YALE UNIVERSITY
LIBRARY

BIBLICAL INTRODUCTION

BIBLICAL
INTRODUCTION OLD TESTAMENT BY
W. H. BENNETT, M.A.
>>»
SOMETIME FELLOW OF ST. JOHN'S COLLEGE, CAMBRIDGE ; PROFESSOR OF OLD
TESTAMENT EXEGESIS, HACKNEY AND NEW COLLEGES, LONDON
NEW TESTAMENT BY
WALTER F. ADENEY, M.A.
PROFESSOR OF NEW TESTAMENT HISTORY, INTRODUCTION, AND
EXEGESIS NEW COLLEGE. LONDON

NEW YORK
THOMAS WHITTAKER
1899

PREFACE
THIS volume is intended for a handbook of Biblical
Introduction — dealing with such questions as the date,
authorship, composition, analysis, and contents of the
several books — for those who are unacquainted or
only slightly acquainted with the original languages of
the Bible and the technicalities of criticism. The
authors have been anxious to include all matters of
importance, to state the prevalent views concerning
them, and to do so at sufficient length to make them
intelligible. Necessarily, therefore, many details of
analysis and criticism have had to be omitted, and
many theories held by only a few scholars have had
to be ignored. Not only did considerations of space
require these omissions, but it was important that
the student should not be so bewildered by a crowd of
details and conflicting theories as to be unable " to see
the wood for the trees." Hence, only an outline of
arguments and specimens of evidence are given, and it
must not be supposed that an exhaustive proof is offered
of the positions maintained. Similarly the authorities
referred to are merely a representative selection. Care
has been taken to secure that the information given
should be accurate and recent.
In the Old Testament, the critical position is,
speaking roughly, that identified in this country with
Professors Cheyne, Driver, Ryle, G. A. Smith, etc. ;

vi BIBLICAL INTRODUCTION
and generally assumed by the writers on O.T. subjects
in Dr. Hastings' Bible Dictionary} Brief notes as to
the light thrown by Assyrian, Babylonian, and other
inscriptions on the history of Israel have been added
to the passages of the historical books which they
illustrate. Under each book, or — where the present
books are collections of earlier works — under each
section, some account is given of its use in the New
Testament ; this account, however, is not exhaustive.
The references to Driver's Introduction are to the Sixth
Edition ; but, except where specially stated, the numbers
of the pages are those of the Fifth and earlier editions,
which are given in brackets [ ] in the text of the
Sixth. Special attention is called to the explanation
of symbols and technical terms on pp. 15 ff., 24 f., 32,
62 n.
With regard to the chapters on the New Testament, a
brief description of the patristic writers cited will be
found in an appendix ; for a fuller account the reader is
referred to Professor Charteris' Canonicity. The scheme
of chronology adopted in the New Testament period is
that which until recently has been almost universally
accepted, that followed in the main by Schurer, Light
foot, Hort, etc. Recently Harnack, McGiffert, and
others have argued for an earlier dating of the chief
events in St. Paul's life, and of the writing of his
epistles. In an important article on " Chronology " in
the new Bible Dictionary, the writer, Mr. C. H. Turner,
has demonstrated the impossibility of these early dates.
There is still some uncertainty; but the variation is
1 The widespread acceptance of such views, even outside the ranks of
O.T. scholars, may be illustrated by the advocacy of the non-historical
character of Jonah by the late Dr. R. W. Dale in the Expositor of Tulv.
1892. J "

PREFACE vii
only a matter of about five years, and the relative
distinctions of dates remain unchanged. Under these
circumstances it seems wisest to adhere to the generally
accepted chronology, though with the proviso that it is
not certain, and might perhaps be shifted back one or
two years, as Mr. Turner suggests.
Each of the authors is solely responsible for his own
share of the book.
This account of Biblical criticism is published in
the faith that "Any criticism of the human element
in the Bible, which makes it more truly human, more
analogous to the workings of the human spirit other
where, tends without question to enhance our sense of
its reality and worth."1 The authors of this volume
trust that it may help its readers to a truer understand
ing of the sacred Scriptures, and to a fuller appreciation
of their unique importance ; and may confirm them in
the evangelical recognition of the supreme authority of
the Bible as interpreted and applied by the Holy Spirit
for the spiritual life.
1 Canon Illingworth, Personality, etc., p. i86.

PAGE V

TABLE OF CONTENTS
Preface . ...
OLD TESTAMENT
CHAPTER I.
Introductory to Old Testament . . . i
I. MSS. and Versions. 2. External Evidence. 3. History
of Criticism. 4. Canon. CHAPTER II.
Earlier Historical Books— Genesis to Kings . .15
I. Alphabetical Table of Terms and Symbols. 2. Methods
of Composition. 3. Earlier Theories. 4. Current Documentary
Theories. 5. Methods of Analysis. 6. Limitations of Analysis.
7. General Table of Analysis. 8. Sketch of Argument.
9. Argument from Historical Situation. 10. Argument
from Theology. 11. Argument from Literary Parallels.
12. Linguistic Argument. 13. Argument from Mutual Relations
of Documents. 14. J. 15. E. 16. JE. 17. D. 18. JED.
19. H. 20. P. 21. Completion of Pentateuch. 22. Mosaic
Elements. 23^ Genesis. 2^, Exodus. 25^- Leviticus.
26^ Numbers. 27., Deuteronomy. 28^ Joshua. 29^. Judges.
30^. Ruth. 31^. Samuel. 32^ Kings. 33. Teaching of
Historical Books. CHAPTER III.
Later Historical Books — Chronicles to Esther : 107
1. Titles, Divisions, and Mutual Relations of Chron. -Ezra-
Neh. 2. Date and Authorship of Chron. -Ezra-Neh. 3. Sources
of Chron. 4^,Contents of Chron. 5. Historical Character and
Teaching of Chron. 6. Use of Chron. in N.T. 7. Sources of
Ezra-Neh. 8. Historical Accuracy of Ezra-Neh. g^. Contents
of Ezra-Neh. 10, Esther.

x BIBLICAL INTRODUCTION

CHAPTER IV.
PAGE
The Poetical Books . • ... 123.
yjob. 2. Psalmsy 3. Proverbs^ 4. Ecclesiastes, 5. Song
of Songs, CHAPTER V.
Isaiah-Daniel . . . ... 171
I. Our Book of Isaiah, with General Analysis. ij/- Isaiah
i.-xxxv. 3. Isaiah xxxvi .-xxxix. 4. Introduction to Isaiah
xl.-lxvi. 5. Isaiah xl.-lv. 6. Isaiah lvi.-lxvi. 7^ Jeremiah.
8« Lamentations. 9-. Ezekiel. icy Daniel.
CHAPTER VI.
The Book of the Twelve Prophets . . . 234
1. Introductory. 2/Hosea. 3yJoel. 4j/Amos. SyObadiah.
6,/Jonah. 7^'Micah. 8^Nahum. g^Habalckuk. 10/Zephaniah.
\ls Haggai. I2y Zechariah i.-viii. 13,, Zechariah ix.-xiv.
14^ Malachi. CHAPTER VII.
Apocrypha, Pseudepigrapha, and some other Jewish
Literature not included in the Protestant
Canon . . . ... 268
1. Apocalypse of Baruch, including Epistle of Baruch.
2. Ascension of Isaiah. 3. Assumption of Moses. 4. Baruch,
Book of. 5. Daniel, Song of the Three Children, Bel and the
Dragon, Susanna. 6. Ecclesiasticus. 7. Enoch, Book of.
8. Enoch, Book of the Secrets of. 9. I. or III. Esdras.
10. II. or IV. Esdras. 11. Esther. 12. Jeremiah, Letter
of. 13. Josephus. 14. Jubilees, Book of. 15. Judith.
16. i. Maccabees. 17. ii. Maccabees. 18. iii. Maccabees.
19. iv. Maccabees. 20. Manasseh, Prayer of. 21. Philo.
22. Psalms of Solomon. 23. Sibyllines. 24. Testament of
the Twelve Patriarchs. 25. Tobit. 26. Wisdom of Solomon.

TABLE OF CONTENTS xi
NEW TESTAMENT
PAGE
Introductory . . . ... 275

CHAPTER I.
The Synoptic Gospels . . . . . 277
1. The Gospels. 2. Matthew. 3. Mark. 4. Luke.
CHAPTER II.
The Synoptic Problem . . . . . 316
I. Resemblances. 2. Differences. 3. Proposed Explanations.
4. Probable Conclusions. CHAPTER III.
The Fourth Gospel . . ... 328
1. Authorship and Historicity. 2. Time and Place of Writing.
3. Contents. 4. Characteristics.
CHAPTER IV.
The Acts of the Apostles . . . . 341
1. Authorship. 2. Historicity. 3. Date. 4. Contents. 5. Aim
and Characteristics.
CHAPTER V.
The Pauline Epistles— First Group . . . 349
I. The Thirteen Epistles. 2. The Thessalonian Christians.
3. 1 Thessalonians. 4. 2 Thessalonians.
CHAPTER VI.
The Pauline Epistles— Second Group . . . 361
I. The Church at Corinth. 2. The Question of a Lost
Epistle. 3. I Corinthians. 4. 2 Corinthians. 5. Galatians.
6. Romans. 7. Characteristics of the Group.

xii BIBLICAL INTRODUCTION

CHAPTER VII.
The Pauline Epistles— Third Group— The Epistles
Written in Prison . • • ¦ • 3^7
The Place and Time of Imprisonment. I. Colossians.
2. Philemon. 3. Ephesians. 4. Philippians. 5- Characteristics
of the Group. CHAPTER VIII.
Fourth Group— The Pastoral Epistles . . . 406
1. The question of genuineness. 2. I Timothy. 3. 2 Timothy,
4. Titus. CHAPTER IX.
The Epistle to the Hebrews . . . . 421
I. Who was the Author— Paul, Luke, Clement, Apollos,
Barnabas? 2. Date and Place of Writing. 3. The Church
Addressed. 4. Occasion of Writing. 5. Contents. 6. Argument.
CHAPTER X.
General Epistles . . . . . 434
1. James. 2. I Peter. 3. 2 Peter. 4. Jude. 5- I John.
6. 2 John. 7. 3 John. CHAPTER XI.
The Revelation . . . ... 460
1. Apocalyptic Literature. 2. Authorship and Origin. History
of Criticism. Date. 3. Contents. 4. Structure and Interpreta
tion. APPENDIX.
Early Witnesses to New Testament Writings . 469
List of Books . . . ... 471
Index . . . . ... 483

BIBLICAL INTRODUCTION
CHAPTER I.
INTRODUCTORY TO OLD TESTAMENT
I. MSS. and Versions j 3. History of Criticism
2. External Evidence I 4. Canon
1. Text, MSS., and Versions.1 — The two main authorities
for the text of the O.T. are the Masoretic edition and the
Septuagint. The Masoretic edition is extant in the numerous
MSS.2 and printed editions of the Hebrew Text. The two
oldest MSS. are one of the Pentateuch, which Dr. Ginsburg
dates a.d. 820-850, in the British Museum ; and one at
St. Petersburg, dated by its own scribe a.d. 916, and con
taining Isaiah, Jeremiah, Ezekiel, and the Twelve. The
oldest MS. of the whole Bible mentioned by Ginsburg was
written c. a.d. 1230.
The various readings are comparatively unimportant, and
the substantial agreement of so many MSS. confirms the
statements that, long before a.d. 800, the accurate transmission
of the Hebrew Text had been safeguarded by a number of
ingenious and efficacious devices. The present consonantal
text was probably fixed, and as it were stereotyped, during the
first three centuries after Christ. The vowel-points were
added later. The " Square Hebrew," however, of our MSS.
1 Cf. § 2 on External Evidence.
a Kennicott collated 581 MSS. of the whole or part of the O.T.—
Smith's Bible Diet., art. "Old Testament." Ginsburg, Introduction to
the Heb. Bible, describes 60 of the most important.

2 BIBLICAL INTRODUCTION
and printed copies is really the Aramaic script adopted by
the Jews some time after the Exile. The character previously
used by Israelite writers was that of the Moabite stone.
Moreover, in the ancient writings themselves the use of weak
consonants for vowels only occurs to a very limited extent.
Thus our present pointed text has been obtained from the
original, by transcription from the old into the square Hebrew,
by the insertion of weak consonants to do duty as vowels,
and by the addition of vowel-points. The comparative
uniformity of existing MSS. suggests that, at some stage
in the formation of the text, the editors constituted one
MS. an archetype for subsequent copies, and suppressed all
the earlier MSS. which differed from it. The margins of our
MSS. and some other Jewish authorities preserve a number
of comparatively unimportant various readings, besides those
obtained by a comparison of the MSS. themselves.
The Samaritans have MSS. of the Pentateuch in a form
of the old Hebrew character; it is claimed that some of
these belong to the first four centuries of the Christian
era. The differences between these MSS. and those of the
Masoretic edition do not substantially affect the text.
The other main authority is the Septuagint or Greek version,
which was made at Alexandria at different times by various
translators. The Pentateuch was probably translated in the
reign of Ptolemy II. (Philadelphus), b.c. 285-246, and the
prologue to Ecclesiasticus shows that a Greek translation of
the Law, the Prophets, and other books existed in B.C. 130.
The Septuagint was probably completed before the Christian
era, but we do not know the exact date. This version is
extant in numerous MSS., apparently all derived from
Christian sources; the oldest and most important are the
Vatican and Sinaitic,1 which also contain the N.T. The
differences of reading discovered by comparing the MSS.
of the Septuagint with each other and with those of the
Hebrew Text are numerous and important.
Probably the Targums, or oral Aramaic translations given
1 BK, both of the fourth century A. D.

EXTERNAL EVIDENCE 3
in the synagogues after the reading of the Hebrew Scriptures,
existed in a kind of oral edition at the beginning of the
Christian era; but the extant Targums were not committed
to writing till a much later date.
The Babylonian Targums, that of the Law named after Onkelos, that
of the Prophets after Jonathan ben Uzziel, belong to the second and third
centuries a.d. The Palestinian Targums, viz., the two on the Law, the
Jerusalem Targum and that of Pseudo-Jonathan, and the rest are later.
Greek translations by Symmachus, Aquila, and Theodotion
were made in the second century a.d. With the exception of
Theodotion's Daniel only fragments are preserved.
The Old Latin Version, second century a.d., was made
from the Septuagint, which also largely influenced the Peshito
or Syriae Version, second or third century. Jerome's Vulgate,
c. a.d. 400, is a very thorough revision from the Hebrew of
the Old Latin Version.
2. External Evidence.1 — As the external evidence concern
ing the date and authorship of the books of the O.T. mostly
refers to the whole collection, it is convenient to give a sketch
of it here. The oldest MSS. of the Hebrew Text show us
that the Hebrew Text now current, from which E.V. is
translated, was known about a.d. 800-1000, i.e., that all the
books of the O.T. were then extant in their present form.
The oldest MSS. of the LXX. show us that they were all
extant in substantially 2 their present form about a.d. 300-400.
Further, the accounts given of the Synod of Jamnia show
that all the books existed at the close of the first century
a.d., and the numerous quotations in the N.T. mostly agree
either with the LXX. or the Hebrew Text, from which we
infer that the books quoted in the N.T. existed then in sub
stantially the same form as that in which they are found
in the LXX. and the Hebrew. These books comprise all the
O.T. except Joshua, Judges, Chronicles, Canticles, Ecclesiastes,
Ezra, Nehemiah, Esther, Obadiah, Zephaniah, Nahum? Philo
1 On Internal Evidence see chap. ii. § II.
2 The differences are appreciable.
3 Westcott, Bible in the Church, p. 43.

4 BIBLICAL INTRODUCTION
and Josephus confirm our inference as to the books used in
N.T., and enable us to extend it to the other books of O.T.,
with two possible exceptions, Ecclesiastes and Canticles.
We can add from Philo, Joshua, Judges, and Chronicles.
Josephus' history shows his acquaintance with all the historical
books. In his account of the Scriptures 1 he states that there
are only twenty-two sacred books : the five books of Moses,
thirteen books by the prophets containing the history from
Moses to Artaxerxes, and four books containing hymns to
God and practical directions to men. The thirteen are
perhaps : (i) Joshua, (2) Judges and Ruth, (3) Samuel,
(4) Kings, (5) Isaiah, (6) Jeremiah and Lamentations,
(7) Ezekiel, (8) The Book of the Twelve Prophets,
(9) Chronicles, (10) Ezra and Nehemiah, (11) Esther,
(12) Daniel, (13) Job: and the Jour, Psalms, Proverbs,
Canticles, Ecclesiastes. 2
It would, however, be quite possible to reckon Ruth and
Lamentations as separate books, to place Job and Lamenta
tions among the four, and extrude Ecclesiastes and Canticles.1
There is no certain trace in Josephus of his acquaintance
with these two books, and his list and classification do
not prove that he was acquainted with them. Perhaps this
master of craft and subtlety was intentionally ambiguous in
view of the conflicting views of the Rabbis.
The fact that the LXX. contains all the O.T. shows that
all the books were written before the LXX. was completed,
i.e., according to common opinion, before the beginning
of the Christian era. Unfortunately this opinion, though
probably correct, is not at present susceptible of formal
proof. The prologue to the Greek translation of Ecclesiasticus
speaks of " the Law and the Prophets and the other books "
as known to the author, a passage which shows that the Law
and the Prophets and some other sacred books were known to
1 Contra Apion, i. 7-9.
2 Buhl, Canon, p. 19.
8 Grate ap. Buhl, p. 19.

EXTERNAL EVIDENCE 5
the translator, b.c 130, and probably to his grandfather, the
author, b.c 180 ; but they by no means prove that the
Hagiographa or Kethubhfm, the third and latest section of
the Hebrew Canon, then included all the books which it
ultimately embraced. On the contrary, the list of worthies,
xliv.-xlix. implies the author's acquaintance with all the books
of the "Law" and the "Prophets'1; but, of the Hagiographa,
only Chronicles, Ezra, Nehemiah, and Psalms are referred to.
The story that the Law was translated into Greek by
seventy-two Jews1 for Ptolemy (Philadelphus), B.C. 284-246,
is extant in a letter, the Epistle of the Pseudo-Aristeas, which
is perhaps as old as b.c. 200; if so, the main fact, the
translation of the Law into Greek c. b.c 250, may probably
be accepted; and we have external evidence of the existence
of the complete Pentateuch at that date.2
The Samaritans possess ancient Hebrew MSS. 3 of the
Pentateuch in a modification of the old Hebrew character.
Probably the Samaritans obtained and accepted the Penta
teuch not long after their establishment of a schismatic
Judaism. This was certainly not earlier than the reforms
of Ezra and Nehemiah, b.c 444. Our information concern
ing the history of the Samaritans is too fragmentary and
ambiguous to enable us to fix exactly the date at which
they received the Pentateuch; but it points to the existence
of the Pentateuch before B.C. 300.
Thus the evidence outside of the O.T. itself shows that the
Pentateuch was in existence before b.c 300 ; Joshua, Judges,
Samuel, Kings, Isaiah, Jeremiah, Ezekiel, the Book of the
Twelve Prophets, Chronicles, Ezra, Nehemiah, and Psalms
before B.C. 180 ; the rest of the O.T. before the beginning
of the Christian era. The proof, however, is not quite
absolute from external evidence alone in the case of Eccle
siastes and Canticles. But, even as a matter of external
evidence, these two books could not be much later.
1 Hence the title Septuagint.
2 Buhl, p. no.
5 Some probably as old as a.d. 400.

6 BIBLICAL INTRODUCTION
The LXX. and the Hebrew Text have reached us along
independent lines of transmission. The differences between
them, though numerous and important, do not seriously affect
O.T. history and teaching. This agreement shows us that
our O.T. existed substantially as we now have it before the
Christian era.1
External evidence as to authorship is necessarily slighter
and less definite. A reference to a book is proof of its
existence at the time when the reference was made, and
fixes a limit to the period within which it can have been
composed. But a statement as to authorship merely conveys
the opinion of the person who makes it, and when he lived
centuries after the book was written his opinion carries little
weight, unless it can be shown — not merely assumed — that he
connects with the book through a satisfactory series of inter
mediate authorities. Revelation, of course, might have given
N.T. writers direct information on such subjects, or our Lord
might have made statements as to the date and authorship of
the Jewish Scriptures part of His message to the world. But
neither Christ nor the inspired writers declare that such matters
are part of the Revelation made by Him or through them.
Our Hebrew and Greek MSS. show that in N.T. times
the books already bore their present titles, and they are
referred to under these titles in the N.T. and elsewhere.
But such references are not equivalent to expressions of
opinion as to authorship. For instance, " Matthew says,
etc." merely means to-day "The First Gospel says, etc.";
the personal name " Matthew " is used as a title for the
book, without any intention of stating a conviction as to
authorship. Thus Calvin does not hold 2 Peter to be the
work of the apostle, but expressly justifies the referring to
it as "Peter," because he believes it to be consistent with
his teaching.2 Similarly, Origen says of the Epistle to the
1 The additions in the LXX. do not affect this evidence.
2 So Dr. Currey writes in the S.P.C.K. commentary on Ecclesiastes,
1878 : "Commentators have in general spoken of the contents of this book
as the words of Solomon, without intending thereby to express any precise
opinion of its authorship and date."

EXTERNAL EVIDENCE 7
Hebrews that " God only knows who wrote it," yet in his
writings he freely quotes it as " Paul's." 1 Hence unless
a writer or speaker makes it clear that he is intending to
state an authoritative judgment as to the authorship of a
book, quotations from " Moses," or " David," or " Kings "
merely mean that the passages are taken from the books
bearing these titles. Our leading authorities are for the
most part singularly wanting in explicit statements as to
the authorship of O.T. books. The N.T. lays little stress
upon authorship ; in the majority of its quotations it does
not think it worth while to mention any author's name ;
it is not careful to confine the term "David" to Psalms
bearing Davidic titles, but extends it to the anonymous
Psalms ii. and xcv.2 In some cases the authors' names
connected with quotations in the N.T. differ from the titles
of the O.T. books from which they are taken.3
It is not that the N.T. writers intended to give an inspired
contradiction of the O.T., but that they were indifferent,
and did not claim to deliver inspired messages on these
subjects. The most explicit statement is the well-known Talmudic
passage, which probably represents the current opinion of the
Rabbis at the beginning of the Christian era.4 It runs as
follows : — " But who wrote (the books of the Bible) ? Moses
wrote his own book (and) the section about Balaam, and Job.
Joshua wrote his own book and (the last) eight verses of the
Pentateuch. Samuel wrote his own book (and) the books
1 e.g., Against Celsus, chap. liii.
2 Acts iv. 25 ; Heb. iv. 7.
3 In Mark i. 2, 3, R.V., Mal. iii. 1, + Isaiah xl. 3 is quoted as
"written in the prophet Isaiah"; in Matt, xxvii. 9, Zech. xi. 12, 13
are referred to as " spoken by Jeremiah the prophet " ; probably elsewhere
the names of authors of quotations have been inserted by scribes, much as
references are written or printed in English Bibles. Thus the name
" Daniel " given in Matt. xxiv. 15 is absent from Mark, R.V., and Luke ;
and "Jeremiah " is omitted by some authorities in Matt. ii. 17.
4 Babylonian Talmud, Baba Bathra, f. 14 b. Though this edition of
the Talmud was composed about A.D. 500, the passage in question is a
" baraitha," or early tradition from the age of the Mishna, i.e., the second
century a.d. .Buhl, Canon, p. 5."

8 BIBLICAL INTRODUCTION
of Judges and Ruth. David wrote the book of Psalms by
the ten venerable elders, Adam the first man, Melchizedek,
Abraham, Moses, Haman, Jeduthun, Asaph, and the three
sons of Korah. Jeremiah wrote his own book, the books
of Kings and Lamentations. Hezekiah and his friends (wrote
the books included in) the mnemonic book Y.a.M.Sh.a.Q., i.e.,
Isaiah (YeshaydM), Proverbs (Meshdlim), Canticles (Shir
hash-Shirhn), and Ecclesiastes (Qoheleth). The Men of the
Great Synagogue (wrote the books included in) the mnemonic
word HaNDaG, i.e., Ezekiel (ye Hezkel), the Twelve (Neb-
hiim), Daniel, and Esther. Ezra wrote his own book and
continued the genealogies of the books of Chronicles down
to his own times. . . . But who completed them (the books
of Chronicles) ? Nehemiah ben Hachaliah."
Clearly, "wrote" cannot be used here of the literary com
position of our present books. The Book of Joshua narrates
the death of Joshua ; the Book of Samuel narrates the whole
reign of David, while Samuel died before his accession. The
Great Synagogue, if it existed at all, was a post-exilic institu
tion, and the Talmud could not mean that Amos and Hosea
were post-exilic. Note, too, that David's "writing" of the
Psalms does not exclude " ten venerable elders " from a share
in the work. The inevitable conclusion is that when the Jews
of our Lord's time spoke of anyone "writing" a book, they
used the term in a very elastic sense; either of preparing
the final edition which took its place in the Canon, 'or of
having some connection with the book, as being its hero,
and the author of part of its contents. Similarly, although
Ecclus. xliv.-xlix. implies that, in the author's time, the
books of the Law and the Prophets bore their present titles,
it does not assert that the persons mentioned in the titles
were the literary authors of the books in their present form.
Even Philo and Josephus, who dilate on Moses' gifts as a
legislator, and speak of him as prophesying his death and
burial, lay little stress on his actual literary authorship.
There is a story in Fourth Esdras, c. a.d. 90-100, that the
Law was burnt, and that Ezra was inspired to dictate afresh

GENERAL COURSE OF CRITICISM 9
ninety-four books to five scribes, seventy of which were
reserved for scholars and twenty-four published.1 This strange
legend seems to point to a tradition of an extensive post-exilic
revision of the Law and the rest of the O.T.
Thus the external evidence as to authorship shows that the
books of the O.T. had their present titles at the beginning
of the Christian era, and that the Law and the Prophets
(including Joshua to 2 Kings, less Ruth) had such titles
about b.c 200; and that the Pentateuch existed in its present
form c. b.c 300. Further, Moses and others named in such
titles are often spoken of as in some sense authors of the
books to which their names are attached, but the extant
evidence suggests that they may not always have been credited
with the literary authorship of these books in their present
form. Otherwise, our authorities seem to have had no in
formation on the subject but that given by the titles and
other contents of the O.T. Practically, therefore, we are
left to determine the date and authorship of the books from
the same evidence.
3. The General Course of Criticism. It follows, from what
has been maintained in the section on External Evidence,
that there is nothing to show either that Jewish views as to
date and authorship were based on any careful and thorough
investigations, or even that their statements are intended to
ascribe literary authorship to the persons whose names they
use as titles of books. The Pentateuch, for instance, might
be called the Law of Moses, and carry his authority, even
if it was not composed by him; it represented his teaching
and his spirit. Thus the criticism of our books had not
really begun when the Church took over the O.T. from the
Synagogue. With the books, the Church also took the titles,
and the loose understanding that the personal titles were,
as far as possible, to be interpreted as ascriptions of author
ship. With slight exceptions, there was no inquiry into the
1 xiv. 19-48 ; the book is called 2 Esdras in the English version of the
Apocrypha. The twenty-four published books are probably those of the
O.T., which were often reckoned as twenty-four.

io BIBLICAL INTRODUCTION
evidence of date and authorship. The intellect of Christian
scholars was preoccupied with the Canon and criticism of
the N.T., and with the construction of a system of theology.
Meanwhile, popular usage hardened into definite and rigid
shape the traditional views taken over from the Rabbis.
Lapse of time gave the authority of prescription to what
had merely been accepted by an otiose assent; and, through
out the Middle Ages, the cruel weight of ecclesiastical
intolerance effectually crushed any movement to reopen a
question which both the Church and the Synagogue were
supposed to have settled. Nevertheless, here and there, a
passage of a father, like Theodore of Mopsuestia, or of a
Rabbi, like Ibn Ezra, shows that the objections to the
traditional views were patent to competent scholars who were
also independent thinkers.
The Reformation promised, at first, to liberate criticism;
Luther and Calvin were the pioneers of modern biblical
criticism ; they set aside traditional views on some points
connected with the Apocrypha and minor O.T. books. But
history repeated itself, the Protestant leaders were mainly
occupied with the revolution in Church government and
the reconstruction of theology. The traditional views which
the Primitive Church had accepted by otiose assent from the
Rabbis, the Protestants again accepted, with little change,
from the Church of Rome. About this period, and before
and after, Spinoza, Grotius, and others, besides the great
reformers, made beginnings of O.T. criticism in various
directions; but there was no comprehensive or thorough
investigation into the date and authorship of the respective
books. The movement towards inquiry was checked, and,
in the absence of any emphatic challenge, it came to be
supposed that the traditional views were part of the body
of Christian truth, which Protestants held in common with
the Church of Rome.
It was only towards the close of the last century that the
principles of the Reformation began to be systematically
applied to O.T. criticism. Since then, the question of the

GENERAL COURSE OF CRITICISM u
date, authorship, etc., of all the books of the O.T. has been
carefully examined. The process has been long, laborious, and
difficult, and is by no means completed. Two special causes
have added to the difficulty, (i) In most cases, and till
recently in all cases, the scholars engaged in this task were
trained to take the traditional views for granted, and to assume
that they were always supported by conclusive evidence.
When a scholar was engaged in a fresh and independent
examination of some one subject, on all other subjects he
was almost obliged to assume the traditional views, which
had moulded all his habits of thought on the O.T. Hence
the first solutions proposed often blend the assumptions of
tradition and the results of criticism in the most curious
fashion. (2) On the other hand, it was soon discovered that,
in many cases, the strong evidence supposed to support the
older views simply did not exist ; and that what seemed to be
evidence was often quite irrelevant. Hence there arose a
tendency to reject both views and evidence in too wholesale
a fashion. For these two reasons results have had to be
revised and reconsidered again and again. But there are
signs that something like finality is being reached as to the
main facts ; although in dealing with a very ancient literature
chiefly by internal evidence, results must always be approxi
mate, there will always be a broad margin of uncertainty,
within which different scholars will arrive at different results.
There has also been a third difficulty. Naturally, anxiety
has been felt lest the processes and results of criticism should
weaken the authority of the Bible, and undermine the founda
tions of essential Christian doctrines. Now, however, the
new positions have met with widespread acceptance for more
than a generation, and experience shows that ministers and
Christians generally hold such positions without losing any
thing of their fulness of spiritual life, or of their zeal and
success in the service of their Master.
In many respects, especially in the Prophetical Books,
criticism has substantially confirmed traditional views; in
many other matters those views have been considerably

12 BIBLICAL INTRODUCTION
modified, or even entirely set aside. The general result,
however, tends not to weaken, but to strengthen, the spiritual
authority and value of the Old Testament.
The very general statement given above would apply to almost all
schools of criticism. Some scholars, however, believe that the ultimate
results of criticism will be much more in accordance with traditional views
than the position taken in the O.T. section of this book. Cf. Preface and
Appendix on Literature.
4. Canon. — The idea of a Canon, or collection of books
distinguished from all others by unique inspiration and
religious authority, was fully established among the Jews
before the beginning of the Christian era. Yet there was
not unanimity as to the exact list of canonical books. The
Hebrew collection of sacred books was less numerous than
that used by Greek-speaking Jews. Even amongst Palestinian
Jews the canonicity of Ezekiel, Ecclesiastes, Ruth, Esther,
Proverbs, and Canticles was still discussed in the first century
a.d. But the Synod of Jamnia, c. a.d. 90, seems to have
fixed the Canon of the Hebrew O.T. as we now have it;
and this Canon was confirmed by the Mishna, c. a.d. 200.
The O.T. as published, so to speak, by the Masoretic editors,
not earlier than about a.d, 150, and as printed in our Hebrew
Bibles, consists of three parts : —
(i.) Torah, or Pentateuch.
(ii.) Nebhtim, or Prophets.
(a) Nebhtim Ri'shbnim, or First Volume of the
Prophets, Joshua, Judges, Samuel, Kings.
(b) Nebhtim 'Ahdronim, or Second Volume of the
Prophets,1 Isaiah, Jeremiah, Ezekiel, and the
Twelve.
(iii.) Kethubhim, or Hagiographa, Chronicles, Psalms,
Job, Proverbs, Daniel, Ezra, and Nehemiah;
and the five festival rolls, or Megilldth, Ruth,
Canticles, Ecclesiastes, Lamentations, and Esther.
1 Another, less probable, explanation of (a) and (b) is " earlier " and
" later prophets. "

CANON 13
This grouping is recognised in the N.T. in the frequent
references to "the Law and the Prophets,"1 and once to
"the Law of Moses, the Prophets, and the Psalms."2
Similarly the prologue to Ecclesiasticus speaks of the Law,
the Prophets, and the other books of our fathers. Thus the
two first sections of the Canon, the Law and the Prophets,
seem fully accepted in their present form before b.c 130, and
almost certainly before b.c 200. The canonical status of
the Pentateuch is implied in Chronicles, b.c 300-250; the
priestly code became canonical under Ezra and Nehemiah ;
the kernel of Deuteronomy under Josiah.
So far we have been dealing with the Canon of the
Palestinian Rabbis. Although the canonicity of some of
our O.T. books was matter for discussion, no serious attempt
seems to have been made to include in the Jewish Canon any
books not contained in our O.T. The Alexandrine and other
Hellenistic Jews, however, had a wider canon, including, in
addition to all the books of our O.T., our Apocrypha, viz.,
the additions to Esther, the additions to Daniel (i.e., the Song
of the Three Holy Children, Susanna, and Bel and the
Dragon), Baruch, the Epistle of Jeremiah, the Prayer of
Manasses, Esdras, 1 and 2 Maccabees, Ecclesiasticus, and
the Wisdom of Solomon, Judith, and Tobit.
Although we have no early express statements that the
Hellenistic Jews had this wider canon, two considerations
point to its existence : (i.) In the existing MSS. of the
Septuagint the Apocrypha are not collected in a final
appendix, but are distributed amongst the other books
as if of equal authority. Although all these MSS. are
Christian, the arrangement is probably borrowed from the
Hellenistic Jews, (ii.) The Apocrypha were often included
in the Christian Canon. Now Christian scholars who refused
to accept any but our O.T. books, did so on the authority
of the Palestinian Jews. Probably, therefore, those who
accepted a wider canon also followed Jewish authority — in
this case, the opinions and customs of the Hellenistic Jews.
1 Matt. vii. 12, etc. 2 Luke xxiv. 44.

14 BIBLICAL INTRODUCTION
With slight exceptions the books of the Palestinian Canon
have been universally received by the Christian Church.1
Christendom has never arrived at any unanimous decision
as to the canonicity of the O.T. Apocrypha. In the Patristic
period and throughout the Middle Ages, there were scholars
who preferred the Palestinian Canon ; but popular usage and
Church authority adopted the wider Canon of the Septuagint.2
At the Reformation the Protestant, Churches practically
limited their O.T. to the Palestinian Canon, but at the Council
of Trent, in 1546, the Church of Rome authoritatively
accepted the Canon of the Vulgate, which includes the bulk
of O.T. Apocrypha.8 The Greek Church arrived at a similar
decision at the Synod of Jerusalem in 1672. 4
1 Some Syrian authorities omitted Chronicles, Ezra and Nehemiah,
Esther and Job ; and the canonicity of Esther was not fully acknowledged
even in the fourth century a.d.; Athanasius and Gregory Nazianzen both
omit it from their lists. — Buhl, O.T. Canon, Eng. tr., pp. 53, 58.
! Jerome attempted to limit the O.T. to the Palestinian Canon, but the
Council of Carthage, held in a.d. 397, accepted the Apocrypha as well.
3 i.e., the additions to Daniel and Esther, Baruch, the Letter of
Jeremiah, 1 and 2 Maccabees, Judith, Tobit, Ecclesiasticus, and Wisdom.
4 Buhl, p. 65.

CHAPTER II.
EARLIER HISTORICAL BOOKS
GENESIS TO KINGS

I. Alphabetical Table of Terms

15. E.

and Symbols.

16. JE.

2. Methods of Composition.

17. D.

3. Earlier Theories.

18. JED.

4. Current Documentary

19. H.

Theories.

20. P.

5. Methods of Analysis.

21. Completion of Pentateuch.

6. Limitations of Analysis.

22. Mosaic Elements.

7. General Table of Analysis.

23. Genesis.

8. Sketch of Argument.

24. Exodus.

9. Argument from Historical

25. Leviticus.

Situation.

26. Numbers.

10. Argument from Theology.

27. Deuteronomy.

11. Argument from Literary

28. Joshua.

Parallels.

29. Judges.

12. Linguistic Argument.

30. Ruth.1

13. Argument from Mutual Rela

31. Samuel.

tions of Documents.

32. Kings.

14. J.

33. Teaching of Historical Books

1. Alphabetical Table of Terms and Symbols. —
A, Dillmann's symbol for P.
B E
Book of the Covenant, Exodus xx-xxiii., §§5, 15.
Book of the Four Covenants, Wellhausen's title for the
Priestly Code.
C, Dillmann's symbol for J.
1 Ruth is included in this chapter in order to follow the arrangement of
the English Bible ; it is doubtful whether it can be called "earlier."
'5

16 BIBLICAL INTRODUCTION
D, either the Kernel of Deuteronomy, or the Deuteronomic
material generally, or in any particular book, §§ 17, 27.
D\ the Kernel of Deuteronomy.
D2, DB, Deuteronomic material later than D1.
Da., Kittel's symbol for a History of David, identified by
Budde with J.
Deuteronomy, Kernel of, see Kernel of Deuteronomy.
Deuteronomic, applied to material in the Kernel of Deu
teronomy, or more widely to material in the style of
Deuteronomy, for which " Deuteronomistic " is some
times used.
Deuteronomic Epitome, the abstract of an earlier source
made by the Deuteronomic author of Kings, § 32.
Deuteronomist, Author of Deuteronomy, or of D2, etc.
Deuteronomistic, see Deuteronomic.
Ztt = D2orRD.
E, the Elohist Prophetic Document, or its author, § 15.
E1, earliest stratum of E,
E2, Es, later strata of E.
El, symbol used in this work for the narratives concerning
Elijah and Elisha, § 32.
Elohist, used by earlier critics for the author of all the
Elohistic material in the Hexateuch, i.e., P + E ; by
later critics for E, §§ 3, 15.
Elohist, First or Earlier, title given to P by critics who
supposed it to be the earliest document of Hexateuch.
Elohist, Later or Second, title given to E by critics mentioned
above.
Elohistic Prophetic Document, E, § 15.
Grundschrift, name given to the Elohistic material, P 4- E,
of the Pentateuch, as the framework of the whole, § 3.
H, Law of Holiness, P1, § 19.
Hexateuch, Hex., Pentateuch + Joshua.
Holiness, Law of, see Law of Holiness.
/, the Jehovistic Prophetic Document, or its author, § 14.
J\ earliest stratum of J.
/2/3, later strata of J.

METHODS OF COMPOSITION 17
JE, the document obtained by combining J and E, § 16.
JED, the document obtained by combining JE and D,
§18.
Je, Kittel's symbol for a History of David mainly identified
by Budde with J.
Jehovistic Prophetic Document, J, § 14.
Kernel of Deuteronomy, the contents of the first edition of
Deuteronomy, D1, § 17.
Law of Holiness, Leviticus xvii.-xxvi., H or P1, § 19.
P, either the Priestly Code, or any material by priestly
writers, § 20.
P1, the Law of Holiness, H, § 19.
P2, the Priestly Code proper.
P3, Pa, P\ later additions to the Priestly Code.
Priestly Code, P2, § 20.
Prophetic Documents, J and E.
Q, Wellhausen's symbol for P2.
R, editor, or matter added by an editor.
RD, editor who added D to JE, or matter composed by
him, § 17.
RJE, editor who combined J and E, or matter added by
him, § 16.
Rp, editor who combined JED and P, or later priestly
editors who supplemented the Pentateuch and other
historical books, § 21.
S, Kittel's symbol for a history of Saul, mainly identified
by Budde with J, § 31.
SS, Kittel's symbol for a history of Saul, mainly identified
by Budde with E2, § 32.
2. Methods of Composition. — A history of ancient times
is the last stage of a process by which it is connected with
the events it describes. The intervening links are, amongst
other things, the effects of these events, monuments and
inscriptions, and earlier histories. In a first-class history
we have the result of careful study of these authorities;
the author combines information from various sources, and
c

18 BIBLICAL INTRODUCTION
reconstructs the nature, sequence, and relation of events;
he also adds notes which give references to and extracts
from his authorities. The text is the homogeneous work
of a single mind, and rests primarily on the authority of
the author ; its accuracy depends partly on that of his sources,
partly on his industry, honesty, intelligence, and imagination,
The notes enable the reader to test the judgment of the
modern historian by the statements of the ancient authorities.
In our O.T. books this advanced form of history has not yet
been reached. They stop short at a much earlier stage, and
are roughly equivalent to the notes of such a work without
the text. There were early sources, the documents in which
tradition was first written down, or the contemporary account
of events. Later writers utilised these in primitive fashion.
In the ancient East custom and tradition were supreme ; when
once a story had taken shape, its general form and, in a
measure, even its words were sacred.1 Yet, from time to
time, Israelite scholars were inspired to attempt a fuller and
more spiritual treatment of the annals of the chosen people.
A modern author tries to be original in method and language
— in the text of his works, but not in his notes; there he
is most anxious to reproduce his authorities as accurately
as possible. The ancient historian reproduced and supple
mented; he did not write a new work of his own. He
used an ancient book as a groundwork, into which he
inserted his new material ; he retained time-honoured phrases,
and interwove sentences and paragraphs from his sources
with each other, and with connecting matter and other
additions of his own, into a most remarkable literary mosaic.
In the course of this process he expressed his conception
of the course of events, and his judgment on history; he
omitted objectionable passages, or accommodated them to
the better taste and higher spiritual feeling of later times;
he explained, illustrated, expanded, or moralised. Like
1 In the same way children resent any departure from the familiar form
of a favourite story, and many people have a predilection for narratives
"in the words of Scripture itself ' — preferably the A.V,

EARLIER THEORIES 19
modern historians, he exercised his judgment and imagina
tion as to what, in the nature of things, must have happened,
and supplemented or even corrected the earlier narrative
accordingly. Nevertheless, he retained as many and as
extensive verbatim extracts as possible ; he was not writing
a new book of his own, but preparing a new edition of
the old history. Thus a comparison of the Synoptic Gospels
shows that Matthew and Luke largely consist of matter
extracted verbatim from older sources, and in Tatian's
Diatessaron a continuous narrative is constructed by piecing
together extracts from the four Gospels. Similarly, Chronicles
is an intricate combination of sections from the earlier
historical books with the author's additions. Several verses
in Judges i. occur in different parts of Joshua. But this
method of using verbatim extracts from earlier works is
not confined to cases where the same passage is still found
in two O.T. books. A careful examination of the books
we are now dealing with shows that they are made up of
extracts from earlier works, which are only preserved so
far as they are contained in our present books. By using
this method the authors, or rather editors, have done us
much better service than if they had rewritten the history
in modern fashion. For the statements in these books, we
have not merely the authority of late editors, but of one or
more earlier sources.
3. Earlier Theories. — We have only space to state briefly
the chief types of these theories, and here and there to give
some slight indication of the grounds on which they have been
advocated or rejected.
(a) Authorship by Moses, Joshua, Samuel, and the Prophets. —
This view, though supported by many other arguments, practi
cally rests on the supposed consensus of opinion of the
Rabbis and the early Church. It contains an important
element of truth. The Pentateuch is Mosaic, inasmuch as
it rests on the authority of Moses, and has its roots in his
work and teaching. Its laws were promulgated by the Jewish

20 BIBLICAL INTRODUCTION
leaders, and accepted by the people, because they were rightly
believed to be in accordance with the revelation made to
him. It is not improbable that the prophets had a share
in composing, editing, and preserving the sacred records.
But there is no appreciable evidence that Moses, Joshua, or
Samuel actually wrote the Pentateuch or the Books of Joshua,
Judges, or Samuel, or that the prophets composed the Book
of Kings.1 The contents of the Pentateuch naturally suggested
the use of the phrases, " Law 2 of Moses," or " Book of the
Law of Moses," as titles of the Pentateuch. When once
these titles were established, they were sure to be interpreted
as implying that the Pentateuch, as a literary composition,
was the personal work of Moses. On the other hand, the
editors who gave the Pentateuch and the Books of Joshua
and Samuel their present form, included in these works the
accounts of the deaths of Moses, Joshua, and Samuel
respectively. This fact shows that it was neither intended
nor expected that they would be regarded as literary com
positions by these three great leaders. A careful examination
of the historical books shows that they contain material from
sources belonging to different ages, and that much of their
contents must be later than the times of the leaders whose
names they bear. Hence the claims of Samuel and Joshua
to authorship even of parts of books are not strongly urged;
and almost all critics admit that the Pentateuch contains an
appreciable amount of editorial additions made long after
the Mosaic Age. A very large portion of the Pentateuch,
forming the basis of the work, is still ascribed to Moses by
some scholars ; but the tendency of criticism is to minimise
the Mosaic elements.
(b) The Older Documentary Theory. — The modern criticism
of the historical books starts with the publication in 1753, by
1 Cf. Ch. i. § 2, External Evidence.
1 Tdrtik, of which word "law" is an unsatisfactory equivalent. Torah
was originally used of any instruction on religious matters, whether given
by priest or prophet. In its earlier uses it is more akin to " revelation"
than to " law."

EARLIER THEORIES 21
Astruc, a French physician, of his Conjectures sur les m'emoires
originaux dont il paroit que Moyse s'est servi pour composer
le livre de la Genese. Noticing that the divine name Elohim
was used throughout some sections of Genesis, and the
divine name Jehovah throughout others, he analysed the book
into two main sources, the Elohistic and the Jchovistic, and
ten minor sources, consisting chiefly of fragments. Moses,
according to Astruc, arranged this material in four columns,
the contents of which were afterwards rewritten as a con
secutive work.1
(c) The Fragmentary Theory? — The attack on the unity
of the Pentateuch was not long confined to Genesis. The
analysis into sources was carried to extremes, and it was
maintained that the whole Pentateuch was a compilation
from a large number of more or less independent fragments.
The numerous resemblances between the Pentateuch and
Joshua were observed, and the two books were ascribed to
the same author.3 This analysis excluded the possibility
of the Mosaic authorship of the Pentateuch as a whole.
(d) The Supplement Theory.*' — The permanent elements of
the Fragmentary Theory were the assertion of the composite
character of the whole Pentateuch, of its close connection
with the Book of Joshua, and the consequent denial of its
Mosaic authorship. But criticism soon returned to the lines
indicated by Astruc. Though a section might not connect
with what went before and after, it was seen to connect
with a series of similar sections throughout the Pentateuch
and Joshua. Deuteronomy was soon seen to be substantially
independent. The rest proved to be compiled from older
documents, often interwoven, especially in the narrative
sections, in a very intricate fashion. For this compilation
Astruc's analysis into a main Elohistic document and a
main Jehovistic document was accepted, and extended to
1 Holzinger, p. 41.
* Geddes, 1792 ; Vater, 1802-1805.
0 Geddes, ap. Addis, Documents, etc., I. xxiv.
' Stahelin, 1830; Ewald, 1831; Tuch, 1838.

22 BIBLICAL INTRODUCTION
the whole Hexateuch,1 outside of Deuteronomy.2 The
Elohistic document was clearly the framework of the whole
book, into which the other material had been fitted. Hence
it was naturally supposed that this framework was the older
book, and that the Jehovistic material had been added by
a later editor to supplement the original text. Because of
the use of the Elohistic material as a framework, it has
often been called the " Grundschrift " or " Fundamental
Document." Ewald called it "the Book of Origins."
4. Current Documentary Theories,
(a) Completion of the Analysis. — Further examination
showed that the Elohistic material had been taken from
two separate documents, the Priestly Code 3 and the Elohistic
Prophetic Narrative;4 and that, although the Priestly Code
had been used as the framework of the Pentateuch, the other
material had not been composed to supplement it, but had
been taken from independent documents. Further analysis
has been occupied with the detailed division of the books
between the several documents, and in showing that the
main documents are themselves composite, especially that
the Priestly Code may be divided into the older Law of
Holiness5 and the more recent Priestly Code proper6; and
that the documents of the Hexateuch extend into Judges,
Samuel, and Kings.
As the result of this long investigation there is substantial
agreement on the following points : —
The Pentateuch is compiled from four main documents :
the two Prophetic Documents, the Jehovistic (J), using
1 i.e., Pentateuch + Joshua.
* There are small sections of the composite work in our book of Deut.
See on Deut.
3 P, called at one time the First Elohist by those who regarded it as the
older of the two.
* E, similarly sometimes called the Second Elohist. The analysis of
the Elohistic material into these two documents was made by Hupfeld,
1853, but had been suggested by Ilgen, Addis, I. xxviii.
5 II or P1. 6 P2.

CURRENT DOCUMENTARY THEORIES 23
Jehovah in Gen., the Elohistic (E), using Elohim in
Gen. ; the Priestly Code (P), using Elohim in Gen. ; the
bulk of Deuteronomy (D).
The Priestly Code includes an earlier work, the Law of
Holiness (H), Lev. xvii.-xxvi. There are post-exilic elements
in the Hexateuch.
Josiah's law-book was an early edition of Deuteronomy,
and was composed not very long before its publication in 621.
The Prophetic Documents, J and E, are older than
Deuteronomy. The detailed analysis, as far as the division into P, D and
the combined JE are concerned.
The following points, however, are still matters of con
troversy : —
The relative age of D and P ; whether the Priestly Code,
as a whole, apart from editorial additions, is post-exilic
and later than Deuteronomy, or pre-exilic and earlier than
Deuteronomy. The relative age, mutual relationship, dates, and place of
composition of the Prophetic Documents, J and E.
The detailed analysis of passages containing material
from J and E into the portions belonging to J and E
respectively. The presence of the same documents in the Hexateuch
and in Judges, Samuel, and Kings.
The process by which J, E, and D were combined.
The analysis of the four main documents into earlier
sources and later additions.
The time and mode of separation of Joshua or its contents
from the rest of the Hexateuch.
(b) The Tlieory of the Pre-exilic origin of the Priestly
Code. — Of the above points of difference, that concerning
the age of the Priestly Code divides the critics who accept
the analysis of the Hexateuch into two schools. A minority,
including very distinguished scholars,1 maintain that the Law
1 Dillmann, Kittel, etc.

24 BIBLICAL INTRODUCTION
of Holiness may include elements as old as Moses, and the
rest of the Priestly Code was composed before Deuteronomy.1
But it is admitted that the Law of Holiness, though contain
ing material older than the rest of the Priestly Code, was
itself compiled during the Exile,2 and that the Code contains
post-exilic material. But those who regard P as post-exilic
would admit that it is largely based on pre-exilic customs
and ritual, perhaps partly preserved in writing. Hence the
difference between the two schools is not so striking as it
seems at first sight. According to the one, P is pre-exilic
with post-exilic additions ; according to the other, P is post-
exilic, using pre-exilic sources. Both views would be included
in the formula — P is a combination of pre-exilic and post-exilic
material. (c) The Theory of the Post-exilic origin of the Priestly
Code? — Arranging the four main documents in the order
J, E, D, P.*
As this is the theory followed throughout the present work,
it is explained here in a tabular form, and a sketch of the
arguments in its favour, and some further details are given
in later sections. According to this theory, the Hexateuch
is the final result of a long development, during which its
material passed through the following stages: — 5
(i.) The events of early Israelite history, the work and
words of Moses, primitive Israelite customs, traditions, and
documents. (ii.) The compilation, c. 800-650, of the two Prophetic
Documents, J and E, which include, inter alia, the earliest
extant edition of the Law (the Book of the Covenant, Exodus
xx. -xxiii.), and some early poems.
1 According to Dillmann and Noldeke, c. 800.
2 Dillmann, Num., etc., 645 ff.
8 Graf, Wellhausen, Kuenen, Stade, etc. ; Driver, etc. This
is often called the Grafian Theory, and is held by the majority of recent
scholars. 1 The priority of J to E is not an essential feature of this theory,
6 For the sake of clearness, the analysis of J, E and the later additions
to D and P are not represented in this table ; cf. }§ 14-20.

METHODS OF ANALYSIS 25
(iii.) The combination of J and E into a single work JE,
c. 650-600. (J + E) RJ^JE.1
(iv.) The Kernel of Deuteronomy, D, published in 621,
compiled somewhat earlier. Second Edition of the Law.
(v.) Combination of JE and D into a single work before
the end of the Exile.
(JE-)-D)Rd = JED.
(vi.) Compilation of the Law of Holiness, H or P1, Lev.
xvii.-xxvi., etc., between 621 and the end ofthe Exile. Third
Edition of the Law.
(vii.) Compilation of the Priestly Code, P, and the in
corporation with it of the Law of Holiness, after the Exile ;
published by Ezra and Nehemiah in 444. Fourth Edition
of the Law.
(viii.) Combination of JED and P, and exclusion of
Joshua or its contents,2 thus forming our Pentateuch,
Fifth and Final Edition of the Law, and Book of Joshua,
shortly after 444.
(JED 4- P) Rp = Pentateuch 4- Joshua.
5. Methods of Analysis. — We have seen that the use of
the divine name Jehovah in some sections of Genesis, and
Elohim in others, afforded a clue to the composite character
of the Pentateuch. This feature, however, is only one of
many. There is a multitude of abrupt transitions, repetitions,
contradictions, differences of style, theological standpoint, and
historical situation, which are inexplicable on the theory that
the Pentateuch is a single consecutive work; but which are
perfectly intelligible when we recognise that it is compiled
from independent documents. It will be convenient to describe
the analysis under three headings : —
(a) The Legal Codes. — Most of the legislation is contained
1 i.e., the composite work JE includes matter from J and E combined
by a Redactor RJ'e, who added necessary connecting matter, and otherwise
modified his sources. The other equations are to be interpreted in the
same way. s Cf. §j 21, 28.

26 BIBLICAL INTRODUCTION
in three separate codes : The Book of the Covenant, Exodus
xx. 24-xxiii. 19; The Kernel of Deuteronomy, Deuteronomy
v.-xxvi. ; The Laws of the Priestly Code, the bulk of
Exodus xxv.-xl.,1 Leviticus, Numbers i.-x., etc. Here
large blocks of material have been inserted whole. The
differences between these codes show that they must have
been composed at different times and under very different
circumstances. Already, therefore, it is clear that at least
three documents were used in the compilation of the Pen
tateuch. (b) Complete Sections. — Apart from these codes, the com
posite character of the work is shown by the marked
differences between consecutive sections. Take, for in
stance, the two accounts of the Creation, Genesis i. i-ii. 4a
and ii. 4b-2 5. They differ in style : the former is a carefully
ordered, almost scientific statement, arranged in formal
schedules of the same type, with recurring formulae; the
latter is a graphic popular narrative; each has its own
vocabulary and idioms. They differ in theological stand
point : the former takes great trouble to avoid every
appearance of anthropomorphism, the latter is frankly
anthropomorphic; the interests of the former are cosmic,
it is concerned with earth and heaven and all life, the
latter thinks only of an inland province — nothing is said
of fishes ; the moral of the former is the observance of
the Sabbath sanctioned by the divine example, that of the
latter, the sanctity of marriage as sanctioned by primitive
usage. Moreover, the two accounts contradict each other.
In the former the animals are first created, and then
Elohim, by a single utterance, creates mankind in two
sexes; in the latter a man is first formed, then the animals,
then a woman.
In Exodus, Numbers, Joshua, Judges, Samuel, and Kings
there are consecutive sections which present similar contrasts.
It is extremely difficult to suppose that a single author,
writing a single consecutive work, wrote first in one style
1 The main exception is Exodus xxxi. i8b-xxxiv. 28.

METHODS OF ANALYSIS 27
and then in another. Here again we trace compilation from
independent documents.
A comparison of such sections, in style, theological stand
point, and historical situation, with each other and with the
three codes shows that they fall into three series, one of
which connects with the Book of the Covenant, another with
Deuteronomy, and a third with the Laws of the Priestly Code.
Moreover, the sections connecting with the Book of the
Covenant can again be divided into two series. Thus our
analysis has discovered the four main documents : two con
necting with the Book of the Covenant, these are J and E ;
the Kernel of Deuteronomy, and connected passages, D ; and
the Priestly Code, P.
(c) Single Sections compiled from two or more Documents. —
Further, however, what seems, at first sight, a single con
secutive narrative of one event proves to be a combination
of two or more independent accounts of that event. Here
again the composite character of such sections is shown
by differences of style, etc., by abrupt transitions, and by
repetitions and contradictions. The following is the analysis
of the account of the Flood. The sections in ordinary type
are from P ; those in italics from J ; those in small capitals
were added by the editor, who combined the two : —
"And the Lord said unto Noah, Come thou and all thy
house into the ark ; for thee have I seen righteous before me
in this generation. Of every clean beast thou shalt take to
thee by sevens, the male and his female : and of beasts that
are not clean by two, the male and his female. Of fowls also
of the air by sevens, the male and the female ; to keep seed
alive upon the face of all the earth. For yet seven days, and
I will cause it to rain upon the earth forty days and forty
nights; and every living substance that I have made will I
destroy from off the face of the earth. And Noah did according
unto all that tlie Lord commanded him.
"And Noah was six hundred years old when the flood of
waters was upon the earth.
"And Noah went in, and his sons, and his wife, and his

28 BIBLICAL INTRODUCTION
sons' wives with him, into the ark, because of the waters of the
flood. Of clean beasts, and of beasts that are not clean, and
of fowls, and of everything that creepeth upon the earth, there
went in two and two unto Noah into the ark, the male
AND THE FEMALE, AS GOD HAD COMMANDED NOAH. And
it came to pass after seven days, that the waters of the flood
were upon the earth.
" In the six hundredth year of Noah's life, in the second
month, the seventeenth day of the month, the same day were
all the fountains of the great deep broken up, and the windows
of heaven were opened.
" And the rain was upon the earth Jorty days and forty
nights. " In the selfsame day entered Noah, and Shem, and Ham,
and Japheth, the sons of Noah, and Noah's wife, and the
three wives of his sons with them, into the ark; they, and
every beast after his kind, and all the cattle after their kind,
and every creeping thing that creepeth upon the earth after
his kind, and every fowl after his kind, every bird of every
sort. And they went in unto Noah into the ark, two and two
of all flesh, wherein is the breath of life. And they that
went in, went in male and female of all flesh, as God had
commanded him :
"And the Lord shut him in. And the flood was forty
days upon the earth ; and the waters increased, and bare up
the ark, and it was lifted up above the earth.
" And the waters prevailed, and were increased greatly upon
the earth ; and the ark went upon the face of the waters. And
the waters prevailed exceedingly upon the earth ; and all the
high hills, that were under the whole heaven, were covered.
Fifteen cubits upward did the waters prevail ; and the moun
tains were covered. And all flesh died that moved upon the
earth, both of fowl, and of cattle, and of beast, and of every
creeping thing that creepeth upon the earth, and every man :
"All in whose nostrils was the breath of life, of all that was
in the dry land, died. And every living substance was destroyed
which was upon the face of the ground, both man, and cattle,

METHODS OF ANALYSIS 29
and the creeping things, and the fowl of the heaven ; and they
were destroyed from the earth: and Noah only remained alive,
and they that were with him in the ark.
"And the waters prevailed upon the earth an hundred and
fifty days. And God remembered Noah, and every living
thing, and all the cattle that was with him in the ark : and
God made a wind to pass over the earth, and the waters
asswaged ; the fountains also of the deep and the windows of
heaven were stopped.
"And the rain from heaven was restrained ; and the waters
returned from off the earth continually :
"And after the end of the hundred and fifty days the waters
were abated. And the ark rested in the seventh month, on
the seventeenth day of the month, upon the mountains of
Ararat. And the waters decreased continually until the tenth
month : in the tenth month, on the first day of the month,
were the tops of the mountains seen.
"And it came to pass at the end of forty days, that Noah
opened the window of the ark which he had made: and he
sent forth a raven, which went forth to and fro, until the
waters were dried up from off the earth. Also he sent forth
a dove from him, to see if the waters were abated from off
the face of the ground; but the dove found no rest for the
sole of her foot, and she returned unto him into the ark,
for the waters were on the face of the whole earth : then he
put forth his hand and took her, and pulled her in unto him
into the ark. And he stayed yet other seven days ; and again
he sent forth the dove out of the ark ; and the dove came in
to him in the evening ; and, lo, in her mouth was an olive
leaf pluckt off: so Noah knew that the waters were abated
from off the earth. A?id he stayed yet other seven days ; and
sent forth the dove ; which returned not again unto him any more.
" And it came to pass in the six hundredth and first year, in
the first month, the first of the month, the waters were dried
up from off the earth :
"And Noah removed the covering of the ark, and looked, and,
behold, the face of the ground was dry.

30 BIBLICAL INTRODUCTION
"And in the second month, on the seven and twentieth day
ofthe month, was the earth dried." (Genesis vii. i-viii. 14.)
The composite character of this narrative is seen : (i.) from
repetitions ; as to the entering in to the ark, the rising of the
flood, the perishing of all living creatures, and the drying
of the earth ; (ii.) from contradictions ; in P we have periods
of 150 days, in J of 40 and of 7 ; in P there are pairs of
all the kinds of animals, in J sevens of the clean, pairs
of the unclean. Moreover, the P passages present the
characteristics of P, and thus connect with the rest of that
document. They fit into its scheme of exact chronology;
they give a quasi-scientific account on a cosmic scale, the
great deep is broken up below, and heaven opened above;
there is no anthropomorphism; we have the divine name
Elohim, and P's favourite formulae, " after his kind," " beast,
cattle, creeping thing, fowl, bird," etc. On the other hand,
in J we have graphic popular narrative, e.g., the picturesque
episode of the dove ; anthropomorphism, the Lord, i.e. Jehovah,
shuts up the ark; the divine name Jehovah, etc. In several
instances the P paragraphs interrupt the connection between
the J paragraphs, and vice versd. The phrases in small
capitals are assigned to the editor, because they do not
seem to belong to their immediate context, and yet find
no place in the other document.
Similar composite narratives and groups of laws occur in
other books.
Thus, apart from the question of date and authorship,
analysis is able to divide the Hexateuch into the four main
documents, J, E, D, P; the exact division, however, of J
and E being often difficult and uncertain. A similar analysis
can be made of Judges, Samuel, and Kings.1
6. Limitations of Analysis. — The reader will have gathered
that the task of analysing the historical books into the earlier
documents from which they were compiled is a difficult one—
by no means so impossible as it seems at first sight, but
1 See §§ 29-32,

LIMITATIONS OF ANALYSIS 31
still sufficiently serious to tax the resources of criticism to
the utmost. Moreover, though most useful and interesting
results are obtained, the task can be only imperfectly fulfilled,
and the analyses given here and elsewhere are not put forward
as being accurate and complete in every detail. The main
documents have certain characteristics, and portions contain
ing these, and all that obviously belongs to such portions, may
be confidently assigned to given sources. But there is a
certain amount of neutral material which might have been
written in any period ; it is natural to assign such to the same
source as its context, and yet it may have been borrowed
from- an earlier document, or added by a later editor. To
take a practical illustration : when a section is assigned 1
to RD or D, all that is meant is that the Deuteronomic
characteristics are found in the passage and not those of
the other sources. Hence it is mainly Deuteronomic, but
may include phrases or sentences borrowed from earlier
sources; or, again, information or laws obtained by the
Deuteronomist from earlier sources, but expressed in his
own language. On the other hand, a passage may be
assigned to JE, without any intention of excluding the
possibility that some neutral matter not essential to the
original context may contain additions by later editors. In
some cases a later writer, either unconsciously or as a
matter of literary taste,2 imitated the style of an earlier
document.3 It is often difficult to distinguish such imita
tions from the original, especially when they are largely made
up of quotations from the document imitated.
In the analyses given in the following sections, space and
clearness have necessitated the omission of many details.
1 This kind of uncertainty is specially common as to parts of sections
which are substantially Deuteronomic, because they make large use of
earlier material ; the work of the Priestly writers is more easily and
certainly distinguished.
s As modern scholars write Ciceronian- Latin. The Hebrew editors, etc.
no more intended or expected their compositions to be taken for the work
of the Jehovist or the Deuteronomist, than the author of a Latin essay
to-day expects his essay to be ascribed to Cicero.
3 e.g., the Deuteronomic passages in Chronicles.

32

BIBLICAL INTRODUCTION

The origin of the longer sections has been given; the
presence in such sections of phrases and verses from other
sources has been indicated, where they contained anything
important, either critically, historically, or in its bearing on
the immediate context, otherwise such minutiae of analysis
have been ignored. Phrases, etc. have usually been assigned
to the same source as their context, when it is not clear that
they belong to other sources, attention being called to any
uncertainty where important questions are involved. In this
way it is hoped that the reader will be able to obtain an
accurate conception of the analysis as a whole, without being
bewildered by a multiplicity of detail.
7. Sketch of Analysis. — The following table is intended
to serve as a rough diagram of the contents and distribution
of the main sources of the Hexateuch. For the sake of
simplicity, where the bulk of a chapter belongs to one
source and a few verses to another, the chapter is reckoned
to the main source. For the more detailed and exact
analysis see "Contents" in §§23-32. Genesis xiv. and Deuter
onomy xxxii., xxxiii. are omitted, as not belonging to the
main sources. The division of J, E, D, and P into various
strata is ignored. Sporadic editorial additions, i.e., those
which do not amount to a continuous revision, are also
ignored : —

PandJ
Combined

Genesis 1-13, 15-19.

P and J E
Combined

Genesis 20-50.
Exodus 1-24.
Numbers 11-16, 20, 21, 32.
Joshua 22.
Judges 20, 21.

P

Exodus 25-31, 35-40.
Leviticus.Numbers 1-10, 17-19, 25-31, 33-36.

SKETCH OF THE ARGUMENT

33

P and JED
Combined

Deuteronomy 34.
Joshua 13-21.

JED

Joshua 1— 1 1.
(Judges 2-8, 10-15.)1

JE

Exodus 32-34.
Numbers 22-24.
(Judges 9, 16-19.)1
(i. and ii. Samuel.) x 2
(i. Kings 1, 2.)x

J

Judges 1.

E

Joshua 24.3
(i. Kings 20, 22.) *
(ii. Kings 3?, 7, o\ io3)1

D

Deuteronomy 1-31.
Joshua 12 and 23.

Deuteronomic Compilation from
Older Sources
cf. JE and E

i. and ii. Kings.

8. Sketch of the Argument for the post-exilic date of P
and the order J and E, D, P. In the previous section we
described the kind of evidence by which the composite
character of the Hexateuch is established; we have now
to show how the dates of the documents are determined.
The arguments, alike for the analysis and for the theory of
the dates and order of the documents, are cumulative. They
1 The identification of the sources of Judges 2-21 and Samuel, and
Kings with J and E is doubtful.
a Except poems and some other additions.
3 Edited by RD-

34 BIBLICAL INTRODUCTION
do not form a chain, which is worthless if one link is broken ;
they are rather like an array of pillars supporting a roof—
the roof will stand, even though some of the pillars are
weak or rotten. These arguments fall into five groups,
which partially overlap: (i.) Historical Situation; (ii.)
Theological Standpoint ; (iii.) Relation to other O.T.
Literature; (iv.) Vocabulary and Style; (v.) Mutual Rela
tion of the Documents. These will be dealt with more
fully in separate sections, but it may be useful to take a
general view of them here.
(i.) Historical Situation. — J and E imply the historical
situation of the Early Monarchy; D that of the Later
Monarchy, connecting especially with the reforms of Josiah;
P that of the exilic or post-exilic period, connecting especially
with the reforms of Ezra and Nehemiah.
(ii.) The Theological Standpoint of each agrees with what
we know of the theology of the period of its historical
situation. (iii.) Relation to other O.T. Literature. — J and E have
points of contact with the literature before c. 650; D with
the literature between c. 651 and the close of the Exile; P
with the literature during and after the Exile. D is unknown
before the Later Monarchy ; P before the Exile.
(iv.) Style and Vocabulary. — The style and vocabulary of
each is that of the period to which it is assigned by its
historical situation.
(v.) Mutual Relation of the Documents. — J and E together,
D, P represent three ascending stages of development; and
P implies the prior existence of D, and D that of J and E.
9. Argument from the Historical Situation. — The laws in
the Book of the Covenant (JE) are addressed to a people
cultivating the land, and living in houses ; J hence this code
was compiled after the settlement of the Israelites in Canaan.
It contemplates a more settled state of society than that
1 Exodus xxi. 6, xxii. 5.

THE HISTORICAL SITUATION 35
described in Judges, and therefore belongs to the Monarchy.
It also recognises a multiplicity of sanctuaries and lays no
stress either on ritual or on any official priesthood. Thus we
read in Exodus xx. 24-26 :
"An altar of earth thou shalt make unto me ... in every
place where I record my name I will come unto thee and
I will bless thee."
The places referred to where Jehovah recorded His name
are the holy places, Bethel, Beersheba, Gilgal, etc., con
secrated by the appearances of Jehovah to the patriarchs,
which are known in history as the " high places." x In
these matters the Book of the Covenant reflects the practice
of the time of the Judges and the Early Monarchy, when
sacrifices were performed not only by priests, but by patri
archs,2 heads of families,3 judges,4 and kings;5 not merely
at the Tabernacle or the Temple, but at many places,6
especially, as Kings tells us repeatedly, at the high places.7
The leaders and teachers of this period and the early writers,
seem quite unconscious that they are transgressing any law ;
the adverse comments on their behaviour come from later
writers. Thus, in these and other ways, the historical situation
implied by the Prophetic Documents is that of the Early
Monarchy. Two chief points in the laws of Deuteronomy are : (a)
the limitation of sacrifice to a single sanctuary, which is
therefore the only legitimate temple of Jehovah, and (b) the
limitation of the priesthood to the Levites. As we have
just seen, there are no traces of such limitations under the
earlier kings. But Amos, Hosea, and Micah attack the
1 Bethel, Gen. xxviii. 19, Hos. x. 15 ; Beersheba, Gen. xxi. 33, Amos
v. 5 ; Gilgal, Joshua iv. 20, v. 13 ff, Amos iv. 4.
* Jacob, Gen. xxxiii. 20.
3 Manoah, Judges xiii. 19 ; Jesse, I Sam. xx. 29.
4 Gideon, Judges vi. 24.
5 Saul, 1 Sam. xiv. 35 ; Solomon, I Kings iii. 4.
6 Ophrah, Judges vi. 24; Ebenezer and Ramah, I Sam. vii. 9, 17;
Gilgal, 1 Sam. xi. 15 ; Gibeon, 1 Kings iii. 4, etc.
7 1 Kings xv. 14, etc.

36 BIBLICAL INTRODUCTION
high places and their priests on account of immorality
and superstition.1 Hezekiah made an attempt to suppress
the high places.2 Isaiah's teaching as to the inviolability
of Zion and the deliverance from Sennacherib enhanced the
prestige of the Temple. Josiah's suppression of the high
places was suggested by a law-book found in the Temple.
This book was read by Shaphan to himself, and to the king,
and read through publicly by the king to the people. Clearly
the book was much shorter than our Pentateuch; but may
very well have been an early edition of Deuteronomy. For
the main object of Josiah's reforms, the establishment of the
Temple as the only legitimate sanctuary of Jehovah, is one of
the chief themes of Deuteronomy, and most of the details of
his reformation are based upon laws in Deuteronomy.3
The northern kingdom had disappeared, and any point
of Josiah's dominions lay within easy reach of Jerusalem,
so that it seemed that a single sanctuary might suffice for
the wants of the whole community. Thus the historical
situation implied in Deuteronomy is that of the times of
Josiah, the close of the Jewish Monarchy.
One distinctive feature of the Priestly Code is the limitation
of the priesthood to the house of Aaron, the establishment
of a dynasty of supreme pontiffs or high priests, and the
assignment to the non-Aaronite Levites of the menial duties
of the Temple service. There is no trace of this distinction
between priests and Levites in Deuteronomy, or in the
account given by Kings of Josiah's reforms, or in the
prophecies of Jeremiah,4 or in any earlier documents.
But Ezekiel confines the priesthood to the priests of the
Temple at Jerusalem, and degrades the priests of the high
places, i.e., the rest of the Levites, to the position of menial
1 Hos. x. 8 ; Amos iv. 4 f. ; Mic. i. 5 f.
2 2 Kings xviii. 4.
3 Cf. in 2 Kings xxiii. 4-7 with Deut. xii. 1-16 ; 8, 9 with Deut. xviii.
6-8 (the discrepancy is quite intelligible on practical grounds, and the
author of Kings seems conscious of it) ; 24 with Deut. xviii. 1 1.
4 Jeremiah speaks of "the priests, the Levites" (xxxiii. 18), and other
places.

THE THEOLOGICAL STANDPOINT 37
attendants. 1 Although, according to this arrangement, the
priests were only a single clan of the tribe of Levi, it is
stated that over four thousand priests returned after the
Exile, but only seventy-four Levites.2 Later on Ezra had
great difficulty in inducing any Levites to accompany him
to Jerusalem.3 Naturally the subordinate position assigned
to them by Ezekiel had slight attractions. In this and in
other matters, and especially in the account of the work
of Ezra and Nehemiah, we see that the historical situation
implied by the Priestly Code is subsequent to the time of
Ezekiel, and is that of the period after the Exile, and that
this code is to be identified with the Law which Ezra brought
to Jerusalem.4 In every way the laws of the Priestly Code
point to a time when the Temple, its services and priesthood,
were the chief national institutions, and the main concern of
the Jews. This was the case after the Exile, but not before.
10. Argument from Theological Standpoint. — There are
special difficulties in the application of this argument; the
line^of development of Israelite theology is not fully deter
mined, and chronological landmarks are more difficult to
find in the case of doctrines than in the more concrete
matters of temple and priesthood. Yet some points are
clear, and make for the theory now being explained. The
frank anthropomorphisms of J, and in a less degree of E,
would naturally indicate an early stage in the religion of Israel ;
and the stress laid in these documents upon the dramatic
interest of the narratives points to their proximity to the primi
tive tradition. Thus and otherwise the theology of J and E
is consistent with a date in the Early Monarchy, or even earlier.
1 Ezek. xliv. 10-16. 2 Ezra ii. 36-40. 3 Ezra viii.
4 e.g., after the Exile there were no Jewish kings till the Maccabees,
and the head of the community was the High Priest ; so in the Priestly
Code the greatest possible emphasis is laid on the supreme position of the
High Priest, while the king is ignored. In Neh. viii. 18, the Feast of
Tabernacles is kept for eight days, in accordance with Lev. xxiii. 39
(P), as against the seven days of Deut. xvi. 13-15. In Neh. x. 37 f.,
the people pay tithes to the Levites, and the Levites to the priests in
accordance with Num. xviii. 20-26. The Deuteronomic arrangements for
tithes are quite different.

38 BIBLICAL INTRODUCTION
As Deuteronomy provides for a single sanctuary and a
single priestly tribe, so it also asserts expressly and em
phatically the unity of the Godhead : " Hear, O Israel, thy
God, Jehovah, is one God." x This express statement is the
natural sequel to the attack of Amos, Hosea, Isaiah, and
Micah upon the popular worship of Jehovah as one among
many gods, and prepares the way for the detailed exposition of
monotheism in Isaiah xl.-lv.
Similarly there are many features in the Priestly Code
which are best explained by assigning it to the post-exilic
stage of Israelite religion, e.g., the scrupulous avoidance of
all anthropomorphism, the numerous traces of systematic
thought and method in the priestly versions of the narratives,
the stress on the " holiness " of Israel, and the practical
application of the principle to an elaborate system of minute
external observances.2
ii. Argument from Literary Parallels. — Points of contact
with J and E are found in the prophets of the eighth century.3
Hosea refers to Jacob's wrestling with the angel;4 Amos
and Isaiah to the overthrow of Sodom and Gomorrah;6
Micah to " the land of Nimrod," and to the history of Balaam
and Balak.6
On the other hand, documents before c. 680-630 7 afford
no evidence that their authors were acquainted with Deuter
onomy, or P.
1 Deut. vi. 4.
2 Early ritual is often elaborate, and so far the priestly ritual might be
early, and doubtless is partly based on primitive custom. But we know
that enthusiasm for ritual was rife and increasing after the Exile, and the
spiritual and scientific treatment of the subject points to the later date.
' Of course, points of contact between two documents are evidence
of the date of the one document only when the date of the other is
known. So that for this purpose we can only use passages whose dates are
fairly certain.
4 Gen. xxxii. 22-32 ; Hos. xii. 2-6.
6 Gen. xix.; Isaiah i. 9 ; Amos iv. 11.
8 Mic. v. 6, vi. 1-8; Gen. *. 8, 9 ; Num. xxii.-xxiv.
7 Approximate limits to the date of Deuteronomy as composed shortly
before 621.

LITERARY PARALLELS 39
This statement would be challenged by some, space does not allow us
to deal with it in detail ; but as the treatment of the argument from
literary parallels is very difficult, and needs much discrimination, it may
be as well to say a few words on the subject, in order to show what is the
point at issue. Parallels between the Pentateuch and early literature are
often cited as arguments against this theory, although they are quite irrele
vant for some such reasons as the following : —
(i.) Only references in early literature to characteristic features of
Deuteronomy and P could be used as arguments against the current
(Grafian) theory; for that theory holds that J and E were early, at any rate
in their original form, and that D and P also use earlier material, and that
many of the customs and rites dealt with were much more ancient than
these documents. Hence it is quite consistent with the Grafian theory
that early literature should refer to J and E and to some matters found
in D and P, and that sacrifices, feasts, etc. dealt with in D and P should
have existed long before the dates assigned to these documents.
(ii. ) Many alleged parallels are entirely irrelevant, and are only such as
must naturally exist between works in the same language, by authors of
the same race, acquainted with the history and literature, customs and
traditions which were earlier than both of them. Thus we should not
maintain that the parallels between J and E, and Amos, Hosea, and
Micah are necessarily proofs that the prophets were acquainted with
those documents.
(iii.) In considering two similar passages, A and B, there are at least
three possible explanations of their resemblance. A may be dependent
on B, or B on A, or both A and B may be dependent on something
prior to both of them. A critic with a theory— and everybody starts
with a prepossession in favour of some theory — is tempted to take for
granted that the relation of the parallel passages is in accordance with
his theory. If he holds that B is older than A, it seems to him that
A is so obviously dependent on B, that this dependence proves the
early date of B. But, as a rule, it is very difficult to determine which
of two similar passages is dependent on the other. Often the question
can only be settled by our knowledge that one passage is taken from
an earlier work than the other ; and where we do not possess such
knowledge the priority is quite uncertain, and a comparison of the
passages yields little or no evidence as to the date of the documents
in which they occur.
(iv.) When a body of literature is known to belong to a certain period,
and a document has numerous parallels to this literature, it probably belongs
to the same period. It may be an earlier work used by the authors of
the literature in question, or a later work which has used this literature ;
but it is easier to verify or eliminate these possibilities than to decide
between the alternatives in the previous paragraph.
(v. ) Where a work is known to be composite, a literary parallel to one
section affords no direct evidence of the date of other sections.1
1 These considerations have to be borne in mind in studying the various
attempts to show that the complete Pentateuch was known to almost all
O.T. writers. For instance, it is for these reasons that Lex Mosaica,
though a very useful and interesting study of the literary relations of the
Pentateuch, affords no real evidence against the Grafian theory.

40 BIBLICAL INTRODUCTION
But Deuteronomy is very closely connected by numerous
points of contact with the literature of the close of the
Jewish monarchy and the beginning of the Exile. The
parallels with Jeremiah are so striking that the prophet
has sometimes been credited with the authorship of
Deuteronomy. Investigation does not confirm this im
pression, but the resemblance shows that Deuteronomy
and the prophecies belong to the same period, e.g., the
term, " the Priests, the Levites " — unknown to earlier
literature — is characteristic of both and of Ezekiel. Again
the Book of Kings assumed its present form during this
period. In the editorial notes the editor writes from the
Deuteronomic standpoint that the Temple is the only
legitimate sanctuary. Also Deuteronomy exercises a very
marked influence on exilic and post-exilic literature.
The Law of Holiness, H or P1, is even more closely
connected with Ezekiel xl. xlviii. than Deuteronomy with
Jeremiah. Although it is not likely that Ezekiel compiled
this code, its editor probably belonged to the same priestly
circle, so that the code may be assigned to about the beginning
of the Exile.
The characteristics of the Priestly Code proper, P or P°,
have affinities with the earlier, and influence the later post-
exilic literature. The distinction between the priests, the
sons of Aaron, and the Levites — a special feature of P —
first appears in Ezekiel xliv., where the prophet ordains that
the priesthood is to be confined to the Jerusalem Levites
of the house of Zadok, and that the other Levites, the
priests of the high places, are to be degraded to the level
of menial attendants. In the Priestly Code the claims of
the Levites to rank with the Jerusalem priests, the fact that
their position was a menial one to which they had been
degraded, are entirely forgotten, and their ministry is held
to be a long-established privilege. Evidently a considerable
interval separated the Priestly Code from Ezekiel.1 Numbers
1 Cf. i 9.

THE LINGUISTIC ARGUMENT 41
xvi., q.v. (Korah, Dathan, and Abiram), was unknown in its
present form to the authors of Deuteronomy xi. 6, Psalm cvi.
17 (post-exilic), who speak of Dathan and Abiram, without
Korah. Chronicles is acquainted with the legal institutions,
etc. of all the documents of the Hexateuch, and thus affords
conclusive evidence that our Pentateuch and Joshua existed,
substantially in their present form, before B.C. 300-250.
12. The Linguistic Argument. — A careful examination of
the lists in Driver's Introduction, in the articles in Hastings'
Bible Dictionary, etc. will show that, not only in subject
matter, but also in vocabulary and idiom, Deuteronomy
resembles Jeremiah, and P resembles the exilic and post-
exilic literature. Thus JE and D agree with the earlier
literature in preferring the longer form 'dnokhi for the personal
pronoun " I," while P agrees with the later literature in pre
ferring the shorter 'ani.
The use in the Pentateuch (not in Joshua) of forms which
elsewhere are exclusively masculine, for both masculine and
feminine, is not a proof of antiquity, but due to the fact
that the text of the Pentateuch has been treated differently
from that of the other books. In some MSS. the usage is
found outside the Pentateuch.1
13. Argument from the Mutual Relations of the Docu
ments. — An examination of the documents shows that they
are arranged by our theory in the natural order of de
velopment, that J and E are the most primitive, H and
P the most mature, and that D occupies an interme
diate position. Thus J and E take little interest in ritual,
which occupies much of the attention of D and H,
and is almost the sole interest of P. In J and E any
Israelite may be a priest ; in D the priesthood is confined
to the Levites ; in H, the Levites are not named, the
priests are the " Sons of Aaron," and the high priest first
1 Driver's Leviticus, pp. 25, 26.

42 BIBLICAL INTRODUCTION
appears ;' in P the exceptional sanctity and authority of
the priests as compared with the Levites, and of the high
priest as compared with the priests, are further elaborated
and emphasised. Again, as to the slaughter of animals for
food and sacrifice, in J and E, animals may be killed, and
sacrifices offered anywhere; in D they may be slaughtered
anywhere, but only sacrificed at the "place which Jehovah
chooses,"2 i.e., the Temple. Similarly, as we pass from
J and E to D and P, the feasts become more numerous,
and are kept for a longer time,3 and with a more precise
ritual. So, too, the provision made for the priests and the
Temple grows as we pass from J and E, to D, and then to
P. J and E provide for firstfruits and firstlings,4 and for
tithes in connection with the Temple at Bethel.5 Deuter
onomy defines the tithes, a yearly tithe, to be spent in
sacrificing and feasting at the Temple at Jerusalem, and
a tithe, to be taken every third year, and given to the poor
and the Levites.6 The Priestly Code assigns the tithes to
the Levites, and a tenth of them to the priests ; gives thirty-
five cities to the Levites and thirteen to the priests, and also
gives to the priests the firstfruits, firstlings, most of the
sacrifices and offerings, and a poll-tax of half a shekel.7
Many similar illustrations might be given of the way in which
the documents taken in the order J and E, D, P present
consecutive stages in the natural movement of national life.
Moreover, the literary relationship between the documents
1 No doubt each of the different priesthoods at Jerusalem and else
where always had a chief priest as a necessary practical arrangement,
but the recognition of the high priesthood, as a special divine institution
of exceptional sanctity, first appears in H, unless, indeed, the passages
referring to a high priest are among the additions made to H by P.
2 Deut. xii.
3 Deut. xvi. 13-15 first directs that Tabernacles shall be observed
seven days ; P adds an eighth day, Num. xxix. 35. P also introduces the
Feast of Trumpets and the Day of Atonement, Lev. xxiii.
4 Exodus xxii. 29 f. 6 Gen. xxviii. 22, E.
0 xiv. 22-29, xxv'- 12-15.
7 Exodus xxx. 11-16; Lev. vii., xxvii.; Num. xv., xviii., xxxv.;
Joshua xxi.

JUD^AN PROPHETIC DOCUMENT 43
is in favour of this order.1 The numerous parallels between
the Book of the Covenant, JE, and D and P (especially H)
are best accounted for by supposing that D and P knew
JE. The shorter and simpler code in JE cannot be a
selection from the larger and more elaborate D and P.
The historical retrospects in Deuteronomy are largely a cento
of material from JE.2
The parallels between D and P, however, may perhaps be
explained by supposing that both D and P used the same
earlier material. It is doubtful whether, as a matter purely
of literary dependence, it can be shown that P was acquainted
with D.3
14. The Judsean Prophetic Document, J.
(a) Analysis. — J was compiled from older documents and
traditions, which sometimes contradicted each other. From
these contradictions J is sometimes4 analysed into earlier
documents and additions by the compiler of J. Thus J
has been separated into an older work J1, c. 850, and
other material added c. 650, J2. Thus5 the narratives of
the Creation and the Fall are given to J1, and that of Cain
and Abel to J2.
(b) Place of Composition. — The emphasis on the sojourn
ings of Abraham at Hebron, and the interest in Judah in
Genesis — according to J, Judah is the firstborn — and similar
1 Cf., however, pp. 39 ff. Although the dependence of the other sources
on J and E seems absolutely certain, and the relation of D and P to
each other and lo J and E seems to imply the priority of D, more
uncertainty attaches to the application of this piece of evidence than
to some others, especially as regards the relation of D to P.
2 i. 6-iii. 29, ix. 6-x. n, cf. the tables. — Driver's Introduction,
PP- 73> 80. Chapters i.-iv., if not part of Josiah's law-book, were added
soon after.
3 Such acquaintance is shown, however, according to our theory, from
other evidence.
4 The different elements are denoted by J1, J2, etc. ; the editorial
matter by J or RJ.
5 e.g., Ball's Genesis in Dr. Paul Haupt's Sacred Books of O.T,
and Polychrome Bible.

44 BIBLICAL INTRODUCTION
features suggest that J was compiled in Judah.1 Some,
however, have held that J or its original edition was compiled
in the northern kingdom.2
(c) Date.— Priority to Deuteronomy gives us a date before
621 ; the earliest possible date would be the final establish
ment of the Monarchy under David, c. 1000; but the dates
assigned to J usually lie between 900 and 650. The religious
attitude suggests the period of prophetic activity which began
with Elijah, and was later on represented in Judah by the
prophets of the eighth century rather than a less advanced
age. If J is used throughout Samuel, we have further evidence
that the document is later than the events recorded in that
book, though it probably contains much older material.
J is dated thus: Addis, I., lxxxii. 850-750; Cornill, J1 850, J2
700; Driver, p. 118, "early centuries of the monarchy"; Haupt,
etc., J' 850, J2 650; Kautzsch, 850; Kbnig, p. 206, "after
David " ; Kuenen, J * 800, J 2 650 ; Wellhausen, History of Israel,
p. 13, "in the course of the Assyrian period." All the above dates
are approximate.
(d) Contents. — J forms a quasi-anecdotal history of Israel
and its ancestors from the Creation to the Conquest, perhaps
to the death of David. It is found in Genesis, Exodus,
Numbers, Deuteronomy xxxiv., Joshua, Judges, and perhaps
Samuel. The editor incorporated some laws, e.g., Exodus
xxxiv. 10-27, and ancient lyrics, e.g., the blessing of Jacob,
Genesis xlix.3
(e) Characteristics. — J uses Jehovah in Genesis, prefers the
name Israel for the patriarch, calls the sacred mountain
Sinai, and the inhabitants of Palestine Canaanites. He
delights in etymologies of personal and place names. J's
narratives are graphic, popular, and dramatic; they are told
for the interest of the stories. At the same time, the religious
sense of the narrator is quick to seize and set forth moral
and spiritual teaching, yet not so as to mar the picturesque
charm of his prose poems. The theology is primitive in
1 Dillmann, p. 626; Driver, "relatively probable," p. 116;
Haupt. s Kuenen, p. 230. 3 Probably.

THE EPHRAIMITIC DOCUMENT 45
its frank anthropomorphism and other matters, yet somewhat
advanced in its deliberate and conscious monotheism and
its teaching that suffering is the consequence of sin. As
to worship, J speaks of the high places, of sacred trees,
without any consciousness of their being illegitimate.
15. The Ephraimitic Prophetic Document, E.
(a) Analysis. — E also has been analysed into various strata,
E", E2, E3, cf. on Date.
(b) Place of Composition. — E, or, at any rate, its original
edition E1, was compiled in the northern kingdom. It is
specially interested in Joseph, the ancestor of Ephraim, and
in the Ephraimitic hero, Joshua. Reuben, which belonged
to the northern kingdom, is the firstborn of Israel. If there
is a later stratum E2, it probably originated in Judah.
(c) Relative Age of J and E. — J is usually1 regarded as
the older. Its anthropomorphism and its theology generally
seem the more primitive, while E's theory of the origin and
meaning of the name Jehovah,2 its avoidance of that name
in Genesis, its conception of Abraham as a prophet, and
its use of earlier works, such as the Book of the Wars of
Jehovah, point to a somewhat advanced stage of religious
reflection on custom and tradition. A few scholars, however,
regard E as the earlier.3 Some again hold that E used J
or J1.4 If the analysis of J and E into strata is accepted,
the problem of priority becomes very complicated. But we
may say that primitive elements are more conspicuous in J,
and later developments in E.
(d) Date. — As an Ephraimitic work, E, or at any rate its
original edition E1, must have been compiled some time
before the Fall of Samaria, 721, i.e., not later than 750;
and if it is later than J, and refers to Elisha, it cannot be
1 C0RN1LL, J1, KAUTZSCH, KUENEN.
2 Exodus iii. 14, 15.
3 Dillmann, etc. Some of the passages cited by him as evidence of
the late date of J are referred by others to J2 or RJe.
4 Kuenen, p. 248.

46 BIBLICAL INTRODUCTION
much earlier. Similar considerations to those which affect
J have led most critics to date E, or E', between 850
and 750.
E is dated thus: Addis, I., lxxxii. 850-750; Cornill, E* 750, Es
650; Driver, p. 1 18, "early centuries ofthe monarchy"; Haupt, etc.,
E ' 750, E 2 650 ; Kautzsch, 775 ; Konig, p. 205, " period of the Judges " ;
Kuenen, p. 248, E * 750, E2 650. All the above dates are approximate.
(e) Contents. — E is a history of Israel, similar to, but more
systematic than J, beginning with the incident of Abraham
and Abimelech in Genesis xx., and extending certainly to the
close of Joshua, and perhaps as far as the Elisha narratives
in Kings. It also incorporates ancient poems, e.g., some
of the Balaam oracles, and laws, e.g., the Book of the
Covenant.1 (f ) Characteristics. — E partially agrees with J in the
following points : Its narratives still show a popular interest
in the story as a story, but there are more formal and obvious
signs of didactic purpose ; according to E, also, high places
and sacred trees were a legitimate feature of Israelite religion.
But E uses Elohim (in Genesis), not Jehovah ; Jacob rather
than Israel; Horeb, not Sinai; Amorites, not Canaanites.
The sacred pillar, or maffeba, occurs frequently in his
narrative. Anthropomorphism, if not entirely absent, is
far less marked than in J. God reveals Himself in dreams,
or through angels; He acts through them, or by means,
like Moses' rod, which do not attribute to Him ordinary
human acts, such as the walking, sewing, shutting of a
door, etc., found in J. In other ways, too, the conscious
formulating of religious truth seems more advanced, e.g.,
the express condemnation of idolatry is constantly in the
writer's mind: Jacob buries the family idols;2 the first
commandment forbids the making of idols ; 3 Joshua induces
the people to put away their idols.4 If the Book of the
Covenant and connected sections were included by E in
his work, it shows a more direct interest in social order
than J. 1 Probably, cf. on Num. xxiii. f.; Exodus xx. ff.
! Gen. xxxv. 4. 3 Exodus xx. 3. 4 xxiv. 14.

COMBINED PROPHETIC DOCUMENT 47
16. The Combined Prophetic Document, JE.
(a) Analysis. — The combination of J and E was a process,
the work of a school; but it is no longer possible to dis
tinguish its stages.
(b) Place of Composition. — Judah.
(c) Date. — This process is, of course, later than the last
editions of J and E, used in the compilation, i.e., probably
after 650. It is difficult to fix the later limit, J and E
seem to have been known separately to D1, and can perhaps
be traced later ; but it does not follow that JE was compiled
after D1. At first, especially amongst the more conservative,
the older separate works would retain their authority, while
JE was ignored as a modern innovation. Some passages
assigned to R,E, the editor who combined J and E, are
so much in the style of the Deuteronomic editors, D2 or
RD, that it is often difficut to say whether a passage belongs
to R,E or RD. Hence it has been suggested that RD and
RJE are identical, i.e., that two stages of the development,
J-hE = JE, JE + D = JED, may be replaced by the single
stage J + E + D. But the close interweaving of J and E,
and the ease with which D can be separated from them,
negative this view. The resemblance shows that J and E
were combined during the period dominated by the influence
of Deuteronomy. Yet, in spite of resemblances, JE is com
paratively independent of D1, and has by no means broken
loose from the primitive ideas of religion and history to the
same extent as Ds The combined document JED was
probably compiled during the Exile. Hence a pre-exilic
date, 650-586, seems suitable for JE.
JE is dated : Cornill, 650-621 ; Driver, p. 109, about the eighth
century; Haupt, t. 640; Kautzsch, c. 650; Kuenen, p. 249, "close
of the seventh or opening of the sixth century."
(d) Method of Combination. — It is possible that R,E used
other documents besides J and E. Which editor first in
cluded in his work any given lyric, or other section not an
integral part of the main sources, is often very difficult to
determine.

48 BIBLICAL INTRODUCTION
RJE combined his materials with great care and skill, so
that it is often quite impossible to disentangle them with
any confidence. The way in which P and J are combined
in the account of the Flood also illustrates the combination
of J and E, except that the latter are the more ingeniously
and intricately interwoven. R,E's general principle was to
make up his narrative of sections taken unaltered from the
sources, but much has clearly been omitted. It is seldom
that a narrative can be resolved into two parallel accounts,
each complete in itself. Where the sources were virtually
identical, repetition has been avoided by omitting material
from one of them. Much has probably been cut out that
seemed unedifying in the light of the fuller revelation of
the Deuteronomic age. Moreover, there are additions ; in
piecing together the documents, connecting phrases were
often necessary, and the redactor has modified and inserted
to suit the ideas and teaching of his times. There is a
certain amount of material clearly not Deuteronomic, and
more closely united with J and E passages than the
Deuteronomic additions usually are, and yet more akin to
Deuteronomy than to the more primitive J and E. Such
additions are probably RJE, though perhaps some of them
might be assigned with equal reason to the final editors of
J and E. Of course, RJE was not careful to see that editorial
insertions in J were in J's style, and in E in E's style, but
sometimes uses J words and phrases in his additions to E
passages, and vice versa. Hence the work of this editor has
seriously added to the difficulty of separating J and E, and
also accounts for the sporadic occurrence of J characteristics
in sections clearly belonging to E, and vice versa.
17. Deuteronomic Material, D.
(a) Analysis. — The contents of Josiah's law-book are
denoted by D or D1, and the later additions to this
document, and the insertions in Joshua, Kings, etc. made
by editors writing in the style and spirit of D, are denoted
by RD, D2, D3, etc.

DEUTERONOMIC MATERIAL 49
(b) Place of Composition. — The earlier portions were com
posed in Judah, the later in Babylonia.
(c) Date. — Josiah's law-book was composed some time
before its publication in 621, and some time after J and
E, upon which it is dependent, and also after the prophets
of the eighth century. The latter know nothing of Deuter
onomy, while Deuteronomy gives practical effect to their
attack on the high places by limiting sacrifice to the
Temple. Further, the attempt to give exclusive rights to
a single sanctuary is more probable after the fall of the
northern kingdom. The Temple might serve the small
area of the southern kingdom. Thus everything points to
a date between 722 and 621. The anti-prophetic policy
of Manasseh and the almost entire absence of literature
belonging to his reign, c. 698-643, would account for the
lack of any traces of the existence of Deuteronomy between
700-621. D1 is dated thus: Addis, ii. 9, 701-621; Cornill, "shortly before
621 " ; Driver, p. 87, in Sixth Edition, text and note, " not later
than the reign of Manasseh," "the century before 621 " ; Kautzsch,
c. 628; Konig, p. 217, "soon after 722"; Kuenen, p. 220, "Josiah's
reign" ; Wellhausen, History, p. 13, "close of Assyrian period."
D2, etc., i.e., the additions made to D1 in Deuteronomy,
and the insertions by Deuteronomic editors in Joshua-
Kings belong substantially to the period between 621 and
the close of the Exile. In the Deuteronomic edition of
the Book of Kings,1 the last event mentioned is the release
of Jehoiachin by Evil-Merodach in 561. The post-exilic
additions to Joshua- Kings mostly bear the stamp of P,
not of D. Chronicles, naturally, contains material borrowed
from or in imitation of Deuteronomy.
D* is dated thus : Cornill, Second Half of Exile ; Haupt, 560-540 ;
Kautzsch, 561-538
(d) Contents. — D1 certainly contained Deuteronomy xii.—
xxvi., probably v.-xi. and xxviii., less probably i.-iv.2 To
1 i.e. , our present book.
2 As to these passages see § 27 on Deuteronomy. Later editorial
insertions are not taken into account.

So BIBLICAL INTRODUCTION
D2 are assigned all of Deuteronomy i.-xxx. which does
not belong to D", a very small amount of material in
Genesis, Exodus, Numbers, and Samuel, and considerable
portions of Joshua, Judges, and Kings.1
(e) Characteristics. — The Deuteronomic writers compose
codes, exhortations to obedience ; they provide earlier
history with chronological framework and religious comment ;
only in Kings do they themselves write history. The historical
retrospects in Deuteronomy are mere abstracts from JE,
and are only introduced as a setting for the laws and ex
hortations. The Deuteronomic narratives in Joshua merely
adapt JE to the Deuteronomic theory of the history that
Joshua carefully observed the Law of Moses, i.e., Deuter
onomy, and completely conquered Canaan, and cleared it
of its inhabitants.
D, like E, uses the names Amorite and Horeb. Favourite
phrases are " God of Israel," " Thy God," also perhaps found
in RJE. Its main theme is the purification of worship by the
suppression of the high places, by making the Temple the
only sanctuary of Jehovah, and by doing away with idols,
macpbas, and all the paraphernalia of superstition. But it
also enacts laws in favour of the social equity and benevo
lence inculcated by the prophets, and formally recognises
the prophetic order.
1 8. The Deuteronomic History and Laws of Israel, JED.
(a) Analysis. — D2, considered in the previous section,
might be divided into: (i.) additions made to D1 before
it was combined with JE; (ii.) additions made to JE and
D in the process of combination ; (iii.) additions made to
the threefold work JED after the combination had been
effected. RD is often appropriately used alike for (ii.), and
for the Deuteronomic editor who inserted (ii.).2 RD, like
1 D2 is used here for all Deuteronomic material later than D '.
s (i.), (ii.), (iii.) can only be distinguished rarely and partially, so that
RD and D3 are often used as equivalent.

HISTORY AND LAWS OF ISRAEL 51
R,E, stands for a school and a process, but the different stages
and hands are only very imperfectly determined.
(b) Place of Composition,1 Babylonia.
(c) Date?— The Exile.
(d) Scope and Method. — The portion of JE extending from
the Creation to the close of Numbers was only slightly
modified by RD. At this point he inserted the Deuteronomic
Code and its connected exhortations. Possibly the Book of
the Covenant originally occupied the place of Deuteronomy,
and was transferred by RD to its present position in the
account of the sojourn at Sinai.2 Another interesting
suggestion is that for a time two editions of Deuteronomy
were current, one consisting of xii.-xxvi. with v.-xi. for an
introduction, and the other of xii.-xxvi. with i. i-iv. 40
for an introduction. If so, part of RD's work was the
fusion of these two editions. He also added to D1 other
material, either his own or borrowed. He dealt very freely
with Joshua, providing it with an ample framework which
gave a view of the history very different from that of JE.
But, at the same time, he retained so much of JE unaltered,
that JE's view is still plain, namely, that the land was
only partially conquered, and that the inhabitants were not
extirpated. It is not certain that the Deuteronomic edition of Judges-
Kings 3 should be reckoned as entirely one with that of
JED. If JE extended to the times of Elisha, it seems
probable that it was. If the documentary connection
between the Hexateuch and these later books is confined
to the use of J1 in Judges i., it seems more likely that
the editing of JED and that of the Deuteronomic editions
of Judges-Kings were two independent pieces of work,
though carried out by the same school. Even in this latter
case RD is a sufficiently elastic symbol to be used for the
1 Cf. (b), (c) of previous section. Kuenen, pp. 270 f., admits that
RD may be post-exilic, but regards an exilic date as more probable.
3 Kuenen, p. 258.
8 Here and elsewhere, Judges-Kings does not include Ruth,

52 BIBLICAL INTRODUCTION
editor of Judges-Kings and for his insertions, etc. In
Judges and Kings he supplies a framework and religious
comments; his contributions in Samuel are much slighter.
RD may also have omitted portions of JE as unedifying,
may possibly have had access to the separate J and E,
and restored sections omitted by R,E. Possibly, too, RD is
responsible for the insertion of some of the poems.
19. The Law of Holiness, H or P',
(a) Analysis and Contents. — In addition to Leviticus xvii.-
xxvi., portions of Leviticus xi., etc. have been assigned to
H. This document was a compilation from older codes,
and either H or some of its sources seems to have been
dependent on the Book of the Covenant. H, as we now
have it, contains additions made by the editor who in
corporated it in the Priestly Code, and perhaps by others.
(b) Date and Place of Composition. — H has points of
contact both with D1 and the Priestly Code, but is very
closely connected with Ezekiel xl.-xlviii. Though not
composed by that prophet, it probably emanated from
the priestly circle to which he belonged. Like Ezekiel
xl.-xlviii., it forms an intermediate stage between D1 and
the Priestly Code, and was compiled in Babylonia during
the Exile. Its sources were pre-exilic, and may be in part
older than D1.
H or P * is dated : Cornill, second half of the Exile ; Driver, pp.
138, 143, shortly before the Exile, H was known by Ezekiel; Haupt,
Sacred Books of O.T., 570; Holzinger, pp. 447 f, immediately after
the Exile, in Babylonia ; Kautzsch, t. 561 ; Kuenen, p. 276, towards the
end of the Exile.
(c) Characteristics. — H seeks to secure that Israel shall
be " holy," i.e., that condition and conduct shall be worthy
of the people's unique relation to Jehovah. It therefore
lays down rules for ceremonial purity and moral life. Its
keynote is the root QDSh underlying the Hebrew words
translated "holy," "holiness," "sanctity." These words

THE PRIESTLY CODE 53
occur with special frequency in H, and the reason for
demanding "holiness" is again and again expressed in the
phrases, " I am Jehovah," " I am Jehovah, your God,"
etc., and is expressed fully in Leviticus xi. 45, " I am
Jehovah, who brought you up out of the land of Egypt,
that I might be your God; ye shall therefore be holy, for
I am holy." H agrees with D' against P2: (i.) in making
no mention of the inferior order of the priestly tribe — the
Levites ; (ii.) in insisting, expressly and with great emphasis,
on the limitation of sacrifice to a single sanctuary, which P2
takes for granted ; (iii.) in legislating expressly for the people
settled in Canaan.
Although the headings connect H with Moses and Sinai, there is no
attempt, as in P2, to write from the standpoint of the camp in the
wilderness. Thus Leviticus xxv. 29, " If a man sell a dwelling-house
in a walled city," cf. Deuteronomy xxii. 8, "When thou buildest a
new house, then thou shalt make a battlement for thy roof." Both
passages take for granted city-life in Palestine. In parts D1 writes
as if on the eve of the conquest, but takes no trouble to maintain this
standpoint. But H agrees with P2, against D*, in its interest in manifold
details concerning sacred acts, persons, places, times, and in
struments, i.e., those specially connected with the external
observances of religion.
20. The Priestly Code, P, incorporating the Law of
Holiness, H.
(a) Analysis. — P is commonly used for the whole of the
composite document, which includes (i.) H or P1; (ii.) the
Priestly Code proper, or P2; (iii.) later additions, P3 or Px.
As P2 itself is partly based on earlier documents, it is often
difficult to say whether a particular passage which seems
earlier than the time of compilation of P2 belongs to one
of the sources of P2, or to H.
(b) Mode of Composition. — It is commonly held that P2
was composed independently of H, and that the two were
subsequently united. Possibly, however, the author of P2

54 BIBLICAL INTRODUCTION
made H the nucleus of his work.1 Additions were further
made to H + P2 by later writers, and also, of course, by the
editor who combined them.
(c) Date and Place of Composition? — P2 was composed in
Babylonia after the Exile and before the mission of Ezra to
Jerusalem in 458 ; after the Exile, because there are no traces
of its special characteristics in history or literature before
this period, and because it marks an advance on Deuter
onomy, Ezekiel, and H ; before Ezra's mission, because it
is part of the Law promulgated by him.3 H and P2 were
also combined in Babylonia before 458, as H seems to have
formed part of the Law promulgated by him in 444, and it
seems scarcely likely that he combined H and P2 between
458 and 444. It is a natural supposition that Ezra was
either the author of P2, or the editor who combined H
and P2; but it is nothing more.4 Later additions to P as
a separate work must have been made in Judah between
444 and 400.
According to Addis, I., lxxxiii., P3 about the time of Ezra; Cornill,
P2 c. 500, union of P" and P2 before 458; Driver, p. 129, P2 "belongs
approximately to the period of the Babylonian captivity " ; Haupt, P '
c. 500; Holzingcr, p. 442, P2 the very beginning of the fifth century
at latest, p. 453, H and P 2 united in Babylonia, before 458 ; Ezra
had no hand either in the compilation of P2, or in its union with H ;
Kautzsch, P2 c. 500, united with H, c. 458; Kuenen, p. 303 f., P2
500-475. (d) Contents. — P is a code in the form of a constitutional
history of Israel; a collection of laws and precedents, with
the circumstances under which they were instituted. It begins
with the Sabbath, as sanctioned by the example of God at the
1 I have not noticed this suggestion elsewhere, but it is so obvious that
it must have been made before, and set aside on account of the many
difficulties it involves. It does not seem, however, out of the range of
possibility. 2 For H see previous section.
3 Cf. §§ 8-13.
4 We can scarcely suppose with Mever, Entstehung, etc., that the
phrase, "scribe (sopher) of the Law," is intended to mean "author of
the Law."

THE PRIESTLY CODE 55
Creation, and follows the course of events to the division of
Canaan amongst the tribes by Joshua. It includes a large
part of Genesis, the greater part of Exodus, Numbers, and
Joshua xiii.— xxii., all Leviticus, and a few verses at the close of
Deuteronomy and in Joshua i.-xi.
In Judges-Kings there are a small series of passages written
under the influence of P, while Chronicles might be described
as the priestly substitute for Joshua-Kings.
(e) Characteristics? — There is a large number of words,
phrases, and idioms found only or chiefly in P, or in P and
Ezekiel and post-exilic literature.
P, often like Haggai and Zechariah, denotes the months by numbers
instead of names ; it follows the post-exilic usage of writing ini almost
always for "I," whereas in pre-exilic works 'dndkht is as common or
commoner, so in JE. 'Edd, in the sense of assembly, is almost, if not
entirely, confined to P and post-exilic writers ; 'Iduth, testimony, of
the tables of the Law, occurs only in P, etc.; cf. table in Driver,
pp. 123 ff.
It is fond of repeating the same formula? again and again
in the same or successive sections, and has all the technical
verbosity of legal documents.
Thus in Genesis i., " Evening and morning were the — ,h day," "And
God saw that it was good," etc. ; in Genesis v., "And — lived — years
and begat — " etc.; in Numbers vii., "On the — day — : his oblation was,"
etc.; but cf. Amos i.
P2 gives the laws with the circumstances of their origin, and
with an account of the first instances of their observance. Thus,
as the laws for the high priesthood are regarded as resting on
the authority of Moses, they are given as addressed to Aaron,
and we are told how they were carried out in the first instance
by Aaron. In the same way the laws for the Temple and its
furniture are given as addressed to the Israelites in the
wilderness by Moses, and we are told how they were
obeyed in the construction of the Tabernacle. All this
represents a bond fide belief that the principles of the laws
for the priesthood and the Temple were Mosaic, and that
1 Cf. § 20.

56 BIBLICAL INTRODUCTION
the period immediately after the Exodus furnished precedents
for some such laws. P2 considers each law, etc. as an entirely
new revelation at the time at which it is recorded. Thus
in Exodus vi. 2-12 the Divine Name, Jehovah, is a new
revelation ; consequently it is never used in Genesis. Again
sacrifices, the distinction of clean and unclean animals and
meats, etc. were new revelations, and unknown before Moses.
Hence in P the patriarchs do not sacrifice, although they do
in JE ; and P's account of the Flood ignores the distinction
made by J between clean and unclean animals.
P follows J in speaking of the mount of the Law as Sinai.
While P2 shares with H and Ezekiel their interest in the
buildings, furniture, services, and priesthood of the Temple,
and in ceremonial observances generally, it introduces several
new features, e.g., the distinction between priests and Levites,1
and the Day of Atonement,2 which is completion of a system
of graduated sanctity, reaching its climax in a single point,
temporal sanctity in the Day of Atonement, local sanctity
in the Holy of Holies, personal sanctity in the high priest.
P2 takes the greatest pains to avoid anthropomorphism.
Further, P2 closely resembles Chronicles in its love of
system and statistics ; it provides the Pentateuch with a
complete and consecutive chronology and set of genealogies,
and gives in detail the specifications of the Ark and the
Tabernacle. 21. The Completion of the Pentateuch, and the earlier
Historical Books.
(a) Form of JED and P before Combination. — If JE only
extended to the death of Joshua, then JED and the Deuter
onomic edition of Judges-Kings were separate from the be
ginning, and there is no reason why a Deuteronomic editor
1 A development from Ezekiel xliv. 10-16. In Ezekiel the status of
the Levites is a degradation, newly ordained on account of their share
in the corrupt worship of the high places ; in P2 the status is an old-
established privilege.
3 Leviticus xvi., also a development from Ezekiel xiv. 18-20, who
appoints two similar days.

COMPLETION OF THE PENTATEUCH $7
should have separated the Joshua sections from the rest of
JED. But if JE extended to the times of Elisha, JED
might include the whole Deuteronomic history, as a single
work from the Creation to the fall of the Monarchy. This
long book would naturally be divided into sections, and
the death of Moses would be a suitable close for the first
of these.
Again P extended to the death of Joshua, but since it
was promulgated as the Law of Moses,1 the Joshua sections
may have been separated before the promulgation.
Thus, when RP2 set to work to combine JED and P2,
either (i.) the Joshua sections had already been separated
from either or both documents ; or (ii.) both documents
still included the Joshua sections, and JED may have also
contained the Deuteronomic edition of Judges-Kings.
(b) Method. — If the Joshua sections had already been
severed from JED and P, the Pentateuchal sections could
be at once combined, and the result would be substantially
our Pentateuch. Otherwise Rp himself may have separated
the Joshua sections from either or both of his documents;
or he may have combined JED and P, both containing
Joshua sections, thus compiling the Hexateuch.
Rp used P as a framework, into which he fitted the sections
of JED. He probably omitted parts of JED, and perhaps
restored3 passages omitted by RD or R,E. Otherwise he
combined his material in the same way as RIE, RD. An
example of his method has already been given in § 5.
If Rp's work was the Hexateuch, Joshua was separated
from the Pentateuch somewhat later. It seems more likely
that Joshua was compiled from the Joshua sections of JED
and P by another editor, who made JED the framework.
1 Assuming that the description of the Code in Ezra-Nehemiah as the
Law of Moses is not — as in the account of Josiah's reforms in Chronicles
— merely due to the chronicler.
8 Rp = the editor, who, writing under the influence of P, added P
to JED.3 J, E, and JE probably continued to exist as separate works after their
contents were included in JE and JED.

58 BIBLICAL INTRODUCTION
In Judges-Kings the priestly editors had no complete
parallel priestly history to combine with the Deuteronomic
history. These books as we have them are substantially
the work of the Deuteronomic editors; the priestly editors
added comparatively little, and that little consists chiefly
of small changes and insertions. The real priestly version
of the history is Chronicles. Also some further additions
were made to the Pentateuch after JED and P were com
bined. The final stage was the division of the Pentateuch
into five books.
(c) Date and Place of Composition. — It has sometimes been
supposed that Ezra's law-book was the complete Pentateuch
which had been compiled in Babylonia before 458. But the
reading and exposition of the Pentateuch would scarcely have
been accomplished even in the eight days devoted to Ezra's
law-book, and it would have severely taxed the ingenuity
of the Levites to explain orally the many contradictions,
obscurities, and abrupt transitions of the Pentateuch. The
Priestly Code, even including H, was a fairly consecutive
and consistent work, which lent itself to such treatment.
Hence the combination of JED and P was probably some
what later than the promulgation of P in 444. It is usually
dated about 400.1 There was every reason for amalgamating
the two works at once. Side by side, as separate books, they
seemed to compete for the title of Law of Moses ; their com
bination prevented any such controversy.
The work of the other priestly editors — the severance or
formation of Joshua, the priestly additions to Judges-Kings,
the further additions to the Pentateuch — lies between 400
and 300, the date at which external evidence2 shows the
complete Pentateuch to have been in existence. Somewhere
about this time the Pentateuch was divided into five books.
Even after this we know from the LXX. and the history
of the LXX. text that a number of small changes were made
1 Kuenen, p. 303 f., Cornill, Kautzsch.
3 Cf. chap. i. \ 2.

MOSAIC MATERIAL IN PENTATEUCH 59
in the Pentateuch and the historical books, but we have
now reached a point at which the work of the editor can
no longer be distinguished from that of the copyist, and
higher passes into textual criticism.
The Pentateuch, in its final form, was called the Law,
Tora, and later, "the five-fifths of the Law."1 The title
" Pentateuch " or " five - volumed " was given to it by
Greek writers, from whom it passed into Latin and other
languages. 22. Mosaic Material in the Pentateuch. — We have seen
that all the main documents rest on older sources, and that
those used by D and P are not confined to J and E. It seems
extremely probable, if not certain, that these earlier sources
contained matter which originated with, or received the
sanction of Moses. Even where a law as it stands was
clearly addressed to the Israelites of the Monarchy, it may be
an adaptation or translation, so to speak, of a Mosaic law to
suit the needs of later times, an application of a principle
laid down originally by Moses. A Mosaic element in the
Pentateuch is as probable as Davidic poems in the Psalter;
but in both cases we have no criteria which enable us
to identify this element with any definiteness or certainty.
Many Israelites, at certain periods, regarded Moses much as
Christians regard Christ, as the supreme authority for religious
truth. All that was implied by or deduced from the teaching
of Moses was held to be Mosaic, just as we call all that is
implied by or deduced from the teaching of Christ, Christian.
The usage is natural and justifiable in both cases. Moses'
position in Israelite religion was, of course, only similar, and
not strictly parallel to the relation of Christ to Christianity;
yet the Pentateuch is Mosaic as the final product of a process
which owed its first impulse, its direction and character to
Moses. 1 Hdmishshd humeshl hat-tSrd.

60 BIBLICAL INTRODUCTION
23. Genesis.
(a) Title.— In the Hebrew Bereshith, "In the beginning,"
i.e., the opening word of the book ; in the LXX. and Vulg.,
and from them in other versions, Genesis " origin," because it
describes the origin of the world.
(b) Contents and Archceology. — i. i-ii. 4a, P's account of
the Creation, as the Institution of the Sabbath, ii. 4b-25, J's
account of the Creation, " God " = Rp-
Narratives of the Creation, mostly with some parallels to the above, are
found amongst most races ; but naturally the closest parallels are found
amongst the Semites. Parallel to P, we have the Assyrian and Babylonian
narrative preserved on seven (?) tablets. ' The Creation starts from chaos1
and proceeds by stages, presenting similarities of language and ideas with
Genesis i., but loses itself in a contest between Merodach and Tiamat,
and gives full play to polytheist mythology. A parallel to the Sabbath
has been seen in the fact that amongst the Assyrians certain acts were for
bidden on the 7th, 14th, 21st, 28th of each month.3
J's account shows traces of being based on ancient Semitic tradition,
but no close parallel to it has yet been published.
iii., iv., J, The Fall, Cain and Abel, Cainite Genealogies,
Lamech. The elements in the story of the Fall — supernatural serpents ; forbidden
food, the eating of which brings disaster ; and sacred trees — are familiar
features of all folklore. The sacred tree and the demon serpent figure
constantly, but for the most part separately, on Assyrian monuments and
gems. It is doubtful, however, whether the colossal winged Assyrian
bulls with human faces were called Kirubu ; and, even if they were,
whether they are connected with the Cherubim. There are Phoenician
sculptures which show griffins guarding a sacred tree. There seems no
real parallel to the Fall, the resemblance between the Babylonian legend
of Adapa, the progenitor of mankind, and Genesis iii. being probably
fortuitous. Adapa forfeits immortality by following advice to avoid eating
certain food.
The names in the genealogies are sometimes identified with those of
Babylonian gods.
v., P ; except 29 = J. The Sethite genealogy, Seth to Noah.
Enoch. 1 Records of the Past, New Series, i. 122 ff. (cf. 147 ff.), also preserved
by Berosus ; cf. the Non-Semitic account vi. 109, which has points of
contact with P.
2 Tiamat; cf. the tehdm, EV. "deep."
3 Davis, Gen., etc., p. 25.

GENESIS 61
The genealogy Kenan to Lamech is another version of the Cainite
genealogy Cain to Lamech. The numbers differ considerably in the
Hebrew, the Sam. Pent., and the LXX.
vi. 1-4, J, The Marriage of the " Sons of God," angels, to the
daughters of men. vi. 5— viii., P; except vi. 5-8; vii. 1-5,
7-10, 12, \db, 17, 22 f; viii. 2b, 3a, 6-12, 13b, 20-22= J.
The Flood.
The Babylonian epic on the adventures of Gilgames contains an
episode, in which Xisuthros tells how he escaped the Flood . The god Ea
warned him that the other gods were about to send a Flood, and bade him
build a ship. Xisuthros did so, dimensions, etc., are given ; it was pitched,
etc., and had storeys and a window. Xisuthros brought in his family,
slaves, and cattle. The Flood came, lasted seven days, and drowned all
mankind except those in the ship. The ship grounded on a mountain.
Xisuthros sent out in succession a dove, a swallow, and a raven. The
dove and the swallow came back, but the raven waded. When Xisuthros
saw this, he left the ship with the rest, built an altar, and offered sacrifice.
The gods smell the sweet savour, and swarm like flies to the sacrifice.
Those who sent the Flood are angry because some have escaped, but Ea
pacifies them, and Xisuthros and his wife are rendered immortal.
This account has some features in common with P, some with J. A
fragment of a different Babylonian version has been found ; and another
version was preserved by Berosus. 1 Traditions of great floods are also
found amongst most races.
ix. 1-17, P, The Rainbow.
In the Babylonian Deluge story allusion is made to " the bow of Ishtar,"
which may be the rainbow.
ix. 18-27, Ji Curse of Canaan.
ix. 28-x., P; except x. 8-19, 21, 25-30 = J. Noah's De
scendants. xi. 1-9, J, Tower of Babel.
xi. 10-26, P, Genealogy from Shem to Terah.
xi. 27-xii., J; except xi. 27, 31/, xii. 4b, 5, xiii. 6, n£ = P,
Abram and Lot, Migration to Canaan, Visit to Egypt, Separa
tion. xiv., Unknown Source, Abram and Melchizedek.
The inscriptions show that most, if not all the names in verse 1 are
those of actual places and persons ; that Babylonia and other powers to
1 Schrader, Cuneiform Inscr., etc., Eng. Trans., i. 53, Records of the
Past.

62 BIBLICAL INTRODUCTION
the east of Syria had dealings with Palestine in very early times, earlier
than any date which might be fixed for Abraham ; and that Elam was
supreme in Western Asia at a period which might very well coincide with
that of Abraham. But the inscriptions do not mention Abraham or
Melchizedek, or any campaign which can be that of this chapter. The
Tel-el-Amarna tablets show that Jerusalem was known as Uru-salim
about B.C. 1300-1400. In a letter to the King of Egypt, the King of
Jerusalem writes, " Neither my father nor my mother appointed me in this
place. The strong arm of the king inaugurated me in my father's
territory," x a curious coincidence with the " without father, without
mother " of Hebrews — nothing more.
Differences of style, etc. , show that this chapter stands alone, and does
not belong to any of the main documents of the Hexateuch. It has no
connection with any context either in P or J ; this fact, and certain
peculiarities of style show that it was inserted by a late editor, after the
combination of JED and P ; but the chapter may be based on an ancient
narrative, or it may have been compiled in Babylon during or after the
Exile, on the basis of those ancient archives, then complete and well
known, whose fragmentary relics alone are now available. Verses 18-20
may be an interpolation. It is curious that the number, 318, of Abram's
slaves, in verse 14, is the sum of the numerical values of the consonants
of Eliezer, xv. 2, etc. , the only male slave of his mentioned by name.
xv., JE, Promise to Abram of an heir whose seed shall
inherit Canaan.
xvi., J; except ia, 3, i5_/i = P, Birth of Ishmael.
xvii., P, Institution of Circumcision.
xviii. f, J; except xix. 29 = P, Promise of Isaac, Sodom
and Gomorrah, Lot.
xx. ff., E ; except xxi. 1-5 = P * ; xxi. 6b, 7, 33, xxii.
2o-24 = J; xx. 18, xxii. i4-i8 = RJE, Abraham, Sarah, and
Abimelech, Birth of Isaac, Sending away of Hagar and
Ishmael, Sacrifice of Isaac.
xxiii., P, Death of Sarah, Precedent as to sale of land.
xxiv., J, Eliezer, Rebecca, and Isaac.
xxv. 1-18, P; except 1-6, 11b, i8 = JE, Death and
descendants of Abraham and Ishmael.
xxv. 19-34, Ji except igf, 26b = P, Birth of Esau and
Jacob, Birthright sold.
xxvi. 1-33, J; except 1-5 (parts of), 15, i8 = R,E, Isaac and
Abimelech. xxvi. 34, 35, P, Esau's Wives.
1 Wincki.br, p. 303. * Mostly; so elsewhere,

GENESIS 63
xxvii. f, JE; except xxvii. 46-xxviii. 9 = P, Blessing of
Jacob and Esau, Esau's Wives, Jacob's Flight, His Dream
at Bethel.
xxix. 1 -xxxii. 1, JE ; except xxix. 24, 28^, 29, xxxi.
i8* = P, Jacob and Laban.
xxxii. 2-xxxiii., JE; except xxxiii. i8« = P, Jacob and
Esau. xxxiv. (constructed on a J basis by a later, probably priestly,
writer), Dinah, Sack of Shechem.
xxxv. 1-220, E; except 9-13, i5 = P, 21, 22a = J, Jacob at
Bethel, Death of Deborah and Rachel.
xxxv. 22b-xxxvii. 1, P; except xxxvi. 31-39 = J, Family
of Jacob, Death of Isaac, Descendants of Esau, Princes of
Edom. xxxvii. 2-36, JE; except 20 = P, Joseph and his Brethren.
xxxviii., J, Judah and Tamar.
xxxix.-xlviii., JE; except xii. 46, xlvi. 6-27, xlvii. 5b, 6a,
7-1 1, 27/, xlviii. 3-7 = P, Joseph in Egypt, Brethren and
Jacob come thither.
Egyptian papyri give a story in which an elder brother, his wife, and a
younger brother play the parts of Potiphar, his wife, and Joseph.
xlix. 1-28, The Blessing of Jacob.
An ancient lyric, incorporated either by J or RJE. Both Judah, 10, and
Joseph, 26, are spoken of as royal tribes, which might be possible in
a poem of the time of David or Solomon, but would be more natural
after Jeroboam ; on the other hand, there is no hint that Levi is a
sacerdotal tribe, hence the Blessing was composed before 621. It is
probably based on much older poems. Verse 28 = R.
Addis, 878-857, J; Cornill, after Jeroboam, before 850, J; Dillmann
and Driver, p. 17, Reign of David or Solomon, J; Kautzsch, Reign of
David ; Kuenen, p. 240, tenth or ninth century.
xlix. 29-L, J; except xlix 29-33, ?• I2/==Pj ^- 15-26 = E,
Death of Jacob and Joseph.
(c) Use in N.T. — Chapter ii. 24 is used by our Lord to
enforce the sanctity of marriage (Matt. xix. 5), and by St. Paul,
in Eph. v. 31, as a reason for conjugal affection and a symbol
of the relation of Christ and the Church, and, in r Cor. vi. 16,
to show the heinousness of fornication. Chapter xv. 6,

64 BIBLICAL INTRODUCTION
Abraham's faith is used in Rom. iv. 3, Gal. iii. 6, Jas. ii. 23.
There are other quotations and numerous references to the
history, especially to show that the promises made to the
patriarchs are fulfilled in Christ, and that the freedom of
God's election is illustrated by the choice of Jacob rather
than Esau.
24. Exodus.
(a) Title. — In the Hebrew Bible, Wdelleh Shembth, from
the opening words ; LXX., Vulg., and other versions, Exodus,
as narrating the departure of the Israelites from Egypt.
(b) Archeology. — No reference has yet been found to the
Exodus in the monuments. From considerations as to where
it would best fit in to what we know of Egyptian history, the
Exodus has been placed in various periods, and numerous
Egyptian kings have figured at different times as the Pharaohs
of the Oppression or the Exodus. Attempts are also made
to combine, the Biblical chronology, which, however, affords
no clear or certain data, with that of Egypt, which is also
only approximately known. The results are naturally unsatis
factory. Popular handbooks often refer to Rameses IL,
c. 1300, as the Pharaoh of the Oppression, and his son
and successor, Merenptah II., as the Pharaoh of the
Exodus.1 But this is only one of many possible theories,
and the discovery of an inscription of Merenptah's, in
which he claims to have subdued Israelites in Syria, renders
it less probable than some others.
(c) Contents.
i., JE ; except 1-7 = P, Oppression in Egypt.
ii. 1-22, JE, Youth of Moses.
ii. 23-vi. 27, JE; except ii. 27,ff., vi. 2-27 =P, Call of
Moses, Mission of Moses and Aaron to the Israelites and
Pharaoh, Genealogy of Moses and Aaron.
vi. 28-xi. (xii. 29 f, JE), JE ; except vi. 2%ff., vii. 1-13, 19-
22* viii. 1-3, 12-15, ix. 8-12, xi. gf. = P, Ten Plagues.
1 So Sayce, Higher Criticism, pp. 237 ff., mainly because Rameses II.
is known from Egyptian inscriptions to have built Pithom. (Exodus i. II.)

EXODUS 65
xii. i-xiii. 16, P; except xii. 29-39, 42 = JE; xii. 21-27,
xiii. 3-16 = RD, Institution of Passover.
xiii. r7-xv. 21, JE; except xiii. 20, xiv. 1-4, 8/, 15-18,
21.2?:,* 26-29*= P, Red Sea.
xv. 1-19, Moses' Song of Triumph; a lyric inserted by E
or RJE. It is later than the Conquest, 1 7, but may rest on a
more ancient, possibly even Mosaic basis.
xv. 20-xvii., JE; except xvi. 1-3, 6-24,* 31-36, xvii. 1* =
P, Marah, Manna, Quails, Water from the Rock at Massah-
Meribah, Amalek.
For the Quails, here P, cf. the fuller story in Numbers xi., J ; for the
Water from the Rock, here JE, cf. Numbers xx. 1-13, P.
xviii., E, traces of J or RyE in if, off., Jethro.
xix. i-xx. 21, JE; except 1, 2a = P, and traces, 6, etc., of RD
or Rp in xx. 2-17, The Ten Commandments given from
Sinai. The Decalogue, xx. 2-17, is generally held to have been incorporated in
E ; but the substance is older than E, and may have been taken from the
tables of stone in the Ark. Addis dates the Decalogue in the eighth or
seventh century. Cf. Deuteronomy v. 6-21.
From xix. 1 onwards, the scene of the rest of Exodus, the whole of
Leviticus, and Numbers i. i-x. 10 is SINAI.
xx. 22-xxiii. 19, The Book of the Covenant.
The Book of the Covenant, cf. §§ 4-16, is generally held to have been
incorporated in E, or possibly by RJE in JE ; it was edited in various ways
before and at the time of its incorporation. It is an ancient code of social
law and ritual, probably not older than the monarchy, but at least as old
as the earliest editions of J and E. Many of the laws it contains may be
much older still.
xxiii. 20-33, E; except 22^-250, 31^-33 (against intercourse
with the Canaanites) = RD, Promises of Blessing if the Law is
observed. xxiv. if., gff., J (or E1), Moses, Aaron, Nadab, Abihu, etc.,
see Jehovah.
xxiv. 3-8, R,E (or E or E2), Covenant, with sacrifice, to
observe the Book of the Covenant.
xxiv. i2ff. (i8a/3b, xxxi. 18b), E (or E1 or E2), Moses in the
Mountain forty days.

66 BIBLICAL INTRODUCTION
xxiv. 15-xxxi, P; except xxiv. 18a /3b, xxxi. 18b = E, Moses
in the Mountain, receives instructions for the Tabernacle and
its appurtenances, and for the vestments and consecration of
the priests, Aaron and his sons.
xxxii.-xxxiii., JE, Golden Calf.
xxxiv. 1-28, J, with editorial additions, a code parallel to
E's Decalogue and Book of the Covenant.
Written, according to the narrative — here, probably, RJE — on the
tables of stone, which replaced those broken by Moses. The writing,
however, is quite different from that on the first tables.
xxxiv. 29-xl., P, Moses descends from the Mountain, and
carries out the instructions given in xxv.-xxxi.
The narrative here is mostly obtained from the instructions by altering
the tenses. The LXX. text differs widely from the Hebrew, especially in
the order, cf. Driver, 37 f.
(d) Use in N.T. — There are numerous references to the
history, especially in the historical retrospects in Acts and
Hebrews; and to the Laws, especially the Decalogue. St.
Paul uses, as illustrations of God's free election, the reference
to Pharaoh in ix. 16, and xxxiii. 19, cf Romans ix. 15, 17.
25. Leviticus.
The scene of the whole book is SINAI.
(a) Title. — Hebrew, Wayyiqra?, from the opening word ;
LXX., Leuitikon; Vulg., and other versions, Leviticus, as
containing the Levitical laws.
(b) Analysis. — The whole book is Priestly Code, in
corporating the Law of Holiness, in xvii.-xxvi., etc.
(c) Contents. — i-x., The Sacrifices.
xi., Clean and Unclean Animals (? H).
Cf. Deuteronomy xiv. 3-20.
xii., Purification after Childbirth.
xiii. f., Leprosy.
xv., Sexual Uncleanness.
xvi., Day of Atonement.

NUMBERS 67
Law of Holiness, xvii. -xxvi.
xvii., Law of Slaughter ; at the Tabernacle only.
xviii., Unlawful Marriages, etc.
xix. f., Various Laws.
xxi. f., Cleanness of Priests, Sacrifices.
xxiii., Feasts.
xxiv., Various Laws.
xxv., Sabbatical Year, Jubilee.
xxvi., Exhortation to keep the preceding laws, enforced
by promises and threats.
xxvii., Vows and Tithes.
Verse 34 may have been added by the editor who divided the Pentateuch
into five books, as a suitable conclusion for Leviticus, Kuenen, p. 341, cf.
Numbers xxxvi. 13.
(d) Use in N.T. — There are references to some of the
laws ; xviii. 5 is quoted Rom. x. 5, Gal. iii. 1 2 ; xix. 2,
"Be ye holy, because I am holy," etc., 1 Pet. i. 16; xix. 18,
"Thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself," Matt. xix. 19,
Rom. xiii. 9, etc. ; cf. xxvi. 1 2, 2 Cor. vi. 1 6.
26. Numbers.
(a) Title. — In Hebrew, according to Jerome Wayyedabber,
the opening word, but in the MSS. and printed editions
BeMidbar = " in the wilderness of," a word in the first
verse, which would serve to describe the position of the
Israelites during the events narrated in the book; LXX.,
Arithmoi, Vulg. Numeri, English versions, Numbers, because
the book contains the enumerations of the Israelites.
(b) Contents. — i. i-x. 10, P, At Sinai, First Census of the
Israelites who left Egypt, Duties of the Levites, Laws of the
Nazarites, etc., Offerings for the Tabernacle, Laws as to the
Levites, the Passover, Second Passover, Silver Trumpets, etc.
x. 1 1-28, P, Departure from Sinai, Order of March.
x. 29-xii., JE, Hobab asked to remain with Israel,
Departure from Sinai, Quails, Seventy Elders who prophesy,
Miriam and Aaron murmur against Moses, Miriam's Leprosy.

68 BIBLICAL INTRODUCTION
In xi. two entirely independent stories, that of the Quails and that
of the Seventy Elders, are curiously combined. Apart from editonal
additions, the story of the Quails belongs to J, that of the Elders
to E or possibly to RJE. There is a brief reference to the Quails in
P, Exodus xvi. 13, before the arrival at Sinai.
xiii. f., P; except xiii. 17^-20, 22^, 27-31, 32, 33, xiv.
1-4 * &f, 1 1-25, 39-45 =JE, Spies, Evil Report of all but
Caleb and Joshua, Discouragement of the People, All but
Caleb and Joshua to die during forty years wandering in
the Wilderness, The People seek to enter Canaan, but are de
feated at Hormah.
xv., P, Various Laws, Stoning of the Sabbath Breaker.
xvi. ia, 2-1 1, 16-24, 35— So,1 xvii. = P, Korah and the
Levites attempt to exercise priestly functions, and are con
sumed by fire from Jehovah, Plague, Aaron's rod buds
as a token of the exclusive right of the Levites to the
Priesthood. An earlier Priestly Narrative, in which Korah's fate enforced the
rights of the whole tribe of Levi as against the other tribes, xvi. 3,
xvii., has been modified to enforce the claims of the house of Zadok
or Aaron, as in Ezekiel and P, against the Levites, xvi. 8-10.
xvi. ib, 12-15, 23~34 = JR) The Reubenites, Dathan and
Abiram, rebel against Moses ; the earth opens and swallows
them up with their families.
The authors of Deuteronomy xi. 6 and Psalm cvi. 17 were acquainted
with a story concerning Dathan and Abiram, but not Korah or On.
In xxvii. 3, P, Korah is mentioned, without any reference to Dathan,
etc. The name of On, who is only mentioned in xvi. I, should probably
be omitted as due to a corruption of the text through the accidental
repetition of some of the consonants. Korah has been introduced into
verses 24, 27, and 32 by the editor who combined JED and P in xvi.
xviii. f, P, Tithes and other Dues of the Priests and
Levites, The Water of Separation for purifying anyone who
has touched a corpse.
xx. f., JE; except xx. 1-T3,* 22-29, xxi. ro/ = P, Death
of Miriam, Water from the Rock at Meribah, Death of
Aaron, Israel defeats Arad and the Canaanites at Hormah,
Brazen Serpent, List of Halting Places, Overthrow of Sihon
and Og. 1 E.V. xvi. 36-50, xvii. 1-13 = Heb. xvii. 1-28.

NUMBERS

69

For the Water from the Rock at Meribah, here P, cf. the parallel
narrative in JE, Exodus xvii. 1-7, at Massah-Meribah, before the arrival
at Sinai. The incident at Hormah, xxi. 1-3, is probably J2, cf. the parallel
in Judges i. 17 =J"; also xiv. 45, probably E, and Deuteronomy i. 44,
probably based on E. The List of Halting Places, xxi. 12-20, is an
older document incorporated by E or Ri". All the poems in xxi.
may be from the " Book of the Wars of Jehovah " mentioned in
verse 14, which may also be the source of other poems in the historical
books ; nothing more is known of this work. According to Addis and
others, the poem in xxi. 27 ff. is a composition of the ninth century
in which the Israelites celebrated their conquests in Moab. Heshbon,
the city of Sihon, is here (verse 30) amongst the Moabite cities which had
been sacked. If so, Sihon is here a Moabite king, and ' ' to Sihon, king
of the Amorites," in verse 29, is an editorial addition. The Conquest of
Og in 33 ff. was not originally part of the same story as the Conquest
of Sihon, but was added by RiE or RD-
xxii. ff., JE,* Balak and Balaam.
The following more detailed analysis is somewhat uncertain, especially
as to the passages assigned to J : —

xxii.

xxiii.

xxiv.

P

1

J

22-25

1-19
E
8-21* 35-41*
1-26
JE
2-7
27-30
25
R
20-24
In xxiv. 20-24 " Assyria " is sometimes taken literally, and R will
be RJE; or "Assyria" may be the Seleucid kingdom of Syria, in which
case the addition must have been made in the Greek period. Apart
from this and other editorial additions, the oracles uttered by Balaam
belong to the early monarchy, perhaps to the period of David and
Solomon. Their unqualified exultation in the strength and glory of
Israel reflects a period of great national prosperity, and xxiv. 17 f.
may refer to the Conquest of Edom and Moab by David. The absence
of any reference to Judah is noteworthy ; it suggests that the poems arose,
and were transmitted in Northern Israel.
xxv. 1-5, JE, the Moabites corrupt Israel.
70 BIBLICAL INTRODUCTION
xxv. 6-18, P, Phinehas slays an Israelite chief, and a noble
Midianite woman whom he had taken into his tent.
Cf. Ezra's attack upon marriage with foreigners.
xxvi. -xxxi., P, Second Census — of the children of those who
left Egypt, the latter having all perished except Joshua and
Caleb,1 Law of Inheritance of Females, Joshua Moses' suc
cessor, Laws of Sacrifices at the Feasts, etc., and of Vows,
Defeat and Extermination of the Midianites, Division of the
Spoil between Israel and the Tabernacle.
xxxii., 1-38, Constructed by a priestly writer on the basis of a
JE narrative. The allotment of Eastern Palestine to Gad
and Reuben.
Half Manasseh in 33 is an editorial addition, as in Joshua xxii. , which
is a very similar document, possibly by the same hand. In Numbers,
however, the order is Gadites and Reubenites ; 2 in Joshua, Reubenites
and Gadites.
xxxii. 39-42, J; except 4o = RJE, The Conquest of Gilead by
the Manassites, Machir, Jair, and Nobah.
In 1-38, Moses gave Gilead to Gad and Reuben ; here he gives it to
Machir the Manassite. The verses were probably originally connected
with Judges i.
xxxiii. 1-49, Compiled from the combined PJED. List of
the Halting Places during the Wandering.
If, as seems to be the case, verse 2 states that this list was written by
Moses, it is probably an independent summary of the history of the
Wandering, and came into the hands of a late editor, who gave it this
heading and added it to the Pentateuch. Verse 2, however, may mean
that the list was based on some document or documents attributed to
Moses, possibly PJED, or JED.
xxxiii. 50-xxxvi., P, Jehovah instructs Moses concerning the
Borders of the Promised Land, the Princes who are to divide
it amongst the People, the Levitical Cities, the Cities of
Refuge, and the Law of Murder. Moses lays down a law
as to the Marriage of Female Heirs.
Kuenen, p. 341, Addis, etc., regard xxxvi. 13, as added by the editor
who divided the Pentatench into five books, as a suitable conclusion for
1 Moses is overlooked.
s Except in 1, possibly altered by an editor.

DEUTERONOMY 71
Numbers. Since, however, it is immediately contradicted by Deuteronomy
i. i, which that editor must have had under consideration, there is less
difficulty in supposing that it is P's conclusion of his legislation, imitated
by the editor who added Leviticus xxvii. 34.
(c) Use in N. T. — In addition to references to the history,
2 Timothy ii. 19 is perhaps suggested by the LXX. of xvi. 5,
" God knows them that are His," i.e., the faithful, in contrast
to Korah and his company.
27. Deuteronomy, cf. §§ 1-18, especially §§ 17 f.
(a) Title. — Hebrew, 'Elleh had-Debharim, the opening
words ; also spoken of as Mishneh, because regarded as a
recapitulation of the laws in the previous books; similarly,
LXX., Deuteronomion, the Second Law; hence Vulg. Deut-
eronomium ; and E.V. Deuteronomy.
(b) Analysis. — Chapters i-xxx. consist of the various strata
of D, incorporating material borrowed by the Deuteronomic
writers from J and E or JE; with slight additions by the
priestly writers. The analysis of xxxi.-xxxiv. will be given
under the various sections.
(c) Contents. — i. i-iv. 40, First introductory Historical
Retrospect and Exhortation.
Based on E or JE, by a different hand from xii.-xxvi., and added to
Josiah's law-book after its publication, but before it was combined with
JE. The archaeological details as to the original inhabitants of Canaan,
ii. 10 ff, 20-23, are obvious additions, probably marginal notes by a
reader, which have slipped into the text. The exhortation, iv. 9-40, is
sometimes (Cornill, Addis, etc.) ascribed to a different author to the rest
of this introduction.
iv. 41 ff., Cities of Refuge, E of Jordan. An isolated fragment, quite
unconnected with its context. It is a correction of xix. 9, which directs
the establishment of three cities at once, three more will be appointed if
the territory of Israel is increased. Who composed these verses, and why
they were placed here, is a mystery. They may be by a Deuteronomic
writer to supplement xix. 9, or by a priestly writer to conform to P's pro
vision of six cities of refuge.
iv. 44-49, Introductory Statement of the occasion on which
the Deuteronomic Laws were promulgated.
Probably the original heading of Josiah's law-book, although either 44
or the whole paragraph is held by some to be a later addition. The para
graph may have been the introduction to an edition containing iv. 44-
xxvi.

72 BIBLICAL INTRODUCTION
v.-xi., Hortatory Introduction to the Deuteronomic Code,
including a Second Edition of the Decalogue, Exhortations
to obey the Law, to avoid idolatry, and to have no dealings
with the idolatrous Canaanites. These exhortations are en
forced by appeals to their experience of the rewards of
obedience, and the punishment of rebellion during the
Wanderings. In v.-xxvi., the mode of address varies, sometimes the second person
singular, " thou shalt," is used ; sometimes the plural, " ye shall " ; some
times the third person singular, "a man shall." Attempts have been
made x to use these as criteria of different sources.
Chapters v.-xi. may either be part of the original law-book; so Addis,
ii. 25, Driver, p. 87, KSnig, p. 210, Marti (Kautzsch, Bibel), Ryle (Hast
ings' Bible Dictionary), Steuernagel ; or composed later than xii.-xxvi.,
but by the same author, Kuenen, p. 212 ; or they may be a later addition
by a different author, Cornill, Holzinger, p. 275, Wellhausen, History,
P- 3^9. D borrowed the Decalogue, v. 6-21, either from JE or E, or, like E,
may have known it as an independent document ; he edited it in his
characteristic style and spirit, cf. Exodus xx. The historical references in
v.-xi. are to JE or to the separate E.
Chapter x. 1-9 (10), (The writing of the second set of tables of stone,
the command to make the Ark, the setting apart of the tribe of Levi), in
terrupt the obvious connection between ix. 29, and x. io2 or li, and are
probably a later addition. Verses 6 f. have no connection with 1-5, 8, 9,
and are utterly out of place. They are often regarded as a piece of jet
sam and flotsam from E, which, by some strange misadventure, has drifted
on to an alien shore, cf. E's list of halting places in Numbers xxi. If so,
the reference to Eleazar is an addition of a priestly editor, for, with the
very doubtful exceptions of this passage, and Joshua xxiv. 33,3 neither J
nor E refer to Eleazar or Phinehas.
Chapter xi. 29 f. are also an addition by the Deuteronomic author of
Joshua viii. 30-35.
XII.-XXVI., The Deuteronomic Code4 (containing the
laws on which Josiah's reforms, 621, were based).
1 Especially by Stark and Steuernagel, as criteria of authorship,
by which v.-xxvi. may be resolved into earlier sources. The differ
ences may very well indicate the presence of earlier material and later
additions, but scarcely enable us to determine the literary history of these
chapters. 2 Verse 10 is clearly written with reference to ix. 29, but it may be the
work of an editor who tried to mend the confusion caused by the intro
duction of x. 1-9.
3 q.v., also probably by a priestly editor,
4 For Contents see next page.

DEUTERONOMY 73
These chapters, like v.-xi.,1 have been analysed into earlier sources,
whose distinctive marks are the singular and plural forms of address ; but
this analysis has met with little acceptance. The Code is an amended
and expanded edition of the JE laws, the Book of the Covenant and
the Decalogue, etc.;2 some laws it repeats, either verbatim or with
explanations and slight modifications, e.g. , the Decalogue; some it
omits, e.g., Exodus xxi. 18-xxii. 15, the compensation to be given for
injuries ; and some it expands, or corrects, e.g., the single verse,
Exodus xxii. 20, prohibiting the worship of strange gods, is expanded
into a long paragraph, Deuteronomy xvii. 2-7, specifying the sun, moon,
and stars as "other gods," and appointing the procedure to be observed in
dealing with their worshippers. Again, the law limiting sacrifice, Deuter
onomy xii. is a correction of Exodus xx. 24, which permits sacrifice
at many sanctuaries. Also, the Code introduces many new laws, e.g., those
limiting the priesthood to the tribe of Levi. For various other details see
under the separate sections.
xii. i-xiv. 21, The worship of Other Gods and the use
of Foreign Superstitious Customs to be avoided by confining
sacrifice to One Sanctuary, Animals may be slaughtered any
where, Practices, etc. which are to be avoided, Punishment
of those who observe or encourage such practices, List of
Animals which may and may not be eaten.
This latter list, xiv. 3-21, agrees almost exactly with Leviticus xi. 2-23,
which is probably H. Apparently the list was older than both D and H,
and was used by both. The list is sometimes regarded as a later addition
to D'. xiv. 22-xv., Tithes and Year of Release.
xvi. 1-17, Yearly Feasts.
xvi. 18-xvii. 13, Law Courts.
The sections prohibiting the use of Asheras and Maceebas, the offering
of unsuitable sacrifices, xvi. 22-xvii. I, have no connection with the con
text, and must be misplaced.
xvii. 14-19, Law for the King.
xviii. 1-8, Provision for the Levites.
xviii. 9-22, Prophets, How to distinguish the True from the
False. xix. 1 -xxiii. 1, Laws concerning Murder, Cities of Refuge,
Landmarks, Perjury, War, Authority of Parents, etc., Benevo
lence to Fellow-countrymen, Judicial procedure as to charges
of Unchastity, etc.
1 See above on v.-xi. 2 See Table in Driver, p. 68.

74 BIBLICAL INTRODUCTION
xxiii. 2-xxv, Laws as to the exclusion of members of
neighbouring tribes from the Assembly, Runaway slaves not
to be sent back, Interest, Vows, Divorce, Provision for the
Poor, Punishments, Marriage with Deceased Brother's Wife,
etc., Curse on Amalek.
xxvi., Firstfruits, Tithe in Third Year, Closing Exhortation.
Although the main section of D1 closes here, probably xxviii. also
belongs to that document.
xxvii., The Law, i.e., D1, to be written on stones, and set up
on Mount Ebal; also an altar to be set up on Mount Ebal,
and curses to be proclaimed.
This chapter, which breaks the connection between xxvi. and xxviii., is
a series of later additions. Verses 9 f. may be the connecting link between
xxvi. and xxviii., i.e., D1, if xxviii. is D1, if not by the Deuteronomic
editor who added xxviii. Verses 1-8, 11-13 are closely connected with
xi. 29 f. and Joshua viii. 30-35, and are by the same hand or hands.
Verses 6 f. which order the erection of an altar cannot have been
originally written by a Deuteronomist, because they, at any rate, seem
to contradict the Law of the One Sanctuary. As Shechem lay between
Ebal and Gerizim, they may be a fragment of E, to which 1-5, 8
have been added as a kind of correction. Verses 14-26, of which
Joshua viii. 30-35 take no notice, and which are not Deuteronomic in
style, must be a very late addition.
xxviii., D1, The Rewards of Obedience, and the Punish
ment of Disobedience.
Ascribed to D1 by Addis, Driver, p. 67, Kuenen, p. 124, Marti, Ryle,
etc.; to a later Deuteronomic writer by Cornill, p. 21 f., Wellhausen,
p. 369, etc. If D ', there are later additions.
xxix. f., An Exhortation to Obedience, enforced by Promises
and Threats.
A later Deuteronomic addition, differing somewhat in style from D";
also xxx. 1-10 presupposes the Exile.
xxxi., Parting Words of Moses to Israel, Joshua, and the
Levites. Moses finishes, 9, 24 f., writing " the words of this
law," i.e., D, "in a book," and bids the Levites put the book
by the side of the Ark.
A series of later additions. Verses 1-8 connect closely with i.-iv.
and with the Deuteronomic verses in Joshua i., and are probably by
the same hand. If i.-iv. is accepted as D1, these verses will be D'.
Verses 9-13, the direction to read the Law, at the Feast of Tabernacles,

DEUTERONOMY 75
in the Year of Release, may be D1. The references to Joshua, 14 f., 23,
are probably E, edited by a Deuteronomic writer. In (a) 16-22 (?JE,
so Addis, Kuenen, p. 256) (b) 24-30 we have two separate introductions
to the Song of Moses. In 24 ff. Steuernagel proposes to read "Song,"
sbird for "Lav/," tbrd.
xxxii. 1-43, Song of Moses, setting forth Jehovah's love to
His people, their apostasy from their Rock, Jehovah, to other
gods, their punishment and ultimate restoration.
An independent poem. Nothing in the poem itself suggests that it
was composed by Moses. It looks back to a period of great national
prosperity, accompanied by an outburst of the worship of other gods.
Israel is oppressed by a nation, which is soon to be punished for its
harshness to God's people. There are points of contact with Jeremiah,
Ezekiel, and II. Isaiah 1 which suggest a date either just before or at the
beginning of the Exile ; so Addis, Driver, p. 89, Konig, p. 224, all
three with some hesitation, Kuenen, p. 256, etc. ; or even at the end
of the Exile or later ; so Cornill, Steuernagel, etc. If, however, Addis
and Kuenen are right in ascribing xxxi. 14-22 to JE, and therefore
regarding the Song as part of JE, we must either date JE in the
Exile, or, more probably, place the Song before 650, regard the
oppressor as the Assyrian, and suppose that the parallels to Jeremiah,
Ezekiel, and II. Isaiah are partly accidental, partly later additions.
Dillmann, p. 394, considers that the Song was composed c. 800, and
included in J. It is more likely that it was included in JED by its
compiler or a later editor.
xxxii. 44, Subscription to the Song.
xxxii. 45-47, Closing Exhortation.
Deuteronomic, D • or later.
xxxii. 48-52, P, Command to Moses to ascend Mount
Nebo, to die.
xxxiii., Blessing of Moses, A series of oracles on the
tribes, like the Blessing of Jacob.
There is nothing in the poem to suggest Mosaic authorship. Verses
4 f., "Moses commanded us a law," etc., and the "he said"s which
introduce each oracle in 7-25, indicate that it was written on the basis
of ancient oracles ascribed to Moses. Simeon has disappeared, Reuben
is at its last gasp, Judah is in distress, and the Blessing prays that he may
be reunited to his people ; but Levi flourishes as a priestly tribe, Benjamin
dwells in safety, Joseph enjoys an exuberant prosperity, Gad is powerful
and warlike, and the other northern tribes are flourishing. Possibly
some of the oracles retain features which were no longer found in the
position of the tribes where the Blessing was compiled, and the oracle
on Levi may be a later addition. But the general character of the
poem shows that it was written by a native of the northern kingdom,
1 Cf. 39, Isa. xii. 4, xlviii. 12, xiv. 5 ; 15, Jer. v. 28 : 41, Ezek.
xxi. 9 f.

76 BIBLICAL INTRODUCTION
when that state was at the height of its power and prosperity, and
when the northern kingdom was regarded as the true Israel, from which
Judah had no right to hold aloof. A curious feature is the apparent
grouping of Benjamin with the northern tribes. The conditions are
held to point either to the time of Jeroboam I., so Dillmann, p. 41 5,
Driver, Deuteronomy i.l. ; or to that of Jeroboam II., so Addis, Cornill,
Kuenen, Steuernagel. It has also been dated in the period of the Judges,
Kbnig, p. 202, but this is improbable.
Its northern origin suggests a connection with E, so Cornill and
Dillmann. There is little to show in which document or edition of
the Pentateuch it was first included, but the absence of Deuteronomic
or priestly glosses points to its having belonged to J E or E.
Steuernagel regards 2-5, 26-29 as a post-exilic psalm, and 9a, 10 as an
addition, earlier than P.
xxxiv., P.; except 1^-7, 10 = JED, 11 f. = RD, Death and
Burial of Moses.
(d) Use in N. T. — Deuteronomy is used in several import
ant passages, especially in our Lord's utterances, and in
Romans and Hebrews. Owing to its didactic form, it lent
itself to quotation ; and in it, as in II. Isaiah, O.T. Revelation
prepares the way for, and, in a measure, anticipates the gospel.
The three O.T. quotations used by Christ at the temptation
are Deuteronomy vi. 13, 16, viii. 3. The "first of all the
commandments. . . . Hear, O Israel, the Lord our God is
one Lord, and thou shalt love the Lord thy God, etc.,"
Mark xii. 29 f, etc., the opening clause of the Shema or
Jewish Confession of Faith is from Deuteronomy vi. 4, 5.
On the other hand, the Law of Divorce, of which Jesus said,
" For the hardness of your heart he wrote you this precept,"
Mark x. 5, etc., is from Deuteronomy xxiv. 1. The promise
of xviii. 18, that God would raise up prophets for His people,
is specially applied to Christ in Acts iii. 22, vii. 37. In
Romans x. 6-9, what is said in praise of the Law in Deu
teronomy xxx. 12 ff., is applied to Christ; cf. also Romans x.
19, xi. n, xii. 19, xv. 10, with Deuteronomy xxxii. 21, 35, 43.
Hebrews i. 6, "Let all the angels of God worship him," is
from the LXX. of Deuteronomy xxxii. 43, and the description
of the scene at Sinai, in Hebrews xii. 18 ff., is from Deuter
onomy iv. n f., v. 23-26. Cf Deuteronomy xxv. 4, "Thou
shalt muzzle the ox, etc.," with 1 Corinthians ix. 9, 1 Timothy

JOSHUA 77
28. Joshua.
(a) Title. — The book is named after the main character in
the narrative, not after the author.
(b) Archceology? — The Exodus itself cannot be brought
directly into relation with what is known from the inscriptions
of the history of Egypt and Palestine ; but the narratives of
the Conquest may be in some measure related to extra-
Biblical information. Our data are fairly numerous. It is
true that, individually, many of them are uncertain, especially
as to the reading and meaning of names; and may be irre
levant; and that they are often very difficult to reconcile
either with each other, or with even the oldest Biblical narra
tive. Yet taken together they, at any rate, help to limit the
number of possible theories.
There are (i.) a number of apparent references to the
presence of Israelites in Palestine extending from about B.C.
1500 to about b.c. 1200. If these are to be trusted, they
seem to indicate either that the Exodus took place very early
before 1500; or that it took place after 1200, and that in
Genesis the narratives of the Patriarchs refer either to chiefs
of tribes, or to tribes themselves ; or that only a portion of
the Israelites went down to Egypt, while the rest remained in
Canaan. The references are as follows : —
At Karnak, in a list of Canaanite towns conquered by
Thothmes III., 2 we find the names of Jacob-el and Joseph-el,
apparently implying a long prior occupation of the district by
the tribes of Jacob and Joseph.
From the archives of Amenophis IV., the Tel-el-Amarna
tablets, we learn that in his reign,3 Southern Palestine (and
perhaps also Northern4) was being invaded by the Habiri.
A theory has been advanced, and has met with some support,
1 Cf. \ 24 (b). For some of the following references I am indebted to
an unpublished paper by Dr. Skinner, Presbyterian Coll., Camb.
11 1481-1449, Pktrib, Egypt, ii. 29.
3 Petrie, Egypt, ii. 205, b.c. 1383-1365.
4 Winckler, p. 143, the rendering is uncertain at present.

78 BIBLICAL INTRODUCTION
that these are the Hebrews.1 The term " Hebrew," however,
might include Moab, Ammon, and Edom.
In the inscriptions of Seti I. and Rameses II.,2 a name
which is read as Asher occurs as the name of a district, in
about the region assigned by the Book of Joshua to the tribe
of Asher.8
In an inscription of Merenptah II.,4 he claims to have sub
dued Israelites in Palestine.
But (ii.) another line of argument also points to a late date
for the Conquest. In all the narratives, the deliverance at the
Red Sea is regarded as the end of all difficulties with Egypt.
None of the accounts of the whole period, including the
Wandering, the Conquest, the Judges, Saul and David, hint
at the presence of Egyptian armies or officials in the Sinaitic
Peninsula, or in Palestine. Hence we ought to be able to fix
the Exodus at the beginning of a period of, at the very least,
two hundred years, during which Egypt left Palestine entirely
to itself. Such a period is difficult to find. Thothmes I.5
overran the hill-country of Palestine, and advanced the
Egyptian frontier to the Euphrates ; his successor, Thothmes
II.,6 claims dominion over Syria; the next king, Thothmes
III.,7 subdued Palestine and Syria in a long series of cam
paigns ; his successor, Amenophis III., also fought in Syria,
The Tel-el-Amarna tablets seem to show that under the next
king, Amenophis IV., the Egyptian dominion in Palestine
was lost for a time, but it was recovered by Rameses I. and
Seti I,8 and the next king, Rameses II.,9 fought many cam
paigns in Syria. His successor, Merenptah II., claims
1 'Ibhri.
2 Brit. Mus. Catalogue, 1366-1333-1300.
' MOller, Asien und Europen, p. 237.
4 Petrie, Egpyl, i. 251, b.c. 1208, onward; Brit. Mus. Catalogue,
1300-1266. s Id., ii. 64, B.C. 1541-1516; Brit. Mus. Catalogue, 1633-1600.
6 Id., ii. 73, 1516-1503; Brit. Mus. Catalogue, 1600.
1 Id., ii. 100, 1503-1449 ; Brit. Mus. Catalogue, about 1600.
6 Id., i. 251, 1328-1327-1275 ; Brit. Mus. Catalogue, 1400-1366-1333.
* Id., i. 251, 1275-1208; Brit. Mus. Catalogue, 1333-1300.

JOSHUA 79
successes in Syria, and Rameses III.1 also fought in Syria.
After his death, Egypt seems to have lost Syria, and the
Egyptian annals record no invasion of Syria until the reign of
Shishak I.,2 the contemporary of Jeroboam I. As the
Exodus can scarcely have taken place two hundred years
before Thothmes I., it seems necessary to place it some time
after the death of Rameses III.
It may also be noted that the Tel-el-Amarna tablets and
other inscriptions show that Palestine had existed for many
centuries as a collection of tribes and city states, as Joshua
found it at the Conquest.
(c) Analysis. — The history of the Book of Joshua is some
what different from that of the rest of the Hexateuch, and
presents some problems not yet solved. The groundwork
is not P as in the first five books, but JED ; the combination
of P and JED in the Pentateuch and in Joshua was probably
by different hands ; RD has dealt much more freely with his
JE material in Joshua, than in the earlier sections. His work
in some parts seems to amount to a rewriting of the history
on the basis of JE, rather than a mere addition of editorial
matter. Hence sections which, as they stand, are RD may
often be based upon and include JE material, which can
no longer be separated with any certainty. Similarly, it is
probable that P, in his account of the territories of the
tribes, makes use of older sources. The conception of
the Conquest as effected by united Israel, in a single war,
under Joshua, which is absent8 from J, is apparently found
in E, and was developed and systematised in part perhaps
by R,E, but more thoroughly by RD. Hence there is some
times a difference of opinion as to whether a passage belongs
to E, R,E, or RD. Probably RD comprises material from at
least two hands. The characteristic idea introduced by
RD is that Joshua and Israel carefully observed the Law
of Moses, i.e., D1, during the life of Joshua and those of
his contemporaries who survived him.
1 Brit. Mus. Catalogue, about 1200.
2 Brit. Mus. Catalogue, 966-933. 3 Cf. on Judges i.

80 BIBLICAL INTRODUCTION
(d) Contents. — I.-XIL, The Conquest.
i. i-viii. 29, JE; except i. 3-9, 11^-18, ii. 10 ff., iii. 7,
10b, iv. 12, 14, 21-24, v- T> Af* V!- 2^->* IS^>* I7^> rS,
24^, 27, viii. if,* 27 = RD; and iii. 4, /». io£.,* 13, 19,
v. 6ff., 10 ff., vi. 2$b, vii. 1, 24** = RP or P, Directions
for crossing the Jordan, Spies and Rahab, Crossing of the
Jordan, Circumcision of the People, " The Captain of the
Army of Jehovah," Fall of Jericho, The unsuccessful attack
on Ai, Achan, Fall of Ai.
Chapter v. 13-15, "The Captain of the Army of Jehovah," has no
connection with the context, and may be a fragment of an unknown source
used by JE, or J or E. Traces of late language, e.g. " Prince," 1 may be
due to editors, or the fragment may have been given its present form and
inserted in the Hexateuch by a late editor.
viii. 30-35, RD, Altar on Mount Ebal, Blessings and
Curses. Cf. on Deuteronomy xi. 29 f., xxvii. 1-8, 11-13, where instructions are
given for the ceremony here performed. Deuteronomy xxvii. apparently
gives directions for two separate acts, the erection of an altar and the
inscription of D ' on stones ; Joshua seems to combine the two into
the erection of an altar on which D * is inscribed. Joshua viii. 30-35
may be by a later writer who misunderstood Deuteronomy ; both may
be by the author of Deuteronomy xxvii., who may have intended the
passage as to the inscription as an interpretation of that about the
altar, which he took from an older source, and shaped our present
passage accordingly.
ix. i-x. 27, JE; except ix. if, 90, 10, 24/, 27^/?, x. 8,
19^, 25 = RD; ix. 15c, 17-21, 23^, 270ft x. 27£/?* = Rpor P,
League with the Gibeonites, Battle of Bethhoron, Sun and
Moon stand still.
The Book of Jashar, cited in x. 12 f., is mentioned in 2 Samuel i. 18 as
containing David's Lamentation over Saul and Jonathan, and in the
original text" of I Kings viii. 12 as containing the short poem uttered
by Solomon. It must have been a collection of poems compiled during
the monarchy. "Jashar" means upright ; it may be used, like Jeshurun,
for Israel; or it may be a collective term for heroes. In the original
poem the words about the sun and moon were figurative, like "the
stars in their courses fought against Sisera" in the Song of Deborah,
Judges v. 20.
x. 28-xii., RD; except xi. 1, 4/, 7/* = JE, Summary of
1 Sar, E.V. " Captain."
' As indicated by the LXX. (verse 53).

JOSHUA 81
Joshua's campaign in the South, Defeat of Jabin, King of
Hazor, Defeat of the Anakim, Brief account of the Districts
Conquered, List of Conquered Kings.
In x. 28-39, 43 RD probably had a JE basis. The passage is sometimes
described as JE, with additions by Rn
XIII.-XXL, Division of the Land.
P 's account of the territories of the tribes has been compiled from con
flicting sources, one of which may have been JE, and has suffered from
textual corruption. The lists of names are often confused and inconsistent,
Many of the J passages in these chapters occur in Judges i.
xiii., P; except 1 = JE, 13 = J, 2-12 = RD, Territories of the
Eastern Tribes.
xiv., 1-5, P, Introduction to account of the Territories of
the Western Tribes.
xiv. 6-15 RD, Hebron given to Caleb.
Sometimes ascribed to JE. The discrepancy with xi. 21 probably
indicates, at any rate, a JE basis.
xv., P ; except 14-19, 63 = J, Territory of Judah.
xvi. f., P; except xvi. iff., 9, xvii. ib, 2*, 8, 9* = JE;
xvi. 10, xvii. 1 1-18 = J, Territories of Ephraim and Western
Manasseh. xviii. 1-10, JE; except i = P; 3,* 7 = RD, Introduction to
the account of the Territories of the Remaining Seven
Tribes. xviii. 11-28, P; except nb = JE, Territory of Benjamin.
xix. -xxi., P; except xxi. 4iff. = ~&?; xix. 9-JE; xix.
47 = J ; xix. 49 f = E, Territories of Simeon, Zebulun,
Issachar, Asher, Naphtali, Dan and Joshua ; Cities of Refuge ;
Levitical Cities.
In xx. vv. 4 ff . and 6b, which are omitted by the LXX., are a very
late addition to the text, modelled on Deuteronomic passages after the
manner of similar sections of Chronicles.
xxii., Rp*; except 1-8 = RD, Return of Reuben, Gad and
Eastern Manasseh to the East of Jordan, Erection of an
Altar in Gilead by Reuben and Gad.
Verses 9-30, in their present form, were compiled by a late priestly
writer, like Judges xxi. Cf. on Numbers xxxii. There was an older
basis, probably JE, for this section ; but the compiler has dealt with it so
freely that the original narrative cannot be reconstructed. " Half Man
asseh " here, as in Numbers xxxii., is an editorial addition.

82 BIBLICAL INTRODUCTION
xxiii., RD, Farewell Speech of Joshua.
xxiv., E; except nb, 13, 31, and a few phrases = RD ; 260,
33 = Rp, Farewell Speech of Joshua.
Verse 33 is generally given to E, cf. on Deuteronomy x. 6.
(e) Use in N.T. — There are references to the history,
especially Rahab and the Fall of Jericho. Cf. also i. 5, with
Hebrews xiii. 5.
29. Judges.
(a) Title. — Hebrew shophetim; rendered by LXX. Kritai;
by Vulg. Liber Judicum or Judicum ; by EV. Judges. This
title was given because the narratives are chiefly concerned
with the "Judges" or rulers in Israel, before the kings.
(b) Analysis. — The framework of the book is due to
Deuteronomic editors, so that it once existed in a Deut
eronomic edition, to which priestly writers made further
additions. The Deuteronomic work made use of earlier
material, which is often supposed to have been a section of
JE, compiled from J and E.1 In order to recognise the
doubt which still remains as to the identification of this
matter with JE, it is denoted in the sketch of contents by
(JE). On the understanding that the identification of the sources
and early edition of Judges with J, E, and JE is probable
rather than certain, the history of the composition of the
book may be summarised as follows2 : —
During the monarchy, c. 850-700, two independent writers
(J) and (E), made collections of the narratives concerning the
Judges. Both contained accounts of Ehud, Gideon and
Abimelech, Jephthah, the Migration of the Danites, and the
Outrage at Gibeah. One narrative (? J) contained also a
narrative of the war with the Jabin, and the story of Samson ;
the other narrative (? E) contained also the stories of De
borah and Barak, and of Samuel. These were combined into
a pre-Deuteronomic Book of Judges (JE), about 650. (JE)
1 Budde, Moore. 2 Substantially as Budde.

JUDGES 83
may have included the accounts of the "Minor Judges,"
Tola, Jair, Ibzan, Elon, Abdon, from (J) or (E) or else
where. During the Exile (JE) was edited by a Deuteronomic1
editor, RD, who added a system of chronology, and the story
of Othniel, and interpreted the book so as to illustrate the
Deuteronomic doctrine of the connection between national
righteousness and national prosperity. He omitted J's history
of the Conquest, i. i-ii. 5, the story of Abimelech, ix., the
Death of Samson, xvi., the Migration of the Danites, and the
Outrage at Gibeah, xvii.-xxi., as unsuitable to his purpose.
RD's Judges may have extended to 1 Samuel xii. ; but on the
other hand, both JE and JED may have been continuous
works from the Creation to the end of their narrative. If so,
we can scarcely speak of pre-Deuteronomic and Deuteronomic
Books of Judges, they were merely yet unseparated portions
of the continuous works.
(JE) continued to exist after the compilation of the Deuter
onomic Judges, and a post-exilic2 editor, Rp, restored the
portions omitted by RD, editing them after his own fashion.
The ground for supposing that these sections were omitted
by RD is that they bear no traces of Deuteronomic style, and
do not fit into the Deuteronomic framework. The accounts
of the Minor Judges may have been added by Rp.
(c) Chronology and History. — The preponderance in the
dates of Judges, and of the history of Moses and Samuel of
the number "forty" and its multiples and fractions, shows
that the system of chronology has been constructed on the
basis of reckoning forty years to a generation. Probably this
chronology is due to the author who states that 480 years
elapsed between the Exodus and the building of Solomon's
Temple; the period was made up of twelve generations of
forty years each. We have thus to consider the chronology of
Judges in connection with that of the whole period of 480
years. The data may be arranged as follows : —

1 Not necessarily the same as RD in the Hexateuch and elsewhere.
2 Not the Rp of the Pentateuch.

84

BIBLICAL INTRODUCTION

(i) Periods outside the Book of Judges.

Moses .

• 4°

Joshua.

X

* *

*

Eli .

. 40 (Heb.) 20 (LXX.)

Samuel

• y

Saul .
z
David .
• 40
Solomon ]
• 4
124 +
ic-f-y + z
01
• 104 + :
< + y + z
(ii) The Greater Judges.
Othniel
. 40
Ehud
. 80
Barak
. 40
Gideon
. 40
Jephthah .
. 62
Samson
. 20
226s
(iii) The Periods of Oppression
Cu shan-rishathai m
. 8
Eglon
. 18
Jabin
. 20
Midianites .
• 7
Ammonites.
. 18
7*
The 40 years oppression of the Philistines, xiii. I, is clearly synchronous
with the 20 years of Samson + the 20 years (LXX. ) of Eli, and is there
fore not to be reckoned.
(iv) Minor Judges.
Tola
• 23
Jair
22
Ibzan
• 7
Elon
10
Abdon
. 8
70
If Abimelech's 3 years be added we get 73 years.
1 Before Building of Temple.
8 LXX., Vat., etc., 60.
3 Or without Jephthah, 220.
JUDGES 85
The sum of i.-iv. is 534 + x + y + z if the Philistine
oppression and the reigns of Abimelech and Saul are in
cluded, and if forty years (Hebrew Text) are given to Eli.
But the Philistine oppression should be omitted ; 1 Abimelech
and Saul were probably left out of the reckoning as illegiti
mate, and the synchronism of the Philistine oppression with
Samuel and Eli requires us to accept the LXX. number
20 for Eli. Thus the whole period from the Exodus to
the Temple works out at 471+x + y. As x4-y, the head
ships of Joshua and Samuel must have occupied much
more than nine years, this result is strikingly at variance
with the 480 years of Kings. The easiest solution is to allow
Joshua and Samuel the usual 40 years each, and to suppose
that RD omitted (iii.) from his reckoning on the assumption
that the judgeships were continuous. Thus we get
47i+x + y-7i=47i + 4o + 4o-7i = 480,
and the RD chronology of Judges agrees with the RD period in
Kings. Either then we may omit the Minor Judges as outside of
the original scheme of chronology, and added by Rp to supply
Judges for the interregna of the oppressions,2 on the theory
that as soon as one judge died, he was always immediately
succeeded by another. Or we may omit the oppressions,
and suppose that each oppression was reckoned to the reign
of the following judge. On the former theory, the twelve
generations are Moses, Joshua, Othniel, Ehud, Barak, Gideon,
Jephthah, Samson, Eli, Samuel, David, Solomon.
The date of the building of the Temple is about 1040,
which, according to RD, gives us 1520 for the Exodus,
apparently much too early; cf. § 28 (b).
(d) Greek Versions. — There are two separate3 versions,
one represented by most of the uncials, the other by various
cursives, etc., and by Lucian's recension.
1 See above.
2 The discrepancy of a year will be due to some error in the transmission
of the text.
3 Apart from Aquila, Symmachus, and Theodotion.

86 BIBLICAL INTRODUCTION
(e) Contents. — i. i-ii. 5, J; except iaa. 4, 8/, 18, ii. 1-5
= Rp, Conquest of Canaan.
Not a sequel to the Book of Joshua, but a. parallel account, much
of which has already been given in that book. Verses 11-15, 21, 1
27 f, 29, 34= Joshua xv. 14-19, 63, xvii. II ff., xvi. 10, xix. 47
(LXX.). Either J gave no account of Joshua or of the combined
action of all Israel, and only narrated the conquests of single tribes
or of groups of tribes ; or J narrated the doings of Joshua and united
Israel up to the battle of Beth-horon, and then, as here, the conquests
of single tribes, etc. Possibly the editor who prefixed ' ' After the death
of Joshua " has removed Joshua's name from the paragraph on Ephraim
and Manasseh.
This is one of the sections supposed to have been included in (JE),
removed by RD and replaced by Rp-
II. 6-XV. Deuteronomic Book of Judges.
ii. 6— iii. 6, RD on a basis of E, with additions by Rp. In
troduction, explaining that the Israelites suffered defeat and
oppression because they worshipped "other gods," but were
delivered by judges because Jehovah had compassion on their
misery. iii. 7-11, RD, Othniel delivers from Cushan-rishathaim.
iii. 12-30 (JE); except 12-150, 3° = RD> Ehud delivers from
Eglon. iii. 31, Rp, Shamgar ben-Anath kills 600 Philistines.
The absence of RD formulae shows that this was not in RD's Judges,
Shamgar is ignored in iv. 1. The name was obtained from v. 6, the Song
of Deborah, and was perhaps inserted to make up twelve judges, after
excluding Abimelech.
iv. f. (JE) ; including an ancient poem, the Song of Deborah,
v. 2-310, and additions of RD, viz., iv. iff., 23/, v. 31b;
and Rp, viz., v. 1, Deborah and Barak deliver from Jabin and
Sisera. The Song is almost universally accepted as a contemporary poem,
possibly by Deborah herself. The absence of any traces of Deuteronomic
revision, and the presence of some words and idioms apparently character
istic of post-exilic Hebrew, suggest that this poem was not included either
in (JE) or the Deuteronomic Judges, but was preserved either inde
pendently or in some collection of poems, and was inserted here by
Rp after a revision necessitated by the fact that many words and idioms
had become obsolete. Owing to the joint effect of the extreme antiquity
of the poem and of the attempt at revision, parts of it are unintelligible,
e.g., 14a. This Song is often considered to be the oldest extant piece of
Hebrew literature. 1 Rp has substituted Benjamites for Judahites.

RUTH 87
vi. ff. (JE); except vi. 1-7, viii. 27b, 28, 33# = RD, and
editorial additions by Rp, Gideon delivers from the Midianites.
Two stories are combined : in one (J ?), Gideon is instructed by the
Angel of Jehovah, the princes of Midian are Zebah and Zalmunna,
and Gideon sets up an ephod-idol at Ophrah ; in the other (E ?),
Jehovah speaks to him in the night, i.e., in a dream, he destroys the
altar of Baal and the Asherah, and the princes of Midian are Oreb
and Zeeb.
ix. (JE) ; omitted by RD, restored by Rp, Abimelech.
x. 1-5, Either (JE), omitted by RD, restored by Rp; or first
added by RF, Two " Minor Judges," Tola and Jair.
x. 6-xii. 7 (JE); except x. 6-16,* xii. 1=RD, Jephthah
delivers from the Ammonites.
The account of Jephthah's negotiations with the king of the Ammonites,
xi. 12-28, does not belong to (J) or (E), but to one of the editors, perhaps
R'E. xii. 8-15, Same source as x. 1-5, Three "Minor Judges,"
Ibzan, Elon, and Abdon.
xiii. ff. (J) ; except xiii. 1, xv. 20 = RD, and editorial addi
tions of Rp, Samson and the Philistines.
xvi.-xxi., Sections of (JE), Omitted by Rd, Restored
and Edited by Rp.
xvi. (J), Samson and Delilah, His Captivity and Death.
xvii. f. (JE), Micah's Idols, Migration of the Danites.
xix. (JE), Outrage at Gibeah.
xx. f, Rp on basis of JE, War of the other Tribes against
Benjamin to punish the Outrage. Wives provided for the
surviving Benjamites.
These chapters are compiled from the older story in the same fashion as
Joshua xxii., perhaps by the same hand.
(f) Use in N. T. — There are three or four references to the
history. 30. Ruth.
(a) Authorship, Date, and Object. — The author's name is
entirely unknown. The indications of time are conflicting.
The post-exilic origin of the genealogy, iv. 8-22, is shown by
its use of some of the formulae of the Priestly Code; but, as

88 BIBLICAL INTRODUCTION
these verses are a later addition,1 this does not show that the
rest of the book — to which we may now confine ourselves — is
post-exilic. The language has points of contact with the pre-exilic
literature,2 but also with post-exilic books ; moreover, there
are Aramaisms.
The customs connected with the marriage of a Goel3 with
his kinsman's widow are spoken of as obsolete4; and differ
from those prescribed in Deuteronomy xxv. 5-10.
The mention of David in iv. 1 7, shows that it is not earlier
than his reign.
The book is not included in the historical books, or first
section of the " Prophets " in the Hebrew Canon, but is
placed amongst the " Hagiographa," as one of a group of Five
Megilloth or Rolls.
Upon these facts the following conflicting views have been
based : —
(i.) The book was written before the Exile out of interest in
the family history of David, and perhaps also to inculcate
marriage with a kinsman's widow.5 The Aramaisms are due
to use of dialect, except in iv. 7, which is a gloss. This view
removes the statement that the custom was obsolete. The
differences from Deuteronomy6 show that the latter was not in
existence, and that therefore our book is earlier than B.C. 621.
As LXX. places Ruth after Judges, it is suggested — not very
plausibly — that Ruth was originally an appendix to Judges,
and was afterwards removed into the Hagiographa.
(ii.) The book is a post-exilic work based on a pre-exilic
narrative.7 This view would explain the mixture of styles.
(iii.) The book is a post-exilic work, written as a protest
1 Bertholet, Driver, etc., etc.
1 The early portions of Samuel, Kings, etc.
3 R.V., "near kinsman."
1 " This was the custom in former time in Israel," iv, 7.
8 Driver.
6 Cf. also Deuteronomy xxiii. 3.
7 Konig.

SAMUEL 89
against the prohibition of mixed marriages by Ezra and Nehe
miah.1 The classical vocabulary and idioms are due to the
author's familiarity with Samuel, Kings, etc., whose style and
spirit he imitated; but the Aramaisms, etc., betray the post-
exilic origin. The custom of marriage with a near kinsman
was obsolete ; and the writer, who was not in sympathy with
Deuteronomy, describes it according to popular recollection,
and not in terms of the law in Deuteronomy. The position
in the Hagiographa points to a post-exilic origin.
In any case there is, doubtless, a historical basis2; some
connection of David with Moab seems indicated by his com
mitting his father and mother to the protection of the king of
Moab.3 Whenever the book was written, the author would
not have invented a Moabite ancestress for David, he must
have had the authority of an accepted tradition. David's
genealogy is used in those of Christ.
31. Samuel.
(a) Title and Divisions. — Hebrew and R.V., Samuel; LXX.,
i. and ii. Kings ; Vulg. and A. V. combine the two titles ; all
with reference to the contents. Our two books originally
formed a single book, and are so treated in the closing
Masoretic note, and were so regarded by the Jews in the time
of Origen. The division is first found in the LXX., from
which it passed into the Vulg. and other versions, and into
the printed editions of the Hebrew Text.4
(b) Analysis and Composition. — Here, again, there are post-
exilic and Deuteronomic sections, added to older material
from various sources. Hence there were pre-exilic, exilic,
and post-exilic editions of the book. The Deuteronomic
1 Bertholet; Cheyne, Origin of Psalter, p. 306; Cornill;
Kautzsch, Bibel; Kayser- Marti, p. 208; Smend, A. T. Theol.,
p. 409, etc., etc.
2 Bertholet, Konig, Budde (ap. Cornill), see in Ruth a section of
the Midrash used by the Chronicler.
8 1 Samuel xxii. 3 f.
4 Cornill, Kirkpatrick, Ginsburg, 43, 953.

90 BIBLICAL INTRODUCTION
material apparently comes from the same school as the
similar sections in the rest of Genesis-Kings, and may be
denoted by RD- The older material is often 1 referred to JE.
The RD and post-exilic additions do not form a continuous
editing, but are sections added to an older work, which was
left substantially unaltered ; the RD material is comparatively
small. Thus Samuel is substantially pre-Deuteronomic, and
its general character has not been seriously affected by the
work of the later editors. The older material (JE)2 falls
into two or more sources.
Kittel3 analyses the older material into five sources, E ; Je.,
a history of David, composed in Judah, in the time of
Solomon or Rehoboam; Da., a later history of David, com
posed in Judah, in the tenth or ninth century; S, a Judahite or
Benjamite history of Saul, perhaps by the author of Je. ; SS,
an Ephraimite history of Samuel and Saul, compiled from
various sources about the time of Hosea. E and SS Corres
pond roughly to the various strata of E in Budde, and Je.,
Da., and S to the various strata of J. Budde's J ' in Samuel
seems plainly either written by, or from the testimony of, con
temporaries of Saul and David, i.e., not much later than the
death of Solomon, c. 930, while he dates J1 "prior to 800."
Either J1 must be dated about a century earlier than usual,
or that document absorbed earlier documents.
The slight character of the RD and post-exilic revisions may
be explained in one or both of two ways. Either the older
book was so well known and established that RD did not ven
ture to make much alteration ; or the theories of the history
held by RD and the priestly editors respectively, did not seem
to them to require any extensive editing of the book.
Probably 1 Samuel i.-xii. formed part of the (JE) and
1 Budde.
1 Brackets are used, as in Judges, to indicate that the identification of
the sources with J, E, and JE is doubtful.
3 In Kautzsch, Bibel ; H. P. Smith, International Com., gives a
similar analysis, referring most of Samuel to two main sources, apart from
Deuteronomic and Priestly additions.

SAMUEL 91
RD Books of Judges. Samuel's Farewell Speech, xii., was
probably E's conclusion of the history of Samuel, corres
ponding to the Farewell Speech, Joshua xxiv., with which E
concludes the history of Joshua. The chronological state
ments in I. iv. 1 8, and perhaps also in vii. 2, belong to the
RD system of dates. In the sketch of contents, both Budde's1
and Kittel's analyses are given ; omitting, however, many details
of the analysis.
(c) Contents. — First Samuel.
I-XIL, Samuel, Eli, and Saul.
i. (E2), SS, Samuel born and given to Jehovah.
The ordinary Hexateuch symbols J, E, etc., give Budde's analysis ;
SS, etc. — for the meaning of which see above — give Kittel's ; where only
one symbol, etc. , is given, Budde and Kittel agree.
ii. 1-10, Song of Hannah.
According to Budde, post-exilic addition, so also Cheyne, Psalter,
p. 57, " probably " ; Kittel, addition from unknown source ; Cornill and
Driver, under the monarchy. The Song is not appropriate to the occasion,
which is only touched upon in passing and in most general terms in $b.
Verse 10 implies either the present or past existence of the kingdom. In
style and spirit the Song has much in common with psalms often regarded
as post-exilic. It is a national lyric, celebrating some national deliver
ance. ii. 1 1— iii. (E2), SS; except that ii. 27-36 in both, and iii.
11-14 in Budde = RD, Samuel announces the Doom of Eli's
Family, on account of the Wickedness of his Sons.
iv.-vii. 1 (E1), E; except iv. i&bfi, 22, vi. 15, 17, i80 = R,
Ark lost at Ebenezer, its Wanderings amongst the Philistines,
its Restoration to Israel.
vii. 2-viii. (E2) ; except the " 20 years" of vii. 2 = RD ; Kittel,
vii. 2-17 = RD* viii. =SS, Repentance of Israel, Victory over
the Philistines at Ebenezer, Request for a King.
ix.-x. 16 (J), S, Samuel anoints Saul.
x. 17-27 (E2), SS; except 25-27 = RJE (Budde), R (Kittel),
Saul chosen by lot.
xi. (J); except 12 f.=R?E; S, except 12-15 = R, Saul's
Victory over the Ammonites.
1 In Dr. Hauft's Sacred Books of the Old Testament.

92 BIBLICAL INTRODUCTION
xii. (E2), with small additions by RD ; Kittel, RD, Samuel's
Farewell Speech.
XIII.-XXL, David, Saul, Samuel.
xiii. f. (J), S; except xiii. i, R; 8-15 (J2), R; 19-22 (J2),
R; xiv. 47-51, RD; also 52 is R in Kittel, Victories of Saul
and Jonathan over the Philistines, etc.
Either we have, in xiv. 47-51, as above, a conclusion of the history of
Saul by RD , who regarded his legitimate reign as concluded at this point ;
in the next chapters he is deposed by Samuel, and David is anointed king.
Or, this is the conclusion of the history as given in one of the ancient
sources, and is placed here by RD.
xv. (E1); except 24-31, 34 f = (E3), SS, Saul rejected for
sparing the Amalekite King.
xvi. 1- 1 3, Post-exilic Editor, Samuel anoints David.
xvi. 14-23 (J), Da., David as Saul's Harper and Armour-
bearer. xvii.-xviii. 5 (E1); except xvii. 12, 13, post-exilic, xviii. 5 = J;
SS, except 12a, 15 = R, David and Goliath.
LXX. B, etc., omit xvii. 12-31, 38b, 41, 48b, 50, 55-xviii. 5, probably
to avoid the contradictions arising from the attempt to treat this and
the preceding passage as parts of one continuous narrative. The alterna
tive advocated by Robertson Smith, Old Testament, etc., p. 121 ff. and
Cornill, p. 101, H. P. Smith, etc., that these passages are additions to
the text, introduced from some lost history of David, seems less likely.
xviii. 6-30 (J); except 6a 0,*, b ft, 12-19 = (E'); Da., except
60a* = R, 12-19, 28-30 = SS, Saul's Jealousy, David Saul's
Son-in-law. LXX. B, etc., omit 17-19, 29b, 30 and smaller fragments ; cf. above.
xix. (E1); except 180/3-24, post-exilic; SS, except 3, 18-
24 = R, Temporary Reconciliation, New attempts on David's
Life by Saul, David flees to Samuel.
xx.-xxi. 1 (J); except 4-17, 40-42 =R,E; Da., except 4-10,
12-17 =?, 40-42 = R, David's Covenant with Jonathan.
xxi. 2-10 (E1), SS, David at Nob.
xxi. 11-16, Budde, post-exilic ; Kittel=?, David at Gath.
xxii.-xxv. (J); except xxii. 19, xxiii. i4b-i8 = (E'), xxii. 5,
post-exilic, xxiv. 21-2300, xxv. 1 = RJE; Da., except xxii. = SS,
xxiii. 6, 14-18, xxv. 1 = R, David at Adullam, Massacre of

SAMUEL 93
the Priests at Nob, David at Keilah and Ziph, spares Saul
at Engedi, Nabal.
xxvi. (E1), SS, David spares Saul in the Wilderness of
Ziph. xxvii. -xxxi. (J); except xxviii. 3 = RD, xxviii. i6^ = R,a;
Da., except xxviii. 3, 17/ = R, David tributary to Achish,
Philistine Campaign against Saul, Saul and the Witch of
Endor, David's Feud with the Amalekites, Defeat and Death
of Saul.
xxviii. 3-25 should come after xxx.
Second Samuel.
I. -VIII., David's Reign.
i.-iv. (J); except i. 6-1 1, 13-16 = (E'), ii. 100, n=RD; Da.,
except!. 6-i6 = SS, /. 5, ii. 100, n, iii. 30, iv. 4 = R, ii. 13-16,
iii. 2-5 = ?, Lament over Saul and Jonathan, David reigns at
Hebron, Ishbaal at Mahanaim, Civil War between them, Abner
and Ishbaal murdered.
The Lament is generally ascribed to David. On the Book of Jashar
see §(28^), Ishbosheth is a corruption of the more accurate Ishbaal, E.V.
Eshbaal, preserved in 1 Chronicles viii. 33, ix. 39 ; cf. Mephibosheth, ix.
v. (J); except 4/. = RD; Da., except 3, 6-16 = Je., 4f. = R,
David King over All Israel, Capture of Jerusalem, Alliance
with Hiram, Victories over the Philistines.
According to Budde, numerous passages in i.— viii., xxi. -xxiv. have
been transposed from their original position.
vi. (J), Je., Ark brought to Zion.
vii. (E2) ; RD on basis of Je., David forbidden to build the
Temple, but promised a Permanent Dynasty.
viii. (J) ; except 1-7 = RD ; 1 if, = Rp ; Kittel, R (?), David's
Victories over Moab, Syria, and Edom.
Verses 14D-18 are evidently the conclusion of a history of David's
reign. Cornill suggests that they were composed to replace ix.-xx. by
an editor who considered the latter chapters damaging to David's reputa
tion. It may, however, be the conclusion of one of the older narratives of
the reign of David.
IX.-XX., David's Court and Family History.
Budde (J); except xii. 7/, io^ = RD, xiv. 25 ff., xv. 24,*
"Levites" and "Covenant," xx. 23-26, post-exilic glosses.

94 BIBLICAL INTRODUCTION
Kittel, Je. ; except xii. iof/\, xv. 24* "Levites" and
" Covenant" = R or glosses.
ix., Meribbaal and Ziba.
Mephibosheth is a correction for the more accurate Meribbaal, preserved
in 1 Chronicles viii. 34, ix. 40 ; cf. on Ishbaal, i.-iv.
x. ff, War with Ammon and Syria ; Uriah, Bathsheba.
xiii.-xix., Absalom, Tamar and Amnon, Exile and Return,
Revolt, Defeat and Death, David's Return, Meribbaal and
Ziba. xx., Sheba's Revolt.
In xx. 23-26 we have the formal close to this account of David's
reign.
XXI.-XXIV, Appendices.
xxi. 1-14 (J); except in 2/ the words between " said unto
them" and "what shall T do" = R,s; Kittel =1, R in 2/ as
above. To avert the famine caused by Saul's attempt to
massacre the Gibeonites, seven of Saul's descendants are
handed over to the Gibeonites, who hang them.
This incident, no doubt, took place at the beginning of David's reign.
Budde transposes the section, and places it before the first Meribbaal
narrative, viii., to which it would form a suitable introduction.
xxi. 15-22 (J), Da., Feats of David's Heroes against the
Philistines, Elhanan kills Goliath of Gath.
Budde places this section after v. 25. It is in apparent contradiction
with the narrative of David and Goliath (E1), SS. The text of verse 19 is
corrupt, but the reading of 1 Chronicles xx. 5, " the brother of Goliath,"
seems an obvious correction.1 Kittel, Budde, etc. read "Elhanan ben-Jair
the Bethlemite."
xxii., Budde, late post-exilic addition; Kittel^, i = R;
Psalm xviii.
Probably, like most of the poems in the historical books, inserted from
a collection of poems ; in this case, either from the Psalter, or from
one of the earlier collections which were incorporated in the Psalter.
The heading is the same as in the Psalter. The differences between
this chapter and the Psalm are textual, not editorial, and are similar
in character and extent to those found between the texts of a chapter
of the Greek text, in two MSS., belonging to quite different groups. The
section xxii. i-xxiii. 7 interrupts the connection.
1 Imitated here by A.V., one of the places where the anxiety of A.V.
to harmonise inconsistent passages overcomes its usual deference to the
Masoretic Text.

KINGS 95
xxiii. 1-7, Budde, late post-exilic addition; Kittel =1, the
heading by R, Last Words of David.
A poem describing the character and blessedness of an ideal king, and
the hateful character and certain doom of the wicked. Budde's and Kittel's
view is that of Cornill, p. 108. Cheyne, Psalter, 205 f., assigns it to the
Exile. xxiii. 8-39 (J), Da., David's Heroes and their Feats.
Placed by Budde with xxi. 1 5-22, of which it is the continuation, after
v. 25. xxiv. (J); Kittel = ?, Census punished by Plague, which is
stayed by sacrifice on the site of the future Temple.
Closely connected with xxi. 1-14, and placed by Budde between viii.
and xxi. I. In i. Kings, chaps. 1 f. are practically the conclusion of the
Book of Samuel ; cf. thereon in Kings.
(e) Use in N. T. — There are a few references to the history ;
among them, our Lord's appeal (Matthew xii. 3 ff.) to
Abimelech's gift of the shewbread to David, I. xxi., as a
justification of the disciples plucking corn on the Sabbath.
The promise to David's dynasty, II. vii. 14, "I will be to
him a father, and he shall be to me a son," is applied to
Christ (Hebrews i. 5.)
32. Kings.
(a) Title and Divisions. — Hebrew and R.V., i. and ii.
Kings ; LXX., iii. and iv. Kings ; Vulg. and A.V. combine
both forms of the titles. Originally a single book ; the
division was made by the LXX., from which it found its way
into the other versions and the printed editions of the
Hebrew.1 (b) Analysis and Composition. — Up to a certain point Kings
presents the same phenomena as the previous books. There
are obvious traces of pre-Deuteronomic sources, of Deuter
onomic material, and of later post-exilic additions ; and it is
clear that an edition of Kings was included in the great
Deuteronomic history or series of histories, Genesis-Kings,2
compiled during or soon after the Exile.
On the other hand, Kings differs in important respects from
1 Ginsburg, pp. 45, 953. a Ruth, as always, excepted.

96 BIBLICAL INTRODUCTION
the preceding books, (i.) The Deuteronomic material is much
more extensive than in Samuel, (ii.) Whereas in Judges and
Samuel, the work of RD was confined in each case to re-
editing a pre-Deuteronomic book, possibly a section of JE ; in
Kings, RD had no such earlier edition to work upon, but him
self compiled the book from various sources, (iii.) J and E,
if present in Kings at all,1 supply only a small portion of the
material ; and the main source or sources are a work or works
constantly cited as "The Book of the Acts of Solomon,"
"The Book of the Chronicles2 of the Kings of Judah," and
" The Book of the Chronicles of the Kings of Israel."
Our book is clearly later than the release of Jehoiachin,
561 3; but probably not much later, for this section is the
conclusion of the author's work, there is nothing extant which
can be a sequel by the same hand; the insertion of this
section shows the author's anxiety to bring his work up to
date, and seems to be the last important event known to him
when he wrote. On these and other grounds, the extant
edition of Kings may be assigned to the second half of the
Exile,4 or to a date soon after the Exile.
But the work of the exilic or post-exilic Deuteronomist to
whom we owe Kings, was merely that of an editor, who
brought an earlier RD book up to date, and co-ordinated it
with the Deuteronomic editions of Genesis-Kings. Apart
from xxiii. 26 — xxv. 30, which were added by the later
Deuteronomist, the rest of the book, in substance, was the
work of an earlier Deuteronomist, writing soon after 621,
possibly towards the close of Josiah's reign, or in that of
Jehoiachin. This earlier RD, the real author of Kings, writes
from the standpoint of the Jewish monarchy, as still existing,
and existing alone; e.g., II. xvii. 18, 21-23.6 So, too, the
phrase " unto this day " is used in RD passages, in a way that
1 See on I. i. f. , II. xx. ff.
2 Of course, not our " Chronicles."
3 II. xxv. 27-30.
4 Apart from insertions by post-exilic editors, see on I. 13, etc., which
did not substantially alter the book.
5 Verses 19 f. , which interrupt the connection, are a later insertion.

KINGS 97
shows that " this day '' was a time when the Jewish monarchy
still existed.1
Amongst other material, the Deuteronomic authors furnished
the introductory and closing formulae to the various reigns,
including the judgment on the character of the kings ; and also
a series of references to the sinful toleration of the high places,
obviously written from the standpoint of Deuteronomy. The
scheme of chronology and the synchronisms between the
reigns of Jewish and Israelite kings are commonly ascribed
to the later RD, because they are sometimes at variance with
the history, as given in the body of the book,2 i.e., as com
piled by the earlier RD. The RD authors will have found
their data — the lengths of the reigns — in the older sources.
The main sources used by RD were the " Books " referred to
above. Those dealing with Solomon and the kings of Judah,
or even all three " Books," may be sections of one work.
These books are not supposed to have been the official annals
of the two kingdoms, but compilations from those annals.
The material apparently derived from, the "Books" had
neither the dry matter-of-fact character nor the cautious
reserve of official archives ; and shows a special interest in
ritual and the Temple.3 If the "Book" on Judah was used
for the reign of Hezekiah, and possibly even for that of
Jehoiachin,4 it must have been compiled in Hezekiah's, or
even in Jehoiachin's reign. The latter seems impossible, it is
too near to the latest possible date for the pre-exilic RD, and is
also excluded by the absence of traces of Deuteronomic in
fluence from the material supposed to be derived from the
" Books.'' Hezekiah's reign would not be an improbable date
for the " Book of the Chronicles of the Kings of Judah," and
if the other two " Books " are not sections or variant titles for
parts of the same work, they may be earlier; but as they
1 II. viii. 22, xvi. 6.
8 Cornill, p. 116, Wellhausen, Composition of the Hexateuch,
p. 3°o-
3 Unless the sections dealing with the latter are from another source.
4 So Kamphausen in Kautzsch, Bibel.
H

98 BIBLICAL INTRODUCTION
seem to have been very similar in character, not much earlier.
Early documents, J or an early history of David, E, ninth
century prophetic narratives of Northern Israel are also dis
tinguished, and apparently were not parts of the " Books."
If the "Book of the Chronicles of the Kings of Judah" is referred to
the reign of Hezekiah, II. xxiv. 5, which cites it for Jehoiakim, is
either a mistaken imitation by the later RD of the formula of the
earlier RD, or the "Book" itself was supplemented and used by the
exilic RD. One is tempted to suggest that the "Acts" and the two
"Books" were a Deuteronomic work or works used by the later RD.
Strictly speaking, our book does not state that the "Acts" and
"Books" are the authorities for its statements, but refers the reader
to them for further information ; but, doubtless, as is generally taken
for granted, the work or works in question were one of the chief
sources used by the author of Kings. The sections of Kings derived
from the "Books" are sometimes spoken of as the "Epitome," and,
of course, owe their present form to the selection and arrangement made
by the pre-exilic RD-
(c) Chronology. — The duration of the reigns of the kings
of Israel and Judah furnishes two sets of data for the
chronology, and the synchronisms bring the two into
relation with each other. The two sets of data, however,
are primd facie inconsistent, e.g., the period from the
accession of Athaliah and Jehu to the fall of Samaria
is 165 years according to the Judahite reigns, but 143
years 7 months according to the Israelite reigns. While,
according to the Assyrian dates, the interval must have
been less than 132 years. By a free use of co-regencies
between father and son, and of other uncertain elements
in the data — such as whether the year of a king's death
counts both to him and his successors — these, or any, dis
crepancies may be harmonised. But it is scarcely worth
while to take the trouble, for Kings affords further evidence
of what has already appeared in Judges, namely, that the
Deuteronomic chronology is partly controlled by 0 priori
theories. I. vi. 1 states that 480 years elapsed from the
Exodus to the building of the Temple ; the Judahite reigns,
etc. give 480 years from the building of the Temple to the
Return j1 the total Israelite reigns amount to 242 years, which
1 An argument for the post-exilic date of the later Ra

KINGS 99
may reasonably be corrected to 240 years, the half of 480.
Evidently sets of twelve and six generations of forty years
each. The discrepancies when the two sets of data are closely
compared may be due to the fact that one or other of the
editors overlooked the fact that, owing to the adjustment of
the figures to his theory of six and twelve generations, his
sum would not "prove." Nevertheless for Kings, RD pro
bably had accurate data, and has not seriously departed from
them.1 (d) Contents and Archceology. First Kings.
I., II., Conclusion of the History of David, Adonijah's
Conspiracy, Solomon Anointed, Death of David, Execution of
Adonijah, Joab, and Shimei, Banishment of Abiathar.
With the exception of ii. 27, a later addition, and ii. 1-11, which has
been edited by RD, chapters i., ii. are the conclusion of the early history of
David, which Budde ascribes to J ; cf. § 31.
III.-XL, Solomon.
iii., Pharaoh's Daughter, Solomon's Choice and Judgment.
Pre-Deuteronomic; except 2/., I4_/^=RD. How far the pre-Deuter
onomic sections in iii.-xi. come from the Book of the Acts of Solomon,
xi. 41, or from "prophetical narratives," is matter of controversy.
iv. 1-14, Solomon's Ministers, Splendour, and Wisdom.
Substantially pre-Deuteronomic.
v. 15-ix. 9, The Temple — Treaty with Hiram and other
Preparations, its Building. Palaces, Pillars, Furniture, etc.
Jehovah appears again to Solomon.
Pre-Deuteronomic groundwork, to which the following are the chief
additions: RD, vi. I (later), 7, 11-13, viii. 1-9,* 14-66,* ix. 1-9; late
priestly writers, "the Most Holy Place," in vi. 16, vii. 48-50, viii. iaa,
2aa, $from " And the Tent of Meeting," 5, "the Most Holy Place" in 6.
LXX. omits "the Tent of Meeting, and all the holy vessels that were
in the Tent," in v. 6 ; its reading in 12 probably shows that the original
cited this verse from the Book of Jashar, cf. on Joshua x. 12 ; lxx. places
12 f. after 53.
ix. 10-x., Cession to Hiram, Acquisition of Gezer, Corvee,
Commerce, Queen of Sheba, Splendour and Power.
Substantially pre-Deuteronomic, from various sources.
1 Cf, " Chronology " in Hastings' Bible Dictionary, and Wellhausen,
Composition of Hexateuch, p. 300, Benzinger, Kings, xviii.-xxi.

ioo BIBLICAL INTRODUCTION
xi., Solomon's Harem, Worship of Strange Gods, Adver
saries and Death.
Deuteronomic ; except 14-28, 40, taken from one of the older sources.
XII. -XVI., Jeroboam to Ahab.
xii. 1-3 1., Division into Two Kingdoms, under Rehoboam
and Jeroboam.
Pre-Deuteronomic; except 26-29 = RD.
xii. 32— xiii., Mission of Anonymous Prophet to Jeroboam at
Bethel, the Prophet's Disobedience and Death.
Post-exilic addition, Benzinger, etc.
xiv. 1-20, Abijah pronounces the Doom of Jeroboam and
his House, Death of Jeroboam.
Deuteronomic.
xiv. 21-31, Rehoboam, Shishak.
Pre-Deuteronomic ; except the formuke. Shishak, c. 966-933, in his
inscription in the temple of Amon at Karnak states that he captured cities
both in Judah and Israel.
xv. f, Abijah, Asa, of Judah ; Nadab, Baasha, Elah, Zimri,
Omri, Ahab, of Israel.
Deuteronomic epitome from the "Book of the Chronicles"; xvi. 2-4,
perhaps composed by RD , or even later.
In the Assyrian inscriptions, Omri is mentioned as paying tribute to
Asurnazirpal in 876 ; Israel is often spoken of as the " House of Omri" ;
Ahab is mentioned in a list of Syrian kings whom Shalmaneser II. claims
to have defeated at Karkar on the Orontes in 854.
On the Moabite Stone, Mesha, King of Moab, tells how Omri oppressed
Moab, and how, under him (Mesha), Moab, by the grace of Chemosh, re
covered its independence, and captured many towns from Gad. This
narrative is the sequel to ii. Kings iii., or vice versa.
XVII. — Second Kings. XIII. — Elijah and Elisha.
In these chapters, the bulk of the narratives concerning Elijah and
Elisha are referred to ninth century prophetical documents of the Northern
Kingdom, denoted below by El. Other long and graphic accounts of the
Wars of Israel and Syria, and the overthrow of the House of Omri, are
referred to another northern document, perhaps the Hexateuchal E.1
xvii. ff., El., Elijah — Famine, Cherith, Zarephath, Victory
over Baal at Carmel, Theophany at Horeb, Calling of Elisha.
xx. (E), Ahab's Victories over Benhadad.
The account of the anonymous prophet, 13 f., 22, 28, 35-43, is re
garded by Wellhausen, Benzinger, and Kamphausen as a later addition,
according to the latter, post-exilic.
1 So Kamphausen; Benzinger, xx., xxii., 9th cent. hist, of Ahab.

KINGS 101
xxi., Et. ; except 20^-26 = RD, Naboth's Vineyard.
xxii. 1-38 (E), Ahab and Jehoshaphat at Ramoth Gilead,
Micaiah's Warning, Death of Ahab.
xxii. 39-54, Jehoshaphat of Judah, Ahaziah of Israel.
Deuteronomic epitome from the "Books of the Chronicles."
Second Kings.
i., Ahaziah's Sickness and Death, Elijah calls down Fire
from Heaven.
Verses 1, 18, belong to the Deuteronomic epitome ; 2-17 are held to be
a late post-exilic addition on an earlier basis ; Benzinger, 2-4, 1 ya =
El., 5-16 belong to time of earlier RD.
ii., El., Elijah's Ascension, Elisha succeeds him.
This chapter and the succeeding sections of El., dealing with Elisha,
probably belong to a document, different from, but allied to the document
from which the earlier sections dealing with Elijah, were taken.
iii. (E) ; except 1 ff. = RD*, War of Jehoram, Jehoshaphat,
and the King of Edom against Moab. Cf. on I. xv. f.
iv.-vi. 23, El., Elisha's Miracles — Widow's Oil, Shunamitess,
Death in the Pot, Feeding a Multitude, Naaman, Gehazi,
Floating Axe-head, Syrian Army beguiled into Samaria and
released. vi. 24-vii. (E), Benhadad besieges Samaria, Famine, De
liverance foretold by Elisha, Flight of the Besiegers.
viii. 1-15, El., Elisha commends the Shunamitess to the
king, and anoints Hazael.
viii. 16-29, Jehoram and Ahaziah of Judah.
Deuteronomic epitome.
ix. f. (E); except ix. 7-100, 14, 150, 29, x. 28-31 = RD; x.
32-36 = Deuteronomic epitome, Jehu slays Jehoram, Ahaziah,
and Jezebel, becomes king, and massacres the family of Ahab
and the worshippers of Baal, Victories of Hazael, Jehu's
reign and death.
From the Black Obelisk of Shalmaneser II., King of Assyria, now in
the British Museum, we learn that Shalmaneser defeated Hazael in 842,
and that Jehu sent tribute to the Assyrian king, which is depicted on it.
xi.-xiii. 13, Athaliah's Usurpation, Athaliah slain and Joash
of Judah crowned, Reign of Joash, Repair of the Temple,
Joash of Israel.

102 BIBLICAL INTRODUCTION
Deuteronomic compilation from "Books of the Chronicles," and per
haps other older sources, e.g., in xi. 13-180. The identity of xiii. 12 f.,
with xiv. 15 f., is due to some accident, perhaps connected with the
successive editings.
xiii. 14-21, El.; 22, 24 f.,* Pre-Deuteronomic; 23, RD,
Death of Elisha, Hazael's Victories and Death, Victories of
Joash. XIV.-XXV., Closing Period of the Monarchy.
xiv. f, Amaziah of Judah, Joash of Israel defeats Amaziah,
Jeroboam II. of Israel, Azariah (Uzziah) of Judah, Zechariah,
Shallum, Menahem of Israel ; Invasion of Pul, King of Assyria,
to whom Menahem pays tribute ; Pekahiah and Pekah of
Israel ; Tiglath-Pileser, King of Assyria, carries captive Galilee
and Gilead ; Jotham of Judah.
Deuteronomic epitome, in which xiv. 5 f. and the framework, etc. of the
formulae are added by the compiler.
Pul was the founder of a new Assyrian dynasty, who assumed the title
of Tiglath-Pileser III., 745-727. His inscriptions record campaigns in
Phoenicia, Syria and Palestine, tribute paid by Azariah of Judah, Rezin of
Damascus, Menahem of Samaria.
xvi. f, Ahaz of Judah, Ahaz attacked by Pekah and Rezin,
purchases the aid of Tiglath-Pileser, who attacks Damascus
and Israel ; Hoshea of Israel, Siege of Samaria by Shalmaneser
IV, Fall of Samaria, Captivity of Israel, Settlement of Eastern
Tribes in the territory of Israel.
Deuteronomic epitome, in which xvii. 7-41 is an epilogue to the history
of Israel by the Deuteronomic editors.
The Assyrian inscriptions record Tiglath-Pileser's subjugation of Syria
and Israel, the deportation of Israelites to Assyria, the annexation of part
of the territory of Israel, the murder of Pekah by his subjects, the appoint
ment of Hoshea by Tiglath-Pileser, to whom his nominee paid tribute,
also how Sargon II., 722-705, took Samaria, and carried the Israelites
away captive in 722.
xviii. ff, Hezekiah — Suppression of the High Places, Fall of
Samaria, Deliverance from Sennacherib, Illness and Recovery,
Embassy of Merodach Baladan.
Deuteronomic compilation from older sources, in which xviii. 4b-"], 12,
etc. axe additions of the editors. The prophecies, xix. 21-28, 32-34, are,
according to Driver, p. 187, unquestionably Isaiah's, and, if so, may have
been borrowed by the editor from an early collection of Isaiah's writings.
Cheyne and Duhm deny that they are Isaiah's ; if so, they will be late
additions to Kings. The section xviii. ij-xx. 19 has been borrowed
from here, with some abridgment by the author of Isaiah xxxvi-xxxix.

THE HISTORICAL BOOKS 103
The events in xx. 1-19, Illness, Embassy, took place before those of
xviii. f.
An inscription of Sennacherib tells how he defeated the Egyptians at
Eltekeh, laid waste Judah, carried off more than 200,000 captives and
much spoil, and received tribute from Hezekiah. Naturally, he does not
mention the catastrophe which befell his army ; but, on the other hand,
he does not claim to have taken Jerusalem. The Babylonian Chronicle
states that S. was assassinated by his son.
xxi.-xxiv. 5, Manasseh, Amon ; Josiah — Repair of Temple,
Discovery of the Law, Suppression of the High Places,
Passover, Defeat by Pharaoh Necho at Megiddo, Death.
Jehoahaz, Jehoiakim.
For the most part a free composition by the author of Kings, i.e. ,
the earlier Deuteronomic editor who had access to contemporary in
formation for this period. The "Book of the Chronicle," however,
is still cited for all these kings, except Jehoahaz, so that some use
was made of that authority, although some or all of the references are
the work of a later editor. The speech of Huldah, xxii. 15-20, is
regarded as the work of the later Deuteronomic editor, substituted for
a parallel section in the first edition of Kings ; xxiii. 26 f. is from the
same hand. If the work of the earlier Deuteronomic editor concluded
with Josiah's Reformation, xxiii. 26-xxiv. 5 must be ascribed to the later
editor. xxiv. 6-xxv., Jehoiachin, First Captivity of Judah; Zedekiah,
Fall of Jerusalem, Final Captivity of Judah ; Release of
Jehoiachin. Composed by the later Deuteronomic editor. The editor of the Book
of Jeremiah has borrowed, with slight changes, xxiv. \%-xxv. 21, xxv.
27 '-30— Jeremiah lit. I-27, 31-34. Nebuchadnezzar's numerous inscrip
tions are taken up with his buildings and offerings in Babylon, and do not
record his campaigns in Judah.
(d) Use in N. T. — There are a few references to the history,
especially to Solomon, Elijah, and Elisha.
33. Teaching of the Historical Books.
(a) History. — The crucial events and main lines of the
History of Israel — the Exodus, the Conquest, the establishment,
development, and fall of the Monarchy — are guaranteed by the
internal evidence of the narratives, and from the time of Ahab,1
by the witness of the monuments and by secular literature.
1 Before Ahab, we have direct evidence from the monuments as to
isolated events, and constructive evidence bearing on the history generally ;
but from the renewal of the Assyrian advance westward, about the time of
Ahab, we have a fairly continuous Assyrian and Chaldean history running
parallel to, and on the whole confirming the history in Kings.

104 BIBLICAL INTRODUCTION
This history obviously serves for warning and example ; its
lessons are mostly pointed out by the prophets. Also, in con
junction with the prophetical writings, our books record the
discipline by which God educated Israel, and the providential
dealings by which He prepared the way for Christ.
(b) Symbolic Narratives. — Some, however, of the narratives
are not generally accepted as literal history. Genealogies, etc.,
especially in Genesis, are often supposed to give tribal history
and state tribal relationships in terms of the individual and
the family. If this is the case, we merely lose one kind of
information and gain another. In other cases, as in the
chapters on the Creation, the Fall, the Flood, etc., the narra
tive is commonly held to be a kind of parable or allegory,
rather than actual history. Again, when we recognise that we
have parables and not history, we incur no loss of spiritual
teaching ; we change the form in which the lessons are taught,
and perhaps even add to their force and significance. Some
of the deepest and strongest religious experiences express
themselves, consciously or unconsciously, through the dramatic
picturesqueness of parable and allegory. It was so with
Christ. In many ways, neither biography nor autobiography
are so impressive or convincing as the symbolic narrative.
The latter is the more candid and faithful, and by its means
the seer can set forth the truth he has learnt from his personal
experience, without the limitations and obscurities of a personal
narrative. Much of the gospel is set forth in such parables
as the Prodigal Son, which have ever been mighty to convince
and save. How many Church histories, how many biographies
of eminent divines would we not gladly sacrifice rather than
lose the Pilgrim's Progress? The great revelations which
came to primitive Israel naturally found expression in such
narratives. They may not be literal history, but they none the
less bear true witness that, in those far off days, God spoke to
man, and man heard, and, in some measure, understood.
(c) The Selection and Transmission of the Narratives. — Our
narratives, whether historical or symbolical, are the survivors
of a much more numerous company. They are extant through

THE HISTORICAL BOOKS 105
a spiritual survival of the fittest, as the conquerors in a
spiritual struggle for existence. In the long process of re
peated editings, inspired men were guided to choose the good
and reject the evil, and the inspired Church within the nation
was guided to accept and canonise the results of their labours.
Thus it is that we have the noble and simple narratives of the
Old Testament instead of the immoral and grotesque legends
of polytheism. And where something is preserved the teach
ing of which was not accurate in the light of a fuller revela
tion, the editors have been careful to place some better
expressions of the truth in the same context. Thus our
narratives not only set forth, historically or symbolically, the
experiences of the man or generation with which they origi
nated, but also of countless subsequent generations who re
iterated and accepted them. They stand in our Bible,
because the spiritual truths they set forth have been recog
nised again and again by the hearts and consciences of men.
As our own hearts respond to them, we share a fellowship of
man with God, which began when these stories were first told,
before the beginnings of history, and has continued ever
since. (d) The Law. — In many respects the social legislation re
presents a higher ideal than any Christian state or Church has
ever seriously attempted to realise. The land laws, for in
stance, seek to provide every Israelite family with an indepen
dent means of livelihood. In other matters, many provisions
which are not according to present Christian standards, never
theless marked a distinct advance in justice and humanity.
Thus slavery is permitted, but each successive code seeks to
improve the condition of slaves. Similarly, ritual regulations,
which do not appeal to us, suitably expressed the religious
feelings of their times, and replaced others of a lower order.
Even the multiplicity and minuteness of the Priestly Code
testify to a profound conviction of the reality of the relations
between Israel and Jehovah, and to the urgent necessity that
the nation should be in right relations to its God. With
certain necessary modifications, we may apply to the laws of

106 BIBLICAL INTRODUCTION
the Priestly Code what Canon Illingworth says of ethnic ritual.
We should not speak of the Levitical regulations as " puerile,"
or even "human enough," though there is a large human
element; but if the ethnic rituals witness to the reality of
religion, the Pentateuchal legislation bears more forcible and
convincing testimony. The passage runs as follows : — " The
ritual regulations of India, Persia, Babylon, Egypt, speak for
themselves. They are obviously human enough ; minute,
excessive, often puerile. Yet there is something behind
them ; they labour to formulate something other than them
selves, a power, an order, an authority, of which man is
vaguely, but really conscious, and which he craves to have
translated into words that he can understand. We turn with
impatience from the endless pages of the religious law-books
of the world ; but their very mass is an indication of the
divine superintendence which they symbolise; an effort to
express the sense of infinite obligation, by the accumulation
of infinitesimal rules." 1
1 Personality, pp. 169 f.

CHAPTER III.
LATER HISTORICAL BOOKS
CHRONICLES TO ESTHER

1.

Titles, Divisions, and Mutual
Relations of Chron.-Ezra-
Neh.

5
6

2. 3-
4

Date and Authorship of
Chron.-Ezra-Neh.
Sources of Chron.
Contents of Chron.

7
8
9
IO

Historical Character and
Teaching of Chron.
Use of Chron. in N.T.
Sources of Ezra-Neh.
Hist. Accuracy of Ezra-Neh.
Contents of Ezra-Neh.
Esther.

i. Titles, Divisions, and Mutual Relations of Chronicles -
Ezra-Nehemiah. — Similarity of style and spirit, the identity
of the end of Chronicles with the beginning of Ezra,1 and
the fact that Chronicles ends in the middle of a sentence,2
show that Chronicles, Ezra, and Nehemiah once formed a
single work. Our English versions follow the Vulg. and
LXX. in placing Chronicles after Kings, and before Ezra
and Nehemiah — the natural order as Ezra-Nehemiah is the
sequel to Chronicles. In the Masoretic lists and in the
Spanish MSS., Chronicles stands at the beginning and Ezra-
Nehemiah at the end of the Hagiographa ; in the Talmud,
most German MSS. and the early printed editions, Chronicles
stands at the end of the Hagiographa, immediately after Ezra-
Nehemiah.3 Apparently, when the division was made, it was
intended to place Ezra-Nehemiah in the Canon, and exclude
1 ii. Chron. xxxvi. 22 f. = Ezra i. l-3a.
* Verse 23b /3 (Chron.) is the first half of the second sentence in
verse 3 (Ezra).
3 Ginsburg, Introduction, pp. 6 ff. ; article " Chronicles," Dr.
Hastings' Bible Dictionary. 107

108 BIBLICAL INTRODUCTION
Chronicles, as a superfluous and inferior variant of Kings.
The ragged end, so to speak, left to Chronicles, points to the
same conclusion. But after the Hagiographa were otherwise
complete, Chronicles was added, sometimes at the beginning,
sometimes at the end. After this addition Chronicles still
formed one, and Ezra-Nehemiah another single book; the
present division into i. and ii. Chronicles, Ezra, and Nehemiah
is due to the LXX., in some MSS. of which, however, Ezra
and Nehemiah still make up one book, Esdras B.
The Hebrew title of Chronicles is Dibhre hay- Yamim,
or "Annals"; whence E.V., Chronicles? The LXX. is
Ta Paraleipomena, usually explained as " the things
passed over," i.e., in Samuel and Kings; whence Vulg.
Paraleipomenon. In Hebrew and E.V. the other two
books are styled Ezra and Nehemiah, originally Ezra-
Nehemiah went by the name Ezra ; when they were divided
Nehemiah was a natural title for the second book. The Vulg.
styles them i. and ii. Esdras; the LXX., either Esdras B2 (as
one book) or Esdras B and Nehemiah.
The iii. Esdras of the LXX. and Vulg., the i. Esdras of
the English Apocrypha, is a variant edition of our Ezra; see
chapter on the Apocrypha.
2. Date and Authorship of Chronicles-Ezra-Nehemiah. —
The author's name is unknown ; his interest in the Levites
and the Temple music suggests that he belonged to one of
the Levitical choirs. The contents of the work show that it
is considerably later than Ezra and Nehemiah, 458-432.
Nehemiah xii. iof. mentions Jaddua, high priest in the time
of Alexander the Great, c. 330. In i. Chronicles iii. 24, the
genealogy of David extends, according to the Hebrew Text,
to the sixth, according to the LXX., Syriae, and Vulg., to the
eleventh generation after Zerubbabel, i.e., to c. 350 or to
c. 200. On the other hand, there is no trace either of the
sufferings or triumphs of the Maccabean period, c. 170-140.
1 To be carefully distinguished from the " Chronicles " cited in Kings.
2 In Lagarde's Lucianic Text as Esdras A.

SOURCES OF CHRONICLES 109
Hence the date is usually fixed as 300-250. The style and
language are consistent with this date, and with the reference
to the book in Ecclesiasticus1 xlix. 13.
3. Sources of Chronicles. — Chronicles cites a number of
authorities : (i.) " The Book of the Kings of Judah and
Israel," for Asa, II. xvi. n, Amaziah, II. xxv. 26, Ahaz, II.
xxviii. 26 ; (ii.) " The Book of the Kings of Israel and
Judah," for Jotham, II. xxvii. 7, Josiah, II. xxxv. 26 f. ; (iii.)
"The Acts of the Kings of Israel," for Manasseh, II. xxxiii.
18; (iv.) "The Words of Samuel the Seer," for David, I.
xxix. 29 ; (v.) " The Words of Nathan the Prophet," for
David, I. xxix. 29, Solomon, II. ix. 29; (vi.) "The Words of
Gad the Seer," for David, I. xxix. 29; (vii.) "The Words of
Shemaiah the Prophet and of Iddo the Seer," for Rehoboam,
II. xii. 15; (viii.) "The Words of Jehu ben-Hanani," for
Jehoshaphat, II. xx. 34 : (ix.) " The Words of the Seers,"2 for
Manasseh, II. xxxiii. 19 ; (x.) "The Vision of Iddo the Seer,''
for Solomon, II. ix. 29; (xi.) "The Vision of Isaiah the
Prophet," for Hezekiah, II. xxxii. 32; (xii.) "The Midrash of
the Book of Kings,"3 for Joash, II. xxiv. 27; (xiii.) "The
Midrash of the Prophet Iddo," for Abijah, II. xiii. 22 ; (xiv.)
"The Acts of Uzziah, written by Isaiah the Prophet," for
Uzziah, II. xxvi. 22; (xv.) "The Prophecy of Ahijah the
Shilonite," for Solomon, II. ix. 29.
(i.), (ii.), (iii.), and perhaps (xii.) are variant titles of the
same work ; most or all of (iv.)-(xi.), (xiii.)-(xv.) are the titles
of sections of this work, a section being cited by the name of
the best known prophet of the period it describes. Thus
"The Words of Jehu ben-Hanani" were "inserted in the
Book of the Kings of Israel," and "The Vision of Isaiah" is
said to be in " The Book of the Kings of Judah and Israel."*
1 c. b.c. 180.
2 So LXX., A. V., R.V. Mg. ; Hebrew and R.V. Text "Hozai";
Kittel, Dr. Haupt's Sacred Books of O.T. , reads "Hozayw,'' his seers,
with Budde.
3 i.e., an edition supplemented by edifying illustrative narratives.
4 II. xx. 34, xxxii. 32.

no BIBLICAL INTRODUCTION
As much of the material in Chronicles is identical with
parts of Kings, this " Book of the Kings " may be our Kings.
But Chronicles states that this " Book " contained certain in
formation, which is not found in Kings. Hence it is com
monly supposed that this " Book" was a Midrash or expansion
of our Kings, and that perhaps the " Midrash " made use of
the sources of our Kings. There seems no reason to suppose
that Chronicles made use of any pre-exilic sources, with the
possible exception of Kings, and some genealogical archives.
Chronicles has borrowed, more or less, directly or indirectly,
from the Pentateuch, Joshua and Ruth; but chiefly from
Samuel and Kings.1
4. Contents of Chronicles.2 First Chronicles.
I. -IX. Genealogies.
i.-ii. 1 7, Adam to David.
Compiled from Genesis, Numbers, Joshua, i. Kings, and Ruth, unless
the genealogy in Ruth is from the source of ii. 5-12.
ii. 18-55, £^'j Calebites, their Settlements.
Kittel refers 25-33, 42_45> 49 to a source older than the Midrash;
'/• §5(b).
iii., The Davidic Dynasty from David to Anani; 17-24= Ch.
Anani was apparently the head of the House of David in the time of
the Chronicler. Verses 1-16 compiled from ii. Samuel and Kings.
iv. 1-23, Ch., Other Judahite Clans, their Settlements.
Kittel refers 1-20 to an older source ; cf. on ii. 18-55.
iv. 24-43, Simeonite Clans, Settlements, and Conquests,
2S-27. 34-43= Ch-
Verses 24, 28-33 compiled from Genesis, Exodus, Numbers, and Joshua
xix. ; most of the rest referred by Kittel to older source.
v., Ch., Clans, Settlements, Conquests, and Captivity of
Reuben, Gad and Eastern Manasseh.
vi. 1-15, Ch., High-priestly dynasty from Aaron to the
Captivity. 1 Cf. Contents.
2 Longer passages, peculiar to Chron. in substance as well as form, are
denoted by Ch.; shorter fragments, in passages compiled from Genesis-
Kings, are not indicated unless specially important.

CONTENTS OF CHRONICLES iu
Some of the names also occur in the earlier historical books. Kittel
refers 5-15 to an older source.
vi. 16-48, Ch., Genealogies of Heman, Asaph, and Ethan,
the traditional ancestors of the Levitical choirs.
vi. 49-53 = 4-8, Ch., High-priestly dynasty from Aaron to
Solomon. vi. 54-81 = Joshua xxi. 5-39, Priestly and Levitical Cities.
vii., Ch., Clans of Issachar, Benjamin, Naphtali, Manasseh,
Ephraim, Asher.
Kittel refers 14-19, 21b- 24 to older source.
viii., Ch., Clans of Benjamin, Descendants of Saul.
Kittel considers viii., which is a variant of vii. 6-12, as a later addition.
Such passages may, however, be additions made by the Chronicler himself
to the material he obtained from his main source.
ix., Ch., Chief families, Priests, Levites, Gate-keepers at Jeru
salem after the Return, Saul's Descendants.
Verses 1 f. = Ezra ii. 70 = Nehemiah vii. 73a, xi. 3b; 3-1 7a = Nehemiah
xi. 4-i9a; 35-44, Saul's descendants, is repeated from viii. 29-38.
X.-XXIX., David.
x. f. = /. Samuel xxxi., ii. Samuel v. 1-3, 6-10, xxiii. 8-39;
except x. 13/, xi. 10, 41^-47=6^., Saul's Death, David's
Accession and Capture of Jerusalem, His Heroes.
Kittel refers xi. 4ib-47 to older source.
xii. = Ch., Warriors who came to David at Ziklag and at
Hebron. xiii. f. = «. Samuel vi. 1-11, v. 11-23/ except xiii. 1-5,*
xiv. 17= Ch., Unsuccessful attempt to bring the Ark to
Jerusalem, Hiram, David's Sons, Victories over the Philistines.
xv. f, Ch., The Ark brought to Zion.
Based on ii. Samuel vi. 12-20, fragments of which are reproduced
in xv. 25-xvi. 3, 43. The psalm in xvi. is compiled from Psalms cv. 1-15,
xcvi. 1-13,* cvi. 1, 47 f.
xvii.-xx. = ii. Samuel vii. f, x., xi. 1, xii. 26, 30/, xxi.
18-22, Nathan's Prophecy, Wars with Ammonites, etc.,
David's Ministers, and Heroes.
xxi. -xxii. 1, Census, consequent Pestilence, stayed by
sacrifice at Araunah's Threshing-floor.
A much altered edition of ii. Samuel xxiv. Satan, and not Jehovah,
tempts David to number Israel ; Levi and Benjamin are not numbered.
Instead of buying the threshing-floor and the oxen for fifty shekels of

ii2 BIBLICAL INTRODUCTION
silver, he buys "the place" (of the threshing-floor) for six hundred shekels
of gold.
xxii. 2-xxix., Ch., Instructions to Solomon as to the
Building of the Temple, Organisation, etc. of the Levites,
Priests, Singers, Gate-keepers, the Army, and the Tribes,
Instructions to Solomon and Israel as to the Temple,
Offerings of the people for the Temple, David's Thanks
giving, Solomon anointed King, David's Death.
Second Chronicles.
I.-IX., Solomon.
i. i- 1 3, Sacrifice, Dream and Choice at Gibeon.
Revised edition of i. Kings iii. 4-13, introducing the "Tent of
Meeting." i. 14-17 = /. Kings x. 26-29, Horses and Chariots.
Kings states that Solomon made silver to be as stones in Jerusalem,
Chronicles expands this to silver and gold.
ii.— vii., Building and Dedication of the Temple.
A very much expanded version of i. Kings v.-ix. ; chapters ii., iii.,
v. 11-13, vi. 12 f., 40-vii. 6, 11-15 are almost entirely the work ofthe
Chronicler. He introduces the Levites and singers, and the courses of
the priests, v. 11 f., and the keeping of the Feast (Tabernacles) on the
eighth day, according to the Priestly Code.
viii. f. —i. Kings ix. 10 f, 17-xi.; except viii. 12-16,* and
many small additions to ix. = Ch., Organisation of the King
dom, Queen of Sheba.
In i. Kings ix. 10 f. Solomon gives cities to Hiram ; in Ch. viii. 2,
which corresponds to it in the arrangement of material, Hiram gives cities
to Solomon.
X.-XXXVI, Division of the Two Kingdoms to the
Restoration.
x. ff. —i. Kings xii. 1-24, xiv. 25-28, 21 / except xi. $-xii. 1,
xii. 2b-&=Ch., Rehoboam.
The Ch. sections enumerate R's buildings, the migration of the Levites
to Judah, R's family, and the warning of Shemaiah.
xiii. 1 i.=i. Kings xv. if, "jb, Abijah.
xiii. 3-22, Ch., Abijah's Victory over Jeroboam.
Abijah is a bad king in Kings.
xiv. i-xv. 15, Ch., Asa — Suppression of the High Places,
Defeat of Zerah the Ethiopian, Prophecy of Azariah ben
Oded.

CONTENTS OF CHRONICLES 113
Portions of i. Kings xv. 8-12 are reproduced in xiv. 1-5. Zerah is
sometimes identified with Osorkon II., King of Egypt, who claims to
have made a successful campaign in Palestine, t. 866. Kittel refers xiv.
8 f.,* II, 12a to older source. OdeJ, xv. 8, for Azariah ben Oded is
due to a corruption of the text.
xv. 16-xvi, 6 = z. Kings xv. 13-22, Asa — Maachah deposed,
High Places not suppressed, Alliance with Benhadad against
Israel. xvi. 7-14, Ch., Asa — Prophecy and Imprisonment of
Hanani, Disease and Death of Asa.
Fragments of i. Kings xv. 23 f. in xvi. 12 ff.
xvii., Ch., Jehoshaphat — Itinerant Priests and Levites teach
the Law, Peaceful Prosperity.
Kittel refers " sent " in 7, and 8b, 9 to older source.
xviii. =i. Kings xxii. 2-350, Jehoshaphat and Ahab at
Ramoth Gilead.
Verses I f., mainly Ch.
xix. -xx. 30, Ch., Jehoshaphat — Prophecy of Jehu ben
Hanani, Priests and Levites as Judges, Invading Ammonites,
Moabites, etc. exterminate one another while the Levitical
choirs sing praises.
xx. 31-37, Jehoshaphat — Summary, Alliance with Ahaziah,
Loss of Navy.
Based on i. Kings xxii. 41 ff., 48 f. ; the condemnation of the alliance
with Israel, and the prophecy of Eliezer are Ch.
xxi. =/*. Kings xxii. 50, ii. Kings viii. 17-22, 24a; except
2-4, iob-ia.= Ch., Jehoram.
Ch. sections include Jehoram's Massacre of his Brethren, Elijah's writ
ing to Jehoram, and the Misfortunes of Jehoram.
xxii. 1-9, Ahaziah.
Based on, and partly extracted from ii. Kings viii. 24-x.
xxii. 10-xxiii., Athaliah.
Revised edition of ii. Kings xi. 1-20, e.g. , the Levitical temple-guard
of the Chronicler's times is substituted for the foreign mercenary body
guard of the Davidic kings.
xxiv., Joash.
Revised and expanded edition of ii. Kings xi. 21-xii., e.g., the Apos
tasy of Joash, and the Martyrdom of Zechariah are Ch.
xxv. =ii. Kings xiv. 2-14, 17, 19/, except 5-118, 12-16 =
Ch, Amaziah.
Ch. sections include Dismissal of Israelite Mercenaries at the bidding
of a Man of God, and Amaziah's Apostasy rebuked by a Prophet,
I

U4 BIBLICAL INTRODUCTION
xxvi., Ch. ; except 1-4 = ii. Kings xiv. 21 f, xv. 2 f, and
20-23 include fragments of xv. $ff., Uzziah.
Ch. portions include the Mission of Zechariah, Uzziah's Victories, His
Intrusion into the Temple. Kittel refers 6, 8a, 9 f. to older source.
xxvii. =ii. Kings xv. 33-34, 35^, 38; except 2b, 3^-7 = Ch.,
Jotham. Kittel refers 4 ff., Buildings and Wars to older source.
xxviii., Ahaz.
Revised and expanded edition of ii. Kings xvi. Ch. adds the Mission
of Oded, Release of Judahite captives, Invasions by Edomites and
Philistines, etc.
xxix.-xxxii., Hezekiah.
Revised and expanded edition of ii. Kings xviii.-xx. Ch. minimises
the part played by Isaiah ; and inserts profuse details as to Temple ritual,
Levites and singers. Kittel refers xxxii. 30, as far as "David," to older
source. xxxiii. 1-20 = ii. Kings xxi. 1-10, 18; except 11-19= Ch.,
Manasseh. Ch. section contains M.'s Captivity, Repentance, and Buildings.
xxxiii. 21-25, Amon.
Expanded from ii. Kings xxi. 19-24.
xxxiv. f, Josiah.
Revised and expanded edition of ii. Kings xxii. -xxiii. 30. Ch. adds,
an express statement that Hilkiah found the law-book, xxxiv. 14, repeated
identifications of the law-book with the Law of Moses, profuse details as to
ritual, priests, Levites and singers, Josiah's neglect of the message sent to
him from God through Pharaoh Necho, xxxv. 21 f.
xxxvi. 1-2 1, Jehoahaz, Jehoiakim, Jehoiachin, Zedekiah.
Compiled from ii. Kings xxiii. 30-xxv. 21. Ch. introduces a reference
to Jeremiah, xxxvi. 12.
xxxvi. 22 f. = Ezra i. i-$a, The Decree of Cyrus,
5. Historical Character and Teaching of Chronicles. — The
Chronicler's selection and statement of history were intended
to enforce, in the most emphatic way, the teaching he had
most at heart.1 He wished to give object lessons in the
observance of the Law. The Law, he held, was not observed
1 The Chronicler and the author of his main source, the Midrash on
Kings, were of the same mind and temper, so that in speaking of the
Chronicler, we include the author of the Midrash. But the dependence of
Chron. on this source shifts the responsibility for narratives not found in
Genesis-Kings from the author of the canonical book to his authority,

THE TEACHING OF CHRONICLES 115
before David, or in that product of schism and treason, the
Northern kingdom. Hence he confines his history to the
Davidic monarchy, even at the expense of sacrificing the
history of Elijah and Elisha. He describes David, Solomon,
Jehoshaphat, Hezekiah, and Josiah as worshipping with a full
accompaniment of ritual, priests, Levites and choirs, and
according to the laws of the complete Pentateuch; for he
assumed that what was binding in his own day must have
been observed by the good kings. The Chronicler was
anxious to teach that virtue and vice invariably meet with
their due ; Kings had not always recorded the sins which in
volved a disastrous close to the reigns of good kings, or the
misfortunes which punished the wickedness of bad kings.
The Chronicler, as far as his source permitted, supplied these
defects.1 As far as possible, nothing is told of the good kings
which would weaken the force of their good examples. Thus
the incidents of Uriah and Bathsheba, of Amnon, Tamar,
and Absalom, are entirely omitted. The Chronicler also
exalts his heroes by giving them large armies, great wealth
and splendour2; and shows a fondness for statistics and
genealogies. Professor Sayce writes thus s : " The consistent exaggera
tion of numbers on the part of the Chronicler shows us that
from a historical point of view his unsupported statements
must be received with caution. But they do not justify the
accusations of deliberate fraud and ' fiction ' which have been
brought against him. What they prove is that he did not
possess that sense of historical exactitude which we now
demand from the historian. He wrote, in fact, with a didactic
and not with a historical purpose. That he should have used
the framework of history to illustrate the lessons he wished to
draw was as much an accident as that Sir Walter Scott should
1 Cf. Contents on ii. Chron. xxiv. f., Joash and Amaziah, and xxxv.
21 f. on Josiah.
2 Cf. Contents on II. i; 14-17, Solomon.
3 Higher Crit., 1894, p. 464.

116 BIBLICAL INTRODUCTION
have based certain of his novels on the facts of mediaeval
history. He cared as little for history in the modern
European sense of the word as the Oriental of to-day, who
considers himself at liberty to embellish or modify the narra
tive he is repeating in accordance with his fancy or the moral
he wishes to draw from it."
In considering the value of Chronicles, we must deal
separately with the different kinds of material.
(a) Material taken from Genesis-Kings, etc. — Chronicles
preserves an alternative text, which sometimes gives the better
reading. (b) Material from Older Sources. — If Kittel is right in
assigning certain passages1 to a source older than the Midrash,
we possess in Chronicles some fragments of information, e.g.,
as to the Invasion of Zerah, not given in Genesis-Kings, but
derived from early, perhaps pre-exilic sources.
(c) Narratives ?wt traceable earlier than the Midrash of
Kings. — Narratives which give no indication of early origin
rest simply on the unsupported testimony of a document
composed from 700 to 300 years later than the events
described. For the teaching of (a), (b), (c) see chapter ii.,
§33- (d) Narratives of Earlier Events in Terms of the Institutions
and Ideas of the Chronicler's Own Times. — Here an example
was set which is constantly imitated ; teachers and preachers
often seek to make a Biblical narrative more impressive by
telling the story as if the event had happened in the nine
teenth century. Probably Chronicles was very useful in this way
to the Jews of the period. To us this material is valuable
as revealing the institutions and ideas of the Chronicler's
time ; the comparison with Kings enables us to contrast the
Jewish community with ancient Israel. Moreover the utter
ances ascribed by Chronicles to its characters often contain
most useful and suggestive teaching ; they were the expression
of deep and real experience, and they still help to renew and
express such experience.
1 Not found in Gen. -Kings. Cf. Contents on I. iv., vi. f., II. xiv., xvii.

SOURCES OF EZRA-NEHEMIAH 117
6. Use of Chronicles in N.T. — It is possible that some
of the persons in Luke's genealogy, iii. 2 b f, are identical
with persons mentioned only in I. iii. 19-22. Matthew ix. 36
is more closely parallel to ii. Chronicles xviii. 16, peculiar
to Chronicles, than to Numbers xxvii. 17 or Ezekiel xxxiv. 5 ;
but it may have been suggested by either of the latter, or
may be simply the current form of a popular figure. The
"Zachariah, son of Barachiah, whom ye slew between the
sanctuary and the altar" (Matthew xxiii. 35) 1 is identified
with the Zachariah, the son of Jehoiada, whose martyrdom
in the Temple court is related in II. xxiv. 21, and nowhere
else. Otherwise there is nothing in the N.T. to show that any
of its writers were acquainted with Chronicles.
7. Sources of Ezra-Nehemiah. — Ezra vii. 27-ix. are in
the first person, and are derived from memoirs composed
by Ezra ; other passages in Ezra-Nehemiah may be based on
these memoirs.2 Nehemiah i.-vii. 5 and xi.-xiii. (in part)
are in the first person, and are derived from memoirs
compiled by Nehemiah; other passages in Nehemiah may
be based on these memoirs.2 Both sets of memoirs may
be dated c. 430. Ezra iv. 8-vi. 18, vii. 12-26, which are in
Western or Palestinian Aramaic, are taken from another
source, which may be dated c. 45o.s Ezra-Nehemiah also
contains a series of official documents : the Decree of
Cyrus, Ezra i. 1-4 ; Letters between Rehum and Artaxerxes,
iv. 7-23; Letters between Tattenai and Darius, v. 6-vi. 12;
Artaxerxes' Firman to Ezra, vii. 11-26. The authenticity of
these documents is matter of controversy.4 Ezra iv. 7-23 is
out of place, and belongs to the building, not of the Temple,
but of the walls. Probably, as in Chronicles, the Chronicler
did not compile Ezra-Nehemiah from the original sources,
1 Also Luke xi. 51, where the father's name is omitted. The first hand
of Cod. Sin. omits it in Matt., and Jerome states that the Nazarene Gospel
had " son of Jehoiada " in Matt. (Tisch. )
2 Cf. Contents. 3 Kautzsch, Cornill.
* They were rejected by Kosters, Het Herstel, etc., German Trans.,
but are accepted by Kautzsch, and with the exception of i. 1-4 by Meyer,
Entstehung, etc.

118 BIBLICAL INTRODUCTION
but revised a compilation already made,1 possibly a portion
of the same work, parts of which are referred to as the
"Book of Kings," etc., or the "Midrash of the Book of
Kings," etc.
8. Historical Accuracy of Ezra-Nehemiah. — It has been
maintained 2 that the Chronicler, or one of his authorities, has
entirely misunderstood the course of the history on two
main points.
(a) The Return and Building of the Temple. — There was, it
is said, no Return in 538 ; there was no attempt to rebuild the
Temple till the time of Haggai and Zechariah, 520 ; and the
Temple was rebuilt by the Jewish community left behind in
Palestine, when the bulk of the population were carried away
captive in 586. The main argument for this view is that
Haggai and Zechariah make no reference to any Return, or to
any previous work towards the building of the Temple. The
treatment of the history in Kings by the Chronicler or his
source, weakens the authority of the statements in Ezra i.-vi.
Yet the silence of Haggai and Zechariah does not seem con
clusive disproof of statements made even as late as 250.
There would still be, one would suppose, a substantially
accurate tradition as to the origin of the Temple and the
Jewish community.
Cheyne's Introd. to Isaiah, xxxviii. f. , substantially adopts Kosters' view,
G. A. Smith, in a careful discussion of the subject in Book of the Twelve,
p. 204 ff., concludes that the Return took place in 537, and that the Jews
who returned rebuilt the Temple, and probably made some beginning
immediately after the Return. Meyer, Entstehung, combats Kosters'
view at length, and it has also been rejected by Kuenen and Wellhausen
(ap. Meyer). Many critics, however, who accept the Return, maintain
that no attempt was made to rebuild the Temple before 520.
(b) The Date of Ezra's Mission. — It is also maintained3
that Ezra's mission and reforms took place — not, as the
Chronicler represents, in 458, before Nehemiah's first term
of office, but — either in Nehemiah's second term of office,
1 Cf. Cornill3, p. 135.
2 Kosters, Het Herstel, etc., German Trans.
3 Kosters, etc.

CONTENTS OF EZRA-NEHEMIAH 119
432 ; or even in the seventh year of Artaxerxes II. , 398. The
different sections of Nehemiah have to be re-arranged and
Ezra vii.-x. is placed immediately before Nehemiah ix., x.
These views have met with little acceptance.
9. Contents of Ezra-Nehemiah. Ezra.
I.-VI. Return, Rebuilding of Temple."
i., Ch., Decree of Cyrus, Return.
Ch. is used, as in Chronicles, for matter composed by the Chronicler,
or by the author of his late post-exilic Midrashic source.
ii.-iii. 1= Nehemiah vii. 6-viii. ia, Statistics of those who
returned under Cyrus, their gifts to the building of the
Temple. In Nehemiah vii. 5, Nehemiah states that he found this list in a book ;
possibly a contemporary record. Ch. has repeated it here from Nehemiah
vii., and, in a most curious fashion, has utilised Nehemiah vii. 73b, viii.
Ia, the opening verse of the account of the promulgation of the Law, as
the opening verse, Ezra iii. I , of the account of the laying of the founda
tion stone of the Temple. Kosters holds that this list does not refer to a
Return under Cyrus, but is a census of the population in the time of Ezra-
Nehemiah, and that the book in which it was found was Ezra's Memoirs.
There are numerous variations, especially as to names and numbers, in the
three texts of this list, Ezra ii. ; i. or iii. Esdras v. ; Nehemiah vii.
iii.-iv. 5, Ch., Altar of Burnt Offering, Feast of Tabernacles,
Foundation Stone, Opposition of Samaritans.
iv. 6 f, Complaints made against the Jews to Xerxes and
Artaxerxes. The text is probably corrupt ; the verses were used by Ch. or his source
as an introduction to the next section.
iv. 8-23, Aramaic Source, Letters between the Persian
Governor and Artaxerxes.
Out of place here, belonging properly to the end of interval between
the arrival of Ezra and that of Nehemiah.
iv. 24-vi. 18, Aramaic Source, Rebuilding and Dedication
of the Temple, Letters between the Persian Governor and
Darius. iv. 24 is the continuation of iv. 5, and is probably Ch.
vi. 19-22, Ch., Passover,
Darius is styled " King of Assyria.''

120 BIBLICAL INTRODUCTION
VII.-X. Mission of Ezra.
vii. i-n, Ch., Introductory Abstract.
vii. 12-26, Aramaic Source, Firman of Artaxerxes to Ezra.
vii. 27-ix., Ezra's Memoirs in the First Person, Thanks
giving to God for Firman, Ezra's Companions, Journey,
Attempt to suppress Intermarriage with Foreigners.
x., Ezra's Memoirs, edited by Ch., Conclusion of account of
Attempt to suppress Intermarriage with Foreigners.
Though ix. and x. are essentially one narrative, x. changes to the third
person, probably because Ch. has recast this portion of Ezra's Memoirs.
Nehemiah.
i.-vii. 5, Nehemiah's Memoirs in the First Person,
Nehemiah's Mission, Rebuilding of the Walls, in spite of
the Opposition of the Samaritans and their allies, Measures
for the Relief of Debtors.
vii. 6-viii. ia. = Ezra ii.-iii. 1, q.v.
vii. 73b-x., Ezra's Memoirs recast by Ch., Promulgation of
the Law, and Covenant to observe it.
The Law was probably the Priestly Code ; cf. chapter i. \\ 19 f.
xi., Migration from the country to Jerusalem, Location of
the Clans in Jerusalem and the country.
An official list, part of which is given in i. Chronicles ix. 1-17. It
is freely edited by Ch. from a list, which probably belonged to Nehemiah's
Memoirs, and followed vii. 5.
xii. 1-26, Ch., Chiefs of the Priestly and Levitical Clans.
Note the reference to Jaddua, High Priest under Alexander, in 22, and
to a "Book of Chronicles" ' in 23.
xii. 27-43, Nehemiah's Memoirs in the First Person, with
additions by Ch., Dedication of the Walls.
xii. 44-xiii. 3, Ch., Provision for Priests and Levites,
Extrusion of Foreigners.
xiii. 4-31, Nehemiah's Memoirs in the First Person,
Nehemiah's Return to Artaxerxes, and Second Term of
Office, Expulsion of Tobiah the Ammonite from the Temple,
Provision for Levites and Singers, Safeguarding the Sabbath,
1 Sepher Diohrl hay - Yamtm.

ESTHER 121
Renewed Attempt to suppress Intermarriage with Foreigners,
Expulsion of a' grandson of the High Priest, who was son-in-
law of Sanballat.1
io. Esther.
(a) Date and Authorship. — The local colouring suggests
that the author lived in Persia, nothing else is known of him.
The absence of any reference to the book in Ecclesiasticus
points to a date not much earlier than b.c. 200, and this
conclusion is confirmed by the language ; its linguistic
affinities are with Daniel, Chronicles and post - Biblical
Hebrew, and there are Aramaisms.
Esther is ascribed to the earlier Greek period by Adeney, Exp. Bible,
p. 353, Cheyne, Encycl. Brit., Driver, etc.; to a later date by Cornill,
c. B.C. 130, Kautzsch, c. B.C. 150, Wildeboer, after B.C. 135.
(b) Canonicity. — The canonicity of Esther was contested
amongst the Jews, even apparently after the Synod of Jamnia,
c. a.d. 90, for the book is absent from the list of books of
the Jewish O.T. obtained by Melito, Bishop of Sardis,
a.d. 150-175. 2 The exaggerated enthusiasm of later Rabbis,
e.g., Maimonides,3 for the book suggests an uneasy conscious
ness of its lack of full authority. The Church, like the
Rabbis, hesitated over Esther; even as late as the fourth
century, Athanasius and Gregory Nazianzen do not include
the book in the Canon. Its position was doubtful in the
East throughout the Middle Ages;4 but in the West its
acceptance by the Council of Carthage, a.d. 397, assured
its position till the Reformation. Luther, however, spoke of
the book as "judaising" and "containing many heathenish
improprieties," and said he wished it did not exist.
(c) The Greek Esther. — In the LXX. there are numerous
late interpolations, designed to remedy supposed defects in
religious and other matters, e.g., in these additions "God"
1 For teaching see chapter ii. § 33. There is no trace of Ezra-
Nehemiah in N.T.
2 Eus. Hist. iv. 26.
8 The Law and Esther will survive all the rest of the O.T.
4 Rejected by Nicephorus Callistus, a.d. 1333. Westcott, Bible in
the Church, 227.

122 BIBLICAL INTRODUCTION
and "Lord" occur frequently, and Mordecai offers a long
prayer. (d) Contents and Historicity. — In spite of the general
accuracy in details, etc. of local colouring, the book is
commonly regarded as a kind of parable or allegory, with
a certain basis of fact, rather than as exact history.1
Difficulties have been found in the way in which the
fact of Esther and Mordecai being Jews is in one place
represented as known, and in another supposed to be
concealed, and in the extraordinary character of the edicts
for the extermination first of the Jews and then of Jheir
enemies, and in many other features of the story. These
difficulties do not seem to furnish a formal proof that the
narrative is not historical in its main outlines. On the other
hand, the probable composition of the book in the Greek
period, and the absence of any corroborating references to
the events narrated, make its substantial historicity uncertain.
For instance, Mordecai and Esther are not mentioned in Ecclus.
xliv. -xlix.
It is doubtful whether the Feast of Purim originated as
our book states. No Persian word Purim is known in the
sense of lots ; but there was a Persian feast Farwardigan,
and the Phrouraia or Phrourdaia of some MSS. of the
LXX.2 has been thought to identify Purim with this feast.
Moreover, Mordecai and Esther are the names of the well-
known Babylonian gods Marduk, or Merodach, and Ishtar.
Accordingly it has been suggested 8 that the original basis
of the book is a Babylonian myth, which had been connected
with the Persian feast, which was originally Babylonian. This
view might explain the entire absence of any Jewish divine
name — God is never mentioned — and the hesitation of the
Jews as to the canonicity of Esther. But so startling a
theory will hardly be accepted till there is further evidence
for it.4 1 Driver, Konig, Wildeboer, etc.
2 The Sinaitic has Phrouraia.
3 Jensen, ap. Wildeboer.
4 There are no quotations from Esther in N.T.

CHAPTER IV.
THE POETICAL BOOKS
I. Job. 2. Psalms. 3. Proverbs. 4. Ecclesiastes.
""""5. Song of SongsT
1. Job. —"-¦"
(a) The Historical Basis. — The view that the book, as a
whole, was a historical record of things said and done, was
widely held amongst Jews and Christians up till and even after
the Reformation. Yet it was denied by a rabbi, whose opinion
— that Job never existed, and was merely a parable — is pre
served in the Talmud, by Maimonides, and by Theodore of
Mopsuestia, c. a.d. 440, who held that Job existed, but that
the Book of Job was a fiction, and a wicked slander on the
character of the Patriarch. Luther recognised a historical
basis, but denied that the book was exact history. The
existence of Job is supported by the references in Ezekiel
xiv. 14, 20,1 and by the improbability that both the hero and
his story were pure inventions. But the whole character of
the book shows that the traditional material has been freely
used as the setting of a didactic colloquy, which is partly
paralleled by Plato's Dialogues. The modern view is well
expressed by Keil,2 when he says that the book is "old
legend wrought up and sustained throughout with poetic
freedom." The suggestion that the Prologue and Epilogue are taken
from an old prose history of Job has met with some support.3
The apparent inconsistency between these sections and the
1 The only references outside of the Book of Job. There is nothing to
connect our Job with the Job of Gen. xlvi. 13 ; where, moreover, Jashub
should be read with LXX. and Num. xxvi. 24, Ball, S.B.O.T.
2 O.T. Introd., English Trans., i. 485. 3 Duhm.
123

124 BIBLICAL INTRODUCTION
rest of the book would be partly explained, if we supposed
that the author felt bound to conform to established tradition,
especially with regard to the happy ending. Otherwise we
have no data for determining the form in which the story was
known to Ezekiel or the author of the Book of Job.
The names of persons and places, as far as they occur
elsewhere, belong to Edom or the neighbouring desert.1
Probably, according to the ancient tradition, Job was a
wealthy and pious Edomite, who was grievously afflicted, and
afterwards restored to prosperity.
An apocryphal appendix to the LXX. identifies Job with
Jobab ben-Zerah, king of Edom,2 a conjecture suggested by
the similarity of the names ; states that the book was trans
lated, whether into Greek or Hebrew is not clear, from the
Syriae, and that Uz was on the borders of Edom and Arabia.
It makes Zophar king of the Minaei, an Arabian tribe.
(b) Date and Authorship. — The author's name is quite un
known ; all existing evidence is opposed to the suggestion
that either Job or Moses wrote the book.
The date has to be determined by internal evidence, which
has been variously interpreted.
(i.) The Exile is very widely accepted as the period when
the book, or its original edition, was composed, 3 a view
supported by many important considerations.
(i) The formal discussion of the consequences of the
doctrine of the divine righteousness as applied to the deal
ings of God with the individual, does not appear to have
begun much before the Exile. An early stage of the dis-
1 Uz, Lam. iv. 21 ; Eliphaz and Teman, Gen. xxxvi. 11, 42 P, Jer.
xlix. 7, etc. ; Shuhite may connect with Shuah, one of the sons of Abra
ham by Keturah, sent away by him eastward, Gen. xxv. 2, 6, JE.
Naamah can scarcely be the town in the south of Judah, Josh. xv. 41.
The mention of Naamah as the wife of a Cainite Lamech, suggests the
existence of a Kenite clan of that name ; the meaning of the word-
pleasant — makes it probable that it was commonly in use both for persons
and places. 2 Gen. xxxvi. 33, P.
3 Cheyne, Job, etc., 67, 73 f., Davidson, Driver, Konig, and
Dillmann, immediately before the Exile ; but in Introduction to Isaiah,
iii, Cheyne writes, re Job xiv. 11, " the speeches in Job are very much
more probably post-Exilic."

JOB 125
cussion is found in Habakkuk, Jeremiah, and Ezekiel, who
deal briefly with the difficulty of the prosperity of the wicked,1
while the latter discusses at length the question of visiting the
sins of the fathers on the children.2 On the other hand, the
author of Job seems entirely ignorant of the explanation of
the sufferings of the righteous by the doctrine of Vicarious
Atonement given in Isaiah liii. and other Servant-passages.
Hence, the Book of Job will be later than Ezekiel, but not
later than Isaiah liii. ; i.e., unless Isaiah liii. is post-exilic, the
Book of Job is exilic.
(2) There are numerous parallels with Jeremiah, Lamenta
tions, Isaiah xl. ff., and contemporary literature ; but there is
the usual difficulty in determining whether the parallels in
dicate literary dependence, or merely authorship in the same
period and under similar circumstances ; and, if there is de
pendence, which parallel is dependent on the other.3 Also
the date of the parallel is often uncertain. The parallels
between Job and the Servant of Jehovah are also striking;
both are lepers, innocent sufferers, who are restored and re
warded. Job xxviii. on Wisdom, q.v., seems earlier than
Proverbs i-ix.
(3) The references to ruin and captivity seem reminiscences
of a recent calamity,4 possibly the Captivity of Israel, more
probably that of Judah.
(4) Ezekiel xiv. 14, 20 show that the story of Job was in
men's minds about the time of the Exile, but do not suggest
that Ezekiel knew our book. But the intercession ascribed
to Job in the Epilogue may have been suggested by these
verses. (5) The Aramaisms and Arabisms of the book are perhaps
best explained by an exilic date.5
1 Hab. i. 13, Jer. xii. 1.
2 Jer. xxxi. 29, Ezek. xviii.
3 Cf. iii., Jer. xx. 14 ff., cf. note on latter ; vi. 15, Jer. xv. 18; xix. 7, 8
Lam. iii. 6-9 ; ix. 8, Isa. xliv. 24 ; xiii. 28, Isa. 1. 9 ; xv. 35, Isa. lix. 4 ;
xxvi. 12 f., Isa. li. 9 ; xxx. 21, Isa. lxiii. 10.
1 iii. 18-20, vii. 1, ix. 24, xii. 6, 17, xxiv. 12.
° Cheyne, lob, etc., 99, 293 f.

126 BIBLICAL INTRODUCTION
(ii.) A post-exilic origin has also met with much acceptance,1
and is supported by the following considerations : —
(i) If Job in any way stands for Israel, the assertions of
innocence point to a date after 400.
(2) The parallels with Isaiah liii., etc., if the Servant-
passages are post-exilic.
(3) The use of Psalm viii. 5 in vii. 17 f., if Psalm viii.
is post-exilic, as Cheyne.2
(4) Job xv. 7 f. is said to be clearly dependent on Proverbs
viii. 22 ff., especially 25. 3
(5) Elsewhere Satan only occurs in post-exilic literature.4
Other views are far less probable.
(iii.) The ascription to Job or Moses, or Mosaic or pre-
Mosaic times is due to a confusion between the period of the
patriarch Job and of the author of the book. The scene being
laid in Edom in patriarchal times, express allusions to the
law and literature of Israel are avoided, and God is usually
spoken of as Elohim; but, as we have seen, the book
constantly betrays acquaintance with the ideas and cir
cumstances of the later monarchy, and most probably of
the Exile.5
(iv.) The age of Solomon has commended itself to many
scholars 6 on account of the parallels to Davidic Psalms, and
to Proverbs i.— ix., etc., supposed by them to be Solomonic,
and the alleged dependence of Amos, Isaiah, and other pre-
exilic literature on Job.7 But the Psalms and the sections in
Proverbs which have most in common with Job are probably
1 Cheyne, cf. above, Cornill, c. b.c 250, Duhm, Kautzsch, c.
B.C. 332?, Kayser-Marti, p. 191, between Zechariah and Chronicles,
Smend. 2 Psalter, 201, Baethgen, about the time of the Exile.
3 So Cornill, who regards Prov. i.-ix., q.v., as late post-exilic.
4 Zech. iii. 1 f, Ps. cix. 6, i. Chron. xxi. 1.
5 For the value of the Talmudic statement that Moses wrote the
"section about . . . Job" see p. 8.
6 Luther, Delitzsch, etc., ap. Cornill.
7 Cf. ix. 8 f., Am. iv. 13, v. 8 ; xii. 15, Am. ix. 6 ; xviii. 16, Am. ii. 9;
xxx. 31, Am. viii. 10; xiv. 11, Isa. xix. 5.

JOB 127
post-exilic, and, in the case of the other parallels, the depen
dence, if any, is as, or more likely to be on the side of Job.
(v.) A date about the time of Isaiah is suggested by the
view that the Captivity which forms the background of the
book is that of Samaria.1 While this view is not impossible,
it seems disproved by the arguments for an exilic or post-exilic
date. (c) Integrity. — The main difficulties arise from an apparent
inconsistency between the different parts of the book.2
The Prologue supplies an explanation of Job's sufferings —
that they are to test his righteousness — which does not seem
to harmonise with the poems.3 On the whole, however, the
poems presuppose the Prologue.4
The Epilogue seems to spoil the whole book by re
habilitating the very doctrine which the book was written
to disprove. Job, restored to health and prosperity, and
living to a good old age, would have been a triumphant
example of the doctrine that, sooner or later, the righteous
were rewarded in this life. Possibly, however, the author felt
it necessary to assert the final bliss of the righteous, even at
the cost of apparent inconsistency.5
The Elihu speeches, though still defended by some dis
tinguished critics,6 are generally regarded as a later addition,7
intended to correct what was regarded as the undue emphasis
on certain aspects of truth. Elihu is never mentioned else
where; no notice is taken of his argument by Job or by
Jehovah; his speeches interrupt the connection between
1 Noldeke, Merx, Hitzig, Reuss, Ewald, under Manasseh, ap.
Cornill. 2 On shorter doubtful passages see Contents passim.
3 Cf. Teaching, ii.
* The Prologue is regarded as later addition by Konig, possibly from a
prose work on Job ; but is accepted by most critics. Cheyne is doubtful,
p. 66 f.
5 Cheyne, p. 69, Epilogue by an editor, based somewhat carelessly
on the Prologue. Duhm derives both from an ancient popular work.
6 Budde, Cornill.
7 Baethgen, Cheyne, Driver "all but certain," Dillmann, Duhm,
Konig, Siegfried, Strack, etc.

128 BIBLICAL INTRODUCTION
Job's appeal to the Almighty, xxxi. 35, and Jehovah's
answer, xxxviii. 1 ; although his contribution is not mere
repetition, it adds hardly anything to the argument against
Job. Dr. A. B. Davidson writes : 1 " The difference ''
between the views of Elihu and those of the three friends
"does not amount to much, and is apt to be exaggerated."
" So far as Elihu's relation to the three friends is concerned,
it is not easy to find any great difference between his concep
tion and theirs, or almost any difference whatever in principle.*
The style of the Elihu speeches differs in many ways from,
and has seemed to many scholars 2 very inferior to, that of the
rest of the book. The two last objections might be met by
supposing that this section was added by the author in his
later years.8
The speeches of Jehovah have been doubted as a whole,4
but unless the original book is cut down to the speeches of
Job and his friends, the utterances of Jehovah seem necessary
to the plan of the work. The descriptions of Behemoth and
Leviathan, xl. 15-xli., are more often regarded as additions;
the style seems inferior to that of xxxviii. f.5
Duhm, in the Kurzer Handkommentar, ascribes the Prologue and
Epilogue to the close of the Monarchy ; the discussion between Job and
his friends and the speeches of Jehovah to c. 500-450 ; the Elihu speeches
by a much later writer. There are also many other additions.
(d) Text. — The obscurities and other difficulties of the
Hebrew text, and the fact that the LXX. text is very different
and much shorter, indicate that many glosses and corruptions
have crept in. Various attempts have been made to recon
struct the original readings by the use of the versions, and by
the application of theories as to metre, but none have met
with much acceptance.6
1 Pages xliv., xiii. 2 Cheyne, Renan, ap. Cheyne.
3 Kamphausen and Merx, ap. Cornill.
4 Cheyne, p. 69.
6 Konig, Siegfried ; Driver is inclined to reject xl. 15-24.
" The most important are Bickell, Carmina V.T., Xx. in Dillon's
Sceptics of O.T. ; Budde, Hiob' ; Merx, Das Gedicht von Hiob. ; Sieg
fried, S.B.O.T.

JOB 129
(e) Contents. — I.— II., Prologue.
Satan is permitted by God to test Job's righteousness by
depriving him of his wealth and of his children, and by
afflicting him with a loathsome disease. Job remains faithful.
His three friends come to comfort him.1
III.-XXXL, Job and his Friends Discuss the Problem
of the Relation of Suffering and Sin.
iii. Job. — He curses the day of his birth and longs for
death.2 iv., v. Eliphaz. — Job's complaint seems to reproach God ;
but, in any issue between God and man, man must be in the
wrong. Job, being human, must have sinned. His calamities
are chastisements, sent for his good. If he submits and
repents he will be restored to great prosperity, and die in
a good old age.
vi., vii. Job. — Renewed complaint and prayer for death.
Job is innocent, his friends have interpreted him harshly and
unfairly. If he has sinned, let God remove his sin and
pardon him.
Siegfried regards vii. 1-10, the brevity and weariness of life, as editorial.
viii. Bildad. — God deals with men according to their deserts;
such is the tradition of the fathers. Job's sons must have
perished for their sins, and if Job were righteous, God would
restore him to prosperity.
ix., x. Job. — Still lamenting and longing for death, Job dis
claims any controversy with God, he is too helpless in spite of
his innocence. But, as a fact, God does not deal with men
according to their deserts ; good and bad alike suffer, or God
" shines on the counsel of the wicked." Job appeals to Him
to explain the mystery.
xi. Zophar— Would that God would make Job see his sins,
as God sees them. Job is really suffering less than he de
serves. Prosperity will follow repentance.
xii. -xiv. Job. — He claims to be as wise as his friends, their
traditional doctrines are either commonplaces or " maxims of
ashes." The wicked prosper, the righteous suffer. Let God
1 Cf. p. 127. " Cf. Jer. xx. 14-18.
K

130 BIBLICAL INTRODUCTION
hieet him as an equal, and convince him of sin. If there
were any prospect of vindication and renewed happiness, he
would wait patiently for it, even in Sheol, if compensation in a
future life were possible.1
Siegfried treats xii. 4-xiii. 1, God's power in Nature and Providence,
as editorial ; xi^i; 2 connects closely with xii. 3 ; xii. 9- 1 2, which seem to
confirm Zophar"s estimate of traditional wisdom, are also omitted by
Cornill. :
Siegfried also regards xiv. I f., xiii. 28, xiv. 5, 7-12, 14, 18-22 (a didactic
poem on the brevity and misery of life, and the certainty of death, parallel
to vii. 1-10), as a later addition.
xv. Eliphaz. — Job's arguments are blasphemous quibbles,
most discourteous to older and wiser men. All are guilty
before God. By a detailed picture E. shows that the wicked
do not prosper, but suffer calamity, and perish miserably.
xvi., xvii. Job. — Condemned by God and man, Job protests
that he is an innocent man delivered up to the wicked. He
must die, but he has a witness in heaven. God knows his
innocence. His sufferings are a marvel to the righteous, who
yet persevere, like Job himself. His only hope is in death — a
barren hope.
xviii. Bildad. — Calarnity dogs the steps of the sinner; his
name and family are cut off (like Job).
xix. Job. — Overwhelmed by God's wrath, forsaken and
despised by God and man, Job appeals to his friends for pity.
Yet he is confident that, even after death, his Vindicator2
(God) will establish his innocence, and he will see God, i.e., be
restored to happy fellowship with Him, 25-27.
For a discussion of the very obscure passage, 25-27, see Davidson's
Job, C.B.S. 291 ff. The Hebrew Text, as it stands, has, by the application
of somewhat unfair pressure, been interpreted to mean that Job expects to
be vindicated by God and restored to His favour before death. Cf. the
alternative renderings: "I shall see God— in my flesh," A.V., "from
my flesh," R.V., "without my flesh," R.V. Mg. Siegfried obtains from
LXX., etc. a reconstruction of the text, which makes the reference to
a resurrection definite and certain, but he regards the passage as a later
addition. Cheyne, Origin of Psalter, 442, regards the text of the passage
as corrupt. xx. Zophar. — If the sinner prospers, it is only for a time;
he is quickly overtaken by misery and shame (like Job).
1 xiv. 13-15. R.V. 2 Go'el.

JOB 131
xxi. Job. — Not so; is it indeed the rule that calamity and
sudden death overtake the sinner, 16-18? Far from it; the
wicked live prosperously to a good old age; they see the
prosperity of their children ; they are honourably buried ; and
men honour them both in life and after death. If their children
suffer, what is that to them ?
A.V. takes 16-18 as a statement; "it is the rule." But this contradicts
the argument of the context. Siegfried also takes it as a statement,
and regards it as an interpolation.
xxii. Eliphaz. — God cannot afflict for selfish ends of His
own, but only in the interests of justice. Sin must be the
reason of Job's sufferings, doubtless the cruelty and oppression,
for which Job's wealth and power would give him opportunity.
Let him repent, amend, and prosper.
Hitherto Job's guilt has only been implied, now he is expressly charged
with specified crimes.
xxiii., xxiv. Job. — He longs for access to God, that he may
prove his innocence, and learn the reason of God's dealings,
and why, in spite of his innocence, he is afflicted as by a
blind Fate. In the world, might and fraud reign, the poor are
oppressed by the rich, the workers by their employers. Crime
is rampant, and the wrongdoer goes unpunished till he dies,
like other men.
xxiv. 18-21, the doom of the wicked, are supposed to be a state
ment, by Job, of the views he is refuting. Siegfried regards 13-21
as an addition.
xxv. Bildad. — What is sinful man before God ?
xxvi. -xxxi. Job. xxvi. i-xxvii. 6. — Job acknowledges the
infinite power of God, and again protests his innocence.
xxvii. 7-23. — The inevitable doom of the wicked and his
family. As this passage expressly contradicts Job's main position, it is probably
not part of his speech. Its teaching is that of Job's friends, and it may be
altogether or in part either a misplaced speech of Zophar,1 who has no
speech in the third set, or a later addition.2
1 Cheyne, Job and Solomon, 38, 114.
2 Konig, Siegfried, Smend, Strack, etc. Budde and Cornill
defend the originality of the ascription to Job, and explain thus : As
the friends know so well the fate of the sinner, let them take warning,
for they are behaving wickedly.

132 BIBLICAL INTRODUCTION
xxviii. — A didactic poem in praise of Wisdom.
The earliest or, at any rate, the most primitive of the great O.T.
passages on Wisdom. As yet, Wisdom is not personified. It is com
monly explained as a further illustration by Job of the mystery of
God's ways, but its calm, didactic tone is out of place at the crisis
of his agony, and it is probably a later addition,1 perhaps an independent
poem inserted here to secure its preservation.2
xxix. -xxxi. Job. — He meets the definite accusations of
Eliphaz in xxii. by a detailed statement of the innocence
and benevolence of his prosperous life, which he contrasts
with his present misery.
XXXII.-XXXVIL, The Elihu Speeches.
Job's friends having been silenced, Elihu, a younger man,
comes forward to set both parties right, to refute Job by argu
ing the friends' case more efficiently than they have done
themselves; or, as we might say, modern thought comes to the
rescue of traditional wisdom. His contribution, however,
is substantially a repetition of the friends' speeches. He
asserts that suffering i§ due to sin, and that Job is presump
tuous in questioning God's doings. The special features of
his speeches are (i.) his reply to Job's complaint that God
does not answer him ; God speaks to men in dreams and by
angels,3 or prayer (as in Job's case) is left unanswered, because
of the pride of man4; (ii.) the stress laid on the disciplinary
value of suffering.5 The concluding picture of the majesty of
God, partly anticipates the speeches of Jehovah.0
XXXVIII. i-XLII. 6, The Speeches of Jehovah and
Job's Submission.
Jehovah shows that Job has spoken presumptuously, by
describing His wonderful works in Nature, especially the horse,
the hippopotamus (behemoth), and the crocodile (leviathan).
Job acknowledges his presumption.7
1 Duhm, Siegfried, Smend, A. T. Theol, 508.
2 Similarly Cheyne, Job, etc., 94. But Budde and Cornill defend the
passage. The author of Job may have written xxviii. independently,
and have sacrificed dramatic effect to his desire to use the poem as an
illustrative parallel ; but it can hardly have been written as an integral part
of the book. 8 xxxiii. 14-23. 4 xxxv. 12.
5 xxxiii. 14 ff., xxxvi. 7 ff., cf. v. 17 ff. « Cf. p. 127. 7 Cf. p. 128.

JOB 133
XLII. 7-17, Epilogue.
Jehovah declares that the friends " have not spoken of me
the thing that is right, as my servant Job hath," but they may
be forgiven, if Job prays for them. Job is restored to health,
and to greater prosperity than that which he formerly en
joyed.1 (f) Teaching. — The main subject of the book is the relation
of suffering and sin. According to popular Jewish theology,
all suffering was punishment; a righteous moral government
of the world was fully manifested in the present life ; happi
ness and prosperity, loss and suffering were meted out in
exact proportion to men's virtues and vices. This doctrine is
denied (i.) by the picture of an exceptionally good man,
beggared and bereaved, tortured by loathsome disease; (ii.)
by Job's description of the prevalence in the world of un
merited suffering and unpunished sin, by the friends' failure
to prove him mistaken, and by the explicit statement of God
that Job is right and the friends wrong.
This denial of the popular doctrine leaves us face to face
with the problem of the compatibility of evil and suffering
with the Divine Righteousness. It is not clear what solution,
if any, the author proposes.
(i.) The Speeches of Jehovah suggest that we are to regard
the problem as an insoluble mystery. If we cannot under
stand God in Nature, we must be still more incapable of
fathoming the mysteries of His moral government of His
creatures. Job's speeches, however, lead us to expect some
thing more practically useful.
(ii.) The Prologue explains Job's sufferings as a test of his
righteousness. Assuming that the Prologue is by the author
of the poem, it is difficult to believe that this is put forward as
an adequate explanation of the unmerited suffering of the
world. The author might perhaps intend to illustrate one
way in which a good man's sufferings might be explained with
out supposing him guilty of secret sin.
(iii.) Job expresses a desperate hope2 that his innocence
1 Cf. p. 127. '' xiv. 13 ff., xvii. 13 ff., xix. 25 ff., cf. Contents.

134 BIBLICAL INTRODUCTION
may be vindicated and he restored to happy fellowship with
God in a future life. The author may have intended to
suggest that the solution might possibly be looked for in
that direction, but compensation in a future life is only a
possible hope, not a certain conclusion.
(iv.) Job's piety and fortitude in his affliction — he denies
that God's righteousness is manifested, but always believes
Him righteous — are doubtless intended for an example.1
(v.) The literary power of the book suggests that the author
has not merely worked out a didactic theme, but has rather
depicted the tragic consequences of the popular doctrine of
retribution, using the deeper mysteries of evil, of Nature, and
Providence, to illustrate his main subject. The author's pre
meditated intention to teach may not go beyond the denial of
exact retribution in this life.
Hebrew theology was primarily concerned with the nation ;
doubtless the Book of Job shows us the difficulties in which
this theology was involved when it turned from the nation to
the individual. But, without regarding Job as a mere per
sonification of Israel, we may suppose that the sufferings of
the restored Jews, in the days of their devoted adherence to
the Law, raised difficulties as to the old doctrine of retribu
tion, even as applied to the nation. The author probably has
the nation in mind, as well as the fate of the individual.
(g) Use in N. T. — It is remarkable how little use is made of
this book in N.T, "The patience of Job" is mentioned in
James v. n, and there are a few parallels, which might be
coincidences.2 Apart from these, the only quotation is v. 13
in i. Corinthians iii. 19, "For it is written, He that taketh the
wise in their craftiness." But for this last it would be possible
to argue that the N.T. writers were not acquainted with the
Book of Job.
2. Psalms.
(a) The Arrangement of the Psalter. — The following table
shows the arrangement of the Psalter in the Hebrew Text and
1 Davidson, xxvi.
2 Phil. i. 19a, however, is identical with Job xiii. 16a, LXX.

PSALMS 135
in the Septuagint. In both it is arranged in five books, each
concluding with a doxology. The difference of numbering
in the two texts is due to the fact that in four instances a
single psalm in one text forms two in the other, thus : —
Hebrew, ix. + x. = LXX., ix.
„ cxiv. + cxv. = ,, cxiii.
„ cxvi. = „ cxiv. + cxv.
„ cxlvii. = „ cxlvi. 4- cxlvii.
The LXX. contains an additional psalm, purporting to be
written by David, in the first person, to celebrate his victory
over Goliath.
In the table the numbers showing the frequency of
occurrence of the Divine Names are taken from Lowe
and Jennings on the Psalms I. xxvii. ; they exclude cases
where Elohim occurs in phrases which do not admit of the
use of Jehovah, e.g., " thy God."
The names, etc. to the left hand are the names of persons,
apparently authors, mentioned in the titles. The figures in
italics refer to the LXX , and the names in italics are names
occurring only in the LXX., either in that particular book
or part of a book, or in the Psalter as a whole. Where the
number of a psalm occurs against two different names, the
title, mostly in LXX., gives both names.

Book I. 1-41, 1-hO.

Jehovistic, Jehovah 272, Elohim 15.

Anonymous
1. 2 10 33
1,2
David
3-8,9 11-32
34-41
3-8, 9 10-31 S2
SS-40
Book II. 42-72, 41-71.
Elohistic, Jehovah 30, Elohim 164.
Anonymous 43 66, 67 7 1
65
David 51-65 68-70
1$ 50-64 66,67-69 70
136 BIBLICAL INTRODUCTION
Book \\.— continued.

Sons of Korah

42

44-49

41

43-48

Asaph

5o
49

Solomon

72
71
Sons of Jonadab and \ ~q
of the first captives )
The concluding doxology is followed by a subscription : " The prayers
of David the son of Jesse are ended. "
BOOK III. 73-89, 72-88.
Psalms 73-83 are Elohistic, 84-89 Jehovistic.
David
86
85
Sons of Korah
84,85
87,88
83,84
86,87
Asaph
73-83
72-82
Ethan
89
88
Jedutkun
77
76
Heman
87
Book
IV. 90-106, 89-105.
Jehovistic.
Anonymous
91, 92,93-99>10o
102 104, 105, 106
91 99
101 104, 105
David
IOI
103
90 92-98 100
102, 103
Moses
90
S9
Book V. 107-150, 106-151.
Jehovistic, except that cviii. = lvii. 7-1 1 -t-lx. 5-12 is Elohistic,
and Elohim is used absolutely in cxliv. 9.
Anonymous 107 m-121 123 125, 126
106 110-120, 121, 122 124, 125, 126
David 108-110 122 124
107-109 123
Solomon 1 27
PSALMS

•37

Book V.

— continued.

Anonymous
128-130
127-129
132 134-136,
131 133- 135
137
David
131
133
138-145
130
132
186, 137-144
Anonymous
146
147
148, 149, 150
David
151
Haggai and j ^ w w ^ 1Jfg m
Zechariah 1
Psalms 120-134 have the title "Song of Ascents," and
Psalms 135, 146-150 begin and end with "Praise ye the Lord,"
"Hallelujah." (b) The Growth of the Psalter. — The table in § 1 contains
the chief data for determining the history of the Psalter. Our
Psalter is the final edition of the canonical Temple hymn-
book; other collections of hymns may have been used at
the Temple later on, but they were not combined with the
Psalter. Such a national collection of sacred song must have
connected with individual psalms through a series of earlier
and shorter collections. The compiler of a hymn-book
may either rearrange earlier collections according to some
principle, authorship, subject, metre, etc., or he may simply
combine previous collections ; or he may partly follow one
method, and partly the other. In most modern hymn-
books the hymns are arranged according to subjects, and
afford no evidence of the history of previous collections
from which the hymns are derived. But sometimes a
supplement is added without altering the arrangement of
the earlier collection, e.g., two or three such supplements
have been added to Sankey's Hymn-book, and the arrange
ment of the latest edition reveals the history of the gradual
growth of the book to its present form.
Similarly the present arrangement of the contents of the
Psalter shows that the Psalter is the result of a process of
aggregation, by which earlier collections were combined and
supplemented, without any extensive rearrangement of their
contents.
138 BIBLICAL INTRODUCTION
The Psalter is not arranged according to authorship as
indicated in the titles, for the Davidic psalms are distributed
through the five books ; nor according to subject matter, for
psalms on similar topics are often found far apart, separated
by others which deal with very different topics. An attempt
has sometimes been made to show that the present arrange
ment is, in a fashion, based upon subject matter; but its
advocates often rely on mechanical similarity of diction,
e.g., xxxiv. and xxxv. have been supposed to be placed
together because they are the only psalms which mention
the Angel of the Lord. It is much more likely that these
psalms were found side by side in an earlier collection, and
the similarity is due to their composition by the same author
or during the same period.
We may therefore examine the present arrangement of the
Psalter to see what evidence it affords of its growth from earlier
collections. The fact that the Jehovistic psalms are not all in one
collection, nor all the Elohistic all in another, shows that
the present grouping has not been arranged by a final editor
according to the Divine Names, but has been taken over
by him from earlier collections. Hence we may conclude
that Book I., Book II. , lxxiii.-lxxxiii., Ixxiv.-lxxxix., Book
IV. 4- Book V. are earlier collections.1
Hence, again, the books are not wholly, at any rate,
divisions made by the final editor, but correspond to earlier
collections. The Elohistic character of Book II. and of lxxiii.-lxxxiii. is
due to an editor; the Jehovistic psalms xiv, xl. 13-17 are
found in II. and III. as liii. and lxx. with Jehovah changed
to Elohim ; such phrases as " God thy God," " Elohim
Sabaoth," i.e., " God Sabaoth," are obtained by altering the
Jehovah in "Jehovah thy God," "Jehovah Sabaoth" to
Elohim. Since, however, this Elohistic editor did not venture
1 They may have been modified by addition, omission, etc. The
reasons for combining TV. and V. and for separating Ixxiv.-lxxxix.
from them will appear later.

PSALMS 139
to make a similar revision of Book I. as a whole, the latter
must have been already firmly established.
The Elohistic section II. + lxxiii.-lxxxiii. is plainly a com
bination of three smaller collections : (i.) a Davidic hymn-
book, li.-lxxii., to which the doxology, and the subscription,
" The prayers of Jesse, the son of David, are ended," originally
belonged; (ii.) the hymn-book of the Korahite temple choir,
xlii.-xlix. ; (iii.) the hymn-book of the Asaphite temple choir,
1., lxxiii.-lxxxiii. (i.) is probably the oldest of these collections.
The Jehovistic appendix, lxxxiv. -lxxxix., is a later Korahite
hymn-book. Books IV. and V. are very similar, and there is no reason
for a division at cvi., since cvii. is the sequel to cvi. Hence
IV. and V. were one collection, and the doxology at the
end of cvi. cannot be, like the other doxologies, the con
clusion of an earlier collection. The different Divine Names
show that IV. and V. were not edited by the editor of II. ;
the subscription to II. , "the prayers of David are ended,"
shows that that editor was not acquainted with IV. and V.,
in which several psalms are ascribed to David.1 Moreover
cviii. is made up of sections of two Elohistic psalms, and
retains the editorial Elohim, hence the editor of IV. and
V. or one of his predecessors was acquainted with the
Elohistic collection. On these and other grounds IV. and
V. are later than II. and III.
The absolute date of these collections is difficult to fix ; the
most probable conclusions are as follows. In I., i., ii., anony
mous both in LXX. and Hebrew, were prefixed by the final
editor as a suitable introduction to the complete Psalter. The
Davidic group, iii.-xli. is the earliest Temple hymn-book.
The literary parallels in some of the Psalms suggest that the
collection was made after the Exile,2 perhaps in connection with
the organisation of the Temple services by Ezra and Nehemiah.8
1 Unless indeed all these titles were added after the collection IV. +V,
was compiled.
2 Individual psalms, of course, may be much earlier.
3 Robertson Smith, Old Testament in the fewish Church, 2nd
edition, p. 221.

140 BIBLICAL INTRODUCTION
The Elohistic section, as later than I., will also be later than
Nehemiah, a conclusion supported by the fact that in Nehe
miah vii. 44 there is only one Temple choir, the sons of
Asaph,1 whereas before the compilation of this section, the
Korahite choir had been formed. On the other hand, this
section was compiled before the time of the Chronicler, 300-
250, for Chronicles names three choirs, Asaph, Heman, and
Ethan or Jeduthun.2
The Jehovistic appendix., Ixxxiv.-lxxxix., to II. and III., is
somewhat nearer to the Chronicler. It marks the transition
from Korah to Heman and Ethan, by combining Korahite
psalms with one headed Ethan, and another, in LXX.,
Heman.3 Hence IV. and V. are later than the Chronicler. The
presence in them of Maccaba?an psalms indicates a date in
that period.
The history of the Psalter may therefore be summarised
thus : —
(i.) It includes very early material, but no date can be fixed,
even approximately, as that at which the most ancient elements
of the Psalter were composed. But the stages of its compila
tion which we are able to trace belong to the period after the
Exile. (ii.) The earliest collection is the Davidic hymn-book, iii.-
xli., compiled about the time of Nehemiah.
(iii.) Later on, three other collections were formed, another
with the title David, and two belonging to the Temple choirs,
Asaph and Korah. These three were combined by an Elo
histic editor.
(iv.) Another Korahite collection was made, and added to
the Elohistic section.
1 Neh. xi. is not part of Nehemiah's Memoirs, but only based upon
them ; the threefold division in xi. 1 7, is not found in the LXX.
2 i. Chron. vi. 31 ff., xxv. 1. The Chronicler describes the past in
terms of the institutions of his own times.
3 If these positions are correct, the "Jeduthun" of lxxii., Heb. and
LXX., may be a later insertion.

PSALMS 141
(v.) The collection IV. + V. was made, also from earlier
collections, cxx.-cxxxiv., cxlvi.-cl., etc.
(vi.) The final editor combined I., II. + III., and IV. + V. ;
and prefixed i., ii., not later than about B.C. 132 (the date of
the Prologue to Ecclesiasticus).
This view of the growth of the Psalter, and the arguments
by which it is sustained, are substantially those of Robertson
Smith.1 We can only notice four of the objections to this
view ; only the third and fourth are serious.
(i.) That the Canon was closed in the reign of Artaxerxes I.
But the weight of evidence, both internal and external, is
decisively against this view. Josephus seems to have held
some such theory2; but his view is merely a deduction from
insufficient and misunderstood data. We also read in ii.
Maccabees ii. 13,3 that Nehemiah established a library con
taining " books concerning the kings and prophets, and those
of David, and kings' letters concerning offerings," but this
does not show that the Canon or the Psalter were closed in
Nehemiah's time.4 Moreover, ii. Maccabees is a very doubt
ful authority. The fact that the Samaritans only received the
Pentateuch makes it improbable that the full O.T. Canon had
been authoritatively established in Nehemiah's time.
(ii.) The translator of Ecclesiasticus, writing in B.C. 132,
refers to a Greek translation of " the Law, the Prophecies,
and the rest of the books." The third class probably includes
the Psalter, and it has been argued that if the Psalter was
translated into Greek in 132, it must have been completed at
a much earlier date. But collections of psalms may have
been translated into Greek long before the Psalter was com
pleted. The Greek editions of Daniel and Esther were
supplemented after they had been translated, even without
1 Op. cit. Lect. vii., similarly Cornill. Cheyne holds that the
Psalter was completed before B.C. 142, and that the collections II. +III.,
IV. + V., were both formed in the Maccabaaan period. Corn ill thinks
the Elohistic section received its Elohistic revision some time after the
collection was formed.
2 Against Apion, i. 8. 3 Probably written before A. v. 70.
4 Buhl, English Trans., 10.

142 BIBLICAL INTRODUCTION
any Hebrew authority for the additions ; a fortiori the Greek
edition of the national hymn-book would be readily enlarged
to conform with the latest Hebrew edition.
(iii.) We have seen that the doxology, cvi. 47 f, at the close
of IV., was added by the final editor; but in i. Chronicles
xvi. 8-36, we find a psalm made up of cv. 1-15, xcvi. 1, etc.,
and cvi. 1, 47 f. This acquaintance of the Chronicler with
the doxology seems to show that the Psalter was completed
before he wrote. Numerous answers have been given to this
objection ; (a) that the doxology was a part of the psalm as
an independent poem1; this is not likely; (b) that the
doxology was composed by the Chronicler, and borrowed by
the editor of the Psalter2; (c) that i. Chronicles xvi. 8-36,
is a very late addition to Chronicles.
(iv.) If, as Gratz and Cheyne maintain, Maccabaean psalms
are found in all the sections of the Psalter, either the collec
tions are more recent, or the editors have interfered with them
much more extensively than Robertson Smith supposed.3
The last two objections suggest, as an alternative theory,
that the stages of the growth of the Psalter were as given
above, but that a Psalter in five books was compiled before
Chronicles, i.e., c. 300, and that later additions were freely
inserted at such points as seemed suitable.
(c) Date and Authorship of Individual Psalms. — We have
three kinds of evidence : titles, position in the Psalter, internal
evidence. For the titles see (d), where it is maintained that
they afford us little help. For position in the Psalter, see (a) ;
we may be able to say that certain psalms are older than
Nehemiah, and that all are older than B.C. 132, but cannot be
much more definite. The internal evidence as to pre-exilic,
Davidic, and Maccabsean psalms is considered in (d), (e);
otherwise internal evidence does not carry us far. Many of
the Psalms are short devotional poems, presupposing no special
1 Robertson Smith, O.T., etc., 196.
s Cornill, p. 225. Similarly, Cheyne suggests that the doxology was
one in use at the Temple services, and therefore known alike to the
Chronicler and the editor of the Psalter.
3 Cf. (e) Maccaba^in Psalms.

PSALMS 143
historical situation, expressing sentiments common to devout
believers in all ages, written in a style which— allowing for the
editing inevitable in a hymn-book in current use, and for the
imitation of older styles by late scholars — might be used at
any time from Isaiah to the Maccabees.
The history of the Psalter renders it probable that a very large
proportion of the Psalms, especially in II. -V, are post-exilic,
and that many in II. and III. belong to the period of Nehe
miah or somewhat later, and that most of the contents of IV.
and V. are later still. The contents of many of the Psalms
confirm such conclusions ; they express the anxious piety of a
poor and suffering people whose main interest is the Temple
and the Law.
(d) The Titles, Davidic and pre-Exilic Psalms. — In attempt
ing to use the titles as evidence for authorship, we meet with
many difficulties. Probably the oldest titles did not originally
denote authorship. Apparently the "David,"1 "Asaph,"
"Korah" psalms are taken from collections bearing those
titles. When the smaller collections were merged in larger
ones, the origin of the individual psalms was shown by pre
fixing the title of the collection to each psalm taken from it.
But the titles " Asaph," " Korah " probably meant that the
collections were the hymn-books of these choirs. So the title
" David " given to iii.-xli., li.-lxxii., doubtless indicates some
connection with David or his dynasty, but not necessarily
authorship by David.
In most of the Davidic psalms, the internal evidence, as far
as it goes, is unfavourable to Davidic authorship; and, with
the exception of xviii., never amounts to anything like a proof
of authorship by David. The notes of time, place, and
circumstance, where there are any, do not point to David
or his times, and the contents do not suggest the David of
the Book of Samuel. As to style, before we can apply this
criterion, we must have a fairly large group of psalms,
certainly David's, before we know what his style was. We
1 i.e., iii.-xli., li.-lxxii. ; the case is different with the other Davidic
psalms.

144 BIBLICAL INTRODUCTION
have no such group. In the Lament over Saul and Jonathan,
the absence of any religious element in dealing with so
solemn a theme is in marked contrast with the deeply religious
character of the psalms ascribed to David.
These facts render it difficult to believe that the Davidic
collections consist to any great extent of psalms written by
David or in his time. Nevertheless, the tradition that David
was a poet, and specially interested in sacred music, is early
and persistent1; probably he composed psalms, some of which
are preserved in I. and perhaps II. , disguised by a long
process of editing.
The evidence for Davidic authorship is strongest for xviii., a
thanksgiving for success in war, which might well have been
written by the victorious poet-king.2
Pre-exilic psalms will most probably be found in the Davidic
collections, those mentioning the king seem to presuppose the
existence of the pre-exilic kingdom, i.e., ii., xviii., xx., xxi.,
xxviii., xiv., lxi., lxiii., lxxii. ; but the king in some of these
may be borrowed from a pre-exilic model, or may be an
archaic ideal, or even, as has been suggested, a Greek or
Maccabasan king, or some of these psalms may be purely
Messianic. Outside of I. and II. the title David is probably due to
conjecture. There has always been a tendency to ascribe
anonymous psalms to David. The LXX. ascribes to him
many psalms, which are anonymous in the Hebrew, while
some of the " Davidic " psalms in V. are anonymous in some
of the best MSS. of the LXX. Later on " David " becomes
a title for the complete Psalter. N.T. quotations which
connect a name with a psalm, invariably quote it as " David,"
1 i. Sam. xvi. 18, Saul's minstrel ; ii. Sam. i., the Lament over Saul
and Jonathan ; iii. 33, Lament for Abner ; vi. 5, plays before Ark ; xxii.,
author of Psalm xviii. ; xxiii. 1-7, last words of David ; Am. vi. 5,
David inventor of musical instruments. As Sam. is composite, the
passages cited show the tradition in existence at different times.
2 So Baethgen, Konig, Schultz, etc. ; other psalms often abscribed
to David by modern critics are iii., iv.,vi. -xii., xv. ,xix. 1-6, xxiv. 7- 10, xxix.,
xxxii. But, according to Cheyne, Introduction to Isaiah, 171, " no part
of the Psalter has yet been shown to have a pre-exilic basis."

PSALMS 145
even when it is anonymous both in the Hebrew and the
LXX., i?.^., ii. in Acts iv. 25.
Hence the chief use of titles is to enable us to trace earlier
collections. (e) Maccabcean Psalms. — From the time of Theodore of
Mopsuestia1 there have been critics, including Calvin, who
have held that the historical situation implied in some of
the Psalms is that of the Maccabajan period.2 The psalms
most often ascribed to this period are xliv., Ixxiv., Ixxix,,
Ixxxiii. In these psalms the Jews are suffering cruel perse
cution, the Temple has been defiled, and the synagogues
burnt, there is no prophet.3 Yet the Jews maintain their
innocence, they are persecuted on account of their faithfulness
to Jehovah.4 The only corresponding event known to us in
O.T. times is the attempt of Antiochus Epiphanes to suppress
Judaism, in the course of which he tortured and massacred
many faithful Jews, sacked Jerusalem, and polluted the
Temple. The persecution was checked, Jerusalem recovered,
the Temple purified and reconsecrated, and Juda;a rendered
independent by the revolt of the Maccabees. As an Elohistic
revision of these psalms occurs in II. -t- (HI.), and Robertson
Smith attributes this revision to a pre-Maccabaean editor, he
rejects the Maccabsean date for xliv., Ixxiv., Ixxix., and
suggests that a similar persecution may have taken place
under Artaxerxes Ochus, c. 350. Cheyne, 1891,6 regarded
Ixxiv. and Ixxix. as Maccabsean, but his analysis of Isaiah 6
led him to accept the view that such a persecution took
place under Ochus, and to connect Ixxiv. and Ixxix. with
that persecution.
Another group of psalms often regarded as Maccabsean
1 D. a.d. 428.
2 For a statement of the views of older critics see Appendix I. to
Cheyne's Origin of Psalter. Amongst later, Cornill and Baethgen
recognise as Maccabsean, xliv., Ixxiv., Ixxix., Ixxxiii. ; and Baethgen
adds ii., lxix., ex., cxlix., "most probably," and lxxv., cii., cviii.,
cxliv., "possibly."
8 Ixxiv. 7, 8, 9, Ixxix. I. 4 xliv. 17-22, Ixxix. 2, Ixxxiii. 3, 4.
1 Origin of Psalter. 6 Introduction, 1895.

146 BIBLICAL INTRODUCTION
comprises ex., cxv, and cxviii. ex., gives a picture of a priest-
king, after the order of Melchisedec, i.e., not in the legiti
mate line of succession, which exactly describes the position
of the Maccabaean priest-kings, the first of whom was Simon,
142-135. As the first four verses, neglecting opening formulae,
begin with Sh, M, Ayin, N, some have seen in it an acrostic
on his name; but the attempts to fit the other three initials,
Aleph, Y, M, into the acrostic have not been successful.
cxv., cxviii. celebrate a successful war, in which the leaders
have been the house of Aaron, to which the Maccabees
belonged. If any of these are Maccabaean, it is probable that other
psalms, which do not clearly reflect their historical situation,
also belong to that period. We should naturally expect to
find most of these in IV. and V.1
Some of the objections to the existence of Maccabaean
psalms have been dealt with already,2 viz., the alleged prior
closing of the Canon and of the Psalter. Others are : —
(i.) That as Maccabaean psalms must have been composed
shortly before the closing of the Psalter, the names of the
authors would have been known, and given in the titles.
But the anonymity of most of the later psalms shows that
it was not the custom to affix the author's name to productions
known to be recent.
(ii.) It is asserted that the Maccabaean period was not one
of literary activity. This assumes the point at issue. More
over Daniel is now assigned to this period, and Ecclesiasticus
to a slightly earlier date, c. B.C. 180.
(iii.) The language of most of the psalms supposed to be
Maccabaean is said to be too classical for so late a period,
but the fragments of the Hebrew original of Ecclesiasticus
show that writers of the period imitated classical Hebrew with
tolerable success.
These objections are not sufficient to prove that there are
1 Cheyne, Origin of Psalter, 1 89 1, accepted 27, viz., 20, 21, 33,
44, 60, 61, 63, 74, 79, 83, 101, 108, 115-118, i35-«38> H5-'47.
2 Cf. on Growth of Psalter.

PSALMS 147
no Maccabaean psalms ; in the case of those mentioned above,
the internal evidence is strongly in favour of a Maccabaean
origin; others probably belong to the same period, but it is
difficult to identify them.
(f) Use in N.T; Messianic Psalms. — As "David" and "son
of David" were synonymous with the promised Deliverer of
Israel, and " David " became a title of the Psalter, the N.T.
freely uses the Psalms as describing the character and ex
perience of the Messiah. Messianic psalms may be divided
into : —
(i.) The Righteous King ; ii. 7, " Thou art my Son, etc.," is
applied to Christ, Acts xiii. 33, Hebrews i. 5, v. 5 ; also, "Thy
throne, O God, etc.," xiv. 6, in Hebrews i. 8, 9 ; ex., with its
king, who is also priest after the order of Melchisedec, is
applied to Christ in Hebrews v.-x., Matthew xxii. 44, etc.,
" If David call him Lord, etc.," Acts ii. 34 f., and i. Corinthians
xv. 2s.1
(ii.) The Innocent Sufferer ; " My God, my God, why hast
thou forsaken me," Matthew xxvii. 46, etc., is from xxii. 1 ;
xxii. 1 8, "The casting of lots" is applied to the Passion, John
xix. 24; xxxi. 5, in Luke xxiii. 46, and xxxiv. 20 in John xix. 36.2
(iii.) The Typical Man; viii., the divinely appointed relation
of Mankind to Nature and the Angels, is applied to Christ,
Matthew xxi. 16, Hebrews ii. 6, 7, i. Corinthians xv. 27.
(iv.) The Perfect Believer ; xvi. 8-10, "Thou wilt not leave
my soul in hell, etc.," was applied to the Resurrection by St.
Peter at Pentecost, and by St. Paul at Antioch in Pisidia,
Acts ii. 25 ff., xiii. 35. 3
The Psalter possesses a special Messianic character as con
taining some of the loftiest and purest ideals, and most exalted
anticipations of O.T. religion, in some of which, at any rate,
1 Cf. also ii. 1, Acts iv. 25 ; xviii. 49, Rom. xv. 9. Other psalms
sometimes included in this class are xx., xxi., xl., lxi., lxxii., lxxxix.
2 Cf. also xxii. 22, Heb. ii. 12 ; xxxv. 19 and lxix. 4, John xv. 25 ; xii.
9, John xiii. 18, of Judas ; lxix. 9, John ii. 17, Rom. xv. 3 ; lxix. 23, Rom.
xi. 9 f. ; lxix. 25, Acts i. 20, of Judas.
3 Cf. also xl. 7, Heb. x. 5-7.

148 BIBLICAL INTRODUCTION
the authors consciously express expectations whose complete
fulfilment lay beyond their own horizon.1
(g) Contents and Teaching. — As these are too rich and varied
to admit of detailed treatment, the Psalms have been arranged
in groups. But a single psalm often touches on several
subjects, so that the classification is only roughly accurate.
I., The appeal of the sufferer for deliverance.
(i.) The appeal of Israel against her oppressors, 44, 60, 74,
94. 129-132, 137.
(ii.) The appeal of the suffering saint — the Israelite or
Israel — against the oppression of sinners, mostly either the
Gentiles, or the Jews who ally themselves with them. Such
alliances are known between Jewish nobles and the Samaritans
in the time of Nehemiah, and between the hellenising Jews
and the Greeks in the time of Antiochus Epiphanes, and
doubtless existed at other times, 3-5, 7, 10-14, 17, 22a,2 26-
28, 31, 35, 41-43. 53-59. 62, 64, 69-71, 89b,3 109, 120, 123,
140-143. (iii.) The appeal of the sufferer for deliverance, 6, 39, 40,
61, 63, 86, 88, 90, 102.
(iv.) The appeal of the sinner for mercy, 25, 38, 51.
II., Praise and Thanksgiving.
(i.) For the actual or prospective deliverance of the righteous
and punishment of the wicked, the speaker being still in the
shadow of recent trouble, 9, 16, 21, 22b,4 23, 30, 32, 36, 52,
75. II6. I24, !38-
(ii.) Confident prayer and praise, and expressions of confi
dent faith. There is a tone of unclouded brightness about
1 Cf. also x. 7, Rom. iii. 14 ; xiv. =liii., Rom. iii. 10-18 ; xix. 4, Rom.
x. 18; xxiv. 1, i. Cor. x. 26; xxxii. I, Rom. iv. 7, 8; xxxiv. 12 f, i. Pet.
iii. 10 f. ; xxxvi. 1, Rom. iii. 18 ; xliv. 22, Rom. viii. 36 ; li. 4, Rom. iii.
4 ; Ixviii. 18, Eph. iv. 8 ; lxxxii. 6, John x. 34 ; lxxxix. 20, Acts xiii. 22 ;
xc. 4, ii. Pet. iii. 8; xci. 11 f., Matt. iv. 6, Temptation; xciv. 11, i. Cor.
iii. 20; xcv. 7 ff., Heb. iii. 7 ff. ; xcvii. 7, Heb. i. 6 ; cii. 25 f., Heb. i.
10 f. ; civ. 4, Heb. i. 7 ; cix. 8, Acts i. 20, Judas ; cxii. 9, ii. Cor. ix. 9 ;
cxvi. 10, ii. Cor. iv. 13; cxvii. 1, Rom. xv. 11 ; cxviii. 6, Heb. xiii. 6;
cxviii. 22, "The stone which the builders rejected " ; Matt. xxi. 42, etc.,
Acts iv. 11, i. Pet. ii. 7 ; cxl. 3, Rom. iii. 13.
* Verses 1-21. 3 Verses 3S-51. 4 Verses 22-31.

PSALMS 149
these psalms. Many are expressly national, and some cele
brate the triumph of Israel over its enemies, 2, 20, 24b,1 34,
46-48, 50a,2 65-68, 76, 84, 85, 91, 92, 95, 101, 103, 108, no,
in, 113, 115, 117, 118, 121, 122, 125, 128, 134, 144, 146,
IS°.-.. (iii.) Praise of God in Nature and Providence, 8, 19a,3 29,
93. I04. 107. i45-T47-
(iv.) Praise of the Law, 19b,4 119.
(v.) Praise of Zion, 87.
III., Historical Retrospects, 78, 81, 89a,6 105, 106, 114,
135. 136.
IV., Exposition of the Doctrine of Rewards and Punish
ments, parallel to Proverbs, 1, 15, 24a,6 37, 49, 50b,7 112.
V., Discussion of the apparent failure of Divine Justice,
parallel to Job, 73.
VI., Marriage Ode, 45.
VII., Eulogy of a King, 72.
Probably when 45 and 72 were included in the complete
Psalter, a spiritual or Messianic interpretation had been given
to them. It is often supposed that in most of the psalms
which use the first person singular the speaker is the com
munity — a view supported by the long and widespread use
of the Psalter in public worship. Yet such psalms would
be based on personal experience, since the Psalter has also
proved to be a perfect manual of private devotion.
(h) Form of Hebrew Poetry. — Hebrew verse is distinguished
from prose not by the use of rhyme or alliteration, or of
special arrangements of accents or quantities, but by a
correspondence of sense, and, in a secondary degree, of
form, called parallelism. The unit of Hebrew verse is
usually a couplet, less often a triplet, and occasionally
a set of four, five, or six lines. The correspondence of
sense between two members of a couplet is of the most
varied description.
Each of the two members may express the same or a very
1 Verses 7-10. 2 Verses 1-15. 3 Verses 1-6. J Verses 7-14.
6 Verses 1-37. 6 Verses 1-6. 7 Verses 16-23.

ISO BIBLICAL INTRODUCTION
similar idea, in which case we have synonymous parallelism,
e.g., Psalm lxix. 8,
"lam become a stranger unto my brethren,
And an alien unto my mother's children."
Sometimes the two members express contrasted truths,
which both illustrate the same general principle, in which
case we have antithetic parallelism, e.g., Psalm xxxii. io,
" Many sorrows shall be to the wicked :
But he that trusteth in the Lord, mercy shall compass him about."1
Sometimes the second member of a couplet merely com
pletes or supplements the sense of the first, in which case
we have synthetic parallelism, e.g., Psalm ii. 6,
" Yet I have set my king
Upon my holy hill of Zion.''
Such couplets are only distinguished from prose by the
context, and, perhaps, by a certain similarity of length and
sound between the two members ; the general rhythm of a
psalm would guide a singer or punctuator in dividing a verse
into its two halves.
The subdivisions of these kinds of parallelism have been
variously named by different scholars. Two striking peculiar
ities are : (i.) the actual repetition of a phrase from (a) in
(b), e.g., Psalm xcvii. 5,
" The hills melted like wax at the presence of Jehovah,
At the presence of the Lord of the whole earth."
and (ii.) the implied repetition of a word or phrase from (a) in
(b), e.g., Psalm xviii. 41,
" They cried, but there was none to save :
Even unto Jehovah, but he answered them not."
1 Two common forms of the relation of the two members (a), (b) of a
couplet in antithetic parallelism may be illustrated mathematically.
We may have —
(a) A is equal to B.
(b) A is not equal to -B, e.g., Proverbs xvi. 10,
"A divine sentence is in the lips of the king :
Or aeain  **'s mout^ s^a" not transgress in judgment."
(a) A=B.
(b) -A= -B, e.g., Proverbs xv. 18,
' ' A wrathful man stirreth up contention :
But he that is slow to anger appeaseth strife. "

PSALMS

151

Correspondence of form naturally arose out of that of
sense, and sometimes, as we have seen, was accepted as a
substitute for it, though, as a rule, there is a relation of
sense between the two members of such couplets, which
produces the feeling of balance or parallelism. The con
nection of form and sense is best illustrated by Psalm xix. 7-9,
where there is a correspondence of "noun to noun, verb to
verb, adjective to adjective."

"The law

of Jehovah is perfect,

restoring

the soul ;

The testimony

of Jehovah is sure,

making wise

the simple ;

The precepts

of Jehovah are right,

rejoicing

the heart ;

The commandment

of Jehovah is pure,

enlightening

the eyes ;

The fear

of Jehovah is clean,

enduring

for ever ;

The judgments

of Jehovah are true,

righteous

altogether.'

In triplets and larger groups of lines the different kinds
of parallelism are variously combined in much the same
way as the rhymes in the various stanzas of English poetry.
In the same psalm the parallelisms may be of different
kinds, but there is a tendency either to use lines of about
the same length throughout a psalm or strophe, or else to
arrange the lengths on some regular principle. The con
clusion of strophes is often indicated by a refrain, e.g.,
Psalm xlvi. 7, n, " Jehovah Sabaoth is with us ;
The God of Jacob is our refuge."
The psalmists occasionally composed alphabetic acrostics ;
the most^ striking is cxix., which consists of twenty-two six-
lined strophes. In each strophe each of the six lines begins
with the same letter : in the first strophe with Aleph, in the
second with Beth, etc. Hence in the English versions each
strophe is headed with the name or symbol of its Hebrew
letter. Other more or less perfect alphabetic acrostics are
ix. 4-x., xxv., xxxiv., xxxvii., cxi., cxii., cxix., cxiv. Psalm ex.
has been read as an acrostic on Simon the Maccabee.1
Numerous attempts have been made to discover hexameters
and similar metres in the O.T., but none of them are generally

Cf. (a).

152 BIBLICAL INTRODUCTION
regarded as successful. The poetry of the O.T. is not con
fined to the books which are specially called "Poetical,"1
but is found in the Prophets, and in the songs, etc. in the
historical books.2
3. Proverbs.
(a) Composition, Date, and Authorship. — Proverbs in many
ways resembles the Psalter. It is a collection of collections
of short poems, assigned by headings to different authors ; the
tendency has been to give the titles Solomon and David to the
complete books, because these two kings were typical repre
sentatives of the wisdom and psalmody of Israel. Just as
the Psalter contains two earlier collections with the title
" David," separated by psalms with other titles ; so here
there are two earlier collections with the title "Solomon,"
separated by proverbs ascribed to "the Wise." These facts
suggest that Proverbs and the Psalter had similar histories.
Thus Proverbs, as the national storehouse of proverbial
wisdom, would be likely to receive additions as long as
Hebrew was a living language, or at any rate till some edition
of it had been current long enough to receive a canonical
status. The production of a new collection of proverbs in
Ecclesiasticus instead of an enlarged edition of our book
shows that the latter was completed some time before b.c
200. According to the analogy of the titles in the Psalter
and elsewhere, the headings may have been added by late
editors. The prologue, " Proverbs of Solomon, etc.," i. 1-6, was
probably prefixed by the compiler of the last edition3; neither
here nor in x. 1, xxv. 1, need the title imply that all the pro
verbs were composed by Solomon.
So far, we may place the final editing of Proverbs at some
date between the formation of the last collection and c. B.C.
250. We have therefore to see within what limits we can fix
1 Psalms, Job, Cant., Eccles., Prov.
8 Cf. Lamentations, pp. 212 f., and Prov., pp. 152, 156,
3 But xxx. f. , may have been added later still.

PROVERBS 153
the dates of these collections. The degree of certainty attain
able is lessened not only by the presence of proverbs much
older than the collections in which they stand, but also by the
probability that some proverbs were inserted and others
brought up to date even after a collection had been formed
and a title prefixed to it.
The following table states a form of the prevalent view as
to Proverbs ; titles in inverted commas : —
A, i. 1-6, Prologue by final editor referring to the book as
" Proverbs of Solomon."
B, i. 7-ix., Late addition, placed at the beginning as suitable
introduction.
C, x. i-xxii. 16, "Solomon," oldest main collection.
D and E, xxii. 17-xxiv. 22, "the Wise"; and xxiv. 23-34,
"the AVise," two appendices to C, combined with it
before the other parts of the book were added.
F, xxv.-xxix., " Solomon, copied out " by the " Men of
Hezekiah," second main collection, added to CDE
as supplement.
G, H, and I, xxx., "Agur"; xxxi. 1-9, "Lemuel" xxxi.;
10-31, three appendices, the two former post-exilic, the
last perhaps pre-exilic.
Thus C is commonly regarded as the oldest collection,
though some1 would assign the priority to F.
C is often2 assigned to the early monarchy, to which period
it must, of course, belong if it is older than F, and if the title
which assigns F to the time of Hezekiah is correct. Very
many of the proverbs in C imply the historical situation of
the period ; the king is spoken of with respect and apprecia
tion,3 the general situation seems one of settled order and
moderate prosperity, such as prevailed in the Israelite states
before the social evils denounced by Amos, Hosea, and Isaiah
came to a head. A contentious woman is one of the most
serious troubles of life.
1 e.g., A. B. Davidson, Encycl. Brit.
2 Davidson, Encycl. Brit.; Cheyne, Job, etc., p. 133.
3 xvi. 10-15, xix. I2i xx- 8> 26> z8> xxi- l-

154 BIBLICAL INTRODUCTION
On the other hand there are features which seem to belong
to a later period.1 It is strange that we find no traces of the
fierce polemic of the prophets against Baal-worship and
idolatry. Even if the collection was formed before these
controversies arose, would it have passed through them un
altered ? Again, advanced ethics need not be a sign of a late
date, benevolence and pity, within limited circles, have always
been popular ; but such sayings as
" Jehovah hath made everything for its own end :
Yea, even the wicked for the day of evil " (xvi. 4),
and " The spirit of man is the lamp of Jehovah,"
"Searching all the innermost parts of the belly " (xx. 27),
point to a period when long reflection had been devoted to
the problems of theology and the spiritual life. They may,
however, have been added after the collection was formed.
The almost uniform use in C of couplets in antithetic
parallelism is not necessarily due to the compiler, but may
be due to a traditional convention. The repetition of the
same or part of a proverb in different places 2 indicates that C
was compiled from earlier smaller collections.
If the heading xxv. 1 is accepted, the appendices D, E
to C might naturally, but not necessarily,3 be placed between
C and the time of Hezekiah. These appendices would very
well reflect the vice, extravagance, and oppression of the
eighth century. Repetitions occur4 in D, E, which also
repeat parts of proverbs from C.6 The introduction to D,
xxii. 17-21, resembles i. 1-6, and may also have been added
by the final editor.
The heading of F, "These also are the Proverbs of
Solomon, which the men of Hezekiah . . . copied out,"
would be a most satisfactory pivot for the criticism of
Proverbs, if it could be certainly relied on. It gives us a
1 Cornill, post- exilic.
2 e.g., xiv. i2 = xvi. 25, Cheyne, _/?£, etc., 133, enumerates nineteen
instances. 3 F may have existed long before its combination with CDE.
6 e.g., xxiv. 20b = xiii. 9b.

PROVERBS 155
date for F, and as the "also" implies another collection,
which can scarcely be other than C, it shows that C is
still older. If F is the older collection, the heading will
still be later than C, and therefore not contemporary, but
the work of the editor who combined CDE and F, who
may be the final editor. The Chronicler mentions no such
literary activity on the part of Hezekiah, though we might
expect that he would have done so, if this heading lay
before him.1 The proverbs in F imply less settled and
prosperous times than those in C, and the king or ruler
is sometimes spoken of as an oppressor.2 The collection
may reflect the troubled days when Samaria was tottering
to its fall, and Jerusalem was expecting to share its fate.
Yet the evils dwelt on are rather those of a society under
an iniquitous government, which uses part of the people as
instruments of its oppression ; and the contentious woman is
still prominent. We do not seem to be on the verge of great
catastrophes. The antithesis between the righteous and the
wicked, and the qualities assigned to them remind us of
post-exilic psalms, and the references to the law suggest a
post-exilic date.3 Cheyne, however, regards F as of the
age of Hezekiah, or, at any rate, pre-exilic,4 and Driver5
writes: "The title (xxv. 1), the accuracy of which there is
no reason to question."
F also repeats proverbs or parts of proverbs from C.6
The three concluding appendices, Agur, Lemuel, and the
Capable Woman, are generally regarded as post-exilic.7
Agur's meditation on the Divine Transcendence belongs
to a very late period of Jewish theology.8 His quaternions
1 Cornill. 2 e.g., xxix. 2.
3 xxviii. 4-9, xxix. 18, the passages do not seem to be additions, and to
render tbrd ' ' instruction " or " revelation " is hardly in accordance with the
concrete, practical nature of the proverbs in this section.
4 lob, etc., pp. 145-149 ; cf. Origin of Psalter, pp. 409, 457.
6 Introduction, p. 383, similarly Nowack, p. xxvii.
0 Cheyne, Job, etc., p. 143, enumerates 11 cases.
7 Driver, p. 382, "doubtless."
8 xxx. 5-9 almost reads like a marginal gloss, the protest of a pious
reader, who prayed that he might be kept from such dangerous speculations
as those of Agur.

156 BIBLICAL INTRODUCTION
remind one of similar groups in the rabbinical sayings in
Pirqt Aboth. The few verses addressed to Lemuel contain
striking Aramaisms.
A post-exilic date is suggested for "the Capable Woman"1
by its being an acrostic — the other O.T. acrostics2 are, as
far as we know, post-exilic — and by its position in the book.3
Otherwise the quiet, prosperous circumstances implied in this
picture of a strenuous housewife might be those of the early
monarchy. The language of the poem would be consistent
with such a date.
The date of A and B, which are probably by the final
editor,4 is another crucial point of the criticism of Proverbs.
Its points of contact with Deuteronomy have led many to
ascribe it to6 the closing period of the Jewish monarchy.
But other considerations point to a post-exilic date;6 the
personification of Wisdom is a great advance on Job xxviii.,
and is closely akin to Ecclesiasticus xxiv. and the Wisdom
of Solomon ; the account of the divine working in Creation
and Providence is an advance on Genesis i. The elaborate
structure of some of the sentences, especially in ii.,7 suggests
the influence of a knowledge of Greek.8
Thus the general conclusion indicated is that the complete
work is post- exilic, not later than c. B.C. 250; and that
probably C and perhaps F were compiled before the Exile,
and A after the Exile.9
When we come to the contents of these collections, we
1 'Esheth hayil, for which there is no English equivalent. "Virtuous
Woman " quite misleads the reader, to whom it suggests absence of vices,
especially one particular vice, and not the active, successful well-doing
denoted by the Hebrew.
2 Pages 151 f. s But see p. 153. 4 So Cornill, etc.
6 A. B. Davidson, Encycl. Brit. ; Driver ; Cheyne, in Job, etc.,
p. 168, but cf. below.
6 So Cornill; Cheyne, Founders, etc., p. 340; Kautzsch, Bibel,
ii. 212; Konig, Smend, p. 510.
1 Sometimes spoken of as a single sentence.
8 The dependence of i.-ix. on Job, and of Job on i.-ix, have been
asserted with equal positiveness ; cf. p. 132.
9 According to Wildeboer, the book was compiled at the beginning
of the Greek period ; the older collections at the close of the Persian
period.

PROVERBS 157
raise the question of the share of Solomon in the book.
Solomonic proverbs and Davidic psalms present very similar
problems. Both are supported by ancient tradition ; 1 are
very probable when all the evidence has been considered,
and are naturally to be looked for in the oldest collections
bearing the names of David and Solomon. But in neither
case is it likely that even the oldest collection is wholly or
substantially David's or Solomon's, and definite criteria for
Solomonic proverbs are more entirely absent than for
Davidic Psalms. The contents of C suggest that the
compiler was rather a man in moderate circumstances
moving in middle-class society than a magnificent and
luxurious king surrounded by a splendid court. Sayings
of Solomon would reach such an editor, but are not now
distinguishable from his other material. Where the evidence
is so vague, critical opinion naturally varies widely. Professor
A. B. Davidson writes 2 of Proverbs : " Much " in the book
" may be referred to the age of Solomon, particularly the
sayings in chapters x.-xxii., though much even in this division
may be later " ; on the other hand, a distinguished critic denies
Solomon any share in Proverbs.3
(b) Text. — The LXX. differs very widely from the Hebrew ;
it makes numerous additions, some of which are also found in
the Vulgate or Syriae. For instance, after vi. 6-8, which
commend the ant as an example, the LXX. adds a similar
passage on the bee. The order of some sections is different,
the most important change being the insertion of xxx. 1-14
(part of Agur) between xxiv. 22 and 23; and xxx. 15-xxxi. 9
(rest of Agur, and Lemuel), between xxiv. 34, and xxv. 1.
This arrangement indicates that the three appendices G, H, I
were combined with the rest of the book in different ways by
different editors.
The headings, x. 1, "Proverbs of Solomon," xxiv. 23, "These
1 i. Kings iv. 32.
2 fob, C.B.S., p. lx. ; Strack speaks of C as substantially (inhaltlich)
Solomonic. 3 Smend, A.T. Theol., p. 510 n., "Mit den kanonischen Proverbien
hat Salomo freilich nichts zu thun. "

158 BIBLICAL INTRODUCTION
also are of the Wise,"1 xxx. i, " Words of Agur," etc., xxxi. i,
"Words of Lemuel," etc., are omitted, in order that the
"Proverbs of Solomon" in i. i, may be understood to extend
to the whole book.
(c) Contents. — I. 1-6, General Heading.
"The Proverbs of Solomon, the son of David, King of
Israel," and statement of purpose of book.
I. 7-IX., In Praise of Wisdom.
Chiefly in couplets and synonymous parallelism.
i. 7— vii., A series of didactic poems, mostly beginning " My
son," exhorting the reader to practise virtues and avoid vice,
and thus follow wisdom.
viii., ix., Wisdom invites men to her banquet ; warns them
against folly. Wisdom as God's agent in creation and provi
dence. X. 1 -XXII. 16, "The Proverbs of Solomon."2
A collection of miscellaneous aphorisms on life and con
duct, for the most part secular rather than distinctly re
ligious ; almost entirely in couplets, and chiefly in antithetic
parallelism. XXII. 17-XXIV. 22, "The Words of the Wise."3
xxii. 17-21, Purpose of collection, stated in first person by
compiler. xxii. 22-xxiv. 22, A similar collection to x.-xxii. 16. The
grouping of the lines is very varied, from couplets to a set of
eight clauses, but quatrains are most frequent. The parallel
ism is chiefly synonymous.
xxiv. 23-34, "These also are the sayings of the Wise."4
Appendix to above, including "the Parable of the Sluggard."
Grouping of lines varied, parallelism synthetic or synonymous.
XXV.-XXIX., "Proverbs of Solomon."
"These also are the Proverbs of Solomon, which the men
of Hezekiah, king of Judah, copied out." Another similar
1 Replaced by an exhortation similar to xxii. 1 7.
2 This heading is omitted by LXX. and Syr.
3 xxii. 17.
4 LXX. omits and replaces by a hortatory clause like xxii. 17.

PROVERBS 159
collection; couplets preponderate, but both grouping of lines
and parallelism are varied.
XXX., "The Words of Agur, the Son of Jakeh, the
Oracle."1 Nothing is known of Agur, the name may be symbolic,
"hireling" or "collector of wisdom."2
A series of epigrams, from two to ten lines each, on the
Divine Transcendence, four wicked generations, four insatiable
things, four wonderful things, four intolerable things, four
things that are little but wise, four stately things, etc.
XXXI. 1-9, "The Words of King Lemuel."3
"The oracle which his mother taught him."
Nothing is known of Lemuel, possibly a symbolic name,
" belonging to God." Unless it is thought necessary to claim
every verse of the book for Solomon, there is no ground for
identifying either Agur or Lemuel with the Wise King.
Warnings against debauchery and injustice.
XXXI. 10-31, The Capable Woman.
An alphabetic acrostic, chiefly in couplets and synonymous
parallelism ; in praise of the capable woman.
(d) Teaching. — The general theme of Proverbs is the
practical advantage of industry and prudence, honesty and
godliness. The problems of Job are ignored, as they mostly
are in Ecclesiasticus, probably not because they were still
unknown, but because they were not urgent at the times and
under the circumstances when the collections were compiled.
The Proverbs state practical truths of average life, and com
fortable, prosperous men of a practical turn of mind have a
gift for ignoring both speculative difficulties and exceptional
suffering. Proverbs also ignores polygamy,4 and, so far, may
be said to praise monogamy. The great passage on Wisdom 5
1 So R.V. Text, R.V. Mg., "burden''; others propose "of Massa,"
understanding Massa as a proper name, possibly a district of Arabia.
LXX. omits xxx. 1.
2 "Ithiel" and "Ucal" should not be taken as proper names, but
translated as R.V. Mg.
3 R.V., or, as R.V. Mg., Lemuel, king of Massa. LXX. omits.
1 Sometimes regarded as evidence of post-exilic origin. s viii. f.

i6o BIBLICAL INTRODUCTION
is the basis of the doctrine of the Divine Wisdom, as an
almost personal manifestation of God in His working; it is
also one of the most striking O.T. statements of God's
creative and providential activity.
(e) Use in N.T.— The " Whom the Lord loveth, He
chasteneth," of Hebrews xii. 5 f, is from iii. 1 1 f.; the " cheerful
giver,"1 of ii. Corinthians ix. 7, is a reminiscence of xxii. 8,
LXX.2 The description of Christ as "the Wisdom of God"3
prepared the way for the later identification of Christ with
" Wisdom," which made the statement that God created
Wisdom4 a proof text of Arian polemics.
4. Ecclesiastes.
(a) Title. — The Hebrew title Qoheleth has been variously
interpreted. It is a derivative of qdhdl, an assembly, and is
in form an active feminine participle, "one who calls or
addresses an assembly." It has been taken (i.) as agreeing
with Wisdom understood, but i. 12, "I, Qoheleth, was king,"
shows that it refers to Solomon ; therefore we should adopt
(ii.) that the feminine form is used, as in Arabic,5 for a repre
sentative character, so LXX. and Vulg. " Ecclesiastes," Luth.
"Prediger," A. R. "preacher," R. Mg. "great orator."6 Less
probable explanations are "collector (of wise sayings)," "caller
of assemblies," "debater."7 Unsuccessful attempts have
been made to show that Qoheleth is a cryptogram for
Solomon. (b) Date and Authorship. — The language belongs to the
lateststage of biblical Hebrew; Aramaic words "are used.8
The~vocabulary~ and idioms have much in common with the
1 IXapbv 86t7]v.
2 Cf. also iii. 34, Jas. iv. 6, i. Pet. v. 5 ; xi. 31, i. Pet. iv. 18 ; xxv. 21,
Rom. xii. 20 ; xxvi. 1 1, ii. Pet. ii. 22. 3 i. Cor. i. 24.
4 viii. 22, LXX. ; Heb. qdndnt, A. R. " possessed," R. Mg. "formed."
6 Palmer, Arab. Gram., p. 53.
6 Cf. the mase. names Sophereth= scribe (fem.), Mokhereth= seller
(fem.), Ezra ii. 55 ff. 1 Plumptre.
8 e.g., z'man, " time," only elsewhere in O.T., in Neh., Esther, and the
Aramaic section of Daniel,

ECCLESIASTES 161
post-biblical Hebrew of the Mishna, etc.1; some idioms in
constant use in biblical Hebrew are rarely or never used.2 A
more or less considerable influence of Greek upon the language
of Qoheleth has been maintained by some scholars,3 but denied
by Cheyne. The language points to a date in the Greek
period, or, at the earliest, at the end of the Persian period.
The historical situation is not clearly defined, but we gather
that the Jews are oppressed by the officers of an alien govern
ment.4 Such a state of affairs points either to the close of
the Persian period, or to the times when the Ptolemies and
Seleucids in turn ill-used the Jews, before the revolt of the
Maccabees. On the other hand, neither the situation implied nor the
depressed tone of the book suit the stirring period of the
Maccabees. It has been maintained 5 that the version found in MSS. of
the LXX. is that of Aquila; but, in any case, the history of
the LXX. is too little known to afford much help in fixing the
date of this book.
The theology of the book also points to a late post-exilic
date. The temple worship is assiduously observed, but a time
has come when men can regard it with a languid approval
which affords them little comfort. The eager enthusiasm and
fierce controversy of Ezra's time seem long since to have died
away, and something of the well-bred indifference of the
Sadducee has crept over men's souls. This again would suit
the Greek period.
Qoheleth has parallels with Greek philosophy,6 which are

in Mishna ; and the use of she and shel, alone or with prepositions, for the
Heb. 'asher.
1 With three exceptions, the Perf. with Simple Waw is used for the
Imperf. with Waw Consec.
3 Gratz, etc., ap. Cheyne, Job, etc., p. 260; Tyler, Wildeboer.
An example is the alleged use of yapheh, "fair," in the ethical sense of
koa&s, especially in the phrase ttibh 'asher yapheh, v. 17, "good which is
fair," said to equal the KaXis K&ya6os. 4 V. 8f.
5 Gratz, rejected by Dillmann ; ap. Wildeboer.
6 Plumptre, Eccl. etc. ; Tyler.

1 62 BIBLICAL INTRODUCTION
sometimes supposed to indicate dependence, either on
Epicurus, as is suggested by the numerous statements that
the only attainable happiness lies in the reasonable enjoy
ment of the good things of this life ; or on the Stoics, whose
doctrine of recurring cycles is parallel to i. 2-1 1, and of
Determinism to iii. ; or on Heraclitus 1 in such passages as
iii. 1-8. Certainly the book has much of the Stoic temper,
and less than the Stoic faith, and the many parallels are most
easily explained by some influence, direct or indirect, of
Greek thought, but it might not be impossible to explain
the book as an independent development of Hebrew thought.2
While, therefore, the possibility of a date at the close of the
Persian period3 cannot be positively excluded, the weight of
the evidence is in favour of about B.C. 200.4
It follows that the ascription to Solomon,6 like that of the
book of Daniel to Daniel, is a mere literary form, which the
author is not very careful to maintain,6 But although, with
few exceptions,7 the Solomonic authorship was universally
accepted till towards the end of last century, even in 1881
Dean Plumptre wrote, " No one now dreams of ascribing it to
Solomon." 8 There are still, however, some works in circula
tion which maintain the traditional view.9
1 Pfleiderer, ap. Wildeboer.
2 Cheyne, Job, etc., 271, "I do not see that we must admit even a
vague Greek influence." Dillon, Sceptics of O.T., sees Buddhist in
fluence in xii. 7, the reabsorption of the spirit into the Divine.
3 So Ewald, Delitzsch, ap. Cheyne, Keil, Eng. Trans., i. 518,
c. b.c. 444.
4 Cheyne, Job, etc., p. 271, Cornill, Driver, Kayser-Marti,
p. 191, Kautzsch, Bibel, c. b.c. 250?; Plumptre, Smend, A.T. Theol.,
Greek period, p. 526, Tyler, Konig, Alex. Jannaeus, b.c. 104-78;
Gratz, Herod the Great, B.C. 39-4.
s Solomon is not named, but the wise, wealthy son of David, king over
Israel in Jerusalem, can be no one else.
6 e.g., the phrase "all," i.e., apparently, all the kings of Israel "that
were before me in Jerusalem," i. 16, ii. 7, 9.
7 Luther, Grotius, etc., ap. Plumptre, p. 23.
8 Eccl. p. 21, cf. Oxford Helps, "The book was formerly supposed to
have been written by Solomon.
9 Principal Douglas in notes inserted in his translation of Kbil's
Introd., 1871 ; Rev. W. T. Bullock, m.a., in the Speaker's Com
mentary.

ECCLESIASTES 163
As to place of composition, the data are indefinite; it is
commonly placed in Judasa,1 but also at Alexandria.2
(c) Composition. — Apart from the first two chapters, the
book is, as Cheyne says,3 "rough" and "disjointed." "The
thread of thought seems to break every few verses ... the
feelings and opinions embodied in the book are often mutually
inconsistent." The theories framed to account for these facts
may be grouped thus :
(i.) That the book was written as it stands, and that the
lack of coherence and consistency either reflect the un
certainty and varying moods of the author, as in Tennyson's
Two Voices? or that the book contains a kind of report of
the discussions of a religious academy,6 or that the more
sceptical passages are the sayings of an infidel objector, quoted
to be refuted.
(ii.) That the lack of order is due either to an accident
to the MS. by which leaves were transposed,6 or to the fact
that iii. -xii. were compiled from loose notes of the author's
after his death.7 This view would explain the presence of
the collection of proverbs.
(iii.) That the confusion arises from omissions and inter
polations made by editors to correct the sceptical tone of
the book. • This view is supported by the probable analogy
of Job.
The epilogues, xii. 9-14, especially 13 f., are often regarded
as additions.8 They certainly read like a subscription by a
later hand, cf. John xxi. 24 f. ; and 13 f. seems to contradict
the teaching of many passages of the book. The rejection,
1 Nowack, p. 197, Cheyne, p. 258, Tyler, p. 63.
' Plumptre, p. 39. 3 Job, etc., p. 204.
4 Nowack, Plumptre, Wildeboer. 6 Tyler.
6 Bickell, who also holds that there are important editorial additions,
e.g. all the passages implying authorship by Solomon. Naturally additions
would be made in the attempt to construct a coherent whole out of the
jumbled leaves.
7 Cheyne, Job, etc., p. 204.
8 Bickell, Cheyne,/^, etc., p. 234. Nowack, Plumptre, p. 101.
xii. 8-14 are accepted by Tyler and Wildeboer.

164 BIBLICAL INTRODUCTION
however, of this section carries with it that of the other
"B" passages.1 The difficulty as to 13 f. is not that its
teaching is necessarily incompatible with the rest of the
book ; in face of all appearances to the contrary, Qoheleth,
like Job, may have clung to his faith in God's righteousness.
But 13 f. is not "the sum of the matter" either as a summary
of the book, or of Qoheleth's feelings as to the subject ; nor
is it easy to understand how the author of the A passages1
would have spoken with the assured certainty of the B
passages as to God's judgments. Was he able to take, at
one and the same time, Job's attitude and that of Job's
friends, without having any suggestion to offer as to how
they were to be reconciled. The simplest theory of the book
seems to be the last (iii-).2
An interesting variety of this theory supposes that the
Epilogue was added at the Synod of Jamnia, a.d. 90, to
adapt Ecclesiastes for reception into ' the Canon, and to
formally close the Canon of the Hagiographa; 12a is
translated : "As for more than these," i.e., the canonical
books, "beware, my son; of making many books there is
no end."
(d) Contents. — Ecclesiastes contains material of three kinds :
(A) an exposition of the vanity of life and its practical con
sequences; (B) notes enforcing ordinary religious views; (C)
proverbs of a purely general character, which might just as
well have been included in the Book of Proverbs. There
is no widely accepted view as to the principle on which the
book has been arranged, and the various materials com
bined. Ar, L, ii., Vanity of human life in the ever-recurring cycles
of existence. Vanity of all things, of wealth and luxury,
wisdom and toil. Yet it is well to enjoy life as well as we
may. [Bi, ii. 26a, God rewards whom He pleases, and
punishes the sinner.
1 See (d).
* Dr. Paul Haupt translates xii. 12a: "And it might be well to
add : my son, be on your guard against these (sayings)."

ECCLESIASTES 165
Also understood1 as a statement of God's
arbitrary choice of one man for good and
another for ill-fortune; "sinner" meaning merely
"man." If so the sentence belongs to Ai.]
A2, iii.— vi., All things have their season. Vanity of specu
lation, of life under oppression,
[B2, iii. 17, God shall judge all men. J
or in solitude. Vanity of superstitious worship, of avarice.
It is well to enjoy life, such as it is.
A3, vii. 1 -viii. 15, A commendation of a sedate life, as
cheerful as may be, in face of the emptiness and weariness
of all things. [B3, vii. 26b, viii. 12 f., God shall reward the good and
punish the wicked.]
A4, viii. 16-ix. 16, All that man's wisdom can see is that
"All things come alike to all"; there is no moral discrimi
nation or intelligible purpose manifest in the government of
the world. It is well to enjoy life, as far as may be, for
wisdom is a barren gift.
[C, ix. 17-x. 20, Collection of Proverbs.]
A5, xi. i-xii. 8, We must labour in spite of uncertainty as
to results. Let a man make the most of youth, before growing
years deprive him of his faculties.
[B4, xi. 9b, xii. 1, God will judge life, therefore let the
young man be mindful of his Creator.2
B5, xii. 7, Man's dust returns to dust, his spirit to
God.3
B6, xii. 9-14, Epilogue stating that the author's
intentions were good, that undue speculation is
dangerous, and that the sum of the matter is that
the whole duty of man is to fear God, because He
will judge all things.]
1 Wildeboer.
2 For "thy Creator," bSra'akhd, P. Haupt, etc. read bbr'kha, "thy
well" understood as a figure for "wife." If so xii. I belongs to A 5.
3 Referring to Genesis ii. 7. The ' ' spirit " is not man's personality,
but the divine breath, which God resumes. Similar statements are made
ofthe beasts, Psalm civ. 29, Job xxxiv. 14 f. Even so this verse contradicts
iii. 20.

166 BIBLICAL INTRODUCTION
(e) Teaching.— The importance of Ecclesiastes lies in its
exposition of the vanity of life. Following up the assaults of
Job, Ecclesiastes deals the last fatal blow to the popular
doctrine of retribution. This doctrine traced the divine
approval or condemnation in material prosperity and suffer
ing. Job showed that this could only be maintained by a
brutally cynic judgment upon all (apparently) good men over
taken by suffering. But Qoheleth shows that this material
prosperity itself, wealth, power, luxury, wisdom, long life, is
" vanity of vanities " ; how then can it be the sign of God's
approval? Further he scarcely seems to have gone, but to
have brought the matter to this point, cleared the way for
another question : " How can the absence of material pros
perity be the token of God's disapproval ? " Again, Qoheleth
ignored, and therefore probably rejected, the doctrine of a
resurrection, which we know was already current in his time.
But this limitation of his faith enabled him to set forth, with
unique emphasis, the truth that man's present life, considered
by itself, is unworthy alike of God and man. Such an ex
position is a conclusive argument for a future life.
The passages added to declare the certainty of divine
judgment, present to us faith, whether author's or editor's,
persisting in the face of overwhelming difficulties.
For us Ecclesiastes has two main lessons, both of which it
shares with the Book of Job. First, that the frank utterance
and discussion of objections to faith may be inspired by the
Holy Spirit, even when the utterer can only show grounds for
doubts, and cannot resolve them. Secondly, and more par
ticularly, in the supposed interests of God's benevolence and
justice, and in order to emphasise sin and responsibility,
religious teachers are constantly tempted to ignore
" . . . . the weight of care,
That crushes into dumb despair
One half the human race."
The presence of Qoheleth in the Canon of O.T. Revelation
reminds us that God's sympathy with His suffering creation is

SONG OF SONGS 167
wider and deeper than we are sometimes taught ; its logical
sequel is the sacrifice of Christ.
(f) Use in N.T— There is no evidence that any N.T. writers
were acquainted with Ecclesiastes, unless we accept Dr. Paul
Haupt's suggestion that "Luke xii. 22-34 . . . (like Psalm
cxxvii.) is evidently directed against Ecclesiastes."1
(g) Canonicity. — The right of Ecclesiastes to a place in the
Jewish canon was long contested, but was officially conceded
by the Synod of Jamnia, a.d. 90. The church, as in many
other matters, simply adopted the decision of the Rabbis.
5. Song of Songs.
(a) Date and Authorship. — The title, " The Song of Songs,
which is Solomon's," may merely mean that it is about
Solomon ; if it is intended to assert authorship, it is merely
a late conjecture suggested by the contents, like so many of
the Psalm titles. Solomonic authorship is now very generally
rejected. The language has some striking characteristics of
the latest period of Hebrew,2 which point to a date at the
close of the Persian period, or even later.3
These linguistic peculiarities, however, are often explained
by supposing that Canticles was written in the dialect of
Northern Israel. The mention of Tirzah, the capital of that
kingdom, before Omri built Samaria,4 has also been held to
support a pre-exilic date. There is every probability that the
language of Northern Israel had dialectic peculiarities, but
there is not sufficient evidence to establish the unlikely theory
that these peculiarities coincided with those of the latest stage
of the Hebrew language. These are entirely absent from the
one O.T. document, which certainly belongs to Northern
1 Johns Hopkins Univ. Circ, No. 89.
2 The use of the prefix sh for 'asher, of Shel; the occurrence of the
Persian pardes, park, iv. 13, cf. Neh. ii. 8, Eccl. ii. 5; and of 'appirybn,
perhaps = Greek phoreion.
3 Budde, 2nd or 3rd century B.C. ; Cheyne, Founders O.T. Crit.,
p. 351 f.; Cornill, not earlier than Persian period; Kautzsch, B.C. 332 ?;
Konig, early post-exilic period ; Strack, Persian period.
* vi. 4, cf. i. Kings xvi. 23 f., also mentioned in ii. Kings xv. 14, 16.

1 68 BIBLICAL INTRODUCTION
Israel, the Book of Hosea. The significance of Tirzah —
pleasantness — would suggest its use as a type of beauty;
Tirzah is used as a woman's name in the Priestly Code,1 and,
if Tirzah be the flourishing modern town of Tulluzah,2 it may
have been important enough in the post-exile period to be
coupled with Jerusalem.
(b) Canonicity. — The status of Canticles was matter of con
troversy amongst the Jews until the Synod of Jamnia, a.d. 90,
when it was definitely received into the Canon. Yet, even in
the second century, parts of it were trolled out3 in the wine
shops as drinking songs. The Church, as usual, endorsed the
decision of the Rabbis. There is no doubt that it became
canonical alike among Jews and Christians on the understand
ing that it was to be used as an allegory. The heading in the
Peshitto Syriae, " Wisdom of Wisdoms," points to this view of
the book. The defenders of the dramatic theory justify its
inclusion in the Canon as a panegyric on virtuous love.
The book is not referred to in the N.T.
(c) Contents and Interpretation. — Canticles contains a collec
tion of poems concerning the mutual affection of two lovers.
It has been variously understood as : —
(i.) An Allegory; among the Jews, of Jehovah's love for
Israel, by Christians of Christ's love for His Church, as in the
headings in A.V.4 There is no reason to suppose that the
original author intended the book for an allegory.
(ii.) A Drama ; with a full equipment of dramatis personae,
lovers, ladies of the harem, first and second citizens, villagers,
etc. This theory has been held in different forms, of which
there are two chief varieties. (1) The drama depicts the
loves of Solomon and one of his queens,5 the Shulamite,
Solomon assuming at times the character of a shepherd.
Thus, i. i-iii. 5, Courtship; iii. 6-v. 1, Marriage; v. 2-vi. 9,
1 Num. xxxvi. n, etc.
2 G. A. Smith, Hist. Geog., p. 355.
3 Trallcrt, Budde, Cant, x., quoting Tosephta Sanhedrin xii.
" Keil, O.T. Introd., Eng. Trans., i. 503.
6 Delitzsch.

SONG OF SONGS 169
Domestic Difficulties; vi. 10-vii. 9, Mutual Satisfaction; vii.
10-end, the Shulamite takes Solomon to visit her home and
family. (2) The drama has three main characters, the Shula
mite, a shepherd, to whom she is betrothed, and Solomon,
who attempts to win her affections.1 Thus, i. i-vii. 9, the
Shulamite, in the harem, combats the persuasions of Solomon
and his womenfolk by the help of her reminiscences of her
shepherd lover ; vii. 10-viii. 4, Final Rejection of Solomon in
favour of the Shepherd; viii. 5-14, Happy Reunion of the
Shulamite and the Shepherd.
According to this view, the book is in praise of pure
conjugal affection.
(iii.) An Epithalamium ; the book is a collection of songs,
connected with a Syrian custom, called the " King's Week."
During the first week after marriage the bride and bridegroom
play at being king and queen, and are addressed as such by a
mock court, in a series of songs similar to those of Canticles.
Thus Canticles would contain a specimen of the cycle of
songs used at a seven days' village feast in honour of a
peasant bride and bridegroom, the latter being addressed as
" Solomon," the type of a splendid and powerful king.
Earlier critics had suggested that the book was a collection
of songs, but this particular view originated in J. G. Wetz-
stein's accounts of the custom sketched above. It was
accepted and developed by Carl Budde in various articles,
and in his commentary on Canticles in the Kurzer Hand
Comm. zum A.T. ; it has been adopted by Cornill, Kautzsch,
etc. One objection to (ii.) and (iii.) — the absence of headings is
not serious. We might perhaps have expected headings to
songs constituting a collection, and should certainly look for
some equivalent of our list of dramatis persona?, stage direc
tions, etc., in the " Book of the Words " of a drama. Yet, in
the present instance, their absence is not difficult to under
stand ; they were probably removed when it was decided that
1 Adeney, Davidson, Driver, Konig, Smith, W.R., etc. , following
Ewald.

170 BIBLICAL INTRODUCTION
the book was to be regarded as an allegory. But in spite of
the ingenuity devoted to the interpretation of the book as
a drama, there is a conspicuous absence of what we should
call dramatic — the story does not tell itself at all clearly. The
dramatic theory moreover is not supported by any parallels in
ancient Jewish literature. On the other hand, Budde's theory
(iii.) affords an adequate explanation of the facts. Possibly,
however, the cycles of songs used at village nuptials were
supposed to tell some traditional story concerning Solomon.
We need not suppose that actors assumed parts, the village
chorus spoke in turn for different personages, bride, bride
groom, etc. Moreover, the compiler of Canticles may have
been acquainted with and used different cycles of songs, so
that our book may be a combination of two or more such
cycles, or more probably one cycle has been amplified from
others.

CHAPTER V.
ISAIAH-DANIEL

i. Our Book of Isaiah, with
General Analysis.
2jf Isaiah i.-xxxv.
3. Isaiah xxxvi. -xxxix.
4. Introduction to Isaiah xl.-
lxvi.

5. Isaiah xl.-lv.
6. Isaiah Ivi.-lxvi.
7. .Jeremiah.
8. Lamentations.
9/ Ezekiel.
lot Daniel.

1. Our Book of Isaiah, with General Analysis. — Our
present Book of Isaiah is quoted in N.T. times under the
title " Isaiah," but it is not certain that this necessarily
means that the whole book throughout was written by Isaiah.
The earliest trace of the existence of our book in its present
form is the statement in Ecclesiasticus xlviii. 23-25 that
Isaiah "comforted them that mourned in Zion,1 etc." The
boqk_ falls into five main sections : (aV, i.-xii. ; (bi- xiii.-xxiii. ;
(c^ xxiv. -xxxv. ; (d),,xxxvi.-xxxix. ; (e)y xl.-lxvi. The present
arrangement suggests that (a), (b), (c) are separate collections
of Isaianic prophecies, based on earlier collections, with
additions. As some of these additions, in each case, are
post-exilic, (a), (b), (c), as they stand, are post-exilic; (d) is
an appendix, added by an editor who combined (a), (b), (c),
therefore also post-exilic. Chapters xl. ff. (e) " Second Isaiah "
is a collection of exilic and post-exilic prophecies ; apparently,
in the time of the author of Ezra, i.e., the Chronicler, this
collection was not attributed to Isaiah. Both collections,
i. -xxxix. and xl.-lxvi., were completed after the Exile, the
exact date depends on the view taken of the date of the
latest sections contained in each. It cannot be earlier than
1 Isaiah xl. I.
171

i;2 BIBLICAL INTRODUCTION
c. 400. The final combination of i.-xxxix. and xl.-lxvi. was
probably accidental. In some lists Isaiah stands after
Jeremiah, Ezekiel. If Isaiah i.-xxxix. were immediately
followed by the anonymous book xl.-lxvi., the combination
of the two, under the title Isaiah, would be inevitable. Cf.
Zechariah. GENERAL ANALYSIS
(Arranged according to Authorship).
Isaiah i.-xxxix.
"First Isaiah."
(Sections not by Isaiah in Italics.)
i.-xi. 9, Judah, Ephraim, Syria, and Assyria.
xi. 10-xiv. 23, First Group of Later Additions.
xiv. 24-xxiii., Oracles on the Nations (including, however,
the older fragments in xv., xvi., and the post-exilic xxi. 1-10).
xxiv.-xxvii., Second Group of Later Additions.
xxviii. -xxxii., Chastisement by and Deliverance from
Assyria. xxxiii.-xxxv., Third Group of Later Additions.
xxxvi.-xxxix., Historical Appendix.
Isaiah xl.-lxvi.
"Second Isaiah."
xl.-lv., " Deutero-Isaiah," Exilic, with Servant passages,
xiii. 1-4 (5-7), xlix. r-6 (7-13), /. 4-9 (10, n), Hi. 13-
liii. 12.
lvi.-lxvi., " Trito-Isaiah," a Collection of post-exilic prophe
cies. , 2:} Isaiah i.-xxxv.
(a) Isaiah and His Teaching. — Tsaiah ministered at
Jerusalem, of which he was probably a native. He was
married, and two sons were born to him during his
ministry. \He ministered for more than forty years, from
his call in the year when King Uzziah died, c. 740, till
after the retreat of Sennacherib in 701, so that he was
born under Joash, began his ministry as a young man,

ISAIAH I.-XXXV. 173
and continued it to old age. 'The story of his. martyrdom
under Manasseh^ cannot be traced beyond the second century
XD/~Like Elisha and Jeremiah, he sought to control the
home and foreign policy of the government ; -.during part
of_Hezekiah's reign he was the chief power in the state,
and probably Hezekiah's reformation was inspired by him.
He protested steadily, but without effect, against foreign
alliances, whether with Assyria against Syria and Israel, or
with Egypt against Assyria. Like Amos, Hosea, and Micah,
he denounced the faith in assiduous and often superstitious
and even idolatrous worship as a substitute for a moral life1
and righteous government, and foretold the ruin of Israel
and the chastisement of Judah, but a pious remnant of
the latter should be saved. These doctrines were specially
emphasised by the names of his sons, " Maher-shalal-hash-
baz," "Hasten booty, speed spoil," and " Shear-jashub," "A
remnant shall return." When it seemed that Jerusalem must
be sacked, Isaiah assured Hezekiah that God would save
His chosen city. Isaiah followed Amos in recognising
God's control of foreign nations as well as His special
interest in Israel, one application being that Assyria was
the rod used by God to chastise His people, and that
Assyria's delusion that it conquered by its own power would
be severely chastised.
Isaiah goes far towards a formal statement of monotheism ;
he speaks of idols as 'elilim, "nonentities," and emphasises
Jehovah's holiness, i.e., His unique deity, and His glory, i.e.,
His manifestation in Nature.2
His practical teaching is largely summed up in his own
words : ' ' In returning and rest shall ye be saved ;
In quietness and confidence shall be your strength."8
Whether Isaiah's teaching included the glowing pictures
of the Messianic King, the Messianic Era, and of universal
1 e.g., chapter i. He does not expressly attack the high places.
2 ii. 8, 20, vi., and the favourite phrase, "the Holy One of Israel."
3 xxx. 15, cf, vii. 4, 9.

174 BIBLICAL INTRODUCTION
devotion to Jehovah,1 is a question on which critics are
divided. At present there is no decisive proof that such
ideas formed no part of Isaiah's teaching.
An important feature of his ministry was his formation of
a group of disciples, to whom he devoted himself, when
further public testimony seemed useless.2 Isaiah's prophecies
can be distributed with approximate certainty between four
periods : the years before the Syro-Ephraimitic War ; the
Syro-Ephraimitic War ; the last years of the northern
kingdom ; the revolt against Sennacherib and deliverance
from him. To us this deliverance is so supremely important,
that it seems the natural and necessary occasion for most
of the prophecies referring to Assyria; but the scantiness
of our data leaves it possible that other crises seemed
equally important to those who lived through them. Sub
ject to this doubt we may group the acknowledged sections
thus 3 : —
(i) Before the Syro-Ephraimitic Crisis, ii. 5-iv. 1, iv. 2-6,
v. 1-24, vi., ix. 8-x. 4 ( + v. 25-30).
(2) In connection with that Crisis, vii. i-ix. 7, xi. 1-9,4
xvii. 1-11.
(3) In connection with the Fall of Samaria, xxviii. 1-6.
(4) Sargon's Invasion, 711, xx.
(5) In connection with Sennacherib, i., x. 5-24, xiv. 24-27,
28-32, xviii., xxii., xxiii.,4 xxviii. 7-29, xxix., xxx., xxxi.
(6) Later, ii. 2-4,4 xxxii.4
(7) Uncertain, mostly 723-701, xv.,4 xvi.,4 xvii. 12-14, xix.,4
xxi. 1 3-1 7. 4
(b). Historical Circumstances. — Isaiah's earlier ministry prob
ably coincided with the last years of Hosea, cf. Amos (b),
Hosea (b). The position which Israel had attained under
Jeroboam II. was already seriously impaired, but Judah still
enjoyed great prosperity. This was threatened by the joint
attack of Rezin and Pekah, against whom Ahaz secured the
1 ii. 2-4, ix. 2-7, xi. 1-9, xix. 16-25, xxxii. f.
2 viii. 16-18. 3 Cf. Contents. 4 If Isaiah's.

ISAIAH I.-XXXV. 175
help of Assyria. Israel was invaded in succession by Tiglath-
Pileser III., Shalmaneser IV., and Sargon II. ; the last named
took Samaria in 722-1; in 720-19 he marched through
Philistia and defeated the Egyptians at Raphia; later on he
settled colonies from the East in Samaria, and in 711 he
invaded Palestine and took Ashdod. Sargon, in his later years,
and his successor Sennacherib had to suppress, by arduous
wars, the attempts of Merodach-Baladan to establish an in
dependent empire at Babylon. After Sennacherib's accession
Judah joined in a confederacy, under the headship of Egypt,
against Assyria; Sennacherib invaded Palestine, defeated the
Egyptians at Eltekeh, and devastated Judah. When Jerusalem
was at its last extremity, Sennacherib's army perished by divine
judgment, and he retreated to Assyria. For a time Judah saw
no more of the Assyrians, but Hezekiah's successor, Manasseh,
became tributary to them.
(c) Contents.
I. i-XI. 9, First Group of Isaiah's Prophecies,
Judah, Ephraim, Syria, and Assyria.
i., General introduction.
1, The title to this collection.
Editorial, the words " concerning Judah and Jerusalem " show that the
collection to which this title was prefixed did not include the Oracles on
foreign nations, and was, substantially, our i.-xi.
2-31, Judah reduced to the last extremity by invasion, be
cause of ingratitude to Jehovah. Forgiveness is not to be
obtained by sacrifices, but by repentance and amendment.
The doom of the impenitent. The purified city.
This invasion has been identified with the attack of Pekah and Rezin
upon Ahaz, or with Sennacherib's invasion in 701. The chapter may be
used as an introduction, because of its representative character. It
is probably a compilation; 27, 28, may be a post-exilic summary of
what precedes ; 29-31 are a detached fragment of an early Isaianic
utterance. ii.— v., Minor collection with title.
ii. 1, Jerusalem, its judgment and final destiny.
ii. 2-4, Jerusalem, the centre of revelation for all nations in
the Messianic Era of universal peace.

176 BIBLICAL INTRODUCTION
Occurs also as Micah iv. 1-3. Probably Isaiah did not borrow from
Micah, nor Micah from Isaiah, but either both from an older prophet,1 or
the section may be a post-exilic insertion in both Micah and Isaiah.2 Or
an editor of one of the books may have inserted it from the other.3
ii. 5-iv. 1, The doom of all that is " high and lifted up," be
cause of the oppressions of the rulers and the wanton luxury
of their women.
As Judah enjoys great prosperity, this section is earlier than the Syro-
Ephraimitic War, i.e., c. 736.*
iv. 2-6, The Remnant restored to a purified Jerusalem.
Parallels with post-exilic literature suggest that the section is wholly
(Cheyne) or partly (Dillmann) post-exilic.
v. 1-7, The barren vineyard laid waste.
8-24, Woes against sinners.
1-24 parallel to previous section, and so c. 736.
25-30, Misplaced fragment.
Probably, on account of refrain 25b, conclusion of ix. 8-x. 4, where it
seems required.
vi., Isaiah's call, " in the year that King Uzziah died,"
c. 740, Vision of Jehovah and the Seraphim. Commission to
apparently fruitless ministry. The Remnant (?).
The chapter may have been committed to writing later on. The last
clause, "so the holy seed is the stock thereof," is rejected by some.6 If
omitted, the ruin is complete and final, there is no remnant.
vii. i-ix. 7, Narratives and utterances connected with the
war with Syria and Ephraim, c. 734.
vii.,6 Isaiah tries to dissuade Ahaz from alliance with
Assyria, the birth of Immanuel a sign of the ruin of Syria
and Ephraim, Assyria will become the scourge of Judah.
8b, " Ephraim shall be broken within 65 years, etc., is a later gloss.7
viii. 1-4,8 Isaiah's son, Maher-shalal-hash-baz, a sign of the
ruin of Samaria and Damascus.
viii. 5-15, Jehovah punishes by an Assyrian invasion.
1 Driver, etc., ap. Cheyne, Introd. to Isaiah, p. 13.
! Cheyne, Isaiah, Polychrome Bible, p. 147.
3 So apparently Duhm, »./., who thinks the passage composed by
Isaiah in his old age.
4 Possible editorial additions are ii. 5, 6a, 20-22, iii. 10, 11, 19-23 (list
of toilette articles), 25, 26.
6 Cheyne, Duhm, H. G. Mitchell. ' In third person.
7 Cheyne and Duhm reject 21-25. 8 Ch. viii. in first person.

ISAIAH I.-XXXV. 177
viii. 16-18, Isaiah is to await the fulfilment of his warnings.
viii. 19-ix. 7, In the last extremity deliverance comes
through the " Wonderful Counsellor, Mighty God, Everlasting
Father, Prince of Peace."
viii. 19-ix. 1, is obscure, and is probably a disconnected fragment with
editorial additions. Cheyne1 concludes that Hackmann is probably right
in regarding the Messianic passage ix. 2-7 as post-exilic. a
ix. 8-x. 4 ( + v. 25-30), a poem in five strophes, with re
frains, on the doom of Ephraim, before 735.
ix. 15, 16, a. 3, may be glosses.3
x- S~34i On Assyria and Judah.
x. 5-27, Doom of Assyria, the axe with which Jehovah
hewed, because it boasted itself against Him.
x. 28-34, Picture of the dismay caused by the advance of
the Assyrians.
The former refers to Sennacherib's, 701, or some earlier Assyrian
invasion ; the latter to either, or to the fears inspired by the Fall of
Samaria, 722.4
xi. 1-9, The Righteous King, or Messiah, in whose time
even the wild beasts will be at peace with man and his
domestic animals.
May be referred to c. 734, like ix. 2-7, which it resembles, or, if
regarded as the sequel to the preceding section, to the same period as x.
According to Cheyne, post-exilic.5
XI. 10-XIV. 23, First Group of Sections not by Isaiah.
xi. 10-16, The exiles of Israel and Judah will be again
united into a single people, will return, and conquer the
neighbouring tribes.
This passage, which implies that Judah as well as Israel has been carried
away captive, is often placed during 6 or after 7 the Exile.
1 Introd., p. 45.
2 Cf. § on Teaching of Isaiah, p. 172; cf. Kayser-Marti, A.T.
Theol, 115, 183 ff.
3 Duhm, Cheyne, Mitchell; Duhm and Cheyne read x. 4a, "Beltis
has sunk down, Osiris is broken, and under the slain they fall," which
Cheyne regards as a gloss.
4 Cheyne, Duhm, and Mitchell reject 10-13, 16-27. 33i 34-
6 Polychrome Bible. * Kautzsch, Bibel.
7 Cheyne, Polychrome Bible, and Mitchell, cf. Skinner.

178 BIBLICAL INTRODUCTION
The reference to " the Root of Jesse " suggests that it was written as an
appendix to the preceding.
xii., Psalm of praise, appended as Epilogue to the First
Collection of Isaiah's prophecies.
Very generally ' regarded as post-exilic on account of close resemblance
to late Psalms and other post-exilic literature.
xiii. i-xiv. 23, Introduction to Isaiah's Oracles against the
Nations ; Fall of Babylon, Restoration of the Jews, Descent of
the King of Babylon into Sheol.
The Israelites in exile, the captives of Babylon, are to be restored after
the capture of Babylon by the Medes,2 a situation which implies composi
tion during the Exile. s
XIV. 24-XXIII. 18, Second Group of Isaiah's Prophe
cies. Oracles against the Nations.
xiv. 24-27, Assyria to be destroyed in Judah.
Perhaps the conclusion of x. 5_I5> 'f so> 722_701.
xiv. 28-32, Philistines to be destroyed by Assyria.
The title, "In the year that King Ahaz died," is probably editorial,
and the breaking of the rod, which raised the hopes of the Philistines,
was the death of an Assyrian king, either Shalmaneser IV., 722, or
Sargon, 705.
xv., xvi., Moab, a description, on the whole sympathetic,
of the desolation of Moab and its cities by an invader.
The Moabite fugitives are recommended to make their peace
with Judah and take refuge there.
These chapters have numerous parallels with Jeremiah xlviii., and are
similar in style to the Song in Numbers xxi. 27-30. As they are not
in the style of Isaiah, it is commonly supposed that both Isaiah and
Jeremiah adapted an earlier prophecy, possibly written when Moab
was threatened by Jeroboam II. In xvi. 13, 14 Isaiah announces the
fulfilment in the near future of the time of writing, i.e., before one of
the Assyrian invasions.
Cheyne, Polychrome Bible, regards the section in its present form as
post-exilic, hesitates whether to ascribe the original to 722 or 589.
Isaiah's share, his additions to an older poem, or fragments of his used by
a later writer, are dated 711 ; xvi. 14 is the only part printed as Isaiah's.
xvii. 1-11, Ruin of Damascus and Samaria.
Period of Syro-Ephraimitic War, c. 734. According to Cheyne and
Duhm, 7 f. , an addition ; Skinner, an addition by Isaiah.
xvii. 12-14, The Assyrian invasion, a tempest which shall
suddenly pass away.
Which invasion uncertain, Cheyne, 723.
1 Lists in Cheyne, Introduction, 59, Driver, 200.

ISAIAH I.-XXXV. 179
xviii., The overthrow of the Assyrians announced to the
Ethiopian ambassadors to Assyria, c. 701.
Cheyne and Duhm regard 7. " At that time Ethiopia shall be offered at
Zion to Jehovah," as post-exilic.
xix., Egypt, 1-15, Jehovah stirs up civil war, makes the
rulers mad, dries up the Nile, and delivers the land to a
"hard lord."
The "hard lord" is commonly regarded as an Assyrian conqueror, and
the passage has been connected with the defeat of the Egyptians by
Sargon in 720 ; with Sargon's war against the Syrian allies of Egypt in
711 ; with Sennacherib's defeat of the Egyptians at Eltekeh, 701 ; with
Esarhaddon's conquest of Egypt, 672. There is nothing, however, in
the passage itself to suggest Assyria or the imminence of a foreign
invasion. Jehovah Himself turns the natural blessings of Egypt, its
king, rulers, and the Nile, into curses, the "hard lord" is probably
a native tyrant. Such might naturally be an utterance of Isaiah, after
the retreat of Sennacherib seemed to have put an end to Assyrian
invasions ; Egypt might be safe from the Assyrians, and yet not escape
chastisement.1 16-25, The Conversion of Egypt, Egypt humbled under
the hand of Jehovah, will stand in awe of Judah. There
shall be in Egypt five cities, one Ir-ha-heres, which shall
speak the language of Canaan; also an altar and pillar
(ma§§eba) to Jehovah. The Egyptians shall worship Him.
Verses 23-25 rank Egypt and Assyria with Israel as the
Chosen People: "Whom Jehovah Sabaoth shall bless, saying,
Blessed be Egypt my people, and Assyria the work of my
hands, and Israel mine inheritance."
Of this wonderful prophecy, Robertson Smith wrote : "Never had the
faith of prophet soared so high, or approached so near to the conception of
a universal religion, set free from every trammel of national individuality " ;
and, "The allusion to the consecrated macceba is quite inconsistent with a
date subsequent to the reformation of Josiah, and the accepance of the
Deuteronomic law of worship."2 His judgment in favour of Isaiah's
authorship of this section is still strongly supported.3 But there are serious
difficulties, in the style and language ; in the contrast between the attitude
towards Egypt and Assyria here and in the rest of Isaiah and pre-exilic
prophecy generally ; and in the apparent references to Jewish colonies in
Egypt and to the temple of Onias. This temple was erected in the nome
of Heliopolis (City of the Sun), and in the neighbourhood of a Temple of
1 Cheyne and Duhm regard the section as post-exilic.
2 Prophets, 1895, pp. 336, 436.
3 e.g., by Driver, 204, Dillmann, A.T. Thiol., 501, Guthe
(Kautzsch, Bibel); and, ap. Cheyne, 109, Cornill, Kuenen, and
Stade.

i8o BIBLICAL INTRODUCTION
the Sun, c. 160. Hence Duhm dates this passage c. 150, and explains
Assyria of the Greek kingdom of Syria,1 Cheyne assigns the passage to
275 (?)> m the reign of Ptolemy Philadelphus, and many others2 regard the
passage as post-exilic. If so, the superstitious use of the macceba had long
been forgotten, and the term is used in a symbolic sense.
xx., In the year 711, when Sargon's general took Ashdod,
Isaiah is commanded to go naked and barefoot three years as
a sign of the captivity of Egypt and Ethiopia.
xxi. 1-10, Lament over the imminent sack of Babylon by
the Medes and Elamites.
Sometimes connected with the captures of Babylon by the Assyrians
from Merodach-Baladan in the time of Isaiah, but the section presupposes
the situation towards the close of the Exile, and may be assigned to that
period.3 xxi. n, 12, Two obscure verses connected with Edom
(Seir), possibly a sequel to the preceding; Edom, which
prospered under the Chaldasans, being anxious as to the
consequences of the Fall of Babylon.
xxi. 13-17, Ruin of the Dedanites and Kedarenes (Arabian
tribes). Often connected with one or other of the Assyrian invasions ; Duhm
connects with the rest of the chapter ; Cheyne regards 16, 17 as Isaiah's,
711, to which later passages, 604-561, have been prefixed.
xxii. 1-14, The Valley of Vision, Jerusalem is besieged after
the defeat of the army, Jehovah calls to penitence, but men
sought to drown care in debauchery : " Let us eat and drink,
for to-morrow we die." Such sin must be punished with death.
Probably to be connected with Sennacherib's siege in 701, and not with
Sargon's campaign in 711. It may have been purely predictive at the
outset of the revolt against Sennacherib, or may have been uttered during
the war, before Hezekiah had accepted Isaiah's teaching, or may be a
retrospect, a judgment after the danger was over on the conduct and
temper of the people during the war.
xxii. 15-25, Shebna, the steward, probably a partisan of
the Egyptian party, is to be replaced by Eliakim, whose
subsequent fall is also predicted.
Connected with the crisis in 701 ; 24 f., and perhaps 19-23 may be later
than 15-18.
1 So substantially Hitzig, followed by Geiger and Merx (Cheyne,
Introd., p. 109 n.).
2 e.g., Gratz (ap. Cheyne, I.e.), Kayser- Marti, 115, Kellner,
" Un-Isaianic," Mitchell, Skinner "probably," Smend, A. T. Theol.,
210. Cf. section 2 (a). 3 Driver, 205.

ISAIAH I.-XXXV. 181
xxiii., Tyre is to be overthrown, but restored after seventy
years, to trade for the benefit of Jehovah and his people.
Verses 1-14 may be connected with the siege of Tyre by Shalmaneser
IV., 727-722, or with Sennacherib's campaign in Phoenicia, 701. Verse 13,
if read as in R.V., might refer to one of the captures of Babylon by the
Assyrians, 710 and 703, but the text is probably corrupt. Cheyne regards
it as a late section on an Isaianic basis, and Duhm connects it with the de
vastation of Phoenicia by Artaxerxes III., c. 349, the subject being origin
ally Sidon, for which Tyre was substituted by an editor. Verses 15-18 are
probably post-exilic.
XXIV.-XXVIL, Second Group of Sections, not by
Isaiah, Anonymous; Post-Exilic Apocalypse concerning
the Last Things.
xxiv, Earth and heaven are involved in one common shock
of doom, the City of Confusion is singled out for special
judgment, the praises of the righteous are heard from the
ends of the earth.
xxv. i-xxvi. 6, The thanksgiving of Israel for the overthrow
of the City of Confusion and of Moab, and for the conse
quent salvation of God's people.
xxvi. 7-19, Prayer of God's people for protection and
deliverance in evil times.
xxvi. 20-xxvii. 13, Out of the present trouble, and out of
the distress which has befallen Israel on account of its sins,
shall issue the ruin of Israel's oppressors and the restoration
of God's people.
It is generally recognised1 that, with the possible exception of Isaianic
fragments borrowed by the author, these chapters are not the work of
Isaiah. Here, as in Micah iv.-vii., compared with Micah i. — iii., the im
pression made is quite different from that produced by the admitted
writings of the prophet. Isaiah's utterances reflect at every turn the
actual circumstances of his time; here we are in a different world from
that of Palestine in the eighth century B.C. Isaiah was concerned with
Judah and Israel, and their neighbours and enemies ; here we have a
judgment embracing earth and heaven. Assyria was not a city state,
and certainly Isaiah never speaks of it as such ; here the oppressor is
a great city, possibly Babylon.2 In spite of a number of resemblances,
1 The chief exception is an able monograph by W. E. Barnes, "An
examination of the objections brought against the genuineness of Isaiah
xxiv. -xxvii.," Cambridge, 1891. Cf. Driver, 207, Cheyne, Inlrod.,
147 ff.
2 xxv. 2, xxvi. 5, perhaps also xxiv. 10, the City of Confusion here is
sometimes understood of Jerusalem, Skinner.

182 BIBLICAL INTRODUCTION
due to literary use of the actual writings of Isaiah, the general style
is different from that of Isaiah.
It is probable that a poem consisting of xxiv. , xxv. 6-8, xxvi. 20-xxvii.
I, xxvii. 12, 13, has been expanded by the insertion ofthe songs of thanks
giving, xxv. 1-5, 9-12, xxvi. 1-6, xxvii. 2-6 ; of the prayer and medita
tion, xxvi. 7-19 > and of the obscure passage xxvii. 7-1 1.1
These chapters presuppose the imminence of far-reaching political
changes which might be expected to bring deliverance to Israel, possibly
through much loss and suffering ; and ruin to its enemies. Such a situa
tion existed, in a measure, towards the close of the Exile ; or, more
exactly, in the time of Haggai and Zechariah 2 ; or, probably during the
earlier stages of Alexander's attack on the Persian empire. This section
has been referred to each of these periods. The Exile3 is suggested by the
identification of the "city" with Babylon. But the vague, yet detailed
apocalyptic picture points to a later date ; Babylon was not destroyed by
Cyrus, and the Jews still looked forward to its ruin in the time of
Zechariah.4 If the "city" is not Babylon, but either Jerusalem or a
symbolic city suggested by Babylon, we might follow Cheyne in assigning
this section to the eve of Alexander's conquest of Persia. Duhm connects
it with the siege of Jerusalem by Antiochus Sidetes, soon after the
accession of John Hyrcanus, 129. The " city" is Samaria, destroyed by
John Hyrcanus.
The apocalypse is remarkable as containing some of the most striking
of the O.T. passages suggesting a resurrection of the dead and an eternal
life. In xxv. 8,6 " He hath swallowed up death for ever," implies that in
the Messianic era, Israelites will never die, while xxvi. 19 points to a
resurrection of dead Israelites. Universalism finds striking expression in
the statement 6 that Jehovah Sabaoth will prepare a feast for all nations in
Zion, and there destroy the veil that is spread over them.
XXVIII.-XXXIL, Third Group of Isaiah's Prophecies.
xxviii., xxix., The Fall of Ephraim a warning to the
priests, prophets, and rulers of Jerusalem of the disasters by
which their sin will be punished. (The dependence of the
former on inspiration.7) Ariel, i.e., Jerusalem, is besieged, but
her foes vanish like chaff. The prophets are useless, the
people only offer lip-service, and are slaves to tradition.
Lack of faith will be put to shame by the glories of the
Messianic era.8
These chapters are compilations ; they are parallel to the other pro
phecies, to which they might almost serve as a summary. As a whole,
they connect with the period when Judah was planning to revolt against
1 So Cheyne and Duhm, cf. Skinner, Isaiah, p. 203.
2 Hag. ii. 6-9, 20-23, Zech. i. 11-17. 8 So Kellner.
4 Zech. v. 5-1 1. The section is referred to this period by Dillmann.
6 Quoted in i. Cor. xv. 54, and Rev. vii. 17. 6 xxv. 6, 7.
7 xxviii. 23-29, if not a later addition, may imply that a fortiori states
men need inspired guidance. 8 xxix. 15-34.

ISAIAH I.-XXXV. 183
Sennacherib, relying on help from Egypt, i.e., c. 702. xxviii. 1-6 may
have been composed just before the Fall of Samaria, and afterwards
utilised as an introduction. On the other hand, xxviii. 1-6, has been held
to determine the date of the whole series of prophecies, which have been
therefore assigned to c. 722. The Messianic picture xxix. 16-24 ls often
regarded as post-exilic.1
xxx., xxxi., A collection of prophecies on the folly and sin
of alliance with Egypt, with which have been combined an
apocalyptic picture of the regeneration of Israel and the re
newal of Nature in the Messianic era, 2 and two sections 3 on
the deliverance of Israel from Assyria.
The interest in the Egyptian alliance connects with the eve of Senna
cherib's invasion, 702. Duhm and Mitchell regard xxx. 18-26, and
Cheyne and Kellner 18-33 as post-exilic. Cheyne also rejects xxxi.
S-9- xxxii., A picture of the Righteous King, the spiritual re
generation and material prosperity of the Messianic age, into
which is inserted a warning to the ladies of Jerusalem.4
Driver regards this chapter as a sequel to the preceding, i.e., c. 702 ;
Duhm regards it as mostly Isaiah's, and partly, at any rate, the work of his
old age. Cheyne and Cornill treat it as post-exilic.
XXXIII.-XXXV., Third Group of Sections not by
Isaiah. xxxiii., An Apocalyptic Psalm, in which the Jews, in their
distress, look forward to deliverance and the establishment
of a Messianic King, who shall reign in peace at Jerusalem.
The style, the apocalyptic character, the description of Zion as righteous,
and as the "city of sacred feast" or "feasts,"6 the parallels with late
psalms, all point to a post-exilic date.6 Driver, however, still7 refers it to
the point in Sennacherib's invasion, at which, having accepted tribute
from Hezekiah, he made fresh demands on him, thus breaking a covenant.8
xxxiv., The Doom of Edom, when Jehovah chastises the
nations. The singling out of Edom as a special object of divine justice began
with the hostility of Edom to the Jews at the Fall of Jerusalem. Hence
this section is exilic or post-exilic.8
1 Cheyne, Duhm (Maccabaean), Mitchell. Cheyne also rejects
xxviii. 5, 6, 23-29, xxix. 5, 7, 8, 11, 12. a xxx. 18-26.
3 xxx. 27-33, XXX1- S-9- 4 9-I4- 5 Verses 5, 20.
6 Cheyne, Duhm, <.. 162, Cornill, Kayser-Marti, p. 115.
7 213, cf. ii. Kings xviii. 13-27. 8 Verse 8.
8 Driver towards close of Exile on account of parallels with Isaiah
xl. ff, etc.; so Cornill, Cheyne, 400 or later.

1 84 BIBLICAL INTRODUCTION
xxxv., The wilderness is turned into a fruitful, well-watered
garden, through which, by a holy way, the exiles return to
Zion. Probably sequel to xxxiv. by same author. The parallels with Isaiah
xl. ff. may point to a similar date or to dependence on exilic literature.
(d) Use in N.T. — The commission to harden the people's
hearts, vi. 9 f., was a favourite quotation of our Lord's,
Matt. xiii. 14 f., Mark iv. 12, Luke viii. 10, John xii. 40,
Acts xxviii. 26 f. The LXX. of vii. 14 is quoted in Matt.
i. 23, Luke i. 31, "A virgin shall conceive," etc. ; also i. 9 in
Rom. ix. 29; viii. 12 f. in i. Peter iii. 14 f. ; viii. 17 f. in
Heb. ii. 13 f. ; ix. 1 f. in Matt. iv. 15 f . ; x. 22 f. in Rom.
ix. 27 f. ; xxii. 13 in i. Cor. xv. 32; xxviii. n in i. Cor.
xiv. 21 ; xxviii. 16 in Rom. ix. 33, x. 11, i. Peter ii. 6; xxix. 10
in Rom. xi. 8; xxix. 13 in Matt. xv. 8 f., Mark vii. 6 f. ;
xxix. 14 in i. Cor. i. 19.
3. Isaiah xxxvi. -xxxix.
The Historical Appendix to the Collection, i.-xxxv. — An
account of Sennacherib's invasion, Hezekiah's sickness and
recovery, and Merodach-baladan's embassy. It is chiefly taken
from ii. Kings xviii. 13-xx. 19, q.v. The main differences are
the omission of ii. Kings xviii. 14-16 (Hezekiah's submission)
and the insertion of Hezekiah's prayer (xxxviii. 9-20).
The dependence on Kings is shown by the following facts :
the collection to which the appendix is added contains sections
much later than the final compilation of the Book of Kings ;
the peculiarities of the appendix are best explained by
supposing it a secondary work based on Kings, which it
partly abridges, partly distorts,1 and partly follows in the
form and with the additions due to the Deuteronomic editor
of Kings.
Hezekiah's prayer is the psalm of a sufferer who has
recovered from dangerous illness. The heading, where we
1 e.g., xxxviii. 21, 22 = ii. Kings xx. 7, 8 is unintelligible as it stands in
Isaiah, and has been misplaced through the insertion of Hezekiah's prayer.
The two "had saids" of E.V. are harmonising mistranslations. The
verbs are the same as in Kings.

INTRODUCTION TO XL.-LXVI. 185
should read " Miktam of Hezekiah," and the reference to
stringed instruments,1 show that the poem has been taken
from a collection of psalms, to the editor of which the
ascription to Hezekiah is probably due. The language and
ideas are similar to those of Job and late psalms, and the
poem is probably post-exilic.2 Dillmann, however, defended
the authorship by Hezekiah.
4. Introduction to xl.-lxvi.
(a) Composition of xl.-lxvi. — A variety of evidence shows that
these chapters are not the work of Isaiah, and do not belong
to' his age, and that, with small and doubtful exceptions,
no part of them is earlier than the close of the Exile.
The Historical Appendix would be intended to close the
collection of Isaiah's prophecies, as a similar appendix does
that of Jeremiah. Hence the editor who added it did not
know xl. ff. as Isaiah's. These chapters are anonymous,
they have no heading ascribing them to Isaiah. Ezra i. 1 f.3
refer to Isaiah xliv. 28, but state that Cyrus acted according
to a prophecy of Jeremiah, and do not mention Isaiah,
So that the author of Ezra knew Isaiah xliv., but not as
Isaiah's. Moreover Jeremiah and Ezekiel in dealing with
the Exile and Restoration do not mention any prophecies
of Isaiah on the same subject.
The historical situation presupposed in many sections, is
clearly that of the Exile, and in others apparently still later.4
On the other hand, there is nothing to suggest that the
author is living in Isaiah's time. Isaiah constantly betrays
his interest in the people and circumstances of his own
time, in Hezekiah, Pekah, and Rezin, in Judah, Ephraim,
Syria, Assyria, and Egypt. In xl. ff. all these have dis
appeared, Assyria and Egypt are only referred to as matter
of ancient history. It is not that the chapters predict the
ruin of Jerusalem and the Exile and Return. They assume
that Jerusalem is in ruins and the Jews in Exile, and describe
1 Verses 9, 20. 2 Cheyne, Duhm, Mitchell.
8 300-250. 4 Cf, on xl.-xlviii., xlix.-lv., lv.-lxvi.

1 86 BIBLICAL INTRODUCTION
the Return as imminent. They would have been unin
telligible to Isaiah and his contemporaries. Professor G. A.
Smith writes J : "It will perhaps startle some to hear John
Calvin quoted on behalf of the exilic date of these prophecies.
But let us read and consider this statement of his : ' Some
regard must be had to the time when this prophecy was
uttered; for since the rank of the kingdom had been obliterated,
and the name of the royal family had become mean and con
temptible, during the captivity in Babylon, it might seem as if
through the ruin of that family the truth of God had fallen
into decay, and therefore he bids them contemplate by faith
the throne of David, which had been cast down.' " 2
The theology of xl. ff. is different and more advanced
than that of Isaiah. Isaiah's theology is subordinated to
his practical message, but xl. ff. dwell on the transcendental
attributes of God; they substitute the Servant of Jehovah
for the Messianic King, and, in some sections, represent the
Jews not, as in Isaiah, hopelessly lost in sin, but as charged
with a spiritual mission to the Gentiles.
The evidence of style and language is also strongly against
authorship by Isaiah, and in favour of exilic or post-exilic
dates for the various sections. These chapters only resemble
the actual prophecies of Isaiah, as a later work would
necessarily resemble a well-known classic of earlier times
on a similar subject. They are influenced in the same way
by Jeremiah. On the other hand, most of the characteristic
terms, phrases, and idioms used by Isaiah are either absent
from or very rare in xl. ff., and vice versd these chapters
introduce a new vocabulary and style of their own.3
1 Isaiah, vol. ii., pp. 14 f. a Calvin on Isaiah lv. 3.
' Only two or three illustrations can be given, e.g. , eltltm, " nonentities,"
of idols, occurs seven times in i.-xxxi., and never in xl. ff., though it
would have been most useful in the polemic against idols. On the other
hand, 'aph, "also" occurs twenty-two times in xl.-xlviii., never in un
disputed portions of Isaiah. Of course, the force of such items of evidence
is cumulative, and can only be appreciated if carefully and exhaustively
studied. See Cheyne, Introduction to Isaiah ; Driver, Introduction,
pp. 225 ff, Isaiah ("Men of the Bible"); and Skinner, Isaiah xl.-lxvi.,
pp. xxxix. ff.

INTRODUCTION TO XL.-LXVI. 187
The integrity of xl. ff. is still matter of controversy. Driver
still1 states that "These chapters form a continuous pro
phecy," and apparently maintains unity of authorship, but
admits that "The literary unity of Isaiah xl.-lxvi. is undoubtedly
imperfect, especially in its later chapters : naturally the whole
will not have been delivered by the prophet continuously."
But the tendency of criticism is against the integrity, which,
even apart from the possible insertion of earlier material, is
often denied.2 Cornill ascribes xl.-lxii. to the same author,
xl.-xlviii. before the Exile, xlix.-lxii. after. He regards lxiii.-
lxvi. as, at any rate, in their present form, by another author.
Duhm regards xl.— 1 v., 3 " Deutero-Isaiah," as a single work with
which the Servant poem, an independent post-exilic work,
c. 500, has been interwoven; lvi.-lxvi., " Trito-Isaiah," is
another single work, c. 444. Cheyne regards xl.-xlviii.3 as
exilic, xlix.-lv.3 as a post-exilic appendix to it, the independent
Servant poem being interwoven with the complete work ; lvi.-
lxvi. is a collection of prophecies, 450-350. The clearest way
of stating the facts bearing on integrity has seemed to be to
deal with sections separately. At present, evidence and dis
cussion point to the conclusion that xl.-lv.3 are exilic, the
Servant passages an independent exilic or post-exilic poem,
and lvi.-lxvi., in spite of some serious difficulties, a collection
of post-exilic passages by different authors. Such reasons for
this view as space permits will be found in connection with the
separate sections.
(b) Historical Circumstances of Isaiah xl.-lxvi. — These
chapters in their different sections are referred to various
dates between Manasseh, c. 695, and Alexander the Great,
333, but chiefly to c. 549-432. During 549-538 Jerusalem
and the Temple were in ruins, and the bulk of the people
exiles in Babylonia. After the overthrow of the Babylonian
empire by Cyrus, which was clearly threatened after 549,
Judaea and the Jews became subjects of Persia ; there was a
1 Sixth Edition, pp. 230, 244.
2 G. A. Smith, Isaiah, xl. ff., p. 20.
i Less Servant passages.

188 BIBLICAL INTRODUCTION
Jewish community in Judaea,1 which rebuilt the Temple, but
had to maintain a constant struggle with physical disadvan
tages and unfriendly neighbours. It seemed as if the Jews
would be absorbed in the neighbouring tribes, and the worship
of Jehovah be degraded to the level of and combined with
that of "other gods." Nehemiah and Ezra secured the
distinct existence of the community and its religion, by build
ing the walls of Jerusalem, and separating the Congregation
of Israel from the Samaritans and their Jewish allies. The
Persian government was usually favourable to the Jewish
worship of Jehovah, but local officials were sometimes hostile,
and in 350-345, under Artaxerxes Ochus, the Jews were dis
affected, and the Persians oppressed them — probably also at
other times.2
5. Isaiah xl.-lv. Duhm's Deutero-Isaiah.
(a) Contents.
xl., xii., Promise of the Return of the Exiles, guaranteed by
the unique deity of Jehovah, which is manifested in Nature
and Providence, and especially in the victorious advance of
Cyrus, because Jehovah raised him up and announced his
coming beforehand.
xiii. 1-9, First Servant Passage. — The meek and gentle
Teacher of the Law as the Restore of Israel.
Duhm and Cheyne regard only 1-4 as part of the original poem.
According to Cheyne, 5-7 is an editorial link connecting the Song on
the Servant with the prophetic framework.
xiii. 10-xlviii., Further exposition of themes of xl. f., De
liverance for Israel, by the free grace of Jehovah, through
His Messiah, Cyrus; Judgment on Babylon, Vindication of
Jehovah's unique deity as above, Humiliation of the gods of
Babylon. Later insertions, according to Duhm and Cheyne, are two sections on
idolatry, xliv. 9-20, xlvi. 6-8, and the series of passages in xlviii., which
address Israel as treacherous, apostate, and unbelieving, viz., Ib, 2, 4, 5b,
7b, 8b-io, nb, I6b-I9, 22. The harsh and unqualified censure of these
verses is very different from the sympathetic and encouraging attitude of
the rest of xl. -xlviii.
1 Cf. on Ezra.
2 Cf. "Historical Circumstances" in §§ on Jeremiah, Ezekiel, Haggai,
Zechariah, Malachi,

ISAIAH XL.-LV. 189
xlix. 1-6 (7-13), Second Servant Passage. — The Prophet not
only to Israel, but also to the nations. (The agent at first
despised, then honoured of the glorious restoration of Israel.)
Verses 7-13 are sometimes regarded as part of the Servant poem ; 7-12
form one of Cheyne's " links."
xlix. 14-I. 3, Jehovah dispels doubt and depression by
assurances of His power and set purpose to deliver Israel.
1. 4-9 (10, 11), Third Servant Passage, The persecuted
Prophet, who shall be vindicated and avenged. (The Servant's
patience an example.)
Verses 10, 11 another "link," an application to later times, Cheyne;
similarly Duhm and Skinner.
li. r — Iii. 12, Exultant lyrics on the imminent restoration of
Jerusalem from its ruin and the departure of the captives from
Babylon. Duhm and Cheyne regard li. 15, 16 ; Hi. 3-6 as insertions.
Iii. 1 3 — liii. 12, Fourth Servant Passage, The despised
Martyr and His reward, Atonement for Israel.
liv., lv., The future glories of Zion contrasted with her ruin
and humiliation, Appeals to the people to accept the certain
deliverance. (b) Date and Authorship of xl.-xlviii. (apart from Servant
Passages). — This section is generally assigned to the close of
the Exile. Those addressed are exiles in Babylonia,1 to whom
a speedy return through the desert to Jerusalem is promised.2
Jehovah has raised up Cyrus, already a mighty conqueror,
and about to overthrow Babylon, release the exiles and
rebuild Zion and its Temple.3 The situation thus pre
supposed points to a date between the conquest of Media
by Cyrus in 549 and his capture of Babylon in 538. The
author probably wrote in Babylonia.4 His name is quite
unknown ; cf. § 4.
1 xiii. 22, xliii. 14.
2 xl. 1-11, xliii. 1-7, 19, xlviii. 20, 21.
3 xii. 25, xliv. 24-xlv. 3, xlvi. 1-5, 10, 11, xlvii., xlviii. 14.
4 Ewald and Bunsen ascribed xl.-lxvi. to a Jew writing in Egypt, and
others to a Jew in'Jndsea, Skinner, Isaiah xl.-lxvi., p. 1. T>VHM,fesaia,
p. xviii., assigns xl.-lv. (apart from Servant Passages) to a Jew in Northern
Phoenicia.

1 90 BIBLICAL INTRODUCTION
(c) Teaching of xl.-xlviii. (apart from Servant Passages). —
Confronted with the magnificent worship of the Babylonian
gods, who, it might be supposed, had given victory to their
worshippers, the Jews needed to be reassured as to the
power of Jehovah. Hence a formal assertion and proof of
the unique deity of Jehovah as Creator and Governor of
the world.1 This proof rests partly on Jehovah's announce
ment of the coming conquests of Cyrus, and is given as an
assurance of the deliverance from Babylon. Cyrus is His
Messiah,2 and Israel His Servant.3 The result of the work
of Cyrus will be the recognition of Jehovah as the one true
God by all nations.4
(d) Use in N.T. of xl.-xlviii. — xl. 3 f. is applied to John
the Baptist in Matthew iii. 3, Mark i. 3, John i. 23, Luke iii. 3-6;
and xl. 8 is quoted in i. Peter i. 24 f. ; xl. 13 f. in Romans
xi. 34 f. and i. Corinthians ii. 16; and xiv. 23 in Romans xiv. 11.
(e) Date and Authorship, etc. of xlix.-lv. (apart from
Servant Passages). — Primd facie these sections seem to imply
the same historical situation as xl.-xlviii., to which they seem
a natural sequel. Judah is still desolate,6 and a return of the
exiles 6 is promised.
Cornill7 explains the acknowledged break at the end of
xlviii. by regarding xlix.-lxii. as a sequel written later on in
Palestine by the same author; while Duhm treats xl.-lv. as
a single work. Unless the Servant passages are a later
insertion, after xlix.-lv. had been added to xl.-xlviii., xl.-lv.
is obviously a single work ; two different authors would
scarcely have utilised the Servant poem so similarly and so
harmoniously. Differences of subject, such as the absence
from these chapters of express references to Cyrus, Babylon,
and the contrast between Jehovah and idols, do not
necessarily imply a distinct work. Nevertheless Cheyne in
1 xl., xii. 21-29, xliv., xiv. 1-3, xlviii. 1-8.
* xiv. I. 8 xiv. 4, etc.
* xiv. 6, 14-17. ° xlix. 19, li. 3, li. 17— Iii. 2.
6 xlix. 22-26, li. 1 1 (gloss according to Cheyne), Hi. 1 1 f. (understood
of Babylon), lv. 12. 7 Page 157 f.

ISAIAH XL.-LV. 191
the Polychrome Isaiah follows Kosters in adopting a view
similar to that of Kuenen's, which he expressly rejected in
his Introduction? and regards xlix.-lv. as post-exilic, and
apparently the Servant passages as later insertions still. If
such a view is adopted, the desolation of Zion is the mean
estate of Judah after the Return, and the exiles are those
who still remained in Babylon. Certainly Zion is addressed
rather as a city in distress, but still actually existing, than
as ruined and uninhabited. Cheyne excludes authorship
by the author of xl.-xlviii. by suggesting, doubtfully, the
date 432.
The teaching of these sections is substantially included in
that of xl.-xlviii., the tendency is, however, to dwell on the
secular dominion rather than the spiritual influence of Israel,
and liv. 17 speaks of the "servants " instead of the " Servant
of Jehovah."
In N.T. Iii. 5 is quoted in Romans ii. 24 ; Iii. 7 in Romans
x. 15; Iii. 11 in ii. Corinthians vi. 17; the promise made to
the restored Jerusalem in liv. 1 is applied to the heavenly
Jerusalem in Galatians iv. 27 ; liv. 13 is quoted in John vi. 45 ;
lv. 3 in Acts xiii. 34.
(f) The Servant of Jehovah, xiii. 1-4 (5-9), xlix. 1-6 (7-13),
/. 4-9 (10, 11), Iii. i$-liii. 12.2
A certain connection can be shown between these sections
and their contexts, as may be gathered from the difference of
opinion as to whether the verses in brackets belong to the
Servant passages, or to the main portion of xl.-lv., or are
editorial links composed to connect the Servant passages with
the context. Yet these passages stand out from the surround
ing material; the connection would be improved, and the
whole would be more homogeneous if they were removed.
Elsewhere the Servant is clearly a title for the actual Israel,
there is scarcely an approach to personification; here the
Servant is either an ideal person, or, even if still Israel, Israel
personified as a teacher and prophet of Revelation, and a
1 1895. 2 The verses in brackets are perhaps secondary ; cf. (a).

192 BIBLICAL INTRODUCTION
martyr (? for the world). The ministry to all nations, and the
vicarious atonement of the sufferings of the righteous x are
characteristic of these sections.
The contrast has been explained as follows : (i.) The author
used an earlier poem, possibly composed by himself; (ii.) the
sections were written in the ordinary way as part of
xlviii.— lv., and the contrast is a literary device of the author to
produce a dramatic effect ; (iii.) the sections are parts of a
separate poem, which were combined by an editor with the
rest of xlviii.-lv.
The Servant in these passages has been explained as Israel
personified, either actual, purified, or ideal, or the righteous
kernel of the people, or the genius of the nation ; as describ
ing or based upon the experiences of Jeremiah, of some post-
exilic scribe, or some other martyr; as personifying the
prophetic order; or as a prediction of a future Prophet or
Redeemer. In any case, the prophecy received its only
adequate fulfilment in Christ ; as Prof. G. A. Smith writes :
"We . . . assert what none but prejudiced Jews have ever
denied, that this great prophecy . . . was fulfilled in One
Person, Jesus of Nazareth, and achieved in all its details by
Him alone."2
If these sections are from an independent poem, the Servant
would seem to be a person ; the picture can scarcely be a
mere description of past history, though some features may be
borrowed from the experiences of a prophet, possibly Jeremiah
or even the author himself. But if the sections were written
at the same time and by the same author as their context, the
Servant will rather be Israel, in some sense, as elsewhere in
xl.-lv. In N.T., the Servant is constantly identified with Christ;
cf. xiii. 1-4 with Matt. xii. 17-21 ; xlix. 6 with Acts xiii. 47 s;
Iii. 15 with Rom. xv. 21 ; liii. 1 with John xii. 38, Rom. x. 16;
1 xiii. 1, 4, xlix. 9, liii. 5-12. 2 Isaiah xl.-lxvi., p. 267.
3 At first sight Paul and Barnabas seem to identify themselves with the
Servant ; but really the quotation is used generally to justify the offer of
Christ's Gospel to the Gentiles.

ISAIAH LVI.-LXVI. 193
liii. 4 with Matt. viii. 17, i. Peter ii. 24 ff. ; liii. 7 f. with Acts
viii. 32 f.; liii. 12 with Luke xxii. 37, Heb. ix. 28.1 Cf. also
xlix. 8 with ii. Cor. vi. 2.
6. Isaiah lvi-lxvi. (Duhm's Trito-Isaiah.)
lvi. 1-8, Proselytes and Eunuchs to be admitted to the
privileges of Jehovah's people, on condition that they observe
the Sabbath ; " for my house shall be called a house of prayer
for all peoples."2 More exiles shall yet return.
The existence of the Temple and the implied return of some exiles
point to a post-exilic date. The keen interest in the Sabbath has no
parallel in xl.-lv., but may connect with Nehemiah's enforcing of the
observance of the Sabbath.3 If so, we may date c. 444.*
lvi. 9-lvii., Denunciation of the Jewish rulers, and of the
immoral superstitions of their neighbours, promise of ultimate
forgiveness and deliverance to the humble and penitent.
The references to rulers and worship at high places point to composition
in Palestine. The parallels in the earlier prophets to these pictures of
government and religion have often led to the conclusion that lvi. 9-lvii.
11 or 13 is borrowed from a pre-exilic prophet.8 Cheyne, however,
points out that the picture suits equally well the low material and spiritual
state of the Jews before the reforms of Nehemiah,6 and his examination of
the language and the literary parallels leads him to assign lvi. 9-lvii. 13a
to that period, the idolaters being the Samaritans.7 He regards I3b-2i
as a later work by a different author.
Iviii., The True Fast and the True Sabbath.
The marks of time in this chapter are not decisive, but its position in
the book, and the parallels to lvi. 1-8 and Zechariah vii. 1-14 point to a
post-exilic date.
lix. r-i5a, Denunciation of the Jews, followed by their un
reserved confession of sin.
Here again lix. 3-15 is often regarded as pre-exilic6; the section
implies at least autonomy in Judah, and cannot well be exilic. The social
wrong-doing is similar to that denounced by Isaiah and Jeremiah. But the
best parallel is to Nehemiah's confession on behalf of Israel, and to the
confession of the congregation under Ezra and Nehemiah,9 and points to a
date in that period.10
1 Mark xv. 28 is a misreading.
2 Quoted Matt. xxi. 13, Mark xi. 17, Luke xix. 46.
" Neh. x. 31, xiii. 15-22. * So Cheyne.
5 Ryssel (Kautzsch), Cornill, p. 160, Driver, p. 244, "It is
generally allowed . . . that they were written originally in the age of
Jeremiah." ¦ So also Skinner. 7 So Duhm.
8 Driver, p. 244, " generally allowed."
9 Ezra x. 2, 13 ; Neh. i., ix. 2, 33.
10 Cheyne, Duhm; Skinner, post-exilic, 3-8, are perhaps an addition.

194 BIBLICAL INTRODUCTION
lix. i5b-2i, Jehovah puts on the Armour of Righteousness
to deliver Israel. In verse 21, His Spirit and Revelation shall
always abide in Israel.
Parallel to lxiii 1-6 ; Cheyne, c. 432, verse 21 an addition. Verses 7 f.
are quoted Romans iii. 15 ff.
lx.-lxii., The wealth and power, the splendour and glory of
Zion, when Jehovah raises her from her low estate.
This section is like xl.-xlviii. in style and spirit, but resembles xlix.-lv.
still more closely. It might possibly be a detached portion of either
poem. But, though the situation described may be explained as that
of the Exile, it is more natural to understand that Zion and the Temple
are actually in existence.1 The desolation refers to the poverty-stricken
state of the meagre population before the coming of Nehemiah. More
over, the tendency to revel in pictures of material wealth and power
has developed beyond that of xlix.-lv. Hence Cheyne regards lx.-lxii. as
composed under the influence of xlix.-lv.; lxi. 1-4 and lxii. 1 being imita
tions of the Servant passages, and lxi. 10 a separate prophecy to be placed
at the end as "Zion's Response."
In N.T. lxi. 1 f., "The spirit of the Lord is upon me," etc., is applied
to Christ in Luke iv. 18 f.
lxiii. 1-6, Vengeance on Edom.
Parallel to lix. 15 ff. , and xxxiv. ; probably connects with some catastrophe
which befell Edom after the Exile.2
lxiii. 7-lxiv., Israel, in deep distress, and acknowledging its
sin, recalls Jehovah's former goodness, and appeals to Him to
renew His mercy. He is their Father, their Redeemer, before
Him they are as clay in the hands of the potter. It is He
who has caused them to err, and hardened their hearts. None
have called on His name, because He hid His face from them,
and delivered them into the power of their guilt.3 City and
Temple are in ruins, will He not relent ?
The statement4 that the holy cities and Zion are a desolation, that
the Temple has been burnt, seems to show that these chapters are exilic.
The situation implied is similar to that in Lamentations, only there is
no mention of a captivity, and the tone is less submissive. It might have
been written in Judah towards the close of the Captivity. But lxiii. 18
states that God's people had only possessed the land, or, it may be, Zion,
a little while, which would not apply to 586. We know of no later
occasion within the possible dates, when the Temple was burnt; but
our information is so scanty that such a catastrophe might have happened,
and left no clear trace in history. Cheyne mentions as suggested occasions
of these disasters, the persecutions of Antiochus Epiphanes and the period
of distress before the coming of Nehemiah, but maintains that this burning
must have taken place under Artaxerxes Ochus, c. 350. Duhm explains
' lxii. 9, 10. » Cheyne, 432 ?. 3 lxiii. 16 f. 4 lxiv. 10.

ISAIAH LVI.-LXVI. 195
the desolation of city and temple as the abiding result of the sack in 586,
the new city and temple being ignored as beneath notice. Even if exilic,
the section is so different in spirit from xl.-lv. , that they can scarcely be by
the same author. In N.T. lxiv. 4 is quoted in i. Corinthians ii. 9.
lxv., Jehovah inaugurates new heavens and a new earth, and
a new dispensation in Jerusalem, from which superstitious
idolaters (? the Samaritans) shall be excluded, while His
servants shall prosper.
Often, but improbably, held to be the answer to lxiii. 7-lxiv. The
chapter seems to belong to a time when the opposition of parties within the
community passed finally into formal division into distinct bodies. It may
very well connect with the final severance under Ezra and Nehemiah of the
congregation from the Samaritans and their adherents.1
In N.T. lxv. 1 is quoted Romans x. 20 f.
Ixvi. 1-5,2 Another contrast of the true worship with super
stition, introduced by the declaration that Jehovah needs no
earthly Temple.3
Either a warning to the Jews not to attach too much importance to the
restored Temple ; or a protest against the building of any temple, perhaps
a polemic against Haggai and Zechariah ; or, much more probably, a. pro
test against an early unrecorded proposal to build a schismatic Samaritan
temple, connecting, as 3-5 shows, with the same crisis as lxv., perhaps at a
later stage.4
In Acts vii. 49 f, Ixvi. 1, " What house would ye build," etc., is used
by Stephen, defending himself against a charge of saying that Jesus would
destroy the temple, to show that the Most High dwelleth not in temples
laid with hands. His indignant audience seem to have at once cut short his
speech. Ixvi. 6-24, Jerusalem exalted, the nations chastised, those
still in exile brought home, and in 23 f, the regular observance
of new moons and sabbaths by all mankind, the carcases of
sinners burning publicly for ever.
The climax of lxv. -Ixvi. 5 and of the same period ; 21 f. may be
an addition.5 Verse 24, the germ of the doctrine of Gehenna, the place
of the lost, is referred to in Mark ix. 43 f., "If thy hand offend thee,"
etc. (j) Jeremiah.
(a) The Prophet. — There is no doubt of the genuine connec
tion of the bulk of the book with Jeremiah.6 He belonged
1 Cheyne. 2 To which Cheyne adds 17, 18a.
3 Cf. John iv. 24.
4 Cheyne, 432 ? ; Duhm ; Meyer, Entstehung der Judenthum, p. 89.
5 Duhm, Cheyne, Skinner.
6 For critical questions see (c) Composition and (e) Contents under the
several sections.

196 BIBLICAL INTRODUCTION
to a priestly family at Anathoth, three miles north of Jeru
salem, but he exercised his ministry in the capital. >^,He
remained unmarried, at the command of Jehovah. In The
thirteenth year of Josiah, 626, while still young, he was called
to be a prophet.1 Hence he was born under Manasseh, and
grew up under the reaction against Isaiah's teaching. Ap
parently this reactionary worship had established its claim to
represent the ancient faith of Israel, and was generally upheld
by the authorities in church and state, for Jeremiah is usually
hostile to all authorities, princes, prophets, and priests. vHis
earlier ministry and that of Zephaniah were doubtless among
the influences which led to the reforms of Josiah and the
establishment of Deuteronomy. From 621 to 608, Jeremiah,
most exceptionally, may have been in sympathy with the
ruling powers. But Josiah's defeat and death at Megiddo
must have seemed the divine repudiation of Deuteronomy
and Jeremiah. The Egyptian party, also that of religious
reaction, regained its supremacy at the appointment of
Jehoiakim by Necho, and, with brief exceptions, retained it
to the close of the monarchy. Throughout this period
Jeremiah defied princes, priests, and prophets alike. He did
his best to baffle the pro-Egyptian policy of the government,
to purify social life and the administration of justice, and to
reform religious faith and worship, but with little external
success. As his hopes of winning the people dwindled, his
threats of punishment hardened into the unqualified predic
tion of the ruin alike of Temple and city. He was universally
unpopular ; the people, misapplying Isaiah's teaching, clung to
the Temple, as the infallible palladium of the city. When
Jeremiah foretold its ruin, he barely escaped with his life. At
another time, his opponents replied to his threats by beating
him and putting him in the stocks. In Jehoiakim himself, the
prophet found an able and determined opponent, but Zedekiah
was a helpless tool in the hands of the stronger party. Jere
miah, on the one hand, and the princes of the Egyptian party
with their hireling priests and prophets, on the other, struggled

JEREMIAH 197
fiercely for the control of the king. His conscience inclined
him to Jeremiah, but his cowardice decided in favour of the
princes, h^s Judah became committed to the hopeless contest
with NeBuchadnezzar, Jeremiah proclaimed the success of
the enemy, urged the king to submit, and declared that safety
could only be found in deserting to the besiegers. He was
imprisoned as a traitor, and was only saved by the tardy
interference of the king from being starved to death. Re
leased by the Chaldeans, after the sack of the city, he threw
in his lot with the Jews left in Judah, but was carried down by
them to Egypt. When we last read of him, he is still engaged
in his life-long task of rebuking and threatening his fellow-
countrymen. ^There are conflicting traditions as to his death ;
Tertullian 1 states that the Jews in Egypt stoned him to death,
which seems very probable. According to the Jews he
escaped to Babylon and died there.2
(b) Historical Circumstances. — Under Manasseh, Judah was
subject to Assyria. But, about the time when Jeremiah began
his ministry, 628, western Asia was overrun by Scythian
hordes. These served the prophet in his early utterances, as
the original of the invader from the north, who should be
the instrument of Jehovah's chastisement of his people.
Assurbanipal, the last great Assyrian king, died in 626. From
that date the power of Assyria dwindled rapidly; the Syrian
states and Israel had been crushed ; so that Judah was for a
time the strongest power in Palestine, and Josiah extended his
authority over part of Ephraim. Meanwhile Babylon was
aggrandising itself at the expense of Assyria, but its claim to
supremacy was challenged by^Pharaoh-Necho, who marched
through Palestine on his way to the Euphrates. Josiah
opposed him, and was defeated and slain at Megiddo, 609.
Later on Necho deposed Jehoahaz, and made Jehoiakim
king. Thus for a time Judah was entirely controlled by the
1 Adv. Gnost., c. 8.
2 The ascription to Jeremiah of Deuteronomy, Kings, certain Psalms,
etc., rests on no good evidence. Jeremiah has often been held to be the
original of the picture of the suffering Servant of Jehovah, Isaiah liii.

198 BIBLICAL INTRODUCTION
Egyptian anti-prophetic party. It was probably after Nineveh
had been captured, and the Assyrian empire overthrown by the
Medes and Babylonians, c. 606, that Necho was defeated by
Nebuchadnezzar at Carchemish in 605, and thenceforward
western Asia lay at the disposal of the conqueror, who soon
established his authority in Palestine. Yet the tact of
Jehoiakim enabled him to retain his throne and persist in a
pro-Egyptian policy, even while professing loyalty to Babylon.
He died just in time to escape the vengeance of Nebuchad
nezzar, but his son and successor, Jehoiachin, and the best
of the population were carried away captive. Although his
successor, Zedekiah, Jehoiakim's brother, was the nominee of
Nebuchadnezzar, he either could not or would not control the
party of revolt against Babylon. The disloyalty of Judah pro
voked a fresh Chaldean invasion and siege of Jerusalem ;
Pharaoh Hophra advanced to its relief, but retreated ; the
siege, which had been raised for a time, was resumed, the
city taken and sacked, the king with his court and most of the
people carried away captive. The attempt to form a new
community was frustrated by the murder of Gedaliah, a
Jewish prince acting as governor for the Chaldeans; and
most of the remaining Jews fled to Egypt. There is evidence
that Nebuchadnezzar invaded Egypt, c. 568, at the beginning
of the reign of Amasis.
(c) Composition.—^ the fourth year of Jehoiakim, Jeremiah
dictated toJBaruch an his prophecies against Israel, Judah,
and the nations. The roll on which Baruch wrote this record
was burnt by the king next year, but Jeremiah dictated its
contents afresh to Baruch, who wrote them on a second
roll, "and there were added besides unto them many like
words." x These rolls were the first two editions of our
book, which no doubt includes the bulk of their contents.
We have thus the testimony of the book itself that the
earliest document which can have been used in its com
position was written from the prophet's recollection of his
utterances, which were largely supplemented at the time of

JEREMIAH 199
writing. Utterances of an earlier date are thus extant in
the form they assumed in the fifth year of Jehoiakim. The
book referred to in xxx. 1 . may have been written as an
appendix to Baruch's roll, possibly also by Baruch.1 We
can only determine the contents of Baruch's roll by ascer
taining the dates of the several prophecies, which cannot
always be done with confidence. Portions, of course, may
have been omitted in process of editing.
But our book is not a collection of Jeremiah's prophecies,
but a rough equivalent of what we should call " The Life,
Times, and Works of Jeremiah." It is nowhere stated that
the narratives it contains were written by Jeremiah, nor, for
the most part, is there anything to suggest that they were.
On the other hand, they are evidently, in the main, the
work of a well-informed contemporary, very probably the
prophet's secretary, Baruch. In adding these narratives to
his roll, he probably also added Jeremiah's later prophecies,
partly from the prophet's notes, partly from his own re
miniscences. The dependence on the Book of Kings in
its final form, and the probable presence of post-exilic
material, show that our book did not take its present shape
till after the Exile. The imperfect chronological arrangement
shows that the editors did not allow the contents of Baruch's
roll to remain together in their original form.
(d) Hebrew and Greek Editions. — The LXX. differs very
widely from the Hebrew Text. There are numerous variations,
transpositions, omissions, and additions. It is commonly
stated that there are about 2700 words contained in the
Hebrew and not in the LXX. The most important omissions
are: x. 6-8, Unique Supremacy of Jehovah; xxxiii. 14-26,
The Branch, and the Covenant with the Levites and David;
xxxix. 4-13, Fall of Jerusalem ; xlviii. 45 f., On Heshbon, in
Oracle on Moab ; Iii. 28-30, Statistics as to captives.
The Utterances on the Nations are inserted in the middle,
after xxv. 13, as in Isaiah and Ezekiel, instead of almost at
1 This verse is rejected by Giesebrecht, but accepted by Rothstein
(Kautzsch) and Cornill.

200 BIBLICAL INTRODUCTION
the end, chh. 46-49. They are also arranged in the order,
Elam, Egypt, Babylon, Philistines, Edom, Ammon, Kedar,
Damascus, Moab; instead of the order of the Hebrew
Text, Egypt, Philistines, Moab, Ammon, Edom, Damascus,
Kedar, Babylon. In minor variations the correct text is to
be found sometimes in the one edition, sometimes in the
other; but the longer passages absent from the LXX. are
probably editorial additions in the Hebrew Text. They do
not show that such editorial expansion continued after the LXX.
was translated, but only that when that translation was made,
at least two very different editions of the book were still current.
(e) Contents.
I.-VL, Originally Composed in the Earlier Part of
Josiah's Reign, c. 628-621.
i., Thirteenth Year of Josiah, 628. Jeremiah's Call to the
prophetic office, to which God appointed him before his
birth. His mission " to pluck up, break down, destroy, and
overthrow; to build and plant." Visions of Almond Tree,
suggesting by paronomasia God's watchfulness; and of
Seething Caldron symbolising a Northern Invader. The
prophet will be in opposition to kings, princes, and priests,
and will not be crushed by them.
ii., Jerusalem and Israel, once devoted to Jehovah, have
ungratefully deserted Him, being less faithful than the Gentiles
to their false gods. They have intrigued with Egypt and
Assyria. All classes, kings, princes, priests, prophets, and
people, are guilty.
iii. 1-5, Idolatry and foreign intrigues punished by drought ;
will not the people repent? Cf. iii. 19 ff.
iii. 6-18, Time of Josiah. Judah did not take warning
by the fate of Israel, but surpassed her in wickedness.
Invitation to Israel to repent. Lost ark not to be replaced,
verse 16. Promise of reconciliation of Judah and Israel at
Jerusalem, whither all nations will gather to worship Jehovah,
17 f.
Interrupts the connection between verses 5 and 19. Giesebrecht
connects 6-13 with 19-iv. 2 ; 14-18 being a later insertion, 14-16 from

JEREMIAH 201
some other prophecy of Jeremiah. Verses 17 f. late gloss, Cornill,
Giesebrecht, Cheyne;1 Smend2 rejects 16-18, and understands iii. as
predicting the final ruin of Judah, and the restoration of Israel.
iii. 19-iv. 2, Penitent Israel shall be accepted by Jehovah.
iv. 3-vi. 30, Description, interspersed with appeals to the
Jews to repent, of a terrible invasion by a northern people,
as a punishment of the guilt of all classes, in spite of their
assiduous sacrifices to Jehovah.
Referring originally to the Scythian inroads c. 628, but perhaps adapted
to the Babylonians when the earlier prophecies were rewritten in the fifth
year of Jehoiakim, xxxvi. 32.
VII.-X., The Beginning of Jehoiakim's Reign, 608.
No danger seems imminent ; which suits the situation after the sub
mission to Pharaoh Necho, and before his defeat at Carchemish by
Nebuchadnezzar. Cf. also vii. and xxvi.
vii. 1-28, Jeremiah is commanded to stand at the gate
of the Temple, and appeal to the people to repent. Unless
they reform social wrongs and forsake the superstitious
worship of the Queen of Heaven and "other gods,"
neither the sanctity of the Temple nor their many sacrifices
to Jehovah will protect them. The Temple at Jerusalem will
perish as did that at Shiloh. " But they will not hearken unto
thee." vii. 29— viii. 3, Because the Jews have sacrified children in
the Valley of the son of Hinnom, the land shall be laid
waste, the valley choked with corpses on which the birds
and beasts shall feed ; the bones of the dead shall be exposed
before the sun, moon, and stars, which they worshipped, and
the living shall long for death. Cf. xix. 3-19.
viii. 4-ix. 22,3 Lamentation over Judah, its obstinate sin
and sure punishment, by failure of crops, by invasion, the
ruin of the cities,4 the death or captivity of the people.
ix. 23-26 ;6 23 f. is a proverbial maxim; man should glory
not in strength or riches, but in God's goodness and righteous
ness. 25 f. threaten Egypt, Judah, and their neighbours with
punishment, because they are uncircumcised in heart.
1 Introduction to Isaiah, p. II. 2 A. T. Theol., 237. f Heb. 21.
4 viii. 13, 16, ix. II, 16, 21, 22. 5 Heb. 22-25.

202 BIBLICAL INTRODUCTION
23-26 interrupt the connection between 22 and x. 17, and were rejected
by Kuenen,1 but are probably genuine, but misplaced.2
x. 1-16, The contrast between Jehovah, the one true God,
Creator and Ruler of the Universe, and the idols of the
Gentiles. Interrupts the connection between 22 and x. 17 ; parallel to and prob
ably dependent on Isaiah xl. 19-22, etc., often regarded as exilic or post-
exilic.3 Verse 11 is in Aramaic, and is probably a later gloss.
x. 17-25, Conclusion of viii. 4-ix. 22.
Verse 25, which implies that Judah is already desolate, may have been
added by Jeremiah later.4
XI.-XX., Originally composed in Jehoiakim's Reign.5
xi. 1-17, The prophet recalls his zeal for God's covenant
with Israel — probably Deuteronomy6 — denounces the failure
of the people to observe it, and threatens them with punish
ment. xi. 1 8— xii. 6, Jeremiah's priestly kinsmen at Anathoth to be
punished because they persecuted him.
xii. 7-17, Judah raided by her neighbours (7-13), who will
be punished with exile, but restored if they adopt the religion
of Israel (14-17).
Often connected with the raids of the " bands " of ChakUeans, Syrians,
Ammonites, and Moabites, about the ninth year of Jehoiakim, c. 600.7
Jeremiah's authorship of 14-17 has been challenged.8 For the restoration
of Moab and Ammon, cf. xlviii. 47, xlix. 6 ; also xlix. 39 (Elam).
xiii. i-n, The ruin of Judah symbolised by a girdle spoilt
by being buried near the Euphrates.
xiii. 12-17, All classes of the people shall be filled with the
wrath of God, like a bottle with wine.
xiii. 18, 19, Lament over the king, the queen-mother, and
the desolate land.
Probably referring to the captivity of Jehoiachin, a youth of eighteen,
whose mother, Nehushta, is mentioned ii. Kings xxiv. 8, 12.
xiii. 20-27, The ingrained sin of Jerusalem — "Can the
Ethiopian change his skin, or the leopard his spots?" —
punished by shame and ruin.
1 Ap. Giesebrecht, i. 1. 5 Giesebrecht, Cornill.
3 Giesebrecht, Cornill, Rothstein, (Kautzsch), who also regard
1 1 as a still later addition. Cheyne, Origin of the Psalter, p. 333.
4 Cornill, gloss. 5 For the most part. 6 ii. Kings xxiii. 3.
7 ii. Kings xxiv. 2. 8 Stade, ap. Giesebrecht.

JEREMIAH 203
xiv. i-xvii. 18, On the occasion of a drought, Jeremiah
announces that the people will be consumed by the sword, by
famine, and by pestilence; the rest will go into captivity.
Appeals for mercy are repeated and rejected, " Though Moses
and Samuel stood before Me, yet My mind could not be
towards this people." Prophets who contradict Jeremiah shall
be punished. Jeremiah complains of his unwelcome message
and the ill-will it excites, and is repeatedly encouraged. He
must not marry or take part in any festivity.
Verses xv. 11-14, xvi. 14-16, interrupt the context, xv. 13 f. being
borrowed from xvii. 3 f., and xvi. 14 f. from xxiii. 7 f. Similarly xvi.
18-21 is wholly or partly a misplaced fragment, and xvii. 11-13, at any
rate, out of place.1
xvii. 19-27, The observance of the Sabbath, the condition
of national salvation.
The parallels to Nehemiah xiii. 15 ff., the interest in the Sabbath, and
in sacrifices are unusual in Jeremiah.2 The style, however, is either
Jeremiah's or modelled on xxii. 1 ff.,3 cf. too Ezekiel xx. 21, 24.
xviii.-xx., The Potter a type of the Divine Sovereignty.
God's threats or promises conditional on perseverance in sin
or righteousness. The doom of Israel. Plots against Jeremiah.
He prays for the punishment of his persecutors. The breaking
of a potter's earthern vessel, which cannot be mended, a
symbol of the irrevocable ruin of Judah.4 Jeremiah addresses
the people at the Temple, and is beaten and put in the stocks
by Pashhur, whose punishment will be, that he and all the
Jews who survive the sack of Jerusalem will be carried to
Babylon. Jeremiah again prays for the punishment of his
persecutors, and curses the day of his birth.
Cf. Job iii. 1-10 with which xx. 14-18 will have some literary connec
tion, probably Job is dependent on Jeremiah. Stade and Dillmann 6
regard xx. 14 ff. as a later addition. Davidson, however, seems to
consider xx. 14 ff. independent of Job, and therefore the original.
1 Giesebrecht.
2 Rothstein (Kautzsch), Cornill, Giesebrecht, Kayser-Marti,
p. 157, Cheyne, Introd. to Isaiah, p. 312, "post-exilic."
3 Giesebrecht, "Gut jeremianisch ist, doch ist es mbglich, dies mit
Kuenen aus absichtlicher Imitation zu erkl'aren " ; Driver, p. 242, " The
style is thoroughly that of Jeremiah."
4 xix. 3-9, I lb- 13, which are largely based on vii. 32-viii. 4, ii. Kings
xxi. 16, xxii. 10-13, are ne'^ by Giesebrecht to be a later insertion.
6 Ap. Konig.

204 BIBLICAL INTRODUCTION
XXI.-XXIX., Passages of Various Dates.
xxi. i-io, During the last siege, 588, Zedekiah sends to ask
concerning the fate of the city, Jeremiah replies that the city
will be taken, sacked, and burnt, and that the only way of
escape is desertion to the Chaldeans.
xxi. 1 i-xxii. 9, Appeal to the court, " the house of the king
of Judah " to rule justly as the condition of national salvation.1
This passage and the sections to xxiii. 8 are commonly considered
a collection of prophecies uttered originally at different times, and com
bined soon after the captivity of Jehoiachin, c. 597.
xxii. 10-30, Judgments on Shallum (Jehoahaz), Jehoiakim,
and Coniah (Jehoiachin), c. 597.
xxiii., Denunciation of shepherds, i.e., princes, priests, and
especially prophets, including a promise of good shepherds, 4,
and of the righteous Branch (cemah) of David, under whom
Judah and Israel shall be restored 5-8, cf xxxiii. 14-16.
Probably under Jehoiakim.
xxiv., Jeconiah (Jehoiachin) and his fellow captives sym
bolised by a basket of good figs, but the Jews left in Judah
by a basket of bad figs.
Early in Zedekiah's reign.
xxv., Fourth year of Jehoiakim, First of Nebuchadrezzar,
605. The Jews are to be subdued, and their land laid waste
by "my Servant Nebuchadrezzar" and the Chaldseans, because
they refused to listen to the appeals of the prophets. They
shall serve Babylon seventy years, then shall Babylon be
punished, n-14. All nations shall drink the cup of God's
wrath. Last of all Sheshach (i.e., Babylon) shall drink, 26b.
26b is probably a later gloss.2 Giesebrecht, also, considers 11-14, 30-38
later additions, verse 1 3b is clearly a gloss.
xxvi., 'In the beginning of the reign of Jehoiakim," Jere
miah threatens that the Temple, like that at Shiloh, will be
destroyed, is accused of blasphemy, but rescued by his friends
among the princes. Cf. vii.-x.
xxvii. -xxix., ^Jeremiah's^ Controversy with the Prophets.
The prophets, especially Hananiah, encouraged rebellion
against Babylon, and contradicted Jeremiah's threats. Death
1 Cf. xvii. 19 ff. 2 Rothstein (Kautzsch), Cornill, etc.

JEREMIAH 205
of Hananiah. Jeremiah and the prophets in exile, who
supported Hananiah, denounce each other by letter.
xxvii. 3, 4, xxviii. 1 show that this controversy took place in the earlier
years of Zedekiah's reign, and that Zedekiah should be read for Jehoiakim
in xxvii. 1.
XXX-XXXIIL, Prophecies of Restoration.
These are combined with a narrative referring to events "in the tenth
year of Zedekiah," 588, during the last siege 1 ; xxxiii. is expressly dated
in this period, to which xxx., xxxi. may also be assigned. The narrative
and the compilation of the section will be the work of the editor. The
Jeremianic origin of the prophecies in these chapters has been contested.
According to Smend,2 xxx. f. presuppose the post-exilic historical situation,
and are dependent on II. Isaiah, e.g., "Jacob, my servant." 3 Giesebrecht
ascribes comparatively little to Jeremiah.4 Doubtless editorial additions 5
have given a post-exilic or exilic colouring to these chapters, otherwise
they are substantially Jeremiah's.8
xxx., When calamity has shown that foreign alliances and
all human help are useless, Jehovah Himself will deliver His
people, bring them back to their own land, and set over them
" David, their king,'- i.e., a prince of the House of David.
Verses 10 f., apparently dependent on II. Isaiah,7 or vice versa, are
rejected by Cornill, also 22-24. Verses 23 f. , at least, are out of place.
xxxi., Ephraim and Judah shall be reconciled at Zion, and
share the renewed mercy of Jehovah. God will make a new
covenant with them, whereby each will be directly taught of
Him, and there will be no need of human teachers.
Two passages are often held to be later additions ; 35-37, Israel shall
abide while sun and moon endure, in which 35 is in the style of II. Isaiah,
cf. Isaiah li. 15 8 ; and 38-40, the future dimensions of Jerusalem, which is
certainly out of place here.9
xxxii. (narrative, 6-25 in first person), During the last siege,
Jeremiah buys a field at Anathoth, as a sign that the Jews will
return from exile to occupy their old inheritance.
1 xxxii. 1. 2 A.T. Theol., pp. 239 ff. 3 xxx. 10.
4 Only xxxii. 6-i7a, 24-44 are actually Jeremiah's, while xxxi. 2-6,
15-20, 27-34, xxxiii. 1, 4-13 are the reminiscences of Baruch ; the rest is
due to later editors. 6 See below.
6 Driver (apparently), Cornill, Konig, Kayser-Marti, 115,
Rothstein (Kautzsch).
7 Cf. Isaiah xii. 13, xliii. 5, xliv. 2.
8 Cornill, Giesebrecht.
9 Rothstein (Kautzsch), Giesebrecht.

206 BIBLICAL INTRODUCTION
Verses 17-23, the somewhat abstract introduction to Jeremiah's prayer,
may be a later addition.1
xxxiii. 1-16, Renewed promises of restoration, and of the
Branch (gemah) of David.
The form of this section seems affected by the actual experiences of the
Captivity, especially in 11-14. Verses 14-16 are chiefly a repetition of
xxiii. 5 f, but here it is Jerusalem and not the Branch which is named
"Jehovah our Righteousness."
xxxiii., 17-26, The House of David and the Levites shall
remain and flourish, as long as day and night endure.
This section is not in the LXX., and the keen interest in the Levites
has no parallel elsewhere in the book ; hence the verses are probably an
addition.2 XXXIV, XXXV., Utterances on Specified Occasions.
xxxiv., During the Last Siege, Zedekiah, after the Fall of
the City, will be taken to Babylon, but his life will be spared,
1-7. The nobles to be punished, because when the siege was
raised for a time, they re-enslaved the Jews whom they had
emancipated. xxxv., " In the days of Jehoiakim." The Jews put to shame
by the loyalty of the Rechabites to their tribal customs.
About 597, the Rechabites being probably driven into the city by the
troubles at the end of Jehoiakim's reign.
XXXVI.-XLV., A History of Jeremiah.
xxxvi., Fourth Year of Jehoiakim, 605. One roll of Jere
miah's prophecies burnt by the king, and another written.
xxxvii.-xxxix.^eremiah, arrested as a deserter, during the
temporary raising of the last siege, is beaten and imprisoned.
He persists in urging the king to submit, and the people to
desert, is thrown into a muddy oubliette, bu,t,released by Ebed-
melech, repeats his prophecies to the king, and is kept in
prison till the sack of the city, when he is released by the
express orders of Nebuchadrezzar. Ebed-melech is promised
his life.
Verses xxxix. 1, 2 are taken from ii. Kings xxv. 1-4 (Jeremiah Iii. 4-7);
and 4-13 from ii. Kings xxv. 4-12 (Jeremiah Iii. 7-16) ; 4-13 are not in the
LXX. , and are probably a later addition.
1 Rothstein (Kautzsch), Cornill, Giesebrecht.
2 Rothstein (Kautzsch), Cornill, Giesebrecht ; and, Driver,
p. 247, " the majority of recent critics. "

JEREMIAH 207
xl.-xliv., Jeremiah is released from among the captives, and
joins Gedaliah, the new governor of Judah. Gedaliah is
murdered by Ishmael. Jeremiah is rescued from Ishmael
by Johanan, and carried, against his will, into Egypt, where
he denounces the worship of the Queen of Heaven by the
exiles, and foretells the ruin of Egypt and the refugees.
xiv., "Fourth Year of Jehoiakim," Baruch is promised that
his life shall be spared.
XLVI. -LI., Prophecies against Foreign Nations.
The prospect of a Chaldfean invasion after the Battle of Carchemish,
605, probably furnished Jeremiah with an occasion for dealing with foreign
nations. Smend1 and Kayser- Marti2 deny the Jeremianic authorship of this
section. Smend considers that the prophet who was so preoccupied
with the sin and doom of Judah could not have exulted in a national
Judaistic spirit over the ruin of foreign nations. Some use, however,
may have been made of Jeremianic material. Giesebrecht, however, holds
that Jeremiah delivered a series of utterances on foreign nations ; assigns
xlvii., xlix. 7-11 to Baruch's reminiscences; and thinks that xlvi. 2-12,
Egypt, rests on a Jeremianic basis ; elsewhere anything of Jeremiah's is
editorially disguised beyond recognition.
xlvi., Egypt, On the eve of the Battle of Carchemish, 605,
Pharaoh Necho's defeat is foretold, 1-12; and, after the
defeat, the conquest of Egypt, and its ultimate restoration,
13-26. Verses 27 f. =xxx. 10 f. are an insertion.
xlvii., The Philistines spoiled by the Chaldseans.
According to I " before Pharaoh smote Gaza," which, however, LXX.
omits. Probably 605.
xlviii., Moab and its cities are doomed.
Parallel to Isaiah xv., xvi., q.v.
xlix. 1-6, Ammon, its captivity and restoration.
xlix. 7-22, Edom, its mountain strongholds to be sacked by
the nations.
xlix. 23-27, Fall of Damascus.
A mosaic, 23b = Isaiah lvii. 20 ; 24b = Isaiah xiii. 8 ; 25 = Isaiah xxii, 1 f. ;
26=1. 30; 27= Amos i. 14. We know nothing that suggests that Damascus
was within the range of Jeremiah's political interests. The section is,
however, accepted by Cornill.
xlix. 28-33, Kedar and Hazor, Nomad tribes of Arabia.
1 A.T. Theol., pp. 238 f. 2 Ibid., p. 115.

208 BIBLICAL INTRODUCTION
xlix. 34-39, Elam, its doom and restoration.
Verse 34, not in LXX., assigns this passage to the beginning of
Zedekiah's reign.
1., li., Babylon, A prophecy or series of prophecies, exulting
over the miserable ruin of Babylon, as a punishment for her
ill-treatment of the Jews. The Jewish exiles are urged to
flee from the doomed city. A note, li. 59-64, is added,
stating that Jeremiah wrote the doom of Babylon in a book,
and gave it to Seraiah, Zedekiah's chamberlain, to take to
Babylon, read it there, tie a stone to it, and throw it into
the Euphrates. This book is probably intended to be
identified with 1., li. Chapter li. ends: "Thus far are the
words of Jeremiah."
These chapters are generally regarded as exilic, with post-exilic
additions. The historical situation is that of the Exile. The Jews
are in Chaldea,1 the Temple and Jerusalem in ruins,2 Babylon is
menaced by a confederation of nations, led by the Medes.3 The
religious situation, too, is not that of Jeremiah. He is overwhelmed
with the sense of Judah's sin and its punishment by Nebuchadrezzar,
the Servant of Jehovah. Here, the situation is that of II. Isaiah ;
Judah's sin is forgotten, Judah's suffering, and the sin and chastisement
of Babylon for destroying Jerusalem occupy the writer's mind.1 Much
of the section is borrowed from the rest of the book and from other
literature, after the manner of other secondary passages in Jeremiah.6
Except for such borrowing, the style is not that of Jeremiah.
LIL, Historical Appendix.
An account of the Fall of Jerusalem, and the release of
Jehoiachin from prison.
Verses 1-27, 31— 34=ii. Kings xxiv. 18-xxv. 21, xxv. 27-30, from
which they are taken. Verses 28-30 are absent from the LXX.
(f) Teaching. — Jeremiah repeats the protests of his pre
decessors against social wrong,6 superstitious and idolatrous7
worship, at the high places8 and elsewhere, and the com
bination of external devotion to Jehovah with a selfish,
immoral life ; 9 and, like them, he announces the ruin and
restoration of Judah and Israel, and the ultimate universalism
1 l. 8, 33, li. 6, 45. 2 1. 28, li. 11, 50 f.
3 1. 9, 41-43, li. 11, 27 f. " 1. 20, li. 10, 33-44.
6 1. 40-46 = xlix. 18, vi. 22-24, xlix. 19-21; li. I5-I9 = x. 12-16;
cf. 1. 39 with Isaiah xiii. 21 f. 6 xxii. 3, vii. 5-7.
7 ii. 20, 27, iii. 13. 8 xvii. 2.
8 vi. 20, vii. 21 ff.

JEREMIAH 209
of true religion.1 The exact relation of Jeremiah to Deuter
onomy v.-xxvi. is a difficult problem. Its ordinances seek
to realise Jeremiah's ideals, and his teaching must have
favoured its acceptance and subsequent observance; indeed,
in xi.2 he appears as its champion. The release of Jewish
slaves brought about by Jeremiah during the last siege was
in accordance with a law borrowed by Deuteronomy from
the older codes.3 But Jeremiah's later teaching goes beyond
Deuteronomy. Indeed the prestige which Josiah's reforms
gave to the Temple as the only legitimate sanctuary of
Jehovah helped the people to harden their hearts against the
prophet's teaching. The people appealed against him to a
written law, " We are wise, and the law of Jehovah is with us,"
but he replied, "The false pen of the scribes hath wrought
falsely."4 We need not suppose that Jeremiah refers to
Deuteronomy ; 5 but it is clear that the written law had
assumed a form against which the prophet was compelled
to protest, and that editors were already busy expanding
and interpreting its contents. His experience of the use
lessness of any written law as the basis of the covenant
between Jehovah and Israel led him to the great utterance,
xxxi. 31-37, which is one of those in which O.T. Revelation
most nearly anticipates the Gospel of Christ, and according
to which God's covenant with His people does not rest on
written law, on a prophetic order or a priesthood, but on the
spiritual fellowship of the believer with God. The same
truth is illustrated by Jeremiah's isolation. In him the
antagonism of the inspired prophets to the prophetic order
and the priesthood reached its climax. He is, after Christ
Himself, the great example that Divine Revelation often
comes as a protest against the traditional teaching of con
stituted authorities.
In dealing with eclecticism, too, Jeremiah follows in the
footsteps of his predecessors, but the issue is more clearly
1 iii. 17 ff. 2 Cf. Contents i. 1.
8 Cf. xxxiv. 13, 14 with Exodus xxi. 2, Deut. xv. 12.
4 viii. 8. " Wellhausen, History of Israel, 403 n.

210 BIBLICAL INTRODUCTION
stated. The people worshipped the heavenly bodies, and other
deities, yet they could say " I am not defiled, I have not gone
after the Baalim," and saw no reason why they should not
appeal to Jehovah for help in time of trouble.1 By his
demonstration of the folly and sin of asssociating "other
gods" with Jehovah, Jeremiah prepared the way for the
explicit statement of monotheism.
Moreover, Jeremiah stands out as a great example of
personal religion, in his unflinching proclamation of an un
popular message, in his sympathy and intercessions for his
people, in his earnest pleading with God, and in his sub
mission to the Divine will.
(g) Use in N.T. — Our Lord's phrase, "den of thieves,"
Matthew xxi. 13, etc., is from vii. 11; "Rachel weeping for
her children," Matthew ii. 18, from xxxi. 15 ; the great passage
on the New Covenant, xxxi. 31-37, is applied to Christianity
in Hebrews viii. 8-12, x. 16 f., Romans xi. 27, and probably
suggested the phrase " new covenant " in the words of institu
tion of the Lord's Supper. Cf. also ix. 24 and i. Corinthians i.
31, ii. Corinthians x. 17. There are also numerous parallels
in the Apocalypse.
8) Lamentations.
(a) Title, Date, and Authorship. — In the Hebrew text, the
heading is simply 'Ekhd, the opening word of the book; in
the LXX., Threnoi or Threnoi Hieremiou, and in the Vulg.
Threni, hence our Lamentations. The LXX. and Vulg.
represent the Hebrew Qinoth = " Lamentations," by which
name the book is referred to in the Talmud, etc.
¦^Jnii. CJrromdesjocxv. , 25_j\£e.read that "Jeremiah corrmosed
ajratnentation for Josiah, which was uttered byldTThe male
and female singers in their lamentations (qinoth) over Josiah
unto this day, and it became a custom in Israel, and
behold they (i.e., the lamentations of the singers, including
that of Jeremiah) are written in (the Book of) Lamentations "
('al haq-qwbth)? This passage evidently refers to Lamenta-
2 Substantially as Kautzsch ; cf. R.V.

LAMENTATIONS 211
tions ; it has been held to claim the whole book for Jeremiah,
but, if the rendering given above is correct, it merely states
that the book includes a lamentation by Jeremiah.
In the Hebrew Canon, Lamentations is one of the Five
Rolls, Megillbth, and is included in the Hagiographa, but the
LXX. places it after Jeremiah, and prefixes a statement that
"After Israel was carried away captive, and Jerusalem laid
waste, Jeremiah sat weeping, and lamented this lamentation
over Jerusalem." The Old Latin, Vulgate, and Syriae versions,
the Targum and the Talmud follow Chronicles and the LXX.
in ascribing the book to Jeremiah. \\The contents show clearly
that Chronicles is wrong in describingSne" book as a lamenta
tion oyer. Josiaji ; it is, as the LXX. perceives, a lamentation
oyertheFall of Jerusalem in 586. Yet "we have the joint
testimony of Chronicles and the LXX. to the authorship of
the whole or part of Jhe book by Jeremiah.
J3ut, though there are parallels to the style and teaching of
Jeremiah, and various passages seem to have been written
by an eye-witness, a comparison of the book with Jeremiah's
prophecies suggests that the tradition of his authorship is an
unsound conjecture. He was a prisoner during the sack of
the city, and after his release he actively co-operated in the
attempt to reorganise the Jewish community. Jeremiah, who
had a very poor opinion of Zedekiah, would hardly have
spoken of him as "The breath of our nostrils, the anointed
of Jehovah ... of whom we said, Under his shadow we
shall live among the nations." 1 We miss, too, any adequate
parallel to Jeremiah's emphatic and repeated assertion that the
ruin of Judah was the punishment of the sin of all classes of
the community. Jeremiah included priests and prophets in
his denunciation, but he would scarcely have laid the whole
responsibility upon them.2
vBut as each of the five chapters is a separate poem, it is
stilr- possible that one or more of them may be the work of
1 iv. 20.
2 " It is because of the sins of her prophets, and the iniquities of her
priests," iv. 13.

212 BIBLICAL INTRODUCTION
Jeremiah. \The vivid descriDtions_of the_sack of Jerusjdjmjn_
ii. ancTiv! show that these chapters were written soon after the
event by an eye-witness. Similar characteristics suggest a
like "origin for v. ; but the fact that v. is the only one of the
four poems, not an acrostic, points to a different author;
unless, indeed, the author had collected twenty-two suitable
sentiments, but never found opportunity to shape them into
an acrostic. The different character of the acrostics in i. and
iii.1 may point to a different authorship. Moreover i. and
iii. are said to be dependent on ii. and iv., and other exilic
literature, and therefore to be later. Though they seem to
imply an exilic date, they are often regarded as post-exilic.
(b) Qinah Metre. — This book furnishes the most striking
example of the Hebrew elegiac or Qmah metre, according
to which each of the two or more parallel members is divided
into two unequal parts, the former being the longer. This
arrangement gives the lines a sort of " dying fall " suited to a
melancholy subject, e.g. :

T,J All her gates are desolate, 7'
4 | — her priests sigh ; 6
/ Her virgins are afflicted, 6
c \ -bi

Hebrew
Syllables.

-bitter is she. 3
Chapters i.-iv. of this book are written in this metre.
The English translation can only partially represent this
peculiarity, and it is not strictly adhered to in the Hebrew,
possibly in some measure through later modifications of the
text. A good illustration of the metre may be seen in
Dr. Skinner's translation2 of Ezekiel xix. 2-9.
(c) Contents. — i., The miserable condition of Jerusalem.
An alphabetic acrostic, following the usual order- of the letters in the
Hebrew alphabet. A single verse is given to each letter, and each verse
contains three lines of Qinah metre, the first of which begins with the
characteristic letter.
iLj The ruin and sack of Jerusalem.
An acrostic, exactly resembling i., except that it has the order Pe,
'Ayin, instead of the usual order 'Ayin, Pe.
iii., The community, speaking mostly in the first person
1 See Contents. 8 Ezekiel, p. 109.

EZEKIEL 213
singular "I," meditates on its sin and suffering, and on its
hopes of deliverance from God.
An acrostic, exactly resembling ii. , except that each of the three Qinah
lines allotted to each letter begins with that letter, and each line is reckoned
as a separate verse ; cf. Psalm cxix.
iv., The sack of Jerusalem, concluding with the doom of
Edom, and the assurance that Zion's punishment is ended.
An alphabetic acrostic, resembling ii. and iii. in having the unusual
order Pe, 'Ayin. A single verse is given to each letter, and each verse
contains two lines of Qinah metre, the first of which begins with the
characteristic letter.
v., The miserable condition of Jerusalem and the Jews.
The poem contains 22 verses, the number of letters in the Hebrew
alphabet ; but it is not an acrostic. Neither is it in the Qinah metre ; but
consists of couplets in synonymous parallelism.1
The book is not used in the N.T.
(9S Ezekiel. ^
(a) Date and Authorship. — The ascription of this book to
Ezekiel is generally accepted,2 and there is no serious doubt
as to the authorship of any considerable passage.3 The
ministry of Ezekiel falls between 592 and 570, and the
book must have been compiled towards its close. Our
knowledge of Ezekiel is derived from the book itself; he
is not mentioned elsewhere in O.T.
Ezekiel, the son of Buzi, was a priest who was carried
captive with Jehoiachin,4 597 ; five years later he was called
to be a prophet. This fact, together with the authority with
which he speaks and the deference shown him, suggests that
he was no longer in his first youth, and this view is confirmed
by his familiarity with priestly ritual, probably acquired as an
officiating priest at the Temple. During his last ten years at
Jerusalem, Jehoiakim was supporting the reaction from the
Deuteronomic legislation, and the revival of earlier customs,
in the teeth of strenuous and persistent opposition from
1 See Psalms.
* The attempts of Geiger, Seinecke, Zunz, etc. to assign the book
to the post-exilic period have met with no success, and need not be
considered. 3 The most important later addition is xxvii. 9b-25a. See Contents.
4 i. 1-3-

214 BIBLICAL INTRODUCTION
Jeremiah. Our book shows a large acquaintance and sympathy
with the teaching of Jeremiah ; probably in these last years at
Jerusalem, Ezekiel was a disciple of the older prophet.
In Babylonia he was settled in a colony of exiles at Tel
Abib, by the river Chebar.1 Both place and river are un
known. His ministry began in 592 ; in his account of it,
it is often difficult to distinguish narratives of real events
from descriptions of symbolic figures ; but the following
facts seem fairly certain. s^The Jewish exiles at Tel Abib
formed a community by themselves, enjoying a kind of
municipal self-government, with elders of their own. ^The
prophet, with his wife, lived in his own house ; his prophetic
status was recognised, and the elders used to come to his
house to consult him.2 Like Jeremiah, he had a more
favourable opinion of the Jews in captivity than of those
left in Judah.3 Yet he also resembled Jeremiah in his
opposition to the general social and religious feeling of the
community amongst whom he ministered, so that he occupied
a position of isolation and antagonism towards his hearers
similar to that of the older prophet at Jerusalem. So, too,
the message of Ezekiel's earlier ministry, 592-586, was the
same as Jeremiah's, the punishment of the sin of Judah
by the overthrow of the state and the captivity of the
people. Towards the close of this period Ezekiel's wife
died.4 There is no mention of any children. The prophet's
bereavement happened about the beginning of the last siege
of Jerusalem by Nebuchadnezzar, and marked the close of
his earlier public ministry. During this period, prophecies
are dated in the fifth, sixth, seventh, and ninth years of the
captivity of Jehoiachin. But he seems 5 not to have spoken
in public from the commencement of the siege in the ninth
year, till the news of the fall of Jerusalem reached him at the
close of the eleventh year.6 Prophecies concerning Egypt
were written during the interval.7
1 iii. 15. 2 viii. I, xiv. 1, xx. I. 3 xxxiii. 23-29.
4 xxiv. 16-18. s Cf. xxiv. 27 and xxxiii. 22.
6 Cf. Contents for date. ' xxix. 1, xxx. 20, xxxi. I.

EZEKIEL 215
The fall of Jerusalem fulfilled the earlier predictions of
Ezekiel, and, no doubt, as in the case of Jeremiah, led to
a fuller recognition of his prophetic authority. He resumed
his ministry with a new and happier message — the coming
restoration of the Jews. According to the dates given, this
period of his work was short, and was succeeded by a long
interval of silence; there is no date between the twelfth
and the twenty-fifth year.1 During this interval his faith in
the coming restoration had grown so strong, that, at its close,
for the benefit of the Jews after they should have returned
to the Holy Land^Jie composed specifications for a new
Temple, ^directions for its services, and a^constitution for the
state. Probably he himself collected and arranged his prophecies
in their present form not long afterwards.
We gather from xxxiii. 30-33 that Ezekiel's preaching was
popular, but ineffective; thus, verse 32, "Thou art unto them
as a very lovely song of one that hath a pleasant voice . . .
for they hear thy words, but do them not." Yet they grew
tired of his elaborate symbols, " Ah, Lord Jehovah ! they say
of me, Is he not a speaker of parables ? "2
The references to the prophet's lying on his side for 390
days have led to the suggestion that he was subject to some
form of catalepsy, as a divinely appointed means of inspira
tion, but this and most of the other symbolic actions are
purely figurative descriptions.3
(b) Historical Circumstances. — See Jeremiah, with whom
Ezekiel was contemporary. No change in the general political
situation took place in the interval between the Fall of Jeru
salem and the close of Ezekiel's ministry.
(c) Contents.
I.-XXIV., Sin of Judah and its Punishment.
jojii. 21 (Fifth Year,4 fourth month, July 592), The
prophet's call. Theophany, a living chariot, a confusion of
1 xxxii. 17 and xl. 1. 2 xx. 49.
3 The theory of catalepsy was suggested by Klostermann ; against it see
Skinner's Ezekiel, p. 55. " From Jehoiachin's captivity.

216 BIBLICAL INTRODUCTION
living creatures, wheels, hands, wings, faces, and eyes ; above
them a firmament, above that a vision of a great sapphire,
that seemed like a throne, and upon the throne there seemed
to be the vision of a man. Ezekiel is sent to rebellious Israel,
swallows the roll of a book, is to be a watchman to warn each
individual. iii. 22-27, Second appearance of the Glory of Jehovah,
renewed commission.
iv. 1-3, Siege of Jerusalem symbolised by a drawing on a
tile, and by an iron pan.
iv. 4-17, Length and distress of siege symbolised by time
spent (figuratively) by the prophet without moving, and by
repulsive food eaten (figuratively) by him.
v., Burning of Jerusalem, massacre of part of population,
and grievous captivity of the rest symbolised by burning,
smiting with a sword, and blowing away of hairs.
vi., vii., Ruin of the people and the land, especially of the
mountains, which were the scenes of idolatry.
viii. (Sixth year, sixth1 month, September, 591), Vision of
idolatrous worship in the Temple, the "Image of Jealousy,"
Animal Worship, Weeping for Tammuz, Sun Worship.
ix.-xii.. Destruction of Jerusalem. A man clothed in linen,
with a writer's inkhbrn, sets a mark on the forehead of the
saints, and sends destroying angels to slay the rest. The
glory of Jehovah, with its chariot of Cherubim, as in i.,
appears in the Temple ; fire from it is scattered over the city.
The glory of Jehovah departs from the Temple and the city
by the eastern gate.
Punishment of unjust rulers.
Restoration and purification of the Jews already in exile.
The captivity symbolised by the prophet's removal with his
goods, by his taking food with quaking.
Assurance that these threats will be speedily fulfilled.
xiii., Denunciation of prophets and prophetesses, who, un
commissioned by Jehovah, claim to speak in His name, saying
"Peace, where there is no peace," contradicting Ezekiel's
1 LXX. (followed by many), 5th, August.

EZEKIEL 217
threats, and supporting the people with false hopes, as they
might daub a wall with untempered mortar.
xiv. i-n, Rebuke of those who consult the prophet, while
they " take idols unto their heart."
xiv. 12-23, A guilty land should not be saved because
Noah, Daniel, and Job dwelt within it ; much less Jerusalem,
where only the dregs of the people are left.
xv., Jerusalem, always a worthless vine, now half burnt, is to
be burnt altogether.
xvi., Jerusalem's persistent sin and certain doom described
under the figure of a foundling, taken to wife by Jehovah ; she
proved faithless and was punished.
xvii., Zedekiah, the vine grown from a shoot of a cedar, the
Davidic dynasty, planted by an eagle, Nebuchadnezzar, is to be
carried captive, because he broke his oath of allegiance to
Babylon, and revolted to another eagle, the king of Egypt.
But Jehovah will plant another shoot of the cedar, which will
itself become a great cedar.
xviii., The Dgcjrjnepf Rgribution. No one will suffer for .
the sins of his father, but will be punished for his own sins. I
The penitent sinner shall live, the backsliding saint shall jj
die. xix., Dirge for Judah and her princes, Jehoahaz and Jehoia
chin, under of the figures of a lioness and her whelps, and a
vine and its branches.
xx. 1-44 (Seventh year, fifth month, tenth day, August,
590), In Egypt, in the Wilderness, in the Holy Land, Jehovah
spared Israel in spite of its utter wickedness, "for His Name's
sake, that It should not be profaned in the sight of the
nations." For the same reason, though the Jews are still
given over to sin, He will chasten, purify, and restore them.
xx. 45-xxi. 1 7, Ruin of Jerusalem and the Holy Land under
the figures of a conflagration and a sword.
xxi. 18-27, Symbolic narrative setting forth imminent ruin
of Jerusalem ; the king of Babylon, marching towards Pales
tine, casts lots as to whether he shall attack Jerusalem or
Rabbath Ammon; the lot falls on Jerusalem.

218 BIBLICAL INTRODUCTION
xxi. 28-32, The doom of Ammon.
Probably a later passage, placed here, and not amongst the Oracles on
the Nations because of the previous reference to Ammon. The " sword "
here is sometimes understood as that of Jehovah • and sometimes as that
of Ammon.2xxii., The total depravity of the people, especially the
princes, prophets, and priests.
xxiii., The alliances of Samaria and Jerusalem with foreign
powers, and the consequent idolatry, corruption, and ruin
described under the figure of the career of two sisters, Oholah
and Oholibah, whom Jehovah married, but they were faithless
to him, with many lovers.
Oholah and Oholibah are both based on 'Ohel, tent ; but their exact sense
is doubtful. They are sometimes explained as contrasted; Oholah — Her
tent, having a (sacred) tent of her own, i.e., self-chosen and illegitimate
worship; Oholibah = My (Jehovah's) tent is in her, i.e., the Temple, as the
one divinely appointed sanctuary. But the chapter suggests no contrast,
and it is better to take the names as synonymous ; Oholah = tent ; Oholi
bah = tent-in-her * ; both referring to the high places and their corrupt
worship. xxiv. 1-14 (Ninth year, tenth month, tenth day; beginning
of final siege of Jerusalem, January, 587), Jerusalem besieged,
figured as a rusted caldron, full of meat, boiling on the fire.
xxiv. 15-27, Ezekiel's wife dies; he is forbidden to mourn
aloud, as a sign that the Jews will be dumb with anguish when
they learn the fate of Jerusalem.
XXV. -XXXII., Oracles against Foreign Nations.
xxv., Ammon, Moab, Edom, and the Philistines.
xxvL-xxviii. 1 9, Tyre. Tyre destroyed by Nebuchadrezzar ;
the princes of the sea, with whom she has traded, lament over
her; her wealth and ruin figured by the wreck of a great
merchant ship ; the pride of the Prince of Tyre in wisdom and
commerce ; he was " wiser than Daniel," " the anointed
cherub ... in Eden, the garden of God . . . and upon the
holy mountain of God " ; yet he perishes miserably.
xsvji. 9b-25a is apparently an interpolation ; it interrupts the context ;
the rest of the chapter describes a ship. These verses describe the trading
city and its customers ; so Bertholet.
xxviii. 20-23, Zidon.
1 Bertholet. a Davidson, Skinner, etc.
3 The i being an old construct ending.

EZEKIEL 219
xxviii. 24-26, Israel, restored and delivered from neigh
bours, who are "pricking briers" and "grieving thorns," shall
dwell securely.
These verses would naturally conclude the section on foreign nations ;
they may have stood originally after xxxii. ; or xxv. -xxviii. dealing with
more immediate neighbours formed a separate section.
xxix. -xxxii., Egypt.
xxix. 1-16 (Tenth year, tenth month, twelfth day, January,
586), Pharaoh, the proud river dragon, destroyed; Egypt,
desolate forty years, is afterwards restored as " the basest of
the kingdoms."
xxix. 1 7-20 (Seven-and-twentieth year, first month, first day.
April, 570), Note to the previous prophecy, added by Ezekiel,
Nebuchadrezzar is to be compensated for his unsuccessful
thirteen years' siege of Tyre by the conquest of Egypt.
xxix. 21, The revival of Israel.
This verse may be the conclusion of xxix. 1-16, or of 17-20 ; in the
latter case it gives the last words of the prophet.
xxx. 1-19, and 20-26 (Eleventh year, first month, seventh day,
April, 586), Egypt to be conquered, its cities sacked, its king
overthrown, and the people carried captive by Nebuchadrezzar.
xxxi. (Eleventh year, third month, first day, June, 586), The
overthrow of Pharaoh under the figure of the cutting down of
a great cedar.
Instead of " the Assyrian was a cedar " in verse 3, Asshur 'erez, read
" Te'asshur," a rare name for a species of cedar ; 'erez, cedar, is a gloss. 1
xxxii. 1-16 (Twelfth2 year, twelfth month, first day, March,
584). The nations lament over the ruin of Egypt.
17-32 (Twelfth year, twelfth month,3 fifteenth day, March,
584), Dirge over Pharaoh and his army, who descend into
Sheol to join Asshur and the other oppressors of Israel.
Chapters xxix. -xxxii. were uttered either during or soon after the siege
of Jerusalem, 588-5S6, when the party opposed to Jeremiah and Ezekiel
hoped that the intervention of Egypt would avert the doom which those
prophets had pronounced against Judah.
1 Cf. Davidson, and Skinner.
2 Syr., LXX. A., eleventh, March, 585.
3 The month is not given in the Hebrew Text, perhaps because this
prophecy was given in the same month as the preceding. LXX. adds
"in the first month," in which case the chronological order requires us to
accept the reading "eleventh year " in verse I.

220 BIBLICAL INTRODUCTION
XXXIII.-XXXIX., Prophecies of Restoration.
(After the Fall of Jerusalem.)
xxxiii. 1-9, The prophet as watchman.
Parallel to iii. 16-21.
xxxiii. 10-20, The penitent sinner shall be saved, and the
backsliding saint shall perish.
Parallel to xviii.
xxxiii. 21-33 (Eleventh1 year, tenth month, fifth day,
January, 585), Ezekiel hears of the Fall of Jerusalem. The
remnant in Judah denounced for immorality, the exiles be
cause they enjoy hearing Ezekiel, but do not act according to
his message.
xxxiv., Former rulers have been evil shepherds, now
Jehovah will shepherd His people, and give them for a
shepherd His servant David, i.e., a prince of the Davidic
dynasty. xxxv., xxxvi., Edom and other intruders into the Holy Land
shall be driven out ; and, for His name's sake, Jehovah will
restore His people, and make the land populous and fertile.
The people shall receive a new heart and a new spirit.
xxjcvii. 1-14, The revival of the people under the figure of
the resurrection of anjurny of dry bones.
xxxvii. 15-28, The reunion of Judah and Ephraim under
" David my servant."
xxxviiL_ 1 -xxxix. 24, The prince of Rosh, Meshech and
Tubal, namely, Gog of the land of Magog, is moved, in the
distant future, to lead the far-off nations against restored
Israel. He and his hordes are annihilated, and the name of
Jehovah finally vindicated before all nations.
Gog, Magog, Rosh, Meshech, and Tubal are alike unknown ; cf. Gen. a. 2.
xxxix._25-29, Brief summary of the promises of restoration,
by way of conclusion to this group of prophecies, ending,
" Neither will I hide my face any more from them, for I have
poured out my spirit upon the house of Israel, saith the Lord
Jehovah." 1 So Syr. and some Hebrew MSS., leaving six months for the news
to reach Babylonia; the ordinary Hebrew Text has " twelfth," leaving
eighteen months, which is too long.

EZEKIEL 221
XL. -XLVIII., The Constitution of Restored Israel.
xl. -xliii. 12 (xl. i, Five-and-twentieth year, beginning of
the year, tenth day, April, 572), The Temple. The glory
of God, described in chapter i., re-enters by the east gate, by
which it departed.1
xliii. 13-27, The Altar.
xliv., The ministers of the Temple. The Levites who had
been priests of the high places are degraded to the inferior
position of temple-servants, and the priesthood is confined to
the sons of Zadok, the Levites of the Temple.
xiv. 1-8, The lands of the Priests, Levites, and Prince.
xiv. 9-xlvi. 24, The sacrifices, for which the Prince provides
out of his revenue.
xlvii. 1-12, A river from the Temple makes all the land
fertile, except the marshes left to provide salt.
xjyii. i3-xlviii. 35, The extent of the Holy Land —
Palestine, west of Jordan — and its division between the
twelve tribes, the Priests, the Levites, and the Prince. The
twelve gates of the city named after the twelve tribes.
(d) Significance of the Book of Ezekiel. — Ezekiel represents
a transition and a compromise ; the transition from the ancient
Israel of the Monarchy to Judaism ; and^jthe compromise
between the ethical teaching of the prophets and the popular
need for ritual. When Ezekiel left his native land, he was
old enough to carry with him the memory of the old order
and its traditions; he was young enough to adapt himself
to the conditions of the new order, which was to be so
powerfully influenced by his ministry. ^Jie also marks the
transition fromjhe prophet to the scribe or theologian ; he
not only announces the Divine Revelation, but also discusses
the relations of its various truths. Moreover in this book
we see prophetic utterance passing into literary composition.
The older prophets were first of all preachers, their books
are merely records of their preaching, often collected and
arranged by others. But, although Ezekiel also was a
preacher, and his book represents his utterances, yet it is
1 x. 18-22.

222 BIBLICAL INTRODUCTION
a careful piece of literary work, and much of it, especially
xl.-xlviii., was originally composed in writing.
Chapters xliii. 18-xlv. 8 are a connecting link between
Deuteronomy and the Priestly Code. Deuteronomy speaks
of " the priests, the Levites," and Deuteronomy xviii. provides
that, since the high places are to be suppressed, the Levites
who had been priests of the high places may come to
Jerusalem and share the functions and revenues of the
Temple priesthood. Ezekiel directs that the Levites of
the high places shall be degraded into an inferior order
subordinate to the priesthood, which is confined to the
Levites of the house of Zadok, i.e., the Jerusalem priest
hood, afterwards styled "Sons of Aaron."1 This is the basis
of the sharp distinction in the Priestly Code between the
priests, or "sons of Aaron," and the Levites.
The period of transition lent itself to compromise. The
earlier prophets laid almost exclusive stress on the moral
and spiritual life, and emphatically condemned formal and
superstitious worship, virtually disparaging all ritual. Yet
fixed religious observances were still necessary for the people.
In Deuteronomy the teaching of the prophets is combined
with reforms in ritual. But this initial compromise was
inadequate and indefinite, and the combination of the
moral and spiritual teaching of i.-xxxix. with the ritual
system of xl.-xlviii. was the formal recognition that Judaism
was to be based on the ritual tradition as well as on the
revelation made to the pre-exilic prophets.
(e) The Teaching of Ezekiel. — In matters of doctrine,
Ezekiel chiefly expresses more clearly and formally the
teaching of his predecessors. "While the substance of
these chapters [i.-xxxix.] presents no single element which
may not be traced in the writings of earlier prophets, there
is none which does not receive a more distinct intellectual
expression in the hands of Ezekiel."2 The denunciation
of foreign alliances, the doom of Israel and Judah on
1 Perhaps including others besides Zadokites.
2 Skinner, art. "Ezekiel," Dr. Hastings' Bible Dictionary.

EZEKIEL 223
account of the vice and cruelty of the governing classes,
the future restoration, and the Messiah as a Davidic prince,
are all part of the message of earlier prophets.
But Ezekiel is chiefly dependent on Jeremiah. Both were
able to look forward from the punishment inflicted upon the
Jews by the Fall of Jerusalem to the new life of the Restora
tion, of which they write more fully and definitely than
their predecessors. Ezekiel endorses Jeremiah's wholesale
condemnation of the prophets, priests, and princes of their
time. Ezekiel, too, utters no condemnation of Nebuchad
rezzar and Babylon. Moreover the younger prophet further
develops Jeremiah's teaching on individual religion ; his
prophetic ministry is partly pastoral, he is a watchman for
every single soul.1 In the famous eighteenth chapter he
traverses the primitive theological application of heredity,
and declares_Jhat a man i^«fi^punisjjejimf£r_^ism^!il^r2£.!
sin; that eaeh_is judged, not„Qnly according to Jrjs_ own \
doings, but according to his moral jxmdhjqn at the time j
o^judgment. His" teaching as to a new heart and a new
spirit 2 is an echo of Jeremiah's New Covenant.
The more characteristic features of Ezekiel's teaching are : —
(i.) The Divine Transcendence; Jehovah touches Jeremiah's
mouth, but Ezekiel multiplies elaborate symbols to suggest his
vision not of Jehovah, but of the glory of God.
(ii.) Jehovah restores the Jews "for His name's sake,"
because His reputation is bound up in the eyes of the
world with their prosperity. Israel has no claim but the
divine election ; the people has been evil from the beginning.3
(iii.) Chapters xxxviii., xxxix., with their picture of the
heathen armies under Gog gathered together to perish in
an attack on Jerusalem, probably suggested the similar
apocalyptic visions in Joel and the Appendix to Zechariah.4
(iv.) The ordinances of xl.-xlviii. involve the principle of
graduated sanctity of religious persons, places, things, and
1 iii. 16-21, xxxiii. 1-9. 2 xi. 19. 3 xxiii.
4 The germ of the idea is perhaps found in Zeph. iii. 8.

224 BIBLICAL INTRODUCTION
times, afterwards developed and systematised in the Priestly
Code. (f) The Relation of xl.-xlviii. to the Law of Holiness, see
chapter ii. § 19.
(g) Canonicity. — It is stated that, on account of the marked
differences between many ordinances in Ezekiel and the
corresponding laws in the Pentateuch, there was some ques
tion of excluding Ezekiel from the Jewish Scriptures ; but, at
the beginning of the Christian Era, Hananiah ben Hezekiah
shut himself up with 300 measures of lamp-oil, and reconciled
them. (h) Use in the New Testament. — Much of the imagery of
the Apocalypse is derived from this book; also, possibly,
the description of Christ as the Good Shepherd 1 ; other
wise the traces of this book in N.T. are very few and slight.
(10) Daniel.
(a) Date and Authorship — It is not clear that the author in
tended this book to be received as the work of Daniel himself.
The narratives are in the third person, and each of the two
halves of the apocalyptic section is introduced by a verse in
the third person.2 Nor does the constant use of " I, Daniel,"
in this section, necessarily involve a claim that the rest of
chapters vii.-xii. was actually written by Daniel. The literary
method which secures dramatic effect by speaking in the name
of some well-known character, has always been familiar. It is
used in Ecclesiastes, where the author speaks in the character
of Solomon, " I, the Preacher, was king over Israel in Jeru
salem " 3 ; and it is the conventional form of apocalyptic litera
ture. We have no clear evidence as to whether the convention
was generally understood by the author's contemporaries.
The general character of an apocalypse is that the author
places in the mouth of some ancient worthy a history of
events up to the author's own time, followed by a description
of God's judgment on the wicked and deliverance of His
1 Cf. xxxiv. with John x. 16, Hebrews xiii. 20, i. Peter ii. 25.
2 vii. 1, x. I. 3 i, 13.

DANIEL 225
people. In Daniel vii.-xii. we have four historical sketches,
each of which ends with the persecution of the Jews by
Antiochus Epiphanes. His ruin and death, which are an
nounced in general terms, seem to be still future. The last
and fullest sketch of the history1 is followed by an account
of the resurrection and judgment. Similarly, but with less
details, Nebuchadnezzar's dream of the Great Image an
nounces the establishment of the Kingdom of God as the
immediate sequel to the Greek dominion in Egypt and Syria.2
In view of these facts, the book is commonly dated
between the desecration of the Temple, 168, and the death of
Antiochus, 164. If we deduce from viii. 14, "The sanctuary
shall be cleansed,"3 that the reconsecration of the Temple in
165 had already taken place, we are shut up to the close of
165 or the beginning of 164.4
This conclusion is confirmed by a wealth of evidence,
external and internal. While there is no trace of the existence
of the book before 1 68, its influence from that time onward is
very marked. Thus there is no mention of Daniel in the
great list of Jewish worthies, Ecclesiasticus xliv.-l., c. 200,
which, moreover, says " Neither was there a man born like
unto Joseph " 5 ; though as a Jew in high office at a foreign
court, and as an interpreter of dreams, Daniel was very like
Joseph. On the other hand a section of the Sibylline verses,
dated about b.c. 140, refers to the " ten horns," 6 and
i. Maccabees, c. b.c. 100, refers to the Fiery Furnace and
the Den of Lions.
In the Hebrew Canon, Daniel is not placed among the
Prophets, but in the Hagiographa, the latest section of the
Canon; although Haggai, Zechariah, and Malachi, who were
later than the time at which Daniel is described as living, are
placed among the prophets. Either the Jews did not regard
1 x.-xii. 2 ii. 44-
3 Wenicdaq qbdhesh, R.V. Mg., justified. Bevan thinks that the vague
ness of this prediction shows that the event had not yet taken place.
4 Cornill, Kautzsch, Konig, Strack, after 168 ; Driver, 168 or
167. 6 xlix. 15.
6 Bevan, cf. vii. 7, 20, 24, with Sibyllines III., 388 ff.

226 BIBLICAL INTRODUCTION
the book as prophetical, or it was considerably later than
Malachi, c. 444.
The language also points to a late date. For the most part
the Hebrew is fairly correct; the author, doubtless, was a
scholar, who wrote in a classical style. But here and there
he betrays himself by using the vocabulary of Chronicles, or
of post-biblical Hebrew.1 The appearance of Greek words,
especially the late Greek cru/tcptovia,2 E.V. dulcimer, points
to the Greek period rather than to the Exile. The recently-
discovered fragments of the original Hebrew of Ecclesiasticus
show that a very fair imitation of classical Hebrew was written
in the Greek period.
The author shows an intimate acquaintance with the times
of Antiochus Epiphanes, but makes serious mistakes about
Nebuchadnezzar and the Fall of Babylon, and the early
Persian Empire. Belshazzar was neither the son, nor of
the family of Nebuchadnezzar. " He had disappeared from
history when Cyrus entered Babylonia . . . Cyrus entered
Babylon in peace . . . and the Babylonian king was not
slain." " ' Darius the Mede ' is a reflection into the past of
Darius, the son of Hystaspes," i.e., history not only tells us
nothing of any " Darius the Mede," but his existence in the
position assigned to him by our book is entirely inconsistent
with what history does tell us of that period. On these and
other grounds Professor Sayce concludes that "The story
of Belshazzar's Fall is not historical in the modern sense
of the word history," and that "The name of Darius and
the story of the slaughter of the Chaldasan king go together."8
The statement of Josephus 4 that the High Priest Jaddua
presented the Book of Daniel to Alexander the Great is from
the narrative of Alexander's visit to Jerusalem, which is
generally regarded as untrustworthy.
The date of the LXX. is too uncertain to be used as an
argument for the early existence of our book.
1 Bevan, 28_ff.
2 iii. 4 sumponya, R.V. Mg. bagpipe.
3 The Higher Criticism and the Monuments, 1894, pp. 524-531.
4 Antt. xi., 8, 5.

DANIEL 227
(b) Historical Circumstances. — At the close of the Greek
period, Judsea was a province of the Seleucid kingdom of
Syria. Antiochus IV. Epiphanes, 175-164, tried to hellenise
the Jews, and met with some success.1 In 175 he deposed
the High Priest Onias III.,2 and replaced him by his hellenis-
ing brother Jason. In 168 Antiochus set on foot a fierce
persecution to induce the Jews to relinquish circumcision and
the observance of the Sabbath. He attempted to destroy all
copies of the Law.8 In this persecution many Jews suffered
martyrdom, with great heroism. At his command there was
set up on the altar of burnt offering at the Temple, "the
abomination of desolation "4 — a heathen altar or idol. In
167 began the revolt of the Maccabees, in 166 Judas Macca-
baeus occupied Jerusalem, and in 165 reconsecrated the
Temple about three years5 after its pollution. In 164,
Antiochus Epiphanes died, leaving Judas still in possession
of Jerusalem.
(c) Daniel. — Probably the narratives in i.-vi. are based on
some older work or on popular tradition, no trace of which,
however, is found except in Ezekiel xiv. 14, 20, where Daniel
is coupled with Noah and Job, and in Ezekiel xxviii. 3, where
he is referred to as a typical wise man ; " Behold," says Ezekiel
to the prince of Tyre, " thou art wiser than Daniel." Apparently
the prophet is referring to some ancient Israelite sage. As he
wrote these verses shortly before the Fall of Jerusalem, 586,
and Daniel did not begin his public career till the second year
of Nebuchadnezzar, c. 603, the story of Daniel as known to
Ezekiel must have been entirely different from that told in our
book. According to i. 4 Daniel was a youth at the time 6 ; he
is also represented as surviving the Fall of Babylon, 536, so
that in 586 he can scarcely have been more than thirty-six.7
1 xi. 32. a ix. 26. 3 Cf. vii. 25, ix. 26, 27, xi. 28-32.
4 i. Mace. i. 54, Daniel xi. 31, xii. 11. 6 vii. 25, etc.
6 The notes of time in chapters i. and ii. are difficult to reconcile with
each other, but the events in chapter ii. must be understood as happening
not more than a year after those of chapter i.
7 Rev. J. E. H. Thomson, author of the Pulpit Commentary Daniel,
has furnished me with a curious parallel to the supposed mention by

228 BIBLICAL INTRODUCTION
(d) Language.— The section ii. 4-vii. 28 is in Aramaic.
The comparison of this section with the rest of the book
does not suggest any satisfactory reason why part should
have been written in Hebrew and part in Aramaic. Why,
for instance, should the Chaldaean king speak to the Chaldaeans
in Hebrew in ii. 3, be answered by them in Aramaic in
ii. 4b, and the rest of the narratives, conversations included,
be given in Aramaic? Why, again, should the vision in vii.,
in the first year of Belshazzar, be in Aramaic, and the very
similar vision in viii., in the same king's third year, be in
Hebrew? The variety of language certainly does not dis
tinguish parts intended for the learned from those addressed
to the common people, nor is it arranged according to the
nationality of speakers or hearers. The least difficult ex
planation is that of Lenormant, adopted by Bevan.1 It is
suggested that part of the Hebrew of Daniel was lost, and
the gap was filled up from an Aramaic translation or Targum.
That the Aramaic section concludes with the end of a
division of the book, raises no difficulty; but it cannot be
a mere accident that the Aramaic section begins immediately
after the statement, " Then spake the Chaldseans to the king
in Aramaic." Perhaps the editor who used an Aramaic
document to supply the gap in the Hebrew did not simply
fill in just what was wanting in the Hebrew, but sacrificed
a portion of the Hebrew to avoid an abrupt and unexplained
transition from Hebrew to Aramaic ; ii. 4a was the latest point
in the Hebrew at which Aramaic could be introduced for the
first time with any apparent fitness.
The book must have assumed its bi-lingual form at a very
Ezekiel of a contemporary in the same breath with ancient worthies.
At family worship, the night after the Disruption, Dr. Hamilton, of
London, read Hebrews xi. , and, in concluding, added to the list of the
Scriptural heroes the names of the leading Disruption worthies. At
the utmost, however, such parallels only show that it is possible that
Ezekiel was speaking of a young contemporary, not that it is probable.
Persons of the name Daniel are also mentioned in i. Chron. iii. I,
a son of David, by the wise woman Abigail, Ezra viii. 2, Neh. a. 6,
they can have nothing to do either with Ezekiel's Daniel, or the subject of
our book. 1 Page 27.

DANIEL 229
early date, since the LXX. was clearly translated from a
MS. in which ii. 4-vii. 28 was in Aramaic and the rest in
Hebrew.1 (e) The Greek Daniel. — Both in the LXX. and in Theodo-
tion, c. a.d. 180, the book is expanded by the insertion of
the Prayer of Azariah and the Song of the Three Children,
and by the addition of the narratives of Susanna, and of Bel
and the Dragon, of which Daniel is the hero.2
In the Greek Bible of the Christian Church,3 Theodotion's
translation displaced that of the Seventy.
(f) Contents.
I. -VI., Narratives in the Third Person.
Daniel and his companions fed on pulse. Nebuchadnezzar's
dream of the Great Image. The Fiery Furnace. Nebuchad
nezzar's dream of the Great Tree hewn down, foreshowing
his madness. Belshazzar's Feast. Daniel in the Den of
Lions. VII.-XIL, Visions in the First Person.4
vii.,5 The Four Beasts, i.e., the Babylonian, Median,
Persian, and Greek Empires. The fourth beast has ten
horns, i.e., ten successive kings. A little horn, i.e., Antiochus
Epiphanes, comes up, before which three of the ten horns,
i.e., three of his predecessors or rivals, are plucked up. The
little horn persecutes the saints, i.e., the persecutions of the
Maccabaean period. The "Ancient of Days " destroys the
Fourth Beast and takes away the power of the other three, and
gives dominion over the earth to a Man, i.e., Israel.
"One like unto a Son of Man," i.e., human in contrast to the beasts
which symbolise the Gentile Empires. Cf. the use of " Servant of
Jehovah" for Israel in Isaiah xliv. 21, etc. The "One like unto a
Son of Man," to whom dominion is given in 14, must equal "the
people of the saints of the Most High," to whom dominion is given
in 27, in the explanation of the vision. This view is quite consistent
with the use of "Son of Man" in N.T. for Christ; N.T. regularly
applies to Christ what is said of Israel in O.T., e.g., Matt. ii. 15 and
Hosea xi. 1. The view, however, that our phrase refers to a personal
Messiah, has been accepted by Ewald.6
1 Bevan, 28. 2 Cf. chap, vii., § 5. 3 e.g, in AB.
4 In vii. I, a. I, introductory verses, Daniel is spoken of in the third
person. 5 Cf. the Dream in ii. 6 Ap. Bevan, 118.

230 BIBLICAL INTRODUCTION
viii., The Ram and the He-Goat. A Ram with two horns,
the Medo-Persian Empire J is overthrown by the Greeks under
Alexander.2 The horn of the He-Goat is replaced by four
horns, the kingdoms of Alexander's successors.3 From one
of the four horns, i.e., Syria, arises a little horn, i.e., Antiochus
Epiphanes, who sacks the Temple and stops the Daily
Sacrifice. The desolation of the Temple to last 2300 morn
ings and evenings, i.e., 1150 days, three years, and a fraction.
The explanation is given by the Angel Gabriel.
ix., After confession and prayer by Daniel, Gabriel appears
and tells him that 4 " From the going forth of the promise
to people and to build Jerusalem," i.e., the promise to
Jeremiah at the time of the Fall of Jerusalem,5 "until an
Anointed One, a Prince," 6 i.e., either until Cyrus,7 or until
there is again a High Priest actually officiating8 "(there are)
seven weeks," i.e., 49 years, about the time of the captivity,
" and for sixty and two weeks it shall be peopled and built,"
and after the sixty-two weeks "the Anointed One shall be
cut off . . . and the city and the sanctuary shall go to
ruin," i.e., 434 years after the Return, the High Priest will
be slain or removed — the reference is perhaps to Onias III.
deposed early in the reign of Antiochus Epiphanes — and
the city and Temple sacked. "The covenant shall be
annulled for the many during one week,"9 i.e., seven years,
perhaps referring to the unsettlement and laxity preceding
the persecutions, " and during half a week," i.e., three years
and a half,10 " sacrifice and oblation shall cease, and instead
thereof (there shall be) abominations set up." Afterwards the
desolator, Antiochus, is to be destroyed.
1 20. 2 21. ' 22.
4 The translation quoted here is Bevan's, p. 161.
5 Jer. xxx. 18-22. 6 Mashtah Nagidh.
7 Isaiah xiv. I.
8 Bleek, etc., ap. Driver, Bevan.
9 R.V., "He shall make a firm covenant with many for one week,"
perhaps referring to Antiochus and the Hellenising party among the Jews.
10 Cf. the three years and a fraction, viii. 14, and the "time, times, and
half a time," xii. 7.

DANIEL 231
The explanation just given would not be borne out by an exact
chronology, from the destruction of Jerusalem, 586, to the reconsecration
of the Temple by Judas Maccabseus, 165, is only about 421 years. But
such absence of mathematical accuracy is unimportant in an apocalypse,
where numbers are not determined merely by arithmetic, but also by
symbolism and theology.1 Moreover, an exact knowledge of chronology
was rare and difficult for the ordinary Jew, and there is no reason to
suppose that the author of this book was an expert in the subject. All
attempts to find in these figures a prediction of the precise date of the
crucifixion are shipwrecked on similar difficulties. An inaccuracy which is
natural and harmless in a symbolic apocalypse, would be fatal to a predic
tion supposed to guarantee Christianity by foretelling the exact time of the
death of Christ.
Cf. Bevan and J. E. H. Thomson, Daniel, Pulpit Commentary.
x.-xii., An abstract of the history of the East from the time
of " Darius the Mede," narrated to Daniel by " One like the
similitude of the sons of men," in the interval between the
narrator's conflicts with the prince, or guardian angel of
Persia, in which the narrator was aided by Michael, the
guardian angel of the Jews. No names of persons are given,
and with some exceptions, places are described and not
named. In spite of the obscurity of this method, and the
scantiness of information as to the East in this period, we
are able to recognise in xi. a tolerably accurate sketch of the
history of the Persian and Greek empires in Egypt and Syria,
between c. 536 and the time of Antiochus Epiphanes. The
latter half of the chapter, or more, is taken up with a more
detailed account of the reign of Antiochus Epiphanes,
specially dwelling on his intrigues with Hellenising Jews,
and his profaning the sanctuary, stopping the regular burnt-
offering, and setting up the abomination "that maketh deso
late."2 The account of his doings concludes " Tidings from
the East and North shall trouble him : and he shall go forth
with great fury to destroy and utterly to make away many.
He shall plant his pavilions between the sea and the glorious
holy mountain " — definite details, followed by the vague,
general statement — "yet he shall come to his end, and none
shall help him."3
1 The 490 years are probably 7 times Jeremiah's 70 years.
2 xi. 30 f. 3 xi. 45.

232 BIBLICAL INTRODUCTION
The lapse from details to generalities seems to show that, at the time of
writing, the death of Antiochus had not yet taken place.
As we know no events towards the close of Antiochus' reign corres
ponding to xi. 40-453, Bevan thinks they are a prediction of what the
author expected to happen. But, "at the time of the end" in 40, is
scarcely sufficient indication of the transition from narrative to prediction.
The tenor and tone of 40 ff. is just the same as that of the preceding
sections It is also difficult to regard it as a resuml of Antiochus' reign,
or as a recurrence to the events of 168, already referred to in 29 ff. The
difficulty may arise from our imperfect knowledge of the history, or from
some corruption of the text, e.g., 40-45 may have been originally indepen
dent, parallel to and not a sequel of the preceding. In 45, Theodotion
has, " He shall come as far as his portion," 1 instead of " he shall come to
his end."
The last chapter tells how Michael, the prince, or guardian
angel of Israel, delivers the people. There is a resurrection
of the dead to rewards and punishments. The tribulation
lasts for "a time, times, and half a time," i.e., three years and
a half, or 1290 days, also about three years and a half from
the stopping of the daily sacrifice. And " Blessed is he that
waiteth" forty-five days longer, "and cometh to the 1335
days."2 (g) Teaching. — The characteristic function of the apocalypse
is to state the divine judgment on history, to trace the course
of events as the working out of God's purposes for His people,
and to announce the vindication of God's moral government
of the world in a day of reward and retribution. The
narratives must have served to steel the Jews to endure
torture and death for their faith. The part played by angels
is similar to that in Zechariah, but here two angels, Gabriel
and Michael, are named,3 and there are "princes " or guardian
angels of different nations.4 Daniel also contains the most
explicit passage5 in O.T. as to a resurrection ; just and unjust
alike are to be raised from the dead, the one to be re
warded, the other to be punished. The resurrection is partial,
1 ?ws fitpovs airrov.
2 Cf. also the 11 50 days of viii. 14 ; the reason and significance of the
slight differences in the number of days cannot now be explained.
3 viii. 16, x. 13, 21, xii. 1.
4 Persia, a. 13 ; Greece, a. 20 ; the Jews, x. 21.
6 xii. 2.

DANIEL 233
" many . . . shall awake " ; perhaps the silence as to Gentiles
shows that the author is only thinking of the Jews ; the
resurrection is to an eternal life in the kingdom of God
on earth. Yet these limitations are more apparent than real.
There are points in O.T. Revelation where Israel almost
becomes a term for regenerate mankind, and, in the Messianic
pictures of the future earth, is transformed to heaven.
(h) Use in the New Testament. — Much of the imagery of
the apocalypse is borrowed from Daniel. Perhaps the N.T.
phrase, "Son of Man," was first suggested by vii. 13, though,
on the one hand, the phrase, in a less special use, is common
in Ezekiel ; and, on the other, it may have reached the
N.T. through the Book of Enoch. This verse is alluded to
Mark xiii. 26, etc., and in Mark xiii. 14 the phrase "abomina
tion of desolation " 1 is applied to something in connection
with the last siege of Jerusalem. The description of the Man
of Sin, ii. Thessalonians ii. 4, may be partly suggested by
xi. 36. In Hebrews xi. 33 f. Daniel is alluded to in the clause,
"stopped the mouths of lions," and the Three Children in
"quenched the power of fire."

CHAPTER VI.
THE BOOK OF THE TWELVE PROPHETS

I. Introductory.
2,^-Hosea.3. Joel.
4. Amos.
5! Obadiah,
6. .Jonah.
7. Micah.

8. Nahum.
9., Habakkuk.
10. .Zephaniah.
11. Haggai.
12. Zechariah i.-viii.
13. Zechariah ix.-xiv.
14. Malachi.

1. Introductory. — These books are usually known as the
"Minor Prophets," because they are shorter than the pre
ceding; but Ecclesiasticus, Josephus, and some of the
Rabbis and Fathers, who reckon them as a single book,
speak of them as " the Twelve " or " the Twelve Prophets,"
or "the Book of the Twelve Prophets,"1 and the use of the
latter title has been revived by Professor G. A. Smith. The
Jewish custom of reckoning the number of O.T. books as
twenty-two or twenty-four implies that " the Twelve " were
reckoned as a single work. Probably it was formed in
dependently as a separate collection, completed not later
than b.c 2002; and passed through one or more earlier
editions, Zech. ix.-xiv. and Malachi being added after the
rest of the books had been collected.
The LXX. places the first six in the order : Hosea, Amos,
Micah, Joel, Obadiah, Jonah ; the last six in the same order as
the Hebrew. Probably the order represents the chronological
theories of different editors.
2V Hosea.
(a) Date and Authorship. — Our only source of information
1 T6 AwdcKaTp6<prjT0i>.
2 On account of Ecclesiasticus xlix. ;o.
234

HOSEA 235
is the book itself. According to i. 1, Hosea the son of Beeri
ministered in the reigns of Uzziah, Jotham, Ahaz, and
Hezekiah of Judah, and Jeroboam II. of Israel, i.e., between
c. 778 and c. 695, and between c. 783 and c. 743. Internal
evidence approximately confirms this statement. Moreover,
the prosperity of Israel is no longer at its height, as in Amos ;
but the series of disasters which culminated in the Fall of
Samaria have begun. Hence Hosea is somewhat later than
Amos, i.e., c. 745-735 ; his ministry probably began about
the close of the reign of Jeroboam II., continued under
his successors, and ended before the attack of Pekah and
Rezin on Ahaz, and the carrying captive of Galilee and
Gilead by Tiglath-Pileser, to which events there is no
reference. Hosea was doubtless a citizen of the northern kingdom ;
notice "our king"1 of the king of Israel. Hosea's call to\
the prophetic office perhaps came through his family troubles.
His wife, who had borne him two sons and a daughter, left
him for another man. This experience may have brought
home to him the corrupt state of the people.2 Eventually
the prophet bought his wife back again, and received her into/
his house.
Critical questions are confined to the interpretation of i.-iii.
and the authenticity of certain passages, especially xiv. ; see
Contents. The lack of orderly sequence shows that the book
cannot have been compiled by the prophet himself, unless it
has since suffered much at the hands of editors.
(b) Historical Circumstances. — Hosea's ministry seems to
have been the immediate sequel of that of Amos.8 The
Assyrians, under Tiglath-Pileser III., began to harass Syria
towards the close of Jeroboam's reign. Jeroboam's son,
Zachariah, after a reign of six months, was murdered by
Shallum ; Shallum, a month later, by Menahem. Menahem
is mentioned in an Assyrian inscription as tributary to Assyria.
He reigned ten years ; his son, Pekahiah, after a reign of two
years, was murdered by Pekah. Even this meagre statement
1 vii. 5. 2 See on i.-iii. J See Amos, (b).

236 BIBLICAL INTRODUCTION
confirms the pictures of anarchy and confusion drawn by
Hosea. The corruption of the prosperous days of Jeroboam
II. blossomed into open vice and crime in the disastrous reigns
of his successors.
(c) Contents. — i.-iii., By divine command Hosea marries an
immoral woman, Gomer, who bears him two sons, Jezreel,
Lo-ammi (not my people), and a daughter, Lo-ruhamah (not
pitied). She left him to live an immoral life ; he bought her
back, and took her home, where he kept her in seclusion.
Gomer and her children are types of Israel, its infidelity to
Jehovah, whom it forsook for the Baalim, and its punishment,
and ultimate forgiveness.
iii. 3b is obscure, and its text uncertain ; it probably means that Hosea
would not associate with Gomer, so that she would be deprived of all
conjugal privileges, with a view to her reformation, just as (see following
verses) Israel was to be deprived of all the privileges of national life, for
the same purpose. These chapters have been interpreted as being (i.) a
literal account of Hosea's actual experiences ; (ii. ) purely allegorical, as if
Jehovah had said to Hosea : Imagine such dealings between yourself and
an unfaithful wife as symbolising my dealings with Israel ; (iii.) founded on
fact, e.g., Hosea's wife having proved unfaithful, he is led to testify against
the vice of his times, and feels that he was as divinely led to his un
happy marriage for this purpose, as if he had received an actual divine
command. Passages contrasting Judah with Israel, e.g., i. 7, iv. 15, xi. 12b, and,
less frequently, other references to Judah, e.g., vi. 11, viii. 14, are supposed
to be additions by later Jewish editors. Probably Israel should be read for
Judah in v. 10, 12, 13, 14.1
Similar views are held by some 2 as to the passages promising restora
tion to Israel, e.g., i. 10, 11, ii. 6, 7, 14, 16, 18-23, "i- 5> v' i5"vl 3i xl-
8b, 9a, 10, 11, xiv.3
iv.— xiii., The vice and immorality of Israel, especially of the
priests and rulers, combined with the immoral and superstitious
worship of Jehovah at the high places,4 will bring Israel to
irrevocable ruin, in spite of attempts to conclude alliances
with Egypt and Assyria.5 Israel shall be carried captive to
Egypt and Assyria.6 Jehovah's love is shown in His yearning
1 Nowack, Minor Prophets.
2 e.g., Cheyne regards i. 10, 11, iii. 5, v. 15-vi. 4, xiv. as additions.
3 See below on xiv.
* iv. 12 ff., viii. 5 f., ix. 15, x. 5, 15, xii. 11.
0 vii. I, viii. 9, xii. 1.
6 ix. 3, 6, a. 6, xi. 5.

JOEL 23;
over Israel, His reluctance to chastise His people, and by His
repeated appeals to them through His prophets.1
For suspected passages, see on i.-iii. and xiv.
xiv., Appeal for repentance, and promise of forgiveness and
restoration. Cheyne2 rejects this chapter, chiefly because it "is akin both in
language and imagery, and in ideas to writings of the age which begins
with Jeremiah," But G. A. Smith unhesitatingly accepts xiv. as by
Hosea, though probably not the latest of his utterances preserved in our
book. The list given in connection with i.-iii., and the fact that the last
we hear of Gomer is that she is still under the protection of Hosea, show
that the idea of restoration runs through the whole book. It is more prob
able that it was a favourite idea of Hosea, than that editors have so
systematically and successfully interwoven it with his utterances. The
parallels with Jeremiah and later writings may be due to their dependence
on Hosea ; Jeremiah especially makes large use of Hosea.
(d) Significance of Hosea. — Hosea endorses Amos' protest
against the divorce of external devotion from morality, and
sums up such teaching in our Lord's favourite quotation 3 : " I
desire mercy, and not sacrifice ; and the knowledge of God
more than burnt offerings " — a verse which also includes
another characteristic doctrine of Hosea, the necessity of
the knowledge of God, i.e., intelligent religion and spiritual
experience. Hosea first, as Isaiah and Jeremiah later on,
denounces foreign alliances. Like Amos, he attacks the
high places, and further specifically denounces idols.4 The
emphasis laid on Jehovah's love for Israel, illustrates the
prophet's intense love for his country, and his deep distress
at her coming ruin.
Other quotations in N.T. : i. 10, ii. 23, Romans ix. 25, 26;
x. 8, Luke xxiii. 30 ; xi. 1, " I called my son (Israel) out of
Egypt," applied to Christ, Matthew ii. 15; xiii. 4, i. Corin
thians xv. 55 f., " O death, where is thy sting? etc."
% Joel.
(a) Date and Authorship. — Nothing is known of the author
beyond his name " Joel, the son of Pethuel," or as the LXX.,
1 v. 15-vi. 6, vii. 1, xi. 1-11, xii. 6.
2 Introduction to 1S95 edition of W. R. Smith's Prophets of Israel,
p. xix.3 vi. 6 cf. Matt. ix. 13, xii. 7. 4 iv. 17, viii. 4, xiii. 2, xiv. 8.

238 BIBLICAL INTRODUCTION
Syr., and some other versions have it "Bethuel" ; and, what
may be gathered from the book itself, that he was a Jew,
probably of Jerusalem, and possibly a priest.
As in the case of Zechariah ix.-xiv., the notes of time have
been very differently interpreted. Some regard Joel as the
earliest of the prophetical books, and assign it to the early
part of the reign of Joash of Judah, c. 830 ; but the general
opinion inclines more and more to a post-exilic date. The
main points, capable of opposite interpretations, are as
follows : (i.) Joel makes no reference whatever to the Syrians,
Assyrians, or Chaldseans. These nations figure constantly
in history and prophecy from the time of Ahaz and Amos
till the Exile. Even later Zechariah is still interested in
Babylon. This silence points to a date before Ahaz or
after Zechariah. (ii.) Joel mentions neither king nor princes,
but, in their stead, elders and priests are prominent.1 This
has been explained of the minority of Joash, when Jehoiada
the priest controlled the government of Judah,2 but agrees
better with the post-exilic period when there was no king, and
the high priest was the chief Jewish authority, (iii.) Egypt
and Edom are denounced for shedding " innocent blood " in
Judah.3 This has been connected with Shishak's invasion in
the reign of Rehoboam, and the revolt of Edom under Jeho
ram, the grandfather of Joash. But these events were remote
in the time of Joash ; hatred of Edom is a constant note of
post-exilic literature ; the mention of Egypt may be a literary
reminiscence of the condemnation of Egypt by the older
prophets ; or may refer to the Ptolemies, (iv.)j Joel presents
a remarkable number of parallels with other O.T. literature.
Either Joel is a very early and popular book, constantly used
by writers from Amos to Malachi ; or he is a very late author,
who made large use of his predecessors. Each of the two
views has been strongly held, but the latter is the more
probable. The easy and classical style of Joel is best under
stood as that of an accomplished student of earlier literature.4
1 i. 9, 13, 14, ii. 17. 2 ii. Kings xii. 2. 3 iii. 19.
4 G. Gray, Expositor, September, 1893; Driver, C.B.S., Joel, etc.,
pp. 19 ff.

JOEL 239
Thus the less decisive notes of time point, on the whole, to
the period after the Exile ; and this date is conclusively con
firmed by the following considerations; the mention of the
Greeks,1 the entire silence as to the northern kingdom, and
the use of the term " Israel " in the post-exilic sense of Judah
as representing the chosen people 2 ; the description of God's
people as "scattered among the nations," who have "parted
my land " between them 3 ; silence as to idolatry, and anxiety
for the regular maintenance of the Temple services, which
priests and people do their best to maintain.4
This last point suggests a date subsequent to the reforms of
Ezra and Nehemiah; otherwise the evidence is not definite
enough to enable us to assign the book to any precise date.
Driver 6 inclines to a date shortly after Haggai and Zechariah
i.— viii.6 (b) Historical Circumstances. — The plague of locusts, which
was the occasion of this book, occurrecTaFsome tune in the
Persian period 7 when the Temple services Were carefully
observed, and when the Jews had suffered from border raids
of their neighbours.
(c) Contents. — i. i-ii. 11, The prophet describes a plague of
locusts, which afflicted Judah in his time, which he regards
partly as a " Day of Jehovah," or special divine judgment ;
partly as a warning of a " day " yet to come, which he
depicts under the figure of a yet more terrible visitation of
locusts. Some regard the section as altogether a figurative description of a great
invasion, either actual or predicted ; others, as altogether a. prediction
either of an actual plague of locusts, or of a future judgment.
ii. 12-17, Exhortation to repentance.
ii. 18-27, Fertile seasons to be restored to penitent Israel.
ii. 28-32, Universal outpouring of the Spirit.
1 iii. 6.
2 Cf. ii. 23, with ii. 27 ; iii. 1 with iii. 2 ; and iii. 16b with iii. 16a, 17.
3 iii. 2. 4 i. 9, 13 ; ii. 14. 6 C.B.S., p. 25.
6 Konig assigns Joel to the end of Josiah's reign, when Judah suffered
at the hands of the Egyptian king, Pharaoh Necho. Rothstein assigns i. ,
ii. to the minority of Joash, iii., iv. to the period after the exile.
' Cf. §§ 11-14.

240 BIBLICAL INTRODUCTION
iii., The nations gathered in the Valley of Jehoshaphat
("Jehovah judges") to be judged. Special punishment of
Tyre, Zidon, Philistia, Egypt, and Edom for wrongs done to
Judah. Judah and Jerusalem delivered and purified, and
established in permanent prosperity.
(d) Significance of Joel, and use in N.T. — The apocalyptic
vision of the last section is dependent on Ezekiel xxxviii.,
xxxix., and may underlie Zechariah xii.-xiv. and Isaiah xxiv.-
xxvii. Note also the absence of any Davidic Messiah; Jehovah
Himself intervenes.
Most striking is the passage which furnished Peter with his
text on the Day of Pentecost,1 "Afterwards will I pour out
my Spirit upon all flesh ; your sons and daughters shall
prophesy, your old men shall dream dreams, your young
men shall see visions : even upon the slaves, both men
and women, will I pour out my Spirit in those days." This
passage is akin to Jeremiah's New Covenant written in every
heart.2 (4) Amos,
(a) Date and Authorship. — Nothing is known except what
may be learnt from the book itself. According to i. 1, Amos8
was a herdsman of Tekoa in the reigns of Uzziah of Judah
and Jeroboam II. of Israel, i.e., between c. 778 and c. 736,
and between c. 783 and c. 743, and prophesied concerning
Israel, "two years before the earthquake." In vii. 14 Amos
repudiates any connection with the guilds of professional
prophets, and styles himself "a herdsman and a dresser of
sycamore trees." The contents of the book quite agree
with these statements. We further learn4 that Amos
appeared at the temple at Bethel, probably at a festival,
denounced Jeroboam, and was driven away by the priest
Amaziah. Amos' ministry to Israel, and the mention of sycamores,
1 ii. 28 ; Acts ii. 17-21, cf. Romans x. 13.
2 Jeremiah xxxi. 31 ff., cf. Ezekiel xxxvi. 26.
3 i.e., '/imds; the father of Isaiah was 'AmSc.
4 vii. 10—17.

AMOS 241
not found at the Judsean Tekoa, have led to the suggestion
that he belonged to some Tekoa in the northern kingdom ;
but Tekoa here is Tekoa in Judah,1 six miles south of
Bethlehem. " Herdsman " 2 denotes keeper of a peculiar
breed of sheep. His second occupation and the lack of
sycamores at Tekoa show that he led his flocks some distance
from home. Nothing more is known about the earthquake 8 ;
but the power of Jeroboam seems at its height, so that the
book may be dated c. 750, some little time before the close of
the reign.
Critical questions merely concern sections of the book ; see
below on ii. 4, 5.
The book may have been compiled by the prophet himself,
or by one of his disciples.
(b) Historical Circumstances. — Under Uzziah and Jeroboam,
Judah and still more Israel enjoyed a great revival of power
and prosperity,4 which, however, as we learn from the pro
phetical books, was accompanied by social corruption and
the oppression of the poor and helpless. The formation
of great estates resulted in the growth of a landless, pauper
class. Yet the worship of Jehovah was carried on with
great splendour and assiduous devotion at many sanctuaries,
and Jeroboam had been encouraged in his successful wars
by Jonah ben Amittai, whom Kings recognises as a true
prophet. The revival of Israel was due to two causes : the power of
Damascus had been broken by the Assyrian kings, Ramman-
nirari III. and Shalmaneser III., etc., 811-767; and the
Assyrians did not push their advantages further, but, for the
time, allowed Jeroboam to reap the fruits of their victories.
Amos' ministry, however, immediately preceded the accession
of Tiglath-Pileser III., 745, who resumed the forward move
ment of Assyria in South Western Asia.
(c) Contents. — i. i-ii. 3, Oracles against Damascus, the
Philistines, Tyre, Edom, Ammon, and Moab. They will be
1 Cf. i. 2, vii. 12. 2 Noqed.
3 Cf. Zech. xiv. 5. " ii. Kings xiv. 23-29.

242 BIBLICAL INTRODUCTION
punished for their sins against Israel and against each other ;
i. n, 12 (Edom) may be an interpolation.
ii. 4-5, The Doom of Judah.
This section with the other references to Judah, i. 2, "from Zion,"
vi. 1, ix. 11, 12 are sometimes held to be interpolations, partly because
the prophet elsewhere seems exclusively interested in Israel.
ii. 6-16, The Doom of Israel for vice, oppression of the
poor, and the silencing of true prophets.
iii.-vi. enlarge upon the theme of the previous section.
Prophecy has its adequate cause, Jehovah's communications
to His servants.1 The high places, Bethel, Gilgal, Beersheba,2
and their splendid worship is rejected by Jehovah, because
combined with cruelty and vice.3 Jehovah will not deliver
them in His " Day," but chastise them by a cruel invader who
will carry them captive beyond Damascus.4
The doxologies to God as Creator and Ruler, iv. 13, v. 8, 9, ix. 5, 6,
may be interpolations ; they are parallel in style and ideas to II, Isaiah,
and interrupt the context.
vii. 1-9, Visions of locusts, fire, Jehovah with a plumb-line
symbolise the ruin of Israel.
vii. 10-17, Amos at Bethel.
viii., Vision of a basket of summer fruit, symbolising the
speedy decay of Israel.
ix, 1-7, Vision of Jehovah at the altar, inflicting chastise
ment, from which there is no escape.5
ix. 8-15, The Restoration of Israel after its purification.
These verses are often regarded as a later addition, because they
contrast with the unqualified predictions of ruin in the rest of the
book ; because ' ' the fallen tabernacle of David " implies the fall of
the dynasty, 586 ; because of the hostile reference to the remnant
of Edom, and other points of contact with exilic and post-exilic
literature. Dr. Driver, however, still assigns them to Amos, with some
hesitation." (d) Significance of Amos, and Use in N. T— -Apart from
fragments in later works, Amos is the earliest prophet whose
words are extant in writing. ^He also first indicates the
1 iii. 1-8. 2 iv. 4, v. 5. 3 v. 18-27.
4 v. 18, 27, vi. 14. 6 On ix. 5, 6 see on iii.-vi.
" C.B.S., Joel and Amos, 119 ff ; the section is rejected by Cheyne and
G. A. Smith. Amongst other suspected passages are i. 9, 10, iii. 14 b,
v. 13-15, 26, vi. 2, 9, 10, viii, 6, 8, if, 12, 13.

OBADIAH 243
severance between true prophecy and the prophetic order
which is conspicuous in Jeremiah and Ezekiel. But his
most important characteristic is that he strikes the keynote
of eighth century prophecy. Popular faith dwelt on the
privileges of the Chosen People, and trusted that Jehovah,
if honoured by adequate external rites, would always be
the Champion of Israel. Amos insists on the responsibility
of_ being God's people: "You only have I known of all
the families of the earth : therefore will I visit upon you
all your iniquities." To a cruel and selfish people, however
externally devout, " The Day of Jehovah is darkness and
not light." x God is a moral being, and requires above \
all else personal and social morality in His people. Acts ;
vii. 42 f. appeals to v. 25 f. as a proof of the ingrained
depravity of Israel, and Acts xv. 16 f. quotes LXX.2 of j
ix. 11 f. as a prediction of the universality of the gospel.
5. Obadiah.
(a) Date and Authorship. — Nothing is known of Obadiah.
As to the book, three things are clear ; the utterance on Edom
in Jeremiah makes use either of verses 1-9 or of the original
upon which they are based 3 ; 10-14 refer to the Fall of Jeru
salem, 586; 1-9 and 15-21 refer to two quite different situa
tions, and are probably of different origin.
It is not clear whether 10-14 ls to be connected with 1-9
or with 1 5-2 1 ; nor is the Jeremianic authorship of Jeremiah
xlix. 7-22 universally accepted.4
The most probable account of the composition of the book
is as follows : —
Verses 1-9 contain an ancient pre-exilic oracle on Edom,
the occasion of which cannot be determined; verses 10-21
are exilic. There may also be later additions.
1 iii. 2, v. 18.
2 Reading 'adam, " Man," for Edom.
3 1 b-4= Jeremiah xlix. 14-16; 5=Jeremiah9; cf. also 6 with Jeremiah
I0a, and 8 with Jeremiah 7.
4 e.g., not by Giesebrecht.

244 BIBLICAL INTRODUCTION
So substantially G. A. Smith, The Twelve, ii. 172. Orelli, etc., regard
the book as a single pre-exilic work. Wellhausen, on the other hand,
regards both sections as post-exilic. Sephared, v. 20, has been identified
with Saparda in Babylonia (Schrader), a view consistent with an exilic
date ; and with Saparda in Bithynia or Galatia (Cheyne, Sayce, Higher
Criticism, etc., 483), a view requiring a post-exilic date, as these countries
were not held by Assyria or Babylon, but formed part of the Persian
Empire; LXX. has Ephratha for Sephared, and the text of 19, 20 is
much corrupted.
(b) Contents. — 1-6, 8, 9, Proud Edom to be_destroyed- by
the nations.
7, Edom is driven out of her territory by treacherous allies.
Probably a later addition referring to the occupation of Edom
by Nabatean Arabs in the post-exilic period.
10-14, Edom exults over the Fall of Jerusalem, and assists
the invaders.
1 1-2 1, In the day of Jehovah, when He deals with all the
nations, Edom is utterly destroyed by Israel, which re-occupies
all its former territory, including Edom.
Obadiah is not quoted in N.T.
6. Jonah.
(a) Date and Authorship. — The book of Jonah is anony
mous, and makes no statement as to its date. It is a narrative
about Jonah, and does not profess to have been written by
him. Jonah ben Amittai, the subject of the narrative, is only
mentioned elsewhere in O.T. in ii. Kings xiv. 25, "He [Jero
boam IL, c. 783-743] restored the border of Israel from the
entering in of Hamath unto the sea of the Arabah, according
to the word of Jehovah, the God of Israel, which he spake
by the hand of his servant, Jonah ben Amittai, the prophet,
which was of Gath-hepher " [a border town of Zebulun ;
Joshua xix. 13].
The story is vivid and detailed, and if it were a simple
narrative of facts, we might suppose that it was written, at
any rate, on Jonah's authority, and while the experience was
still fresh in his memory. Accordingly the editors of the
Book of the Twelve Prophets 1 place the book fifth.
But the internal evidence shows that the book is much later,
1 See § 1,

JONAH 245
certainly post-exilic. It has been assigned to various dates in
the Persian and Greek periods, i.e., between b.c. 536 and b.c
1 50- Th e idiom and vocabulary of the book are those of the
latest period of O.T. Hebrew; and it has a marked affinity
with Ecclesiastes, c. b.c 250, and contains many Aramaic
words. The book has many parallels with post-exilic literature.
The statement that God made the sea and the dry land, i. 9,
is probably a reminiscence of Genesis i. 9, where the same
word yabbashd is used. The prayer or psalm, ii. 2-10, is mainly
a cento of phrases from the Psalms, and partly from post-
exilic psalms, such as cxlii.
Compare also
Verse 2 = Psalms xviii. 5, 6, cxx. I.
Verse 3b = Psalm xiii. 7b.
Verse 4a — Psalm xxxi. 22a, Lamentations iii. 54b.
Verse 5a= Psalms xviii. 4, lxix. I, cxvi. 3.
Verse 7a = Psalm cxlii. 3a.
Verse 9 = Psalms iii. 8, 1. 14.
And iii. 9, "Who knoweth if God will turn and repent," with Joel ii. 14,
" Who knoweth if he will turn and repent." In iv. 2, " A gracious God,
merciful, slow to anger, and of great kindness, and repentest thee of the
evil," is probably based on Exodus xxxiv. 6 ; cf. Joel ii. 13, Psalms lxxxvi.
15, ciii. 8, which are based on the same passage.
Although there are many vivid details, they are such as
might be suggested by ordinary experiences, a storm at sea,
or exposure to the sun ; there are none of those casual
allusions to time, place or person, which we expect in a
man's account of his own experiences ; we are not told the
name of the king of Nineveh, nor anything about the route
from the great fish to that city.
Moreover the phrase " king of Nineveh " was never used of
the Assyrian kings, and its use, together with iii. 3, " Nineveh
was an exceeding great city," implies that the Assyrian empire
had long since passed away.
Budde has suggested that the book is an excerpt from the Midrash or
free expansion of the Book of Kings, which is commonly assumed as the
main source of Chronicles.

246 BIBLICAL INTRODUCTION
(b) Contents. — Jonah attempting to escape from the mission
to Nineveh is swallowed by a great fish. He is released,
preaches at Nineveh, the people repent and are forgiven,
at which he is angry, and is rebuked by Jehovah.
The Psalm ii. 2-10 is sometimes supposed to be a later addition.
(c) Significance of the Book of Jonah, and use in N.T. — The
book is commonly regarded as an allegory or parable. Prof.
G. A. Smith writes1: "Nor does this book . . . claim to be
real history. On the contrary, it offers us all the marks of the
parable or allegory ... we really sin against the intention of
the author, and the purposes of the spirit which inspired him,
when we wilfully interpret the book as real history."
Our Lord's casual references 2 neither state nor imply that
the book is history. Again, Prof. G. A. Smith writes3: "We
do not believe that our Lord had any thought of confirming
or not confirming the historic character of the story. His
purpose was purely one of exhortation, and we feel the
grounds of that exhortation to be just as strong when we
have proven the Book of Jonah to be a parable. Christ is
using an illustration : it surely matters not whether that illus
tration be drawn from the realms of fact or of poetry."
The book represents the broader spirit of post-exilic
Judaism, it protests against the narrow exclusiveness which
culminated in Pharisaism, by teaching that the Gentiles
might repent and be forgiven ; it prepared the way for the
doctrine of universal salvation by faith, and connects the
great prophets with Christ.
The book also furnishes a most conspicuous example of the
conditional character of prophetic prediction ; promises might
be forfeited by backsliding, threats might be averted by re
pentance. Jonah states most categorically,4 "Yet forty days,
and Nineveh shall be overthrown " ; but the people repent,
and God does not overthrow the city.
1 The Twelve, ii. 498-500.
2 Matthew xii. 39 ff., xvi. 4, Luke xi. 29 ff.
3 The Twelve, ii. 508, and cf. context.
4 iii. 4.

MICAH 247
i, 7} Micah.
(a) Date and Authorship. — According to i. 1 Micah pro
phesied in the reigns of Jotham, Ahaz, and Hezekiah, c. 740
to c. 695; and Jeremiah xxvi. 18 f. quotes iii. 12 as having
been uttered in the reign of Hezekiah, and as having led
the king to repentance. Chapters i.-iii. clearly belong to
the period of the Fall of Samaria; iv.-vii. are the subject
of much controversy. Cheyne 1 writes : " It is becoming
more and more doubtful whether more than two or three
fragments of the heterogeneous collection of fragments in
chapters iv.-vii. can have come from" Micah. G. A. Smith,
however, challenges this statement,2 and calls attention to
recent monographs3 which defend the substantial integrity
of the book. It is difficult to resist the impression that
there is a marked contrast in style and thought between
i. — iii. and iv.-vii., which suggests a different age and author
for the latter section ; but it is equally difficult to estimate
the evidential value of such an impression. See further
Contents on the several sections.
Micah is styled " the Morasthite," 4 probably as belonging
to the " Moresheth-gath " of i. 14, which Jerome identifies
with a " Morasthi " existing in his time to the east of
Eleutheropolis, i.e., in the Shephelah, or low hills on the
western outskirts of Judah.
(b) Historical Circumstances. — The beginning of Micah's
ministry has been placed as early as the reign of Ahaz,
c. 736, and its close as late as that of Manasseh, i.e.,
after c. 695. His ministry may have been either an
immediate sequel to that of Hosea, covering the reigns of the
last kings of Israel, or it may have partly coincided with and
partly extended beyond the last half of Isaiah's ministry, thus
covering the reign of Hezekiah and the accession of
Manasseh. For these periods see Hosea, (b), and Isaiah.
1 Introd. to W. R. Smith's Prophets, xxiii.
2 The Twelve, I. xxiv.
3 By Wildeboer, Von Ryssel, and Elhorst.
1 Both in i. 1 and Jer. xxvi. 18, "Micaiah the M." in some texts.

248 BIBLICAL INTRODUCTION
(c) Contents— i.-iii., Doom_of Samaria and Jerusalem for
the sins of the nation, especially social wrongs committed
by the rulers, whose bribes are accepted by priests and
prophets, and the idolatrous worship of the high places.
The prophecy of restoration, ii. 12 f., interrupts the connection, and
is generally held to be out of place,1 and by many to be a post-exilic
addition,2 parallel to sections of II. Isaiah.
The threats against Samaria8 seem to fix the date of i. before its
capture, 722 ; but, as a document, at any rate, it may have been written
about that date. An Assyrian inscription affords some slight ground for
doubting whether Samaria was destroyed after this capture,4 if not the
chapter may be later.
Chapters ii. , iii. show no consciousness of imminent danger, and belong
to some period after 722, when the fear of an immediate Assyrian advance
had died away, and there seemed no prospect of any speedy renewal of the
Assyrian invasion.
iv. 1-5, Jerusalem the centre of Revelation for all nations
in the Messianic Era of universal peace.
Cf. on Isaiah ii. 2-4 with which 1-3 is nearly identical.
iv. 6-v. 15, Deliverance of the nation, after the capture
of Jerusalem and the carrying captive to Babylon, by a
Righteous Ruler from Bethlehem, who shall lay waste
Assyria. God will deliver the land from superstition, and
enable it to dispense with horses, chariots, and fortresses.
This section is a compilation of separate fragments, some of which are
not Micah's. The references to the Assyrians may well be Micah's,
written perhaps at the time of Sennacherib's invasion. The " Babylon"
clause in iv. 10 is generally held to be a later addition. Nowack accepts
only iv. 9 f. (except the Babylon clause), 14, v. 9-13 as Micah's.
vi. i-vii. 6, Jehovah's controversy with Israel ; His demand
for " mercy and not sacrifice " illustrated by Balaam's answer
to Balak. Fraud in business to be punished by bad seasons.
Persecution of the righteous, and utter social depravity.
The picture in vii. 1-6 seems too dark for the reign of Hezekiah,
and these verses are often referred to the reign of Manasseh, with
which vi. 1-8 may be connected by the reference to child sacrifice.5
Even if written under Manasseh, the author may still be Micah ; but the
difference of style and thought rather points to a different author.
1 Driver, G. A. Smith, Steiner, etc.
2 Cheyne, Wellhausen, Nowack. 3 i. 1, 6.
4 Samsimuruna in Sennacherib's inscription, Taylor Prism, Kellner's
Isaiah, 34, is sometimes identified with Samaria.
6 vi. 7, vii. 2, cf. ii. Kings xxi. 6, 16; but Ahaz also practised child
sacrifice, ii. Kings xvi. 3.

MICAH 249
vii. 7-20, Zion is suffering for sin ; yet confidently expects
from God pardon and deliverance, victory and universal
dominion. According to G. A. Smith,1 "a Psalm composed of little pieces
from various dates," from before the Fall of Samaria, 722, to soon
after the Exile. Others also think that the references to Assyria,
Gilead, and Bashan best suit a date not long before Nehemiah.2 Driver,
on the other hand, inclines to assign the passage to Micah in the time
of Manasseh.3
(d) Significance of the Book of Micah, and Use in N. T. —
The book, both in i.-iii. and elsewhere, insists on the leading
themes of Amos, Hosea, and Isaiah, the protests against
the high places and their corrupt rites,4 against social wrong,
sanctioned by the ministers of religion.5 Even if vi. 1-9
be a later passage, in which these doctrines are more
thoroughly thought out and carefully formulated, it, at any
rate, furnishes an eloquent and explicit statement of the
demand of eighth century prophecy for a moral life and
spiritual religion rather than external ritual. " Wherewith
shall I come before Jehovah, and bow myself before the
high God ? shall I come before Him with burnt offerings,
with calves of a year old? Will Jehovah be pleased with
thousands of rams, or with ten thousands of rivers of oil?
shall I give my firstborn for my transgression, the fruit of
my body for the sin of my soul? He hath shewed thee,
0 man, what is good; and what doth Jehovah require of
thee, but to do justly, and to love mercy, and to walk
humbly with thy God ? " 6 The wrongful accumulation of
great' estates is specially mentioned as a flagrant social
evil.7 Micah, like most of the canonical prophets, is in
antagonism to the prophetic order.8 If iv. and v. are
Micah's, or even of the reign of Manasseh, we have an
early suggestion of the apocalyptic visions of the last things,
1 The Twelve, i. 374.
2 Wellhausen, Nowack.
3 313, quoting Elhorst in support of the view.
4 i. 1-9, v. 12-14. B ii., iii.
6 vi. 6-8, cf. Psalm 1. 8-15, probably post-exilic.
7 ii. 1-3. 8 "i. 5-' l-

250 BIBLICAL INTRODUCTION
connected in v. 2 with the personal deliverer, the Messiah.
In v. 10-14, Wlth its condemnation of horses and chariots,
images and Asherim, we have a parallel to Deuteronomic
passages.1 Again, vii. 8-20, with its confession of sin, and
confidence in the pardoning love of God to the penitent, its
tender passion of prayer, is one of the passages in which
O.T. Revelation culminates, and most nearly anticipates the
evangelical teaching of the gospel.
Micah v. 2 is appealed to in Matthew ii. 6 as an
authority for the statement that the Messiah is to be born
at Bethlehem.2
(& Nahum.
(a) Date and Authorship. — In i. 1 Nahum is styled "the
Elkoshite," which probably means " man of Elkosh." Elkosh
is unknown, but there are various conjectures. Jerome men
tions " Helkesei " in Galilee, and Capernaum ( = village of
Nahum) seems to connect Nahum with Galilee. If so, he
was a northern refugee in Jerusalem. Epiphanius, c. a.d. 360,
locates Elkosh in the south of Judah. Some moderns find
Elkosh in the modern Alkush, two days' journey to the north
of the site of Nineveh, thus making Nahum an Israelite
captive in Assyria.
The book was written between the sack of No-Amon, the
Egyptian Thebes, c. 663, which it describes, and the Fall of
Nineveh, c. 607, which it predicts. The precise date is un
certain. Perhaps the vivid pictures of imminent ruin reflect
the last agonies of Assyria, in the period just before the fall of
its capital.
(b) Historical Circumstances. — This period coincides with
the latter years of Josiah's reign, after the Deuteronomic re
formation had secured comparative purity of life and worship,
and after the retreat of the Scythians had left Judah a breath
ing space of peace and prosperity.
For 663-621 see § 10.
1 Deut. xvi. 21, 22, xvii. 16 ; cf. Hosea iii. 4.
2 Cf. John vii. 42.

HABAKKUK 251
(c) Contents. — i., Psalm describing a Theophany in which
Jehovah destroys the enemies of His people.
Cheyne1 and others regard i. as post-exilic. Bickell, G. B. Gray, etc.,
find in it a mutilated and distorted alphabetic acrostic. Some emendation
is necessary, especially in H-15, where the present text requires "thee"
to stand for Judah and Assyria alternately in a most impossible fashion.
ii., iii., Description of the siege and sack of Nineveh.
ii. 2 is either a gloss or should be taken with i.
(d) Significance. — Nahum, like Habakkuk, is remarkable
for the absence of any reference to the sin of Judah. Judah,
the righteous sufferer, is contrasted with its wicked oppressor.
This attitude may be due to the Deuteronomic reformation, or
Nahum and Habakkuk may represent a school of prophets
in partial opposition to Jeremiah and the main line of
prophecy. Nahum is not quoted in N.T.
(7^) Habakkuk.
(a) Date and Authorship. — Nothing is known of Habakkuk,
except what may be gathered from this book.
The LXX. ascription of "Bel and the Dragon" to Habakkuk; the
account in " Bel, etc.," of an angel carrying Habakkuk by his hair from
Judah to Babylon, to give his dinner to Daniel in the lion's den ; and the
information given by Epiphanius, are unhistorical. The statement that
Habakkuk was a Levite is a deduction from the presence in the book of a
Psalm with the musical directions of the Levitical choir.
The description of the Chaldasans2 shows that the book
was written when they were a prominent power, i.e., after the
revival of the Chaldaean empire in 625, and before the Fall of
Babylon in 536, probably before the Fall of Jerusalem in 586.
The exact date depends on the interpretation of the book.3 If
the oppressor of Israel is the Assyrian, the date would be
before the Fall of Nineveh, c. 625-607 ; if the Egyptian,
between Pharaoh Necho's victory at Megiddo and his defeat
at Carchemish, c. 606 ; if the Chaldaean, after the deportation
of Jehoiachin, c. 597-586.
Even if i. 5- 11 is omitted (so Nowack, see below) there is still
sufficient ground for regarding Habakkuk as a contemporary of Jeremiah.
The book reflects the conditions of the closing years of the Jewish
monarchy. 1 Introd. to Isaiah, p. 1 12. 2 i. 5-11. 3 See below.

252 BIBLICAL INTRODUCTION
(b) Historical Circumstances. — Cf Jeremiah.
(c) Contents. — i., ii., The Vindication of Judah and the
Punishment of its. Oppressor.
The statement of contents depends upon the interpretation. We give
the three main views with an analysis according to each.
(a) Judah's sin will be punished by the Chaldaeans, who in their turn
will be punished. l
i.1-4, Social corruption of Judah, in which the righteous Jew, caddiq,
is oppressed by the wicked Jew, rasha.
5-1 1, The destructive might of the Chaldaeans, who are raised up to
punish the wicked Jews.
12-17, Appeal to Jehovah against the unmeasured cruelty of the
Chaldaeans, the wicked, rasha, who are even less righteous, caddiq, than
the Jews.
ii. 1-4, Deliverance promised.
"5^20, Woes against the Chaldaeans for their cruelty, debauchery, and
idolatry. This view takes the text just as it stands, but involves the following
difficulties : The " wicked " is in one place a portion of the Jews, in
another, the Chaldaeans ; i. 5-1 1 breaks the connection ; in i. 6 the
Chaldaeans are a new power to be raised up ; in ii, 5-20 the oppressors
are spoken of as well known and of long standing.
(/3) Nothing is said of the sin of Judah ; the prophet dwells on the
wrongs done to Judah and other nations by the Chaldaeans, and announces
the coming chastisement of the oppressor, i. 5-1 1 is either * later
addition,2 or to be placed before i. 1-4. 3
[i. 5-1 1, Chaldaean oppression.]
i. 1-4, Social disorder in Judah, sufferings of the righteous, caddiq,
Jews, at the hands of the wicked, rasha, Chaldaeans.
5-1 1, Interpolated expansion of the picture of Chaldaean cruelty.
12-17, Appeal against the wicked Chaldaeans on behalf of the righteous
Jews. ii. 1-4, Deliverance.
5-20, Woes against the Chaldaeans.
The chief objection to this view is that i. 5-1 1 neither furnishes a suit
able exordium, nor seems a probable interpolation.
(7) Nothing is said of the sin of Judah, the prophet dwells on the
wrongs inflicted either by the Assyrians 4 or by the Egyptians.5 The
oppressor in his turn is to be punished by the Chaldaeans ; i. 5- 11 is to be
placed after ii. 4.
i. 1-4, Sufferings of the righteous Jews at the hands of the wicked
Assyrians or Egyptians.
12-17, Appeal against the wicked oppressor on behalf of the righteous
Jews. ii. 1-4, Deliverance.
i. 5-1 1, Through the prowess of the Chaldaeans.
ii. 5-20, Woes against the oppressor, Assyrian or Egyptian.
1 So Driver, Davidson, and most critics. 2 Wellhausen, etc
3 Giesebrecht, etc. 4 Budde, etc. 6 G. A. Smith.

ZEPHANIAH 253
The chief objections to this view are the difficulty of accounting for the
transposition of i. 5-1 1 ; and the absence of any mention of the Assyrians
or Egyptians. The part or whole of ii. 9-20 is considered by Kuenen,
etc., not to be Habakkuk's.
iii., A psalm provided with heading, " Prayer of Habakkuk,"
etc., and subscription as in the Psalter.
iii. 2-15, Theophany in which Jehovah delivers His anointed
— the people Israel — from the wicked.
16-19, Expression of faith in the depths of affliction.
The heading and subscription suggest that iii. was taken from a. collec
tion of Psalms, and that the ascription to Habakbuk is a conjecture of an
editor. The term "anointed" mdshtah for Israel seems post-exilic, in
pre-exilic literature mdshtah is the actual king. Hence Cheyne and others
regard iii. as post-exilic.
(d) Significance and use in N.T. — Habakkuk, like Nahum,
emphasises not Judah's sin, but the contrast between righteous
Judah and her wicked oppressor, an attitude very different
from that of Isaiah and Jeremiah. In iii. 17 f. the spirit of
trustful acceptance of suffering finds its supreme expression in
" Though the fig tree shall not blossom . . . yet will I rejoice
in Jehovah."
Paul in Romans i. 17 and Galatians iii. 11, uses ii. 4 in the
LXX. form, " The righteous shall live by faith ; " the Hebrew
is rather "by faithfulness." Cf. also Hebrews x. 37, 38; also
i. 5 with Acts xiii. 41.
10. Zephaniah.
(a) Date and Authorship. — The opening verse describes the
book as " The word of Jehovah which came unto Zephaniah,
the son of Cushi, the son of Gedaliah, the son of Amariah,
the son of Hezekiah, in the days of Josiah, the son of
Amon, king of Judah." The contents confirm this statement,
and the picture of social and religious corruption suggests a
date before the reforms of Josiah, i.e., 639-621. Probably
Hezekiah is the king, and the genealogy is given in order to
introduce the name of this distinguished ancestor.
(b) Historical Circumstances. — The efforts of Isaiah and
Hezekiah for purity of life and worship were followed by
a reaction under Manasseh and Amon. During the minority

254 BIBLICAL INTRODUCTION
of Josiah, the prophetic party, under Zephaniah and his
younger contemporary, Jeremiah, were gathering strength for
a new movement, which culminated in the reforms of Josiah.
Abroad the Assyrian empire was in the throes of dissolution,
Egypt was not formidable, and the minor Syrian states were
left to their own devices. Western Asia, however, was subject
to the ravages of Scythian hordes, who reached the frontiers
of Egypt.
(c) Contents. — The book is occupied with the Doom of
Judah and Jerusalem and all nations in the Day of Jehovah.
L, Judah and Jerusalem are punished for corrupt worship,1
social injustice,2 and disbelief in a living God, they "say in
their heart, Jehovah will do neither good nor evil."
ii., Doom of Philistines, Moab, Ammon, Ethiopians, and
Assyria, iii. 1-13, Doom of Jerusalem and all nations. Deliverance
of a purified remnant, " a humble and poor people " in Jeru
salem. iii. 9, 10 are perhaps a later addition. Doubts have also been raised as
to every verse in ii. and iii., especially ii. 8-1 1 (Moab and Ammon) and
iii. 8-20.
iii., 14-20, A post-exilic lyric in the style of Second Isaiah,
celebrating the restoration of the exiles to Zion, and the
Divine Presence in their midst.
(d) Significance. — Zephaniah is a link between Isaiah and
Jeremiah. In the gathering of the nations for destruction,8
wehave the germ of the apocalyptic visions of later prophets.
There is no quotation from Zephaniah in N.T.
Uj) Haggai.
(a) Date and Authorship. — The book contains four utter
ances, each separately ascribed to Haggai, and dated in the
second year of Darius (i.e., Darius I., Hystaspis), b.c 520;
on the ist of the sixth, the 21st of the seventh, and (the last
two) on the 24th of the ninth month, i.e., about September
to December. Probably they were committed to writing
about the time of delivery. The book frames these utter-
1 i. 4-6- 2 i. 9. 8 iii. 8.

HAGGAI 255
ances in a very brief narrative, and Haggai is spoken of
throughout in the third person; it may have been compiled
by the prophet himself, or by one of his hearers. In
addition to the facts recorded of Haggai in this book,
Ezra v. 1, vi. 14 tell us that heawith Zechariah, persuaded the
Jews to rebuild the Temple.
(b) Historical Circumstances. — Sixteen years before, after
the capture of Babylon by Cyrus, many Jews returned1 to
Judah, and settled there as subjects of Persia, under the
Davidic^ _Prince, Zerubbabel, and the High Priest, Joshua.
They were harassed by hostile neighbours, who induced
Cyrus to forbid the building of the Temple, after the
foundations had been laid. The recent accession of
Darius I. held out prospects of a change of the Persian
policy in Judah, while numerous revolts raised hopes of
great internal changes issuing in the full deliverance of
Israel. (c) Contents. — The First Utterance, i. r-n, urged them
to rebuild the Temple, which they had neglected for their
own houses. A recent drought had been sent as a punish
ment. A short narrative, i. r2-i5, tells us that three weeks later
the Jews under Zerubbabel and Joshua set to work on the
Temple. The Second Utterance, ii. 1-9, promises that the new
Temple, enriched with the wealth of the Gentiles, and blessed
with peace, shall be more glorious than Solomon's.
The Third Utterance, ii. 10-19, teaches that their neglect
of the Temple tainted and blasted all their life, but that they
will be blessed for their new zeal.
The Fourth Utterance, ii. 20-23, announces that, in
the approaching overthrow of the nations of the earth,
Zerubbabel will be the favoured and protected Servant of
Jehovah. (d) Significance and Use in N.T. — The new energy which
Haggai inspired was a necessary preliminary to the work
1 But cf. chapter on Chron., Ezra, and Neh.

256 BIBLICAL INTRODUCTION
of Ezra and Nehemiah. Haggai and Zechariah, § 12, must
be reckoned amongst the founders of Judaism. Hebrews
xii. 26 quotes ii. 6, the "shaking" of all things.
f"i2j The Prophecies of Zechariah, Zechariah i.— viii.
(a) Date and Authorship. — These chapters contain a series
of utterances, each separately ascribed to Zechariah, and
dated from the second year of Darius (i.e., Darius I.,
Hystaspis), B.C. 520, the eighth month, about August, to the
fourth year of Darius, B.C. 518, the 4th day of the ninth
month, about September. The first person is used freely
throughout, and all the evidence shows that these chapters
were composed by Zechariah himself soon after the latest
of the prophecies. In addition to the facts recorded of
\ Zechariah here, Ezra v. 1, vi. 14 tell us that he, with Haggai,
j persuaded the Jews to rebuild the Temple.
(b) Historical Circumstances. — As the prophecies of
Zechariah were uttered within a few months of those of
Haggai, the historical circumstances are substantially the same.
(c) Contents. — Second Year of Darius, eighth month
(August, 520).
i. r-6, Appeal to the fulfilment of ancient prophecy.
Second Year of Darius, eleventh month, 24th day (Novem
ber, 520).
i. 7-17, Vision of Angelic JHorsemen, who report that the
shaking announced in Haggai ii. 20-23 has not taken place.
Promise of great prosperity to Jerusalem.
i. 18-21, Vision of Four_Smiths, who file away the Four
Horns, which had scattered Judah. The horns and smiths
are nations, not to be more exactly defined.
ii. 1-5, Vision of Man with Measuring-line, forbidden to
draw any fixed limits for the future city.
ii. 6-13, Exilic Lyric on the Restoration of the Jews.
The situation is that of the Exile ; the ideas and style resemble
II. Isaiah. The lyric was either used by Zechariah or inserted by an
editor, as a suitable expansion of the teaching of the preceding vision.
iii., Vision of the High Priest accused by Satan, but puri-

THE PROPHECIES OF ZECHARIAH 257
fied, acquitted, and honoured by Jehovah. The Branch or
Messiah, i.e., Zerubbabel.
iv., Vision of the Seven - branched Candlestick supplied
with oil from the Two Olive Trees, symbolising the grace
given to the Jews [? through Zerubbabel and Joshua to build
the Temple].
iv. 6-10 interrupts the context, and seems to belong to an earlier
stage of the building of the Temple than November, 520. Probably
an earlier utterance of Zechariah placed here, at or after, the compilation
of the book.
v. 1-4, Vision of the Flying Roll, which carries a destroying
curse to sinners.
v. 5-1 1, Vision of Wickedness — as a Woman — shut up
in an ephah-measure, carried away to the land of Shinar
(Babylon). vi. 1-8, Vision of the Four Chariots, which go through the
earth to execute God's judgments.
vi. 9-15, The Crowning of the Messianic Prince, the
Branch, Zerubbabel.
The text, as it stands, refers 11-13 to Joshua, and makes him "the
Branch"; but the plural "crowns," II, and the "both," 13 show
that two persons were originally referred to. The " Branch " elsewhere,
Jeremiah xxiii. 5> 6, xxxiii. 15, 16, is a Davidic prince, specially
Zerubbabel, Zechariah iii. 8 ; and the builder of the Temple is
Zerubbabel, Zechariah iv. Hence the text has been reconstructed, and
is translated, G. A. Smith, Twelve Prophets, ii. 308 and note: "Thou
shalt . . . make a crown, and set it on the head of [Zerubbabel] . . . and
he shall wear the royal majesty and sit and rule upon his throne, and
[Joshua] shall be priest on his right hand, and there will be a counsel
of peace between the two of them."
This utterance, which regards the building of the Temple as still
future, is probably out of place here, and was delivered before the
preceding prophecies.
Fourth Year of Darius, ninth month, 4th day (September,
5i8). vii. 1-7, Shall fasts continue ? Unreal fasts.
vii. 8-14, The former ruin of Israel the punishment of
oppression. viii. 1-17, The future happiness and peace of Jerusalem.
viii. 18-23, The abolition of fasts. All nations shall
worship at Jerusalem.

258 BIBLICAL INTRODUCTION
(d) Significance and Use in N. T— Zechariah was com
missioned to enforce the lessons and continue the work
of the older prophets. They and their hearers had passed
away, but the Word and purpose of God remained.1
Zechariah has reminiscences of his predecessors ; his
formula, "And he said unto me, What seest thou? And
I said," is found in Amos vii. 8, viii. 2, Jeremiah i. n, 13;
and his message, "Execute true judgment, and show mercy
and compassion every man to his brother; and oppress not
the widow, nor the fatherless, the stranger, nor the poor,"
is an echo of the teaching of the great pre-exilic prophets.2
But in Isaiah's time sacrifices were offered as a substitute
for righteousness, and the prophets were indifferent to or
even denounced ritual and sanctuary. Now the best hopes
for social righteousness lay in devotion to the Temple, hence
Zechariah is zealous for it and its priesthood. The older
prophets had announced that the sin of Israel must be
punished by the overthrow of the nation. Zechariah knows
that the Jews are still sinful, but this sin may be purged
away by the destruction of individuals, by the removal of
wickedness and the purification of the people.3 The ancient
hope of deliverance through the house of David revived
and fastened itself on Zerubbabel;4 this Messianic hope
connects itself, as of old, with victory over the Gentiles,
but also with the homage of the Gentiles to Jehovah at
Jerusalem,5 which shall be "the city of truth" and the
temple hill "the holy mountain"; and "there shall sit in
the streets of Jerusalem old men and women, each with
staff in hand because of great age; and the streets of
the city shall be full of boys and girls playing in the
streets thereof,"6 and all this is to be brought about, "Not
1 i. 4-6, vii. 7.
2 Cf. also ii. 13 with Zeph. i. 7; viii. 3 with Isaiah i. 26; viii. 18-23
with Isaiah ii. 1-4, Micah iv. 1-3.
3 iii., v.
4 See above on vi. 11-13.
6 ii. 11-13, viii. 18-23.
6 viii. 4, 5.

ZECHARIAH IX.-XIV. 259
by might, nor by power, but by my Spirit, saith Jehovah
Sabaoth."1 In Zechariah, however, Hebrew prophecy begins to lose
its sense of immediate communion with God; the prophet
receives his messages through visions and angels ; and it is
Satan who denounces the sin of Israel, symbolised by the
filthy garments of the High Priest.
Zechariah viii. 9-12 repeats the teaching of Haggai i. 1-11,
ii. 15-19, that indifference to the rebuilding of the Temple
brought calamity, especially failure of crops and vintage.
The unwelcome peace among the nations, i. 11, is a reference
to the shaking of the nations in the interests of Israel promised
in Haggai ii. 6, 7, 21. Another parallel with post-exilic litera
ture is the denunciation of the sham fast in vii. 5 as compared
with Isaiah Iviii.2
The N.T. contains only a few traces of these chapters,
chiefly in the Apocalypse.
13. Zechariah ix.-xiv.
(a) Date and Authorship. — Owing to the accident that
Zechariah xi. 13 is quoted in Matthew xxvii. 9 as from
Jeremiah, criticism early3 suggested that these chapters were
not the work of Zechariah. Apart from this, there are many
striking differences between the two parts of the book, which
show that they are not by the same author.
In i.— viii., the sections have headings specifying the date
and author — Zechariah ; Zechariah speaks in the first person ;
almost every paragraph has numerous points of contact with
b.c 520-518. There are many visions, in which angels play
an important part.
In ix.-xiv., either there are no headings, or, if there are,
they are silent as to date and authorship ; the author rarely
speaks in the first person. Where he does, it is not, as in the
1 iv. 6, cf. Isaiah xxxi. 3, " The Egyptians are men, and not God ; and
their horses flesh, and not spirit."
2 Dated by Cheyne, b.c 450-444.
3 Joseph Mede, 1632.

2<5o BIBLICAL INTRODUCTION
first part, in his own, but in some symbolic character, e.g., the
Good Shepherd ; there are no points of contact with b.c
520-518, but rather with other periods (see below); there
are neither visions nor angels.
There are also diversities of vocabulary, style, and ideas.
Criticism started with an attempt to ascribe these chapters
to Jeremiah; i.e., also to assign them to the period b.c
626-586. They are certainly not by Jeremiah, nor do they
belong to his period, but some critics still regard them as pre-
exilic. Ephraim, ix. 10, Assyria, x. 10, Damascus, ix. 1, and
Hamath, ix. 2, are spoken of as in existence, which seems to
imply a date before the Fall of Samaria, B.C. 722. The carry
ing away of captives from Gilead, x. 10, has been connected
with the captivity of Gilead by Tiglath-Pileser, ii. Kings xv.
29. The "three shepherds cut off in one month," Zechariah
xi. 8, have been explained of ii. Kings xv. 13-15, where
Zechariah and Shallum perish in a short time, the third
shepherd being some unknown pretender. The necessity for
this sheer conjecture shows that there is no real connection
between the two passages. On these and similar grounds the
whole or part of ix.-xi. with xiii. 7-9 are sometimes referred
to the last days of the kingdom of Israel ; and xii.-xiv. (less
xiii. 7-9) to the last days of the kingdom of Judah, for the
mourning in xii. 1 1 is often understood of the mourning for
Josiah, ii. Chronicles xxxv. 24, 25.
But, on the whole, a closer examination of this appendix
shows that both sections are post-exilic, at any rate in their
present form. In ix. 13, Greece is mentioned as the great
enemy of the Jews, and the Greeks first became a great
neighbouring power after the conquests of Alexander, B.C. 333.
The idea of the Messianic King as Prince of Peace, ix. 9,
would be very remarkable in a pre-exilic work dealing with
the impending ruin of Israel and Judah. The idea is even
more developed than in Isaiah x. 6, often regarded as post-
exilic. From xii. onward, the marks of post-exilic authorship are
numerous and convincing. In xii. 1 Israel stands for Judah;

ZECHARIAH IX.-XIV. 261
the importance given to " the house of Levi " by being placed
side by side with "the house of David," xii. 12, 13, reminds
us of the exalted position of the priesthood after the exile ;
the utter contempt poured upon prophecy, xiii. 2-6, suggests
a late period when genuine prophets had ceased to appear ;
xiv. is an apocalypse of an advanced type ; the importance
attached to the Feast of Tabernacles, xiv. 16, to the sanctity
of pots and bells, xiv, 20, 21, to the absence of foreigners
from the Temple, xiv. 21, and the universal observance of
Jewish feasts by Gentiles, point to the ritual of the post-exilic
period. Hence ix.-xiv. is, as a whole, post-exilic. The reference to
Greece, ix. 13, points to a date in the Greek period, after
B-c- 333> f°r at any ra-te a part of the chapters. Some, how
ever, obtain an earlier date by attributing this reference to an
editor. Thus the appendix belongs either to the Persian or Greek
period, but its exact date or dates cannot be certainly fixed;
nor can we be sure whether ix.-xi. with xiii. 7-9, and
xii.-xiv. (less xiii. 7-9) are by the same or by two different
authors. Hence Ephraim and Joseph are only used in a quasi-
symbolic sense, Judah and the restored Jews claim to re
present Ephraim and Joseph, just as they appropriate the term
Israel. Assyria is either used as a geographical term, or
applied to the Greek kingdom of Syria. The later applica
tion was very natural, seeing that " Syria " is simply a Greek
contraction for "Assyria." These usages can be paralleled
from Ezra vi. 22, Judith i. 1.
Probably the appendix, together with the equally anonymous
"Malachi," was placed, because of its anonymity, at the end
of the Book of the Twelve Prophets, i.e., after Zechariah;
and thus came to be written consecutively with Zechariah and
included under the same title.
(b) Historical Circumstances. — For Persian period see § n
Haggai; for Greek period see chapter v. § 10, (b) ; cf. Contents
below.

262 BIBLICAL INTRODUCTION
(c) Contents.— IX.-XI. with XIII. 7-9.
ix. 1-8, The Temple protected when Phoenicia and Philistia
are devastated. A remnant of the Philistines converted.
ix. 9-17, The Messianic King brings peace and prosperity
to Israel by giving victory over the Greeks.
x., Victory and restoration for Judah and Ephraim.
xi., with xiii. 7-9, In a time of calamity the people were
oppressed by their rulers or " shepherds " ; the prophet repre
senting Jehovah " cut off three shepherds in one month " and
undertook to rule the people, " feed the flock," with two
staves, " Grace " and " Union," 1 symbolising the covenant
of Jehovah with man and the union of Judah and Israel.
But, saith the prophet, " I was weary of them, and they also
loathed me." He relinquished his task, broke his staves, and
received for his hire thirty shekels, the price of a slave, which
he cast into the Temple treasury.2 Then Jehovah delivers
over His people to a good-for-nothing3 shepherd, who neglects
and devours the flock, and is punished. Then the prophet,
"my shepherd, the man that is my fellow, saith Jehovah
Sabaoth," is slain and the flock scattered ; finally, a third
part of the people are purified and reconciled to God.
The action is symbolic, the prophet representing in turn
very different actors in an apocalyptic drama, first Jehovah,
then the worthless shepherd, then the faithful shepherd who
is martyred. XII. i-XIII. 6, XIV.
xii. 1 -xiii. 6, Siege of Jerusalem by Gentiles allied with
Judah; the assailants are discomfited, Judah is reconciled
to Jerusalem ; both are delivered, Judah first, that Jerusalem
may not be puffed up. The city mourns for a martyr, whom
it has put to death ; and is purified by a fountain opened for
1 So G. A. Smith, Book of the Twelve Prophets; A.V., R,V.
"Beauty," "Bands."
2 In xi. 13 read "treasury" '6cdr for " potter " yocer with G. A. SMITH,
etc. 3 A.V. "idol," R.V., G. A. Smith, " worthless," xi. 17.

ZECHARIAH IX.-XIV. 263
sin and uncleanness, and by the cutting off of idols, prophets,
and the unclean spirit.
xiv., Another siege of Jerusalem by the Gentiles ; the city
is actually taken and sacked, when Jehovah appears upon the
Mount of Olives, which splits asunder, and the Jews escape
through the chasm. Living waters flow east and west from
the city, and the rest of the land becomes a plain. The
besiegers are destroyed. The remnant of the Gentiles shall
go up every year to worship Jehovah at the feast of Taber
nacles, and if they neglect will be punished with plagues.
Everything in Jerusalem, down to the pots, shall be holy.
If we translate with R.V. text, "Judah also shall fight against
Jerusalem," we must suppose that verses 13 and 14, which in any case
interrupt the context, have either been transferred here from the beginning
of xii., or have been added by an editor to connect xiv. and xii., cf. G. A.
Smith, i. 1. Driver takes the rendering of R.V.Mg., "Judah shall fight
at Jerusalem," but even this is quite alien to the context.
(d) Significance and Use in O.T. — In Zechariah ix.-xiv.
passages of ancient prophecy may be embedded, but
we are mostly in the region of the apocalyptic visions of
later Judaism. In the picture of the future, Judah and
Jerusalem, and the Temple, the circumstances of the writer's
own time, are strangely blended with vast armies of all nations
attacking the Holy City, with supernatural plagues and trans
formations of mountain and rivers, with vague symbolism of
shepherds, and with the phantoms of dead peoples and
empires, Ephraim and Assyria. This confusion of symbols
from all sources makes it difficult to discover any certain
indications of the actual conditions of the author and his
times. The martyr of xii. 10 and perhaps also of xiii. 7
did not necessarily belong to the author's own time, but
may have been someone whose death burdened the con
science of Israel for many generations ; perhaps the innocent
sufferer whose fate suggested Isaiah liii.
Yet xii. 2, 7, xiv. 14 indicate a time of estrangement
between Jerusalem and the house of David on the one
hand, and the rest of Judah on the other; and xiii. 1-6

264 BIBLICAL INTRODUCTION
shows the prophetic order in the last stage of decay ; the
" wounds " in 6 were perhaps self-mutilations connected with
superstitious ritual.
The Messianic pictures become more detailed and ex
plicit. The post-exilic type of saint was the humble, pious,
God-fearing man, the 'ani ; so, ix. 9, the King comes to
Zion " vindicated and victorious, meek and riding upon an
ass."1 In xii. 8, "The house of David shall be as God."
The overthrow of the Gentiles and their homage to Jehovah
are still dwelt on, but with the grimness of apocalypse; the
heathen hosts moulder into rottenness as they stand ; the
survivors are compelled by dread of drought to be regular
attendants at the Feast of Tabernacles, xiv. 12-19.
Finally the ethical zeal for righteousness connects itself,
after the manner of the Pharisees, with the ceremonial clean
ness of material objects, bells, bowls, and pots, xiv. 21.
The clause in xii. 1, "Jehovah which stretcheth forth the
heavens, and layeth the foundation of the earth," is a favourite
formula of II. Isaiah.2 The fountain opened for uncleanness,
the streams issuing from Jerusalem, and the transformation of
the land, are based upon similar pictures in Ezekiel.3
The picture of the Meek King, ix. 9, riding on the ass,
is applied to Christ entering Jerusalem, Matthew xxi. 5,
John xii. 15. The thirty pieces of silver thrown to the
potter, xi. 13, are applied to Judas' thirty pieces given for
the potter's field, Matthew xxvi. 15, xxvii. 9, 10. Cf. also
xii. 10, "They shall look unto me whom they have pierced,"
with John xix. 37; and xiii. 7, "I will smite the shepherd,"
etc., with Matthew xxvi. 31, Mark xiv. 27.
14. Malachi
(a) Date and Authorship. — The book is anonymous.
" Malachi," which means " my messenger " or " my angel,"
1 So G. A. Smith ; R.V., "just and having salvation ; lowly," etc.
2 xl. 22, xiii. 5, etc.
3 xxxvi. 25, xlvii. 1-12, cf. Joel iii. 18.

MALACHI 265
is a title prefixed by an editor, to whom it was suggested
by the "my messenger" of iii. i.1
The book is clearly connected with the reforms of Ezra
and Nehemiah, b.c 458-433. Two main features of those
reforms were the provision for>tiie maintenance of the services
of the Temple, and ^e prohibition of marriages with
foreigners ; and the Book of Malachi is devoted to the
advocacy of these two objects. Opinion is divided as to
the exact date. The book may have been issued before
the first arrival of Nehemiah, B.C. 458, or before the
promulgation of the Priestly Code in b.c 444, and may
thus have prepared the way for the reforms ; or it may
have been issued after b.c 444, or even after Nehemiah's
final departure from Judah, some time after b.c 433, and
may have served to overcome the reluctance of the Jews
to fully accept and maintain the new dispensation. The
fact that the book has points of contact with Deuteronomy,
Ezekiel, and the Law of Holiness,2 rather than with the
later portions of the Priestly Code, points to a date previous
to the promulgation of the latter.
(b) Historical Circumstances. — Malachi falls in a part of
the Persian period, the reign of Artaxerxes Longimanus,
464-424, when the Persian government was favourably dis
posed to the Jews. Before the first arrival of Nehemiah,
however, the condition of Judaea was very unsatisfactory.
The Temple had been completed, but its completion had
not been followed by the prosperity promised by Haggai
and Zechariah; people and priests alike were careless about
the services, and entangled in marriages and other relations
with heathen and half heathen neighbours ; there was danger
lest the worship of Jehovah should be degraded to the level
1 male'dkkt; the word in i. I is taken as a title by the LXX., which,
however, read male'dkhd, "his messenger," and by the Targum of
Jonathan. This view was adopted by Calvin, who has been followed
by most recent critics. Some, however, still regard Malachi as a proper
name. Cf, however, the designation of Haggai as the " messenger" of
Jehovah in Haggai i. 13.
2 Lev. xvii. -xxvi.

266 BIBLICAL INTRODUCTION
of heathen religions, and confused and blended with the
worship of other gods. These dangers were averted by
Ezra and Nehemiah. Nehemiah used his authority, as the
representative of the Persian King, to establish the Priestly
Code as the Law of the Jews, to put an end to marriages
with foreigners, to make a sharp and permanent division
between the Jewish community and its neighbours, and to
make adequate provision for the Temple services.
(c) Contents. — i. 1-5, Edom's ruin a proof of Jehovah's love
to Israel.
i. 6 — ii. 9, Neglect of the Temple services by priests and
people. ii. 10-16, Jewish wives divorced to make room for foreign
women. Verses 11, 12 break the connection, and may be a later addition; see
G. A. Smith, i. 1.
ii. x 7 — iii. 6, The sudden coming of Jehovah's messenger to
purify priests and people.
iii. 7-12, Fertility will reward the due payment of tithes and
offerings. iii. 13-iv. 3, Prosperous sinners will come to ruin, and
suffering saints will be delivered.
iv. 4-6, Elijah the Forerunner.
(d) Significance and Use in N.T. — The form of the book
is an argument against those who are prepared to justify
themselves, e.g., " Ye have wearied Jehovah with your words.
Yet ye say, Wherein have we wearied Him?"1 It is a
manifesto on behalf of earnest and pious Jews alike against
the self-satisfied indifference to true religion of -the ruling
classes, the priests and the people generally, and against
the despondency of those who thought that the prosperity
of wicked oppressors showed that God had deserted His
own cause and those who were faithful to it.2 Here, as in
Haggai and Zechariah, zeal for holiness and righteousness
goes hand in hand with zeal for the Temple. The devotion
1 ii- 17- 2 iii. 13-iv. 3.

MALACHI 267
and enthusiasm of the party represented by this book made
the reforms of Ezra and Nehemiah possible.
Two details may be noticed. The Davidic Messiah does
not appear ; but a messenger, a new Elijah, is announced, who
shall prepare the way for Jehovah and His Day of Judgment.
In a most remarkable passage the writer seems to recognise
the Gentile worship of their gods as worship paid to Jehovah,
" For from the rising of the sun even unto the going down of
the same my name is great among the Gentiles ; and in every
place incense is offered unto my name, and a pure offering ;
for my name is great among the Gentiles."1
In the New Testament, St. Paul uses i. 2 to illustrate the
doctrine of divine election2; and the prediction of Elijah the
Forerunner is applied to John the Baptist.3
In Mark i. 2 a quotation from Malachi iii. 1 is included in a
quotation from " Isaiah the prophet."
1 i. II R.V. Text. 2 Rom. ix. 13.
3 Matt. xvi. 14, xvii. 1-13, Mark i. 2-4, etc.

CHAPTER VII.
APOCRYPHA, PSEUDEPIGRAPHA, AND
SOME OTHER JEWISH LITERATURE NOT
INCLUDED IN THE PROTESTANT CANON1

I.

Apocalypse of Baruch,

nclud-

13-

Josephus.

ing Epistle of Baruch

14.

Jubilees, Book of.

2.

Ascension of Isaiah.

IS-

Judith.

3^

Assumption of Moses.

16.
i. Maccabees.
4-
Baruch, Book of.
17-
ii. Maccabees.
5-
Daniel, Song of the
Three
18.
iii. Maccabees.
Children, Bel ane
the
19-
iv. Maccabees.
Dragon, Susanna.
20.
Manasseh, Prayer of.
6.
Ecclesiasticus.
21.
Philo.
7-
Enoch, Book of.
22.
Psalms of Solomon.
8.
Enoch, Book of the Secrets of.
23-
Sibyllines.
9-
I. or III. Esdras.
24.
Testament of the
10.
II. or IV. Esdras.
Patriarchs.
n.
Esther.
25-
Tobit.
12,
Jeremiah, Letter of.
26.
Wisdom of Solomon
Twelve
1. Apocalypse of Baruch. — Extant in Syriae version of
Greek version of the original Hebrew; written by unknown
Pharisaic authors, c. a.d. 70-130. Apocalypse of the history
from the time of Baruch to the Last Days, and the Reign of
Messiah, put into the mouth of Baruch. It has much in
common with ii. or iv. Esdras, and includes what was known
as the Epistle of Baruch.
2. Ascension of Isaiah. — Extant in Latin and Ethiopian
versions of the original Greek, consists of a Jewish, possibly
pre-Christian account of the sawing asunder of Isaiah, with
1 Cf. Chapter I. § 4 on the Canon.
268
APOCRYPHA 269
Christian additions, containing Isaiah's vision of the Seven
Heavens, with a prologue and epilogue. The combination
may be dated c. a.d. 100.
3. Assumption of Moses. — Extant in Latin version of
Greek version of Aramaic or Hebrew (Charles) original,
written by a Zealot or Pharisee, c. a.d. 0-50. Only part is
extant, viz., an Apocalypse of the history from the time of
Moses to the Last Days, when Jehovah shall manifest Him
self to restore the theocracy. The lost portion, only known
from the Fathers, contained an account of the end of Moses,
and was Jude's x authority for the dispute over the body of
Moses. 4. Baruch, Book of. — Extant in LXX. and dependent
versions. A combination of at least two independent works,
(a) i.-iii. 8, Confession of the sins which led to the Captivity,
with historical introduction, apparently dependent on Daniel
ix., or vice versd, written in Hebrew, assigned to various dates
from b.c 320 to a.d. 70. (b) iii. 9-v., Praise of Wisdom, and
Consolations for the Exiles, written in Greek after a.d. 70.
Marshall, Hastings' Bible Dictionary, holds that iii. 9-iv. 4, the Praise
of Wisdom, was written in Aramaic.
5. Daniel, the Song of the Three Children, Bel and the
Dragon, Susanna. — The Greek Daniel contains these three
and other additions. Bel and the Dragon, and Susanna in
many MSS. and editions of the LXX. are given separately.
The Dragon story of the former, and the Song exist in
Aramaic, otherwise these three additions are only found in
Greek, in which language they were probably composed, the
Aramaic being not the original but a translation. In LXX.,
Bel and the Dragon bears the title, " From the prophecy of
Ambakoum (Habakkuk), Son of Jesus, of the tribe of Levi."
These additions may be dated between b.c 160 and the
Christian Era.
6. Ecclesiasticus or Wisdom of Jesus ben Sirach. — Extant,
as a whole, in LXX. and allied versions, of a Hebrew original,
1 Verse 9.

270 BIBLICAL INTRODUCTION
of which xxxix. 15-xlix. 11, and other portions, have been
recently discovered. Composed about b.c 180 by Jesus ben
Sirach, and translated into Greek by his grandson about
b.c 130. A second and larger Book of Proverbs.
7. Enoch, Book of. — Extant entire in Ethiopic version ; in
part, in Greek version of Hebrew or Aramaic original. Con
sists of five books, which may be five separate works, the
second is certainly by a different hand from the rest. The
second book, a Vision of Heaven and Hell, and of the
Judgment by the Messiah, the Son of Man, variously dated
from b.c 95 to a.d. 70. 1 The rest contains the Fall of the
Angels, Enoch's Journeys through earth and heaven, a
Treatise on Astronomy, two Visions of the Flood, and two
Apocalypses of the history from Adam to the establishment
of Messiah's kingdom, and is variously dated from b.c 160
to b.c. 105. It is quoted as Scripture in Jude 14 f. (?) and
Barnabas iv. 3, xvi. 5.
8. Enoch, Book of the Secrets of. — Extant in a Slavonic
version, made known to Western Europe for the first time
in 1896, by the translation of W. R. Morfill, edited with
Introduction and Notes by R. H. Charles. According to
Mr. Charles, this book was written in Egypt, in Greek,
a.d. 1-50, but embodies fragments of an older Hebrew
work. It contains Enoch's journey through the Seven
Heavens ; God's description to Enoch of the Creation, the
Fall of the Angels, the Fall of Adam ; Enoch's Translation,
and his temporary return to instruct his sons. In spite of its
similarity to the Book of Enoch, it is a distinct work.
9. I. Esdras (E. V. and LXX?) or III. Esdras ( Vulg., Sixth
Article, and early English Bibles) ; often the Greek Esdras. —
A Greek edition of Ezra (order of sections altered), ii.
Chronicles xxxv. f. (Josiah-Zedekiah), Nehemiah vii. 73-
viii. 13 (Promulgation of the Law), with an original section,
iii. i-v. 6, describing Zerubbabel's victory in a contest of wit
1 Konig, Cornill, etc. regard this section as a Christian document.
' Esdras A, but in Lagarde, Luc. Text, Esdras B.

JOSEPHUS 271
before Darius, and its reward in the Return of the Jews.
Either compiled from the Greek of the LXX., or by a
Greek writer who translated freely from the Hebrew;
iii. i-v. 6, in any case, composed in Greek. Used by
Josephus, and may be dated b.c 170-100.
10. II. Esdras (Eng. Apoc), or IV. Esdras (Vulg.).1 —
Extant in Latin, Syriae, Ethiopic, Armenian, and Arabic
versions of a Greek original. The original work, iii.— xiv.,
is closely connected with the Apocalypse of Baruch, and
was perhaps known as the Apocalypse of Ezra ; it was
written by a Palestinian Jew, c. a.d. 81-96, and contains
discourses and visions given to Ezra by an angel, and an
account of the rewriting of the O.T. by Ezra. Some of
the visions are symbolic apocalyptic statements of history,
in the manner of Daniel and Revelation. Chapters i. f,
xv. f. are much later additions of little interest.
n. Esther. — The Greek Esther contains a speech and
prayer of Mordecai, two letters of Artaxerxes to the
provinces, a prayer of Esther and other additions, not
found in the Hebrew, which were composed in Greek,
c. b.c 300-100.
12. Jeremiah, Letter of. — In many MSS. of LXX., and
in Vulg. and English Apocrypha given as Baruch vi. A
polemic against idolatry, purporting to be a letter from
Jeremiah to the exiles at Babylon, cf. Jeremiah xxix. 10,
written in Greek, c. b.c 200 — Christian Era.
13. Josephus. — Born a.d. 37, died c. 103, a Jewish priest,
who commanded the forces in Galilee during the revolt, but
was taken prisoner by the Romans, and became a protege
of Titus. Besides an autobiography, works On the Jewish
War, and Against Apion, he wrote, in a.d. 95, the Antiquities,
a history of the Jews from the Creation to the outbreak of
1 In some Latin MSS., ii. Esdr. i. f. =ii. Esdras, ii. Esdras iii.-
xiv. =iv. Esdras, ii. Esdras xv. f. = v. Esdras. Thackeray, art.
"II. Esdras," Hastings' Bible Dictionary.

272 BIBLICAL INTRODUCTION
the Jewish War. The older history is almost entirely derived
from the O.T., and adds little or nothing that is trustworthy.
His accounts of the Jews and their literature were intended
to make as favourable an impression as possible upon Gentile
readers. He wrote in Greek, also in Aramaic, which he trans
lated into Greek.
14. Jubilees, Book of, or Leptogenesis, "Little Genesis,"
etc. — Extant in an Ethiopic version of a Greek version of a
Hebrew or Aramaic original ; fragments of a Latin version also
exist. Written towards the beginning of the first century a.d.
A Midrash x on Genesis i.-Exodus xiv., arranged according to
Jubilees, or periods of 49 years.2 The history purports to have
been revealed to Moses by an angel during his stay in the Mount.
15. Judith, Book of. — Extant in the LXX., etc. of a
Hebrew or Aramaic original, composed by a Palestinian
Jew, c. b.c. 150-100. Narrates how Judith delivered the
Jews who had returned from the Exile, by cutting off the
head of Holofernes, the general of an invading army sent
by Nebuchadnezzar, King of Assyria.
16. I. Maccabees. — Extant in the LXX., etc. of a Hebrew
original, composed by a Palestinian Jew, c. b.c 100-70.
A most valuable history of the Maccabees from the accession
of Antiochus Epiphanes, 175, to the murder of Simon, 135.
1 7. II. Maccabees. — A Greek work, preserved in the LXX.,
variously dated from b.c 125 to a.d. 70. There are two
introductory letters, containing legends about Jeremiah, etc. ;
but the bulk of the book from ii. 18 is an abridgement of an
earlier work by Jason of Cyrene, c. b.c 150. The work is a
history of the Jews from the accession of Seleucus IV., 187,
to the death of Nicanor, 161. It is very inferior as history
to i. Maccabees.
18. III. Maccabees. — A Greek work, by an Egyptian Jew,
preserved in the LXX., variously dated from b.c. ioo-a.d. 100.
1 Edition supplemented by illustrative narratives, etc.
3 Not 50 as in the Pentateuch.

SIBYLLINE POEMS 273
A legend of the miraculous deliverance of the Temple, and
also of Jewish captives at Alexandria, from Ptolemy IV, b.c
222-204. Its only connection with the Maccabees is the
name and its position in the LXX.
19. IV. Maccabees. — A Greek work, preserved in the
LXX., composed c. a.d. 30-70. Uses an incident from ii.
Maccabees as the text of a sermon on the Supremacy of
Reason, at one time wrongly ascribed to Josephus.
20. Manasseh, Prayer of. — A Greek work, contained in
some MSS. of the LXX., variously dated from b.c 200 to the
beginning of the Christian Era or later. Purports to be the
prayer mentioned II. Chronicles xxxiii. 18.
21. Philo. — Born c. b.c 20, died after a.d. 40. A Jewish
philosopher of Alexandria, who sought to combine and
harmonise the teaching of the Pentateuch with Greek philo
sophy. He wrote in Greek a long series of works which
constitute an allegorising commentary on the Pentateuch,
and also various philosophical treatises. Some of them are
only extant in Latin translations.
22. Psalms of Solomon. — Eighteen poems, composed in
Hebrew or Aramaic, by a Palestinian Jew, partly after
Pompey's capture of Jerusalem in b.c 63, partly after his
death in b.c 48 1 ; preserved in a Greek translation in some
MSS. of the LXX., but not included in the Vulgate or the
English Apocrypha. The poems are partly general and
didactic, but chiefly consist of praise, prayer, and lamenta
tion concerning contemporary events, and include a glowing
description, xvii., of the reign of Messiah.
23. Sibylline Poems. — Numerous poems, purporting to be
Sibylline oracles, circulated in the Roman empire; many of
these were composed by Jews and Christians, in order to
propagate their own doctrines under the authority of the
1 Both events are referred to in these psalms in terms which imply that
they were recent. The language is symbolic, and gives no names, but the
reference to Pompey's death is quite clear.

274 BIBLICAL INTRODUCTION
ancient Sibyl. The extant twelve books, in Greek, are a
medley of Jewish and Christian fragments of various dates,
in which are embedded some relics of older Gentile poems.
The Jewish portions— iii. 97-820, written under Ptolemy VII.,
c. b.c 140, iii. 36-92, c. b.c 40, iv. (probably Jewish), c. a.d.
80, v. (in part), first century a.d., xi.-xiv., much later — contain
polemics against polytheism and apocalyptic visions of history,
the Day of Judgment, and the world-wide dominion of Israel
and the Messiah.
24. Testament of the Twelve Patriarchs. — A Greek work,
composed by a Jewish Christian, c. a.d. 70-130, perhaps on
the basis of an older Jewish work in Hebrew. It purports to
be the last words of the twelve sons of Jacob. Each gives
Midrashic1 history of himself, a discourse on some moral
topic, such as Envy or Simplicity, and apocalyptic history
and prophecy.
25. Tobit, Book of. — A Greek work, composed, probably
in Assyria, between b.c 200-20. The Hebrew and Aramaic
editions are probably versions of the Greek. A religious
romance, inculcating obedience to the Law, and the burial
of the dead. The scene is laid in Assyria under Sennacherib
and his predecessor and successor. Tobit is an Israelite
captive. The archangel Raphael heals Tobit's blindness,
and obtains for his son Tobias the hand of Sarah, daughter
of Raguel, in spite of the demon Asmodeus. It contains a
brief apocalyptic poem put into the mouth of Tobit.
26. Wisdom of Solomon. — A Greek work, composed in the
first century B.C. by an Alexandrian Jew, preserved in the
LXX. An essay on Wisdom as the divine agent in creation and
in the providential government of the world, as illustrated by
the history of Israel, and in the spiritual discipline of man.
As combining O.T. teaching with that of Greek philosophy,
it is closely allied to Philo's works, and has sometimes been
ascribed to that philosopher, but wrongly.
1 See p. 272 n.

THE NEW TESTAMENT

INTRODUCTORY
The New Testament — literally the new Covenant, as that
part of the Bible which deals with the covenant predicted by
Jeremiah,1 and introduced and confirmed by Jesus Christ2 —
contains the especially Christian scriptures, although, from the
first, Christianity has claimed the Jewish scriptures, and al
though the N.T. writers repeatedly appeal to them as inspired
authorities, and for the proofs they afford of the Christian
teachings. The contents of the N.T. consist of records of
the life, death, and resurrection of Jesus Christ; a historical
account of the early churches and of the missionary work of
some of their leaders ; a number of letters to churches and
individual persons, treating of the profoundest question of
religious truth, but also devoting much attention to practical
duties and Church administration, and abounding in expres
sions of affectionate interest; and lastly, standing quite by
itself, the Apocalypse, with its mysteries of strange symbolism.
It was only in course of time that all these books were
united in one volume. First we meet with a collection of
the gospels, called " The Gospel," then with St. Paul's epistles,
called "The Apostle." By degrees the other books were added.
Two influences in particular helped to settle the canon of
the N.T. The first was the use of certain books in public
worship, since it was necessary to determine which books were
to be so employed. The second was the call to refute erro
neous opinions by appeal to primitive authority. In early
1 Jer. xxxi. 31 ff.
1 Mark xiv. 24 ; Heb. vii. 22 ; viii. 6 ff,
275

276 BIBLICAL INTRODUCTION
times people of peculiar views made their own selections.
Thus the extreme Paulinists following Marcion only used
eleven books — a mutilated edition of Luke and ten of St.
Paul's Epistles.1 On the other hand, some of the Jewish
Christians rejected the Pauline Epistles and Acts, but received
the " Gospel according to the Hebrews."
Meanwhile the main body of Christians was feeling its way
towards the canon we now possess, guided by two principles —
apostolic authorship, and traditional acceptance in the oldest
and principal Churches.
Harnack holds that this canon was deliberately formed between a.d. 150
and 170, because there is no sign of it in Justin Martyr at the earlier date,
while a little after the later date Irenseus is found appealing to most of
our N.T. books as authorities, and quoting them freely on the evident
assumption that they are familiar to his readers. Dr. Sanday considers
that this hypothesis involves too sudden a movement for Irenaeus to be
making his appeals in full assurance that they will be understood and
admitted. History knows of no such formal settlement of the canon.
By the end of the second century most of our N.T. books
were recognised and appealed to as authorities, though the
Western Churches were slow to accept Hebrews and the
Catholic Epistles (except 1 John and Jude, of which they show
no doubts), and the Eastern Churches were slow to accept
Revelation and some of the Catholic Epistles.
By the end of the third century even these books on the
margin of the canon were generally accepted. After this we
come to the direct testimony of the MSS., the oldest of which
date from the fourth century.
1 Omitting 1 and 2 Timothy, Titus, and Hebrews — ascribed by many
to the apostle.

CHAPTER I.
THE SYNOPTIC GOSPELS

I. The Gospels.
2. Matthew.

3. Mark.
4. Luke.

1. The Gospels.
a. The Word Gospel. — The word gospel, meaning "glad
tidings,"1 was not used as the title of the four books to
which it is attached in our N.T. when those books were
written. In early times it was confined to the message
of redemption in Jesus Christ which was preached by our
Lord Himself and His disciples.2 But inasmuch as the
message is really presented most fully and clearly in the
story of the life of Christ, when that story was written out
it came to be regarded as a narrative of the gospel. Still,
as there could be but one gospel in the primary sense of
the word, the several narratives would not be regarded as
so many gospels, but only as so many accounts of the gospel.
Therefore when the word was first attached to them it
retained its reference to the glad tidings which had been
preached, and meant that the one gospel was set forth in
each of these books. For this reason we read of "the
gospel of God," 8 with reference to its source — God revealing
the good news, and "the gospel of Christ"4 with reference
to its contents — the gospel telling about Christ, but never
of the gospel of Matthew, the gospel of Mark. The men
1 'Evary&io?.
2 This must be the case in Mark i. 1, the word gospel there not
describing the book, but the message of good news, as the added phrase
" of Jesus Christ " shows.
3 Rom. xv. 16. 4 i. Cor. ix. 12.
277

278 BIBLICAL INTRODUCTION
to whom the books were ascribed had to be connected with
them in some other way. This seems to be the explanation
of the fact that the titles appear as " the gospel according to
Matthew," " the gospel according to Mark," etc.,1 i.e., Matthew's
version of the gospel, Mark's version, etc. The books only
came to be known as gospels in the second century.
As far as it can be traced the word "gospel" is first given
to a written account of the life of Christ in the time of
Marcion (c. a.d. 140). 2 Justin Martyr, writing to the Roman
Senate, the members of which knew nothing of the Christian
books, refers to the gospels as "the Memoirs of the
Apostles";3 but he notes that they are "called gospels."4
b. The Four Gospels. — Many attempts were made to set
forth the story of Christ even before our Third Gospel
was written ; 6 and several more were made during the
next half century. Harnack has constructed a list of
twenty gospels, concerning which some information has
been preserved, while many others have fallen out of notice.
Harnack's list is as follows : —
1-4. The canonical gospels.
5. The gospel according to the Hebrews.
6. The gospel of the Twelve Apostles.
7. The Peter gospel.
8. The Egyptian gospel.
9. The Matthias gospel.
10. The Philip gospel.
1 1. The Thomas gospel.
12. The Protevangelium of James.
13. The Acts of Pilate (gospel of Nicodemus).
14. Basilides' gospel.
15. Valentinus' gospel.
16. Marcion's gospel.
17. The gospel of Eve.
18. The gospel of Judas.
19. The writing, Tivva. Mapfas (also the " Great and little questions of
Mary").
20. The gospel TeXeicicrews.6
1 Kara Ma88aiot>, etc.
2 Tertullian, Adv. Marcion, iv. 2.
3 Ta atrop.i'ri/xoiiebTa tOiv &to<tt6\wv.
4 a KaXeirai etiayytMa, Apol. i. 66.
5 See Luke i. I.
6 Chronologic, pp. 589-651.

THE GOSPELS 279
Some few of these books may have been independent
of the N.T. gospels; but, as far as can be discovered,
most of them were late apocryphal works, either directly
based on the canonical gospels, or relying on legends and
imaginative materials of a manifestly unhistorical character.
The gospel according to the Hebrews is the only one that
was at all generally received and relied upon in the main
body of the Church in addition to our four gospels. The
question then arises, how was it that these four were selected
for especial honour, and they alone admitted into the canon
when it was formed ? The answer is that they were regarded
as of apostolic authority, two of them being ascribed to
apostles (Matthew and John), and two to companions of
apostles (Mark the companion of Peter, Luke the companion
of Paul). Other gospels claimed apostolic authority, but the
claim was rejected as unauthentic. Then several of the
gospels early put into circulation were tainted with Jewish
or gnostic views, and only received among the separated
bodies in which those views were cherished, their "heresy"
condemning them in the eyes of Catholics. Marcion's gospel
was a mutilation of our Luke, especially adapted to the views
of the Marcionites. When this was not the case, the triviality,
the absurdity, the manifestly legendary character of other
gospel writings were signs of their untrustworthiness as
historical records. Undoubtedly the sobriety and truthful
ness of our gospels, their own inherent worth, in addition
to the apostolic traditions, commended them to use in the
churches above their rivals. It is a noteworthy fact that
nearly all the references to sayings and doings of our Lord
in the writings of the early Fathers can be traced to our
N.T. gospels, though often not in verbal agreement with
them. c. Early Testimony to the Gospels. — Eusebius when sorting
out the universally received books of the canon, in distinction
from those which some have questioned, writes : "And here
among the first must be placed the holy quaternion of the
gospels." (H.E., iii. 25.) The gospel according to the Hebrews

280 BIBLICAL INTRODUCTION
he places among the disputed books. He only mentions the
apocryphal gospels to reject them.
Eusebius is especially important for the early authorities— now lost to
us — which he cites in witness of N.T. books. But here an important
question has been raised by the author of Supernatural Religion. Are
we to infer that when Eusebius does not give us the testimony of a
certain author to any book of the N.T., that author must have known
nothing about it ? The author of Supernatural Religion answered in the
affirmative, and argued accordingly from ' ' the silence of Eusebius " that
the four gospels were not all known in the first half of the second century,
because Eusebius does not give the witness of writers of that period. But
Bishop Lightfoot replied with crushing effect, showing the utter fallacious
ness ofthis style of reasoning. It implies: (i) that if Eusebius does
not cite a writer's testimony, that writer did not leave any testimony ;
and (2) that if the writer did not quote a N.T. book, he must have
been ignorant of that book. Thus it is argued that Hegesippus did not
know our gospels because Eusebius does not quote any testimony to
them from that author, whom, however, he quotes for other purposes,
and therefore proves himself to know ; that Papias did not know Luke
or John because Eusebius only quotes what he says about Matthew
and Mark, etc. Now the argument turns entirely on the purpose of
Eusebius. In describing this he discriminates, saying of the disputed
books that he will indicate what church writers have "made use of"
them, while he only promises to give, concerning the undisputed, any
information that has been "made about them,"1 i.e., any historical
statements or anecdotes about them. Thus, for example, Clement R.
definitely names our 1 Corinthians ; Justin Martyr cites from our gospels
under the name, "Memoirs of the Apostles"; Theophilus of Antioch is
the first writer to quote the gospel according to St. John by name ; Irenaeus
cites Acts as Luke's, and cites all St. Paul's epistles except Philemon, yet
Eusebius reproduces none of these testimonies, and for the simple reason
that it did not come within his announced plan to do so. The books
referred to were not disputed, and the references gave no specific in
formation about them. So in the case of Papias he only cites certain
statements about two gospel writings ; he does not say what gospels
Papias used, for the gospels were undisputed, and therefore he only
collected anecdotes and historical statements about them. But in the
case of disputed books Eusebius follows a different course, collecting
all the evidence for the use of them that he can lay hands on. The
author of Supernatural Religion replied to Dr. Lightfoot to the effect
that the omissions in Eusebius referred to above might be due to over
sight on his part. That is most improbable, for Eusebius was scholarly
and thorough ; nobody who knew Irenaeus's writings — and Eusebius
certainly knew them— could fail to observe that Father's many quotations
from St. Paul's epistles. Yet Eusebius never appeals to the testimony
of them. This could not be owing to oversight. But further, if Eusebius
had been so careless with the testimony of Irenaeus to St. Paul, he might
have been equally careless in the case of testimony of Papias to Luke
1 Wyes tSiv Kara xP^>"Ovs eKKkr}a-ia.o-Ti.KCjv avyypa<piuv owolais KixprivraA
Tlie a.vTLkeyop.t'vuv, tIvo. re Trepl rQsv evSiaQ-qKiiv Kal bp.o\oyoviiiv(jiv
ypa<t>Civ koX iaa. irepl tCiv p.r) tolovtuiv airrots etprjTat. — HE., iii. 3.

THE GOSPELS 281
or John. Thus the argument from " the silence of Eusebius " falls to
the ground.
Clement of Alexandria, Origen, and Tertullian ' were familiar
with our four gospels, frequently quoting and commenting on
all of them. Irenaeus (a.d. 180) not only knows and quotes
the four gospels, but introduces quaint, fantastic arguments to
prove that they must be just four, no more and no less.2 The
very absurdity of his reasoning testifies to the well-established
position attained in his day by the four to the exclusion of all
others. Irenaeus's bishop was Pothinus, who lived to the age
of 90, and Irenaeus had known Polycarp in Asia Minor.
Here are links of connection with the past that go back
beyond the beginning of the second century. Thus Irenaeus's
testimony to the gospels is exceptionally significant. The
Muratorian Fragment testifies directly to Luke and John,
and indirectly to the other two gospels, as it begins with
words that evidently refer to Mark,3 and introduces Luke as
"the third gospel." The gospels are found in the Peshitto and
other early Syriae versions probably of the second century.
Then the recently recovered Diatessaron of Tatian comes
in to show that all four gospels were acknowledged and their
position well enough established for this harmony to be made
from them for use in public worship, probably at Edessa,
during the second century.
The Diatessaron.4 — The finding of this book is one of the most im-
1 Tertullian even refers to a Latin version known to himself and his
readers. This carries us back beyond his time.
2 "It is not possible that the gospels can be either more or fewer in
number than they are. For since there are four zones of the world in
which we live, and four principal winds, while the church is scattered
throughout all the world, and the pillar and ground of the church is the
gospel and the spirit of life, it is fitting that she should have four pillars,
breathing out immortality on every side, and vivifying men afresh." Adv.
Haer., iii. 9, 8.
3 "Quibus tamen interfuit et ita posuit," a remark coming just before the
mention of St. Luke's gospel, that seems clearly to point to St. Peter as one
who had taken part in the events recorded, and so to the gospel commonly
held to be derived from his teaching.
4 The word Diatessaron may be taken in its literal translation, "by
means of four, " as meaning that which is constructed out of four documents ;
but more probably it just means "a Harmony," being derived from the
idea of the four parts in music.

282 BIBLICAL INTRODUCTION
portant literary discoveries of the century. It was well known that Tatian
the Assyrian, a disciple of Justin Martyr, had written a Harmony of the
gospels — either in Greek or Syriae, we do not know which — for several
allusions to it were found in ecclesiastical writers, a but the work itself had
been lost sight of till it was brought to light in our own day. Dionysius-
Bar-Salibi (ob. 1207) mentions that Ephraem the Syrian, a deacon of
Edessa, wrote a commentary on Tatian's Diatessaron. An Armenian
version of that commentary was published by the monks of St. Lazzaro, near
Venice, out of which Zahn endeavoured to reconstruct the original text.
Meanwhile an Arabic MS. of the Diatessaron itself was lying unnoticed
in the Vatican library. The publication of Zahn's work led Agostino
Ciasca, one of the guild of writers at the Vatican, to turn his attention to
the subject. From the Visitor Apostolic of the Catholic Copts he obtained
another Arabic MS., and this he published in the year 1888, accompanied
with a Latin translation. The Arabic has since been translated into
English.2 The author of Supernatural Religion had maintained that the
Diatessaron was too ancient to have been constructed out of our gospels ;
but now we have it before us we see that most certainly this was the case.
It begins with the prologue from John, and as it proceeds with the narra
tive it pieces together extracts from each of the four gospels. It is to be
observed that it omits our Lord's genealogies, which we have in Matthew
and Luke, probably from a gnostic objection to allow any human relation
ship.3 Thus before the end of the second century we see our
gospels accepted in Rome (the Muratorian Fragment), in Gaul,
and also in Asia Minor (Irenaeus), in Africa (Tertullian
and the Old Latin version), in Egypt (Clement), in Syria
(Tatian, the Diatessaron, and the Syriae versions). Still more
ancient testimony is forthcoming, though it becomes less
distinct as we push the inquiry further back to times of
comparative obscurity. There is good reason to believe that
Justin Martyr used the gospels we have in our N.T. under the
title of Memoirs of the Apostles. Writing to the Roman
Senate, which knew nothing of the Christian books, and re
porting a discussion with a Jew, he naturally uses a descriptive
periphrasis, but, as we have seen, he states that they were
called gospels. Nearly all the many sayings and incidents
1 The Doctrine of Addai, xxxv. 15-17 ; Eusebius, H.E., iv. 29,
Epiphanius, Haer., xlvi 1, Theodoret, Haer., i. 20, etc.
2 The Earliest Life of Christ, etc., by Rev. HAMLIN HlLL, whose
translation from the Latin was collated with the Arabic by Mr. G.
Buchanan Gray, of Mansfield College.
3 Harnack is of opinion not only that the Diatessaron presupposes
our gospels, but that it bears traces of having been based on a still earlier
harmony of them. — Chronologie, p. 435 (2).

THE GOSPELS 283
from the life and teaching of Christ which he mentions are to
be found in our gospels, and when he gives any that are not in
our gospels he does not attribute these to the Memoirs.
The following are Justin's statements not found in our gospels : — That
Jesus was born in a cave ; that the Magi came from Arabia ; that Herod
killed all the children in Bethlehem; that Jesus made ploughs and yokes;
that at His baptism a fire was kindled in the Jordan, and a voice then said,
" Thou art my son, this day have I begotten thee." :
Now it has been objected that Justin's quotations do not verbally
coincide with corresponding passages in our gospels. But then his quota
tions from the LXX. are equally loose, and there we know what authority
he is following. In the case of the O. T. he combines two or three passages
in a single paragraph, and he quotes the same passage twice with different
variations from the original on each occasion. 2 Evidently then he quotes
from memory, and without taking care to be verbally accurate. This
was the custom with citations made in the primitive ages before the N.T.
books had been reckoned of canonical rank, and while tradition was
still fresh enough to allow literature not to be regarded as of para
mount importance. Moreover, it is to be observed that the discovery of
the Diatessaron removes all question as to Justin's use of our gospels, for
since Tatian was a disciple of Justin's, it is inconceivable that he should
have worked on quite different gospels from those of his teacher, while
each held the gospels he used to be the books of primary importance.
Then Papias knew at least Mark and a Hebrew Matthew.3
The evidence of the Apostolic Fathers is more difficult to
disentangle. None of them name the gospels or cite them
with verbal exactness. It has been suggested that "The
Shepherd of Hermas " abounds in references to the four
gospels,4 but the mystical imagery of that book is too obscure
for this to be maintained with assurance. In the " Epistle of
Barnabas" there are several passages that coincide more or less
closely with Matthew, and once the author uses the technical
expression for inspired Scripture "it is written" for a saying
that we have in Matthew : " As it is written, many are called,
1 This last statement is in the MS. D of Luke. Possibly Justin had a
similar text. The other statements may have come down in tradition ; or
they may have been found in some other gospel, and if so, most likely in
the gospel according to the Hebrews.
2 It has been pointed out that some of his O.T. quotations are more
accurate. These are from the Psalms, the exact words of which are better
known owing to the use of them in public worship.
3 Eusebius, H.E., iii. 39. To be considered later with reference to
each of these gospels.
4 TAYLOR, The Witness of Hermas to the Gospels.

284 BIBLICAL INTRODUCTION
but few are chosen." (Barnabas iv. 14, cf. Matthew xxii. 14.)
Clement R. gives several of our Lord's sayings which come
very near to Matthew — nearer than to Luke, but not verbally
coinciding. Resch has suggested that he had one of the
sources of our gospels, while Dr. Sanday inclines to regard
the quotations as drawn from some notes for catechumens,
based on our gospels or on Matthew's collection of the sayings
of Christ.
Clement writes : ' ' Most of all remembering the words of the Lord
Jesus which He spake, teaching forbearance and longsuffering : for thus
He spake ; Have mercy, that ye may receive mercy : forgive, that it may
be forgiven to you. As ye do, so shall it be done to you. As ye give, so
shall it be given unto you. As ye judge, so shall ye be judged. As ye
shew kindness, so shall kindness be shewed unto you. With what measure
ye mete, it shall be measured withal to you." (Clement R., 1 Corinthians
xiii.) It is evident that this is not an exact quotation from Matthew,
though it comes nearest to that gospel. In particular it is to be observed
that while Clement gives us the two sayings of Matthew vii. 1, "Judge
not, that ye be not judged : and with what measure ye mete, it shall be
measured unto you," he has the first in a different form : "As ye judge,
so shall ye be judged," and he inserts another saying between this and the
second one in Matthew, viz., "As ye shew kindness, so shall kindness be
shewed unto you." The form of the concluding sayings seems to echo the
form in St. Luke's version (vi. 36-38). We know that Clement quotes loosely
from memory, because this is his habit with the O.T.1 Possibly, therefore,
he does so here with Matthew, and perhaps also Luke. But we cannot
cite him with assurance as a witness to those gospels, as it is quite possible
that he is using some other document containing the sayings of Christ.
The case of the Didache is similar. Five times the author
quotes sayings of Christ as given " in the gospel," but in his
primitive age that phrase was not used for any book, and it
must mean the preaching of the glad tidings. These sayings
can all be traced to Matthew and Luke. 2
The Lord's prayer is given almost verbally as in Matthew 3
(Didache viii. 2).
The saying, "Give not that which is holy unto the dogs"
1 e.g., compare Clement, 1 Cor. iii. 1 with Deut. xxxii. 15 ; 1 Cor. viii. 2
with Ezekiel xxxiii. 11. 1 Cor. xxix. 2, 3 seems to be a combination of
Numb, xviii. 27, Deut. iv. 34, and 2 Chron. xxxi. 14.
1 Harnack is decidedly of opinion that the author used both Matt.
and Luke. Chronologic, p. 435.
3 The only variations are ev rip oipavQ for ev tois obpavois, iXBirw for
iXSira, &cf>lep,ev for &<t>r)Kap.ev, rr\v d^eiXrjv for to 6<f>eCKr)iMTa, and in the
doxology, which is later than the original text of Matthew.

MATTHEW 285
(Didache ix. 5) agrees verbally with Matthew vii. 6. Still
these are utterances of Christ that might well be kept in their
exact form in other lists of Logia. There is one saying which
is not to be found in any of our gospels, viz., " It hath been
also said concerning this matter, Let thine alms drop like
sweat into thy hands, so long as thou knowest not to whom
thou givest." (Didache i. 6.) On the whole we may conclude
that these allusions to sayings of Christ in the Apostolic Fathers
render it highly probable that Matthew, and also, though less
assuredly, Luke, were used by them, and that even if that were
not the case, the collections of sayings quoted are seen to be
so near to our gospels as to be themselves partial confirma
tions of the historicity of those documents.
2. Matthew.
a. The Apostle Matthew. — This apostle, also known as
Levi the son of Alphaeus,1 was the collector of customs
at Capernaum, whom Jesus called as he sat at his work by
the entrance to the city, and who made a feast in honour of
our Lord, to which he invited his fellow tax-collectors in the
neighbourhood. Forsaking his lucrative office to follow
Christ, he became one of the Twelve, but he did not
emerge into sufficient distinctive activity during our Lord's
lifetime to have any further doings of his noted down in
the gospels. According to a late tradition he preached for
fifteen years in Judsea, and then ministered in Parthia or
Ethiopia.2 The interesting part of this tradition is the
connection of his name with a ministry to the Jews. The
early references to his literary work point in that direction.
b. St. Matthew's Hebrew Work. — It is repeatedly asserted by
early Church writers that Matthew wrote his gospel in Hebrew.
But the earliest reference to his work — that of Papias —
describes it as Logia, a word which seems to indicate sacred
sayings, "oracles," rather than historical narratives. That
such a work may have contained connecting historical matter
1 Compare Mark ii. 14 and Luke v. 27 with Matt. ix. 9.
2 See Eusebius, H.E., iii. 24; Socrates, H.E., i. 19.

286 BIBLICAL INTRODUCTION
is very probable, and there is reason to believe that this was
the case with St. Matthew's book. Still the reference to the
Hebrew language and the use of the title Logia furnish two
reasons for supposing that Papias cannot be referring to our
gospel, and that we have here some earlier work consisting
chiefly of sayings of Christ.1
Papias writes : " Matthew then composed the Logia in the Hebrew
tongue, and every one translated them as he was able."2 His statement
of the translating in the past tense — " every one translated" — seems to
suggest that this troublesome process with its varying results was no
longer necessary, because the work was now rendered in Greek.
Irenaeus writes : " Matthew among the Hebrews published a gospel
in their own language." (Adv. Haer., iii. I.) Origen says in his account
of the gospels : " The first was written by Matthew, once a publican,
afterwards an apostle of the Lord, and delivered to the Jewish believers
composed in the Hebrew language."3 (Eusebius, HE., vi. 25.) Eusebius
himself tells us that " Matthew having first preached to the Hebrews,
when he was about to go to other people, delivered to them in their own
language the gospel according to him." (HE., iii. 24.) Lastly we have
Jerome writing : " Matthew, also called Levi, who from being a publican
became an apostle, first wrote a gospel of Christ in Judtea and in Hebrew
letters and words (Uteris verbisque) for the benefit of those of the circum
cision who believed. Who afterwards translated it into Greek is not quite
certain." (De Vir. III., 3.) He adds that he himself had seen it, and that
the Nazarenes who had a copy of the original in the library of Pamphilus
at Caesarea allowed him to transcribe it. He had previously stated that
when at Bercea he had translated the gospel according to the Hebrews
which the Nazarenes and Ebionites used into Greek and Latin. Further,
both Eusebius and Jerome state that Pantaenus found in India the gospel of
Matthew which was written in India, and Jerome adds that Pantoenus
brought it to Alexandria.
The case is very complicated ; but the following facts seem
to come out of it : (1) It is impossible to resist the wide-
1 Dr. Lightfoot urged that the word Logia could be used for the gospel,
because it stands for the O.T. Scriptures. But when it is so used, it can
best be understood as indicating the Divine utterances in the Law or
through the Prophets, rather than the very books of the O.T. (See
Acts vii. 38; Rom. iii. 2.) So it could be applied to inspired Chris
tian teaching in Heb. v. 12, and even to the utterances of Christian
prophets in i. Peter iv. II. It is most improbable that so early as
Papias it would be applied to a historical record. Greek writers use the
word for the Pagan and Sibylline oracles. In the LXX. it is the trans
lation of TKT1, the High Priest's breastplate, with a reference to its use in
divination. 2 Mot^oios i&v 08c "EppalSt. didKiicrip to. \oyia avveyp&ij/aTo. 'Hpp.t)vevce
S'airrd. ws r)v Svvo.tos ^/cacTos. — Eusebius, H.E., iii. 39.
3 ypa/i/MHriv "Efipa'iKoU uvvTeTa,yp.(vov.

MATTHEW 287
spread and quite uncontradicted statements that Matthew
wrote in Hebrew — this may be the sacred language, or the
writers may mean the current language of Palestine, Aramaic.
(2) Most of these writers appear to identify Matthew's work
with the original of our Matthew. (3) None of them assert
that they saw the Hebrew gospel to which they refer except
Jerome, and he adds that he translated it into Greek and
Latin. But this implies that it could not have been the
original of our Matthew, since the Greek Matthew and its
Latin versions were already familiar to Jerome. Moreover,
extracts from the gospel according to the Hebrews have
been preserved, and these are manifestly not taken from
our Matthew ; J most of them have a late and apocryphal
character. It looks as though there were a double confusion
here. First Papias' statement is assumed to apply to our
Matthew. Then the well-known gospel according to the
Hebrews is also assumed to be the Logia to which Papias
referred. Its late apocryphal character, however, proves that
this cannot be the case. In point of fact we have three
works : (1) Papias' Logia, which is St. Matthew's real Hebrew
work ; (2) our Greek Matthew ; (3) the gospel according to
the Hebrews, probably founded on one or both of these.
This last was the book which Jerome saw and translated, and
which came in course of time to be mistaken for St. Matthew's
Logia, though it was a more recent work.
c. Authorship and Composition. — Now the question arises,
what is the relation of the first two of these works to one
another ? Is our Matthew simply a translation of the Logia
to which Papias referred? That appears to have been
assumed in the early Church ; but it cannot be the case.
For one thing, a complete gospel, with its account of the
birth, life, death, and resurrection of Christ, would scarcely
have such a title. But the conclusive objection is that the
work is manifestly not a translation from the Hebrew, but
a work originally composed in Greek. The style and con-
1 See Resch. Agrapha, pp. 322-342.

288 BIBLICAL INTRODUCTION
struction demand that verdict. In particular, quotations from
the O.T. are taken from the LXX.
This is not the case universally. Those quotations which Matthew has
in common with one or both of the other synoptics are taken from the
LXX. ; but those which are found only in Matthew appear to be translated
direct from the Hebrew, a fact which points to a literary connection
between the gospels, to be considered in the next chapter. But all the
proofs of that connection, which is in Greek, indicate that our Matthew is
not a translation from Hebrew, especially if, as will appear later, Matthew
is in part founded on Mark, certainly from the first a Greek book.
On the other hand, the large amount of space devoted to
the teachings of Jesus in Matthew shows that this subject
was especially important in the estimation of the author.
The probability is that the source from which he drew his
information concerning it was no other than the Logia. If
our Matthew was largely dependent on that work, absorbing
perhaps the greater part of it, this gospel would naturally
come to be closely associated with St. Matthew's Hebrew com
pilation in the minds of its readers. It is possible to hold
that Matthew himself wrote the second book, in the Greek,
as well as the Hebrew Logia. But if we come to see in
our study of the synoptic problem that Mark was used as
the groundwork of the gospel, this hypothesis is not probable.
We cannot suppose that Matthew, an apostle and an eye
witness, would resort to Mark, whose information was derived
second-hand. Still St. Matthew's name came to be naturally
attached to the gospel, since it contains so much of his
writing in the reports of our Lord's discourses — its most im
portant contents.
d. Date and Place of Origin. — It has been argued that this
gospel was written subsequently to the destruction of Jeru
salem (a.d. 70) on the ground that it contains references to
that event (e.g., xxii. 7), and also predictions of the coming of
the Son of Man in the generation then living (x. 23, xvi. 28).
But these are all sayings of Christ, and the argument goes on
the assumption that our Lord could not have foreseen or fore
told the events predicted in them. Now later versions of
Christ's teaching may indicate a consciousness of subsequent
events on the part of the writers and editors. But the Ian-

MATTHEW 289
guage in Matthew is quite general. A comparison with Luke
helps us here. (1) The eschatological discourse in Matthew
contains a veiled allusion to an approaching desecration de
scribed in words from Daniel as " the abomination of desola
tion," with a parenthetic remark, "Let him that readeth
understand."1 This points to a time before the event had
made the meaning clear, but when hints were already to be
seen, i.e., at the time of the outbreak of the war. That a
more distinct statement was natural after the siege of Jeru
salem is evident from St. Luke's version of the discourse.2
(2) The blending of the second coming of Christ with the
destruction of Jerusalem also points to the earlier time.
Accordingly we are led to a date a little before a.d. 70.
We have no indication of the place where the gospel was
written, except that it was not written in Palestine, which it
describes as " that land "3 (ix. 26, 31). The author is writing
for Greek -speaking Jews, who need the interpretation of
Hebrew words. Thus he interprets "Immanuel" (i. 23),
"Golgotha" (xxvii. 33), and the words of Christ's prayer
(xxvii. 46).
e. Contents.
(1) Preparation, i. — iv. 11.
i. 1-17, Genealogy from Abraham.
18-25, Announcement concerning Jesus to Joseph.
ii. 1-12, The birth of Jesus and the visit of the Magi.
13-23, Flight into Egypt, massacre of the Bethlehem
infants, and settlement in Nazareth.
iii. 1-12, The work of John the Baptist.
13-17, The baptism of Jesus.
iv. i-n, The temptation.
(2) The Beginning of the Ministry, iv. 12-25.
12-25, The commencement of our Lord's ministry in
Galilee ; the call of the four fishermen ; Jesus preaching and
healing. 1 This is just the same in Mark xiii. 14, showing that one gospel used
the other, or that they had a common source.
2 See Luke xxi. 20.
3 i) yfj iKelvr/. Weiss suggests Ephesus.
U

290 BIBLICAL INTRODUCTION
(3) The Sermon on the Mount, v. -vii.
v. 1, 2, Introductory description.
3-12, The Beatitudes.
13-16, The disciples as salt and light.
17-20, Jesus fulfiling the law, and expecting higher righteous
ness than that of the scribes and Pharisees.
21-48, The new teaching concerning murder and hatred,
adultery and lust, swearing, revenge.
vi. 1 -1 8, Against hypocrisy in almsgiving; in prayer —
with the opposite example of the Lord's Prayer; in
fasting. 19-34, Against the worldliness of Mammon worship, and
anxiety for material things ; Nature teaching trust in God ;
the call to seek first His kingdom.
vii. 1-5, Judging and censoriousness forbidden.
6, Discrimination to be observed in communicating the
treasures of the kingdom.
7-12, Encouragements to prayer.
13, 14, The two ways,
15-23, False prophets, and how to detect them.
24-29, The two houses ; and the effect of the discourse on
the people.
(4) The Ministry at Capernaum and by the Lake, viii. -xiv.
viii. 1-4, Cleansing of a leper.
5-13, Cure of the servant of a centurion at Capernaum.
14-17, Cure of Peter's wife's mother.
18-22, Two would-be disciples discouraged.
23-27, The storm calmed.
28-34, The two Gadarene demoniacs cured, and the herd
of swine perishing in the sea.
An instance of Matthew's doublets ; Mark has one demoniac (v. 2).
ix. 1-8, Cure of the sick of the palsy.
9, Call of Matthew from the place of toll.
10-13, Christ sitting at table with publicans and sinners.
14-17, Christ's disciples accused of not fasting; His de
fence of them.
18-26, The cure of the woman who touched Jesus' garment,

MATTHEW 291
and the raising to life of the daughter of the ruler of the
synagogue. 27-31, Two blind men receive their sight.
32-34, A dumb man cured ; Jesus accused of working in
league with the prince of the demons.
35-x. 1, Jesus' compassion for the multitude.
x. 2-xi. 1, The twelve apostles ; and the charge to them.
xi. 2-19, Opinions about John and Jesus.
20-24, Lament over Chorazin, Bethsaida, and Capernaum.
25-30, Thanksgiving for the revelation to babes, and invita
tion to the heavy-laden.
Note the peculiar Johanian style here.
xii. 1-8, The disciples plucking ears of corn on the Sabbath,
and Christ's defence of them.
9-21, Jesus curing the man with the withered hand on the
Sabbath day ; His mission of mercy predicted by Isaiah.
22-37, Cure of a blind and dumb demoniac; the charge of
Satanic influence ; blasphemy against the Spirit.
38-42, Seeking after a sign.
43-45, The house swept and garnished.
46-50, Who are Christ's mother and His brethren ?
xiii. 1-52, A group of parables about the kingdom — the
sower, the tares, the mustard seed, leaven, the treasure hid in
a field, the pearl of great price, the net ; concluding with the
well-furnished scribe.
53—58, Jesus in His own country.
xiv. 1-12, The murder of John the Baptist.
13-2T, The feeding of the five thousand.
22-33, Christ and Peter walking on the sea.
34-36, Healing the sick in Gennesaret.
(5) Retirement to Remote Districts and more Private Ministry,
xv. -xviii.
xv. 1-20, Objection to the disciples not washing cere
moniously; answered by Christ.
21-28, The Canaanite woman.
29-39, The feeding of the four thousand.
Many take this as another version of the feeding of the 5,000 (Schleier-
macher, Neander, Wendt, Weiss, Beyschlag, Holtzmann, &c).

292 BIBLICAL INTRODUCTION
xvi. 1-12, The Sadducees seeking a sign; leaven of the
Pharisees and Sadducees.
13-28, Peter's confession of Christ, and His first prediction
of His death.
xvii. 1-13, The transfiguration.
14-23, The lunatic boy ; Christ's second prediction of His
betrayal and death.
24-27, The shekel in the fish's mouth.
xviii. 1-14, On the treatment of children, and Christ saving
the lost sheep.
15-35, Treatment of an offending brother; the limits of
forgiveness and the parable of the wicked servant.
(6) Jesus east of the Jordan, xix., xx.
xix. 1-12, Jesus forbidding divorce.
13—15, Jesus blessing children.
16-22, The young man who refused to give up all for Christ.
23-xx. 16, The difficulty of a rich man entering the king
dom ; and the parable of the labourers.
17-28, Christ's third prediction of His death, followed by
the request of the mother of Zebedee's children.
29-34, The two blind men of Jericho.
Another of Matthew's doublets. Cf. Mark x. 46 ; Luke xviii. 35.
(7) The Last Days in Jerusalem, xxi.-xxv.
xxi. 1-17, The triumphant entry; the cleansing of the
temple. 18-22, The withered fig-tree and the power of faith.
23~32> Christ challenged for His authority; His reply
challenge. 33-46, The parable of the vineyard.
xxii. 1-14, The marriage feast.
15-46, Questions to entrap Christ : (a) the Pharisees' and
the Herodians' question on the lawfulness of paying tribute
to Caesar; (/3) the Sadducees' question on marriage and the
future life ; (y) the lawyer's question on the commandments ;
(3) Christ's question about David's son.
xxiii. 1-12, On not seeking the chief places.
13-36, Denunciation of the Scribes and Pharisees.

MATTHEW 293
37-39, Lament over Jerusalem.
xxiv., Apocalyptic prediction of the coming woes, and warn
ings to escape.
xxv., Parables of judgment — the ten virgins; the talents;
the sheep and the goats.
(8) The Passion, Death, and Resurrection of Jesus, xxvi.-
xxviii. xxvi. 1-5, Decision of the council about the arrest of
Jesus. 6-13, The woman with the cruse of ointment.
14-16, Judas' bargain to betray Christ for money.
17—35, The Passover, the indication of the traitor, the
Lord's Supper, and the warning of Peter's denial.
36-56, Jesus in Gethsemane, betrayed and arrested.
57-68, The trial before Caiaphas.
69-75, Peter's denial of Christ.
xxvii. 1, 2, Jesus delivered to Pilate.
3-10, Judas' repentance and suicide.
1 1-3 1, Jesus tried by Pilate ; the release of Barabbas ; Jesus
mocked. 32-56, The crucifixion and death of Jesus.
57-61, Joseph of Arimathaea and the burial of Jesus.
62-66, Pilate grants a guard for the tomb.
xxviii. 1-10, The women at the sepulchre ; the angel ; Jesus
meeting them.
11-15, The guard bribed to keep silence.
16-20, Jesus meeting the eleven in Galilee; His com
mission to them to evangelise the world.
f. Characteristics. — This gospel is more Hebraistic than the
other synoptics : (1) In language the Greek follows Hebrew
idioms more closely. Thus here we have the expression "the
kingdom of heaven," while not only in the other gospels,
but everywhere else in the N.T. we read "the kingdom of
God," an instance of the Jewish reluctance to use the name
of God. Quotations from the O.T., not found in the parallel
gospels, are made direct from the Hebrew, not taken from the
LXX. (2) The standpoint of the writer and the atmosphere

294 BIBLICAL INTRODUCTION
of his ideas are largely Jewish. While St. Luke traces the
genealogy of Christ back to Adam, in our gospel it com
mences with Abraham ; and the names are arranged in three
groups of fourteen (i.e., 3 of twice 7 — both sacred numbers in
the O.T), an arrangement not adopted in Luke. Then our
Lord's most explicit statements on the authority of the Law
appear only in this gospel. It is here only that we read " I
did not come to destroy the Law, but to fulfil it " (Matthew v.
171), followed by a severe condemnation of anyone who
breaks the smallest of the commandments. Matthew only
gives in the commission to the Twelve the direction, " Go not
into any way of the Gentiles, and enter not into any city of the
Samaritans : but go rather to the lost sheep of the house of
Israel" (x. 6, 7) ; in the conversation with the Canaanite2
woman, the sentence, " I was not sent but unto the lost sheep
of the house of Israel " (xv. 24) ; and after our Lord's descrip
tion of the scribes and Pharisees as sitting in the seat of
Moses, the remarkable direction, " All things therefore
whatsoever they bid you, these do and observe." (xxiii. 3.)
Jerusalem is the holy city (iv. 5, xxvii. 53). Lastly the
author frequently quotes the O.T., especially prophecies, the
fulfilment of which he sees in Christ.
On the other hand it is far from the standpoint of the
extreme Judaisers, St. Paul's opponents, i.e., the party of
James ; for it has strong words in condemnation of the Jews,
and definite commendations of the Gentiles. Matthew alone
gives the account of the homage of the Gentiles in the visit
of the Magi to the infant Christ (ii. 1-12). In this gospel we
have warm praise of a Roman centurion's faith, with the com
ment, " Verily I say unto you, I have not found so great faith,
no, not in Israel. And I say unto you, that many shall come
from the east and the west, and shall sit down with Abraham,
and Isaac, and Jacob, in the kingdom of heaven : but the sons
of the kingdom3 shall be cast forth into the outer darkness,
1 Luke xvi. 17 is parallel to what follows in Matt., but much briefer.
2 A more Hebraistic designation than Mark's " Syro-Phcenician."
3 Note the Hebraism of form — "sons of the kingdom."

MARK 295
etc." (viii. 10-12.) Matthew gives the parable of the vine
yard with the concluding words, "Therefore say I unto you,
the kingdom of God shall be taken away from you, and shall
be given to a nation bringing forth the fruits thereof" (xxi. 43);
and he ends his gospel with the words of the great commission
to "Make disciples of all the nations." (xxviii. 19, 20.)
Pfleiderer holds these two positions to be absolutely contradictory, and
he would explain the phenomena on the hypothesis that the gospel
was originally a strongly Jewish writing, and that Pauline and anti-
Jewish ideas were brought into it by the insertion of certain sentences
later when it fell into the hands of some editor of the opposite school
to that of its author.1 But this is to ignore the purposely paradoxical
methods of Christ's preaching. There is no real contradiction between
the two sets of sayings. Each represents a phase in our Lord's teaching.
His immediate mission was to Israel, and so was that of the Twelve ; He
claimed the spirit of the law, and developed it. But it is a denial of the
N.T. portrait of Christ to assert that the world-wide aims of the gospel
were not in the mind of its Founder.
3. Mark.
a. St. Mark the Evangelist. — John Mark was the son of
one of the N.T. Marys — probably a woman of some position,
as the Jerusalem Church met in her house (Acts xii. 12) —
and a nephew of Barnabas (Colossians iv. 10.) It has
been suggested that he was the young man whose presence
in the garden he mentions so curiously (Mark xiv. 51, 52);
but, as far as we know, he was not a personal follower of
our Lord. Still he was one of the early Christians at
Jerusalem, for he was there during the famine (a.d. 45-6) ;
and Barnabas, who came up to the city with Saul carrying
presents from Antioch, took him to the Syrian capital on
the return journey. He accompanied these two on what
is called St. Paul's "First Missionary Journey," but left
them at Perga, in Pamphylia, when the apostle determined
to extend it beyond the Taurus Mountains. Since St. Paul
was annoyed at this action — though, as Professor Ramsay
shows, it was not altogether unreasonable2 — and refused to
have him on the next journey, Barnabas took him to his
1 Urchristenthum, pp. 540, 541.
3 St. Paul the Traveller, p. 90.

296 BIBLICAL INTRODUCTION
own home in Cyprus (xv. 39). We have no account of
his subsequent movements. According to tradition he was
the founder of the church at Alexandria.1 His evangelistic
work in Egypt may have occupied the interval between
a.d. 50 and a.d. 62. Near the latter date we find him
with St. Paul at Rome (Colossians iv. 10), a fact showing the
apostle to be reconciled to him, and honoured as a " fellow
worker." (Philemon 24.) In 1 Peter he appears as an intimate
disciple of St. Peter, for that apostle calls him " My son "
(v. 13)-
b. Mark and Peter. — It has been common to treat the
second gospel as virtually Peter's. The reason for doing so
is that several writers of very early dates associate the name
of Peter with Mark in connection with it, telling us that
Mark wrote what he had heard Peter teach. The chief
witness is Papias, who gives us his information on older
authority, ascribing it to the elders from whom he had
learnt. Other authorities are Irenseus, Clement of Alexan
dria, Tertullian, and Origen. Justin Martyr refers to the
" Memoirs of Peter " when giving a statement found in Mark
iii. 17.2
Papias writes : ' ' And the Elder said this also : Mark, having become
the interpreter (ep/irivevTf)s) of Peter, wrote down accurately everything
that he remembered, without, however, recording in order (ob p.e'vToi. 7-d£«)
what was either said or done by Christ. For neither did he hear the
Lord, nor did he follow Him ; but afterwards, as I said, he attended
Peter, who adapted his instructions to the needs of his hearers, but
had no design of giving a connected account of the Lord's words (\byav).
So then Mark made no mistake, while he thus wrote down some things as
he remembered them ; for he made it his own care not to omit anything
that he heard, or to set down any false statement therein." (Eusebius,
H.E., iii. 39.) One or two questions arise here: (1) In what sense
was Mark an interpreter of Peter? Possibly the reference is simply
to his work as a catechist explaining the discourses to the hearers. But
the usual sense of the word would point to linguistic interpretation. This
is how it is employed by St. Paul when referring to the unknown tongues.
(1 Corinthians xiv. 28.) Therefore the meaning may be that Mark, who
had Hellenistic connections, e.g. with Barnabas, translated Peter's Aramaic
utterances into Greek.3 (2) What does Papias mean by saying that
1 Eusebius, H.E., ii. 16. 2 Tryph. 106.
3 Not Latin ; Greek would be used for religious instruction at Rome in
these times See Swete, St. Mark, xix., xx.

MARK 297
the gospel was "not in order"? This may refer to a break with
chronology, and Lightfoot suggested that Papias had in mind John's
order, which is different in many respects from Mark's.1 But it may
be that Papias meant that this gospel was not a systematic history, not
a complete biography, but a book, the contents of which were selected
wilh a view to the profit of the readers. 2
Irenaeus writes : " Matthew also issued a written gospel among the
Hebrews in their own dialect, while Peter and Paul were preaching at
Rome, and laying foundations of the church. After their departure (QoSov),
Mark, the disciple and interpreter of Peter, delivered to us in writing
the things that had been preached by Peter (ret virb Jl^Tpov Kr/pvao-6/j.eva)."
(Adv. Haer., iii. I.) Possibly IrenEeus is dependent on Papias ; but he adds
to what we have from Papias the statement that the gospel was written
after the death of Peter and Paul, and he more definitely fixes the form of
the source as what Peter preached.
Of Clement of Alexandria, Eusebius says : " In the same books
Clement has given a tradition concerning the order of the gospels
which he had received from the presbyters of old (aviKaOev), and which
is to this effect : He says that the gospels containing the genealogies
were written first ; that the occasion of writing the gospel according to
Mark was this : Peter having publicly preached the word at Rome,
and having spoken the gospel by the Spirit, many present exhorted Mark
to write the things which had been spoken since he had long accompanied
Peter, and remembered what he had said ; and that when he had composed
the gospel, he delivered it to them who had asked it of him. Which
when Peter knew, he neither forbad nor encouraged it." (Eusebius, H.E.,
vi. 14.) Here we may notice that Clement relies on tradition from elders
of a long time back. Agreeing with Papias and IrenEeus in the main,
he contradicts the latter in one respect, viz., in dating the composition
of the gospel during the lifetime of Peter, while Irenaeus sets it after
Peter's death. IrenEeus is more definite, and probably it is he who is
correct. Then Origen says : " Mark wrote it as Peter directed him " (cis
TLerpos bqrqyh.ao.To abT<p), thus supporting Clement (Eusebius, H.E.,
vi. 25) ; and Tertullian says : " The gospel published by Mark may be
called Peter's, whose interpreter (interpres) Mark was." (Adv. Marcion,
iv. 5. ) Moreover, this ancient testimony is without contradiction.
c. Genuineness and Historicity. — Pfleiderer, while accepting
St. Mark as the author of our gospel, denies his connection
with St. Peter partly on the ground that the gospel contains
miracles, of which the apostle, an eye-witness, of course knew
nothing.3 This is high-handed criticism indeed. The most
conclusive evidence is to be set aside, because it does not
agree with the non-miraculous theory of the universe. Only
1 Essays on Supernatural Religion, p. 165.
2 See Swete, xx., xxi.
3 Urchristenthum, p. 414.

298 BIBLICAL INTRODUCTION
a disciple of Hume could admit such an argument. But
another point of Pfleiderer's has been perceived by many.
The gospel has not the aspect of discourses, because it is
almost confined to narrative matter. Now it may well be
allowed that Mark, when sitting down to the task of writing
his gospel, did not confine himself exclusively to what he
had heard Peter utter in public preaching. Besides, what
he had learnt in this way would be used by him as material
for a composition in his own words and style. Certainly
the gospel does not consist merely of a reporter's notes of
sermons. We need not demand that it should, in order,
satisfy the requirements of the patristic statements about it.
And then it is reasonable to think that Peter did repeat many
stories of his Master's life. That would be a very real way
of preaching Christ, the best way for making Christ known.
A brief notice of one of his sermons which is given in Acts
represents him as saying that Jesus " went about doing good "
(Acts x. 38), a phrase just on the lines of the gospel according
to St. Mark, which would serve well as a summary of that
gospel. Then it has been objected that the phrase "not in
order" does not apply to Mark, which is the most orderly
of the gospels, and which is chronologically arranged. But
the expression may mean, "not as a set historical composition,"
and further, in point of fact it is not entirely chronological.
For example, it gives five occasions of offence to the Jewish
authorities on the part of Jesus in immediate succession
(ii. i-iii. 6). It is hardly likely that they occurred thus
closely together ; possibly we have here the grouping in one
of Peter's sermons on the subject.
We cannot reasonably doubt that our Mark is the book
to which the patristic references apply. It was well known
to Irenaeus as one of the four gospels, and his frequent citations
remove all doubt on the point as far as he is concerned.
But Irenaeus's Mark cannot be other than Papias's Mark,
though probably it has undergone re-editing. The connection
of time, locality, and association between the two Fathers is
too close. Probably our gospel was one of Justin Martyr's

MARK 299
Memoirs of the Apostles, for Justin gives words that occur in
Mark only.1 Possibly it was known to Hermas.2
d. Date and Place of Origin, and Destination. — As we do
not know the date of St. Peter's death, neither the statement
of Irenaeus nor that of Clement will help us much in fixing
the date of this gospel. Still, since it is probable that St. Peter
was living at least as late as the Neronian persecution, and since
it is also probable that Irenaeus is right, and that St. Mark did
not write down his recollections of the apostle's preaching till
that was completed, it is not likely that the gospel was composed
before about a.d. 65. At all events it must have been after
Colossians, which was written when Mark was with Paul at
Rome, for there is no indication in the epistle of his being
with Peter also then. Peter's coming to Rome therefore must
be later than 62, and the reports of the preaching some time
after that. On the other hand, as in the case of Matthew,
probably we should not assign the gospel to a time subsequent
to the destruction of Jerusalem. The same argument from
the contrast with the reference to that event in the apocalyptic
discourse applies here also.3 Moreover, if Mark was used as
a basis of Matthew, it must be earlier. Thus we come back
to about a.d. 65 or at latest 66. There is no reason to deny
the ancient tradition that it was written in Rome. It contains
several Latinisms.4 Evidently it was intended for Gentiles
who were not familiar with Jewish customs, for it explains some
of those customs, e.g., the custom of Purification (vii. 4).
e. Contents.
(1) Introduction, i. 1-13.
i. 1-8, The mission of John the Baptist.
9-13, The baptism and temptation of Jesus.
(2) Early Ministry in Galilee, i. 1 4.— iii. 12.
1 tov ploavepy4s, 8 i<mv viol /J/jopttjs, in Tryph, 106, and there attributed
to the Memoirs of Peter is only found in Mark iii. 17 (though with the
spelling poavr/pyh).
2 See Taylor, Witness of Hermas, p. 5 ff.
3 See page 289.
4 e.g., Latin words — 8-qvapi.ov, Kevrvpluv, KoSpdvTijS, Kpd/3arTOS, Xeyaiv,
£<:crnjs, crweKov\a.Tup ; and such phrases as KaK&s ^x<"'7"«s, iox^Tas £x«.

300 BIBLICAL INTRODUCTION
i. 14-28, Commencement of the ministry; preaching in the
synagogue at Capernaum ; demoniac cured.
29-34, Cure of Peter's wife's mother, followed by many
miracles of healing.
35-45, A leper cleansed.
ii. i-iii. 6, Successive grounds of offence : (a) claim to for
give sins when curing a paralytic ; (f3) eating with publicans
and sinners after the call of Levi ; (y) permitting the disciples
not to fast ; (8) permitting the disciples to break the Sabbath
by plucking corn ; (e) Jesus Himself breaking the Sabbath in
curing a man with a withered hand on that day.
iii. 7-12, Jesus with the multitudes by the seaside.
(3) More advanced Galilean Ministry, iii, 13-vii. 23.
This is characterised by fuller teaching on the manner in which the
kingdom comes, and by greater wonders.
iii. 13-19, The call of the Twelve.
20-30, Jesus accused of alliance with Satan; His answer;
the unpardonable sin.
31—35, Christ's mother and His brethren.
iv. 1-34, A group of parables about the kingdom: the
sower, the lamp, seed growing automatically, the mustard
seed. The "seed growing automatically" is only in Mark.
35-41, The storm calmed.
v. 1-20, The Gerasene demoniac and the swine.
21-43, The cure of the woman who touched Christ's gar
ment, and the raising of Jairus's daughter.
vi. 1-6, Jesus rejected at Nazareth.
7-13, The mission of the Twelve.
14-29, The murder of John the Baptist.
30-44, The feeding of the five thousand.
45—56, Christ walking on the sea ; His return to Gennesaret ;
many cures.
vii. 1-23, Defilement from within, not from without.
(4) Retirement before Opposition, and Further Teaching of the
Select Few, vii. 24-ix.

MARK 301
vii. 24-37, The Syro-Phcenician woman; the deaf mute.
viii. 1-2 1, The feeding of the four thousand; leaven.
22-26, A blind man at Bethsaida seeing men as trees.
This incident and that of " the deaf mute " (vii. 24-37) only in Mark.
27-ix. 1, Peter's confession at Caesarea, and Christ's first
announcement of His death.
ix. 2-32, The transfiguration; cure of the lunatic boy;
Christ's second announcement of His death.
33-50, The example of the little child, and the evil of
causing a little one to stumble.
(5) Christ in Percea, x.
x. 1-10, Jesus forbidding divorce.
13-16, Jesus blessing children.
17-22, The young man who refused to give up all for Christ.
23-31, The difficulty of a rich man entering the kingdom.
32-45, Christ's third prediction of His death, followed by the
ambitious request of Zebedee's sons, and His announcement of
His mission to serve, and to give His life a ransom for many.
46-52, Bartimaeus at Jericho cured of his blindness.
(6) The Last Days in Jerusalem, xi.-xvi.
xi. 1-11, The triumphant entry.
12-26, The withered fig tree, the cleansing of the temple,
the power of faith, and the duty of forgiveness.
27-33, Christ challenged for His authority ; His reply
challenge. xii. 1-12, The parable of the vineyard.
I3-4°, Questions to entrap Christ : (a.) the Pharisees' and
Herodians' question on the lawfulness of paying tribute to
Caesar; (/?) the Sadducees' question on marriage and the
future life; (7) the scribe's question on the commandments;
(8) Christ's question about David's son, and warning against
the scribes.
41-44, The widow's mites.
xiii., Apocalyptic predictions of coming woes, and warnings
to escape.
xiv. 1, 2, Decision of the council about the arrest of Jesus.
3-9, The woman with the cruse of ointment.

302 BIBLICAL INTRODUCTION
io, ii, Judas bargaining to betray Jesus for money.
12-31, The Passover, the indication of the traitor, the Lord's
Supper, and the warning of Peter's denial.
32-52, Gethsemane, the betrayal, and the arrest.
53-65, The trial of Jesus before the council.
66-72, Peter's denial of Christ.
xv. 1-15, The trial before Pilate and the release of
Barabbas. 16-20, The mockery.
21-47, The crucifixion, death, and burial of Jesus.
xvi. 1-8, The women at the empty tomb.
9-20, Appendix with summary of resurrection appearances.
The Concluding Section. — This section (verses 9-20) is bracketed by
Westcott and Hort, and is rejected by many critics as not a part of
the original text. The reasons for that judgment are both documentary
and intrinsic : ( I ) Documentary. The section is not found in the two
oldest MSS. (N and B). An old Latin MS. k. and some Armenian and
/Ethiopian MSS. are also wanting in it. Eusebius and Jerome both
say that it was absent from many MSS., and Dr. Hort suggests that
perhaps Eusebius rested on the authority of Origen in his doubts con
cerning the passage. The ' ' Eusebian canons " 1 end at verse 8. Neither
Justin Martyr nor Clement of Alexandria make any reference to the
contents of these verses. (2) Intrinsic. The most serious objections arise
from a consideration of the verses themselves : (a) We meet with several
words not usual in Mark. Thus iKeivot occurs five times in this short
section in an unusual sense, without any emphasis; iropeiopai occurs
three times, though it is used nowhere else in the gospel ; and iBeiBi)
twice. (/3) Verse 18 contains marvels that suggest a later age. (7) Mary
Magdalene is introduced with a description identifying her as one ' ' from
whom He had cast out seven devils" (verse 9) ; and yet she had already
appeared twice before in the narrative (xv. 47, xvi. 1). Surely this
fact alone must suggest that we have here an alien document. (S) Jesus
is seen in Jerusalem ; but according to the earlier narrative the angel
bade the disciples go to Galilee to meet Him. That a few verses after that
statement He should be described as manifesting Himself to one of the
women who heard it on the very same morning, without any explanation
of the change of place, is improbable, (e) Then the whole structure of
the passage is unlike Mark. In place of the full graphic style of the
gospel we have bald summaries of events. But when we examine these
summaries, we find that they add nothing to our knowledge. They could
all have been based on the other gospels.
Verse 9 rests on John xx. 14 and Luke viii. 2.
Verses 9, 10 are a natural inference.
Verses 12, 13 are an abridgment of the Emmaus incident of Luke
1 The Eusebian canons are parallel lists of passages in the three gospels
constructed for cross reference, in the form of a harmony.

MARK 303
xxiv. 13-35. The expression, "in another form," is suggested by the
fact that the two disciples did not recognise the Risen Christ.
Verse 14 could be founded on Luke xxiv. 36-43, or on John xx. 26-29.
Verse 15 reminds us of Matthew xxviii. 19.
Verse 16 has no parallel in the gospels, but it has a late character.
Jesus never required baptism as a condition of salvation.
Verses 17 and 18 also read like late legendary matter.
Verse 19 points to St. Luke's account of the ascension.
Verse 20 is a summary of the history in Acts. 1
With these objections against it, although nearly all the MSS. contain
the passage, it must be held to be not original.2 A few later MSS.
have another ending, viz. ; "And they reported briefly to Peter and
those in his company all the things commanded. And after these things
Jesus Himself also sent forth through them from the east even to the
west the holy and incorruptible message of eternal salvation." This
is evidently a late conclusion, added to round off the work. Certainly
the gospel did not end originally at verse 8. No one would finish with the
Greek words i<pop^ovvTo yap. Even the MS. B, which has neither con
clusion, leaves a blank space between these words and the beginning
of Luke. We must consider, then, that the original conclusion was early
lost, perhaps the final page accidentally torn out of the autograph.
f. Characteristics. — St. Mark's style is essentially graphic.
He, more than either of the other two synoptic authors, writes
like an eye-witness. This suggests his fidelity in reproducing
St. Peter's vivid impressions. He has an eye for the concrete.
He loves colour, and sees it (e.g., vi. 39.) So freshly does
he realise his narrative, that at times he gives us the sharp
abruptness of the original dialogue in startling fashion, as
for instance, " What is this ? A new teaching ! With authority
he commandeth even the unclean spirits," etc. (i. 27., R.V.).
His language, though not so Hebraistic as Matthew, is still
much influenced by Hebrew phrases.
Especially note the use of iytveTo, for "it came to pass" ; the idiom
Sbo dbo for "two by two," similarly o-vfiTrSata <rvyct7r6<rta, irpacrtal irpaatat ;
the simple linking together of sentences with "and," instead of by the
varied connections of classic Greek.
The gospel omits the narratives of the infancy, only briefly
1 The result of this analysis is against accepting Mr. Conybeare's
suggestion that the passage was written by Aristion, on the authority
of an Armenian MS. (a.d. 986), which assigns it to the presbyter Ariston.
Papias describes Aristion as an immediate disciple of our Lord. (Eusebius,
H.E., iii. 39.) Would such a man make a mere summary of statements in
the gospels, many of them second and third hand statements ?
8 The integrity of the passage was vehemently defended by Dean
Burgon, On the last twelve verses of St. Mark.

304 BIBLICAL INTRODUCTION
touches on the temptation, and is chiefly devoted to the
active works of Jesus in His Galilean ministry. It gives
much less space to the teaching of Christ than Matthew
and Luke, and it dwells at length on the miracles, devoting
special attention to those that concern demoniacal possession.
4. Luke.
a. Sl. Luke the Evangelist. — It appears from Colossians iv.
14 that St. Luke was a Gentile, as his name is not included in
the list of " those of the circumcision." From the same pas
sage we learn that he was a physician. The mention of his
name here and in Philemon 24, shows that he was with St.
Paul during at least part of the first imprisonment at Rome.
The only other occasion in which his name occurs in the N.T.
is at 2 Timothy iv. 11, where we find him again with the
apostle, this time during the second imprisonment,1 and as
the only faithful attendant after all others had forsaken Paul.
Thus we discover his close relations with the apostle. Then,
granting that he was the author of the passages in Acts,
written in the first person plural,2 we are able to carry our
information further back. There we learn that he accom
panied the apostle from Troas to Philippi, when St. Paul
made his first journey in Europe (Acts xvi. 10-17). The
resumption of the narrative in the third person implies that
the apostle left him at Philippi. About six years later Paul
was again at Philippi, and there he again met Luke, who then
travelled with him to Jerusalem— as the resumption of the
"we" narrative implies (xx. 5-xxi. 18); he also accompanied
the apostle in the voyage to Rome, sharing the experience of
the shipwreck at Malta on the way. An ancient legend 3 re
presents him as a painter. His symbol in Christian Art is the
ox or the calf.
b. Authorship of the Gospel. — From the second century
downwards the third gospel was assigned to Luke. There is
1 i.e., on the hypothesis that 2 Timothy belongs to a second imprison
ment. See chapter viii. 2 See page 342.
3 First found in Theodore, a reader at Constantinople in the sixth
century. MlGNE, Patr. Gr., lxxxvi. 165.

LUKE 305
no evidence to indicate that this claim was ever disputed.
No other name was ever proposed. The first references to
St. Luke's name as that of the author of the gospel are in
Irenaeus and the Muratorian Fragment. Then we have
Clement of Alexandria, Tertullian, etc., writing of the gospel
as Luke's.
Thus Irenaeus writes : " Luke, also, the companion of Paul, recorded
in a book the gospel preached by him" (Adv. Haer., iii. i; see also a
fuller account in iii. 14). Here we have the earliest reference to
the relation of St. Paul to the third gospel. Undoubtedly it obtained
authority in the churches owing to the connection of Paul with Luke, as
the second gospel obtained it through Peter's relations with Mark, so that
all four gospels were accredited with apostolic authority. But we cannot
regard the cases as parallel, seeing that Paul was not, like Peter, a witness
of the events of our Lord's life and work, and the preface to the third
gospel shows that its author sought information from eye-witnesses. The
gospel can only be traced to St. Paul in the spirit of it.1
The Muratorian Fragment has the phrase, "The third book of the
gospel, that according to Luke." • For the testimony of Clement of
Alexandria, see Eusebius, H.E.,vi. 14; for Tertullian's, see Adv. Marcion,
iv. 2 and 5 ; for Origen's, see Eusebius, H.E., vi. 25, etc.
c. Genuineness. — There can be no doubt that the references
of Irenaeus and later fathers to St. Luke are directed to our
gospel ; the citations prove it. We cannot go further back
with the name, but the very fact that so obscure a person is
unanimously indicated speaks for genuineness. There would
be no motive to select a scarcely known personage for the
purpose of pseudonymous writing. And the history of the
gospel itself is older than these references. It is used in
Tatian's harmony, as we can now see for ourselves.3 There
fore it must have been recognised and read in the churches of
Syria soon after the middle of the second century. The
presence of it in the Peshitto witnesses to the same fact. It
seems to have been one of the " Memoirs of the Apostles "
used by Justin Martyr.
1 When St. Paul says "My gospel" (e.g., Rom. ii. 16), he cannot mean
our third gospel or any other written narrative. Any idea of the kind is
an anachronism. The reference must be to the message he delivered, the
good tidings he proclaimed, especially to righteousness and life in Christ,
through the cross, and by faith.
2 In barbarous Latin — TERTIO EUANGELII LIBRUM SECUNDO LUCAN.
3 See The Earliest Life of Christ, etc.

306 BIBLICAL INTRODUCTION
Thus Justin mentions several facts only found in this gospel, e.g.,
" Elizabeth as the mother of the Baptist, the sending of Gabriel to Mary,
the census under Quirinius, there being no room in the inn, Jesus' ministry
beginning when He was 30 years old, His being sent by Pilate to Herod,
His last cry, ' Father, into thy hands I commend my spirit ' " ( I Apol. xxxiv. ;
Tryph., lxxviii., lxxxvi., c, ciii., cv., cvi.).1
Celsus must have known the third gospel, as he refers to the
genealogy representing Jesus as descended from the first man
(Origen, Con. Cels. ii. 32). In the epistle of the churches of
Lyons and Vienne there is a quotation from this gospel.2
It also seems to have been referred to in the Clementine
Homilies, commented on by Heracleon, and known to
Basilides and Valentinus. It may be referred to by Hermas,8
but we cannot trace it with confidence to any of the Apostolic
Fathers, though it seems to have been known to the author of
the Didache? Its private dedication suggests that it was not
at first intended for the churches, and this fact may account
for its not being so much used in the earliest times as
Matthew. d. Marcion's Gospel. — The most important testimony to
the antiquity of our third gospel is to be found in the use of
it by Marcion. This great reformer and heretic came to
Rome about a.d. 140, with a N.T. of his own selection,
consisting of one gospel and ten epistles. The title of the
gospel gives us no indication of its authorship, as Marcion
simply calls it "the gospel of the Lord" or "the gospel of
Christ." But an examination of its contents, most of which
can be recovered from Tertullian, shows that it was founded
on Luke. This is a very important fact as regards the
antiquity and the early recognition of the authority of our
gospel. Baur held that Marcion's gospel was the original, a Pauline gospel,
which the writer of Luke had softened down to suit Catholic ideas ; but
this opinion once held by the Tubingen School was given up by Baur's
successor, Hilgenfeld, who showed that Luke was the original. Ritschl
too contended for the priority of Luke, which is now generally admitted.
None of the fathers mention Marcion's gospel as used by any but his own
1 Plummer, Internat. Crit. Com., St. Luke, p. xv.
2 See Eusebius, H.E., v. 1, compared with Luke i. 6, 67.
8 See Taylor, The Witness of Hermas, p. 34. * xvi. I.

LUKE 307
followers. Its omissions and alterations can be perfectly accounted for
as made in order to bring the gospel into harmony with Marcion's teach
ings. Thus Luke i. and ii. with the accounts of the infancy, and the
genealogy and the temptation from chapters iii. and iv. , are omitted as in
consistent with Marcion's docetism. For Luke xiii. 28, instead of " Abra
ham, Isaac, and Jacob," we have "the righteous"; and at xvi. 17, Marcion's
gospel reads, " It is easier for heaven and earth, the law and the prophets,
to fail than one tittle of the word of the Lord " — alterations made to suit
his gnostic anti-Judaism.
e. The Preface. — Luke opens with an elaborate dedication
to a person of high rank — as the title "most excellent" in
dicates J — bearing the name Theophilus. We have no means
of knowing who this man was, but it is not probable that the
name is fictitious, to designate "the pious reader." The title
of rank is against that idea. In this dedication the evangelist
states both the occasion which led him to write the gospel,
and the method he pursued in preparing himself for the task.
He tells us that many had taken in hand to draw up a narra
tive " of the gospel occurrences." There is no ground for the
assumption that either Matthew or Mark is here referred to.
The surprising thing is that even as early as St. Luke's time
there were already many attempts at the writing of gospels.
St. Luke does not directly condemn these attempts, or profess,
as is sometimes assumed, to correct and supersede them. The
form of his language only implies emulation to follow the
example of others, with an excuse for writing in that example.
Still the tone and spirit of the preface do certainly suggest a
depreciatory regard for the earlier attempts. The expression
"taken in hand" implies as much; and the indefinite "many"
without giving any names — as though he had said "gospels by
the cart-load" — also suggests that no high value was set on
the works. Still more, St. Luke's careful declaration of his own
method of work cannot but suggest his belief that no such
pains had been taken by his predecessors. He here informs
us first that the narrative is to deal with what had been
received from "eye-witnesses and ministers of the word" —
people who had seen the events described, and had themselves
1 Strictly speaking it belongs to a man of the Equestrian Order. See
Ramsay, St. Paul, etc., p. 388 (1).

308 BIBLICAL INTRODUCTION
taken part in them. These must be disciples who accom
panied our Lord on His travels. Then he says he "traced
the course of all things accurately from the first," a claim to
diligent searching and careful observation, the conscientious
work of a trained and disciplined mind^ There is no excuse
for doubting St. Luke's good faith, when he comes thus before
us claiming our confidence in him as a trustworthy historian.
It is true St. Luke's words do not necessarily imply that in every case
he took his facts from the lips of the witnesses. The phrase, "as they
delivered (irapiSoaav) them unto us," would apply to tradition. But the
whole passage shows that the author took pains to obtain the most accurate
information, and he was contemporary with many of the witnesses. He
does not say whether he received his information orally or in writing.
We shall see in the next chapter that he used written material, and that
these were not all first hand. What he assures us is that he was careful
to get what had been testified to by the men who took part in the events
recorded. The Difficulty of the Census. — St. Luke tells us that a decree went
out from Csesar Augustus for a universal census ; that the first census took
place when Quirinius was governor of Syria ; that every one went to his
own city for this object ; and that thus Joseph and Mary went up to
Bethlehem (iii. 1-4). Several objections have been raised against these
statements. (1) Herod was reigning as king, and his subjects would not
come into a Roman census. (2) A Roman census goes by households, not
by family relations and pedigrees. (3) No census of the Roman empire
occurred at the time when Jesus was born, though there was a census
under Quirinius in a.d. 6. (4) Quirinius was not governor of Syria when
Jesus was born ; his administration was from A.D. 6 to 9, and Quinctilius
Varius was then governor of Syria. These difficulties have been consider
ably lightened by recent researches. The following points may now be
urged in defence of St. Luke's correctness: — (1) In the year 8-7 B.C.,
Augustus wrote a letter to Herod informing him that whereas he had
regarded him hitherto as a friend, henceforth he would treat him as a
subject. From that time Herod's dominions would be an integral part of
the Roman empire. (2) Herod would administer the census on Jewish
lines to conciliate his people. (3) Documents recently discovered in Egypt
have made it clear that periodical enrolments were carried on in that
province every fourteen years, and working back from those that are
referred to in these records, we come to the year 8-7 B.C. for one of these
Egyptian censuses. It is likely enough that the letter to Herod would be
followed by the extension of the census to Palestine, and thus a little later
than in Egypt. But the new Dictionary of the Bible on independent
grounds fixes the year 6 B.C. for the birth of Jesus, which exactly coincides
with this date of the census. (4) St. Luke does not use the substantive
"governor" or "legate" (iiyep.(iv), but the verb in the participle, "acting
as leader" (-nye/MovebovTos). Now it is known that before the death of
Herod, Quirinius was engaged in a war among the Taurus mountains,
that affected the foreign relations of Syria. Professor Ramsay argues that
it is the military position of Quirinius that is referred to by St. Luke.

LUKE 309
Mommsen argued that Quirinius was twice legate of Syria on the
evidence of an anonymous marble inscription found in the Tiber in the
year 1764, which records the career of a high officer who twice governed
Syria in the time of Augustus, though his name has not been preserved.
It is difficult to find a time when Quirinius could have held the legate's office
twice. Professor Ramsay assigns the first governing to the military posi
tion he held in the war.1 At all events St. Luke's historicity is considerably
vindicated. f. Date and Place of Origin. — The gospel must have been
written before Acts, as it is referred to in that work. (Acts
i. 1, 2.) If therefore Acts were written at the time when
the history of it ends (a.d. 62), Luke would be earlier than
that date. But there is no reason to assign the later work
to the time when the events in the narrative cease, and
there are strong reasons for giving both Acts and the gospel
a later date. If St. Luke used Mark,2 the latest date for Mark
must precede the earliest for Luke. Then a comparison of Luke
with the other two synoptics shows that while they seem to
have been written before the destruction of Jerusalem, the Third
Gospel was written after that event. In our Lord's apocalyptic
discourse in place of obscure allusions to "the abomination
of desolation," etc. with the writer's comment, " Let him
that readeth understand," we have a clear description of
the siege and its issue. (Luke xxi. 20, 24.) And further,
while the final judgment is associated with the doom of
Jerusalem in the other synoptics, in Luke it is distinguished
from the local event, and a vague interval placed between
the two in the statement, "And Jerusalem shall be trodden
down of the Gentiles, until the times of the Gentiles be
fulfilled." (Luke xxi. 24.) On the other hand, if St. Luke
wrote the gospel, we cannot assign to it a very late date,
for even if he lived to a great age, it is not likely that
he would have postponed so important a work to the end
of his life.3 And then it precedes Acts. Perhaps the nearest
we can come to the date is to suggest about a.d. 75. There
1 See Ramsay, Was Christ born at Bethlehem ?
3 See next chapter.
3 The case of St. John with his reflective gospel is quite different, and
by contrast confirms the earlier date of Luke.

310 BIBLICAL INTRODUCTION
is no evidence concerning the place of origin. St. Luke's con
nection with Philippi suggests that city.
g. Contents.
(i) Preface, i. 1-4.
(2) The Infancy, i. 5 — ii.
i. 5-25, Prediction of the birth of John the Baptist.
26-38, The annunciation.
39-56, Mary's visit to Elizabeth ; the Magnificat.
57-80, Birth of John the Baptist; Zaccharias' psalm of
praise. ii. 1-7, The birth of Jesus.
8-20, The shepherds and the angels.
21-40, The circumcision and dedication of Jesus; Simeon
and Anna.
41-52, The boyhood of Jesus; visit to the Temple.
(3) The Preparation, iii.-iv. 13.
iii. 1-22, The ministry of John the Baptist and his baptism
of Jesus.
23-38, Genealogy.
iv. 1-13, The temptation.
(4) Galilean Ministry, iv. 14-ix. 50.
i iv. 14-30, Commencement of preaching; rejection at
1 Nazareth.
1 31-44, Jesus at Capernaum; deliverance of demoniac;
cure of Peter's wife's mother ; other miracles and preaching.
v. 1-11, The miraculous draught of fishes and the call of
Simon. 12-16, A leper cleansed.
x 17-vi. 11, Grounds of offence: (a) Christ's claim to forgive
sins when curing a paralytic ; (/?) call of Levi, and Christ
eating and drinking with publicans and sinners ; (y) Christ's
disciples not fasting; (8) the disciples plucking corn on the
Sabbath; (e) Jesus curing a man's withered hand on the
Sabbath. vi. 12-19, The appointment of the Twelve, and the coming
together of the multitude for healing.
i 20-49, The sermon in the plain : (a) Beatitudes and woes;

LUKE 311
(/3) the duty of forgiveness and mercy ; (y) against fault-find
ing ; (8) two houses.
vii. 1-10, Cure of a centurion's servant at Capernaum.
1 1-17, Raising of the son of the widow at Nain.
l8-3S> Jonn tbe Baptist's question; Christ's answer; and
descriptions of John and of the age that rejected both Christ
and John.
36-50, The penitent ; parable of two debtors.
viii. 1-3, The ministering women.
4-18, Parables of the sower and the lamp.
19-21, Christ's mother and His brethren.
22-25, The storm calmed.
26-39, The demoniac and the swine.
40-56, The cure of the woman who touched the border of
Christ's garment, and the raising of the ruler's daughter.
ix. r-6, The mission of the Twelve.
7-9, Herod's perplexity.
10-17, Christ feeding the multitude.
18-27, Peter's confession, followed by Christ's first an
nouncement of His death.
28-45, Transfiguration, followed by the cure of a lunatic
boy, and Christ's second announcement of His death.
46-48, Ambition rebuked from the example of a child.
49> 5°j John rebuked for rebuking an unattached believer.
(5) Later Ministry, chiefly outside Galilee, ix. 51 -xix. 28.
ix. 51-56, Jesus rejected by the Samaritans.
57-62, Discouragements of discipleship.
x. 1-16, Mission of the seventy with lament over the cities
of Galilee.
17-24, Return of the seventy and Christ's thanksgiving.
25-37, The lawyer's question and the parable of the Good
Samaritan. 38-42, Mary and Martha.
xi. 1-13, The Lord's prayer and lessons on prayer.
14-26, Jesus charged with alliance with Beelzebub; His
reply. 27, 28, The woman who blessed Christ's mother.

312 BIBLICAL INTRODUCTION
z9-36, On seeking a sign ; the lamp and the bushel.
37-54, Denunciation of Pharisees and lawyers.
xii. 1-12, Leaven of the Pharisees; confidence in God;
blasphemy against the Holy Spirit.
13-21, Covetousness; the rich fool.
22-34, Anxiety allayed.
35-59> Watchfulness and diligence; signs of the times.
xiii. 1-9, The meaning of calamities ; the fruitless figtree.
10-17, An infirm woman cured on the Sabbath.
18-21, The mustard seed and the leaven.
22-35, Gentiles coming in place of Jews; lament over
Jerusalem. xiv. 1-6, Lawfulness of healing on the Sabbath, in the case
of a man with dropsy.
7-14, On taking the lowest place, and inviting the poor for
guests. 15-24, The parable of the supper.
25-35, Counting the cost.
xv., Parables of the lost sheep, the lost piece of silver, the
prodigal son.
xvi. 1-13, The unrighteous steward; the use and abuse of
mammon. 14-18, The law not to fail.
19-31, The rich man and Lazarus.
xvii. 1-4, Occasions of stumbling ; the offending brother.
5-10, Faith and service.
11-19, The ten lepers.
20-37, The kingdom of heaven now in our midst; the
coming days of the Son of man.
xviii. 1-8, The unjust judge.
9-14, The Pharisee and the publican in prayer.
15-17, Jesus blessing little children.
18-30, The young ruler.
31-34, Jesus declares that He is now going up to Jerusalem
to suffer and die.
35-43, The blind beggar at Jericho cured.
xix. 1-10, Zacchaeus the publican.

LUKE 313
11-28, The parable of the pounds.
(6) The Last Days in Jerusalem, xix. 29-xxiv. 53.
xix. 29-40, The triumphant entry.
41-48, Jesus weeping over Jerusalem, and cleansing the
Temple. xx. 1-8, Christ's authority challenged ; His question on the
baptism of John.
9-18, The parable of the vineyard.
r9-47i Questions to entrap Christ : (a) The scribes' and
priests' question about tribute to Caesar: (fi) the Sadducees'
question about marriage and the resurrection; (y) Christ's
question about David's son.
xxi. 1-4, The widow's mites.
5-38, Warnings of the destruction of the Temple ; the siege
and destruction of Jerusalem ; the times of the Gentiles ; the
final coming of the Son of Man.
xxii. 1-6, Judas covenants to betray Jesus.
7-23, The Passover and the Lord's Supper.
24-38, Ambition rebuked; Peter warned; all to be pre
pared. 39—53, The agony on the Mount of Olives ; the betrayal.
54-65, Jesus arrested; Peter denying his Master; Jesus
mocked. 66-74, Trial before the elders.
xxiii. 1-25, Jesus before Pilate; sent to Herod; again
before Pilate.
26-31, Simon of Cyrene ; the lament of the daughters of
Jerusalem. 32-49, Jesus crucified with two malefactors ; death of
Jesus. 50-56, Joseph and the burial of Jesus.
xxiv. 1-12, The women at the tomb; Peter also there.
13-35, The journey to Emmaus.
36-43, Jesus appearing to His disciples, and eating fish
before them.
44-49, His final commission.
50-53, The Ascension.

314 BIBLICAL INTRODUCTION
h. Characteristics. — Luke is written in better Greek style
than the other synoptic gospels. The Preface is the best
Greek in the N.T. The hymns in the earlier chapters,
however, are thoroughly Hebraistic in style as well as
thought, a clear sign that the evangelist did not compose
them himself, but that he transferred them to his pages in
the form in which he found them. The construction of
the gospel differs from Mark in allowing more space to
the teachings of Jesus, as is the case with Matthew also;
but frequently it differs from Matthew in placing more of
the sayings of Christ in direct connection with the events
which furnished the occasion for uttering them — Matthew
having more blocks of sayings without intermediate narrative.
Thus the sayings of Matthew's "Sermon on the Mount" are
distributed over two or three portions of the narrative in
Luke. Like Matthew, and unlike Mark, Luke has an account
of the infancy of Christ, which is much fuller in the third
gospel than in the first ; and the association of John the
Baptist's birth is here introduced. Luke has a considerable
section of history and some most important teaching
belonging to the later part of our Lord's ministry, largely
in Perea and by the Jordan, which is not found in the
other synoptics — that containing the parables of the lost
sheep, the lost coin, the prodigal son, the unrighteous
steward, the rich man and Lazarus, the unrighteous judge,
the Pharisee and the publican, the incident of the ten lepers,
etc. This indicates some special source of his own.
The aim and purpose of the gospel, as the author indicates
in his preface, is to give a connected account of the life and
teachings of Christ. It has been asserted that he has
manipulated his materials under the influence of a doctrinal
bias, and this in two directions : (i) Ebionite. St. Luke shows
especial sympathy for the poor, as for example his version
of the Beatitudes with corresponding woes for the rich
(vi. 20-26) and the parable of Dives and Lazarus indicate.
His gospel contains our Lord's sternest denunciations of
the abuse of wealth. (2) Pauline. Many phrases in Luke

LUKE 315
resemble phrases in St. Paul's writings.1 The Pauline
liberalism is repeatedly manifested, and the richness of the
doctrine of grace illustrated. Yet we cannot deny that all
the facts were found by St. Luke in the reports of the
work and teaching of Christ that came into his hands,
though he naturally looks at them in his own way. Nor
are these two elements contradictory, as their titles might
suggest. Certainly the gospel is not anti-Jewish in the
narrow sense of the term.
The early narratives commend O.T. piety ; Jesus is known as the Son
of David (xviii. 38, xx. 41) ; salvation is first for Israel (xiii. 16, xix. 9) ;
and the apostles are for the twelve tribes of Israel (xxii. 30). *
Other characteristics that have been observed in this gospel
are (1) the importance attached to prayer both in the example
of Christ and in His teaching on the subject, (2) the joyous
tone that pervades the narrative, and the scope it gives for
expressions of praise and thanksgiving, (3) the admirable narra
tive style, and character painting, as in Zacharias, Anna,
Zacchaeus, Herod Antipas, (4) the writer's care to note the
course of historical development — seen for instance in the
way he marks the end of the Galilean ministry, and the
successive stages of the journey up to Jerusalem, (5) his fond
ness for domestic scenes, such for example as the anecdote of
Mary and Martha.3
Blass holds that St. Luke issued two editions of his gospel — the first,
represented by the accepted text, for Palestine readers ; the second, when
at Rome, represented by the MS. D, for western readers.4
1 Compare Luke iv. 32 with 1 Cor. ii. 4 ; vi. 36 with 2 Cor. i. 3 ;
vi. 39 with Rom. ii. 19 ; vi. 48 with I Cor. iii. 10 ; vii. 8 with Rom.
iii. 1; viii. 12 with 1 Cor. i. 21 and Rom. i. 16; viii. 13 with
I Thess. i. 6 ; x. 7 with I Tim. v. 18 ; x. 8 with 1 Cor. x. 27 ;
X. 16 with I Thess. iv. 8 ; x. 20 with Phil. iv. 3 ; xi. 7 with Gal. iv. 17 ;
xi. 29 with I Cor. i. 22 ; xi. 41 with Tit. i. 15 ; xii. 35 with Eph. vi. 14 ;
xii. 42 with I Cor. iv. 2 ; xiii. 27 with 2 Tim. ii. 19 ; xviii. I with
Col. i. 3, 2 Thess. i. 11, and Gal. vi. 9; xx. 16 with Rom. ix. 14,
xi. 11, Gal. iii. 21; xx. 22, 25 with Rom. xiii. 7; xx. 35 with
2 Thess. i. 5 ; xx. 38 with Rom. vi. II and Gal. ii. 19; xxi. 23 with
1 Thess. ii. 16 ; xxi. 24 with Rom. xi. 25 ; xxi. 34 with 1 Thess. v. 3-5 ;
xxi. 36 with Eph. vi. 18 ; xxii. 53 with Col. 1. 13.— See Plummer, xiv.
2 See Weiss, N.T. Introd., ii. p. 308.
3 See Plummer, p. xlviii.
4 Philology of the Gospels, chap. ix.

CHAPTER II.
THE SYNOPTIC PROBLEM
I. Resemblances. I 3. Proposed Explanations.
2. Differences. | 4. Probable Conclusions.
The first three gospels are often called "the synoptics"1
from the fact that they take a common view of the life and
teaching of Christ, in contrast with St. John's very different
treatment of the subject ; and the synoptic problem arises
from the complications of their mutual relationship. If they
invariably followed the same lines we should naturally infer,
either that they were derived entirely from one or more
common sources, or that they were dependent one upon
another; and if they moved in quite distinct planes we
should reckon them to be independent and separate narra
tives. But the peculiar difficulty of the problem is found in
the fact that neither of these characteristics is to be observed
in them uniformly throughout. For a time two or all three of
them will run in closely parallel lines ; then for no reason that
we can easily discover one will suddenly branch off into a region
of its own, to return to its companions later on, in the same
sudden style. Or all three will diverge for a time and go their
own way, and then reunite either at the same place or one
after the other.
While these variations necessarily complicate the problem,
they supply us with hints concerning the composition of the
gospels which, when followed up, may lead to luminous con
clusions. Thus the result of the study of the synoptic
problem will be to take us a stage back towards the actual
1 From avv and S^is.
316

THE RESEMBLANCES 317
events by introducing us to the original sources in which the
evangelists found the materials for their books. We have to
notice, therefore, both the resemblances and the differences,
and then, if possible, to account for them and discover what
they imply.
1. The Resemblances.
These may be observed in the following particulars : —
a. A Common Plan. — After separate accounts of the infancy
of Jesus in Matthew and Luke, xMark joins them, and then all
three give the ministry of John the Baptist, followed by the
baptism and temptation of Jesus, and the commencement of
His ministry. From this time they rigidly confine their atten
tion to scenes in the north, although St. John is able to
describe much that happened in Judaea and Samaria. More
over, they are most explicit with regard to the first year of our
Lord's public work, hurrying over the later times till they
come to the last week, where all three of them enter into the
fulness of the details.
b. A Common Selection of Incidents. — Although our Lord's
public ministry probably occupied over two years, during
which time He would have said and done many things not
recorded in any of our gospels — as an appendix to the fourth
gospel recognises (John xxi. 25) — the synoptics concur in
giving us many incidents in common. They do not record
more incidents than could have been included in a few weeks
if they all had happened together; how is it then that they
accept so many of the same incidents out of the immense
number that filled the whole period over which their narratives
are spread?
If we reckon the incidents to be 88,1 we find them dis
tributed as follows : —
In all three gospels . . . 42
In Mark and Matt. . . .12
In Mark and Luke . • ¦ 5
In Matt, and Luke . . .12
Common Incidents . 71
1 This is a slight modification of Dr. Davidson's reckoning.

318 BIBLICAL INTRODUCTION
Only in Mark . . • • 3
Only in Matt. . . • 5
Only in Luke . . • ¦ 9
Exclusive Incidents . 17
Total . 88
Thus we have nearly half the total number of incidents in
each of the synoptics, 7 1 shared by at least two gospels, and in
Mark only three which are not also found in one or other of
the companion gospels. Can this be accidental ?
c. Similar Groups of Scenes. — We often meet with the
same succession of detached events in two or all three of
the synoptics, the same selection of incidents which were
separated by intervals of time.
For example, the cure of the paralytic, the call of Levi, the question
of fasting in all three (Matthew ix. 1-17 ; Mark ii. 1-22; Luke v. 17-39) >
the cornfield incident and the cure of the withered hand — events separated
by a week (Matthew xii. 1-21 ; Mark ii. 23— iii. 6 ; Luke vi. 1-1 1) ; Jesus
feeding the multitude, and walking on the sea, Peter's confession and the
transfiguration and following events (Matthew xv. 32-xvii. 23 ; Mark viii. I-
ix. 32, and also Luke ix. 10-45). The third evangelist omits the walking
on the sea, but he too brings the transfiguration incident next to St. Peter's
confession, and yet he tells us that there was an interval of eight days
between them. Can it be accidental that all three synoptic writers do this,
that all of them are silent on the occurrences of that week of travel at a most ¦
critical time ? Still more striking is the way in which the death of John
the Baptist is introduced alike by Matthew and Mark (Matthew xiv. 3 ;
Mark vi. 17). In neither case does this appear where the account of
John's work is given, but in both cases it is brought in later, parentheti
cally, to explain Herod's terrors. Thus we read in each of these gospels
that the king hearing the fame of Jesus, said He was John risen from the
dead, "for Herod " had arrested John, and so on, with the ghastly narra
tive of the murder, in both cases introduced by way of explanation with
the word "for" (yap). It is impossible to regard this coincidence as
accidental. d. Verbal Agreement. — There are many instances in which
the gospels agree quite verbally. This is most frequently the
case in the reports of sayings of Jesus, as might be expected.
But it is also found in narrative passages where the words
employed are not of vital importance. A striking kind of
coincidence is that in which quotations from the O.T. are
found in two gospels with the same variations from the
LXX.

THE DIFFERENCES 319
Matthew iii. 3, Mark i. 3, and Luke iii. 4 have a quotation from
Isaiah xl. 3, in which they agree word for word, though at the end they
depart from the Greek text they are citing — all three having " His paths "
t&s Tplfiovs afrrov, while the LXX., correctly following the Hebrew original,
has "the paths of our God" (rAs rplflovs tov Oeov j]/j.G>v). Dr. Abbott has
drawn out a careful analysis of the verbal identities and variations in
Matthew xxi. 33-44, Mark xii. I-II, Luke xx. 9-1 8. 1 Similar results
will be obtained if we make other comparisons. Take for instance
Matthew ix. 1-8, Mark ii. 1-12, Luke v. 17-26. Coming to verse 5 in
Mark we find that they verbally agree except that Matthew and Luke
have etira. (in Luke elwev) for Mark's \iyei, a change of no significance,
the words having the same meaning ; that Matthew adds, "be of good
cheer" (O&paei), and that Luke omits Jesus (6 'I^troOs), and substitutes
the less Hebraistic "man" (dvOpuire) for the "son" (t4kvov) in Matthew
and Mark. That is to say, except for Matthew's striking addition, "be
of good cheer ! " we have none but alterations such as editors make. In
verse 5 Matthew reads like an abbreviation of Mark ; except that he has
softened the text by inserting ' ' for " (ydp), every word in Matthew is also
in Mark. Turning to Luke we find him word for word as Matthew,
except that he has not included Matthew's added word "for," but has
added "thee" (aoi), and in one case changed the order of another word to
suit this addition (placing <rov after its substantive). Then at verse 10 in
Mark we have a parenthetic construction that is repeated in both the
parallels, and the phrases are verbally identical, except that Matthew,
according to his method, adds a word (rdre) to make the style more
smooth ; and that Luke has one synonymous word variation (elirev again
for \4yei).
2. The Differences.
If we only had the agreements to consider, there would
not be much difficulty in arriving at a satisfactory solution
of the synoptic problem. But now we are confronted with
equally striking differences, and these too have to be accounted
for. a. Accounts of Different Events. — We scarcely need to
explain the fact that some gospels give us incidents that
are not recorded in other gospels. That is not a difficult
position to face. The surprise is that there are so few cases
of solitary narration.
b. Differences in the Several Accounts of the Same Events. —
Occasionally the variations are too serious to be set down to
editorial liberty in dealing with the same materials. For
instance, while Luke gives a full and detailed narrative of
the birth of Christ, with clear statements about the life
1 See Encycl. Brit., art. "Gospels."

320 BIBLICAL INTRODUCTION
of Mary and Joseph in Nazareth before that happened,
Matthew betrays no knowledge that they had ever been to
Nazareth before the return from Egypt, when they would
have gone back to Bethlehem if they had not heard about
Archelaus, information which induced them to avoid his
territory and led to their settling in Nazareth, which city the
evangelist here introduces for the first time into his narrative,
saying of Joseph, "And being warned of God in a dream,
he withdrew into the parts of Galilee : and came and dwelt
in a city called Nazareth : that it might be fulfilled which
was spoken by the prophets," etc. (Matthew ii. 23.) Then
Matthew and Luke give the accounts of the second and
third temptations in different order. (Matthew iv. 5-1 1;
Luke iv. 6-12.) The greater part of Luke's version of
Matthew's Sermon on the Mount (Matthew v. 1) is given
as spoken on a level place ("and He came down and
stood on a level place " (Luke vi. 1 7) — no real contradiction,
but a variation). Luke's version of the Beatitudes reduces
the number, omits the more spiritual attributes, and is
followed by corresponding denunciation — three important
differences from Matthew's. (Luke vi. 20-26 ; Matthew
v. 3-12.) Other sayings from the Sermon on the Mount
appear in various parts of Mark and Luke.1 Matthew
(xiii. 53-58) and Mark (vi. 1-6) give the visit of Jesus
to Nazareth and His rejection some way on in His ministry
after work in Capernaum, etc. ; Luke (iv. 16-30) at the
very commencement, and as the occasion of His going
down to Capernaum, apparently for the first time, for he
adds, "And He came down to Capernaum, a city of Galilee"
(verse 31). We cannot suppose them different visits, for the
surprise at the carpenter's son, the proverb about the prophet
not being honoured in his own country, the failure to work
miracles, etc. occur in the other two gospels accounts just
1 In Mark iv. 24. Following Matthew's consecutive order, we have
passages scattered over Luke as follows : Luke vi. 20-26 ; xi. 33 ; xiv. 34,
35 ; xvi. 17 ; xii. 57-59 ; xvi. 18 ; vi. 29, 30 ; vi. 27, 28, 32-36 ; xi. 2-4 ;
xli- 33. 34; xi- 34-36; xvi. 13; xii. 22-31 ; vi. 37-42— with additions;
xi. 9-13 ; vi. 31 ; xiii. 23, 24 ; vi. 43"4S ; vi. 46 ; xiii. 26, 27 ; vi. 47-49-

PROPOSED EXPLANATIONS 321
as in Luke. Then Mark (x. 46) and Matthew (x. 29) have
the cure of Bartimaeus on the departure from Jericho; but
Luke (xviii. 35 ; xix. 1) at the entrance into the city. Con
siderable variations occur in the resurrection incidents. In
particular we have to notice that Matthew and Mark know of
no appearances in Jerusalem,1 and only represent that the
disciples must go to Galilee to see Jesus; but Luke gives
accounts of appearances in and near Jerusalem. Then we
have what are called Matthew's doublets : two demoniacs
(Matt. viii. 28) — Mark (v. 2) and Luke (viii. 27) have but one;
two blind men at Jericho (Matt. xx. 30. cf Mark x. 46, Luke
xviii. 35); the ass as well as its colt brought for the use of
Jesus, and the garments laid on both. (Matt. xxi. 7. cf. Mark
xi. 7, Luke xix. 35).
c. Verbal Differences. — These are most striking where the
general resemblance is most close. In the passages which we
compared above, viz., Matthew ix. 1-17, Mark ii. 1-23, Luke
v. 18-39, we saw some curious verbal modifications where the
sentences ran close together. But in those very passages there
are sentences which totally differ.
Mark ii. I is quite different from the parallels in Matthew and Luke.
Verse 2 is not represented at all in the other gospels ; at verse 3 we
have great variation ; verse 4 is not represented in Matthew : in Luke
it is represented with variations ; verses 6 and 7 are represented by
variations ; verse 8 is nearer to Luke than to Matthew, or than Matthew is
to Mark;2 verses 11, 12, 13 are also represented with great variations.
3. Proposed Explanations.
The history of the synoptic problem reveals the greatest
divergence of view as to the probable solution of it. Happily
in recent years those divergences have been narrowing, and
a nearer approach to a general agreement on the question
has been arrived at among critical students of the gospels.
The proposed hypotheses group themselves in three classes :
(1) Oral tradition ; (2) earlier sources in writing ; (3) mutual
dependence. The theory of oral tradition dispenses with all
1 i.e., on the understanding that Mark xvi. 9-20 is not a part of the
original gospel. See page 302.
2 e.g., both have inyvobs, while Matthew has idiiv, and both a form of
the word 6ta\oyl£ofw,i.
Y

322 BIBLICAL INTRODUCTION
idea of literary connection between the gospels, taking their
agreements to come from the fixing of the very words of
tradition, after the methods of rabbinical teaching common
among the Jews at the time when they were written, while
of course it easily accounts for the variations in the text.
The second hypothesis — that of earlier sources — looks for
these in the allusions of Patristic writers, such as Papias'
reference to Matthew's Logia, and in the results of an analysis
of the gospels. The theory of mutual dependence is of
course based upon the latter process. According to this
theory the earliest gospel was used by its two successors,
or by the third only through the medium of the second.
It is evident that these theories admit of indefinite modifica
tion and also of combination. It is quite legitimate to argue
that all three processes were followed — that traditions were
followed by the writers, that there were earlier documents
which they employed, that they used one another's works.
It is no longer possible to accept Chrysostom's comforting suggestion
that the agreements between the evangelists prove their truthfulness and
the divergences their independence. The problem is too complicated
for that ready solution. Augustin held that each evangelist worked on
the production of his predecessor, and in particular that Mark was an
abridgment of Matthew. The latter position is impossible. Where they
are on the same ground, Mark is fuller than Matthew. In the eighteenth
century, in Qermany, Lessing from the world of literary criticism suggested
that the gospel according to the Hebrews lay behind our gospels. His idea
was taken up by N.T. students, and Eichhorn proposed a primitive Syro-
Chaldaic gospel as the basis. Then Marsh, an Englishman, pointed out
coincidences in the Greek that demanded an original in that language,
with arguments which convinced Eichhorn, who now modified his theory,
and added that a Greek translation of his Syro-Chaldaic gospel was in
the hands of our evangelists. In the year 1818 Gieseler, on a suggestion
of Herder, worked out the theory that there was an oral primitive gospel
in Aramaic (the modern name for Eichhom's Syro-Chaldaic language),
i.e., a fixed tradition in set words, which had been put into Greek by
St. Paul,1 and afterwards changed in various ways by the other apostles.
Matthew and Mark represent the later apostolic gospels, while Luke
comes nearer the early Pauline form of it. The great theologian
Schleiermacher, perhaps the most influential theologian of the century,
proposed a more scientific theory: (1) The basis of Matthew was an
Aramaic collection of the sayings of Christ, the Logia described by
Papias. (2) Our Mark was founded on an earlier work by St. Mark, the
"Primitive Mark" (Urmarkus, of which much has since been heard
1 Hence the expression "my gospel," said to be used of this very book.

PROPOSED EXPLANATIONS 323
in later criticism). (3) Luke was founded on a series of small frag
ments. Credner followed, proposing as the basis of our gospels two
documents — the Logia and the Primitive Mark ; and Ewald carried the
analysis on further, elaborating a succession of writings in as many as
nine stages, the last of which is represented by our gospels. This may be
regarded as the first period of the history of the problem in modern times.
The second period opens with the work of Baur ("epoch-making," it
has been repeatedly called). The ' ' tendency " criticism of the Tubingen
School, inaugurated by Baur, and carried out in some of its details by
Schwegler and Zeller, treats the gospels as artificial products of theological
prepossessions in which the history is warped and coloured to suit the ideas
of the writers. Matthew and Luke represent the opposition of primitive
apostolic Christianity and Paulinism, but weakened and modified by the
introduction of other elements, Matthew coming from a Petrine source,
and Luke being founded on Marcion's gospel, which was strongly anti-
Jewish. Mark stands last as mediator, an entirely neutral gospel. This
extreme position came to be discredited within the school itself. It is
impossible to hold it now. Still Pfleiderer in our own day represents its
characteristics to some extent. Mark he takes to be the earliest gospel,
and a genuine work of the man whose name it bears — a great admission
from a leader of the more radical criticism. Luke comes next, founded
on Mark, but altering it to suit Pauline universalism ; while Matthew comes
last, based on Mark and Luke, and also on some strongly Jewish book,
probably The Gospel according to the Hebrews?
Pfleiderer introduces us to the period of contemporary criticism. This
is marked by an abandonment of the more extreme negative positions and
a remarkable drawing together of the radical and conservative schools on
ground which secures at least the substantial historicity of the gospels.
Among the more recent continental writers the following are especially
noteworthy : —
Reuss.2 — The two primitive writings named by Papias — "The Primitive
Mark " and the "Logia" — are the basis of the gospels. Our Mark
is based on the "Primitive Mark " ; our Matthew on the Canonical
Mark and the Logia ; Luke on Matthew and special sources of his
own.
Weiss.* — First there is the Logia, which contains incidents as well
as sayings. Mark is based on Peter's preaching and the Logia ;
our Matthew on Mark and the Logia ; Luke on Mark, the Logia,
and other sources.
Holtzmann.4 — First we have two primitive sources — an original Mark
and the Logia. Our Mark is a later, altered edition of the primi
tive Mark ; Matthew and Luke are both based on the two primitive
sources, but with the use of additional materials.
Jiilicher.5 — The earliest works are our Mark and the Logia of Matthew.
Both Matthew and Luke use these ; but they both also use other
sources. He discusses two hypotheses. (1) Was Mark acquainted
with Ihe book of the sayings of Jesus? His answer is that probably
1 Urchristenthum, pp. 359-443-
- Hist, of NT. (Eng. Trans.) pp. 175 ff.
8 lntrod., English trans., vol. ii., pp. 203-239.
4 Einleitung, pp. 340-367- 5 Einleitung, pp. 207-227.

324 BIBLICAL INTRODUCTION
Mark knew it, and that its existence was the reason why he did not
himself supply his own version of the teaching of Jesus, but that
he did not make much use of it. (2) Was Luke dependent on
Matthew? The answer is that if Matthew was the earlier book,
probably Luke would have seen it. But he did not make much
use of it.
Zahn.1 — Matthew's Hebrew gospel comes first (c. a.d. 62), Mark
follows (c. 67), Luke's gospel comes next (c. 75), and finally the
Greek Matthew (c. 80).
Among English writers the following may be noticed : —
Bishop Westcott — In his work on the gospels supporting the theory of
oral tradition and documentary independence.
Abbott.2 — By a comparison of the three gospels a common narrative
may be extracted. This is called "the triple tradition." It is
very bald and meagre ; but it is taken as the reliable history. All
else in the three gospels is aftergrowth.
Salmon.3 — (1) There was one common narrative. (2) This must have
been in writing, not a merely oral tradition. (3) It was in Greek.
(4) It came so near to Mark that we may regard it as our Mark,
though slight editorial alterations must be allowed for. Then there
was Matthew's Logia. Matthew and Luke are based on these two
works, but with other sources also. The difference in the narratives
of the infancy, etc., shows that they were independent of one
another.
Sanday.4 — Accepts Mark and the Logia as the chief authorities ; but he
points out the probability of other sources being used by the writers
of the first and the third gospels, who sometimes prefer these to
Mark and the Logia in parallel passages. This accounts for their
very different versions of some incidents and sayings of Christ.
Recent investigations have revived the question as to whether an Aramaic
document was used by all three evangelists. In this way the appearance
of synonymous words in the three gospels s may be accounted for, and so
too perhaps some discrepancies. Resch maintains that there must have been
an Aramaic document behind Mark ; and Professor Marshall has advocated
a common Aramaic original ; but many of his proofs have been discredited.
4. Probable Conclusions.
This narrowing of the issues as the result of recent criticism
in various schools is not a little significant. Certain results
may be regarded as fairly established. Others are coming out
with increasing clearness. The following points seem to be
settled with tolerable unanimity : —
(a) The Priority of Mark to the other Two Synoptics and its
1 Einleitung, vol. ii., pp. 158 ff. 2 Encycl. Brit., art. "Gospels."
8 Introd., Lectures viii. and ix. 4 D.B.2, art. "Gospels."
5 e.g., KptLpfiaTov in Mark ii. n ; K\lvnv in Matthew ix. 6; kXivISiov
in Luke v. 24, for the paralytic's mattress.

PROBABLE CONCLUSIONS 325
Employment in the Construction of both Matthew and Luke. —
An important factor of the case is the almost complete absorp
tion of Mark in the other two gospels. This can be accounted
for thus. Matthew comes first and takes a large slice of Mark.
Luke follows quite independently, and takes his large slice.
The natural result is that they partly agree and partly differ
in their selection, so that while they have a considerable
amount of common material from Mark, they each have
extracts exclusively their own ; but between them they appro
priate nearly the whole of Mark. But why not put it the
other way, and take Mark as a compilation from the other
two synoptics? For one thing because Mark is a fresh,
vigorous, rugged composition, while the other synoptics are
smoother in style. It bears on the face of it a character of
individuality and original force. Moreover, the difficulty of
producing the result as suggested by this alternative would be
insuperable in the cases where the three gospels verbally
agree, because it is found that, though they are often only
loosely parallel, whenever Matthew and Luke verbally agree
on a sentence that is also in Mark, that gospel also verbally
agreeing. This would be inevitable if both took from Mark.
But in the opposite case, i.e., supposing Mark to be based on
the two others, the difficulty of picking out the verbal agree
ments of Matthew and Luke, and reproducing them in
Mark would be insuperable ; and if successfully accomplished,
it would spoil Mark's freshness and power of narration. Be
sides, it is unreasonable to suppose it would ever be attempted.
We start with Mark, the genuineness of which is now
generally conceded. Certain points at which Mark differs
from the others suggest that it has been re-edited since it
was used for Matthew and Luke, but that is all. Substantially
we can take it as the original gospel ; there is no need to call
in the hypothesis of a primitive Mark. Its own fresh character
is against that hypothesis, and its close resemblance to so much
of what is common in Matthew and Luke renders it needless.1
1 For these reasonings and results we are largely indebted to Dr.
Abbott's investigations.

326 BIBLICAL INTRODUCTION
b. An Original Collection of Sayings of Christ. — Many
sayings of Christ are found in Matthew and Luke which are
not in Mark. This applies both to parables and to strings of
utterances, making up the twelve sections referred to above.1
It is generally agreed that this source is Matthew's Logia, des
cribed by Papias. But it must have been translated into Greek
to allow of verbal identities in the Greek renderings of sayings of
Christ.2 And yet it must also have been known in the original
Hebrew or Aramaic to account for variations in the translation.
Of course some other collection of the sayings of Christ might have
served ; but the presumption is in favour of Matthew's Logia. We know
from Papias that such a book existed ; the apostolic authorship would give
it authority ; and the unanimous ascription of the first gospel — which con
tains most of our teachings of Christ — to that apostle associates his name
with it from very early times, and is a presumption that he was in some
way connected with it. ¦
c. Certain Other Sources Unknown to Us. — These are
required for both the infancy narratives and the resurrection
narratives. Neither of those narratives are in Mark; nor
could either have been in the Logia, because if either had
been, then the authors of both the first and the third gospels
using that document would have seen it, and would have
avoided great divergences between their accounts.3
Moreover, St. Luke's authority for the large section of the
Peraean teaching that is peculiar to his gospel could scarcely
have been the Logia, or the first gospel, which gave so much
space to the teachings of Jesus, would not have omitted it.
In his preface St. Luke leads us to suppose that he had a
number of sources.
Two other likely conclusions may be briefly noticed:
(i) Probably Mark knew the Logia. This will account for his
close agreement with Matthew and Luke in so many of his
reports of the sayings of Christ. (2) Probably Matthew and
Luke were quite independent of one another. The differences
where they part from Mark and the Logia, as in the infancy
and resurrection narratives, point to this conclusion.
But while these results may be considered as fairly settled,
1 Page 317.
2 See the rare word iinobatos in both Matthew's and Luke's versions of
the Lord's prayer. s Mentioned on page 288.

PROBABLE CONCLUSIONS 327
some very perplexing questions remain open to speculation.
The question of an Aramaic original, behind all the gospels
and other than the Logia, is still obscure. It looks as though
this might account for curious merely verbal differences.
And then there is the question how far the evangelists who
used the Logia kept closely to the text of it, or how far
that may have been modified before it reached their hands.
It is scarcely to be supposed that a document written by
one of the Twelve Apostles would be so freely handled
as the divergences suggest. Thus, for example, the two
accounts of the Beatitudes are so very different, that we
cannot believe both evangelists took them from the same
original. If they did, which is closest to that original ? If
Matthew's version is most correct, we must suppose that
Luke deliberately emptied it of its spiritual wealth of ex
pression, and reduced it to a more secular form, which
would be quite contrary to his character as a historian,
and utterly unlike what his preface leads us to expect.
But if Luke's is the original version, and the writer of the
first gospel expanded it to the proportions now found in
that work, we appear to have the evangelist improving on
]the Master — an impossibility. We seem thus led to the
conclusion that there was more than one collection of Logia
of Christ in the early Church. This is only what we might
naturally expect. Perhaps the mistake has been in attributing
too much in Luke to Matthew's Logia. Luke's parallel
sayings in divergent form could be more reasonably attributed
to some other collection. We must still admit Mark and
the Logia as the main sources. But probably more weight
and scope should be allowed to the special sources of Luke.
Finally, the contact of the evangelists with traditions and living
witnesses would lead them to modify what reached them in
written sources.
In spite of the difficulties that still beset the problem,
we may be thankful that the progress made towards a
solution has gone far to establish the historicity of the
synoptic records.

CHAPTER III.
THE FOURTH GOSPEL
i. Authorship and Historicity. I 3. Contents.
2. Time and Place of Writing. | 4. Characteristics.
1. Authorship and Historicity.
We cannot speak of the authenticity or genuineness of the
gospels in the sense in which we apply those words to the
epistles, because all four of these works are anonymous.
The titles which they bear in our Bibles were not originally
attached to them, and in the text itself there is no direct
claim to authorship. Matthew and Mark are perfectly im
personal. Luke, in its preface, contains some personal
statements by the writer, but without a hint as to his
name. In John we have several statements that point
pretty clearly to the identification of the writer. Still he
is not named, and it is possible to hold as some have done,
either (1) that "the beloved disciple" was not St. John, or
(2) that "the beloved disciple," though allowed to be St.
John, is not claimed by the book itself as its author. These
are questions to be examined on their merits apart from ideas
of pseudonymity or forgery. Nevertheless the historicity of
the gospel is closely bound up with the authorship. To
establish the tradition that the Apostle John wrote it is to
vindicate its essential historicity.
a. The Witness of Antiquity. — The gospel was certainly
known and used in the Church soon after the beginning of
328

AUTHORSHIP AND HISTORICITY 329
the second century, and we have statements attributing it to
the Apostle John as early as the middle of that century.
Moreover the Eucharistic prayers in the Didache are very
Johannine, though we cannot be certain that they are based
on the gospel (Didache 9). The gospel was in the ancient
Syriae and in the old Latin of North Africa by the end of the
second century.
(1) For the antiquity of the gospel we have some important new
evidence furnished in our own age. The recovery of the Refutation of
all Heresies by Hippolytus enables us to see in that book two quotations
from the gospel in gnostic writings cited by Hippolytus. Referring to
Valentinus (c. a.d. 130) he writes: "Therefore, says he, the Saviour
says : All who have come before me are thieves and robbers," plainly
taken from John x. 8 (Ref. Haer., vi. 30); and referring to Basilides
(c. A.D. 125): "And this he says is what is said in the gospels: The
true light which enlighteneth every man was coming into the world,"
which is John i. 9 (Ref. Haer., vii. 22); and again also referring to
Basilides : ' ' And that each thing, he says, has its own seasons, the
Saviour is a sufficient witness, when He says, My hour is not yet come," a
saying found only in John ii. 4 (Ref. Haer., vii. 27). '
From the internal evidence of his writings it becomes increasingly
probable that Justin Martyr knew our gospel — though probably he did
not include it among his "Memoirs of the Apostles." Thus in his
account of baptism he writes, ' ' For Christ also said, Except ye be born
again ye shall in no wise enter into the kingdom of heaven" — a slight
variation of John iii. 3 (1 Apol. 61).2 Then the recent discovery of
Tatian's Diatessaron makes it certain that its author had the fourth gospel.
He begins with the prologue and weaves the contents of the gospel into
his composite narrative. Possibly Papias knew our gospel, for IrenEeus
gives an explanation of the phrase, "In my father's house are many
mansions" (John xiv. 2), by "the presbyters," among whom he seems to
include Papias (Adv. Haer., v. 36). Certainly he knew the companion
writing, I John, for Eusebius tells us that he "used testimonies from the
first Epistle of John" (H.E., iii. 39). Further, the recent vindication of
the Ignatian epistles3 enables us to use their evidence, and also that of
Polycarp's epistle, which stands or falls with them. Now these works
are saturated with Johannine ideas and phrases.4
1 It is idle to assert that Hippolytus may have been citing writings
of the later followers of these gnostics. The repeated "he says" (<pyal)
in the singular forbids that interpretation.
2 Justin Martyr's evidence is thoroughly discussed and vindicated by
Ezra Abbot, Authorship of the Fourth Gospel.
3 By Lightfoot and Zahn ; their genuineness is accepted by Harnack.
4 e.g. , " Recover yourselves in faith, which is the flesh of the Lord, and
in love which is the blood of Jesus Christ" (Trail. 8) ; "Living water"
(Rom. 1); "Children of light" (Phil. 2); Christ as the "Word"
(Mag. 8) ; "The door of the Father " (Phil. a). Polycarp quotes I John
iv. 3 (Ad. Phil. vii. 1).

330 BIBLICAL INTRODUCTION
(2) For the association of St. John's name with the gospel,
the earliest witness is Theophilus of Antioch (a.d. 170), who
writes, " John says : In the beginning was the Word, and the
Word was with God " — and more from the same passage in the
gospel (Ad. Autolyc. 22). Later fathers, Tertullian, Clement A.,
Origen, etc., all ascribe the gospel to John. Polycrates of
Ephesus (a.d. 190), referring to John, says: "He who rested
on the bosom of the Lord" (Eusebius, H.E., iii. 31 :). In
the Muratorian Fragment the gospel was attributed to John.
But the most important witness is Irenaeus, for that father tells
us that he has distinct memories of Polycarp, who was a
disciple of John. Writing to Florinus, he says : " For I saw
thee, when I was still a boy in Lower Asia, in company with
Polycarp, while thou wast faring prosperously in the royal
court, and endeavouring to stand well with him. For I
distinctly remember the incidents of that time better than
events of recent occurrence ; for the lessons received in child
hood, growing with the growth of the soul, become identified
with it, so that I can describe the very place in which the
blessed Polycarp used to sit when he discoursed, and his
goings out and his comings in, and his manner of life, and his
personal appearance, and the discourses which he held before
the people, and how he would describe his intercourse with
John and with the rest who had seen the Lord, and how he
would relate their words. And whatsoever things he had
heard from them about the Lord, and about his miracles, and
about his teaching, Polycarp, as having received them from
eye-witnesses of the life of the Word, would relate altogether
in accordance with the Scriptures. To these discourses I
used to listen at the time with attention by God's mercy which
was bestowed upon me, noting them down, not on paper, but in
my heart ; and by the grace of God I constantly ruminate upon
them faithfully" (Eusebius, HE., v. 20). Now Irenaeus is
unhesitating in holding that the apostle John wrote the fourth
gospel. It is difficult to think that he was mistaken.
1 Hilgenfeld admits that this is an allusion to John xiii. 25.

AUTHORSHIP AND HISTORICITY 331
b. Internal Evidence. — The supreme spiritual worth of the
gospel speaks for its apostolic origin. At all events it justifies
its veracity, for the book exalts the idea of truth, and sternly
denounces falsehood. The verse xxi. 24 is perhaps to be
regarded as external evidence, the testimony it may be of the
Ephesian elders. At all events, it is very ancient — it is found
in all good copies ; and it formally authenticates the book.
There is also a definite claim to veracity in xix. 35. But who
is the writer making this claim ? It seems clear that he is the
same as the beloved disciple ; the anonymous reference to
that disciple can only be satisfactorily explained on the
hypothesis that he is the author. Certainly the claim is for
one of the inner circle of Christ's disciples. Peter is named
repeatedly as a different person. James, the brother of John,
is not named ; but he died too early. The almost certain
inference is that the allusion is intended to point to
John.1 We may take it then, that, though not in so many words,
yet really and distinctly, the gospel claims to come from the
apostle John, and the ancient attestation appended to it is
intended to support and confirm his authority.
Further, when we come to details, we see a convergence of
signs that point in the same direction. It is common to
indicate this in four narrowing circles : — (1) The author
was a Jew. He quotes the O.T. as frequently as Matthew,
generally from the LXX., but on two or three occasions
translating directly from the Hebrew where the LXX. had
diverged.2 His construction is Hebraistic, with simple
sentences linked together by the word "and." He fre
quently gives us the Hebrew chtijv, and he employs such
Hebraisms as "son of perdition," "rejoice with joy," etc.
Then he shows familiarity with the feasts and with Jewish
manners generally.
1 The suggestions of Andrew and Nicodemus for "the beloved disciple "
are quite unsupported by evidence.
8 e.g., John xiii. 1 8, follows the Heb. "has lifted up his heel," though
the LXX. reads "multiplied tripping with the heel."

332 BIBLICAL INTRODUCTION
Thus he is acquainted with details of the Tabernacles (e.g., vii. 37) ;
the water pots for cleansing (ii. 6) ; the question of purifying (iii. 25) ; the
Jews' purification of themselves before the Passover (xi. 55) ; their fear of
defilement on entering the Prtetorium (xviii. 28). The same familiarity
with Jewish customs is seen in the relation of the Jews to the Samaritans
(iv. 9), the idea of the soul's pre-existence and sin (ix. 2), the objection to
let the bodies remain on the crosses on the Sabbath (xix. 31).
The mention of the Jews as foreigners (ii. 6, 13 ; v. 1 ; vi. 4) is no
objection if John is writing for Gentiles.
(2) The author was a Palestinian. He shows his know
ledge of quite out-of-the-way places such as Cana of Galilee,
Bethany beyond Jordan, Sychar, l the exact situation of
Jacob's well, with the Samaritan holy mountain, Gerizim,
close at hand, and the cornfield in full view. He knows
many details about Jerusalem — indeed his knowledge of that
city and its neighbourhood is quite exceptional.
Thus he knows the intermittent springs (v. 2), the pool of Siloam
(ix. 7), Solomon's porch (x. 23), the number of stadia between Jerusalem
and Bethany (xi. 18), the Valley of the Kidron and the Garden of
Gethsemane (xviii. 1), Gabbatha (xix. 13), Golgotha (xix. 17).2
(3) The author was contemporary with the events described.
His treatment of the Messianic ideas of the time suggests
this. He shows how the expectation of the Messiah was
shared by the Samaritans, and he distinguishes " the prophet "
(i. 21, 25; vi. 14; vii. 40) from the Christ, although Christian
teachers soon became accustomed to recognise both in our
Lord. And then on the negative side the evidence is also
for his being of this early period. He makes no reference
to the great gnostic heresies of the second century. Many
of his phrases were used by the teachers of those systems,
and he would have guarded against such use of them had he
known of the possibility of it.
(4) The author writes as an eye-witness. Four times the
claim is made by him, or for him, viz., in i. 14 ; xix. 35 ;
xxi. 24 ; and 1 John i. 1, for the epistle was certainly written
1 Identified with Asgar by the " Palestine Exploration Fund."
2 Professor Sanday has shown the absurdity of the theory that St. John
might have "got up" his knowledge ofthe locality from "geography
books," by exhibiting the meagreness of such books even for important
parts of the empire (Expositor, March, 1892).

AUTHORSHIP AND HISTORICITY 333
by the author of the gospel. The vivid details of the gospel
suggest the eye-witness.
In particular consider the narrative of the loaves and fishes, with
St. Philip's place in it, etc. (vi. 5, 9, 15, 23), and the many notes of time
(e.g., i. 29, 35, 43 ; ii. I ; iv. 43, 52 ; vi. 22 ; xi. 6, 7 ; xii. 1, 12 ; xiii. I ;
xx. 1), even hours of the day (iv. 6 ; xiii. 30 ; xviii. 28). Moreover the
author knows and understands the feelings of the disciples.
When we put all this together we cannot fail to see that the
gospel is amply attested as a genuine work justly ascribed to
the apostle John. It would seem that such evidence could
scarcely be disturbed by the most serious objections.
c. Objections. — The gospel was received in the early
Church with practical unanimity. The only exceptions are
with some people whom Irenaeus mentions without naming
them,1 and an obscure party in the second century whom
Epiphanius, writing in the fourth century, describes under
the nickname of the " Alogi," probably the same people
Irenseus referred to. He tells us that they rejected both
the gospel and the Apocalypse, attributing them to Cerinthus,
the heretic. But their reasons were evidently doctrinal, such
as objections to the " logos '' doctrine.2
But during the present century a number of objections have
been raised, and various hypotheses proposed. The principal
difficulties may be briefly epitomised as follows : —
(1) Inconsistency with the character of St. John. In the
synoptics he and his brother are "Boanerges" (Mark iii. 17),
and they evince a passionate and somewhat narrow-minded
disposition ; 8 but in the fourth gospel " the beloved disciple "
has quite another disposition. This is a very feeble objection.
It allows no room for the softening and mellowing of character.
Besides, it assumes that if Jesus especially loved any disciple,
that disciple must have been of a gentle disposition.
(2) Inconsistency with the Apocalypse. This is more
serious. As early as the third century Dionysius of
1 Adv. Haer., iii. 11.
2 Epiphanius, Haer., 1. 1.
3 See, for instance, Mark ix. 38 ff. ; Luke ix. 54, 55.

334 BIBLICAL INTRODUCTION
Alexandria pointed out the great difference between the
style of the two works, and deduced the conclusion that
the Apocalypse must have been written by some other
John.1 The grammatical forms of the gospel are in good
Greek; but those of the Apocalypse are most erratic, so
much so, that "the grammar of the Apocalypse" has a
chapter assigned to it in books of N.T. grammar. And
while the gospel is liberal in tone, the Apocalypse has
statements more in accordance with Judaistic Christianity.
So strong are these divergences, that it is generally admitted
that St. John couM not have written the Apocalypse after writ
ing the gospel. It is possible to think of the Apocalypse
as composed before his residence in Ephesus and the gospel
many years later, when his associations with Greek civilisation
as well as the growth of his own Christian experience may
have much changed his thought and language.2 But if the
same man did not write both books, it is a question whether
we should not follow Dionysius and assign the Apoca
lypse to some other writer.3
(3) Inconsistency with the synoptics. This is pointed
out in a number of instances. Thus the synoptic accounts
represent the scene of Christ's ministry as wholly in Galilee,
till at the very last He goes up to Jerusalem to die; but
John contains descriptions of several visits to Jerusalem
and public teaching in that city. No doubt it is the fact
that the three earlier gospels give us the ministry in the
north, perhaps resting on a Galilean tradition ; yet incidentally
they admit that Jesus had been to Jerusalem by recording
His lament over Jerusalem, where He says, "How often
would I have gathered your children, etc. ; but ye would
not." (Matthew xxiii. 37; Luke xiii. 34, 35.)* Then it
is said that the synoptics allow but little more than one
1 See Eusebius, HE., vii. 25.
2 That depends on the date of the Apocalypse, which will be considered
further on.
3 For a full discussion of this point see Reynolds, Pul. Com., John.
4 The best MSS. of Luke iv. 44 read : " He was preaching in the
synagogues of Judsea."

AUTHORSHIP AND HISTORICITY 335
year for our Lord's ministry; but John gives three years.
Now the article on " Chronology " in the new Dictionary
of the Bible shows that though Luke seems to think of
but one year, Mark requires two, and John gives no more
than two. So this difficulty vanishes. Next it is pointed
out that while the synoptics show Jesus taking the last
Passover at the usual Jewish date of that feast, John seems
to treat the Passover as not due till the evening of the day
on which Jesus was crucified.1
Further, we miss all signs of progressive development in the
teaching ; e.g. in the synoptics Jesus veils His messiahship at
first; it is only confessed by St. Peter at Caesarea after the
public work in Galilee is over, and even then Christ will
not have it proclaimed. (Mark viii. 27-30.) But in John
it is admitted from the first, even virtually proclaimed by
the Baptist.2 But the gravest difficulty remains to be con
sidered. Our Lord's method of teaching is completely
changed in the fourth gospel. Instead of picturesque parables
and pithy proverbs, we have long discourses and arguments.
Then, while in the synoptics Christ is practical and occupied
with others, in John He is theological, transcendental, and
occupied with His own person and relation to God. It is
something, however, to have it proved that the essential truths
taught by Christ are the same in all four gospels.3
d. Probable Solution. — The weighty evidence for the
antiquity and Johannine authorship still stands, and that
too cannot be lightly set aside, although sometimes it is
ignored when the difficulties are under discussion. While
1 For the synoptic date see Mark xiv. 12; Matthew xxvi 17; and
especially Luke xxii. 7 ; and for John's date, John xiii. I, 29 ; xviii. 28 ;
xix. 14, 31, 42. Three methods of reconciliation have been proposed:
(1) That Christ anticipated the feast. The synoptic references exclude
this. (2) That John refers to the whole week of the festival, most of
which was still future, under the names "Passover" and "Feast," the
"Preparation " being taken as the Jewish name for Friday. (3) That the
eating of the lambs was not got through on the Passover night, so many
had to be prepared.
2 John i. 29, 41, 49; iv. 26, etc.
3 Demonstrated both by Wendt and Beyschlag.

336 BIBLICAL INTRODUCTION
accepting the tradition on this evidence, and assigning the
gospel to St. John, we may still allow considerable scope
to two considerations : (i) It must be conceded that St.
John reproduced his memories after long meditation and
frequent use of them in teaching as they shaped themselves
in the forms of his own thought. This is apparent from
the fact that the language and style are exactly the same
in sayings of Christ, in sayings of John the Baptist, in
comments of the evangelist, and in the first epistle of John.1
We must attribute this unique and easily recognisable
Johannine style to St. John himself throughout. That need
not trouble us if we remember that "the letter killeth,"
while it is "the Spirit" that "giveth life." (2) Possibly
we should go further, and allow that St. John may have written
the work through one of his disciples, who would be re
sponsible for the signs of Greek culture it contains, while
the substance of the incidents and teaching was contributed
by the apostle himself.
Not only extreme radical critics, but more moderate students have found
difficulties in accepting this gospel. Still the movement of late is towards
both a fuller recognition of historicity and a closer association with the
name of John the apostle.
Pfleiderer, it is true, holds that the book does not belong to historical
works at all, but must be classed with Hellenistic doctrinal productions,
as "the richest fruit of the development of the Hellenistic doctrine found
in the Hebrew." 2
On the other hand, Weizsacker allows the gospel to contain genuine
historical reports of the sayings and deeds of Christ ; and although he does
not admit that it comes directly from John, he attributes it to a Johannine
School at Ephesus.3
Holtzmann denies the apostolic authorship,4 ascribing it to a Christian
Jew of the dispersion ; and so does Julicher, who regards the gospel as "a
philosophic fiction " with a religious tendency, of the third generation.6
Harnack takes a middle course. He regards John the elder as the
author, but allows that this man obtained his information from the
1 e.g., for similarities between John the Baptist and the evangelist see
i. 15-18 and iii. 27-36 ; and for similarities between Christ and the
evangelist see iii. 11-21. In the one case John's words, in the other
Christ's words, blend imperceptibly with the evangelist's.
* Urchristenthum, pp. 695-786.
3 Apostolic Age, English trans., vol. ii., pp. 206-226.
4 Einleitung, pp. 453-465. » Einleitung, p. 258.

CONTENTS 337
apostles.1 This is to grant the substantial historicity of the gospel. Mc-
Giffert also ascribes it to John the elder.2
The great difficulty for these critics is the weighty testimony of Irenaeus.
Harnack holds that since that Father fell into an error in supposing that
Papias knew John, he may have done the same with regard to Polycarp,
the essential link of connection with the evangelist. But the cases are not
at all parallel. Irenaeus never writes of Papias as he does of Polycarp in
his letter to Florinus. The Johannine authorship of the gospel has obtained
substantial support from Lightfoot, Sanday, Reynolds, etc., and it is
elaborately defended by Zahn.3
2. Time and Place of Writing.
Even extreme criticism has continually receded in its asser
tions concerning the date of the gospel.
The Tubingen date (a.d. 160-170) of Baur and Schwegler is now no
longer maintained by any. Zeller retreated to 150, Pfleiderer to 140,
Hilgenfeld to 130-140. Julicher dates it soon after 100, Harnack 80-110.
An exact date cannot be fixed.
While assigning the gospel to the apostle John, we must
look for it in his extreme old age, that is to say not far from
the end of the first century. There is a general agreement in re
garding Ephesus as the place of its origin,
3. Contents.
a. Introduction, i. 1-18.
The Word with God; manifested (1) in creation, (2) in
prophecy, (3) in the light within, (4) in the Incarnation.
b. Before the First Passover ; the Baptist and Christs early
Galilean Ministry, i. 19-ii. 12.
i. 19-34, John's testimony to Christ.
35-51, John's disciples passing over to Jesus.
ii. 1-12, The marriage at Cana; Jesus at Capernaum.
c. The Year from the First to the Second Passovers; Christ's
Work in Jerusalem, Judcea, Samaria, and Galilee, ii. 13-iv. 47.
ii. 13-25, Jesus at the Passover; purging the temple.
iii. 1-2 1, Nicodemus and the new birth.
22-36, Jesus in Judaea; John at ^Enon; his testimony to
the superiority of Jesus.
iv. 1-26, The woman of Samaria and living water.
27-42, Our Lord's ministry in Samaria.
1 Chronologie, pp. 651-680. 2 Apostolic Age, pp. 606-621.
3 Einleitung, vol. ii., pp. 445 ff.
Z

338 BIBLICAL INTRODUCTION
43-54, Jesus a second time at Cana; cure of the Capernaum
nobleman's son.
v. 1-9, Jesus at a feast in Jerusalem ; cure of the infirm man.
10-18, The Jews complain of Sabbath-breaking.
19-47, Christ's reply; His claim to give life from the dead;
testimony of the Scriptures to Christ, who is sent by the Father.
d. The Year from the Second Passover to the Third ; Jesus
in Galilee, then in Jerusalem and the South Country, vi. i-xi. 57.
vi. 1-15, Christ feeding the multitude; attempt to make
Him a king.
16-21, Walking on the sea.
22-59, Christ the bread of life; eating His flesh and drink
ing His blood.
60-71, Many disciples leaving at the hard saying.
vii. 1-13, Search for Jesus at the Feast of Tabernacles.
14-24, Jesus at the feast; charged with demoniacal pos
session. 25-36, Attempt to seize Him and kill Him.
37-44, Invitation to all who thirst.
45-52, The officers, overawed, refuse to arrest Christ;
Nicodemus claims justice for Him.
[vii. 53— viii. 11, The woman taken in adultery.]
This passage is not found in the best MSS., and it is rejected by biblical
critics as not part of the gospel. Still it is very ancient, x and very Christ
like. Probably it embodies a genuine tradition, and perhaps it is taken
from some lost gospel. Blass ascribes it to a second edition of Luke,
prepared by that evangelist.2
viii. 1 2-30, Contest concerning the claims of Christ.
31-59, The Jews no longer Abraham's children; Christ's
claim to pre-existence rejected.
ix. 1-12, Cure of the blind man at the Pool of Siloam.
13-41, Discussion with the Pharisees about this cure having
been on the Sabbath day.
x. 1-2 1, The good shepherd.
22-39, At the Feast of the Dedication; the Jews attempt
to stone Jesus. 1 In the western text, D, etc.
2 See Blass, Philology of the Gospels, p. 163.

CONTENTS 339
40-42, Jesus beyond the Jordan.
xi. 1-46, The raising of Lazarus.
47-53, On the advice of Caiaphas, the Council propose to
put Jesus to death.
54-57, Jesus in retirement at Ephraim.
e. The Last Days at Jerusalem, xii.-xiii.
xii. 1-8, Mary anointing the feet of Jesus.
9-1 1, The notoriety of Lazarus.
12-19, The triumphant entry.
2 0-3 6a, Greeks desiring to see Jesus; His premonition of
death ; the voice from heaven,
36 b-50, Jesus in retirement; on believing or rejecting Christ.
xiii. 1-20, At the Passover ; Jesus washing His disciples'
feet ; the lesson about humility.
2 1-30, The traitor pointed out.
31-38, Christ to be glorified in death ; Peter warned.
f. The Last Discourse and Prayer, xiv. -xvii.
xiv., Seeing the Father; the promise of the Comforter;
Christ's peace.
xv., The true vine ; the new commandment.
xvi., The Spirit of truth; the little while; concluding
assurances. xvii., Christ's prayer of intercession.
g. The Arrest, Trials, Crucifixion, and Resurrection, xviii.-xxi.
xviii. i-n, The betrayal and arrest in the garden.
12-27. Trial before Annas and Caiaphas; Peter's denial.
28-xix. 16, Trial before Pilate, and condemnation.
xix. 17-30, Crucifixion and death of Jesus.
31-37, The spear-thrust.
38-42, The burial.
xx. 1-18, Mary Magdalene at the tomb, and meeting Jesus.
19-23, Jesus appearing to His disciples.
24-31, Thomas' doubt; his faith on seeing Christ; other
signs. xxi. 1-14, Appearance by the sea of Galilee.
15-23, Christ's questions for Peter.
24, 25, Appended notes of verification.

340 BIBLICAL INTRODUCTION
4. Characteristics.
The fourth gospel opens with an introduction, simple in
phrase but profound in meaning, which identifies the Word
with Christ, and traces the manifestations of the Word down
to the Incarnation.
" The Logos " (6 \67os) was a title familiar to Alexandrian Jews from
its prominence in the writings of Philo, who had derived it from the
Stoics, and used it in the sense given to it by those earlier philosophers as
the Divine Reason. So close was the communication between Alexandria
and Ephesus, we cannot doubt that the appearance of the term
in our gospel is derived from Philo. But this applies to the title itself,
rather than to its meaning. St. John understands it as meaning Word, not
Reason, and uses it in harmony with Palestinian Jewish thought, rather
than in the Alexandrian way. Thus old rabbinical teachings about the
Memra, "the Word of the Lord," which was almost taken to be a
person and a mediator between God and the world in later Judaism,
is echoed in John's doctrine of the Logos. But this, in turn, is based
on the O.T. teaching about the Word of the Lord. But John gives
it quite a new form in applying it to Christ. The chief differences between
John and Philo may be stated as follows : —
(1) Philo's Logos is Reason ; John's is Word.
(2) ,, ,, impersonal; ,, a Person.
(3) ,, „ not incarnate ; ,, incarnate.
(4) ,, ,, not the Messiah ; ,, the Messiah.
St. John, or his editor, tells us distinctly that his object in
writing is to induce faith in Christ (xx. 31). To that end
no doubt he selects incidents and teachings that bring our
Lord's Divine nature into view. He also sets forth those
teachings of Christ which reveal the deeper experiences of
the human soul in relation to Christ — the new birth, the
living water, the light, the heavenly bread, reaching a climax in
the utterances about eating the flesh and drinking the blood
of the Son of Man. At the same time he shows how Christ's
work was carried on in the midst of a conflict with error and
direct opposition. We see throughout the darkness contending
with the light, but not able to suppress it. It is characteristic
of John that even the last conflict, in the passion and death of
Christ, is described as a glorification. St. John gives no account
of the infancy, the temptation, most of the Galilean ministry,
the Lord's Supper, the agony in the garden; but it is probable
that he knew one or more of the earlier gospels, and left those
works to tell their own tale. It was early recognised as the
"Spiritual Gospel." Yet it is singularly definite and vivid.

CHAPTER IV.
THE ACTS OF THE APOSTLES

I. Authorship,
2. Historicity.
3. Date.

4. Contents.
5. Aim and Characteristics.

1. Authorship.
This book was unanimously ascribed to St. Luke by the
early Church, and accepted as the work of that writer in all
subsequent ages until the rise of modern criticism.
a. Internal Evidence. — It is beyond question that the
author of the third gospel was the author of Acts. Both
begin with an introduction addressed to Theophilus, and Acts
refers to the gospel as "the former treatise." A similar style
is to be traced through the two works. If therefore we have
seen reason to accept the Lucan authorship of the third
gospel, that is a justification for attributing Acts also to Luke.
Then Acts has characteristics of its own which well accord
with this judgment. It is very Pauline in tone, and a con
siderable portion of it is devoted to an account of the
apostle's journeys, so that we may be sure that it was written
by one of his friends.
b. Testimony of Ancient Writers. — The book is acknow
ledged as Luke's in writings dating soon after the middle
of the second century. Irenaeus thus acknowledges it, and
it is ascribed to Luke in the Muratorian Fragment.
For Irenaeus's statements see Adv. Haer., iii. 14, 1 ; 15, I. Acts was
known to the author of the letter of the Churches at Lyons and Vienne,
who cites St. Stephen's dying words, though without naming his authority
(Eusebius, H.E., v. 2). There is reason to think it was known to
Justin Martyr, though he does not expressly cite it (I. Apol, 49 ; Tryph.,
20, 68, 118). The Acts of Paul and Thecla, though an apocryphal work,
must be ascribed to the second century, and it makes use of Acts. It is
needless to cite later testimony. Acts is in the Peshitto and the Old Latin
versions. 341

342 BIBLICAL INTRODUCTION
c. Authorship of the Sections in the First Person. — Without
any explanation or introduction the author passes into the use
of the first person plural with the pronoun "we" in three
sections of his book, viz., xvi. 10-18; xx. 5-xxi. 18; xxvii. 1-
xxviii. 16. The narration of these portions begins at Troas and
goes on to Philippi. It returns on the occasion of St. Paul's
second visit to Philippi, and accompanies him to Jerusalem.
There it disappears, but it is resumed for the apostle's voyage
from Jerusalem to Rome. Thus, it would seem, St. Paul met
the author at Troas, took him to Philippi, and left him there ;
picked him up again on his return to Philippi, and had his
company to Jerusalem, and again after the Caesarean im
prisonment for the journey to Rome. The most probable
explanation is that St. Luke was the companion on these
occasions, and Professor Ramsay suggests with some proba
bility that he was a native of Philippi, and the "man of
Macedonia" who appeared to St. Paul in his night visions
at Troas, perhaps after conversation with the apostle the
previous evening.1 An alternative is that St. Luke here inserts
sections of some writing by another person, and the names
of Silas and Timothy have been proposed. Neither will
fit the circumstances : (1) Silas was with the apostle at
Philippi; but he disappears after this first visit to Europe,
and we have no reason to suppose he was with St. Paul
in his later journeys. (2) Timothy was with the apostle
later ; but then he is named in the " we " sections as a
third person. Besides, it is quite contrary to St. Luke's literary
method to introduce some other writer without a word of
explanation. We know he had many sources for his gospel ;
probably it was the same with Acts. Yet he treats no other
portions of his materials in this way. He was far too skilful
an author to lapse into so crude and clumsy a method. There
is no reason to deny these sections to Luke, who, we know,
was with St. Paul at Rome. (Colossians iv. 14.) It is natural
to suppose that he accompanied the apostle on his voyage
1 St. Paul, pp. 200-205.

HISTORICITY 343
thither. Thus Paul indirectly confirms Luke's statements.
Moreover the style of these fragments agrees with Luke's style
elsewhere. 2. Historicity.
Difficulties as to the historicity of Acts have been suggested
on a variety of grounds :
a. Inconsistency with the Theory of a Doctrinal Schism in
the Church. — This was Baur's great objection. Starting with
the theory of bitter antagonism between St. Paul and the
Twelve Apostles, and maintaining that this antagonism
corresponded to two totally different conceptions of Christian
truth, this critic and his followers regarded Acts as a fancy
picture in which the rigour of Paul's anti-Judaism and the
strictness of the older apostles' Judaism are both softened
down to agree with later Catholic unity. But it is now
seen that the Tubingen school grossly exaggerated the
difference between the two lines of Christian teaching.
Galatians, in which Baur thought he found the strongest
evidences of divergence, really testifies to the essential agree
ment between Peter and Paul, both in accepting liberal views
with regard to the Gentiles1 and in recognising one another's
claims.2 b. Contradictions to St. Paul's Statements of Fact. — It
must be allowed that the difficulties which present themselves
in this relation are not a little puzzling. The chief points
come out of a comparison with Galatians where St. Paul
describes his visits to Jerusalem. It will be best to reserve
them for consideration when we are studying that epistle.3
c. Comparison with Josephus. — This is made in two
opposite ways. It is said that the author of Acts used
Josephus, and therefore must be much later than St. Luke ; it
is also said that he is inconsistent with Josephus — and there
fore is not worthy of credit. But surely these two objections
cannot both be maintained at the same time. If our author
1 See Gal. ii. 3, 12. 2 See Gal. i. 24, ii. 9. 8 See chapter vi.

344 BIBLICAL INTRODUCTION
used Josephus he would not be likely to contradict his
authority ; if he contradicted Josephus that would be a sign
of independent authorship — unless we say he used the Jewish
historian carelessly, which would be contrary to what the pre
face to the gospel justifies us in expecting.
( i ) The first point is one of verbal resemblances, and can only be discussed
at length with an elaborate comparison of Greek words. Writers of the
same period, in the same country, with the same culture, dealing with his
torical events that sometimes coincide, might naturally hit upon the same
terms. It is to be noted that the comparison is with words and phrases,
not whole sentences.
(2) The second point comes up especially in the report of Gamaliel's
speech, where we read of the insurrections, first of Theudas, and then of
Judas of Galilee (Acts v. 36, 37). Now according to Josephus the insurrec
tion of Theudas took place under Cuspus Fadus at least ten years later
than the period of Gamaliel's speech, and long after that of Judas.1 But
since St. Luke wrote later than the time of Theudas he may have known of
his name and misplaced it in Gamaliel's speech. We must remember that
he was not a Palestinian. Still such a blunder would tend to discredit his
accuracy as a historian. It is quite possible that there was some other
insurgent named Theudas to whom the speech of Gamaliel refers, for we
know there were many risings in these troublesome times.2 At all events
it will not do to say that the author of Acts drew his information from
Josephus, and then disarranged it when quoting from memory, for he tells
us that Theudas had a following of 400 men, a detail not in Josephus.
d. Differences between the Earlier and the Later Parts of
Acts. — The Pauline part is more easily accepted because of
the closer connection of its author with the events he narrates;
and recent archaeological discoveries go far to vindicate St.
Luke's accuracy as a historian in this section of his work.8
But such a vindication must also help to establish all he
writes. Moreover, the earlier portion contains evidences of
its own genuineness in the picture of the Church at Jerusalem
that it contains. St. Peter's speeches have a very primitive
christology, and their references to the death of Christ contain
1 Aut. xx. v. 1. Yet it is curious that Josephus mentions this earlier
insurrection after that of Theudas, though at the same time recognising its
prior occurrence — a fact that has encouraged the suggestion that the order
in Acts results from a cursory glance at Josephus. This is too small a
point to prove dependence on Josephus. See Headlam, new Bible. Die,
"Acts." 2 There were three pretenders named Judas, and four named Simon.
See Lightfoot on Acts in Smith's D.B.7.
3 See Ramsay, St. Paul, etc. , passim.

CONTENTS 345
no hint of the sacrificial efficacy of that event which is so
prominent in St. Paul.1
3. Date.
The concluding verses have given rise to the idea that Acts
was written at or before the close of St. Paul's imprisonment
there described. But it must come after the third gospel,
and that we have seen was written after the destruction of
Jerusalem (a.d. 70). When we allow time for collecting
materials after writing the gospel, we cannot well fix the date
before a.d. 80. There is no necessity to fix it much later.
4. Contents.
a. The Church at Jerusalem, i. i-viii. ia.
i. 1-11, Introduction; the apostolic commission; the
ascension. 12-26, Choice of a new apostle.
ii. 1-13, The gift of the Spirit with the tongues.
14-42, Peter's speech at Pentecost.
43-47, The brotherhood of the enlarged Church.
iii. 1-10, Cure of a lame man.
11-26, Peter's speech on this occasion.
iv. 1-22, Peter and John before the Council.
23—37, Dismissal and return to the Church; the generosity
of the brotherhood.
v. 1-11, The lie of Ananias and Sapphira, and their death.
12-16, Miracles of healing.
I7_32> Second imprisonment of Peter and John.
33-42, Gamaliel's advice.
vi. 1-7, The appointment of the seven.
8-15, Stephen's ministry and arrest.
vii. 1-53, Stephen's defence.
54— viii. ia, Stephen's martyrdom.
b. Spread of Christianity in Judaa and Samaria, viii. 1 b-
xi. 18.
1 Spitta endeavours to trace two documents underlying Acts, especially
in the earlier part, one of which he attributes to Luke. But why not
regard both as sources used by Luke? Probably he consulted many
authorities.

346 BIBLICAL INTRODUCTION
viii. ib-3, The Church scattered by persecution.
4-13, Philip in Samaria ; Simon Magus.
14-25, Visit of Peter and John to Samaria.
26-40, Philip and the Ethiopian.
ix. 1-25, Conversion of Paul.
26-31, Paul at Jerusalem.
32-43, Peter at Joppa and Lydda; raising of Tabitha.
x., Peter and Cornelius; Peter's trance; his speech at
Caesarea. xi. 1-18, Peter's explanation at Jerusalem.
c. Spread of Christianity in Phoenicia, Cyprus, and Antioch,
xi. 19-xii. 25.
xi. 19-30, Those scattered by the persecution carrying the
gospel abroad.
xii. Herod's persecution ; murder of James ; Peter's third
imprisonment and escape ; death of Herod.
d. Paul's First Missionary Journey; associated with
Barnabas, xiii. i-xv. 35.
xiii. 1-3, The missionary dedication of Barnabas and Paul
by the Church at Antioch.
4-12, Journey through Cyprus.
13-52, At Antioch in Pisidia; Paul's speech in the
synagogue ; turning to the Gentiles.
xiv. 1-7, Preaching at Iconium, and driven out of the
town. 8-28, Cure of a lame man at Lystra; Paul stoned.
xv. 1-35, The Jerusalem Church Council on the question
of the circumcision of the Gentiles.
e. Paul's Second Missionary Journey; accompanied by
Silas, xv. 3 6 -xviii. 22.
xv. 36-xvi. 5, Visit to the churches founded during the
first journey.
xvi. 6-40, Paul crosses to Europe; imprisonment at
Philippi ; conversion of the jailor.
xvii. 1-15, At Thessalonica and Bercea.
16-34, At Athens; speech at the Areopagus.
xviii. 1-17, At Corinth; brought before Gallio.

AIM AND CHARACTERISTICS 347
18-22, Paul travels by Ephesus and Caesarea to Antioch.
f. Paul's Third Missionary Journey, xviii. 23-xxi. 16.
23-28, Paul revisiting Galatia and Phrygia; Apollos at
Corinth. xix., Paul at Ephesus ; the riot.
xx. 1-6, Journey to Macedonia and Greece.
7-12, Paul at Troas ; Eutychus' fall, and restoration.
1 3-38j Journey to Miletus; Paul meets the elders of
Ephesus there.
xxi. 1-16, Voyage to Tyre and Caesarea.
g. Paul's Arrest at Jerusalem, Imprisonment at Cxsarea,
and Voyage to Rome, xxi. 17 to the end.
xxi. 17-26, Paul with the Jerusalem Church.
27-40, The Jews try to kill Paul; He is rescued and
conveyed to the castle.
xxii. 1-2 1, Speech before the Jews at Jerusalem.
22-30, Paul with the chief captain.
xxiii. 1-10, Paul before the council.
11-35, Taken to Caesarea.
xxiv., Paul before Felix.
xxv., xxvi., Paul before Festus; appeal to Caesar; speech
before Agrippa.
xxvii., Voyage and shipwreck.
xxviii. 1-10, Paul at Melita.
11-16, Journey to Rome.
17-31, Paul expounds his gospel at Rome.
5. Aim and Characteristics.
In his preface St. Luke states his aim, or rather illustrates
it from the commission to the apostles, viz., to show the
ever-widening circles of the spread of Christianity (i. 8).
It will be observed that he carries this intention into effect ;
the plan of the book shows us first the Jerusalem Church,
then the Judaean evangelisation, next that of Samaria, after
this the great advance into the Gentile world, beginning
with Antioch, the centre of Gentile missionary work, and
going on with the journeys of St. Paul, the great evangelist

348 BIBLICAL INTRODUCTION
of the Gentiles, until he is seen planting the gospel in Rome,
the head city of the world. But while this is the first object
aimed at, it would seem that the author's ultimate design
is to commend the gospel to his readers by exhibiting its
gracious aspects and its great fruitfulness. He seems
especially to have the Roman world in view. Roman
officials invariably appear in a favourable light, military
officers especially so ; and this is in marked contrast with
the fierce antagonism of the Jews and their leaders, from
whom in every case the persecution of the Christians arises
— excepting in one or two instances of riots among pagan
mobs, on the incitement of men actuated by trade interests.
This conciliatory treatment of the Roman world constitutes
the book in a sense an Apologia. But there is no reason
to question the truthful character of the narrative on that
account. It was calumny and misunderstanding that first
prejudiced the pagan world against the Church. A "plain,
unvarnished tale " was the best way to prevent the growth of
senseless prejudices.

CHAPTER V.
THE PAULINE EPISTLES: FIRST GROUP
I. The Thirteen Epistles. j 3. 1 Thessalonians.
2. The Thessalonian Christians. ! 4. 2 Thessalonians.
1. The Thirteen Epistles.
Thirteen epistles are commonly ascribed to St. Paul. A
fourteenth — the epistle to the Hebrews, which bears the
apostle's name in its title in our English Bibles — is now
almost universally considered to be the work of some other
author.1 These books naturally fall into four groups, deter
mined both by their characters and contents, and by the
periods when they were written. The works of St. Paul —
at all events those that have been preserved to our own
day — are not distributed evenly over the apostle's career.
Supposing his conversion to have occurred about a.d. 35,
we have eighteen years before the first epistle was written.
Then come four literary periods : —
First, a.d. 53, 1 and 2 Thessalonians.
Second, a.d. 57, 58, 1 and 2 Corinthians, Galatians,
Romans. Third, a.d. 62, 63, Ephesians, Colossians, Philemon,
Philippians. Fourth, a.d. 65, Titus, 1 and 2 Timothy, i.e., if we admit
the genuineness of the pastoral epistles, or of portions of
them. 1 The full titles of the N.T. books in our English Bibles are quite
late in their origin. They are not found in the oldest MSS., which
give much shorter titles, and therefore they cannot claim any authority.
In the text itself the epistle to the Hebrews does not claim to be written
by St. Paul. Since no author's name appears in it, the question as to
who wrote it, which will be considered later on, does not affect its
genuineness. 349

350 BIBLICAL INTRODUCTION
These dates are most of them only approximate. But when once the
general scheme of chronology which they follow is accepted, they fall
into their places with sufficient accuracy to exclude more than about
a year's variation either forward or backward. Specific questions con
cerning the dates of the several books will be considered as they arise.
In other schemes of chronology these epistles still preserve their relative
positions but little altered. They are arranged by Harnack ] as follows : — ¦
48/9 (47/8), 1 and 2 Thessalonians.
53 (S2)i : Corinthians, Galatians.
53 (52), Early autumn, 2 Corinthians.
53/54, Romans.
57-59 (56-58), Colossians, Philemon, Ephesians (if genuine), Philip
pians. 59-64, Genuine Pauline elements of the pastoral epistles.
Certain common characteristics may be traced with more or
less distinctness through all the Pauline epistles. They are
real letters, impressed with the personality of the writer, taking
cognizance of the circumstances of the people to whom they
are directed; in form opening with the style of address
current at the time, though enriched with deeper meaning,
and closing as a rule with personal salutations ; in spirit
breathing a warmly affectionate feeling for the readers, and
a deep, passionate concern for the issues at stake. At the
same time they all deal with matters of religion, varying in
relative proportion, but still, in nearly every case discussing
doctrinal points, describing processes of spiritual experience,
and giving direct advice on practical questions. It may be
said that St. Paul created this style of literature — since been
imitated by Cyprian, Fenelon, and others — in which the most
serious religious truths and the most momentous actions of
life are discussed in letters.2
St. Paul was in the habit of dictating his letters to an
amanuensis, possibly owing to weakness of eyesight, or per
haps because the rough work of his handicraft rendered his
fingers unapt at holding the pen. In Romans xvi. 22 the
1 Chronologie, pp. 233-239.
2 The great originality of this kind of literature has been put forward as
an argument against the early date of the Epistle of St. James, because if
that is earlier than the first of St. Paul's epistles, St. James must be
credited with the invention. But that epistle must be considered before
we yield the point.

THE PAULINE EPISTLES 351
amanuensis, who gives his name as Tertius, appends his own
greeting. The apostle emphasises the fact that he writes the
short personal letter to Philemon with his own hand (Phile
mon 19), and in appending a postscript to the epistle to the
Galatians (vi. n-18) he calls attention to the large size of his
letters in comparison with his secretary's neat handwriting.
From 2 Thessalonians iii. 17 we learn that it was the apostle's
custom to authenticate his letters by adding a few words him
self. In this case it is a salutation followed by the final
benediction (verses 17, 18). So the apostle points out that he
writes 1 Corinthians xvi. 21-24, and Colossians iv. 18, in his
own hand. Possibly — as Weiss suggests — the doxology in
Romans (vi. 25-27), the final benediction in Ephesians
(xvi. 23, 24), the greetings in Philippians (iv. 21-23), and
perhaps 2 Corinthians xiii. 12-14, and 1 Timothy vi. 20, 21,
were written by St. Paul himself. It was often the practice of
the apostle to associate his travelling companions and fellow
missionaries with himself in his writing (e.g., 1 Thessalonians
i. 1 ; 2 Thessalonians i. 1, etc.). But he soon relapsed into
the first person singular, and he always wrote on his own in
dividual apostolic authority.
Besides these thirteen epistles there is reason to believe that
St. Paul wrote others that have been lost. Two in particular
are directly alluded to — one epistle to the Corinthians earlier
than our 1 Corinthians (mentioned in 1 Corinthians v. 9), and
one to the Laodiceans (mentioned in Colossians iv. 16),
Probably the extant epistles contain fragments of lost epistles.
In particular Romans xvi. appears to be part of an epistle to
Ephesus,1 and there is reason to believe that 2 Corinthians
consists of two epistles — in whole or part — run together.2
On the other hand it can scarcely be supposed that any large,
important epistle has been lost. In all probability such a
work would have left traces in early Church history. The
most ancient writers who quote from St. Paul with acknow
ledgement only cite what is in our N.T.
Of our thirteen epistles nine are addressed to churches, four
1 See pages 379, 380. 2 See page 368.

352 BIBLICAL INTRODUCTION
to individual men. Of the nine to churches some are sent to
single communities, e.g., Romans ; others are for a group of
churches, e.g., Galatians, probably Ephesians, and also in a
measure 2 Corinthians, which, though primarily to Corinth, is
also directed to "all the saints that are in the whole of
Achaia" (2 Corinthians i. 1). Letters to churches were to
be read to all the members. This is apparent throughout.
It is expressly stipulated with regard to the first written letter
(1 Thessalonians v. 27). Of the four epistles to individual
men three are of a pastoral character, and therefore essentially
of public interest to the churches (1 and 2 Timothy and
Titus). One is a wholly private and personal letter (Phile
mon). 2. The Thessalonian Christians.
The two epistles to the Thessalonians are evidently
addressed to the same community, consisting of the converts
whom St. Paul had won on the occasion of his first visit to
Europe, when, crossing over the sea from Troas and landing at
Neapolis, he had first visited Philippi, and then directed his
course southwards to Thessalonica. This city — the modern
Salonica — situated at the north-east corner of the Thermaic
Gulf, was the capital of one of the Roman divisions of
Macedonia, a large place containing a considerable industrial
population, and some thousands of Jews who had an im
portant synagogue there. According to his custom, the
apostle first preached to the Jews; after his third Sabbath
visit to the synagogue, being rejected by his own people, he
turned to the Gentiles.
It has been objected that such a church as the epistles concern could
not have been formed in so short a time. But this is to overlook the fact
that the apostle may have stayed some weeks or even months longer
preaching among the Gentiles. Acts xvi. 4 seems to imply as much. From
this verse we gather that there were a few Jew converts, but that the
majority were Greeks, i.e., Greek-speaking Gentiles. By race these
people were of the solid, reliable Thracian race : — they had been wor
shippers of idols (1 Thessalonians i. 9). It is interesting to find that the
apostle found his most loyal converts among these worthy people. In
particular there were men already "God-fearing" (aefsop.e'vuv, Acts xvii. 4),
1 See Renan, St. Paul, chapter vi.

i.e

i THESSALONIANS 353
in a measure proselytes, brought to reverence the God of the Jews
and also a number of women of the wealthier classes, who afterwards
contributed to the maintenance of the apostle. [
A riot stirred up by the Jews compelled the apostle to leave
the city suddenly, perhaps bound over by the authorities to
absent himself.
3. 1 Thessalonians.
a. Genuineness. — This epistle is growing in favour and
general acceptance. Baur rejected it, but his successor,
Hilgenfeld, accepts it. Its genuineness has also been allowed
by critics of such diverse schools as Pfleiderer, Holtzmann,
Davidson, Harnack, Jiilicher, Zahn. The external testimony
is as good as could be expected for so short a work. It is in
Marcion's canon of St. Paul's epistles (c. a.d. 140), and is
quoted by Fathers of the second century, and it is in the
earliest versions of the N.T., also dating from the second
century. No certain allusion to this epistle can be found in the apostolic fathers ;
but that is the case with most of the epistles. They were not collected
into a volume, or widely known at the early date of these witnesses.
Neither does their high authority seem to have been then recognised.
Still Ignatius may have known our epistle. His Ephesians x. I suggests
I Thessalonians v. 17 ; compare also his Epistle to Polycarp i. 3. Perhaps
his Philippians ii. 1 alludes to 1 Thessalonians v. 5.2
Irenanis is the first to quote the epistle by name ( Con. Haer. , v. 6.
I = I Thessalonians v. 23). See also v. 30. 2. At the end of the first
century, Clement of Alexandria makes use of it (Paed., v. 19; Strom.,
i- 9- 5,3)- So does Tertullian (De. Res. Carn., c. 24). The epistle is
recognised in the Muratorian Fragment, and it is found in the Old Latin
and Syriae versions.
The internal evidence in favour of it is strong. It bears
the stamp of the apostle's earnest, affectionate character, and
it fits well into the circumstances under which it was written.
In particular, the reference to some Christians at Thessalonica
who had died points to a very ancient date. The brethren were
1 See RAMSAY, St. Paul the Traveller, etc., p. 227.
2 In regard to this last comparison it has been objected that the word
"unceasing" is not represented in the Syriae version of Ignatius. That
is no valid objection, as it is now known that in the Syriae form the
Ignatian letters are quite mutilated and abbreviated.

354 BIBLICAL INTRODUCTION
disappointed and disconcerted by the occurrence, apparently
having supposed that Christ's near advent was not to be
preceded by the death of any of His people. This is a
delusion that could only have been entertained in a very
early stage of a church's existence. The need the apostle
found for dispelling it and comforting those who were troubled
by it stamps the epistle as most primitive.
(i) It was objected by Baur that the epistle lacked Pauline doctrinal
statements. But this fact only points to its antiquity, before the rise
of the great contest with Judaisers, or it may be accounted for by the
fact that this contest was not known at Thessalonica. And the very
simplicity of the epistle makes for its genuineness. There was no motive
for forging it. (2) ii. 16 has been referred to the destruction of Jerusalem
(A.D. 70). It is too general to be forced to such an application. (3)
Apparent inconsistencies with Acts have been pointed out. But similar
and even greater difficulties are felt with Galatians, which is accepted, and
it is therefore not necessary to discuss them here. x (4) A more serious diffi
culty may be felt in the time which seems to have been required for the
growth and development of the Church. But in epochs of religious revival
1 fe moves fast, and events follow one another rapidly. The reference to
deaths will not allow of much time. Some must have occurred in the
course of nature before long.
b. Place, Date, and Circumstances of Origin. — By com
paring Acts xvii. and xviii. with our epistle we can settle
these points with tolerable accuracy. St. Paul had left
Timothy and Silas in Macedonia (Acts xvii. 14) when he
went on with other friends to Athens, whence he sent
back a request that they should follow him (verse 15).
They did not reach him until he had passed on to Corinth.
(Acts xviii. 1 and 5.) They are with him when he writes
the epistle (1 Thessalonians i. 1), Timothy having just arrived
(iii. 6).
It would seem, however, from this epistle that Acts is not perfectly
accurate on one point. St. Paul here says that he thought it well to
be left at Athens alone, and that he sent Timothy to Thessalonica
(1 Thessalonians iii. 1, 2), who had since returned (verse 6). This,
however, is a minor point. Possibly Timothy had met the apostle
earlier than St. Luke supposed, and had been sent back, or possibly
he had been of those who accompanied St. Paul to Athens, though
St. Luke, knowing he was at Thessalonica a little later, had concluded
that he had remained in Macedonia.
1 For a discussion of these points the reader is referred to Jowett,
Epistles of St. Paul to the Thessalonians, etc. Third edition, pp. 4-17-

i THESSALONIANS 355
Thus we find the epistle was written from Corinth on the
occasion of the apostle's first visit to the city (probably in
a.d. 53). The. reason for writing it is found in the coming
of Timothy with news from Thessalonica. The apostle
wished to encourage his friends whom he had left so
abruptly, to help them with practical advice as to their
conduct in daily life, and especially to relieve them from the
perplexity occasioned by the death of some of their brother
hood. c. Contents. — The epistle opens with a salutation, including
Silvanus and Timothy with himself in the message of greeting
(i. 1).
i. 2-10, Thanksgiving and congratulation. The gospel has
borne good fruit in Thessalonica, the fame of which extends
through Macedonia and Achaia.
ii. 1-12, Reminiscences of the apostle's ministry at
Thessalonica, its boldness (verse 2), its purity (verse 3),
its honesty (verses 4-6), its gentleness (verses 7, 8), its
gratuitousness — the missionaries supporting themselves by
manual labour (verse 9), their blameless example (verse 10),
and their affectionate, fatherly treatment of their converts
(verses n, 12).
ii. 13-16, Thanksgiving again for the way the Thessalo
nians received the gospel as the word of God, and con
gratulations on their endurance of persecution from the
Jews. ii. 17-20, The apostle's eager desire to see his friends. But
he is hindered by Satan.
" Satan hindered." This might refer to some illness (e.g., 2 Corinthians
xii. 7) ; but more likely St. Paul alludes to Satan as a ruling power of evil
working through adverse circumstances, as in a magisterial order excluding
the apostle from Macedonia.
iii. i-io, As St. Paul could not go himself, he had sent
Timothy who had returned with cheering news.
iii. n-13, The apostle still prays that God will direct his
way to the Thessalonians, that he may establish their hearts
unblameable in holiness.

356 BIBLICAL INTRODUCTION
iv. 1-8, The apostle encourages obedience to the precepts
preached, and adds an exhortation against uncleanness.
iv. 9-12, Exhortation to quiet work.
iv. 13-18, Explanation of the state of the blessed dead.
The Thessalonians, surprised that some of their number had
died before Christ came a second time, feared they would
miss the joy of the Parousia. It will not be so. On the
contrary the dead in Christ will rise and see Christ before
the Christians who are on earth at the time will have that
privilege. Then the living Christians will be caught up in
the clouds, and join them.
At this time St. Paul expected to be of the living at the Parousia. Later
he gave up the expectation, and anticipated death for himself. (2 Corinthians
v. 1 ; Philippians i. 21.)
v. 1-3, The sudden coming of the Lord.
v. 4-1 1, Call for watchfulness and sobriety with the hope of
the salvation through Christ who died for us.
v. 12-22, Various exhortations, first to treat the leaders of
the Church well, and to live in peace together, and then con
cerning specific Christian duties.
Note in particular: (1) Verse 12, no titles are given. We
have no mention of bishops, elders, or deacons by name
in any of these early epistles. But the verse seems to
point to Church officers. (2) Verses 19, 20 refer to the
prophetic gifts. They are not to be checked or despised,
but tested, and what is proved to be good, held to.
v. 23-28, Final commendations and exhortations.
The epistle is simple and practical in character. Nevertheless it
indirectly indicates the following ideas : The Divinity of Christ (i. I,
10; iii. II, 12; v. 28); His death (ii. 15), as concerning us (irepl fyuDe,
v. 10) ; His resurrection as God's act (ov tfyeipev, i. io), the second
advent (frequently referred to) ; the Holy Spirit given by God (iv. 8),
to work in Christians (i. 5 ; v. 19) ; Christian union with Christ
(iv. 14, 16 ; v. 10) ; the resurrection of Christians (iv. 14) ; Satan
as a hindering power (ii. 18) ; various duties of the Christian life,
especially love, purity, and honest industry ; some undefined Church
government calling for respect towards its leaders (v. 12). No reference
to Judaising Christians. The opponents are Jews.

2 THESSALONIANS 357
4. 2 Thessalonians.
a. Genuineness. — This epistle is rejected by some who
admit 1 Thessalonians, e.g., by Hilgenfeld. It is well de
fended by Jowett (Thessalonians, etc., 3rd edition, pp. 70-76).
The external evidence is even stronger than that for 1 Thes
salonians, the epistle being alluded to by Polycarp in the
middle of the second century, and apparently by Justin
Martyr. Irenaeus is the first to name it.
Compare Polycarp, Ad. Phil., ii. with 2 Thessalonians iii. 15 ; Justin
Martyr, Trypho., no with 2 Thessalonians ii. 3. For the first direct
mention of the epistle see Irenaeus, Con. Haer., iii. 7, 2. It is also cited
by Clement A. (Strom., v. 3), Tertullian (De. Res. Cam., 24; Scorp. 13).
It is in Marcion's canon, the Muratorian Fragment, the Old Latin and
the Syriae versions. It was never questioned in the early Church.
The internal evidence in favour of this epistle is similar to
that for the first, in the suitability to the circumstances, the
affectionate, earnest character of the writer, etc. Over and
above objections that it shares with 1 Thessalonians, the
following have been urged against the genuineness of 2 Thes
salonians1 : —
(1) Its eschatology appears to contradict 1 Thessalonians,
where we read that the Son of man will come suddenly. (1 Thes
salonians v. 2.) Here delay and intermediate occurrences are
predicted. (2 Thessalonians ii. 1-3.) But is this a contradic
tion? Suddenness is not immediateness. The thief in the
night startles the house with his unexpected presence ; but his
coming may still not be soon. If we knew it would be, we
should not be startled. And would a literary imitator create
this difficulty ? Besides, St. Paul may have modified his ideas
while brooding over this subject between the two epistles.
(2) The doctrine of antichrist is said to be un-Pauline,
dependent on the Apocalypse, and perhaps here even savour
ing of Montanism (second century). That St. Paul does not
discuss it in his later writings is quite true. His whole
position in regard to the second advent underwent gradual
transformation. But if Matthew xxiv. is history, the seed of
1 Pfi.eideri'R, Urchristenthum, pp. 77, 78.

358 BIBLICAL INTRODUCTION
this doctrine was in the teaching of Christ Himself. More
over, St. Paul, trained in Jewish literature, would not be
ignorant of the Apocalyptic ideas of his own people. Jiilicher
holds that his writing on this subject is based on his earlier
Jewish training, utilised in Christian thought.1
(3) The concluding authentication (iii. 1 7) is objected to as
unlike St. Paul's manner, and a needless precaution if the
apostle dictates the letter himself. It is not probable that
false letters had been sent to Thessalonica thus early. But
we need not take the passage to imply that this was the case.
St. Paul was guarding against possible contingencies. Still, it
must be admitted, the passage is peculiar, and not easily
accounted for.
(4) There are variations from the apostle's style.2 On the
other hand the writer is said to imitate St. Paul. Spitta
assigns the epistle to Timothy. But if that is a correct
surmise is it not very remarkable that no tradition preserved
the title of so well known a Christian leader ? Still, as one of
the associated senders of the epistle (i. 1), Timothy may have
had some hand in it, possibly as the amanuensis allowing him
self some freedom in the shaping of phrases.
b. Time and Circumstances of Origin. — Baur followed
Grotius in placing this epistle earlier than our 1 Thessalonians.
The principal grounds for this view (which was adopted by
Renan, Ewald, and others) is found in the references of
2 Thessalonians to the teaching of the apostle while he was
yet with his converts. In any case, it could not have been
written long after he had been present, ii. 2 seems to refer to
the earlier epistle — though the expression "by epistle as (us)
from us " rather suggests one that pretended to come from the
apostle, but was not really sent by him; and the allusion
further on to "traditions which ye were taught, whether by
word or by epistle of ours " (ii. 1 5), seems to point clearly
to some previous epistle. But the chief reason for putting
1 Einleitung, p. 43.
2 For a full list of these variations, and a discussion of them, see
Jowett, Thessalonians, etc., p. 73.

2 THESSALONIANS 359
this second is that it clears up a difficulty which the earlier
epistle left behind, especially if ii. 2 refers to that epistle.
The Thessalonians were so full of the immediate coming of
Christ, that some of them ceased to work for their livelihood
(iii. 10.) This error the apostle corrects, and he shows that
the advent is not to be so near. The epistle cannot have
been written long after its predecessor. Its references to the
time when St. Paul was with his readers do not allow of
that, and the same companions (Silvanus and Timothy) are
associated with the apostle, (i. 1.) iii. 2 seems to point to the
events described in Acts xviii. 1 2 ff. We should date it there
fore from Corinth, and probably in a.d. 53, possibly in 54.
c. Contents.
i. 1, 2, Opening salutation.
3-12, Thanksgiving for spiritual growth, and congratulations
on the patient endurance of persecution.
ii. 1-12, Apocalyptic passage. A warning against anticipat
ing the immediate advent of Christ. The man of sin must
first be revealed. At present he is restrained. But in time
the restraining power will be removed.
13-17, Renewed thanksgiving and exhortation to steadfast
ness. iii. 1-5, A request for the prayers of the Thessalonians,
followed by an expression of assurance that they will be kept
and directed by God.
6-15, Withdrawal from disorderly brethren required. The
apostle had worked for his own living; his converts must
all work for their living, and none of them burden their
brethren. 16, 17, Concluding salutation in the apostle's own hand,
following a benediction.
The Man of Sin, ii. 1-12. — In the main there are two distinct views of
this mysterious passage. ( 1 ) That the man of sin is the Roman Emperor,
Caligula, or more probably Nero, who is in hiding (see Tacitus, Hist., ii. 8),
restrained by the ruling Emperor Vespasian. According to this view, the
epistle is a later work, and not genuine. " Setting himself forth as God "
(verse 4) seems to point to the self-deification of the Roman emperor.
(2) That the man of sin is a personification of the Jewish power. This
fits in with the situation when St. Paul was at Corinth. The Jews resist the

360 BIBLICAL INTRODUCTION
progress of the gospel. The restraining power is that of the Roman
Government, which had been exercised both at Thessalonica when the
apostle was there, and more recently at Corinth under Gallio. (Acts xviii.
12-17.) The phrase, "he that sitteth in the temple of God" (2 Thes
salonians ii. 4), suits the Jews better than a pagan emperor. It must be
understood that the phrase "mystery of iniquity" (ii. 7) means not a
mysterious, turbulent power, but one, the latent evil of which is now
known. Hilgenfeld, placing the awoa-Taala in the time of Trajan, under
stands the "mystery of iniquity" to refer to gnosticism, and so ascribes
the writing of the epistle to the second century. It is pure conjecture.
There have been many wild guesses at the personality of the "man of
sin" — that he is Simon Magus, Mahommed, Cromwell, Napoleon, the
Pope, etc. These need not detain us.
This epistle teaches the Fatherhood of God, i. 1, 2, and
concerning Christ that as a Divine Being He is associated
with God in conferring grace, (i. 1, 2, 12; ii. 16, 17; iii. 1-5,
18.) A severe tone marks the references to the second
advent. Christ is to come " rendering vengeance " (i. 8) ;
" the Lord Jesus shall slay ' the lawless one ' with the breath
of His mouth." (ii. 8.) But deliverance and salvation are for
His people, who, however, must be fitted for the kingdom of
heaven. The epistle contains no direct reference to the death
of Christ, His resurrection, or the atonement ; but its practical
purpose did not lead to those subjects. It exalts faith, love,
patience, diligence.

CHAPTER VI.
THE PAULINE EPISTLES: SECOND GROUP

I. The Church at Corinth.
2. The Question of a Lost
Epistle.
3. I Corinthians.

4. 2 Corinthians.
5. Galatians.
6. Romans.
7. Characteristics of the Group.

An interval of nearly five years separates the second from
the first group of St. Paul's epistles. The four masterly
epistles which form this group were written within a twelve
month, during parts of the years a.d. 57 and 58, the epoch
of the apostle's greatest literary productiveness. The inter
vening time, while it had been occupied with assiduous
missionary labours, had seen the rise of a determined
opposition to St. Paul's claims and principles on the part
of Judaising Christians who were sheltering themselves
under the great name of St. James, and pushing his con
servative views to extremes. The effects of this opposition
on the apostle's mind are very marked. They compel him
to justify his position, and thus lead him to formulate his
ideas distinctly, so that indirectly they stimulate the develop
ment of his thought and teaching. Accordingly the epistles
written under these circumstances become doctrinal and
argumentative works, luminous in exposition and vigorous
in controversy. But throughout this painful contest St.
Paul is eager to heal the breach, not by conceding his
opponents' position, but in a practical way, by proving to
the moderate majority of the Jerusalem Church from which
they come the essential brotherhood of all Christians. In
pursuit of this aim he devotes much attention to the
361 '

362 BIBLICAL INTRODUCTION
collection of contributions from his Greek churches, which
are to be sent as tokens of brotherly love to relieve the
wants of the poor members of the mother Church.
i. The Church at Corinth.
The Corinth of St. Paul's time was not the famous city
of Greek history, which Cicero had styled "the light of
Greece," though it was situated on the same site, the
isthmus between the Ionian and the ^Egean seas. The
older city had been destroyed by the Roman General
Mummius (b.c. 146), and for a hundred years the site had
lain waste. Then a new city was built by Julius Caesar,
who imported a number of Roman colonists and made it
a Latin colony, called at first "Colonia Julia." The
population consisted of descendants of these colonists
mixed with Greeks who joined them. We may notice
several Latin names among the Corinthian Christians.
Corinth was made the capital of the Roman province of
Achaia (which comprised Hellas and the Peloponnesus),
and being well situated for commerce it grew rapidly
in wealth and luxury. It was variously governed at
different times. When St. Paul visited Corinth it was
under a proconsul, the well-known Gallio, Seneca's brother
(" Dulcis Gallio "). The place was notorious for its vicious
corruptions. Dion Chrysostom calls it a city, "the most
licentious of all that are or have been." (Oral., vol. ii., p. 119,
edit. Reiske.) Dean Farrar notes that it was customary to
introduce the Corinthians on the stage as drunken men.
The Acrocorinthus, a mountain spur nearly 2000 feet high,
which rises just above the city, was consecrated to the
goddess Aphrodite, who was worshipped with the gross
Syrian rites of Astarte, having in her service a thousand
women devoted to an impure life. The moral corruptions
of the church at such a place, which appear in the epistles,
will be the less astonishing when we remember these facts.
The church was founded by St. Paul during his first
visit to Europe after he had come down from Philippi,

THE QUESTION OF A LOST EPISTLE 363
Thessalonica, and Bercea through Athens (a.d. 53), settling
in Corinth for a year and a half. At first he preached
in the synagogue, and even converted the ruler Crispus.
Then being rejected by the Jews, he turned to the Gentiles.
(See Acts xviii.) The church was mixed ; but it consisted
chiefly of Gentiles. (1 Corinthians xii. 2.) There were a few
wealthy and cultivated persons in it, but the majority were
drawn from the humbler classes. (1 Corinthians i. 26.) Still
the church boasted of its intellectuality. In their jealousy
the Jews prosecuted St. Paul before Gallio, who, however,
dismissed the case. Nevertheless the apostle then felt it wise
to remove from Corinth, leaving Apollos in charge of his work.
2. The Question of a Lost Epistle to the Corinthians.
There is reason to think that prior to our 1 Corinthians
St. Paul had written a short, sharp epistle to the church
at Corinth, rebuking the evils of which information had
reached him. This seems to be referred to in 1 Corinthians
v. 9 : "I wrote unto you in my epistle to have no company
with fornicators." (1) Instances of a similar phrase used
for the very epistle in which it occurs have been cited ;
but they are not pertinent, as in every case they are found
at the end of the document, while this sentence is in the
first half of the epistle. (2) Then the very phrase is used
by St. Paul for a former epistle in 2 Corinthians vii. 8.
Moreover the passage referred to by this verse cannot be
found in an earlier part of 1 Corinthians, and the sentence
could not point to a later part of the same epistle.
Verses 2, 5, 6, and 7 in the same chapter have been cited as perhaps
what the apostle was pointing to. But coming as they do immediately
before this verse, could they be described as here : " I wrote unto you in
my epistle ? " J
1 The opinion that there was a lost epistle, together with the manifest
references in I Corinthians to an epistle from Corinth, gave rise to two
forgeries, one purporting to be the Corinthian letter, the other to be
St. Paul's. They were found in the Armenian church, and inserted by
Whiston in his collection of Authentic Records belonging to the Old and
New Testaments. A translation, partly executed by Lord Byron, is in
Moore's Life of Byron. It is the opinion of critics that these forgeries
cannot be dated earlier than the eleventh century.

364 BIBLICAL INTRODUCTION
3. 1 Corinthians.
a. Genuineness. — The four epistles of this second group
are almost universally accepted as genuine. Baur, who
admitted no others, acknowledged these. The external
evidence for 1 Corinthians is exceptionally good. It is ex
pressly named by Clement of Rome in his epistle to Corinth
(c. a.d. 95), and it appears to be alluded to by several writers
early in the second century.
Clement writes : " Take up the epistle of the blessed Paul the apostle.
What did he first write to you in the beginning of the gospel ? Of a truth
he sent a letter to you (iiria-TeCkev vpXv) by the spirit concerning himself
and also Cephas and Apollos, because you had even then formed parties"
(Clement, 1 Cor. xlvii. 1). Also compare Clement's epistle to the Corin
thians ( = C.) with St. Paul's ( = P.) further :— C. xx. 4 with P. xv. 38 ; C.
xxiv. 1 with P. xv. 20-23 ; C. xxiv. 5 with P. xv. 26 ; C. xxxiv. 8 with
P. ii. 9 ; C. xxxvii. 4 with P. xii. 12 ff. ; C. xlviii. 6 with P. a. 24 ; C.
xlix. I ff. with P. xiii. Probable allusions to our epistle appear in Hermas,
Sim. v. 7. 2 (cf. I Cor. iii. 17); Polycarp, v. 3 (cf. 1 Cor. vi. 9, 10), and
xi. 2 (cf. 1 Cor. vi. 2) ; The Martyrdom of Polycarp ii. 3 (cf. I Cor. ii. 9).
Justin Martyr, Tryph., cxi. (cf. 1 Cor. v. 7). After Clement of Rome,
Irenteus is the first to name the epistle (Adv. Haer., iii. 11. 9). It is in
the Syriae and Latin versions ; Marcion's and the Muratorian Canons, and
cited by Athenagoras, Theophilus, Clement A., Tertullian, etc.
Fitting well into the history, revealing the heart and soul of
the apostle, intensely real throughout, the epistle speaks for its
own genuineness.
Nevertheless, attempts to discredit it have recently been made in two
quarters. ( 1 ) By Loman, who, however, holds the gospels to be mythical,
and denies the historical existence of Jesus Christ. (2) By Steck, on such
ground as that it is inconsistent with Acts, that it shows dependence on
Romans (the a. yiypairrai of I Cor. iv. 6, referring to Romans xii. 3), and
also on the gospels (the account of the Lord's Supper coming from Luke) ;
and the witnesses for the resurrection appearances in chapter xv. being
derived from more than one gospel. These objections do not call for
serious consideration.
b. Place of Origin and Date. — The subscription " from
Philippi" is ancient since it is in the Syriae; but it is not
correct. Probably it was suggested by xvi. 5 — read as " I am
passing through," taken literally instead of the obvious mean
ing, "lam about to pass through." Undoubtedly the epistle
was written from Ephesus (see xvi. 8 and 1 9), and towards the
end of the apostle's stay in that city, i.e., a.d. 57 (xvi. 3, 8).

i CORINTHIANS 365
(1) Apollos had come from Corinth, and joined St. Paul at Ephesus
(i. 12; iii. 4, 22 ; iv. 6; cf. Acts xix. I.) (2) After leaving Ephesus
the apostle purposed to travel by Macedonia to Achaia (xvi. 5-7). This
route he took (Acts xx. I, 2). (3) Aquila and Priscilla are at Ephesus
(xvi. 19). They had accompanied St. Paul on his going there from Corinth
(Acts xviii. 18, 19). (4) The collection of money for the poor at Jerusalem
is now going on in Achaia (xvi. 1-3). It was completed during St. Paul's
next stay at Corinth (Acts xx. 3 ; Romans xv. 26). (5) St. Paul hopes to
go by Corinth to Jerusalem ( 1 Corinthians xvi. 4). This hope he cherished
at the end of his time in Ephesus (Acts xix. 21). This brings us to the
year 57.1
Further, it was before Pentecost (xvi. 8), and perhaps near
Easter (v. 6-8).
c. The Reasons for Writing the Epistle. — The immediate
occasion for sending this letter to Corinth was the receipt
of a letter from the church there (vii. 1), brought by deputies
(xvi. 17), and containing questions about celibacy (vii. 1),
the eating of meat offered to idols (viii. 1) ; concerning
the use of spiritual gifts (xii. 1), and the collection for
Jerusalem (xvi. 1), each of which subjects is introduced by
the same formula, " Now concerning " (LTept Se). But news
had come to the apostle from some members of the household
of Chloe (i. n), and perhaps other visitors from Corinth, that
there were grave irregularities in the church — party divisions
(L, ii); a case of gross immorality unchecked (v. 1); a Christian
going to law with his brother Christian in the pagan courts
(vi. 1) ; indecorous conduct on the part of some women in the
church (xi. 5) ; selfish feasting, and even drunkenness at the
Agape and the Lord's supper (xi. 20, 21); denial of the resurrec
tion (xv. 1 2). St. Paul writes to correct these errors as well as to
answer the questions he has received. He had sent Timothy
to Corinth (iv. 1 7). But Timothy could not have arrived yet,
as he was to travel round through Macedonia (Acts xix. 2 2).
The epistle would prepare for Timothy, and the action he was
to undertake personally on behalf of St. Paul (xvi. 10).
d. Contents. — This epistle is remarkably orderly in its
arrangement, proceeding from topic to topic seriatim.
1 See Conybeare and HowsON, Life and Epistles of St. Paul, chapter
xv. ; and Appendix ii. ; also new Bible Die, art. " Chronology. "

366 BIBLICAL INTRODUCTION
Introduction, i. 1-9.
Salutation (verses 1-3); thanksgiving (verses 4-9).
(1) Faults of the Church, i. 10-vi.
a. Faction (i. 10-iv. 21). Party spirit, following various
leaders. This is rebuked on the ground that all the leaders
work for a common end, and also that the real power is not
man's at all, but God's.
f3. A case of neglected immorality. A man had taken his
stepmother, perhaps married her. The church is to deliver
such a person to Satan for chastisement. St. Paul reminds
the Corinthians that he had warned them in a previous letter
not to associate with immoral persons (v.).
y. Going to law with a brother in the pagan courts is re
buked. The church is advised to constitute its own court for
disputes among the brethren (vi. 1-11). A warning against
profligacy follows (verses 12-20).
(2) Reply to the Letter of the Corinthians, vii.-xi. 1.
a. Marriage and celibacy. It would be good to avoid
marriage. Still, those already married are not to separate.
The apostle has no commandment for the unmarried, though
under present circumstances he would prefer to see others un
encumbered as he is (vii.).
f3. Food offered to idols. Christain liberty vindicated;
still the danger of idolatry through participation in idol feasts
must be avoided (viii.). St. Paul's own example of not claim
ing one's rights (ix.). The higher expediency (x-xi. 1).
(3) Return to Faults of the Church, xi. 2-34.
a. Women to behave more decorously in the Church
(xi. 2-16).
ft Disorderly conduct at the Lord's Supper and the Agape
rebuked. An account of the institution of the Lord's Supper
(xi. 17-34).
(4) Reply to a Question concerning Spiritual Gifts, (xii. -xiv.)
a. Unity and diversity, one body and many members (xii.).
/3. Love the greatest grace (xiii.).
y. Prophesying and tongues (xiv.).
(5) Vindication of the Resurrection, (xv.).

2 CORINTHIANS 367
u. The truth proved from the resurrection of Christ,
evidence for which is cited (xv. 1-34).
[3. Objections answered by repudiating the gross Jewish
doctrine, and teaching a spiritual resurrection (xv. 35-58).
(6) Practical Directions and Personal Details, xvi.
Directions concerning the collection. Timothy's mission.
Exhortation and salutation.
The Factions. — The four names — Paul, Apollos, Cephas, Christ — suggest
four parties. Baur allowed only two — the Pauline, with which are united
those who claim Apollos ; the Petrine, with which are associated those
claiming to be of Christ. But this was arbitrary to square with his theory.
Pfleiderer allows three, denying the existence of a Christ party, as this
must have inclined to one of the other three. Those claiming the Christ
name might be neutral, standing aloof from all parties ; and yet in doing
so they would tend to become a party unawares. Moreover, 2 Corinthians
x. 7 implies that the people taking the Christ name showed narrowness in
refusing it to St. Paul. If they were a party (i) they might be those who
had known our Lord on earth. But it is not likely such would be at
Corinth. Besides the personal name Jesus would be more suitable for a
reference to the life of Christ on earth. (2) They might be men who
claimed a direct mystical relation with the Christ in a semi-gnostic sense.
(3) The view that they simply repudiated human leaders, and so took only
the name of Christ, is more simple, and it fits the case. Innocent in the
beginning, such a position would easily lead on to the arrogance seen in
2 Corinthians. Then the Apollos party might represent the "wise," who
are rebuked in the earlier part of the epistle, and the Peter party the
Judaisers. But the latter idea is not probable. It is more likely that such
a party would claim James. Therefore it would seem that the divisions
are not formed on doctrinal lines, but represent personal predilections —
some championing Paul, some his successor Apollos, some turning to
Peter as the true head of the apostolate, others repudiating all human
names, and claiming only to be followers of Christ. St. Paul's treatment
of the question favours this view. He does not discuss doctrinal differences,
but he shows the true harmony of the work of the various leaders.
4. 2 Corinthians.
a. Genuineness. — This scarcely needs discussion. The
almost universal acceptance of the four epistles of the
group indicates overwhelming reasons for receiving them.
2 Corinthians was early cited, though not so early as
r Corinthians. It is first mentioned in surviving Church
literature by Irenaeus. The character of the writing, the
vivid self-portraiture of the apostle, and the eager, vital grasp
of facts of the time stamp it as original.

368 BIBLICAL INTRODUCTION
2 Corinthians is cited in Irenaeus, Adv. Haer. , iii. 7. I ; iv. 28. 3 ;
Athenagoras, De Res., 18; Clement A., Strom., iv. 16; Tertullian,
De Pudic. 13, and in all these instances, except that of Athenagoras,
it is indicated by name.
b. Two Epistles. — The view of Hilgenfeld and Holtzmann
that our 2 Corinthians consists of two epistles, or rather
one epistle and part, if not the whole, of another, has
been growing in favour. The division is put at the end
of chapter ix., and the chapters that follow are regarded as
constituting an epistle, or part of an epistle, written earlier
than the preceding chapters — -a composition which comes
chronologically between 1 Corinthians and 2 Corinthians i.-ix.
At this point the tone of the apostle suddenly changes. In
the first nine chapters he is grateful and hopeful with regard
to the whole church at Corinth ; here he writes in sorrow
concerning the state of the whole Church, and rebukes it
sternly. It has been suggested as an explanation of this
sudden change that while he was writing 2 Corinthians he
received bad news from Corinth. But this would mean that
Titus, who had brought the cheering report referred to earlier
(vii. 6), had been completely deceived. Besides, would the
apostle then have let the cheerful part of his letter go un
altered, and have changed his tone so completely for the
later part without giving a hint of his reason for this
sudden alteration ? Then, it has been said, the nine chapters
are to the faithful section of the church, and the remainder
to a troublesome faction. That cannot be, because in both
cases the whole church is addressed — in the one with general
congratulations, in the other with general complaints.
Note in particular the following points : —
(1) 2 Corinthians ii. 4 refers to a previous letter written in much
affliction and anguish. This would scarcely apply to I Corinthians.
But it would well characterise the latter part of 2 Corinthians.
(2) 2 ^Corinthians vii. 8, 9 also refers to the severity of a previous
letter in a way that would apply to 2 Corinthians x.-xiii. better than
to I Corinthians.
(3) In 2 Corinthians iii. I we read, "Are we beginning again to
commend ourselves ? " When had St. Paul commended himself to
Corinth ? Much more in 2 Corinthians than in 1 Corinthians (e.g. , *.
7-18; xi. 16-33; *»¦ 5. ", '7)-

2 CORINTHIANS 369
(4) In 2 Corinthians we find the apostle shrinking from the idea of
visiting Corinth. (2 Corinthians i. 23; ii. 1, 4.) No such feeling was
exhibited in 1 Corinthians, in spite of the complaints he then had to
make (e.g., I Corinthians xvi. 8, 9). But if he had written 2 Corinthians
x.-xiii. in the interval with reference to new troubles in the Corinthian
church, the situation would be altered, and the change of feeling accounted
for. This is borne out by 2 Corinthians xii. 20, 21 and xiii. 1, 2.
For these reasons it seems that we should accept the view that
2 Corinthians x.-xiii. is the earlier epistle referred to in 2 Corinthians
ii. 4; iii. 1; vii. 8, 9, an epistle rebuking the Corinthians for some
grievous evils of which St. Paul has heard.1
c. Circumstances and Reasons for Writing. — (1) 2 Cor
inthians x.-xiii. After despatching 1 Corinthians St. Paul
seems to have paid a brief visit to Corinth. We have no
mention of it in Acts. But we learn from 2 Corinthians
xii. 14 that he must have been twice to Corinth before
writing this, as he is now prepared for a third visit.2 He
seems to mention the second visit as an accomplished fact
if we may read with R.V, " When I was present the second
time" (xiii. 2). It would seem that he had been badly received
on this visit. The reference to his weak bodily presence and
unimpressive oratory (x. 10) cannot apply to the time when
he had been living and ministering in Corinth ; it must allude
to a time when he had been coldly received. Further, the
offence referred to in 2 Corinthians ii. 5 is scarcely the same
as that of 1 Corinthians v., because this implies a personal
insult to the apostle, while the earlier one was a case of
immorality, having no relation to himself. It would seem
that someone had grossly insulted him, and repudiated his
authority. The party arrogating the name of Christ now
1 See J. H. Kennedy in Expositor, October, 1897. Dresher, in
Studien und Kritiken, 1897, accepts the idea of two epistles in our
2 Corinthians, but puts chapters x.-iii. later than chapters i.-ix. This
view is liable to the objection that Titus was deceived as to the state
of Corinth, and it would not allow for the aptness of the allusions
above referred to.
2 The explanation that as the apostle only writes of being ' ' prepared "
a third time, he may mean that he had made preparations for his second
visit at some previous time, and then had postponed it, so that adding
these preparations to those he is now making, and the preparations for
his first visit, we get three. But this is most improbable. If the apostle
meant that, he would say " the second time," for it would be the second
preparation then in mind.
2 B

370 BIBLICAL INTRODUCTION
seems to be most active in opposing the apostle (x. 7).
The visit when this was made apparent had been very
painful to St. Paul. That visit seems to be in mind when
he writes that he has determined not to come again in sorrow
(ii. 1). The first visit was not in sorrow. Since this visit
was so unfortunate, and the church is still in an un
happy condition, the apostle writes the epistle containing
2 Corinthians x.-xiii. to rebuke and expostulate. He also
sends Titus to Corinth.
(2) 2 Corinthians i.-ix. This was written after Titus had
returned, bringing most cheering news. The Corinthians
had taken the letter in good part, and the rude opponent
had been severely handled by the church, and was now
plunged in penitence (ii. 7). St. Paul is full of joy and thank
fulness. His heart melts for the offender whom he asks the
church to forgive.
d. Place and Time of Writing. — 2 Corinthians x.-xiii,
gives no indication of its locality, but if it precedes
2 Corinthians i.-ix., it must have been written during
St. Paul's residence at Ephesus. 2 Corinthians i.-ix. is
written from Macedonia after the apostle had left amid
scenes of violence and danger in the riot at the theatre
(Acts xix. 23-41 ; xx. 1), to which apparently he refers in
2 Corinthians i. 8-10. Those scenes are still fresh in mind,
and therefore the intermediate epistle which makes no allusion
to them must have preceded them (and the departure from
Ephesus). The apostle had gone to Troas first, but not yet
seeing Titus he had passed on to Macedonia, where Titus had
met him (ii. 12, 13). This would be the end of the year 57.
e. Contents. — Taking the document as it stands in our
N.T, we have two main divisions, corresponding to the idea
of two epistles just discussed.
(1) i.-ix., A very affectionate letter of thanksgiving, con
gratulation, and exhortation.
i. 1, 2, Salutation.
3-14, Thanksgiving for God's mercy in affliction, with prayer
that a like comfort may come to others in their affliction.

2 CORINTHIANS 371
1 5— ii- 2, The promised visit postponed for the sake of the
Corinthians. 3-1 1, The previous letter, the sorrow it caused, the penitence
of the offender, the forgiveness of him.
12-17, Good news from Titus. Thanks to God. Triumph
in Christ.
iii. 1-5, The fruits of the apostle's ministry are his com
mendation ; yet they are God's work.
6-18, The superior glory of this ministry of the gospel
of life above that of the old Mosaic dispensation.
iv., The joys and privileges of this ministry, in spite of
trouble and peril; present light affliction working for eternal
glory through the vision of the Unseen.
v. 1-10, Hopes beyond death inspiring present courage.
11-19, The constraining love of Christ and the new creation
in Him.
20-vi. 13, The persuasive ministry in sorrow and sympathy.
1 4- vii. 1, Warning against being unequally yoked with
unbelievers. vii. 2-16, Reflections on the previous letter, the errand
of Titus, and the godly sorrow that followed.
viii. 1-15, Concerning the collection for the poor at
Jerusalem. The Macedonians most generous in this.
16-24, In praise of Titus.
ix., Exhortations to generosity in the collection, with re
minders of God's bounty.
(2) x.-xiii., A most sorrowful and vehement expostulation.
x., A warning to those who despise the apostle's authority.
xi. 1-7, This authority reaffirmed.
8~33) A recital of the apostle's rights and arduous ex
periences in his work.
xii. 1-10, A heavenly vision and a thorn in the flesh.
11-13, The signs of an apostle.
14-21, How Paul and Titus had treated the Corinthians.
xiii., Further warnings and exhortations ; greetings ; and a
final benediction.

372 BIBLICAL INTRODUCTION
5. Galatians.
a. The Galatian Churches. — The word "Galatia" is used in
two applications: — (1) ethnographically, for the district in the
extreme north of Asia Minor, which was inhabited by immigrant
Celts (Galatian = Gaul) from the west, and (2) politically for
the Roman province, which included with this district a much
larger area — the greater part of Pisidia, Isauria, Lycaonia, and
a portion of Phrygia. In this province of Galatia were situated
the towns visited by St. Paul during his first journey through
Asia Minor — Antioch, Iconium, Derbe, and Lystra. There
is good reason to believe that the churches addressed in
Galatians are those which the apostle had planted in those
towns. Bishop Lightfoot argued for North Galatia.1 But since the publi
cation of his commentary, the argument for the south Galatian theory
— that which, taking the name to apply to the whole province, allows of
the churches which we know St. Paul to have planted in the south of it to
be those addressed in the epistle — has been powerfully strengthened by
Professor Ramsay's researches in Asia Minor, and arguments based on
them.2 The following considerations make for this position : — (1) St. Paul
invariably writes of the regions he visits under the names of the Roman
provinces in which they are situated — Asia, Macedonia, Achaia. In this
he differs from St. Luke, who uses the popular local names. Thus we
may account for the fact that in Acts the churches of the first missionary
journey are not said to be Galatian, but described as in Pisidia (Acts xiii.
14) and Pamphilia (xiv. 24). (2) It would be singular that Acts should
give no details of the founding of churches so intimately connected with
St. Paul as Galatians shows the churches there addressed to be ; and still
more remarkable that in none of his epistles the apostle should refer to
churches which Acts connects so closely with him as those at Antioch,
Iconium, Derbe, and Lystra. If these are the Galatian churches, both
difficulties disappear. We have a full account of the founding of the
Galatian churches in Acts, and St. Paul frequently refers to the churches
of his first missionary journey through Asia Minor. (3) It is highly im
probable that St. Paul would have taken the long journey over a wild,
almost impassable mountain region to the Celtic Galatians. Professor
Ramsay's travels on the spot have brought out this difficulty. St. Paul
usually travelled on Roman roads, on the great highways between the
centres of population. (4) In 1 Peter i. 1 Galatia appears in a list of
1 Commentary on Galatians, pp. 1—35.
2 Ramsay, The Church in the Roman Empire, chapters v., vi. ; St.
Paul, etc., chapters v., vi., viii. This view, which has been maintained by
Renan, Weizsacker, Hansrath, Schenkel, Pfleiderer, etc., is accepted and
well defended in the most recent N.T. Introduction, Zahn's Einleitung,
Vol. I., pp. 123-129 [1897].

GALATIANS 373
Roman provinces, and therefore must be understood as a province. Among
minor considerations note that Barnabas is referred to more than once in
Galatians (ii. i ; ii. 13). Now Barnabas was with St. Paul in the mission
to the southern churches (Acts xiii. 2, 43, 46, 50; xiv. 12, 14, 20), and
was therefore well known among them. But he was not with the apostle
during the second journey, when, according to the North Galatian theory,
the Galatian churches would have been founded (Acts xv. 36-40 ; xvi. 6).
Then Professor Ramsay, supposing that the "thorn [stake] in the flesh"
(2 Corinthians xii. 7) represents an illness — probably malarial fever — con
tracted at Perga, in the weakness consequent on which St. Paul visited the
towns beyond the Taurus Mountains, suggests that it is referred to in
Galatians iv. 13, 14. It has been objected that secular writers do not
refer to these towns as Galatian. But then St. Paul's known constant
habit of writing of Roman provinces must be set off against that. Nor
was it only an idiosyncrasy. He delighted to think of the large possibilities
of the gospel planted in local centres, and in this case no one local name
would cover all the churches addressed. Moreover, there were Phrygians
among them, and it was not considered complimentary to address anybody
as a Phrygian, that name being popularly used for a low character.
b. Genuineness of the Epistle. — Being one of the four
almost unquestioned1 writings of St. Paul, this does not
require much time for the examination of its credentials.
Possibly alluded to by several of the Apostolic Fathers, and
apparently by Justin Martyr and Athenagoras in the middle
of the second century, it is expressly named by Irenaeus,
Clement of Alexandria, Tertullian, etc. But more convincing
than any external testimony is the witness of the epistle to its
own genuineness. Its vehemence, its abruptness, its very slips
of grammar show how it comes hot from the heart of the
apostle. It exactly suits the circumstances of his time, and
could not fit in with Gnostic, Ebionite, or Catholic reaction
ideas of a later period. The very difficulty of reconciling some
of its narrative with Acts speaks for its honesty. A Pauline
imitator knowing Acts would not have manufactured this
hindrance to the acceptance of his work.
For external evidence cf. Clement R. , 1 Epis., xlix. 6 with Gal. i. 4 ;
Barnabas xix. 8 with Gal. vi. 6; Polycarp, Phil, iii. 2 with Gal. iv. 26;
v. 1 with Gal. vi. 7 ; vi. 3 with Gal. iv. 18 ; ix. 2 with Gal. ii. 2 ; Justin
Martyr, Tryph., 95 with Gal. iii. 10 ; Epis. to Diognetus, v. 5 with Gal.
iv. 10 ; Athenagoras, Legatio, xvi. with Gal. iv. 9, as possible allusions.
Irenaeus cites and names the epistle in Adv. Haer., iii. 7. 2 ; iii. 16. 3 ;
v. 21. 1 ; also Clement A., Strom., iii. 16; Tertullian, Adv. Marc, v. 2. I ;
De Prascrip., vi. 1 Except in the Dutch school, see page 364.

374 BIBLICAL INTRODUCTION
c. Occasion. — The occasion for the writing of this epistle
is very evident in its contents. St. Paul is amazed and
distressed with the alarming news that his Galatian converts
have been tampered with, and perverted from the gospel he
has taught them, by some Jewish Christians who have come to
persuade them to accept circumcision, and submit to the law
for the perfecting of their Christianity. These intruders have
been so successful that the apostle thinks the Galatians must
be bewitched. One consequence of this perversion is that
the authority of St. Paul and his influence have been under
mined. The apostle writes in a tone of angry, though pain
ful expostulation. The Galatians have seen Christ crucified
clearly set before them ; who then has bewitched them ?
They had been most affectionate to the apostle himself, ready
to pluck out their eyes for him ; how then are they now
turned against him? Thus St. Paul has a twofold aim in
writing : — ( i ) The vindication of his own apostleship. This he
does by appealing to his inward call direct from Christ (i. i,
12, 15, 16), and reciting the circumstances of his early
Christian career, which show that he could not have received
his gospel from the other apostles. But the establishment of
his claim is only to lead to a larger question. (2) The clear
demonstration of his gospel. St. Paul will have his readers see
the fatal mistake of going back to the law, since faith is the
sole means of justification before God. This position he
argues to prove.
d. Date and Place of Writing. — These points must be
determined to some extent by the decision as to the locality
of the Galatian churches. With the North Galatian theory
we cannot date the epistle earlier than some time after the
conclusion of St. Paul's stay at Corinth. In Galatians iv. 13
he writes of when he preached to the Galatians "the first
time." This implies that there had been a second visit. On
the North Galatian theory these two visits would seem to be
those of Acts xvi. 6 and xviii. 23. This brings us to a.d. 54
as the earliest possible date. But on the South Galatian
theory the first visit was that of Acts xiii., xiv., and the second

GALATIANS 375
that of Acts xvi. 1-5. This would allow of as early a date as
a.d. 51. Moreover, the phrase, "I marvel that ye are so
quickly removing from him that called you " (Galatians i. 6),
would seem to show that the epistle was not written long after
the conversion of the Galatians. Still this is an indefinite
expression. While it would incline us to give an early date to
the epistle, making it the first written of St. Paul's epistles, there
are strong reasons for placing it later. In style and thought it
is closely allied to the epistles of the second group. To place
it before 1 and 2 Thessalonians is to dislocate all indications
of development in the apostle's teaching. The four epistles of
the second group are all concerned with the great controversy
concerning the relation of Christianity to Judaism, and they
all reach the high-water mark of the apostle's vigorous writing.
Thoughts and phrases repeat themselves in this group as no
where else. It is more difficult to determine the place of the
epistle in the group. The indications that it was written not
too long after the founding of the Galatian churches would
urge us to put it first, and therefore at Ephesus even before
the writing of 1 Corinthians — say early in a.d. 57. On the
other hand the great resemblance of its chief ideas and of
many of its verbal expressions to Romans should perhaps
incline us to follow Lightfoot, and place it immediately before
that epistle, in which case we have to take it as written from
Corinth on the occasion of the apostle's second visit to that
city, probably early in a.d. 58.
e. Contents. — The epistle falls into two parts: (1) Bio
graphical; (2) doctrinal.
(1) Biographical, i., ii.
i. 1-5, Salutation, without a word of the usual congratula
tions. 6-10, Astonishment at the quick perversion of the
Galatians. 11-17, Account of the apostle's call — from the inside.
His early Judaism, persecuting the Church; yet his Divine
destiny from his birth; the revelation of God's Son in him;
his not conferring with any man ; his retirement to Arabia.

376 BIBLICAL INTRODUCTION
18-24, St. Paul's first visit to Jerusalem after his conversion,
staying fifteen days with Cephas, seeing James, but no other
apostle. Preaching tour in Syria and Cilicia
ii. 1-10, Visit to Jerusalem fourteen years later with
Barnabas, attended by Titus. Going up "by revelation."
A private account of the mission to the Gentiles given to
" them who were of repute." Attempts of " false brethren "
to get Titus circumcised successfully resisted. James, Cephas,
and John give Paul and Barnabas the right hands of fellow
ship, agreeing that they should go to the Gentiles, but
commissioning them to remember the poor brethren in
Jerusalem while Peter has the charge of work among the
Jews. 1 1-2 1, Cephas at Antioch withstood by Paul for weakly
yielding to some who had come from James, and ceasing
to eat with the Gentiles, even carrying Barnabas with him.
It is difficult to bring this narrative into agreement with Acts. The
epistle only names two visits to Jerusalem. The first (Galatians i. 18, 19)
can be identified with that of Acts ix. 26-30 without much difficulty,
though in Acts he preaches ' ' boldly " at Jerusalem and disputes with
the Hellenists, while in Galatians his visit, lasting only fifteen days,
seems to have been wholly private, so that he was unknown by face
to the churches of Judaea. There is no absolute contradiction here.
Of course St. Paul's own narrative must be accepted as the most
authentic account, if we cannot quite reconcile the two. But what
of the second-named visit? (Galatians ii. 1-10.) This has generally
been identified with that of Acts xv. 1-29. But while in Acts Paul
goes with Barnabas as a deputation from Antioch to consult the Church
at Jerusalem, and a meeting of the Church is held, from which a letter
is sent back to Antioch ; in Galatians he does not refer to the
"Jerusalem council," or the "decree" sent from it, but says he laid
his gospel "privately before them who were of repute," and obtained
a confirmation of his mission from the three leaders, James, Cephas,
and John. Moreover in Acts we read of an intermediate visit, when
"Barnabas and Saul" were sent up from Antioch with relief for the
Jerusalem Christians in a time of famine. (Acts xi. 27-30.) Yet the
narrative in Galatians would suggest that St. Paul is reciting all his
visits to Jerusalem.1 Professor Ramsay proposes to identify the second-
named visit in Galatians with the second in Acts.2 But St. Paul makes
no reference to the famine or the deputation with contributions. More
over, different as are the accounts in Galatians ii. 1-10 and Acts xv,,
1 This apparent discrepancy has been used to discredit the historicity
of Acts. By the recent Dutch it is turned the other way, to discredit
Galatians. 2 St. Paul, etc., chapter iii.

GALATIANS 377
it may be noted : ( I ) Describing the case from his own standpoint,
the apostle might tell of a revelation which encouraged him to go, and
which would not be inconsistent with the Antioch Church's action.
(2) In Galatians he may be referring to his own private movements at
Jerusalem previous to the more public meeting of the Church. (3) The
visit during the famine may not have been mentioned in Galatians,
because St. Paul did not then see the apostles. Acts expressly says
the gifts were given to the elders (Acts xi. 30), and does not mention
the apostles in this connection, suggesting that they were absent, perhaps
owing to Herod's persecution. But in Galatians St. Paul is simply concerned
with proving that he had not received his gospel from the apostles. A
further difficulty has been felt with the narrative of St. Peter's weakness
in Galatians which, it is said, could not have occurred after the council.
But (1) How do we know that St. Peter might not have gone back under
pressure from the position he held at Jerusalem? St. Paul's narrative
implies that St. Peter's first action and conviction went with the liberal
view. And the Jerusalem decision did not actually allow Jews to eat
with Gentiles. But perhaps St. Paul does not give this incident in its
chronological order with relation to what he narrates before. He does
not introduce it with any note of time. It may have occurred between
the two visits to Jerusalem which he describes.1
(2) Doctrinal, iii.-vi.
iii. 1-5, Expostulation with the Galatians for being
"bewitched" into forsaking the gospel of Christ crucified
and the power of faith.
6-14, Abraham justified by faith. In O.T. the righteous
live by faith.
15-22, The covenant with Abraham older than the law,
which only came in as an afterthought because of trans
gressions. 23-29, The law as a tutor to bring us to Christ, in whom
human distinctions of race, etc. are at an end.
iv. 1-7, The slave and the son.
8-1 1, Return to beggarly elements.
12-20, Pleading in recollection of the old friendship.
21-v. 1, The allegory of Hagar.
2-1 2, The uselessness of circumcision.
I3-I5> Freedom to be exercised in love.
16-26, The works of the flesh and the fruits of the Spirit.
vi. 1-5, Bearing one another's burdens.
.6-10, The duty of supporting the teachers. The harvest.
1 See new Bible Dictionary, art. "Chronology," by C. H. Turner,
vol. i., p. 424.

378 BIBLICAL INTRODUCTION
1 1-18, An addition in the apostle's own handwriting. Not
circumcision, but a new creature. St. Paul branded with the
marks of Jesus. Benediction.
6. Romans.
a. The Roman Church. — The origin of the Church at
Rome is lost in obscurity. It is clear from the course of
the history in Acts,1 and also from this epistle which is
addressed to Roman Christians as people whom the apostle
had not yet seen (Romans i. 8-1 1 ; vi. 17 ; xv. 28, 29, 32),
that the church was not planted by St. Paul. It is almost
equally certain that it was not founded by St. Peter. Not
only is there no reference in Acts or anywhere else in the
N.T. earlier than 1 Peter to that apostle going to Rome,2
but it is also clear that he could not have been there
when St. Paul wrote Romans, or the fact would be men
tioned. Besides, St. Paul would not have expressed his
eagerness to visit the church and impart some spiritual
gift (Romans i. n), as this would have been contrary to
his rule of not building on another man's foundation.
(Romans xv. 20.) Possibly the church was founded by
some of the Pentecost converts. (Acts ii. 10.)
The earliest extant assertion that St. Peter was a founder of the
Church of Rome was made by Dionysius of Corinth (c. a.d. 170),
but he associates St. Paul in the work, which we know to be incorrect.
Evidently it is a loose statement, though it may be taken as ancient
testimony to the presence and work of the two apostles in the city at
some time.3
The church at Rome seems to have consisted of Jews
and Greeks. Chapters ii., iii., and iv. continually address
Jews. This is very marked at ii. 17 ff. And yet other
passages show that the majority are Gentiles, (i. 5, 6, 13;
xv. 15, 16.) St. Paul does not address these people
1 See Acts xix. 21; xxiii. 11; and especially Acts xxviii. 14, I5>
which describes Roman Christians as welcoming St. Paul on his first
visit to the city.
2 And that only on the supposition that the Babylon of 1 Peter v. 13 is
Rome. 3 Ttjk dird TUrpov Kal Ha6\ov <j>vrelav yevqBeioav 'Foi/jaluv re Kal
KopivBiav o-vveKepaa-are. — Eusebius, H.E., ii. 25.

ROMANS 379
collectively under the title of the "church," as he had
addressed the readers of all his previous letters,1 but as
"saints," and he names no church officers — bishops, elders,
or deacons. Yet it is evident that the Christians constitute
an assembly, meeting and working together (xiv. i), with a
real fellowship (xv. i, 2), various forms of service falling to
the lot of various members according to their gifts (xii. 6-8).
A similar condition was found at Corinth.
b. Genuineness of the Epistle. — This is the fourth of the
virtually unquestioned epistles.2 It was evidently known to
Clement R. (c. a.d. 95), and it is often referred to by second
century writers, Irena;us, as usual, being the first to quote it
by name. Its extraordinary vigour and freshness of thought
and the perfectly sublime reach of its argument stamp this as
an inspired work of the highest order, and authenticate its
claim to apostolic authorship. The personality of the apostle
is evident throughout. It is thoroughly characteristic.
For external evidence compare 1 Clement, xxxv. 5 with Rom. i. 29-32 ;
Polycarp, Phil., vi. 2 with Rom. xiv. 10; Theophilus, Ad Autol., i. 14
with Rom. ii. 6-9 ; Ignatius, Eph. , 18 with Rom. i. 3, 4 ; and Smyrn. I
with Rom. i. 3, 4. The epistle of the churches of Lyons and Vienne
(Euseb., H.E., v. I. 6) with Rom. viii. 18 ; Justin Martyr, Trypho., xxiii.
with Rom. iv. 3, 10, II. Irenaeus quotes "the presbyters" as saying "all
men are wanting in the glory of God, but they are not justified by them
selves" (Adv. Haer., iv. 27. 2), evidently alluding to Rom. iii. 23; and
these are men of an earlier generation. The first occasion when the
epistle is quoted by name is in Irenaeus, Adv. Haer., iii. 16. 3. Irena:us
quotes it on several other occasions. So do Clement A., Tertullian, etc.
It is in the Marcionite canon, the Muratorian Fragment, the early
versions. c. Integrity. — Doubts have been felt as to the right of the
last two chapters (xv., xvi.) to be included in the epistle,
a few extreme critics rejecting them as not genuine, but
many more holding that though written by St. Paul, they
do not belong to this epistle, but are fragments of other
epistles. The case is strongest in regard to chapter xvi.
There are good reasons for detaching this chapter and taking
1 1 Thess. i. I ; 2 Thess. i. I ; 1 Cor. i. 2 ; 2 Cor. i. 1 ; Gal. i. 2.
2 Though, in common with the other three, questioned by Steck, etc.,
and the Dutch school. See page 364.

380 BIBLICAL INTRODUCTION
it as in all probability a fragment of an epistle to Ephesus,
commending Phcebe to that church, (i) This chapter abounds
in greetings and the most varied personal characterising of
the men and women saluted. It is improbable that St. Paul
knew so many people at Rome. We are told that many Jews
visited the metropolis for purposes of trade, etc. True : but
what a cluster of intimate friends we have here ! More than
are saluted in any other epistle. Yet the earlier chapters are
addressed as to strangers. On the other hand St. Paul knew
many in Ephesus, where he had laboured for two years.
(Acts xix. io.)
(2) The chief reason for selecting Ephesus among the
places well known to the apostle comes from the mention
of Prisca and Aquila (xvi. 3), for we know they were at
Ephesus a short time before (1 Corinthians xvi. 19; Acts xviii.
18, 26); and when they are next met with they are also at
Ephesus. (2 Timothy iv. 19.) The probable inference is that
they were to be found there in the interval. Then Epasnetus
was also of Ephesus or its neighbourhood, as he is called
"the firstfruits of Asia." (Romans xvi. 5.)
(3) The tone of xvi. 17-20 does not agree with that of the
earlier part of the epistle. It refers to known divisions, of
which the body of the epistle gives no hint; its appeal to
" the teaching which ye learnt " implies that St. Paul knew
what that teaching had been; and the strong words used in
characterising the disturbers, followed by the affectionate
paternal appeal to his readers to be wise and true, is quite
of another tone from the courteous address of Romans as
to people whom the apostle did not yet know personally.
Further, in regard to the question of integrity, the following points
should be noted : —
(1) Chapters xv. and xvi. were not in Marcion's Romans. But then
Marcion was not solely influenced by questions of literary genuineness in
limiting his canon. The acceptance of the O.T. in xv. 4 was contrary to
his doctrine.
(2) The epistle seems to have three endings — at xv. 33 ; xvi. 20 ; and
xvi. 27.
(3) The final doxology appears in various places in different copies of
the epistle.

ROMANS 381
(o) At the end of xvi. (The MSS. N BCDE ; Pesh., Vulg,, Memph.,
Aeth. versions ; some copies known to Origen). (/9) At the end
of xiv. (L ; most cursives ; Greek lectionaries ; the later Syriae,
Gothic, Armen., Slav, versions; copies mentioned by Origen,
Chrysostom, Cyril, Theodoret, etc.). (7) In both places (A and
some cursives). (5) Omitted altogether by F.G. and some copies
alluded to by Jerome. The preponderating evidence is for (a), i.e.,
to read the doxology at the end of the epistle. Still the variations
are significant.
These data have given rise to considerable divergence of opinion.
Semler, who first raised doubts as to the integrity of the epistle, took xvi.
to contain a list of teachers who were to receive copies of the epistle on
the way to Rome, and xv. special directions for those teachers. Paulus
regarded xv. as an appendix for the enlightened, and xvi. as an added
leaflet of greetings.
Baur held that neither of the chapters was written by St. Paul, main
taining that they were added to reconcile the Judaisers and the Paulinists.
Like Marcion, he could not reconcile xv. 4 with his idea of St. Paul's
position ; and he regarded xvi. as deliberately composed to make it appear
that the apostle had many friends at Rome. Dr. Samuel Davidson, while
retaining xv., rejected xvi. as spurious. But for the most part, the Pauline
authorship of both chapters is now admitted. Renan divides the epistle
thus: — (1) i.-xi., xv., for Rome ; (2) i.-xiv., xvi. 1-20, a copy for Ephesus;
(3) i.-xiv., xvi. 21-24, a copy for Thessalonica — the names in the latter
section appearing to him to point in that direction ; (4) i.-xiv., xvi. 25-27,
a copy for some unknown church, the apostle himself having issued different
editions of the epistle. Spitta considers that there are two epistles laid to
gether, the second consisting of i. 7-12 ; xii.-xv. 7 ; and xvi. 1-20, which
we have combined with the original epistle to the Romans. Bishop Light
foot argued that all but the last four verses went to Rome, and that
subsequently the apostle issued another edition, in which he substituted
these verses for chapters xv. , xvi. This theory rests partly on the fact that
the western MS. G. omits eVPii/i?; in two places (i. 7 and 15). A double
omission could not be accidental, and it is supported by the cursive 47.
The theory also attempts to account for some of the other peculiarities of
the last two chapters. Dr. Hort disputed this position, maintaining that
the doxology summed up the whole argument of the epistle, and attribut
ing the MS. variations partly to the influence of Marcion on the text, and
partly to the way the epistle was divided in lectionaries.1
d. Occasion of Writing. — -In part the epistle seems to
have been designed to prepare the Romans for a visit from
the apostle; but its chief aim was to guide the church to
1 For a full discussion of these points see Sand ay and Headlam,
Internat. Com. on Rom., pp. Ixxxv.-xcviii., and Lightfoot, Biblical
Essays. Among recent critics who assign xvi. to Ephesus are Weiss,
Introd. (Eng. trans., pp. 321, 322); Julicher, Einleitung, pp. 72-74;
Holtzmann, Einleitung, pp. 242-246 ; Pfleiderer, Urchristenthum,
p. 145 ; Lipsius, Hand.-Com on Rom., p. 86. On the other hand the
integrity of the epistle is maintained among recent critics by Godet,
Introd., Vol. I., pp. 468-482, and Zahn, Einleitung, Vol. I., pp. 267-298.

382 BIBLICAL INTRODUCTION
full Christian liberty and righteousness by faith, and then
to guard against antinomianism and inculcate brotherly
charity. If the epistle had been issued in successive editions
to various churches, it might be regarded as a general
presentation of St. Paul's gospel. It was natural that he
should desire to send such a document to Rome, the
metropolis of the world. Much as the positive theme of
this epistle resembles that of Galatians, it must be observed
that the error opposed is not the same, for while in Galatians
St. Paul resists Judaistic Christianity, here it is Judaism, pure
and simple, with which he contrasts the new gospel of God-
given righteousness through faith.
e. Date and Place of Origin. — The epistle is written from
Achaia (xv. 25, 26), therefore probably from Corinth. The
occasion must be the second visit recorded in Acts (xx. 2).
It could not be the first, that of Acts xviii., because the
apostle had preached the gospel as far as Ulyricum. (Romans
xv. 19.) This gives us as a probable date early in a.d. 58.
The epistle has many echoes of the vehement Galatian epistle,
and seems to have been written soon after it.1
f. Contents. — The epistle falls into two parts: (1) Doc
trinal; (2) Practical.
i. 1-7, Opening salutation.
8-17, Interest in the Romans. Desire to visit and help
them. Part i. Doctrinal, i. 1 8-xi. 36.
(1) Universal sinfulness, i.-iii. 20.
i. 18-32, Seen in the degraded state of the pagan world.
ii., Without excuse when also found among the Jews. This
shows contempt of God's law. They who have not the law
are a law to themselves, having the law of conscience in their
hearts. Jews the more to blame for not practising what they
preach. The true Jew must be one inwardly; the true cir
cumcision that of the heart.
iii. 1-8, The Jew's privilege. He has the oracles of God.
God's wrath just. 1 See Lightfoot, Galatians, pp. 45-48,

ROMANS 383
9-20, Scripture testimony to sin. No excuse.
(2) Justification and its effects, iii. 21— viii.
iii. 21-31, God's righteousness, apart from law, through
faith in Christ, whom God set forth to be a medium of
mercy. Therefore all exulting on our part is excluded.
iv., Abraham justified by faith.
v. 1-1 1, Justification leading to peace and proving God's love.
12-21, The analogy of Adam. As sin entered through one
man, Adam, so the free gift enters through one, Christ; but
with differences.
vi. 1-14, Antinomianism excluded : — Shall we sin that grace
may abound 1 No; because the old self is dead, crucified
with Christ, and we now live in Him.
15-23, Shall we sin because we are not under law? No;
because we are no longer servants of sin, but servants of
righteousness. vii. 1-6, The analogy of the woman who is free to marry
again when her husband is dead. We, dead to the law, can
be united to Christ.
7-25, The use of the law in rousing the consciousness of sin.
It is much disputed whether this passage is autobiographical, and if
so, whether it refers to the apostle's present or past experience. The
intense feeling that pervades it points to real experience. In favour
of its referring to the present the actual struggles of Christian men
are appealed to. On the other hand, St. Paul begins with a sort
of biographical recital, mentioning first the unconscious innocence of
childhood, and then the awakening of conscience (verse 9). The struggle
follows without any mention of the great change of regeneration. And
further, chapter viii. points to the serenity of the Christian in contrast
with the misery depicted in chapter vii.
viii., The life of the Spirit. Sonship, redemption, inter
cession, triumph.
(3) The fate of the Jews, ix.-xi.
God has a right to choose whom He will. The Jews
rejected because of unbelief.
Baur regarded this as the chief part of the epistle. Others have held
it to be out of harmony with the rest of the espistle, and almost an
incumbrance. But after rejecting Judaism it is natural that St. Paul
should consider the people most interested in it, his own people too,
and their position in the light of the new teaching.

384 BIBLICAL INTRODUCTION
Part ii. Practical, xii. -xvi.
xii., Gifts and corresponding duties.
xiii., Duties to rulers, to our neighbours; awaking to the
light. xiv.-xv. 13, The weak in faith to be received and not
disturbed. Some conscientiously refuse to eat meat and
observe days. The stronger and freer have not these
scruples. The strong should bear the burdens of the weak.
The question here raised is different from that in 1 Corinthians con
cerning the lawfulness of eating meat offered to idols. There is no
reference to idols and heathen sacrifices in Romans. The "weak"
refuse to eat meat at all, practise vegetarianism as a matter of conscience.
These would not be the Jewish section of the church, unless they were
Essenes ; but it is not likely that this obscure party which had its home
by the Dead Sea would be represented at Rome. It is more probable
that Pythagorean ideas were affecting some of the Gentile part of the church.
Then the observing of days would not refer to Jewish Sabbath-keeping,
etc., but to pagan notions of lucky and unlucky days.
xv. 14-33, Concluding personal remarks on the apostle's
work and his desire to visit Rome and Spain.
xvi. 1, 2, Commendation of Phcebe, a helper and support
of the church at Cenchraea.
3-16, A number of individual salutations.
17-20, Warning against false teachers.
21-23, Salutations from St. Paul's companions.
25-27, Concluding Doxology.
7. Characteristics of the Group.
These four great epistles, 1 and 2 Corinthians, Galatians,
Romans, all written within a twelvemonth and separated by
four years from the preceding group, and by another four
years from the next group of epistles, stand by themselves
as containing between them the most complete and vigorous
presentation of the apostle's teaching. The least disputed
books in the N.T., they have been named " the quadrilateral
of Christianity," and it has been shown that if we possessed
no other documents it would be possible to substantiate the
main facts and principles of the Christian religion on the
basis of these epistles. They show us St. Paul at the height

CHARACTERISTICS OF THE GROUP 385
of his power, burdened with the care of the churches, and
harassed by the antagonism of opponents who claim the
authority and prestige of the older type of Christianity
prevalent at the mother church of Jerusalem. At first
St. Paul's liberalism is practical — the free offer of the
gospel to the world at large. But controversy stimulates
an intellectual justification of it. Thus in these epistles
where that process is carried on we see the genesis of
Christian theology as a subject of thought. All through
the controversy St. Paul is forced to defend his own
apostleship and authority. Then he has to defend what
he calls his gospel. This, in distinction from that of the
Judaisers, is negatively a repudiation of the law as, first,
not of any service to Gentiles, and further, as abolished
altogether even for Jews who become Christians. Then
positively his gospel is developed as the good news of
the gift of eternal life in Jesus Christ, and forensically
regarded as announcing God's gift of righteousness in
Christ received by us through faith. St. Paul paints sin
in the darkest colours. Its consequence is death. All
mankind are sinners, under the wrath of God. When
explaining the relation of Christ to the gospel St. Paul
teaches His Divinity — He is God's Son and the fountain
of grace; and also His humanity — He was born of a
woman. The cross is most significant with St. Paul. It
is not only that Jesus is Christ in spite of being crucified,
nor that the crucifixion was foreordained in the mysterious
purposes of God, but it took a great part in our redemption.
Christ died on our behalf (virep fjpmv), and because of our
sins. He was treated as a sinner (" made sin ") for us that
we might have God's righteousness. The resurrection com
pleted Christ's work and established our justification. By
faith this is ours. Our faith unites us to Christ, so that
we die with Him, rise with Him, live in Him. This is
the mystical part of St. Paul's teaching that becomes more
apparent in the third group. Thus united with Christ we
become God's sons by adoption, and joint heirs with Christ.
2 c

386 BIBLICAL INTRODUCTION
The consequence is the firstfruits of the Spirit, from which
come the insight of spiritual discernment, purifying and
consecrating grace, and specific gifts (charismata). Thus
privileged, the Christian is under the highest obligation to
live a holy life, cultivating above all else the grace of
love. Brotherly love between Christians is especially to be
cherished, and each member of the Church to take his
right place according to his gift in ministering to the good of
the whole body. At the same time duties to the outer world
are to be carefully observed. Christians live in expectation
of the return of Christ to judge the world and establish His
kingdom. Then the dead in Christ shall live again, and share
in the blessed future.

CHAPTER VII.
THE PAULINE EPISTLES: THIRD GROUP
The Epistles Written in Prison

The place and time of imprisonment.
i. Colossians.
2. Philemon.

3. Ephesians.
4. Philippians.
5. Characteristics of the Group.

Another interval of some years (probably four) separates
the epistles of the third group from those of the preceding
period. The four epistles of this group were all written during
St. Paul's imprisonment. In Colossians he refers to the
mysteries of the Christ, "for which also," he adds, "I am
also in bonds '' (Scoe/un, iv. 3), and he pathetically exclaims,
" Remember my bonds." (verse 18.) In Philemon he writes
as "Paul a prisoner of Christ Jesus" (1), "now a prisoner
also of Jesus Christ " (9), while Onesimus is his child
"begotten in the bonds," who could minister to him "in
the bonds of the gospel." (13.) In Ephesians he is "the
prisoner of Christ Jesus" (iii. 1), and "the prisoner in the
Lord." (iv. r.) In Philippians he refers four times to "my
bonds." (i. 7, 13, 14, 17.) It is impossible to assign these
epistles to any imprisonment earlier than that which followed
the apostle's arrest in Jerusalem (a.d. 58 ; Acts xxi. 33), after
which he was detained by Felix for two years at Caesarea
(Acts xxiv. 27), and then sent to Rome, on his appeal to
Caesar, where he was two years in his own hired house before
his trial. (Acts xxviii. 30.) But it is a question whether the
letters were written from Caesarea or from Rome. The prob
ability, however, is in favour of Rome, where St, Paul had
3«7

388 BIBLICAL INTRODUCTION
more liberty of action and intercourse, and towards the end
of the imprisonment, i.e., about a.d. 62.
Some who admit that three of these epistles were written from Rome,
detach Philippians, which they assign to Ccesarea, while others reverse this
position. In favour of Caesarea as the place of writing one or more of
these epistles, are the following arguments : — (i) For Philippians in
particular that the mention of the "prsetorium" (Philippians i. 13) is
explained by the fact that according to Acts xxiii. 35, St. Paul was
confined in Herod's "praetorium" at Caesarea. But the expression may
well refer to the "praetorian guard" at Rome, in charge of which the
apostle was placed. On the other hand, " Caesar's household " (Philippians
iv. 22) plainly points to Rome. So does St. Paul's allusion to the progress
of his work (i. 12 ff.), since he found new ground for evangelising at
Rome, while Caesarea was already a familiar centre of apostolic labours j
and the freedom for this work was found at Rome while the apostle was in
his own house, as it was not found at Caesarea, where he was kept in a
dungeon, though kindly treated.1
(2) por the other epistles. — In Philippians ii. 24 St. Paul intends to
proceed from Rome to Macedonia, whereas when he wrote Philemon 22
he wished to go straight to Colossse. Further, his request for a lodging
to be prepared there implies his expectation of speedy release, which he
could not cherish at Rome.8 But Philemon went with Colossians, and
Ephesians must have been written about the same time. Therefore, it is
argued, all three must be assigned to Csesarea. On the other hand it must be
allowed that St. Paul could change his intended route ; and the request for
a lodging might be a playful hint of his urgent desire to come to Colossae.
But it is pointed out that Tacitus describes the destruction of Colossae in
a.d. 60, s and yet St. Paul makes no reference to the fact. Therefore, it
is argued, he must have written before that date. But Lightfoot shows
that Eusebius, who mentions that the three cities of Asia, Laodicea,
Hierapolis, and Colossae, were destroyed by earthquake four years later, is
especially accurate in his dates of earthquakes,* and Tacitus has been
proved to be wrong in the case of another earthquake.6 The comparative
freedom of the apostle's life at Rome is the convincing reason for assigning
the origin of all four epistles to that city. Resemblances to the pastoral
epistles also makes for Ephesians and Colossians being late. Philippians i.
24-26 shows that St. Paul expects an acquittal, and therefore the attitude
of this epistle is not so different from that of Philemon, with its expecta
tion of being soon able to visit Colossae.
1. Colossians.
a. The City and the Church. — Colossae was a Phrygian city
in the Roman province of Asia, one of the three cities of the
1 See Lightfoot, Phil. , p. 29.
2 See Weiss, Introd. to the N.T., Eng. trans., vol. i. p. 327.
3 Ann. xiv. 27.
4 Col. (ed. 1875), pp. 37-40.
5 Suetonius, Nero, 160, 172. Cited in Hort, Rom. and Eph., p. 106.

COLOSSIANS 389
Lycus Valley. The Lycus is a tributary of the Maeander, and
two of the cities, large, important places, Laodicea and Hiera-
polis, faced one another on opposite sides of the stream, while
Colossas was an insignificant town — much the smallest town to
which the apostle addressed any of his extant letters — twelve
miles further up, and therefore more in the heart of Phrygia.
The church at Colossae had not been founded by St. Paul,
and he had never visited it when he wrote his epistle. The
narrative of Acts does not bring the apostle through the
Lycus Valley, and in the epistle he only writes of hearing of
the faith and love of the Colossians (Colossians i. 4), refers
gratefully to the day when the first news of their recep
tion of the gospel had reached him (verse 9), and describes
the Colossians as people who had not seen his face in the
flesh, (ii. 1.) And yet the church was in an especial way
under his charge, for it had been founded by Epaphras, the
evangelist whom St. Paul had directly commissioned to visit
the district where it was situated. (7, 8.)
b. Genuineness of the Epistle. — This epistle is well attested
by external evidence, being mentioned by Irenaeus, Clement,
and Tertullian, at the end of the second century, probably cited
by Justin Martyr in the middle of the century, and included
in Marcion's canon still earlier. It is essentially Pauline in
doctrine, and its profound spiritual character makes for the
honesty of its claim. Dr. Lightfoot has shown that there is
nothing in its teaching that betrays second century ideas or
conflicts with the period of St. Paul's lifetime.1 Although its
genuineness is not so almost universally admitted as that of
the epistles of the second group, it is accepted by critics who
reject Ephesians, and opinion is growing in favour of its being
an original work of St. Paul's.2
1 See Lightfoot, Col., Introd. ii., The Colossian Heresy.
2 Hilgenfeld followed Baur in rejecting it ; Pfleiderer allowed there
were fragments of St. Paul's writings in it. Later it has been vindicated
by Van Soden, who, however, allows of interpolations, Julicher, Zahn,
and Sanday, who opposes Van Soden's idea that the christological
parts were interpolations. (Smith, D.B2.) It is generally accepted by
English and American commentators, Lightfoot, Vincent, etc.

390 BIBLICAL INTRODUCTION
For external evidence compare Barnabas xii. J (tov 'lyaov, tin iv aimp
irivTo. Kal els avrdv) with Colossians i. 16. Justin Martyr repeatedly re
minds us of a striking phrase of the epistle, tov irpdirbroKov tCiv to,vtuv,
Tryph. , 84 ; wpurorbKov 7ra<r?;s Krlo-em, Tryph. , 85 ; irparoroKov p.ev tov
Oeov Kal irpb ravrav tuv KTio-piaTuv, Tryph., 100, suggesting an allusion
to Colossians i. 15 ("the firstborn of all creation," TrpunbroKos irao-i)!
KTlcreas). This is the more striking, because Philo, with whom Justin
seems to be acquainted, never has this phrase, but uses Trpwrbyovos (De
Agric, 12; De Sovm., i. 37). Compare also Tatian (Justin's disciple),
Orat. ad Grace, 5. The epistle is in the Syriae and Old Latin versions,
and is recognised in the Muratorian Fragment. Moreover, Colossians is
indirectly attested by Philemon . The two epistles are closely associated,
and there is strong reason for accepting Philemon.
The objections are wholly on internal grounds : (1) The
heresy opposed has been regarded as some form of second
century gnosticism ; but Dr. Lightfoot showed that this con
tained none of the later gnostic peculiarities, and was more
likely to be a Jewish speculation. (2) The doctrine of Christ
is more advanced than in St. Paul's recognised epistles.
Christ here appears as the centre of the universe. All things
have been created not only through Him (St' avrov), but also
"unto Him" (eis avTov, i. 16). Elsewhere this is said of God
the Father in distinction from Jesus Christ (e.g., Romans
xi. 36 ; 1 Corinthians viii. 6.) This led Van Soden to regard
the passage as an interpolation. But may we not take it
as an advance in the development of St. Paul's Christology?
(3) The style is regarded as un-Pauline. The old vehemence
disappears, and we have long, cumbrous sentences in place
of the short, abrupt utterances of the earlier epistles. In
reply it may be said that St. Paul is mellowed and calmed
with age and subdued by his long confinement, and that
the controversies which engaged him earlier have passed
away. (4) The vocabulary of these epistles contains many
words not found hitherto in St. Paul's epistles. This difficulty
is partly met in two ways : First, the residence at Rome
would bring the apostle into fresh associations, and the
imprisonment give him leisure for reading and thus en
larging his knowledge of Greek words. Second, the subjects
treated — in particular the Colossian heresy — by introducing
a new series of ideas, would stimulate a corresponding fresh-

COLOSSIANS 391
ness of language. And yet it must be confessed that these
answers do not entirely remove the difficulty. Perhaps we
should accept the suggestion that Timothy, as St. Paul's
amanuensis, was allowed more liberty in the case of this
epistle, so that the association of his name with the apostle's
in the opening sentence was not merely nominal.1 These
difficulties do not destroy the strong evidence for the genuine
ness of the epistle. It is highly improbable that a work so
profound in its spiritual thought as Colossians should have
been falsely ascribed to St. Paul. The character of the
epistle and the greatness of its thought make for its genuine
ness. c. Occasion of Writing, etc. — As St. Paul was writing to
Philemon on a personal matter, he would be led to think
of sending a letter to the church in the city where his friend
lived. Epaphras, the founder of the church at Colossae,
who was now with the apostle at Rome (iv. 12), may have
brought information about the disturbing teachers which
would have prompted St. Paul to counteract their errors.
The letter is to be conveyed by Tychichus, who is to give
personal information concerning the apostle's affairs (iv. 7),
which perhaps it would not have been safe to have committed
to writing.
d. Contents.
i. 1, 2, Salutation from Paul and Timothy.
1 Thirty-four words are found nowhere else in the N.T. , viz., d6vp.eiv,
aiffXpoXoyia, dveiptbs, avravairk-qpovv, dvTa-jrddocns, aireKoveaBai, airtKb'vo-is,
&Tl>xpri(ns, dpeaKela, atpeiSla, fspafSebeiv, doyp-arlt^ea-dai, dvva/iovv (but
Ephesians vi. 10 has edwafiovade), £6e\odpT)G-Ke[a, eipijvoiroLeiv, efifiaTebetv,
eirxdparTos, dednjs, KaTafipaflebeLV, fxeTaKivelv, p.op.<pT], vovpyvia, 6par6s,
irapriyopta, iridavoXoyla, ir\T)o-p.ovn., irpoaKOiieiv, wpo<rrj\ovv, irpoiTeieiv,
crepew/iai, o-vXayuryeTv, a-up-ariKuts, <p(Kooo<f>la, xelP°yPa(Pov' Twelve
occur in other N.T. writers, but not elsewhere in St. Paul, viz., ti\as,
d-jroKplveo-dat, dw6Kpv(pos, dprbeiv, yeveodai, deiyp.aTifeu', i^aXetepeiv,
wapaiKoyl^eadai, iriKpaiveiv, irovos, ffKid, o-vvSovkos, and three in the
pastoral epistles, viz., airoKeiadat, KpvitTeiv, wXovaiuis. On ihe other
hand this epistle contains eleven Pauline words used by no other N.T.
writer, viz , iireivcu, edpaios, ei'/ri) (?), epedifav, dpiap.fiei>eiv, Uavovv,
ladrris, 7ra'0os, avvaixixaiKaTos, ovvBdirTeiv, qtvaiovv — an important make
weight in favour of genuineness. See Abbott, Ephesians and Colossians,
pp. lix, lx.

392 BIBLICAL INTRODUCTION
3-8, Thanksgiving for the gospel reaching Colossae by
means of Epaphras, and for its fruit there and elsewhere.
9-19, All things summed up in Christ, through whom
and for whom the universe was created, and in whom it
consists. 20-23, Reconciliation through Christ, and His death.
24-29, The apostle's work in proclaiming the mystery of
the gospel, which is Christ as the hope of glory for the
Gentiles. ii. 1-5, His prayer for the Colossians that they may be
knit together in love, and may attain to the knowledge of
God in Christ.
6-15, Exhortations, especially against the delusion of a
false philosophy, appealing to the new life of those who,
buried with Christ in baptism, are also raised with Him.
16-23, Warnings against the bondage of external ordinances.
iii. 1-4, Practical appeal to seek the heavenly things in
accordance with the experience of being risen with Christ.
5-1 1, Warnings against sensuality, malice, and other vices
of the old life.
12-17, Encouragements to live the Christian life, and attain
to its graces.
iii. 18-iv. 1, Domestic duties — wives and husbands, children
and parents, servants and masters.
iv. 2-6, Exhortations to prayer, and wisdom and grace of
speech. 7-9, Concerning Tychicus the messenger and Onesimus
the beloved brother.
10-14, Salutations from the apostle's companions.
15, 16, Messages concerning Laodicea, and an exchange of
epistles. 17, A message to Archippus to take heed to his ministry
(or deaconship).
18, Final salutation in the apostle's own handwriting.
The Colossian Heresy. — It is evident that in this epistle St. Paul is
contending against some false teaching which was put forth as a
philosophy, i.e., as a rule of life. This was Jewish, in the observance

PHILEMON 393
of Sabbaths and new moons, and making distinctions in food (ii. 16-23);
and also gnostic, claiming a peculiar intellectuality, indulging in specula
tive tenets concerning cosmogony, and thus associating the construction
and administration of the universe with a series of heavenly beings.
Hilgenfeld took these two elements to belong to different parties, but
Lightfoot showed that Jewish speculations and practices, having an
essential affinity of type with those of the Essenes, would account for
what St. Paul refers to. The Essenes were more rigorous than the
Pharisees in Sabbath-keeping, and were ascetic in practice, refusing
flesh and wine, and not marrying. Philo denies that they were given
to "abstract philosophy," and it is difficult to suppose that these
people who devoted themselves to agriculture in Juda;a, and of whom
we never read elsewhere, could have had much influence in '¦ Phrygia,
Still there is reason to think that allied tendencies were found in Asia
Minor. Essenism owed much of its peculiarity to Oriental influences
which were more powerful in Asia Minor than where it arose. There
is no reason to suppose that the special ideas of gnosticism sprang
from Christian sources. They were Greek and Oriental — partly Persian,
perhaps Buddhist, and in some degree to be traced back to Babylonian
astrology. These ideas were early grafted on to Judaism ; the Kabbala
is one of the fruits of this union. In the second century they blossomed
into great systems of thought in combination with Christianity. In
Colossians we see them pressing into the Church through their earlier
alliance with Judaism. The Colossian heresy in particular dishonoured
Christ practically by bringing in angels for worship, and speculatively
by dividing the functions of creation, etc. among these beings. All that
was here affirmed of the angels St. Paul claims for Christ, who is supreme
in the universe.1
2. Philemon.
This beautiful little letter bespeaks its own genuineness
beyond question. It is wholly personal in character and aim,
and there is nothing about it to suggest a writer with doctrinal
and other objects sheltering under St. Paul's name.
Philemon is in Marcion's and the Muratorian Canons, and in the Syriae
and Old Latin versions. It is not cited by Irenaeus or Clement A. , but its
brevity and personal character will account for that. Tertullian and
Origen refer to it.
a. Occasion and Circumstances of Origin. — Onesimus, a
slave of Philemon's, having stolen some of his master's
property, had fled to Rome, where he had come under the
influence of St. Paul; and this had led to his conversion.
St. Paul, in sending him back, writes to beseech Philemon to
pardon the defaulter, and receive him as no longer merely a
slave, but a brother beloved. The mention of Archippus
1 See Lightfoot, Colossians and Philemon, " The Colossian Heresy."

394 BIBLICAL INTRODUCTION
here (2) and in Colossians iv. 17 fixes Colossae as the place at
which Philemon lived. Then the reference to Onesimus in
Colossians iv. 9, as about to go to Colossae, further associates
the two epistles. Demas and Luke also send salutations in
both letters. It is evident that this little letter accompanied
Colossians, Tychicus probably taking both ; or possibly One
simus, who travelled with him, took the letter, which was for
his own benefit.
b. Contents.
i. 1-3, Salutation from Paul and Timothy to Philemon, and
Apphia (? his wife), to Archippus and the church in Philemon's
house. 4-7, Thanksgiving for Philemon's love and faith.
8-21, A pathetic plea for the pardon of Onesimus, who is
now a brother beloved and the apostle's spiritual son begotten
in his bonds. Paul will make himself responsible for what
was stolen.
22, A lodging to be prepared.
23, 24, Concluding salutations.
25, Benediction.
3. Ephesians.
a. Destination of the Letter. — There are strong reasons for
believing that this letter was not written to the church at
Ephesus. The title represents an ancient tradition, but it is
not itself authoritative, as in no cases were the titles of the
epistles in the original documents. The address "to the saints
which are at Ephesus'' (i. 1), which is found in our N.T., has
not the support of the two best MSS. X and B, which omit
the words " in Ephesus " (iv 'E<j>eo-ip). These words are also
missing in a late cursive MS. (67), as corrected by a second
hand. A more ancient testimony is that of Origen, early in the
third century, who writes in a way that implies the absence of
these two words.1 Still earlier, in the first half of the second
century, Marcion accepted the epistle, but under the title,
1 The passage in Origen taken from Cramer's Catena, p. 102, is cited
in Hort's Rom. and Eph. , page 76, footnote.

EPHESIANS 395
"To the Laodiceans." He could hardly have done so if the
words " in Ephesus " had been in his text. Besides, Tertullian
would have accused him of falsifying the words of the apostle
here. As he does not, we may conclude that Tertullian also
knew of MSS. from which the words were omitted.1 The
uncertainty which is thus suggested is met by a decided argu
ment against the Ephesian destination of the epistle from the
tenor of its contents. Ephesus was one of the chief centres
of St. Paul's labours. He had resided and worked in the city
for more than two years. (Acts xix. io.) There is no more
touching scene in the history of the early church than his
interview with the Ephesian elders at Miletus, (xx. 17-38.)
One of the Ephesians accompanied him to Jerusalem.
(xxi. 29.) Here then was a church of his most intimate
friends. But the epistle does not contain a word of in
dividual salutation. No name is mentioned among the
people to whom he is writing, although several persons are
named in the companion epistle to the Colossians, a people
whom confessedly the apostle had never seen.2 Therefore we
may confidently conclude that this epistle could not have been
addressed to St. Paul's friends at Ephesus. We are tempted
to imagine that Marcion was right, and that it was addressed
to Laodicea, one of the three cities of the Lycus Valley,
which, in common with Colossae and Hierapolis, the apostle
had never visited, and the reference to the exchange of epistles
in Colossians iv. 16 would seem to fall in with that idea. And
yet the phrase there is not " the epistle to Laodicea," but " the
epistle from (Ik) Laodicea," which rather points to one that
was to be passed on through that city. The general character
of our epistle favours the opinion that it was a circular letter
for the churches of this neighbourhood.
We still have to account for the singular condition of the text in the
MSS. above referred to, where we read tois 117(015 tois oS<nv [omitting iv
'Etpiaip] Kal maTois. One view is to render o£<nv absolutely, with the
1 See Tertullian, Adv. Marc, v. n, 17.
2 The phrase, "If so be that ye heard (etye lyKoiyffare, iii. 2), though not
expressing a doubt, could not be used in a case of absolute certainty, such
as that of a church St. Paul had himself taught.

396 BIBLICAL INTRODUCTION
meaning, " the saints who truly exist— as such, etc." But this is a forced
and unnatural interpretation. Another view favoured by Hort is " the
saints who are also faithful." Against this is the application of this same
participle of the verb elp.1 in other epistles, where it directs attention to the
place.1 Possibly a blank was left for the name of the church to be filled
in. This might be done in writing if several copies had been written off ;
but the notion is too modern. Besides, it excludes the idea, otherwise
probable enough, that Ephesians may be the epistle which was to come on
from Laodicea. A simpler method would be to send a single copy with
out any name, leaving the name of each church receiving the epistle to be
supplied by the reader. Ephesus, being the metropolis of the province,
would naturally receive it in the end, and then nothing would be more
natural than for somebody to fill in the gap with the name of the city
where the epistle was subsequently found.
b. Genuineness. — The external evidence for this epistle is
stronger than that for Colossians. It seems to have been
known to Clement R. as early as a.d. 95. Evidently it was
quoted by Ignatius early in the second century, and by
Polycarp, and it was accepted by Marcion before a.d. 140.
Compare 1 Clem. xlvi. 5, " Have we not one God, and one Christ,
and one Spirit of grace poured out upon us, and one calling in
Christ," with Ephesians iv. 4 ; Ignatius, Magnes. vii. 1 with Ephesians
iv. 3-6 ; Phil. ii. 1 with Ephesians v. 8 ; Ad Polyc. v. I with
Ephesians v. 25, 29 ; Polycarp, Phil. i. 3 with Ephesians ii. 8, 9 ; and
possibly Ibid. xii. 1, where "Irascimini, et nolite peccare" is quoted
as scripture (ut in his scripturis dictum est), with Ephesians iv. 26.
But we only have this last quotation in a Latin translation ; possibly in
both cases it is taken from some Logia of Jesus Christ ; or it may be an
allusion to Psalm iv. 4, LXX. The epistle is in Marcion's and the Mura
torian Canons, and in the Old Latin and Syriae versions. It is first named
as St. Paul's by Irenaeus. (Adv. Haer., v. 2. 3.)
Moreover it shares with Colossians the general Pauline
standpoint, and is rich in vital spiritual thought, one of the
gems of Scripture. It is hard to doubt the genuineness of
a work of such paramount worth.
Nevertheless it is more questioned than Colossians.2 The
objections are largely the same as those urged against
Colossians. We have the advanced Christology, though
not so pronounced with regard to the universe and creation
1 tois odoiv iv'Pibfi-ri (Rom. i. 7),ttj oBot; iv KoplvBip (I Cor. i. 2), tois
odoiv iv QCklirirots (Phil, i, I).
2 Van Soden, for instance, who defends Colossians, ascribing Ephesians
to a large-minded Jewish Christian of the dispersion.

EPHESIANS 397
as in Colossians, the same style of long sentences, the same
phenomena of un-Pauline words.
There are thirty-two words used only in this epistle, and twenty-eight
found elsewhere in the N.T., but not in Paul. On the other hand there
are eighteen words found in Pauline epistles, but not elsewhere in the
N.T., and several of the hapax legomina are in the list of the Christian
armour, and therefore quite naturally accounted for, being inevitable when
once the idea of elaborating the image was entertained.
But in addition to these objections, which may be met as
were the similar objections to Colossians, certain special ob
jections are urged against Ephesians : (i) Whereas previously
St. Paul championed the Gentiles against the Jews, here writ
ing to Gentiles he seems to champion the Jewish Christians.
That, however, might be the case in this later period
when liberty was secure, and among churches chiefly Gentile.
Moreover the idea appears in Romans xi. 13-24. (2) The
expression, "the devil," occurs twice (iv. 27 ; vi. n). But else
where St. Paul always has "Satan." It may be replied that
elsewhere in the N.T. the names are interchangeable. Writing
later at Rome St. Paul might prefer the Greek term. (3) The
phrase, " holy apostles " (iii. 5), is objected to as more like
a formula of later ecclesiastical usage. But we must re
member that the word rendered "holy" (uy«ns) is the
common title of all Christians, and points to consecration
rather than to personal holiness. It occurs a little later,
where St. Paul describes himself as "less than the least of
all saints " (d-ytwv, iii. 8). (4) The most singular phenomena
in connection with the epistle is its close resemblance to
Colossians. Out of 155 verses no less than 78 have ex
pressions identical with phrases in that epistle. Hence
it has been inferred that this is founded on Colossians, of
which some have regarded it as a " weak " expansion. As
to whether it is "weak," that is a matter of taste. The
similarity of phrase is too close to be accidental. But if
the apostle wrote the two epistles at the same time, it would
be perfectly natural that he would say the same things in
both. The situation was so far similar, that both epistles
went to people whom the apostle had not seen. Both were

398 BIBLICAL INTRODUCTION
sent by Tychicus. (Colossians iv. 7, 8; Ephesians vi. 21, 22.)
Then as Ephesians seems to be a circular letter, it might
be less crisp than one written with a more definite conception
of the persons to whom it was to be sent.1
c. Occasion and Time of Writing. — Probably Epaphras in
bringing news from Colossae had reported on the condition
of the neighbouring churches, and then Tychicus, who was
to take a letter to Colossae, would be able to carry one for
the other churches also. In particular the spread of Jewish
gnostic speculations derogatory to the supremacy of Christ
and His sole authority in the Church would call for a state
ment of the truth concerning this subject. As the two
epistles appear to have been written about the same time,
it is of little consequence to inquire which was produced
first. Still the larger expansion of the common ideas which
we find in Ephesians may perhaps indicate that this was
written after its companion.
d. Contents.
i. 1, 2, Salutation from Paul only.
3-14, Thanksgiving, leading to exposition of the idea of
God's purpose in adopting us as sons chosen by the Father ;
redeemed by the Son, in whom all things in heaven and earth
are to be summed up ; and sealed by the Spirit.
15-23, Prayer that the readers may appreciate their privileges
in Christ, who was raised from the dead, and is exalted above
the highest powers and authorities.
ii. 1-10, Their new state in grace.
1 1-22, The reconciliation of Jews and Gentiles in Christ.
iii. 1-13, The revelation of the gospel for the Gentiles
made through Paul.
14-19, Prayer for spiritual progress in knowing the love of
Christ. 20, 21, Doxology.
iv. 1-16, Unity in the body, with diversity of offices.
1 Holtzmann supposes there was a Pauline nucleus, which a subsequent
writer enlarged into two epistles, an elaborate theory which seems to be
adopted as a counsel of despair.

PHILIPPIANS 399
1 7-24, Warnings against heathen vices.
2S-32i Practical advice, especially as regards duty to our
neighbour. v. 1-14, To walk in love, and avoid immorality and
covetousness. 15-21, Care in conduct to avoid offence; praise and song.
22-33, The union of husbands and wives like that of Christ
and His Church.
vi. 1-4, Duties of children and parents.
5-9, Duties of servants and masters.
10-20, Exhortation to strength and courage; the whole
armour of God.
21, 22, Personal news by Tychicus.
23, 24, Benediction.
Two specific ideas of great importance are found in this
epistle :
(1) The Supremacy of Christ. — This corresponds to similar
teaching in Colossians. Here, as in the companion epistle,
Christ is exalted above all things not only in the sphere
of the gospel, but also in the universe, heavenly as well as
earthly. But in this epistle the supremacy of Christ over His
Church is especially emphasised.
(2) The Unity of the Church. — In earlier epistles St. Paul
often refers to individual local churches, and in writing
about the duties of their members he dwells on the im
portance of harmony in co-operation. But here he rises
to the conception of a universal Church of which Christ is
the head, and he insists on its essential unity realised through
the common faith and experience of all Christians.
4. Philippians.
a. The Church at Philippi. — Philippi was a Roman colony
in Macedonia, and the church in this city was the first planted
by St. Paul in Europe. The vision of the "man of Mace
donia" — whom Professor Ramsay identifies with St. Luke —
had induced the apostle to cross from Troas to the port of
Neapolis, whence he went at once over the hills to the

400 BIBLICAL INTRODUCTION
beautiful plain where Philippi stood on a promontory. There
was no synagogue at this place, but St. Paul discovered a
Proseuche, an enclosure for worship, in the suburbs, apparently
near the stream Gangites. His teaching won Lydia, who
represented a dyeing business at Thyatira, and she received
the apostle and his companions into her house. A small
church was formed, at first consisting principally of women.
It was most devoted to St. Paul, and it helped to support him
with its gifts during subsequent missionary journeys. The
troubles which disturbed other churches were scarcely known
here. No disloyalty to the apostle appeared among these
enthusiastic followers as at Corinth and in Galatia, no erroneous
doctrine as in the churches of the Lycus Valley. A little personal
difference between two active women in the church is all the
epistle has to allude to as not quite satisfactory. (Phil. iv. 2.)
b. Genuineness of the Epistle. — The difficulties that have
been felt with regard to Colossians and Ephesians are scarcely
met with in Philippians, and as the evidence from antiquity and
the character of the epistle itself strongly support St. Paul's
authorship, it is very generally received even by critics who
reject the other epistles of the imprisonment period. It seems
evident that this epistle was known and cited authoritatively
early in the second century ; it fits well into the circumstances
of the apostle's life, and reveals his spirit and character more
distinctly than almost any other of his writings.
Hippolytus refers to an interpretation of the phrase, "in the form of a
servant " (Phil. ii. 7), by a very primitive Ophite sect, the Sethites (Ref.
Haer., v. 8). Polycarp, in his epistle to the Philippians, refers to the letter
they had received from " the blessed and glorious Paul." (Pol. Phil., iii. I.)
Ignatius appears to refer to phrases from this epistle (Rom. , ii. 2 ; Philad. ,
viii. 2), as does the Epistle to Diognetus (5). It is cited in the letter ofthe
churches of Lyons and Vienne (Euseb., HE., v. 3). It is in Marcion's
collection, the Muratorian Canon, the Syriae and Old Latin versions.
Irenaeus (Adv. Haer., iv. 18. 4), Clement of Alexandria (Paedag., i. 6;
Strom., iv. 13), and Tertullian (De Resur., 23, 47 ; C. Marc, v. 20; De
Praescr., 26), cite it as St. Paul's.1
1 The epistle was rejected by Baur, Schwegler, etc. More recently its
genuineness has been attacked by Hitzig, Kreucker, Hinsch, Hoekstra,
Biederman, and especially by Holsten. But it is accepted and defended by
Hilgenfeld, Weizsacker, Harnack, Mangold, Pfleiderer, Lipsius, Godet,
B. Weiss, Holtzmann, Julicher, Klopper, Zahn — names which represent
very diverse schools, and some of them extreme critical positions.

PHILIPPIANS 401
The following objections have been brought forward : — (1) The separa
tion of the Divine pre-existence of Christ from His humanity (ii. 6- n) as
un-Pauline, since here the humanity begins at the Incarnation, while in
I Corinthians xv. 47-49, it is pre-existent as dvdpunros iirobpavi.o's. But the
iiroipavios does not refer to pre-existence ; it refers to the Resurrection.
(2) tin-Pauline justification, where the apostle appears as blameless with
regard to the law (iii. 4-11). But that was external ; Romans vii., etc.,
refer to his internal life. (3) Indifference to the objective truths of the
gospel (i. 15-18). — The parties preaching another Jesus, and anathematised
in Galatians i. 6-9 and 2 Corinthians xi. 4 are said to be here allowed.
But they are not the same. (4) Uncertainty concerning the Resurrection
(iii. 11). This may be denied. (5) Differences of style. These are far
less than in Colossians and Ephesians. Other objections are still less
important. 1
c. Occasion for Writing the Epistle. — Epaphroditus had
brought a contribution of money from the Philippian church
(ii. 25, iv. 18). Either owing to the hardships of the journey,
or his exertions on behalf of the apostle in Rome, he had
been dangerously ill. He feared the Philippians would be
anxious about him, and he was eager to return home (ii. 26).
St. Paul sends this letter with him containing thanks for the
gift (iv. 10-18). At the same time the apostle takes the
opportunity to give an account of his own condition, and of
the success of his work in Rome, and to flood his letter with
thoughts of encouragement and admonitions for his beloved
friends at Philippi.
d. Date. — There is considerable uncertainty as to the exact
date of this epistle and its position relative to the other epistles
of the imprisonment. Lightfoot puts it first in the group, and
in this he is followed by Hort. The principal reason for
its priority is the position it seems to take in the order of
the development of St. Paul's thought and style. It has more
of the simple, vigorous style of the earlier epistles, and many
phrases remind us of Romans. On the other hand we miss
the speculative elements of Colossians and Ephesians, and
the long sentences and cumbrous style of those epistles.
Therefore Lightfoot places it next to Romans, though with
the requisite interval of time, as he assigns it to Rome. But
this very interval tends to destroy the weight of his argu-
1 See Vincent, Internat. Crit. Com., Phil, and Phile., pp. xxv.-xxx.
2 D

402 BIBLICAL INTRODUCTION
ment. Some four years must be allowed between Romans
and Philippians, even if Philippians is the first letter of the
imprisonment, and at most two or three years separate this
from Colossians and Ephesians. Most critics place it last in
the group.
The following reasons make for the later date : — (i) It would seem that
the apostle has already been in prison for a long time. He has been able
to make Christ known through the whole praetorian guard (i. 12-14). (2)
Friends who had been with him when he wrote the other epistles have
now left him (ii. 20). St. Luke had accompanied him to Rome. (Acts xxviii.
16, "we entered into Rome.") He was with the apostle when Colossians
was written, and sent a salutation to that city. (Colossians iv. 14.) There
is no salutation from him to the Philippians, among whom he was well
known. (Acts xvi. 11 ff. ) Nor does Demas appear as in Colossians iv. 14.
(3) Some time is required for the journeys between Rome and Philippi,
implied by the letter. (4) Greater severity of treatment is apparent. St.
Paul had enjoyed comparative liberty ; now he is hardly dealt with,
(5) It would seem that the apostle's case has reached a crisis. He
proposes to send Timothy shortly, as soon as he knows what the decision
is to be (ii. 23). He is ready for death if that should be the issue, and
even desirous of it on his own account (i. 23). But he expects to be set
free (i. 25 ; ii. 24). Whatever might be the result, it would not be to leave
him still in prison, as Colossians and Ephesians and Philemon allow.
Therefore those epistles must precede Philippians.1
e. Integrity. — It has been suggested that we have two
writings of the apostle run together, because half-way through
our epistle we find St. Paul drawing to a close with the
formula, "Finally, my brethren," etc. (iii. 1). But (1) the
apostle might have intended to close here, and then fresh
ideas have started him on a fresh course. He often writes
without any evident scheme, spontaneously, setting down his
thoughts as they occur. (2) Possibly, however, we should
not translate the Greek phrase (to Aom-dv) as "finally," but
understand it as meaning "for the rest," as dismissing one
topic, and proceeding to others. So it may have been used
elsewhere (e.g., 2 Thessalonians iii. 1). The tone and character
of the epistle are remarkably harmonious throughout, and
testify to its being a single work.
1 For arguments in favour of the earlier date see Lightfoot, Phil,
Essay II. , "The order of the Epistles of the Captivity." In Zahn's
Einleitung the arguments for the later date are maintained.

PHILIPPIANS 403
f. Contents.
i. 1, 2, Salutations from Paul and Timothy to the Christians
at Philippi (as usual, denominated "Saints," a-yioi) together
with the bishops and deacons.
This is the first mention of "bishops" and "deacons" in St. Paul's
epistles, and the first mention of them in N.T. history.1 We do not
meet with the titles in any other place in his writings till we come to
the pastoral epistles, where their qualifications are discussed. Here they
are only named. In earlier epistles we have had vague allusions to church
officers (e.g., \ Thessalonians v. 12, 13) without any titles. Where official
titles are referred to, they are different from these, e.g. , ' ' apostles, prophets,
teachers," etc. (1 Corinthians xii. 28) ; or gifts and corresponding functions
rather than offices are named (e.g. , Romans xii. 6-8).
3-11, Thanksgiving for the kindness shown by the
Philippians to the apostle, and prayer for a blessing on
them. 12-26, Statements about his condition. The imprisonment
has helped in furthering the gospel throughout the whole
prastorian guard. The apostle expects a favourable issue to
his trial. Yet he does not desire this on his own account, his
life being devoted to Christ ; and death would be gain to him.
27-30, Exhortation to fidelity and courage under persecu
tion. ii. 1-5, Affectionate entreaty to unselfish humility.
6-1 r, The example of Christ, who emptied Himself,
became a man, and was obedient unto death, for which
reason God has highly exalted Him.
12-18, Exhortation to Christian progress, since God works
in us ; and warning against disputes, that the apostle may not
have laboured in vain.
19-30, Timothy to be sent; Epaphroditus, who had been
very ill, now sent back.
iii. 1-6, Warning against Jewish influences, followed by
1 Acts, though probably written later, refers to "elders" in an earlier
period of the history as in Jerusalem (Acts xi. 30), and as even appointed
by Paul and Barnabas during the "first missionary journey." (Acts
xiv. 23.) That book does not name "deacons," though it describes
the appointment of "the seven." (Acts vi. 1-6.) James, which may
be the earliest epistle, mentions elders (v. 14). The title does not
appear in Paul before the pastoral epistles.

404 BIBLICAL INTRODUCTION
an enumeration of St. Paul's own Jewish privileges and
attainments. 7-1 r, What he had counted profitable in these things given
up for the sake of Christ.
1 2-1 6, The apostle's eagerness to press forward to higher
attainments. 17-iv. 1, Warning from the example of fallen brethren;
a reminder of the heavenly citizenship and of the hope
of the coming of Christ; a consequent exhortation to
steadfastness. iv. 2, 3, Messages urging harmony between Euodia and
Syntyche, and suggesting encouragement from one addressed
as "true yokefellow" for them and Clement.
4-7, Exhortations to rejoicing and prayer, with a benediction
of peace.
8, 9, Topics worthy to be thought of; and the apostle's
teaching to be followed.
10-20, Thanks for the gift brought by Epaphroditus, which
is valued chiefly as a token of affection. The apostle has
learnt to be independent of want or plenty.
21, 22, Final salutations.
23, Benediction.
5. Characteristics of the G-roup.
The ideas set forth in these epistles of the third group
correspond to the changes that have taken place both in
the apostle's environment and in the history of the churches.
The sharp conflict with Judaising Christians that marked the
second period of literary activity has subsided, and St. Paul
has the satisfaction of seeing his larger gospel accepted in
the churches under his charge. At the same time the personal
opposition to the apostle which was one phase of that conflict
has also disappeared. Accordingly he no longer needs to
maintain his principles in the same polemical style, nor
to assert his own apostolic claims as in the controversial
epistles. But new troubles have emerged in the churches of
Asia through the introduction of ascetic practices and specula-

CHARACTERISTICS OF THE GROUP 405
tions of Jewish origin, but not associated with pharisaic
legalism. To meet the practical tendencies the apostle
denounces formal, superstitious restraints. But he has a
greater aim in the more spiritual region. This is to set
against the novel speculations a very exalted idea of the
nature and work of Jesus Christ. Thus these epistles see
a development of Christology. In Colossians we advance
from the earlier association of Christ with the universe as
the medium of creation to a fuller idea of His eternal
connection with it in sustaining it, and see its end in
Him. In Ephesians, while His relation to nature is also
affirmed, we see His headship over the Church more
developed, and the unity of the Church in Him affirmed
and illustrated. Philippians is addressed to Christians in
Macedonia, who were not affected by the movements of
thought in the Lycus Valley. But still Christ is central
in the epistle. Here we have the locus classicus for the
doctrine of the kenosis, with its issue in the supreme
exaltation of Christ who has received a name above every
name, and to whom every knee shall bow, in heaven as
well as on earth. In all these epistles the mystical union
of the Christian with Christ becomes more prominent
than the forensic relationship dwelt on in the epistles of
the Judaistic controversy.

CHAPTER VIII.
FOURTH GROUP : THE PASTORAL
EPISTLES
l. The question of genuineness. I 3. 2 Timothy.
2. 1 Timothy. 4. Titus.
1. Genuineness.
These three epistles are so closely associated, and resemble
one another in so many respects, that the question of their
genuineness must be considered in a common study of them.
In point of fact most critics either accept all of them or reject
all of them.1 Exception is taken to the epistles almost entirely
on internal grounds, for they are well supported by the
evidence of antiquity. Eusebius included them in the N.T.
books that were universally accepted.2 He therefore knew of
no doubts in the Catholic Church. Then they are named by
Clement of Alexandria and Tertullian, and as usual we find
Irenaeus the first to name them.3 Even earlier than this, 1 and
2 Timothy are evidently quoted by Polycarp, though not
named. They are also found in the Syriae and the Old Latin
versions, and are acknowledged in the Muratorian Fragment.
Compare Polycarp, Phil. iv. 1 with I Tim. vi. 7, 10 ; Phil. xii. 3 with
1 Tim. ii. I, 2 ; Phil. v. 2 with 2 Tim. ii, 11, 12 ; Phil. ix. 2 with 2 Tim.
iv. 10.
1 Schleiermacher, with whom the scientific study of the pastoral epistles
commenced, at first threw doubts on 1 Tim. by regarding it as a compila
tion from 2 Tim. and Tit., but it was soon seen that the three epistles
stand or fall together ; and Schleiermacher himself pointed out difficulties
concerning 2 Tim. and Tit.
2 to. irapb. too-iv 6p,6\oyobp.eva. See H.E., ii. 22 ; iii. 3.
8 Irenaeus names the two to Timothy (Adv. Haer., iii. 3. 3), and cites
from Tit. as Paul's (Adv. Haer., i. 16. 3 ; iii. 3. 4).
406

THE QUESTION OF GENUINENESS 40;
There is one important witness that must be cited on the
other side. Marcion did not accept these epistles as St. Paul's.
This fact should not be set aside so hastily as has been fre
quently done by apologists. Marcion's is the earliest extant
canon of St. Paul's epistles. As a reformer, reviving neglected
Pauline doctrine, this man made it his business to enforce
what he conceived to be the teaching found in the apostle's
writings. It is quite possible that it was Marcion who first
made any collection of the scattered letters. On the other
hand, it must be observed that he was possessed by a strong
doctrinal bias. It was on doctrinal and not critical grounds
that he rejected all the gospels except Luke, and mutilated
that, and that he received no other part of the N.T. but St.
Paul's epistles. Inasmuch as the pastoral epistles contain
statements which Marcion would not agree with, it is quite
possible that it was only on the ground of those statements
that he rejected them.
E.g., the high value set on the O.T. (2 Tim. iii. 16), which Marcion
rejected; opposition to docetism (1 Tim. ii. 5), which Marcion taught;
also opposition to asceticism in ' ' forbidding to marry, and commanding to
abstain from meats which God commanded to be received with thankful
ness," etc. (1 Tim. iv. 3) — Marcionite precepts.
There is much in the epistles themselves that speaks for
their genuineness. The spirit and power of the N.T. are
here ; we have not yet reached that inferior condition, that
lack of verve and originality, which marks the writings known
to be of the sub-apostolic age. They are Pauline in spirit too,
and they contain graphic touches of a personal character, which
some who have rejected the epistles in their completeness
have allowed to be genuine fragments from writings of the
apostle. Renan, who does not admit the authenticity of the
epistles, accepts these fragments as historical data, with which
to complete his story of St. Paul. Then the names of com
panions compare well with those of previous epistles. Some
old names reappear ; others are dropped out ; and in place of
them some new names appear. These are just such changes
as might be expected in the course of a few years.

408 BIBLICAL INTRODUCTION
Nevertheless, there is a very widespread rejection of these
epistles by various schools of criticism.
As stated above, Schleiermacher was the first to raise doubts on
I Timothy. Eichhorn and de Wette followed, rejecting all three in their
Introductions. The dispute first turned on the question whether the
epistles were written by St. Paul himself, or by one of his disciples,
perhaps St. Luke. A new position was taken by Baur, who held that
these epistles were written about A.D. 150 to combat gnosticism, especially
that of Marcion.1 Baur's view somewhat modified was adopted by his
followers, Schwegler and Hilgenfeld ; Pfleiderer and Weizsacker advocate
the essential position, which is also admitted by Beyschlag, but the latter
critics do not admit Baur's late date, and recede to the times of Trajan and
Hadrian. Of course, this gives up the reference to Marcion, who is of later
date. Holtzmann, who has shown that the great gnostic systems of the
second century are not here referred to, still rejects the epistles, and so do
Harnack and Jiilicher. They are defended by Zahn and by most English
writers on N.T. introduction, though rejected by Davidson.
The following difficulties and objections have been raised : —
a. Historical Difficulties. — No place for these epistles can
be found in St. Paul's life, neither according to Acts, nor
according to the other epistles. In 1 Timothy i. 3 we find
the apostle had left Timothy at Ephesus when going himself
to Macedonia. This could not be at the conclusion of his
long residence at Ephesus, which terminated with the riot
in the theatre, because then he sent Timothy into Macedonia
first, and followed later. (Acts xix. 22; xx. 1.) It could not
be previous to the period of residence, because at that
early time the church would not have been so advanced
as 1 Timothy suggests, and the errors described in the
epistle would not have had time to creep in. This epistle
clearly shows that the church at Ephesus had been in
existence for some considerable time when it was written.
Moreover St. Paul had exhorted Timothy to "tarry at
Ephesus" (1 Timothy i. 3), and he expected to return to
Timothy at Ephesus (iii. r4), though if he were delayed
Timothy would understand the reason (iii. 15). But after
St. Paul had gone to Macedonia from Ephesus, Timothy
was with him (2 Corinthians i. 1), so he was in Greece
1 Baur even took the avTiBtaets of I Tim. vi. 20, to refer to Marcion's
work, "Antitheses," and the vop,oSida<rKa\oi. of I Tim. i. 7, and /uo^ai
vofiiKal ol Tit. iii. 9 to the Maroionites and their opposition to the O.T.

THE QUESTION OF GENUINENESS 409
before the apostle could return to Asia. (Acts xx. 4.) We
cannot place the journey referred to in 1 Timothy any time
during the three years' stay at Ephesus, as a sort of flying
visit to Macedonia, not noticed in Acts, because 1 Timothy
implies a long absence, during which Timothy has to carry
on a continuous work in correcting false doctrine, etc. Surely
St. Paul would do this himself, if it were during the period of
his residence at Ephesus. Similar difficulties apply to 2 Timo
thy. There we read, "Trophimus I left at Miletus sick"
(iv. 20). This could not be on the journey to Jerusalem
described in Acts xx. (see verse 17), because we find
Trophimus with the apostle when he had reached that city.
(Acts xxi. 29.) After this St. Paul was a prisoner. But we
cannot think of some earlier journey, for the apostle writes
as a prisoner at Rome (2 Timothy i. 17), and his language
about Trophimus must refer to his last visit to Miletus.
It is the same with other personal references, e.g., "Erastus
abode at Corinth " (iv. 20). When ? He had not been to
Corinth for some years before the journey to Rome recorded
in Acts; two years had been spent at Caesarea, and since
his last visit to Corinth Timothy had been with him
(Acts xx. 4) ; so that he would not need now to write to
Timothy about what had happened then. "The cloke
that I left at Troas," etc. (2 Timothy iv. 13) — this must be
recent. Yet the only occasion Acts allows is seven or eight
years before. (Acts xx. 5-7.) " I have sent Tychicus to Ephe
sus." (2 Timothy iv. 12.) This could not be the journey from
Rome to take the Colossian and Ephesian Epistles because
Timothy was then with the apostle. (Colossians i. 1.)
Difficulties also come out of the historical situation of the
Epistle to Titus. There we see Titus left by St. Paul in
Crete. (Titus i. 5.) He is to join the apostle in Nicopolis
(iii. 12). Acts allows no opportunity for such movements.
The condition of Crete and the reference to Apollos
(iii. 13) put this later than St. Paul's stay at Corinth.
(Acts xviii.) Yet a considerable time in Greece is here
implied.

410 BIBLICAL INTRODUCTION
The only possible reconciliation is to place all three epistles
later than the history in Acts. This is on the hypothesis that
St. Paul was liberated after his trial, travelled as these epistles
indicate, was again arrested, and again sent to Rome. Now
there are several points in favour of this hypothesis. Professor
Ramsay has pointed out that the attitude of the Roman
government to St. Paul and the Christians and also the state
of the law would have issued in an acquittal. St. Paul
had appealed to Caesar, knowing his innocence in regard
to the law ; and as yet the government had not gone
against the Christians.1 The apostle expected to gain his
case, and be set free, as both Philippians2 and Philemon3
imply. Very different is his feeling when writing 2 Timothy.
Then he is assured of approaching martyrdom.4 Moreover
there was an impression in the early church that the apostle
was liberated, and subsequently imprisoned again when he
suffered martyrdom at Rome.
Jerome is the first to assert this positively. Eusebius knows of the
tradition, though with his usual accuracy he is cautious not to be too
positive about it, writing, "he [St. Paul] is said to have departed again
on the ministry of preaching." (H.E. ii. 22.) In the Muratorian Frag
ment St. Paul is said to have gone to Spain, which could only have been
later than the history in Acts. Clement of Rome says that he went to
" the boundary of the west," 5 a phrase which written in Rome seems
to point to Spain.
If we admit this hypothesis, all historical difficulties vanish.
Everything referred to in the pastoral epistles could have
occurred between the two imprisonments and during the
second of them.
b. Personal Difficulties. — St. Paul seems to protest his
apostleship in a manner that would be superfluous when
1 The Church in the Roman Empire, pp. 245 ff. ; St. Paul, etc.,
p. 308. 2 In Phil. ii. 19. He anticipates being saved, and attributes this
prospect to his friends' prayers. Though ready to die, he knows he
"shall abide" (i. 25). He trusts he will soon come to Philippi (ii. 24).
3 Requesting Philemon to prepare him a lodging. (Phile. 22).
4 He has "fought the good fight," and "finished the course."
Henceforth there is laid up for him "the crown of righteousness."
(2 Tim. iv. 8.)
6 iirl rb Tkppa tt\% Sbo-ews. Clem, R. , I Cor. v. 7.

11111

THE QUESTION OF GENUINENESS 411
writing to such friends and personal followers as Timothy
and Titus.1 It may be replied that though addressed to these
two, the epistles were not wholly personal in character, and
were intended for public use, or at all events to be appealed
to as authorities when necessary. Then the references to
Timothy's "youth" (1 Timothy iv. 12; 2 Timothy ii. 22)
seem strange after years of public service. First meeting St.
Paul about a.d. 51 (Acts xvi. 1), he would have known him
for some thirteen years if 1 Timothy were written some time
after the two years in Rome — say about a.d. 64, and 2 Timo
thy is even later. Still he might be of a shrinking nature,
and younger looking than his years, a fact perhaps humor
ously alluded to by the apostle. Besides, the master is apt to
forget the growing age of his pupil.
c. References to Heresies. — It has been said that these
epistles contain references to second century heresies, in
particular to the gnosticism of Marcion. Some "gnosis
falsely so called " 2 is in the writer's mind, and Timothy is
warned to prevent the teaching of a " different doctrine " from
" the gospel " dealing with " fables and endless genealogies "
(1 Timothy i. 4). It has been suggested that the gnostic ideas
of the evolution of creation are here referred to. But no such
allusions can be proved. The heresy is plainly Jewish ascetic,
possibly associated with Essene mysticism; and the genealogies
are most naturally understood to be those found in Genesis
interpreted allegorically.8
That the tendency is Jewish is shown by allusions to " teachers of the
law" (1 Tim. i. 7), "circumcision" (Tit. i. 10), "Jewish fables"4 (Tit. i. 14).
At the same time it is ascetic, reminding us of the Essenes rather than of
the Pharisees.5
1 See I Tim. i. 1 ; 2 Tim. i. 1 ; Tit. i. I, 2.
' ipevSilivviios yvCoais, I Tim. vi. 20.
3 Philo applied the term "genealogies" to the first part of Genesis.
Greek writers use it of early mythological history, e.g. , Polyb. ix. 2.
4 Compare this with the "fables and endless genealogies" of I Tim.
i. 4, which seem thus to be just the Jewish Haggada and fanciful specula
tions. 5 See I Tim. iv. 3, 8 ; Tit. i. 14, 15. But Dr. Hort doubts whether
there is any direct Essene influence. Still he regards the heresy as Jewish.
fudaistic Christianity, chap. vii. Van Soden in the Hand- Com. denies

412 BIBLICAL INTRODUCTION
d. Church Development— -It is said that the conditions of
church organisation apparent in these epistles point to a later
historical period than that of St. Paul's lifetime. Titus was
left in Crete to appoint elders in every city. (Titus i. 5.)
The character of the bishop is discussed both with Timothy
(1 Timothy iii. 1-7) and with Titus (Titus i. 6-9), and that of
the deacon with Timothy. (1 Timothy iii. 8-13.) Now it
cannot be denied that our attention is here given to church
officers in a way we do not meet with earlier in St. Paul's
epistles. But it must be observed that little is said about
them beyond what concerns their characters. We are left in
the dark as to their functions. Then if the elder is not
identical with the bishop in every case, still the bishop
appears as one of the elders.1 In the case of the elders
there is no sharp distinction between officers of the church
and senior Christians,2 and the widows are described im
mediately after a reference to the elders, indicating a certain
indefiniteness and quite primitive character in the church
relations of these people. There is no sign here of the
monarchical episcopacy advocated by Ignatius early in the
second century. Then, on the supposition of a second
imprisonment these epistles come in any case some years
later than any of the previous ones, the last of which refers
to "bishops and deacons." (Philippians i. 1.) Besides, some
churches might develop organisation more rapidly than
others. e. Un-Pauline Features. — We are struck with a certain
harshness, as in the judgment of the Cretans (Titus i. 12, 13),
any reference to Montanist, Valentinian, or Marcionite ideas. Pfleiderer
argues that the second century gnostic systems are referred to because
Irensus finds answers to them in the pastoral epistles. But have not
church writers in all ages appealed to the N.T. for answers to their
contemporary opponents? Weiss fully discusses and disposes of these
references in the new edition of Meyer's Com.
1 Timothy is to "appoint elders" of a certain character, "for the
bishop must be blameless." (1 Tim. i. 5, 7.) Some have maintained that
the word "bishop" is not official, and only means "he who has the over
sight." 2 e.g., " Rebuke not an elder, but exhort him as a father ; the younger
men as brethren," (i Tim. v. 1.)

THE QUESTION OF GENUINENESS 413
and in the reference to Alexander the coppersmith. (2 Timothy
iv. 14.) On the other hand the universality of grace is said
to be un- Pauline. God is called "the Saviour of all men."
(1 Timothy iv. 10.) 1 The phrase is peculiar, but the idea
agrees with the evangelical temper of the apostle. Then the
repeated references to "a faithful word," "a faithful saying,"
seem to refer to a later time when memories of past teachings
were to be cherished. In one place we read what seems very
like a confession of faith, consisting of several articles, and
apparently introduced without its commencing words.2 In
another, a saying of Christ seems to be quoted as Scripture.
But this is not certain.3 It must be admitted that if the
doctrinal statements are not beyond what might have come
from St. Paul, still these latter points are not easily reconciled
with so early a date as about a.d. 65.
f. Un-Pauline Language and Style. — This is the most
serious difficulty of all. Not a few critics who have admitted
possible replies to all the earlier objections have thought this
last one insuperable. A great number of peculiar words and
phrases unknown to earlier Pauline epistles appear in the
pastoral epistles.
Some of these are not to be accounted for by novelty of topic. They
represent a different— and a more classical — vocabulary. We also meet
with favourite words and phrases in these epistles, specially characteristic
of them, such as ebai^eia,, Tcarbs 6 \6yos, byt-qs and byialveiv with reference
to correct teaching, [lidoi, ^¦qaei.s, i-ntpdveia for the Second Advent instead
of Tapovo-ia, SeenriTJ/s instead of Kvpios, awT-tip applied to God, dpveicrdai,
irapaiTeiadai,, irepuo-T&vai to avoid, irpocrexew with the dative, virop.ip.v-ri<TKeiv,
etc. On the other hand we miss St. Paul's favourite particles, such as dpa,
8i6n, and other favourite words of his, such as Kavxdop.ai (but this is not
1 Similar expressions are in I Tim. ii. 3-6 ; Tit. ii. 11.
2 " Great is the mystery of Godliness — who was manifest in the flesh,
justified in the spirit, etc." (1 Tim. iii. 16), where the masculine relative
seems to require a corresponding antecedent — probably some name for our
Lord. 3 "The Scripture saith, Thou shalt not muzzle the ox when he treadeth
out the corn. And, The labourer is worthy of his hire." (1 Tim. v. 18.)
The first of these sentences is in Deut. xxv. 4 ; but the second is only to
be found as a saying of Jesus Christ in Luke x. 7. The objection goes too
far. Sayings of Christ are not quoted even in the second century merely
as "Scripture," without reference to His name. Probably the word
Scripture here only refers to the first quotation.

414 BIBLICAL INTRODUCTION
found in Colossians or Philippians), irepio-aeboi (but this is not found in
Galatians, which is undoubtedly St. Paul's). We also miss St. Paul's
broken sentences. The style is smooth. It is possible to reply here as
in the case of the third group. Time has elapsed, and brought with it
changes affecting the mind of the writer.
The argument is cumulative, and it can only be appreciated
where it is gone into fully.1
When these considerations are taken together, though some
of them can be quite explained, it is clear that we have
difficulties besetting these three epistles that apply to no others.
Nevertheless the alternative must be faced. If the pastoral
epistles were not written by St. Paul, they were intended to
be passed off as his. Why then should the writer of them
manufacture difficulties for himself? This is not like the
case of the epistle to the Hebrews, which does not claim
to be written by St. Paul. The great weight of critical
opinion which is against the Pauline authorship justifies us
in exercising some caution in regard to this question. We
cannot positively assert the genuineness of the epistles. Still
the evidence in favour of them is so strong, and so many
of the objections can be met, that we cannot deny them to be
genuine, and it seems not unreasonable lo regard them as St.
Paul's, perhaps with more scope allowed to the amanuensis.2
2. 1 Timothy.
a. Timothy. — We learn from Acts xvi. i that Timothy was
the son of a Greek-speaking Gentile father and a Jewess
mother at Derbe or Lystra in Lycaonia. Trained in the
scriptures by his mother, who was named Eunice, and his
grandmother Lois (2 Timothy i. 5), he was one of the
converts won by St. Paul when the apostle accompanied
Barnabas on what we call the first missionary journey.
Probably he was but a boy at this time, but those who
were gifted with prophetic insight in the church pointed
him out as destined for missionary work. (1 Timothy i. 18;
1 See Davidson, Introd., "The Pastoral Epistles,'' where a full list
of words peculiar to these epistles is given.
2 The Pauline authorship is very fully discussed and defended in
Zahn's Einleitung, Vol. I., pp. 398-489.

i TIMOTHY 415
iv. 14.) The elders solemnly set him apart for this work
(ibid.), and on St. Paul's return to the district, some six
or seven years after his first visit, the apostle chose him
as a colleague in the ministry, according to Acts first having
him circumcised, no doubt that he might be able to work
among Jews as well as Gentiles. (Acts xvi. 3.) Henceforth
we find him most frequently associated with the apostle both
in travel and in the writing of epistles, of some of which
perhaps he was the amanuensis.1 He was with St. Paul
during the first imprisonment at Rome, and the pastoral
epistles indicate that he was the apostle's travelling companion
again after the release.
b. Occasion, Place, and Date of Writing. — St. Paul had been
recently at Ephesus, and had been called away to Macedonia,
leaving Timothy in charge of his work there (i. 3). He had
intended to return before long ; but he had been unexpectedly
delayed (iii. 14, 15). This delay led him to send directions
to Timothy. These are concerned partly with doctrine, for
the prevention of the spread of a false teaching that is
threatening the church, and partly with administrative affairs,
the appointment of church officers, and the sort of persons
who should be chosen. Timothy seems to need rousing and
encouraging (iv. 12-15). The apostle appears to be now in
Macedonia. This must be some time after the first imprison
ment, i.e., after a.d. 62, perhaps about a.d. 64.
c. Contents.
i. 1, 2, Salutation.
3-7, Timothy left at Ephesus to counteract false teaching
about the law.
8-1 1, The true use of the law, which is not for the righteous,
but for sinners.
12-17, Paul's conversion gratefully acknowledged.
18-20, Timothy charged to be faithful, and warned from two
examples of apostasy.
1 His name occurs among the messengers of the salutation in Rom.
xvi. 21, and united to the apostle's name as a joint sender of six
letters. (2 Cor. i. 1 ; Phil. i. 1 ; Col. i. 1 ; 1 Thess. i. 1 ; 2 Thess.
i. 1; Phile. 1.)

416 BIBLICAL INTRODUCTION
ii. 1-7, Prayer for all men, since God wills all to be saved
through the One Mediator.
8-15, Conduct of men in worship, and decorous behaviour
of women.
iii. 1-7, The character for a bishop.
8-13, The character for deacons.
14, 15, Expecting to come soon to Timothy, the apostle
charges him to direct the church.
16, A confession of primary beliefs about Christ.
iv. 1-5, Ascetics, forbidding marriage and certain foods,
condemned. 6-16, Timothy to be a good minister, nourished by the
truth, not trusting in bodily exercises, and avoiding foolish
fables. v. 1, 2, Concerning rebukes of elders, etc.
3-16, Directions concerning widows.
17-25, Duties to elders, for their support, and in charging
them with faults.
vi. 1, 2, The duties of servants, especially not to despise
believing masters.
3-5, Against vain disputations.
6-10, The duty of contentment, and the mischief of the
love of money.
n-16, Timothy charged to be courageous in conflict,
looking for the manifestation of the Great King.
17-19, A charge to the rich against pride, to be generous,
and prize the true riches.
20, 21, Final warning of Timothy against foolish and false
teachings. The citation of what are called " faithful sayings " is a peculiarity of the
pastoral epistles.1 These may be (1) utterances of the Christian prophets,
or (2) phrases arranged for catechetical teaching, or (3) in some cases
scraps of hymns familiar from frequent repetition. It is not probable
that they are Logia of Jesus Christ, since, though some might have
been spoken by our Lord, this could not have been the case with all ;
that of 1 Timothy iii. 1, " If a man seeketh the office of a bishop, he
desireth a good work," is certainly of late origin.
1 Found in I Tim. i. 15 ; iii. 1 ; iv. 9 j 2 Tim. ii. 11 ; Titus iii. 8,

2 TIMOTHY 417
3. 2 Timothy.
a. Place, Date, and Occasion of Writing. — St. Paul is
now at Rome again (i. 17), and a second time a prisoner,
the reason of his imprisonment being the witness he has
borne to Christ (i. 8, 12). It would seem that he had not
been able to fulfil the wish expressed in 1 Timothy, and
return to Timothy at Ephesus, owing to his arrest and re
moval to the Imperial City. This imprisonment had already
lasted some time, for news of it had reached Ephesus, and
the apostle had requested two of his friends, Phygellus and
Hermogenes, to come to him in Rome, but they had refused,
probably because of the danger (i. 15). A beautiful exception
was that of the Ephesian Onesiphorus, who had not been
ashamed of owning the prisoner, and had sought the apostle
out of his own accord. St. Paul does not expect to escape
this time. His case has already had a first hearing, when
no witness appeared in his defence (iv. 16). He is now ready
to be offered up, assured that the time of his departure has
come (iv. 6). But he has heard sad news of Timothy, who
is depressed and alarmed (i. 7, 8). The apostle writes to
encourage him and guide him in his work, but with the
specific object of asking him to come to his friend at
Rome before winter (iv. 21). This shows that St. Paul
does not anticipate an immediate execution. Accepted as
a genuine epistle of St. Paul, probably 2 Timothy should
not be later than a.d. 65.
b. Contents.
i. 1, 2, Salutation.
3-5, Thankfulness for Timothy's hereditary faith.
6-14, Exhortation to energy and courage in view of the
holy calling in Christ Jesus.
15-18, The failing of friends in Asia, and the fidelity of
Onesiphorus in visiting the apostle in prison.
ii. 1-13, Exhortation to endure hardship as Christ's soldier
in remembrance of Him and His resurrection. They who die
with Christ shall live with Him.
14-19, Contentions and profane discussions to be shunned.
2 E

418 BIBLICAL INTRODUCTION
The instances of Hymenaeus and Philetus, who overthrow
the faith of some by asserting that the resurrection is past
already. We have no data for determining the nature of this heresy. It is not
likely that it was merely the denial of a bodily resurrection, as some have
thought, because the expression "past already" would not suit such an
idea, except for those who were already dead, and then not aptly. Prob
ably the notion is that the resurrection time for all Christians was passed,
and the new age arrived, so that there would be no further development
to look for, no Parousia in the future, and possibly no death. '
20-26, Varieties of character like varieties of vessels in a
house. To be as a vessel of honour, a man should purge him
self, escaping from youthful desires, and avoiding foolish
questionings. iii. 1-9, The coming mischief-makers, who will creep into
houses, deceiving foolish women.
10-12, A reminder of the persecutions Timothy had wit
nessed or heard of in his own country.
13-17, Finding instruction in Scripture inspired by God
in order to avoid impostors.
iv. 1-6, A charge to be faithful in the ministry of preaching,
rebuking, encouraging, etc.
7, 8, The apostle's course drawing to an end.
9-15, Personal notes; Timothy urged to come, since most
of his companions have forsaken the apostle.
16-18, The first hearing of the apostle's case, when no one
appeared in his defence.
19-22, Final salutations.
4. Titus.
a. Titus the Evangelist. — All we can know of Titus must
be gathered from St. Paul's epistles, as he is never mentioned
in Acts. He was a Gentile (Galatians ii. 3), and a convert of
St. Paul's. (Titus i. 4.) We first meet with him as a com
panion of Paul and Barnabas in the visit to Jerusalem
described in Galatians ii. 1-10, when he was not compelled
to be circumcised. He would seem to have been personally
1 This is Von Soden's interpretation, Hand-Corn., in loe.

TITUS 419
known to the Galatians, perhaps because, like Timothy, he was
a fellow-countryman. Subsequently he attended the apostle
at times during his missionary journeys. When difficulties
arose in Corinth he was despatched thither, and he was able
to report good news on meeting his master in Macedonia.
(2 Corinthians vii. 6, 7, 13-15.) He was the bearer of 2 Corin
thians (viii. 6, 16-18). Then we lose sight of him. After St.
Paul's release from his first imprisonment, Titus was with him
in Crete, and was left there by the apostle to direct the affairs
of the churches. (Titus i. 5.)
b. Occasion and Time of Writing the Epistle. — Zenas, a
former teacher of the Jewish law, and Apollos, having to
travel by way of Crete, St. Paul, in commending them to the
churches there (iii. 13), seizes the opportunity to send a letter
of directions to Titus. A special reason for writing is found
in the invasion of the churches by Jews, mercenary teachers
who seek to fascinate the Cretans with their " fables ''
(i. 10-14). The apostle indicates that the work of Titus in
appointing worthy and capable elders is to counteract this
mischievous influence. The situation compels a date subse
quent to the history in Acts, and the condition of the churches
suggests a late date. The similarity to 1 Timothy suggests
that the two epistles were written at the same time, i.e., about
a.d. 64. It is impossible to say which was written first. The
locality of the apostle when writing cannot be determined.
As he expects to winter at Nicopolis, probably the city of that
name in Epirus, possibly he is writing from Greece or Mace
donia. c. Contents,
i. 1-4, Salutation, with reminder of the promise of eternal
life. 5-9, Titus left in Crete to ordain elders; the requisite
character for a bishop.
io-r6, Unruly men, vain talkers, especially such as are
Jews, to be restrained.
ii. i-ro, Duties of aged men and women ; young women
and men ; servants.

420 BIBLICAL INTRODUCTION
11-15, The grace of God that brings salvation, and the
hope of the appearing of Christ.
iii. 1, 2, Subjection to rulers, diligence, kindness, gentleness,
etc., to be commended.
3-8, The kindness of God, delivering us from our former
evil life, and saving us to be heirs of eternal life.
9-1 1, Foolish discussions to be avoided. How to deal
with a factious person.
12-14, When Artemas or Tychicus are sent to him, Titus
is to join the apostle at Nicopolis for the winter. Zenas the
lawyer, and Apollos commended.
15, Final salutation.
In i. 12, St. Paul quotes a Cretan "one of themselves, a prophet of
their own." The saying is by Epimenides, a native of Phaistus or
Cnossus in Crete, a bard who was regarded as a seer. Plato calls him
fieios aviip, and Cicero couples him with Bacis, the Boeotian sibyl.1 But
the saying is quoted by Callimachus, from whom St. Paul may have
derived it. Or it may have become a popular proverb, and thus known
to the apostle apart from literature. Still the definite ascription of it to
its author renders it more probable that St. Paul had seen the line when
reading the writings of its author.
There is not much that can be regarded as an advance in
the apostle's teaching to be found in the pastoral epistles.
These writings deal with fresh forms of false teaching, but
unlike Colossians and Ephesians, which meet the error, and
counteract it, by the full exposition of the truth which opposes
it, the pastoral epistles, while describing and characterising
what the apostle objects to, do not enter into any arguments
or make any assertions of the contrary truth. The object is
rather to encourage and urge Timothy and Titus to resist the
mischievous teaching by means already familiar to them.
Some development of church order is now manifest. The
appointment of elders is directly commanded in order to keep
irregularities out of the churches. To this end teaching faculty
is a valuable qualification for the office. Deacons are also
now recognised as a second order in the churches.
1 See Ellicott's Com., in loe.

CHAPTER IX.
THE EPISTLE TO THE HEBREWS

I. Who was the Author— Paul,
Luke, Clement, Apollos,
Barnabas ?
2. Date and Place of Writing.

3. The Church Addressed.
4. Occasion of Writing.
5. Contents.
6. Argument.

1. The Author.
This is a perfectly anonymous work. Unlike St. Paul's
epistles, which begin with the apostle's name, it has no
such commencement; nor does the writer anywhere indicate
who he is, for the title in A.V. and R.V. is not part of the
original text, and is not found in the older MSS. Therefore
the question of authorship is not one of genuineness. It has
been assigned to Paul, Luke, Clement R., Apollos, Barnabas.
a. St. Paul. — We first meet with the name of Paul in
connection with the epistle at Alexandria about the middle
of the second century. This came to be the current idea
in the East first; the West was slower to accept the epistle
as a work of the apostle. Thus it is ascribed to St. Paul
by Pantaenus, Clement, and Origen in Alexandria; by Paul
of Samosata at the Synod of Antioch; by Eusebius of
Cassarea ; by the Council of Laodicea (a.d. 364), and
universally by the later Greek fathers. On the other hand,
in the West we find that Irenaeus, Hippolytus, Caius of Rome,
Tertullian, and Cyprian did not attribute it to St. Paul. It
was not in the Canon of Marcion, nor in the Muratorian
Fragment as St. Paul's. It was not accepted in the West
as a work of the apostle till the fifth century, under the
influence of Augustine and Jerome, and the latter expressed
some hesitation on the subject. 421

422 BIBLICAL INTRODUCTION
Pantsenus of Alexandria in the middle of the second century is the
earliest writer to refer the authorship to St. Paul. He gives two reasons
why the apostle did not attach his name to it : (i) That Christ was
the real apostle to the Hebrews ; (2) that Paul was the apostle to the
Gentiles, not the Jews.1 Clement of Alexandria follows, also ascribing
it to St. Paul, and adding that it was written for the Hebrews in the
Hebrew tongue, and translated by Luke.2 The latter statements are
plainly incorrect, as the book is not a translation ; but the fact that
Clement was led to make them is not without significance. It shows
that critical difficulties about the style had been perceived. Next we
have Origen, whose statements are not entirely consistent. In his
Homilies on Joshua he ascribes fourteen epistles to St. Paul,8 and in
the epistle Ad Africanum, chapter ix, he defends the Pauline authorship
against those who deny it. Such defence then is to be found even in the
East. This is in a.d. 240. Five years later Origen has modified his posi
tion. In a homily dated A.D. 245, while he states that Hebrews was
traditionally ascribed to Paul by "men of old time," he admits difficulties
in the style, and comes to the conclusion that the thought was Paul's, but
the writer a disciple of Paul's. He mentions traditions assigning it to
Clement R. and to Luke, and for his own part declares "who wrote
the epistle God only knows."4 If then we accept Origen's final judg
ment as representing his ripe opinion, we shall have to class this im
portant and ancient scholar with those who deny the Pauline authorship.
When we turn to the Syrian Church we find the epistle in the Peshitto, as
in our Bibles, not with the letters to the churches, but after the letters
to individual men, which suggests that it was added as an appendix
to the Pauline collection. Yet at the Synod of Antioch a letter of
Paul of Samosata was read, which quoted Hebrews xi. 26 together
with sentences from 1 and 2 Corinthians as by the same apostle.
Eusebius must be cited on the Pauline side. He often quotes the
epistle as St. Paul's, accepts fourteen epistles of St. Paul,6 and includes
Hebrews in St. Paul's " Homologoumena." 6 But subsequently he follows
Origen in holding that the apostle wrote it in Hebrew, and relates how
some say that the evangelist Luke, others that Clement, translated it.
Eusebius inclines to accept Clement (i.e., of Rome) as the translator.7
Subsequently he seems to have placed it among the " Antilegomena."8
The Council of Laodicea and the Fathers Athanasius, Basil, Gregory
Naz., Gregory Nys., Cyril Jer., and Theodoret, all ascribe it to St. Paul.
Still even Theodoret mentions people of Arian sentiments who rejected
Hebrews as spurious (v66os), denying that Paul wrote it. Thenceforth,
however, we meet with no more doubts.
In the West the case is very different. Though quoted by Clement R.,
the epistle fell out of notice in this region. IrenEeus, while frequently
1 Eusebius, HE., vi. 14. a Ibid.
3 "God thundering on the fourteen trumpets of his" — i.e., Paul's—
"epistles, threw down even the walls of Jericho, that is, all the in
struments of the idols and the doctrines of the philosophers." But
this is only preserved in the Latin translation by Rufinus, who professedly
"corrects" Origen.
4 Eusebius, H.E., vi. 25. B HE., iii. 3.
0 Ibid., iii. 25. 7 Ibid., iii. 38. 8 Ibid., vi. 13.

THE AUTHOR 423
citing the Pauline epistles, never cites Hebrews, though it would often
have helped his argument;1 nor docs Hippolytus name it. Caius of
Rome only refers to thirteen epistles of Paul, thus excluding Hebrews."
Tertullian does not seem to know that Hebrews had ever been attributed
to Paul.3 Cyprian writes of the seven churches to which Paul wrote,4
thus excluding Hebrews ; and he never mentions Hebrews, and never
cites it. Not till the fourth century do we hear a whisper in the
West of the Pauline authorship. As far as we know, the first Western
writer to ascribe Hebrews to St. Paul is Hilary of Poictiers (A.D. 368) ;
others follow, e.g., Lucifer, Ambrose. Jerome often quotes Hebrews
as St. Paul's. Yet he writes with hesitation, as when he says, " If
anyone is willing to receive that the epistle has been written . . .
under Paul's name. " 6 He says the Latin custom had not been to
receive it among the Canonical epistles. Augustine uses it as St. Paul's,
and from his time it is acknowledged as Pauline in the West as well
as the East.
When we turn to internal evidence we find certain traits
that might indicate a Pauline origin : (1) The author writes
with weight, and as one who has a right to exhort his readers.
(2) He is a friend of Timothy (xiii. 23). (3) He refers to
" my bonds " (x. 34). But that is only according to doubtful
MS. authority.6 (4) He refers to " those of Italy " (xiii. 24).
But this does not imply that he writes from Italy. (5)
Certain linguistic coincidences have been pointed out.
Dr. Salmon cites a number of verbal coincidences.' Like St. Paul
he is found ringing the changes on a word, e.g., on b-Kordaoa. (Hebrews
ii. 8; conf. I Corinthians xv. 27.) But as to the verbal resemblances
generally, it is agreed that whoever the author was, he knew some of
the apostle's epistles, and borrowed phrases from them.
(6) In the matter of doctrine the Pauline liberalism is
assumed. 1 Eusebius says he mentioned Hebrews (H.E., v. 26), but does not say
he ascribed it to St. Paul. No passage in the extant works of Irenaeus
can be pointed to as supporting Eusebius's statement. Stephen Gobas
(sixth century), in a passage preserved by Photius Cod. 232, writes,
" Hippolytus and Irenaeus say that the epistle of Paul to the Hebrews
is not his."
2 Eusebius, HE., vi. 20.
3 His opinion will be considered with respect to the Barnabas theory.
4 Adv. Jud., i. 20.
5 Com. on Titus, i. 5 ; compare Com. on Titus, ii. 5 ; Ezek. xxviii. 1 1 ;
Amos viii. 7, 8 ; Jer. xxxi. 31.
6 SeoTxois p.ov — N; Seo-pUois — A.D. vg., syrr., cop., arm.
7 Introd., Lect. xxi.

424 BIBLICAL INTRODUCTION
On the other hand there are insuperable difficulties to
accepting the Eastern tradition that St. Paul was the author.
The work is not at all like any of St. Paul's epistles. In its
form it is much more like a treatise. The Greek is purer
than that of the apostle. The style is very different from his.
St. Paul is vehement and abrupt, given to break, off from the
main topic, inserting parentheses, and generally writing in the
free manner of conversation. But in Hebrews we have finished
phrases; full, rounded, rhetorical sentences, and every evi
dence of calm self-possession. One clear distinction may be
noted. When quoting from the O.T. St. Paul makes frequent
use of the Hebrew text, and corrects the LXX. by it ; but the
author of Hebrews invariably quotes the LXX., and even
argues from it where it differs from the original.1 More
over, his way of introducing the O.T. is different from St.
Paul's; for while the apostle uses such phrases as "it is
written," " the Scripture says," " David says," " Moses says,"
"Isaiah says," Hebrews does not cite under the title "Scrip
ture," or with the authors' names, but attributes the utterances
cited to the Holy Spirit, or to God, except that once he refers
to a writer in a vague way, saying " one hath somewhere testi
fied" (ii. 6).
We meet with a number of phrases foreign to the Pauline writings, e.g.,
"the living God," "the living way," "the living Word," full-sounding
poetical words (such as p.eya'Kiao-bvri, used twice for God, i. 3 ; viii. 1).
Greek particles are more frequent than in Paul, especially y&p and re xaf,a
Even more convincing is the strongly-marked difference of
doctrinal standpoints. It is not that there is any contradiction
between Hebrews and Paulinism. But the way of regarding
the Christian scheme is very different. With St. Paul, Christi
anity is the one saving faith for which Judaism is a preparation
by awakening conscience through the law, and so demonstrat
ing the need of the gospel ; but according to Hebrews Christi
anity is the new covenant, which contains in reality and
perfection what the law had but in shadow, and with inferior
1 In the use of LXX., Paul commonly agrees with the Vatican MS.,
but Hebrews with the Alexandrian.
2 For a list of verbal peculiarities see Davidson, Introd., Hebrews.

THE AUTHOR 425
merits. Taking all these facts into consideration, and noting
the great uncertainty of patristic tradition on the subject, we
must come to the conclusion that the epistle was not written
by St. Paul.
b. St. Luke. — Clement's and Origen's remarks cited above l
raise the question whether St. Luke was the author. This
view has been maintained by Delitzsch and others, chiefly on
the ground of similarity of style and vocabulary.2 But the
fatal objection to it is that the author was a Jew, while St.
Luke was a Gentile.3 Besides, in the case of such a well-
known writer as the author of the third gospel and Acts,
it is difficult to imagine how one of his works could thus
be detached from his name.
c. Clement of Rome. — Origen's suggestion of a tradition
connecting Hebrews with Clement R. has brought his name
into the field, and a comparison with 1 Clement shows many
points of resemblance. Erasmus was inclined to accept
Clement. But the weak, diffuse style of Clement's epistle
is quite unworthy of the author of Hebrews, from a literary
point of view the most able writer in the N.T. Origen gives
no authority for the tradition, which he unites with that
naming St. Luke. Evidently he attached no weight to it.
d. Apollos.- — Luther first suggested the name of Apollos,
which has found much favour in recent days. It was
advocated by Bleek and Dean Alford. Lunemann was so
confident as to speak of this hypothesis as " the only correct
one," and Davidson regarded it as the most probable. The
following points may be noted in its favour : —
(1) Apollos was a friend of St. Paul, in general sympathy
with the apostle's ideas, and associated with the group of his
friends, yet with a certain independence in his own methods, as
we may gather from 1 Corinthians i. and ii. This would suit
the author of Hebrews. (2) He was " an eloquent man " (dvr)p
1 Page 422.
2 Delitzsch gives a long list of linguistic resemblances. See Com. on
Heb., Introd.
* See Col. iv. 11, 14.

426 BIBLICAL INTRODUCTION
A.oy 105, Acts xviii. 24) ; and the epistle is especially charac
terised by rhetorical merits. (3) He was "mighty in the
Scriptures," and Hebrews deals with the O.T. in a masterly
way. (4) He was an Alexandrian Jew. Now Hebrews
contains many Alexandrian traits. The author only uses
the O.T. in the LXX. version, and he reasons in the
Alexandrian method. He seems familiar with Philo and
the Book of Wisdom.1 If Apollos was the author, we must
set aside the idea that the epistle was directed to the Jeru
salem church or to Palestinian Christians at all ; but that
destination has been doubted on other grounds. It is not
quite clear how Apollos could describe himself as one who
had received the gospel from those who had been personal
disciples of Jesus Christ, since he was instructed by Aquila
and Priscilla. But others may have " confirmed " this teach
ing." 2
A further difficulty in regard to Apollos is that no tradition
whatever has preserved his name as that of the author. Con
sidering how prominent Apollos was in the first century, and
how much the question of the authorship of Hebrews seems
to have been discussed in the second century (to judge by
what we read of the Alexandrian teachers, Pantaenus, Clement,
and Origen alone), it is inconceivable that no one should have
discovered the secret if he had been the author of the epistle.
Clement R. wrote to Corinth and quoted Hebrews in his
epistle. If he had known that Apollos had written that work,
1 Bleek adduces 22 passages of resemblance between Heb. and
Philo. In particular compare Heb. vi. 13 with Philo, Leg. Allegor.,
vol. i., p. 127 (edit. Mang.) ; vii. 12 with Leg., vol. i., p. 102—
"the king of Salem" interpreted as "king of Peace"; vii. 3 with De
Inebriebate, vol. i., p. 368, the rare word apvbjwp; iii. 5 with Leg. Allegor.,
vol. i., p. 128 — "Moses was faithful in all his house," the very same
words. ' ktradryaapa (Heb. i. 3) is a favourite word of Philo's. For
comparison with the Book of Wisdom, compare Heb. i. 1 with Wisd.
vii. 22—irdKvp.epts, used of o-o0(a ; Heb. i. 2 with Wisd. vii. 26 —
dnrabyao-pa, also used of aotpla ; Heb. i. 3 with Wisd. xvi; 21 — vwboTaais ;
Heb. xii. 17 with Wisd. xii. 10 — rbirov p^ravolas ; Heb. xiii. 7 with Wisd.
ii. 17 — the rare word iKplao-is for death in both cases. Dean Plumptre
even suggested that Heb. and Wisd. were written by the same author.
2 Compare Acts xviii. 25, 26 with Heb. ii. 3, " Confirmed unto us by
them that heard."

THE AUTHOR 427
surely he would have mentioned him when citing his words
for the benefit of the church of which he was one of the
most famous teachers ; and that he would not have known
is most improbable.
e. Barnabas. — Tertullian assumes that the epistle is the
work of Barnabas, writing, " There is extant withal an epistle
to the Hebrews under the name of Barnabas," etc. ; 1 and
again, "The epistle of Barnabas is more generally received
among the churches than that apocryphal ' Hermas ' of
adulterers,"2 and then proceeds to cite Hebrews vi. 1, 4-6,
and again 7, 8, thus making it evident that he means our
epistle. Harnack justly remarks how unmethodical it is to
place the Barnabas hypothesis on a level with the Clement,
Luke, and Apollos hypotheses, which have no such authority.8
Tertullian implies that Barnabas was the accepted author
in North Africa, and North Africa was in close connection
with Rome, where the epistle was known at least as early
as Clement R. (a.d. 95). Then there is much in the con
tents favouring the Barnabas theory : (1) Barnabas was a
companion of Paul, and yet as the older man more or
less independent. (2) He could speak with almost apostolic
authority. (3) A Levite, he would be interested in the
ritual of the Levitical system, so elaborately discussed in
this epistle. (4) A native of Cyprus, he would be on a
line of close communication with Alexandria by sea. Philo's
teaching would easily pass on to Cyprus. In the Clementine
Homilies Barnabas is represented as teaching in Alexandria.4
(5) Known in the N.T. as a "son of consolation," or
"exhortation,"5 he would be well represented by an
epistle, the chief end of which is encouragement of the
faint-hearted. It is to be noted that in the stichometrical list of O.T. and N.T.
books at the end of Cod. Claromontanus (D2) "The Epistle of
1 De Pudic. , 20.
2 Ibid.
3 Chronologic, vol. i., p. 477, note 2.
4 Clem. Horn., 1. 9.
5 vlbs irapaKSiaem, Acts iv, 36.

428 BIBLICAL INTRODUCTION
Barnabas" has 850 verses assigned to it. Comparing this number
with the numbers assigned to other books, we see that it would
suit Hebrews better than our so-called epistle of Barnabas, which is
half as long again.
It has been objected that Barnabas was not eloquent, since
at Lystra he was taken for Zeus, while the lot of Hermes
was assigned to Paul as the chief speaker. (Acts xiv. 12.)
But surely it is a just reply that the best writer is not
always the most fluent open-air speaker. The highly-finished
literary style of Hebrews would not be so suited to
evangelistic addresses as St. Paul's more rugged oratory.
Then it has been objected that the author of Hebrews
makes mistakes about the Temple customs, which would
have been impossible to Barnabas. But the apparent errors
admit of explanation, and if not explained they are not
prohibitive. (1) The pot of manna and Aaron's rod in the ark (ix. 4), where,
according to 1 Kings viii. 9, only the two tables of stone were kept,
a point on which Philo and Josephus agree ; (2) the altar of incense
belonging to the holiest place (ix. 4), but general association may be
all that is meant ; (3) the high priest sacrificing daily (vii. 27). At
all events he was free to do this, and his conscience might be thought
to prompt him to it.
Agreeing with earlier critics Dr. Salmon and Harnack in
cline to Barnabas, though not certainly. It would seem that
we have more reason for assigning the epistle to Barnabas
than to any other of the proposed authors. Possibly the
author was some unknown person, whose name has not
been preserved in the N.T. or in church history. But this
is scarcely probable. The man who wrote with so assured
a tone of authority, and produced so magnificent a work,
could scarcely be unknown in other respects.
2. Date and Place of Writing.
Whoever wrote Hebrews, the antiquity of the work is assured
by the fact that it was known to Clement of Rome.
Clement does not formally introduce his references as quotations,
nor does he mention any author or book in connection with them ;
but they are unmistakable. Compare Clement R., I Corinthians ix.
2 and xii. I with Hebrews xi. 7, 31 ; and Clement R. , 1 Corinthians
xxxvi. 2 with Hebrews i. 3 ff.

DATE AND PLACE OF WRITING 429
From indications in the epistle itself we may infer that
it was written before the destruction of Jerusalem, a.d. 70,
for it contains no reference to that event, while its argument
dealing with the transitory character of Judaism would have
been strongly supported by an appeal to it if it had occurred.
On the other hand we cannot place Hebrews very early,
because it indicates that the first generation of Christians
had passed away.1 It is after some imprisonment of Timothy.2
Probably we should place it in the decade a.d. 60-70, perhaps
about a.d. 68.3 It is quite uncertain where the epistle was
written. 3. The Church Addressed. — In all extant MSS. and versions
the epistle appears as addressed " To the Hebrews," and this
is the name under which it is quoted by the fathers. Its
aim in showing the superiority of Christianity to the O.T.
religion would be specially suitable to Jews. In the opening
sentence the writer refers to the Jews as "our fathers" (i. 1),
and in describing the Incarnation he says that Christ "took
hold of the seed of Abraham" (ii. 16). Then the promises
to Israel pass on to Christian " people of God " without any
hint of a change of race (iv. 9). All the references to the
Levitical services imply that the readers value them. Still
some one church is addressed, and not the Jews generally,
as several definite expressions show.4 This can scarcely be
the Jerusalem church, for the readers are not addressed as
a community of such importance ; they had not had martyrs
(xii. 4) ; and they had been givers of aid (x. 34). Some com
munity of Palestinian Jews would suit the epistle better.
There are critics who hold that the epistle was not ad
dressed to Jews at all. The treatment of Judaising teaching
as a " strange doctrine " (xiii. 9), and the idea of " departing
from the living God" (xiii. 12) rather than from Christ,
1 See ii. 3 ; xiii. 7.
a xiii. 23.
3 Harnack considers that it might be as late as Domitian, and dates
it between 65 and 95. — Chron., pp. 475-479-
4 v. n, 12; x. 34; xiii. 23, 24.

430 BIBLICAL INTRODUCTION
seem to point to converts from heathenism. Rome has
been named as the place addressed.1 The use of the
epistle by Clement shows that it was known there. "They
of Italy" (xiii. 24) would be Italian friends of the readers.
The Neronian persecution is thought to be referred to in
x- 32> 33-2 But could the expression, "Ye have not yet
resisted unto blood" (xii. 4), be addressed to the Roman
church after Nero?
Alexandria has also been suggested, because it is thought the temple
of Onias might suit the language of the epistle better than that at
Jerusalem. But the writer is referring to the tabernacle. The allegorical
style applies to the writer rather than the readers. The epistle ' ' to
the Alexandrians " in the Muratorian Fragment may be our Hebrews ;
but this is purely a matter of conjecture.
4. Occasion of Writing.
The church addressed is in distress, undergoing a trial of
its faith, a chronic persecution which threatens to become
acute (xii. 1-13). This distress is accompanied by a feeling
of disappointment that the O.T. hopes are not realised.
There is even danger of a relapse. Yet the church has
a good record in connection with its past leaders and its
own generosity and sympathy with the suffering. It is
not so much to be blamed, as warned, exhorted, and
encouraged. To this end the writer aims at showing
how great are the Christian privileges which realise and
exceed all that was foreshadowed in the Jewish system ; at
the same time he urges his readers practically to live up
to their privileges.
5. Contents.
i. 1-3, The higher revelation in the Son contrasted with
that by the prophets.
5-14, The superiority of the Son tp the angels.
1 This view is supported by Renan, Pfleiderer, Harnack, etc. Hort,
in Judaistic Christianity, pp. 156-159, defends the Palestinian locality.
So do Salmon, Bishop Westcott, and Bruce.
2 Note especially the singular expression, " being made a gazing stock"
(8eaTpi^6/ievoi), aptly suggesting the scene in Nero's garden.

CONTENTS 431
ii. 1-4, Warning against drifting from this higher revelation.
5-8, Superiority to the angels further demonstrated.
9-18, Christ humiliated and perfected through suffering.
This shows why, though Scripture declared Him to be greater
than the angels, we see Him on earth in an inferior condition. The
humiliation is for the sake of mankind, that Christ may be a merciful and
faithful high priest.
iii. 1-6, Christ as the Son contrasted with Moses, who
indeed was faithful in God's house, but only as a servant.
7-19, Consequent warning not to follow the example of
those who were disobedient to Moses in the wilderness.
Since our Leader is greater, our obligation not to fall away
is correspondingly more urgent.
iv. 1-13, Continued warning and exhortation leading to an
encouragement based on the very failure of the Israelites.
Since neither under Joshua nor under David had they
realised the promised rest, that rest must still remain in the
future for the people of God, because God's word is sure.
14-16, Encouragement to boldness of access to the throne
of grace through our High Priest.
v. 1-10, High priesthood of Christ — which a psalmist
describes as "after the order of Melchizedek" — compared
with that of Aaron in two respects — (1) human nature, (2)
divine appointment.
11-14, Elementary condition of the readers, who need
milk, not solid food.
vi. 1-8, Need to advance, because of the danger of falling
away to hopeless ruin.
9-12, A better hope for the " Hebrews," who at least do
good in ministering to the saints.
13-20, God's blessing assured by His oath.
vii. 1-28, Allegory of Melchizedek. (1) His unique posi
tion (1-3) ; (2) His superiority to the Levitical priests, seeing
that in Abraham Levi paid tithes to him (4-10); (3) His
promised coming (in Psalm ex.) implies the weakness and
failure of the Aaronic priesthood, which He is therefore called
to supersede, Himself abiding for ever (11-25); (4) Christ

432 BIBLICAL INTRODUCTION
such a High Priest, and further superior to Aaron because
not needing to offer daily sacrifices for Himself (26-28).
viii. 1-5, Christ the High Priest of the heavenly tabernacle
offering sacrifices.
6-13, The new covenant promised in the O.T.
ix. 1-10, The tabernacle, its furniture, and its services, but
temporary and to serve as a parable.
11-22, Christ a High Priest of greater things, and in the
more perfect tabernacle, cleanses our consciences by His
blood, and becomes the Mediator of the new covenant
which is consecrated by His blood, as the old covenant
had been consecrated by the Levitical sacrifices.
23-28, Christ's great sacrifice of Himself offered once for
all to bear the sins of many.
x. 1-4, The repetition of the Levitical sacrifices a sign of
their impotence.
5-18, By coming to do God's will, Christ superseded the
ineffectual sacrifices in which God took no pleasure, and by
one offering, perfected the consecrated people, who now have
the new covenant of the law on their hearts.
19-25, Consequent encouragement to enter the holy place,
and maintain the assemblies for worship.
26-31, Warning against apostasy, which, to those who
despise the Son of God, must bring worse punishment than
that threatened against the breakers of Moses' law.
32-39, Encouragement to be faithful in memory of early
days, and the heroism of the martyrs.
xi., The heroes of faith.
xii. 1, 2, Consequent exhortations to run the race with
diligence. 3-13, Chastisement to be endured as a proof of sonship.
14-17, Exhortation to peace, and fidelity.
18-29, Our Mount Zion superior to the mount of the law,
and therefore its associated utterances more weighty.
xiii. 1-7, Definite exhortations concerning brotherly love,
hospitality, prisoners, marriage, the love of money, content
ment ; former ministers of the Church to be remembered.

THE ARGUMENT AND PURPOSE 433
8-9, Christ being changeless, we are exhorted not to be
unsettled by strange teachings.
10-15, Our a^tar outside the camp, and the city we seek.
16, 17, Charity and obedience.
1 8, 19, Prayers of the Hebrews sought; hope of seeing
them soon.
20, 21, Benediction and doxology.
22, Concluding explanations.
24, 25, Salutations and benediction.
6. The Argument and Purpose.
There is a unity in the argument of Hebrews such as we
find in no other book of the N.T. The writer continually
breaks the thread of his argument to draw practical con
clusions and exhort his readers to conduct corresponding
to each point reached. Nevertheless, he resumes it again
where he left off, and thus carries it on to the end. The
eloquent exordium starts the theme. Christ as the Son is a
manifestation of God superior to the revelation in the O.T.
That came by angels; the new revelation is in a Son. The
old covenant was served by Moses, a servant ; the new is in
the hands of Christ, the Son. Then in regard to the priest
hood, Christ is like Melchizedek, and in many ways superior
to Aaron ; it is the same with His sacrifice, which is far
superior to those of the law; His heavenly tabernacle is
greater than the Levitical tabernacle on earth; and now we
are called to the heavenly Zion, greater than Sinai in the
wilderness. Thus the new covenant has all that was in the
old, and has it in a higher, better, more effectual way. The
conclusion is to prize this new covenant, and be faithful to it.
The splendid hero-roll of faith comes in aptly here in the
concluding exhortation. If faith under the inferior covenant
produced such magnificent results, what sort of men should
we be who have the greater covenant ?

2 r

CHAPTER X.
THE GENERAL EPISTLES
I. James — Question of Author- 4. Jude.
ship and Origin. 5. 1 John.
2. 1 Peter — Relation to St. Paul. 6. 2 John.
3. 2 Peter. ,. 3 John.
1. James.
a. The Authorship and Origin. — The epistle opens with
the name of its writer as "James, a servant of God and of
the Lord Jesus Christ" (i. 1), and it gives no further in
formation as to who this James is. He could not be Zebedee's
son, who was killed as early as a.d. 44, for the epistle can
scarcely be placed so far back as that. We know nothing
of James "The Little" to lead us to assign it to him. The
only James known in the N.T. history, to whom it can be
referred with any probability, is "the Lord's brother," the
leader of the Jerusalem church, and to him it has been
ascribed by church tradition.
The epistle was not universally accepted in the early church.
Still it was cited by Hermas in Rome, and by Irenaeus in
Gaul. It seems to have been in the Old Latin version
and the Syriae. Origen is the first to ascribe it to St. James.
Eusebius places it among the Antilegomena, but accepts it
himself.1 Hermas has, " If ye resist the devil, he will be conquered, and flee
from you in disgrace" (Mand. xii. 5) ; compare James iv. 7. But it could
be said that "James" here cites " Hermas." IrenEeus plainly cites it, but
unlike his habit with St. Paul's epistles he does not ascribe it to any
author; compare Adv. Haer., iv. 16, 2 with James ii. 23. Clement A.
seems to have used it,2 and so perhaps does Hippolytus.3 Origen
1 H.E., ii. 23 and iii. 25.
2 See Eusebius, HE., vi. 14; Cassiodorus, Instil. Divin.
Script., viii.
3 Discourse on End of World (doubtfully ascribed to Hippolytus), 47.
434

JAMES 435
ascribes the epistle to James in his commentary on John. It is not
included in the Muratorian Canon ; but from the time of Athanasius,
who acknowledged it, the epistle grew in favour, and a century later,
in the time of Augustine and Jerome, it was all but universally acknow
ledged. There is much in the contents of the epistle that suits
what we know of St. James. If not from Acts xv., at all
events from Galatians i. and ii. we gather that he represented
the more Jewish and less evangelical type of Christianity, and
this is what we find in the epistle. No book of the N.T.,
except the gospels, contains so many echoes of the teachings
of our Lord, and in this respect it may be thought to naturally
represent the mind of the brother of Jesus. These echoes are
none of them verbally identical with gospel logia, which is a
reason for supposing the epistle was written before the gospels,
and that its author drew on oral tradition.1
Nevertheless serious objections have been raised to the
belief that this James was the author : —
(i) It is said to be improbable that James, the brother of
the Lord, should have written with no reference to the life
of Christ or His great work in all he had to say. This
epistle only mentions Jesus Christ twice (i. i ; ii. i), and
then without any descriptive details. It says nothing of His
character and doings on earth, His death, resurrection, and
redemptive work. But we cannot assert that St. James would
have referred to these subjects in a short practical letter;
we have no means of judging what were his ideas concerning
their importance.
(2) It has been thought improbable that a Galilean peasant
would have had the very rich vocabulary and command of
language revealed in this epistle, which contains many rare
words and some elegant phrases only to be acquired through
a knowledge of Greek literature. Unlike St. Paul at Ephesus
and Rome, and St. John at Ephesus, St. James, who resided
at Jerusalem till his death, had no opportunity for coming
into contact with the Greek world of culture. Bishop
1 A full list of these resemblances is in Zahn's Einleitung, vol. i.,
pp. 87, 88.

436 BIBLICAL INTRODUCTION
Wordsworth suggested that he wrote the epistle in Aramaic,
and that then a scholarly man translated it into Greek. The
style is Hebraistic in its abruptness. And yet it does not read
like a translation. We must admit that this is a difficulty;
but again we must remember that we know very little about
St. James.
(3) It is said to contain quotations from other N.T. works.
But it is possible that in some cases the quotations may be
from James in the other writings. This applies especially
to 1 Peter, which most clearly contains similar passages to
what we find in James. 1 Peter plainly quotes from some
of St. Paul's epistles, and it is reasonable to suppose that
its resemblances to James are to be explained in the same
way. Compare James i. IO, 11 with I Peter i. 24; James iv. 6 with I Peter
v. 5 ; James v. 20 with 1 Peter iv. 18. Other comparisons suggested
are James ii. 23 with Romans iv. 3, and Galatians iii. 6. But these are
not so close.1
(4) The circumstances of the church addressed are said
not to suit the times of St. James. Many corruptions have
crept in. In particular the rich are domineering over the
poor. This is not like the church life portrayed in Acts.
But it may be that in some cases St. James when most
vehement is not really addressing any of his readers, but
apostrophising the rich as a class (especially in iv. 13-
v. 6). Or it may be that a Jewish synagogue had adopted
Christianity, while a minority of its members was not con
verted to the new faith.
(5) The apparent contradictions to St. Paul's doctrine of
justification, side by side with the exaltation of living faith,
are thought by some to be impossible for St. James. We must
say that either the epistle came before the great controversy,
or long after it. If before, it could be by James.
Pfleiderer2 holds that the epistle is written to counteract the anti
nomianism of extreme Paulinists of a later time who misunderstood
1 See Holtzmann, Einleitung, pp. 335, 336.
2 Urchristenthum, p. 865 ff.

JAMES 437
the apostle. Spitta1 maintains that the book is a Jewish work adapted
by some Christian who merely inserted a Christian phrase in one or two
places, e.g., the words "Jesus Christ" twice. He points out in great
detail the similarity of its utterances throughout to what may be found
in purely Jewish literature. This paradoxical theory fails to account
(l) for the singular resemblance to the teachings of Jesus ; (2) for the
silence of the author concerning the ceremonial law ; (3) for the self-
restraint of the adapter in not being more definite, especially in the
description of St. James, who is to authenticate the work. While with
Spitta the work is very primitive, before the N.T., with Harnack it is
late. The name James, he holds, may be given in good faith, and not
intended to represent the Lord's brother, but standing for some other
James. With Harnack,2 however, the work is not an epistle at all, but a
collection of extracts from several Christian homilies. He regards it as
not epistolary in character, and too disjointed to be one work. And yet
is there not a marked unity of style throughout ?
b. Date. — The question of the date of this epistle is
bound up with that of its authorship. If it is early, there
is strong reason for believing it to be the work of James,
the brother of the Lord. Now there is much in it that
favours an early date : — (1) The very lack of Christian theology
points to a time before this had been elaborated by St. Paul,
and thus makes for the primitive character of the epistle.
(2) If, as the opening salutation suggests, it was written
to Jews, we should expect to see some allusion to the
destruction of Jerusalem, unless it were earlier than that
event. (3) On the same hypothesis the total silence as to
Gentile churches would be strange; there is no hint of the
existence of such. But of course these two arguments do
not hold with those who deny the Jewish destination of
the epistle. (4) The church order is most elementary.
Neither "bishops" nor "deacons" are named; we only
meet with "teachers" (iii. 1), and "elders" (v. 14); and
the teaching seems to be quite unorganised, as at Corinth
in the time of 1 Corinthians. The direction to send for
elders to pray for the sick and anoint them (v. 14) is most
primitive. So is the description of the Church as a
"synagogue" (ii. 2). But, if early, the epistle must be
very early, to come before the outbreak of the controversy
1 Zur Geschichte u. Litterat. des Urchrist., vol. ii., pp. I ff.
* Chronologic, pp. 485-491.

438 BIBLICAL INTRODUCTION
on St. Paul's teaching, i.e., before a.d. 50, and thus it must be
the first written book of the N.T.1 With this understanding
it can be ascribed to St. James.
On the other hand serious reasons have been brought forward for quite
a late date: — (1) The improbability that the epistolary form for treating
religious truth, unknown before the N.T., should have been originated
by this epistle rather than by St. Paul's epistles. The originality of the
method suggests a great original mind — St. Paul's rather than St. James's.
(2) The corruptions of the church, which, however, might be assigned
to the original Jewish synagogue, as already suggested. (3) The supposed
reference to ultra-Paulinism. It is said to be impossible for a contest about
the relative value of faith and works to have arisen before St. Paul's teachings
on the subject. This is a serious consideration ; but the antithesis is not
that of Paul, who contrasts faith with law, not with works ; besides, the
author has other contrasts, e.g., words and deeds. (James i. 19-27.) (4)
Blaspheming "the honourable name" (ii. 7) is said to point to persecutions
later than Acts, when Christians were prosecuted as such, in the manner
suggested by I Peter iv. 16. But the language is too vague to be pressed
to this meaning. Early Jewish persecutions of Christians must have in
volved insults to the name of Jesus. The very expression, "suffer dis
honour for the name," occurs in connection with the earliest persecutions
at Jerusalem (Acts v. 41). The case is perplexing; but if the epistle is
late, it must be quite down in the second century.8 And the indications
of a primitive character are against that position. Since we cannot rest
in the intervening period, we seem driven back to the early date.
c. Place of Writing. — This is not given, but there are
indications that specially suit Palestine, such as allusions
to " the early and latter rain " (v. 7), the effect on vegetation
of the burning wind (i. 11), the existence of salt and bitter
springs (iii. n), the cultivation of figs and olives (iii. 12), and
the neighbourhood of the sea (i. 6; iii. 4)."3 This would
favour St. James as the author.
d. The Persons Addressed. — The epistle is addressed " to
the twelve tribes which are of the dispersion" (i. 1). If it
comes from the Jerusalem James, we must take this literally.
St. James is writing to the dispersion ; only we must under
stand him to refer to Christians, i.e., Christian Jews outside
Palestine. But on the theory of the late date the address
is held to be figurative, referring to the spiritual Israel, i.e.,
Christians, not Jews at all. In favour of this opinion it is
1 See Mayor, Com., pp. cxix.-cxliv.
2 Julicher dates it A.D. 125-150 ; Harnack — the homilies out of which
he holds it to be constructed — A.D. 120-140.
3 See Mayor, Com., p. cxviii.

JAMES 439
pointed out that the epistle seems, in part at least, to have
one church in view (e.g., ii. 2). But there is very little that
can be so construed, and that is more than counterbalanced
by the fact that no names or personal references whatever
besides the name of the writer appear.
e. Contents.
i. i, Greeting.
2-4, Trials endured with patience helpful.
5-8, Wisdom to be sought from God ; the instability of the
double-minded man.
9-1 1, Exaltation of the lowly, and temporary character
of the prosperity of the rich.
12-15, The genesis and the fruit of sin.
16-18, The Father of lights, His gifts, and the life He
engenders. 19-27, Foolish speech discouraged, and good deeds com
mended as the true ritual.
ii. 1-7, Warning against cringing to the rich and dishonour
ing the poor.
8-13, The royal law of love to our neighbour.
14-20, A warning against having belief without works.
21-26, Abraham and Rahab justified by works.
This is the passage in which the controversy with ultra - Paulinism is
suspected. It is to be noticed how small a part of the epistle is thus
occupied—just half one of the five chapters, 13 verses out of 108. There
fore it can hardly be supposed that the epistle was written merely or
mainly to deal with this one topic. Then neither the faith nor the justi
fication here referred to are those of St. Paul. Not the faith— for here
irfo-Tis is mere belief (see verse 19) ; but with St. Paul it is trust and
loyalty, surrender of the soul and adhesion of the will, what St. James
would call "living faith," that which shows itself by its works. Not the
justification — for here the idea is acquittal at the final judgment ; but with
St. Paul diKalao-is is the act of forgiveness with which the Christian life
begins. _ It is true the very opposite use of the story of Abraham from St.
Paul's (in Galatians iii., and Romans iv.) suggests the appearance of
antagonism. If it is there Pfleiderer must be right, the antagonism must
be to the ultra-Paulinism of a later generation, which misinterpreted the
apostle. But the frequent use of the name of Abraham in the N.T.— it
occurs no less than 72 times — suggests that it was familiarly used in Jewish
theological discussions, so that the coincidence may be accidental. " Rahab
the harlot " occurs in Hebrews xi. 31, in witness to faith — possibly also a
familiar name in Jewish discussions, though the coincidence has been cited
as a sign that James used Hebrews.

440 BIBLICAL INTRODUCTION
iii. 1-12, On bridling the tongue.
13-18, The wisdom from above contrasted with the factious
ness of earthly wisdom.
iv. 1-10, The quarrels that arise from covetousness, and the
evil of pride and worldliness.
n, 12, Against maligning or judging a brother.
13-17, The foolishness of boasting about the morrow.
v. 1-6, A denunciation of the rich.
7-1 1, Patience commended, with illustrations from the
husbandman and Job.
1 2, Against swearing.
13-18, Prayer and praise commended. The great efficacy
of prayer, illustrated from the example of Elijah, especially
for a sick person, on behalf of whom elders are to be sent to
pray over him and anoint him, when the Lord will raise him
up. 19, 20, The great work of converting a sinner.
This epistle is practical throughout. It denounces faults,
and encourages right conduct. It does not discuss doctrines.
The abuses it contends against — foolish talk, respect of
persons, empty belief, ambition for teaching others, carnal
wisdom, covetousness, unkind judgments, boasting, the
oppression of labourers by the rich — are all in the region
of conduct. The opposite conduct is commended in pre
cepts reminding us of the teachings of Jesus in the synoptics.
The book is more like a homily, or a series of homilies, than
an epistle. But it might be regarded as a pastoral for general
circulation among Jewish Christians.
2. 1 Peter.
a. Genuineness. — This epistle claims to be by "Peter, an
apostle of Jesus Christ " (i. 1). It is one of the best attested
books of the N.T. If we were sure that 2 Peter was genuine,
we should say that the earliest witness was that epistle.
(2 Peter iii. 1.) 1 Peter was known to the author of the
Didache, and to Polycarp, Papias, and the author of the
Epistle to Diognetus. As usual, Irenaeus is the first to

I PETER 441
name it. Later fathers quote from it freely. It is among the
Homologoumena of Eusebius, though it is not in the Mura
torian Fragment.
The Didache has " abstain from fleshly and bodily lusts " (i. 4), which
reminds us of 1 Pet ii. 11. Compare Polyc, Phil. 1 with 1 Pet. i. 8;
Phil. 2 with I Pet. i. 13; Phil. 8 with 1 Pet. ii. 22 and 24. Eusebius
states that Papias "made use of testimonies from the first epistle of John,
and likewise from that of Peter" (HE., iii. 39). Compare, further,
Epis. to Diog. 6 with I Pet. ii. II. Irenams writes, ' ' And Peter says in
his epistle, Whom having not seen ye love, etc." (Adv. Haer. , iv. 9. 2) ;
compare 1 Pet. i. 8. After this it is needless to cite the frequent quota
tions in Clement A., Origen, and Tertullian. The omission from the
Muratorian Fragment is a curious fact. Certainly the epistle was known
earlier. Yet the writer does not name it to reject it, as he does in the case
of some spurious works ; accordingly Dr. Salmon sets the omission down
to an accident of carelessness. 1
Then the internal evidence shows much that agrees with the
character and history of Peter. The author seems to make a
difference between himself and his readers in saying " Whom
having not seen ye love " (i. 8), and he describes himself as a
witness of the sufferings of Christ. There are several points
of resemblance between the epistle and the speeches assigned
to Peter in Acts. Thus in both appeal is made to O.T. pre
dictions ofthe sufferings of Christ (Acts iii. 18; 1 Peter i. 10);
in both we have the reference to the stone that was rejected
by the builders (Acts iv. n; 1 Peter ii. 7, 8) ; in both the
cross of Christ is described as a " tree," or as " wood " (gvkov
— Acts v. 30; 1 Peter ii. 24). 2
Davidson's objection, that we cannot be sure of the verbal accuracy of
the speeches in Acts, is no adequate reply ; because the coincidences exist,
and they are too slight to be designed.
But over and above these details, it must be felt by the
thoughtful reader of this epistle that its author was a man of
rare spiritual gifts, who stood very near to the fountains of
inspiration. This is one of the very choicest gems in the
N.T., worthy of the great apostle whose name it bears.
Nevertheless, it is held by many that the epistle is wrongly
1 Introd. , Lecture xxii.
2 For a number of similar coincidences see Gloag, Introd, lo Cath.
Epis., p. 114.

442 BIBLICAL INTRODUCTION
assigned to St. Peter. The following are the chief grounds of
objection : —
(i) The epistle is entirely in the line of St. Paul's teaching
— so much so that Harnack allows the possibility that Paul
himself may have written it, though he assigns it to a disciple
of the apostle. l This objection was stronger when the
Tubingen hypothesis was maintained, since that hypothesis
involved the direct antagonism of Peter and Paul. It is now
widely admitted that no such antagonism existed. Still it is
remarkable to find Peter thoroughly absorbing Paulinism, so
that there is no other book of the N.T. not written by Paul
himself that so closely resembles his writings. And then
there are but the fewest reminiscences of the earthly life of
Christ, only such as could have been gathered from the general
knowledge possessed by the church ; so that Peter here
appears as having learnt more from Paul than from Christ.
Moreover there are many allusions to some of Paul's epistles,
certainly to Romans, probably to Ephesians. It is said to be
most improbable that Peter would borrow so much from
Paul. We cannot put it the other way and suppose that Paul
borrowed from Peter, for Paul prided himself on his inde
pendence of the older apostles.
Compare I Pet. i. I with Eph. i. 4-7 ; 1 Pet. i. 3 with Eph. i. 3 ; I Pet.
i. 14 with Rom. xii. 2 ; 1 Pet. i. 21 with Rom. iv. 24 ; 1 Pet. ii. 5 with Rom.
xii. 1 ; 1 Pet. ii. 6, 7 with Rom. ix. 33 ; 1 Pet. ii. 10 with Rom. ix. 25, 26;
1 Pet. ii. 13 with Rom. xiii. 1-4; 1 Pet. ii. 16 with Gal. v. 13; 1 Pet. ii. 18
with Eph. vi. 5 ; 1 Pet. iii. 1 with Eph. v. 22 ; 1 Pet. iii. 9 with Rom.
xii. 17 ; I Pet. iv. 10, 11 with Rom. xii. 6, 7 ; 1 Pet. v. 1 with Rom. viii.
18 ; 1 Pet. v. 5 with Eph. v. 21 ; 1 Pet. v. 8 with 1 Thess. v. 6. Then
we meet with Pauline phrases such as iv Xpiorip (1 Pet. iii. 16; v. 10, 14);
the "revelation" of Christ for His second advent (i. 7, 13 ; iv. 13) ; KaXeiv
used not in the gospel sense of the open invitation, but in the Pauline
sense of the " effectual call " ; instead of the fori) alavios of Christ's teach
ing as the end of the gospel, the Pauline 86 fa etc.2
It has been pointed out in reply that St. Peter was of a re
ceptive nature, and liable to be influenced by the associations
immediately surrounding him (e.g., at Antioch, according to
1 Chronologic, pp. 451-465.
' See Holtzmann, Einleitung, p. 317.

i PETER 443
Galatians ii. 12). If he and St. Paul were much together in
their later years he may have come to lean on the stronger
apostle. But the author shows some originality.1
(2) It is improbable that Peter would have written to the
churches of Asia, which had been the scenes of Paul's labours,
without once naming the great apostle who had founded them
and watched over them. His ministry was for the Jews, and
indeed we cannot understand how he would go out of his way
to address these churches of Gentiles at all — if the epistle were
designed for such.2
(3) The indications of a comparatively late date seem to
exclude St. Peter, and so does the mention of Babylon as the
place of writing. But these objections do not hold together.
If the date is late, Babylon may stand for Rome.
(4) It is said to be improbable that Peter, a fisherman of
Galilee who spoke Aramaic, and who, according to Papias,
needed an interpreter at Rome, should have written in the
comparatively good Greek of this epistle. But we do not
know in what sense Mark may have been "the interpreter" of
Peter, nor do we know how far Greek was known in Palestine
in N.T. times. It is remarkable that all our N.T. books are
in Greek.
It must be admitted that these are serious reasons for
questioning the Petrine authorship. If we hold the balance
even we can scarcely allow that they count for nothing. To
some students they may appear to be of overwhelming force.
This is a case in which it cannot be wise to assume a very
positive attitude. Criticism is teaching us that there are
questions concerning which fairness and modesty suggest that
they cannot be answered with assurance. Nevertheless, in spite
of all these difficulties, the striking testimony of early recogni
tion, and the supreme excellence of the epistle still stand as
strong reasons for believing in its authenticity.3
1 See paragraph following " Contents."
2 See below, page 445.
3 Dr. McGiffert suggests Barnabas as possibly the author, since he was

444 BIBLICAL INTRODUCTION
b. Date and Place of Origin.— The fact that the epistle
is addressed to a region where St. Paul had laboured compels
us to date it later than the arrest of the apostle at Jerusalem
(a.d. 58). The use of Romans also requires this, and the
probable use of Ephesians brings it down at least to a.d. 62.
Then the fact that two or more of Paul's epistles are known
and used for this one document requires some longer time
still. But if Peter wrote the epistle, we cannot go beyond
a.d. 66, as it is most probable his martyrdom occurred no
later. Professor Ramsay dates it in the reign of Domitian,
and holds that Peter lived on till the year 80,1 a most im
probable idea. The principal reason for so late a date is
found in the references to persecution which involved punish
ment for the Christian "name" (1 Peter iv. 13-15), apart
from any accusation of specific crimes. This was not known
in the period of Acts, though it was seen at the time of
Trajan. On the other hand it refers to the persecution as
a new thing (iv. 12), and St. Peter shows a friendly attitude
to the state, and writes hopefully (iii. 13 ff. ; iv. 7; v. 10).
This is very different from the attitude of Revelation, with
its bitter antagonism to Romans and its allusions to long con
tinued persecution. Dr. McGiffert points out that we have
here a reason for putting 1 Peter earlier than Revelation.2
The question of the place of writing the epistle is closely
connected with that concerning the date. It contains a
salutation from "Babylon" (v. 13). If the epistle came
later than Revelation, this might be the Babylon of that
book, i.e., Rome, although it would be strange to meet
the mystical name in an epistle. There is good evidence

(1) one of the few companions of Paul who could fulfil the conditions in
v. 1 ; (2) a missionary to Asia Minor, who might naturally write to that
region ; (3) known to Silvanus, who is referred to in v. 12 (see Acts
xv. 25 ff.) ; (4) a near relative of Mark, whom the writer calls his "son"
in v. 13 (see Col. iv. io), and a favourite travelling companion (Acts
xv. 37 ff.); i(5) credited |in the church with having written an epistle.
Apostolic Age, pp. 599, 600.
1 Church in the Rom. Emp. , p. 262 ff.
1 Apostolic Age, p. 597.

i PETER 445
that Peter was at Rome.1 He was with Mark when the epistle
was written (v. 14), and we know that Mark was invited to
Rome during Paul's last imprisonment. (2 Timothy iv. 11.)
But if this is earlier than Revelation, Babylon may be
either the city of that name by the Euphrates, or the
Egyptian Babylon (near the present Cairo).2 We have no
hint that Peter went to either place, and the Jewish colony
at Babylon by the Euphrates was broken up and removed
to Seleucia by this time. Still some Jews may have been
left there.
c. The Persons Addressed. — These are called " elect
sojourners of the dispersion," in districts that include the
whole of Asia Minor north of the Taurus mountains.
The question is whether the phrase is to be taken literally
for Jews, i.e., Jewish Christians, or figuratively for the scattered
communities of Christians, chiefly Gentile. The latter is the
more probable interpretation, for two reasons : (1) We have
no evidence of the existence of any Jewish Christian churches
in these parts. Jews and Christians mingled in the Pauline
churches. (2) The language of the epistle implies that the
readers had been pagan.3
(d) Contents.
i. 1, 2, Salutation, with a reminder of the Christian election,
and its consequent sanctification.
3-5, Thanksgiving for the incorruptible inheritance.
6-9, The trial of faith supported by love for the unseen
Christ. 10-12, The mystery of the predicted salvation through the
sufferings of Christ.
1 The following are the authorities : Clem. R. (i Cor. v.) ; Dionysius
of Corinth (Euseb., HE., ii. 25); Iren^us (Adv. Haer., iii. 1);
Tertullian (De Bapt., 4; De Pra-scr., 36); Caius, of Rome, who
refers to the trophies (to. Tpbiraia) of Peter and Paul near Rome (Euseb.,
H.E., ii. 25); "The Preaching of Peter" (quoted by Lactantius,
Institut. Divin., iv. 21); and of course many later writers.
' The Coptic Church has a traditional claim for this Babylon as the
place of Peter's residence.
3 See i. 14, 18 ; ii. 9, 10 (especially note, " which in time past were no
people ") ; iii. 6 ; iv. 3.

446 BIBLICAL INTRODUCTION
13-25, Exhortation to holiness on the ground of redemption
by the blood of Christ and the new life to which Christians
are begotten.
ii. 1, 2, Exhortation to guilelessness.
3-10, Christ the living stone rejected by men, but honoured
by God, on whom Christians are built to form a spiritual
house. 11, 12, Duty to behave as sojourners and pilgrims.
13-17, Duty of obedience to the civil government in order
to silence calumniators.
18-20, The duty of slaves to obey and endure patiently.
21-26, Example of the patience of Christ when He endured
reviling and bore our sins.
iii. 1-6, Duty of wives, especially with respect to simplicity
of dress.
7, Duty of husbands.
8-12, General duties of kindness and patience.
13-17, Suffering for well-doing commended.
18-20, Christ having suffered for sin, and being put to
death in the flesh, but made alive in the Spirit, preaching
to the spirits in prison who had been disobedient in the days
of Noah.
21, 22, The cleansing of our conscience through the
resurrection and ascension of Christ.
iv. 1-6, Consequent duty to have the mind that was in
Christ, and abandon all the old heathenish abominations.
7-1 1, The end being at hand, soberness and prayer needed,
but chiefly brotherly love, with the exercise of gifts to the
glory of God.
12-19, Persecution not to be thought strange, but regarded
as blessed if endured for the name of Christ, and not for any
crime. v. 1-4, Charge to the elders to be good pastors.
5, Charge to the younger members to be subject to the
elders. 6-9, Duty of all to be humble, trustful in God's care, sober,
watchful, steadfast.

2 PETER 447
10, n, The final perfecting from God, to whom be the
dominion for ever and ever.
12, The letter sent by Silvanus.
13, 14, Final salutations and benediction.
The epistle is hortatory throughout, and its doctrinal state
ments come in rather to enforce the practical advice than
as distinct teaching. The persecution so frequently referred
to is a great trial of faith and constancy, and St. Peter en
deavours to encourage the sufferers with cheering assurances
of their rich inheritance and stirring appeals to be worthy
of their redemption, and make a good use of their privileges.
It is to be observed that Peter lays great stress on the
new birth (i. 3, 23 ; ii. 2) ; in this he is nearer to John
than to Paul. He also dwells with much feeling on the
redeeming work of Christ, connecting this more with the
sufferings of Christ than is the case in St. Paul's epistles.
The discussion of the behaviour of Christians is also original
in this epistle.
3. 2 Peter.
a. Genuineness. — The genuineness of this epistle has been
more questioned than that of any other book in the N.T.
Erasmus and Calvin expressed doubts concerning it, and in
the present day many who may be regarded as conservative
scholars feel compelled to join hands with advanced critics in
regard to it. It stands on an entirely different ground from that
of 1 Peter. It is very little referred to in early patristic literature.
Even Irenaeus fails us here. The first mention of the epistle
is in Origen. Eusebius places it among the Antilegomena. It
is not in the Muratorian Fragment, nor in the Peshitto.
2 Peter ii. 5 has been compared with Clement R., I Cor. 7 ; and
2 Peter ii. 6-9 with Clement R., I Cor. 2. But the connection is not
certain, and if it exists the probability is that 2 Peter is dependent on
Clement.1 Possibly Justin Martyr knew the epistle (c. Tryph., 81 com
pared with 2 Peter iii. 8) ; but the allusion may be to Psalm xc. 4.
Hippolytus seems to have known it (Refuta., ix. 2, x. 20). But he does
not refer to its author. Origen, the first to name Peter in connection with
1 See Dr. E. A. Abbott, in Expositor, 2nd series, vol. iii., pp. 152, 153.

448 BIBLICAL INTRODUCTION
the epistle, says, ' ' Peter speaks aloud by the two trumpets of his epistles. " l
But Eusebius quotes him as expressing doubts about it. " Peter . . . has
left one epistle undisputed. Suppose also the second was left by him, for
on this there is some doubt " (H.E., vi. 25). Eusebius himself says of it,
"As to the writings of Peter, one of his epistles, called the first, is
acknowledged as genuine. . . . But that which is called the second we
have not indeed received by tradition to be in the canon (ivbidBiiKov) ; yet
as it appeared useful to many, it was studiously read with the other
scriptures (ypatp&v, H.E., iii. 3).
There is not much that can be appealed to as internal
evidence in favour of the genuineness of the epistle. It claims
to be written by Peter (i. 1 ; cf. iii. 1); commences with the same
salutation as 1 Peter. But of course this could be designedly
arranged by the writer, whoever he was, if he possessed 1 Peter.2
On the other hand there are very serious difficulties. (1)
The early date, which it would be requisite to assign to the
epistle if it were written by St. Peter, seems to be excluded by
the reference to St. Paul's epistles as already collected, and as
in Scripture (iii. 15, 16). 1 Peter used some of the Pauline
epistles, and that fact was a difficulty in regard to it. But the
case is much stronger here. All the usage of the early church
is against the idea that these epistles were put on a level with
the O.T., and regarded as Scripture during the lifetime of St.
Peter. (2) The relation to Jude affords another grave difficulty.
Nearly the whole of the short epistle of Jude is taken over
and utilised in 2 Peter.

Compare Jude 4

with

2 Peter ii.

i-3

>>

J J

0

»» !>

4

> >

17

7

JJ JJ

6

»j

»»

8

tt yt

10

J 1

>>

10

»j ii
12
tt
J)
11
tt tt
15
tt
1)
12,
13
j j j»
*3» 17
It
1*
16
tt tf
18
» J
tt
17,
18
„ iii.
i-3
1 But this is in the Latin translation of Rufinus, who confessedly
amends the original (Migne, vol. ii., p. 857). For various other supposed
references to 2 Peter, see Gloag, Introd. to the Cath. Epis., pp. 205-209;
Charteris, Canonicity, pp. 313-318.
1 Still coincidences with the speeches in Acts may be noted, e.g., com
pare 2 Peter ii. 15 with Acts i. 18—" wages of iniquity" ; 2 Peter iii. 10
with Acts ii. 20 — " the day of the Lord" ; 2 Peter iv. 24 with Acts iv. 24
— 8e<riron)i for Christ in the epistle, for God in Acts ; but the original
speech was in Aramaic.
2 PETER 449
The priority must be assigned to Jude, e.g., 2 Peter ii. 4 is less distinct
than Jude 6, which gives the ground of the condemnation of the angels ;
and 2 Peter ii. 1 1 is really unintelligible without Jude 9, a mere allusion to
what is there stated. In 2 Peter we read ' ' whereas angels . . . bring not
a railing judgment, etc.," the word " whereas " assuming something known.
The passage in Jude gives the case of Michael, when he durst not bring "
railing accusation against the devil, and puts it quite clearly. Moreover
Jude is a brief, crisp epistle, while 2 Peter is less firm and strong in style ;
and in these respects Jude appears to be the original. In favour of the
priority of 2 Peter, it is urged that in this epistle the false teachers are yet
to come (ii. 1-3 ; iii. 3), while in Jude they are already present (4). But
even according to 2 Peter some are already present (ii. 10 ff.).1
Now we have seen that 1 Peter made use of earlier writings.
But it is one thing to lean upon Paul and even James, and
another thing to absorb and utilise virtually the whole of the
short epistle of so obscure a writer as Jude. In defending
the genuineness of 2 Peter we accuse the great apostle Peter
of plagiarising in a remarkable way. (3) In style and thought
it differs greatly from 1 Peter. The style of 1 Peter is ex
cellent; that of 2 Peter most awkward. And while 1 Peter
is saturated with Paulinism, this is not apparent in 2 Peter.
The sufferings of Christ and the thought of redemption, which
are so prominent in the earlier epistle, are not brought forward
in this. The writer claims to have been a witness, but of the
glory. Of course, if St. Peter did not write 1 Peter, this is no
objection to the genuineness of 2 Peter ; but the evidence for
1 Peter is immeasurably stronger than that for 2 Peter. See
ing that the epistle is very weakly attested by the Fathers, and
that it was always the most doubtful book of the N.T., we
have little to bring in answer to these strong objections ; and
the balance seems to be in favour of denying its genuineness.
It is impossible to say who wrote it. The very emphasis with
which Peter's name is claimed and this epistle linked to
1 Peter, itself a suspicious fact, shows that the author desired
to use the apostle's authority for what he wrote.
Mr. Vernon Bartlet suggests a compromise, viz., that ii. — Iii. 7 was intro
duced by a later hand into a genuine epistle of St. Peter's.
b. Occasion and Date of Authorship.— -One object is to coun
teract certain false teachers. The language both of 2 Peter and
of Jude is too indefinite to enable us to decide for certain
1 Dr. E. A. Abbott has shown that 2 Peter made use of Josephus,
2 G

4SO BIBLICAL INTRODUCTION
who these are — probably those constant disturbers of the
churches, the earlier gnostics, Cainites or Ophites.1 But the
writer has further the positive object of endeavouring to
stimulate the efforts of his readers to acquire true knowledge.
The right gnosis must oppose the'false gnosis. " Knowledge "
is the keynote of i Peter. The reference to St. Paul's epistles
as Scripture requires quite a late date — probably the middle
of the second century.2
c. The Persons Addressed.— The epistle is quite general, with
no particular address, except that it is for Christians — "them
that have obtained a like precious faith with us " (i. i).
d. Contents.
i. 1-2, General salutation.
3-1 1, Exhortation to progress in the successive acquisition
of Christian graces.
12-2T, Reminder of the truth of the Christian teaching,
confirmed by the Divine testimony to Christ and the light of
prophecy. ii., The false prophets and their evil practices.
iii. 1-7, Rebuke for those who disbelieve in the final judg
ment. 8-13, The coming of the Lord and the destruction of the
world. 14-18, Exhortations to diligence, patience, and growth in
grace. 4. Jude.
a. The Author. — The author of this brief epistle intro
duces himself as "Jude, a servant of Jesus Christ, and brother
of James." He can scarcely be the apostle Jude (perhaps
the same as Thaddaeus and Lebbaeus), although that apostle is
related to a James,3 because not only does he not claim to be
1 Mansel suggests the Nicolaitans of Rev. ii. 15 as denying Christ and
inculcating immorality. But would such be actually teachers within the
churches? 2 Harnack places it a.d. 160-175, Chronologic, pp. 465-470.
3 'lotSav'IaKilipov (Luke vi. 15), "Jude of James," rendered "brother
of James" in AV., evidently on the ground of this epistle, but "son of
James " in R.V., according to the general usage of the idiom.

JUDE 451
an apostle, but by designating himself only with relation to
his brother he excludes any such authority as would arise
from his being one of the Twelve; besides, he refers to
" the apostles of our Lord Jesus Christ " as former teachers,
among whom he does not include himself (17, 18). It is
more likely that he is a brother of the well-known James, head
of the church at Jerusalem ; and if so, also a brother of our
Lord. We can understand his not claiming the higher rela
tionship. The fact that he takes this modest position makes
for the genuineness of the epistle ; and so does the fact that
so little known a man appears as its author.1 Who would wish
to pass off a pseudonymous epistle as the work of a man
whose identity it would be difficult to fix ? This epistle was
often referred to in the church of the later part of the second
century. It was known to Clement of Alexandria,2 and Ter
tullian,3 both of whom cite it by name ; and it is in the
Muratorian Fragment.
The epistle is quite general, being addressed simply "to
them that are called, beloved in God the Father, and kept
for Jesus Christ" (1); but it presupposes that its readers had
been instructed by the apostles (17), a fact which would point
to Palestine or Syria as the more probable region in which it
would be first circulated. The references to Jewish apocryphal
works also suggest the same area, where they would be best
known. The work must be comparatively late to allow of the
false teachings to which it refers having crept in, but there is
nothing to exclude the lifetime of a brother of James.
The chief indications of a later date are (1) The reference to the teaching
of the apostles (17). Certainly that is spoken of as past ; but then it is
supposed to be in the memory of the readers, not as a tradition, but as
what they had themselves heard, though an earlier phrase— "the faith
which was once for all delivered unto the saints " (3) might be taken to in
dicate tradition. (2) The corrupt teaching— -This is said to be Ophite or
Cainite— "for they went in the way of Cain" (11)— i.e., gnostic of the
1 There is no direct evidence for the theory that the author of the
epistle was Judas Barsabas (Acts xv. 22, 23) ; but as this Jude is called " a
chief man among the brethren " at Jerusalem, it must be allowed to be
possible. 2 Paedag., iii. 8.
3 De Cultu. femin. i. 3.

452 BIBLICAL INTRODUCTION
early second century. "The error of Balaam" suggests the Nicolaitans.
(Rev. ii. 14, 15.) Still, as we know there were later Cainites, the pointed
reference to Cain cannot but raise a suspicion of an allusion to these
heretics. But then Cain is mentioned for warning in 1 John iii. 12 ; and
also in Heb. xi. 4, the latter undoubtedly earlier than the Cainites.
The author's object is to denounce the corrupt teaching and
warn his readers against it. This teaching has two evils. It
encourages immorality, and it denies "our only Master and
Lord, Jesus Christ."
b. Contents.
1, 2, Salutation.
3, 4, The teaching originally received to be maintained
against the false teachers.
5-7, Warnings from the punishment of the Israelites, of
fallen angels, of Sodom and Gomorrah.
8-10, Railing at dignities rebuked from the example of
Michael. n-13, Denunciation of the corrupters who go in the way
of Cain and Balaam, and spoil the Agape feasts.
14-16, These false teachers in accordance with the prophecy
of Enoch.
17-19, Reminder that the apostles had predicted such
teachers. 20, 21, Duty of edification in the love of God, and hoping
for the mercy of Christ.
22, 23, Every effort to be made to save men.
24, 25, Concluding doxology to the God who can keep from
stumbling. Origen found the reference to Michael in the "Assumption of Moses"
(De Principiis, iii. 2), on which Jude here draws.
The reference to Enoch is found in the Book of Enoch i. 9. Both of
these are Jewish apocryphal works, though the latter has been converted
into a Christian book with many interpolations.1
5. 1 John.
a. Authorship. — As in the case of Jude the question of
the authorship of 1 John is not merely whether the epistle
is genuine and the work of the man whose name is associated
with it, but also as to who that man is, seeing that it is an
1 See Charles, The Book of Enoch, p. 42.

i JOHN 453
anonymous writing, the title, of course, in this case, as in
all other cases, being not part of the original work. And
even when the very ancient tradition that connects it with
the name of John is accepted, we are still able to ask
which John — the apostle, or the elder?1 It is almost
certain that this epistle was written by the author of the
fourth gospel, the same peculiar style and special ideas
appearing most conspicuously in both.
Among phrases which connect the epistle with the gospel we have
frequent references to life and truth, and such expressions as "to do
the truth," " to be of the truth," " to be of God," " to be of the world,"
"to be ofthe devil," "to have eternal life," "to conquer the world"
(compare I John iv. 4 ff. with John xvii. 14) ; " the only begotten Son ,;
(compare 1 John iv. 9 with John i. 14, 18). Pfleiderer3 following Baur
objects (1) that the "antichrists" of the epistle (ii. 18) do not appear
in the gospel ; (2) that l\ao-p.6s, twice applied to Christ in the epistle
(ii. 2 ; iv. 10), does not occur in the gospel. But can we argue thus
a silentio, when there is no proof that the gospel had occasion to
introduce these ideas? Besides, the gospel describes Christ as "the
Lamb of God, that taketh away the sin of the world " (John i. 29),
which really contains the l\ao-p,6s idea. Further, in the epistle the
Paraclete is Christ (1 John ii. 1), while in the gospel He is the Holy
Ghost (John xiv. 16). But then in the gospel the Holy Ghost is described
as "another Paraclete," which implies that Christ too is a Paraclete.
It is true there is a difference in the ideas of the Paraclete — in the epistle
Christ is our advocate with the Father, in the gospel the Holy Ghost
directly helps us ; but there is no inconsistency here.
This makes the importance of the authorship of the epistle
very great. But since what has been already considered in
regard to the gospel applies to the epistle, and since it was
necessary to refer to this work when discussing questions
concerning the gospel,3 we need not go over the ground
again. It is sufficient to notice certain points specifically
related to the epistle. Though the author nowhere designates
himself an apostle, he claims to be an eye-witness of the
gospel events and a personal disciple of Jesus Christ (i. 1-3) ;
and he writes with authority and fatherly affection for his
readers. Very early testimony connects the work with John,
the son of Zebedee, and there is no ancient witness for any
other authorship. The epistle was known to Polycarp and
Papias. Irenaeus is the first to cite it by name. It is in the
1 See page 337. 2 Vrchristenthum, pp. 791 ff. 3 See page 328 ff.

454 BIBLICAL INTRODUCTION
Muratorian Fragment. Clement of Alexandria, Origen, and
Tertullian referred it to John.
Polycarp writes : "For whosoever does not confess that Jesus Christ has
come in the flesh is antichrist (Ad Phil., 7), plainly derived from 1 John
iv. 3. Eusebius says that Papias "made use of testimonies (Kexprirai
8' b abrbs /Maprvptais) from the first epistle of John." (H.E., iii. 39.)
Irenaeus writes: "For this reason he (John) thus testified to us in his
epistle: Little children, it is the last time," etc. (Adv. Haer., iii. 16. 5.
Compare 1 John ii. 18.)1
The apostolic authorship of the epistle has been objected
to on the ground of its alleged "feebleness." That there
is great simplicity in the phrasing may be allowed, and also
that there is a habit of repetition, which may be set down
to the advanced age of the writer, is also not to be denied.
And yet we must not be deluded into the supposition that
the underlying thought is not of great value. We have here
some of the most precious teaching of the N.T., e.g., con
cerning the love of God, brotherly love, Christ's propitiation
for sin, eternal life. Then it has been objected that second
century gnosticism is referred to. It is true the author
contends against Docetism, the teaching that denied the
corporal reality of the incarnation (iv. 2) ; but he makes
no allusion to the specific ideas of the great gnostic systems
of Valentinus and Basilides, who wrote early in the second
century. The error he contends against may be that of
Cerinthus, which appeared during the lifetime of St. John.2
b. Date and Place of Writing- — 1 John was written in
a time of peace, as it contains no allusion to persecution.
The references to doctrinal error suggest a late date in the
apostolic era. Avoiding the Domitian persecution, we must
assign it either to an earlier period, or more probably to the
time after that persecution was over in St. John's extreme
1 See also Adv. Haer., iii. 16. 8; for Clement see Strom, ii. 15;
Paedag., iii. 11 ; for Origen see Eusebius, H.E., vi. 25 ; De Oral., Opp.,
torn, i., p. 233 ; for Tertullian see Adv. Prax., 15.
2 Baur thought he saw a reference to Montanism in the "sin unto
death" (1 John v. 16), corresponding with the mortal sins described
by Tertullian (De Pudic, 19). But might not Montanism seek its authority
in this very passage ?

i JOHN 455
old age. It gives no hint of any locality where it was written.
Probably it came from Ephesus, since John lived there.
c. Persons Addressed and Occasion of Writing. — This book
is not in the form of a letter, and yet it is not like a treatise,
as some have said, for it contains direct hortatory appeals.
We can better compare it to a pastoral,1 especially aimed
at correcting false ideas about the incarnation, but largely
practical, to inculcate obedience to the commandments of
Christ, and brotherly love.
d. Contents.
i. 1-4, Introduction, promising to give the readers the
knowledge of the Word of Life, of which the writer has had
personal experience.
5-10, The message that God is light, and our fellowship
with Him dependent on walking in light. Still if we confess
sin, it will be forgiven through the blood of Christ.
ii. 1-6, Christ the propitiation, whom we know if we keep
His commandments.
7-1 1, The old commandment, and the new. Love of
one's brother a necessary condition of walking in the light.
12, 13, The messages to children, fathers, young men.
14-17, On the vanity of loving the world.
18-23, Antichrist and the denial of Christ.
24-29, Abiding in Christ.
iii. 1-3, The love of God in calling us His children, and its
purifying hope.
4-12, Christ manifested to take away sin, and lead us
to love one another, in the opposite character to Cain's.
13-22, Love of the brethren the sign that we have passed
from death into life.
23, 24, The commandments to believe in the name of
Christ, and love one another.
iv. 1-6, Trying the spirits.
7-16, The duty to love another, because God is love.
17-21, The perfecting of love, and its victory over fear.
v. 1-5, The victory over the world through faith in Christ.
1 See Westcott, The Epistles of St. fohn, Introd., p. 30.

456 BIBLICAL INTRODUCTION
6-13, The three witnesses and life eternal in Christ.
14-17, Prayer for the sinner.
18-21, The new life in God and in His Son.
6. 2 John.
a. Authorship. — The writer describes himself as "the
elder," but without giving any name. Therefore some x have
assigned this epistle and 3 John, which is similar in address,
to the presbyter John, even while allowing 1 John to be by
the apostle. But the resemblance in style between the three
epistles is too close to allow of the probability of diversity of
authorship. As 2 John has no name, it could not in any case
be called "a forgery," and it is too simple and practical to
admit of any question of its genuineness. It has very early
attestation to its connection with the name of John, certainly
in Irenaeus, probably in the Muratorian Fragment.
Irenaeus certainly quotes verse 7 of this epistle, though with an ex
pression that might suggest his only knowing one epistle of John, saying,
"And John the disciple of the Lord, in his epistle . . . when he says,
for many deceivers are entered into the world, who confess not that Jesus
Christ is come in the flesh ; this is a deceiver and an antichrist." (Adv.
Haer., iii. 16. 8.) The Muratorian Fragment refers to two epistles of
John. Probably this is one of them. It was known to Clement2 and
Origen,3 who, however, while admitting that John wrote the first epistle,
expresses doubts as to his authorship of the second and third.
b. Destination. — The epistle is addressed to "the elect
lady." 4 It is a question whether this expression is to be taken
literally, or figuratively for a church. In favour of the former
interpretation are (1) the simplicity of the epistle, (2) the
references to the elect lady's children (verses 1, 4), (3) the
analogy of 3 John, which is addressed to one man, Gaius, (4)
the mention of the elect lady's house (verse 10). On the
other hand, in favour of the latter interpretation — understand
ing the phrase to stand figuratively for some church — (1) it
must be allowed that the purpose and contents of the epistle
1 See e.g., Ebrard, Com. Introd.
2 Strom., ii. 15; Eusebius, H.E., vi. 14.
8 Eusebius, H.E., vi. 26.
4 'EKXeKrrj Kvpla, which might also be rendered either " the elect Kyria,"
"lady Eclecte."

2 JOHN 457
are more suitable to that application. We have warnings
against antichrist and exhortations to love, very like those
in r John, which was not directed to a private person. (2)
John not only refers to children of the elect lady who are with
her, but also to others whom he has met, leading us to think
of a greater number than the children of one woman. (3)
The elect sister and her children (verse 13) seem to be
another church. The house could be that where the church
met ; churches then assembled in private houses. On the
whole, therefore, it seems best to take the expression "elect
lady " figuratively as the half playful description of a church.
c. Occasion, Date, and Place of Writing. — The special
object of this brief letter is to warn the " elect lady and
her children " against deceivers who deny the incarnation ; at
the same time they are exhorted to keep to the original com
mandments, especially that of brotherly love. There is no
reason to doubt the tradition that puts this epistle after
1 John ; but the similarity of tone suggests that it was written
about the same time, i.e., towards the end of the first century,
and probably at Ephesus.
d. Contents.
1-3, Salutation.
4, Thanksgiving for certain of the elect lady's children
whom John has found walking in the truth.
5, 6, A reminder of the old commandments, especially that
requiring brotherly love.
7-1 1, The antichrist deceivers who deny the incarnation not
to be received into the house or acknowledged with a greeting.
12, The writer, expecting to visit his correspondents, will not
say more now.
13, Final salutation.
7. 3 John.
a. Authorship. — This epistle, which is addressed to one
man, the hospitable Gaius, opens exactly in the same way as
its predecessor, the writer introducing himself simply as "the
elder." It is not much referred to in early church literature ;

458 BIBLICAL INTRODUCTION
but the absence of any doctrinal statements and the fact that
it was addressed to a private individual account for the
neglect of it. There is no good reason to doubt that it was
written by the author of 2 John.
Hilgenfeld and Holtzmann follow Baur in assigning the epistle to the
author of 2 John, though placing it in the second century.1
It was known to Origen, who expressed doubts concerning it as well as
concerning 2 John. (Eusebius, H.E., vi. 25.) Eusebius accepts it, though
he places it among the Antilegomena. (H.E., iii. 25.) It is in the Old
Latin, but not in the Peshitto.
b. Occasion, Date, and Place of Authorship. — It would
appear that the special object of this epistle was to commend
a man named Demetrius to Gaius ; so that it may be regarded
as one of those "letters of commendations" that were used
in apostolic and later times.2 Having thus occasion to write,
John avails himself of it further to congratulate his friend on
the hospitality this good man is practising to Christians who
come to him as strangers. Referring to some previous letter
that he has sent to the church, he sternly rebukes a certain
Diotrephes for his ambition and tyranny. This epistle may
be assigned to the same time and place as 2 John, i.e., towards
the end of the first century at Ephesus. Some persecution has
recently been experienced (verse 7), probably that of Domitian.
c. Persons Mentioned. — (1) Gaius.— We meet with a Gaius
at Corinth. (1 Cor. i. 14.) Possibly the same man is referred
to in Romans xvi. 23, as that was written from Corinth. Here
St. Paul calls him "my host." The common characteristic
of hospitality faintly suggests identity with our Gaius. But
hospitality was common in the early church, and St. Paul
must have stayed somewhere. Besides, this epistle comes
quite thirty years later than Romans. We also meet with a
Gaius of Macedonia (Acts xix. 29), and another of Derbe in
Lycaonia (xx. 4). The name was common, being a Greek
form of the Latin " Caius." At the late period of our epistle
most likely it denotes some person not otherwise known to us,
1 See also Ziilicher, Einleitung, pp. 159, 160, for proofs of the
common authorship of the two epistles.

3 JOHN 459
possibly a prosperous Christian in whose house a church was
accustomed to meet. (2) Diotrephes. — All we know of this
man is what the epistle suggests. He was a member of the
church with which Gaius was connected. It has been inferred
that he was a presbyter, and though no title is given him, not
only the fact of his loving the pre-eminence — which might be
the case with any ambitious person — but his tyranny, point to a
post of influence. This man was going about maligning the
author of the epistle, and generally doing his worst to break
up the church. (3) Demetrius. — Some Christian on his
travels about to visit the place where Gaius lives, who is
therefore commended to him for a brotherly reception by
the church.
d. Contents.
1, Salutation from "the elder" to Gaius.
2-4, Good wishes for the health of Gaius, with congratula
tions that he is walking " in the truth."
5-8, The hospitality of Gaius, especially to fugitive Chris
tians who were driven from their homes by persecution.
9-12, The opposition of the ambitious Diotrephes and
his tyrannous conduct, both in refusing admission to new
comers and his expulsion of members from the church.
13, 14, Concluding personal matters and salutation.
There is no theology in this epistle. The first and second
epistles have much common Johannine teaching. They dwell
with emphasis on the Incarnation, repudiating any who deny
that Jesus Christ has come in the flesh as "antichrist." It
would seem that the "heresy" was that of Cerinthus, who
asserted that Jesus was a man on whom the Christ, or
according to another version, the Holy Spirit, descended
at His baptism, deserting Him at the crucifixion. John
insists on the reality of the Incarnation. This brings us
eternal life, which is in God's Son, so that he who has the Son
has life, and he who has not the Son of God has not the life.
God is light and love. Our duty is to walk in the light and
in love, especially in that love of our brother without which
we cannot love God, and must remain in darkness.

CHAPTER XI.
THE REVELATION

i. Apocalyptic Literature.
2. Authorship and Origin.
History of Criticism. Date.

3. Contents.
4. Structure and Interpretation.

1. Apocalyptic Literature.
The Apocalypse stands apart from all other books of the
N.T., with none of which we can compare it. Yet it is
not unique in literature. In external form and style it
is similar to some works that were much read and highly
valued at the time when it was written. There were a
number of Jewish Apocalypses, and these were followed by
several Christian Apocalypses.
The origination of this literature may be traced back to the book
of Daniel, the second portion of which may be regarded as the earliest
Apocalypse. Recent discoveries have brought to light the Book of Enoch,
the Book of the Secrets of Enoch, the Apocalypse of Baruch, etc. among
Jewish works. The fragment of the so-called Apocalypse of Peter which
we possess comes from a later time, and is a Christian writing of the same
class. To point out this fact, however, is not to put our book
of the Revelation on a level with the contemporary works,
any more than to point out the epistolary form of St. Paul's
writings is to place those writings on a level with Cicero's
or Pliny's letters. Some portions of Revelation at all events
command our reverence as among the loftiest, most inspired
utterances of the N.T. ; and the book as a whole stands quite
apart from other works of its class in spiritual significance,
thus justifying its place in the Canon.
2. Authorship and Origin.
The Apocalypse has been generally assigned to the apostle
John, and regarded as a record of the visions that were given
460

AUTHORSHIP AND ORIGIN 461
to him from heaven while he was an exile on the isle of
Patmos in the reign of Domitian. There is much in the
book itself that harmonises with this popular conception,
and in our own day till quite recently the apostolic authorship
was universally accepted among critics of all schools. But
new ideas about the book have now been brought up, and
old objections of patristic times revived. Therefore we need
to look into the question of its authorship afresh.
a. The Testimony of Antiquity. — This book is one of
the best attested of early times. It was known to Justin
Martyr and Irenaeus as the work of the apostle, and it
was admitted by Papias. In the West it was unanimously
accepted as St. John's. It was slower in obtaining full recog
nition in the East.
Justin Martyr writes : ' ' There was a certain man among us whose
name was John, one of the apostles of Christ, who prophesied by a
revelation," etc., and then he mentions the prediction of the millennium.
(Tryph. 81.) Irenaeus quotes our Revelation as from "John the disciple
of the Lord." (Adv. Haer., iv. 20.) This is especially important
because of Irenaeus' intimate knowledge of John's disciple, Polycarp.1
Two Cappadocian bishops, Andrew and Arethas, probably of the fifth
century, tell us that Papias looked upon the book as inspired (8e6irvev<rros)
and credible (dl-ibirurTos). 2 The Apocalypse was accepted by the churches
of Lyons and Vienne. (Eusebius, HE., v. 1, 2.) It seems to have been
known to Hermas.3 Eusebius cites Melito of Sardis as acknowledging
it (HE,, iv. 26), and so does Jerome. (De Vir. III. 24). But the
Apocalypse is not in the Peshitto. It was rejected by the Alogi4 who
also rejected the gospel of John, and on critical grounds denied to the
apostle by Dionysius of Alexandria. Eusebius seems to accept it as
the apostle's, and as among the undisputed books (bp.o\oyabp.eva, H.E.,
iii. 25) ; but subsequently he suggests that it may have been written
by John the presbyter. (H.E., iii. 39.)
b. Internal Evidence. — The book claims to be a revelation
which God gave to His servant John (i. 1), and in addressing
the seven churches the writer twice calls himself John (i. 4, 9).
The name does not appear in the body of the work ; but we
meet with it once again in the last chapter (xxii. 8). John is
1 See page 330.
2 See Charteris Canonicity, pp. 338, 339.
3 Vis. i. 3. 2 ; 4. 1 ; ii. 2, 7 ; ii. 4. 1 ; iii. 5- 1 ; iv. 1, io ; 2. 1 ; 2. 4 ;
Mand. x. 3. 2.
4 See page 333.

462 BIBLICAL INTRODUCTION
a common Jewish name, and there is nothing in the descrip
tion of the writer to fix upon Zebedee's son in particular. In
fact the indications are rather adverse to that conclusion.
St. John's habit in the gospel is not to give his name as it is
given here. The author of Revelation never refers to Christ in
the way so intimate a friend as the beloved disciple would
naturally be expected to do, but remotely. Then he never
calls himself an apostle, and he mentions the " twelve
apostles" in a manner that does not include himself among
them (xxi. 14), while he represents the angel as reckoning
him among the "prophets" (xxii. 9), who, as we learn
especially from the Didache, were an order in the Church
quite distinct from the apostles. Of course, in writing such
a book as Revelation, John the apostle could be designated
a prophet, for this book would be regarded as prophecy.
Still, if we had not the evidence of ancient writers in favour of
the apostle, there would be no sufficient reason why we should
assign the book to Zebedee's son, and considerable reason
for relegating it to some other author. There is a growing
opinion in the present day that the apostle was not the
author. We know what a strong tendency there was in the
early church to ascribe works by unknown or obscure writers
to apostles and other well-known men.1 If we could allow
this to be the case with Revelation, the serious difficulty of
believing that the same man wrote the fourth gospel would
disappear, and we should have one great stumbling-block to
the Johannine authorship of that work removed. Still
the question cannot be considered definitely settled. If
the apostle did not write Revelation, the most likely man
to be its author is the presbyter John, a contemporary at
Ephesus.2 While the fourth gospel is in fairly good Greek, Revelation is the most
Hebraistic book in the N.T. It even contains distinct barbarisms such as
the nominative case for the accusative (vii. 9), and the accusative for the
nominative (xx. 2). It is true there are certain resemblances between the
1 It is a fact that every other known apocalypse was not written by the
person to whom it was assigned.
2 Known to us from Papias, Eusebius, HE., iii. 39.

AUTHORSHIP AND ORIGIN 463
two works. In Revelation Christ appears twenty-five times as the Lamb
(apvlov) ; in John He is the " Lamb of God" (but dp.v6s, another Greek
word, John i. 29). So he appears as the bridegroom (Revelation xix. 7 ;
xxi. 2 — compare John iii. 29) ; and the Logos (Revelation xix. 13 ; compare
John i. 1). But then, if John the elder is the author, it still comes from
the Johannine school at Ephesus.
c. History of Criticism. — The apostolic authorship of
Revelation was not only denied by Epiphanius's obscure
Alogi, of whom we know too little to take them into account,
but also by Dionysius of Alexandria, who laid down the lines
that subsequent criticism has followed. The ground taken by
Dionysius was the marked difference of style between the
Apocalypse and the gospel of John. Accepting the gospel as
beyond question, the Alexandrian critic decided that Revela
tion must have been written by some other John. In support
of his view he mentioned the fact that there were two monu
ments or tombs in Ephesus with the name of John.1 But
little heed was paid to Dionysius's argument until the begin
ning of the present century, when it was turned round by
opponents of the Johannine authorship of the fourth gospel,
and used to discredit that work, Baur and his followers in
the Tubingen school accepting Revelation as the work of the
apostle John. More recently doubts have been thrown on
its integrity, and through the analysis of its contents it has
been suggested that they come from various sources, some of
these being Jewish, also that the various portions of it bear
evidence of having been written at different times. There is
a growing agreement among scholars that it is a composite
work. Still that does not preclude the apostolic authorship,
because the apostle may have used the work of previous
apocalyptic writers ; neither does it exclude the idea that
the John of Revelation is presbyter John.
In the year 1882 Weizs'acker wrote maintaining that Revelation is a
compilation containing some materials of a very early date ; and he was
followed by Volker, who divided the work into five parts, written at
different times. Then Vischer started the idea that Revelation was a
translation into Greek of a Jewish apocalypse written in Hebrew before
a.d. 70, the introduction, conclusion, and slight interpolations in the text
being added by a Christian writer towards the end of the century. A
1 /ivbimra. Eusebius, HE., vii. 24, 25.

464 BIBLICAL INTRODUCTION
Dutch scholar, Weyland, worked out independently a similar theory, but
looking for two Jewish sources, one of the time of Nero, the other of the
time of Titus, and assigning the Christian revision to the age of Trajan.
Pfleiderer virtually holds to Weyland's position. Sabatier and Schoen
modified these theories by regarding the Apocalypse as a Christian work
based on Jewish predecessors. The question is elaborately discussed by
Spitta, who comes to the conclusion that the Christian kernel of Revela
tion was written by John Mark about A. D. 60, and that subsequently a
Christian editor united this work with two Jewish apocalypses — one as
early as Pompey (63 B.C.), the other of the time of Caligula. In the year
1895 Gunkel introduced a new element into the discussion by tracing back
parts of Revelation to the " Tiamat myth" in the Babylonian epic of the
creation. Chapter xii. in particular is assigned to this Babylonian source,
adopted into Jewish traditions before it passed into apocalyptic literature.
In the new edition of Meyer's Commentary, Bousset defends the unity of
the book, but holds that it was based on previous Jewish writings, agree
ing however with Gunkel that chapter xii. could not have had a Jewish
origin. Harnack considers that the work is composite. The earlier
stratum he holds to have been written under Nero or his successor, on
the evidence of Revelation xvii. 9-1 1, and the final editing done in the
reign of Domitian.1 Among English and American writers Professor
Milligan defended the unity and Christian origin of the book ; and Professor
Briggs regards it as a Christian work, but composite in nature as follows :
Edition 1 has the Seals, Trumpets and Bowls. Edition 2 adds the Epistles.
Edition 3 brings in the Beasts and the Dragon. A redactor follows with
i. 1-3 ; xxii. 18-20, and many notes inserted throughout the work.
McGiffert also holds that the author made large use of earlier materials.2
d. Date and Place of Origin. — If we are to accept the theory
of a composite nature for Revelation, the question of date or
dates becomes rather complicated. But then this theory will ex
plain some of the difficult problems about the subject. Leaving
out of reckoning the age of the traditional elements which
may have come down in Jewish circles from the time of the
Babylonian captivity, we have still indications of several dates.
Chapter xiii. 1-10 seems to point to the time of Caligula, in
that emperor's attempt to compel the Jews to worship his
image. Possibly also all the Apocalypse of the beasts should
be assigned to that time. Then vii. 9-1 1 seems to set the
Apocalypse of the Vials in the reign of Nero or Galba, accord
ing as we count the five emperors from Julius Caesar or
Augustus. Next, xi. 8 assumes that Jerusalem is still stand
ing. That must be before a.d. 70. But Professor Ramsay
1 Chronologic, vol. i., pp. 245, 246, 679.
2 Apos. Times, p. 633 ff. For an admirable survey of the recent
criticism see American Journal of Theology, October, 1898.

CONTENTS 465
argues that the hostility to Rome and the picture of the
church under persecution point to a still later period.1
This would lead us on to the period assigned by Irenaeus,
the reign of Domitian, about a.d. 90, or a little later for the
most recent portions of the book. There is no reason to
doubt that the vision of chapter i., etc., was in Patmos, as
the author tells us (i. 9). The full construction of the book,
weaving in the earlier with the later materials, may be set
down to Ephesus, where, according to every ancient witness,
both Johns were living.
3. Contents.
a. Title and description, i. 1-3.
b. The Seven Churches, i. 4. — iii. 22.
i. 4-20, The vision of the Son of man.
ii., iii., The letters to the seven churches.
c. The Apocalypse of the Seals, iv. i-viii. 1.
iv., v., The vision of the Divine glory and of the Lamb that
was slain.
vi. i-viii. 1, The opening of the seven seals. The sealing
of the 144,000. The innumerable multitude.
d. The Apocalypse of the Trumpets, viii. 2-xi. 19.
viii. 2-5, The vision of the seven angels, and the incense of
the prayers of the saints.
6-ix. 21, The sounding of the trumpets and the woes that
follow. x., The angel with the little book, which the seer is to eat.
xi. 1-14, The measuring of the temple. The two witnesses.
Great woes for Jerusalem.
14-19, The seventh trumpet.
e. The Apocalypse of the Woman and the Dragon, xii. (Said
to be founded on a Babylonish myth.)
f. The Apocalypse of the Beasts, xiii.
g. The Lamb with the 144,000 redeemed. God's judgment
and mercy, xiv.
1 Rev. vi. 9, II ; vii. 14 ; xii. 11 ; xiii. 15 ; xvi. 6 ; xvii. 6 ; xviii. 24 ;
xx. 4, etc. See The Church in the Roman Empire, pp. 295-302.
2 H

466 BIBLICAL INTRODUCTION
h. The Apocalypse of the Vials, xv.-xvi.
xv. 1-4, The victors' song of triumph.
5-xvi. 21, The outpouring of the seven vials.
i. The Fall of Babylon, xvii.-xx. (Prophecy referring to
Rome and the emperors.)
xvii., The beast with the seven heads and ten horns.
xviii., The overthrow of Babylon.
xix., The war of the Word of God with the Beast.
xx., Closing scenes: (1) Millennial peace; (2) outbreak of
Satan ; (3) universal judgment.
j. The final glory, xxi, xxii.
xxi.-xxii. 7, The heavenly city.
xxii. 8-21, Admonitions and encouragements.
4. The Structure and Interpretation of the Book.
a. Its Structure. — The composite nature of Revelation
already referred to seems to be indicated at the very com
mencement. It has three introductions: (1) i. 1-3 is an
introduction to the whole book ; (2) i. 4-8 is an introduction
to the letters to the seven churches ; (3) i. 9 also indicates a
fresh beginning. Then the letters to the seven churches are
wholly different from the succeeding visions. There is much
in this part of the book that harmonises with the last two
chapters, where John's name occurs again. These portions
contain some of the most valuable inspired utterances of the
N.T. It is when we come to deal with the central portions of
the book that our difficulties begin. Here also we come upon
hymns of the church, references to the Lamb, allusions to
Christian martyrdom, and other signs that, wherever the author
obtained his materials, he aimed at converting the whole into
one work, and that a Christian Apocalypse.
b. Interpretation. — Of course the question of the origin
and structure of the book must govern our views of its
interpretation. If pre-existing Jewish traditional lore and
earlier writings were used by the author as materials, we are
face to face with a very difficult question when we ask how
far he assimilated those materials, and gave them his own

INTERPRETATION OF THE BOOK 467
interpretation. It seems almost hopeless to go farther back
and ask what were the original meanings of the pre-existing
materials. But in regard to both questions of interpretation
we are helped by the analogy of the Jewish Apocalypses
that have been preserved to our own day, which would
lead us to reject the notion that every item has a distinct
mystical or symbolical meaning. Imagination runs riot with
the elaborate fancies of this marvellous book, although
perhaps those fancies were never intended to be interpreted
prosaically into specific significations. Great general ideas
run through the succession of visions — seals, trumpets,
vials; ideas that are in harmony with apocalyptic literature
generally, and the same recur in the more evidently
Christian portions of the book. It was always in some
time of trouble that a Jewish Apocalypse appeared, and then
it aimed at encouraging the sufferers with faith in God's
final judgment of their foes and deliverance of His people.
Similar ideas run through our N.T. Apocalypse. There is
present persecution; a great conflict is impending; God will
interfere through His angels ; Christ will come to smite
and judge the evil powers and save His people. We
need not take the succession of visions of judgment in
chronological sequence, as indicative of a historical series
of events. The same idea is repeated in many forms.
Two definite historical applications appear in the course
of the book. The judgment of Jerusalem (xi.), written
when the Jews were the chief enemies of the Christians ;
and the judgment of Rome (xvii.-xix.), written later when
Rome was their antagonist. But for the rest we have the
ideas of conflict, judgment, and deliverance set forth again
and again in a rich variety of imagery to impress upon us
their force and truth.
If this be at all a right conception of the nature of the book, it will be
seen that the various popular forms of exposition are out of keeping with
its aim and meaning. These are classified as follows : — (i) The Prseterist,
which sees all the references to events in the past, contemporary or almost
contemporary with the writing. This ignores the general character of
apocalyptic literature, which all points to a final judgment, yet it is

468 BIBLICAL INTRODUCTION
right with regard to many parts of the Apocalypse. (2) The Historical,
which takes the book as a sort of chart of the centuries of history
down to our time and beyond. (3) The Futurist, which holds that all
is mysterious, because none is yet fulfilled. (4) Tbe Ideal, which denies
any historical references. We have seen that there are definite historical
allusions in several parts. When these occur, they all refer to con
temporary history, and give no justification for the second school of
interpretation. The third school is so far correct, that a final judgment
is contemplated. Yet the same process recurs again and again earlier —
with Jerusalem, with Rome, with any city or people similarly situated, on
to the end of time, when at last Christ will triumph, and a .pure and happy
state of society prevail among men.

APPENDIX.
EARLY WITNESSES TO NEW TESTAMENT
WRITINGS

Clement of Rome. A Bishop of Rome.
Epistle to Corinthians . . .
[Barnabas.] Epistle, wrongly attributed to
Barnabas . . ...

c. a.d. 95.
between A.D. 96 and
120.

Didache. "The Teaching of the Twelve
Apostles," an ancient church manual c. A.D. 100.
Hermas. The Shepherd, an allegorical
work . . ...
Ignatius. Bishop of Antioch and Martyr.
7 epistles . . ...
Marcion. From Pontus, formed his own
Canon . . ...

c. A.D. 130-160.

c. A.D. 1 1 5.

A.D. 144.

ob. A.D. 155.
middle of 2nd cent.

Polycarp. Bishop of Smyrna and Martyr,
Epistle to Philippians . . .
Epistle to Diognetus. Anonymous . .
Papias. Bishop of Hierapolis. Exposition
of the Oracles of the Lord. Only
fragments, preserved by Eusebius middle of 2nd cent.
Justin Martyr. Apologist. 1 and 2 Apolo
gies and Dialogue with Trypho
Tatian. Assyrian writer and disciple of
Justin Martyr. Diatessaron, a har
mony of the gospels . . .
Theophilus. Of Antioch, AdAutolicum .
Irenaeus. At Lyons and Vienne. Against
Heresies . . ...
469

A.D. 155.
A.D. 160-170.
C. A.D. 180.
A.D. 180.

470

BIBLICAL INTRODUCTION

Hippolytus. At Rome. Refutation of all
Heresies . . ...
Clement of Alexandria. Head of the
Catechetical school. Pcedagogus,
Miscellanies, etc. . ...
Origen. Clement's successor at Alexandria,
a learned and voluminous writer .
Dionysius. Bishop of Alexandria and
teacher after Origen . . .
Tertullian. North Africa. Many writings
Eusebius. Bishop of Caesarea in the reign
of Constantine. Ecclesiastical His
tory, etc. . . ...
Muratorian Fragment. A fragment of a
Canon of the N.T. named after its
discoverer Muratori . . .
Peshitto. The Syriae popular version of
the N.T., probably preceded in part
by other versions . ...
Old Latin. A North African version, older
than Tertullian . ...
Vulgate. Latin version, revised by Jerome

end of 2nd cent.
end of 2nd cent.
first half of 3rd cent.
a.d. 248.
end of 2nd and be
ginning of 3rd cent.
early 4th cent.
c. a.d. 170.

second half of 2nd
cent.
middle 2nd cent.
early 5th cent.

LIST OF BOOKS
TO WHICH THE STUDENT IS REFERRED
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION
Considerations of space necessitate the exclusion of many
excellent works, there is only room for a representative
selection. Untranslated foreign works are only mentioned
where no satisfactory book of precisely the same character
is accessible in English.
A. General.
i. Bibliography. — Introduction to Theology and its Literature.
Alfred Cave, d.d. (T. and T. Clark.)
2. Bible Dictionaries. — A Dictionary of the Bible, edited by James
Hastings, d.d. (T. and T. Clark.) Only 2 vols, issued.
Encyclopaedia Biblica, edited by T. K. Cheyne, d.d. (A. and C.
Black.) Announced.
3. Concise Handbooks.— Cambridge Companion to the Bible.
(Camb. Univ. Press.)
How to Read the Bible, by W. F. Adeney. (James Clarke.)
Primer of the Bible, W. H. Bennett. (Methuen.)
4. Geography of Palestine.— Sinai and Palestine, by A. P. Stanley.
Historical Geography of the Holy Land, by Prof. G. A. Smith.
(Hodder and Stoughton.)
Names and Places in O. and N.T., by G. Armstrong. (Pal. Expl.
Fund.)
Publications and Maps of Pal. Expl. Fund.
Geographie des Alten Palastina, by D. F. Buhl. (J. C. B. Mohr,
Leipzig.) 471

472 BIBLICAL INTRODUCTION
5. Archceology— Antiquities of Israel, by H. Ewald. (Longmans.)
Lehrbuch der Hebraischen Archaologie, by W. Nowack. (J. C.
B. Mohr, Leipzig.)
Hebraische Archaologie, by J. Benzinger. (J. C. B. Mohr.)
Manners and Customs of the Modern Egyptians, by E. W. Lane.
(Murray, 187 1.)
Arabian Nights.
B. Old Testament.
Books written more or less on the lines of traditional criticism are
enclosed in brackets ( ) ; the critical position of the rest is substantially
that of the O.T. section of this book, or else the books or subjects dealt
with do not raise serious critical questions, or are treated without special
reference to such questions.
1. Canon— The Canon of the O.T., by Prof. E. H. Ryle.
(Macmillan.)
2. Text— A. Short History of the Hebrew Text of the O.T., by
T. H. Weir. (Williams and Norgate.)
Introduction to the Hebrew Bible, by C. D. Ginsburg, Trinitarian
Bible Soc.
3. History. — History of Israel, by H. Ewald, 5 vols., tr.
(Longmans.)1
Lectures on the Hist, of the Jewish Ch., by A. P. Stanley,
3 vols. (Murray.)1
History of the Hebrews, by R. Kittel (applying Dillmann's critical
views), tr. (Williams and Norgate.)
History of the People of Israel, by Prof. C. H. Cornill, tr.
(Kegan Paul.)
Histoire du Peuple d'Israel, by C. Piepenbring. (Williams and
Norgate.)
History of Israel, by J. Wellhausen, tr. (A. and C. Black.)
4. Introduction. — Introduction to the Lit. of the O.T., by Prof.
S. R. Driver. (T. and T. Clark.)
Outline of the Hist, of the Lit. of the O.T., by Prof. E. Kautzsch,
tr. (Williams and Norgate.)
1 Representing the transition from traditional to modern criticism.

LIST OF BOOKS' 473
O.T. in the Jewish Ch., by W. Robertson Smith. (A. and C.
Black.)
5. Theology.— (Theology of the O.T., by G. F. Oehler, tr.)
(T. and T. Clark.)
O.T. Theology, by H. Schultz, tr. (T. and T. Clark.)
Theology of O.T., by C. Piepenbring, tr. (New York.)
Theology of O.T., by W. H. Bennett. (Hodder and Stoughton.)
Lehrbuch der Alt-Testamentlichen Religionsgeschichte, by R.
Smend. (J. C. B. Mohr, Freiburg i. B.)
6. Assyrian and Egyptian Inscriptions, etc. — History, Prophecy,
and the Monuments, by J. P. McCurdy, 3 vols. (2 issued).
(Macmillan.)
The Cuneiform Inscriptions and the O.T., by E. Schrader, tr.
(Williams and Norgate.)
(The Higher Criticism and the Monuments, by A. H. Sayce,
S.P.C.K.)1
Life in Ancient Egypt, by A. Erman, tr. (Macmillan.)
Authority and Archaeology, by S. R. Driver, etc. (Murray.)
Light from the East, by C. J. Ball. (Eyre and Spottis
woode.)
7. Commentaries, etc. — Abbreviations, etc. : (a) Works on introduction.
(b) Complete commentaries for advanced students, (c) Concise com
mentaries for English readers, etc. (d) Expository works, which do
not include a, complete detailed commentary, (e) Works in which
the text is arranged so as to show the analysis into earlier documents,
including some notes, but not a complete commentary.
C.B.S., Cambridge Bible for Schools and Colleges (Camb. Univ. Press);
E.B., Expositor's Bible (Hodder and Stoughton); H.B.C., Handbooks
for Bible Classes (T. and T. Clark); I.C., International Critical Com
mentary (T. and T. Clark) ; P.B., Polychrome Bible (James Clarke
and Co.).
H.B., Kurzgefasstes exegetisches Handbuch zum Alten Testament
(S. Hirzel, Leipsic); H.C., Kurzer Hand-Commentar zum Alten Testa
ment (J. C. B. Mohr, Freiburg i. B.) ; H.K., Hand-Kommentar zum
A.T. (Vandenhoeck and Ruprecht, Gottingen.).
1 But accepts most of the principles and many of the results of modern
criticism.

474 BIBLICAL INTRODUCTION
Pentateuch (or Hexateuch=Pent. + Josh.).1
(a) The Hexateuch, by Kuenen, tr. (Macmillan.)
The Higher Criticism of the Hexateuch, by C. A. Briggs. (New
York.)
Einleitung in den Hexateuch, by H. Holzinger. (J. C. B. Mohr,
Freiburg i. B.)
Hebraica, Papers in, 1888, v.-viii., by W. R. Harper and (W.
H. Green.)
(The Inspiration of the O.T., by Dr. A. Cave, Congregational
Union).
(The Higher Criticism of the Pentateuch, by W. H. Green.)
(Dickinson.)
Also sections of histories, introductions, etc.
(e) Documents of the Hexateuch, by W. E. Addis, 2 vols. (Nutt.)
Genesis?— (b) Delitzsch, tr. (T. and T. Clark) ; Dillmann, tr.
(T. and T. Clark), (c) Marcus Dods (H.B.C.). G. A.
Wade, (d) Marcus Dods (E.B.). (e) The Genesis of
Genesis, by B. W. Bacon, Hartford, U.S.A. The Com
position of the Book of Genesis, by E. I. Fripp. (Nutt.)
Exodus? — (b) Exodus and Leviticus, by C. V. Ryssel (H.B).
(c) James Macgregor (H.B.C.). (e) The Triple Tradition
of the Exodus, by B. W. Bacon, Hartford, U.S.A., all
Pent, except Genesis.
Leviticus? — (b) See Exodus, (e) See Exodus ; also S. R. Driver
and H. A. White (P.B.).
Numbers? — (b) Numeri, Deuteronomium und Josua, by A.
Dillmann (H.B.). (e) See Exodus.
Deuteronomy?— -(b) Driver (I.C.). (d) A. Harper (E.B.). (e) See
Exodus.
Joshua?— (b) See Numbers, (c) J. S. Black (Smaller C.B.S.).
(e) W. H. Bennett (P.B.).
Judges.- -(b) G. F. Moore (I.C.). (c) J. S. Black (Smaller C.B.S.).
(e) G. F. Moore (P.B.).
Ruth.—(b) A. Bertholet, in Die Fiinf Megillot (H.C.). (c) R.
Sinker, in Ellicott's O.T. Comm. for Eng. Readers.
(Cassell.)
1 Cf. several books. * Cf. Pentateuch. 3 Ibid.

LIST OF BOOKS 475
Samuel.— Notes on the Hebrew Text of the Books of Samuel, by
Driver. (Clarendon Press.) (b) H. P. Smith (I.C.). (c) A. F.
Kirkpatrick (C.B.S.), 2 vols.
Kings— (b) J. Benzinger (H.C.). (c) J. R. Lumby (C.B.S.),
2 vols, (d) F. W. Farrar (E.B.).
Chronicles.— ib) S. Oettli, in the Kurzgefasstes Komm. z. A.T.
(c) C. J. Ball, in Ellicott's O.T., see Ruth, (d) W. H.
Bennett (E.B.)
Ezra, Nehemiah, and Esther.— (b) C. V. Ryssel (H.B.). (c)
H. E. Ryle, Ez. and Neh. (C.B.S.). (d) W. F. Adeney
(E.B.).
Job— (a.) T. K. Cheyne, Job and Solomon ; W. T. Davison,
Wisdom Literature of the O.T (C. H. Kelly), (b) Duhm
(H.C.) ; S. Cox (Kegan Paul), (c) A. B. Davidson (C.B.S.),
the best comm. in Eng. ; E. C. S. Gibson (Methuen).
(d) R. A. Watson (E.B.).
Psalms.— (a) T. K. Cheyne, Origin of the Psalter (Kegan Paul) ;
W. T. Davison, Praises of Israel (C. H. Kelly), (b)
Cheyne (Kegan Paul) ; Delitzsch (T. and T. Clark) ; J. S.
Perowne (Bell and Sons), (c) A. F. Kirkpatrick, books
i.-iii., 2 vols. (C.B.S.); Wellhausen (P.B.). (A) A. Maclaren
(E.B.), 3 vols.
Ecclesiastes.— (a) Cheyne and Davison, as on Job. (b) D. G.
Wildeboer, in Die Fiinf Megillot, see Ruth; C. H. H.
Wright (Hodder). (c) E. H. Plumptre (C.B.S.). (d) S. Cox
(E.B.); Koheleth, by T. C. Finlayson.
Canticles or Song of Songs. — (b) C. D. Ginsburg (Longmans) ;
Budde, in the Fiinf Megillot, see Ruth, (d) W. F. Adeney,
Cant, and Lam. (E.B.).
The Prophets}
(a) The Prophets of Israel— Amos, Hosea, I. Isaiah, Micah— by
W. R. Smith. (A. and C. Black.)
The Books of the Prophets, by G. G. Findlay, vol. i— Obadiah,
Joel, Isaiah xv., xvi., Amos, Zechariah ix.-xiv., Micah.
(C. H. Kelly.)
The Theology of the Prophets, by A. Duff— Amos, Hosea, Isaiah,
Micah. (A. and C. Black.)
1 Cf. the several books.

476 BIBLICAL INTRODUCTION
Isaiah?— (a) Introduction to the Book of Isaiah, by Cheyne
(A. and C. Black) ; Isaiah, etc., by Driver (Nisbet) ;
(Isaiah One and His Book One, by G. C. M. Douglas),
(Nisbet). (b) Cheyne, 2 vols. (Kegan Paul) ; Delitzsch,
2 vols., tr. (T. and T. Clark), (c) J. Skinner, 2 vols.
(C.B.S.). (d) G. A. Smith, 2 vols. (E.B.) (e) Cheyne (PB.).
Prophecies of Isaiah — pamphlet on Assyriology, etc. — by M. L.
Kellner, Camb., U.S.A.
Jeremiah. — (a) Jeremiah, etc., by Cheyne. (Nisbet.) (b) Cheyne,
Exposition in Pulpit Comm. ; Giesebrecht (H.K.). (c) A.
W. Streane (C.B.S.). (d) i.-xx., C. J. Ball (E.B.); xxi.-lii.,
W. H. Bennett (E.B.).
Lamentations. — (b) Cheyne, at end of Jeremiah ; Budde, in the
Fiinf Megillot, see Ruth, (c) Streane, at end of Jeremiah.
(d) W. F. Adeney, see Canticles.
Ezekiel.— -(b) A. Bertholet (H.C.). (c) A. B. Davidson (C.B.S.).
Toy (P.B.). (d) J. Skinner (E.B.).
Daniel. — (a) (The Book of Daniel from the Christian Standpoint,
by John Kennedy. Eyre and Spottiswoode.) (b) A. A.
Bevan (Camb. Univ. Press) ; (J. E. H. Thomson, etc.,
Pulpit Comm.), (Kegan Paul), (d) F. W. Farrar (E.B.).
The Minor Prophets— (b) Nowack (H.K.); Pusey (Oxford).
(d) G. A. Smith, 2 vols. (E.B.).
Hosea?— (c) Cheyne (C.B.S.).
Joel and Amos.'2— (c) Driver (C.B.S.).
Obadiah 3 and Jonah .3— (c) T. T. Perowne (C.B.S.).
Micah?— (c) Cheyne (C.B.S.).
Nahum, Habakkuk, and Zephaniah? — (c) A. D. Davidson (C.B.S.).
Haggai, Zechariah, and Malachi? — (c) T. T. Perowne (C.B.S.).
Zechariah— (b) (C. H. H. Wright). (Hodder and Stoughton.)
8. Apocrypha, Pseudepigrapha, etc.
Apocrypha, in "Speaker's Comm.," by H. Wace, etc., 2 vols.
(Murray.) 1 See The Prophets.
- See The Prophets and The Minor Prophets.
3 See The Minor Prophets.

LIST OF BOOKS 477
Pseudepigrapha, by W. J. Deane. (T. and T. Clark.)
Books which influenced our Lord, etc., by J. E. H. Thomson.
(T. and T. Clark.)
The Age of the Maccabees, by A. W. Streane. (Eyre and
Spottiswoode.)
Book of Wisdom, by W. J. Deane. (Oxford.)
Book of Enoch, by R. H. Charles. (Oxford.)
Book of the Secrets of Enoch, by W. R. Morrill and R. H.
Charles. (Oxford.)
Apocalypse of Baruch, R. H. Charles.
First Maccabees, W. Fairweather and J. S. Black (C.B.S.).
Psalms of Solomon, by H. E. Ryle and M. R. James. (Camb.
Univ. Press.)
Testaments of the Twelve Patriarchs, by R. Sinker.

C. New Testament.
1. Canon. — Canonicity, by Prof. A. H. Charteris. (Blackwood.)
History of the Canon, by Bishop Westcott. (Macmillan.)
History of the Canon, by Prof. E. Reuss (Eng. trans. Gemmell,
Edinburgh.)
Geschichte des Neutestamentlichen Kanons, by Th. Zahn.
(Erlangen and Leipzig.)
Die Chronologie der Altchristlichen Litteratur, by Adolf Harnack.
(Leipzig.)
2. Text. — Novum Testamentum Graece, with full critical apparatus,
by Tischendorf, 8th edit. (Leipzig.)
New Testament (Greek), by Westcott and Hort. (Macmillan.)
The Greek Text of the Revised Version. (Oxford University
Press.)
The Resultant N.T., by Dr. Weymouth. (Eliot Stock.)
Novum Testamentum Graece cum apparatu critico ex editionibus
et libris manu scriptis collecto— an excellent Gr. N.T. at a
low price. (Stuttgart.)

478 BIBLICAL INTRODUCTION
3. Textual Criticism. — Prolegomena to Tischendorf's N.T., by
C. G. Gregory (Latin). (Leipzig.)
Introduction to the Criticism of the N.T., by Scrivener, 4th edit.,
edited by Miller. (Deighton Bell.)
Introduction to Westcott and Hort's N.T., by Dr. Hort.
(Macmillan.)
Textual Criticism of N.T., by Prof. B. B. Warfield, D.D. (Theol.
Educator, Hodder and Stoughton.)
4. History. — A History of the Jewish People in the Time of
Jesus Christ, by E. Schurer (Eng. trans., T. and T.
Clark.)
New Testament Times, by Hausrath (Eng. trans., Williams
and Norgate.)
Palestine in the Time of Jesus Christ, by E. Stapfer (Eng. trans.,
Hodder and Stoughton.)
Apostolic and Post-Apostolic Times, by Lechler (Eng. trans.,
T. and T. Clark.)
Neutestamentliche Zeitgeschichte, by O. Holtzmann. (Freiburg.)
Apostolic Age, by C. Weitzsacker (Eng. trans., T. and T. Clark.)
Lives of Christ, by B. Weiss (Eng. trans., T. and T. Clark) ;
S. J. Andrews — a Student's Text-Book (Ibister).
Edersheim (Longmans) ; Didon (Paris) ; Geikie (Strahan) ;
Farrar (Cassell) ; Beyschlag (Halle).
Works on St. Paul, by Sabatier (Eng. trans., Hodder and
Stoughton) ; Stevens (Dickinson) ; Conybeare and Howson
(Longmans).
St. Paul the Traveller and Roman Citizen, Prof. Ramsay. (Hodder
and Stoughton.)
Paulinism, by Pfleiderer (Eng. trans., Williams and Norgate.)
5. Introduction. — N.T. Introductions (in English), by Salmon
(Murray) ; Weiss (Eng. trans., Hodder and Stoughton) ;
Reuss (Eng. trans., T. and T. Clark) ; Marcus Dods
(Theol. Educ, Hodder and Stoughton) ; McClymont
(Black). In German, by Jiilicher (Freiburg) ; Zahn
(Freiburg) ; Holtzmann (Freiburg).

LIST OF BOOKS 479
6. Theology.— The Teaching of Jesus, by Wendt (Eng. trans.,
T. and T. Clark.)
The Teaching of Jesus, by Dr. Horton. (J. Clarke and Co.)
The Kingdom of God, and The Training of the Twelve, by
Prof. Bruce. (T. and T. Clark.)
New Testament Theology, by Beyschlag (Eng. trans., T. and
T. Clark.)
New Testament Theology, by B. Weiss (Eng. trans., T. and T.
Clark.)
Theology of N.T., by Stevens (T. and T. Clark).
Theology of N.T., by W. F. Adeney (Theol. Educ, Hodder and
Stoughton).
Theologie du Nouveau Testament, by J. Bovon. (Lausanne.)
Lehrbuch der Neutestamentlichen Theologie, by N. T. Holtzmann.
(Freiburg.)
7. Synoptic Problem. — Besides the N.T. Introductions the follow
ing deal especially with this subject : Articles Gospel in
New Bible Dictionary, by Dr. V. H. Stanton ; in Encyc.
Brit., by Dr. Abbott.
Horas Synopticse, by Sir J. C. Hawkins, Bart. (Oxford, Clarendon
Press.)
Some Synoptic Problems, by Arthur Wright. (Methuen.)
The Formation of the Gospels, by F. P. Badham. (Kegan Paul.)
Synopticon, by Rushbrooke. (Macmillan.)
Introduction to the Study of the Gospels, by Bishop Westcott.
8th edit. (Macmillan.)
Die Synoptische Frage, by P. Wernle (J. C. B. Mohr, Freiburg, i. B).
8. Commentaries. — For abbreviations see page 473; and add H.C.
Hand Commentar (Leipzig); C.C.S., for Cassell's Com
mentary for Schools.
Matthew.— {b) Meyer (T. and T. Clark); Die Synoptiker, by
Holtzmann (H.C). (c) Carr (C.B.S.); Plumptre (CCS.)
Morrison (Hodder and Stoughton.) (d) Monro Gibson
(E.B.).
Mark. — (b) Swete (Macmillan); Gould (I.C); Meyer; Die
Synoptiker, by Holtzmann (H.C). (c) Maclear (C.B.S.) ;
Plumptre (CCS.) ; Morrison (Hodder and Stoughton).
(d) The Dean of Armagh (E.B.) , Cartoons from St. Mark,
by Dr. Horton (J. Clarke).

480 BIBLICAL INTRODUCTION
Luke.— (b) Plummer (I.C); Meyer; Godet (T. and T. Clark);
Die Synoptiker, by Holtzmann (H.C). (c) Farrar (C.B.S.) ;
Plumptre (CCS.), (d) Burton (E.B.).
John.—(b) Meyer; Godet (T. and T. Clark); Westcott (Mac
millan) ; Holtzmann (H.C.) ; Reynolds (Pul. Com.), (c)
Plummer (C.B.S.) ; Watkins (C.C.S.). (d) Marcus Dods
(E.B.).
Acts. — (a) Die Apostelgeschichte ; ihre Quellen, etc., by Spitta
(Halle) ; ditto, by Jiingst (Gotha). (b) Blass — Latin,
(Gottenburg) ; Hackett (Hamilton Adams) ; Holtzmann
(H.C.) ; Weiss (Leipzig), (c) Lumby (C.B.S.) ; Plumptre
(C.C.S.). (d) Stokes (E.B.).
Romans. — (b) Sanday and Headlam (I.C.) ; Godet (T. and T.
Clark) ; Vaughan (Macmillan) ; Lipsius (H.C.) ; Liddon,
" Explanatory Analysis " (Longmans) ; Meyer, (c) Moule
(C.B.S.) ; Sanday (CCS.) ; Beet (Hodder and Stoughton).
(d) Moule (E.B.).
I Corinthians. — (b) Edwards (Hodder and Stoughton) ; Ellicott
(Longmans); Meyer; Schmiedel (H.C). (c) Lias (C.B.S.) ;
Shore (C.C.S.). (d) Marcus Dods (E.B.); Expository
Lectures, by F. W. Robertson (King).
2 Corinthians.— (b) Meyer; Schmiedel (H.C). (c) Lias (C.B.S.) ;
Plumptre (C.C.S.). (d) Denny (E.B.).
Galatians.— (b) Lightfoot (Macmillan); Meyer; Ramsay ("St.
Paul," etc.), (Hodder and Stoughton); Lipsius (H.C).
(c) Perowne (C.B.S.) ; Sanday (CCS), (d) Findlay (E.B.).
Ephesians.— (b) T. K. Abbott (I.C); Ellicott (Parker); Mac-
pherson ; Meyer ; Von Soden (H.C). (c) Moule (C.B.S.) ;
Bishop Barry (C.C.S.). (d) Findlay (E.B.) ; Dale (Hodder
and Stoughton).
Philippians.— (b) Lightfoot (Macmillan) ; Vincent (I.C.) ; Meyer ;
Von Soden (H.C). (c) Moule (C.B.S.) ; Barry (CCS).
(d) Rainy (E.B.)
Colossians and Philemon. — (b) Lightfoot (Macmillan) ; T. K.
Abbott, Col. (I.C.) ; Vincent, Phile. ; Meyer ; Von
Soden (H.C). (c) Moule (C.B.S.) ; Barry (C.C.S.). (d)
Maclaren (E.B.)

LIST OF BOOKS 481
1 and 2 Thessalonians.— (b) Jowett (Murray) ; Ellicott (Parker) ;
Liinemann (Meyer); Schmiedel (H.C). (c) Findlay
(C.B.S.); Mason (C.C.S.). (d) Denny (E.B.).
1 and 2 Timothy, Titus. — (b) Ellicott (Parker) ; Meyer ; Von
Soden (H.C). (c) Humphreys (C.B.S.) ; Canon Spence
(C.C.S.). (d) Plummer (E.B.).
Hebrews. — (b) Westcott (Macmillan) ; Liinemann (Meyer) ; Von
Soden (H.C.) ; Vaughan (Macmillan) (c) Farrar (C.B.S.) ;
Moulton (C.C.S.); Davidson (H.B.C). (d) Edwards (E.B.);
Bruce (T. and T. Clark).
James. — (b) Mayor (Macmillan) ; Beyschlag (Gottingen) ; Von
Soden (H.C). (c) Plumptre (C.B.S.) ; Punchard (C.C.S.).
(d) Plummer — with Jude (E.B.) ; Dale (Hodder and
Stoughton).
1 and 2 Peter, Jude. — (b) Huther (Meyer) ; Von Soden (H.C).
(c) Plumptre (C.B.S.); Plummer (CCS.), (d) Lumby
—1 and 2 Pet. (E.B.).
'> 2> 3> John. — (b) Westcott (Macmillan) ; Huther (Meyer) ;
Ebrard (T. and T. Clark) ; Holtzmann (H.C). (c)
Plummer (C.B.S.) ; Sinclair (C.C.S.). (d) Alexander
(E.B.).
Revelation. — (b) Vischer (Leipzig) ; Volter (Freiburg) ; Weiss
(Leipzig), (c) Simcox (C.B.S.) ; Boyd Carpenter (C.C.S.).
(d) Milligan (E.B.)

INDEX

Abbott, E. A., on Gospels, 325.
Acrostics, Hebrew —
 Lamentations, 212.
 Proverbs, 156.
 Psalms, ij 1.
Acts of Apostles, 341 ff.
Alexandria and Hebrews, 430.
Amos, 240.
Analysis of Historical Books —
 Limitations of, 31.
 Method of, 25.
 Sketch of, 32.
Apocalypse, 460 ff.
 of Baruch, 268.
Apocalyptic Literature, 181, 224,
254. 271. 274. 460.
 Fourth Gospel and, 333 ff.
Apocrypha—  O.T., 13, 268.
Apollos and Hebrews, 425.
Aquila, 3, 380.
Aristion, 303.
Ascension of Isaiah, 268.
Assumption of Moses, 269.
"Babylon," in N.T., 443, 444,
466.
Balaam, 69.
Barnabas —
 Epistle of, 469.
 Hebrews and, 427.
Baruch —
 Apocalypse of, 268.
 Book of, 269.
 Epistle of, 268.
Baur's Theory, 343.
Bel and the Dragon, 269.
Bleek on Hebrews, 426.
Blessing of —
 Jacob, 63.
 Moses, 75.
Books on Biblical study, 471 ff.

Calvin on Biblical Criticism, 6,
10.
Csesarea, 388.
Canon —
 O.T., 12.
 N.T., 275 f.
Canticles, 167.
Celsus, 306.
Census in Luke, 308.
Cethubhim (Hagiographa), 5, 12.
Chronicles, 107.
Chronology, Pauline, 350.
Chrysostom on the Gospels, 322.
Clement of Alexandria, 470.
 on the Gospels, 297.
 on Hebrews, 422.
Clement of Rome, 284.
 Epistle of, 469.
 on 1 Corinthians, 364.
 on Hebrews, 425.
Colossians, 388 ff.
Combined Prophetic Document (JE)
of Pentateuch,. 47.
 combined with D, 50.
Composite character of books of
O.T., 17.
Composition of Historical Books of
O.T.—
 Method, 17.
 Theories of (Current), 22.
 Theories of (Earlier), 19.
 Theory of (Dillmann), 23.
 Theory of (Graf, Wellhausen,
and Kuenen), 24.
Conquest of Palestine, 77.
Corinth, 362.
 factions at, 367.
 Lost Epistle, etc. , 363.
Corinthians I., 364 ff-
Corinthians II., 367 ff.
Cretans, 419.
Criticism, General course of O.T. , 9.

4S3

484

BIBLICAL INTRODUCTION

D, 16, 48, 71.
Daniel, 227.
Daniel, Book of, 224.
 Apocryphal additions to, 229,
269.
David and Goliath, 92, 94.
 Lament over Saul and Jonathan,
93-
 Last words of, 95.
 Psalms of, 143.
Deborah, Song of, 86.
Decalogue, 65.
Deuteronomic —
 Edition of Historical Books, 50.
 Materialin Historical Books, 49.
Deuteronomy, 71.
Diatessaron, Tatian's, 281, 329.
Didache, 469.
 and John, 329.
 and Synoptics, 284.
Dillmann on Pentateuch, 23.
Dionysius on John, 333 ff. , 463.
E,4S- Ecclesiastes, 160.
Ecclesiasticus, 4, 269.
El, 100.
Elijah and Elisha, 100.
Elohistic Document (E) of Penta
teuch, etc., 45.
 Combined with J, 47.
Enoch —
 Book of, 270.
 Book of the Secrets of, 270.
Epaphras, 391, 398.
Ephesians, 394 ff.
Esdras, Books of, 271.
Essenes, 384.
Esther, Book of, 121.
 Apocryphal additions to, 121,
271.
Eusebius, Silence of, 280.
Evidence as to date, etc., of O.T.
books —
 External, 3.
 Internal, 39.
Exodus, 64.
Exodus, Book of, 64.
Ezekiel, 213.
Ezekiel, Book of, 213.
Ezra, Book of, 107, 117.
Florinus, Letter to, 330.

Fourth Gospel, 328 ff.
Fragmentary theory of composition
of Pentateuch, 21.
Galatian Churches, 372.
Galatians, 372 ff.
Gamaliel, 344.
General Epistles, 434 ff.
Genesis, 60.
Gospels —
 Luke, 304 ff.
 John, 328.
 Mark, 295 ff.
 Matthew, 285 ff.
 Synoptic, 277.
Graf on Pentateuch, 24.
Greek versions of O.T., 2, 3.
Gunkel, 464.
H, 52.
Habakkuk, 251.
Haggai, 254.
Hagiographa, 5, 12.
Hannah, Song of, 91.
Harnack —
 Chronology, 350.
 List of Gospels, 278.
Hebrew MSS. of O.T., I.
Hebrews, 421 ff.
Heresies, 411.
Hexateuch, 16.
Hippolytus on John, 329.
Historical Books of O.T.—
 mode of composition, 17, 56.
 sources. See D, E, El, H, J,
P, and the several books.
 teaching, 103.
Hosea, 234.
Imprisonment, Epistles of, 387 ff.
Internal evidence on books of O.T,,
39-
Irenteus on Gospels, 281, 297.
Isaiah, 172.
 Ascension of, 268.
Isaiah, Book of—
 General analysis, 171.
 Present book, 171.
 i.-xxxv., 172.
 xxxvi. -xxxix., 184.
 xl.-lxvi. (Second Isaiah), 185.
 ¦ xl.-lv. (Deutero-Isaiah), 188.
 lvi.-lxvi. (Trito-Isaiah), 193.
 Servant of Jehovah, 191.

INDEX

485

J.43- Jacob, Blessing of, 63.
James, 434 ff.
Jashar, Book of, 80.
JE, 47-
JED, 50.
Jehovistic Document (J) of Penta
teuch, 43.
 combined with E, 47.
Jeremiah, 195.
 Epistle of, 271.
Jeremiah, Book of, 195.
Jerome, Vulgate, 3, 470.
Jerusalem, Paul's visits to, 376.
Jesus ben Sirach, 269.
Job, 123.
Job, Book of, 123.
Joel, 237.
John—  Gospel, 328 ff.
 I. Epistle, 452 ff.
 II. Epistle, 456 ff.
 III. Epistle, 457 ff.
 Apocalypse, 460 ff.
Jonah, 244.
Josephus, 4, 271.
 and Acts, 343 ff.
Joshua, 77.
Jubilees, Book of, 272.
Judas of Galilee, 344.
Jude, 450, ff.
Judges, 82.
Judith, 272.
Justification in James, 436, 439.
Justin Martyr —
 Memoirs of Apostles, 282.
 on John, 329.
 on Luke, 306.
Kethubhim (Hagiographa), 5, 12.
Kings, 95.
Koheleth, 160.
Lamentations, 210.
Laodicea, Council of, 421.
Laodiceans, Epistle to, 351, 395.
Law, 59, 103.
 of holiness, 52, 67.
Leviticus, 66.
 xii. -xxvi., 52, 67.
Lightfoot —
 on Galatians, 372.
 on Philippians, 401.

Logia, 286, 326 ff.
Luke, 304 ff.
 and Acts, 341 ff.
 and Hebrews, 425.
Luther on Biblical Criticism, 10.
Lycus Valley, Churches of, 389,
400.
Maccabean Psalms, 145,
Maccabees, Books of, 272.
Malachi, 264.
" Man of Sin," 359.
Manasseh, Prayer of, 273.
Marcion —
 Canon, 407.
 Gospel, 306.
Mark, 295 ff.
 Priority of, 324,
Masoretic Text, 1.
Matthew, 285 ff.
 Hebrew, Logia, 286 ff.
Megilloth, 12.
Messianic —
 Prophecies, 173, 175, 177,
182 f., 188-191, 205, 220, 242,
248, 257, 262 ff., 268, 270, 273.
 Psalms, 147.
Micah, 247.
Milligan, 464.
Minor Prophets, 234.
Mosaic material in Pentateuch,
59-
Moses —
 Assumption of, 269.
 Blessing of, 75.
 Laws and teaching of, 59.
105.
 Song of, 75.
 Song of (at Red Sea), 65.
MSS. (O.T.), 1.
Muratorian Fragment, 470.
Nahum, 250.
Nehemiah, 107, 117.
Numbers, 67.
Obadiah, 243.
Old Latin version of O.T. , 3, 470.
Onesimus, 393, 394-
Onesiphorus, 417.
Ophites, 400.
Origen —
 Mark, 297.
 Hebrews, 422.

486

BIBLICAL INTRODUCTION

O.T.—
 Canon, 12.
 Text, 1.
 Versions, 2.
P. 52. S3-
Pantsenus on Hebrews, 422.
Papias, 286, 296, 469.
Parallelism in Hebrew poetry, 149.
Parousia, 356.
Pastoral Epistles, 406 ff.
Paul, St., 349 ff.
 Second imprisonment, 410.
Pentateuch —
 Complete, 56.
 Criticism, points of agreement
and difference, 23.
 Dillmann on, 23.
 Graf on, 24.
 Mosaic material in, 59.
Cf. Historical Books.
Peshito, 3, 470.
Peter I., 440 ff.
Peter II., 447 ff.
Peter, St., and Mark, 296.
 Memoirs of, 296.
Philemon, 393 ff.
Philippians, 399 ff.
Philo, 3, 273, 340.
Phcebe, 380.
Poetry, Form of Hebrew, 149.
Polycarp, 330.
 on John, 329,
Pre-exilic Psalms, 143.
Priestly Code (P), 53.
 combined with JED, 56.
Prisca, 380.
Proverbs, 152.
Psalms, 134.
 xviii., 94.
 Acrostic, 151.
 Davidic, 143,
 Maccabean, 145.
 Messianic, 147.
 Pre-exilic, 143.
 of Solomon, 273.
Qinah Metre, 212.
Qoheleth, 160.
Quirinius, 308,
Ramsay —
 on Acts, 342.

Ramsay on Galatians, 372.
Revelation, 460 ff.
Roman Government, 410.
Romans, 378 ff.
Rome, Church at, 378.
Ruth, 87.
Samaritan Pentateuch, 2, 5.
Samuel, 89.
Septuagint, 2, 4.
Servant of Jehovah, 191.
Sethites, 400.
Sibyllines, 273.
Solomon —
 Psalms of, 273.
 Song of, 167.
 Wisdom of, 274.
Song of —
 Deborah, 86.
 Hannah, 91.
 Moses, 75.
 Moses at Red Sea, 65.
 Solomon, 167.
 The Three Children, 269.
 Triumph over Moab, 65.
Supernatural Religion, 280.
Supplementary theory of compo
sition of Pentateuch, 21.
Susanna, Book of, 269.
Symbols used in O.T. criticism, 15,
24, 32, 62 n.
Symmachus, 3.
Synoptic Problem, 316 ff.
Synoptics and Fourth Gospel, 334 ff.
Talmud, 7.
Targums, 2.
Tatian, 281, 329.
Tel-el-Amarna Tablets, 77.
Ten Commandments, 65.
Terms of O.T. criticism, 15.
Testament of the Twelve Patriarchs,
274.
Text of O.T. , I.
Theodotion, 3.
Theophilus on John, 330.
Thessalonians, 352 ff.
Theudas, 344.
Three Children, Song of, 269.
Timothy I., 414 ff.
Timothy II., 417 f.
Titus, 418 ff.
Tobit, 274.

INDEX

487

Tradition, Oral, 321 ff.
Tubingen School, 343.
Tychicus, 391, 398.

Urmarcus, 322
Versions of O.T. ,
Vischer, 463.
Volker, 463.
Vulgate, 3, 470.

2.3-

Wars of Jehovah, Book of, 69.
Weyland, 464.
Wisdom—
 of Jesus ben Sirach, 269.
 of Solomon, 274.
Zechariah —
 i.-viii., 256.
 ix.-xiv., 259.
Zephaniah, 253.

PLYMOUTH :
WILLIAM BRENDON AND SON,
PRINTERS.