii. 15), as concerning us (frepi ^jimv, 
 v. 10) ; His resurrection as God's act {fiv •^yeipei', i. 10), the second 
 advent (frequently referred to) ; the Holy Spirit given by God (iv. 8), 
 to work in Christians (i. 5 > ^- '9) i Christian union with Christ 
 (iv. ^4, 16 ; V. 10) ; the resurrection of Christians (iv. 14) ; Satan 
 as a hindering power (ii. 18) ; various duties of the Christian life, 
 especially love, purity, and honest industry ; some undefined 'Church 
 ■ government calling for respect towards its leaders (v. 12). No. reference 
 to Judaising Christians. Ihe opponents are Jews. 
 
2 THESSALONIANS ^57 
 
 4. 2 Thessalcnians. 
 
 a. Genuineness. — This epistle is rejected by some who 
 admit i Thessalonians, e.g., by Hilgenfeld. It is well de- 
 fended by Jowett {Thessalonians, etc., 3rd edition, pp. 70-76). 
 The external evidence is even stronger than that for i Thes- 
 salonians, the epistle being alluded to by Polycarp in the 
 middle of the second century, and apparently by Justin 
 Martyr. Irenseus is the first to name it. 
 
 Compare Polycarp, Ad. Phil., ii. with 2 Thessalonians iii. IS ; Justin 
 Martyr, Trypko., no with 2 Thessalonians ii. 3. For the first direct 
 mention of the epistle see Irenseus, Con. Hatr., iii. 7, 2. It is also cited 
 by Clement A. [Strom., v. 3), Tertullian (Z)«. Res. Cam., 24; Scorp. 13). 
 It is in Marcion's canon, the Muratorian Fragment, the Old Latin and 
 the Syriac versions. It was never questioned in the early Church. 
 
 The internal evidence in favour of this epistle is similar to 
 that for the first, in the suitability to the circumstances, the 
 affectionate, earnest character of the writer, etc. Over and 
 above objections that it shares with i Thessalonians, the 
 following have been urged against the genuineness of 2 Thes- 
 salonians ^ : — 
 
 (1) Its eschatology appears to contradict i Thessalonians, 
 where we read that the Son of man will come suddenly, (i Thes- 
 salonians V. 2.) Here delay and intermediate occurrences are 
 predicted. (2 Thessalonians ii. 1-3.) But is this a contradic- 
 tion? Suddenness is hot immediateness. The thief in the 
 night startles the house with his unexpected presence ; but his 
 coming may still not be soon. If we knew it would be, we 
 should not be startled. And would a literary imitator create 
 this difficulty? Besides, St. Paul may have modified his ideas 
 while brooding over this subject between the two epistles. 
 
 (2) The doctrine of antichrist is said to be un-Pauline, 
 dependent on the Apocalypse, and perhaps here even savour- 
 ing of Montanism (second century). That St. Paul does not 
 discuss it in his later writings is quite true. His whole 
 position in regard to the second advent underwent gradual 
 transformation. But if Matthew xxiv. is history, the seed of 
 
 ' Pfleiderer, Urchristenthum, pp. 77, 78. 
 
35? BIBLICAL INTRODUCTION 
 
 this doctrine was in the teaching of Christ Himself. More- 
 over, St. Paul, trained in Jewish literature, would not be 
 ignorant of the Apocalyptic ideas of his own people. Jiilicher 
 holds that his writing on this subject is based on hiS; earlier 
 Jewish training, utilised in Christian thought.^ 
 
 (3) The concluding authentication (iii. 17) is objected to as 
 unlike St. Paul's manner, and a needless precaution if the 
 apostle dictates the letter himself. It is not probable that 
 false letters had been sent to Thessalonica thus early. But 
 we need not take the passage to imply that this was the case. 
 St. Paul was guarding against possible contingencies. Still, it 
 must be admitted, the passage is peculiar, and not easily 
 accounted for. 
 
 (4) There are variations from the apostle's style.^ On the 
 other hand the writer is said to imitate St. Paul. Spitta 
 assigns the epistle to Timothy. But if that is a correct 
 surmise is it not very remarkable that no tradition preserved 
 
 ■ the title of so well, known a Christian leader ? StiU, as one of 
 the associated senders of the epistle (i. i), Timothy may have 
 had some hand in it, possibly as the amanuensis allowing him- 
 self some freedom in the shaping of phrases. 
 
 b. Time and Circumstances of Origin. — Baur followed 
 Grotius in placing this epistle earlier than our i Thessalonians. 
 The principal grounds for this view (which was adopted by 
 Renan, Ewald, and others) is found in the references of 
 2 Thessalonians to the teaching of the apostle while he was 
 yet with his converts. In any case, it could not have been 
 written long after he had been present, ii. 2 seems to refer to 
 the earlier epistle-^though the expression "by epistle as (ws) 
 from us " rather suggests one that pretended to come from the 
 apostle, but was not really sent by him ; and the allusion 
 further on to "traditions which ye were taught, whether by 
 word or by epistle of ours" (ii. 15), seems to point clearly 
 Jo some previous epistle. But the chief reason for putting 
 
 ^ Einleitung, p. 43. 
 
 ■' For a full list of these variations, and a discussion of them, see 
 JowBTT, Thessalonians, etc., p. 73. 
 
2 THESSALONIANS ^9 
 
 this second is that it clears up a difficulty which the earliei 
 epistle left behind, especially if ii. 2 refers to that epistle. 
 The Thessalonians were so full of the immediate coming of 
 Ciirist, that some of them Ceased to work for their livelihood 
 (iii. 10.) This error the apostle corrects, and he shows that 
 the advent is not to be so near. The epistle cannot have 
 been written long after its predecessor. Its references to the 
 time when St. Paul was with his readers do not allow of 
 that, and the same companions (Silvanus and Timothy) are 
 associated with the apostle, (i. i.) iii. 2 seems to point to the 
 events described in Acts xviii. 12 ff. We should date it there- 
 fore from Corinth, and probably in a.d. 53, possibly in 54. 
 
 c. Contents. 
 
 i. I, 2, Opening salutation. 
 
 3-12, Thanksgiving for spiritual growth, and congratulations 
 on the patient endurance of persecution. 
 
 ii. 1-12, Apocalyptic passage. A warning against anticipat- 
 ing the immediate advent of Christ. The man of sin must 
 first be revealed. At present he is restrained. But in time 
 the restraining power will be removed. 
 
 13-17, Renewed thanksgiving and exhortation to steadfast- 
 ness. 
 
 iii. i-s, A request for the prayers of the Thessalonians, 
 followed by an expression of assurance that they will be kept 
 and directed by God. 
 
 6-15, Withdrawal from disorderly brethren required. The 
 apostle had worked for his own living; his converts must 
 all work for their living, and none of them burden their 
 brethren. 
 
 16, 17, Concluding salutation in the apostle's own hand, 
 following a benediction. 
 
 The Man of Sin, ii. 1-12. — In the main there are two distinct views of 
 this mysterious passage, (i) That the man of sin is the Roman Emperor, 
 Caligula, or more probably Nero, who is in hiding (see Tacitus, Hist. ,ii. 8), 
 restrained by the ruling Emperor Vespasian. According to this view, the 
 epistle is a later work, and not genuine. " Setting himself forth as God" 
 (verse 4) seems to point to the self-deification of the Roman emperor. 
 (2) That the man of sin is a personification of the Jewish power. This 
 fits in with the situation when St. Paul was at Corinth. The Jews resist the 
 
36o BIBLICAL tNTRODUCTION 
 
 progress of t\\e gospel. The restraining power is that of the Roman 
 Government, which had been exercised both at Thessalonica when the 
 apostle was there, and more recently at Corinth under Gallio. (Acts xviii. 
 12-17.) The phrase, "he that sitteth in the temple of God" (2 Thes- 
 salonians ii. 4), suits the Jews better than a pagan emperor. It must be 
 understood that the phrase "mystery of iniquity" (u. 7), means not a 
 mysterious, turbujent power, but one, the latent evil of which is now 
 known. Hilgenfeld, placing the Avoa-TaHa in the time of Trajan, under- 
 stands the "mystery of iniquity" to refer to gnosticism, and so ascribes 
 the writing of the epistle to the second century. It is pure conjecture. 
 There have been many wild guesses at the personality of the :",man of 
 sin " — that he is Simon Magus, , Mohammed, Cromwell, Napoleon,, the 
 Pope, etc. These need not detain us. 
 
 This epistle teaches the Fatherhood of God, i. i, 2, and 
 concerning Christ that as a Divine Being He is ,assoqiated 
 with God in conferring grace, (i. i, 2, 12 ; ii. 16, 17 ; iii. 1-5, 
 18.) A severe tone marks the references to the second 
 advent. Christ is to come "rendering vengeance" (i. 8); 
 " the Lord Jesus shall slay ' the lawless one ' with the breath 
 of His mouth." (ii. 8.) But deliverance and salvation are for 
 His people, who, however, must be fitted for the kingdom of 
 heaven. The epistle contains no direct reference to the death 
 of Christ, His resurrection, or the atonement ; but its practical 
 purpose did not lead to those subjects. It exalts faith, love, 
 patience, diligence. 
 
CHAPTER VI. 
 THE PAULINE EPISTLES: SECOND GROUP 
 
 1. The Church at Corinth. 
 
 2. The Question of a- Lost 
 
 Epistle. 
 
 3. I Corinthians. 
 
 4; 2 Corinthians. 
 
 5. Galatians. , 
 
 6. Romans. 
 
 7. Characteristics of the Group. 
 
 An interval of nearly five years separates the second frorn 
 the first group of St. Paul's epistles. The fotir masterly 
 epistles which form this group were written within a twelve- 
 month, during parts of the years a.d. 57 and 58, the epoch 
 of the apostle's greatest literary productiveness. The inter- 
 vening time, while it had been occupied with assiduous 
 missionary labours, had seen the rise of a determined 
 opposition to St. Paul's claims and principles on the part 
 of Judaising Christians who were sheltering themselves 
 under the great name of St. James, and pushing his con- 
 servative views to extremes. The effects of this opposition 
 on the apostle's mind are very marked. They compel him 
 to justify his position, and thus lead him to formulate his 
 ideas distinctly, so that indirectly they stimulate the develop- 
 ment of his thought and teaching. Accordingly the epistles 
 written under these circumstances become doctrinal and 
 argumentative works, luminous in exposition and vigorous 
 in controversy. But throughout this painful contest St. 
 Paul is eager to heal the breach, not by conceding his 
 opponents' position, but in a practical way, by proving to 
 the moderate majority of the Jerusalem Church from which 
 they come the essential brotherhood of all Christians,. In 
 pursuit of this aim he devotes much attention to the 
 
 361 
 
362 BIBLICAL INTRODUCTION 
 
 collection of contributions from his Greek churches, which 
 are to be sent as tokens of brotherly love to relieve the 
 wants of the poor members of the mother Church. 
 
 I. The Ohurch at Corinth. 
 
 The Corinth of St. Paul's time was not the famous city 
 of Greek history, which Cicero had styled "the light of 
 Greece," though it was situated on the same site, the 
 isthmus between the Ionian and the ^gean seas. ' The 
 older city had been destroyed by the Roman General 
 Mummius (b.c. 146), and for a hundred years the site had 
 lain waste. Then a new city was built by Julius Cse^ar, 
 who imported a number of Roman colonists and made it 
 a Latin colony, called at first "Colonia Julia." The 
 population consisted of descendants of these colonists 
 mixed with Greeks who joined them. We may notice 
 several Latin names among the Corinthian Christians. 
 Corinth was made the capital of the Roman province of 
 Achaia (which comprised Hellas and the Peloponnesus), 
 and being well situated for commerce it grew rapidly 
 in wealth and luxury. , It was variously governed at 
 different times. When St. Paul visited Corinth it was 
 under a proponsul, the well-known Gallio, Seneca's brother 
 ("Dulcis Gallio"). The place was notorious for its vicious 
 corruptions. Dion Chrysostom calls it a city, "the most 
 licentious of all that are or have been." (Orat, vol, ii., p. 119, 
 edit. Reiske.) Dean Farrar notes that it was customary to 
 introduce the Corinthians on the stage as drunken men. 
 The Acrocorinthus, a mountain spur nearly 2000 feet :liigh, 
 which rises just above the city, was consecrated to the 
 goddess Aphroditfe, who was worshipped with the gross 
 Syrian rites of Astarte, having in : her service a thousand 
 women devoted to an impure life. The moral corruptions 
 of the church at such a place, which appear in the epistles, 
 will be the less astonishing when we remember these facts. 
 The church was founded by St. Paul during his first 
 visit to Europe, after he had come down from Philippi, 
 
THE QUESTION OF A LOST EPISTLE 363 
 
 Thessalonica, and Bercea through Athens (a.d. 53)1 settling 
 in Corinth -for a year and a half. At first he preached 
 in the synagogue, and even converted the ruler Crispus. 
 Then being rejected by the Jews, he turned to the Gentiles. 
 (See Acts xviii.) The church was mixed ; but it consisted 
 chiefly of Gentiles, (i Corinthians xii. 2.) There were a few 
 wealthy and cultivated persons in it, but the majority were 
 drawn frorn the humbler classes, (i Corinthians i. 26.) Still 
 the church boasted of its intellectuality. In their jealousy 
 the Jews prosecuted St. Paul before Gallio, who, however, 
 dismissed the case. Nevertheless the apostle then felt it wise 
 to remove from Corinth, leaving Apollos in charge of his work, 
 
 2. Tlie Question of a Lost Epistle to the Corinthians. 
 
 There is reason to think that prior to our i Corinthians 
 St. Paul had written a short, sharp epistle to the church 
 at Corinth, rebuking the evils of which information had 
 reached him. This seems to be referred to in i Corinthians 
 V. 9 : "I wrote unto you in my epistle to have no company 
 with fornicators." (i) Instances of a similar phrase used 
 for the very epistle in which it occurs have been cited; 
 but they are not pertinent, as in every case they are found 
 at the end of the document, while this sentence is in the 
 first half of the epistle. (2) Then the very phrase is used 
 by St. Paul for a former epistle in 2 Corinthians vii. 8. 
 Moreover the passage referred to by this verse cannot be 
 found in an earlier part of i Corinthians, and the sentence 
 could not point to a later part of the same epistle. 
 
 Verses 2, 5, 6, and 7 in the same chapter have been cited as perhaps 
 what the_ apostle was pointing to. But coming as they do immediately 
 before this verse, could they be described as here : "I wrote unto you in 
 my epistle?"' 
 
 } The opinion that there was a lost epistle, together with the manifest 
 references in i Corinthians to an epistle from Corinth, gave rise to two 
 forgeries, one purporting to be the Corinthian letter, the other to be 
 St. Paul's. They were found in the Armenian church, and inserted by 
 Whiston in his collection of Authentic Records belonging to the Old and 
 New Testaments. A translation, , partly; executed by Lord Byron, is in 
 ■Moore's Life of Byron. It is the opinion of critics that these forgeries 
 cannot be dated earlier thfl.n the eleventh century. 
 
364 BIBLICAL INTRODUCTION 
 
 3. 1 Corintliians. 
 
 a. Genumeness.— The {out epistles of this second group 
 are almost universally accepted as genuine. Baur, who 
 admitted no others, acknowledged these. The external 
 evidence for i Corinthians is exceptionally good. It is ex- 
 pressly named by Clement of Rome in his epistle to Corinth 
 (e. A.Ti. gs), and it appears to be alluded to by several writers 
 early in the second century. 
 
 Clement writes : " Take up the epistle of the blessed Paul the apostle. 
 What did he first write to you in the beginning of the gospel ? Of a truth 
 he sent a letter to you {iwiiTTeCKev vfuv) by the spirit concerning himself 
 and also Cephas arid Apollos, because you had even then formed parties" 
 (Clement, i Cor. xlvii. i). Also compare Clement's epistle to the Coria' 
 thians ( = C.) with St. Paul's ( = P.) further :— C. xx. 4 with P. xv. 38 ; C. 
 xxiv. I with P. XV. 20-23 > C. xxiv. -5 with P. xv. ,26 ; C. xxxiv. 8 with 
 P. ii. 9 ; C. xxxvii. 4 with P. xii. 12 ff. ; C. xlviii. 6 with P. x. 24 ; C. 
 xlix. I ff. with P. xiii. Probable allusions to our epistle appear in Hermas, 
 Sim. V. 7. 2 {cf. I Cor. iii. 17) ; Polycarp, v. 3 (ir/: I Cor. vi. 9,.lp), and 
 xi. 2 {c/. I Cor. vi. 2) ; The Martyrdom of Polycarp ii. 3 {cf. i Cor. ii. 9). 
 Justin Martyr, Tryph., cxi. {cf. i Cor. v. 7). After Clement of Rome, 
 Iren^us is the first to name the epistle {Adv. Haer., iii. 11. 9); It is in 
 the Syriac and Latin versions ; Marcion's and the Muratorian Canons, and 
 cited by Athmagoras, Theophilus, Clefnent A., TertuUian, etc. 
 
 Fitting well into the history, revealing the heart and soul of 
 the apostle, intensely real throughout, the epistle speaks for its 
 own genuineness. 
 
 Nevertheless, attempts tb 'discredit it have recently been made in two 
 quarters. (l) By Lpman, who, however, holds the gospels to be mythical, 
 and denies the historical existence of Jesus Christ. (2) By Steck, on such 
 ground as that it is inconsistent with Ads, that it shows dependence on 
 Romans (the A '^iyptaraC 6i I Cor. iv. 6, referring to Romans xii. 3), and 
 also on the gospels (the account of the Lord's Supper coming from Luhe] ; 
 and the witnesses for the resurrection appearances in chapter xv. being 
 derived from more than one gospel More recently Van Manen has argued 
 against the genuineness of all the Pauline epistles in the Encyclofceiia 
 Bihlica. 
 
 b. Place of Origin and Date. — The subscription "from 
 Philippi" is ancient since it is in the Syriac; but it is not 
 correct. Probably it was suggested by xvi. 5 — read as " I am 
 passing through," taken literally instead of the obvious mean- 
 ing, "I am about to pass through." Undoubtedly the epistle 
 was written from Ephesus (see xvi. 8 and 19), and towards the 
 end of the apostle's stay in that city, i.e., a.d. 57 (xvi. 3, 8). 
 
I CORINTKIANS ^65 
 
 (i) Apollos had come from Corinth, and joined St; Paul at Ephesus 
 (L 12; iii. 4, 22 ; iv. 6; cf. Acts xix. i.) (2) After leaving Ephesus 
 the apostle purposed to travel' by Macedonia to Achaia (xvi. 5-7). This 
 route he took (Acts xx. i, 2)i (3) Aquila and Priscilla are at Ephesus 
 (xvi. 19). They had accompanied St. Paul on his going there from Corinth 
 (Acts xviii. 18, 19). (4) The collection of money for the poor at Jerusalem 
 is now going on in Achaia (xVi, 1-3). It was completed during St. Paul's 
 nejct stay at. Corinth (Acts xx. 3 ; Romans xv. 26). , (5) St. Paul, hopes to 
 go by Corinth to Jerusalem (i Corinthians xvi. 4). This hope he cherished 
 at the end of his time in Ephesus (Acts xix.\2i). This brin'gd us to the 
 
 Further, it was before Pentecpst (xvi. 8), and perhaps near 
 Easter (v. 6-8). 
 
 c. The Reasons for Writing the Epistle. — The immediate 
 occasion for sending this letter to Corinth was the receipt 
 of a letter from the church there (vii. i), brought by deputies 
 (xvi. 17), and. containing questions about celibacy (vii. i), 
 the eating of meat offered to idols (viii. i) ; concerning 
 the use ,of spiritual gifts (xii. i), and the collection for 
 Jerusalem (xvi. i), each of which subjects is introduced by 
 the same formula, " Now concerning '' (Hept 8e). But news 
 had come to the apostle from some members of the household 
 of Chloe (i. 11), and perhaps other visitors from Corinth, that 
 there were grave irregularities in the church— party divisions 
 (i., ii); a case of gross immorality urichecked (v. i); a Christian 
 going to law with his brother Christian in the pagan courts 
 (vi. i) ; indecorous conduct on the part of some women in the 
 church (xi. 5) ; selfish feasting, and even drunkenness at the 
 Agapi and the Lord's supper (xi. 20, 2 1); denial of the resurrec- 
 tion_(.xv. 12). St. Paul writes to correct these errors as well as to 
 answer the questions he has received. He had sent Timothy 
 to Corinth (iv. 17). But Timothy could not have arrived yet, 
 as he was to travel round through Macedonia (Acts xix. 22). 
 The epistle would prepare for Timothy, and the action he was 
 to undertake personally on behalf of St. Paul (xvi. lo). 
 
 d. Contents. — This epistle is remarkably orderly iti its 
 arrangement, proceeding from topic to topic seriatim. 
 
 ' See CoNYBEARE and HowsoN, Life and Epistles of St. /"aa/, chapter 
 XV. ; and Appendix ii.; also new Bible Die, art. "Chronology." 
 
366 BIBLICAL INTRODUCTION 
 
 Introduction, i. 1-9. 
 
 Salutation (verses 1-3) ; thanksgiving (verses 4-9). 
 
 (i) Faults of the Church, i. lo-vi. 
 
 o. Faction (i. lo-iv. 21). Party spirit, following various 
 leaders. This is rebuked on the ground that all the leaders 
 work for a common end, and also that the real power is not 
 man's at all, but God's. 
 
 /3. A case of neglected immorality. A man had taken his 
 stepmother, perhaps married her. The church is to deliver 
 such a person to Satan for chastisement. St. Paul reminds 
 the Corinthians that he had warned them in a previous letter 
 not to associate with immoral persons (v.). 
 
 7. Going to law with a brother in the pagan courts is re- 
 buked. The church is advised to constitute its own court for 
 disputes among the brethren (vi. i-ii). A warning against 
 profligacy follows (verses 12-20). 
 
 (2) Reply to the Letter of the Corinthians, vii.-xi. i. 
 
 a. Marriage and celibacy. It would be good to avoid 
 marriage. Still, those already married are not to separate. 
 The apostle has no commandment for the unmarried, though 
 under present circumstances he would prefer to see others un- 
 encumbered as he is (vii.). 
 
 /8. Food offered to idols. Christian liberty vindicated; 
 still the danger of idolatry through participation in idol feasts 
 must be avoided (viii.). St. Paul's own example of not claim- 
 ing one's rights (ix.). The higher expediency (x-xi. i). 
 
 (3) Return to Faults of the Church, xi. 2-34. 
 
 a. Women to behave more decorously in the Church 
 (xi. 2-16). 
 
 ^ Disorderly conduct at the Lord's Supper and the Agap) 
 rebuked. An account of the institution of the Lord's Supper 
 (xi. 17-34). 
 
 (4) Reply to a Question concerning Spiritual Gifts^. (xii.-xiv.) 
 a. Unity and diversity, one body and many members (xii.), 
 |8. Love the greatest grace (xiii.). 
 
 y. Prophesying and tongues (xiv.). 
 
 (5) Vindication of the Resurrection, (xv.). 
 
2 CORINTHIANS %&7 
 
 a. The truth proved from the resurrection of Christ, 
 evidence for which is cited (xv, 1-34). 
 
 /8. Objections answered by repudiating the gross Jewish 
 doctrine, and teaching a spiritual resurrection (xv. 35-58)., 
 
 (6) Practical Directions and Personal Details, xvi. 
 . Directions concerning the collection. Timothy's mission. 
 Exhortation and salutation. 
 
 The Factions, — The four names — Paul, Apollos, Cephas, Christ^suggest 
 four parties. Baur allowed only two — the Pauline, with which are united 
 those lybo claim Apollos ; the Petrine, with which are associated those 
 claiming to be of Christ. But this was arbitrary to square with his theory. 
 PfleideVer allows three, denying the existence , of a Christ party, as this 
 must have inclined to one of the other three. Those claiming the Christ 
 name might be neutral, standing aloof from all parties ; and yet in doing 
 so they would tend to become a party unawares. Moreover, 2 Corinthians 
 X. 7 implies that the people taking the Christ name showed' narrowness in 
 refising it to St. Paul. If they were a party (l) they might be those who 
 had known our Lord ori earth. But it is not likely such would be at; 
 Corinth.' Besides the personal name Jesus would be more suitable for a 
 reference to the life of Christ on earth. (2) They might be men who 
 claimed a direct mystical relation with the Christ in a semi-gnostic sense. 
 (3) The view that they simply repudiated human leaders, and so took only 
 the name of Christ, is,more simple, and it fits the case. Innocent in the 
 banning, such a position would easily lead on to the arrogance seen in 
 2 Corinthians; Theii the Apollos party might represent the "wise," who 
 are ■ rebuked ' in theiearlier part of the epistle, and the Peter party the 
 Judaisers. But the latter idea is not probable. It is more likely that such 
 a party would claim James. Therefore it would seem that the divisions 
 are not formed on doctrinal lines, but' represent personal predilections — 
 some championing Paul, some his successor Apollos, some turning to 
 Peter as the true head of the apostolate, others repudiating all human 
 nanies, and'claimiiig only to be followers of Christ. St. Paul's treatment 
 ofsthe question, favours this view. ■ He does not discuss doctrinal differences, 
 but he shows the true harmony of the work of the various leaders. 
 
 4. 2 Corinthians. 
 
 a. Genuineness. — This scarcely needs discussion. The 
 almost universal acceptance of the four epistles of the 
 group indicates overwhelming reasons for receiving them. 
 2 Corinthians was early cited, though not so early as 
 I Corinthians. It is first mentioned in surviving Church 
 literature by Irenasus. The character of the writing, the 
 vivid self-portraiture of the apostle, and the eager, vital grasp 
 ef facts of the time stamp it as original 
 
368 BIBLICAL INTRO:I>UG.TION 
 
 ,2 Corinthians is cited in Irenseus, Adv. Hatr., iiL 7.. i ; iv. 28. 3 ; 
 Athenagoras, De Res., 18 ; Clement A., Strom'., iy. 16 ; TertuUian, 
 De Pudic. 13, and in all these iri'stanees, except that of Athenagoras 
 it is indicated by name. 
 
 b. Two Epistki. — The view' of Hilgenfdd a!nd' Heltzmann 
 that our 2 Corinthians consists of two epistleS,- or rather 
 one epistle and part, if not the who!e,'''of another, has 
 been growing in favour. The division ^ is' put at' the end 
 of chapter ix., and the chapters th^t follow , are regarded as 
 constituting an epistle, or part of an epistle, written earlier 
 than the preceding chapters — a composition which comes 
 cltronologically between i Corinthians and 2 Corinthians ,i.-ix. 
 At this' point the tone of the apostle suddenly changes. In 
 the first nine chapters he is grateful and hopeful with regard 
 to the whole church at Corinth; here he writes in sorrow 
 concerning the state of the whole Church, and rebukes it 
 sternly. It has been suggested as an explanation of this 
 sudden change that while he was writing 2 Corinthiatts he 
 received bad news from Corinth. But .this wopld mean, that 
 Titus, who had brought the cheering report referred to earlier 
 (vii. -6), had been coinpletely deceived. , Besides, would the 
 apostle then have let the cheerful ipart of his letter go^ un- 
 altered, and have changed his tqiie so cpmpletely for the 
 later part without giving a hint of his , reason for , this 
 sudden alteration? Then, it has 'been said, the nine chapters 
 are to the faithful section of the church, and the remainder 
 to a troublesome faction. Tha'ff cannot be, because in bbth 
 cases the whole church is addressed — in the one with general 
 congratulations, in the other with general complaints, 
 
 •'•' '•.''''■ir^.l,-.} ; 
 
 Npte in particular the following points : — , 
 
 (i) 2 Corinthians ii. 4 refers to a previous letter written in much 
 affliction and anguish. This would ■ scarcely apply : .to i I Corinthians.' 
 But it.wouljl well. characterise the la,tter part,.qf 2 Coriifthiaiis,; ,, , 
 
 (2) 2 [Corinthians vii., 8, g also refers to the severity of a preyious 
 letter in a \^ky that would apply to 2 Corinthians x.-xiii.' better than 
 to I: 'Corinthians. . , • ,< ,,, , ,!,.'.; 
 
 ,. (3) In 2 . Coripthians iii. I we read,:' /'Are we beginning again to 
 commend ourselves ? " When had St. Paul commended himself to 
 Coiinth'? Much, more in 2 Csririthians than- in I Corinthians' («.^.,x. 
 7-18 J xi. 16-33; xii. S, II, 17)- .., ,1 
 
; 2 CORINTHIANS ' 369 
 
 ; (4) In 2 -Corinthiaiis we find the apostle shrinking frQra th? idea of 
 visiting^ Corinth. (2 Corinthians i. 23; ii. i, 4.). No such feeling was 
 exhibited in I Corinthians, in spite of the complaints ' he then 'had to 
 make {e.g., i Corinthians xvi. 8, 9). But if he ha4 written 2 Corinthians 
 x.-xiii, in, the interval with reference to new troubles in the Corinthian' 
 chufchl, ,tne situation would be altered, and the change of feeling accounted 
 for. This is borne out by 2 Corinthians xii. 20,- 21 and xiii. i, 2. '^ 
 
 For these reasons it ,seems .that we should accept , the view that 
 2 Corinthians x.-xiii. is the earlier epistle referred to in 2 ' Corinthians 
 ii. 4; lii.' r; vii.'S, 9, an epistle rebuking the - Corinthians for' some 
 grievous evils of which St. Paul hasheard.' 
 
 c. Circumstances and Reasons for Writing. — (i) '2 Cor- 
 inthians' x.-xiii. After despatching i Corinthians St. Paul 
 seems to have- paid a brieif visit to Corinth. We have no 
 mention of it in Acts. But we learn from 2 Corinthians 
 xii. ' 14 that he must have been twice to Corinth before 
 writing this, as he is now prepared for a ' third visit.^ He 
 seems to mention the second visit as an accomplished fact 
 if we may read with R.V., " When I was present the second 
 time" (xiii. 2). It would seem that he had been badly rfeceived 
 on this visit. The reference to his weak' bodily presence and 
 unimpressive oratory (x. 10) cannot apply to the time when 
 he had been living and ministering in Corinth ; it must allude 
 to a time when he had been coldly received. Further, the 
 offence referred to in 2 Corinthians ii. 5 is scarcely the same 
 as that of i Corinthians v., because this implies a personal 
 insult to the apostle, while the earlier one was a case of 
 immorality, having no relation to himself. It would seem 
 that someone had grossly insulted him, and repudiated his 
 authority. The party arrogating the name of Christ now 
 
 ■^ See J. H. Kennedy, The Second and'Third Epistles to the' Corinthians': 
 Dresher, m Studien und JCritiken, 1897, accepts the idea of two epistles 
 in, our. 2 Corinthians, but puts chapters x.-xiii. later than chapters i.-ix. 
 This view is liable to the objection that Titus was deceived as to the state 
 6f Corinth, ' arid it' would not allow for the aptness of the allusions 
 above referred to, , . : , 
 
 ? The -explanation that as the apostle only writes of being "prepared" 
 a third time, he may mean that he had made preparations for his second 
 visit at some previous time, and then had postponed it, so that a;dding 
 these preparations to those he is now making, and the preparations ; for 
 his first visit, we get three. But this is most improbable. If the apostle 
 meant that, he would say "the second time," for it would be the- second 
 preparation then- in mind. 
 
370 BIBLICAL INTRODUCTION 
 
 seems to be most active in opposing the apostl6> (x. 7). 
 The visit when this was made apparent had been very 
 painful to St. Paul. That visit seems to be in mind when 
 he writes that he has determined hot to corne agaiti in sorrow 
 (ii. i).. The first visit was not in sorrow. Since this visit 
 was so unfortunate, and the church is still in an un- 
 happy, condition, the apostle writes the epistle containing 
 2 Corinthians x.-xiii. to rebuke and expostulate. He also 
 sends Titus to Corinth. 
 
 , (2) 2 Corinthians i.-ix. This was written after Titus, had 
 returned, bringing most cheering news. : Tbp Corinthians 
 had taken the letter in good part, a.nd the, riide opponent 
 had been severely handled by the^ church, and .was now 
 plunged in penitence (ii. 7). , St. Paul is full of joy and tha,nk- 
 fulness. His heart melts for the offender whom he asks the 
 church to forgive. 
 
 d. Place and Time of Writing. — 2 Corinthians x.-xiii. 
 gives no indication of, its locality, but if it prepedes 
 2 Corinthians i.-ix., it inust have been vfritten during 
 St. . , Paul's • residence at Ephesus. ; 2 Corinthians i.-ix. is 
 written , from Macedonia after the apostle had left amid 
 scenes of violence: and; danger in the riot at the theatre 
 (Acts xix. 23-41; XX. i), to which apparently he refers in 
 2 Corinthians i. 8-10. Those scenes are still fresh in mind, 
 and therefore the intermediate epistle which rnakes no allusion 
 to them must have preceded them (and the departure from 
 Ephesus). The apostle had gone to Troas first, but not yet 
 seeing Titus he had passed on to Macedonia, where Titus had 
 met him (ii. 12, 13). This would be the end of the year 57. 
 
 e. Contents. — Taking the document as it stands in our 
 N.T,, we have two main divisions, corresponding to the idea 
 of two epistles just discussed. ' ■< - ■ 
 
 (i) i.-ix., A very affectionate Utter of thanksgiving, con- 
 gratulation, and exhortation. . '^ 
 
 i. I, 2, Salutation. 
 
 3-r4, Thanksgiving for God's mercy in affliction, with prayer 
 that a like comfort may come to others m their affliction. 
 
2 CORINTHIANS 371 
 
 15-ii. 2, The promised visit postponed for the sake of the 
 Corinthians. 
 
 3-1 1, The previous letter, the sorrow it caused, the penitence 
 of the offender, the forgiveness of him. 
 
 12-17, Good news from Titus. Thanks to God. Triumph 
 in Christ, 
 
 iii. 1-5, The fruits of the apostle's ministry are his com- 
 mendation ; yet they are God's work. 
 
 6-18, The superior glory of this ministry of the gospel 
 of hfe above that of the old Mosaic dispensation. 
 
 iy.. The joys arid privileges of this ministry, in spite of 
 trouble and peril; present light affliction working for eternal 
 glory through the vision of the Unseen. 
 
 v. i-io, Hopes beyond death inspiring present courage. 
 
 ii-ig, The constraining love of Christ arid the new creation 
 in Him. 
 
 20-vi. 13, The persuasive ministry in sorrow and sympathy. 
 
 14-vii. I, Warning against being unequally yoked with 
 unbelievers. 
 
 vii. 2-16, Reflections on the previous letter, the erirand 
 of Titus, and the godly sorrow that followed. 
 
 viii. 1-15, Concerning the collection for the poor at 
 Jerusa;lem. The Macedonians most generous in this. 
 
 16^24, In praise of Titus. 
 
 ix., Exhortations to generosity in the collection, with re- 
 minders of God's bounty. 
 
 (2) x.-xiii., A most sorrowful and vehement expostulation. 
 
 X., A warning to those who despise the apostle's authority. 
 
 xi. 1-7, This authority reaffirmed. 
 
 8~33j a recital of the apostle's rights and arduous ex- 
 periences in his work. 
 
 xii. i-io, A heavenly vision and a thorn in the flesh. 
 
 11-13, The signs of an apostle. 
 
 14-21, How Paul and Titus had treated the Corinthiansi 
 
 xiii., Further warnings and exhortations ; greetings ; and a 
 final benediction. 
 
372 BIBLICAL INTRODUCTION 
 
 5. Galatians. ' ' 
 
 a. The Galatian Churches.— The word "Galatia" is used in 
 two applications :^ — (i) ethnographically, for the district in, the 
 extreme north of Asia Minor, which was inhabited by immigrant 
 Celts (Galatian = Gaul) from the west, arid (2) politically' for 
 the Roman province, which included with this district a much 
 larger area — the greater part of Pisidia, Isauria, LycaOriia,' and 
 a portion of Phrygia. In this provinfce of Galatia were situated 
 the towns visited by St. Paul during his first' journey through 
 Asia Minor — Antioch, Iconium, Derbe, Bind Lystra. There 
 is good reason to belifeve that the churches addressed in 
 Galatians are those which the apostle had planted in those 
 towns. 
 
 Bishop Lightfoot argued for North Galatia. ^ But siiice the publi- 
 cation of his , commentary, the argument for the south Galatian Uieory 
 — that which, taking the name to apply to the whole province, allows of 
 the churches which we know St. Paul to have planted in the south of it to 
 be those addressed in the epistle — has been powerfully strengthened by 
 Professor Ramsay's researches in Asia Minor, and arguments bas^d on 
 them.^ . ' 
 
 The following considerations make for this position : — (i) St. Paul 
 invariably writes of the regions he visits under; the names of the Roman 
 provinces in' Which they are situated — ^Asia, Macedonia, Achaia. In this 
 he differs from St. Luke, who uses the popular local names. Thus we 
 rnay account for the fact that in Acts the churches of the first missionary 
 journey are not said to be Galatian, but described as in Pisidia (Acts xiii. 
 14) and Pamphylia (xiv. 24). (2) It would be singular that Acts should 
 give no details of the founding of churches so intimately connected with 
 St. Paul as Galatians shows the churches there addressed to be ; and still 
 more re'raa'rkable that in h'oiie of his epistles the apostle should refer to 
 churches which Acts connects so closely with him as those at Antioch, 
 Iconium, Derbe, and Lystra. If these are the Galatian churches, both 
 difficulties disappear. 'We have a fiill account of the founding of the 
 Galatian churches in Acts, and St. Paul frequently refers to the churches 
 of his first missionary journey through, Asia Minor. (3) It is highly im- 
 probable that St. Paul would have taken the long journey over a wild, 
 almost impassable mountain region to the Celtic Galatians. Professor 
 Ramsay's travels on the spot have brought out this difficulty. St. Paul 
 usually travelled on Roman roads, on the great highways between the 
 centres of population. (4) In I Peter i. i Galatia appears in a list of 
 
 1 Covm^ntary^ on Galatians, pp. 1-35. 
 
 ^ kAMSAY, The Church in the Roman Empire, chapters v., vi. ; St. 
 Paul, etc., chapters v., vi., viii. This view, which has been maintained by 
 Renan, Weizsiicker, Hausrath, Schenkel, Pfleiderer, etc., is accepted and 
 well defended inmost recent N.T. Introductions, e.g., Zxim' s Einleitung, 
 'Vol. I., pp. 124-126 [1S97], Bacon's Introduction to theN.T., pp. 58-60. 
 
GALATIAN'S S73 
 
 Roman provinces, and therefore must be understood as a province. Anibrg 
 minpr considerations note that Barnabas is referred to more than once in 
 Qalatians (ii. I ; ii. 13). Now Barnabas was with St. Paul in the mission 
 to the southern churches (Acts xiii. 2, 43, 46, 50; xiv. 12, 14, 20), and 
 was therefore well known among them. But he was not with the apostle 
 during the second journey,- whjen, according to the North Galatian theory, 
 the Galatian churches would have been founded (Acts xv. 36-40 ; xvi. 6). 
 Then' Professor Ramsay, supposing that the " thorn [stake] in the flesh" 
 (2 Corinthians xii. 7) represents an illness — probably malarial fever^cpn- 
 tracted at Perga, in the weakness consequent on which St. Paul visited the 
 towns beyond the Taurus Mountains, suggests that it is referred to in 
 Galatians iv. 13, 14. It has been objected, that secular writers . dp not 
 refer to these towns as Galatian. But then St. Paul's known constant 
 habit of writing of Roman provinces must be set off against that. Nor 
 was it only an jdiosyncraSyi He delighted to think of the large possibilities 
 of the gospel planted in local centres, and in this case no one local name 
 would cover all 'the churches addressed. Moreover, there were Phrygians 
 amongithem, and. it was npt cpnsidered complimentary to address anybody 
 as a Phrygian,; that name being pppularly used for a low character. 
 
 b. Genuineness of the Epistle. — Being one of the four 
 
 almost unquestioned ^ writings of St. Paul, this does not 
 
 rdquire much time for the examination of its credentials. 
 
 Possibly alluded to by several of the Apostolic Fathers, and 
 
 apparently by Jiistih Martyr and Athenagoras in the middle 
 
 of the second century, it is expressly named by Irensus, 
 
 Cleriieilt of Alexandria, TertuUian, etc. But more convincing 
 
 than any External testimony is the witness of the epistle to its 
 
 own gfehuineness. Its vehemence, its' abruptness, its very slips 
 
 of' grammar show how it comes hot from the heart of the 
 
 apostle. It exactly suits the circumstances of his time, and 
 
 could not fit in with Gnostic, Ebionite, or Catholic reaction 
 
 ideas of a later period.' The very difficulty of reconciling some 
 
 of its narrative with Acts speaks for its honesty, A Pauline 
 
 imitator knowing Acts would not hive manufactured this 
 
 hindrance to the acceptance of his work. 
 
 For external evidence £;/^ Clement R., i' Epis;, xlix. 6 with Gal. i. 4'; 
 JBarnabaS xixc8iWith:Gal. vi. 6; Polycarp, T'AjV., iii. 2 with.GaL iv. 26; 
 v, I with Qal. vi, 7 ; vi. 3 with- Gal. iv. 18 ; ix. 2 with Gal. ii. 2 ; Justin 
 Martyr, 'TVj'/^'., 95 with Gal. iii. 10 ; Epis. to Diognetus, v. j with Gal. 
 iv. 10 ; ■ Athenagoras; Ligatio; xvi. with Gal. iv. 9, as possible allusions. 
 Jrenseus cites and names the epistle in- Adv. Haer., iii. 7. 2 ; iii. 16. 3 ; 
 V. il. I,; also Clement A., Sirom.j iii. i6;Ter'tullian, ^o'd. Marc, v. 2. I; 
 'Bt Prcescrif.j vi. 
 
 ' 'i 1 Except in the Dutch school, see page 364. 
 
374 BIBLICAL INTRODUCTION 
 
 c. Occasion. — The occasion for the writing of this epistle 
 is very evident in its contents. St. Paul is amazed and 
 distressed with the alarming news that his Galatian converts 
 have been tampered with, and perverted from the gospel he 
 has taught them, by some Jewish Christians who have come to 
 persuade them to accept circumcision, and submit to the law 
 for the perfecting of their Christianity. These intruders have 
 been so successful that the apostle thinks the Galatians must 
 be bewitched. One consequence of this perversion is that 
 the authority of St. Paul and his influence have been underr 
 mined. The apostle writes in a tone of angry, though pain- 
 ful expostulation. The Galatians have seen Christ crucified 
 clearly set before them; who then has bewitched them? 
 They had been most affectionate to the apostle himself, ready 
 to pluck out their eyes for him ; how then are they now 
 turned against him? Thus St. Paul has a twofold aim in 
 writing ; — ( i ) The vindication of his own apostleship. This he 
 does by appealing to his inward call direct from Christ (i. r, 
 12, 15, 16), and reciting the circumstances of his early 
 Christian career, which show that he could not have received 
 his gospel from the other apostles. But the establishment of 
 his claim is only to lead to a larger question. (2) The clear 
 demonstraiion of his gospel. St. Paul will have his readers see 
 the fatal mistake of going back to the law, since faith is the 
 sole means of justification before God. This position he 
 argues to prove. 
 
 d. Date and Place of Writing. — These points must be 
 determined to some extent by the decision as to the locality 
 of the Galatian churches. With the North Galatian theory 
 we cannot date the epistle earlier than some time after the 
 conclusion of St. Paul's stay at Corinth. In Galatians iv. 13 
 he writes of when he preached to the Galatians " the first 
 time." This implies that there had been a second visit. On 
 the North Galatian theory these two visits would seem to be 
 those of Acts xvi. 6 and xyiii. 23. This brings us to a.d. 54 
 as the earliest possible date. But on the South Galatian 
 theory the first visit was that of Acts xiii., xiv., and the second 
 
GALATIANS 3^5 
 
 that of Acts ixvi. ,1-5. This would allow. of as early a date as 
 A.D. 51. Moreover, the phrase^ "I marvel that ye are so 
 quickly removing from him that exiled you" (Galatians i. 6), 
 would seem to show that the epistle was not written long after 
 the conversion of the Galatians. Still this is an indefinite 
 expression. While it would incline us to give an early date to 
 the epistle, making it the first written of St. Paul's epistles, there 
 are strong reasons for placing it later. In style and thought it 
 is closely allied to the epistles of the second group. To place 
 it before i and 2 Thessalonians is to dislocate all indications 
 of development in the apostle's teaching. The four epistles of 
 the second group are all concerned with the great controversy 
 concerning the relation of Christianity to Judaism, and they 
 all reach the high- water mark of the apostle's vigorous writing. 
 Thoughts and phrases repeat themselves in this group as no- 
 where else. It is more difiicult to determine the place of the 
 epistle in the group. The indications that it was written not 
 too long after the founding of the Galatian churches would 
 urge us to put it first, and therefore at Ephesus even before 
 the writing of i Corinthians— say early in a.d. 57. On the 
 other hand the great resemblance of its chief ideas and of 
 many of its verbal expressions to Romans should perhaps 
 incline us to follow Lightfoot, and place it immediately before 
 that epistle, in which case we have to take it as written from 
 Corinth on the occasion of the apostle's second visit to that 
 city, probably early in a.d. 58. 
 
 e. Contents. — The epistle falls into two parts: (i) Bio- 
 graphical; (2) doctrinal. 
 
 (i) Biographical, i., ii. 
 
 i. i-s, Salutation, without a word of the usual congratula- 
 tions. 
 
 6-10, Astonishment at the quick perversion of the 
 Galatians. 
 
 11-17, Account of the apostle's call — from the inside. 
 His early Judaism, persecuting the Church; yet his Divine 
 destiny from his birth; the revelation of God's Son in him; 
 his not conferring with any man ; hiS: retirement to Arabia. 
 
376 BIBLICAL INTRODUCTION 
 
 i8-24j St/Paul's first visit to Jerusalem after his conversion, 
 staying fifteen 'days with Cephas, seeing James, but no other 
 apostle. Preaching tour in Syria and Cilicia 
 
 ii. i-io, Visit to Jerusalem fourteen years later with 
 Barnabas, attended by Titus. Going up "by revelation." 
 A private account of the mission to the Gentiles given to 
 "them who were of repute." Atteihpts of " false brethren " 
 to get Titus circumcised successfully resisted. James; Cephas 
 and John give Paul and Barnabas the right hands of fellow- 
 ship, agreeing that they should go to the Gentiles, but 
 commissioning them to remember the poor brethren in 
 Jerusalem while Peter has the charge of work among the 
 Jews. ■...■•- 
 
 1 1-2 1, Cephas at Antioch withstood by Paul for weakly 
 
 yielding to some who had come from James, and ceasing 
 
 to eat with the Gentiles, even carryirig Barnabas with him. 
 
 It is difficult to bring this narrative into agreement with Acts. The 
 epistle only names two visits to Jerusalem. The first ,(Galatians i. l8, 19) 
 can be identified with that of. , Acts ix. 26-30 without much difficulty, 
 though in Acts he preaches "boldly" at Jerusaleiti and disputes with 
 the Hellenists, while in Galatians his visit, lasting only fifteen days, 
 seeins.tohave been' .whoUy ,P"''atej so that he was unknown by face 
 to the churches of Judjea. ^ There is no absolute contradiction here. 
 Of course St. Paul's' own ' narrative must be accepted as ■ the most 
 authentic account, if we cannot quite reconcHe the two. But .what 
 of the second-named visit? (Galatians ii. l-ic). This has generally 
 been identified with that of Acts xv. 1-29. But whife in Acts Paul 
 goes with Barnabas as a deputation from Antioch to .consult- the Church 
 at Jerusalem, and a meeting of the Church is held, from which a letter 
 is sent back to Antioch ; in Galatians he does not refer to the 
 "Jerusalem council," or the "decree" sent from it, but says jhe. laid 
 his gospel "privately before them who were of. repute," and ojitained 
 a confirmation of his mission from the three leaders, James, Cephas, 
 and John. Moreover in Acts we read of sin intermediate visit, when 
 "Barnabas, and Saul"- were sent , up-- from, Antioch: with;, relief, for ;the 
 Jerusaletti Christians in a time of famine. (Acts xi. 27-30'.)' Yet the 
 narrative in Galatians would suggest that St. Paul is reciting all his 
 visits tO; Jerusalem.' Professor Ramsay proposes to .identify the .secpnd- 
 named visit in Galatians with "the second in Acts.'' But St. Paul, makes 
 no reference to the famine or the deputation with contributions. More- 
 over, different as are the accounts in Galatians ii. l-io and -Acts xv., 
 
 ^ This apparent discrepancy has been used to discredit the historicity 
 ;of Acts. By the recent Dutch; it is turned the other, way, to discredit 
 Galatians. 
 
 ' Si. Faul, etc., chapter iii. 
 
GALATIANS - 377 
 
 it may be noted: (i) Describing the base from his o^Wi Standpoint, 
 the apostle might tell of a revelation which encouraged him to g9, and 
 which would not be inconsistent wil;h the Ahtioch Cnuirch'^'auibn. 
 (2) In Galatians he may be referring to; his own'private movements at 
 Jerusalem previous to the more public meeting of the Church. (3) The 
 visit during the famine may not have been mentioned in Galatians, 
 because St. Paul did not then see the apostles. Acts expressly says 
 the gifts Were given to the elders {Actsxi. 30), and does not mention 
 the apostles in this coiinection, suggesting that they were' absent, perhaps 
 owing to Herod's persecution. But in Galatians St. Paul is simply concerned 
 with proving that he' had not received his gospel from the . apostles. A 
 fiirther .difficulty has, been felt with the narrative of St. Peter's weakness 
 in Galatians which, it .is said, could not have occurred after the council. 
 But (l) How do we kiioW that St. Peter'might iiot have'goiie back under 
 pressure from the position he held at Jerusalem? St. Paul's narrative 
 implies that St. Peter's first. action and conviction went with the liberal 
 view. And the Jerusalem decision did not actually allow Jews to eat 
 with Gentiles. But perhaps St. Paul does not give this incident in its 
 chronological order with relation to what he narrates before. He does 
 liot introduce it with any iiote of time. It may have occurred between 
 the two visits to Jerusalem which he describes.''- 
 
 (2) Doctrinal, iii.-vi. 
 
 iii. 1-5, Expostulation with the Galatians. for being 
 ".bewitched" into forsaking the gospel of Christ crucified 
 and the power of faith. 
 
 6-14, Abraham justified by faith. In O.T. the righteous 
 live by faith. , 
 
 15-22, The covenant with Abraham older than the law, 
 which only came in as an afterthought because of , trans- 
 gressions. , ' , 
 . 23-29, The, law as a tutor to bring us to Christ, in whorn 
 human distinctions of race, etc. are at an end. 
 ( iv. 1-7, The slave and the son. 
 
 8-1 1, Return to beggarly elements. 
 
 12-20, Pleading in recollection of the old friendship. 
 
 2 i-v. I, The allegory of Hagar. 
 
 2-12, The uselessness of circumcision. 
 
 i3-r5, Freedom to be exercised in love. 
 
 16-26, The works of the flesh and the fruits of the Spirit. 
 
 vi. 1-5, Bearing one another's burdens. 
 
 6-10, The duty of supporting the teachers. The harvest. 
 
 ' See Hastings' Dictionary of the Bible, art. "Chronology," by 
 C. H. Turner, vol. i., p. 424. 
 
378 BIBLICAL INTRODUCTION 
 
 11-18, An addition in the apostle's own handwriting. Not 
 circumcision, but a new creature. St. Paul branded with the 
 marks of Jesus. Benediction. 
 
 6. Bomans. 
 
 a. The Roman Church. — The origin of the Church at 
 Rome is lost in obscurity. It is clear from the course of 
 the history in Acts,^ and also from this epistle which is 
 addressed to Roman Christians as people whom the apostle 
 had not yet seen (Romans i. 8-11 ; vi. iy; xv. 28, 29, 32), 
 that the church was not planted by St. Paul. It is almost 
 equally certain that it was not founded by St. Peter. Not 
 only is there no reference in Acts or anywhere else in the 
 N.T. earUer than i Peter to that apostle going to Rome,^ 
 but it is also clear that he could not have been there 
 when St. Paul wrote Romans, or the fact would be men- 
 tioned. Besides, St. Paul would not have expressed his 
 eagerness to visit the church and impart some spiritual 
 gift (Romans i. 11), as this would have been contrary to 
 his rule of not building on another man's foundation, 
 (Romans xv. 20.) Possibly the church was founded by 
 some of the Pentecost converts. (Acts ii. 10.) 
 
 The earliest extant assertion that St Peter was a founder of the 
 Church of Rome was made by Dionysius of Corinth (c. a.d. 170), 
 but he associates St. Paul in the work, which we know to be incorrect. 
 Evidently it is a loose statement, though it may be taken as ancient 
 testimony to the presence and work of the two apostles in the city at 
 some time.' 
 
 The church at Rome seems to have consisted of Jews 
 and Greeks. Chapters ii., iii., and iv. continually address 
 Jews. This is very marked at ii. 17 fF. And yet other 
 passages show that the majority are Gentiles, (i. 5, 6, 13; 
 XV. 15, 16.) St. Paul does not address these people 
 
 ^ See Acts xix. 21; xxiii. 11; and especially Acts xxviii. 14,' iSi 
 which describes Roman Christians as welcoming St. Paul on his first 
 visit to the city. 
 
 ' And that only on the supposition that the Babylon of I Peter v. 13 is 
 Rome. 
 
 '• Tt))' dirJ nfr/aou KaX HojJXou tfiwdav yevridetaav 'Pu/mIoip re KoX 
 Kopii'Slui' ivveKepiaare. — EusEBiUS, H.E,, ii. 25. 
 
ROMANS 3|9 
 
 collectively under the title of the "church," as he. had 
 addressed the readers of all his previous letters,^ but as 
 "saints," and he names no church officers — bishops, elders, 
 or deacons. Yeit it is evident that the Christians constitute 
 an assembly, meeting and working together (xiv. i), with a 
 real fellowship (xv. i, 2), various forms of service falling to 
 the lot of various members according to their gifts (xii. 6-8). 
 A similar condition was found at Corinth. 
 
 b.. Genuineness of the Epistle. — This is the fourth of the 
 virtually-tinquestioned epistles.^ It was evidently known to 
 Clement R. (c. a.d. 95), and it is often referred to by second 
 century writers, Irenseus, as usual, being the first to quote it 
 by name. Its extraordinary vigour and freshness of thought 
 and the perfectly sublime reach of its argument stamp this as 
 an inspired work of the highest order, and authenticate its 
 claim to apostolic authorship. The personality of the apostle 
 is evident throughout. It is thoroughly characteristic. 
 
 For external evidence compare i Clement, xxxv. J with Rom. i. 29-32 ; 
 Polycarp, Phil., vi. 2 with- Rom. xiv. 10; Theophilus, Ad Autol., i. 14 
 with Rom. ii. 6-g ; Ignatius, Eph., l8 with Rom. i. 3, 4 ; and Smyrn. i 
 with . Rom. i. 3, 4. The epistle of the churches of Lyons and Vienne 
 (Euseb., H.E., v. i. 6) with 'Rom. viii. 18 ; Justin Martyr, Trypho., xxiii. 
 with Rom. ivi 3, 10, 11. IrenEEUs quotes "the jpresbyters". as saying "all 
 men are wanting in the glory of God, but they are not justified by them- 
 selves" {Aiv. Haer., iv. 27. 2), evidently alluding to Rom. iii. 23 ; and 
 these are men of an earlier generation. The first occasion when the 
 epistle is quoted by name is in IrenEeus, .<4r/w. Haer., iii. 16. 3. Irenseus 
 quoies it on several other occasions. So do Clement A., TertuUian, etc. 
 It is in the Marcionite canon, the Muratorian Fragment, the early 
 versions. 
 
 c. Integrity. — Doubts have been felt as to the right of the 
 last two chapters (xv., xvi.) to be included in the epistle, 
 a few extreme critics rejecting them as not genuine, but 
 many more holding that though written by St. Paul, they 
 do not belong to this epistle, but are fragments of other 
 epistles. The case is strongest in regard to chapter xvi. 
 There are good reasons for detaching this chapter and taking 
 
 1 I Thess. i. I ; 2 Thess. i. i ; i Cor. i. 2 ; 2 Cor. i. i ; Gal. i. 2. 
 ''■ Though, in common with the other three, questioned by Steck, etc.; 
 and the Duteh school. See page 364. 
 
38o BIBLICAi:: INTRODUCTION 
 
 it as in all probability a fragment >6i an epistle to Ephesus, 
 commending Phoebe to thatdiiirch.V(i) This chapter abounds 
 in greetings and the most varied personal characterising of 
 the men and women- salilted. It is improbaJble that St. Paul 
 knew so many people at Rome. We are told that many Jews 
 visited the metropolis for purposes of trade, etc. True : but 
 what a cluster of intimate friends we have here ! , More than 
 are saluted in any other epistle. Yet the earlier ^chapters are 
 addressed as to strangers. On the other hand St. Paul knew 
 many in Ephesus, where he had laboured for two years, 
 (Acts xix. iq.) 
 
 (2) The chitef reason for selecting Ephesus among the 
 places well known to the apostle comes from the mention 
 of Prisca and Aquila (xvi. 3), for we know they were at 
 Ephesus a short time before (i Corinthians xvi. 19; Acts xviii. 
 t8, 26); and when they are! next met with they are also at 
 Ephesus, (2 Timothy iv. 19.) The probable inference isi that 
 they were to be- found there in the interval Then Epsenetus 
 was also of Ephesus or its neighbourhood, as he is, called 
 " the firstfruits of Asia." (Romans xvi. J.) ' 
 
 , (3) The tone of xvi. 17-20 does not a,gree with that of the 
 earlier part of the epistle. It refers to known divisions, of 
 which the body of the epistle gives no hint ; its appeal to 
 "the teaching which ye learnt" implies that St. Paul knew 
 what that teaching had been; and the strong words used in 
 characterising the disturbers, followed by the affectionate 
 paternal appeal to his readers to be wise and true, is quite 
 of another tone from the courteous address of Romans as 
 to people whom the apostle did not yet know personally. 
 
 Further, in regard to the question of integrity, ' the following points 
 should be noted :—^ '.'..■'■ , / :■ 
 
 , (i) Chapters xv> and xvi. were not in Marcion's Romans. Eu,t then 
 Marcion was jiot solely influenced, by questions of literary genuineness in 
 limiting his canon. The acceptance of the O.T. in xv. 4 was contrary to 
 his doctrine. ; ' 1 
 
 (2) The epistle seems to have three endings — at xv. 33 ; xvi. 20 ; and 
 xvi. 27. • ' ■;•"■: ■ '■ :' 
 
 (3) The final d'OKology appears in various places in different copies of 
 the epistle. 
 
' :romans - ■ ''. 3|i 
 
 , (o) At the endofxvL (The MSS. NBCDE; Pes&., Vrfg., Memph/, 
 
 , Aeth. versions ;. some copies known to Origen). (/3) At the end 
 
 of xiv. (L ; most 'cursives ; Greek leclionaries ; the later Syriac, 
 
 Gothic, Armen. , Slav, versions ; copies mentioned by. Origen, 
 
 Chrysostom, Cyril, Theocjoret, etc.). (7) In both places (A and 
 
 sorrip cursives). (S) Omitted altogether by F.G. and sortie copies 
 
 ■ ' alluded to by Jeromei The preponderating evidence is for (a), i.e., 
 
 to read thf doxology at the, end of the epistle, , Stjll: the variations 
 
 ' are significant, 
 
 ' These data have given rise to considerable divergence of opinidn', 
 
 Semler, who first raised doubts as to the integrity of the epistle, t^ok xvi, 
 
 to cpnlain a, list of teachers, who. were to receive copies of the epistle on 
 
 the way to Roijie, and xv. .special directions for those teachers, Paulus 
 
 regarded xv, as. an appendix for the enlightened, ■ and xvi. bs 'ah' added 
 
 •leaflet of- gfee;tings.., ; ,,.... ■•■-, 
 
 Baur held that neither of the chapters was written by St. Paul, main- 
 taining that they were added to reconcile the'jildaisers and the' Pauliriists. 
 Like: Marcion, he could not reconcile xv. 4 • with his idea of St. Paul's 
 .position ; and he, regarded xvi, as deliberately composed to make it appear 
 that the apostle had many friends at Rome. Dr. Samuel Davidson, while 
 retaining xv. , rejected xvi. as. spurious. .' But for the most part, the Pauline 
 authorship of both chapters is now admitted. Renan divides the epistle 
 thus: — (i) i.-xi,, xv., for Rome; (2) i.-xiv., xvi. 1-20, acopy for Ephesus; 
 (3) i.-xiv., xvi. 21-24; ^ copy fdr Thessalohica^the names in the latter 
 section appearing to him to point in that direction ; (4) i.-xiv., xvi. , 25-27, 
 a copy for some unknown chjirch, the apostle Jiimself having issued different 
 editions of the epistle.' Spitta considers that there are two' fepistlesi laid to- 
 gether, the second consisting of i. 7-12 ; xii.-xv, 7 J and xvi. l,-r20, which 
 we have combined with the original epistle to the Romans., Bishop Light- 
 foot argued that all 'but the last ' four verses wtnt to Rome, and that 
 subsequently the apostle issued another edition, in which he substituted 
 these verses for chapters xv., xvi. This thepry rests partly on the fact that 
 the western MS. G. omits ev 'fA/iri in two places (i. 7 and 15). ' A double 
 omission could not fee accidental, and it' is supported by the cursive 47, 
 The theory also attempts to account for some of the other peculiarities, of 
 the last two chapters. Dr. Hort disputed this, position, maintaining that 
 the doxology summed up the whol4 argument of 'the epistle, and attribut- 
 ing the MS. variations partly to ithe. influlence of Klarcion on the text, and 
 partly ):o_tl;je way the epistle was dij'ided in lectionari,es..^ 
 
 d. Occasion, of WriUng.-^ln part the epistle seemsi to 
 have been designed to prepare the Romans for a.visit frotn 
 the. apostle; but. its chief aim was to guide the ;church to 
 
 ^ For a full discussion of these points see Sand4Y and iHEADLAM, 
 Internal.- Com. on ' Iiom..,.\'pp.. Ixxxv'.-xcviii., and LlGHTEQCT, Biblical 
 Essays. Among recent critics who assign xvi. to Ephebus are Weiss, 
 Introd. (Eng. trans., pp. 321, 322); JtJLlCHER, Einleiiung, pp. 72-74; 
 HOLTZMANN, Einleitung, pp. 242-246; Pfleiderer, Urchristenthum, 
 p. 145; LiPSins, Hand.- Com on Rom., p. 86. On the other hand the 
 integrity of the epistle is maintained among recent critics by GoDKT, 
 Introd., Vol. I., pp. 468-482, and Zahn, Einkihmg, Vol, I., pp. 267-298. 
 
382 BIBLICAL INTRODUCTION 
 
 full Christian liberty and righteousness by faith, and then 
 to guard against antinomianism and inculcate brotherly 
 charity. If the epistle had been issued in successive editions 
 to various churches, it might be regarded as a general 
 presentation of St. Paul's gospel. It was natural that he 
 should desire to send such a document to Rome, the 
 metropolis of the world. Much as the. positive theme of 
 this epistle resembles that of Galatians, it must be observed 
 that the error opposed is not the same, for while in Galatians 
 St. Paul resists Judaistic Christianity, here it is Judaism, pure 
 and simple, with which he contrasts the new gospel of God- 
 given righteousness through faith. . 
 
 e. Date and Place of Origin. — The epistle is written from 
 Achaia (xv. 25, 26), therefore probaibly from Corinth. The 
 occasion must be the second visit recorded in Acts (xx. 2). 
 It could not be thfe first; that of Acts xviii., because the 
 apostle had preached the gospel as far as Illyricum. (Romans 
 XV. 19.) This gives us as a probable date early in a.d. 58. 
 The epistle has many echoes of the vehement Galatian epistle, 
 and seems to have been written soon after it.^ 
 
 f. Contents. — The epistle falls into two parts: (i) Doc- 
 trinal; (2) Pjactical. 
 
 i. 1-7, Opening salutation. 
 
 8-17, Interest in the Romans. Desire to visit and help 
 them. 
 
 Parti. Z'tf^/r/«a/, i. i8-xi. 36, 
 
 (i) Universal sinfulness, i.-iii. 20. 
 
 i. 18-32, Seen in the degraded state of the pagan world. 
 
 ii,. Without excuse when alsb found among the Jews. This 
 shows contempt of God's law. They who have not the law 
 are a law to themselves, having the law of conscience in their 
 hearts. Jews the more to blame for not practising what they 
 preach. The true Jew must be one inwardly; the true cir- 
 cumcision that of the heart. 
 
 iii. 1-8, The Jew's privilege. He has the oracles of God, 
 Cod's wrath just. 
 
 » See I/WHTFOOT,. G0laims,pp. 45-48, 
 
ROMANS ^83 
 
 9-20, Scripture testimony to sin. No excuse. 
 
 (2) Justification and its efifects, iii. 21-viii. 
 
 iii. 21-31, God's righteousness, apart from law, through 
 faith in Christ, whom God set forth to be a medium of 
 mercy. Therefore all exulting on our part is excluded. 
 
 iv., Abraham justified by faith. ., 
 
 V. i-i I, Justification le&:ding to peace and proving God's love. 
 
 1 2-2 1 j The analogy of Adam. As sin entered through one 
 man, Adam, so the free gift enters through one, Christ; but 
 with differences. 
 
 vi. 1-14, Antinomianisin excluded : — Shall we sin that grace 
 may abound ? No ; because the old self is dead, crucified 
 with Christ, and we now live in Him. 
 
 15-23, Shall we sin because we are not under law? No; 
 because we are no longer servants of sin, but servants of 
 righteousness. 
 
 vii. 1-6, The analogy of the woman who is free to marry 
 again when her husband is dead. We, dead to the law, can 
 be united to Christ. 
 
 7-25, The use of the law in rousing the consciousness of sin. 
 
 It is much disputed whether this passage, is autobiographical, and if 
 so, whether it refers to the apostle's present or past experience. The 
 intense feeling that pervades it points to real experience. In favour 
 of its referring to the present the actual struggles of Christian men 
 are appealed to. On the other hand, St. Paul begins with a sort 
 of biographical recital, mentioning first the unconscious innocence of 
 childhood, and then the awakening of conscience (verse 9). The struggle 
 follows without any mention of the great change of regeneration. ' JfVnd 
 further, chapter viii. points to 'the serenity of the Christian in contrast 
 with the misery depicted in chapter vii, 
 
 viii.. The life of the Spirit. Sonship, redemption^ inter- 
 cession, triumph. ; 
 
 (3) The fate of the Jews, ix.-xi. 
 
 God has a right to choose whom He will.. The Jews 
 rejected because of unbelief. 
 
 Baur rega;rded this as the chief part of the epistle. Others have held 
 it to be out of harmony with the rest of the ^spistle, and almost an 
 incuinbrance. But after rejecting Judaism it is natural that St. Paul 
 should consider the' people most interested in it, his own people tob, 
 and their position in the light of the new teaching. 
 
 2 C 
 
384 BIBLICAL INTRODUCTION 
 
 Part ii. Practical, xii.-xvi. 
 
 xii., Gifts and corresponding duties. : 
 
 xiii., Duties to rulers, to our neighbours; awaking to the 
 light. ' i. 
 
 xiv.-xv. 13, The weak in faith to be received and not 
 disturbed. Some conscientiously refuse to eat meat and 
 observe days. The stronger and freer have: not these 
 scruples. The strong should bear the burdens of the weak. 
 
 The question here raised is different from that in I Corinthians con- 
 cerning the lawfulness of eating meat offered to idols.. There is ino 
 reference to idols and heathen sacrifices in Romans. The "weak" 
 refuse to eat meat 'at all, practise vegetarianism as a matter of conscience. 
 .These would not be the Jewish section of the church, unless they were 
 Essenes ; but it is not likely that this obscure party which had its home 
 by the Dead Sea would be represented at Rome. It is more probable 
 that Pythagorean ideas were affecting some of the Gentile part of the church. 
 Then the observing of days would not refer .to Jewish Sabbath^keeping, 
 etc., but to pagan notions of lucky and unlucky days. 
 
 XV. 14-33, Concluding personal rernarks on the apostle's 
 work and his desire to visit Rome and Spain. 
 
 xvi. I, 2, Commendation of Phcebe, a helper and support 
 of the church at Cenchrsa. , j ;.j . 
 
 3-16, A number of individual salutations. 
 
 17-20, Warning against false teachers. 
 
 21-23, Salutations from St. Paul's companions. 
 
 25-27, Concluding Doxology. 
 
 7. Characteristics of the Group. 
 
 These four great epistles, i and 2 Corinthians, Galatians, 
 Romans, all written within a twelvemonth and separated by 
 four years from the preceding group, and by another four 
 years fronl the next group of epistles, stand by themselves 
 as containing between them the ' most' complete and vigorous 
 presentation of the. apostle's teaching. The least disputed 
 books in the N.T., they have been named " the quadrilateral 
 of Christianity," and it has been shown that if we possessed 
 no other documents it would be possible to substantiate the 
 main facts arid principles of the Christian religion on the 
 babis of these epistles. They show us St. Paul at the height 
 
CHARACTERISTICS OP THE GROUP 385 
 
 of his power, burdened with the care of the churches, and 
 harassed by the antagonism of opponents who claim the 
 authority and prestige of the older type of Christianity 
 prevalent at the mother church of Jerusalem. At first 
 St. Paul's liberalism is practical — the free offer of the 
 gospel to the world at large. But controversy stimulates 
 an intellectual justification of it.- Thus in these epistles 
 where that process is carried on we see the genesis of 
 Christian theology- as a subject of: thought. All through 
 the controversy St. Paul is forced to ' defend his own 
 apostleship and authority. Then he has to defend what 
 he calls his gospel. This, in distinction from that of the 
 Judaisers, is negatively a repudiation of the law as, firsit, 
 not of any service to Gentiles, and further, as abolished 
 altogether even for Jews who become Christians. Then 
 positively his gospel is developed as the good news of 
 the gift of eternal life in Jesus Christ, and forensically 
 regarded as announcing God's gift of righteousness in 
 Christ received by us through faith. St. Paul paints sin 
 in the darkest colours. Its consequence is death. All 
 mankind are sinners, under the wrath of God. When 
 explaining the relation of Christ to the gospel St. Paul 
 teaches His Divinity — He is God's Son and the fountain 
 of grace J and also His humanity — He was born of a 
 woman. The cross is most significant with St. Paul. It 
 is not only that Jesus is Christ in spite of being crucified, 
 nor that the crucifixion was foreordained in the mysterious 
 purposes of God, but it took a great part in our redemption. 
 Christ died on our behalf {vTrip fjiLmv), and because of our 
 sins. He was treated as a sinner (" made sin ") for us that 
 we might have God's righteousness. The resurrection com- 
 pleted Christ's work and established our justification. By 
 faith this is ours. Our faith unites us to Christ, so that 
 we die with Him, rise with Him, live in Him. This is 
 the mystical part of St. Paul's teaching that becomes more 
 apparent in the third group. Thus united with Christ we 
 become God's sons by adoption, and joint heirs with Christ. 
 
386 BIBLICAL INTRODUCTION 
 
 "The consequence is the firstfruits of the Spirit, from which 
 come the insight of spiritual discernment, purifying and 
 consecrating grace, and specific - gifts (charismata). Thus 
 privileged, the Christian is under the highest obligation to 
 live a holy life^ cultivating above all else the grace of 
 love. Brotherly love between Christians is especially to be 
 cherished, and ' each member of the Church to take his 
 right place according to his gift in ministering to the good of 
 the whole body. At the same time duties to the outer world 
 are to be carefully observed. Christians live in expectation 
 of the return of Christ to judge the world and establish His 
 kingdom. Then the dead in Christ shall live again, and share 
 in the blessed future. 
 
CHAPTER VII. 
 
 THE PAULINE EPISTLES: THIRD GROUP 
 
 The Epistles Written in Pjrison 
 
 The place and time of imprisonment. 
 
 1, Colossians. 
 
 2. Philemon. 
 
 3. Ephesians. 
 
 4. Philippians. 
 
 5. Characteristics of the Group. 
 
 Another interval of some years (probably four) separates 
 the epistles of the third group from those of the preceding 
 period. The four epistles of this group were all written during 
 St. Paul's imprisonment. In Colossians he refers to the 
 mysteries of the Christ, " for which also," he adds, " I am 
 also in bonds'' (SeSe/srat, iv. 3), and he pathetically exclaims, 
 " Remember my bonds." (v6rse 18.) In Philemon he writes 
 as "Paul a prisoner of Christ Jesus" (i), "now a prisoner 
 also of Jesus Christ " (9), while Onesimus is his child 
 "begotten in the bonds," who could minister to him "in 
 the bonds of the gospel.'' (13.) In Ephesians he is "the 
 prisoner of Christ Jesus" (iii. i), and "the prisoner in the 
 Lord." (iv. i.) In Philippians he refers four times to "my 
 bonds." (i. 7, 13, 14, 17.) It is impossible to assign these 
 epistles to any imprisonment earlier than that which followed 
 the apostle's arrest in Jerusalem (a.d. 58; Acts xxi. 33), after 
 which he was detained by Felix for two years at Csssarea 
 (Acts xxiv. 27), and then sent to Rome, on his appeal to 
 Caesar, where he was two years in his own hired house before 
 his trial. (Acts Tcxviii. 30.) But it is a question whether the 
 letters were written from Caesarea or from Rome. The prob- 
 ability, however, is ia favour of Rome, where St. Paul had 
 
 387 
 
388 BIBLICAL INTRODUCTION 
 
 more liberty of action and intercourse, and towards the end 
 of the imprisonment, i.e., about a.d. 62. 
 
 Some who admit that three of these epistles were written from Rome, 
 detach Philippians, which they assign to Coesarea, while others reverse this 
 position. In favour of Ceesarea as the place of writing one or more of 
 these epistles, are the following arguments : — (l) For Philippians in 
 particular that the mention of the "praetorium" (Philippians i. 13) is 
 explained by the fact that according to Acts xxiii, 35, St. Paul Was 
 coniined in Herod's "praetorium" at Csesarea. But the expression may 
 well refer to the " piEEtorian guard ", at Rome, in charge of which the 
 apostle was placed. On the other hand, " Giesar's household " (Philippians 
 iv. 22) plainly points to Rome. So does St. Paul's allusion to the progress 
 of his work (i. 12 ff.), since he found new ground for evangelising at 
 Rome, while Caesarea was already a familiar centre of apostolic labours ; 
 and the freedom for this work was found at Rome while the apostle was in 
 his own house, as it was not found at Csesarea, where he was kept in a 
 dungeon, though kindly treated.^ 
 . (2) For the other epistles.— Viy Philippians ii. 24 St. Paul intends to 
 proceed from Rome to Macedonia, whereas when he wrote Philemon 22 
 he wished to go straight to Colossse. Further, his request. for a lodging 
 to be prepared there implies his expectation of speedy release, which he 
 could not cherish at Rome." But Philemon' went with Colossians, and. 
 Ephesians inust have been written about the same tinie^ Therefore, it is' 
 argued, all three nmst be assigned to C^sarea. On the other hand. it must be . 
 allowed that St. Paul could change his intended route ; and the request for 
 a lodging might be a playful hint of his urgent desire to come to Colossse. 
 But it is pointed out that Tacitus describes the destruction of Colossas in 
 A.D. 60,^ and yet St. Paul makes.no reference to the fact, Therefore, it 
 is argued, he must have written before that date. But Lightfoot shows 
 that Eusebius, who mentions that the three cities of ' Asia, Laodicea, 
 Hierapolis, and Colossas, were destroyed by earthquake four years later, is 
 especially accurate in his dates of earthquakes,* and Tacitus has been 
 jiroved to be wrong in the case of another earthquake.^ 'The comparative 
 freedom of the apostle's life at Rome is the convincing .reason for assigning 
 the origin of all four epistles to that. city. Resemblances to the pastoral 
 epistles also make for Ephesians and Colossians being late. Philippians; i. ' 
 24-26 shows that St. Paul expects.an acquittal, and merefbre the attitude 
 of this epistle is not, so different from that of Philemon, wijth its expecta- 
 tion of being soon able to visit Colossi. 
 
 T. Colossians. 
 
 a. The City and the Church. — Colossse was a Phrygian city 
 in the Roman province of Asia, one of the three cities of the 
 
 . ,1 See LiGHTFOQT, Phil., p. 29. 
 " See "Weiss, Inirod. to the N.T^, Eng. trans., vol. i. p. 327. 
 ' Ann. xiv." 27. 
 
 * Col. (tM. i87S), PP- 37-40. 
 
 • Suetonius, Nero, 160, 172. Cited in HotLT, Jiom. ap,dEfh,, p. 106. 
 
. 'i COLOSSI ANS 589 
 
 Lycus Valley. The Lycus is a tributary of the Maeander, and 
 two of the cities, large, important places, Laodicea and Hiera- 
 polis, faced one another on opposite sides of the stream, while 
 Colossi was an insignificant town — much the smallest town to 
 which the apostle addressed any of his extant letters — twelve 
 miles further up, and therefore more in the heart of Phrygia. 
 The church at Colossi had not been founded by St. Paul, 
 and he had never visited it when he wrote his epistle. The 
 narrative of Acts does, not bring the apostle through the 
 Lycus Valley, and in the epistle he only writes of hearing of 
 the faith and love of the Colossians (Colossians i. 4), refers 
 gratefully ' to the day when the first news of their recep- 
 tion of the gospel had reached him (verse 9), and describes 
 the Colossians as people who had not seen his face in the' 
 flesh, (ii. I.) 'And yet the church was in an especial way 
 under his charge, for it had been founded by Epaphras, the 
 evangelist whom St. Paul had directly commissioned to visit 
 the district where it was situated. (7, 8.) 
 
 b.' Genuineness of the Epistle. — This epistle is well attested 
 by external evidence, being mentioned by Irenseus, Clement, 
 and Tertullian, at the end of the second century, probably cited 
 by Justin Martyr in the middle of the century, and included 
 in Marcion's canon still earlier. It is essentially Pauline in 
 doctrine, and its ptofound spiritual character makes for the 
 honesty of its claim. Dr. Lightfoot has shown that there is 
 lib'thing in its teaching that betrays second century ideas or 
 conflicts with the period of St. Paul's lifetime.^ Although its 
 genuineness is not so almost universally admitted as that of 
 the epistles of the second group, it is accepted by critics who 
 reject Ephesians, and opinion is growing in favour of its being 
 an original work of St. Paul's,^ 
 
 1 See t,iGHTFOOT, Col., Introd. ii.. The Colossian Heresy. 
 
 '^ Hilgenfeld followed Baur in rejecting it; Pfleiderer allpwed there 
 were fragments of St. Paul's writings in it. Later it has been vindicated 
 by Von Soden, JUlicher, Zahn, and Sanday. It is generally accepted 
 by English and American scholars, Lightfoot, T. K. Abbott, Peake, 
 Bacon, etc. 
 
390 BIBLICAL INTRODUCTION 
 
 For external evidence compare Barnabas xii. 7 ito,v'Jria;oS, 8n iv aiir<fl 
 irivTa KoX eh aiT6v) with Colossians i. 16. Justin Martyr; repeatedly re- 
 minds us of a striking^ phrase of the epistle, rbv irporrbroKov twv TavTiiiv, 
 Tryph. , 84 ; . irpuTordKov ira/riis Krlireas, Tryph. , 85 ; irpariroKov /ih tov 
 9eoO Kal wpb Tvavroiv twv ktkt/mtwi', Tryph., lOO, suggesting an allusion, 
 to Colossians i. 15 ("the firstborn of all creation," irparlyroKm Traffics 
 KTlaeai). This is the liiore striking, because Philo, with . whom Justin 
 seems to be acquainted, never has this phrase, but uses irpaTlr^ovos {De 
 Agric, 12; De Somn., i. 37). Compare also Tatian (Justin's disciple), 
 Orixt. ad Grace, 5. The epistle is in the Syriac and Old Latin- versions, 
 and is recognised in the Muratorian Fragment. Moreover, Colossians is 
 indirectly attested by Philemon . The two epistles are closely associated,, 
 and there is strong reason for accepting Philemon, 
 
 , The objectioas are wholly on internal grounds : (i) The 
 heresy opposed has been regarded as some form of second 
 century gnosticism; but Dr. Lightfoot showed that this con- 
 tained none of the later gnostic peculiarities, and was more 
 likely to be a Jewish speculation. (2) The doctrine of Christ 
 is more advanced than in St. Paul's recognised epistles. 
 Christ here appears as the centre of the universe. All things 
 have been created not only through Him (8t' avroij), but also 
 "unto Him" (et's amov, i. 16). Elsewhere this is said of God 
 the Father in distinction from Jesus Christ {e.g., Romans 
 xi. 36 ; I Corinthians viii. 6.) This led Von Soden to regard 
 the passage as an interpolation. But may we not take it 
 as an advance in the development of St. Paul's Christology? 
 (3) The style is regarded as un-Pauline. The old vehemence 
 disappears, and we have long, cumbrous sentences in place 
 of the short, abrupt utterances of the earlier epistles. In 
 reply it may be said that St. Paul is mellowed aijid calmed 
 with age and subdued by his long confinement, and that ' 
 the controversies which engaged him earlier have passed 
 away. (4) The vocabulary of these epistles, contains many 
 words not found hitherto in St. Paul's epistles. This difficulty 
 is partly met in two ways : First, the residence at Rome 
 would bring the apostle into fresh associations, and the 
 imprisonment give hirh leisure for reading and thus en 
 larging his knowledge of Greek words. Second, the subjects 
 treated — in particular the Colossian heresy — ^by introducing 
 a new series of ideas, would stimulate a corresponding fresh- 
 
COLOSSIANS 391 
 
 ness of language. And yet it must be confessed that these 
 answers do not entirely remove the difficulty. Perhaps we 
 should accept the suggestion that Timothy, as St. Paul's 
 amanuensis, was allowed more liberty in the case of this 
 epistle, so that the association of his name with the apostle's 
 in the opening sentence was not merely nominal.^ These 
 difficulties do not destroy the strong evidence for the genuine- 
 ness of the epistle. It is highly improbable that a work so 
 profound in its spiritual thought as Colossians should have 
 been falsely ascribed to St. Paul. The character of the 
 epistle and the greatness of its thought make for its genuine- 
 ness. 
 
 c. Occasion of Writings etc. — As St. Paul was writing to 
 Philemon on a personal matter, he would be led to think 
 of sending a letter to the church in the city where his friend 
 lived. Epaphras, the founder of the church at Colossse, 
 ■wfho was now with the apostle at Rome (iv. 12), may have 
 brought information about the disturbing teachers which 
 would have prompted St. Paul to counteract their errors. 
 The letter is to be conveyed by Tychichus, who is to give 
 personal information concerning the apostle's affairs (iv. 7), 
 which perhaps it would not have been safe to have committed 
 to writing. 
 
 d. Contents. 
 
 i. I, 2, Salutation from Paul and Timothy. 
 
 ^ Thirty-four words are found nowhere else in the N.T. , viz., ddvjj.eti', 
 alcrxpoXoyiay d^ve^ibs, dvravaTrXTjpoOv, iiPTaTr6do(riS; direKdOeadaL^ dTT^/cSutrts, 
 d7r6xp7;(rts, dpeo-Keia, dcpeiSia,, ^pa^edecv, doyixarl^effdai, dvvafiouv (but - 
 Ephesians vi. 10 has idvpafiouade), i6e\odpT}(rKeta, dpT^voirouTvy 4/j,^ar€uetj/, 
 e6x,dpi<rTos, dedrris, KWra^pa^eieiv, neTHKiveiv, fj,ojx<ji7), vovpurpla, bparbs, 
 TapriyopiHf Trt^apoXoryia,. Trkrio'fiov'^, jrpoa/coiJet^, 'irpoa'T]\oOp, TpiCTeieiVf 
 aTEpiojfiaL, (rvKayioyetVf (rcofiaTtKwSj <f)L\oaotpla, x^^P^JP^i^^^' Twelve 
 occur in other N.T. writers, but not elsewhere in St. Paul, viz., HXas, 
 diroKpiveo'datf dwiKpucpos, dpTieiv^ ysieaOai, dety/j.ari^etp, i^oKel^eiv^ 
 Ta.pdKoyi^E<r6ai, irtKpaipECV, irdvo?, crKid, criipSoiiXos, and three in the 
 pastoral epistles, viz., diroKeiadat., Kp^irreiv, irXovcriws. On the other 
 hand this epistle contains- eleven Pauline words used by no other N.T. 
 writer, viz,, direivai., eSpalos, elKTJ (?), ipeSl^eLv, BpMp.^eiei.!', Uavovv, 
 Mriis, irdSos, avvatxi'-akoiTos; avvBaiTTeiv, ipvaiodv — an important make- 
 weight in &vour of genuineness. See Abbott, Ephesians and Colossians, 
 pp., fo, Ix. 
 
392 BIBLICAL INTRODUCTION 
 
 3^8, Thanksgiving for the gospel reaching Colossi by' 
 means of Epaphras, and for its fruit there and elsewhere. 
 
 9-1 9, All things summed up in Christ, through whom 
 and for whom the universe was created, and in whom it 
 consists. . 
 
 20-23, Reconciliation through Christ, and His death. 
 
 24-29, The apostle's work in proclaiming the mystery of 
 the gospel, which is Christ as the hope of glory for the 
 Gentiles. 
 
 ii. i-s, His prayer for the Colossians that they may be 
 knit together in love, and may attain to the knowledge of 
 God in Christ. 
 
 6-15, Exhortations, especially against the delusion of a 
 false philosophy, appealing to the new life of those who, 
 buried with Christ in baptism, are also raised with Him. 
 
 16-23, Warnings against the bondage of exterrial oirdinances. 
 
 iii. 1-4, Practical appeal to seek the heavenly things in 
 accordance w'ith the experience of being risen with Christ. 
 
 S-i I, Warnings against sensuality, malice, and other vices 
 of the old life. ' 
 
 12-17, Encouragements to live the Christian life, and attain 
 to its graces. ' 
 
 iii. i8-iv. I, Domestic duties — wives and husbands, children 
 and parents, servants and masters. 
 
 iv. 2-6, Exhortations to prayer, and wisdom and grace bf 
 speech. 
 
 7-9, Concerning Tychicus the messenger and Onesimus 
 the beloved brother. 
 
 10-14, Salutations from the apostle's companions. 
 
 15, 16, Messages concerning L^odicea, and an exchange of 
 epistles. ■ > 
 
 17, A message to Archippus to take heed to his ministry 
 (or deaconship). 
 
 18, Final salutation in the apostle's own handwriting. 
 
 The Coiossian Heresy, — It is evident that in this epistle St.' Faiil is 
 contending against some false teaching which was put forth as a ' 
 philosophy, i.e., as a rule of life. This was Jewish, in the observance 
 
PHILEMON 393 
 
 of Sabbaths and new moons, and making distinctions in food(ii. 16-23); 
 and also gnostic, claiming a peculiar intellectuality, indulging in specula- 
 tive tenets cpncerning cosinogony, and thus associating the construction 
 and administration ' of the universe with a series Of heavenly beings. 
 Hilgenfeld took these two elements to belong to different parties, but 
 L^htfoot showed that Jewish speculations and practices, having an 
 essential affinity of type with those of the Essenes, would account for 
 what St. Paul refers- to. The Essenes were more rigorous than the 
 Pharisees in Sabbath-keeping, and were ascetic in practice, refusing 
 flesh and wine, and not niarrying. Philo denies that they were given 
 to "abstract philosophy," and it is difficult to suppose that these 
 people who devoted themselves to agriculture in Judsea, and of whom 
 we never read elsewhere, could have had much influence in IPhrygia. 
 Still there is reason to think that allied tendencies Were found in Asia 
 Minor. Essenism owed much of its peculiarity to Oriental influences 
 which were more powerful in Asia Minor than where it arose. There 
 is no reason to suppose that the special ideas of gnosticism sprang 
 from Christian sources. They were Greek and Oriental — partly Persian, 
 perhaps Buddhist, and in some degree to be traced back to Babylonian 
 astrology. These ideas were early grafted on to Judaism ; the Kabbala 
 is one of the fruits of this union. In the second century they blossomed 
 into . great systems of thought in combination with Christianity. In 
 Colossians we see them pressing into the Church through their earlier' 
 alliance with Judaism. The Colossian heresy in particular dishonouredt 
 Christ practically by bringing in angels for worship, and speculatively 
 by dividing the functions of creation, etc. among these beings. All that 
 was here affirmed of the angels St. Paul claims for Christ, who is supreme 
 in the universe.^ 
 
 2. Philemon. 
 
 This beautiful little letter bespeaks its own genuineness 
 beyond question. It is wholly personal in character and aim, 
 and there is nothing about it to suggest a writer with doctrinal 
 and other objects sheltering under St. Paul's nariie. 
 
 Philemon is in Marcion's and the Muratorian Canons, and in the Syriac 
 and Old Latin version's. It is not cited by Irenseus or Clement A. , but its ' 
 brevity and personal character will account for that. TertuUian; and 
 Origen refer to it. 
 
 a. Occasion and Circumstances of Origin. — Onesimus, a 
 slave of Philemon's, having " stolen some of his master's, 
 property, had fled to Rome, where he had come under the 
 influence of St. Paul; and this had led to his conversion. 
 St. Paul, in sending hirri back, writes to beseech Philemon to 
 pardon the defaulter, and receive him as no longer, merely a, 
 slave, but a brother beloved. The mention of Archippus 
 
 ' See LroHTfOOT, Colossians and Philemon, "The Colossian Heresy." 
 
394 BIBLICAL INTRODUCTION 
 
 here (2) and in Colossians iv. 1 7 fixes Colossae as the place at 
 which Philemon lived. Then the reference to Onesimus in 
 Colossians iv. 9, as about to go to Colossse, further associates 
 the two epistles. Demas and Luke also send salutations in 
 both letters. It is evident that this little letter accompanied 
 Colossians, Tychicus probably taking both ; or possibly One- 
 simus, who travelled with him, took the letter, which was for 
 his own benefit. 
 
 b. Contents. 
 
 i. 1-3, Salutation from Paul and Timothy to Philemon, and 
 Apphia (? his wife), to Archippus and the church in Philemon's 
 house. , 
 
 4-7, Thanksgiving for Philemon's love and faith. 
 
 8-21, A pathetic plea for the pardon of Onesimus, who is 
 now a brother beloved and the apostle's spiritual son begotten 
 in his bonds, Paul will make himself responsible for what 
 was stolen. 
 
 22, A lodging to be prepared. 
 
 23, 24, Concluding salutations. 
 25, Benediction. 
 
 3. Ephesians. 
 
 a. Destination of the Letter. — There are strong reasons for 
 believing that this letter was not written to the church at 
 Ephesus. The title represents an ancient tradition, but it is 
 not itself authoritative, as in no cases were the titles of the 
 epistles in the original documents. The address "to the saints 
 which are at Ephesus " (i. i), which is found in our N.T., has 
 not the support of the two best MSS. K and B, which omit 
 the words " in Ephesus " (Iv 'E(jf>eo-e^). These words are also 
 rhissing in a late cursive MS. (67), as corrected by a second 
 hand. A more ancient testimony is that of Origen, early in the> 
 third century, who writes in a way that implies the absence of 
 these two words.^ Still earlier, in the first half of the second 
 century, Marcion accepted the epistle, but under the title, 
 
 ' The passage in Origen taken from Cramer's Catena, p. 102, is cited 
 in Hort's Mom. and Eph., page 76, footnote. 
 
EPHESIANS 395 
 
 ♦ 
 
 " To the La&diceans." He could hardly have done so if the 
 words " in Ephesus " had been in his text. Besides, TertuUian 
 would have accused him of falsifying the words of the apostle 
 here. As he does not, we may conclude that TertuUian also 
 knew of MSS. from which the words were omitted.'- The 
 uncertainty which is thus suggested is met by a. decided argu- 
 ment against the Ephesian destination of the epistle from the 
 tenor of its contents. Ephesus was one of the chief centres 
 of St. Paul's labours. He had resided and worked in the city 
 for more than two years. (Acts xix. lo.) There is no more 
 touching scene in the history of the early church than his 
 interview with the Ephesian elders at Miletus, (xx. 17-38.) 
 One of the Ephesians accompanied him to Jerusalem, 
 (xxi. 29.) Here then was a church of his most intimate 
 friends. But the epistle does not contain a word of in- 
 dividual salutation. No name is mentioned among the 
 -people to whom he is writing, although several persons are 
 named in the companion epistle to the Colossians, a people 
 whom confessedly the apostle had never seen.^ Therefore we 
 may confidently conclude that this epistle could not have been 
 addressed to St. Paul's friends at Ephesus. We are tempted 
 to imagine that Marcion was right, and that it was addressed 
 to Laodicea, one of the three cities of the Lycus Valley, 
 which, in common with ColossEe and Hierapolis, the apostle 
 had never visited, and the reference to the exchange of epistles 
 in Colossians iv. 16 would seem to fall in with that idea. And 
 yet the phrase tjiere is not " the epistle io Laodicea," but " the 
 epistle from (Ik) Laodicea," which rather points to one that 
 was to be passed on through that city. The general character 
 of our epistle favours the opinion that it was a circular letter 
 for the churches of this neighbourhood. 
 
 We still have to account for the singular condition of the text in the 
 MSS. above referred to, where we read tois 1x7^015 toTs oSa-i,v [omitting h 
 'Eipia-ifi]^ Kal iriaToCs. One view is to render otfcric absolutely,' with the 
 
 ^ SeeiTERTULLiAN, Adv. Marc, v. ir,. 17. 
 
 ' The phrase, " If so be that ye heard {eiye -qKoinraTe, iii. 2), though not 
 expressing a doubt, could not be used in a case of absolute certainty, such 
 as that of a church St. Paul had himself taught. 
 
396 BIBLICAL INTRODUCTION 
 
 meaning, " the. saints who truly exist — as such, etc." But this is a forced 
 and unnatural interpretation. Another view favoured by Hort is "the 
 saints who are also &ithful." Against this is the application of this same 
 participle of the verb dfil. in other epistles, where it directs attention to. the 
 place. 1 Possibly a blank was left for the name of the church to be filled 
 in. This might be done in writing if several copies had been V^fritteii off; 
 but the notion is too modern. Besides, it excludes the idea, otherwise 
 probable, enough, that Ephesians may be the epistle which was to come.qn 
 from Laodicea. A simpler method would be to send a single copy with- 
 out any name, leaving the name of each church receiving the epistle to be 
 supplied by the reader. Ephesus, being the metropolis of.the province, 
 would naturally receive it in the end, and then nothing w,ould be more 
 natural than for somebody to fill in the gap with the haine of the city 
 where the epistle was subsequently fgund. 
 
 b. Genuineness.— The external evidence for this epistle is 
 stronger than that for Colossians. It seems to have been 
 known to Clement R. as early as a.d. 95. Evidently it was 
 quoted by Ignatius early in the second century, and by 
 Polycarp, and it was accepted by Marcion before a.d. 140. 
 
 Compare. I Clem. xlvi. 5, "Have we not one God, and One Christ, 
 and one Spirit of grace poured out upon us, and one calling jn 
 Christ," with Ephesians iv. 4 ; Ignatius, Magnes. vii. I with Ephesians 
 iv. 3-6 ; Phil. ii. I with Ephesians v. 8 ; Ad Polyc. v. i with 
 Ephesians v. 25, 29 ; Polycarp, FMl.' i. 3 with Epljesians ii. 8, 9 ; and 
 possibly Ibid. xii. i, where "Irascimini, .et nolite peccare" is quoted 
 as scripture (ut in his scripturis dictum 'is/), ' y/ith Ephesians iv. 26. 
 iBut we only have this last quotation in a Latin translation ; possibly in 
 both cases it is taken from some Logia of Jesus, Christ ; or it may be an 
 allusion to Psalm iv. 4, LXX. The epistle is in Marcion'sahd the Mura- 
 torian Canons, arid in the Old Latin and Syriac versions. It is first, named 
 as St. Paul's by Irenseus. {Adv. Sizer., v. 2. 3.) 
 
 Moreover it shares with Colossians the general Paulinfe 
 standpoint, and is rich in vital spiritual thought, one of the 
 gems of Scripture. It is hard to doubt the genuineness of 
 a work of such paramount worth. 
 
 Nevertheless it is more questioned than Colossians.^ The 
 objections are largely the same as those urged against 
 Colossians. We have the advanced' Christology, though 
 riot so pronounced with regard to the universe and creation 
 
 1 Tots aSciv dp'^di/j-T] (Rom. i. 7),t5 oSirjf ip. KoplvBcfi (l Cor. i. 2), roJs 
 oBiTH' & *I^i^r7ro<s (Phil. i. I). ,i 
 
 ^ VonSoden, for instance, who defends Colossians, ascribing Ephesians 
 to a large-minded Jewish Christian of the dispersion. 
 
EPHESIANS 397 
 
 « 
 
 as in Colossians, the same style of long sentences, the same 
 phenomena of un-Pauline words. 
 
 There are thirty- two words used only in this epistle, and twenty-eight 
 found elsewhere in the N.T., but not in Paul. On the other hand there 
 are eighteen words found in Pauline epistles, but not elsewhere in the 
 N.T., and several of ih& hafax legomena are in the list of the Christian 
 armour, and therefore quite naturally accounted for, being inevitable when 
 once the idea of elaborating the image was entertained. 
 
 But in addition to these objections, which may be met as 
 were the, similar objections to Colossians, certain special ob- 
 jections are urged against Ephesians : (i) Whereas previously 
 St. Paul championed the Gentiles against the Jews, here writ- 
 ing to Gentiles he seems to champion the Jewish Christians. 
 That, however, might be the case in this later period 
 when liberty was secure, and among churches chiefly Gentile. 
 Moreover the idea appears in Romans xi. 13-24. (2) The 
 expression, "the devil," occurs twice, (iv. 27 ; vi. 11). But else- 
 where St. Paul always has "Satan." It niay be replied that 
 elsewhere in the N.T. the names are interchangeable. Writing 
 later at Rome St. Paul might prefer the, Greek term. (3), The 
 phrase; " holy apostles " (iii. 5), is objected to as more like 
 a formula of later ecclesiastical usage. But we must re- 
 mertiber that the word rendered "holy" (dytois) is the 
 common title of all Christians, . and points to consecration 
 rather than to personal holiness. It occurs a little later, 
 where St. Paul describes himself as "less than the least of 
 all saints " (ajyiinv, iii. 8). (4), Th,e most singular phenomena 
 in connection with the epistle is its close resemblance ; to 
 Colossians. Out of 155 verses. no less than 78 have ex- 
 pressions identical with phrases in that epistle. Hence 
 it has been inferred that this is founded on Colossians, of 
 which some have regarded it as a "weak" expansion. As 
 to whether it is "weak," that is a matter of taste. The 
 similarity of phrase is too close to be accidental. But if 
 the apostle wrote the two epistles at the same time, it would 
 be perfectly natural that he would say the same things in 
 both. ■ The situation was so far similar, that both epistles 
 went to people whom the apostle had not seen. Both were 
 
39? BIBLICAL INTRODUCTION 
 
 sent by Tychicus. (Colossians iv. 7, 8; Ephesians vi. 21, 22.) 
 Then as Ephesians seems to be a circular letter, it might 
 be less crisp than one written with a more definite conception 
 of the persons to whom it was to be sent.^ 
 
 c. Occasion and Time of Writing.- — Probably Epaphras in 
 bringing news from Colossse had reported on the condition 
 of the neighbouring churches, and then Tychicus, who was 
 to take a letter to Colossse, would be able to carry one for 
 the other churches also. In particular the spread of Jewish 
 gnostic speculations derogatory to the supremacy of Christ 
 and His sole authority in the Church would call for a state- 
 ment of the truth concerning this subject. As the two 
 epistles appear to have been written about the same time, 
 it is of little consequence to inquire which was produced 
 first. Still the larger expansion of the common ideas which 
 we find in Ephesians may perhaps indicate that this was 
 written after its companion. 
 
 d. Contents. 
 
 i. I, 2, Salutation from Paul only. 
 
 3-14, Thanksgiving, leading to exposition of the idea of 
 God's purpose in adopting us as sons chosen by the Father ; 
 redeemed by the Son, in whom all things in heaven and earth 
 are to be summed iip ; and sealed by the Spirit. 
 
 15-23, Prayer that the readers may appreciate their privileges 
 in Christ, who was raised from the dead, and is exalted above 
 the highest powers and authorities. 
 
 ii. i-io, Their new' state in grace. 
 
 11-22, The reconciliation of Jews and Gerltiles in Christ. 
 
 iii. 1-13, The revelation of the gospel for the Gentiles 
 niade through Paul. 
 
 14-19, Prayer for spiritual progress in knowing the love of 
 Christ. 
 
 20, 21, Doxology. 
 
 iv. 1-16, Unity in the body, with diversity of offices. 
 
 ^ Holtzmann supposes there was a Pauline nucleus, which a subsequent 
 writer 'enlarged into two epistles, an elaborate theory which' seems to be 
 adopted as a counsel of despair. Bacon holds it to be genuine. 
 
PHILIPPIANS |99 
 
 17-24, Warnings against heathen vices. 
 
 25-32, Practical a4vice, especially as regards duty to our 
 neighbour. 
 
 V. 1-14, To walk in love, and avoid immorality and 
 covetousness. 
 
 15-21, Care in conduct to avoid offence; praise and song. 
 
 22-33, The union of husbands and wives like that of Christ 
 and His Church. 
 
 vi. 1-4, Duties of children and parents. 
 
 5-9, Duties of servants and masters. 
 
 10-20, Exhortation to strength and courage; the whole 
 armour of God. 
 
 21, 22, Personal news by Tychicus. 
 
 23, 24, Benediction. 
 
 Two specific ideas of great importance are found in this 
 epistle: ■ 
 
 (i) The Supremacy of Christ. — This corresponds to similar 
 teaching irf Colossians. Here, as in the companion epistle, 
 Christ is exalted above all things not only in the sphere 
 of the 'gospel, but also in the universe, heavenly as well as 
 earthly. But in this epistle the supremacy of Christ over His 
 Church is especially emphasised. ' 
 
 (2) The Unity of the Church. — In earlier epistles St. Paul 
 often refers to individual local churches, and in writing 
 about the duties of their members he dwells on the im- 
 portance of harmony in co-operation. But here he rises 
 to the conception of a universal Church of which Christ is 
 the head, and he insists on its essential unity realised through' 
 the common faith and experience of all Christians, 
 
 4^ Fhilippians. 
 
 a. The Church at Philip fi.- — ^Philippi was a Roman colony 
 in Macedonia, and the church in this city was the first planted 
 by St. Paul in Europe. The vision of the "man of Mace- 
 donia " — whom Professor Ramsay identifies with St. , Luke — 
 had induced^ the apostle to cross from Troas to the port of 
 Neapolis, whence he went s-t OPCe pvejr the hjlls to the 
 ? P 
 
400 BIBLICAL INTRODUCTION 
 
 beautiful plain where Philippi stood on a promontory. There 
 was no synagogue at this place, but St. Paul discovered a 
 Proseuche, an enclosure for worship, in the suburbs, apparently 
 near the stream Gangites. His ' teaching won Lydia, who 
 represented a dyeing business at Thyatira, and she received 
 the apostle and his companions into her house. A small 
 church ■vyas formed, at first consisting principally of women. 
 It was most devoted to St. Paul, and it helped to support him 
 with its gifts during subsequent missionary journeys. The 
 troubles which disturbed other churches were, scarcely known 
 here. No disloyalty to the apostle appeared among these 
 enthusiastic followers as at Corinth and in Galatia, no erroneous 
 doctrine as in the churches of the Lycus Valley. A little personal 
 difference between two active women in, the church is all the 
 epistle has to allude to as not quite satisfactory. (Phil., iy. z.) 
 
 b. Genuineness of the Epistle. — The difficulties that have 
 been felt with regard to Colossians and Ephesians are scarcely 
 met with in Philippians, and as the evidence from antiquity and 
 the character of the epistle itself strongly support St. Paul's 
 authorship, it is very generally received even by critics who 
 reject the other epistlds of the imprisonment period. It seems 
 evident that this epistle was known and cited authoritatively 
 early in the second century ; it fits well into the circumstajices 
 of the apostle's life, and reveals his spirit and ,Gharacter more 
 distinctly than almost any other of his writings. , , 
 
 Hippolytus refers to. an interpretation of tjie phrase, "in the form, of a 
 servant " (Phil. ii. 7), by a very primitive Ophite sect, the Sethi'tes \&ef. 
 Haer., v. 8). Polycarp, in his epistle to the Philippians, refers, to the letter 
 they had received from " the blessed and glprious Paul." (Pol. Phil., iii. I.) 
 Ignatius appears to refer to phrases from this epistle [Rom., ii. 2 ; Philad., 
 viii. 2), as does the Epistle' to Diognetus (5), It is cited in the letter of the 
 churches of Lyons and Vienne (Euseb., H.E., v. 3). It is in Marcion's 
 collection, the Muratorian Canon, the Syriac and Old Latin versions. 
 Irenaeus {Adv. Haer., iv. 18. 4), Clem,ent of Alexandria [Faedag., i. 6,; 
 Stroffi., iv. 13), and TertulHan (i3g Resur., 23, 47 ; C, Marc, v. 20; De 
 Praescr., 26), cite it as St.. Paul's.^ 
 
 ^ The epistle was rejected by Eaur, Schwegler, etc. More recently its 
 genuineness has been attacked. by Hitzig, Kreucker, Hinsch, Hoekstra, 
 Biederman, and especially by Hols'ten. But it is accepted and defended by 
 Hilgenfeld, Weizsacker, Harnack, Mangold, Pfleiderer, Lipsius, Godet,' 
 B. Weiss, Holtzmann, JUlicher, Kldpper, Zahn,^ H. A. A. Kennedy,, 
 Bacon — names which represent very diverse schools, and some of them 
 extreme critical positions. 
 
PHILIPPIANS 401 
 
 The fpnpwing objections have been brought forward : — (l) The separa- 
 tion of the Divine pre-existence of Christ from JSis humanity (ii. 6-11) as 
 un-Pauline; since here the humanity begins at the Incarnation, while in 
 I Corinthians. XV. 47-49, it is pre-existent as Hndpuiros ^xoiJpa/'ios. But the 
 iTToifiavio? does not refer to pre-existence ; it refers to the Resurrection. 
 (2) M-Pduline justifitatioti, where the apostle appears as blameless with 
 regard to the law (iii. 4-11). But that was external j Romans :vii., etc., 
 refer to his internal life. (3) Indifference to the objective truths of the 
 gosfel{i, 15-18), — The parties preaching another Jesus, and anathematised 
 in Galatians i. 6-9 and 2 Corinthians xi, 4 are said to be here allowed. 
 But they are not the same. (4) Uncertainty concerning the Resurrection 
 (iii. 11). This may be denied (5) Differences of style. These are far 
 less than, in Colossians and Ephesians. Other objections are still less 
 impprtant. ' ; , , 
 
 . G. Occasion for Writing the Epistle. — -Epaphroditus had 
 brought a contribution of money from the Philippian church 
 (ii. 25, iv. i8)' Either owing to the hardships of the journey, 
 or his' exertions on behalf of the apostle in Rome, he had 
 been dangerously ill. He feared the Fhilippians would be 
 anxious about him, and he was eager to return home (ii. 26). 
 St. Paul sends this letter with him containing thanks for the 
 gift (iv, 10-18). At the same time the apostle takes the 
 opportunity to give an account of his own condition, and of 
 the success of his work in Rome, and to flood his letter with 
 thoughts of encouragement and admonitions for his beloved 
 friends at Philippi. 
 
 d. Z'a/«.— There is considerable uncertainty as to the exact 
 date of this epistle and it's position relative to the other epistles 
 of the imprisonment. Lightfoot puts it first in the giroup, arid 
 in this he is followed by Hort. The principal reason for 
 its priority is the position it seems to take in the order of 
 the development of St. Paul's thought and style. It has more 
 of the simple, vigorous style of the earlier epistles, and many 
 phrases reinind us of Romans. On the other hand we miss 
 the spectilative elements of Colossians and Ephesians, and 
 the long sentences and cumbrous style of those epistles. 
 Therefore Lightfoot places it next to Roriians, though with 
 the requisite interval of time, as he assigns it to Rome. But 
 this very interval tends to destroy the weight of his argu- 
 
 * See Vincent, Znternat. Crft. Com., Phil, and Fhik., pp. xxv,-»xk. 
 
402 BIBLICAL INTRODUCTION 
 
 ment. Some four years must be allowed between Roiiians 
 and Philippians, even if Philippians is the first letter of the 
 imprisonment, and at most two or three years separate this 
 from Colossians and Ephesians. Most critics place it last in 
 the group. -■ 
 
 The following reasons make for the later date : — (i) It would seem that 
 the apostle has already been in prison for a long time. He has been able 
 to make Christ known through the whole prsetorian guard (i. 12-14), (2) 
 Friends who had been with him when he wrote the other epistles have 
 now left him (ii. 20). St. Luke had accompanied him to Rome. (Acts xxviii. 
 16, "we entered into Rome.") He was with the apostle when Colossians 
 was written, and sent a salutation to that city. (Colossians i v. 14. ) There 
 is no salutation from him to tte Philippians, among whom he was well 
 known. (Acts xvi. 11 ff.). Nor does Dernas appear as in, Colossians iv. 14; 
 (3) Some time is required for the journeys between Rome and Philippi, 
 implied by the letter. (4) Greater severity of treatment is apparent. St. 
 Paul had enjoyed comparative liberty; now he -is hardly dealt with. 
 (S) It would seem that, the apostle's case has reached a crisis. He 
 proposes to send Timothy shortly, as soon as he knows what the decision 
 is to be (ii. 23). . He is, ready for death if that should be the issue, and 
 even desirous, of it on his own account (i. 23). But he expects to be set 
 free (i. 25 ; ii. 24). Whatever might be the result, it would not be to leave 
 him still in prison, as Colossiaiis and Ephesians and Philemon allow. 
 Therefore those, epistles must precede Philippians.^ 
 
 e. Integrity. — It has been suggested that we have two 
 writings of the apostle run together, because half-way through 
 our epistle we find St. Paul drawing to a close with the 
 formula, ";Finally, my brethren," etc, (iii. i). But (i) the 
 apostle might have intended to close here, and then fresh 
 ideas have started him on a fresh course. He often writes 
 without any evident scheme, spontaneously, setting down his 
 thoughts as they occur., (2) Possibly, however, we should 
 not translate the Greek phrase (rb Xomov) as "finally," but 
 understand it as meaning "for the rest," as dismissing one 
 topic, and proceeding to others. So it may have been used 
 elsewhere {e.g., 2 Thessalonians iii. i). The tone and character 
 of. the epistle are remarkably harmonious throughout, and 
 testify to its being a single work, 
 
 ^ For arguments in favour of the earlier date see Lightfoot, Phil., 
 Essay II., "The order of the Epistles pf^ the Captivity." In Zah^'S 
 Einleitung the arguments iar the later date are maintained. 
 
PHILIPPIANS 403 
 
 f. Contents. 
 
 i. I, 2, Salutations from Paul and Timothy to the Christians 
 at Philippi (as usual, denominated "Saints," ayiot) together 
 with the bishops and deacons. 
 
 This is the first mention of "bishops" and "deacons" in St. Paul's 
 epistles, and the first mention of them in N.T. history.^ We do not 
 meet with the titles in any other place in his writings till we come to 
 the pastoral epistles, where their qualifications are discussed. Here they 
 are only named. In earlier epistles we have had vague allusions to church 
 officers {e.g.., I Thessalonians v. 12, 13) without any titles. Where official 
 titles are referred to, they are different from these, e.g. , ' ' apostles, prophets, 
 teachers," etc. (l Corinthians xii. 28) ; or gifts and corresponding functions 
 rather than offices are named {e.g., Romans xii. 6-8). 
 
 3-1 1, Thanksgiving for the kindness shown by the 
 Philippians to the apostle, ahd prayer for a blessing on 
 them. 
 
 12-26, Statements about his condition. The imprisonment 
 has helped in furthering the gospel throughout the whole 
 praetorian guard. The apostle expects a favourable issue to 
 his trial. Yet he does not desire this on his own account, his 
 life being devoted to Christ ; and death would be gain to him. 
 
 27-30, Exhortation to fidelity and courage under persecu- 
 tion. 
 
 ii. 1-5, Affectionate entreaty to unselfish humility, 
 
 6-1 1, The example of Christ, who emptied Himself, 
 became, a man, and was obedient unto death, for which 
 reason God has highly exalted Him. 
 
 12-18, Exhortation to Christian progress, since God works 
 in us; and warning against disputes, that the aposfle may not 
 have laboured in vain. 
 
 ig-30, Timothy to be sent ; • Epaphroditus, who had been 
 very ill, now sent back. 
 
 iii. 1-6, Warning against Jewish influences, followed by 
 
 ' Acts, though probably written later, refers to "elders" in an earlier 
 period of the history as in Jerusalem (Acts xi. 30), and as even appointed 
 by Paul and Barnabas during the "first missionary journey." (Acts 
 xiv. 23.) That book does not name "deacons," though it describes 
 the appointment of "the seven." (Acts vi. 1-6.) James, which may, 
 be the earliest epistle, mentions elders (v. 14). The title does not 
 appear in Paul before the pastoral epistles. 
 
404 BIBLICAL INTRODUCTION 
 
 an enumeration of St. Paul's own Jewish privileges and 
 attainments. 
 
 7-1 1, What hehad counted profitable in these things- given 
 up for the sake of Christ. 
 
 1 2-1 6/ The apostle's eagerness to press forward to higher 
 attainments. 
 
 17-iv. I, Warning from the example of fallen brethren; 
 a reminder of the heavenly citizenship and of the hope 
 of the coming of Christ; a consequent exhortation to 
 steadfastness. 
 
 iv. 2, ,3, Messages urging harmony between Euodia and 
 Syntyche, and suggesting encouragement from one addressed 
 as " true yokefellow '' for them and Clement. 
 
 4-7, Exhortations to rejoicing and prayer, with a benediction 
 of peace. 
 
 8, 9, Topics worthy to be thought of; and the apostle's 
 teaching to be followed. 
 
 10-20, Thanks for the gift brought by Epaphroditus, which 
 is valued chiefly as a token of affection. The apostle has 
 learnt to be independent of want or plenty. 
 
 21, 22, Final salutations. 
 
 23, Benediction. 
 
 5. Characteristics of the Group. 
 
 The ideas set forth in these epistles of the third group 
 correspond to the changes that have taken place both in 
 the apostle's environment and in the history of the churches. 
 The sharp conflict with Judaising Christians that marked the 
 second period of literary activity has subsided, and St. Paul 
 has the satisfaction of seeing his larger gospel accepted in 
 the churches under his charge. At the same time the personal 
 opposition to the apostle which was one phase of that conflict 
 has also disappeared. Accordingly he. no longer needs to 
 maintain his principles in the same polemical style, nor 
 to assert his own apostolic clairns as in the controversial 
 epistles. But new troubles have emerged in the churches of 
 Asia through the introduction of ascetic practices and specula- 
 
CHARACTERISTICS OF THE GROUP ^05 
 
 tions of Jewish origin, but not associated with pharisaic 
 legalism. To meet the practical tendencies the apostle 
 denounces formal, superstitious restraints. But he has a 
 greater aim in the more spiritual region. This is to set 
 against the novel speculations a very exalted idea of the 
 nature and work of Jesus Christ. Thus these epistles see 
 a development of Christology. In Colossians we advance 
 from the earlier association of Christ with the universe as 
 the medium of creation to a fuller idea of His eternal 
 connection with it in sustaining it, and see its end in 
 Him. In Ephesians, while His relation to nature is also 
 affirmed, we see His headship over the Church more 
 developed, and the unity of the Church in Him affirmed 
 and illustrated. Philippians is addressed to Christians in 
 Macedonia, who were not affected by the movements of 
 thought in the Lycus Valley. But still Christ is central 
 in the epistle. Here we have the locus classicus for the 
 doctrine of the kenosis, with its issue in the supreme 
 exaltation of Christ who has received a name above every 
 name, and to whom every knee shall bow, in heaven as 
 well as on earth. In aU these epistles the mystical union 
 of the Christian with Christ becomes more prominent 
 than the forensic relationship dwelt on in the epistles of 
 the Judaistic controversy. 
 
CHAPTER VIII. 
 
 FOURTH GROUP: THE PASTORAL 
 EPISTLES 
 
 1. The question of genuineness. | 3. 2 Timothy. 
 
 2. I Timothy. | 4. Titus. 
 
 I. Genuineness. 
 
 -These three epistles are so closely associated, and resemble 
 one another in so many respects, that the question of their 
 genuineness must be considered in a common study of them. 
 In point of fact most critics either accept all of them or reject- 
 all of them.i Exception is taken to the epistles almost entirely 
 on internal grounds, for they are well supported by the 
 evidence of antiquity. Eusebius included them iii the N.T. 
 books that were universally accepted.^ He therefore knew of 
 no doubts in the Catholic Church. Then they are named by 
 Clement of Alexandria and Tertullian, and as usual we find 
 Irenseus the first to name them.^ Even earlier than this, i and 
 2 Timothy are evidently quoted by Polycarp, though not 
 named. They are also found in the Syriac and the Old Latin 
 versions, and are acknowledged in the Muratorian Fragment. 
 
 Compare Polycarp, Phil. iv. i with I Tim. vi. 7, 10 ; Phil. xii. 3 with 
 I Tim. ii. I, 2 ; Phil. f. 2 with 2 Tim. ii, 11, I2 ; PAH. ix. 2 with 2 Tim. 
 iv. 10. 
 
 ^ Schleiermacher, with whom the scientific study of the pastoral epistles 
 commenced, at first threw doubts on I Tim. by regarding it as a compila- 
 tion from 2 Tim. and Tit., but it was soon seen that the three epistles 
 stand or fall together ; and Schleiermacher himself pointed out difficulties 
 concerning 2 Tim. and Tit. 
 
 " t4 vapi, waciv d/io\oyoifi,eya. See H.E., ii. 22 ; iii. 3. 
 
 ' Irenseus names the two to Timothy [^Ach, IJaer., iii. 3, 3), and cites 
 from Tit. as Paul's {Adv. Haer., i. 16. 3 ; iii. 3. 4). 
 
 406 
 
THE QUESTION OF GENUINENESS 407 
 
 There is one important witness that must be cited on the 
 other side. Marcion did not accept these epistles as St. Paul's. 
 This fact should not be set aside so hastily as has been fre- 
 quently done by apologists. Marcion's is the earliest extant 
 canon of St. Paul's epistles. As a reformer, reviving neglected 
 Pauline doctrine, this man made it his business to enforce 
 what, he conceived to be the teaching found in the apostle's 
 writings. It is quite possible that it was Marcion who first 
 made any collection of the scattered letters. On the other 
 hand, it must be observed that he was possessed by a strong 
 doctrinal bias. It was on doctrinal and not critical grounds 
 that he rejected all the gospels except Luke, and mutilated 
 that, and that he received no other part of the N.T. but St. 
 Paul's epistles. Inasmuch as the pastoral epistles contain 
 statements which Marcion would not agree with, it is quite 
 possible that it was only on the ground of those statements 
 that he rejected them. 
 
 jB.^., the high value set on the O.T. (2 Tim. iii. 16), which Marcion 
 rejected; opposition to docetism (i Tim. ii. 5)) which Marcion taught; 
 also opposition to asceticism in ' ' forbidding to marry, and commanding to 
 abstain from meats which God commanded to be received with thankful- 
 ness," etc. (i Tim. iv. 3) — Marcionite precepts. 
 
 There is much in the epistles themselves that speaks for 
 their genuineness. The spirit and power of the N.T. are 
 here; we have not yet reached that inferior" condition, that 
 lack of verve and originality, which marks the writings known 
 to be of the sub-apostolic age. They are Pauline in spirit too, 
 and they contain graphic touches of a personal character, which 
 some who- have rejected the epistles in their completeness 
 have allowed to be genuine fragments from writings of the 
 apostle. Renan, who does not admit the authenticity of the 
 epistles, accepts these fragments as historical data, with which 
 to complete his story of St. Paul. Then the names of com- 
 panions compare well with those of previous epistles. Some 
 old names reappear ; others are dropped out ; and in place of 
 them some new names appear. These are just such changes 
 as might be expected in the course of a few years. 
 
4o8 BIBLICAL INTRODUCTION 
 
 Nevertheless, there is a very widespread rejection of these 
 
 epistles by various schools of criticism. 
 
 As stated above, Scbleiermacher was the first to raise doubts on 
 I Timothy. Eichhorn and de Wette followed, rejecting all three in their 
 Introductions. The dispute first turned on the question whether the 
 epistles were written by St. Paul himself, or by one of his disciples, 
 perhaps St. Luke. . A new position was taken by Baur, who held that 
 these epistles were written about A.D. 150 to combat gnosticism, especially 
 that of Marcion.^ Baur's view somewhat modified was adopted by his 
 followers, Schwegler and Hilgenfeld ; Pfleiderer and Weizsacker advocate 
 the essential position, which is also admitted by Beyschlag, but the latter 
 critics do not admit Baur's late date, and recede to the times of Trajan and 
 Hadrian. Of course, this gives up the reference to Marcion, who is of later 
 date. Holtzmann, who has shown that the great gnostic systems of the 
 second century are not here referred to, still rejects the epistles, and so do 
 Harnack and Jiilicher. They are defended by Zahn and by most English 
 writers on N.T. introduction, though rejected by Davidson. There is now 
 a tendency to regard them as written in the sub-apostolic age, but em- 
 bodying fragments of St. Paul's writings — a view advocated by Harnack, 
 Bacon, etc 
 
 The following difEculties and objections have been raised : — 
 
 a. Historical Difficulties. — No place for these epistles can 
 
 be found in St. Paul's life, neither according to Acts, nor 
 
 according to the other epistles. In i Timothy i. 3 we find 
 
 the apostle had left Timothy at Ephesus when going himself 
 
 to Macedonia. This could not be at the conclusion of his 
 
 long residence at Ephesus, which terminated with the riot 
 
 in the theatre, because then he sent Timothy into Macedonia 
 
 first, and followed later. (Acts xix. 22; xx. i.) It could not 
 
 be previous to the period of residence, because at that 
 
 early time the church would not have been so advanced 
 
 as I Timothy suggests, and the errors described in the 
 
 epistle would not have had time to creep in. This epistle 
 
 clearly shows that the church at Ephesus had been in 
 
 existence for some considerable time when it was written. 
 
 Moreover St. Paul had exhorted Timothy to "tarry at 
 
 Ephesus" (i Timothy i. 3), and he expected to return to 
 
 Timothy at Ephesus (iii. . 14), though if he were, delayed 
 
 Timothy would understand the reason (iii. 15). But after 
 
 St. Paul had gone to Macedonia from Ephesus, Timothy 
 
 was with him (2 Corinthians i. i), so he was in Greece 
 
 ^ Baur even took the dcTifltVeis of I Tim. vi. 20, to refer to Marcion's 
 work, "Antitheses," and the yo;«o5i5o(r/caXot of I Tim. i. 7, and juaxoi 
 yoiuKal oi Tit iii. 9 to the Marcionites and their opposition to the O.T. 
 
THE QUESTION OF GENUINENESS ^409 
 
 before the apostle could return to Asia. (Acts xx. 4.) We 
 cannot place the journey referred to in i Timothy any time 
 during the three years' stay at Ephesus, as a sort Of flying 
 visit to Maeedoniaj not noticed in Acts, because i Timothy 
 iinplies a long absence, during which Timothy has to carry 
 on a continuoius work in correcting false doctrine, etc. Surely 
 St. Paul would do this himself, if it were during the period of 
 his residence at Ephesus. Similar difBculties apply to 2 Timo- 
 thy. There we read, "Trophimus I left at Miletus sick" 
 (iv. 20). This could not be on the journey to Jerusalem 
 described in Acts xx. (see verse 17), because we find 
 Trophimus with the apostle when he had reached that city. 
 (Acts xxi. 29.) After this St. Paul was a prisoner. But we 
 cannot think of some earlier journey, for the apostle writes 
 as a prisoner at Rome (2 Timothy i. 17), and his language 
 about Trophimus must refer to his last visit to Miletus. 
 It is the same with other personal references, e.g., "Erastus 
 abode at Corinth " (iv. 20). When ? He had not been to 
 Corinth for some years before the journey to Rome recorded 
 in Acts; two years had been spent at Csesarea, and since 
 his last visit to Corinth Timothy had been with him 
 (Acts XX. 4); so that he would not need now to write to 
 Timothy about what had happened then. "The cloke 
 that I left at Troas," etc. (2 Timothy iv. 13) — this must be 
 recent. Yet the only occasion Acts allows is seven or eight 
 years before. (Acts xx. 5-7.) " I have sent Tychicus to Ephe- 
 sus." (2 Timothy iv. 12.) This could not be the journey from 
 Rome to take the Colossian and Ephesian Epistles because 
 Timothy was then with the apostle. (Colossians i. i.) 
 
 DifBculties also come out of the historical situation of the 
 Epistle to Titus. There we see Titus left by St. Paul in 
 Crete. (Titus i. 5.) He is to join the apostle in Nicopolis 
 (iii. 12). Acts allows no opportunity for such movements. 
 The condition of Crete and the reference to Apollos 
 (iii. 13) put this later than St. Paul's stay at Corinth. 
 (Acts xviii.) Yet a considerable time in Greece is here 
 , implied. 
 
410 BIBLICAL INTRODUCTION 
 
 The only possible reconciliation is to place all three epistles 
 
 later than the history in Acts. This is on the hypothesis that 
 
 St. Paul was liberated after his trial, travelled as these epistles 
 
 indicate, was again arrested, and again sent to Rome. Now 
 
 there are several points in favour of this hypothesis. Professor 
 
 Ramsay has pointed out that the attitude of the Roman 
 
 government to St. Paul and the Christians and also the state 
 
 of the law would have issued in an acquittal. St. Paul 
 
 had appealed to Csesar, knowing his innocence in regard 
 
 to the law ; and as yet the government had not gone 
 
 against the Christians.^ The apostle expected to gain his 
 
 case, and be set free, as both Phihppians ^ and Philemon ' 
 
 imply. Very different is his feeling when writing 2 Timothy. 
 
 Then he is assured of approaching martyrdom.* Moreover 
 
 there was an impression in the early church that the apostle 
 
 was liberated, and subsequently imprisoned again when he 
 
 suffered martyrdom at Rome. 
 
 Jerome is the first to assert this positively. Eusebius knows of the 
 tradition, though with his usual accuracy he is cautious not to be too 
 positive about it, writing, "he [St. Paul] is said to have departed again 
 on the ministry of preaching." {H.E. ii. 22.) In the Muratorian Frag- 
 ment St. Paul is said to have gone to Spain, which could only have been 
 later than the history in Acts. Clement of Rome says that he went to 
 " the boundary of the west," ' a phrase which written in Rome seems 
 to point to Spain. 
 
 If we admit this hypothesis, all historical difficulties vanish. 
 Everything referred to in the pastoral epistles could have 
 occurred between the two imprisonments and during the 
 second of them. 
 
 b. Personal Difficulties. — St. Paul seems to protest his 
 apostleship in a manner that would be superfluous when 
 
 ' The Church in the Roman Empire, pp. 245 ff. ; St, Paul, etc., 
 p. 308. 
 
 ' In Phil. ii. 19. He anticipates being saved, and attributes this 
 prospect to his friends' prayers. Though ready to die, he knows he 
 "shall abide" (i. 25). He trusts he will soon come to Philippi (ii. 24). 
 
 ' Requesting Philemon to prepare him a lodging, (Phile. 22). 
 
 * He has "fought the good fight," and "finished the course," 
 Henceforth there is laid up for him "the crown of righteousness." 
 (2 Tim. iv. 8.) 
 
 ' ivX t6 Tep/M T^s Siireas. Clem, R, , i Cor, v. 7. 
 
THE QUESTION OF GENUINENESS 4" 
 
 writing to such friends and personal followers as Timothy 
 and Titus.i It may be replied that though addressed to these 
 two, the epistles were not wholly personal in character, and 
 were intended for public use, or at all events to be appealed 
 to as authorities when necessary. Then the references to 
 Timothy's "youth" (i Timothy iv. 12; 2 Timothy ii. 22) 
 seem strange after years of public service. First meeting St. 
 Paul about A. D. 51 (Acts xvi. i), he would have known him 
 for some thirteen years if i Timothy were written some time 
 after the two years in Rome — say about a.d. 64, and 2 Timo- 
 thy is even later. Still he might be of a shrinking nature, 
 and younger looking than his years, a fact perhaps humor- 
 ously alluded to by the apostle. Besides, the master is apt to 
 forget the growing age of his pupil. 
 
 c. References to Heresies. — It has been said that these 
 epistles contain references to second century heresies, in 
 particular to the gnosticism of Marcion. Some "gnosis 
 falsely so called " ^ is in the writer's mind, and Timothy is 
 warned to prevent the teaching of a " different doctrine " from 
 " the gospel " dealing with " fables and endless genealogies " 
 (i Timothy i. 4). It has been suggested that the gnostic ideas 
 of the evolution of creation are here referred to. But no such 
 allusions can be proved. The heresy is plainly Jewish ascetic, 
 possibly associated* with Essene mysticism; and the genealogies 
 are most naturally understood to^ be those found in Genesis 
 interpreted allegorically.^ 
 
 That the tendency is Jewish is shown by allusions to " teachers of the 
 law" (iTim. i. 7), "circumcision" (Tit. i. 10), "Jewish fables"^ (Tit. i. 14). 
 At the same time it is ascetic, reminding us of the Essenes rather than of 
 the Pharisees.^ 
 
 1 See I Tim. i. I ; 2 Tim. i. i ; Tit. i. i, 2. 
 
 ' ^evBdipv/ws yvdns, I Tim. vi. 20. 
 
 ^.Philo applied the term "genealogies" to the iirst part of Genesis.. 
 Greek writers use it of early mythological history, e.g. , Polyb. ix. 2. 
 
 :' Compare this with the "fables and endless genealogies" of 1 Tim. 
 i 4, which seem thus to be just the Jewish Haggada and fanciful specula- 
 tions. 
 
 = See I Tim. iv. 3, 8 ; Tit. i. 14, 15. But Dr. Hort doubts whether 
 there is any direct Essene influence. Still he regards the heresy as Jewish. 
 Judmiic Christianity, chap. vii. Vo» Soden i» the ffamf-Cem. denies 
 
412 BIBLICAL INTRODUCTION 
 
 d. Church Development. — It is said that the conditions of 
 church organisation apparent in these epistles point to a later 
 historical period than that of St. Paul's lifetime. Titus was 
 left in Crete to appoint elders in every city. (Titus i. 5.) 
 The character of the bishop is discussed both with Timothy 
 (i Timothy iii. 1-7) and with Titus (Titus i. 6-9), arid that of 
 the deacon with Timothy, (i Timothy iii. 8-13.) Now it 
 cannot be denied that our attention is here given to church 
 officers in a way we do not meet with earlier in St. Paul's 
 epistles. But it must be observed that little • is said about 
 them beyond What concerns their characters. We are left in 
 the dark as to their functions. Then if the elder is not 
 identical with the bishop in every case, still the bishop 
 appears as one of . the elders.^ In the case of the elders 
 there is no sharp distinction between officers of the , church 
 and senior Christians,^ and the widows are described im- 
 mediately after a reference to the elders, indicating a certain 
 indefiniteness and quite primitive character, in the church 
 relations of these people; There is no sign here of the 
 monarchical episcopacy advocated by Ignatius early in the 
 second century. Then, on the supposition of a second 
 imprisonment these epistles come in any case some years 
 later than any of the previous ones, the last of which refers 
 to r" bishops and deacons." (Philippians.i. i.) Besides, some 
 churches might develop organisation more rapidly than 
 others. 
 
 e. Un-Pauline Features. — We are struck with a certain 
 harshness, as in the judgment of the Cretans (Titus i. 12, 13), 
 
 any reference to Montanist, Valentinian, or Marcionite ideas. Pfleiderer 
 argues that the second century gnostic systems are referred to because 
 Irenaeus finds answers to them in the pastoral epistles. But have not 
 church writers in all ages appealed to the N.T, for answers to their 
 contemporary opponents? Weiss fully discusses and disposes of these 
 references in the new edition of Meyer's Com. 
 
 ^ Timothy is to "appoint elders" of a certain character, "for the. 
 bishop must be blameless." (i Tim. i. 5, 7.) Some have maintained that 
 the word "bishop" is not official, and only means "he who has the over- 
 sight." 
 
 ^ e.g., " Rebuke not an elder, but exhort him as a father; the younget 
 men as brethren." (l Tim. v. J.) 
 
THE QUESTION OF GENUINENESS 413 
 
 and in the reference to Alexander the coppersmith. (2 Timothy 
 
 iv. 14.) On the other hand the universality of grace is said 
 
 to be un- Pauline. God is called "the Saviour of all men." 
 
 (i Timothy iv. 10.)^ The phrase is peculiar, but the idea 
 
 agrees with the evangelical temper of the apostle. Then the 
 
 repeated references to "a faithful word," "a faithful saying," 
 
 seem to refer to a later time when memories of past teachings 
 
 were to be cherished. In one place we read what seems very 
 
 like a confession of faith, consisting of several articles, and 
 
 apparentiy introduced without its commencing words.^ In 
 
 another, a saying of Christ seems to be quoted as Scripture. 
 
 But this is not certain.^ It , must be admitted that if the 
 
 doctrinal statements are not beyond what might have come 
 
 from St. Paul, still these latter points are not easily reconciled 
 
 with so early a date as about a.d. 65. 
 
 f. Un-Pauline Language and Style. — This is the most 
 
 serious difficulty of all. Not a few critics who have admitted 
 
 possible replies to all the earlier objections have thought this 
 
 last one insuperable. A great number of peculiar words and 
 
 phrases unknown to earlier Pauline epistles appear in the 
 
 pastoral epistles. 
 
 Some of these are not to be accounted for by novelty of topic. They 
 represent a different — and a more classical — vocabulary. We also meet 
 with &yourite words and phrases in these epistles, specially characteristic 
 of them, such as eiai^eia, irurrbs 6 \6yos, 1)711}! and iyialpeiv with reference 
 to correct teaching, /iiJffoi, iT]T7)<reis, iirKpiveia, for the Second Advent instead 
 of -xapoucia, ffeffTrtSr??! instead of Kipios, (TwttJp ' applied to God, apvetaSaCj: 
 irapaiTsicrBaL, vepuaT&vai. to avoid, irpoaex^Lv with the dative, i)TroiJ,i.iJ,vi}aKei.v, 
 etc. On the other hand we miss St. Paul's favourite particles, such as fi/ra, 
 Si&n, and other favourite words of his, such as Kavxaofioi (but this is not 
 
 * Similar expressions' are in i Tim. ii. 3-6 ; Tit. ii. il. 
 
 ' "Great is the mystery of Godliness — wAo was manifest in- the flesh, 
 justified in the spirit, etc." (l Tim. iii. i6), where the masculine relative 
 seems to require a corresponding ai}teq,edent — ^probably some name for our 
 Lord. ' 
 
 ' "The Scripture saith. Thou shalt not muzzle the ox when he treadeth 
 out the com. And, The labourer is worthy of his hire." (l Tim. v. 18.) 
 The first of these sentences is in Deut. xxv. 4 ; but the second is only to 
 be found as a saying of Jesus Christ in Luke x. 7. The objection goes too 
 far. Sayings of Christ are not quoted even in the second century merely 
 as "Scripture," without reference to His name. Probably the word 
 Scripture here only refers to the first quotation. 
 
414 BIBLICAL INTRODUCTION 
 
 found in ; Colossians or Vhilippiaas),; irepura-eiw (but this is not found in 
 Galatians, which is undoubtedly St. Paul's). We also miss St. Paul's, 
 broken sentences. The style is smooth. It is possible to reply here as 
 in the case of the third group. Time has elapsed, and brought with it 
 changes affecting the mind c^ the writer. . 
 
 The argument is cumulative, and it can only be appreciated 
 where it is gone into fully.^ ' 
 
 When these considerations are taken together, though some 
 of them can be quite explained, it is clear that we have 
 difficulties besetting these three epistles that apply to no others. 
 Nevertheless the alternative must be faced. If the pastoral 
 epistles were not written by St. Paul, they were intended to 
 be passed off as his. Why then should the writer of them 
 manufacture difficulties for himself? This is not like the 
 case of the epistle to the Hebrews, which does not claim 
 to be written by St. Paul. The great weight of critical 
 opinion which is against the Pauline authorship justifies us 
 in exercising some caution in regard to this question. Prob- 
 ably the view that best meets all the facts of the case is that 
 advocated by Dr. Mc-Gififert, that these epistles are "authentic 
 letters of Paul to Timothy and Titus, worked over and en- 
 larged by another hand."^ 
 
 2. 1 Timothy. 
 
 a. Timothy. — We learn from Acts xvi. i that Timothy was 
 the son of a Greek-speaking Gentile father and a Jewess 
 mother at Derbe or, Lystra in Lycaonia. Trained in the 
 scriptures by his mother, who was named Eunice, and his 
 grandmother Lois (2 Tinjothy i. 5), he was one of the 
 converts won by St. Paul when, the apostle accompanied 
 Barnabas on what we call the first missionary journey. 
 Probably he was but a boy at this time, but those who 
 were gifted with prophetic insight in the church pointed 
 him out as destined for missionary work, (i Timothy i. 18; 
 
 ' See Davidson, Introd., "The Pastoral Epistles,", where, a full list 
 
 of words peculiar to these epistles is ^iven. t , , , 
 
 ^ Apostolic Age, p. 405. The Pauline authorship is very fully discussed 
 
 and defended in Zaun's Emleitung, Vol. I., pp. 398-489. 
 
I TIMOTHY 4.1 5 
 
 iv. 14.) The elders solemnly set him apart for this work 
 {ibid.), and on St. Paul's return to the district, some six 
 or seven years after his first visit, the apostle chose him 
 as a colleague in the ministry, according to Acts first having 
 him circumcised, no doubt that he might be able to work 
 among Jews as well as Gentiles. (Acts xvi. 3.) Henceforth 
 we find him most frequently associated with the apostle both 
 in travel and in the writing of epistles, of some of which 
 perhaps he was the amanuensis.^ He was with St. Paul 
 during the first imprisonment at Rome, and the pastoral 
 epistles indicate that he was the apostle's travelling companion 
 again after the release. 
 
 b. Occasion, Place, and Date of Writing, — St. Paul had been 
 recently at Ephesus, and had been called away to Macedonia, 
 leaving Timothy in charge of his work there (i. 3). He had 
 intended to return before long ; but he had been unexpectedly 
 delayed (iii. 14, 15). This delay led him to send directions 
 to Timothy. These are concerned partly with doctrine^ for 
 the prevention of the spread of a false teaching that is 
 threatening the church, and partly with administrative affairs, 
 the appointment of church officers, and the sort of persons 
 who should be chosen. Timothy seems to need rousing and 
 encouraging (iv. 12-15). "The apostle appears to be now in 
 Macedonia. This must be some time after the first imprisoD- 
 ment, i.e., after a.d. 62, perhaps about a.d, 64. 
 
 c. Contents. 
 
 i. I, 2, Salutation. 
 
 3-7, Timothy left at EphesUs to counteract false teaching 
 about the law. 
 
 8-1 1, The true use of the law, which is not for the righteous, 
 but for sinners. 
 
 12-17, Paul's conversion gratefully acknowledged. 
 
 18-20, Timothy charged to be faithful, and warned from two 
 examples Of apostasy. 
 
 ' His name occurs among the messengers of the salutation in Rom. 
 xvi. 21, and united to the' apostle's name as a joint sender of six 
 letters. (2 Cor. i. I ; Phil. i. I j Col. i. I J 1 Thess. i. i ; 2 Thess. 
 L I J Phile. I.) 
 2 E 
 
4i6 BIBLICAL INTRODUCTION 
 
 ii. 1-7, Prayer for all men, since God wills all to be saved 
 through the One Mediator. 
 
 8-15, Conduct of men in worship, and decorous behaviour 
 of women. 
 
 iii. 1-7, The character for a bishop. 
 
 8-13, The character for deacons. 
 
 14, 15, Expecting to come soon to Timothy, the apostle 
 charges him to direct the church. 
 
 16, A confession' of primary beliefs about Christ. ' 
 
 iv. 1-5, Ascetics, forbidding marriage and certain foods, 
 condemned. 
 
 6-16, Timothy to be a good minister, nourished by the 
 truth, not trusting in bodily exercises, and avoiding foolish 
 fables. 
 
 V. I, 2, Concerning rebukes of elders, etc. 
 
 3-16, Directions concerning widows. 
 
 17-25, Duties to elders, for their support, and in charging 
 them with faults. 
 
 vi. I, 2, The duties of servants, especially not to despise 
 believing masters. , 
 
 3-5, Against vain disputations. 
 
 6-10, The duty of contentment, and the mischief of the 
 love of money. 
 
 11-16, Timothy .charged to be courageous in conflict, 
 looking for the manifestation of the Great King. 
 
 17-19, A charge to the rich against pride, to be generous, 
 and prize the true riches. 
 
 20, 21, Final warning of Timothy against foolish ' and false 
 teachings. 
 
 The citation of what are called " faithful sayings " is a peculiarity of the 
 pastoral epistles.^ These may be (l) utterances of the Christian prophets^ 
 or (2.) phrases arranged for catechetical teaching, or (3) in some cases 
 scraps of hymns familiar from frequent repetition. It is not probable 
 that they are Logia of Jesus Christ, since, though some might have 
 been spoken by our Lord, this could not have been the case with all ; 
 that of I Timothy iii. i, " If a man seeketh the ofEce, of a bisho,p, he 
 desireth a good work," is certainly of late origin. 
 
 1 Found in I Tim. i. 15 ; iii. I ; iv, 9 ; 2 Tim. ii. 11 ; Titus iii. 8, 
 
2 TIMOTHY 4*7 
 
 3. 2 Timothy. 
 
 a. Place, Date, and Occasion of Writing. — St. Paul is 
 now at Rome again (i. 17), and a second time a prisoner, 
 the reason of his imprisonment being the witness he has 
 borne to Christ (i. 8, 12). It would seem that he had not 
 been able to fulfil the wish expressed in i Timothy, and 
 return to Timothy at Ephesus, owing to his arrest and re- 
 moval to the Imperial City. This imprisonment had already 
 lasted some time, for news of it had reached Ephesus, and 
 the apostle ha.d requested two of his friends, Phygellus and 
 Hermogenes, to come to him in Rome, but they had refused, 
 probably because of the danger (i. 15). A beautiful exception 
 was that of the Ephesian Onesiphorus, who had not been 
 ashamed of owning the prisoner, and had sought the apostle 
 out of his own accord. St. Paul does not . expect to escape 
 this time. His case has already had a first hearing, when 
 no witness appeared in his defence (iv. 16). He is now ready 
 to be offered' up, assured that the time of his departure has 
 come (iv. 6). But he has heard sad news of Timothy, who 
 is' depressed and alarmed (i. 7, 8). The apostle writes to 
 encourage him and guide him in his work, but with the 
 specific object of asking him to come to his friend at 
 Rome before winter (iv. 21). This shows that St. Paul 
 does not anticipate an immediate execution. Accepted as 
 a genuine' epistle of 'St. Paul, probably 2 Timothy should 
 not be later than a.d. 65. 
 
 b. Contents. 
 
 i. I, 2, Salutation. 
 
 3-5, Thankfulness for Timothy's hereditary faith. 
 
 6-14, Exhortation to energy and courage in view of the 
 holy calling in Christ Jesus. 
 
 15-18, The failing of friends in Asia, and th6 fidelity of 
 Onesiphorus in visiting the apostle in prison.. 
 
 ii. 1-13, Exhortation to endure hardship as Christ's soldier 
 in remembrance of Him and His resurrection. They who die 
 with Christ shall live with Him. 
 
 14-19, Contentions and profane discussions to be shunned 
 
4i8 BIBLICAL INTRODUCTION 
 
 The instances of Hymenaeus and Philetus, v?ho overthrow 
 
 the faith of some by asserting that the resurrection is past 
 
 already. 
 
 We have no data for determining the nature of this heresy. It is not 
 likely that it was merely the denial of a bodily resurrectionj as some haye 
 tihought, because the expression "past already" would not suit such an 
 idea, except for those who were already dead, and then not aptly. Prob- 
 ably the notion is that the resurrection time for all Christians was passed, 
 aijd the new age arrived, so that there would be no further development 
 to look for, no Parousia in the future, and possibly no death. ^ 
 
 20-26, Varieties of character like varieties of vessels in a 
 house. To be as a vessel of honour, a man should purge him- 
 self, escaping from youthful desires, and avoiding foolish 
 questionings. 
 
 iiii 1-9, The coming mischief-makers, who will creep into 
 houses, deceiving foolish women. 
 
 10-12, A reminder of the persecutions Timothy had wit- 
 nessed or heard of in his own country. 
 
 13-17, Finding instruction in Scripture inspired by God 
 in order to avoid impostors. 
 
 iv. 1-6, A charge to be faithful in the ministry of preaching, 
 rebuking, encouraging, etc. 
 
 7, 8, The apostle's course drawing to an end. 
 
 9-15, Personal notes; Timothy urged to come, since most 
 of his companions have forsaken the apostle. 
 
 16-18, The first hearing of the apostle's case, when no one 
 appeared in his defence. 
 
 19-22, Final salutations. 
 
 4. Titus. 
 
 a. Titus the Evangelist. — All we can know of Titus must 
 be gathered from St. Paul's epistles, as he is never mentioned 
 in Acts. He was a Gentile (Galatians ii. 3), and a convert of 
 St. Paul's. (Titus i. 4.) We first meet with him as a com- 
 panion of Paul and Barnabas in the visit to Jerusalem 
 described in Galatians ii. i-io, when he was not compelled 
 to be circumcised. He would seem to have been personally 
 
 * This is Von Soden's interpretation, Iland-Com., in loc. 
 
TITUS 4»9 
 
 known to the Galatians, perhaps because, like Timothy, he was 
 a fellow-countryman. Subsequently he attended the apostle 
 at times during his missionary journeys. When difficulties 
 arose in Corinth he was despatched thither, and he was able 
 to report good news on meeting his master in Macedonia. 
 (2 Corinthians vii. 6, 7, 13-15-) He was the bearer of 2 Corin- 
 thians (viii. 6, 16-18). Then we lose sight of him. After St. 
 Paul's release from his first imprisonment, Titus was with him 
 in Crete, and was left there by the apostle to direct the affairs 
 of the churches. (Titus i. 5.) 
 
 b. Occasion and Time of Writing the Epistle. — Zenas, a 
 former teacher of the Jewish law, and Apollos, having to 
 travel by way of Crete, St. Paul, in commending them to the 
 churches there (iii. 13), seizes the opportunity to send a letter 
 of directions to Titus. A special reason for writing is found 
 in the invasion of the churches by Jews, mercenary teachers 
 who seek to fascinate the Cretans with their " fables '' 
 (i. 10-14). The apostle indicates that the work of Titus in 
 appointing worthy and capable elders is to counteract this 
 mischievous influence. The situation compels a date subse- 
 quent to the history in Acts, and the condition of the churches 
 suggests a late date. The similarity to i Timothy suggests 
 that the two epistles were writtSh at the same time, i.e., about 
 A.D. 64. It is impossible to say which was written first. The 
 locality of the apostle when writing cannot be determined. 
 As h& expects to winter at Nicopolis, probably the city of that 
 name in Epirus, possibly he is writing from Greece or Mace- 
 donia. 
 
 c. Contents. 
 
 i. 1-4, Salutation, with reminder of the promise of eternal 
 life. 
 
 5,-9, Titus left in Crete to ordain elders; the requisite 
 character for a bishop. 
 
 io-i6, Unruly men, vain talkers, especially such as are 
 Jews, to be restrained. 
 
 ii. i-io, Duties of aged men and women ; young women 
 and men j servants. 
 
420 BIBLICAL INTRODUCTION 
 
 11-15, The grace of God that brings salvation, and the 
 hope of the. appearing of Christ. 
 
 iii. I, 2, Subjection to rulers, diligence, kindness, gentleness, 
 etc., to be commended. 
 
 3-8, The kindness of God, delivering us from our former 
 evil life, and saving us to be heirs of eternal life. 
 
 "9-1 1, Foolish idiscussions to be avoided. How to deal 
 with a factious person. 
 
 12-14, When Artemas or Tychicus are sent to him, Titus 
 is to join the apostle at Nicopolis for the winter. Zeiias the 
 lawyer, and Apollds commended. 
 
 15, Final salutation. 
 
 In i. 12, St. Paul quotes a Cretan "one of themselves, a prophet of 
 their own." The saying is by Epimenides, a native of Ph^tus or 
 Cnossus in Crete, a bard who was regarded as a seejr. Plato calls, him 
 Belas &v-fip, and Cicero couples him with Bacis, the Boeotian sibyl.^ But 
 the saying is quoted • by Callimachus, . from' whom St. , Paul may have 
 derived it. . Or it may have become a popular proverb, and thus known 
 to the apostle apart from literature. Still the definite ascription of it to 
 its author renders it more probable that St. Paul had seen the line when ■ 
 reading the writings of its author. 
 
 There is not much that can be regarded as an advance in 
 the apostle's teaching to be found in the pastoral epistles. 
 These writings deal with fresh forms of false teaching, but 
 unlike Colossians and Ephesians, which meet the error, and 
 counteract it, by the full exposition of the truth which opposes 
 it, the pastoral epistles, while describing and characterising 
 what the apostle objects to, do not enter into any arguments 
 or make any assertions of the contrary truth. The object is 
 rather to encourage and urge Timothy and Titus to resist the 
 mischievous teaching by means already familiar to them. 
 Some development of church order is now tnanifest. The 
 appointment of elders is directly commanded in order to keep 
 irregularities out of the churches. To tbis end teaching faculty 
 is a valuable qualification for the office. Deacons are also 
 now recognised as a second order in the churches. 
 
 ' See- Ellicott's Com., in loc. 
 
CHAPTER IX. 
 THE EPISTLE TO THE HEBREWS 
 
 1. Who *as the Author— Paul, 
 
 Luke, Clement, ApoUos, 
 Barnabas 7 
 
 2. Date and Place of Writing. 
 
 3. The Church Addressed. 
 
 4. Occasion of Writing. 
 
 5. Contents. 
 
 6. Argument. 
 
 I. The Author. 
 
 This is a perfectly anonymous work. Unlike St. Paul's 
 epistles, which begin with the apostle's name, it has no 
 such commencement; nor does the writer anywhere indicate 
 who he is, for the title in A.V. and R.V. is not part of the 
 original text, and is not found in the older MSS. Therefore 
 the question of authorship is not one of genuineness. It has 
 been assigned to Paul, Luke, Clement R., Apollos, Barnabas, 
 Priscilla. 
 
 a. St. Paul. — We first meet with the name of Paul in 
 connection with the epistle at Alexandria about the middle 
 of the second century. This came to be the current idea 
 in the East first; the West was slower to accept the epistle 
 as a .work of the apostle. Thus it is ascribed to St. Paul 
 by Pantserius, Clement, and Origeh in Alexandria ; by Paul 
 of Samosata at the Synod of Antioch; by Eusebius of 
 Csesarea ; by the Council of Laodicea (a.d. 364), and 
 universally by the later Greek fathers. On the other hand, 
 in the West we find that Irenseus, Hippolytus, Caius of Rome, 
 Tertullian, and Cyprian did not attribute it to St. Paul. 'It 
 was not in the Canon of Marcion, nor in the Muratorian 
 Fragment . as St. Paul's. It was npt , accepted in the West 
 as a work of the apostle till the fifth century, under the 
 influence of Aiigustine and Jerome, and the latter expressed 
 some hesitation on the subject. 
 
 42i 
 
422 BIBLICAL INTRODUCTION 
 
 PantEEnus of Alexandria in the middle of the second century is the 
 earliest writer to refer the authorship to St. Paul. He gives two reasons 
 why the apostle did not attach his name to it: (i) That Christ was 
 the real apostle to the Hebrews; (2) that Paul was the apostle to the 
 Gentiles, not the Jews.^ Clement of Alexandria follows, also ascribing 
 it to St. Paul, and adding that it was written for the Hebrews in the 
 Hebrew tongue, and translated by Luke.* The latter statements are 
 plainly incorrect, as the book is not a translation ; but the fact that 
 Clement was led to make them is not without significance. It shows 
 that critica!l difficulties about the style had been perceived. Next we 
 have Origen, whose statements are not entirely consistent. In his 
 Homilies on Joshua he ascribes fourteen epistles to St. Paul,^ and in 
 the epistle Ad Africanum, chapter ix, he defends the Pauline authorship 
 against those who deny it. Such denial then is to be found even in the 
 East. This is in a.d. 240. Five years later Origen has modified his posi- 
 tion. In a homily dated A.D.- 245, while he states that Hebrews was 
 traditionally ascribed to Paul by " men of old time," he admits difficulties 
 in the style, and comes to the conclusion that the thought was Paul's, but 
 the writer a disciple of Paul's. He mentions traditions assigning it to 
 Clement R. and to Luke, and for his own part declares ' ' who wrote 
 the epistle God only knows." ^ If then we accept Origen's final judg- 
 ment as representing his ripe opinion, we shall have to class this im- 
 portant and ancient scholar with those who deny the Pauline authorship. 
 When we turn to the Syrian Church we find the epistle in the Peshitto, as 
 in our Bibles, not with the letters to the churches, but aftef the letters 
 to individual men, which suggests that it was added as an appendix 
 to the Pauline collection. Yet at the Synod of Antioch a letter of 
 Paul of Saraosata was read, which quoted Hebrews xi. 26 together 
 with sentences from I and 2 Corinthians as by the same apostle, 
 Eusebius must be cited on the Pauline side. He often quotes the- 
 epistle as St. Paul's, accepts fourteen epistles, of St. Paul,° and includes 
 Hebrews in St. Paul's " Homologoumena.'.'p But subsequently he follows, 
 Origen in holding that the apostle wrote it in Hebrew, and relates how 
 some say that the evangelist Luke, others that Clement, translated it. 
 Eusebius inclines to accept Cleiment (i.e., of Rome) as the translator.' 
 Subsequently he seems to have placed it among the "Antilegomena."' 
 The Council of Laodicea and the Fathers Athanasius, Basil, Gregory 
 Na?., Gregory Nys., Cyril Jer., and Theodoret, all ascribe it to St. Paul. 
 Still even Theodoret mentions people of Arian sentiments who rejected 
 Hebrews as spurious (^-iffos),' denying that Paul wrote it. Thenceforth, 
 however, we meet with no more doubts. 
 
 ; In the. West th,e case is very different. Though quoted by Clement R., 
 the epistle fell out of notice in this region. Irenseus, while frequently 
 
 ^ Eusebius, H.E., vi. 14. ' Ibid. 
 
 ' "God thundering on the fourteen trumpets of his" — i.e., Paul's— 
 "epistles, threw down even the walls of Jericho, that is, all the in- 
 struments of the idols and the doctrines of the philosophers."' But 
 this is only preserved in the Latin translation by Rufinus, who professedly 
 " corrects " Origen. 
 
 * Eusebius, H.E,, vi. 25. ' B.E., iii. 3. 
 
 ' Ibid., iii, 25. ' ibid., iii, 38. * Ibid., vi. 13. 
 
THE AUTHOR 423 
 
 dting the Pauline epistles, never cites Hebrews, though it would often 
 have helped his argument;^ nor does Hippolytus name it. Caius of 
 Rome only refers to thirteen epistles of Paul, thus excluding Hebrews^* 
 Tertullian does not seem to know that Hebrews had ever been attributed 
 to Paul.' Cyprian writes of the seven churches to which Paul wrote,* 
 thus excluding Hebrews ; and he never mentions' Hebrews, and never 
 cites it. Not till the fourth century do we hear a whisper in the 
 West of the Pauline authorship. As far as we know, the first Western 
 writer to ascribe Hebrews to St. Paul is Hilary of Poictiers (A.D. 368) ; 
 others follow, e.g., Lucifer, Ambrose. Jerome often quotes Hebrews 
 as St. Paul's. Yet he writes with hesitation, as when he says, " If 
 anyone is willing to receive that the epistle has been written . . . 
 under Paul's name."^ He says the Latin custom had not been to 
 receive it among the Canonical epistles. Augustine uses it as St. Paul's, 
 and from his time it is acknowledged as Pauline in the West as well 
 as the East. 
 
 When we turn to internal evidence we find certain traits 
 that might indicate a Pauline origin : (i) The author writes 
 with weight, and as one who has a right to exhort his readers. 
 (2) He is a friend of Timothy (xiii. 23). (3) He refers to 
 " my bonds " (x. 34). But that is only according to doubtful 
 MS. autjiority.s (4) He refers to " those of Italy " (xiii. 24). 
 But this does not imply that he writes from Italy, (5) 
 Certain linguistic coincidences have been pointed out. 
 
 Dr. Salmon cites a number of verbal coincidences.' Like St. Paul 
 he is found ringing the changes on a word, e.g., on uiroTdtro-d). (Hebrews 
 ii. 8 ; conf. I Corinthians xv. 27.) But as to the verbal resemblances 
 generally, it is agreed that whoever the author was, he knew some of 
 the apostle's epistles, and borrowed phrases from them, 
 
 (6) In the matter of doctrine the Pauline liberalism is 
 assumed. 
 
 ' Euseblus says he mentioned Hebrews (H.E., v. 26), but does not say 
 he ascribed it to St. Paul. No passage in the extant works of Irenaus 
 can be pointed to as supporting Eusebius's statement. Stephen Gobar 
 (sixth century), in a passage preserved by Photius Cod. 232, writes, 
 " Hippolytus and IrenEeus say that the epistle of Paul to the Hebrews 
 is not his." 
 
 ' EusEBius, ff.E., vi. 20. 
 ' ' His opinion will be considered with respect to the Barnabas theory. 
 
 * Adv. Jud., i. 20. 
 
 ' Com. on Titus, i. 5 ; compare Covt. on Titus, ii. J ; Enek. xxviii. r I ; 
 Amos viii. 7, 8 ; Jer. xxxi. 31. 
 
 ° deofioTs /iov — K ; Beofdois — A.D. vg. , syrr. , cop. , arm, 
 
 ' Introd., Lect. xxi. 
 
424 BIBLICAL INTRODUCTION 
 
 On the other hand there are insuperable difficulties to 
 accepting the Eastern tradition that St. Paul was the author. 
 The work is not at all like any of St. Paul's epistles. In its 
 form it is much more like a treatise. , The Greek is purer 
 than that of the apostle. The style is very different from his^ 
 St. Paul is vehement and abrupt, given to break off from the 
 rnain topic, inserting parentheses, apd generally writing in the 
 free manner of conversation. But iii Hebrews we haye finished 
 phrases; full, rounded, rhetorical sentences, and every evi- 
 dence of calm self-possession. One clear distinction may be 
 rioted. When quoting frbm the O.T. St. Paul makes frequent 
 use of the Hebrew text, and corrects the LXX. by it ; but the 
 author of Hebrews invariably quotes the ' LXX., and even 
 argues from it where it differs from the original.'- More- 
 over, his way of introducing the 0,T. is different from St. 
 Paul's; for while the apostle uses such phrases as "it is 
 written," "the Scripture says," "David says," " Moses says," 
 "Isaiah says," Hebrews does not cite under the title ." Scrip- 
 ture," or with the authors' names, but attributes the utterances 
 cited to the Holy Spirit, or -to God, except that once he refers 
 to a writer in a vague way, saying " one hath sornewhere testi- 
 fied" (4i. 6). ' ■ , ' ' ■ ' ^, 
 
 . We meet with a number of phrases foreign to the Pauline writings, 6.g., 
 "the living God," "the living way," "the living Word," full-sounding 
 poetical words (such as lieyaKaaivTj, used twice for God, i. 3 ; viii. l). 
 Greek particles are more frequent than in Paul, especially "ydp and-Te KaL^ 
 
 Even more convincing is the strongly-marked difference of 
 doctrinal standpoints. It is not that there is any contradiction 
 between Hebrews and Paulinism. ^ But the way of regarding 
 the Christian scheme is very different. With St. Paul, Christi- 
 anity is the one saving faith for which Judaisrh is a pfeparatioii 
 by awakening conscience through the law, and so demonstrat- 
 ing the need of the gospel ; but according to Hebrews Christi- 
 anity is the new covenant^ which contains in reality arid 
 perfection what the law had but in shadow, and with inferipr 
 
 1 In the use of LXX., Paul commonly agrees with the Vatican MS., 
 but Hebrews with the. Alexandrian. 
 
 * For a list of verbal peculiarities see Davidson,. Introd., IJebrews, 
 
THE AUTHOR i 425 
 
 merits. Taking all these facts into consideration, and noting 
 the great uncertainty of patristic tradition on the subject, we 
 must come to the conclusion that the epistle was not written-- 
 by St. Paul. 
 
 b. Sf. Luke. — Clement's and Origen's remarks cited above ^ 
 raise the question whether St. Luke was the author. This 
 view has been maintained by Delitzsch and others, chieiiy on 
 the ground of similarity of style and vocabulary.^ But the 
 fatal objection to it is that the author was a Jew, while St; 
 Luke was a Gentile.^ Besides, ' in the case of such a well- 
 known writer as the author of the third gospel and Acts, 
 it is difficult to imagine how one of his works could thus 
 be detached from his name. 
 
 a Clement of Rome. — Origen's suggestion of a tradition ■ 
 connecting Hebrews with Clement R. has brought his name 
 into the field, and a comparison with i Clement shows many 
 points of resemblance. Erasmus was inclined to accept 
 Clement. But the weak, diffuse style' of Clement's epistle 
 is quite unworthy of the author of Hebrews, from a literary 
 point of view the most able writer in the N.T. Origen gives 
 no authority for the tradition, which he unites with that 
 naming St. Luke. Evidently he attached no weight to it. 
 
 d. Apollos. — Luther first suggested the name of ApoUos, 
 which has found much favour in recent days. It was 
 advocated by Bleek and Dean Alford. Liinemann was so 
 confident as to speak of this hypothesis as "the only correct 
 one," and Davidson regarded it as the most probable. The 
 following points may be noted in its favour : — 
 
 (i) Apollos was a friend of St. Paul, in general sympathy 
 with the apostle's ideas, and associated with the group of his 
 friends, yet with a certain independence in his own methods, as 
 we may gather from i Corinthians i. and ii. This would suit 
 the author of Hebrews. (2) He was " an eloquent man " (avrip 
 
 ' Page 422. 
 
 ''■ Delitzsch gives a long list of linguistic resemblances. See Com. on 
 Ileb., Introd. 
 
 ' See Col. iv. II, 14. 
 
426 BIBLICAL INTRODUCTION 
 
 Xoyios, Acts xviii. 24) ; and the epistle is especially charac- 
 terised by rhetorical merits. (3) He was "mighty in the 
 Scriptures,'' and Hebrews deals with the O.T. in a masterly 
 way. (4) He was an Alexandrian Jew. Now Hebrews 
 contains many Alexandrian traits, The author only uses 
 the O.T. in the LXX. version, and he reasons in the 
 Alexandrian method. He seems familiar with Philo and 
 the Book of Wisdom.^ If Apollos was the author, we must 
 set aside the idea that the epistle was directed to the Jeru- 
 salem church or to Palestinian Christians at allj but that 
 destination has been doubted on other grounds. It is not 
 quite clear how Apollos could describe himself as one who 
 had received the gospel from those who had been personal 
 disciples of Jesus Christ, since he was instructed by Aquila 
 and Priscilla. But others may have "confirmed" this teach- 
 ing." 2 
 
 A further difficulty in regard to Apollos is that no tradition 
 whatever has preserved his name as that of the author. Con- 
 sidering how prominent Apollos was in the first century, and 
 how much the question of the authorship of Hebrews seems 
 to have been discussed in the second century (to judge by 
 what we read of the Alexandrian teachers, Pantsenus, Clement, 
 and Origen alone), it is inconceivable that no one should have 
 discovered the secret if he had been the author of the epistle. 
 Clement R. wrote to Corinth and quoted Hebrews in his 
 epistle. If he had known that Apollos had written that work, 
 
 * Bleek adduces 22 passages of resemblance between Heb. and 
 Philo. In particular compare Heb. vi. 13 with Philo, Leg. AUegor., 
 vol. i., p. 127 (edit. Mang.) ; vii. I2 with Leg., vol. i., p. 102 — 
 "the king of Salem" interpreted as "king of Peace"; vii. 3 with De 
 Jnebriebale, Vol. i., p. 368, the rare word d/xi)Tu/); iii. 5 with Leg. AUegor., 
 vol. i., p. 128 — "Moses was faithful in all his house," the very same 
 words. Aira6ya(rfw, (Heb. i. 3) is a favourite word of Philo's. For 
 comparison with , the Book of Wisdom, compare Heb. i. I with Wisd. 
 vii. 22 — iroXvp.eph, used of cro0ia ; Heb. i. 2 with Wisd. vii. 26 — 
 Airaiyaa-fj,a,, also used of a-o<pia ; Heb. i. 3 with Wisd. xvi. 21 — tnrSa-Tains j 
 Heb. xii. 17 with Wisd. xii. 10 — TdTrov n^ravotas ; Heb. xiii. 7 with Wisd. 
 ii, 17 — the rare word &/3acris for death in both cases. Dean Plumptre 
 even suggested that Heb. and Wisd. were written by the same author. 
 
 ^ Compare Acts xviii. 25, 26 with Heb. ii, 3, " Confirmed unto us by 
 them that heard." 
 
THE AUTHOR 427 
 
 • 
 
 surely he would have mentioned him when citing his words 
 for the benefit of the church of which he was one of the 
 most famous teachers; and that he would not have known 
 is most improbable. 
 
 e. Barnabas. — Tertullian assumes that the epistle is the 
 work of Barnabas, writing, " There is extant withal an epistle 
 to the Hebrews under the name of Barnabas," etc. ; ^ and 
 again, "The epistle of Barnabas is more generally received 
 among the churches than that apocryphal 'Hermas' of 
 adulterers,"^ and then proceeds to cite Hebrews vi. i, 4-6, 
 and again 7, 8, thus making it evident that he means our 
 epistle. Harnack justly remarks how unmethodical it is to 
 place the Barnabas hypothesis on a level with the Clement, 
 Luke, and Apollos hypotheses, which have no such authority.^ 
 Tertullian implies that Barnabas was the accepted author 
 in North Africa, and North Africa was in close connection 
 with Rome, where the epistle was known at least as early 
 as Clement R. (a.d. 95). Then there is much in the con- 
 tents favouring the Barnabas theory: (i) Barnabas was a 
 companion of Paul, and yet as the older man more or 
 less independent. (2) He could speak with almost apostolic 
 authority. (3) A Levite, he would be interested in the 
 ritual of the Levitical system, so elaborately discussed in 
 this epistle. (4) A native of Cyprus, he would be on a 
 line of close communication with Alexandria by sea. Philo's 
 teaching would eaisily pass on to Cyprus. In the Clementine 
 Homilies Barnabas is represented as teaching in Alexandria.* 
 (s) Known in the N.T. as a "son of consolation," Or 
 "exhortation,"^ he would be well represented by an 
 epistle, the chief end of which is encouragement of the 
 faint-hearted. 
 
 It is to be noted that in the stichometrical list of O.T, and N.T. 
 books at the end of Cod. Claromontanus (Dj) " The Epistle of 
 
 ^ De Pttdic, 20. 
 
 " Ibid. 
 
 ' Chronologie, vol. i., p. 477, note 2. 
 
 * Clem. Horn., 1. 9. 
 
 ' uJJs irapaKX^o-£U!, Acts ivi 3^' 
 
428 BIBLICAL INTRODUCTION 
 
 Barnabas " has 850 verses assigned to it.' Comparing this number with 
 the numbers assigned to otlier books, we see that it would suit Hebrews 
 better than our so-called epistle of Barnabas, which is half as long again. 
 
 It has been objected that Barnabas was not eloquent, since 
 
 at Lystra he was taken for Zeus, while the lot of Hermes was 
 
 assigned to Paul as the chief speaker. (Acts xiv. 12.) But 
 
 surely it is a just reply that the best writer is not always 
 
 the most fluent open-air speaker. The highly-finished literary 
 
 style of Hebrews would not be so suited to evangelistic 
 
 addresses as St., Paul's more rugged oratory. Then it has 
 
 been objected that the author of Hebrews makes mistakes 
 
 about the Temple customs, which would have been impossible 
 
 to Barnabas. But the, apparent errors admit of explanation, 
 
 and if not explained they are not prohibitive. 
 
 ( I ) The pot of manna, and Aaron's rod in the ark (ix. 4), where, according 
 to I Kings viii. 9, only the two tables of stone were kept, a point on 
 which Philo and Josephus agree ; (2) the altar of incense belonging to the 
 holiest place (ix. 4), but general association may be all that is meant ; 
 (3) the high priest sacrificing daily (vii. 27). At all events he was free to 
 do this, and his conscience might be thought to prompt him to it. 
 
 e. Priscilla. — Harnack has made the brilliaiit suggestion 
 that the epistle was written by this well-known, capable, and 
 successful woman-worker in the primitive Church, and he is 
 supported by Dr. Rendel Harris, (i) In the N.T. her name 
 appears before that of Aquila more frequently than in the 
 usual order where husband and wife are named, suggesting 
 that she was the leading evangelist of the two (Acts xviii. 18, 26; 
 Rom. xvi. 3; 2 Tim. iv. 29). (2) She was associated with 
 Paul in his work. (3) She was a teacher of the Alexandrian 
 Apollos, and Hebrews has Alexandrian affinities. (4) If this 
 epistle was written by a woman, the fact may explain -the 
 concealment of the author's narne. 
 
 2. Date and Place of Writing. 
 
 Whoever wrote Hebrews, the antiquity of the work is assured 
 
 by the fact that it was known to Clement of Rome. 
 
 Clement does not formally introduce his references as quotations, 
 nor does he mention any author or book in connection with them ; 
 but they are unmistakable. Compare Clement R., i Corinthians ix. 
 2 and xii. I with Hebrews xi. 7, 31 ; and Clement R., I Corinthians 
 xxxvi. 2 with Hebrews i. 3 ff. 
 
DATE AND PLACE OF WRITING 429 
 
 From' indications in the epistle itself we may infer ' that 
 it was written before the destruction of Jerusalem, a.d. 70, 
 for it contains no reference to that event, while its arguriient 
 dealing with the transitoiry character of Judaism would have 
 been strongly supported by an appeal to it if it had occurred. 
 On the other hand we cannot place Hebrews very early, 
 because it indicates that the first generation of Christians 
 had passed away.^ It is after some imprisonment of Timothy.^ 
 Probably we should place it in the decade a.d. 60-70, perhaps 
 about A.D, 68.8 It is quite uncertain where the epistle was 
 written. 
 
 3, The Church Addressed. — There are critics who hold 
 that the epistle was not addressed to Jews at all. The treat-' 
 ment of Judaising teaching as a " strange doctrine " (xiii. 9), 
 and the idea of "departing from the living God" (iii. 12) 
 rather than from Christ, seem to. point to converts from 
 heathenism. But in all extant MSS. and versions the 
 epistle appears as addressed "To the Hebrews," and this 
 is the name under which" it is (Quoted by the fathers. Its 
 aim in showing the superiority of Christianity to the O.T. 
 religion would be specially suitable to Jews. In the opening 
 sentence the writer refers to the Jews as "our fathers" (i. i), 
 and in describing the Incarnation he says that Christ " took 
 hold of the seed of Abraham" (ii. 16). Then the promises 
 to Israel pass 6n to' Christian "people of God" without any 
 hint of a change, of race (iv. g). AH ' the references to the 
 Levitical services imiply that' the readers value them/ Still 
 some one church is addressed, and not the Jews ^generally, 
 as several definite expressions show.* This can scarcely be 
 the Jerusalem church, for the readers are not addressed as 
 a cornmunity of such importance ; they had not had martyrs 
 (xii. 4) ; and they had been givers of aid (x. 34). Some com- 
 munity of Palestinian Jews, e.g., at Cffisarea, would suit the 
 
 ' See, ill 3; xiii. 1. 
 ^ xiii. 23. 
 
 ' Hamack considers that it might be as late as Doniitian, and dates 
 it between 65 and r)%,.—Chron., pp. 475-479- 
 « V. II, 12; X. 34; xiii. 23, 24. 
 
430 BIBLICAL INTRODUCTION 
 
 epistle better. Rome has been strongly advocated as the 
 place addressed.^ The use of the epistle by Clement shows 
 that it was known there. " They of Italy " (xiii. 24) would 
 be Italian friends of the readers. The Neronian persecution 
 is thought to be referred to in x. 32, 33.^ Although the 
 expression, "Ye have not yet resisted unto blood" (xii. 4), 
 could not well be addressed to the Roman church after Nero, 
 on the whole Rome seems to be the most likely destination. 
 
 Alexandria has also been suggested, because it is thought the temple 
 of Onias might suit the language of the epistle better than that at 
 Jerusalem. But the writer is referring to the tabernacle. The allegorical 
 style applies to the writer rather than the readers. The epistle "to 
 the Alexandrians " in the Muratorian Fragment may be our Hebrews ; 
 but this is purely a matter of conjecture. 
 
 4. Occasion of Writing. 
 
 The church addressed is in distress, undergoing a trial of 
 its faith, a chronic persecution which threatens to become 
 acute (xii. 1-13). This distress is accompanied by a feeling 
 of disappointment that the O.T. hopes are not realised. 
 There is even danger of a relapse. Yet the church has 
 a good record in connection with its past leaders and its 
 own generosity and sympathy with the suffering. It is 
 not so much to be blamed, as warned, exhortedj and 
 encouraged. To this end the writer aims at showing 
 how great are the Christian privileges which realise and 
 exceed all that was foreshadowed in the Jewish system; at 
 the same time he urges his readers practically to live up 
 to their privileges. 
 
 5. Contents. 
 
 i. 1-3, The higher revelation in the Son contrasted with 
 that by the prophets. 
 
 4-14, The superiority of the Son tp the angels. 
 
 ^ This view is supported by Renan, Pfleiderer, Harnack, Holtzmann, 
 Von Soden, Bacon, Peake, etc. Hort, in JttdaisHc Christianity, 
 pp. 156-159, defends the Palestinian locality. So do Salmon, Bishop 
 Westcott, and Bruce. 
 
 ''■ Note especially the singular expression, "being made a gazing stock" 
 (9eaT/)if6/4ecoi), aptly suggesting the scene in Nero's garden. 
 
CONTENTS 431 
 
 ii. r-4, Warning against drifting from this higher revelation. 
 S-8, Superiority to the angels further demonstrated. 
 9-18, Christ humiliated and perfected through suffering. 
 
 This shows why, though Scripture declared Him to be greater 
 than the angels, 'We see Him on earth in an inferior condition. The 
 humiliation is for the sake of mankind, that Christ may be a merciful and 
 feithful high priest. 
 
 iii. 1-6, Christ as the Son contrasted with Moses, who 
 indeed was faithful in God's house, but only as a servant. 
 
 7-19, Consequent warning not to follow the example of 
 those who were disobedient to Moses in the wilderness. 
 Since our Leader is greater, our obligation not to fall away 
 is correspondingly more urgent. 
 
 iv. 1-13, Continued warning and exhortation leading to an 
 encouragement based on the very failure of the Israelites. 
 Since neither under Joshua nor under David had they 
 realised the, promised rest, that rest must still remain in the 
 future for the people of God, because God's word is sure. 
 
 14-16, Encouragement to boldness of access to the throne 
 of grace through our High Priest. 
 
 V. i-io, High priesthood . of Christ— which a psalmist 
 describes as "after the order of Melchizedek" — compared 
 with that of Aaron in two respects — (1) human nature, (2) 
 divine appointment. 
 
 11-14, Elementary condition of the readers, who need 
 milk, not solid food. 
 
 vi. 1-8, Need to advance, because of the danger of falling 
 away to hopeless ruin. 
 
 9-12, A better hope for the "Hebrews,'' who at least do 
 good in ministering to the saints. 
 
 13-20, God's blessing assured by His oath. 
 
 vii. 1-28, Allegory of Melchizedek. (i) His uniqiie posi- 
 tion (1-3) ; (2) His superiority to the Levitical priests, seeing 
 that in Abraham Levi paid tithes to him (4-10); (3) His 
 promised coming (in Psalm ex.) implies the weakness and 
 failure of the Aaronic priesthood, which He is therefore called 
 to supersede. Himself abiding for ever (11-25); (4) Christ 
 
 2 F 
 
432 BIBLICAL INTRODUCTION 
 
 such a High Priest, and further superior to Aaron because 
 not needing to offer daily sacrifices for Himself (26-28). 
 
 viii. 1-5, Christ the High Priest of the heavenly, tabernacle 
 offering sacrifices. 
 
 6-13, The new covenant promised in the O.T. 
 
 ix. i-io, The tabernacle, its furniture, arid its services, but 
 temporary and to serve as a parable. 
 
 11-22, Christ a High Priest of greater things, and in the 
 more perfect tabernacle, cleanses our consciences by His 
 blood, and becomes the Mediator of the new covenant 
 which is consecrated by His blood, as the old covenant 
 had been consecrated by the Levitical sacrifices. 
 
 23-28, Christ's great sacrifice of Himself offered once for 
 all to bear the sins of many. 
 
 X. 1-4, The repetition of the Levitical sacrifices a sign of 
 their impotence. 
 
 5-18, By coming to do God's will, Christ superseded the 
 ineffectual sacrifices in which God took no pleasure, and by 
 one offering, perfected the consecrated people, who now have 
 the new covenant of the law on their hearts. 
 
 19-25, Consequent encouragement to enterthe holy place, 
 and maintain the assemblies for worship. . 
 
 26-31, Warning against apostasy,, which, to those who 
 despise the Son of God, must bring worse punishment than 
 that threatened against the. breakers of Moses' law. 
 
 32-39, Encouragement to be faithful in memory of early 
 days, and the heroism of the martyrs, 
 
 xi.. The heroes of faith. 
 
 xii. I, 2, Consequent exhortations to run the race with 
 diligence. 
 
 3-13, Chastisement to be endured as a proof of sonship. 
 
 14-17, Exhortation to peace, and fidelity. 
 
 18-29, Ou'' Mount Zion superior to the mount of the law, 
 and therefore its associated utterances more weighty. 
 
 xiii. 1-7, Definite exhortations concerning brotheirly love, 
 hospitality, prisoners, marriage, the love of money, content- 
 ment J former ministers of the Church to be remembered. 
 
THE ARGUMENT AND PURPOSE 433 
 
 8-9, Christ being changeless, we are exhorted not to be 
 unsettled by strange teachings. 
 
 10-15, Our altar outside the camp, and the city we seek. 
 
 16, 17, Charity and obedience. 
 
 18, 19, Prayers of the Hebrews sought; hope of seeing 
 them soon, 
 
 20, 21, Benediction and doxology. 
 
 22, Concluding explanations. 
 
 24, 25, Salutations and benediction. 
 
 6. Tlie Argument and Purpose. 
 
 There is a unity in the argument of Hebrews such as we 
 find in no other book of the N.T. The writer continually 
 breaks the thread of his argument to draw practical con- 
 clusions and exhort his readers to conduct corresponding 
 to each point reached.- Nevertheless, he resumes it again 
 where he left off, and thus carries it on to the end. The 
 eloquent exordium starts the theme. Christ as the Son is a 
 manifestation of God superior' to the revelation in the O.T. 
 That came by angels; the new revelation is in a Son. The. 
 old covenant was served by Moses, a servant ; the new is in 
 the hands of Christj the. Son. Then in regard to the priest- 
 hood, Christ is like Melchizedek, and in many, ways superior 
 to Aaron; it is the same with His sacrifice, which is far 
 superior to those, of the law; His heavenly tabernacle is 
 greater than the LeviticaL tabernacle on earth ; and now we 
 are called to the heavenly Zion, greater than Sinai in th^ 
 wilderness. Thus the new covenant has all that was in the 
 old, and has it in a higher, better, more effectual way. The 
 conclusion is to prize this new covenant, and be faithful to it. 
 The splendid hero-roll of faith comes in aptly here in the 
 concluding exhortation. If faith under the inferior covenant 
 produced such magnificent results, what sorf of men should 
 we be who have the greater covenant ? 
 
CHAPTER X. 
 THE GENERAL EPISTLES 
 
 1. James — Question of Author- 
 
 ship and Origin. 
 
 2. I Peter — Relation to St. Paul. 
 
 3. 2 Peter. 
 
 I. Jaiues. 
 
 4. Jude. 
 
 5. I John, 
 
 6. 2 John. 
 
 7. 3 John. 
 
 "■'a,. The Authorship and Origin. — The epistle opens with 
 the name of its writer as "James, a servant of God and of 
 the Lord Jesus Christ" (i. i), and it gives no further in- 
 formation as to who this James is. He could not be Zebedee's 
 son, who was killed as early as a.d. 44, for the epistle can 
 scarcely be placed so far back as that. We know nothing 
 of James "The Little" to lead us to assign it to him. The 
 only James known in the N.T. history, to whom it can be 
 referred with any probability, is "the Lord's brother," the 
 leader of the Jerusalem church, and to him it has been 
 ascribed by church tradition. 
 
 The epistle was not universally accepted in the early church. 
 Still it was cited by Hermas in Rome, and by Irenseus in 
 Gaul. ' It seems to have been in the Old Latin: version 
 and the Syriac. Origen is the first to ascribe it to St. James. 
 Eusebius places it among the Antilegomcna, but accepts it 
 him^self.^ 
 
 Hermas has, "If: ye resist the devil, he will be conquered, and (flee 
 from you in disgrace" (Mand. xii. 5) ; compare James iv. "J, But it could 
 be said that "James " here cites " Hermas." Irenseus plainly cites it, but 
 unlike his habit with St. Paul's epistles he does not ascribe it to any 
 author ; compare Adv. Haer., iv. 16, 2 with James ii. 23. , Clement A. 
 seems to have used it,* and so perhaps does Hippolytus.^ Origen 
 
 ' H.E., ii. 23 and iii. 25. 
 
 ^ See Eusebius, p.E., vi. 14; Cassigdoeus, Instit. Divin. 
 Script., viii. 
 
 • Discourse on End of World (doubtfully ascribed to Hippolytus), 47. 
 
 434 
 
JAMES 435 
 
 ascribes the epistle to James in his commentary on John. It is not 
 included in the Muratorian Canon ; but from the time of Athanasius, 
 who acknowledged it, the epistle grew in favour, and a century later, 
 in the time of Augustine and Jerome, it was all but universally acknow- 
 ledged. 
 
 There is much in the contents of the epistle that suits 
 what we know of St. James. If not from Acts xv., at all 
 events from Galatians i. and ii. we gather that he represented 
 the more Jewish and less evangelical type of Christianity, and 
 this is what we find in the epistle. No book of the N.T., 
 except the gospels, contains so many echoes of the teachings 
 of our Lord, and in this respect it may be thought to naturally 
 represent the mind of the brother of Jesus. These echoes are 
 none of them verbally identical with gospel logia, which is a 
 reason for supposing the epistle was written before the gospels, 
 and that its author drew on oral tradition.^ 
 
 Nevertheless serious objections have been raised to the 
 belief that this James was the author : — 
 
 (i) It is said to be improbable that James, the brother of 
 the Lord, should have written with no reference to the life 
 of Christ or His great work in all he had to say. This 
 epistle only mentions Jesus Christ twice (i. i ; ii. i), and 
 then without cliy descriptive details. It says nothing of His 
 character and doings on earth, His death, resurrection, and 
 redemptive work. But we cannot assert that St. James would 
 have referred to these subjects in a short practical letter; 
 we have no ineans of judging what were his ideas concerning 
 their importance. 
 
 (2) It has been thought improbable that a Galilean peasant 
 would have had the very rich vocabulary and command of 
 language revealed in this epistle, which contains many rare 
 words and some elegant phrases only to be acquired through 
 a knowledge of Greek literature. . Unlike St. Paul at Ephesus 
 and Rome, and St. John at Ephesus, St. James, who resided 
 at Jerusalem till his death, had no opportunity for coming 
 into contact with the Greek world of culture. Bishop 
 
 1 A full list of these resemblances is in Zahn's Einkitung, vol. i,, 
 pp. 87, 88. 
 
436 BIBLICAL INTRODUCTION 
 
 Wordsworth suggested that he wrote the epistle in Aramaic, 
 and that then a scholarly man translated it into Greek. The 
 style is Hebraistic in its abruptness. And yet it does not read 
 like a translation. We must admit that this is a difficulty j 
 but again we must remember that we know very little about 
 St. James. 
 
 (3) It is said to contain quotations from other N.T. works. 
 
 But it is possible that in some cases the quotations may be 
 
 from James in the other writings. This applies especially 
 
 to I Peter, which most clearly contains similar passages to 
 
 what we find in James, i Peter plainly quotes from some 
 
 of St. Paul's epistles, and it is reasonable to suppose that 
 
 its resemblances to James are to be explained in the same 
 
 way. 
 
 Compare James i. 10, 1 1 with r Peter i. 24 ; James iv. 6 with I Peter 
 V. 5. J James v. 20 with 1 Peter iv, 18. Other comparisons suggested 
 are James ii. 23 with Romans iv, 3, and Galatians iii. 6, But these are 
 not so close.' 
 
 (4) The circumstances of the church addressed are said 
 not to suit the times of St. James. Many corruptions have 
 crept in. In particular the rich are domineering over the 
 poor. This is not like the church life portrayed in Acts. 
 But it may be that in some cases St. James when most 
 vehement is not really addressing any of his readers, but 
 apostrophising the rich as a class (especially in iv. 13- 
 V. 6). Or it may be that a Jewish synagogue had adopted 
 Christianity, while a minority of its members was not con- 
 verted to the new faith. 
 
 (5) The apparent contradictions to St. Paul's doctrine of 
 justification, side by side with the exaltation of living faith, 
 are thought by some to be impossible for St. James. We must 
 say that either the epistle came before the great controversy, 
 or long after it. If before, it could be by James. 
 
 Pfleiderer'* holds that the epistle is written to counteract the anti- 
 nomianism of extreme Paulinists of a later time who niisunderstood 
 
 ' See HOLTZMANN, EinkituHg, pp. 335, 336. 
 ' Urchrisienthum, p. 865 ff. 
 
JAMES .1,37 
 
 the apostle. Spitta^ maintains that the boplc is a Jewish w6rfc adapted 
 by some Christian who merely inserted a Cliristian phrase in one or two 
 places, e.g., the words "Jesus Christ" twice. He points out in great 
 detail the similarity of its utterances throughout to what may be found 
 in purely Jewish literature. This paradoxical theory fjiils to account 
 
 (1) for the singular resemblance to the teachings of Jesiis ; (2) for the 
 silence; of . the author concerning the ceremonial law; (3) for the self- 
 restraint of the adapter iri not being more definite, esfiecially in the 
 description of St. James, who is to authenticate the work. While with 
 Spitta the work is very primitive, before the N.T., with Harnack it is 
 late. The name James, he holds, may be given in good faith, and not 
 intended to repjresent the Lord's brother, but standing for some other 
 James. With Harnack,^ however, the work is not an epistle at all, but a 
 collection of extracts from several Christian homilies. He regards it as 
 not epistolary in character, and too disjointed to be one work. Bacon 
 adopts this view. And yet is there not a marked unity of style throughout ? 
 
 b. Date. — The question of the date of this epistle is 
 bound up with that of its authorship. If it is early, there 
 is strong reason for believing it to be the work of James, 
 the brother of the Lord. Now there is much in it that 
 favours an early date ;— (i) The very lack of Christian theology 
 points to a time before this had been elaborated by St. Paul, 
 and thus makes for the primitive character of the epistle. 
 
 (2) If, as the opening salutation suggests, it was written 
 to Jews, we should expect to see some allusion to the 
 destruction of Jerusalem, unless it were earlier than that 
 event. (3) On the same hypothesis the total silence as to 
 Gentile churches would be strange ; there is no hint of the 
 existence of such. But of course these two arguments do 
 not hold with those who deny the Jewish destination of 
 the epistle. (4) The church order is most elementary. 
 Neither "bishops" nor "deacons" are named; we only 
 meet with "teachers" (iii. i), and "elders" (v. 14); and 
 the teaching seems to be quite unorganised, as at Corinth 
 in the time of i Corinthians. The direction to send for 
 elders to pray for the sick and anoint them (v. 14) is most 
 primitive. So is the description of the Church as a 
 "synagogue" (ii. 2). But, if early, the epistle must be 
 very early, to come before the outbreak of the controversy 
 
 1 Zur GescMchte u. LUterat. des Urchrist., vol. ii., pp. I ffi 
 • Chronologic, pp. 485-491. 
 
438 BIBLICAL INTRODUCTION 
 
 on St. Paul's teaching, i.e., before a.d. 50, and thus it must be 
 
 the first written book of the N.T.^ With this understanding 
 
 it can be ascribed to St. James. 
 
 On the other hand serious reasons have been brought forward fof quite 
 a late date : — (l) The improbability that the epistolary form for treating 
 religious truth, unknown before the N.T., should have been originated 
 by this epistle rather than by St. Paul's epistles. The originality of the 
 method suggests a greait original mind — St. Paul's rather than St. James's. 
 (2) The corruptions of the church, which, however, might be assigned 
 to the original Jewish synagogue, as already suggested. (3) The supposed 
 reference to ultra- Paulinism. It is said to be impossible for a contest about 
 the relative value of faith and works to have arisen before St. Paul's teachings 
 on the subject. This is a serious consideration ; but the antithesis is not 
 that of Paul, who contrasts faith with law, not with works ; besides, the 
 author has other contrasts, «.^., words and deeds. (James i. 19-27.) (4) 
 Blaspheming "the honourable name" (ii. 7) is said to point to persecutions 
 later than Acts, when Christians were prosecuted as such, in the manner 
 suggested by i Peter iv. 16. But the language is too vague to be pressed 
 to this meaning. Early Jewish persecutions of Christians must have in- 
 volved insults to the name of Jesus. The very expression, "suffer dis- 
 honour for the name," occurs in connection with the earliest persecutions 
 at Jerusalem (Acts v. 41). The case is perplexing; but if the epistle is 
 late, it must be quite down in the second century." And the indications 
 of a primitive character are against that position. . Since we cannot rest 
 in the intervening period, we seem driven back to the early date. 
 
 c. Fhce of Writing. — This is not given, but there are 
 indications that specially suit Palestine, such as allusions 
 to "the early and latter rain" (v. 7), the effect on vegetation 
 of the burning wind (i. 11), the existence of salt and bitter 
 springs (iii. 11), the cultivation of figs and olives (iii. 12), and 
 the neighbourhood of the sea (i. 6; iii. 4)."* This would 
 favour St. James as the author. 
 
 d. The Persons Addressed. — The epistle is addressed "to 
 the twelve tribes which are of the dispersion" (i. i). If it 
 comes from the Jerusalem James, we must take this literally. 
 St. James is writing to the dispersion; only we must under- 
 stand him to refer to Christians, i.e., Christian Jews outside 
 Palestine. But on the theory of the late date the address 
 is held to be figurative, referring to the spiritual Israel, i.e., 
 Christians, not Jews at all. In favour of this opinion it is 
 
 ' See Mayor, Com., pp. cxix.-cxiiv. 
 
 ^ JUlicher dates it A.D. 125-150 ; Harnack — the homilies out of which 
 he holds it to be constructed — A.I>. .120-140. 
 'See Mayor, Com., p. cxviii. 
 
JAMES 439 
 
 pointed out that the epistle seems, in part at least, to have 
 one church in view {e.g., ii. 2). But there is very little that 
 can be so construed, and that is more than counterbalanced 
 by the fact that no names or personal references whatever 
 besides the name of the writer appear. 
 
 e. Contents. 
 
 i. I, Greeting. 
 
 2-4, Trials endured with patience helpful. 
 
 5-8, Wisdom to be sought from God ; the instability of the 
 double-minded man. 
 
 9-1 1, Exaltation of the lowly, and temporary character 
 of the prosperity of the rich. 
 
 12-15, The genesis and the fruit of sin. 
 
 16-18, The Father of lights. His gifts, and the life He 
 engenders. 
 
 ig-27, Foolish speech discouraged, and good deeds com- 
 mended as the true ritual. 
 
 ii. 1-7, Warning against cringing to the rich and dishonour- 
 ing the poor. 
 
 8-13, The royal law of love to our neighbour. 
 
 14-20, A warning against having belief without works. 
 
 21-26, Abraham and Rahab justified by works. 
 
 This is the passage in which the controversy with ultra- Paulinism is 
 suspected. It is to be noticed how small a part of the epistle is thus 
 occupied — just half one of the five chapters, 13 verses out of 108. There- 
 fore it can Jiardly be supposed that the epistle was written merely or 
 mainly to deal with this one topic. Then neither the faith nor the justi- 
 fication here referred to are those of St. Paul. Not the faith — for here 
 ttiVtis is mere belief (see verse 19) ; but with St. Paul it is trust and 
 loyalty, surrender of the soul and adhesion of the will, what St. James 
 would call "living faith," that which shows itself by its works. Not the 
 justification — for here the idea is acquittal at the final judgment ; but with 
 St. Paul SiKttiMffts is the act of forgiveness with which the Christian life 
 begins. It is true the very opposite use of the story of Abraham from St. 
 Paul's (in Galatians iii., and Romans iv.)- suggests the appearance of 
 antagonism. If it is there Pfleiderer must be right, the antagonism must 
 be to the ultra-Paulinism of a later generation, which misinterpreted the 
 apostle. But the frequent use of the name of Abraham in the N.T.— it 
 occurs no less than 72 times— suggests that it was familiarly used in Jewish 
 theological discussions, so that the coincidence may be accidental. "Rahab 
 the' harlot" occurs in Hebrews xi. 31, in witness to faith— possibly also a 
 femiliar name in Jewish discussions, though the coincidence has been cited 
 as a sign that James used Hebrews, 
 
440 BIBLICAL INTRODUCTION 
 
 iii. I-I2, On bridling the tongue. 
 
 13-18, The wisdom from above contrasted with the factious- 
 ness of earthly wisdom. 
 
 iv. i-io, The quarrels that arise from covetousness, and the 
 evil of pride and worldliness. 
 
 11, 12, Against maligning or judging a brother. 
 13-17, The foolishness of boasting about the morrow. 
 V. 1-6, A denunciation of the rich. 
 
 7-11, Patience commended, with illustrations from the 
 husbandman and Job. 
 
 12, Against swearing. 
 
 13-18, Prayer and praise commended. The great efBcacy 
 of prayer, illustrated from the example of Elijah, especially 
 for a sick person, on behalf of whom elders are to be sent to 
 pray over him and anoint him, when the Lord will raise him 
 up, 
 
 1 9, 20, The great work of converting a sinner. 
 
 This epistle is practical throughout. It denounces faults, 
 and encourages right conduct. It does not discuss doctrines. 
 The abuses it contend-s against — foolish talk, respect of 
 persons, empty belief, ambition for teaching others, carnal 
 wisdom, covetousness, unkind judgments, boasting, the 
 oppression of labourers by the rich — are all in the region 
 of conduct. The opposite, conduct is commended in pre- 
 cepts reminding us of the teachings of Jesus in the synoptics. 
 The book is more Uke a homily, or a series of homilies, than 
 an epistle. But it might be: regarded as a pastoral for general 
 circulation among Jewish Christians. 
 
 2. 1 Peter. 
 
 a. Genuineness. — This epistle claims to be by "Peter, an 
 apostle of Jesus Christ " (i. i). It is one of the best attested 
 books of the N.T. If we were sure that 2 Peter was genuine, 
 we should say that the earliest witness was that epistle. 
 (2 Peter iii. i.) i Peter was known to the author of the 
 DidaM, and to Polycarp, Papias, and the author of the 
 Epistle to Diognetus. As usual, Irenaeus is the first to 
 
I PETER 44J 
 
 name it. Later fathers quote from it freely. It is among the 
 Homologoumena of Eusebius, though it is not in the Mura- 
 torian Fragment, 
 
 The Didachl has " abstain from fleshly and bodily lusts" (i. 4), which 
 reminds as of 1 Pet. ii. 11. Compare Polyc, Phil. 1 with I Pet, i. 8; 
 Phil. 2 with l_ Pet. i. 13 ; Phil. 8 with i Pet. ii. 22 and 24. Eusebius 
 states that Papias " made use of testimonies from the first epistle of John, 
 and likewise from that of Peter" {H.E., iii. 39). Compare, further, 
 Efis. to Diog. 6 with r Pet. ii. 11. Irenseus writes, "And Peter says in 
 his epistle, Whom having not seen ye love, etc." (Adv. Haer., iv. 9. 2) ; 
 compare l Pet. i. 8. After this it is needless to cite the frequent quota- 
 tions in Clement A., Origen, and Tertullian. The omission from the 
 Muratorian Fragment is a curious fact. Certainly the epistle was known 
 earlier. Yet the writer does not name it to reject it, as he does in the case 
 of some spurious works ; accordingly Dr. Salmon sets the omission down 
 to an accident of carelessness.' 
 
 Then the internal evidence shows much that agrees with the 
 character and history of Peter. The author seems to make a 
 difference between himself and his readers in saying " Whom 
 having not seen ye love " (i. 8), and he describes himself as a 
 witness of the sufferings of Christ. There are several points 
 of resemblance between the epistle and the speeches assigned 
 to Peter in Acts. Thus in both appeal is made to O.T. pre- 
 dictions of the sufferings of Christ (Acts iii. 18; i Peter i. io)j 
 in both we have the reference to the stone that was rejected 
 by the builders (Acts iv. 11; i Peter ii. 7, 8) ; in both the 
 cross of Christ is described as a " tree," or as " wood " {^vkoy 
 — Acts V. 30; I Peter ii. 24).^ 
 
 Davidson's objection, that we cannot be sure of, the verbal accuracy ol 
 the speeches in Acts, is no adequate reply ; because the coincidences exist 
 and they are too slight to be designed. 
 
 But over and above these details, it must be felt by the 
 thoughtful reader of this epistle that its author was a man of 
 rare spiritual gifts, who stood very near to the fountains of 
 inspiration. This is one of the very choicest gems in the 
 N.T., worthy of the great apostle whose name it bears. 
 
 Nevertheless, it is held by many that the epistle is wrongly 
 
 ' Introd. , Lectiire xxii. 
 
 " For a number of similar coincidences see Gloag, Introd. to Cath. 
 Epis., p. 114. 
 
442 BIBLICAL INTRODUCTION 
 
 assigned to St. Peter. The following are the chief grounds of 
 objection : — 
 
 (i) The epistle is entirely in the line of St. Paul's teaching 
 T— so much so that Harnack allows the possibility that Paul 
 himself may have written it, tjiough he assigns, it to a disciple 
 of the apostle. ''■ This objection was stronger when the 
 Tubingen hypothesis was maintained, since that hypothesis 
 involved the direct antagonism of Peter and Paul. It is now 
 widely admitted that no such antagonism existed. Still it is 
 remarkable to find Peter thoroughly absorbing Paulinism, so 
 that there is no other book of the N.T. not written by Paul 
 himself that so closely resembles his writings. And then 
 there are but the fewest reminiscences of the earthly life of 
 Christ, only such as could have been gathered from the general 
 knowledge possessed by the church ; so that Peter here 
 appears as having learnt more from Paul than from Christ. 
 Moreover there are many allusions to some of Paul's epistles, 
 certainly to Romans, probably to Ephesians. It is said to be 
 most improbable that Peter would borrow so much from 
 Paul. We cannot put it the other way and suppose that Paul 
 borrowed from Peter, for Paul prided himself on his inde- 
 pendence of the older apostles. 
 
 Compare I Pet. i. I with Eph. i. 4-7 ; I Pet. i. 3 with Eph. i. 3 ; i Pet. 
 i. 14 with Rom', xii. 2 ; l Pet. i. 21 with Rom. iv. 24 ; l Pet. ii. 5 with Rom. 
 xii. I ; I Pet. ii. 6, 7 with Rom. ix. 33 ; I Pet. ii. 10 with Rom. ix. 25, 26; 
 I Pet. ii. 13 with Rom. xiii. 1-4; I Pet. ii. 16 with Gal. v. 13; I Pet. ii. 18 
 with Eph. vi. 5; i Pet. iii. I with Eph. v. 22; i Pet. iii. 9 with Rom. 
 xii. 17 ; I Pet. iv. 10, 11 with Rom. xii. 6, 7 ; i Pet. v. i with Rom. viii. 
 18 ; I Pet. V. 5 with Eph. v. 21 ; i Pet. v. 8 with i Thess. v. 6. Then 
 we meet with Pauline phrases such as iv Xpurri} (l Pet. iii. 16; v. lO, 14); 
 the "revelation" of Christ for His second advent (i. 7, 13 ; iv. 13) ; KoKeiv 
 used not in the gospel sense of the open invitation, but in the Pauline 
 sense of the " effectual call " ; instead of the fw^ aldrios of, Christ's teach- 
 ing as the end of the gospel, the Pauline S6fo etc.^ 
 
 It has been pointed put in reply that St. Peter was of a re- 
 ceptive nature, and liable to be influenced by the associations 
 immediately surrounding him (e.g., at Antioch, according to 
 
 ' Chronologic, pp. 451-465. 
 
 ' See HoLTZMANN, Einleiiung, p. 317. 
 
I PETER 442 
 
 Galatians ii. 12). If he and St. Paul were much together in 
 their later years he may have come to lean on the stronger 
 apostle. But the author shows some originality.^ 
 
 (2) It is improbable that Peter would have written to the 
 churches of Asia, which had been the scenes of Paul's labours, 
 without once naming the great apostle who had founded them 
 and watched over them. His ministry was for the Jews, and 
 indeed we cannot understand how he would go out of his way 
 to address these churches of Gentiles at all — if the epistle were 
 designed for such.^ 
 
 (3) The indications of a comparatively late date seem to 
 exclude St. Peter, and so does the mention of Babylon as the 
 place of writing. But these objections do not hold together. 
 If the date is late, Babylon may stand for Rome. 
 
 (4) It is said to be improbable that Peter, a fisherman of 
 Galilee who spoke Aramaic, and who, according to Papias, 
 needed an interpreter at Rome, should have written in the 
 comparatively good Greek of this epistle. But we do not 
 know in what sense Mark may have been " the interpreter " of 
 Peter, nor do we know how far Greek was known in Palestine 
 in N.T. times. It is remarkable that all our N.T. books are 
 in Greek. 
 
 It must be admitted that these are serious reasons for 
 questioning the Petrine authorship. If we hold the balance 
 even we can scarcely allow that they count for nothing. To ' 
 some students they may appear to be of overwhelming force. 
 This is a case in which it cannot be wise to assume a very 
 positive attitude. Criticism is teaching us that there are 
 questions conc-erning which fairness and modesty suggest that 
 they cannot be answered with assurance. Nevertheless, in spite 
 of aU these difficulties, the striking testimony of early recogni- 
 tion, and the supreme excellence of the epistle still stand as 
 strong reasons for believing in its authenticity.^ 
 
 ^ See paragraph following " Contents." 
 
 ' See below, page 445. 
 
 ■ Dr. McGiffert suggests Barnabas as possibly the author, since he wa» 
 
444 BIBLICAL INTRODUCTION 
 
 b. Date and Place of Origin. — The fact that the epistle 
 is addressed to a region where St. Paul had laboured compels 
 us to date it later than the arrest of the apostle at Jerusalem 
 (a.d. 58). The use of Romans also requires this, and the 
 probable use of Ephesians brings it down at least to a.d. 62. 
 Then the fact that two or more of Paul's epistles are known 
 and used for this one document requires some longer time 
 still. But if Peter wrote the epistle, we cannot go beyond 
 A.D. 66, as it is most probable his martyrdom occurred no 
 later. Professor Ramsay dates it in the reign of Domitian, 
 and holds that Peter lived on till the year 80,1 a most, im- 
 probable idea. The principal reason for so late a date is 
 found in the references to persecution which involved punish- 
 ment for the Christian "name" (i Peter iv. 13-15)) apart 
 from any accusation of . specific crimes. This was not known 
 in the period of Acts, though it was seen at the time of 
 Trajan. On the other hand it refers to the persecution as 
 a new thing (iv. 12), and St. Peter showsa friendly attitude 
 to the state, and writes hopefully (ii. 13 ff. ; iv. 7; v. 10). 
 This is very different from the attitude of Revelation, with 
 its bitter antagonism to Romans and its allusions to long con- 
 tinued * persecution. Dr. McGiiifert points out that we have 
 here a reason for putting i Peter earlier than Revelation.^ 
 The question of the place of writing the epistle is closely 
 connected with that concerning the date. It contains a 
 salutation from "Babylon" (v. 13). If the epistle came 
 later than Revelation, this might be the Babylon of that 
 book, i.e., Rome, although it would be strange to meet 
 the mystical name in an epistle. There is good evidence 
 
 (l) one of the few companions of Paul who could iijlfil the conditions in 
 V. I ; (2) a missionary to Asia Minor, who might naturally write to that 
 region; (3) known to Silvanus,, who is referred to in v,_ 12 (see Acts 
 XV. 25 £f.) ; (4) a near relative of Mark, whom the writer calls his "son" 
 in V. 13 (see Col. iv. 10), and a favourite ■ travelling companion (Acts 
 XV. 37 ff.) ; .(S) credited in the church vnth having written an epistle. 
 Apostolic Age, pp. 599, 600. 
 
 1 Church in the Rom. Emf. , p. 262 & 
 
 2 Ajitistolic Age, p. 597. 
 
I PETER 4^5 
 
 that Peter was at Rome.' He was with Mark when the epistle 
 was written (v. 14), and we know that Mark was invited to 
 Rome during Paul's last imprisonment. (2 Timothy iv. 11.) 
 But' if this is earlier than Revelation, Babylon may be 
 either the city of that name by the Euphrates, or the 
 Egyptian Babylon (near the present Cairo). ^ We have no 
 hint that Peter went to either place, and the Jewish colony 
 at Babylon by the Euphrates was, broken up and removed 
 tO'Seleucia by this time. Still some Jews may have been 
 left there. 
 
 c. The Persons Addressed. — These are , called "elect 
 sojourners of the dispersion," in districts that include the 
 whole of Asia Minor north of the Taurus mountains. 
 The question is , whether the phrase is to be taken lite;;ally 
 for Jews, Le., Jewish Christians, or figuratively for the scattered 
 communities of Christians, chiefly Gentile. The latter is the 
 more probable interpretation, for two reasons : (i) We have 
 no evidence of the existence of any Jewish Christian churches 
 in these parts. Jews and Christians mingled in the Pauline 
 churches. (2) -The language of the epistle implies that the 
 readers had been pagan. ^ 
 
 (d) Contents. 
 
 i. I, 2, Salutation, witt a reminder of the Christian election, 
 and its consequent sanctification. 
 
 3-5, Thanksgiving for the incorruptible inheritance. 
 
 6-9, The trial of faith supported by love for the unseen 
 Christ. 
 
 ,,,10-12, The mystery of the predicted salvation through the 
 sufferings of Christ. 
 
 ' The following are the authorities : Clem. R. (i Cor. v.) ; Dionysius 
 of Corinth (EosKD., H.E., ii. 25); Iren/eus {Adv. Haer., iii. i); 
 Tertullian {De Bapt., 4; De Prascr., 36); Caius, of Rome, who 
 refers to the trophies {jk Tpbiraia) of Peter and Paul near Rome (Euseb., 
 H.E., ii. 25);.-''i'The Preaching of Peter" (quoted by Lactantius, 
 Institut. Divin., iv. 21); and of course many later w^riters. 
 
 " The Coptic Church has a traditional claim for this Babylon as the 
 place of Peter's residence. 
 
 ' See i. 14, 18 ; ii. 9, 10 (especially note, "which in time past were no 
 people"); iii. 6; iv. 3. 
 
446 BIBLICAL INTRODUCTION 
 
 13-25, Exhortation to holiness on the ground of redemption 
 by the blood of Christ and the new life to which Christians 
 are begotten. 
 
 ii. I, 2, Exhortation to guilelessness. 
 
 3-10, Christ the living stone rejected by men, but honoured 
 by God, on whom Christians are built to forfla a spiritual 
 house. 
 
 II, 12, Duty to behave as sojourners and pilgrims. 
 
 13-17, Duty of obedience to the civil government in order 
 to silence calumniators. 
 
 18-20, The duty of slaves to obey and endure patiently. 
 
 21-26, Example of the patience of Christ when He endured 
 reviling and bore our sins. 
 
 iii. 1-6, Duty of wives, especially with respect to simplicity 
 of dress. 
 
 7, Duty of husbands. 
 
 8-12, General duties of kindness and patience. 
 
 13-17, Suffering for well-doing commended. 
 
 18-20, Christ having suffered for siti, and being put to 
 death in the flesh, but made alive in the Spirit, preaching 
 to the spirits in prison who had been disobedient in the days 
 of Noah. 
 
 21, 22, The cleansing of our conscience through the 
 resurrection and ascension of Christ. 
 
 iv. 1-6, Consequent duty to have the mind that was in 
 Christ, and abandon all the old heathenish abominations. 
 
 7-1 1, The end being at hand, soberness and prayer needed, 
 but chiefly brotherly love, with the exercise of gifts to the 
 glory of God. 
 
 12^19, Persecution not to be thought strange, but regarded 
 as blessed if endured for the name of Christ, and not for any 
 crime. 
 
 V. 1-4, Charge to the elders to be good pastors. 
 
 5, Charge to the younger members to be subject to the 
 elders. 
 
 6-9, Duty of all to be humble, trustful in God's csjre, sob^r, 
 watchful, steadfast. 
 
2 PETER 44^ 
 
 lo, II, The final perfecting from God, to whom be the 
 dominion for ever and ever. 
 
 12', The letter sent by Silvanus. 
 
 13, 14, Final salutations and benediction. 
 
 The epistle i? hortatory throughout, and its doctrinal state- 
 ments come in rather to enforce the practical advice than 
 as distinct teaching. The persecution so frequently referred 
 to is a great trial of faith and constancy, and St. Peter en- 
 deavours to encourage the sufferers with cheering assurances 
 of their rich inheritance and stirring appeals to be worthy 
 of their redemption^ and make a good use of their privileges. 
 It is to be observed that Peter lays great stress on the 
 new birth (i. 3, 23 ; ii. 2) ; in this he is nearer to John 
 than to Paxil. He also dwells with much feeling on the 
 redeeming work of Christ, connecting this more with the 
 sufferings of Christ than is the case in St. Paul's epistles. 
 The discussion of the behaviour of Christians is also original 
 in this epistle. 
 
 3. 2 Peter. 
 
 a. Genuineness.— 'Vae genuineness of this epistle has been 
 more questioned than that of any other book in the N.T. 
 Erasmus and Calvin expressed doubts concerning it, and in 
 the present day many who may be regarded as conservative 
 scholars feel compelled to join hands with advanced critics in 
 regard to it. It stands on an entirely different ground from that 
 of I Peter. It is very little referred to in early [patristic literature. 
 Even Irenseus fails us here. The first mention of the epistle 
 is in Origen. Eusebius places it among the .(4«/27«^i3?«e«a. It 
 is not in the Muratoriati Fragment, nor in the Peshitto. 
 
 2 Peter ii. 5 has been compared with Clement E., i Cor. 7 ; and 
 2 Peter ii, 6-9 with Clement R., i Cor. 2. But the connection is not 
 certain, and if it exists the probability is that 2 Peter is dependent on 
 Clement.^ Possibly Justin Martyr knew the epistle {c. Tryph., 81 com- 
 pared with 2 Peter iii. 8) ; but the allusion may be to Psalm xc. 4. 
 Hippolytus seems to have known it (Refuta., ix. 2, x. 20). But he does 
 not refer to its author. Origen, the first to name Peter in connection with 
 
 * See Dr. E. A. Abbott, in Expositor, 2nd series, vol. iii., pp. 152, 153, 
 2 G 
 
448 BIBLICAL INtkODUCTlON 
 
 the epistle, says, " Peter 'spdak's 'Moud -by 'the 'two trumpets o'f his epistles."' 
 But Eusebius quotes him as expressing doiibts about it. " Peter . . . haS 
 left one epistle undisputed. Suppose also the second was left by him, for 
 on this there is some doubt" {H.E., v'i. 25). Eusebius himself says of it, 
 "As to the writings of Peter, one of his epistles, called the first) is 
 acknowledged as genuine. . , . But that which is called the second we 
 have not indeed received by tradition to be in the canon [IvhiSifKov) ; yet 
 as it appeaired useful to many, it was studiously read with the other 
 scriptures {ypaipuv, H.E., iii. 3). 
 
 There is not much that can be appealed to as internal 
 evidence in favour of the genuineness of the epistle. , It claims 
 to be written by Peter (i. i; cf. iii. 1); commences with the same 
 salutation as i Peter. But of course this coiiM be designedly 
 arranged by the writer, whoever he was, if he possessed i Peter.' 
 
 On the other hand there are very serious difficulties, (i) 
 The early, date, which it would be requisite to assign to the 
 epistle if it were written by St. Peter, seems to be excluded by 
 the reference to St. Paul's epistles as already collected, and as 
 in Scripture (iii. 15, 16). i Peter used some of the Pauline 
 epistles, and that fact was a difficulty in regard to it. But the 
 case is much stronger here. All the usage of the early church 
 is against the idea that these epistles were put on a level with 
 the O.T., and regarded as Scripture during the lifetime of St. 
 Peter. (2) The relktion to Jude affords another grave difficulty. 
 Nearly the whole of the short epistle of Jude is taken over 
 and utilised in 2 Peter. 
 
 Compare Jude 4 
 
 with 
 
 2 Peter 
 
 ii. 
 
 1-3 
 
 tt 11 
 
 6 
 
 
 II 
 
 11 
 
 4 
 
 tt t} 
 
 7 
 
 
 11 
 
 II 
 
 6 
 
 II It 
 
 8 
 
 
 II 
 
 II 
 
 10 
 
 II I] 
 
 10 
 
 
 II 
 
 II 
 
 12 
 
 »i 11 
 
 II 
 
 
 11 
 
 11 
 
 IS 
 
 II II 
 
 12, 
 
 13 
 
 11 
 
 If 
 
 I3i 17 
 
 11 If 
 
 i6 
 
 
 II 
 
 ■ II 
 
 18 
 
 II II 
 
 17, 
 
 iS 
 
 II 
 
 iii. 
 
 1-3 
 
 'But this is in the Latin translation of Rufinus,. who confessedly 
 amends the original (MiGNE, vol. ii., p. 857). For various other siipposed 
 references to 2 Peter, see Gloag, Introd. to ike Cath. Epis., pp. 205-209; 
 Charteris, Canohiciiy, pp. 313-318. 
 
 ' Still coincidences with the speeches in Acts may be noted, e.g., com- 
 pare 2 Peter ii. 15 with Acts i. 18 — " wages of iniquity?" ; 2 Peter iii. 10 
 with Acts ii. 20 — " the day of the Lord " ; 2 Peter iv. 24 with Acts iv. 24 
 —deirirdTTis {01 Christ in the epistle, for God in Acts; but the originsd 
 speech was in Aramaic, 
 
2 PETER 
 
 449 
 
 The priority must be assigned to Jude, e..g., 2 Peter ii. 4 is less distinct 
 tlian Jude 6, whicli gives the ground of the condemnation of the angels ; 
 and 2 Peter ii. 1 1 is really unintelligible without Jude 9, a mere allusion to 
 what , is there stated. In 2 Peter we read ^'whereas angels . . .. bring not 
 a railing judgment, etc.," the word "whereas" assuming something known. 
 The passage in Jude gives the case of Michael, when he durst not bring a 
 railing accusation against the devil, ajid puts it quite clearly. Moreover 
 Jude is a brief, crisp epistle, while 2 Peter is less firm and strong in style ; 
 and in these respects Jude appears to be the original. In favour of the 
 priority of 2 Peteir, it is urged that in this epistle the false teachers are yet 
 to come (ii. 1-3 ; ili. 3), while in Jude they are already present {4). But 
 even according to 2 Peter some are already present (ii. 10 ff.).' 
 
 Now we have seen that i Peter made use of earlier writings. 
 But it is one thing to lean upon Paul and even James, and 
 another thing to absorb and utilise virtually the whole of the 
 short epistle of so obscure a writer as Jude. In defending 
 the genuineness of 2 Peter we accuse the great apostle Peter 
 of plagiarising in a remarkable way. (3) In style arid thought 
 it differs greatly from i Peter. The style of i Peter is ex- 
 cellent; that of 2 Peter most awkward. And while i Peter 
 is saturated with Paulinism, this is not apparent in 2 Peter. 
 The sufferings of Christ and the thought of redemption, which 
 are so prominent in the earlier epistle, are not brought forward 
 in this. The writer claims to have been a witness, but of the 
 glory. Of course, if St. Peter did not write i Peter, this is no 
 objection to the genuineness of 2 Peter ; but the evidence for 
 I Peter is immeasurably stronger than that for 2 Peter. See- 
 ing that the epistle is very weakly attested by the Fathers, and 
 that it was always the most doubtful book of the N.T., we 
 have little to bring in an.swer to these strong objections ; and 
 the balance seems to be in favour of denying its genuineness. 
 It is impossible to say who wrote it. The very emphasis with 
 which Peter's name is claimed and this epistle linked to 
 I Peter, itself a suspicious fact, shows that the author desired 
 to use the apostle's authority for what he wrote. 
 
 Mr. Vernon Bartlet suggests a compromise, viz., that ii.-iii. 7 was intro- 
 duced by a later hand into a genuine epistle of St. Peter's. 
 
 b. Occasion and Date of Authorship. — One object is to coun- 
 teract certain false teachers. The language both of 2 Peter and 
 of Jude is too indefinite to enable us to decide for certain 
 ' Dr. E. A. Abbott has shown that 2 Peter made use of Josephus. 
 
450 BIBLICAL INTRODUCTION 
 
 who these are — probably those constant disturbers of the 
 churches, the earlier gnostics, Cainites or Ophites.^ But the 
 writer has further the positive object of endeavouring to 
 stimulate the efforts of his readers to acquire true knowledge. 
 The right gnosis must oppose the false gnosis. " Knowledge " 
 is the keynote of 2 Peter. The reference to St. Paul's epistles 
 as Scripture requires quite a late date — probably the middle 
 of the second century.^ 
 
 c. The Persons Addressed. — The epistle is quite general, with. 
 no particular address, except that it is for Christians — " them 
 that have obtained a like precious faith with us " (i, i). 
 
 d. Contents. 
 
 i. 1-2, General salutation. 
 
 3-1 1, Exhortation to progress in the successive acquisition 
 of Christian graces. 
 
 12-21, Reminder of the truth of the Christian teaching, 
 confirmed by the Divine testimony to Christ and the light of 
 prophecy. 
 
 ii., The false prophets and their, evil practices. 
 
 iii. 1-7, Rebuke for those who disbelieve in the final judg- 
 ment. 
 
 8-13, The coming of the Lord and the destruction of the 
 world. 
 
 14-18, Exhortations to diligence, patience, and growth in 
 grace. 
 
 4. Jude, 
 
 a. The Author. — The author of this brief epistle intro- 
 duces himself as " Jude, a servant of Jesus Christ, and brother 
 of James." ■ tie can scarcely be. the apostle Jude (perhaps 
 the same as Thaddseus and Lebbseus), although that apostle is 
 related to a James,^ because not only does he not claim to be 
 
 ^ Mansel suggests the Nicolaitans of Rev. ii. I J as denying Christ and 
 inculcating immorality. But would such be actually teachers vdthin the 
 churches? 
 
 ^ HaRnack places it A. p. i60tI75, Chronologic, pp. 465-470. 
 
 ^ 'loiiSai' 'la/cci^ou (Luke vi. 15), "Jude of James," rendered "brother 
 of James" in A.V., evidently on the ground of this epistle, but "son of 
 James" in R.V., according to thegerieral usage of the idiom. 
 
JUDE 4|l 
 
 an apostle, but by designating himself only with relation to 
 his brother he excludes any such authority as would arise 
 from his being one of the Twelve; besides, he refers to 
 " the apostles of our Lord Jesus Christ " as former teachers, 
 among whom he does not include himself (17, 18). It is 
 more likely that he is a brother of the well-known James, head 
 of the church at Jerusalem ; and if so, also a brother of our 
 Lord. We can understand his not claiming the higher rela- 
 tionship. The fact that he takes this modest position makes 
 for the genuineness of the epistle ; and so does the fact that 
 so little known a man appears as its author.^ Who would wish 
 to pass off a pseudonymous epistle as the work of a man 
 whose identity it would be difficult to fix ? This epistle was 
 often referred to in the church of the later part Of the second 
 century. It was known to Clement of Alexandria,^ and Ter- 
 tuUian,' both of whom cite it by name; and it is in the 
 Muratorian Fragment. ' 
 
 The epistle is quite general, being addressed simply "to 
 them that are called, beloved in God the Father, and kept 
 for Jesus Christ" (i); but it presupposes that its readers had 
 been instructed by the apostles (17), a fact which would point 
 to Palestine or Syria as the more probable region in which it 
 would be first circulated.- The references to Jewish apocryphal 
 works also suggest the same area, where they would be best 
 known. The work must be comparatively late to allow of the 
 false teachings to which it refers having crept in, but there is 
 nothing to exclude the lifetime of a brother of James. 
 
 The chief indications of a later date are (i) Tie reference to the teaching 
 qf the apostles (l^). Certainly, that is spoken of as past; but then it is 
 supposed to be in the memory of the readers, not as a tradition, but as 
 what they had themselves heard, though an earlier phrase — " the faith 
 which was once for all delivered unto the saints " (3) might be taken to in- 
 dicate tradition. (2) The corrtipt teaching. — This is said to be Ophite or 
 Cainite— "for they went in the way of Cain" (11)— ?.«., gnostic of the 
 
 . ,n I' ■ ■:-■■.'- ' ' 
 
 , 1 There is no direct evidence for the theory that the author of the 
 efiistle was Judas Barsabas (Acts xv. 22, 23) ;■ but as this Jude is called " a 
 chief man among the brethren" at Jerusalem, it must be allowed to b« 
 possible, 
 
 ' Paedag., iii. 8. 
 
 • De CuUu. femin. i. 3. 
 
452 BIBLICAL INTRODUCTION 
 
 early second century. "The error of Balaam" suggests tjie Nicolaitans. 
 (Rev. ii. 14, 15,) Still, as we know there were later Cainjtes, the pointed 
 reference to Cain cannot but raise a suspicion of an allusion to these 
 hereticSi But then Cain is mentioned for warning in I John iii. 12 ; and 
 also in Heb. xi. 4, the latter undoubtedly earlier than the Cainites. 
 
 The author's object is to denounce the corrupt teaching and 
 warn his readers against it. This teaching has two evils. It 
 encourages immoraUty, and it denies "our only Master and 
 Lord, Jesus Christ." 
 
 b. Contents. 
 
 I, 2, Salutation, 
 ■ 3, 4, The teaching originally received to be maintained 
 against tlie false teachers. 
 
 5-7, Warnings from the punishment of the Israelites, of 
 fallen angels, of Sodom and Gomorrah. 
 
 8-10, Railing at dignities rebuked from the example of 
 Michael. 
 
 11-13, Denunciation of the corrupters who go in the way 
 of Cain and Balaam, and spoil the Agapl feasts. 
 
 14-16, These false teachers in accordance with the prophecy 
 of Enoch. 
 
 17-19, Reminder that the apostles had predicted such 
 teachers. 
 
 . 20, 21, Duty of edification in the love of God, and hopmg 
 for the mercy of Christ. , 
 
 22, 33, Every effort to be made to save men. 
 
 24, 25, Concluding doxology to the God who can keep from 
 stumbling. 
 
 Origan found the reference to Michael in the "Assumption of Moses" 
 {^De Principiis, iii. 2), on Which Jude here draws. 
 
 The reference to Enoch is found in the Book of Enoch i. 9. Both of 
 these are Jewish apocryphal works/ though the latter has been converted 
 into a Christian book with many interpolations. 
 
 5. 1 John. 
 
 a. Authotshtp. — As in the case of Jude the question of 
 
 the authorship of i John is not merely whether the epistle 
 
 is genuine and the work of the man whose name is associated 
 
 with it, but also as to who that man is, seeing that it is an 
 
 » See Charles, The Book of Enoch, p. 42. 
 
I JOHN 453 
 
 * 
 anonymous writing, the title, of course, in this case, as in 
 all other cases, being not part of the original work. And 
 even when the very ancient tradition that connects it with 
 the name of John is accepted, we are still able to ask 
 which John — the apostle, or the elder ?i It is almost 
 certain that this epistle was written by the author of the 
 fourth gospel, the same peculiar style and special ideas 
 appearing most conspicuously in both. 
 
 Among phrases lyhich connect the epistle with the gospel we have 
 frequent references to life and truth, and such expressions as "to do 
 the truth," "to be of the truth," "to be of God," "to be of the world," 
 " to be of the devil," " to have eternal life," " to conquer the world " 
 (compare I John iv. 4 ff. with John xvii. 14) ; " the pHly begotten Son " 
 (compare I John iv. 9 with John i. 14, 18). Pfleiderer' following Baur 
 objects (i) that die "antichrists" of, the epistle (ii. 18) do not appear 
 in the gospel ; (2) that Aacr/jJis, twice applied to Christ in the epistle 
 (ii. 2 ; iv. 10), does not occur in the gospel. But can we argue thus 
 a silmtio, when there is no proof that the gospel had occasion to 
 introduce these ideas ? Besides, the gospel describes Christ as " the 
 Lamb of God, that'taketh away the sin of the world" (John i. 29), 
 which really contains the IXaa/iSs idea. ' Further, in the epistle the 
 Paraclete is Christ (l John ii. i), while in the gospel He is the Holy 
 Ghost Qohn xiv. 16). But then in the gospel the Holy Ghost is described 
 as "another Paraclete," which implies that Christ too is a Paraclete. 
 It is true there is a diiference in the ideas of the Paraclete — in the epistle 
 Christ is our advocate with the Father, in the gospel the Holy Ghost 
 directly helps us ; but there is no inconsistency here. 
 
 This makes the importance of the authorship of the epistle 
 very great. But since what has been already considered in 
 regard to the gospel applies to the epistle, and since it was 
 necessary to refer to this work when discussing questions 
 concerning the gospel,^ we need not go over the ground 
 again. It is sufiScient to notice certain points specifically 
 related to the epistle. Though the author nowhere designates 
 himself an apostle, he claims to be an eye-witness of the 
 gospel events and a personal disciple of Jesus Christ (i. 1-3) ; 
 and he writes with atithority and fatherly affection for his 
 readers. Very early testimony connects the work with John, 
 the son of Zebedee, and there is no ancient witness for any 
 other authorship. The epistle was known to Polycarp and 
 Papias. Irenseus is the first to cite it by name- It is in th^ 
 
 ' See page 337. * Urchristmthum, pp. 791 S. " See page 328 ff 
 
454 BIBLICAL INTRODUCTION 
 
 Muratorian Fragment. Clement of Alexandria, Origen, and 
 Tertullian referred it to John. 
 
 Polycarp writes : ' ' For whosoever does, not confess that Jesus Christ has 
 come in the flesh is antichrist' (^Ad Phil., 7), plainly derived from I John 
 iv. 3. Eusebius says that Papias "made use of testimonies. {Kex/)?)rai 
 S' a airhi /j.apTvplais) from the first epistle of John." {H.E., iii, 39.) 
 IrenjEus writes: "For this reason he (John) thus testified to us in his 
 epistle: Little children, it is the last time," etc. {Adv. Haer., iii. 16. 5. 
 Compare I John ii. 18.)^ i: 
 
 The apostolic authorship of the epistle has been objected 
 to on the ground of its alleged "feebleness." That there 
 is great simplicity in the phrasing inay be allowed, and also 
 that there is a habit of repetition, which may be set down 
 to the advanced age of the writer, is also not to be denied. 
 And yet we must not be deluded into the supposition that 
 the underlying thought is not of great value. We have here 
 some of the most precious teaching of the N.T., e.g., con- 
 cerning the love of God, brotherly love, Christ's propitiation 
 for sin, eternal life. Then it has been objected that second 
 century gnosticism is referred to. It is true the author 
 contends against Docetism, the teaching that denied the 
 corporal reality of the incarnation (iv. 2) ; but he makes 
 no allusion to the specific ideas of the great. gnostic systems 
 of Valentinus and Basilides, who wrote early in the second 
 century. The error he contends against may, ,be : that of 
 Cerinthus, which appeared before the end of the first century.' 
 
 b. Date and Place of Writing. — i John was written in 
 a time of peace, as it , contains no allusion to persecution. 
 The references to doctrinal error suggest a late date in the 
 apostolic era. Avoiding the Domitian persecution, we must 
 assign .it either to an earlier , period, or more probably to 
 the time after that persecution was over. ^ It gives no hint 
 
 1 See also Adv. Boer., iii. 16. 8; for Clement see Strom, '-a. 15; 
 Paedag., iii. II ; for Origen see EusEBTUS, H.E., vi. 25 ; De Oral., 0pp., 
 torn, i., p. 233 ; for Tertullian see ^(&. /Va.a;.,i^. , ■ ^ 
 
 " Baur thought lie saw a reference to Moiitanismin the "sin lintp 
 death" (i John v. 16), corresponding with the mortal sins described 
 by Tertullian (De Ptidic, 19). But might not JVIontanism seek its authority 
 in this very passage ? 
 
I JOHN i m 
 
 of any locality where it was written. Probably it came from 
 Ephesus, since John lived there. 
 
 c. Persons Addressed and Occasion of Writing. — This bbok 
 is not in the form of a letter, and yet it is not like a treatise, 
 as some have said, for it contains direct hortatory appeals. 
 We can better compare it to a pastoral,^ especially aimed 
 at correcting false ideas about the incarnation, but largely 
 practical, to inculcate obedience to the commandments of 
 Christ, and brotherly love. 
 
 d. Contents. 
 
 i. 1-4, Introduction, promising to give the readers the 
 kno,wledge of the Word of life, of which the writer has had 
 personal experience. 
 
 5-10, The message that God is light, and our fellowship 
 with Him dependent on walking in light. Still if we confess 
 sin, it will be forgiven through the blood of Christ. 
 
 ii. 1-6, Christ the propitiation, whom we know if we keep 
 His commandments. 
 
 7-11, The old commandment, and the new. Love of 
 one's brother a necessary condition of walking in the light. 
 
 12, 13, The messages to children, fathers, young men, 
 
 14-17, On the vanity of loving the world. 
 
 18-23, Antichrist and the denial of Christ. 
 
 24-29, Abiding in Christ. ^ 
 
 iii. 1-3, The love of God, in calling us His children, and its 
 purifying hope. 
 
 4-12, Christ manifested to take away sin, and lead us 
 to love one another, in the opposite character, to Cain's. 
 
 13-22, Love of the brethren t^e sign that we have passed 
 from death into life. , ; , , 1 
 
 23,, 24, The commandments to, believe in the name of 
 Christ, and love one another, 
 
 iv. 1-6, Trying the spirits. 
 
 7-16, The duty to love another, because God is love. 
 
 17-21, The perfecting of love, and its victory over fear. 
 
 V. 1-5, The victory over the world through faith in Christ, 
 1 See Westcott, The Efistles of St. John, Introd., p. 30, 
 
4S6 BIBLICAL INTRODUCTION 
 
 6-13, The three witnesses and life eternal in Christ. 
 
 14-17, Prayer for the sinner. , 
 
 18-2 r, The new life in God and in His Son. 
 
 6. 2 Jolm. 
 
 a. Authorship. — ^The writer describes himself as "the 
 elder," but without giving any name. Therefore some ^ have 
 assigned this epistle and 3 John, which is similar in address, 
 to the presbyter John, even while allowing i John to be by 
 the apostle. But the resemblance in style between the three 
 epistles is too close to allow of the probability of diversity of 
 authorship. As 2 John has no name, it could not in any case 
 be called " a forgery," and it is too simple and practical to 
 admit of any question of its genuineness. It has very early 
 attestation to its connection with the name of John, certainly 
 in Irenseus, probably in the Muratorian Fragment. 
 
 Irensus certainly quotes verse 7 of this epistle, though with an ex- 
 pression that might suggest his only knowing bi^e epistle of John, saying, 
 "And John the disciple of the Lord, in his epistle . . . when h? says, 
 for many ,deceivers are entered into the world, who cpnfess not that Jesus 
 Christ is come "in" the flesh; this is a deceiver and an antichrist.' {^Adv. 
 Haer., iii. 16. 8.) The Muratorian Fragment refers to two epistles of 
 John. Probably this is one pf them. It was known tp Clement * and 
 Origen,' who, however, while admitting that John wrote the first epistle, 
 expresses doubts as to his authorship of the second and third. 
 
 b. Destination. — The epistle is addressed to "the elect 
 lady."* It is a question whether this expression is to he taken 
 literally, or figuratively for a church. In favour of the former 
 interpretation are (i) the simplicity of the epistle, (2) the 
 references to the elect lady's children (verses i, 4), (3) the 
 analogy of 3 John, which is addressed to one man, Gaius, (4) 
 the mention of the elect lady's house (verse 10). On the 
 other hand, in favour of the latter interpretation — understand- 
 ing the phrase to stand figuratively for some church — (i) it 
 must be allowed that the purpose and contents of the epistle 
 
 ^ See e.g., Ebeard, Com. Introd. 
 » Strom., ii. 15 ; EusEBius, B.E., vi. 14. 
 ' Edsebius, H.E., vi. 26. 
 
 ^ 'EKXejcrg Kvfli^, which might also be rendered either '/ the elejct Kytia," 
 "lady Eclecte," 
 
2 JOHN 457 
 
 are more suitable to that application, We have warnings 
 against antichrist and exjiortations to love, very like those 
 in I John, which was not directed to a private person. (2) 
 John not only refers to children of the elect lady who are with 
 her, but also to others whom he has met, leading us to think 
 of a greater number than the children of one woman. (3) 
 The elect sister and her children (verse 13) seem to be 
 another church. The house could be that where the church 
 met; churches then assembled in private houses. On the 
 whole, therefore, it seems best to take the expression "elect 
 lady " figuratively as the half playful description of a church. 
 
 c. Occasion, Date, and Place of Writing. — The special 
 object of this brief letter is to warn the " elect lady and 
 her children" against deceivers who deny the incarnation; at 
 the same time they are exhorted to keep to the original com- 
 mandments, especially that of brotherly love. There is no 
 reason to doubt the tradition that puts this epistle after 
 I Johi) ; but the similarity of tone suggests that it was written 
 about the same time, i.e., towards the end of the first century, 
 and prpbably at Ephesus. 
 
 d. Contents. 
 1-3, Salutation. 
 
 4, Thanksgiving for certain of the elect lady's children 
 whom John has found walking in the truth. 
 
 5, 6, A reminder of the old commandments, especially that 
 requiring brotherly love. 
 
 7-1 1, The antichrist deceivers who deny the incarnation not 
 to be received into the house or acknowledged with a greeting. 
 
 12, The writer, expecting to visit his correspondents, will not 
 say more now. 
 
 13, Final salutation. 
 
 7. 3 John. 
 
 a. Authorship. — This epistle, which is addressed to one 
 man, the hospitable Gaius, opens exactly in the same way as 
 its predecessor, the writer introducing himself simply as " the 
 elder." It is not much referred to in early church literature ; 
 
4S8 BIBLICAL INTR0DUCTION 
 
 but the absence of any doctrinal statements and the fact that 
 it was addressed to a private individual account for the 
 neglect of it. There is no good reason to doubt that it was 
 written by the author of 2 John. 
 
 Hilgenfeld and Holtzmann follow Baur in assigning the epistle to the 
 author of 2 John, though placiiag it in the second century.^ 
 
 It was known to .Origen, who expressed doubts concerning it as well as 
 concerning^ 2 John. (Eusebius, H.E., vi. 25.) Eusebius accepts it, though 
 he places it among the Antilegomena. {H.E., iiii 25.) It is in the Old 
 Latin, but not in the Peshittp. 
 
 b. Occasion, Date, and Place of Authorship. — It would 
 appear that the special object of this epistle' was to commend 
 a man named Demetrius to Gaius ; so that it may be regarded 
 as one of those "letters of commendations" that were used 
 in apostolic and later times.^ Having thus occasion to write, 
 John avails himself of it further to congratulate his friend on 
 the hospitality this good man is practising to Christians who 
 come to him as strangers. Referring to some previous letter 
 that he has sent to the church, he sternly rebukes a certain 
 Diotrephes for his ambition and tyranny. This epistle may 
 be assigned to the same time and place as 2 John, i.e., towards 
 the end of the first century a.t Ephesus. Some persecution- has 
 recently been experienced (verse 7), probably that of Domitiah. 
 
 c. Persons Mentioned.^{j.) Gains. — We meet with a Gaius 
 at Coriiith. (i Cor. i. 14.) Possibly the same man is referred 
 to in Romans xvi. 23, as that was written from Corinth. Here 
 St. Paul calls him "my host." The common characteristic 
 of hospitality faintly suggests identity with our Gaius. ,But 
 hospitality was common in the early church, arid St. Paul 
 riiiist have stayed somewhere; Besides, this epistle ' comes 
 quite thirty years later than Romans. We also' meet with a 
 Gaius of Macedonia (Acts xix. 29), and another of Derbe in 
 Lycaonia (xx. 4). The name was common, being a Greek 
 form of the Latin " Caius." At the late period of our epistle 
 most likely it denotes some person not otherwise known to us, 
 
 1 See also JtiLlCHBR, Einldtung, pp. 159, 160, for proofs of the 
 common authorship of the two episUes. 
 ' t.g., see 2 Cor, iii. i. 
 
3 JOHN 459 
 
 • 
 
 possibly a prosperous Christian in whose house a church was 
 accustomed to meet. (2) Diotrephes. — All we know of this 
 man is what the epistle suggests. He was a member of the 
 church with which Gaius was connected. It has been inferred 
 that he was a presbyter, and though no title is given him, not 
 only the fact of his loving the pre-eminence — which might be 
 the case with any ambitious person — but his tyranny, point to a 
 post of influence. This man was going about maligning the 
 author of the epistle, and generally doing his worst to break 
 up the church. (3) Demetrius. — Some Christian on his 
 travels about to visit the place where Gaius lives, who is 
 therefore commended to him for a brotherly reception by 
 the church. 
 
 d. Contents. 
 
 I, Salutation from " the elder " to Gaius. 
 
 2-4, Good wishes for the health of Gaius, with congratula- 
 tions that he is walking " in the truth." 
 
 5-8, The hospitality of Gaius, especially to fugitive Chris- 
 tians who were driven from their homes by persecution. 
 
 9-12, The opposition of the ambitious Diotrephes and 
 his tyrannous conduct, both in refusing admission to new 
 comers and his expulsion of members from the, church. 
 
 13, 14, Concluding personal matters and salutation. 
 
 There is no theology in this epistle. The first and second 
 epistles have much common Johannine teaching. They dwell 
 with emphasis on the Incarnation, repudiating any who deny 
 that Jesus Christ has come in the flesh as "antichrist." It 
 would seem that the "heresy" was that of Cerinthus, who 
 asserted that Jesus was a man on whom the Christ, or 
 according to another version, the Holy Spirit, descended 
 at His baptism, deserting Him at the crucifixion. John 
 insists on the reality of the Incarnation. This brings us 
 eternal life, which is in God's Son, so that he who has the Son 
 has life, and he who has not the Son of God has not the life. 
 God is Ught and love. Our duty is to walk in the light and 
 in love, especially in that love of our brother without which 
 we cannot love God, and must remain in darkness. 
 
CHAPTER XI. 
 THE REVELATION 
 
 1. Apocalyptic Literature. 
 
 2. Authorship and Origin. 
 
 Histoiy of Criticism. Date. 
 
 3. Contents. 
 
 4. Structure and liiterpretatioii. 
 
 1. Apocalyptic Literature. 
 
 The Apocalypse stands apart from all other books of the 
 N.T., with none of which we can compare it. Yet it is 
 not unique in hterature. In external form and style it 
 is similar to some works that were much read and highly 
 valued at the time when it was written. There was a 
 number of Jewish Apocalypses, and these were followed by 
 several Christian Apocalypses. 
 
 The origination of this literature may be traced back to the book 
 of Daniel, the second portion of which may be regarded as the earliest 
 Apocalypse. Recent discoveries have brought to light the Book of Enoch, 
 the Book of the Secrets cf Enochs the Apocalypse of BarucA, etc. among 
 Jewish works. The fragment of the so-called Apocalypse of Peter which 
 we possess comes from a later time, and is a Christian writing of the same 
 class. 
 
 To point out this fact, however, is not to put our book 
 
 of the Revelation on a level with the contemporary works, 
 
 any more than to point out the epistolary form of St Paul's 
 
 writings is to place those writings on a level with Cicero's 
 
 or Pliny's letters. Some portions of Revelation at aU events 
 
 command our reverence as among the loftiest, most inspired 
 
 utterances of the N.T. ; and the book as a whole stands quite 
 
 apart from other works of its class in spiritual significance, 
 
 thus justifying its place in the Canon. 
 
 2. Authorship and Origin. 
 
 The Apocalypse has been generally assigned to the apostle 
 John, and regarded as a record of the visions that were given 
 
 460 
 
AUtHORSHIP AND ORIGIN 461 
 
 to him from heaven while he was an exile on the isle of 
 Patmos in the feign of Domitian. There is much in the 
 book itself that harmonises with this popular conception, 
 and in our own day till quite recently the apostolic authorship 
 was universally accepted among critics of all schools. But 
 new ideas about the book have now been brought up, and 
 old objections of patristic times revived. Therefore we need 
 to look into the question of its authorship afresh. 
 
 a. The Testimony of Antiquity. — This book is one of 
 the best attested of early times. It was known to Justin 
 Martyr and Irenseus as the work of the apostle, and it 
 was admitted by Papias. In the West it was unanimously 
 accepted as St. John's. It was slower in obtaining full recog- 
 nition in the East. 
 
 Justin Martyr writes: "There Was a certain man among us whose 
 name was John, one of the apostles of Christ, who prophesied by a 
 revelation," etc., and then he mentions the prediction of the millennium. 
 {Tryph. 8i.) Irenseus quotes our Revelation as from "John the disciple 
 of the Lord." {Adv. Haer., iv. 20.) This is especially important 
 because of Irenseus' intimate knowledge of John's disciple, Polycarp.^ 
 Two Cafipadocian bishops, Andrew and Arethas, probably of the fifth 
 century, tell us that Papias looked upon the book as inspired {BibirveudToi) 
 and credible (dfi6irt<rTos).* The Apocalypse was accepted by the churches 
 of Lyons and Vienne. (Eusebius, H.E., v. i, 2.) It seems to have been 
 known to Hefmas.* Eusebius cites Melito of Sardis as acknowledging 
 it (H.E,, iv. 26), and so does Jerome. {Di Vir. III. 24). But the 
 Apocalypse is not in the Peshitto. It was rejected by the Alogi,j who 
 also rejected the gospel of John, and on critical grounds denied to the 
 apostle by Dionysius of Alexandria. Eusebius seems to accept it as 
 the apostle's, and as among the undisputed books (buokoyoiixeva, H.E., 
 iii. 25) ; but subsequently he suggests that it may have been written 
 by John the presbyter. {H.E., iii. 39.) 
 
 b. Internal Evidence. — The book claims to be a revelation 
 which God gave to His servant John (i. i), and in addressing 
 the seven churches the writer twice calls himself John (i. 4, 9). 
 The name does not appear in the body of the work ; but we 
 meet with it once again in the last chapter (xxii. 8). John is 
 
 * See page 330. 
 
 ' See Chaeteris Canonicity, pp. 338, 339. 
 
 ' Vis. i. 3. 2 ; 4. I ; ii. 2, 7 ; ii. 4. i ; iii. 5. i ; iv. i, 10 ; 2. I ; 2. 4 5 
 Mand. x. 3. 2. 
 
 * See page 333, 
 
462 BIBLICAL INTRODUCTION 
 
 a common Jewish name, and there is nothing in the deScrip' 
 
 tion of the writer to fix upon Zebedee's son in particular. In 
 
 fact the indications are rather adverse to that conclusion. 
 
 St. John's habit in the gospel is not to give his name as it is 
 
 given here. , The author of Revelation never refers to Christ in 
 
 the way so intimate a friend as the beloved disciple would 
 
 naturally be expected to do, but remotely. Then he never 
 
 calls himself an apostle, and he mentions the " twelve 
 
 apostles " in a manner that does not include himself among 
 
 them (xxi. 14), while he represents the angel as reckoning 
 
 him among the "prophets" (xxii. 9), who, as we learn 
 
 especially from the DidacM, were an order in the Church 
 
 quite distinct from the apostles. Of course, in writing, such 
 
 a book as Revelation, John the apostle could be desigriated 
 
 a prophet, for this book would be regarded as prophecy. 
 
 Still, if we had not the evidence of ancient writers in favour of 
 
 the apostle, there would be no sufficient reason why we should 
 
 assign the book to Zebedee's son, and considerable reason 
 
 for relegating it to some other author. There is a growing 
 
 opinion in the present day that the apostle was not the 
 
 author. We know what a strong tendency there was in the 
 
 early church to ascribe works by unknown or obscure writers 
 
 to apostles and other well-known men.^ If we could allow 
 
 this to be the case with Revelation, the serious difficulty of 
 
 believing that the same man wrote the fourth gospel would 
 
 disappear, and we should have one great stumbling-block to 
 
 the Johannine authorship of that work removed. Still 
 
 the question cannot be considered definitely settled. If 
 
 the apostle did not write Revelation, the most likely man 
 
 to be its author is the presbyter John, a contemporary at 
 
 Ephesus.^ 
 
 While the fourth gospel is in fairly good Greek, Revelation is the most 
 Hebraistic book in the N.T. It even contains distinct barbarisms such as 
 the nominative case for the accusative (vii. 9), and the accusative for the 
 nominative (xx. 2). It is true there are certain resemblances between the 
 
 ^ It is a fact that every other known apocalypse was not written by the 
 person to whom it was assigned. 
 
 ' Known to us from Papias, Eusebius, H.E., iii. 39. 
 
AUTHORSHIP AND ORIGIN 463 
 
 two works. In Revelation Christ appears twenty-five times as the Lamb 
 {ipdov); in John He is the "Lamb of God" (but i,fi.v6s, another Greek 
 word, John i. 29). So he appears as the bridegroom (Revelation xix. 7 ; 
 xxi. 2— compare John iii. 29) ; and the Lo^as (Revelation xix. 13 ; compare 
 John i. i). _ But then, if John the elder is the author, it still comes from 
 the Johannine school at Ephesus. 
 
 c. History of Criticism. — The apostolic authorship of 
 Revelation was not only denied by Epiphanius's obscure 
 Alogi, of whom we know too little to talce them into account, 
 but also by Dionysius of Alexandria, who laid down the lines 
 that subsequent criticism has followed. The ground taken by 
 Dionysius was the marked difference of style between the 
 Apocalypse and the gospel of John. Accepting the gospel as 
 beyond question, the Alexandrian critic decided that Revela- 
 tion .must have been written by some other John. In support 
 of his ,view he mentioned the fact that there were two monu- 
 ments or tombs in Ephesus with the name of John.^ But 
 little heed was paid to Dionysius's argument until the begin- 
 ning of the present century, when it was turned round by 
 opponents of the Johannine authorship of the fourth gospel, 
 and used to discredit that work, Baur and his followers in 
 the Tiibingen school accepting Revelation as the work of the 
 apostle John. _ More recently doubts have been thrown on 
 its integrity, and through the analysis of its contents it has 
 been suggested that,they come from various sources, some of 
 these being Jewish, also that the various portions of it bea,r 
 evidence of having been Written at different times. There is 
 a growing agreement among scholars that it is a composite 
 work. Still that, does not preclude the apostolic authorship, 
 because the apostle may, have used the work of previous 
 apocalyptic writers ; neither does it exclude the idea that 
 the John of Revelation is presbyter John. 
 
 In the year 1882 Weizsacker wrote maintaining that Revelation is a 
 compilation containing some materials of a very early date ; and he was 
 followed . by Vblker, who divided the work into five parts, written at 
 different times. Then Vischer started the idea that Revelation was a 
 translation into Greek ' of a Jewish apocalypse written in Hebrew before 
 A.D. 70, the introduction, conclitsion, and slight interpolations in the text 
 being added by a Christian writer towards the end of the century. A 
 
 1 li.rrjiMTa. EuSEBlOS, H.E., vii. 24, 25. 
 2 H 
 
464 BIBLICAL INTRODUCTION 
 
 Dutch scholar, Weyland, worlced out independently a similar theory, but 
 looking for two Jewish sources, one of the time of Nero, the other of the 
 time 'of Titus, and assigning the'Christian revision to the age of Trajan. 
 Pfleiderer virtually holds to Wey land's position. Sabatiet and Schoen 
 modified these theories by regarding the Apocalypse as a Christian wforit 
 based on Jewish predecessors. The question is elaborat-ely discussed by 
 Spitta, who comes to the conclusion that the Christian kernel of Revela- 
 tion was written by John Mark about A.D. 60, and that Subsequently a 
 Christian editor united this work with two Jewish apocalypses— one «s 
 early as Pqmpey (63 B.C.), the other of the time of Caligula. In the year 
 1895 Gunkel' introduced a new element into the discussion by tracing back 
 parts of Revelation to the " Tiamat myt;h" in the Babylonian epic of the 
 creation. Chapter xii. in particular is assigned to this Babylonian source, 
 adopted into Jewish traditions before it passed into apocalyptic literature. 
 In the new edition of Meyer's Commentary, Bousset, defends the unity of 
 the book, but holds that it was based on previous Jewish writings, agree- 
 ing however with Gunkel that chapter xii. could not have had a Jewish 
 origin. Harnack considers that the work is composite. The earlier 
 stratum he holds to have been written under Nero or his successor, on 
 the evidence of Revelation xvii. 9-1 1, and the final editing done in the 
 reign of Domitian.^ Among English and American writers Professor 
 Milligan defended the unity and Christian origin of the book ; and Professor 
 Briggs regards it as a Christian work, but composite in nature as follows : 
 Edition I has the Seals, Trumpets and Bowls. Edition 2 adds the Epistles. 
 Edition 3 brings in thp Beasts and the Dragon. A redactor follows with 
 i. 1-3; xxii. 18-20, and many notes inserted throughout the work. 
 McGiffert and Bacon hold that the author made large use oif earlier 
 materials.^ 
 
 d. Date and Place of Origin. — If we are to accept the theory 
 of a composite nature for Revelation, the question of date .or 
 dates becomes rather compUcated. But then this theory will ex- 
 plain some of the difficult problems about the subject. Leaving 
 out of reckoning the age of the traditional elements which 
 may have come down in Jewish circles from the time of the 
 Babylonian captivity, we have still indications of several dates. 
 Chapter xiii. i-io seerhs to point to the time of Caligula, in 
 that emperor's attempt to compel the Jews to worship his 
 image. Possibly also all the Apocalypse of the beasts should 
 be assigned to that time. Then xvii. 9-1 1 seems to set the 
 Apocalypse of the Vials in the reign of Nero or Galba, accord- 
 ing as we count the five emperors from Julius Cffisar or 
 Augustus. Next, xi. 8 assumes that Jerusalem is still stand- 
 ing. That must be before a.d. 70. But Professor Ramsay 
 
 1 Chronologic, vol. i., pp. 245, 246, 679. 
 
 ' Apos. Age, pp. 633 ff. For an admirable survey of the recent criticism 
 Bee American Jourtfalof Theology, October, 1898, 
 
CONTENTS 465 
 
 argues that the hostility to Rome and the picture ofithe 
 church under persecution point to a still later period.^ 
 This would lead us on to the period assigned by Iren^us, 
 the reign of Domitian, about a.d. 90, or a little later for the 
 most recent portions of the book. There ia no reason to 
 doubt that the vision of chapter i., etc., was in Patmos, as 
 the author tells us (i. 9). The full construction of the book, 
 weaving in the earlier with the later materials, may be set 
 down to Ephesus, where, according to every ancient witness, 
 both Johns were living. 
 
 3. Contents. 
 
 a. Title and description,!. 1-3, 
 
 b. The Seven Churches, i. 4-iii. 22. 
 
 i. 4-20, The vision of the Son of man. 
 ii., iii., The letters to the seven churches. 
 
 c. The Apocalypse of the Seals, iv. i-viii. i. 
 
 iv., v., The vision of the Divine glory and of the Lamb that 
 was slain. 
 
 vi. i-viii. I, The opening of the seven seals. The sealing 
 of the 144,000. The innumerable multitude. 
 
 d. The Apocalypse of the Trumpets, viii-. 2-xi. 19. 
 
 viii. 2-5, The vision of the seven angels, and the incense of 
 the prayers of the saints. 
 
 6-ix. 21, The sounding of the trumpets and the woes that 
 follow. 
 
 X., The angel with the Httte book, which the seer is to eat. 
 
 xi. 1-14, The measuring of the temple. The two witnesses. 
 Great woes for Jerusalem. 
 
 14-19, The seventh trumpet. 
 
 e. The Apocalypse of the Woman and the Dragon, xii. (Said 
 to ,he founded on a Babylonish myth.) 
 
 f. The Apocalypse of the Beasts, xiii. 
 
 g. The /.amb with the 144,000 redeemed. God's judgment 
 and mercy, xiv. 
 
 ' Rev. vi. 9, II ; vii. 14 ; xii. 11 ; xiii. 15 ; xvi. 6 ; xvii. 6 ; xviii. 24 ; 
 jcx. 4, etc. See The Church in the Roman Bnvpire, pp. 295-302. 
 
466 BIBLICAL INTRODUCTION 
 
 h. The Apocalypse of the Vials, xv.-xvi. 
 
 XV. i-4, The victors' song of triumph. 
 
 5-xvi. 2 r, The outpouring of the seven vials. 
 
 i. The Fait of Babylon, xvii.-xx. (Prophecy referring to 
 Rome and the emperors.) 
 
 xvii., The beast with the seven heads and ten horns. 
 
 xviii., The overthrow of Babylon. 
 
 xix., The war of the Word of God with the Beast. 
 
 XX., Closing scenes : (i) Millennial peace; (2) outbreak of 
 Satan ; (3) universal judgment. 
 
 j. The final glory, xxi, xxii. 
 
 xxi.-xxii. 7, The heavenly city. 
 
 xxii. 8-2 r, Admonitions and encouragements. 
 
 4. The Structure and Interpretation of the Book. 
 
 a. Its Structure. — The composite nature of Revelation 
 already referred to seems to be indicated at the very com- 
 mencement. It has three introductions : (i) i. 1-3 is an 
 introduction to the whole book ; (2) i. 4-8 is an introduction 
 to the letters to the seven churches ; (3) i; 9 also indicates a 
 fresh beginning. Then the letters to the seven churches are 
 wholly different from the succeeding visions. There is much 
 in this part of the book that harmonises with the last two 
 chapters, where John's name occurs again. These portions 
 contain some of the most valuable inspired utterances of the 
 N..T. It is when we come to deal with the central portions of 
 the book that our difificulties begin. Here also we come upon 
 hymns of the church, references to the Lamb, allusions to 
 Christian martyrdom, and other signs that, wherever the author 
 obtained his materials, he aimed at converting the whole into 
 one work, and that a Christian Apocalypse. 
 
 b. Interpretation. — Of course the question of the origin 
 and structure of the book must govern our views of its 
 interpretation. If pre-existing Jewish • traditional lore and 
 earher writings were used by the author as materials, we are 
 face to face with a very difficult question when we ask how 
 far he assimilated those materials, and gave them his own 
 
INTERPRETATION OF THE BOOK /i^7 
 
 interpretation. It seems almost hopeless to go farther back 
 and ask what were the original meaning^ of the pre-existing 
 materials. But in regard to both questions of interpretation 
 we are helped by the analogy Of, the Jewish Apocalypses 
 that have been preserved to our own dky, which would 
 lead us to reject the notion that every item has a distinct 
 mystical or symbolical meaning. Imagination runs riot with 
 the elaborate fancies of this marvellous book, although 
 perhaps those fancies were never intended to be interpreted 
 prosaically into specific significations. Great general ideas 
 run through the succession of visions — seals, trumpets, 
 vials; ideas that are in harmony with apocalyptic literature 
 generally, and the same recur in the more evidently 
 Christian portions of the book. It was always in some 
 time of trouble that a Jewish Apocalypse appeared, and then 
 it aimed at encouraging the sufferers with faith in God's 
 final judgment of their foes and deliverance of His people. 
 Similar ideas run through our N.T. Apocalypse. There is 
 present persecution; a great conflict is impending; God will 
 interfere through His angels ; Christ will come to smite 
 and judge the evil powers and save His people. We 
 need not take the succession of visions of judgment in 
 chronological sequence, as indicative of a historical series 
 of events. The same idea is repeated in many forms. 
 Two definite historical applications appear in the course 
 of ,the book. The judgment of Jerusalem (xi.), written 
 when the Jews were the chief enemies of the Christians; 
 and the judgment of Rome (xvii.-xix.), written later when 
 Rome was their antagonist. But for the rest we have the 
 ideas of conflict, judgment, and deliverance set forth again 
 and again in a rich variety of imagery to impress upon us 
 their force and truth. 
 
 If this be at all a right conception of the nature of the book, it will be 
 seen that the various popular forms of exposition are out of keeping with 
 its aim and meaning. These are classified as follows : — (i) The Prseterist, 
 which sees all the references to events in the past, contemporary or almost 
 contemporary with the writing. This ignores the general character of 
 apocalyptic literature, which all points to a final judgment, yet it is 
 
468 BIBLICAL INTRODUCTION 
 
 right with regard to niany parts df the Apocalypse, (z) The Historicsil, 
 which takes the book as a sort of chart of the centuries of history 
 down to our time and beyond. (3) The Futurist, which holds that all 
 is raysterikJus, becaJOse none is yet JilfiUed. (4) The Ideal, which denies 
 any historical references. We have seen that there are definite historical' 
 allusions in several parts. When these occur, they all refer to con- 
 temporary history, and give no justification for the second school of 
 interpretation. The third school is so far correct, that a final judgment 
 is contemplated. Yet the same process recurs again and again earlier — 
 with Jerusalem, with Rome, with any city or people similarly situated, on 
 to, the end of time, when at last Christ will triumph, and a pure and happy 
 state of society prevail among men, 
 
APPENDIX A 
 
 EARLY WITNESSES TO NEW TESTAMENT 
 WRITINGS 
 
 Clement of Eome. A Bishop of Rome. 
 
 Epistle to Corinthians . . . c. A.D. 95. 
 
 [Barnabas.] Epistle, wrongly attributed to 
 
 Barnabas . . ... between A.D. 96 and 
 
 120. 
 DidacL.6. "The Teaching of the Twelve 
 
 Apostles," an ancient church manual c. A.D. 100. 
 Hennas. The Shephird, an aMegorical 
 
 work . . . . . c. A.D. 130-160. 
 
 Ignatius. Bishop of Antioch and Martyr. 
 
 7 epistles . . . . . c. A.D. 115. 
 
 Marcion. From Pontus, formed his own 
 
 Canon . . ... a.d. 144. 
 
 Polycarp. Bishop of Smyrna and Martyr. 
 
 Epistle to Philippians . . . ob. A.D. 155. 
 
 Epistle to Diognettis. Anonymous . . middle of 2nd cent. 
 
 Papias. Bishop of Hierapolis. Exposition 
 of the Oracles of the Lord. Only 
 • fragments, preserved by Eusebius first half of 2nd cent. 
 
 Justin Mart3n:. Apologist, i and 2 Apolo- 
 gies and Dialogue with Trypho . c. A.D. 155. 
 
 Tatian. Assyrian writer and disciple of 
 Justin Martyr. Diatessaron, a har- 
 mony of the gospels . . . A.D. 160-170. 
 
 Theophilus. Oi Antioch, Ad Autolicum . c. a.I). iSo. 
 Irenasus. At Lyons and Vienne. Against 
 
 Heresies , . ... A.D. iSa 
 
 469 
 
470 BIBLICAL INTRODUCTION 
 
 Hippoljrtus. At Rome. Refutation of all 
 
 Heresies . . ... end of 2nd cent. 
 
 Clement of Alexandria. Head of the 
 Catechetical school. Pcedagogus, 
 Miscellanies, etc. . ... end of 2nd cent. 
 
 Origen, Clement's successor at Alexandria^ 
 
 a learned and voluminous writer . first half of 3rd cent 
 
 Dionysius. Bisliop of Alexandria and ' . .■' 
 
 teacher after Origen 1 , , , . A.D. 248. 
 
 Tertullian. North Africa. Many writings end of 2nd and be- 
 ginning of 3rd, cent 
 
 Eusebius. Bishop of Csesarea in the reign 
 of Constantine. Ecclesiastical His- 
 tory, etc. . . . . . early 4th cent 
 
 Muratorian Fragment. A fragment of a 
 Canon of the N.T. named after its 
 discoverer Muratori . . . c. A.D. 17a 
 
 Peshitto. The Syriac. popular version of 
 
 the N.T.J probably preceded in part 
 
 by other versions,, .. . . . 2nd cent to 4th 
 
 cent. 
 Old Latin. A North African yersion,", older 
 
 than Tertullian . ... middle 2nd cent 
 
 Vulgate. Latin version, revised by Jerome early 5th cent. 
 
APPENDIX B 
 
 HAMMURABI (AMRAPHEL) 
 
 ThEi most important discoveries of inscriptions of late years,.' as 
 far' as the Old Testament is concerned,, are those connected -with 
 the Babylonian King; Hammurabi, c. B.C. 2100, especially the laws 
 engraved oil the broken' portions of a block of black diorite, 
 oiice forming a monument about eight feet high. This important 
 discovery was made in January, 1902. Hammurabi is very 
 commonly, though by no means universally, identified with the 
 Amraphel of Genesis xiv. The monument just mentioned con- 
 tains aijout 3,600 lines of inscription in forty-four columns, including, 
 a legal code of nearly 300 ordinances. ' There are parallels with 
 the Pentateuch which, have suggested that some of its authors 
 were acquainted with Hammurabi's laws, but the. similarities 
 hardly warrant such a conclusion. This and other recent dis- 
 coveries confirm the view already held, that Babylon in this era 
 had attained a high level of civilisation and exercised a dominant 
 influence in Western Asia. They do not confirm the historicity • 
 of Genesis xiv., except to the extent stated on pp. 61, 62. 
 
 47» 
 
APPEMJIX C 
 
 WISDOM LITERATURE, 
 
 Job, Proverbs, and Ecclesiastes, together with the Apocryphal 
 EcdesiaUieus and Wisdom of Solomon, are often spoken of as the 
 "Wisdom Literature," from their references to "Wisdom," or 
 Khechmah. They are the nearest approach in the Old Testament 
 to Philosophy and the speculative discussion of Theology,, though 
 they also include other material ; e.g., the narratives in Job. On 
 the other hand, there are sections of other O.T. books which 
 might be included in, the Wisdom Literature, notably Psalm Ixxiii, 
 and the Psalms included in § IV,, p. 149. Similar material is 
 found in some of the Rabbinical writings, especially in the most 
 ancient, the Pirqe Aboth,, or Sayings of the Fathers, portions of 
 which may be pre-Christian. 
 
 On the meagre and ambiguous evidence of a few references 
 to " the Wise " in the O.T. a theory has been built up of a class of 
 scholars who studied and wrote about " Wisdom " even before the 
 exile ; but it may be doubted whether this species of literature was 
 not a post-exilic development in Israel, succeeding to and not 
 contemporaneous with Prophecy, 
 
 472 
 
APPENDIX D 
 
 THE RECENT CRITICISM OF THE BOOK OF 
 JEREMIAH 
 
 This criticism consists largely of the independent discussion 
 of numerous sections, some very short. Some references have 
 been made to it in the account of the contents, pp. 200 ff. ; but 
 these numerous discussions, involving endless details, cannot be 
 summed up in any concise elementary statement. It is generally 
 admitted {a) that much of the book comes directly from Jeremiah, 
 or indirectly chiefly through Baruch ; and that much that is told 
 of the prophet is also from Baruch, and is substantially historical ; 
 and {b) that there are additions which are not directly or indirectly 
 from Jeremiah or Baruch. Scholars, however, differ widely as to 
 the distribution of material between {a) and {b). Apart from 
 shorter passages, the following are very commonly assigned to 
 {b — Non-Jeremianic sections) : — x. 1-16, xvii. 19-27, xxxiii. 17-26, 
 xxxix. 1-13, l.-lii. According to some critics, xlvi.-xlix., or large 
 portions of them, would also belong to ib). 
 
 Cornill, in his Hebrew Text of Jeremiah in Dr. Paul Hampt's 
 Sacred Books of the Old Testament, distributes the book thus : — 
 
 id)* Contents of the Roll, mentioned in xxxvi. 32. 
 
 i.-viii. ; ix. 1-22; x. 17-24; xi. ; xii. 1-6; xviii. ; xxv. 1-29; 
 xlvi. 1-12 ; xlvii. f. ; xlix. 1-33. 
 
 {fi)* Other utterances of feremiah. 
 
 ix. 23-25; xii. 7-17; xiii.-xvii.; xx.-xxiv.; xxix.-xxxii.; xxxiii. 1-13; 
 XXXV. ; xlvi. 13-20 ; xlvii. ; xlviii. ; xlix. 34-39. 
 
 * N.B. — From the passages in (a) and (b) must be excepted many 
 interpolations, the more important of which are enumerated below in [c), 
 
 (c) Sections not by Jeremiah. 
 
 X. 1-16; XV. 11-14; xvii. 19-27 ; xix. ; xx. 1-6; xxv. 4-6, 12-14, 
 30-38; xxvi.-xxviii. ; xxix. 2, 16-31; xxx. 10, 11, 22-24; xxxi. 10-14, 
 35-37; xxxii. 1-5, 17-23; xxxiii. 2, 3, 11-26; xxxiv. ; xxxvi.-xlv. ; 
 xlviii. 21-34, 45-47 J L-lii- 
 
 473 
 
LIST OF BOOKS 
 
 TO WHICH THE STUDENT IS REFERRED 
 > FOR FURTHER INFORMATION 
 
 Considerations of space necessitate the exclusion of many 
 excellent works ; there is only room for a representative 
 selection. Untranslated^ foreign works are only mentioned 
 where.no satisfactory bqok of precisely the, same character 
 is accessible in English. 
 
 A. General. 
 
 I. Bibliography. — Introduction to Theology and its Literature, 
 Alfred Cave, D.d. (T. and T. Clajrk.) 
 
 3. Bible Dictionaries. — A Dictipnary of the Bible, edited by James 
 
 Hastings, D.D. (T. and ,T. . Clark.) 
 
 Encyclopasdia Biblica, edited by T. K. Cheyne, d.d. (A. and C, 
 Black.) 
 
 2^ Concise Handbooks.— Cs.xi^x\&g^ Companion to the Bible. 
 (Camb. Univ. Press.) 
 
 How to Read the Bible, by W, F. Adeney. (James Clarke.) 
 
 Primer of the Bible, W. H. Bennett. (Methuen.) 
 
 A Guide to Biblical Study, by A. S, Peake. (Hodder and Stoughton.) 
 
 4. Geography of Palesline.—Simd and Palestine, by A. P. Stanley. 
 
 Historical Geography' of the Holy Land, by Prof. G. A. Smith. 
 (Hodder and Stoughton.) 
 
 Names and Places in O. and N.T., by G. Armstrong. (Pal. Expl. 
 Fund.) 
 
 Publications and Maps of Pal. Expl. Fund. 
 
 Geographic des Alten Palastina, by D. F. Buhl. (J. C. B. Mohr, 
 Leipzig.) 
 
 474 
 
LIST OF BOOKS ^ 475 
 
 5. Arc^aology.—Pi.nHqmties of Israel, by H. Ewald. (Longmans.) 
 
 Lehrbuch der Hebraischen Archaologie, by W. Nowack. (J. C. 
 B. Mphr, Leipzig.) 
 
 Hebraische Archaologie, by J. Benzinger. (J. C, B. Mohr.) 
 
 Manners and Customs of the Modern Egyptians, by E. W. Lane. 
 (Murray, 1871.) 
 
 Arabian Nights. 
 
 The Land and the Book, by W. M. Thomson. 
 
 Travels in Arabia Deserta, by C. M. Doughty. 
 
 B. Old Testament. 
 
 Books written more or less on the lines of traditional criticism are 
 enclosed in brackets ( ) ; the critical position of the rest is substantially 
 that of the O.T. section of this book, or else the books or subjects dealt 
 with do not raise serious critical questions, or are treated without special 
 reference to such questions. 
 
 1. Canon.— The Canon of the O.T., by Prof. E. H. Ryle. 
 
 (Macmillan.) 
 
 2. Text.—K Short History of the Hebrew Text of the O.T., by 
 
 T. H. Weir. (Williams and Norgate.) 
 
 Introduction to the Hebrew Bible, by C. D. Ginsburg, Trinitarian 
 Bible Soc. 
 
 3. History. — History of Israel, by H. Ewald, 5 vols., tr. 
 
 (Longmans.)^ 
 Lectures on the Hist, of the Jewish Ch., by A. P. Stanley, 
 
 3 vols. (Murray.)' 
 History of the Hebrews, by R. Kittel (applying Dillmann's critical 
 
 views), tr. (Williams and Norgate.) 
 History of the People of Israel, by Prof. C. H. Cornill, tr. 
 
 (Kegan Paul.) 
 Histoire du Peuple d'Israel, by C. Piepenbring. (Williams and 
 
 Norgate.) 
 History of Israel, by J. Wellhausen, tr. (A. and C. Black.) 
 Old Testament History, by H. P. Smith. (T. and T. Clark.) 
 ' Representing the transition from traditional to modern criticism. 
 
476 BIBLICAL INTRODUCTION 
 
 Old Testament History, by G. W. Wade. (Methuen.) 
 
 History of the Hebrews, by R. L. Ottley. (Camb. Univ.) 
 
 The Biblical History of the Hebrews, by Foakes-Jackson, F. J. 
 (Heffer.) 
 
 4. Introduction. — Introduction to the Lit. of the O.T., by Prof. 
 
 S. R. Driver. (T. and T. Clark.) 
 
 Outline of the Hist, of the Lit. of the O.T., by Prof. E. Kautzsch, 
 tr. (WiUiams and Norgate.) 
 
 O.T. in the Jewish Ch., by W. Robertson Smith. (A. and C. 
 Black.) 
 
 5. Theology.— T^a^Qlog-j of the O.T., by A. B. Davidson. (T. and 
 
 T. Clark.) 
 
 O.T. Theology, by H. Schultz, tr. (T. and T. Clark.) 
 
 Theology of O.T., by C. Piepenbring, tr. (New York.) 
 
 Theology of O.T., by W. H. Bennett. (Hodder and Stoughton.) 
 
 Lehrbuch der Alt-Testamentlichen ReHgionsgeschichte, by R. 
 Smend. (J. C. B. Mohr, Freiburg i. B.) 
 
 6. Assyrian and Egyptian Inscriptions, etc. — History, Prophecy, 
 
 and the Monuments, by J. P. McCurdy, 3 vols. 
 
 (Macmillan.) 
 The Cuneiform Inscriptions and the O.T., by E. Schrader, tr, 
 
 (Williams and Norgate.) 
 (The Higher Criticism and the Monuments, by A. H. Sayce, 
 
 S.P.C.K.)! 
 Life in Ancient Egypt, by A. Erman, tr. (Macmillan.) 
 Authority and Archaeology, by S. R. Driver, etc. (Murray.) 
 Light from the East, by C. J. Ball. (Eyre and Spottiswoode.) 
 Explorations in Bible Lands during the Nineteenth Century, by 
 
 H. V. Hilprecht. (T. and T. Clark.) 
 The Seven Tablets of Creation, by L. W. King. (Luzac.) 
 The Ancient East (Series of Booklets). (Nutt.) 
 The Laws of Moses and the Code of Hammurabi, by S. A. Cook. 
 
 (Black.) 
 
 ■' But accepts most of the principles and many of the results of modern 
 criticism. 
 
LIST OF BOOKS 477 
 
 * 
 
 The Oldest Code of Laws (Hammurabi), by C. H. W. Johns. 
 (T. and T. Clark.) 
 
 7. Commentaries, etc. — Abbreviations, etc. : (a) Works on introduction. 
 (b) Complete commentaries for advanced students, (c) Concise com- 
 mentaries for English readers, etc. (d) Expository vforks, which do 
 not include a complete detailed commentary. (e) Works in which 
 the text is arranged so as to show the analysis into earlier documents, 
 including some notes, but not a complete commentary. 
 
 C.B., Century Bible (T. C. and E. C. Jack) ; C.B.S., Cambridge Bible 
 for Schools and Colleges (Camb. Univ. Press) ; E.B., Expositor's Bible 
 (Hodder and Stoughton) ; H.B.C., Handbooks for Bible Classes (T. and 
 T. Clark); I.C., International Critical Commentary (T. and T. Clark) ; 
 P.B., Polychrome Bible (James Clarke and Co.). 
 
 H.B., Kurzgefasstes exegetisches Handbuch zum Alten Testament 
 (S. Hirzel, Leipsic) ; H.C, Kurzer Hand-Commentar zum Alten Testa- 
 ment (J. C. B. Mohr, Freiburg i. B. ) ; U.K., Hand-Kommentar zum 
 A.T. (Vandenhoeck and Ruprecht, Gdttingen.). 
 
 Pentateuch (or Hexateuch = Pent. + Josh.).i 
 
 (a) The Hexateuch, by Kuenen, tr. (Macmillan.) 
 
 The Higher Criticism of the Hexateuch, by C. A. Briggs. (New 
 
 York.) 
 Einleitung in den Hexateuch, by H. Holzinger. (J. C. B. Mohr, 
 
 Freiburg i. B.) 
 Hebraica, Papers in, 1888, v.-viii., by W. R. Harper arid (W. 
 
 H. Green). 
 (The Inspiration of the O.T., by Dr. A. Cave, Congregational 
 
 Union.) 
 (The Higher Criticism of the Pentateuch, by W. H. Green.) 
 
 (Dickinson.) 
 The Hexateuch, by J. E. Carpenter and G. Harford-Battersby. 
 
 (Longmans.) 
 
 Ce) Documents of the Hexateuch, by W. E. Addis, 2 vols. (Nutt.) 
 Genesis? — (b) Delitzsch, tr. (T. and T. Clark) ; Dillmann, tr. 
 XT. and T. Clark) ; Gunkel {H.K). (c) G. W. Wade ; 
 S. R. Driver (Methuen) ; W. H. Bennett \c.B.). (d) Marcus 
 Dods {E.B). (e) The Genesis of Genesis, by B. W. Bacon, 
 Hartford, U.S.A. The Composition of the Book of Genesis, 
 by E. L Fripp. (Nutt.) 
 
 ' Cf. several books. ' Cf. Pentateuch. 
 
478 BIBLICAL INTRODUCTION 
 
 Exodus?- — (b) Exodus and Leviticus, by C. V. Ryssel {H.B^\ 
 B. Baentsch {H.K). (c) W. H. Bennett, (C.5.). ' (e) The 
 Triple Tradition of the Exodus, by B. W. Bacon, Hartford, 
 U.S.A., all Pent, except Genesis. ' •■ 
 
 , Leviticus. ''■^■(Wj See Exodus; E. Baentsch {H.K.); Bertholet 
 {H.C.). (e) See Exodus ; also S. R. Driver and H. A. 
 White {P.B.). 
 
 Numbers} — (b^ Numeri, Deuteronomium und Josua, by A. 
 Dillmann {H.B.) ; G. B. Gray (/.C.) ; B. Baentsch {H.K.). 
 (e) See Exodus. 
 
 ■ Deuteronomy?— ()i) Driver {I.C); Bertholet (i^.C.) ; Steuernagel 
 {H.K.). (d) A. Harper {E.B.). (e) See Exodus. 
 
 Joshua? — (b) See Numbers; Steuernagel {H.K.); Holzinger 
 {H.C). (c) J.S. Black {Smaller C.B.S.). (e) , W. H. 
 Bennett {P.B.). 
 
 Judges.— <^) G. F. Moore {I.C?) ; Nowack {H.K) ; Budde {H.C). 
 (c) J. S. Black {Smaller C.B.S.) ; G. W. Thatcher (C.5.). 
 (e) G. F. Moore {P.B.). 
 
 Ruth.-^(h) A. Bertholet, in Die Fiinf Megillot (/f.C); Nowack 
 {H.K.). (c) R. Sinker, in Elhcott's O.T. Comin. for Eng. 
 Readers. (Cassell.) " : ' 
 
 Samuel. — Notes on the Hebrew Text of the Books of Samuel, by 
 Driver. (Clarendon Press.) (b) H. P. Smith (/.C.) ; Budde 
 {H.C.). (c) A. R. S. Kennedy {C.B.) ; A, F. Kirkpatrick 
 (C.5.5.), 2 vols. :^ . . - 
 
 Kings.— {h) J. Benzinger {H.C.) ; C. F. Burney (Notes on the 
 Hebrew Text); Kittel (i^.A^.). (c) J. Skinner (C.5.). (d) F. 
 W. Farrar {E.B.). 
 
 ■Chronicles.— {h) Kittel {ff.K.) ; Benzinger {H.C.). (c) W. ,E. 
 Barnes {C.B.S.). (d) W. H. Bennett {E.B.). 
 
 Ezra, Nehemiah, cind Esther.— {h) C. V. Ryssel {H.B.) ; Siegfried 
 {H.K.); Bertholet, Ez. and Neh. {H.C.). (c) H. E. Ryle, 
 Ez. and Neh. {C.B.S.). (d) W. F. Adeney {E.B.). 
 
 job.—{s.) T. K. Cheyne, Job and Solomon ; W. T. Davison, 
 Wisdom Literature of the O.T. (C. H. Kelly), (b) Duhm 
 {II.C.) ; S. Cox (Kegan Paul); Budde (^.^.). (c) A. B. 
 Davidson {C.B.S.) ; Peake {C.B.); E. C. S. Gibson 
 (Methuen). (d) R. A. Watson {E.B.). 
 
 1 Cf. Pentateuch. " Ibid. 
 
LIST OF BOOKS ,479 
 
 Proverbs.— (h) C. H. Toy (/.C.) ; Wildeboer {H.C.) ; Frankenberg 
 {ff.K.). (c) Archd. Perowne {C.B.S.), (d) R. F. Horton 
 (E.B.). 
 
 Psalms.-^a) T. K. Cheyne, Origin of the Psalter (Kegan Paul) ; 
 W. T. Davison, Praises of Israel (C. H. Kelly), (b) 
 Cheyne (Kegan Paul) ; C. A. Briggs (I.C). ; Duhm {/f.C). ; 
 Baethgen {H.K). (c) Davison and Witton Davies {C.B). ; 
 A. F. Kirkpatrick, 3 vols. {C.B.S.); Wellhausen {P.B.). 
 (d) A. Maclaren {E.B.), 3 vols. 
 
 Ecdesiasies.^a) Cheyn and Davison, as on Job. (b) G. Wilde- 
 boer, in Die Funf Megillot, see Ruth; T. Tyler (Nutt) ; 
 Siegfried {H.K.). ; C. A. Barton (I.C.)'. (c) E. H. Plumptre 
 (C.B.S.). (d) S. Cox {E.B.); Koheleth, by T. C. Fin- 
 layson. 
 
 Canticles or Song of Songs. — (b) C. D. Ginsburg (Longmans) ; 
 Budde, in the Fiinf Megillot, see Ruth ; Siegfried {H.K.). 
 
 (d) W. F. Adeney, Cant, and Lam. {E.B.). 
 
 The Prophets.^ 
 
 (a) The Prophets of Israel — Amos, Hosea, I. Isaiah, Micah— by 
 W. R. Smith. (A. and C. Black.) 
 
 The Books of the Prophets, by G. G. Findlay, vol. i. — Obadiah, 
 Joel, Isaiah xv., xvi., Amos, Zechariah ix.-xiv., Micah. 
 (C. H. Kelly.) 
 
 Thd Theology of the Prophets, by A. Duff — Amos, Hosea, Isaiah, 
 Micah. (A. and C. Black.) 
 
 Isaiah.'^ — (a) Introduption to the Book of Isaiah, by Cheyne 
 (A. and C. Black) ; Isaiah, etc., by Driver (Nisbet) ; 
 (Isaiah One and His Book One, by G. C. M. Douglas), 
 (Nisbet). (b) Cheyne, 2 vols. (Kegan Paul) ; Delitzsch, 
 2 vols., tr. (T. and T. Clark) ; Duhm {U.K.) ; Marti {H.C). 
 (c) J. Skinner, 2 vols. {C.B.S.); Whitehouse {C.B.); 
 W. E. Barnes (Methuen). (d) G. A. Smith, 2 vols. {E.B.). 
 
 (e) Cheyne {P.B.). 
 
 Prophecies of Isaiah — pamphlet on Assyriology, etc. — by M. L. 
 
 Kellner, Camb., U.S.A. 
 Jeremiah.— {fi) Jeremiah, etc., by Cheyne. (Nisbet.) (b) Cheyne, 
 
 Exposition in Pulpit Comm. ; Giesebrecht (^.A'.) ; Duhm 
 
 (A^.C). (c) A. W. Streane (C.B.S.). (d) i.-xx., C. J. BaU 
 
 {E.B.); xxi.-lii., W. H.. Bennett (E.B.). 
 
 * C/. the several books. ' See 1 he PtopkiUi. 
 
 2 1 
 
48o BIBLICAL INTRODUCTION 
 
 Lamentations. — (b) Cheyne, at end of Jeremiah ; Budde, in the 
 Funf Megillot, see Ruth, (c) Streane, at end of Jeremiah, 
 (d) W. F. Adeney, see Canticles. 
 Ezekiel.—{h) A. Bertholet {//.C.) ; Kraetzschmar (ff-IC.). (c) 
 A. B. Davidson (C.B.S.) ; Toy (P.-S.). (d) J.' Skinner 
 (,E.B.). 
 Daniel. — (a) (The Boole of Daniel from the Christian Standpoint, 
 by John Kennedy. Eyre and Spottiswpode.) '(b):A. A. 
 Bevan (Camb. Univ. Press); (J. E. H. Thomson, etc., 
 Pulpit Comm.), (Kegan Paul) ; J. D, Prince (Williams and 
 Norgate); Behrmann (i^./sf.) ; Marti (^H.C). (c).S. R. 
 ; ,, ,. ,, Driver (C.5.5.). ~ (d) F. W. Farrar {E.B.). , ;., , 
 The Minor Prophet^^-^^) ^pwack {U.K.) ; Pusey ; Wellhausen 
 (Skizzen lind Vorarbeiten, Part V., Reimer, , Berlin, (c) 
 Horton and Driver ,(C.5.). (d) G. A. Smith, 2 vols. {E.B.). 
 ffosea.^—{c) Cheyne {C.B.S.}. Hosea and Atnos.^yf. R Harper 
 
 ■ {I.e.). ■ .. ; 
 
 Joel and Amos.^ — (b) Amos, H. G. Mitchell (Boston), (c) Driver 
 
 {C.B.S.). 
 Obadiah} and Jonah.^—{c) T. T. Perowne {C.B.S.). 
 Micah>—{c) Cheyne {C.B.S.). 
 
 Nahum, Habakkuk, and Zephaniah? — (c) A. B. Davidson {C.B.S.). 
 Haggai, Zechariah, and Malachi.^ — (c) T. T. Perowne (C.^.i".). 
 Zechariak.—{h) (C. H. H. Wright). (Hodder and Stoughton.) 
 
 8. Apocrypha, Pseudeiigrapha, etc. 
 
 The Apocryphal Books, by H. T. Andrews. (T. C. and 
 E. C. Jack.) 
 
 Apocrypha, in "Speaker's Comm.,'' by H. Wace, etc., 2 vols. 
 
 (Murray.) 
 Pseudepigrapha, by W. J. Deane. (Ti and T. Clark.) 
 Books which influenced our Eord, etc., by J. E. H. Thomson, 
 
 (T. and T. Clark.) 
 The Age of the Maccabees, by A. W. Streane. (Eyre and 
 
 Spottiswoode.) 
 Book of Wisdom, by W. J. Deane. (Oxford.) 
 Book of Enoch, by R. H. Charles. (Oxford.) 
 Book of the Secrets of Enoch, by W. R. MorfiU and R. H. 
 
 Charles. (Oxford.) 
 
 ^ See The Prophets and The Minor Prophets. 
 " See The Minor Prophets. 
 
LIST OF BOOKS . 481 
 
 Apocalypse of Baruch, R. H. Charles. 
 
 First Maccabees, W. Fairweather and J. S. Black (C.B.S.). 
 
 Psalms of Solomon, by H. E. RyJe and M. R. James. (Camb, 
 
 Univ. Press.) 
 Testaments of the Twelve Patriarchs, by R. Sinker. 
 Book of Jubilees, by R. H. Charles. (Black.) 
 
 C. New Testament. 
 
 1. CanoM.—Ca.nomcity, by Prof. A. H. Charteris. (Blackwood.) 
 History of the Canon, by Bishop Westcott. (Macmillan.) 
 History of the Canon, by Prof E. Reuss. (Eng. trans. Gemmell,. 
 
 Edinburgh.) 
 New Testament in the Christian Church, by Moore. (Macmillan.) 
 Geschichte des Neutestamentlichen Kanons, by Th. Zahn. 
 
 (Erlangen and Leipzig.) 
 Die Chronologic der Altchristlichen Litteratur, by Adolf Harnack. 
 
 (Leipzig.) 
 
 2. Te^i: — Novum Testamentum Graece, with full critical apparatus, 
 
 by Tischendorf, 8th edit. (Leipzig.) 
 New Testament (Greek), by Westcott and Hort. (Macmillan.) 
 The Greek Text of the Revised Version. (Oxford University Press.) 
 Greek Testament, Revised Text, by Nestle. (British and Foreign 
 
 Bible Society.) 
 The Resultant N.T., by Dr. Weymouth. (Eliot Stock.) 
 Novum Testamentum Graece cum apparatu critico ex editionibus 
 
 et libris manu scriptis coUecto — an excellent Gr. N.T. at a 
 
 low price. (Stuttgart.) 
 
 3. Textual Criticism. — Prolegomena to Tischendorf's N.T., by 
 
 C. G. Gregory (Latin). (Leipzig.) 
 Introduction to the Criticism of the N.T., by Scrivener, 4th edit., 
 
 edited by Miller! (Deighton Bell.) 
 Introduction to Westcott and Hort's N.T., by Dr. Hort. 
 
 (Macmillan.) 
 Textual Criticism of N.T., by Prof. B. B. Warfield, d.d. (Theol. 
 
 Educator, Hodder and Stoughton.) 
 Handbook to the Textual Criticism of the New Testament, by 
 
 F. G. Kenyon. (Macmillan and Co.) 
 
482 BIBLICAL INTRODUCTION 
 
 Textual Criticism of the Greek Testament, by Nestle. (Williams 
 
 and Norgate.) 
 The Text of the N.T., by K. Lake. (Oxford Church Text Books, 
 
 Rivingtons.) 
 
 4. History.— l^ History of the Jewish People in the Time of 
 
 Jesus Christ, by E. Schurer. (Eng. trans., T. and T. 
 
 Clark.) 
 New Testament Times, by Hausrath. (Eng. trans., Williams 
 
 and Norgate.) 
 Palestine in the Time of Jesus Christ, by E. Stapfer. (Eng. trans., 
 
 Hodder and Stoughton.) 
 Apostolic and Post -Apostolic Times, by Lechler, (Eng. trans., 
 
 T, and T. Clark.) 
 Neutestamentliche Zeitgeschichte, by O. Holtzmann. (Freiburg.) 
 The Apostolic Age, by Bartlet. (T. and T. Clark.) 
 Christianity in the Apostolic Age, by C. Weitzsacker (Eng. trans., 
 
 T. and T. Clark.) 
 Lives of Christ, by B. Weiss (Eng. trans., T. and T. Clark); 
 
 S. J. Andrews— a Student's Text-book (Ibister). 
 
 Edersheim (Longmans) ; Didon (Paris) ; Geikie (Strahan) ; 
 
 D. Smith, The Days of His Flesh (Hodder and Stoughton) ; 
 
 Sanday (T. and T. Clark) ; O. Holtmann (A. and C. Black) ; 
 
 Beyschlag (Halle). 
 
 St. Paul the Traveller and Roman Citizen, Prof Ramsay (Hodder 
 and Stoughton) ; Bacon, The Story of St. Paul (Hodder 
 and Stoughton) ; Weinel, St. Paul (Williams and Norgate). 
 
 Paulinism, by Pfleiderer. (Eng. trans., Williams and Norgate.) 
 
 5. Introduction. — N.T. Introductions (in English), by Salmon 
 
 (Murray) ; Weiss (Eng. trans,, Hodder and Stoughton) ; 
 Jiilicher, trans, by Janet Ward (Smith, Elder, and Co.) ; 
 Bacon (Macmillan) ; The Historical New Testament, by 
 J. Mofifatt (T. and T. Clark). In German, by Zahn (Frei- 
 burg) ; Holtzmann (Freiburg). 
 
 Von Soden, History of Early Christianity. (Williams and Norgate.) 
 
LIST OF BOOKS * 483 
 
 6. Theology.— yhs Teaching of Jesus, by Wendt. (Eng. trans., 
 
 T. and T. Clark.) 
 The Teaching of Jesus, by R. H. Horton. (J. Clarke and Co.) 
 Jesus, by Bousset. (Williams and Norgate.) 
 The Kingdom of God, and The Training of the Twelve, by 
 
 Bruce. (T. and T. Clark.) 
 New Testament Theology, by Beyschlag. (Eng. trans., T. and 
 
 T. Clark.) 
 New Testament Theology, by B. Weiss. (Eng. trans., T. and T. 
 
 Clark.) 
 Theology of N.T., by Stevens. (T, and T. Clark.) 
 . Theology of N.T., by W. F. Adeney. (Theol. Educ, Hodder and 
 
 Stoughton.) 
 Wemle, Beginnings of Christianity (Williams and Norgate) ; 
 
 Dobschiitz, Christian Life in the Primitive Church (Williams 
 
 and Norgate). 
 Theology of Hebrews, by Bruce (T. and T. Clark) ; Milligan (T. 
 
 and T. Clark). 
 Theology of John, by Stevens. (Dickinson.) 
 Theology of St. Paul, by Sabatier (Eng. trans., Hodder and 
 
 Stoughton) ; Stevens (Dickinson). 
 Theologie du Nouveau Testament, by J. Bovon. (Lausanne.) 
 Lehrbuch der Neutestamentlichen Theologie, by N. T. Holtzmann. 
 
 (Freiburg.) 
 
 7. Synoptic Problem.-^'?,ts\d&s the N.T. Introductions the follow- 
 
 ing deal especially with this subject : Articles Gospel in 
 
 Bible Dictionary, by Dr. V. H. Stanton ; in Encyc. Bib., 
 
 by Dr. Abbott and Schmiedel. 
 The Gospels as Historical Documents, by Stanton. (Camb.) 
 Synopsis of the Gospels in Greek, by Arthur Wright. (Macmillan.) 
 Horje Synopticffi, by Sir J. C. Hawkins, Bart. (0-xford, Clarendon 
 
 Press.) 
 Synopticon, by Rushbrooke. (Macmillan.) 
 Introduction to the Study of the Gospels, by Bishop Westcott, 
 
 8th edit. (Macmillan.) 
 Burkitt, Gospel History and Transmission.- (T. and T. Clark.) 
 Stevens and Burton, Harmony of the Gospels. 
 Die Synpptische Frage, by P. Wemle. (J. C. B. Mohr, Freiburg, i. B.) 
 
 8. Commentaries. — For abbreviations see page 477 ; and add H.C, 
 
 • Hand Commentar (Leipzig) ; C.C.S., foi: Cassell's Com- 
 mentary for Schools. 
 
484 BIBLICAI. INTRODUCTION 
 
 Mamew.r-{h) Allen (/.C); Meyer (T. and T. Clark); Die 
 Synoptiker, by Holtzmann (ff.C.). (c) Slater (C.B.); 
 Carr (C.B.S.) ; Plumptre (CCS.) ; Morrison (Hoddet and 
 Stoughton). (d) Monro Gibson {E.B.). 
 
 Mark.—{h) Swete (Macmillan) ; Gould (I.C) ; Meyer ; Die 
 
 Synoptiker, by Holtzmann {H.C) ; Wellhausen. (c) Sal- 
 
 , mond {C.B.) ; Maclear {C.B.S.) ; Morrison (Hodder and 
 
 Stoughton). (d) The Dean of Armagh (JS.B.) ; Cartoons 
 
 from St. Mark, by Dr. Horton (J. Clarke). 
 
 Lu^e. — (a) St. Luke's Gospel in Greek, by Arthur Wright (Mac- 
 millaii). (b) Pluramer (/.C.) ; Meyer; Godet (T. and T. 
 Clark) ; Die Synoptiker, by Holtzmann {H.C) ; Wellhausen, 
 (c) Adeney {C.B.) ; Farrar (C.B.S.). (d) Burton {E.B.). 
 
 John. — (a) Drummond (Williams and Norgate) ; Scott (T. and 
 T. Clark) ; Jackson (Camb. Univ. Press) ; Criticism of the 
 Fourth Gospel, by Sanday (Oxford Clar. Press) ; Wendt, tr. 
 (Williams and Norgate). (b) Meyer ; Godet (T. and T. 
 Clark); Westcott (Macmillan); Holtzmann (A''.C.); Reynolds 
 (Pul. Com.), (c) McClymont {C.B) ; Plummer (CB.S.) ; 
 Watkins {C.C.S.). (d) Marcus Dods (£.S.) ; Loisy (Paris, 
 Picard). 
 
 Ads. — (a) Credibility of Acts, by Chase (Macmillan) ; Pauline 
 and Other Studies, by Ramsay (Hodder and Stoughton) ; 
 Die Apostelgeschichte ; ihre Quellen, etc., by Spitta (Halle); 
 ditto, by Jiingst (Gotha). (b) Rackham (Westminster Com- 
 mentary) ; Blass — Latin (Gottenburg) ; Hackett (Hamilton 
 Adams) ; Holtzmann {H.C) ; Weiss (Leipzig), (c) Bartlet 
 {C.B.); Lumby {C.B.S.); Plumptre {CCS.), (d) Stokes 
 {E.B.). :: 
 
 Romans. — (b) Sanday and Headlam {I.C); Godet (T. and T. 
 Clark); Vaughan (Macmillan); . Lipsius {H.C); Liddon, 
 " Explanatory Analysis " (Longmans) ; Meyer, (c) Garvie 
 {C.B.) ; Moule {CB,S.) ; Sanday {CCS.) ; Beet (Hodder 
 and Stoughton). (d) Moule {E.B.). 
 
 I Corinthians. — (b) Edwards (Hodder and Stoughton); Ellicott 
 (Longmans) ; Meyer ; Schmiedel {H.C). (c) Massie {C.B.) \ 
 Goudge (Westminster Commentary) ; Lias {C.B.S.) ; Shore 
 {CCS.), (d) Marcus Dods {E.B.) ; Expository Lectures, 
 by F. W. Robertson (King). 
 
 z Corinthians.-^{a) Kennedy, (b) Meyer; Schmiedel (Z?!C.). (c) 
 Massie (C.5.); Lias (C.5.5.); Plumptre (CC.?.). (d),Denny 
 {E.B.). 
 
LIST OF BOOKS * 485 
 
 Galatiatts.—Qs) Lightfoot (Macmillan) ; Meyer ; Ramsay (Hodder 
 and Stoughton) ; Lipsius {H.C.). (c) Adeney {C.B.) ; 
 Perowne {C.B.S.); Sanday (C.C.S.). (d) Findlay {E.B.). 
 
 Ephesiam.—{h) T. K. Abbott {I.C.); EUicott (Parker); Mac- 
 pherson ; Meyer ; Armitage Robinson (Macmillan) ; West- 
 cott (Macmillan) ; Von Soden {H.C.) ; Haupt. (c) G. C. 
 Martin {C.B.) ; Moule {C.B.S.) ; Barry {C.C.S:). (d) Findlay 
 {,E.B) ; Dale (Hodder and Stoughton). 
 
 Philippians. — (b) Lightfoot (Macmillan) ; Vincent (/.C.) ; Meyer ; 
 Von Soden {H.C). (c) G. C. Martin (C.A); Moule 
 (C.5.5.) ; Barry (CC.5.). (d) Rainy {E.B). 
 
 Colossians and Philemon. — (b) Lightfoot (Macmillan); T. K, 
 Abbott, Col. {I.e.) ; Vincent, Phile. ; Meyer ; Von Soden 
 {H.C.). (c) G. C. Martin {C.B) ; Moule {C.B.S.) ; Barry 
 {C.C.S.). (d) Maclaren {E.B.). 
 
 I and 2 Thessalanians. — (b) Jowett (Murray) ; Ellicott (Parker) ; 
 
 Liinemann (Meyer) ; Schmiedel (jKC). (c) Adeney (C^.); 
 
 Findlay {C.B.S.) ; Mason {C.C.S.). (d) Denny {E.B.). 
 I and 2 Timothy, Titus. — (b) Ellicott (Parker); Meyer; Von 
 
 Soden {H.C). (c) Horton {C.B); Humphreys {C.B.S.); 
 
 Spence {C.C.S.). (d) Plummer (£.^.)- 
 Heirews.- — (b) Westcott (Macmillan) ; Liinemann (Meyer) ; Von 
 
 Soden {H.C.) ; Vaughan (Macmillan). (c) Peake {C.B.) ; 
 
 Farrar {C.B.S.) ; Moulton {CCS.) ; Davidson {//.B.C.). 
 
 (d) Edwards {E.B.) ; Bruce (T. and T. Clark). 
 James. — (b) Mayor (Macmillan); Beyschlag (Gottingen) ; Von 
 
 Soden {H.C). (p) Bennett {C.B); Plumptre {C.B.S); 
 4 Punchard {C.C.S) ; Knowling (Westminster Commentary). 
 
 (d) Plummer — with Jude {E.B) ; Dale (Hodder and 
 
 Stoughton). 
 I and 2 Peter, Jude. — (b) Bigg {/.C) ; Huther (Meyer) ; Von 
 
 Soden {H.C). (c) Bennett {C.B)\ Plumptre {C.B.S); 
 
 Plummer {C.C.S). (d) Lumby {E.B). 
 i» 2, 3 John. — (b) Westcott (Macmillan) ; Huther (Meyer) ; 
 
 Ebrard (T. and T. Clark) ; Holtzmann {H.C). (c) Bennett 
 
 {C.B); Plummer {C.B.S); Sinclair {C.C.S). (d) Alexander 
 
 {E.B.). 
 Revelation. — (b) Swete (Macmillan) ; Ramsay, Seven Churches in 
 
 Asia (Hodder and Stoughton) ; Boussett. (c) Anderson 
 
 Scott {C.B) ; Simcox {C.B.S). (d) Milligan {E.B). 
 
INDEX 
 
 Abbott, E. A,, on Gospels, 325. 
 Acrostics, Hebrew — ' 
 
 Lamentations, 212. 
 
 Proverbs, 156. 
 
 Psalms, 151. 
 
 Acts of Apostles, 341 ff. 
 Alexandria and Hebrews, 430. 
 Amos, 240. 
 Analysis of Historical Books — 
 
 Limitations of, 31, 
 
 Method of, 25, 
 
 Sketch of, 32. 
 
 Apocalypse, 460 ff. 
 
 of Baruch, 268. 
 
 Apocalyptic Literature, 181, 224, 
 254, 271, 274, 460. 
 
 Fourth Gospel and, 333 ff, 
 
 Apocrypha— 
 
 O.T., 13, 268. 
 
 ApoUos and Hebrews, 425. 
 Aquila, 3, 380. 
 Aristion, 303. 
 Ascension of Isaiah, 268. 
 Assumption of Moses, 269. 
 
 "Babylon," in N.T,, 443, 444, 
 
 466. 
 Balaam, 69. 
 
 Barnabas — 
 
 Epistle of, 469. 
 
 Hebrews and, 427. 
 
 Baruch — 
 
 Apocalypse of, 268, 
 
 Book of, 269. 
 
 Epistle of, 268. 
 
 Baur's Theory, 343. 
 Bel and the Dragon, 269, 
 Bleek on Hebrews, 426. 
 Blessing of — 
 
 ' Jacob, 63. 
 
 Moses, 75- 
 
 Books on Biblica.1 study, 4?! ff. 
 
 Calvin on Biblical Criticism, 6, 
 
 10. 
 Csesarea, 388. 
 Canon — 
 
 O.T., 12. 
 
 N.T.,27Sf. 
 
 Canticles, 167. 
 Celsus, 306. 
 Census in Luke, 308. 
 Cethubhim (^Hagiografhd), 5, 12. 
 Chronicles, 107. 
 Chronology, Pauline, 350. 
 Chrysostom on the Gospels, 322. 
 Clement of Alexandria, 470. 
 
 on ftie Gospels, 297. 
 
 on Hebrews, 422. 
 
 Clement of Rome, 284. 
 
 Epistle of, 469. 
 
 on I Corinthians, 364. 
 
 on Hebrews, 425. 
 
 Colossians, 388 ff. 
 
 Combined Prophetic Document (JE) 
 
 of Pentateuch, 47. 
 
 combined with D, 50. 
 
 Composite character of books of 
 
 O.T., 17. 
 Composition of Historical Books of 
 
 O.T.— 
 
 Method, 17. 
 
 Theories of {Current), 22. 
 
 Theories of {Earlier), 19. 
 
 Theory of (Jjillmann), 23. 
 
 Theory of {Graf, WeWiausen, 
 
 and JCuenen), 24. 
 Conquest of Palestine, 77. 
 Corinth, 362. 
 
 factions at, 367. 
 
 Lost Epistle, etc., 363. 
 
 Corinthians I., 364 ff. 
 Corinthians II., 367 ff. 
 Cretans, 4! 9. 
 Criticism, General course of O.T. , 9. 
 
 486 
 
INDEX 
 
 487 
 
 D, 16, 48, Jl. 
 
 Daniel, 227. 
 
 Daniel, Book of, 224. 
 
 Apocryphal additions to, 229, 
 
 269. 
 David and Goliath, 92, 94. 
 Lament over Saul and Jonathan, 
 
 93- 
 
 Last words of, 95. 
 
 Psalms of, 143. 
 
 Deborah, Song of, 86. 
 Decalogue, 65. 
 Deuteronoraic — 
 
 Edition of Historical Books, 50. 
 
 Material in Historical Books, 49. 
 
 Deuteronomy, 71. 
 DiateSsaron, Tatian's, 281, 329. 
 Didachi, 469. 
 — -— and John, 329, 
 
 and Sjmoptics, 284. 
 
 Dillmann on Pentateuch, 23. 
 Dionysius on John, 333 if., 463. 
 
 E, 4S. 
 
 Ecclesiastes, 160. 
 Ecclesiasticus, 4, 269. 
 El, 100, 
 
 Elijah and Elisha, 100. 
 
 Elohistic Document (E) of Penta- 
 teuch, etc., 45. 
 
 Combined with J, 47. 
 
 Enoch — 
 
 Book of, 270. 
 
 Book of the Secrets of, 270. 
 
 Epaphras, 391, 398. 
 
 Ephesians, 394 ff. 
 
 Esdras, Books of, 271. 
 
 Essenes, 384. 
 
 Esther, Book of, 121. 
 
 Apocryphal additions to, 121, 
 
 271. 
 
 Eusebius, Silence of, 280. 
 
 Evidence as to date, etc., of O.T. 
 books — 
 
 External, 3. 
 
 Internal, 39. 
 
 Exodus, 64. 
 
 Exodus, Book of, 64. 
 
 Ezekiel, 213. 
 
 Ezekiel, Book of, 213. 
 
 Ezra, Book of, 107, 117. 
 
 Florinus, Letter to, 330. 
 
 Fourth Gospel, 328 ff. 
 
 Fragmentary theory of composition 
 of Pentateuch, 21, 
 
 Galatian Churches, 372. 
 Galatians, 372 ff. 
 Gamaliel, 344. 
 General Epistles, 434 ff. 
 Genesis, 60. 
 Gospels — 
 
 Luke, 304 ff. 
 
 John, 328. 
 
 Mark, 293 ff. 
 
 Matthew, 285, ff. 
 
 Synoptic, 277. 
 
 Graf on Pentateuch, 24. 
 Greek versions of O.T., z, 3. 
 Gunkel, 464. 
 
 H, 52. 
 
 Habakkuk, 251. 
 Haggai, 254. 
 Hagiographa, 5, 12. 
 Hannah, Song of, 91. 
 Hamack — 
 
 Chronology, 350. 
 
 List of Gospels, 278. 
 
 Hebrew MSS. of O.T., i. 
 Hebrews, 421 ff. 
 Heresies, 411. 
 Hexateuch, 16. 
 Hippolytus on John, 329. 
 Historical Books of O.T. — 
 
 mode of composition, 17, 5^. 
 
 sources. See D, E, El, H, J, 
 
 P, and the several books. 
 
 teaching, 103. 
 
 Hosea, 234. 
 
 Imprisonment, Epistles of, 387 ff. 
 Internal evidence on books of O.T., 
 
 39- 
 Irensus on Gospels, 281, 297. 
 
 Isaiah, 172. 
 
 Ascension of, 268. 
 
 Isaiah, Book of— 
 
 General analysis, 171. 
 
 Present book, 171., 
 
 i.-xxxv., 172. 
 
 xxxvi.-xxxix., 184. 
 
 xl.-Ixvi. (Second Isaiah), 185, 
 
 xl.-lv. (Deutero-Isaiah), 188. 
 
 Ivi.-lxvi. {Trito-Isaiah), 193. 
 
 Servant of Jehovah, 191. 
 
488 
 
 INDEX 
 
 J. 43- 
 
 Jacob, Blessing of, 63, 
 Tames, 434 ff, 
 Jashar, Book of, 80. 
 JE, 47- 
 TED, SO. 
 
 Jehovistio Document (J) of Penta- 
 teuch, 43. 
 
 combined with E, 47, 
 
 Jeremiah, 195. 
 
 Epistle of, 271. 
 
 Jeremiah, Book of, 195. 
 
 Jerome, Vulgate, 3, 470. 
 
 Jerusalem, Paul's visits to, 376. 
 
 Jesus ben Sirach, 269. 
 
 Job, 123. 
 
 Job, Book of, 123. 
 
 Joel, 237, 
 
 John— 
 
 Gospel, 328 ff. 
 
 ■ I. Epistle, 452 ff. 
 
 II. Epistle, 456 ff. 
 
 III. Epistle, 457 ff. 
 
 Apocalypse, 460 ff. 
 
 Jonah, 244. 
 Josephus, 4, 271. 
 
 and Acts, 343 ff. 
 
 Joshua, 77. 
 
 Jubilees, Book of, 272. 
 
 Judas of Galilee, 344. 
 
 Jude, 450, ff. 
 
 Judges, 82. 
 
 Judith, 272. 
 
 Justification in James, 436, 439. 
 
 Justin Martyr — • 
 
 Memoirs of Apostles, 282. 
 
 on John, 329. 
 
 on Luke, 306. 
 
 Kethubhim (Hagiographa), 5, 12. 
 Kings, 95. 
 Koheleth, i6o. 
 
 Lamentations, 210. 
 Laodicea, Council of, 421. 
 Laodiceans, Epistle to, 351, 395. 
 Law, 59, 105. 
 
 of holiness, 52, 67. 
 
 Leviticus, 6(3. 
 
 -^■^ xii.-xxvi., 52, 67. 
 
 Lightfoot — ■ 
 
 — r^ on Galatians, 372. 
 
 ^-^ on Philippians, 401, 
 
 Logia, 286, 326 ff. 
 Luke, 304 ff. 
 
 and Acts, 341 ff. 
 
 and Hebrews, 425. 
 
 Luther on Biblical Criticism, 10. 
 Lycus Valley, Churches of, 389, 
 400. 
 
 Maccabean Psalms, 145. 
 Maccabees, Books of, 272. 
 Malachi, 264. 
 " Man of Sin," 359. - 
 Manasseh, Prayer of, 273. 
 Marcion — 
 
 Canon, 407, 
 
 Gospel, 306. 
 
 Mark,. 295 ff. 
 
 Priority of, 324. 
 
 Masoretic Text, i. 
 Matthew, 285 ff. 
 
 Hebrew, Logia, 286 ff. 
 
 Megilloth, 12. 
 Messianic — 
 
 Prophecies, 173, 175, 177, 
 
 182 f., 188-191, 205, 220, 242, 
 248, 257, 262 ff, 268, 270, 273. 
 
 Psalms, 147, 
 
 Micah, 247. 
 
 Milligan, 464. 
 
 Minor Prophets, 234. 
 
 Mosaic material in Pentateuch, 
 
 59. 
 Moses — 
 
 Assumption of, 269. 
 
 Blessing of, 75. 
 
 Law^ and teaching of, 59, 
 
 IDS. 
 
 Song of, 75. 
 
 Song of (at Red Sea), 65. 
 
 MSB. (O.T.), I. 
 Muratoriah Fragment, 470. 
 
 Nahum, 250. 
 Nehemiah, 107, 117. 
 Numbers, 67. 
 
 Obadiah, 243. 
 
 Old Latin version of O.T., 3, 470. 
 
 Onesimus, 393, 394. 
 
 Onesiphorus, 417. 
 
 Ophites, 400. 
 
 Origen^- 
 
 Mark, 297. 
 
 Hebrews, 422. 
 
INDEX 
 
 489 
 
 O.T.— 
 
 Ramsay on Galatians, 372. 
 
 Canon, 12. 
 
 Revelation, 460 ff. 
 
 Text, I. 
 
 Roman Government, 410. 
 
 Versions, 2. 
 
 Romans, 378 ff. 
 
 
 Rome, Church at, 378. 
 
 P. 52, S3- 
 
 Ruth, 87. 
 
 Pantsenus on Hebrews, 422. 
 
 
 Papias, 286, 296, 469. 
 
 Samaritan Pentateuch, 2, 5. 
 
 Parallelism in Hebrew poetry, 149. 
 
 Samuel, 89. 
 
 Parousia, 356. 
 
 Septuagint, 2, 4. 
 
 Pastoral Epistles, 406 ff. 
 
 Servant of Jehovah, 191. 
 
 Paul, St., 349 ff. 
 
 Sethites, 400. 
 
 Second imprisonment, 410. 
 
 Sibyllines, 273. 
 
 Pentateuch — 
 
 Solomon — 
 
 Complete, $6. 
 
 Psalms of, 273. 
 
 Criticism, points of agreement 
 
 Song of, 167. 
 
 and difference, 23. 
 
 Wisdom of, 274. 
 
 Dillmann on, 23. 
 
 Song of— 
 
 Graf on, 24. 
 
 Deborah, 86. 
 
 — ^ Mosaic material in, 59. 
 
 Hannah, 91. 
 
 Cf. Historical Bocks. 
 
 Moses, 75. 
 
 Peshito, 3, 470. 
 
 Moses at Red Sea, 65. 
 
 Peter I., 440 ff. 
 
 Solomon, 167. 
 
 Peter II., 447 ff. 
 
 The Three Children, 269, 
 
 Peter, St., and Mark, 296. 
 
 Triumph over Moab, 65. 
 
 Memoirs of, 296. 
 
 Supernatural Religion, 280. 
 
 Philemon, 393 ff. 
 
 Supplementary theory of compo- 
 
 Philippians, 399 ff. 
 
 sition of Pentateuch, 21. 
 
 Philo, 3, 273, 340. 
 
 Susanna, Book of, 269. 
 
 Phoebe, 380. 
 
 Symbols used in O.T. criticism, 15, 
 
 Poetry, Form of Hebrew, 149. 
 
 24, 32, 62 n. 
 
 Polycarp, 330. 
 
 Symmachus, 3. 
 
 on John, 329. 
 
 Synoptic Problem, 316 ff. 
 
 Pre-exilic Psalms, 143. 
 
 Synoptics and Fourth Gospel, 334 ff. 
 
 Priestly Code (P), 53. 
 
 
 combined with JED, 56. 
 
 Talmud, 7. 
 
 Prisca, 380. 
 
 Targums, 2. 
 
 Proverbs, 1S2. 
 
 Tatian, 281, 329. 
 
 Psalms, 134. 
 
 Tel-el- Amarna Tablets, 77. 
 
 xviii. , 94. 
 
 Ten Commandments, 65. 
 
 Acrostic, 151. 
 
 Terms of O.T. criticism, 15. 
 
 Davidic, 143. 
 
 Testament of the Twelve Patriarchs, 
 
 Maccabean, 145. 
 
 274. 
 
 Messianic, 147. 
 
 Text of O.T., r. 
 
 Pre-exilic, 143. 
 
 Theodotion, 3. 
 
 of Solomon, 273. 
 
 Theophilus on John, 330. 
 
 
 Thessalonians, 352 ff. 
 
 Qinah Metre, 212. 
 
 Theudas, 344. 
 
 Qoheleth, 160. 
 
 Three Children, Song of, 269. 
 
 Quirinius, 308. 
 
 Timothy I., 414 ff. 
 
 
 Timothy II., 417 f. 
 
 Ramsay — 
 
 Titus, 418 ff. 
 
 — — on Acts, 342, 
 
 Tobit, 274. 
 
490 
 
 Tradition, Oral, 321 ff. 
 Tubingen School, 343. 
 Tychicus, 391, 398. 
 
 Urmarcus, 322 
 
 Versions of O.T., 2,3, 
 Vischer, 463. 
 Volker, 463. 
 Vulgate, 3, 470. 
 
 INDEX 
 
 Wars of Jehovah, Book of, 6g. 
 Weylandi 464. 
 Wisdom — 
 
 of Jesus ben Sirach, 269, 
 
 of Solomon, 274. 
 
 Zechariah — 
 
 i.-viii., 256. 
 
 ■ ix.-xiv., 259, 
 
 Zephaniah, 253. 
 
 PRINTED BY 
 
 WILLIAM BKENDON ANE SON, LTD. 
 
 PLYMOUTH