BJWMto^WWfaWI^^

toW<W<WtfJflttWftWfti3ttlfr^J^^ .Titfiif'nfiJ,:""'r.'"^",i"'-*'w^'ui'fJ"in','irll"''u-"

D

Sgii
for the founding of ', a College in, this Colony"

- ILIlIBByMSy •

Bought with the income
ofthe
John T. Norton Fund

BOOK BY BOOK

BOOK BY BOOK

popular Sfetubus on tj)e ©anon of Sbctiptute

BY TBE
Eight Eev. the Lord Bishop of Ripon
Ven. Archdeacon Farrar, D.D. Very Eev. H. D. M. Spence, D.D.
Late Professor W. G. Ehnslie, D.D. Prof. A. B. Davidson, D.D. LL.D.
Prof. 'Marcus Dods, D.D. Prof. Stanley Leathes, D.D. Eev. Canon MaeUar, D.D.
Eev. George Salmon, D.D. LL.D. Prof. James Eobertson, D.D.
Prof. William Sanday, D.D. Prof. William Milligan, D.D.
Eight Bev. the Bishop of Worcester

LONDON
ISBISTEE AND COMPANY Limited
15 & 16 TAVISTOCK STREET COVENT GARDEN
1892

LONDON :
PRINTED BY J. S. VIRTUE AND CO., LIMITED,
CITY ROAD.

PREFACE.

These studies originally appeared as Introductions to the
various Books of Holy Scripture in " The New Illustrated
Bible," the last division of which has just been published
by Messrs. J. S. Virtue & Co., Limited. The names of
the authors furnish at once a clear indication and an ample
guarantee of tbe character and quality of the essays ; and
the circumstance that it is now possible to issue in a single
volume a complete and scholarly survey of the questions
affecting the Sacred Canon which have of recent years
caused so mucb anxiety, will, it is hoped, be considered
a sufficient justification for reproducing them in the present
popular form. THE PUBLISHERS.

CONTENTS.

THE PENTATEUCH.
Inteodtjction
GenesisExodusLeviticus Numbers
Deutebonomy
By Prof. James Boiertson, D.D.

PAGE
. 1
17
25
. 33
. 41
. 49

HISTORICAL BOOKS.
The Book of Joshua . .58
The Books op Judges & Ruth 67
,, ,, Samuel . . 77
,, „ Kings . . 92
„ ,, Chronicles . 110
,, ,, Ezra and Ne
hemiah . 120
The Book op Esther . .131
By Prof. James Eobertson, D.D.

THE POETICAL BOOKS.
The Book of Job . . 136
By Prof. A. B. Davidson, D.D., LL.D.

The Book of Psalms .

TAGB
. 150

By the Right Rev. the Bishop of
Worcester.
The Book op Peoveebs . 172
Ecclesiastes ; "OE, the
Pbeachee .... 185
The Sons of Solomon. . 193
By Prof. A. B. Davidson, D.D., LL.D.

THE PROPHETICAL BOOKS.
The Book op the Peophet
Isaiah .... 198
The Book of the Peophet
Jbeemiah .... 217
The Lamentations op Jeee-
miah  230
By the Very Eev. H. D. M. Spence, D.D.
The Book of the Peophet
Ezekiel .... 233
The Book of Daniel . .241
By Prof. Stanley Leathes, D.D.

viu

CONTENTS.

THE MINOR PROPHETS. PAGE
Hosea . ... 251
Joel .... 260
Amos  269
Obadiah . . • 278
Jonah . . ¦ 284
Micah . . 291
Nahum . . .299
Habakkuk . . . 307
Zephaniah . . . 315
Hagoai . . . .321
Zechariah .... 327
Malachi . - ¦ 338
By the late Prof. W. G. Ehnslie, D.D.

THE SYNOPTIC GOSPELS.
General Introduction . 345
The Gospel accoeding to
St. Matthew . . . 373
The Gospel accoeding to
St. Maek . . . .386
The Gospel according to
St. Luke . . .395
By Prof. William Sanday, D.D.
The Writings asceibed to
St. John . . . .408
By Rev. George Salmon, D.D. , LL.D.
THE ACTS OF THE APOSTLES. 428
By Ven. Archdeacon Farrar, D.D.

THE EPISTLES OF ST. PAUL. PAGE
The Epistle to the Romans 444
Fiest and Second Epistles
to the Corinthians. . 451
Epistle to the Galatians . 456
Epistle to the Ephesians . 460
Epistle to the Phxlippians 466
Epistle to the Colossians . 470
Fiest and Second Epistles
to the Thessalonians . 476
The Epistle to Philemon . 493
By Prof. Marcus Dodds, D.D.
Epistles to Timothy and
Titus . . . .483
By the Right Rev. the Lord Bishop
cf Uipon.
Epistle to the Hebeews . 496
By Eev. Canon Maclear, D.D.
THE REMAINING EPISTLES.
The Epistle of Jambs . 506
The Fiest Epistle op Peteb 516
The Second Epistle of
Petee .... 527
The Epistle of Jude . 534
By Rev. Canon Maclear, D.D.

THE REVELATION OF ST.
JOHN THE DIVINE . 544
By Prof. William Milligan, D.D.

INTRODUCTION TO THE
PENTATEUCH.

1. Name and Divisions. — The books of the Old Testament which
relate the history of Israel had originally no titles. A continuous
stream of narrative runs on from the beginning of Genesis to
the end of the Second Book of Kings ; and the names by which
the various parts of this narrative were designated are of later
date than the time of composition, and were given on various
grounds, as will be explained in the chapters on the respective
books. From very ancient times the first five books of the series were
treated as one whole ; and in the Synagogue Manuscripts, which
give us a better idea of tbe early appearance of the Old Testa
ment Scriptures than our printed Hebrew Bibles, they form
one roll, divided not into books but into sections. The name
given by the Jews to this collection is Torah, meaning teaching
or law ; more fully, the Book of the Law, or the Law of Moses.
To indicate the five-fold division, they also called the whole the
Five-fifths of the Law ; and the. early Christian Fathers, who
received it in this form from the Jews, bestowed on it the name
by which we now generally denote it, the Pentateuch, or five-fold
work. From the statement in Joshua xxiv. 26, that " Joshua wrote
these words in the book of the law of God," it may be inferred
that some parts at least of that book were originally joined on
to what preceded, and there are other features of the Book of
Joshua that point to the same conclusion. Hence critics, in their
investigations into the origin of the Old Testament books, are
in tbe habit of speaking of the Hexateuch, or six-fold work.
But the separate existence of the Pentateuch is very ancient,
and tbe Samaritans, whose Pentateuch corresponds substantially
with the Hebrew work, possess also a book of Joshua which.

A BOOK BY BOOK.
diverges very widely from the Hebrew book of that name. The
five-fold division also is ancient, and seems to have given
occasion to the division of the Psalter into five parts or books,
as now represented in the Revised Version. The divisions are
determined by the nature of the subject matter. Deuteronomy
ends with the death of Moses, a well-defined point in the history
of Israel ; in like manner Genesis ends with tbe death of Josepb ;
Exodus brings the narrative down to the time when the Taber
nacle was set up ; and, though Leviticus and Numbers are more
closely connected, they are marked off by a formal pause, in the
narration. 2. Constituent Elements — Main Purpose. — Ayery slight exami
nation of the Pentateuch, in the form in whicb it has come
down to us, is sufficient to show that it contains two great
elements, narrative and legislation. The latter is so prominent
a feature that the Jews, particularly on account of the turn
which their religious life took, give tbe name of law to the
whole collection. Yet it is evident that the narrative is the
uniting bond, and the narration of history the main purpose
throughout the books. We see this (1) in the mode in which
the connection is striven after and maintained, so that not only
is there a steady advance in each individual book, but tbe
progression is clearly marked from book to book. It is seen
also (2) in the manner in which laws and institutions are
linked on to signal events which are narrated. Thus the Sab
bath law is connected with the record of the Creation (Gen.
ii- 1 — 3); the prohibition of blood with the preservation of
Noah's family at the Flood (Gen. ix. 1 — 7) ; circumcision with
the covenant of promise to Abraham (Gen. xvii. 1 — 14); the
Passover and the consecration of the first-born with the Exodus
(Exod. xii.— xiii. 16).
In like manner the larger collections of laws and ordinances
are set in an historical framework, as, for example, the collec
tion beginning at Exod. xxv.; and as in Lev. x., and fre
quently in the Book of Numbers, an incident in the history gives
occasion to some additional detail of legislation. The appear
ance of_ the laws in this fashion, in separate collections or in
detail, in various places, while the narrative moves on in steady
progression, gives the impression that the primary object in
view throughout is not so much the exhibition of an elaborate
code of laws as the delineation of a connected course of history.
And then (3) if we consider the nature of the laws themselves,
we are led to the same conclusion. Many of them are given
with reference to special situations, or suited only to temporary
conditions ; a greater number are in themselves of a formal or

INTRODUCTION TO THE PENTATEUCH. 3
ritual character, but tbe purpose for which they are given is
always distinctly held up to view. Prior to the giving of the
law is the choosing of the people; and the law is given to
educate them for their bigh destiny. Such expressions as " I
am the Lord," " Thou art an holy people," are ever recurring
as reasons for the promulgation of a statute or motives for its
observance ; and underlying the enactments of the law there
is the establishing of a covenant. "When God promises Abraham
a numerous seed and the possession of Canaan, He makes a
covenant with him (Gen. xv. 18, xvii. 2) ; when He reveals
Himself to Moses in the bush, there is a new declaration of the
same covenant (Exod. vi. 4) ; and the great transaction at Horeb
is spoken of also as a covenant (Deut. v. 2 ; compare Jerem. :
xxxi. 31).
The whole legislation of the Pentateuch points back to the
choosing of a people for a special purpose, and points forward to
the unfolding of that purpose in their history.
3. Plan. — Thus the two streams of narrative and legislation
come together, and the current tends onward, mainly in chrono
logical order, to one great end. The Book of Genesis is complete
in itself, yet the reader at its close is aware that a great plan is
being unfolded, and asks what is to follow ; and at the close of
Deuteronomy there is not only a distinct retrospect to all that
preceded, but there is a great plan still in progressi
And what is the plan ? It is to trace the rise, selection, and
consolidation of a covenant people who have, in God's purpose,
a great work to perform in the world. And in the unfolding of
this plan, the narrative is not content with starting from the
time when the people existed as a nation, but traces them back
ward to a chosen family, of which Abraham was the head.
This family is again traced back to its source, and that again to
ahigber source, till the origin of tbe human race and of the uni-'
verse is reached. Or, to change the point of view, there is from
the beginning onwards a kind of pyramidal structure, each
succeeding stage of which is narrower than the preceding.
Thus, when "All flesh had corrupted its way on the earth," a
new beginning is made in the family of Noah ; in this family a
limitation is made to the descendants of Shem; from among
them the family of Abraham is selected, and the patriarch him
self is made tbe depositary of the promise. Again, there is an
elimination of Ishmael and the Keturajans, and the promise
centres in Isaac ; one son of Isaac is set aside, and the blessing
runs in the line of Jacob and his descendants, among whom
Ephraim and Judah are specially designated to future pre
eminence. "
b 2

BOOK BY BOOK.
Along with this limitation in the extent of the chosen people,
there is an increasing intensity in the nature of the charge
assigned to them. The covenant with Abraham is much more
special than the covenant with Noah, and the covenant at Sinai
is ratified with still more specific commands. In all this there is
a manifest unity of plan and a steady progress to a future.
Great blanks in time do not interrupt the thread of the narra
tive, and from the very first there are bints of a greater con
summation which, even at the close of the books, is still distant.
The purpose is plainly not to collect facts in order to satisfy
curiosity, but to select facts to prove a design. It is history, and
particularly the religious history of a divinely guided people
that is contemplated.
4. Unity. — The unity of the Pentateuch, however, lies rather
in this uniting idea than in its external form ; it is more historical
than literary. Though there is a steady progression, events are
not narrated in strictly chronological order ; different accounts
of one and the same event are found side by side ; repetitions
are not considered a literary blemisb ; nor is all that relates to
one subject set down in one place.
As in other Scriptures, the work of human hands is apparent
in the arranging and selecting of existing materials, and there
is little or no effort made to conceal the fact that materials are
made use of. "Whereas a modern historian, after consulting
his authorities and verifying his facts, relates occurrences in bis
own words, with a reference to the sources from whicb be has
drawn, we have here the very words of the authorities ; family
registers, lists of places, fragments of old poetry, stories of
bygone days, and details of the lives of ancient heroes, minute
regulations of social life or ritual service, are all strung upon
the one thread of the history, but their individuality is not
obliterated. As the books traverse a wide space of time, the materials thus
put together belong to different periods. Side by side with
accounts of primeval times, handed down orally or in writing
we have notices of a later time, explaining the names of places or
elucidating matters that are obscure. Points that in a modern
book would fall into foot notes are placed in the text ; and there
is no attempt to conceal the work of human hands in the com
position. The work may be said to be as unique in its literary
form as it is uniform in its historical conception.
5. The Literary Problem. — A production of such a description
presents a literary problem of great difficulty, and no question
has been more keenly discussed than that of the origin and

INTRODUCTION TO THE PENTATEUCH. 0
composition of tbe Pentateuch. The Jews indeed, from the
earliest times at which we find them stating their tradition as
to the origin of the various books of the Old Testament, without
hesitation ascribe the Pentateuch to Moses, using the expression
"Law of Moses," or " Book of the Law of Moses," convertibly
with the ' ' Five-fifths of the Law."
This belief was accepted without question by the early
Christian Church on the authority of the Jewish synagogue,
and so the Pentateuch has come to be commonly described as
the Five Books of Moses. A tradition so persistent is not to be
summarily set aside, for it may be concluded that it rests on
some solid basis of fact, but neither is it to be accepted as decisive,
because this is a matter of minute details in which tradition
cannot be expected to be precisely accurate. The occurrence
of a great event, or of a series of great events, or tbe activity
of a great personage, may make such an impression on the
, memory and the life of a people that tradition cannot go astray
in reference to it ; but the handing on of a book or books
througb a series of generations, when the art of printing was
unknown, and through a history full of remarkable vicissitudes,
is a different matter.
Jewish tradition itself ascribes to Ezra an undefined but not
inconsiderable share in the work of reducing the Pentateuch and
other Scriptures to their present shape, and from the time of
Moses to that of Ezra we have no definite information as to the
process through which the earlier writings passed. But it is to
be observed that it was not on the strength of their being written
by this or that person that the ancient Jews accepted their
sacred books. These books had come down to them from
ancient times, many of them being anonymous compositions,
though no doubt some tradition of authorship attached to each
of them ; but it seems to have been only when they were being
collected or after they were collected into a canon, that each had
its authorship assigned to it. The historical books from Judges
onwards give no intimation of the hands by whom they were
written, and the traditions of the Jewish synagogue, of a later
time, are very uncertain.
It is particularly to be noticed that in the books of the Pen
tateuch itself the Mosaic origin is not claimed. In the Book of
Genesis there is no mention of authorship whatever ; and in the
three succeeding books the few passages that might be taken
as direct assertions that Moses wrote what has come down to us
in the Pentateuch, will be found on examination to refer only
to certain specific things, though of course they do not exclude

6 BOOK BY BOOK.
the writing of other things.* And the same is to be said of the
similar statements in the Book of Deuteronomy xxxi. 9— 1 1, 22,
24 — 26. What all these passages directly say is that Moses
was commanded to write and did put down in writing certain
matters, both of history and of legislation, "for, a memorial; "
and thus, indirectly, the Pentateuch itself leads us to the con
clusion that he had to do with the two great streams of which
we saw it is composed. So also the Book of Joshua makes dis
tinct mention not only of a law, but of a book of the law, the
writing of which is ascribed to Moses.f It is remarkable that
neither in the Book of Judges nor in those of Samuel is there
any direct mention of such a written work ; but notices of it again
appear in the Book of Kings, and are continued in the succeed
ing historical Books of Chronicles, Ezra, and Nehemiah. These
notices are either in general terms, such as those that have just
been adduced, or consist of references to special laws and ordi
nances ascribed to Moses. They become more precise in the
priestly Books of Chronicles ; and in the time of Ezra, who was
" a ready scribe in the law of Moses, which the Lord God of
Israel had given" (Ezra vii. 6), there is a detailed account
(Nehemiah viii.) of the public reading, with ceremony, of a
formal "Book of the Law of Moses," "from the morning till
midday," in the audience of the people.
6. Traditional View. — "We need not therefore wonder at tbe
tenacity of the tradition which ascribes the Pentateuch to Moses.
On the one hand, the work of the great leader had deeply
impressed itself on the memory of the nation and moulded its
history, as testified by succeeding events and by tbe constant
appeal of the prophets. On the other hand, there were these
distinct references to his work as a writer and legislator,
warranting the impression that the legal system handed down
from old time was derived from him. Nothing was more
natural, when the sacred books were collected and accepted as
a basis of faith and practice, than that the Pentateuch should
be summarily accepted as of Mosaic authorship. If ever there
was a time in the history of Israel when laws and ordinances
were particularly needed to shape the nation's life, it was at
such a time and in such a situation as the history assigns to
Moses. _ The time of youthful hope, in nations as in individuals
is the time when plans are made for the future ; at such a time
a^d in such circumstances also, a nation would become conscious
ot the fact that it had a destiny and a history before it.
• The passages should .be examined in their connection:— Exodus xvii 14-
xxiv. 4, 7 ; xxxiv. 27. Numbers xxxiii. 1—2 '
t Josh. l. 7, 8 ; viii. 31, 34 ; xxiii. 6 ; xxiv. 26.

INTRODUCTION TO THE PENTATEUCH. 7
i
It is one thing to make history and another thing to write it
(though in the discussions that have taken place as to the origin
and transmission of these books, the distinction has not been
sufficiently borne in mind) ; but we have seen enough to prove
that Moses, standing at the commencement of the national life,
thought of both things. Knowing that his people were born
to a high destiny, he put down " for a memorial" tbe record of
great events in which they were concerned, and committed
to writing laws and ordinances for their future guidance. But
as to the actual amount of his writing we are not informed.
Things that were "rehearsed in the ears " of Joshua, things that
were spoken to "Aaron and his sons," or to " the priests," may
have been preserved orally by them, or committed afterwards to-
writing. The potent influence of Moses on the history and
destinies of his nation is undoubted ; but the precise amount of
the matter contained in the Pentateuch that came directly from
his hand is a legitimate subject of critical inquiry. Now the
tradition of the Jews, accepted by the early Christian Church,:
was evidently based on the general belief as to the historical
position of Moses, not on a minute examination of tbe writings
ascribed to him. It belongs to a time when the work of literary
criticism was unknown, and it did not take account of some
considerations which must be borne in mind in seeking to arrive
at an exact conclusion on such a subject.
7. Modification of Traditional View. — In the first place, we must
bear in mind the long time that elapsed between Moses and
Ezra, to whom the Jews attribute the restoration of the law. It
was a time, not only long in extent, but filled up with the extra
ordinary vicissitudes of a most remarkable history, periods of
declension and seasons of revival, war from without and schism
from within, the deadening effects of prosperity and the sobering
influences of captivity ; and we are told nothing of the custody
and fate of the sacred writings during this period, and only in
very general terms are they mentioned at all. The history turns
more upon the maintenance of the nation's religion than upon
the preservation of its literature. The prophets had at times to
contend earnestly for the very recognition of the true God and
the practice of the most fundamental duties of religion; and
though they ever appealed to the covenant relation of Israel, we
do not wonder that they troubled themselves little with tbe
enforcing of the mere external observances of the law, or even
threw contempt upon these when they were divorced from heart-
religion. For long periods the people of Israel seem to have been as
ignorant of their own religion as the people of Europe were of

8 BOOK BY BOOK.
theirs in the Dark Ages. The discovery of tbe law book in the
reign of Josiah (2 Kings xxii.) is like the discovery by Luther
of the New Testament in the monastery ; and when at last Ezra
reads the law to the returned exiles, it is as new to them as the
Bible was to the people at the Eeformation. But whose hands
preserved the original writings during all this time ? By what
pens were they copied from generation to generation, and in
what form were they handed down till they came into the posses
sion of Ezra the Scribe ?
These questions suggest a second point which we have to bear
in mind in considering this matter, viz., the mode in which books
were transmitted in ancient times. We know with what care
the Jews have preserved and handed down their sacred books
from the time that they were collected into a canon ; but that
time falls comparatively late, and, whatever may have been the
cause, we have not, as in the case of the New Testament,
manuscripts of the Old Testament reaching back to a period
reasonably near the time at which the books were composed.
The oldest known manuscripts of the Old Testament belong to
the tenth century after Christ, and though versions of an older
date show that the text was fixed centuries before, yet we have
do means of knowing what aids were employed to secure the
correctness of the text, or, indeed, on what principle the text
was fixed. And when we look at the books themselves, and con
sider the mode in which other Eastern works have been handed
down, there are some noteworthy features that strike us.
Tbe anonymous character of all the historical writings of the
Old Testament would lead us to conclude that the ancient
Hebrews had not the idea of literary property which we
attach to authorship. Joshua, as we have seen, wrote certain
things in tbe Book of the Law ; and whole passages are found
repeated, with variations, in different parts of Scripture* Even
in two contemporaneous writers the same piece occurs, without
any information as to whether the one borrowed from the other
or both from a common source, t Whatever documents or
sources were employed in the Pentateuch, they are simply
appropriated, and only on rare occasions]: is the quarter named
from which they are taken. Besides this absence of marks of
quotation, we have-to note the absence of marginal or foot-notes,
such as are common in modern works of history. Tet, unless
* Compare 2 Sam. xxii. wifh Psalm xviii., and 2 Ejngs xviii. 13— xx 19
with Isaiah xxxvi. — xxxix. ' '
t Compare Isaiah ii. 1 — 4, with Mioah iv. 1  3.
j As in Numbers xxi. 14.

INTRODUCTION TO THE PENTATEUCH. V
the Hebrews were very different from other Orientals in this
respect, they must have written on the margins of their manu
scripts. In Eastern works that have been handed down in
manuscript, it is tbe commonest thing to find marginal notes
by a later band by way of explanation or commentary, and not
an uncommon thing to find, on the margin of one work, a com
plete treatise of another author on the same or a kindred
subject.. Now a scribe copying a work with marginal notes, especially
if it were a work in regard to which the question of literary-
property did not occur to him, might naturally transfer such
notes into the text ; or an editor, wishing to have a complete
edition, might combine two or more longer pieces into one whole,
adding to the fulness of tbe work, yet allowing the joinings of
the original parts to be seen. Of course, when once the .books
were collected into a canon and the text fixed, this was no longer
admissible ; and the Jew3 have most carefully handed down, the
books of their canon, without venturing to change a word or a
letter. But what happened to these anonymous works while
they were in process of completion is not a matter of direct
historical knowledge. It is a legitimate task for criticism to
examine the books themselves, as other ancient books are
examined, with a view to determine, if possible, by what
process their materials were brought together and handed
down. 8. Composite Character of the Pentateuch. — It is long since the
composite character of the Pentateuch was observed. Even the
earlier Jewish writers, who claimed Mosaic authorship for the
whole, except the concluding verses of Deuteronomy, which
record the death of Moses ; and some of the more acute thinkers
of a later time were struck by the occurrence of j expressions,
phrases, and passages which could hardly have come from his
hand, but seemed rather to be later additions.* Several writers
in the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries drew attention to
other features in the books pointing in the same direction, and
advanced theories to account for them ; but it was not till the
middle of the eighteenth century that a line of investigation
was started which determined the future course of systematic
criticism. * It is impossible, in an introduction like the present, to go into details,
or even "to refer to many of the- phases which critical discussion on this
subject has assumed. The reader who is conversant with the subject will
observe that the aim is to lead on, as briefly as possible, to the present position
of the discussion.

10 BOOK BY BOOK.
Astruc, a learned French physician, accepting Moses as the
author of the Book of Genesis, set himself to discover and
exhibit the documents that Moses had made use of m the
writing of it. He pointed out that certain parts were distin
guished by the employment of the name Elohim, rendered God
in our English version, while other parts employed the name,
usually written Jehovah in Enghsh, and rendered in our version ,
The Loed. He supposed that these different names indicated
different original documents, and that out of these two larger
documents, and a certain number of smaller ones, Moses con
structed the existing Book of Genesis, and the opening chapters
of Exodus. On the line of enquiry thus started it has been the
endeavour of modern criticism to determine the component
elements of the Pentateuch and their relative dates._
9. Literary Criticism. — It was observed by the critics that this
peculiarity in the use of the Divine names was not confined to
Genesis, but extended to tbe other books. It was also noted
that the portions using these different names had other character
istics distinguishing them from one another ; moreover, that the
Book of Deuteronomy had a style and tone different in important
respects from both, and that all these literary features are
found also in the Book of Joshua. The problem, therefore, was
to account for this diversified character of composition, to deter
mine the relations of the various component parts to one another,
and to fix their respective dates.
In the course of an inquiry, prosecuted with the utmost labour
and ingenuity, various theories were put forward, agreeing in
certain main points, but exhibiting differences of detail as
numerous as the writers who engaged in tbe discussion. The
theory of fragments, advanced by some, according to which
the Pentateuch was composed of isolated pieces, put together
without any internal connection, was admitted to be inadequate
to explain the manifest coherence of tbe whole. The hypothesis
of two independent original works, the one Elohistic and tbe
other Jehovistic, combined by a later band, did not account for
the fact that certain Elohistic parts adhered so firmly to the-
Jehovistic work that they could not be separated. And the
theory that an original Elohistic work had been supplemented
by a Jehovistic writer, left unexplained the fact that the supposed
supplement appeared to be, so far, a document complete in
itself. The main points on which critics came to be agreed, about a,
quarter of a century ago, were : — that there was, first in order,
an Elohistic document (in which were incorporated some elements-
of an ancient date), running through the Pentateuch and beyond

INTRODUCTION TO THE PENTATEUCH. 11
it ; that there was also a document described as Jehovistic,
although Elohistic matter adhered to it ; and that there came,
finally, the Deuteronomic portion, the work of a succeeding
writer, who had combined the others, and, with the addition of
his own material, constru'cted what we have now substantially
in the Pentateuch and the Book of Joshua. As to the manner
in which the various elements were brought together, and the
times at which the composition and editing took place, scarcely
any two writers of note agreed. Criticism almost lost itself in
the multiplicity of its details ; and Kuenen, one of tbe most
prominent of the critical school, had at last to confess that " the
books of Moses " themselves " did not furnish a sufficient
number of fixed points, and left room for great difference of
opinion " on this subject.
10. Historical Criticism. — Meanwhile another line of inquiry
had been taken up. It was presumed that an examination of the
historical books from Judges onwards would show to what extent
the laws and ceremonies of the Pentateuch had been actually
observed, and would consequently afford means for determining
in what order the different parts of the legislation had come into
force. The Deuteronomic legislation was taken as the starting-
point; and it was concluded that, since the law prescribing a
central sanctuary* was not enforced before the time of Josiah,
the law itself could not have existed till that king's reign, and
the substance of the book must have been written shortly before
the reformation which he set on foot.f On the same line of
reasoning, Graf set himself to examine the history with reference
to the legislation contained in the Elohistic portion, which had
hitherto been reputed the earliest part of the Pentateuch. The
conclusion at which he arrived was, that the laws of that portion
were not observed till after the Captivity, and that therefore they
must have been introduced by Ezra and his successors. And then,
when it was pointed out that these laws are closely incorporated
with historical details which relate the early institution of the
laws, Graf boldly declared that these historical portions were
likewise of late date, and must have been written to give a
colour of antiquity to the laws.
This theory, as compared with other theories which had pre
ceded it, has not inappropriately been called a theory of crystal
lization. For it explains the composition of the Pentateuch and
historical books by the supposition of a process of literary
deposits belonging to different periods. That is to say, it pro-
* It is found in Deut. xii. 4 ff, and elsewhere.
t 2 Kings xxii., xxiii.

12 BOOK BY BOOK.
fesses to have discovered three different codes of legislation,
separated by wide intervals of time, viz., tbe Book o± the'
Covenant, contained in Exodus xx. 23— xxiii. ; tbe Deuteronomic
Code, introduced in tbe reign of Josiah ; and the Levitical Oode,
embracing a great part of Exodus and the whole of Leviticus,
and introduced after the Exile. And it arranges the historical
materials of the books in a series of deposits, according as they
show that one code or another was in existence at the time ot
¦ their composition. The theory, it will be seen, is revolutionary
in its critical aspects ; for it places last in order of composition.
the document which had hitherto been considered to have all
the marks of being tbe earliest. It is also revolutionary m tbe
view it gives of the course of Israel's history ; for it represents
tbe nation as having, existed with the smallest amount of written
law, and with the very crudest and most elementary notions of
reHgion up to the time of tbe prophets, who were tbe teachers
of a purer faith, and through whose influence the two greater
legislative codes were at subsequent times introduced. Tbe order
of succession, on this theory, is no longer "Moses and the
Prophets," but tbe Prophets and Mosaism ; and a large part of
the narratives of the Pentateuch is legendary or fictitious, com
posed at a late time to support an unhistorical view that had
come to prevail as to Israel's early history.
It is evident that the question of the handing down of books
dwindles into insignificance in view of tbe issue that is now
raised. The point now is, not as to tbe amount that Moses wrote,
but as to the truth of the story which the Pentateuch tells of the
time and activity of Moses; and we have, as opposed to the
account which the Biblical writers give of the course of tbe
history, an entirely different account, which is evolved by critical
processes from the writings. As to the steps in the critical
process by which the theory is reached, detailed discussion
would here be out of place ; and it will be more convenient
to refer to them in treating of the several books. It may be
merely said here that many points which are claimed to be proved
are at least very questionable ; and that the fluctuations of critical
inquiry in the past, and the attitude of reserve maintained by
some writers ot undoubted critical ability at the present time,
make it very probable that what claims to-day to be " the
received view of European scholarship " may at no distant date
be seen to be open to revision. We can only make a few obser
vations on the theory as a whole.
11. Objections to the Critical View. — This theory of Israel's
history, when presented in its fully developed form, is open to
very serious objections from three different points of view.

INTRODUCTION TO THE PENTATEUCH. 13
In the first place, it is manifest that the principle of denying
the existence of a law on the ground that, at a stated time, or
for a certain period, there is no historical proof of its observance,
is one that cannot safely be applied. The history of the Chris
tian Church during the nineteen centuries in which the New
Testament has been accepted as the authoritative rule of faith
and Hfe is a standing refutation of it ; for have there not been
doctrines and practices lying in abeyance, sometimes for centuries,
in spite of the written word? On this principle it might be
concluded that the second commandment was not known in
Solomon's time, because there were " graven images " of bulls
under the great brazen laver in the Temple court ; and from the
way in which Jeremiah speaks of the practices of cutting and
making bald for the dead- (Jer. xvi. 6), it might be inferred that
the laws forbidding these things (Deut. xiv. 1, Lev. xix. 28) were
unknown to him. The Law of the Covenant itself was syste-
maticaUy violated in its essential part, the prohibition of
tampering with idolatry, down to the close of the nation's
independence. It will be the proper place in the chapters on the
succeeding books to speak of their alleged silence as to the
Mosaic legislation, and the accounts they give of the antecedent
history. It is sufficient here to observe that the historical books
continuaUy assume Israel's unfaithfulness to the law and the
covenant, that the prophets had a higher function than to enforce
the observance of ceremonial laws, and that aU succeeding
writers assume the truthfulness of the history of the Mosaic
period. In the second place, when the theory is appHed in detail it is
found to raise more difficulties, and difficulties of a more serious
nature, than those which it professes to remove. («) It puts a
weight upon the age of Ezra and his successors which it wUl not
bear. It is plain from the Books of Ezra and Nehemiah, and
from what we know of the succeeding time, that that age was not
one of such productiveness as this theory demands. These men
rested upon a past, and but for a general belief in the authority
of an existing law they could not have induced the people to
accept the reforms which they introduced. Moreover, (b), the
Samaritans could not have received their Pentateuch later than
the time of Ezra and Nehemiah ; it is virtuaHy the same book as
the Hebrew one, and in view of their jealousy of the leaders at-
Jerusalem, their possession of it implies their belief in its exist
ence and authoritative character at a much earlier time. Again,
(c), this theory fails entirely to explain the activity of the
prophets before the Exile. For it represents them as the virtual
originators and founders of the monotheistic reHgion, and the

14 BOOK BY BOOK.
nation of their time as not only practising the religious rites of
the heathen around them, but as actuaHy knowing no better ;•
whereas the whole tone of the prophetic teaching is one of
reproof for unfaithfulness to the true God, and for breaches of a
covenant which was tbe very basis of the nation's existence.*
Finally, (d), the theory fails to account for the high esteem
in which Moses is held from first to last in Scripture, and for the
firm belief in the events which are associated with his name ; in
other words, it reduces the influence of Moses to such a degree
that there is not sufficient material left on which to base tbe
prevalent beHef that he was tbe great lawgiver and leader of the
nation. In the third place, underneath this theory, as it has been held
by its most prominent advocates, Hes the assumption that religion
is merely a matter of ethical development, an assumption which
vitiates the whole process. Thus Wellhausen adopts as the
motto of his inquiry the words used by St. Paul in reference to-
the heathen nations, ' ' these having not the law, do by nature
the works of tbe law," and summarily sets aside all that is
miraculous in the narratives as unhistorical; and Kuenen opens
his "ReHgion of Israel" with the declaration, "For us the
Israelitish religion is one of tbe principal religions, nothing less,
but also nothing more," and proceeds to treat tbe documents on
the hypothesis that the reHgion of Israel grew up by natural
development. _ This is a begging of the whole question. Tbe
whole point is to find out whether it is or is not "something '
more." These writers themselves accept tbe fact that the history
of Israel is unique, and that it was their religion that made it so.
The whole question is, Was there not something unique in the
manner in which this reHgion was made known ? But the pre
supposition with which these critics start requires them to
identify tbe religion of any period with the belief and practice
of the people for the time being ; and their theory of historical
development enables each individual to extract just as much or
as Httle of historical fact from the documents before him as suits
his own views. WeUhausen, for example, admits that the
* As an instance of the way in which a theory can be pushed at all
hazards, it may be noted that Stade, in his " aeschichte des Volkes Israel "
(1881—1888), admits that Hosea, one of the earliest of the writing prophets
represents the corrupt religion of his time as a declension ; but instead of
accepting the prophet's declaration as a statement of fact, he says in effect
that Hosea was wrong on this matter, and that his misrepresentation we
pared the way for the "unhistorical view" that came to be taken of the
nation's history under the influence of later ideas !

INTRODUCTION TO THE PENTATEUCH. 15
Exodus from Egypt was an historical event, although it was
effected in a natural manner ; but Stade says boldly that it is in
vain to look for traces of Israel's sojourn in Egypt because the
people were never there. And when two writers, claiming to be
guided by the same principles of criticism, draw conclusions so
different from the same documents, it is plain that it is something
apart from the documents that determines the result.
12. Credibility. — On the whole it maybe said that the course of
critical inquiry tends to confirm our confidence in the credibility
and value of these early books. By investigating the process by
which the books were brought together, it has, so to speak, sum
moned so many different witnesses in corroboration of the history.
The different portions, so diverse in their tone, and belonging
to different periods, fit together in a remarkable manner into a
consistent history, showing development in the best sense of the
word. Arranged in any order into which the ingenuity of criti
cism may cast them, they tell substantially the same tale. Tbe
only alternative, that large portions were invented at a later time
to support a fiction, is an instance of criticism driven .to despera
tion. That a writing is late is no reason to regard it as inaccu
rate. The very lateness of a writer may be the occasion of
giving him a deeper insight ; and the course of the succeeding
history has proved that tbe insight of the Old Testament writers
was correct.
The existence of the Jewish race at the present day is a fact
which can only be explained by their history and their reHgion.
The Christian religion itself is the witness to the unique charac
ter of the history of Israel. We do not require to press the New
Testament references to the Law into proofs that the Pentateuch
as it is came from the hand of Moses. But the whole history of
Christianity proves that a reHgion may, at its rise, be far above
the conceptions of the time, and that it may, for centuries, be far
above the practice of those who profess it ; and the New Testa
ment rests so firmly on the Old, that there is the strongest pre
sumption that what is true of the one, in this respect, is true of
the other. We need not undervalue the truth that is found in
the other " principal religions " of the world. The Bible itself
acknowledges the existence of such truth in various ways. But
the fact remains, that the One God designed from the first to
give to mankind one religion which is above aU others ; and
these early books show us tbe first stages of preparation for its
manifestations. There may remain doubts as to when the various parts of the
Pentateuch were actuaUy written down ; it may be admitted that

16 BOOK BY BOOK.
later writers wrote in the Hght of the events and circumstances
of their own times. But the substantial coherence and consist
ency of the whole indicate a guiding Hand and a Divine purpose
reveahng itself from stage to stage ; and the manner in which
the story is told indicates that there was a perception of such a
plan and a consciousness of the purpose on the part of the men
by whom the story was committed to writing. So that, in reading
these records of early time, while we note " tbe sundry times and
divers manners " in which it was made known, we become more
and more convinced that a great plan of mercy underHes the
whole, which is unfolded through Moses and all the prophets,
and is at last fulfilled in Jesus Christ.

GENESIS.
1. Name ofthe _Z?ooA.— The names given in the Hebrew Bible
to the five books composing tbe Pentateuch consist merely of a
word or words taken from the opening verse of each ; and so this
first book of the series is simply designated by the expression
translated " In the beginning " ... Jewish writers sometimes
employ other names descriptive of the contents, calHng the book
before us the "Book of Creation ; " and, on the same principle,
the HeUenists and Church Fathers appHed to it tbe name we now
use, Genesis, i.e. Origin or Genealogy. The name is not inappro
priate, in view of the commencement of the book and the
recurring genealogies which are found in it ; but it would be
inadequate, if taken to imply that the chief aim of the book is to
give an account of the origin of the world. In the opening chapters
we have indeed an account of the Creation and of the early history
of tbe human race ; but this is but preparatory to the main part of
tbe book, beginning at the eleventh chapter, viz. the history of
the chosen family of Abraham, which at the close of the book is
seen expanding into the chosen nation of Israel.
2. Plan and Form. — A definite plan is more observable in the
Book of Genesis than in the other books of the Pentateuch.
Starting with the origin of the world and of the human race, it
teUs of the entrance of sin (i. — iv.), the spread of mankind and
the increase of evil leading to the infliction of Divine judgment
in the Flood (v. — viii. 4.). A new commencement is made with
righteous Noah and his family, and there is a new expansion and
increase of evil, culminating in the judgment of Babel (viu. 15 —
xi. 9). The chosen succession is again limited to the line of Shem
and the family of Terah (xi. 10 — 32), and at this point the
patriarchal history commences, the remainder of the book being
occupied with tbe fortunes of Abraham-, Isaac, and Jacob and
his family, who at the close are transplanted to the soil of
Egypt, from which they are to come forth as a nation.

18 BOOK BY BOOK.
In all this we perceive at once the narrowing of the lines of
God's choice and the intensifying of tbe purpose for which the
choice is made.* We perceive, also, what may be caUed the
philosophy of history which runs througb the Old Testament : a
holy seed grows, becomes corrupted, and suffers punishment,
but a remnant, purified by chastisement, is saved, again expands
and runs through the same cycle.
Very observable, in the matter of Hterary form, is the
arrangement of the history in a series of genealogies. The
expression, " These are the generations," occurs ten (or,
Btrictly speaking, eleven) times, showing a steady progres
sion of the narrative. Thus we have " the generations of " —
The heavens and the earth (ii. 4). Terah (xi. 27).
Adam (v. 1). Ishmael (xxv. 12).
Noah (vi. 9). Isaac (xxv. 19).
Sods of Noah (x. 1). Esau (xxxvi. 1, 9).
Shem (xi. 10). Jacob (xxxvii. 2).
Among other Hterary characteristics of the composition that
have been pointed out may be mentioned the two accounts of
the Creation (i. 1 — ii. 3 and ii. 4 — 25), and two of the Flood
(vi. 5 — ix. 17), distinguished by the names of " God " and "tbe
Loed " respectively, in the latter case the two accounts being
fused into one. The notes in regard to the "Canaanite" (xii.
6) and "the kings that reigned in Edom" (xxxvi. 31) were
also long ago pointed out as indications of the work of a late
hand in the composition ; and the position of the account of tbe
family of Keturab (xxv.) may be taken as an instance of the
writer's indifference to strict chronological order.f
3. Scope. — The Book of Genesis, regarded by itself, might be
described as the account given by the Hebrews of their own origin
and of the origin of the world. To tbe questions, Whence are
we ? and Whence came this world ? aH literary nations have,
in their infancy, appHed themselves, and given very various
answers. They are tbe questions which children put to their
parents in all ages, and this book contains the answers which we
may suppose the fathers in Israel gave to their children when
they asked the meaning of various reHgious observances, or
clustered round their knees and gazed inquiringly up to heaven,
while the moon walked in brightness and stars looked down from
the cloudless sky. They would be told how their forefather
Abraham left his home in distant Ur of the Chaldees, and
journeyed westward in obedience to a heavenly caU : that the
* See Introduction to the Pentateuch, 5 3, p. 3.
t Ibid., §§ 4, 8, pp. 4, 9. '

GENESIS. 19
God who caHed him was the Creator of aU things, who bad made
aU things good, and man for a holy purpose : how men, in their
forgetfulness of God, had fallen into the worship of sun,
moon, stars, and other created things, but that God had never
ceased to guide them and make Himself known to them : and how
Abraham had been finaUy severed from tbe idolatrous race, and
made the father of a family which was to be the depositary
of God's truth, the means of keeping aHve His memorial in the
world. Such was the faith, such were the traditions, going back to
earhest times, which must have prevailed, if not among tbe mass
of the people, at aU events among the thinking and pious of the
nation, before the materials which compose the Book of Genesis
took shape. Such a faith was needed to give the nation soHdity
and unity ; without such a faith it could not have assumed the
form it took nor held the position it maintained, in the midst
of nations and peoples vastly, more powerful in numbers and
superior in the arts and appliances of life.
4. Religious Tone. — And we cannot fail to be struck, first of
aU, with the high reHgious tone of these early traditions of the
Hebrews, as compared with the accounts which other nations of
antiquity have given of themselves and of the world. The first
verse strikes the keynote of the whole. By the few simple words,
" In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth," the
"gods many" of the heathen mythologies are swept away, the
extravagant ancient cosmogonies are brushed aside ; the deifica
tion of material things, the degradation of tbe Godhead, and the
fabulous divine origin of mankind — everything, in short, that
distinguishes the pagan systems — is contradicted, and the world
and the human race are set in a new and brighter Hght. Even
when there is an approach to the mythological language of
paganism (as in vi. 2), there is no approach to its gross
materialistic conceptions. The very name of God, Elohim, is
plural in form, but it is regularly employed as a singular, and
suggests no polytheistic meaning ; and though the Loud, Jehovah,
is represented as smeUing with satisfaction the savour of Noah's
sacrifice (viii. 21), and coming down to earth to interfere in
man's affairs (xi. 7), yet there is not the faintest trace of the
ascription to Him of the caprices and passions which the heathen
attributed to their gods.
And this is the characteristic of the Hebrew writers through
out the Old Testament, that, though their language is steeped
in poetic feeling and abounds in the boldest personifications, they
are never betrayed by it into the deification of created things, or
the endowment of them with conscious Hfe. Sun, moon, and
c2

20 BOOK BY BOOK.
stars, which others worshipped and regarded as sentient
existences, are merely the work of God's fingers. Hebrew poets
may represent the morning stars as singing together, floods
Hfting up their voices, and fields clapping their hands, but they
are stars, floods and fields still, and aU their manifestations are
to the praise of God. In tbe wide universe everything is from
God and subject to Him ; of aU earthly creatures, man alone is
made in the Divine image, and man's world is still under the
direct government of God.
We may find, in the later history of Israel, this faith over
laid with many corruptions, and held in conjunction with very
inconsistent practices (and what nation has not exhibited similar
perversions of its own religion?), but it is there as a Hght
shining in a dark place, and giving to the world a witness to
the true God. The whole subsequent history of Israel is based
on the supposition that God made Himself known to Abraham,
and that the patriarch handed on to his descendants a purer
tradition of primitive times than the traditions of other historic
peoples. This tradition the Book of Genesis has preserved for
us ; and in whatever mode we may suppose that the mate
rials of the book were brought together, or in whatever way we
may conclude that they were preserved before they assumed
their present form, it is round this faith, as round a magnet, that
they have been attracted and have grouped themselves : that
God, the Maker of aH, has had a purpose from the beginning,
and that, amid aU the strivings of mankind, and the idolatries of
the nations, the Divine rule has never been relaxed, and a
Divine providence has been recognised by those who possessed the
secret of the Lord.
5. Relation to Science. — Now, if it is the main purpose of the
book to emphasise this truth, it is of the utmost importance that
we should bear it constantly in view if we would estimate rightly
the character of the whole and the significance of the various
parts. Yet much perplexity and needless alarm have been caused
by the neglect of so obvious a rule. So strong is the fascination
of aH questions as to the origins of things, that many persons,
accepting the Bible as the highest authority, took for granted
that, when it touched on such questions, it would give definite
and precise information ; and when science, in the course of its
advances, seemed to give a different account of some matters,
there was no Httle alarm at tbe supposed " conflict of science
and reHgion."
AH this comes of losing sight of tbe standpoint of the book,
the purpose of which is not to teU us about nature, so much as
about the God of nature and providence. What the sacred

GENESIS. 21
writers know and have learned on other subjects they wiU teU,
so far as these bear on the matter in hand, and in a manner
which the readers for which they wrote could comprehend. As
the historian of Christianity goes back to Judaism, to show the
connection of the old faith with the new, so the historian of
Israel goes back to the time before the nation had a separate
existence, in order to explain its origin and standing. But in
the one case, as in the other, the writer passes by much that
might be interesting, because it has no. special bearing on his
subject. As the stream of religious history is traced upwards
to its source, there are many things seen on its banks, to Hnger
over which would divert us from the main purpose, which is not
to satisfy curiosity on aU subjects, but to show the bearing of aU
on the one point in view. The facts of modern science were then
hidden from .men, and without scientific process and scientific
language, could neither have been described nor understood ; and
to expect early Hebrew writers to teach us exact geological, or
astronomical, or ethnographical science, is as unreasonable
to expect them to write in a modern language.
The book of nature is open to aH, and what man can learn
from it God leaves him to learn ; but God Himself is known
only to those to whom He makes Himself known. The secrets
of nature He has left mankind to learn by slow degrees through
out the ages for themselves ; but in mercy He made Himself
known to men in the earHest times, and has revealedhimself with
increasing clearness as they could bear it. That the sacred writers
themselves did not contemplate scientific accuracy on subjects
that have a scientific reference we may see from the varying
modes in which the work of creation is represented in different
places. By a hard and Hteral interpretation it might be con
cluded from chap. ii. 1 9 that the creation of man is made to
precede that of the beast of the field and the fowl of the air ; yet
the writer or compiler of the book must have seen no inconsis
tency in the accounts of the first and second chapters. And
there are other passages which, if pressed HteraHy, would
exhibit remarkable variations from the account of the first
chapter : * but, with unvarying voice they all proclaim the
one great fact, that God is the Creator and Preserver of aU
things. In Hke manner we perceive that the traditions of early times,
in proportion as the events recede into the distance, are clothed
in more general and pictorial or poetical forms, while detafls
* See Job xxvi. 7 — 11 ; xxxviii. 4 — 7 ; Psalm xxiv. 2; Prov. viii. 24 — 29.
In Psalm civ. the order of Genesis i. is followed, but no reference is made to
the six days.

22 BOOK BY BOOK.
of patriarchal Hfe are sketched in clearer Hght and with firmer
hand; but whether the view is near or remote, one fact
shines with undimmed lustre, that God rules aU things for
good. 6. Confirmed by Modern Research. — Yet the results of modern
science do not conflict with the statements of the Book of Genesis,
when these are read in the sense in which they are meant to be
taken. On the contrary, the increase of knowledge that has
been gained in tbe fields of physical science, of archaeology, and
of topography, has added much to our understanding of these
early records, and shown in many ways how accurate are tbe
statements of the sacred writers, even on matters which were
only incidental to the great subject they had before them.
(i.) In regard to physical science, it is not necessary, from our
point of view, to enter into details as to where geology and the
BibHcal account of Creation agree, or to discuss at length the
sense in which some expressions are employed in tbe first
chapter of Genesis. We must make aUowance here, as in the
case of any writing, for the writer's standpoint and tbe under
standing of those for whom he wrote. But tbe marvellous thing
is, that if the BibHcal writers were not led to set down scientific
truth in scientific phrases, they were guided so as not to set down
things inconsistent with scientific results. It may be safely said
that the BibHcal account of Creation agrees more closely with the
conclusions of modern science than with any of the cosmogonies
that were adopted before the sciences of geology and astronomy
existed, and -that of aU attempts to explain the origins of things,
this comes by far the nearest to the truth as science has dis
covered it. And this is not so much because it contains more
precise detaUs, but because it is drawn on broader Hnes, which
science, as it advances, is enabled to fiU in with ascertained facts.
Science in its patient advance into the remote past, is showing
more and more clearly the manner in which the world came into
existence ; but the goal towards which its researches are tending
is the point at which Revelation stands shedding its light down
the ages.
(n.) Again, from discoveries made in recent years among the
ruins of Babylon and Assyria, much light has been thrown on
the early traditions of the Hebrews. We are now able to teU
what were the early beHef s of tbe people in the distant land from
which Abraham came into Canaan, and to compare them with
the accounts of tbe BibHcal writers. Thus we find, among these
remains, detailed accounts of the Creation and of the Flood, as
weU as other traditions of matters touched upon in the early
chapters of Genesis ; but while the resemblances are so strong

GENESIS. 23
that we cannot but see that they have a common source, the
contrast between the gross polytheism on the one hand, and the
pure monotheism on the other, strikes tbe reader at a glance.
In both respects tbe accuracy of the Bible story is attested ; for
it is to the effect that the traditions of primitive times were per
petuated among the peoples living in those lands, but that
Abraham was severed from the idolatrous behef of his fathers.*
So also the table of the families of the earth in chapter x. has
been shown by tbe inscriptions to correspond with the nations
that lay round about the field of history which the sacred writer
set himself to describe. And Haran, whose great distance from
"Or of the Chaldees was long an occasion of perplexity, is now
known to have been the frontier town of the same Babylonian
empire, on the high road leading to the west.
(Hi.) FinaUy, Palestine has in recent years been more carefuUy
explored, and tbe habits of the people more attentively studied,
with the result that the accuracy of the BibHcal accounts has
been marveUously confirmed. A mere romancer is never more
liable to f aU into error than when he enters into topographical
details, or describes the modes of Hfe of a long-past time, and,
in both respects, we can test these stories of the Hves of the
patriarchs to the letter. We can measure their journeys; we
can stand where they are represented as standing, and ' ' lift up
our eyes, and see " what they are said to have seen. And there
is the other point. As the God of the Hebrew writers is high
above aU the passions and frailties of the heathen gods, so their
men are divested of the fabulous quaHties of heathen heroes :
they are as human as their God is divine. The narrator who
could describe tbe Hfe and wanderings of the patriarchs as they
are here depicted must have had the actual figures before bis
eye. But the mode of Hfe which is here described was impossible
at the time the land was filled with a settled population. If,
after the manner of some critics, we search for a time when this
mode of Hfe prevailed, we must either go back to a period before
Israel had grown into a settled nation, or come down to a time
when Hfe in Palestine had undergone a complete change. The
Hfe is the life of the Arab of the desert, and can be tested by it
in minutest detaU, but the scene is Palestine, and the topography
is exact to the minutest detaH. The narratives, therefore, came
from some one who was conversant with Hfe in Palestine when
* Attempts that have been made to show that the Biblical account of
Creation was obtained from Babylon in the time of the Captivity, and re-cast
in a monotheistic form in the post-Exilian writings, have not been successful.
The resemblance is even more striking in the portions which the critics have
not assigned to so late a date.

24 BOOK BY BOOK.
its inhabitants were partly settled and partly nomad, as it was in
the days of the patriarchs, and as it is at the present day.
7. Value. — Thus, from different quarters we find facts which
heighten our admiration for the accuracy of tbe account handed
down to us in this ancient book. It may be a matter of criticism
to discover the joinings of the narratives, and to trace tbe literary
process by which the book took its present shape ; but it is of far
deeper interest to note the existence of a pure Hght in the midst
of the world's darkness. It is our familiarity with it that makes
us overlook the significance of the early testimony of the Hebrew
people to the truth of the one God. But when we reflect that,
at a time when the great nations of antiquity were stumbling in
the dark on this subject, or groping their way towards it, the
Hebrew race had it as their oldest tradition, we cannot but
acknowledge that they received it from God Himself. And of
far higher importance is it to our faith than 'the anticipation of
the results of modern science would have been, to be assured
that from hoary antiquity, the God and Father of our Lord Jesus
Christ has been guiding our race and preparing it for tbe fulness
of the times.

EXODUS.
1. Name. — The second book of the Pentateuch is, in the Hebrew
Bible, simply entitled "Now these are the names of " .... or
briefly, " The names of "... . Exodus, by which it is known
among us, is the Greek name which was given by the Church
Fathers, to indicate the principal subject of the book, the depar
ture of the chfldren of Israel from Egypt. The later Jews, how
ever, when they wished to designate it by its contents, with their
legalistic predilection caHed it the book of "Damages," from
the legislative element which here comes prominently into view.
For, whereas the Book of Genesis is almost entirely of a narra
tive character, this book, Hke that of Numbers, is of mixed contents,
the former being narrative, the latter legislative. Yet these two
elements are not sharply separated the one from the other. In the
middle of the account of the preparations for the Exodus we find
detafled regulations for the observance of the Passover and the
Law of the Firstborn (xH. 1 — xHi. 16) ; and closely interwoven
with the legislation at Sinai we have not only the particulars of the
occasion under which the laws were given (xxiv.) and the account
of the manner in which some ofthe regulations were put into exe
cution (xxxv. 20 — xxxix), but also the narrative of the Sin of the
Golden Calf and the judgment to which it led (xxxn. — xxxiii).
2. Divisions and Contents. — The book may, however, be roughly
divided into two parts, chapters i. — xviii. giving an account of
the departure of Israel from Egypt, and chapters xix. — xl. re
lating to the ratification of the covenant and the delivery of the
law at Sinai in the first and second years of the Exodus.
In tbe former portion we have a description of the oppression
in Egypt, the story of the birth and eariier Hfe of Moses, and
his appointment to be leader of the people (i. — iv.). Then
foUows the account of the struggle, which is both poHtical,
between Pharaoh and Israel, and religious, between the signs
of Jehovah and those of the Egyptian magicians (v. — x.). The

26 BOOK BY BOOK.
struggle terminates in the tenth plague and the hurried departure
of Israel (xu. 29—36), closely connected with which are the in
stitution of tbe Passover and the Law of the Sanctification of the
Firstborn. Tbe journey to Sinai is then narrated, with details
of the provision made by God for the guidance and sustenance of
the people in the wilderness (xv. 22— xvii. 7), their victory over
Amalek (xvii. 8—16), and tbe advice given by Jethro to Moses
for the ordinary administration of justice (xviii. 1 — 27).
The second portion of the book, starting with tbe accompHshed
fact of the deliverance from Egypt, lays down the condition of
the covenant between God and Israel, the observance of which
would preserve them as " a pecuHar treasure, a kingdom of
priests, and a holy nation " (xix. 1—6). The condition being
accepted by the people, there foUow the declaration of the law
and the solemn ratification of it, over the "book of the cove
nant" (xiv. 7— xxiv. 8). From chapter xxiv. 9 to xxxi. 18 we
have an account of the stay of Moses for forty days in the Mount,
during which be receives tbe tables of stone and detailed instruc
tions for tbe making of the Tabernacle. Meantime the people
sin in tbe makingyrf the golden calf, and Moses intercedes for
them ; God make&'a revelation of Himself as the Merciful and
Eigbteous, the /tables are renewed and the covenant is again
confirmed (xxsSi. — xxxiv.). And finaUy, there is a detailed
description of the work of preparing and fitting the Tabernacle,
which is set up on the first day of the first month of the second
year of the Exodus (xxxv. — xl.).
3. Connection with Genesis. — The Book of Exodus exhibits an
advance upon that of Genesis. We have here no longer bio
graphies and family histories, but tbe beginnings of the history
of the chosen nation ; and in place of revelations from time to
time to individuals, we have provision for a continuous com
munication of the Divine wiU to the whole people by means of
divinely appointed leaders.
The people that was, in the providence of God, to be placed in
the midst of aU the great nations of antiquity, and out of which
in the f ulness of time was to radiate the Hght that was to Hghten
the whole world, is here brought into contact with one of the
great ancient civilisations ; and we cannot f aU to perceive the
fitness of tbe circumstances under which they were consolidated
into an organised nation. Their sojourn in Egypt no doubt
made them familiar with idolatry to their hurt, as the sin of the
golden calf early testifies ; yet they were preserved by tbe prevaU-
ing custom of caste in Egypt, and by their separation in the land of
Goshen, from becoming mixed with the nation by whom they were
enslaved. At the same time, while the rich climate and the hard

EXODUS. Zi
labour favoured the increase of the race, their subject condition
kept th©™. from feeling at home. Moreover, the cultivation of
lettersin the land of their sojourn and the existence of an organised
civU Hfe around them, must have had an educative influence, not
only on Moses and the leaders, but even on the people as a
whole. Bezaleel of the tribe of Judah and Aholiab of the tribe of
Dan, and other " wise-hearted " men, are found fitted to undertake
the difficult technical work of constructing the Tabernacle in the
wilderness, though, at a later time, Solomon had to caH to his
assistance the skHled workmen of Tyre for the construction of the
Temple. Even the conditions of the hard labour in which they
were employed had the counterbalancing advantage in this respect,
that it brought into prominence the native chiefs and heads of
families among the IsraeHfces, who were made responsible to
the Egyptian taskmasters for the work to be accompHshed.
It is also to be noted that the contest represented by the plagues
of Egypt, which must have extended over several months, would
in various ways prepare the people for the Exodus. As the hope
of deliverance grew stronger, *the feeling of national unity and
independence would increase ; and the relenting of Pharaoh from
time to time furnished an opportunity, on every occasion on
which he promised to let the people go, for a rehearsal, so to
speak, of the Exodus. And thus, instead of its being a tumul
tuous flight, as we are sometimes incHned to regard it, the
departure from Egypt took tbe form of an orderly march.
This book, however, rests upon tbe Book of Genesis, and
would be incomprehensible apart from it. Though a great space
of time intervenes between tbe two, the narrative of Exodus
is a continuation of that of Genesis ; and though we have here
the beginnings of the national Hfe of Israel, the elements of the
national Hfe are to be sought in an earHer period. There is not
only community of race among the Israelite bondmen, there is
also a community of reHgion which, more than their separate
abode, preserves them from intermixture with their neighbours,
and at once binds them together and furnishes the motive for
their desire to depart. The servitude of centuries has not
crushed out their feeling of brotherhood nor obliterated tbe
recoUection of the promise given to their fathers. It is impos
sible to explain the sohd movement of the whole body, notwith
standing their own cowardice, and in spite of the oppression of
Egypt, except by the fact that they had already a consciousness
of a Divine caUing and the prospect of a settled home. What
ever may have been their reHgious observances in Egypt, they
evidently did not acknowledge the gods of the country, but
regarded themselves as belonging to a God who made Himself

28 BOOK BY BOOK.
known to their fathers, and who could say, "AU the earth is"
mine " (xix. 5). It was not the law given at Sinai that made
them for the first time the people of Jehovah ; it was the cove
nant, on which tbe law rested, that bound them to Him as a
peculiar treasure ; and that covenant, though it assumed a more
definite format the Exodus, went back to the time of their fathers
in Canaan.*
4. Connection with subsequent Books. — On the other hand, this
Book of Exodus is so related to the subsequent books that they
would be incomprehensible apart from it. We have here the
record of events which became fundamental parts ofthe nation's
traditions, and the explanation of ideas and expressions which
wrought themselves into the thoughts and literature of all suc
ceeding times. The great deliverance from Egypt is celebrated
in national song, underlies aU the historical writings, and by
the earliest of the prophets is assumed as a matter not to be
disputed ; so that even critics who maintain that this account of
the Exodus was written very late do not. deny tbe historical
character of the event. The prophets not only appeal to the
facts, but attach to them the same religious significance with
which they are here invested ; f the very language employed in
chapter iv. 22, 23, is used by Hosea, and made tbe basis of his
argument with the degenerate people of his time (Hos. xi. 1).
Equally fundamental is the idea that Israel is " a kingdom of
priests and an holy nation " (xix. 6); "all Israelis considered,
from the theocratic point of view, a sacerdotal body, a people of
priests. "J It was, indeed, this conviction that Israel as a nation
was God's peculiar people that enabled them to fulfil their
destiny ; and though the abuse ofthe truth led them into careless
indifference or haughty self-sufficiency, the truth was there, and
could be appealed to from time to time by tbe teachers who arose
among them, so as to arouse the national conscience. We must
not loose sight of the fact that God reveals Himself first as the
Lord of the whole earth, and shows his power alike upon
Pharaoh and upon the forces of nature ; and then in virtue of
this power assumes to Himself Israel as his peculiar treasure.
The prophet Amos gives precisely the same view of God's
relations to Israel (Amos ix. 6, 7) ; and equaUy inconsistent
with it is the perversion of it by the Jews into the principle that
Jehovah was only the God of Israel, and the view of some in
* See chap. vi. 1 — 8, and compare what is written in Eom. iv. and Gal. iii.
t Amos iii. 1 — 2 ; Hosea xii. 9 ; xiii. 4.
% The quotation is from Eeuss, the father of the Grafian hypothesis, on
Hosea iv. 6, and forms an instructive contrast to the view of some that there
was no priest-people till after the Exile.

EXODUS. 29
modern times that the idea of Jehovah as a national God
expanded into the idea of Jehovah as the Lord of the whole
earth. As regards the observances and laws contained in this book,
it is possible that some of them are based on older and simpler
usages. The mention of a feast and sacrifice in chapters v.
1 — 3, x. 9, seems to point to something of this kind, as also the
mention of priests in chapter xix. 22, 24, before the formal
setting apart of the sons of Levi in chapter xxviii. 1 . So there
seems to have been a "tent of meeting" outside the camp
(xxxiH. 7 — 11) before tbe Tabernacle was set up. Yet, if there
was such earHer usages, they received at the Exodus a new
destination and distinctive meaning, so that in the succeeding
history they are traced back to this period and associated with
its great events.
5. Literary Form. — In Hterary form the book does not present
the same regularity as that of Genesis. A merely cursory reading
is sufficient to show that there is not a precise chronological
arrangement in the narrative, nor an artistic arrangement of the
laws. Thus, for example, after it has been told how Moses and
Aaron had an interview with Pharaoh (chap, v.), their genealogy
is given in chapter vi., and they are spoken of as if they were
mentioned for the first time. Again, in chapter xvi. 33 — 34
mention is made of tbe laying up of a pot of manna before tbe
Testimony, although the making of the Ark of the Testimony
is not described tiU chapter xxv. So also chapter xxxiv. contains
commands which had aHeady been given in chapter xxiH.
In general we may say that tbe book does not by any means
give a fuU account of aU that happened in the period to which it
refers, and that there is no attempt to set down the laws in a
systematised form. It should not be forgotten that the book was
written for a people to whom the events of the history were a
common tradition, and among whom the observances were matters
of estabhshed usage, the object being to exhibit them in their
beginnings. Acpordingly it has the appearance rather of a
coUection of separate pieces, put together substantiaUy in the
form in which they were originaUy composed, than of a sustained
orderly composition. Yet, though Hterary criticism may succeed
in exhibiting, in a general way, the several pieces, the attempt
to trace the sources from which they came is far from successful,
much less the endeavour to assign their respective orders and
dates. From the prevalent practice of writing in Egypt long
before the time of the Exodus, and from the several occasions in
which writing is distinctly mentioned in the book, it is natural
to conclude that tables of laws and narratives of events com-

30 BOOK BY BOOK.
posed in tbe wUderness were handed down to a succeeding time ;
and from tbe modest way in which Moses is mentioned, as con
trasted with the tone of Deuteronomy xxxiv. 10 — 12, which is
from a later hand, it is reasonable to suppose that the great law
giver himself left such written documents, which were made use
of in the composition of the book as it now Hes before us. The
mere fact that the book exhibits this composite character is
against the idea that it is a late fabrication, designed to give
support to an unhistorical tradition.
The view put forward in recent times that the legislation con
tained in the sections xx. 22 — xxiii., xxiv. belongs to tbe time
of settlement in Canaan and aUows worship by sacrifice at any
place is inconsistent with xxiii. 17, xxxiv. 23 — 24. The circum
stances of the life of the desert as compared with the scattering
of the people over the country of Canaan would lead us to expect
that worship at a central sanctuary preceded, and did not f oUow,
the worship at different places.
6. Modern Discoveries. — Modern research has contributed much
to show the accuracy of detaUs of various kinds contained in the
Book of Exodus. There is evinced an acquaintance with the
physical features and social life of ancient Egypt and with the
topography of the desert which could only have been gained in
the circumstances which the book describes : and as our know
ledge of those times increases the minute accuracy of the records
becomes more striking. It has been shown that the "plagues"
of Egypt were intensified forms of common visitations, and that
the order in which they occur agrees with the progression of the
seasons in that country; and though our knowledge of the
ancient topography is yet very imperfect, the results of recent
explorations lead us to expect important revelations in this
direction in the future.
"Upper Egypt, with its monuments above ground, is better
known to us than the Delta, where ancient remains, if they
exist, He buried under the soil ; but the discoveries made quite
recently at TeU-el-Maskhutah show us what might be expected
from more extended excavations. It is now weU known that
there were m tbe Delta tribes of kindred origin and language to
the IsraeHtes ; and when Abraham went down to sojourn in the
country, the Hyksos or Shepherd Kings were reigning in the
land, and be found no difficulty in holding intercourse with tbe
people. It is also pretty weU agreed that Eamses II. was the
Pharaoh of the oppression, and Menephtab IL, who began to
reign in 1325 b.c, tbe Pharaoh of the Exodus; counting back
from which date 430 years, for the sojourn of Israel in Egvpt
we come to one of the Shepherd Kings to whom Joseph may

EXODUS. 31
have been prime minister. The excavations at Tell-el-Maskhutah
have brought to light Pithom in the region of Succoth, which
was buUt by Eamses II., and exhibited extensive store chambers
such as the Israehtes are related to have built (chap. i. 11).
Thus, although as yet actual traces of Israel in Egypt may not
be said to be found, it is very hazardous to predict, as some have
been bold enough to do, that such wiU not be found. The
accuracy of the narrative is, at aU events, exhibited in a remark
able manner, and this leads us to look for more Hght as research
goes on.
The discoveries which have been mentioned seem likely also
to clear up the obscurity resting on the route foUowed by the
Israehtes in their departure from Egypt. A closer study of the
topography leads to the conclusion that the Red Sea extended,
at the time of the Exodus, considerably farther north than at
present, and that -in aU probability tbe Yam Siiph, or Sea of
Reeds (translated Red Sea in our Bibles), which the people
crossed, corresponded to what at a later time took the form of
one of the lakes. Etham "injthe edge of the wilderness"
(xiii. 20) no doubt corresponds to the Egyptian frontier district
of Atuma, in which a document of the time of the Exodus repre
sents shepherds as pasturing their flocks ; and it is to be expected
that continued patient exploration wiU bring to Hght from old
papyri and from the mounds of the Delta many similar con
firmations of the accuracy of the simple narrative of the Book
of Exodus.
7. Credibility. — We come to the conclusion that, in the Book
of Exodus, we have a credible account of the great events con
nected with the departure of Israel from Egypt, and of their
consolidation, under a constitution given by the hand of Moses,
into a nation with a great future before them. This conclusion
is confirmed by the minute accuracy of details just referred to,
and is tbe only conclusion that seems in keeping with an unbiassed
interpretation of the concurrent testimony of the nation from the
earhest times. It seems also to be more credible in itself than
the supposition that a number of tribes, with the slightest bonds
of national coherence, found their way by merely natural impulse
into Canaan, and there grew into an independent people with
distinctive reHgious faith and institutions.
Nq doubt the legislation which is ascribed to Moses had pro
spective reference to a settled life in a country like Palestine,
and the ordinances of worship and ceremonial are very detaUed
and minute. But this is no vaHd objection if it is borne in mind
that Egypt was a land in which the people of Israel must have
become famUiar with an organised ritual, and if it be admitted

32 BOOK BY BOOK.
that the Exodus was not an aimless departure, but a start for a
country associated with the memory of the fathers of the nation,
a country whose condition, as the most recent discoveries prove,
had long been familiar to dweUers in Egypt.
To what extent the laws as originaUy given were modified in
course of time, and how far, in their original forms, they corre
sponded with what now stands written in the law books, we
shall probably never know, because we do not know precisely
through what process these books passed ; but to deny the sub
stantial accuracy of the record before us is an excess of criticism
which would not be appHed to other ancient documents, and
would make it almost impossible to determine the true course of
the succeeding history.

LEVITICUS.
1. Name. — The third book of the Pentateuch, beginning
with the words " Then caUed the Lord unto Moses," is simply
entitled in tbe Hebrew Bible "Then caUed" . . . The names
by which the Jews indicate its contents are "The Book of the
Law of Offerings," or, more commonly, " The Book of the Law
of the Priests ; " and the latter is, strictly speaking, more appro
priate than the Greek name of Leviticus which we now employ,
since the "Levites" are only mentioned once, and that inci-
dentaUy (chap. xxv. 32, 33), in the whole book, whereas the
" priests " are everywhere referred to.
The book, though closely connected with those of Exodus and
Numbers, is distinguished from them in being entirely of legis
lative contents. Yet the legislation is set in an historical frame
work. The scene is laid in Sinai (xxv. 1, xxvi. 46, xxvii. 34);
the circumstances of the desert Hfe are referred to or impHed
(iv. 12, xHi. 46, xiv. 8, xvi. 10, &c); detaUs are given of the
putting into execution of certain of the regulations (viii. — x.) ;
and an incident of the desert Hfe is mentioned as giving ,
occasion to the promulgation of a particular law (xxiv. 10. —
23). 2. Contents. — The laws contained in this book have less of a
moral and civU than of a reHgious and ceremonial character.
They are, for the most part, such laws as would be committed to
the priests for execution, x>r whose observance would be under
their special care, the functions and standing of the priests them
selves being included among them. The first seven chapters deal
with the various offerings : the Burnt Offering (i.), the Meal*.
Offering (H.), the Peace Offering (Hi.), the Sin Offering (iv. — v.
13), and the Trespass Offering (v. 14 — vi, 7). The regulations
concerning these are foUowed by special instructions to the
priests with regard to their due observance (vi. 8 — vH, 38) ; and
* So the Revised Version rightly translates the word denoting the blood
less offering, which the Authorized Version renders meat-offering.

34 BOOK BY BOOK.
in chapters viii. to x. we have a detaUed description of the conse
cration of Aaron and his sons, with an account of the offence of
Nadab and Abihu, and certain regulations, suggested by the
occurrence, for the proper performance of the priestly functions.
The five succeeding chapters deal with matters of uncleanHness
and purification. Thus we have in chapter xi. a list of the
animals that may and of those that may not be used for food,
and the ceremonies to be used in cases of defilement by those
that are impure ; in chapter xii. the laws for purification after
childbirth ; and in chapters xui. to xv., the laws of leprosy and
other defilements. The sixteenth chapter contains the institution
of the Day of Atonement and the ceremonial of its observance.
The seventeenth chapter contains the law forbidding the eating
of blood, and the eighteenth, introduced by the words " I am the
Lord your God," contains the laws of consanguinity and tbe
forbidden degrees of marriage.
The next two chapters (xix., xx.) are closely related, the
former beginning with the words " Ye shaU be holy : for I the
Lord your God am holy," and tbe latter ending, " Ye shaU be
holy unto me : for I the Lord am holy, and have separated you
from the peoples that ye should be mine." They are of very
varied contents, warnings against idolatry and the idolatrous
customs of the neighbouring nations (xix. 4, xx. 2 — 5, 23) being
mixed with commands of a moral character, injunctions to re
spect the aged and to deal kindly with the afflicted, directions for
the sowing and reaping of the ground, and laws of cleanness and
chastity. Then begins another series of ritual and religious laws,
chapters xxi. and xxii. relating to the proper condition of
officiating priests and the quality of the offerings ; chapter xxiii.
enumerating and explaining the set feasts ; chapter xxiv. ordain
ing the oU for the sacred lamps and flour for the shewbread, and
containing also the law on blasphemy, with which are combined
a few other regulations.
Chapter xxv. contains the laws for the Sabbatical year and the
year of JubUee, and chapter xxvi. looks Hke a conclusion to the
whole book. It has a solemn call to keep God's statutes and
commandments, with specific promises in case of obedience and
threatenings even more explicit in case of disobedience ; and ends,
" These are the statutes and judgments and laws which the
Lord made between. Him and the children of Israel in Mount
Sinai by the band of Moses." Yet, after this formal conclusion,
we have m chapter xxvii. regulations for vows and things
devoted, concluding again in a similar manner, "These are the
commandments which the Lord commanded Moses for the children
of Israel in Mount Sinai."

LEVITICUS. 35;
3. Arrangement. — The foregoing summary is sufficient to show
how Httle regard has been had to systematic arrangement pf the
materials of the Book of Leviticus; and a closer inspection
reveals other Hterary peculiarities of a striking kind. It is
observable that the laws appear in the form of separate coUec-
tions, the several groups being very often provided with special
headings and conclusions ; that laws relating to the same matters
are not aU found in the same place ; that there are repetitions of
the same laws in different parts of the book ; and that matters of
a very dissimUar nature stand in close proximity.
The commands are aU expressly or impHcitly ascribed to God ;
but the mode in which they are proclaimed, and the persons to
whom they are addressed, are very various. As a rule it is said
that "the Lord spake unto Moses," but sometimes we have "the
Lord spake unto Moses and unto Aaron," and we find even " the
Lord spake unto Aaron" (x. 8). And when it is Moses thatis
primarUy addressed, he is told sometimes to ' ' speak unto the
children of Israel," sometimes "to speak unto " or " command
Aaron and his sons," at other times to " speak unto all the con
gregation of the children of Israel," or to "speak unto Aaron
and his sons, and aU the children of Israel." These are not aU
the varieties in the modes of address, and the laws with simUar
headings are found scattered up and down the book in the most
striking manner. Even the first seven chapters, which seem to
form a code by themselves regulating the, offerings, and have a
formal conclusion (vii. 37, 38), are interrupted several times by
such separate headings. Again, a comparison of chapter xviu.
with chapter xx. wiU bring out the fact that many of the regula
tions are repeated in the same or simUar words ; and there are
many other instances of repetitions in other places.
The laws, in fact, seem to bear on their own face that they
were given forth ' ' at sundry times and in divers manners." And
when we remember that the whole period intervening between
the setting up of the Tabernacle described in the end of Exodus,
and the departure from Sinai, was but a month and twenty
days,* within which time the events recorded in the early chap
ters of Numbers took place, it wiU appear far from probable that
the laws in this Book of Leviticus were promulgated in one body
during the brief remaining time. Far more Hkely is it that
just as Moses was enjoined to make the Tabernacle " after the
pattern that was shown him in the Mount,"f so we have here
before us the detailed regulations for the worship and life of
the people which, according to the revelations received by him at
* Compare Exodus xl. 17 with Numbers x. 11.
t Exodus xxv. 40 ; xxvi. 30 ; xxvii. 8.
D 2

36 BOOK BY BOOK.
Sinai, were given forth from time to time to the persons con
cerned, and that they were preserved in their separate form.
4. Character of the Legislation. — It is also observable that,
though we have Hi this book regulations extending to the
minutest detaUs of worship and Hfe, these are, in many cases,
stated in such terms as to imply that the persons to whom
they are addressed had already some acquaintance with them.
Observances are referred to as if they were aHeady understood,
and the laws bearing upon them have the appearance of
regulations of practices already existing. Thus the very first
laws of the book begin with the words, "If any man of you
bring an offering unto the Lord," &c. (i. 2, ii. 1, Hi. 1), as
if it were a weU- estabhshed custom to do so. In the same
way, the regulations in regard to vows (xxvii.) presuppose the
custom of making such ; and many of the prescriptions, as, for
example, those relating to the rending of clothes and the cutting
of the flesh for the dead (x. 6, xix. 27 — 28), have reference to
customs which evidently are weU known and commonly
practised. It is thus implied, as it is everywhere impHed in the
Pentateuch, that God's people had a religion and a worship
before the time of Moses. Cain and Abel bring offerings, which
are both denominated by a general name, which in Leviticus is
used exclusively to denote the bloodless offering (Gen. iv. 3 — 5) ;
Noah bunds an altar and offers burnt offerings (Gen. viH. 20 —
22) ; Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob buUd altars and caU upon the
name of the Lord ; and tbe covenant with Abraham is ratified
over the bodies of such animals as are prescribed in the law for
sacrifice (Gen. xv. 9 — 21). So also, during the struggle with
Pharaoh which preceded the Exodus, tbe leaders repeatedly
demand that the people should be aUowed to go and worship and
offer sacrifices to their God in the wUderness.*
The peculiar form which the pre-Mosaic offerings exhibits,
and the general terms in which they are mentioned, show that
the writer of the Book of Genesis does not seek to transfer to
patriarchal times what was a later institution, but that he
regards them as instances of a more primitive usage. The dis
tinction of clean and unclean animals, also, is pre-Mosaic, and
so is the prohibition of blood. We know, moreover, that the
nations with whom Israel was early brought into contact bad
weU-defined systems of worship. Phoenician and Assyrian
monuments show that these nations had sacrificial and other
rites resembling those of the Hebrews, and the Egyptians had
a most elaborate priestly system. Laban the Syrian is as
familiar with sacrifice as his kinsman Jacob (Gen. xxxi. 54), and
* See Exodus, { 4, p. 29.

LEVITICUS.. 37
Jethro, the priest of Midian, " takes a burnt offering and sacri
fices for God," and Aaron and aU the elders of Israel "come
and eat bread with Moses' f ather - Hi - law before God"
(Exod. xvHi. 12). The peculiarity of the Mosaic system is
that, recognising such primitive and general customs, it gives a
new sanction and significance to them, and so directs and employs
them as to provide an orderly system for the regulation of the
Hfe of the people.
Above all, the observances are Hfted out of the sphere of mere
common and immemorial usage and endued with significance
as symbols of the reHgious beliefs of Israel and memorials of
great events in theH history. They are thus made to minister
to the nation's training and development by knitting them
together in a visible bond around the recoUection of their
national birth. The Sabbath itself, which is as old as the race
and a, distinctive memorial of the creation, is also made a sign
of the special covenant between God and Israel (Exod. xxxi.
12 — 17), and even associated with the deHverance from Egypt
(Deut. v. 15). The three great pilgrimage feasts, the Passover,
Pentecost, and the Feast of Tabernacles, feU at three weU-
marked periods of the agricultural year : the Passover at the
beginning of barley harvest, Pentecost at the close of wheat
harvest, and the Feast of Tabernacles at the final ingathering
of the fruits. Yet, though this reference to the seasons of the
year is preserved in the ceremonial prescribed for tbe feasts, a
new and higher reference is added. The Passover is pre
eminently a memorial of the deliverance from Egypt ; and the
booths of branches in which the people are enjoined to dweU at
tbe Feast of Tabernacles are to remind them of the time when
they dwelt Hi tents Hi the wUderness.
5. Unity. — Besides the regulation and consecration of earHer'
usages, and the quickening of national sentiment, we have to
notice very particularly the mode in which, from even the most
minute prescription as to food or dress up to the most distinctive
sacred rite, everything is calculated to stimulate and educate the
reHgious feeling and the spHitual Hfe. Sanitary and dietary
laws are not laid down as such, but. are made distinctive marks
of the consecrated life of a chosen people ; detaUs of ritual are
not prescribed with a view to enhance the imposing character of
the forms of worship, but to express the sense of the holiness of
the God in whose service they are exercised.
At the recurring festal seasons Israel is not simply to " rejoice
as the nations " * because a bountiful nature provides the supply
of material wants, but to rejoice before the Lord and remember
* Hosea ix. 1.

38 BOOK BY BOOK.
His special goodness to His own people. They are taught
that the season does not hallow the ordinance, but the ordinance
the season; and the ritual of the most ordinary kind is so
ordered, and a gradation from lower to higher in the feasts is
so marked, that the deeper necessities of the heart are felt and
provided for. The sin-offering, and the impressive ceremonial
of the Day of Atonement may be said to be the culminating
points of the Levitical offerings, tending to awaken the sense of
sin, and the need of forgiveness, and to impress the dullest mmd
with the spHitual meaning of the whole system.
It is from this point of view that we observe the unity that
pervades what seems at first a confused and imperfectly
organised body of laws. Israel is to be a holy people, because
the Lord their God is holy. Therefore no detail of their life
is common or secular, no customary observance a mere custom,
no rite a mere ceremony. Hence, in the statement of the
laws, there is no sharp distinction between ceremonial, civil,
and sacred ; particulars relating to the one or the other are
found closely connected, because aU come under the one common
category of " hoHness to the Lord." In the same way, while
primitive usages resting on the instinctive feelings of worship
are consecrated with a new reference, usages of heathen nations,
which had become associated with idolatry, are prohibited. The
people of Israel were thus at every turn reminded that they
were a peculiar people ; and, in the infancy of their national
Hfe, by means of these outward and carnal ordinances, they
were being taught, in an elementary way suited to their com
prehension, what, in the full light of the Gospel, is the highest
law of spiritual activity : "Whether ye eat, or drink, or what
soever ye do, do aU to the glory of God."
6. Critical Views. — The Book of Leviticus forms the greater
part of what critics of tbe advanced school call the Levitical
Code, the composition of which is by them ascribed to the time
succeeding the ExUe.* It is maintained that no such eoUection
of laws as this book contains could have been promulgated in
the Mosaic period or for long after it; that, on the contrary, the
distinctive feasts of Israel grew up in Palestine, by natural pro
cesses, out of agricultural festivals such as were practised by the
Canaanite inhabitants ; and that the elaborate system of the
Levitical Code was the result of tbe studies of the scribes during
the ExUe, and an attempt to give a high authority to later usages
and to laws which then came into operation for tbe first time, by
the fiction of ascribing them to Moses. In support of this view
* See Introduction to the Pentateuch, §10, pp. 11, 12.

LEVITICUS. 39
it is held that the legislation of this Code exhibits a more de
veloped priestly and religious character than either the Book of
the Covenant or the Deuteronomic Code ; and also that there is
no trace of the observance of the Levitical Code in tbe pre-
ExUian history.
Two instances wUl be sufficient to show bow inconclusive and
misleading is this mode of reasoning. Regulations for the ob
servance of tbe Passover are contained in aU the three Codes ; *
and it no doubt feU, as has been already said (§ 4), at the time
of an old spring festival. But, whereas the two so-caUed older
Codes make no reference to an agricultural ceremony, and ex
pressly say that it is to be observed in the month of Abib,
because Hi that month the children of Israel came out of Egypt,
the Levitical Code, which on the theory ought to show a
development beyond natural custom, prescribes the waving of
a sheaf of barley as an observance at the Passover time (Lev.
xxiH. 9 — 14), and thus suggestively connects it with the begin
ning of barley harvest.
Again, it is quite true that there is no mention of the ob
servance of the Day of Atonement in the pre-Exilian historical
writings ; but neither is it mentioned in the post-Exihan Books
of Chronicles. Indeed, because it is not mentioned with other
feasts observed on the return from Babylon, some critics go the
length of maintaining that its institution dates even later than
the tunes of Ezra and Nehemiah. But, on their own principle,
they ought to go farther ; for the first mention of the Day of
Atonement, outside the Levitical Code, occurs in tbe writings of
Josephus and Philo and the New Testament ; so that we should
have the writer of the Epistle to the Hebrews basing his argu
ment from the imperfection of the old Levitical system on an
ordinance which was instituted almost in his own day. Indeed,
the sUence of the post-ExUian writings is, in some particulars, as
remarkable as that of the pre-ExiHan, and , proves that this
whole mode of reasoning on the subject cannot be reHed upon.
7. Credibility and Value. — Although the sUence of the historical
books as to the Levitical system is remarkable, and although we
know that the actual worship of the Israelites was far short of
the ideal, we must not hastUy conclude that the law "fras a dead
letter and of none effect. Many things took place in the history
that do not find a place in the historical books ; and the obser
vance of outward rites and ceremonies, even if it was mixed with
superstition, was a bond uniting the people together. The
observances themselves were standing witnesses and perpetual
* Exod. xxiii. 15 (compare xii. 17) ; xxxiv. 18 ; Deut. xvi. 1 — 8 ; Lev.
xxiii. 4 — 8.

40 BOOK BY BOOK.
memorials of the religion and of the facts which they symbolized,
just as tbe Christian sacraments administered in the most super
stitious ages of the Church were visible memorials of the cardinal
doctrines of Christianity.
And there were always in Israel, as in every nation, some who
could look beneath the surface and derive edification from what,
to the mass around them, was a dead form. The fundamental
truths underlying the system, and tbe meaning of the symboHsm,
were not lost sight of, as the writings of the prophets testify;
and the value of the law as a spiritual educator is clearly evident
from many of tbe Psalms. But such a stage of reHgious con
sciousness could only have come to maturity by slow degrees.
The expressive ceremonial of oft-repeated sacrifice must have
been to the reflective and pious in Old Testament tunes a
stepping-stone to the sacrifice of broken hearts. Not only to us,
in the light of the New Testament, does the ritual of Leviticus
reflect the priesthood and sacrifice of Christ, but these things
must have been, as the writer to the Hebrews expresses it, "a
figure for the time then present," " a shadow of good things to
come " (Heb. ix. 9, x. 1), and thus served, in God's providence,
to prepare for the manifestation of Him who was to be " the end
of the law for righteousness to everyone that believeth " (Rom.
x. 4).

NUMBEES.
1 . Name. — The name Numbers, by which the fourth book of
the Pentateuch is commonly designated, is the Latin equivalent
of tbe title given by the Greek translators of the Old Testament.
It was employed with reference to the two numberings of the
people which appear prominently in the book, in the wUderness
of Sinai, in the first instance (chapter i.), and afterwards in tbe
plains of Moab (xxvi.). In the same way the Jews, when they
designate this book by its contents, caU it " Musterings ; " but
it is more commonly indicated, in the same manner as the other
books of the Pentateuch, by one of the opening words, ' ' Then
spake . . . ." or "In the wUderness," taken from the first
verse, " Then spake the Lord unto Moses in the wilderness of
Sinai." The book resembles Exodus in that it is partly narra
tive and partly legislative in contents, and presents the two
elements in close combination ; but in situation it stands closely
related to Leviticus, and is its natural continuation.
2. Divisions and Contents. — The Book of Numbers may be
divided into three sections. In the first section, embracing
chapters i. to x., the scene is, as in Leviticus, at Sinai, and tbe
contents are very closely related to those of that book. It begins
with the command to number the people, given on the first day
of tbe second month of the second year from the departure from
Egypt, or exactly a month after the Tabernacle was set up, as
noted in Exodus xl. 17. The first two chapters relate how the
numbering was effected, and give the order in which the various
tribes were commanded to encamp and to march on the wilder
ness journey. As the Levites were not numbered with the other
tribes, we are then told, Hi the thHd and fourth chapters, how a
separate enumeration of them was made, as also of the firstborn
males of aU the people, for whom the Levites were substituted
to perform the sacred service of the Tabernacle. These chapters
also define the different parts of service in which the different
families of the Levites were employed. The next two chapters
are legislative in character, containing regulations for the exclu-

42 BOOK BY BOOK.
sion of lepers from the camp, the law of restitution for trespass,
the ceremony of the water of jealousy, the law of the Nazante,
and the formula to be employed by the priests in blessing the
people. The seventh chapter describes tbe offerings brought by
the princes of the tribes, on twelve successive days, on tbe occa
sion of the dedication of the Tabernacle ; and the eighth relates
to the Hghting of the lamps of the golden candlestick, and
describes the consecration of the Levites to the service of the
sanctuary. In the ninth chapter we have an account of the
observance of tbe Passover at Sinai, and regulations for the
observance of a supplementary Passover in tbe second month by
any who should be ceremoniaUy unable to do so at the statutory
time. This section concludes with an account of the manner in
which the piUarof cloud regulated the movements of the camp
(ix. 15 — 23), and the way in which the silver trumpets were
employed to give signals, for concerted action (x. 1 — 10).
The second section of the book (x. 11 — xxii. 1) is concerned
with the journey from Sinai to Moab, and covers the period from
the twentieth day of the second month of tbe second yearto the
fortieth year of the Exodus. It does not profess to give an
account of aU that passed in this long period ; it does not even
give a condensed and orderly account of the doings and move
ments of tbe people. It gives rather a series of episodes in tbe
wUderness Hfe, with various laws, arranged, however, mainly in
chronological order, up to the time when the people " came into
the plains of Moab beyond the Jordan at Jericho." Thus we
have the murmurings and unbelief of tbe people at Taberab,
where they were punished by burning (xi. 1 — 3); at Kibroth-
battaavah, where the Spirit was poured out upon the seventy
elders, and the people were rebuked by the sending of the quaUs
(xi. 4 — 35) ; and fiiaUy at Kadesh, after the return of the spies,
when the sentence of forty years' wandering was pronounced
(xiH., xiv.). So we have the revolt of Aaron and Miriam against
the authority of Moses punished by the leprosy of Miriam (xii.);
and the revolt of Korah and his company punished by the death
of the revolters and rebuked by the sign of Aaron's rod (xvi.,
xvii.). Interspersed with these historical notices, we have various
laws, in chapters xv., xviii., and xix., conspicuous among which
is the ceremonial of the water of purification made from the
ashes of , the red heifer (xix.) The next two chapters describe
the journey from Kadesh, round Edom, and through the terri
tories of Arad, Sibon, and Og, into the plains of Moab, with the
episodes of the unbeHef of Moses and Aaron at Meribab (xx.
2 — 13), and tbe visitation of the fiery serpents (xxi. 5 — 9).
In the last section of tbe book (xxii. 2 — xxxvi.) the Israelites

NUMBERS. 43
are Hi the plains of Moab. Balaam, sent by Balak to curse them,
pronounces on them a remarkable blessing (xxii. 2 — xxiv. 25) ;
the relapse into idolatry at Shittim is signally punished (xxv.) ;
another numbering of the people is made (xxvi.) ; Joshua is
designated as the successor of Moses (xxvii. 12 — 23) ; the two
tribes and a half receive theH inheritance on the east of Jordan
(xxxii.) ; directions are given for the division of the land to the
remaining tribes (xxxiv.); and regulations made for setting
apart forty-eight cities of the Levites, of which six are to be
cities of refuge (xxxv.). In the midst of these matters this
section also has a chapter relating to the encounter with the
Midianites, through whose instigation Israel had been led into
sin at Shittim (xxxi.) ; a Hst of the wUderness stations (xxxiii.
1 — 49) ; and a number of laws, on inheritance, the relation of
Israel to the heathen nations, and feasts and offerings (xxvii.
1 — 11, xxviii. — xxx., xxxHi. 50 — 56, xxxvi.): the whole con
cluding with the words " These are the commandments and the
judgments which the Lord commanded ' by the hand of Moses
unto the chUdren of Israel Hi the plains of Moab by the Jordan
at Jericho."
3. Period covered by the Book. — A long and -important period of
the history of Israel is covered by the book of Numbers. If we
deduct the fourteen months spent Hi the journey from Egypt to
Sinai and Hi the vicinity of the sacred mountain, the whole
remaining portion of the forty years spent between Egypt and
Canaan faUs within the book.
Now, when we remember that the first ten chapters refer to
the sojourn at Sinai, and that tbe rest of the book, as we have
seen, consists mainly of episodes in the remaining journey, with
laws and regulations of considerable amount, it will be seen that
we have almost no record of about thirty-eight years of the
desert life. There is, indeed, a marked difference in the manner
in which the journey to Sinai with the events that occurred there,
and the subsequent journey to Kadesh, are related, and the
brief account given of the movements of the succeeding thirty-
eight years. Whereas we can trace the advance of the host
from the shores of the Red Sea to the foot of the sacred mount,
and can follow the line of theH progress from Sinai to Kadesh,
the long years of penal wandering are passed over in a few
Words ; and a bare list of the stations, with a few episodes of the
journey, make up aU the notice we have of the whole period.
Events are crowded into fourteen months Hi a manner that makes
it difficult to find room for them, but the events of thHty-eigbt
years, if we except those of the closing year, are left almost
entirely to conjecture.

44 BOOK BY BOOK.
It is only from an observation of the localities in which the
time was spent, and a consideration of the condition of the people
at its close, that we can form any idea of the Hfe of Israel during
the years of wandering. It may be that no great events are
recorded because there were none to relate, and that, for tbe
most part, the daily Hfe of the people for these thirty-eight years
was Httle more than the monotonous round of caring for the
existence of themselves and their flocks, which makes up the Hfe
of the children of the desert at the present day. Yet the period
was not without its effect on the character of the future nation.
Like tbe long uneventful period of tbe sojourn in Egypt, it
formed a stage of transition. A new race, inured to the hard
ships of the wUderness, grew up ; collisions with neighbouring
tribes and peoples, of which we have notices or indications,
trained them to the use of arms ; the necessities of their daUy
life caUed forth individual courage, self-help, self-reliance, whUe
they were preserved from degenerating into a number of petty
isolated tribes by the constitution which had been set up at
Sinai. 4. The Desert of the Wandering.— It has often been wondered
how the desert provided subsistence or even afforded room for
the large host of Israel during so many years. Some have even
declared tbe account of the forty years' wandering to be alto
gether incredible, or merely a legendary growth of late tradition,
devised to magnify the early history of the nation. But a closer
examination of the physical character of the peninsula of Sinai
and the Desert of the Wandering, made by explorers Hi recent
times, as well as an observation of the modes of Hfe of tbe present
inhabitants, whUe they have shown that many of tbe popular
conceptions in regard to tbe desert have to be modified or
abandoned, have also proved that the Biblical accounts relating
to this period are not to be summarUy rejected as unhistorical.
In dealing with the Book of Exodus (§ 6) it was pointed out
that excavations in the Delta have thrown new light upon the
accounts of the sojourn of Israel in Egypt and the route they
foUowed on their departure. In the same way, the route from
the Red Sea to Mount Sinai has of late years been found to
present the features ascribed to it by the BibHcal writers. On
one important point, in regard to which uncertainty had existed,
we have now certain information : the peak known by tbe name
of Jebel Sufsafeh, forming the northern end of the traditional
Mount Sinai, is found to have all the features answering to the
description of tbe Mount from which the law was proclaimed,
with a plain in front of it sufficient to accommodate the assembled
people on that memorable occasion.

NUMBERS. 45
The Desert of Sinai itself, it is now known, was capable of
supportmg a large population at the time of the Exodus. The
Pharaohs of that time maintained a garrison in the peninsula to
look after the numerous workmen employed in iron, copper, and
turquoise mines. The remains of smelting furnaces prove that
a large amount of timber must have been consumed in these
operations ; although timber has now entirely disappeared, and
with it what must have been a considerable f ertUity has vanished.
Even at the present 'day the peninsula contains many valleys
watered by pleasant streams and teeming with natural vegeta
tion ; and tbe trees that in certain spots have been spared, as
weU as others that had been planted by old monkish colonists,
show how the mountain torrents which are common at certain
seasons, and plentiful ram, such as we know fell when Israel
was in Sinai,* may be restrained and turned to good account.
With an almost total neglect of cultivation, and a simple depen
dence on what Nature sends, the country supports a large number
of Arabs with their flocks, t and must have been immensely more
productive at the time of the Exodus.
It is also possible to foUow the general course of the Israehtes,
though perhaps as yet not to identify theH successive halting-
places, as they emerged from the rocky peninsula and entered
upon the wUderness of Paran, in which they spent the years of
wandering. Here also the country must have undergone great
physical changes. The district immediately to the north of the
Desert of the Wandering, known as the Negeb or South Country,
retains numerous traces of extensive vineyards and careful culti
vation, and, though it is now Httle else than a barren waste,
must have been at least as fertUe as tbe cultivated parts of
Palestine are at the present day. The Might of barrenness,
however, has faUen upon the whole country, and shows itself in
increasing intensity as we proceed southward. We are there
fore safe Hi concluding that the wilderness of Paran, bare and
bleak as it is now, was in former times proportionately fertUe.
The numerous traces of human dwellings, even in what are now
the barest portions, and, in more favoured places, the remains
of dams and terraces to husband the rainfall, show that the
country was capable of supporting a large population.
5. The Desert Life. — From the physical conditions of the country
* See Psalms lxviii. 7—9 ; lxxvii. 17.
t The lamented Professor Palmer, to whom we are indebted for the best
recent information, as the result of his expedition at the outbreak of the
Egyptian rebellion, estimated the whole number of Sinai Arabs capable of
military service, taking the Desert as far east as Petra, and the peninsula
itself, at about 50,000.

46 BOOK BY BOOK.
and the mode of life of its present inhabitants, we can form some
idea of the daUy Hfe of tbe Israehtes during their long wandering
in the desert. It would be a mistake to suppose that tbe whole
multitude marched day after day, and pitched night after night,
for forty long years, making an endless round of the desert. A
continuous forward movement, no doubt, was made in the journey
to Sinai, and afterwards in the journeys from Sinai to Kadesh,.
and from Kadesh to the plains of Moab, when there was a
distinct goal in view. But during the thHty-eight years, the
tribes would be scattered over the wUderness to seek pasturage
for their flocks, according to the custom of the Arabs at the
present day, the Tabernacle, surrounded by tbe Levites and the
leaders, forming the raUying point, which, like the camp at
head-quarters of a modern tribe, was moved from time to time
as occasion required.
The stations given in the Hst in chap. xxxHi. are, in aU pro
bability, tbe stations at which the Tabernacle was successively
set up, whUe tbe tribes may have been dispersed to considerable
distances on aU sides. In a similar way the Arab tribes are
found at a distance of many mUes from the headquarters of
their camp, according to the exigencies of theH flocks ; and we
are to suppose that, though mHaculous provision was made for
the wants of Israel, the ordinary provision of nature was not
neglected, and that part of the purpose of the long sojourn in
the desert was to inure them to hardship by daily toil as a pre
paration for the work of conquest that lay before them. So long
as they wandered about in this scattered fashion, their move
ments would be a matter of indifference to tbe powerful and
settled nations, on whose borders they hovered, just as the Arabs
of the present day are not molested by the authorities of Egypt
or Syria ; but as soon as they made a concerted movement to
advance upon Canaan, they were vigorously resisted (xiv. 40 — 45,
xx. 14—21).
6. Relation to succeeding Books. — The fragmentary and brief
detaUs which are here recorded concerning the desert life are
suggestive in view of the succeeding history of Israel. Very
little is said about the worship of the people in this period ; we
are left to suppose that, while at the Tabernacle itself the ritual
appointed at Sinai was in some manner observed, a great part of
tbe people, owing to their distance, would not be able, or able
only occasionaUy, to take part in it. In connection with the
Passover observed at Sinai (ix. 1—14), regulations are given for
the observance of the feast by those who could not celebrate it on
the proper day. No doubt the circumstances of tbe daily Hfe
imposed simUar restrictions Hi regard to other observances, and

NUMBERS. 47
from the narrative in Joshua v. we gather that distinctive require
ments of the law had not been observed in the wUderness. We
thus perceive, at the very outset of the nation's history, that
anomaly which has perplexed criticism, of a law ordained and
in force, while it was, to a great extent, neglected or held in
abeyance. There is an apparent inconsistency between tbe accounts of
the setting up of an elaborate Tabernacle service and the state
ments of the prophets * that Israel in the wUderness served
strange gods; but it is not the inconsistency of contradictory
written accounts, but the inconsistency of human nature, of
which Israel is ever a striking example. It is not necessary to
go to the historical books, whether pre-Exilian or -post-Exilian,
for proofs of the non-observance or violation of the law. The
books of the Pentateuch, which record its institution, give the
most glaring instances of its violation ; the golden caH was made
under the very shadow of Sinai ; the sin of Baal-Peor and the
commotion of the mixed multitude show how deeply ingrained
were the elements of heathenism ; and from these books, which
detaU so minutely the ritual and worship, we cannot gather
much as to the extent to which the ritual and worship were
observed. Even at this early stage of theH history, the people
of Israel, chosen not for their own merits, and beloved in spite of
theH sins, are a witness to the eternal truth of the graee of God.
7. Literary Features. — The Book of Numbers, as a literary
work, has the same features as tbe other books of the Pentateuch.
The minute cHcumstantiahty of detaU, and the special suitability
of many of the laws to the desert life, show that these materials
belong to that early period. On the other hand, the expression
" WhUe the children of Israel were in the wilderness " (xv. 32)
gives indication of a later hand in the composition ; the "Book
of the Wars of the Lord," from which a quotation is made
(xxi. 14), was evidently an older production than the book that
quotes it, and probably the same may be said of the other
snatches of song quoted in the same chapter (verses 17 — 18,
27 — 30). Again, the fact that Moses is said to have written the
Hst of stations given in chap. xxxiH. affords a presumption that
he did not write the narrative which refers to it.
"We find also the same indifference to strictly chronological
order, and the same mixture of legal and historical matter that
we find in Exodus ; and some of the laws in this book are repe
titions or supplements of laws already given in Leviticus.f But
* Hosea ix. 10 ; Amos v. 25 f£. ; Ezek. xx. 15 ff. Compare Lev. xvii. 7.
t Compare, for example, Num. xv. 1 — 16 with Lev. i. — vii. ; Num. v.
5—10 with Lev. v. 5 ff., vi. 5 ff. ; Num. xv. 22—28 with Lev. iv. 13 ff.

48 BOOK BY BOOK.
literary features Hke these, and the complexity of the whole
situation disclosed in this book, preclude tbe supposition that we
have before us a late and legendary story. An invented story
would have presented fewer difficulties, and a story of late time .
would have betrayed itself by late ideas. A writer desirous of
ascribing late laws to the Mosaic time would have been careful
to show also the early observance of the laws ; an ExiHan writer
could have no practical object to gain in devising laws which
were fitted only for the desert Hfe, and could by no possibility
pome into operation in post-Exilian times.
The close resemblance of such laws as those for priestly puri
fication, the water of jealousy, and the red heifer, to Egyptian
customs, and tbe prominence given to laws of leprosy, which an
ancient Egyptian tradition makes a disease speciaUy affecting
the Israehtes, aU point to a time when contact with Egypt was
recent ; and the friendly attitude of Israel to Edom and Moab,
as weU as the knowledge of the true God ascribed to Balaam,
are not what we should have expected from a late writer. But,
indeed, it is misleading to speak of later tradition, when we find,
as even advanced critics admit, that the earliest of the writing
prophets have the same view of the early history of their people
as is here presented. The tradition is one of the earliest and
most deeply rooted that Israel possessed, so firmly embedded in
their Hterature that, if we tear it out, we have nothing substan
tial left out of which to construct theH early history. And
though, from the brief and fragmentary manner in which the
detaUs of the desert Hfe have come down to us, we may have
difficulty in forming a clear and connected view of all the events,
the mode in which the record is made, and the striking confirma
tions it receives from every side, leave no room to doubt that the
story is true.

DEUTERONOMY.
1. Name. — The fifth book of the Pentateuch is, in the Hebrew
Bible, designated by the expression "These are the words" . . .
or simply "Words," taken, as in the case of the titles of the
preceding books, from the opening sentence. The name by
which the book is now commonly known had its origin in the
Septuagint rendering of chapter xvii. 18, where it is ordained
that the future king shaU " write him a copy of this law in a
book." The word translated in our version " Copy," i.e. duplicate,
has, in the hands of the Greek translators, been combined with
the word " law," so as to produce the expression which, in Eng
lish guise, becomes Deuteronomy, i.e. Second or Repeated Law.
The Jews also denote tbe book by the Hebrew phrase referred
to, and, looking to the contents, understand the title in the sense
of " Repetition ofthe Law."
In situation, Deuteronomy stands in close connection with the
Book of Numbers. Although the narrative is not formally taken
ug^the preceding history is supposed throughout, and the scene
is stiU in the plains of Moab. The amount of time covered by
the book is not long. It opens with the first day of the eleventh
month of the fortieth year of the Exodus (i. 3) ; and as we learn
from Joshua iv. 19 that it was on the tenth day Of the first month
of the foUowing year that the passage of the Jordan took place,
and from Deuteronomy xxxiv. 8 that the mourning for Moses
lasted thirty days, there remain only forty days for the addresses
by Moses to have been deHvered and the other events to have
occurred in which he was concerned.
2. Literary Features. — The Book of Deuteronomy at the first
glance presents features that strikingly distinguish it from
the preceding books. Though it is the natural completion
of the Book of Numbers, bringing down the history to the
death of Moses and the point at which the Israelites were
about to enter into theH promised inheritance, and although it
presents the same combination of narrative and legislation which

50 BOOK BY BOOK.
is observable in Exodus and Numbers, yet the whole tone of the
book is Hi marked contrast with that of any other book of the
Pentateuch. We miss the customary formula of Leviticus,
" The Lord spake unto Moses " ; for Moses here speaks directly
to the people in his own name, or enunciates laws as having been
given previously through his mediation. The striking feature
is the hortatory tone which pervades the book.
Apart from the few historical notices at the conclusion, the
whole book may be said to be made up of a series of addresses
by the great Lawgiver, in which he reviews the past and gives
counsel and warding for the future. We have, first of all, an
introductory discourse (i. — iv. 40), in which God's goodness and
care in the past are dwelt upon as motives for faithful obedience
to His laws. Chapter iv. 44 seems to be the heading of what
follows, a section forming the greater part of the book, and giv
ing it the character which has been associated with the name of
Deuteronomy, as usuaUy understood, Repetition of the Law.
. The section extending to the end of chapter xxvi. consists of one
unbroken address, delivered by Moses "unto all Israel" (v. 1).
The first part of this address, ending with the eleventh, chapter,
contains a repetition of tbe Decalogue, with a recital of the cir
cumstances under which the covenant was made at Horeb, and
emphasises particularly the first two commandments, tbe duty of
serving God alone and of abstaining from aU forms of idolatrous
worship. The second part of the address, beginning with chap
ter xii., lays down more speeificaUy "the statutes and judg
ments " which were to be observed in tbe land about to be
possessed. These relate to matters of reHgion and worship (xH.
1 — xvi. 17), the appointment and duties of judges and officers,
modes of procedure in civil and criminal cases, and suchlike
(xvi. 18 — xxi. 23), and matters of a social and individual
character (xxii. 1 — xxvi. 19).
A third discourse begins at chapter xxvii., where " Moses and,
the elders of Israel " command that the people, after crossing
the Jordan, shaU inscribe "aU the words of this law" on plas
tered stones on Mount Ebal, and, after offering burnt-offerings
and peace-offerings, shall solemnly bind themselves, by blessmg
and cursing, to its faithful observance. In chapter xxviii. Moses
himself unfolds in detail what the nature of the blessing and
the curse shall be ; and from this to the end of chapter xxx. he
again urges faithfulness to the covenant thus ratified, in order
that the promised blessing may foUow. The next chapter (xxxi.)
contains the commission of Joshua to carry on the work begun
by Moses, the delivery of the written law to the priests and
elders, with the charge to read it pubHcly before the assembled

DEUTERONOMY. 51
people once in seven years, and the command of God to Moses to
deHver to the people, in the form of a song, a recital of aU His
deeds for them, that it may in generations to come be a witness
against them. The song itself is given in chapter xxxH. ; the
foUowing chapter has, also Hi poetical form, " the blessing where
with Moses the man of God blessed the children of Israel before
his death " ; and the closing chapter, in brief but exalted style,
teUs how the great lawgiver, at God's command, went up " unto
Mount Nebo, to the top of Pisgah," viewed the land on which
he was not to set foot, and " died there in the land of Moab, ac
cording to the word of the Lord." y
3. The Situation. — The hortatory character of Deuteronomy is
Hi keeping with the situation in which the book presents Israel
at this period. The wandering in the desert was at an end, the
tribes were assembled Hi an orderly camp, and only the narrow
stream of the Jordan separated them from the land which for
generations they had been taught to regard as their inheritance.
Everything depended on theH fidehty to the God who had in
covenant taken them for his pecuHar people. Moses, recognis
ing that he had only been the temporary minister of an abiding
covenant, seeks to impress upon the people that tbe foundation
of their existence as a nation lay in God's choice (vH. 7, 8 ; x. 15),
and that the only hope of theH achieving His purpose lay in
theH obedience to His law.
To impress the former point, he reviews at length the wonder
ful dealings of theH God with them Hi the desert, and the
earnest of the inheritance He had aHeady given them in the
partial possession on the east of the Jordan ; and Hi doing so,
ne is not careful to state events in theH strictly chronological
order, but groups them as best to suit the purpose of his exhorta
tion. In regard, to the latter point he speaks as a prophet. As
he is convinced of the unchanging purpose of God, so he knows
bow prone the people had been from the beginning to swerve
from the path of obedience, and, with unerring intuition, warns
them of the dangers to which they would be particularly liable-
Like aU succeeding prophets, he deals Hi broad and general terms
when he refers to the actual occurrences of the future : speaks
as if the crossing of the Jordan would be foUowed by a sudden
and almost peaceable possession of Canaan, and alludes in the
most general way to the place which should ultimately become
the religious centre, and the mode of government which in course
of tune would be set up. But with him, as with aU other pro
phets, the moral and reHgious issues of the future are certainties :
he sets before the people Hfe and death, blessing and cursing
(xi. 26, 27 ; xxx. 15, 19), assuring them that by no possibUity
e 2 '

52 BOOK BY BOOK.
would prosperity be theirs unless they obeyed the voice of the
Lord theH God.
This prophetic tone has been heard on former occasions when
the covenant relation between God and Israel had to be enforced.
At Sinai, in connection with the giving of tbe first tables of the
law and the reading of the Book of the Covenant, Moses im
pressed upon Israel the same truths Hi simUar words (Exodus
xix. 4, 6 ; xxiH. 20, 33). At the second giving of tbe tables of
the law, we find the same thing (Exodus xxxiv. 10, 16) ; and at
tbe close of the legislation of Leviticus, there is a whole chapter
(Leviticus xxvi.) which anticipates what is more fully expressed
in the twenty-eighth chapter of this book. The tone of warning
thus swells louder and louder, and reaches its height when the
covenant is ratified for the last tune before the crossing of the
Jordan. For on every high HU and in every shady grove of
Canaan, the rights of an impure heathen worship were cele
brated ; and we need not wonder that Moses reiterates the
-words " Thou shalt not do so unto the Lord thy God " (xii. 4 ;
xviii. 14), and puts in the forefront of his address the two first
commandments of the Decalogue ; for he knew, and tbe succeed
ing history too plainly proved, that the seductions of the heathen
worship were more formidable obstacles to the fuU occupation of
the land than aU the armed resistance of its inhabitants.
4. Character of the Legislation. — The situation of the people, on
the eve of crossing the Jordan, also furnishes an explanation of
the form in which the legislation of Deuteronomy is east. That
there should have been a repetition of the law along with the
renewal of tbe covenant is in keeping with former experience,
as the instances just mentioned prove. It was the more necessary
on this occasion, seeing that the tribes had been for many years
leading a nomadic life, and many of the observances of the law
were neglected or held in abeyance.* Yet there is manifestly a
special purpose Hi view in this case, which controls the form
which the laws assume. The present position of the people and
theH prospects in the immediate future are the main objects of
regard ; and whatsoever would tend to bind them more closely
together, and to preserve them faithful to God and pure from
heathen contamination, is emphasised. Itis "aU Israel" that
is addressed, the laws are such as concern the whole people^ not
special classes, and such as bear upon the development of the
national Hfe Hi a settled condition.
The legislation of Deuteronomy is not by any means a simple
repetition of that of the preceding books, for the situation and
* See chap. xii. 8, and compare Numbers, § 6, pp. 46, 47.

DEUTERONOMY. 53
purpose are different. Laws that had special reference to the
life of the desert find no place ; and on certain subjects the
legislation of Deuteronomy is at variance with that of the Levi
tical code. For example, in Leviticus xvii. 15 it is prescribed
that whoever ate of what died of itself should be unclean until
the evening ; but in Deuteronomy xiv. 21 such food is altogether
forbidden to the Israehtes : the law in the former case being
more lax, doubtless because, in the desert, animal food was a
greater rarity. In the same way, in Leviticus xvii. 2, it is or
dained that aU animals to be used for food should be slaughtered
at the door of the Tabernacle, an ordinance practicable in the
desert where, as among the modern Arabs, animal food is rarely
eaten, not to mention the special reason given in the seventh
verse ; but Hi Deuteronomy xH. 15 animals used for food may be
killed and eaten in any place, a Hberty rendered necessary by
the cHcumstances of settled Hfe in Canaan.
Again, there is a conspicuous absence of laws of a ritual and
ceremonial kind, which bulk so largely in Leviticus ; for such
laws would be under the special charge of the priestly class, and
the acquaintance of the people with them was a matter of
secondary importance. Whereas in Leviticus the "sons of
Aaron " are distinguished from the general body of the Levites,
and the functions of the priests and of the different famiHes of
the Levites are minutely specified, the Book of Deuteronomy
uses the comprehensive expression "the priests the Levites,"
and scarcely refers to any distinction of privilege or function.*
It is only in incidental notices that the distinction comes out (x.
6, xvHi. 1, xxxHi. 8); yet, though such distinctions are left to
the custody of the Levitical classes themselves, the due of the
priests from the people is particularly mentioned (xviii. 3), and,
Hi keeping with the whole situation of the book, the tribe of
Levi, which was to have no territorial inheritance, is repeatedly
commended to the generosity of the other tribes.
The presence of laws relating to clean and unclean foods, 'the
marriage relation and personal purity, such as bulk largely in
Leviticus, and of other laws relating to judges, officers, and
legal processes, which are scarcely found in that book, is ac-
* In the earlier stage of criticism, when Leviticus was believed to be older
than Deuteronomy, the identification of priests and Levites in the latter book
was supposed to indicate a gradual elevation of the status of the Levite ;
according to the nearer view, which regards Deuteronomy as the earlier book,
the pre-eminence of the sons of Aaron in Leviticus denotes the gradual
growth of a hierarchical tendency and the elevation of a distinctly priestly
family. The view rests mainly on an intricate and very precarious inter
pretation of a passage in Ezekiel (chap, xliv.), upon which we cannot here
enter.

54 BOOK BY BOOK.
counted for by the one controlling purpose, to secure that Israel
should be kept clear of heathen contamination and be prepared
for the duties of a settled Hfe in the land of theH inheritance.
And, finaUy, as the preservation of the unity of reHgion would
depend much on the uniform observance of its great ceremonies,
the necessity of a central sanctuary, which had been met by
the existence of the Tabernacle in the wUderness, is insisted on
with an emphasis which forms a leading characteristic of the
book. 5. Relation to other books ofthe Pentateuch.— 'Ihe considerations
that have just been put forward explain to a great extent why it
is that the Book of Deuteronomy, as a whole, is in its Hterary
aspects so different from the other books of the Pentateuch. It
remains to be added that a close examination of the book shows
that it was not intended to be a work complete in itself, and that
it is not inteUigible apart from those that precede it. Not merely
does it, by its introduction and conclusion, fit into tbe historical
outline of the whole Pentateuch ; but there are, in the body
of the book itself, features both of the narrative and of the
legislation which rest upon the history and legislation that
precede it.
For example, we find in chapter xxiv. 8, "Take heed in the
plague of leprosy that thou observe dUigently to do according
to aU that the priests the Levites shaU teach you ; as I com
manded them, so shaU ye observe to do." As the prescriptions
referred to, which necessarily would be of an intricate descrip
tion, are not found in Deuteronomy itself, we are bound to
assume that the reference is to such detaUed laws as are laid
down Hi Leviticus xHi., xiv. In the same way, Hi Deuteronomy
xviii. 2, it is said of the tribe of Levi, " They shall have no in
heritance among theH brethren ; the Lord is their inheritance,
as He hath said unto them," where tbe reference must be, to
such passages as Numbers xviii. 20, 23.
Even more striking are the incidental aUusions. The making
of the ark is only aUuded to in a brief phrase (x. 1), and the
first mention of the Tabernacle of the congregation— and it is
merely a mention — occurs in xxxi. 14. Such allusions do more
than vouch for the mere existence of the ark and the Taber
nacle : they rest upon, and are uninteUigible apart from, a ritual
and worship of which these were pi ominent features. So again,
when it is said (xxiv. 9), "Remember what the Lord thy God
did unto Miriam, by the way as ye came forth out of Egypt,"
the whole story of Miriam's leprosy, as told in Numbers xii., is
suggested ; and indeed the manner in which tbe events of the Exo
dus and the wilderness journeyings are touched upon throughout

DEUTERONOMY., 55
the book, impHes that the whole narrative of the preceding
books is weU known.
¦ 6. Critical Views. — Nevertheless, the newer school of criticism
holds it as proved that the legislation of Deuteronomy is earlier
than that of Leviticus, and that the book itseH was " composed
in the same age as that in which it was discovered, and that it
was made the rule of Josiah' s reformation, which took place
about a generation before the destruction of Jerusalem by the
Chaldseans" (2 Kings xxii.). * It is maintained that the only
authoritative code of law up to this time was the brief Book of
the Covenant (Exodus xx. 23 — xxiii.), that the Deuteronomic
code was drawn up -and ascribed to Moses, Hi the interest of the
centraHsation of worship, and did actuaUy bring about the re
form of that king's reign. But, however positively it may be
asserted, there is absolutely no proof that the Book of Deute
ronomy alone is referred to as " the Book of the Law," or " Book
of the Covenant " (2 Kings xxii. 8 ; xxiii. 2), that was found in
the Temple.
Suppose for a moment that we admit that this book was written
for the purpose of authorising a central sanctuary, the question
arises, What was the use of authorising a sanctuary whose ritual
and service are not prescribed ? It is impossible from the Book
of Deuteronomy, still less possible from the Book of the Cove-
bant, to construct a manual of laws for the Temple service ; and
yet the Temple service could not have been maintained up to
the tune of Josiah without an orderly and detaUed ritual. If
the existing ritual was accepted as authoritative, then there was
some law, such as that of Leviticus, written or unwritten, to
sanction it : if it was the mere growth of usage, it is incr edible
that Mosaic sanction should not have been sought for it as weU
as for central worship : and if, as is certain, the ritual had been
overlaid with corruptions, there was the more reason why its
pure forms should be laid down. We are thus driven, by every
consideration, to assume that some Levitical Code was accepted
as authoritative, and no other is known to have existed. than the
code of Leviticus. But, had the main purpose of the book
been to give authority to a central sanctuary, what stronger
motive could have been urged than the presence of the ark Hi
the Temple, not to speak of the Tabernacle in the wUderness ?
Yet this argument is not employed, although as we have seen
the writer knew of both the ark and the Tabernacle.
• For the late date of the book much rehance is placed on the
Law of the Kingdom (xvH. 14 — 20), which it is maintained could
* See Introduction to the Pentateuch, § 10, pp. 11, 12.

56 BOOK BY BOOK.
only have been framed after Solomon and other kings had given
examples of the luxury therein animadverted upon. But, apart
from all prophetic foresight, which the most modern critics refuse
to admit, it was surely the most natural thing for Moses, ac
quainted with the kingly government as it prevailed among aU
surrounding nations but his own, to foresee and provide for the
eventuaHty supposed. If the abuses against whieh be uttered
his warning were exactly those which occurred, they bad already
been seen in other nations, and were exactly those that might
have been expected : and it is remarkable that one danger men
tioned, from which other nations had suffered, that of being
ruled over by a king of foreign blood, never emerged, so far as
we are aware, in the actual history of Israel.
Again, if the book was composed at a late date and mainly
under prophetic influence, it is very remarkable that the pro
phetic order should be referred to in so vague a manner as it
seems to be in xviii. 15 — 22, and stUl more so that there is
nowhere to be found a bint of the antagonism between the pro
phetic and priestly classes, of which the critics make so much,
and which had certainly shown itself long before the time of
Josiah. And yet, aceording to the critical view, tbe reformation
of Josiah's time was one that was very disadvantageous to the
priestly class. That HUkiah tbe high priest co-operated in the
reform is a good proof that he regarded the "Book of the Law "
as having a higher authority than that of the prophetic order ;
and the entire harmony of priestly and prophetic tendencies in
this book indicates an early time when the harmony was un
broken. 7. Retrospect.— On looking back from tbe point at which the
Pentateuch closes, we can see that not one of the five books of
whieh it is composed is complete in itself and devoid of reference
to the others. _ The story is taken up by one where it is dropped
by the preceding ; and the legislation also, however fragmentary
in the way in which it is presented, shows a connection and a
progress. It may be admitted that the component parts of the
books belong to different periods, the death of Moses, for ex-,
ample, being recorded side by side with words spoken and
written by Moses. It may be admitted that we have three stages
of legislation, as represented in the Book of the Covenant, the
Levitical code, and Deuteronomy; it may be admitted that
there are variations in the laws and an advanee from a lower
to a higher stage ; but all this does not necessitate the assump
tion that these codes are separated by intervals of centuries.
From the time when the short code of the Covenant was given
at Sinai tUl the time when Israel was ready to cross the Jordan,

DEUTERONOMY. 57
many changes, internal and external, had taken place.* Laws
suited to the desert would be unsuited to settled Hfe, and laws
given in prospect of the life in Canaan might from various causes
faU into disuse or be held in abeyance. The modification in the
age of Levitical service found in the compass of one book f
shows how regulations of this kind are subject to change. It
is always so with matters of ritual ; and it is quite possible that
Levitical laws, under the special custody of tbe priests, might
be retouched from time to time as usage varied, and yet be
essentiaUy Mosaic.
AU this and much more may be admitted ; but aU who would
give the Biblical writers credit for ordinary honesty wUl hesitate
before admitting that we owe a great part of the Pentateuch to
Hterary fiction. When it is gravely asserted that prophets and
the best spHits of the nation framed first one code, and then
another, with the dehberate intention to represent the history of
the past as something different from what it actuaUy was, when
the co-caUed historical books are said to have been written to
support an unhistorical view, and when even the writings of con
temporary prophets have to be expurgated before they can be
used as evidence, one may despair of arriving at the truth
altogether, or at once set about constructing the history without
tbe aid of these books. And when we remember, on the one
hand, that such prophets as Jeremiah, who is beheved to have
had an active share in the production of Deuteronomy, were in
the habit of enforcing their words by no authority of Moses, but
by a peremptory "Thus saith the Lord"; and on the other hand,
that very Httle is left, on this theory, of Mosaic work to appeal
to, it appears more and more evident that the only use of the
hypothesis of Hterary fiction is to afford critics a way of escape
from an untenable position.
* "Wellhausen has to assume that in fifty years of the Exile a people who
had been hopelessly wedded to the worship of the high places was effectually
and for ever cured of this tendency. If so much could happen in those fifty
years, why should the forty years between Egypt and Canaan be a fixed
point? t Numbers iv. 3, viii. 24. Compare also 1 Chron. xxiii. 3, 27 ; 2 Chron.
' 17.

THE BOOK OF JOSHUA.
1 . Its Place in the Canon. — The books which now bear the names
of Joshua, Judges, Samuel, and Kings are in the Hebrew Bible
classed together under the general name of the Former Prophets.
They are called prophets, not because they are regarded as_ pro
phetical books in the usual sense, but because they were believed
to have been composed by prophetic men, and the qualification
former refers simply to the fact that they precede, in tbe order of
the canon, the prophetic writings, strictly so caUed, which are
named the Latter Prophets.
The names of the individual parts of this series, it wiU at once
be apparent, indicate the subjects, not the authors, of the com
positions, and the division of the whole into separate books has
varied, as wUl be explained when we reach the Books of Samuel
and Kings. These books are aU of anonymous authorship, and
we are left to determine, as far as possible, by a critical exami
nation of tbe compositions themselves, out of what materials they
were composed, and how and at what period they attained their
present forms. This cHcumstance, however, so far from detract
ing from the credibUity of tbe books, in reality enhances their
value Hi this respect. The writing down of such historical records
as these books contain must have been the work, not of private
individuals, but of persons possessing the acquirement, rare in
early times, of letters, and occupying some official standing among
theH people ; and the more ancient these writers, the more pro
minent would be their position.
It is expressly stated that Moses wrote down such accounts of
events of his time, and wrote them in an authoritative manner
lor national preservation.* The same thing is said of Joshua ; f
and it is natural to suppose that those who continued their
literary work would be men of recognised standing. Writings
* See Introduction to the Pentateuch, § 5, pp. 5, 6.
t Joshua xxiv. 26.

THE BOOK OF JOSHUA. ,59
put forth by such men, relating the history of a people whose
national consciousness was so strong, must have had a kind of
official recognition, and are thus vouched for, so to speak, not
merely by an individual author, but by the whole nation. Like
the Gospel narratives Hi the early Church, they set forth "the
things most surely beUeved among " the people of Israel, and so
they were handed on without question, accepted as in the highest
sense the national Hterature, and included, as a matter of course,
in the canon of sacred books.
¦ 2. Name and Divisions. — The Book of Joshua is so named from
the personage who figures most prominently in its pages. Joshua,
the son of Nun, had been the servant and intimate companion of
Moses in the desert, and had, towards the close of Moses' Hfe
(Deut. xxxi.), been solemnly set apart as his successor. The
work to which he was speciaUy caUed was the leadership of the
armed host in the conquest of the promised land, for whieh he
had early shown a special fitness by his aptitude for mUitary
affaHs (Exod. xvii. 8 — 16). But, Hi general, be had to carry on
the work of Moses, to be, as the lawgiver himself expressed it,
" a man over the congregation, who may go out before them, and
who may go Hi before them, and who may lead them out, and
may bring them in, that the congregation of the Lord be not as
fcbeep which have no shepherd " (Num. xxvii. 16, 17). The book
which shows how this was accompHshed appropriately bears his
name ; and, as the books caHed the books of Moses ends with the
death of tbe lawgiver, tbe Book of Joshua ends with the death
of the military leader.
It falls naturally into three parts ; the first, embracing chapters
i. to xH., narrating the conquest of Canaan; the second, extend
ing from chapters xiii. to xxiH., describing the partition of the
land among the several tribes; whUe the thHd (xxHi., xxiv.)
forms a conclusion to the whole, and is mainly of a hortatory
character. The principal events of the conquest which are here
related are these. Joshua, encouraged by a special revelation,
orders the tribes to prepare for the crossing of the Jordan (chap, i.),
and sends two spies, who find a lodging in Rahab's house and
return with a hopeful report (ii.). The people march from
Shittim, where they had been encamped (Num. xxv. 1), to the
banks of the Jordan, and after three days make the miraculous
passage of the river (Hi., iv.) ; after which they celebrate theH
entrance into Canaan by the performance of the rite of cHcum-
cision and the observance of the Passover (v. 1 — 12). The waUed
city of Jericho is taken (v. 13 — vi. 27), Ai is attacked, and, after
the detection and punishment of Achan's sin, is taken (vii. —
vHi. 29). The covenant is confirmed .at Ebal and Gerizim

60 BOOK BY BOOK.
(viii. 30—35). The Gibeonites by craft procure a treaty of peace
with Israel (ix.) ; and the league of the Southern Kings is
broken by the great battle of Beth-horon (x.). With the defeat
of a simUar confederacy of forces in the north in a battle near the
waters of Merom (xi.), the conquest of the whole country is prac-
ticaUy secured, a list of the conquered kings being given in
chapter xH.
In the second part of the book, after a general statement of
the boundaries of tbe land to be divided (xHi. 1 — 7), and an indi
cation of the limits of the territory whieh bad aHeady been
allotted to the two tribes and a-half on the east of Jordan (xHi.
8 — 33), Joshua and Eleazar, having first assigned Hebron^ to
Caleb (xiv. 6 — 15), proceed to divide the western territory, giving
portions, first of all, to Judah, Ephraim, and half of Manasseh
(xv. — xvii.), and then, after the setting up of the Tabernacle at
Shiloh, to the remaining tribes except Levi (xviii. — xix. 48), a
special inheritance being set apart to Joshua himself (xix. 49 — 51).
The cities of refuge and the Levitical cities are designated (xx. —
xxi.), and the two tribes and a-half are sent home to theH own
territory with an injunction to maintain faithfuUy the national
religion (xxii.).
In the concluding part of the book Joshua solemnly addresses
the people, warning them against the idolatry of the neighbour
ing nations, caUs them to Shechem, where the bones of Joseph
had been laid, and there renews the covenant, incorporating a
record of the transactions in the Book of the Law, and setting up
a commemorative stone under the oak that was by the sanctuary
of the Lord (xxiH., xxiv. 28). The book closes with a brief
account of the death and burial of Joshua and of Eleazar (xxiv.
29—33). 3. Literary Features. — In style as weU as Hi contents the dif
ferent parts of the book have their individual peculiarities. The
first part is historical, both Hi form and substance ; the second,
while historical in style, is in contents chiefly topographical. It
may be said to be also legislative, for tbe partition of territory is
carried out in an official manner, Joshua, the successor of Moses,
and Eleazar, the successor of Aaron, representing the prophetic
and priestly authority, and the sacred lot giving Divine sanction
to their proceedings. The concluding portion is in the hortatory
style of Deuteronomy.
Certain variations in language also have been observed in
these different portions. The original word for " tribe " employed
in the chapters relating to the conquest is different from that.
used in those relating to the partition of the land. In tbe earlier
part, and also Hi the concluding section, the officials associated

THE BOOK OF JOSHUA. 61
with Joshua are usuaUy designated elders, heads, or officers*
whereas, in the middle part, they are styled heads of the fathers.f
Now, it has been observed that these peeuHarities correspond
with usages found in the Pentateuch. In portions which are
known as Jehovistic {e.g. Exod. v. 14, 15, 19; Num. xi. 16), as
also in Deuteronomy, the "officers" are frequently mentioned,
and "elders" occur less frequently than in the Elohistic soctions,
in which " the heads of the fathers " are also characteristic
(Exod. vi. 14, 25 ; Num. vH. 2, xxxH. 28, xxxvi. 1). Again,
Eleazar, who Hi the second portion of this book is associated with
Joshua in the partition of the land, is not mentioned at all in the
earHer portion, not even where the priests appear, and it is main
tained that aU the places Hi the Pentateuch where he is menr
tioned are Elohistic.
For such reasons modern critics have concluded that the Book
of Joshua is of the same composite character as the Pentateuch,
and assume that, in its original form, it was closely joined to the
preceding work, the whole forming a connected history ending
with the conquest : and so they are in the habit of speaking of
the Bexateuch, or book of six portions, as distinguished from
tbe present Pentateuch. \ The Book of Joshua, however, Hi its
present form, has features that show that it was intended to be
complete in itself ; and the fact that the Samaritans have sub-
stantiaUy the Pentateuch as it exists in the Hebrew, but a work
widely divergent from the Book of Joshua, is proof that, if the two
were once connected, the separation must have taken place before
they assumed theH present form. The references to the " Book
of the Law of Moses" (i. 8, viH. 34, 35, xxiv. 26) presupposes
the existence in a formal and independent shape of something
corresponding to the legislative part of the Pentateuch. The
ending of the book with the death of Joshua and Eleazar, just
as the Pentateuch ends with tbe death of Moses, shows that the
writer wished to make his work a completed composition. Cer
tain peeuHarities also in the spelhng of proper names betray a
different hand from that employed on the Pentateuch ; and the
division of the eastern territory and the designation of the cities
of refuge, which form part of the subject of the Pentateuch, are
here treated at length anew, as if the author wished to give com
pleteness and independence to his work.
* See i. 10, iii. 2, vii. 6, viii. 10, 33, xxiii. 2, xxiv. 1, in some of which it
will be observed judges also occur. In ix. 15, 18, 19, 21, we have "¦princes
(or chiefs) of the congregation."
t See xiv. 1, xix. 51, xxi. 1, xxii. 14, 21, 30, and note the variation,
" heads of the thousands." In xvii. 4 we have also "princes."
% See Introduction to the Pentateuch, §§1,8, 9, pp. 1, 9, 10.

62 BOOK BY BOOK.
4. Period covered by the Book. — The book contains but a brief
and summary account of tbe events which happened during the
period to which it relates. The duration of Joshua's rule has
been variously estimated ; probably it may be stated as lasting
about twenty-five years. It is said towards the close of the
account of the conquest (xi. 18) that " Joshua made war a long
time with aU those kings ;" and when Caleb, at the partition of
territory, claimed a special inheritance, he said it was five and
forty years since Moses had made such a promise to him,(xiv. 1 0),
referring to the time when the spies returned to Kadesh, before
the beginning of tbe wandering of thirty-eight years. Thus
seven years at least are to be assigned to tbe conquest ; and
when Joshua summons the people together at the close of the
book (xxiH. 1) he is " an old man, weU stricken in years," and
"many days" have passed since "the Lord had given rest to
Israel from aU their enemies round about." Yet the events
which must have filled up this long time are only stated- in a
summary manner.
"We have, in the history of the conquest, only tbe details of a
few great battles which were decisive of the contest ; we have
also indications of the boundaries of the tribes and Hsts of the
towns lying within them ; but as to the manner in which the
people as a whole settled down in the new cHcumstanees Hi whieh
they were placed, and the extent to which they took actual pos
session of the land assigned to them, we have only the most
general hints. In a war of occupation in a country like Palestine
the foe is not finaUy broken in a few encounters. Though the
invaders secure a footing, the original inhabitants only retire to
advance again, or keep up a desultory warfare " for a long time,"
molesting the invaders, or taking advantage of theH movements
to regain lost ground. Thus places that feU at the first shock
are found raising their heads again when the clash of arms is
past, and towns are taken and retaken before the struggle is con
clusively decided. Hebron and Debir, for example, are men
tioned as taken by Joshua in the southern campaign (x. 36  39
xi. 21), yet requHe to be subdued by Caleb (xiv. 12  14, xv'.
13 — 19); andGezer, smitten by Joshua (x. 33, xii. 12), had to
be cleared by the children of Joseph (xvi. 10).
It is most remarkable that we have no account at aU of the
conquest of the largest part of the country, tbe great backbone
of the land faUing principaUy to the lot of Ephraim. WhUe
there is a great battle fought in the south, and a similar decisive
battle in the north, the intervening territory is not mentioned
except briefly Hi one verse (xi. 16), although it must have been
firmly taken possession of, and that after no Httle effort, as the

THE BOOK OF JOSHUA. 63
•remarkable passage xvii. 14 — 18 shows. Moreover, in the list of
conquered kings given in xH. 9 — 24, while there is a f uU enume
ration of places in the south and north that had been subdued,
there is an almost total absence of names of places faUing within
the great central district. Tbe account given Hi viii. 30 — 35 of
the confirming of the covenant at Shechem seems strangely out
of place immediately after the capture of Ai, and before any word
has been said of the subjugation of the territory in which Shechem
lay. If it is not placed where it stands by anticipation, this may
imply other military operations in the heart of the country of
which we have no record. At aH events, the striking omission
of detaUs regarding this territory, to whatever cause it is due,
emphasises the fact that a great deal must have happened during
these years which can only be inferred from the brief accounts
given Hi tbe book, and reminds us that tbe conquest and occupa
tion of Canaan must have been a slower and more arduous work
than a cursory reading might lead us to suppose.
5. The Conquest. — The purpose of the book being evidently to
give an account of the manner Hi which Canaan was subdued,
and its territory apportioned among the tribes, the details, though
few, are so presented as to show the wisdom with which both
were effected. We can see the advantage of the Israehtes not
having been aUowed to enter the land from the south, where
height after height would have had to be taken, and a stronger
resistance encountered at every step. Entering from the east,
and securing a firm base at GUgal by the destruction of the
neighbouring strong town of Jericho, they were able to penetrate
the country by the pass leading up to Ai, to strike right and left
in the very heart of the country, and, after the great battle, to
pursue tbe fleeing foe down the pass of Beth-boron. These two
passes, opening up from the east and west on the mountainous
inland ridge, enabled them to keep up communication with their
base at GUgal, and to carry out the subjugation of the southern
part of the country. That this was effectuaUy done we gather
from the brief summary of chapter x. 40—43, where the Revised
Version gives a more precise rendering of the fortieth verse : —
" So Joshua smote aU the land, the hUl country and the south
[the Negeb], and the lowland [the Shephelah], and the slopes
and aU theH kings." And it was probably so far concluded
before the great battle in the north was fought ; for it was the
rumour of Joshua's victories that roused Jabin and bis con
federates to combine to oppose him, and though Joshua's move
ment against them was sudden he must have felt secure from the
southern side before venturing so far north.
Again, the chapters which describe the territories of the tribes

64 BOOK BY BOOK.
are. from an antiquarian and topographical point of view, exceed
ingly interesting, and have been caUed by Dean Stanley the
Domesday Book of the conquest of Canaan. The boundaries
seem to have been drawn with the greatest care, and in the case
of seven tribes at least it is expressly said that this was done after
an actual survey and from written notes (xviii. 4 — 9). Recent
examinations by the officers of the Palestine Exploration Fund
have shown that the boundaries of the various tribes were
" almost entirely natural — rivers, ravines, ridges, and the water
shed Hnes of the country." They have also discovered that the
names of towns situated in the various tribes are not put down at
haphazard, but "follow an order roughly consecutive, and aU
those of one district are mentioned together." This fact, indeed,
has enabled the explorers in some cases to effect theH identi
fications. It is also pointed out that the territories of individual tribes in
many cases constitute distinct districts of the country. " Issachar
had the great plain, Zebulon the low hiUs north of it. The sons
of Joseph held the wUd central mountains, and NaphtaH those of
Upper GalUee. Dan and Asher occupied the rich Shephelah
(or lowland) and maritime plain. Simeon inhabited tbe desert,
while Judah, holding the largest share of territory, had both
mountain and Shephelah, plain and desert in its portion." And,
once more, ' ' the proportion of territory to population is calcu
lated to vary exactly in accordance with the fertility of the dis
trict. Taking as a basis tbe tribe populations (Num. xxvi.), it
appears that the ancient populations must have been most dense
exactly in those districts in whieh the greatest number of ancient
ruins is now found, and which are stiU most thickly inhabited." *
6. Plan and connection with other books. — AU these things, how
ever, are set down by the sacred writer, not for the purpose of
satisfying antiquarian curiosity, but, in accordance with the
plan underlying aH these books, to show that tbe promise of
God to the fathers of Israel had been fulfiUed. At the close of
the record of the conquest it is said : "So Joshua took the
whole land, according to aU that the Lord said unto Moses"
(xi. 23) ; and after the last division of territory the same thought
finds expression at greater length : " The Lord gave unto Israel
aU the land which He sware to give unto their fathers ; and they
possessed it and dwelt therein. And the Lord gave them rest
round about, according to aU that He sware unto theH fathers.
. . . There faUed not aught of any good thing which the Lord
had spoken to Israel; aU came to pass" (xxi. 43 — 45). In this
* "Twenty-one Tears' Work in the Holy Land," page 110. Palestine
Exploration Fund, 1886.

THE BOOK OF JOSHUA. 65
way* the book of Joshua connects itself Hi plan and contents with
the antecedent Pentateuch.
We shaU also see that it is connected on the other side with
the succeeding Book of Judges, and thus forms a link in the
chain of history which it is the object of the sacred writers to
unfold. In one aspect it may be regarded as the conclusion of
one stage of history, for it represents the fulfilment of the
promise ; in another aspect it is the beginning of a new period,
for Israel now passes into settled Hfe, and has new problems to
solve, new difficulties to face. But, from whatever side the
sacred writers view the history, they assume that Israel has a
special calling, and is under a special Divine protection and
guidance. And, indeed, it is impossible to account for their
conquest of Canaan without assuming the help of God and their
conviction of His help. The Canaanites were far their superiors
Hi the civUisation of the time ; and, although their vices had
enervated them and theH divisions made them an easier prey to
the invaders, they were stiU able to offer a stout resistance and
to continue to give trouble to theH vanquishers.
The idea of some writers of recent times that the various tribes
passed over from the east of tbe Jordan into Canaan at different
times and secured possession by theH independent efforts, or
even peaceably by purchase or alliance with the native races, is
clearly not the idea of the sacred writers, and is entirely inade
quate to explain either the accounts' or the events. There can
be no question that it was one of the earliest and most deeply
rooted behefs of the Israehtes that they had obtained possession
of Canaan Hi an extraordinary way and by the special help of
theH God; it is equaUy clear that they obtained such a decided
mastery over the native races that the language and laws
and religion of the conquerors took the place of those of the
conquered. But to assume that such a belief, which was the mainspring
of aU the national greatness of Israel, rested on nothing more
than the wanderings of tribes into Canaan and gradual inter
mixture and incorporation with the inhabitants, and that such a
mastery was gained by a race that not only borrowed the culture
but even adopted the reHgious usages of the people among
whom they settled, is to accept mHacles greater than those
which it is proposed to set aside. To whatever depths Israel
afterwards feU, it is clear that, in order to gam possession of
Canaan, they must have had to fight hard, and that tUl theH
supremacy was secured they must have remained united in
national Hfe and Hi reHgion or they would have been absorbed.
Only the consciousness of a high destiny, and the conviction that

66 BOOK BY BOOK.
they were one united people under Divine guidance, such as this
book ascribes to them, could have given them courage to achieve
what they did; and nothing less than tbe memory of great
events can explain the early national belief of a history such as
is here recorded.
7. Parallels in History. — The conquest of Canaan by the Israel
ites has its paraUels to some extent in general history. The
barbarous Germanic tribes broke down the superior culture of
the Roman EmpHe, and tbe rude Mohammedans of the desert
overran the empires of the East. It is the law of God's provi
dence that luxury brings decay, and that nations whose moral
hfe is corrupted deteriorate in physical courage and political
strength. Regarded from this point of view the victory of the
Israelites was inevitable. Trained in tbe scanty life of the
desert, debarred from returning to Egypt, and pressed forward
by their growing needs, they penetrated tbe fertUe land of
Canaan and supplanted the effete civUisation of its inhabitants
with their own more healthy Hfe. That in the process of subju
gation there were severe struggles and much blood shed is no
more than has happened in the similar cases aUuded to ; and it
is captious to object to things occurring in sacred history which
are matters of course in the general history of the world.
There are, however, certain things which distinguish the wars
of Israel from other wars of conquest : they were fighting for a
land which was hallowed by the sepulchres of their fathers, and
had been given them by Divine promise ; tbe consciousness that
they were engaged in a holy war saved them from the brutalising
effects of bloodshed and the debasing effects of plunder ; above
aH, they were the bearers of a religion which was to be a
blessing to aU tbe earth, and their occupation of Canaan was
necessary in the fulfilment of theH destiny tiU " tbe fulness of
the time" should come. "The Israehtes' sword," says Dr.
Arnold, "Hi its bloodiest executions, wrought a work of mercy
for all the countries of the earth to the very end of the world.
In these contests, on the fate of one of these nations of Palestine
the happiness of the human race depended. Tbe Israelites
fought not for themselves only, but for us. It might foUow
thatthey should thus be accounted tbe enemies of aU mankind ;
it might be that they were tempted by their very distinctness to
despise other nations. StiU they did God's work; stUl they
preserved unhurt the seed of eternal Hfe, and were the ministers
of blessing to aU other nations, even though they themselves
faUed to enjoy it."

THE BOOKS OF JUDGES AND
EUTH.

1. The Names. — The Book of Judges is so named from the
series of distinguished leaders who appeared in Israel from time
to time between Joshua and Samuel, and whose deeds form the
principal subject of tbe book. The name given to these leaders
is not to be taken to imply that the primary office of the judges
was the exercise of judicial functions. The word "judge" in
the Old Testament has tbe usual sense (as may be seen in Psalm
xHH. 1, compared with Exod. ii. 14) of maintaining the cause, or
asserting the right, of any one ; and the history shows that the
judges were raised up, when Israel was in straits, to maintain
the cause of God's people against hostUe nations, and to assert
the principles on which the Hebrew nation was founded. Hence
they are caUed saviours (chap. iii. 9 ; compare ii. 16).
Judicial functions are not, however, excluded ; for, in a state
of society such as that depicted in this book, the leader who comes
to the front in a time of pubhc necessity is invested with wide
powers, and held in general regard. And thus, when Moses and
Joshua, who had held office for Hfe, had passed away, and a
permanent head Hke a king had not yet been appointed, the
mUitary leader for the time would naturaUy wield also an
authority in civU matters. What is particularly mentioned of
Deborah (iv. 5), that "the chUdren of Israel came up to her for
judgment," was doubtless true of others; and Samuel, who may
be taken as the last of the Hne, representing the transition to the
monarchical rule, not only himseH exercised such functions, but
appointed his sons also as judges (1 Sam. viii. 1). The office
was not hereditary, the judge being raised up at the time and in
the place of special need : it was thus in keeping with the con
dition of the period, which was one of transition from the rule of
Moses and Joshua, who governed by dHect instructions from
]?2

68 BOOK BY BOOK.
God, to that of the kings, who had a settled organization for
civU and military affaHs. The book also, Hi its literary form,
reflects this character of transition, consisting, for tbe most part,
not of a continuous narration, but of a series of sketches or
pictures, strikingly different in their detaUs, of the life of the
time, and of the deeds of the leaders who, under Divine guidance,
influenced the course of events through which Israel settled down
to permanent occupation of the promised land.
The Httle Book of Ruth, so named from the principal personage
whose fortunes it relates, though an independent composition,
and doubtless written at a different time, connects itself in its
subject with the Book of Judges ; for the events it records are
stated to have occurred "in the days when the judges judged"
(Ruth i. 1). Accordingly, it stands Hi tbe ancient versions, as Hi
our English Bible, between the Books of Judges and Samuel,
although in the Hebrew Bible it has a different place. Some
have even supposed that it once formed part of the Book of
Judges. 2. Contents. — In the series of historical books of the Old Testa
ment the Book of Judges forms an orderly and connected link,
following up the story of the conquest contained in the Book of
Joshua, and preparing for the opening of the Books of Samuel
which exhibit the rise of the kingly power. It faUs naturaUy
into three divisions : an introductory portion extending to chap.
iH. 6 ; the main body of the book, embracing chaps, iii. 7, to
xvi. ; and an appendix in chaps. xvH. — xxi.
The introductory portion is twofold, retrospective and prospec
tive. In chap. i. 1 to H. 5, there is a condensed description of
the extent to which the land had been, " after the death of
Joshua," subdued by Israel. It mentions particularly the cities
and districts which were left in the hands of the Canaanites, and
concludes with a special revelation, threatening Israel with heavy
trials if they did not take energetic measures for the possession
of theH territory. Then, in ii. 6 — iii. 6, is given, prospectively,
a summary view of the whole period of the judges which is to
be described in the succeeding chapters.
After this introductory matter comes the main part of the book
(Hi. 7- — xvi. 31). . There are, in aU, twelve persons mentioned
who performed the function of judge, reckoning Deborah and
Barak as one, and excluding Abimelech, who is regarded as a
usurper. Of six of these the exploits are related at varying
lengths ; of the other six we have Httle more than a bare
mention. The six who are treated in detail are : Othniel, son of
Kenaz, who deHvered Israel from the oppression of Cushan-
Rishathayim, of Mesopotamia (Hi. 7—11) ; Ehud, the Benjamite,

THE BOOKS OF JUDGES AND EUTH. 69
who appeared during the subjugation of Israel by Moab, with
Ammon and Amalek, and achieved deUverance by slaying the
Moabite king, Eglon (Hi. 12 — 30); Deborah of Ephraim and
Barak of Naphtali, who defeated Sisera, the general of Jabin,
king of tbe Canaanites, at the battle of Tabor (iv., v.) ; Gideon
of Manasseh, who repeUed the invasion of the Midianites and
"the ChUdren of the East" (vi. 1 — vHi. 32), but by his impru
dent assumption of a show of permanent authority gave occasion
to the ambition of bis son Abimelech, whose upstart reign is the
subject of viH. 33 — ix. 57 ; Jephthah of GUead, who was caUed
by his countrymen to act as leader against the Ammonites (x. 6
— xH. 7); and Samson, the Danite, who "began to deHver"
Israel from the oppression of the Philistines (xiH. — xvi.). The
sue who are but briefly mentioned are : Shamgar, who performed
an exploit against the PhUistines (Hi. 31), Tola of Issachar (x. 1,
2), JaH of GUead (x. 3 — 5), Tbzan of Bethlehem (xii. 8 — 10),
Elon of Zebulon (xH. 11, 12), and Abdon of PHathon (xH. 13 —
15), Hi regard to whom we are told only the period over which
theH rule extended, and some details as to theH families and
social position.
The appendix contains two episodes belonging to the time of
the judges, viz., the story of the image- worship of Micah the
Ephraimite, Hi its connection with the settling of the Danites in
tbe north of the land (xvH. — xviu.) ; and the account of the out
rage committed at Gibeah, which led to the war of extermination
waged against Benjamin by the other tribes (xix. — xxi.).
The Book of Ruth, so far as the subject is concerned, may be
regarded as another appendix, relating the episode of the young
Moabitish widow, who became a mother Hi Israel and an ances
tress of the royal house of David. Though the duration of the
various oppressions and the time of the rule of the judges, and
of the "rest" which the land enjoyed after each deUverance,
are carefuUy given in most instances, it is impossible from these
numbers to construct a system of chronology for the period of the
Judges which would harmonize with other fixed dates in the
history. From the frequent recurrence of the number forty, it
would seem probable that the whole period of four hundred and
.eighty years, which, according to 1 Kings vi. 1, elapsed between
the Exodus and the commencement of the building of the Temple,
was divided by the BibHcal writers into twelve round periods of
forty years. But, seeing that a simple addition of the numbers
mentioned in this Book of Judges would make the period far too
extensive, it is most probable that there was an overlapping of
several of the periods mentioned ; and the probability is aU the
stronger when we regard the fact that the judges appeared in

70 BOOK BY BOOK.
places remote from one another in connection with oppressions
that were more or less Hmited Hi theH range.
3. Characteristics. — The several divisions of tbe Book of Judges
which have just been enumerated have their different character
istics. The second portion of the introduction attaches itself
closely to the main part of the book which immediately foUows
it. The conception of both is that, during the period of the
Judges, the history of Israel repeats itself in ever recurring
cycles. This conception is clearly enunciated in the preface (ii.
11 — 18) as the principle on which the succeeding history is to be
treated, and finds expression in certain stereotyped phrases which
occur at intervals throughout the book : ' ' The children of Israel
again did evU in the eyes of the Lord ; " . . . "Tbe Lord sold
them into the hand of" the oppressor for tbe time, whom
" they served " for so many years ; . . . "The Lord raised up a
deliverer " in the person of the judge whose deeds are then
recorded . . . this deHverer judged Israel so long, and finaUy,
" the land had rest " for a certain round number of years. This
portion is apparently designed to be the sequel to the book of
Joshua, for the introduction takes up the narrative at the point
where it bad been dropped in that book, and repeats the very
words with which it closes.* It is thus written to give an account
of the condition of Israel in the period when Joshua and all his
contemporaries had passed away ; and, coming down as it does
to the oppression by the PhUistines in tbe time of Samson, it
carries us into the period taken up in the First Book of Samuel,
at the opening of which the PhUistines are seen holding a firm
grasp of Israel in the south. f
The former part of the introduction, on the other hand, con
nects itself most naturaUy with the first part of the Book of
Joshua, giving a picture of the state of the country immediately
after the war of conquest, or, at aU events, soon after Joshua's
death. Here also we find the very words of the preceding book
repeated in reference to the subjugation of certain places,]: the
object being evidently to show how imperfectly Israel had ful
filled its duty, as is seen more distinctly in "the threatening
uttered by the angel of the Lord, with which this part of the
introduction closes (ii. 1 — 5).
The appended narratives, again, at the close of the book (xvii.
— xxi.) connect themselves Hi time with this part of the intro
duction, falling, as they do, shortly after the time of Joshua,
when the grandsons of Moses and Aaron were stiU alive. In
* Compare Judges ii. 6—10, with Josh. xxiv. 28—31.
t Compare Judges xiii. 1, 5, with 1 Sam. vii. 13.
1 Compare, for example, Judges i. 11 — 15, with Josh. xv. 15 — 19.

THE BOOKS OF JUDGES AND KUTH. 71
chap. xvHi. 30, in reference to the idol-worship set up at Dan,
it is said that " Jonathan, the son of Gershom, the son of Moses,*
he and his sons were priests to the- tribe of the Danites untU the
day of the captivity of the land ; " and in chap. xx. 27, 28, we
read that Phinehas, tbe grandson of Aaron, was alive and minis
tering before tbe ark at the time of the war with Benjamin.
The time to which the Book of Ruth relates is indicated in the
genealogy at the close (Ruth Hi. 1 8 — 22), which shows that Boaz,
the husband of Ruth, was the grandfather of Jesse, the father of
David. .
4. Composition. — These different materials have the appearance
of having come from different hands, but we have only tbe most
general indications of the sources from which they are derived,
and the periods at which they were composed. From the recurring
statement in the closing chapters (xvii. 6 ; xvHi. 1 ; xix. 1 ; xxi.
25), " In those days there was no king in Israel," we may gather
that these portions, and the related introduction, which regards
the period of the Judges as a completed whole, wer^ written in the
time of the monarchy, by one who wished to magnify the kingly
office, or, at least, that they come from a writer who wished to
show the superiority of the regal period over a time when
" every man did that which was right in his own eyes." The
Book of Ruth also, which begins by referring to " the days when
the judges ruled " (Ruth i. 1 ) and ends by showing the genealogy
of David (Ruth iv. 22), evidently belongs to a time when the
Davidic line was estabhshed on the throne.
There is some doubt as to the reference of the words, " until
the day of the captivity of the land," in chapter xviii. 30. Some
suppose that the time implied is the same as that mentioned in
the succeeding verse, viz., "aU the time that the house of
God was Hi ShUoh," and an ancient manuscript actuaUy
reads " until the day of the captivity of the ark." If the refer
ence is to the overthrow of the northern kingdom, it would f oUow
that the latest hand traceable in the book belongs to the time of
the Captivity, but it is quite Hkely that the expression " capti
vity " was appHed to other national calamities, although, as
it is said Hi the Talmud, ' ' a greater captivity causes a former
one to be forgotten." At aU events, there can be no doubt that
the Book of Judges contains elements of a much earlier date.
The song of Deborah (chap, v.) has aU the freshness and fire of
a contemporaneous production, and is regarded on aU hands as
belonging to the time whose stirring events it relates.
* So the Revised Version now reads. The name Moses is believed to have
been purposely changed to Manasseh by pious scribes, out of respect to the
memory of the Lawgiver.

72 BOOK BY BOOK.
As to the accounts of the deeds of the various judges, it has
been supposed by some that they were collected from oral tradi
tion and from different quarters, the tribe or f amUy to which the
respective leader belonged having, in the form of popular story,
preserved the memory of its hero's exploits. The recitals are, at
all events, of a popular cast. The fragments of poetry, parables
and proverbs, references to common customs, and the graphic
manner in which the various characters are depicted and theH
actions described — the deed itself being more prominent than its
moral character — are aU characteristic of such a kind of early
national literature. There is, however, no ground for the sup
position that each of the tribes contributed a picture to the
national coUection ; for, though there are twelve judges in aU,
they are not distributed over tbe twelve tribes.
From whatever source the accounts were derived they have
been put together on a fixed plan, and made to Ulustrate one
guiding principle, as has aHeady been said. It may be added
that the simplicity of the style, the minute accuracy of topo
graphical detail, the variety of incident, and, above all, the
absence of any attempt to conceal or paUiate the failings of the
characters described, aU combine to give the impression that we
have before us, not fabulous or mythical tales, but true narra
tives of rough but brave deeds, such as might be looked for in a
transitional state of society, when men had hard problems to
solve, and often solved them in a rough and ready manner.
5. Situation. — The situation of Israel in the period covered
by these books is a very pecuHar one. Deprived of the leader
ship of Moses and Joshua, the tribes are left as a rule to theH
individual self-government, and, scattered to their various terri
tories, they are exposed to various dangers and have theH
various vicissitudes. The Book of Joshua had partly prepared us
for the spectacle which is here presented, and these books supply
to a great extent what is lacking there of information as to
the manner Hi which a permanent settlement was effected in
Canaan.* Tbe problem before the people is to take firm possession of
the land as their home. They are not reinforced by fresh
arrivals of kindred tribes, as other invaders have been ; they do
not seek to conquer Palestine as a province, and hold it by armed
force, as great empires have added to their dominions ; neither
are they allowed to amalgamate with the native races and make
a mixed stock, as has generaUy been the rule in the occupation
of a land by a conquering race. But these very cHcumstances
* See Joshua, § 4, p. 62.

THE BOOKS OF JUDGES AND KUTH. 73
render theH task aU the more difficult ; and the Book of Judges
shows us the two great dangers to which the situation chiefly
exposed them.
In the first place, it shows that they suffered more from the
seductions of peace than from the hardships of war. So long as
they were an armed host, they were true to their calling and
invincible. But the time taken to subdue the land was, after all,
comparatively short, and many of the native races were left in
the midst of Israel, as the book shows. Thus, the first sharp
struggle of the conquest over, when the native races of the land
had given up the contest, or contented themselves with holding a
few positions of advantage, the original warlike ardour of the
conquerors abates, and they begin to taste the sweets of peace in
a land of fertility and plenty. Dependent to a great extent for
local information on the natives around them, and taking advan
tage of theH labour or observing theH modes of agriculture, they
would come to mingle with them in the ordinary occupations of
Hfe. From chUdren like themselves, from bondmen and bond
women in theH homes, the younger generation of Israel would
imbibe superstitious notions ; and the past history shows too
plainly how deeply saturated the minds of the parents already
were with such notions. From thi3 point the transition would
be easy to the apostasy described in the Book of Judges ; the
local shrines venerated by the Canaanites would be visited by
the Israelites, and the local deities, regarded as givers of plenty,
would be acknowledged and reverenced. Thus, becoming like the
nations whom they had supplanted, they run the imminent risk
of sharing their fate. Moab, Ammon, and Amalek, on the south
and east ; the Canaanite kingdom of Jabin on the north ; the
roving Midianites and the chUdren of the east, like the modern
Bedawin Arabs, from the desert ; and the rising power of the
Phihstines on the south-west, in turn take advantage of their
weakness and reduce them to straits.
• In the second place, from the dispersion of the tribes, there
was danger of that national unity bemg broken, on which the
success of Israel depended. Tbe old system of local government
by elders, and the assignment of definite territories to the
mdividual tribes, whUe keeping each single tribe from breaking
up, would tend to make each its own centre. The provision of a
national assembly no doubt existed, and the high-priest was there
to deHver the sacred oracle when it was asked ; but these provi
sions, it is observable, come into fuUer view only in the time of
revived national Hfe under Samuel, and are scarcely noticeable
Hi the Book of Judges.
Between these two dangers, then, Israel is placed during this

74 BOOK BY BOOK.
period, and the history of the judges is the history of their
deliverance from them. Each successive oppression faUs upon
them when they forget the Lord and serve other gods ; the pres
sure felt at each new point brings home to the tribe concerned its
isolation and its inability to cope single-handed with the enemy.
In their distress they return unto the Lord, whom in their
prosperity they had forgotten ; the necessity of combination
revives their feeling of national unity ; and thus by tbe very
backslidings of tbe time they are disciplined for a better future.
The faUures and the successes of the period culminate in the time
of Samuel, in whose days the Hght of Divine revelation, whieh
had fitfully flickered up in the period of tbe judges, begins to
shine steadily in tbe teaching of the prophets, and the sporadic
rule of judges merges in tbe settled reign of kings.
6. Relation to other Books. — The contrast presented by the Book
of Judges and those of the Pentateuch and Joshua Hi the matter
of the reHgious observances and life of Israel is very marked. In
tbe Book of Joshua there were references to the law of Moses,
and Joshua and Eleazar are seen acting still with the old authority
of Moses and Aaron. Here, on the contrary, there is not one
reference to the law, and from the greater part of the book we
could scarcely infer that such a law bad been given. We bear
nothing of the service of the Tabernacle, tbe ark of the covenant
is only incidentaUy mentioned (xx. 27, 28), and, in general, we
are told very little about the reHgious usages of the people. Not
only so, but what we are told reveals a state of matters which we
do not naturally expect. For, besides the general statement as
to the worship of heathen gods, the conceptions of worship
exhibited by Micah and the Danites, the degraded position of the
Levites, the conduct of a godly man Hke Gideon in setting up an
ephod in his house at Ophrah, tbe pictures given of tbe characters
of Jephthah and Samson, and indeed the whole view that we
obtain of the religious condition of the time, seem sadly out of
keeping with the requHements of the law and. with the training
and experience which Israel had enjoyed. Hence those who
maintain the late date of the Mosaic system point to the Book
of Judges in proof of their contention that the religious insti
tutions of Israel grew up by development from a crude stage
such as that book represents.
Now, as to the reHgious practice of Israel, it is not sufficiently
borne in mind that the very books of the Pentateuch, which
relate to the giving of the law and its acceptance by the people,
record gross violations of it from the very commencement, and
prepare us for the declension which is witnessed in the time of the
Judges. Again, the argument drawn from the silence of this

THE BOOKS OF JUDGES AND RUTH. 75
book as to observances of worship is very misleading. The state
ments as to the worship of Jehovah and the worship of Baalim
and Ashtaroth are given in the same general terms, " They for
sook the Lord and served other gods." If we accept the one half
of the statement, we must accept the other ; and if the worship of
the BaaHm consisted in formal and definite acts, the worship of
Jehovah, which was neglected, must also have had its definite
recognised forms. The brief notice therefore implies a recognised
reHgious service quite different from that of the surrounding
heathen. It is further to be remembered that none of these books
professes to give a complete view of all that occurred in the time
tp which it relates. Many things happened, many observances
must have been in existence, many regulations for civil and reli
gious Hfe must have been in exercise, of which not a word is
said. The Httle story of Ruth, relating to this same time, had it been
the only account of that period that had come down to us, would
have led us to believe that the period was one of idyllic peace and
fervent piety. So also when the Book of Samuel opens, it dis
closes to .us the Tabernacle at Shiloh, and a regular worship,
overlaid with corruptions, but certainly not borrowed from the
Oanaanites, as generaUy recognised and observed. Even the
corrupt forms in whieh the reHgion of the time of the Judges
inanH ests itself, prove the existence of a better worship of which
they were perversions. The position in which the Levites are
represented is mean enough ; but who were these Levites at all,
if, aceording to the view of the advanced critics, the tribe of Levi
bad entirely disappeared, and the Levitical guUd arose at a later
time by the gradual elevation of a priestly caste ? FinaUy, the
rallying of the tribes to a common standard in time of danger
proves the existence of tribal organisation and the consciousness
of national unity, such as the accounts of the Pentateuch attest,
and is inconsistent with the modern theory of the immigration
and independent settlement of various tribes.
A great deal is made of the fact that, in Deborah's song, in
the muster-roU of the tribes, no mention is made of Judah, as if
this were a proof that at that time the great southern tribe had
not yet risen into importance. Whether this omission arose from
the fact that Judah was distant ' from the scene of danger and
conflict, or it is an indication that even at this time the southern
tribe was assuming that semi-independent position in which it
already appears under the first kings, the argument drawn from
it is very unsafe. In the summary given in chap. i. of the territory
occupied by tbe tribes, aU those in the west of the Jordan are
mentioned except Issachar, although in Deborah's song that

(76 BOOK BY BOOK.
tribe bears the brunt of the fighting against Jabin (v. 15) ; and
there are similar striking omissions in other books.*
7. The Period. — We cannot, therefore, take the period of the
Judges as the starting point of the national history of Israel, nor
regard the reHgious practice of the time as the germ out of which
future institutions were slowly developed. At the same time, to
ignore the fact that religious Hfe was at a low ebb would be op
posed to the plain teaching of the books before us. AU the
narratives, both of the Pentateuch and of the succeeding books,
agree in representing the law as too highly pitched for the
people's life, an ideal for them to aim at, a standard to reprove
them. In their first ardour at its delivery, they are wiHing to
say, " AU that the Lord hath spoken we wUl do," and, under the
tension of the struggle of the conquest they adhered so far to
their resolution. But a nation such as they were is not easily
educated to the point of a permanent conformity to a law such as
they acknowledge. It was only some sixty years from the time
when the law was given to the death of Joshua, when they
became exposed to every temptation which would appeal to theH
inborn superstition and draw them away from theH fidehty ; and
the consequence, though it may not agree with our preconceived
notions of development, is too consistent with human experience
and with the history of religious progress. Tbe age immediately
succeeding that of the Apostles exhibits an ignorance and super
stition which make the existence of the Apostolic age almost in
credible. Even in the days of the Apostles themselves, as we
gather from St. Paul's Epistles, there prevailed among professing
Christians practices sadly at variance with the religion to which
they adhered ; and nowhere is the vast distance between a truth
taught and a truth apprehended more manifestly apparent than
in the case of the disciples of Christ whUe He was with them.
The period of the Judges is intelligible on the supposition that a
religion had been given to Israel, up to whose standard they
were to be graduaUy raised ; and the sacred writer, while
putting faithfuUy on record the shortcomings of the period,
recognises .the design of Providence even in these. It was an
important period in the religious education of the people ; their
enemies were left among them, and they were left to struggle
with them, that by them God might "prove Israel " (iii. 1).
* Se3, for example, Joshua, § 4, p. 62.

THE BOOKS OE SAMUEL.
1. Name. — The books designated in the Jewish Hsts the Former
Prophets are four in number, viz., Joshua, Judges, Samuel, and
Kings ; Hi other words, the two Books of Samuel, as we now
have them, are reckoned as one, and Hkewise the two Books of
Kings. The division into two of each of these books, which
now prevaUs and is followed in our English Bible, is found in
the Septuagint and other early versions. These versions, how
ever, regarded the Books of Samuel and Kings as forming one
connected series, the four parts of which were called the four
Books of the Kingdoms or of the Kings. The earliest printed
Hebrew Bibles adopted that division and retained even the
double titles ; so that the First Book of Samuel was called by that
name, and also "tbe First Book of the Kings," whUe what is now
the FHst Book of Kings was so designated and was also caUed
"the Third Book of the Kings." Thismodeof reckoning had its
justification Hi the fact that in the four books taken together
we have the history of the Kings or of the two Kingdoms from
the very beginning to the tune of the Babylonian Captivity. Yet,
as Hterary productions, the Books of Samuel and those of Kings
are from different hands, belong to different periods, and are
respectively marked by clearly discernible characteristics.
It wUl be convenient to treat of the two Books of Samuel to
gether, as they originaUy formed one whole and are closely
connected together in subject and in literary features. The
name of Samuel, which is attached to them, cannot, it is evident,
denote authorship, for the record of his death comes as early as
the twenty-fifth chapter of the first book. Yet there was an
appropriateness in naming these books after the last of the
Judges, who caUed to theH office the first two kings and gave
an impulse to the monarchy and the national life which long sur
vived him. Both by his personal influence over Saul and David,
and by tbe relation in which he stood to the prophetic move
ment, Samuel's activity may be said to extend to the close of the

78 BOOK BY BOOK.
period covered by the books which bear his name ; so that the
older title of the books is more fehcitous than that given to them
in the early versions.
2. The Period. — Tbe history embraced in the Books of Samuel
extends from the close of the period of the Judges to the death
of David. As in the case of other books, a connection is main
tained with the preceding and tbe succeeding periods, so as to
present a continuous history. Thus, at the commencement, the
judgeship of Eli is introduced to prepare for that of Samuel,
who may be reckoned as the last of the judges ; and, at the
close, the reign of David, is represented as at an end, although,
in fact, its final scenes are only first described in the First Book
of Kings.
From the manner in which the narrative breaks off before the
death of David some have concluded that the writer, who cer
tainly Hved after David's time {see 2 Sam. v. 5), did actuaUy
carry down his history tiU the close of David's reign, or even
until the time of Solomon. It has even been supposed, that the
opening portion of the FHst Book of Kings may have originally
been joined to the Books of Samuel. Considering, however, that
Solomon actuaUy began to reign before the death of his father,
and looking to the manner in which the concluding chapters of
2 Samuel introduce a variety of matters belonging to the close of
David's reign, without arranging them in strict chronological
order, it is more probable that the present division is the original
one, and that the absence of strict Hterary finish is to be ex
plained by the fact that the author bad written materials before
him which he put together in the form in which he found them.
The history contained in these two books thus centres round
the three principal personages who were prominent in the period.
The period of Samuel extends to 1 Sam. xii., the reign of Saul
to the end of the first book, while the second book narrates the
events of the reign of David. But these periods, again, are so
closely interwoven with one another that they cannot be repre
sented independently. Samuel's activity begins while EH is stiU
judge, and is continued even after bis own demission of that
office. So under Saul's reign David is already the anointed
king, and the events related in that period concern David as
much as Saul ; and finally, David's reign is not ended when the
activity of Solomon begins. AU this wiU be more apparent if
we now take a summary view of the contents of the two books.
3. Contents of First Book. — The first book opens at tbe time
when EH was priest at ShUoh and the recognised judge of Israel.
Samuel, the son of a praying mother, is dedicated by his parents
to the service of the Lord, and grows up leading a pure priestly

THE BOOKS OF SAMUEL. 79
life at the sanctuary, affording a silent rebuke to the corrupt
Hves of Eli's sons and a demonstration of the insufficiency of a
mere hereditary priesthood. When the doom of the unfaithful
priestly famUy is clearly denounced, he is speciaUy marked out
as a prophet, and is so regarded by the people at large (Hi. 1 —
20). He commences his pubHc work at Shiloh, and comes into
national prominence when the threatened Divine vengeance faUs
upon Israel in the victory of the Philistines, the loss of the ark,
and the ruin of EH's house (iii. 21 — v. 1). Under his wise and
godly administration there is a revival of national piety and-
patriotism, the Divine favour is shown in the return of the ark
from the country of tbe PhUistines (v. 2 — vii. 1), the heart of
Israel is turned to God in penitence ; and, in the strength of
theH restored zeal, they achieve a victory over theH enemies at
Ebenezer. This was the turning-point in the national fortunes, the cul
mination of the influence of Samuel, who continued to foster
the piety of tbe nation by cHcuits made from Ramah over the
adjacent country (vii. 2 — 17). But the period had come when
the national Hfe of Israel was to assume a new form. The evils
of tbe hereditary priestly power, on the one hand (viii. 1. ff.),
and, on the other, the desire of the people to be like the neigh
bouring nations, prepared for the institution of the monarchy.
The request of the people for a king is complied with, although
the dangers to which this would lead are exposed, and the prin
ciple of a pure theocracy on which the nation was incorporated
are emphasised (viii. 4 — 22). Saul is anointed by the prophet
(ix. 1 — x. 16), bis appointment is ratified by the lot and by legal
ordinance (x. 17 — 26), and vindicated against gainsayers by tbe
king's successful exploit against the Ammonites (x. 27 — xi. 15) ;
and then Samuel formaUy lays down his office of judge (xii).
The bravery of the new king is seen in the manner in whieh he
wages war with the neighbouring PhUistines and Amalekites,
the valour of his son Jonathan being equally conspicuous (xiii.,
xiv.). The king is, however, constantly reminded by Samuel
that he reigns under the dHect command of God ; and, after he
has twice disobeyed instructions conveyed through the prophet
(xiii. 8 ff., xv. 9 ff.), sentence of his rejection is pronounced, and
it is intimated that a worthier man is to reign.
From this point onward to tbe end of the book we have an
account of the gradual rise of David and of the fall of Saul.
Chosen by God, David is set apart by prophetic anointing (xvi.
1 — 13), comes to the court of Saul, who is afflicted with melan
choly (xvi. 14 — 23), and by his exploit against Goliath of Gath
attracts the notice of the king, gains the friendship of Jonathan,

80 BOOK BY BOOK.
and wins favour with aU the people (xvii. 1 — xviii. 7). This
popularity of David excites Saul's envy, so that be seeks by craft
to compass his death, and finaUy pursues bim with open hostUity
(xviii. 8 — xix.l). Warned by Jonathan, David first takes refuge
with Samuel at Naioth in Ramah, whence, being further in
formed by his faithful friend of Saul's continued opposition, he
flees to tbe PhUistines, who send bim back to Judah (xix. 2 — xxi.
15). At AduUam there gathers round him a multitude of dis
affected men, and he is joined by Gad the Seer, who advises bim
to remain in Judah. A fresh outburst of Saul's enmity, how
ever, forces him to send his parents for safety to the land of
Moab, and Saul's vengeance is wreaked upon the priests at Nob
for their suspected encouragement of the outlaw (xxH.). Yet
even in his exUe David engages in warfare against tbe PhUis
tines, tbe enemies of his country (xxiii. Iff.); and this exhibi
tion of patriotism, together with his generosity in sparing Saul
on two occasions when the king was in his power, causes
the more thoughtful people in the country to regard bim as a
person to be respected.
After the death of Samuel, who had been his close friend,
David is regarded by the nation as the divinely appointed leader ;
though he stiU has to elude the violence of Saul, being, bunted
from place to place, and narrowly escaping with his Hfe at KeUab,
Maon, Engedi, Paran and Zipb (xxiii. — xxvi.). He finally quits
Judah, and seeks an asylum with Achish, King of Gatb, who
assigns him Ziklag as a place of residence. Still, however, he is
at heart an enemy of the enemy of his country (xxvii., xxx.),
and only by the jealousy of the lords of the Philistines them
selves is saved from the necessity of taking part in a war against
Judah (xxix., xxx.). Saul himself, driven to desperation, seeks
to obtain, through the witch at Endor, some counsel from the
departed Samuel, but hears only a repetition of the doom which
tbe prophet had uttered whUe aHve (xxviii.), is defeated by the
PhUistines at the battle of GUboa, and falls by his own hand
(xxxi.). 4. Contents of Second Book. — The second book is devoted to the
reign of David. In chapters i. — iv., relating to the seven years
and a half that he reigned over Judah in Hebron, we have the
beautiful elegy on the death of Saul and Jonathan, the account
of the setting up of Ishbosheth, Saul's son, as king at Maha-
naim, the faU of that prince and the extinction of the dynasty of
Saul by the treacherous murder of Abner by Joab, and the as
sassination of Ishbosheth himself . The former crime is lamented
by David in a beautiful elegy over Abner, and the latter he
avenged by the execution of the murderers. The remaining

THE BOOKS OF SAMUEL. 81
chapters (v. — xxiv.) relate to David's rule over aU Israel in Jeru
salem. Gaining a victory over the Jebusites he takes theH city
and makes it the capital of his kingdom and the royal residence
(v. 1 — 16). After another victory over the PhUistines, Jerusalem
becomes also the seat of the ark of the covenant, and prepara
tions are made for a more permanent and more magnificent re
presentation of the national unity and worship. Directions are
given regarding the buUding of the Temple, and promises of the
continuance of the Davidic dynasty are conveyed through Nathan
the prophet, who is the king's faithful guide and counseUor (v.
17 — vii. 29). The boundaries of the kingdom are extended from
the Mediterranean to the Euphrates by conquests over the PhUis
tines, Moabites, Edomites, and Syrians (viH. 1 — 14): and the
account of the prosperity of the empHe is concluded with a der
seription of David's magnificence and an enumeration of his court
officials ; his greatness being enhanced by the generosity he dis
played towards the descendants of Saul and tbe firmness he
exercised in dealing with outside enemies of his country (viii.
15— x. 19).
But another aspect of the history is presented in the chapters
whieh foUow. In these we see the domestic and personal Hfe of
David, with the consequences of his acts on the affairs of his
later years and on the development of the succeeding history
of the monarchy. His sin in the matter of Bathsheba (xi.) is
foUowed by trouble, grief, and humUiation in his own famUy,
culminating in the rebelhon of Absalom (xii. — xv. 12). The
flight of David from Jerusalem, the civU war, and the king's
return after tbe vietory, are narrated at length (xv. 13 — xix. 40);
and then foUows a section showing the growing jealousy between
Judah and the other tribes, breaking out in the revolt of Sheba
the son of Bichri, and foreshadowing the rupture of the united
kingdom (xix. 41 — xx. 22).
The four concluding chapters contain supplementary matters
of various kinds. Thus we have an account of the famine and
the means by which it was removed (xxi. 1 — 14) ; lists of the
names and notices of the exploits of David's mighty men (xx. 23
— 26 ; xxi. 15 — 22 ; xxiH. 8 — 39) ; poetical pieces of David's
composition (xxii. 1 — xxiH. 7) ; and, finaUy, an account of the
numbering of the people, which was punished by a visitation of
the plague and atoned for by sacrifice (xxiv.).
5. Composition. — From the preceding sketch of their contents it
wiU be apparent that the two Books of Samuel are one connected
composition, put together by some one who from the outset had
the succeeding history and its close before his eye. At the same
time the slightest perusal of the Books of Kings wiH show that

82 BOOK BY BOOK.
they have not come from the same hand as those before us. For
example, there is no mention in the Books of Samuel of the
Captivity, nor any reference to it, or even to the decline of the
kingdom of the ten tribes ; whereas the writer of the Books of
Kings has in view the catastrophe of the kingdoms, and narrates
the downfaU of both of them.
Again, in the Books of Samuel, the law is not quoted, and is
only once referred to (Hi 1 Sam. x. 25), whereas the author of the
Books of Kings sees Hi the past history which he relates the
causes of the disasters which he has to record, passes condem
nation on one king after another for departing from the ordi
nances of the law, and connects the national decline with the
forsaking of the national religion and the tampering with
idolatrous worship. Fo also, while the writer of the Books of
Samuel makes no distinct citations of any written materials which
he may have employed, except in one place in whieh he refers to
the Book of Jashar (2 Sam. i. 18), the writer of the Books of
Kings, standing at a grealer distance from the events which he
records, cites his authorities, and refers to writings of which he
has made use, wherein are to be found fuUer details than those
whieh he thought it his province to repeat.
Besides those differences the whole style and manner of
composition show that the Books of Samuel constitute an inde
pendent work. As to the time of its composition, we have only
slight indications to guide us to a decision. The absence of
reference to the Captivity would prove that it was written before
the ExUe. That the writer lived a considerable time after the
events which he relates may be concluded from the formula " till
this day " which repeatedly occurs (1 Sam. v. 5 ; vi. 18 ; xxvii. 6 ;
xxx. 25; 2 Sam. iv. 3 ; vi. 8; xviii. 18), and also from the
reference to a usage existing " beforetime in Israel" (1 Sam.
ix. 9), and the antiquarian remark as to the dress of the king's
daughters (2 Sam. xiii. 18). Again, when the fuU number of
years that David reigned both in Hebron and Jerusalem is stated
(2 Sam. v. 5), it is plain that the writer wrote after David's
death; and when it is said (1 Sam. xxvii. 6) that " Ziklag
pertaineth unto the kings of Judah unto this day," we must infer
that the schism of the kingdom had by this time taken place (if
indeed, the reference is not even, as some suppose, to tbe time
when the kingdom .of Judah alone existed).
Such references are, however, very general and indecisive,
especially as we know so little of the process through which the
Old Testament books may have passed before they assumed their
final form ; and, accordingly, whUe some would place the com
position of the Books of Samuel in the first decades after the

THE BOOKS OF SAMUEL. 83
schism of the kingdom, others would bring the date down to a
short time before the Babylonian Captivity, or even place it in
the time of the ExUe. But, at whatever time it was written, the
book has the honest and fearless tone of the true prophetic spirit
of ancient Israel. Although the greatest prominence is given to
the reign of David, and the antecedent narrative, with evident
purpose, leads up to him who was the first of the long dynasty
of the kings of Judah, yet his faults and sins are depicted with
so firm a hand that it is plain the book was not composed for the
purpose of throwing a halo of fictitious glory round his character
or magnifying tbe splendour of his reign. In this respect the
tone of the writer is in marked contrast with that of a writer
like Josephus, or even the author of the Book of the Chroni
cles, who looked back upon a period which was already long
past and who necessarily regarded things from a different
standpoint. 6. Sources. — Though the writer of these books makes sparing
reference to written sources from which he may have drawn
.materials for his work, we may conclude with some certainty that
he did make use of such compositions. The only direct reference
is to the Book of Jashar (2 Sam. i. 18), in which the lament on
Saul and Jonathan was contained. Whether or not other poetical
pieces found in the books were drawn from the same source, it
is clear that they are not given as the author's own compositions,
and are thereby shown to have been taken up by him from some
source, oral or written, into his narrative. Such pieces are, the
Song of Hannah (1 Sam. ii. 1 — 10) ; David's lament over Abner
(2 Sam. iii. 33 f.) ; the poetical piece in 2 Sam. xxH., which is
the same as Psalm xviii. ; and "the last words of David" given
in 2 Sam. xxiii. 1 — 7.
It is quite probable, also, that the writer availed himself of
official documents, state lists, and so forth, or even incorporated
them bodily, in such passages as 2 Sam. xxi. 15 — 22 ; xxiii.
8 — 39, where there are Hsts of brave men in David's service and
records of theH exploits. In 2 Sam. viii. 16 — 18 (compare xx.
24), in the list of court officials a "recorder," or chronicler,
and a " scribe," or secretary, appear. The existence of officials
of this description makes it probable that documents of a public
kind were at hand for reference and that writing was not un
common at the time. Moreover, besides such public documents
referred to or incorporated in the books, there are pretty evident
traces of distinct narratives, referring to the same events or
relating different series of events, which have been put together
by the hand from which the books came in their completed form ;.
and there is nothing in this supposition inconsistent with what we
g2

84 BOOK BY BOOK.
otherwise know of the composition of the Old Testament books.
It is quite probable that the prophetic men, in their addresses to
the people that resorted to them, or in the assembhes of their
disciples, gave forth recitals of events that were preserved oraUy
or in writing, and were afterwards coUected by the writers of
these books. When two such accounts referring to the same
events are preserved, it is almost certain that they wUl exhibit
discrepancies, which, without an accurate knowledge of aU the
detaUs, it may be difficult to reconcile.
For example, in the passages relating to David's first appear^
anee at the court of Saul, there are some particulars which
seem scarcely to bp in harmony with one another. David is
represented as having been summoned to the court to act as
musician to Saul (1 Sam. xvi. 19 — 23) : and yet, when tbe war
with the PhUistines breaks out, he is at home at Bethlehem
attending to the sheep, comes only on an errand to the camp,
apparently a stranger to warfare, and is unknown to the king
(xvii. 12 — 31, 55 — 58). Accordingly many have been led to
conclude that in chapters xvi. to xviii. there are reaUy two
accounts of David's entrance on pjibHc life, which have become
fused together. It is remarkable that the Septuagint Version,
in its older form as represented in the Vatican manuscript,
does not contain several passages of these chapters, and, by
their omission, exhibits a narrative which is consecutive and.
consistent throughout. And in this connection it is to be men
tioned that the Hebrew text of tbe Books of Samuel seems to
have been less carefuUy handed down than that of most of the
books of the Old Testament, and that in several passages the
Septuagint translators clearly had another text before them
than that which is found in our Hebrew Bibles.
From Hterary causes of this kind, and also from displacement
of materials, if, as it is probable, the books were composed out of
different documents, discrepancies and difficulties occur in various
passages, the explanation of which is otherwise not clear. Thus,
it is said in 1 Sam. vii. 13, that "the PhUistines came no
more into the coast of Israel all the days of Samuel," and yet in
chapter ix. 16, Saul is appointed king to save Israel from the
oppression of the Philistines, and the severity of theH oppression
is described Hi x. 5 and xiii. So also thtre is a difficulty .in
understanding how Samuel's command to Saul to go down to
GUgal and wait for him seven days (1 Sam. x. 8) is so far
separated from xiii. 8, which refers to that command.
Peculiarities Hke these do not, however, warrant the conclusion
which some would draw from them that the one account or the
otlier is false, or that one of the divergent accounts represents a

THE BOOKS OF SAMUEL. 85
late and unhistorical conception. One would expect a later
writer to strive after a harmonising of accounts rather than to
introduce a contradiction ; and the fact that different documents
which formaUy present discrepancies are aUowed to stand side
by side is a strong presumption that they both came from ancient
sources, and were believed by the compiler to be reconcilable
from some point of view. It is most certainly an excess of
criticism to assume that certain accounts of events that are
similar and are stated to have occurred more than once, are
merely different forms of a tradition of one and the same event.
Twice the rejection of Saul is pronounced (1 Sam. xiii. 8 — 14,
and xv. 12 ff.) ; twice he is spared by David (xxiv. and xxvi.) ;
twice David flees to the PhUistines (xxi. 10 — 15, and xxvii. 1 f.) ;
twice the prophetic excitement comes upon Saul (x. 10 — 12, and
xix. 22 — 24); and twice the " evU spirit of the Lord" seizes
him (xvHi. 10 f., and xix. 9 f.). But there is nothing im
possible or, in the circumstances, improbable in aU this ; while
tbe detaUs in the different cases vary so much that the rise
of the two narratives from one common event is not by any
means clear.
7. The Prophetic Order. — Perhaps the most striking feature
that presents itseH Hi these books is the prophetic activity which
begins with Samuel himself, and takes its place as a permanent
influence Hi the reHgious development of the succeeding history,
No explanation of the origin of prophecy is given ; it is spoken
of as a thing weU recognised and understood ; but some of its
earlier manifestations are not a Httle remarkable. It is in
connection with a communication of the Divine purpose to
Samuel that it is said that " aU Israel, from Dan to Beersheba,
knew that Samuel was established to be a prophet of the Lord "
(1 Sam. iH. 20). And this is Hi keeping with the idea of the
prophet expressed in the Pentateuch ; he is one in whose mouth
God has put His words, and who speaks to the people aU that
God has commanded (Deut. xviii. 18). He was of old time caHed
a seer (1 Sam. ix. 9) ; even Hi the writing prophets a prophecy
is caUed a vision (Isaiah i. 1), and Amos tells us the words which
he saw.
The prophetic activity of Samuel's days, manifested in the
excitement and musical exercises of bands of prophetic men, has
by some recent writers been explained simply as the result of
high-strung patriotic feeling, which in Israel was always closely
related to reHgion ; and these manifestations have been regarded
as altogether different from the regular activity of the prophets
whose written words have come down to us. But this seems to
be a confusion of cause and effect, for it is more natural to

86 BOOK BY BOOK.
explain the tension of religious and patriotic feeling as produced
by the prophetic influence ; the association of the prophets in
companies shows that the movement was deeply rooted Hi the
theocratic life, and the continuance of tbe so-called " schools of
the prophets " down to a time at which written prophecy com
mences shows that the movement was not the result of temporary
excitement. Moses, in fact, is, to the Old Testament writers, tbe
type of the prophet who receives communications of God's will,
" not in dark speeches " but plainly (Num. xii. 8), and makes it
known with authority to God's people. And a's at the birth of
the nation we see Moses and Aaron standing together and acting
in concert, as representatives of tbe prophetic and priestly influ
ences, so here, at a revival of national life, Samuel combines in
himself the two offices ; and at aU succeeding crises in the
history, when the nation made a new advance, the two are found
conjoined or working in harmony.
It cannot be satisfactorily proved that prophecy arose as a
reaction against the priesthood, or that the two were, in their
nature, antagonistic influences. The two are essentially there
from the beginning, just because the reHgion had its two ele
ments of spirit and outward form. At most an examination of
the history wiU show that when, by a common tendency, the
form came to be exclusively attended to, the prophetic voice was
raised to declare that the form without the spHit was not only
worthless but was wrong. This truth, expressed by Samuel in
the words "to obey is better than sacrifice" (1 Sam. xv. 22), is
tbe burden of aU succeeding prophecy ; for the law was based
on a fundamental covenant ; and prophecy therefore, though not
an enforcement of the law in its detailed prescriptions, is a
continual insistence on the principle without which the law has
no meaning.
But though the spirit of prophecy is thus as old as the cove
nant, the prophetic activity, as an organised and sustained
movement, comes before us first in the time of Samuel, and so in
Acts iii. 24, he is reckoned the first of the prophets. AU the
outward features of its manifestation, the highly strung feelings
and ecstatic utterances of the prophetic bands, their concerted
movement, and, as it would appear, the common life in the
Naioth or coenobite dwellings, are deeply interesting. We are
left entirely to conjecture as to the mode in which the prophetic
men spent their time, and the nature of the external association
in whieh they were held together, and also as to the connection
between their earlier manifestations and the so-caUed "schools
of the prophets " in the times of Elijah and Elisha. Much
ingenious speculation has been employed in the endeavour to

THE BOOKS OF SAMUEL. 87
reconstruct these prophetic societies and to trace back to them
various similar movements of later times. And though a great
deal of this speculation has been unprofitable, the fact cannot be
ignored that from this time is to be dated, if not the beginning,
yet certainly the formal embodiment of a movement which lasted
throughout the history of Israel, and was a most powerful
feature in the moulding of the national reHgion and life.
8. Poetic Activity. — The connection of music with the .prophetic
activity of Samuel's time is noteworthy in several respects. The
company of prophets whom Saul met coming down from the
high place had "a psaltery and a timbrel, and a pipe, and a
harp, before them" as they prophesied (1 Sam. x. 5) ; and the
association of music with prophecy seems to have been perma
nent, for we read of EHsha, on one occasion, calling for a
minstrel, and ' ' when the minstrel played the hand of the Lord
came upon him " (2 Kings iii. 15). This musical element throws
much Hght on the account of Saul's contact with the prophets.
The word denoting " to prophesy " is, in fact, used also of the
king's accessions of madness (1 Sam. xviii. 10), and is appHed to
"raving" generaUy. Thus a son of the prophets who came
with a message to Jehu is contemptuously caUed a ' ' mad f eUo w ' '
by Jehu's brother officers (2 Kings ix. 11), and "to bemad"
and " to act the prophet " are by Jeremiah spoken of as synony
mous (Jer. xxix. 26). Yet the same word is employed to denote
the prophet's normal activity, which was not necessarily accom
panied with ecstatic utterances. And so when the writer of the
Books of Chronicles is describing the provision made for the
regular and orderly Temple music, he says, "they separated for
the service certain of the sons of Asaph, and of Heman, and of
Jeduthun, who should prophesy with harps, with psalteries, and
with cymbals" (1 Chr. xxv. 1 — 3, R.V.), which is explained
farther on of " giving thanks and praising the Lord."
It is natural, indeed, to suppose that, as prophetic utterance
was not always ecstatic, music was not always boisterous ; and as
prophecy did not die when the excited phase had passed, neither
did music continue to be always associated with excitement. The
time of Samuel was not the first period in the history of Israel
when national song was called forth by the stirring of national
feeling ; but it was a time well fitted to give a special stimulus
to the spirit of patriotism and religion to which the national
songs of Israel give expression. Hence we may conclude that,
as prophecy from this time onward took its place as an abiding
element of the reHgious Hfe of the nation, sacred song also from
this time received a new impulse and entered upon a course of
more regular development.

80 BOOK BY BOOK.
We are told that David sojourned for a time in Naioth at
Ramah (1 Sam. xix. 18, 19), and he was not only befriended by
Samuel, but closely associated with other prophetic men. Now
the poetic activity of David was so famous that the whole coUec-
tion of the Psalms has come to bear his name ; and it is remark
able that he appears as a poet and musician just at the time when
this movement took such a lively turn in the companies of the
prophets. The Psalter is a collection of compositions belonging
to ages far apart and to circumstances the most varHd ; but it is
quite as unwarrantable to relegate the great bulk of them to late
times (as some would do) as to ascribe them aU in the mass to
.David or to his time. The combination of cHcumstances brought
before us in the Books of Samuel, however, warrants the conclu
sion that from this time onwards sacred song received a strong
impulse. Cultivated in the prophetic circles, poetry not only retained its
national and patriotic tone, but became also more exalted and
spiritual in its reHgious expression, and entered therefore as a
powerful factor into the history of the nation in the succeeding
ages. And it is essential to bear this in mind H we would obtain
a just appreciation and comprehensive idea of the development
of the history of Israel. We must study the Psalms, as well as
the historical and legal books, if we would foUow the course
which the Hebrew spirit took in the process of Divine education
through which it passed ; and such a study wiU show that, under
neath the exterior of a common life that was sometimes rude
enough, and alongside a ceremonial worship that was often
corrupt, there was a current of religious feeling and genuine
faith, bearing on the best of the nation to better conceptions of
Divine things. The song of Hannah and the undisputed early
productions of David give evidence of this, and the note struck
in these compositions swells louder and louder as the volume of
psalmody increases.
9. Historiography. — Among the prophetic men who appear at
this early period are some who are mentioned in the much later
Book of Chronicles as writers of histories. Nathan, Gad, and
Samuel himself are thus spoken of : — " Now the acts of David
the king, first and last, behold, they are written in the history of
Samuel the seer, and in the history of Nathan the prophet, and
in the history of Gad the seer " (1 Chron. xxix. 29, R.V.). Now,
although the history of Samuel here mentioned can hardly be
the Books of Samuel before us, yet it is generaUy admitted that
he must have occupied himseH with work of this kind ; and the
reference of the Chronicler to such writings can only mean that
works ascribed to these men exibted in bis day. The same writer

THE BOOKS OF SAMUEL. 89
in other places refers to simUar histories by other prophets of the
reigns of various kings of a later period.*
That the later prophets occupied themselves with the writing
of history we know from the Books of Isaiah and Jeremiah, and
everything tends to show that the movement in that dHection
began at a much earlier period. The time of Samuel was favour
able to such a movement, a time when the nation became dis
tinctly conscious of its national position and apprehended that it
had a history to make. By that time it had a past to look back
to, a future to which to look forward, and an arduous task before
it Hi the present. Men of prophetic spirit, reflecting over these
things, would become, as a matter of course, historians, poli
ticians, and forecasters of the future ; and aU the prophets par
take of these characters. From the addresses of Samuel and
other prophets of that early time we may gather what were the
subjects of thought and themes of discourse in the gatherings of
the Naioth, in the cHcles of the prophetic men, and in the assem
bhes of a more pubhc kind frequented by the people. The great
deeds done for the nation, the faithfulness of God to His cove
nant, the duty of serving Him alone and avoiding all heathen
contamination, would be insisted on, and 1 eproof s for backsUding
and warnings against idolatry would be freely administered. In
such cHcles the stories of the patriarchs and the deeds of heroes
of more recent times would be treasured and commented upon ;
and among such men there would be no lack of persons capable
of writing down, and disposed to commit to writing, much that
hitherto had been preserved oraUy.
The number of the names of men so employed which is given
by the Chronicler is very considerable, as we have seen, and the
series extends over the whole historical period. When, therefore,
we know that the time of Samuel and that which foUowed it were
favourable to this literary activity, and when we perceive the
same spirit breathing through all the historical books, we may
conclude that the authors of the " sources " out of which these
books were composed, if not the authors of the books as they
stand substantially before us, were just such prophetic men. No
other men capable of executing such work are known to us, and
when we substitute for such abstractions as Elohist, Jehovist,
and so forth, the names of these prophetic historians, we seem to
get a nearer view of the Hterary activity and religious life of
ancient Israel. When we look at the leading men from Samuel
onwards, who may be supposed to have concerned themselves
with the writing of the nation's history, they are not men repre-
* See 2 Chr. ix. 29 ; xii. 15 ; xiii. 22 ; xx. 34 ; xxvi. 22 ; xxxii. 32 ;
xxxiii 18 — 19.

90 BOOK BY BOOK.
senting each a single idea or an exclusive tendency, but men
standing in close relations to the complex circumstances of the
growing life of the nation. David is in equaUy close feUowship
with priests and with prophets ; and whenever there was a stirring
of the national Hfe, the best of the nation, of whatever class, par
ticipated in tbe movement.
Moreover, if there was thus a succession of men from Samuel's
time onwards who concerned themsslves with tbe writing of
national compositions, it is not difficult to understand bow such
prophets as Amos and Hosea, who open the series of writing
prophets, employ a literary language and are masters of a finished
style. When Wellhausen seeks to explain the fact that we have
no written compositions of Elijah and Elisha, while Amos and
Hosea, a century later, appear suddenly as authors, all he has to
say is that, in the meantime, a non-literary had developed into a
Hterary age. But the detaUs that we gather from the books of
Samuel tend to show that a process of preparation had been
going on, and that literary activity was not a hasty product.
Just as the earliest writing prophets claim to be not teachers of
a new truth but upholders of an older faith, so as authors they
are not sudden apparitions, but the outcome of a preceding
literary activity.
10. Transition to the Monarchy. — The great historical event of
the period covered by these books is the setting up of tbe
monarchy in Israel, and, particularly, the establishment of the
Davidic dynasty, which lasted to the close of the nation's history.
That the people of 1 srael continued up to this tune without a
king, while surrounded by peoples that possessed that form of
government, is a proof that there. must have been a strong bond
of national union among the tribes ; and that the kingdom, when
once established, so soon gained wide dominion and paramount
influence, is a proof that the tribal organization was well com
pacted. Moreover, that the dynasty of David took root so firmly
and held its position for so many generations, proves that it was
based upon the principles which bad hitherto held the people
together, answered the nation's needs at tbe time, and fostered
their aspirations. The abortive attempt of Abimelech to rule at
Shechem (Judges ix.), and the complete coUapse of Saul's house,
show what the monarchy of Israel might have been if it had been
a mere pohtical expedient. The fate of the northern kingdom,
with its changes of dynasty and sudden revolutions, shows what
the monarchy actually became when divorced from the theocratic
principles which lay at the foundation of the national existence
What these principles were appears from the attitude of
Samuel towards both Saul and David : the king ruled, not by

THE BOOKS OF SAMUEL. 9.1
the wUl of the people, much less according to his own arbitrary
wUl, but by the will of God, and, equally with the most humble
IsraeHte, he was a subject of the God of Israel, the Lord of
Hosts. Saul, choosing to reign Uke the kings of the nations,
forfeited his position, while David, recognising the constitution
by which be ruled, had "a sure house." Olosely identifying
himself with the prophetic movement, he showed himseH to be
in sympathy with the spirit which kept the nation aHve ; careful
for the outward observance of worship, and sohoitous for the
buUding of a Temple which should form a fitting centre for its
exercise, he showed how sensible he was of the importance of
maintaining a visible and striking manifestation of the faith
which the nation professed. His own religious feeling and con
fident trust in God gave emphasis to these public acts ; so that he
became to the people the ideal of the Lord's anointed, identified
with his people, the embodiment of the idea on which Israel, as
a kingdom of priests, was constituted. From his time onward
grew the expectation of a Messiah, who, as King, Priest, and
Prophet, at the bead of an ideal state, was to fulfil aU things.
The influences that were to educate the people to higher
spiritual conceptions were now at work, and the settled arrange
ments of a consohdated state afforded the framework within
which these influences were to operate. God works slowly : in
His providence the foundations were thus laid for compacting
the nation that was to be the bearer of Hght to the world ; and,
though it needed the discipline of centuries to bring it to matu
rity, there was planted at this early time the seed of a kingdom
that would never be moved. In its outward aspect the age of
David is, in many respects, rude enough. The wars that he
waged, the generals who served him, the people who followed
him into battle, are very much Hke what we see elsewhere in
" secular " history ; tbe character of the king himself is far from
perfect ; and the historian gives the best guarantee of the truth
of his narrative in placing all these things faithfully on record.
But when we look beneatn the surface, we see that the strivings
and strugghngs of men in human passions were being guided
by a Divine hand ; and only thus can we explain the fact that
whUe great empires have crumbled into oblivion, the Httle king
dom set up in the person of David, the son of Jesse, survived the
calamities of neighbouring states and handed down to the world
an imperishable inheritance of blessing.

THE BOOKS OF KING&
1 . The Books as one whole. — The two Books of Kings, like the
two Books of Samuel, are to be regarded as one work.* The
title they bear has been applied to them because they give an
account of the history of Israel during the greater part of the
monarchical period, viz. from the accession of Solomon to the
Babylonian Captivity. Though the two Books of Kings contmue
the story of the two Books of Samuel in such a manner that the
series of the four books constitutes a connected history, yet the
most superficial examination reveals the fact that the two works
are independent compositions from different hands ; and a closer
examination brings to Hght striking differences in their concep
tion and Hterary form. They must also have been written at
different times ; for whereas the Books of Samuel make no
reference to the Babylonian Captivity, nor even to the decHne of
the northern kingdom, tbe Books of Kings bring down tbe his
tory to the thirty-seventh year of the Captivity (2 Kings- xxv.
27 ff).
That the history closes at that particular point is a pretty
clear indication that the writer who was last engaged on the
work did not survive the Captivity, and from an expression in
one passage it may be inferred that he lived among the exUes.
In 1 Kings iv. 24, it is stated in regard to Solomon, according to
the Authorised Version, that he had dominion ' ' over aU tbe
region on this side the river," i.e. the river Euphrates; but the
original, as given Hterally in the margin of the Revised Version,
has " aU the region beyond the river," an expression which
would be more appropriate if used by a writer in Babylon. At
the same time, however, there are in both the Books of Kings a
number of passages whieh speak of the kingdom of Judah as
stUl in existence and the Temple as stiU standing ; + and the
• See the Books of Samuel, § 1, p. 77.
t See 1 Kings viii. 8, ix. 21, xii. 19 ; 2 Kings x. 27, xiii. 23.

THE BOOKS OF KINGS.

93

frequently recurring formula " till this day " seems always to
refer to the period before, and chiefly to the period immediately
before, the Captivity.
Expressions of this kind favour the supposition that a his
torical work, similar to the work before us, was composed shortly
before tbe Exile, and that what we now have is a revision or
later edition of the same, continued to the point at which its
history closes. In one passage, the seventeenth chapter of the
second book, we may even detect traces of the different editions ;
for inverses 18 and 21, belonging to the original work, Judah
is represented as stUl a kingdom, whereas verses 19 and 20,
added by the last writer, indicate that the southern kingdom also
had been swept away. The statement of the Talmud is that
Jeremiah wrote the Books of Kings, and certain similarities of
style give a show of support to that view ; yet the literary
resemblances are such as can be accounted for by the writers
Hving about the same time and moving amid the same circum
stances ; and, moreover, it is most probable that the last chapter
of tbe Book of Jeremiah, which most closely resembles the cor
responding narrative of the Books of Kings, was added by an
editor to the writings of tbe prophet. The truth is, there is no
conclusive evidence to determine who was the author of the
books before us.
2. Divisions and Contents. — The combined work embraced in
these two books may be divided, according to the matters treated
of, into three parts : the first relating to the reign of Solomon,
the second to the divided kingdom, and the third to the surviving
kingdom of Judah.
(i.) The first part, extending from chapter i. to xi. of the first
book, is confined to the reign of Solomon. It has been noted in
the chapter on the Books of Samuel (§2) that these chapters are
closely related to the conclusion of those books, inasmuch as
Solomon began his reign during the lifetime of his father David.
By the wisdom and foresight of the prophet Nathan, who had
been David's close friend and faithful counseUor, the throne was
secured for Solomon Hi the face of an attempt at usurpation on the
part of Adonijah (chapter i.). The young king, being publicly
proclaimed and exhibited to the people, receives his father's last
charge, and, after David's death, takes such measures against
those who had conspHed to exclude him from the succession, that
his throne is firmly secured (chapter ii.). The writer then gives
an account of the internal condition of the kingdom during
Solomon's reign (iii. 1— ix. 9). The wisdom of the king is shown
in the matter of the dream which he had at Gibeon (Hi. 1 — 15),
and in his decision of a difficult matter referred to him for

94 BOOK BY BOOK.
judgment (iii. 16 — 28). Then foUows a description of the
arrangements of the royal household, of the distribution of high
officers up and down the land, and of the king's magnificence
and fame, which excited the admiration of neighbouring princes
(chapter iv.). Chief among these was Hiram, king of Tyre, with
whom Solomon made a friendly treaty. By tbe terms of this
treaty he received, in exchange for the produce of the country,
materials and workmen for tbe construction of the Temple and
the royal palace, the particulars of which are contained in chap
ters v. — vii., while chapter viii. concludes the narrative with a
full account of the consecration of the Temple and Solomon's
dedicatory prayer.
It is to be observed that this section opens and closes with
significant hints of the danger attending so much prosperity and
luxury. Thus, in chapter iii. 1 — 3, it is stated that Solomon
made affinity with Pharaoh, king of Egypt, and took his daughter
to wife, and that the king and the people sacrificed in the high
places ; and in chapter ix. 1 — 9, after the dedication of the
Temple, along with a promise of blessing in case of obedience,
there is a warning given that, if the people should serve other
gods, their land would be made desolate and their Temple ruined.
From the internal affairs of the kingdom the historian passes
to its foreign relations (He. 10 — xi. 43). DetaUs are given of
Solomon's intercourse with Hiram, king of Tyre, his alliance by
marriage with the king of Egypt, his maritime commerce with
Ophir, and the visit of the queen of Sheba to Jerusalem (ix. 1 0
— x. 13). The description of the wealth and luxury to be seen
at the court and capital (x. 14 — 29) is significantly foUowed by
an enumeration of the heathen wives whom Solomon married,
who turned away his heart from the God of his fathers, and led
him to pay reverence to the deities of their native lands (xi. 1 — 8) ;
and this leads to a solemn denunciation of the king's unfaith
fulness, and a prophecy of the disruption of the kingdom (xi. 9
— 13). The historian then indicates the quarters from which
trouble was to arise, by enumerating the " adversaries" raised
up in Solomon's reign — Hadad the Edomite, Rezon of Zobah,
and Jeroboam, the son of Nebat, of Ephraim ; and with a distinct
intimation of the impending schism the account of Solomon's
reign closes (xi. 14 — 43).
(ii.) The history of the divided kingdom, is the subject of the
second part, embracing 1 Kings xii. to 2 Kings xvii. This part
may be divided into three periods : the first extending to the
time of Ahab, king of Israel, during which there was a sharp
opposition between the northern and southern kingdoms ; the
second coming down to the commencement of the reign of Joash

THE BOOKS OF KINGS. yO
of Judah, during which, owing to a marriage alliance of the two
reigning families, the northern kingdom stood in close friendly
relations with the southern ; and the third reaching to the down-
f aU of Samaria, when the two kingdoms are again less friendly,
or even at hostUity.
(a) Iu the first period (1 Kings xii. 1 — xvi. 28) the historian
shows how the discontent of the people broke out on the death
of Solomon, and bow it was, by the incapacity of his son Reho
boam, goaded to open revolt under Jeroboam ; how the schism
was recognised by the prophets as a thing "from the Lord;"
and how it was widened and perpetuated by Jeroboam's setting
up of sanctuaries at Dan and Bethel, and his appointment of
priests who were not of Levitical extraction (xii. 1 — xiv. 20).
In the southern kingdom, Rehoboam and Abijam hold the reins
of government with weak hands, and the former suffers humi
liation from the forces of Egypt, while both are in constant
hostUity with the northern kingdom (xiv. 21 — xv. 8). Asa, how
ever, brings about a reformation, and, by the aid of Benhadad,
king of Syria, is successful in his conflict with Israel (xv. 9 — 24).
In the northern kingdom, the dynasty of Jeroboam comes to an
end with the death of his son Nadab, after a reign of ,two years ;
Baasha usurps the throne, and, after a reign of twenty-four
years; is succeeded by his son Elah, who, after a reign of two
years, is murdered by his own servant Zimri. But the murderer
had no sooner seized the throne than he was successfully attacked
by Omri, the head of the army, between whom, again, and Tibni
there arose a civU war of four years' duration, resulting in the
success of Omri and the founding of the dynasty which came to
bear his name.
(b) The second period, which covers the duration of the house
of Omri, is treated of in 1 Kings xvi. 29 — 2 Kings xi. 20. Ahab,
the son of Omri, during a reign of twenty-two years, raises the
northern kingdom to a condition of great outward prosperity,
the capital being finally fixed at Samaria. But having married
Jezebel, the daughter of the king of Phoenicia, he introduces the
worship of the Tyrian Baal and Astarte as the state religion.
.Against this a vigorous protest is raised by the prophet Elijah,
by whose exertions, in the face of the queen's opposition, the
priests of Baal are slain and the people of Israel brought back
in a measure to the recognition of Jehovah as the national God
(1 Kings xvi. 29 — xix. 14) ; intimations of further judgments on
the house of Omri and more thorough reformation of religion
being given in the selection of Elisha and Jehu to carry on the
work which Elijah had begun (xix. 15 — 21). Ahab wages suc
cessful war against Benhadad, king of Syria, but the tyranny of

96 BOOK BY BOOK.
his rule is exhibited in his treatment of Naboth of Jezreel
^xx. — xxi.) ; and, in a renewed war with Syria, he suffers defeat
at Ramoth-GUead, and is mortally wounded (1 Kings xxii. 1—40).
In this battle be was accompanied by Jehoshaphat, the pious
king of Judah, who was in alliance, for warUke and commercial
purposes, first with Ahab, and then with his successors, Ahaziah
and Joram (1 Kings xxii. 40 — 53 ; 2 Kings Hi.). The aUiance
between the two kingdoms was more closely cemented by the
marriage of Jehoshaphat' s son Jehoram to AthaUah, the
daughter of Jezebel, the infamous queen of the northern
kingdom (2 Kings viii. 16 — 18), a union of fatal issue to the
kingdom of Judah.
Meanwhile Elisha, after tbe translation of his master Elijah,
exercises the prophetic office, acting as the head of the prophetic
associations in various centres, and recognised as a prophet of
God even in tbe kingdom of Syria (2 Kings iv. 1 — viH. 15):
But the iniquities of the house of Omri brought about at last
the ruin of that dynasty, and involved also in disaster the
allied house of Judah. For Joram, king of Israel, being
wounded in war with the Syrians, is suddenly attacked by his
impetuous general Jehu and put to death along with Jezebel
and her grandson Ahaziah, king of Judah, who happened to
be at Jezreel on a visit to bis sick kinsman. Jehu, regarding
himseH as the executioner of a Divine sentence, orders the
slaughter of the priests of Baal, roots out the foreign worship,
kUls aU the members of the royal family on whom he can lay
hands, and establishes a new dynasty in the northern kingdom
(2 Kings ix. — x.). At Jerusalem, AthaUah, mother of Ahaziah,
hearing of the murder of her son at Jezreel, puts to death all
the seed royal, the infant Joash alone escaping, and reigns her-
seH for six years. At the end of that time, the young prince,
who had been brought up by Jehosheba, daughter of king
Jehoram, is shown to the people by Jehoiada, the high priest,
and is proclaimed and accepted as king; Athaliah herself
perishing in the insurrection (2 Kings xi.).
(c) With her death and the disappearance of the house of
Omri the third period begins, in which the relations of the two
kingdoms are again those of indifference or hostility (2 Kings xii.
— xvHi.). Joash of Judah, under the guidance of Jehoiada, the
high priest, puts away, the idolatrous customs that had been
introduced by Athaliah, and brings about a reform of worship ;
but he had to buy off an invasion of Hazrel, king of Damascus
(2 Kings xii.). In the northern kingdom, the rulers of the bouse
of Jehu foUow all the evU courses of their predecessors, the
Phoenician Baal-worship excepted, but in the struggle with the

THE BOOKS OF KINGS. 97
kingdom of Syria they are more fortunate than their southern
neighbours (2 Kings xiii. 1 — 13, 22 — 25), and inflict humiliation
also upon the kingdom of the south. For Amaziah of Judah,
the successor of Joash, proudly elated by a victory gained over
the Edomites, chaUenges the king of Israel to combat, and Joash,
the son of Jehoahaz, comes up against him, defeats him and
breaks down part of the waU of Jerusalem (xiv. 1 — 16). Joash
of Israel is succeeded by his son Jeroboam II., who rules with
great energy for forty-one years, and regains nearly all the
territory formerly possessed by Israel (xiv. 23 — 29).
At the same time, also, the kingdom of Judah, under Azariah,
or TJzziah, who had a reign of fifty-two years, "enjoys great
prosperity. The northern kingdom, however, having reached
its highest point of greatness under Jeroboam, hastens to its
decline as soon as his firm grasp of government is relaxed.
With the death of his son Zechariah, the dynasty qf Jehu
comes to a close. A succession of usurpers occupies the
throne, while the beginning of the end is seen in the steady
advance of the Assyrians and the subjection of the weakened
kingdom of Israel to the great eastern empHe. ShaUum reigns
only a month when he is murdered by Menahem, who gives
tribute to Pul of Assyria to gain his support on the throne. His
son, Pekahiah, after a reign of two years, is dethroned by Pekab,
one of his officers, in whose reign Tiglath-pileser, king of Assyria,
falls upon the country, takes a great part of ¦ territory, and carries
away many of the inhabitants ; and Pekah in turn is dethroned
and succeeded by Hoshea (2 Kings xv. 8 — 31).
Meantime, in the kingdom of Judah, Uzziah had been suc
ceeded by his son Jotham, whose reign is marked by the begin
ning of opposition from Pekah of Israel, aided by Rezin of
Damascus (xv. 32 — 38). Tbe hostility is continued in the reign
of his son Ahaz, who, seeing his capital besieged and territory
being lost, sends presents and offers of submission to Tiglath-
pUeser of Assyria, as conditions of receiving help against his two
powerful neighbours (xvi. 1 — 8). In consequence of this the
king of Assyria marches against Damascus and kills Rezin ; and,
later on, Shalmaneser, who had accepted Hoshea as a tributary,
"finds conspHacy Hi him" and comes up against him. The
army of Assyria, after a siege of three years, takes and destroys
Samaria, thus -putting an end to the northern kingdom, multi
tudes of the people being carried captive and foreigners settled
in theH room (2 Kings xvi. 9 — 17).
(Hi.) The kingdom of the ten tribes having thus come to an
end, the historian, in the third part, constituting the remainder
of the book (2 Kings xvHi. — xxv.), foUows the fortunes of the

98 BOOK BY BOOK.
surviving kingdom of Judah. Hezekiah, in the sixth year of
whose reign Samaria feU, set about the work of reformation
in his dominions, and received powerful aid in this work from
the prophet Isaiah. God's pleasure was manHested to him
in the miraculous deliverance from the invading army of Sen
nacherib, and in his restoration from a dangerous illness ;
but he was reproved for his conduct on the occasion of the
embassy of Merodach-Baladan of Babylon, and a hint was
given to him of the doom that was to overtake his kingdom
(xviii. — xx.).
After his death the impiety of his successors, Manasseh and
Amon, hastened the threatened disaster (xxi.). Not even the
reforming zeal and pious intentions of Josiah, in whose reign the
law-book was found in the Temple, nor the reforms in accordance
with its requirements which he set on foot, could avert the
catastrophe. Josiah himseH is killed fighting at Megiddo against
Necho, king of Egypt (xxii. 1 — xxiH. 30), who places on the
throne Eliakim (or Jehoiakim) instead of another son of Josiah,
named Jehoahaz, who had, by the wiU of the people, reigned
three months at Jerusalem. Jehoiakim is bard pressed by the
Babylonian power as weU as by the neighbouring peoples ; and
his son and successor, Jehoiaehin, is reduced so low that he
surrenders himseH to Nebuchadnezzar, king of Babylon, who
carries off the king and ten thousand of the people, and sets on
the throne Mattaniah, the king's uncle, changing his name to
Zedekiah. With this king the independence of the kingdom of Judah
comes to an end ; for Nebuchadnezzar, to punish bim for an
attempt to throw off the yoke of subjection, marched with an
army into Judah, and after a siege of about three years took the
capital, plundered and destroyed it, carrying captive or putting
to death large numbers of tbe inhabitants. The few that
remained, having risen against Gedaliah, who had been
appointed governor, and having put him to death, took refuge
in Egypt to escape the wrath of the king of Babylon. The land
was thus reft of its inhabitants, and the Book of Kings closes
when thirty-seven years of the Captivity bad passed, king
Jehoiaehin being still aHve and treated with honour Hi the land
of his captivity (xxiii. 31 — xxv. 30).
3. Purpose and Plan. — From the foregoing sketch of the con
tents of tbe Books of Kings, we may gather what was the
purpose of the writer in composing them, and may note the
literary form of the composition. His object evidently was to
exhibit the bloom and decay of the kingdom of Israel, and to
trace the influences which moulded its varying destiny. He

THE BOOKS OF KINGS. 99
represents the whole history, from first to last, as under the
direct control of the reHgious government of Jehovah, the national
God, and he proceeds on the fixed idea that the promise given
to David of a sure house remained in force during aU the vicissi
tudes of the divided kingdom, and was not even frustrated by
the faU of the kingdom of Judah. This confidence appears in
the terms of David's fareweU charge to his son Solomon
(1 Kings ii. 4), is repeated on the occasion of the schism of the
ten tribes (1 Kings xi. 34 — 39), and recurs again and again to
explain why the wickedness of successive longs did not make a
final end of the state.* Even at the close of the narrative, in
the significant mention of the royal treatment in captivity of the
last king of David's stock (2 Kings xxv. 27 — 30), the writer
sUently conveys the promise that a branch was to grow out of its
roots. In this respect the author of the book before us is in
accord with the writers of other historical books of the Old
Testament, particularly with the writer of the Books of Samuel
(see 2 Sam. vii.).
From a Hterary point of view, however, this book has
characteristics which mark its individuaHty and distinguish it
particularly from the preceding Book of Samuel. ' The writer
lays out for himseH a sort of Hterary framework, marked by
the recurrence of the same or simUar phrases, to indicate the
beginning, continuance, and close of successive reigns, reminding
us, in this feature, of the style of the Book of Judges ; and within
this literary framework his materials are arranged with great
regularity. Thus, at the commencement of a reign, it is gene
rally stated how old the king was when he came to the throne,
how many years he reigned, and, in the case of the kings of
Judah, what was his mother's name. There is then a general
judgment pronounced on the character of his reign, whether he
" did that which was right " or " did that which was evU " in
the eyes of the Lord ; and, at the close of the reign, the place of
burial is mentioned and the name of the succeeding ruler given, |-
with a reference to another authority in which a fuUer account
of the king's deeds is recorded.
In giving the history of the divided kingdom, the author's
mode of proceeding generaUy is to record first the events relating
to the northern kingdom, and then to give the contemporaneous
history of the kingdom of Judah, thus dividing the history off
into periods of longer or shorter duration. So closely is this
mode of writing adhered to, that events whieh have a common
bearing on the two kingdoms are related separately under the
* See 1 Kings xv. 4, 5 ; 2 Kings viii. 19 ; xix. 34 ; xx. 6.
t See e.g. 1 Kings xii 43 ; xiv. 20, 21 ; xv. 26 ; 2 Kings iii. 2.
H 2

100 BOOK BY BOOK.
head of each. Thus, under the reign of Pekah of Israel it is
stated (2 Kings xv. 20) that Tiglath-pUeser came up and took
part of his territory, whfle under the contemporaneous reign of
Ahaz of Judah (xvi. 7 ff.), we see that the invasion was at the
instance of the southern king, contrived as a reHef against his
enemies on the northern frontier. In the same way the invasion
of Shalmaneser is mentioned under the reigns of Hoshea of
Israel (2 Kings xvii. 5, 6) and of Hezekiah of Judah (xviH. 9 ff.) ;
and under the contemporaneous reigns of Asa of Judah and
Baasha of Israel the identical statement is repeated that " there
was war between Asa and Baasha king of Israel aU theH days "
(1 Kings xv. 16, 32).
4. Sources.— A. work extending over so long a period of history
as is covered by the Books of Kings can evidently not be the
expression of the direct personal knowledge of the writer. From
the nature of the composition, he must have had recourse to
written materials ; and there are diff erences in style in different
parts which suggest that the work is to a certain extent the
result of eompUation. The Hterary peculiarity which has been
pointed out in the preceding paragraph makes it, probable that
the writer availed himseH of records of the two kingdoms in
theH separate forms, and put so much of them together, in their
original words, as suited his purpose. That he was not careful
to adjust his extracts to the cHcumstances of his own time we
can see by several examples : as where it is said that the staves
of the ark remained "unto this day" as they were placed in
Solomon's time (1 Kings vHi. 8), and that " Israel rebeUed
against the house of David unto this day" (xH. 19). So also
there is a close verbal agreement between tbe passages 2 Kings
xviH. 15 — xx. 19 and Isaiah xxxvi. — xxxix., as also between
many parts of the Books of Kings and those of Chronicles,
indicating that they are drawn from common sources.
And here we come upon a feature which distinguishes the
Books of Kings broadly from the books which precede them.
Whatever use the writer of the Books of Samuel, for instance,
made of pre-existing written documents, he makes sparing refe
rence to them by name ;* and in the case of these and other
books it is only by critical examination that we can separate the
different sources employed. It would seem that, for the events
recorded Hi the earlier chapters of the Books of Kings, the author
of these books made use of documents relating to the reign of
David, such as, although unnamed, were used also by the writer
of the Books of Samuel. But in the succeeding parts of his
* Sno the Books of Samuel, § 6, pp. 83, 84.

THE BOOKS OF KINGS.

101

work he makes constant reference, at the close of the various
reigns, to certain records by name from whieh he apparently
drew Ms materials, and to which he refers his readers for " the
rest of the acts," and so forth, of the kings whose doings he has
briefly related.
The works thus referred to are : " The Book of the Acts of
Solomon," for the reign of that king (1 Kings xi. 41) ; and for
succeeding rulers, "The Book of the Chronicles of the Kings of
Israel," to whieh there are seventeen references (1 Kings xiv.
19, &c); and "The Book of the Chronicles, of the Kings of
Judah," referred to fourteen times (1 Kings xiv. 29, &c). Some
have supposed that these were formal compositions of a historical
character, of the nature of a work referred to in 2 Chronicles
xxiv. 27, as "The Story of the Book of the Kings," and that
our author made quotations from them for his account of the
different reigns. But it is more probable that they were the
State records of the two kingdoms, of a pohtical and statis
tical character, kept by the official recorders or scribes, who are
enumerated among the court officials.* This is rendered the
more probable by the nature of the references. Thus, for
example, the records of the kings of Judah are, under the reign
of Asa, referred to for the rest of his acts, " and aU his might,
and aU that he did, and the cities which he built " (1 Kings xv.
23) ; and those of the kings of Israel, under the reign of Ahab,
for " aU that he did, and the ivory house which he made, and aU
the cities that he built" (1 Kings xxH. 29).
It is remarkable that the few cases in which there is no refe
rence to these records at aU are cases in which the reign came to
a sudden or violent end, as those of Joram of Israel and Ahaziah
of Judah, who were both swept away in the furious onset of
Jehu (2 Kings ix. 21 — 28), and of Hoshea of Israel, and Jehoa-
haz, Jehoiaehin, and Zedekiah of Judah, who close theH reigns
amid the wreck of theH respective kingdoms. From this we
may infer that the records in question were made up at the close
of each reign, and that in the cases mentioned they were left ,
unfinished in the disasters which overtook the longs. Besides
these documents of a more official description, it is pretty evident
that the writer made use of other compositions of a more general
and popular character, Hi which were related the sayings and
doings of men like EHjah and EHsha, who figure so prominently
in these books.
It wiH be observed that the passages which refer to these two
prophets are interspersed in the general narrative, and form
* The Books of Samuel, } 6, pp. 83, 84.

102 BOOK BY BOOK.
connected pieces by themselves, capable of being removed
without disturbing the adjacent history. EHjah is mtroduced
abruptly, without explanation, into the narrative (1 Kings xvii. 1),
and the accounts of his doings and those of his successor, EHsha,
which are written Hi a more flowing style than the mam portion
of the books, are such as would not naturaUy have found a place
in the State annals.
5. Prophetic Activity. — The prophetic activity which is seen
commencing in the time of Samuel* was in fuU operation in tbe
time of the kings ; and the books before us, not merely by the
personal notices they give of lives and acts of individual prophets,
but by the close connection in which they represent these men as
standing with the political and religious movements of the times,
furnish materials for a history of prophetic activity as much as
they exhibit the material and political growth of the nation.
Thus, at the crisis of the handing over of the reins of govern
ment to Solomon, at the opening of the books, Nathan the
prophet is even a more prominent person than either the king or
his aged father (1 Kings i. 22 ff.). Abijah of ShUoh, watching
the course of events that was leading to the rupture of the king
dom, declares to Jeroboam with a voice of authority the destiny
that is before him and the Divine purpose controUing the events
(1 Kings xi. 29 — 39) ; and with equal authority he pronounces
at a later time the doom which would befaU the house of Jero
boam for their wickedness (xiv. 5 — 16).
On the other hand, Rehoboam is warned by Shemaiah, "the man
of God," to desist from attempts at forcible union of tbe northern
tribes, because the thing was "from tbe Lord" (1 Kings xii.
22—24). So did Jehu, the son of Hanani, denounce the sins of
Baasha and foretell his fate (1 Kings xvi. 1 — 4, 7, 12). The
contest of EHjah with Ahab, and the influence of EHsha on
pubHc affaHs in his time, are not less remarkable than their
general prophetic work, and the writer purposely shows how
these men were as important factors in the history as the kings
.whose affairs they controUed. So we have the fearless Micaiah,
son of Imlah, delivering an unpleasant "word of the Lord" to
two powerful kings and in the face of the flattering testimony of
a crowd of false prophets (1 Kings xxii. 5 — 8). Isaiah, the son
of Amoz, in the reign of Hezekiah, occupies a far higher position
as adviser to the king than any court official (2 Kings xix.
20—34, xx. 1— 19) ; and Huldah, the prophetess, in the time of
Josiah, when the law-book was found in the Temple, is resorted
to for advice by priests and high officers of State (2 Kings xxii.
* The Books of Samuel, § 7, pp. 85, 86.

THE BOOKS OF KINGS. 103
14 ff.). Besides these, whose pubHc influence is more apparent,
we have- a reference to the prophetic activity of Jonah, son of
Amittai, of Gath-hepher (2 Kings xiv. 25); and notices and
words of unnamed prophets, as of the " man of God " who came
out of Judah to Bethel, and cried against the altar of Jeroboam
(1 Kings xiH. 1 — 32) ; of others who assured Ahab of victory
over Benhadad of Syria, and reproved him for not slaying his
enemy (1 Kings xx. 12 — 15, 28, 35—43); and of the prophets
who at Jerusalem foretold the rum of the southern kingdom for
the iniquities of Manasseh (2 Kings xxi. 10 — 15).*
Some of the detaUs regarding these prophetic men may, as
has been aHeady said, have been drawn from special composi
tions in which the Hves and teaching of the prophets were
recorded ; but Hi the great majority of instances where the
prophetic influence is exerted, the narrative of the historian
would lose aU its point and force, and reduce itself to the barest
chronicle of events, if the prophets and their work did not appear
in his pages. Even as it is, we know, by a comparison of the
writings of prophetic men that have come down to us, that many
events which here occupy Httle space and receive but shght
notice, were pregnant with meaning for good or iU to Israel ;
and we require to read those writings along with the Books of
Kings in order to obtain anything like an adequate conception
of the history which is here briefly related.
6. Standpoint. — It is the prophetic tone which has just been
aUuded to that makes these books history, as distinguished from
a bald chronicle. The historian leaves us in no doubt as to the
spirit in which he treats his subject. His whole aim is to exhibit
the .course of events as so controlled by the Divine Hand, that
faithfulness to God ensured blessmg and unfaithfulness brought
down His displeasure and led to national decline. Just as the
writer of the Book of Judges sums up tbe period of whieh he
treats Hi a comprehensive survey,! so the writer of the books
before us is continuaUy reminding his readers of his guiding
principle, and now and then expands it into a general review of
the whole cycle of events, from beginning to end, which he has
set himseH to relate. Passages of this kind are found in 2 Kings
xvii. 7 — 23, 32 — 41 ; xxiii. 27. In such passages the writer
* It is somewhat remarkable that the prophet Jeremiah, who plays so
important a part in the closing history of the kingdom of Judah, is not once
mentioned in these books ; and some would take this as an indication that he
had a hand in their composition, according to the statement of the Talmud
(see § 1). ' But it is hardly possible that he was the final editor, for by the
time the work was completed he must have been, if still alive, of a very great
age. t See the Book of Judges, § 3, p. 70.

104 BOOK BY BOOK.
insists on the fact that it was because Israel forsook their God
and walked in the statutes of the heathen that they lost theH
national independence.
Writing at a period when the influences, human and divine,
which had moulded the history, had had time to show their
developments, he holds these up to Hght Hi bis pages, exhibiting
at once what God bad done for His people, and the manner in
which they had requited His goodness. In the true spirit of
prophecy He does not reprove the people for their neglect of
outward ordinances nor insist on the ceremonial part of the law,
but reproves them for forgetting the God that brought them out
of the land of Egypt, for turning a deaf ear to the prophets, and
for rejecting "His statutes and His covenant that He made with
theH fathers, and His testimonies which He testified against
them" (2 Kings xvii. 15).
This is the aspect in which the prophets always regard the
law, as a fundamental principle underlying its specific obser
vances ; but though our author makes only such general
aUusions to the Mosaic law, neither he nor any other Old
Testament writer gives any foundation for the idea of some
modern writers that the law was nothing but the "instruction"
of the prophets conveyed from time to time as occasion caUed it
forth. He declares that the Lord testified " against Israel and
against Judah by aU the prophets and by aU the seers, saying,
Turn ye from your evU ways and keep my commandments and
my statutes, according to all the law which I commanded your
fathers, and which I sent to you by my servants the prophets "
(2 Kings xvH. 13). In numerous passages there are such
aUusions to "statutes" and "judgments" and "command
ments," the very terms which the Pentateuch itseH employs,
which can only refer to some code or codes which were sufficient
to regulate the moral and reHgious Hfe of the nation, and must
have been known to the people whom the prophets addressed.
It is customary, among those who beHeve that the Book of
Deuteronomy originated about the time of Josiah, * to say that
the writer of the Books of Kings had his conceptions of the law
-coloured by the code which was the only one of any extent known
in his day ; and they point to the minuteness of detaU which he
exhibits in his description of the buUding of Solomon's Temple,
and his palliation of the worship on the high-places before that
time (1 Kings Hi. 2), in proof that he attached great importance
to a central sanctuary. But as it was not by any means impos
sible for Moses, at the beginning of the nation's history, to fore-
* See Introduction to the Pentateuch, § 10, pp. 11, 12, and Deuteronomy,
§ 6, p. 55.

THE BOOKS OF KINGS.

105

see the dangers to which Israel wouldbe exposed from heathen
worship in Canaan, and to guard against such dangers by legis
lation, so also it was but natural for a writer, Hving at the close
of the nation's history, and seeing the havoc wrought by the
idolatrous practices of evil times, to condemn in the severest
terms the worship of the high-places and kindred heathen cor
ruptions, which in both kingdoms had caused so much mischief.
To conclude that there was no ceremonial prescribed before
the time of Solomon, and no recognised code of law beyond the
Book of the Covenant up to the time of Josiah, is not warranted
by anything stated in the Books of Kings, nor, it may be added,
by the omission of anything which is not stated. It is self-
evident that an orderly Temple service is necessary in a recog
nised Temple, and the very condemnation of the sacrifices of the
heathen impHes legaHsed and authoritative sacrifices. It is in
credible that a writer should continuaUy uphold the honour and
dignity of a priesthood that had no prescribed functions, and
blame the people for worship on the high-places H they knew no
other worship to practise.
Whatever may have been the law-book that was found in
the reign of Josiah (and, after aU has been said, it is not proved
that it was nothing but the Code of Deuteronomy), the writer of
our books proceeds on the supposition that there was one central
sanctuary from the tune of Solomon at least, and implies that
Israel was in possession of laws and ceremonies distinctly
opposed to those of the nations around them. If he does not
furnish us with detaUs of the history of ritual worship, it is
simply because this lay beyond the purpose he had before him,
and was only remotely connected with his guiding principle.
7. Credibility. — As records of the history of the Israehte
people during the time that they enjoyed national independence
as a monarchy, these Books of Kings have their credibility
amply attested by the records of neighbouring states, so far as
these are avaUable. The Moabite Stone, discovered in 1868,
with an inscription of Mesha, king of that country, recording
his successes, besides its interest as an early specimen of writing,
had a special value in that it referred to events touched upon in
the books before us (2 Kings iii. 4 — 27). Not only did it confirm
the account there given of the relations subsisting between the
Israelites and the Moabites, but it implied, and could only be
rightly understood by assuming, the detaUs which the Biblical
writer communicates ; so that, read along with the passage just
referred to, and 2 Chron. xx., it enables us to construct an in
teresting history of the movements that took place at that time
on the eastern borders of Palestine.

106 BOOK BY BOOK.
Of late years also we have gained an ever-increasing mass of
materials, in the Assyrian inscriptions, to compare with the
Hebrew records for the events that brought the great empHe of
the East upon the scene of the affairs of Israel and Judah. As
these monuments have been from time to time brought to light
and deciphered, they have not only confirmed the statements of
the Old Testament writers, but have made clear many points
which theH brief narratives left in obscurity. It is interesting
to note that on these inscriptions the kingdom of the ten tribes is
almost uniformly spoken of as "the land of the house of Omri,"
Jehu himseH being styled "son of Omri," showing, as the
Moabite Stone also indicates, that that dynasty, the first of
whom, according to 1 Kings xvi. 24, made Samaria the capital
of the northern kingdom, enjoyed a high reputation among
foreign peoples. More particularly, the successes and reverses
of the kingdoms of Israel and Damascus, in their various col
lisions, which are only lightly touched on by the writer of tbe
Books of Kings, are shown by these monuments to have been
mainly influenced by aUiances made by the one or the other with
the great empire of the East, just as the same power also con-
troUed the relations of Ahaz to his northern neighbours.*
In general, it may be said, that for the period preceding the
faU of Samaria (b.o. 722) the Assyrian inscriptions largely sup
plement the slight notices of the Books of Kings, and for the
succeeding period they are found to confirm in many minute
details the accounts, which become fuUer in these books and in
the prophetical writings, on aU subjects in which they are
mutuaUy concerned. It has, for example, been now definitely
ascertained that Pul, mentioned in 2 Kings xv. 19 f., as to whose
identity there was much doubt, is the same person, under a
Babylonian name, as Tiglath-pUeser, the king of Assyria, and
that he styles himseH, on the monuments, " king of Babylon "
as weU as " king of Assyria."
_ This discovery has tended to reduce, to a certain extent, a wide
divergence which at that point of the history existed between
the Assyrian and the Hebrew dates ; though it cannot be claimed
that the difficulties in the chronology of tbe Biblical writers
haye been settled by the newer discoveries. Research has brought
to Hght very complete Hsts of Assyrian rulers, after whom the
years were reckoned ; and from these and the so-called canon of
Ptolemy (which mentions eclipses and other astronomical phe
nomena), a weU-defined system of chronology has been com
puted, by which the exact dates of the notable events in Assyrian
and Babylonian history are determined. On the other hand, the
* See e.g. 1 Kings xx. ; 2 Kings x. 32—36 ; xv. 19, 20 ; xvi. 5—10, &c.

THE BOOKS OF KINGS. 107
Books of Kings contain a system of chronology of theH own, in
which the dates of accession of the rulers of the one kingdom
are fixed in relation to the contemporaneous reign in the other,
and the length of the various reigns is stated.
On comparing tbe two systems it is found that, whUe they
agree in the date for the fall of Samaria, they diverge more or
less widely both before and after that event.* The differences
cannot be explained on the supposition of errors in the copying
of numbers in the manuscripts, but must be due to the mode of
computation adopted by the Hebrew writer. In the first place,
the system of reckoning the accession of a king of Israel from
the year of the reign of the king of Judah, and vice versd, is most
probably to be ascribed to the last editor of the Books of Kings,
for it was not likely to be found in the official annals of the
respective kingdoms ; and then it was no doubt based on earlier
statements of the length of reigns, and so forth, which gave
only approximate and round numbers.
According to the Hebrew reckoning tbe whole time intervening
between the Exodus from Egypt and the return from the Baby
lonian Captivity feU into two nearly equal periods of about 480
years each, the building of the Temple (1 Kings vi. 1) represent
ing the middle point ; and the frequent recurrence of the number
40 both in the Books of Kings and in the Book of Judges \
* The divergences in regard to some of the more prominent events may be
stated : the battle of Karkar, in which Ahab, in alliance with Benhadad of
Syria (see 1 Kings xx. 34), was defeated, was, according to the monuments,
fought in B.C. 854, whereas Ahab's reign, according to the Biblioal chrono
logy, extends from 918 to 897 ; Jehu, " lie son of Omri," gives tribute to
the Assyrian king while the latter wages war against Hazael of Damascus
(see 2 Kings x. 32) in the year 842, though his reign on the Biblical chrono
logy is given as 884 — 856 ; Menahem's tribute (2 Kings xv. 19) is recorded
on the monuments in 738, but his reign on the Biblical reckoning extends
from 771 — 761 ; and the invasion of Sennacherib (2 Kings xviii. 13) is fixed
by the monuments at 701, whereas, on the Hebrew mode of computation, it
falls in 714.
t See the Book of Judges, § 2, end, p. 69. The reigns of David, Solomon,
and Joash, are each given as 40 years. Stade "maintains that ihe-number 40
is artfully concealed in other cases. Thus the reigns of Rehoboam and
Abijam together amount to 20 years, or half of 40 ; Asa reigns 41 years ; the
reigns from Jehoshaphat to Athaliah make up another 40 ; those of Amaziah
and Uzziah combined give the number 81 or one more than twice 40 ; and
from Jotham to the sixth year of Hezekiah (when Samaria was destroyed) is
a period of 38, or two years less than 40, the deficiency being made up by the
two additional years in preceding periods. Moreover, he says, the remainder
of HezeHah's reign, together with those of Manasseh and Amon, gives
another 80 years. In the same way he finds 16 to be the base number for
the reigns of the kings of Israel from Jehu to Hoshea, and 12 for the period
preceding. But it would be easy to perform feats of that kind with any
series of numbers,

108 BOOK BY BOOK.
makes it probable that it came to be customary to divide these
two periods each into twelve parts of 40- years. That strict
numerical accuracy was not aimed at is seen in the habit of
stating a king's reign in complete years, of which we have a
striking example in the case of David (2 Sam. v. 4, 5). Yet,
while in this matter we ought to accept thankfully the aids fur
nished by the Assyrian inscriptions* towards a more precise
chronology, the divergent system of the books before us does
not detract from the substantial accuracy of the narrative, which
finds striking confirmation from the same monuments.
8. Brevity ofthe Narrative. — It is but an outHne after aH that
these books give of the history of the four centuries to which
they relate. From the time of David, indeed, to the ExUe, the
nation of Israel Hved its Hfe as an independent, organized state,
rising from the condition of a community of hardy tribesmen to
the position of a powerful empire, and again disappearing from
the scene of poHtieal affairs. In the northern kingdom, twenty
kings, belonging to nine different dynasties, occupied the_ throne,
while the southern kingdom, with its one dynasty of David, had a
succession of nineteen kings from Rehoboam to its f aU ; yet we
have but the scantiest record of the deeds of these rulers, and
of the social, religious, and national changes that took place
during theH reigns. Many important events occurred which are
only glanced at ; many things which would have been of the
deepest interest are passed by without mention ; and our curiosity
is only whetted by recurring references to lost records containing
detaUs which the author did not care to transfer to his pages.
From hints dropped here and there, as weU as from ancient
monuments, we learn something of the part played by Israel and
Judah on the broad theatre of the poUtics of the ancient world.
A series of writings from a succession of prophetical men who
Hved and taught during the period of the monarchy remains to
cast much Hght on the poHtieal and reHgious movements in which
they took part ; and treasures of sacred song, from the time of
David onwards, and compositions of a more speculative character,
from the time of Solomon, have been preserved as evidences of
the Hterary and mental activity of this long period. Old insti
tutions must have been modified under altered circumstances ;
and there must have been a growth of ideas, an enlargement of
views, a widening conception of theH national caUing on the
part of the thinking men of the nation; but of aU this the
author of our books takes little note, leaving his readers to
gather information from casual statements or from other works.
* Sehrader, however, himself reminds us that these are not faultless, and
require in detail to be handled critically.

THE BOOKS OF KINGS. 109
It has been objected against him that in literary style he is
even behind his predecessors, stiff and pedantic in his mode of
representation, and so narrow and cHcumscribed in view that he
measures everything by the ideas of bis own late age. But,
however it may be as to Hterary achievement, the author had his
fixed view of the history, and, from his late standpoint, having
seen the course which the history had run, he laid special stress
upon the points on which it had turned. And we are bound to
say that the experience of the world has confirmed his view. He
does not lose himseH in a multipHeity of details. It was -of Httle
moment to him that the proud house of Omri had raised the
northern kingdom to greatness by brilliant deeds ; a matter of
comparative indifference to him that a king was rich and power
ful, ii he did not walk in tbe way that was right. In his brief,
dry records of the doings and failings of the rulers of Israel and
Judah, he has pointed out where the strength or weakness of a
kingdom Hes, and given us the most valuable lessons on poHtieal
freedom. How many patriots and reformers, since his day; have
been nerved to brave the fury of princes and do vaHantly for the
truth by the example of Old Testament prophets as set before
them in these pages ! And had the author of the Books of
Kings done nothing more than this he had rendered incalculable
service to the world.
His views may not be wide, but he does not deviate from his
main position that a state stands secure only when it is founded
on God's truth, and that it is preserved from danger only by His
constant defence. He sees also, and the whole world has seen,
that God had a special purpose in setting up the house of David
at Jerusalem, aud that His promise to that house did not faU of
effect. The great empires of the East, with aU their magni
ficence, have passed away and contributed but Httle to the
world's good. The house of Omri perished and nearly involved
the bouse of David Hi its faU ; but the Httle kingdom of Judah,
amid backshdings and shortcomings, was preserved tiU it was
enabled to hand down to the world an enduring spiritual
blessmg. The fabric of an organized state held together tUl the
seed of Divine truth had time to germinate and take deep root
in the minds of those to whom it was revealed, and the decay of
the outward state, and the faUures of the best of human rulers,
were tbe means by which these chosen ones were led to look for
a kingdom which is not of this world.

THE BOOKS OF CHRONICLES.
1. Title and Place in the Canon. — The name by whieh these two
books are designated in the EngHsh Bible owes its suggestion to
Jerome, who described them as "a chronicle of the whole of
sacred history." After him, some editions of the Vulgate en
titled the work " Chronicles, ,? or "Book of Chronicles," and our
translators adopted the name. It expresses pretty accurately the
meaning of the title given in the Hebrew Bible, which is, Hte-
raUy, "The Acts," or "Affairs of the Times," — i.e. journals or
annals. This was tbe name given to those records, kept by
officials of the kings, which contained an account of the notable
events in each reign ; * and it was natural, when books of history
came to be written mainly out of materials drawn from such
registers, that they would receive a similar name, although, of
course, they would be less restricted in theH compass and mode
of treatment. The Greek translators of the Old Testament,
however, were not satisfied with this general name, and designated
these books Paraleipomena, meaning " things passed over " or
" left out," from the idea that theH author took up things which
the writers of previous books had omitted or not fully related.
This name, though aiming at greater precision, is not an accurate
description of the books, as we shall presently see.
Like the Books of Samuel and Kings, the two Books of Chro
nicles originaUy constituted one work, the division into two
being made by the Greek translators, although no doubt a pause
of some kind existed in the original at the point where the
division has been effected. The work is of late authorship.
Besides many features in the original which show a decaying
period of the language, we may observe that the mention of
Cyrus (2 Chr. xxxvi. 22) and the tracing of the descendants of
David to the sixth generation after Zerubbabel (1 Chr. Hi. 19 ff.)
* See the Books of Kings, § 4, pp. 100, 101.

THE BOOKS OF CHRONICLES. Ill
would bring the composition down to the close of the Persian or
tbe early times of the Grecian domination.* It was for this
reason that it was not included in the. Hebrew canon among the
Former Prophets or historical books, f but found a place among
the Hagiographa, % where it stands last among the books of the
Hebrew Bible.
2. Form and Plan. — The first glance at the Books of Chronicles
is sufficient to discover that these books are very different in
form and conception from tbe historical books which precede
them in the English Bible. Up to this point, the various books,
from Genesis to Kings, had fitted into one another, so that one
takes up the history where the preceding had dropped it, the
whole giving a continuous history from the Creation to the Baby
lonian Captivity. The Books of Chronicles, however, beginning
at Adam and coming down to the Restoration and, in its genea
logical Hsts, to a period much later, seem to aim at giving in
themselves a view of the whole period embraced in aU these
books put together. Yet they do not merely gather up details
which had been omitted by previous writers, as the Septuagint
translators imagined ; for we find the repetition of many things
which had formerly been narrated, and there are whole sections
agreeing very closely in actual words with the Books of Kings.
A very shght examination shows also that, in Hterary form,
the books present a striking contrast to those which immediately
precede them. The author's predUection for genealogies and
Hsts is very marked. He delights Hi tracing the ancestry of
tribes and families and individuals back to the earhest times,
and exhibits, in elaborate Hsts, the names and ranks of officials,
the orders and functions of priests and Levites, and Hi general,
the persons who held important offices or rendered special ser
vice. It wUl be noticed also that he concerns himseH more with
the reHgious than the poHtieal aspect of the history, and has
much more to say about the outward observances of reHgion, the
Temple and its ritual, the priests and theH duties, than about
the wars of the kings and the material prosperity of the people.
And perhaps the most striking feature of the books that presents
itself to the ordinary reader is the fact that the author deals
almost exclusively with the history of the kingdom of Judah.
The northern kingdom is only alluded to when its affaHs touch
upon those of the southern, whUe the whole line of the kings of
the house of David passes in review, and its descendants are
* For the connection with the Books of Ezra and 'Nehemiah, see the
chapters on those books, § 1, p. 120, and § 5, pp. 126, 127.
t See Joshua, § 1, p. 58, and the Books of Samuel, § 1, p. 77.
t See the Book of Esther, § 1, note *.

112 BOOK BY BOOK.
traced far down beyond the time of the Restoration. In follow
ing the history, also, it wiU be observed that he dwells at par
ticular length and with evident fondness on those reigns that were
distinguished by zeal for reHgion and reformation of worship,
bestowing praise on faithful kings and censure on those who
swerved into evU ways. AU this wiU appear more clearly if we
examine in some detail the contents of the books.
3. Contents of First Book. — The first book brings the history
down to the death of David. It contains ten chapters of intro
ductory matter, and nineteen chapters relating to the reign of
David. The introductory portion is almost entirely in the form
of genealogical lists, which, however, are not given as matters
of mere antiquarian interest, but are so arranged as to show that
the author is leading on to give a history of the kingdom of
Judah. Thus the Hsts in chapters i. and ii., beginning with
Adam, give the genealogies of Japheth, Ham, Shem, Abraham,
Ishmael, Esau and the Edomite kings, Jacob, and end with the
famUies of Judah; and these are foUowed (in chapter Hi.) by
the succession of the royal race of David, carried down pre
sumably to the author's own time. In chapters iv. to viii. we
have genealogical tables of the twelve tribes of Israel, but
special fulness of detail is shown in regard to the tribe of Levi
(chap, vi.) who served at the Temple, and the tribe of Benjamin
(vii. 6 — 12; viii. 1 — 40), to which a great many of the inhabi
tants of Jerusalem belonged (viii. 28, 32 f.). From the eighth
chapter onwards the author leaves coUective Israel out of account,
and confines himseH to the kingdom of the south, proceeding,
by means of lists of the families of Jerusalem (ix.l — 34) and by
a table of the genealogies of Saul and a brief notice of his fate
(ix. 35 — x. 14), to the main theme, thehistoryofthe royal house
of David, with which the remaining chapters of the first book
are concerned.
As, however, the main interest of the author centres in the
reHgion and worship, David's reign at Hebron is passed over,
and the scene is at once laid in Jerusalem. FHst there is an ac
count of the election of the king by the elders at Hebron, of his
consecration and anointing, and of the capture of Jerusalem
(xi. 1—9) ; foUowed by lists of his heroes, his adherents
before he came to the throne, and the crowds that assembled at
Hebron to do him homage (xi. 10 — xH. 40). Then comes an ac
count of the removal of the ark from Kirjath-Jearim, and its
temporary deposit in the house of Obed-Edom (xiii.), foUowed
by detaUs of the building of the royal palace, of the king's
famUy, and a notice of his wars with the PhUistines (xiv.). The
formal removal of the ark to Jerusalem is narrated at length

THE BOOKS OF CHEONICLES. 113
(xv., xvi.), and David's purpose to build a temple is unfolded ;
but the execution of this work is postponed by prophetic advice,
and a special blessing is pronounced on David and his descen
dants (xvH).
In chapters xviH. to xx. we have a summary of the wars that
David waged with surrounding nations, with a Hst of his chief
officers andhigh officials (xvHi. 15 — 17). It is then related how
David was induced to number the people, and in consequence a
plague broke out among them ; and how, on the occasion of a
sacrifice offered at its discontinuance, the king received instruc
tions as to the site of the future place of worship, and set about
making preparations for its erection (xxi., xxii.). Here foUow
hsts of the Levites and priests according to theH courses and
offices (xxiH — xxvi.), and simUar lists of the divisions of the army,
chiefs of the tribes, and royal functionaries (xxvH.). Then, at a
pubHc assembly held at Jerusalem, David in a formal manner
makes arrangements for the succession of Solomon, charging
him speciaUy to persevere with the completion of the Temple
(xxviii. , xxix.), and having finished his work the king dies "in a
good old age, full of days, riches, and honour, and Solomon his
son reigned in his stead."
4. Contents of Second Book. — The second book continues the
history on the same principle, nine chapters bemg devoted to
the reign of Solomon, and the rest to those of the succeeding
kings. The author's predUection for all that pertains to the ob
servances of religion shows itseH again in his treatment of the
reign of Solomon, six chapters bemg given to detailed descrip
tions of the various operations connected with the buUding and
adornment of the Temple and provision for its services, and the
solemn ceremonial observed at its dedication (H. — vH.) ; whUe
the arrangements made for the administration of the kingdom,
and the account of the king's wealth and greatness, are com
prised in two chapters (viu., ix.).
In what foUows the writer gives, in chronological order, as in
the Books of Kings, the successive reigns, confining himself,
however, to the kingdom of Judah, and bestowing most attention
on those reigns in which worship was properly observed, and
reHgion flourished and Jerusalem prospered. He introduces the
various prophetic men who appeared from tune to time, especi
aUy when their message bears upon the observance of the
national religion.
Thus we have an account of the reign of Rehoboam and the
schism of the kingdom (x. — xii.), with the prophetic work of
Ahijah the ShUonite (x. 15), and of Shemaiah " the man of God "
(xi. 2, xH. 5) ; of Abijah and his victory over Jeroboam (xiii.) ;

114 BOOK BY BOOK.
and of Asa (xiv. — xvi.), with notices of the prophets Azariah the
son of Oded\xv. 1), and Hanani " the seer " (xvi. 7). The reign
of Jehoshaphat which foUows is treated at greater length (xvii.
1 — xxi. 1.). Here the author mentions the activity of various
prophets (xviH. 7 ; xix. 2 ; xx. 14, 37), but dweUs particularly
on the arrangements made by the king for the instruction of
the people in the law at the hands of priests and Levites, who
"went about throughout aU the cities of Judah and taught
among the people " (xvH. 7—9), and similar provision made for
the administration of justice in the various centres of Judah
(xix. 5 ff.).
The reigns of Joram (xxi. 2 — 20), of Ahaziah, and AthaUah
(xxii., xxiii.) are briefly treated, special mention being made of
the preservation of the infant Joash ; and his reign gives the
writer the opportunity of recording the taxing that took place
for the repaH of the Temple and the supply of sacred vessels.
It was also signaHsed by the murder of Zechariah, the son of
the king's faithful adviser Jehoiada, because be lifted up his voice
against the apostasy into which Judah was betrayed (xxiv.).
Next come the reigns of Amaziah, who was rebuked for his
idolatry, and suffered defeat at tbe hands of Joash of Israel
(xxv.) ; of Uzziah, who usurped priestly functions and was
smitten with leprosy (xxvi.); of Jotham (xxvii.); and of Ahaz
(xxviii.), in whose time appeared the prophet Oded with a mes
sage to the army of Israel, which had obtained a victory over
Judah (xxviii. 9 ff.).
The reign of Hezekiah presents the writer with congenial
topics (xxix. — xxxii.) ; for we have accounts of the cleansing of
the Temple and the purification of the Levites after the desecra
tion that had happened in the closing years of Ahaz ; of the
observance by the whole nation of the Passover with joy, the
like of which had not been known since the time of Solomon
(xxx. 26); and of the ordinances made by the king for the
support of the priests and Levites and the maintenance of
the sanctuary (xxxi.). After the reign of Manasseh, with an
account of his impiety, captivity, repentance, and restoration,
and the brief reign of his son Amon (xxxiii.), the author comes
to the reign of Josiah, which is again treated in fuUer detaU
(xxxiv., xxxv.).
Here we have an account of the finding of the law-book in
the Temple, the utterance of the prophetess Huldah, and the
description of a celebration of a Passover such as had not been
"kept in Israel from the days of Samuel the prophet" (xxxv.
18). Finally, in the closing chapter (xxxvi.), he gives a brief
history of the reigns of Jehoahaz, Jehoiakim, Jehoiaehin, and

THE BOOKS OF CHRONICLES.

115

Zedekiah, a short statement of the deportation, and, in a broken
sentence, taken up again Hi the opening verses of the Book of
Ezra, a notice of the restoration from captivity.
5. Sources. — The sources from which the author of these books
drew the materials for his work are in part mentioned by himseH
and in part may be inferred from the nature of the materials pre
sented. FHst of aU, he makes frequent reference to what seems
to have been one work, though it is designated by him sometimes
as the " Book of the Kings of Judah and Israel " (2 Chr. xvi. 1 1 ;
xxv. 26 ; xxvHi. 26 ; xxxii. 32), and sometimes as " the Book of
the Kings of Israel and Judah" (2 Chr. xxvH. 7; xxxv. 27;
xxxvi. 8). It may be the same which in one place (2 Chr. xx. 34)
is briefly caHed ' ' the Book of the Kings of Israel, " for by the time
to which be then refers the kingdom of Israel in its Hmited sense
had disappeared.
The work thus variously designated cannot have been the
records to whieh the writer of the Books of Kings makes con
stant reference,* for these were the separate registers and state
papers of the individual kingdoms, whereas the work here named
was a combined account of the two. Nor can it have been our
present canonical Books of Kings to which the writer of
Chronicles referred ; for the work in question is said to have con
tained the deeds of the monarchs " first and last," and aft theH
wars and all their ways (2 Chr. xxvii. 7), and it is referred to for
events and sayings which are not found in the Books of Kings. It
would seem tb have been a comprehensive work of a historical
kind, relating to both Israel and Judah, and based no doubt on
the respective annals of the two kingdoms.
That such historical works, of greater or less compass, had
been produced before the author's time is in itseH probable, and
it may be to such a work that he refers for the reign of Joash,
under the name of " the story of the Book of the Kings " (2 Chr.
xxiv. 27), and to another, for the reign of Abijah, under the name
of "the story of the prophet Iddo " (xiH. 22). At the same time
we have to remember that the canonical Books of Samuel and
Kings were in existence by the time the Books of Chronicles were
written, and were doubtless employed by the author in writing
his own history. The great simUarity of his language to that of
those books, in parts which treat of the same subjects, may arise
from his having quoted either dHectly from them or from the
sources which they had Hi common. "We can see, moreover,
from the manner Hi which events recorded in the earlier books
are impHed without being actuaUy related by the chronicler,
* See the Books of Kings, { 4, pp. 100, 101.
12

116 BOOK BY BOOK.
that he assumed these histories to be known to his readers.*
Secondly, we find several references to writings designated by
the names of prophetical men, as Samuel, Gad, and Nathan
(1 Chr. xxix. 29 ; 2 Chr. ix. 29) ; Abijah, Shemaiah, and Iddo
(2 Chr. ix. 29 ; xH. 15) ; a writing of the prophet Isaiah relating
to Uzziah (2 Chr. xxvi. 22), and apparently another in 2 Chr.
xxxiii. 19.
From what is said in 2 Chr. xx. 34, and xxxii. 32 {see the
Revised Version), it may be concluded that these writings,
known by the names of theH prophetical authors, were Hi some
cases at least " inserted in the Book of the Kings," from whieh
our author drew so largely, although it is quite probable that
some of them were in circulation in separate form in his day. In
addition to these compositions referred to by the writer himseH,
he must have had access to, and availed himseH of, various
registers, Hsts, and genealogies. Some of these, of a more
national and public character, he no doubt found already incor
porated in the historical work from which he drew so largely
{see 1 Chr. ix. 1 ; xxvu. 24), whUe others, of a private or famUy
description, would be the property of individuals or heads of
tribes. Some of iShese documents seem to have been ancient and
curious ; for in the formal genealogical tables with which the
work commences there are found not a few detaUs for which we
search in vain in the earHer books which cover the time to which
they relate.
6. Historical Value.— It has been the fashion among a certain
class of critics to speak disparagingly of the Books of the Chro
nicles, as if they had Httle or no independent historical value.
It is variously alleged that the author of these books is only to
be trusted when his statements are confirmed by other books,
particularly by the Books of Kings ; that what he has in common
with preceding books is simply borrowed from them, and that
aU the rest is the product of late ideas, the misconception of tbe
author's days ; or even that he is guilty of dehberate falsification
of history by means of fabricated lists of names and invented
titles of books. Such accusations are both superficial and unjust.
There is no reason to doubt the honesty of the author in the use
of such materials as he had command of ; nor is there any reason
to question the existence of the writings to which he refers.
It is urged, indeed, that the writings in question, H they
existed, were composed also at a late date, and were animated
* Compare, eg., 1 Sam. xxxi. 12, with 1 Chr. x. 12 ; 1 Kin. ix. 12, with
2 Chr. viii. 2 ; 1 Kin. iii. 1, with 2 Chr. viii. 11 ; 1 Kin. xi. 29-39, with
2 Chr. x. 15 ; 2 Kin. xviii. 3—6, with 2 Chr. xxx. 6, 7 ; 2 Kin. xx. 13—19,
with 2 Chr. xxxii. 25, 31.

THE BOOKS OF CHRONICLES. 117
by the bias of a late time, and that therefore anything based
upon them can have no historical value ; that, in short, by the
time of the chronicler there were no original and trustworthy
documents in existence that bad not in substance been worked
into earHer books of the canon. But aU this is mere assertion.
We know from the author of the Books of Kings himself that
there were many things within his reach in written documents
which he did not transfer to his pages ; and it is evident on the
face of his books that they do not by any means give a complete
account of the history of the centuries to which they relate.
As to discrepancies which are to be found between the Books
of Chronicles and Kings, a great many of them are differences
in names, numbers, and individual expressions, which may be
accounted for on the supposition that the text of one or other of
the books has not been correctly handed down. For the rest,
the variations are such as might appear in two independent
works, or may be attributed to tbe different standpoints aDd
aims of the writers ; at aH events, they do not warrant the
sweeping charges that are brought against the writer of the
books under consideration. It is quite clear that he had a
special fondness for dwelling on aU that pertained to the strict
observance of the Temple worship, and a special purpose in
relating throughout his work how the good kings attended to
the orderly arrangements of aU matters of reHgion. But if he
thought fit to dweU on these things at greater length than the
writer of the Books of the Kings had done, this is no reason for
doubting his accuracy, any more than his omission of things
which the other recorded is a reason for concluding that he did
not know of these things. And if, in his narrative, be gives
prominence to matters of ritual observance and priestly activity
in the early monarchical period, and thus causes inconvenience
to the theory of the late origin of the Levitical system, his state
ments are not on that account to be put aside as due to false
conceptions of the ancient history, and therefore unworthy of
credence. A charge of falsifying history should not be made without
very clear proof, and it is suspicious that it is brought precisely
against those books which do not square with certain notions of
the development of Israel's history. At the same time, it is to
be remembered that no writer can divest himseH of the ideas of
his age, nor can bis work be understood apart from his circum
stances and training. There were good reasons why the writer
of the Chronicles laid stress on certain aspects of the history of
his nation ; and it may be granted that he read the record of th©
past Hi the Hght of his own time, reproducing in his own manner

118 BOOK BY BOOK.
the speeches of former ages, and freely handUng bis materials
in a way that best suited the plan of his work. But when aU
this is admitted, we have done nothing to impugn his veracity
or to detract from the substantial accuracy of his work, the main
purpose of which was to present a particular aspect of the history
of his nation, which had not been brought into prominence by
former writers, but was regarded by bim as of special value to
the people of his own time. ">
7. Standpoint. — "We must have regard to the period at which
the writer of these books lived, and the cHcumstances of the
people for whom he wrote, if we would understand the form in
which they appear and the object for which they were composed.
The national independence of Israel was a thing of the past, but
the descendants of David, to whom had been given the promise
of a sure house, survived. The Captivity had done its work ;
the exiles, thoroughly cured of the old tendency to idolatry, had
been aUowed to gather on theH ancestral soU, to erect a temple
on the ruins of that of Solomon, and to observe the rites of their
national religion. The voice of prophecy had become sUent ;
the two precious possessions that survived the ExUe and bound
the present to the past were the exercise of their reHgion and
the offspring of David ; round these clustered the hopes of the
future, at a time when restored Israel was at the mercy of a
heathen power for corporate existence and tbe semblance of
national Hfe.
At such a tune and Hi such circumstances an author, taking a
review of the past history of his nation, saw everything in a
peculiar Hght, and would approach his work with a pecuHar
purpose. It had become a settled conviction that Israel had
suffered for unfaithfulness in the matter of religion ; and, as the
forms of religion were more punctiliously observed after the
Captivity, our author would look for the reigns in which these
received due attention and dwell upon them as " tbe good old
times" of the nation's life, whUe he would perceive and emphasise
the fact that it was when these were neglected that the unfaithful
kings had suffered. From this point of view he set himseH the
task of writing the whole history of his nation, so as to sustain
(he courage of his people Hi theH depressed condition, and give
them guidance and hope for the future. The encouragement
was, that so long as the community, deprived though they were
of theH old political independence, adhered to the observances
of theH national religion, they would be preserved from mingling
among the nations and being lost ; and the hope was, that if
they so remained steadfast to the covenant, the God of their

THE BOOKS OF CHRONICLES. 119
fathers would remember "the sure mercies of David," and would,
in His good time, " restore the kingdom to Israel."
Such a book, in short, would contribute not a Httle to keep
alive the persistent separate existence of the Jewish race, which
is one of the most striking features of history, and to stamp upon
theH later reHgious Hfe the character which it retained for the
succeeding centuries. The book was at once the result of the
new impulse that had been given to the observance of the law
at the time of Ezra,* and at the same time would tend to foster
the same adherence to the forms of worship as the sole remaining
bond of Israel's union and the mark of their separation from the
heathen nations. And, H the tendency seems to us a faUing
away and a decay as compared with the earlier prophetic period,
we are not to forget that it was only the natural hardening of
the husk, after the bloom had disappeared, around the Hving
seed which, after centuries of apparent death, was to burst forth
into new and higher life.
* See the Books of Ezra and Nehemiah, § 7, p. 129.

THE BOOKS OF EZEA AND
NEHEMIAH.
1. Titles and Place in the Canon. — These two books go naturaUy
together. The men whose names they bear were contemporaries,
and some of the most valuable inf ormation we possess in regard
to Ezra is contained in the Book of Nehemiah. In the Talmud,
indeed, and by Josephus and the early Church fathers, tbe two
books are reckoned as one, called the Book of Ezra, although it
is usuaUy spoken of as consisting of two parts, called FHst and
Second Ezra. In the Hebrew canon the two books are put
separately, yet they are reckoned as forming only one of the
twenty -four books into which the whole Old Testament is
divided,* and the Masoretic conclusion which is usuaUy appended
to each book comes at the close of Nehemiah.
The explanation of this varying treatment of the books, accord
ing to which they were first regarded as one, then separated into
two, and firiaUy designated by two separate names, is no doubt
due, as it has been expressed, to an " unconscious criticism." It
was perceived that the books, referring to the same time and
situation, had so far a common origin, and yet they presented
features which led to the appreciation of dual authorship. The
hands of both Ezra and Nehemiah, in short, are discernible in
the respective compositions, although a common influence is dis
cernible in the reducing of them to the state in which they now
appear before us.
In the Hebrew Bible the books are placed together after
Daniel and before Chronicles, an arrangement which has been
variously explained. In that position, as it wiH be perceived,
the books before us continue the story of the Captivity contained
in Daniel and give an account of tbe restoration ; the Books of
Chronicles then foUowing as a complete summary of the history
* See the Book of Esther, § 1, note*, p. 131.

THE BOOKS OF EZRA AND NEHEMIAH. 121
from the earHest times tUl the eve of the return from capti
vity. In our English Bible, however, Ezra and Nehemiah foUow
Chronicles, and can be read as a sequel to the history of these
books. It wUl be observed that the closing verses of Chronicles
(2 Chron. xxxvi. 22, 23) are almost identical with the opening
words of Ezra — a feature which has led many to beHeve thai
the works originally formed one continuous composition, and
which, at aU events, shows that the Books of Ezra and Nehemiah
were recognised as forming a natural continuation of the history
of the Chronicles. Those books had brought down the history to
the first year of Cyrus, and the books before us contain the his
tory of the re- establishment of the IsraeHte society by the return
of colonists, theH settlement in Jerusalem, the rebuilding of the
Temple and city, and the reorganisation of Hfe and worship.
The narrative begins in the Book of Ezra at the first year of
the reign of Cyrus, b.c 538, and it is dropped Hi Nehemiah soon
after the thirty-second year of Artaxerxes, B.C. 432; so that the
two books together carry us over a space of about a century. The
whole history of this time, however, f aUs into three clearly defined
periods. The first, treated of Hi the first six chapters of Ezra, is
the tune that elapsed from the first return of exUes to the com
pletion of the Temple ; the second, of which an account is con-
tamed in the remaining chapters of Ezra, is the period of his
activity as leader of the second colony that came to Judaea ; and
the third, covered by the Book of Nehemiah, is the period of the
activity of the two men in the reconstitution of the new commu
nity at Jerusalem. It wiU be convenient to speak of these three
periods separately.
2. First Period. — The first period extends over twenty-three
years, viz. from the first return of exUes in 538 tiU the comple
tion of the Temple in the sixth year of Darius B.C. 515. The
whole of this period was anterior to the coming of Ezra, and
chapters i. — vi. of his book contain a succinct account of what
was an arduous and almost hopeless struggle on the part of the
first colonists to establish themselves in the city of theH fathers.
From the Books of Haggai and Zechariah, who belonged to that
period, we gam much additional Hght on that troubled time ; and
the condition of the great empire under whose protection the
colonists effected a settlement, as it is known to us from his
tory, enables us to understand many things which are but Hghtly
touched upon in the canonical books.
What we learn from the Book of Ezra is that Cyrus, in the
first year of his reign, gave permission to as many of the Israelite
exiles as were so disposed to return and settle Hi their native

122 BOOK BY BOOK.
land ; that persons from the tribes of Judah, Levi, and Benjamin,
as well as Nethinim, or Temple servants, to the number of
42,360 (or, if this number stands for heads of families, about
200,000 in aU), set out under Zerub babel or Sheshbazzar (compare
Ezra i. 8, H. 2, and v. 14), to whom, by the king's command,
were delivered the sacred vessels of the Temple, which had been
carried away from Jerusalem by Nebuchadnezzar (Ezra i., ii.).
The exUes were accompanied by Joshua, the high priest ; and,
in the seventh month of the year of their return, they set up an
altar for burnt offering and celebrated the Feast of Tabernacles.
From that time onwards the observance of the prescribed rites
of theH reHgion was maintained ; but it was not till tbe second
year that the foundations of the Temple were laid, amid the joy
ful shouts of the younger colonists and the weeping of older men
who had seen the former Temple (chapter Hi.). TheH work,
however, was not aUowed to proceed in peace. " The adversaries
of Judah and Benjamin," that is to say, the inhabitants of
Samaria, a mixed people who had been settled Hi the old terri
tory of the kingdom of the ten tribes,* approached Zerubbabel
and his colonists, asking to have a share in the buUdmg of the
Temple, seeing that they also had been worshippers of the same
God from the days of Esar-haddon. Their offers were rejected,
and from that tune began the bitter hostility of the Samaritans to
the Jews, which lasted down to New Testament times (John iv. 9).
The Samaritans had many opportunities of venting theH hatred.
TheH own city, Samaria, was by that time a place of some
importance, with a Persian governor, through whom they could
send reports to headquarters, representing in a bad light the
intentions of the Jews in setting up their Temple at Jerusalem ;
they could, moreover, encourage tbe marauding Arabs of the
neighbourhood to engage Hi petty annoyances or warUke attacks
on the infant colony. In one way or another they impeded the
progress of the work tiH the reign of Darius (Ezra iv. 1 — 5).
Between the death of Cyrus and the accession of Darius there
intervened a space of about eight years, represented by the reign
of Cambyses, son of Cyrus, and the brief usurpation of the
so-caUed Pseudo-Smerdis. Some have thought that these are
the kings referred to in Ezra iv. 6, 7, under the names of
Ahasuerus and Artaxerxes. It is pretty certain, however, that
the names stand for Xerxes I. and Artaxerxes I., who were the
successors of Darius, and that the verses 6 — 23 do not f oUow the
preceding narrative in strictly chronological order, but were sug-
* See 2 Kings xvii. 24 — 41, -written, it will be remembered, at least not
earlier than the closing days of the old kingdom of Judah, and possibly even
after the Captivity. Compare Kings, § 1, p. 92.

THE BOOKS OF EZRA AND NEHEMIAH. 123
gested to the author (or editor) by the subject in hand. Having
stated that the opposition lasted tiU the time of Darius, he adds
that it was continued even later, and proceeds to give instances
of how it mamfested itseH ; but in verse 24 he returns to the
point to which he bad come, at which a temporary change in the
circumstances of the colony took place.* In the second year of
Darius, he proceeds to say, the prophets Haggai and Zechariah
urged the people to a more vigorous prosecution of the work ; and
under theH impulse tbe building was resumed.
It was a time when the great Persian empire was shaken to
its base, and Darius was making tremendous efforts to retain the
sovereignty over revolted provinces ; and it may have been
thought that, at such a time, the king's attention would not be
turned to the operations of the little colony at Jerusalem, and
that the work would be aUowed to proceed in peace. But the
enemies of Judah were on the watch ; and no doubt it was at
theH instigation that Tattenai, the Persian satrap of Syria,
demanded from the Jews a proof of the authority by which they
were carrying on theH work. The Jews referred him to the edict
of Cyrus ; and whUe correspondence was going on between him
and the court of Darius to verify theH statement, we may beHeve
they would continue to push on the work of buUdmg (chapter v.).
At aH events, Darius, now at rest from his enemies, made search
for the old edict, found it, and confirmed it, giving orders to his
governors to aid the Jews Hi theH work. And thus, in the sixth
year of his reign, the Temple was finished, a joyful feast was
held at the dedication, and the Passover was observed in the
same month (chapter vi.).
3. Second Period. — The second period begins with the seventh
chapter of Ezra, and extends to the close of the book. These
chapters will teU us how Ezra brought the second colony from
Babylon and settled them in Jerusalem in the seventh year of
King Artaxerxes I., caUed Longimanus, i.e. Hi the year B.C. 458
(Ezra vH. 8). Since the former period ended with the sixth year
of Darius, or 515, and this begins with the seventh year of
Artaxerxes, there is thus an interval of fifty-seven years passed
over -without record. This space represents the remaining thirty
years of Darius, the twenty years' reign of Xerxes, and the
opening seven years of that of Artaxerxes. As has been stated
in the last paragraph, the passage Ezra iv. 6 — 23 is best explained
as referring to this interval. "Verse 6 simply says that, in the
reign of Ahasuerus (Xerxes), in the beginning of his reign, they
wrote an accusation against the Jews, but the verses that foUow
* Observe that, on this view, the verse Ezra vi. 14 must also be regarded
as an anticipation of the succeeding history.

124 BOOK BY BOOK.
give at length a correspondence that took place " in tbe days of
Artaxerxes" between the local governors* and the court of
Persia. The complaint then made was that the Jews were
" building the rebellious city and had finished the waUs," the
insinuation being that they were aiming at independence ; and
the result of the correspondence was that the works were stopped
tiU a positive decree should be issued on the subject.
We may either place the episode before the arrival of Ezra,
and suppose that the exiles, taking encouragement in the early
years of Artaxerxes, pushed on the work, and that the decree
referred to was a favourable one, and was virtuaUy the commis
sion to Ezra himself. Or we may put it down later than Ezra's
arrival, in which case it would be the reforming impulse which
he gave which led to the intervention of the adversaries, and the
stoppage would have occurred some time before tbe arrival of
Nehemiah. For it is to be remembered that though Ezra reached
Jerusalem in the seventh year of Artaxerxes, and Nehemiah
does not appear tiU the twentieth year of tbe same reign, all the
events recorded in Ezra viii. — x. in connection with his coming
seem to have occurred in the space of a few months ; so that for
nearly thirteen years Ezra disappears from the narrative, although
he may have been present at Jerusalem.
However this may be, it was in the seventh year of Artaxerxes
that he obtained permission to lead a second colony, and was not
only provided with such free-wiU offerings as the Jews might
contribute, but received also a gift from the royal treasury, and
orders to local governors to give him every support (vii.). Col
lecting his volunteers at tbe river Ahava, he discovered that
there were no Levites among them, and persuaded some from
Casiphia to accompany him ; and then, after solemn fasting and
prayer, set out on his journey. Though tbe condition of the
empire rendered travelling dangerous, Ezra had no armed escort,
having been ashamed to ask such protection after confidently
saying to the king that the hand of God would be upon them
for good. The journey occupied four months, and the caravan
reached Jerusalem in safety (Ezra viii. 1 — 32; comp. vii. 8 — 10).
Delivering his credentials to the governors and handing to the
priests the offerings for the house of God (viii. 33 — 36), Ezra
proceeded to execute the charge entrusted to bim, "to enquHe
concerning Judah and Jerusalem according to the law of thy
* Mithredath and Tabeel were probably the Persian satrap of Syria and
his secretary, and Rehum and Shimshai the governor of Samaria and his
secretary. The accusation would be stronger when presented by the two
parties. The name Bishlam is uncertain ; the Septuagint and Syrian versions
translate the word " in peace."

THE BOOKS OF EZRA AND NEHEMIAH. 125
God which is in thine hand " (vii. 14). The condition of matters
was even worse than he had expected, for when he heard that
the people, and even the priests and Levites, had contracted
mixed marriages and conformed to heathen customs, he" sat
down astonied till the evening sacrifice " (ix. 1 — 3). He then
rose and, in the hearing of the people, poured out a touching
confession of the sins of the nation (ix. 5 — 15) ; which so moved
the hearts of the people that some of the leaders entreated him
to take measures for cleansing the community, binding them
selves by oath to put away theH heathen wives. An assembly
was convened in the cold, rainy weather of November, at which
it was agreed that a commission should search out aU the cases
of trespass, and in two months- they had completed their task
(x. 1 — 17). The Book of Ezra closes abruptly with a list of
those who had offended and who pledged themselves to put away
their strange wives (x. 18 — 44).
4. Third Period. — Thirteen years after the arrival of Ezra's
colony Nehemiah appears at Jerusalem ; and the third period,
treated of in the Book of Nehemiah, and extending over twelve
years, is the period of theH joint activity. In the twentieth year
of Artaxerxes, Nehemiah, cup-bearer to the king, having heard
mournful accounts of the condition of his countrymen Hi Judea
(chapter i.), obtained leave of absence from the court, and was
appointed governor of Jerusalem. He traveUed with a royal
escort and was provided with letters to officials by the way, as
weU as orders to the keeper of the royal parks to furnish him
with timber for buflding purposes ; aU of which gave great
displeasure to the unfriendly neighbours of the Jews, SanbaUat,
the Samaritan governor, and his secretary Tobiah (H. 1 — 10).
Unmoved by the contempt of these men, Nehemiah, as soon as
he had made an inspection of the ruins, took in hand the repair
of the waUs, dividing the work among the various chiefs and
guUds, who vigorously lent their aid (ii. 11 — Hi. 32).
The adversaries, seeing the progress of the work, planned an
attack upon the city by the help of the Ammonites and Arabians ;
but, by keeping his men under arms and labouring incessantly,
Nehemiah was able to proceed without interruption (iv.). At
the same time he attended to the wants of the poor, and made
great sacrifices on theH behaH (v.). The waUs were completed
in fifty-two days, and then SanbaUat and his associates laid
various snares to entrap the governor, being aided in their
designs by certain false prophets in Jerusalem itseH. AU these
machinations Nehemiah eluded (vi.), and, having seen his work
completed, he appointed faithful men over the city with special
instructions to keep the gates (vi. 1 — 5). About a week after

126 BOOK BY BOOK.
this, in the beginning of the seventh month, Ezra, again.
appears. At a great public assembly he reads the law to the people,
being supported on the right and left by priests, and attended
by Levites who explain what is read, the service being continued
from early morn till mid-day, and the day observed as a time of
holy joy (viii. 1 — 12). This was foUowed by a great observance
of the Feast of Tabernacles, during the continuance of which
there was a simUar daUy reading of the law (viH. 13 — 18) ; and
then "the seed of Israel separated themselves from aU strangers"
(ix. 1 — 3), and bound themselves by a solemn covenant to keep
the law, and particularly to abstain from mixed marriages, to
sanctify the Sabbath, to observe the Sabbatical year, and to tax
themselves for the mamtenance of the Temple worship (ix. 4 —
x. 39). Measures were then taken for gathering into the city a
sufficient population from the surrounding country (xi.), and the
completed waUs were dedicated by a solemn procession (xii.).
Nehemiah, however, was recaUed to the court of Persia in the
thirty-second year of Artaxerxes (xiii. 6), and returning after au
absence of some undefined time, found that the old abuses had
again crept in, the chief offender bemg the high priest himseH,
whose name is significantly absent from the Hst of those who
had signed the covenant twelve years before (x. 1 — 28).
It appears that he was related by marriage to SanbaUat (xiii.
28), and that he had actuaUy assigned to Tobiah, Sanballat's
associate, a chamber in the Temple which should have been
appropriated to sacred purposes. The governor, enraged at the
profanation, cast forth the household stuff of Tobiah, cleansed
the chamber, recaUed the Levites who bad been driven to Hve on
theH lands outside the city, and appointed treasurers to look
after the payment of tithes in future (xHi. 1 — 14). Tbe book
comes to rather an abrupt close while Nehemiah is stiU en
gaged in such works of reformation, its last words being his
oft-repeated prayer: "Remember me, 0 my God, for good"
(xiii. 23—31).
5. Literary Features. — Looked at as literary compositions these
books present features which prove they could not, in their
present form, have been written by the men whose names they
bear. Certain portions of both books are written in the first
person,* Ezra and Nehemiah bemg presumably the authors,
while in other parts these men are spoken of in the third person,
as ii by another writer. Since the narrative in Ezra begins at a
point some eighty years before his arrival in Jerusalem, H Ezra
* Viz. Ezra vii. 27 — ix. 15 ; Nehemiah i. — vii. ; xii. 27 — 43 ; xiii. 4  31.

THE BOOKS OF EZRA AND NEHEMIAH. 127
composed it, he must have depended upon written materials
for his information, and it wiU be observed that about two-
thHds of the section i. — vi. is made up of official Hsts and state
documents. Again in the Book of Nehemiah, while he obviously is the
author of the opening and closing portions, and whUe some of
the Hsts may have been drawn, up by himseH or in his own days,
other Hsts are older (as that given in vii. 6 — 73, which is a
duphcate of Ezra H. 2 — 70), and some eome down to a period
long posterior to Nehemiah. In chapter xii. 26, the times of
Ezra and, Nehemiah are spoken of as past; in xii. 10, 11, the
lists of high priests is brought down to Jaddua, who, according
to Josephus, was a contemporary of Alexander the Great, in
other words, was about a century later than Nehemiah ; and
verse 22 of the same chapter, referring to the same time, names
Darius the Persian, as H by that tune the Persian empire had
passed away, the king referred to being most probably Darius
Codomannus, the last Persian king (b.c 336—331). The last
writer who touched the books, therefore, whether he only intro
duced the brief notices that have been instanced, or made a more
extensive eompUation, must have Hved as late as the tune of the
Greek domination. He may have been the same person who
composed the Books of Chronicles, which are later in date than
the times of Ezra and Nehemiah.*
Many indeed hold that tbe three books, Chronicles, Ezra, and
Nehemiah, constituted origmaUy one large work, and in proof
of this it is pointed out that Chronicles has no proper termina
tion, but breaks off in the middle of a sentence, which is com
pleted in Ezra. But, on the other hand, it may be maintained
that the verses common to the two books stand more naturaUy
at the opening of Ezra, and that theH presence in Chronicles is
more inteUigible on the supposition that the Book of Ezra already
existed. Moreover, the advocates of this theory can give no
satisfactory account of the separation of the large work into
three, and the inversion of the parts into what is not a chrono
logical order. Further, there are repetitions in the books which
are scarcely consistent with the idea that they once formed a
whole. Thus the Hst Hi Ezra u. 2 — 70, is repeated in Nehemiah
vii. 6 — 73, and the Hst of the inhabitants of Jerusalem after the
restoration, whieh has its natural place in Nehemiah xi., is found
also, with variations such as the same author would hardly have
introduced, in 1 Chron. ix.
On the whole it seems most natural to suppose that materials
* See the Books of Chronicles, $ 1, p. 110, and § 7, p. 118.

128 BOOK BY BOOK.
from the hands of Ezra and Nehemiah respectively formed a
nucleus, around which the two books which have come to bear
their names grew into their present form, and it may haye been
the author of the Books of Chronicles who gave them their defi
nite shape.
6. The New Reform. — Little as we are told of the personal
histories of Ezra and Nehemiah, we perceive that they were
eminently fitted for the crisis in which they appeared. It is
evident that the efforts of the first colony under Zerubbabel and
Joshua sufficed at most to preserve a lingering existence. It
was only after the arrival of Ezra that the restored community
took a new departure, and only by the energetic action of Nehe
miah that it assumed a position in which it was able to unfold,
under new conditions, its old religious life. It has been con
jectured that probably the influence of Esther and Mordecai on
Xerxes, the predecessor of Artaxerxes,* may account for Jews
being in such high regard at the court.
It is clear that both Ezra and Nehemiah were in high estima
tion with the king, or they would not have been entrusted with
the functions they were sent to perform ; and it was providential
that, at a time when the first colony was struggling for existence,
these two men, of the seed of Israel, were raised up to guide
theH nation through a trying time and give it a constitution
which would survive the successive dynasties under whieh the
Jewish people Hved. Ezra, a scribe, instructed in the law of
Moses, was able to expound the principles of the reHgion, and to
show their application to daily Hfe : Nehemiah, endued with
fuU powers from the king, was a man of determined wUl, fertihty
of resource, and devotion to his people. And thus, at a crisis
which became a reformation in Israel, the leaders possessed the
intelligent conception of the thing needed, and the administrative
capacity to effect it, without which no reformation can be brought
about. So it is from this period that a new era in the Hfe of the
Jewish people is dated, and tradition assigns to Ezra a place
next to Moses in the moulding of the reHgious Hfe. The national
unity was saved from being shattered into fragments by the
Captivity; for the Temple with its service was the reHgious
centre to which in aU places of theH wanderings the dispersed
ever turned. Even though many remained in Babylon, and
entered upon a new reHgious and inteUectual career in the famous
schools which arose there, though others in other lands fell under
the speU of the Greek philosophy, yet in aU places of their dis-
* See the Book of Esther, § 2, p. 132.

THE BOOKS OF EZRA AND NEHEMIAH. 129
persion they looked to Jerusalem as their metropolis, and all
their mental activity had one starting point, and can be traced
to the. movement inaugurated by Ezra.
7. Restoration of the Law. — In an account of the great gathering
in the seventh month, contained in Nehemiah vHi., ix., the thing
that is most remarkable is the extraordinary desire of the people
to become acquainted with the books which the scribe read in
theH hearing. We see Ezra attended by a number of men who,
Hke himseH, must have given special study to the law, for they
"caused the people to understand " (viii. 7); and for three hours
on end the people stood listening to the reading, and for as many
hours more engaged in worship (ix. 3). As at the Reformation
in Europe preaching became a distinctive feature of the new
reHgious Hfe, so here for the first time a pulpit is mentioned
(viH. 4), and the regular exposition of Scripture commences. It
is this prominence given to Scripture that distinguishes the
reform of Ezra, and accounts for the high honour assigned to
him in later tradition.
"Whatever may be the amount of truth underlying the tradition
whieh calls him the restorer of the law, it is clear that from this
tune a special value was set upon the sacred writings, and that
the study of Scripture and the work of the " Scribe " became
new features in the reHgious history. It was a necessity of the
tune that, of aU the sacred writings, the "law," prescribing a
regular ritual of worship, and requiring a distinctive life, should
receive special attention at the crisis when a sharp separation
had to be drawn between the colony at Jerusalem and the sur
rounding heathen. And, since the maintaining of that separa
tion was a continuous and arduous process, and, in the absence
of national independence, the religious observances of the law
became the visible mark of the separation, it came to pass
naturaUy that Legalism and Rabbinism ultimately set in, giving
to Judaism the hardness and formalism which it presented, tiU
such time as the world was ready for the free dissemination of
the truth of which the nation was the depository. But, while
the impulse towards LegaHem was thus given in the movement
inaugurated by Ezra, there is nothing in the books under con
sideration to warrant the conclusion of advanced critics that the
Book of the Law from which he read was in any proper sense his
own composition, or that he was the author of the Levitical Code.
Those colonists did not leave comfortable homes Hi Babylon
to set up a Temple at Jerusalem whose ritual had, Hi their esti
mation, anything short of a Divine sanction. Ezra brings forth
the book, and the people receive it, as the law of Moses, the
ancient constitution of the nation which they had sacrificed so

130 BOOK BY BOOK.
much to restore ; and the modern theory gives no adequate
explanation of this deeply-rooted national behef. Ezra is a
restorer, not an innovator. And although the high regard to
Scripture which he inaugurated degenerated into a slavish
worship of the letter, and the attention to the legal element ran
into extravagance, it is the great merit of bim and his associates
that, at a critical time, they preserved the ancient writings which
show how from earliest times the people of Israel bad been the
channel of the revelation of God's will to mankind, and raUied
around these writings the wondrous people that has been from
age to age the witness of God's truth to the world.

THE BOOK OP ESTHER.
1. Title and Place in the Canon. — The Book of Esther stands in
the English Bible at the close of the historical books ; it does not,
however, form a link in the connected series, as it only relates to
an episode Hi the history. It has, moreover, features of its own
which distinguish it broadly from the historical books, and indeed
from aU the other books of the Old Testament. It takes its name
from the Jewish maiden who became queen of the Persian king
Ahasuerus, and it was written doubtless with the primary pur
pose of explaining the institution of the feast of Purim, which
originated mainly through her means. In the Hebrew Bible it
stands among the Hagiographa, the third division of the canonical
books, as one of the five rolls,* and by the later Jews has come
to be esteemed almost as highly as tbe law itself.
Its authorship and date are unknown ; but from the indication
in the first verse of the time at which the events to be narrated
took place, we may conclude that it could not have been' written
till a considerable time after the close of the reign of Ahasuerus.
This king is now generaUy beheved to have been Xerxes (named
* The number of books in the Old Testament is reckoned by the Jews as
twenty-four, divided into three collections, Law, Prophets, and (Sacred)
"Writings or Hagiographa. The number twenty- four is made up as follows : —
I. The law, viz. , Genesis to Deuteronomy . . 5 books
II. The former prophets — Joshua, Judges, Samuel,
and Kings  4
The latter prophets— Isaiah, Jeremiah, Ezekiel,
and the twelve minor prophets counted as one i
III. The three so-called poetical books — Psalms, Pro
verbs, Job  3
The five rolls — Canticles, Ruth, Lamentations,
Ecclesiastes, and Esther .... 5
The three books, Daniel, Ezra-Nehemiah, and
Chronicles . . .... 3
In all . . .24
K 2

132 BOOK BY BOOK.
in the Persian inscriptions Kshyarsha), who succeeded Darius on
the throne of Persia in 485 B.C., and reigned twenty years* Tbe
composition of the book may with some probability be placed
not earlier at least than that of the Books of Chronicles, Ezra,
and Nehemiah, i.e. towards the close of the Persian or in the
early part of the Greek domination. +
2. Contents. — Though attempts have been made to resolve the
Book of Esther into different constituent parts, it presents itseH
most naturaUy as one composition. It is graphic in its deHnea-
tion of detaUs, and the plot of the story is unfolded with almost
dramatic vividness. Ahasuerus, the powerful king of Persia, at
a great feast in the third year of his reign, being heated with
wine and elated with pride, repudiates his queen Vashti for
refusing to obey bis foolish command ; and in the seventh year
of his reign the orphan Jewess Hadassah {Myrtle), who had been
brought up by her kinsman Mordecai, a Benjamite, is chosen for
her beauty and demeanour to take the place of tbe repudiated
queen, receiving apparently the Persian name Esther {Star).
Mordecai, who may have been in court employment, and had
rendered special service to the state by the discovery of a plot
against the king's life, wounds the pride of Haman, the king's
minister and favourite, by refusing to stand up and do him
honour in the king's gate. At this Haman conceives a bitter
hatred for the whole race of the Jews, and forms a plan for their
extermination. Finding, by the employment of the lot {pur), an
auspicious day for the accomplishment of his purpose, he prevails
upon the king to issue an edict that, in all parts of his dominions,
on the thirteenth day of the tweHth month, or Adar, the whole
race of the Jews, ' ' both young and old, little children and
women," should be put to death. Mordecai communicates intel
ligence of the plot to Esther, imploring her to use her influence
with the king to save her people from destruction. She resolves
to risk her life in the attempt, and prepares for the execution of
her purpose by a fast, in which the Jews of Susa, the capital,
join her.
Venturing into the royal presence she invites tbe king and
Haman to a banquet, at which, being pressed by the king to
prefer her request, she invites them to another banquet on the
foUowing day. Haman goes home boasting to his friends of the
honour done to him, and, confident of the success of bis scheme,
prepares a gaUows for the execution of Mordecai. Tbe same
night, however, the king, unable to sleep, has the registers of
the kingdom read to him, and is reminded of the former service
* See Ezra and Nehemiah, §§ 2, 3, pp. 121 — 5.
t Chionicles, 5 1, p. 110 ; Ezra and Nehemiah, § 5, pp. 126, 127.

THE BOOK OF ESTHER. • 133
of Mordecai, which had never been publicly acknowledged.
Next day, when Haman presents himself, the king, still thinking
of Mordecai's service, puts the question, " What shall be done to
the man whom the king deHghts to honour?" and Haman,
flattering himself that a distinction is to be conferred on himself,
suggests a pompous procession and a royal proclamation. To
his mortification he is ordered to carry out his own programme
in honour of Mordecai ; and, coming in to the banquet after his
degrading task, he is denounced by Esther as the enemy of her
people, and is immediately hurried away to be executed on the
gaUows which he had prepared for Mordecai.
An edict is then despatched, empowering the Jews, in all
places of the empire, to stand for their defence on the day
appointed for theH massacre ; and on that day, and in Susa the
capital on the succeeding day also, they take up arms and inflict
a bloody vengeance on their enemies, celebrating their success
in a general rejoicing. Thus, it is explained, originated the
feast of Purim, or lots, to commemorate the deliverance of the
Jewish nation from the ruin which Haman had cast lots to com
pass ; and Esther and Mordecai ordained that besides the two
days of rejoicing, a day of fasting and mourning should be
observed as part of the celebration.
3. Historical Character. — The truth of the story told in this
Book of Esther is attested by the subsistence of tbe feast of
Purim among the Jews to the present day. Without some such
great national occurrence as is here related, the introduction of
such a feast and its observance by the whole race cannot be
explained. In the Second Book of Maccabees it is already
spoken of as "the day of Mordecai," and Josephus also refers
to it. No other satisfactory account can be given of its origin
than that contained in this book ; and the appeal of the writer to
the "book of the chronicles of the kings of Media and Persia"
(x. 2) implies that the occurrence was one of public notoriety.
It has been objected that the narrative contains historical
improbabUities, and that the writer betrays ignorance of the cus
toms of the Persian court ; but in these respects the credibUity
of the writer is confirmed and not shaken by more perfect know
ledge. The time at which the events are said to have occurred
was eminently opportune ; for the great gathering of princes and
nobles at Susa in the third year of the reign of Xerxes would
agree with the mustering of his forces before undertaking the
war with Greece, and the blank that is left till his seventh year
covers the time of that disastrous expedition. All that is here
related of Ahasuerus is in keeping with his character as described
in history. He was capricious in temper, extravagant in his

J.34 BOOK BY BOOK.
habits, overweening in pride, and much under the influence of
court favourites, male and female.
From Persian authors nothing can be learned regarding this
king's Hfe after the sixth year of his reign, and Greek writers
who treat of his times concern themselves with the pubHc events
bearing on the history of their own country ; so that the Book of
Esther, giving a glimpse of his domestic Hfe, does not receive
direct confirmation from these sources. The details which it fur
nishes are, however, in keeping with aU that we otherwise know;
and the minute carefulness in such matters as Hsts of names, and
the accuracy of the particulars as to the usages of the court of
Persia are proof that the writer was not drawing upon his fancy,
and are in marked contrast with the inaccuracies of certain of the
apocryphal books. Though, of course, we must recognise the
spirit of a Jewish writer in recording the signal deliverance of
his nation, there is, on the whole, no reason to doubt the accu
racy of the account which he gives of the occurrences.
4. Religious Significance. — A book which has for its object to
record the triumph of the Jewish people over their heathen
enemies was bound to be received by them with unusual favour.
There were not wanting those among them at an early time who
discountenanced the spirit in which the feast of Purim was
observed, and presumably objected to the tendency of the book ;
yet the people, as a whole, becoming more exclusive as their
separation from the world became more marked, magnified the
feast and gave corresponding respect to the book which relates
its institution,."
But in proportion as the Jews esteemed the Book of Esther,
and for the very reasons that enhanced its value in their esteem,
Christian writers depreciated it, and hesitated to accept it as part
of canonical Scripture. Luther plainly gave it as his opinion
that it would be better excluded from the Canon, and said of it
and the Second Book of Maccabees that he would gladly wish
they had never been written. The objection taken by him and
others to the book is that it fudaizes too much, some even say
that it breathes a spirit of pride and revenge. There is no doubt
that the tone of the book is very different from that of the older
Hebrew writings, and little is said of the Divine providence in
the events recorded. The king of Persia is mentioned some
one hundred and eighty-seven times, while, as has been often
remarked, the name of God does not once occur.
On the other hand, there are valuable moral lessons in the
book ; the conduct of Esther and Mordecai would be inexpheable
without a belief on their part in God's providence, and a reliance
on His power and faithfulness ; and the cause of the quarrel

THE BOOK OF ESTHER. 135
between Haman and Mordecai was the scrupulous regard of the
latter for his own reHgion. We are not to expect the high spirit
of Christianity in a book written at the time and amid the cir
cumstances Hi which the Book of Esther was produced. We
aHeady see in the Books of Chronicles, Ezra, and Nehemiah, the
beginning of the tendency to Rabbinic legahsm ; and the book
before us in Hke manner bears traces of the process by which the
Jewish people, deprived of the guidance of prophecy and no
longer poHtieaUy independent, passed into that narrow exclusive
ness which marked the later Judaism. What Haman urged
against the Jews of his day, that ' ' their laws are diverse from
aU people " (Hi, 8), became more and more theH boast and pride ;
and so, instead of celebrating Purim with humble thankfulness
for national preservation, they came to make it a tune of unseemly
reveHy and a commemoration of pride and conceit. Neverthe
less, we need not disparage the Book of Esther, which in its
graphic narrative relates the wonderful preservation from ruin
of a people who were destined to a position of which they were
unconscious and unworthy.

THE BOOK OF JOB.
1. The Book of Job is so called from the name of the man
whose history forms the subject of it. In consists of five parts.
The Prologue (chap. i. — ii.). — This introduces to us a man
named Job, Hving in the Land of Uz, and describes in rapid
touches his piety and wealth and the extraordinary calamities that
befeU him. The man was " perfect and upright, and one that
feared God and eschewed evil," and his piety was reflected in the
great prosperity that attended him. Then the narrative describes
how the disinterestedness of Job's piety was called in question
in the council of heaven by the Adversary. This angel insinuated
that Job's religion was insincere, and that if the blessings show
ered on him by God were withdrawn he would disown God to
His face. Satan receives permission to afflict Job, with the
reservation that he must not touch him in his person.
In one day the man is stripped of all his possessions and
bereaved of his chUdren. Job mamfests the HveHest tokens of
grief, but his reverent submission to God remains unshaken.
" In aU this Job sinned not nor ascribed wrong to God " (ch. i.).
Again the heavenly council convenes and again the Lord speaks of
his servant Job with approval, and upbraids the Adversary for
instigating Him to bring undeserved affliction upon him. Satan's
answer is ready : the trial did not touch Job close enough ; let
God touch him in his own bone and flesh and he would disown
Him to His face. The Adversary receives permission to afflict
Job himself, with the reservation that he shall spare his life.
Straightway Job is smitten with sore boils, the leprosy called
elephantiasis. His deeper afflictions only reveal greater deeps
in Job's reverent piety. " We receive good at the hand of God,
and shaU we not also receive evU ? " (ch. ii.)
Then the narrative informs us how Job's three friends, having
heard of his calamities, come to condole with him. They are
struck dumb at the sight of his great afflictions. Moved by the
sympathising presence of his friends, Job ¦ loses bis self-control
and breaks out into a passionate cry for death (iii.).

THE BOOK OF JOB. 137
2. The Debate between Job and his Friends (chap. iv. — xxxi. (as
also chap, iii.), written in poetry). — This part comprises a series
of speeches in which the problem of Job's afflictions and the rela
tion of evU or suffering to the righteousness of God and the con
duct of men is discussed. The theory of the friends is that afflic
tion impHes previous sin on the part of the sufferer, though in the
case of a good man such as Job it is meant to wean him from evil
stUl clinging to him; they therefore exhort bim to repentance, and
hold up a bright future before him. Job replies that his sufferings
are due to sin, of which he is innocent ; God wrongly holds him
guUty and afflicts him. And, taught by his own history to survey
the course of providence in the world more closely, he faUs to per
ceive that inseparable connection between sin and suffering which
the three friends insisted on ; the providence of God is not, in fact,
administered on such a principle. Job agreed with his friends in
holding that providence ought to be so conducted ; hence he missed
the righteousness of God in the rule of the world, and this threw
his mind into the greatest perplexity regarding God,' and
tempted him to disown Him, as Satan had predicted he would do.
The discussion between Job and his friends consists of three
cHcles of speeches : (i.) chap. iv. — xiv. ; (ii.) chap. xv. — xxi. ; (Hi.)
chap. xxii. — xxxi. Each of these circles comprises six speeches,
one by each of the friends, with a reply from Job. In the last
round, however, the third disputant, Zophar, fails to speak.
This is a confession of defeat ; and Job, left victor in the strife,
resumes his parable and carries it through a series of chapters.
in which, with a profound pathos, he contrasts his former great
ness with his present humiliation, protests before heaven his
innocence of aU offences, and adjures God to reveal to him the
cause of his afflictions (chap. xxiv. — xxxi.).
3. The Speeches of Elihu (chap, xxxii. — xxxvii.). — A youthful
bystander named EHhu, who hitherto had been a sUent Hstener
to the debate, here intervenes, not without mamfold apologies
for presuming to speak in the presence of such aged and wise
counseUors. He is dissatisfied both with Job and his friends.
He -is shocked at the charges of unrighteousness brought by the
former against God, and indignant with the three friends because
they have failed to answer Job and show him to be in the wrong.
His object in speaking is " to give right to his Maker," and in
a long discourse he expresses his abhorrence of Job's sentiments,
controverts his views on God's providence and the meaning of
afflictions, and insists more than the friends had done that afflic
tions proceed from the goodness of God, who by their means
seeks to wean men from evil (chap. xxxiH. 29, 30 ; xxxvi. 8 — 10).
4. The Speeches of the Lord out of the Storm (chap, xxxviii. —

138

BOOK BY BOOK.

xiii. 6). — In reply to Job's repeated demand that God would
appear and solve the riddle of his sufferings, the Lord answers
him out of the storm. The answer is altogether unHke what Job
had expected. The speaker does not condescend to refer to Job's
individual problem. The inteUectual solution of problems can
never be the question between God and His servants ; He requHes
from them submission and trust even amidst inteUectual darkness,
and it is only a deeper sense of what He is that can produce this,
and this deeper sense He awakens in Job's mind. In a series pf
splendid pictures from the material creation and from animal
life He makes all the glory of His being to pass before Job. The
sufferer is humbled, and lays his hand upon his mouth. Such
thoughts of God had never before filled his heart ; his former
knowledge of Him was Hke that learned from hearsay. Now
his eye saw Him, and he repented his former words in dust and
ashes (chat), xl. 4 ; xiH. 5).
5. The Epilogue, also prose (chap. xiii. 7 — 17). — This describes
how Job, having humbled himseH before God, and risen to a
higher knowledge of Him, is restored to a prosperity double that
which he enjoyed before ; his former friends again gather round
him ; he is anew blessed with children, and (Hes old and full of
days. With the- exception of the discourses of Elihu, the con
nection of which with the poem in its original form may be liable
to doubt, aU these five parts appear original elements of the work
as it came from the hand of the author, though it is possible that
there might be slight additions in the second and fourth divi
sions. 6. The kind of literary composition to which the Book of Job
belongs has been a subject of discussion both in ancient and
modern times. Some have held that the book was historical in
aH its parts, that the events narrated happened as they are de
scribed, and that the speeches of Job and his friends were spoken
as we have them. Others have maintained that the book was a
simple creation of the author's mind, with no historical founda
tion, being a didactic poem. While a third view is that, though
mainly a creation of the author's mind, the poem embodies an
historical tradition, which the writer made use of as suitable for
his moral purpose.
Among the Jews in early times the opinion seems to have been
general that the book was historical. Some scholars, however,
held a different view. In the Talmud (a.d. 450) a rabbi is aUuded
to who had said, " A Job existed not, and was not created; he
is a parable." And the great Rabbi Maimonides (died 1204)
advocated tho opinion that " Job is a parable, meant to exhibit
the views of mankind in regard to Providence." In the Christian

THE BOOK OF JOB. 139
Church also the prevailing view was to the effect that the book
was historical. Luther, however, while admitting an historical
basis, considered that the facts had been poeticaUy treated. In
his " Table Talk " he says, " I hold the Book of Job to be real
history ; but that everything so happened and was so done I
do not beheve, but think that some ingenious, pious, and learned
man' composed it as it is." This view, however, did not commend
itseH to other Protestant writers, who thought such an opinion
scarcely reconcUeable with just views of Scripture. Fred. Span-
heim, in his " History of Job " (1670), maintained that " Job, if
it be not history, is a fraud of the writer." Such a judgment
would condemn as frauds not only the majority of modern compo
sitions, but the dramatic andparabohc writings of all ages.
HappUy a juster and wider conception of the nature of Scrip
ture now prevaUs, and we are prepared to find in it any form of
composition which it is natural for men to employ, and which
may be effective for its moral purpose and fitted to influence the
minds of men. The general view in modern times coincides with
that of Luther, that the book reposes on an historical tradition,
which the author has used and embellished, and made tbe
vehicle for conveying the moral instruction which it was his
object to teach. There are still some scholars, however, who
regard the book as a truly poetical creation, and this view is held
even by writers of tbe most conservative opinions in regard to
Scripture, such as Hengstenberg.
7. There are several things which show that the book is not
literal history, e.g. the views of the heavenly council given in the
prologue (chap. i. ii. ; comp. 1 Kings xxii. 19), and the long
addresses put into the mouth of the Jjord-( chap, asxvin. — xiii.) ;
the symbolical .numbers Hrhree "and seven used to describe Job's
ilocks andhis children (i. 2, 3,), and the fact that his possessions
are exactly doubled to him on his restoration, whUe he again
receives seven sons and three daughters, precisely as before
(xiH. 12, 13). The description of the incidence of his calamities,
too, is dramatic and ideal (i. 1 3. seq.), while the profound thought
and highly-wrought imagery in the speeches of Job and his
friends show that, so far from being the extemporaneous utter
ances of three or four persons casually brought together, they
are the elaborate and leisurely production of a writer of the
highest genius.
On the other hand, it is not quite probable that the book is a
purely poetical invention. The allusion in Ezekiel (chap. xiv.
14) can hardly be to our present book, but rather to a tradition
which represented Job as a man famed for piety in ancient
times. And it is the manner of Hebrew writers to attach theH

140 BOOK BY BOOK.
works to the name of some great personage of former times, as
the author of Ecclesiastes makes Solomon the Hving embodi
ment of the wisdom which he describes. It is probable, there
fore, that the writer of Job, having a moral purpose in view,
revived a tradition slumbering in the minds of the people, find
ing it suitable to his design and more Hkely to interest^ men
because not altogether unfamiliar to them. NaturaUy it is not
possible to decide now what precise elements belonged to the tra
dition. A story could scarcely exist which did not contain the nam 4
of the hero, and the name " Job " is no doubt historical. In all
probabiHty the tradition included Job's great prosperity and
power, his unparalleled and inexplicable sufferings, and possibly
also his restoration ; probably, too, the fact that the mystery of his
sufferings engaged the attention of the wise men of his country
and formed the subject of discussion. It might be that Uz, the
country of Job, and the names of his three friends, and the story
of his wife, belonged to the tradition, though this is less certain.
Tbe book has been called an epic by some, by others a drama,
more particularly a tragedy, and by others still a didactic poem.
That the poem has a didactic purpose is undeniable. It is equaUy
evident that it contains many elements of the drama, such as
dialogue, and a plot with an entanglement, development, and
solution. Much in the action may rightly be called tragic, but
the happy conclusion is at variance with the conception of a
proper tragedy. Any idea of representing his work on a stage
never crossed the author's mind; his object was to instruct his
countrymen, to sustain their faith in God, and inspire them with
hope in the future. Though the book cannot be called a drama, it
is certainly dramatic. The action, however, is internal and mental,
being the varying moods of a great soul struggling with the
mysteries of its fate, and not trying external situations. This
action is reaUy the thing of interest in the book, because through
if the answer is worked out to the prediction of tbe Adversary,
" He wiU disown thee to thy face." This prediction is falsified.
Job, though he faUs into sin in the course of the debate with
bis friends, continues to cling to his faith in God, which becomes
stronger as the dispute proceeds, untU finaUy his mind regains
its peace through the appearance and words of the Lord.
The Meaning of the Book. — It has been found very difficult to
dispose aU the parts of the book under a single conception, and
some writers have contented themselves with stating a few of
the more prominent truths which it teaches. The prologue, for
instance, shows that even pious men may be visited with severe
afflictions, which it is wrong to consider due to special sins on
their part, or to regard as signs of God's displeasure ; they may

THE BOOK OF JOB. 141
be rather permitted by God in order to try the pious mind, and
to elevate it through the trial to a higher degree of godliness.
Again, the impatience of Job under his afflictions, and his imgunp-
ing of the righteousness of God, teach us that it is presumption
in man thus to seek to call God to give an account of His doings,
seeing the providence of God is beyond the mind of man to
fathom, whose true wisdom is to fear the Lord and eschew evil ;
whUe the final history of Job, his restoration and peace, shows
that God will at last deHver the pious sufferer if he perseveres in
his righteousness, or H, having fallen into sinful murmuring
under his sufferings, he repents of his evU.
These are aU great truths clearly taught in the book ; it is
probable, however, that some more definite and single lesson is
to be discovered in it. The books of Scripture have generally a
practical aim, explainable from the circumstances of the time at
which they were written, and they have usuaUy the pubHc design
of instructing or consoHng the people, or of sustaining their faith
and hope amidst theH trials. The Book of Job was evidently
written during a time of great distress, and though it be the
sufferings of an individual that are described, the sufferer must
be held to be a type of the pious sufferers of his time, or even of
the suffering nation of Israel. The disasters of the ExUe and
the prolonged miseries which foUowed it, were felt to be due to
the sins of tbe people, and when the nation as a whole was con
sidered, this was the true explanation. Yet there were many
pinus individuals in the nation on whom great calamities had
fallen because they were involved in the sins of others. Their
sufferings were due to sins of which they had not themselves
been guilty, the sins of those before them or those around them.
This singular fact, when reflected on, became a fruitful source
of profound religious thoughts. When the fact that the godly
suffered for the offences of the unjust and rebelHous was coupled
with the other fact, or with the hope that by the perseverance
and the efforts of these godly sufferers transgressors would be
converted from theH evU and restored, there was a step taken
towards a doctrine of vicarious suffering. On the other hand,
the feeling of the righteous that they were suffering because of
the sins of those before them would be apt to He upon them
with a crushing weight, paralyzing all individual effort. They
expressed this feeling by saying, " The fathers ate sour grapes,
and the children's teeth are set on edge, ' ' and prophets Hke Ezekiel
contend against such a state of mind, and endeavour to free men
from the shackles of this belief, and to impress on them the
truth of individual responsibility to God (Ezek. xviii. 2).
NaturaUy, when the false exaggerations of the doctrine that

142 BOOK BY BOOK.
the sins of the fathers were visited on the children had, begun to
be overcome, and the truth acquired clearness that God's deal
ings with each man and with each generation of men bore
immediately on their own conduct, and were directed towards
their own good, the question arose, What is God's providential
purpose in the sufferings of the righteous ? And this is the
question to which the answer is given in the Book of Job. The
answer is not a universal or a conclusive one, it is merely one
for the eireumstances of the time, an answer additional to other
answers aHeady known ; and the answer is, that tbe sufferings
of the righteous may be a trial of theH faith, which, if success
fully borne, wUl yield the peaceable fruits of righteousness, and
lift them up into fuUer knowledge of God and more assured
peace. This truth is taught directly by the author of the book in the
prologue (chap. i. H.), and it is Ulustrated in the history which
Job's mind passes through as reflected in the debate with his
friends, and finaUy as instructed by God. The debate of Job
with his friends regarding the meaning of evU contributes
nothing positively, but it shows that the old views advocated by
the friends are untenable, and thus clears tbe foundation on
which the writer erects his own principle. Both Job and bis
friends come to the discussion of the question of Job's afflictions,
ignorant of the true meaning of his sufferings as disclosed to us
in the prologue. The three friends come armed with the old
belief that wherever there is great suffering there must have
been great sin in the sufferer to account for it. Afflictions from
the hand of God, however, are not meant to destroy him, but to
arrest him in his evU way ; and they earnestly exhort Job to lay
his chastisement to heart and seek unto God, promising him a
future more brilliant and blessed than his past. Job agreed
with the three friends in the beHef that sufferings from the hand
of God came on none but on those whom He held guilty of
having greatly sinned ; hence, conscious of his innocence, he
concluded that God held him guUty wrongly and was become
his enemy.
Hence he has a double conflict to maintain : first, the merely
dialectic one against his friends ; and secondly, the far more
profoundly agitating one with God, which calls forth the deepest
religious emotions and the loftiest aspirations of his heart. The
contention of his friends he is able to refute on both its sides.
They insisted that sufferings were experienced only where there
had been sin. Job meets this on one side with his own case, a
man suffering though innocent; and, on the other side, he points
to many a wicked man whose Hfe is prosperous and his death

THE BOOK OF JOB. , 143
easy, whose bier is foUowed in honour to the grave, and on
whose dust the clods of the valley He softly. When the author
allows Job thus to refute the beHef of the invariable connection
of suffering with sin, we may be sure that it was his purpose to
cast discredit on that theory and show that it was not a solution
of the problem, universally appHcable. And having disposed of
it he substitutes for it the principle that sufferings may be a trial
of the faith of the godly.
That they are such a trial, and how they are so, is exhibited
in the struggle which Job's mUid passes through. The author
of Job is an artist and a great poet, but though he gives ideal
¦intensity and grandeur to the part which his hero plays, he does
not create it. Probably he himself, certainly many others Hi
that disastrous time, had played it in real life. That which
made afflictions so severe a reHgious trial to the saints of that
age was just the beHef, which was held in common by Job and
his friends, that the external events of life truly reflected the
mind of God towards them : when they were prosperous they
enjoyed His favour, when under affliction they experienced His
displeasure — God rewarded every man according to his works.
This, they believed, was the case, and it ought to be the case,
they thought, under the providence of a righteous ruler of men.
Hence when things were reversed, when the wicked triumphed
and the righteous cleansed his heart in vain, their faith received
such a shock as made it totter. Probably a deeper sense of
personal unworthiness might have hushed aU murmurs of the
righteous under theH afflictions, but the prosperity of the wicked
was less easUy accounted for. And when men, as Hi Job's case,
charged such a saint, conscious of rectitude, with foul iniquities,
his conscience reclaimed against the imputation, and as he knew
no alternative, he was driven to impugn the rectitude of God in
afflicting him.
Job takes this step founding upon bis own experience, but he
goes farther. CompeUed to take a general survey of the world
and tbe Hfe of men, to meet the instances adduced by his friends,
he perceives his own experience repeated a hundred times : that
which befaUs men is in no way apportioned according to their
character : — " One dieth in his full strength,
Being wholly at ease and quiet ;
And another dieth in the bitterness of his soul,
And hath not tasted of good ;
They lie down alike in the dust,
And the worms cover them." (Ch. xxi. 23).
Thus Job's victory over his friends is not gained without

144 BOOK BY BOOK.
inflicting a mortal wound upon himself. He misses the rectitude
of God not only in his own instance but in God's general rule of
the world (chap. xxiv. 1). But this was to pluck the moral Sun
out of the heavens. This terrible thought of an unrighteous
God paralyzed Job's heart. It was not his afflictions in them
selves that dismayed, him, it was that God was unrighteous in
inflicting them : " Therefore am I troubled before bim : when I
consider, I am afraid of him. For God maketh my heart soft
(terror-stricken), and the Almighty troubleth me " (chap, xxiii.
15). And the question was not a mere speculative one, as it
might be nowadays : it was a prof oundly reHgious one. Job had
hitherto lived, as he thought, in the feUowship of a great and
righteous Person, whose gracious providence had everywhere
preserved his spirit '(chap. x. 12), and memories of this feUow
ship in the haUowed past and yearnings for its renewal again in
the present, crowd into the sufferers mind and give a deeply
religious colour and a singular pathos to aU the struggles of his
intellect. As the question of the sufferings of the righteous was not of
old a mere inteUectual one but one of practical reHgious life,
many answers are suggested to it. The answer given from the
side of God in the speeches from the storm (chap, xxxviii. seq.)
is, in the words of the Apostle : " Nay, but who art thou, 0 man,
that replieth against God ? " — although this answer is not made
by God without such a revelation of HimseH in making it as to
give it power to compose the perplexed heart. The answer with
which the pious soul stills its own trouble amidst a darkness
which it cannot pierce is : "Nevertheless I am continuaUy with
thee : thou holdest my right hand " (Psalm Ixxiii. 23), an answer
given many times in Job's speeches. These are practical answers
sufficient for the hour. Yet the reHgious mind craves for some
principle which wiU carry it through its perplexities and justify
the ways of God to man. Such a principle the author of the
book suggests in the prologue, and further Ulustrates in the
epUogue. And he allows Job to rise to a solution, which has in
it aU the elements of a universal one and satisfies the cravings
of a human heart. This solution is reached in the weU-known
passage (chap. xix. 25) : —
" But I know that my redeemer liveth,
And in after time he shall stand upon the dust,
And, after this my skin is destroyed,
And without my flesh, I shall see God."
Job's redeemer is God, and he is assured that when his disease
has brought him unto death he shall see God, no longer his

THE BOOK OF JOB. 145
enemy but in peace. To suppose that Job expects this vision
of God on this side of the grave is to contradict the whole
scope of his language throughout the book. He is assured that
his malady is mortal, and his malady was to him token of
God's displeasure and the hiding of His face. On this side of
death he shall not see God, but beyond his eyes shall behold Him.
He expresses his assurance that he shaU die under God's
chastening hand with an unvarying consistency ; he has no hope
of God's favour in this Hfe, but, assured that God knows his inno
cence, he has an invincible certainty of it in the future. Hence in
chap. xiv. the idea rises before his mind that after death he might
be restored to a new life upon the earth to enjoy God's favour :
" Oh that Thou wouldst hide me in Sheol,
That Thou wouldst keep me secret till Thy wrath be past,
That Thou wouldst appoint me a set time and remember me —
If a man die shall he live again ? —
, All the days of my appointed time would I wait till my release came ;
Thou wouldst call and I would answer Thee,
Thou wouldst have a desire to the work of Thine hands."
And in chap. xvi. 18, after appealing to the earth not to cover
his blood unjustly shed, he adds his assurance of being justified
in the future : " Even now behold my witness is in heaven, and
he that shaU vouch for me is on high." And this thrusting of
the final solution of the mysteries of God's providence beyond
the borders of this Hfe is in harmony with those other passages
where Job pushes his principles to theH proper extreme. He
shows not only that he himseH and other righteous men die
with theH righteousness unrecognised in this world, but on
the other side wicked men die in full prosperity and peace ;
in neither case is the ultimate solution seen in this Hfe.
Of course we must beware of attributing to any saint of
that age such clear conceptions of the condition after death as
subsequent revelation has given to us. Job has absolutely no
knowledge of a condition after death, except the idea common
in his day, that deceased persons descended into Sheol, the place
of the dead : "A land of darkness as darkness itself, and of the
shadow of death, without any order, and where the light is as
darkness " (chap. x.. 22 ; iH. 17 — 19). Hence his redeemer " will
stand upon the dust " ; his assurance is that though he die under
his malady, as he is certain he shaU, yet notwithstanding his
death he shall yet see God reconcUed to him, and be vindicated
by him. His assurance is a religious necessity, a postulate of
faith. Hence he rises to this lofty anticipation only for a moment,
and faUs back again into the demand to know the meaning of
his afflictions.

146 BOOK BY BOOK.
Some writers, feehng justly that Job's anticipation in chap.
xix. is the highest point to which the book reaches, have been
incHned to think that the author should have closed it here, and
that it would have been purer truth to aUow Job to go down
to the grave clasping to his breast his inextinguishable hope,
than to restore him to prosperity in this life, as he does in the
epUogue. Now it is plain that the author, when he allows Job
to postpone his vindication by God beyond bis death, does so of
purpose and fuUy understanding the meaning of what he does,
for elsewhere Job shows that the true relations of men to God,
whether righteous or wicked, many tunes do not come to liglit
in this Hfe. But reHgion requires that they shaU somehow
be brought to Hght, and therefore this can be only after
death. Now if tbe faith in a future life had been sufficiently advanced
to enable the author to show Job's vindication after death, he would
naturaUy have ended his drama in this way. But there existed
no such advanced faith or knowledge in regard to a future Hfe
in his time. The utmost that the efforts of pious spirits had
attained in his day was in occasional flights of faith to pierce
the darkness beyond this Hfe, and assure themselves that their
life with God here should not be interrupted there. But there
was no such clearness of knowledge as to afford room for a
scene of reconciliation and union between God and tbe pious soul.
And yet the purpose of the writer requHed that he should verify
Job's anticipations, because the object of his book was to show
that afflictions are a trial leading to higher blessedness ; and hence
he is obliged to aUow Job's hope to be verified in this Hfe. It
is to be observed, however, that the desHe of Job's heart was a
reHgious one entirely, that he should see God, and this desire
was granted in the revelation of God out of the storm ; the
subsequent prosperity was but a coroUary to this and no part
of it.
8. The Unity of ihe Book. — Objections have been made to the
prologue and epUogue with the view of showing that these
were no parts of the original book. The objections are of
very little weight ; some historical introduction must have pre
ceded the book, and there is no reason to suppose that our
present- introduction was not the primary one. The objection to
the epUogue is that it f aUs into the old doctrine of retribution
in this life, which it is the object of the book to discredit. This
objection would teU also against the divme speeches, and the
religious composure in this Hfe which Job is enabled through
them to reach. '
The prevailing view among modern scholars is that the speeches

THE BOOK OF JOB. 147
of Elihu (ch. xxxii. — xxxvH.) do not belong to the original book,
but are the insertion of a later time. The grounds of this
view are such as these: — 1. That EUhu is unknown both to
the prologue and epUogue ; 2. That Job makes no reply to bim ;
3. That his citations from the book are so exact as to betray a
reader of the poem ; 4. That the language of his speeches
shows signs of deterioration, marking a later age, and that he
is characterised by a mannerism quite unlike the other speakers ;
5. That his speeches destroy the connection between the chal
lenge of Job (ch. xxxi. 35 seq.) and the reply of the Almighty ;
and 6, finaUy, that EUhu occupies vHtually the same grounds
with the friends, and that there is nothing in what he advances
against Job which the latter would have regarded as any real
answer to his complaints. It is also argued that where EUhu
differs from the three friends, it is rather Hi a more advanced
view of sin and a greater insistence upon the goodness of God in
his afflictions, as weU as in a deeper repugnance to the language of
Job ; thingsbetraying a later date, and suggesting that the original
book perplexed pious minds by its extraordinary boldness. The
character of Elihu is very distinct. He is of a very devout
nature ; his reverence of God and fear before Him are very great.
It is this feeling that makes hiin come forward to meet the asser
tions of Job — he will ascribe right to his Maker (xxxvi. 3).
This reverent sensitiveness in regard to God constitutes the chief
charm of EHbu's speeches, and the book would be decidedly
poorer for the want of them.
9. Age and Authorship ofthe Booh. — The age of the book must
not be confounded with the age of Job himseH. Job is repre
sented as Hving in the patriarchal times, and the author of the
book has skUfuUy, thrown the colours of this age over his com
position. Thus the divine names which the speakers employ are
the patriarchal ones : God, God Almighty, but not Jehovah (cf .
Ex. vi. 2, 3), though the author uses this name itseH, xxviii. 28.
Like the great forefathers of Israel, Job is rich in cattle (chap.
i. 3 ; Gen. xH. 16) ; he is also the priest of his family (chap. i. 5),
and offers the patriarchal "burnt-offering; " and aU historical
events aUuded to are those of the patriarchal world (xvHi. 15;
xxH. 15). But though Job himself belonged to this age, the
author is an IsraeHte, and the book is a reflection of the
reHgious Hfe and religious thought in Israel.
The date of such a book as Job, which contains few aUusions
to historical events, ean be determined only approximately.
The literature of Israel is, more than any other literature,
national. It was the nation or people that was in covenant with
Jehovah, and hence it is the destinies of this subject, the people,
l2

148 BOOK BY BOOK.
that the religious mind foUows with keenest interest. The literary
compositions of any age reflect the conditions and state of mind
of the people of that age, and the question to be put is : Of
what period in the chequered history of the people is the Book
of Job a reflection ? The opinion expressed by the Talmud that
Moses was the author of Job is unworthy of any attention.
The antique colour of the book suggested to uncritical minds
that it was an ancient composition, and such minds are always
ready to ascribe an anonymous writing to some weU-known name.
Neither the Mosaic age, however, nor the times that foUowed it —
times of stirring enterprise and warfare — were favourable for the
production of a work of deep reflection such as Job. And there
is evidence in the book itself that the author was famihar with
writings usuaUy ascribed to the age of David ; the passage chap.
vH. 1 7, betrays a knowledge of Psalm viH.
The earliest period to which the book can be assigned is the
age of Solomon, and Luther appears to have placed it in this
period, a view in which he is foUowed by many writers still.
If we look into the great eoUections of the Proverbs, however,
such as chap. xxv. — xxix. or x. — xxii., we find that though their
purpose is to exhibit the operations of God's providence, there is
not a trace in them of the disquieting problems of providence
which fill the Book of Job. History had not yet forced such
questions on men's minds. The collection Prov. i. — ix. probably
belongs to the seventh century, but Job xxviii. is in all prob-
abUity posterior to it. In Prov. viii. wisdom, i.e. a general and
satisfying conception of God's operations in the world, is held
out as attainable by man ; in Job xxviii. such comprehension
of providence is spoken of as beyond the range of man's mind.
The moral disorders of the world, the sorrowful destinies of many
pious men baffled the religious mind of the time.
These two general facts, then, first, that questions of pro
vidence have entered upon a new phase, and that not its general
course but its problems absorb men's attention ; and secondly,
that a condition of great disorder and misery forms the back
ground of the poem — both point to a late period in the history
of Israel as that to which the book is due. When we read such
passages as these: "The earth is given into the hands of the
wicked ; He covereth the faces of the judges thereof " (ix. 24) ;
" The tabernacles of tyrants prosper, and they that provoke God
are secure" (vii. 6); " Out of the city the dying groan, and the
soul of the wounded crieth out, yet God regardeth not the
wrong" (xxiv. 12) ; and much more of the same kind, we
feel that the picture is one of the public condition of the
world, and not the mere creation of a sick and gloomy mind.

THE BOOK OF JOB. 149
There are other arguments, also, whieh suggest a period not
earlier than the Exile, e.g. the very lofty doctrine of God ; and
the inwardness of the morality taught (chap, xxxi.), and the
points of contact which the book presents with Jeremiah an<i
the ideas of his age, and the parallel between Job and the
servant of the Lord in Isaiah xl. — lxvi. Most writers have
felt that Job iii. and Jer. xx. 14 seq. are not independent of one
another. Job iii. is highly elaborate and artistic ; but the
passage in Jeremiah, just on account of its greater simplicity
and naturalness, is probably to be considered the original. The
coincidences of Job with Isaiah xl. — lxvi. are very numerous.
These chapters are now usually considered to belong to the
period of the Exile, and the great probability is that the Book cf
Job owes its origin to the trials and religious perplexities of the
same period.
We have been left Hi complete ignorance who the author of the
book is, just as we are ignorant who the authors of many other
parts of Scripture are. The book has been attributed to Job
himseH, Elihu, Moses, Solomon, Heman the Ezrahite, author of
Psalm lxxxvHi., Isaiah, Hezekiah, author of the hymn Isaiah
xxxvui., Baruch, the friend of Jeremiah, and others. Conjec
ture is entirely vain. No literature contains so many great
anonymous works as that of Israel. It was only the prophets
that usuaUy put theH names to theH writings. The writers of
the Old Testament did not speak their own words but those of
the Lord, and having delivered theH message they passed out of
sight, forgetting themselves and being speedily forgotten in name
by others.

THE BOOK OF PSALMS.
1 . The Psalter forms a part of tbe third great division of the
Hebrew scriptures known as the Kethubhim or Hagiographa.
Both from its intrinsic importance and also from its liturgical
use it commonly occupied the first place in this division, and
hence the Old Testament was summed up under the three names
of the Law, the Prophets and the Psalms (Luke xxiv. 44).*
In Hebrew Bibles the Psalter is caUed Tehillim, i.e. "The
Praises," and a more suitable title could hardly have been
chosen; for the psalms ring with the voice of joy and thanks
giving ; and even those in which the confession of sin, or the
waU of sorrow, or the cry for help predominate are not all gloom.
The struggle ends in the hope and the assurance of deUverance,
and the heart breaks forth into praise.
A yet earlier title, given, however, not to the whole, but
only to a portion of the Psalter, is TephiUoth, "Prayers." This
appHes apparently to the coUection comprised in the first two
books ; for the subscription to Psalm lxxii., with which the
second book closes, informs us that " The prayers of David the
son of Jesse are ended," an intimation apparently that all
David's psalms, so far as they were then known, had here been
gathered together.
It is noticeable that only one psalm in those two books, the
17th, is separately caUed "A Prayer," and only one in the
whole coUection, the 145th, is separately caUed "A Praise ;" but
tbe two general titles "prayers" and " praises " admirably sum
up the whole character and iatention of the Psalter, as the
Liturgy and Hymn-book of the Old Testament Church. Our
* The order indeed is not universal, for in the Talmud Ruth precedes
the Psalms (the ordt-r being Buth, Psalms, Job, Proverbs) and in the Mas-
soreth and the SpaDish MSS. Chronicles is placed first ; but in the German
MSS. and in most printed editions the order is PsalmB, Proverbs, Job ; then
the five MegiUoth, as they are called, viz Canticles, Buth, Lamentations,
Ecclesiastes, Ksther ; ami then Daniel, Ezra, Nehemiah, Chroniclts.

THE BOOK" OF PSALMS. 151
own English title "Psalms," comes to us through the Latin word
from the Septuagint translators, who styled the whole coUection
¦f-aXixoi, as denoting that, in accordance with their use in the
liturgy of the- Temple and the Synagogue, these sacred poems
were sung with a musical accompaniment.*
2. Division ofthe Psalter.— The Psalter as it stands in our Hebrew
Bibles is divided into five books, the close of each of the first
four being marked by a doxology, and the 150th Psalm itself
forming the doxology which concludes the last, and indeed the
whole collection. These books are distributed as foUows : —
Book L, Psalms i. — xii. ; Book IL, Psalms xiii. — lxxii. ; Book
IIL, Psalms Ixxiii. — Ixxxix. ; Book IV., Psalms xc. — cvi. ; Book
V., Psalms cvH. — cl.. This division, according to the Midrash
on Psalm i. 1, foUows that of the Pentateuch : "Moses gave to
the Israehtes the five Books of the Law, and, corresponding to
these, David gave them the Book of Psalms, which consists
of five books ; " and in Hke manner Hippolytus, quoted by
Epiphanium, calls the Psalter "a second Pentateuch." The
division, it must be confessed, is somewhat artificial as regards
the Fourth and FHth Books. At the end of each of the first
three books the doxology stands appropriately as marking the
end of certain groups or coUections of psalms, but there is no
appropriateness in the division which separates the 106th Psalm
from the 105th. Consequently the doxology must have been
placed here by the last coUector or editor in order to make up
the fivefold division. In 1 Chron. xiv. 35, 36, there is a quota
tion with some variation, from verses 47 and 48 of the 106th
Psalm, the latter of which forms the doxology. But the chro
nicler, instead of giving it " Let aU the people say, Amen," turns
the ascription into an historical fact, "And aU the people said,
Amen." It is doubtful therefore whether the division between
these books existed in his tune, for he treats the first part of the
doxology as an integral part of the Psalm.
ItwUl be observed that a larger number of psalms are by
theH titles ascribed to David than to any other author : aU in
the FHst Book, except four that are anonymous; nearly aU in
the second haH of the Second Book ; one in the Third Book ;
two in the fourth ; and fifteen in the FHth ; in aU seventy- three
psalms, or nearly one-haH of the whole coUection.
Next to him come David's singers : (1) The Sons of Korah,
to whom twelve psalms are assigned (or eleven if we regard
Psalms xHi. and xHH. as one) ; (ii) Asaph, who is also the reputed
author of twelve psalms. He seems to have ranked only second
* The word "psalter" is strictly the name of a musical instrument;
whether it was invented in Greece or in Babylon is uncertain.

152 BOOK BY BOOK.
to David as a master of sacred song (1 Chron. xv. 7 — 21, xvi.
5 : Neh. xii. 46) ; (iii) Heman (mentioned 2 Chron. xx. 1 9 as a
famous musician), who as a member of the Korahite guUd is
said to have written Psalm lxxviii., for this seems to be the
meaning of the double title of that psalm : (iv) Ethan the
Ezrahite, who, like Heman, is named only as the author of one
psalm, the 89th. The only other authors to whom particular
psalms are ascribed are Moses, who is said to have written one
psalm, the 90th, acknowledged on aU hands to be a psalm of great
antiquity, and Solomon, who is said to have written two, the
72nd and the 127th.
There are indeed certain variations in the titles as they stand
in the Septuagint and in other ancient versions. For instance,
in the title of Ps. cxxxvii. the LXX. add the name of Jeremiah
to that of David. In Psalms cxxxviii., cxlvi., exlvii., cxlviii.,
they gave Haggai and Zechariah as the authors, the three last
being anonymous in the Hebrew text. In lxxi. they add to the
name of David, " Of the sons of Jonadab and of those that were
first led captive," thus indicating theH belief that this was a
psalm dating from the Captivity, whilst retaining the name of
David as they found it in their copies. We see then that by far
the larger number of the psalms were traditionally held to be
David's, or to have been written by Levitical singers appointed
by him for the musical service of the Temple and inspired by
his influence and example ; and hence the whole coUection came
to be styled "Psalms of David," just as the Book of Proverbs
was caUed "Proverbs of Solomon," though a large part of it
belongs to a later time.
3. The Formation and Arrangement of the Psalter. — When we
come to examine the Psalter more closely one of the first things
that strikes us is that besides its division into five books it con
sists of a number of smaller coUections. Groups of psalms
supposed to be by the same author and having a common purpose
are placed together. Thus the First Book consists almost
exclusively of psalms ascribed to David ; the second of a series of
Psalms by the sons of Korah, and another series by David ;
the third has a group by Asaph, foUowed by a second group of
Korahite psalms ; in the fourth, Psalms xcii. — c. form one great
prophetical anthem ; in the fifth we have besides "thePUgrim
Songs" (cxx. — cxxxii.) and the " HaUelujah Psalms," the
group cxiii. — cxvUi. which is called "tbe HaUel." AU these
were originaUy no doubt separate collections, smaller hymn-books,
which were at length combined so as to form our present Psalter.
In the main, as might be expected, the arrangement is chrono
logical. The Fourth and Fifth Books carry upon their face

THE BOOK OF PSALMS. 153
the evidence of a later date. They are fuU of allusions to the
Exile and to the Eeturn. The earlier books are of a different
character. We may assign the first two in the main to David
and his contemporaries. The Third represents a later period
of Jewish song and may have been coUected by "the men of
Hezekiah." But the chronological order is not always observed.
There is one psalm in the Second Book, the 44th, which is
certainly not of David's time, and has been brought down by
many critics to the time of the Maccabees. In Hke manner the
74th and the 79th in the ThHd Book have been held to refer to
the destruction and profanation of the Temple by Antiochus Epi
phanes. On the other hand, tbe 1 0 1 st and the 1 1 Oth Psalms in the
Fourth Book are almost certainly Davidic. StiU in the main, as
I have said, the earlier psalms are to be found in the earlier
books, the later in those with which the collection closes.
Let us now look at the phenomena presented by the severalbooks
with special reference to the supposed authorship of the different
psalms. The psalms in the First Book, except four, the 1st,
the 2nd, the 10th, and the 33rd, which are anonymous, are
ascribed, as has been said, to David. But the 1st Psalm was
commonly regarded as a general introduction to the book, and
according to an ancient arrangement the 2nd Psalm was united
with it, which would account for the latter having no title.
Similarly in the version of the LXX. the 10th Psalm forms one
with the 9th, and the alphabetical arrangement, whieh though
broken is stiU discernible running through both psalms, lends
colour to the theory that they were originally one poem. On the
other hand, the LXX. give Psalm xxxiii. to David.
At the end of the Second Book we read, " The Prayers' of
David the son of Jesse are ended." In point of fact Psalms
H. — lxxi. are attributed to David with the exception of three
which are anonymous in the Hebrew, but at least two of them
are by the LXX. given to the same author. But the first half
of this book (Psalms xHi. — 1.) is a collection of Korahite poems.
It is scarcely credible that the subscription could have been
added by the general editor. He would not have inserted the
twelve Korahite psalms so as to break the series of Davidic
hymns, which but for this insertion would run on continuously
from the beginning of the First Book (Pisalm iii.) to the end of
the Second. There is another important circumstance to be
noted. In the First Book the Divine Name almost exclusively
employed is Jehovah (Yahveh), whereas the abstract term Elohim
is quite exceptional. In the Second Book, on the contrary, the use
of Elohim is the rule and the use of Jehovah the exception. That
this is deliberately done is shown for instance in such a Psalm

154 BOOK BY BOOK.
as the 45th, where we have the repetition of the name, " God, thy
God " instead of " Jehovah, thy God." StiU more striking is the
change where the same psalm occurs in both books. Thus the
14th Psalm appears with slight alterations as the 53rd, and the
latter portion of the 40th as the 70th, and the two editions are
distinguished by ihe Tespeotive use of the two names. This
cannot poesibly he due to the same redactor, who would never
have thought of arbitrarUy substituting the one name for the
other in the two editions. It is evident that this was done as a
part of a general plan. It is doubtful even whether the editor
of the second collection could have had the first before him when
he was preparing his own.
4. But were aU the psalms in the First Book with the excep
tion above mentioned written by David ? When we come to
examine their contents and compare them with the historical
notices which form part of the inscriptions in several instances,
we shaU find reason to question the accuracy of the traditional
statements. The 9th and 10th Psalms obviously refer to a state
of things to which we find no paraUel in David's history.
Heathen enemies have been in the land and have cruelly
oppressed Israel ; but God has executed judgment upon them
and overthrown them, so that their very memorial has perished.
The time is subsequent to the removal of the ark to Zion, for
God is described as " dwelling in Zion," and the poet declares
he wiU praise Him " in the gates of the daughter of Zion."
But the cHcumstances are not those of David, if we are to take
the history in the Books of Samuel as a guide to us. Again
Psalms xx. and xxi. could hardly have been written by David :
they are " not spoken by a king, but addressed to the king by
his people." " To suppose that David wrote for the people the
words in which they should express their feelings towards his
throne is to sacrifice the fresh spontaneity of the Psalms to mere
theory." Psalm xxii. describes sufferings such as David never
knew. Never in any of his persecutions by Saul was be reduced
to straits such as these, and though this is strictly a Messianic
psalm, stiU we have no right to assume that it is so entirely
predictive as to correspond to nothing in the circumstances of
the author. In the inscription of Psalm xxxiv. Abimelech is
said to have been King of Gath in the time of David, whereas
the only Abimelech mentioned in the history was a contemporary
of Abraham's, and Achish was King of Gath when David found
refuge there.*
* Dr. Bobertson Smith alleges objections regarding the Davidic author
ship of some of the other psalms that do not appear to me to be equally valid.
" Several of the p.-alms of the first book,'' he says, " not only speak of Zion

THE BOOK OF PSALMS. 155
5. But as we have no reason to suppose that David prefixed
his name to his own poems, and as in accordance with Oriental
custom they were probably handed down for some time by
word of mouth, sung or recited, before they were committed
to writing, it is easy to see how psalms the authorship of which
was doubtful or unknown would be given as a matter of course
to the greatest of the national poets. The most that can be said
is that these titles represent the tradition at the time when the
first coUection, Psalms i. — xii., was made. How easily the
Davidic authorship of any hymn came to be accepted we see from
the statement in the First Book of Chronicles (xvi. 7) that, when
he appointed the Levitical singers, David delivered a psalm into
theH hands which is a mere cento of quotations from other
Psalms, chiefly from the 105th and 106th, whieh are "both as
late as the Exile, the 106th having a distinct reference to it
(ver. 46, 47). And it strikingly illustrates the uncritical
method of procedure which could assign this composite psalm to
David, that not only is this reference to the Captivity put into
his mouth (1 Chron. xvi. 35), but, as has aHeady been observed,
even the doxology slightly varied with which the Fourth Book
concludes, though the division between the Fourth and Fifth
Books is unquestionably later than the Exile.
6. As regards the series of Davidic psalms found in the
Second Book, Psalms li. — lxx., except lxvi. and lxvii., which
are Hi the Hebrew anonymous, the same remark applies to the
titles of these as to those of the First Book : the contents of the
Psalm are often at variance with the -reputed authorship. The
59th Psalm may be taken as an instance Hi point. It is said to
have been written by David, ' ' when Saul sent, and they watched
the house to put him to death." But the aUusions in the psalm
to the writer's enemies are quite inconsistent with the supposed
cHcumstances. Saul's emissaries could not possibly be described
as making their rounds every evening as a patrol about the city,
uttering oaths and curses, howling Hke unclean dogs seeking
theH garbage, men whose curse it is to wander about for bread,
men finaUy whose overthrow wiU make the name of the God
as God's holy mountain, which David must do, after he had brought the ark
to Jerusalem, but allude to the Temple in which the singer of Psalm xxvii.
desires to live continually. But the house of God at Zion in David's time
was not a temple but a tent." I have, however, shown in my commentary
on the 5th Psalm that the word translated " lemple " may be used of any
considerable structure, as it was for instance of the Tabernacle and the sur
rounding buildings at Shiloh ; and on the 27th Psalm I have pointed out that
the author expressly calls these same structures " a tent." Obviously, as at
Shiloh, there was not merely the tent but buildings of a substantial kind
(doors are mentioned) which enclosed it.

156 BOOK BY BOOK.
of Jacob known throughout the world. It is difficult to believe
that such a psalm could apply to any circumstances in David's
Hfe. The Davidic coUection was beUeved, as we have seen, to
end with the Second Book. Yet we find a few more psalms,
more especiaUy in the Fifth Book, bearing his name. These may
have escaped the notice of the collector of the first two books,
but most of them seem to be of later date.
7. There can be no doubt that the fourth and Fifth Books
were compiled subsequent to the return from the ExUe. Tbe
Exile itself, with its painful memories and ardent hopes, had
stirred many a heart to song. We hear Hi these psalms the
sorrowful sighing of those who hung their harps on the wiUows
by the waters of Babylon, and the joy of those who were " like
unto them that dream," when " the Lord turned again the cap
tivity of Zion." Many of these poems teU their own tale, and,
speaking generaUy, the tone and colouring are those of a later
time. The sparkle, the vigour, the concentrated energy and
passion of the Davidic lyre are for the most part absent ; they
flow in a smoother and gentler current. It does not follow, how
ever, that none of these songs belong to an earlier period.
Some ancient poems might have been overlooked when the earlier
collections were made, and psalms like the 101st and the 110th
are both of them almost certainly psalms of David.
But there is no trace in these books, as in the earlier ones, of
distinct groups or collections of Davidic psalms. Those ascribed
to David are scattered here and there, and some of those which
the titles give to him it is quite certain are not his. This
is manifestly the case with the 122nd, which, speaking of
" thrones of the house of David," must have been written at a
time when his dynasty had been long in existence. The 124th
Psalm is fuU of the return from Babylon. The 144th is a
curiously composite piece, containing many quotations from
earHer poems, and could not have been written by David. It
is ascribed to him exactly in tbe same way as we have already
seen in 1 Chron. xvi. 8 — 36 ; a psalm put together out of Psalms
xcvi., cv., andcvi., is said to have been given by David "into
the hand of Asaph and his brethren." The same may be said,
but upon other grounds, of the 139th Psalm. It is one of the
most striking psalms in the whole coUection, in loftiness of con
ception and solemn grandeur of expression second to none, but
its Aramaic forms either betoken a dialectic variety, the author
perhaps being a native of the northern kingdom, or are evidence
that it was composed after the Exile.
8. The Fifth Book has one distinct group of psalms, called in
our Version " Songs of Degrees," which is of peculiar interest.

THE BOOK OF PSALMS.

157

With one exception they are aU very short, and must have con
stituted originaUy a smaU separate hymn-book, intended appa
rently for the use of pilgrims going up to Jerusalem to keep
the national feasts. The title of these psalms, which is strictly
"Songs of Ascent" (or going up), denotes the purpose which
the coUector had in view. Other interpretations have indeed
been giv/en of the title, but this seems the most probable, and it
is that with which the contents of the collection harmonise ; some
of these poems referrmg directly to incidents of the journey,
and others expressing the feehngs of the pilgrims as they came
in sight of the Holy City or stood within its gates. But there
are also in these little songs constant aUusions to the return from
the Captivity, showing that they could not have been written
earHer than the times of Ezra and Nehemiah. Hence
some critics have supposed that the " going up " of the title
refers to the return from Babylon, which was spoken of as a
" going up " to the Holy Land. The other explanation, how
ever, is the better, as being the more comprehensive. The
collection consists of post-Captivity psalms, but it was intended
for pUgrimages to the Second Temple, and hence the double
aUusions by which it is marked. The custom of going up to
keep the feasts with music and song was ancient, as we learn
from Isaiah xxx. 29.
9. The psalms which are assigned to the Levitical singers are
not by theH titles associated with anj' particular circumstances
in the history. But it is perfectly plain that such historical
psalms as the 74th and 79th, describing the devastation wrought
in the Temple and the profanation of it by the erection of
heathen emblems, could not have been written by the Asaph who
was the contemporary of David. Hence some critics have main
tained that "Asaph" stands for "the sons of Asaph," and
that these psalms were composed by members of the Levitical
guild, either after Nebuchadnezzar's destruction of the Temple,
or after the havoc and profanation wrought by Antiochus
Epiphanes. It is noticeable, however, that we never find " the
sons of Asaph " in any of the Psalm inscriptions, though we do
find the phrase in the Book of Chronicles.
These two groups of psalms by Levitical singers are marked
by certain peculiarities. In those ascribed to Asaph God is fre
quently spoken of as the Shepherd of Israel, whieh is His flock,
and as the Judge both of Israel and of all the nations of the world.
There are many references to the giving of the law on Sinai, to
the march through the wilderness, and to other portions of the
ancient history, such as do not occur in the psalms of the first
two books. In these psalms both the Divine names, Elohim and

158 BOOK BY BOOK.
Jihovah, and also the names 'El and 'Elyon (Most High) occur.
There are besides several expressions whieh are found either exclu
sively or most frequently in these psalms.
In Hke manner the psalms " of the sons of Korah " have their
characteristic features. As in the psalms of Asaph God is the
Judge, so in these psalms He is represented as the King. Jeru
salem is spoken of as " the city of God," and as under the protec
tion of God. The name of God used by preference is Elohim,
though Jehovah is also found in xlvi., xlvii., xlviii., Ixxxiv.,
Ixxxvii.; other names are "the Living God" and "Jehovah
Sabaoth " (Jehovah of Hosts).
10. Both groups have several features in common. Both the
Korahite and Asaphite psalms are, with few exceptions, national
songs, either prayers for the nation in its distresses or thanks
givings for its deliverance ; they abound in references to the
Sanctuary and the joy to be experienced in its service; they
reflect the feelings and hopes of those who, like the Levites,
were engaged in that service. The hypothesis therefore
that they were written by or composed for the use of members
of Levitical guUds is thus confirmed. Dr. Eobertson Smith
calls attention to another feature which the two groups
have in common. They contain no confession of sin. In some
of them Israel appears as divided into a righteous class, to
whom the singer belongs, and a wicked class against whom
he prays. Elsewhere the whole nation seems to speak with
one voice, and claims to be righteous, and not suffering for
its own sin. "Wherever sin is acknowledged in these
psalms it is the sin of a former generation ; " which, however,
can hardly be maintained in the case of the 85th Psalm. And
he proceeds to argue that it is impossible that the reaUy godly
could have used such language before the times of Ezra and
Nehemiah. No IsraeHte before the ExUe could have used lan
guage Hke that of the 44th Psalm, averring that, in spite of
theH afflictions, they had not forgotten God, and that for His
sake they were accounted as sheep for the slaughter. This refers
to a reHgous persecution, and hence he would bring down this
psalm and the 74th and 79th to a date as late as that of
Artaxerxes II., when the Persian general Bogoses denied the
Temple. The conclusions at which we arrive from these investigations
are : —
FHst. That the present Psalter is made up of a number of
smaUer collections, which originaUy existed in an independent
for n, the earliest of them being a Davidic hymnal.
Secondly. That besides these groups there were several indi-

THE BOOK OF PSALMS. 159
vidual psalms, which were either taken up at different times into
one of the minor coUections or were incorporated by the final
editor, and inserted in their present place for reasons which
cannot now be ascertained.
Thirdly. That we cannot trust the notices as to the authorship
of the different psalms, especiaUy where these notices are of an
historical kind, because there is a manifest disagreement between
the language of the poem and the supposed circumstances of the
writer. Fourthly. The existing arrangement of the Psalter is so far
chronological that in the main the earHer groups stand first and
the later last ; but individual psalms seem here and there to be
curiously out of place.
12. Numbering of the Psalms. — We find a different numbering
of the Psalms in the Hebrew and in the LXX. Indeed, even the
Hebrew MSS. exhibit some varieties in this respect. In some of
them Psalms i. and ii., Psalms xhi. and xliii., and Psalms cxvi.
and cxvii. are united. On the other hand, Psalm cxviii. is
divided into two, or even into three. In many instances the
entire number is set down at 149. The LXX., who are foUowed
by the Vulgate, combine Psalms ix. and x., and also cxiv. and
cxv. On the other hand, they divide cxvi. into two (ver. 1 — 9,
10 — 19), and Hi Hke manner cxl vii. into two (ver. 1 — 11, 12 —
20) ; thus obtaining the same number of 150 for the whole coUec
tion, though by a different distribution.
This divergence is easUy explained if we remember, that in the
case of those psalms which have no inscription there would be
little to distinguish between the end of one psalm and the
beginning of the next, nothing more, perhaps, than a smaU
space between the two. In the earliest MSS. probably the
copyist would not have even the inscription to guide him, and
would be left very much to his own judgment. That two psalms
so utterly unlike in theH contents and style as the first and
second -should nevertheless have been regarded as one psalm, as
they were by many of the Rabbis and according to the Talmudic
tradition (T.B. Berakhoth, 9 b), shows in what an uncritical
fashion questions of this kind were decided. The only ground
aUeged for this union of the two was, that the one began and the
other ended with the same word " Blessed " {ashre').
As regards other instances, the LXX. were probably right in
combining Psalms He andx., as the acrostic arrangement, though
broken, may still be traced through both psalms. And Psalms
xiii. and xliii., being marked by the same refrain, doubtless con
stituted originaUy one poem. On the other hand, some psalms
which now appear as one may have been formed out of two.

160 BOOK BY BOOK.
This may have been the ease with xix. ver. 1 — 6 and 7 — 14;
xxiv. 1—6 and 7 — 10; cxliv. 1 — 11 and 12 — 15; and possibly a
few others. Indeed, there are many proofs that the Psalter
has undergone editing. Additions, omissions, alterations of
particular passages were made, as in our modern hymn-books, in
order to adapt a psalm to a special occasion. This wUl explain
how Psalms ix. and x., and Psalms xlu. and xliii., whieh were
originaUy one, came to be broken into two, and how Psalm lxx.,
which was originaUy the concluding portion of Psalm xl., came
to be detached from it and altered ; and how, again, Psalm Hii.
appears as a new version of Psalm xiv. Psalm cviii. consists of
portions of two other psalms, lvii. 8 — 12 and lx. 7 — 14. The
variations in Psalm xviii., as compared with the version of the
same psalm given in 2 Sam. xxii., may have arisen from their
having been transmitted orally long before they were committed
to writing.13. Liturgical and Musical Notices. — As regards these it must
be confessed that we are very much in the dark.
(i.) Liturgical. To this class belongs the oft-repeated
Lam'natsdach, rendered in the Authorised Version ' ' For the Chief
Musician." He was probably the person who, like the precentor
in our cathedrals, had the chief direction of the musical portion
of the services ; the word is used in 2 Chron. ii. 17 Hi the
general sense of " leader." The phrase may either denote that the
particular psalm tp which it is prefixed was given to him to be set
to music for the Temple service, or simply that, as intended for
public worship, it was put into his hands that he might take care
that it was properly rendered both by band and singers. The
expression occurs fifty-five times in the inscriptions (fifty-two
times in the first three books), and, except in the case of two
anonymous psalms, lxvi. and Ixvii., is only prefixed to psalms
of David, Asaph, and the sons of Korah . Connected with this
perhaps is the notice Vlammed ("for teaching"), Psalm lx.,
which may mean that the precentor was to teach the psalm to the
Levites, just as David's elegy over Saul and Jonathan was to
be taught to the men of Judah, 2 Sam. i. 18.*
Two other liturgical notices are apparently connected with
sacrificial acts. Thus Vhazldr ("to bring to remembrance"),
Psalms xxxviii. and lxx., may refer to the azkardh, or " offering
of incense," at the time of offering which these psalms were
to be sung. The phrase occurs in 1 Chron. xvi. 4, where it is
rendered in the Revised Version "to celebrate," and is joined
with " to give thanks and to praise " as a part of the duties pre-
* " The Bow " may be the title of the elegy, or the word may have crept
into the text by mistake. It does not appear in the Vat. text of the LXX.

THE BOOK OF PSALMS. 161
scribed to the Levites. In hke manner, Vthodah (" for thanks
giving"), Psalm c., may have been intended to signify that the
psalm was to be sung when the thank-offering was presented.
(H.) Musical. Under this head eome — (a) The different names
by which a psalm is described, as SMr, "a song," Mis&mdr, "a
psalm," denoting that it was to be sung with instrumental
accompaniment ; Michtam (LXX. crrrjkoypoxbla), perhaps ' ' a
golden poem " ; or " a mystery," a song of deep spiritual import ;
Maskil, " a skilfully constructed ode " (LXX. crWo-etos, eis
crvveo-iv), a meaning which seems to be required by tbe use of
the word in the body of a psalm (xlvii. 7 [8]), where it must
mean " in a skilful strain," or " a skiHuUy constructed song ; "
Shiggaion, " perhaps a dithyrambic ode, " as being irregular in
form or metre. But this and other explanations are very
doubtful, as we have in Hab. Hi., " Upon Shiggionoth," which
may, however, denote that the song was to be sung " after the
manner of dithyrambs " or " to dithyrambic measures." Com
pare the expressions "Upon Alampth," "Upon the Sheminith
(or octave)."
{b) The instruments which were to be employed when the
psalm was sung in the Temple service : " Upon Nehiloth " (in
scription of Psalm v.), "To the flutes," or with flute accom
paniment;* "On Neginath" (Psalms iv., vi., Hv., Iv., Ixvii.,
Ixxvi.), i.e. "with accompaniment of stringed instruments;"
and simUarly, though with a slight variation of form, in
Psalm lxi.
{e) Particular tones or measures to which the psalm was to be
sung. On Alamofh (Psalm xlvi. ), ' ' after the manner of maidens ; ' '
and Upon Sheminith (vi. xii.), "upon the octave" (found also
in the historical books, 1 Chron. xv. 20), the former referring, it
has been conjectured, to the women's voices — maidens we know
joining in the singing and music of the service (Psalm lxviii. 25)
— and the latter to the bass voices upon the (lower) octave ; Upon
Gittith (Psalm viH.), " after the manner of Gath," some measure
or style which the Hebrews had borrowed from theH PhUistine
neighbours Hi that city; To Jeduthun (xxxix.) or Upon Jeduthun,
" after the manner of Jeduthun," one of David's famous singers.
{d) Besides these notices, there are several others which pro
bably indicate the first word of other, apparently secular, poems
* It has been objected to this explanation that it is not likely that wi id
instruments would be employed in sacred music as an accompaniment to the
Binging, but Delitzsch has observed that the use of the flute in divine wor
ship is attested by Is. xxx. 29 (cf. 1 Sam. x. 5 ; 1 Kings i. 40). In the second
Temple, on twelve days in the year, the " Hallel" was sung to the accom
paniment of flutes. See Delitzsch, Commentary on the Psalms (Eng. trans. ),
parti., pp. 43, 1S5. M

162 BOOK BV BOOK.
to the airs of which particular psalms were commonly sung.
There is nothing incredible in this. In the sixteenth century
Clement Marot's metrical translations of tbe Psalms in French
Were often sung to popular airs. Reuss teUs us that he has
himseH heard Hi missions organised by the Jesuits, after the
restoration of the monarchy in France, religious hymns sung to
the airs of the operas then in vogue. What more natural than
that something of the same kind should have taken place in
Jerusalem, where, as we know, singing and music were the
constant accompaniments of banquets (see e.g. Is. v. 12; Am. vi,
5, viii. 10), and where there must consequently have been a
large number of secular songs, every trace of which has disap
peared except so far as they have been preserved in these titles.
Thus, for instance, in the inscription of Psalm xxH., we have
(see Revised Version) " set to Aijeleth hash-Shahar," that is
"the hind of the morning," because it was set to the same music
as some song beginning with those words. So again in Psalm xiv.
we have "set to Shoshannim," that is "lilies," the song be
ginning with the word lilies. Or again Psalm lvi. the melody
was one which was originaUy that of a song beginning, " The
silent dove of far off (lands)," or as others interpret, " The dove
of the distant terebinths." Or yet again, as in Psalm Iviii. the
melody was borrowed from a vintage song, the words ' ' Al tash-
heth," " Destroy not," being perhaps the first words of the song
of which we may have a further trace, as Dr. Robertson Smith
suggests, in the Prophet Isaiah (Ixv. 8), " When the new wine
is found in the cluster, men say, ' Destroy it not, for a blessing
is in it.' " But as regards aU these musical notices we must speak
with due reserve. They were enigmas even to the Septuagint
translators, and the most recent investigations have added nothing
to our knowledge.
(«) The same may be said of another musical sign, the word
Selah, which does not indeed occur in the inscriptions but in the
body of the psalm. It occurs most commonly at the end of a
strophe, but sometimes in the middle of a verse, and even where
it interrupts the sense, as e.g. in lv. 19 [20], lxvH. 7 [8], 33 [34].
The LXX. translate it by 8ia<pa\fia, evidently supposing that it
denoted the intervention at the particular place of a musical
symphony. The voices ceased and the musical instruments
alone were heard. The word, derived from a root signifying
"to Hft up," was intended as a direction to the musicians to
strike up in a louder strain. Of the many interpretations which
have been given of the word, this seems on the whole the most
probable. 14. The Psalms as a Collection of Religious Poetry. — The Psalms

THE BOOK OF PSALMS.

163

are a phenomenon unique in literature ; there is no other collec
tion of sacred poetry in the world that can be compared with
them. The Psalter indeed is not one book, but many. It con
sists not of one but of several coUections of hymns and spiritual
songs put together at various time3. It covers a period of well
nigh a thousand years, from David, the great master of Jewish
song, down, perhaps, to the last great struggle for national
independence in the time of the Maccabees. It covers a still
wider space if the 90th Psalm was written, as its title indicates,
by Moses, and indeed that psalm must be in any ease of very
considerable antiquity. The Psalter is thus the marvellous
record of human hearts pouring themselves out from age to age
and from century to century in communion with God. It traverses
aU the vicissitudes of human Hfe. It is both national and per
sonal. It sings the praises of God in nature and in grace. It
goes down into the deepest depths of human anguish ; it soars
to the highest heights of human joy. But, above all, the Psalms
glow with a depth and tenderness of personal affection towards
God such as has never been surpassed even in the hymns of the
Christian Church.
In prayer and praise God and man draw nigh one to the
other ; and the Psalms have this, distinctive feature, and it is to
be found in all of them, they are true in their representation of
God, true Hi theH representation of man's heart and man's needs
and aspHations.
(i.) They are true in their representation of God. It is the
same God who is the stay of aH theH hearts. It is not as in
heathen prayers and hymns, a number of different and rival
deities who are the objects of worship and praise ; it is the One
God, Elohim or Jehovah, whom aU aUke adore. The names may
be different, the Being is one. Who is this God who thus binds
them to Himself? Who is this God for whom words seem
too weak to express His glory or to celebrate His lovingkin dness ?
He is the God who has revealed HimseH to them and to their
fathers, and taken them into His holy covenant. He is not Hke
the gods of the heathen, the impersonation of the powers of
Nature, or the merely exaggerated image of degraded and
profligate men. The gods of the heathen were, at the best, gods
of the wood and the river and the sea, gods of the winds and the
storms and the sunrise ; and too often were monsters of cruelty
and lust and passion and vindictiveness, beings whom men
supposed they could propitiate by sacrifice and offerings, but
beings, Hke themselves, capricious, revengeful, hcentious, such
as no true heart could honour, much less adore and love.
But the God of the Psalms is not only one, He is not only the
m 2

164 BOOK BY BOOK.
absolute Ruler and Kingof the universe, not only the God to
whose glory aU creation bears witness, who has made the sun
and the moon and the stars, who has established the round
world that it cannot be moved, in whose hand are the deep
places of the earth and the heights of the mountains are His,
who covereth tbe heavens with clouds and prepareth rain for the
earth, who giveth to the beast his food and to the young ravens
that cry — not only the Lord of Nature, fuU of power and
majesty, but also the God of hoHness and righteousness and
truth, who wiU be honoured and worshipped by bis reasonable
creatures in truth and holiness and righteousness.
This is no projection of man's understanding, no invention of
man's heart. The conception is far too pure and too lofty. God
in His dwelling-place above and in His temple upon earth is a
holy God, a God who hateth iniquity and with whom evil cannot
dwell. And yet He is not a God who repels His creatures. He
is fuU of tender pity and condescension. He Hstens to the cry of
the penitent heart, He is the helper of aU that are oppressed,
" the Father of the fatherless and the God of the widow, even
God in His holy habitation." " He bears our burdens, He for
gives our iniquities, He heals our diseases, He crowns us with
lovingkindness and tender mercies." " As the heaven is high
above the earth, so great is His mercy towards them that fear
Hun." "Like as a father pitieth his chUdren, so the Lord
pitieth them that fear Him."
This is no unknown or distant God. There is no doubt in the
minds of any of the psalmists of Israel as to the object of wor
ship, no question, as in the refrain of a weU-known Vedic hymn,
"Who is the God to whom I shaU offer sacrifice?" Jesus
Christ our Lord has indeed brought God nearer to us, because
He, the Eternal Son, has manifested the Father in human flesh,
so that He could say, " He that hath seen me hath seen the
Father." Nevertheless, it is the same God who was the joy
of the hearts of Hebrew psalmists ; and the fact remains that
with all the bright iUumination of the Christian revelation, the
words of Hebrew psalmists are stiU used in aU churches and in
aU lands as the best expression of Christian adoration, whether
in the closet or in the congregation.
(ii.) And this also because they are the true and adequate
expression of human needs and desires and aspirations. Hence
theH permanence ; and this it is that is so striking. These are
no dead echoes from the past, no curiosities of an extinct Htera
ture. They are not Hke the Vedic hymns or the hymns of the
Avesta, with whieh they have sometimes been compared — relics
of a bygone age, telhng indeed of human longings and aspira-

THE BOOK OF PSALMS. 165
tions, of a f eelmg after God if haply they might find Him, but
never striking deep root even in the heart of the nation for
whom they were written, far less evoking any sentiment of awe
and worship in other nations.
The Psalms Hve and breathe. They are not the deserted
shrines of a cold and extinguished worship, altars on whieh no
flame of devotion any longer burns. Empires have risen and
perished ; the face of the world has changed again and again ;
Christianity has succeeded to Judaism ; even Jewish history ahd
Jewish prophecy do not always hold us under their speU; but
the Psalms have a fascination from which we cannot escape.
They appeal to our Christian conscience and our Christian emo
tions. They are the best expression of our feelings in our purest
and healthiest moments. They never grow old. They inspHe,
dHect, control our hearts at all times ; they answer to aU our
moods. The joys, the sorrows, the penitence, the fear, tbe doubt,
the trust, the despair, the triumph, aU are ours. There is not a
note of the human harp, not one of its myriad strings, whieh
does not find its response there. The words are the words we
want ; they are written for us. And this, because they are the
true utterances of human hearts, taught by the Spirit of God,
because His hand has swept the strings and brought out their
fitful yet harmonious music. What other explanation can be
given of this phenomenon ? AU is real here. There is no
exaggeration, no gloss, none of that unhealthy sentimentalism
which so often disfigures mediaeval hymns and modern hymns
which imitate them, the sickly effusions of a morbid reHgious
feeling with which a manly heart can have no sympathy.
The Psalms are real. It is not that they are not fuU of
poetry. They abound in magnificent poetry. They lay aU nature
under contribution for splendid images and bold comparisons.
They have a wealth of beauty in which they are not surpassed
by the poets of any nation. But it is the poetry of truth. Man's
heart as it is, not as he would make it out to be, finds here its
exact expression. And therefore the Psalms can never grow
old. They are fresh now, as fresh as they were some two or
three thousand years ago. Hence it is that we use them in our
services day by day ; hence it is that we love them and meditate
on them and pray them, and find no other book in the world so
helpful to us in our daily communing with God. Is there any
reasonable, any probable, any possible explanation of the fact
but this, that the Spirit of God, who knows man's heart,
breathed on the hearts of them that wrote, and thereby made
theH words the perpetual measure and adequate expression of
aU true prayer and praise ?

166 BOOK BY BOOK.
15. The Imprecations in the Psalms. — Although the Psalms
have been an abiding element in all Christian worship, it must
be admitted that there are some tones in the Psalter which seem
to jar upon our feelings, which do not naturaUy or readUy adapt
themselves to Christian sentiment. There is an outburst ever
and anon of vindictive joy, there is an exultation Hi the overthrow
of the wicked, as in the 58th Psalm : " The righteous shaU
rejoice when he seeth the vengeance, he shall wash his footsteps
in the blood of the ungodly." There is an almost savage deHght
in the destruction of the oppressor, as in the 137th Psalm:
" Happy shaU he be that taketh thy Httle ones and dasheth
them against the stones." There are withering imprecations,
as in the 69th and the 109th Psalms, so fierce and so elabo
rately wrought that it makes one's blood run cold to read them.
How are we to account for them ? We take them on our Hps.
They are retained in Christian Hturgies. On what principle can
we justify theH retention ?
(i.) Some persons would say, They are relics of a barbarous
age, evidences of a moral standard infinitely below that of the
Gospel, and therefore quite unsuitable for Christian worship.
(ii.) Others have attempted to justify the repetition of these
psalms in public worship and in private meditation by applying
the language to the spiritual struggles of the Christian. The
enemies we have to face are not persecutors or tyrants such as
the oppressors of Israel were against whom the Psalmists utter
theH burning words, but spHitual foes. ' ' We wrestle not against
flesh and blood, but against principalities, against powers, against
the rulers of the darkness of this world, against spHitual wicked
ness in high places."
Accordingly the language of the Psalmists is to be turned from
its original sense into a spiritual channel. Those vehement
scathing words may be a prayer for the defeat of Satan and bis
hosts, or for the subjugation of fleshly lusts which war against
the soul. So for instance in the 137th Psalm, some of the
Fathers and expositors who follow them expound "Babylon"
as meaning "the flesh." The "Httle ones" are "fleshly
lusts " in the earHer stages of theH assaults whilst they are
yet young, as it were, and before they have gathered strength,
and " the stones " are to be interpreted of " the Toek,"
which is Christ, against which they are to be dashed and so
destroyed. FancHul and arbitrary interpretations of this kind are reaUy no
interpretations at all. And how is it possible to carry out such
a principle of interpretation consistently ? How in our spiritual
warfare could we adopt with any definite meaning such words

THE BOOK OF PSALMS. 167
as these : "Set thou an ungodly man over him, and let Satan
stand at his right hand;" "Let his prayer be turned into
sin;" "Let bim be blotted out of the book of life," and the
Hke ? The unnatural strain which must be put upon words to
make them fit into such a system of exegesis ought long ago to
have led expositors to abandon it.
(Hi.) Others again would regard these psalms as predictive..
They remind us that the 69th Psalm is again and again quoted
in the New Testament as having its fulfilment in the circumstances
of our Lord's earthly Hfe or in the history of the Church ; that
words from the 69th Psalm (ver. 25), and the 109th Psalm
(ver. 8), are referred to by St. Peter as "the Scripture which
must needs be fulfiUed which the Holy Ghost spoke before by
the mouth of David concerning Judas." Hence instead of
saying, " Let theH table become a snare," "Let their habitation
be made desolate," "Let them be blotted out of the book of
life," &c, these interpreters would have us render, " Their table
shaU become a snare ; " " Their habitation shall be desolate ; "
" They shaU be blotted out of the book of life," &c.
But even if the laws of Hebrew grammar did not forbid such
a rendering as the substitution of the future for the expression
of a wish, it must be observed that there are imperatives which
cannot be so explained: "Pour out thine indignation upon
them," "Add iniquity to their iniquity," and the Hke. And in
any case how can we put words Hke these into the mouth of
our Blessed Lord in the hour of His passion ? It was indeed
true of Him, as it had been of some saint of old, that "when
He was thirsty they gave Him vinegar to drink " (Psalm Ixix.
21); but who can for a moment believe that thoughts of awful
vengeance such as those in the psalm dwelt in the heart of the
Divine Sufferer, whose every word from the cross was a word
of tenderest pity and love, who did not condemn even the
unrepentant robber, who prayed for His murderers, " Father,
forgive them ; for they know not what they do " ?
(iv.) An ingenious attempt has indeed been made in the 109th
Psalm, where the imprecations are the most awful, and the most
elaborately drawn out, to escape from the difficulty by putting
them into the mouth of the Psalmist's enemies and regarding
them as directed against himseH. At the end of the 4th ver.*e we
are to supply the word " saying," which is not uncommonly
omitted Hi Hebrew poetry {e.g. Psalm H. 2, xxii. 7), and to read
it thus : " They have rewarded me evU for good and hatred for
my good wiU ; saying, Set thou an ungodly man over him," and
so on through the whole string of anathemas, to ver. 20, where
the Psalmist, having thus quoted the words of his enemies, com-

168 BOOK BY BOOK.
forts himseH with the thought, "This is the reward of mine
enemies from the Lord, and of them that speak evU against my
soul." And it is urged in support of this interpretation that
whereas the Psalmist speaks of his enemies throughout in the
plural (ver. 1 — 5, 20 to end of the psalm), they on the other
hand, speaking of him in the intermediate passage, always use the
singular.* But the admission of such an explanation, if it turns the edge
of the difficulty in this particular instance, leaves aU the others
of a like kind untouched. We have not got rid of the impreca
tions of the 69th Psalm, nor of the fierce exultation at the
overthrow of cruel and powerful oppressors which meets us in
the passages already quoted from the 58th and 137th Psalms.
(v.) To arrive at a true explanation of the difficulty we must
endeavour to realise the exact position of the Jewish Psalmists.
In the first place, they are not influenced by personal hatred.
They are the mouthpiece of injured innocence. These are the
accents, the natural accents, of the martjrr church. The righteous
are almost synonymous with the afflicted. The people of God
are in so many of the psalms crushed, bowed down, mourning
all the day long because of the oppression of the enemy. The
enemies may be foreign tyrants, or they may be ungodly men
in Israel, but in either case they are men who have obtained
power and are using that power unscrupulously to oppress and
destroy the faithful worshippers of Jehovah. And it is an
intolerable thing to see high-handed wickedness triumphing, and
to be powerless to arrest it. The true heart, on the side of God,
rises up against this hateful insolence. It does long, and it does
pray, for the rooting out of evU and the destruction of evil-doers.
And the Psalmists give utterance to this feeling with the more
intensity and the more eagerness because, the awful retributions
of the future life being to a great extent hidden from their eyes,
they longed to see God's justice manifested in this world in the
righteous punishment of the wicked.
But, in the next place, we must frankly admit that the Old
Testament stands on a lower level as regards the forgiveness of
injuries than the New. Our Lord HimseH draws the distinction :
"Ye have heard that it was said to them of old time, Thou shalt
love thy neighbour and hate thy enemy ; but I say unto you,
Love your enemies, and pray for them that persecute you." He
warned His disciples, when, like Elijah, they would have caUed
down fire from heaven upon the Samaritans who refused to
* This is the interpretation of Kennicott and Mendelssohn, and it has been
defended recently by Dr. Taylor, The Gospel in the Law, and by Bev. J.
Hammond in the Expositor.

THE BOOK OF PSALMS. 169
4
receive Him, that they knew not what spirit they were of. " He,
when He was revUed, reviled not again ; when He suffered, He
threatened not." His lesson to them was, "Forgive not until
seven times, but until sevehty-times seven." The Psalms do not
inculcate the duty of forgiveness of all personal wrongs, or that
clear distinction between the sinner and the sin, which is so
emphaticaUy characteristic of the New Testament. But ought we
to expect it ? The Old Testament is not contrary to the New,
but it is inferior to it. And this inferiority, this imperfection,
is no proof that the Psalms are not inspHed because they contain
these execrations ; unless we regard it as an essential condition
of inspHation that it should lift the subjects of it altogether
above theH own time and people. It was necessary that the
stern sense of righteous detestation of all wrong should be
planted Hi men's hearts, even if its harsher forms were afterwards
to be softened by the meekness and gentleness of Christ.
Nor must it be forgotten that even in the New Testament we
find traces of the same righteous indignation. No doubt the
Gospel teaches a larger charity. No doubt it forbids aU personal
resentment. But St. Paul when opposed in his ministry by a
wicked man could find satisfaction in the thought that the Lord
would reward him according to his works, and could exclaim
against those whose false teaching wrought havoc in the Church,
"I would they were cutoff that trouble you." And St. John
could bid his little children refuse to receive a false teacher into
theH houses. And St. Jude could write a whole epistle full of
denunciation of ungodly men. And the seer of the Apocalyptic
vision could write of the faU of Babylon, " Rejoice over her, .
thou heaven, and ye holy apostles and prophets, for God hath
avenged in her the blood of them that were slain upon the
earth." But although so far as the sense of righteous indignation is
concerned the Psalms are not out of harmony with the teaching
of the New Testament, stiU there is nothing in the New Testa
ment like the elaborately wrought, detaUed, and terrible
anathemas of the Psalms, and it would not be lawful for us as
Christians now to pray, " Oh that thou wouldest slay the wicked,
OGod;" or, "Add iniquity unto their iniquity;" "Let their
prayers be turned into sin; " " Blot them out of the book of
life." 16. The Messianic Psalms. — There is one other subject of con
siderable interest connected with the theological aspect of the
Psalms which must not be passed over. It is surely a striking
fact that of aU the quotations which in the New Testament are
made from the Old touching Christ and His kingdom, nearly

170 BOOK BY BOOK.
one-half are drawn from the Psalms. The Psalms then are pre
dictive ; the poet is a prophet. Such psalms as the 2nd, the
20th, the 21st, the 45th, the 72nd, the 110th, where a king is the
object ; or such psalms as the 16th, the 22nd, the 40th, the 69th,
where a prophet or a servant of God who is a sufferer for
righteousness' sake are portrayed, are all quoted in the New
Testament as having their fulfilment in Christ.
Yet there are expressions in some of these psalms — as in the
40th, where there is a confession of sin, " Mine iniquities are
more in number than the hairs of my head; " as in the 16th,
where the poet exclaims, "Their drink offerings of blood wiU I
not offer, neither take up their names (those of idols) in my
lips ; " as in the 69th, where the sufferer breaks forth, as has
been aHeady said, into burning imprecations — which certainly
cannot be regarded as suitable on the lips of our Lord. How
are we to explain these ? How is it that whilst we find in these
psalms words which the New Testament writers put into the
mouth of our Lord or teU us are fulfiUed in Him, there are yet
other words which cannot possibly find such an application ?
Only on the principle that prophets and kings of old were types,
and consequently imperfect adumbrations, of the Christ who
was to come.
They spoke out their own feelings, and hence the strictly human
element in their poems ; but as foreshadowing the true Prophet
and the true King they were carried beyond themselves. One
higher and fairer than any son of man was before theH eyes
and in their hearts as inspired seers. Christ is in the Psalms.
Who can read the 22nd Psalm without seeing there the mar
vellous portrait of the Divine Sufferer ? The words express the
real feelings of some suffering saint of God or of the suffering
nation, but they go far beyond their first occasion. Where,
indeed, in the world shaU we find anything approaching to this
exact correspondence between prophecy and fulfilment ? Even
in the Gospel itself we scarcely behold so consoling a vision of
the crucified Redeemer as in this psalm, written centuries before
He appeared upon earth.
Looking then at the Psalter as a great collection of sacred
poetry, we may sum up its power and its teaching in the words
of Luther.
First, as he says : " A finer book of the Hves and legends of
the saints has never appeared on the earth, nor ever can appear.
For if we were to desire that out of aU the lives, legends, and
histories the best were picked out and brought together and set
forth to the best advantage ; why the book thus produced would
be just the Psalter we now have."

THE BOOK OF PSALMS. 171
And next : " The Psalter ought to be precious and dear to us
were it for nothmg else but the clear promise that it holds forth
respecting Christ's death and resurrection, and the prefiguration
of His kingdom and of the whole state and system of Chrif
tianity ; insomuch that it might be well entitled a Litile Bible,
wherein everything contained in the entHe Bible is beautifully
and briefly comprehended and compacted into an enchiridion or
manual. ... It seems to me as if the Holy Ghost had been
pleased to take on Himself the trouble of putting together such
a Bible, or book of exemplars, touching the whole of Christianity
or aU the saints ; in order that they who are unable to read the
whole Bible may nevertheless find almost the whole sum com
prehended in this little book."

THE BOOK OF PEOVERBS.
1. Constituent Parts. — The Book of Proverbs consists of the
foUowing parts : —
(i.) The preface, chap. i. 1 — 7, which gives the title and indi
cates the design of the coUection : " The Proverbs of Solomon,
the son of David, King of Israel : To know -wisdom and
instruction ... to give subtilty to tbe simple, to the young
man knowledge and discretion . . . that he may understand a
proverb and a figure, the words of the wise and their dark
sayings." This is foUowed by the fundamental maxim of
the Wisdom : " The fear of the Lord is the beginning of
wisdom." (ii.) This general preface is followed by a long passage,
chap. i. 8 ; ix. 18, which consists, not of detached proverbs, but
of connected discourses in praise of Wisdom, and the benefits
which she confers upon those who embrace her. The speaker is
one of the wise, or a type of them, who addresses his youthful
pupU or friend as "my son," though at several places Wisdom
berseH is introduced speaking, displaying her graces, offering
herseH to men, narrating her history, and magnifying the
delights which she confers on those who follow her, as well as
the evils from which she preserves them. This passage
includes the singular personification of Wisdom in chap, viii.,
one of the most remarkable and beautiful things in Hebrew
literature. (iii.) Then follows the largest section in the book, chap. x.
1 — xxii. 16, with anew heading, " The Proverbs of Solomon."
This division consists of three hundred and seventy-four verses,
each of which contains a single proverb or maxim in two Hnes,
with the exception of the verse chap. xix. 7, which has three
lines, owing probably to some early fault in the text. Tbe kind
of poetical paraUelism most common in these verses is the anti
thetic, of this type : —
' ' A wise son maketh a glad father :
But a foolish son is the heaviness of his mother " (x. 1) .

THE BOOK OF PROVERBS. 173
This type of verse prevaUs almost exclusively in chaps, x. — xv.,
after which other types are more commonly introduced, as the
synonymous —
" Pride goeth before destruction,
And a haughty spirit before a fall" (xvi. 18),
and others. The proverbs Hi this coUection are of a very mis-
ceUaneous character, and foUow one another without any classi
fication or regard to subject, although occasionaUy a few
consecutive verses refer to a common topic. Sometimes two
proverbs occur having the first member the same (x. 15;
xviii. 11), whUe the second is different, and in others the first
member is different while the second is identical (xv. 33 ;
xviH. 12). This peculiarity shows that many of the proverbs
had cHculated for a long time orally before they were gathered
together in a written form.
(iv.) Then comes a coUection which has been formed out of
two smaU pieces put together. The author of the first piece,
chap. xxH. 67 — xxiv. 22, informs his son or disciple that what
he addresses to him is, " Words of the Wise ; " and the second
smaU code, chap. xxiv. 23 — 24, is inscribed, "These are also
by the Wise," that is, by anonymous proverbiahsts. The pro
verbs in this coUection sometimes make one verse, sometimes
two or three, and sometimes extend to a short proverbial dis
course. (v.) This smaU code is foUowed by an important collection,
chaps, xxv. — xxix., with the inscription, " These also are Pro
verbs of Solomon, which the men of Hezekiah, King of Judah,
copied out" (xxv. 1). The expression "copied out" or "trans
ferred" seems to imply that the men of Hezekiah formed their
coUection out of written sources. Hezekiah, besides being a
wise and reforming king, appears to have been a poet (Is.
xxxviii.), andhis "men" were no doubt scholars and scribes
who shared his Hterary tastes, and whom he employed to rescue
from oblivion the precious remains of the ancient wisdom by
transferring them from the smaU coUeetions in which they lay
concealed into a single code (2 Kings xviii. 37). The maxims
in this code, particularly Hi chaps, xxv. — xxvii., approach nearer
to what we should imagine the early popular, proverb to have
been than many of those in the other large coUection, aud
probably the coUection has preserved some of the most ancient
proverbs. (vi.) Two smaU pieces then foUow, related to one another,
chaps, xxx. and xxxi. 1 — 9. The superscriptions to these pit ces

174 BOOK BY BOOK.
are obscure. Probably in both cases the suggestions of the
Revised Version margin should be adopted, and chap. xxx.
1 — 2, read: " The words of Jakeh of Massa: the man said, I
have wearied myseH, 0 God, I have wearied myseH, 0 God,
and am consumed ; surely I am more brutish than any man,"
&c. The words are those of one who has striven to find out
God unto perfection and found the task above him (Ps. Ixxiii. 22,
Job. xxviii.). In like manner chap. xxxi. 1 would read : " The
words of Lemuel, king of Massa, which his mother taught
him." (The word massa, if a common noun, means " oracle,"
as in the Revised Version text ; in Gen. xxv. 14, it occurs as
a proper name). The language in these two passages has
an Aramean tinge, and they may have been drawn from
abroad. (vii.) Finally the book is closed by an acrostic or alphabetical
poem on the "virtuous," that is, the good or capable wife,
chap. xxxi. 10 — 31.
2. Literary Character. — The Proverbs belong to that depart
ment of Hebrew literature caUed the Wisdom, which m addrtim
includes Ecclesiastes, Job, and some Psalms, as xxxvii., xlix., and
lxxiu. This Hterature is the fruit of a direction of mind in Israel
frequently aUuded to. The "wise" were a class about as weU
known as priests and prophets. It is the purpose of the Book of
Proverbs to give the young man knowledge, " that he may under
stand the words of the Wise and theH dark sayings." The
opponents of Jeremiah, who trusted to others than the prophet
for dHection, said: "Come, and let us devise devices against
him ; for the law shaU not perish from the priest, nor counsel
from the Wise, nor the word from the prophet " (Jer. xviii. 18).
This pecuHar kind of reflection which produced the Wisdom
was not confined to Israel. In 1 Kings iv. 30, it is said of
Solomon that " his wisdom exceUed the wisdom of all the
children of the east country and aU the wisdom of Egypt ; for
he was wiser than aU men, than Ethan the Ezrahite, and
Heman, and Chalcol, and Darda, the sons of Mahol." Teman
ia Edom was famed for its wisdom: "Is wisdom no more in
Teman ? is counsel perished from the prudent ? is theH wisdom
vanished? " (Jer. xlix. 7, Obad. 8).
Some of the negative characteristics of the Wisdom best
indicate its peeuHarities. Though sacrifice, for example, be
once or twice aUuded to, Httle importance is attached to the
ritual system ; the priest is not once mentioned, and the external
exercise of worship appears to have Httle significance. But
singularly the wise man differs as much from the prophet as he
does from the lawgiver. AU those ideas that speciaUy charac-

THE BOOK OF PKOVERBS. 175
¦terise prophecy are absent, such as the idea of a Kingdom of
God, of a chosen people, of a Messiah or future King of the
house of David, and others. The distinction between "Israel "
and the " Gentiles " is not aUuded to. The familiar phraseology
of the prophets, "Israel," "Jacob," "Zion," "my people,"
"the day of the Lord," the revelation of his "glory," in a
word; the whole of the language of "particularism," the idea
that Israel is the peculiar people of the Lord, so characteristic
of prophecy and many of the Psalms, nowhere appears. The
conflict between the true worship of Jehovah and that of false
gods, with which the pages of the prophets are filled, does not
receive even a passing reference.
3. " The Wise." — More than one suggestion has been made to
account for these peeuHarities of the " wise." One suggestion
made is entirely without warrant. It has been argued that the
" wise " were men whose way of thinking placed them outside of
their dispensation and in antagonism to the circle of particular
istic beHefs cherished by the prophets ; in short, that they took
up a humanistic or naturahstic position. A position to which the
name "naturahstic" could be given is not conceivable in Israel;
and there is nothing in the Proverbs to indicate any antagonism
on the part of tbe wise either to priest or prophet. The passage
(chap. Hi. 9), " Honour the Lord with thy substance and with
the first fruits of thine increase," shows their friendliness to the
ritual ; while the other saying, " Where there is no vision (pro
phetic revelation, 1 Sam. iii. 1) the people cast off restraint "
(chap. xxix. 18), is proof enough of their esteem of prophecy ;
and the frequent references to the " law," i.e. revelation, the
"commandment," the "word," show that theH thoughts all
moved within the sphere of the revealed reHgion.
The wise men had no unfriendliness to the institutions or
pubhc teachers of Israel ; they occupied themselves, however,
more with the life of the individual than of the community, and
sought to distil from the teaching of the prophets, directed to
theH own people, general principles which, both in morals and
reHgion, should be universaUy appHcable. Still this universaHsm,
acknowledged to be a peculiarity of the teaching of the wise, is a
remarkable thing, and a different attempt has been made to
explain it. It has been suggested that the Hterature of the
Wisdom is late, chiefly post-ExUe, and that the want of aUusions
to the State is due to the fact that there was now no State,
only a community. The wise are the successors of the prophets,
whose particularistic teaching has now lost its meaning, inas
much as the State has perished, but whose great religious and
moral truths remain, and it is the task which the wise set before

176 BOOK BY BOOK.
themselves to impress these truths on every member of the
community. This suggestion leaves much unexplained, and can hardly be
considered satisfactory. For, first, it is certain that the class of
" wise " men existed long before the Exile, and it is probable
that remains of their activity should have been preserved ; and
undoubtedly the national tradition, as we see it reflected in the
Book of Job, was that the moral wisdom was of antiquity far
beyond memory. Again, though Israel was only a community
after the Exile, it is certain that the national feeling remained
as strong as ever, and the sense of the high privileges of
"Israel" and its distinction from the " Gentiles " even grew
in intensity, so that the peeuHarities of the Wisdom are as diffi
cult to explain at this time as at any other. It is at this period
also that the "law" was most rigidly observed, and yet
aUusions to the ceremonial are entirely wanting Hi the Pro
verbs ; a fact which becomes the more remarkable when it is
remembered how often the author of Ecclesiasticus, who Hved at
this period, extols the "law," and insists upon its observance.
And, finaUy, many of the proverbs are of such a kind that
they cannot have been spoken first in the post-Exile period, for
example, the one aHeady quoted : ' ' Where no vision is the
people east off restraint" (xxix. 18). This can hardly belong
to a tune when prophecy had ceased. The frequent references
to the "king" also suggest that the proverbs belong to the
time of the monarchy, e.g. "My son, fear the Lord and the
king" (xxiv. 21 ; cf. 1 Kings xxi. 10) ; and such a sentiment as
this, ' ' A divine sentence is on the Hps of the king ; his mouth
shaU not transgress in judgment" (xvi. 10), seems to take us
back to the more ancient times in Israel, when the king actuaUy
judged causes in person (cf. xvi. 12 ; xx. 8). The conclusion
from aU this is that the historical tradition of the existence of
these wise men during the whole history of Israel is to be rehed
on. The prophets generaUy arose only at great crises in the
State, the " wise" pursued a calmer method, and as "reprovers"
and monitors are frequently alluded to by the prophets them
selves (Hos. iv. 4; Am. v. 10).
4. Hebrew Conception of Wisdom. — The fundamental idea of the
Hebrew Wisdom is that the world is a moral constitution. Under
all its phenomena and within all the history of men and all the
events of the individual's life, there is a living God fulfilling
Himself, His thoughts, and His will. The sacred philosopher did
not rise up through nature and Hfe unto God, he came down
from God upon the world and Hfe ; he did not discover God from
observing the world, he recognised Him everywhere in the world.

THE BOOK OF PROVERBS. 177
It was this that made his study of life so fascinating, and gave
unity to it. And it was not life merely on its religious but
particularly on its mental side, as an embodiment of sense or
inteUigence, that attracted him, for underneath every aspect of
it there was a divine reality or thought, upon which it was his
delight to lay his finger.
The wise man, however, does not merely observe Hfe and
give a dispassionate photograph of men and theH conduct ; he
is a teacher, and passes judgment. Yet his observations are
always good-natured, and never betray dislike of his feUow-
men. He walks through the bazaars and observes the methods
of Oriental marketing. "Itis naught, it is naught, saith the
buyer ; but when he is gone his way then he boasteth " (xx. 14).
Or he observes bow our natural selfishness cuts into us some
what deeper, and describes it with a certain kindly sarcasm :
" AU the brothers of the poor man do hate him ; much more wiU
his neighbours go far from him " (xix. 7). Sometimes his ex
pressions border on humour, as when he makes the sluggard
express his deadly terror of labour by his cry, " There is a
Hon Hi the road ! a lion in the streets ! " (xxvi. 13) ; or describes
him as too tired to lift his hand from the dish to his mouth,
or too lazy to wash that which he took in hunting (xxvi. 15).
But usuaUy he shows a kindly sympathy with the f eeHngs of
every sentient creature, which descends even to the lower
creation. " A merciful man regards the natural desires of his
beast" (xii. 10). Thence every emotion and natural feehng of
the individual is of interest, and he sympathises with it, whether
sorrow or joy: "Sorrow in the heart of a man bears him
down " (xii. 25) ; and, on the other hand, "A merry heart doeth
good Hke a medicine" (xvH. 22). And he is delicate enough
to perceive that however grateful the sympathy of others is to
us ordinarily, there are times when we must be left alone with
our own feelings. " The heart knoweth his own bitterness,
and a stranger intermeddleth not with his joy " (xiv. 10). Yet,
on the other hand, we Hve Hi one another, we stretch out our
hands to the future, and sometimes the "half of our soul"
embarks on the sea or wanders in distant lands, and we long to
kuow how he fares. " Hope def erred maketh the heart sick"
(xiH. 12) ; " A good report maketh the bones fat " (xv. 30) ; and
" As cold water to. a thirsty soul, so is good news from a far
country " (xxv. 25).
Nothmg human is alien to the wise man ; he is philanthropic
in every sense. And all the broad distinctions created by God,
as man and woman, father and chUd, youth and old age, he
dweUs upon as each beautiful in its place, and seizes on that

178 BOOK BY BOOK.
in each which constitutes its charm. "A gracious woman
attains to honour, as strong men attain to wealth" (xi. 10);
that indescribable delicacy in women which is the complement
of strength Hi man, and secures her her place, the philosopher
signaHses at once, and almost with rudeness indicates that
beauty cannot compensate for the want of it : "As a jewel of
gold in a swine's snout, so is beauty in a woman without dis
cretion " (xi. 22). Similarly, " The glory of young men is theH
strength ; the glory of old men is the grey head " (xx. 29).
Why the glory of old men is the hoary head is explained else
where : "The hoary head is a crown of glory; it is found in
the way of righteousness" (xvi. 31), for "the fear of the Lord
prolongeth days, but the years of the wicked shaU be shortened"
(x. 27).
5. The Sense of God's Presence. — If now, passing from the
beauty and charm of all the forms of individual life, we inquire
how the individual should bear himself, what habits of mind he
should cherish, we enter the region of duty, and touch on the
fundamental idea of the Wisdom, that aU is of God. The pre
vailing feeling in the mind should be the fear of the Lord, and
out ot this wUl grow the other states of mind that are right.
One of the first of these will be humiHty, not as a temperament,
but as a religious condition of the mind before God. "When
pride cometh, then cometh shame " (xi. 2). " By humility and
the fear of the Lord are riches and honour and Hfe " (xxii. 4) ;
" Who can say, I have made my heart clean, I am pure from
my sin ? " (xx. 9.)
This abiding sense of God's presence wUl reveal itself in the
whole life, in a general gravity of deportment, in self-restraint,
in thoughtful consideration and slowness to speak, and even in
a dignified manner of speech, unlike the levity and want of
thought and hasty talk of the fool. "He that is soon angry
dealeth foolishly " (xiv. 17); "An equal temper is the Hfe of
the flesh, but keenness of mind is the rottenness of the bones "
(xiv. 30) ; " He that is slow to anger is greater than a hero,
and he that ruleth his spHit than he that taketh a city " (xvi.
32) ; "The heart of the righteous meditates in order to answer,
but the mouth of the wicked bubbleth over with evU things "
(xv. 28); "The tongue of the righteous gracefuUy uttereth
knowledge, but the mouth of fools poureth out foohshness "
(xv. 2) ; " Wise men reserve knowledge, but the mouth of the
fool is an imminent downfall" (x. 14).
On another side this sense of the nearness of God stimulated
to activity and diligence. Man's task was to bring himself into
harmony with God, whom he felt to be everywhere present, and

THE BOOK OF PROVERBS. 179
to realise His purpose. Hence the encomiums passed on dili
gence : "The hand of the dUigent maketh rich;" "Love not
sleep lest thou eome to poverty ; " " In aU labour there is gain "
(x. 4; xx. 13; xiv. 23).
Of course it is in intercourse with men that the disposition
can best be seen, and must be judged. The disposition re
quired, to state it in a single word, is charity, philanthropy in
the widest sense. Nothing is more beautiful than the con
siderate kindliness of the wise man. Looking- abroad upon all
the classes of men his eye alights upon the poor, with compas
sion for the unreHeved monotony of their life, in whieh there are
no good and bad days as in that of other men : " AU the days
of the poor are bad" (xv. 15), and he puts in a plea for their
kindly treatment : " He that hath mercy on the poor happy is
he " (xiv. 21).
Nay, regarding the various orders of society as the creation of
God, be who disdains any of them seems to him to sHght
Jehovah himseH: " He that oppresseth the poor reproacheth his
Maker," whUe, on the other hand, " He that hath pity upon tbe
poor lendeth unto the Lord, and that which he hath given wiU
He pay him again" (xiv. 31; xix. 17). But the bearing of
each man among his feUow-men should be characterised by a
wide human goodness. In the presence of others he wiU be
courteous: " A soft answer turneth away wrath." He esteems
others highly: "He who despiseth his neighbour is a fool"
(xi. 12). And should evil rumours regarding others reach his
ear he wUl give them no further currency. '¦ He that divulges
a slander is a fool" (x. 18). In a word, he looks with kindly con
sideration on aU men, and makes aUowance for their faults :
" Charity covereth a multitude of sins " (x. 12).
6. Moral Scope of the Book. — It has sometimes been said that
the motive set before men in the Proverbs when they are ex
horted to strive after wisdom is not a lofty one, being usually
material weU-being. The answer to this charge is that it is by
no means universaUy true, and where it is true it is largely
explained by differences between Hebrew modes of thinking and.
our own. When Wisdom says —
' ' My fruit is better than gold, yea, than fine gold,
And my revenue than choice silver" (viii. 19),
she is conscious of offering men something more precious than
material weU-being.
And even when material good is presented as the reward of
wisdom it must be remembered that material good had a larger
meaning to the Hebrew than to us. For, first, he did not draw
n 2

180 BOOK BY BOOK.
that distmction between tbe "soul," or spHitual side of our
nature, and aU other sides which we draw; the whole "man"
in its unity was the subject which had to be satisfied; and this
requHed a material sphere and material blessings. And, secondly,
as aU these blessings came directly from tbe hand of God, and
His presence was recognised in them, they had a sort of sacra
mental meaning to the ancient saint ; they were the tokens and
seal to him of God's favour, and needful to assure bim that he
possessed it. His fundamental idea, that the universe was a
moral constitution, led him to see moral principles always reaHsed
in the external world, and this was so much the case, that when
adversity befeU him be saw in it the anger of God. And it is
here, no doubt, that is found the explanation of the absence of
any formal doctrine of immortaHty Hi the Proverbs, and any idea
of " another world."
To the Hebrew mind God was in every phenomenon and in
every event in the universe ; He was present in the whole Hfe of
man, and there could be no "other" world. The world was
one and God filled it. It was not defect but excess of reHgion
that postponed so long the doctrine of immortality. Only when
death called men away from tbe enjoyment of God's presence
here, or when great miseries and the evUs of Ufe taught them
that full blessedness in His feUowship could not be enjoyed on
earth, or when a deepening sense of sin convinced them that
that purity of heart needful to see God could not be attained in
the present conditions of Hfe — only then did the thought of
another sphere of Hfe with God arise and grow into clearness.
When, however, such a statement is made in Proverbs as this :
' ' In the way of righteousness is life,
And the pathway thereof is immortality " (xii. 28),
it would be a very superficial reading that found nothing more
in it than a reference to occasions of danger in a man's Hfe. It
is the statement of a principle ; and other parts of revelation
show how the principle is to be reconcUed with facts, such as
that of death, which seem to contradict it.
7. God's World-Plan. — It has been said that the fundamental
conception of the Wisdom is that the world, including the Hfe of
man, is a moral constitution, in all the phenomena of which God
is present and reaHsing HimseH. AU things are but the- innu
merable reflections, infinitely various in theH colours, of one
great divine idea. This idea, however, is especially reflected in
the social order and moral Hfe of man. The single proverbs
exhibit in a great variety of ways individual iUustrations of this.
But in chaps, i. — ix., the general idea of God's world-plan or

THE BOOK OF PROVERBS. 181
world-conception, particularly on its moral side, is seized and
personified and presented as a Being, Wisdom herself. This
figure, chaste and beautiful, with the serenity of order upon her
face, and truth and religion in her eyes, the divine Wisdom
which may also become man's, is set forth in contrast with FoUy
who too often takes the shape of the " strange woman " or the
brigand murderer who lurks in the thickets (chaps, i., vii.).
The traits of this exquisite picture of Wisdom are borrowed
from a hundred sources, from the moral conditions of the time,
from the usages of the religious teachers of the day, from the
social order and public Hfe in the city ; yet not from these as
superficial phenomena, unsubstantial shadows that come and go,
but as aU of them expressions of an invisible whole, the moral
framework of the human economy, image of the mind of God.
It is in chap. vHi. where this personification attains its most
brilliant form. First, (1 — 3) Wisdom is introduced as a pubhc
teacher, and the places are described where she takes her stand
and speaks. She stands on the "high places," the Temple
heights, where the crowds may be addressed as they pass ; or
at the gates, where justice was dispensed, and Hfe was most
intense. Then (4 — 11) Wisdom herself speaks, naming those
whom she desires to hear her, and to whom she offers herself : —
" Unto you, 0 men, I call ;
And my voice is unto the sons of men. . . .
Receive my instruction and not silver ;
And knowledge rather than choice gold."
Then, 12 — 31, she states how she manifests herself: —
" I, Wisdom, indwell in prudence,
Counsel is mine and sound wisdom :
I am understanding ; I have power.
In me kings rule, and princes decree justice.
In me princes are princes, and rulers all the judges of the earth.''
Prudence is a form in which "Wisdom reveals herself. That
society is organised, that intelligence and rule are exercised,
that there are offices and officers dispensing right — these things
are embodiments of her. She is the substratum of inteUigence
and of godliness, for the fear of the Lord is the beginning of
wisdom: "pride and arrogancy, and the evU way, and the
froward mouth do I hate." And then, having said that she was
ready to bestow herself on them who bad received her — " I love
them who love me " — her own image seems to fill her mind,
and she speaks of her own past, when she was alone with God,
or ever the earth was ; when she was His workman in creation,
which was but herself taking shape in the magical play of her
power : —

182 BOOK BY BOOK.
" The Lord possessed me at the beginning of His way,
The first of his works of old.
I was set up of old from the beginning,
Or ever the earth was.
" "When He set up the heavens I was there :
When he drew a circle on the face of the deep :
When He made firm the skies above ....
When he marked out the foundations of the earth :
Then was I with him as his workman,
And day by day was I full of delights,
Playing before him at all times ;
Playing in his habitable earth,
And my delights were with the sons of men.' '
Wisdom was with God from the beginning, or ever the earth
was ; she was the first of His works. Also she was present at
creation, not as a spectator, but as an artificer ; the work of
creation was but Wisdom reaHsing herseH and taking form ;
creation is the embodiment of her movements, as with an intoxi
cating joy she played before God ; and there, where her dehghts
were highest and her reaHsation of herseH most perfect, was Hi
the habitable earth, the moral world of the sons of men.
8. Wisdom as Teacher. — This very remarkable chapter presents,
first, Wisdom as a teacher addressing men. The exquisite pic
ture could have been drawn only by combining many materials
together, such as tbe pubhc teaching of the prophets, the con
versational instruction of the wise, the procedure of the law
courts in the gates, and the many lessons of soeial order and Hfe
which the thronging thoroughfares presented. These are the
things that sweU the voice of Wisdom : she is the personifica
tion of everything that had a voice to speak to men and impress
upon them the principles of divine order in the world. Her
voice gathers into itself the many voices continuaUy sounding
in men's ears, the voice of public life, of an orderly society, of
revelation, or, Hi a word, of the whole course of things.
This is Wisdom the teacher, and her theme is herself, Wisdom
the thing. There is such a thing. Within the sphere of life
and the world there is a divine framework upon which all
things are buUt. The principles of tbe economy of the human
race and the world in which it is placed form a weU-ordered
organism, immaterial but not hidden ; it speaks with a thousand
tongues of revelation and of Hfe, and what it speaks of in the
ears of men is itseH.
Finally, this organic frame of principles, now reaHsed in the
economy of man, had its origin in God ; it was from the begin
ning. God gave it being as the first of His works. It was His
creation-plan, His world-conception, which He projected out of

THE BOOK OF PROVERBS. 183
His own mind. Hence it is ideahsed as having subsistence of
its own beside God, and His purpose to realise it is considered
a capacity of its own to effectuate itself, which it does in crea
tion. It is God's artificer in creation ; it plays before Him, and
its play is creation. Every movement embodies itself in some
creative work. And there, where the divine beauty of its move
ments was most conspicuous and its deHghts deepest, was in the
habitable earth and the moral economy of the sons of men.
Though the Wisdom here be as yet only a personification and
not a person, there is no doubt that the profound conception was
taken up among the other Messianic thoughts of Israel, to which
it gave vaster scope, suggesting the relation of the Messiah to
creation and the universe ; and the things said here of Wisdom
are seen verified in the Son of God : " The Word was with
God ; " " AU things were made by Him ; " and " He is before
all things, and in Him do aU things subsist."
9. The Age of the Different Collections.- — The Proverbs are chiefly
maxims touching Hfe on its reHgious and moral side. These
maxims, being of such infinite variety, and the fruit of such a
wide observation and reflection, cannot be the production of an
individual mind. Many of them may weU be by Solomon, and
a great number may belong to his age ; but though the stream
of wisdom began to flow Hi his day, it gathered volume as tune
advanced. In the book which now exists we find gathered
together the most precious fruits of the Wisdom in Israel
during many centuries, and no doubt the later centuries were
richer, or at least fuUer, in their contributions than the earlier.
There is no reason to doubt the historical worth of the head
ings to chaps, xxv., xxix., "Proverbs of Solomon, which the
men of Hezekiah copied out." We have here a historical
guarantee that this coUection was made Hi the eighth century,
and possibly it may be the oldest of the codes now contained in
the book. Many of the proverbs in this ease contain a com
parison; and as the word "proverb" signifies "comparison,"
this was probably the oldest form. Some of these comparisons
are of great beauty: "An earthen vessel glazed with sUver
dross; so are fervent Hps and a bad heart " (xxvi. 23) ; " A city
that is broken down and without waUs, so is he that hath no
rule over his own spirit " (xxv. 28) ; "A trampled fountain and
a fouled spring, is a righteous man who giveth way before the
evU" (xxv. 26).
Almost aU the proverbs that have entered into our own lan
guage have been taken from this collection, such as "Iron
sharpeneth iron ; " " As face answereth to face ; " " The dog is
returned to his vomit;" "Bray a fool in a mortar;" phrases

184 BOOK BY BOOK.
like "Heap coals of fire on his head," "Singing songs to a
weary heart," "The curse causeless," "The fear of man
bringeth a snare," " A whip for the horse, a bridle for the ass,
and a rod for the fool's back," and many more.
As to the code (chaps, i.— ix.), though the general preface
(1 — 7) has "Proverbs of Solomon," the recurrence of this
heading at chap. x. impHes that chaps, i. — ix. were not con
sidered Solomonic. These chapters form a general introduction
to the Proverbs properly so-called. The descriptions given of
Wisdom taking her stand by the broadways and at the gates,
and there addressing the crowds of men (chaps, i., viu.), as weU
as the figure of the " strange woman " prowling in the streets
at nightfall (chap, vii.), suggest that the writer had the idea of
a large and populous city present to his mind. This city could
be no other than Jerusalem, and Jerusalem before its destruction.
The miserable city of the Restoration could not, untU many
generations after the return from exile, have afforded materials
for the writer's picture, for in Nehemiah's days, nearly a cen
tury after the return of the first exiles, great part of tbe city was
stiU in ruins (Neh. vii. 4). Probably, therefore, these chapters
were written some time before the destruction of the city (586),
and about a century after Hezekiah made his collection.
The age of the code, chaps, x. — xxii., is difficult to determine.
It has been usually considered the oldest, but the arguments
used in support of this view are very precarious. The extremely
miscellaneous nature of the collection, the repetitions in it, and
the frequent occurrence of proverbs which are but modifications
of others, are proofs that it contained elements belonging to very
different periods. When we find one proverb repeated verbally
(xiv. 12 = xvi. 25), a number of others having the first member
identical but differing in the second, and conversely a number
having the second member identical but differing in the first, we
are led to infer that many of the proverbs, before coming into
the coUection, had a long history of oral transmission, during
which they underwent great changes ; that, like defaced coins,
they were thrown into the mint and came forth with a new
image and superscription to cHculate again among men; and
that the coUection as a whole has been drawn largely from oral
sources. WhUe many of the maxims in such a code may be very
ancient, the code itself as a coUection may be pretty late. There
is nothing in the contents which would compel us to bring it in
its present form below the Exile ; at the same time it is possible
that this great coUection may have been open to receive later
additions. There is little in the other coUections to suggest any
precise date, although some of the smaUer pieces, particularly
the closing alphabetical poem, may be late.

ECCLESIASTES; OR, THE PREACHER.
1 . Plan and Aim of the Book. — The title of this book in Hebrew
is Koheleth, a word of somewhat uncertain meaning. Literally
it would mean, "one who calls together an assembly;" but,
as the assembly ofthe people was caUed together to be addressed,
the term may mean "the addresser" or teacher, or as we say,
the preacher. In this sense the Greek translator took it, render
ing "Ecclesiastes," he who addresses the ecelesia — assembly or
congregation of the people.
The book has many peculiarities, but several things are
suggested by a mere reading of tbe work. FHst, the book has a
general idea running through it. It is no collection of un
connected fragments, nor meie reflections which the author has
transferred from a note-book, or which some one has found
in a note-book and given out after the author's death. In some
parts of the book the connection may appear loose, but that the
author had a general idea in his mind, towards the illustration of
which aU his examples and musings converge, is in no way to be
questioned. Another thing plain from the book is that the author's aim
was practical, and not exclusively speculative. He is a teacher.
This is common to him with aU Hebrew authors. He has his
countrymen before him, and he means to convey a lesson to them
to guide them in life in the age and circumstances in which he
and they lived. This is evident both from the name which he
gives himseH and from the concluding references to himself (xii.
9, 10). No doubt he touches on various mysteries, matters
which have been subjects of speculation at aU times, but he does
not pursue these matters out of a speculative interest in them
merely, but rather to discover and to teach how human life should
be Hved in the face of them. It is also true that there is a large
personal element in the book : it is the author's confessions ; but

186 ' BOOK BY BOOK.
he is not solitary in his perplexities, he only gives expression
to what many felt. His pecuHar state of mind is the product of
two general causes, the wretched conditions under which human
life was led in his day, and a general religious tone of mind.
And both these things must have been common to him with his
contemporaries. 2. Character of the Author. — From the practical aim of the book
it foUows that it is everywhere serious. Its aim is moral. There
is no dialectical play or word-fencing in it. Ideas are not set up
in order to be overturned, nor theories broached in order to be
reduced ad absurdum. The author nowhere poses or plays the
advocate ; he is deeply in earnest throughout. Neither is he, as
he has often been caUed, a sceptic. He is baffled before the
great problem of God's providential rule of the world, so baffled
that action was paralysed ; at least he was driven to a mood of
mind to which all activity seemed useless, and a passive and
quiet' enjoyment of whatever good life offered the only reason
able course ; but he never doubts any of the great truths com
monly believed among bis people. He holds fast his faith in
God, and even in His moral rule of the world, though his
failure to see the latter operating as he would expect is the cause
of his perplexity and weariness. But even this mood of weari
ness gives way before his practical sense, and he counsels men
to throw themselves into the stream of human enterprise, unde
terred by .the uncertainties that may hang over the result of
their efforts (xi. 1 — 6).
It is possible that his gloom of mind from being an effect
became also a cause, and threw its own sombre shade over some
beliefs or hopes prevailing or beginning to prevaU in Israel.
He is not unacquainted, for example, with the idea of an immor
tality of the spirit of man in the presence of God, but the hope
is too uncertain to build upon (iii. 20, 21 ; comp. ix. 1 — 6).
Yet even this negative attitude could scarcely be caUed scepticism,
for though minds like Job and the Psalmists had occasionally
divined such an idea in moments of strong faith, it had not yet
risen into a fixed beHef . The author's position appears to remain
the same throughout the whole book. There is no evidence of a
struggle in his mind between faith and doubt, in which faith
achieves the victory; much less are the difficulties and apparent
contradictions of the book to be explained by the assumption that
it contains the utterances of "two voices," one doubting and the
other believing.
3. His Philosophy of Life. — The author states the general con
ception of his book in the opening verses : AU is vanity ; what
gain is there to man in all the labour in which he labours under

ECCLESIASTES ; OR, THE PREACHER. 187
the sun ? In other words, human life is without result. And
this general truth in regard to human life is also a truth in
regard to all things — all things move in an endless round, and
nothing results from the movement. The sun rises and sets, and
he again rises and sets. The wind circles from north to south,
and it returns upon its circuits. AH the rivers run into the sea,
and the sea is not fuU ; the rivers run into the sea. AU things
recur, and there is nothing new, no advance made, under the
sun. If a thing happens of which it is said, this is new, it is not
new; it has been long ago, only the past is forgotten, and so
that which is now present wUl be forgotten in the time to come
(i. 1-11).
Then the author narrates how he reached this conclusion, and
the practical truth at which he arrived Hi consequence. First,
he set himself to inquire by wisdom into all the works which men
do under the sun, and he found that aU was vanity and without
result, for —
' ' That which has been made crooked cannot be straightened,
And that which is wanting cannot be numbered " (i. 15, vii. 13).
Man finds himseH' imprisoned in a fixed system, the evils of
which he is without power to amend. And the very knowledge
of this evU system which the author has gained by his study, or
as he says, "by wisdom," is itself of no use and a striving after
the wind —
' ' For in much wisdom is much grief,
And he that increaseth knowledge, increaseth sorrow " (i. 12 — 18).
Secondly, having failed to 'find by study of human activity, any
form of Hfe that yielded any gam, the author had recourse
to another experiment, he tried pleasure. He denied himself
no joy, and reveUed in all the pleasures whieh man can procure
for himself (not as a vulgar sensualist, for his wisdom
remained with him, ii. 3 — 9) ; but the experiment was as fruit
less as before —
" I said of laughter, It is mad ;
And of mirth, What doeth it ? " (ii. 2.)
This also was vanity. No doubt when wisdom and folly were
compared together there was an advantage of a kind in wisdom ;
yet the advantage was no permanent one, ' ' for as the fool
dieth, so dieth the wise man." There being, therefore, no profit
or permanent gain in Hfe, however it be lived, the practical
conclusion drawn by the author is this : " There is nothing
better for a man than that he should eat and drink, and make
his soul enjoy good Hi his labour " (H. 24).

188

BOOK BY BOOK.

This is no recommendation of a sensual life : it is a recommen
dation of a sober enjoyment of life while it last's, in the fear of
God, for this is what God has given to man upon the earth
(comp. Jer. xxii. 15). And even this is the gift of God. Man
has no power over anything else, and even over this he has no
power, unless God confer the power of enjoyment upon him
(ii. 25, 26). For (chapter iii.) all the events of human life are in
the hand of God ; man has no power over them more than he
has over the wind (viii. 8). There is a time to be born, and a
time to die ; a time to weep, and a time to laugh ; a time to love,
and a time to hate ; all is in the hand of God, whether it be love
or hatred; man knoweth it not — all is " before them " (ix. 1).
"Whatsoever God doeth it shall be for ever; nothing can be
put to it, nor anything taken from it ; and God hath made it
that men should fear before him " (iii. 14). Even the evils of
life, the injustice and wickedness, are there by God's deter
mination (though this does not remove the culpability of men,
whom God made upright) ; but they have sought out many
inventions (vii. 29). His time wiU come for judging them, for
there is a time for everything ; and so far as men are concerned
they are intended " to prove them," and to teach them what they
are, nothing better than beasts ; for one occurrence, even death,
happens to men and beasts : " Who knoweth the spHit of man
whether it goeth upward, and the spirit of the beast whether it
goeth downward to the earth ? " (iii. 16—21).
This, then, is the author's meaning when he says that aU is
vanity ; not quite that which we mean. It is not that the world
is unsatisfying, and that the human soul craves something
higher than the world can give. It is that all men's efforts are
without result. One can accumulate no gain, can perform
nothing that can be called an audition to things. His spirit
is larger than his sphere. AU is vanity because man is not
free, because he is confined by a fixed determination of every
thing on all sides of him by God. He cannot shape any destiny
for himself. The vanity is a universal one, because the spirit
of man over against God and his determination of aU things
is impotent, can effect nothing, change nothing, cannot even
comprehend the scheme of which it is a fixed part. AU that
sueha being as man can do is to enjoy what of life is good, for
this is that which God has given him in his Hfe of vanity.
4. Date and Style. — Although there is much that is personal
here, particularly in the deep f eeHng, and the gloom bordering on
dispair, of the writer's mind, there are some general points evident
enough, which help to explain his particular state of mind. One
point is, the wretched condition of society in his day ; and another

ECCLESIASTES ; OR, THE PREACHER. 189
is, the general reHgious tone of his tune. The date of the book
cannot be accurately fixed. It is allowed on all hands to be
very late, almost the latest work in the Canon. The language
and style cannot be explained on any other supposition.*
Although in the beginning of the book the experiments on life
seem to be made by Solomon, this transparent disguise is very
soon abandoned. Solomon is but the ideal of one possessing the
highest wisdom and having the most unbounded resources at his
command ; and in the epilogue the Preacher is merely one of the
wise (xu. 9). The book may almost with certainty be assumed
to be earHer than the great outburst of national spirit and
reHgious hopes in the middle of the second century B.c. On the
other hand, it is probably not earlier than towards the end of the
fourth century. This period from 350 to 150 may be called the
dark age of Jewish history, and some time in the course of it
Ecclesiastes was written.
5. Condition of Society. — Though the particular circumstances
that press with such a crushing weight upon the heart of the
Preacher are unknown, the veU which he partially Hfts from the
condition of the world in his day reveals great miseries under
which men groaned : injustice in the judgment seat, rapacity of
rulers, neglect and persecution of the righteous, and triumph of
the strong. The evUs of Hfe were such as to cause men to
despair. " Then I turned and saw aH the oppressions that are
done under the sun, and behold the tears of such as were
oppressed, and. they had no comforter ; and on the side of their
oppressors there was power ; but they had no comforter. Where
fore I praised the dead which are already dead, more than the
Hving which are yet aHve ; yea, better than both did I esteem
him which bath not yet been, who hath not seen the evU work
that is done under the sun " (iv. 1 seq. ; comp. iii. 16, 17 ; viu. 2 ;
x. 5—7, 16, 17, 20).
These passages give a picture of the time. And against such
evUs the writer felt himseH impotent. He was a member of a
subject race. Even his own people were probably disunited in
sentiment and aim. Mankind seemed to him a heap of atoms
without coherence, with no destiny, hke fishes of the sea which
are taken in an evU net (He. 12). A hopeless individualism met
him everywhere.
6. Externalism in Religion. — But another thing also helped to
determine his state of mind. A tendency to externaHse in reH
gion was the necessary result of the introduction of the strict
legahstic constitution at the return from exile. Men put the
* See the proofs in Delitzsch's Commentary (Clark's translation).

190 ROOK BY BOOK.
law between them and God ; they obeyed the law, not God.
Further, the very loftiness of the conception of God now reached
was in a certain sense dangerous to religion. God became a
transcendent omnipotence, far removed from human Hfe. The
Preacher never uses the name Jehovah, the living God of the
people, but always the abstract " God." Many things show
this tendency to remove God away from men's life ; for example,
the great development of the doctrine of angels, who acted as
intermediaries between God and men.
The Preacher's doctrine of predestination is another instance
of tbe same thing. Instead of the Hving God who of old was
present in every movement of the people's history, there is a
cold impersonal " purpose " of a distant mind everywhere
fulfilling itseH. The Preacher is a religious man, a reverent
man ; the fear of God is strong in his mind, but his religion is
reflective merely. He has not that intense feeling of being in
fellowship with a living person which Job and the Psalmists
had, and which enabled them to force their way through the
anomalies of providence to the Hving God behind it, or to open
up as a religious necessity a world beyond death. Job appeals
from God to God, from the God whom he identified with pro
vidence to the God with whom his spirit had fellowship ; but the
Preacher knows only the former God, Him whom he learns to
know by reflecting on the world and the life of men.
7. Viewed in the Light of Greek Philosophy. — Nothing could
be more inept than to look upon Ecclesiastes as reflecting the
ideas of Greek phUosophy, whether Stoical or Epicurean. The
coincidences of phraseology are merely Hterary, not technical.
Nor can the terms Stoic or Epicurean be applied to him in theH
proper sense. One who in answer to the question, What is good
for man in his life? says, "Itis better to go to the house of
mourning than to the house of f easting ; . . . sorrow is better
than laughter " (vii. 1 — 6), was at least no vulgar sensuaHst.
Neither is there a trace of Stoicism in the book. On the contrary,
it teaches that he who is wise wiU use every effort to obviate and
alleviate the evUs of life.
The work is a genuine product of the Hebrew Wisdom. Its
fundamental principle is the same as that in tbe Proverbs and
in Job, viz., that God is in aU things that occur. But when
this principle in a time of prosperity and well-being gave un
speakable joy to the pious mind, and while even in tunes of
adversity and oppression, such as those in which Job and the
Psalmist lived, a powerful personal faith was able to use it to
wring out great religious principles from it, when the times were
evU and faith also feeble, the principle that God determined

ECCLESIASTES; OR, THE PREACHER. 191
everything produced a sense of impotency in the mind which
compeUed men to conclude that human life was without result.
The Preacher's conception of God is too much that of reflection
for him to say either with the Psalmist, " Nevertheless I am con-
tinuaUy with thee " (Psalm Ixxiii. 23), or with Job, "I know
that my redeemer liveth, and that I shaU see God " (xix. 25) ;
but he holds fast to faith in God, in His moral rule, however
obscurely it is to be seen, and in human duty. Job and the
Psalmists threw themselves upon the anomaHes of providence
with a religious energy that was determined to get rid of them.
The Preacher knows that they are not to be got rid of. Hence
the greater part of his book consists of considerations whieh
tend to show either that the evUs have some element of good in
them, or how to obviate them.
In one respect he makes an advance on older models by
drawing the evUs of Hfe into life itself, and showing how they
have a discipHnary character. Thus even the gross injustice of
rulers has the effect of " proving " men (Hi. 16) ; and even a bad
government is better than anarchy (v. 8). And on the other
side, the things that seem good to men, such as riches, have
evUs attending them that overbalance the good (vi: 10 — 17). In
general the Preacher recommends a certain prudence and
moderation of mind, a wise eircumspectness of conduct in aU
departments of Hfe. Even Hi reHgion a man ought to be calm
and meditative (v. 1 — 7). So in regard to evU rulers a wise
man wUl not hastUy take part in conspHacies, but wait the
judgment of God upon their injustice (viii. 1 — 7). And in regard
to present evils it is foolish to be sentimental over them, and ask
why the former days were better than these (vii. 10). The good
that there is in the present is to be enjoyed in the fear of God
(ui. 14 ; v. 6 ; vii. 18), for God wiU judge every human life (ix.
1 — 10) ; and rising above his own phUosophy, the Preacher
inculcates dUigence and a prudent enterprise, without
gloomy forecasts in regard to success or faUure (xi. 1— 6 ; ix.
10). 8. The Preacher and His Age. — No book of Scripture can be
justly estimated apart from the age to which it belongs. Every
part of Scripture is practical, speaking to the condition of
men's minds at the time when it was written. The Preacher
belonged to Israel's dark age. The reflecting reHgion of his
day differed from the intuitional fervid reHgion of the prophets,
as much as the colourless piety of the eighteenth century did
from the faith of the Reformation, which immediately embraced
God. But the apologetics of the eighteenth century were suit
able to the tune. And the Preacher, when rightly understood,

192 BOOK BY BOOK.
is seen to furnish a powerful apologetic for his time. His
deep sympathy with men in theH sorrows, and the under
tone of melancholy in his mind, enables him to speak with
effect. He has gauged the evU fuUy. Then Hi spite of the
evil his faith in God and His moral rule, and in human duty,
remains unshaken (iii. 17 ; viu. 12 seq. ; xi. 9). And the wise
practical counsel which he offers, his kaleidoscopic handhng of
the elements of human life, showing the good side of what is
. usuaUy thought evil, and the evU side of what is considered
good — aU this was fitted to give a firmer tone to men's minds.
9. The Preacher rejects the idea of what we caU " culture," a
disciplining of the individual mind by reflection and the
experiences of life. A culture to which death put an end could
not satisfy a spirit like his. Then he was too sick at heart to
cherish the conception of a progress of the race, a widening of
its life in the circuit of the suns. Society was too disintegrated,
and the first principle of moral order too habitually disregarded
for such an idea to sustain itseH. Again he was not certain of
a conscious immortality of the individual. And he was stUl
entangled in the belief, which was the cross of aU afflicted men
in Israel, that the outward lot of men in the world was a true
reflection of the mind of God towards them. The Preacher
prepares for Christianity by showing the need of it. He is a
voice "crying in the night." His cry may justly be called
prophetic. The Hght and immortaHty brought to light in the
Gospel would have changed his "vanity of vanities" into an
activity of gladness. When Christ said, "God is spirit, and
they that worship must worship Him in spirit," He not only
stated a necessity, He gave a definition. Religion is feUow
ship with God in spirit. And to one having this feUowship
the world no more appears, as it did to the Preacher, an
external machine, crushing him to pieces ; he feels himself
with God at the centre of it, and can say to his soul, AU things
are yours.

THE SONG OF SOLOMON.
1. Characteristics. — The Song remains the most obscure book
in Scripture. It is impossible not to feel the charm of its poetry
and be dehghted by its intense love of nature, a feebng which
the poetry of the Hebrews alone among ancient nations exhibits
in common with modern poetry. The wealth and luxuriousness
of language at the command of the writer in describing the
aspeets and objects of nature is astonishing, as weU as the depth
of his feeling for its beauties. It is also easy to perceive from
the continuous dialogue carried on in the book that it is of the
nature of a lyrical drama, although it may never have been
intended, as some writers think that it was, to be actually repre
sented. And finally, it can be perceived at once that the subject
celebrated in the book is love (chapter viii. 5 — 7). But beyond
this it is difficult to go with any certainty.
2. Methods of Interpretation ; the Allegorical. — The earliest known
method of interpreting the book was the AUegorical. The love
of Solomon and the Shulamite set forth in a figure the love of
Jehovah to His people Israel. Traces of this method of interpre
tation among the Palestinian Jews are found in the Fourth Book
of Ezra, about the end of the first century a.d. And the method
is fuUy developed in the Chaldee translation (in the case of this
book rathera paraphrase), which, though not itself early, may
be presumed to have preserved the early tradition. The book
was interpreted by reading into it the whole history of the
people of Israel from the Exodus to the perfect times of the
Messiah. From the Jews this method passed over to the early
Christian Church, naturaUy with the difference that the book
became an aUegory of the love between Christ and the Church
or the individual soul.
The great theologians of the early and mediaeval Church com
mented on the book in this sense with a voluminousuess perhaps
not surprising considering that they read into it their own
mysticism. Origen's work on the Song extended to ten volumes ;.
o

194 BOOK BY BOOK.
and Bernard in eighty-six sermons had only reached chapter iii, 1,
when he was arrested by death. And the same view has been
presented with great religious depth and beauty in modern times,
sometimes to illustrate the pious soul's experiences, and some
times as a prophetic prefigurement of the IHe of Christ or the
history of the Church.
Apart, however, from the not very great suitableness of making
Solomon represent Christ, the theory fails to take any account of
the reaUstie nature of the book, and leaves very much unex
plained. The "little sister" might be heathenism, butwhoarethe
sixty queens and eighty concubines ? (vi. 8.) And the book itself
offers not the sHghtest hint that it is prophetical. A somewhat
different turn has been given by some to the aUegory by the
assumption that the Shulamite represented "wisdom," and that
the love between her and Solomon set forth the wise monarch's
devotion to sacred philosophy.
3. The Typical Method. — As early as the fifth century Theodore
of Mopsuestia, the great Syrian exegete, protested against the
allegorical interpretation, though the protest was so little to the
taste of the Church of his day that it brought him after his death
under ecclesiastical censure. From the seventeenth century,
however, there began to prevail a view of the book which might
be caUed the Typical. In the allegorical method Solomon and
the Shulamite were mere figures representing higher subjects;
the Typical interpretation recognised that there was a real rela
tion ot love between the historical king and the Shulamite, also
an actual person, but considered that this love was a type of a
spiritual relation, according to the Apostle's words regarding
marriage, "This is a great mystery, but I speak concerning
Christ and the Chnrch " (Eph. v. 32). The Shulamite was sup
posed by some to be Pharaoh's daughter, the wife of Solomon
(Grotius); by other more modern writers a Galilean maiden
whom he made his queen (Delitzsch). This theory distinguished
between a primary historical sense and a higher typical spiritual
sense. A true chaste human love was celebrated Hi the book,
though with the design of suggesting a relation of love which
was divine. It was natural when this footing in a historical
sense of the book had been gained to drop the supposed typical
reference more and more out of view, and to prosecute a closer
inquiry into the primary meaning.
4. Exegetical Difficulties. — The interpretations hitherto aUuded
to had assumed that the words of endearment in the book were
aU spoken by Solomon and the Shulamite in regard to one
another. But this view encounters great difficulties. It requires
us to suppose that the king is introduced in the guise of a shep-

THE SONG OF SOLOMON. 195
herd or at least a rustic youth, which is extremely unnatural,
besides beingineonsistent with other passages where he is called
king and represented as surrounded by a royal retinue. It
therefore becomes of consequence to inquire who the interlocutors
are in the poem.
Of these there are certainly three, Solomon, the Shulamite,
and the daughters of Jerusalem, presumably the ladies of the
court. In chapter iii. 6 other persons are introduced expressing
their admHation of the royal palanquin and retinue seen advan
cing in the distance, but they are mere spectators and play no
part in the piece. In chapter vi. 10 the queens and concubines
who exclaim, "Who is this that looks forth like the dawn ?" are
probably to be identified with the ' ' daughters of Jerusalem." In
chapter viii. 8 the Shulamite' s brothers are represented as speak
ing of theH sister, but their words are merely recorded by her.
She refers to these brothers more than once, and also to her
mother ; but none of them actually appears upon the scene. It
is a question, however, whether there be not a fourth person who
is frequently alluded to by the Shulamite, and who on several
occasions actually speaks. The Shulamite is supposed to aUude
to this absent person in the very first words of the poem, verses
1 — 4, drawing a distinction between him and the king (verse 4).
She has been brought into the king's eourt, the royal ladies are
present, verses 5 — 8, but the king does not appear tUl verse 9.
He addresses her in terms of admiration, verses 9 — 11, but she
indirectly repels his advances by saying, "While the king was
(absent) in>his divan my spikenard sent forth the smeU thereof,"
that is, the thought of her absent beloved, whom she compares
to a bunch of henna flowers, filled her mind with deHght. It is
to this person that she refers, ii. 8, describing him as " coming
skipping upon the hills "—an odd description of a king — and
between whom and her the dialogue is carried on, ii. 10 — 17. It
is in regard to this person that the daughters of Jerusalem say
to her, "What is thy beloved more than another beloved?"
(v. 9, vi. 3) — a question whieh they could hardly have put in
regard to King Solomon.
5. Views of Modern Writers. — FoUowing the clue supplied by
these and other passages, modern writers have come to the con
clusion that the " beloved " of the Shulamite is not Solomon, but
a youth who had won her affections before she accidentally
encountered the royal chariot and engaged the attention of the
king (vi. 10 — 13). This view gives an entirely different aspect
to the poem. With whatever modifications it then becomes the
celebration of a pure affection, which holds out against the temp
tations of a court, and rises superior to all the seductive arts
o2

196 BOOK BY BOOK.
even of a monarch. To narrate such a history cannot have been
the author's design merely with the view of giving pleasure ; his
purpose must have been moral; and this moral purpose can
hardly have been any other than to protest against tbe licen
tiousness of Solomon's court, and to lead men back to simplicity
and purity and the law of nature in the relations of men and
women. As such a work could scarcely have come from the hand of
Solomon himseH, nor from the hand of a subject during his day,
and as its language and aUusions appear to betray a northern
origin, some poHtieal motive may have concurred with the primary
moral one. This motive could only be to make the royal house
of Judah and its rule odious, with the view of strengthening the
basis of the newly-formed state in the north. When we remember
that the northern kingdom had in some sense the sanction of the
prophets of God, such a poHtieal motive could hardly be held to
detract from the dignity of the poem.
At aU events, the question whether the "beloved" of the
Shulamite be another than Solomon is one for investigation to
settle. No objection could be urged against the poem if its
design was to teach the moral lesson just referred to. Men are
always, by their luxury and selfishness, found perverting the
simplicity of nature ; and that which Christ thought it needful
strongly to insist upon and make an imperative law of his king
dom, cannot be held beneath the dignity or outside the purpose
of the Old Testament to teach. It has always been felt difficult
to reconcile the laxity of morals with the elevation of the reHgion
of the Old Testament saints, and it would not be without satis
faction that we found the great fundamental law of nature, now
drawn up into Christianity, already insisted upon in this book.
6. Date and Authorship. — It must be acknowledged that among
those who hold the theory of the book just stated there exists
great diversity of opinion as to the interpretation of individual
passages. The theory almost of necessity excludes the Solomonic
authorship ; the book would be about Solomon, not by bim. The
language of the poem and its allusions are considered to be
rather in favour of a northern than a Judean origin. The refer
ence to THzah along with Jerusalem (vi. 4) has been thought to
point to the time when the former city was the capital of the
northern kingdom (1 Kings xiv. 17; xvi. 8, 15) before Samaria
was built by Omri (1 Kings xvi. 24; i.e. before 920 B.C., but
after the disruption of the kingdom under Rehoboam). On the
other hand, some of the peculiarities of language are just those
which characterised the post-ExUe period ; and there are some
expressions, e.g. Pardes (Paradise), which are Persian, and their

THE SONG OF SOLOMON. 197
occurrence at so early a period awakens doubt. Altogether it
must be acknowledged that much obscurity stiU continues to hang
over both the date and the interpretation of the book.
In the Revised Version the spaces left between the verses indi
cate the different speakers.
A few notes wiU suggest how the poem is read on the modern
view: —
Chapter i. 2 — ii. 7: Shulamite, daughters of Jerusalem, king. (Shula
mite, 2 — -4, speaks of the beloved, who is absent ; 9 — 11, the king addresses
her ; 12 — i4, she indirectly repels him. If 15 — ii. 3 be a dialogue between
her and the king, he must be understood to speak to her, while she speaks of
the beloved, who is absent.)
Chapter ii. 8 — iii. 5 : Shulamite, daughters of Jerusalem. (8 — 14, Shulamite
narrates a visit of the beloved and his words, and her own reply, 15 — 17.
The words, 1 5, are supposed to be a verse of a. vineyard song ; iii. 1 — 5,
Shulamite narrates a dream or an occurrence.)
Chapter iii. 6 — iv. 6 : Spectators, king, Shulamite. (6—11, spectators of
the approaching litter of the king ; iv. 1 — 6, the king addresses the Shula
mite.) Chapter iv. 7 — v. 1 : Beloved, Shulamite. (7 — 16, beloved ; last words of
16, Shulamite ; v. 1. beloved.)
Chapter v. 2 — vi. 3 : Shulamite, daughters of Jerusalem. (2 — 8, Shula
mite narrates a dream ; 9, daughters of Jerusalem ; 10 — 16 ; Shulamite ;
vi. 1, daughters of Jerusalem; 2, 3, Shulamite.)
Chapter vi. 4 — vii. 9 : King, daughters of Jerusalem, Shulamite. 4—9,
king, 10 — 13, give an account of the first encounter of the Shulamite with the
royal cortege ; vii. 1 — 9, king.)
Chapter vii. 10 — viii. 14 : Shulamite, daughters of Jerusalem, beloved.
(10 — viii. 4, Shulamite ; da, a spectator witnessing approach of Shulamite and
beloved ; 5i — 7, Shulamite to beloved ; 8 — 12, Shulamite narrates an episode
of her girlhood, with reflections; 13, beloved to Shulamite ; 14, Shulamite
in reply.)

THE BOOK OF THE PROPHET
ISAIAH.
1. The Prophet Himself .—To write anything like a biography
of Isaiah is simply impossible. We have no materials for such
a work. Like so many other of the great ones who, in the Old
Testament story, worked so weU for theH Master, Isaiah, as
regards himself, was usually studiedly sUent.
From notices scattered here and there in his writings we
gather, however, the foUowing particulars respecting himself.
He was the son of Amoz. A Jewish tradition relates how this
Amoz was a brother of King Amaziah. This is improbable, as
such a relationship would make Isaiah too old. But that in
some way Amoz was connected with Amaziah is not unlikely. It
is clear that Isaiah belonged to an influential bouse, from the
fact that from early days he was admitted to the friendship of,
and evidently had great influence with, Kings Jotham and Heze
kiah. It has been suggested by Dean Plumptre that Isaiah was
a priest, as the vision which he saw (chap. vi. 1) was from the
court which none might enter save the sons of Aaron. The
explanation, however, of this scene is, that Isaiah saw and heard
what is related in chapter vi. when in a trance.
His lite was a long and busy one. He Hved and worked
under five kings — Uzziah, Jotham, Ahaz, Hezekiah, and Manas
seh — apparently under cHcumstances of great intimacy, roughly
speaking from b.o. 779 to B.C. 690, some ninety years. The
rabbinical tradition teUs us how, under the last-named monarch,
having refused to obey some of his idolatrous ordinances, the
aged prophet was cruelly put to death : placed, so runs the story,
between two planks, Isaiah was killed by being sawn asunder. The
reference Hi Heb. xi. 37 is not improbably an allusion to the
great prophet's fate. Compare Talmud, treatise Sanhedrim,
ciii. 2. The Fathers Justin Martyr, TertuUian, Jerome, and
Augustine accept this tradition as authentic.
It was a stormy and eventful period during which Isaiah

THE BOOK OF THE PROPHET ISAIAH. 199
lived and preached and wrote. In his earlier years he dwelt in
the midst of the comparative wealth and luxury enjoyed by
Judah during the prosperous reign of Uzziah. He witnessed
the sister kingdom of Israel first rendered tributary by the
Assyrian monarch Pul, and subsequently conquered by the same
people under Tiglath-Pileser. He watched the last struggles of
Israel and the desperate resistance of Samaria, when the rem
nant of the iU-f ated northern division of the chosen people were
carried into captivity.
Isaiah, we know, with his own immediate circle, belonged to
the higher and wealthier classes. He was on terms of intimacy
with the high priest, and his usual residence was in the capital.
As tune went on, his influence increased, and in middle and
later Hfe he was undoubtedly the foremost man in the nation,
exercising a pecuHar power over the sovereign of the time and
his advisers. His mighty and enduring influence was due, in
the first instance, to his great natural abilities, to his earnestness
and singleness of purpose, to his true patriotism and passionate
desHe to see his countrymen once more restored to the favour of
the invisible King to whom the nation owed name, and laws;
and poHtieal existence. But behind these things which any
great and patriotic statesman might have possessed, Isaiah was
indubitably regarded by king and people as possessing, in an
eminent degree, those rare and supernatural powers which, ever
and anon, belonged to the great reHgious heroes of Hebrew
story, men like Samuel, Nathan, and EHjah. After David,
Isaiah is possibly the most conspicuous personage in the history
of Israel.
When Isaiah lived there was little left in Israel or Judah of
real reHgious life. There was the formal, elaborate ritual of
service and of sacrifice still maintained in the Temple, but it
was generally hoUow and meaningless, and the old friendship
between the individual IsraeHte and the Eternal of Hosts com
paratively unknown. In the northern kingdom of Israel, the
cup of iniquity was filled, as we have seen, in Isaiah's time, and
the prophet-statesman was a witness of the final invasion, the
utter defeat of its armies, the storming of the capital- city,
Samaria, and the hopeless captivity of the people.
In the southern kingdom of Judah. it was Isaiah's IHe work
to bring about a reformation, and to ward off a ruin simUar to
that which was witnessed in their kinsmen of the northern king
dom. The internal order of Judah, in the days when Isaiah
wrote, has been graphicaUy described as foUows:* "Wealth
* See Professor Robertson Smith, The Prophets of Israel, lecture vi., "The
Reign of Ahaz."

200 BOOK BY BOOK.
had greatly accumulated in the later years of comparative pros
perity, but its distribution had been such that it weakened rather
than added strength to the nation. The rich nobles were steeped
in gallantry, and feminine extravagance and vanity gave the
tone to aristocratic society, which, like the noblesse of France on
the eve of the great Revolution, was absorbed in gaiety and
pleasure, whUe the masses were ground down by oppression,
and the cry of their distress fiUed the land, AU social bonds
were loosed in the universal reign of injustice ; every man was
for himseH, and, no man for his brother. The subordination of
classes was undermined. . . . The characteristic Hebrew obsti
nacy . . . was backed up by false religious confidence. The
idols, of which the land was fuU, had not lost theH reputation.
Isaiah alone foresaw the approach of the hour of despair, when
their vain deliverers should be confronted with stern realities."
During the reigns of Jotham and Ahaz his work and preaching
outwardly seemed to have effected but little. But, no doubt,
round the loved prophet an ever-increasing circle of disciples
and listeners were preparing the way for the great reformation
which took place in the reign of King Hezekiah. Under this
monarch Isaiah's influence reached its highest point. At the
court he was aU-powerful ; among all classes of the people his
popularity was evidently very great. Nor was his advice and
counsel by any means limited to the moral Hfe of the nation and
to things reHgious. He was, too, throughout the reign, the
trusted adviser in foreign affairs and so could dictate the bold
and patriotic policy which ended in the crushing defeat and
consequent retreat of Sennacherib and the powerful Assyrian
host. Of this particular period of Isaiah's life we have a detaUed
account, evidently from the pen of the prophet himself.
In the course of his story this true servant of the Lord lifts the
veU which hangs between us and the unseen world around us,
and gives us a graphic picture of the direct interposition of the
Eternal of Hosts in favour of repentant Israel at the supreme
moment of her awful danger.
During the remainder of Hezekiah's reign Judah enjoyed
comparative peace and prosperity. It is in this period of rest,
when the people, struggling to cleanse and purify the national
Hfe, were restored to the protection of the Glorious Arm, that
Isaiah, released from the burden of sorrowful denunciation of
national corruption, and rejoicing in the newly found national
prosperity under the shadow of the Almighty Wings, saw and
wrote down the exquisite and touching prophecies and promises
which form the last great division of his works.
Tradition — apparently reliable — tells us how the old prophet

THE BOOK OF THE PROPHET ISAIAH. 201
lived to see Manasseh succeed Hezekiah ; lived to mourn over
the utter declension of Judah, which set in during Manasseh's
reign, and at last perished in his efforts to stem the tide of
idolatry. 2. The Work of Isaiah. — The exact position Isaiah held in
Jerusalem or at the court of the king of Judah is difficult for us
to define. From either his relationship to the royal house, or
from his position in Judah, he evidently was during the greater
portion of his IHe on intimate relations with the court, and at
times his influence appears to have been very great. He occu
pied with the people the peculiar position of a prophet or leader
with whom the Eternal of Hosts held frequent communings. He
was regarded with the same feeHngs of awe, mingled with fear
or love, as in old days an EHjah or Elisha had been. To this
favoured friend of the Eternal would the High and Holy One
now and again, by vision in a prolonged trance, or by some
mysterious communication of the Word of the Lord, disclose His
will, and impart such knowledge of the near or even distant
future as would assist his prophet in his high and difficult
work. Now what was this work ? It was to bring to Judah-^-still
loved of God— final offers of mercy ; it was to tell them the sure
doom which would f oUow if the present way of Hving was stiU
followed in Judah and Jerusalem. It was to point out the utter
worthlessness of the elaborate ceremonial law and the stately
Temple ritual if the life of the nation remained selfish and
loveless. This arousing message, delivered in the morning of Isaiah's
Hfe, had but Httle success. The evil things went on in Judah
as they did aforetime. The prophet was then charged with a
stern message of doom. The reign of Hezekiah, and the reforma
tion in the reHgion and Hfe of the people, was the result. A new
day seemed to be dawning for the chosen race. King and people
united in a brave effort to reform the former Hfe. Nor did
the reward tarry, for the glorious Arm of the Lord was raised
conspicuously in defence of Jerusalem and her king on the
occasion of the great catastrophe which destroyed the army of
Sennacherib. The record of these stirring events was written by Isaiah him
seH, and the scribe who Hi after days collected and compiled his
writings wove the well-loved record of the bright times when
Hezekiah was king into the tapestry of his prophecy.
In those happy days after the great deliverance from Senna
cherib, we think the word of the Lord came with new power on
the prophet, perhaps somewhat after the fashion so beautifully

202 BOOK BY BOOK.
suggested by Dean Bradley*: "Isaiah was transported by
God's Spirit into a time and region other than his own ; ... he
is led in prolonged and solitary visions into a land that he
has never trodden, and to a generation on whom he has never
looked. "The famiHar scenes and faces among which he had Hved
and laboured have grown dim and disappeared. AU sounds and
voices of the present are bushed, and the interests and passions
into which he has thrown himself, with all the intensity of his
race and character, move him no more. The present Has died
out of the horizon of his soul's vision. . . . The voices in his
ears are those of men unborn, and he lives a second life among
events and persons, sins and sufferings, fears and hopes, photo
graphed with the minutest accuracy on the sensitive and
sympathetic medium of his own spirit; and he becomes the
spokesman of the faith, and hope, and passionate yearning of
the exiled nation, the descendants of men living when he wrote,
in the profound peace of a renewed prosperity."
Very roughly, then, the writings of Isaiah may be divided
into three great divisions —
The First. The book of warnings, denunciation, and woe.
The Second. The historical episode of the conversion of Israel
under Hezekiah, and how the Lord awaked as one out of sleep
and raised once more the Glorious Arm in defence of the people
whom he loved.
The Third. The book of consolation, written during the hap
pier days of Hezekiah — the outcome of what he saw in vision
and trance concerning the coming Redeemer and the future of
the Israel of God.
3. The Authorship of Chapters xl. — lxvi. — The authorship
of the last great section of " Isaiah," chapters xl. — lxvi., in
recent times has been frequently called in question. In Old Tes
tament criticism these famous chapters occupy in some respects
a somewhat simUar position to St. John's Gospel in the New
Testament, both suggesting searching inquiry, owing to the deep
importance of both these writings in Christian theology.
The question is, Did Isaiah write these chapters ? After
* The passage occurs in a University sermon, and was published in the
Undergraduates' Journal (Oxford), Feb. 18, 1875, and is quoted by Professor
Cheyne in these words (" Isaiah," vol. ii., essay 6) : "No one, perhaps, has
better expressed this view than the present Dean of Westminster, who does
not, however, venture to decide upon its merits." The view in question was
that Isaiah xl. — lxvi. was a monograph written by Isaiah in a quasi-ecstatic
state, not necessarily at one time. St. John not improbably refers to some
such quasi-ecstatic condition when he writes, " I was in the spirit on the
Lord's Day, and heard behind me a great voice,'- &c, Seo. (Rev. i. 10).

THE BOOK OF THE PROPHET ISAIAH. 203
weighing the various arguments it seems indisputably clear that
he and no other was the writer.
The foUowing is a summary of the main points of the evidence
which leads us to this conclusion.
(i.) The Clear Testimony of History. — It may be asserted with
aU confidence that for eighteen centuries no Jewish tradition
existed which even suggested a different author of this latter
part of the "Isaiah" prophecy; on the contrary, all ancient
authority from the earliest times contradicts any suspicion of the
authorship of chapters xl. — lxvi. So the Septuagint, the Greek
version of the OH Testament scriptures, put out B.C. 285 — 150,
ascribes the entire contents of the book to Isaiah, son of. Amoz.
WhUe in the book of Psalms — then as now popularly ascribed
to David — the LXX. translators are careful in theH headings to
particular psalms, to give the name of the traditional composer
of the special psalm — such as Moses, Asaph, Ethan, " the chief
musician," and others.
Jesus the son of Sirach, the author of the book "Ecclesias
ticus," distinctly ascribes to the Isaiah "who lived in the days
of Hezekiah " the authorship of chapters xl. — lxvi. of the great
prophecy. This son of SHach was famous in his days for great
learning and wisdom. He lived and wrote his important work
circ. b.c 150.
About 170 b.c. the Haftarahs, or prophetic lessons read in the
synagogue on Sabbath days, festivals, and fasts, were authori
tatively arranged by the Jews. Sixteen of these lessons are
taken from Isaiah ; of these thirteen are taken from these
disputed chapters.
Josephus, the weU-known Jewish historian, very early in the
Christian era gives it as a received tradition among his country
men that Cyrus published his decree for the rebuilding of the
Temple (Ezra i. 2) after he had been shown Isaiah's prophecies
about himseH (Isaiah xHv. 28 and following).
Among the early Christians no doubt as to the authorship of
these chapters existed. The New Testament writers constantly
quote them as Isaiah's. The first suggestion that the writings
contained Hi chapters xl. — lxvi. were not the work of Isaiah
came from the Jewish writer Aben Ezra, who wrote in the
tweHth century of our era — nearly two thousand years after the
first appearance of the great prophecies. During those two
thousand years these writings had been read and studied and
pondered over by Jew and Gentile, by friend and foe, with
varied feelings, but with the deepest interest and closest atten
tion. But no idea of another than Isaiah having been their
author seems ever to have occurred to either friend or foe.

204 BOOK BY BOOK.
From Aben Ezra's time until the close of the eighteenth
century — five to six hundred years more — nothing fresh was
suggested respecting the authorship of these later chapters of
Isaiah. Since the close of the last century the last part of Isaiah
has occupied the place, in some respects — with scholars and
critics of different schools of thought — in the Old Testament,
which the Gospel of St. John fiUs in the New.
There is no doubt but that in both these cases it is tbe very
clear and definite witness to the Person and office of Jesus Christ
which these writings afford, which has brought upon them this
searching and often hostile investigation.
It has been weU said that "the fact that such a character as
Jesus Christ, so unique, so divine, should have come into the
world, leads us to feel that there must surely have been in
earHer times some shadows at least, or images, to represent,
dimly it may be, to former generations that great thing which
they were not actuaUy to witness. It would lead us to believe
that there must have been some prophetic voice to announce the
future coming of the Lord, or else the very stones would have
cried out."* Such a reasonable expectation is fulfiUed in many
a passage whispered at different times by the Holy SpHit into
the ears of prophet and psalmist, and woven by them — bright
golden threads — into the tapestry of their writings. Nowhere,
however, in any of the Old Testament writings do we find such
distinct pictures of Jesus Christ, the suffering Messiah, as in
the so-called second part of Isaiah — such clear f oreshadowings
of special circumstances in the life of our Lord. The earlier
chapters of the same prophet are not without these foreshadow-
ings ; for instance, in the seventh chapter we have the strange
and, until the Incarnation, the inexplicable picture of the Virgin
who was to conceive and to bear a Son whose name was
to be "Immanuel" (God with us); and in the ninth chapter
we read of the ChUd who was to be born and given to us, and
the Child's name was to be " Wonderful, Counsellor, the Mighty
God, the Everlasting Father, the Prince of Peace." The meaning
of the marvellous picture of the Divine Child — who was to be
caUed " the Mighty God " — was an unsolved mystery tiU the
bHth of the Child Jesus.
But the portraits of the teaching, suffering, and in His suff-r-
ing triumphant, Messiah, notably in chapters xiii. 1 — 7, xlix.
1 — 6, 1. 4 — 9, Hi. 13 — 15, HU., stand out alone in vividness,
exactness, and clearness among the many Old Testament fore-
shadowings of the coming Deliverer.
* Dean Stanley, quoted by Professor Cheyne, " Isaiah," vol. ii. p. 194.

THE BOOK OF THE PROPHET ISAIAH. 205
No one, save he whose heart is hopelessly hardened and
whose eyes are eternally blinded, can read these words, written
seven hundred years before the Passion tragedy, without being
conscious of something of the impression that this solemn, awful
prophecy produced upon tbe Earl of Rochester, of whom Bishop
Burnet writes : "As Lord Rochester heard it read, he felt an
inward force upon him which did so enHghten his mind and
conviction that he eould resist it no longer, for the words had an
authority whieh did shoot like rays or beams in his mind, so
that he was convinced, not only by the reasonings he had about
it which satisfied his understanding, but by a power which did
so effectuaUy constrain him, that he did ever after as firmly
believe in the Saviour as if he had seen him in the clouds."*
But the famous second part of Isaiah does not merely contain
these vivid pictures of that strange sweet life which, seven hun
dred years later, was to be Hved in Israel and Judah. It contains
plain and unmistakable statements respecting the great doctrine
— the keystone of Christian theology — vicarious atonement. In
the famous passage, chapter Hi. 13 — 15, and chapter Hii., it is
plainly taught in language none can mistake. The servant of
the Lord successfully makes intercession for the many sinners,
and by the sacrifice of HimseH atones for theH sins. It is true
that this is the master-thought which runs through the whole
of the Law of Moses, but it was left to Isaiah (in the so-called
second part of the book of his prophecy) to explain how this
great atonement was to be made and who was the Person to
make it.
It was necessary that this all- important explanation should be
made in order to explain the latter part of that wonderful Psalm
xxH., which, next to these chapters of Isaiah, contains the
clearest anticipation of Jesus Christ in the Old Testament; for
there is a gap between the former and the latter part of this
psalm, which can only be filled up by assuming the vicarious
atonement given by Isaiah Hi. 13 — 15, Hii. " The writer of the
psalm foresaw, as it were in a vision, the sufferings of Christ
and the glory that should foUow, but it was not revealed to the
Psalmist how these sufferings produced so immense a result. "f
Jsaiah, in certain of the later chapters of his prophecy, fills up
this gap, and completes the prophetic story of the future great
Redemption, not of Israel, but of all the world.
(ii.) The Arguments upon which Critics, since the end of the
Eighteenth Century, have based the Assumption that Chapters xl. —
lxvi. were the work of other hands than Isaiah's. — These chap-
* Quoted by Professor Cheyne, " Isaiah," vol. ii. p. 208.
t See Professor Cheyne, "Isaiah," vol. ii„ essay 111 (4).

206 BOOK BY BOOK.
ters would have been written with greater probabUity by a
Jew living at the time of the return from Babylon. The name
and history of Cyrus (chapters xliv., xiv.) would have been
known to such a writer, whereas, if these prophecies were
Isaiah's, a special revelation of the name and work of the great
Persian monarch must have been made to the prophet in a trance
or otherwise. But such an argument here can have little weight.
The whole of the great prophecy known as Isaiah's is undoubtedly
studded with such special revelations : for instance, prediction
of the fall of Babylon, of the most definite kind in chapter xiii.,
xiv., xxi. Again, granted that chapters xl. — lxvi. were the work
of a Jew or Jews contemporary with the return from Babylon,
what but a special revelation had enabled the writer or writers
to have written this marvellous detailed story of the passion of
Jesus Christ, more than five centuries before this strange, awful
drama was acted under the shadow of Herod's temple in the
Jerusalem of Pontius Pilate ?
If the modern critic gets rid of the difficulty which the pre
diction of the doom of Babylon, or the restoration by the Persian
Cyrus, confronts him with, he is met with the far more important
question : Who told the writer the Passion story ?
(iii.) The Local Colouring of the Late Chapters. — Absolutely
nothing can be made of this argument. These notices of scenery
can be pressed with equal force by the critics, or by those
scholars who prefer to walk along the old paths of Jewish and
Gentile tradition.
(iv.) The Question of Style. — Considerable stress has been laid
by the school of modern critics on the change of the style of the
different divisions of the book. They suggest that the Book of
Isaiah, in the form we possess it, was the work of four or five
or even more hands (Ewald suggests seven). Now it is clear
that the prophet-statesman lived to a great age, and that a very
large portion of his long Hfe was passed in activity, now as a
preacher of righteousness, now as a prophet or seer in the highest
sense of the word, now as a statesman. The book, as we have
it, represents his work in aU these different epochs of his long
and varied career, a public career which was contemporary with
the reigns of five kings— Uzziah, Jotham, Ahaz, Hezekiah, and
Manasseh — a period of between sixty and seventy years.
The sHght differences in the style and diction of this book—
for after all the differences are but slight — are exactly what
would be expected from a writer writing during a period extend
ing oyer so many years_ and addressed to such varied audiences.
It is, in fact, what we find in authors of our own age. Then
too, the style of a writing devoted to passionate exhortation or

THE BOOK OF THE PROPHET ISAIAH. 207
burning rebuke would be considerably altered from the style
of a composition devoted to a mysterious prophecy of things to
happen in some dim and far-remote future, or made up of words
of blessed comfort and serene hope. And it is of these different
compositions that the Book of Isaiah is made up. The so-called
earHer chapters are mainly made up of passionate exhortation
and burning rebuke. The smaller central portion is purely
historical, and consists of the archives of a portion of King
Hezekiah's noble and eventful reign, picturesquely and graphic
aUy written. The latter chapters are for the most part prophecies
of a far future, lit up with joyous expectancy, or are words of
the sweetest comfort written in language of thesubHmest poetry.
Surely all these compositions, spread over sixty or seventy years,
could not be written in one style; the most skilful forger the
world has ever seen could scarcely have accomplished such a
task. Indeed, the differences of style are what a faU critic would
naturaUy expect. On the other hand, in aU the various sections
of Isaiah we find the same thoughts running through the writings,
the same imagery aUopted, the same words used, the same meta
phors employed. For instance, the loved title of God, "the
Holy One of Israel," which we only find in five places in all the
other books of tho Old Testament, in the earliest chapters of
Isaiah we come upon it eleven times, and in the later chapters
thirteen times. As an instance of the same peculiar imagery
being adopted, the images of light and darkness, used in a
spiritual sense, are comparatively rare in the Old Testament ;
in the Book of Isaiah they are very frequent, light being used
some eighteen times, and darkness sixteen, and the imagery
occurs indifferently in the various sections of the prophecy.*
Indeed the advocates of a plurality of authors in Isaiah are
compeUed to aUow that the " great unknown" (the appeUation
given by Ewald to the writer to whom he attributes the largest
share in the authority of the so-caUed disputed chapters), and
the other presumed writers of large portions of the book, must
have been deeply steeped in the phraseology and thoughts of the
older Isaiah to have been able so closely to imitate the famous
and popular prophet.
Dean Plumptre has well observed here " that the history of
aU literature shows that a writer may, from various motives, so
imbue his mind with the thoughts and language bf another, that
it wiH not be easy even for an expert to distinguish between the
* Canon Rawlinson, in his comments on Isaiah, discusses the points raised
here at great length (see "Pulpit Commentary," "Isaiah," pp. xxii. —
xxvii.), and gives very many similar examples.

208 BOOK BY BOOK.
counterfeit and the original. AU that can be said as to the
application of this inductive method to the disputed portions of
Isaiah is that the paraUelisms and peeuHarities may fairly be
left to balance each other." * In this portion of the field the
contest will and must ever be a drawn one ; the disputants on-
both sides will claim the victory. The real battle-field must be
chosen elsewhere. The advocates for the unity of authority of
the book bearing the honoured name of Isaiah may, however,
rest their arguments with real security upon the historical proofs
already adduced; may ask their adversaries, with some confi
dence that no satisfactory reply wiU be given, how it comes, to
pass that while Jewish tradition faithfuUy hands down the
varied authorship of many of the Psalms, attributed as a whole
to David, no hint is given as to a varied authorship of the
different sections of Isaiah; but from two hundred and fifty
years before Christ f until our own day, with the exception of
one solitary scholar in the twelfth century (Aben Ezra), we know
that Jews as weU as Christians have held and taught, without
doubt and without question, that the book of the Old Testament
known as Isaiah was written during the lifetime and by the hand
of the great prophet-statesman.
4. Characteristic Features ofthe " Messiah of Isaiah." — The Book
of Isaiah occupies its unique position in the hearts of aU sorts
and conditions of men, in the hearts of the many unlearned, as
well as of the few learned, owing to its frequent mention of and
reference to Messiah, not only the Restorer of the tribes of Israel,
but the Light of the GentUes also. It is not its many and deeply
interesting historical allusions, not its curious and plainly ful
filled prophecies, not its words of tenderest comfort, not its
subHme and soul-stirring poetry, which has won for it its sohtary
pre-eminence among the prophetic books, perhaps among all the
writings of the Old Testament ; it is its testimony to Messiah, to
which men's hearts turn, some with unfriendly critical inquHy,
some with grateful adoration. It is its strange and marveUous
witness to the coming Redeemer which constitutes its chief title
to honour.
(i.) Among its characteristic Messianic features is the extra
ordinary resemblance of the person painted and of the Hfe
described to the person and life of Jesus Christ, who did not
appear on the visible stage of the earth for some seven hundred
years after the -n riting and teaching of Isaiah. Among other
* The Dean of Wells (Dr. E. H. Plumptre), "Isaiah," in Bishop Elli
cott's Commentary on the Old Testament, Introduction, p. 414.
t And the LXX scholars of course simply repeated the teaching they hadj
received from a yet earlier generation.

THE BOOK OF THE PROPHET ISAIAH. 209
famous passages which exempUfy this, the foUowing are especiaUy
notable— Isaiah vH. 14, &c. ; the strange and supernatural
manner of Messiah's bHth — Isaiah ix. 12 ; the GaHlean ministry
of Messiah; and chiefest of aU, Isaiah hi. 13 — 15, Hii.; the
manner in which the work of Messiah was accompHshed. Many
other sections and passages might be quoted to exempUfy this
last characteristic feature, notably Isaiah lxi. 1 — 3.
(H.) The Messiah or servant of Jehovah in His work of
governing and redeeming the world is Himself Divine. This
runs through various parts of the prophecy. EspeciaUy, how
ever, should be noted Isaiah ix. 6, where the prophet states how
the "Child Messiah" was. to be styled "The Mighty God,"
the same lofty and awful title given in the next chapter (x. 21)
to Jehovah. Thus in the prized volume of the most revered
prophet of the monotheistic Jew is the coming Messiah termed
"The Mighty God"!
(Hi.) While presenting a picture of a Messiah glorious and
triumphant (see such passages as Isaiah lxiu. 1 — 6), this book
pamts Hi plain, unmistakable colours the sad true figure of this
Messiah winning His glory and triumph through an awful suf
fering (as Hi Isaiah Hi. 13 — 15, HH.). The striking and ample
references in Isaiah to a suffering and, through His suffering,
triumphant Messiah, supplement and Ulustrate with a startling
clearness older and more obscure references to the same awful
suffering to be endured by the coming Divine DeHverer in the
Psalms and older prophets. It was no doubt mainly owing to
these references, especiaUy to the Isaiah passages, as well as to
oral traditions, that the great Jewish teachers, before and after
the Christian era, whose teaching is embodied and crystaUised
in theH loved Talmud, owed their doctrine of a suffering Messiah.
This doctrine of the Talmudists is well illustrated by the foUow
ing beautiful apologue taken from the Talmud : " Rabbi Joshua
Ben Levi found EHjah, who, in Jewish tradition, was to be the
pioneer of the Messiah, standing at the gate of Paradise. Rabbi
Joshua asked EHjah, 'When cometh the Messiah?' Elijah
repHed, 'At the Lord's good pleasure.' Again Rabbi Joshua
asked, 'When cometh the Messiah?' EHjah answered, 'Go
thyself and ask him.' Rabbi Joshua went on, 'Then where
dweUeth he ? ' EHjah told him, ' Messiah was at the gate of
the city (Rome), and was sitting among the poor and sick, and
there was tenderly dressing one wound after the other.' " — >
Talmud, Treatise Sanhedrim, 98a.*
* Quoted by Professor Cheyne, " Isaiah," essay ii. 219, from "Wunsclie —
" Leider des Messias." Leipzig: 1870. See Dr. Westcott, " Introduction to
the Study of the Gospels," chap. xi.

210 BOOK BY BOOK.
(iv.) The doctrine of the vicarious atonement (in the sense
Christians understand it) is plainly taught by Isaiah. A suffer
ing Messiah was no new idea Hi Hebrew theology; and the
thought of the vicarious atonement which this Divine sufferer
was to accomplish, had appeared in even the earHer Books of
the Old Testament. Effectual intercession of the righteous for
the sinful is a thought running through the entire Old Testament
(cf. such passages as Genesis xviii. 23 ff, Exodus xxxii. 32 ff,
Psalm cvi. 23, and Amos vii. 1 ff *) : and though we know there
is a height which guUt may reach at which God -will no longer
accept the intercession of his servants (Jeremiah xv. 1, xi. 14 ff),
the way is prepared for the revelation of One greater than any
of the created sons of men ; of One not only perfectly righteous
Himself, but able by uniting them mystically to Himself to
make the many righteous ; of One whose sacrifice of Himself
was so precious that it could be accepted even for a people which
had deliberately broken its covenant with Jehovah, and whieh
was therefore legally liable to the punishment of extirpation.
The thought too was perpetuaUy before the eyes of the
children of Israel Hi their simple sacrifices, from the days of
Adam to Moses, and after the time of Moses in the elaborate
ritual of the Tabernacle and tbe Temple. But tbe thought was
embodied by Isaiah in language new and possibly for the hearers,
strange and startiing.
5. The Character of Isaiah the Prophet. — Although we are not
in possession ot materials which would enable the writer to put
together a Hfe of Isaiah, yet from the sixty-six chapters which
we possess of his, we can' form a faHly accurate knowledge of
the character of the greatest of the Hebrew prophets, the one
who — of all that strong, mighty band who occupy a unique
position in the world's story— has most powerfully influenced
not merely tbe generations among whom he Hved and worked,
but their descendants for some 2,600 eventful years.
The most conspicuous feature of this true hero, and the one
which must most weightily influence those souls who, more or
less closely, have communed with the book of his prophecy, is
his reverence for, his awful fear of, the Lord. It seems as though
the vision which he saw when on the threshold of active Hfe was
ever present with him, as though he ever looked on the Lord
high and Hfted up, the seraphim, or burning ones, standing by
the awful Presence, keeping solemn watch and ward.
6. Isaiah in a Vision had looked on God. — As a preacher and teacher
he deHvered his message, often a hard stern message, fearlessly.
* Oehlen, O. T. Theol. ii. 425 (trans.).

THE BOOK OF THE PROPHET ISAIAH. 211
To him, whether he addressed the king or the lowest subject, it
was tbe same thing. He would say to the monarch : " Is it a
smaU thing for you to weary men, but must ye weary my God
also ? " In the most scathing terms he denounces the nobles and
ehief men of the country for theH pride and injustice, for their
sensuahty, for theH heartless oppression of the poor and help
less. Isaiah, in his great and sublime task, cared for no man —
prince, or noble, or high official.
Not that he was in any sense a demagogue, thirsting for
popular applause. In the plainest,, severest language he re
proached the people for theH want of true reHgion, for their
love of evil. " The faithful city " (Jerusalem), he teUs them,
" has become a harlot." "The people are laden with iniquity ;
they are a seed of evil-doers." " The nation is a sinful nation,"
The people draw near God, with their mouth and with theH Hps
they honour Him, but they have removed their hearts far from
Him. Yet Hi spite of this severity, this hot indignation against
sin, we find him ever fuU of the tenderest sympathy towards
sinners. Although a true Jew and a devoted patriot, his heart is large
enough to rejoice at the grand vista which he beheld in his
visions of the future admission of the isles of the GentUes into
the glorious kingdom of his God.
As a writer Isaiah was a humorist and satirist in the truest
sense of the word. This is evident from his vivid, quaint de
scription of the strange manufacture of idols and images of
worship, from his curious and vivid picture of female luxury and
fashion Hi his day and time.
For some sixty years this noble and heroic man, who after
David fills the foremost place in the story of the chosen people,
discharged the varied offices of prophet and seer, writer and
statesman, in a most critical and eventful period of his nation's
history. To his devoted loyalty to the God who loved Israel, to
his unswerving faith, to his splendid patriotism, was owing the
great moral revolution whieh was rewarded by the golden reign
of the great Hezekiah, and the strange spectacle of the com
paratively Httle kingdom of Judah successfuUy defying the
mighty power of the greatest nation of the Eastern world. And
although Isaiah survived the good and great Hezekiah, and
lived long enough to witness the relapse of the court and people
into their old sin and degradation, his writings and his work
Hved on long after Jerusalem was a byword and her Temple a
ruin. Though, to human eyes, Isaiah and his work seemed
a faUure, and his words as though only traced in the sand, the
words and the work, the one dictated and the other inspired

212 BOOK BY BOOK.
by the Eternal of Hosts, men now see possess a deathless power
which increases as the centuries roU on in theH solemn course.
The words have been — nay, stiU are — in part, at least, the basis
of the theology of Christendom. On them the pious Jew stUl
loves to linger, because they represent to him the noblest, truest
aspUations of his race. In them, century after century, devout
Christians in every nation under heaven find written in the
sublimest yet in the simplest language those sweet and blessed
promises which, Hi aU the stress and fever of Hfe's trials, nerve
men and women to suffer and be strong, and which again and
again whisper to them of the coming times when sorrow and
sighing shall flee away.
Like so many of earth's great ones, the prophet-statesman —
so runs the sad tradition — passed through pain and agony to his
rest. Now in the bosom of God he sees the fruit of his long
and noble though, as far as earth was concerned, ill-requited
toUs — sees the souls of unnumbered harassed ones finding in his
story of Messiah new and ever new bulwarks for the faith which
must save them ; reading Hi his sweet and comfortable promises
great and fresh assurances of the perfect peace which passeth
understanding. May we not say of Isaiah as of Isaiah's master,
" He sees of the travaU of his soul and is satisfied " ?
7. Ofthe Compilation of Isaiah in its present Form. — It is clear
that the Book of Isaiah as we possess it — even though it be
assumed (as it is in this Httle study) that it is aU the work of
one hand, and that the hand of the great prophet— never left
the prophet Hi its present evidently abbreviated, and (looked at
as a whole) disconnected state.
Now roughly the Book of Isaiah may be divided into three
main parts.
Part i. is largely made up of sections containing burning
exhortations to repentance and of scathing denunciations, and
consists of thirty-five chapters. These sections are some of them
very brief, evidently but extracts from a much longer original.
This first part is capable of division into many sections, each
of which is perfectly complete in itseH, and hardly, H at aU,
connected with what precedes or succeeds it.
Part ii., chapters xxxvi. — xxxix. is purely an historical memoir
of a remarkable episode in the history of Judah, an episode
with which Isaiah was closely connected. It is a piece quite
complete in itself, and has no real connection with anything
that goes before or that foUows after.
Part Hi. consists of twenty-seven chapters, xl. — lxvi., and
may be described as "the Book of Consolations." It is not
so entirely disconnected as Part i., stiU it is broken up into

THE BOOK OF THE PROPHET ISAIAH. 213
many different sections. It cannot be looked upon as originaUy
one book.
The whole of the great work has evidently passed through
the hands of a compUer, who has chosen for his purpose only
certain extracts from the writings of the great author. Yet
this coUection or compUation is of most ancient date. Isaiah,
as we now have it in our Enghsh Bible, was read and studied
Hi the synagogues and schools in the time of our Lord, nearly
nineteen centuries ago. In more remote times we still find
"Isaiah" in its present condition. The Septuagint translation
was made about 250 B.C. from the same Hebrew " Isaiah "
whieh we now possess. The revision or compUation must fihen
have been made at some epoch between 750 b.c and 250 b.c
The question then presents itself : How, and when, and by
whom was this work of collecting and selecting, and possibly
of recasting the Prophet's writings, carried out? We possess
no detaUs here, no tradition of names remains to us. After the
return from the Captivity, when the chosen people were once
more settled Hi theH ruined city and loved land, but under
sadly changed conditions : shorn of theH old power and wealth,
reduced in numbers and Hi influence, scarcely owning a name
even among vassal races, in these times of regret and almost
hopeless mourning the people cared for the memory of the
great heroes who had been friends of God in a way their
ancestors had never cared for the Hving men themselves. It
was to satisfy theH national cravings to learn more of a past
IHe irrevocably lost, of a Hfe illumined by the nearer presence
of a God the memory of whose very name was lost, that there
arose among the "returned from exUe" a great and peculiar
Hterary class — the scribes or Sopherim — whose function was
coUeeting and editing, and probably subsequently expounding,
the scattered records of prophetic revelation. Much of the Old
Testament as we now possess it was the work of these earnest
and devoted men. But though these Sopherim or scribes may,
probably did, put the larger part of our Old Testament into its
present shape, its devout reader need never think that the old
loved words are not the words of Moses or Samuel, or the ex
pressions of David or Isaiah. It is hard to beHeve that a scribe
ever altered a word or changed an expression ; he abbreviated
and made selections — that was aU.
When we caU to mind the deep spirit of intense reverence for
every letter of their ancient records which, with all their faults,
certainly characterised the Jewish- nation after the return from
the Captivity, when we remember the strange and peculiar
respect for every jot and tittle of the sacred memoHs of theH

214 BOOK BY BOOK.
dead heroes which we know was the great feature of the Jews
in those sad times of cherished memories and unavailing regrets,
it is surely in the highest degree improbable that any additions
were made to the records whieh they possessed. The work of
the. Sopherim was no doubt Hmited to a careful selection of what
they deemed important and interesting for the people, to what
especially bore upon the lost national glories of Israel and theH
former intimate friendship with the Eternal of Hosts, and, above
aU, to what threw light upon the dim and distant vision of the
coming Deliverer, the one hope which lent colour to this grey
and monotonous period.
The work of the Sopherim may be summed up in the word
"abbreviation," or better, " selection from " materials preserved
in the schools of the prophets or in the royal and priestly archives.
There is no reason to suppose that any of these precious writings
were lost in the days of their captivity. Such a probable theory
of the work of the Sopherim on the books of the Old Testament,
after the return from exile, wiU explain many a difficulty in the
various books, as, for instance, repetition, apparent contradiction,
want of continuity, seeming error ; when it is remembered that
constantly the important passage or the interesting statement
has been without explanation taken from the context ; when it
is borne in mind how not unfrequently the same story as told by
two or more narrators, viewing the events naturaUy from entirely
different standpoints, has been selected, from its deep importance
or its special interest, for a double mention (like the story of
Creation in Genesis), in the scribes' great compUation men call
the Old Testament.
To sum up, these scribe compUers of Isaiah had before them
probably a considerable mass of memoirs, prophecies, sermons,
written memoranda of rapt communings with his God-friend,
left by Isaiah, the fruit of a Hfe of sixty noble years of toU, and
out of aU this mass of material, the Sopherim had to select what
in their judgment would best help to raise the life of the poor
remnant of faUen Israel which had returned to their country.
This explains the varied nature of the book, its abruptness, its
strange want of continuity ; the abruptness, for instance, of the
two earhest Messianic prophecies in chapters vii. and ix. These
passages were no doubt taken from their original context, a
context which probably contained no useful lesson for future
days, whUe the marveUous and startling prophecies by them
selves were judged worthy of a place in the book, though the
compilers possibly never guessed their deep, real import.
Applying this rule generally, many of the difficulties of exposi
tion vanish.

THE BOOK OF THE PROPHET ISAIAH. 215
According to their judgment was the selection made. Yes,
but was not that judgment helped, informed,, prompted, by the
unearthly higher wisdom ? May we not surely teach that these
nameless Sopherim too were, in the highest sense, inspired in
theH selection of passages. To their loved work they devoted
theH lives, regardless of personal distinction. To these self-
forgetting ones Professor Cheyne, though in a different context,
nobly appHes the words of an American prose-poet: "They
chose the better, and loftier, and more unselfish part, laying their
individual hopes, their fame, theH prospects of enduring remem
brance, at the feet of those great departed ones whom they so
loved and venerated." *
8. On the Sopherim {Scribes), to whose Labour " The Book of
Isaiah" in its Present Form is owing. — Roughly speaking, we
may assume that Ezra, the Priestly Scribe, on the return from
the Captivity about b.c. 450 — 440, laid the foundation of the new
Judaism. The destruction of the Temple and city, the long
Captivity, had slain the spHit of idolatry, which had, from the
days of Moses, poisoned the Hebrew life, and the marveUous
reaction which has endured for nearly 2,400 years among the
Chosen People set in.f The law of Moses was restored with
terrible sternness — synagogues were established, the Sopherim
were constituted, and, under the guidance of Ezra, the sacred
books which form the Old Testament canon probably were finally
cast into theH present shape ; then, by degrees, thanks to their
labours and that of theH successors, that marveUous compilation
known as the Talmud grew round the sacred books ; first pro
bably in the form of oral traditional " decisions " respecting the
fuU bearing and signification of the precepts of the Mosaic law
generaUy termed Halakha, later known, when committed to writ
ing, as the Mishna ; secondly, but considerably later, in the form
of oral explanations and comments and legends founded upon the
Decisions (Halakha). These are generaUy termed Haggada, and
later known, when committed to writing, as the Gemara; the
Mishna and Gemara were subsequently known as the Talmud.
* Hawthorne's "Transformation," chapter vi. The writer of this sketch
here takes the opportunity of gratefully acknowledging his thanks to Pro
fessor Cheyne, of whose learning and research, though not always of the
conclusions drawn, the writer has freely availed himself.
t The Talmud account of this is as follows : " Ezra established a East
Day, on which he and the Levites prayed to God with loud cries to banish
idolatry from the people. A billet fell from Heaven, on which was written
the word ' granted.' After three days and nights the spirit of idolatry was
delivered to them like a flaming lion, which bounded out of the Holy of
Holies. By the advice of the prophet Zechariah, they seized it and flung- it
into a leaden coffin hermetically sealed." — Treatise "Toma," f.67 ; Treatise
" Sanhedrin," foi. 14, col. 1.

216 BOOK BY BOOK.
To these early, at first, oral teachings which began with Ezra
and his companions, and which subsequently expanded into the
Mishna and Gemara, we must add the Masorah, which was also
the work of the schools of scholars founded by Ezra, and which
became, as the Rabbis termed it, "a fence to the Scriptures."
The Masorah busied itself only with the text of the old Hebrew
Scriptures, and took careful account of every letter and every
verse of the sacred writings; as it now exists Hi writing, its
date is uncertain ; in its original oral form it doubtless began
its work not long after the days of Ezra.
Ezra founded and organized the first great school for the
coUection, putting in order, and editing, and subsequently com
menting upon the Holy Scripture, including the law, the
prophets, and the sacred poetry such as the Psalms and other
books deemed holy, which have, since his days, now about 2,400
years ago, formed the canon of Old Testament Scripture. This
school or coUege of Ezra's is known in Jewish story as " The
Men of the Great Synagogue," and these we may regard as
the fathers of Rabbinism. Aceording to Maimonides, the great
Jewish scholar and writer, these were 120 in number and com
menced with Haggai * the Prophet, who is referred to frequently
in the Talmud as the expounder of the Oral Law.f These "Men
of the Great Synagogue" of Ezra were, according to ancient
Jewish tradition, in dHect succession from Moses.
Moses received the law on Mount Sinai and gave it to Joshua,
Joshua committed it to the Elders, the Elders committed it to
the Prophets {i.e. schools of the Prophets), and the Prophets
committed it to the " Men of the Great Synagogue" % of Ezra
after the Captivity.
It was these earnest and devoted men, of whom personaUy,
with the exception of Ezra and Haggai, we know so httle, who,
we beHeve, sorted, arranged, and selected the papers and
memoranda of Isaiah, and among other labours connected with
the Book of the Old Testament canon, gave us the Book of
Isaiah the prophet in the form we now possess it.
* Talmud, Treatise Tevamoth, f. 16, p. 2.
t Pirke Avoth, i., Avoth of Rabbi Nathan, i.
X The School of the Great Synagogue lasted with the Sopherim 138 years.
It was in this period, we believe, that the canon was definitely settled.
Maimonides reckons rather a longer period for the work of the " Men of the
Great Synagogue " from Haggai, B.C. 520, to Simon the Just, B.C. 300.

THE BOOK OF THE PEOPHET
JEREMIAH.
1. Tlie Times of the Prophet. — Different to Isaiah, and it
may be said, to the rest of the " goodly fellowship of the
prophets," we possess full information as to the life and work
of Jeremiah. Indeed, the book of his prophecy is so closely
interwoven with the events of his stormy Hfe, that to grasp the
meaning of the prophecies, we must have the Hfe-story unroUed
before us.
To understand the meaning of the story, some knowledge of
the history of that sad age is especiaUy needful. It was not
long before Jeremiah was born that the Hfe and work of the
great Isaiah came to an end ; the apostasy and subsequent
repentance of Manasseh, in whose reign Isaiah was murdered,
must have been still fresh in the memory of men Hi the early
years of Jeremiah.
King Esarhaddon of Nineveh avenged the great disaster of
Sennacherib, his father, before Jerusalem in the days of Isaiah
when Hezekiah reigned, by taking the holy city and by leading
captive her king, Hezekiah's son Manasseh, to Babylon. Ma
nasseh was subsequently released, and consented as a vassal
king to Nineveh to hold Judah. Assurbanipal, most probably
the "great and noble Asnapper" of Ezra, succeeded Esarhaddon,
his father, circa B.C. 666. The Ninevite king resided principaUy
in Babylon, which was already showing signs of dissatisfaction
with the Ninevite rule. He was evidently a strong sovereign,
and completely broke the Egyptian power by dividing Egypt
into twelve petty kingdoms. During his reign Judah remained
a tributary to Nineveh.
In the seventeenth year though of the reign of this Assur
banipal, king of Nineveh, Psametichus restored the broken unity
of Egypt, and once more united the whole land. Egypt now,

218 BOOK BY BOOK.
for a season, disputed the sovereignty of the Eastern world with
Nineveh. When this restoration of Egypt to the position of a
great power took place, Manasseh was in the twenty-fourth year
of his reign, and from this time gradually grew up that strong
incHnation in Judah to court the friendship of Egypt, which
eventuaUy proved its ruin. Politically, the great work of
Jeremiah's life was to combat this fatal policy. Manasseh was
succeeded by Amon, and Amon by the good king Josiah. During
Josiah' s reign Jeremiah exercised great influence. This prince
lost his IHe fighting against Pharaoh Neeho at Megiddo. Four
years after its victory at Megiddo, the Egyptian power was
totaUy destroyed at Carchemish by a new power whieh bad
lately risen on the ruins of the old Ninevite dominion.
The power of Nineveh probably had been for some time
declining, partly owing to a great invasion of Scythians, partly
to the discontent of Babylon, a discontent which ended in
Babylon asserting its independence. The Eastern world, two
years after the battle of Megiddo, Hi which Josiah lost his Hfe,
was astonished at learning that Nineveh, so long the Queen
City of the East, had fallen before the armies of Cyaxares the
Mede and Nabopolassar, king of the recently freed Babylon.
The ruin of Nineveh was complete. Two years later the son of
Nabopolassar, the famous Nebuchadnezzar broke the Egyptian
power at Carchemish.
The great Babylonian Nebuchadnezzar was temporarily stayed
in his career of conquest by his father's death, and the need of
his presence at Babylon in order to consolidate his power. Egypt
and her vassal states became now subject to Babylon. Amongst
these latter was Judah jand her king, Jehoiakim, who succeeded
Josiah. I
After three years Jehoiakim rebelled against the authority of
Babylon ; Nebuchadnezzar in person took the field against his
rebeUious vassal. Jerusalem was invested and soon feU. Her
king was put to death, and a few months later Jehoiaehin — who
succeeded his father in the sad sovereignty — was, with the flower
of the people^ carried away captive to Babylon. A poor remnant
was left inJudah, and Zedekiah reigned as their king. Again
Egypt became their snare. Something like a revival of the
Egyptian power had taken place under Pharaoh Hophra ; the
miserable remnant of Jews left under King Zedekiah in Judah,
turning against their mighty Babylonian master, sought to
strengthen themselves by an aUiance with Egypt, against the
advice of Jeremiah, who had remained with Zedekiah in Judah.
The Chaldean vengeance did not tarry long ; again was Jerusalem
besieged, again captured. Then, the Temple was burnt, the king

THE BOOK OF THE PROPHET JEREMIAH. 219
was bHnded, the best of the poor remnant of the people left by
Nebuchadnezzar were carried into Babylonia. Gedaliah, a friend
of Jeremiah, was appointed governor of the now desolate and
almost deserted land.
GedaHah was shortly after murdered by some self-styled patriot
Jews, who, after theH deed of blood, fled, carrying Jeremiah, an
unwiUing captive, with them to the city of Tahpanhes, in Egypt.
Here we lose sight of the aged and desolate prophet. A tradition,
well supported, relates how his angry countrymen, infuriated at
the mournful reproaches and earnest remonstrances of Jeremiah,
stoned the dreaded and hated prophet some time after the arrival
of the fugitives at Tahpanhes.
The foUowing tables of dates and principal historical events
which happened in the Hfe of Jeremiah will be useful to the
reader, but it must be borne in mind that though roughly the
general chronological arrangement is fairly reliable, any exact
chronological arrangement of this period is precarious and cer
tainly open to criticism. The first table is generaUy taken from
Professor H. Brandes' "The Royal Succession of Judah and
Israel, according to the Biblical Narrative and the Cuneiform
Inscriptions," quoted by Professor Cheyne, "Jeremiah" in the
"Pulpit Commentary."
Manasseh, in whose reign Isaiah was, according to tradition, put to death.
Amon.
b.o. |
641 Eirst year of Josiah. In the thirteenth year of Josiah, the " "Word
of the Lord " came to Jeremiah. The ministry of Jeremiah
especially belongs to the last eighteen years of Josiah' s reign.
611 Thirty-first year of Josiah.
610 Jehoahaz.
609 Eirst year of Jehoiakim.
599 Eleventh year of Jehoiaehin.
598-7 Jehoiaehin. Beginning of the Captivity.
597 Zedekiah appointed king. ,
596 Eirst year of Zedekiah.
586 Eleventh year of Zedekiah. Fall of the kingdom of Judah.

After the FaU of Judah as a Kingdom.
Gedaliah is left in Judah as governor of the remnant of the people allowed
to remain in the land.
Jeremiah remains with him.
Gedaliah is murdered, and Jeremiah is carried away by the Jews who
murdered Gedaliah into Egypt.
At Tahpanes, in Egypt, probably not loug after, the Jewish fugitives
murdered Jeremiah.

220 BOOK BY BOOK.
Foreign Political Events which materially affected the History of Judah and
Jerusalem during the Last Period of its History.
Assurbanipal had succeeded hie father Esarhaddon, the son and successor
of Sennacherib, as king of Assyria. He divided Egypt into twelve separate
states, and rendered it for a time powerless, until Psametichus, in the seven
teenth year of Assurbanipal, again united the whole country. It was this
sudden growth of great power in Egypt which caused statesmen in Judah to
turn their thoughts towards winning Egypt as a friend and protector
against the great Eastern power on the banks of the Euphrates and Tigris.
Acting though under the advice of Jeremiah, Josiah encountered Pharaoh
Necho at Megiddo, and was defeated and slain'. Some two years after the
battle of Megiddo, Nineveh fell before the armies of Cyaxares and Nabopo
lassar. Babylon now takes the place of Nineveh, and for a time held almost
undisputed sovereignty over the East.
The power of Egypt had been previously broken by the defeat of Pharaoh
Necho at Carchemish by Nebuchadnezzar the son, and subsequently the
successor, of Nabopolassar at Babylon.
2. The Mission of Jeremiah. — Although scarcely more than a
generation had passed away since the death of Isaiah, when
Josiah attempted his reformation, the moral state of Judah had
grown sensibly worse. The evils which had long threatened the
nation under the wicked king Manasseh, definitely showed them
selves, and king and people openly threw off the restraints
imposed by the religion of Jehovah, and made a public profession
of idolatry. In the gloomy reign of terror which Manasseh
inaugurated, Isaiah, and most of the nobler spirits who had
gathered round him in the reign of Manasseh's father, Hezekiah,
were hunted down and put to a cruel death. The swHt and
sudden judgment which overtook king and city seems to have
acted as a solemn warning, and we read bow Manasseh repented,
and how, after his restoration to a throne Hi partial subjection to
Nineveh, during a long Hfe and reign, he and his people again
served the Jehovah of their fathers. But the evil let loose by
the strange and fearful licence of the early days of bis reign was
too strong, and the idol- worship and its terrible influence upon
the hearts of the people, though outwardly put away, stiU exer
cised its baneful, withering power, tiU it had destroyed aU that
was left of real life in Judah.
But outwardly, after Manasseh and his son Amon had passed
away, and Josiah, with his earnest longing to do what was
right and just in the sight of the Lord, had come to the throne,
all seemed well in Judah. Prosperity was returning ; the old
dark shadow of Nineveh, then beginning to decHne Hi power,
brooded with less and ever less baleful influence over Judah and
its more remote tributaries. Egypt was scarcely then a real
danger, and Josiah the king had at his right hand one of those
strong mighty men of God, of whom we hear alone in that

THE BOOK OF THE PROPHET JEREMIAH. 221
eventful IsraeHte story — Jeremiah the prophet. It was in the
thirteenth year of Josiah that the " Word of the Lord " came
upon Jeremiah, and armed him for his life's great work.
But aU was wrong within the doomed land. To use the words
of another and an older seer, "the whole head was sick, and the
heart was faint " Jerusalem — and Jerusalem set the example to
all the smaUer towns and cities — was fuU of licentiousness and
open disregard for aU equity and honour. Jeremiah even
accuses the professing worshippers of the Lord of the gravest
crimes, such as murder and adultery, perjury and theft. These
wicked citizens were to have one last chance. The Word of the
Lord came to Jeremiah and sent him to them with this last
solemn message from the Eternal of Hosts. If they would hear
him and repent, weU ; if not, the ruin and desolation of the land
would surely foUow. Alas for Judah ! the message was practi-
caUy disregarded, and the city and the glorious temple were
ruined, and the king and people carried into captivity, far away
from the Land of Promise, for many a weary year.
The earnest efforts of King Josiah and the great prophet who
stood by him to reform the people failed. Outwardly some
effect was produced. The open practice of idolatry was given
up, the ceremonial part of God's law was again performed with
strict punctuality. But there, generaUy speaking, the work of
reformation ended.
The people beUeved that this was enough to win for them
selves and theH land the splendid promises we read in Deutero--
nomy promised to the faithful and true Jew ; but the weightier
matters of the law, justice, purity, integrity, true nobleness of
heart and purpose, were utterly neglected, and the old life,
abhorred of God, went on as it did aforetime. No one saw this
more clearly than did Jeremiah. He went on' delivering his
message, but as time passed by, and as the people's guUt became
heavier each year, and their own strange satisfaction with them
selves continued, his words became more ominous, his general
tone more and more despairing.
When all hope of a real reformation was given up by the man
of God, then, like the captain of a ship whieh is plainly foun
dering makes the last melancholy arrangements for his crew by
means of open boats and rafts, so Jeremiah in his utter despaU,
hoping to make the impending rum a less cruel fate, pressed
upon the doomed people to submit without useless resistance to
the powerful Chaldean invader, who, Jeremiah knew, with no
mortal insight, was the appointed instrument of Judah s punish
ment. But here again his voice was not heeded, and the awful
doom in aU its terrible detail was carried out.

222 BOOK BY BOOK.
What a heavy, overwhelming burden was laid on the patriotic'
prophet, to know of the frightful danger whieh hung over his
loved Judah and Jerusalem, and the glorious holy house on
Zion — an awful danger from that great nation whose sudden
rise to enormous power he, Jeremiah, saw in the vista of no
distant future, a vista clearly open to the seer's vision : a rise to
colossal power vigorously portrayed by a seer contemporary with
Jeremiah. "Behold ye among the heathen, and regard, and wonder marvellously:
for I will work a work in your days, which ye will not believe, though it be
told you.
"For, lo, I raise up the Chaldeans, that bitter and hasty nation, which
shall march through the breadth of the land, to possess dwelling-places that
are not theirs." (Habakkuk i. 5, 6.)
To know of this swift, oncoming danger, to know, too, that
this impending danger might be warded off, and the help of the
"Glorious Arm" once more vouchsafed to the loved city, H the
people would only hearken to his words, and with heart and soul
turn unto the Lord ; to watch the people utterly careless and
godless, growing year by year more self-satisfied as they grow
more shameless ; to be compeUed, sick at heart and despairing,
positively to preach as their best, theH only hope, submission to
an invader, an idolatrous conqueror, and even then to find his
words disregarded, and himseH positively branded as a traitor, —
weU might Jeremiah utter, at different epochs of that sad Hfe of His,
these well-known melancholyplaints : " Cursed be the day wherein
I was born : let not the day wherein my mother bare me be
blessed," &c. (xx. 14); "Let mine eyes run down with tears
night and day " (xiv. 17) ; " Why is my pain perpetual, and my
wound incurable, which refuseth to be healed?" (xv. 18.) See,
too, viii. 22, ix. 1, and many other simUar passages — some of an
exquisite, an inimitable beauty — as he mourned over the coming
doom of the hapless nation— a doom he, with aH his super
natural knowledge and power, was utterly unable to avert.
A modern commentator has with great power summed up the
reasons for the intense sorrow of the sad and touching prophecy
of Jeremiah- — prophecy quite unheeded and neglected in the
great seer's lifetime, though afterward, when through pain and
agony he had passed to his rest, this unheeded prophecy became
the favourite book of the scattered and ruined people.
" His style is in keeping with the man. He spake as he
thought. Ever brooding over his message to his people, it pre
sented itseH to his mind in many aspects, but was in substance
ever the same ; we have no change of subjects in bis prophecy.
Whatever there is of novelty arises simply from the altered, state

THE BOOK OF THE PROPHET JEREMIAH. 223
of external circumstances. Slowly the sad drama advances
towards the sole possible conclusion ; year after year the prophet
saw Judah shding lower and lower down to the very edge of the
fearful precipice of national ruin, and at each stage of its down
ward progress he could but repeat the old warning ; like the
Zealots who ran about the streets of Jerusalem before its second
destruction, he has but the one cry of ' ' Woe ! " AU he can do is
to adapt his unvarying tale to the present state of things, and
present it under new images." *
3. Was Jeremiah's Life-work a Failure? — Judged by the
ordinary standards of success and faUure, no public Hfe could
be painted which was more conspicuously an example of faUure
than the prophet Jeremiah's, as sketched out mainly by him
self. CaUed early in life, by some striking supernatural pheno
menon, to his high service, the young seer thus splendidly gifted
naturaUy expected a large measure of success. He had before
his eyes the great example shown and the noble work done
scarcely more than a generation back by the heroic and honoured
Isaiah, when once more king and people with heart and soul had
thrown themselves, in real faith, beneath the eternal throne of
theH Divine King ; and once more, as in old days, the Glorious
Arm had fought for them and won for them a deliverance the
fame of which rung through the East and which procured
for Judah some years of peace and prosperity. Surely the
Word of the Lord had caUed him, Jeremiah, to a similar mighty
work. By his side, too, stood a king, Josiah, not unlike his famous
predecessor, Hezekiah, who with real earnestness made it his
Hfe-work to remove every vestige of idolatry, and the infamy
which hung round idol-worship, out of the land. It turned out
very different, however, to his bright hopes ; all seemed against
him. As it has been truly said, " There are times when the
Holy SpHit HimseH seems to work in vain, and the world seems
given up to the powers of evil." The strong efforts of the king
and the burning words of the prophet only effected a popular
reformation of ritual. Life remained untouched. The outward
ceremonial reHgion was certainly restored in Judah and Jeru
salem, but city and country still went on Hving the Hfe abhorred
of God. Josiah, the prophet's friend, the earnest and devoted
king, was defeated and slain at Megiddo in the war with Egypt.
Then things grew worse : Josiah' s successor, the irrehgious
Jehoiakim, became the willing vassal of Egypt. He naturaUy
* Canon Rawlinson, in the " Speaker's Commentary.''

224 BOOK BY BOOK.
dishked Jeremiah and poured scorn upon bis prophecies. Then
commenced what may be termed the second and saddest period
of the prophet's Hfe, when the Word of the Lord told him that
the times of reformation were past, and that all hope of change
of heart in Judah was over and gone. The seer had a bitter task
before him. He would soften if he could tbe stroke ready to
descend upon bis nation, so he counseUed submission to that
great and warlike power, Babylon, the appointed instrument of
the punishment of God. Again he was doomed to disappoint
ment. The sovereign, the hierarchy, and the nobles utterly
refused to listen to bim, and chose rather to lean upon the broken
reed of Egypt, their hereditary foe, and thus positively precipi
tated the final ruin, and Jeremiah for his wise advice was
branded as a traitor to his country. During that long sad life of
Jeremiah, made up of disappointments, baffled hopes, even
despaH, we catch sight of scenes of tbe bitterest persecution.
Now the roll of his writings, with the impress of the seal of the
SpHit of God visibly upon them, is publicly and ignominiously
torn up and burnt ; now we see him, one of the foremost states
men, enduring the cruel indignity of the stocks ; now we find
him immured in a noisome, impure dungeon, now hunted down
as a traitor and spy ; and at last we see him, an old man worn
out by sorrow and hopeless toU, carried away the captive of his
determined opponents into Egypt, the land against which he bad
so often in vain warned his feUow-countrymen ; and then in an
unfriendly nation, surrounded by Jews, exiles and fugitives,
among his bitterest foes, we lose eight of the great seer, stUl
speaking words of tenderest warning and most earnest reminders
to repentance. Tradition -writes the last sad chapter of that sad,
bravely patient life, and tells us how, in return for his true and
faithful witness, his enemies stoned him to death.
In less than a century after the prophet's death, Jewish
opinion respecting Jeremiah and his prophecies completely
changed. On the return from Babylon, impressed no doubt by
the marveUous fulfilment of the great seer's words respecting the
duration of the seventy years' exile, bis writings were received —
most probably by Ezra and his revisionist scribes — among the
sacred Hebrew writings ; and in the Babylonian revision,
strange to say, Jeremiah, not Isaiah, was placed first among tbe
writings of the great prophets, the order being Jeremiah, Ezekiel,
Isaiah. The touching sadness and the burning faith of his words found
a perpetual echo in the hearts of the restored and humbled Jews
Round him gathered a mass of reverent tradition. Men said he
had taken the tabernacle, and the ark, and the altar of incense,

THE BOOK OF THE PROPHET JEREMIAH. 225
and had, hidden them in a safe hiding-place somewhere among
the rugged fastnesses of Mount Nebo, tiU the hour should strike
when God shaU gather together once more the people whom He
loves (see 2 Mace. xi. 1 — 8). Jeremiah was that antique patriot
hero who appeared to the gallant Judas Maccabams as " a man
with grey hairs, and exceeding glorious," as one who " prayed
much for the holy city." Jeremiah was. the prophet of the Lord
who gave the same hero " a golden sword with which he shall
fight the battles of the Lord " (2 Mace. xv. 13—16).
In the days of Jesus Christ, he, Hke Elijah, was looked for to
prepare the way for Messiah. Some even said of Jesus that He
was Jeremiah, or one of the prophets, Jeremiah being singled
out of the glorious company as the most popular representative.
Even in early Christian story the once misjudged prophet
played a distinguished part, and exposition pointed to Jeremiah
as one of the "two witnesses" of Rev. xi. 3. Eusebius (Praep.
Evang. ix. 39) relates how the story of his sufferings, so bravely
and patiently endured, ranked alongside the more famous
accounts of Christian martyrs.
Verily, though not here, not now, did this true servant of the
Living God " see of the travaU of his soul and was satisfied."
4. The Absence of Messianic Prophecy in Jeremiah. — The almost
entHe absence of aU reference to a coming Messiah in this book is
on first thoughts remarkable. Different from his great predecessor
Isaiah, who lived Httle more than a generation before him, the
key-note of whose prophecy was the advent of the great coming
One, though generaUy as a suffering teacher, who, though
suffering, would redeem those who listen to him, than as a
glorious and triumphing king. Different even from the rougher
and shorter prophecies Hke Micah, where Messianic hopes colour,
so to speak, each solemn section of the writing. Different to
them, Jeremiah is almost silent. There is just a reference here
and there as in xxxi 9, 21, xxxiu. 15, and a few similar passages,
but the great bulk of the prophecies are silent as to Messianic
onlook. The nature of his task, for the most part, alas ! ex
cluded hope. To speak of the victorious king would, in the case
of Jeremiah's hearers, have been but to raise faUacioas expecta
tions, and to teU so blind and stubborn, so seH-wUled and per
fectly self-satisfied a generation, of salvation through suffering
would have simply aroused a storm of contumely and of scorn.
Jeremiah's task was not that of a herald of the great coming
One ; but though not a herald he was a pioneer, a pioneer of the
truest kind. He lived that strange beautiful life of utter self-
forgetfulness, of suffering voluntarUy undergone for others. He
set the example — an example imitated by thousands of his un-

226 BOOK BY BOOK.
happy countrymen in coming generations — of the purest and
most devoted patriotism. See how closely did his typical life
resemble in many particulars the inimitable life of lives. " He
stood alone, with few friends and no family joys to console him ;
his country was hastening to its ruin at a crisis which strikingly
reminds us of the times of our Saviour. He Hfted up a warning
voice, but the natural guides of the people drowned it by their
blind opposition. . . . The prophet weeping over Zion, chap. ix.
1, xiii. 17, xiv. 17, is an adumbration of the sacred tears in St.
Luke xix. 41."*
The character of Jeremiah is a singularly interesting one.
Different to Moses, Samuel, Elijah, Isaiah, and the majority of
the more prominent prophets of Israel, Jeremiah was, compara
tively speaking, little influenced by those great powers of super
natural wisdom and of unerring insight down the dark vista of
coming years. He was, so to speak, more human than the
majority of his brothers in the glorious company of the prophets.
Ever sensitive to public opinion, tender-hearted, even timorous,
weU-nigh always hopeless, we find him, in spite of these charac
teristics, unswervingly true to his high calling, never shrinking
from carrying out his painful mission and proclaiming his un
popular message : a noble example, as it has been well said, of
the triumph of the moral over the physical nature. His whole
strength lay in his determination to do what was right at what
ever cost.f
In the Sistine Chapel, where Michael Angelo has happily
caught the spirit of Jeremiah, he is portrayed as brooding, with
eyes cast down, in sad thought. It was, indeed, a sorrowful and
a weary task for the patriot prophet to be for so many long years
ever the prophet of ill, to be always foretelling a future in
which the sword, the famine, and the pestilence were the chief
agents. Of the many devoted patriot hearts in the long, many-coloured
story of the chosen people, none ever beat with a more passionate
devotion for his country than did Jeremiah's. It was his strange
sad destiny to have given to him as his life-work the task of
preaching to a people who would not hear him, and who, in
their blind folly year by year, approached nearer the awful ruin
which, as Jeremiah knew, hung over temple and city. No Jew
has ever mourned with such true and tender sympathy over the
lost glories and the sad and hopeless destinies of hia race as did
Jeremiah. His words, for centuries, were used as the expression
of the thoughts of the exiled and down-trodden Hebrew. Again,
* Prof. Cheyne, "Jeremiah," in the "Pulpit Commentary," vol. i. ch. xiv.
t Dean Payne Smith.

THE BOOK OF THE PROPHET JEREMIAH. 227
far beyond the Hebrew people, his beautiful and touching plaints
have become folk-songs and folk- proverbs ; such as : —
" Is there no balm in Gilead ;
Is there no physician there f
Why then is not the health of the daughter of my people recovered ?"
(vii. 22.)
" Stand ye in the ways, and see,
And ask for the old paths, where is the good way,
And walk therein, and ye shall find rest for your souls,
Bat they said, We will not walk therein." (vi. 16.)
" Why is my pain perpetual, and my wound incurable f " (xv. 18.1
' ' A voice was heard in Ramah, lamentation, and bitter weeping ;
Bachel weeping for her children, refused to be comforted for her children,
Because they were not." (xxxi. 15.)
5. The Language and Style of Jeremiah. — For general readers
Jeremiah has far less interest than Isaiah or Daniel, and with
the exception, perhaps, of Ezekiel, finds fewer students outside
the Jewish world than any book of the Old Testament. Certain
passages are very famUiar, but, outside these, comparatively Httle
is commonly known.
The language is charged with monotony and the style with
diffuseness, as dealing with a period characterised with a dreary
sameness of sin and folly, and unrelieved by any recitals of
speciaUy heroic deeds ; and which, unlike to the usual story of
Israel, is never Ulumined by any conspicuous interposition of the
Glorious Arm of Jehovah.
To a considerable extent these and such-like popular criticisms
are just. Its monotony could not be helped, for one subject, the
sin of the people, their blindness and self-will, and the sure and
certain rum at the end of a comparatively speaking short period
of time, too plainly foreseen, in all its melancholy details, by the
prophet — one subject filled his heart from the hour of his first
solemn caU to that sad day when we lose sight of him, the un
popular prophet, the author — as some affirmed — of theH woes,
at Tahpanhes in Egypt.
To the ordinary Gentile reader, too, the prophecy of Jeremiah
seems diffuse, for it is the same old story told again and again.
It wants the art of Isaiah, and we miss the poetry and the lofty
imagery which form the beautiful characteristic of eo many
passages in the other prophetic books. But it has been urged
with great justice that in Jeremiah, " His poetic flights were
restrained by his presentiments, and his utterances dulled by
tears. How could he exercise his imagination in depicting woes
whieh he aHeady so fully realised? " *
* Dean Payne Smith in " Pulpit Commentary."
Q2

228 BOOK BY BOOK.
Another commentator, with considerable truth, loves to com
pare this prophet with Dante, and thinks that in the pages of
Jeremiah "the great Florentine found one of the founts of his
inspiration, for he quotes him again and again, both in his poetry
and in his prose, even borrowing from him the opening symbohsm
of the Divina Commedia." *
6. The Divergences between the Masoretic {Hebrew) and LXX.
Greek Text. — There are some curious divergences between the
Masoretic text as contained in our Hebrew Bible (from whence
our English Authorised Version was made) and the Greek text
of the Septuagint. But although the variations are extremely
numerous, and the position of a large section of the prophecy is
different in the Greek and Hebrew, the variations are reaUy of
an unimportant description. We may fairly speak of the Maso
retic (Hebrew), and the LXX. texts as being substantiaUy the
same. AU the chapters containing the group of the prophecies " on
foreign nations " are differently 'arranged. In the Hebrew text
this particular group is found in chapters xlvi. — li. In tbe LXX.
they are found after chapter xxv. 13.
But the variations of the LXX. text are far more singular. It
has been computed that the Greek (LXX.) version omits some
2,700 words of the Masoretic (Hebrew) text. It adds but a very
few. Words and phrases which ever and again occur in the
Hebrew are dropped in tbe Greek version. For instance, Jere
miah is rarely termed the prophet ; Jehovah rarely has the title
"of Hosts " added ; the formula " saith Jehovah " is left out by
the Greek translators more than sixty times. It would thus
appear that, for some cause or other, the Greek text aimed at
abbreviating the original Hebrew, but it evidently studiedly
avoided omitting anything which really bore on the sense. This
careful abbreviation, which reaUy only affected titles and redun
dant and purely rhetorical words and phrases, was a most valu
able indication to us of the estimation in which the prophecies of
Jeremiah were held when the LXX. translators did their work
for the Greek-speaking Jews of Egypt, B.C. 285 — 150. With an
evident strong desire, for some reason or other, to abbreviate as
much as possible, they carefuUy refrained from taking away one
of the precious sentences of the prophecies and exhortations of
theH loved and revered seer.
It is, of course, quite possible that two editors, so to speak, of
Jeremiah existed, and that the LXX. translators had before them
the shorter edition or revision. Dean Payne Smith, with great
* E. H. Plumptre, Dean of Wells.

THE BOOK OF THE PROPHET JEREMIAH. 229
ingenuity, suggests a reason for this " shorter edition." After
the death (probably a violent death) of Jeremiah in Egypt,
Baruch and the faithful companions of the prophet no doubt left
in aU haste a country so hostile to their loved master. Naturally
they would carry back with them to Palestine, as their chiefest
treasure, the writings of the great teacher. But among the
fugitive Jews in Egypt there were doubtless "true believers, who
would not aUow such a precious document to be taken away
without a copy bemg left behind." Such a transcript would in
the nature of things be a hurried one ; superfluous words and
phrases, Hkely enough, would be omitted. Probably, too, no
definite place in tbe writings had been at that time assigned to
the "displaced" section containing "the prophecies concerning
the nations," which, no doubt, possessed a less interest for the
people than the inspired words relating to themselves. This is a
most ingenious conjecture, but stUl only conjecture." The pheno
menon of the strange divergence between the texts, the Hebrew
and the Greek, of " Jeremiah " is reaUy unexplained. The only
two omissions, however, of any real importance are chapters
xxxiii. 14 — 26, xxxix. 4 — 13.
7. The Death of King Josiah — Between the life and work of
Jeremiah and Isaiah there are many interesting parallel scenes,
none perhaps so interesting for the general student as the life
and fate of King Josiah. The two great prophets both lived
through several reigns. In both instances these reigns, with one
exception in each ease, were productive of grave evil for Judah
and Jerusalem, the sovereigns and their courts setting generaUy
a shameful example. But one considerable portion of the life of
both the prophets was passed in the company of a noble and
heroic king, who loved the law of the Lord. In the midst of
theH successful and comparatively happy reigns the angel of
death overshadowed Hezekiah and Josiah. Hezekiah, owing to
the intercession of Isaiah, was spared for ten more glorious and
successful years. Josiah, though acting under the direct advice
of Jeremiah, was slain, fighting for his country, on the fatal field
of Megiddo. Men are tempted to question often the Divine
decree when a good and useful Hfe is suddenly cut off. The death
of Josiah, the favourite— as he has been termed— "of God and
man," wUl supply an answer to such' querulous questioning. We
see the reason of his early death quite clearly. Josiah had done
bis work faithfuUy, but the work we know was a failure, and
the hero-king was taken away from the evil to come. To have
prolonged his life, like Hezekiah's, would have been a sad
guerdon. The glorious death on the battle-field and the eternal
hereafter with his God was for Josiah the best.

THE LAMENTATIONS OF JEREMIAH.
1. What is the Book of Lamentations — that short coUection of
poems with no author's name appended to it in the Hebrew
text ? The Book of Lamentations consists of five elegies, care
fully composed aceording to certain standards of Hebrew poetry.
Three of these, the first, the second, and the fourth, have certain
common characteristics. Each begins with the word " echah "
(how). Each is of the peculiar form of Hebrew verse known as
"alphabetical" — that is, every verse, or half verse, or little
group of verses, begins with one of the twenty-two letters of the
Hebrew alphabet : a not uncommon form of poetry, of which
Psalm cxix. is the best known example. See also for examples,
more or less perfect, of this alphabetical arrangement of poetry,
Psalms xxv., xxxiv., xxxvii. cxix., cxlv., and Proverbs xxxi.
10 — 31. SHght irregularities in the arrangement, however,
occur in these elegies.
2. Jerusalem, after the fall and ruin of the city at the hands
of Nebuchadnezzar and the Chaldeans, long predicted by Jere
miah, is the general subject of aU the five elegies ; of the three,
(first, second, and fourth), in which considerable points of like
ness occur : the first dwells on the sad, ruined city, Zion. The
second sings of the "fons et origo " of the woe of Zion — Jehovah,
who at last has carried out the awful threats of punishment on a
wicked people. The theme of the fourth depicts the sufferings
of the various classes of the people at the hands of their con
querors. The third of these elegies again is distinguished by the alpha
betical structure of the poetry. It is even more artificial in its
arrangement than the first, second, and fourth. It too dwells
on the sorrow of the people, but it is more personal. The
writer in this poem speaks of himseH' as " the man that has seen
the affliction" (Lamentations Hi.).
The fifth is different, in its composition : it is not strictly
alphabetical, like the first four poems. Only in the number of

THE LAMENTATIONS OF JEREMIAH. 231
verses — twenty-two, the number of Hebrew letters — does it
suggest the same artificial arrangement. The "ruin of Zion"
is stiU the groundwork of the poem ; but the writer, befoi e the
end of his sorrowful song, seems to speak as though this ruin
was an event which had taken place years before (see ven-e 20).
3. The Authorship of the Lamentations. — The Septuagint (Greek
version), b.c circa 285, clearly states that the author of Lamen
tations was the Prophet Jeremiah. The seventy translators have
prefixed the foUowing words to their version : "And it came to
pass after Israel was taken eaptive, and Jerusalem made deso
late, that Jeremias sat weeping, and lamented with this lamen
tation over Jerusalem, and said." This statement is repeated
in the Vulgate (Latin version) with some slight additions.
Josephus, in the first century of our era, endorses the above
Septuagint gloss, seemingly identifying these elegies with the
" Lamentations" which, we read in 2 Chron. xxxv. 25, the Pro
phet Jeremiah composed for the funeral of King Josiah. The
Talmudists also assume that Jeremiah was the author of the
book (see Talmud, Bava Bathra, foi. 15, col. i.) ; and the general
consensus of Jewish and Christian writers ascribe the five chap
ters of Lamentations to the same prophet.
One Hnk, and that the most important, however, is missing in
this chain of historic testimony. It does not appear in the
Hebrew text which those most careful and painstaking Masoretic
editors have given us, although, as it has been well urged, seeing
that these Masoretic scribes, who no doubt (see reference above
about Talmud, Bava Bathra) believed themselves in the Jeremiah
authorship, would have been the last to have omitted this all-
important testimony to the authorship. But the Hebrew text
omits the name of Jeremiah.
4. Internal Testimony. — The whole style of these poems, though
exquisitely beautiful and touching, and studded with the thoughts
of the great prophet, is absolutely different to anything we And
in the long roll of Jeremiah's great work. It is too artificial, too
much studied, too elaborately worked out. The internal evi
dence would seem to point to it having been the work of pious,
cultured Jews, deeply imbued with the spirit and thought of
Jeremiah; living at the time of the great catastrophe ; eye-wit
nesses of the ruin wrought by Nebuchednezzar and the Chal
deans; not improbably pupUs and frienrls of Jeremiah, but
nameless, Hke so many of the Greek scribes and compilers who
lived and worked contemporary with Ezra, or shortly after his
time. 5. Its Place in the Jewish Canon. — It was evidently admitted
into the canon of inspired writings at the earliest date, no doubt

232 BOOK BY BOOK.
by Ezra and the Men of the Great Synagogue; but these ancients
never placed it in the position it now occupies in the Septuagint
and Vulgate, or in an English Bible. It appears in the Masoretic
(Hebrew) text between Ruth and Koheleth (Ecclesiastes), among
the generaUy nameless K'thuvim or Hagiographa.
There is no question as to the high estimation in which these
sweet sad songs were held by the people from very early days.
It is evident that Zechariah at the end of the Captivity is quot
ing them in his first chapter, verse 6. On the 9th day of Ab, a
very ancient fast-day, commemorating the burning of the Temple,
these plaintive and touching Lamentations were read in the
synagogues. PUgrims, who after aU these many centuries of
exile, stiU gather in Jerusalem at the " place of wailing" by the
wall which yet remains of the ruins of theH holy beautiful house,'
are said to often use these sad songs as they weep and pray.
In the Latin Church in Holy Week the Book of Lamentations
is used on the three last days of the week : and the Church of
England, at the last revision * of her lectionary, has woven them
into the beautiful tapestry of her services for the same solemn
season. * In the Revision of 1871, chapter iii. and portions of chapters i., ii., and
iv. were ordered to be read on the Monday, Tuesday, and Wednesday of
Holy Week. Portions of Lamentations had been appointed to be read in
Holy Week in the first book of Edward VI., but that use was not contiuued
in the second book of Edward VI., or in any subsequent revision of the
Prayer Book until 1871.

THE BOOK OF THE PROPHET
EZEKIEL.
1 . Ezekiel, as the book which bears his name stands in our
own and the Hebrew canon, is the first prophet who proclaims
his message from the land of his captivity. The Book of Daniel
opens with the thHd year of Jehoiaehin, but Ezekiel begins with
the fifth year of Jehoiachin's captivity. Daniel, therefore, had
probably preceded Ezekiel into exUe, and undoubtedly outlived
him, but they were in exUe together, though far distant from
each other. Ezekiel was of priestly family, the son of Buzi.
As, however, the name of his father is not otherwise mentioned
in Scripture, we know no more about him. In the Jerusalem
Targum the son of Buzi (the despised one) is interpreted to mean
the son of Jeremiah, because he was despised. This is, of
course, of no other value than as showing that there was a kind
of natural succession in the two men.
In the narrative of Jehoiachin's captivity, in the Book of
Kings, no mention is made of any priests among the captives,
but only of "princes," " officers," and "mighty men of valour,"
among whom rather than the "craftsmen and smiths" Ezekiel
must have found his place, being, as Josephus says, " then but
young " (Ant. x. 6, 3). The prophet describes himseH as among
the captives by the river of Chebar, which has by some been
identified with the Chaboras or Khabour, a tributary of the
Euphrates, flowing into it near Circesium, Carchemish, Karkisia ;
but as this river is said to have been " in the land of the Chal
dees," and it is doubtful whether tbe Khabour was included in
that district, it has been supposed that the river Chebar may be
identified with the Nahr Malcha or royal canal, whieh was cut
by the order of Nebuchadnezzar, and in making which many
Jews were not improbably employed. As Chebar was equivalent
to " great," it is quite possible that this name may have been
appHed to that canal as well as to any other large river of the
country, but it does not help us to any nearer identification of
Ezekiel's abode. AU that is certain seems to be the impossibility

234 BCOK BY BOOK.
of identifying this latter river with the " Halah and Habor by
the river of Gozan " to which Shalmaneser transported the Israel
ites in the reign of Hezekiah. The initial letters in the two words
are totally different, and by no means to be confounded. There
is, however, an inherent difficulty in supposing that an artificial
canal was magnified by the designation " great river," though
as a matter of fact the word nahar is common to both. (Cf.
Ps. cxxxvii. 1.)
2. Date. — Ezekiel begins his prophecy with very precise speci-
cation of the year, month, aud day in which the heavens were
opened and he saw the visions of God ; but though he says it was
the thirtieth year we are at a loss to know from what date it is
to be reckoned, whether from his own birth or, as some have
supposed, from the finding of the law in the Temple, or, as
others have conjectured, from the era of Nabopolassar, the
father of Nebuchadnezzar, who came to the throne B.C. 625,
whieh would aU nearly correspond. This question, however
interesting, is the less important, inasmuch as the thirtieth year
is further specified as the fifth year of Jehoiaehin's captivity. As,
however, no other indication whatever of date is given by the
prophet, it seems most natural to understand the thirtieth year
as that of his own age. As this was the time at which the.
Levites entered on their service (Num. iv. 23, 30) it seems to
give a very probable date. This was also the age at which our
Lord began His ministry (Luke iii. 23).
That the prophet should without any notice make mention of
a Babylonian era, which may or may not have been in ordinary
use, seems highly improbable ; and there is no evidence that
any particular era was in use among the Jews, and no reason to
beHeve that the finding of the Book of the Law would have fur
nished the basis of such an era. From his frequent mention of
the sons of Zadoc (xl. 46 ; xliii. 19 ; xliv. 15, 16) as the priests,
it is supposed that he was himself of this family. There is no
reference to him in the canonical books of the Old Testament,
though he makes mention himself of his contemporary Daniel,
and in the enumeration of the worthies in Ecclus. xlix. 8, 9, he
is spoken of as he " who saw the glorious vision which was
showed him upon the chariot of the cherubims, for be made men
tion of the enemies under the figure of the rain, and directed
them that went aright." (See xiii. 11 ; xxxviii. 9, 22, &c.) Eze
kiel was partly contemporary with Jeremiah and Daniel, but
Jeremiah had begun to prophesy thirty-four years before Ezekiel,
and continued to do so for some six or seven years after his first
vision ; and as Daniel lived till the third year of Cyrus (Dan." x. 1 ),
he in all probability long survived Ezekiel, the commencement

THE BOOK OF THE PROPHET EZEKIEL. 235
of whose ministry, as we have seen, nearly corresponded with
that of his own captivity.
3. His Name. — As was so often the case with the prophets and
other biblical celebrities, the name of Ezekiel was significant,
though in this instance its significance was of general rather
than specific appropriateness. There is always room for doubt
as to the exact way in whieh the component words are intended
to be understood in the case of proper names, and aU that we
can be sure of here is the existence of the two elements, " God,"
and the verb " strengthen," in the name Ezekiel, but whether it
impHed that God would strengthen, or " prevail," or " hold by
the hand," it is difficult to say. Freely, the name might be
understood to mean the " strength of God," but what was the
more precise significance of the word it would be hard to deter
mine. In probable reference to his own name, Ezekiel says of
himself, in Hi. 14, " the hand of the Lord was strong upon, me."
(Cf. w. 8, 9.) In 1 Ch. xxiv. 16, we find mention made of a
priest of this name in tbe time of David ; but, with this excep
tion, the prophet stands alone as the bearer of it.
4. Personal Details. — In reading Ezekiel it is always to be
borne in mind that he was distant in space from the scenes he de
scribes, e.g. in ch. xxiv. he is bidden to name a particular day,
which was found afterwards to be the very day when the siege
of Jerusalem began, he being then in the land of his captivity
by the river Chebar. In like manner, in eh. viii. he describes in
detail the idolatrous abominations perpetrated in the temple at
Jerusalem, which he is shown in vision, though far away. The
latest date given in the book is the twenty-seventh year of Jehoi
achin's captivity, 527 B.C. (ch. xxix. 17). This is seventeen years
later than the date of the first verse of the same chapter. The
vision of the restored temple (eh. xl.) is dated in the 25th year.
We learn incidentally from ch. xxiv. 18 that Ezekiel was mar
ried, and that his wife died in the ninth year of his exile,
590 b.c. ; also from iii. 24 ; vHi. 1 , that though in exUe he never
theless had a house of his own. Probably, therefore, the con
dition of the captives, at aU events in certain cases, was not an
oppressive one, but its bitterness consisted in expatriation from
the land of their fathers, which was itseH intolerable to the Jew
with his highly developed and sensitive patriotic feelings. Of
Ezekiel's later history nothing is known. There is every reason
to beHeve that he died in exile, where it is evident that he was
recognised as a prophet and held in honour by his fellow country
men, as we see by the fact of the elders of the nation often
assembling themselves to receive his prophetic counsels and
admonitions. As these were by no means of chastened severity,

236 BOOK BY BOOK.
it is plain that his position was sufficiently well established to
make it possible for them to be deHvered without fear, and
received without questioning or dispute (vHi. 1 ; xiv. 1 ; xx. 1 ;
xxxiii. 30).
No stress can be laid upon a tradition which has been preserved
that he died a martyr, being put to death by one of the chief
men of the Jewish people on account of his prophecies. Jo
sephus, as we have seen, caUs him a " boy " when he went into
exUe, but as his prophetic career does not seem to have extended
over more than twenty-two years (xxix. 17), we must either sup
pose him to have died very young or must assume that the
expression of Josephus is to be interpreted with considerable lati
tude. It is not improbable that the caU of Ezekiel to the prophetic
office may have had some connection with the communication of
Jeremiah's predictions to Babylon, which took place in the year
preceding Ezekiel's visions (Jer. li. 59 ; cf. xxix. 21 — 28), H not
in the way of cause and effect, at aU events as taking up the note
of warning and denunciation, and carrying on the message of
prophecy. Ezekiel, however, does not mention Jeremiah, nor
does Jeremiah mention Ezekiel.
The three prophets, Jeremiah, Ezekiel, Daniel, correspond
generaUy to the prophets of the previous century, who flourished
before and after the captivity of Israel, namely, Isaiah, Hosea,
Amos, and Micah, but in every case the individuaHty is too
strongly marked to make any closer relation possible. For in
stance, tbe silence of Ezekiel with regard to his personal history
contrasts strongly with the diffuseness of Jeremiah in this
respect, whose personal history is largely contained in his writ
ings. This contrast of individual character is the more interest
ing, inasmuch as it shows that in selecting His human agents
the Spirit of God does not obliterate individual characteristics.
5. Canonicity. — The genuineness of Ezekiel's writings has been
Httle disputed. It is chiefly the last nine chapters, in themselves
sufficiently perplexing and mysterious, that have been impugned,
and they only by a few rash critics of no great name. The
canonicity of the book is estabhshed by Jewish and Christian
authorities. There is, indeed, no express reference to it or quo
tation from it in the New Testament, but the foUowing passages
apparently refer to it : — Eom. ii. 24, " For the name of God is
blasphemed among the Gentiles through you, as it is written ''
(cf. Ezek. xxxvi. 20—23) : Eom. x. 5, Gal. iii. 12, "For Moses
describeth the righteousness which is of the law, That tbe man
which doeth those things shaU Hve by them." (See Lev. xviii.
5, and Ezek. xx. 11, 21, &c. Cf. also 1 Pet. iv. 17, Ezek. ix. 6;

THE BOOK OF THE PROPHET EZEKIEL. 237
and 2 Pet. Hi. 4, Ezek. xii. 22.) It is obvious also that there is a
general correspondence between parts of Ezekiel and the Apoca
lypse of St. John.
6. Analysis and Contents. — There are four main divisions of the
book. 1 . Chaps, i. — xxiv. chiefly directed against the Israelites
and speciaUy the inhabitants. of Jerusalem ; the only exception is
the discourse against the Ammonites in chap. xxi. 28 — 32, or in
the Heb. xxi. 33 — 37. There is often a date given of the year,
month, and day, reckoning, as has been said, from Jehoiachin's
captivity. In this section the people are reproached for their
sins, idolatry, sun-worship, &c, which was carried on by the
elders, especiaUy Jaazaniah, the son of Shaphan (viii. 11). Zede
kiah is reproached with his Egyptian alliance (xvii. 15, &c),
which is so far evidence of Ezekiel's acceptance of Jeremiah's
prophetic authority, who had consistently discouraged this aUi-
anee with Egypt. The prophet threatens him with captivity
(ver. 20), as he had previously done with dying in the land
without seeing it (xu. 13). In xxi. 25, he is also severely threat
ened and vHtuaUy deposed in language which is at once a
distinct reference to the prophecy of Jacob (Gen. xUx. 10), and
the basis of the angelic announcement (Luke i. 12 — 33). Chap.
xx. is that which so mysteriously foreteUs the dispersion among
" the wUderness of the peoples," not "people," as A.V. ; a dis
persion which had aHeady begun in the prophet's own day, but
which was to be continued for long ages tiU our own and our
chUdren's days possibly, to be foUowed (ver. 41) by some signal
manHestation of divine action which should declare God's ways
as plainly as the first return from captivity which was distinctly
promised (vi. 8, 9; xxH. 16). Chap. xxi. represents the king of
Babylon as hesitating whether to go up against Jerusalem or
Sabbath first. He decides for the former (ver. 22), but the
prophet assures the Ammonites that they shaU not escape (ver.
28). This accounts for the apparent interruption of a series of
prophecies otherwise directed whoUy against Israel. Chap. xxii.
declares the judgment of the "bloody city." Chap. xxiH. relates
the idolatrous apostasy of Aholah, "her tent," and AhoHbah,
"my tent is in her," or of Israel (Samaria) and Judah (Jeru
salem), under the image of two women thus named. Chap. xxiv.
contains the death of the prophet's wHe.
This ends the first division of the book ; the second includes
chaps, xxv. — xxxii., which are chiefly prophecies against foreign
nations, that in chap. xxv. against the Ammonites, Moabites,
Edomites and PhUistines is without date. Chaps, xxvi., xxvii.
and xxvHi. are against Tyre and Zidon, and are dated in the
eleventh year. Chaps, xxix. — xxxii. are against Egypt and

238 BOOK BY BOOK.
Pathros, and dated in the tenth, eleventh, and twelfth year, with
the exception of xxix. 17, which is dated the twenty-seventh year,
and is the latest in the whole book. It is probably inserted here
for the sake of uniformity, and to bring together prophecies
relating to the same subject. The prediction in verses 13 — 15
cannot be understood literally, but must be taken as showing
that Egypt shall be dealt with somewhat after the analogy of
Israel with a definite period of political extinction.
The third section extends from chap, xxxiii. to chap, xxxix.
Chap, xxxiii. 1 — 20, declares the office of a watchman; chap.
xxxiv. reproves the shepherds of Israel and promises to raise up
one shepherd, even David. As it is utterly impossible that this
could have been understood, or meant to be understood, HteraUy,
it is the more remarkable as a witness to the hope that stili
centred in the house of David and the more significant in rela
tion to Christ. Chap. xxxv. relates to the ancient enmity of
Edom, which broke out against Israel when the troubles of the
Exile fell upon the nation, as is so often aUuded to in Scripture,
and threatens the desolation of the country. (Cf. xxv. 12 — 27;
Ps. cxxxvii. 7; Obadiah 10; Mai. i. 2, &c.) Chap, xxxvi. con
tinues the promise of God's care for Israel with that of the new
heart and the outpoured spirit. Chap, xxxvii. has the vision of
the resurrection of the dry bones, and under the figure of the
union of two sticks (ver. 16) is prophesied the restored union of
Israel under one head, "my servant David." Chaps. xxxvUi. and
xxxix. are occupied with the promised overthrow of Gog and
Magog. The latter name is found in Gen. x. 2 ; but Gog is only
known elsewhere as the name of a Eeubenite (1 Chron. v. 4).
Both names are adopted by St. John (Eev. xx. 8).
We now eome to the last division of Ezekiel's prophecies; the
most obscure and enigmatical of all — his vision and description
of the restored Temple (chap. xl. — xlviH.), about which certain
facts must be borne in mind. First, it is perfectly certain that
the details of this vision were not accepted as the basis of the
restored Temple. It is quite certain that the Jews who returned
must have been acquainted with Ezekiel's prophecies and with
this portion of his book. It is no less certain that when the
Temple was rebuUt by Zerubbabel, be was guided by wholly
different plans and directions, in fact that he followed the main
features of Solomon's Temple, that original edifice which many
of the returning captives still remembered.
This of itself is no sHght evidence of the existence at that
time of prescriptions and regulations which were then regarded
as of higher authority even than Ezekiel's. It is hard to beHeve
that the plans and directions which were followed in the building

THE BOOK OF THE PROFHET EZEKIEL. 239
of the second Temple were themselves of no more ancient origin,
if those of Ezekiel's -vision were set aside Hi favour of them.
But, secondly, it is no less clear that the arrangements of Eze
kiel's vision were physically impossible to be complied with.
For instance, the boundaries of the city and Temple in the vision
are quite different from what they were actually, and the Temple
was outside the city. The Temple was several miles north of
the city, and the city several miles north of the site of Jerusalem ;
the natural boundaries of the western sea and the Jordan were
too narrow by several miles to aUow of the assignment made for
the Temple and the priests and Levites.
The portions of the tribes were arranged in total disregard of
the aUotments made by Joshua. Each tribe was , to have a
portion of equal width. The seven tribes of Dan, Asher,
Naphtali, Manasseh, Ephraim, Eeuben, and Jndah, were to be
on the right of the Temple und its precincts — " the oblation " ;
and the five others, Benjamin, Simeon, Issachar, Zebulun, and
Gad on the south. The restoration of animal sacrifices is pro
vided for in the ordinances of the Temple in the prophet's
vision. The Ark of the Covenant is not mentioned, and there is
no high priest ; only the Passover and the Feast of Tabernacles
are named, not Pentecost nor the Great Day of Atonement ; but
a new feast is instituted on the first and ninth days of the first
month, when a solemn purification for the sanctuary was to take
place for those who had sinned through error (xiv. 20).
It is remarkable that 'Ezekiel speaks in 1his chapter of a new
functionary, whom he calls the prince, nasi, to whom a large
portion of land east and west of the oblation for the priests
and Levites is assigned, and whose duty it is to provide the
sacrifices. Here again it is only possible to interpret these
features spirituaUy. In later times the head of the Sanhedrim
who filled a very diff erent office, was called by this name. The
mediatorial function, which is assigned to this personage in the
vision of Ezekiel, is very remarkable.
In the forty-seventh chapter we have the vision of the living
waters which flowing eastwards from under the altar rapidly
become an impassable stream, which flows into the Dead Sea
and makes it sweet. This is manifestly the original of St. John's
vision in the last chapter of the Revelation. It is to be observed
that all the latter chapters of Ezekiel, whatever may be their
interpretation, are only to be understood on one assumption, that,
namely, of the restoration of the Temple and the reoocupation
of the land. When we bear in mind that the latest date in
Ezekiel's prophecies was some three years before the release of
Jehoiaehin from prison, this expression of confident hope is the

240 BOOK BY BOOK.
more remarkable, and is certain proof of the influence. of Jere
miah's promise of the restoration. (Cf. Daniel ix. 2.)
Ezekiel's writings as a whole have probably commended them
selves to a more limited circle of readers than those of Isaiah
and Jeremiah, in consequence of the detailed accounts of his
visions, which are at aU times difficult to realise, but they never
theless abound Hi passages of permanent and universal interest,
and when regarded as a whole with reference to the time and
conditions under which they were penned they fill a conspicuous
and important part Hi the economy of revelation, and are of no
inconsiderable value for the clear evidence they afford of the
acquaintance with the law of Moses which the children of Israel
must have carried with them into the land of their exile. (Cf . ehs.
xviii., xx., xxii. e.g.)

THE BOOK OF DANIEL.
1. The Book'of Daniel stands in the Hebrew canon among the
Hagiographa or Sacred Writings, which are speciaUy so caUed
in distinction to the Law and the Prophets, not as implying any
greater degree of sanctity, but as claiming an actual and inde
pendent sanctity for them, notwithstanding their position as
thHd Hi the scale. In that canon the position of Daniel is after
Esther and before Ezra. In the Septuagint and Vulgate, as
also Hi Luther's version, its place is among the four greater pro
phets after Ezekiel, which is its natural chronological position,
supposing Daniel to have been an historical character and this
book a genuine production by bim, for though Daniel's career
began earlier than Ezekiel's, he no doubt long survived him, as
he lived to witness the return of his countrymen in consequence
of the edict of Cyrus, b.o. 536 (Dan. i. 21 ; x. i.).
It consists of twelve chapters, which are written partly in
Hebrew and partly in that Aramaic dialect commonly caUed
Chaldee, which the Jews seemed to have acquired, and more or
less adopted, Hi the land of their captivity. The first six chap
ters relate matters of fact of a substantive nature ; the last six
contain various visions which were vouchsafed to Daniel. The
former haH is divided into several sections, loosely joined to
gether without any formula of transition or even a connecting
particle except between the first and second chapters. In fact,
they form complete narratives in themselves, but they foUow on
in natural sequence, so that the former chapters are presupposed
in the latter.
2. Authenticity, Genuineness, and Integrity. — This book has uni
formly been ascribed to Daniel by the combined testimony of
the Jewish and Christian Churches. In recent years, however,
this judgment has been utterly reversed. As the issues depend
ing upon it are very important, it is desHable to enter into this
question at some length. There are three questions involved,
(1) the authenticity, (2) the genuineness, and (3) the integrity

242 BOOK BY BOOK.
of the book. By its authenticity we mean its trustworthiness as
a record of fact ; by its genuineness, that it is rightly ascribed
to its supposed author ; and by its integrity, that it is an original
whole, and not the casual combination of distinct and inde
pendent parts. It is important to point out that the questions
of authenticity and genuineness are, to a large extent, interde
pendent ; that is to say, if the book is authentic, it can hardly
be other than genuine, and if it is genuine we may take it for
granted that it is authentic.
If Daniel wrote this book we may weU hesitate to question its
detaUs; and if its details are trustworthy, there is no one to
whom we are so Hkely to be indebted for them as to Daniel —
to his presiding supervision and care, if not to his personal
authorship. It should also be clearly noted that in the historic
credibiHty of tbe book, or, in other words, its authenticity, is
inseparably bound up the due recognition of tbe miraculous.
The stories of the deliverance of Daniel's companions from the-
fiery furnace and of himself from the den of Hons, are such as to
baffle aU explanation to account for them. We are challenged
by the writer on the most definite issue to determine whether
they occurred as facts or did not occur. If they occurred as facts
then they are miracles and can be nothmg else ; if they did not
occur, then the story relating them must be a romance, a fiction,
or a myth, and it can be nothing else. These stories, of all
others in Scripture, the most resolutely refuse to yield to any
process or theory which, accepting them as artistic sketches, with
a moral and didactic purpose, nevertheless denies to them tbe
weight of historic reahty, and dissipates theH substantial worth
as actual occurrences.
The Book of Daniel, therefore, offers a crucial test on many
points which are directly or impHcitly denied in the present day.
Nor must we imagine that it is only in the present day that the
severity of this test is felt. There never can have been a time
when it was reaUy more easy to beHeve the story of the deUver
ance from the fiery furnace than it is now, H the imagination
truly grappled with it ; but when the truth of Daniel was first
impugned, it was rather on the prophetic than the historic
ground. Porphyry, who died a.d. 304, wrote fifteen books
against the reHgion of Christ, and the whole of his tweHth book
was taken up with an attack on the genuineness of Daniel. He
maintained that it was written by a Jew in the time of Antio
chus Epiphanes, and for this reason it seemed to predict truly
up to this point, but falsely afterwards. The Book of Daniel,
then, raises a definite issue on the subject of miracles and pro
phecy ; if it is genuine it is absolutely impossible to refuse to

THE BOOK OF DANIEL. 243
acknowledge either ; and for this reason it is easy to see that a
disposition to reject either may weU tend to a prejudgment of
the genuineness or authenticity of Daniel, not on the actual merits
of the question, but in accordance with preconceived opinions
upon miracles and prophecy.
3. Canonicity. — Our business, however, is with the grounds
upon whieh Daniel has been accepted as canonical and believed
as an integral part of the Holy Scripture. And these are two
fold: (a), external ; {b), internal.
(i.) It must be admitted that externally the Book of Daniel
comes to us as weU authenticated as any other canonical book.
FHst, there is the reference in the first Book of Maccabees, ii.
59, 60, "Ananias, Azarias, and Misael by beHeving were saved
out of the flame ; Daniel for his innocency was delivered from
the mouths of Hons." This is mentioned in conjunction with
David and Elias, and it is evidently regarded as of the same
character and authority as what is related of them. It is true,
of course, that the speech in which it occurs may be an imaginary
one of the writer's, which he has put into the mouth of the
dying Mattathias, but at aU events we must regard it as one
which he might have spoken.
At this time, therefore, the historian saw nothing improbable
Hi Mattathias being acquainted with the history of Daniel, and
as we have no history in which these events are recorded but this
Book of Daniel, he must have learnt them from it, and at any
rate proof is afforded that when the book of Maccabees was
written the canonical position of Daniel was secure. Now the
first Book of Maccabees was probably written in the last quarter
of the second century before Christ, that is to say, about two
generations after the tune of Antiochus Epiphanes. It foUows
therefore that, if Daniel was a late production, it had managed
to work its way into reception on a level with the rest of Scrip
ture Hi the short space of sixty or seventy years. This is by no
means likely, as the first Book of Maccabees itself was not so
received, nor is there any reason to beHeve that any other book
of the same period was aUowed a place in the canon.
(H.) Again, this first Book of Maccabees not only presupposes
the existence of Daniel, whieh it does merely as a matter of inde
pendent testimony, just as Milton's allusion to Shakespeare
proves that he lived after Shakespeare's time, but it displays
acquaintance also with the Alexandrian version of the book, so
that the Semitic original must have been in existence long
enough to find a place in an authorised translation like that of
the LXX. ; e.g. in 1 Mace. i. 54 we read that " they set up the
abomination of desolation upon the altar," meaning no doubt the
r 2

244 BOOK BY BOOK.
heathen idol, and quoting the remarkable words of Dan. xi. 31,
as they are in the Greek (ef. Dan. ix. 27). So in 1 Mace, ix 40,
the words /cat Zireo-ov rpavfiarlou iroWni are an echo of the Greek
of Dan. xi. 26, /ecu n-eo-owTai TpavpjxTiat woXkol, and Hi 1 Mace. ix.
27 there is close correspondence with the language of Dan. xii.
1. It seems, therefore, fairly certain that the writer of tbe first
Book of Maccabees was acquainted with the Greek version of
Daniel, whieh necessitates an earHer existence of the book than
the age of Antiochus Epiphanes, even if the Septuagint version
. itself is not of earHer date than that.
(iii.) The narrative in Josephus (Ant. xi. 8, 5), that when Alex
ander the Great in his conquering march came to Jerusalem, the
Book of Daniel was shown to him, and that he took to himself
the prophecy in it that a Greek should destroy the Persian em
pire, and was much pleased therewith, is clear proof that in the
opinion of Josephus the book was in existence then, whether or
not we accept the story, whUe it shows that he could have known
of no incident or tradition which made its existence then impos
sible. As a matter of historical fact, however, it is true that
Alexander treated the Jews with marked favour, which gives
some colour of probability to the story of Josephus, and itself
must be accounted for by some predisposing cause such as this
would have furnished.
(iv.) Lastly, had Daniel first appeared in Maccabean times, as
the natural product of them, there would probably have been
other books of a Hke kind, but we have no evidence of any,
and therefore this book must stand entirely alone if not
genuine, and however appropriate certain portions may be to the
requUements of that time, it is hard to see the special bearing
of others upon them, and therefore the theory of Maccabean
origin, while it affords a plausible motive for some parts, offers
no explanation of others which are equaUy characteristic, any
more than it explains why the one part should have been
linked so closely with the other, if it was not a whole from the
beginning. It is important to estimate these positive and substantive facts
at their true value, because they seem to furnish definite mate
rial, which it is aUke impossible to set aside and to reconcUe with
any theory of the late origin of Daniel. However we are to deal
with the mHaculous and prophetic elements of the book, it is at
aU events not fair to minimise the value of these facts in order
to depreciate the ostensible importance of the miracles and pro
phecies contained in it. If we are horiest and earnest students,
therefore, we cannot ignore the fact that the external testimony,
dHect and indirect, to the existence of Daniel at a time antece-

THE BOOK OF DANIEL. 215
dent to the age of Antiochus Epiphanes is very strong. It would
certainly be held to be conclusive Hi the absence af any motives^
for setting it aside.
(v.) Another point deserves to be more carefuly noted than it
seems commonly to have been. We have in the prophet Ezekiel
distinct reference to the existence of the prophet Daniel in his
time. In the fourteenth chapter he twice couples him with Noah
and Job, as a notable instance of deliverance, and in chap, xxviii.
3, he says of Tyre, "Behold thou art wiser than Daniel, there
is no secret that they can hide from thee." Ezekiel and Daniel
were contemporaries. It is plain that Ezekiel knew of Daniel as
one who had either wrought some great dehverance for others,
or had been himseH the subject of it, and also as of one who
was a great revealer of secrets. Now we may not assume that
Ezekiel was acquainted with the Book of Daniel, but as these are
the only two references we have to Daniel Hi the Hebrew htera
ture, we must either assume, if the book was late in date, that
it was a story based entirely on these two meagre and frag
mentary references to the history of Daniel, which were conse
quently sufficient to supply the foundation and framework of it,
or else that more extensive traditions sufficient for supplying it
were in existence, and had survived in adequate measure for the
space of three centuries and a half tiUthey suggested the remark
able compUationfwhich we now know as the Book of Daniel.
It seems to me that this is a point that is weU worthy of note,
and we may be absolutely certain that the writer of Daniel in the
second century before Christ either fabricated his romance
entirely out of the materials supphed by Ezekiel, or else made
use of traditions of which there is no trace elsewhere, or else
gave the rein to his imagination to create a story in substantial
agreement with the brief allusions to Daniel in Ezekiel. I do
not believe that any of these courses was probable or possible,
nor do I believe that the whole compass of literature supplies any
case corresponding to what this would have been. The fact that
certain stories, such as that of Bel and the Dragon, and of
Susanna, became attached to the Book of Daniel, but did not
find a place in tbe Hebrew canon, serves at least to show that
there was felt to be an intrinsic difference between them, whether
it was that of age or anything else, and neither of these
stories can have originated in the way it is assumed that the
Book of Daniel arose from a desire to encourage the Jews when
suffering under the severities of the Antiochian persecution,
though indeed it is useless to speculate as to what may or may
not have been . the possible origin of any book whose apparent
and traditional origin is disputed.

246 BOOK BY BOOK.
4. Arguments on the Other Side. — The arguments which are
advanced against tbe genuineness of the Book of Daniel are as
follows :
(i.) The fact that its place in the Hebrew canon is not among
the Prophets but in the so-caUed Sacred Writings, is advanced
to show that the book was not known when the division was
made which consisted of the writings of the Prophets. This may
possibly have been made by Ezra or Nehemiah somewhere about
450 b.c, or more than one hundred years after the age of Daniel.
In the Septuagint version, however, which was probably made in
the third century b.c , Daniel foUows Ezekiel as he does in our
own version. And it is a very reasonable explanation of the
place of Daniel in the Hebrew canon, that he was not officiaUy
a prophet with a distinct caU, as is recorded in the case of Isaiah,
Jeremiah, and Ezekiel, but only a prophet in virtue of his gifts.
His book is regarded rather as an historical treatise, and therefore
is classed with those of Ezra, Nehemiah, and Esther. In like
manner, though Daniel was pre-eminently a prophet and acknow
ledged as a prophet, he is not classed among the prophets Hi
the canon, but is placed in the forefront of the ' ' Sacred Writ
ings ." I think it is obvious that these two considerations entirely
neutraHse any impression arising from the position of Daniel in
the Hebrew canon, and fuUy account for it.
(ii.) A second reason is conceived to exist in the silence of
Jesus the son of Sirach, in Ecclus. xlix., when the worthies of
Israel are enumerated. The entHe passage extends from chap.
xliv. to chap. 1. Daniel, however, is not the only name omitted ;
no mention is made of Esther or of Mordecai, whereas Nehemiah
finds his place somewhat inappropriately between Zerubbabel
and Enoch. It is manifest that no vaHd argument can be raised
on this cHcumstance, seeing that the entHe catalogue is of a rhe
torical character, and the selection made on arbitrary principles.
The date of Ecclus. is probably about 180 — 200. If, therefore,
Daniel was of the age suggested, and not genuine, this would
of course account for the sUence of the son of Sirach, though of
course it may very weU arise from other causes. Clearly, if we are
right in assigning the LXX. translation to the third century B.C.,
the place of Daniel in that version is alone conclusive as fur
nishing positive evidence to his existence in opposition to the
negative evidence deduced from the sUence of the son of SUach.
And it must always be remembered that Ezekiel was mani
festly acquainted with a Daniel, whether or not the book bearing
his name has a right to be received as genuine. Indeed, as I
have aHeady stated, the reference made by Ezekiel is altogether
inexplicable, if the Book of Daniel is a forgery of the second

THE BOOK OF DANIEL. 247
century b.o. Who was the Daniel to whom Ezekiel refers ? and
how is it that being so eminent as he clearly was we know nothing
whatever about him ? If te was held worthy of being classed
with Noah and Job, how is it that tradition was absolutely silent
as to his history for some four centuries, tiU it suddenly blazed
forth in the age of Antiochus Epiphanes with this profusion of
supernatural incident and enigmatical prediction ?
(Hi.) Thirdly, it is said that there is no mention of Daniel in
Haggai, Zechariah, or Malachi. But why is it necessary to
suppose there should have been, considering the specific character
of these writers and the brevity of their writings ? There is no
mention of Ezekiel in Jeremiah, or of Jeremiah in Ezekiel,
though they were contemporary. To aU appearance, however,
this negative feature is more than neutralised by what is pro
bably a verbal reference to Daniel in Nehemiah. The words of
Nehemiah (i. 5) are a reproduction of Daniel (ix. 4), and the
peculiar phrase, " great and terrible God," is used only in Deu
teronomy and in this place of Daniel. The position Hi which
Nehemiah found himseH was not unhke that of Daniel, and so
far calculated to bring to his recoUeetion the words of Daniel.
In Nehemiah ix. 32, we see also that Nehemiah has adopted an1
alteration of Deut. vH. 9, which Daniel has made in ix. 4. If in
the former instance we might question which of the two was
the original, there is hardly the same opportunity of doing so
here, where we seem to have the result of a longer and wider
experience. It is, moreover, at least probable that two of Zecha-
riah's visions are more or less adapted and borrowed from Daniel
(Zech. i. 18 — 21 ; vi. 1 — 5), and H this is so, we have quite as
much indication of acquaintance with Daniel in the post-Captivity
prophets as we can reasonably expect. Indeed, the visions of
Zechariah may very weU be thought to lean upon those of Ezekiel
and Daniel.
ft has even been suggested that the frequent asseverations of
truth are blinds to conceal a consciousness of falsehood on the
part of the writer. This only shows the perversity of the spirit
of the objector, just as, in certain chapters of Isaiah, we are
asked to beHeve them not genuine because they do not claim to
be his ; whereas in chapters like the thirteenth and fourteenth,
whieh do claim to be his, the authority of the superscription is
without scruple -set aside. Doubtless, had there been no vouchers
for truthfulness in Daniel, that would have been advanced as an
indication of spuriousness, just as the frequency of them is con
strued into a tacit admission of forgery. So just and appropriate
is our Lord's remark : ' ' Whereunto shaU I liken this genera
tion ? It is Hke unto chUdren sitting in the market-place and

248 BOOK BY BOOK.
crying unto their f eUows : We have piped unto you, and ye have
not danced; we have mourned unto you, and ye have not
lamented." So difficult is it to conceive the eUeumstanees in
which the excuse for objection should not arise.
It is to be remembered that, with regard to the Book of Daniel,
the question as to its date lies only between the actual date,
which we may suppose to be that of the old age of Daniel, or
about the middle of the sixth century B.C., and that of the death
of Antiochus Epiphanes (163 B.C.), a distance of more than three
centuries and a half. No other date has ever been suggested ;
but it is not hard to see that, even conceding the latter date as
the true one, there is a distinct prophecy as early as the second
chapter, which probably reappears afterwards, that renders abso
lutely futile any such hypothesis, for it is not possible to inter
pret Nebuchadnezzar's dream without perceiving that the rise
of the Christian Church as a kingdom that should last for ever is
definitely promised therein.
Of course, in the case of any prophecy, no matter how close its
correspondence with what purports to be its fulfilment, it is
always possible, on a priori grounds, to affirm that the fulfilment
does not establish the prophecy, because we cannot be certain
that it was so fulfilled. The correspondence may be fortuitous,
but for all that there is a natural inability in the human mind to
reject the inference which forces itseH on us in consequence of
any such correspondence, especiaUy when repeated again and
again. An aggregate of threads, each of whieh may be weak in
isseH, is yet strong enough to hold the mind enchained ; and
there can be no doubt that prophecy may not only be regarded
as one bf such threads, but also that this particular prophecy is
reaUy one of the strongest of them ; and though it may be unwise
to dweU with too great exclusiveness even on this indication of
antecedent design, it is equaUy unwise to shut our eyes altogether
to the cogency of it.
The Book of Daniel, like that of Ezra, is written partly in
Hebrew and partly, as aHeady stated, in the Aramaic dialect,
commonly called Chaldee. Some have affirmed that the Chaldee
of Daniel is a disguised imitation of that of Ezra ; but sufficient
Hnguistic differences have been pointed out to negative this
assumption. These differences are, indeed, slight, and the
Chaldee of Ezra and Daniel is more nearly aUke than that of
either is to the language of the oldest of the Chaldee Targums.
There is reason to beheve that neither the Hebrew nor the
Chaldee of Daniel was in use Hi the time of the Maccabees,
and hence the notion of a Maccabean origin for tbe Book of
Daniel is rendered the more improbable.

THE BOOK OF DANIEL. 249
5. Analysis. — In attempting to analyse the Book of Daniel, it
is as difficult to discover on what principle the transition from the
Hebrew to the Chaldee is made, as it is to decide why the narra
tive passes from the third person to the first.. The book opens
in Hebrew, and passes on to Chaldee at chap. ii. 4, but at
chap. viii. 1, it reverts to Hebrew, which is maintained to the
end of the book. On the other hand, the thHd person is uni
formly adopted in the first six chapters and the first verse of
chap, vii., when the narrative is continued in the first person
and maintained throughout, except at viii. 1, and x. 1, where
both forms may be said to be combined: "a vision appeared
unto me, Daniel . . . and I saw ; " "a thing was revealed unto
Daniel . .' . in those days I Daniel." It is to be observed from
this fact that the two parts are the more closely welded together,
inasmuch as the use of the two languages and the two moods of
narration characterise both parts, regarding the end of chap. vi.
as the most natural and obvious division.
The first division contains Nebuchadnezzar's dreams and the
interpretations of them, and the narrative of the deliverance of
Daniel and his companions in a mUaculous manner ; but the
second part of the book is almost exclusively occupied with an
account of the visions vouchsafed to Daniel. In the eleventh
chapter these take the form of a communication made to him by
an angel, who relates in detaU, as it seems, the history of the
Seleucian kings. There can be no doubt that this, in any
aspect, is one of the most remarkable chapters of Scripture. If
the book is not genuine, this chapter is the most audacious of
forgeries ; but if genuine, it can only be regarded as the most
extraordinary of prophecies — in fact, it may claim to be alto
gether unique ; and yet we can only, on the most arbitrary prin
ciples, venture to regard this chapter as an interpolation, and
suppose that it warrants us in caUing in question the integrity
of the book. It is absolutely impossible to sever this chapter
from its surroundings ; it must stand or f aU with the rest of the
book. To any one who is at all open to beHef , the question of the
genuineness of Daniel is decided by the fact that there are two
prophecies in the book which no hypothesis of its late origin can
at aU account for : these are the prophecies of the fifth empire
and that of the seventy weeks. If there is any meaning at aH
in ii. 44, vii. 27, it can only be the promise of a vast and per
manent spiritual kingdom, such as that which claims to have
been founded by Christ. It is, humanly speaking, as unlikely
that this should have been foreseen in the second century as in
the sixth before Christ; and stiU more unlikely is it that a

250 BOOK BY BOOK.
person writing in the second century before Christ the kind of
imaginary fiction this book would have been, should have framed
so lofty a conception as this, and have put it into the mouth of
Nebuchadnezzar, and have asserted it so confidently.
And the same may be said of the prophecy of the seventy
weeks. This is absolutely unintelligible on the supposition of
its late origin ; whereas if it is part, as it professes to be, of a
divine vision, it is not only susceptible of a marveUously minute
interpretation, but seems to have furnished the only conceivable
basis upon which our Lord declared, when He commenced His
ministry, that the time was fulfilled ; for in the whole compass
of Scripture there is nothing to show that the Messianic hopes
and promises were to be fulfilled in the age of Christ — who
claimed to have fulfilled them — more than at any other time, and
yet we have independent evidence that, at that time, there was
a very general impression that they were then to be fulfilled. '
It is for these reasons, then, that we regard the Book of Daniel
as a genuine work of the age of Daniel, and as coming to us with
his authority and sanction. And as such it sets the coping-stone
to the edifice of the sacred Scriptures, as a monument of divine
revelation ; for though in Psalm and Prophecy we have many
indications of a presiding divine mind, as we have in sacred
history of a divine providence, yet nowhere, as in the Book of
Daniel, have we the definite and bold assertion of a claim to
declare beforehand the events of the hidden future — the distinct
and unfaltering chaUenge on the part of the historian to have
triumphed over the ordinary laws of nature; to have "stopped
the mouths of Hons and quenched the violence of fire."

HOSEA.
1. Position in the Canon. — The first place in the coUection of
shorter prophecies, commonly called The Minor Prophets, is
assigned to Hosea both in the Hebrew and in the Greek canon.
The cause of this arrangement may have been the occurrence in
i. 2 of the phrase, " The beginning of the word of the Lord."
Or it may have been the character of the work as the one great
prophetic production of the northern kingdom. Possibly there
was no more abstruse reason than that it was the longest of the
earlier books in the group. The very earhest it could hardly be,
for putting aside the claims of Jonah and Joel, which are open
to question, we have only to compare the contents of Amos to
perceive that the period mirrored in it is antecedent to that
pictured Hi the pages of Hosea. These two prophets were
indeed closely related, and the work of the one throws light on
that of the other. As EHjah and Elisha stand out against the
dark background of the downfaU of the dynasty of Omri, in like
manner Amos and Hosea presage the overthrow of the royal
house of Jehu and the destruction of the kingdom of Ephraim,
and at once interpret the purpose of Jehovah and vindicate His
character Hi the final catastrophe.
2. Career of the Prophet. — Of the prophet's person and career
we know Httle, for he is not mentioned in the historical books of
the Bible, and not much can be gathered from his own writing.
His name is identical with that of the last king of Samaria
(2 Kings xv. 30), and also with the earlier name of Israel's great
leader in the conquest of Canaan (Numbers xiii. 16). His father
Beeri has been mistakenly identified with Beerah (1 Chron. v.
6), and gratuitously credited with the authorship of Isaiah viii.
19, 20. There are other traditional statements concerning our
prophet, but they contradict one another, and have no authority.
Enough may be gathered from the style and spirit of Hosea's
book to construct a vivid and very individualistic portrait of the
man and of the seer. If an interpretation of chapters i. — Hi.

252 BOOK BY BOOK.
which of late years has gained the support of the highest
scholarship and the finest critical discernment of our time may
be accepted, then we have the veU drawn aside from a pathetic
story of domestic trial, that discloses the origin of what is
deepest and most original in the message of tbe prophet, and
gives us the key to his peculiar place in the orderly progress of
revelation. A difficult reference in ix. 7, 8, suggests that, as might have
been surely inferred, Hosea was exposed to the most maddening
opposition and obduracy, if not also to treacherous and perilous
attack. The same passage, in combination with the denuncia
tions of priest and prophet (iv. 4, 5, &c), seems to point to the
official reHgious orders as the standing antagonists of the prophet
and of his doctrine. It is commonly assumed that he was a lay
man, and Hke Amos no member of a prophetic guild, but called
by a personal divine impulse to his pubHc work. This is probably
correct, though it has been urged with some ingenuity that the
prominence given to the priesthood in his utterances, his interest
in worship, his knowledge of ritual, law, and history, mark him
out as himself a member of the priestly caste, and thus explain
the allusion to "hatred in the house of his God " (ix. 8).
The idea which used to prevail in certain quarters, that, though
his mission was mainly to the northern nation, the man was
himseH a citizen of the J southern kingdom, has been practicaUy
abandoned. It remains possible, and to some extent bis refer
ences to Judah support the notion, that towards the end of his
career he was driven by persecution to forsake Ephraim, and to
take up his abode in Judaaa, where he put together the record of
his prophetic activity. That he was beyond all question by
birth, breeding, life, and sympathy a native of the north is
evidenced by his intimate and easy f amiHarity with its geography,
recent history, social condition, and minute local circumstances
and characteristics. There is, indeed, in the testimony of the
Judeean Amos a wonderful accuracy and detaU of acquaintance
with the northern realm. But it is not equal to that of Hosea,
and there is a difference of kind. The one knows about the
affaUs of Ephraim. The other is at home in its life, bound up
in its sorrows, sins, and ruin, personally burdened with its guilt,
agonising in its death-throes, and in every note of its funeral
dhge f eeHng its fate as his own.
3. Date and Contemporary Events. — There is a twofold indica
tion of date prefixed to the Book of Hosea. First, it is stated,
in terms of the Judsean monarchy, that the word of the Lord
came to him " in the days of Uzziah, Jotham, Ahaz, and Heze
kiah, kings of Judah." Second, in terms of the northern mon-

HOSEA. 253
archy, it is said to have been " in the days of Jeroboam, the son
of Joash, king of Israel," that is of course Jeroboam IL, the
greatest and most statesmanlike of Israel's kings. These are
manffestly distinct headings, and not paraUel designations of the
same period. For it is certain that Jeroboam was dead some
years before the end of Uzziah's reign, and whUe the reference
to the northern monarch terminates about the middle of the
eighth century, the Judsean date carries us down to its close.
The chronology of the age is extremely uncertain, and even
with the aid of the Assyrian inscriptions scholars have succeeded
in fixing no more than a few events in it with precision. What
the double date of the superscription does enable us to say with
approximate certainty is, that Hosea' s earliest prophecies feU in
the closing years of Jeroboam, and therefore in aU HkeHhood
before B.C. 750. As for the rest, the lengthy Hst of Judsean
kings does not necessarily imply that there are in the book oracles
belonging to each and aU of these reigns. The heading is a
large and general one, indicating the prophet's epoch. Probably
it was a technical designation of that splendid age of prophetic
activity which corresponded with the slow and momentous ad
vance of the Assyrian power. It is noteworthy that we find it
attached to the Book of Isaiah, which heads the series of the
prophets proper in the Old Testament canon, and with the omis
sion of Uzziah it also introduces the work of his younger con
temporary, Micah. In the case of Hosea its scope is plainly
limited by the faU of Samaria, which took place about the com
mencement of Hezekiah's reign.
We may, therefore, roughly locate the activity of Hosea in the
two middle quarters of the eight century. In this period the
first haH formed a striking contrast to the last. Through the
prowess and abUity of Jeroboam, taking advantage of Assyria's
persistent pressure on Syria, the ancient enemy of Samaria,
Israel had recovered much of its former importance, and was
enjoying great prosperity. This good fortune was of course
fallacious, for Assyria's conquest of Damascus meant the clear
ance of its way to Samaria and the rich coast towns and provinces
of Palestine. Moreover, wealth and success had not bettered
the moral and spHitual condition of Ephraim, but rather were
breeding in tbe commonwealth a host of lawless ambitions, evU
passions, and demoralising forces, such as have so often caused
a strong mUitary despotism to be foUowed by anarchy and sudden
decay. * It was so Hi Israel. With the death of Jeroboam, his
empHe was rent and wasted by the struggles of military adven
turers, the conspUacies of rival factions, and the hatreds of inter
necine feuds, compHeated by foreign intrigues with the great

254 BOOK BY BOOK.
rival empires of Egypt and Assyria. His son Zechariah, after
a brief reign of six months, was dethroned and slain by ShaUum,
who -within a month was massacred by Menahem. With the
aid of Assyria Menahem held the throne for some years, but his
son Pekahiah in two years was murdered by Pekah, and he in
turn was slain by Hoshea, the last king of Samaria. Tbe period
was one of frightful violence and confusion ; aU ties of social
life were loosened ; immorality, Ureligion, superstition, panic,
and despair contributed to the common misery and ruin; it hardly
needed prophetic insight to foresee the inevitable end in the total
dissolution of the state.
Corresponding to this change of character in the national con
dition and fortunes, there is a sharply defined distinction between
the opening chapters (i. — iii.) of Hosea and the remainder (iv. —
xiv.) of the book. The first part belongs to the earHer period
of prosperity, for it pictures national plenty and rejoicing (ii. 5,
8, 13), and only threatens famine and disaster. The people are
accused of infidelity to Jehovah and of attendant immoraHty,
but not of such moral disintegration as marked later times.
Moreover, the throne is still occupied by the dynasty of Jehu
(i. 4).
With equal decisiveness we have in the second part the
atmosphere of the dark and distracted age that followed the
decease of Jeroboam (iv. 1, 2; v. 1, 2, 13; vii. 7, 11, &c).
Everywhere we are confronted with the lawlessness, the dissolute
ness, the plotting factions, the mad daUying with the great
powers, and a thousand unmistakable indications of the last
years of Israel's decHne and decay. But, while there can be no
hesitation in assigning the whole of this section to the period in
question, it is almost a hopeless task to divide it into separate
utterances, and to attach these to particular stages of the down
ward career of the kingdom. This difficulty is due partly to the
peculiar style adopted by the prophet, whose utterances flow on
in one long, impassioned monologue, in which we rather dimly
divine pauses than clearly discern them. Moreover, the references
to contemporary incidents and current circumstances, though
numerous and detaUed, are too vague to help us much in our
extreme ignorance of the actual course of events, which are
chronicled in the most summary fashion in the historical books.
The following identifications have been proposed, but are none
of them proved. The phrase, ' ' Now shaU a mouth devour them ' '
(v. 7) refers to ShaUum ; " All theH kings are faUen " (vH. 7) to
Menahem, as also viii. 4 and 9 — 10, on account of bis relations
with Assyria (2 Kings xv. 19); while the mention of Shalman
(x. 14) is held to indicate the reign of Hoshea. This last would

HOSEA. 255
be very important, if we could be certain that Shalmaneser IV.
is meant, but it might equaUy weU be Shalmaneser III., or a
King Salamanu of Moab, whose name occurs in an inscription
of Tiglath-PUeser. Moreover, did the book cover so late a
period, should we npt find some trace in it of the remarkable
movement which so stirred Isaiah, when Eezin of Damascus and
Pekah of Samaria attacked Judaea, and tempted Ahaz to caU in
the aid of Assyria? Would the references in v. 1, vi. 8, xH. 11,
be possible, after the devastation of GUead and Naphtali by
Tiglath-PUeser, which was the consequence ? On the contrary,
throughout the book Assyria appears not as a cruel destroyer
(except Hi prediction ofthe future), but rather as a formidable
power, whose alliance is foolishly courted by selfish factions in
Israel. As this attitude is maintained even to the end (xiv. 3),
it is urged with much probability, that the period actuaUy
reflected in Hosea's utterances does not extend much or at aU
beyond the times of Menahem.
4. The Basis of the Prophet's Teaching. — The characteristic fea
ture of Hosea's book is his representation of his relation between
God and the chosen people in terms of the marriage tie. Jehovah
is the nation's husband, and Israel His unfaithful spouse. The
choice of the figure is remarkable, and stiU more startling the
use that is made of it. The idea of a conjugal union between a
god and the land or people belonging to him was, indeed, a
commonplace of Semitic rehgions. And it had its natural sequel
Hi the encouragement of gross sexual abuses as a regular accom
paniment of the established worship. The very evU that was
blighting Ephraim in Hosea's age was the introduction of this
physical conception, with its vile abuses, into the cult of Jehovah.
Yet it is precisely this notion that the prophet takes and makes
the basis of his entire polemic against the prevalent ills of the
time, and the keynote of his teaching concerning God and His
purposes with His people.
How came Hosea to a thought of such bold and original
creativeness ? He teUs us that it grew out of a personal expe
rience of a very remarkable character. By Divine direction he
formed relations either of marriage or concubinage with one or
possibly two women of dissolute Hfe, had chUdren, assigned to
these significant names, and was taught thus to discern the mean
ing and drift of Jehovah's ways with His faithless people.
Taken in this bare and probably inexact reading, the story is
so repulsive that a majority of interpreters have always refused
to count it an actual transaction, and have relegated it to the
category of symbolical action, aUegory, or objective vision—
whatever that may mean. But what would be foul in fact does

256 BOOK BY BOOK.
not become clean in symbol, vision, or fancy, and so in neither
case would the supposed transaction have been possessed of much
edifying efficacy. Moreover, if acted in dumb show, or simply
told as a parable, it would not have had any speciaUy impressive
power on the minds of spectators or hearers, whUe as an actual
experience in the prophet's home, its movement would be too
slow and its scenes too removed from pubHc view to teU on the
conscience of the community.
Evidently its purpose was not the instruction of the people,
but the making of the prophet. What the painful tragedy could
accomphsh as nothing else could, was to penetrate the prophet's
own Hfe, and thought, and spirit, with an analogical but intensely
vivid reaHsation of the heart and mind of God in His deaHng
with wayward Israel. And for that, we cannot but conclude, it
must have been an experience actuaUy Hved through — not, how
ever, Hi relations of baseness, but necessarily Hi a sphere of pure
and honourable love, hope, and aspHation. That it was an
actual episode in the prophet's fortunes is confirmed by the fact
that while the children's names are manifestly symboHcal, the
wife's name is as certainly real and not imaginative.
WhUe we have but to bring to the story an inteUigent know
ledge of the idiosyncrasies of Hebrew narration and the methods
of Divine revelation to get rid of a number of unhappy assump
tions, and to find, in place of a history that, whether aUegory or
actuahty, was alike repellent and spHitless, a pure and pathetic
tale of suffering and loyal love, which might weU make a high-
tuned heart sensitive to tbe Divme tenderness, and stir a brave-
souled patriot to the career of a prophet.
Hosea was a citizen of northern Israel, in whom burned the
zeal of EHjah for Jehovah. The persistent sinning of his people
pained him and perplexed him with questions concerning God
and providence in the past, present, and future. At last light
broke on him from a strange quarter, and yet certainly from
heaven. It was "the beginning of God's word " to him, and
through him to Israel. By Divine guidance, under the impulse
of a warm attachment, he married, counting on a pure and
happy domestic Hfe. But his wife, contaminated by the religious
taint of the time, proved unfaithful. He forbore with her, and
hoped for amendment. ChUdren were born and, by Divme
direction, caUed by names significant of Israel's disloyalty to
her God.
The truth was penetrating Hosea's whole being, that in him
and his faithless spouse God was exhibiting types of Himself
and wayward Israel. At length, by Hosea's act or her own, the
unhappy wife ceased to be an inmate of his home, a partaker of

HOSEA. 257
his care and shelter. She f eU into a condition of slavery and
misery. The old love was not gone from Hosea's heart. The
thing was almost beyond tbe humanly possible, but a voice
within him said, " Go, love her stiU, and by firm and tender
handling win her back to purity."
It was. the voice of God. Nay, it was the spirit of Jehovah-
in Hosea reproducing the feeling, thought, and action of God in
His treatment of Israel. The prophet's first ardent attachment,
his pain and grief under his wrongs, his loathing of the sin, his
jealous indignation, his relenting, and patience, and forbearance,
the loving sternness of discipHne, the clinging affection that
followed the unhappy outcast, the compassion for her in her
degradation, the more than human loyalty of love and strength
of goodness that recovered and redeemed her — these emotions,
and conflicts, and experiences in Hosea are echoes and expres
sions of the very heart of God. This is the secret of Jehovah
and of His providential leading of His people.
5. Conception of Jehovah. — Armed with this understanding of
Hosea's ruling thought, we have a clue, if not to the logical
order of the somewhat intricate maze of his monologue, at least
to its emotional unity and its spiritual contents. Jehovah is a
bemg, not of mere natural energies and physical bountif ulness,
but He is a God of moral forces, of justice, truth, and love.
EeUowship with Him must Hve and move in these attributes, or
it cannot be at aU. A social order that is unrighteous, a religious
worship that is immoral, a national existence based on earthly
guarantees, may call themselves by Jehovah's name, but in truth
they are a deflection from His feUowship, a defiance of His
authority, and an outrage on His love. The local Baals, at
whose shrines Israel sacrifices and feasts, with practices and
behefs contaminated by Canaanitish paganism and impurity ;
the gold-plated calves, that are adored as the embodiment of
Israel's god, tUl the worshippers have forgotten that He is moral
and not material ; these are not Israel's true Divine husband,
but usurpers of His place and of His rights. They are in fact
and Hi practice other gods, and indeed no gods at aU, whUe theH
cult is a profanation and an infidelity perpetrated in the face of
the Hving God.
A twin act of desertion and unfaithfulness is the separate
national existence of the northern kingdom, perpetuating as it
does an ill-omened schism oleft in the unity of Jehovah's chosen
people, and cursed by the instability of government, the lawless
ness and violence, and the lack of moral and reHgious stamina
which are the inevitable weaknesses of a community founded on
revolt, held together by material interests only, and not rooted

258 BOOK BY BOOK.
in a sure and clearly discerned purpose of providence. An
aggravation of this fundamental falseness, and a consequence of
it, is Israel's ambition to mingle with the nations, to covet wealth
and mUitary might, and to seek support in its extremity from
the great world powers rather than from its God.
The immediate harvest of its disloyalty to Jehovah is a universal
relaxation of morahty, the decay of aU truth, and mercy, and
purity, a creeping canker of selfishness and heartlessness, and
the steady disintegration of aU those virtues that make the
happiness and strength of a nation. Hope of immediate amend
ment Hosea has none. The reHgious guides, the prophets and
priests, the national leaders, the judges and rulers, are aU
involved Hi the universal corruption — are, indeed, its source.
There is no knowledge of God in the land. Nevertheless, God's
love of His people cannot be defeated, though its kindness may
be thwarted and delayed. By calamity, famine, conquest, and
exile He wiU prove to them the impotence of theH false gods
and alHes. In their loneHness and misery He wUl speak to
them, wake old memories in theH breast, stir their souls to more
spiritual desHes, woo them back to theH former love, and wed
them to HimseH again " in righteousness, and in judgment, and
in lovingkindness, and in mercies." They shall abjure their
idols, and carnal worship, and earthly trusts, and secular am
bitions (xiv. 2, 3). They shall " seek the Lord theH God, and
David theH king, and shaU fear the Lord and His goodness in
the latter days."
6. Style. — Hosea is the Cassandra of the northern kingdom.
He pours out his lamentations over prevalent evUs rather to
unburden a surcharged grief than with any hope of mending
them. He proclaims the approach of doom with no thought of
averting it, and it is as it were only from tbe necessity of his
own soul to seek escape from the overpowering gloom of the
surrounding darkness, that after a long dUge of woes he sud
denly breaks away, and expatiates on the Hght of the Divine
restoration that must dawn when the night of sorrows is done.
His style is fresh, poetical, nervous, but often enigmatical and
difficult, rather from a superabundance of thought and meaning
than from poverty of expression or obscurity of conception. His
language is tumultuous with emotion, teeming with images that
crowd one another uncompleted onwards, swinging to and fro
between the opposite poles of anger and compassion, upbraiding
and appeal, disdaining constantly the elaborate exposition of
logic, and fusing its Hnks of argument in the impassioned utter
ance of the heart.
In Hke manner, whUe his teaching marks a decisive advance

HOSEA. 259
in defining and securing the contents of the true religion of
Jehovah, his theology is a theology of the heart more than of
the head. His expression of the tie between God and Israel in
the imagery of the noblest human love, that has in its heart all
justice, and purity, and truth, emancipates for ever the concep
tion of reHgion from aU elements that are not moral and spiritual,
and flings about it and its subject the glow and warmth of ethical
IHe and love. The conceptions of his predecessor, Amos, may
indeed have more breadth, but they lack tbe depth and intensity
of Hosea's realisation of God's heart in relation to His people.
It is the spHit of Hosea's emotional piety that is echoed in mwch
of the finest of later prophecy, and that breathes in the devotional
grandeur of the Psalms. And Hi the New Testament, besides
the numerous dHect quotations of his words (Matt. ii. 15 ; ix.
13 ; xH. 7, &c), the central thought of Hosea is taken up by our
Lord HimseH, and becomes the chosen image of the union of
fidelity, and sacrifice, and undying love between Himself ami
His mystic bride, the Church.

92

JOEL.
1. Character and Author. — The arrangement of the minor pro
phets in the Hebrew Canon, and in the earliest of the versions,
the Greek Septuagint, is the same for the last six, but differs
considerably in respect of the earHer ones. ' The respective orders
are as foUows : —
Hebrew. — Hosea, Joel, Amos, Obadiah, Jonah, Micah.
Septuagint.— Hosea, Amos, Micah, Joel, Obadiah, Jonah.
It is evident that in both the relative position of Hosea, Amos,
Micah is identical, while the discrepancy arises in connection
with the points where Joel, Obadiah, Jonah are introduced.
These three books lack any indication of date Hi theH super
scriptions, and apparently at an early period canonical editors,
thrown back on internal evidence, arrived at diverse conclusions.
It is even probable that, whUe the great groups of the collection
are placed chronologicaUy {i.e. Assyrian, Babylonian, Persian),
the position of individual books has been determined by con
siderations of a more Hterary character, such as affinities of
thought, theme, or even phraseology. Therefore the canonical
rank of Joel does no more than teU us that be was reckoned to
belong to the early period of prophecy.
The title of the book adds Httle to our information. The
prophet's name means Jehovah is God. He was the son of Pethuel,
but of his birthplace and condition in Hfe we are told nothing.
That he prophesied, wrote, and published his memoir in Jeru
salem seems certain (ii. 15 — 17, &c). From the prominence
which the Temple and its functionaries and ritual have in his
oracle it has been conjectured that he belonged to the priestly
order. The guess is neither proved nor disproved by tbe manner
of his references to the priests (i. 9, 13 ; ii. 17). As to the time
when be Hved and worked there is no definite statement either
in the title or in the body of the book. The date must be
purely a matter of inference from its general character and
contents.

JOEL. 261
2. Scope of the Prophecy. — The situation pictured in the pro
phecy is the foUowing. The land has been devastated by
successive swarms of locusts. A stiU more terrible visitation is
impending. In the intervening pause the prophet appears.
With graphic strokes he depicts the bygone disasters, describing
them as Divine judgments on the land, and urging the people
to repentance (i.). He proceeds to paint in stUl darker tints
the more awful vengeance of Heaven that is approaching, and
passes over into an overpowering appeal for penitence and
instant prayer to God for mercy (ii. 1 — 17). This first inter
vention having proved successful, the prophet presents himself
to the contrite congregation, and pours forth a comforting re
assurance of God's present pity and future grace (ii. 18 — 32),
and concludes with a majestic picture of the consummation of
judgment and triumphant establishment of God's kingdom on
earth (Hi.).
Of these main divisions the first faUs into five sub-sections—
an introduction, three special appeals, and the conclusion. A
calamity of unprecedented magnitude has befallen the land.
Swarm after swarm of locusts have stripped it bare (i. 2 — 4).
The profligate and luxurious are struck by the blow, for the new
wine and other means of indulgence are destroyed (i. 5 — 7). The
religious portion of the community is also stricken, for the
materials for sacrifice are cut off, and, as it were, intercourse
with Heaven is severed (i. 8—10). The agricultural classes and
the whole body pohtic are concerned, for the sources of existence
are annihUated, and the withered aspect of the blasted fields
spreads to men's faces, and joy is banished from theH homes
(i. 11, 12). It is tune for the priests to unite the people in a
penitential fast and universal prayer for mercy, when already
famine gnaws, the seed rots in the blighted soU, pastures and
streams are dried up by scorching drought, and the beasts by
their distracted movements and cries of agony make appeal to
Heaven for compassion (i. 13 — 20).
The second division describes a new invasion of locusts, more
terrible in itseH and in its circumstances, because more mani
festly accompanied by the personal presence of the Divine Judge.
The utterance faUs into five sections, of which the opening one
dramaticaUy delineates the first appearance in the distance of
the dreaded scourge (ii. 1 — 3); the second, the sickening horror
of theH nearer approach (H. 4 — 6) ; the third, their resistless
onset and men's presaging despair (H. 7 — 11); the fourth fur
nishes a promise of escape to sincere repentance (ii. 12—14),
and the fifth completes the continuous summons to national
contrition and supplication (H. 15 — 17).

262 BOOK BY BOOK.
The third division, opening with a terse historical statement,
tacitly assuming that penitence has been done, and declaring
God's forgiveness, proceeds to unroU a 'new chart of the future.
The prophet had foretold the approaching doom of impenitent
Israel. He must now unfold the changed character of coming
events in view of the great fact of a penitent Israel. The main
elements of the programme are depicted in five sections. With
repentance and restoration to Divine favour Israel's relation to
the great elements of God's government is entirely altered.
The impending judgment is withdrawn. TheH present distress
is reheved and passes into plenty and prosperity. In this de
liverance the supreme effect of gladness is the assurance of
God's presence with them and His unchanged purpose of grace
and glory in them (u. 18 — 27). Therefore the prophecy must
proceed. Temporal reHef is not enough. Israel is destined for
more than physical prosperity. The world's consummation is
drawing on. To play their part Hi the grand fulfilment of
history, Israel must have a holiness beyond that of the present
reformation. The nation must become the perfect instrument
of God, inhabited by His character, inspHed by His aims, entirely
consecrated to His service.
Such a new nature must be created, not by Israel's own act,
but by a Divine deed, by a gift from above. The nation must
be inspHed by God's Spirit in every individual member. Then
wiU the end of aU things be near. With Israel's complete fit
ness to the Divine purpose the consummation of the world's
drama must speedily foUow. The outpouring of the SpHit is
the precursor of judgment. The day of tbe Lord comes— a day
of dread to evU-doers, but of deliverance to aU who caU on God's
name, and whom God caUs (ii. 28—32). The final act of judg
ment has, therefore, no menace any longer for God's people, but
directs its violence against the heathen nations, who, persistently
impenitent, have remained hostile to Jehovah and His people
(Hi. 1—8). With weUd colours and terrible dramatic power the
destruction of the nations in the valley of Jehoshaphat {Jehovah
judgeth) is depicted (Hi. 9—17). And the prophecy concludes
with a glowing picture of the happy repose of finished judgment
and mercy, in which all God's enemies are seen to be vanquished,
and Israel, prosperous and conferring prosperity, is estabhshed
for ever and ever (Hi. 18— 21).
3. Differences of Interpretation. — Several points in the interpre
tation of the book furnish matter for dispute, and, according as
they are decided, materiaUy affect our conception of the pro
phecy. Contrary to the line taken in the preceding sketch, it is

joel. 263
held that the seer is throughout describing future calamities,
and not disasters aHeady begun. The theory is possible, but
improbable, Hi the face of such expressions as occur Hi i. 2,
16 — 20, and the warm personal and presential feeling breathed
into the recital (i. 13 ; ii. 15 — 171 Again, the prophecy is some
times construed as one continuous utterance without change of
circumstance, and the verbs in ii. 18 are translated not as pasts
describing an occurrence, but as futures enunciating a principle
of Divine dealing, or expressing a desHe that God may so deal
with the suppHcants. The rendering is grammatically possible,
but, reducing as it does the whole second part of the book from
a dHect Divine declaration to a mere human wish or inference, it
involves an artistic blunder hardly conceivable in a writer of
such Hterary skill, and a construction practicaUy impossible in a
prophecy. Another question concerns the locusts. They are taken
HteraUy, and the occasion of the oracle is assumed to have been
some terrible period of famine produced by this scourge and
aggravated by drought and heat. Another view holds them to
be, either in chapter H. or in both chapters i. and ii., an alle
gorical piece of imagery, used to portray the devastation of
definite invading armies. A third theory counts' them to be an
apocalyptic device, employed without regard to actual historical
events, but with the vague reference and eschatological futurity
of the locusts described in Revelation ix. This last notion has
Httle to commend it, and is already discounted if the aUegorical
view fails to hold its ground. The natural impression of an
unbiassed reader is certainly that the locusts are locusts. The
burden of proof or disproof, therefore, rests on the second
theory. It is argued that things are ascribed to the locusts proper
only to human beings and responsible agents, or contrary to
the habits, or beyond the powers of locusts, and that generaUy
the intensity of the feeling and the sombreness of the represen
tation are out of aU proportion to a mere plague of locusts. But
the calamity is a famine, gaunt, deadly, and inexorable, such
as a prolonged plague of locusts might readily produce in a
smaU and mainly agricultural country, as was Judaea when the
prophet wrote, whUe the ineompatibiHties and exaggerations
aUeged either exist only in the objectors' fancy or are finely felt
strokes of imaginative deHneation on the part of the prophetic
author. On the other hand, H the locusts are merely symbols for an
invading army, then in chapter H. we have the symbolic locusts

264 BOOK BY BOOK..
compared back again with their original, i.e. an army, horsemen,
warriors, &c. ; and in the detaU of this illustration we have
inserted features certainly discordant with the assumed original
(ii. 5, 9, &c). Again, H the locusts are mere imagery, the
minuteness of their portraiture (ii. 1 — 9), the elaboration of theH
depredations (i. 1 — 20), and the exquisite art spent on these
delineations must be counted a blunder as monstrous as H a
builder were to expend all his carving, gUding, and decoration
on the scaffolding instead of on the edifice itself. While wmat
has been caUed exaggeration of feeling would be equaUy out
of proportion to any invasion, and is so precisely because it is
created and justified by the prophetic sense of a more awful
presence in the physical calamity ; to wit, the approach of the
day of the Lord, the consummation of aU things.
One thing remains to some extent a difficulty in the way of
the Hteral rendering. The prophet describes the cause of the
calamity as the northern army (ii. 20), a designation unlikely for
locusts, which usually come from the south, and in view of
references Hi Ezekiel (xxxviH. — ix.) naturally suggesting the
dreaded northern invaders, or more simply the Assyrians. This
is not, however, conclusive ; the word is capable of other ren
derings ; the verse is besides peculiar, and may be a marginal
comment ; and Hi any case this one point cannot outweigh the
powerful impression of Hteral intention made by the whole
fashion in which the locusts are handled in the prophecy.
That the second half of the book deals with Israel's relations
to the heathen people is no stumbHng-block, because its theme
is that day of the Lord, of which the plagues in the first haH
were the precursors, and whose Hghtnings diverted from peni
tent Israel now strike the nations. That the end of all things
should be conceived Hi such close, even organic, connection with
a physical calamity is no more difficult than if the disaster were
of a mUitary nature, and is a universal characteristic of pro
phetic representation, whieh always portrays God's punitive
energy and gracious activity massively, ideaUy, and Hi their
finahty. The tide of modern scholarly opinion sets in favour of the
literal interpretation, li, however, that should be discarded,
the alternative would be, not a reference to the Assyrians, or
any actual single invader, but we should see Hi the book a broad
post-Exilic survey of Israel's bygone desolations, and a passionate
expectation of ultimate vengeance and requital.
4. Joel's Place in History. — The difficulty of fixing the place of
Joel in history by internal evidence, which is our sole resource,

JOEL.

265

appears sufficiently in the fact that dates have been assigned
him ranging over five centuries. PracticaUy the question at
present hes between two, viz., the beginning of the reign of
Joash (say b.o. 860) or in the post-ExUic period about the time of
Nehemiah (say b.c. 445). The earlier has in its favour the posi
tion of our book in the canon, and may therefore claim to be in
possession. It supports and defines its presumptions by a posi
tive construction of the historical references of the prophecy.
Joel, it is said, knows Jehoshaphat's triumph (Hi. 2 ; 2 Chron.
xx.), Edom's revolt (Hi. 19 ; 2 Kings vHi. 20), and the PhiHstine
invasion under Jehoram (iii. 4 ; 2 Chron. xxi. 16), whUe he does
not know the Assyrian troubles, nor Amaziah's revenge on Edom
(2 Kings, xiv. 7), nor the Syrian attempt on Jerusalem in the
close of Joash's reign (2 Kings xii. 18). He must, therefore, be
later than b.c 885 and earlier than B.C. 840. Within this period
the picture of the internal condition of the community excludes
the years of Ahaziah and Athalia, and also the later evU years
of Joash, whUe it answers exactly to the period of Joash's
minority under the regency of the high priest Jehoiada, say
about B.C. 865.
Against this combination the defenders of the post-Exilic date
urge that the historical argument is arbitrary, and that the
internal features that teU for Joash's minority tell more strongly
for Nehemiah's age, whUe certain larger considerations seem
expressly to exclude any early date. The issue is fine and com-
pHcated. It is impossible to do more than marshal the evidence
and indicate its general bearing. The historical combinations
aHeady cited teU strongly for the early date, if Joel has particular
hostilities in view beyond mere border quarrels and slave-steahng
and dealing. But the weight is diminished by the regularity
with which the nations named appear as Israel's enemies, in
prophetic denunciations, both before and after the Exile. The
trade in slaves to the Levant (Hi. 6) and to South Arabia (Hi. 8),
which was always carried on through the PhUistine and Phoeni
cian seaports and the Edomite and Arabian caravans, furnishes
no clue from the balanced character of Joel's references.
The strange silence — assuming ii. 20 to refer to locusts — con
cerning Assyria, Babylon, and Persia, suggests that Joel wrote
before or after the era of those great world powers. Perhaps
the last, though unmentioned, might have been existent, since
it did not rank with the first two in point of injury and hatred.
Against the time of Nehemiah is the absence of Samaritans,
Moabites, and Ammonites in the Hst of the foes of Jerusalem.
But stiU more adverse to the pre-ExUic date is the extraordinary

266

BOOK BY BOOK,

disappearance— as compared with the practice of the other early
prophets — of Northern Israel from the prophet's picture of the
present and his forecast of the future.
Much is made of tbe representation of the internal condition
of Judah. The entire people is summoned to the fast by blast
of trumpet ; a locust plague means annihUation ; agriculture is
the sole resource, therefore, of a small, narrowly circumscribed,
and impoverished population. Freeing this statement from pro
saic wilfulness, and remembering how smaU a territory at all
times was Judsea, and how reduced was the nation in Joash's
time, we cannot aUow it much influence on behalf of the later
date. If the dispersion and disintegration of territory contem
plated in iii. 1 — 2 are presented as already fuUy realised, then,
spite of such passages as Hosea vi. 11, Amos ix. 14, it is a strong
argument for the post-ExiHc time. But the prophetic oratorical
style mitigates greatly its conclusiveness. The internal organi
zation of the community is held to be purely municipal under
priests and elders, while there are no king, princes, statesmen, or
warriors. But against the failure to mention the king might be
put the faUure to mention the post-ExiHc high priest. Moreover
the community is not expHcitly represented as under the govern
ment of priests and elders. Only the priests are officiaUy sum
moned to inaugurate the fast (i. 14). The elders are simply a
class picked out for special mention among those to be convened,
and probably the word should be rendered old men as in i. 2 ;
ii. 16. Moreover, the priestly regency of Joash's minority is
not incompatible with the predominance of the priests in Joel's
appeal. More important by far, though difficult of objective valuation,
are such considerations as the authoritative bearing of the pro
phet ; the conscious absence of prophetic rivalry and opposition,
his harmonious relations with the priesthood, the weight and
prominence attached by him to the ceremonial of religion, the
central place assigned to sacrifice, and particularly to the meat
and drink offerings, the seeming non-existence of high places or
idolatry, the absence of polemic against the great national sins
that bulk so largely in the pages of other prophets prior to the
ExUe; and finaUy the aUeged physical, non-political, and gene
raUy circumscribed sphere of his prophetic survey and activity.
Whether the primary powerful impression of these arguments
maintains itseH after aUowance has been made for dispropor
tionate statement, a priori assumptions, the possibiUties of
Jehoiada's rule, and above aU the personal idiosyncrasy of the
prophet, is a question that wUl not be answered with any

JOEL.

267

Approach to imanimity, tiU scholars are more agreed as to the
general course of Israel's history, and the principles that must
determine our interpretation of prophecy.
lines of reasoning are led of a stUl more doctrinaire descrip
tion, turning on the prophet's religious conceptions, but their
value is merely psychological. One method of investigation re
mains to be mentioned, viz., the literary relations of Joel to other
books of the Old Testament. Ideas and phrases of this book
recur from Amos onward along the whole Hne of prophetic
writers. In regard to Amos especiaUy a very plausible case has
been made out for Joel's priority, but it is met by strong denial.
Perhaps the one sure inference is that Joel is either the first or
the last in the prophetic succession. He is either the original
prophetic quarry or the latest conglomerate. Looking at his
indubitable artistic genius, the second haH of the alternatives
jars on one's critical instinct. Meantime the question of the
book's date remains open, and wUl hardly be closed except as
part of the general settlement of the great controversy concerning
the history of Israel.
5. Style. —As might be inferred from what has been aHeady
said, the style and thought of Joel are strikingly characteristic,
notwithstanding numerous assonances of detail with other" pro
phets. In the first haH we are under the speU of a descriptive
poet or word painter, but the prophetic orator asserts himseH in
the second haH. Language and structure are pure, flowing, and
artistic, but the Hterary exceUence is not an argument for either
date, but rather a dHficulty in the way of his being either the
first or the last of the prophetic authors. Personal traits appear
in the detaUed delineation of the physical aspects of the disaster,
in the contrasting vagueness as to the sins that caused it, and in
the predominant and aU-possessing engrossment of the seer in
the grand conception of the day of the Lord. These mental
quahties of the writer may account for certain features Hi his
work that are put toward as proof of post-Exflic times.
The Hmitation of the prophet's religious range and the par
ticularism of his aspirations have been exaggerated. He em
phasises the ritual of penitence, doubtless, but he declares it
worthless save as the expression of reality (ii. 13). Earthly
weU-being bulks largely, but as the prelude, promise, and plat
form of spHitual attainment, privUege, and service (ii. 28 ;
iii. 18). The outpouring of the SpHit is probably confined to
Israel, yet salvation depends not on Jewish birth but on spHitual
citizenship in God's kingdom (ii. 32). The Messianic future is
buUt on existing conditions and relations, has its home on Zion,

268 BOOK BY BOOK.
destroys, not converts the heathen, lacks the figure of a personal
Messiah, is disappointingly physical in its garb, and comes short
of the ethical and spiritual elevation of the pictures of the great
prophets. But the fact remains unaltered, that the prophecy is
rooted in an absolute faith in the eternal principles of God's
government of the world, that its Hving theme and interest is the
march through history of Divine grace and judgment, that it
wakes echoes in the thought and apocalyptic expectations of the
New Testament, and in its conception of the triumph of God's
kingdom as the direct fruit of the plenary gift of God's Spirit
has anticipated the wonder of Pentecost, and presaged the inner
secret and source of aU that is holy and divine in the progress
of Christendom.

AMOS.
1. Place in the Canon.- — In the Hebrew canon of the minor
prophets Amos stands third ; but in the Septuagint he is placed
second. He must not be identified with Amoz, the father of
Isaiah, as some of the Greek fathers fancied, for though the
names are spelt the same in Greek, they are quite different in
Hebrew, and the distmction is sufficiently, though incompletely,
marked in our own version. Our knowledge of the man is de
rived solely from personal references in his book. Nowhere else
in the Old Testament is any biographical aUusion made to him.
Fortunately there is in his prophecy detaU enough to furnish a
definite and interesting conception of his character and career.
, 2. History of the Prophet. — The prophet was by birth and resi
dence a citizen of Judaea. He belonged to the district of Tekoa,
a smaU town some twelve mUes south of Jerusalem, perched on
a high bill, looking away eastwards across a waste of barren
hUls to the Dead Sea peeping through theH interstices, and the
lofty tableland of Moab bounding the horizon beyond. It stands
on the edge of the desert, where the fringes of agriculture thin
away into a wUderness of rock and sand, broken only by scattered
patches of scanty pasturage. The town can never have been
much more than a prosperous viUage ; but the adjacent soU is
fruitful and kindly, and its oU and honey became celebrated for
theH exceUence. For strategic purposes it was fortified by Reho
boam, and it had the advantage of lying ia a region intersected
by some of the busiest highways of commerce. Its inhabitants
might see much and hear more, and, Hi .connection with trading
caravans, be drawn into travel and become acquainted with the
world and its doings. The place was thus in several ways not
unsuitable for the training of a prophet, and it is arbitrary to
argue, as two or three scholars have recently done, because there
is now no sycamore culture Hi the district, and because Amos
possesses an intimate knowledge of the north, that therefore we
must look for another Tekoa somewhere in Samaria.

270 BOOK BY BOOK.
There is more room for reasonable difference of opinion in
determining the prophet's precise condition in Hfe. In the super
scription of his book he is described as " one of the herdmen of
Tekoa" (i. 1). But the word noqedh, translated herdman, may
mean either one who tends flocks or one who breeds and owns
them, Hi which sense it is used of the king of Moab (2 Kings
iii. 4). Again, the designation, " a dresser of sycamore-trees "
(vH. 14), leaves it uncertain whether he was a proprietor of
sycamore plantations, or whether, as a shepherd hHeling, he
eked out meagre rations by gathering wUd sycamore figs, the
coarsest fruit of Palestine, and eaten chiefly by the poorer classes.
It is generally held that the balance of probabUity is turned in
favour of the second opinion, by the prophet's declaration that
the Lord took him "from foUowing the flock" (vH. 15). But
the active pursuit of the pastoral calHng is not inconsistent with
ownership, or at least sonship to the owner (compare 1 Sam.
xvi. 11), and the idea of the prophetic office with its necessity of
absolute and instant disposal at the Divine bidding seems to
require, not, indeed, a man of wealth (as the Jewish rabbis
would have it), but certainly a man who was his own master in
the full sense of the word. Nothing positive can be deduced
from the degree of culture manifested in the book.
Spite of a floating tradition to the contrary, which stiU survives
in popular circles, we shaU see later on that the Hterary merits
of the production must be rated very high. The general informa
tion of the writer is comprehensive and minute. He can paint in
detaU the reHgious customs, the social conditions, the local cir
cumstances and vicissitudes of every part of the northern kingdom.
With the geography and history, the aUiances and feuds, trade
relations, national institutions, and aspUations of the neighbour
ing nations, he is thoroughly f amiHar. He is possessed of pro
found ideas about nature, providence, the movements of races,
and theH place and function in the world's government.
For breadth of survey, for strength and massiveness of con
ception, alike in morals and in religion, he is not surpassed by
any of the prophets. He is a poet, an orator, a phUosopher, and
a statesman. But Hi those days and in his social environment,
he might be aU this without being a man of books and cities.
Native genius, interest in the traditions of his people, intercourse
with passing caravans, personal visits to distant parts, and a
spHit awake to the presence and working of God in human
history, past, present, and future — these were influences potent
enough to educate the man, and admirably adapted to prepare
the way for the prophet. And this school was equaUy open to
him, whether he was a poor man, Hving by his labour, now Hi

AMOS. 271
one service, now in another, or a prosperous sheep-master and
wealthy owner of fig orchards.
3. Period of his Public Life. — The period of his prophetic
activity may be fixed, H not with minute precision, at least with
broad certainty. It was, the title tells us, and the book (vu. 10)
confirms the statement, " in the days of Uzziah, king of Judah,
and Hi the days of Jeroboam, the son of Joash, king of Israel "
(i. 1), i.e. during the closing years of the latter and the early
years of the former, when their respective reigns overlapped each
other. According to the traditional chronology, that would locate
him Hi the first quarter of the eighth century ; by the revised
chronology, in the second. No detaUed adjustment between the
biblical dates and the Assyrian synchronisms, which unf ortunately
are few and some of them uncertain, has as yet been estabhshed.
AU we can say meantime is, that the prophet's career f eU between
b.c. 800 and 750 ; Hi aU probability nearer the last-mentioned
limit. The cUcumstantial detaU, added in the title, that he prophesied
"two years before the earthquake," excites our hopes only to
disappoint them. The reference is unquestionably to an earth
quake that occurred in the time of Uzziah, so terrible as to remain
a permanent time-mark in the people's memory; witness the
aUusion to it in Zechariah xiv. 5, where the prophet says, " Ye
shaU flee as ye fled before tbe earthquake in the days of Uzziah,
king of Judah." AU attempts, however, to fix the year of this
great calamity have proved unavailing, and probably it was
specified in the title of this prophecy for moral and religious
motives rather than for chronological purposes.
The book itself is fuU of special aUusions to cHcumstances
affecting Israel, Judah, and the surrounding cities and states,
but none lends itseH effectively to our inquiry. What is said
of Gath, Hamath, Calneh, Edom, is variously interpreted, in
order to define more nearly the origin of the prophecy, but our
knowledge of contemporary history is too meagre to establish
any quite reHable combinations. If the description of the taber
nacle of David as "faUen" (ix. 11) is suggested, not by the
great national schism, but by the exceptional depression of
Judah's fortunes when Uzziah came to the throne, then we
should have a right to place Amos in the section of Jeroboam's
reign coincident with the accession of Uzziah, and prior to the
first mUitary successes of that energetic monarch, who so speedUy
and splendidly retrieved the fortunes of his state.
With this location taUies well the general tenor of the prophet's
references to Judaea, and likewise the picture he paints of the
condition of the northern kingdom. It is the portrait of a people

272 BOOK BY BOOK.
strong and prosperous, free from hostile menace, flushed with
recent triumphs, arrogant in their confidence of security, and
demoralised on the one hand by the cost, and on tbe other by
the booty, of successful wars. This fits exactly the culmination
of Jeroboam's career, when, released from the harassing rivalry
of Damascus by the erippHng attacks made on that state by
Assyria, he seized the opportunity to develop the internal
resources and extend the frontiers of his kingdom, tiU he had
re-established Israel's rule from Hamath in the north to the
brook of the Arabah in the south. (Compare 2 Kings xiv. 25,
with Amos vi. 14.) This, of course, meant wealth and prosperity
to the mUitary chiefs and official families, as also to the commer
cial and monied classes.
But war, whether fortunate or unfortunate, is always a crush
ing burden to the common people, and especially to the peasantry.
Besides the expenditure of blood and treasure, which they have
to supply, there is the loss of devastated or neglected harvests,
and the heavy taxes and levies made to maintain a large army,
a drain on the country that seems to be referred to in the peculiar
phrase, " the king's mowings " (vii. 1, compared with 1 Kings
xviu. 5, 8, 1 Samuel viii. 14, 15). Apart from actual oppression,
the smaU yeoman holders of the soil get behind, fall into the
hands of money-lenders, have to part with their produce at unfair
prices, mortgage their ancestral lands, and ultimately lose them,
becoming either bHed labourers or out-and-out bondsmen. In
the towns also property and wealth accumulate in the hands of
the upper ranks, while the condition of the poor and dependent
classes deteriorates. The usual ethical mischiefs supervene, in
luxury and sensuality on the one hand, and on the other dis
content and loss of self-respect, to the corruption of pubhc
morality and reHgion, and ultimately the dissolution of society.
That is precisely the process of national demoralisation which
looks at us out of the pages of Amos. It is the same sad sight
that confronts us in the first portion of tbe prophecy of Hosea,
who was either contemporary with or a little later than Amos.
In both cases it marks with convincing force the period of these
prophetic utterances, and compels us to locate them in the after
noon of Jeroboam's brilliant reign.
4. The Prophet's Mission. — Though a citizen of the southern
kingdom, Amos was divinely commissioned to work in the
northern. Whether he speaks dHectly of Israel, or more imagi
natively of Joseph (v. 6, 15 ; vi. 6), or Isaac (vii. 9), or uses forms
of indirect address, it is always Ephraim that he has Hi view,
Ephraim that he threatens, Ephraim that he appeals to. There
is but one or at most two exceptions, when, in vi. 1, he couples

amos. 273
Zion with Samaria, and possibly he may mean to include Judah
in the words, " the whole famUy, which I brought up out of the
land of Egypt " (iii. 1). It is not contrary to our assertion that
the fiat of judgment proceeds from Zion (i. 2), nor that Judah
makes one of the doomed states (ii. 4, 5), with the certainty of
whose destruction he preludes the denunciation of Israel, nor
that his ideal picture of the restored nation groups itseH about
the Davidic throne. Hence it is needless to suppose that the
introduction of Judaea in these places is an afterthought, not
jput Hi execution tUl the time when the actual utterances against
Israel were committed to writing. They fit in quite naturaUy
with theH vicinity, and rather throw into relief the fact, that the
prophet's field of work was Hi the north, and his Hving audience
Israel. It is the common supposition that the whole of these prophecies
were deHvered in one jet of impassioned utterance and on one
single occasion ; that, in fact, the prophet's mission was summed
up and exhausted Hi his appearance at Bethel. There is much to
suggest and support this idea, in the pecuHar way in whieh the
incident of Amos's coUision with the priest Amaziah juts out in
the mid-stream of his prophecy, and in the seemingly intentional
limitation in the title of his action to a point just two years before
the earthquake. But all we may certainly argue from these
features is, that the testimony of Amos reached its supreme
achievement in the scene at Bethel, whUe he may have been
labouring previously in Ephraim, and indeed afterwards as weU ;
for it is not said that the prophet was immediately either expeUed
by force or sUenced by motives of personal prudence. The con
tents and arrangement of his book tend rather to the opposite
conclusion. A more prolonged and widely-diffused activity is
implied in the intimate acquaintance displayed by the seer -^vith
the fortunes and misfortunes of Ephraim ; in the phrases which
suggest f utUe pleadings with them in the past ; in the vivid direct
ness of the appeal to the haughty and heartless ladies of Samaria ;
and especiaUy in Amaziah' s assertion that Amos had conspired
against the king in "the midst of the house of Israel" and
that "the land" was not able "to bear all his words" (vii. 10).
It would therefore be improper to maintain dogmaticaUy that
the contents of our book were deHvered entire to the gay crowd
before the sanctuary at Bethel ; or that, if delivered, the appeal
was not a recapitulation of a previous ministry of some duration.
EquaUy impossible is it to attempt to define what part of the
book was oraUy uttered and what was not. Like the other
prophetic Scriptures, the book is in all likehhood a condensed
record of the outstanding truths taught during a more or less

274 BOOK BY BOOK.
continuous activity. On the other hand it is possible, as the
greater number of commentators interpret the statement in
vii. 14, 15, that in Amos we have an exception to the general
rule, and that his prophetic action was confined to one brief
episode of Divine inspUation let into a career otherwise undistin
guished by either the gift or the ministry of prophecy. That is,
perhaps, the natural, though not the inevitable inference from
bis protest in reply to the priest's taunt, that he is no prophet
getting a living by that profession, but that God took him from
foUowing the flock and sent him to prophesy to Israel. That the
memoH of his utterances was not composed tiU some time later
seems certain, if the title formed part of the first draft, for it
makes mention of the great earthquake as an event that had
happened two years later. What the actual interval was can
not, of course, he determined.
5. Genuineness and Unity of the Book. — The book, as it left the
prophet's hands, is an orderly planned and perfect whole. Beyond
one or two possible omissions (iv. 3), or transpositions (v. 7 to
foUow 9), the genuineness and unity of the book are almost
beyond question. It is in the interest of a theory rather than on
sufficient grounds of fact, that a few sections are asserted to be
interpolations, viz., iv. 13 ; v. 8, 9 ; ix. 5, 6, and sometimes vi. 2.
Tbe plan of the book is weU defined. Amos' s message is pre
dominantly one of doom. His duty is to denounce Divine judg
ment on Israel's incurable depravity. He proclaims nothing less
than the downf aU of the throne, the exUe of the people, and the
dissolution of the state.
The book consists of three sections. In the first (i., H.) there
is a general announcement of approaching destruction as a punish
ment of sin. The second section (iii.— vi.; expands and reiterates
the indictment and the menace. The third (vii. — ix.) is a dramatic
enforcement and summing-up of the impending doom, passing
over into promise for the future. These larger divisions fall
easily into smaUer subdivisions, and a regular progression of
thought may with some degree of confidence be traced through
them. The first (i., H.) has the character of a prelude. The seer
has heard the roar of approaching judgment. He sees towering
on the northern horizon the black thunderstorm of Assyrian in
vasion. AHeady, as in the lurid Hght that preludes a storm, the
fair face of Canaan seems to grow paUid and withered (i. 2).
Slowly .the Hghtning-laden cloud rolls over the whole cHcle of
Palestinian states, striking with destruction now one, now another
(i. 3— ii. 3), tUl at the seventh its fires faU on Judah (ii. 4, 5),
and then concentrate theH condensed and prolonged terrors upon
Israel (ii. 6 — 15). It is usuaUy held that the sins for which the

amos. 275
nations are to be punished are violations of humanity, but it is
more consistent to think that, as in the case of Judah and Israel,
the common cause of judgment is thwarting God's wiU in His
gracious government of mankind.
The next great division (iii. — vi.) consists of five parts, marked
by simUar headings and order of thought. The first emphasizes
the certainty of judgment. As surely as effect follows cause and
proves its existence, the prophet's mission argues God in motion
for judgment, the Divine anger postulates sin in Israel, and sin
must bring ruin (iii. 1 — iv. 3). Next we have the hopelessness
of more moderate chastisements producing an adequate repen
tance (iv. 4 — 13). Then, as a natural sequel, foUows an impas
sioned exposure of the ineradicable fixedness of their religious
and social declension (v. 1 — 18), which, in the two closing sec
tions, expands into a woe pronounced, first, on theH reHgious
debasement (v. 18 — 27), and, second, on theH moral corruption
(vi. 1—14).
The last large division (vii. — ix.) is framed upon five visions,
devised to depict powerfully the dark destiny of the nation. We
have, first, destruction by locusts ; second, by fire ; third, the
waU condemned upon application of the plumb Hne (vii. 1 — 9).
At this point occurs the interruption of the altercation with tho
priest Amaziah (vH. 10 — 17). Resuming, the prophet pictures
under the symbol of ripe fruit the nation's readiness for destruc
tion, and works out the thought at some length (viii. 1 — 14).
FinaUy be presents God standing over the altar in the sinful
temple, huriing it in ruins on the heads of the worshippers,
pursuing to his death the last one of the fugitives, and making
an end of old impenitent Israel (ix. 1 — 10). But with accom
pHshed judgment comes the recoU of recoUeetion, and the prophet
proceeds to show how the sHting of Israel among the nations wiU
end in restoration. Once more the ideal Davidic rule and empire
shaU be estabhshed, and in more than earthly prosperity and
permanence God's people shaU possess God's land and be God's
kingdom on earth (ix. 11 — 15).
6. Idterary Qualities. — Jerome remarks that Amos was "rude
in speech but not in knowledge " ; and Jewish tradition has been
pleased to credit him with a stutter or impediment of speech.
This is probably the origin of a mistaken idea that his book is
badly written, or at least betrays the rusticity of its author. On
the contrary, the Hebrew of Amos ranks among the purest and
most powerful compositions of the Old Testament. His language
is choice and melodious, possibly in a few peculiar spellings
recording a provincial pronunciation, or more Hkely the slips of
copyists' pens. His style is terse, dramatic, and simple, but very
x 2

276 BOOK BY BOOK.
pointed and forcible. He loves brief uninvolved sentences, though
occasionaUy carried away into passionate appeal or lyrical out
bursts of poetic delineation. He indulges much in question,
apostrophe, and exclamation. He is an orator more than an
artist or a bard. With all his simplicity we find- traces of
paranomasia, rhythmic arrangement, and rhetorical construction.
His exposition abounds in rich and varied imagery derived from
nature, and striking illustrations taken from every-day Hfe. The
ordered arrangement, compact style, and general hterary finish
of his book suggest slow, careful, and leisurely construction,
while the fire of its invective, the impetus of its appeals, and the
terrible dHectness of its denunciation prove it the record and
embodiment of speech originaUy oraUy delivered.
7. The Prophet's Teaching. — The teaching of Amos is deter
mined by the wants of his auditors, coloured by the character of
his own personality, and hmited by the attainments of his time.
His prophecy is not a system of theology nor a treatise of moral
phUosophy. It is a matter-of-fact protest against definite sins
and errors, and a practical preparation to secure the triumph of
religion in impending strains and changes. Israel, intoxicated
by success, and lured by the flesh, had forsaken the true Jehovah.
The god of the calf -worship was a physical and carnal deity,
pleased with a sensual service, pacified by sacrifices, careless of
justice and truth and mercy. The life of the nation may be
eaten out by oppression, and corruption, and luxury, and lust,
but Israel is Jehovah's people, and — so they argued — He wiU
not for personal pride permit them to suffer loss, but the day of
their need wUl be the day of His gracious and triumphant inter
vention. This bHnd superstition was destined speedUy to be
shattered by the overwhelming avalanche of Assyrian invasion.
If faith was to survive, then the lesson of Providence must be
interpreted beforehand and set in its true Hght.
This was the mission of Amos and of the prophets that foUowed
him. Jehovah was not the God the people fancied Him. Sacrifices
and incense are nothmg to Him whose throne is the universe.
Jehovah is a God of mercy and righteousness. With this corrupt
Israel He is not pleased, but displeased. Them indeed He chose
out of aU the nations of the earth to be His people. But, there
fore, He wUl not favour them. He wiU the more sternly punish
their sins. His day of visitation is at hand, but for unrighteous
Israel it wUl be a day, not of deUverance, but of vengeance. He
has aHeady gathered the fires of His fury together, and is about
to launch them on the states of Palestine, and to execute just
retribution on His guilty people. These were startling and crea
tive conceptions, whose value in the growth of revelation was

amos. 277
immense. For a national and fleshly notion of the covenant tie
between God and Israel this teaching substituted an ethical and
reHgious. In place of a merely natural explanation of the world's
course, it presented the sublime thought of a righteous govern
ment and guidance of human history. Beyond aU else, it set forth
the ethical nature of the Creator and Ruler of the world in unap
proachable majesty and might. In the words of a very helpful
writer : — "Morahty is that for the sake of whioh aU things exist ;
it is the alone essential thing in the world. It is no postulate, no
idea, but at once a necessity and a fact, the most intensely Hving of
personal powers — Jehovah the God of Hosts." That is a great
lesson, and one that reHgion is too apt to forget.
On the surface Amos may seem to make too much of mere
moraHty, but it is only an appearance. With him, to do right
is to serve God, and the motive must be the love of God and of
our neighbour. The central note of his prophecy rings Hke a
prelude of the great definition of the Apostle : — " Pure rehgion
and undefiled before God and the Father is this, To visit the
fatherless and widows in theH affliction, and to keep himself
unspotted from the world."

OBADIAH.
1. Authorship and Date. — The brief prophecy of Obadiah con
cerning Edom, which stands fourth among tbe minor prophets
in the Hebrew Bible and fifth in the Septuagint, presents Httle
difficulty to the expositor, but confronts the critic with very per
plexing problems. The title declares it to be a record of the
vision of Obadiah, and teUs us nothmg about him. It mentions
neither his father nor his birthplace, and in the book itseH there
is no positive statement of the period in which he lived, nor any
quite definite clue to determine the date of his prophecy. AU
we know certainly about him is his name. That is a derivative
of a word meaning servant or worshipper, and the sacred name of
Israel's covenant, Jehovah God. It is a type of name common
in Semitic languages (Abdeel, AbdaUah, &c), and it occurs very
frequently of persons mentioned in the Old Testament — especiaUy
of members of the tribe of Levi. Among these the best known
are a captain of King Ahab's (1 Kings xvHi.) and a prince em
ployed by Jehoshaphat in the religious reform attempted in his
reign (2 Chron. xvii. 7).
Tradition, quick to utilise its opportunity in the absence of
information, has imagined our prophet identical with several of
these, but the combinations are now universally recognised as
simply plays of devout fancy, though one or two modern scholars
have expressed some favour for the identification with Jehosba-
phat's prince. On such conjectures clearly no argument for the
date can be founded, and unfortunately not much can be gathered
from the place assigned to the book in the canon of the minor
prophets. For the order has been determined by other considera
tions besides chronology, and the arrangement is not the same
in the Septuagint.
In both, however, Obadiah holds an early place, and it may be
taken for granted that the coUectors went, at all events, generaUy
on the plan of placing first the pre-Exihc works. But the pre-'
sumption Hi favour of an early date springing from this generaH-

OBADIAH. 279
sation can hardly be pressed in face of the doubts as to the date
of Joel, Jonah, parts of Micah, Zechariah, &c. And on other
grounds as weU, critics of aU schools prefer to explain the place
of Obadiah after Amos by the idea that it was inserted here in
order to serve as an amplification of the curt reference to Edom
in the closing words of that prophecy.
If we turn to the book itseH and look in it for some historical
aUusion or other sure mark of age, we find ourselves still desti
tute of any soHd foothold. An expression in ver. 20 has been
seized on by some ingenious interpreters and held to indicate that
Obadiah was one of a company of exUes settled on the coast of
Phoenicia, or in Egypt, or in Babylonia. But it is a question
whether the word means "host," or "stronghold," or "sandy
coast," and the proper rendering of the present text of the entire
verse is doubtful. If we could settle the locality of the Sepharad,
named Hi the same verse, we might have something to guide us.
But it is variously identified by the Ancients with the Bosphorus,
Spain, and France, and by modern scholars with a Saparda in
Media, or a Cparda near Ionia (probably Sardis), both of which
names occur in the euneHorm inscriptions. Beyond these there
is no local or circumstantial detaU to serve as a key to the time of
the prophecy. We are, therefore, relegated in our conjectures
to the general impression produced on our minds by a study of
the atmosphere, aim, and actual contents of the book.
2. Analysis of the Contents. — The prophet is conscious of a
mihtary movement among the nations. It is instigated by Jehovah,
directed against Edom, and wUl result in its downfaU and humi-
Hation. Spite of the strength of their rocky fastnesses, they shaU
be defeated and their wealth plundered. Trusted allies shaU
betray them, and so with aU theH vaunted wisdom and might the
chUdren of Esau shaU be caught in the snare of their own selfish
pohcy and utterly destroyed (w. 1 — 9). The cause of their doom
is the wrong done to their kinsmen, the Israelites, whom they
abandoned in theH dire extremity, aiding their foes, rejoicing
in theH calamity, sharing in the pUlage, cutting off the fugitives
and seUing them into slavery (vv. 10 — 14). For the Divine
judgment, now complete on Israel, must pass on to his heathen
enemies and requite their injuries. In the general retribution
the rescued people of Jehovah shall dweU safe and holy on Mount
Zion, regain theH old possessions, burn up Edom Hke stubble,
overflow into the lands of the surrounding peoples, estabhsh a
strong government Hi Zion, and then " the kingdom shaU be the
Lord's" (vv. 15— 21).
3. The fulfilment of Obadiah's prediction of the destruction of
Edom, even if we could fix the date with precision, would not

280 BOOK BY BOOK.
help us much to settle the natal age of the prophecy. Prior to
the ExUe the relation of Judsea to Idumea was one of friendly
alliance, suzerainty, or conquest, alternated by intervals of petty
border hostility or open war. Subsequent to the faU of Jeru
salem, in which the Edomites sided with the invaders, Idumea
suffered apparently a severe disaster at -the hands of the Chal
deans soon after ; under Judas Maccabaeus the country was
crippled, and completely conquered by John Hyrcanus a Httle
later ; but its worst, and what we may fairly count its final over
throw, did not take place tUl after the birth of Christ.
This difficulty in fixing the fulfilment matters little. To de
termine the bHth of a prophecy we must seek not its ultimate
fruits in the future, but its hidden subterranean roots in the past.
A prophetic word of God, at aU events as a general rule, does not
emerge out of nothmg, but grows out of living conditions, em
bodies the needs and aspirations of the time, and satisfies the
immediate spiritual necessities of the men to whom it is given.
We may, therefore, take it that Obadiah does not prediet in cold
blood atrocities to be perpetrated by the Edomites and denounce
retribution on them, but that his oracle of vengeance rests on
some definite great disaster suffered by Jerusalem, aggravated
and embittered by the treachery and cruelty of the Edomites.
The outstanding mUitary calamities recorded in the history
are : ( 1 ) the capture of Jerusalem by Shishak under Rehoboam
(1 Kings xiv., 2 Chron. xu.) ; (2) the invasion of the PhUistines
and Arabians in the time of Jehoram (2 Chron. xxi.) ; (3) the
defeat of Amaziah by Jehoash of Israel and partial demohtion of
the defences of Jerusalem (2 Kings xiv., 2 Chron. xxv.) ; (4) the
successful campaign of Ephraim and Syria against Ahaz (2 Chron.
xxviu.) ; and (5) the sack and destruction of Jerusalem by the
Chaldeans (2 Kings xxiv., 2 Chron. xxxvi.). With the exception
of the first, each of these has been made the occasion of Obadiah' s
oracle, and the book is variously ascribed to tbe reigns of
Jehoram, Uzziah, Ahaz, the period just before or after the faU of
Jerusalem, while a few critics place it after the Restoration, or
even reduce it to the end of the fourth century.
It may be faUly said that opinion is seriously divided only
between either the reigns of Jehoram and Uzziah, or the time of
the Chaldean conquest. To choose between these must be diffi
cult, perhaps impossible, for we have nothing more definite to go
upon than our knowledge of the history, which is meagre, and
our impressions of the several elements of the prophecy — a method
of investigation which is too purely subjective to give results that
are sure. The description of Edom's pride (w. 1 — 9) has an
archaic ring in its graphic imagery. Its adoption in the prophecy

OBADIAH.

281

suggests that at the time Edom was independent, strong, pros
perous, and in high repute for wisdom and wealth. The reference
(ver. 7) to confederates indicates that Edom had entered into
alliance with a power or powers hostile to Judsea. So far these
appearances suit admirably the, Chaldean combination, but are
probably equaUy consistent with the earHer dates.
The following passage (w. 10 — 14), whose imperative (see
Revised Version) constitutes not a future warning but a dramatic
denunciation, describes a series of cruel and treacherous injuries
inflicted on the Jews by theH Idumean kinsmen. The warmth of
the invective proves the actuality of the wrong, and either its
recent occurrence or the indelible nature of the resentment created
by it. Now Edomite treachery and cruelty had existed aU along
and been resented by Israel (Amos i. 6, 9, 11 ; ix. 12, &e.); but
Hi the precise form and detaU of the offence and in the intensity
of the indignation produced we find nothing comparable tiU we
come to certain Exilic utterances (Ezek. xxv., xxxv. ; Lam.- iv. ;
Psalm cxxxvH.), which read as if they had been written in chorus
with the heat and passion of the one before us. This resemblance
is not a proof, but it makes a strong presumption for the later
origin of our prophecy.
It is perhaps true that the form, in which the conception of the
day of the Lord (ver. 15) appears, indicates an advanced point in
the progress of prophecy, but a much more soHd argument may
be built upon the picture of Israel's disaster and restoration. It
is not merely a disabled state or a partially plundered capital
that we have delineated, but a dismembered and dispossessed and
dispersed nation. Moreover, the chosen people no longer exists
in the divided kingdoms of Ephraim and Judah, for in the
Restoration the latter bears both names (ver. 18), and is to occupy
the lands that used to belong to the former (ver. 19). The im
pression is hardly to be resisted, that this situation is incompatible
with any earHer period than the Chaldean conquest, and that the
prophet regards it not as a disaster anticipated, but as a calamity
aHeady felt and experienced.
This critical construction of the date might be aUowed to hold
the field unchallenged, were it not for one grave difficulty that
stands in the way. The opening section of Obadiah is repro
duced, frequently with verbal exactness, in a prophecy against
Edom found Hi the forty-ninth chapter of Jeremiah. The resem
blance is top close to allow a doubt of the relationship. The only
question is, whieh is the parent and which the child, unless,
indeed, they should prove to be brothers. In Obadiah the ideas
appear Hi a natural order and logical progression, making a har
monious and compact picture, while in Jeremiah they are reversed

282 BOOK BY BOOK.
in sequence, broken off from one another, mingled with other
matter, and so deprived of theH cumulative and orderly signifi
cance. Thus verses 1 — 4, 5 — 6, 8 — 9 of Obadiah correspond to
verses 14 — 16, 9 — 10, 7 — 8 in Jeremiah, where the omission of
aU reference to the foUy of trusting perfidious aUies (Obad. 7)
leaves the ridicule of Edom's pretended wisdom without definite
justification. Therefore, if the one is directly dependent on the
other, we are forced to the conclusion that Obadiah is the original,
and that Jeremiah has borrowed from him, just as in the pro
phecies against Moab (Jer. xlvHL) he incorporates elements from
the older oracles embedded in Isaiah xv., xvi. and Numbers xxi.
and xxiv.
An acute and microscopically minute argument has been led to
show from detaUs of language that the obHgation is on the other
side, but it is met by an equaUy ingenious analysis, and, more
over, cannot outweigh the conviction produced by the superior
coherence, conciseness, and simplicity of the passage in Obadiah.
Now, spite of an attempt to question the date if not the genuine
ness of Jer. xlix., it may be taken for granted that the chapter
was produced some time prior to the fall of Jerusalem, and by
the above chain of reasoning the opening section of Obadiah was
known to the author. The dUemma is met in several ways.
The conclusion is accepted, counted proof positive for the earHer
dates, and Obadiah is relegated to the reigns of Jehoram or
Uzziah, notwithstanding the perplexities occasioned by the clos
ing pictures of tbe production. Or the two prophets are taken
to have been contemporaries, and by either allowing Obadiah's
entHe description to be predictive in respect of tbe offence as
well as the punishment, or by dating the forty-ninth chapter
of Jeremiah a little later than the Chaldean disaster, a sufficient
interval is created between them to permit of the literary use
presupposed in the relation of the two passages.
A third course is possible, and has much to commend it The
correspondence is entirely confined to the first section of Obadiah,
for other alleged paraUels are trivial and dubious. This opening
paragraph of our prophet, as we have seen, suggests by its
character and style an early origin, while it is only in what fol
lows that we encounter the strong marks of the Chaldean period.
The practice of building prophecies fitted to the time on the
utterances of earlier seers was a common one, as we can see in
the writings of Isaiah, Micah, Joel, Jeremiah, &c. May it not,
therefore, be that an inspired man of God, to comfort and hearten
his generation in the dark Chaldean age, took up the defiance of
Israel's ancient enemies bequeathed by the faith of a former age,
and, as Jeremiah had used it in anticipation of the catastrophe,

OBADIAH. 283
adapted it to meet the doubts and perplexities and to satisfy the
demands of faith in the special cHcumstances and relations that
foUowed the great coUapse of Israel's national existence ? The
supposition is one that meets aU the points of the problem. It
explains certam variations of atmosphere and point of view in
the book, tbe correspondence of Jeremiah with one division only,
the remarkable resemblances between certain phrases in the
other division and the Book of Joel, and fits admirably into the
suggestions pf the particular place assigned to the prophecy in
the canon of the minor prophets.
4. Object of Prophecy. — In later times Edom came to be the
supreme antipathy and the typical enemy of Jewry. So, when
the actual Edomites ceased to be, the name was transferred first
to tyrant Rome and then to persecuting Christendom, and the
impassioned words of Obadiah became a favourite vehicle for
the expression of national and reHgious hatred. That is a mis
understanding and a misuse of the book. The prophecy is,
indeed, instigated by indignation against Edom, and the retri
butive destruction of that people is its theme. But the subject
is worked out in a large fashion that precludes the suspicion of
petty vengefuhiess, and justifies the book's place in the record
of revelation The motive is not the gratification of national
spite, nor is the aim to either warn or edify the Edomites. The
seer speaks out of the need of his own heart and to the hearts
of his people. What creates his vision and compels its utterance
is an indestructible sense of the eternal justice and fideHty, and
of the Divine destiny of Israel in buUding up the kingdom of
God on earth. The tragedy of Edom is but a part in the great
drama. H is therefore presented on a vast stage, and has the
world's history for its background. Very real and concrete to
the prophet, no doubt, are the antagonisms of Israel and his
enemies, but none the less really and consciously, even if in a
fashion grand beyond his conceptions, it is the collision of uni
versal forces and everlasting principles, that is embodied in them.
Limited and material the presentment of those issues may be,
but they carry in their bosom the consummation of the ages.
Within the rivalry of Edom and Israel there was wrapped the
eternal antithesis of truth and falsehood, good and evil, and the
vision of an earthly kingdom on Mount Zion is finding its ful
filment in the sUent, slow, but sure advent of the kingdom of
God and of our Christ.

JONAH.
1. Peculiarity ofthe Book. — The position of the Book of Jonah
among the minor prophets is remarkable. It is not a prophecy
but a narrative. Unlike aU the other members of the group, it
does not contain the utterance, or a collection of the utterances,
of a prophet. With the exception of the words, "Vet forty days
and Nineveh shaU be overthrown," it is from beginning to end
the recital of a prophet's self-wiU and ignorance, and their disci
pHne and correction by God. The interest of the story, the
striking character of some of its situations, and the use made of
it by our Lord, have stirred the imagination of its readers, exer
cised the ingenuity of theologians, and made tbe book the best
known and most widely studied of all the shorter prophetic
Scriptures of the Old Testament.
2. Life of Jonah. — The prophet whose strange experiences are
recorded in the book is described as Jonah, the son of Amittai.
Only once elsewhere do these proper names recur in the Old
Testament, and there in the same relationship to one another.
In 2 Kings xiv. 25, we read that Jeroboam, the son of Joash,
king of Israel, "restored the coast of Israel from the entering of
Hamath unto the sea of the plain, according to the word of the
Lord God of Israel, which He spake by the hand of His servant
Jonah, the son of Amittai, the prophet, which was of Gath-
hefer." The identity of the two men can hardly be made subject
to the shadow of a doubt. We may, therefore, take it for granted
that the prophet of our story was born at Gath-bef er, a smaU
town on the eastern frontier of Zebulon, a little over an hour's
journey north of Nazareth, and probably represented by the
modern hamlet of El-Mesched.
His prophetic activity must have been either prior to or con
temporary with the reign of Jeroboam IL, that is, somewhere
about the year b.o. 800. From the nature of the reference to
him in Kings, it is evident that he must have been the author
of important and considerable oracles, which lingered in oral

JONAH.

285

tradition or were embodied in written records. But no specimen
of his work has come down to us, unless he is the author, as has
been suggested, of the ancient prophecy against Moab, incor
porated in Isaiah xv. and xvi. ; but this is at best no more than
an ingenious conjecture. In the Greek revision of the Book of
Tobit (xiv. 4) the threat of Jonah against Nineveh is quoted,
and there are several references to him in the New Testament
(Matt. xii. 39—41, xvi. 4; Luke xi. 29—30).
The Jewish tradition, mentioned by Jerome, that he was the
miraculously restored' son of the widow of Zarephath is on the
face of it evidently a play of rabbinical fancy, founded on the
resemblance between the meaning of the name Amittai (truth)
and the exclamation of the glad-hearted mother — " Now by this
I know that thou art a man of God, and that the word of the
Lord Hi thy mouth is truth " (1 Kings xvii. 24). The grave of
Jonah is shown at El-Mesehed, and among the ruins of Nineveh
there is a mound named after him, Nebbi Junus.
3. Salient Features. — The sahent features of the story may be
summarised as foUows. Jonah, commissioned to denounce doom
on Nineveh for its wickedness, recoils from the task. He fears
that the city may repent and God relent, and he either counts
such a result detrimental to his professional repute, or is reluc
tant to be the minister of salvation to the hated heathen capital.
To avoid this repugnant mission to the East, and- to escape from
the presence of Jehovah, he takes ship for Tarshish in the
extreme West. Pursued by a storm, detected as the culprit by
the easting of lots, Jonah submits, confesses his guilt, and, to
save his innocent companions from sharing his fate, causes him
self to be thrown overboard. Instantly the storm ceases ; the
saUors fear Jehovah, offer sacrifices and make vows ; while
Jonah, now penitent and submissive, is preserved from drowning
by a great fish, prepared by God to swaUow him up aHve, and
convey him back to the shore.
In this position of imprisonment, but also of deliverance,
Jonah composes a poem of grateful thanksgiving to God, and
after three days and three nights of confinement is cast out upon
the dry land. Despatched anew to preach to Nineveh, Jonah
compHes, enters the great city, proclaims its destruction in forty
days, produces universal panic and repentance, whereupon God
pities and pardons the contrite capital. FUled. with chagrin at
the foreseen result of his mission, the prophet complains of the
Divine compassion, and is rebuked. StiU dissatisfied and rebel-
lious, he is sharply discipHned, and finaUy put to shame by the
startling inconsistency between his excessive regard for and
sorrow over the loss of a plant which he had not worked to pro-

286 BOOK BY BOOK.
duce, but that bad given him pleasure, whUe he grudges God's
sparing the great city with its myriads of innocent human Hves
His own Divine hands had made. Thus the book ends with the
majestic thought that in God's government of men, GentUe as
well as Jew, penitence universaUy procures pardon, since human
life is everywhere God's loving workmanship, in which He has
pleasure, and which He wiU not wilUngly pain, and only in the
last extremity of impenitence destroy.
4. Structure and Style. — Though the composition makes no
express claim to be from the pen of Jonah, and the narrative
throughout is carried on in the third person, it has been taken
for granted Hi Jewish and Christian tradition alike that the book
is a piece of autobiography. It begins abruptly with a conjunc
tion, as H detached from an antecedent narrative, and it ends in
an unfinished fashion without teUing us what became of the
hero. Hence it is thought that it may have originaUy belonged
to a larger biography of Jonah, or to a coUection of stories of
the early prophets of action who preceded the prophets of speech
and writing. There are striking resemblances in it to the tales
of Elijah and EHsha recorded in the Books of the Kings, par
ticularly to the account of Ehjah's despaH (1 Kings xix.), while
the conversation between God and the prophet Hresistibly
reminds us of the Divine dialogues in the early chapters of
Genesis. The style throws no decisive Hght upon the probable date,
though the vocabulary presents a number of pecuHar words and
uses of words that have been held to indicate a late origin. But
recent Hebrew grammarians inchne to ascribe such peculiarities
rather to a northern origin or to local individual circumstances.
The statement that Nineveh was an exceeding great city has
been taken to show that at the tune it was penned the capital of
Assyria had already long been a thing of the past ; but the
phrase may be an editorial note, or it may equally weU be
construed as a description of the city as Jonah found it. The
poetical prayer, recorded in chapter ii., is a mosaic of quotations
from the Book of Psalms, which certainly furnishes a strong
argument against a very early date, provided this poem is an
original part of the composition.
Very powerful arguments may be drawn from the contents,
spirit, and theological tendency of the book. How, it is asked,
could such a work have been produced during the Assyrian
period ? Is such a friendly attitude towards Nineveh conceiv
able, while the Assyrian capital was the object of Hebrew hate
and dread, and the focus of the bitterest invective of every Jewish
prophet ? How, too, could .such an unflattering picture of a

JONAH. 287
prophet be painted during the prime and glory of living pro
phecy ? On the other hand, it may be asked, how teaching so
broad in its charity and free in its scope is consistent with
the hard narrowness and selfish bigotry of later post-Exilic
Judaism ? Such considerations have, and ought to have, great
weight ; but their effect wiU vary according to individual pre
conceptions and beUefs as to the history of Israel's literature and
reHgion. Accordingly we need not be surprised to find that this
enigmatical book is ascribed by competent and devout scholars
to various dates, that range between the eighth and fourth cen
turies before Christ. Nor, in the absence of any express declara
tion or decisive mark of time in the book itself, is the date likely
to be otherwise than long an undecided problem of Old Testa
ment study.
5. Historical Validity. — Coming now to the contents of the
narrative, we are confronted by a question as to the literary
character of the work. Have we to deal with a literal, matter-
of-fact history, or with an aUegorical and pictorial composition ?
To answer this question we must examine the story, and strive
to neither exaggerate its peeuHarities nor minimise its difficul
ties. Unquestionably the narrative contains much that is start-
Ung, and that ought to make us in any case reserved in our
assertions, and chary of dogmatism. He does but a sorry service
to Revelation who lays on it needless loads and burdens too heavy
to be borne. On the other hand the actual perplexities of this
book have often been unreaUy magnified, and not a few have
been gratuitously invented.
It has been urged that the mission of Jonah to Nineveh is
inconsistent with the idea of Hebrew prophecy, and a solecism
in Old Testament reHgious thought. Doubtless it is unusual
and Hi some respects unique, but in remembrance of the relations
maintained by his predecessors Elijah and EHsha with Syria, the
connection of Jonah with Assyria is not so utterly out of the
question (compare also Hosea v. 13). It was also the fashion to
regard the descriptions of Nineveh's area and population as
grotesque exaggerations, but recent discoveries and decipher
ments tend to confirm them and their echoes in classical authors.
Much has been made of the representation of Jonah composing
in the whale's beUy an elaborate poem, which in its general
tenor and in some of its detaUs is not very evidently appropriate
to the position of a man in such a living tomb. This difficulty,
which springs from a HteraHstic reading of the story, was long
ago disposed of by the common-sense of Luther, who remarked
that we are not to suppose that Jonah "said just these words
with his mouth and set them so in order," but they show us

288 BOOK BY BOOK.
what were the mood of his mind and the thoughts of his heart
as he fought his battle with death. The amazing effect on
Nineveh of the preaching of a prophet in a foreign tongue and
in the name of an alien deity is a graver difficulty, but not by
any means unthinkable in face of the astonishing possibilities of
superstitious awe and reHgious panic. Much more unaccountable
is the utter absence of any reference to so extraordinary an event
in the historical books of the Bible, and in the copious subsequent
prophecies that deal with Assyria and its relation to Israel. To
those who accept the fact of miracle the marvels of the fish and
the gourd are not in themselves stumbling-blocks, and a reverent
faith in the supernatural of revelation wiU repudiate all weU-
meant attempts to reduce theH wondrousness by unreliable
travellers' stories and vagaries of natural history.
The real difficulty about the element of the miraculous in the
Book of Jonah consists, for believing minds, rather in the amount
and the kind of it. From beginning to end the narrative is one
continuous chain of surprises^ providences, and marvels of a very
unusual description. And what is more significant stUl, much
of it is, so far as we can perceive, unnecessary for the practical
accompHshment of the matter-of-fact object assigned, while it as
evidently serves with unequalled effectiveness a didactic purpose,
viz., to emphasize and throw into intense relief certain truths of
the very first importance Hi revelation. To this must be added
a certain indefiniteness and lack of detaU which mark' the story.
We are not informed where Jonah was landed, how he made his
way to Nineveh, the name of the Assyrian king, what passed
between monarch and prophet, whUe what finaUy became of
Jonah is untold in the story, which in fact terminates in a moral
or doctrine.
The value of these observations, and their critical import may
be very diversely construed, but there is general agreement on
the following points. The mHaculous ingredient forms the very
warp and woof of the composition, and cannot by any possi-
bUity be detached without the literary demolition of the piece.
Nevertheless the fact that the mechanism or marvel of the super
natural are not dwelt upon or at aU elaborated, proves that the
miraculous is not the prime interest or theme, but simply the
machinery or vehicle of a didactic purpose. And in like manner
the historical is not an object in itself, but is subordinated as
means to end to subserve the ethical and reHgious teaching,
which is the supreme motive and final aim of the book.
6. Various Interpretations. — These considerations have origi
nated a considerable variety of interpretations, and have had
their proper influence in shaping the views of even the most

JONAH. 289
zealous defenders of the historical validity of the narrative and
the most uncompromising behevers in the supernatural. Thus
it is urged that, while the book is a trustworthy chronicle of
actual events, the essential significance of these must be sought
Hi their symbohcal character, and theH permanent value in the
typical or prophetic import of the occurrences. Some devout but
imaginative interpreters have endeavoured to reduce the diffi
culty of the miraculous by quoting parallel wonders from apocry
phal bits of natural history, or by supposing that the conscience-
stricken prophet had a dream in the ship, or that the story grew
out of a misunderstanding of a poem of Jonah's.
It has also been suggested that the story is a Hebrew adapta
tion of the myth of the rescue of Andromeda from the sea
monster on the Joppa coast by Perseus, or the paraUel myth of
Hesione and Hercules, or that it is a variation of the Babylonian
myth about the fish god Oannes, who rose from the sea to teath
the people the arts and institutions of civilisation. This theory
has as Httle likelihood as have the naturalistic evasions of the
supernatural, which is inextricably woven into the framework of
the narrative.
There is probably no intermediate resting-place for intelligent
faith between a simple acceptance of the history, and the theory
held by many believing scholars, who, influenced by no shrinking
from the supernatural but purely by the literary character and
didactic bent of the story, have found in it a kind of composition
akin to the Book of Job, or the pictorial prophetic visions and
symbohcal actions recounted in the memoirs of the prophets, and
which in the present case may be more exactly defined as a
species of spiritual aUegory or reHgious parable, founded on a
more or less extensive basis of historical fact. Between these
theories opinions wiU continue to be divided, at least untU we
have reached a more thorough knowledge of ancient modes of
thought, and a profounder understanding of the variety of
inteUectual channel and Hterary expression open to a Divine
revelation. 7. The Inspired Meaning. — It is a happy circumstance that we
may differ widely in our estimate of the Hterary framework of
the book without missing its inspired meaning or frustrating its
revelation purpose. Here indeed aU parties meet together and
are substantiaUy agreed, though not without interesting varia
tion Hi point of view and proportion of component parts. To
determine the central truth embodied in the picture we have
simply to regard it as a whole and from a sufficient distance. It
is evident that the sovereign aim of the artist, from first to last,
is to throw into sharp relief an element in God's government of
v

290 BOOK BY BOOK.
the world, and an attribute of His character, by contrasting
them with the startUngly antagonistic mood and conflicting
action of the prophet. It is, therefore, only Hi a subordinate
and indirect fashion that such doctrines emerge as God's provi
dential lordship over aU things, the resist! essness of His wiU,
the grandeur and responsibility of the prophetic office, &c. Too
narrow in conception, and negative in form, are such summaries
of the teaching as that the story is a warning to the prophets
against unfaithfulness, or an admonition to Israel against im
penitence, or a vindication of the prophets against attack on the
ground that some of theH predictions had not been fulfilled.
An intelligent and sympathetic study of the book wiU, we
think, justify the opinion that tbe ethical and religious purpose
of the piece embraces the foUowing points. Prophecy is remedial,
designed not to destroy but to save, conditional therefore on
human conduct, and so in the letter of its predictions may remain
unfulfilled. In every nation and not in Israel alone, contrition
and submission secure the divine pity and pardon. For God,
the maker of aU, loves what He has made, hates to destroy, and
wiU seek to save to the uttermost. Israel's ultimate relation to
the heathen is, therefore, one of compassionate endeavour to
bring them also into the kingdom of God, for this is the will of
God concerning them. That being so, it is evident how finely
appropriate are Christ's references to Jonah.
The Jews, in their narrow-hearted particularism, hating Jesus
for His embodiment in Himself and in His preaching of Israel's
world-wide mission of redemption, demand of Him "a sign. He
answers that through their obstinacy and rebelliousness the
story of Jonah shaU be repeated in His person. As the prophet's
repudiation of his saving mission handed him over to death,
while his resumption of it restored him to life for its accompHsh-
ment, in like manner their rejection of Jesus' mission would
produce His death and burial, while His loyal fidehty to it would
secure His resurrection for its achievement. But, whereas the
men of Nineveh repented at the preaching of Jonah, such is the
hardness of their hearts, that they remain, and wiU continue to
remain, obdurate to the ministry of One far mightier than the
prophet of olden days. In the most profound sense, therefore,
the story of Jonah is typical of the Hfe and work of Jesus, whUe
no book of the Old Testament more nearly approaches the breadth
and depth of gospel universalism, and the grandeur of the New
Testament conception of the fatherly love of God.

MICAH.
1. Name and Birthplace of Micah. — The sixth book of the minor
prophets is described Hi the title as a collection of the teaching
of the Judsean prophet Micah. In a reference to his work con
tained in the Book of Jeremiah, the name is written Hi a lengthier
form as Micajah. It was a common name among the Hebrews,
and occurs many tunes of various individuals in the Old Testa
ment. There is a remarkable divergence in the spelling. The
oldest and fuU form seems to have been Micahjahu, intended to
express the central article of Jewish faith in the chaUenge,
" Who is Hke Jehovah ? " Some of the variations are probably
eccentricities of speUing, and others contractions in famUiar use.
It is somewhat surprising not to find the fuU form in the title of
the prophet's book, at aU events H it is original or early.
He is distinguished as "theMorasthite," whieh is not a patro
nymic, but a designation of his bUthplaee. This was not, as
some have supposed, the Mareshah, mentioned in i. 15, but
Moresheth-gath (i. 14), an obscure hamlet in the western lowland
of Judsea, bordering on the PhUistine country. In Jerome's time
the place was known in the vicinity of EleutheropoHs ; it claimed
the prophet's grave, and a Christian church was built over it.
DetaUs of his personal relations and career are found in Jewish
and Christian traditions, but they are f uU of palpable blunders
and deserve no credence. The confusion of our prophet with
Micaiah son °f Imlah, who hved in the time of Ahab, is probably
due to tbe fact that in the Hebrew text of 1 Kings xxii. 28 the
opening words of this book are ascribed to the earHer prophet,
but it is noteworthy that in the Septuagint (with the exception
of one codex) the ascription is not found. The identification is
of course baseless, and in the face of Micah's distinctive appel
lation as the Morasthite somewhat surprising.
2. Mission and Date. — Apart from the record of his prophecies we
have but one absolutely authentic reminiscence of the life-work
u2

292 BOOK BY BOOK.
of Micah. It is related in the twenty-sixth chapter of Jeremiah.
The prophet of woes, at the bidding of God, had proclaimed the
imminent destruction of the town and of the temple. Arraigned
on a capital charge, he is saved by the intervention of certain
elders. " Micah the Morasthite," say they, "prophesied in the
days of Hezekiah, king of Judah, and spake to aH the people of
Judah, saying, Thus saith the Lord of Hosts; Zion shaU be
plowed like a field, and Jerusalem shaU become heaps, and tbe
mountain of the house as the high places of a forest (Micah iii.
12). Did Hezekiah, king of Judah, and all Judah put bim at aU
to death ? did he not fear the Lord, and besought tbe Lord, and
the Lord repented him of the evil which he had pronounced
against them ? "
The reference is of great interest. It shows us what a powerful
influence was exerted by Micah at the court and in the capital.
Further, it teUs us that in the opinion of contemporaries and
later generations his predictions of destruction were not fulfiUed
in the tune or in the forms contemplated by the prophet, retri
bution having been averted by repentance. FinaUy, it gives us
a definite date for one, and that the chief oracle in his book, for
the passage (iii. 12) is quoted exactly as it stands, and it may
faUly be counted the keystone of the whole.
A reasonable inference would be that the entire contents belong
to the reign of Hezekiah, and, since the fall of Samaria is con
templated as proximate, to the opening years of it. On the other
hand, the title assigns to the prophet a more prolonged period of
activity, extending over the reigns of Jotham, Ahaz, ana Hezekiah.
In support of this statement various references and descriptions
in the book are instanced as relevant to the times of the first-
named kings, but whoUy inconsistent with the government of
Hezekiah. The historical records do not paint for us the actual
state of things with sufficient definiteness to allow of this kind
of evidence having much weight, while a simUar train of reason
ing would tend to show that chapters vi.- — vH. belong to the
monarchy of Manasseh. Nor can much be made of the passage
in chapter iv. (verses 1 — 4), which appears Hkewise in the second
chapter of Isaiah, a prophecy spoken probably in the a<?e of
Ahaz. For though Micah's version is the fuller, the probabUity
is that neither borrows from the other, but that a famous pre
diction of an earlier seer has been incorporated in the personal
utterance of both.
In aU likelihood the title does not intend to assign the reigns
of the three kings as the period during which Micah's book was
gradually composed, but rather as the era Hi which his prophetic
activity f eU, and that in large, general terms, that should exhibit

MICAH. 293
him as bplonging to the later portion of the epoch, which includes
Amos, Hosea, and Isaiah. The great mamfesto mentioned in
Jeremiah may have been the culmination of a protracted career.
and in it he may have summed up the scattered elements and
Hnes of his earher prophetic teaching. To disentangle and date
these in his memoir is a task rendered impossible by its summary
and often enigmatic arrangement. Like many other records of
prophecy, it is a condensation of speeches and predictions
emitted on many and various occasions, and was probably put
together during the first years of Hezekiah, perhaps on the
particular occasion referred to in Jeremiah.
3. Unity of the Book. — Of recent years the unity of the book has
been strongly questioned. If it is one continuous composition by
the same pen, we are compeUed to recognise several very abrupt
transitions and enormous changes of scene. That is, nevertheless,
a feature found in other prophecies, and any excess of it in
Micah's style may be due to mental make, as in the case of
Hosea, or perhaps to the fashion Hi which prophetic memoirs
were compiled.
As the book stands there seems to be a fofmal division into
three parts, viz., chapters i. — H., iii. — v., vi. — vii., each section
introduced by the Hi vocation "Hear ye," starting with denun
ciation of sin, passing on into menaces of judgment, and ending
with promise. In the first of these the element of threatening
preponderates ; in the second the promise is predominantly dwelt
upon ; whUe the third vindicates the justice, certainty, and inner
meaning of the Divine dispensation. So far, then, the structure
seems intelligible, consistent, and coherent. But it is pointed
out that the promise at the end of the first section (ii. 12 — 13)
comes in very abruptly and is embodied Hi two single verses.
If these be removed then we get a more massive and simple
division. For the denunciation of judgment rolls on unbroken
through chapters i. — Hi., while the background of promise fills
the second act in chapters iv. — v. It is, therefore, suggested
that the couple of interrupting verses did not stand in the original
plan of the book. Either they were a marginal note that has
crept into the text, or, belonging to some other point in the pro
phecy, they have somehow got misplaced.
The assumption is not of such consequence as to need discussion.
A more important criticism is as to the origin of chapters vi. — vii.
As we pass into them we are conscious of a distinct change of
atmosphere. The tone is more subdued. The antagonisms
present to the mind of the speaker are altered in character. Sin,
social disorder, alienation from God are there, and in even
aggravated degree; but the kind has changed. There is the

294 BOOK BY BOOK.
gloom of a reign of terror, an embittered religious scepticism,
coupled with superstition and a corruption that has reached
maturity. One thinks naturaUy of the reign of Manasseh, and
so tbe passage is assigned to that time, whether written by
Micah or a disciple. But there are not wanting explanations of
these features of the section, not to mention the blank that would
be left by its excision in the general plan of the book, and the
element of uncertainty in aU such reasoning.
If, however, the separation be justified we should probably
carry it out a Httle further, and hold vii. 7— 20, as contemporary
with Isaiah xi. — lxvi., whieh it strikingly resembles in tone and
thought. In chapters iv. — v. the leaps from threat to promise
are peculiarly sudden. Various causes are suggested, and it is
not impossible that the original draft may have been enlarged
or annotated. But as it stands the difficulty of individual tran
sitions is diminished by the appearance of a certain symmetrical
arrangement, by which in succession the main elements of dis
aster, announced in Hi. 12, are taken up, amplified, and made to
pass into a picture of restoration and subsequent triumph.
A more practical question is, whether the reference to Babylon
in iv. 10, is original, or is a subsequent explanation introduced
into the text. It is urged that as Assyria is the threatening
enemy the introduction of Babylon is Hrelevant, and that it is
Assyria over which renovated Israel is to triumph (v. 6).
Besides, as we know from Jeremiah that the destruction which
Micah anticipated was averted, how Hkely that the abiding prin
ciple of his prophecy should be adapted to later circumstances
by himself or another. Further, as a proof of the possibUity,
we find that in the Greek text of the Septuagint there is intro
duced an extra reference to Babylon Hi iv. 8. On the contrary
it is urged that as Babylon was a conquest of the Assyrian arms
about that time, and as 2 Kings xvii. 24 and tbe inscriptions
inform us that the populations of captured towns were often
interchanged to diminish risk of revolt, the idea of captivity in
Babylon is quite in place. If we omit the mention of Babylon,
we get a simple but favourite thought of Micah, that only in the
people's reduction to a primitive, uncorrupted life, stripped of
luxury and military show, could they reach the retrieval of theH
lost hopes. The question is one to be settled on purely exegetical
grounds, and quite apart from dogmatical prepossessions.
4. Analysis of Contents. — Passing from these formal questions
we come to consider the contents of the book as it Hes in our
hands. The first great division (chapters i., ii.) summons the
whole world to witness a Divine drama. Striding over the
mountains, in the thunderstorm of Assyrian invasion, God is

MICAH. 295
advancing to chastise the sins of His people, which are concen
trated in the idolatry and wickedness of the capitals. The first
act Hi the tragedy is the destruction of Samaria, but the evU does
not stop there ; the desolating scourge sweeps on towards
Jerusalem. In a series of vivid pictures of the horrors of invasion, con
nected by word-play with the names of a number of provincial
towns, the course and completeness of Judah's ruin are portrayed.
Reverting to the authors of this impending judgment, he attacks
the privUeged and powerful classes for their fraudulent oppression
of the poor and theH mercUess rapacity, threatening them with
retributive humiliation and extirpation. Their sneer against
himseH and his God he retorts, defends the justice of Jehovah,
once more pillories their heartless cruelties perpetrated on the
weak and defenceless, declares the very land is sick of it, and
must purge itseH of them and their abominations, and taunts
them with theH besotted trust in lying prophets, that promise
them physical prosperity in spite of moral wrong. Then in swift
recoU from the dark prospect he turns to the brighter future
beyond, and pictures the nation's restoration to God's favour,
and to happy enjoyment of the land of promise.
The second division (chapters Hi. — v.) travels over similar
ground, only omitting aU mention of Samaria, condensing the
threatening, and expanding the delineation of promise. We
have, first, an impassioned invective against the nobles and
judges, who misuse power, pervert justice, grind down the indi
gent, and drive the needy to desperation. As they showed no
mercy, they shaU get none from God. Next he scathes with
burning Hony the hypocritical and venal tribe of prophets that
support the corrupt chiefs, and threatens them with the con
fusion, ignominy, and ruin that must eome on men whose action
is based on external expediency, not founded on the eternal laws
of truth and justice. Bursting into a conjoint denunciation of
corrupt judges, priests, prophets, and nobles, who have buUt a
splendid and luxurious capital out of the blood, and tears, and
ruin of their country, the prophet reaches the climax of his
burden in the terrible declaration that Zion the royal residence,
Jerusalem the capital, and the Temple itseH shaU be laid in ruins
and desolation.
With that a revulsion of feeHng ensues. Starting with the
crowning element of disaster, the seer beholds the restored
Temple in unprecedented magnificence, accepted as the religious
and moral centre of the world, exercising peaceful control over
the people, whUe around it Israel dwells in safety, happy in
repossession of more than its ancient Davidic empire. Reverting

296 BOOK BY BOOK.
again to the second element of disaster, the defeat and depopu
lation of the city, he describes the certainty that this calamity
will be foUowed by restoration, and depicts the inviolable
strength of the new community in a picture (that has a touch of
the apocalyptic in it) of the nations gathered against Zion,
dreaming of its destruction, but knowing not that God has
brought them there for theH utter overthrow, as to a threshing-
floor for judgment.
A thHd time he catches up the sentence of doom, and, singling
out the downfall of the monarchy, he predicts in stately language
the advent of the ideal ruler of Israel, who, springing from the old
Davidic cradle, and ruling in the strength and spirit of God, shall
establish Israel,, repel Assyria, and make the chosen people
resistless among the nations, Hke a Hon among sheep, and Hke
showers that descend from God and do not depend on man.
The section concludes with the thought that in this new era the
purified Israel shaU be purged of aU sinful forms of worship and
forbidden sources of moral support, as weU as from aU rehance
in merely temporal resources and muniments of war. The
nation shaU derive its strength from God, and not from an arm
of flesh.
The third section (chapters vi., vii.), counting it as an integral
part of the book, is best construed as a less impassioned, more
thoughtful, and somewhat apologetic confirmation of the neces
sity, justice, and inevitable issue of the imminent calamity.. In
structure it is exceedingly dramatic, falling constantly into dia
logue, in -which the speakers rapidly change.
The prophet opens a process before the everlasting mountains,
and claims a hearing for Jehovah. God introduces His ease
with the demand, whether His loyalty to the covenant with
Israel has in any point faltered, or furnished ground for their
disloyalty. Responding to the appeal, the people offer compen
sation and amendment in the form of sacrifices, even of their
first-born. This offer the prophet rejects indignantly, pointing
out that nothing but moral and reHgious regeneration will
suffice. Jehovah takes up the plea, and points out that with all
their multiplied ceremonial observances their private, commer
cial, and political IHe is f uU of dishonesty and violence ; that
undeterred by common chastisements they persist in theH iniqui
ties ; and that, therefore, a righteous God cannot accept them,
nor exempt them from destruction. Further, the faintest hope
of real repentance is exhibited as impossible in the picture of one
searching vainly for a good man amid this corrupt society, in
which the most sacred ties of affection have lost all binding force,
and which must dissolve of its own rottenness. But even in this

MICAH. 297
uttermost darkness there is light. Affliction exerts its remedial
power. A new and better spirit awakes in smitten Israel — of
humUity, penitence, longing to atone and regain God's favour.
Gradually assurance that God's purpose cannot be frustrated,
though it may be delayed, supervenes. The Divine voice is heard
promising restoration and a more glorious future than ever the
past has known.
And so the book ends in an exquisite prayer of trustful desire,
and a magnificent confession of faith in the transcendency of God
in His attributes of mercy and of truth.
5. Literary and Moral Characteristics. — The teaching of Micah
possesses remarkable qualities both in style and thought. His
language is vigorous, graphic, and varied. At times he is emo
tional and pathetic, anon terse and trenchant, and again elevated
and sublime, as the occasion and subject demand. He does not
quite command the grand style of Isaiah, but he is more sharply
teUing and direct. In width of survey and weight of movement
he differs from his great contemporary, somewhat as a tribune of
the people or a preacher of righteousness differs from a statesman
of the first order.
It is singular that Micah takes no notice of foreign policy,
never mentions the rival Assyrian and Egyptian parties at court,
nor deals in any way with questions of state ; but he burns with
indignation against the eviction of the peasants from their small
holdings, and is moved by the social wrongs and inhumanities
of the time in a fashion that forees us to feel he must himself
have been a man of the people, and probably a resident in a
district peculiarly exposed to those forms of evil that were break
ing up the old happy, simple Hfe of primitive Israel. Against
such actual iniquities and injuries to Jehovah's people his
polemic is mainly directed, though he clearly recognises that
they have theH origin in disloyalty to the nation's Divine Head,
and the spHit of His true religion. In this he resembles Amos,
but his conception of right is a more deeply ethical one, as is
also his thought of the tie between Israel and Jehovah. It is
indeed a very profound and noble idea that is embodied in the
picture of the pleading in chapter vi., and in the aspect of the
covenant that is there put forward. The personal and moral
so completely predominate over the merely juridical and legal.
The Messiauic idea of Micah is a remarkably developed one,
though he has not fuUy worked out the process by which it is to
be reached. For its basis he takes the ideaHsed picture of the
heroic, happy, united empire of King David, in which the corrup
tion, extremes of wealth and poverty, foreign humiliation, and
internal miseries of the present age were unknown. His vision

298 BOOK BY BOOK.
is that of the kingdom of God, though clothed in earthly forms,
and cramped by temporal limitations. Its foundations are justice,
mercy, and the fear of God ; its destiny world-wide dominion ;
and the issue peace, prosperity, and righteousness. The whole
bright dream centres round a kingly figure that emerges from the
eternal purposes of God, after the flesh of Bethlehem origin hke
David, but clothed with attributes and powers Divine. No wonder
that in many features of the story of Jesus of Nazareth we catch
echoes of the Book of Micah, aU along that pathway of glory and
of shame that stretches from the cradle of Bethlehem to the
agony of Gethsemane and the cross of Calvary.

NAHUM.
1. Meaning of Name. — Tbe place assigned to Nahum in the
succession of the minor prophets is the same Hi the Hebrew
Bible and in the Septuagint. Nor after this point is there any
divergence in the arrangement of the books that foUow. The
order is identical Hi the Massoretic canon and in the Greek, the
oldest of the versions. The word Nahum probably means the
comforter, and Hi conformity with the name the prophet's oracle
is a message of consolation. In form it is an impassioned anti
cipation of the destruction of Assyrian Nineveh, the oppressor of
God's people, but its inner motive is an undying faith in God's
redemptive purpose, and its destination to comfort the heart of
Israel well-nigh sick with hope so long deferred.
2. The Prophet's Personality. — Of Nahum we know nothing
except what we can gather from his book. The name was pro
bably not uncommon, though no other person bears it in the Old
Testament. There is a Nahum among the ancestors of Joseph
(Luke Hi. 25) ; our prophet is mentioned in the apocryphal books
of Esdras ; and the name possibly appears in the inscriptions of
Phoenician origin. In the title prefixed to the prophecy Nahum
is caUed " the Elkoshite." From the form of the word this can
not be a patronymic. It might indicate a famUy stem, but none
such appears Hi the Hebrew Hsts. It may be taken as certam
that it is meant to designate the prophet's native place or his resi
dence. Unfortunately we have no reference elsewhere Hi the
Bible to any Elkosh. The very pronunciation is uncertain. In
the Septuagint it is -written " Elkesite." Yet this phrase is aH
we have to go upon Hi determining the personal cHcumstances of
the seer.
At a comparatively early period tradition located Elkosh in
GalUee. Jerome tells us that he was shown as the prophet's
birthplace a small vUlage with traces of the ruins of ancient
buUdings, which the Jews beUeved to be the place of Nahum's
nativity. If the concluding statement rests on Jerome's own
knowledge, then there must attach to the tradition more weight

300 BOOK BY BOOK.
than if it depended merely on the obliging zeal of a guide. The
most likely identification of the site is with El-Kauzeh, which
lies a few miles south-west of Tiberias, in the vicinity of Ramah
in Naphtali. The suggestion is ingenious, but devoid of any
material proof, that Elkosh is to be recognised in the Capernaum
of the New Testament, whose name means village of Nahum, for
supposing the interpretation correct there is nothing to show that
it was called, after the prophet and not after another Nahum.
There are some other early references to Elkosh, but they are
vague and add nothing to our knowledge.
If the prophet's birthplace were, indeed, in the north, his
family must have either escaped the general deportation of the
inhabitants by Sargon, or else he may have been as a child
among the exUes, and in that case uttered his oracle against
Nineveh in the land of his banishment. ¦ On the other supposi
tion, it is most likely that his family moved southwards, and that
his prophetic activity was in Judea. A strong point is made
against the whole theory of a Galilean origin by appeal to the
protest of the Jews, who in Christ's time were already. zealous
builders of the prophets' tombs (Matt, xxiii. 29), that "out of
Galilee ariseth no prophet " (John vii. 52).
A conflicting tradition as to the prophet's place of abode dates
back to the sixteenth century, but unhappily for its credibility
no farther. At Alkosh, a considerable village on the left bank
of the Tigris, two days' journey north of the ruins of Nineveh,
the tomb of the prophet is shown, and to this day is reverenced
by devout Jewish, Christian, and Mohammedan pilgrims. But
the tomb, the house in which it stands, and the whole place are
destitute of any traces or marks of genuine antiquity. And in
the twelfth century, according to Benjamin of Tudela, the syna
gogue of Nahum was in Mosul, and his tomb at Ain- Japhata, in
Babylonia. Moreover, even if he did Hve in some part of the
Assyrian realm, tbe fact might be stated in the title of his book,
but a Hebrew prophet would hardly describe himself or be
described as the native of a foreign place (compare Ezek. i. 3).
So far then the historical evidence is against an Assyrian Elkosh,
but it must also be aUowed that the proof of a Galilean Elkosh
is not convincing. We must, therefore, seek Hght Hi another
direction, and resolve the geographical question into a larger and
niore interesting one.
3. Local Colour. — A writing is apt to reflect the surroundings
of its author. This is especiaUy true, if it deal not with abstract
principles but with places, persons, and practical movements. Of
this nature is the oracle of Nahum against Nineveh. Its struc
ture, its address, or some one of its many detaUs ought to betray

NAHUM. 301
its origin, and prove it to have been composed either in Palestine
or Assyria. The expectation is a natural one, but experiment
proves it not quite satisfactory. Study of the contents and form
of the book does not lead to one conclusion. Each side of the
alternative is stoutly maintained by competent scholars. It is
urged that Nahum must have lived in the neighbourhood of
Nineveh, for that great metropolis dominates all his thought,
engrosses his attention, is described with a knowledge of topo
graphy and local colour possible only to an eye-witness, intrudes
into the writer's vocabulary, and interests him in its fortunes as
no remote city known only by hearsay could have done. On the
contrary, Judah is but cursorily mentioned, and the reference is
seen to be that of a speaker far away when it is compared with
the paraUel aUusion to Assyria of a prophet in Judsea (Zeph. ii.
13—15). There is truth in some of this characterization, but it seems
twisted to a wrong conclusion. The prophecy is indeed engrossed
in Nineveh, but • in the realisation of Nineveh's destruction, and
Hi Nineveh's destruction conceived as Judsea's deliverance. The
reference to Judsea is not, therefore, correctly described as a pass
ing aUusion, but is the central address of the whole impassioned
vision, placed therefore in the climax of the utterance, and f orm-
ing the crown and keystone of the structure. That is not what it
would have been if the writer had been an exUe addressing his
feUow-exUes. It is the appeal of a prophet Hi Judaea speaking
to the heart of Judaea, stirred not by the woes of his banished
brethren, but by the crippling wounds and desolations of the
mother country bereft of her children (i. 13 — H. 2).
If local colour is to be appealed to, we have the citation of
Bashan, Carmel, and Lebanon (i. 4), and would no doubt have
more Palestinian tints were Nineveh not our author's theme.
There are in his book at most two or three Assyrian words, and
these— we can see from other Old Testament books — such as an
author in Palestine might naturally know and use in writing of
Assyrian affaHs. If the topographical references, the detailed
touches, and the graphic realism of the dehneation of the taking
and destruction of Nineveh are held decisive of personal know
ledge, the same conclusion would attach to the author's minute
and vivid picture of the physical surroundings, material resources,
mUitary strength, and terrible overthrow of Egyptian Thebes (iii.
8 — 10). The truth is that the appearance of detaU is due, not
only here, but in other elements of the piece, not to observation,
but to a powerful and picturesque imagination, operating on infor
mation concerning Nineveh possessed by aU the peoples interested
by conquest Hi the capital of theH conqueror. There is, in fact,

302 BOOK BY BOOK.
a remarkable absence of names of localities, persons (Huzzab is
erroneous, ii. 7), and events, such as would colour the composi
tion of a writer actuaUy on the spot. The argument is, of
course', too much one of personal Hterary instinct to be made
much of, but the trend of critical opinion is certainly against
assigning to Nahum an Assyrian home and career.
4. Contemporary History. — The period of the prophet's activity
is not specified in the superscription. It ' must be gleaned, as
nearly as we can, from the contents of the prophecy. Till recent
years our knowledge of events was not such as to permit of any
one certain combination. There was, therefore, a very wide
divergence of opinion as to the probable date, ranging from the
beginning to the erid of tbe seventh century. The three most
respectable theories locate the composition respectively under
Hezekiah (about b.c. 700), under Manasseh (about b.o. 660),
under Josiah (about B.C. 630).
In the light of fresh discoveries opinion gravitates to the
middle date. This conclusion might have been arrived at from a
thorough study of the character of the book. Israel Hes bound
and helpless in the grasp of Assyria (i. 13) ; half of her people,
the northern kingdom, has been emptied out (ii. 2) ; through her
midst the wicked one has passed (i. 15), and Judah is left broken
and despoiled (ii. 2). If the description is general, it would
apply to Israel at any time subsequent to tbe terrible invasion of
Sennacherib during the reign of Hezekiah. H it indicates a par
ticular calamity it most probably refers to that disaster. If a
later experience must be found, it is possible to faU back on the
narrative in 2 Chron. xxxiii. 11, which speaks of a captivity of
Manasseh, that must have been the act either of Esarhaddon
(b.c. 680 ?), or of Assurbanipal (b.c. 648). Several phrases in
the wording (i. 11, 12, 14, 15 ; ii. 13) resemble, really or seem
ingly, features of the narrative of Sennacherib's invasion in
Kings and Isaiah. But the similarity comes far short of proving
the combination, while even if this be the reference it does not
foUow that the passage is contemporaneous. Such a crisis of
terror, permanent cripphng, and national depression would Hve
fresh and ever present in the people's mind tUl they were either
retrieved, or by stiU worse calamities echpsed.
Nothing, therefore, shuts us up to Hezekiah's age, whUe there
is something that irresistibly demands a later era. One of the
most outstanding pictures in the book is the delineation of the
overthrow of No-Amon, i.e. Thebes on the NUe. From an early
date there had been hostility between Egypt and Assyria, and
such a disaster might have happened at any time, say, under
Sargon or Sennacherib, to tally with tbe theory of early origin.

NAHUM. 303
But the inscriptions have decided the matter by giving us a
definite account of the capture and spoliation of Thebes by the
army of Assurbanipal about b.o. 662. No doubt the great city
may have been sacked at an earlier period, but coupled with
other evidence we have a moral certainty that Nahum wrote sub
sequent to that date.
Turning now to the theory that he wrote long subsequent to
this period, about the year B.C. 630, we find that the only argu
ment for it is the prejudice, that the impulse and basis of Nahum's
prediction must be found in an actual menace to the existence of
Nineveh, such as did exist about that time in the hostile move
ments of the Medes and Babylonians, while earHer than this date
the Assyrian empHe was in the meridian of its might and glory.
But the supposition is mistaken from first to last. If anything
is manifest in Nahum's prophecy, it is that his certainty of
Nineveh's overthrow is not a political forecast but a reHgious
inspiration. It is a deduction from the eternal laws of justice
and divme grace, not an inference from an historical survey of
existing facts. The actual executioner is God, and there is not
the f aintest indication of the earthly agents. Moreover, his pic
ture is not of a decaying Assyria that has already received its
death-blow, but of an Assyria in the plenitude of its power and
aixogance, gorged with the plunder of wars and the profit of the
world's commerce, defiant aUke of men and of God (i. 12, ii. 13 —
14 ; iu. 15 — 17). It is precisely that, the apparent invincibUity
of the heathen world power, that inspires the Hebrew prophet to
his daring flight of faith. Just when sight and reason and pro
bability are most adverse to hope, then is reHgion's opportunity,
then is faith's hour to be certain in spite of sense, then is pro
phecy needed to comfort and assure the heart of God's people.
If this be the true genesis of prophecy, if this be the law of its
origination and action, what season more suitable to assert the
reaHtyof the world's Divine government and to declare Nineveh's
certain doom than just in the hour of its supreme triumph, when
over the ruin of its great rival Egypt it stood the unehaUenged
mistress of the world? Either then, in connection perchance
with Manasseh's disaster, or some time later, if that calamity did
not' faU so early, the heart of Nahum was roused to indomitable
confidence in coming deUverance, his spirit was stirred with an
irresistible certainty of slow but sure retribution of old wrongs,
and in thoughts that glowed and words that burned- he chanted
the death (Urge of the world's colossal oppressor. With aU but
complete assurance we may place Nahum about the middle of
the seventh century. Earlier we have no right to locate him,
nor indeed any moral or reHgious inducement. Later he could

304 BOOK BY BOOK.
hardly have written our prophecy, for by the time of Nineveh's
last struggles Assyria had ceased to be an object of either menace
or hatred to Judea.
5. Character of the Book. — The oracle of Nahum is one con
tinuous utterance, not to be broken into separate elements, but
the embodiment of a single mspiration, forceful, rounded, and
complete. Every attempt to dismember it is a faUure. Its unity
and genuineness are acknowledged on aU bands. Only the first
part of the superscription has been questioned. But there is
nothing unnatural in the title assigning, correctly, first the sub-.
ject of the prophecy, and then its author. The piece is of the
nature of a highly poetical and imaginative composition, is
indeed an inspired vision. Clearly cut divisions can hardly be
marked out, but it is probable that eight stages may be detected
in the stately march of the seer's conception.
Over against the Assyrian power with its gigantic pagan might
he sees God, the vindicator of right, the avenger of wrong, the
final judge of all human issues. Slow to strike, because He is
so strong, He is nevertheless relentlessly just. He wields, the
powers of the aH, commands the waters, controls the soU, makes
the soHd earth tremble, and rules among men omnipotent, resist
less (i. 2 — 6). This God, faithful to friends, fearful to foes, anni
hilating the most formidable resistance, has been thwarted and
defied by Assyria, and therefore wUl utterly destroy her (i. 7 — 12).
Judah, so long oppressed, shall be set free by the Divme over
throw of the Assyrian, and aHeady may rejoice in the happy
release, for sure alike are the downfall of the foe and the restora
tion of crippled Israel (i. 13; ii. 2). The taking of tbe city is
now depicted before our eyes, with Hghtning-like rapidity, in a
series of vivid pictures of the muster of the contending forces, the
assault, the sudden coUapse of the defences, the seizure of the
palace, the capture and flight of the inhabitants (ii. 3 — 8). Next
comes the sack and piUage of the wealthy city, the emptiness and
sickening desolation, the weird contrast with the time when it
was hke a great lion's den gorged with the plunder of its devas
tating armies, for God has risen against her and made an utter
end of her might, her wealth, and her empire, that were gathered
and built up out of bloodshed and violence unending (ii. 9 ; iii. 1).
Once again the seer calls up in Hving images the din and
terror of the conflict, and the fatal completeness of the defeat,
and figuring the heartless capital as a cruel courtezan, that has
devoured the fortunes and Hves of the nations, he exults in the
terrible humihation of her haughtiness, and the contumely and
impHed shame of her overthrow (iii. 2 — 7). By the example of
her own destruction of mighty Thebes, the royal residence of her

NAHUM. 305
great rival Egypt, he asserts the possibUity of the catastrophe,
and founds its certainty on her impotence in the hour of need,
the faU of her fortresses, the demoraUsation of her soldiers, and
the faUure and destruction of her last defences (iii. 8 — 13).
FinaUy he taunts her with her helplessness, pictures the destruc
tion of her commerce, the scattering of her potentates, the dis
persion of her populace, and the relief and rejoicing that her faU
wiU create Hi aU nations, for wide as tbe world has been the
curse of her oppression (Hi. 14 — 19).
6. Literary and Religious Features. — Among the prophetic writers
of the Old Testament Nahum, brief as his book is, claims high
rank Hi respect of Hterary exceUence. By general consent he is
counted a master of Hebrew style. His vocabulary includes
some pecuHar words and exceptional forms. But what has some
times been reckoned Galilean provinciaHsm or the betrayal of a
late or deteriorating style, is more probably the result of de
fective copying. Identities of phrase and idea may be traeed
between his book and several other prophetic writers, but this,
when used to determine age or originaHty in favour of one author
rather than another, is apt to prove a two-edged sword. For
fiery vigour, glowing colour, dramatic impressiveness, wealth of
imagination, and pictorial imagery, Nahum stands pre-eminent.
He is, as it were, hurried away by his own passion, and has not
time to do more than sketch his vividly conceived pictures in a
few daring strokes. Perhaps aU the more on that account his
delineation seems to actuaUy hve and move and make itself heard
with the real clash of arms, and hurry of panic-stricken feet, and
the awful hush of rum and desolation.
As to the prophet's rank in the series of inspHed teachers, it is
suggested that his message is meagre, and his conceptions narrow.
He has nothing to say about Israel's Messianic character and
future. He has no rebuke for her sinfulness and unworthiness.
His soul is consumed with unreasoning indignation against
Assyria, and he is devoid of that lofty conception of the world's
government whieh enabled earHer prophets to recognise in
Assyria Jehovah's scourge for His people's stubbornness and the
chastening rod of His gracious discipHne. In contrast to that
large and reHgious interpretation of providence, Nahum appears
as the representative of a retrogression into narrow, national
particularism. Now it is to be admitted that the form of Nahum's
oracle lends itseH to this misreading; but the sphit and aim of
the prophet ought to have prevented it. Besides, the wrong of
Israel, more than once in his short utterance he presents Assyria as
the oppressoraof mankind, whose avenger Jehovah is (Hi. 4, 7, 19).
Nor even in the contemplation of his own people's injuries is the
x

306 BOOK BY BOOK.
prophet's zeal national and vindictive. It is not revenge but
righteousness that demands the transgressor's downfaU. It is
not Israel's pride that is at stake but God's honour, not the
redemption of his people but the vindication of his God that is
in question. With Nahum Nineveh's punishment is the guarantee
of the world's Divine government, and his impassioned declara
tion of its downfaU is the measure not of his hostility to it but of
the struggle and triumph of bis faith in God and in God's king
dom. That bemg the single and simple issue present to his
mind, he naturaUy does not even touch that aspect of the
Assyrian enigma which explains its evil power over God's people
and the world by theH sinful failure to be what God would have
had them be for their own happiness and humanity's good.
Thus his oracle is essentially though not superficiaUy Mes
sianic. How coiUd it be otherwise with a prophet who has a
conception of God so moraUy and spiritually majestic? For the
rest it is needless to remark that the faith of Nahum was not
falsified. Improbable as it seemed to earthly reason Hi the
height of Assyria's prosperity, that the great empire should
within haH a century crumble to pieces, and that the splendid
capital with its titanic mUitary strength and its vast commerce,
standing as it did on the great highway between east and west,
should be not merely deprived of its supremacy, but captured
and destroyed and obliterated by fire and water and time, tiU tbe
very place of it was forgotten, this — mad as it looked when
Nahum foretold it — has in the complete fulness of its terror come
true, and may be read not only in the pages of history, but stUl
more graphicaUy in the calcined, weather-worn relics of Nineveh's
long vanished greatness, that have been laid bare in the recently
discovered and partially disinterred ruins of the ancient Assyrian
capital.

HABAKKUK.
1. Name and Identity. — The name of Habakkuk is peculiar in
form, and is borne by no other person in the Old Testament.
The question has been raised whether it is originally a personal
or a symboHcal designation. Probably it is derived from a root
meaning to embrace, and is variously interpreted to signify the
beloved one, or the wrestler, or ihe comforter. Taking the last sug
gestion, Luther founds on it a finely felt characterization, which
admUably expresses the spirit of the prophet's message, H not
the etymology of the name. What Habakkuk does in his
prophecy is, he says, " to caress his people and take them Hi his
arms ; that is to say, he comforts and cheers them, as one caresses
a poor weeping chUd or fellow-creature, that it may be hushed
and contented, because it shaU soon, if God wiU, be better."
Recently the name of the seer has been connected in its Greek
form with an Assyrian word hamlakuku, the name of a plant.
In the Septuagint Habakkuk is written Ambakum, a form
derived from a Hebrew original pronounced Habbakuk, the
double b resolving itself into mb, and the harsh final k bemg
changed by assonance into m. Similar changes appear in Bab-
el-mandel for Bab-el-mandeb, and, perhaps, in Beelzebul for
Beelzebub. If our conjectures about the name are somewhat uncertain, it
is unfortunate that our information about the prophet's person
is still more vague. In the superscription of the book there is
no recital of his ancestry, such as we have in the ease of
Zephaniah, not even a patronymic or reference to his bHthplace,
and, worst of aU, no statement of the period when he emitted
his prophecy. On the other hand, he is formaUy designated the
prophet (i. 1), as is also done in the titles to the books of Haggai
and Zechariah. Though the word is used in the New Testament
with a wider range of application, it is nowhere in the Old
Testament appended to the name of any one whose proper func
tion and profession was not strictly the prophetic office.
x2

308 BOOK BY BOOK.
Therefore, although we have only one short composition from
Habakkuk, and that apparently composed to be read, not oraUy
deHvered, we may safely think of the author as one whose Hfe
was devoted to the ministry of prophecy. The concluding division
of his book is a poem, provided with metrical or musical direc
tions and notes, exactly similar to those used in the Psalter, and
clearly indicating that the piece was set to be sung with musical
accompaniment in the Temple worship. From the phrase, on my
stringed instruments, used in the terminal instruction (Hi. 19), it
is held that he was a Levite, and occupied some office in connec
tion with the service of praise. This belief finds either a dubious
confirmation, or more likely an ancient echo, in the statement
inserted Hi the superscription of the story of Bel and tbe Dragon
in the version of the Septuagint in Origen's " Tetrapla," that
Habakkuk was "the son of Joshua, of the tribe of Levi." It
is very far from certain that the Temple choH and orchestra
consisted of Levites alone, and eminently unhkely at this early
date. A very simUar statement terminates the poem ascribed to
Hezekiah (Isa. xxxviii. 20) on occasion of his mUaeulous recovery
from a sickness that seemed to be unto death. Moreover, the
acknowledged state of the Hebrew text suggests hesitation in
building large inferences on such a small basis as the letter
which represents the pronoun. Nor would dogmatism be prudent
in view of the possibility that the musical setting of this magnifi
cent poem does not date back to its first pubhcation, but was the
outcome of a later and Hturgical desHe to make devotional use
of an expression of faith and hope men would not -willingly let
die, or leave unused in times of national need. Besides these
vague possibilities, there is no further biographical matter to be
gleaned in the pages of the prophecy. Tradition, Jewish and
Christian, has plenty to teU us, but it is either, for the most part,
allegory and devout fancy, or baseless and sometimes manifestly
false legend. For instance, he was employed to convey food in
a miraculous fashion to Daniel in the Hons' den. He was son
of the lady of Shunem, to whom Elisha promised that she should
embrace a son (2 Kings iv. 16) ; or, again, the watchman set
(Isa. xxi. 6) to look out for tokens of the fall of Babylon. He
was born at Bethzocher, removed before the destruction of
Jerusalem to Ostracine, died two years prior to the return of the
exUes, and was buried at KeUah, in Judah, or, according to
another tradition, at Chukkok, in Naphtali. The human mind
does not wUlingly accept the principle, that, where we have not
knowledge, the fact of ignorance is better than the pretence of
information.

HABAKKUK. 309
2. Date. — The date of the prophecy cannot be fixed with pre
cision. Neither in the book, nor anywhere else in the Old
Testament, have we any statement on the point, nor any historical
aUusion sufficiently detaUed to enable us to draw a positive con
clusion. But while minute definition is out of the question, we
can say with much certainty that the book belongs to the closing
decades of the seventh century, which witnessed the decUne and
faU of the Assyrian empUe. For in its pages Nineveh has van
ished and Babylon takes possession of the stage. Indeed we
may almost venture to affirm that the event which dominates
the thought and emotion of the book is precisely the imposing
spectacle of the transference of the world's sovereignty from the
capital on the Tigris to the mighty city of the Euphrates. The
problem of the prophecy is the part to be played in the fortunes
of mankind, and especiaUy the influence to be exerted on Israel's
career, by this new, terrible, and unexpected arbiter of human
destiny. In the absence of indisputable statements, the book
has had dates assigned to it ranging over more than a century,
but reasonable conjectures concentrate themselves within the
period indicated.
Three theories hold the field at the present moment, though
the issue promises to He between the second and third. The
book belongs either to the close of Manasseh's reign (b.c 650 —
640), or to the tune of Josiah's great reform (b.c 630 — 620), or
to the early years of Jehoiakim (b.c 608 — 600). To decide
between these rival opinions quite a number of considerations
are adduced, of which many are indecisive, a few possess some
weight, but none is quite conclusive. Jewish tradition, which
assigns the book to the age of Manasseh, amounts to nothing.
Neither does its place Hi tbe canon determine anything. The
fact that the prophecy terminates in a hymn, prepared and
arranged to be rendered musicaUy in the Temple worship, is held
to' exclude the times of Manasseh and Jehoiakim, and to indicate
the era of Josiah's reformation. But, not to rest upon the reform
ascribed to Manasseh (2 Chron. xxxiii. 15 — 16), the worship of
Jehovah, though corrupted, was not abolished in either period,
and, as has aHeady been pointed out, the musical setting of
Habakkuk's poem is hardly a satisfactory basis for argument
about the author's age, anymore than about his personal circum
stances. A Hne of proof has been led, with a good deal of confi
dence, founded on certain similarities of idea and wording between
Habakkuk and other prophets. The chief passages adduced
are these. It is argued that Hab. U. 20 is the model of Zeph.
i. 7, and that Jer. iv. 13, v. 6, are echoes of Hab. i. 8. Now
these passages, of whieh Habakkuk is held to be the original,

310 BOOK BY BOOK.
belong to the prophecies promulgated during the days of Josiah'
Hi aU likelihood in the opening years of his reform. This wo Id
seem to exclude tbe Jehoiakim date, and between the two earHer
it would rather favour the Manasseh theory, in whose time,
moreover, we are told that prophets pronounced just such oracles
of evil as this (2 Kings xxi. 10 — 15).
But of late years, reasoning based on assumed Hterary rela
tionship has been gravely discredited, and in the present case
the evidence is sHght and far from sufficient to establish either
priority, or the bare fact of actual indebtedness, while if Manas-
seh's age had its harbingers of doom, there were certainly as
many in the later decades of this fateful century (Jeremiah,
Zephaniah, Huldah, &c). Against a very early date it is urged,
that by his use of the phrase in your days (i. 5), the prophet fixes
the Chaldean invasion within the Uf etime of his own generation,
and as be addresses not the infants but the adults of his time,
that aUows us an interval of not more than twenty or thirty
years between prediction and fulfilment. That this is a fair
estimate seems clear from passages of a simUar description (Joel
i. 2 ; Jer. xvi. 9 ; Ezek. xii. 25). The time of Manasseh is, there
fore, put out of the question, and we must date our prophecy not
earlier than B.C. 630. Fault can hardly be found fairly with this
logic by those whose theory of prophecy permits them to reason
from the historical fulfilment back to the announcement. But
apart from definitely tuned predictions, such a Hue of reasoning
seems at least precarious in the light of ascertained facts, and in
view of the subordinate place expressly assigned to the element
of time in the dehvery of prophecy (1 Peter i. 11).
At the same time, if the argument is questionable Hi form,
the conclusion is probably sound. Certainly the prophet's use
of the phrase proves that he felt the disaster of Judsea imminent,
as he equally clearly presents the downfall of Babylon in the
remote future (ii. 3). A clue might have been hoped for from
the picture of Judah's condition in i. 2 — 4. H the violence, law
lessness, and paralysis of justice refer, as some hold, not without
plausible grounds (compare i. 13; H. 4, 8, 17), to injuries inflicted
by the Chaldeans, then clearly chapters ii. and Hi. depict accom
plished facts, and we must date our prophecy in the time of
Jehoiakim, and late in his reign rather than early. But the
majority of interpreters are agreed that the verses in question
depict internal corruptions, not external injuries, and that aU
that foUows is future, is indeed the punitive sequel of present sin.
This is in aU HkeHhood the true scope of the passage, and it
deprives it of any defining value, for the dark picture is applic
able to periods in the reigns of each of the three monarchs in

HABAKKUK. 311
question. It does, perchance, teU against the second reformed
section of Josiah's reign, but it would be quite compatible with
the long years of bitter and only haH-successful struggle to
introduce and establish the royal programme of reHgious reform
and rectification of old abuses. The most significant indication
of date is the fashion in which Habakkuk presents the Chaldeans
as a new and unf amUiar power on the stage of western history
(i. 5 — 11). His graphic portrait may of course be thrown into
its peculiar form solely for artistic reasons, but the impression
remains that it reflects an actual novelty of the people portrayed.
That being so, we must not date our book later than the opening
of Jehoiakim's reign. The prophet further speaks of the Chal
dean tide of conquest as a thing marveUous, unexpected, and
hardly to be beUeved.
We must take care not to push the wording of prophetic
oratory too far, and it is, therefore, hardly a legitimate inference
to count this language as conclusive against the later date. It
may be admitted that it is most perfectly exphcable, if we have
to do with the era of Josiah's reform, but it might quite weU be
used at any time prior to the great battle of Carchemish. During
the years of Assyria's decHne under the attacks of the Medes
and Chaldeans, its hold on the West had relaxed, and Judea had
begun to breathe freely, to recover materiaUy, and to dream of
freedom. But Egypt also had meantime revived and begun to
dream of empUe. Thus at the time when Nineveh feU, not
Babylon, but Egypt was Judsea's dread, as it marched north
wards to attack its old enemy Assyria (2 Kings xxui. 29). Hence
the disastrous interference of Josiah, and the defeat of Megiddo.
On, therefore, to the crushing defeat of Egypt by the Chaldeans
at Carchemish (b.c 605), it must have appeared to Judsea that
the empire of the world belonged to the near and dreaded Colossus
of the West, and not to the new unproved power in the far East.
The language of Habakkuk may have been naturaUy employed
at any tune up to that decisive conflict, but not subsequent to it,
for that would oe to blindly treat a flight of inspired imagina
tion as if it were a cold, artificial piece of political logic. The
prophecy of Habakkuk is an intuition, not an argument ; an
impassioned achievement of religious faith, not a statesman's
calculated forecast.
We are thus left uncertain between the dates of Josiah's
reform and Jehoiakim's accession to the throne. A decision on
external grounds seems to be impossible, but a personal verdict
may be reached according to the impression , we form of the
dominant mood and ultimate motive of the book. If we detect
in it the impatient grief of a noble reform delayed, foiled, or at

312 BOOK BY BOOK.
least paralysed by obdurate resistance, driving the prophet m
despair to look for an external, punitive, Divine solution, then
we shall picture to ourselves the prophecy born out of the aspira
tions, struggles, and disappointments of Josiah's early attempts
at reformation. If, on the contrary, we feel ourselves in contact
with the disheartenment of a man who looks back at the ruins
of a brief but promising period of internal reform and national
prosperity, and looks forward with dismay to a future of darker
threatening than ever before, and in his extremity cries to God
for light in the great darkness, we shall Hi that case place
Habakkuk among the faithful hearts whose fate it was to behold
the bright promise of Josiah's reign quenched in the gloom of
his untimely death, and to witness the reversal by Jehoiakim of
all his righteous and beneficent reforms. Between these poles
opinions wiU continue to osciUate, but that somewhere within
their limits (b.c 630 — 600) faU the activity and authorship of
Habakkuk, is a conviction that promises to secure the common
consent of modern scholarship.
3. Analysis of Contents. — An unusuaUy clear and continuous
line of thought may be discerned running through this prophecy.
There are three chief divisions. We have, first, the Divine
design to raise up the Chaldean empire as a scourge for men's
sins (i.); second, its ultimate overthrow and replacement by God's
kingdom (ii.) ; third, the certainty of this happy issue in the
grandeur of the Divine nature (Hi.). These ruling ideas are
worked out in the foUowing fashion. The seer, confronted by
the spectacle of violence, corruption, and injustice, obdurate and
incurable, demands almost passionately the Divine intervention
(i. 1 — 4). God answers by announcing speedy chastisement in
the Chaldean career of conquest, rude, resistless, unmerciful,
and finally sacrUegious (i. 5 — 11). Awed and sadly the prophet
accepts the necessity of the Chaldean discipHne, but his sense of
the repugnance between God's holy nature and the brutahty of
the scourge He employs convinces him instinctively that Baby
lonian conquest is not God's last word in the world's story, and
so he asks for further light (i. 12 — 17).
Waiting thus on Divine guidance he receives and is ordered
to record a vision of the developments of time (ii. 1- — 3). Doubt
as to the issue is destroyed in the assurance that the future
belongs to the righteous who possess God in Hving faith, not to
the godless tyranny which, unrestrained by principle, shaU be
driven by lust of conquest, as by love of drink, to excess that
breeds its own ruin. This law of history is expanded in five
woes, of which the first shows how oppression creates insurrec
tion, the second how Ul-gotten gains turn against its owner, the

HABAKKUK. 313
thHd enunciates the futility of all godless civilisation, the fourth
the demoraHsing effect on tyrants of an immoral rule, and the
last finds the root of the ruin in the impossibility of building up
an abiding social order on aught save the knowledge and obedi
ence of the living God (ii. 4 — 20). This course of thought has
brought the seer to recognise in the nature of God the final
solution of aU problems, and has stirred his spirit to an intense
realisation of the Divine presence in aU human affairs past,
present, future. He beholds God, as in the days of old, emerging
from the world unseen, marching gloriously through the earth,
bending nature, nations, history to His majestic designs, righting
aU wrongs, overturning every oppression, annihilating the most
formidable resistance, and triumphantly establishing his kingdom
on earth. In tbe splendour of that certainty of faith the prophet
can possess his soul in patience, and aHeady, even amid the
coUapse of aU earthly props and solaces, he wUl rejoice in the
Lord and joy in the God of his salvation (Hi. 1 — 19).
4. Literary and Ethical Character. — The Book of Habakkuk
is beyond most prophecies a work of art, finely planned and
exquisitely articulated, in which every part is organicaUy con
nected with the rest, and has its proper place in the natural and
vital progression of thought and emotion. The genuineness has
scarcely been questioned, though quite recently an attempt has
been made to detach the last four woes and the poem, and to
ascribe these to post-ExUic times. The intimate unity of the
book has not, however, been so universaUy recognised. Various
sections of it have been assigned to various points Hi the prophet's
career. The motive has been the exigency of theory of date, and
it has not been perceived that what made dismemberment easy
should have made it impossible to a true critical instinct, to wit, ,
that perfect articulation and finish of individual part which is
the most absolute proof of organic unity in the whole. In truth,
the very part that superficially seems most detached and separable
— the terminal poem — is most vitally connected and essential.
For the last words of the woe on Babylon anticipate just such a
theophany as is presented in the poem, and that gathers up in
itseH precisely the two unharmonized notes Hi the prophecy —
the perplexed pain at the thought of Israel's renewed humiliation,
the comforting reassurance of her enemy's ultimate overthrow,
takes them up, gives them unrivaUed emotional expression,
hushes them in the overmastering conception of God's majestic
sovereignty of history, and so blends their harmonies and dis
cords in the unison of an awed but absolute reliance Hi the
strength and goodness of Jehovah.
The style is distinguished by graphic imagery, dramatic pre-

314

BOOK BY BOOK.

sentation, vivid description, rare lyrical beauty, and sublime
conception. The combination of minute artistic workmanship
with undiminished power and freshness is speciaUy notable Hi
the poem and in the rhythmic structure of the woes in the
second chapter. There are several pecuHar words, and the text
is probably defective in a few passages, particularly in the
psalm. It is natural to assume that the prophecy was prepared
not for oral delivery but for written publication (H. 2). Indeed
it is so subjective in tone, and has such affinity with psalms of
spHitual conflict, such as the seventy-third, that one is tempted
to doubt whether it was in its initiation planned for the nation,
and is not rather the unrestrained utterance of a personal soul-
struggle for faith and hope in a time of heart-breaking darkness.
The prophetic contents of the book hardly need comment.
Contrary to human expectation Jerusalem did f aU before Babylon ,
and later on that mighty empUe succumbed through the opera
tion of those eternal laws of retribution and progress discerned
by our prophet. WhUe there is no Messianic reference in a
narrow sense, Hi the truest and deepest sense the whole founda
tion of the thought of the prophecy is Messianic. The question
at stake in the world's drama presented on its stage is the future
of the kingdom of God upon earth, and the denouement is that
" the earth shall be fiUed with the knowledge of the glory of the
Lord as the waters cover the sea " (ii. 14). The theological and
religious value of the piece is very great. Light is thrown on
the methods of prophetic revelation (ii. 1,2); the ultimate laws
of poHtieal and social evolution (H. 4—20) ; the moral and
reHgious aspect of secular affaHs (i. 12). Indeed the book is
fuU of large conceptions of history, fine philosophical reason
ing, subtle ethical analysis, and a superb faith in God and
righteousness. Subject to the limitations of his place in human progress and
the development of revelation, this prophet may claim to be the
apostle of the great ultimate fact of faith, and of its sovereign
part Hi the evolution of human destiny (U. 4). This key-note,
aUke of his prophecy and of his personal experience, has been
taken up and expanded in the well-known New Testament
adaptation, reached its full rights at the Reformation, and in
the creeds and life of evangelical Christendom will doubtless
continue to be illustrated in ever wider issues on to the world's
end.

ZEPHANIAH.
1. Authorship. — The name of Zephaniah has a special aptness
in relation to his message and office, but the appeUation is by no
means pecuHar to the prophet. It occurs of several other per
sonages in the Old Testament (2 Kings xxv. 18 ; Jer. xxi. 1, &c. ;
Zech. vi. 10; 1 Chron. vi. 36). In the Septuagint it appears as
Sophonias. The word is a compound of the Divine name, and a
root meaning to hide, and particularly with the effect of shelter
ing or preserving the object hidden. It is not unreasonable to
suspect a reference to the suggestion of his name in the prophet's
use of the phrase, "Ye shaU be bid in the day of the Lord's
anger " (u. 3). Jerome suggests an alternative interpretation,
resting on another root, which throws into relief the prophet's
function as a watchman or searcher into the purposes of Provi
dence. The previous explanation is the more probable.
Of the man we know little beyond his date and his pedigree,
of which the latter is given at considerable length in the super
scription of his book. This is unusual. In the case of Zecha
riah the title goes back to the grandfather, but the Hneage of
Zephaniah is traced to the fourth ancestor. He is the "son of
Cushi, the son of Gedaliah, the son of Amariah, the son of
Hezekiah " (i. 1). The reason of this exceptional fulness can
hardly be to distinguish him from a contemporary priest Zepha
niah, frequently mentioned by Jeremiah. It is more likely that
the prophet's Hneage was a distinguished one, and that the
recital proceeds as far as and stops in Hezekiah, because of the
crowning lustre of this ancestor. The interval is short, but not
too short to aUow of the ancestor Hi question bemg King Heze
kiah, and it is natural to find in this the motive of the lengthy
pedigree. But the name was probably not uncommon. So far
as we know the king had no sons save Manasseh. And surely
in this Hst he would be described as "king" or "king of Judah,"
for the fact of the designation following another name in close
proximity does not account for its absence, since a Hebrew writer
would npt consider the repetition a hterary blemish.

316 BOOK BY BOOK.
The point is not one for dogmatic assertion, and we must re
main in Tin-willing uncertainty whether in Zephaniah we have
or have not a prophet of tbe blood royal and of the seed of
David. Tradition represents him as of Mount Sarabatha, of tbe
tribe of Simeon, and his grave is assigned to Geba in Lebanon.
An apocryphal book circulated in the early Church under his
name. Unfortunately neither the historical books of the Old
Testament nor his own prophecy furnish any biographical
details. AU we can assume from his writing with moral cer
tainty is that he prophesied, wrote, and published his book in
Jerusalem. 2. Date. — The title, whieh is singularly fuU and reliable, places
the prophet's activity " Hi the days of Josiah, the son of Amon,
king of Judah" (i. 1). The reign of Josiah was a long one.
extending from B.C. 640 to 608. There is nothing in the book to
justify the faintest suspicion that it does not belong to this period.
Neither is there, unhappily, anything that enables us with
certainty to define the partieular portion of these thirty years
that witnessed the publication of Zephaniah' s prophecy. The
conception of the oracle carries with it a certain universahty
that excludes concrete treatment and historical allusion. The
great judgment threatening the world, which is the writer's
theme, is indeed embodied in the imagery of war and conquest
(i. 13, 16; ii. 12; iii. 15), but there is nowhere any delineation
of the Divinely designated scourge, nor passing hint that might
mark a definite personality. This striking vagueness means
either that the prophet spoke in a moment of panic in tbe pre
sence of a palpable menace of invasion, or that the plan of his
oracle made him deliberately throw the earthly minister of ven
geance into the background, that the picture might be fiUed with
the presence of the Divine Judge Himself.
If the prophecy were prompted by an actuaUy impending
danger, it cannot have been Assyria or Egypt, since both are
represented as sufferers. The instrument of retribution must
have been the new Chaldean power, which was slowly but surely
rising on the decay of Assyria during Josiah's reign, or else the
terrifying Hruption into Asia and Palestine of the Scythian
hordes, which took place between b.c 630 — 620, and is asserted
to be the peril that lends a lurid colouring to the early prophecies
of Jeremiah. In view of the studied indefiniteness of Zepha-
niah's drafting, there is no need to find the personal instigation
to his prophecy in any single one of contemporary causes of
anxiety and bodeful anticipation. The ultimate inspUation of
his action hes deeper, and is not to be sought in the realm of
sense, while the apocalyptic character of his message is not the

ZEPHANIAH. 317
reflex of an age of panic, but is rather the proper outcome of the
mental and moral idiosyncrasy of the messenger.
The prediction of the destruction of Nineveh (H. 13 — 15) does
not help us to a more definite date, for it is probable that the
Assyrian capital did not faU in b.c 625, but about the close of
Josiah's reign. Perhaps the general manner of the reference
suggests that the city was then not actuaUy threatened, while
the absence of rancour, in contrast with the warm denunciation
of Moab and Ammon (ii. 8 — 10), breathes of the period, subse
quent to the era of Nahum, when the cruel grip of Assyria on
Palestine had become relaxed. There are many similarities of
thought and expression between Zephaniah and the early pro
phecies of Jeremiah, who began his career in the thirteenth
year of Josiah, but to determine the precise relation between
them is an enterprise too precarious to inspire any confidence in
the result. According to the historical books the reign of Josiah
was marked by one great outstanding event. The reformation
of religion, carried out by the king, divided his reign into two
periods strongly contrasted. Such, however, is the complexion
of Zephaniah's book, that we can discern no direct reference to
this epoch-making movement, nor can we show that the pro
phecy bears in an unmistakable manner the characteristic colour
of one or other of these two periods.
The one safe inference might seem to be, that the book was
not produced in the excitement of the reformation (b.c 622), but
either considerably before or after. In other words, it belongs
to the period of preparation, and is a threatening summons
to amendment (H. 1 — 3), or it pertains to the era of reaction,
and is faith's refuge from despair in face of the manUest faUure
of aU hope of adequate reform (iii. 1 — 10). This narrowing of
the issue has not controUed critics, so that we have the book
assigned to various points during the king's rule, e.g. the begin
ning of his reign, the commencement of the reform, soon after
that event, and towards the close of his Hfe. It is enough to
notice the arguments only so far as they tend to place the work
prior to or posterior to the reform.
3. Description of the Period. — In the foreground of the prophet's
picture of his age, we are confronted with a luxuriant growth of
idolatry, corrupt worship, indifference, violence, and injustice
(i. 4 — 13 ; iii. 1—7), that seems to clash with the description in
Kings of the purged and justly governed people after b.c 622,
and tallies with Jeremiah's pictures of unreformed Israel, when
he began to prophesy. But both from Kings, Jeremiah, and
the subsequent history, we know that these evils were never
quite eradicated, quickly sprang up again, and persisted on to

318 BOOK BY BOOK.
the faU of Jerusalem. That the corruption described is not that
which existed previous to the beginning of the king's reforming
campaign is thought to be indicated by Zephaniah's use of the
expression, / will cut off the remnant of Baal (i. 4). The phrase,
however, comparing it with the paraUel idiom, and the name of the
Chemarim, is more probably intended to express utter extermina
tion, and therefore decides nothing.
EquaUy inconclusive is the contention that the reference to the
priests doing violence to the law (Hi. 4) must be explained by
the discovery of the book of the law (2 Kings xxii.), and proves
our prophecy subsequent to the reform. The mention of the
king's sons among classes of the community on whom the judg
ment shaU faU, if it necessarily means Josiah's chUdren and
involves public wrong on their part, would compel us to date
the prophecy late, for in B.C. 622 the oldest was but twelve years
of age, and could hardly even then be personaUy participant in
national guUt. But conceivably the author's purpose is to point
not to the victims' UI desert, but to the comprehensiveness of the
judgment. Moreover, the reference is in aU Hkehhood a general
designation of all the princes of the blood royal (2 Kings xi. 2 ;
2 Chron. xxii. 11) attached to the court, or resident in Jerusalem.
The point may afford a slight presumption in favour of the later
date, but that is the utmost that can be said of it, and indeed of
every other consideration that has been put toward.
In this absence of material evidence, we must be content with
the larger era named in the title. Or the reader must decide for
himself the narrower issue formulated above by the impression
made on his mind as to the nature of the informing spirit and
tone of the prophecy. If the prophecy sound to his ear like a
stern trumpet caU, meant to terrify the party of resistance and
rouse the party of reform, he wiU locate it in the beginning of
Josiah's reign. If it stir with the enthusiasm of a great move
ment in operation, if it reflect the Hkeness of a society corrupt
but bettering, then he wiU date it during the reform. If it
breathe despaU of the nation and contemplate only the salvation
of a remnant (ii. 3, 7, &c), H it betray the disappointment of
fondly cherished hopes (Hi. 2, 7) and the abandonment of aU
faith in the present (Hi. 8), then we shaU recognise one of those
prophetic voices (2 Kings xxiH. 26, 27) that in the evening of
Josiah's reign proclaimed the inadequacy of his reform, or of
any reform, to reverse the downward course of Israel's fortunes,
and so sadly but trustfuUy turned theH eyes to the future and
to God.
4. Genuineness. — The genuineness of the book has scarcely
been questioned, and the unity of the piece is generaUy admitted.

ZEPHANIAH. 319
A few scholars propose to divide it into two or three oraoles
emitted at different times, but the composition is evidently an
organic whole, put together on a single occasion, though of
course it may sum up the teaching of a protracted ministry.
Sharply severed divisions are not to be distinguished in the
structure, but there seems to be a natural and progressive un
folding of the writer's thoughts. His theme is nothing less than
the consummation of the world's history. He develops it in
three stages. There is, first, the great judgment upon sin
(chap, i.) ; second, tbe salvation of a faithful remnant amid the
crash of nations (chap, ii.) ; third, the completion of judgment
and restoration of God's kingdom upon earth (chap. Hi.). The
prophet perceives the imminent end of the present age of human
sin and divine patience ; final judgment is decreed, it faUs with
destructive force on aH classes of reHgious offenders in Jerusalem
(i. 2 — 7). Every form of sin in every quarter — luxury, violence,
dishonesty, indiff erence — shaU be reached, and receive inevitable
retribution (i. 8 — 13). For near is the great day of judgment,
terrible, resistless, not to be bought off, universal, and final
(i. 14 — 18). Nevertheless repentance, sincere recourse to God,
meekness, and righteousness are possible, and shaU secure for
the faithful a safe hiding-place in the coming judgment (H. 1 —
3). Philistia desolated, depopulated, falls to the possession of
the loyal remnant of God's people (H. 4 — 7). Moab and Ammon,
who rejoiced in Israel's calamity, shall be brought to ruin and
inherited by the faithful, whose God they defied, but who now
makes an end of aU false gods, and conquers to Himself the
worship of the world (H. 8 — 11). In the distant west Ethiopia
shaU be devastated with the sword, and in the far east Nineveh
the proud, the defiant mistress of the world, shaU be reduced to
utter desolation (ii. 12 — 15). Jerusalem, persistently disobe
dient, spite of Divine faithfulness and discipline, remains un
ashamed, obdurate, and impenitent (iii. 1 — 5). Judgments on.
other peoples, meant to warn her, proving futile, force on the
advent of the final judgment, which in God's inscrutable mercy
issues Hi the regeneration of the peoples and tbe restoration of
Israel (Hi. 6 — 10). Israel humbled, purged, sanctified, shaU
rejoice over her deliverance, God's presence Hi her midst, and
her perpetual security (Hi. 11 — 15). Happy and strong is this
renewed Israel, with God joying in her love regained, completing
her restoration, and fulfilling her destiny of world-wide goodness
and glory (Hi. 16 — 20).
5. Style and Theme. — The prophecy of Zephaniah is pecuHar in
style, matter, and spirit. Consequently the book has hardly
received due appreciation at the hands of readers or common-

320 BOOK BY BOOK.
tators. The composition is said to lack originality, and the
writer is accused of leaning too much on his predecessors. The
criticism is superficially correct, but the judgment is not sympa
thetic enough, to bring out the truth. So far as the observation
is justified by facts, it is due to this, that Zephaniah, in an
abstract fashion, picks out and enforces just the two or three
central dogmas of aU prophecy, and so wakes echoes on every
hand, not only with precursors, however, but equaUy with suc
cessors. Certainly his language exhibits a remarkable number
of reminiscences of earHer writers, but probably an exaggerated
estimate of the amount has gone abroad, and in some eases the
drift of criticism tends to prove him not the copier but the model
{e.g. i. 7, compared with Hab. H. 10 ; Joel i. 15 ; Is. xxxiv. 6 ;
Is. xiU. 3).
For the rest his style has not the lyrical elevation, the speaking
imagery, the impassioned power of some of his coUeagues, but
be is a thinker of another mould, and his style has the quaHties
proper to his thought. He is systematic, massive, comprehen
sive ; abstract and dogmatic in execution rather than concrete
and historical ; nevertheless clear and flowing in expression,
forcible and weighty in statement, and full of a restrained but
strong moral heat and religious ardour.
His theme appears to be judgment, but on closer inspection
that is seen to be but a means to the real end and goal of the
prophet's hopes, to wit, the creation of the kingdom of God
among men. The judgment is, therefore, conceived not as an
outburst of Divine anger, not as mere retribution on sin, but as
a purging and remedial process destined to issue Hi redemption.
Traces of Old Testament limitation of idea there are throughout,
but the prophet's conception should win our admiration for its
large-hearteu comprehensiveness. As all nations are included
iu the judgment, so all peoples are embraced in the regeneration.
If the heavenly kingdom has as its centre Zion and its kernel
Israel, nevertheless its citizenship covers mankind, and its cH-
cumference is wide as the world. Preliminary fulfilments of
the prophet's predictions history speedily furnished, but the
vision he saw and the truths he taught will not be exhausted tUl
God's government of men in its twofold aspect of judgment and
of mercy be complete.

HAGGAI
1 . Personal Traditions. — The series of minor prophets is closed
by a group of three post-Exilic writers, of whom the first in order
and the earliest in actual date is Haggai. The appeUation is.
pecuHar to the prophet, though it is very closely akin to the
names Haggi (Gen. xlvi. 16 ; Num. xxvi. 15) and Haggiah
(1 Chron. vi. 30). It is derived from a root descriptive of excited
or rapid movement, such as dancing, which came to be specially
used of the celebration of religious festivals. If it is not an
abbreviation, then this particular formation bears the meaning
festal, and may have been attached to a child born on the anni
versary of some great reHgious feast. It is less likely to be
connected with the Cheering character of Haggai's message. A
very probable suggestion, on the other hand, is that the name is
a contraction of Hagariah {Jehovah gvrdeth), as the Hebrew of
Zacchams is of Zechariah. In the Book of Ezra Haggai is men
tioned along with Zechariah, as the prophets who stirred the
people to the rebuUding of the temple ; and his name occurs Hi
the Apocrypha under the form Aggeus.
The title of his book describes him simply as Haggai the prq-
phet, without name of father, statement of bUthplace, or any
other detaU. In this absence of information, founding probably
on the phrase the Lord's messenger (i. 13, compared with Mai.
ui. 1; H. 7), devout imagination early suggested that Haggai
and Malachi, together with John the Baptist, were not ordinary
men, but angels in human form. Tradition, both Jewish and
Christian, has much to teU of our prophet. According to the
Talmud it was he who indicated the site of the former altar amid
the temple ruins, who readjusted the orders of the priesthood,
who gave permission for the law to be written in the Assyrian
script, &e. Christian writers record that he was born in Babylon,
went as a young man to Jerusalem, and was buried by the tombs
of the priests.
It is vain to attempt to extract anything rehable from such
Y

322 BOOK BY BOOK.
sources, and we are relegated to conjectures, more or less pro
bable, based on the contents of his prophecy. From that we
should conclude that he was certainly one of the exiles who
returned under the decree of Cyrus ; that he was possibly a
priest, and probably a very old man, who had passed througb
the destruction of Jerusalem, survived the ExUe, and played an
important part in the Restoration. His advanced age is inferred,
fancHuUy perhaps, from his Hterary style, but more forcibly
from the personal turn given to his appeal to those who had seen
the first Temple, from the very brief duration (four months) of
bis recorded activity, and from the fact that two years later his
(younger ?) contemporary Zechariah appears as chief of the pro
phets in Jerusalem.
On the ground of stylistic affinities, along with other cHcum
stances, Haggai has been suggested as the author of some of the
older portions of the Book of Ezra. In the Septuagint, Syriac,
and Vulgate his name, in association with that of Zechariah, is
found in the superscriptions of certam psalms (notably the psalms
numbered cxxxviii., cxlvi. — cxlix. Hi the Enghsh Psalter), but
the ascription varies, and is wantmg in some MSS., and probably
means merely that in certain quarters these psalms were asso
ciated with the writings, or the devotional use of the writings, of
these prophets.
2. Date and Character of the Period. — The recorded prophetic
action of Haggai occurred in the second year (b.c 520) of Darius,
son of Hystaspes, who must be clearly distinguished from Darius
Nothus, whose reign feU a whole century later. Some sixteen
years before, the return from ExUe had taken place (b.c 536),
and, according to the traditional interpretation of the difficult
narrative found in the Book of Ezra, the foundation of the new
temple was laid early Hi the foUowing year. Little progress was
made with the building ere the work had to be abandoned, owing
to the intrigues of jealous neighbours at the imperial court. An
altar had, indeed, been at once inaugurated and the routine of
sacrificial worship estabhshed, but the temple edifice was left
untouched during the reigns of Cyrus, Cambyses, and tbe usurper
Pseudo-Smerdis. It is, indeed, even a question whether the
ruins had been at this early period dealt with to such an extent
as to permit of a formal foundation laying. There is much reason
to suppose that this ceremony only took place in the second year
of Darius (compare Hag. H. 15, 18 ; Zech. iv. 9 ; viii. 9), and that
the description in Ezra (Hi. 8 — 13) reaUy applies to this event.
In any case the position of things was profoundly dangerous
and discreditable to the newly founded community at Jerusalem.
The enthusiasm that had steeled the exUes to the sacrifices, and

HAGGAI. 323
stirred them to face the toUs and hazards of the return, was the
inspiring thought of rebuilding their holy and beautiful house
on Mount Zion, and of once more finding in the restored Temple
a centre of national life, and faith, and hope. The abandonment
of the enterprise, under external opposition and personal dis-
heartenment, meant practicaUy the acknowledgment of political
impotence and the renunciation of theH patriotic and reHgious
destiny. That the work was one of immense difficulty, that they
were few in number and poor in resources, that discouraging and
unforeseen obstacles supervened, these things were theH misfor
tune, and not theH fault. But that they supinely resigned
themselves to defeat, that they too readily interpreted difficulties
into insuperable barriers, or that, actuaUy checkmated for the
tune, they too easUy sat down under defeat, and turned to an
exclusive and speedUy aU-engrossing concern for their own
material prosperity, these symptons of spiritual decline and
demoraUsation were at once theH disgrace and their warning.
No doubt there was much to excuse and account for this
sudden collapse of zeal and recoU from lofty aspHation to faith
less seH-seeking. Like other enthusiasts, they had taken up
theH high caUing with genuine devotion, but with many a fond
Ulusion. They had invested theH eager hopes in a difficult
enterprise, and had prematurely promised themselves the harvest
of rich returns, discounting a future that was much farther off
than they dreamt of. The glowing imagery and poetic imagina
tion of an Isaiah, guaranteeing the levelling of mountains and
the filling up of vaUeys ; beholding God himseH bearing them
on eagle's wings over every obstacle; picturing Jerusalem
restored and. the Temple rebuilt for forgiven Israel by the labour
and largess of heathen peoples and their monarchs— these and
simUar outbursts of prophetic faith they had taken HteraUy, and
rpckoned on victory without conflict, achievement without weary
waiting, and the immediate reahsation of the prophet's gorgeous
visions of Zion's Messianic glory and triumph.
Instead, they found themselves, a smaU and despised colony.
confronted with the heart-breaking task and stupendous toU of
rebuilding ruins, reclaiming a soU spoUed by neglect, hindered
and thwarted by petty enmities on every side, deceived by large
imperial promises that were forgotten, or delayed by official
indolence, or intercepted by the intrigues of rivals, with no
prospects before them but a slow, desperate, and unaided hand-
to-hand combat with untoward circumstances, adverse surround
ings, and the depression of a mean and sordid existence. Human
nature is but human. Reaction was inevitable. No wonder
that enthusiasm gave way to despondency in face of such ob-
Y 2

324 BOOK BY BOOK.
staeles, whUe spiritual hfe became crushed under, the burden of
grinding material toU, and so, partly of necessity and partly of
demoraUsation,. the people having ceased to build the house of
God, drifted slowly away from higher purposes, and threatened
to sink to the level of the people of the land, satisfied to secure a
physical subsistence, and forgetful of theH Divme vocation and
providential career.
3. The Prophet's Message. — At this critical point Hi the history
of the restored community the prophet Haggai appeared on the
scene, and to him, Hi concert with Zechariah (Ezra v. 1 — 2 ;
vi. 14), belongs the credit of having recalled Israel to the path
of duty and the ministry of revelation. The message of Haggai
is dHected to one definite purpose from beginning to end : to
rouse the people to resume the erection of the sanctuary, to keep
them steadfast to the work against every possible discourage
ment, and to inspHe them with an animating faith in the inner
grandeur of the material undertaking on which they were
engaged. Whether he chose his time and course quite inde
pendently, or in consultation with Zerubbabel, the governor,
and Joshua, the high priest, stimulated by the fact that under
the new emperor cHcumstances favoured the attempt, are points
that must stand on their own inherent probabUity.
The Book of Haggai consists of three prophetic appearances,
falling respectively in the sixth, seventh, and ninth months of
the second year of Darius. The prophet pUlories the people's
acquiescent procrastination of the duty of rearing and finishing
the Temple, while they themselves (1 Chron. xvH. 1) dwell in
weU-panelled houses. He seizes on that very element Hi their
condition which had been theH chief excuse for delay, the poor
ness of the material progress already made, and turns it into a
stimulus to energetic action. Boldly he declares that a blight
and canker of dissatisfaction must rest on aU they do, so long as
the central element of moral and material prosperity is neglected,
and with promises of happier days and more rewardful industry,
he urges them to concentrate the whole energies and resources of
the community on the restoration of the Temple (i. 1 — 11).
The appeal pierces the conscience and convinces the judgment
of the Httle colony. The prophet assures them that in their new
obedience to the Divine wiU they shaU have the presence with
them and the succour of Jehovah, and twenty-four days later
operations are commenced on the Temple ruins (i. 12 — 15).
Before a month had elapsed a moral danger menaced the under
taking. With natural retrospective partiahty, with no iU inten
tions, but with the most disheartening effects on the workers,
the old people, who remembered the splendour of the former

HAGGAI. 325
Temple (Ezra iU. 12 — 13), indulged in disparaging comparisons
between its magnificence and the poverty of its successor, doubted
whether the future could retrieve the vanished past, and ques
tioned if Israel's forfeited bHthright were not lost beyond recall.
EnergeticaUy the prophet intervenes, protests against such faith
lessness in the Divine presence and tenacity of purpose, declares
that God's promises may linger on the way, but cannot lapse on
account of man's unfaithfulness, and in view of Jehovah's power,
the changes of providence, and the certainty of Heaven's resolves,
predicts, with ringing certainty of assurance, that the future
glory of the Temple shah outshine all the wonders of the past in
the peace and perfect fruition of God's accompHshed purposes
(H. 1-9).
Two months later a fresh intervention took place. Apparently
doubts were expressed in some quarters, H the completion of the
Temple would bring the desHed and promised prosperity, which
the erection of the altar and performance of reHgious rites had
faUed to secure. Haggai, by an illustration derived from the
rules of ceremonial holiness and defilement, shows the people
that aU their previous endeavours were contaminated and robbed
of blessmg by the guUt of theH neglect of theH central and
supreme obHgation, and, assuring them that the impotence of
partial surrender to God's wiU must not be made the measure of
the possibilities of complete consecration, promises them the
progress and weU-being that had been hitherto lacking (ii. 10 —
19). Then, turning to the head and representative of the small
and unassuming theocracy, which yet held within it the promise
and potency of Heaven's best gift to men, the prophet foreteUs
the downfaU and overthrow of aU worldly powers and authori
ties, and through the Divme favour, fideHty, and unchanging
purpose of redemption, predicts the ultimate supremacy of God's
chosen servant and minister on earth (H. 20 — 23).
4. Literary and Ethical Qualities. — The language of Haggai is
simple, sober, and pure. Two or three unwonted expressions
belong rather to the -writer's individuahty than to his age. Com
pared with the picturesque imagery, glowing poetry, majestic
conceptions, and impassioned oratory of an Isaiah, his style seems
cold, threadbare, and poverty-stricken. But the comparison is
hardly just, for the purposes and cHcumstances of the speakers
are so diverse, and in aU HkeHhood theH personaHties were
equaUy contrasted. The aim of Haggai was immediate, matter-
of-fact, and cHeumscribed. The cHcumstances of the people
were reduced, their horizon narrowed, and the contents of their
national existence simplified. But it would be a mistake to
accuse our prophet of insignificance because of his composition,

326 BOOK BY BOOK.
or of superficiahty because of the character of his mission. A
prophet's historical magnitude is measured not by the Hterary
splendour of his style, but by the importance of the work that
he accomplishes.
It was an attenuated community and a contracted field on which
Haggai had to operate ; but none the less he saved his people
from moral extinction and preserved in them the kingdom of
God, just as much as any of his more heroic forerunners. His
material goal was, indeed, the erection of a temple of stone and
mortar ; but who can read his words of ethical and spiritual
anticipation (ii. 6 — 9, 20 — 23) without feeling that he valued
the building only as the shrine of the knowledge, feUowship,
and power of the Hving God of providence and history, and
recognised in their neglect or performance of this external
service Israel's abandonment of or allegiance to its high and holy
vocation as the people of God upon earth ?
He does, doubtless, exhibit marks of the limitations and
tendencies of the new epoch of Israel's history with its more
ecclesiastical development, its ceremonial and Levitical engross
ment (ii. 11 — 14), its particularistic and not altogether lovely
severance from the common sympathies and aspirations of
humanity. While we have in the import attached to the Davidic
personality of Zerubbabel a prolongation of the pre-Exilic hope,
and in the vast pictures of the world's throes that usher in the
Messianic times echoes of Isaiah's mighty dreams, we have, on
the other hand, in the prominence of the Temple building the
development of Ezekiel's priestly programme, and a preluding
warning of the inevitable narrowing of Israel's national Hfe in
the future.
Yet it was precisely in this pathway that God's purpose was
to work itseH out, and His people achieve theH redemptive
mission to mankind. It was a mingled sowing of noble and of
base, of good and of evU, and it had a mingled harvest. But,
standing away back at the beginning of that strange process,
beyond aU question the aspirations that stirred the soul of
Haggai, and the visions of glory and of peace that glow in bis
prophecies, were the seed, not of that sterUe Judaism that
rejected and refused their fulfilment, but the precursors and
harbingers of tbe true glory of the second Temple — Jesus Christ
and His kingdom of righteousness and peace.

ZECHARIAH.
1. Account of the Prophet. — The eleventh book of the minor
prophets is assigned in the title (i. 1) to a prophet caUed " Zecha
riah, the son of Berechiah, the son of Iddo»," who began his
career in the " eighth month of the second year of Darius." His
early utterances deal with the rebuUding of the Temple, and we
may therefore with absolute certainty identify him with the
Zechariah mentioned in Ezra (v. 1 ; vi. 14), as the coUeague of.
Haggai in spurring on the people to achieve this great and ardu
ous enterprise. It is true that in Ezra Zechariah is caUed " the
son of Iddo," but it is probable that this curt designation, linking
him immediately with his grandfather (cf . Gen. xxix. 5 ; 2 Kings
ix. 20), is due to the fact that Berechiah died prematurely, and
so Zechariah succeeded dUectly to the rights and dignities of his
grandfather. This presumption is confirmed by the fact, that in the table of
priestly succession in Nehemiah xii. (cf. w. 4, 16) an Iddo who
returned with Joshua from Babylon is foUowed by a Zechariah,
who can hardly be other than the author of these prophecies. That
being so, we must refuse to find in our prophet the Zechariah,
son of Jeberechiah, of Isaiah's tune (Isaiah viii. 2), or the martyr
Zechariah, whom our Lord cites as slain between the temple and
the altar (Mat. xxui. 35). But we may reasonably infer that this
prophet of the Restoration was of priestly hHth, and compara
tively a young man when he commenced his. prophetic work.
The name is one of the most common in Hebrew history, and has
been explained to mean memory of Jehovah, or who remembers
Jehovah, but the analogy of simUarly constructed names rather
points to the signification whom Jehovah remembers. Of our
prophet tradition has much to relate that is curious, but presents
nothmg quite rehable. There is a certain likelihood in the state
ments that he Hved to a great age, and was buried near to
Haggai in the priests' place of sepulture.
2. Unity of the Book. — The unity of the book, ascribed to
Zechariah, has long been contested. More than two centuries
ago the Enghsh scholar, Mede, raised the question in the interest

328 BOOK BY BOOK.
of reverence for Scripture. Remarking that in Matthew xxvii.
9, 10, a prediction is ascribed to Jeremiah that nowhere occurs
Hi his writings, but is nearly akin to the purport of Zechariah
xi. 12, 13, he argues that the inspHed evangelist's citation out
weighs Hi authority the mechanical arrangement of the Hebrew
canon, whieh may weU be, here as elsewhere, inexact in respect
of authorship and chronology. He instances the loose order of
the oracles contained in the Book of Jeremiah, the combination
in other coUections of utterances of various writers, the possi
bilities of mistake latent in the custom of engrossing on the same
parchment roU diverse Scriptures according to considerations of
space and convenience. Further, he urges the discord of charac
ter, contents, and aim between the earHer and undoubted utter
ances of the Zechariah of the Restoration, and the later chapters
of our book.
WhUe much importance cannot be attached to the motive of
Mede's critical questionings, Christian scholarship has found in
the grounds with which he confirmed them matter for serious
consideration, and at the present moment one of the most per
plexed and uncertain problems of Old Testament study is the
connection and origin of the various parts of the Book of Zecha
riah. The first division (i. — viii.) is universaUy ascribed to
Zechariah, the coUeague of Haggai, and dated b.c 520 — 518.
The second division (ix. — xiv.) is usuaUy separated into two dis
tinct sections (ix. — xi. and xii. — xiv.), and is assigned to one or
two prophets prior to the ExUe, or to one or more writers of a
much later date than the restoration. There are, however, not
wanting scholars who maintain the single, undivided authorship
of Zechariah.
3. Summary of the First Division. — The first eight chapters form
a collection of utterances, complete and cHcumscribed, dHected
throughout to promote the erection of the Temple. The cHcum
stances of the period have been f uUy described in tbe pages deal
ing with the Bo.ok of Haggai. The work had been paralysed
by actual difficulties, but still more by supineness of spirit and
despond. What the people needed was the inspUation of a soar
ing faith and the heartening of buoyant hope. This is precisely
the spirit that animates the addresses of Zechariah— a spHit, we
may be sure, attained by himseH not without struggle, H we have
regard to the mingled elements of doubt and reassurance, of
questioning and enHghtenment, that made his messages so helpful
to his hearers, and render them stiU so biographicaUy interesting
to us.
The oracles consist of three groups aU minutely dated : ( 1 )
chap. i. 1 — 6, Hi the eighth month of the second year of Darius,

ZECHAEIAH.

329

consisting of an admonitory prelude ; (2) chaps, i. 7 ; vi. 15, in
the four-and-twentieth day of the eleventh month of the same
year, consisting of a seven-fold vision, with its termination (vi.
1 — 8), and an appendix (vi. 9 — 15); (3) chaps, vii. 1 — vHi. 23,
in the fourth day of the ninth month of the fourth year of Darius,
consisting of a judgment concerning fast days and feasts. Zecba-
riah's prophetic action is a warning appeal to the people's melan
choly past. Bygone calamity should not create despond but
inspHe wisdom. The prophets of old and their admonitions were
unheeded. Preachers and hearers are dead and gone, but tbe
Divine judgments foretold have come terribly true. All that is
human passes away, but the wUl of God prevaUs and abides.
That alone must be done (i. 1 — 6). But where is the promise of
a glorious restoration of God's kingdom in Judea ? The
land hes desolate, and the great world to aU appearance is
inert. In a vision the prophet sees the heayenly couriers, that ride
through the world, and realises the watchful interest in men's
affaUs of Divine providence. Beneath the seeming neglect and
inactivity there are present and working an impassioned zeal
of God for His People, slow but sure resentment of the
heathen's excesses, and Israel's imminent restitution to power
and prosperity in the exercise of His Divine vocation (i. 7 — 17).
Is this possible in a world where Israel's foes are so formidable,
and God's people so ruined and reduced ? The horns that scat
tered Israel may tower aloft stupendous enough and menacing,
but the secret resistless forces of Jehovah's righteous rule of the
world are filing their roots through, and they must suddenly
topple down Hi impotence (i. 18 — 21). The Jerusalem of to-day,
slowly and insignificantly emerging from its ruins, may seem
smaU and stripped of great possibUities Hi the future. Neverthe
less God's city shaU so expand that no waUs can contain it, nor
for its defence shaU it requHe earthly ramparts, secure in God's
keeping as within a waU of fire. Therefore let God's people quit
theH homes of exile amid the doomed heathen, and hasten to Zion,
sacred as the chosen dwelling-place of God, and the cradle of the
world's destiny (ii. 1 — 13).
But can a lost vocation be resumed, and bygone guUt atoned ?
Does not the sordid present prove that the past is irretrievable,
and Israel's election gone beyond recaU ? The high priest, clad
in stained garments, stands before Heaven's judgment throne,
accused by Satan, but the Divine judge himseH rebukes the
adversary, vindicates his claim of access to God, invests him
anew Hi priestly robes of acceptance, pronounces the saved
remnant of Israel the object of God's love and high election, and

330

BOOK BY BOOK.

declares that the unseeming present aHeady holds within it the
germ and promise of the Messianic kingdom (iu. 1 — 10). To
sight it is not easy to discern in the feeble instruments of the
present the implements capable of such achievement. It needs
faith to recognise their potency in the mspiration of them by God
with His might and sphit. The golden candlestick, emblem of
Israel's hope and hfe, might weU burn out impoverished, but not
if in deed and truth its flame be fed by ever-renewed oU of two
living olive-trees, emblem of Israel's civil and reHgious heads
rooted in the infinite and perennial resources of Divine omnipo
tence. With such supernatural succour human fraUty may
aceompUsh the buUding of the Temple, and aU things besides
(iv. 1 — 14). Divine support demands on man's side moral co
operation. To be Jehovah's instrument Hi reaHsing His kingdom
Israel must be purged clean from the evUs that canker and
corrode, paralyse and destroy a people's material and spHitual
potency. This national purification is imaged in a flying roU, charged
with destructive retribution upon aU dishonesty and untruth (v.
1 — 4). With this outward cleansing, the evU spHit, that was old
Israel's ruin, shall depart clean away, and be replaced by God's
own spHit of righteousness and truth. This transformation is
pictured in the vision of the woman, borne away to the land of
uncleanness in a leaden-Hdded epnah, carried by two women
with the wind in theH wings (v. 5 — 11). AU enigmas are now
solved, aU questions answered, the future and its process stand
forth clear and certam. The vision has reached its end. The
Divine emissaries ride forth to the four quarters of the earth,
charged to execute everywhere the good and holy will of God,
who quietly awaits the result (vi. 1- — 8). To this sevenfold vision
of hope the prophet attached an action of bold encouragement.
From some gold, contributed by exiles in Babylon, he had a
crown or crowns made, and crowning the high priest (or the
prince, or both — there is uncertainty about the narrative),
promised the speedy completion of the Temple, and the advent
of the expected Messianic reign of peace and glory (vi. 9 — 15).
The third section of these opening chapters presents an ani
mated discourse of encouragement, springing from a question
whether the fasts of the ExUe should not at once be changed into
feasts. Fasting and feasting, says the prophet, are nothing in
themselves. They did not cause nor avert your fathers' faU.
What God asked was the doing of justice and mercy. They dis
obeyed and perished. Tour duty now is not to indulge in sadness
or despair, but to cherish bright confidence in God's zeal and
power ; to put forth your best energies in your work, relying on

ZECHARIAH.

331

the promised prosperity ; and above all to practise truth and
righteousness. So shaU God give you a future of unapproach
able splendour, in which Israel shall be the centre of the world's
aspiration and faith, because in Israel God Hves and moves and
rules (vH. 1 — vHi. 23).
4. Style. — Tbe language of these prophecies is remarkably
pure Hebrew, containing few, H any, traces of Aramaic in
fluences. The style is mostly plain and prosaic, as befits descrip
tion ; but there are impassioned passages, where the speaker is
moved in ethical appeals or in the delineation of Messianic
glories. The form of his utterances, in respect of vision, inter
pretation, &c, is allied to the methods of Ezekiel and Daniel,
though similar phenomena are present in earlier prophets, viz.,
in Amos, &c. Some of the features, such as the Divine couriers,
angels, the female personification of Wickedness, the accusing
Satan, &c, remind us of characteristic ideas of the Books of Job
and Proverbs.
On the surface the prophet's conceptions and personal feehngs
might be accused of Jewish particularism and Levitical eon-
trastedness of interest. When we aUow for circumstances, the
necessity of teUing on immediate hearers, and when we search
the seer's hopes and aspHations to their depths, we shaU not
refuse to see in his mood and theology the elements of Hmitation,
that lent themselves to later Judaism ; but we shaU much more
wonder at Zechariah's miracle of faith and invincible loyalty to the
promise, and recognise in him a strong and indispensable comba
tant for the triumph of righteousness and of God upon earth.
5. Summary of the Second Division. — The second portion of the
Book of Zechariah is clearly divided into two main sections, each
mtroduced by the phrase, The burden of the Word of the Lord,
which also stands at the head of the foUowing prophecy of
Malachi. The first section consists of three pieces, which may
roughly be divided as in the chapters of our Authorised
Version. Divine retribution is approaching from the north. The Syrian
peoples are overthrown ; the Phoenician cities subdued ; the
Philistine states depopulated, repeopled by a mixed race, and
made vassals to Judah ; whUe God's people shaU remain un
harmed, encompassed by God's jjare. Zion's long looked for
king comes, powerful to save, lowly of heart, resistlessly imposing
peace on the peoples. Israel's bondage is over : his prisoners
shall return ; his warriors — Judah and Ephraim combined —
vanquish the sons of Greece, irresistible in might Divine ; and
the land is crowned with prosperity and joy (ix. 1 — 17).
From God alone must Israel's weU-being be sought, and not

332 BOOK BY BOOK.
from false guides and hurtful leaders, against whom God's anger
burns. Jehovah HimseH will fight for Israel, restore tbe houses
of Judah and Joseph, overthrow the power of Assyria and Egypt,
recaU the exiles and re-erect the theocratic kingdom (x. 1 — 12).
Invasion from the north is roUing onward, and faUs with
destruction on the chosen land. For God's people have been
wayward and rebelHous. He would have deHvered them from
heartless shepherds and tended them HimseH, securing for them
favour with the nations and unity among themselves {i.e, between
Ephraim and Judah). These shepherds were cut off in one
month ; but they wearied Jehovah, and He broke the rod of
favour that shielded them from external hostUity. FinaUy
rejected as their shepherd, He next broke the brotherhood be
tween Ephraim and Judah, and delivered them over to the cruelty
of a worthless shepherd, to theH undoing and that ultimately of
the shepherd (xi. 1 — 17).
The connection of this piece with the two foregoing discourses
is hard to make out, if we are to take it as the sequel. One can
hardly help asking, if it is not rather a mournful retrospect of
Israel's history up to the ExUe, showing the people's wilful guilt
and Jehovah's unwiUing but necessary rejection of them. It is
also a question whether originaUy the passage (xiii. 7 — 9) did
not conclude this deHneation, though where it now stands its
presence is justified and, indeed, essential.
The second section faUs into two discourses, and differs from
the previous passages in taking no more note of Ephraim, which
is perhaps predominant over Judah in the former. God, who is
Lord of human destiny, has set Jerusalem to be the world's
centre, and the test of the fortunes of aU other peoples. All
nations, combined in attack upon it, are smitten by God with
blindness, and the city is delivered. The deliverance commences
in the country districts of Judsea, and the whole people are in
spired with preternatural prowess (xii. 1 — 8). A spHit of contri
tion seizes on the house of David and the inhabitants of Jerusa
lem, and they bewail him whom they pierced with a universal grief
hke the national mourning for Josiah slain in the battle of Me
giddo (xH. 9 — 14). A fountain of cleansing shaU be opened Hi
the land, and the people shaU purge themselves pf aU sins,
especiaUy of idolatry and false prophecy (xiii. 1 — 6).
Again disaster looms out in the opening of a last great oracle.
By God's ordering Israel's shepherd is slain and the flock are
scattered, one-thUd only surviving, but refined and purified they
are restored to Divine favour and their high vocation (xiH. 7 — 9).
Jerusalem, assaUed by all nations, is aHeady taken, pillaged,
and haH the people led away captive. Suddenly Jehovah inter-

ZECHARIAH. 333
venes, cleaves Mount Ohvet in two, and saves His people in the
cleft, and so " at evening time there shaU be hght " (xiv. 1 — 8).
From Jerusalem living waters flow out to the world ; God reigns
there, the land is transfigured, and densely and happUy re-
peopled (xiv. 9 — 11). The heathen foes of Jerusalem are des
troyed by plagues, disunion, and internecine war, and their
wealth transferred to God's people (xiv. 12 — 15). The surviving
heathen go up to Jerusalem to keep the feast of tabernacles and
worship Jehovah, recalcitrants being destroyed by plague and
drought, while in Jerusalem holiness pervades even the most
common things of daUy Hfe, and henceforth nothmg intrudes
alien, unclean, or hurtful (xiv. 16 — 21).
6. Theories of Commentators. — A perusal of this analysis, much
more a careful study of the book, wiU suffice to show how remark
able a contrast there is between the first eight chapters and the
concluding six. In the former we are surrounded by the sights
and sounds of the rebuUding of Jerusalem, and at every step we
know where we are ; but as soon as we leave them, where are
we ? We seem to pass at one step from sohd earth and trans
parent sunHght into an obscure labyrinth or a country in the
clouds, where aU things are shadowy, confused, and inter
mingled. So vague and perplexed is the interpretation of these
oracles, that the best commentators are hopelessly divided in
theH aUocation, distributing them respectively over a period of
five or six hundred years.
The most probable theories may be reduced to three. First,
it is maintained that the second haH of the book contains prophe
cies penned by the Zechariah of the first haH, but after a very
long interval, in old age, and altered cHcumstances. Secondly,
the latter half of the book is broken into two portions, of which
chaps He. — xi. (usuaUy with xiH. 7 — 9 added) are the work of a
pre-Exihe prophet about the tune of King Ahaz (b.c 735), pos
sibly the Zechariah Ben Jeberechiah mentioned in Isaiah viii. 2,
while chaps. xH. — xiv. {minus xiii. 7 — 9) are the production of a
prophet in the time of Jeremiah (b.c 606), possibly the Urijah
referred to in Jeremiah xxvi. 20. ThHdly, the six chapters, as
a whole or possibly in separate sections, are assigned to a much
later period than the age of Zechariah, varying from the
beginning of the thHd to the middle of the second century before
Christ. An immense range of considerations is involved in the discus
sion of the problem, and some of the most valuable evidence is
of a very subtle Hterary description. It is impossible here to do
more than indicate some of the palpable and most solid argu
ments that go to determine the issue. We shaU refer to the

334 BOOK BY BOOK.
three divisions, i.e. chaps i. — viii., ix. — xi., xii. — xiv. as Parts I.,
IL, and III. for the sake of brevity and convenience.
7. Literary and Historical Evidence. — The language of the
several sections of the Book of Zechariah has been subjected to
careful scrutiny and minute analysis with very conflicting results.
Evidence of divergent vocabulary has been neutralised by
aUeging the reasonableness of diversity in view of the changes
of theme, and is confronted by proof of community in tbe use of
certain characteristic expressions and idioms, but nothing signifi
cant has been by either side estabhshed. The difference of style
between the prosaic periods of Part I., and the oratorical and
imaginative flights of Parts II. and III. ; the absence in these of
the visions, interpreting angel and alhed imagery of the early
chapters ; the lack of definite and dated headings in the later
portion, and the failure to ascribe the utterances to Zechariah or
any other ; the striking change of scene and theme ; the vast and
dim and distant vistas that replace the earHer ne"ar view and cU-
cumscribed horizon ; these and a host of other contrasts are real
and significant, but do not in themselves establish separate
authorship, though they go to prove lapse of time in produc
tion, and a decisive transformation of situation, mood and aim.
When we proceed to search for definite historical aUusions, or
disclosures of actual background, that might positively fix the
origin of these six chapters, we encounter a remarkable conflict
of probabilities. In chap. ix. disaster descends on Syria,
Hamath, and tbe cities of Phoenicia and Phihstia, while Israel
is preserved ; and in chaps, x. Assyria and Egypt are presented
as the powers that on either side have injured and stiU threaten
Ephraim and Judah. Moreover, these two exist as co-ordinate
and warlike states, while apparently in chap. x. there is refe
rence made to the anarchy of the last years of Ephraim. AU this,
it is urged, points conclusively to the period of Hosea and the
early years of Isaiah. But against this construction there is
much to be said. Apparently from ix. 13, at the time of this
prophecy, Israel's worst enemies and oppressors are the Greeks
which could hardly be put forward prior to the ExUe.
It may be said, that what is meant here, as in Joel Hi., is simply
that at an early period Hebrew slaves had been sold to the
Ionians ; but surely the manner of the reference impHes that
Greece was then Israel's worst enemy, whieh points to the open
ing of the fifth or the end of the fourth century. If the discourse
is purely a general forecast, the former might weUbe the period,
and into that age Zechariah may easUy have survived and
prophesied. If on the contrary a particular occurrence shapes
this ninth chapter, unquestionably what fits it best is Alexander's

ZECHARIAH. 335
victorious march, when after the battle of Issus (b.c 333) he
swooped down on Syria, captured Tyre after a short siege,
received the submission of the Palestinian towns, and put the
inhabitants of Gaza to the edge of the sword.
In post-ExiHc times the Jews had much to endure from the
inhabitants of the countries and cities named in ix. 1 — 8 (cf. 1
Mae. v. ; SH. i. 26, &c), and the statement of ix. 6 reminds us
irresistibly of the uninteUigibility of the language of Ashdod Hi
Nehemiah's time (Neh. xiii. 24), due probably to intermixture
of the old race with Arab immigrants (Neh. iv. 7). During this
period, H we understand by Assyria, either Persia (cf . Ezra vi.
22) or the Seleucid Kingdom in its rivalry of the Ptolemies,
Judsea had constant cause for uneasiness, and was involved in
actual suffering through the restless relations of Egypt to the
opposing power on the other side of Palestine. Again, it seems
more in conformity with the language both of chaps, ix. and xi.
to consider Ephraim and Judah not as co-ordinate states, but as
actuaUy united, and as the period prior to the original schism is
impossible, we should have recourse to tbe post-ExUic period,
when the restored community was held to be the representative
in idea and Hi fact of aU Israel, or to a stiU later time, when the
Hebrew community in GaHlee or the Diaspora was described
under the old name of Ephraim.
During this era there was also plenty of occasion to picture
Israel as the prey of rapacious and worthless shepherds (xi.),
whUe the degree of the dispersion suggested by such passages as
ix. 11 — 13, x. 6, 11, can hardly be referred to the Assyrian
devastation of GUead and Lebanon, but drives us powerfully to
think of times subsequent to the ExUe (compare ix. 12, with
Isaiah xl. 2, xhi. 7).
Coming now to Part IIL, we are struck by the absence of any
further reference to Ephraim, the exclusive interest of the writer
Hi Jerusalem, and the remarkable alteration of atmosphere and
prospect. This diversity is enough to suggest difference in the
time of composition, but hardly distinction of authorship and
epoch, at least unless both parts are pre-ExiHe. In chap. xii.
the presentment of Jerusalem's danger has a decidedly post-
ExiHc character, while if the aUusion to deliverance originating
in the country be occasioned by any definite event, we should find
the motive in the story of the Maccabees. If it be urged that
the event contemplated is the Chaldean disaster, then it is diffi
cult to combine the tenor of the prophecy with the teaching of
Jeremiah, or its detaUs with the actual cHcumstances and facts.
It is vain to urge that Josiah's death is stUl recent, on account
ofthe reference in xH. 11, in face of the paraUel allusion to the

336 BOOK BY BOOK.
earthquake of King Uzziah in xiv. 5. The manner in which the
house of David is introduced (xu. 12) and the absence of any
mention of a king favour the post-ExUic theory, while the cita
tion of idolatrous practices and false prophecy as prevalent sins
does not exclude the later dates, when we consider the reason of
Nehemiah's stern resistance of mixed marriages, and the state
ments of post-Exilic Hterature, both sacred and secular (Neh. xiii.
26 ; Mai. Hi. 5 ; Joseph. Antiq. viii. 2 — 5, &c). The special
reference to Egypt of xiv. 18, 19, while it peculiarly suits the
period of Josiah and Jehoiakim, is too undefined and too natural
at any time to serve in fixing the date, and the same may be said
of the suggested aUusion to Manasseh's persecutions (xH. 10),
and other proposed combinations.
A very valuable line of investigation has been led, but awaits
further and more exact prosecution, in the shape of determining,
relationship between the language and ideas of these chapters and
the various books of the Old Testament prophetic Hterature. It
is impossible to enter into the detaUs of the process, but, while
much may stiU be doubtful, it seems faH to say that a number of
points of contact exist between these six chapters and the prophets
of the ExUe, and that it is hardly possible to beHeve that these
have borrowed from Zechariah ix. — xiv. Moreover, whUe much
of the wording of the prophecies in question recaUs earlier times,
it can hardly be denied that the general atmosphere is priestly,
apocalyptic, post-Exilic. Much of the imagery leads to the same
conclusion, and the Messianic conceptions and expectations belong
to the later prophetical developments.
If these impressions be weU-founded — and the flow of critical
opinion is setting Hi the direction of the theory of post-ExUic
origin — then we must account for those features of language and
aUusion, which suggest an early date, in one or other of two
ways. Either the author, as has been suggested of Obadiah,
took up ancient oracles, that lent themselves to his purpose, and
especiaUy in chaps, ix. — xi. adapted them to express the fears
and hopes and faults of his own day. Or else, in conformity
with a Hterary affectation or custom of his age, or from personal
reverence for what was old and venerable, he deliberately clothed
his messages to his own age in an archaic dress, and framed them
in a more or less aUegorical form.
Both suppositions are easily possible, and might be supported
by many simUar phenomena. But it is probable that it wiU for
many a day remain an open question, whether Zechariah wrote
the entire book, the first part in youth, the second in old age ; or
whether the oracles of two earlier seers, existing in manuscript
without note of authorship, came in later tunes to be appended

ZECHARIAH. 337
to the genuine work of Zechariah ; or whether the production of
a prophet in the time of the Ptolemies was first combined with
the work of Malachi, receiving simUar headings, the whole sub
sequently placed in the canon after the original Zechariah, tiU in
course of time these chapters came to be taken as part of Zeeha-
riah's own prophecies. Between these last suppositions there is
little to choose, for Hi the one case how came a work of tbe eighth
century to be tagged on to Zechariah, and in the other how came
a second or third century piece to find its way in among the
prophets instead of going to the Hagiographa ?
Whatever the origin of these prophecies, aU wiU unite in
admiration of their majestic, H sometimes weHd and sombre
grandeur. They are couched in a style of much power and
imaginative beauty. The reHgious conceptions, marked as they
are by inevitable imperfections, are in their essential contents
profound and creative. How great has been their influence can
only be measured by those who are acquainted with Jewish and
Christian apocalyptic writings. The part they play in the Mes
sianic delineations of the New Testament needs not to be
recounted. In each and aU of its elements and influence the
Book of Zechariah has amply vindicated its right to a place in
the history of the Old Dispensation, and beyond the measure of
many other prophecies has prepared and heralded the advent of
Christ and the establishment of His Kingdom.

MALACHI.
1. Authorship. — The canon of the minor prophets is closed by
the Book of Malachi, who has therefore been caUed by the Jews
" the seal of the prophets." Of the author we know absolutely
nothing. It is even doubtful if we are in possession of his real
name. The word Malachi, if it is not an abbreviation, means
either angelic, or my angel, or messenger. More probably it is a
contraction for Malachijah, as Abi (2 Kings xviii. 2) is for
Abijah (2 Chron. xxix. 1), and signifies messenger or angel of
Jehovah. In any case the meaning of the name is remarkable.
The name itself is not borne by any other person in the Old
Testament, nor is our prophet mentioned in the Books of Ezra
and Nehemiah, though they contain such elaborate lists of the
famUies and personages of the period. The word {Malachi = my
messenger) occurs in a characteristic passage of the book (Ui. 1).
The title (i. 1), which gives no patronymic, or birthplace, or
detaU of any description, is curiously similar to the headings of
the closing sections of Zechariah (ix. 1 ; xii. 1). Consequently
the idea early arose that the word is not the writer's proper
name, but either a nom de guerre employed by himself, or a con
venient title of reference attached to the book by some scribe or
editor, suggested by the most picturesque and outstanding phrase
of the prophecy. The Septuagint prefixes to the prophecy the
heading Malachias, but translates the title, The burden of the word
of the Lord to Israel by the hand of His messenger or angel. The
Targum inserts the note, Malachi, whose name is Ezra the scribe.
The idea of a nom de guerre, though rejected by a majority of
writers, found favour with not a few Jewish Rabbis and early
Christian authors, whUe some eminent modern scholars argue
strongly for the ascription of the book to Ezra. Unquestionably
the facts aHeady cited create a considerable degree of uncertainty
about the name. But that Ezra should have been the author, in
face of the absence of his name and differences of style, is hard

MALACHI. 339
to believe, while the notion of anonymity has against it the
general custom and essential character of the prophetic function,
and Hi addition the peeuhar difficulty, not to say impossibility,
of concealment in the circumstances of the restored Jewish com
munity. 2. Date. — The period of Malachi's activity may be determined
with approximate exactness. As in the case of Haggai and
Zechariah, we find ourselves among the Jews of the Restoration,
but at a much later point in their history. The question of the
prophetic urgency is no more the rebuilding of the sanctuary.
The Temple exists, and the routine of sacrifice has been long in
operation. Unlike the desolations of Edom, the ruins of Jeru
salem have been repaired. The Jewish colony is estabUshed on
a firm footing, but the enthusiasm of a restoration, that has
proved only partial, has given way to disappointment and doubt.
In the depression of weary delay, faith has sunk into scepticism,
and reHgious indiff erence has engendered various disorders ; in
particular, a scandalous degradation of divine worship, grave
Uregularities Hi the priesthood and perversions of their office,
widespread social oppression and injustice, and especially a
dangerous readiness to intermarry with heathen neighbours.
The picture corresponds minutely with the delineations in the
Books of Ezra and Nehemiah, and therefore points unmistakably
to a period commencing about half a century after the Restoration,
and terminating with the second administration of Nehemiah
(say b.c 475 — 425). The book has been dated earlier and
also later, but practicaUy the question narrows itself to a choice
between the time of Ezra's first reforming activity (b.c 458) and
the final intervention of his successor and coadjutor, Nehemiah
(b.c 425). So far as the abuses dealt with by the prophet are
concerned, they were probably as prevalent on Ezra's arrival as
on the* occasion of " Nehemiah's second visit. We know that it
was so with regard to the laxity of marriage (Ezra ix., x.), and
who can doubt that the kindred corruptions existed likewise ?
StiU there is not that minute detaU of correspondence which we
find between the prophecy and the narrative of Nehemiah's
reformation (Neh. xiii.)
Moreover, had Malachi worked so early, the fact could hardly
but have been chronicled in the history, while if he laboured at
the later date, the faUure to mention him is not inexpHcable in
a record of such brevity. If the reference to the ruins unrepaired
of Edom (i. 3) imphes the rebuUding of Jerusalem's walls, that
would fix us to a point subsequent to Nehemiah's first governor
ship (b.c 433). If it be the case that prior to this time the
z 2

340 BOOK BY BOOK.
material for the Temple service was a charge on the imperial
purse (Ezra vi. 9 ; vii. 20 — 23), a simUar inference would foUow,
since Malachi holds the people responsible, and we know that
Nehemiah publicly pledged them to provide what was necessary
for the maintenance of religion (Neh. x. 32 — 39).
The prominence given to the law of Moses, and particularly to
questions of worship, suggests a time subsequent to the promul
gation of the Mosaic code by Ezra (Neb. viii.) and the solemn
covenant imposed upon the nation, which especiaUy emphasised
observance of the law, purity of marriage, sanctity of the Sab
bath prescribed release of debtors, and the endowment of the
Temple. It may, however, be urged that, with the doubtful
exception of the aUusion to the tithes (iii. 10), the chief references
to the law {e.g. Horeb (iv. 4), statutes and judgments (iv. 4),
covenant with Levi (ii. 4), &c, are distinctly Deuteronomic, and
surely, had Malachi shortly followed the enactment of the great
national covenant, he would have expressly appealed to it as an
aggravation of the people's guUt, and used it as a goad to their
consciences. A positive decision may be impossible, but the
balance of opinion inclines decisively to the later date.
In that case we may think of Malachi as either the precursor
of Nehemiah's reform, conducting an agitation prior to bis
return, or as his adjutant in actuaUy effecting the reform. The
allusion to the custom of going with presents to the governor
has been held to exclude Nehemiah's actual administration,
because he did not exact his official dues (Neh. v. 14). But a
gift to ingratiate the giver is quite another thing, and, more
over, the reference is not personal or local, but general and
purely iUustrative. Apart, however, from this irrelevant point,
every consideration combines to recommend as the period of
Malachi' s prophetic activity the years of religious relapse, of
restiveness under burdens warmly taken up, of weariness of
vows enthusiastically made and now meanly shirked, which fol
lowed the departure of Nehemiah and preceded his return.
If this be so, then the advent of the stern reformer in the
unforeseen suddenness of his appearance, in his fiery zeal for
God's house and service, in his mercUess severity of reformation,
in his embodiment of the spirit of an EHjah, and in his inexorable
enforcement of the law of Moses, must have appeared an imme
diate, if only a partial, fulfilment of the threatenings and promises
of Malachi.
3 Character and Purpose. — The book is not a collection of
speeches uttered on different occasions. It forms one continuous
composition, prepared for publication perhaps, rather than for

MALACHI. 341
oral delivery. It is addressed to an age of overt, though
unavowed, national discontent and • disaffection. Theocratic
scepticism, born of moral obtuseness, is tbe evU whieh Malachi
confronts. The people look at their slow and humbling recovery,
in place of the rapid and glorious progress prophecy had led
them to anticipate, and they ask bitterly, " Is this God's peculiar
love of His people ? " The prophet's reply points them to the
significant fact of Jehovah's persistent restoration of Israel to
national existence, in contrast with the irretrievable downfaU of
their kinsmen the Edomites. That the reverses of fortune should
be Edom's destruction, but Israel's discipline, is proof that Israel
possesses a unique place and destiny in the Divine purposes
(i. 1-5).
The answer is adequate, but requires to be supplemented by
an explanation of what is painful and perplexing in tbe present
situation of tardy recovery. This is done by pointing out that
the delay in fulfilling Israel's destiny is due not to Divine slack
ness, but to Israel's unworthiness and disloyalty to the covenant.
The indictment consists of two parts, of which the first seizes
and scathes with burning scorn the degradation of Divine wor
ship, the corruptions of the priesthood, and the social wrongs
among the people (i. 6 ; ii. 16), whUe the second lays bare their
roots in reHgious doubt of God's moral earnestness, the profitable
ness of His service, and His fidehty to fulfil the promises of the
covenant (ii. 17 ; iv. 6).
The people are unwiUing to admit theH culpabUity, and it is
necessary for the prophet to drive his charges home. Sons honour
their fathers, servants their masters, but Israel has no reverence,
not even bare respect for God. For His worship they select the
sorriest beasts of their flocks and the shabbiest remnants of their
possessions, such as they would never think of presenting to the
civU ruler, and in this loveless insult priests and people are un-
blushingly combined. Better far to shut the Temple and to quench
the altar's fire, for aHeady in every land a worship ascends to
Jehovah pure and warm and acceptable in His sight (i. 6 — 14).
The priests, chosen by God to be the fountain of law and
justice and reHgion, promised therefore the Divine favour and
the people's honour and support, have perverted their office,
corrupted justice, ahenated the laity from religion and moralitj',
and have, therefore, in just recompense forfeited their power to
bless, destroyed the dignity of theH high vocation, and incurred
universal obloquy and contempt (ii. 1 — 9).
The people, forgetful of the obhgations of theocratic brother
hood, reckless of the risk to religion and the continuity of a holy

342 BOOK BY BOOK.
seed, have intermarried for sordid advantages with heathen
neighbours, and aggravated their guilt by heartlessly putting
away their Jewish wives, whose tears and plaints ascending to
heaven in the Temple court hide from God's eyes the sacrifice
offered on the altar, and call down on the transgressors His
righteous vengeance to root them and theH houses out of His
land and people (ii. 10 — 16).
This moral degeneracy has its root in a deep-seated religious
scepticism. The delay in the accomplishment of the covenant
promises, conceived selfishly and superficiaUy as Israel's material
aggrandisement, has begotten doubt of God's moral earnestness.
Does God judge on earth ? Is He on the side of the good and
against the wicked (Ps. Ixxiii.) ? The prophet meets the sneering
misgiving with a stern declaration of the certainty of the judg
ment, an explanation of its delay because of Israel's unreadiness
for it, and a description of God's speedy advent, in order that
He may, first of all, purge unsparingly people and priesthood,
and, secondly, execute relentless judgment on all persistent
wickedness (ii. 17 — iii. 6). Further, the depression in the
material affairs of the nation has produced scepticism as to God's
care for human homage, that is, in its material form, doubt of
the profitableness of God's service. The prophet protests that
it is precisely this half-heartedness of worship and dishonesty in
giving God His dues, that is the cause of their continued mis
fortunes. He chaUenges the people to make experiment of a
contrasted course of conduct, and see what a wealth of blessing
it will bring (iii. 7 — 12).
FinaUy, the divine delay to right Israel among the comity of
the nations has, on the one hand, set the ungodly sneering in
unbeUef, and on the other moved the devout to mutual conference
and sad but trustful prayer and waiting. God is not blind as
His sUence might seem to suggest. He marks the loyalty of
these, the defiance of those. Speedily He will speak out, and in
the triumph of the just and the destruction of the unjust He will
make for ever unmistakable the eternal distinction of goodness
and of evil. In a final manifestation of Divine grace and judg
ment God wiU avenge aU wrong and establish all righteousness.
He will make an end of sin, and gloriously reward His own, and
so completely f ulfil His covenant promises. In anticipation of
that day Israel's duty is a loyal return to the spirit of the ancient
law and prophecy. For that end Elijah, the great prophet of
fidelity and national decision, shall return. Thus prepared, Israel
can face the coming judgment without fear, and welcome the
consummation of the Divine covenant (iii. 13 ; iv. 6).

MALACHI. 343
4. Method and Structure. — The method and style of Malachi are
exceedingly characteristic. How far they are the product of his
own individuality and how far the creation of his age, it is not
easy to determine. Critics probably make too much of the latter
influence, and too little of the former. The language is good,
pure Hebrew, and, with the exception of one or two passages,
easy to read and understand. The integrity of the entHe book
is admitted, though quite recently the genuineness of the last
verse has been questioned. The prophet's style has power,
fulness, fire, with a certain logical restraint and mechanical
uniformity that disguise its intrinsic energy. Though some
passages remind us of the dramatic oratory of the great prophets,
the greater part is couched rather in the style of the legal pleader
or moral reasoner. The structure has more of plan and detailed
arrangement, more of argument and appeal to first principles,
more, in short, of the scribe and the school. But it is possible
that Malaehi's sententious maxims, and citations of objections
and captious questions, may represent the clash of actual public
exhortation and discussion, and, in any case, in their warmth and
point they are far removed from the cold dialectic and logic
chopping of a closet moraHst.
If the manner of Malachi bears traces of the approaching
reign of the scribes, there is also a very perceptible breath of
the coming winter of prophecy in his striking reversion to the
thought of Moses and EHjah, in connection with the conception
of a new spring-tide, that should be at the same time the fulfil
ment of the old. The presentiment found its verification in the
silence of the voice of prophecy till the advent of Christ's fore
runner, John the Baptist, and the prophetic intuition, its New
Testament confirmation, in the spHitual significance of the story
of the Transfiguration.
For the rest, it is false to accuse Malachi of harsh particularism
and ceremonial shallowness. In the reference to Esau there is
an appearance of harshness in the phraseology, but not in the
prophet's positive conception, while there is a fine width and
humaneness in his ideas of a world-wide service of Jehovah
(i. 11), God's preference of mercy and justice over sacrifice and
ceremony (ii. 13), and the ethical obhgations of brotherhood
created by the faith in a Divine Fatherhood (H. 10).
If his thoughts and ideas move largely in the realm of Old
Testament worship and material things, that is the penalty of
his fideHty to his duty as a man of his own tune and his own
people. But if, as was right, his thoughts of God and his hopes
for men begin on earth and are rooted in his own age, they

344 BOOK BY BOOK.
prove their heaven-born origin in this, that they do not end on
earth or terminate in time, but grow on through the ages, and
travel down through the generations, with a wealth of meaning
that is inexhaustible, and a vitality that is eternal. The last
word of the Old Testament has become the first of the New, and
the faith of the prophet is finding its fulfilment in the fulness of
Christ and of His kingdom.

GENEEAL INTRODUCTION TO THE
SYNOPTIC GOSPELS.*
The Problem of the Synoptic Gospels. — The first three Gospels
present a problem which is believed to be unique in the history
of Hterature. They are three biographies, whieh bear the names
of different authors, which have each, so far as it can be traced, a
separate and independent history, and which also in detail are
marked by a number of substantial differences, and yet which at
the same time agree together in a way that is so remarkable as
evidently to need some special explanation. It is not only that
the same incidents are chosen for narration, not only that they
are narrated in what is frequently the same order — that order
not being chronological — but also that the very words in which
they are narrated'are to a large extent identical. It is this extra
ordinary degree of resemblance which has given to the first three
Gospels a name by which they are very commonly known — the
Synoptic Gospels.
It has often been observed that, while the first three Gospels
present aU these numerous points of contact and coincidence, the
fourth Gospel — though again not without such points-of intimate
relation — yet stands comparatively alone. And to distinguish
* Since this and the three following chapters were written, the criticism of
the Synoptic Gospels appears to be entering upon a new phase. In several
quarters at once there is a marked tendency, while accepting the main lines
of an analysis similar to that which has been here given, to throw back the
composition of the oldest form of Gospel (by some identified with the original
" Oracles " of St. Matthew) to a date earlier than had hitherto been thought
possible for it. The chief advocate of this view, Dr. Resch, in a work entitled
" Agrapha," goes so far as to say that it is olderthan any of the extant books
of the New Testament, and he contends that quotations were made from it not
only in the earliest ecclesiastical literature, but throughout the New Testament
itself, beginning with the First Epistle to Thessalonians, written about 52 a.d.
It is probable that the arguments by which it is sought to prove this will be
subject to considerable deductions, but they represent the fruit of twenty-five
years' study, and cannot lightly be put aside.

346 BOOK BY BOOK.
them from it and bring out into clear relief this leading charac
teristic, a name has been coined from the Greek whieh means
" capable of being seen in one view," or, as we might express it,
" capable of arrangement in paraUel columns."
It is weU known that harmonies have frequently been at
tempted, both in English and in Greek, drawn up in this man
ner; among the best of which may be mentioned Robinson's
" Harmony of the Four Gospels in' Greek" (New York, 1845),
with an English edition adapted from the work of the eminent
American traveUer and scholar ; Fuller's " Harmony of the Gos
pels" (London, 1875), and Dr. E. A. Abbott's "Common Tra
dition of the Synoptic Gospels " (London, 1 884). Literature does
not contain another group of biographies which lends itseH to
such treatment in anything like the same degree.
The problem, however, consists not merely in the one rela
tion of resemblance — which, if it stood alone, would not be so
difficult to account for — but in the combined relation of resem
blance and difference. The question is, what hypothesis wUl
satisfactorily explain the phenomena, and explain them not
only in general terms but when it comes to be appUed in close
detail ?
It is practicaUy agreed at the present time that the problem is
a purely scientific one, and that it is not foreclosed by any theory
of inspiration. Inspiration, as Christians are coming to see, is
concerned with the substance of revelation rather than with its
outward form. The very same inquiries which bring out the
natural human element in Scripture, also show where that ele
ment ends. They point to causes at work which are rightly
called not human, but in a special and peculiar sense Divine ; and
over and above this, the Christian wiU also believe in a Provi
dence which shapes the ends and determines the course of all
causes and operations, however indirectly associated with revela
tion ; but this does not absolve him from the duty of seeking to
trace the action of those causes by such methods as are alone
open to him. He wiU write o-vv ®eo>, "under God," over every
theory that he may be led to form ; but subject to that reserva
tion, the fact that a theory accounts (humanly speaking) for the
facts, is enough to give it a legitimate place in the growing body
of organised knowledge.
We ask, then, what account is to be given of the veiy remark
able phenomena at once of agreement and of difference which
characterize the first three, or Synoptic Gospels? The reaUy
scientific discussion of the question may be said to be little more
than a century old. In earlier ages (if we except some isolated
expressions in tbe writings of the Fathers) a natural and laudable

GENERAL INTRODUCTION TO THE SYNOPTIC GOSPELS. 347
but, as we have seen, mistaken instinct of reverence put a veto
upon the inquiry before it was weU begun. But within the last
hundred years a very great amount of acumen and industry has
been brought to bear upon it. Almost every conceivable hypo
thesis has been started, applied, and criticised; and though a
general agreement has not yet been reached, and the difficulties
are yet some way from being aU removed, real progress has
nevertheless been made, and gHmpses at least may be obtained
of what promises to be a final solution.
To attempt to record all, or even any considerable part, of the
hypotheses that have been raised, would only leave upon the
reader's mind an impression of infinite confusion. It will there
fore be best to select just a few salient or representative theories,
whieh either have in tbe past attracted, or at present attract, tbe
greatest amount of attention. These may be said to be : (1) The
theory that after the writing of Gospels had once begun, the suc
ceeding evangelists each made use of the work of his prede
cessor or predecessors. This we wiH call the theory of successive
dependence. (2) The theory that all three Gospels alike are based
upon a common foundation of tradition, more or less fixed in its
form, though committed to writing for the first time in our pre
sent Gospels. This we will call the theory of oral tradition.
(3) The theory that the Gospels derive their common element
not merely from their dependence upon a common tradition, but
from the common use of certain written documents. This we will
caU the theory of documentary sources.
In attempting to understand and to estimate each of these
three hypotheses, it wiH be weU to bear constantly in mind the
conditions of the problem which we have to solve : viz., the com
bined presence of resemblance and of difference, and that no
solution can be successful which does not account for both at
once, and which does not show itself capable of being carried
into detail.
1 . The Theory of Successive Dependence. — This is the oldest theory.
It goes back as far as to St. Augustine, who thinks that the
Evangelists were acquainted with each other's writings, and
were inspHed in some respects to supplement them. Thus, in
the genealogies, whUe St. Matthew gives the descent of the
Saviour in the royal line, that of Solomon, St. Luke gives the
priestly descent, or that which is not royal, through Nathan.
St. Mark he regards as simply the abbreviator of St. Matthew.
{De Cons. Ev. i. 2, § 4). But St. Augustine spares himself the
necessity of grapphng with the difficulties of this view by con
fining its expression to a few very general sentences, and by
making no attempt to explain in detaU why the later writers

348 BOOK BY BOOK.
made so many changes in the text of the earlier, why they modi
fied, transposed, and omitted, as they have done.
(i.) Here lies the great difficulty which always has accom
panied and always must accompany the theory of successive
dependence. It imposes upon its holders the necessity of account
ing for aU the multitude of variations, great and smaU, in the
three Gospels. The coincidences are accounted for easily enough,
but to account for the differences is no such easy matter. What
ever is supposed to have been tbe order of succession, the diffi
culty remains the same.
Perhaps the commonest assumption is that to which we have
just been referring in St. Augustine, that St. Matthew preceded
St. Mark, and that they both preceded St. Luke. This has in its
favour the traditional order of the Gospels — which is, however,
not a primitive order, but one which came to be more and more
adopted from tbe fourth century onwards. This at once raises
the question, why did not St. Mark foUow more closely in tbe
footsteps of his predecessor ? As compared with St. Matthew
two things strike us about St. Mark ; the one is the omission of
a number of incidents and sayings ; tbe other is the tendency to
amplify the details of those which remain. In the common
sections, St. Mark is nearly always the fuller of the two; but,
taken as a whole, his Gospel is the shorter — and it is made
shorter by the excision of much that is found in St. Matthew.
Whence these amplifications ? and whence these excisions ?
The tendencies to which they point seem to be rather contradic
tory to each other. But, in any case, it is extremely hard to
supply a motive for them in detail. In one respect, the difficulty
is lightened if St. Luke is put before St. Mark. We might then
suppose that St. Mark (or the author of the second Gospel, for
those who hold this view usually regard the author as anony
mous) obtained his greater fulness by combining tbe expressions
used by the two previous Evangelists.
But this recondite process of dovetailing the language of two
separate documents is seen, when it comes to be examined, to be,
in a high degree, artificial and improbable. And even H it were
not so, just in proportion as the one difficulty was lightened the
other difficulty would be increased. We should then have all
the narratives and sayings in St. Luke added to those in St.
Matthew, and we should have to explain how it was that St.
Mark came to be so much shorter than either of them. The
same kind of perplexities pursue us whatever hypothesis we have
recourse to. If we put St. Mark first on the list, or St. Luke,
their incidence may vary somewhat, but theH amount is not
diminished.

GENERAL INTRODUCTION TO THE SYNOPTIC GOSPELS. 349
(ii.) It is true that one systematic attempt has been made to
supply a motive for the variations in the Synoptic Gospels — the
attempt connected with the name of Dr. Ferdinand Christian
Baur (died 1860), a writer distinguished as much for width of
view and command of daring hypothesis as for lucidity of expo
sition. The key-to unlock tbe intricacies of the problem he found
in the party leanings of the authors of the Gospels.
Parties certainly there were in the Apostolic age as much as
in any subsequent period of the Church's history ; and no one has
ever brought out theH significance more clearly than Baur did.
At the root of them aH was the great division of Jew and GentUe.
Converts from Judaism and converts from GentUe heathenism
came to Christianity with such very different antecedents that it
was impossible that they should at once see eye to eye with one
another. Most of aU was this rendered impossible by the fact
that the Jew regarded himself as occupying an altogether higher
platform than the GentUe ; the Gentiles were described by the
sweeping designation of " sinners" (Gal. ii. 15); the Jew was a
member of the chosen people, heU to aU the promises.
The two bodies had this much in common, that both confessed
Jesus to be the Messiah ; but that left a number of questions
stiU open. On what terms were Gentiles to be admitted ? The
Mosaic law had not been formally abrogated. What degree of
compHanee with that law was to be required of them ? We can
not faU to see that questions like these left room for great dif
ferences of opinion. Such differences no doubt existed, from the
extremes of strictness and exclusiveness among the partisans of
Judaism, to the extremes of laxity and latitudinarianism in the
converts from heathen rehgions.
Between these extremes there were a number of intermediate
positions of which many traces have come down to us in the pages
of the Acts and in the Epistles of St. Paul. Much Hvely contro
versy, much open antagonism, split up the Church into sections
as widely separated from each other as any that exist in our own
day. What wonder if they also left their mark upon the compo
sition of the Gospels ?
(iii.) There was a good primd-facie case for looking for the
indications of party influence. As far back as the second cen
tury St. Matthew's Gospel had been regarded.as in a special sense
the Gospel of the Jews, and St. Luke's as in a special sense the
Gospel of the Gentiles ; while St. Mark, the associate at once of
St. Paul and St. Peter, seemed to stand haH-way between the
other two. Baur took hold of these admitted facts and developed
them with great subtlety and acumen. By means of them he
sought to explain the deviations of the evangehcal writers from

350 BOOK BY BOOK.
each other as due to the desire (conscious or unconscious, but for
the most part conscious) to give effect to their own sympathies
and antipathies.
The Particularist author of the first Gospel laid stress on the
fulfilment of prophecy, on the observance of the Jevvish law, on
the privileges and claims of Israel, on the "holy city," Jerusalem,
and the like. The Universalist author of the thHd Gospel
preached a doctrine almost like that of St. Paul, a doctrine of
free forgiveness extended to the outcast and undeserving, not
confined to the Jews, but open to the Samaritan and even to the
GentUe; sayings Hke that relating to the permanence of tbe
Mosaic law were quietly dropped ; the gap which separated the
Old Dispensation from the New was widened. The first and
the third Gospels thus stood opposed to each other ; the function
of the second Gospel was that of mediation and conciliation. A
phrase was omitted here, another was softened there, so as to
avoid offending the susceptibilities of either party, and to pro
mote that policy of union or fusion on which was to be built the
structure of the CathoHc Church.
(iv.) Even so, the problem with which Baur and his foUowers
had to deal was not a simple one. The phenomena were not all
of one kind. It was true that Particularist expressions might be
quoted from St. Matthew, and Universalist expressions from St.
Luke, but the parts were sometimes interchanged. St. Matthe^
spoke of many coming from the east and from the west and sitting
down with Abraham and Isaac and Jacob in the kingdom of
heaven, while the sons of the kingdom were cast into outer dark
ness (Matt. viii. 11, 12). It is he who records the threat that the
Kingdom of God should be taken away from the Jews and given
to a nation bringing forth the fruits thereof (Matt. xxi. 43) ; he
who commemorates the curse whieh the Jews invoke upon them
selves and upon theH chUdren (Matt, xxvii. 25) ; and he finaUy
who alone gives the express command to " make disciples of
every nation" (Matt, xxvii. 19).
On the other hand, St. Luke contains even more aUusions than
St. Matthew to the ardent expectations among the Jews at the
time of Christ's birth : "Looking for the consolation of Israel,"
" for the redemption of Jerusalem," " for the kingdom of God,"
" restoring the kingdom to Israel," are his phrases and not St.
Matthew's (Luke ii. 25, 38 ; xxiii. 51 ; cf. Acts i. 6) ; it is he and
not St. Matthew who speaks of the " daughter of Abraham whom
Satan had bound" (Luke xiii. 16), and of scrupulous observers
of the law like Zacharias and Simeon (Luke i. 6 ; H. 25).
(v.) It was not easy to fit these diverse tendencies into the same
framework. The Gospels could not be treated as indivisible

GENERAL INTRODUCTION TO THE SYNOPTIC GOSPELS. 351
wholes ; they were not aU of a piece. The dependence of one
upon the other could not be a dependence of the complete Gos
pels as they have come down to us. A process of dissection
began, in which the dividing lines were drawn by the tendency
observable in the different portions. We must not attempt to
foUow aU the speculative results of this dissecting process. A
prominent part in it was played by two rather shadowy docu
ments of which mention was made by early writers : one was the
so-eaUed Gospel according to the Hebrews, the other was a pecu
liar abridgment of St. Luke said to have been used by the
Gnostic Marcion.
A Gospel according to the Hebrews would naturaUy represent
the earhest stage of evangeHcal composition. At the opposite
pole to this would naturaUy be the work approved by one who
accepted only the writings of St. Paul, and hated everything that
savoured of Judaism. Given these two documents, it would not
be difficult to conceive how they might be buUt up into our pre
sent Gospels by gradual accretions and modifications. For such
a process time was necessary ; and the Tubingen School, as it
was caHed, from its headquarters in the University of Tubingen
where Baur was professor, did not hesitate to draw freely upon
time. It supposed that the Synoptic Gospels did not reach their
present shape untU the period 130 — 170 a.d., when the unmis
takable aUusions to them first begin.
(vi.) We must not stay to point out the impossibiHties in this
construction bf history. An alternative scheme, which seeks to
evade those impossibUities, wiU be presented shortly. Enough
to remark that the theory is no longer that of " successive depend
ence." It has become a form of the theory of " documentary
sources," in which the leading feature is that the modifications
introduced into those sources are supposed to be due to the dog
matic leanings of the writers, who one after another reviewed
and recast them.
(vH.) The theory so conceived was far too one-sided to account
for the facts. On the one hand, it led to many strained "and
far-fetched interpretations. Dogmatic leanings were suspected
everywhere, not only in places which reaUy involved doctrine,
but Hi others which were guUtless of any such intention. The
Evangehsts were transformed from chroniclers not devoid of art
of a simple, Oriental, or HeUenistic kind, into nineteenth-century
pamphleteers ; or rather pamphleteers whose recondite, indirect,
and aUusive style of recommending theH doctrines was that of no
eentury whatever.
The perversion arose from attempting to make a single cause
do duty for a number of causes. It was natural that the writers

352 BOOK BY BOOK.
or compilers of our Gospels should be influenced by their attitude
towards tbe leading questions of their own day. A certain pro
portion of the variations in the Gospels can be accounted for in
this manner, but by no means all of them. The critic must keep
his eye open to aH the influences at work, and must not aUow
himself to lay an exaggerated stress upon one to the exclusion of
the rest.
(viii.) The theory of Baur was, as we have seen, the most
elaborate attempt to explain the variations in the Gospels, on the
hypothesis of the successive dependence of one upon the other or
others. Even it did not represent that hypothesis in a pure form.
The truth was, that it was beset by such fundamental difficulties,
that as soon as it came to be applied in detaU it was seen to be
impossible. Tbe hypothesis of the general dependence of the
successive Gospels upon each other is now nearly extinct, H not
quite. Even in the quaUfied form in which it was held by the
Tubingen critics, it has been for some time on the decline. It
has met with the fate of many other theories. The elements of
truth in it have been absorbed in the common stock of know
ledge, while its own adherents have borrowed freely from rival
systems. (He.) There is just one modified application of the dependence-
theory whieh stiU retains its vitality. Of recent years there has
been a growing tendency among some leading critics to beHeve
that St. Luke had before him the works of both his predecessors.
This, however, is combined with a form of the documentary hypo
thesis : although these critics assume that St. Luke had access to
our present Gospel of St. Matthew, they only suppose him to
have made a quite subordinate and subsidiary use of it. The
real foundation of St. Luke's Gospel they regard as laid in
other documents, but they think that the Evangehst either occa
sionaUy glanced into the finished work that has come down to
us, or at least had seen it and was affected by his recoUeetion
of it.
2, The Hypothesis of Oral Tradition. — The inherent and in
superable objection to the dependence-theory is that, whUe it
accounts readUy enough for the resemblances of the three Gospels
to each other, it does not account, and really makes it impossible
to account, for theH differences. The theory of oral tradition is
just the opposite of this. It accounts for the differences. The
question is, can it also account for the resemblances ?
(i.) Of course, any theory as to the origin of the Gospels must
start from oral tradition. " The Gospel " at first meant, not any
thing written, but preaching by word of mouth ; it was the " glad
tidings of good things." This oral teaching had too, at first, a

GENERAL INTRODUCTION TO THE SYNOPTIC GOSPELS. 353
different content from our written Gospels. That Jesus of Naza
reth was the long-expected Messiah ; that He was also in a wider
sense the Son of God ; that He died for our sins ; that He rose
again the thHd day ; that He would come a second time to judge
the earth — were the propositions with which it was chiefly
concerned. These propositions are the basis of the body of theology in
St. Paul's Epistles. We can see that they were the points on
which he was in the habit of insisting ; but we can see further
that they were no peculiar property of his, but that he shared
them with the rest of the Apostles, and with aU other Christian
teachers. They are the hinges on which Christianity as a sys
tem of doctrine turns. He who could really take them into his
heart and soul did not need to "know Christ after the flesh."
And yet such more mundane knowledge could not but have
the deepest interest and fascination for Christians. St. Paul was
a beUever of very exceptional mould. He was capable of em
bracing an abstraction with an intensity of fervour whieh few
others could give. The mass of mankind craved for something
concrete. In order to become loyal subjects of the Messiah it was neces
sary that they should know what manner of man He was when
He walked the earth. Only so could their f uU enthusiasm be
called out. Nor were they more eager to hear than the Apostles
and others who had actually companied with the Lord would be
eager to teach. • This would be especiaUy the ease in the mother
church of Jerusalem, where the greater number of the Apostles
and of the original disciples were gathered together, and where
the Christian community were most settled and of longest stand
ing. Here it was less necessary to " lay again the foundation "
of moral and religious teaching. There would be time to enlarge
more fuUy upon the detaUs of the Lord's life. We can imagine
how knots of interested listeners would coUect round the members
of that httle company who had themselves seen the Lord, and
heard and could repeat His words. Meantime they were in
close and constant intercourse with each other. Particulars that
were known to one would soon become the common property of
all. So would graduaUy grow up a more or less fixed cycle of
narration. The oft-told story would have a tendency to stereo-.
type itseH. The same incidents, the same sayings would find
theH way into it whoever was the narrator.
And all this would be oral. It, was not the custom of the Jews
to commit what they had to say to writing. A Rabbi discoursing
and his pupils listening, was the established method of communi
cating knowledge. Nor were they attended by the shorthand
A A

354 BOOK BY BOOK.
writer who figures so often in Greek and Roman reports. The
Jew was constantly practising his memory, and to memory he
trusted. The teachers who day after day rehearsed some portion
or other of the sacred history, and the bystanders who carried
away fragments of it, were only doing what their countrymen
were in the habit of doing. Some would eome and go ; new
converts would be made among the pilgrims who came up to the
feasts; even the Apostles had their "circuits" and longer
journeyings (Acts ix. 32 ; Gal. ii. 11; 1 Cor. ix. 5), and yet
there would be a sufficient, number of permanent residents to
keep up the continuity of the narration, and to prevent it
from wandering far from the type to which they were
accustomed. (ii.) There are then quite sufficient reasons for thinking that
the Gospel story would not merely cHculate in an indefinite
variety of forms, but that it would crystaUise after one particular
pattern. And when the troubles whieh preceded the great cata
strophe began to thicken, and the circle of the Apostles was
broken up, and the Church received its warning to flee from the
doomed city ; when the conditions under which the oral narra
tive had taken shape were ceasing to exist, and the necessity
arose for written documents, it was natural that those who under
took the composition of these documents should try to embody as
much as they could of what had now become a recognised and
standard type of narration.
(Ui.) Such is the historical basis on which rests the theory of
oral tradition. The common element in our three Gospels is ac
counted for by the fact that they aU drew from the same tradi
tion, while tbe variable element is only such as might be expected
from the different positions of the different writers, and the
special sources to which they each had access.
(iv.) There can be no doubt that the Gospels were composed
under pecuHar conditions, and conditions which prepare us for a
greater amount of resemblance than would be usual in three in
dependent biographies of the same person. But is this a quite
adequate explanation of the degree and kind of resemblance
which we actually find ? Many eminent EngHsh scholars, and
some foreign scholars, think that it is. We wiU not take upon
ourselves to gainsay them ; but it is at least right that the reader
should reahse the fuU extent of the phenomena which have to be
accounted for.
It is not only that the same incidents are chosen for narration,
and those incidents, as it would seem, a selection from a much
larger mass, the rest of which is passed over in sUence. There
can be no question that our Lord wrought many miracles and

GENERAL INTRODUCTION TO THE SYNOPTIC GOSPELS. 355
spoke many parables whieh have not been recorded. He re
minded Chorazin and Bethsaida of the " mighty works " which
had been done in them, yet no one of aU those mighty works
has found its way into the Gospels ; but for this one sentence the
very names of these cities, as scenes of His ministry, would be
unknown. " How often," He says, had He tried to gather to
gether the chUdren of Jerusalem ; yet so far as we can teU from
any dHect statement in the Synoptic Gospels, the occasion on
which He said this was the first on which He had paid a visit to
Jerusalem since His baptism. St. John, at the end of his Gospel,
after he has himseH largely supplemented the synoptic narrative,
adds with a pardonable hyperbole, that so much still remained
which Jesus did, that if it were aU to be written down, "the
world itseH would not contain the books that should be
written." These are only a few proofs among many, that the Synoptic
Gospels omitted far more than they recorded ; and yet the frame
work of the narrative is practicaUy the same in aU three ; it con
sists very largely both of the same events and of the same
discourses. This, however, is not aU ; not only is the selection
of incidents fundamentaUy the same, but the order in which
they are related has a hke fundamental identity, and the words
in which they are told remarkably agree.
(v.) The identity of order is somewhat disguised and only re
veals itseH to attentive study. U we wish to discover the succes
sion of incidents whieh the three Evangehsts had before them,
we must look for it in St. Mark. It is true both St. Matthew
and St. Luke diverge considerably from this, but a comparison
of the three Gospels shows that where they do so it was for some
special reason. In spite of theH divergence it is clear that they
were acquainted with St. Mark's order, and that they were con
tent to follow it whenever it did not interfere with some pecu-
Harity of structure of theH own.
The Gospel of St. Mark may be divided into three sections,
the first of which ends at iii. 6, the second at vi. 13, while the
thHd extends from that point to xvi. 8, whieh forms the close of
the Gospel Hi an important group of authorities. Now in the
first of these sections St. Matthew diverges, but the order of
St. Mark is substantiaUy that of St. Luke ; in the third section
St. Luke diverges, but again St. Mark agrees substantiaUy with
St. Matthew. In the intervening section, iii. 7 — vi. 13, the rela
tions are not so consistent, but even here St. Mark is supported
for three or four consecutive paragraphs at a time, first by
one of the companion Gospels and then by the other. There
could hardly be more satisfactory proof that the order of St.
aa2

356 BOOK BY BOOK.
Mark reaUy underUes and is presupposed Hi the other two
Gospels. We can see, too, why they depart from it. It is characteristic
of St. Matthew to group events and discourses. But between
Matthew Hi., where the threefold narrative begins, and the end
of Matthew xiii., there are three such groiips of discourse (the
sermon on the Mount, the discourse at the sending out of the
Apostles, and the coUection of parables in chap, xiii.), and one
group of representative incidents (those contained in Matthew
viu., ix.). It is this massing of simUar matter which causes St.
Matthew to desert the common order. Again, the most distinc
tive feature in the Gospel of St. Luke is the " great insertion "
(Luke ix. 51 — xviH. 14). Such a wholesale importation into
the text which the thHd Evangelist had before him naturaUy led
to much dislocation. This and the special knowledge which
St. Luke displays of matters relating to the court of the
Herods, sufficiently account for the greater part of his divergence.
(vi.) The order of St. Mark is the fundamental order. If that
order had simply followed the chronology of the events, that
would not have been so very surprising. But those who have
looked into the matter agree that though St. Mark retains,
roughly speaking, the outHne of our Lord's ministry, his order
is yet not entirely chronological. There is an element of artifi
cial combination about it as well. Can we think that so fixed
and peculiar an order as this would be given merely by oral
tradition ? Is it not the more probable view that the first
and the third EvangeUsts had before them something Hke it in
writing ?
(vii.) If we lean to that conclusion, we shaU see a confirmation
of it Hi the verbal coincidences between the three Gospels. The
extent of these coincidences may be seen set forth with great
exactness Hi Mr. Rushbrook's sumptuous "Synopticon" (Lon
don, 1880 — 81). It has been calculated that the Gospel of St.
Mark contains in aU 11,15.8 words. Of these no less than 6,618
are common to one or both of tbe other two Gospels. More
exactly, 2,651 are found in aU three Gospels, 2,793 Hi St. Mark
and St. Matthew, 1,174 in St. Mark and St. Luke* Is that a
proportion which we should expect to exist in three independent
biographies, no matter how closely connected by common matter ?
Here again, too, we observe that the coincidences do not occur at
random, but that St. Mark is the meeting-point of the other two
Gospels as regards diction, just as' he is the meeting-point be
tween them as regards order. Once more the relation between
* Schaff, " History of the Christian .Church," i. 596, f. New York, 1882.

GENERAL INTRODUCTION TO THE SYNOPTIC GOSPELS. 357
the threefold narratives appears to require some more tangible
explanation than that supplied by oral tradition. It seems to
eonduct us up to a written source or sources.
(viH.) We may add to this another objection. The advocates
of oral tradition invariably and naturaUy look to Jerusalem as
the home of that tradition. Is it not then strange that it should
say so Httle about the work of our Lord at Jerusalem ? Here is
a tradition which is supposed to have been formed and circulated
for some forty years at Jerusalem, and yet its contents are
almost entirely taken up, not with those visits to Jerusalem of
which St. John has so much to say, but with the ministry in
Gahlee. Are these two things easUy reconcilable ? It does not
seem so.
3. The Hypothesis of Documentary Sources. — Oh the continent of
Europe, and especiaUy in Germany, the theory that our first
three Gospels are derived from some common source or sources
has been most in favour of recent years. It seems beforehand
to hold out a better prospect than either of the competing theories
can do, of doing justice to both sides of the problem. The coin
cidences, whether of selection, of order, or of expression, are at
once naturaUy and simply accounted for H a common document
or documents lie at the base of aU three Gospels. Nor do the
differences cause any real difficulty if we aUow (1) for the pos
session by each EvangeHst of some special sources of information
besides those whieh he has in conjunction with his feUows,
and (2) for the natural idiosyncrasies of style and mode of
treatment. (i.) There is this difference between the theory which we have
now before us and the other two, that whereas they take our
present Gospels as they are, and in the case of the dependence-
theory account for the form which they have assumed by direct
modifications of the earHer Gospels in the later, and in the case
of the oral theory, make them grow immediately and without
intervening breaks out of the common ground-stock of tradition,
the theory with which we are now dealing confessedly goes
behind our present Gospels and accounts for the phenomena
which they present by means of certain hypothetical documents
which are supposed to have existed antecedently to them. *
(ii.) The mere fact that the documents are hypothetical — that
they are found in no extant MS., and that their text cannot be
* It should be observed that though the common names " St. Matthew"
and "St. Mark" are used, it is not intended to prejudge the question
whether the whole of our first and second Gospels is the work respectively of
St. Matthew and St. Mark. In any case it is the opinion of the present
writer that the third Gospel came as we have it from the pen of St. Luke ;
and in regard to the other two Gospels he has tried to state the probabilities

358 BOOK BY BOOK.
appealed to — wiU be a strong presumption against them to many
minds. Those who have had much to do with the criticism of
ancient writings wiU estimate that presumption differently. Only
the other day we had a brilliant instance in which a purely
hypothetical and imaginary document had its existence verified.
It is weU known that the "Didache" or "Doctrine of the
Apostles " had been substantiaUy reconstructed from the " Apos
tolic Constitutions "• and other later writings by tbe Roman
Catholic scholar Krawutzcky before there was even a rumour of
its actual discovery by Bryennios. The attempted reconstruc
tion of the documents which underlie our Gospels is precisely
of the same kind, though it wants the aU-important verification !
(Hi.) It must not, however, be supposed that these underlying
documents are altogether imaginary. The preface to St. Luke's
Gospel expressly teUs us that many other biographies were in
existence when be undertook to write his. Arid the great
majority of those who hold the documentary theory beHeve that
they have a description of their two principal documents in two
often-quoted fragments of the sub-apostolic writer Papias pre
served by Eusebius.
(iv.) For aU this, which may be true but in any case holds out
matter for much discussion, we must not seem to suggest that
the documentary hypothesis is easy of proof or one about which
scholars are by any means agreed. Once more we have the
difference between a statement in general terms and proof Hi
detaU. General statements may sound very plausible and attrac
tive, but it is another matter when they come to be confronted
with the texts and applied verse by verse. Many who are agreed
in contending that some form of the documentary hypothesis is a
necessity are by no means agreed as to the particular form which
they would adopt.
We cannot here pretend to enumerate aU these forms. Suffice
it to say that the great majority of the current theories proceed
upon the assumption of an original Matthew older than our
present St. Matthew, and (under different names and differing in
its extent) an original Mark older than our present St. Mark.
Papias, as we have just seen, speaks of the work of the first two
EvangeUsts in terms which are thought to apply better to docu
ments which may be beUeved to be incorporated in our present
Gospels than to the actual Gospels as we have them. We reserve
the fuller discussion of this point for the Hidividual chapters on
St. Matthew and St. Mark.
as they appear to him as candidly as he can, but he has not made up, and
does not wish to make up, his own mind, until he has studied the question
for himself in systematic order and in close detail.

GENERAL INTRODUCTION TO THE SYNOPTIC GOSPELS. 359
The true jground, however, for the assumption of these older
Gospels is not the evidence of Papias, or at least not that taken
alone but in connection with the results of an analysis of the texts
of the first three Gospels. It does not need a very profound
study of these Gospels to see that theH contents f aU under three
heads. (1 ) From the ministry of the Baptist onwards the main
outlines of the history are substantiaUy the same in aU three. (2)
Interspersed, however, with this, there are a number of scattered
coincidences, sometimes longer, sometimes shorter, between St.
Matthew and St. Luke, which relate for the most part to saying0
or discourses. (3) Besides this matter which is common eithei
to aU three Gospels or to two out of the three, St. Mark to a very
shght extent, and St. Matthew and St. Luke to a much larger
extent, have sections pecuHar to themselves and standing apart
from the main body of the evangehcal tradition. Conspicuous
examples of this would be the first two chapters of St. Matthew
and St. Luke.
(v.) As regards that broad substratum pf narrative which
underUes the greater part of aU three Gospels we have aHeady
seen that the order of the successive sections is substantiaUy that
of St. Mark. The statistics as to diction wiU also prepare us for
the conclusion that here, too, St. Mark contains the largest pro
portion of the common language. Short as the second Gospel
is, this shortness is obtained by the absence of whole sections,
and not — Except in very rare cases — by the abridgment of what
remains. Augustine caUed St. Mark an " epitomator," but his
Gospel is no epitome. When the three narratives are placed
side by side his is almost invariably the fullest of the three. It
may be weU to give an example of this in order that the relations
of the three Gospels to each other in this respect may be under
stood. The resemblances which are indicated by the use of
different type are those in the Greek original and not Hi the
Enghsh version.
Words printed in thick type are common to aU three
Gospels. Words printed in small capitals are common to St. Matthew
and St. Luke.
Words printed in ROMAN CAPITALS are common to St.
Matthew and St. Mark.
Words printed in ITALIC CAPITALS are common to St.
Mark and St. Luke.
Words printed in italics are peculiar to the Gospel in which
they occur.

360

BOOK BY BOOK.

CALL OE LEVI. FEAST IN LEVI'S HOUSE.

Matthew rx. 9 — 13.
And AS Jesus PASSED
BY from thence, HE
SAW a man, called Mat
thew, sitting at the
place of toll: and HE
SAITH unto him Follow
me. And he arose, and
followed him.
And IT CAms TO
PASS, as HE SAT AT
MEAT in the house, be
hold many publicans and
SINNERS came and sat
DOWN WITH JESUS
AND HIS DISCIPLES.
And WHEN the Phari
sees SAW IT, THEY
said UNTO his dis
ciples, Why eateth your
Master with the publi
cans and sinners 1 But
when he HEARD IT, he
said, They that are
"WHOLE have no need
of a physician, but
they that are sick. But
go ye and learn what this
meaneth, I desire mercy,
and not sacrifice : for I
caME not to call the
righteous, hut sinners.

Maex ii. 13—17.
AND HE WENT
FORTH again by the sea
side; and all the multi
tude resorted unto him,
and he taught them. And
AS HE PASSED BY,
HE SAW LE VI the son
of Alphwus sitting at
the place of toll, and
HE SAITH unto him,
Follow me. And he
arose and followed him.
And IT CAm* TO PASS
that HE was SYTting
AT MEAT in HIS
house, and many publi
cans and SINNERS sat
DOWN WITH JESUS
AND HIS DISCIPLES:
for there were many and
they followed him. And
the SCRIBES of the
Pharisees, WHEN
THEY SAW thnt he was
eatmg with the sinners and
publicans, said UNTO
his disciples, He eateth
AND DEINKeth with
publicans and sinners.
AND when JESUS
HEARD IT, he saith
unto THEM, They that
are WHOLE have no
need of a physician hut
they that are sick: I
caME not to call the
righteous, hut sinners.

Luke v. 27—32.
AND after these things
HE WENT FORTH,
and beheld a publican,
named LEVI, sitting at
the place of toll, and
said unto him, Follow
me. And he forsook all,
and rose up and followed
him. And Levi made him
a great feast in HIS
house: and there was a
great multitude of pub
licans and of others that
were sitting at meat with
them. And the Pharisees
and their SCRIBES mur
mured against his dis
ciples, sayi«^, Why do ye
eat AND DRINK with
the publicans and sin
ners f AND JESUS
answering said unto
THEM, They that are
wlwle have no need of a
physician; hut they that
are sick. I am not come
to call the righteous hut
sinners to repentance.

(vi.) This may be taken as a faH average sample of the three
fold narrative. It presents in a sufficiently distinct form the
kind of phenomena that are usuaUy found elsewhere. For our
purpose the most important feature is that which is expressed
by the two kinds of larger capitals. These show how the lan
guage of St. Mark appears alternately in the other two Gospels.
It will be seen that the instances Hi which this is the case very
greatly preponderate over those (expressed by smaU capitals) in
which the two other Gospels, St. Matthew and St. Luke, combine
against St. Mark.

GENERAL INTRODUCTION TO THE SYNOPTIC GOSPELS. 361
(vH.) Thus both the order of the narratives and the language
in which they are couched converge upon the same conclusion.
They seem to prove that St. Mark has preserved more nearly
than either of his f eUow EvangeUsts the original form of that
common authority (whatever it was) which Hes at the base of
the whole evangehcal tradition. If we assume that this common
authority was something nearly resembling our present St. Mark
we can then explain both the paraUel columns from St. Matthew
and St. Luke. Two writers, both copying independently, and
both copying freely from the same source, would naturaUy
reproduce different features characteristic of that source : one
set of expressions would appear in the one, another set of
expressions would appear Hi the other.
The alternative hypothesis, that the text of St. Mark was
made up by taking here a word from St. Matthew and there a
Word from St. Luke, impHes a process that really is not credible.
And what appHes to the diction of the parallel sections applies
quite as clearly to their order. The inference has been contested,
but it is one that every day is receiving a greater amount of
recognition, that the common foundation of the Synoptic Gospels
must be sought in close connection with St. Mark. Whether
that f oundation was an oral tradition, or whether it was a written
document, in either case St. Mark has reproduced it most
exactly. (viii.) It would greatly simphfy matters if we could go a step
farther and say not only that this foundation was to be sought
in connection with St. Mark, but that it was St. Mark as we have
it : in other words, if this relation which we have seen to be so
preponderant was not merely preponderant, but an absolutely
constant relation. Unfortunately it is not this. In the passage
whieh we have just analysed, and more or less throughout
the Gospel, there are words, phrases, clauses, sentences which
would have on our plan to be printed in smaU capitals, as
representing an agreement between St. Matthew and St. Luke
against St. Mark.
(ix.) Here is one of the great perplexities of Synoptic criticism.
H the proposed solutions of this part of the problem seem diffi
cult and far-fetched, these phenomena are mainly the cause. We
wiU mention a few such solutions without discussing them,
which would take up much space and lead to no assured and
final result.
{a) The original document which all three Evangelists are
foUowing was somewhat fuUer than our present St. Mark, and
contamed those expressions which have dropped out of our St.
Mark, though they are retained by St. Matthew and St. Luke.

362 BOOK BY BOOK.
(i) Our St. Mark is a composite work, and embodies to a
subordinate extent another document, which is reproduced more
exactly in St. Matthew and St. Luke.
{c) St. Luke, though foUowing in the main a document hke
our St. Mark, had also had sight of our St. Matthew, and
introduced some expressions from it.
This is the position in which the question stands at the present
moment, and the ultimate answer to it cannot yet be foreseen ;
it wall need very close and careful examination.
Under the second head (J) we placed those passages which
were found in St. Matthew and St. Luke, but which were absent
from St. Mark. It is not absolutely necessary that aU these
passages should have the same origin. By far the majority of
them, however, are simUar in kind, consisting of discourse
rather than of narrative. Now a possible interpretation of tbe
language of Papias was that St. Matthew wrote a " collection of
discourses." If this were granted, then the hypothesis lay near
at hand that the discourses found alike in St. Matthew and St.
Luke were taken from this primitive coUection, the true work
of the publican-Apostle. And it would also be an easy step to
explain the attribution of the first Gospel to St. Matthew as
due to the fact that it embodied so much of that work, on the
principle nominetur a potiori.
Here again was a solution in which there was much that was
attractive. But again it is necessary to suspend judgment. Once
more the statement in general terms is a different thing from
the detaUed testing. The task has been attempted with com
mendable zeal, diligence, and courage, but it is by no means
easy to reconstruct this original "coUection of discourses,"
and to give an inteUigible account of the manner in which it
came to assume the form it does Hi the first and third Gospels.
This is another question which must be regarded as still sub
judice. (x.) The portions of each Gospel which are pecuHar to that
Gospel are less difficult to deal with. In any case they would
owe their present shape to the final editor. Within hmits, we
can form a probable conjecture as to whether they were origi
nally oral tradition or written. The strongly Hebraistic bias of
the first two chapters of St. Luke make us suspect that the writer
had a Palestinian document before him. At the same time the
presence of so many touches of style which are characteristic of
the author of the third Gospel and the Acts induces us to beheve
that he worked up the contents of this document in language
that was largely his own. On tbe other hand, the allusions
(which aU hang together) to facts connected with the court of

GENERAL INTRODUCTION TO THE SYNOPTIC GOSPELS.

363

the Herods clearly rest on information the source of which would
be oral.
The theory as a whole no doubt leaves unsolved problems. It
is only thought that these are on the whole fewer and less for
midable than those which attach to other theories. Time alone
and critical investigation can dispose of them.
4. Date and Historical Character of the Gospels. — The mam cause
of the obscurity which hangs over the origin of the Gospels is
the multiform and apparently conflicting character of the data.
Even where the evidence distinctly preponderates in one direction,
there will stiU be some residuary phenomena which point in
another. If a number of arguments teU in favour of written
documents as the base of the common tradition, others still
remain which seem to raise a presumption that the original tra
dition was oral ; if five out of six of the data point to the priority
of St. Mark, the sixth wiU seem to give precedence to St. Matthew
or St. Luke ; H it is difficult to think that our first Gospel as a
whole lay before the author of the thHd, there are yet some
places which hardly seem as H they could be independent of each
other. (i.) In regard to the date of the Gospels something of the same
state of things obtains, though in a modified degree. We can
assert with great confidence that the mass of our Synoptic Gos
pels, even H not actuaUy committed to writing, had at least
assumed it's present form before the faU of Jerusalem in 70 a.d.
That event was a dividing Hne in the history of the Church such
as it has perhaps never seen since. The year 70 saw a fugitive
little community at PeUa, which was nearly aU that remained
of the Hebrew-born and Hebrew- or Aramaic-speaking Christ
ians. Meantime in Syria, Asia Minor, Macedonia, Greece,
in Rome itseH, and H not aHeady, yet within a very short time,
in Egypt, GentUe Christianity was advancing "by leaps and
bounds." The Church had no longer a fixed centre and metropolis ; its
leaders were scattered to the four winds, and the daughter
churches vied with each other in the vigour and elasticity of their
growth. Where there had once been a single centre, now there
were a number of centres, and it seemed quite an open question
which would command the rest. Christianity at this moment
was a diaspora without Jerusalem, even without Palestine. If
ever any one thing could be pronounced impossible, it is that
our Gospels should have arisen under such conditions. They are
Jewish to the core, not in the sense that they do not transcend
Judaism, but that their root is firmly planted in Judaism, however
much they may pass out beyond it.

364 BOOK BY BOOK.
We need not perhaps deny that some forlorn seeker among
the ruins might have hit upon the rather recondite detaUs of
topography that are found in the Synoptic Gospels, on Chorazin
and Bethsaida, Bethany and Bethphage, Nain and Emmaus. He
might have caught and reproduced those treating of Syrian
peasant IHe, which were not pecuHar to a single generation. The
fishermen on the Sea of Gahlee (though sad havoc must have
been made among them by the war), with theH casting-nets and
drag-nets ; the toU-office ; the labourers waiting to be hired, and
then working through the hot wind in the vineyard ; the cere
mony of a Jewish funeral, the bier and the paid mourners ; the
lepers and possessed who were so common an object of pity
or repulsion ; the different grades of officials of various kinds —
not only the ordinary toU-collectors but their chiefs (Luke xix. 2),
not only the members of the committee of the synagogue, but
the one in particular who regulated its services (Matt. He. 18 ;
Mark v. 22), the verger or attendant who brought out the sacred
roll and gave it to or received it from the reader (Luke iv. 20),
the local courts, the high court (Matt. v. 22), the Sanhedrin at
Jerusalem. Many even of these detaUs would hardly have come
naturally to a Christian of the generation which foUowed the
extinction of Jewish independence. Nor should we expect such
a one to draw those graphic pictures of the Pharisees in the
height of their power and glory, "making broad theH phylac
teries," praying ostentatiously at the corners of the streets, going
up with parade to the Temple, pronouncing some meats clean and
others uncleau, prescribing ablutions, evading the law on which
they laid such stress by theH casuistical distinctions.
AU these things we cannot but feel are drawn from the life ;
and stUl more from the Hfe, and only from the life, could a Chris
tian writer depict the Master whose name he bore, Hi conflict
with these men, caHed Hke them "Rabbi," but arraigning their
dearest principles ; exposing their hollowness and formaHsm ;
propounding larger and higher views of the Sabbath, of marriage
and divorce, of the resurrection, yet pursued by them with the
same casuistry which they practised among themselves, in the
hope that He might be caught tripping ; asked his opinion about
"biUs of divorcement," about Satanic agency in the casting out
of devUs, about the position of the woman in a case of LevUate
marriage, and about the reconciling of a passage in the Old
Testament which spoke of the Messiah at once. as " Lord" and
"Son." Least of all. would any Christian of this later date have repro
duced as our Evangelists have done so many phases in the history
of the Messianic expectation and its graduaUy revealed f ulfil-

GENERAL INTRODUCTION TO THE SYNOPTIC GOSPELS. 365
ment ; now writing entirely from the point of view of a Jew
with his particularist notions about the " consolation of Israel,"
the "redemption of Jerusalem," the "kingdom" promised to
the chosen people ; now presenting the idea as a subject of
debate and question — Was Jesus of Nazareth the Messiah, or
was He the prophet spoken of in Deuteronomy ; or was He
Elijah who was to precede and prepare the way for the Messiah?
Did not the Baptist himseH express a doubt as to whether He
was the Expected One or no ? — And even when he is asserting
the claim which Christ reaUy made, letting it be seen bow
widely the idea as represented by Him differed from the ordinary
conception — a Messiah who did not " strive or cry or lift up his
voice Hi the streets " ; a Messiah whom no one had constituted
"a judge or a divider" (Luke xu. 14); a Messiah who rode in
triumph into Jerusalem upon an ass, and there suffered the
enthusiasm of His foUowers to melt away ; who bade the loyal
adherent who would have fought for Him sheathe his sword, and
who put the eHmax to His own life by dying Hke any other victim
of Roman oppression upon the cross.
(H.) The great bulk of the Gospel narrative thus bears its date
upon its face as distinctly as H the writers had signed their names
at the foot of it. Theories which would throw the composition of
the Gospels into the second century are simply wide of the mark.
At that interval of time and at that stage of the Church's history
the conditions which our Gospels presuppose no longer existed.
And yet, although this is the case, there are touches in them here
and there whieh appear to date not before but after the taking
of Jerusalem.
In reproducing the language of prophecy it is natural that a
writer should aUow bis reproduction to be coloured by his own
relation to the fulfilment of that prophecy. From this point of
view it has been often remarked that the three Gospels practicaUy
date themselves. When St. Matthew records the events which
were to attend the taking of Jerusalem he does so evidently with
an eye to his own readers. When the abominable thing — the
unclean Roman standards — invades the sanctity of the Temple,
that is to be a signal for Christians to fly with all speed, and they
wiU pray that their flight may not be in the winter or on the
Sabbath, for an impeded or shortened journey wiU not carry
them quickly enough beyond the reach of danger. It is clear
from this that when it was written the catastrophe was near at
hand. But it had not yet actuaUy come ; because St. Matthew,
as he goes on, puts no interval between that catastrophe and
the end of the world : "Immediately after the tribulation of these
days the sun shaU be darkened," &c. (Matt. xxiv. 29).

366 BOOK BY BOOK.
St. Mark apparently wrote a Httle later : he stiU expects the
end of the world to f oUow quickly, but he does not regard it as
simultaneous with the faU of Jerusalem: "In those days, after
that tribulation," &e. (Mark xui. 24). By the tune that St. Luke
is writing the taking of Jerusalem is an event Hi the past : his
description is no longer couched Hi general terms but is fuU of
precise detaU suggested by the facts as they actuaUy happened
— the compassing with armies, the vallum thrown up to complete
the investment, the utter destruction, the massacre, dispersion,
and enslavement which foUow, whUe Jerusalem is trodden under
foot of the Gentiles " untU the times of the GentUes be fulfiUed"
(Luke xix. 42 — 44, compared with xxi. 20 — 24). In those very
" times of the Gentiles " St. Luke was writing, expecting (but in
vain) that they would pass away.
It has been often supposed, especiaUy by English writers, that
the Acts of the Apostles was composed at the point of time with
which it ends : if so, it was natural to infer that the Gospel was
written somewhat earlier, which would bring it about to the years
60 or 61. But apart from the argument of which we have just
been speaking, the preface to the Gospel demolishes every such
supposition. It impHes a far more advanced stage of Gospel-
writing than can have been possible at such a date. It would
make St. Luke an older Gospel not only than St. Matthew and
St. Mark but even (H those Gospels are based upon antecedent
documents) older than the documents out of which they were
composed — a reductio ad absurdum of the whole theory. The true
date of St. Luke must be placed at a substantial interval after
the taking of Jerusalem — say, about the year 80. There is
nothing in the data which conflicts with this.
In regard to St. Matthew and St. Mark the case is not quite
so clear. The phenomena are not aU strictly of a piece. The
considerations just urged seem faUly decisive in placing the main
body of the first Gospel at a measurable distance before the event
of a.d. 70 ; and the main body of the second Gospel within nearer
sight of that event. At the same time we have seen that viewed
on the side of their Hterary relations to each other the second
Gospel may claim a certam priority. There are, too, single
expressions (like " the king was wroth and sent his armies and
slew those murderers, and burnt up their city," in Matt. xxii. 7),
which seem to look back upon the destruction of Jerusalem.
How these apparent contradictions are to be reconcUed is a part
of the problem which stiU seeks solution.
5. History of the Use and Canonical Reception of the Gospels. — The
desired solution may perhaps be found when we come to consider
the circumstances under which the Gospels were first put into cH-

GENERAL INTRODUCTION TO THE SYNOPTIC GOSPELS. 367
culatioh. We cannot suppose that there was any formal pubH-
cation such as took place Hi the ease of Greek or Roman classics
at this date, when the author pubHcly recited his new piece in a
lecture-hall fiHed with his friends and admirers, and when some
famous publisher like Atticus undertook to have it copied in
wholesale quantities and launched upon the market. The early
Christians had command of no such machinery. They were as a
rule drawn from the poorer classes. Many of them must have
been illiterate. The few who distinguished themselves by com
position had picked up the art as it were by the wayside — in
some pubhc office like the coUecting of market dues and toUs, or
Hi the ranks of a provincial profession. We are .not to think of
authors like these as surrounded by the shorthand writers and
cahgraphers who attended upon the hterary men of Rome or
Alexandria, who took down and transcribed their productions in
clear and beautiful characters like those of the Bankesian Hiad
or of the famous " Codex Vaticanus."
Many signs point to the conclusion that the period of greatest
activity in the composition of Gospels included the years just
before and just after the faU of Jerusalem — an anxious and
troubled period, when the wisest course for Christians was to
avoid public notice as much as possible. Under these circum
stances of constraint and secrecy the Gospels were written, very
probably on rough material, with Hnked letters, not exactly in
the later cursive hand, but in the hand used for everyday busi
ness transactions, which feU some way short of the purity and
clearness of the book-hand. So written, the first copies would be
passed about privately from hand to hand, often suffering in the
process, and becoming more degenerate as bad copies were pro
pagated. This would account for the many variants that are
found Hi the early texts.
But there is one particular feature which we must keep speciaUy
Hi view. The private persons who possessed and circulated these
copies, and even the church officers who from time to time had
charge of them, would not feel exactly bound by the obligations
of professional copyists. They would not reject an opportunity
of enriching their MS. with additions from the oral tradition,
which, H they were not part of the original Gospel, might have
been, so far as their contents were concerned, and were very
possibly quite as authentic. In this way not a few slight but
deeply interesting and important additions have come down to us
which are wanting in what we caU " the best MSS.," and upon
the purest line of transmission, but which for aU that we may be
very glad to have preserved.
Nor can we suppose that the same persons who accepted these

368 BOOK BY BOOK.
additions would feel themselves debarred from making other
seemingly trivial alterations so as to give greater point to an
expression or to clear up an obscurity. Some such smaU changes
may have been made in copies so early that all trace of their
origin had been lost. The autographs of the Gospels, written on
fragile papyrus and much used, soon perished, and these inter
polated copies alone became the parents of that long succession
which has come down to us.
Started thus upon theH career, the Gospels were yet not at first
the same exclusive authority whieh they soon became. They
were read in the churches ; they were doubtless used in eatechetic
instruction ; and they must have been often eagerly studied by
private individuals. But the written Gospel had to compete with
another source of information which had not yet run dry. The
same Papias above mentioned, who gives such interesting if
tantalising details about the first two Gospels, records also
(but not necessarUy in dHect antithesis to them) his own pre
ference for what he caUs " the Hving and abiding voice " of oral
tradition. There is no reason to think that he would have valued more
highly words which he was assured had been spoken by St.
Matthew than words which he knew to have been written by
St. Matthew's own hand. He probably had in mind more pre
tentious and less authentic Gospels, Hke those used by BasUides
and his followers, whieh bad aHeady begun to be current in his
day. Even side by side with our present Gospels, there sprang
into existence other embellished and apocryphal histories, a
growth of tares which in ancient times seldom failed to shoot up
round the memory of illustrious Hves. But these apocryphal
Gospels, connected as they were by many links of genuine tra
dition with the true Gospels, and some of them even based upon
those Gospels, as the Gospel according to the Hebrews on that of
St. Matthew, naturaUy awoke a certain suspicion among the
leaders of the Church ; and we can understand how a man like
Papias would receive with more satisfaction the stories that were
told him by venerable persons who had been themselves the con
temporaries of Apostles, and whom he could cross-question as to
the source from which their narratives were derived.
In any case, for some fifty years after the faU of Jerusalem
there was a concurrent stream of oral tradition side by side with
the written Gospels. The Church writers (such as there were
lor but few of their remains have come down to us) drew from
this stream as weU as from the. Gospels. And even when they
used the Gospels, their use of them seems to have been affected
by the fact that they were still in what we may call an oral

GENERAL INTRODUCTION TO THE SYNOPTIC GOSPELS. 369
period, a period of speech and action rather than of writing.
They are apt to trust to memory, and to reproduce freely, as per
sons quoting from memory wiU do, giving the sense correctly,
but often combining what was found Hi one Gospel with what
was found in another, and, Hke the New Testament writers them
selves, not seldom mixing together passages more or less widely
separated in the original.
To the period of which we are speaking belong the ApostoHc
Fathers, as they are caUed, Clement of Rome, Ignatius, Polycarp,
Barnabas, Hermas, and the newly recovered "Doctrine of the
Apostles." The chief writer of the next period is Justin Martyr,
whose " Apology " falls about 150 a.d. Nearly of the same date
is the so-called Second Epistle of Clement, which, since the miss
ing portion has been added to it, is seen to be really the earliest
existing specimen of a Christian homUy. With Justin may be
also bracketed his disciple Tatian.
There can be no doubt that Justin quotes, and quotes largely,
from our present Gospels, as a number of the distinctive expres
sions and detaUs of each reappear in his pages. He is fond of
the title " Memoirs of the Apostles," by which he usuaUy refers
to our Gospels ; and he appears to be acquainted with the tra
dition which connects the Gospel of St. Mark specially with St.
Peter. A large part of the Synoptic narrative might be repro
duced, in outline at least, from Justin. Justin, however, still
makes a subordinate use either of oral tradition or of an Apo
cryphal Gospel, perhaps of both. His contemporary, the author
of the Second Epistle of Clement, along with a number of unmis
takable quotations from St. Matthew and St. Luke, also openly
quotes apocryphal authorities, of which the Gospel according to
the Egyptians is one. We are still, it wiH be seen, in a period of
transition. Though the authority of our Gospels is firmly rooted,
it is stiU shared by others.
They are, however, graduaUy becoming separated from the
rest, and acquUing a character of exceptional sacredness. A
writer Hke Papias is careful to vindicate the historical accuracy
of St. Mark, but he does so in a way which might apply to any
other historian. The exceptional and sacred character attached
at first, not to any particular record, but to the " sayings of the
Lord" in themselves. To these sayings the writers of the first
generation after the Apostles were wont to give a name whieh
weU expressed theH conception of them. They caUed them
" Oracles." Like the utterances of the Pythoness at Delphi,
they were brief in form, but charged with concentrated meaning,
and they carried a more than human authority.
There is, indeed, some difference of opinion as to the extent of
B B

370 BOOK BY BOOK.
the application of this name " Oracles." Many would apply it
to the complete Gospels as we have them ; but it seems better, at
least in the majority of the places where it is used, to understand
by it rather the " Gospel within the Gospel," the actual sayings
and discourses of the Lord. " His words are short and concise,"
says Justin, " for He was no sophist, but His speech was the
power of God."*
It was in the struggle with heresy that the position of the
Canonical Gospels came to be graduaUy defined. The Gnostics,
whose greatest activity faUs in the first haH of the second cen
tury, made especial use of Gospels which they either composed
or interpolated and otherwise tampered with, so as to make them
convey their doctrines. It was a work of this kind which was
used in the HomUy ascribed to Clement. But the leaders of the
Church entered upon a struggle with Gnosticism, and they took
steps to guard against its insinuating itseH in this way. They
adopted in spirit the Talmudical motto, ' ' to make a fence round
the law." They drew the cordon more and more closely round
those Gospels whieh seemed to them free from heretical taint, and
which they conceived to rest upon the best authority.
It was Hi the age of Justin that this process was going on. It
must have proceeded with great rapidity, for by the time of
Irenaeus it was not only complete, but it was treated as if it had
been some time complete, the estabhshed law of the Church.
There is a famous passage Hi the third book of Irenaeus " Against
Heresies" which was written about the year 185. It is worth
whUe to quote this passage, as it shows what was the tone of
thought at this date in the Church on the subject of the Gospels.
The "fourfold Gospel" is no novelty, but has its settled place
in the mystical order and constitution of things.
" Forasmuch as there are four quarters of the world in which we live, as
there are also four universal winds, and as the Church is scattered over all
the earth, and the Gospel is the pillar and base of the Church and the breath
(or spirit) of life, it is likely that it should have four pillars breathing im
mortality on every side, and kindling afresh the life of men. Whence it is
evident that the Word, the architect of all things, who sitteth upon the
cherubim and holdeth all things together, having been made manifest unto
men, gave us the Gospel in a fourfold shape, but held together by one Spirit.
As David, entreating for His presence, saith, ' Thou that sitteth upon the
cherubim show Thyself.' Eorthe cherubim are of fourfold visage, and their
visages are symbols of the economy of the Son of Man. . . . And the Gospels
therefore agree with them, over which presideth Jesus Christ."
The writer then goes on to apply in detail the symboHsm of
the cherubim to each in turn of the four Gospels, foUowing an
• " Apol." i. 14 : comp. Eom. i. 16.

GENERAL INTRODUCTION TO THE SYNOPTIC GOSPELS. 371
order different from that with which we are now most famUiar.
St. John he compares to the Lion, St. Luke to the Calf, St.
Matthew to the Man, St. Mark to the Eagle. A usage which
has reached this reflective and speculative stage is clearly one pf
long standing.
From the time of Irenaeus onwards aU'obscurity has vanished-
Up to Irenaeus, or we may say up to the year 185, we are obliged
to piece together one item of evidence with another from 'the
scanty literature which has come down to us, and to reconstruct
a hypothetical view from imperfect materials. But from the date
we have mentioned aU becomes clear : evidence pours in on every
side. Irenaeus, as we have seen, is quite unequivocal. Perhaps
a year or two before Irenaeus, or j ust upon the threshold of his
great work, comes a remarkable document caUed from its dis
coverer the Muratorian Fragment. This fragment is the first
canonical Hst of the Books of the New Testament. It is muti
lated at the beginning, but there can be no doubt that it origi
naUy contained an enumeration of our four Gospels. Not long
after Irenaeus is Clement of Alexandria (flourished 193 a.d.);
soon after Clement Tertullian (writing 194 — 221 a.d.) ; contem
porary with Tertullian Hippolytus (died 236 a.d.); and but a
little younger than Hippolytus Origen (died 253 a.d.), who
again overlaps the Latin writers Novatian and Cyprian (mar
tyred 258 A.D.)
These names stand at the head of a voluminous Hterature, and
theH testimony is practicaUy unanimous. The Alexandrian writers
are somewhat freer than the rest in their use of extra-canonical
books, but their deliberate language is essentiaUy the same. The
only Gospels "received without dispute Hi the Church under
heaven"* are our present four.
We need not pursue the history of the reception of the Gospels
farther. Its pages are reaUy closed. There has been no appre
ciable difference in the attitude of the Church towards the Gos
pels from the Muratorian Fragment to our own day. It is true
that in recent years a sharper controversy has gathered round
them : theH dates, their authorship, their historical character has
been questioned. In these questionings criticism and hyper-
criticism have been largely mingled, and the end of the process
has not yet been reached. Only perhaps we can trace, not
expressed Hi any formula, and often not consciously realised, a
sort of sUent gravitating towards a view more nearly akin to that
of the first age than of subsequent ages ; a tendency to treat the
Gospels as Hi the first instance historical authorities for the acts
* Origen, ap. Eus. HE., vi. 25.
B B 2

372 BOOK BY BOOK.
and words of Christ, not altogether perfect or infallible autho
rities, fragmentary, incomplete, varying from time to time in the
nature of theH authentication, and embodying along with the
facts something also of the conceptions of simple and unscientific
minds ; and yet guarded against any wide possibiUties of error
by the assured primitiveness of theH date, bearing on theH face
a thousand marks which stamp them as the product of a still
living and faithful tradition, and guaranteed above aH by their
consistent presentation of a single unique and commanding
figure, which neither theH authors nor any other hand of man
could have invented. There is a tendency to detach this por
trait from its framework, and to see in the Gospels primarily,
what Papias and his contemporaries saw in them, the record of
" Oracles of the Lord."

THE GOSPEL ACCORDING TO
ST. MATTHEW.
1. Early Statements respecting the Gospel. — In the preceding
chapter mention has several times been made of Papias, Bishop
of HierapoHs, a city not far from Colossse, in the most flourishing
and active part of Phrygia. Two brief statements by Papias
exceed in importance aU the other early references to our Gospel,
partly from theH early date and partly from their express charac
ter. A slight addition which has been recently made to the
extant fragments of Papias would tend to show that he was
writing as late as the reign of Antoninus Pius (138 — 161), or, at
least, of Hadrian (117 — 138). But the passages of which we are
speaking cannot weU be later than the beginning of Hadrian's
reign, as the context imphes that Papias himself was not sepa
rated by more than a generation from the Apostles, and that
some who could speak with an authority almost equal to that of
the Apostles stiU survived. We are thus carried back to the
time when so many critical changes were taking place, and when
the hterature which should have recorded them was so scanty.
The statements of Papias have the further advantage of bemg,
not Hke the references Hi the few tracts or letters that have come
down to us, mere quotations from or side-aUusions to the text of
unnamed Gospels, but definite affirmations bearing the names
which stiU appear in the titles of our Bibles.
The words of Papias respecting St. Matthew, HteraUy rendered,
are as foUows :
"Matthew then composed the Oracles of the Lord in the
Hebrew tongue, and every one interpreted them as he was
able." Hebrew means here, not, of course, the Hebrew of the Old
Testament, which was by this time a dead language, nor yet the
Hebrew of the Talmud, which was the property of a few Rabbis,
but the Aramaic vernacular commonly spoken in Palestine.

374 BOOK BY BOOK.
Papias does not stand alone in asserting that St. Matthew wrote
in this dialect : he is only the first of a chain of writers who say
the same thing. Origen says it several times : twice in the
Commentary on St. John written in 228 — 231, and once Hi the
Commentary on St. Matthew written in 245—6. This latter
passage affirms expressly that St. Matthew wrote "in Hebrew
[Aramaic] characters." Older still than Origen, the first great
name in the Alexandrian Church, Pantaenus, teacher of Clement,
and a contemporary of Irenaeus, was reported to have gone as a
missionary to "the Indians " (meaning probably the Homeritae
in Arabia Felix), and to have found there a copy of St. Matthew's
Gospel " in Hebrew characters " left by St. Bartholomew.
These early authorities are quoted and endorsed by Eusebius
(circa 324) and Eusebius again by Jerome (392), who claims also
to have seen a copy at Bercea, in Syria, though there is much
reason to think that in this he is confusing the work of St.
Matthew with the apocryphal " Gospel according to the He
brews." There is no counter-tradition which at aU conflicts
with these statements, so that it would not be wrong to say that
the universal opinion of antiquity, so far as we have the means
of ascertaining that opinion, is that St. Matthew wrote "in
Hebrew, for Hebrews," i.e. Hi Aramaic, for Aramaic-speaking
Christians. 2. Comparison of these Statements with our present Gospel. — Our
next question then is to ask, Does the description thus given fit
our present Gospel ? Was our Gospel one of the many transla
tions of the Aramaic original into Greek ? Such a translation
might conceivably have been made by St. Matthew himseH, and
there are some who believe that it was so made. There is no
doubt that Irenaeus and Origen had in theH minds our present
Gospel. There is no doubt that Pantaenus also was in the habit
of using that Gospel, though what precisely was the document
which he found among the Arabians (if he did find it), we have
no means of testing. That Papias, too, used our present Gospel
is extremely probable. But it should be remembered that he is
not sitting down to criticise the text of the Gospel or even to trace
its history : he is merely stating an historical fact, traditionaUy
handed down, and referring to times considerably anterior to
his own.
Are there valid reasons for supposing that this tradition relates
to our Gospel? (i.) Scholars who have examined the subject
have not been able to discover in the diction or style of the Gos
pel any clear proof that it is a translation. There are certain
cases of play upon words which rather seem to point to a Greek
original. Besides, when the Gospel is compared with the stUl

THE GOSPEL ACCORDING TO ST. MATTHEW. 375
extant fragments of an undoubtedly Hebrew or Aramaic work
hke the Gospel according to the Hebrews, the idioms of the
latter are seen to be Hebrew where those of the former are not.
(ii.) So far the hne of argument is somewhat precarious. There
are translations and translations. In some the transfusion of
thought and language is much more thorough than in others.
But a further examination of our Gospel reveals phenomena
which it is more difficult to reconcUe with the theory of an Ara
maic original. The treatment of Old Testament quotations in
the Gospel is pecuHar ; and a kind of law seems to run through
them. Those whieh occur in the parts of the Gospel which have
no paraUel, frequently show the influence of the Hebrew, and
present many points of contact with the Targums, or Aramaic
paraphrases which have preserved for us the traditional inter
pretations used in our Lord's time in the synagogues.
On the other hand the quotations in those parts of the Gospel
which have direct paraUels in the other synoptics are taken from
the Septuagint. Good examples of the first class would be Matt.
U. 6 (= Micah v. 2), a passage expressly applied to the Messiah
in the Targums, and one the form of which bears every appear
ance of having been influenced by oral paraphrase ; and Matt.
H. 23, where " He shaU be caUed a Nazarene " is best explained
by a play upon the Hebrew netser, " a Branch " {vide Isa. xi. 1) ;
Matt. xH. 18 — 21 = Isa. xHi. 1 — 4, which diverges widely from
the Greek, is an example of a comment inserted into the body of
the Evangelical narrative. Quotations like Matt. xiii. 14, 15, or
xv. 4, 8, 9, which belong to the common synoptic matter agree
with the Greek. There are some seventeen quotations which are
thus common to aU three synoptics, besides a number more which
are common to St. Matthew and St. Mark, or St. Matthew and
St. Luke.
3. Our present St. Matthew a Composite Work. — These pheno
mena, which are clearly marked, strongly suggest the conclusion
that our present Gospel is a composite work. We have already
seen that this was probably the case from a comparison of the
three Gospels with each other, and now our previous argument
is confirmed from another side. An analysis of the first Gospel
resolves it into three main parts. One of these is the matter
pecuHar to the Evangelist, a characteristic feature of which we
have just been considering. A second comprises the whole
framework of narrative from the Baptism of John to the Resur
rection. The third consists of certam great blocks of discourse,
inserted at intervals in the midst of the narrative. It is hard to
beheve that the first and second of these parts came originally
from the same hand. Some common welding together they have

376 BOOK BY BOOK.
of course undergone, due to the hand which gave to our Gospel
its present shape ; but this superficial adjustment and actual
first composition are quite different things.
When the narrative of St. Matthew is closely examined by the
side of that of St. Mark, the greater originality of the latter is
almost everywhere visible. If not our St. Mark itself, a docu
ment very like our St. Mark supplied the base for both the other
Gospels. Now, though it is quite within the bounds of possi-
biHty that the Apostle Matthew thus reproduced another man's
work at second-hand instead of having recourse to his own recol
lections, it cannot be said that such a hypothesis is probable.
Much more probable is it that a later — though not late — writer
combined these three disparate elements into one, himseH being
responsible for the first, and drawing upon other sources for the
remaining two. More probable, on one condition, viz., that some
good reason can be given for the tradition which connects the
name of St. Matthew with the Gospel.
4. The Collection of Discourses in the Gospel. — So far we have
spoken of two out of the three elements in the Gospel, but we
have as yet said very Httle about the third. When we put aside
the preliminary narratives, the most distinctive feature in the
first and third Gospels as compared with the second is the much
greater ampHtude of the discourses contained in them. In the
first Gospel these discourses show an even greater art of compo
sition. It is not probable that they were aU entirely spoken on
the occasions with which they are connected. Some of them
could not have been spoken at once at the times to which they
are assigned by St. Matthew, and also at those at which they
appear in St. Luke. It is clear that in St. Matthew there is a
certain amount of grouping ; sayings of simUar character are
brought into juxtaposition.
With this characteristic of St. Matthew's Gospel in our mind
let us look back once more at the testimony of Papias. He says,
" Matthew composed the Oracles of the Lord in Hebrew." We
have aHeady admitted that this term "Oracles of the Lord"
might mean a complete Gospel, such as we now have. But then
we have also seen that it is very doubtful that St. Matthew ever
composed such a Gospel in Hebrew. It is therefore natural to
f aU back on the narrower and stricter sense of the word trans
lated " Oracles," and to identify them with these discourses for
which " Oracles," the word used specially of the utterances of the
prophets, is the most appropriate that could be chosen.
Then at once day Hght seems to dawn upon our inquiry. The
condition for which we had stipulated is satisfactorily fulfilled.
The Gospel, as we have it, was not composed by St. Matthew ;

THE GOSPEL ACCORDING TO ST. MATTHEW. 377
but St. Matthew did compose the collection of "Oracles" em
bodied in our Gospel, and that most distinctive part gave the
Gospel its name. The original coUection, as an independent
work, written on fraU papyrus, and exposed as we may weU
believe to perils both by land and by sea, perished. In that
time of harassed movement and distress which environed the
destruction of Jerusalem, there is nothing in this to surprise us,
even though the scanty Christian chronicles (which owe nearly
aU they have to teU us to the Jew Josephus) take no notice of
the fact. But, before it perished, St. Matthew's httle roll had
been aHeady copied, and either that copy or another was soon
incorporated, with such changes and rearrangement as the
transfer necessitated, into our present Gospel.
This is a hypothetical view of the way in which our present
Gospel arose. The impression must not be given that it is free
from difficulties, or that it has as yet been completely substan
tiated by proof. It has aHeady been implied that this is not the
case, nor would the writer of this venture to claim for it a greater
degree of acceptance than it deserves ; he only puts it forward
as the theory which seems to him most Hkely, in its main lines,
to hold its own.
5. Doctrinal Character and Purpose of the Gospel. — The doctrinal
character and purpose of the Gospel was very early apprehended,
and on this point, too, we have anticipated somewhat in the pre
ceding chapter. If the Gospel was written "for Hebrews, in
Hebrew," it naturaUy foUowed that it would be written in such
a way as would most commend the faith of Christ to the Jews.
The great stumbling-block for the unconverted was the claim
that the crucified Jesus, from the despised Galilean city Nazareth,
was the Messiah ; and the great turning-point for those who
accepted Christianity was the conviction of His Messiahship. To
this then the EvangeHst addresses himself, and he seeks to prove
that Jesus of Nazareth was reaUy the Messiah of Jewish pro
phecy, reaUy the legitimate descendant of Abraham and David,
heir, in a grander sense than David himself had ever reaHsed,
to the Davidic empHe. Accordingly he dweUs in minute detail
not only on the direct fulfilments of prophecy, but also on those
many particulars in the Gospel narrative which seemed to repro
duce features or incidents connected with the ideal figures of the
Old Dispensation.
The wonderful birth and symbolical Name of which Isaiah
spoke pre-figured the Birth and Incarnation of the Messiah. He
was the Deliverer whom Micah had foretold as to be born in
David's city. The wailing which attended the carrying away
captive of the "chUdren of Rachel" {i.e. inhabitants of Judah

378 BOOK BY BOOK.
and Bethlehem) by the Chaldeans, typified the waUing which
arose upon the massacre which aimed at the hfe of the infant
Messiah. The Chosen People Israel came up out of Egypt, and
so must the Messiah — God's Chosen — be brought up out of
Egypt. If He took up His abode in the city of Nazareth that,
too, had been intimated in one of His symbolical titles. Like
the servant of Jehovah His ministry was to be mild and gentle,
tender towards the weak and wavering, not loud or demonstra
tive. Like that servant in another aspect He was to take upon
Himself the infirmities and sufferings of humanity. Even the
reward paid to the traitor Apostle has its counterpart in that
goodly sum, as it is ironically called, which the prophet Zacha-
riah represents the discarded Shepherd of Israel as receiving tor
his services. None of these are mere chance coincidences. The
course of both the Old and New Dispensations is aU Divinely
ordered. There is a "pre-established harmony" between its
parts ; the Old points forward to the New, and the New points
backward to the Old; nothing happens of itself, but that the
word spoken "by the Lord through the prophets" might be
fulfiUed. This is the leading idea of St. Matthew's Gospel. It is not
merely an apologetic argument addressed to bis countrymen : it
is rather the fruit of his own devout reflection, and that of others
like him, tracing the finger of God in history, and bringing out
the deep significance of those events on which the Christian mind
deHghts to dweU. Such an attitude of mind is essentiaUy Jewish.
It is true that the Gentile converts adopted the argument from
prophecy ; but it was not possible that they should have so strong
a grasp — Uke that of the ancient prophets themselves — on the
Divme overruling of all events and cHcumstances in the carrying
out of a religious purpose.
There is something equaUy Jewish in the way in whieh the
Evangelist clings to the old use of terms. Jerusalem is stiU for
him the "Holy City," the Messiah is "King of the Jews," or
"Son of David"; the God whom people praise is "Israel's
God." It is to the "lost sheep of the House of Israel " that the
Apostles are sent. The heathen lie outside the sphere of Christ's
mission.* Even "at the regeneration" the "twelve tribes" of
Israel are to be judged by the Apostles for the Messiah.
In keeping with this is the stress which is laid upon the fulfil
ment of the law. St. Paul himseH at times put forward this side
of the question ;f but he is far more often occupied in showing
that the law, as a system of precepts, has come to an end. What
* Matthew xv. 23, 26, 27. t Romans iii. 31 ; xiii. 9.

THE GOSPEL ACCORDING TO ST. MATTHEW. 379
with him is the exception, with St. Matthew is the rule, laid
down with unequivocal precision.*
And yet the first EvangeHst is no narrow-minded or illiberal
Christian. He thoroughly accepts the admission of the Gentiles
into the Church, and records many sayings which anticipate that
admission. He alone describes the visit of the eastern sages ;
he takes notice of the words of the Baptist demolishing the pre
tensions of the Jews as the children of Abraham ; he mentions
the announcement to the faithful centurion that many should
come from the east and west and sit down with the patriarchs in
the heavenly kingdom ; with true historical perspective, as the
history advances and the conflict grows deeper, declarations of
this kind increase in number, f till the Gospel finally closes with
the command to " make disciples of aU nations."
The EvangeHst — who thus if he is not St. Matthew himself,
most probably retains to the fuU the spirit of St. Matthew —
stands midway between two worlds. His roots are struck deep
into the past ; he is impressed with the strict continuity of
the dispensations on the dividing line between which he was
Hving ; and yet he also looks forward into the future with no
unfriendly or reluctant gaze ; as the prophets had foreseen the
coming of Christ, so he recognises that Christ had foreseen the
throwing wide of the gates to those whom the Old Law had ex
cluded. He has not discarded Judaism, but with him it is a
Judaism of the spirit and not of the letter : Judaism enlarged
and Christianized. Jew among Jews, as he is, the EvangeHst
does not look to the high-placed Pharisees and Sadducees as the
true representatives of his people. He turns rather with tender
sympathy to the poor and suffering, and he sees in them the true
"children of the kingdom." The "poor in spirit" ; the angels
of Christ's httle ones who behold the face of His Father ; the
Gospel hidden from the wise and prudent and revealed unto
babes ; the hght yoke and easy burden of Christ, are phrases
peculiar to this Gospel. St. John speaks of the "new birth"
which the beUever must undergo, but St. Matthew has portrayed
that new birth with the most deHcate and feehng touches. He
has caught and saved for us those words of his Master which
most truly express the innermost essence of Christianity.
6. Analysis of the Gospel. — Bearing in mind the results which
have been so far reached, both as to the critical history and
doctrinal character and purpose of the Gospel, we are now in a
position to attempt an analysis of its contents, such as may at
once bring out the leading features of its structure, and also
* Matthew v. 17—19. t Matthew xxi. 28—32, 42, 43 ; xxii. 1—10.

380 BOOK BY BOOK.
help to Ulustrate the foregoing discussions. We wUl do this,
premising once more that we are not deaHng with assured con
clusions — no such conclusions as yet exist — but only with such
as seem best to commend themselves for provisional acceptance.
The three sources of the Gospel appear to be (i.) the Mark-
Gospel (whieh we caU by this name so as not to prejudge its exact
identity with our St. Mark); (ii.) the Oracles, originaUy com
posed in Hebrew by St. Matthew; (Hi.) Oral Tradition, speciaUy
coUeeted by the EvangeHst.
The structure of the Gospel is determined by its leading idea,
the presentation of Jesus of Nazareth as the Jewish Messiah.
The first two chapters bring together a number of notes in the
bHth and early life of Jesus, marking Him out as the Messiah of
prophecy. In the remainder of the Gospel materials, whieh the
EvangeHst found aHeady existing, are worked up in such a way
as to throw into rehef His Messianic character. From this point
of view the cHmax is reached when the reserve and deHcate,
indHect seH-manHestation of Jesus HimseH, with the corres
ponding prolonged hesitation of His disciples, are at last broken
by St. Peter's explicit confession. This height, however, is no
sooner reached and the confession confirmed by the glories of
the Mount of Transfiguration than the road begins to lead down
wards into the VaUey of the Shadow of Death. Another aspect
of the Messianic office is brought out : the Messiah was not only
to reign as King over His people, but He was also to suffer for
the sins of mankind.*
The Earthly Career, Character, Mission, and Death of Jesus,
the Messiah.
I. Preliminary history : Birth and chUdhood of the Messiah in
fulfilment of prophecy (i., H.).
Abrahamic and Davidic Lineage — "virgin- BUth — Visit of
tbe Magi — Flight into Egypt — Massacre of Bethlehem — ¦
Return to Nazareth.
Except the genealogy, which was probably written,. Oral Tradition,
collected by the evangelist.
II. Inauguration to the Messianic office (iii. 1 — iv. 11).
Ministry of John — Baptism — Temptation.
Outline from Mark- Gospel with additions from Oracles.
* In the Greek text published by Drs. Westcott and Hort, attention is
called by the mode of printing to the fact that in thin Grospel the formula
which marks the commencement of our Lord's public ministry (iv. 17) is
exactly repeated at the point where He first begins to prophesy His ap
proaching death (xvi. 21). Both are critical moments which correspond to
each other.

THE GOSPEL ACCORDING TO ST. MATTHEW. 381
ILL GalUean Ministry of the Messiah, in a series of scenes or
pictures, partly narrative and partly descriptive or typical.
1. FHst scene. Typical examples of His words and works
(iv. 12— ix. 34).
i. Historic introduction, dating from the imprisonment of
John (iv. 12— v. 2).
Settlement at Capernaum — CaU of Apostles —Circuit of
Galilee.
From Mark-Gospel.
H. Typical discourse[s] on the Messianic Kingdom (v. 3—
vii. 29).
Character approved by the Messiah in the members of
His Kingdom — The Messianic Righteousness — Laws
of the Kingdom — Devotion — Duties — Rules of Life.
Erom the Matthean Oracles.
iu. CoUection of representative works (viii. 1 — ix. 34).
The Leper — The Centurion's Servant — Peter's Wife's
Mother — Heahng — FoUowers — Storm at Sea — Two
Gadarene Demoniacs Paralytic at Capernaum — Con
necting Narrative : CaU of Matthew, and Discourse at
his House — Ruler's Daughter — Issue of Blood — Two
bhnd Men — Deaf and dumb Demoniacs.
Mainly from Mark-Gospel; many think that the healing of the cen
turion's daughter came from the Oracles.
2. Second scene. Mission of the Twelve with its sequel
(ix. 35 — xu.).
i. CHcumstances of the Mission (ix. 35 — x.).
Description probably from Oracles.
H. Discourse on the Mission (x. 5 — 42).
Mission for Israel — Charge to the Missionaries-^Their
Reward.
Mainly from Oracles.
iu. Thread of Narrative continued : Rising opposition ; the
Httle flock of BeHevers'(xi., xii.).
Question and character of the Baptist — Chorazin and
Bethsaida — The Gospel of babes and toilers — Two
Sabbath Anecdotes* — Gentleness of the Messiahf —
Casting out devUs by Beelzebub — The Messiah's
fame.*
Mainly from Oracles ; sections marked* from Mark-Gospel ; that
marked t a comment by the evangelist.
3. Third scene. ParaboHc teaching of the Messiah ; con
tinuation of narrative (xui., xiv.).

382 BOOK BY BOOK.
i. Seven parables (xiii. 1 — 52).
The Sower — Wheat and Tares — Mustard-seed — Leaven —
Treasure —Pearl — Drag-net.
Mark- Gospel and Oracles intermixed.
ii. Thread of narrative continued (xiii. 53 — xiv. 36).
Rejection at Nazareth — 'Death of John— Feeding of five
thousand — Walking on the Water.
From Mark-Gospel.
4. Fourth scene. Culminating point of opposition and confes
sion (xv. 1 — xvi. 20).
i. Conflict with the Pharisees on tradition (xv. 1 — 20).
Erom Mark-Gospel.
ii. Withdrawal to the north — Excursion across the Lake (xv.
21— xvi. 12).
The Canaanite Woman — Feeding of four thousand— Further
Conflict with Pharisees.
Mainly from Mark-Gospel.
iii. Second withdrawal (xvi. 13 — 20).
Peter's Confession ; chmax to the recognition of the Messiah
by His disciples.
Mark-Gospel combined with Oracles.
5. Fifth scene. The confession ratified — Forebodings of the
end (xvi. 21- — xviH. 35).
i. Caesarea PhUippi (xvi. 21 — xvii. 20).
First announcement of the Passion — Transfiguration — The
epUeptic Boy.
Erom Mark- Gospel.
ii. Return to Capernaum (xvH. 22 — 27).
Second announcement of Passion — The Temple-tax.
Mark- Gospel and Special Tradition.
iii. Discourses at Capernaum (xviii.).
The Child-like Temper — Offences — Straying — DiscipHne —
The Unmerciful Servant.
Mainly from Oracles; introduction from Mark-Gospel.
6. Last Journey to Jerusalem (xix., xx.).
Marriage and Divorce — Children Blessed — The Rich Young
Man— Labourers in the Vineyard — ThHd announcement
of Passion — Sons of Zebedee — Two Blind Beggars at
Jericho.
From Mark- Gospel; Parable of Labourers from Oracles.
7. The Messiah at Jerusalem ; final acts and discourses (xxi.
 XXV.).

THE GOSPEL ACCORDING TO ST. MATTHEW. 383
i. Entrance into Jerusalem (xxi. 1 — 17).
The triumphal Procession — Cleansing of the Temple — Babes
and Sucklings.
From Mark-Gospel.
ii. Discourses and controversies (xxi. 18 — xxii. 45).
The Barren Fig-tree — Authority of Messiah — The two
Sonsf — Wicked Husbandmen — The Messianic Banquet f
— The special Robe +— Plots frustrated.
Mainly from Mark- Gospel ; sections marked t from Oracles.
Hi. Denunciation of the Pharisees (xxiii.).
Another group of sayings from Oracles.
iv. Discourses on the last things (xxiv., xxv.).
Apocalyptic Discourse — Watchful Servants — Virgins —
Talents — Last Judgment.
The apocalyptic discourse mainly from Mark-Gospel, rest from Oracles.
IV. Passion and Resurrection of the Messiah (xxvi. — xxviii.).
1. Two days before the Passover (xxvi. 1 — 16).
Fourth announcement of Passion — The Rulers' Plot —
Anointing for Burial — Treachery of Judas.
Mainly from Mark- Gospel.
2. i. The Last Supper (xxvi. 17 — 35).
The Paschal Meal — Betrayal foretold — Institution of the
Eucharist.
ii. On the way to Gethsemane — Dispersion of the Disciples
and Peter's denial foretold.
From Mark-Gospel.
3. Arrest, trial, and crucifixion ; fulfilment of prophecy
noted (xxvi. 36 — xxvii. 56).
Gethsemane — Arrest — Trial before Caiaphas — Peter's
FaU— §End of Judas— Trial before Pilate— §PUate's
Indecision — The Sentence — Mocking — Simon of Cyrene
— Crucifixion — §Attendant Wonders — Witnesses of the
Crucifixion.
From Mark- Gospel, with traces of special tradition in passages marked & .
4. The Burial (xxvU. 57—66).
Joseph's Tomb — §The Pharisees' Guard.
From Mark- Gospel ; passages marked § from Special Tradition.
5. The Resurrection ; After Appearance (xxviu.).
The Messiah Risen — §Appearance to the Women — gFalse
Report — gAppearance in GaHlee — gConcluding Charge.
From Mark- Gospel and Special Tradition.

384 BOOK BY BOOK.
Regarded as a hterary composition the structure of the Gospel
shows a considerable amount of art of a simple kind, and such as
is found in Jewish works of this period. This appears especiaUy
in the grouping of events and sayings, and is apt to take a
numerical form ; e.g. the seven miracles, seven parables, the
Beatitudes, woes on the Pharisees, &c. The Evangelist shows a
special fondness for arranging his subjects in paHs. Thus we
may compare the two Gadarene demoniacs and the two blind
men at Jericho, with the single demoniac and single blind
Bartimaeus of the other Gospels. When we observe that each of
these cases goes along with the omission of some previous narra
tive (Matt. viii. 28 ff. with omission of Mark i. 21—28, and
Matt. xx. 29 ff. with the omission of Mark vui. 22—26) the
temptation hes near at hand to suppose that some principle of
compensation has been at work. This, however, wiU not account
for the two blind men of Matt. ix. 27 — 31, so far at least as the
extant narratives enable us to judge. a The mention of the colt as
well as the ass in Matt. xxi. 2 — 7, appears to be due to the
influence of Zeeh. ix. 9.
7. Date and Early History of the Gospel. — Not much need be
added to what has been aHeady said as to the date of the Gospel.
It was complete in its present form, excepting possibly a few very
slight expressions, before the final catastrophe of Jerusalem.
Tbe great mass of the contents of the Gospel are unaffected by
this. The Temple and the altar are spoken of as if they were
still standing ; and the coming of the Son of Man is expected
immediately after the culmination of the troubles of which the
siege of Jerusalem formed a part. But if the whole Gospel was
complete before the year 70 that would throw back the composi
tion of the documents worked up in it some way into the decade
60 — 70. We may weU beUeve the tradition that St. Matthew
wrote down his collection of " Oracles " as he was in the act of
quitting Jerusalem not later than the year 66. Any alteration
introduced after a.d. 70 would seem to have been more of the
nature of the freedom exercised by the early copyists than of a
formal editorial revision.
The Gospel according to St. Matthew soon attained a wide
circulation. For a long time it was the favourite Gospel. We
may attribute this favour to the fact that at first especial stress
was laid on the " sayings of the Lord," and St. Matthew's
Gospel gave pecuHar prominence to those "sayings." Something
also may be due to the cHcumstances under which the other
Gospels were put into circulation. The ThHd Gospel, as we shall
see, was addressed to an individual, and probably remained for
some time in private hands. More or less clear quotations from

THE GOSPEL ACCORDING TO ST. MATTHEW. 385
it or aUusions to it occur by aU the so-caUed ApostoHc Fathers
except Hermas. It is clearly presupposed by the recently dis
covered Teaching of the Twelve Apostles. In the Epistle of Barna
bas a quotation from it is introduced by the significant "it is
written," a phrase which though it implies authority, stiU does
not exactly imply what we should caR- canonical authority, as
apocryphal books are quoted in a similar manner. In the works
of Justin quotations from St. Matthew hold a prominent place ;
and Tatian, the disciple of Justin, included it in his Diatessaron
or Harmony of the Four Gospels. The coUection of Four
Gospels, and no more, was by this time well established, and
apocryphal works were rapidly driven out of aU competition with
them. Among these four the first place was almost universaUy
assigned to St. Matthew. The place of the other Gospels might
vary, but that of St. Matthew came first in all the great and
authoritative coUections. The few exceptions are rather accidents
of the MSS. than expressive of any dehberate opinion.

CO

THE GOSPEL ACCORDING TO
ST. MARK.
1 . Early Statements respecting the Gospel. — Papias has a state
ment in regard to the work of St. Mark quite as remarkable
as that relating to St. Matthew. The passage is as foUows : —
"This too the Presbyter said: Mark having become the
interpreter of Peter wrote down what he remembered, accurately
though not in order, of the things said and done by Christ. For
he neither heard the Lord nor had he been in His company, but
at a later date, as I said, in the company of Peter, who adapted
his teaching to the occasion, and not as though he were putting
together a record of the sayings of the Lord : so that Mark did
no wrong in setting down some things as he remembered them ;
for he was careful of one thing, not to omit anything of
what he had heard or falsify it in any particular." {Euseb.
HE. iii. 39.)
Here we are expressly told that Papias is drawing his informa
tion from some unnamed member of an older generation : he is
not criticising the Gospel current under the name of St. Mark,
but is only relating an historical fact as to the cHcumstances of
St. Mark's authorship.
2. Comparison of this Statement with our present Gospel. —
Again, then, we have to ask : Does this description fit the
Gospel as it has come down to us ? And again we are met by a
problem of very considerable intricacy. What the extract from
Papias leads us to expect is a string of anecdotes loosely strung
together. We are expressly warned not to suppose that these
anecdotes would make up a complete and formal biography, and
we are prepared for finding in them a certain want of order. The
first of these conditions our Gospel satisfies very well. It is easy
to see that it is far from exhaustive. The events of a single day
are treated with some degree of fulness, and a number of other
more or less saHent incidents . stand out distinctly enough, but

THE GOSPEL ACCORDING TO ST. MARK. 387
there are often wide gaps between them, and we have only to
turn to the Gospel of St. John to see how extensive and how
important is the matter which is omitted. St. Mark says nothing
about a Judean ministry ; the acts of our Lord in no way turn
with him round the Jewish feasts ; the only feast which he men
tions is the last passover ; yet we might be sure that our Lord,
as caUed upon " to fulfil aU righteousness," would attend other
feasts besides this, precisely as the fourth Gospel makes Him
attend them.
3. Order of the Narratives. — So far aU is satisfactory : the
phenomena of the Gospel duly tally with the description given
by Papias. But is this equaUy the case with the second condition
— the absence of order ? There are many who maintain with
much show of reason that it is. The informant of Papias, they
say, took as his standard some particular order — such as the
order of St. Matthew, or the order of St. Luke, or the order of
St. John. Either of the last two might weU be taken ; for St.
Luke claims to write in order,* and St. John maps out his narra
tive by bold chronological landmarks whieh are wanting in the
other Gospels. Judged by such standards as these the Gospel of
St. Mark might seem to have no systematic order. And yet on
the other hand, as we shaU see presently, it has a very good
disposition of its own.
It has a weU-marked beginning and a weU-marked ending,
and the intervening narrative is laid out Hi such a way as to
offer no glaring anachronism or inversion — the successful open
ing of the public ministry, the growing controversies, the excur
sions from Capernaum, Peter's confession foUowed by the first
prophecy of death, the Transfiguration, the slow journey to Jeru
salem, and so on. But the most remarkable phenomenon in regard
to the order is how, whatever it may be in itself, it appears to
supply the common outline for the order in the other two
Gospels. The other EvangeUsts appear, roughly speaking, to
follow the lead of St. Mark ; where one deserts that lead (as
St. Matthew does in the earlier part of the narrative and
St. Luke in the later) the other keeps closely to it. In the
middle for a short space the three diverge somewhat ; but on
the whole it may be said that whUe by assuming the order . of
St. Mark we can explain the order of St. Matthew and St.
Luke, we cannot in hke manner take either St. Matthew or St.
Luke as a key to the two remaining narratives.
4. Origin of the Gospel. — There seems here to be some pre
sumption, though not perhaps a decisive presumption, against
* Luke i. 3.
cc2

388 BOOK BY BOOK.
the complete identity of the notes described by Papias with our
present Gospel. It "would seem as if a further digesting and
ordering process must have taken place between the death of
St. Peter and the appearance of the Gospel Hi the form in
which we have it. And yet the time allowed for this is very
short. If we foUow the tradition, the death of St. Peter would faU at
Rome in the year 67 or 68. If we stiU foUow the tradition,
St. Mark's notes were not set down in writing untU after that
event. Of course it is easy to throw over our authorities ; but
the tradition which they embody is early and faUly consistent,
and it ought not to be abandoned unless we are sure that we
have something better to put in its place. But then if we were
right in supposing that the first Evangelist had before him the
substance at least of St. Mark's Gospel digested and arranged
at the time when he brought out the first Gospel as we have
it, i.e. shortly before the catastrophe of a.d. 70, events must
have marched at a rapid rate; in the meantime the note3 of
St. Peter's preaching must have been first written, then reduced
to connected shape, then carried to Palestine, there combined
with St. Matthew's " Oracles," the combined works also
edited and published, aU within the narrow space of three years.
That this may have been so is far from impossible. But
must we not also say that it is far from certain ? Events
probably did move quickly. The time had at last come when
the importance of these written narratives was fuUy reaHsed.
The ApostoHc generation was fast passing away ; crowds of
eager Christians from the Jewish Dispersion and from Gentile
lands were pressing into the Church and were asking for details
of the life of Him whose name they bore. At a distance from
the great shock in Palestine the end may not have seemed so
near. These procious facts must not be suffered to fall into
oblivion. We cannot wonder that, as St. Luke says, many had
already begun to set down in writing such particulars as they
could coUect ; nor can we wonder that a narrative associated
from the first with such eminent names should quickly pass from
one end of the Christian world to the other and be resorted to
as one of the best of existing authorities ; the reader must form
his own' opinion as to the probability of this. The whole round
of questions to which it belongs is still sub judice.
5. Date and Integrity of the Gospel. — Traces of a date after the
taking of Jerusalem in St. Mark's Gospel are extremely few.
The outlines of that event stiU loom dimly and indistinctly all
through the great prophetic chapter (Mark xiii.). Only in a
single expression ("in those days," Mark xui. 21, compared

THE GOSPEL ACCORDING TO ST. MARK. 389
with " immediately " Matt. xxiv. 29) does it seem as if a wider
interval were left between the lesser catastrophe and the greater.
So slight a change as this might be introduced after the publica
tion of the Gospel, in the way in which other sUght variations
crept in, but not without betraying themselves in the extant
MSS. The most conspicuous example of a passage, which seems
to have been absent from the original text of the Gospel though
very early appended to it, is supphed by the last twelve verses of
the concluding chapter.
The genuineness of these verses is a weU-known subject of
controversy. They are wanting in two MSS., which are not
only the oldest in date but are found in a very great number of
instances to have preserved readings which there is strong
reason to accept as the true ones. The Church historian Euse
bius, who lived in the early part of the fourth century, and
besides being the leading scholar of his day had access to the
library of Origen, and may be so said to be at the centre of the
critical situation, says expressly though in somewhat varying
language, that the verses are not current " in some copies," "in
the accurate copies," "in almost aU the copies of the Gospel."
Further, a few MSS. and a group of early and important versions
have a different and shorter conclusion which clearly took the
place of the longer in widely separated districts.
Surveying the whole of the evidence a delusive appearance of
unanimity is seen to be given by the great mass of MSS. whieh
support the verses. The farther we go back in time the slighter
does the evidence for them become : from the second century
Irenaeus, whose work contains many certainly wrong readings,
and perhaps Justin, who does not represent a pure BibHcal text ;
from the thHd century no direct evidence, but only inferential
evidence from data, which themselves belong to the fourth. An
examination of the verses themselves confirms the conclusion
thus suggested. They are found to be not continuous with the
previous part of the chapter, but to involve an altogether new
beginning. Thus considerations of external and of internal
evidence alike converge to make us believe that the Gospel as
at first issued was without them. For some reason or other,
which we cannot now determine with certainty, the original
Gospel ended abruptly ; either it was not finished, or the last
column or columns of writing were torn off or defaced, and the
defectwas made good in various ways, one earlywriter substituting
the shorter conclusion, and another the longer as we now have
it. The latter, if not taken from a written document, was adopted
from the still Hving oral tradition ; and, therefore, though the
facts of the narrative have not quite so good a warranty as

390 BOOK BY BOOK.
those of the rest of the Gospel, they are not devoid of substantial
attestation. 6. The Author. — The conjecture is not without a certain degree
of probabUity that the young man who was looking on at our
Lord's arrest and who fled " naked " {i.e. without his outer gar
ment or " himation "), may have been the author of the Gospel.
When persons otherwise unknown are mentioned in a narrative
it is a fair inference that they stand in some special relation
either to the author or to his informants. But we know from
Acts xii. 12, that the house of St. Mark was in Jerusalem. His
family must have held a good position. The house of his mother
was a rendezvous for the Church, and his cousin, Barnabas, pos
sessed landed property in Cyprus. It is even sometimes argued,
and, again, not entirely without reason, that the house of Mary
was the same in which our Lord held His Last Supper, and in
which the disciples gathered after His Ascension.
In any case the young St. Mark stood in close relation fo the
leaders of the Church. St. Peter describes bim as "his son,"
an expression which is no doubt to be taken in a spiritual sense,
and his kinsman, Barnabas, mtroduced him to St. Paul. The
two cousins started with St. Paul on bis first missionary journey,
and visited together the island of Cyprus, to which they would
be attracted by the connection of Barnabas with the island. Here
they separated, St. Mark for some unexplained reason returning
to Jerusalem ; either his courage faUed him or else his stricter
Jewish views may have received a shock from the Hberality of
St. Paul Hi his dealings with the GentUes. For the time the
breach was serious (Acts xv. 37, 38), but at a later date it was
made up, and we find St. Mark in the company of St. Paul when
he wrote the Epistles to Colossians, Philemon, and Timothy.
Later stiU he is attached to St. Peter.
The ecclesiastical tradition of the second century laid great
stress on this association. We have seen how Papias speaks of
St. Mark as the " interpreter of St. Peter." Perhaps, as the
context seems to suggest, his functions may have been rather
those of "secretary." St. Peter appears to have possessed a faU
degree of facility in Greek, though he may have needed help
when it became necessary fo write or discourse in Latin. Tbe
numerous Latinisms in the Gospel would lead us to suppose that
St. Mark knew something of this language. The "interpreter-
ship " becomes a fixed point in the later tradition, and so also is
the intimate connection of the second Gospel with St. Peter.
Justin Martyr, in the middle of the second century, refers to it
in so many words as the " Memoirs of Peter." AU agree that the
preaching of the Apostle supplied the materials for the Gospel.

THE GOSPEL ACCORDING TO ST. MARK. 391
There is only a difference as to whether it was composed during
his lifetime or after his death. The latter version has the earlier
and better authority.
7. Character, Style, and Doctrinal Standpoint of the Gospel. —
The influence of St. Peter is discernible on the Gospel. St. Mark
himseH was not an eye-witness, but he has caught something of
the vividness and fulness of detaU characteristic of an eye
witness. The paralytic who is healed at Capernaum is carried
on his couch by "four" bearers, who "take up the tiles"
probably of the corridor of the house where Jesus was, and so
let down theH patient into His presence. When He heals the
withered hand He looks round Him " with anger." The Gada-
rene demoniac wanders about " among the tombs and among the
mountains, crying out and cutting himseH, with stones." At the
cleansing of the Temple not only are the buyers and the sellers
turned out, but the further detail is added that no one is aUowed
to " carry a vessel" through the Temple.
In another way touches of nature appear in the narrative. At
a distance from home the memory of St. Peter dweUs fondly on
particular expressions used by his Master in His own Aramaic
speech ("Ephphatha," "TaHtha Cumi" or "Cum"). Here,
too, we have a verification of the tradition that the writer himself,
as weU as his informant, came from Palestine. A foreigner
Would never have thought of preserving such expressions ; nor
would tradition have preserved them long after it had begun to
travel beyond Palestinian soil. On another side the tradition is
confirmed when it speaks of Rome as the place where the Gospel
was written. The Latin names to which we have referred are
one proof of this ; a stiU better is supplied by the incidental
mention of "Rufus " (Mark xv. 21), who appears to be the same
as the Rufus of Romans xvi. 13; pure Latin names are not
common among the early Christians.
Attempts have been made to fix a dogmatic tendency upon the
Gospel. AU must agree that if there is any such tendency it is
marked by great moderation. Hence the Evangelist has been
claimed for opposite sides, by some as a representative of Pauline,
by others as a representative of Jewish Christianity. He is
reaUy no partisan, though he reflects the conscience of the Church
at the comparatively later period at which he is writing. The
only object of the Gospel appears to be to give an adequate idea
of the wondrous and wonder-working Hfe of Christ. It is a
filling-out of the programme sketched by St. Peter in Acts x.
37 — 41 : " That saying ye yourselves know whieh was pubHshed
throughout aU Judea, beginning from GaHlee, after the baptism
whieh John preached, even Jesus of Nazareth, how that God

392 BOOK BY BOOK.
crowned Him with the Holy Ghost and with power : who went
about doing good, and healing aU that were oppressed of the
devil; for God was with Him. And we are -witnesses of aU
things which He did both in the country of the Jews, and in
Jerusalem ; whom also they slew, hanging Him on a tree. Him
God raised up the thHd day, and gave Him to be made manifest,
not to aU the people, but unto witnesses that were chosen before
of God, even to us who did eat and drink with Him after He rose
from the dead." It is a striking coincidence, and one that should
not be forgotten in our estimate both of the speeches in the Acts,
and of the traditions relating to the origin of the Gospels, that
the report of this speech of St. Peter's agrees so weU with the
phenomena of the Petrine Gospel.
8. Analysis ofthe Gospel. — In accordance with this description
of the Gospel we look in it rather for a simple, straightforward
narrative of events than for the development of an abstract idea.
No deeply cogitated scheme hes at the bottom of it. The order
seems to be Hi the main and roughly speaking chronological, not
from any dehberate aiming at chronology, for the author aban
dons this without hesitation whenever it suits him, but only
because the evenis naturaUy feU into a sort of chronological
sequence. Sometimes the sections of narrative are grouped
according to theH subject-matter {e.g. the two incidents relating
to the Sabbath Hi H. 23 — iii. 6 ; the sayings in iv. 21 — 25, and
the two parables which foUow) ; but the grouping is not anything
recondite or far-fetched ; it is such a grouping as would almost
come of itseH.
At the same time this easy and natural arrangement is very
instructive ; it reflects better than any artificial system would do
the actual course of events. In particular, the gradual develop
ment of belief and the gathering storms of opposition are clearly
represented. If a Hke development may be traced Hi the other
Gospels, it must be remembered that their outline is derived
from St. Mark ; but in none is the real sequence so Httle dis
turbed. It is possible that future inquiries may show that even
St. Mark's Gospel is composite in its origin, and that aU the tra
ditions which it embodies are not drawn from the same source —
St. Mark himseH may have had access to other authorities besides
St. Peter — but for our present purpose it must be treated as a
single whole. It seems, as we have said, to have lain before the
other two Evangelists in a form which differed but Httle from
that which it still has in our Bibles.
The Public Life and Work ofthe Son of Man.
I. Introductory paragraph on the Mission of the Baptist (i. 1 — 8).

THE GOSPEL ACCORDING TO ST. MARK. 393
II. The Public Ministry of Jesus.
1. Baptism (Messianic anointing), and Temptation, sum
marily narrated (i. 9 — 13).
2. Beginning of GalUean ministry, dating from imprison
ment of John (i. 14, 15).
3. CaU of four apostles" (i. 16—20).
4. Opening day of the ministry at Capernaum (i. 21 — 34).
5. CHcuit of teaching in Galilee ; the leper (i. 35 — 45).
6. Capernaum :
i. Rising opposition (ii. 1 — Hi. 6).
The Paralytic — CaU of Levi — Fasting — Two Sabbath
Anecdotes.
ii. MHacles and Teaching (iii. 7 — iv. 34).
Crowds attracted — Choice of the Twelve — Casting out of
DevUs — Relatives of Jesus — Parables.
7. Various movements, with alternations of work and con
troversy.
i. Across the lake ; Decapolis ; Capernaum ; Nazareth ; a
second circuit (iv. 35 — vi. 13).
Storm at Sea — Gadarene Demoniac — Jairus's Daughter —
Incredulity of Nazarenes — Mission of Apostles.
H. Herod Antipas (vi. 14 — 29).
Effect on Herod — Parenthetic mention of Death of John.
Hi. Across the lake ; Gennesaret ; longer journey through
Tyre and Sidon ; DecapoHs ; further side of the lake
(Dalmanutha ?) ; Bethsaida (vi. 30 — viii. 26).
Feeding of Five Thousand — Walking on the Sea — Heal
ings — Controversy with Pharisees from Jerusalem —
The Syro-Phcenician Woman — The Deaf and Dumb —
Feeding of Four Thousand — A Sign — Leaven of the
Pharisees — Blind Man Healed.
8. Culmination of the Galilean ministry.
i. Caesarea Philippi (viu. 27 — ix. 29).
Peter's Confession — First Announcement of the Passion —
Taking the Cross — The Transfiguration — The EpUeptic
Boy.
ii. Return to Capernaum (ix. 30 — 50).
Second Announcement of the Passion — "Who shaU be
greatest? " — " Not against us, for us " — Offences.
9. Last journey to Jerusalem.
i. On the way through Peraea (x. 1 — 45).
BUI of Divorce — Little ChUdren — Rich young Man — Third
Announcement of the Passion — The Sons of Zebedee.
ii. Jericho (x. 46 — 52). Blind Bartimaeus.
iii. Jerusalem and Bethany (xi. — xiH.).

394 BOOK BY BOOK.
Triumphal Entry — Return to Bethany— Barren Fig-tree
— Cleansing of the Temple — Discourses in the Temple :
Authority of Jesus— Labourers in the Vineyard — Tribute
to Caesar — LevHate Marriage — Tbe great Command
ment—David's Lord— The Scribes— The Widow's Mite
— Apooalytic Discourse.
III. The Passion and Resurrection.
1. Preparations for the end : two days before the Passover
(xiv. 1—11).
The Plot — Anointing for Burial — Treachery of Judas.
2. The last Supper (xiv. 12—31).
The Paschal Meal — Betrayal foretold — Institution of the
Eucharist — Peter's Denial foretold.
3. Arrest, trial, and crucifixion (xiv. 32 — xv. 41).
Gethsemane— The Arrest — Trial before the High Priest
—Peter's Fall— Trial before PUate— The Sentence-
Mockery — Simon of Cyrene — The Crucifixion — Wit
nesses of the Crucifixion.
4. The Burial (xv. 42—47).
5. The Resurrection (xvi. 1 — 8).
The Women and the Empty Grave.
6. Supplemental summary of Appearances after the Resur
rection (xvi. 9 — 20). (Probably an early addition to the Gospel
and perhaps substituted for a lost section.)
9. Early History of the Gospel. — It was not unnatural that the
shortest of the three Gospels, which contained hardly any matter
peculiar to itself, should be overshadowed by the two longer
works which circulated along with it. The possessor of the
Gospels of St. Matthew and St. Luke would find in them nearly
aU that he would find in St. Mark and more besides. He would
make the closest study of the Gospels from which he learnt the
most, and he would quote from those with which he was most
famUiar. Yet there is clear proof that Justin was acquainted
with our Gospel. He refers to the name " Boanerges," which it
alone mentions, as contained in the " MemoHs of Peter." The
constant tradition, to which reference has been made, shows that
he means the work of Peter's secretary. Tatian, the disciple of
Justin, included the Gospel in his Fourfold Harmony. The
mutUated beginning of the Muratorian Fragment {circa 180)
probably contained a more expHcit account of it. It is referred
to quite unequivocaUy by Irenaeus, who, as we have seen, is the
first to assign to it one of the Evangelic symbols. Irenaeus gave
it the eagle, later tradition the lion. From Tatian onwards there
can be no doubt that its place was fixed as one of the sacred and
authoritative four.

THE GOSPEL ACCORDING TO
ST. LUKE.
1. The Preface to the Gospel. — For St. Luke we miss the valuable
but perplexing evidence of Papias. No saying of his in regard
to the third Gospel has been handed down to us, and for an
express mention of St. Luke as the author we have to wait untU
Irenaeus and the Muratorian Fragment towards the end of the
second century. But if until that time the author remains anony
mous, in regard to the circumstances under which the Gospel was
composed, we possess evidence better and more assuredly authentic
even than that of Papias, viz., tbe evidence of the Evangelist
himseH. Writing like a man of larger culture than the other
two synoptists, he begins his Gospel in the approved literary
manner by a brief preface, in which he explains the object and
sources of his work and his relation to his predecessors. It is
true that this is done in general terms which leave room for much
uncertainty in detaU, but making aU aUowance for this the infor
mation given is of value.
We learn then that the writer of the Gospel is one degree
removed from the events, and belongs to what might be called
the second generation of Christians. He had not himseH been
present at the events, but he had obtained his account of them
partly from those who had, partly from others who had been
indHectly connected with them, having been occupied with the
preaching of Christianity which rested upon them. With the
help of these authorities he claims to possess a fuU and accurate
knowledge of the whole history, and to reproduce it in regular
order from first to last. But that this order is necessarily chrono
logical would be too much to assert, and there are certainly some
incidents (such as the visit to Nazareth, Luke iv. 16 — 30) where
the order of St. Luke is inferior to that of the other two Gospels.
We learn further that others had tried before this to put
together written narratives which were, however, not altogether

396 BOOK BY BOOK.
satisfactory. At least it is clear that the author of the preface
thought that he could improve upon them. On the question
whether or not these attempted Gospels included the canonical
St. Matthew and St. Mark we shaU have a word to say presently.
The preface is addressed, as it would seem, to a private indivi
dual, who from the epithet applied to him would appear to be a
person of rank, named Theophilus. Nothing is known of any
such person, and the view has not wanted defenders — including,
though with some reserve, the late Bishop of Durham in his
article on the Acts in the second edition of the Dictionary of the
Bible — that the name Theophilus represents a fictitious per-
sonaHty, and is intended to stand for the devout Christian in
general, much as in the late Bishop Wordsworth's Theophilus
Anglicanus. It is, however, an objection to this view that the
epithet of which we have just spoken is distinctly appropriated
to official personages, and therefore would hardly be in place as
appHed to the average Christian.
It seems, therefore, better to suppose that some influential
person otherwise unknown to history is meant. He was aHeady
a Christian, and aHeady had had the outlines of the narrative set
before him in that course of oral instruction which was under
gone by the candidates for baptism. His curiosity was, how
ever, not yet satisfied, and in this he is typical of the large class
for whom our Gospels were written. The teaching of tbe first
generation of Christians had been in the main doctrinal, turning
upon a few saHent points, such as the crucifixion, resurrection,
and ascension. But there was a growing desire, especiaUy among
the Gentile converts, to know more of the details of the Hfe of
the Messiah ; and this desire both the Gospel before us and the
attempts which it superseded were intended to meet.
2. The Author of ihe Gospel. — Who was the author of this anony
mous work ? Ecclesiastical tradition has seen in him consistently
St. Luke, the beloved physician, one of the companions of St.
Paul. The earliest date at which this tradition appears in writ
ing was, as we have said, the latter years of the second century,
when expression is given to it by Irenseus and the Fragment on
the Canon. From that time onwards it is abundantly attested ;
nor is the delay of a hundred years anything abnormal. Up to
the time of Irenaeus the stream of Christian literature outside
the New Testament is so scanty that many facts, the memory of
which must have been continuously preserved, find their first
mention at that period. The tradition of St. Luke's authorship
is also supported by the absence of any divergent tradition, nor
was the name prominent enough to offer a strong attraction to
those who, at the end of the second century, were eager to find

THE GOSPEL ACCORDING TO ST. LUKE. 397
apostoHc authority for their own opinions, and for the documents
which gave countenance to them.
On aU these grounds the tradition comes to us with a strong
presumption in its favour, and that presumption is heightened
by the argument based on the certain identity of the author of
the thHd Gospel with the author of tbe Acts. We must not go
into this question here. Suffice it to say that it is still by far the
most probable view that the Book of Acts was really written by
a companion of St. Paul, who was included in the group spoken
of as " we " in Acts xvi. 10, and many places afterwards. There
are only three possibilities : either the writer was really one of
St. Paul's companions ; or a diary written by one of St. Paul's
companions has been incorporated into the book ; or some other
person has sought to pass for a companion of St. PaiU's, and has
deliberately given his narrative the colour of proceeding from
such a companion. AU these views have been held, but in Eng
land the balance of opinion stiU is, and is Hkely to be, decidedly
in favour of the first. And H it is once agreed that the anony
mous writer was one who had accompanied St. Paul on his jour
neys, then it has been elaborately proved that no other name
satisfies the conditions so weU as St. Luke's, so much so that even
those who do not ascribe the whole book to him, stiU for the most
part either see in him the author of the incorporated diary, or
else beheve that it was sought to suggest his authorship. Taking
the question as a whole the present writer is of opinion that,
except for the Pauline Epistles, as strong a case can be made out
for the traditional authorship of the third Gospel and the Acts as
for that of any other book of the New Testament.
As to the personahty of St. Luke, what we reaUy know of bim
is derived from the Acts and the Epistles of St. Paul. He was a
physician by profession, and is first found in the company of St.
Paul when he decided to cross over from Asia Minor to Europe.
Together they sailed from Troas, and together they arrived at
NeapoUs and PhUippi. Here, if we may argue from the dropping
of the first person in the narrative, St. Luke was left, perhaps
through some private connection with the place, though the
inference drawn by M. Renan that he was a native of PhUippi
has not enough to bear it out. At PhUippi he would seem to
have stayed, or at least to have made it his headquarters, through
out the interval, which, on a probable chronology, would extend
from the year 54 to 58, for it can hardly be a chance coincidence
that the first person plural is resumed (Acts xx. 5) in the nar
rative of the Acts from St. Paul's arrival at the same point on
his return journey from Greece, when he was on his way to
attend the feast of Pentecost at Jerusalem.

398 BOOK BY BOOK.
From this time onwards St. Luke remains with him, so far as
we can gather, to the erd of the Apostle's Hfe. The Acts repre
sent them as traveUing together aU the way, first to Caesarea and
then to Rome. St. Luke is stiU there at the writing of the
Epistles to Colossians and PhUemon, and he is the Apostle's
sole stay at the time when he wrote his last Epistle (2 Tim. iv. 11).
Now he disappears and the rest is conjecture. If we are to
beHeve Eusebius, St. Luke was a native of Antioch. This may,
however, have arisen from a confusion with Lucius of Cyrene,
mentioned in Acts xiii. 1, just as Origen appears to identify him
with the Lucius of Rom. xvi. 21. But the name Luke, though equi
valent to Lucanus, is not properly the same name as Lucius. The
notion that Lucanus is the same name as Silvanus is a mere
fancy, and the tradition that St. Luke was a painter as weU as a
physician is quite late and of no value. Neither can he have
been, as Epiphanius would give us to understand, one of the
Seventy. The Seventy were both " eye-witnesses and ministers
of the word," from whom the Evangelist expressly distinguishes
himseH. 3. Sources of the Gospel. — If the author of the thHd Gospel was
really St. Luke, the companion of St. Paul, then his historical
position is fixed at once. Christian antiquity, from TertuUian
onwards, always regarded this Gospel as representing the Apostle
of the GentUes. Eusebius even mentions, as having some cur
rency in his day, the fooUsh idea that when St. Paul speaks of
"my Gospel" (as in Romans U. 16), he means the Gospel, of
St. Luke. It would be clear from this that St. Luke would
obtain much of his information — not exactly from St. Paul him
self, for St. Paul had to depend upon others for the facts of the
Gospel history (1 Cor. xv. 3) — but at least in the entourage of St.
Paul. The influence of St. Paul is seen rather in the general
tone and standpoint of the Gospel than Hi the narrative of par
ticular facts.
The one conspicuous instance of a parallehsm of the latter kind
turns upon a very doubtful reading. A marked resemblance
exists in the ordinary texts between the account of the institution
of the Lord's Supper as given by St. Luke, and that in 1 Cor.
xi. 24, 25 ; but the best critics are of opinion that the greater
part of the verses Luke xxu. 19, 20 — aU that foUows the words,
" This is my body " down to "which is shed for you " — has been
introduced into the text of St. Luke from the Epistle. The pas
sage is wanting in a group of MSS., mainly Latin or Graeco-
Latin, which represent an extremely ancient text ; and the
common reading, though found in the large mass of authorities,
raises considerable difficulties by dividing the account of the

THE GOSPEL ACCORDING TO ST. LUKE. 399
institution of the cup, or making it repeated twice over. That
the narrative should have been filled out at a very early date by
borrowing from the language of St. Paul is in accordance with
other phenomena of the text, and is a hypothesis by no means
improbable. This would reduce the points of special contact
with St. Paul to the mention of the appearance of the risen Lord
to St. Peter (Luke xxiv. 34, compared with 1 Cor. xv. 5), which
is without doubt something more than a chance coincidence.
Other supposed points of contact cannot be pressed.
When St. Luke's Gospel comes to be examined in detaU it is
found possible to map out its contents according to the probable
sources from which they were derived. EspeciaUy is this the
case if we may accept as probable the theory as to the origin and
composition of the Synoptic Gospels whieh has been put forward in
the previous chapters. In part the composition of St. Luke would
be parallel to that of St. Matthew. H we lop off from both the first
two and the latter half of the last chapters, then what remains
wiU be found to have the same fundamental structure. The out
line of the narrative appears to be supplied by a document closely
resembling, H not identical with, our present St. Mark. In ffhis
are inserted masses of discourse which we may believe to have
been taken from the original " Oracles " of St. Matthew. If this
were the case we should then know two at least of the " eye
witnesses and ministers of the word " to whom St. Luke expresses
his obligations ; they would not be excluded by the fact that their
testimony is spoken of as "deHvered," a word which in the Greek
is most commonly used of oral tradition.
The tradition to which St. Luke refers was partly written and
partly oral, and the Gospel of St. Mark and Oracles of St.
Matthew did not make up the whole of it. Two other sources
at least are discernible in the narrative as it has eome down to
us. The first two chapters (deducting the Preface) stand by
themselves. They are fuU of Hebraising expressions which give
them a stamp of their own; such would be "walking in the
commandments and ordinances," " stricken in years," " great in
the sight of the Lord," "filled with the Holy Ghost," "spirit
and power of Elias," "take away my reproach," "hast found
favour with God," &c. These two chapters then we may mark
off as having a special source of their own, which was probably
in writing. Most of the occasions of which we hear of St. Luke
have their scene at a distance from Palestine ; but at one time he
would seem to have been for fuUy two years within the limits of
the Roman province which bore that name. He accompanied
St. Paul on his last recorded journey to Jerusalem, stayed with
him for some time at the house of Philip the "Evangelist" at

400 BOOK BY BOOK.
Caesarea, went up with him to Jerusalem, and, as we infer,
remained not far away from his person during the time of his
later confinement at Caesarea.
Though Philip was not an " EvangeHst " precisely in the sense
in which we now give the name to St. Luke, but rather as an
itinerant preacher or missionary than the author of a written
Gospel, stUl he too would have to make inquiries for facts as to
the Hfe of tbe Lord, and in his company it is very possible that
St. Luke may have met others who would be able to give him.
information more or less at first hand. We are not without indi
cations as to one of the quarters from which such information
came. St. Luke displays a special knowledge of matters relating
to the court of the Herods. He mentions by name a woman
whom none of the other Evangelists mention : "Joanna the wife
of Chuza, Herod's steward : " * and in like manner in the Acts he
speaks of Manaen "foster-brother of Herod." Here we have a
glimpse of a cHcle from which St. Luke probably got his account
of the quarrel and reconciUation between PUate and Herod, as
weU as of the circumstances of the death of Herod Agrippa I.-,
and of facts relating to Agrippa II. f
One sUght indication would perhaps suggest that we owe to
the same source the narrative of the walk to Emmaus ; the name
Cleopas (short for Cleopatros) is just such as would he affected
in the surroundings of the Herodian court. Herod the Great at
one time greatly curried favour with Antony and Cleopatra, and
such a name might weU descend among the dependants of his
house. The name (unlike Cleopas, which may = Alphaeus) was
not one which would be borne by a strict Jew. This Herodian
source may very possibly have been oral. St. Luke has besides
this a quantity of peculiar matter in regard to which it is difficult
to say how far it came from a single source, and how far from a
number of sources. To some extent the peculiar portions are
simUar in subject. Thus we have a number of incidents relating
to Samaritans. \ We have some typical cases of the dealings of
Christ with publicans and sinners ; § and also examples of His
teaching as to the admission of the outcast and penitent. |[ On
the other hand, the opposition of riches and poverty is strongly
brought out ; ^f and occasionaUy narratives are inserted with a
* Luke viii. 3. ; compare Acts xiii. 1.
f Luke xxiii. 7 — 12 ; Acts xii. 20 — 23 ; xxv. 13, &c.
X Luke ix. 51—56 ; x. 30—37 ; xvii. 11—18.
§ Luke vii. 36—50 ; xix. 1—10.
|| Luke xv. 1—7; 8—10, 11—32; xviii. 9—14.
IT Luke i. 52, 53 ; vi. 20, 21 ; xvi. 19—31.

THE GOSPEL ACCORDING TO ' ST. LUKE. 401
strongly Jewish cast, like those of the " daughter of Abraham
whom Satan had bound " with a spirit of infirmity.*
4. Character, Style, and Analysis of the Contents of the Gospel. —
Owing to this diversity of origin of its different parts, the Gospel
presents a many-coloured appearance, now seeming to favour one
set of views and now another. Rich and profound teaching, such
as that which the Evangelist records, presented a number of
different sides, of which diff erent minds would take hold. The
course of events and the evolution of history would throw hght
upon sayings which had at first lain dormant and attracted Httle
attention.' The first coUectors of the evangelical traditions would
vary much in theH own standpoint and width of outlook. Some
would contemplate the past, others the future ; some would be
intent on their own immediate surroundings, others would hft
up theH eyes tp a more distant horizon ; some would think rather
of the Jews and of Palestine, others of the growing Gentile
Church and of the wider destinies of the world. These differ
ences were impressed on the materials of which St, Luke made
use, and he has faithfuUy reproduced them. He is Hke the
householder in the parable who brings out of his treasures
" things new and old." He has his own leanings, and those
leanings appear in the Gospel. The predominant tone is such
as we should expect in the companion and disciple of St. Paul.
Most characteristic is that chapter (xv.) which contains the
parables of the lost sheep, the lost piece of money, the lost or pro
digal son. It is not the outcasts of Palestine alone who are in view,
but those dispersed abroad throughout the world. These deli
cate and tender pictures are no inventions. They lay in a side
room apart from the public gaUery of the first age, and the pre
ceding evangelists had passed them by. St. Luke brought them
out never again to be lost sight of. Yet he, too, sets by their
side pieces conceived Hi another spirit, touches of particularism
which had escaped his predecessors. He is a true historian who
coUects what he can wherever he finds it.
St. Luke has more Hterary ambition than his feUows. He
spreads his canvas more elaborately and more after the manner
of the secular artists. He alone endeavours to connect the
Gospel narrative with the annals of the province of Syria and
the Roman empHe. It is a mistake to say that he had read
Josephus ; but Josephus is not the only authority who dealt with
the Roman government of- Judea and its border territories. At
Antioch, at Caesarea, at Rome, he would have abundant oppor
tunities of becoming acquainted with the fasti of the province or
* Luke xiii. 11—17.
d D

402 BOOK BY BOOK.
provinces of which it feU to him to treat. In this way he has
come to speak of the census of Quirinius, the fifteenth year of
Tiberius Caesar, Lysanias of AbUene, and the Hke. AU His data
may not be exactly right ; he had not the facUities of one who
enjoyed the favour of emperors like Josephus, or who belonged
to the foremost Roman aristocracy like Tacitus ; but he made, at
least, a conscientious attempt, and the historical detaUs, of the
Acts show that he attained a high standard of success.
These are some of the characteristics of the Gospel, of which
we may now proceed to give a brief analysis, bearing, as far as
we can, those characteristics in mmd.
History of the Life on Earth of the Saviour of the World.
I. Preface, explaining the sources and object of the Gospel
(i. 1-4).
n. BHth and early years of the Saviour and His Forerunner
(i. 5— ii. 52).
Announcement of the BHth of John and of Jesus — Birth
of John — Birth of Jesus at the first Census of Quirinius
— His Circumcision and Presentation in the Temple —
Visit to the Temple at the age of twelve years.
From peculiar source or sources.
III. Judean Ministry of the Saviour.
FoUowing for the most part the outline of St. Mark.
Note that St. Luke uses Judean in a wide sense so as to
include Gahlee.
1. The Mission of the Baptist (Hi. 1—20).
The fifteenth year of Tiberius — Preaching of John — Bis
Prophecy of Christ — Notice of his Death.
From Mark-Gospel, with enlargement perhaps from Oracles.
2. Inauguration of the Ministry of Jesus (iii. 21 — iv. 13).
Baptism of Jesus— Genealogy — Temptation.
Mark- Gospel, special source, and Oracles.
3. Jesus in Gahlee (iv. 14 — 44).
Preaching in Gahlee — Discourse at Nazareth and Incre-
duhty of Nazarenes (antedated) — Settlement at Caper
naum — A Day's Ministry — Circuit.
Mark- Gospel, with special source for Discourse.
4. Narrative continued (v. 1 — vi. 15).
CaU of four Apostles — the Leper — The Paralytic — CaU of
Levi — Fasting — Two Sabbath Anecdotes.
Mainly from Mark-Gospel, first subject expanded from special

THE GOSPEL ACCORDING TO ST. LUKE. 403
5. The so-called Lesser Interpolation. Discourses, MHaeles
of Heahng, and other incidents not aU connected with Gahlee
(vi. 12— viii. 3).
* Choice of the Twelve — f Sermon on the Mount ("level
place" St. Luke) — fCenturion's Servants — § Widow's
Son at Nain — f Question and Character of John —
§ Jesus' feet anointed — § The Ministering Women.
Passage marked with * from Mark-Gospel, those marked t
probably from Oracles, those marked § from sources peculiar to
St. Luke.
6. Narrative continued (viii. 4 — 56).
Parable of the Sower — Relations of Jesus— Storm at Sea
— Gadarene Demoniac.
From Mark-Gospel, perhaps with slight influence from Oracles
in earlier portion.
7. Height of the GalUean Ministry (ix. 1 — 50).
Mission of the Twelve — Effect on Herod — Feeding of Five
Thousand — Peter's Confession — First Announcement of
Passion — Taking the Cross — Transfiguration — The
EpUeptic Boy — Second Announcement of Passion —
"Who shaU he greatest?" — "Not against us, for us."
Mainly from Mark-Gospel.
TV. The Greater Interpolation, consisting largely of matter
peculiar to St. Luke (ix. 51 — xviH. 14).
This is sometimes caUed the "Peraean Section" or
" Samaritan Section" because of He. 51 — 56 ; x. 30 — 37;
xvH. 11—19.
1. First Section (He. 51 — xiii- 35).
i. §The Samaritan Village — f Followers — §The Seventy —
I Chorazin and Bethsaida — §f Return of Seventy — *The
Greatest Commandment — §The Good Samaritan — §Mary
and Martha.
U. f§ Prayer — *f Casting out DevUs by Beelzebub — §True
Blessedness — Sign of Jonah — fLamp of the Body — fThe
Pharisees denounced — t Boldness in Confession — §The
Inheritance — §The Rich Fool — fCares — fTreasures —
j- Watchful Servants — f'Not peace but division."
Hi. §The Slaughtered Galileans — § Parable of Fig-tree —
§ Spinal Curvature healed — * Mustard Seed — f Leaven —
f"Who are the saved ?"— Departure from Gahlee:
§ Message to Antipas — f Jerusalem.
2. Second Section (xiv. 1 — xvH. 10.)
i. §Dropsy Healed — §Banquets — fThe Messianic Banquet —
D D 2

404 ' BOOK BY BOOK.
f§Counting the Cost— fThe Lost Sheep— §The Lost
Drachma — §The Lost Son.
ii. §The Clever Steward— fShort Sayings — §Rich Man and
Lazarus — *Offences — *Faith — §Servants' duties.
Hi. §The Samaritan Leper — §fComing of the Kingdom —
§The Unrighteous Judge — §Pharisee and PubHcan.
Passages marked * mainly from Mark-Gospel, those marked t
mainly from Oracles, those marked § peculiar; combined signs
denote combination of sources.
V. Journey to Jerusalem completed ; Jesus in Jerusalem and at
tbe Mount of OHves (xviii. 15 — xxi. 22).
\ittle Children — The Rich Voung Man — Third Announce
ment of the Passion — Blind Man at Jericho — §Zacchams —
§The Minae — Triumphal entry — Lament over Jerusalem —
Cleansing of the Temple.
ii. Authority of Jesus — Wicked Husbandmen — Tribute to
Caesar — Levirate Marriage — David's Son and Lord — The
Scribes — The Widow's Mite — Apocalyptic Discourse.
Mainly from Mark-Gospel ; passages marked § peculiar.
VI. Passion and Resurrection of the Saviour (xxH. 1 — xxiv. 12).
1. Two days before Passover (xxii. 1 — 6).
Treachery of Judas.
2. The Last Supper (xxii. 7—38).
The Paschal Meal — Institution of the Eucharist — Betrayal
prophesied — "Who shaU be greatest?" — Prophecy of
Peter's Denial — §A Turning-point.
3. Arrest, Trial, and Crucifixion (xxii. 39 — xxiii. 49).
Gethsemane : §The Agony — Arrest — Peter's Denial —
Trial of Jesus before the Presbytery — Trial before PUate
— §Jesus sent to Herod — Sentence — Simon of Cyrene
— § Daughters of Jerusalem — Crucifixion : § The two
Criminals — Witnesses of the Crucifixion.
4. The Burial (xxiii. 50—56).
5. The Resurrection : After-Appearances (xxiv.).
Women at the Empty Grave — §Walk to Emmaus — §Ap-
pearance to Simon — § Appearance to the Eleven —
§ (The Ascension ?).
Main outline from Mark- Gospel; passages marked § peculiar.
5. Date and Early History of the Gospel. — We have aHeady
seen that the Gospel was probably composed about the year
80a.d., during the period which St. Luke himself caUs "the
times of the GentUes" (xxi. 24), i.e. the period ushered in by
the faU of Jerusalem, during which the GentUes were to be the
appointed ministers of Divine vengeance. We have also seen

THE GOSPEL ACCORDING TO ST. LUKE. 405
that the Gospel was written, in the first instance, for a private
person named Theophilus. That this was its original destina
tion is confirmed by the apparent significance of some remark
able phenomena in the text. The Gospel appears at a very early
date to have undergone certain additions, which have left traces
of themselves in the MSS. The additions in question would
seem from the authorities which support them to have been made
at two distinct tunes.
On one occasion there were only added the two verses which
describe the agony of the Saviour as " drops of blood " in the
garden of Gethsemane (xxii. 43 — 44), and those most important
and precious words — which are certainly authentic as a statement
of fact, whatever theH textual character — the prayer for forgive
ness of those who caused His death (xxiii. 34).* On the other
occasion a longer string of additions was made. Foremost
among them would be in aU probabUity the insertion of words
borrowed from 1 Cor. xi. 24, 25, expanding the account of the
institution of the Eucharist (xxH. 19, 20), and the words
describing the Ascension (" and He was carried up into heaven,"
xxiv. 51), with several other less important phrases in
Chapter xxiv.
Both these sets of additions were introduced at such an early
date that some (including Bishop Lightfoot) have supposed that
St. Luke himself actuaUy issued two editions of his Gospel. It
appears, however, to satisfy the conditions rather better, H we
suppose that they were introduced after they had left the hands
of the evangehst, but so soon after that the most natural person
to think of in connection with them is, H not the writer of the
Gospel, yet the person to whom the Gospel was written, the
"most exceUent Theophilus." Additions like these are just
such as would be made by the private possessor of a written
narrative, who, after it was received, fell in with some additional
incidents which came to him with good authentication, or who
thought himseH justified in filling out a point here and there
by a process of legitimate inference. Such an one would think
that he was only doing what he would with his own ; that he
himseH was the gamer ; and that no harm could possibly come
from his zeal. And we at this distance of time, may in most
cases heartily endorse his action, and express our gratitude to
him for preserving words which we should indeed not willingly
"let die."
If we may carry our speculations a step farther we should say,
putting together what we know of the origin of the particular
• This addition perhaps belongs rather to the next class.

406 BOOK BY BOOK.
group of MSS. in which the second class of additions is absent,
with the official title " most excellent," and the tradition con
necting St. Luke with Antioch, that Antioch itseH was the most
probable residence of Theophilus, and that he is Ukely to have
teen in someway or other attached to the staff of the " legatus
of Syria. These are conjectures, but to the student of the text
they wiH, it is thought, possess rather more foundation than
appears upon the face of them.
After the death of TheophUus the process of grafting on small
additions to the Gospel, partly by way of inference and compari
son with the other Gospels which were now cUculating Hi the
neighbourhood of it, but partly also drawn from the not yet
exhausted strain of oral tradition, stiU continued. One con
spicuous instance of it we may mention. Numerous copies of
the Gospel had been made and dispersed abroad — the parent
hnes of our present text had been aHeady laid — when in a
single copy there was inserted after vi. 4, the foUowing anecdote
which could hardly have been derived from any other source
than hving tradition : "On the same day, seeing one at work on
the Sabbath, He said to him, ' 0 man, H thou knowest what
thou doest thou art blessed, but H thou knowest not thou art
accursed and a transgressor of the law.' " To illustrate which
we may compare St. Paul in Romans xiv. 23, 25 : " Happy is he
that judgeth not himseH Hi that which he approveth. But he
that doubteth is condemned if he eat, because (he eateth) not of
faith ; and whatsoever is not of faith is sin." In other words,
an act done from sincere and fuU conviction may be justified,
when, if done from any lesser motive, it would be condemned.
The copy Hi which the insertion first appeared was probably stUl
made somewhere in the region of Antioch, but more in a corner
than those of which we have been speaking. It may be seen to
this day in the famous MS. presented by Beza to the University
of Cambridge.
Unequivocal proofs of an extensive use of St. Luke's Gospel
in quarters far remote from that to which it was originaUy
addressed meet us as we approach the middle of the second cen
tury. The heretic writer Marcion, from the province of Pontus,
whieh stretches along the shores of the Black Sea on the north
of Asia Minor, accepted only a single Gospel, which he cut down
to somewhat reduced dimensions by removing everything which
seemed to conflict with his own pecuHar doctrines. That Gospel
was our present St. Luke. At one tune it was thought that
Marcion's shorter Gospel might be the original, and our own
Gospel an expansion, but this view is now generaUy given up.
Not only did Marcion use our present Gospel, but there is evi-

THE GOSPEL ACCORDING TO ST. LUKE. 407
dence to show that he used it in a text which aHeady, even at that
early date, bore traces of corruption. The Gospel which he used
about the year 140 cannot have been a new production, but must
have been current for a considerable time and have passed
through a number of hands.
A little later than Marcion {circa 150) Justin Martyr also cer
tainly used our present Gospel, and in his time it already con-
, tained the verses describing the Bloody Sweat which we have
some reason to think were not in the original copy. It was one
of the four works which went to make up the "Diatessaron"
of Tatian, Justin's disciple (160 — 170). When we come to the
Muratorian Fragment we have an account of the origin of the
Gospel, which seems to be made up from Scriptural data but is
proof of the estimation in which the Gospel was held. When
the corrupt text is emended it appears to run thus : " The third
book of the Gospel, ' according to Luke,' Luke the physician,
composed after the Ascension of Christ, when Paul had taken
him with him as the companion of his journeying, in his own
name from hearsay (he had not himseH seen the Lord in the
flesh), and as best he could, beginning with the bHth of John."
With Tatian, the Fragmentist, and Irenaeus the Gospel is aHeady
what we should caU " canonical," and it does not go back from
this position.

THE WRITINGS ASCRIBED TO
ST. JOHN.
1. Tradition as to Authorship. — The traditional beHef of the
Christian Church, dating from the earhest times, ascribes the
authorship of five of the New Testament books to the Apostle
John. Of these five, the Gospel and the FHst Epistle are
classed by Eusebius ("Ecc. Hist." Hi. 25) as undisputed books,
whose authority was recognised by all the churches throughout
the world. We shall presently discuss a further statement of
Eusebius, viz., that John wrote his Gospel with a knowledge of
what the other three Evangelists had written, and with the
intention of supplementing theH narratives. A tradition to this
effect had been recorded by Clement of Alexandria about the
end of the second century.
The external testimony to the Second and Third Epistles is
less strong. The very early citations of them are scanty, and
yet perhaps as numerous as can reasonably be expected in the
case of documents so short and presenting so httle matter for
quotation. It is Hkely that, being private letters addressed to
individuals, they were for some Httle tune not included in the
public reading of the Church. And the letters being anonymous
there was room for individual speculation as to who the writer
might be who describes himseH as " the Elder." But we shaU
presently see good reason for acquiescing in the prevalent opinion,
aU dissent from which soon died out, that the writer was the
same as the author of the Gospel and of the FHst Epistle.
The four books just enumerated are aU anonymous, and our
knowledge of their authorship rests on independent tradition ;
but the fifth book, that of the Revelation, itself gives its author's
name as John ; and so early as the middle of the second century
the book is cited by Justin Martyr as the work of John the
Apostle. In respect of antiquity of attestation few New Testa
ment books stand more favourably; but after a time the authority
of the book came to be disputed, less, however, because of any

THE WRITINGS ASCRIBED TO ST. JOHN. 409
good grounds for questioning the earlier tradition as to its
authorship than because the contents of the book were not
acceptable to many Christian readers. But by the end of tbe
fourth century aU opposition had died out, and the book has
been for centuries universaUy accepted in the Christian Church
as the record of a divine revelation made to one of the twelve
apostles. In modern times all the traditional opinions con
cerning the authorship of the New Testament books have been
subjected to free examination by critics who own no high respect
for Church authority. Under this examination the Apocalypse
has fared better than some other books of the Church canon,
this book being recognised as St. John's by many critics who
refuse the like acknowledgment in the case of the four other
books traditionaUy ascribed to the same author.
In the present introduction we have thought it advisable to
confine ourselves to topics on which the mere English reader is
competent to pass judgment. We therefore do not attempt to
produce in full the testimony of early Christian Fathers, in order
to appreciate which some learned discussion would be necessary
as to the meaning of the passages cited, and as to the credit due
to the writers. We shaU content ourselves with testing by
internal evidence the various points of the traditional belief. It
is necessary to begin by examining whether the five books with
which we have to deal have been rightly ascribed to the same
author, because on the determination of this question depends
whether inferences drawn from one of these books can properly
be combined with those drawn from another.
2. Common Authorship of Gospel and First Epistle. — If it is
possible to prove anything by internal evidence the identity of
authorship of these two works may be regarded as certain. x The
simUarity of style and phraseology, though no doubt more striking
in the original, is obvious enough in a translation. No style
presents more marked peculiarities than that of the Fourth
Gospel. The most careless reader is conscious of the difference
when he passes on to this Gospel from the study of the preceding
three, and equaUy so when he passes on from this Gospel to the
Epistles of St. Paul or St. James or St. Peter. If he proceeds
to examine wherein the peculiarity consists, he finds among
other things that in the Fourth Gospel each sentence usually
stands by itself, and that whUe there is continuity of thought
there is httle in form of expression. The sentences are linked
together only as the propositions in Euclid are Hnked together,
where, though one proposition prepares the way for those that
come after, yet it is complete in itself, and there is nothing in
its enunciation to indicate that others are to follow.

410 BOOK BY BOOK.
Thus St. John's style may be compared to that of the old
uncial MSS., in which each letter is a capital not joined on to
any other. The EvangeHst does not write Hke an advocate
bound to prove his case by argument, but he assumes the tone
of a teacher whose bare word is enough to satisfy his hearers.
He makes a statement ; then, when his hearers have had time
to ponder on it, he goes on fo make another, suggested by some
thing he has said, in whieh some idea that he has expressed is
enlarged or supplemented. Very frequently the second sentence
foUows the former without any connecting particle, or with at
most the conjunction " and."
(i.) We are at once struck with this characteristic of style on
reading the opening verses of the Gospel, which consist of a
number of short sentences connected by no particle but " and."
The same characteristic prevaUs aU through the First Epistle.
It wiH be a sufficient example to take the last three verses of the
first chapter and the opening verses of the second, where we
have some sentences standing independent, others connected only
with "and": " And if any man sin"; "And he is the pro
pitiation " ; " And hereby we do know." One of the " ands " in
the first chapter (verse 5) deserves notice, because the Authorised
Version has not preserved this peculiarity of style. It renders
"This then is the message," but the Revised Version has HteraUy
" and this is the message," the form of expression being strik
ingly parallel to that at the beginning of the Gospel (i. 19),
" And this is the witness of John." See also " and this is his
commandment " (1 John Hi. 23) ; " and this is the witness" (1 John
v. ii.).(H.) But though the sentences in the Gospel are sHgbtly con
nected by particles, they are united in a more Ultimate way,
succeeding sentences being constantly pervaded by tbe same
thought, and often the same word running on through several
successive verses. Thus observe how the word " witness " runs
through the verses (John v. 31 — 39). The Epistle is fuU of
instances of the same characteristic. The same word "witness"
runs through 1 John v. 6 — 11, where, though in the Authorised
Version the translators sometimes substitute the word "record,"
both represent the same word in the original. In Hke manner
observe how the word "love" runs through the verses v. 7 — 12.
(iii.) Again, it is a habit of the EvangeHst to express an idea
both positively and negatively. " AU things were made by him,
and without him was not anything made " (i. 3) ; "he confessed
and denied not" (i. 20) ; " shaU not perish but have everlasting
life" (iU. 15, 16), &c. Instances of the same habit are numerous
in the Epistle. " God is Hght, and in Hun is no darkness at

THE WRITINGS ASCRIBED TO ST. JOHN. 411
all " (i. 5) ; "is truth and is no He" (iii. 27), &c. In connection
with the second example it may be added that both in Gospel
and Epistle we find the statement that a proposition is true, sup
plemented by the statement that to assert the opposite would be
to teU a lie (John vHi. 55; 1 John i. 6, 8 ; ii. 4, 22; iv. 20).
Compare also Rev. U. 2 ; iii. 9.
(iv.) The words and phrases which are favourites with the
EvangeHst are also prominent in the Epistle. We have already
had some instances of this. For example, tbe word " witness,"
aHeady noticed, may be said to be one of those favourite words.
It is comparatively rare in the Synoptic Gospels, but either the
noun or the corresponding verb occurs some fifty times in the
Fourth Gospel. It is needless to say what a prominent place the
word "love " holds, both in Gospel and Epistle ; and we cannot
be wrong in finding Hi the " commandment" of love, 1 John iv.
21, a reference to the "new commandment," John xiH. 34, for
the "new commandment" is expressly mentioned, 1 John ii. 8.
So hkewise the contrast between those who " abide in the light "
and those who " walk Hi darkness," 1 John i. 6, 7 ; ii. 9, 11, has
not only its counterpart Hi the Gospel, Hi., 19 ; vni. 12 ; xi. 9 ; xii.
46, but the very same words are found both in Gospel and Epistie,
"He that walketh in the darkness knoweth not whither he goeth "
(John viH. 35 ; 1 John H. 11).
The same contrast is also in both books spoken of as one
between " death " and " IHe "; and here too, in identical words,
" have passed from death unto hfe " (John v. 24; 1 John Hi. 14).
"Eternal IHe " is the constantly recurring theme in both books,
and of this Hfe not only is our Lord described in the Gospel as
the source, but He is given the title " the Life " (John i. 3 ; xi.
25; xiv. 6). At the very beginning of the Epistle we have (i. 2)
"the LHe was manifested"; this word "manifested" being also
a favourite word with the EvangeHst, and appHed by him to our
Lord's appearance Hi the world (i. 31); and the Epistle closes
with "this is the eternal LHe" (v. 20) ; see also v. 11, 12. Other
titles given to our Lord in both Gospel and Epistle are " Only
begotten" (John i. 14; 1 Johniv. 9), and "Saviour of the world"
(John iv. 42 ; 1 John iv. 14).
The latter coincidence deserves the more attention because the
title indicates a total change from the Messianic conception when
Jews had looked for a successor to David who should restore the
independence of their people and raise them to sovereignty.
They now believe in one who was the "propitiation, not for
their sins only, but for the sins of the whole world." It would
be too long to go through several other coincidences between the
two books in connection with this word " world." One may be

412 BOOK BY BOOK.
mentioned, the phrase to " overcome the world " (John xvi. 33 ;
1 John v. 4, 6).
It would be tedious to go through aU the detaUs of proof, and
we but add by way of specimen a few more coincidences, in pome
of which identical expressions are to be found, John xvi. 20,
1 John i. 4 ; John xvii. 3, 1 John v. 24 ; John v. 38, 1 John U.
14 ; John viH. 47, 1 John iv. 6 ; John i. 18, 1 John iv. 12 ; John
xiv. 16, 1 John ii. 1 ; John xix. 34, 1 John v. 6. Suffice it to
say that the proofs of common authorship are so abundant that
a good critic could hardly faU to recognise the books as works of
the same author, even if they had come to him separately, and if
he were ignorant of the fact that, from the earHest times the
books were known down to the present century, the beHef in
theH common authorship had universally prevaUed.
3. The Two Minor Epistles. — It has been aHeady stated that
while the early Church was unanimous Hi ascribing the Gospel
and the First Epistle to the same author, the other two Epistles
had Hi early times so much more Hmited circulation that there
was then some difference of opinion as to whether " the Elder"
in whose name they are written was or was not the Apostle.
But if the weakness of external testimony should cause us any
hesitation in accepting the beHef Hi unity of authorship, which
after a time came to prevaU universaUy Hi the Church, our doubts
are entirely removed by internal evidence. Not only does the
Second Epistle bear a general resemblance to the First, both as
to ideas and as to form of expression, but it has been pointed
out that of tbe thirteen verses of whieh the shorter Epistle consists
eight have close counterparts Hi the FHst.
One phrase which has been aHeady noticed as common to the
Gospel and the FHst Epistle, "that your joy may be fuU," occurs
in the Second Epistle also (verse 12). Other indications of com
mon authorship wUl be found on comparing tbe phrase "both
the Father and the Son " (verse 9) with 1 John ii. 23, v. 12 ; and
what is said about the commandment of love 2 John 5 — 7 with
1 John in. 22, 23. In these verses of 2 John there is an even
more striking coincidence with 1 John ii. 7,' Hi the successive
mention of "that which ye had from the beginning," "that
which ye heard from the beginning." The ThHd Epistle so
resembles the Second, both Hi its commencement and its conclu
sion, that no one has dreamed of separating the authorship of
these two.
4. The Book of the Revelation. — It is not intended in this article
to discuss the authorship of the Book of Revelation. The plan
we have adopted of addressmg ourselves mainly to the Enghsh
reader precludes us from entering into an examination of the

THE WRITINGS ASCRIBED TO ST. JOHN. 413
character of the Greek of this book, on the unlikeness of which
to the Greek of the Gospel has been founded one of the principal
arguments for the diversity of authorship of the two books. But
if we take into account how very different are the subjects of the
two books, the English reader will be much more struck with
their likeness than with their unHkeness. In the present case
the study of the books in a translation is not without advantage ;
for one of the methods by which those who hold both books to
have proceeded from the same author account for the difference
of Greek style, is by the hypothesis that this author who, it will
be readUy admitted, thought in Aramaic, employed in the two
books different hands to translate his thoughts into Greek. If
this were so, differences of style introduced by the translators
would be apt to disappear when the books were translated into
•another language. Thus by examining the books in a transla
tion we are able to separate their fundamental points of likeness
or unlikeness from those peeuHarities of diction for which it is
possible not the author but his secretary may be responsible.
Of the striking agreement between the doctrine concerning our
Lord taught in the Gospel and in the Apocalypse we shall
speak a httle later on ; at present we deal with more superficial
points of resemblance. The Evangelist lays particular emphasis
on the piercing of our Lord's side at His crucifixion and the
issuing therefrom of blood and water as an incident that he had
witnessed himseH (xix. 35). We have aHeady seen that the
Epistle also makes mention of the water and the blood (v. 6).
Now in the very beginning of the Apocalypse we find a reference
to the piercing of our Lord with a clear use of the same words of
the prophet Zechariah that are expressly quoted in the Gospel ;
and it may be added that the two books agree Hi using the same
translation of that prophet's words, not that of the Septuagint.
Let us return now to the opening words of the Gospel, "In
the beginning was the Word." This title, " the. Word," it wiU
be observed, is used by the EvangeHst only Hi his prologue ;
not only is it never put into our Lord's own mouth, but the
disciples are never introduced as using it when speaking of Him.
We have not laid stress on the fact that the Epistle also begins
by speaking of "the word of life," because it admits of question
whether this phrase is here to be understood as the name of a
person ; but there certainly is a coincidence with the prologue of
the Gospel in the next verse of the Epistle, for the " eternal Hfe
who was with the Father," is clearly identical with "the Word
who was with God." In the Revelation (xix. 11) our Lord is
given the appellation " Faithful and true," and (v. 13) His name
is said to be the Word of God. The former appeUation sends

414 BOOK BY BOOK.
us back to Rev. Ui. 14, where Jesus is spoken of as the "faithful
and true witness, the beginning of the creation of God." He is
also called "the beginning and the end " (Rev. xxi. 6 ; xxii. 13).
In connection with the word " witness " just quoted it must
be mentioned that this is one of the favourite words of the
Evangelist, occurring with him far more frequently than with
any other New Testament writer ; and that the same character
istic prevails in the Apocalypse. Another title commonly given
to our Lord in the Book of Revelation is the " Lamb " ; but this
is also found in the Gospel, " Behold the Lamb of God " (i. 36).
The cleansing power of the blood of Jesus finds startling expres
sion in the Book of Revelation where the redeemed are described
as having washed theH robes and made them white in the blood
of the Lamb (vii. 14) ; but the doctrine is also to be found in the
Epistle, "the blood of Jesus Christ eleanseth us from aU sin "
(i. 7). The title " Son of God" which is so often given to our
Lord in the Gospel, is ascribed to Him also in the Apocalypse
(iv. 18).
There are many other coincidences of language ; for instance,
the phrase "he that overcometh," which is of frequent occur
rence alike in Apocalypse, Gospel, and Epistles (John xvi. 33 ;
1 John ii. 13, iv. 4, v. 4 ; Rev. ii. 7, 11, Hi. 5, xii. 11, xxi. 7).
The phrase "keep my word" Rev. iU. 8, 10) ; " keep my say
ings " (Rev. xxii. 7, 9) is a favourite with the EvangeHst, but is
not used by any other New Testament writer (John viii. 51, 52,
55 ; xiv. 23, 24 ; xv. 20 ; xvH. 6 ; 1 John H. 5). The same
imagery is employed in both books as to the thUst and hunger
of the soul, and as to the means of supplying these needs. In
the Revelation (H. 17) Jesus promises believers "the hidden
manna " ; in the Gospel referring also to the manna, " the true
bread from heaven " ; and it may be added that this word
"true," Hi the sense of "real," "genuine," is another of the
characteristic words of the Gospel also frequently occurring Hi
the Apocalypse. So likewise our Lord's cry in the Gospel (vii.
37), " If any man thirst let him come unto me and drink," is
repeated in the Apocalypse (xxii. 17), "Let him that is athirst
come, and whosoever wiU, let him take of the water of hfe
freely." But the close affinity of the two books comes out more plainly
when we study the doctrinal characteristics of both.
5. The Christology of Gospel and Apocalypse. — We have aHeady
spoken of the difference of which every reader is conscious when
he passes to the Fourth Gospel from the study of the preceding
three. One point of difference is the predominance in the Fourth
Gospel of the doctrinal over the narrative element. The three

THE WRITINGS ASCRIBED TO ST. JOHN. 415
synoptic Evangelists do not give us the impression of having any
object in view, but simply to relate those deeds and words of our
Lord which had most fastened themselves on His disciples' recol
lection. The Fourth Gospel is avowedly written with a purpose,
namely, " that ye might believe that Jesus is the Christ the Son
of God, and that beHeving ye might have Hfe through his name"
(xx. 31). Accordingly, before telhng anything of the earthly
Hfe of Jesus, the EvangeHst begins by declaring the doctrine of
His pre-existence. He was with God "in the beginning" before
yet anything was created, for " through him all things were
made." Clement of Alexandria, before the end of the second
century, had expressed this difference in the statement that
John, "feeling that the things pertaining to the body had been
sufficiently declared in the previous Gospels, at the request of
his friends and under the mspiration of the Spirit wrote a
spHitual Gospel."
Assertions of our Lord's pre-existence run through the Gospel
and are put into His own mouth. He repeatedly declares that
He had been in heaven before His appearance on earth (iii. 1 3 ;
vi. 33, 38, 51, 62 ; xvi. 28). He claims to have had glory with
the Father before the world was (xvii. 5). He claims to be the
only way through which men can have access to God (x. 9 ; xiv.
6). If the treachery of Judas seems to cast discredit on his
' Master's judgment of character, the EvangeHst is careful to tell
that He had never been deceived; for that "knowing what was
in man," He had aU along foreseen the traitor's faithlessness
(U. 24 ; vi. 67, 71 ; xiH. 4). If it seems incredible that meu
should be able to put to death one of supernatural power, the
EvangeHst records his Master's declaration that His death had
been entirely voluntary : "No man taketh my hfe from me, but
I lay it down of myseH " (x. 18). It is taught with equal dis
tinctness that it was as a sacrifice for others His Hfe was given
(x. 11, 15; xv. 13; xi. 51, 52; 1 John iU. 16, U. 2). Further
" the Son " is represented as not only having been in the past
the agent in the work of creation, but also as appointed to be in
the future the administrator of judgment. All judgment has
been committed unto the Son. It is at His voice the dead shaU
one day come forth, and by His authority that judgment shaU
be executed on them (v. 22 — 29). It foUows that completely
divine honour is claimed for Him ; He and the Father are one
(x. 30) ; aU men are to honour the Son even as they honour the
Father (v. 23).
It has seemed to some critics impossible that such a beHef
concerning Jesus of Nazareth should be entertained by one who,
like the Apostle John, had been his companion during great

416 BOOK BY BOOK.
part of His earthly hfe. But this at least is certain, that the
writer of the Apocalypse also held the doctrines just described.
For the assimilation of the honours paid to God and to the Lamb
see Rev. vH. 10, xx. 6, xxi. 22, 23, xxii. 1 ; for the execution of
judgment by the Son see Rev. xix. 11, sq. ; for the atonement
made by His death Rev. v. 9 ; for his eternal existence xxu. 13.
But in truth the doctrines just stated were the beUefs of the
Christian Church before either Gospel or Apocalypse was written.
Paul associated with those who had been apostles before him,
and must have known what they thought of their Master, but
his teaching exhibits striking coincidence with that of the Gospel
and Apocalypse which we are discussing. Thus with regard to
the ascription to Jesus of divine honours, and even the use con
cerning Him of the name of God, see Rom. ix. 5 ; Phil. ii. 6 ;
2 Cor. viii. 14; Eph. v. 5; 1 Thess. iii. 11; on His pre-existence
and His share in the work of Creation, 1 Cor. viii. 6 and Col. i.
16, 17 ; on His future judgment, 2 Cor. v. 10 ; on the voluntari
ness of His humiliation, 2 Cor. viii. 9 ; Phil. ii. 7 ; on the atoning
efficacy of His blood, Rom. v. 9 ; 1 Cor. v. 7 ; Gal. iii. 13 ; Eph.
i. 7. No book of the New Testament leads us to form any dif
ferent opinion about our Lord.
With respect to the testimony to the dignity of our Lord's
person borne in the Synoptic Gospels, not to quote such passages
as Matt. v. 27, 28, 29, xxviii. 18 — 20, we content ourselves with
the proof that these Gospels agree with St. Paul and with the
Johannine books in teaching that it is Jesus Christ who shaU
preside at the Judgment of the Last Day. They represent Him
as, in answer to a solemn adjuration by the high priest, profess
ing HimseH to be that Son of Man who was one day to come in
the clouds of heaven as Daniel had prophesied. (Matt, xxvii. 65 ;
Mark xiv. 62 ; Luke xxii. 66. See also Matt. xxiv. 30, xxv.
31, sq.) If Jesus had but represented Himself as exempt from
the judgment to whieh aU others must submit on the last day,
that would have been to put in a yery starthng way a claim to
absolute and unquestioned innocency of life ; but when He goes
further, and claims to be judge of the whole human race, the
pretension would be ridiculous except on the supposition that
Jesus was Hi nature quite different from other men.
It is to be owned that assertions of this uniqueness of our
Lord's nature occur less frequently in the Synoptic Gospels than
in the Fourth ; but if the ancient opinion be -correct that the
Fourth Gospel was written by one acquainted with the others
and with the intention of supplementing theH contents, then the
mere fact that any point had been slightly touched on in the
earHer Gospels would be reason enough for its being more fuUy

THE WRITINGS ASCRIBED TO ST. JOHN. 417
dwelt on in the latest Gospel. It wiU be well, therefore, to
examine how far internal evidence supports the correctness of
this ancient opinion; for it must be owned that this is a point on
which modern critics are far from being agreed, many of those
who beheve the Fourth Gospel to have been written by the
Apostle John not admitting that he could have been acquainted
with any of the other Gospels.
6. The Supplemental Character of the Fourth Gospel. — Whether
it be intended or not, the fact is certain that the Fourth Gospel
is supplemental to the other three. These three resemble each
other in general character, and have in common a number of
incidents and discourses, even related in nearly the same
words, so as to suggest that each EvangeHst intended his
work for readers not supposed to be Hkely to have met with the
others. But it is quite exceptional if we find in the Fourth
Gospel anything that had been recorded in the others ; and when
we do, there is usuaUy some obvious reason for its insertion.
Thus, though the miracle of feeding the five thousand related Hi
John vi. had been told in the other Gospels, it is used by St. John
to introduce a discourse which the previous Evangelists had not
recorded. Except in this chapter St. John relates no nuracle
recorded in the other Gospels, while he gives six which they had
not mentioned, the turning water into wine (ii.), the heahng of
the nobleman's son (iv.), the cure of the impotent man at the
pool of Bethesda (v.), the giving sight to the man born blind
(ix.), the raising of Lazarus (xi.), and the miraculous draught of
fishes (xxi.)
Now the question is, can this avoiding of topics, sufficiently
dealt with in the other Gospels be reasonably ascribed to acci
dent ? If different persons had attempted independently to com
mit to writing the leading facts believed in in the Christian
community concerning the Hfe of its Founder, together with some
specimens of His discourses, although some things might he
omitted by one that were told by another, there surely would be
a number which any two would agree in regarding as too im
portant to be omitted. It would be a feat little less difficult than
that in the old ordeals of walking blindfold amid hot plough
shares without touching any, if a narrator without knowledge of
what three predecessors had told, managed to keep clear of
everything they had related.
But we are under no temptation to avoid the most natural
explanation of the characteristics of the Fourth Gospel now under
consideration. For aU critics agree in ascribing to this Gospel a
date considerably later than that of any of the other three. Those
who beheve the Apostle John to, have written it believe that he
E.H

418 BOOK BY BOOK.
did so at the very end of a long life — that is to say, not long
before the end of the first century. Those who do not ascribe
the Gospel to St. John place its date stUl later. In any case aU
beHeve that the other Gospels were in circulation at the time the
Fourth Gospel was written, and if so, why should we imagine
that its writer had not seen them ?
One thing is certain, that this EvangeHst takes for granted
that his readers had already, through some source or other,
become acquainted with the principal facts of the Gospel history.
In the first chapter (ver. 40) he describes Andrew as Simon
Peter's brother, taking for granted that Simon Peter was known.
A reference to the Baptist (iii. 24) is accompanied by the paren-
thetical remark, "for John was not yet cast into prison," evidently
intended for men who knew that John's career had been thus cut
short, but who needed the explanation that the events which the
Evangelist is relating occurred whUe the Baptist was stiU in
activity. He does not directly teU of the appointment of the
twelve apostles, but he assumes it as known (vi. 70) : " Have not
I chosen you twelve, and one of you is a devU? " His narrative
does not inform us that Joseph was the reputed father of our
Lord, but this appears incidentaUy when the Jews ask, "Is not
this Jesus, the son of Joseph, whose father and mother we
know?" (vi. 42; i. 45). The baptism of our Lord is not
expressly mentioned, but is impHed in the account the Baptist
gives of his having seen the Spirit descending on Him (i. 32),
The ascension is not related, but it is thrice referred to (iii. 13 ;
vi. 62 ; xx. 17).
An argument may also be drawn from the omissions of the
Gospel. It has been noticed that it does not relate the institution
of either of the sacraments of Baptism or the Lord's Supper.
But it is certain from other sources that both these institutions
were established Christian rites at the comparatively late period
when the Fourth Gospel was written. It would be strange if
the Evangelist's silence about these rites were intended to dis
parage them, seeing that in point of fact no book has done more
than this Gospel to raise the estimation in which these rites have
been held in the Christian Church, a discourse in the third
chapter having been commonly understood of the one, and one in
the sixth of the other. It is therefore reasonable to beHeve that
the reason why the EvangeHst does not record our Lord's insti
tution of these rites is because he knew that his readers had
aHeady other accounts in theH hands.
If there can be any doubt on this point there seems room for
none on the next point, viz., the sUence of the EvangeHst as to
our Lord's birth at Bethlehem, and of the tribe of Judah. For

THE WRITINGS ASCRIBED TO ST. JOHN. 419
he does relate (i. 45 ; vH. 41, 52) that it was made a ground of
objection to the acceptance of Jesus as the Messiah that he was a
GalUean, the son of Joseph, whose father and mother they knew
(vi. 42), whereas it had been foretold that the Messiah should be
born in Bethlehem, and of the house of David. The Evangelist,
as we shaU presently see, beUeved in the Old Testament, and
habituaUy takes pleasure in tracing the fulfilment of Old Testa
ment prophecies in the hfe of our Lord. We may be sure
therefore that he himseH believed that Jesus, whom he accepted
as the Messiah, had been born as the prophets foretold He-
should. And he certainly would not have placed a stumbling
block Hi his readers' way by telling them of tlm Jewish objection
without ever teUing them the true answer to it, unless he knew
that they were aHeady in possession of that answer in some more
authentic shape than mere traditional rumour.
The examination made in the present section was necessary,
because there can be no sound criticism of the Fourth Gospel
without a correct decision of the question whether or not the
author intended it as a complete account of the Saviour's Hfe.
It is an undoubted fact that the Fourth Gospel omits many things
told in the previous Gospels, and relates much which they omit.
It is necessary to decide whether on this account we are to regard
this witness as at variance with his predecessors, or whether we
are at hberty to combine what he and they have told, making
the assumption that the later writer was designedly concise
where his predecessors had been fuU, and f uU where they had
been concise.
7. The Evangelist was a Jew. — The earHest dissension that we
read of in the Christian community arose out of the opposition
made by men of Jewish bHth to the doctrine preached by Paul,
namely, that the middle waU of partition between Jew and
GentUe had been thrown down and that Jew and GentUe were
thenceforward one in Christ Jesus. On this question the Fourth
EvangeHst takes his side with those whp were in favour of the
widest opening of the portals of the Christian Church. When a
question was raised as to the rival claims of Jerusalem and
Mount Gerizim our Lord is recorded as answering (iv. 21), "that
the hour cometh, when ye shaU neither at Jerusalem nor Hi this
mountain worship the Father." Our Lord is represented as
announcing (x. 16) that He had other sheep "not of this fold,"
whom also He must bring so that aU should become one flock.
Jesus is recorded as predicting (xu. 32) that He should draw all
men unto him. His death is stated (xi. 52) to be not for the
Jewish nation only, but "that also he should gather together in
one the chUdren of God that were scattered abroad." The
e e 2

420 BOOK BY BOOK.
Apocalypse likewise represents the redeemed (vii. 9), as a great
multitude, which no man could number, of aU nations and
kindreds and peoples and tongues (see also v. 9).
Yet he who thus declares himseH on the side of those who
freely admitted GentUes into the Church was, like St. Paul, of
Jewish birth himseH. We may gather this from his possessing
a famUiarity with the Old Testament, not easUy gamed by one
who had not known the book from chUdhood. The testimony
borne to Jesus by the Jewish scriptures is both appealed to in
general terms (v. 39, 46 ; i. 45), and particular instances are
specified of the fulfilment in Him of predictions of the prophets
(xii. 15, 38 — 41 ; xix. 24, 36, 37 ; xx. 9). In one of these cases
(xii. 15), where two previous Evangelists have simply recorded
a fact without connecting it with the Old Testament, St. John
quotes the prophecy which was thereby fulfilled, and remarks
that the disciples had not at first understood that in what they
were doing they were fulfilling a prophecy. Old Testament
types of the Saviour's work are cited (hi. 14 ; vi. 32 ; xix. 36).
This Evangelist also lays on the Jewish feasts a stress not put
on them in the other Gospels, telling of our Lord's attendance on
many concerning which they had been sUent (U. 18, 23 ; vi. 4 ;
vH. 37 ; x. 22). He exhibits acquaintance with Jewish customs
and habits of thought (ii. 5 ; iv. 27 ; vii. 15, 35 ; viii. 48 ; ix. 2 ;
xi. 55 ; xvui. 28 ; xix. 31). The Jews are claimed (i. 11) to be
our Lord's " own" people ; and in the very passage where the
claims of spiritual reHgion, apart from any distinction of place
or race, are most strongly set forth, the prerogatives of the Jew
are asserted as strongly as they are by St. Paul himself when he
has to answer the question, " What advantage then hath the
Jew?" This Gospel puts into our Lord's mouth the words
(iv. 22) "Ye worship ye know not what: we know what we
worship ; for salvation is of the Jews."
But though the Evangelist thus shows himseH to be a Jew, he
writes like one Hving among Gentiles, and at that late period,
when the Christian community had become completely separated
from the Jewish, so as to be known by different names. In a
community where men of Jewish birth were in a decided
minority, the title " the Jews " would come to be used to denote
a distinction rather of religion than of birth. It is so used by
St. Paul (1 Thess. ii. 14), who distinguishes "the Churches of
God that are in Judea" from "the Jews," the latter being
described as those "who both kiUed the Lord Jesus and their
own prophets and have persecuted us." In this sense the phrase
"the Jews" is used repeatedly in the Fourth Gospel, as it also
is Hi the FHst (xxvUi. 15).
The conclusion to which we have just come is Hi f uU accordance

THE WRITINGS ASCRIBED TO ST. JOHN. 421
with the weU-authenticated tradition that the Fourth Gospel is
the latest of the four and that it made its first appearance in Asia
Minor. But this work, though written at a distance from Jeru
salem, exhibits minute acquaintance with the topography of the
Holy Land. He mentions the foUowing localities (some of them
being but smaU places), and in some cases exhibits minute
knowledge of them : Cana of Galilee (ii. 1, 2 ; iv. 46 ; xxi. 2) ;
Bethsaida (i. 44) : Bethany beyond Jordan (i. 28) ; Bethany,
near Jerusalem (H. 18) ; the city Ephraim, near the wUderness
(xi. 54) ; iEnon, near to Salim, where John baptized (iii. 23) ;
Syehar, the city of Samaria where Jacob's WeU was (iv. 4). At
Jerusalem the EvangeHst knows the pool of Bethesda, near the
sheep-gate, with its five porches, the treasury at the Temple,
Solomon's porch, the pool Siloam, the brook Kedron, the place
that is caHed the pavement but in the Hebrew Gabbatha, the
place of the skull called in Hebrew Golgotha.
8. The Date of the Gospel. — We have already said that it cannot
be placed in the very earHest days of the Church, but neither
can it be placed, as some have done, so late as to be quite outside
the limits of the apostoHc age. We can at least say that it must
be antecedent to the Gnostic heresies which broke out quite
early in the second century. The problem that most occupied
the minds of the Gnostic speculators was how to account for the
origin of evU ; and the solution they generally agreed in offering
was that evU was inherent Hi matter. It foUowed that the
creation of matter could not have been the work of the good
God, and since the God of the Jews claimed the work of creation
as His own, that He must be a being different from, and, aceord
ing to many systems, hostUe to the supreme God. Thus the
authority of the Old Testament was rejected. Further, those
who held these views found it impossible to beheve that the
Saviour could have assumed a material body, and so they were
led to maintain that in His earthly life He was only in appearance
hke other men. Again, they could not beheve that the existence
of matter would be prolonged beyond the present Hfe, and so
they rejected the doctrine of the resurrection of the body. And
as they conceived that perfection was to be attained through
release from the dominion of matter, they inculcated an ascetic
mode of hfe, abstinence from animal food and from wine, as weU
as from marriage through which the material Hfe is perpetuated.
Now it is not merely that the Fourth Gospel gives no counte
nance to any of these theories, but there is no trace that the
EvangeHst had ever heard of them. The authority of the Old
Testament is assumed as a matter about which there can be no
question. The Temple which the Jews had buUt for the worship
of theH God is claimed by Jesus as His Father's house (ii. 16).

422 BOOK BY BOOK.
The resurrection of the body is plainly taught (v. 28), for the
future Hfe is not represented as resulting from the continuance
of the soul, though separated from the body; but " they that
are in the grave shaU hear the voice of the Son of Man and shall
come forth." No question as to the lawfulness of marriage is
suggested as having been raised, but Jesus is represented as
gracing a wedding feast with His presence. Jesus is represented
as having a body subject to the accidents of weariness and thHst,
and which even after His resurrection His disciples might handle
(xx. 27 ; 1 John i. 1). The question concerning tbe lawfulness
of animal food had been raised in St. Paul's time (Rom. xiv. 2),
and had been treated by him as a harmless scrupulosity. The
question of the lawfulness of marriage had been also discussed
(1 Cor. vii. 1). And towards the end of his life the teachers of
asceticism had become so troublesome as to need to be more
severely dealt with (1 Tim. iv. 3). But these questions do not
appear to have been under discussion in the circle for which the
fourth EvangeHst wrote. On the other hand, a docetic theory
concerning our Lord's person, which some things in the Gospel
might be used to countenance, had become formidable enough
when the Epistle was written to need express condemnation,
and the denial that Jesus Christ was come in the flesh was pro
nounced to emanate from the spHit of antichrist (1 John iv. 3 ;
2 John 7).
Another consideration which forbids our assigning a very late
date to the Fourth Gospel is drawn from the fact that it is
in some instances in real or apparent disagreement with the
Synoptic Gospels. It is enough to mention one point, about
which harmonists dispute to the present day, viz., that the
Synoptic narrative gives the impression that our Lord ate the
Passover with His disciples on the night before He suffered,
whereas St. John would lead us to think that He did not. Now
if the Fourth Gospel had been composed at any time in the
second century, a time when the other Gospels had had time to
gain acceptance and to be generaUy received among Christians
as the authentic account of their Master's Hfe, the framer of this
supplemental Gospel would have been careful to dovetail his
work properly into the accepted story. He would not injure his
chance of gaining credit for his new Gospel by deviating from
what the Church had accepted as the true apostolic tradition.
So that H objectors have been successful in attempts to find
contradictions between the Fourth Gospel and the preceding
three, the result would be not to overthrow, but to confirm the
tradition as to the apostolic origin of the last Gospel. No
one would venture to dispense with careful conformity to the
estabhshed account but one whose own authority stood so high

THE WRITINGS ASCRIBED TO ST. JOHN. 423
that he had no need to consider what others had said before
him. The traditional account of the authorship of the Gospel is
further confirmed by the perfect knowledge which the writer
exhibits, how unlike the Messianic conception of a " Kingdom
not of this world," which early came to be that of the Christian
Church, was that expectation which prevailed among the Jews
at the time of our Lord's coming, of a temporal deliverer who
should restore sovereignty to their nation. This Evangelist
tells that the impression produced by the mHacle of feeding the
multitude was such that they were about to come by force to
make our Lord a king, and that He was obHged to withdraw
HimseH from their importunity to a mountain alone. He repre
sents the prudent Jewish rulers as resolved to put down the
prophesying of Jesus, because they feared that the political
consequences of His assertion of His kingdom would be an unsuc
cessful revolt which would be disastrous to their nation (xi. 48).
And he brings out the fact that it was as a pretender to temporal
sovereignty that the Jews accused Hun before PUate, who,
though personaUy inclined to dismiss the complaint, was with
held from doing so through fear of exciting the jealousy of his
emperor by his remissness H in such a matter as this he showed
himseH not Caesar's friend (xix. 12).
This state of Jewish f eehng couhl scarcely have been so vividly
represented except by one who had himseH experience of it. But
it was queUed by the destruction of Jerusalem under Titus, so
that we are led to think of the Fourth Evangelist as one who had
lived through the time before that event. There was indeed a
revival of Jewish national feehng leading to the unsuccessful
rebellion under Barcochba, which was put down a.d. 135. But
considerations already brought forward, besides those to be pre
sently adduced, forbid us to place the Fourth Gospel so late.
9. The Johannine Authorship. — It is a fact with which we have
got to deal that the Evangelist four times expressly claims to
have been an eye-witness of our Saviour's IHe (i. 14 ; xix. 35 ;
xxi. 24; 1 John i. 1). In one of these passages (xxi. 24) the
author is identified with him whom it describes as ' ' the disciple
whom Jesus loved," and even if there had not been this explicit
declaration, the way in which that disciple is introduced, xiii. 23 ;
xix. 26; xx. 2; xxi. 7, 20, and probably xviii. 15, irresistibly
conveys the impression that the Evangelist wished the readers
to understand that he himself was that disciple. It does not
admit of serious question that by this disciple the Apostle John
is intended. Now it is a curious feature of this Gospel, which
records things said by Apostles of whom the other three Gospels
teU us little (PhiHp, vi. 7; xiv. 8; Andrew, vi. 9 ; Thomas,

424 BOOK BY BOOK.
xi. 16 ; xiv. 5 ; xx. 25 ; Judas, not Iscariot, xiv. 22), that it not
only never mentions by name the great Apostle John, but that
when speaking of our Lord's forerunner, it does not, like the
other Gospels, add the title "the Baptist," but describes him
simply as " John," as if there were no other of the same name
with whom there might be danger of confounding him. Now,
whereas almost everyone in the Church would feel the necessity
of distinguishing by some special name John the forerunner from
John the Apostle, there was just one person who would not feel
that necessity and. could not form the habit, namely, the Apostle
John himseH.
The character of the book is exactly what it might have been
expected to be H the author's claim were weU founded to have
been an eye-witness on intimate terms with the subject of the
narrative. The book is fuU of minute particulars of time and
place (iv. 6, 52 ; viii. 20 ; x. 23 ; i. 44 ; xii. 21 ; xviH. 10). The
EvangeHst tells what places the disciples were accustomed to
resort to (xi. 54 ; xviii. 2 ; xx. 19), what they said to each other
(iv. 33; xi. 16; xvi. 17; xx. 25; xxi. 3, 7), and what they
thought (ii. 11, 17, 23; iv. 27; xiH. 22, 29).
The question has to be decided whether all the details in which
the Fourth Gospel is so abundant are to be regarded as the real
recoUections of an eye-witness or as the fictions of an unscrupulous
inventor. In support of the latter view stress has been laid on
aUeged contradictions between the statements of the Fourth
Gospel and what has been asserted in the simpler and more
credible story of the earlier Evangelists. But on examination
the supposed contradictions are found to melt away, and are
completely accounted for when it is recognised that it was St.
John's purpose to supplement some omissions in the only narra
tives tUl then current in the Church.
One of the most striking points of difference is that the
Synoptic narrative gives an account of but one year of our
Lord's ministry, the scene of which, until the last week, is laid
in Gahlee, whereas St. John relates the events of more Passovers
than one, and teUs of more visits than one by our Lord to Jeru
salem. But a study of the internal characteristics of the Gospels
has led many modern critics to accept one of the oldest traditions
concerning the Gospels, namely, that the basis of St. Mark's
Gospel, and to some extent of St. Matthew's and St. Luke's
also, is the account which St. Peter gave of what he recoUected
of his Master's Hfe. Now it was the most natural thing in the
world, that that account should begin by relating how he himseH
had been called on to forsake aU and follow Jesus, becoming
thenceforward His constant companion. The events of that
memorable day fiH the first chapter of St. Mark's Gospel. But

THE WRITINGS ASCRIBED TO ST. JOHN. 425
that, day was after John the Baptist was cast into prison (Mark
i. 14), and St. John undertakes (Ui. 24) to teU much that took
place before John was cast into prison.
Now, although if we had St. Mark's Gospel only we might
take up the idea that Simon and Andrew, James and John, had
not known Jesus until they received His command to leave their
fishing and become fishers of men, yet no such statement is
made by the Evangelist, and St. John, so far from contradicting,
throws great Hght on the preceding narrative when he explains
that it was not at the bidding of an unknown person that the
disciples forsook all. We learn from the Gospel that before the
disciples thus forsook their avocations to JoUow Jesus, they had
aHeady learned under the guidance of John the Baptist to
recognise Jesus as the prophet who should come into the world.
The three Synoptic Gospels had each related the descent of the
Holy Ghost on our Lord at His baptism without stating on what
testimony theH narrative was founded. St. John informs us,
what when we think on it seems most natural, that the Church
learned this fact on the testimony of the Baptist himseH, who
though, as St. Matthew teUs us, he had aHeady known enough
of Jesus to feel that He had no need of baptism of his, yet was
then first assured that it was He who was to come baptizing with
the Holy Ghost. Great stress is laid on this testimony of the
Baptist, whieh is appealed to a,s part of His credentials by our
Lord HimseH (John v. 32). But the fact that John had been
witness to Jesus is indHectly attested by the Synoptic Gospels,
which give us to understand that there was such a connection
between John and his Successor that any who acknowledged the
Divine mission of the Baptist would be bound in consistency to
own the authority of Jesus (Matthew xxi. 25 ; Mark xi. 31 ;
Luke xx. 5).
If St. Mark's narrative might have led us to think of the
caUing of the Apostles to forsake their ordinary avocations as
immediately foUowing the Baptism, ,St. Luke's narrative would
lead us to think that there was some intervening time, so that
there is nothing to stumble at if St. John's narrative makes us
understand that the interval was stiU longer than we might
otherwise have supposed.
Neither is there anything to stumble at if we are told that
during that interval our Lord attended feasts at Jerusalem.
Nay, rather we should have cause for surprise if the fact were
not so ; if He whom St. Matthew records as having said that it
became Him " to fulfil aU righteousness," whom St. Luke relates
to have been brought up by His parents to attend a feast whUe
still a boy, neglected to fulfil this duty of ordinary Jewish obli
gation. Nor would it be strange if some of His Apostles, before

426 BOOK BY BOOK.
they had yet been called to be His daUy companions, were at
least His feUow-traveUers in journeys which as devout Jews
they would doubtless have made on theH own account. It has
been suggested that besides the religious motive for visiting
Jerusalem, St. John as a fisherman would have commercial
reasons for visits, and might in this way have become known at
the high priest's palace (John xviii. 16). In any case our Lord's
words, Matt. xxui. 37, " How often would I have gathered thy
chUdren together," imply repeated visits to Jerusalem ; and
indeed it is not credible that if He had come to Jerusalem for
the first time for that Passover in which He suffered, and had
not given offence by rebukes on previous visits, the authorities
of Jerusalem would have so speedily resolved on His destruc
tion, or been able in so short a time to find means to bring it
about. Thus, although critics of the last generation had objected to
the trustworthiness of St. John's narrative, because in the part
just discussed, and in some others, it appeared to them incon
sistent with the preceding Gospels, yet the result of a closer
examination has been to bring Renan, and others by no means
prepossessed in favour of traditional views, to the conviction that
the Fourth Gospel cannot be neglected by any one who attempts
to write the history of the Hfe of Jesus, and that it deserves to be
trusted even on some points on which it gives an impression
different from that produced by the narrative of the earHer
EvangeUsts. It is not possible that the Fourth Gospel could thus
throw real hght upon the earlier narrative unless the writer was
possessed of first-hand information. We have then only to
choose between the account which the Church has always re
ceived, viz., that this Gospel was written by an eye-witness,
namely, the Apostle St. John ; and the hypothesis of some
modern critics that the author was an unknown disciple of St.
John who embodied in this Gospel possibly some things be had
heard from his master, together with inventions of his own.
In favour of the former view may be urged that no critic can
mistake the traces of strong personal feeling under whieh the
EvangeHst writes, though he refrains from giving formal expres
sion to it, the feeling of strong attachment to his Master, of
indignation at the treachery of Judas, and at the preference
given by the Jews to Barabbas. Attention must also be paid to
the manner in which the Evangelist deals in his last chapters
with the belief current among the disciples that Jesus had pre
dicted that St. John should not die before His second coming.
The EvangeHst explains that the behef had originated in words
of our Lord whieh did not necessarUy guarantee any such pro
mise, yet he refrains from saying that the behef was wrong.

THE WRITINGS ASCRIBED TO ST. JOHN. 427
This quite faUs in with the account that the Gospel was written
when St. John had attained a great age, but before he died.
Against the hypothesis that the Gospel was written by an
unknown person is the evidence yielded by the third Epistle
ascribed to St. John, which we have aHeady found good reason
to think was written by the author of the Gospels. This Epistle
carries the evidence of its genuineness on its face by revealing a
state of things whieh no forger had any motive for inventing, or
was ever likely to imagine as possible. The writer, it appears, had
sent brethren as bearers of a letter from him to a particular
Church, and they, instead of being received with the hospitahty
usual among Christians, were treated as heretics, the man who
claimed to take the leading part in the government of that Church
actuaUy threatening excommunication to any who should afford
them hospitality. What uninsphed writers teU with one consent
about St. John is that he spent the last years of his Hfe settled in
Asia Minor, and ruling the Churches of that district. It is a con
ceivable thing that before his arrival he may have sent messen
gers with a letter, possibly from his place of banishment in Pat-
mos ; and as we know from the Epistles to the Corinthians and the
Galatians that the Apostolic Church was not free from dissensions,
there is nothing incredible in the supposition that the estab
hshed rulers of the Asiatic Churches may at first have given an
unfriendly reception to a new teacher.
But no one in the next century would be likely to imagine
apostoHc messengers meeting such a reception ; and certainly it
would be absolutely contrary to the interests of a forger to repre
sent the hero of his fiction treated with disrepect. Assured as
we are then that the Third Epistle is no fiction, but the real letter
of a great Church ruler preserved after the circumstances which
had drawn it forth had been forgotten, it foUows at once that the
author is no unknown person hiding his personality under the
cover of a great name. He comes forward in his own person,
claiming great authority, sending his legates to an old-established
Church, and treating resistance to his claims on the part of the
rulers of such Churches as idle " prating," whieh he is confident
that by his presence he wiH at once put down. And according
to aU appearance his anticipations prove correct, and his rule
over the Churches of Asia is completely acquiesced in. When
such a man pubUshes a Gospel containing a clearly implied claim
on the part of the writer to be the " disciple whom Jesus loved,"
we cannot suppose the claim to be made on behaH of some one
else, but must regard it as exhibiting the grounds of the authority
which the writer himseH exercised. Those who deny him. to have
been the Apostle John are bound to teU who else he could pos
sibly have been.

THE ACTS OF THE APOSTLES.
1. The Authorship of the Acts. — It may be regarded as abso
lutely certain, even on the admission of the most sceptical critics,
that the Acts of the Apostles was written by the same author as
the Third Gospel, and that the writer of both was St. Luke.
The book comes before us as the professed sequel to that Gospel,
which is assigned to St. Luke by the Muratorian Fragment
on the Canon (not later than a.d. 170), as weU as by Irenaeus,
TertuUian, Clement of Alexandria, and others. The reception of
the Acts of the Apostles by the earliest Christian writers, if
not absolutely proved, is yet rendered extremely probable by
the resemblance to phrases which it contains, and facts which
it narrates, in the writings of Clement of Rome, Ignatius,
Hermas, Polycarp, Dionysius of Corinth, Papias, Justin Mar
tyr, and the author of the Epistle to Diognetus, all of whom
wrote before the close of the second century.
It is true that not one of these references would be singly suf
ficient to demonstrate an acquaintance with the Acts, but their
coUective force is too strong to be rejected ; especially as it is
further strengthened by traces that the book was known to the
Ebionites, to some of the early Gnostics, and to the Pagan
scoffer Lucian, as well as to the Churches of Lyons and
Vienne. The probability of the early dissemination of the Acts,
estabhshed by these apparent allusions, is confirmed by the dis
tinct evidence of the Muratorian Fragment. In a passage, of
which the general meaning is clear, this ancient document
directly attributes to St. Luke the authorship both of the Gospel
and of the Acts. This " Canon " represents the testimony of
the Western Church ; and as the book was certainly known to
Irenaeus, Bishop of Lyons, who as a pupU of Polycarp represents
the traditions of the Eastern Church, no doubt can be entertained
as to the authenticity of the Acts.
The learned Eusebius of Caesarea, to whom Church history
owes so much, refers to the Acts as the work of St. Luke,

THE ACTS OF THE APOSTLES. 429
and as a book indisputably genuine (6//,oAo-ydi>/u.evoi'*). Of this
fact no doubt was ever expressed till towards the close of the
ninth century, when Photius makes the astonishing statement
that, whUe some considered the book to have been written by
Luke, others attributed it to Barnabas, or Clement of Rome. To
conjectures so ignorant and baseless Photius himself attributes
no importance, and he says that the question of the Evangelist's
authorship is evident on the surface.
The only statement in any of the Fathers which can be
regarded as derogatory to the authority of the Acts is the
incidental remark of St. jOhrysostom, at the beginning of his
HomiHes (a.d. 401), that many persons knew nothing of the
existence of the book. Probably the remark only applies
to persons at Constantinople, who may have been but recently
converted, and who were probably very ignorant of all the
sacred books except the Gospels. It must be remembered that
manuscripts were rare and precious, and as the Acts was
addressed to one individual it was less hkely than other books
to get into universal circulation. The suggestions that it was
written by any other author than St. Luke have been so contrary
to aU avaUable evidence, and have found so few foUowers,
that it is quite unnecessary to enter into any serious refutation
of them.
For indeed the internal evidence that the book was written
by the Third Evangelist is even stronger than the external.
(i.) Both the Gospel and the Acts are prefaced by a carefully
composed introduction in which the works are dedicated to a cer
tain TheophUus, to whom in the Gospel is given the honourable
title of "most exceUent."
(U.) In both treatises there is a remarkable identity of style.
Nearly a hundred phrases and idioms are common to the Gospel
and Acts. Some words seem to belong characteristicaUy to
St. Luke and St. Paul almost alone among the sacred writers.
Thus the beautiful word x»/°ls> "grace" or "favour," does
not occur in the first two EvangeUsts, and only Hi one brief
clause of St. John (i. 14—17); but it occurs eight time's in St.
Luke's Gospel, seventeen times in the Acts, and very frequently
in the Epistles of St. Paul.f The verb -)(aplt,op,a.i occurs only in
the Epistles of St. Paul and seven times ia the Gospel of St.
Luke and the Acts.
(iii.) Further than this, it is a curious fact that St. Luke, both
in the.Gospel and the Acts, has two styles. His own proper style
* It also occurs ten times in 1 Peter — an Epistle which in many respects
shows a Pauline tone.
t Buseb., H. E. iii. 25.

430 BOOK BY BOOK.
is more correct and classical than that of any other writer in
the New Testament ; but there are entHe chapters, alike in the
Gospel and the Acts, in which we find a totally different style,
largely coloured by Hebraisms, whieh shows at once that the
writer, by a method peculiarly his own, is incorporating writ
ten documents or has verbaUy taken down the testimony of eye
witnesses. (iv.) Besides this curious unity of style and Hterary charac
teristics, there is a close resemblance in tone between the Gospel
and the Acts. Both are marked by a fine geniaHty, a deHcate
insight, a singular sweetness, whieh becomes stiU more fuU of
charm from its alHance with a fervid enthusiasm. The writer
is a consummate artist who produces the greatest effect by the
fewest touches. Partly because he is dealing with facts known
to him either directly or mediately at first hand, and partly be
cause he was endowed with a high but unconscious Hterary skdll,
he gives us the most vivid deHneation of characters and events.
Without any long descriptions or psychological analysis, Philip,
Barnabas, Stephen, James, Herod Agrippa I., Felix, Festus,
Herod Agrippa IL, GaUio, and many other personages, both
heathen and Christian, are made to stand out in distinct person
ality from the few brief pages which furnish us with so vast a
range of priceless information.
(v.) There is further a unity of thought in the Gospel and the
Acts. They reveal to us that the author was a man of large
sympathies, who, in his general theology no less than Hi sepa
rate expressions, was attached to that view of the Gospel doe-
trine — that "Gospel to the Gentiles" — of which St. Paul was
" the vessel of election."
We may then regard it as unquestionable that St. Luke
was the author of the Acts. With supreme modesty he entirely
suppresses his own name, and he is only mentioned three times
in Scripture, as "the beloved physician" (Col. iv. 14), the
" f eUow-labourer " and most faithful companion of St. Paul in
his first and second Roman imprisonments (PhUem. 24 ; 2 Tim.
iv. 11). From the context of the first passage it has been in
ferred that he was not " of thecUeumcision," and there can there
fore be but Httle doubt that he was "a proselyte of the gate."
That he was a Syrian of Antioch is probable from internal evi
dence, as well as from the statements of Eusebius and Jerome ;
and if the reading " whUe we \Jjp.mv\ were assembled together "
in Acts xi. 28 be genuine,'3 he first made the acquaintance of
St. Paul at Antioch.
* It is found in D (the Codex Bezae), and was known to Augustine.

THE ACTS OF THE APOSTLES. 431
AU that we further know about him is deduced from those sec
tions of the Acts in which he uses the word " we " throughout.
These " we " sections, as they are called, show us that he
joined the little missionary band of the Apostle at Troas (Acts
xvi. 10), and, becoming one ofthe earUest EvangeUsts of Europe,
accompanied him to Macedonia, probably in his character as
" a physician," since at that time St. Paul had been suffering
from an acute attack of his " thorn in the flesh." He seems to
have stayed behind at PhUippi (xvui. 1 " they "), where we stiU
find him after a lapse of seven years'(xx. 5). He was appointed
one of the delegates to coUect and convey to Jerusalem the
contributions of the Gentile Christians (2 Cor. viii. 18), and he
went with St. Paul to the Holy City (xxi. 18). It is probable
that he stayed with St. Paul during his two years' imprisonment
at Caesarea, and that during that time his Gospel was partly
written. He accompanied the Apostle on his disastrous voyage
to Rome, and Hved with him, in all probability, until his
liberation. TheophUus, to whom he dedicates his work, may have been.
the wealthy Antiochene Christian mentioned in the Clementines
as having lent his house to St. Peter for Christian assemblies ;
and H so St. Luke may have been his physician-slave or freed-
man. Contractions, Hke Lucas for Lucanus, are common in
the names of slaves. There is not the shghtest evidence that
he was a painter, and our earUest authority for his supposed
martyrdom is a vague reference of St. Gregory of Nazianzus to
wards the close of the fourth century. That he was famUiar
with the sea is clear from the accurate though unprofessional aUu
sions made in his minute descriptions of St. Paul's voyages, and
it is not an unreasonable conjecture that he may have some
times practised his heahng art Hi the huge and densely-crowded
merchant ships which whitened the Mediterranean with their
saUs during the summer months. His knowledge of medicine
is abundantly Ulustrated by the medical language which is found
in both of his writings, and which has even left some marked
traces on the phraseology of St. Paul.
2. The Main Subject of the Book. — The contents are indicated by
the title, " The Acts of the Apostles ; " but whether this title
came from the author himseH or not is very uncertain. The
manuscripts vary between "Acts ; " " Acts of Apostles : " "Acts
of the Apostles ; " and "The Acts of the Apostles." ' "Acts"
is the title given in the Sinaitic Manuscript, and is a name fre
quently used also in apocryphal literature, to describe what we
would caU "Memoirs." The book was quoted by the learned
Clement of Alexandria as " Acts of the Apostles."

432 BOOK BY BOOK.
Strictly speaking the fuUer title — The Acts of the Apostles —
is not accurate. It errs by excess ; for the eleven, as a body,
play but a very subordinate part in the book, and of individual
Apostles we hear very Httle except of St. Peter and St. Paul.
The mention of St. John is quite incidental, and he only appears
in a secondary capacity on three occasions (iii. 1 ; iv. ; xii. 2).
The martyrdom of St. James the Elder is mentioned (xii. 2),
but nothmg further is told us about any of the rest of the eleven
except St. Peter. On the other hand we have certain " acts " of
the two deacons PhUip and Stephen, and of James, the Lord's
brother. (i.) But even the recorded "Acts" of St. Peter and St. Paul
are extremely incomplete. St. Luke tells us nothing about St.
Peter after the CouncU of Jesusalem, and makes no mention of
his memorable dispute with St. Paul at Antioch, his subsequent
journeys, or his martyrdom at Rome. And minute as are many
of the details furnished about St. Paul, the EvangeHst narrates
but a tithe of his manifold adventures. If that part of the Acts
which narrates his mission-labours deserves the title of "the
Christian Odyssey," it is an Odyssey both fragmentary and
discontinuous. Absolutely invaluable as a source of information respecting
large portions of the Apostle's IHe, yet the Acts does not even
mention so much as one of his five scourgings with Jewish
thongs ; one only of his three beatings with Roman rods ; one
only of the three shipwrecks which preceded the one so elabo
rately recorded. Two only are mentioned of his traditional
seven imprisonments.* Nothmg is said of the night and day in
the deep. There are even whole classes of the Apostle's hard
ships and perUs which are passed over without notice ; such as
the perUs of rivers, perils of robbers, perUs Hi tbe wUderness,
perils among false brethren, and the miseries of hunger, thirst,
fasting, and nakedness. f
It is stiU more singular that although St. Luke, as a friend of
St. Paul during his long Roman imprisonments, must have been
famUiar with his letters, and may even have acted at times as
his amanuensis, yet he does not so much as aUude to the fact
that the Apostle ever wrote a single Epistle. Titus was a be
loved, faithful, and able companion of St. Paul, yet his name
is unmentionedr; nor does the writer allude, except very inci-
dentaUy, to his own labours in the cause of the Gospel. Obvi
ously therefore the Acts does not pretend to be a complete
history. Considered in that Hght it would be fragmentary and
* Clem. Eom. Ep. ad Cor. 5, InraKig Scaud diunEo-ae.
t 2 Cor. xi. 23—27.

THE ACTS OF THE APOSTLES. 433
imperfect. It is only by combining the numerous data of St.
Paul's Epistles with the events narrated in the Acts that we are
enabled to grasp theH fuU significance, or to gain an adequate
conception of all that the Apostle of the Gentiles was or did.
(ii.) How we are to account for this phenomenon will be seen
in the 5th and 6th sections of this chapter, when we deal with
the object which the writer had in view, and the method which he
adopted. Meanwhile we may pause to observe that the avowed
fragmentariness of the narrative furnishes us with the most
ample and unsuspected means for testing its accuracy. That it
was written independently of St. Paul's Epistles is admitted, and
it is certain that errors would have been detected in hundreds of
incidental allusions if the narrative had not been entirely faith
ful. As it is, the separate detaUs furnished by the Epistles
furnish us with a multitude of undesigned coincidences, and
may be tesselated with St. Luke's narrative into a perfect mo
saic. Paley in his Horce Paulince has furnished a striking proof,
and one that might be indefinitely elaborated, that the Acts can
thus stand the severest test of comparison in the minutest de
tails with a series of genuine and (so to speak) accidental com
positions of the very Apostle with whom the narrative is mainly
concerned. (hi.) The book covers a period of about thirty years in the
history of Christianity, from the Ascension, in a.d. 33 of the
received chronology, to the close of St. Paul's first Roman
imprisonment, about March, a.d. 63. We see at a glance that it;
falls into two great sections, of which the first (i. — xii.) is mainly
occupied with the work of St. Peter ; and the second (xiii. —
xxviii.) is devoted almost exclusively to the missions, sufferings,
and controversies of St. Paul. On another principle of division
we might regard the first section as consisting of chapters i. — ix.>
31, which narrate the establishment of the Church in Palestine ;
and the second from ix. 32 to the end of the book, as designed
to teU the history of the extension of church membership to
Gentiles, and the radiation of the Church over Asia Minor,
Greece, and the Western world as far as Rome.
(iv.) The first fourteen verses are introductory. We may
infer theH preciousness from the fact that in these alone we
learn that only forty days elapsed between the Resurrection and
the Ascension. They mention the inauguration of the kingdom,
and record Christ's " promise of the Father " and of "the bap
tism by the Holy Ghost." These were the true secret of that
stupendous victory gained over the world " by the Hresistible
might of weakness " whieh sceptical historians have vainly
endeavoured to explain. The eighth verse might well stand as

434 BOOK BY BOOK.
the motto for the whole book: "Ye shaU receive power when
the Holy Ghost is come upon you ; and ye shaU be my witnesses
both in Jerusalem, and in aU Judaea, and in Samaria, and
unto the uttermost parts of the earth." The first section of the
book records the fulfilment of the earher part of this promise,
and carries us down to the conversion of St. Paul ; the latter
portion of the book Ulustrates the triumphant beginnings of its
complete and final accomphshment.
(v.) The analysis of the book is, briefly, as foUows : —
Introduction, i. 1 — 3.
I. The Founding ofthe Church (i. 4 — ii. 47).
The Ascension and last instructions of Christ (i. 4 — ii. ) ; the
election of Matthias (i. 12 — 26). The Day of Pentecost and the
state of the primitive Church (ii. 1 — 47).
II. The Church in Jerusalem (iii. — vii.).
Miracles, testimony, and sufferings of St. Peter, together with
the first persecutions (iii. — v. 42).
The election of deacons (v. 1 — 7).
The Acts of St. Stephen (vi. 8— vii. 60).
III. The Church in Judcea and Samaria (viii. — ix. 43).
The Acts of Philip ; the visit of Peter and John to Samaria ;
the conversion of the Ethiopian eunuch (viu.).
The conversion of Saul (ix. 1 — 30).
The Acts of Peter at Lydda and Joppa (ix. 31 — 43).
IV. The Transference of Church Membership to ihe Gentiles.
The vision of Peter and the conversion of Cornelius (x.).
The objections of Jewish particularism broken down (xi.
1—18). The capital of Christianity gradually transferred from Jeru
salem to Antioch, by the combined work of Barnabas and Saul
(xi. 19—30).
Persecution of Herod Agrippa I. Martyrdom of James. Death
of Herod (xii.).
V. The Church among the Gentiles, and their relation to the Jewish
Christians. a First missionary journey of Paul and Barnabas through
Cyprus, Pamphylia, and Pisidia (xiii., xiv.).
The Council of Jerusalem (xv. 1 — 35).
P Second missionary journey of Paul with Silas and Timothy
to Asia Minor and Europe (xv. 36 — xviii. 22).
y ThHd missionary journey to Asia Minor, Macedonia, and
Greece, and Paul's return to Jerusalem (xviii. 23 — xxi. 16)
VI. Final Acts of St. Paul.
His arrest, imprisonment, and defence before the Sanhedrim
(xxi. 17 — xxiH. 11).

THE ACTS OF THE APOSTLES. 435
His removal to Caesarea, and his trials before Felix, Festus,
and Herod Agrippa II. (xxiu. 12 — xxvi. 32).
His disastrous journey to Rome (xxvii. 1 — xxviii. 15).
His imprisonment and work at Rome (xxvui. 16 — 31).
(vi.) But an analysis alone can give no impression of the
historical value of the facts recorded. St. Luke, and he alone,
enables us to take our stand by the very cradle of the infant
Church. Even in the first chapter we learn the priceless details
that the disciples who first met at Jerusalem were only one hun
dred and twenty Hi number; that the free attendance of holy
women at that earUest gathering inaugurated a new era of
emancipation for haH the human race ; and that the Resurrection
— for obviously no other adequate explanation can be suggested
— had so powerfully affected the minds of " the Brethren of the
Lord," that, whereas they had hitherto been cold if not hostile
to His Messianic claims, they henceforth left the world to
which they had once belonged,* and braving its hatred flung
in their lot with the foUowers of the obscure and persecuted
Galileans. (vii.) How important again is the account of the sweet and
simple Hves of the early believers ; of theH mistaken attempt at
communism, and its imphed failure ; of the wise attitude adopted
by Rabbi Gamahel, the worthy grandson of the noble Hillel ;
of the brilliant career and eloquent speech of St. Stephen, which
is the earUest attempt at a complete phUosophy of Jewish history ;
of the first persecution ; of St. Paul's conversion; of the epoch-
making vision of St. Peter at Joppa, which practically decided
that Christianity was not to be a Jewish sect, but the religion of
the world ; of the manner in which the narrow and rigid Juda
ism of the Pharisaic Christians of Jerusalem was gradually
expanded into universality ; of the abandonment of insistence
on cHcumeision and on the distinctive signs of Jewish prosely
tism, which was extorted, by the revelation of God in history,
even from the strict Judaic attitude of St. James the Lord's
brother ; of that first Christian Council at Jerusalem, which was
to be the precursor of such numerous gatherings, but in which
laymen no less than presbyters took a prominent part !
How instructive again is the gHmpse which St. Luke gives us
that the bold initiative of preaching to uncircumcised Gentiles
was due to unknown disciples who had been scattered by the
very persecution Hi which the future Apostle of the Gentiles had
taken the foremost place ! f
How much should we have lost had we not learnt from his
pages the origin and first use of the name " Christian," once a
* John vii. i ; Mark iii. 21, &c. t xi. 20 ; read " Greeks."
!• F 2

436 BOOK BY BOOK.
mark of shame and the synonym of "malefactor," but after
wards the noblest of aU titles, and a work which in its Greek,
Hebrew, and Latin elements — being as it was a Greek transla
tion of a Hebrew conception fitted to a Latin termination— bore
a witness to Jesus from the three great languages of the ancient
world. Again St. Luke shows us how first, in the person of St. James
the Elder, Christianity stood before kings and was not ashamed,
and how the sudden death of a royal persecutor fulfilled the
prediction that " he who fell on the stone of Christianity should
be broken in pieces, and he on whom it fell should be scattered
as dust."
(viii.) In the second great division of the book we watch the
first eagle-flight of the young spirit of missions; we see the
heroism, the endurance, the poverty, the persecution of the first
missionaries ; we see the messengers of heaven step from their
ship for the first time upon the soil of Europe, and watch them
as with the eye of a personal witness, while they passed from
city to city of the Roman world. Then we sail with St. Paul
through the isles of Greece to Jerusalem ; we stand with him
before the Jewish mob, before the Sanhedrim, before Felix,
Festus, and Agrippa, and almost seem to share his long stormy
voyage from Caesarea to his shipwreck at Malta, and thence to
the hired room which was his prison at Rome.
(ix.) Thus the Acts of the Apostles is a book of the Origines
Christiana. It teUs us of a the Ascension with fuller details than
had become known to St. Luke when he wrote the Gospel ; of
the first co-opted Apostle, St. Matthias ; of the first Apostle who
was consecrated neither of man nor by men, but by the Holy
Ghost — St. Paul ; of the first Pentecost ; the first Christian ser
mon ; the first Christian miracle ; the first general baptism ; the
first persecutor ; the first martyr ; the first mission ; the first con
firmation; the first thorough breaking down of the middle wall
of partition between Jews and Gentiles ; the first attempt at
simony ; the first deacons ; the first heretic ; the first baptized
GentUe convert ; the first European Church ; the first Christian
Council ; the first attempt at ecclesiastical organisation ; the first
transference of the capital of Christianity to a Gentile city. Thus
the whole book becomes a comment on one of its own phrases,
" So mightily grew the word of God and prevailed" (xix. 30),
while it shows us that the two best evidences of the truth of the
Gospel are those which stiU stand virsi bly before the whole world,
namely, Christianity and Christendom.
(x.) These facts alone wUl show how terrible a blank would
have been left had we not been furnished by the Third EvangeHst
with this First Ecclesiastical History — the first and also by far

THE ACTS OF THE APOSTLES. 437
the best and greatest, brief and discontinuous as it is. It has
been weU observed that only from the Acts of the Apostles are
we able to understand that union of the apparently antagonistic
elements of Judaism and Christianity, which would otherwise be
as impossible to explain as a confluence of the waters of the
Tiber and the Jordan. To very few since the world began has
it been granted to render to mankind two services so unique as
those rendered by the retiring and modest Evangelist. In his
Gospel — " the most beautiful book in the world" — he has given
us an exquisite picture of the Saviour of Mankind ; and in the
Acts — narrating events of which he was often an eye-witness,
and in which he took so honourable a share — he has used his
sacred gifts of patient research, keen insight, lucid expression,
and large-hearted catholicity, to enable us to watch the dawn of
Christianity as it broadened and brightened into the boundless
day. The Gospel and the Acts occupy but a few pages, but those
few pages are among the most valuable which were ever penned
by a human hand.
3. Where was the book written ? — The place where the book was
written cannot be stated with any certainty, but as it suddenly
drops the curtain upon St. Paul after he had spent two years
as a prisoner in his own hUed room at Rome, it is at least
' possible that it was written during the enforced leisure which
the EvangeHst enjoyed during that period, and may have been
given to the world at the conclusion of those two years, about
a.d. 63.
4. What were the sources on whieh St. Luke depended? — The
answer to this question furnishes an iUustration of St. Luke's
method. It was obviously not his object to narrate aU the facts
with which he must have been acquainted. He selected his ma
terials, partly no doubt because he made it his Hterary habit to
do so, but partly because he had special objects in view. At the
beginning of his Gospel he lays claim to that thorough knowledge
which is derived from careful and independent research. In
writing the Acts he reHes partly on facts which he had observed
as an eye-witness, and partly on those which he had derived from
trustworthy sources. The "we sections" (xvi. 10 — xvii. 1, and
xx. 5 — xxviii. 31) are broken by the years which St. Luke ap
pears to have spent at Philippi, but they are marked by the
inimitable detaU and vividness which are intrinsic signs of truth.
For all the later portions of his history he could rely on the
personal testimony of St. Paul, obtained during long hours of
daily familiarity. If, as seems probable, he was with St. Paul
during his incarceration at Caesarea, he would there have had
ample opportunities of seeing and consulting the members of the
Churches of Palestine, who had been famUiar from the first with

438 BOOK BY BOOK.
the origin and progress of the new faith. His circumstances^ as
weU as his gifts placed him in an uniquely favourable position
for carrying out his sacred task.
How weU he used his advantages is shown by his marvellous
accuracy in numbers of detaUs which have but a remote bearing
on his general purpose. We have aHeady seen that this accu
racy is signally vindicated by the subtle coincidences of his
narrative with the conditions indicated by the Epistles of St.
Paul — coincidences aU the more remarkable because they some
times depend on apparent contradictions. Considering how com
plicated and incessant were the journeyings, labours, and
afflictions of the great Apostle, nothing is more certain than that
no forger could have written a sketch of them without coming
into contact and violent coUision with facts ; and also that no
human ingenuity could have invented the minute particulars of
resemblance and verisimiHtude, even if the Epistles had lain
open before him as he wrote.
But this is not aU. St. Luke can be tested, in hundreds of
instances, by secular as weU as by sacred history, and that from
the most unsuspected sources ; and he triumphantly stands the
test. It is not only from St. Luke, but also from Josephus, the
Talmud, Tacitus, Suetonius, Seneca, and other sources, both
Jewish and Pagan, that we learn something about the crowd of •
personages who pass each other so swiftly on the stage of his
vivid narrative. The pen of an obscure provincial — of one who
had perhaps been a slave at Antioch — might weU have slipped in
delineating characters so various, and historical surroundings so
diverse, as those of the Rabbi GamaHel ; the High Priest Ana
nias ; the Idumean family of Princes, Herod Agrippa I., and
Agrippa II. , and Bernice, and DrusUla ; Roman procurators,
like Felix and Festus ; proconsuls, like GaUio, the brother of
Seneca, and Sergius Paulus ; officers, like Claudius Lysias and
Julius the centurion ; — yet there is not one sketch which we can
test that is not thoroughly and even minutely accurate.
Another proof of his historic care is that he does not con
tent himseH with general titles, but in each city or province
gives the exact designation of the governing authorities, however
unique or rare. Thus he speaks of the Protos of Malta • the
Recorder and Asiarchs of Ephesus ; the purely local " Praetors"
(as they dehghted to call themselves) at PhUippi ; and even the
Pohtarchs at Thessalonica. In some of these instances his
accuracy has been chaUenged, and has only been vindicated by
minute historic investigations, and sometimes by the unexpected
discovery of coins, medals, and inscriptions.
The arch of Thessalonica, now in the British Museum the
excavations at Ephesus, the inscription at Soli which bears the

THE ACTS OF THE APOSTLES. 439
name of Sergius Paulus, discovered by General Cesnola, are all
unsuspected witnesses of his truthful care ; and Jewish and
Pagan historians bear him out to the letter Hi his account of the
famine in the days of Claudius ; the vanity and the strange death
of the popularity-hunting Agrippa I. ; the cosmopohtan insouci
ance of his son, Agrippa II. ; the greed of FeUx ; the fairness of
Festus ; the disdainful retirement of GaUio ; the existence of an
ItaHan band at Caesarea ; Claudius's decree for the expulsion of
Jews from Rome ; the dialect of Lycaonia ; the traces left by the
local legends of Baucis and PhUemon, in the antique Paganism
of that rude district ; the silver aediculae of Artemis, which
formed a staple trade at Ephesus ; the Ephesian love of amulets
and magic ; the colonial privUeges of PhiHppi ; the mode of
deaHng with Roman prisoners, and the minutest detaUs of ancient
navigation. Places so obscure as the Fair Havens and Lasaea at Crete can
stiH be identified by the indications of St. Luke ; and he has
been proved to be exact even in so smaU and remote an incident
as the soundings, the nature of the bottom, and the conformation
of the shore off Point Koura, on the north-east side of the island
of Malta.*
5. What was St. Luke's object in writing the Acts f — The first
and simplest answer to this question is, of course, that St. Luke
had received the charism of a sacred historian, and wished to
delineate " alike the individual, the congregational, and the eccle
siastical Ufe of the Christians." With a prophetic conviction of
the awful importance of events which occupied but a very small
portion of the world's attention, he determined to commit to
writing, for the benefit of Theophilus and of the Church in
general — but with special reference to GentUe Christians — the
things which he had seen and known. No one felt more strongly
than St. Luke that the course of the world's history was being
guided, not by might nor by power, but by the Spirit of the
Lord of Hosts. The Holy Spirit is aUuded to more frequently
than in any other book of the Bible — no- less, indeed, than
seventy-one times. The. Acts might almost be caUed "the
Gospel of the Holy Ghost."
But beside this general object I see no reason to doubt that
he was guided by special considerations.
It has been charged against St. Luke, almost as if it were a
* It is true that there is an unsolved difficulty ahout Theudas (Acts v. 36),
in which St. Luke has fallen into an anachronism if he and Josephus are
speaking of the same person and if Josephus is right. But there is no proof
that the Theudas of St. Luke may not be a different person ; and if the
Theudas intended be the same, we have far more reason to trust St. Luke
than to trust the careless and often untrustworthy Jewish historian.

440 BOOK BY BOOK.
crime, that the Acts is a "tendency-writing," that it was ex
pressly meant to serve as an eirenicon. Impressed with the holy
and beautiful ideal of unity, simpUcity, and peaceful gladness in
the Church of Christ, he sets forth the attainment of that ideal,
and renders it more possible by his mediating point of view.
There was nothing otherwise than noble in such an aim, nor is
St. Luke's credibility as an historian thereby more disparaged
than that of any other great and honest historian who has
written with an avowed bias. The truth seems to be that no
great history can be written except by men of keen sensibUities
and strong convictions. A cold and passionless neutrahty cannot
inspire the interest necessary for historical research, and aU that
we demand of an historian is that the view which he presents,
even if it be incomplete, should yet be founded on real facts, and
not upon their perversion.
Now it is undoubtedly true that in the Epistle to the Galatians,
and other Epistles of St. Paul, we find traces of a more bitter
antagonism between "the circumeisionists " (01 7repiTeju.vo)ii€i>oi,
Gal. vi. 13), as he calls them, and the party of Christian freedom,
of which he was the head. But however severe may have been
the struggle, however fierce the heart-burnings (and if St. Luke
passes over these with comparative lightness, he yet by no means
conceals the fact that they existed), they did not preclude the
spirit of a deeper unity. St. Luke, no doubt, meant to iUustrate
this Catholic ideal, which was nobly rendered possible by the
mutual concession and forbearance of St. Paul on the one side
and of the elders of the Church of Jerusalem on the other.
It must be remembered that St. Luke's narrative is extremely
brief, and traverses a vast extent of ground. Under such cH
cumstances it was natural that subjective considerations should
have played their part in the selection and arrangement of his
facts and narratives. If St. Luke had a bias, it was a bias far
nobler, and one which gave a truer picture than could have been
given from the standpoint of philosophic indifference. Under
the conflicting views and partial divergences which arose among
the teachers of the early Christian phurch there lay a more
fundamental and eternal agreement, and to Luke this great
ooean of Christian unity seemed to be, as indeed it was, of far
greater significance than the transient ripples which swept its
surface. When there is partial disunion and profound brother
hood a noble mind, believing that the brotherhood belongs to what
is true and permanent whUe the disunion is only partial, acci
dental, and superficial, will dweU mainly on the former, without
making any attempt to suppress the existence of the latter.
6. What Method does the Author follow ? — This draws our
attention to two questions.

THE ACTS OF THE APOSTLES.

441

i. St. Luke has been charged, not only with producing a
picture whieh was purposely toned down to disguise the diffe
rences of opinion between the Judaic and Christian party in the
Church — a charge which rests on complete misapprehension of
the scope of his work — but with the graver fault of manipulating
his narratives so as to suggest an unreal parallel between the
two great Apostles whose acts he chiefly sets forth. Thus, it is
said, both St. Peter and St. Paul heal a cripple ; they both raise
the dead ; they both confront sorcerers ; the prominent events in
the life of both are preceded by visions ; both are at times
severe ; both are worshipped. The answer to this charge is very
' simple. So far as there is any resemblance between " the signs
of an Apostle" wrought by either of them, they are resemblances
whieh arise from the analogous circumstances by which they
were surrounded, and the analogous gifts with which they were
endowed. Moreover, the slightest examination suffices to show
that the differences of the events and miracles are at least as
observable as theH general likeness.
ii. St. Luke's method has been described by the German word
sparsamkeit, which implies the economical selections of those
detaUs only which seemed alike illustrative and permanently
valuable, with the further conditions that he could vouch for
them if possible by personal testimony, or, if not, by documents
or information of indisputable authority. The special points on
which he desired to lay emphasis have been variously stated
because his book is many-sided in its character. We may safely
assert that his primary object was to illustrate the growth of
Christianity in the Church itself and its spread throughout the
world, and to show that this was due to ' ' the power of Christ's
resurrection " and the grace of the Holy Spirit. All other objects
were subordinate to that of setting forth how Christianity burst
the swaddling-bands of Judaism, and conquered the hostility of
the heathen. In furtherance of this design the book begins at
Jerusalem and ends at Rome ; it begins when Christianity is
stiU a strictly Jewish sect of the cHcumcised consisting of one
hundred and twenty persons, and it ends when converts could
be counted by thousands, and aU Gentile Christians were autho
ritatively emancipated from the minute and burdensome require
ments hitherto demanded of aU proselytes to the Mosaic law.
hi. Judged from this point of view there is no real abruptness
in the close of the Acts. It ends with a word of the most weighty
and sonorous cadence, o.ko>\vtok, an epitrite (^  ) evidently
chosen as a suitable termination ; just as the word k-Kuhprtp, an
antispastus (w - - u), is, in accordance with ancient laws of taste,
chosen as the first word of the Gospel. We may be sure that
St. Luke ends where he intended to end, and by breaking off at

442 BOOK BY BOOK.
that point he has given to his treatise a magnificent unity. He
has shown us how, in thHty years, the Gospel had passed from
the capital of Judaea to the capital of the world ; how it made
conquests alike among Samaritans, Greeks, Asiatics, and Romans ;
how it had, with Divine adaptability, met the needs of learned
Athenian phUosophers and great Jewish rabbis, no less than
those of the poor and ignorant Lystrenian peasantry ; how the
sceptre of righteousness had (so to speak) been transferred from
the hands of the Jew to those of the Gentile ; how the centre
of gravity of the Universal Church had been shifted from the
exclusive Semitic city to the huge metropolis of the ancient
world. iv. It is no doubt strange that St. Luke sheds no gleam of
light on the result of St. Paul's trial at Rome, or on any of his
subsequent fortunes. The curtain drops quite suddenly, and we
cannot but deeply regret the absence of even one more sentence
which would have saved reams of future and apparently endless
controversy. We are left to conjectures in order to explain the
sudden silence. Did St. Luke merely break off at the point to
which he had brought down his narrative when his book first
saw the light? Did he intend to add a third book to the previous
two? Did he himself die at the close of St. Paul's first two
years at Rome ? Was he prevented from carrying the narrative
further by the terrible outbreak of the Neronian persecution,
which reduced Christianity to the condition of a religio illicita,
and which would render the possession of any Christian book
extremely perUous.
This is perhaps the most probable of these vague conjectures.
When the heathen were raging against Christianity with the
virulence of which we read the traces in Tacitus, and Juvenal,
and Martial, and Suetonius, and PUny, a single traditor might
hand over to the Roman agents a book which would suffice to
involve a whole Christian community Hi ruin, unless all expres
sions unfavourable to the Government were concealed Hi strange
cryptographs unintelligible to the Pagan world, as was the
Apocalypse of St. John. Even if St. Luke did not himseH perish
in the Neronian persecution in Rome, or in one of its local out
bursts in the provinces, it would have been impossible for him
to write with historic plainness of the guUty Emperor, that
diademed WUd Beast of the Revelation, who reveUed in the
blood of the saints and martyrs.
7. When -was the Book written ? — We have nothing but internal
evidence to rely upon for the answer. It was almost certainly
written before the faU of Jerusalem, a.d. 70, for it is scarcely
conceivable that otherwise there should have been no aUusion to
an event which shook the whole religious world far more power-

THE ACTS OF THE APOSTLES. 443
fuUy than the Pagan world was shaken by the sack of Rome in
a.d. 410. There is not so much as a single aUusion to imply
that the Holy City was not still existing and flourishing when
the book appeared. We have therefore good reason to believe
that it was permitted to see the light as soon as it was finished,
and that this was soon after the period at which it closed.
8. Characteristics. — I wiU conclude with two remarks.
One is the poetic grandeur which attaches, H not to the com
position of the book itseH, yet to the historic circumstances
which it so vividly narrates. One of the finest descriptions in
the mighty iambics of Greek tragedy is that in which JEschylus
teUs how the fire-signals of Agamemnon flashed from hiU to hill
the message of the faU of Troy, and how the " courier-flame"
gleamed from Ida, and leapt over the sea till its last blaze from
the summit of Cithaeron aroused the watchman on the roof
of the.Atridae. The story of the Acts has always reminded me
of this noble scene. St. Luke, a poet and more than a poet,
sets forth with exquisite skUl how the beacon-lights of Chris
tianity shone from Jerusalem to Antioch, and from Antioch to
Ephesus, and to Troas, and then, leaping over the sea to Philippi,
gleamed on to Athens and Corinth, until at last they were
kindled in the very palace and Praetorian camp of the Caesars in
Imperial Rome. The beam of dawn which had shone amid the
wintry darkness at Bethlehem had broadened so gloriously that
in one short generation it had filled Asia, Greece, and Italy with
the light of heaven.
Lastly, the Acts of the Apostles, besides its supreme historic
interest and importance, is fuU of the deepest spiritual lessons.
Luther said with justice that it might be regarded as nothing
less than a comment on the Epistles of St. Paul. Church history
often furnishes very sad reading, except to those who delight in
the growth of formalism. But this faithful and glowing history
of the Church's earUest days shows us her pure ideal before her
orange-flower had begun to fade. It reveals to us the true secret
of the Church's invincibUity as consisting Hi her simpHcity, her
sincerity, her faith and courage even in the midst of savage
persecution. It shows us that " God is the only final public
opinion," and that "one with God is always in a majority."
Never can the golden candlestick of any Church be removed if
it be true to the high lessons of faith, and hope, and love, which
enabled the Church of the Apostles to triumph over the banded
antagonism of the world's vice and hatred, and to prevail, not
only over the idolatry without, but also over the false types of
orthodoxy and false types of goodness which sometimes arise
within her fold.

THE EPISTLE OF PAUL THE APOSTLE

ROMANS.
1. PauVs Desire to Visit Rome. — That the Apostle of the Gentiles
should cherish a desire to preach Christ at Romo was to be
expected. Until he could unfurl the Christian flag in the imperial
city he must have felt himself delayed among the outposts, not
penetrating to the citadel. He had always pursued the plan of
visiting the busiest centres of population, and this plan neces
sarily led his thoughts to Rome. It was the true metropolis, to
which every road led, which received from all the provinces what
ever was of interest or value, and distributed to the world law,
order, civilisation. Even while living in Ephesus he felt himself
gravitating to the greater city. Even then he expressed it as his
fixed resolve, "I must also see Rome" (Acts xix. 21). Often
prevented from accomplishing this purpose (Rom. i. 13), delayed
by the claims of the churches he had founded in Asia and Mace
donia, he at last sees some prospect of being able to set his face
westwards, and hopes to reach even Spain (Rom. xv. 23).
Only one duty remained for him to discharge before starting ;
he must carry to Jerusalem the funds which the Christians of
Macedonia and Achaia had collected for the poor of the holy city.
This was a duty he could not delegate, because he was in hopes
that the charity and brotherliness of the Gentile Christians might
knit together the Jewish and Gentile sections of the Christian
community, and might thus accomplish more than his own reason
ings had accomplished, or at any rate might form a living union
between parts his reasonings had outwardly stitched together
(Rom. xv. 20 — 28). As soon as these funds were handed over
to the authorities at Jerusalem he meant'to start for Rome. In
this expectation he was disappointed, and ultimately reached the
metropohs as a prisoner, after two years' detention in Caesarea.

THE EPISTLE OF PAUL THE APOSTLE TO THE ROMANS. 445
But before leaving Corinth for Jerusalem he writes this Epistle
to the Romans to Ultimate his intention, and as far as possible to
pave the way for his teaching.
2. Date. — From the Book of Acts (xx. 1 — 3) we learn that
Paul's journey to Jerusalem with the contributions for the poor
saints was made at the close of his wintering in Corinth, and pre
sumably in the spring of the year 59 a.d. This also was the date
of his letter to Rome, which he sent apparently by the hand of
Phoebe (xvi. 1), a deaconess of the church of Cenehrea, the port
of Corinth. He wrote it whUe living in the house of Gaius
(xvi. 23), who was a Corinthian (1 Cor. i. 14). It would also
appear from 2 Tim. iv. 20 that Erastus, who sends his saluta
tions to the Christians in Rome (xvi. 23), was chamberlain of
Corinth. 3. The Church in Rome. — Such being the immediate occasion of
this Epistle its contents would necessarily be determined by the
character of the Church to whieh it was addressed. Unfortunately
very Httle is known of the origin and constituent elements of the
Church in Rome. For more than a hundred years there had been
a large and growing and influential Jewish population in Rome,
and this population was necessarily in regular communication with
Jerusalem. Jews from Rome heard Peter preach at Pentecost, and
when they returned to the capital they no doubt carried with
them the Gospel they had heard. And so far the tradition which
ascribes to this Church a Petrine origin is probably correct. The
nucleus of a Christian community thus formed would be aug
mented in the natural course of the ceaseless communication
which was maintained between Rome and the outlying provinces.
And yet from the account given us in the Book of Acts (xxviii. 17)
of Paul's reception in Rome, it would appear as if even at that
time, nearly thHty years after Pentecost, the leading Jews of
Rome knew little of the Christian Church or its tenets. This
ignorance on their part, whether real or feigned, cannot be
accepted as evidence that there were no Jewish Christians there.
For both the edict of Claudius, which a few years before had
expeUed the Jews from Rome on the ground of riots connected
with Christianity ( Chresto impulsore), and the massacre of the Chris
tians by Nero in the year 64 a.d., show that, though little might
be known of theH belief, Christians were recognised as an appre
ciable element in the Roman population, and that to a casual ob
server the Christians and the Jews were not distinctly separable.
4. Gentile and Jewish Elements. — If we examine the Epistle
itseH with a view to discover whether the Jewish or the Gentile
element predominated in the Church at Rome, we are led to the
conclusion that while the majority of the Christians were GentUes,

446 BOOK BY BOOK.
there were also in the Church many Jews and proselytes. Among
those to whom Paul sends salutations are kinsmen of his own,
who must, therefore, have been pure-blooded Jews (xvi. 7).
There are also Aquila and PrisciUa, Mary and ApeUes, all
Jewish names (cf. Horace, Sat. I. v. 100). The majority of the
names are, however, Gentile, and for the most part Greek.
At the date of Paul's Epistle the active, pushing, and pHable
Greek was possessing himself of every department of commercial
and social enterprise in Rome, so much so that shortly after this
time the Roman satirist upbraids the metropolis with having
become a Greek city (Juv., Sat. iii. 60). It is not surprising,
then, to find that the names in this letter are Greek rather than
Latin, that the language used, both in this letter and in the
earUest Hterature of the Church of Rome, is Greek, and that in
the catacombs the Greek characters so often appear in the inscrip
tions. The same mingling of Jew and Gentile in the Christian
community at Rome is apparent in the substance of the Epistle.
Sometimes Paul explicitly addresses himself to Gentiles, as in
xi. 13; xv. 16; i. 13; sometimes it is obvious that he has Jews
in view as he writes, as in ii. 17; iv. 1 .
5. The Type of Christianity at Rome. — But it is not enough to
determine the proportion which the Christians of Gentile origin
bore to those of Jewish origin in the Church at Rome ; it must, if
possible, also be determined what type of Christianity they had
adopted. Did the Pauline or the distinctively Jewish Christian view
of the Gospel prevaU ? In other words, did they believe that Gen
tiles in order to become Christians must first become Jews, or did
they understand that Hi Christ there is neither Jew nor GentUe ?
Lipsius {Protestantenbibel) thinks that everything in the Epistle
is meant for Jewish Christian readers. The writer, he says,
' ' assumes throughout that he is addressing readers of Jewish
education who are also accustomed to the Jewish methods. The
hypotheses from which he sets out, the conceptions with which
he works, the arguments from the maxims and examples of the
Old Testament Scripture, the express appeal to the reader's
knowledge of the law — aU this is only inteUigible if the Apostle
wishes to influence the Jewish Christian mind. . . . The PauHne
Gospel can have had few, if any, adherents at that time in Rome,
and no doubt even those believers who had been gathered from
among the GentUes were altogether under the influence of the
Jewish spirit. Pfleiderer (Hibbert Lectures, 139) thinks that the
Epistle suggests that the relations between the Jewish and
Gentile sections of the Church were strained, that the healthy
development of the Church was thus placed in daily greater peril,
and the more so as through the rapid growth of the GentUe

THR EPISTLE OF PAUL THE APOSTLE TO THE ROMANS. 447
section, the Jewish, which had undoubtedly formed the principal
element originally, had sunk into the position of a powerless
minority. Even this more moderate statement makes more of the strained
relations between the two sections of the Church than the Epistle
warrants. Certainly the majority was free from all Jewish
Christian scrupulosity ; for Paul feels himseH impeUed to exhort
the Church to receive into fellowship the weakly scrupulous
believer who observed days and refused to eat what had been
offered to idols. And it is plain that had the Church as a whole
been pronouncedly anti-Pauline, and tainted with Jewish-Chris
tian views, Paul could not have spoken of its members as " full
of aU goodness, fiUed with all knowledge, able also to admonish
one another" (xv. 15). There is no evidence in the Epistle that
there was an anti-Pauline party in the Church. No doubt such
a party might at any time arise, for Jewish Christianity was-
merely a one-sided exaggeration of a view of the Jew's relation
to Christ, which must have inevitably suggested itseH to every
Jewish mind. And certainly this letter cuts the ground from
the Jewish Christian position by proving that Jews and Gentiles
aUke are under sui, and aUke must be saved by grace. But this
is done without any polemical pushing of principles to their
issues, or expHcit assault upon the Jewish Christian position such
as we find in the Epistle to the Galatians. The aUusions to that
type of Christianity are incidental, and are not the main object
of the Epistle.
6. Object ofthe Epistle. — What, then, is the object of the letter
which determines aU its contents ? In substance the letter is a
justification of the Apostle's mission to the Gentiles ; a justifi
cation first to his own mind, and secondly to all whom it may
concern. He habitually considered himself " the minister of
Jesus Christ to the Gentiles " (xv. 16) ; and among the Gentiles
he made no distinctions, but recognised that he was bound to
carry the Gospel to the highly civihsed as well as to the rude and
uneducated; or, as he himself puts it, he felt himself to be
" debtor both to the Greeks and to the barbarians ; both to the
wise and to the unwise." Accordingly he longed to bring the
Gospel into contact with civUisation Hi its highest form, with
Roman society, for he was "not ashamed of the gospel of Christ"
(i. 15, 16). But in proposing to do so he was conscious that he
was taking a new step, that he had reached a crisis in his career,
and was more distinctly than ever giving himseH te the GentUes.
It was natural, therefore, that at this time he should review the
situation, and should make clear to his own mind the relation of
Jew to Gentile, and the relation of each to the Gospel. And

448 BOOK BY BOOK.
in this Epistle he explains his fundamental thoughts on these
subjects. He explains why he considers the Gospel needful, what the
Gospel is, and in what consists its sufficiency for Jew and GentUe
alike. He does so with less reference to the actual condition of
the Church he writes to than is usuaUy found in his Epistles ;
but he cannot write in oblivion of the fact so forcibly impressed
on his own experience that in the Christian Church two_ great
classes have to be considered, Jew and Gentile. His object in
writing is, as he explicitly declares (xv. 15, 16), to put his cor
respondents in mind that he was to be the minister of Jesus Christ
to the Gentiles ; and his letter accordingly is an exposition of the
apphcability of the Gospel to the Gentiles. And this he effects,
in great measure, by showing that the fact of the Jews having
the law does not put them on a different platform from the
¦G-entiles ; that such Jews as had been saved before Christ came
or as were saved now, were saved on terms available for GentUes.
In short, there is throughout the Epistle constant reference to
the law, the prejudices, the destiny of the Jews, to illustrate the
main purpose of the writer and throw light on the salvability ef
the Gentiles.
7. Analysis of Contents. — This wiU more clearly appear if we
briefly analyse tbe contents of the Epistle. He means, he says,
to preach the Gospel at Rome, because he believes that it is "the
power of God unto salvation," not to one race only, but " to
every one that believeth"; to the Jew first, no doubt, in the
order of God's providence, " but also to the Greek " (i. 16). The
Gospel, that is, is the medium through which God's power to lift
men out of moral evil and bring them into perfect correspondence
with His own righteousness is exercised. That this is God's
grand purpose with men is evident from the results which attend
unrighteousness — " the wrath of God is revealed against aU un
godliness and unrighteousness of men " (i. 18).
Of these results the inhabitants of Rome had ample experience
(i. 21 — 32). But the frightful wickedness of the Gentiles and
the manifest punishment which foUowed were no reasons for the
Jewish contempt and hopelessness. Rather did the scorn with
which the Jew looked on the immoral and ignorant Gentile reflect
on his own sin against the light of the law. If the Gentile who
knew not the law was, by his immorality, beyond God's mercy,
equaUy or more so was the Jew who knew the law, and yet did
not observe it. Not the having the law but the keeping it
was righteousness ; not the circumcision of the flesh but of the
spirit saves (ii. passim). If so, is the Jew righteous and the
GentUe condemned ? Alas ! the law itself says, " There is none

THE EPISTLE OF PAUL THE APOSTLE TO THE ROMANS. 449
righteous, no, not one " ; and what it says it of course says to
them who are under the law ; to Jews, not to. Gentiles. It means,
"There is no Jew righteous, no, not one" (iii. 19). If, then,
men are to be justified, it must be not by the Jewish law but by
faith; by that which the Gentile as weU as the Jew may have.
Jew and Gentile alike must put away boasting, and on an equal
footing of humihty accept God's grace. Thus was even Abraham
justified (iv.) ; righteousness was imputed to him without works
meriting it and without circumcision. As he believed God, and
trusted that God would bless him, and did not think of earning
the blessing God promised of His own graee, so must we accept
the peace offered us in Christ. For it is in Christ God's love is
now shown, and in Christ His righteousness is now revealed
(v.). Neither wiU our abandonment of the idea' that we must
earn the blessedness God gives lead us to undervalue holi
ness and live in sin. On the contrary, the acceptance of Christ
and the Hfe that is Hi Christ involves renunciation of sin and
consecration of the whole self to God. The spirit of life which is
in Christ makes men truly sons of God, and carries them on to
perfect righteousness and lasting glory (vi. — viu.).
But the very triumph Paul feels in so saving a Gospel suggests
to him the condition of his unbeheving fellow-countrymen, and
in chapters He., x., and xi. he discloses his thoughts regarding
theH future. His turning to the Gentiles was not agreeable to
his feelings. Not only so, he was perplexed in his mind by the
apparent futility of the Gospel among the very people who, in so
many respects, were most carefuUy prepared to receive it. The
Jews seemed to have been intended to be speciaUy Christ's people,
but Christ's coming had reaUy alienated and ruined them. This
unexpected result demanded a phUosophy of history or scheme of
providence which might satisfactorUy account for it. Wherever
Paul went he found that the prepared Jews did not accept the
Messiah as readUy as the GentUes did. What did this mean ?
Have the Jews no advantage ?
Many of Paul's enemies might think that he, the universalist
who broke down all waUs of partition, would say the advantage
was small. Many of the Gentiles might suppose that he who
had been insulted, beaten, outraged by the Jews would be care
less of their fate. But, on the contrary, his heart bleeds for them
and yearns over them. He would accept any fate for himself,
if thereby he could alter the fate they had brought on themselves
by their unbehef . He wiU not suffer the Gentiles to suppose
that, because he turns to them, the Jews are for ever cast off by
God. He is convinced theH rejection is but for a time, and that
their acceptance of Christ wiH be as a new birth to the world.
G G

450 BOOK BY BOOK.
Their unbelief has sent Paul to the Gentiles ; if, then, "the cast
ing away of them be the reconciling of the world, what shaU the
receiving of them be, but Hfe from the dead?" (xi. 15). Then
foUows a fuU and beautiful exhibition of the duties and character
resulting from this Gospel Paul preaches, and tbe Epistle con
cludes with the usual salutations.
8. Authenticity and Integrity. — The authenticity of this Epistle
is not doubted by any, but suspicions have been cast on its
integrity. It has been thought strange that St. Paul should send
salutations to so many people in a Church he had never visited ;
strange, also, that so many of these salutations should be
addressed to persons whose names are associated rather with
Ephesus than with Rome. The repeated terminations to the
Epistle at xv. 33, xvi. 20, 24, 27, have also been a puzzle. Even
conservative critics have suggested that perhaps the letter was
issued in more forms than one, and, being despatched to dif
ferent Churches, -copies might exist with different salutations
and different conclusions.

FIRST AND SECOND EPISTLES OF PAUL THE APOSTLE

CORINTHIANS.
1. Corinth. — At the date of St. Paul's visit to Corinth it was
the chief city of the Roman province of Achaia and the head
quarters of the Proconsul. Its natural situation on the Isthmus,
commanding on the eastern side the port of Cenchrea, and on
the western that of Lechaeum, had from the earUest tunes given
it importance. Rather than encounter the risks of doubhng
Cape Malea "of bad fame," the seamen bringing goods from
Asia to Italy preferred to unlade at the one port and relade at
the other. So commonly was this done that arrangements were
made for conveying the smaUer ships themselves across the
Isthmus, and shortly after the Apostle's visit the Emperor Nero
cut the first turf of a proposed, but never finished, canal. To
one approaching the Isthmus from either sea, the most con
spicuous object was an abrupt and massive rock, nearly two
thousand feet high, known as the.Acrocorinthus. On a slightly
elevated platform at the northern base of this citadel the city of
Corinth was buUt.
But ia the year 146 B.C. the ancient city was completely
destroyed by the Roman general Mummius. For a century it
lay demohshed and deserted ; but in the year 44 b.c. Julius Caesar
rebuilt and repeopled it, chiefly with Roman veterans and freed-
men. Hence, many of the Corinthians mentioned by St. Paul
bear names which indicate theH Roman or servile origin, Quar
tus, Crispus, Gaius, Justus, Fortunatus, Achaieus. The city
soon regained its former size and opulence, and also, unfortu
nately, its old reputation for profligacy. As Renan says, ' ' the
whole city was hke a vast pandemonium, where the numerous
strangers, the saUors particularly, resorted to spend their wealth
foolishly." "To live as they do at Corinth " was, in St. Paul's
time, the equivalent for Hving in luxury and licentiousness. It
gg 2

452 BOOK BY BOOK.
was a city, too, in whieh Roman brutality and Oriental vice were
not the only obstacles to Christianity. Greek factiousness and
vanity, the sophistries of a shallow phUosophy and tbe verbal
victories of the demagogue, found for themselves a congenial
soU in this mixed population. No city could give a fuller repre
sentation of the various weaknesses and vices of the ancient
world, or seem a less promising field for the Gospel.
2. Condition of the Church.— Row the Apostle of the GentUes
reached this focus of heathenism, how he founded a Christian
Church, and how he defeated the machinations of the unbelieving
Jews may be read in the Book of Acts, c. xviii. For eighteen
months he remained in Corinth, partly, no doubt, induced by his
success, partly by perception of the dangers ahead. At length,
in the spring of the year 54 a.d., he leaves to be present at
Pentecost in Jerusalem. After celebrating the feast he proceeds
to Antioch, where he spends "some time," and after visiting
Phrygia, Galatia, and other parts of Asia Minor, he reaches
Ephesus either late in 54 or early in 55. Here he remains for
about three years. Meanwhile, ApoUos, who had made a marked
impression in Ephesus, had gone to Achaia, and was no doubt
helpful in restraining the evil tendencies of the Corinthian
Church. But in spite of aU Christian effort the pressure of their heathen
surroundings was too much for many of the Corinthian converts,
and in 1 Cor. v. 9, 10, there is trace of a letter previously written
to them by St. Paul, in which he had prohibited intercourse
with fornicators, idolaters, covetous persons, and extortioners.
Either wUfuUy or ignorantly misunderstanding him, they had
replied that society in Corinth was wholly composed of such per
sons, and that comphance with his prohibition involved their
going out of the world altogether. With this reply they
laid before him a number of other difficulties ( 1 Cor. vii. 1 ;
viii. 1 ; xii. 1, &c). This letter from Corinth, together with the
oral information he had received from members of Chloe's house
hold, who had come to Ephesus, calls forth the first extant
Epistle to the Corinthians.
3. The Questions before the}Apostle. — The sad state of matters in
the Church of Corinth, which is disclosed in this Epistle, shows
us the kind of work requUed of one who in those days had the
care of aU the Churches. A host of difficult questions poured
in upon him, questions regarding the very foundations of the
faith, questions of moraHty and of casuistry, questions regarding
public worship and social intercourse. Are we to dine with our
heathen relatives ? May we intermarry with them ; or, if already
married, are we to divorce our heathen partners ; or may we

FIRST AND SECOND EPISTLES TO THE CORINTHIANS. 453»
marry at all? Can slaves continue in the service of heathen
masters ? Can we restrain those who speak with tongues and
are inspHed ?
But the mere difficulty of answering such questions was not
that which filled Paul's eyes with tears as he answered their
inquiries (2 Cor. ii. 4). It was the self-satisfied vanity that shone
through even their request for advice (viu. 1), the evidence
whieh some of their questions bore to the presence of a restless
Greek inteUectualism (xv. 35) and Htigiousness (vi. 1 — 11), and
of a potent residuum of Corinthian sensuality (vi. 1 6 ; x. 8 ; xi. 21 ),
and above all, the tidings that had reached hiin of their party-
spirit and of theH scandalizing even the heathen by retaining in
their communion a man who had married his step-mother (v. 2) ;
it was this which excited in Paul's mind the deepest misgivings
regarding the future of the Church.
The calmness and good temper with whieh he exposes the sin
of getting drunk at the Lord's table or the scandalous disorder
of theH meetings for worship are not less remarkable than the
sagacity with which he pronounces upon their various difficulties,
and the ease, promptitude, and finality with which he sets them
free from errors of opinion. We can never be sufficiently
thankful that in that primitive age, when the Christian Church
was " pawing to get free " from its natal clay of heathenism, it
found one strong hand to help it, one sane and balanced judg
ment to mark out boldly and clearly the boundaries of right
and wrong.
4. Scope of the First Epistle. — No analysis of this Epistle need
be given, for its divisions are weU marked. It consists of lucid
judgments on a series of points, and not of one prolonged argu
ment whose steps might caU for explanation. After the usual
introduction the writer rebukes theH divisions and party-spUit
(i. 10 — iv. 21) ; in chapters v. and vi. he aUudes to the scandals
which had arisen by unlawful alliances and by a readiness to carry
brethren before heathen tribunals ; he then discusses the ques
tions relating to marriage Hi vii., and in viii, ix., and x. the diffi
culties arising in connection with idol-sacrifices. The abuses which
had crept into theH meetings for worship, the unveiling of women,
and the irregularities in administering the Lord's Supper, are
rebuked and corrected in c. xi. This leads to a full explanation
of the principles of Christian feUowship, of the relative value of
the diverse gifts possessed by the various members of the body
of Christ, and of the order which should be observed in the use
of these gifts (xii., xiii., xiv.). Then follows the argument in
favour of the resurrection (xv.), and the Epistle closes with the
usual personal explanations and greetings.

454 BOOK BY BOOK.
5. Parties in the Church. — The mention of four parties in the
Church of Corinth has been supposed to give countenance to the
Tubingen idea that between Paul and the original Apostles there
existed an irreconcilable difference in doctrine and in feeling.
Closer examination of the facts dispels this idea. That Paul and
ApoUos were friendly, and that Paul was anxious that ApoUos
should renew his labours in Corinth, is obvious from xvi. 12 of
this Epistle. It is clear, therefore, that there could be no mate
rial difference between the Gospel preached by the one and that
preached by the other ; and the assumption by members of the
Corinthian Church of the name of Paul or ApoUos as their leader
could mean no more than that some admired the one more than
the other. ApoUos probably presented the Gospel in a more
philosophic garb and with more of the graces of the orator.
The manner in which St. Paul speaks of the parties in the
Church puts it beyond question that it was the unseemliness of
personal preferences, and not the danger of heretical teaching be
had in view.
The same remarks apply to the party who said, " We are of
Cephas." But who were those who said, " We are of Christ " ?
They could only be persons who plumed themselves on having
heard Christ Himself , and who piqued themselves on depending
on no Apostle or teacher. Of these men the Apostle speaks, in
the Second Epistle, in language of extreme severity. He ironi
cally caUs them " overmuch Apostles " (xi. 5 ; xii. 11), and even
denounces them as " false Apostles " (xi. 13). From his descrip
tion of them it may be gathered that they were native Jews who
came to Corinth with letters of recommendation, and sought to
destroy the influence of St. Paul and substantiate theH own
claims to authority.
6. Date of the First Epistle. — It would appear from xvi. 8, " I
will tarry at Ephesus until Pentecost," that St. Paul wrote this
First Epistle to the Corinthians from Ephesus, and early in the
year. It is not absolutely certain what year this was. We know
that he left Ephesus shortly after despatching the letter, and
worked his way through Macedonia to Corinth, where he win
tered. Leaving Corinth in early spring he made his way to
Jerusalem, where he was arrested, and after being confined two
years in Caesarea, he was sent to Rome. This relegation of the
Apostle to the imperial tribunal occurred shortly after Felix had
been recalled and had been replaced by Festus. But whether
this event belongs to the year 60 or 61 is uncertain. If Felix
was recaUed in 60 a.d., then 1 Corinthians was written in the
spring of 57 ; if in 61 a.d., then the Epistle belongs to the
spring of 58.

FIRST AND SECOND EPISTLES TO THE CORINTHIANS. 455
7. Date of the Second Epistle. — vThe relative, though not the
absolute date of 2 Corinthians, is also easily fixed from the
various aUusions to the writer's movements which it contains.
By these aUusions (i. 8 — 10 ; ii. 12, 13 ; vii. 6) we can trace St.
Paul's movements and feehngs as he passed through Asia Minor
from Ephesus to Troas, and thence to Macedonia, where at length
Titus joined him with reassuring news from Corinth. It was on
receipt of this news he penned the Second Epistle, so that it is
separated from the First by only a few months, and was sent
from Macedonia whUe Paul was on his way to Corinth.
8. Its Purpose. — The object of the letter was chiefly to express
his satisfaction at the good results of his former letter and of- the
mission of Titus. He first of aU endeavours to remove any sore
ness which might be lingering in the minds of the Corinthians
owing to his visiting Macedonia before coming to Corinth. He
had originaUy intended to pass through Corinth on his way to
Macedonia (i. 16), and had abandoned this plan not because of
mere fickleness, or beause it now suited him better to adopt
another, but because he could not bear to eome among them
merely to rebuke and find fault (i. 17 ; ii. 13). While waiting
for such tidings from Corinth as would enable him to visit them
in friendliness and with approval he preaches the Gospel as he
has opportunity, and the mention of this leads him to indulge in
a glowing eulogy of the Gospel and its power (ii. 14; vi. 10).
At this point- in the Epistle (vi. 11) he reverts to the condition of
the Corinthian Church, and urges the necessity of Christians
living separate from scandalous sinners. This he believes the
Corinthians were now endeavouring to do ; so Titus has told
him ; and therefore he does not regret having pained them by
warnings and rebukes which have borne this good fruit (vii.).
He is also happy to acknowledge their charity in contributing to
the support of the poor of Jerusalem (vHi., ix.). But this grate
ful and encouraging tone is changed when in the tenth chapter
he proceeds to expose those who had come among them professing
to have their Gospel from Christ Himself, and striving to under
mine the authority of St. Paul. In a singularly powerful and
eloquent passage he disposes of their pretensions, and explains
on what his own authority rests (x., xi., xii.). These things, he
concludes by saying, he prefers to write, that when he comes he
may have nothing disagreeable to say.
These two Epistles are accepted as authentic by even the most
hostile critics.

THE EPISTLE OF PAUL THE APOSTLE
TO THE
GALATIANS.
1. Who were the Galatians ?— This Epistle is addressed to " the
Churches of Galatia" (i. 2). But where these Churches were
situated, and when founded, it is impossible to determine with
precision. This difficulty arises from the circumstance that the
name Galatia may either be used ethnologicaUy of the region
inhabited by the Celtic tribes known as Galatian, or poUticaUy
of the Roman province which included Lycaonia, Isauria, and
parts of Phrygia and Pisidia. It would appear, however, from
the book of Acts (xiii. 14 ; xiv. 6 ; xvi. 6), that Luke, and
probably, therefore, Paul, used these names of countries in theH
geographical and not in their political sense. Lystra and Derbe
are spoken of as cities of Lycaonia, not of Galatia ; Antioch is
described as belonging to Pisidia ; and Phrygia and Galatia are
spoken of as distinct regions. The probability therefore is that
by Galatia is meant the region lying to the north-east of Phrygia,
and crossed by the river Halys. It was here that the descend
ants of the Celtic tribes who had invaded the country in the
third century b.c were to be found. The three principal tribes,
the Trocmi, the ToHstobogii, the Teetosages, bad each a chief
town, named respectively Tavium, Pessinus, and Aneyra, but in
which of these cities, if in any of them, the Apostle had founded
a Church, we do not know.
Confirmation of the view that the Churches of Galatia had at
least a mixture of Celtic blood is found in the character of their
members as revealed by this Epistle. Ancient writers remarked
upon the impressible, eager, and fickle disposition of the Celts ;
upon their vanity, quarrelsomeness, and sensuahty. Miehelet
describes his own people as true chUdren of the Gael, prompt
to learn, prompt to despise, and greedy of new things ; Hght,
excitable, sensual. This character appears in the persons
addressed in this Epistle. They had readily received the Gospel,
but as readily relinquished it. They were sensual (vi. 8), vain
(v. 26), quarrelsome (v. 15).

EPISTLE OF PAUL THE APOSTLE TO THE GALATIANS. 457
2. The Occasion of the Epistle. — If " the Churches of Galatia "
had meant the Churches in the Roman province of Galatia,
then we should have a fuU account of their foundation, for no
part of Luke's narrative is more complete and distinct than that
which tells of the Apostle's preaching in Iconium, Derbe, and
Lystra. But, so far as can be gathered from Acts, in Galatia
proper Paul apparently did not even mean to preach, but while
passing through the country on his way to Troas or Bithynia
he feU iU, and was compeUed. to interrupt his journey (Gal. iv.
13). Seizing the opportunity afforded by this enforced delay,
he preached the Gospel and found extraordinary acceptance (iv.
14, 15). The Galatians were unconscious of, or seemed to over
look anything insignificant or repulsive in Paul's appearance, and
showed him the utmost attention.
At first the new converts "ran well," but when Paul visited
them about two years after, on his way from Jerusalem to Ephe
sus, he perceived symptoms of defection and weariness in weU-
doing which caused him anxiety. Judaizing teachers had found
access to these young Gentile communities, and had to some extent
persuaded them that only by passing through Judaism could
any one become a Christian. The law of Moses, the right of
cHcumeision, the observance of Jewish fast days were pressed
upon them, and so skilfully that many were wavering. Paul's
visit was opportune, and no doubt helpful in checking defection
from the pure faith he had taught. He " strengthened all the
disciples " (Acts xviii. 23). But his departure was the signal
for further relapse. Shortly after his arrival in Ephesus such
accounts of the success of the Judaizers reached him as impeUed
him to write this Epistle.
3. Nature ofthe Controversy. — St. Paul himself does not seem
to have known who these teachers were. " Who hath bewitched
you? "he says (iii. 1). It is not Ukely, therefore, that they
used the name of any of the older Apostles. And no special
reason for their coming to Galatia need be sought ; for the
question of the relation of Gentile Christians to the Mosaic
law was sure, sooner or later, to emerge in every Church in
which there were any Jewish Christians. The prompt and easy
solution of the difficulty, or its elevation into a matter of serious
dissension and HreconcUable party strife, depended of course on
how it was met and dealt with. The Judaizers who maintained
that to become a Christian a man must first become a Jew, had
much to say for themselves. The law was a divine institution
and could not be abrogated or neglected. The promises were
given solely to the Jews, to Abraham and his seed. The Messiah
was the Messiah of the Jews. Jesus Himself was circumcised
and kept the whole law ; the original Apostles did the same.

458 BOOK BY BOOK.
Besides, if the Gentile converts were not enjoined to keep the
law, how were they to escape from the immoralities in which
they had been brought up ? Such arguments were specious ;
but had they prevailed, Christianity would have dwindled into a
short-lived Jewish sect. In the case of the Galatians other argu
ments had been added to these. Paul's authority was ques
tioned. He had not been of the original twelve. Moreover, it
was insinuated that he could not object on principle to circum
cision, because when it suited him he enjoined it, as in the case
of Timothy. If, therefore, he had not enjoined it on the Gala
tians, it was through a desire to please men and make the recep
tion of the gospel easier to them.
4. Paul's Doctrinal Position. — The occasion, then, was of a kind
to call out the fuU strength of the Apostle of the GentUes. And
never with as few words was a great controversy disposed of. In
the first two chapters he disposes of the insinuations against his
authority as an Apostle ; in the next two he shows the relation
of the law to Christ, or of Judaism to Christianity ; in the last
two he refutes the allegation that liberty and Hcence are the
same. To the disparagement of his Apostolic authority he
gives a threefold reply. First, declaring himself to he an
Apostle, " not of man, neither by man, but by Jesus Christ and
God the Father " ; he proves from his movements after his con
version to Christianity that it was impossible he should have re
ceived his knowledge of the Gospel from men. In point of fact
he had gone at first into Arabia, and when at length he did go to
Jerusalem he saw only Peter (i.). Second, it was only after
many years of preaching that at length he went to confer with
the original Apostles at Jerusalem, and even then, so far from
receiving any additional light from them, they approved of his
teaching, gave him the right hand of feUowship, and encouraged
him in his work (ii. 1 — 10). Third, when Peter himself came to
Antioch he ate with the uncircumcised Gentiles, which no strict
Jew would have done. In Paul's opinion Peter thus surrendered
the whole Judaizing position, for, as he says, if one who was
himself a Jew neglected the strictest Jewish regulations, how
could he in consistency command GentUes to observe them ?
Paul convinced Peter of this, and thus, at one and the same time,
iUustrated his own authority and made good bis doctrinal position
(ii. 11—21).
The dogmatic significance of the demand that the Gentiles
should keep the whole law is next examined by Paul. And here
he first appeals to their own experience. They had received the
Spirit ; that is, they had in themselves the earnest of salvation.
Had this great possession become theirs by the observance of
the law ? They knew it was not so, but ' ' by the hearing of

EPISTLE OF PAUL THE APOSTLE TO THE GALATIANS. 459
faith" (Hi. 1 — 5). It was so even in the case of Abraham, the
typical, justified man. Whatever blessing he had he received
by faith (Hi. 6 — 9). The law indeed has power only to curse,
and from this curse Christ came to redeem us (iii. 10 — 14). Be
sides, long before the law was heard of, the promise had been
given to Abraham, and could not be made of none effect by any
institution which succeeded it. The promise was first and held
the field. Not that the law was useless ; far from it. The law
was added to show men what sin and righteousness are, and
to stimulate men to long for the fulfilment of the promise, the
coming of the SpHit. The law thus discharged the function of
the slave who took the boys to school, or of the guardian who
took charge of persons under age ; but when the fulness of time
comes the guardian is no more needed, the full-grown son
receives the spHit of his Father and needs no outward control.
This is what has happened in Christ (iii. 15; iv. 7). But the
Galatians had persisted in carrying theH chUdish customs into
theH mature years. Lastly, from the law itself Paul convinces
them that there is a better thing, even freedom. This he does by
using as an allegory the story of Ishmael and Isaac (iv. 21 — 31).
In the third division of the Epistle (v.) he proceeds to vindi
cate Christian freedom against aU aspersions ; first of all exhort
ing them to stand fast in their liberty, and not to put themselves
under bondage to minute observances (v. 1 — 12), and then warn
ing them against using this liberty as an occasion to the flesh (v.
13; vi. 10). In a brief conclusion, written with his own hand
in the large letters (vi. 11) that distinguished his writing from
the more clerkly writing of his amanuensis, he contrasts his own
affectionate attitude towards them with the selfish aims of the
Judaizers. 5. Date of the Epistle. — Owing to the absence from this
Epistle of aUusions to the writer's circumstances, and to those
who were with him, it is not easy to fix its date. In the address
lie unites with himself " aU the brethren who are with me " (i.
2), but names none. The stress laid upon the suddenness of the
Galatian declension — " I marvel that ye are so soon removed from
him that called you " (i. 6) — has inclined some to place the letter
as early as possible in the Apostle's Ephesian residence. It has
also been argued from 1 Cor. xvi. 1, that before these words
were written, that is before the last year of the writer's residence
in Ephesus, he was again on good terms with the Churches of
Galatia. On the other hand it may very reasonably be argued
that H the Epistles to the Corinthians were written after that
to the Galatians, there would be discernible deeper traces of the
conflict with Judaizing teachers.

THE EPISTLE OF PAUL THE APOSTLE

EPHESIANS.
1. The Apostle's Visits to Ephesus. — On Paul's first visit to
Ephesus (Acts xviii. 19) he was exceptionaUy weU received by
the Jews, who, before they aUowed him to depart, extracted
from him a promise that he would return. Before he was able
to fulfil this promise the impression he had made on the Ephe
sian Jews was greatly deepened by the eloquence of ApoUos
(Acts xviii. 24 — 28). So promising a field was thus opened to
Paul that when he returned to Ephesus he was induced to remain
there for nearly three years. His very success, however, roused
the hostility of the craftsmen, whose livelihood seemed to be
endangered by the secession of Diana's worshippers. It was
still perilous for him to visit Ephesus the year following (Acts
xx. 16), but we gather from 1 Tim. i. 3, that he did again visit
this Church. Next to Rome itself Ephesus was the most impor
tant city visited by Paul. Its position as a commercial and
industrial centre had attracted to it large numbers of Jews,
whUe its political and reHgious importance secured that what
was taught in Ephesus should be Heard throughout the whole
province (Acts xix. 10). The whole narrative in the Book of
Acts indicates that the Gospel was widely received both by the
Jews and Greeks of Ephesus, and that the connection of Paul
with the Christians there was unusually intimate.
2. Peculiar Character of the Epistle. — But turning to the Epistle
which we know as " the Epistle to the Ephesians," we find none
of the friendly salutations common in the other Epistles, none of
the fond naming of this friend and that in the Church addressed,
no transmission of greetings from companions of the writer.
And what is even more staggering, we find Paul speaking as
if it was possible that the Ephesians were not aware of the

EPISTLE OF PAUL THE APOSTLE TO THE EPHESIANS. 461
character and contents of his preaching, or could only have
become acquainted with it by report (Eph. Hi. 2; iv. 21). More
over, while in the Acts there is evidence that the Ephesian
Church must have been largely composed of Jews, it is in this
Epistle addressed as a Gentile Church (ii. 11, 19; iii. 1 ; iv. 17).
But in point of fact the words of the inscription, " at Ephesus"
(Eph. i. 1), are not read in our two oldest MSS., the Vatican and
the Sinaitic. And there is no doubt that the early Christian
writers had difficulties about the inscription. Basil tells us that
the words cited were not Hi the oldest MSS. Origen certainly
did not read them. Marcion called the Epistle, " the Epistle to
the Laodiceans," and Tertullian' s reply to him is unsatisfactory.
With these facts before us it is natural to suppose that as the
letter left the hand of the writer it was without any particular
address, and was intended to be read not only by the Church at
Ephesus, but by other Churches of proconsular Asia in which he
was not personaUy known. The letter was carried by Tychicus
(Eph. vi. 21), who was also the bearer of the letter to the Colos
sians (Col. iv. 7), and whose commission probably extended to
cither Churches of the district. It is, indeed, quite possible that
this "Epistle to the Ephesians" was the "Epistle from Laodicea,"
which the Apostle instructed the Colossians to read (Col. iv. 16).
That Epistle cannot have been addressed particularly and exclu
sively to Laodicea, else Paul could not have sent his greetings
to the members of the Laodicean Church through the Colossians
as he did (Col. iv. 15). Had he been writing dHectly to the
Laodicean Church he would certainly have sent greetings dHectly.
The "Epistle from Laodicea" must therefore have been of a
general character, such as that to the Ephesians, and there is no
reason to beHeve it was not that letter itseH.
If this is the right construction to put upon the incidental
aUusions found in these Epistles, then we conclude that Tychicus
was entrusted with this "Epistle to the Ephesians," and was
instructed to read it to the Churches he visited. These Churches
of proconsular Asia had not been founded by Paul himself, and
were considered by him as essentiaUy Gentile-Christian, and are
so addressed. When his letters were collected this circular letter-
to the Churches of Asia would naturaUy be inscribed with the
name of the metropoHs and mother church, and be subsequently
known as the Epistle to the Ephesians.
3. Its Theme and Purpose. — The contents of the Epistle quite
bear out this idea of its destination. For a circular letter no
subject could be more appropriate than the unity of the Church.
Unity is the key to this Epistle — the unity of the Church with
Crod, the unity of the two great sections of the Church — the

462 BOOK BY BOOK.
Jewish and the GentUe ; the unity of the individual members
with one another in the one body of tbe Church CathoHc. " In
Christ aU things, both which are in heaven, and which are in
earth, are gathered together in one" (i. 10). This is God's
eternal purpose, hid from former ages (iU. 5), but now made
known (Ui. 5, 9). To reconcUe all things to God — that is the
purpose whieh through aH the ages has been running on to
fulfilment. It is in Christ this purpose is fulfilled, for as in
the Epistle to the Colossians Paul had taught that ' ' in Christ
dwelleth aU the fulness of the Godhead bodily," so in this
Epistle he teaches that as Christ is the fulness and as it were
body of God, so is the Church " Christ's body, the fulness of
Him that fiUeth aU Hi aU." Union with God is not mechanical
in the case of men ; they are brought into true feUowship with
God, being "chosen in Christ to be holy" (i. 4). In reconcUing
Jew and GentUe alike to God, Christ has reconcUed them to one
another, "making of twain one new man" (ii. 15), and giving
"both access by one SpHit unto the Father" (ii. 18). In order
to come into this true reconciliation with God, and be " filled
with aU the fulness of God" (Hi. 19), Christ must dweU in the
heart by faith tiU the sovereignty and dominion of His love over
aU things be in some measure understood (iii. 17 — 20). As soon
as churches and members of churches recognise that " there is
one body and one Spirit, even as they are caUed in one hope of
their calling, one Lord, one faith," &c. (iv. 4 — 6), they are
ashamed of bitterness, wrangling, fraud, and feel themselves
bound to promote the good of the whole body by each performing
his own function.
The practical injunctions into which these doctrinal statements
run are ruled by two ideas. The idea of unity excludes lying,
"Speak every man truth with his neighbour, for we are members
one of another" (iv. 25). Anger, stealing, foul conversation are
also excluded by the law that binds us to do and to say what
may minister to those about us (iv. 29). The idea that the
radical relationships of Hfe are pure also plays its part. In
opposition to the Gnostic asceticism, which taught that these
relationships must be abandoned U men would be holy, Paul
shows that in these relationships the highest Christian graee, the
very love which Christ bore to men, is to be cultivated.
4. Conjecture as to its Occasion. — Weiss is of opinion that the
Epistle had a more definite and urgent historical occasion than
the mere accident of the journey of Tychicus to Colossae. He
thinks the contents of the Epistle can only be accounted for if
we suppose that Paul saw in the Churches of Asia symptoms
of the same dangers which had grown to such magnitude in

EPISTLE OF PAUL THE APOSTLE TO THE EPHESIANS. 463
Galatia. " The Phrygian disturbances had again reminded the
Apostle how readUy the old antagonism which he had overcome
in his legaUy-minded Pharasaic opponents might spring up
again in a new form ; hence it occurred to him to show that it
might be got rid of by admitting the GentUes to the possession
of the salvation and the promises of free Israel, and must neces
sarily be dissipated on the part of the Gentiles by the laying
aside of all heathen practices, and the regulation of the whole
moral life Hi a Christian spirit, which makes aU legal or ascetic
restrictions superfluous." That there were Jewish Christian
Churches in Asia he considers is involved in the inscription of
St. Peter's First Epistle, and the many reminiscences and echoes
of that Epistle which occur in the Epistle to the Ephesians are
accounted for on the supposition that the same Churches were
in the writer's view. It must, however, be acknowledged that in
the Epistle there is little evidence even of an embryonic hostility
on the part of the Jewish Christians, whatever shyness on the
part of the GentUe Christians may be discerned. [Material for
a comparison of the Epistle to the Ephesians with 1 Peter wUl
be found in Weiss's "Introduction to the New Testament,"
i. 355.]
5. Its Similarity to " Colossians." — Knowing as we do that the
Epistles to the Ephesians and Colossians were dispatched, and
therefore probably written, at the same time, we are not sur
prised to find that many of the thoughts and many of the
phrases are the same in both. The writer is evidently moving
in the same cHcle of ideas, the cosmic significance of the person
and work of Christ, the purpose of God towards the world, and
the arrangement in accordance with this purpose of the ages or
dispensations in history. Paul in both Epistles calls attention
to the fact that he had been entrusted with the ministry by a
special dispensation of God's grace, that he might make known
the mystery whieh in former ages had been hid (Eph. iii. 1 — 9 ;
cp. Coloss. i. 23 — 27). In both Epistles the work of Christ is
spoken of as a reconcUing work (Eph. ii. 13 — 19 ; Col. i. 20). In
both Christ is presented as embodying and making available for
man the fulness of God (Eph. i. 23 ; Col. i. 19), and as the head
of the body the Church (Eph. i. 22 ; iv. 15; Col. i. 18). The
condition of men apart from Christ is described in simUar terms
in both Epistles (Eph. H. 5 ; Col. ii. 13) ; the results of Christ's
work are also simUarly described (Eph. i. 7 ; Col. i. 14), and the
transition from the natural to the Christian life is in both spoken
of as a "putting off the old man" and putting on the new
(Eph. iv. 22 — 24 ; Col. iii. 9, 10). The graces which the " new
man " exhibits, and the conduct becoming his high caUing, are

464 BOOK BY BOOK.
spoken of in almost identical language in the closing exhorta
tions of both Epistles, although in the Ephesian letter there is
richer development of domestic duties.
6. Date and Circumstances of Composition. — This simUarity has
excited much attention, and has, in the first place, invited the
question, which of the two letters was first written ? From the
supposed mention of the Epistle to the Ephesians in Col, iv. 16,
it has been concluded by many sound critics that it was the earHer
of the two. But on the other hand it is urged that the occur
rence of the expression "you also," in Eph. vi. 21, is proof that
this same recommendation of Tychicus had aHeady been made
to the Colossians (cp. Col. iv. 7, 8). " In any Jcase it is most
natural to suppose that the Epistle designed for concrete needs
was written first, wider and freer expression being then given
by the Apostle in a letter of more general character to the
thoughts by which he was stirred." The attempts which have
been made to show the dependence either of Ephesians on
Colossians (HSnig) or of Colossians on Ephesians (Mayerhoff)
cannot be said to have been successful. Each of the Epistles
is so freely written, and contains so much independent matter,
and makes so different a use of ideas that are common to both,
that aU we can say is that they were written at the same time
and under the influence of the same dominating thoughts.
Whether written before or after the sister Epistle to the Colos
sians, this letter was evidently written while Paul was a
prisoner (see iu. 1 ; iv. 1 ; vi. 20). It has usuaUy been sup
posed that it was during his Roman imprisonment these
letters were penned, but recently there has been a considerable
reaction in favour of the Cesarean imprisonment. Between
these competing claims it is not easy to decide, but on the whole
the evidence is rather in favour of the later date, the Roman
imprisonment. Baur, indeed, and his disciples persuade them-
selve that it must have been written much later than this or
any point within the lifetime of Paul. References both to
Gnosticism and Montanism are found in it. The latter phase of
doctrine is detected in " the prominence given to the irvevp.a as
the Montanist Paraclete of the gHt of the Spirit, the union of
Prophets with Apostles, the insistence on the holiness of the
Church, and the division of its hfe into epochs, as well as the
comparison of its relation to Christ with the marriage relation
and such Hke.
The proper aim of the Epistle seemed to be to bring the
two parties in the Church, viz., the Jewish and Gentile Chris
tians who were stiU separated, into the unity of the Catholic
Church, which was attempted by an external synthesis of faith

EPISTLE OF PAUL THE APOSTLE TO THE EPHESIANS. 465
and love, by modifying the PauUne thesis of justification, and
making concessions to Judaism with its righteousness of works,
and by an external union of Jews and Gentiles through the
aboUtion of the law, i.e. essentiaUy of circumcision.
7. Authenticity. — But considering the amount of attestation the
Epistle receives from the sub-apostolic writers, it is impossible to
doubt its authenticity. Clement of Rome (i. 46) seems to have
it in his mind when he says, " Have we not one God, and one
Christ, and one Spirit of grace poured out upon us, and one
caUing in Christ." Ignatius, in his Epistle to the Ephesians {circa
110), mentions Paul's Epistle to them, and imitates the intro
duction of the apostolic letter in his own. In chapters ix. and
xv. he also makes use of the idea of a temple buUt of Hving
stones as naturaUy suggests the similar language of Paul.
Polycarp also quotes this Epistle ; and it is included as Pauline
Hi the Canons of the second century.

u If

THE EPISTLE OF PAUL THE APOSTLE
TO THE
PHILIPPIANS.
1. The Church at PhUippi. — PhUippi was the most easterly city
of Macedonia, and was therefore "the first" (Acts xvi. 12) at
which Paul arrived in that province, on his first visit to Europe.
It had originally been known as KpijviSes {Fountains) ; but when
PhUip the Great enlarged and strengthened it, he named it after
himself, PhUippi. In history it became conspicuous as the scene
of the overthrow of Brutus and Cassius, in commemoration of
which event it was erected into a colony by Augustus. Its popu
lation accordingly must have been largely composed, in New
Testament times, of the descendants of Roman veterans, using
the Latin language and observing the Roman law. The Jews
were apparently few, as they had no synagogue but only a plaee
of prayer on the bank of the Httle stream, Gangites, which
flowed past the town. The idea, therefore, that the Philippian
Church was the subject of a Jewish Christian schism is untenable,
although both in former times, and more recently by so able a
critic as Holstein, this has been maintained. (See Schinz, " Die
ChristUche Gemeinde zu PhUippi," Zurich, 1833.)
It is evident, however, from iii. 2, seqq., that the Philippian
Church was exposed to the same dangers as other Churches from
Jewish Christian teaching, although as yet this teaching had not
deeply influenced many of its members. They are not addressed
in this passage as the members of the Galatian Church were
addressed. They are not admonished or rebuked as having
aHeady faUen away from Pauline teaching, but are warned
against teachers whose influence was anti-Pauline. Neither is
this warning the main theme of the letter, nor is it the object of
the Apostle's writing.
The occasion of the Epistle was the return of Epaphroditus to

EPISTLE OF PAUL THE APOSTLE TO THE PH1LIPPIANS. 467
PhUippi. He had come to Rome as the bearer of a gift from
the Apostle's friends in PhUippi, and had thrown himself so
sympatheticaUy into the work of Christ in the metropolis, that
he had contracted serious Ulness (ii. 30). On recovering and
hearing how anxious his friends had been on his account, he
naturaUy desired to return to PhUippi, and Paul could not send
him home without putting in his hands a written acknowledg
ment of the kindness he had received from the Philippians. He
wished also to prepare the way for Timothy's visit (U. 19), and
to incite them to unity and joyfulness of spirit.
2. Date and Place of Composition. — The Epistle, then, bears on
its face that it was written from Rome towards the close of Paul's
imprisonment. Though stiU in bonds he was hving in expecta
tion of a speedy decision in his case. To himseH personally it
mattered Httle whether this decision should consign him to a
martyr's death, or should set him free to face once more the
toils and risks and contumely of an Apostle's life. But though
on his own account he had much reason to long for emancipation
from the privations and hardships of Hfe, and for entrance into
the joy of his Lord, he was quite wiUing to spend himself for
others, and incHned to think that he was destined to be used
stUl Hi Christ's cause on earth (i. 20 — 26). And he was recon
cUed not only to the termination of his imprisonment, whatever
its issue might be, but he wTas now in a position to see how
much the Gospel had been furthered by that very confinement
which had threatened to obstruct his usefulness. The soldiers
who guarded him could not but talk Hi the barracks of the
Pretorian guard (i. 13) of the strange words that feU from his
Ups. The reaHty of bis character and the truth of his teaching
penetrated even into the household of Caesar (iv. 22), and a
gospel which might have been contemptuously ignored, had it
been proclaimed in the Jewish quarter, was now the talk of
Rome. Besides his pertinacity and joy in prosecuting stiU his
Apostolic function gave new confidence to the followers of Christ
Hi the metropoHs (i. 14); and even those who grudged him his
influence, were by theH envy (i. 15) stirred to greater zeal in
proclaiming the Gospel.
Paul tells them how his sufferings had thus tended to "the
furtherance of the Gospel," that they may be encouraged to
expect a eimUar result from their sufferings (i. 27 — 30). His
imprisonment must not discompose them, nor are they in his
absence to suffer theH faith or their love to faU; but foUowing
theH Lord in His humility, they are to accept a lowly place, and
so work out their own salvation, depending not on the presence
of an Apostle, but on a higher and stronger wiH (ii. 1 — 13). He
¦ hh2

468 BOOK BY BOOK.
encourages them to this humble and joyful acceptance of theH
lot by telhng him that he means to send Timothy to visit them,
and hopes also to come himself . By this introduction he at last
reaches the announcement of the return of Epaphroditus, which
was the prime occasion of his writing.
3. St. Paul's Doctrine. — Although the object of tbe Epistle was
not doctrinal, Paul never more clearly announced his Gospel
than in the thHd chapter. If circumcision, Hebrew descent,
legal blamelessness, formed a just claim to salvation, Paul had
more to rely upon than the most convinced and zealous Judaizer.
He was circumcised, of pure blood, and a rigid observer of the
law. But though he once buUt his hope of God's favour on
these things, and counted them over in his own mind as his
spiritual gains, he now esteemed them not at aU. He found
them to be an actual hindrance, a loss, a minus quantity. He
had to cast them away, to renounce aU these claims, in order that
he might win Christ. For a man who hopes to earn God's favour
by his own righteousness has no need of Christ, and wiU not
accept Him. But, says Paul, "I have suffered the loss of aU
things " — aU, that is, on which he had founded the hope of
God's favour — "and do count them but dung, that I may win
Christ and be found in Him," &c. (Ui. 8, 9). He saw how much
purer, deeper, more efficient was the righteousness offered to
him Hi Christ, and therefore in order to win it he rejected the
other. To depend on both was impossible; they mutually
exclude each other. Paul made his choice, threw away his
former gains and so gained Christ. He saw that the favour of
God, which he had been laboriously trying to secure by exact
observance of the law, was already his by God's free gift. And
he at the same tune saw in the character of Christ that the
righteousness of God was an absolute righteousness impossible
for him to attain to by the law.
But while he abandoned his own righteousness as a ground of
God's favour, he was far from abandoning the hope of hoHness.
On the contrary, his aim is not only to win Christ and be found
in Him, but "to know Christ and the power of His resurrection,"
&c. (Hi. 10). His final object being " to attain to the resurrec
tion of the dead," to be conformed to Christ in spirit and in body
(iii. 21), he finds in Christ new forces for the attainment of this
object. He sees it attained in Christ, and this gives a definite
ness and hopefulness to his aim which it had not before. And
lurther, the intimate feUowship into which Christ has caHed him
sustains, purifies, and strengthens him.
4. Critical Objections. — Schrader, who confined his criticism to
the section Hi. 1 — iv. 9, was the first to throw doubt on the

EPISTLE OP PAUL THE APOSTLE TO THE PH1LIPPTANS. 469
authenticity of the Epistle. Baur conceived the Epistle to be
eoneihatory, and thus summarises his objections : " What
appears suspicious to me in the Philippian Epistle may be
reduced to the foUowing three heads : 1. The appearance of
Gnostic ideas in the passage H. 6 — 9. 2. The want of anything
distinctly Pauline. 3. The questionableness of some of the
historical data." Schwegler, following Baur, finds an allusion
to the two opposed Church parties in the two women of iv. 2,
and Peter is the "yoke-fellow" appealed to by Paul. This
criticism, however, has been repudiated by the more recent
chiefs of the modern school, Hausrath, Hoitzmann, Pfleiderer,
and Hilgenfeld, who maintain the authenticity of the Epistle.
Holstein has indeed reopened the question, instructively ana
lysing the doctrine and the language of the Epistle, but his
reasoning has not materially altered the attitude of criticism
towards the authorship.
Readers of the Epistle wiH be disposed to agree with Weiss,
who says, "It is Hi fact bard to understand how an Epistle
containing so Httle that is properly doctrinal, and for the forging
of which no object whatever can be conceived, should be spurious.
The purely personal outpourings of the Apostle's heart respect
ing his feehngs towards the PhiHppians, his frame of mind and
prospects Hi captivity, would appear to be entirely at variance
with such a view ; especiaUy does it seem inconceivable that a
pseudonymous writer should have put into the mouth of the
Apostle the expectation of being set free, although such expecta
tion by the assumption of criticism was not actuaUy fulfilled."

THE EPISTLE OF PAUL THE APOSTLE
10 THE
COLOSSIANS.
1. The City of Colossce. — Colossae, situated on the river Lycus,
in south-western Phrygia, but within the Roman pro-consular
province of Asia, had in earlier times been a large and populous
city, but was considerably reduced at the date of this letter, pos
sibly owing to the rivaHy of its prosperous neighbours Laodicea
and HierapoHs, which lay a few miles farther down the river.
The only feature of the population which throws light on the
Epistle is its very considerable Jewish ingredient. Two thou
sand Jewish families had been transplanted by Antiochus the
Great, and had been settled Hi Lydia and Phrygia, and it is
important to observe that those families had been brought from
Babylonia and Mesopotamia. Other influences increased the
Jewish population, until in Paul's time they formed a distinctly
influential element in the towns of Phrygia.
2. Occasion of the Epistle. — Although the missionary journeys
of Paul had more than once lain through Phrygia, it is clear that
his route had always been east and north of the cities lying in
the vaUey of the Lycus. In writing to the Colossians he classes
them (ii. 1) with " those who have not seen [his] face in the
flesh." Apparently they had received the Gospel through Epa-
phras (i. 7), who was himseH a Colossian (iv. 12), and probably
was one of those who heard Paul preach at Ephesus, in the
school of Tyrannus, and who spread the knowledge of the Lord
Jesus among " aU them which dwelt in Asia" (Acts xix. 10).
Epaphras had joined Paul in Rome, and had given him a vivid
idea of the progress and of the dangers of the Christian Churches
in the valley of the Lycus (i. 8; iv. 12, 13). Teachers had
appeared in Colossae who were conf using the minds of the con
verts not yet " estabhshed in the faith."
The precise doctrines and affinities of these teachers can be

EPISTLE OF PAUL THE APOSTLE TO THE COLOSSIANS. 471
gathered from the Epistle itself, in which Paul warns the Chris
tians against them. That they were Jews is evident from their
enjoining cHcumcision (ii. 11; iii. 11), and the observance of
the Mosaic ordinances, sacred days and seasons, and so forth
(H. 14 — 22). So far they resembled the Judaisers who had
marred Paul's work Hi Galatia and elsewhere. But with this
Judaism the Colossian teachers mingled a " philosophy " (ii. 8),
a "worshipping of angels" (ii. 18), and an ascetic "neglect of
the body " (H. 23) whieh were not characteristic of Judaising
teachers. It would also appear that their philosophy or theo-
sophy endangered the supremacy of Christ, probably by ascrib
ing to angels the work of creation (i. 16), of giving and enforcing
the law (ii. 15), and of mediating in redemption between God
and man (ii. 18). And it is plain that aU this was taught as a
mystery or as esoteric doctrine imparted to the initiated alone,
and under seal of secrecy (ii. 3 ; i. 27) ; and the emphasis laid
on the non-exelusiveness of the Gospel i. 28, in the three times
repeated " every."
3. The Colossian Heresy. — But no sooner are these characteristics
of the Colossian heresy stated than it is obvious that point by
point they coincide with Gnosticism. The very terms used by
Paul are Gnostic terms.* Gnosticism, as the name itself implies,
asserted the supremacy of knowledge (gnosis). Faith may suffice
for the multitude, but the initiated, the select few, are saved by
knowledge. The esoteric doctrine they imparted was a doctrine
of creation devised to save God from the responsibUity of being
the author of evU. God, who is absolutely good, cannot by His
immediate act have produced the world, for had He done so, it
also must, Hke its author, be only good. Besides this moral
difficulty there was ever clamouring for solution the metaphysical
difficulty of connecting the Absolute God with the material world.
Both these difficulties the Gnostics claimed to solve by their
theory of emanations. God expressed Himself by giving bHth
to a being worthy of Him ; and that being again reproduced a
third, and so on through successive emanations, each naturaUy
in proportion to its distance from the source having a feebler
divine ingredient, until contact with matter and the work of
creation become possible. Between the supreme perfect God and
the world there is thus interposed a graduated series of beings,
which appear sometimes as personal, sometimes as impersonal, in
the various Gnostic systems, and which are variously known as
emanations, aeons, or angels. Underlying this whole theory is
the Oriental duahsm which ascribes the origin of evU, not to the
* "Pleroma," ii. 9 ; "Principalities and Powers," &o., i. 6.

472 BOOK BY BOOK.
wUl of man but to matter. And as a necessary result of this
tenet the Gnostics taught that redemption is to be achieved by
asceticism. 4. A Phase of Gnosticism. — The form which Gnosticism took
when combined with Jewish Christianity is distinctly seen in the
teaching of Cerinthus, who flourished in the time of Trajan. He
was a Jewish Christian, who adopted Gnostic views, and taught
that the world was not made by the Supreme God, but by a power
distinct from Him and ignorant of Him. Jesus, who was a mere
man, received at His baptism the Christ, by whose inspiration
He announced the unknown Father, the Supreme God. Toward
the end of His ministry the Christ departed from Him, so that
the mere man Jesus suffered, died, and rose again. This teaching
brings out clearly the Ebionite tendency which naturaUy resulted
from the Gnostic horror of matter ; and that some simUar tendency
was exhibited by the Colossian errorists is evident from the
emphatic manner in whieh Paul (i. 14, 19, 20, 22, &c.) Hnks
together the supremacy of Christ and His death, insisting that
the same person who made aU things suffered on the cross.
5. Historical Objections to Genuineness. — But tbe emergence of
Gnostic ideas and terminology in a letter purporting to be
written in the year 64 a.d., is declared to be sufficient. proof that
it is not what it claims to be. Thus Baur affirms that "we are
here transported to a circle of ideas which belongs to a whoUy
different historical period, viz., to the period of Gnosticism," that
is, to the second century. It is true that, before the time of
Cerinthus, we have no trustworthy record of any sect or teacher
who combined fuUy-developed Gnostic ideas with Christian doc
trine. But to argue that Gnosticism was not known in the Church
until the beginning of the second century, and that this Epistle
must therefore be referred to that period, is either to throw dust
in the eyes or to betray ignorance of history. For the roots from
which Gnosticism sprang can be traced not merely into the first
century, but through the writings of PhUo, the books of Wisdom
and Ecclesiasticus, back to the Persian speculations -with which
the Jews became familiar during the Captivity. And there is as
much reason to refer Philo to the second century as to refer this
Epistle to the period of fuUy-developed and expUcitly-enounced
Gnosticism. The fact is that, long before the Christian Church was founded,
the thinkers of Asia were famUiar with the ideas and speculations
which were afterwards identified with Gnosticism ; and H this
great system was not earHer recognised as a Christian heresy, the
probabiUty is that the delay was caused, not by any lack of
endeavour to combine Christianity and Gnosticism, but by the

EPISTLE OF PAUL THE APOSTLE TO THE COLOSSIANS. 473
strenuous opposition which the Apostles offered to the incipient
tendencies towards this combination. It would be strange,
indeed, H in an age when East and West were minghng, when
amalgamations and combinations of every kind were attempted,
when men seem to have come to distrust each separate philosophy,
and to imagine that truth might be found by combining all, no
attempt had been made to combine Christianity and Gnostic
speculations. This Epistle is the most trustworthy evidence we
have of any actual attempt of this kind, and in these Colossian
teachers we see the spiritual progenitors of Cerinthus and the rest.
6. Historical Place of the Colossian Heresy. — Bishop Lightfoot has
materiaUy aided the endeavour to posit this Colossian heresy in
its proper historical place by showing that it has its natural pre
cursor in a weU-known form of Judaism, which existed Hi the
time of our Lord and His Apostles. He has shown that Essenism
was Gnostic Judaism, and that this type of Jewish thought had
estabUshed itseH in Phrygia and Asia in tbe Apostolic Age. The
Essenes represented, among the Jews, legaUsm, mysticism, and
asceticism. They were scrupulous in their observance of the
Mosaic law, though they looked with horror on bloody sacrifices ;
abstained, as it would seem, from eating flesh and drinking wine,
and discountenanced marriage. It is easy to recognise the prin
ciple which lay at the root of this asceticism — the principle that
matter is evU, and that to be deHvered from sin man must, as far
as possible, be emancipated from all dependence on matter. They
betrayed their genealogical connection with Persian speculation
by theH worship of the sun and their doctrine of angels.
What that doctrine precisely was it is impossible to say, for
the initiated was sworn "to conceal nothing from the members
of the sect, and to report nothing concerning them to others . . .
not to communicate any of their doctrines to any one otherwise
than as he himseH had received them . . . and to guard carefuUy
the names of the angels." The Essenes would thus seem to
have possessed three of the characteristic notes of Gnosticism :
" This Jewish sect exhibits the same exclusiveness in the commu
nication of its doctrines. Its theological speculations take the
same direction, dwelling on the mysteries of creation, regarding
matter as the abode of evil, and postulating certain intermediate
spHitual agencies as necessary links of communication between
heaven and earth. And, lastly, its speculative opinions involve
the same ethical conclusions, and lead in like manner to a rigid
asceticism." If, then, Essenism came in contact with Christianity
and sought to form an alliance with it, there would result a con
glomerate distinguishable by the very features of this Colossian
heresy.

474

BOOK BY BOOK.

7. Attitude of the Apostle. — By these explanations not only is
the genuineness of the Epistle established, but the point and
power of its statements are brought clearly out. Paul does not
aim at exploding the incipient heresy by argument. He con
tents himseH with showing that aU that was advantageous or
attractive Hi the new doctrine existed aHeady in Christ, and
existed in Him, not in appearance, but in truth. To the attrac
tiveness of being initiated into mysteries and esoteric doctrines
to which none but the select few were admitted, he opposes his
ministry of a Gospel free from aU inteUectual exclusiveness,
which he preaches to " every creature " (i. 23), "warning every
man, and teaching every man in all wisdom, that we may present
every man perfect in Christ Jesus " (i. 28). The mere statement
of this true perfecting of every man by the revelation of the
mystery of Christ should be enough to make every sound-hearted
man ashamed of being led away by a promised "perfection,"
accomplished in a few by initiation into mysterious speculative
theories. SimUarly, over against the theory of intermediate
beings saving God from direct contact with matter, Paul enun
ciates the true deity of Christ, and affirms that " by Him were
aU things created, that are in heaven, and that are Hi earth,"
and that so far from matter being evU " aU things were created
. . . for Him" (i. 16).
No language could more firmly and exphcitly affirm the proper
divinity of Christ, or dispel the growing tendency to an Ebioni-
tism, which might seem to save the Divine from coming into
ignominious contact with matter, and even with death. The
Christ whom Paul preached was not one emanation to be found
at some point of the graduated descent from God to the last
developed aeon, but was Himself divine ; "it pleased the Father
that in Him should aU the pleroma dwell," the totaHty, or fulness
of the Godhead, so that in Him aU Divine attributes were to be
found (i. 19 ; ii. 9). There was, therefore, no need of any
wisdom or help which could not be found in Christ (ii. 3, 10).
To worship angels and seek theH help (ii. 18) may seem humUity,
but it is gratuitous and futile, for " ye are complete in Christ,
who is the head of aH principality and power" (ii. 10). Hold
the head and you are saved ; and ref i ain from all speculations
which merely puff you up with a sense of fancied superiority
(ii. 18).
The practical results of this incipient Gnosticism are exposed
in the same manner, by exhibiting Hi contrast the greater efficacy
of the purely Christian teaching. The rules of an ascetic avoid
ance of material things, " Touch not, taste not, handle not,"
have a show of humUity, but " are of no value against the indul-

EPISTLE OF PAUL THE APOSTLE TO THE COLOSSIANS. 475
gence of the flesh " (u. 23). The true dehverance from carnaUty
and earthliness is to be found in fellowship with Christ, in so
truly beHeving and in loving Him that our affections are carried
with Him to things above (Ui. 1 — 5).
8. Authenticity. — The authenticity of the Epistle is externaUy
attested by echoes in Barnabas, Clement, and Ignatius ; by
quotations in Justin Martyr, and by its reception into the canons
of the first century. Mayerhoff was the first to throw suspicion
upon it by exhibiting its resemblances to the Epistle to the
Ephesians. Renan argues strongly for its genuineness, and
among other grounds urges that if Ephesians was an imitation
of it this impHes that the imitator accepted Colossians as Pauline.
Hilgenfeld holds with Baur, that " the Colossian letter has to do
with an aHeady fuUy developed Gnosticism, and this carries us
not merely beyond Paul's Hfetime, but beyond the first century."
It is, however, impossible to imagine a letter such as this to have
been written in presence of the fully developed systems. Oppo
sition to these systems would have been more detaUed and
pronounced. The difficulties which have been found in the style of the letter
are explained by Paul's want of famUiarity with this novel
teaching. He was on ground he had not traversed before, using
the suggestions of heresy to elucidate new aspects of Christ and
His Gospel. The easy and natural manner in which this letter
links itseH to the Epistle to Philemon (cp. iv. 9 — 14, with PhU.
23, 24 ; iv. 17, with Phil. 2) is, as Renan shows, strong proof of
authenticity. It may be added that the descriptions given of
those who send salutations correspond with the fact that Paul
and his constant companions had not been at Colossae. Baur's
idea, that Luke and Mark are brought together with " reconcil
ing " intention is too ridiculous.
The mention of "the Epistle from Laodicea" (iv. 16) has
given rise to a number of theories, which are classified and
examined by Lightfoot. His own opinion is that the Epistle
here referred to was that to the Ephesians, which was intended
as a circular letter, to be read first by the Ephesians, then by the
Laodioeans, and then by the Colossians. The spurious Laodicean
Epistle is given by Lightfoot. It is a mere cento of phrases
and clauses from the PauUne letters, and is entirely worthless.

FIRST AND SECOND EPISTLES OF PAUL THE APOSTLE
TO THE
THESSALONIANS.
1. Thessalonica. — At the date of Paul's visit to Thessalonica, it
was a city of some importance both commercially and politically.
Lying, as it does, at the head of the Thermaic gulf, with the open
sea in front and a rich country behind, it could scarcely faU to
become a prosperous seat of commerce, and as it was also very
capable of defence, Cassander rebuilt and enlarged it, and gave
it the name of hiis wife Thessalonica, a sister of Alexander the
Great. When^t passed into the hands of the Romans its im
portance was still recognised, and it became the chief city of
Macedonia Secunda, and ultimately the metropolis of the whole
of that province. At the time of Paul's visit it was in the enjoy
ment of the rights of a free city, electing its own poHtarchs,
although, subject to the Roman proconsul.
Thessalonica was therefore a city in which the Apostle
might expect to find a centre from which the Gospel might be
disseminated both inland and seaward. Besides, unlike PhUippi,
it contained a synagogue to which his Jewish birth would give
him entrance, and in which his message would at least be
Hstened to with intelligence. It happened also that his own
trade, the manufacture and preparation of goat's-haU cloth, was
one of the staples of Thessalonica, as it stiU is of its modern
representative Saloniki. For three Sabbaths Paul was allowed
to address the Jews in the Synagogue (Acts xvii. 2), with the
result that some believed, while a large number of " the devout
Greeks andof the chief women " also accepted his teaching. The
unbeheving Jews, however, here as elsewhere, compassed the
dismissal of Paul from the city.
2. Date of the First Epistle. — The order of events from the
compulsory departure of the Apostle from Thessalonica to the
date of the FHst Epistle to the Church there, is clearly described

FIRST AND SECOND EPISTLES TO THE THESSALONIANS. 477
in the Book of Acts (chaps.' xvH. and xviii.). From that source
we learn that after leaving Thessalonica with his companions,
Silas and Timothy, St. Paul proceeded to Berea and thence to
Athens. Whether Timothy was sent back to Thessalonica from
Berea, or from some other point, does not appear; but it is
certain that when St. Paul found it impossible to return himseH
(1 Thess. ii, 17, 18), he dispatched Timothy to encourage and
establish the young converts in that place. Meanwhile the
Apostle went on from Athens to Corinth, and there Silas and
Timothy coming from Macedonia overtook him (Acts xviii. 5).
It was the tidings which Timothy brought which prompted
the letter (1 Thess. iU. 6). The Epistle therefore would seem
to have been written two or three months after the Apostle's
visit, and most probably in the early part of the year 53 a.d.
Between his visit and his letter, time must be given for the
occurrence of such events as he aUuded to in the letter, the death
of some at least of the Thessalonian Christians (iv. 13), and
the fame which their faith had attained not only in their own
neighbourhood but in more remote localities (i. 8). But for
these events two or three months is quite sufficient. The
Epistle is therefore the earliest extant Epistle of St. Paul.
3. The Occasion of Writing. — As Timothy's arrival in Corinth
enables us to fix the date of the Epistle, so must we find the
occasion of it in the tidings brought by that messenger. The
report was in the main favourable. Though suffering some per
secution, the faith of the young converts was firm, their love for
one another was stiU apparent, and their affection for St. Paul
himseH unabated (Ui. 6). At the same time Timothy had not
concealed their shortcomings, but had reported that some Greek
vice stiU adhered to the new Christians (iv. 1 — 8) ; and also that
the motives of the Apostle in bringing the Gospel to them had
been called in question. Paul felt it necessary both for his own
and for the Gospel's sake to defend his character from these accu
sations. There were also one or two irregularities appearing in
the Httle Christian community which it was advisable to check.
The persecution to which the Christians were subjected, though
it did not avaU to destroy their faith, made them more ready to
listen to highly coloured pictures of the kingdom and coming of
Christ. And such was the excited expectancy which the idea of
the speedy return of Christ produced that some of them gave up
their secular employment and became dependent idlers (iv. 1 1 ;
v. 14). Others again were disturbed in their min ds because they
feared that their friends who died before the coming of Christ
might miss the glory and joy of that event.
There was quite enough then in the condition of this young

478 BOOK BY BOOK.
Church to ehcit a letter of counsel and encouragement from its
founder. Baur, indeed, says that " the insignificance of its
contents, the want of any special aim, and of any inteUigible
occasion or purpose, is itself a criterion adverse to a Pauline
origin." But manifestly there was occasion ; and bad there been
no disorders in the Church which needed correction, and no
slanderers whom it was expedient to. gag, yet the mere affec
tion of the Apostle for those who were suffering for the truth
might weU have prompted a friendly letter. Besides, the
objection that there is no important teaching Hi the letter cuts
two ways; for, as Jowett observes, "if it were admitted that
the absence of doctrinal ideas makes the Epistle unworthy of
St. Paul, it makes it also a forgery without an object."
4. Evidence of Authenticity. — But so obviously and flagrantly
arbitrary is Baur's criticism of this Epistle,, that the mass of
those who usuaUy foUow him here part company, and accept this
as a genuine production of St. Paul's. The external attestation
to its authenticity is complete. The internal evidence is also
strong. In no letter do Paul's emotional characteristics more
conspicuously appear : his warm and eager acknowledgment of
any good that could be seen in his converts, his anxiety for their
welfare, his sympathy with theH distresses, his desHe to revisit
them, his frank and humble egotism, the delicacy with which he
aUudes to shortcomings. In the words of Bishop Lightfoot,
" The fineness and deUcacy of touch with which the Apostle's
relations toward his Thessalonian converts are drawn — his
yearning to see them, his anxiety in the absence of Timothy, and
bis heartfelt rejoicing at the good news — are quite beyond the
reach of the clumsy forgeries of the early Church. In the second
place the writer uses language which, however it may be ex
plained, is certainly coloured by the anticipation of the speedy
advent of the Lord — language natural enough Hi the Apostle's
own lips, but quite inconceivable Hi a forgery after his death,
when time had disappointed these anticipations, and when the
revival or mention of them would serve no purpose, and might
seem to discredit the Apostle. Such a position would be an
anachronism in a writer of the second century."
5. Survey of Contents. — In the first three chapters of the Epistle
the writer's object is to encourage his Thessalonian converts,
and to cleanse their minds of every idea which might obstruct or
retard their perseverance. It begins by assuring them that
their faith and its fruit hitherto have been matter of constant
gratitude to God on his part (i. 1 — 3) ; and that they may be
stimulated to surpass previous efforts he reminds them that theH
faith had manH'estly been God's work, and that theH election

FIRST AND SECOND EPISTLES TO THE THESSALONIANS. 4.79
had been proved by their being made an exemplary instance of
God's power in converting idolaters and bringing them to the
true God (i. 4 — 10). The two conspicuous features of his visit
to Thessalonica had been those which he mentions in i. 9, the
power which had characterized his own preaching, and the un
usually striking effects. of it.
In the second chapter he first expatiates on the former, and
then on the latter of these features. In ii. 1 — 12 he repels the
calumnies and insinuations which had been set in circulation
about his interested motives, and appeals to the Thessalonians
themselves as witnesses of his blameless life, his freedom from
avarice and indolence, and his confidence in the value of the
message he delivered to them. In the paragraph ii. 13 — 16, he
appeals .to their steadfastness under persecution in proof that
his Gospel was the word of God ; and, therefore, by implication,
that he was God's commissioned servant. In ii. 17 — iii. 13, he
continues to defend himself, but now against the aspersion of
cowardice and fickleness which were supposed to be shown
in his sudden abandonment of Thessalonica, leaving his con
verts to fight their own battle. To this he replies that he
had striven to return, that although absent in body he, was
With them in spirit, and lived by their prosperity and progress ;
and he further reminds them how he had been content to remain
. alone Hi a strange and hostUe city that he might send his com
panion to aid them and bring news of them.
This forms the true body of the Epistle, and the rest is
supplementary, as is shown by the connecting phrase " Further
more," or, as the Revised Version more accurately has it,
"FinaUy, then." In this supplement the Apostle admonishes
his readers to hold fast to the commandments of the Lord which
he had made known to them, and especiaUy to beware of un-
chastity, Httle as it might be thought of among their heathen
friends (iv. 1 — 8). Of brotherly love he would not have spoken
had not some manifestations of their spHit endangered that love ;
he exhorts them, therefore, to increase in love, and to study to
be quiet, and to earn tlieir own bread (iv. 9 — 1 2). And as it
was the expectation of the Lord's coming which had led some to
give up theH ordinary employments, so the same expectation had
led them to curious and unwise questionings regarding the fate of
those who die before that event, and regarding the time at which
it is to be expected. These questionings St. Paul deprecates.
Those who die before the Lord's coming are at no disadvantage,
and the precise time no one can teU ; the children of Hght wiU
not be taken unawares (iv. 13 ; v. 11). The Epistle then passes
into a series of admonitions, not as a river loses itseH in a marsh,

480 BOOK BY BOOK.
for these admonitions are not abstract and random, but are
dHected pointedly at the actual conditions and needs of the
Thessalonians, and it concludes with the injunction that it be
publicly read.
6. The Question of Pauline Doctrine. — There is then in this
Epistle Httle affirmation of what is known as speciaUy PauUne
doctrine. " Of the inability of the natural man to work out his
own salvation, of the seat of sin Hi the flesh, of justification by
grace, or of community of Hfe with Christ mediated by His
SpHit, of the position of the Christian as regards the law, or of
the Apostle's profound reflections on the relation of Christianity
to Judaism and heathenism, we have not a word." From .this
fact it is commonly inferred that at the date of this Epistle the
theology of St. Paul had not attained that complete development
which it afterwards reached. That may be so, but the proof of
it can scarcely be found in this Epistle, in which he was address
ing a Church whose difficulties were practical and personal rather
than doctrinal. The constantly recurring theme of the. Epistle is
the Coming of the Lord (i. 10 ; U. 19 ; Hi. 13 ; v. 23).
The Church at Thessalonica was largely composed of GentUes,
and to Gentiles, as we see from the Apostle's speech at Athens,
appeal could most effectuaUy be made through conscience. St.
Paul set before the GentUes Jesus as the Lord appointed by God
to judge the world in righteousness ; and hence in this brief
Epistle it is mainly this aspect of the gospel he aUuded to.
" There are many reasons why the subject of the second advent
should occupy a larger space Hi the earliest stage of the Apos
tolical teaching than afterwards. It was closely bound up with
the fundamental fact of the gospel, the resurrection of Christ,
and thus it formed a natural starting point of Christian doctrine.
It afforded the true satisfaction to those Messianic hopes which
had drawn the Jewish converts to the fold of Christ. It was the
best consolation and support of the infant Church under perse
cution, which must have been most keenly felt in the first aban
donment of worldly pleasures and interests ; more especiaUy, as
telling of a righteous Judge who would not overlook iniquity, it
was essential to that caU to repentance which must everywhere
precede the direct and positive teaching of the gospel " (Bishop
Lightfoot). 7. The Second Epistle. — The Second Epistle to the Thessalonians
was evoked by a misunderstanding of some expressions used in
the First, and was probably written a few months after it, and
certainly while Paul, SUas, and Timothy were stiU together at
Corinth. These brethren are included with the Apostle in the
inscription of the Epistle. The aUusion in c. iii. 1, 2, to opposition

FIRST AND SECOND EPISTLES TO THE THESSALONIANS. 481
which was being made to their work agrees very well with the ;
account given Hi Acts xviii. 12, of the disturbances in Corinth
which resulted in the appeal to the Proconsul. Grotius, indeed,
maintained that this so-called Second Epistle was in reality the
FHst, and Hi this idea he is foUowed by Ewald, Renan, and
other critics ; but there is reaUy no plausibility Hi such a sup
position. The Second Epistle not only presupposes, but expressly refers
to the FHst (u. 15). In the First the aUusions to St Paul's recent
work in Thessalonica are, as was natural, abundant and vivid ;
in the Second such aUusions are rare. The Parousia, which is
spoken of as imminent in the FHst Epistle, is in the Second more
guardedly, though more definitely, explained. The hostility of
the Jews, which at the date of the earlier Epistle had begun to
make itseH felt, has at the date of the Second become formidable.
8. The Object of the Writer. — The object of this Epistle was
to remove some misunderstandings of what Paul had said in
his previous letter regarding the coming of the Lord. The
Thessalonians had received the impression that " the day of
Christ was at hand " (U. 2), and in consequence they had on
the one hand been perplexed to find that the months went by
without any fulfilment of this expectation, and on the other
hand they were led into idle and disorderly conduct. That
they were stUl exposed to persecution, and found no relief from
the manifestation of the Lord, St. Paul assures them is only a
more certain proof that a manHestation for the judgment of their
enemies and for theH deUverance wiU one day take place (i. 4
— 12). And as they are not to be disturbed by theH; continued
suffering, so neither are they to be disturbed hy the non-inter
vention of the Lord's judgment, as H this had been definitely
predicted as speedily to take place. For much must first take
place ; lawlessness must eome to a head in a person before the
personal coining of Christ destroys it (ii. 1 — 12). They them
selves were chosen to salvation, which they should attain by
holding fast what he had taught them (ii. 13 — 17). After asking
their prayers he concludes by giving them stringent instructions
regarding such members of theH Church as walked disorderly,
being carried away by the expectation of the Second Coming.
9. Authenticity. — The authenticity of this Epistle has frequently
been caUed in question. Weiss says that " the rejection of the
Second Epistle has become almost as universal in the modern
critical school as the recognition of the First." This rejection bases
itseH on two grounds. It is thought that the view taken of the
Parousia Hi the one Epistle disagrees with that taken in the
other. The FHst Epistle speaks of it as imminent; the Second

482 BOOK BY BOOK.
as not immediate. But on more careful examination of the First
Epistle it is found that it is rather the suddenness than the im
mediacy of the Parousia that is urged, and that St. Paul expHcitly
declines to say anything of the times and seasons.
The other ground of rejection is found in the apocalyptic
language of the second chapter. It is maintained that the
esehatology of this chapter is not the eschatology of Paul, but is
borrowed from the book of Revelation. The man of sin is sup
posed to be Nero, of whom it was beUeved that he had not died,
but was hidden in the East, and was destined to return. The
' ' withholder " is Vespasian ; and the Epistle must therefore have
been written about the year 68 or 70 a.d. Certainly if this be the
true interpretation of the passage it cannot have been -written by
Paul. But the actual circumstances in which Paul was placed,
as described in the Book of Acts, give us the key to the true
interpretation of the passage. It was from the Jews the chief
danger to the young Christian Church was to be apprehended.
It was by tbe Jews the Apostle himself had everywhere been
counterworked and assaUed ; and it was by them, also, that the
Thessalonians had been persecuted. The Jewish hostUity to the
Gospel was, however, held in check by the Roman magistracy ;
and wherever St. Paul went he had new proof that, without the
protection accorded to him and to his converts by imperial
authority and justice, the Christian Church would be crushed in
its infancy. , This Jewish anatocism Paul believed was to cuh
minate in an Antichrist, a false Messiah, necessarily a Jew,
who should head the anti-Christian movement, and only be
defeated by the appearance of Christ HimseH. These expecta
tions were derived from the eschatological discourses of the Lord
Himself ; and the expressions and phraseology in which they
were embodied find theH roots in these discourses and in the
Book of Daniel. It is quite true that such ideas seem incon
gruous in Paul's writings, for in general he has httle to say of
such subjects ; but compeUed, as he Hi this instance was, to
aUude to the future of Judaism and Christianity, there is nothing
in what he says which indicates later date or ideas which con
tradict his known opinions.

THE EPISTLES OF PAUL THE APOSTLE
. TO
TIMOTHY AND TITUS.
1. Authorship. — When any book arrests our attention, we
begin to feel an interest in the author. What manner of man,
we ask, was he who put down those words which seem to live
and which have such power to move our hearts ? This is a
natural question ; and with the answer to it comes renewed
interest Hi the book. As we know something of the writer, the
significance of his words and phrases is found to deepen and
widen. Our attention becomes more sympathetic. We hear as
it were a human voice behind the words. The writer has been
brought nearer to us ; and our hearts kindle with the conscious
ness of personal friendliness.
But it should be remembered that the value of the book was
established in our minds before our curiosity concerning its
authorship was awakened. We may indeed read a book which
was written by a friend, and we may be tempted to give it a
fictitious value because of our friendship ; but the great works
of the world have not been treated thus. They have made theH
way in the world without the support of patronage or the par
tiality of friendship. They were theH own patrons : theH value
to the minds and souls of men is in one sense whoUy apart from
their authorship. We are not interested in the book because of
its author : we are interested in the author because of the book-
We have only to recaU the books which have made good their
hold upon humanity to feel the truth of this statement. The
"Imitationof Christ" has had a cHculation beyond aU other
books, except the Bible. The question of the authorship can
hardly be considered as absolutely answered. The force of the
book awakens the interest in the writer. The "Iliad," by its
own colossal worth, claimed a world-wide fame, and thus called
forth the contest between the cities which claimed the honour of
n2.

484 BOOK BY BOOK.
being the author's bUthplace. The Bible itself gives illustra
tions of this principle. Ecclesiastes and Job stir our interest
and curiosity to know something of their writers ; but their
true value remains whether the question of authorship can be
answered or not.
We turn to these Pastoral Epistles. They have a value apart
from their authorship. Doubtless there are reasons why the
question of authorship must impart special significance and
importance to these letters ; but it is a mistake to treat them as
though they had not a value independent of the writer. We need
only open the Epistles and read to convince ourselves of theH
value. The end of the charge is love out of a pure heart and a good
conscience and faith unfeigned (1 Tim. i. 5).
Faithful is the saying and worthy of all acceptation, that Christ
Jesus came into this world to save sinners (1 Tim. i. 15).
Every creature of God is good, and nothmg is to be rejected,
if it be received with thanksgiving ; for it is sanctified through
the word of God and prayer (1 Tim. iv. 4, 5).
God gave us not a spHit of fearfulness, but of power and
love and discipline (2 Tim. i. 7).
Howbeit the firm foundation of God standeth, having this
seal, The Lord knoweth them that are His : and, Let every one
that nameth the name of the Lord depart from unrighteousness
(2 Tim. ii. 19).
When the kindness of God our Saviour and His love toward
man appeared, not by works done in righteousness, which we did
ourselves, but aceording to His mercy, He saved us through the
washing of regeneration and renewing of the Holy Ghost which
He poured upon us richly through Jesus Christ our Lord (Titus
iii. 4—6).
Words such as these carry a message to the heart and the
conscience. We do not need to ask who wrote them. TheH
message is for us. The truths they embody are independent of
author or of age. They Hve on the pages of these Epistles for
the eternal help of humankind. They are messages from Heaven
to earth. The human hand that wrote them down was, we think,
St. Paul's, but, even were it another's, the messages would remain,
and they would speak with abiding force to the hearts of the
sons of men. ' ' The reHgious consciousness which was quickened
by the words of prophets and apostles in turn ratified their
writings." The profit which we may gain from the study of these letters
is not whoUy lost by reason of any doubts thrown upon theH
authorship.

EPISTLES OF PAUL THE APOSTLE TO TIMOTHY AND TITUS. 485
But our interest may be lessened and the range of their
authoritativeness diminished. It is, therefore, our duty next to
enquUe somewhat about the writer.
2. Could St. Paul home written these Epistles? — Here first a
question arises which we may caU the biographical problem. It
has been said that, on biographical grounds, it is impossible
that St. Paul could have written these letters. It may be con
ceded that the question has its difficulties. The arguments on
both sides may be likened to two threads, both of which are
sUght, but theH relative strength is best tested when it is asked
which, of them can the better bear the strain put upon them.
The opponents of the Epistles ground theH opinions on the
difficulty of finding a place and time for the writing of these
Epistles in the IHe of St. Paul. This difficulty depends upon
another question. Was St. Paul released after his captivity
recorded in the Acts ? If he was not released, he did not write
these Epistles ; for, Hi these Epistles, he speaks of journeys
which can only have been taken after such a release. The record
in the Acts of the Apostles cannot be considered complete as far
as it goes. It leaves no room for a journey to Crete, for instance.
St. Paul's release is a fact which is necessary, therefore, H we
are to accept these Epistles as genuine. Now the Acts of the
Apostles leaves us in doubt. The last scene with which it pre
sents us is that of St. Paul Hi his hired house under the surveU-
lance of the soldier who guarded him. We are told that this
state of things lasted two years. Are we at hberty, when the
book ends with such a description of the Apostle's position, to
make any conjectures or to draw any inferences ?
We are, I think, at Hberty to infer that at the close of the two
years some change in the Apestle's position occurred. Now,
only two conjectures concerning the nature of such a change are
(as far as I can see) admissible. His position was changed
either for the better or for the worse. The better could only be
release ; the worse could only be the severer custody foUowed
sooner or later by martyrdom. It is hard to believe that, if the
latter had been the case, the writer of the Acts would not have
said so. Of course, circumstances might have made it impossible ;
but yet there is a probabUity that, having been able to record
the two years' imprisonment, he had the opportunity of adding
the very few words whieh would teU of the great Apostle's final
trial and martyr-triumph.
But he added nothing. Does his sUence imply that the
Apostle's condition was bettered when the two years were accom
plished ? The only bettering was release. But if the imprison
ment ended in release, aU the Apostle's friends knew of it, for

486 BOOK BY BOOK.
he was among them ; and this being the case, there was no caU
upon St. Luke to add a word more.
The matter, therefore, stands thus :— If he had opportunity of
adding more, and yet was content to leave his narrative incom
plete, his silence is explicable only on the assumption of a release.
On the other hand it is only on the assumption that the writer had
no opportunity of adding a word that we can explain his sUence,
supposing the Apostle passed from imprisonment to death.
Hence Hi proportion to the probability that the writer had the
chance of writing more, is the probability of the Apostle's
release. If death cut the writer's Hfe short; — if such cHcum
stances occurred whieh made writing impossible, then these two
chances of a release or of worsened lot remain where they were
— unknown, and, so far, equal chances. But H the writer was
free to write, and did not write more, it can only have been
because it was needless, seeing that the Apostle had been restored
to the Churches of God, which he had founded and fostered.
At this point the general impression and opinion of early
tunes may legitimately help us. The Acts of the Apostles does
not negative this theory of a release. It leaves the door open to
a faint supposition in favour of the theory ; and we find, as a fact,
there were in early times those who believed that such a release
took place. The balance, therefore, moved perhaps by smaU
weights, drops with some decisiveness in the direction of the
release theory. Again, the very existence of these Pastoral
Epistles (whether written by St. Paul or not) is in favour of the
theory ; no writer would have written letters Hi the name of the
Apostle, and connected them with a time when the Apostle was
known to be dead.
On the whole, then, it seems faU to say that the probabUity is
that the Apostle was released, and that there was a period of bis
Ufe in which he could have written these Pastoral Epistles.
3. External Evidence of Authorship. — A few words must be said
respecting the external evidence. The external authority is
strong, and it is unquestionably in favour of their genuineness.
It is beheved that in early times they were rejected by some
heterodox teachers — such, for instance, as Basilides ; but what
ever importance might attach to this fact (if it be a fact) is
neutralized when we learn that the rejection of these letters was
not due to any Hterary or critical evidence against them, but to
doctrinal prejudice.
Dean Alford wrote : — "There never was the slightest doubt
in the ancient Church that the Epistles to Timothy and Titus
were canonical, and written by St. Paul." AU external authority
confirms this statement. We have not space for individual

EPISTLES OF PAUL THE APOSTLE TO TIMOTHY AND TITUS. 487
quotations, but the foUowing wiU iUustrate the general posi
tion. Irenaeus quotes from these Epistles, and quotes them as the
Apostle's, using the phrase — "As the Apostle says," or, "As
•Paul commands." Clement of Alexandria quotes these Epistles
frequently : he recognises them as St. Paul's, and explains that
Basilides rejected them on doctrinal grounds. TertuUian's
evidence is in the same dHection. The Peshito- Syriac Version
contains the Epistles, and they are recognised in the Mercatorian
Fragment. In addition to these witnesses, phrases and words
occur Hi Clement of Rome, Ignatius, Polycarp, Hegesippus,
Athenagoras, which imply an acquaintance with these Epistles.
One Ulustration of the evidential value of this early acquain
tance with these Epistles may be of interest. In the Epistle
which Clement ' addressed in the name of the Roman Christians
to the Corinthian Church, three names are mentioned (Ep. ad
Cor.), Claudius Ephebus, Valerius Bito, and Fortunatus. These
men are described as "faithful and prudent men who have
walked among us from youth unto old age unblameably." Men
who have reached " old age " must be able to carry back their
memories over thHty or forty years at least. The date of the
Epistle in which they are mentioned is a.d. 95. TheH recollec
tion must have reached back to the imprisonment of St. Paul.
St. Paul must have been a venerable memory to such men.
Whatever writings of his remained would be cherished : forged
writings claiming his name would hardly escape denunciation,
especiaUy if they dealt largely with names of those who must
have been personaUy known to these Roman Christians. In any
case, a forged or doubtful letter of the great Apostle would hardly
be used, or its phrases used with approval.
But Hi this very letter to the Corinthian Church, whieh was
carried to Corinth by men who must have known St. Paul,
aUusions to the Pastoral Epistles are found. We can hear the
echoes of famiUar phrases. We hear ofthe "Hfting up of holy
hands," of walking in "witness of Spirit" (cf. 1 Tim. ii. 8). and
we are reminded that our Lord and Master is " King of the
Ages" (cf. 1 Tim. i. 17). It is difficult not to feel that these
expressions came naturaUy to the writer, and are used as phrases
which reverent affection delights to employ. Of course it is quite
conceivable that such words carry memories of St. Paul's teach
ing whUe he was at Rome. They may have been heard from
his lips by the Roman Christians, and so they may have been
familiar to them not through the Pastoral Epistles, but through
his ministry among them. But the occurrence of such famiUar
phrases, taken in conjunction with the undoubted opmion of the

488 BOOK BY BOOK.
earliest times, must be aUowed as a factor in the problem, and
its value must be counted on the side of the Pauline authorship
of the Epistles. Thus as far as external authority is concerned,
the matter stands thus : These Epistles were known Hi very
early times, and early accepted as St. Paul's.
4. Internal Evidence of Authorship. — The internal evidence must
be considered. The language is said to be unhke that of St.
Paul's other writings. There are in the First Epistle to Timothy
no less than seventy-four words not used elsewhere. The Second
Epistle has forty-six such words, and that to Titus forty-eight.
This means that the peculiar words bear a proportion of about
4 to 4£ per cent, of the number of words used. It would be an
interesting enquHy to search out the percentage of peculiar words
used in the various works of other writers. PersonaUy I somewhat
distrust these arithmetical calculations respecting literary subjects.
A man's vocabulary, no doubt, is hmited, but in no work is he
likely to exhaust his whole vocabulary. He may be described as
a ship at anchor or as an animal tethered, and the area in which
the ship can float at anchor, or over which the animal can graze,
wiU represent his vocabulary ; but neither does the ship float
always on the same side of its anchor, nor does the animal feed
oVer the same grass. The one swings with the tide, the other
varies his pasture; and writers draw from one storehouse of
their vocabulary at one time and unlock another storehouse at
another time.
Further the analogy is not wholly true, for the ship cannot
stretch its cable nor the animal its rope, but man can enlarge the
range of his vocabulary ; and this is especially the case with men
whose Hves are spent in traveUing and in frequent converse with
men of different classes, occupations, and nationalities. At each
stage of his journey he picks up new words or rehabUitates old
ones. From the sailors he wUl gather nautical phrases ; from
the shopmen the language of commerce, from the lawyer the
judicial phrases. More than this, his varying experiences wiU
suggest new illustrations of his favourite thoughts, and these in
their turn wUl generate new phrases or special forms of expres
sion. To a man of active mind and observing habits, Hfe is a
perpetual enrichment of his vocabulary. And none wiH deny
the varied experience, the mental vigour, the penetrating powers
of observation of St. Paul.
He had a pliancy of disposition which was a kind of genius in
its way. In the time of the shipwreck, he steps into a position
of almost supremacy ; he has won the confidence of the sailors
and he has estabUshed himself in the favour of the centurion.
Do we not feel that the Apostle who wrought with the men of his

EPISTLES OF PAUL THE APOSTLE TO TIMOTHY AND TITUS. 489
craft as a tent-maker, was just the kind of man who would mingle
as freely as he could among the crew of his ship, and whUe seek
ing the good of the men, glean up many a saUor's phrase, and
gain a sympathetic knowledge of his companions' work ? To
Buch a man every journey would mean enlargement of knowledge
and enrichment of language. And the statistics of his language
bear this out. It is not in the Pastoral Epistles alone that we
find this exuberance of language and the use of pecuHar words.
In the Epistle to the Romans there are one hundred and eleven
peculiar words ; one hundred and eighty-six in 1 and 2 Corin
thians; fifty-seven in Galatians, and fifty-four in PhUippians.
With these figures before us, and bearing in mind the activity
and versatility of the Apostle's mind, the objections raised on
the ground of language become, to say the least, of doubtful
value. 5. Alleged Doctrinal Discrepancies. — It is further urged that
the theological position in these Epistles differs from that taken
up in those letters which are the undoubted works of St. Paul.
"Faith, which in Paul's view had been the subjective act of the
surrender of the heart to Christ, acquires now a completely
objective, dogmatic significance ; it is sometimes soundness of
belief, or submission to the form of teaching sanctioned by the
Church ; at others it is really identified with that teaching and
so becomes thus doctrinal behef {fides quce creditur), which
aHeady begins to be definitely fixed in formula as a regula fidei,
after the manner of creeds. . . . Faith consists simply Hi a
dogmatic assent to the doctrine of the Church : it can no longer
of itself bring justification, but requHes to be supplemented by
love and other virtues ; further, though at first the meritorious-
ness of good works is denied, they acquire even greater signifi
cance and value, so that the FHst Epistle to Timothy is able to
see in them a great foundation and degree of salvation."
On this we may remark that the scientific aspect (H we may
use the phrase) of Christianity and its administrative order
would be naturaUy given a prominence in those Epistles whieh
are addressed to an official of the Church. A man necessarily
varies the tone of his language, and of the order of his thoughts
as he addresses different classes. But, further, even aUowing
for this, I think that the passage which I have quoted gives a
somewhat harsh view of the position adopted in the Pastoral
Epistles. . Take the single word faith. This, it is said, has Hi
the Pastoral Epistles lost its subjective meaning, and has found
a dogmatic one. It is fides quce creditur. It is true that the word
faith is used in these Epistles Hi this sense, but not in aU the
passages which are cited in support of the theory advanced. If

490 BOOK BY BOOK.
we admit that the writer • speaks of the faith, we find that he is
also earnest in speaking of faith in the hearts of the people.
Reference is made by Pfleiderer to ten passages — 1 Tim. i.
4, 5, 19 ; ii. 7 ; Hi. 9 ; iv. 1, 6 ; vi. 10, 21 ; Tit. i. 4. It wUl not
be lost time to touch upon them. Of these ten passages, three
certainly are used without any such necessary dogmatic signifi
cance, and two appear to me to be at least doubtful. The
remaining five suggest the thought of the symbohsm of faith —
the creed. But if this be the state of the case, where is the
ground for saying that the old subjective use of the word has
disappeared and that inteUectual assent has taken the place of a
faith whieh is the grasp of the heart ? It was perfectly natural
that the grasp of the heart upon the Lord who redeemed it
should define and describe itseH, and that faith should find
expression Hi the faith ; but neither is the faith a new element
found first in these Epistles, and not discoverable elsewhere in
St. Paul's writings, nor has the old subjective and personal
sense of the word been forgotten or left out of sight here.
Further, it must not be overlooked that there is in these
Epistles a spirit of tolerance and the sagacity which recognizes
changed conditions. It is not fair to represent these letters as
though they were the sapless directions of a man who had lost
the warmth and moisture of life, and was content with the hard,
dry outline of what once had been living and luxuriant growth.
There are, it is true, signs that Christianity has become more
apparent : the necessity for order, for government, and for disci
pHne, has become apparent ; but with this necessity there has
arisen another, which could not have been perceived by one who
had faUen under the yoke of an unethical dogmatism.
The new necessity is the necessity of more humane views of
the order of Hfe, and larger thoughts .concerning the work of
Christianity in the world. There are a number of questions which
fill men's minds and tongues whieh the writer dismisses as
indifferent and valueless. One thing is the beginning and end
of all — charity, out of a pure conscience and of faith unfeigned
(1 Tim. i. 5 — 7). It is because men have forgotten this supreme
ethical goal of teaching that divisions of opinion and Urespon-
sible dogmatists have arisen. The line of demarcation between
the Church and the world is not to be made darker and broader.
AU, whether they have accepted formaUy the teaching of Christ
or not, are to be viewed as objects of prayer and intercession,
because all are dear to the heart of God. " I exhort that suppH-
cations, prayers, intercessions, and giving of thanks be made for
aU men — for kings and for all that are in authority . . . for
this is good and acceptable in the sight of God our Saviour who

EPISTLES OF PAUL THE APOSTLE TO TIMOTHY AND TITUS. 491
wUl have aU men to be saved " (1 Tim. ii. 1 — 4) ; and in the
same spHit the writer says later that God is "the Saviour of aU
men." In this latter case, he is defending society against the spirit
of extravagant asceticism which he foresees will develop with
the growth of ecclesiastical pride. Men wiH come to look upon
external matters as making the difference between man and
man. Marriage wiU be forbidden, and questions of bodily exer
cise wiU occupy men's attention. It will be forgotten that the
inward spHit of godliness is of the first importance. Men may
differ much in outward action. Many things are indifferent, but
the spHit in which they are done is of measureless importance.
Godliness is profitable unto aU things. Every creature of God
is good and nothing to be refused, if it be received with thanks
giving (1 Tim. iv. 4). The one thing to be dreaded is the outward
form without the inward life (2 Tun. iii. 5). The real foundation
of men's spiritual hfe is inward — spiritual and ethical — not
external (2 Tim. ii. 19). Outwardly there wiU always be variety.
Vessels of various forms, materials, and uses will be found in
the Master's house. To be a clean vessel and serviceable is the
matter of main importance for each man's seH. For the rest,
the Master of the house must judge. Hereafter the division wiU
be made by Him who cannot err. For the present, the real caU
of the grace of God is- a caU to godliness, temperance, righteous
ness, to good works and not to profitless questions and contentions
(Titus H. 11 — 14 and iu. 8, 9). More might be said, but there
is enough here to show that the same ethical spirit which urged
the claims of righteousness, toleration, and charity elsewhere
(Gal. v. 16 sqq. ; Rom. vi. 11 sqq. 12, 18) is not wanting in these
Epistles. 6. The Balance of Critical Opinion. — But whatever may be said
on this subject, we are met with the frankest confessions of the
Pauline character of these letters. Thus Ewald, Pfleiderer,
and Hausrath see, in two passages of the Second Epistle to
Timothy (chap. i. 15 — 18, and iv. 9 — 21) genuine Pauline ele
ments. Renan, after having explicitly said that these three
Epistles were forged, proceeds to say, " Some passages in these
three Epistles are also so beautiful that the question might be
asked whether the forger had not some authentic letters of St.
Paul in his possession which he embodied in his apocryphal
compositions." (" The Christian Church," chap, vi., p. 52, in the
Enghsh translation.) In other words, the force of St. Paul's
hand is felt. It is like the question of the genuineness of a
picture. The hand of the master is recognised somewhere even
by those who cannot accept it as completely genuine.

492 BOOK BY BOOK.
On the whole, then, the result is this : The biographical diffi
culties are great, but they cannot be called decisive against the
Pauline authorship of these letters. The hypothesis that the
letters were forgeries is beset by still greater difficulties. The
external evidence is whoUy on the side of the genuineness ; and
the Hnguistic argument cannot be quoted as decisive against it.
The historical argument, grounded on the allusions to certain
heretical notions and the ripe organisation of the Church evi
denced in the Epistles, has not the force which has been attri
buted to them. The heretical notions may be shown to be
aUuded to elsewhere in St. Paul's genuine writings ; and the
argument based on Church organisation, is, I think, largely
iUusory. Space forbids me to enter further into these questions. It will
at any rate be some consolation to those who have found Hi these
Epistles much teaching and refreshment to know that the influ
ence of St. Paul is recognised in these letters even by those who
wiH not acknowledge that they are St. Paul's. We can stUl
listen to the old Apostle declaring his unshaken faith and his
experience of the unfailing help of his Master. The Lord stood
with me and strengthened me. The Lord shaU deHver me from
every evU work and will preserve me unto his heavenly kingdom ;
to whom be glory for ever and ever. Amen.

THE EPISTLE OF PAUL
TO
PHILEMON.
1. Character ofthe Epistle. — The place of the Epistle to Phile
mon among the New Testament books has been compared to the
position of Ruth among those of the Old Testament. It is " an
idyl of domestic life," in which we escape from the storm of con
troversy. Timothy is associated with Paul in the greeting, and
formaUy the letter is addressed to the Church of which Philemon
was a member ; but reaUy it is a private letter from Paul to
PhUemon. The others may have been included in the address
because Paul wished that Onesimus should not merely be rein
stated in Philemon's household, but should be admitted to the
feUowship of the Church.
Of PhUemon nothing is known beyond what may be gathered
from this letter and that to the Colossians, unless we accept as
additional information the statement of Theodoret that he saw
Philemon's house in Colossae. That he was resident in Colossae
appears from Col. iv. 9. He had been brought to the Christian
faith by Paul (19), and had become a prominent and useful mem
ber of the Church (4 — 7), if not its founder (ep. Col. ii. 1, and
PhUemon 1). His wife, Appia, was also a Christian, and Archip-
pus is commonly supposed to have been their son, and was cer
tainly an active member of the Church (Col. iv. 17).
2. Occasion and Purpose. — The occasion of the letter was pecu
liar. Onesimus, one of PhUemon' s slaves, had committed some
delinquency, possibly, as Dr. Abbott suggests, an unpreme
ditated theft (cp. 18), and had absconded. NaturaUy he turned
his face to Rome, to which every road led, and where hiding
could best be secured, and a new Hfe most readUy entered.
Whether impeUed by want or by curiosity,' or by weariness of
wrong-doing, or perhaps by mere accident, he met with Paul, and
was arrested by his words. To the Ufe in Christ opened to him by
Paul he gave himseH cordiaUy, and with his slave's handiness

494 BOOK BY BOOK.
soon made himself so useful that the Apostle parted with him
reluctantly (11 — 14). But to retain him Paul feels would be to
steal him, or at any rate to deprive PhUemon of the pleasure of
voluntarily sending him to assist and minister to him (14). Be
sides, it would be better both for Onesimus and for PhUemon
that the penitent and Christianised slave should return to his
master. Accordingly he is sent with this exquisitely worded
letter which, if he heard it read, or himseH wrote it as Paul's
amanuensis, must have shown him that his forgiveness was a
foregone conclusion.
The delicacy, courtesy, and right feeling exhibited in the letter
have again and again been remarked upon. After quoting the
very similar letter of the younger Phny, Bishop Lightfoot pro
ceeds to compare the two, and says : " The younger Pliny is the
noblest type of a true Roman gentleman, and this touching letter
needs no words of praise. Yet, if purity of diction be excepted,
there wiH hardly be any difference of opmion Hi awarding the
palm to the Christian Apostle. As an expression of simple dig
nity, of refined courtesy, of large sympathy, and of warm personal
affection, the Epistle to Philemon stands unrivaUed." A play
fulness too, which rarely had opportunity Hi Paul's Hfe of coming
to the surface, appears in the eleventh verse. " Onesimus (Pro
fitable) who was to thee Hi time past unprofitable, but now pro
fitable to thee and to me ; " and even more obviously in verse
twenty, "Tea, brother, may I be profited by thee in the Lord."
3. Authenticity.— The authenticity of this note is undoubted.
It was included in the first coUection of Pauline writings, which
was made by Marcion about the year 140 a.d. Baur, indeed,
was compeUed, by his rejection of Colossians, whose authenticity
is imphcated with that of PhUemon, to reject this Epistle also,
but he was conscious of the awkwardness of his position and
apologizes for it. "In the case of this Epistle," he says, "more
than any other, if criticism should inquUe for evidence Hi favour
of its apostoHc name, it seems Hable to the reproach of hyper-
criticism, of exaggerated suspicion, of restless doubt, from the
attacks of which nothing is safe. What has criticism to do with
this short, attractive, friendly letter, inspired as it is by the
noblest Christian feehng, and which has never yet been touched
by the breath of suspicion?" Notwithstanding this freedom
from suspicion the letter is assaUed by Baur, who supposes it was
intended as a romance from which readers might learn that what
was lost in the world was recovered in Christianity, and that for
ever. It might also serve to Ulustrate the manner in which
slaves should be dealt with in the Church. Certainly if these
were the writer's purposes, he lost his labour, for the early

THE EPISTLE OF PAUL TO PHILEMON. 495
Church took very slight notice of the Epistle, and did not draw
from it these lessons.
4. Effect of the Epistle. — That the Epistle to Philemon had any
considerable effect Hi ameUorating the condition of slaves, or in
accomplishing theH emancipation, was not to be expected. From
the first, slaves were freely admitted into the Church, and some
of them rose to office in it. Their servUe condition was no bar
to their admission to Church privileges, whUe of some of these
privUeges it greatly enhanced the value. But as a general rule
Christian masters retained theH slaves in slavery, although the
force of Christ's spirit taught them to deal more justly and ten
derly with them, and graduaUy it came to be considered a reli
gious act to emancipate or ransom slaves. But no general
emancipation was thought of untU the ninth century. Indeed
the Church herseH frequently held slaves as ecclesiastical pro
perty. The emancipation of slaves and other great social changes
have been effected not by edicts issued by Christ and his Apostles,
but by the gradual and inevitable pervasion of the whole of
human hfe by the spHit of Christ.

THE EPISTLE OF PAUL THE APOSTLE

HEBREWS.
1. Author. — An ordinary reader of the Bible would notice that
the Epistle to the Hebrews is separated from the Epistles written
by St. Paul to other Churches by those which he addressed to
individuals ; and he would perhaps observe that neither the name
of the writer nor of the readers is found in it. But the title
supphes the information, and the subscription at the end further
states that it was written from Italy (and sent) by .(the hand of)
Timothy. He would not suspect that the facts which had attracted
his attention raise some of the most difficult questions connected
with the books of the New Testament.
(i.) The antiquity of the Epistle is remarkably attested. There
is repeated reference to it in St. Clement's Epistle to the Corin
thians, written before the end of the first century — a fact noticed
by Eusebius, E. H. iii. 38. Clement does not name any book
of the New Testament except, Hi one place, St. Paul's (first)
Epistle to the Corinthians. But he adopts the language of our
Epistle more than that of any of the others. One instance wUl
show how he makes use of it. " Through him the Master wiUed
that we should taste of immortal knowledge ; Who being the bright
ness of His Majesty is so much greater than the Angels, as He hath
inherited a more excellent name. For so it is written ; Who maketh
His angels spirits, and His ministers aflame of fire ; but of His
Son the Master said thus : Thou art My Son, I this day have
begotten Thee. Ask of Me, and I will give Thee the heathen for Thine
inheritance, and the ends of the earth for Thy possession. Amd again
He said unto Him; Sit Thou on My right hand, until I make
Thine enemies a footstool for Thy feet (36)." This anonymous use
of the Epistle is continued by Justin Martyr about the middle
of the second century, and somewhat later in a fragment of
Pinytus of Crete — Eusebius, E. H. iv. 23.

EPISTLE OF PAUL THE APOSTLE TO THE HEBREWS. 497
The first distinct mention is in Clement of Alexandria, a.d. 165
— 220, who ascribes it to St. Paul, and often quotes it. But
Eusebius records (E. H. vi. 14) from one of his lost works his
modification of St. Paul's authorship, as far as regards the form
in which we have it. " Clement, in his Outlines, to speak generaUy,
has given concise explanations of aU the Canonical Scriptures.
. . . And, moreover, he says that the Epistle to the Hebrews is
Paul's, but that it was written to the Hebrews in the Hebrew
dialect, and that Luke, having carefuUy translated it, published
it for the use of the Greeks. And that it is owing to the fact
that he translated it that the complexion of this Epistle and that
of the Acts is found to be the same. Further he remarks that, it'
is natural that the phrase Paul an Apostle does not occur in the
Subscription, for in writing to the Hebrews, who had conceived
a prejudice against him, he was wise in not repelHng them at the
beginning by affixing His name. And then, a Httle further on,
he adds : and as the blessed presbyter before now used to say,
since the Lord as bemg the Apostle of the Almighty, was sent
unto the Hebrews, Paul, through his modesty, inasmuch as he
was sent to the GentUes, does not inscribe himseH Apostle of the
Hebrews, both on account of the honour due to the Lord and
because it was a work of supererogation that he addressed an
Epistle to the Hebrews also, since he was herald and apqstle to
the GentUes." The " blessed presbyter " spoken of is prpbably
Pantaenus, Clement's predecessor as head of the Catechetical
School of Alexandria. This carries the tradition of St. Paul's
bemg the writer a long way back towards the Apostolic age.
Clement receives if and passes it on, adding the statement about
St. Luke, whether from tradition or as his own conjecture.
Origen succeeded Clement in his office, and Eusebius teUs
us how he expressed himseH on the subject. " In addition to
these statements he (Origen) thus discusses the Epistle to the
Hebrews in his HomUies upon it : Every one who is competent
to judge of differences of diction would acknowledge that the
style of the Epistle entitled To the Hebrews does not exhibit
the Apostle's rudeness and simplicity in speech, though he
acknowledged himseH to be simple in his speech, that is in his
diction ; but it is more truly Greek in its composition. And
again, that the thoughts of. the Epistle are wonderful, and not
second to the acknowledged writings of the Apostle, every one
who pays attention to the reading of the Apostle's works would
also grant to be true. And, after other remarks, he adds : "Ljj_
I were to express my own opinion, I should say that the thoughts
are the Apostle's, but the diction and composition that of some
one who recorded from memory the Apostle's teaching, and, as

498 BOOK BY BOOK.
it were, Ulustrated with a brief commentary the sayings of his
Master. If, then, any Church hold this Epistle to be Paul's,
we cannot find fault with it for so doing ; for it was not without
good reason that the men of old time have handed it down as
Paul's. But who it was who wrote the Epistle, God only knows
certainly. The account which has reached us is [manifold], some
saying that Clement, who became Bishop of Rome, wrote it, while
others assign it to Luke, author of the Gospel and the Acts." —
E. H. vi. 25. Here Origen goes beyond Clement of Alexandria
in giving it as his opmion that the writer was not St. Paul, but
one of his scholars, the teaching being identical, so that it might
be said to be ultimately his. Accordingly, in his own quotations
he speaks of it as a writing of Paul or " the Apostle." In this
sense the Church of Alexandria continued to accept it. Eusebius
himseH agreed with Clement that Paul wrote it in Hebrew, but
he was incHned to think that Clement of Rome was its translator
— E. H. iii. 98.
The Pauline authorship was assumed, apparently without
entering further into the matter, by the other Greek Fathers of
the fourth century. Thus, in aU the Greek Churches of the
East, it seems to have been always recognised as Canonical,.
deriving its authority directly or mdirectly from St. Paul. Simi
larly, in the native Syrian Church it was included among the
Canonical Books in the old version (Peshito), but it found a
place after Philemon, and was not attributed to St. Paul in the
Title or Subscription ; while Jacob of Nisibis in the earHer and
Ephrem Syrus in the later part of the fourth century treat it as a
writing of St. Paul.
(H.) The history of its reception in the Western Church is very
different. We have seen the high estimation in whieh it was held
by Clement of Rome. After him there followed a long silence
about it. The testimony of Irenaeus, though writing in Gaul in
the latter part of the second century, strictly belongs to the
Church of Asia Minor, whence he came in his youth. Eusebius
teUs us that he mentioned the Epistle Hi one of his works and
quoted from it, and a few coincidences of language are found
in his extant writings, but he was said not to have considered
that St. Paul was the author. Of those who strictly belonged
to the Latin Churches TertuUian is the first who mentions it by
name. He does so in one place only (de Pudic. 20), and then
not as the writing of Paul, but Barnabas, assigning it a secondary
authority, which shows that it had no place Hi the Canon of the
Church of North Africa. And this is tbe more remarkable
because the passage quoted is vi. 4 — 8, which at first sight
favours his Montanist views, so tha,t he would have every

EPISTLE OF PAUL THE APOSTLE TO THE HEBREWS. 499
inducement to claim the highest possible authority for the
Epistle. It was not quoted by Novatian nor St. Cyprian. Eusebius
mentions its rejection by the Church of Rome in his own day —
E. H. iU. 3. It is not before the middle of the fourth century
that we find it used by Western writers, first by Hilary of Poitiers,
and subsequently by St. Ambrose and Philastrius of Brescia.
These writers speak of the support which the Novatians affected
to derive from it, which may have encouraged Church writers in
theH disinclination to acknowledge it. But new influences had
now set Hi. The Arian Controversy made the different parts pf
the Church better acquainted with each other, and the Western
divines were impressed by the recognition of the Epistle which
they found in the East.
In a.d. 397 it was reckoned as St. Paul's along with his
thirteen Epistles Hi the Canon of the ThHd CouncU of Carthage.
Jerome and Augustine lent theH powerful help in the same
direction, treating the Epistle as possessed of the authority of
St. Paul, though not conceaUng the uncertainty of themselves
and others as to the degree in which he was its actual author.
After theH time it came into fuU recognition everywhere, and
was mostly thought to have been written by St. Paul.
(Hi.) Enough has been said about its canonicity, but we must
pursue the question of authorship. It arose again at the time
of the Reformation. Erasmus and Cajetan on the one side, and
Luther and Calvin on the other, were satisfied that it was not
written by St. Paul. The chief reasons for not assigning it to
him are : ( 1 ) The improbability that he would write to a Church
the members of which to a great extent regarded him with dis
like. (2) In ii. 3 the writer classes himseH along with his readers
among those who had received the Gospel at second-hand, from
those who had heard the Lord ; whereas St. Paul was accus
tomed to vindicate his authority by the direct revelation and
commission which he had received — cf . Gal. i. 1 ; ii. 2, 6. (3) The
difference of style, which in St. Paul 'shows no trace of art.
Speech was to him merely an instrument of expressing his
meaning Hi the readiest way, and consequently it was a reflection
of the impetuosity of his feeling and the rapid transitions of his
thought. The -writer of the Hebrews has a stately manner,
showing its cultivation Hi his most moving utterances. His
sentences are rhythmical and balanced, and his words carefully
chosen, frequently with a view to a pecuHar effect depending on
the repetition of sounds, whieh is lost in translation. (4) The
quotations in this Epistle are introduced in a different way
from St. Paul's; they are taken from the LXX., commonly
kk2

500 BOOK BY BOOK.
with exactness, and show Httle or no acquaintance with
Hebrew. St. Paul sometimes quotes from the LXX., sometimes
translates from the Hebrew, and often reHes on his memory.
(5) The Epistle shows a famUiarity with the Alexandrian tone
of thought, and probably with the writings of Philo Judaeus.
(6) The doctrinal agreement of this Epistle with St. Paul's
teaching is commonly admitted, but it differs from his mode of
presentation. St. Paul dweUs upon the Law and its having
become obsolete, not on ceremonial as the counterpart of Christ's
priestly work. The conception of Faith in c. xi. is distinct from
that of the Faith which justifies without the works of the Law.
The prominence which St. Paul gives to the Resurrection of our
Lord is not found here, and nothing is said about the admission
of the GentUes to the privileges of Israel. These arguments,
which have various degrees of weight, have prevaUed with the
greater number of the students of the Epistle.
But it would not be fair to an opinion so widely held in former
times to dismiss the question without Hstening to a reply. The
argument buUt on ii. 3, it is said, is not conclusive, for in his
speech at Antioch in Pisidia St. Paul speaks in the way which is
said to have been impossible (Acts xiii. 31, 32). His fear of
being unacceptable to the Hebrews was overcome by his ardent
love for his countrymen, but it had the effect of restraining his
impetuousness and making him weigh his words, which produces
the difference of style. Origen said that there was no sign of
that "rudeness of speech" of which the Apostle was conscious
(2 Cor. xi. 6). But he is there speaking ironicaUy. He was not
ignorant of the rules of rhetoric, though he commonly disre
garded them. Here they are purposely observed. Chrysostom,
as good a judge of the Apostle's style as Origen, speaks of it
enthusiastically. His manner varies according to cHcumstances
in his other Epistles. And from 1 Cor. xui. aU can judge of the
refinement which it admitted of when he saw occasion. And the
whole difference in the statement of doctrine arises from the
peculiarity of his aim in this Epistle. By such considerations as
these we might explain to ourselves the facts of the ease, H there
had been an absolute agreement on the question Hi antiquity.
But as it is, they are commonly not felt to be convincing.
Can we then ascertain the writer ? We can only make con
jectures. And yet our choice is limited. It must be admitted
that, apart from other considerations, the few hints which we
have in the tone of authority,' together -with the consciousness of
lying under suspicion (xiii. 18), and the famUiar mention of
Timothy (xiii. 23), point to no one so naturaUy as to St. Paul.
But H we have to search for some other writer, the fundamental

EPISTLE OF PAUL THE APOSTLE TO THE HEBREWS. 501
agreement of the teaching with that of the Apostle, the great
intimacy with his language, and what is said about Timothy,
lead us to look for him within the cHele of St. Paul's com
panions. We have seen that in ancient times it was thought by some
that Clement of Rome (PhUippianS iv. 3) or St. Luke had trans- •
lated the Epistle from St. Paul's Hebrew original. But the
fancy of its being a version is universaUy abandoned, as for
bidden by the phenomena which its language presents. They
were also considered by others to have been its authors. This
notion finds httle support as regards Clement. But St. Luke's
title, not so much, as writing independently though fuU of the
thought of St. Paul, as under his direction and superintendence,
has been ably maintained. The striking resemblance between
the language of the Epistle and St. Luke's writings is the chief
evidence. But after aUowing for the difference between historical
compositions and an argumentative letter, the dissunUarity of
style is too great. And the Epistle is evidently written by a
feUow-countryman, while it is inferred from Col. iv. 10 — 11, 14,
that St. Luke was a GentUe.
Tertullian says that Barnabas was the author. Several cH
cumstances are Hi favour of this. He was a Levite of Cyprus,
and consequently an HeUenist, but also an early member of the
Church at Jerusalem, which might account for the relations
existing between the writer and that Church, if it be the one
addressed, see xiii. 18 — 19, 23. We should not, however, expect
him, being probably older than St. Paul (cf. Acts ix. 36 — 37 ;
vU. 58), to be writing after his death. Nor are we prepared by
what we read of him to find the peculiar abUity, or the Alexan
drine culture which appear in the Epistle. But these are negative
considerations ; and the confident way in which Tertullian
speaks produces the impression that he was not expressing an
individual opinion, but the view which was current in Africa and
at Rome.
The most attractive suggestion, however, is that of Luther,
who fixed upon ApoUos. In Acts xviu. 24 — 28, we read that he
was a Jew, an Alexandrian by race, eloquent or learned, and
mighty Hi the Scriptures ; and that he mightily convinced the
Jews at Corinth, proving from the Scriptures that Jesus was
Ghrist. The character of his work there was such that a party
was formed which looked on him as their head (see 1 Cor. i. — iv).
They were probably drawn to him by that literary training and
style of thought which he brought from Alexandria. His inti
macy with St. Paul appears in 1 Cor xvi. 12 ; Titus iu. 13. And
the former of these passages is thought to contain proof of his

502 BOOK BY BOOK.
modesty and considerateness in avoiding aU appearance of
encouraging the divisions at Corinth ; which agrees weU with
the reserve of the writer of the Hebrews, who contented himself
with those personal references which were enough at the time,
but have left posterity in doubt. None of St. Paul's friends seem
to fulfil so weU the required conditions.
2. The Persons Addressed; Date and Place of Writing. — Apart
from the Title, we have to gather from the Epistle itself that it
was written to Jews. At first sight it might be thought to be
addressed to aU believers of that nation ; but we see from xui.
17 — 19, 23, that some particular Church is intended. But which
was it? It seems impossible to give a decided answer. The
absence of all reference to GentUe Christians, the danger of
apostasy owing to the attraction of the Jewish ritual, and the
f amUiarity with it which it impHed, lead our thoughts naturally
to the Church of Jerusalem. And this suits faUly weU with the
mention of a persecution (xU. 3 — 13) which was not so severe as
an earUer one (x. 32 — 34, cf. Acts viii. 1 — 3). But the minister
ing to the saints (vi. 10) hardly agrees with the poverty of the
Church of Jerusalem. And no foUower of St. Paul, so far as we
know, was on such intimate terms with it, except perhaps St.
Barnabas, or was in a position to address such reproofs to the
Mother Church. And why, on this supposition, should the
language of the. Epistle be Greek, and aU quotations made from
the Greek version ? The Church of Alexandria has been thought
of, Hi connection with ApoUos. But we know little of its early
history, or its connection with Timothy. And it was here that
the tradition of Pauline authorship was the strongest. Analogous
difficulties present themselves in the case of Rome, Corinth, or
Ephesus. We must remain equally uncertain as to where it was written.
The mention of the release of Timothy and the message, " They
of Italy salute you," together with the belief that St. Paul was
in prison, but expecting shortly to be set free (xHi. 23 — 4),
suggested that it was written at Rome. On the theory of a
different authorship every clue is lost.
Its date cannot have been early (see v. 12 ; x. 32 ; xiii. 7,
Rev. Ver.). It must have been written after St. Paul's death
and the release of Timothy (who had been probably imprisoned
at Rome after obeying St. Paul's summons (see 2 Timothy iv. 9),
and before the faU of Jerusalem, a.d. 70. This is not a necessary
inference from the language of the passages in which the Jewish
Ceremonial is spoken of as stUl being carried on, for it might be
used Hi an ideal sense ; but after that catastrophe the solemn
argument of the Epistle would have been needless.

EPISTLE OF PAUL THE APOSTLE TO THE HEBREWS. 503
3. Object and Character. — The Epistle is caUed a "word of
exhortation " (xiii. 22). This expresses its aim. The Jewish
Christians were suffering persecution, and not only felt its
burden, but were cast down by disappointed hopes of the
glorious coming of the Lord (x. 36 — 37) ; whUe their unbeHeving
countrymen were elated with that confidence in the victorious
mission of Israel which made them defy the Roman power.
They had found the difficulty of dispensing with the external
support of the ordinances of the Law. The splendour of its
Ritual stUl impressed them, and aU the more from its contrast
with the simple worship of the Church. They were at a stand-
stiU in spHitual Hfe and inteUigence, or rather had gone back (v.
11 — 12), and gave cause for fearing that they would faU away
(vi. 3—8).
FuU of his purpose and the subhmity of his subject, the writer
puts aside as inopportune aU preface and personal aUusion, and
states the sum of his arguments at the very beginning, com
pressing it into the three first verses. Here he declares the
finality of the work on our behalf of Christ, in whom God com
pleted His gradual .revelation of HimseH, His exalted nature,
and the glory which received Him in heaven. In developing
his argument he begins with a point of dignity belonging to the
Old Covenant in having been introduced by the ministry of
angels, which was more prominent in the contemporary Jewish
teaching than hi the Pentateuch, and shows the superiority of
Christ to the angels ; which leads to the honour put upon human
nature by His assuming it, and the part which suffering has in
perfecting the Captain of our salvation in His office, and further
to its place in the perfecting of ourselves. The superiority of
Christ to Moses, the human agent in the giving of the Old
Covenant, is then estabhshed.
The third part of the argument is the temporary nature of the
Jewish Ceremonial and the Covenant with which it was con
nected. Old habits of thought made the Hebrew believers feel
that a Divine Institution must be permanent. The writer
reminds them of its imperfection, and shows that the ideal priest
hood belongs to Christ, and that the ideal sanctuary is in heaven.
He confirms his teaching by recaUing the fact that the Old
Testament prepared them for a new covenant (viii. 8 — 12 ; Jere
miah xxxi. 31 — 34), and for a new form of priesthood, after the
order of Melehizedek (Psalm ex. 4). He was a relic of the com
bination in one person of the offices of king and priest, which
was found elsewhere in simple times (compare, "Rex Anius, rex
idem hominum Phoebique sacerdos." — Virg., JEn. Ui. 80). It seemed
fitting at one time that the king, who was a representative of

504 BOOK BY BOOK.
God's government, should also personate his subjects in their
atonements and thanksgivings. But the inability of one man to
discharge such weighty offices led to theH separation. Yet
absolutely it was the higher order of things, and so Hi Abraham,
the forefather of the Levitical priests, "the less was blessed of
the greater." Many hundred years after this event the Psalmist
set before his countrymen in the person of Melehizedek the type
of that higher order which was to be restored, when the inade
quacy of the ceremonial ministration of Aaron's sons should be-
replaced by a true priest, and misrule should come to an end
under a true king, both titles meeting in the person of Messiah.
As the meaning of this type was not obvious, it is elaborately
explained, more stress being laid on the perpetuity of Melchize-
dek's priesthood than on his kingly office. The tendency of aU
this was to establish their hearts. The inherent completeness of
Christ only needed the experience of suffering and the discipline
of obedience. Thus perfected, He sat on God's right hand. And
He makes His brethren perfect by the one offering of HimseH
and by His help. But they must be content to suffer in faith
and patience that they may receive the recompense of the
reward. The writer's practical object is never lost sight of. A trace of
this is seen in the way in which he confines his words to the
Hebrews. In ii. 6 — 16 the broader prospect whieh the Incar
nation opens (9, 14) is narrowed to the seed of Abraham ; and
the width of meaning which those words had gained, so as to
include the GentUes, though doubtless present to his own mmd,
is nowhere brought forward.
The argument, it will be noticed, is directed to Christian Jews,
not to those who were unconverted. The Incarnation and the
facts of our Lord's life on earth are taken for granted. This has
to be remembered in reading some of the passages cited from the
Old Testament, e.g. i. 5; ii. 12, 13. They are adduced on the
principle that its full meaning is found in Christ. We may
mention further that some of the quotations, e.g. ii. 7 ; x. 5 ;
xii. 26, are adapted to the purpose for which they are cited only
in the form in which they appear in the LXX.
Some apparent inaccuracies, such as in ix. 2 — 4 (where the
altar of incense is omitted, or more probably is intended by the
word which is translated " censer," in which case it is wrongly
placed within the veil), have been regarded as signs of a want
of famiUarity with particulars. But this can hardly be a case of
ignorance. It is more likely that, in accordance with his habit
of looking at things in their higher relations, the writer asso
ciates the altar of incense with the Holy of HoHes, to which it

EPISTLE OF PAUL THE APOSTLE TO THE HEBREWS. 505
belonged symbolicaUy more than to the Holy Place. In the
same manner he speaks only of the Tabernacle, never hinting at
the existence of the Temple. He cleaves to the idea, and dis
regards departures from it.
4. Analysis.
i. 1—3. God's successive revelations completed in His Son.
4 — H. 18. Superiority of Christ to the Angels. — Shown by a com
parison of God's language to Him and them, 4 — 14. Warning,
u. 1 — 4. Shown in God's subjection of all things to man, 5 — 16.
FHst mention of Christ as High Priest, 17 — 18.
Hi. 1 — 6. Superiority of Christ to Moses.
7 — iv. 13. Warning. — Not to imitate the unbelief of Israel in
old time, and so faU to enter into rest, 7 — 19 ; the promise of
whieh is unfulfilled, iv. 1 — 8. Itis a Sabbath rest like God's,
9 — 11. Disobedience cannot escape detection, 12 — 13.
iv. 14 — x. 18. Superiority of Chrisfs Priesthood. — Hortatory,
14 — 16. Characteristics of a high priest, v. 1 — 4. The last of
them illustrated in Christ. First mention of Melehizedek, 5 —
10. Digression, in which they are rebuked for dulness of
hearing, 1 1 — vi. 20. Explanation of the type of Melehizedek,
vU. 1 — 28. Christ is the ideal Priest, viii. 1 — 13. The
non-ideal nature of the Tabernacle and the Old Covenant, ix.
1— x. 18.
19 — xHi. 17. Exhortation and Warning. — Having a new and
Hving way to draw near to God and to hold fast their profession,
and to remember the former times, 19 — 39. Examples of Faith,
xi. 1 — 40. Exhortation, xii. 1 — 17. Contrast between Mount
Sinai and Mount Zion, i.e. the heavenly Jerusalem, 18 — 29.
MisceUaneous exhortations, xHi. 1 — 17.
18 — 25. Conclusion. — The writer asks their prayers that he
may be restored to them, 18 — 19; he prays for them. Doxology,
20 — 21. He begs them to bear the word of 'exhortation, 22.
The release of Timothy, and a promise to oome to them ; saluta
tions, 23—24.

THE EPISTLE OF JAMES.
1. The Seven Catholic Epistles. — Next in order to the Epistles
of St. Paul and that to the Hebrews come the General or CathoHc
Epistles. By these terms were meant in the first instance
circular Epistles, i.e. such as were intended for more than one
Church. Thus understood they are inapphcable to 1 and 2 John.
But Eusebius, who is the first to use the word " CathoHc " in
reference to aU the seven, appears to mean that they were in
common use in the Church, whieh sense is appropriate to the
whole of them. They are ascribed to James, Peter, John, and
Jude, who with the exception of the last, are described by
St. Paul as men " who seemed to be pillars " (Gal. ii. 9).
Each of these three, as well as St. Paul, represented different
modes of apprehending our Lord and His work, and took distinct
parts in building up the Church. And tbe proof of this is found
in their writings. That there should be this variety Hi theH
contributions to one common end wiU not surprise us, when we
remember that while St. Paul was "a chosen vessel" to carry
Christ's name to the Gentiles, St. John stood in a tender personal
relation to Him, and St. Peter received from Him, when he was
in His presence for the first time, a name which embodied His
foresight of the work which he was to do in the early days of
the Church.
2. The Epistle of James. The Writer. — The first of these general
Epistles is that of James, a place which it occupied in the tune of
Eusebius. Its author must have been one of the three men of
that name who are mentioned in the New Testament — James, the
son of Zebedee, brother of John, and one of the apostles ; another
apostle, James, the son of Alphaeus ; and James, the Lord's
brother. There is an almost universal consent that the first is
excluded by the early date of his martyrdom (Acts xH. 2). The
last two have been very commonly regarded as one and the same
person. But this view is now very generaUy given up. The
question is intricate, and is fully discussed in the study on Jude,
to which the reader is referred.
(i.) If, then, we distinguish James, the son of Alphaeus, from
James, the Lord's brother, which of them wrote this Epistle ? Its

THE EPISTLE OF JAMES. 507
tone of authority,. not expressed but implied, points to the more
conspicuous of them. This was the Lord's brother, who appears
as chief in authority in the Church of Jerusalem in the latter part
of the Acts of the Apostles and in the Epistle to the Galatians.
On the other hand, no separate mention of the son of Alphaeus,
any more, than of the greater part of the apostles, occurs after
that which is found in Acts i. 13. StUl we may ask, H the writer
was the brother of the Lord, why he does not give himself that
title. The answer seems to be that, in the spirit of the words
recorded Hi Matt. xH. 48 — 50, Luke xi. 27 — 28, he placed himseH
on the level of all those who served the risen and ascended Jesus.
In the same way Jude, another of our Lord's brethren,, is con
tented to caU himseH the " servant of Jesus Christ, and brother
of James."
(u.) The names of these brethren of the Lord were James, Joses,
Simon, and Judas (Matt. xHi. 55), where his sisters are also men
tioned, but not by name. What we read further of them in the
New Testament may be stated thus. They accompanied Jesus,
His mother, and His disciples, to Capernaum (John H. 12) ; they
did not beHeve in Him (John vH. 2 — 9) ; and this is confirmed by
St. Mark's statement (Ui. 21), that His friends, i.e. His brethren
and mother (see verse 31), " went out to lay hold of Him, for they
said, He is beside Himself."
(iU.) We may stop here to inquire what was the nature of their
relationship. The natural inference from the way in which they
are spoken of is that they were brothers in the strict sense, sons
of Joseph and Mary. This opmion was held by a few respectable
names Hi antiquity, and has its supporters at the present day.
It was the leading tenet of a sect who were branded as heretics
Hi consequence, but its most prominent defender was Helvidius, a
Roman lawyer, a.d. 383. He was attacked by St. Jerome with
unmerited fierceness, for he did not wish to dishonour the Lord's
mother, but to uphold the sanctity of marriage.
Jerome himself originated the view that "brethren" meant
kinsmen, or, more definitely, "cousins," the sons of Alphaeus and
the sister of the Lord's mother. This met with immediate approval,
and became the prevaUing interpretation for centuries, displacing
the more ancient one, that they were sons of Joseph by a former
wHe, the chief supporter of which was Epiphanius. The question
is one which raises strong and even passionate f eeHng, but there is
one matter of fact whieh has not perhaps been attended to enough.
When our Lord was upon the cross He entrusted His mother,
not to any of His brethren, but to St. John. It is not probable
that He would have done so if they had been her own sons. On
the other hand, the close connection with her in which they are
constantly found, and the mention of His sisters also, as weU as

508 BOOK BY BOOK.
the fact that James was known to Josephus as the brother of
Jesus, appear to show that Jerome's sense is too remote. The
subject cannot be adequately discussed in a few words. It wUl
be found treated in an exhaustive manner in Bishop Lightfoot's
edition of the Galatians, which has done much to restore to the
older view the favour which it lost.
(iv.) Our Lord's Resurrection put an end to His brethren's
unbelief, and to James He granted a special appearance (1 Cor.
xv. 7). We find them aU mentioned, along with the women and
Mary the mother of Jesus, as being in close union with the
apostles after the Ascension (Actsi. 13 — 14). In 1 Cor. ix. 5, St.
Paul claims the same right to travel with a wife as the brethren of
the Lord, or Cephas. The remaining notices relate exclusively to
James. We learn from Gal. i. 18, that when St. Paul came to
Jerusalem, three years after his conversion, to visit Peter, he
saw James at the same tune. And in Acts xH. 17, Peter directs
that his release from prison should be told to James and the
brethren, whieh points to his holding an official position in the
Church at Jerusalem. This appears more clearly later on from
the tone and effect of his speech at the Council of Jerusalem
(Acts xv. 13 sqq., compared with Gal ii. 9—12). The last men->
tion of him is when he and the elders of the Church gave a pubHc
reception to Paul at the end of his thHd apostoHcal journey (Acts
xxi. 18—25).
(v.) It would seem that the apostles made over to him after a
time the government of the Church of Jerusalem, for which he
was recommended by his relation to the Lord, and by his
character and principles. He conformed to the law, sharing no
doubt the feeling of the other members of that Church, that the
ordinances of the old dispensation had not been done away for
them, but were fiUed out with new life and meaning in Christ.
And thus the conformity of whieh he set the example, joined with
the respect which he won from aU, seems to have long secured
for his Church an immunity from serious persecution. As regards
the GentUes, the HberaHty of his sentiments is attested by St.
Paul, and by his own words (Acts xv. 13 — 19), while his fore
thought on behalf of the prejudices of the Jewish Christians is
equaUy shown by the concessions which he proposed on the part
of the GentUes (20 — 21), and by his inducing St. Paul to give a
practical proof that he neither taught the beHeving Jews " to
forsake Moses," nor did so himseH (Acts xxi. 20 — 24).
(vi. ) His position, and that of those over whom he presided, was
inteUigible and lawful, for circumcision and the other ordinances
belonged to the national as weU as the reHgious Hfe ; but it was
destined to cease. As we read the Acts of the Apostles our
attention is transferred to Antioch as a new centre, and to the

THE EPISTLE OF JAMES. 509
spread of the Gospel among the GentUes. The mother Church
retains the respect due to it, but it is forced by poverty to accept
the alms of the converts from the heathen. A further blow was
struck by the destruction of Jerusalem and the Temple. It must
have led them to reconsider their position, and have opened their
eyes to the transitory character of the Mosaic Law and worship.
And their flight to PeUa ,in anticipation of that event marked
them out Hi the eyes of theH countrymen as traitors to the national
cause. The persecution of them by Barcochab during his rebellion
against the Romans, a.d. 132 — 135, tended to sift them stUl more.
Many abandoned their claim to the privileges on which they had
prided themselves, and blended with their brethren of GentUe
origin, whUe the rest took up a sectarian position, and lingered
on under the name of Ebionites into the fifth century.
(vii.) Our further information about St. James is derived from
a fragment of Hegesippus, the first historian of the Church, circa
170, preserved in Eusebius (E. H. ii. 23), and from Josephus.
The former teUs us that he was caUed " The Just " by aU men,
and that "he was holy from his mother's womb. He drank no
wine nor strong drink, neither did he eat flesh. No razor ever
touched his head ; he did not anoint himseH with oil ; he did not
use the bath. He alone was aUowed to enter into the holy place.
For he wore no wool, but only fine Hnen. And he would enter
into the Temple alone, and be found there kneeHng on his knees
and asking forgiveness for the people."
There is no reason to doubt the general reverence in which he
was held, nor the strict sanctity of his Hfe. He may have been
an Ascetic, but there is no trace of it in his Epistle, and his
continual intercessions are very probable. But fabulous matter
runs through the whole of Hegesippus' s account, which he is
supposed to have drawn from Ebionite sources. It appears
especiaUy m the dramatic narrative of St. James's martyrdom.
Owing to the progress of the Gospel the Pharisees became
alarmed and placed him on the pinnacle of the Temple at the
Passover, in order that he might ' ' persuade the multitude not to
go astray after Jesus." But he took the opportunity of confess
ing Him. The enraged Pharisees threw him down, after which
he was stoned, and at length kiUed by a blow from a fuUer' s club.
Josephus, who was contemporary, gives a different and more
probable account (Antiq. xx. 9. 1), according to which Ananias,
the High Priest, brought James, the brother of Jesus, who was
caUed Christ, and certain others before the CouncU on a charge
of breaking tbe law, and ordered them to be stoned to death. He
had chosen for this purpose the interval between the death of
Festus and the arrival of his successor. But the dissatisfaction.
which this proceeding caused amongst the most equitable of the

510 BOOK BY BOOK.
Jews led to complaints against him, which ended in his being
displaced from his office. This would fix a.d. 62 as the year of
St. James's death. In the Clementines, which are forgeries of
the Ebionites, and fathered on Clement of Rome, St. James is
termed "Bishop of Bishops," and regarded as practicaUy the
head of the whole Church.
3. Place and Time of Writing. — St. James would naturally write
from Jerusalem ; it is in agreement with this that some of the
natural phenomena to which he aUudes belong particularly to
Palestine; such as salt and bitter springs (iii. 11, 12), the early
and latter rain (v. 7), and the scorching wind (Rev. Vers. i. 11).
He writes "to the twelve tribes which are scattered abroad," or
"which are in the Dispersion" (cf. John vii. 35, 1 Pet. i. 1).
He addresses only those who are Jews by birth ; an incidental
mark of this is his giving the name of " synagogue " to the place
where they met for worship (H. 2). There is no hint of the
existence of any Christians of heathen origin. We do not know
where these communities consisting entirely of Jewish Christians
were situated ; but we may suppose them to have been partly in
Palestine and partly in neighbouring lands, the fruits of inter
course with the Church of Jerusalem at the great festivals, and
of the unrecorded labours of the apostles, which must have been
confined to their own countrymen. A Httle before his death, St.
James reckoned the number of such behevers as amounting to
many thousands (Acts xxi. 20).
(i.) This absence of any reference to the GentUes is probably a
proof of the very early date of the Epistle. The grave questions
originated by St. Paul's first apostoHcal journey, which came
before the CouncU of Jerusalem for decision, would seem not to
have arisen as yet. It is, at least, difficult to explain the main
tenance of such complete sUence about the Gentile converts
subsequent to those events, especially after they had begun to
contribute to the support of theH poor brethren in Judaea.
(i.) But we must assign a later date, if the Epistle shows, as
many think, an acquaintance with St. Paul's writings. There are
several expressions and passages in it which remind us of them
strongly, and chiefly of the Romans. The most important are
i 22, cf. Rom. ii. 13 ; i. 3, Rom. v. 3 ; iv. 1, Rom. vH. 23. Both
the passages in the first paH may probably be a reminiscence of
our Lord's words, Matt. vii. 26. And there may be some common
source for the two others in the habitual language of the Church
(with i. 3, cf. also 1 Pet. i. 7, and with iv. 1, cf. 1 Pet. H. 11)
which we cannot trace.
(iii.) But ii. 14 — 26, presents more difficulty. Our first im
pression of this passage is, not only that it is inconsistent with
St. Paul's teaching, but that it is intended to correct it or the

THE EPISTLE OF JAMES. 511
abuse of it. This led to Luther's weU-known description of the
Epistle as "a letter of straw." And in a later and more re
spectful mention of it, he stated as one of his reasons for not
holding it to be the work of an apostle, that it contradicted Paul
and aU other Scripture in giving righteousness to works. On
the other hand, the greater part of the older divines employed
themselves in showing the agreement between St. Paul and St.
James, Hi spite of appearances. But more recent inquiry leads
to the conclusion that the two teachers were not opposed, because
they had different objects in view, while using similar language.
St. James speaks of faith in one God — the distinguishing belief
of Israel (ii. 19) — and declares that mere faith wUl not justify.
The error which he opposed was a barren Pharisaic orthodoxy,
akin to the reHance on the privUege of being Abraham's seed,
which John the Baptist denounced (Matt. Ui. 9, cf. Rom. ii. 17 —
29). We learn from Justin Martyr, in the next century (Dial.
c. Tryph, p. 370), that there were Jews Hi his day, and others
hke them Hi this respect (Jewish-minded Christians), who said
that " even H men are sinners, but know God, the Lord will not
impute sin to them." But St. Paul combated the slighting of
God's grace in Christ Jesus, which is ours through faith, on the
part of those who looked for justification to their strict observance
of the law of Moses.
St. James's rebuke was dHected against a trust in a dead faith,
Which led to no works, " the opus operatum of faith ;" St. Paul's
feU on a trust Hi seH-righteousness. We are apt to look upon
St. Paul as the first to give prominence to faith, and the ori
ginator of the term "justification;" but there is evidence that
these matters were discussed, along with the example of Abraham,
before his time, in the Jewish schools, to which both he and St.
James were indebted.
(iv.) If this view is right it bears on a question of more im
portance than the date of the Epistle. We find in it no injunctions
as to the observance of ceremonial ordinances. If this was un
necessary owing to the agreement on this point of the writer
and his readers, it stiU shows that it was not regarded as open
to attack. This of itself is an objection to the view of the
Tubingen school, which imagines that a fierce contest on this
subject raged during the Hfe of St. James and long afterwards.
But at first sight his teaching about faith gives an encourage
ment to the idea of an hostUity to St. Paul. On further exami
nation this, too, disappears, and there remains nothmg to disturb
our conception of the fundamental unity of the leaders of the
Church, to which we have testimony in Acts xv. and the Galatians.
4. Character, Style, Quotations.— The tone of the whole Epistle
is practical, earnest, and stern in parts. It was occasioned, no

512 BOOK BY BOOK.
doubt, by the existence of the. faults whieh he corrects — the
results, perhaps, not so much of deterioration as of slow progress.
When the law and the Gospel were blended in the convictions of
the same person, the latter element may often have been smaU
and its influence shaUow. Thus we find warnings against respect
for the rich (ii. 6, 7), a barren faith (14 — 26), forwardness in
becoming teachers (iii. 1), bitter language (iii. 9, 10), defamation
and uncharitable judgment (iv. 11, 12), fierce contentions and
sensuality (iv. 1 — 3), and dishonest oppression of the poor (v. 1
— 6). But it may be doubted whether the worst features, such as
iv. 2, v. 1 — 6, belong to members of the Church, and do not
rather refer to their unbeheving countrymen, to whose eon-
sciences the writer appeals, so far as his words wUl reach them.
There was need, also, of encouragement under trial. The various
exhortations are enforced by the solemnity with which St. James
looks forward to the Lord's coming.
(i.) There is little of distinctively Christian doctrine. Every
thing of the kind relates to the conception of our Lord's person
in respect of His example (v. 11), authority (i. 1 ; v. 10), glory
(ii. 1), power (v. 14 — 15) ; and His coming to judgment (v. 7—
9) ; or to the word of truth, the instrument of a new birth (i. 18,
21 ). But the Gospel is not named. The rule of the life is the
Law, but as advanced by our Lord into a "law of liberty" (ii.
12) ; itseH delivered from the restrictions imposed at first for the
hardness of men's hearts, and from narrowing traditions, and
bestowing liberty Hi turn through freedom from sin (cf. John
viii. 33 — 36). No mention occurs, as we have seen, of Jewish
ordinances. And, on the other hand, the low value of mere
externals is indicated by the fact that in the descriptioh of pure
religion — the word used refers to the outward aspect of it — all
that is ceremonial is omitted, and works of charity and habitual
purity take its place. We are reminded throughout of our Lord's
teaching as recorded in the three first Gospels, rather than of
that side of it which is found in St. John, or the truths revealed
after Pentecost.
(ii.) In respect of the organization of the Church, we find men
tion of elders who are to be summoned to pray for the sick man,
and anoint him with oil in the name of the Lord (v. 14; cf . Mark
vi. 13, xvi. 18). It has been inferred from iii. 1, that no definite
arrangement had yet been made for instruction in these Churches.
(Hi.) The language is a very pure specimen of HeUenistic Greek.
This is what might not have been expected. The style is simple
and inartificial. There is little attempt to foUow a distinct plan
or develop the connection of thought. The continuity of the
whole is the writer's earnestness, culminating in the thoughts
which belong to the second advent. From this point of view the

THE EPISTLE OF JAMES. 513
abrupt way in which the Epistle ends, without even a " Fare ye
weU," is not inappropriate ; it shows the pressure of the ex
pectation under which the appeal is made to save an erring
brother whUe there is tune.
(iv.) Among the quotations from the Old Testament, Lev. xix.
18, " Thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyseH," is distinguished
by the title of the Royal Law, in consequence, no doubt, of the
prominence given to it by our Lord, Matt. xix. 19; xxU. 39.
The Book of Proverbs is twice quoted, Prov. iii. 34, in iv. 6, and
Prov. x. 12, Hi v. 20. And it is thought that St. James used the
kindred teaching of the Book of Ecclesiasticus, the strongest
resemblance being between i. 13 and Ecclus. xv. 11 — 12. In
regard to the New Testament, the echoes of our Lord's teaching; •
and particularly of the Sermon on the Mount, are numerous, ef . i.
2, Matt. v. 10—12 ; i. 4, Matt. v. 48 ; i. 5, Matt. vii. 7 ; ii. 13,
Matt. vi. 14—15 ; Hi. 17—18, Matt. v. 9 : iv. 4, Matt. vi. 24; iv.
11, Matt. vu. 1 ; v. 2, Matt. vi. 19; v. 10, Matt. v. 12 ; v. 12,
Matt. v. 33; compare also iv. 10, Matt, xxiii. 12 ; iv. 12, Matt.
x. 28 ; iv. 9, Luke vi. 25. The passages which seem paraUel with
others in St. Paul have been spoken of above. The quotations
from the Proverbs are found again in 1 Peter v. 6, iv. 8, with
the same deviations from the LXX. The resemblance between
i. 12 and Rev. U. 10 has been accounted for by the supposition
of an unwritten saying of our Lord underlying both passages.
5. Authenticity.— Eusebius quotes the Epistle, but places it
among the books which were disputed, but acknowledged by
most (E. H. Hi. 25), and he says (E. H. ii. 23), that not many of
the ancients mentioned it. We find accordingly that the first
who speaks of it by name is Origen {c. 230), who quotes it some
times, and Hi one place as the Epistle "current" as that of
James. Before him, traces of its use are only found in Irenaeus
and the Shepherd of Hermas, which brings us to the middle of
tho second century. It was accepted early by the Syrian Church,
and included Hi theH version. It had not apparently a place in
the Old Latin, nor is it named in the Muratorian Canon. After
the tune of Eusebius the recognition of it kept extending, and it
ranks with the other books of the New Testament in the Canon
of the ThHd CouncU of Carthage, a.d. 397. In the fifth century
it was universaUy acknowledged.
The critics of the present day, who supposed it to have been
written ia the name of St. James after his death, mostly belong
to the Tubingen school. To what has been said in reply to them
already Hi section 3, we may add that the sUence about the
controversy in respect of cHcumcision may indeed be accounted
for by supposing that the Epistle was written after it had entirely
ceased, as weU as before it began. But if so, how late are we

514 BOOK BY BOOK.
to place it to suit their theory, according to which a serious
struggle was carried on tiU the latter part of the second century ?
Most of its readers, impressed by the feeling of genuineness
which it conveys, will not be ready to chaUenge the j udgment of
the Church.
6. Analysis.
i. 1. The Greeting.
2 — 18. The subject of Trial {Temptation and Affliction).
(a) 2—12. The joy, blessing, and reward of enduring trial.
Trial to be accounted joy, as working endurance, which must have
a perfect work, in order that ye may lack nothing, 2 — 4. ^ One
such lacking may be that of wisdom. Pray for it without
wavering, 5 — 8. The circumstances of Christian Hfe break down
the differences of wealth and station. Under persecution and
temptation the lowly who endures should rejoice in his spiritual
exaltation, and the wealthy in his humiliation ; thus both are
brought to the common ground of obedience, 9 — 1 1 . Blessing
and reward of enduring, 12.
(5) 13 — 15. No one should yield to temptation on the plea
that it comes from God.
(c) 16 — 18. Further refutation of this idea. All good is God's
gift, and in Him is no change (so that He should send us what
is evil), 16 — 17. Of his own will He begat us, by the (regenerat
ing) word of truth to be a kind of first-fruits of His creatures, 18.
19 — -27. Rules arising out of the preceding. — To reahse this
dignity let every man be swift to hear . . . putting away filthi
ness . . . and welcoming the implanted word, 19 — 21; of which
you must be doers and not hearers only, 22 — 25. Tests of reality.
An unbridled tongue a proof of its absence. What pure religion
is, 26—27.
ii. Faith.
1 — 13. Faith in connection with respect of persons. — Faith in the
Lord Jesus Christ, the Lord of glory, not to be held in company
with respect of persons, 1 . IUustration of such respect, 2 — 4.
God makes choice of the poor whom ye dishonour, 5 — 6a. The
treatment of you by the rich deprives them of a claim upon you,
6} — 7. The right course is to obey the Royal Law, "Thou shalt
love thy neighbour as thyseH," which is inconsistent with respect
of person. For failure in one point (which this is) is breach of
the whole law, 8 — 13.
14 — 26. Necessity of the union of Faith and Works. — Inutility of
faith without works, 14 — 17. Reply to the speaker in the
fourteenth verse, 18 — 19. The case of Abraham, 20 — 24- of
Rahab, 25. Faith without works is dead, 26.
iii. Wisdom.
1 — 12. Wisdom in reference to the conceit of it. — Ambition to

THE EPISTLE OF JAMES. 515
become teachers is dangerous in case of stumbUng, 1. One of the
chief occasions is forwardness to speak. The man who stumbles
not with his tongue is perfect, 2. The importance of it is not to
be measured by its size. Bridles and rudders are instances of
the power of smaU things, 3 — 4 ; so the tongue is small but
boastful, ha. Another instance is the great conflagration which
is kindled by a Httle fire, 5b. The defiling and inflammatory
character of the tongue, 6 ; which is less tameable than wild
beasts, 7 — 8. The inconsistency of blessing God and cursing
man is opposed to the analogy of natural things, as a fountain,
fig-tree, and vine, 9 — 12.
13 — 18. True Wisdom. — The works of a good IHe done in the
meekness of wisdom, are a proof of its presence, as jealousy and
envy are of its absence, 13 — 14, These last are not the wisdom
from above, the description of which foUows, 15 — 18.
iv. Carnal-mindedness and Presumption.
1 — 10. Source of their contentions. — These come from fleshly
pleasures, 1 . Te desire and strive to satisfy your wants by vio
lence, which after aU is Hi vain. Prayer would secure their
supply, but not your prayer ; because its aim is to spend the
results on your pleasures, 2 — 3. This is (spiritual) adultery,
forsaking God's friendship- for the world, which His jealousy
wiU not permit, 4 — 6. Exhortation to submission and change of
life and feeling, 7 — 10.
11 — 12. Against Presumption in slandering and judging. — The
man who judges his brother sets himself above the law (which
forbids it), 11. There is only one law-giver and judge, 12.
13 — 17. Carnal confidence. — The forming of plans without
reference to the uncertainty of Hfe, 13 — 14; and to the wiU of
God, 15 ; a presumption in which ye glory, 16 — 17.
v. The Lord's Coming.
1 — 6. Against rich oppressors. — The calamities coming on them,
1 . The decay which attacks theH treasures, 2 — 3. God hears
the cry of the labourers whom they defraud, 4. TheH luxury,
injustice, and violence, whUe punishment is impending, 5 — 6.
7 — 18. Encouragements and directions. — Duty of patience till
the Lord's coming, which is nigh, after the example of the
husbandman who waits for the early and later ram, 7 — 8. Mur
mur not against one another — the judge stands before the door.
Consider the example of the prophets, Job, and the end of the
Lord, 9 — 11. Patience shown in forbearing to swear, 12.
Affliction to be met with prayer, as cheerfulness is to be conse
crated with songs of thanksgiving, 13. The healing of sickness
to be sought in the ministry of the elders, and in mutual
confession and prayer. Example of Elias.
19 — 20. An urqent appeal to reclaim an erring brother.
ll2

THE FIEST EPISTLE OF PETER.
1. The Writer.— The author of this Epistle is St. Peter. He
belonged originaUy to Bethsaida, on the shores of the Sea of
GaHlee. His name was Simon, or Simeon, Acts xv. 14 ; cf.
2 Pet. i. 1 ; and his father's Jonas (the Greek form of Jonah),
Matt. xvi. 17, or John, John i. 42 ; xxi. 15 — 17 (Rev. Ver.).
He received the name Cephas, an Aramaic word meaning
"Rock," translated by the Greek "Petros," from our Lord
when he was brought to Him by his brother Andrew, who was
a disciple of John the Baptist, and heard his testimony to Jesus
(John i. 36 — 43). Both of these became disciples of Christ
(John U. 2), but they were not at first permanently attached to
fiim, but continued their occupations of fishermen (cf . Matt. iv.
18 — 20; Mark i. 16). It was not untU the miraculous draught
of fishes (Luke v. 2—11) that they finally abandoned theH trade.
It is unnecessary to go through St. Peter's history minutely.
It wUl be enough to recall some of its incidents and the features
of his character — his impetuous nature (Luke v. 8 ; John xviH.
10, xxi. 7) ; his forwardness in being the spokesman of his
brethren, as in his refusal to quit Jesus (John vi. 68), in his
confession of Him as the Christ (Matt. xvi. 15 — 16), and in his
rebuke of Him when He foretold His sufferings, emphasized
by the hand he laid on Him as he spoke (Matt. xvi. 22) ; the
inconstancy and timidity which humbled his zealous confidence
when he went to Jesus on the water (Matt. xiv. 28 — 31), and pro
tested that he would never be offended in Him (Matt. xxvi. 33).
Along with the sons of Zebedee he was admitted to behold the
raising of Jairus' s daughter and the Transfiguration. It was their
sympathy which our Lord sought during His agony in the garden.
But Peter was distinguished beyond the other two. The name
which Jesus gave him (John i. 42) was prophetic, and its signi
ficance was declared at the time of his confession. If the dignity
of being the Rock on which the Church was to be built must be
reserved for Him whom Peter had confessed, still his office of
giving solidity to the Church is recognised Hi the words, "Thou

THE FIRST EPISTLE OF PETER. 517
art Peter;" andhis special responsibUity Hi receiving fhe keys
of the kingdom of heaven is then marked, as elsewhere (Matt.
xviu. 18), the power of the Apostles coUeetively to loose and
bind. Peter had been the leading disciple, and he was encouraged
to continue to be so by our Lord's charge, " And do thou, when
once thou hast turned again, stabhsh thy brethren " (Luke xxii.
32— Rev. Ver.).
Jesus appeared to him separately on the day of His resurrec
tion (Luke xxiv. 34 ; 1 Cor. xv. 5). What passed at that solemn
meeting we are not told, but it must have been a reinstatal of
Peter after his denial. And subsequently he received a commis
sion once more, "Feed my lambs, feed my sheep" (John xxi.
Accordingly, we find him the chief figure in the early part of
the history of the Church. It was his proposal to fill up the
vacant place in the ApostoHc CoUege (Acts i. 15 — 26). He is
the speaker on the Day of Pentecost (ii. 1 — 41), and again to the
multitude after the heahng of the lame man, and to the Council
before whieh he and John were summoned in consequence of that
nuracle (Hi. 1 — iv. 22) ; and when aU the Apostles were arrested
(v. 29 — 32) ; and in the punishment of Ananias and SapphUa
(v. 1 — 11). The sick were brought into the street that even his
shadow might faU on them (v. 16). He and John were delegated
by the Apostles to visit Samaria, where Philip had made many
converts ; and Simon asked him to seU the power of bestowing
the Holy Ghost (vHi. 14—24).
In the rest enjoyed by the Churches of Judaea, Gahlee, and
Samaria they were visited by him, his stay at Lydda being
marked by the healing of -33neas, and at Joppa by his raising
Dorcas to Hfe (ix. 31 — 43). Here, too, he had the vision which
prepared him for obeying the summons to Caesarea from Cor-
neHus, and for recognising without reserve the indication of God's
will in the gHt of the Holy Ghost to him and his household.
"Can any man," he said, " forbid water, that these should not
be baptized, which have received the Holy Ghost as weU as we ? "
(x. 1 — 48). He was not the first to admit a GentUe into the
Church. Philip had not hesitated to baptize the eunuch without
the authorization which Peter, it may be, would have needed
(vui. 36 — 39). But the case of Cornelius was more important,
The notice of the Church was caUed to it, and Peter had to defend
his conduct on his return to Jerusalem. His plea was that he
had foUowed God's guidance. And for the fact of the gift of the
Holy Ghost to men uncHcumcised he appealed to the testimony
of the six brethren who accompanied him to Caesarea, and whom
he had prudently brought with him to Jerusalem. The Church

518 BOOK BY BOOK.
thankfully acquiesced in what had been done (xi. 1 — 18). But
it was not foUowed up, and St. Peter's ministry was stUl dHected
to the cHcumcision (Gal. ii. 7, 8). The effect lay dormant.
The object of Paul's going to Jerusalem three years after his
conversion was to visit Peter, but both he and James suspected
him of wishing to acquaint himseH with the affaHs of the Church
in order to betray it to the rulers ofthe Jews, tiU Barnabas over
came theH doubt (Acts ix. 26—30 ; Gal. i. 18—24).
The next event was his deUverance by the angel from prison
and the death which Herod designed for bim, after which "he
departed and went into another place" (Acts xii. 1 — 17). We
do not know how he was employed in the interval between this
and the CouncU held at Jerusalem after St. Paul's first apostolical
journey. A comparison of Acts xv. 6 — 29, with Gal. H. 1 — 10,
shows not only the hearty support received by St. Paul on that
occasion from James, Peter, and John, which he had taken pains
to secure, but the wisdom with which aU the proceedings were
conducted. There was a party consisting of men who had been
Pharisees which insisted on the necessity of circumcision and the
keeping of the law on the part of the GentUes admitted into the
Church. The matter was discussed by speakers on both sides.
Then Peter arose, and referrmg to his own history Hi connection
with CorneHus, said that the question was one which God had
HimseH decided "a good while ago." He appealed to them
not to lay a yoke on the Gentiles whieh they themselves were
unable to bear ; and reminded them that both Jews and GentUes
had one and the same hope of salvation through the grace of the
Lord Jesus Christ. His words produced a sUence. Barnabas
and Paul followed, not discussing the matter on its merits, which
might have had an exasperating effect, but describing the approval
whieh God had given them in the miracles which He wrought
by them among the heathen. Then James spoke, treating Peter's
reference to CorneHus as decisive, and showing that this was in
agreement with the teaching of the Prophets. He ended by
giving his decision not to "trouble" the Gentiles, but to call
on them to abstain from certain things which, with the exception
of fornication, were not matters of necessity, but of policy. This
councU was held circa a.d. 52, and there is no further mention of
St. Peter in the Acts of the Apostles.
Not long afterwards he went to Antioch. At first he conformed
to the practice of that Church, and ate with the GentUes. But
certain men came there from James. The expression seems to
imply that they had some kind of commission from him. Many
members of the Church of Jerusalem were likely to have less
wisdom and HberaHty than its head, and these men seem to have

THE FIRST EPISTLE OF PETER. 519
imitated the conduct of others of their brethren on a previous
occasion (Acts xv. 1 — 24), expressing disapproval of what they
witnessed. Peter, out of fear of them, separated himseH from
the GentUes, as did aU the other Jewish members of the Church
of Antioch, and even Barnabas. St. Paul speaks of their
'¦hypocrisy," as acting in opposition to their own convictions.
And he charged Peter with his inconsistency in the presence of
them aU. "If thou, being a Jew, livest after the manner of
the Gentiles and not as do the Jews, why eompellest thou the
GentUes to hve as do the Jews?" (Gal. ii. 10 — 14). He does
not teU us the effect of his rebuke, but we can hardly doubt that
it was successful, for Peter had acted against his own principles.
" He stood condemned " (Rev. Ver.).
It was not the first instance of his yielding to fear, nor of his
swift repentance. In his legendary history these traits continue
to the end. Yielding to the entreaties of the faithful at Rome
to flee from the death which threatened him, he was said to
have left the city. He met the Saviour on the Appian Way
bearing His cross. " Lord, whither goest thou ?" he said. The
answer was, "To Rome, to be crucified again." Peter turned,
went back weeping, and faced His death. The scene of the story
was formerly marked by the church of Sancta Maria ad passus,
but now by one which is caUed Domine, quo vadis? St. Paul
mentions him again as regarded by a party in the Corinthian
Church as theH head (1 Cor. i. 12 ; cf. iii. 22) ; and as commonly
accompanied in his journeys by his wife (1 Cor. ix. 5).
The rest of his history is uncertain, except that we. may -feel
sure that the division of labour described in Gal. ii. 7 — 9, by
which it was arranged that Paul should go to the GentUes and
Peter and the others to the circumcision, was Hi the main
respected. What light is to be derived from 1 Pet. v. 13, will
be seen below. We are left to traditional accounts which are to
some extent untrustworthy. According to the statement com
monly received Hi old times, he was Bishop of Antioch for five
years. This is not credible if we consider the origin and cha
racter of that Church (Acts xi. 19—26; xiii. 1—3; xv. 1-2).
It appears to have been suggested by his visit mentioned by St.
Paul in the Galatians. After that he was said to have preached to
the Jews, to whom he writes in this epistle (Euseb. E. H. iii. 1) ;
but it contains no signs of his being known to them personaUy.
The Church of Corinth also seems to have claimed him as a
joint founder with St. Paul, according to the letter of its Bishop
. Dionysius, which he wrote to the Romans in the time of their
Bishop Soter, a.d. 168—176 (Euseb. E. H. ii. 26). This may be
derived from 1 Cor. i. 10 ; and he could not have had a hand in

520 BOOK BY BOOK.
founding the Church, of which St. Paul was the spiritual father
(1 Cor. iv. 5). Yet the memory of a residence of his at Corinth
may have been preserved in that Church. But Rome was said
to have been the chief scene of his labours. He went there in
the second year of Claudius to oppose Simon Magus, who had
tumed heresiarch, and became the first bishop, holding the see
during the last twenty-five years of his IHe. The story of his
contest with Simon Magus at Rome is derived by Eusebius (E. H.
ii. 15) from Justin Martyr. The probable origin of it was shown
in a remarkable way. Justin had appealed, for the proof of
Simon's visit to the capital and his powers of imposture, to the
fact that a statue dedicated to him as a god, Simoni Deo Sancto,
was to be seen in the island of the Tiber. Here, in 1574, a
statue was discovered bearing the name of the Sabine deity,
Semo Sancus. St. Peter's foundation of tbe Roman Church and
long episcopate are inconsistent with what we know from St.
Paul's Epistle to the Romans and the account in the Acts of
the Apostles of his first imprisonment. Strictly speaking, neither
St. Paul nor St. Peter founded that Church, whose origin is un
known. But St. Paul's influence was so great that he might be
caUed one of its founders ; and if St. Peter spent any time there,
there would be good reason for speaking of him in the same way.
The account of St. Peter's death in its fuUest form was that
he suffered at Rome under Nero on the same day with St. Paul,
being crucified with his head downwards (the first authority for
this is Origen in Euseb. E. H. iii. 1), obtaining this favour as
unworthy of the position in which his Master died. St. Paul,
on the other hand, was beheaded as a Roman citizen. The tra
dition was expressed Hi the Mediaeval couplet : —
" Ense eoronatur Paulus, cruce Petrus, eodem
Sub duce, luce, loco ; dux Nero, Roma locus."
The manner of his death is alluded to in John xxi. 18, and
Clement, who was Bishop of Rome, in the letter which he wrote
to the Corinthians about the end of the first century, gives early
testimony to his martyrdom. There is no good reason for
rejecting the tradition that it took place at Rome, though some
of the circumstances may be picturesque additions. From the
middle of the second century onwards this was the account uni
versaUy received, and it would seem to have been handed on by
the earlier age. There is no trace of any other place having
claimed to be the scene of his death, whereas Caius, a Roman
presbyter, writing just after the end of the second century, speaks
of being able to point to the "trophies" of the two Apostles
which must mean some kind of monument, one on the Vatican
the other on the road to Ostia.

THE FIRST EPISTLE OF PETER.

521

There is no complete proof of St. Peter ever having been at
Rome. But a personal relation on his part to that Church is
implied at as early a date as that of Ignatius's letter to it, circa
107, in chap. iv. And there must have been some ground for a
tradition which was undisputed in antiquity. It has been conjec
tured that the part claimed for St. Peter as weU as St. Paul in
the foundation of the Roman Church is to be explained by the
supposed existence of two churches side by side, the one GentUe,
and the other Jewish, the latter being formed of such as with
drew after St. Paul's arrival (cf. Phil. i. 15—18, with Col. iv. 11) ;
and that these Churches stood in a near relation to St. Paul and
St. Peter respectively. The harmony between the two Apostles
would tend in the dHection of reunion, which was completed
before the end of the century in the time of Clement.
2. To whom Written. — The Epistle is addressed to "the elect
who are sojourners of the Dispersion Hi Pontus, Galatia, Cappa
docia, Asia, and Bithynia " (Rev. Ver.). This would prepare us
for finding that Jewish Christians are alone contemplated. But
as the Churches in three, at least, of these countries were mainly
founded by St. Paul, the Jewish element must have been the
smaUer ; and it seems unlikely that St. Peter would address one
portion of them only. And, in fact, passages such as ii. 9 — 10 ;
iv. 2 — 4, according to the Revised Version (cf. i. 14, 18 ; iii. 6)
are more applicable to Christians of GentUe origin. St. Peter
regards these converts as adopted into the true Israel,, and
includes them Hi the sojourners of the Dispersion. It is plain
from his beseeching them ' ' as strangers and pilgrims to abstain
from fleshly lusts " (U. 11) that the position of all God's servants
on earth, and absent from theH true home, is in his mind (cf.
Ps. xxxix. 12; cxix. 19).
In his exhortations against heathen vices (ii. 11, 16), retaha-
tion and revUing (iU. 8 — 12), and the love of gain and power on
the part of the elders (v. 2—3), he may have aimed at faults
among them which had come to his knowledge. Another
motive was their encouragement under the trials to which they
were exposed, and to fortify them against the severer persecu
tion whieh was impending. A third purpose is hinted at
rather than fuUy expressed : "I have written briefly, exhorting,
and testifying that this is the true grace of God wherein ye
stand " (v. 12). The exhortations meet us everywhere. The
testimony seems confined to this passage, while its importance is
marked by its place at the end. He wished, apparently, to dis
sociate himself from sympathy with Judaizers, and to express his
agreement with St. Paul. These Churches were not of his own
planting, and he wished to give his witness to the truth of the
teaching which they had received from his brother Apostle, in the

522 BOOK BY BOOK.
letter which he sent by Silvanus, bis feUow-worker in those very
regions. It is in keeping with the modesty with which this purpose is
intimated that, in addressing the elders, he simply styles himself
theH " fellow-elder " (v. 1), and that the whole of the personal
aUusions to himself are contained in that same verse.
It has been assumed that Silvanus (v. 12) is the same as Silas,
one of the two members of the Church of Jerusalem who were
sent to Antioch along with Paul and Barnabas as independent
witnesses to the decision of the CouncU (Acts xv. 22 — 35), and
who was St. Paul's companion in his second apostolical journey
(Acts xv. 40 — xviii. 5). His name has here the same form as
St. Paul uses (1 Thess. i. 1 ; 2 Thess. i. 1 ; 2 Cor. i. 19), of which
the other is an abbreviation. The mention of him as " our
faithful brother as I account him" (Rev. Ver.), cannot have been
intended to hint the slightest degree of doubt, but expressed in
a delicate manner the agreement of the writer's estimate with
that which he knew to exist Hi the minds of his readers.
The salutation sent from "Marcus, my son" (v. 13) may be,
as some think, that of a son of the Apostle of whom we read
nowhere else. But it is more likely that the term of affection
impHes one who was as a son to him, and that John Mark is
meant, to whose mother's house St. Peter went when released
from the prison (Acts xii. 12). He was cousin or nephew of
Barnabas (Col. iv. 10), and started with St. Paul and him on
theH first apostolical journey, but left them at Perga, in Pam-
phyha (Acts xiii. 13). St. Paul's refusal to take him in the next
journey caused a breach of friendship between him and Barnabas
(Acts xv. 38 — 39) ; but many years afterwards we find St. Paul
anxious for his society (2 Tim. iv. 11). According to Papias
and Clement of Alexandria, he was also closely connected with
St. Peter as his follower (Euseb. E. H. ii. 15) and "interpreter"
(iii. 39) ; by which was meant that St. Mark's Gospel was the
record of what he had heard from the Apostle.
The idea that the Mark here mentioned was St. Peter's own
son is connected with the salutation immediately preceding. The
Bevised Version aims at giving the ambiguity of the original,
" She that is in Babylon elect together with you saluteth you."
If this be an elect sister it must be Peter's wife. But in this
case the mode of expression is unnatural. There can be Httle
doubt that the Syriac and Vulgate are right in understanding it
of the Church in Babylon.
3. Date and Place of Writing. — The fall of Jerusalem, a.d. 70,
probably marks the time before which the Epistle was written,
for after that break-up of the home ,of the Jewish race the term
" dispersion" (i. 1) would lose much of its meaning. But the

THE FIRST EPISTLE OF PETER. 523
precise date cannot be fixed. The mention of persecution only
helps us to a certain degree. The cHcumstances of these Chris
tians of Asia Minor were those of unpopularity and ill-treatment;
but the irial was not severe as yet, though it was about to
become so. It was this unpopularity of the Christians at Rome
which tempted Nero to turn aside from himseH on to them the
suspicion of having set fire to the city. St. Peter may have
written in the foresight of what was coming, though there had
been no example as yet on a great scale. In this case, we may
place the writing of the Epistle a short time before the Neronian
persecution in a.d. 64. On the other hand, though there is no
evidence that this persecution extended to the provinces, it is
Hkely that the example set at Rome would not be forgotten.
And St. Peter may have had in view the approach of persecution
resulting from it.
The mention of Mark is some guide to us. He was with St.
Paul at Rome during his first imprisonment, a.d. 61 — 63, but
was about to go into Asia Minor (Col. iv. 10). Some years later,
during his second imprisonment {circa 67 or 68), the Apostle
wished Timothy to bring him when he came to him (2 Tim.
iv. 11). In this interval we may place Mark's visit to Peter
(v. 13) and the writing of the Epistle. And it cannot be later if
we adopt the traditional account of his death. But those who
do not feel themselves bound by it, and who think that he could
not have written to Churches in which St. Paul's authority was
chiefly recognised during his lifetime, refer it to some time later
than his death.
St. Peter wrote from Babylon (v. 12), but it has been a matter
of dispute whether the old capital of the Chaldeans is meant,
which, though ruined and going to complete decay, still con
tained a large population, in which there were many Jews ; or
whether Eome is intended, the mystical Babylon, an interpreta
tion as old as Papias (Euseb. E. H. H. 15). There is no doubt
that this is the meaning in Rev. xiv. 8 ; xvi. 19 al. But such a
use of the word is as suitable to the character of that book as it
seems unsuitable here. But whether St. Peter's presence so far
to the East was onlya visit, or belonged to a residence of greater
length, we are unable to determine.
4. Style and Character. — The topics foUow each other in no
premeditated order, and the successive thoughts belonging to
them often seem suggested by the one next before. But the
whole form of the Epistle has a great likeness to those of St.
Paul. We see it in the greeting at the beginning, followed by
an introductory passage of some length (i. 3 — 12), in the saluta
tion at the end, and the doxologies (iv. 11 ; v. 11). But the
simUarity does not stop here. The phraseology is frequently

524 BOOK BY BOOK.
that of St. Paul. And there can be little doubt that some
passages are quotations from his writings or influenced by a
recollection of them. This is particularly the case in regard to
the Epistle to the Romans. Compare ii. 6 — 7, Romans ix. 33,
where there are the same departures from the LXX. in quoting
two passages of Isaiah ; i. 14, Rom. xii. 2 ; ii. 2, Rom. xu. 1 ;
ii 13—14, Rom. xiii. 1—5 ; iv. 1—2, Rom, vi. 7 sqq. ; iv. 10—11,
Rom. xii. 6—8. Compare also H. 16, Gal. v. 13 ; v. 12, 1 Cor.
xv. 1. It may be, though this is less clear, that an acquaintance
is shown with Epistles of St. Paul written during his first
imprisonment, cf. i. 10—12, Eph. iii. 9—11; Hi. 22, Eph. i.
20—22 ; ii. 4—6, Eph. ii. 20—22 ; iii. 4, Eph. iii. 16 ; iii. 19—
20, Eph. iv. 8 — 10; or even later, if iu. 3 is connected with
1 Tim. ii. 9.
There are coincidences of expression also with the Epistle of
James, cf. i. 6 — 7, James i. 3 ; ii. 1, James i. 21 ; ii. 11, James
iv. 1 ; iii. 14, iv. 14, James i. 12, 25 ; iv. 8, James v. 12 ; v. 6,
James iv. 10. And there are three quotations common to both :
Isa. xl. 6 — 8. in i. 24, James i. 10 — 11 ; Prov. Hi. 34, in v. 5,
James iv. 6 ; Prov. x. 12, in iv. 8, James v. 20. In the last
instance there is the same abandonment of the LXX. for a render
ing in accordance with the Hebrew. This Hst of references
would be very largely increased if we were to point out the
influence of our Lord's words preserved both in the synoptical
Gospels and St. John. But it is worth while to notice resem
blances between the Epistle and St. Peter's speeches in the Acts
of the Apostles, cf. i. 17, Acts x. 34 ; i. 20, Acts ii. 23, Hi. 18 ;
i. 21, Acts ii. 32 — 36 ; iii. 15, iv. 10 ; H. 4, Actsriv. 11 ; ii. 8,
Actsi. 16, cf. 25 ; iU. 18, Acts Ui. 14.
We might expect to find the Apostle's language deeply
coloured by the Old Testament and the words of our Lord. And
it is interesting to notice how far that source of influence extends.
Thus, we might at first sight be disposed to derive the expres
sion, " that they may be gained " (iii. 1) from 1 Cor. ix. 19 — 20;
but our Lord's words (Matt. xvHi. 15) are the original source in
both cases. But the familiarity shown by St. Peter with the
thoughts and words of St. Paul comes on us as a surprise. We
must remember that he was the great letter- writer as well as the
great teacher. In the enforcing of what was contained in his
Gospel, as he termed it (Rom. ii. 16 ; xvi. 25), he moulded to a
great degree the language of the Church whUe directing its
thought. St. Peter had a personal acquaintance with him, in
which the mind of St. Paul could not fail to impress itseH on
him. Thus, whUe we seem to be able to trace in St. Peter's
writings his acquaintance with his coUeagues James and John,
the influence of St. Paul comes next to that of our Lord. But

THE FIRST EPISTLE OF PETER. 525
he does not merely echo him. He has his own mode of pre
senting doctrine, his own words, and his own grammatical
peeuHarities. In accordance with his desUe to give encouragement under
trial, he turns to the future in hope (i. 3 — 5, 13 ; Hi. 9 ; v. 1, 4,
10, 11). His doctrinal teaching is subordinate to his practical
purpose. But it is much fuUer than St. James's, as we might
expect from his position midway between him and St. Paul. We
meet with the office of each person in the Trinity (i. 1 ), and the
power of the SpHit (i. 12, 22). He enters more into the work of
our Lord, through whom God receives His glory (iv. 11), and we
our caU (v. 10). He speaks of his sufferings (v. 1) in connection
with theH example (ii. 21 — 23), and theH power of cleansing and
reconcUing (i. 1 ; U. 24, 25 ; Ui. 18 ; iv. 1) ; of His Resurrection,
which is the source of behef (i. 21), and of regeneration (i. 3, 23 ;
ui. 21) ; of His Ascension, and the subjection of the angels to
Him (iU. 22). He does not mention the Law, and his spiritual
conception of the Church is seen in H. 5 — 9, and of baptism in
Hi. 21. And yet the treatment and expression in these points is
not the same as St. Paul's, and the characteristic teaching about
justification does not occur.
The Old Testament is frequently quoted, but we do not find in
it what we read about the prophets in i. 10 — 12. And we learn
through St. Peter alone the interest taken by the angels in the
Gospel (i. 12), but cf. Eph. Hi. 10, and our Lord's preaching to
the spHits Hi prison (iU. 19).
5. Authenticity. — This was undisputed in antiquity. It was
among the books universaUy received. The first allusion to it is
in 2 Peter Ui. 1. It is repeatedly quoted by Polycarp — the great
Unk between the apostolic age and the one which followed it— ¦
in his Epistle to the PhUippians. He does not name it. But
this is done more than once by Irenaeus, and by Clement pf
Alexandria, TertulHan, and Origen. It is not mentioned in the
Muratorian Canon, which admits of explanation ; but it was
included in the old Latin and Syriac versions.
Tn modern times it has been caUed in question, on the ground
of the want of originahty which is seen in the use of other men's
writings — a thing unworthy of an Apostle — and the absence of
such a distinct individuahty as would befit St. Peter. These
points have been dealt with above. A relative originahty is
apparent Hi it, though not an absolute one. It is said, also, that
the characteristics of the persecution agree best with that which
was carried on in Trajan's time, of which we read in the corre
spondence between PHny, when he was Governor of Bithynia,
circa a.d. 112, and the Emperor (Pliny's Letters, x. 97, 98). But
the tune of Trajan is not so suitable as that of Nero, or one near

526 BOOK BY BOOK.
it. The Christians were not obliged to defend themselves before
the magistrates, but were merely to be ready always to give an
answer to every man that asked a reason of the hope that was in
them (iii. 15) ; so that suffering on account of being a Christian
was connected with the general dislike of them (see Tacitus,
Ann. xv. 44). And we see no trace in the Epistle of the success
of the Gospel which brought on the persecution in Bithynia,
where the temples had been almost deserted, and there was no
longer a sale for animals for the purpose of sacrifice.
The theory of those who refer the Epistle to this date is that it
was written by an adherent of St. Paul, who bad also a leaning
towards St. Peter, to Churches in which attachment to the latter
was prevalent, in order to cheer them under theH persecution ;
and that to do this successfully he assumed the name of Peter,
and dropped the most distinctive points in Paul's teaching. Or
else the contrary is supposed, that the writer was of Peter's
school, and adopted much of Paul's doctrine to recommend his
letter to those who would otherwise not have paid attention to it.
It seems safer to remain content with the strong external tes
timony on the one hand, and on the other to recognise in St.
Peter himself the union of those elements of thought which, as
these conjectures admit, must have belonged' to him. And it is
not a matter of sentiment, but strictly belongs to the argument,
to mention the power exercised by the Epistle on a devout
reader. Those who are acquainted with the practical commen
tary upon it of Archbishop Leighton know the stores of wisdom
and strength which it contains. This is more easily understood
if it be a genuine work, than on the supposition that it was com
posed by any one, however able or well-intentioned, who made
use of another man's name.
6. Analysis.
i. 1 — 2. Salutation.
3 — 12. Introduction. — 13 — ii. 10. A Group of General Exhorta
tions. — (ii. 4 — 10 is not strictly hortatory, but enforces the pre
ceding passage.)
ii. 11— -iv. 19. A second Group of Exhortations relative to their
Position in the Presence of the Gentiles.
{a) Relating to the influence of Christian example as observed
by the heathen, ii. 11 — iii. 12.
(b) Prescribing a line of conduct under their insults, Ul-treat-
ment, dissolute life, and active enmity, iU. 13 — iv. 19.
v. 1 — 9. Exhortations to particular Classes and the whole Body.
10 — 11. A Promise that God will perfect them, ending with a
Doxology. 12 — 14. Conclusion.

THE SECOND EPISTLE OF PETER.
1. Relation to 1 Peter and Jude. — The writer in the first Epistle
is " Peter, an Apostle of Jesus." He styles himseH here " Simon "
(or "Synieon," cf. Actsxv. 14) "Peter, a Servant and an Apostle
of Jesus Christ." From the reference in iii. 1 to 1 Peter, it
appears that the readers are the same in both cases, though they
are not here spoken of as belonging to the Dispersion in Asia
Minor. But the address takes in others. It is quite general,
" to them that have obtained like precious faith with us." This
may mean the whole body of Jewish Christians outside Judea
who had received the same privileges as himseH and his brother
Apostles, with the other members of the Church of Jerusalem.
But from the absence of that which applies peculiarly to Jewish
behevers it would seem that the Gentiles, who were very much
in St. Peter's thoughts before, are now distinctly regarded as
occupying the same position as the Jewish Church at large. So
this is a strictly Catholic Epistle.
Its object, as stated Hi Ui. 17 — 18, is to promote their stead
fastness by warning them of danger which threatened faith and
practice, and to urge them to seek a fuUer knowledge of God and
Jesus Christ (cf . i. 2 — 3, 8). It is not, then, the same as in 1 Peter.
There is no mention of danger from without in the shape of per
secution, but from the encouragement to evU Hving given by false
teachers (H.), and disbelief of the Lord's coming (Hi.).
Its style differs considerably from that of the earlier Epistle,
a fact which, as St. Jerome teUs us, weighed with those who
rejected it, and which he accounted for by supposing that different
"interpreters" or secretaries were employed. It has a greater
unity of thought. It is more elegant, and comes nearer to
having a Greek air about it. A charge has even been made
recently, but without success, of an absurd affectation of fine
writing. On the other hand, many resemblances between the two
Epistles have been pointed out, to appreciate which they must be
compared in the original.

528 BOOK BY BOOK.
Quotations from the Old Testament, which are numerous in
1 Peter, are rare here. Besides the historical references in
chaps, ii. and Hi., the only use of it is in iii. 8, Psalm xc. 4 ; iii.
13, Isaiah Ixv. 17; and ii. 22, Prov. xxvi. 11, where the paral
lelism is completed by the Apostle or some earHer writer. The
daUy vexation of Lot is not contained in the narrative of Genesis,
nor the great noise with which the heavens wiU pass away (iii.
10) Hi our Lord's words (Matt. xxiv. 35). And the part which
fire is to play in the destruction of the earth, canente David et
Sibylla, is not found in the Psalms, nor was it a point of Jewish
belief. Its presence Hi the SibyUine Oracles, part of the Chris-
tian additions which they received, and in Justin, Apol. ii. 7,
both rest ultimately, it has been urged, on the teaching of this
Epistle (Hi. 10—12).
The likeness of a part of it to Jude is obvious. There can be
no doubt that one of the writers is indebted to the other. The
question as to the priority has been differently answered. But
the fact that there is greater vigour, symmetry, and consistency
in Jude gives his Epistle the look of originality. And in some
places it supplies the key to St. Peter's meaning. Thus, whUe
in Jude 6 the aUusion is not clear, but has been explained by the
Jewish interpretation of Genesis vi. 1 — 2, it is less apparent in
2 Peter ii. 4. Without Jude 9 (for the source of whieh see
the chapter on that Epistle) we should not understand what
2 Peter Ui. 1 1 refers to. The chief argument for the earlier date
of 2 Peter is that it foreteUs the coming of those whom St. Jude
describes from experience in a way answering to the prophecy.
The common opinion, however, is that St. Peter had read Jude's
Epistle. But stUl his use of it is free and independent. It
abandons its language suddenly, applies it differently, adds,
abridges, and expands. He does not foUow Jude fuUy in his use
of traditional views or apocryphal books in the passages aHeady
referred to, and he omits aU mention of the Book of Enoch (Jude
14 — 15). He makes additions suitable to his argument in ii. 5,
6 — 9, 16, 19 — 22; and founds a great part of iH. on Jude 18.
His readiness to employ the words and thoughts of others in
his own way meets us Hi 1 Peter, though in a less striking manner.
It is not an improbable suggestion that St. Jude's Epistle, whether
dHectly communicated to him or not, produced a deep impression
on him, partly by its vivid description of existing mischief, and
partly by the proof it gave of more than had come under his own
notice. This deepened sense of danger to the Church impeUed
him to do what his position called for while he had time (i. 12  15).
2. Authenticity. — The peculiar position of the Epistle in regard
to external testimony requHes a somewhat full notice. In the

THE SECOND EPISTLE OF PETER. 529
list which Eusebius gives of the Books of the New Testament
in tbe first part of the fourth century (E. H, iU. 25), he states
that the greater part were generaUy received. He caUs others
of them " controverted but well-known and recognised by most."
These are Hebrews, James, 2 Peter, 2 and 3 John, Jude, and
the Apocalypse. But this distinction soon disappears, and we
have other Hsts belonging to the same century either identical
with our own, as that of Athanasius, Epiphanius, Jerome,
Rufinus, and Augustine, or almost so, as that of Cyril of Jerusalem,
in which the Apocalypse is omitted. To the same age belongs
the earUest judgm'ent on the subject by Councils of the Church.
The Acts of the CouncU of Laodicea in Phrygia, a.d. 363, contain
a Hst of canonical books which is the same as Cyril's. Its genuine
ness is doubtful. But no doubt attaches to the Canon of Scripture
as recognised by the ThHd CouncU of Carthage, a.d. 397, which
agrees entirely with that which we inherit. Neither these Councils
nor the writers just mentioned professed to do more than record
the testimony of the earlier periods as it had eome down to them.
After this only reminiscences appear from time to time of the
doubts entertained as to parts of the Canon, chiefly in those
particular regions in which they were once unknown.
(i.) The ground on which a book was acknowledged to be
canonical was its having for its author an Apostle or apostoHc
man. This was a matter on which the Church of the earliest age
was able to pronounce. Existing as it did before the writing of
any of the books of the New Testament, they were successively
entrusted to its recognition and care, under the guidance of Divine
providence, as "the Keeper and Witness of Holy Writ." But
the knowledge of them was not everywhere complete at the same
time. In the case of the Epistles the Churches to which they were
originaUy written cherished them from the first, and became
centres from which the knowledge of them spread. But it took
time and intercommunication between the widely-separated com
munities, Hi an age when such intercourse was more difficult than
it is now, before the whole Church became famUiar with all its
possessions of this kind, and distinct in the enumeration of them.
This result was helped on by conflicts with heresies, and above
aU by the demand made by order of Diocletian upon the Chris
tians to surrender the Scriptures in order that they might be
destroyed. This persecution, carried on in the early years of the
fourth century, directed the attention of aU to the practical ques
tion as to which books, within the whole range of Christian
literature, were or were not Scripture.
The full expression of agreement on this point belongs, as we

530 BOOK BY BOOK.
have seen, to that period. It was not the effect of any corporate
act of the whole Church, but an agreement stUl found in the
pages of the leading writers, as to what had been held from the
first. We cannot recover the whole process by which it was
attained. The entire evidence which was relied on has not reached
us ; but it is instructive to trace the separate lines of testimony
supplied by the earlier periods, such as quotations Hi orthodox
and heretioal writings, and the admission or exclusion of certain
books from the most ancient versions. These sources, from the
character of the Hterature of the two first centuries and the
fragmentary condition in which it has descended to us, must be
imperfect. And yet the information actuaUy supplied is remark
able. This is true not only of the undisputed, but, in a less degree,
of the controverted books. But the Second Epistle of Peter has
the least amount of this kind of support. There is no undoubted
trace of it in Church writers before Origen, who wrote in the
first part of the third century. His words are preserved in
Eusebius (E. H., vi. 25) : " Peter again, on whom the Church of
Christ is built, against which the gates of heU shaU not prevaU,
has left behind an Epistle generaUy acknowledged, perhaps also
a second, for it is a disputed question." There is additional
mention of it jn his -writings, and even quotations from it, but as
they are only Hi the Latin version of Rufinus, who was in the
habit of supplementing his author's text, they are not to be
trusted. Again, Hi the interval between Origen and Eusebius,
no reference to it is found except one which is implied in the
words of FirmUian, Bishop of Caesarea Hi Cappadocia, and a>
disciple of Origen, in a letter which he wrote to St. Cyprian,
a.d. 256. Nor did it form part of the old Syriac version, nor of
the old Latin. There is no mention of it in the Muratorian
Canon, but this is true also of 1 Peter, about which there was
no doubt.
Thus it must be admitted that the evidence for it Hi detaU is
extremely smaU. StUl the fact remains that the Church, whieh
had been in no hurry to recognise it or the other disputed books,
ultimately pronounced Hi its favour, as it did in theirs. But
there is one point which must not be passed over. It is hard to
explain how a writing proceeding from one in the position of St.
Peter could have failed to find immediate and universal acceptance.
Our wonder is lessened to some extent by the few signs of acquaint
ance with the first Epistle, which appear for a long time in one
quarter. " It must be noticed that the actual traces of the early
use of 1 Peter in the Latin churches are very scanty. There
is not tbe least evidence to show that its authority was ever

THE SECOND EPISTLE OF PETER. 531
disputed ; but, on the other hand, it does not seem to have been
much read. The Epistle is not mentioned in the Muratorian
Canon, though no stress can be laid on that fact. It is more
strange that TertuUian quotes it only twice, and that, too, in
writings which are more or less open to suspicion." (Westcott,
"Survey of the History of the Canon of the New Testament,'
p. 260, n.) Even on the supposition of its not being genuine,
the obscurity of 2 Peter is perplexing. We might have expected
to have found it denounced. It is clear that we are not acquainted
with aU the cHcumstances.
(ii.) Internal difficulties operated in some degree against it.
We have seen what Jerome said about the effect of the difference
of style Hi the two Epistles. And we learn from him that the
authority of Jude was questioned on account of its use of Apocry
phal writings. This would be Hkely in a degree to affect the
reception of this Epistle. Objections to it of this nature have had
great influence in modern tunes. It contains an accumulation
of points open to criticism. An anxiety on the part of the writer
to be recognised as an Apostle has been detected, contrasting with
the modesty of the earlier letter. It may be replied that the
Apostle's aim now was to speak out in his own name, and to use
the authority which he had, whUe the other tone was in agree
ment with his purpose there.
It has been said that St. Peter's Hfe does not aUow for an
interval between the Epistles long enough for the rise of a new
set of circumstances completely changing his aim. But spiritual
evils are often of rapid growth, and noticed in theH early stages
by those whose duty it is to be on the watch. A mark of later
date is seen in the term "holy mount" apphed to the scene of
the transfiguration (i. 18), as if it were a recognised name for it
to the prejudice of Mount Zion. But it seems to imply no more
than that the readers were acquainted with the event referred to.
And the confining of the apostoHc witness to that one incident in
our Lord's Hfe, to the omission of His passion and resurrection
dwelt on in 1 Peter, is taken as showing a want of the sense of
proportion not to be expected in one of His companions. Yet it
is Hi keeping with the view of the whole Epistle. The first
coming of the Lord was not denied by the scoffers. It is His
" eternal kingdom " into which St. Peter incites his readers to
secure an entrance (i. 11). He assures them of the power of
Jesus Christ, and His coming in glory by his testimony to the
sight of His majesty which had been granted beforehand to him
and the two other Apostles. Again St. Paul's Epistles are placed,
perhaps with other contemporary writings, in the same rank
apparently as the Scriptures of the Old Testament (iii. 16). It is
M M 2

532

BOOK BY BOOK.

- not what we should look for in St. Peter's time. But the difficulty
disappears on reflection.
The writings of the Apostles Were originaUy subordinate to
their spoken words. TheH witness to the facts and meaning of
the Lord's hfe was deHvered by them Ha person. The cHcum
stances which drew letters from them were only occasional. But
they would not have aUowed, on the one hand, that their record
about the Lord was inferior in importance or authority to the Old
Testament ; nor that what they wrote was to be less regarded
than what they said. Hence there is no reason to see here a trace
of the peculiar reverence paid at a later time to the writings of
St. Paul and the other Apostles, when theH voice was sUent ;
nor to look upon the respect actuaUy claimed for them as an
anachronism. (iU.) The appeal to internal characteristics may be made also
on the other side. If St. Peter was not the author, we have
before us the work of a forger. But if so, he must have been
an artless one, for he has not taken the pains to make his writing
conform to the model of the First Epistle in several minor points
in which we might have expected it. The spHit of the writer is
admitted to be one which befitted the Apostle. This is against
the probabiUty of deceit. In writers of a different stamp, and of
a later age than that to which the Epistle professes to belong,
pious fraud is more inteUigible. And if it is a forgery, it stands
quite by itself.
Its apostolic tone not only separates it from the mass of spurious
books, but from Barnabas or the Shepherd of Hermas, and even
from Ignatius and Clement. The character of the false teaching
spoken of suits no age so weU as that of the Apostles. It was in
the undeveloped state of which we find mention in the Colossians
and the Pastoral Epistles. It is bard .to see how the language
which is used would have suited the purpose of one who had in
view any full-grown form of heresy. He would almost certainly
have given clearer indications of the nature of those errors which
he wishes to condemn with the authority of St. Peter. But it
may be weU to repeat that the consent of the Church is firm
ground. The discussion of internal evidence, on one side or the
other, gives us a less trustworthy footing.
3. Analysis.
(i.) 1 — 2. Greeting.
3 — 11. Exhortations. — To meet the bounty of God by diligence
in rising through a sevenfold series from faith to charity, 3  7 •
in order to avoid unfruitfulness and blindness, and to secure an
entrance into the eternal kingdom of Christ Jesus, 8  11.
12 — 15. Personal Reastnifor writing the Epistle.

THE SECOND EPISTLE OF PETER. 533
16 — 21. Grounds for expecting the Lord's coming. — His majesty
witnessed beforehand by the Apostle on the Mount, 16 — 18 ;
the teaching of prophecy, 19 — 21.
(U.) 1 — 22. Fake Teachers to be expected ; their punishment.— There
shaU be false teachers among them, as there were false prophets
in Israel, 1 — 3 ; God knows how to deUver the godly out of
temptation, and to keep the ungodly under punishment tiU the
day of judgment ; as shown by the example of Noah and Lot,
on the one hand, and by that of the sinful angels and Sodom
and Gomorrha, on the other, 4 — 10. Description of these teachers
(so far as they have aHeady made their appearance), 11 — 16;
theH influence, 17 — 22.
(Ui.) 1 — 10. The Lord's coming defended against Scoffers. The aim
of this and the former Epistle is to remind them of the words
of the prophets and the Lord, 1 — 2. Scoffers wiU come deriding
their expectation of Him, 3 — 4. They wUfuUy forget that God,
who once destroyed the earth by water, will do so again by fire,
5 — 7. His delay is long-suffering, 8 — 9 ; but He wiU come, and
suddenly, 10.
11 — 18. Concluding Exhortations, including mention of St. Paul's
¦ Epistles. Doxology.

THE EPISTLE OF JUDE.
1. Authorship. — The seventh and last of the so-caUed CathoHc
Epistles claims (verse 1) to be the work of " Jude, the servant of
Jesus Christ, and brother of James." Of the several persons in
the New Testament bearing the name of Jude only two can be
said in any way to answer to this description of our writer,
viz. : —
(i.) "Jude of James," a member of the band of Apostles,
Luke vi. 16 ; Acts i. 13 ; John xiv. 22. This phrase is translated
by a somewhat unusual method in the Authorised Version,
"Jude, the brother of James," in order to make the title agree
with that by which the writer of this Epistle definitely names
himself ; but the ordinary significance of this form of expression
in Greek demands rather the translation, "Jude, the son of
James," as it is rendered in the Peshito Version, and by Tyndale,
Cranmer, Luther, and most modern critics ; and indeed in the
case of the other Apostles so described, the eUipse is thus supphed
in the Authorised Version, e.g. "James, the son of Alphaeus."
The twelve members of the ApostoHc body in aU the hsts
(Matt. x. 2 ; Mark iu. 16 ; Luke vi. 14 ; Acts i. 13) faU into three
groups of four. In the first two Hsts the name " Jude of James "
does not occur, but its place is represented by the name " Thad
daeus," Hi consequence of* which "Jude of James" has been
identified with Thaddaeus, who was — according to some MSS. of
the Greek Testament, foUowed by Jerome — also caUed Lebbaeus.
Also, since in aU four Usts of the Apostles, James, the son of
Alphaeus, is the first name of the group in which the member
Thaddaeus or Jude of James is also always placed, it has been
generaUy thought that this James is the father intended in the
title, Jude the son of James.
This Jude, therefore, was — («) an Apostle; (S) also called
Thaddaeus ; {e) the son of James the Little and grandson of
Alphaeus. (ii.) Jude, the brother of the Lord, mentioned in Matt. xui.
55 ; Mark vi. 3, together with a brother named James.

THE EPISTLE OF JUDE. 535
These two men have been by some critics regarded as one and
the same person.
According to this supposition Jude is the brother of James, he
and James being both sons of Alphaeus ; Alphaeus is the same as
Clopas, the husband of a Mary (Mark xv. 40 ; John xix. 25), who
is regarded as the sister of the VUgin Mary, so that Jude and
James would be the cousins (in Greek " brethren ") of our Lord,
and agree with the names recorded in Matt. xiii. 55 ; Mark vi. 3.
Against this view, however, are the two facts— first that, as
aHeady stated, it is unusual to interpret the Greek phrase, "Jude
of James," Hi any other manner than " Jude, the son of James ; "
next, that it is distinctly remarked in John vii. 5, that our Lord's
brethren did not beHeve Hi Him, and therefore it is impossible
that they could have been among the Apostles ; and indeed from
Acts i. 13, 14, it is clear that they were distinguished from the
Apostles after theH conversion. It would seem safer, therefore,
to regard "Jude of James," or Thaddaeus, the Apostle, as one
person, and Jude, the brother of the Lord, as another distinct
from him.
If this be the case, which of the two may we more probably
regard as the author of the Epistle ?
The writer styles himseH (verse 1) "the servant of Jesus
Christ, and brother of James," from which it would appear;
first, that he was not Jude, the son of James, the Apostle ; next,
that he was not an Apostle at aU, or he would have mentioned
the fact in the usual manner (as St. Paul in the first verse of
almost aU his Epistles, and St. Peter in the opening of his two
letters), and by identifying himseH as an Apostle of Jesus Christ
he would not have been obhged to fix his personality by the
description "brother of James."
In accordance with this conclusion is the fact that nowhere in
his Epistle does the writer speak as an Apostle, but perhaps
rather as one outside the ApostoHc body, e.g. in verse 17, "Re
member ye the words which were spoken before of the Apostles."
And the absence of the Epistle in the Peshito (Syriac) Version of
the New Testament may perhaps also be taken as a sign that it
was not the work of the Apostle Jude Thaddaeus, to whom
tradition assigns the foundation of the Syrian Church of Edessa.
For these reasons, therefore, the writer would appear to have
been Jude, the brother of the Lord and of James, who had
probably been converted to the faith after the Lord's resurrec
tion (see Acts i. 14 ; 1 Cor. ix. 5). If so, his brother James must
have been a weU-known person at the time, from the introduc
tion of the relationship in the opening words of the letter, and
he was therefore perhaps the James who was the first Bishop

536 BOOK BY BOOK.
of Jerusalem (Acts xii. 17 ; xv. 13, 19 ; xxvi. 18 ; Gal. ii. 9, 12),
and possibly the author of the Epistle bearing that name.
Against the identification of our author with the brother of
the Lord, and in favour of the writer's being the Apostle Jude,
it has been alleged —
(i.) That the phrase, "servant of Jesus Christ," may convey
the idea of Apostleship, as in Rom. i. 1, Tit. i. 1. But in these
passages, as in 2 Pet. i. 1, it is coupled with, and apparently
distinct from, the title of Apostle; and in PhU. i. 1, it is appHed
also to Timothy, who was not an Apostle ; and, lastly, it may be
noted that, as the phrase certainly does not of necessity imply
the Apostolate, it would assuredly be an insufficient aUusion to it
in a solitary letter from one of the less-known members of the
ApostoHc body.
(ii.) That if he were really the brother of the Lord, the writer
would certainly have described himseH as such rather than as
the brother of James. But it is probable, as the author of the
" Adumbrationes " ascribed to Clement of Alexandria long ago
pointed out, that from motives of modesty he preferred to veil
his casual relationship with the Lord under the general and less
distinctive title, "the servant of Jesus Christ," as expressing
his more important spiritual union with Him who had been by
the Resurrection exalted as the Son of God, for the union through
faith echpsed the union through the flesh (Matt. xH. 49, 50 ;
Heb. U. 11). Indeed, as Dean Alford remarks, "had such a
designation as the brother of the Lord been found in the address
of an Epistle, it would have formed a strong d priori objection
to its authenticity," as savouring rather of " those superstitious
feelings with which the next and foUowing ages regarded His
earthly relatives."
It seems, therefore, more in accordance with the natural and
simple bearing of tbe evidence to assume that the author of the
Epistle was Jude, the brother of the Lord (whatever exact rela
tionship that designation may imply), and not Jude Thaddaeus,
the Apostle, the son of James and grandson of Alphaeus.
As to the after history of the writer : — The traditions con
nected with the name of Jude (aU of which appear to be of
late origin) relate to the Apostle Jude Thaddaeus, except the
interesting story preserved by Eusebius ("Eccl. Hist." iii. 20)
from Hegesippus, that the descendants of Jude, "the reputed
brother of the Saviour according to the flesh," were viewed with
suspicion by the Emperor Domitian from their connection with
David, the ancestor of the coming Messianic King, as likely to
prove leaders in any Jewish rising against the Roman power ;
but they were eventually dismissed by him with contempt as

THE EPISTLE OF JUDE. 537
harmless rustics, when he found on examination that their ideas
of the kingdom to come were not what he had imagined.
2. Authenticity. — The exact personality of the author being
uncertain, we are not surprised to find that the canonicity of the
letter has been a matter of doubt, not merely in modern times,
but also Hi the early ages of the Church when it was not univer
saUy known.
The evidence bearing on the authenticity of any work naturaUy
faUs under two heads : —
Internal evidence gathered from the contents of the writing
itself.
External evidence, consisting of points in the writings of
other authors, or of facts in history, which in any way
connect themselves with the work in question.
(i.) The evidence of genuineness which the letter itself presents
is chiefly of a negative character, and may be summed up as
foUows : —
(a) No portion of it gives ground for the faintest suspicion
that it was written with intent to impose upon the
Church in any degree. The simple and indefinite
description of the writer is in itself a mark of the
straightforward character of the work. Accordingly
we find that the doubts as to its canonicity have
never been based upon any supposed traces of
forgery in the Epistle.
{b) Neither the personage of the author, nor the nature
of the contents, are sufficiently ambitious to render
any fraud probable. Relatively speaking, the
Epistle is of Httle importance either for novelty of
revelation or for special application of doctrine;
and a forger would have aimed at some more
definite and significant object in order to obtain
acceptance for his work. And it is from this com
paratively unimportant character of the letter that
the doubts as to its authenticity have mainly arisen,
the question in the minds of the ancients being
whether it seemed to fiU any real gap in the fabric
of Holy Scriptures.
(U.) Passing to the evidence relating to the letter from external
sources, we may briefly trace its history as foUows : —
It is not noticed by any of the Apostolic Fathers, nor in the
so-caUed Epistle of Barnabas and Shepherd of Hermas, nor is
there any vestige of its existence in the writings of Irenaeus and
Papias. As already stated, it is absent from the Peshito Version
of the New Testament (a work of untraceable antiquity) in com-

538 BOOK BY BOOK.
mon with the Second Epistle of St. Peter, the Second and ThHd
of St. John, and the Apocalypse. This fact, however, may merely
show that at the early date when the Syriac translation was made
the Epistle had not reached the Asiatic Churches, while the
brevity of the letter and the limited aim of its contents suffi
ciently account for the absence of quotations from it Hi the early
fathers. Side by side as containing the earliest known trace of the
Epistle come —
{a) The old Latin Version of the New Testament, which
it is thought must certainly have been made previous
to a.d. 170, where the letter is found in its place
among the canonical books ; and
{b) The Muratorian fragment of the Canon, circa a.d. 170,
which says, " The Epistle of Jude and,two Epistles
bearing the name of John are received in the
Catholic Church," or " among the CathoHc
Epistles," the text and interpretation being un
certain.
Clement of Alexandria, circa a.d. 165 to 220, refers to the
Epistle more than once as the authoritative work of St. Jude, and
is the first of the fathers to notice it.
Origen, a.d. 186 to 253, though in one passage seeming to
concede only a disputed reception to the Epistle, yet elsewhere
quotes from it several times, and in his comments on Matt. xHi.
55, 56, characterizes it as " an Epistle of few verses, but full of
words vigorous with heavenly grace."
TertuUian, circa a.d. 190, not only regards the Epistle as the
work of "an Apostle," but also uses it as a decisive proof of the
authority of the Book of Enoch, which is quoted in it.
By subsequent writers it is frequently aUuded to as an inspired
authority. The cautious Eusebius, however, circa a.d. 270 to 340,
even in his time in one passage (E. H. ii. 23) regards the book
as a spurious writing, though in another (E. H. iii. 25) he merely
places it among the disputed works. Lastly, Jerome, at the close
of the fourth century, places the Epistle among the canonical
books as the work of an Apostle, explaining that the doubts as
to its authenticity in the past were chiefly due to the quotation
from the Apocryphal Book of Enoch.
From the varied tone of these notices it will be observed that
the Epistle only passed into acceptance throughout the Church
by very slow degrees, which may be explained by the brevity
and comparative insignificance of the work, the uncertainty as to
its author, and the aUusions to Apocryphal books which it con
tains; whUst it must also be borne in mind that the tendency
of delay Hi the recognition of the Epistle by the different

THE EPISTLE OF JUDE. 539
Churches would be to increase rather than to diminish the force
of prejudice.
3. Object. — The letter is addressed (verse 1) "to them that
are sanctified by God the Father, and preserved in Christ Jesus,
and caUed." This salutation is so general as to be apphcable
to aU Christians, and thus serves to Ulustrate the aim of a
" CathoHc " Epistle in the simplest sense of this term. SimUarly
the exhortations and warnings throughout the Epistle would
apply equaUy to aU branches of the Church.
But perhaps two hints seem to point to a particularly Jewish
Church as the primary destination of the letter : —
(i.) The description of the writer as the " brother of James,"
which would not only be a sufficient identification, but would also
have a special significance to Palestinian Christians, if1 that
brother were James, the famous Bishop of Jerusalem.
(ii.) The thoroughly Jewish historical aUusions ; e.g. the
Redemption from Egypt and purification in the wUderness (verse
5) ; the overthrow of Sodom and Gomorrha (verse 7) ; the Rab
binic legend about the body of Moses (verse 9) ; the sins of Cain,
Balaam, and Korah (verse 11) ; the traditions concerning Enoch
(verses 14 and 15), aU of which imply a Jewish turn of mind in
the recipients of the Epistle.
It would therefore appear that the letter was originaUy written
to Hebrew-Christians in Palestine, and this may perhaps be Cor
roborated by the aUusion to ApostoHc teaching, as a whole, in
verse 17, where it seems to be UnpHed that the readers of the
Epistle had themselves heard the Apostles generaUy.
The object which St. Jude had in writing to them is stated
(verse 3) to be "to exhort them that they should earnestly contend
for the faith which was once delivered unto the saints ; " and
this exhortation is said (verse 4) to be rendered necessary by the
evU examples of certain reprobate members in the Church, against
whom he dUects his efforts to warn his readers by a vehement
exposure of theH wickedness. These offenders appear to have
been carnaUv-minded libertines who used the freedom of Christians
from the Hteral obligation of the Mosaic law as a cloke for vice,
Hving Hi Ucentiousness themselves and raUing contemptuously
against aU authorities and rulers both ecclesiastical and civil.
The handUng of the subject will be more evident from an analysis
of the letter; it is modeUed throughout on a careful plan —
bordering on the artificial — the main divisions, subdivisions, and
instances all bemg arranged on a threefold system.
(A) Preface ; verses 1 — 4 :
I. Salutation : verse 1 — 2.
H. Object of the letter : verse 3
III. Reason for this object : verse 4.

540 BOOK BV BOOK.
(B) Warnings ; verses 5 — 19:
I. Three instances of Divine punishment for corporate wicked
ness applied to the case of these Hbertines : verses 5 — 10 :
(a) The rebellious IsraeHtes in the wilderness : verses 5, 8.
(b) The unfaithful angels in contrast to the faithful :
verses 6, 9.
(c) The sensual cities of the plain : verses 7, 10.
II. Three instances of individual wickedness Ulustrating the
sins of these evil-doers : verse 1 1 :
(a) Cain = disobedience.
(b) Balaam=greed,
(c) Korah=raUing.
III. Three vivid descriptions of these latest rebels, with three
tokens by which their condemnation may be evident; verses 12
—19 : {a) IUustration of their state by images from Nature :
verses 12, 13 ; to be recognised from its agreement
with the words of Enoch : verses 14, 15.
{b) By their base thoughts and language : verse 16 ; ful
filling the prophecies of the Apostles : verses 17, 18.
(«) By their unfaithful conduct, attested by their lack of
spirituaHty : verse 1 9.
(C.) Exhortations ; verses 20 — 25 :
I: As to themselves (verse 20, 21) let his readers be firm in :
(a) Faith : verse 20.
{b) Love: verse 21 a.
(c) Hope : verse 21 J.
II. With reference to the libertines (verses' 22, 23) let the
faithful treat :
(a) Some of them with gentle measures : verse 22.
(b) Others with strong remedies : verse 23«.
(e) But all their sins with utter disapproval : verse 235.
I1T. As regards God: Doxology (verses 24, 25) let all join in
thanks to Him for :
{a) His support against similar falling away : verse 24«.
{b) His grace in sanctification : verse 24i.
(e) His wisdom in overruUng everything : verse 25.
4. Date, Place, etc., of Writing. — On these points we have no
direct information, either internal or external : aU the indications
are so slender that the inferences deduced from them have varied
considerably in everything except uncertainty.
(i.) The story preserved by Eusebius (quoted above) seems to
imply that the descendants of St. Jude were summoned from
Palestine to the Emperor Domitian ; and as we found that the
writer appeared to claim a Palestinian reputation in the opening

THE EPISTLE OF JUDE. 541
of his Epistle, we may perhaps most reasonably conjecture that
the letter was written somewhere in the Holy Land.
(ii.) In verse 17 the teaching of the Apostles is aUuded to as
a thing of the past ; "the words whieh were spoken before " . . . .
" how they told you." This language, however, cannot be forced
to mean more than that the Apostles had passed away from
that particular part of the world where St. Jude's readers
resided, and were carrying on their work elsewhere.
(iii.) The internal condition of the Church to which the Epistle
points is certainly not very far advanced. There appears to have
been no definite code of discipHne ; notorious offenders are" stUl
members of the Church, and present at the Agapae, or Love-
feasts, which united aH Church-members : even the most violent
upholders of new opinions are not ecclesiastically deposed, and
are only just beginning to separate themselves (verse 19). The
reaction of the escape from Judaism is stUl fresh, as in the case
of the recipients of some of St. Paul's Epistles, and shows itself
in the laxity of these Hbertines ; theH excesses are of a primitive
nature, and theH heresies are not yet developed into a system.
(iv.) It is noteworthy that the destruction of Jerusalem (a.d.
70) is Hi no way aUuded to, which would appear to point to a
previous date for <he composition of the letter. It has indeed
been asserted that the event is in no degree connected with the
subject of the Epistle, and that therefore there is no cause for
surprise in the omission of aU reference to it, although it might
have aHeady taken place. But the writer expressly bases his
warnings on the most notable judgments of God for disobedience ;
and therefore, with such a subject in hand, he would have found
the destruction of Jerusalem and overthrow of the Jewish nation
signally to the purpose, if it had been accompHshed, as a recent
instance paraUel to that of the Church in the wUderness (verse 5)
or of the fallen angels (verse 6).
The result of these slight indications is to point to a date
towards the close of the era of general Apostolic labour, yet
previous to the faU of Jerusalem, i.e. some time between a.d. 60
—70. As to the language in which the Epistle was originally written,
there is not sufficient warrant to suppose that the letter ever
appeared in any other than the Greek dress which it now wears.
Attempts have been made to prove that the original was in
Hebrew ; but the fact that the language is Greek written by a
Jew is enough to explain any apparent Semiticisms whieh may
be noticeable in places.
5. Peculiarities. — Besides the impetuous and intensely earnest
style, which must be an evident token of the writer's character,

542 BOOK BY BOOK.
this short Epistle presents in an important degree the interesting
pecuHarity of definitely referring to events in the ancient history
of the Church of God which are not contained in the Canonical
Books of the Old Testament, even going so far in one starthng
instance as to quote dHectly from the Apocryphal Book of Enoch.
(i.) In verse 9 we are informed of a conflict between the
Archangel Michael and the devU on the body of Moses, and it is
natural to inquire whence the writer obtained this aUusion.
In the " Adumbrationes " assigned to Clement of Alexandria,
and Hi Origen's work " De Principiis " III., H. 1, mention is
made of an apocryphal book called " The Assumption of Moses "
(parts of which have been discovered in a Latin translation), as
containing notice of this conflict ; and this, according to Didymus
of Alexandria, was the reason why the Manichees rejected the
Epistle. But we are not Hi a position to say that this book was in exis
tence at the time of St. Jude, nor that: — supposing it were written
before his day — he was actuaUy acquainted with it, though, ac
cording to some late writers, Gal. v. 6; vi. 15, is a quotation
from it by St. Paul.
It is more probable that St. Jude's knowledge of this legend
was derived from the same source as that whence the author of
" The Assumption of Moses " received it, viz., from the tradition
of the Jewish Rabbis. Tbe original groundwork of the legend
is doubtless the passage Hi the Targum of Jonathan (which is
supposed to have existed in oral form at the time of our Lord),
on Deut. xxxiv. 6, which states that the grave of Moses was
placed under the care of Michael. Round this centre floated a
whole cycle of legends, traceable here and there in Rabbinic
literature, of which St. Jude here adopts one — without neces
sarily investing it with any canonical authority — to Ulustrate his
purpose, as bemg known to bis readers and showing the feehngs
of right-minded men — apart from mspiration — against certain
conduct. SimUarly, St. Paul takes up names current amongst the Rabbis
for the Egyptian magicians who imitated the miracles of Moses
before Pharaoh (2 Tim. Hi. 8), or employs the Rabbinic legend
of the Rock following the Israehtes in the wUderness, to draw
out a spiritual lesson (1 Cor. x. 4) ; compare also Acts vH. 22, 23,
30 ; Gal. Ui. 19 ; Heb. H. 12 ; xi. 24, for a somewhat similar use
of Rabbinic tradition to supplement the narratives of the Old
Testament. The case is analogous to St. Paul's applications of
the sayings of heathen poets in Acts xvH. 28 ; 1 Cor. xv. 32 ¦
Tit. i. 12.
(ii.) In verses 6, 14, 15, we have passages which appear to be

THE EPISTLE OF JUDE. 543
derived from the Book of Enoch. This book is now generaUy
assigned — at least in its earliest portions — to a date quite a century
before our Lord, and the widespread acquaintance with it in the
ecclesiastical writings of the second century a.d. seems to render
it probable that St. Jude derived his language in these verses
rather from the book itseH than from independent tradition after
wards incorporated into the book. The Book of Enoch is an
important early work of the apocalyptic class modeUed on the
style of the latter part of Daniel.
It was used by the early fathers — Justin Martyr, Irenaeus,
Clement of Alexandria, Origen, TertuUian, Augustine — though
TertulUan alone regarded it as canonical. After theH time, how
ever, the book as a whole was lost, and aU that remained of it
was represented by the quotations in these and other writers.
But in 1773 the Ethiopic translation of the book was discovered
and brought over to England by the traveUer Bruce. This trans
lation was made during the fourth century a.d. from the Greek,
but the original language in whieh the book was written is gene
raUy thought to have been Hebrew. ¦
It contains, Hi one hundred and eight chapters, a series of
visions claiming to have been accorded to Enoch and Noah, and
explaining the working of Providence in the world — from a
Jewish point of view.
The substance of Jude, verse 6, is contained repeatedly in the
book, and it seems preferable to refer his traditions to this work
rather than to Gen. vi. 2, of which the interpretation is uncertain
and much disputed.
The passage in Jude, verses 14 and 15, is contained almost ver
batim in Enoch, chap. U.
On the remaining important point to notice, viz., the relation
between the Second Epistle of St. Peter and that of St. Jude —
see the chapter on the former Epistle.

THE EEVELATION OF ST. JOHN
THE DIVINE.
1. The Enigma ofthe Church. — It is impossible not to sympathise,
to a certain extent at least, with those who, in every age, have
found difficulty in accepting as a divinely inspHed and canonical
book the Revelation of St. John. In its contents and in its style,
it is so entirely different from all 'the other books of the New Testa
ment, that it is not easy to class it along with them as produced
by the operation of the same Spirit, and directed to the attain
ment of the same end. Everything else contained in the sacred
volume, exclaims the humble foUower of Christ, content to walk
by the Hght of a few simple truths, is comparatively easy ; "A
wayfaring man, though a fool, shaU not err therein." Here all
is dark and perplexing — an extravagance of figure such as was
never before witnessed, and an irregularity of language such as
has no paraUel in any ancient writing, either sacred or profane ;
it is impossible that this book can be from Him who loves to
guide the weak in judgment, "and to teach them His way. Such
was undoubtedly the feeHng of those who in early Christian
times refused to acknowledge the inspiration of the Apocalypse.
The feeling is hardly less prevalent now than it was then ; whUe
many who have really tried to grapple with the subject, and have
for this purpose studied the history of apocalyptic interpretation,
have only become more perplexed than ever. Tossed from one
system of interpretation to another ; introduced to a medley of
dates deduced from the same words, but often differing from each
other by centuries ; taught to see at one moment the greatest, at
another the paltriest, events of human history represented by the
same figures, and always finding theH guides animated by un
shaken confidence in their own views, and even passionately
opposed to others, it is no wonder that the further they try to
penetrate into the wood, the more obscure and tangled does their
path become. Strange surely that it should be so, and that the
only book in the Bible whieh has annexed to it the promise,
" Blessed is he that readeth, and they that hear the words of the

THE REVELATION OF ST. JOHN THE DIVINE. 545
prophecy," should be, at first sight at least, the one most difficult
to cotnprehend.
Yet the Church would under no cHcumstances be entitled to
despaH. If she has good reason to beHeve that the authenticity
and genuineness of the work are estabhshed by a chain of
evidence, as unbroken and strong as in the case of any other
book of the New Testament ; more especiaUy if the evidence
-points to St. John, "the beloved disciple" of Jesus, rather than
to some whoUy unknown person, as the author, she must beHeve
that the difficulties connected with the subject are capable of
being, and wiU be finaUy, overcome. Nothing can be more
inconsistent with the whole idea of revelation, nothing more out
of keeping with God's other dealings in creation, providence, or
grace, than to imagine that a book has been put into our hands
designed to perplex and trouble us. And this is the more evident
when we observe that the writer of the book distinctly states that
he writes for the encouragement and comfort of his " brethren,"
of those who were " companions with him in the tribulation and
kingdom and patience which are in Jesus ; " that he feels that
he has a divine commission to "show unto God's servants the
things which must shortly come to pass ; " and that in the seven
epistles of chaps. H. and Hi., which contain an abstract of all
that is afterwards unfolded Hi the book, we have the seven times
repeated cry, " He that hath an ear let him hear what the Spirit
saith to the Churches" (chaps, i. 1, 9, U., Hi.).
The expectation thus founded in the nature of the case is
confirmed by results. It can hardly be denied that the more
recent interpretations of the Apocalypse have exhibited greater
unity of view as to its meaning than had been witnessed for
several centuries. As the storms of the period immediately pre
ceding and foUowing the Reformation passed away, Hght began
to break again Hi the Church's sky, and the mistaken interpre
tations of a time of disunion and discord among brethren to dis
appear, tiU at last we seem to be on the verge of a period when,
if opinions are not less discordant than ever regarding some
external critical questions affecting the Apocalypse, they are
approaching harmony as to the principles upon which it is, if
received, to be understood.
In these cHcumstances it would be at once faithless and
cowardly to despaH. The writer of the book did not only under
stand what he was saying. The sublime march of his periods ;
the grandeur of his figures when we look at them with Jewish
eyes ; the at one time terrible, at another pathetic, eloquence of
his language ; the glow, in short, of prophetic and poetic enthu
siasm which is diffused over every part of his work, show that he

546 BOOK BY BOOK.
was himseH cheered, roused, and transported by what he saw.
As he saw he would have us see ; and we must be as he was it
we would see with him. Let the Church therefore only approach
her task of endeavouring to see with meekness, humUity, and
love ; let her rise above the thought of different, of too_ often
jarring, sections of her body ; let her remember that she is one,
and that it is with the whole body as the Bride of Christ that she
has here to do, and there can be httle doubt that the darkness
so often complained of wiH be dispeUed, and that she too, by what
she sees, wiH be not less cheered, roused, and transported than
the beloved disciple was to whom the vision was first given.
2. The Unity of the Apocalypse. — In turning our attention more
particularly to the book before us, recent events have shown that
one point in connection with it requHes fuUer notice than would
have been thought necessary only a few years ago. The unity
of the book has been of late seriously disputed. It had been so
before, but the controversy had been apparently exhausted ; and
so general was the agreement that one author only had taken
part in its composition, that commentators had begun in theH
prolegomena to leave the question of its unity undiscussed. Volter
and Weizacker at Tubingen, and Vischer and Harnack at Mar
burg, have recently revived the controversy, and it is necessary
to say something in regard to it. It is unnecessay, indeed, to
speak at any length either of Weizacker or of Harnack. The
former in his elaborate work, "Das ApostoHsche Zeitalter," 1886,
has simply intimated his belief that the Apocalypse is in many of
its parts more or less interpolated ; the latter, in bis " Texte und
Untersuchungen," vol. ii. part 3, 1886, has done nothing more
than adopt, with a few commendatory suggestions, the views of
his pupU Vischer. The real attack is by Volter first and Vischer
afterwards. (i. ) The first of these critics pubHshed his views Hi 1 8 82, and after
wards in a second and enlarged edition of his pamphlet in 1885.
They amount to this, that instead of proceeding as a whole from
one author, the Apocalypse consists of five different parts, belong
ing to eras of the Church more or less remote from each other,
aud written by at least four different persons. The book had
been at first very brief, and greatly Hmited in its scope ; but so
much had it been valued, that it was repeatedly enlarged, and
different recensions were produced, the last of which appeared
between a.d. 160 and a.d. 170. The attempt is made to show that
there is a correspondence between the different parts of the book
and contemporary events so close as to justify the conclusion that
the former were taken from the latter. It is needless to add that,
under the process, the spiritual life and power of the book wholly

THE REVELATION OF ST. JOHN THE DIVINE. 547
disappear, and that it becomes a narrative relating only to the
craft and foUies of cunning impostors, wicked kings, and deluded
peoples. The second critic named pursues an entirely different course.
Under the impression that there are two distinct lines of thought
in the Apocalypse, especiaUy in its Christology, and that these
two lines cannot be traced to one mind, Vischer supposes that
the_ groundwork of what we now possess was a Jewish Apocalypse
which had passed into the early Christian Church, and attained
great reputation there ; that an unknown member of the latter
body had resolved to adapt the book more thoroughly to Christian
uses, and that for this purpose he had interpolated it with
Christian thoughts, more particularly prefixing the first three
chapters, adding the latter part of the twenty-second chapter, and
introducing now the word " lamb," now again the word "Jesus "
or " Christ," but occasionally also finding room for whole para
graphs, such as the second vision of chap. vH., the first vision of
chap, xiv., and several verses associated in chaps, xxi. and xxii.
with the descriptions there given of the mUlennial glory and of
the New Jerusalem. The re- worker thus, as it were, baptized the
old Jewish Apocalypse in a Christian font, and a Jewish became
a Christian child.
(U.) We may be spared dwelling at any length upon the views
of the two writers named, for this reason, if for no other, that
they, have taken up each an attitude of determined opposition to
the other. Vischer in publishing his theory was careful to de
monstrate the weakness of Vdlter's ; Volter in self-defence held
up Vischer's theory to ridicule and scorn. The two critics may
be left to bring their controversy to a close at the tune most con
venient for themselves. Meanwhile it is sufficient to say that
neither has gained anything hke a general, or even a widespread,
acceptance for his theory. Volter has failed to account for that
simUarity of style whieh marks the whole book and is inconsistent
with the supposition of so many different authors having been
engaged on it, while his correspondences of place and time are
only gained by forcing the text into meanings which it is impos
sible for it to bear. Vischer, on the other hand, whUe proceeding
upon the simple plan of cutting out aU direct Christian aUusions
in the book, leaves us as a Jewish work what no Jew could have
written, expectations and hopes inconsistent with those which we
know to have been entertained in Israel, and long passages whieh,
even when such words as "the lamb" or "Jesus" have been
removed from them, can only be accounted for on the supposition
that they are the product of a Christian pen. Both writers, too,
ignore the fact that a spiritual interpretation of the Apuctiiypse,

548 BOOK BY BOOK.
not differing in principle from that which must be apphed to
other parts of Scripture, is possible; that harmony of purpose
may be shown to mark aU the visions which it contains ; that one
consistent meaning may be traced throughout ; and that the
difficulties to be met by the theories resorted to are easUy over
come by attention to those principles of plan and structure upon
which the author everywhere proceeds.
These last considerations, indeed, are to be urged not only
negatively but positively by the defender of the unity of the Apo
calypse. No book probably ever proceeded from the pen of man
aU the parts of which were so closely interlaced with one another.
AUusions in earlier parts are very frequently uninteUigible until
they are more fully explained in later parts. Descriptions in
later parts point back for the key that is to open up the mystery
,of theH meaning to earlier parts. Again and again, when we
seem, upon a superficial inspection, to be dealing with visions
relating to new subjects, we find upon a closer examination that
we have only before us old thoughts in a new form. Throughout
the book there is from first to last the unfolding of one great
thought, of one great principle of the Divme government of the
Church and the world. Add to aU this that the writer's pecu
liarities of style and language are of a kind which render it
almost impossible to think that a forger or interpolator, especiaUy
jn an age for which our opponents claim artlessness of composition
#s a leading characteristic, could successfuUy imitate them with
out betraying what he was, and we are entitled to conclude that,
whatever other difficulties the Revelation of St. John may present,
it is at least in its authorship one compact and united whole.
3. Authorship. — The book is one. Who is the author of it?
is the next question that the reader naturaUy asks. The Church,
from the beginning to the present century, with an exception so
trifling that it is unnecessary to notice it, has always answered,
the Apostle John. An introduction such as this is hardly the
place to present in regular and successive order the various testi
monies of early Christianity by which the Church was led to this
conclusion. And it is the less necessary to do so because theH
force is not denied. The external evidence in favour, not only of
the apostoHc but of the Johannine authorship of the book, is even
singularly unanimous and complete ; and doubts as to the validity
of the long unquestioned conclusion have sprung whoUy from
another quarter.
Internal considerations have awakened them. The nature of
the book itself has produced a feeling of uncertainty whether it
can be ascribed to any member of the apostolic circle ; and more
particularly whether, if St. John be at the same time the author
of the Gospel, it can be ascribed to him. Keeping in view for a

THE REVELATION OF ST. JOHN THE DIVINE. 549
moment only the first of these two points, it may be observed that
there is nothing in the book inconsistent with the supposition
that it may have proceeded from one belonging to a company of
poor and unlettered men. The poetic fire whieh it displays, the
rich exuberance of figures and symbols which it employs, the
strong and impassioned language in which it speaks, are not the
result of education in any age, and least of aU of the education
given in Jewish circles at the beginning of the Christian era.
The formaHsm of the Rabbis of that time, their narrow devotion
to the letter only of what they studied, their dependence, upon
the sayings of their predecessors in their schools, and their re
pression of aH originahty in theH pupils, would tend powerfully
to check the development of that spirit whieh the Apocalypse
reveals. We can understand the writing of such a book if its author
came to his task either from direot study of the old prophets of
his people or from personal contact with the Ufe of Jesus, for in
both cases conventionaUties had been broken through, mannerism
had been overcome, and freedom, alike of thought and style,
had burst the bonds of that trifling occupation with the smallest
particulars of the Divine Word, in which its general spirit had
been lost sight of an,d its great end missed. But we cannot so
weU understand it if we are to look for the writer among those
who were educated, in the sense Hi which education was then
given, among the "wise and prudent" rather than among the
"unlearned and ignorant" (Acts iv. 13). Nor is there an im
probability in the idea that its author should have pursued, at
least Hi early Hfe, the occupation of a fisherman upon the Sea of
GaHlee, and that he should never have risen above an estate of
poverty. A simUar objection might be urged against the idea
that "The PUgrHn's Progress" was written by a poor tinker of
Bedford. Depth of emotion, insight into the deahngs of God
with the soul of man, hatred of sin, conviction of righteousness,
and a strong persuasion that, notwithstanding aU appearances
to the contrary, there is a righteous Governor of the universe
who wiU yet avenge His elect, may be found not less among the
poor and suffering than among the rich and prosperous. Nay,
they are more natural to the one than to the other, for the former
know, by an experience such as the latter can hardly have, by an
experience which penetrates the inmost fibres of their being, what
the trials of this world are, and what that " patience in Jesus"
(Rev. i. 9) is whieh alone can meet them. We can have no diffi
culty, therefore, in accepting the conclusion that, striking as the
characteristics of the Apocalypse are, that book may have
proceeded from one of our Lord's Apostles, or even from
St. John.

550 BOOK BY BOOK.
The question, however, stiU remains whether, although such
authorship be allowed to be possible, the thought of it is not
forbidden by indications contained in the book itself. And this
difficulty, it is imagined, may be urged with irresistible power
against those who receive the Fourth Gospel as, not less than the
Apocalypse, the work of the Apostle John The Church does thus
receive it, and the belief of the Church upon the point has been
defended in the Introduction to the Fourth Gospel contained in
this volume. The present writer accepts the conclusion ; and he
is bound, therefore, to say something, however briefly, upon the
possibility of ascribing the Apocalypse also to the same Apostle.
Several minor objections, indeed, drawn from internal indica
tions, we may be permitted to pass by without dwelling upon them.
In the eyes of the Enghsh reader they will hardly appear to have
much weight. Such are the facts, that the John of the Apocalypse
names himself, whUe the writer of the Fourth Gospel and of the
cathoHc Epistles ascribed to St. John does not do so ; that, instead
of describing himself in the opening of his book as an Apostle, he
calls himseH only a " servant " of Christ (chap. i. 1) ; and that he
could not have spoken as he does in chap. xxi. 14, of the waU of
the New Jerusalem having "twelve foundations, and on them
twelve names of the twelve Apostles of the.Lamb," had he him
self been one of the twelve. Objections like these wiU make no
impression upon the mind if we can satisfy ourselves that the
more serious objections still remaining may be met. Let us turn,
therefore, to them.
(i.) It is urged with great confidence that the style and lan
guage of the two books are so different as to show that they
cannot be the expression of the same mind. The difference is
admitted ; but as to the mere language, it can be shown, though
hardly without constant reference to the original Greek, that the
difference is designed, and that there is a strikingly parallel
difference between the plainer parts of the discourses of Christ
and His more sublime and mysterious utterances at critical mo
ments of His Hfe. Of this difference, our Lord's discourses upon
the Last Things, in Matt, xxiv., Mark xiii., Luke xxi., and His
words at the institution of the Last Supper, Matt. xxvi. 26 — 29 ;
Mark xiv. 22—25 ; Luke xxii. 14—20 ; 1 Cor. xi. 23—25, to say
nothing of the discourses in St. John's Gospel, compared with
those in the Synoptists, may afford sufficient iUustration.
As to the general style and method of the Apocalypse, again, as
it shows itseH in symbol and figure, and on the supposition, which
appears to be the most probable, that both it and the Fourth
Gospel were written in the last decade of the first century, the
chief difficulty is to conceive that the same writer could employ
two such different styles at the same period of his Hfe. Yet the

THE REVELATION OF ST. JOHN THE DIVINE. 551
difficulty is not so great as might at first appear. It really resolves
itself into the question, Could the same writer, at the same age
and surrounded by the same circumstances, entertain the calm
thought of an historical IHe lived in the past, side by side with a
poetic and prophetic vision of the future, which the Leader of that
life had Himself suggested at moments when He rose to loftier
than ordinary heights of prophetic utterance ? There seems no
good reason why that question should be answered in the nega
tive ; and if the two pictures could dwell in his mind, he could
certainly present them to his readers. It is too often forgotten
that, in our Lord's own language, we have two entirely different
styles of thought ; and that if these could coexist in Him, they
might also coexist in one to whom He was so drawn by some
wonderful affinity that He regarded Him as ' ' the disciple whom
He loved."
(ii.) With not less confidence it is urged that the tone and
temper of the two books are so different, that if St. John be the
author of the one he cannot also be the author of the other. But
this objection rests upon a failure to estimate the true character
of the Gospel simUar to that of whieh we have just spoken in
regard to the utterances of Jesus. There can be no greater mis
take than to speak of the Fourth Gospel as a calm and peaceful
idyl, revealing nothmg but the outgoings of a tender heart to
wards loved disciples, and breathing nothing but serenity and
repose. Such is certainly not the character of the Apocalypse, but
it is not less false to fact to say that it is the character of the
Gospel. H the one is fuU of tumult, war, and excited passion,
the other is not less so. There are, no doubt, passages in it
which exhibit the spirit ascribed by partial observation to the
whole. Such are chaps, xiii. to xvH., in which Jesus finds Him
self in the bosom of the Httle famUy He is shortly to leave, and in
whieh He speaks to them with aU the sympathy and tenderness of
a dying father who knows that he is .about to be taken from his
chUdren, and that after his departure they wiU be exposed without
the support of his immediate presence to the coldness and opposi
tion of the world. But these chapters are not the central portion
of the book. That portion we must seek for in the chapters closing
with chap, xu., in which the Saviour's struggle with the world is
so strikingly presented to us. In these chapters, accordingly, we
meet the very same characteristics as those by which the Apoca
lypse is marked — a constantly increasing opposition between the
world and Jesus, the hatred of the former to the latter, as well
as the severity of the latter's judgment on the former, ever
deepening Hi intensity and force. There is excitement, tumult,
war in the one book as much as in the other. In each the compas
sionate Redeemer, who purchased His people with His blood, and

552 BOOK BY -BOOK.
weeps with them in theH sorrows, is also the judge of men and
the triumphant conqueror over aU His enemies.
(Ui.) A difference of teaching has also been urged as separating
the two books to an extent which shows that, H St. John be the
author of the Jewish Gospel, he cannot also be the author of the
Apocalypse. The subject thus opened up is wide ; but it may be
sufficient to say that when the Apocalypse is, as it ought to be,
interpreted according to the exegetieal rules suggested by itself,
not only is there no difference in the teaching of the two books :
theH similarity in this respect is rather their most striking feature.
Every one will admit that, in each of the New Testament writers,
there is, as we might expect, a type of teaching peculiar to himself.
The substance is the same, but the point of view from which it
is looked at and the form differ. No one wiU contend that St.
James, St. Peter, St. Paul, and St. John are not, in the manner in
which they present the truth, clearly distinguishable from one
another. Much is the same, but much also is so peculiar to each
that we at once feel ourselves entitled to say, " This is his, and no
other's ; this is characteristic of one of them, and not of the other
three." Bearing this in mind, let us now take the most character
istic parts of the teaching of fhe Apocalypse, and it wUl be found
that they present a mode of thought differing from that of all
the other New Testament writers except St. John ; and, further,
not only not differing from him, but resembling him in the closest
and most remarkable degree.
The force of these remarks can be fuUy appreciated only when
the doctrinal teachings of the two books are carefuUy studied and
compared throughout. But in confirmation of what has been said,
we may refer the reader to the mode in whieh they present the
truths connected with the Person and Kingdom of Christ ; the
field of His working, and the work He has to do in it ; the appro
priation of redemption, and the relation of behevers to their Lord ;
the moral freedom of man ; and the final judgment. It is not too
much to aUege that on every one of these points there is a most
singular degree of correspondence between the way in which the
author of the Apocalypse and the author of the Fourth Gospel
think. We are compeUed to come to the conclusion that the
former cannot be St. James, or St. Peter, or St. Paul, but that,
in so far as striking similarity of thought in two books leads us
to identify the same person as the author of both, he may be, and
probably is, St. John.*
Enough has been said upon the question immediately before us.
* The similarity alluded to above has been unfolded at considerable length,
by the present writer in his " Revelation of St. John," 2nd Edition, 1887, in
the Appendix devoted to a comparison of the Apocalypse and the Fourth
Gospel. To this he is compelled by want of space here to refer the reader.

THE REVELATION OF ST. JOHN THE DIVINE. 553
External evidence is, by the admission of all inquirers, strongly in
favour of the Johannine origin of the Apocalypse. Internal evi
dence alone occasions difficulty ; but the more minutely the book
is examined the more do the difficulties suggested either by its
contents or their form disappear. We may therefore take the
book into our hands, and without hesitation feel that we are
Hstening to the words of that. Apostle who was known in the
early Christian Church by the beautiful name of Epistethios, the
leaner upon the breast.
We turn now to the question whieh most of aU concerns us
when we take an ApostoHc or divinely-inspired book into our
hands. 4. The Meaning. — In what sense are we to understand the
book ? What is it designed to teach us ? What does it mean ? No
book of the New Testament has been so singularly tossed about
among different and contradictory explanations. It is not wonder
ful that it should have been so, for the Apocalypse affords oppor
tunities for variety of interpretation such as few books do. The
wonder only is that the Church should have so largely acquiesced
in this state of matters, and should not have been more impa
tient of conclusions fatal to the. intelligent reception of a book
proclaimed by her to be divine. Is there any way then by whieh
we may be guided through the labyrinth, any test that we may
apply to determine which of aU the varying interpretations has the
chief claim on our regard ?
We start, of course, with the supposition that each, to a certain
extent at least, may f aUly represent the meaning of the words, and
that, at the beginning of our efforts, we are not entitled to put
aside any of them as absolutely impossible. Our test, then, is one
strictly fair. Does the interpretation we adopt, whUe violating no
law of language, give unity, harmony, completeness, to the book ?
We have aHeady, it wiH be remembered, seen that the book is
one. It comes from one author, and that evidently an author of
originality and force. It follows, therefore, from the best known
laws of the human mind, that tbe meaning of the book must be
one, that every part of it wUl bear upon one result, and that no
part wiU be inconsistent with the rest. Let this great law of
interpretation be fulfiUed in the case of any book that we are
endeavouring to understand, and we shaU have no smaU reason to
believe that we have obtained possession of the key which unlocks
its meaning.
Before entering directly upon this, however, there is one pre
possession to which it seems desUable to aUude. We are told by
not a few leading scholars that it is impossible to Hsten to any
other interpretation of the Apocalypse than that which simply sees
in it the reflection of the historical cHcumstances in the midst of

554 BOOK BY BOOK.
which the writer was placed. This prepossession must be re
moved before we proceed further, and it ought to disappear before
the apphcation of the rule just spoken of. The simply historical
interpretation is not enough. It fails to give that unity and con
sistency to the interpretation of the book whieh is the main
guarantee of the correctness of whatever theory we adopt.
Harnack, one of the latest writers upon this point, has indeed
said, " All interpretations not strictly historical must be excluded.
The ethico-spirituaHstic, rationalistic, and dogmatic explanations,
such as were first attempted by the Alexandrian theologians, are
fatal to the understanding of the book, as are also the explana
tions drawn from Church history which were first put forward by
Mediaeval sects. To see with Hengstenberg ' demagogy ' in 'Gog
and Magog' (xx. 8), to identify ' ApoUyon' (ix. 11) with 'Napo
leon,' or Hi Antichrist to detect the Emperor, or the Pope, or
Mohammed, or Luther, or Calvin — these interpretations are not
a bit worse than those which turn the book into a compendium
of morahty or dogma, wherein is set forth by means of imagery
and allegories the triumph of virtue over vice or of orthodoxy
over heterodoxy."*
Before pronouncing such a judgment it would have been weU
for Harnack, who is here the representative of many other critics,
to have seen that he had himself a consistent interpretation to
propose. Even then indeed the author, whUe dealing simply
with the historical facts of his own time, might have beheld in
them the deeper meaning which they involved, and might have
delineated them, not for their own sake, but for the sake of
bringing that deeper meaning into view. The demand, however,
which we are surely first of aU entitled to make upon those who
see in the Apocalypse no more than the counterpart of the politi
cal facts of the seventh and eighth decades of the first century is,
that the facts shaU be correctly stated, or that the book shaU
agree with the facts. But it does not do so, when we refuse to
see in its facts pictures (let them be caUed "figures" or
" aUegories," as men please) of deeper thoughts.
Thus, upon the supposition we are now combating, the Anti
christ of chap. xiii. and of chap. xvH. must either be Nero,
or, as Harnack prefers to suppose, not the Nero of Tacitus, but
the impostor who in the reign of Vespasian raised an insurrection
in the neighbourhood of the Euphrates, and who, having been
for a time supported by Artobanus, who would have restored him
at Rome by force of arms, was at last surrendered by the Par-
thians, about a.d. 88, to Domitian. f Now the great objection
to aU this is, that it does not correspond to the facts. It has
* In the Encycl. Britann., 9th Edition, " Revelation," p. 496.
t U. S., p. 500.

THE REVELATION OF ST. JOHN THE DIVINE. 555
been far too much overlooked by inquirers that chaps, xiii. and
xvii. of our book do not proceed upon the supposition of the pre
valence of a popular rumour that Nero had not died, but would
again return from his place of exUe to his old dominion. They
proceed upon the supposition of an actual death and of an actual
resurrection from the dead. Such an idea, however, had never
-entered into tbe popular mind ; and, H the Apostle entertained it,
he was simply false to the very cHcumstances upon which it is
beUeved that his whole description rests.
Again, the proposal has been made by Mommsen to find in the
second beast of chap. xiii. the imperial representatives in the
provinces, especiaUy the Roman Governors in the Asiatic pro
vinces. The proposal is said by Harnack to be " very probable "'
and to rest " on good grounds."* But can any one who gives
due attention to the fact that the Jewish Apocalyptist speaks of
this second beast as " the false prophet," and who says of it that
" he doeth great signs, that he should even make fire to come
down out of heaven upon the earth in the sight of men " (chap.
xiH. 13), imagine for a moment that a merely secular, not reli
gious, authority could have supphed the foundation of the figure ?
The thing is impossible. But these Governors were purely secular
authorities. If the theory is correct the Apocalyptist is again
false to his facts.
Once more, Harnack urges that the three-and-a-haH years,
so often spoken of, must be taken literally, " The three-and-a-
haH years in xi. 2, xii. 14, xiii. 5 are taken from the Apoca
lypse of Daniel, and no deeper meaning is to be sought in
them." f In that case, however, the writer, if he writes in the
year 68, is not dealing with facts of whieh he is cognisant ; he
is predicting ; and, if he writes near the year 80, he is supposing
a state of affairs at variance with what he must have known to
have been the course of history.
The consequence of aU this is that nothing can be done to
solve the important question of date. Difficulties of one kind
or another meet us at each step, and Harnack himself is com
peUed to resort to the supposition, for whieh there is not the
shghtest evidence, that the book, after having been written under
Galba, underwent various revisions under Vespasian, about 75
to 79, and perhaps under Domitian, 93 to 96.
Thus it appears that the historical interpretation, in the sense
above spoken of, fails to. explain the phenomena. It would cer
tainly be no sound argument for rejecting it that, did it afford
the only, meaning of the book, the Apocalypse would not be
worthy of a place in the canon of Scripture. Proof that it is
not worthy of its place there is open to any one who can estab-
• TJ. S., p. 499. t U. S., p. 500, note 2.

556 BOOK BY BOOK.
lish such a view. Our contention is, that the attempt to interpret
it as a writing founded simply on the poHtieal or pohtico-eccle-
siastieal events of the writer's time, and with no deeper purpose'
than to describe them, fails. The book ceases to have unity,
consistency, and meaning.
Unquestionably it must be admitted that the author wrote
from the standpoint of his own age, with its events before his
eyes, and with a practical purpose bearing primarUy upon it.
But that did not hinder him from beholding these events less in
themselves than in the eternal principles that underlay them and
came into manHestation through them. Nothing is clearer than
that he was the child of his tune in a sense in which few writers
are. Why should he not also be steeped in the principles which
had made the past what it was, and whieh were to form the
future ? To think that he was so, to think that he cared more
for the ideal than the phenomenal, for the deeper meaning of
facts than for the facts themselves, is to put him on a level with
the highest, not the lowest, spirits of our race, and with aU in
whom God has most clearly spoken. Then, if proceeding on
this principle we find that such an interpretation lends consis
tency, harmony, unity to the book regarded as a whole, we have
every reason to think that our interpretation is true, or that, at
aU events, it ought not to be put on a level with the absurdities
of mediaeval sects.
With these preliminary remarks let us now notice one or two
considerations to be borne in mind when we try to ascertain
the meaning of the Apocalypse.
(i.) The book is not prophetic in the ordinary sense of the
word. It is not intended to set before us any series of events which
were to occur during the long period known to us, though not to
the early Christians, as to precede the Lord's second coming. That
it has relation to the future is undoubted. The first words of
the book are, ' ' The Revelation of Jesus Christ, which God gave
Him to show unto His servants, even the things which must
shortly come to pass." But there are two ways of viewing the
future. We may think of it as a time when events of greater
or of less importance wiU foUow one another in close succession
as they have done in the past ; or we may think of it simply as
a tune when certain great principles of God's government will
be made manifest by the course of human affairs. A prophet in
troduces us, at least in a certain measure, to the one, an Apoca
lyptist to the other. The line of distinction indeed cannot be
sharply drawn. Prophecy deals very largely with principles, and
to think of it only as prediction is to remove from it one of the
chief elements of that mspiration by which the prophet spoke.
Apocalyptic vision deals also to some extent with the embodi-

THE REVELATION OF ST. JOHN THE DIVINE. 557
ment of principles in events ; but this, for the most part, only
because it is necessary to give principles, Hi order that we may
see them, a concrete form. Though, however, the- two methods
of revelation have thus a good deal in common, they are in their
main characteristics distinct, and we are not to look in the Revela
tion of St. John for any prediction of events beyond that great
event of which the whole New Testament is fuU — the manifesta
tion of the glory of the now exalted but hidden Lord, together
with His complete and final victory over aU evil. The Apoca
lyptic writer, indeed, was hardly in a position to think of any
important succession of events. These could not happen without
presupposing a long time for theH evolution. But no such long
time was before his eyes. " The things which must shortly come
to pass" were what he saw. "The time is at hand"' was the
feeling with which he contemplated their occurrence. " Behold,
I come quickly," was the cry which sounded in his ears from
the glorified Redeemer for whom he waited (i. 1, 3 ; xxii. 20).
In so far as he thought of tune at aU he thought of it as con
tracted, hurried, brief. At any moment the Lord whom he loved,
and who was alive for evermore, might appear in glory.
The Apocalypse, accordingly, is only prophetic in the sense in
which the great discourse of our Lord HimseH, contained in the
first three Gospels (Matt, xxiv., xxv., and paraUels), is prophetic.
When carefuUy studied in its whole form of articulation and
substance, it appears to be simply an expansion of that discourse.
We may weU suppose that upon no words of his Lord would the
"beloved disciple" more constantly or more fondly dweU than
upon those which, H they told of his Master's going away, told
not less of His coming again — the Bridegroom of His Church,
the Master of His waiting servants, the Friend who united Him
seH so closely to the humblest member of His Body (Matt. xxv.
1, &c, 14, &c, 40). As he lingered upon the great truths con
tained in that last discourse of Jesus they took shape in the figures
whieh the Old Testament and his Jewish training had made fami
Uar to him ; and the Apocalypse was the result. We shaU be
wrong, therefore, H we treat the book as predictive, and if we
seek in particular events either of the Church's or the world's
history for the fulfilment of its supposed predictions.
(U.) The book is mainly occupied with the enunciation of the
great principles which guide the action of the Church's Lord until
the tune of His return. It has sometimes been said of late that,
after the first introduction of the Saviour in chap, i., we hear
nothing of Him again until He comes forth at the head of His
armies in chap. xix. There cannot be a greater mistake. The
whole book is the action of Jesus, though of Jesus glorified ;
and in this respect it corresponds to the Acts of the Apostles

558 BOOK BY BOOK.
as related to the Third Gospel. In that book the writer looks
back to something whieh he had previously written, and begins
what he has now to say with the words, " The former treatise I
made, 0 TheophUus, concerning aU that Jesus began both to do
and to teach, until the day in which He was received up " (chap.
i. 1). Thus speaking he indicates by the word "began," that
he is about to take up the thread of his earHer narrative, and to
explain to us the action of Jesus after He " parted from His
disciples and was carried up into heaven " (Luke xxiv. 51). Thus
also is it with St. John in the Revelation, and there is no vision
of the book in which the action is not that of Jesus glorified.
There is this difference, indeed, that whUe the Acts of the
Apostles shows us, in the events of history, how the great King
and Head of all founds and propagates His Church in the world,
the Apocalypse shows us in symbolic representation the prin
ciples upon which He does so. The latter book thus becomes the
emblematic delineation of that great struggle between Hght and
darkness, between righteousness and unrighteousness, between
Christ and Satan, which constitutes the essence of the Church's
and the world's history. The Church and the world, in its Johan-
nine sense, are fundamentally opposed to one another, and both
make ceaseless efforts to rule the heart and to control the destiny
of man. We are invited by St. John to take our stand upon a
commanding height, and to watch the struggle from its begin
ning to its close. Nor can it be said that to confine the Apoca
lypse to this one thought is to give it a field meagre, Hmited,
and at last made tame and wearisome by constant repetition.
Whether we aUow it at first or not, this is reaUy the history of
humanity as it passes onward to that goal to which all things
both around and within it point, and for which ' ' the whole crea
tion groaneth and travaileth in pain together untU now " (Rom.
viii. 22). There is the mustering of the hosts ; there is the shock
of battle ; there is the deepening eagerness of the combatants ;
there are angels looking on as weU as men ; there is the pre
servation of the righteous ; there is the overthrow of the wicked ;
there are the hallelujahs of heaven and earth as good gains its
victory ; there are the lamentations of aU who had been made
rich by the world's dainties as, like a great miUstone cast into
the sea, "Babylon, the great city, is cast down, and shall be
found no more at aU " (chap, xviii. 21). The manifestation of
principles like these can never paU upon us. They are rather a
source of profound and endless interest, until we feel that we can
no longer sit inactive spectators upon our height, but must come
to the help of the Lord, to the help of the Lord against the
mighty (Judges v. 23).

THE REVELATION OF ST. JOHN THE DIVINE. 559
(Hi.) The action of the book covers the whole Christian era
from its beginning to its end. Perplexed by such words as those
which have been already quoted regarding the shortness of the
time, and seeing in the visions of the Seer representations only
of events contemporaneous with himself, many commentators have
thought it necessary to limit St. John's field of vision to things
passing around him at the moment when he wrote. Only a shght
inspection of the book is sufficient to show that such limitation
is impossible. It is true that St. John did start from the events
of his own day, but he beheld in them iUustrations of principles
which had marked the dealings of God with His people in all
past ages of His Church, and which would continue to mark His
deaHngs to the end. That end is constantly before him. It is
not reached either in the destruction of Jerusalem or in any
prospect of the overthrow of the Roman power. It comes only
with the final manifestation of the Lord, with the final judgment
of the wicked, and with the casting of death and Hades into the
lake of fire.
No events in the previous history of the Church or the world
can possibly exhaust the meaning of the visions seen by the
Apostle. He passes on through aU intervening time to the instant
when sin and Satan shall be for ever crushed, and when they who
have overcome by the blood of the Lamb shaU be confirmed in
theH everlasting triumph. Other commentators who have felt
this have resorted to an entirely different expedient in order to
meet the difficulties which beset them. Instead of referring the
Apocalypse to the opening, they have limited it to the closing
years of the Christian age. They have supposed that the Seer
takes his stand in the far distant future, and that he deals with
nothing but what is immediately to precede the winding lip of the
present dispensation. This view, however, is not less untenable
than the one last mentioned. It is inconsistent with any fair
interpretation of the Seer's own language. It renders it neces
sary to understand such phrases as these, ' ' The things which
must shortly come to pass," " The time is at hand," "Behold,
I come quickly," as meaning, not that, reckoning from the
poiut at which the Seer stood, they would soon happen, but
that when they did happen no more than a brief period would
be required for the carrying through of aU that was involved in
them. Such cannot be the meaning of the words. If one thing con
nected with the book is clearer than another, it is that St. John
wrote to the men of his own day, that he felt for their trials
and temptations and sorrows, and that he designed to show them
that there w as an aspect of their circumstances which ought to

560 BOOK BY BOOK.
bring them immediate reUef . He has to tell not simply of a
righteous order of things to be introduced when time ends and
eternity begins, but of the prevalence of such an order even now.
The prince of darkness is always opposed by the Prince of Light ;
the enemies of Christ, even when they seem to be victorious, can
never touch the true Ufe of the chUdren of God ; the righteous are
always preserved, and not one of them is lost. These are the
lessons which the Apocalypse is designed to teaph, and H their
consolatory effect is to be experienced they must emerge from
the present circumstances of its readers, and not merely from
what wiH be the position of Christians hundreds, or it may be
thousands, of years after the date at which the book is written.
The indubitable meaning of. the Apocalyptic writer is that from
the very moment when he speaks the Church may reap the
quickening and consolatory fruits of what he says.
Both the views now spoken of must be unhesitatingly dis
missed, and the only conclusion left us is that the action of the
book covers the whole Christian era from its beginning to its
close. At whatever point in the evolution of that era our lot is
cast, St. John invites us to behold with him a Divine procedure
going on around us which ought to make us keep Christ's works
unto the end.
(iv.) Everything contained in the Apocalypse is to be under ^
stood symbohcaUy and spiritually. Even did this not appear
upon the face of the book as a whole, the writer gives us in one
case a clear indication of the principle of interpretation he would
have us apply. When speaking of the fate of the two witnesses
he says ia chap. xi. 8 : " And their dead bodies he Hi the streets
of the great city, which spiritually is called Sodom and Egypt,"
words clearly showing that, in this instance at least, we are not
to interpret Hterally. Apart, however, from these particular
words, Hteral interpretation must be admitted by aU to be at least
in the main parts of the hook impossible. Tbe only question
might be, Whether we are to draw any Hne between the sym
bolical and the Hteral, and, H so, where and how ? No abso
lute rule can be laid down. The skill and tact of the interpreter
can alone guide him. But this much may be said, that where by
far the larger portion of the book is symbolical, the probabUities
are in favour of the supposition that all is so.
One thing we are at least entitled to lay down as certain, that
different parts of the same figure cannot be interpreted upon
different principles ; and yet this rule is continuaUy violated by
interpreters. What, for example, can be more indefensible than
to interpret the "temple" and the "altar" of chap. xi. 1,
literally, as if they referred to the temple and altar of Jerusalem

THE REVELATION OF ST. JOHN THE DIVINE. 561
then standing, and in the very same sentence to understand sym-
boUcaUy the words, " measure them that worship therein " ? Yet
upon this mixture of literal and symbolical interpretation is
founded what may, without impropriety, be caUed the main
argument for assigning the book to a date prior to the destruc
tion of Jerusalem. One principle or another ought to be adopted,
and to be appHed consistently throughout.
To nothing do these remarks apply more than to the interpre
tation of the numbers of the Apocalypse. The use of numbers,
of 3, 4, 7, 10, 12, 100's, 1000's, forms one of the most remarkable
phenomena with which, in reading the book before us, we have
to deal. To connect with numbers thoughts of a kind altogether
different from numerical is so strange to us that we have the
greatest difficulty in working ourselves into the state of mind
which leads to it. That, notwithstanding this, they often have
such a force Hi the Apocalypse can be denied by none ; and the
old question returns, Is this only occasionaUy, or is it invariably
the case ? The same answer as before must be given. To inter
pret at one tune Hterally and at another time symbolicaUy can
. lead to nothing but confusion ; and unless, therefore, instances
call be adduced in which the Hteral meaning is obviously neces
sary, it is our manHest duty to abide by the symboHcal. What
an amount of unprofitable speculation would have been saved to
the Church had this principle been adhered to Hi the interpretation
of chap. xx. it is unnecessary to say.
There is, indeed, an idea in many minds that "symboHcal " is
no more than another name for " wUful " interpretation ; that in
applying the principle every interpreter is left to the play of his
own fancy ; and that, when we take it as our guide, we may make
anything of Scripture that we please. No idea can be more un-
phUosophical or more inconsistent with the reaHties of the case.
SymboHcal language may be a not less definite exponent of
human thought than any other form of speech that we employ.
The same symbol may be used, and on the Hps of a true teacher
wiH be used, as strictly as any word that HteraUy expresses his
idea. The meaning may, in the present instance, be at first
more difficult to discover, because Hi the West, which is so
much colder and more phlegmatic than the East, we are accus
tomed to give much less play to the imagination than is done
in regions at once warmer, grander, and more mysterious.
But of this we may be assured, that a distinct meaning lies be
neath the figures that are employed, and that, even when we
may not be able to disoover every particular of that meaning, we
may at least discover enough to put us in possession of the
writer's mind. o o

562 BOOK BY. BOOK.
Not only in the Apocalypse, but throughout almost aU its books,
the Bible is fuU of figures or symbols. The highest truths respect
ing our Lord HimseH are presented to us in such symbols as the
Vine, the Bread of LHe, the Shepherd of His flock, the Captain
of our Salvation. The blessings of the gospel enjoyed, by us here ;
the glory set before us as our reward hereafter ; the relation of
Christians to their Father in heaven ; the influence exercised over
them by the Holy SpHit : these and such Hke truths are almost
always symbolicaUy set forth. Between them and the symbols of
St. John Hi the Revelation there is no difference of principle,
although the latter are often much more remote from ordinary
apprehension than the former.
Thus then we have endeavoured to point out to the reader what
may be said in favour of the unity of tbe book now before him,
the interest and importance attaching to its authorship, and the
principles upon which he is alike entitled and caUed upon to
interpret it.
Keeping these considerations Hi view we may now return to the
question, What is the meaning of the book ? What are we to
expect and to look for in it ? Did our space permit, it would be
an interesting task to dweU for a little on the Gospel of St. John,
and to show that in what may be described as the introductory
portion of that book, consisting of the first four chapters, the
writer prepares us for what he is to set forth in tbe foUowing
and main portion. We should find there traces of aU that is to
be afterwards unfolded at greater length — Jesus tbe Son of God,
His manHestation of HimseH, His struggle as Light with dark
ness, His preservation from His enemies, and His final victory.
It must suffice to say that these things are there, and that pre
cisely the same structure marks the Apocalypse. We have thus
a thread to guide us through the apparent labyrinth. For —
(a) We are at the very opening of the book introduced to Christ
HimseH in His aspect as the Head of His people, of the same
nature with them, and of one mind with them. In contrast with
the Fourth Gospel, which begins with the Word as God, and
then teUs us that that Word became flesh and tabernacled among
us, the Apocalypse begins with Christ as man. "And I saw,"
says the Seer, " in the midst of the candlesticks one Hke unto a
son of man " (chap. i. 13), though, as man, raised from the dead,
exalted, and glorified.
(fl) We are next introduced, in chaps, ii. and Hi., to the Uni
versal Church under there presentation given of seven churches
of Asia selected for that purpose. These churches are so
selected that they present us with a picture of the various elements
that make up the Church's Hfe. We see her in herself and in

THE REVELATION OF ST. JOHN THE DIVINE. 563
her relation to the world ; in her strength and in her weakness ;
in her steadfastness and in her declensions ; in her prosperity and
in her sufferings ; in her outward poverty and in her true riches ;
in the distinction existing between the real and nominal foUowers
of Christ within her borders ; in the just indignation of her
Supreme Head against the one, and in His leading the other to
the f uU possession of His own triumph in the presence of His
Father and theH Father, of His God and theH God.
In the first three chapters of the book we have thus the subject
of which it is to treat set before us. That subject is the Lord
Jesus Christ, not so much in the essential and external glory of
His divine Sonship as in the glory belonging to Him as the Head
o.f His Church. In other words, the subject of the Apocalypse
is the Church in Christ ; and the object of the book is to present
to us a picture of her trials and struggles in the world until the
time when, at His Second Coming, her Lord makes His glory
manifest, and completes His victory over aU her enemies.
{c) The fourth and fifth chapters, again, are to be regarded a
songs of triumph sung even before the contest begins, and con
veying to us an assurance of what wUl be the issue. It wiU not
be forgotten that this is elsewhere the manner of St. John.
Before the great contest dehneated in the Fourth Gospel, which
begins at chap, v., we have the victory of the Redeemer over
Nicodemus, the woman of Samaria, and th-8 Gahlean nobleman.
When speaking in his FHst Epistle of the struggles of Christians
with the world, St. John uses the words, "And this is the victory
that hath overcome the world, even our faith " (chap. v. 4). He
does not speak of the weapons with which the Christian soldier
prepares himself for the battle, but of the " victory " with whieh,
as if it were his armour, he is from the first equipped. In other
words, it is St. John's manner of thought to sing his song of
triumph before the fight begins, and that is exactly what he does
Hi the fourth and fifth chapters of the Apocalypse.
{d) At chap. vi. the real drama of the book opens, and from
that point onward to chap, xviii. 24, we have before us the
struggle of Hght with darkness and of good with evil. That
struggle is mainly suggested by the three series of visions known
as the Seals, the Trumpets, and the Bowls (the last being im
properly spoken of Hi the Authorised Version as Vials). As
compared with the two series which f oUow it, the first series, that
of the Seals, is general, including, as it does, the dealings of
God both with the world and the Church. It carries us onward
to the end of the present Dispensation, to the time when that
Redeemer whom the world scorned and persecuted, and whom
even a large portion of the Church denied, wiU return, " ren-

564 BOOK BY BOOK.
dering vengeance to them that know not God and to them that
obey not the gospel of our Lord Jesus," but " to be glorified in
His saints and to be admHed in aU them that beUeved" (2 Thess.
i. 8, 10).
After a short interval Hi chap, vii., in which we have two
visions of encouragement and consolation, assuring us of the
safety of God's children amidst aU their trials, we enter upon the
second great series of visions, that of the Trumpets. This series
is occupied mainly with the judgments of God upon the world,
and it, too, after visions of consolation mtroduced at exactly the
same point as in the previous series, brings us, at chap. xi. 18,
to the end, to "the time of the dead to be judged, and the time
to give reward to God's servants the prophets, and to the saints
and to them that fear God's name, the smaU and the great ; and
to destroy them that destroy the earth." The third series of
visions stiU remains, that of the Bowls. These Bowls, in which
the seven last plagues of the wrath of God are filled up, relate
mainly to the Church, and in so far as they tell us of judgment,
they apply to the degenerate and apostate Church, that great
outward Church out of whieh Christ's true people have to be
called, as His true sheep had been caUed by Him when He was
on earth out of the fold of Israel. We have to do, however, in
the first instance with the universal Church, the vine of God's
planting, the institution charged to carry on the contest with the
enemies of God.
These enemies, then, we ought to know, and hence the position
of chaps, xii. and xiii. In these chapters the three chief adver
saries of the real kingdom of God in the world are described.
The first is the dragon or Satan. The second is the power of
the world striving to withdraw our thoughts from the unseen
and eternal, and to confine them to the seen and temporal. The
third is the spirit of a carnal reUgiousness, Hke that which so
bitterly opposed Jesus in the days of His flesh, and sought to
substitute its superficial and hoUow forms for the depth, the
sincerity, and the freedom of a true life with God. These two
last agencies always work together, and help one another against
Christian truth. Nothing so welcome to the mere politicians of
this world as a faithless Church which wUl help them to use
men for their own selfish ends. Nothing so welcome to a faith
less Church as tbe honours, the riches, and the spoUs whieh the
mere pohticians of the world have to bestow.
In this part of the Apocalypse, therefore, the passion of the
Seer burns with its intensest flame. The degenerate Church is
represented under the figure of Babylon. In quick succession
the contents of the bowls are poured out upon her, untU she is

THE REVELATION OF ST. JOHN THE DIVINE. 565
cast Hke a great miUstone into the sea ; and company after
company of those who had been enriched with the abundance of
her dainties lament with piercing cries her disastrous and Ure-
mediable fate. This series, Uke the two former, brings us to the
end. («) Then, in chap. xix. and the earlier part of chap, xx., the
King of kings and Lord of lords comes forth in His victorious
progress, accompanied by the armies of the redeemed, who ride,
like Him, upon white horses, and share His triumph.
(/) In the latter part of chap. xx. and in chap. xxi. to chap.
xxU. 5, aU Christ's enemies are destroyed, and the happiness of
the saints is perfected. Upon the millennial bliss of the re
deemed, and upon the glory and happiness of the New Jerusalem,
it is not possible to dweU. Suffice it to say that we are to behold
Hi the former a figure of the perfected and eternally secured life
of those who not only die but rise with Christ ; and that in the
latter we have a bright and beautiful, as weU as elevating,
picture of that new condition into which the foUowers of Jesus
are mtroduced even on this side the grave, and amidst the labours
and trials of theH present pilgrimage.
Nothing, we are persuaded, has tended more to perplex the
interpretation of the Apocalypse than the idea that that holy city
which St. John saw "coming down out of heaven from God,
made ready as a bride adorned for her husband," is intended to
represent a glorious state into which the redeemed shall enter
sooner or later after the close of theH earthly pUgrimage, but
before they obtain possession of theH eternal inheritance. Taking
such a view it is impossible to interpret fairly aU the expressions
of the passage, while it deprives us at the same time of the
thought of those subhme privileges which, as we are everywhere
taught in Scripture, are not the future only but the present in
heritance of God's chUdren.
It is true indeed that even they who are " in " Christ Jesus
are still surrounded by a darkness whieh has no plaee in the
heavenly Jerusalem, that they have stiU to shed tears which
are there washed away, and that they have still to fear that they
must- meet that death which shaU there be swaUowed up of
victory. CaUing these things to mind it can be no matter of
surprise that many have difficulty in beHeving that the bright
ness and glory of this celestial city can under any point of view
represent an earthly scene through which we are thankful if we
may but grope our way, " fightings without and fears within."
Yet let them remember that the Christian Hfe has two sides, those
two which are brought forward so prominently by the Apostle
when he speaks of himself and his feUow ministers " as dying,

566 BOOK BY BOOK.
and behold we live ; as chastened, and not kUled ; as sorrowing,
yet alway rejoicing ; as poor, yet making many rich ; as having
nothing, yet possessing aU things" (2 Cor. v. 1, 9, 10). Let them
remember that, if the follower of Christ dies daily with his Lord,
he also rises with Him daUy, and ascends to the heavenly places
and is set down there, his life not maintained amidst the things
of earth but " hid with Christ in God." Let these thoughts be
ever present to their minds, and they wiH not have much diffi
culty in seeing that in the description of the New Jerusalem we
have the ideal side of the Christian's position, elevated to its
highest point and iUuminated with its brightest colouring, but
stiU a side that is true to one aspect of his present state.
One of the great lessons of the Apocalypse, indeed, consists in
this, that it unfolds such a bright view, not of a world beyond
the grave, but of this present world, when we contemplate it with
the eye of faith, and penetrate through the veil of sense to the
great springs of spHitual action by which it is reaUy moved. It
may be doubted if in this respect there is one single picture of
the Apocalypse appHcable only to the future inheritance of the
saints. What is set forth in its apparent visions of future happi
ness is rather the present privUege of beHevers, when they look
at what they possess in the Hght of that Christian revelation in
whieh old things pass away, and aU things are made new. If
we enter upon the study of it with this f eeHng, and it is a f eeUng
which, as the spirituahty of the Church increases, will more and
more commend itseH to the Christian mind, the visions of this
book wiU be to us what they were to the Apostle who first beheld
them. They will give us feUowship on the loneliest rook of the
wide ocean of human life, and they wiH Ughten the darkest spots
of earth with a heavenly and unchanging glory.
{g) The EpUogue of the book, beginning at chap. xxu. 6,
closes aU.

THE END.

By the Bight Bev. A. W. Thorold, D.D.,
Lord Bishop of Winchester.

Questions of Faith and Duty.
Just Published. Crown 8vo, 5 s.
Contents : — The Personal Life — The Home — Christ
Crucified — Christ Risen — Christ Ascended — Secret
Faults — Sorrow — Service, &c, &c.
Every one of these short addresses will hear reading and reading again.
They should awaken the careless, stimulate the godly, and confirm the
waverers ." — Record.
The Yoke of Christ.
Twelfth Thousand. Crown 8vo, 5 s.
Contents : — Marriage — Illness — Letter - Writing —
Friends — Money— The Loss of Friends.
" The six essays which make up the volume are the ripe fruit of twenty
yeais' meditation, and they have the 'nuttintss ' of age about them."
Saturday Review.
The Gospel of Christ.
Sixth Thousand. Crown 8vo, 4s. 6d.
" May well take its place amongst the classics of experimental religion." Record.
The Claim of Christ on the Young.
ThHd Thousand. Crown 8vo, 2s. 6d.
" They deserve to be ranked amongst the most remarkable pulpit
utterances of modern times. They deal with living questions and real
dangers ; are simple and yet powerful ; wise and at the same time uncom
promising in the defence of a supernatural Gospel. We commend the work ¦
as both timely and of remarkable value." — Churchman.
The Presence of Christ.
Nineteenth Thousand. Crown 8vo, 3s. 6d.
On the Loss of Friends, sewed, 3d.
On Being 111. sewed, 3d.
ISBISTER & CO., Limited, Covent Garden, London..

By the Venerable F. W. Farrar, D.D.
Archdeacon a"nd Canon of Westminster.

The Voice From Sinai; the Bases
of God's Moral Law. A Series of Discourses on the Ten
Commandments. Crown 8vo, 5s.
" This book is one which speaks to the conscience and the heart, and
it s=ts an example of fearless, faithful, and practical preaching, which
ministers in general would do well to imitate." — Scotsman.
Every-day Christian Life ; or, Ser
mons by the Way. Sixth Thousand. Crown 8vo, 5s.
" Altogether a kindly, manly book, meeting a real need of a practical,
earnest age, in an able, refreshing, and understandable way." — Pall Ma I
Gazette. " A book we can thoroughly recommend .... supplies an excellent
model for imitation." — Literary Churchman.
Truths to Live By. A Companion
Volume to " Every-day Christian Life." Fourth Thousand.
Crown 8vo, 5s.
" No theologian is better qualified to speak with lucidity of the cardinal
tenets of the Christian creed. Canon Farrar has attempted to set forth
those tenets ' in simple and untechnical language,' and he has admirably
succeeded." — Daily Telegraph.
" We may without insincerity say that any one who will carefully and
reverently read the book — in the same eari est spirit in which it has manifestly
been written — cannot fail to be helped and strengthened by its manly
pleadings. The circulaiion of the book is bound to be large ; its influence
and its value are bound to be great." — Church Bells.
By the Bight Son. W. F. Gladstone, M.P.

The Impregnable Rock of Holy
Scripture. A Series of Old Testament Studies. Revised
and Enlarged Edition. Crown 8vo, 3s. 6d.
" We do not think that the story of Creation has ever been treated with
so large a sagacity and fo full an appreciation of what could and what could
not be taught to primitive and, as we may say, infantine man. . . . Mr.
Gladstone applies these principles with what we may call a statesmanlike
insight and subtlety." — Spectator.
ISBISTER & CO., Limited, Covent Garden, London.

@S%jgfegj53gS^i&jp^^