^\ ;^1 
 
 :niMi']0li in €itd 
 
 ALEXANDER ,/^(WFJ<TS^ /-. £\ 
 
.{^X^XVi 
 
 ssi t^« ®^«**%Jal ^ 
 
 ^k 
 
 PRINCETON, N. J. 
 
 SM/.. 
 
 ■BSA.5.D 
 .n.(oA 
 
 Number ..C.OX^^.. 
 
 Division , 
 
 Section . 
 
Old Testament Revision: 
 
 % PaitbIj0oh for dSitiglbl^ ^ijatiirs. 
 
 ALEXANDER^ ROBERTS, D.D., 
 
 Professor of Humanity, St. Andrcivs, and Member of New Testament 
 Compatiy of Revisers ; 
 
 AUTHOR OF " COMPANION TO THE REVISED VERSION OF THB 
 ENGLISH NEW TESTAMENT,' ETC, 
 
 SECOND THOUSAND. 
 
 NEW YORK 
 
 CHARLES SCRIBNER'S SONS 
 
 1883 
 
PREFACE. 
 
 TT seems desirable, in view of the approach- 
 ing publication of the Revised Version of 
 the Old Testament, to furnish, in popular 
 form, some information on interesting and 
 important points connected with that portion 
 of Scripture. This I have endeavoured to do 
 in the following little volume. From the 
 nature of the case, this work has been con- 
 structed on totally different lines from my 
 " Companion to the Revised Version of the 
 New Testament." Comparatively little, for 
 instance, requires to be said, or, indeed, can 
 be said, respecting the text and manuscripts 
 of the Old Testament — points which call for 
 the utmost care in dealing with the New 
 
iv PREFACE. 
 
 Testament. My object in the present work 
 has been to present, in easy, untechnical 
 language, a considerable amount of general in- 
 formation, which may enable ordinary English 
 readers to peruse with greater interest and 
 intelligence the Scriptures of the Old Testa- 
 ment, when these are set before them in the 
 Revised Version. 
 
 I willingly acknowledge that I have learned 
 much on the subject of the Old Testament 
 from so-called rationalistic writers. And I 
 trust I am willing to learn more ; for what- 
 ever commends itself as true ought to be 
 welcomed from any and every quarter. At 
 the same time, I am constrained to say that 
 a tone of dogmatism, and a tendency to one- 
 sidedness, may as plainly be discovered in 
 the writers referred to, as among those who 
 belong to the strictly " orthodox " class. The 
 candid seeker after truth must be on his guard 
 in dealing with the statements of extreme men 
 on the one side as well as on the other. 
 
PREFACE. 
 
 I have embodied in the following pages a 
 number of what appear to me improved trans- 
 lations of Old Testament passages, without 
 having the least idea whether or not these 
 have been adopted by the Revision Company. 
 Multitudes of additional emendations will, of 
 course, appear in the Revised Version, although 
 it is to be hoped that the work will not be 
 marked by that amount of minute and really 
 needless change which is one of the greatest 
 weaknesses of the Revised New Testament. 
 
 Should my little book fall into the hands 
 of any Biblical scholars, I would respectfully 
 solicit their attention to the argument in behalf 
 of the habitual use of the Greek language 
 by Christ, as set forth in Chapter IX. My 
 apology for taking another opportunity of 
 handling this subject is simply that I believe 
 it to be one of the most interesting and im- 
 portant of Biblical questions. Indeed, should 
 the view for which I plead as to the language 
 generally used by Christ be at last accepted, 
 
vi PREFACE. 
 
 a revolution must, to a considerable extent, 
 take place in the science of Biblical criticism. 
 
 To prevent all possible misunderstanding, 
 it may be well to add that, though the sheets 
 of the Revised Old Testament have, from time 
 to time, been sent to me, I am not, now that 
 my book has been printed, acquainted with a 
 single change of rendering which the Revisers 
 have adopted. 
 
 A.R. 
 
 University, St. Andrews, 
 Dec^ zoth, 1882. 
 
T- 
 
 CONTENTS. 
 
 CHAPTER I. 
 
 PAGE 
 
 LANGUAGE AND CONTENTS OF THE OLD TESTA- 
 MENT I 
 
 CHAPTER II. 
 THE PENTATEUCH— ITS AUTHORSHIP AND DATE . 2$ 
 
 CHAPTER IIL 
 
 THE PENTATEUCH — CORRECTIONS OF THE AUTHOR- 
 ISED ENGLISH VERSION 45 
 
 CHAPTER IV. 
 
 THE PROPHETS— CORRECTIONS OF THE AUTHOR- 
 ISED ENGLISH VERSION 71 
 
 CHAPTER V. 
 
 THE HAGIOGRAPHA — CORRECTIONS OF THE 
 
 AUTHORISED ENGLISH VERSION . • » 93 
 
 CHAPTER VI. 
 
 THE APOCRYPHAL BOOKS OF THE OLD TESTAMENT II 3 
 
 CHAPTER VII. 
 
 THE TEXT OF THE OLD TESTAMENT • • .137 
 
viii CONTENTS. 
 
 CHAPTER VIII. 
 
 PAGE 
 
 THE SEPTUAGINT AND THE SAMARITAN PENTA- 
 TEUCH • . . 157 
 
 CHAPTER IX. 
 
 THE SEPTUAGINT — ITS CONSTANT USE BY CHRIST 
 
 AND HIS APOSTLES 179 
 
 CHAPTER X 
 
 THE TALMUD AND THE TARGUMS .... 20I 
 
 CHAPTER XI 
 
 VERSIONS OF THE OLD TESTAMENT LATER THAN 
 
 THE TIME OF CHRIST 223 
 
 ' CHAPTER XII. 
 
 ENGLISH VERSIONS OF THE OLD AND NEW TESTA- 
 MENTS . • • • • . 24s 
 
 INDEX OF TEXTS 273 
 
 GENERAL INDEX •••••.. 277 
 
T},r^ ^^0, 
 
 CHAPTER I. 
 
 LANGUAGE AND CONTENTS OP THE OLD 
 TESTAMENT. 
 
 ALL the canonical books of the Old Testament 
 are written throughout in the Hebrew lan- 
 guage, with the exception of a very few passages 
 to be afterwards noticed. 
 
 The language thus called " Hebrew " has been 
 supposed by not a few eminent scholars to have 
 acquired its name from Eber, or rather (with a 
 weak guttural sound) Heber, who is referred to in 
 Genesis x. 21, 24. But, far more probably, the 
 appellation was derived from a word meaning 
 ** beyond," or "on the further side," and was 
 applied to Abraham and the dependants who 
 accompanied him, because they had passed over 
 from the other side of the great river Euphrates, on 
 their way from Mesopotamia to Canaan. The name 
 thus given them by the people among whom they 
 came to settle, was adopted by the immigrants 
 themselves, and was afterwards used by them to 
 denote the external relation in which they stood to 
 other nations. 
 
OLD TESTAMENT REVISION. 
 
 Hebrew is a member of what is known as the 
 Shemitic, or Semitic, family of languages. The 
 term "Shemitic" has been applied to them, because, 
 according to the genealogies contained in the Book 
 of Genesis, most of the nations who speak them 
 are descended from Shem, the eldest son of Noah. 
 This widely spread group of human tongues falls 
 into three main divisions, — the Aramaic, or northern 
 dialect, the Hebrew, or central dialect, and the 
 Arabic, or southern dialect. With the Aramaic are 
 connected the Syriac, which, in a corrupted form, 
 is still spoken by the Druses and Maronites at the 
 present day, and the cuneiform inscriptions which 
 have been found in Babylonia and Assyria. With 
 the Hebrew there are connected the Phoenician, 
 Samaritan, and Punic, of which only a few remains 
 are now possessed. With the Arabic, again, are 
 connected the ancient ^thiopic, and some kindred 
 forms of speech ; while the languages now spoken 
 in Malta and Abyssinia exhibit it in a more or less 
 corrupted form ; and in its comparatively pure state 
 Arabic is still used by a vast number of the inhabit- 
 ants of our globe. 
 
 The great characteristic of Semitic speech is the 
 tri-literal composition of its words. Almost all the 
 verbal forms consist of three letters — neither less 
 nor more. And these letters are all consonants^ the 
 vowels being left unwritten, as of comparatively 
 
LANGUAGE OF THE OLD TESTAMENT. 3 
 
 little consequence. This constitutes one marked 
 difference between Semitic languages, like the 
 Hebrew or Arabic, and Indo-European languages, 
 such as Sanscrit, Greek, German, or English. In 
 the Indo-European languages, we find that, from 
 the earliest times, the consonants were often vari- 
 able, while the vowels must be regarded as having 
 been deemed at least equally important. But in 
 Hebrew, as long as the language was a living one, 
 and even for ages afterwards, the vowels remained 
 unwritten. The form thus presented by the words 
 may be exhibited to one unacquainted with the 
 original, by means of English characters, reading 
 these, of course, from right to left, as is the case 
 in all the Semitic languages. Thus, the three con- 
 sonants L T K stood for katal, " he killed," and 
 the three consonants V SH Y, for jyashav, " he 
 sat." But the first of these examples might also 
 receive such a vowel punctuation as changed the 
 word into kotel, " one who kills," and the second 
 might be so pointed as to change the preterite into 
 the {uinxQ—jyeshev, ** he shall sit." Many other 
 words, as will afterwards be noticed, vary in sense 
 much more than these, according to the vowel 
 pointing which is adopted. 
 
 It follows at once from what has been said, that 
 there must occasionally be room for difference of 
 opinion as to the exact meaning of the Hebrew text. 
 
OLD TESTAMENT REVISION. 
 
 We shall have occasion in a subsequent chapter 
 to consider more particularly the value which should 
 be assigned to the traditional system of vowel 
 punctuation followed in our ordinary Hebrew Bibles ; 
 but, in the meantime, an example may be given of 
 the ambiguity which sometimes arises from the fact 
 that the vowels were not originally written along 
 with the consonants. For an illustration, let us 
 turn to I Kings xvii. 6. We there read in our 
 common version respecting Elijah, that " the ravens 
 brought him bread and flesh in the morning, and 
 bread and flesh in the evening ; and he drank of 
 the brook." The word here translated "ravens" 
 undoubtedly has that meaning as traditionally 
 pointed, but, with other vowels, it may mean either 
 "Arabians " or " inhabitants of Oreb." And there 
 have not been wanting high authorities who have 
 preferred one or other of these renderings to that 
 of " ravens." The following are the remarks of 
 Dr. Kitto on the subject. " It is certain," he says, 
 " that any person finding the word without vowels, 
 and left to find the meaning from the context, 
 would not for a moment think of ravens^ but would 
 fix on one of the other alternatives. As to the 
 Orebim, there was a rock called Oreb (Judges vii. 
 25), the inhabitants near which may be supposed 
 to have been so called ; but this was on the other 
 side of the Jordan. And with reference to the 
 
LANGUAGE OF THE OLD TESTAMENT, 5 
 
 Arabians, nothing seems to us more likely than 
 that encampments of Arabs (who still intrude their 
 tents into the border or waste lands of settled 
 countries) would in this season of drought have 
 been formed on the banks of the brook Cherith, 
 and (knowing the scarcity of water elsewhere) would 
 have remained there as long as it aiforded water to 
 them — that is, as long as Elijah remained. They 
 were also, both from their conditions and habits, 
 the very persons in whose keeping the secret of his 
 retreat was most safe — far more so than it would 
 have been with any townsmen, subjects of Ahab. 
 They were the least likely to know his person, and 
 that he was sought after by the king ; and if they 
 did know, they were less than any other persons 
 open to the inducements the king could offer, or 
 the fears he could impose. If, however, the reader 
 prefers to hold that the well-disposed inhabitants 
 of a town called Oreb, or Orbo, were the parties 
 by whom Elijah was supplied with food, there are 
 good authorities to support him in that conclusion, 
 and to show that a small town of that name did 
 exist near at hand. 
 
 *' As to the ravens^ we can easily conceive that, 
 in an age when the love of the marvellous had 
 become absolutely a mania among the Jews, they 
 would by choice select of many interpretations the 
 most unlikely and wonderful ; and we feel as assured 
 
OLD TESTAMENT REVISION. 
 
 that, having the present alternatives before them, 
 they would, from their instinctive marvellousness,* 
 fix on this, as we are that this is the very one which, 
 of all the others, a man of plain understanding 
 would reject. Indeed, the opportunity of determin- 
 ing the sense to ravens must to a Jew have been 
 too delicious to be neglected, since it afforded 
 excellent opportunities of amplifying and illustrating 
 the matter in his own peculiar vein. 
 
 "The difficulties attending the common opinion 
 have greatly embarrassed the commentators. Of this 
 a sample may be given from the Synopsis Criticorum 
 of the elaborate Poole : ' Unquestionably they 
 brought meat dressed, not raw (Gen. ix. i). You may 
 ask. Where did the ravens get it? Ans. i. From the 
 kitchen of King Ahab, or of Jehoshaphat. 2. Or, 
 it was prepared for him by some of the seven 
 thousand to whom God communicated the secret 
 (i Kings xix. 8). Or, 3. The angels perhaps exposed 
 the meat in some certain place, whence the ravens 
 brought it. Or, 4. He could provide, who gave 
 them such a commission, and who could effect this 
 in a thousand ways. God prepared a table for His 
 servant in the utmost penury. He did not take care 
 that wine should be brought him.' Hales (who 
 
 * So in writer, meaning, no doubt, ''tendency to t?ie mar- 
 vellous." 
 
LANGUAGE OF THE OLD TESTAMENT. 
 
 takes the view that the inhabitants of a place called 
 Oreb are denoted) properly remarks on this : * Such 
 a comment, put out of a learned language into 
 plain English, can only excite a smile, mingled with 
 regret that literary talent should be so wasted or 
 misemployed on idle speculation.' We should add 
 that the Jewish interpreters have not only suggested 
 the alternatives mentioned by Poole, but several 
 others, among which one is, that the meat was a 
 portion of that which Obadiah provided for the 
 prophets whom he concealed in the caverns." ^ 
 
 To my mind there seems a great deal of force in 
 these remarks. It is true that the traditional render- 
 ing has the weighty suffrage of Josephus, and of the 
 ancient versions, in its favour. But notwithstanding 
 this, and taking all things into account, I am hardly 
 prepared to adopt the very decided language of a 
 recent writer when he says, "A vast deal of inge- 
 nuity has been devoted to explaining away Elijah's 
 
 ravens There is no escape from the plain 
 
 meaning of the words — occurring as they do twice 
 in a passage otherwise displaying no tinge of the 
 marvellous — or from the unanimity of all the Hebrew 
 MSS. of all the ancient versions, and of Josephus."t 
 The truth is, that, in all such cases, the context is our 
 
 * Pictorial Bible, in loc, 
 
 f Smith's Dictionary of the Bible, art. Elijah. 
 
OLD TESTAMENT REVISION. 
 
 only safe guide, and if that fails us, nothing certain 
 can be said.* This may be made pretty plain by 
 an illustration in English. If these three consonants, 
 M D L, stood by themselves, without any accom- 
 panying vowels, they might be understood to ex- 
 press any one of the following senses, medal, models 
 modal, meddle, middle, muddle, or perhaps to refer to a 
 place bearing the name of Mydal or Mydol. The 
 sentence, however, in which the word occurred, taken 
 in connexion with other known circumstances, would 
 probably render clear the meaning which was to be 
 attached to the word. Otherwise, no dogmatic 
 opinion whatever could be formed upon the subject ; 
 and this should be borne in mind in reading any 
 translation of the Old Testament. 
 
 Judging by the varied and extensive literature 
 which we still possess in the books of the Old 
 Testament, the Hebrew language was always marked 
 by a very limited vocabulary. It did not contain, so 
 far as we know, over six thousand words, and these 
 have been reduced to about five hundred roots.f 
 Hence one word has often a great variety of 
 
 * Of course there is a presumption in favour of the tradi- 
 tional vowel pointing ; see this point further touched upon in 
 chap. vii. 
 
 f Max Miiller's Lectures on Language (ist sen), p. 297. 
 
LANGUAGE OF THE OLD TESTAMENT. 9 
 
 meanings, and these apparently very far separated 
 from each other. Thus, the one word Tor, which, 
 in its fundamental signification, seems to imply 
 *' arrangement," also signifies *'a way of acting," 
 *'a turn," "a string of pearls," **a turtle-dove," 
 and ''an ox." Again, the word Goor, as denoting 
 " a lion's whelp," may be regarded as having been 
 derived from the sound which the animal utters, but 
 it is certainly not easy to understand how a verb 
 Goor, with exactly the same letters, came to mean 
 not only "to fear," but *'to dwell," "to assemble," 
 "to go abroad," "to worship."* As M. Renan 
 has observed, the one root Room, which expresses 
 the idea of height, has given rise to the following 
 related, yet widely divergent, meanings : to rise, to 
 strengthe?t, to lift up, to build a house, to educate, to 
 place in safety, to render conque?vr, to extol, to speak 
 loud, to levy a tax, to raise hurriedly, to offer sacrifice, 
 to cherish pride, a hill, a heap, haughtiness, a sacrifice, 
 a gift. The same writer remarks that the single 
 root Koom expresses, by means of its difi"erent verbal 
 and noun forms, the following variety of meanings : 
 to rise, to exist, to appear, to increase, to dwell, to persevere, 
 to approve, to walk gracefully, to live, to preserve alive, 
 to verify, to arrange, to consti'iict, to rebuild, to revolt, to 
 lift up, to establish, stature, haughtiness, up-standing, 
 
 * Canon Farrar, Language and Languages^ p, 197. 
 
lo OLD TESTAMENT REVISION'. 
 
 substance, thing, place, dwelling, rebellion, enemy, means 
 of resistance, adversary.^ 
 
 It is obvious that a language like the Hebrew, 
 which thus expresses such widely separated mean- 
 ings by modifications of one and the same root, 
 cannot fail to be of a highly metaphorical character. 
 And such, accordingly, we find to be the case. This 
 appears not only in the widely ramified senses 
 attached to the same word, as exemplified above, 
 but in the character of the literature generally. The 
 boldest metaphors are constantly employed. God 
 is spoken of as *' a Sun and a Shield " (Ps. Ixxxiv. 
 ii), and as ''a Rock" (Ps. xviii. 31, etc.), as well 
 as "a Father" (Isa. Ixiii. 16, etc.). Wicked men 
 are described as ** wolves" (Zeph. iii. 3), as "bulls" 
 (Ps. xxii. 12), and as *'dogs" (Isa. Ivi. 10, etc.). 
 To be prosperous is to have one's "horn exalted" 
 (Ps. xcii. 10, etc.), and to be afflicted is to "melt 
 away" (Job vi. 14), while to be humble is to have 
 "low eyes" (Job xxii. 29). The Church is God's 
 "vineyard" (Isa. v. i), and the care which He 
 expends upon it is set forth under the figure of 
 "a vine," at great length, and with much beauty 
 (Ps. Ixxx. 8 ff). To pardon sin was to " cover 
 it" (2 Chron. xxx. 18); to be angry was to have 
 the "nose made hot" (Exod. xxxii. 10, etc.); to 
 
 * Histoire dcs Langues Semitiques, p. 131. 
 
LANGUAGE OF THE OLD TESTAMENT. ii 
 
 be patient, or forbearing, was to have the *' nose 
 long" (Exod. xxxiv. 6, etc.); to be irritable, or 
 hasty, was to be "short of nose" (Prov. xiv. 17); 
 and so in regard to a multitude of other meta- 
 phorical expressions.* 
 
 The Semitic languages, as a whole, approach 
 much more nearly to the primitive type of human 
 speech than do those of the Indo-European or 
 Aryan family ; and among the Semitic tongues, so 
 far as we can trace them at the present day, Hebrew 
 exhibits by far the most ancient form.f Not so 
 very long ago, indeed, Hebrew was generally re- 
 garded as having been the original language of 
 mankind, and as such was supposed to have been 
 spoken in Paradise. The vagaries of learned men 
 on these points have been most amusing. Thus, 
 we are told that Goropius, in a book published 
 
 * Figurative expressions like the above are found at the 
 present day in languages which are still in a comparatively un- 
 developed state. Thus, says Canon Farrar, " To give but one 
 instance : the king of Bokhara informed Dr. Wolff that he had 
 put to death poor Lieut. Connolly because * he had had a long 
 nose,' by which he simply meant in an expressive manner to 
 imply that he was irritable or proud." {Lang, and Langs., p. 
 360.) It will be noticed that a different meaning belongs to this 
 expression in Hebrew. 
 
 f Hertzog's Real- Encyclopddie, art. Hebraische Sprache. 
 Winer says of the Hebrew, that it is "one of the oldest languages 
 of which we have any knowledge." (R. W. B., art. Sprache.) 
 
12 OLD TESTAMENT REVISION. 
 
 at Antwerp in 1580, tried to prove that Dutch had 
 the honour of having been the primitive tongue. 
 Another writer, named Kempe, seriously maintained 
 that God spoke in Swedish to our first parents, that 
 Adam answered Him in Danish, and that the serpent 
 addressed Eve in the French language ! * Others 
 have strenuously argued that Basque, with all its 
 strange peculiarities, was really the language of 
 Paradise ; but the claims of Hebrew to that dis- 
 tinction were generally allowed to be pre-eminent, 
 until conclusively disproved by the researches of 
 comparative philology. The science of language, 
 which is scarcely yet a century old, among other 
 great achievements, has clearly proved that no 
 existing tongue — not even Sanscrit — can be ac- 
 cepted as the original tongue spoken by mankind. 
 That language will in all probability never be 
 discovered, although it may to some extent be 
 conjecturally built up by bringing together roots 
 which are ultimately found to be common to all 
 languages. 
 
 But though the claim once put forward for 
 Hebrew as having been man's primitive speech is 
 now universally abandoned, it nevertheless has all 
 the marks of a very high antiquity. It abounds 
 in onomoiopoetic words, that is, words derived from 
 
 * Delbos' Chapters on the Science of Language^ p. 22. 
 
LANGUAGE OF THE OLD TESTAMENT. 13 
 
 an imitation of natural sounds, of which we have 
 familiar examples in our own language in such 
 expressions as quack, purr, caw ; sigh, moan, tvhoop ; 
 clap, clang, whir ; and multitudes of others. The 
 nearer a language is to its primitive state, the more 
 abundant will such expressions be found, since they 
 are apt to be changed with the lapse of time, just 
 as pebbles are rounded by the constant action of 
 the sea. Hebrew, again, delights in assonances, or 
 jingles of words — another undoubted mark of a 
 language possessed of great antiquity. Thus, in 
 the very second verse of the Bible, the words which 
 are rendered in our authorised version " without 
 form and void," read in Hebrew, Thohu va- Vohii ; 
 and many similar jingles of sounds might be quoted. 
 From its highly metaphorical character, Hebrew 
 is admirably fitted for the purposes of poetry. Even 
 in prose it is often marked by poetical forms of 
 expression, as when the wise woman of Tekoah 
 says (2 Sam. xiv. 14), not only that " we must needs 
 die," but adds that we **are as water spilt on the 
 ground, which cannot be gathered up again." As 
 Dr. Farrar has well said, a Hebrew " seemed ill at 
 ease in realizing a conception, unless he could paint 
 it in words confessedly and distinctly picturesque;" 
 and he adds, that in the Old Testament, " People 
 not only speak, but open their mouths and speak ; 
 not only answer, but answer and say ; not only get 
 
14 OLD 1 EST A ME NT REVISION. 
 
 angry, but their visage is inflamed ; not only- 
 sorrowful, but their visage falls ; do not merely go 
 back, but rise up and return to the place whence 
 they came forth ; and the widow of Tekoah is not 
 only a widow, but thinks it necessary to tell David 
 that she is a ' widow woman, and her husband is 
 dead.' When, in the Merry Wives of Windsor, Pistol 
 uses the expression, * He hears with ears,' Sir Hugh 
 Evans indignantly exclaims, * What phrase is this, 
 "He hears with ears"? Why, it is affectations.' 
 But, in point of fact, so far from being ' affecta- 
 tions,' it marks the pictorial redundancy of the 
 earliest stages of language." * 
 
 When, however, we come to look at the distinct- 
 ively poetical books of the Old Testament, we find 
 that it is in Job, the Psalms, Proverbs, Isaiah, and 
 some of the other prophets, that the grandeur of 
 Hebrew poetry is most strikingly displayed. As is 
 well known, paj-allelism is the feature by which it 
 is specially distinguished. By this, speaking gene- 
 rally, is meant the repetition in two poetic lines 
 of the same idea with slight, if any, modification. 
 Examples abound throughout the sacred writings, 
 and one or two may here be quoted. A very pure 
 illustration is found in the poetical outburst of 
 Balaam, recorded in Numbers xxiii. 7 — 10: it will 
 
 * Lang, and Langs., p. 359. 
 
LANGUAGE OF THE OLD TESTAMENT 15 
 
 be observed that the • lines run in couplets, the 
 second line always repeating, while modifying, the 
 sentiment contained in the first.* " He took up 
 his parable, and said, — 
 
 7. " From Aram has Balak brought me, 
 
 The king of Moab from the mountains of the East : 
 
 Come, curse me Jacob, 
 
 And come, speak wrath against Israel. 
 
 8. How shall I execrate whom God hath not execrated ? 
 And how shall I speak against him whom God hath not 
 
 spoken against ? 
 
 9. For from the top of the rocks I see him, 
 And from the hills I behold him : 
 
 Lo ! the people who shall dwell alone, 
 And shall not reckon themselves among the nations t 
 10. Who has counted the dust of Jacob, 
 Or the number of the fourth of Israel ? 
 Let my soul die the death of the righteous, 
 And let my last end be like his." 
 
 One other passage may be given in illustration of 
 the parallelism so characteristic of Hebrew poetry. 
 I select Job iii. 20 — 24, and translate the passage 
 as follows : — 
 
 * The examples which follow illustrate what has been called 
 synonymous parallelism^ in which the same thought is repeated 
 in varying but equivalent terms. Bishop Lowth also notices 
 antithetic parallelism, in which a point is brought clearly out 
 by its opposite being set over against it, and synthetic or con- 
 structive pa?'ailelism, which depends simply on the form of 
 construction. For instances of the former, see Prov. xxvii. 6, 7, 
 I Sam.ii. 4 — 7 ; and of the latter, Ps. xix. 7 — 10, Isa. xliii. 2. 
 
l6 OLD TESTAMENT REVISION. 
 
 20. " Why doth He give light to him that is miserable, 
 And life unto the bitter in soul ; 
 
 21. Who long for death, and it cometh not, 
 And dig for it more than for hid treasures ; 
 
 22. Who would rejoice exceedingly 
 And exult if they could find a grave ? 
 
 23. Why to a man whose way is hid, 
 And whom God hath hedged about? 
 
 24. For my sighing cometh before my food, 
 
 And my moanings are poured forth like water." 
 
 "The whole composition of this passage," says 
 Bishop Lowth, " is admirable, and deserves a 
 minute attention. * Wherefore should he give light 
 to the miserable ? ' But who is the giver alluded 
 to } Certainly God Himself, whom Job has indeed 
 in his mind ; but it escaped his notice that no 
 mention is made of Him in the preceding lines. 
 He seems to speak of the miserable in general, 
 but by a violent and sudden transition he applies 
 the whole to himself. * But my groaning cometh 
 like my daily food.' It is plain therefore that in 
 all the preceding reflections he has himself only 
 in view. He makes a transition from the singular 
 to the plural, and back again, a remarkable ampli- 
 fication intervening, expressive of his desire of 
 death, the force and boldness of which is incom- 
 parable : at last, as if suddenly recollecting himself, 
 he returns to the former subject, which he had 
 apparently quitted, and resumes the detail of his 
 
LANGUAGE OF THE OLD TESTAMENT. 17 
 
 own misery. From these observations I tiiink it 
 will be manifest, that the agitated and disordered 
 state of the speaker's mind is not more evidently 
 demonstrated by a happy boldness of sentiment 
 and imagery, and an uncommon force of language, 
 than by the very form, conduct, and arrangement 
 of the whole." ^ 
 
 I may here take the opportunity of remarking 
 that,* besides illustrating the form and majesty of 
 Hebrew poetry, the above passage also suggests the 
 extreme difficulty which is frequently felt in appre- 
 hending the exact meaning of the original. It will 
 be observed that, in the lines specially quoted, 
 Bishop Lowth differs to some extent from the 
 translation presented above ; and in some of the 
 other lines he gives quite a different turn to the 
 passage. Where I have ventured to suppose that 
 the questioning form of expression is still continued, 
 and have rendered — 
 
 " Why [act thus] to a man whose way is hid, 
 And whom God hath hedged about ? " 
 
 the Bishop has — 
 
 '* Well might it befit the man whose way is sheltered, 
 And whom God hath surrounded with a hedge." 
 
 This is enough to suggest to every candid and 
 
 * Sacred Poetry of the Hebreivs, p. 161. 
 
l8 OLD TESTAMENT REVISION: 
 
 considerate reader of a version of the Old Testa- 
 ment, how much may frequently be said in favour 
 of a somewhat different rendering from that which 
 is preferred by any translator, however competent, 
 or any body of translators, however well qualified 
 for the task which they have undertaken.* 
 
 Hebrew, no doubt, existed as a living language 
 long before the earliest period to which we are 
 now able to trace it. Its sister dialect, the Aramaic, 
 exerted no small influence over it throughout the 
 whole course of its history, so far as that is known 
 to us. In fact, the popular dialect of the Israelites 
 is thought by scholars to have approached much 
 nearer to the tongue of Aram than the extant 
 Hebrew literature would seem to indicate.f But 
 the Old Testament itself betrays the influence of 
 the Aramaic. Not only are certain books, such as 
 Job, Ecclesiastes, and others, strongly marked by 
 Aramaisms, but in several passages Hebrew is 
 deserted altogether, and the writer has recourse to 
 the kindred, though different, language. These 
 
 * I am glad to find that the rendering which I have adopted 
 is supported by the high authority of De Wette. 
 
 f Smith's Did., Shemitic Langs., p. 1255. Renan observes, 
 **I1 est a remarquer que les langues semitiques different moins 
 dans la bouche du peuple que dans les livres." — Lang. Sem.y 
 P 134- 
 
LANGUAGE OF THE OLD TESTAMENT. 19 
 
 passages are the four following: (i) Jeremiah x. 11 ; 
 (2) Daniel ii. 4— vii. 28; (3) Ezra iv. 8 — vi. 18; 
 (4) Ezra vii. 12 — 26. The reason why the first of 
 these passages is expressed in Aramaic, and not 
 Hebrew, may be conjectured to have been that the 
 captive Jews might be able to proclaim to the ido- 
 latrous nation who had enslaved them, in language 
 which they could understand, the folly of worshipping 
 false gods. The long passage in Daniel may have 
 been written in Aramaic, as having a special interest 
 for those who made use of that language ; and the 
 passages in Ezra are evidently given in Aramaic, 
 because such was their original language. 
 
 After the return of the Israelites from the captivity 
 (about 450 B.C.), Hebrew speedily died out as a living 
 language, and was replaced by Aramaic. The sacred 
 tongue, however, continued to be studied by scho- 
 lars, though no longer heard on the lips of the 
 people. For at least a century before Christ it had 
 ceased to be used in writing, as long previously it 
 had been abandoned by the Jews as the medium of 
 oral intercourse with one another. 
 
 According to the generally accepted chronology, 
 the Hebrew literature now in our possession extends 
 from about 2000 years before Christ to some centu- 
 ries before the commencement of our era. One of 
 the most remarkable features of this long-reaching 
 series of literary productions is the similarity of form 
 
20 OLD TESTAMENT REVISIOA. 
 
 by which, from first to last, it is characterized. This 
 fact can hardly be accounted for except upon the 
 theory of successive redactions of the Old Testa- 
 ment."^ 
 
 The Hebrew Bible, as we now possess it, comprises 
 thirty-nine books. This may seem at first sight 
 inconsistent with the statement of Josephus, when 
 he tells us that there were only " twenty-two books " 
 acknowledged as *' divine " among the Jews ; that 
 five of these belonged to Moses ; that thirteen were 
 ascribed to the prophets ; and that the remaining 
 four consisted of hymns and practical precepts for 
 the guidance of human life.f But it is evident that 
 the number twenty-two was artificially adopted to 
 correspond to the number of letters in the Hebrew 
 alphabet. Several books which we reckon separately 
 were in this way counted together. And it is clear 
 that when Josephus tells us that " the prophets who 
 came after Moses wrote down what was done in their 
 times in thirteen books," he includes among "the 
 prophets " all the historical books. The canon of 
 
 * As will be noticed in the following chapter, archaic forms 
 certainly exist in the earlier books of Scripture, but only to a 
 very limited extent. Deutsch states the case pretty strongly 
 when he says that " enough remains to show a gradual and 
 important difference between the earlier and the later stages of 
 the language in the earlier and later books of the Old Testament." 
 — Literai'y Remains, p. 306. 
 
 t Against Apion, i. 8. 
 
LANGUAGE OF THE OLD TESTAMENT. 21 
 
 Josephus thus seems to have included (i) The Laiv^ 
 consisting of Genesis, Exodus, Leviticus, Numbers, 
 Deuteronomy; (2)" The Prophets, including Joshua, 
 Judges and Ruth, i and 2 Samuel, i and 2 Kings, 
 Isaiah, Jeremiah with Lamentations, Ezekiel, the 
 twelve minor Prophets, Job, Daniel, i and 2 Chron- 
 icles, Ezra and Nehemiah, Esther; and (3) The 
 Writmgs, comprising Psalms, Proverbs, Canticles, and 
 Ecclesiastes. The list of sacred books given by 
 Josephus is thus apparently identical with our own 
 at the present day. 
 
 We learn from the New Testament itself that a 
 threefold division of the Old Testament books ex- 
 isted among the Jews in the time of Christ. Thus 
 we read, Luke xxiv. 44, that the risen Saviour said to 
 His disciples, " These are the words which I spake 
 unto you, while I was yet with you, that all things 
 must be fulfilled which were written in the law of 
 Moses, and in the Prophets, and m the Psalms, 
 concerning me." The term " Psalms " here repre- 
 sents that section of the Old Testament which is 
 generally spoken of under the technical appellation 
 of Hagiogt'apha, that is, holy writings."^' And the 
 
 * I venture to let this sentence stand, notwithstanding the 
 strong language of Dr. Robertson Smith to the opposite effect 
 {7 he Old Test, injewish Church, p. 165). He calls it'a "ra- 
 tionalising exegesis " to regard the title Psalms as embracing 
 the whole division of the sacred writings to which Psalms the 
 
22 OLD TESTAMENT REVISION. 
 
 usual arrangement of the three classes of books is 
 somewhat different from that given above out of 
 Josephus. It is as follows : (i) The Law, including 
 the five books of Moses, generally styled the Pen- 
 tateuch ; (2) The Prophets, comprising Joshua, 
 Judges, I and 2 Samuel, i and 2 Kings, Isaiah, 
 Jeremiah, Ezekiel, the twelve minor Prophets ; and 
 (3) The Hagiographa, embracing Psalms, Proverbs, 
 Job, Lamentations, Esther, Daniel, Ezra, Canticles, 
 Ruth, Nehemiah, i and 2 Chronicles, Ecclesiastes. 
 This is the classification which we shall follow in 
 dealing with the several books in the immediately 
 succeeding chapters. 
 
 belonged, but worse specimens of such ' ' exegesis " might too 
 easily be found. And unless such books as Daniel, Proverbs, 
 and Job are included under the heading referred to, they must 
 have been ignored by Christ altogether. Yet the canonicity of 
 these books was universally acknowledged by the Jews in our 
 Saviour's day. 
 
CHAPTER II 
 THE PENTATEUCH.— AUTHORSHIP AND DATE. 
 
 IT seems hardly possible at present to say any- 
 thing in connection with the Pentateuch, without 
 noticing some recent opinions which have been 
 promulgated as to its authorship and date. The 
 view has of late been widely circulated in our 
 country, that only the most insignificant portions 
 of it (so far as extent is concerned) were written by 
 Moses. We are taught to regard the Book of 
 Deuteronomy as having been unknown till the reign 
 of Josiah (about B.C. 621),* while the Levitical code, 
 passing under the name of Moses, is affirmed to 
 have been first set forth in the times of Ezra (about 
 B.C. 520), that is, immediately after the return of 
 the Jews from the Babylonian exile. 
 
 These somewhat startling opinions have recently 
 been maintained, with rare learning and acuteness, 
 
 * This date is given by Dr. Robertson Smith as 521 B.C., but 
 that is doubtless a misprint. {TJie Old Testament in the Jewish 
 Church, p. 244 ) 
 
24 OLD TESTAMENT REVISION. 
 
 by Dr. Robertson Smith, in his volume of Lectures 
 entitled "The Old Testament in the Jewish Church." 
 The following extracts from that work will suffice 
 to bring both the nature and importance of his 
 views before us : — 
 
 " When the Levitical law first comes on the stage 
 of actual history at the time of Ezra, it presents 
 itself as the law of Moses. People who have not 
 understood the Old Testament are accustomed to 
 say, with the usual presumption of unhistorical 
 rationalism, that this is either literally true or a 
 lie. The Pentateuch is either the literary work of 
 Moses, or it is a barefaced imposture. The reverent 
 and thoughtful student, who knows the complicated 
 difficulties of the problem, will not willingly accept 
 this statement of the question. If we are tied up to 
 make a choice between these two alternatives, it is 
 impossible to deny that all the historical evidence 
 that has come before us points in the direction of 
 the second. . . . 
 
 ** It is plain that no thinking man can be asked 
 to accept the Pentateuch as the literal work of 
 Moses without some evidence to that effect. But 
 evidence a thousand years after date is no evidence 
 at all, when the intervening period bears unanimous 
 witness in a different sense. By insisting that the 
 whole Pentateuch is one work of Moses, and all of 
 equal date, the traditional view cuts off all possi- 
 
THE PENTATEUCH— AUTHORSHIP, ETC, 25 
 
 bility of proof that its kernel is Mosaic ; for -it is 
 certain that Israel, before the exile, did not know 
 all the Pentateuch ; therefore, if the Pentateuch is 
 all one, they did not know any part of it. If we 
 are shut up to choose between a Mosaic authorship 
 of the whole five books and the sceptical opinion 
 that the Pentateuch is a mere forgery, the sceptics 
 must gain their case" (pp. 307 — 309). 
 
 *' Sacrifice is not necessary to acceptable religion. 
 , . . Micah declares that Jehovah does not require 
 sacrifice ; He asks nothing of His people, but ' to 
 do justly, and love mercy, and walk humbly with 
 their God' (Micah vi. 8). And Jeremiah (vii. 21, 
 seq.) says in express words, '' Put your burnt offerings 
 to your sacrifices, and eat fliesh. For I spake not 
 to your fathers, and gave them no command in the 
 day that I brought them out of Egypt, concerning 
 burnt off"erings or sacrifices. But this thing com- 
 manded I them, saying. Obey my voice, and I will 
 be your God, and ye shall be my people," etc. 
 (compare Isa. xliii. 23, seq.). The position here 
 laid down is perfectly clear. When the prophets 
 positively condemn the worship of their contem- 
 poraries, they do so because it is associated with 
 immorality, because by it Israel hopes to gain God's 
 favour without moral obedience. This does not 
 prove that they have any objection to sacrifice and 
 ritual in the abstract. But they deny that these 
 
26 OLD TESTAMENT REVISION. 
 
 things are of positive divine institution, or have 
 any part in the scheme on which Jehovah's grace 
 is administered in Israel. Jehovah, they say, has 
 not enjoined sacrifice. This does not imply that 
 He has never accepted sacrifice, or that ritual 
 service is absolutely wrong ; but it is at best mere 
 form, which does not purchase any favour from 
 Jehovah, and might be given up without offence. 
 It is impossible to give a flatter contradiction to the 
 traditional theory that the Levitical system was 
 enacted in the wilderness. The theology of the 
 prophets befofe Ezekiel has no place for the system 
 of priestly sacrifice and ritual" (p. 287). 
 
 ** Whence, then, did the book (Deuteronomy) 
 derive the authority which made its discovery the 
 signal for so great a reformation } How did it 
 approve itself as an expression of the Divine will, 
 first to Hilkiah and Josiah, and then to the whole 
 nation } To this question there can be but one 
 answer. The authority that lay behind Deuteronomy 
 was the power of the prophetic teaching which half 
 a century of persecution had not been able to sup- 
 press. After the work of Isaiah and his fellows, 
 it was impossible for any earnest movement of 
 reformation to adopt other principles than those 
 of the prophetic word on which Jehovah Himself 
 had set His seal by the deliverance from Assyria. 
 What the Deuteronomic code supplied was a clear 
 
THE PENTATEUCH— AUTHORSHIP, ETC. 27 
 
 and practical scheme of reformation on the pro- 
 phetic lines. It showed that it was possible to 
 adjust the* old religious constitution in conformity 
 with present needs, and this was enough to kindle 
 into new flame the slumbering fire of the word of 
 the prophets. The book became the programme 
 of Josiah's reformation, because it gathered up in 
 practical form the results of the great movement 
 under Hezekiah and Isaiah, and the new divine 
 teaching then given to Israel. It was of no conse- 
 quence to Josiah — it is of equally little consequence 
 to us — to know the exact date and authorship of the 
 book" (p. 362). 
 
 Elsewhere we read (p. 320), that "the Pentateuch 
 is a history incorporating at least three bodies of 
 law." The first of these codes is that contained 
 in Exod. xxi. — xxiii., and stands '* in immediate 
 connection with the fundamental revelation of the 
 ten commandments on Horeb." The second is the 
 law of Deuteronomy, which properly begins with 
 chap, xii., and extends to chap. xxvi. 16. The third 
 is the Levitical legislation '' scattered through 
 several parts of Exodus and the books of Leviticus 
 and Numbers." Of these codes, the first only was 
 possessed by the Israelites all through the days of 
 the Judges, of Solomon, and of Hezekiah. Then 
 the second, or Deuteronomic code, was somehow 
 called into being about the time of Josiah. The 
 
28 OLD TESTAMENT REVISION. 
 
 third, or Levitical legislation, had not yet been 
 heard of, and was, indeed, utterly unknown till the 
 days of Ezra, when it was announced under the 
 name of Moses, and was at once carried into full 
 operation. 
 
 It must be clear to every candid reader of Dr. R. 
 Smith's work, that his great object is to establish 
 what he regards as undoubtedly the truth on the 
 subjects dealt with, and that thus the character of 
 his book is as honest as its erudition is remarkable. 
 It is indeed one of the most honourable and out- 
 standing features of the age in which we live, that 
 a passion for the true is growing among men, and 
 that the prepossessions of former times no longer 
 wield the power which was so long accorded them. 
 There can be no doubt that many critical results 
 have now been conclusively established against the 
 old traditional opinions. To give only one example : 
 No one worth listening to would deny at the present 
 day that the Book of Genesis is composite^ that it is, 
 in fact, a congeries of fragments collected from 
 many different sources, and proceeding from many 
 different authors. But the danger has now arisen 
 of supposing that traditional views must be wrong 
 altogether, and that, if " criticism " has conquered 
 at some points, it must be held to have been 
 victorious all along the line. This is a fallacy to 
 
THE PENTATEUCH— AUTHORSHIP, ETC. 29 
 
 be most carefully guarded against in dealing with 
 all Biblical questions. There is even an antecedent 
 probability that tradition will, to a certain extent, 
 be right, since it has succeeded in establishing 
 itself among the accepted opinions of mankind. 
 At any rate, it has a claim to be fairly and even 
 favourably considered ; and nothing could be more 
 unscientific than to fly oif from all that has hitherto 
 been generally believed on any particular point, 
 and to suppose that truth can be reached only by 
 forsaking traditional opinions altogether. 
 
 Now, it" humbly appears to me that this tendency is 
 strikingly illustrated in the lectures of Dr. R. Smith. 
 That a belief is traditional seems almost to amount 
 with him to a demonstration that it is false. In 
 one passage, indeed, "Jewish tradition" is referred 
 to as "welcome" along with other facts.^* But, 
 practically, criticism and traditionalism are pitted 
 against each other throughout the entire volume, and 
 the former is invariably permitted to over-ride the 
 latter. This is not the way to reach the truth ; 
 and I shall now endeavour to show, of course very 
 briefly, that the tradition which ascribes the Penta- 
 teuch, in its substance, to Moses, remains unshaken, 
 notwithstanding the elaborate attack which Dr. 
 Robertson Smith has made upon it, while the view 
 
 * Old Tesiamettt, p. 26. 
 
30 OLD TESTAMENT REVISION. 
 
 which he has tried to substitute in its place involves 
 difficulties and improbabilities of the most formida- 
 ble character. 
 
 First, then, let us consider the strength of the 
 tradition which ascribes the Pentateuch to Moses. 
 
 That tradition is of the most ancient and har- 
 monious character. It has existed among the Jews 
 of all ages, countries, and sects ; while it is again 
 and again accredited by our Lord Himself. We 
 find it throughout the whole of the Old Testament, 
 as in Josh. viii. 31, 32; i Kings ii. 3; Ezra iii. 2; 
 Nehem. viii. i ; Mai. iv. 4, etc. It is everywhere 
 in the Jewish historian Josephus (see especially 
 his Antiquities^ book iii. passim^. It is maintained 
 in all countries (see Acts xv. 21). It is held alike 
 by Sadducees and Pharisees (see Matt. xxii. 24 ; 
 Mark x. 4, etc.). Above all, it is constantly referred 
 to by Christ as embodying an undoubted truth. 
 Thus in John vii. 19, He asks the Jews, "Did not 
 Moses give you the law ? " and this is only one of 
 many passages in which our Lord accepts, and 
 argues upon, the Mosaic authorship of the Penta- 
 teuch. Now, is all this to be set aside, as so much 
 worthless evidence, in deference to some difficulties 
 called forth by " criticism " at the present day ? To 
 my mind no difficulty could be so great as that of 
 believing that such an unbroken and powerfully 
 
THE PENTATEUCH— AUTHORSHIP, ETC. 31 
 
 supported tradition should be baseless. And, while 
 far from seeking to hamper or overbear critical 
 processes or results by the citation of mere autho- 
 rity, I must acknowledge that the repeated allusions 
 wljich Christ makes to the Pentateuch as the work 
 of Moses impresses my mind with the conviction 
 that the tradition which prevailed to that effect 
 rested on a foundation of fact. No one has spoken 
 in loftier or more reverent language of our Lord 
 than has Dr. R. Smith, and with the views which he 
 entertains of Him as the incarnate Truth of God, 
 the tradition which He so often corroborates as to 
 the Mosaic authorship of the Pentateuch should 
 surely be regarded as comprising a genuine historical 
 fact. 
 
 Secondly, let us look at the evidence which the Pen- 
 tateuch itself presents in favour of its Mosaic origin. 
 
 We turn to such a chapter as Exodus xxxii., and 
 there we read (ver. 7 — 10) the following words: 
 "And the Lord said unto Moses, Go, get thee 
 down ; for thy people, which thou broughtest out 
 of the land of Egypt, have corrupted themselves : 
 they have turned aside quickly out of the way which 
 I commanded them : they have made them a molten 
 calf, and have worshipped it, and have sacrificed 
 thereunto, and said, These be thy gods, O Israel, 
 which have brought thee up out of the land of 
 
32 OLD TESTAMENT REVISION. 
 
 Egypt. And the Lord said unto Moses, I have 
 seen this people, and, behold, it is a stiffnecked 
 people : now therefore let me alone, that my wrath 
 may wax hot against them, and that I may consume 
 them ; and I will make of thee a great nation." 
 And then we read (ver. 30 — 34), as the sublime 
 sequel to this divine menace, as follows : ** And it 
 came to pass on the morrow, that Moses said unto 
 the people. Ye have sinned a great sin : and now 
 I will go up unto the Lord ; peradventure I shall 
 make an atonement for your sin. And Moses 
 returned unto the Lord, and said. Oh, this people 
 have sinned a great sin, and have made them gods 
 of gold. Yet now, if Thou wilt forgive their sin — ; 
 and if not, blot me, I pray Thee, out of Thy book 
 which Thou hast written. And the Lord said unto 
 Moses, Whosoever hath sinned against me, him 
 will I blot out of my book. Therefore now go, 
 lead the people unto the place of which I have 
 spoken unto thee : behold, mine angel shall go 
 before thee : nevertheless in the day when I visit 
 I will visit their sin upon them." Can any one 
 read this passage, trembling as it is throughout 
 with personal feeling, and believe that it is not 
 a record, at first hand, of what actually occurred, 
 but is an invention of an age a thousand years later 
 than the period at which the events profess to have 
 occurred } Surely, any mind which can rest in such 
 
THE PENTATEUCH— AUTHORSHIP, ETC. 33 
 
 a supposition must have been so utterly sophisticated 
 with theories, as to be unable to distinguish between 
 the genuine and the false. And so in regard to 
 many other portions of the Pentateuch. It contains 
 narratives, such as that respecting Korah, Dathan, 
 and Abiram, so congruous to the circumstances of 
 the history, and descriptions so minute, such as the 
 details concerning the construction of the tabernacle, 
 that, unless they were written at the time by one 
 who was familiar with them, it is necessary to 
 conceive of a creative genius almost superhuman, 
 who, so late as the days of Ezra, could project 
 himself into the old desert life, and draw ideal 
 pictures — so baseless, yet so natural — of what then 
 took place among the children of Israel in the 
 wilderness ! 
 
 But, more than this, Moses is in several passages 
 expressly declared to have written down in the desert 
 the injunctions which he received from the lips of 
 Jehovah. Thus we read in Exod. xxxiv. 27, after 
 the enumeration of various special precepts, that 
 "the Lord said unto Moses, Write thou these words; 
 for after the tenor of these words I have made a 
 covenant with Israel." It almost appears, indeed, 
 that there was a well-known volume in which the 
 Jewish lawgiver regularly kept a record of events as 
 they occurred. We read in Exod. xvii. 14, that "the 
 Lord said unto Moses, Write this for a memorial," 
 
 3 
 
34 OLD TESTAMENT REVISION. 
 
 not " in a book," as in the English Authorised Ver- 
 sion, but *' in the book," apparently referring to a 
 record which Moses was understood to keep of 
 God's dealings with His people in the wilderness. 
 See also Exod. xxiv. 4, and Numb, xxxiii. 2, in 
 which Moses is expressly said to have written " all 
 the words of the Lord," etc. ; and compare such pas- 
 sages as Lev. xxvi. 46, xxvii. ■ 34 ; in which, after 
 a detailed account of various laws, the words are 
 added, " These are the commandments which the 
 Lord commanded Moses for the children of Israel in 
 Mount SinaiT It does seem somewhat audacious, 
 in the face of all this, for a writer at the present day 
 to maintain that the middle books of the Pentateuch 
 had no existence till the days of Ezra, and were then 
 set forth by an unknown author under the name of 
 Moses. Such a claim, if made, must have refuted 
 itself. The book would have borne fabrication on 
 its very surface ; and, to say nothing of the morality 
 of its author, not the most credulous of mankind 
 could have been persuaded to admit the pretensions 
 which were made in its behalf. 
 
 * Subsidiary, but very substantial, arguments for the 
 Mosaic authorship of the Pentateuch are moreover 
 to be found in the minute acquaintance with Egyptian 
 practices which it contains, and in the aroma of the 
 desert, so to speak, which hangs around it. For the 
 former, the reader may turn to Gen. xliv. 5, in which 
 
THE PENTATEUCH— AUTHORSHIP, ETC. 35 
 
 a well-known form of Egyptian divination is referred 
 to, or to Numb. xi. 5, which mentions various kinds 
 of food specially used in Egypt, and many other 
 passages which indicate the utmost familiarity with 
 the products and habits of Egypt.* Every one, again, 
 who reads the Pentateuch with unclouded eye must 
 trace in it proofs of the writer's familiarity with 
 the topography and phenomena of the desert. Dr. 
 Robertson Smith, no doubt, affirms that the work 
 *' displays an exact topographical knowledge of 
 Palestine, but by no means so exact a knowledge of 
 the wilderness of the wandering," and that "the 
 narrative has none of that topographical colour 
 which the story of an eye-witness is sure to possess. "f 
 But most writers, competent to speak with authority 
 on the subject, have expressed a very different 
 opinion. Thus, the late Dean Stanley, referring to 
 Exod. xix. 2, where we read that ** Israel camped 
 before the mount," remarks that, whatever theory 
 may be held as to " the mountain of the law, the 
 plain below will still remain the essential feature of 
 the view of the Israelite camp. That such a plain 
 should exist at all in front of such a cliif is so 
 remarkable a coincidence with the sacred narrative, 
 as to furnish a strong internal argument, not merely 
 
 * This has been illustrated at great length by many writers; 
 see especially Hengstenberg's Egypt and the Books of Moses. 
 \ Old Testament, etc., p. 324. 
 
36 OLD TESTAMENT REVISION. 
 
 of its identity with the scene, but of the scene itself 
 having been described ly an eye-witness T'^" And so 
 in regard to many other particulars. Now, such an 
 accurate acquaintance with Egyptian customs as has 
 been indicated, and such exactness with reference to 
 the wilderness, are perfectly natural when the Penta- 
 teuch is regarded as having been written by Moses, 
 but become little less than miraculous if the work is 
 considered as a product of the times of Ezra. Such 
 a theory may safely be dismissed as incredible. 
 
 I have as yet made no direct allusion to the 
 authorship of Deuteronomy. But I now remark that 
 it is bound to the other Pentateuchal books by some 
 peculiarities of expression well known to all Hebrew 
 scholars. Archaic forms occur in it, and the rest of 
 the Mosaic writings, that are found nowhere else in 
 the Hebrew Bible. Amid the many revisions to 
 which the Pentateuch was undoubtedly subjected, the 
 latest of which took place under Ezra, there were 
 still left in it some antique and peculiar forms which 
 mark out the several books as belonging to the same 
 stage in the development of the Hebrew language, 
 or, in other words, to the same period in the history 
 of the Israelitish people. And then the Book of 
 Deuteronomy expressly claims to have been written 
 by Moses. Thus we read in chap. xxxi. 9, that 
 
 * Sinai and Palestine i p. 42. 
 
THE PENTATEUCH— AUTHORSHIP, ETC. 37 
 
 " Moses wrote this law," and substantially the same 
 assertion is made in other passages. Now, whatever 
 may be thought of the innocence of that " legal 
 fiction " of which Dr. R. Smith speaks so compla- 
 cently (p. 385), it seems impossible to believe that a 
 book like Deuteronomy, which avows itself to be 
 the production of Moses, would ever have obtained 
 credit had it first become known only in the days of 
 Josiah. The demand here again made by " criti- 
 cism " upon our faith is so great as to be plainly 
 inadmissible. 
 
 Thirdly, it is not correct to say that there is no 
 pre-exilic testimony in favour of the Mosaic aiithorsh, 
 of the Pentateuch. 
 
 In a passage quoted above, Dr. R. Smith tells us 
 respecting the Israelitish prophets, that " they say 
 Jehovah has not enjoined sacrifice." He founds 
 the statement specially on a passage in Jeremiah, \ 
 chap, vii., regarding which he observes that *' the 
 position here laid down is perfectly clear." And 
 so it must, no doubt, be considered, if we look at 
 these words in ver. 22 by themselves, and put a 
 literal construction upon them : "" For I spake not 
 unto your fathers, nor commanded them, in the 
 day that I brought them out of the land of Egypt, 
 concerning burnt offerings or sacrifices." These 
 words appear to negative as plainly as language 
 
38 OLD TESTAMENT REVISION. 
 
 can do the Divine appointment of sacrifice as set 
 forth in the Levitical legislation. But no one — 
 and far less a scholar like Dr. R. Smith — needs to 
 be told how dangerous a principle of interpretation 
 it is to isolate a few words from the context in 
 which they are imbedded, and then to assign them 
 a rigid literal meaning, without taking anything else 
 into account. The most grotesque and even revolt- 
 ing ideas might thus be attached to many passages 
 of Scripture. In the present instance, I can only 
 express my utter amazement that so acute and able 
 a man as Dr. R. Smith should have allowed himself 
 to rest for one moment in the explanation of the 
 passage which he has suggested. That he has done 
 so can, I believe, only be accounted for by the 
 seeming support which, when read superficially, it 
 gives to that theory of the Levitical laws which he 
 has adopted.* For, let us read the passage with 
 its context, and the meaning of it will be perfectly 
 clear. It stands as follows (vv. 21 — 24): "Thus 
 saith the Lord of hosts, the God of Israel ; Put 
 your burnt offerings unto your sacrifices, and eat 
 flesh ; for I spake not unto your fathers, nor com- 
 
 * It may be noticed that in his exegesis of this passage, as in 
 so many other respects, Dr, R. Smith has followed Professor 
 Wellhausen. That author infers from the words in question 
 that Jeremiah knew nothing of the Levitical code as having 
 been given thiongh Moses. — Geschichtc Israels, i. 61. 
 
THE PENTATEUCH— AUTHORSHIP, ETC. 39 
 
 manded them, in the day that I brought them out 
 of the land of Egypt, concerning burnt offerings or 
 sacrifices ; but this thing commanded I them, say- 
 ing, Obey my voice, and I will be your God, and ye 
 shall be my people ; and walk ye in all the ways that 
 I have commanded you, that it may be well unto 
 you. But they hearkened not, nor inclined their 
 ear, but walked in the counsels and in the imagina- 
 tion of their evil heart, and went backward, and not 
 forward." Is it not obvious to every one, on reading 
 over these words, that the great principle which they 
 involve is just that laid down so tersely in another 
 part of the Old Testament (i Sam. xv. 22), '* To 
 obey is better than sacrifice, and to hearken than 
 the fat of rams " ? Mere ritual was as nothing in 
 comparison with the moral and spiritual character 
 of the worshipper. This is constantly set forth both 
 in the Old and New Testaments. Thus we read in 
 Hosea vi. 6, " I desired mercy, and not sacrifice, and 
 the knowledge of God more thajt burnt offerings," 
 Compare the use of this text made by our Lord in 
 Matt. ix. 13, xii. 7, and see a similar form of ex- 
 pression in Ps. xl. 6, li. 16, 17, etc. The obvious 
 meaning of the passage in Jeremiah is, that, while 
 the Israelites continued to disobey God in heart and 
 life, it was utterly vain for them to seek His favour by 
 the presentation of sacrifices of any sort whatever. 
 The prophet indignantly tells them to take even the 
 
40 OLD TESTAMENT REVISION. 
 
 Burnt offerings which used to be wholly consumed 
 upon the altar, and add them to the peace offerings, 
 part of which properly belonged to themselves. 
 They would thus, at least, not altogether throw 
 away their sacrifices, but would, by not offering 
 them to God, be able to gratify their own sensual 
 propensities in connection with them. All the 
 offerings of whatever kind presented to God were, 
 when viewed by themselves, only like the " mint, 
 anise, and cummin" referred to by our Lord in 
 Matt, xxiii. 23; and *'the weightier matters of the 
 law" have always been "judgment, mercy, and 
 faith ; " but, adds Christ, in language exactly appli- 
 cable to the point before us, " These ought ye to 
 have done, and not to leave the other undone.'* 
 It is obvious that the words of Jeremiah, instead 
 of implying that the Israelites of his day were not 
 acquainted with the Levitical enactments, would 
 have had no point whatever, unless the men whom 
 he addressed had been perfectly familiar with the 
 various kinds of sacrifices to which he refers. And 
 thus the passage on which Dr. R. Smith builds so 
 much not only fails to yield him support, but proves 
 the very opposite of what he maintains.* 
 
 * I have dwelt at some length upon this passage, because 
 Dr. R. Smith appears to attach to it special importance. Again 
 and again he refers to Jer. vii. 22, and, on the ground of that 
 verse, says that "Jeremiah denies in express terms that a law 
 
THE PENTATEUCH— AUTHORSHIP, ETC. 41 
 
 There are many texts and narratives of Scripture 
 which might be quoted to show that the Levitical 
 law was known among the Israelites before the exile. 
 But I must be satisfied with simply referring to the 
 following passages for comparison with each other : 
 Hosea xii. 4, with Gen. xxxii. 24 ; Joel ii. 2, with 
 Exod. X. 14; Amos v. 17, with Exod. xii. 12 ; i Kings 
 XX. 42, with Lev. xxvii. 29 ; 2 Kings vii. 3, with Lev. 
 xiii. 46, and Numb. v. 3, etc.* 
 
 On considering such passages, well may it be said 
 that, "beyond all doubt, there are numerous most 
 striking references both in the Prophets and in the 
 Books of Kings to passages which are found in our 
 present Pentateuch. One thing at least is certain, 
 
 of sacrifice forms any part of the Divine commands to Israel " 
 (p. 372; comp. pp. 117, 263, 370). How utterly baseless is 
 such an assertion has, I trust, been sufficiently shown above. 
 
 * A great number of additional texts are quoted for compa- 
 rison in Smith's Dictionary of the Bible, art. Pentateuch, and in 
 Hengstenberg's Authenticity of the Pentateuch, though it must 
 be admitted that some of them are far from conclusive. The 
 following are the suggestive words of a man who had no pre- 
 tensions to be regarded as a scholar in the technical sense of the 
 word, but who was possessed of a very shrewd intellect, as well 
 as a very lofty genius. Commenting on I Kings ii. 3, Dr. 
 Chalmers remarks, " One feels interested by his (David's) 
 reference to the law of Moses — that law which, as appears in the 
 Psalms, was the frequent study and meditation of this great 
 monarch." This one text, and the reflections it suggests, are, in 
 fact, conclusive. 
 
42 OLD TESTAMENT REVISION, 
 
 that the theory of men like Von Bohlen, Vatke, and 
 others, who suppose the Pentateuch to have been 
 written in the times of the latest kings, is utterly 
 absurd." * If this be so, one cannot but deeply regret 
 that tone of dogmatism by which Dr. R. Smith's 
 interesting volumes are disfigured. He speaks in 
 one passage of "the demonstration" which has of 
 late been given "that the priestly legislation did 
 not exist before the exile." t But, happily, the 
 demonstrations of " criticism " are not quite so stable 
 as are those of Euclid. Only a generation ago, it 
 was supposed to have been demonstrated that our 
 first Gospel is a translated, and not an original work. 
 But what scholar of any eminence now maintains 
 that opinion } In like manner, the " critics " not so 
 long ago maintained that our third Gospel was built 
 upon that of the heretical Marcion who flourished in 
 the second quarter of the second century. But that 
 view also has become thoroughly discredited, and 
 Marcion's Gospel is now universally admitted to 
 have been a mutilated copy of that of St. Luke. 
 And so, I believe, will it be with the question we 
 have been considering. Further inquiry will dissi- 
 pate the views which now prevail among the so- 
 called critics, and will prove that the Pentateuch, as 
 
 * Smith's Dictionary, ii. p. 780. 
 The Prophets of Israel, p. xi 
 
THE PENTATEUCH— AUTHORSHIP, ETC. 43 
 
 we now possess it, is to be traced, in substance, to 
 the legislator, Moses. 
 
 I say, in substance, for that slight additions have 
 been naade to it since his day is unquestionable. 
 It was always, of course, admitted that the last 
 chapter of Deuteronomy, which contains an account 
 of the death of Moses, had been written by another 
 hand. But several other obvious interpolations may 
 be detected. We ought to remember that the Penta- 
 teuch must have been subjected to many redactions 
 before receiving its final shape in the times of Ezra ; 
 and on these occasions various notes and explana- 
 tions seem to have been inserted in the text. Among 
 these are to be reckoned the following : Gen. xii. 6, 
 xiii. 7, "And the Canaanite and the Perizzite 
 dwelled then in the land," with Gen. xxxvi. 31, 
 "These are the kings that reigned in the land of 
 Edom, before there reigned any king over the land 
 of Israel." And such a passage as Numb. xii. 3, 
 ** Now the man Moses was very meek, above all the 
 men which were upon the face of the earth," should 
 at once be granted to have been a marginal note 
 which has slipped into the text. It is impossible to 
 conceive of Moses as writing of himself in such 
 terms, but nothing is more natural than that a note 
 of the kind should have been made by an editor or 
 transcriber, and that this note should, in course of 
 time, have found its way into the narrative itself. 
 
44 OLD lESTAMENT REVISION. 
 
 We know that this has happened in several cases, 
 with respect to the manuscripts of the New Testa- 
 ment. Such is the explanation, probably, to be given 
 of the insertion of the doxology of the Lord's Prayer, 
 Matt. vi. 13; of the statement as to the angel which 
 is found in John v. 3, 4; and of the ecclesiastical 
 formula which appears in Acts viii. 37. So in regard 
 to the Old Testament. There is no difficulty in 
 conceiving that slight but significant interpolations 
 of the kind referred to should, in course of ages, 
 have been introduced into the Mosaic narrative ; 
 while nevertheless the Pentateuch, as a whole, must 
 be ascribed to the immediate authorship of the great 
 lawgiver of Israel.* 
 
 * An acute remark of Astruc, the celebrated Belgian phy- 
 sician, who was the first in modern times to suggest the docu- 
 mentary hypothesis as to the origin of Genesis, is worth referring 
 to in this place. In his " Conjectures," published in 1753, ^^ 
 observes that " Moses always speaks in Genesis as a simple 
 historian, and never says that any part of his narrative has been 
 conveyed to him by inspiration." He proceeds to notice that it 
 is otherwise in the remaining books of the Pentateuch. On this 
 Dr. R. Smith justly remarks (p. 419), "When ^ is admitted 
 that the Bible histoiyis based upon written sources, oral testi- 
 mony, and personal observation, no theory of inspiration can 
 alter the principle that the knowledge of the writers was hmited 
 by their sources." 
 
CHAPTER III. 
 
 THE PENTATEUCH.— CORRECTIONS OF THE 
 AUTHORISED ENGLISH VERSION. 
 
 I NOW proceed to direct attention to some 
 amendments which require to be made on the 
 Authorised English Version of the Pentateuch. 
 Passing over multitudes of slight improvements 
 which are called for, only those which seem of great 
 or considerable importance will here be noticed. 
 
 Gen. ii. 4, 5, stands in our common version as 
 follows : — " These are the generations of the heaven 
 and of the earth when they were created, in the day 
 that the Lord God made the earth and the heavens, 
 and every plant of the field before it was in the 
 earth, and every herb of the field before it grew : 
 for the Lord God had not caused it to rain upon 
 the earth, and there was not a man to till the 
 ground." Every reader must feel the awkwardness 
 of this statement ; but the true rendering completely 
 escapes from it, and is as follows : — ** These are the 
 generations" (or "This is the history") '*of the 
 
46 OLD TESTAMENT REVISION. 
 
 heavens and of the earth when they were created, 
 in the day that the Lord God made the earth and 
 the heavens. And no plant of the field was yet in 
 the earth, and no herb of the field had yet sprung 
 up ; for the Lord God had not caused it to rain 
 upon the earth, and there was not a man to till the 
 ground." 
 
 Gen. xii. 6, xiii. i8, xiv. 13, xviii. i. The Hebrew 
 word rendered in all these passages "plain" (or 
 "plains") should in each case be translated oak, or 
 oak-groves, though some Hebraists think that the 
 term employed denotes a terebinth, and others that 
 it simply means a large forest tree. Nothing can be 
 said ^s to the signification of the word " Moreh." 
 
 Gen. xii. 9. In this verse it would be preferable 
 that the expression " south " should be printed with 
 an initial capital letter, as indicating Abram's ap- 
 proach to a well-known and definite region called 
 "the South." The same remark applies to many 
 other passages. 
 
 Gen. xxviii. 20 — 22. These verses stand as follows 
 in the Authorised Version: — "And Jacob vowed a 
 vow, saying. If God will be with me, and will keep 
 me in this way that I go, and will give me bread to 
 eat, and raiment to put on, so that I come again to 
 my father's house in peace ; then shall the Lord be 
 my God ; and this stone, which I have set for a 
 pillar, shall be God's house ; and of all that Thou 
 
CORRECTIONS OF AUTHORISED VERSION. 47 
 
 shall give me, I will surely give the tenth unto Thee." 
 By this translation, the construction is made to 
 change in the middle of ver. 21, but such is not 
 the case in the original. The Hebrew does not 
 adopt the future tense till the first clause of ver. 22 
 is reached, and the better rendering therefore is, 
 " If God will be with me, and will keep me in this 
 way that I go, and will give me bread to eat, and 
 raiment to put on, and if I come again to my father's 
 house in peace, and if the Lord will be my God, 
 then shall this stone, which I have set for a pillar, 
 be the house of God, and of all that Thou hast given 
 me, I will surely give a tenth unto Thee." * 
 
 Gen. xxxi. 19, 34, 35. The Hebrew word which 
 is in these verses translated ** images" would perhaps 
 better be left in its original form, "Teraphim." The 
 reference is to images in the human form, large or 
 small, which seem to have been made use of for 
 the purposes of divination. They may have been 
 analogous to the ** images" of ancestors so much 
 revered among the Romans. At any rate, they im- 
 plied an early form of superstition bordering on 
 idolatry, and, as doing so, are condemned in several 
 
 * The above change is approved of in "The Speaker's Com- 
 mentary," but is not accepted by De Wette. I have throughout 
 this chapter consulted these two important authorities, without, 
 however, being always able to agree with either. 
 
48 OLD TESTAMENT REVISION. 
 
 passages of Scripture. (See i Sam. xv. 23 ; 2 Kings 
 xxiii. 24.) 
 
 Gen. xxxvi. 24. The words which are in this 
 verse rendered " Anah that found the mules in the 
 wilderness," ought to be translated *'Anah that 
 found the hot spriJtgs in the wilderness." The word 
 does not occur anywhere else in the Old Testament. 
 
 Gen. xxxvii. 28, xxxix. i. In these verses we 
 find the absurd form " Ishmeelites," instead of the 
 usual and correct form *' Ishmaelites," met with in 
 almost every other part of Scripture. Many readers 
 have doubtless puzzled themselves with the two 
 different forms of the same word ; and it is evident 
 that such unmeaning and perplexing diversity can 
 in no way whatever be justified. 
 
 Gen. xlix. 10. This is a very difficult passage, and 
 widely different views have been held as to its mean- 
 ing. The reason of this diversity of opinion is 
 chiefly to be found in the word Shiloh, which occurs 
 in the verse. Is that word subject or object ? is it 
 the name of a place, or the designation of a person ? 
 and, if the latter, how should it be translated ? After 
 the most careful consideration, I believe the verse 
 should be rendered as follows: "The sceptre shall 
 not depart from Judah, nor a lawgiver from be- 
 tween his feet, until (He who is) Peace comes, and 
 unto Him shall be the obedience of nations." Of 
 course, this rendering implies that the verse has a 
 
CORRECTIONS OF AUTHORISED VERSION. 49 
 
 Messianic reference ; and that, of itself, is sufficient 
 to discredit it in the estimation of a certain class 
 of scholars. I am afraid it must be said that the 
 self-styled " critical " school of interpreters is dis- 
 tinguished by a tendency always, if possible, to set 
 aside any reference in Old Testament passages to 
 a coming Messiah. But why should this be so ? 
 What is the Old Testament without its Christology ? 
 It then sinks into a series of comparatively unin- 
 teresting and unimportant narratives, which can be 
 regarded as but of little value to us at the present 
 day. But let it have Christ in view throughout, let 
 references to a personal Messiah be seen imbedded 
 in its announcements, and it then becomes part of 
 a grand living organism, instinct from beginning to 
 end with the revelation of God's grace to the chil- 
 dren of men. The Bible in its many parts, and with 
 its manifold varieties of teaching, is thus felt, in a 
 spiritual sense, to be but one book. Christ first as 
 coming, and then as come, gives a unity to the whole 
 of revelation, and imparts a dignity worthy of God 
 to every portion of Scripture. So far, then, from 
 there being any objection to the interpretation which 
 is off"ered of an Old Testament passage, in the fact 
 that it implies a reference to the Messiah, that is rather 
 a recommendation of the explanation suggested, 
 provided it does no violence to the proper lexical 
 and grammatical meaning of the words. And here 
 
 4 
 
50 
 
 OLD TESTAMENT REVISION. 
 
 I cannot but remark on the appropriation of the 
 title ** critical," as peculiarly or exclusively applicable 
 to those who set themselves against opinions which 
 have hitherto been generally accepted. For what 
 is criticism ? Is it not the ascertainment of truth ? 
 And who has any right to say that views which have 
 been entertained for ages are not true, until they 
 have been shown to be false ? Let all that can be 
 proved to be unfounded or capricious in the tradi- 
 tional teaching of the Church be unhesitatingly set 
 aside ; but let not the utterly unscientific principle 
 be adopted, that an opinion must be erroneous simply 
 because it has prevailed through many generations, 
 and because it still commends itself to those who 
 believe that truth is old as well as new, and who are 
 anxious to embrace the truth, whatever may be the 
 nature of the claims by which it is urged on their 
 consideration and acceptance. 
 
 Exod. ii. II, 12. These verses run as follows in 
 our common English translation : — ''And it came to 
 pass in those days, when Moses was grown, that 
 he went out unto his brethren, and looked on their 
 burdens; and he spied an Egyptian smiting an 
 Hebrew, one of his brethren. And he looked this 
 way and that way, and when he saw that there was 
 no man, he slew the Egyptian, and hid him in the 
 sand." Here comes out one of the most character- 
 
CORRECTIONS OF AUTHORISED VERSION. 51 
 
 istic blemishes of the Authorised Version — its need- 
 less and misleading variations in the rendering of 
 terms which are exactly the same in the original. 
 The verb translated '* smiting " in the first of the 
 two verses quoted above, and *' slew " in the second, 
 is in both cases the same in the Hebrew ; and a 
 uniformity of rendering ought manifestly to be 
 preserved. 
 
 Exod. iii. 22, xi. 2, xii. 35, 36. It is the 
 general opinion of Hebrew scholars that the word 
 translated '* borrow " in the first three of these 
 passages would be more correctly rendered "ask;" 
 and that, correspondingly, the word translated 
 ** lent," in the last passage, should be simply 
 rendered "gave." There can be no doubt that ask 
 and give are the usual meanings of the Hebrew 
 words, and by adopting these renderings here, as 
 in other passages of the Old Testament, a seeming 
 want of straightforwardness, which exists in the 
 narrative as it stands, no longer suggests itself to 
 the mind of the reader. 
 
 Exod. ix. 5. This verse stands in our common 
 version as follows : — '* For now I will stretch out my 
 hand, that I may smite thee and thy people with 
 pestilence ; and thou shalt be cut off from the 
 earth." But it is evident that such a translation does 
 not cohere with the context either before or after ; 
 and most Hebraists agree that the more correct ren- 
 
52 OLD TESTAMENT REVISION. 
 
 dering is, " For now, had I stretched forth my hand, 
 and smitten thee and thy people with the pestilence, 
 then hadst thou been cut off from the earth." 
 
 Exod. ix. 31. "And the flax and the barley was 
 smitten : for the barley was in the ear, and the flax 
 was boiled." Probably few modern readers could 
 quite at once explain this last clause as meaning that 
 " the flax was in blossom^ And this leads me to 
 remark that the many other obsolete terms which 
 occur in the Old Testament should, of course, be 
 exchanged for language which is intelligible at the 
 present day. Among these are to be reckoned such 
 expressions as the following : ouches, earing, brigan- 
 dine, all to (for " altogether "), delicates, bravery 
 (Isa. iii. 18, in the sense of the Scotch "braws"), 
 vagabond (for "wanderer"), noisome (for "noxious") 
 scrabbled, minish, undersetters, and many others, more 
 of which will be found noticed in the concluding 
 chapter of this work. 
 
 JSxod. xxxiv. 13. Here we find the following in 
 our English translation: — "But ye shall destroy their 
 altars, break their images, and cut down their 
 groves." The rendering " groves," which occurs 
 in this verse, and in many other passages, is quite 
 erroneous. The Hebrew word made use of {asherim) 
 always denotes either a heathen goddess or images 
 intended to represent her. In this passage "images" 
 must be meant, while in i Kings xv. 13, the goddess 
 
CORRECTIONS OF AUTHORISED VERSION. 53 
 
 herself must be referred to, but the word *' grove " 
 is never an appropriate rendering of the original. 
 (See afterwards on Deut. vii. 5.) 
 
 Exod. xxxiv. 33. In this verse the Authorised \. 
 English Version is altogether erroneous and mis- 
 leading. It stands thus : "And //// Moses had done 
 speaking with them, he put a veil on his face." 
 This word "till" is quite an improper supplement. 
 It should be when, as the Septuagint and other 
 ancient versions show, and as the reasoning of St. 
 Paul on the passage (2 Cor. iii. 13, seq.') demands. 
 The common belief is, that when Moses spoke to the 
 people, he had the veil upon his face. But not so : 
 " he spoke to them without the veil, with his face 
 shining and glorified ; when he ceased speaking to 
 them, he put on the veil ; but whensoever he went 
 in before the Lord to speak to Him, the veil was 
 removed till he came out, and had spoken to the 
 Israelites all that the Lord had commanded him. 
 during which speaking they saw that his face shone, 
 and after which speaking he again put on the veil. 
 So that the veil was the symbol of concealment and 
 transitoriness : the part revealed they might see, 
 beyond that they could not: the ministry was a 
 broken, interrupted one ; its end was wrapped in 
 obscurity." * The verse before us, then, should be 
 
 * Alford on 2 Cor. 13. seq. 
 
54 OLD TESTAMENT REVISION. 
 
 rendered — "And when Moses had done speaking 
 with them, he put a veil on his face." 
 
 Lev. V. 1 6, vi. 21, viii. 15, etc. The point in 
 common to these verses, as they stand in the 
 Authorised Version, is that they needlessly introduce 
 varieties of rendering as regards certain Hebrew 
 words. In v. 16, "harm" is substituted for "sin," 
 which is the translation adopted everywhere else 
 throughout the book; in vi. 21, a very uncommon 
 Hebrew expression is translated " baken," while in 
 vii. 12 the same word is rendered "fried;" and in 
 viii. 15 we find "to make reconciliation" for "to 
 atone," which is the translation of the word given 
 in almost every other passage. It is obvious that 
 such capricious varieties of rendering are fitted only 
 to bewilder and mislead the English reader. 
 
 Lev. xvi. 8. We here read in the Authorised 
 Version, " And Aaron shall cast lots upon the two 
 goats : one lot for the Lord, and the other lot for 
 the scape-goat." The word azazel, here translated 
 " scape-goat," has given rise to very various inter- 
 pretations. The two forms of expression, " for the 
 Lord," and "for azazel," are exactly the same in 
 the original, so that we can hardly understand the 
 latter as literally referring to the goat itself. What 
 view, then, is to be adopted as to its meaning } In 
 answer to this question, the following judicious 
 
CORRECTIONS OF AUTHORISED VERSION. 55 
 
 remarks seem to me worthy of quotation : — *' May 
 it not be supposed that the word azazel was some- 
 what vague and indeterminate in its signification 
 to the ancient Israelites themselves, just as redemp- 
 tion is to the Christian ? So far as our sinful 
 condition is concerned, nothing can be plainer or 
 more vitally important; but when the question is 
 *asked, ' To whom is this redemption paid ? ' no 
 certain and satisfactory answer has been, or can 
 be, given. May it not have been in the same way 
 with this word to the Israelites ? That their sins 
 were borne away was most clearly taught ; but 
 looking upon these sins as concrete realities, the 
 question might arise, * Whither were they carried ? ' 
 The answer is, in the first place, to the wilderness, 
 * to the place of banishment from God ; ' and then 
 further to azazel. It was not necessary that the 
 word should be clearly understood ; in fact, the 
 more vague its meaning, the more perfect the 
 symbolism." ^^ In these circumstances, perhaps the 
 best way to deal with the term is simply to leave it 
 untranslated, as has been done by many interpreters, 
 ancient and modern, and so to read the verse thus : 
 *' And Aaron shall cast lots upon the two goats, one 
 lot for Jehovah, and the other lot for azazel." 
 
 * Dr. F. Gardiner in Lange's Commentary^ edited by Dr. 
 SchafF, vol. ii. in loc. 
 
S6 OLD TESTAMENT REVISION. 
 
 Lev. xviii. i8. This verse has been the subject of 
 much controversy in connection with the question 
 of the lawfuhiess of marriage with a deceased wife's 
 sister. The authorised English translation is fairly 
 correct, but may perhaps be slightly improved as 
 follows : — *' Neither shalt thou take a wife to her 
 sister, to provoke her to jealousy, ... in addition 
 to her, during her lifetime." The alternative ren- 
 dering found on the margin of our English Bibles 
 — *'one wife to another" — as if polygamy were the 
 thing forbidden, is, I think, wholly inadmissible.* 
 Two sisters, in the literal sense of the words, are 
 unquestionably referred to, and polygamy being 
 apparently for the time conceded (comp. Matt. 
 xix. 8), the prohibition is to this effect, that two 
 sisters shall not simultaneously be the wives of one 
 man. The seemliness as well as expediency of 
 such an enactment is clear ; but it obviously leaves 
 the question open as to marriage with the sister of * 
 a wife who is dead ; or rather, by the emphasis 
 which it puts on the words " in her lifetime," it 
 
 * Prof. Lagarde, indeed, in a recent brochure, thinks that 
 there is in the verse a reference to polygamy. He argues that 
 the Hebrew word rendered in our version, " to vex her," should 
 be translated a " fellow- wife ; " but it is difficult to believe, ia 
 view of the subsequent Biblical history, that the verse contains 
 a prohibition of polygamy. In that case, however, it will simply 
 have no bearing whatever on the question of marriage with a 
 deceased wife's sister. 
 
CORRECTIONS OF AUTHORISED VERSION. 57 
 
 implicitly sanctions such marriages as perfectly law- 
 ful. This must, I humbly think, be manifest to every 
 one who looks at the passage with an unbiassed 
 judgment ; and it is simply a matter of regret and 
 reproach, that English law has not yet acknowledged 
 the validity of the marriages in question, while so 
 much suffering and sorrow have followed in con- 
 sequence. 
 
 Numb. xiv. 21 — 23. More than one mistake occurs 
 in the rendering of these verses, as they stand in 
 our authorised translation. They should be cor- 
 rected as follows : — '* But as truly as I live, and all 
 the earth shall be filled with the glory of the Lord, 
 all those men who have seen my glory, and my 
 miracles which I did in Egypt and in the wilder- 
 ness, and have tempted me now these ten times, 
 and have not hearkened to my voice, shall not see 
 the land which I sware unto their fathers : all who 
 have rejected me shall not see it." 
 
 Numb, xxiii. 18 — 24. The magnificent poetical 
 outbursts contained in the narrative respecting 
 Balaam (chap. xxii. 2 — xxiv. 25) all admit of being 
 more correctly rendered than in our common version. 
 The first of them (chap, xxiii. 7 — 10) has already 
 been given in an amended form, as an example of 
 parallelism, in chapter i. We have now to look 
 at Balaam's second utterance, and we find that it 
 
58 OLD TESTAMENT REVISION. 
 
 requires to be corrected in English somewhat to 
 the following effect : — 
 
 1 8. " Rise up, Balak, and hear ; 
 
 Hearken unto me, O son of Zippor. 
 
 19. God is not a man, that He should lie ; 
 Neither a son of man, that He should repent. 
 Hath He said, and shall He not do it ? 
 And spoken, and shall He not make it good ? 
 
 20. Behold, I have received [an inspiration] to bless^ 
 And He hath blessed, and I cannot reverse it. 
 
 21. He hath not beheld iniquity in Jacob, 
 Neither hath He seen misery in Israel ; 
 The Lord his God is with him,- 
 
 And the shout of a king is in his midst. 
 
 22. God brought them forth out of Egypt \ 
 
 He hath, as it were, the strength of an urus. 
 
 23. Surely there is no enchantment against Jacob, 
 And there is no divination against Israel. 
 
 In due time it shall be told to Jacob and Israel what God 
 doeth. 
 
 24. Behold, the people shall rise up as a great lion, 
 And lift up himself as a young lion : 
 
 He shall not lie down till he eat of the prey, 
 And drink the blood of the slain." 
 
 The meaning of ver. 21 has often been mis- 
 taken. As frequently happens, there is a slight 
 deviation in the second branch of the parallel from 
 the meaning of the first, but here with strict logical 
 precision. God beheld not iniquity in Jacob — 
 viewing them, not as individuals, but in their 
 corporate capacity as in covenant with Him ; and 
 therefore neither did He see misery in Israel — there 
 
CORRECTIONS OF AUTHORISED VERSION. 59 
 
 was no sufifering, because there was no sin. The 
 rendering ''unicorn" in ver. 22 is a very unfortunate 
 one. It is taken literally from the Septuagint 
 version, which here suggests quite an erroneous 
 conception of the meaning. The reference is pro- 
 bably to a sort of gigantic wild ox, well known to 
 the ancients, although now apparently extinct. 
 Caesar gives a striking description of an animal of 
 this kind, as inhabiting the Hercynian forest {Gallic 
 War, vi. 28). He styles it the urus, and his account 
 of the strength, size, form, swiftness, and ferocity, 
 by which it was distinguished, harmonizes well with 
 the other references made in Scripture (Job xxxix. 
 II ; Ps. xxii. 21, etc.) to the animal spoken of in this 
 passage. In ver. 23, some prefer the rendering 
 "in" to "against," and take the meaning to be 
 that the arts of divination were not practised among 
 the Israelites. This was, no doubt, true, and the 
 original is perhaps rather in favour of such a trans- 
 lation, but the words do not then seem congruous 
 to the circumstances of the speaker. 
 
 Numb. xxiv. 3 — 9. This passage does not require 
 much emendation, but may be given as follows : — 
 
 3. " Thus saith Balaam, the son of Beor, 
 
 Thus saith the man whose eyes are opened, 
 
 4. Thus saith he who has heard the words of God, 
 Who hath seen the vision of the Almighty, 
 And, falling down, hath had his eyes opened : 
 
6o OLD TESTAMENT REVISION. 
 
 5. How goodly are thy tents, O Jacob ! 
 Thy tabernacles, O Israel ! 
 
 6. As the valleys are they spread forth, 
 As gardens by the river's side. 
 
 As trees of sweet aloes which the Lord hath planted. 
 As cedar trees beside the waters. 
 
 7. He shall pour forth water from his two buckets, 
 And his seed shall be in many waters. 
 
 And his king shall be higher than Agag, 
 And his kingdom shall be exalted. 
 
 8. God brought him forth out of Egypt, 
 
 He hath, as it were, the strength of an urus : 
 He shall eat up the nations his enemies, 
 And shall suck dry their bones. 
 And shall break in pieces their arrows. 
 
 9. He couched, he lay down as a lion, 
 
 And as a great lion : who shall raise him up ? 
 Blessed is he that blesseth thee, 
 And cursed is he that curseth thee." 
 
 In ver. 4, the " falling down " spoken of seems to 
 refer to the powerful physical effect produced upon 
 Balaam, when the divine afflatus came on him : he 
 was smitten down, and the eyes of his spirit v/ere 
 opened. In ver. 7, there is a reference to the mode 
 of irrigation in the East : the water is poured from 
 two buckets suspended at the two ends of a pole ; 
 and so Israel should be well watered, or, in other 
 words, should abound in blessings. In ver. 8, the 
 last clause is very obscure : some render it, *' shall 
 pierce them through with his arrows," as in the 
 Authorised Version ; and others, ** shall break his 
 own arrows," as having no further need of them ; 
 
CORRECTIONS OF AUTHORISED VERSION 6i 
 
 while various emendations of the text have been 
 proposed. The interpretation given above is sup- 
 ported by the high authority of De Wette. 
 
 Numb. xxiv. 15 — 25. This, the concluding pro- 
 phecy of Balaam, is the most remarkable of the 
 whole. It is in one or two parts very obscure ; but 
 the common English version may, with some degree 
 of certainty, be improved as follows : — 
 
 "And he took up his parable, and said, — 
 
 15. " Balaam, the son of Beor, saith, 
 
 And the man whose eyes are open saith, 
 
 16. He saith who hath heard the words of God, 
 And known the knowledge of the Most High, 
 And seen the vision of the Almighty, 
 
 Who, falling down, hath had his eyes opened, — 
 
 17. I see him, though he be not now, 
 I behold him, though not near ; 
 There cometh forth a star out of Jacob, 
 And there riseth a sceptre out of Israel, 
 And he smiteth Moab on every side. 
 And uprooteth all the sons of tumult. 
 
 18. And Edom is his possession, 
 
 And Seir, belonging to his enemies, is his possession. 
 And Israel doeth mightily, 
 
 19. And he ruleth out of Jacob, 
 
 And destroyeth him that escaped from the city. 
 
 " And he looked upon the Amalekites, and took 
 up his parable, and said, — 
 
 20. ** Amalek is the first of the nations, 
 But his end is utter destruction. 
 
62 OLD TESTAMENT REVISION. 
 
 *' And he looked on the Kenites, and took up his 
 parable, and said, — 
 
 21. ** Strong be thy dwelling-place, 
 And put thou thy nest upon a rock ; 
 
 22. Only then for destruction is Kain, 
 
 "When Asshur shall carry thee away captive. 
 
 ** And he took up his parable, and said,— 
 
 23. " Alas ! who shall live when God doeth this ? 
 
 24. And ships shall come from the coast of Chittim (Cyprus), 
 And shall humble Asshur, and humble Eber, 
 
 And his end, too, is utter destruction. 
 
 '* And Balaam rose up, and set forth, and returned 
 to his place ; and Balak also went his way," 
 
 The most remarkable statements in this passage 
 are those contained in ver. 17. No one can doubt 
 the extraordinary elevation of Balaam's mind when 
 he uttered these words. But the question arises as 
 to the properly Messianic import of the announce- 
 ment. Those critics who deny a reference to the 
 Messiah in Gen. xlix. 10, follow the same course 
 with respect to this passage. But the remarks made 
 above, on the former text, also apply here. There 
 is, I believe, in the utterance of Balaam, a still 
 clearer allusion to the coming Messiah than is to be 
 found in the words of Jacob. True, there is no 
 reason to suppose that Balaam himself had anything 
 like a full idea of the meaning of the words he uttered. 
 How much they may have conveyed to his con- 
 
CORRECTIONS OF AUTHORISED VERSION. 63 
 
 sciousness we cannot tell. But he himself was well 
 aware that a supernatural power had now taken pos- 
 session of him, and was making him the medium of 
 announcing what of himself he did not desire to 
 speak, and what he certainly did not wholly under- 
 stand. The Jews manifestly regarded the passage 
 as Messianic, for we find that the title assumed by 
 one of the many false Christs who appeared after our 
 Lord's death was Barcochha, that is, " The Son of a 
 Star," — a title obviously derived from the language 
 of this passage. We are reminded also of the star 
 which guided the wise men of the East to the infant 
 Saviour, and cannot but believe that, in that region 
 to which Balaam himself belonged, the memory of 
 his great prediction had been preserved from gene- 
 ration to generation. In ver. 22, the meaning seems 
 to be that the Kenites, as the friends of Israel (comp. 
 Numb. X. 32, etc.) would be preserved from ruin as 
 long as the Israelites themselves escaped, but the 
 triumph of Asshur would be destructive to both 
 peoples ; so terrible indeed would be the results of 
 that event, that Balaam shudders to contemplate it, 
 and regards it as tantamount to the overthrow of all 
 peace and prosperity upon the earth. 
 
 Deut. vii. 5, xvi. 21. The first of these passages 
 is thus rendered in the Authorised Version : " But 
 thus shall ye deal with them: ye shall destroy the 
 
64 OLD TESTAMENT REVISION. 
 
 altars, and break down their images, and cut down 
 their groves, and burn their graven images with 
 fire;" while in the second we find, ''Thou shalt 
 not plant thee a grove of any trees near unto the 
 altar of the Lord thy God, which thou shalt make 
 thee." But the word translated ** grove " in these 
 and other passages should, as before remarked, be 
 rendered "■ wooden idol," literally ** an Asherah." 
 The reference is to the pillars of wood which were 
 erected in honour of the Phoenician goddess Ash- 
 taroth, the classical Astarte, or, in general, Venus. 
 It is said that the Koran, notwithstanding its asser- 
 tion, even to weariness, of the worship of one God, 
 has not been able to eradicate, in countries like 
 Egypt, this ancient pillar worship, even down to 
 the present day. 
 
 Deut. xxxii. 40 — 42. Both the punctuation and, to 
 a certain extent, the meaning of these verses, as 
 given in the Authorised Version, should probably 
 be altered. The passage will then stand thus : 
 ** For I lift up my hand to heaven, and say. As I 
 live for ever, if I whet my glittering sword, and 
 mine hand take hold on judgment, I will render 
 vengeance to mine enemies, and will recompense 
 them that hate me ; I will make mine arrows drunk 
 with blood, and my sword shall devour flesh, from 
 the blood of the slain and the captives, from the 
 chief of the princes of the enemy." 
 
CORRECTIONS OF AUTHORISED VERSION. 65 
 
 Deut. xxxiii. The following is a continuous 
 rendering of this striking chapter, with which the 
 Pentateuch, as far as Moses is concerned, sublimely 
 closes. No one can read it attentively without 
 perceiving how closely it links itself on to the 
 blessings pronounced by Jacob in Gen. xlix. 
 
 "And this is the blessing wherewith Moses the 
 man of God blessed the children of Israel before 
 his death. And he said, — 
 
 2. "The Lord came from Sinai, 
 And rose up from Seir unto them ; 
 He shined forth from Mount Paran, 
 
 And He came from amidst myriads of holy ones : 
 From His right hand went a fire : law [was given] for 
 them. 
 
 3. Truly He loved the peoples (tribes) ; 
 All His saints are in thine hand ; 
 
 And they sit down at thy feet, to receive thy words.* 
 
 4. Moses commanded us a law, 
 
 As the inheritance of the congregation of Jacob ; 
 
 5. And he was king in Jeshurun,f 
 
 When the heads of the people assembled, 
 And the tribes of Israel came together. 
 
 6. Let Reuben live, and not die, 
 
 And let not his men be small in number. 
 
 7. And this [is the blessing] to Judah ; and he said, 
 Heur, Lord, the voice of Judah, 
 
 And bring him [back] to his people ; 
 
 * So De Wette, but the clause is very obscure. 
 
 t The "Speaker's Commentary" here remarks, "Rather he 
 became king; i.e., the Lord, not Moses, who is never spoken of 
 as ' a king.' " But the natural reference is to Moses. 
 
66 OLD TESTAMENT REVISION. 
 
 Let his hands be sufficient for him ; 
 
 And be thou a help to him from his enemies. 
 
 8. And of Levi he said, 
 
 Let thy Thummim* and thy Urim be with thy holy 
 
 one,t 
 Whom thou (Israel) didst try at Massah, 
 And didst strive with at the waters of Meribah ; 
 
 9. Who said of his father and of his mother, I have not seen 
 
 them, 
 And did not acknowledge hi& brethren, 
 Nor knew his own sons, 
 For they observed Thy word [O Lord], 
 And kept Thy covenant.J 
 
 10. They shall teach Jacob Thy judgments, 
 And Israel Thy law ; 
 
 They shall put incense before Thee, 
 And burnt sacrifice upon Thine altar. 
 
 11. Bless, O Lord, his strength, 
 
 And let the work of his hands please Thee ; 
 
 Smite the loins of those that rise against him, 
 
 And of them that hate him, that they rise not again. 
 
 12. And of Benjamin he said, 
 
 The beloved of the Lord shall dwell in safety upon him ; 
 
 He (the Lord) shall shelter him day by day, 
 
 And he (Benjamin) shall dwell between His shoulders. 
 
 13. And of Joseph he said, 
 Blessed be his land of the Lord, 
 
 With the precious things of heaven, with the dew, 
 
 * De Wette renders, " Let thy truth and thy light be." It is 
 remarkable that Thummim in this place alone stands before 
 Urim. 
 
 t That is, Levi. 
 
 X The meaning is that the closest earthly ties were disregarded 
 in order to preser\'e faithfulness to God. (Compare Matt. x. 37.) 
 
CORRECTIONS OF AUTHORISED VERSION. 67 
 
 And with the deep which coucheth beneath, 
 
 14. And with the precious fruits produced by the sun, 
 And with the precious fruits drawn forth by the moon, 
 
 15. And with the chief things of the ancient mountains. 
 And with the precious things of the everlasting hills, 
 
 16. And with the precious things of the earth, and the fulness 
 
 thereof; 
 And let the good will of Him that dwelt in the bush 
 Come upon the head of Joseph, 
 Even upon the crown of him that was separated from his 
 
 brethren. 
 
 17. The firstborn of his (Joseph's) bullock is his glory ; * 
 His horns are as the horns of an urus ; 
 
 With them he shall thrust the peoples 
 - Together to the ends of the earth ; 
 
 And they are the ten thousands of Ephraim, 
 And they are the thousands of Manasseh. 
 
 18. And of Zebulon he said, 
 
 Rejoice, Zebulon, in thy going forth, 
 And, Issachar, ifi thy tents : 
 
 19. They shall call peoples to the mountains, 
 There they shall offer sacrifices of righteousness, 
 For they shall suck of the abundance of the seas. 
 And of the hidden treasures of the sand.f 
 
 20. And of Gad he said. 
 
 Blessed be he that enlargeth Gad ; 
 
 He coucheth as a lion, 
 
 And teareth the arm, and the crown of the head. 
 
 And he provided the firstfruits for himself, 
 
 For there was the leader's portion reserved. J 
 
 * The reference is to Ephraim, who is likened to the firstling 
 of Joseph's bullock. 
 
 ■j- All the treasures yielded by the sea. 
 \ Compare Numb, xxxii. 
 
68 OLD TESTAMENT REVISION. 
 
 And he came with the heads of the people ; * 
 He carried out the justice of the Lord, 
 And his judgments with Israel. 
 
 22. And of Dan he said, 
 Dan is a lion's whelp ; 
 
 He springeth forth from Bashan. 
 
 23. And of Naphtali he said, 
 
 O Naphtali, satisfied with favour, 
 And full of the blessings of the Lord, 
 Possess thou the sea and the sunny district.f 
 
 24. And of Asher he said, 
 Blessed in sons % be Asher, 
 
 Let him be acceptable to his brethren, 
 And let him dip his foot in oil. 
 
 25. Thy shoes shall be iron and brass ; 
 As thy days, so shall thy strength be.§ 
 
 26. There is none like unto God, O Jeshurun, 
 Who rideth in the heaven for thy help. 
 And in His excellency on the clouds. 
 
 27. The eternal God is thy dwelling-place. 
 And underneath are the everlasting arms. 
 
 And He shall thrust oiit the enemy from before thee, 
 And shall say. Destroy them. 
 
 28. And Israel shall dwell in safety ; 
 
 * De Wette renders " at the head of the people.'' 
 
 f Or, " the west and the south." 
 
 \ Some prefer "blessed above the sons (of Jacob)," but this 
 would not be in accordance with the facts. 
 
 § One is unwilling to throw any doubt upon this beautiful 
 text. But the translation is far from certain ; and even if the 
 words are allowed to stand as above, we are told in the 
 "Speaker's Commentary" that the sense is, "thy strength 
 .shall be continued to thee as long as thou shalt live : thou 
 shalt never know feebleness and decay." 
 
CORRECTIONS OF AUTHORISED VERSION. 69 
 
 Alone shall the fountain of Jacob be, 
 Upon a land of corn and wine ; 
 Also his heavens shall drop down dew. 
 29. Happy art thou, O Israel ! who is like unto thee ? 
 A people saved by the Lord, 
 The shield of thy help, 
 And who is the sword of thine excellency ; 
 And thine enemies shall cringe before thee, 
 And thou slialt tread upon their high places, *! 
 
CHAPTER IV. 
 
 THE PROPHETS.— CORRECTIONS OF THE 
 AUTHORISED ENGLISH VERSION. 
 
 AVERY wide field here opens up before us, and 
 we must be content to pass lightly over it. As 
 was indicated in the first chapter, many of the 
 properly historical books have been classed with the 
 Prophets. But as it is in the Prophets, strictly so 
 called, that most of the errors and obscurities ob- 
 servable in our common English version are to be 
 found, I shall devote the greater part of this chapter 
 to these, and shall not linger over such books as 
 Joshua, Judges, and Kings, which are, upon the 
 whole, comparatively well translated. 
 
 Joshua V. 14. I select this verse for remark, 
 because it is one of a large class of passages in 
 which a greater precision of rendering is called for 
 than appears in our English version. The word 
 translated *' captain " in the clause, *' as captain of 
 the host of the Lord am I now come," received in 
 other passages such renderings as the following: — 
 
72 OLD TESTAMENT REVISION. 
 
 chiefs general^ governor, keeper, lord, master, prince, 
 steward, etc. ; while, on the other hand, our English 
 word ** captain" represents no fewer than twelve 
 different Hebrew words. Now, while it is true, as 
 has been well remarked, that " scarcely any problem 
 is more perplexing to the translator of the Old 
 Testament than to find appropriate designations for 
 the officials and dignitaries, civil and military, among 
 the Jews and related nations," * the facts just stated 
 are sufficient to suggest that there is a great amount 
 of unnecessary vagueness, with respect to the render- 
 ing of such terms, in our Authorised Version. There 
 must be a certain amount of indefiniteness and con- 
 fusion even after every effort has been made ; but 
 that tnay nevertheless be greatly reduced from what 
 now exists ; and an improvement of this kind will 
 be much to the advantage of the ordinary English 
 reader. 
 
 Judges V. 15 — 31. This chapter contains the song 
 of Deborah, which is a composition of the loftiest 
 order of poetry, though in some of its parts ex- 
 tremely difficult. There is not a verse in our English 
 translation but admits, more or less, of emendation. 
 I have chosen the latter half of the song for illus- 
 
 * Lange's Comm. on Old Test,: Joshua, translated by Dr. 
 Bliss, p. 62. 
 
CORRECTIONS OF AUTHORISED VERSION. 73 
 
 tration, both as being very striking in itself, and 
 as suffering sadly in our Authorised Version. Of 
 course, no claim is made for absolute correctness 
 in presenting the following translation. All that I 
 endeavour to do is to remove some obvious blemishes 
 which exist in our common English version, and 
 thus bring out more clearly the beauties of the 
 original. But no translation can do it justice — 
 none, in particular, can represent the emphatic and 
 impressive alliteratio7i by which the Hebrew is 
 distinguished. 
 
 The song consists of an introduction (2 — 5) 
 devoted to the praise of God ; and then successively 
 of a description of the misery which had existed 
 (6 — 8), of gratitude that deliverance had been secured 
 (9 — 11), of a commendation of those who took part 
 in the battle, or were, at least, willing to help (12 — 
 15), of a sarcastic condemnation of the tribes which, 
 though near at hand, gave no assistance to Zebulon 
 and Naphtali, who had boldly encountered the op- 
 pressor (15 — 18), an account of the victory (19 — 
 23), and a powerful picture of the death of Sisera, 
 with its attendant circumstances. It should be 
 noticed that verse 16 ought to begin with what is 
 the middle of verse 15 in our Authorised Version. 
 Deborah exclaims, — 
 
 15. "Among the streams of Reuben, there were mighty reso- 
 lutions of heart ! 
 
74 OLD 7 EST A MEN! REVISION. 
 
 16. Why sittest thou by the folds, to listen to the flute of the 
 
 herds ? 
 Among the streams of Reuben, there was great delibera- 
 tion of heart ! 
 
 17. Gilead rested on the other side of Jordan j 
 And Dan, why abode he in his ships ? 
 
 Asher sat by the sea-shore, and rested in his bays. 
 
 18. But Zebulon was a tribe that hazarded his soul unto death, 
 And Naphtali [also] on the high places of the field. 
 
 19. Kings came to fight — then kings of Canaan fought — 
 At Taanach — at the waters of Megiddo. 
 
 Booty of silver gained they none. 
 
 20. They fought from heaven : 
 
 The stars in their courses fought against Sisera. 
 
 21. The river of Kishon swept them away — 
 
 A stream of assistance was Kishon's stream. 
 
 22. March boldly on, my soul ! 
 
 Then the hoofs of the horses struck the ground, 
 From the fast gallopping of their brave riders. 
 
 23. Curse ye Meroz, saith tVe angel of the Lord» 
 Curse ye bitterly the inhabitants thereof ; 
 Because they came not to the help of the Lord| 
 To the help of the Lord against the mighty. 
 
 24. Extolled above women be Jael, 
 The wife of Heber the Kenite, 
 Extolled above women in the tent. 
 
 25. He asked for water : she gave him milk ; 
 She brought him cream in a lordly dish, 
 
 26. She stretched forth her hand to the nail, 
 Her right hand to the workmen's hammer, 
 And she smote Sisera ; she crushed his head 
 
 And she crashed through, .and transfixed his temples 
 
 27. At her feet he curled himself, he fell, he lay still ; 
 At her feet he curled himself, he fell, 
 
 And where he curled himself, there he fell dead. 
 
CORRECTIONS OF AUTHORISED VERSION. 75 
 
 28. Through the window there looked, 
 
 And through the lattice there called the mother of Sisera, 
 Why is his chariot so long in coming ? 
 Why tarry the wheels of his chariots ? 
 
 29. Her wise ladies answered her, 
 
 Yea, she herself answered her own words : 
 
 30. Will they not find booty, and divide it ? 
 
 A maiden, [yea] two maidens for each man, 
 
 A booty of coloured garments for Sisera, 
 
 A booty of coloured garments of needlework, 
 
 A coloured garment, [yea] two garments of needlework 
 
 For the necks of [them that take the] spoil. 
 
 31. So let all Thine enemies perish, O Lord, 
 
 But let them that love him be as the sun when he goeth 
 forth in his might." 
 
 A few explanatory remarks may be added to this 
 translation. In ver. 15, 16, the tribe of Reuben is 
 taunted with the grand purposes which were 
 cherished, but led to no practical result. The 
 expression "herds," in ver. 16, seems to be 
 equivalent to "herdsmen." "Gilead," in ver. 17, 
 probably refers to the tribe of Gad and the half- 
 tribe of Manasseh ; so that, these also being ex- 
 cluded, none of the tribes east of the Jordan took 
 part in the war. In fact, as appears from chap. iv. 
 10 (comp. v. 18), only Zebulon and Naphtali mus- 
 tered on the plains of Issachar, and engaged in 
 the battle with Sisera. In ver. 19, the expression 
 "kings" must be understood as simply denoting 
 mighty men. The real meaning of the second clause 
 
76 OLD TESTAMENT REVISION, 
 
 of ver. 21 is very doubtful, but that given above 
 seems best to represent the original. Being in flood, 
 the river Kishon " assisted " the Israelites in the 
 destruction of Sisera's host. The same verse 
 strikingly depicts the hurried flight of the conquered 
 foe, as well as Deborah's exultation in picturing to 
 herself the spectacle. Verses 24 — 26 are a mere 
 patriotic outburst, and do not necessarily imply a 
 moral approbation of the conduct of Jael (compare 
 Ps. cxxxvii. 9).'''' In ver. 30, the rendering is doubtful 
 in the last clause ; and where certainty cannot be 
 reached, it is better to adhere to the Authorised 
 Version. The close of the song is most striking 
 from the silence which it preserves as to the disap- 
 pointment of Sisera's mother. No language, how- 
 ever eloquent, could have been so forcible and 
 impressive. 
 
 I Kings iv. 24. I refer to this passage simply as 
 illustrating the needless and hurtful variation which 
 too often occurs in our version with respect to the 
 
 * The reader of Scotch history may recall the vigorous lines 
 of Sir David Lindsay, with reference to the murder of Cardinal 
 Beaton ; — 
 
 •' As for the Cardinal, we grant, 
 He was a man we weel might wan^ 
 
 And we'll forget him sone ; 
 And yet I think, the sooth to say. 
 Although the lown is weel away. 
 The deed was foully done." 
 
CORRECTIONS OF AUTHORISED VERSION. 77 
 
 rendering of the names of places and persons. 
 Here the familiar "Gaza" appears as **Azzah," to 
 the manifest bewilderment of the reader. So, again, 
 at Deut. ii. 23 ; Jer. xxv. 20. In like manner, we 
 have Enoch and Henoch; fared and Jered ; Perez and 
 Pharez ; Ai and Hai ; and evQn Jonaihan dcXidi Jeho- 
 nathaft, with many others. It is obvious that such 
 diversities cannot but prove perplexing, and that 
 the same persons and places, as often as they 
 recur, should be spoken of under the same appel- 
 lation. 
 
 Isaiah v. 7. This passage may be briefly noticed 
 as containing one of those striking assonances^ or 
 jingles of sound, so frequent in the writings of 
 Isaiah. It is very desirable, if possible, to preserve 
 these in translating into English, though that can 
 very rarely be done without some sacrifice of the 
 sense. No endeavour is here made in our common 
 version to imitate the jingle of the original. That 
 has, however, been attempted as follows : — 
 
 *' He looked for reason, but behold treason ; 
 For right, but h^oXA fright." 
 
 But this sacrifices the sense to the sound, and 
 the cost of reproducing the assonance in English 
 has therefore been well described as " too dear." * 
 A more satisfactory effort has been made by the 
 
 * Revisioji of the Old Test., by Dr. Davidson, p. 52. 
 
78 OLD TESTAMENT REVISION, 
 
 English translator of Ewald's Commentary on 
 Isaiah : — 
 
 **He waited for rights but behold might ; 
 For exactness, but behold exaciio7i,'" 
 
 Isaiah vii. 14 — 16. This passage is, in several 
 parts, erroneously given in our Authorised Version. 
 It should stand as follows : — 
 
 14. " Therefore the Lord Himself will give you a sign : 
 Behold, the young woman shall conceive and bear a son. 
 And shall call His name Immanuel. 
 
 15. Cream and honey shall He eat, 
 
 When He shall know to refuse the evil and choose the 
 good; 
 
 16. For ere the boy knoweth to refuse the evil and choose the 
 
 good. 
 The land before whose two kings thou tremblest shall 
 be desolate." 
 
 Isaiah viii. 19, 20. The 20th verse runs as follow 
 in our Authorised Version : — " To the law and to 
 the testimony ; if they speak not according to this 
 word, it is because there is no light in them ; " and 
 the passage is very frequently quoted in support of 
 the supreme authority of Scripture. But it is certain 
 that our translation is wrong, and the verses should 
 stand something like this : — 
 
 19. " And if they shall say unto you, 
 
 Enquire of the ghost-seers and of the magicians. 
 That chirp and that mutter ; 
 
CORRECTIONS OF AUTHORISED VERSION. 79 
 
 (Shall not a people apply to their gods, 
 To the dead instead of the living ?) 
 . 20. [Reply] To the doctrine and to the oracle I 
 Do not they speak according to this word, 
 For whom there is no morning brightness ? " 
 
 Isaiah ix. i. This verse ought to belong to chap, 
 viii., and should be translated as follows : — ** Yet 
 there is not darkness where is (now) distress : as the 
 former time brought shame to the land of Zebulon 
 and the land of Naphtali, so the latter time brings 
 honour (to the district) beside the sea, beyond 
 Jordan, the circuit of the heathen." 
 
 These may suffice as specimens of the alterations 
 required in detached passages. I shall now set 
 before the reader a whole chapter more exactly 
 rendered than in our common version. And I shall 
 select the familiar fifty-third chapter, as in some 
 respects the most interesting in the whole book. 
 The reader will mark the departures from the Autho- 
 rised Version. These are not very numerous or 
 important, even when chap. lii. 13 — 15 is taken with 
 chap, liii., as is now generally and properly done : — 
 
 lii. 13. "Behold, my servant shall be successful : 
 
 He shall be lofty, and exalted, and be very high. 
 14. Just as many were amazed at thee — 
 
 His visage was so marred more than any man, 
 And His form more than the sons of men — 
 15. So will He make many nations joyful ; 
 Kings shall shut their mouths before Him, 
 
8o OLD TESTAMENT REVISION. 
 
 For that which had not been told them shall they see, 
 
 And that which they had not heard shall they under- 
 stand, 
 liii. I. Who believed our report ? 
 
 And to whom was the arm of the Lord revealed ? 
 2. He grew up before him as a tender plant, 
 
 And as a root out of a dry ground, 
 
 He had no form nor comeliness, that we should behold 
 Him, 
 
 And no beauty that we should desire Him. 
 
 3. He was despised and rejected of men, 
 
 A man of sorrows, and acquainted with grief ; 
 And as one who hideth his countenance before us, 
 He was despised, and we esteemed Him not. 
 
 4. Surely He bare our ills, 
 
 And laid our sorrows upon Himself; 
 
 Yet we did deem Him stricken, 
 
 Smitten of God, and afHicted. 
 5. But He was wounded for our transgressions, 
 
 He was bruised for our iniquities ; 
 
 The chastisement of our peace was upon Him, 
 
 And with His stripes we were healed. 
 6. All we like sheep had gone astray. 
 
 We had turned every one to his own way. 
 
 And the Lord caused to fall on Him the iniquity of 
 us all. 
 
 7. Oppressed was He, yet He humbled himself, 
 And opened not His mouth. 
 
 He was brought as a lamb to the slaughter. 
 And was dumb as a sheep before her shearers, 
 And opened not His mouth. 
 
 8. He was taken from prison and from judgment ; 
 And in His generation who considered 
 
 That He was taken away from the land of the living, 
 That for the transgression of my people He was stricken? 
 
CORRECTIONS OF AUTHORISED VERSION. 8i 
 
 9. He had His grave with the wicked, 
 And was with the godless in His death, 
 Although He had done no injustice, 
 And there was no deceit in His mouth. 
 
 10. Yet it pleased the Lord to bruise Him ; 
 He put Him to grief; 
 
 But when He has made His soul an offering for sin. 
 
 He shall see His seed, 
 
 He shall prolong His days, 
 
 And the pleasure of the Lord shall prosper in His hand, 
 
 11. Of the travail of His soul He shall see, He shall be 
 
 satisfied ; 
 By His wisdom shall my righteous servant justify many, 
 And He shall bear their iniquities. 
 
 12. Therefore I will allot Him a portion with the great, 
 And He shall divide the spoil with the strong ; 
 Because that He poured out His soul unto death ; 
 And He was numbered with transgressors, 
 
 While He bare the sin of many, 
 And interceded for ti-ansgressors." 
 
 Jer. xvii. 9. This verse stands as follows in the 
 Authorised Version : — '* The heart is deceitful above 
 all things, and desperately wicked ; who can know 
 it ? " The translation " desperately wicked " is cer- 
 tainly too strong, and has given rise to the charge 
 that our translators were here influenced by dogmatic 
 bias in the rendering which they adopted. This, 
 however, is a charge which should not be made 
 against any man, or body of men, except on grounds 
 that can hardly be disputed. And perhaps it is not 
 necessary to bring so grave an accusation against 
 
 6 
 
82 OLD TESTAMENT REVISION. 
 
 the framers of our Authorised Version, because they 
 gave such a strong rendering to the Hebrew word 
 which occurs in this passage. That word properly 
 means " seriously diseased," and, when used meta- 
 phorically, easily assumes the meaning which our 
 translators have assigned it. But, while disposed to 
 acquit them of any sinister motives in the rendering 
 which they preferred, it must, at the same time, be 
 admitted that the language used is unnecessarily, 
 and even unjustifiably, strong. Human nature is 
 not unfairly dealt with in the Bible. Its excellences, 
 as well as its errors, are acknowledged ; and it is 
 certainly not the part of a lover of the truth either 
 to depreciate the former or to exaggerate the latter. 
 Aiming at absolute accuracy, which shall neither go 
 beyond, nor fall short of, the meaning of the original, 
 the verse before us may be rendered — ** The heart is 
 deceitful above all things, and depraved: who can 
 know it ? " 
 
 Ezek. xxvii. 1 1 . The translation of this verse, found 
 in our Authorised Version, affords an opportunity of 
 calling attention to a pretty large class of errors 
 which exists in it. Not unfrequently words have 
 been regarded as proper names, and left standing in 
 their original form, when they might and ought to 
 have been translated. This is the case with the term 
 *' Gammadims," which occurs in the verse before us. 
 
CORRECTIONS OF AUTHORISED VERSION. ^Z 
 
 * The Gammadims," it is said, " were in thy towers ; " 
 while the real meaning is, ** heroes were in thy 
 towers." In the same way, instead of *' the book of 
 Jasher," we ought to read ** the book of the pious,"" 
 or "upright"; and "men of Belial" should simply 
 be referred to as " wicked," or *' worthless men." 
 The converse error, however, has at times been 
 committed ; and the names of places have been 
 translated as if they were common nouns. So is it, 
 for instance, with " Bethel " in Judges xx. 26, which 
 is rendered, according to its etymology, "the house 
 of God," but should have been left untranslated ; 
 with " No-Ammon," in Nahum iii. 8, which is trans- 
 lated as "populous No," but should not have been 
 changed ; and especially with the word " Lehi," in 
 Judges XV. 19, where we read that "God clave an 
 hollow place that was in the jaw, and there came 
 water thereout," whereas'the translation should be, 
 " And God clave the hollow place that is in Lehi, 
 and there came water thereout."* 
 
 Hosea iv. 18. This verse maybe regarded as re- 
 presentative of the many difficulties and obscurities 
 which are found in Hosea. The common rendering, 
 " Her rulers with shame do love, Give ye," is cer- 
 tainly not right, and is, indeed, almost unintelligible. 
 
 * JSible Revision, by members of the American Revision Com- 
 mittee, p. 64. 
 
84 OLD TESTAMENT REVISION. 
 
 But it is not easy to suggest anything in its place. 
 The literal translation of the clause probably is, 
 '* Her shields with eager desire are in love with 
 shame," and the expression " shields," being used 
 as a metaphor for "defenders," the rendering will 
 be, " Her rulers are ardently in love with shame." 
 
 Hosea xiv. 8. In the Authorised Version, this verse 
 stands as follows : — "Ephraim (shall say). What have 
 I to do any more with idols ? I have heard (him) 
 and observed him. I (am) like a green fir tree. 
 From me is thy fruit found." But, as Jehovah is the 
 speaker in the context, it is most unnatural to intro- 
 duce Ephraim as making the declaration thus ascribed 
 to him. The rendering of the verse should rather 
 be, "Ephraim, what have I any more to do with 
 idols } {i.e., in reproving thee on account of theni, 
 since Israel has returned to Jehovah.) I have 
 answered, and will watch* over him. I am like a 
 green cypress tree. From me is thy fruit received." 
 
 Joel iii. 4. The word " Palestine " employed in 
 this verse is apt to prove misleading : it should rather 
 be Philistia. The " coasts," or " borders," or, more 
 literally, " circles " of Philistia, refer to the five 
 Philistine principalities — Gaza, Ashkelon, Ashdod, 
 Gath, and Ekron. It may be added generally, that 
 there are not a few such geographical errors in our 
 common version, which plainly require correction. 
 
CORRECTIONS OF AUTHORISED VERSION. 85 
 
 Hob. iii. I — 16. This is a very sublime, though 
 somewhat irregular and obscure passage. It certainly 
 admits of being rendered with greater precision than 
 in our Authorised Version. We must acknowledge, 
 however, to begin with, that it is impossible to say 
 with any certainty what is the meaning of the term 
 Shigionoth, which stands at the head of the chapter. 
 It probably denotes an ode of the kind correspond- 
 ing to the Greek dithyrambic poetry, as seen in 
 Pindar. 
 
 1. *' A prayer of Habakkuk the prophet, in lofty strains. 
 
 2. O Lord, I have heard the report of Thee, [and] am afraid ; 
 O Lord, revive Thy work in the midst of the years : 
 
 In the midst of the years make known : 
 In wrath remember mercy. 
 
 3. God comes from Teman, 
 
 And the Holy One from Mount Paran. Sdah {Pause). 
 His splendour covers the heavens, 
 And the earth is full of His praise. 
 
 4. And His brightness is as the sun-light ; 
 Rays stream forth from His hand ; 
 And there is the hiding of His power. 
 
 5. Before Him goes the pestilence, 
 
 And a burning plague issues at His feet. 
 
 6. He stands, and measures the earth ; 
 He looks, and makes nations tremble ; 
 
 And the everlasting mountains are shattered j 
 The perpetual hills sink low : 
 His ways are everlasting. 
 
 7. I see the tents of Cushan in distress ; 
 
 The tent curtains of the land of Midian tremble. 
 
86 OLD TESTAMENT REVISION. 
 
 8. Burns Thy wrath, O Lord, against the rivers? 
 Is Thine anger against the rivers? 
 
 Is Thy fury against the sea, 
 
 That Thou dost ride upon Thy horses, 
 
 In Thy chariots of victory ? 
 
 9. Thy bow is made entirely bare ; 
 
 Chastisements sworn by the word [are inflicted]. Pause* 
 Thou dividest the earth with rivers. 
 
 10. The mountains see Thee ; they tremble ; 
 A flood of water passes over ; 
 
 The abyss utters its voice ; 
 It lifts up its hands on high. 
 
 11. Sun and moon stand still in their habitation, 
 
 On account of the light of Thy fast-flying arrows, 
 And the sheen of the lightning of Thy spear. 
 
 12. In anger Thou marchest through the earth ; 
 In wrath Thou treadest down nations, 
 
 13. Thou goest forth for the salvation of Thy people ; 
 For salvation to Thine anointed : 
 
 Thou shatterest the head from the house of the wicked. 
 Laying bare the foundation even to the neck. Pause. 
 
 14. Thou piercest with his own spears the chief of his 
 
 captains, 
 Who rush on as a tempest to scatter us ; 
 Their rejoicing is, as it were, to devour the afflicted in 
 
 secret. 
 
 15. Thou treadest upon the sea with Thy horses. 
 Upon the foam of many waters. 
 
 16. I heard, and my heart trembled; 
 At the voice my lips quivered ; 
 Rottenness entered into my bones ; 
 My knees shake beneath me ; 
 
 Who am to wait quietly for the day of distress, 
 For the approach of him to the people, who is to oppress 
 them. 
 
CORRECTIONS OF AUTHORISED VERSION. 87 
 
 Several of the renderings in the above passage 
 are little better than conjecture, and there seems 
 to be no means of attaining certainty. The second 
 clause of ver. 9 is especially doubtful, and it is 
 said that more than a hundred different expla- 
 nations of it have been proposed. In ver. 16, the 
 word which I have translated " heart " is literally 
 " belly." But that does not suit our idiom, and 
 clearly ought to be replaced by a word which does 
 so. Different nations have fixed upon various organs 
 of the body, such as the bowels, the liver, and the 
 heart, as the seat of emotion. It is mischievous 
 in cases of the kind to aim at a literal translation, 
 and the Authorised Version has erred considerably 
 in this respect. So has it, I may add, in a kindred 
 point — that of giving literal renderings of words and 
 phrases, which, though not offensive to Oriental 
 taste, are extremely so when transferred, just as 
 they stand in the original, into our language. I 
 may refer for an example to Gen. xxxiv. 30, and 
 especially to i Sam. xxv. 22, and similar pas- 
 sages. In such cases, a literal translation is the 
 most unfaithful of all translations. Indelicacy 
 might easily be avoided, while the sense is 
 preserved ; and, if thought necessary, the literal 
 meaning of the Hebrew might be placed on the 
 margin, but it certainly ought not to appear in the 
 text. 
 
OLD TESTAMENT REVISION. 
 
 Haggai ii. 7. It is with no small reluctance that 
 we find it necessary to relinquish the beautiful 
 expression, "the Desire of all nations," which occurs 
 in this verse. That title seems so exactly descrip- 
 tive of Christ, and is so familiar to us in connection 
 with Him as the long-expected Saviour, that we 
 would fain retain* it if w^e could. But it is simply 
 an impossible rendering of the original. Almost 
 every scholar of repute admits that such is the case, 
 and the verse must be translated as follows : — 
 
 ** And I will shake all nations, 
 
 And the choice things of all nations shall come [to this house], 
 And I will fill this house with glory, 
 Saith the Lord of hosts, " 
 
 Zechariah xi. 13. This is a most difficult passage, 
 when viewed in connection with its quotation by 
 St. Matthew, chap, xxvii. 9. The evangelist departs 
 widely both from the Hebrew and the Septuagint, 
 and evidently quoted the passage in a loose sort 
 of way from memory. Recent critics change the 
 vowel pointing of the Hebrew, and thus exclude all 
 mention of "the potter" from the passage. " Here," 
 says Dr. Samuel Davidson, " we should read, — 
 
 •' * And Jehovah said unto me, 
 Cast it into the treasury, 
 
 The splendid price at which I was valued by them. 
 So I took the thirty pieces of silver, 
 And cast them into the treasury in the house of Jehovah. 
 
CORRECTIONS OF AUTHORISED VERSION. 89 
 
 He adds, "A potter has no connection with the 
 temple. By changing the last vowel of the word 
 so rendered, we get the treasury, which is unques- 
 tionably correct. The word potter, however, has 
 got into the passage as cited by St. Matthew ; 
 and not only so, but field along with it. This is 
 peculiar adaptation, containing a departure both 
 from the Septuagint and the Hebrew." ^* The 
 passage well illustrates what I have said elsewhere 
 as to the uncertainty sometimes caused by the fact 
 that the vowels were not originally written in the 
 Hebrew text, and also as to the manner in which quo- 
 tations are sometimes made by the New Testament 
 writers, t 
 
 Malachi iii. i. A very simple but important cor- 
 rection requires to be made in this verse. Where 
 "messenger" occurs the second time, we should 
 read " angel ; " and the passage will therefore stand 
 thus : " Behold, I send my messenger, and he shall 
 prepare the way before me ; and the Lord whom 
 ye seek shall suddenly come to His temple, even 
 the Angel of the covenant, whom ye delight in; 
 behold, He cometh, saith the Lord of hosts." In 
 connection with this change, the following excellent 
 remarks should be considered : " From a very early 
 
 * Rev. of the Eng. Old Test., p. 62. 
 f See chaps, i., vii., ix. 
 
90 OLD TESTAMENT REVISION. 
 
 period we find mention of an extraordinary Messen- 
 ger, or Angel, who is sometimes called the Angel 
 of God J at others, the Angel of Jehovah. He is 
 represented as the Mediator between the invisible 
 God and men in all God's communications and 
 dealings with men. To this Angel, divine names, 
 attributes, purposes, and acts are ascribed. He 
 occasionally assumed a human form, as in His inter- 
 views with Hagar, Abraham, Jacob, Joshua, Gideon, 
 Manoah, and his wife. He went before the camp 
 of Israel on the night of the exodus. In Exodus 
 xxiii. 20, Jehovah said, ** Behold, I send an angel 
 before thee, to bring thee into the place which I 
 have prepared. My name is in him." In Isaiah 
 Ixiii. 9, he is called the Angel of His presence, ox face, 
 where there is a reference to Exod. xxxiii. 14, 15, 
 where Jehovah said to Moses, ** My presence (or 
 Hebrew, My face) shall go with thee, and Moses 
 said. If Thy face go not with us, carry us not up 
 hence." He is called the face of God, because, 
 though no man can see His face and live, yet the 
 Angel of His face is the brightness of His glory, and 
 the express image of His person. In Him Jehovah's 
 presence is manifested, and His glory reflected ; 
 for the glory of God shines in the face of Jesus 
 Christ. There is thus a gradual development in the 
 Old Testament of the doctrine of the incarnation, 
 of the distinction of persons in the Godhead, not 
 
CORRECTIONS OF AUTHORISED VERSION. 91 
 
 brought to light fully, lest it should interfere with 
 the doctrine of the unity of God." "^^ 
 
 Taking these facts into account, we seem not only 
 justified, but required, to translate as above by 
 "Angel of the Covenant," in order to indicate the 
 identity of the Person referred to with Him who, 
 under similar appellations, is so often set before 
 us in other passages of the Old Testament. 
 
 * Lange's Commentary^ in loc. (edited by Dr. Schaff. 
 Malachiy by Dr. Packard), 
 
CHAPTER V. 
 
 THE HAGIOGRAPHA.— CORRECTIONS OF THE 
 AUTHORISED VERSION. 
 
 HERE again, nothing more can be attempted 
 than to bring forward some of the more 
 striking specimens of those alterations and improve- 
 ments which require to be made in our current 
 English translation. And in doing so, the books of 
 Psalms, Job, Proverbs, Ecclesiastes, and Daniel will, 
 in this chapter, briefly attract our consideration. 
 
 The Book of Psalms is, upon the whole, very well 
 translated. Many felicities of rendering occur in it, 
 which ought to be scrupulously preserved, even 
 though it may be possible to make a somewhat 
 closer approach to the meaning of the original. 
 Who could bear to have the beautiful words of Ps. 
 i. 3, " He shall be like a tree planted by the rivers 
 of water," exchanged for *' He shall be like a tree 
 planted by the watercourses," or the striking state- 
 ment of Ps. xlvi. 5, ** God shall help her, and that 
 right early," altered into "God shall help her at 
 
94 OLD TESTAMENT REVISION. 
 
 the turning of the morning " ? The Psalms are, 
 next to the Gospels, that portion of Scripture which 
 has most securely taken possession of the hearts of 
 readers, and the renderings of the book with which 
 we have become familiar ought not, if possible, to 
 be disturbed. Still, there are cases in which faith- 
 fulness to the original demands correction, and to 
 some of these our attention will now be directed. 
 
 Psalm ii. 12. There can be no doubt as to the 
 Messianic character of this psalm. That is abun- 
 dantly plain from its own internal structure, as 
 well as from the use which is made of it in the 
 New Testament (Acts iv. 25, etc.). But we must 
 not on that account press for Messianic allusions, 
 where the language does not naturaUy bear such an 
 interpretation. Now, I do not think that the trans- 
 lation found in ver. 12, **Kiss the Son, lest He be 
 angry," is a correct representation of the original. 
 Several reasons might be assigned for this con- 
 clusion. Of these I shall only mention one which 
 will be obvious to the English reader, that it is 
 the Lord who is the subject of the passage, and that 
 it is most improbable that a different person should 
 here be introduced. In accordance, therefore, with 
 the tenor of the passage itself, and with the ancient 
 interpretations of it, we should read it as follows : — 
 
 10. *' Be wise now, therefore, O ye kings : 
 Be instructed, ye judges of the earth. 
 
CORRECTIONS OF AUTHORISED VERSION. 95 
 
 11. Serve the Lord with fear, 
 And rejoice with trembling, 
 
 12. Worship purely, lest He be angry, and ye perish from 
 
 the way ; 
 For quickly will His anger be kindled."* 
 
 Psalm xvi. i — 4. Every reader has probably noticed 
 the obscurity which surrounds this passage as it 
 stands in the Authorised Version It is as follows : — 
 
 1. ** Preserve me, O God : for in Thee do I put my trust. 
 
 2. O my soul, thou hast said unto the Lord, Thou art my 
 
 Lord : 
 My goodness extendeth not to thee j 
 
 3. But to the saints that are in the earth, 
 
 And to the excellent, in whom is all my delight. 
 
 4. Their sorrows shall be multiplied that hasten after another 
 
 god: 
 Their drink offerings of blood will I not offer, 
 Nor take up their names into my lips." 
 
 The unsatisfactory character of this translation 
 
 * "While agreeing with Dr. S. Davidson as to the change of 
 translation required in this psalm, I regret that he denies, surely 
 against very strong evidence, its Messianic character. He says . 
 *' This psalm is quoted in the New Testament, and applied 
 to Messiah by the early Christian disciples in Jerusalem (Acts 
 iv. 25) ; by Paul (Acts xiii. 33) ; and by the writer of the 
 Epistle to the Hebrews (i. 5). We may therefore presume that 
 it was the current interpretation of the day. Yet internal 
 evidence is against the exposition." (^Introd. to the Old Test., ii. 
 281.) His view of this psalm seems to have influenced the 
 judgment which he expresses regarding Daniel ix. 25, in his 
 Rez'ision of the English Old Testament, p. 54, 
 
96 OLD TESTAMENT REVISION. 
 
 is admitted by every scholar. But the greatest 
 difficulty is felt in replacing it by something better. 
 Upon the whole, the following version of the 
 passage seems to me as near an approach to the 
 meaning as can be reached : — 
 
 1. " Preserve me, O God : for in Thee do I put my trust. 
 
 2. I have said unto the Lord, Thou art my Lord ; 
 My prosperity is not above (independent of) Thee : 
 
 3. To the saints [also] who are in the land [I have said the 
 
 same]. 
 And to the noble, in whom is all my delight. 
 
 4. Their sorrows shall be multiplied, who hasten elsewhere ; 
 I will not pour out their drink offerings of blood, 
 
 And will not take their names upon my lips." 
 
 The obvious intention of the psalmist is to place 
 in the strongest possible contrast his own conduct 
 in making Jehovah the only object of his trust, to 
 that of others who had recourse to the worship of 
 idols. According to the translation given above, 
 he declares both to God and man — to Jehovah in 
 heaven, and to the saints on earth, that his choice 
 was decisively made, and that he would have nothing 
 whatever to do with those false gods in whom others 
 trusted. A coherent meaning seems thus imparted 
 to the verses. But the passage has been the despair 
 of interpreters, and a great variety of renderings 
 still strive for acceptance at the present day. 
 
 Psalm xix. i — 4. It seems preferable to strike 
 out the supplementary adverb here inserted in the 
 
CORRECTIONS OF AUTHORISED VERSION. 97 
 
 Authorised Version, and to read the passage as 
 follows : — 
 
 1. *' The heavens declare the glory of God, 
 And the firmament showeth His handiwork. 
 
 2. Day unto day uttereth speech, 
 
 And night unto night showeth knowledge. 
 
 3. There is no S[)eech and no language : 
 Their voice is not heard : [yet] 
 
 4. Their line is gone out through all the earth, 
 And their words to the end of the world." 
 
 The meaning of ver. 3, when thus translated, is 
 that nature utters no audible voice, but yet, without 
 any words, powerfully proclaims her lessons to the 
 reflecting mind. The idea, in short, is just that so 
 b"eautifully expressed by Addison, when he says 
 respecting the orbs of heaven, — 
 
 *' In reason! s ear they all rejoice. 
 And u tter forth a glorious voice^ 
 For ever singing, as they shine, 
 ' The hand that made us is divine.' " 
 
 Psalm xxiv. 6. There is an obvious incongruity 
 in this verse, as it stands in the Authorised Version, — 
 
 " This is the generation of them that seek him, 
 That seek thy face, O Jacob." 
 
 The second line should either be read thus, — 
 
 That seek Thy face, [of the house of] Jacob ; 
 
 or, 
 
 That seek Thy face, [O God of] Jacob. 
 
98 OLD TESTAMENT REVISION. 
 
 Psalm Ixxxiv. 4 — 7. This passage should be cor- 
 rected as follows : — 
 
 4. " Blessed are they that dwell in Thy house; 
 Continually do they praise Thee. Pause. 
 
 5. Blessed is the man whose strength is in Thee, 
 Whose thoughts are of the pilgrim -ways. 
 
 6. Passing through the valley of weeping, 
 They make it a place of fountains ; 
 
 Yea, the early rain covers it with blessings. 
 
 7. They go from strength to strength : 
 
 They appear [at length] before God in Zion." 
 
 Psalm cxxiv. 3. The word "quick" is very apt 
 to be misunderstood in this verse, as if it stood for 
 quickly. It really means alive, as in Heb. iv. 12; and 
 the unambiguous rendering is, " Then had they 
 swallowed us up alive." 
 
 Psalm cxxvii. 2. The common translation of the 
 last clause of this verse is, " For so He giveth His 
 beloved sleep." But this seems erroneous, and the 
 verse should probably stand thus : — 
 
 *' It is vain for you to rise up early, 
 ♦ And that ye lie down late ; 
 
 That ye eat the bread of sorrows ; 
 
 So giveth He it to His beloved sleeping." 
 
 The meaning is, that all the blessings for which 
 others toil so hard are freely bestowed by the 
 Lord upon His beloved, without effort on their part, 
 and unexpectedly, as in a dream. 
 
CORRECTIONS OF AUTHORISED VERSION. 99 
 
 There are a number of other slight improvements 
 which admit of being made in the common version 
 of the Book of Psalms. But, as has already been 
 suggested, it is, upon the whole, exceedingly well 
 translated ; and the familiar English forms to which 
 we are accustomed in reading it are too sacred to 
 be lightly tampered with. The case is very different 
 with the Book of Job, to which we now proceed. 
 This book must always be felt interesting and 
 sublime, even in the worst translation. But it 
 certainly is most obscure and enigmatical in many 
 passages, as presented in our Authorised Version. 
 I shall now bring forward some of these passages, 
 leaving, of necessity, many others unnoticed, though 
 they perhaps stand equally in need of correction. 
 
 Job iv., V. These chapters contain the first and 
 most important speech of Eliphaz. It is allowed on 
 all hands to be a masterpiece. The greatest skill 
 appears in its composition, when it is carefully 
 considered. It bears, of course, chiefly upon the 
 patriarch's complaints contained in the third chapter. 
 Job's sin is evidently assumed by the speaker as the 
 only possible explanation of his calamities, but the 
 thought is not painfully obtruded : there is a desire 
 evinced to spare the sufferer, while dealing faith- 
 fully with him, and to win him to repentance, rather 
 by suggesting the Divine majesty and mercy, than 
 
100 OLD TESTAMENT REVISION. 
 
 by pressing home the charge of his own guilt. 
 The speech is throughout one continued climax, 
 ascending from a lower to a higher step in th3 
 argument; "rising," to use the words of an eminent 
 German critic, " from the faint whisper and tune of 
 the summer wind to the loud and irresistible thunder 
 of the wintry storm." The following is perhaps a 
 more adequate translation of it than that contained 
 in our Authorised Version : — 
 
 1. " Then Eliphaz the Temanite answered and said, 
 
 2. If one venture on a word with thee, wilt thou be offended ? 
 But who can restrain himself from speaking? 
 
 3. Behold, thou hast instructed many, 
 
 And thou hast strengthened the feeble hands. 
 
 4. Thy words have upheld him that was tottering, 
 And thou hast sustained the sinking knees. 
 
 5. But now it Cometh upon thyself, and thou faintest ; 
 
 It toucheth thine own person, and thou art confounded. 
 
 6. Is not thy pious fear thy confidence ? 
 
 Thy hope, is it not the uprightness of thy ways ? 
 
 7. Think now : who ever perished, being innocent? 
 And where have the righteous been cut off? 
 
 8. According as I have seen, those who plough iniquity, 
 And sow mischief, reap the same. 
 
 9. By the breath of God they perish, 
 
 By the blast of His anger they vanish away. 
 
 10. The roaring of the lion, and the voice of the hoarse lion, 
 And the teeth of the young lions are rooted out. 
 
 11. The old lion perishes for lack of prey ; 
 
 And the whelps of the lioness are scattered abroad. 
 
 12. Moreover, a word came to me stealthily, 
 And my ear caught a whisper thereof. 
 
CORRECTIONS OF AUTHORISED VERSION. loi 
 
 13. In thoughts from the visions of the night, 
 When deep sleep falleth upon men ; 
 
 14. Fear came upon me, and trembling, 
 And caused all my bones to shake. 
 
 15. Then a spirit passed before my face ; 
 The hair of my flesh stood up. 
 
 16. It stood, but I discei-ned not its aspect j 
 A form was before mine eyes ; 
 
 A gentle * rustling, and I heard a voice ; 
 
 17. Is mortal man more just than God ? 
 
 Is great man more pure than He who made him ? 
 
 18. Behold, He trusteth not in His servants. 
 And His angels He chargeth with folly j 
 
 19. How much more them that dwell in houses of clay. 
 The foundation of which is in the dust ! 
 
 They are crushed before the moth. 
 
 20. From morning till evening they are broken in pieces : 
 Utterly unnoticed, they perish for ever. 
 
 21. Doth not their glory pass away with them? 
 They die, and not in wisdom. 
 
 V. I. Call now ! Does any one answer thee ? 
 
 And to which of the holy ones dost thou turn ? 
 
 2. For grief slays the foolish man, 
 And envy destroys the simple. 
 
 3. I myself saw a fool taking root. 
 But speedily I cursed his habitation. 
 
 4. His children were far from safety, 
 
 And were crushed in the gate, with none to deliver them. 
 
 5. His hai-vest did the hungry man eat, 
 
 And took it even from within the enclosures, 
 While greedy robbers swallowed up his M^ealth. 
 
 6. For trouble cometh not forth from the dust, 
 Nor does affliction spring out of the ground ; 
 
 * Exactly — " Scarce more than silence is, and yet a sound." — 
 
 The Spanish Student, by Longfellow. 
 
I02 OLD TESTAMENT REVISION, 
 
 7. But man is born unto sorrow, 
 Even as the sparks fly upward. 
 
 8. Truly I would seek unto God, 
 
 And to God would I commit my cause, 
 
 9. Who doeth great things beyond all search, 
 Yea, marvellous things without number j 
 
 10. Who giveth rain upon the earth, 
 And sendeth waters upon the fields : 
 
 11. To set up on high those that are low ; 
 And the mourning are exalted to safety. 
 
 12. He bringeth to nought the devices of the crafty, 
 
 So that their hands cannot accomplish their purpose ; 
 
 13. He taketh the wise in their own craftiness, 
 
 And the counsel of the cunning is hurried to ruin. 
 
 14. Even by day they stumble in darkness, 
 And at noonday they grope as in the night. 
 
 15. And he saveth from the sword, from their mouth. 
 Yea from the hand of the mighty — the poor. 
 
 16. So to the feeble arises hope ; 
 And iniquity shutteth her mouth. 
 
 17. Lo, blessed is the man whom God correcteth ; 
 Despise not thou, therefore, the chastening of the 
 
 Almighty. 
 
 18. For though He woundeth. He also bindeth up ; 
 Though He smiteth, yet His hands make whole. 
 
 19. In six troubles He shall deliver thee ; 
 Yea, in seven, no evil shall touch thee. 
 
 20. In famine, He shall redeem thee from death ; 
 And in war from the power of the sword. 
 
 21. When the tongue smiteth, thou shalt be hidden ; 
 And thou shalt not fear destruction when it comes« 
 
 22. At devastation and at famine thou shalt laugh. 
 
 And thou shalt not be afraid of the beasts of the earth ; 
 
 23. For thou art in covenant with the stones of the field, 
 And the beasts of the field are at peace with thee. 
 
CORRECTIONS OF AUTHORISED VERSION. 103 
 
 24. So shalt thou know that thy tent is in peace, 
 
 Thou shalt inspect thy household, and find nothing gone. 
 
 25. Thou shalt know also that thy seed shall be many, 
 And thine offspring as the grass of the earth. 
 
 26. Thou shalt come to thy grave in a full age. 
 As a sheaf of corn cometh in its season. 
 
 27. Lo, this [is the truth] : we have closely examined it ; 
 Thus stands the case : O hear it, and apply it to thyself." 
 
 Job xix. 25 — 27. This is a specially interesting 
 passage, from the reference which it has usually 
 been supposed to contain to a coming Messiah. 
 As was formerly remarked on Gen. xlix. 10, it is 
 rather a recommendation than otherwise of the 
 rendering which is given of an Old Testament 
 passage, if, when the words are naturally and fairly 
 translated, they are found to be of a Messianic 
 character. In the present case, I have no doubt 
 as to the reference ; and I think the following a 
 pretty correct representation of the original : — 
 
 25. ** For I know that my Redeemer liveth. 
 
 And that He shall stand hereafter upon the dust ; 
 
 26. And though after my skin, this [body] is destroyed, 
 Yet out of my flesh shall I see God ; 
 
 27. Whom I shall see for myself, 
 
 And mine eyes shall behold Him, and not another : 
 My veins faint with longing within me." 
 
 It is not to be denied that much uncertainty exists 
 as to the exact meaning of this passage. The only 
 point of which I am fully persuaded is that it is 
 
104 OLD TESTAMENT REVISION. 
 
 Messianic in character. When it was uttered, the 
 speaker was evidently in a state of high spiritual 
 exultation. He had entered that region of unde- 
 fined yet glorious hope, which was, from time to 
 time, penetrated by the Old Testament saints. 
 They saw that a great Deliverer was to come; 
 and however vague the notions respecting Him to 
 which they attained, they foand enough in these to 
 lift them above present sufferings, and convey the 
 strongest consolation to their hearts. So it was 
 with Job on this occasion. He now got a glimpse 
 of his future Redeemer, and of the close relation in 
 which he himself stood to that great and gracious 
 Being, which filled his soul, for the moment, with 
 ecstatic delight, and prevented him from ever again 
 sinking into those depths of misery and despair, 
 of which he had previously had so painful an 
 experience. 
 
 Job xxxiii. 23, 24. This passage also is a peculiarly 
 interesting one, for the same reason as that which 
 has just been considered. Here, again, we appear 
 to be admitted within the circle of those Messianic 
 ideas, which seem, unquestionably, -to have been 
 disseminated among the Semitic peoples at a very 
 early date. The proper translation of the passage 
 appears to be as follows ; but it is right to state that 
 the greatest diversity of opinion prevails among 
 scholars on the subject : — 
 
CORRECTIONS OF AUTHORISED VERSION, 105 
 
 23. ** If there is for him an angel, a mediator, 
 One from among a thousand, 
 
 To declare unto man that which is right, 
 
 24. Then will He be gracious unto him, and say, 
 Deliver him from going down into the pit ; 
 
 I have found a ransom." 
 
 It is obvious that there is much vagueness about 
 the ideas here expressed. But it is also, I think, 
 evident that the germs of evangelical truth exist in 
 the passage. And if a primitive revelation of a 
 coming Saviour was indeed made to mankind, we 
 should expect it to be wrapped, for a long time, in 
 obscurity, and only to grow in clearness with suc- 
 ceeding generations. All the doctrines of Scripture 
 have had a history^ coming home to the human con- 
 sciousness very dimly at first, but being evolved and 
 brought into prominence with the lapse of time. 
 The Book of Job, in particular, seems to abound in 
 those seminal thoughts which were developed and 
 exhibited clearly in the later books of Scripture. 
 
 Job xxxvi. 29 — 33. As this passage stands in the 
 Authorised Version, it seems perfectly unintelligible. 
 It runs, — 
 
 29. «* Also can any understand the spreadings of the clouds, 
 Or the noise of His tabernacle ? 
 
 30. Behold, He spreadeth His light upon it, 
 And covereth the bottom of the sea. 
 
 31. For by them judgeth He the people ; 
 He giveth meat in abundance. 
 
io6 OLD TESTAMENT REVISION. 
 
 32. With clouds He covereth the light j 
 And commandeth it not to shine 
 By the cloud that cometh betwixt. 
 
 33. The noise thereof showeth concerning it, 
 The cattle also concerning the vapour." 
 
 No word need be said to prove that this cannot 
 be the correct translation, since it is, in fact, little 
 better than nonsense. But there is very great diffi- 
 culty in proposing anything satisfactory in its place. 
 I diffidently suggest the following : — 
 
 29. " And can any understand the outspreading of the clouds, 
 Or the fearful thunderings in His pavilion ? 
 
 30. B.ehold, He flashes His lightnings over it, 
 While He darkeneth the abysses of the sea. 
 
 31. For by these means He ruleth the nations, 
 
 By these also He provides food in abundance ; 
 
 32. With His hands He covereth the lightning, 
 And commandeth it where to strike. 
 
 33. He pointeth out to it His friends ; 
 His wrath collects over the wicked." 
 
 This last verse is most variously interpreted ; and 
 its difficulty will be apparent to the reader, when the 
 following version of it is set before him, as equally 
 probable with that given above: — 
 
 ** His thundering announces Him : 
 The cattle even [tell] of His approach.*' 
 
 Prov. viii. 22 — 31. This is perhaps the most inte- 
 resting and important passage in the whole Book of 
 
CORRECTIONS OF AUTHORISED VERSION. 107 
 
 Proverbs. It is very fairly rendered in our common 
 version, but is well worthy of an attempt at a still 
 more exact translation. I venture to give it as 
 follows : — 
 
 22. *' The Lord created me as the beginning of His way, 
 Before His works of old. 
 
 23. I was set up from everlasting, 
 
 From the beginning, before the foundation of the earth. 
 
 24. While as yet there were no depths, I was brought forth, 
 While there were no fountains abounding with water. 
 
 25. Before the mountains were settled, 
 Before the hills was I brought forth ; 
 
 26. While as yet He had not made earth and plains, 
 And the first of the dust of the world. 
 
 27. When He prepared the heavens, I was there. 
 When He set a compass over the face of the deep, 
 
 28. When He established the clouds above, 
 
 When the fountains of the deep violently burst forth ; 
 
 29. When He gave to the sea its decree, 
 
 That the waters should not pass over their bounds, 
 When He appointed the foundations of the earth, 
 
 30. Then was I beside Him as the worker, 
 And was His delight day by day. 
 While I rejoiced before Him continually, 
 
 31. Rejoicing in the habitable part of His earth, 
 And my delights were with the sons of men.' 
 
 Two extreme views have been taken of the mean- 
 ing of this passage. Some have found in it as clear 
 a revelation of the Logos doctrine as that which is 
 contained in the New Testament. But this is absurd, 
 and contrary to the whole analogy of Scripture. As 
 
io8 OLD TESTAMENT REVISION. 
 
 has been already remarked, every doctrine has been 
 marked by growth and development; and, as the 
 very opening of this passage shows, the writer had 
 only an imperfect conception of the truth afterwards 
 revealed. All Hebrew scholars agree at the present 
 day, that the word in ver. 22, translated ** possessed " 
 in our English version, must have the meaning 
 " created " given it ; and this is out of harmony with 
 the Logos doctrine, as taught by St. John and other 
 writers of the New Testament. But, on the other 
 hand, some have seen in this passage nothing more 
 than a personification of Divine wisdom. This is 
 clearly to fall short of the meaning, as several ex- 
 pressions show. The word translated **set up" in 
 ver. 23 might perhaps be rendered "was conse- 
 crated ; " and a vague personal reference, at least, 
 would then suggest itself to the reader. But this is 
 far more obvious and certain in ver. 31, where the 
 acts of rejoicing and delighting spoken of point un- 
 mistakably to a person. The whole passage is thus 
 an adumbration of the Messiah, and may properly 
 be used in illustration of what is more clearly revealed 
 ■n other parts of Scripture respecting Christ. 
 
 Prov. xi. 16. This passage is here referred to, as 
 exhibiting the amendments which may occasionally 
 be made on the Hebrew text by means of the Greek 
 version. The Septuagint inserts two lines which 
 are not in the Hebrew ; and, in the opinion of the 
 
CORRECTIONS OF AUTHORISED VERSION. 109 
 
 best critics, these lines are genuine. They have a 
 ring of truthfulness and propriety about them, which 
 makes it difficult to imagine them the invention of 
 a later age. The reader will observe how admirably 
 they complete the parallelism : — 
 
 '* A gracious woman acquireth honour, 
 [But a seat of disgrace is she that hateth righteousness ; 
 The idle become destitute of substance,] 
 But the diligent acquire riches." 
 
 It may be observed, generally, that the Hebrew 
 text of the Book of Proverbs is in a most unsatis- 
 factory state. Nor can much be done for it, till 
 critical editions of the ancient versions are acces- 
 sible. This point will be found adverted to in sub- 
 sequent chapters.''* 
 
 Ecclesiastes xii. i — 7. This is, probably, the most 
 striking passage in the book, and I shall here en- 
 deavour to give it a more accurate rendering than 
 that which stands in our Authorised Version. 
 
 1. " Remember, then, thy Creator in the days of thy youth ; 
 Before the days of evil are come, and the years draw nigh, 
 When thou shalt say. There is no pleasure in them : 
 
 2. While the sun, the dawn, the moon, and the stars are not 
 
 darkened, 
 Nor the clouds return after the rain : 
 
 3. In the day when the keepers of the house tremble, 
 And its strong men bow themselves, 
 
 * See chaps, vii., viii. 
 
no OLD TESTAMENT REVISION, 
 
 And the grinders fail both in strength and numbers j 
 And those that look out of the windows are darkened ; 
 
 4. And the doors on the street are shut ; 
 And the sound of the mill is faintly heard, 
 Although the man rises at the voice of the bird, 
 And all the daughters of music are brought low ; 
 
 5. When he is afraid, too, of that which is high j 
 And terrors are in the way : 
 
 And the almond tree blossoms ; 
 
 And the grasshopper is felt a burden ; 
 
 And all desire fails ; 
 
 (For thus man goeth to his long home, 
 
 And the mourners walk about the streets ;) 
 
 6. Before the silver cord is loosed. 
 And the golden bowl is broken, 
 
 And the pitcher shattered at the fountain, 
 
 7. And the wheel broken at the cistern ; 
 And the dust returns to the earth as it was. 
 And the spirit returns to God who gave it." 
 
 There is in this passage an elaborate and highly 
 poetical comparison of the human body to a house.* 
 The following brief explanation of the metaphors 
 employed may be useful : In ver. 3, " the keepers 
 of the house" appear to denote the arms, "the 
 strong men" the legs, ** the grinders" the teeth, 
 and "those that look out of the windows" the eyes. 
 In ver. 4, it seems best to regard the allusions 
 throughout to be to the ears. The sense of hearing 
 
 * The classical scholar will remember the striking use which 
 the Roman dramatist Plautus makes of the same image in the 
 Mostellai'ia, act i., sc. 2. 
 
CORRECTIONS OF AUTHORISED VERSION, ill 
 
 has grown dull with age, yet the voice of the bird 
 in the morning has power to awake the light sleeper, 
 while no pleasure is any longer felt in music. In 
 ver. 5, "the almond tree," with its white blossoms, 
 denotes the hoariness of age ; and the last two 
 clauses appear to be best taken as a parenthesis. 
 In ver. 6, " the silver cord " denotes the thread of 
 life ; ** the golden bowl " has reference to the body 
 as a vessel containing the life blood ; "the shattered 
 pitcher" suggests, in particular, the destruction of 
 the organs of respiration; and "the wheel broken 
 at the cistern" implies the cessation of that cyclic 
 action by which life, while it endures, is maintained. 
 Finally, in ver. 7, we find a plain description of the 
 last solemn event, which has, in the previous verse, 
 been set forth under such varied imagery. 
 
 Daniel ix. 24 — 27. This is one of the most re- 
 markable passages in the Old Testament. As it 
 stands in our Authorised Version, it forms the very 
 climax and crown of the Messianic predictions. 
 There is a definiteness about it which belongs to 
 no other passage, and, on this very account, it has 
 been discredited in the estimation of certain critics. 
 As is well known, the authenticity of the Book of 
 Daniel has been flatly denied by not a few modern 
 scholars. But it has also been most ably defended. 
 We are not here called upon to discuss the question ; 
 
112 OLD TESTAMENT REVISION. 
 
 all we have to do with is the correctness of the 
 translation.* Very different versions of the passage 
 before us have been proposed, many of which 
 completely strip it of all reference to the Messiah. 
 But, after taking everything into account, I venture 
 to present the following as a fair and accurate trans- 
 lation of the verses : — 
 
 "Seventy weeks are determined upon thy people, and upon 
 thy holy city, to finish the transgression, and to make an end 
 of the sins, and to make reconciliation for iniquity, and to bring 
 in everlasting righteousness, and to seal up vision and prophet, 
 and to anoint a thing most holy. Knovi', therefore, and under- 
 stand, that, from the going forth of the word to restore and 
 build Jerusalem unto Messiah Prince shall be seven weeks ; 
 and for sixty and two weeks it shall be restored and built up 
 with streets and walls, yet in times of trouble. And, after the 
 sixty and two weeks, Messiah shall be cut off, and no one [shall 
 stand] by Him ; and the people of a prince that shall come shall 
 destroy the city and the sanctuary, and his end shall be in the 
 flood, yet war shall be to the end, according to decreed deso- 
 lations. And He shall make firm a covenant with the many 
 for one week, and, during half of the week. He shall cause 
 sacrifice and oblation to cease, and on the wing of abominations 
 shall make desolate, even till the end, and till the appointed 
 judgment shall be poured upon the desolator." 
 
 * While not entering on the question of authenticity, the 
 words of Havernick may be quoted : "The book appears in 
 a collection which contains no other prophet. Hence we con- 
 clude that this position was assigned to the prophet deliberately. 
 Were the book an interpolated one, it would, doubtless, have 
 been smuggled into the collection of the prophets." (Quoted by 
 Auberlen, Daniel, etc., p. 26.) 
 
CORRECTIONS OF AUTHORISED VERSION. 113 
 
 I do not, of course, enter upon any exposition 
 of this most striking passage. Comments without 
 number have been written upon it, and many dif- 
 ferent views have been expressed as to its import. 
 After a careful consideration of the chief of these, 
 and after endeavouring to translate the original 
 as accurately as possible, I must here be content to 
 say, that no interpretation seems to me to do justice 
 to the meaning of the passage, which does not 
 admit its Messianic character. 
 
CHAPTER VI 
 
 THE APOCRYPHAL BOOKS OF THE OLD 
 TESTAMENT. 
 
 IT is to be regretted, in several respects, that the 
 Apocryphal books of the Old Testament have 
 been so little read in this country. Many of them 
 abound in excellent matter. To these books indeed, 
 more justly than to the work which drew forth the 
 words, may the saying be applied, that if in them 
 the silvery peal of inspiration is no longer heard, its 
 vibration still lingers in the air, and serves both to 
 charm the ear and delight the heart. Reference will 
 be mcfde to some of these striking and edifying 
 passages in the sequel ; while it must, at the same 
 time, be acknowledged, that not a little of the con- 
 tents of the Apocryphal books is of the most puerile 
 character, and utterly unworthy of being set side by 
 side with the canonical Scriptures. 
 
 But, besides the intrinsic excellence of much of 
 the Apocrypha, it has a special value as forming a 
 connecting link between the Old and New Testaments. 
 The literature of the several books reflects the feel- 
 ings which prevailed among the Jews during those 
 
Ii6 OLD TESTAMENT REVISION. 
 
 centuries which elapsed between the return from 
 the captivity and the advent of Christ; while the 
 history which some of them contains, fills up what 
 must otherwise have been little better than a blank 
 in Israelitish history. From the almost total neglect 
 of the Apocrypha which has prevailed in Britain, 
 many even of the educated and intelligent classes 
 among us have but a very vague and confused notion 
 of its contents, and consequently are but slightly 
 acquainted with the fortunes and feelings of the 
 Jewish people between the times of Nehemiah and 
 Christ. It is to be hoped that the revision of the 
 text and translation of the Apocrypha, which, it is 
 understood, will be added to the revised version of 
 the Old arid New Testaments, may attract to it many 
 more readers, and thus lead to a more general 
 acquaintance with a very interesting and stirring 
 period in the history of the Jews. 
 
 The following is a list of the books which are 
 generally reckoned as constituting the Apocrypha* of 
 the Old Testament : — 
 
 1. The First Book of Esdras, 
 
 2. The Second Book of Esdras. 
 
 * There is no doubt that Apocrypha is a Greek wor/d, 
 meaning " hidden," but it is not easy to explain how this came 
 to acquire the sense of sptrious. See the various explanations 
 in Smith's Did. of Bible ^ art. Apocrypha. 
 
APOCRYPHAL BOOKS OF OLD TESTAMENT. 117 
 
 3. The Book of Tobit. 
 3. The Book of Judith. 
 
 5. Additions to the Book of Esther. 
 
 6. The Book of Wisdom. 
 
 7. Ecclesiasticus, or, the Book of the Son of 
 Sirach. 
 
 8. The Book of Baruch. 
 
 9. Additions to the Book of Daniel. 
 ID. The Prayer of Manasseh. 
 
 11. The First Book of Maccabees. 
 
 12. The Second Book of Maccabees. 
 
 I shall now give a brief account of these books 
 separately, with any remarks which they may 
 naturally draw forth, and then say a few words with 
 respect to the Apocrypha as a whole. 
 
 I . The First Book of Esdras is called the third in 
 Article VI. of the Church of England, because the 
 Latin Bible has there been followed. In the Vul- 
 gate, the canonical books of Ezra and Nehemiah are 
 styled First and Second Esdras respectively, and 
 hence the book with which we have now to deal 
 is called the third. The general object of this 
 book is to give an account of the restoration of the 
 Temple. Its most important and only independent 
 portion is comprised in chaps, iii. — v. 6. This section 
 embraces a discussion of the question as to what is 
 mightiest. The decision is at last given in favour of 
 
ii8 OLD TESTAMENT REVISION. 
 
 Truth; and there is a noble passage (chap. iv. 
 38 — ^41) to the following effect : " As for the truth, it 
 endureth, and is always strong ; and it liveth and 
 ruleth for evermore. With her there is no accepting 
 of persons or making of distinctions ; but she doeth 
 the things that are just, and refraineth from all unjust 
 and wicked things ; and all men take pleasure in her 
 works, and there is nothing unrighteous in her judg- 
 ment. And she is the strength, and the kingdom, 
 and the power, and the majesty of all ages. Blessed 
 be the God of truth. And he ceased from speaking, 
 And thereupon all the people shouted, and then 
 said. Great is truth, and mighty above all things." 
 It is worthy of notice that the last clause of this 
 passage has given rise to the oft-quoted proverb, 
 ** Magna est Veritas, et praevalebit." Many make use 
 of that saying, who have not the least idea whence it 
 is derived. As the clause stands in the Latin version, 
 it runs thus, " IMagna est Veritas et prcEvalet^^ and 
 this is an exact rendering of the Greek original. 
 But in some Y\^ay or other, and as if to indicate that 
 Truth has generally to wait a considerable time for 
 victory, the present has been exchanged for the 
 future, so that for prcEvalet we invariably find prcB- 
 valehit. 
 
 Apart from the independent and original part of 
 the book just noticed, the statements which it con^ 
 tains are exceedingly confused and inconsistent, 
 
APOCRYPHAL BOOKS OF OLD TESTAMENT. 119 
 
 besides being hopelessly irreconcilable with those 
 of the canonical Scriptures. Josephus, however, 
 attached importance to them, and makes no small 
 use of the book. Its author was probably a Jew 
 of Palestine, and its original language Greek, 
 though some writers have brought forward objec- 
 tions to both these opinions. The period of its 
 composition cannot be definitely fixed, but may 
 confidently be placed in the first or second " century 
 before Christ. 
 
 It must be regarded as a strange fact, that the 
 Church of Rome, while embracing so many of the 
 books of the Apocrypha in the canon of Scripture, 
 by a decree of the Council of Trent, excluded this 
 Book of Esdras. Certainly, several others were pro- 
 nounced canonical, which seem to have much weaker 
 claims to be so recognised than this one. Probably 
 the reason for its exclusion was twofold ; first, that 
 Jerome has spoken disparagingly of it, and secondly, 
 that the Council did not know of its existence in the 
 Greek language. 
 
 2. The Second Book of Esdras is styled the fourth 
 in the Articles of the Church of England, for the 
 reason indicated above. This book belongs to the 
 Jewish Apocalyptic literature. It is to be reckoned 
 with such productions as the Book of Enoch 
 (Jude 14). Both contain professed revelations, 
 
120 OLD TESTAMENT REVISION. 
 
 though of a very different character. The Book of 
 Enoch is jubilant and exulting, while second Esdras 
 is gloomy in the extreme. Neither book was of old 
 admitted into the canon of Scripture, and both have 
 been rejected in modern times, alike by Catholics 
 and Protestants. 
 
 This Second Book of Esdras contains a number 
 of visions referring to the Messiah. By means of 
 these we approximate towards the date of the book, 
 which may be somewhat doubtfully fixed about the 
 last decade of the first century of our era. Its 
 original language was certainly Greek, but it is now 
 known only through five ancient versions, — Latin, 
 Syriac, ^thiopic, Arabic, and Armenian. The 
 multitude of these early translations of the book 
 testifies to its great popularity in the primitive 
 Church ; and while it has always been excluded 
 from the canon, it is still numbered in our own 
 country among those writings which may be read 
 "for examples of life." 
 
 3. The Book of Tohit. This is a very mteresting 
 as well as edifying book. Some of the details which 
 it contains may, indeed, appear to our taste gro- 
 tesque and repulsive, but they are quite in keeping 
 with the literature of the East. The book was 
 evidently a very great favourite in ancient times. 
 This is plain from the simple fact that it has come 
 
APOCRYPHAL BOOKS OF OLD TESTAMENT. 121 
 
 down to us in three Greek forms, three Latin, two 
 Hebrew, one Syriac, and one Chaldaic. There is 
 nothing but a deep-rooted, though baseless, preju- 
 dice as to the literary language of Palestine at the 
 time of its composition, to give birth to any doubt 
 that it was originally composed in the Greek 
 language.*^ Its most probable date is towards the 
 close of the period of the Maccabees. 
 
 The story of the book is told in a very simple but 
 graphic fashion. There is one touch in it which 
 is perhaps unique in Jewish literature. As every 
 reader of Scripture knows, dogs are generally spoken 
 of by Hebrew writers with contempt, and are never 
 referred to as companions of man, while, metaphori- 
 cally, the name is often employed to denote all that 
 is evil. But in Tobit v, 16, we read respecting Tobit 
 and the angel, that " they w^ent forth both, and the 
 young viands dog with themr Some have suspected 
 that the last clause is an interpolation, but on no 
 sufficient grounds ; and it should rather be welcomed 
 as one passage which redeems the dog from the 
 general dislike or disgust with which he is usually 
 spoken of in Oriental literature. 
 
 Till the Reformation, the Book of Tobit was 
 regarded as a real history, and is, indeed, frequently 
 quoted by the Fathers as one of the canonical 
 
 * See afterwards, in chaps, viii., ix. 
 
123 OLD TESTAMENT REVISION, 
 
 Scriptures. But it is now regarded by almost all 
 scholars as not being strictly historical : it is rather 
 looked upon as a didactic and religious romance. 
 But this does not detract from its great merits. 
 Luther, while pronouncing it a fiction, justly de- 
 scribed it as " a book useful for Christian reading." 
 Its delineation of the family relations is of the most 
 pleasing character. Of course, extravagances appear 
 in it, as in regard to the exaggerated importance 
 it attaches to almsgiving and fasting, and the views 
 of the ministry of angels which it presents. But 
 its moral tone is uniformly high, and there is not 
 a little spiritual elevation in the beautiful hymn 
 contained in chap. xiii. The book was included 
 among the canonical writings by the Council of 
 Trent. 
 
 4. The Book of Judith. This book, like that of 
 Tobit, must be regarded as an historical romance. 
 Some, like the illustrious scholar Grotius, have 
 deemed it an allegory, and found a significance in 
 the names of all the characters that appear in it. 
 But this requires considerable straining, though it may 
 be admitted that several of the appellations given 
 to the personages which figure in it were selected 
 on account of the meaning which their derivation 
 suggests. In its mere literary form, the book has 
 a special interest as being one of the earliest of 
 
APOCRYPHAL BOOKS OF OLD TESTAMENT. 12$ 
 
 historical fictions. And, as has been well remarked, 
 its " value is not lessened by its fictitious character. 
 On the contrary, it becomes even more valuable 
 as exhibiting an ideal type of heroism, which was 
 outwardly embodied in the wars of independence. 
 The self-sacrificing faith and unscrupulous bravery 
 of Judith were the qualities by which the champions 
 of Jewish freedom were then enabled to overcome 
 the power of Syria, which seemed at the time scarcely 
 less formidable than the imaginary hosts of Holo- 
 fernes. The peculiar character of the book, which 
 is exhibited in these traits, affords the best indication 
 of its date ; for it cannot be wrong to refer its 
 origin to the Maccabean period, which it reflects 
 not only in its general spirit, but -even in smaller 
 traits." * Its date may thus be fixed about the 
 middle of the second century before Christ ; and its 
 author was unquestionably a Jew of Palestine. 
 
 While there is much that is noble and inspiriting 
 in the Book of Judith, the character of its heroine 
 can by no means be regarded as an ideal of female 
 excellence. Her conduct was marked by the great- 
 est duplicity, and her religion can be commended 
 only by those who hold that *'the end sanctifies 
 the means." Jael seems to have been selected as 
 her prototype ; and if the treachery of that Kenite 
 
 * Smith's Dza. of Bible, art. Judith. 
 
124 OLD TESTAMENT REVISION. 
 
 heroine, as described in the fourth chapter of the 
 Book of Judges, is to be reprobated, whatever may 
 be pleaded in her behalf, much more must the 
 deception practised by Judith, and all the odious 
 circumstances attending it, be subjected to the 
 severest condemnation. 
 
 The book appears to have been originally written 
 in Hebrew, from some seeming inaccuracies of 
 rendering which occur in the Greek. But if so, the 
 original was speedily lost in the translation ; and 
 the Greek version has been the source of all the 
 forms in which the book has descended to our 
 day. 
 
 5. Additions to the Book of Esther. These Addi- 
 tions are found woven into the text of the Septuagint 
 version with jnuch skill, so as in no way to interfere 
 with the natural flow of the narrative. But in the 
 common English version they appear in a very 
 confused and absurd connection. The reason of 
 this is, that the Authorised Version of 161 1 slavishly 
 followed the Latin Bible in the placing of these 
 Additions. Now, when Jerome published his edition 
 of the Vulgate, he first translated the Book of Esther 
 as it stands in the Hebrew, without the passages in 
 question, and then added them from the Greek 
 version, indicating, at the same time, the particular 
 parts of the history at which they should be taken in 
 
ArOCRYPHAL BOOKS OF OLD TESTAMENT. 125 
 
 and read. But, in course of time, Jerome's explana- 
 tory remarks were allowed to drop, and the Additions 
 then remained as so many more chapters appended 
 to the book. Hence the ridiculous order in which 
 they stand. For instance, the verse which should 
 be the very last in English and Latin, as it is in 
 Greek, actually stands as the first of the so-called 
 eleventh chapter ; and the second verse of the same 
 chapter should be the first verse of Addition I., 
 which, comprising in all eighteen verses, is prefixed 
 to the canonical book. Altogether there are seven 
 Additions. 
 
 There is no doubt that these Additions were 
 originally composed in Greek, but it is impossible 
 to say who was their author. They are used by 
 Josephus {Antiq. xi. 6, i), and seem to have been 
 prized as highly by the early Fathers as the rest of 
 the book (Clem. Rom. i. 55 ; Clem. Alex. Sirom. iv. 
 19).* The motive which led to their production 
 appears to have been a desire to supplement sup- 
 posed deficiencies in the Hebrew text. As is well 
 known, the name of God does not occur in the 
 whole of the canonical Book of Esther. But it is 
 
 * I desire here to refer, once for all, to the admirable volume 
 of Dr. Bissell on the Apocrypha, edited by Dr. Schaff, in con- 
 nection with the Commentary of Dr. Lange. The work of Dr. 
 Bissel on the Apocrypha is by far the best in the English lan- 
 guage. 
 
126 OLD TESTAMENT REVISION, 
 
 copiously made use of in the Additions, and to 
 introduce it may have been one reason for their 
 fabrication. There is nothing objectionable about 
 them. Luther compared them to "corn-flowers," 
 which he was unwilling to destroy. They were, of 
 course, pronounced canonical by the Council of 
 Trent. 
 
 6. The Book of Wisdom, This book was of old 
 known by the title of "The Wisdom of Solomon," 
 and was supposed to have had the wise king for its 
 author. But, as it clearly appears that the book was 
 written in Greek, the idea of its Solomonic author- 
 ship must at once be set aside. Nor can any one 
 be named with certainty, or even probability, as its 
 author. It has been ascribed to Philo of Alexandria ; 
 but its contents are, in several respects, antagonistic 
 to his teaching. The date of its composition may 
 be fixed a little before the time of Christ. In style, 
 the book is admirable and striking. To many writers 
 this has seemed a conclusive proof that it could not 
 have been written by a Jew of Palestine. But those 
 who argue thus forget that they have to account for 
 the canonical Epistle of St. James. The two writings 
 may be placed side by side, so far as diction is con- 
 cerned ; and if the one was composed by a Pales" 
 tinian Jew, so might the other. 
 
 Many interesting passages might be quoted from 
 
APOCRYPHAL BOOKS OF OLD TESTAMENT. 127 
 
 the Book of Wisdom. To it we owe the beautiful 
 expression, "a hope full of immortality" (ch. iii. 4), 
 and that noble address to God, "Thou sparest all, 
 because they are Thine, O Lord, Thou lover of 
 souls " (ch. xi. 26). The following paragr?.ph may 
 be quoted in full, on account of the splendid 
 imagery, as well as just thoughts, which it contains : 
 "What hath pride profited us? or what good hath 
 riches with our vaunting brought us ? All these 
 things have passed away like a shadow, and as a 
 message that hurrieth by ; as a ship that passeth 
 through the billowy water, which, when it has gone 
 through, not a trace thereof is to be found, nor the 
 pathway of her keel amid the waves ; or, as when 
 a bird hath flown through the air, there is no token 
 of her way discovered ; but the light air, being beaten 
 by the stroke of her wings, and parted with a strong 
 whirring noise, is passed through on moving pinions, 
 and after that no sign is found of her way therein ; 
 or, as when an arrow is shot at a mark, it parteth 
 the air, and that immediately cometh together again, 
 so that a man cannot know where it went through ; 
 even so we, as soon as we were born, began to draw 
 to our end, and had no sign of virtue to show, but 
 were wasted away in the midst of our wickedness. 
 For the hope of the ungodly is like dust that is 
 carried off by the wind, and like thin froth that is 
 driven away by the storm, and as a smoke which 
 
128 OLD TESTAMENT REVISION. 
 
 is dispersed by the wind, and which passeth away 
 as the remembrance of a guest that tarrieth only a 
 day. But the righteous live for evermore : their 
 reward also is in the Lord ; and the care of them 
 is with the Most High. Therefore shall thpy receive 
 the kingdom of glory and the diadem of beauty from 
 the Lord's hand ; for with His right hand shall He 
 cover them, and with His arm shall He protect 
 them" (ch. V. 8—16).* 
 
 7. Ecclesiasticus. This is the Latin name for the 
 book which is styled in Greek, ** The Wisdom of 
 Jesus the Son of Sirach." It is the great pearl of 
 the Apocrypha. By far -the longest, it is also by 
 far the most valuable, of the books. In substance, 
 it consists of a series of apothegms, and, according 
 to Jerome, it really bore the name of " Proverbs." 
 Many of the sayings which it contains are marked 
 
 * So little is the Apocrypha known in our country, at least 
 in Scotland, that I remember hearing a reverend and learned 
 professor in one of our universities extol for beauty and origin- 
 ality the following metaphor which occurs in Robert Hall's 
 sermon on the death of the Princess Charlotte : — " The arrow 
 passes through the air, which soon closes upon it, and all is 
 tranquil." As appears from the passage quoted above, the image 
 is at least as old as " The Book of Wisdom." I may add that it 
 appears again, before the time of Hall, in the " Night Thoughts '* 
 of Young, in which we find these lines : — 
 
 " But their hearts wounded, like the wounded air, 
 Soon close : where passed the shaft, no trace is found." 
 
APOCRYPHAL BOOKS OF OLD TESTAMENT. 129 
 
 by the greatest shrewdness and knowledge of the 
 world. Thus, in chap. xi. 7, we find the pithy 
 admonition (which has too often been forgotten), 
 *' Blame not before thou hast made full examination : 
 understand first, and then rebuke." In chap. xiii. 
 9, 10, we read, " If thou be invited by a great man, 
 show thyself backward, and so much the more will 
 he invite thee. Press thou not upon him, lest thou 
 be put back ; stand not far off, lest thou be for- 
 gotten." In ver. 25 of the same chapter we find 
 the following too true declaration: "When a rich 
 man speaketh, every one is silent, and they extol 
 his speech unto the clouds ; but when a poor man 
 speaketh, they say, Who is this } and if he stumble 
 they will help utterly to overthrow him." The fol- 
 lowing original and suggestive comparison occurs 
 in chap. xxv. 20: — "As the climbing up by a sandy 
 way is to the feet of an old man, so is a woman full 
 of words to a quiet man." The last clause of chap, 
 xxxviii. 25 will be recognised as very familiar, and 
 is quoted by many who have no idea whence it is 
 derived : " How can he get wisdom that holdeth the 
 plough, and that glorieth in the goad, that driveth 
 oxen, and is occupied in their labours, and whose 
 talk is of bullocks ? " The following is the eloquent 
 tribute which the writer pays to Simon the Just, in 
 chap. 1. 5 — 10 : — " How glorious was he in the midst 
 of the people, as he came out from the inner sanc- 
 
 9 
 
I30 OLD TESTAMENT REVISION. 
 
 tuary! He was as the morning star in the midst 
 of a cloud, and as the moon when she is at the full, 
 as the sun shining upon the temple of the Most 
 High, and as the rainbow giving light in the bright 
 clouds, as the flower of roses in the spring of the 
 year, as lilies by the fountains of waters, and as 
 branches of the frankincense tree in the time of 
 summer, as fire and incense in the censer, and as a 
 vessel of beaten gold adorned with all manner of 
 precious stones, as an olive tree putting forth fruit, 
 and as a cypress tree which lifteth itself up unto the 
 clouds." I only add one remarkable passage in 
 which the writer represents God's mercy as ex- 
 tending to all the members of our race. He says 
 (chap, xviii. 8 — 13), ''What is man, and whereto 
 serveth he } what is his good, and what is his evil } 
 The number of a man's days are many, if they reach 
 a hundred years. As a drop of water unto the sea, 
 and as a grain in comparison with the sand, so are 
 a few years to the days of eternity. Therefore is 
 the Lord patient with them, and poureth forth His 
 mercy upon them. He saw and perceived their end 
 to be evil : therefore He multiplied His compassion. 
 The mercy of man is toward his neighbour, but the 
 mercy of the Lord is toward all flesh : He reproveth, 
 and educateth, and teacheth, and bringeth again, 
 as a shepherd does his flock." 
 
 As we learn from the prologue of this book, it 
 
APOCRYPHAL BOOKS OF OLD TESTAMENT. 131 
 
 was at first written in Hebrew, that is, probably in 
 Aramaic, the popular dialect of the Jews after the 
 captivity. But no relic of the original remains. As 
 a necessary consequence of the Hellenizing ten- 
 dencies of the Jews, the book was speedily translated 
 into Greek by the grandson of the author, and the 
 version henceforth supplanted the original. The 
 date of the book, as at first issued, was probably 
 about B.C. 200, and the Greek translation of it was 
 produced some half-century afterwards. As all 
 agree, both author and translator were Jews of 
 Palestine. 
 
 8. The Book of Baruch, This book, though pro- 
 nounced canonical by the Council of Trent, has little 
 that can be pleaded in its behalf, either on the 
 ground of intrinsic merit or external authority. It 
 was but lightly esteemed by the Jews of old, and is 
 not recognized by the earliest Christian writers. 
 The Church of Rome, however, has assigned it a 
 place in the canon, along with most of the other 
 Apocryphal books. 
 
 The author assumes to have been the well-known 
 associate of Jeremiah (Jer. xxxii. 12, etc.). But 
 this is easily disproved by the historical inaccuracies 
 which the book contains. It was probably com- 
 posed by one or more authors in the second or third 
 century before Christ. The first part is thought to 
 
132 OLD TESTAMENT REVISION. 
 
 have been originally written in Hebrew ; the second 
 was unquestionably composed in Greek. The whole 
 book is destitute of independent thought, and is 
 simply a feeble echo of the earlier canonical Hebrew 
 Scriptures. 
 
 In imitation of the Vulgate, our common English 
 version has inserted the so-called "Epistle of 
 Jeremy" as the sixth chapter of the Book of Baruch. 
 The prophet Jeremiah had certainly nothing to do 
 with this production. It was clearly written in 
 Greek, and probably about the period of the 
 Maccabees. 
 
 9. Additions to the Book of Daniel. These Additions 
 consist of (i) The Song of the Three Children, 
 (2) The Story of Susanna, and (3) Of Bel and the 
 Dragon. All the three pieces may be described as 
 worse than worthless, and have certainly no claim 
 to a place in the canon, although that rank has been 
 given them by the Church of Rome. They seem to 
 have been composed in Greek, in the first or second 
 century before Christ. 
 
 10. The Prayer of Manasseh. This short compo- 
 sition is far superior to the legends just noticed, 
 although, curiously enough, along with i and 2 
 Esdras (alone of the Apocryphal books) it was re- 
 fused admission into the canon by the Council of 
 
APOCRYPHAL BOOKS OF OLD TESTAMENT. 133 
 
 Trent. It expresses, with not a little force and 
 feeling, the penitential emotions which are supposed 
 to have sprung up in the bosom of Manasseh, while 
 lying in captivity at Babylon. Many legends, doubt- 
 less, arose in connection with the striking history 
 of ]\Ianasseh, as recorded in the Hebrew Scriptures ; 
 and this prayer, written in Greek, seems to have 
 found its way into the Septuagint about the same 
 time as the Additions to Daniel just noticed. 
 
 1 1 . The First Book of Maccabees. There is reason 
 for gratitude that this book has descended to our 
 day. It contains a very simple, interesting, and 
 substantially accurate narrative of the mad attempts 
 of Antiochus Epiphanes, in particular, against the 
 religion and liberties of the Jews, and of the heroic 
 struggle by which, under the Maccabean princes, 
 they secured their independence. The history com- 
 prised in the book extends from about B.C. 175 to 
 B.C. 135; and for some part of that period we are 
 dependent for information on it alone. It is thus 
 an exceedingly valuable historical relic, and although 
 exaggerations occur in it (as in iv. 14 — 24, etc.), 
 and a poetical colouring is often given to the 
 language (see ii, 5 — 13, etc.), yet the general credi- 
 bility of the book is universally acknowledged. It 
 is believed to have been originally written in Hebrew, 
 but the original was speedily superseded by a Greek 
 
134 OLD TESTAMENT REVISION. 
 
 translation, and in that form the book was made 
 use of by the Jewish historian, Josephus. 
 
 12. The Second Book of Maccabees. History is also 
 to be found in this book, but not in such a pure 
 and uncorrupted state as in the former. To some 
 extent, both books travel over the same ground, 
 and where discrepancies exist between them, as is 
 not unfrequently the case, there need be no question 
 that the first is to be preferred. This second book, 
 however, is, in splendour of diction and power of 
 rhetoric, superior to the former. Passages of rich 
 expressiveness occur (as in v. 20, viii. 18, etc.); 
 and sometimes the narrative is very lively and rapid 
 (as in xiii. 22 — 26), As almost all now admit, the 
 book was originally written in Greek, and its date 
 may be fixed about the middle of the first century 
 before Christ. 
 
 Such, then, is a brief account of the Old Testa- 
 ment Apocrypha ; and from what has been said, 
 the reader will see that some of the books which 
 it contains are extremely valuable. They link ©n, 
 as nothing else can do, the Old Testament to the 
 New, and fill up, to some extent, that deplorable 
 hiatus which, but for them, exists between the 
 period of the Return and the opening of the Gospel 
 history. It is therefore much to be regretted that 
 
APOCRYPHAL BOOKS OF OLD TESTAMENT. 135 
 
 an extreme and fanatical Protestantism has led, in 
 many quarters, to an almost entire neglect of these 
 books. They are certainly not worthy of being 
 placed, as the Church of Rome has placed most of 
 them, on a level with the books comprised in the 
 Hebrew canon of Scripture ; but that is no reason 
 why they should, as a whole, be spoken of with 
 scorn, or treated with neglect. Many of the 
 Fathers refer to them with the greatest respect. 
 Luther, as we have seen, often drops a kindly word 
 in their favour. He even goes so far as to declare 
 respecting the First Book of Maccabees, that *' it 
 is not unworthy to be reckoned among the other 
 sacred books," and Grimm, one of our greatest 
 modern authorities on the subject of the Apocrypha, 
 emphasises this opinion of the Reformer, by saying 
 that '* it deserves a place among the Hagiographa of 
 the canon, not entirely perhaps with the same right 
 as the books of Ezra and Nehemiah, but decidedly 
 with a better claim than the Book of Esther."* 
 
 The question whether the Apocryphal books are 
 quoted or referred to in the New Testament has 
 been much discussed, and with varying results. 
 As to express quotations, there seem to be none, 
 though many striking parallels can be produced. 
 But as to references, these are clear and certain. 
 
 * Quoted by Dr. Davidson, Introd. to Old Test., iii. 443. 
 
136 OLD TESTAMENT REVISION. 
 
 No one can consider with a fair mind such a passage 
 as Heb. xi. 35 — 38, without perceiving that it con- 
 tains several obvious allusions to the narratives com- 
 prised in the first and second books of Maccabees. 
 In fine, a great boon would be conferred on 
 ordinary English readers, if at least the Book of 
 Wisdom, Ecclesiasticus, and the Books of Maccabees 
 were printed in our common editions of the Bible. 
 They might either be inserted in smaller type than 
 the rest of the volume, between the Old and New 
 Testaments, or given in like type, as an appendix at 
 the end of the New Testament. 
 
CHAPTER VII. 
 
 THE TEXT OF THE OLD TESTAMENT 
 
 IN dealing with the text of the Old Testament, 
 scholars find themselves in a very different posi- 
 tion from that which they occupy in seeking to settle 
 the true text of the New Testament. They have less 
 trouble with the Old Testament text, simply because 
 they possess fewer materials for criticism. The 
 number of manuscripts containing the whole or 
 part of the Greek New Testament is enormous ; 
 and many of these can be proved to be quite inde- 
 pendent of each other. Moreover, several of the 
 manuscripts of the New Testament are of great 
 antiquity ; some, as the Vatican, the Sinaitic, and the 
 Alexandrian, dating as far back as the fourth or 
 fifth century of our era. But it is wholly different 
 with the manuscripts of the Old Testament. Very 
 few of these can be deemed older than the twelfth 
 century, and, when carefully examined, they are 
 all found to have sprung from the same source, 
 being only somewhat varying forms of one original 
 copy. 
 
138 OLD TESTAMENT REVISION. 
 
 The Old Testament text, then, so far as we have 
 any means at our command for establishing its 
 correctness by means of manuscripts, is rather to be 
 compared with some of the classical writers, than 
 with the New Testament. For example, it is gene- 
 rally held that all existing copies of the Greek 
 tragedian, -^schylus, are to be traced to a single 
 original manuscript, the date of which cannot be 
 carried higher than the tenth century. In that case, 
 the variations which appear in other manuscripts of 
 ^schylus can simply be regarded as inaccuracies 
 which have been committed, or conjectural emenda- 
 tions which have been introduced, by transcribers. 
 So with respect to the text of the Old Testament. 
 All manuscripts, even the most ancient, so far as yet 
 known, are to be traced to one archetypal text, 
 which had become fixed among the Jews some time 
 after the birth of Christ. 
 
 This seems a settled point in the judgment of 
 modern Hebrew scholars. They are, in general, 
 agreed *' that all copies of the Hebrew text go back 
 to one archetype ; " * and, referring to this conclu- 
 sion, as held by such men as Olshausen, Lagarde, and 
 others, Dr. R. Smith, who is so familiar with the 
 whole subject, after expressing himself to the above 
 eifect, does not hesitate to add, ** I know of no 
 
 * The Old Test, in Jew. Ch., p. 397. 
 
THE TEXT OF THE OLD TESTAMENT. 139 
 
 attempt to refute the argument." We may thus say, 
 respecting the present text of the Old Testament, 
 what has been said in regard to the poem of 
 Lucretius, — '* It is now universally admitted that 
 every existing copy has come from one original, 
 which has itself long disappeared." * 
 
 The important inquiry, therefore, at once presents 
 itself, — "■ Whence was that fontal text derived } " 
 The following answer has been recently given to 
 this question. Referring to the ancient scribes, 
 Dr. R. Smith remarks, "We have the text of the 
 Hebrew Old Testament as they gave it to us." And 
 he goes on to say, " After the fall of the Jewish 
 state, when the scribes ceased to be an active party 
 in a living commonwealth, and became more and 
 more pure scholars, gathering up and codifying all 
 the fragments of national literature and national life 
 that remained to them, we find the text of the Old 
 Testament carefully conformed to a single archetype. 
 But we cannot trace this text back through the 
 centuries when the nation had still a life of its own. 
 Nay, we can be sure that in these earlier centuries 
 copies of the Bible circulated, and were freely read 
 even by learned men like the author of the Book of 
 Jubilees, which had great and notable variations of 
 text, not inferior in extent to those still existing in 
 
 * Munro's Lucreiius, ii i. 
 
140 OLD TESTAMENT REVISION. 
 
 the New Testament MSS. In later times every trace 
 of these varying copies disappears. They must have 
 been suppressed or gradually superseded by a deli- 
 berate effort, which has been happily compared by 
 the German scholar, Noldeke, to the action of the 
 Caliph Othman in destroying all copies of the 
 .Koran which diverged from the standard text that 
 he had adopted. There can be no question who 
 were the instruments in this work. The scribes 
 alone possessed the necessary influence to give one 
 text or one standard MS. a position of such supreme 
 authority. . . . This, then, was what the scribes did. 
 They chose for us the Hebrew text which we have 
 now got. Were they in a position to choose the 
 very best text, to produce a critical edition which 
 could justly be accepted as the standard, so that we 
 lose nothing by the suppression of all divergent 
 copies ? Now, this at least we can say, that if they 
 fixed for us a satisfactory text, the scribes did not 
 do so in virtue of any great critical skill which they 
 possessed in comparing MSS. and selecting the best 
 readings." And, *' if the scribes were not the men 
 to make a critical text, it is plain that they were also 
 not in a position to choose, upon scientific principles, 
 the very best extant MS. ; but it is very probable 
 that they selected an old and well-written copy, 
 possibly one of those MSS. which were preserved in 
 the court of the Temple. Between this copy and 
 
THE TEXT OF THE OLD 7ESTAMENT. 141 
 
 the original autographs of the sacred writers there 
 must have been many a link.'' * 
 
 It must be confessed that this is a very plausible 
 theory, but it is set forth with by far too much con- 
 fidence. The truth is, that the real character of the 
 existing Hebrew f text, as respects absolute trust- 
 worthiness, is as yet undecided, and must remain so, 
 until certain great objects are accomplished. There 
 must be a more scientific handling of all the mate- 
 rials of criticism. Manuscripts and versions of the 
 Hebrew text must be more thoroughly investigated, 
 while a far more exhaustive collection must be made 
 of those quotations from the Old Testament, which 
 are so profusely scattered through the lat'=^r Jewish 
 literature. Meanwhile, the following brief account 
 may be given of the manner in which the Hebrew 
 text, as it stands, has descended to our day. 
 
 We owe it to the labours oi a company of Jewish 
 
 * The Old Test., etc., p. 67 ff. 
 
 f The Hebrew text generally current at the present day is 
 substantially that of Van der Hooght, published at Amsterdam 
 and Utrecht in 1705. This text was based on that of Athias, 
 a learned rabbi of Amsterdam, whose first edition came out in 
 1 66 1, and was revised in 1667. But the original text, on which 
 all subsequent issues have chiefly rested, was that of Bomberg, 
 printed at Venice, 1525-26. The editor was a learned Tunisian 
 Jew, named Jacob ben Chasin, and he happily adopted the Mas- 
 soretic text, which, as we shall see, there is reason to believe, on 
 the whole, very correct, though undoubtedly admitting of many 
 emendations. 
 
142 OLD TESTAMENT REVISION. 
 
 scholars, called *'the Massorets," whose work, 
 beginning about a.d. 600, extended over centuries, 
 and was not concluded until about a thousand years 
 after Christ. The term '* Massorets " means *'pos-. 
 sessors of tradition," and the result of the long- 
 continued efforts of those included under this 
 appellation is known as *' the Massora," a kindred 
 term, denoting what has been handed down from 
 former generations. 
 
 The work proposed to themselves by the Massorets 
 was of a very varied and comprehensive character- 
 It embraced such points as the settlement of the 
 true text ; the proper vocalization and accentuation 
 of the words ; the numbering of the verses of each 
 of the books of Scripture ; and, to a certain extent, 
 the discussion of that interpretation of the sacred 
 writings which should be accepted. The contents 
 of the Massora have usually been described as 
 dealing with the letters, words, and verses of the 
 books of Scripture. And, with regard to each of 
 these, the most minute observations are made. As 
 respects the letters, the Massorets counted how often 
 each letter of the Hebrew alphabet occurred in the 
 Old Testament — noticed irregularities in the pointing 
 which a few letters presented — and commented on 
 anvthino: unusual which was to be noted in the form 
 or size of some of them. As regards the words, they 
 
THE TEXT OF THE OLD TESTAMENT. 143 
 
 recorded on the margin readings which were to be 
 preferred to those in the text — noticed any peculi- 
 arities of meaning or syntax — and stated how often 
 particular words were to be found at the beginning, 
 middle, or end of verses. And again, in regard to 
 the verses, they pointed out the middle one in each 
 of the books, named the letters with which verses 
 began, and took notice of various other circum- 
 stances, often of a trivial or childish character, but 
 all showing the microscopic attention which had 
 been devoted to the sacred text.* 
 
 One of the most valuable services rendered by the 
 Massorets was their collection of various readings. 
 The number of these has been differently estimated 
 at from about 800 to 1170. They were in no case 
 admitted into the text by the Massorets themselves, 
 but were either written on the margin, or preserved 
 in separate documents. In existing manuscripts, 
 however, these marginal notes are often found 
 incorporated in the text. They, no doubt, arose 
 partly from the various readings met with in the 
 different manuscripts used by the Massorets, and 
 partly from critical conjecture on the part of the 
 compilers of the Massora. These marginal varia- 
 
 * So minute were their observations, that they noted the verses, 
 such as Zech. vi. 1 1 — amounting to twenty-six in the whole 
 Bible — which contain in themselves all the letters of the Hebrew 
 alphabet. 
 
144 OLD TESTAMENT REVISION. 
 
 tions seem always to have represented the readings 
 which the Massorets preferred, and are, in fact, 
 generally superior to the traditional text. In our 
 English version of the Old Testament, sometimes 
 the ** written" or received text is followed, while at 
 other times the " reading " on the margin is adopted. 
 A curious phenomenon will be found here and 
 there presenting itself to the eyes of one who looks 
 carefully through a copy of the Hebrew Bible as 
 printed at the present day. He will observe certain 
 letters with marks over them, others printed in a 
 larger size than common, and still others printed in a 
 smaller form than the rest, with a few less frequent 
 peculiarities. Thus in Gen. xvi. 5, xviii. 19, xxxvii. 
 12, etc., a circular mark appears over some of the 
 words, which may be thus represented in English, 
 "where;" and the Rabbinical writers explain these 
 marks as indicating that a mystical sense is to be 
 found in the passages ; but what the signs were 
 meant at first to indicate cannot now be determined. 
 In other places, letters are either increased or di- 
 minished in size, so as to attract special attention ; 
 and this practice, too, is thought to point out hidden 
 meanings which would not otherwise have been 
 suspected. Thus, in Deut. vi. 4, the final letter of 
 the Hebrew word for ** hear," is enlarged, as if it 
 were written in English '' hear," and this is regarded 
 as calling particular attention to the importance of 
 
THE TEXT OF THE OLD TESTAMENT 145 
 
 the statement about to be made. On the other 
 hand, letters are sometimes found written in a smaller 
 form than those around them, as in Esther ix. 7, 
 where the name of one of Haman's sons is written 
 as if thus in English, " Parshandatha," and this dimi- 
 nution of the Hebrew letter standing for th is 
 thought to suggest the disdain of the Jews for 
 Haman and his children. The peculiarities of writing 
 referred to probably had their origin in mere acci- 
 dent ; but their careful preservation by one copyist 
 after another shows the extreme watchfulness which 
 was brought to bear on the work of transcription ; 
 and it is a curious fact that such variations in the 
 size of letters, due at first to merely accidental 
 causes, should have a place in our printed copies of 
 the Hebrew Bible even at the present day. 
 
 The important subject of vocalization was formerly 
 glanced at, but here falls to be more particularly 
 considered. It was shown that only the consonants 
 were, for a very long period, written in Hebrew 
 documents, and that most diverse meanings might 
 be attached to these, according as one set of vowels 
 or another accompanied them. Strange to say, some 
 recent writers have pleaded that the vagueness of 
 meaning thus imparted to the text was an advantage, 
 and that therefore the Hebrew text should be inter- 
 preted in any way the consonants by themselves 
 
 10 
 
146 OLD TESTAMENT REVISION. 
 
 would permit ! But this is obviously absurd. The 
 sacred text could have had at first but one definite 
 meaning, and this must have been fixed by the 
 particular vowels which in every case waited upon 
 the consonants. To give another illustration : as 
 in English, the three consonants, W R D, may mean 
 either "ward" or "word," according to the vowel 
 which is placed between the first and second letters, 
 while, if vowels are inserted also between the second 
 and third letters, we may have such diff"erent senses 
 suggested as "warred" "wearied" "worried;" so is 
 it very frequently in Hebrew. In fact, there are 
 some cases in which we know that the Jewish 
 authorities differed as to the proper vowels, and 
 therefore as to the meaning of the words. Thus, 
 the word rendered "bells" in Zech. xiv. 20, may 
 with a different pointing be translated " shadows," 
 and it is actually so taken by some of the Rabbinical 
 writers. Again, the word rendered " bed " in Gen. 
 xlvii. 31, may, with different vowels, be translated 
 " staff," and is so taken by the Septuagint. This 
 accounts for the difference between Gen. xlvii, 31, as 
 given in our Authorised Version, and Heb. xi. 21, 
 which refers to the passage. In the latter the 
 Septuagint is followed. From such illustrations it 
 becomes plain how important the question is as to 
 the degree of authority which is to be attached to 
 the traditional svstem of vocalization. 
 
THE TEXT OF THE OLD TESTAMENT. 147 
 
 Very various opinions have been expressed as to 
 the origin and authorship of the Hebrew vowel 
 points. Some have maintained that they were 
 invented or restored by Ezra, and then handed 
 down by tradition, until at last they were perfected 
 and written down by the Massorets. Others have 
 held that the Massorets themselves invented them ; 
 while such an eminent Hebrew and Rabbinical 
 scholar as Dr. Lightfoot goes so far as to claim for 
 them divine inspiration. These and other discrepant 
 theories sufficiently prove that no certain conclusion 
 can- be reached on the point in question. We can 
 only be guided by probability in deciding it. If I 
 may venture to express an opinion regarding it, I 
 should be i-nclined to hold that provision had been 
 made from the time when the Hebrew began to fade 
 out of use as a living tongue, for the accurate trans- 
 mission of its vowel points. We have seen what a 
 vital matter this is in the interpretation of the 
 language. The most diverse significations attach 
 themselves to words, according to the vowels by 
 which their consonants are attended. And we can- 
 not conceive that such a momentous matter as the 
 correct exegesis of Scripture would be left to hap- 
 hazard, or would not, in fact, be cared for in the 
 most scrupulous and effective manner. Probably, 
 therefore, about the date of the return from the 
 captivity, means were devised for fixing and trans- 
 
148 OLD TESTAMEMT REVISION, 
 
 miting the proper Hebrew vocalization. There is, 
 however, no proof that the vowels were written in 
 the text, along with the consonants, for many 
 centuries afterwards. It is doubtful whether they 
 are referred to in the Talmud or not, some scholars 
 taking an affirmative, and others a negative, view of 
 this question. What alone seems certain is, that they 
 were no invention of the Massorets, but had existed 
 long before .their day, and that the system was simply 
 elaborated and written down by them in the course 
 of the many centuries embraced by their labours. 
 
 Something must now be said with respect to the 
 Hebrew accents. These fulfil far more important and 
 manifold purposes than is the case in most other 
 languages. First, and as in other tongues, they 
 indicate the tone-syllable. This is a far more weighty 
 matter than we sometimes clearly apprehend. From 
 being accustomed to read Greek and Latin accord- 
 ing to quantity, and not accent, we are apt to forget 
 how important the latter is, in order to the bring- 
 ing out of the true meaning of a word. F'very one, 
 however, who has been in Greece, where the ancient 
 language is so wonderfully preserved in substance, 
 soon discovers how necessary attention to the correct 
 accentuation is, in order that he may either under- 
 stand, or be understood. And we have only to think 
 what different ideas are suggested in our own Ian- 
 
THE TEXT OF THE OLD TESTAMENT. 149 
 
 guage by the words present and present^ desert and 
 desert, that we may feel how much frequently depends 
 on attending to the proper accentuation of a word.* 
 Again, the Hebrew accents are also used as a 
 means of punctuation. This, too, is a most impor- 
 tant object. As every one who reflects for a moment 
 will perceive, the place and manner in which stops 
 are employed often amount to interpretation. A 
 striking illustration of this is found in the New 
 Testament in Rom. ix. 5. As that verse stands in 
 the Authorised Version, it runs thus : " Whose are 
 the fathers, and of whom as concerning the flesh 
 ■ Christ came, who is over all, God blessed for ever. 
 Amen." But readers of the Revised Version find 
 the following note upon the margin: ** Some modern 
 interpreters place a full stop dSXer Jiesh, and translate. 
 He who is God over all be {is) blessed for ever; or. He 
 
 * Every Scotchman has smiled at times to hear from the lips 
 of Englishmen such an accentuation as Balmoral for Balmoral, 
 MSntrose for Montrose, Oban for Oban; and the following 
 amusing illustration may be added of the strange way in which 
 a misplaced accent disguises a word. The story goes that an 
 accomplished Frenchman, who had acquired his knowledge of 
 English only from books, cherished a great admiration for the 
 pastoral poet Shenstone, and that, on the death of his favourite, 
 he wrote the following epitaph in his honour : — 
 
 " Beneath this plain stone 
 Lies WilHam Shenstone, 
 Who wrote on things rural. 
 In language natural ! " 
 
150 OLD TESTAMENT REVISION. 
 
 who is over all is God, blessed for ever. Others punc- 
 tuate, flesh, who is over all. God he {is) blessed for 
 everP * There is nothing corresponding to stops in 
 the ancient Greek manuscripts, so that the true 
 rendering of such a passage as the above must be 
 reached on other grounds. But the Hebrew text 
 has, in this respect, the advantage. It is furnished 
 with a rich system of accents, which serve, among 
 other purposes, to show the relation in which each 
 word stands to the whole sentence. By attending 
 to the interpunction thus secured, various errors of 
 translation may be avoided. Thus, some Jewish 
 expositors have striven hard to get rid of the Mes- 
 sianic reference in Isaiah ix. 5, which is rendered as 
 follows in our Authorised Version : " For unto us a 
 child is born, unto us a son is given : and the 
 
 * Many illustrations of the importance of a proper punctua- 
 tion in order to bring out the real meaning or force of a passage 
 might be adduced. The following additional one may be given 
 from the Samson of Milton. Near the beginning of the poem 
 we find these lines generally pointed as follows: — 
 
 " Ask for this great deliverer now, and find him 
 Eyeless in Gaza at the mill wiih slaves, 
 Himself in bonds under Phiiistian yoke." 
 
 But how much more strikingly is the climax of Samson's 
 miseries brought out when the second line is differently punc- 
 tuated, and the passage read thus : — 
 
 " Ask for this great deliverer now, and find him 
 Eyeless, in Gaza, at the mill, with slaves, 
 Himself in bonds under Phiiistian yoke." 
 
THE TEXT OF THE OLD TESTAMENT. 151 
 
 government shall be upon his shoulder; and his 
 name shall be called Wonderful, Counsellor, the 
 mighty God, the everlasting Father, the Prince of 
 peace." They have tried to substitute some such 
 rendering as the following: '*The God who is called 
 Wonderful, Counsellor, the mighty God, the ever- 
 lasting Father, calls his name the Prince of peace;" 
 but the accentuation is against this, and in favour of 
 the common English version ; * while Aben Ezra, 
 a celebrated Jewish Rabbi, himself declares, "Any 
 interpretation which is not in accordance with the 
 arrangement of the accents thou shalt not consent 
 to, nor shalt thou listen to it." 
 
 Yet again, the Hebrew accents were intended to 
 serve a musical purpose. They regulate that pecu- 
 liar cantillation made use of by the Jews in the reci- 
 tation of the Scriptures in the synagogues. Some 
 have maintained that their import from the first was 
 essentially rhythmical. As to their antiquity, the 
 same remarks will apply that have been made above 
 with respect to the Hebrew vowel points. It is 
 certain, from the way in which the accents are re- 
 ferred to in the Massora, that they were of earlier 
 date than that compilation. Scholars are divided in 
 opinion as to whether or not they are referred to in 
 the Talmud. 
 
 * British Quarterly Review^ April, 1881, p. 338. 
 
152 OLD TESTAMENT REVISION. 
 
 A few more particular remarks may now be made 
 on the subject of existing Hebrew manuscripts. 
 From time to time rumours are circulated that some 
 very ancient copies have been discovered. But 
 nothing practical has resulted from these reported 
 discoveries. So far as is yet known, the most ancient 
 Hebrew manuscripts cannot be dated much higher 
 than the tenth century. And, even at the present 
 day, the principles on which the age of such docu- 
 ments ought to be settled have not been agreed 
 upon by scholars. The science of Old Testament 
 textual criticism is still in a comparatively imperfect 
 condition, so that little can with certainty be said 
 as to the value or antiquity of extant manuscripts. 
 The following brief account of the matter by an 
 English and a German writer must here suffice : — 
 
 " In computing the number of known MSS.," says 
 Mr. Thrupp, *' it must be borne in mind that by far 
 ':he greater part contain only portions of the Bible. 
 Of the 581 Jewish MSS. collated by Kennicott, not 
 more than 102 give the Old Testament complete, 
 with those of De Rossi the case is similar. In Ken- 
 nicott's volumes, the MSS. used for each book are 
 distinctly enumerated at the end of the book. The 
 number collated by Kennicott and De Rossi together 
 were, for the Book of Genesis, 490 ; for the Megilloth 
 (including the books of Ruth, Esther, Proverbs, the 
 Song of Solomon, and Lamentations) collectively, 
 
THE TEXT OF THE OLD TESTAMENT. 153 
 
 549 : for the Psalms, 495 ; for Ezra and Nehemiah, 
 172; and for the Chronicles, 211. Manuscript 
 authority is most plenteous for the Book of Esther, 
 least so for those of Ezra and Nehemiah. Since the 
 days of Kennicott and De Rossi, modern research 
 has discovered various MSS. beyond the limits of 
 Europe. Of many of these there seems no reason 
 to suppose that they will add much to our knowledge 
 of the Hebrew text. Those found in China are not 
 essentially different in character from the MSS. 
 previously known in Europe : that brought by Bucha- 
 nan from Malabar is now supposed to be a European 
 roll."* Strack, a recent German writer, has enu- 
 merated and described the most ancient and valuable 
 Hebrew manuscripts which are known to exist. He 
 refers to the following : (i.) That of Ben Asher, 
 who lived at Tiberias in the tenth century. This 
 MS. is described as the most celebrated and valuable 
 of all, and has had a very dominant influence in the 
 formation of the received text, (ii.) A MS. of the 
 ProphetSj said to have been written in the year 
 827. (iii.) A IMS. of the later prophets, undoubtedly 
 ancient, now in the British Museum, (iv.) Two an- 
 cient MSS., said to be at Damascus, but which have 
 not yet been accurately collated, (v.) The MSS. 
 of Kennicott, already described, (vi.) The MSS. of 
 
 Smith's Diet, of Bible, art. Old Test., p. 604. 
 
154 OLD TESTAMENT REVISION. 
 
 De Rossi, four of which are supposed to date from 
 the eighth to the eleventh century, (vii.) The MSS. 
 preserved at Odessa, one of which, written on 
 deerskin, and containing the law complete, is said 
 to have been written before 580 a.d. But these 
 Odessan MSS. still await full examination, (viii.) 
 The great collection of MSS. made by Firkowitz, 
 nearly half a century ago, and now in the Imperial 
 Library at St. Petersburg. Some of these are said 
 to be very ancient, but as yet very little is known 
 with certainty regarding them.* 
 
 It thus appears that there is no inconsiderable 
 amount of available manuscript wealth, which still 
 remains to be turned to full account. Those copies 
 which have had a Karaite origin should especially 
 be examined with great care. The Karaites are a 
 sect of Jews who attach supreme importance to the 
 written law, and reject mere oral traditions. There 
 is reason, therefore, to expect that their manuscripts 
 of the sacred books may exhibit a text differing, to 
 some extent, from that of the Massorets. It is not 
 likely, however, that much change will require to be 
 made on the Hebrew text as now received, even 
 after all the manuscript materials for criticism which 
 exist have been subjected to the most sifting 
 examination. 
 
 * Proleg. Ciit. in Vet. Test. Hebraic, p. 43. 
 
THE TEXT OF THE OLD TESTAMENT. 155 
 
 One further remark may be made respecting the 
 text of the Old Testament. It used to be main- 
 tained that the Jews had, in several places, wilfully 
 corrupted it, in order to weaken the argument de- 
 rived from it in favour of Christianity. This charge 
 is as old as the days of Justin Martyr, who lived in 
 the early part of the second century. That primitive 
 Father of the Church alleges in his ** Dialogue with 
 Trypho," that the Jews had cut out from Ps. xcvi. 
 10, the words, **from the wood." He would have 
 the verse to run thus : '* Say among the heathen, The 
 Lord reigneth yr(?;;2 the wood ;^^ and he affirms that 
 these last three words had been excised by the Jews 
 because of their clear reference to the cross of 
 Christ.* But there is not the slightest ground for 
 such an allegation. As Otto has remarked, it is 
 far more likely that the words were inserted by some 
 Christian, than that they were cut out by the Jews. 
 And the many charges of a similar kind made by 
 the early Fathers seem all equally baseless, f 
 
 * Dial, cum Tryph. Jud., chap, Ixxiii. 
 
 f The most remarkable passage, after that referred to above, 
 is the following, which was said to have been cut out from the 
 text of Jeremiah : — " And the holy Lord remembered His dead 
 Israel, wdio had fallen asleep in the land of sepulture, and de- 
 scended to them to preach the salvation which is from Him, that 
 He might save them." Justin Martyr expressly accuses the 
 Jews of having excised this passage, and Irenaeus frequently 
 quotes it. But, as Harvey has remarked, **the fact that 
 
156 OLD TESTAMENT REVISION, 
 
 Scholars are now generally agreed that there is no 
 reason to believe that the Jews at any time mutilated 
 the sacred text. De Wette* observes with much 
 force, that, had they allowed themselves to do so, 
 this must have appeared in their bitter controversies 
 with the Samaritans. But, on the contrary, it was 
 their opponents who altered the words of Scripture, 
 in order to obtain some seeming support for the 
 peculiar views which they had adopted. In the 
 fidelity with which the Jews thus acted, we find a 
 strong confirmation of the belief that they have 
 banded down to us a generally sound and genuine 
 text, so far as that was in their own possession. 
 But, as we shall see in the following chapters, 
 ancient versions still remain to be more carefully 
 and critically studied, with a view to the more 
 definite ascertainment of the primitive Hebrew 
 text. 
 
 not only ignored in the Hebrew text, but also in the LXX., the 
 Vulgate, the Hexapla. the Targums, and all other ancient 
 versions of Scripture, is a conclusive proof of its spuriousness" — 
 Irenirus, ii. 109. 
 
 * Eim. in das AlL 7 "est., s. 84. 
 
CHAPTER VIII. 
 
 THE SEPTUAGINT AND THE SAMARITAN 
 PENT A TEUCH. 
 
 I BRING the Septuagint and the Samaritan 
 Pentateuch together in the same chapter for 
 two reasons, — first, because they were both formed 
 before the coming of Christ, and secondly, because, 
 as we shall see, they have a very close connection 
 with each other.* 
 
 Hardly any event in the history of the world can 
 be deemed more providential than the formation of 
 the Greek version of the Old Testament. The 
 Hebrew language was always confined within a very 
 narrow territory; and so long as Divine revelation 
 continued locked up in that tongue, it could become 
 known only to comparatively few of the members of 
 our race. But, under the wise government of the 
 Almighty, provision had' been made, long before 
 
 * The Samaritan Pentateuch is a recension rather than a 
 version, since its language is substantially the same as the 
 Hebrew. 
 
158 OLD TESTAMENT REVISION, 
 
 the coming of Christ, for the easy and rapid spread 
 of the Gospel message throughout the whole civil- 
 ized world, as soon as the fulness of time arrived. 
 The Septuagint translation of the Hebrew Scriptures 
 had been gradually formed at Alexandria, between 
 the third and first century before Christ, and was 
 everywhere current among the Jews at the date of 
 our Saviour's birth. The Old Testament Scriptures 
 were thus thrown open to the whole world ; and 
 as the New Testament was throughout written in 
 Greek, the whole of the sacred volume, so far as 
 its contents were collected and circulated, thus 
 became intelligible to almost every one within the 
 vast bounds of the Roman Empire. It is well worth 
 our while to pause here for a little, and consider 
 how widely a knowledge of the Greek language 
 had been spread throughout the world before the 
 commencement of the apostolic age. We shall thus 
 see how wonderfully the way had been prepared for 
 the promulgation of divine truth among all nations, 
 when the stream of spiritual blessings hitherto con- 
 fined, for the most part, to the land of Israel was 
 now to burst its barriers, and carry its life-giving 
 waters even to the ends of the earth. 
 
 The great primary cause of the diff'usion of the 
 Greek language was the conquest of the East by 
 Alexander the Great. Setting out from his native 
 
SEPTUA GINT 6- SAMARITAN PENTA TE UCH. 1 59 
 
 Macedon in the year 334 before Christ, the youthful 
 conqueror, in the course of the next ten years, made 
 himself undisputed master of the whole of Asia. 
 But the glory which he acquired was far greater 
 than that of a mere victor. Everywhere his advance 
 was the herald of civilization and culture. Far from 
 being satisfied with simply destroying, his constant 
 policy was to improve and enlighten the countries 
 which he subdued. For this purpose, cities were 
 built, and colonies planted, as he went forward in 
 his victorious career ; and these, of course, became 
 centres from which the influence of Greek civili- 
 zation spread with ever-advancing power. At his 
 death, the immense empire owning his sway was 
 broken up into a number of Greek kingdoms which 
 endured for centuries ; and, under their fostering 
 care, the Hellenism, which he had done so much 
 to diffuse, continued more and more to acquire 
 ascendency throughout the earth. 
 
 Accordingly, when we glance at the condition 
 of the civilized world for some generations before 
 Christ, we see that it had become almost completely 
 Hellenized. We look at Italy, and find that, as 
 respects art and literature, " captive Greece had 
 captured her fierce conqueror." We look at Egypt, 
 and we find that, under the beneficent rule of the 
 Ptolemies, Hellenic culture was promoted in every 
 possible way, and carried to the highest pitch of 
 
i6o OLD TESTAMENT REVISION. 
 
 refinement. We look at Judeea even, and we find 
 that, more than a century before Christ, the influence 
 of Greece had become predominant ; so that, as the 
 author of the Second Book of Maccabees expresses 
 it (chap. iv. 13), **a kind of acme of Hellenism" 
 then prevailed in the country. 
 
 Alexandria in Egypt was especially regarded as 
 the metropolis of Greek learning. Vast numbers 0{ 
 Jews had settled in that city. They formed, indeed, 
 one of the three bodies constituting the original 
 colonists, the other two elements consisting of 
 Greeks and Egyptians. The Jews had a district and 
 a governor of their own ; and as Philo, himself an 
 Alexandrian Jew, informs us, were in possession of 
 special rights and immunities. Now, among these 
 thoroughly Hellenized Jews, few of whom under- 
 stood a word of Hebrew, there would speedily 
 spring up a natural desire to possess their sacred 
 books in the language with which alone they were 
 familiar. This feeling sufficiently accounts for the 
 undoubted fact that, towards the close of the third 
 century before Christj the Hebrew Scriptures began 
 to be translated into Greek at Alexandria, and that 
 the work was gradually carried forward, until what 
 is known as the Septuagint version was at last 
 completed. 
 
 But a much more romantic account than this has 
 descended to us from antiquity, with respect to the 
 
SEPTUA GINT &- SA MARITAN PENT A TE UCH. 1 6 1 
 
 origin of the Septuagint translation. In a letter 
 purporting to have been written by Aristeas or 
 Aristeus, to his brother Philocrates, we are told that 
 the work was due to the desire of Ptolemy Phila- 
 delphus to have a copy in Greek of the sacred 
 writings of the Jews, for the further enrichment of 
 that famous library which, in B.C. 273, had been 
 established at Alexandria. With this view, he sent 
 the writer Aristeas, who held a high position at his 
 court, and Andreas, captain of his guards, to Jeru- 
 salem, to beg the assistance of the high priest in 
 carrying his wish into fulfilment. They presented 
 rich presents to the Temple, and easily obtained 
 from Eleazar an authorised copy of the law, which, 
 says the account, was wTitten in letters of gold, 
 along with six interpreters from each of the twelve 
 tribes. On reaching Alexandria, the interpreters 
 were invited to a banquet which lasted seven 
 days, and then had lodgings assigned them in 
 the island of Pharos, where, after mutual com- 
 parison, they finished their work in the space of 
 seventy-two days. Later accounts affirm that the 
 translators did not confer with each other at all, 
 but carried on their work separately, or, as some 
 say, in pairs, and then met on an appointed day, in 
 the presence of the king, to exhibit the versions 
 which they had produced. It is added that, when 
 these were compared, they were found in every point 
 
 II 
 
1 62 OLD TESTAMENT REVISION. 
 
 exactly to agree ; and the work was therefore, of 
 necessity, believed to have been the result of divine 
 inspiration. 
 
 No word need be said to prove that this narrative 
 is, to some extent at least, fabulous. The professed 
 letter of Aristeas is now generally believed to be a 
 fabrication, though it was accepted as genuine by 
 Josephus and by the Fathers of the Church. But 
 it is difficult to conclude that the account has not 
 some foundation in fact. Not improbably, Ptolemy, 
 who was a most enlightened and liberal prince, 
 hearing of the desire of his Jewish subjects to pos- 
 sess a version of their sacred books in the Greek 
 language, encouraged the design, and took some 
 steps to aid in its accomplishment. The statement' 
 that seventy-two learned Jews were, at his request, 
 sent from Jerusalem to Alexandria, to carry out the 
 work, has nothing incredible about it ; and the 
 name which the version has always borne is thus 
 naturally accounted for, it having been styled, in 
 round numbers, from the earliest times, the Septua- 
 gint — the Seventy. 
 
 But whatever may be thought of this, the un- 
 doubted facts are, that the Greek version was formed 
 at Alexandria — that it was begun under the Ptolemies 
 about 280 B.C., that the Pentateuch was first trans- 
 lated, circulating for a time by itself — and that the 
 translation of the remaining books was gradually 
 
SEPTUAGINT 6- SAMARITAN PENTATEUCH. 163 
 
 carried forward, until the work stood complete 
 several generations before Christ. 
 
 And now the important inquiry arises — In what 
 esteem was the Septuagint version held by the Jews 
 of the Apostolic age, and by the early Fathers of 
 the Christian Church ? Those who have really 
 investigated this subject have happily now no diffi- 
 culty in replying to these questions. The ridicu- 
 lous notions once prevalent, as to the hatred 
 which the Jews entertained towards the Greek 
 version, are now thoroughly exploded. No doubt 
 they received some sanction from certain passages 
 in the Talmud, but these were the utterances of 
 an age too late to have any weight in deciding 
 the matter, and of persons who spoke and wrote 
 under the influence of hopeless prejudice. It is 
 lamentable, however, to find how such misrepre- 
 sentations were, until recently, repeated by some of 
 the ablest writers in our country. The late Dean 
 Stanley, for example, gave his countenance to the 
 fable that "the Jews of Palestine . . . held that 
 on the day on which the seventy translators met a 
 supernatural darkness overspread the earth ; and the 
 day was to them one of their solemn periods of 
 fasting and humiliation."* As is well known to all 
 
 * Lectures on the Jewish Church, i., p. xxxv. Although the 
 worthy Dean was thus betrayed into the acceptance of a pre- 
 
i64 OLD TESTAMENT REVISION. 
 
 that have looked carefully into the subject, these 
 notions are utterly baseless. They rest on some 
 Talmudical statements, which are in thorough con- 
 tradiction to other, and far more trustworthy, 
 announcements contained in the Talmud itself. 
 As might be expected from the nature of that vast 
 collection of Jewish thought, feeling, and specu- 
 lation, the most inconsistent views on various 
 subjects are often found presented in its pages.* 
 But all competent inquirers are now agreed as to 
 the judgment which its most ancient statements of 
 opinion lead us to form with respect to the esteem 
 in which the Septuagint version was held by the 
 Jews of the apostolic age. This will be made plain 
 from the following quotations. 
 
 The opinion of Rabbi Symeon, who was a con- 
 temporary of Josephus, is quoted in the Talmud to 
 the following effect, "that it was lawful to write 
 
 vailing delusion, never was there a writer more willing to 
 acknowledge his mistakes and to correct them. I cannot help 
 stating, in illustration, that in one of the last letters I received 
 from him, referring to the statement which he had made in his 
 Sermons in the East, that in the synagogue at Nazareth " the 
 roll of the Hebrew Scriptures was delivered to Christ," he 
 frankly said that such words were written " in the days of his 
 ignorance," and that they should be corrected in any subsequent 
 edition. Thus willing was he to abandon opinions which he 
 had come to see were not in accordance with truth. Utinani 
 sic ojnnes ! 
 
 * See chap. xi. for an account of the Talmud. 
 
SEPTUA GINT 6- SAMARITAN PENTA TE UCH. 1 65 
 
 down the sacred Scriptures, and to read them in 
 public, only in the Greek language, and not in foreign 
 tongues." This is the kind of feeling expressed 
 by all the early Rabbinical writers. Accordingly, 
 Frankel, a modern Jewish scholar, who has devoted 
 great attention to the subject, declares that the 
 Septuagint is habitually referred to in the Talmud 
 in terms of the highest respect.* "Early Rabbinical 
 tradition," says Dr. R. Smith, *' expressly recognises 
 the Greek version as legitimate."! Stronger lan- 
 guage might warrantably be used, for in some pas- 
 sages of the Talmud it is even implied that the 
 Septuagint was divinely inspired. Such passages 
 reflect the feelings of the Jews at the beginning of 
 our era : why different sentiments were at a later 
 period expressed with regard to the Greek version 
 will afterwards be noticed. 
 
 As to the opinion of the Alexandrian translation 
 entertained by Christ and His Apostles, the best 
 evidence is furnished by the use which is made of it 
 in the New Testament. We find that it was the 
 Bible which they constantly employed ; % and they 
 
 * Vorstudien zii der Septuaginta, p. 61. 
 
 f The Old Test, in yeiuish Church, p. loi. 
 
 X This point is, in several respects, so interesting and impor- 
 tant, that I have devoted the whole of the following chapter to 
 its consideration. It has, of course, a weighty bearing on the 
 question as to the authority to be ascribed to the Septuagint in 
 determining the genuine Hebrew text. 
 
1 66 OLD TESTAMENT REVISION. 
 
 thus, in the most emphatic and practical way, at- 
 tached to it the stamp of their approbation. The 
 same continued to be the case in the early Christian 
 Church. All the primitive Fathers, such as Clement 
 of Rome, Ignatius, Justin Martyr, and Irenaeus, 
 rested exclusively upon the Greek version for their 
 knowledge and use of the Old Testament Scriptures. 
 And they had the very highest estimate of its 
 authority and value. This comes out again and 
 again in the writings of Irenaeus. Thus he says in 
 one passage, that ** even the Gentiles present," when 
 the Septuagint translation was presented to King 
 Ptolemy, ** perceived that the Scriptures had been 
 interpreted by the inspiration of God ; " and he goes 
 on to claim for the renderings of the version an 
 authority as decisive as that of the Apostles them- 
 selves. * This continued for many ages to be the 
 judgment of the Christian Church. It is very strongly 
 expressed, for instance, in the following passage 
 from one of the best known of the works of St. 
 Augustine : — ** If any other translator of the Scrip- 
 tures from the Hebrew into another tongue is faith- 
 ful, in that case he agrees with these seventy trans- 
 lators ; and if he is not found to agree with them, 
 then we ought to believe that the prophetic gift is 
 possessed by them. For the same Spirit who was 
 
 * Against Heresies, iii. 21, 2, 3. 
 
SEPTUAGINT ^ SAMARITAN PENTATEUCH. 167 
 
 in the prophets when they spake those things was 
 also in the seventy men when they translated them, 
 so that unquestionably they had power also to say 
 something else [of their own], just as if the prophet 
 him.self had said both, because it would be the same 
 Spirit who said both ; and they could say the same 
 thing differently, so that, although the words were not 
 the same, yet the same meaning would shine forth 
 to those of sound understanding ; and they could 
 omit or add something, so that even by this it might 
 be shown that there was in that work not a human 
 bondage, which the translator had to yield to the 
 words, but rather a divine power, which filled and 
 ruled the mind of the translator."*' The Greek 
 version is thus placed on the very same platform of 
 authority with the Hebrew original ; and, although 
 we may not be disposed to acknowledge its claims 
 to such a position, we cannot but feel that a work 
 which was held in such esteem and reverence by the 
 early Church may justly demand and receive the 
 utmost respect at the present day. 
 
 In modern times, however, the Septuagint has 
 lain comparatively neglected. Sad to say, no satis- 
 factory edition of it yet exists. Its text still awaits 
 
 * The City of God, xviii. 44. As is well known, Augustine 
 regarded the Septuagint as too sacred a work to have even its 
 errors corrected, and, on this ground, strongly objected, for a 
 V\me, to the amendments on it proposed by Jerome. 
 
1 68 OLD TESTAMENT REVISION. 
 
 critical examination and adjustment ; and little use, 
 consequently, has as yet been made of it for the 
 correction of passages manifestly corrupt in the 
 Hebrew. But scholars are now awakening to the 
 pre-eminent value which would, in this respect, 
 belong to a trustworthy edition of the Septuagint. 
 When we reflect that it represents a text of the Old 
 Testament which circulated among the Jews before 
 the days of Christ, and remember that, as shown in 
 the preceding chapter, our present Hebrew text must 
 be traced back to a single original copy, we cannot 
 fail to be impressed with the unspeakable value which 
 would belong to a critically revised text of the 
 Septuagint translation. 
 
 If, however, we look at the version as it at present 
 exists, we perceive in it many obvious errors. Some- 
 times Hebrew consonants which resemble each 
 other in shape or sound have been mistaken, the 
 one for the other ; while, again, an improper vowel 
 pointing has not unfrequently been adopted. At the 
 same time, when discrepancies appear between the 
 Hebrew and Greek texts, the error is by no means 
 always on the side of the translation. Many passages 
 occur, in which even the existing text of the Septua- 
 gint, confused and unsettled as it so largely is, must 
 be preferred to the Hebrew, as we now have it. 
 Examples are to be found in Gen. iv. 8, where, 
 instead of the words, " And Cain talked with Abel 
 
SEPTUAGINT 6- SAMARITAN PENTATEUCH. 169 
 
 his brother," we should read, "And Cain said to 
 Abel his brother, Let us go forth into the field ; " 
 in Exod. ii. 25, where, for ** and had respect unto 
 them," we should read, ** and was made known unto 
 them ; " in Prov. v. 16, where a negative ought to be 
 inserted, and we should read, " Let not thy waters 
 overflow from thy fountain ; " and in Nahum iii. 8, 
 where the Greek and Hebrew are, in the first half 
 of the verse, totally diff"erent. It is greatly to be 
 regretted that a revised and improved text of the 
 Septuagint should not have been prepared before 
 the formation of a revised version of the Old 
 Testament in our language.* 
 
 We now proceed to a brief consideration of the 
 Samaritan Pentateuch. 
 
 The Jews and the Samaritans, in their relations to 
 each other, furnish the very types of religious bigotry 
 and hatred. They illustrate the saying which has 
 been too often verified, that, the nearer two religious 
 
 * Additional references to passages in which the Greek text 
 is to be preferred to the Hebrew will be found in The Old Test, 
 in Jewish Church, pp. 91—99. As to the Septuagint version 
 generally, Dr. R. Smith well remarks, **The translation is not 
 of equal merit throughout, and it is plain that different parts of 
 the Bible were rendered into Greek by men of varying capacity ; 
 but, in general ... it is safe to say that the translators were 
 men of competent scholarship, as scholarship then went, and that 
 they did their work faithfully, and in no arbitraiy way " (p. 92). 
 
lyo OLD TESTAMENT REVISION. 
 
 parties approach each other, the bitterer is the 
 mutual animosity which they cherish. *'The Jews 
 have no dealings with the Samaritans " (John iv. 9) ; 
 "They went, and entered into a village of the 
 Samaritans, to make ready for Him ; and they did not 
 receive Him, because His face was as though He 
 would go to Jerusalem" (Luke ix. 52, 53). '' Say we 
 not well that Thou art a Samaritan, and hast a devil ?" 
 (John viii. 48.) Such are some passages which indi- 
 cate the deep-rooted enmity and prejudice existing 
 between co-religionists, like the Jews and Samaritans, 
 and which restrained them, as much as possible, from 
 holding fellowship with one another. 
 
 This rancorous spirit was unhappily fostered, from 
 generation to generation, by a difference which 
 existed in their religious books. The Samaritans 
 accepted as sacred only the Pentateuch, maintain- 
 ing, as one of their leading principles, that " there 
 is no prophet but Moses," and branding the other 
 scriptural writers with the most opprobrious epithets. 
 Thus Samuel is declared to have been *'a magician 
 and an infidel," and Ezra is described as being 
 ** cursed for ever." The law, however, as accepted 
 by the Samaritans, was, in all essential particulars, 
 identical with that of the Jews. A few variations 
 occur, of which the following, as most important, 
 may be noticed : — 
 
 In Deut. xxvii. 4, Gertzim is substituted for Ebal, 
 
SEPTUA GINT 6- SAMARITAN PENT A TE UCH. 1 7 1 
 
 and reads thus, " It shall be when ye be gone over 
 Jordan, that ye shall set up these stones which I 
 command you this day on Mount Gerizim." This 
 change appears obviously to have been made in the 
 interest of Samaritan notions as to the holiness of 
 Mount Gerizim, on which their temple was built. 
 Some Biblical scholars, however, among whom was 
 not only the eccentric Whiston, but the great 
 Hebrew palaeographer Kennicott, have held that 
 Gerizim is the correct reading, and that Ebal is a 
 corruption introduced by the Jews, But *' this sup- 
 position," says Deutsch, " is completely given up by 
 modern Biblical scholars, although," he adds, "it 
 cannot be denied that there is some prima facie 
 ground for a doubt upon the subject.""^* A very 
 remarkable emendation of the Hebrew text occurs 
 in Exod. xii. 40. The following words, printed in 
 italics, form an important supplement to the passage 
 as it stands in our common version : — " Now the 
 sojourning of the children of Israel, and of their 
 fathers, which they sojourned in the la7id of Canaan and 
 in the land of Egypt, was four hundred and thirty 
 years." The Septuagint has the same reading, and 
 there appear to be good reasons for its acceptance. 
 In fact, the statement made in our English version, 
 based upon the Hebrew, is incorrect. The actual 
 • ' ~™ 
 
 * Deutsch, Lit. Rem., p. 417. 
 
172 OLD TESTAMENT REVISION, 
 
 stay of the children of Israel in Egypt did not 
 amount to more than two hundred and fifteen years. 
 St. Paul, following, as usual, the Septuagint, gives the 
 right chronology in Gal. iii. 17; and there seems 
 no difficulty in understanding why, in a mere rhe- 
 torical passage, the period should be referred to in 
 round numbers in Acts vii. 6, as having embraced 
 four hundred years. Other variations from the 
 Hebrew text are found in the dates of events in the 
 lives of the patriarchs, and in other minute points of 
 comparatively little consequence. 
 
 Though the language of the Samaritan Pentateuch 
 is substantially the same as the Hebrew, the form 
 of the letters used in it is totally different. It is 
 written in the old Samaritan characters, the same, 
 or nearly the same with those which appear on the 
 so-called Maccabean shekels which have survived 
 till our day. This was probably the character in 
 general use among the Jews before their adoption 
 of the square Hebrew letters, so familiar to us in 
 modern printed editions of the Old Testament. 
 
 Notwithstanding that several references to the 
 Samaritan Pentateuch are found in the writings of 
 the Fathers, it was not till the beginning of the 
 seventeenth century that copies of it were brought 
 to Europe. About sixteen nearly complete manu- 
 scripts are now accessible, along with a number of 
 fragments, more or less important. 
 
SEPTUAGINT ^ SAMARITAN PENTATEUCH. 173 
 
 When first the Samaritan Pentateuch became 
 known to Europeari scholars, a very fierce controversy 
 arose as to its value, and raged for almost two hun- 
 dred years. Some maintained that it was far superior 
 to the Massoretic text adopted in our ordinary 
 versions. They would have had the Samaritan 
 followed throughout, although it should surely have 
 been manifest that it had altered readings under the 
 influence of a dogmatic bias, as, e.g.^ in constantly 
 substituting God ''has chosen," for ** will choose," 
 a place for His worship, to indicate that Mount 
 Gerizim, on which the temple of the Samaritans 
 stood, was the spot which had been pointed out to 
 Moses as the place selected for the worship of 
 Jehovah. It was not until 1815 that the relative 
 merit of the Hebrew and Samaritan text was conclu- 
 sively settled. In that year the celebrated Hebraist, 
 Gesenius, published a work upon the subject, which 
 scattered to the winds those claims which had been 
 so persistently urged in favour of the Samaritan 
 recension, and placed on a secure basis the general 
 superiority of the Massoretic text. 
 
 To this day, hardly anything absolutely certain 
 is known as to the age or origin of the Samaritan 
 Pentateuch. Many points remain to be more fully 
 investigated, before satisfaction can be reached on 
 these questions. Known manuscripts must be ex- 
 amined and compared with greater care. The 
 
174 OLD TESTAMENT REVISION. 
 
 history of the Samaritan people must be inquired 
 into with deeper research. Search must be made for 
 more ancient copies of the Samaritan Pentateuch, 
 than those which are as yet possessed. None of 
 the manuscripts at present in Europe can claim a 
 higher date than the tenth century after Christ, but 
 others, of far greater antiquity, are probably still in 
 existence. The Samaritans claim an absurdly high 
 age for the scroll still in use at Nablous, but that 
 copy probably is possessed of a very considerable 
 antiquity. It is astonishing how tenaciously the 
 people of Samaria have always kept themselves dis- 
 tinct from the Jews, and maintained their peculiar 
 religious observances, even down to our day. They 
 are now reduced to about two hundred persons, but 
 still cling to the ancient home of their race at 
 Shechem, afterwards, with a slight change of site, 
 called Neapolis, which name survives in the form 
 Nablous, by which the place is known at the present 
 day. The Samaritans of our Lord's day have been 
 described as **a people distinct from the Jews, 
 though lying in the very midst of the Jews ; a people 
 preserving their identity, though seven centuries had 
 rolled away since they had been brought from Assy- 
 ria by Esarhaddon, and though they had abandoned 
 their polytheism for a sort of ultra-Mosaicism ; a 
 people who, though their limits had been gradually 
 contracted, and the rallying- place of their religion 
 
SEPTUA GINT &- SAMARITAN PENT A TE UCH. 175 
 
 on Mount Gerizim had been destroyed one hundred 
 and sixty years before, by John Hyrcanus (b.c. 130), 
 and though Samaria, the city, had been again and 
 again destroyed, and though their territory had been 
 the battle-field of Syria and Egypt — still preserved 
 their nationality, still worshipped from Shechem and 
 their other impoverished settlements towards their 
 sacred hill, still retained their nationality, and could 
 not coalesce with the Jews."* This once flourish- 
 ing people, springing from the Cuthite settlers and 
 the remnants of the ten tribes left in the land, with 
 a Bible and a religion so peculiar, have now dwindled, 
 as has been said, into a very small community, but 
 even now preserve their ancient peculiarities. As 
 a modern writer has remarked, "Through all vicis- 
 situdes, Gerizim, the oldest sanctuary in Palestine, 
 retained its sanctity to the end. Probably in no 
 other locality has the same worship been sustained 
 with so little change or interruption for so great a 
 series of years as in this mountain, from the time of 
 Abraham to the present day. In their humble syna- 
 gogue, at the foot of the mountain, the Samaritans 
 still worship, — the oldest and the smallest sect in 
 the world : distinguished by their noble physiognomy 
 and stately appearance from all other branches of 
 the race of Israel. In their prostrations at the ele- 
 
 * Smith's Did. of Bible, art. Samaria. 
 
176 OLD TESTAMENT REVISION. 
 
 vation of their revered copy of the Pentateuch, they 
 throw themselves on their faces in the direction, 
 not of priest or law, or any object within the build- 
 ing, but obliquely towards the eastern summit of 
 Mount Gerizim. And up the side of the mountain, 
 and on its long ridge, is to be traced the pathway by 
 which they ascend to the sacred spots where they 
 alone of all the Jewish race yearly celebrate the 
 paschal sacrifice." * 
 
 As has been already suggested, it is impossible to 
 fix with certainty the date at which the Samaritan 
 Pentateuch was formed from the Hebrew. But a 
 conjecture may be hazarded, as perhaps more pro- 
 bable than any other. Chiefly at a time when the 
 Jews and Samaritans were at variance on other 
 grounds might a difference on religious points be 
 expected to arise between them. Now we know 
 that a very hostile spirit was evinced by the one 
 community towards the other, when the Jews returned 
 from the Babylonish captivity, and set about rebuild- 
 ing the Temple at Jerusalem. We read in Ezra iv. 
 2 — 6, that the Samaritans requested permission to 
 join in that pious labour, declaring that they served 
 the sajne God as the Jews, and had done so since 
 the days of Esarhaddon. But they were resolutely 
 excluded from the work by Zerubbabel and the rest 
 
 Stanley's Sinai and Palestifie, p. 240. 
 
SEPTUA GINT &- SAMARITAN PENTA TEUCH. 177 
 
 of the fathers of Israel. The consequence was, that 
 they contracted a spirit of bitter enmity against the 
 Jews, and sought in every possible way to hinder 
 the success of their labours. This, then, was exactly 
 the time at which a religious schism might be ex- 
 pected to take place. Debarred from all interest in 
 the Temple at Jerusalem, the Samaritans built a 
 temple of their own on Mount Gerizim. And, out 
 of jealousy of the Jews, they refused to acknowledge 
 any of those books which were about this time 
 added to the Hebrew canon ; while, from some 
 motive or another, they also rejected all the books 
 which had found a place in it after the books of 
 Moses. We may thus conclude that, about 450 B.C., 
 the Samaritan Pentateuch assumed its special form, 
 preserving, in substance, the Mosaic legislation, but 
 being, in some passages, altered, so as to yield a 
 seeming support to the claims of the Samaritans. 
 
 As to the undoubted similarity which is frequently 
 found to exist between the Samaritan Pentateuch 
 and the Septuagint, it is very difficult to suggest a 
 satisfactory explanation. The problem is a highly 
 complicated one. For, while it is true that, in per- 
 haps not fewer than two thousand passages, the 
 Septuagint and Samaritan Pentateuch agree in read- 
 ings different from those of the common Hebrew 
 text, it is no less true that the Septuagint, more 
 
 12 
 
I7S OLD TESTAMENT REVISION. 
 
 frequently still, agrees with the Hebrew against the 
 Samaritan, and, even where it does deviate from the 
 Massoretic text, refuses to follow that of the Sama- 
 ritan Pentateuch. The problem thus suggested still 
 awaits solution, and there is no likelihood of its 
 being mastered until critical editions of both the 
 rival texts have been produced. Then it may be 
 seen how far the Septuagint was based upon the 
 Samaritan Pentateuch, or vice verm; and to what 
 extent either or both may be safely applied for the 
 rectification and improvement of the present Hebrew 
 text of the Old Testament, 
 
CHAPTER IX. 
 
 THE SEPTUAGINT—ITS CONSTANT USE BY 
 CHRIST AND HIS APOSTLES. 
 
 EVERYWHERE in the Gospels and Epistles 
 we meet with references to the Scriptures 
 of the Old Testament. The word occurs about 
 fifty times in the writings of the Evangelists and 
 Apostles. It is used with reference to both high 
 and low, rich and poor, learned and unlearned, 
 among the Jews. " Did ye never read in the Scrip- 
 tures } " was a question which could be asked with 
 the utmost point by Christ, in speaking to His 
 countrymen, whether priests or people. He could 
 say, "Search (or ** Ye search") the Scriptures 
 (John V. 39) in more immediately addressing the 
 leaders of thought in Judea; and His humble disci- 
 ples were in circumstances to have it said regarding 
 themselves (Luke xxiv. 27), that " He expounded 
 unto them in all the Scriptures the things concerning 
 Himself." Christ could, in His addresses to the 
 common people, familiarly cite texts from the Scrip- 
 tures (Mark xii. 36), with perfect assurance that Hi-; 
 
i8o OLD TESTAMENT REVISION. 
 
 hearers possessed the means of verifying His word ; 
 and the Jews, again, could readily quote from the 
 same sacred source (John vi. 31) in the presence 
 of His disciples (ver. 60), all classes having mani- 
 festly an easy access to, and an intimate acquaint- 
 ance with, the contents of the Old Testament. 
 
 The Scriptures, then — that is, a written copy of 
 the whole Old Testament — evidently circulated in 
 Palestine in the times of Christ. That, I suppose, 
 will be admitted to be as clear as any point possibly 
 can be. All the Jews, of whatever station, then had, 
 or might have, in their hands the whole of the Old 
 Testament writings. That is implied in almost 
 every chapter of the Gospels, and will, I cannot 
 but believe, be universally acknowledged. In what 
 form, then, let us ask, did the Bible of the Jews 
 then circulate among them ? What was the language 
 through which they obtained that knowledge of the 
 Old Testament, which, it is plain, was at the time 
 commonly possessed } 
 
 Before investigation, any one of the three following 
 answers might be given to this question. Some 
 might reply that the Old Testament Scriptures 
 were then current among the Jews in the original 
 Hebrew; others, that they were circulated in an 
 Aramaic translation ; and others, that they were 
 generally known only by means 0/ the Septuagint 
 version. We have now to consider which of these 
 
THE SEPTUAGINT. i8i 
 
 three views can be shown to be the only one in 
 accordance with the facts of the case. 
 
 First, then, as to the hypothesis that the Old 
 Testament Scriptures circulated among the Jews of 
 our Saviour's day z>? the original Hebrew. 
 
 Ninety-nine persons out of a hundred probably 
 imagine that such was the case. They know that 
 the Old Testament was composed in Hebrew : they 
 believe that, as a matter of course, the Jews spoke 
 Hebrew ; and so the question is settled, — the Hebrew 
 Bible was commonly known and read in Palestine 
 in the times of Christ. This idea is, no doubt, 
 popularly kept up by the fact that we several times 
 read in the New Testament of people having spoken 
 in Hebrew. Thus, in Acts xxi. 40, we are told that 
 St. Paul addressed the Jews " in the Hebrew tongue.' 
 But, as every scholar knows, that was a very different 
 dialect from the ancient Hebrew, in which the books 
 of the Old Testament were composed. This is now 
 quite a commonplace in Biblical discussions, and 
 will hardly bear further repetition. It has recently 
 been expressed as follows : — ** Long before the time 
 of Christ, the Jews had ceased to speak Hebrew. 
 In the New Testament, no doubt, we read once and 
 again of the •Hebrew tongue as spoken and under- 
 stood by the people of Palestine; but the language 
 which is called Hebrew in the New Testament was 
 
i82 OLD TESTAMENT REVISION. 
 
 a dialect as unlike to the Hebrew of the Bible as 
 German is to English — a different language, although 
 a kindred one. This language is called Hebrew, 
 because it was spoken by the Hebrews, just as the 
 Spanish Jews in Constantinople at the present day 
 call their Spanish jargon Hebrew. It was a kind 
 of Syriac or Aramaic, which the Jews had gradually 
 learned in place of Hebrew, after their return from 
 captivity, when they found themselves a small hand- 
 ful living in the midst of nations who spoke Aramaic, 
 and with whom they had constant dealings." * 
 To quote only one other authority on this subject, 
 the illustrious German scholar Bleek, referring to 
 the times of Christ, remarks, **The ancient Hebrew 
 had already for a long time been, even to the Jews 
 of Palestine, a dead language, the knowledge of 
 which, so far as it was necessary for the reading of 
 the Holy Scriptures, continued only among those 
 who were devoted to such a special study." f Ac- 
 cordingly, we find that even Josephus, who prided 
 himself especially on his Jewish learning, shows 
 conclusively in his works that he had only a very 
 imperfect acquaintance with ancient Hebrew. 
 
 Let the reader mark, then, how the case really 
 stands. The Old Testament was to the great 
 majority of Jews, in our Lord's day, a sealed book, 
 
 ^ T]t.e Old Test, in Jew. Ck., p. 47. f Eml. in das N. T., p. 53. 
 
THE SEPTUAGINT. 183 
 
 so far as its original language was concerned. They 
 knew nothing of the Old Hebrew tongue. When 
 confronted with it, they were as helpless as would 
 be an Englishman, acquainted only with his own 
 language, if referred to the Bible in German. It 
 is obvious, therefore, that *'the Scriptures," so often 
 spoken of, and appealed to, in the Gospels, could 
 not have been the Old Testament books in their 
 original language. 
 
 Next, however, it has been maintained that the 
 sacred writings then circulated among the Jews 
 in an Aramaic translation. 
 
 This is quite a common supposition, but it may 
 easily be shown to be baseless. Let the reader 
 only consider what he is required by it to believe. 
 He is asked to conceive, first, that a written Aramaic 
 version of the whole of the Old Testament Scriptures 
 existed in Palestine during the times of Christ and 
 His Apostles, of which not a single shred has 
 descended to our day. As we have already seen, 
 the Samaritan Pentateuch has been preserved 
 throughout all the ages to our own times, but it 
 seems that a version of the whole Old Testament 
 once circulated in Palestine, which vanished as 
 completely as does a cloud of vapour in the morning 
 sky I He is asked to believe, next, in the existence 
 of an Aramaic version, of which, apparently, the 
 
1 84 OLD TESTAMENT REVISION. 
 
 great Jewish historian never heard. As has been 
 already remarked, Josephus gives a particular 
 account of the formation of the Septuagint, and 
 frequently uses it in his writings; but he is dumb 
 as to any Aramaic translation, and, so far as it 
 appears, never knew of its existence ! He, the 
 modern reader, is asked to believe, thirdly, that an 
 Aramaic version circulated in Palestine, although 
 none of the Fathers of the Church make the faintest 
 allusion to it, or preserve to us the slightest speci- 
 men of its contents. We know how zealously such 
 men as Origen and Jerome devoted themselves to 
 Biblical studies, and how deeply interested they 
 were in all that bore upon their successful prose- 
 cution. Yet here, \ve are told, was a precious 
 version of the Old Testament, specially precious 
 as having, according to the supposition, been the 
 Bible of Christ and His apostles, which these great 
 cholars and theologians did not deem worthy of 
 the least attention, and which they do not even 
 mention in their waitings ! He is asked to believe, 
 finally — this sore-tried modern reader — that a written 
 Aramaic version of the Old Testament was generally 
 current in Palestine during the lifetime of our Lord, 
 although a most stringent rule prevailed that no 
 such version should be formed. The interpreter 
 was solemnly enjoined *' ' not to use a written Targum^ 
 but to deliver his translation viva voce^ lest it might 
 
THE SEPTUAGINT, 185 
 
 appear that he was reading out of the Torah (the 
 Law) itself, and thus the Scriptures be held respon- 
 sible for what were his own dicta" So profound 
 was this detestation of written versions in Aramaic, 
 that we are told that Gamaliel the elder, who lived 
 in the first century of our era, having heard of such 
 a translation of the Book of Job " caused it to be 
 hidden and buried out of sight." * Yet, in spite of 
 all this, we are required to believe that a written 
 Aramaic version of the entire Old Testament 
 circulated freely and familiarly in Palestine in the 
 days of Christ and His Apostles ! Enough, and 
 more than enough, has surely been said to refute 
 any such supposition. 
 
 We come, then, to a consideration of the third 
 and only remaining view, that the Jews of our 
 Saviour's day were indebted for their acquaintance 
 with the Old Testament to the Septiuigint translation. 
 
 The two former suppositions having been excluded, 
 we are logically compelled to rest in this one. And 
 all the facts warrant our doing so. We know that 
 the Greek version had for long been in existence 
 before the time of Christ. We know, as has been 
 shown in a preceding chapter, that it was very highly, 
 yea, even superstitiously, esteemed by the Jews; 
 and we Jia^^e only to open the Greek New Testa- 
 
 * Deutsch's Literary Remains, p. 324. 
 
1 86 OLD TESTAMENT REVISION: 
 
 ment, in order to find how often it is quoted verbatim 
 by the sacred writers. This is the case even in 
 passages such as Acts xv. i6, 17, Hcb. i. 6, etc., 
 where the meaning of the Greek is totally different 
 from that of the Hebrew, showing how thoroughly 
 the writers trusted the Septuagint version, and how 
 dependent they were upon it for their knowledge 
 and use of the Old Testament. 
 
 It is true that there are some comparatively few 
 passages in which the New Testament writers depart 
 from the Greek translation, and express with greater 
 accuracy the import of the Hebrew original Now, 
 what is the inference to be derived from this fact ? 
 Is it that men like Peter and John were acquainted 
 with ancient Hebrew, and so could correct the 
 Greek version for themselves } This has often been 
 asserted or implied ; and we find in a recent learned 
 writer an affirmation to the eflfcct that, ** in the times 
 of the New Testament, the Greek and Hebrew 
 Bibles were current side by side ; and men like the 
 Apostles, who knew both languages, used either text 
 indifferently." * Such is quite the loose, popular 
 way of stating the matter, but it will not bear serious 
 consideration. Let it be remembered that, as already 
 said, even the learned historian, Josephus, with all 
 his acknowledged erudition, had only a most im- 
 
 * The Old Test, in the Jew. Ch., p. J02. 
 
THE SEFTUAGINT. 187 
 
 perfect knowledge of Hebrew, and then say what 
 likelihood there is that humble fishermen of Galilee 
 were familiar with that language. Let it moreover 
 be considered that, after a most careful study of St. 
 Paul's writings. Professor Jowett has reached the 
 conclusion that even they do not " offer any certain 
 proof that the Apostle was acquainted with the 
 Hebrew original." * Now, if this be the case with 
 respect to St. Paul, much less can it be held that 
 *' unlearned and ignorant men," like St. Peter and 
 St. John — men certainly destitute of what was then 
 technically known as "learning" among the Jews, 
 were so well acquainted with the Hebrew of the Old 
 Testament as to be able to quote from it at pleasure. 
 In fact. Dr. R. Smith himself plainly appears to 
 contradict, by implication, the statement quoted from 
 him above. Thus, at p. 73, he speaks of ^^ learned 
 Jews who read Hebrew," and the Apostles had cer- 
 tainly no claim to be ranked among such ; and again, 
 still more clearly at p. 48, he states that " before 
 the time of Christ, people who were not scholars had 
 ceased to understand Hebrew altogether." This 
 surely settles the question as to the use by the 
 Apostles of the original Hebrew text. 
 
 Those occasional deviations from the Greek 
 version, observable in the New Testament, may 
 
 * Epistles of St. Paul, i. 401. 
 
1 88 OLD TESTAMENT REVISION. 
 
 easily be accounted for on other grounds than the 
 obviously untenable one, that the writers possessed 
 a knowledge of ancient Hebrew. In the first place, 
 they may have used a different text of the Septuagint 
 from that now current. We still wait, as has already 
 been said, for a trustworthy edition of the Greek 
 version ; * and when that has been provided, we may 
 find that it really is in harmony with the quotations 
 as they stand in the New Testament. t In the 
 second place, there is no difficulty in supposing that 
 " revised versions " of the Septuagint, which was, 
 as it were, the authorised version of the Jews, then 
 circulated in Palestine. It is certain that from the 
 
 * It is to be feared that the insertion of the word not in 
 Lev. xi. 6, is a glaring example of intentional corruption in the 
 vSeptu i!^int text. ''Ths, " says the late Dean Stanley, ''is the 
 earliest instance of the falsification of Scripcure to meet the de- 
 mands of science ; and (he justly adds) it has been followed in 
 later times by the various efforts which have been made to twist 
 the earlier chapters of Genesis into apparent agreement with the 
 last results of geology, representing da^s not to be days, morning 
 and evening not to be morning and evening, the deluge not to be 
 the deluge, and the ark not to be the ark." {Sermons on Special 
 Occasions, p. 202.) But the point wliether " not " (" cheweth not 
 the cud") originally existed in the text of tfee Septuagint still 
 remains to be determined. 
 
 f A remarkable illustration is found in Matt. xxvi. 31. It has 
 been argued that in the quotation there made, the Evangelist de- 
 parts from the Septuagint. And so he does from the common 
 text ; but his words are all but identical with the text of the 
 Septuagint as it stands in the Alexandrian manuscript. 
 
THE SEPTUAGINT. 189 
 
 first there were mistakes in the Greek version, just 
 as there are in our common English version, and 
 the Apostles may have availed themselves of well- 
 known corrections of these in several of their quota- 
 tions. In the third place, where the passages quoted 
 agree perfectly neither with the Hebrew nor the 
 Greek, we have only to remember that the writers 
 were not in the habit of turning up chapter and 
 verse in making their quotations, but trusted, in 
 general, to memory. Hence the deviations from 
 both texts which may occasionally be observed. 
 
 The Greek version, then, was really the Bible of 
 our Lord and His Apostles. And, accepting this 
 conclusion, we at once understand that ready access 
 to, and familiar acquaintance with, the contents of 
 the Old Testament, which are everywhere taken for 
 granted as possessed by the Jews of our Saviour's 
 day. Few, indeed, among them could have made 
 anything of the ancient Hebrew text, had it been 
 spread out before them. And fewer still, probably, 
 could have afford.ed to purchase a copy of the entire 
 Hebrew Scriptures. We have conclusive evidence 
 as to the heavy cost even of a copy of the law by 
 itself; and to acquire the whole Bible must have 
 taxed the resources of even the wealthiest in the 
 land. Greek books, on the other hand, were cheap 
 and abundant, so that the poor man, as well as the 
 rich, might easily possess his Bible in that language. 
 
1 90 OLD 7 ES TAME NT REVISION. 
 
 And now let us glance at some inferences which 
 necessarily tollow from the conclusion which has 
 been reached. 
 
 First, we learn that G7'eek was the language usually 
 spoke ft by our Lord and His Apostles. 
 
 This is an inevitable corollary from what has been 
 already established. If it was the Greek Scriptures 
 which Christ constantly quoted, and to which He 
 so frequently referred (Matt. xxi. 42 ; Mark xii. 24; 
 Luke xxiv. 32 ; John vii. 42, etc.), then Greek must 
 have been the language which He habitually used in 
 His addresses to the people. This, of course, left 
 Him free occasionally to adopt a word from the 
 Hebrew patois which existed side by side with the 
 Greek, and which was in use for the purposes of 
 familiar intercourse. The relation between the two 
 languages was very similar to that which now holds 
 between English and Gaelic in many parts of the 
 Highlands of Scotland. Greek was the language of 
 literature and public life, Aramaic the language of 
 homely fellowship and domestic converse. The 
 Jews were, in fact, bilingual, and hence we find a 
 few Aramaic expressions, such as Raca, Corhan, 
 Mammon, etc., introduced into the discourses of 
 Christ, while nothing could have been more natural 
 than that the gracious utterance, " IMaid, arise," 
 should have been whispered to the damsel in the 
 familiar Talitha cumi (Mark v. 41) of her childhood. 
 
THE SEPTUAGINT. 191 
 
 Still, the assertion is constantly repeated by one 
 writer after another, that ^^ Afatiiaic was the language 
 which our Lord spoke." Evidence to the contrary 
 seems totally disregarded. But I would once more 
 humbly request any who have hitherto maintained 
 that position to look at it in the light of the above 
 argument. Let them consider what was really the 
 Bible in the hands of Christ and His disciples, and 
 then say what was the language v;hich they habitually 
 employed. * 
 
 I am simply amazed at the line of argument which 
 satisfies some able writers in dealing with this 
 subject. Thus says Dr. Farrar, in reference to these 
 words uttered by Christ upon the cross, — Eli, Lit, 
 lama sahachthani ? — "The fact that thus in His last 
 moments Jesus speaks in Aramaic would seem to 
 prove that this had been the ordinary language of 
 His life." t Why so } We have exactly as much 
 
 * So inveterate is the prejudice against the conckxsion sug- 
 gested by the above argument, that I am not unprepared still to 
 be met with the statement in certain quarters, — " We cannot 
 believe that the common people among the Jews spoke Greek of 
 any kind," — and so on. Facts have been, and may still be, dis- 
 regarded, but they nevertheless prove, as the late Cardinal 
 Wiseman saw and acknowledged, that "in the times of Jose phus, 
 even slaves were acquainted with the Greek language." {Horce 
 Syriacce, p. 71. Compare Josephus, Antiq. xiv. lO, 3, xviii. 
 8, 5 ; Wars, v. 7, 4, etc.) 
 
 \ Life of Christ, so\ ii., p. 415. 
 
192 OLD TESTAMENT REVISION. 
 
 proof that the other six cries of Christ upon the 
 cross were uttered in Greek, as that this one was 
 expressed in Aramaic. Throughout his whole work 
 Dr. Farrar never really faces the question, notwith- 
 standing the many occasions on which it presents 
 itself to the critical scholar. 
 
 The difficulty which Josephus speaks of in the 
 concluding chapter of his "Antiquities," as having 
 beset him in the composition of that work, used to 
 be brought forward as a proof that Greek could not 
 have been commonly known among the Jews in the 
 time of Christ. But this argument is now abandoned. 
 All admit that the Jews were then bilingual, knowing 
 both Greek and Aramaic, so that the difficulty 
 which Josephus felt consisted not in writing such 
 Hebraic Greek as is found in the New Testament, 
 but Greek which should approach the style of the 
 classical historians. 
 
 The position of Josephus was thus analogous to 
 that of Scotch writers of English in "the last century. 
 They confess that they experienced the greatest 
 difficulty in avoiding Scotticisms, and expressing 
 themselves in pure idiomatic English. As Josephus 
 styles the Greek " an alien and outlandish tongue," 
 so might they have spoken with reference to the 
 language of England. An apt illustration recently 
 fell under my notice. Referring to some advice 
 given him in early days by an aged and intelligent 
 
THE SEPTUAGINT. , 193 
 
 friend, a writer in one of our magazines says, ** He 
 cautioned me with entire gravity, to be punctilious 
 in writing English ; never to forget that I was a 
 Scotchman, that English was a foreign tongue, and 
 that if I attempted the colloquial. I should certainly 
 be shamed : the remark was apposite, I suppose, 
 in the days of David Hume.""^* Now^ this exactly 
 represents the view for which I plead as to the 
 linguistic condition of Palestine in the time of Christ. 
 Greek of a certain kind was known and used 
 habitually by the Jews of the period, just as English 
 of a certain kind was known and used habitually by 
 Scotchmen in the days of Hume. But as Scotch 
 writers had then to strive very hard, and often with 
 imperfect success, to express themselves in correct 
 English, so was it with Josephus in dealing with the 
 Greek language. 
 
 Secondly, we are led by the above argument to 
 a simple and satisfactory soliitio?i of the great problem of 
 the Gospels. 
 
 That problem is how to account both for the 
 si?7iilarities and the diversities which exist between 
 the first three Evangelists. Every one must have 
 noticed how strikingly they agree in the language 
 which they use, and then again how strangely 
 
 * Cornh ill Magazine, Aug. 1882, p, 154. 
 
 13 
 
194 
 
 OLD TESTAMENT REVISION. 
 
 they differ in the expressions which, in the 
 midst of so much verbal harmony, are employed. 
 There thus emerges the puzzling literary ques- 
 tion, How are these two sets of co-existing facts 
 to be accounted for ? and the providing of a 
 satisfactory answer to that question has been the 
 source of enormous difficulty and labour to Biblical 
 critics. 
 
 Some have had recourse to the almost desperate 
 supposition that the Evangelists copied from each 
 other. But the utmost diversity of opinion, or 
 rather conjecture, has existed as to who was the 
 original writer, and who the copyists. Tve y one of 
 the Evangelists has, in turn, held the place of 
 honour, and then again been degraded from it. But, 
 while the theory that they copied from each other 
 might, in a rude and unsatisfactory way, account for 
 the coincidences between them, it wholly fails to 
 explain the diversities. Let us take, for example, 
 the three descriptions which are given of the call of 
 Levi or Matthew, and of the events which immedi- 
 ately followed. 
 
 MATT ix. 9—17. 
 
 And as Jesus passed 
 by from thence, he saw 
 a man, called Matthew, 
 sIttiMg at the place of 
 toll : and lie saith unto 
 him, Follow me. And 
 
 MARK ii. 13 — 22. 
 
 And he went forth again 
 by the seaside ; and all 
 the multitude resorted 
 unto him, and he taught 
 them. And as he passed 
 by, he saw Levi, tl^.e son 
 
 LUKE V. 27—39. 
 
 And after these things 
 he went forth, and beheld 
 a publican, named Levi, 
 sitting at the place of toll, 
 and said unto him, Follow 
 me. And he forsook all. 
 
THE SEPTUAGINT. 
 
 195 
 
 he arose, and followed 
 him. And it came to 
 pass, as he sat at meat 
 in the house, behold, 
 many publicans and sin- 
 ners came and sat down 
 with Jesus and his dis- 
 ciples. And when the 
 Pharisees saw it, they 
 said unto his disciples, 
 Why eateth your Master 
 with the publicans and 
 sinners? But when he 
 heard it, he said, They 
 that are whole have no 
 need of a physician, but 
 they that are sick. But 
 go ye and learn what this 
 meaneth, 1 desire mercy, 
 and not sacrifice : for I 
 came not to call the righ- 
 teous, but sinners. Then 
 come to him the disciples 
 of John, saying. Why do 
 we and the Pharisees fast 
 oft, but thy disciples fast 
 not? And Jesus said unto 
 them. Can the sons of the 
 bridechamber mourn, as 
 long as the bridegroom is 
 wiih them? but the days 
 will come, when the bride- 
 groom sh ill be taken 
 away from them, and 
 then will they fast. And 
 no man putteth a piece 
 of undressed cloth upon 
 an old garment ; for that 
 which should fill it up 
 taketh from the garment, 
 and a worse rent is made. 
 Neither do men put i.ew 
 wine into old wine-skins : 
 else the skins burst, and 
 the wine is spilled, and 
 the slcins perish : but they 
 
 of Alphseus, sitting at the 
 place of toll : and he saith 
 unto him, Follow me. 
 And he arose, and fol- 
 lowed him. And it came 
 to pass that he was sitting 
 at meat in his house, and 
 many publicans and sin- 
 ners sat down with Jesus 
 and his disciples ; for 
 there were rrany, and 
 they followed him. And 
 the sc;ibes of the Phari- 
 sees, when they saw that 
 he was eating with the 
 sinners and publicans, 
 said unto his disciples. 
 He eateth and drinketh 
 with publicans and sin- 
 ners. And when Jesus 
 heard it, he saith unto 
 them, 1'hey that are 
 whole have no need of a 
 physician, but they that 
 are sick. I came not to 
 call the righteous, but 
 sir ners. And John'^s dis- 
 ciples and the Pharisees 
 were fasting: and they 
 come and say unto him. 
 Why do John's disciples 
 and the disciples of the 
 Pharisees fast, but thy 
 disciples fast not ? And 
 Jesus said unto them, 
 Can the sons of the bride- 
 chamber fast while the 
 bridegroom is with them? 
 As long as they have the 
 bridegroom with them 
 they cannot fast. But 
 the days will come, when 
 the bridegroom shall be 
 taken away from them, 
 and then will they fast in 
 that day. No man seweth 
 
 and rose up, and fo'lowed 
 him. And Levi mide 
 him a great feast in his 
 house : and there was a 
 great multitude of publi- 
 cans and of others thit 
 were sitting at meat with 
 them. And the Pharisees 
 and their scribes mur- 
 mured against his dis- 
 ciples, saying. Why do 
 ye eat and drink with the 
 publicans and .sinners 
 And Jesus answering said 
 unto them. They that are 
 whole have no need of a 
 physician, but they that 
 are sick. I am not come 
 to call the righteous, but 
 sinners to r peiitance. 
 And they said unto him, 
 The disciples of John last 
 often, and make supplica- 
 tions ; likewise also the 
 disciples of the Pharisees ; 
 but thine eat and drink. 
 And Jesus said unto them, 
 Can ye make the sons 
 of the bridechamber fast 
 while the bridegroom is 
 with them ? But the days 
 will come ; and when the 
 bridegroom shall be taken 
 away from them, then will 
 they fast in those days. 
 And he spake also a 
 parable unto them ; No 
 man rendeth a piece from 
 a new garment, and put- 
 teth it upon an old gar- 
 ment ; else he will rend 
 the new, and also the 
 piece from the new w II ' 
 not agree with the old 
 And no man putteth new 
 wine into old wine-skins ; 
 
196 
 
 OLD TESTAMENT REVISION. 
 
 put new uine into fresh 
 uine-skins, and both are 
 preserved. 
 
 a piece of undressed cloth 
 on an old garment ; else 
 that which should fill it 
 up taketh from it, the 
 new from the old, and a 
 worse rent is made. And 
 no man putteth new wine 
 into old wine-skins ; else 
 the wine will burst the 
 skins, and the wine 
 perisheth, and the skins : 
 but they put new wine 
 into fresh wine-skins. 
 
 else the new wine will 
 burst the skins, and itsell 
 will be spilled, and the 
 skins will perish. But 
 new wine must be put 
 into fresh wine-skins. 
 And no man having 
 drunk old wine desireth 
 new ; for he saith the old 
 is good.* 
 
 Now, any one glancing over these passages will at 
 once perceive how strikingly they agree, not only in 
 substance, but in language. He will also, however, 
 observe that they differ as strikingly, and that in a 
 way which forbids the thought that one writer copied 
 from the others. As has been well said, " The three 
 accounts are in matter nearly identical, and in diction 
 so minutely and unaccountably varied, as to declare 
 here, as elsewhere, their independence of one another, 
 except in having had some common source from 
 which they have more or less deflected." t The 
 copying hypothesis, then, as to the origin of the first 
 three Gospels, must be dismissed. 
 
 But some other very elaborate schemes have been 
 devised to account for the phenomena in question. 
 With these the names of Bishop Marsh in this 
 countiy, and of Eichhorn in Germany, are specially 
 
 * Revised Version, as more exact than the Authorised. 
 + Alford on Mark ii. 13—22. 
 
THE SEPTUAGINT. 197 
 
 identified. They are now, however, quite abandoned 
 by scholars, and it would serve no good purpose to 
 set them, with all their intricacies and perplexities 
 before the reader. Let us rather look, for a little, a 
 the aspect which the problem of the Gospels presents 
 when contemplated in the light of that conclusion 
 we have reached above. 
 
 One of the most puzzling elements in it is com- 
 pletely removed. As long as it is supposed that 
 Christ spoke in Hebrew, the identity which is ob- 
 served among the Evangelists in the reports which 
 they have given of His speeches, must appear truly 
 marvellous, if it does not even approach the miracu- 
 lous. They had, each for himself, to translate from 
 Hebrew into Greek, and yet they hit, in most cases, 
 upon the very same expressions. Surely, the fable 
 told with respect to the authors of the Septuagint is 
 at last realized ! But can any one imagine that these 
 independent translators from one language into 
 another could have attained to such harmony in the 
 words which they selected as is displayed by the 
 Evangelists } The idea is preposterous, and no sane 
 man will deem it worthy of serious consideration. 
 
 The aspect of the problem, however, is entirely 
 altered when we take into account the fact demon- 
 strated above, that Christ did not speak in Hebrew, 
 but in Greek. The impossible factor has now been 
 eliminated from it, and we see our way to a solution. 
 
198 OLD TESTAMENT REVISION. 
 
 Christ spoke in the same language in which the 
 Evangelists have reported His words. As a matter 
 of course, therefore, they could not but verbally agree 
 in the reports which they furnished of His addresses. 
 And it is to be observed that it is in their statements 
 of what was said that the authors of the Gospels 
 mostly agree, while they vary in their descriptions of 
 the attending circumstances. This is exactly what 
 happens on every like occasion. The reporters who 
 give an account of a public meeting will harmonize, 
 word for word, throughout many consecutive sen- 
 tences, as to the matter which was spoken, while they 
 will inevitably differ as to the descriptions which 
 they give of the scene, or of the individuals present.. 
 Here, then, we seem to have found a sufficiently 
 simple and satisfactory explanation of those features, 
 alike of harmony and diversity, presented by the first 
 three Gospels. They agree so strikingly, because 
 they are faithful reports of what was said ; they differ 
 so naturally, because they are the productions of 
 three different men, who wrote independently of one 
 another. 
 
 I am far from maintaining that all difficulties con- 
 nected with the origin of the Gospels are thus 
 removed. But I claim this much, that the problem 
 has, at least, been greatly simplified, and brought 
 nnich nearer a solution. In the conclusion reached 
 above, that Christ and His Apostles habitually made 
 
THE SEFTUAGINT. 
 
 199 
 
 use of the Greek language, we find a basis for the 
 satisfying reflection, that His words, so far as 
 reported, are still with us in the form in which they 
 were uttered : * while we are also furnished with the 
 means of removing some of the greatest difiiculties, 
 which, owing to a contrary, erroneous belief, have 
 perplexed the critical student of the New Testament. f 
 
 * Of course, unless this be granted, almost all the words which 
 Christ actually uttered must be regarded as having perished. 
 This supposition has sometimes been made, the basis of a power- 
 ful attack on the Gospels. In an able publication sent to me 
 some years ago, a learned Jew is represented as saying to some 
 clergymen of the Church of England, "I will receive your 
 sacrament, and subscribe your thirty-nine articles to-day, if you 
 ■will repeat to me, as they fell from his lips, three sentences of 
 the teaching of that revealing Emmanuel." Much more follows 
 to the same effect ; and the argument of the sceptic is conclu- 
 sively pushed home on the hypothesis that Christ did not make 
 use of the Greek language, but of the Hebrew /«/m of His day. 
 — Orthodoxy from the Hebrew Po'mt of Vie;v, p. l8ff. 
 
 f See for a fuller development of the above argument "The 
 Bible of Christ and His Apostles '' (Cassell and Co.), and for 
 many additional proofs to the same effect my " Discussions on 
 the Gospels," Part I. (Macmillan and Co.) 
 
CHAPTER X. 
 
 THE TALMUD AND THE TARGUMS. 
 
 THOSE English readers who take an interest in 
 Biblical questions have doubtless often en- 
 countered the expressions Talmud and Targums, in 
 articles or books bearing upon the Old Testament. 
 But not improbably the terms referred to may have 
 possessed to many only the vaguest significance, 
 and may have appeared as if wrapped in a veil of 
 mystery which they had neither time nor opportunity 
 to penetrate. Perhaps this little book may fall into 
 the hands of some such readers. It is indeed 
 specially meant for those who, without being pro- 
 fessed scholars or theologians, are intelligent stu- 
 dents of the Bible, and wish to become acquainted 
 with all that may, without the use of erudite or tech- 
 nical language, be told them in connection with it. 
 The object of this chapter, therefore, will be to 
 explain, in as simple a manner as possible, the 
 seemingly strange appellations " Talmud " and *' Tar- 
 gums," and thus to clear away that obscurity which 
 
302 OLD TESTAMENT REVISION. 
 
 to not a few readers may hitherto have lingered 
 round the words. 
 
 "What is the Talmud?" 
 
 These were the opening words of a famous article 
 which appeared in one of our leading Reviews some 
 fifteen years ago.* The article excited great in- 
 terest in our own and other countries, but certainly 
 did not answer with anything like accuracy or fair- 
 ness its own opening question. Written in a style 
 of the greatest liveliness and vigour, its whole ten- 
 dency was to mislead. The author, while carefully 
 abstaining from any precision as to the dates of the 
 documents he quoted, nevertheless left the impres- 
 sion that these were anterior to Christianity, and that 
 the New Testament was, in fact, largely dependent 
 upon the Talmud for its phraseology and doctrines. 
 What had been deemed the most striking and original 
 of Christ's sayings were thus insinuated to have been 
 merely the echo of sentiments which really circulated 
 among the Jews before His day. Nowhere, indeed, 
 did the learned writer of the article definitely commit 
 himself to such an assertion, but that this was the 
 drift of his production soon appeared from the use 
 which was made of it by others. Knowing nothing 
 of the subject but what they gathered from Mr. 
 Deutsch's clever handling of it, writers in some of 
 
 * Quarterly Revie^v^ Oct., 1867. 
 
THE TALMUD AND THE TARGUMS. 203 
 
 the ablest of our periodicals were completely hood- 
 winked by it, and allowed themselves to be betrayed 
 into the most groundless statements. Thus said 
 one : " As for the old idea that the Talmud was not 
 written before the Christian dispensation, and therefore 
 contains plagiarisms of the New Testament, that has 
 by this time been given up, along with the notion that 
 all languages are derived from Hebrew, or that the 
 cuneiform inscriptions are the work of worms." * 
 
 This, of course, was the utterance simply of crass 
 ignorance. How differently has one who really 
 knows something of the Talmud, and has done his 
 part to make what is best in it known to others, 
 recently expressed himself! *'To assert," says 
 Mr. Hershon, *'that the New Testament owes many 
 of its sublime teachings to the Talmud, which was 
 not committed to writing till four centuries after Christ, 
 presumes rather too much on the credulity even of 
 unbelievers, and none are more credulous than 
 they." t 
 
 What then is the Talmud } 
 
 It is an enormous and chaotic repertory of Jewish 
 thought, tradition, and speculation on almost all 
 conceivable subjects. The magnitude of the work 
 may be inferred from the fact that, as first printed 
 
 * Saturday Review, Nov. 2, 1867. 
 
 f Treasures of the Tal7}iud,^.%'^. By Paul J. Hershon. 1 882. 
 
204 OLD TESTAMENT REVISION. 
 
 in 1520-23, and as generally printed still, it con- 
 sists of twelve immense folio volumes ! The con 
 tents are classed under two general heads — the 
 Mishnah and the Gemarah. The term ** Mishnah " 
 means repedition, being based on the Pentateuch, 
 and repeating, as it were, while enlarging the original 
 text.* The term ** Gemarah," again, denotes com- 
 pletion, being a sort of commentary on the Mishnah, 
 which it develops and explains at vast length, thus 
 completing, as was supposed, the Mosaic legislation. 
 All this taken together constitutes the " Talmud," 
 which is a word that means study or learning, and 
 this was the oral or unwritten law of the Jews, as 
 distinguished from the Pentateuch, the written law, 
 which was always regarded, in theory at least, as the 
 supreme and unchangeable authority. 
 
 The Mishnah was begun to be written down by 
 the celebrated Rabbi Judah about the middle of the 
 second century after Christ, and was completed by 
 his disciples some time about the close of the cen- 
 tury. It is by far the most valuable of the rabbinical 
 writings, and doubtless preserves traditions that had 
 been orally handed down from a remote antiquity. 
 The Gemarah was gradually added on to this in the 
 
 * Such is the common explanation, but Deutsch maintains 
 (ZzV. Rem., p. 332) that Mishnah means "learning," and is 
 synonymous with Talmud and Torah. This does not appear 
 probable. 
 
THE TALMUD AND THE TARGUMS. 205 
 
 course of the next three hundred years.* Many 
 rabbis took part in the work, and by inserting in it, 
 very much at random as would appear, all sorts 
 of laws, customs, explanations, and illustrations, 
 gradually built up the enormous structure which is 
 known as the Talmud at the present day. Its 
 multifarious contents have been divided into what 
 are called "Halachah" and " Haggadah," the first 
 of these words meaning rule, and referring to exposi- 
 tions and enlargements of the Pentateuchal laws, 
 while the second denotes legend, and includes alle 
 gories, parables, and narratives of the most varied 
 character.f The legal and the legendary elements 
 thus join together to form that stupendous pile of 
 literary matter which has so long and perniciously 
 stood between the Jews and the pure Word of God, 
 and which, in spite of the sufferings which adherence 
 to it has frequently caused them, most of the de- 
 scendants of Abraham still regard with superstitious 
 reverence. 
 
 As has recently been well remarked, "Implicit 
 
 * The Talmudic period may be said to extend from about 200 
 A.D. to 600 A,D. The Jerusalem Talmud was formed about 300 
 A.D., and the Babylonian Talmud, which is to be understood as 
 referred to when the Talmud is mentioned, was not completed 
 before 600 A.D. 
 
 f Under Baggadah chiefly may be classed Midrash — any 
 popular exposition of the sacred books with a view to edification. 
 This is often mixed up with translation. Deutsch happily refers 
 
2o6 OLD TESTAMENT REVISION: 
 
 adherence to the teaching of the Talmud has often 
 drawn, like a lightning conductor, the electricity of 
 persecution upon the hapless and hopeless Jews, and 
 doubtless does so still. Let them but cast their idol, 
 the Talmud, * to the moles and to the bats,' and they 
 will fare like other men ; they will enjoy liberty, and 
 be free from persecution. Take the case of the 
 Karaite * Jews, for example, in bigoted Russia. 
 They command more respect there, and enjoy 
 greater personal freedom and social privileges than 
 their so-called orthodox brethren. The former, not 
 being influenced by the Talmud, make far better 
 citizens, and the Russian Government is not so 
 blind as not to observe the marked difference be- 
 tween the one and the other, nor so unjust as not 
 to signify its preference in a special manner." t 
 
 While it is certainly true, as the writer just quoted 
 observes, that "the special pleading of Deutsch in 
 his writings cunningly drapes all that is bad in the 
 book, and hides its ungainly parts," we may, in so 
 far, also agree with him when he says that "the 
 Talmud has its attractions, and they are neither few 
 
 to Bunyan's " Pilgrim's Progress," as a sort of Haggadah in our 
 own language. {Lit. Kem., p. 47.) 
 
 * Those Jews who hold by the ivritten law, and seek to ex- 
 pound it, not according to tradition, but by fair grammatical 
 interpretation. (Comp. above, p. 154.) 
 
 t Treasures of the Talmud, p. xii. 
 
THE, TALMUD AND THE TARGUMS. 207 
 
 nor small, but its moral poverty sadly detracts from 
 its charms, and, in fact, serves to make it unsightly."* 
 I shall now set before the reader some specimens of 
 what are called *' The Treasures of the Talmud," and 
 shall leave him to infer of what nature those vastly 
 larger portions of it must be which cannot be em- 
 braced under such a designation. t 
 
 * Ibid., p. xi. 
 
 f Here the term Cabala or Kabala may be noticed. The 
 word properly denotes "tradition," and refers to that spurious 
 science among the Jews which professes to bring out the secret 
 meaning of Scriptui-e. Every letter, word, and accent of the 
 Law is supposed to have a mystic sense, and by studying that 
 the Cabalists pretended even to be able to predict future events. 
 Longfellow, in "The Golden Legend," has well set forth the ex- 
 aggerated importance which the Jews attached to their various 
 "traditions" as compared with Scripture, when he makes a 
 rabbi express himself as follows : — 
 
 " I am the Rabbi Ben Israel, 
 
 Throughout this village known full well, 
 And, as my scholars all will tell. 
 
 Learned in things divine ; 
 The Kabala and Talmud hoar 
 Than all the prophets prize I more ; 
 For water is all Bible lore. 
 
 But Mishna is strong wine." 
 
 There is, of course, an anachronism in ascribing such sentiments 
 to a contemporary of Christ. But at the present day ' ' only he 
 is an orthodox Jew, who recognizes the Talmudic interpretation 
 of Holy Writ as that handed down from Moses. " (^Contemporary 
 Review, ^Q.^\.., 1882, p. 372.) Let the reader consider this claim 
 in the light of some of the interpretations afterwards brought 
 forward. 
 
208 OLD TESTAMENT REVISION, 
 
 "Whence," it is asked, "do we ascertain that 
 God's anger lasts only for a moment ? (Ps. xxx. 5,) 
 
 * His anger endureth but a moment : in His favour 
 is life.' If thou wilt, I would prove it from this 
 (Isa. xxvi. 20), * Hide thyself, as it were, for a little 
 moment, until the indignation be overpast.' At 
 what time of the day is God angry .^ Abaii says, 
 
 * During the first three hours of the day, when the 
 cock's comb turns white.' But the cock's comb 
 turns white at all the other hours of the day. Well, 
 but then there are still some streaks of red left on 
 the comb, which is not the case when God is angry, 
 for then it is quite white. Rabbi Yehoshua ben 
 Levi used to suffer much from a certain Min {i.e., a 
 heretic, or a Christian). One day he got a cock, 
 and placed it at the foot of his bed, in order to find 
 out the time when God was angry, intending at the 
 nick of time to curse the Min. But when the time 
 came, the rabbi fell asleep. On waking and noticing 
 that the opportunity was gone, he remarked (Ps. 
 cxlv. 9), * His tender mercies are over all His 
 works,' and it is also written (Prov. xvii. 26), 
 'Also to punish the just is not good, therefore it 
 is not right for me so to do.' " We learn in the 
 name of Rabbi Meir, " When the kings (of the 
 nations) put their crowns upon their heads and 
 worship the sun, God instantly becomes angry.* 
 {Avodah Zarah, folio 4 B.) 
 
THE TALMUD AND THE TARGUMS. 209 
 
 The translator naively appends as a note, "This 
 tell-tale faculty of the cock's comb, which is corro- 
 borated in Sanhedrin (fol. 105 b), has not been 
 noticed by naturalists of the present day." * 
 
 The following is an example of that absurd quib- 
 bling which is so characteristic of the Talmud in 
 dealing with Scripture : — 
 
 " He who gives of his seed to Molech is not 
 guilty, unless he has both given over his child to 
 Molech, and also caused it to pass through the fire. 
 If he has given it over to Molech, and has not caused 
 it to pass through the fire, or if he has caused it to 
 pass through the fire, but has not given it over to 
 Molech, he is not guilty. ... If one has caused all 
 his children to pass through the fire, he is not guilty ; 
 for it is said (Lev. xviii. 21), * Any of thy seed,' and 
 it is not said, * all thy seed.' " t 
 
 A few samples may be added of the rabbinical 
 style of interpretation : — 
 
 *' The Holy One — blessed be He ! — will in the 
 future bring together Mount Sinai and Tabor and 
 Carmel, and place Jerusalem on the top of them; 
 for it is said (Isa. ii. 2), 'The mountain of the 
 Lord's house shall be established on the top of the 
 mountains.'" {Midrash Tillim, fol. 39 A.) 
 
 "Jerusalem will in the future be extended in 
 
 * Treasures of the Talmud, p. 156. f /<^'^., p. I79. 
 
 14 
 
210 OLD TESTAMENT REVISION. 
 
 ever}- direction, till it reaches the gate of Damascus, 
 where the returned exiles shall come and rest, that 
 it might be fulfilled which is said (Zech. ix. i), 
 * Damascus shall be the rest.' " i^Shir Hashirim 
 Rabba, fol. 274 A.) 
 
 "It is written (Isa. Ixvi. 23), 'It shall come to pass 
 from one new moon to another,' etc. But how 
 is it possible that all flesh shall come upon every 
 new moon and every Sabbath to Jerusalem ? Rabbi 
 Levi said, 'In the future, Jerusalem will be as the 
 land of Israel, and the land of Israel shall be as the 
 whole world.' But how will they come from the 
 ends of the world every new moon and every Sabbath ? 
 The clouds will come and convey them to Jerusalem, 
 where they will repeat their morning prayer, and 
 this it is for which the prophet praises them (Isa. Ix. 
 8), 'Who are these that fly as a cloud.?'" etc. 
 {Valkut Shimoni, fol. 57 b.)* 
 
 We meet with the following amazing statements : — 
 
 " Nero embraced Judaism, and Rabbi Meir was 
 one of his descendants." {Gittin, fol. 55.) 
 
 "As a reward for the forty-two sacrifices which 
 Balak the king of Moab off'ered, he was accounted 
 worthy to become the ancestor of Ruth, of whom 
 came Solomon, who wrote (i Kings iii. 4), "A 
 thousand burnt offerings did Solomon offer." {Soieh^ 
 
 fol. 47 A.) 
 
 * lOi'd.s D. 2oq. 
 
THE TALMUD AND THE TARGUMS. 211 
 
 Of Titus, when at sea, we are told, ** Then came a 
 Bath Kol, a voice from heaven, and said, * O thou 
 wicked man, son of a wicked man, and descendant 
 of Esau the wicked, go ashore. I have a creature 
 insignificant in my world ; go thou and fight with 
 that.' (This creature was a gnat, and was termed 
 insignificant, because it has a mouth to take in food, 
 but has no outlet to discharge it.) Immediately he 
 landed, a gnat flew into his nostrils, and made i+s 
 way to his brain, upon which it fed for a period ^f 
 seven years. Once he happened to pass a black- 
 smith's forge, and the noise of the hammer caused 
 the gnat to cease working on his brain. *Aha!' 
 said Titus, * here's a remedy.' He ordered a black- 
 smith continually to hammer before him, paying him 
 four zouzim a day if a Gentile blacksmith, but paying 
 nothing to a Jewish one ; for said he to the latter, 
 
 * Thou art well paid by seeing me, thy enemy, in such 
 a painful condition.' For thirty days he felt relief, 
 but after that period all the hammering was in vain. 
 Rabbi Phinehas, the son of Aruba, testified, saying, 
 
 * I myself was among the magnates of Rome when 
 an inquest was made upon Titus, and upon opening 
 his brain they found in it the gnat, as big as a 
 swallow, weighing two selas. Others say it was as 
 large as a pigeon a year old, weighing two litres. 
 Abaii said, * We found its mouth to be of copper, and 
 its claws of iron.' Titus willed that after his death 
 
212 OLD TESTAMENT REVISION. 
 
 his body should undergo cremation, and his ashes 
 should be scattered over the surface of the seven seas, 
 that the God of the Jews might not find him, and 
 bring him to judgment." * {Gittin, fol. 56 b.) 
 
 The following are one or two specimens of the 
 grotesque conceptions and ludicrous exaggerations 
 of the rabbis : — 
 
 " Rabbah bar bar Channah said, * I myself saw a 
 frog which was as large as the village of Acra in 
 Hagronia. How large was Acra in Hagronia ? It 
 consisted of sixty houses. A serpent came and 
 swallowed the frog, and a female raven swallowed 
 the serpent, and then flew off, and perched on a 
 tree. Come, see how strong this tree must have 
 been.' Rav Pappa bar Shemuel said, * I should 
 never have believed it had I not been present 
 myself.' " {Bava Bathra, fol. 73 B.) 
 
 " Rabbah bar bar Channah said, * We were once 
 on board ship, and we saw a certain fish, upon whose 
 nostrils a creature fastened itself, and killed him. 
 The dead fish was washed ashore by the waves of 
 the sea, and sixty villages were swamped in conse- 
 quence. Sixty other towns fed upon the carcase, 
 and sixty towns besides them salted what was left 
 over. From one eye-ball only they filled three 
 hundred barrels of oil. When we visited the same 
 
 * Ibid., p. 260. 
 
THE TALMUD AND THE. TARGUMS. 213 
 
 place a year afterwards, we found that they had cut 
 up the bones of the fish for the rebuilding of the 
 demolished cities.' " {Ibid.) 
 
 " Rabbi Yohanan related, * Once we were sailing 
 in a ship, when we descried a fish which lifted up 
 its head out of the sea. His eyes were like two 
 moons, and the water was spouted from his nostrils 
 like two rivers of Sura.' Rav Saphra related, * We 
 were once on shipboard, and saw a fish which put 
 his head up out of the sea ; he had horns, and upon 
 them was written, *' I am the meanest creature of 
 the sea, and I am three hundred miles in length, 
 and am now bound for the mouth of the leviathan 
 for his meal to-day." ' Rav Ashi said this was the 
 sea-goat, which diggeth in the bottom of the sea 
 with its horns in search of food."* {Ibid., fol. 74A.) 
 
 The reader will now feel that enough, and perhaps 
 more than enough, of this trash has been set before 
 him. The apology which some present for it is that 
 such stories (with others of a kind which cannot be 
 quoted) are cryptographs^ meaning that they are not 
 to be literally understood, but must be mystically 
 interpreted. If so, some of the " initiated " ought 
 surely to come forward and do the necessary work. 
 Such attempts as are made in the Talmud itself to 
 attach an allegorical significance to some of its 
 
 * Ibid., p. 305 fif 
 
214 OLD TESTAMENT REVISION. 
 
 narratives do not strike one as very successful. 
 And even after making every allowance for the 
 exuberance of Eastern fancy and the severity of 
 Western taste and judgment, it seems impossible 
 to avoid the conclusion that in the Babylonian 
 Talmud of the Jewish rabbis there is presented 
 to us the most stupendous mass of childishness 
 and folly that was ever collected. Of course, in a 
 work of such vast dimensions, all cannot be bad. 
 There are some very wise maxims, and some really 
 beautiful legends ; and that this aspect of the work 
 may also be presented, I '\\ '11 now set a few favour- 
 able specimens of these before the reader.* 
 
 "The place honours not the man, 'tis the man 
 who gives honour to the place." 
 
 " If a word spoken in its time is worth one piece 
 of money, silence in its time is worth two." 
 
 "When wine enters the head, the secret flies out." 
 " The camel desired horns, and his ears were 
 taken from him." 
 
 " Silence is the fence round wisdom." 
 " Rather be the tail among lions than the head 
 among foxes." 
 
 " Truth is heavy, therefore few care to carry it." 
 " Descend a step in choosing thy wife : ascend a 
 step in choosing thy friend." 
 
 * I am indebted for what immediately follows to H. Polano's 
 Selections from the Talmud, p. 307 ff. 
 
THE TALMUD AND THE TARGUMS. 215 
 
 "■ Commit a sin twice, and it will not seem to thee 
 a crime." 
 
 "■ Despise no man, and deem nothing impossi- 
 ble : every man hath his hour, and every thing its 
 place." 
 
 ** The best preacher is the heart : the best teacher 
 is time : the best book is the world : the best friend 
 is God." 
 
 *' There is a great difference between one who can 
 feel ashamed before his own soul, and one who is 
 only ashamed before his fellow-men." 
 
 The Bride and Bridegroom. 
 
 " There was once a man who pledged his dearest 
 faith to a maiden, beautiful and true. For a time all 
 passed pleasantly, and the maiden lived in happiness. 
 But then the man was called from her side, and left 
 her ; long she waited, but he did not return. Friends 
 pitied her, and rivals mocked her; tauntingly they 
 pointed at her, and said, * He has left thee ; he will 
 never come back.' The maiden sought her chamber 
 and read in secret the letters in which he promised 
 to be ever faithful, ever true. Weeping she read 
 them, but they brought comfort to her heart: she 
 dried her eyes, and doubted not. 
 
 " A joyous day dawned for her : the man she loved 
 returned ; and when he learned that "others had 
 doubted, and asked her how she had preserved her 
 
2i6 OLD TESTAMENT REVISION. 
 
 faith, she showed his letters to him, declaring her 
 eternal trust. 
 
 *' Israel, in misery and captivity, was mocked by 
 the nations : her hopes of redemption were made 
 a laughing-stock; her sages were scoffed at, her 
 holy men derided. Into her synagogues, into her 
 schools, went Israel ; she read the letters which her 
 God had written, and believed in the holy promises 
 which they contained. God will in time redeem her ; 
 and when He says, ' How could you alone be faith- 
 ful of all the mocking nations ? ' she will point to 
 the law, and answer, ' Had not Thy law been my 
 delight, I should long since have perished in my 
 affliction' (Ps. cxix, 92)." 
 
 Truth, 
 
 " When God was about to create man, the angels 
 gathered round Him. Some of them, opening their 
 lips, exclaimed, * Create, O God, a being who shall 
 praise Thee from earth, even as we in heaven sing 
 Thy glory.' But others said, * Hear us. Almighty 
 King ; create no more ! The glorious harmony of the 
 heavens, which Thou hast sent to earth, will be by man 
 disturbed, destroyed.' Then silence fell upon the 
 contesting hosts, as the Angel of JNIercy appeared 
 before the throne of grace on bended knees. Sweet 
 was the voice which said entreatingly, * O Father, 
 Create Thou man ; make him Thine own noble image- 
 
THE TALMUD AND THE TARGUMS. 217 
 
 With heavenly pity will I fill his heart, with sympathy 
 towards every living thing impress his being : through 
 him will they find cause to praise Thee.' Then the 
 Angel of Mercy ceased, and the Angel of Peace, 
 with tearful eyes, spoke thus : * O God, create him 
 not ! Thy peace he will disturb ; the flow of 
 blood will follow sure his coming. Confusion, 
 horror, war, will blot the earth, and Thou wilt no 
 longer find a pleasant place among Thy works on 
 earth.' Then spoke in stern tones the Angel of 
 Justice : * And Thou wilt judge him, God : he shall 
 be subject to my sway.' The Angel of Truth ap- 
 proached, saying, * Cease ! O God of truth, with 
 man Thou sendest falsehood to the earth.' Then 
 all were silent, and out of the deep quietness the 
 divine words came, *Thou, O Truth, shalt go to 
 earth with him, and yet remain a denizen of heaven 
 — betwixt heaven and earth to float, a connecting link 
 between the two/ " 
 
 What, we have next to enquire, are the Jewish 
 Targums } 
 
 This point need not detain us long. The word 
 "Targum" simply denotes translation, and the 
 Jewish Targums accordingly are those versions of 
 the Old Testament which, at varying dates, were 
 made into the Syro-Chaldaic or Aramaic language. 
 
 As shown in the preceding chapter, written trans- 
 
2i8 OLD TESTAMENT REVISION. 
 
 lations of the Scriptures into Aramaic were for a 
 long time strictly forbidden among the Jews. But 
 Hebrew having after the return from the captivity 
 become a dead language, interpreters {Meturgemanini) 
 were employed in the synagogues orally to translate 
 the original into the common Aramaic, until, as 
 would appear, the general acquaintance with Greek 
 which was acquired by the people led to the aboli- 
 tion of the office.^* And even while these " inter- 
 preters " were needed and permitted, they were far 
 from being much respected or encouraged. The 
 following is the account which Deutsch gives of 
 them : — " Persons unfit to be readers, as those whose 
 clothes were so torn and ragged that their limbs 
 became visible through the rents, their appearance 
 thus not corresponding to the reverence due to the 
 sacred word itself, or blind men were admitted to 
 the office of a meturgeman ; and, apart from there 
 being not the slightest authority attached to their 
 interpretations, they were liable to be stopped and 
 silenced, publicly and ignominiously, whenever they 
 seemed to overstep the bounds of discretion. . . . 
 Altogether, they appear to have borne the character 
 of empty-headed, bombastic fools." f Even had 
 
 * It is well worthy of notice that no reference whatever to 
 such interpreters occurs in the New Testament, notwithstanding 
 the mention which is made of the synagogue worship. 
 
 ■j- Lit. Rem., p. 326. 
 
THE TALMUD AND THE TARGUMS. 219 
 
 men of this character and standing ventured against 
 express prohibition to form any written translations 
 of Scripture, it is plain that these would never have 
 become popular, or been allowed the least authority. 
 But, as might in the circumstances have been ex- 
 pected, they made no such attempt. We hear of no 
 Targum in written form before the days of Christ. 
 
 Those Targums which still exist are all of very 
 uncertain date and authorship. This much only is 
 certain regarding them, that the most ancient of 
 them was not committed to writing till about the 
 second century after Christ. 
 
 The oldest Targum extant bears the name of 
 Onkelos. Who he was, or, indeed, whether a person 
 of that name ever existed, is matter of speculation and 
 dispute. Some recent writers have been disposed 
 to identify him with Aquila, whose Greek version 
 of the Old Testament will be hereafter described. 
 His work consists of a very free, but, of its kind, 
 excellent translation of the Pentateuch. For various 
 reasons he often departs from the exact meaning of 
 the original. Thus, as is well known, one of the 
 commonest Hebrew words for God, " Elohim," is in 
 reality a plural form. Christian divines have fre- 
 quently seen in this, if not a proof, yet a support, of 
 the doctrine of the Trinity. But it seems to have 
 made quite a different impression on the mind of 
 Onkelos. To him it appeared liable to suggest a 
 
220 OLD TESTAMENT REVISION. 
 
 multiplicity of deities, and therefore he substitutes 
 Jehovah for it. He also changes anthropomorphic 
 expressions which are applied to God, and any other 
 forms of words which' seemed lowering to the Divine 
 majesty. Thus, in Gen. xi. 5, instead of "And 
 Jehovah came down to see the city," the Targum has 
 ** And Jehovah revealed Himself; " while in Exod. xv. 
 II, instead of "Who is like unto Thee, O Jehovah, 
 among the gods } " the rendering given is, " There 
 is none like unto Thee, Thou art God." For these 
 and various other reasons, this Chaldee Targum of 
 Onkelos often departs from the strict meaning of the 
 original Hebrew. 
 
 This is far more the case with the Targum of 
 Jonathan ben Uzziel on the Prophets, which comes 
 next in age and value to that of Onkelos. It can 
 hardly be deemed a translation at all. With greater 
 propriety it might be called a paraphrase, with room 
 made for much foreign matter, parables, allegories, 
 and such-like, having no place in the Hebrew text. 
 It embraces the following books — Joshua, Judges, 
 Samuel, Kings, Isaiah, Jeremiah, Ezekiel, and the 
 twelve minor prophets. It is, of course, written in 
 Chaldee, and may most probably be assigned to the 
 first half of the third century after Christ. Like the 
 work of Onkelos, it issued from the learned Jewish 
 academies which then flourished at Babylon. 
 
 The seare by far the oldest of existing Targums of 
 
THE TALMUD AND THE TARGUMS. 221 
 
 the Old Testament. Several others belonging to a 
 later date might be mentioned, but hardly call for 
 notice in this place.* It may simply be stated that 
 those fragments of the Targum of Job still in exist- 
 ence may possibly embody some portion of what 
 was perhaps the very first of all the Targums. 
 
 According to the Talmud, Job had no real exist- 
 ence. Its language respecting him is, " Job never 
 was, and never was created," having simply been 
 summoned into existence by an inspired poet, for 
 the purpose of weaving round his name the most 
 interesting and important instructions. From the 
 same source we learn, as was formerly noticed, that 
 an unauthorised Targum of the Book of Job was 
 formed at a very early period of our era. 
 
 To give the English reader some idea of the 
 character of these Jewish translations, or rather 
 paraphrases, of the Old Testament, a verse from 
 our Authorised Version is subjoined side by side 
 with the corresponding passage in the Targum of 
 Jonathan.! 
 
 I Samuel xvii. 8. 
 
 Authorised Version, Targum of Jonathan. 
 
 And he stood and cried And he arose, and he cried unto the armies of 
 
 unto the armies of Israel, Israel, and said unto them, Why have you put 
 
 * See for a full and excellent account of the Targums Smith's 
 Diet, of Bible, iii., pp. 1637 — 1665, or the same as reprinted in 
 Deutsch's Literary Reinains^ pp. 319 — 403, 
 
 t Deutsch's Lit. Rem., p. 378. 
 
222 
 
 OLD TESTAMENT REVISION. 
 
 and said unto them, Why 
 are ye come out to set 
 your battle in array ? Am 
 not I a PhiUstine, and ye 
 servants to Saul ? Choose 
 you a man for you, and 
 et him come down to me. 
 
 yourselves in battle array? Am I not the Phi- 
 listine, and you the servants of Saul ? [I am 
 Goliath the Philistine from Gath, who have 
 killed the two sons of Eli, the priests Hophna 
 and Phinehas, and carried captive the ark of 
 the covenant of the Lord, I who have carried it 
 to the house of Dagon, my Error, and it has 
 been there in the cities of the Philistines seven 
 months. And in every battle which the Phi- 
 listines have had, I went at the head of the 
 army, and we conquered in the battle, and we 
 strewed the killed like the dust of the earth, 
 and until now have the Philistines not thought 
 me wor.thy to become captain of a thousand 
 over them. And you, O children of Israel, 
 what mighty deed has Saul the son of Kish 
 from Gibeah done for you, that you made him 
 king over you ? If he is a valiant man, let him 
 come out and do battle with me ; but if he is a 
 weak man], then choose for yourselves a man, 
 and let him come out against me. 
 
CHAPTER XI. 
 
 VERSIONS OF THE OLD TESTAMENT LATER 
 THAN THE TIME OF CHRIST. 
 
 IT is a singular fact that no less than three addi- 
 tional versions of the Old Testament into Greek 
 were formed in the second century of our era. There 
 must have been some powerful reason for this. Both 
 Jews and Christians, as we have seen, cherished the 
 highest esteem for the Septuagint version in the 
 apostolic age and the times immediately succeeding 
 it. But by-and-by a very different feeling sprang 
 up among the Jews, and led to those strangely in- 
 consistent utterances which are found in the Talmud 
 with regard to the work of the Seventy. While the 
 early rabbis expressed themselves in almost enthusi- 
 astic terms with respect to the Greek version, the 
 later rabbis adopted a totally different tone, and 
 allowed themselves to be betrayed into many wild 
 sayings in consequence. They spoke of the common 
 Greek version as an accursed thing. They averred 
 that on the day on which the seventy translators met 
 a supernatural darkness covered the earth, with other 
 
224 OLD TESTAMENT REVISION. 
 
 Statements of the same kind. Now, whence arose 
 this change of feeling in regard to the Septuagint ? 
 Simply, as would appear, from the fact that it was 
 deemed too favourable to the claims of Christianity. 
 Having often the worst of the argument when an 
 appeal was made to JNIessianic passages as contained 
 in the Septuagint, the Jews desired a version which 
 might embarrass them less in their controversies 
 with the Christians. And hence, apparently, the 
 origin of the first of the three versions about to be 
 described. 
 
 The author of this version was one Aquila, a native 
 of Pontus. Some strange stories are told regarding 
 him by ancient writers, which are not worthy of 
 repetition. All that we know for certain is that, 
 from being a heathen, he became a convert to 
 Judaism, and was employed by the Jews to translate 
 their sacred writings into Greek. This new version 
 was undoubtedly intended to be a rival to the Septua- 
 gint, and did indeed supplant its use among the 
 Jews. The great characteristic of the translation of 
 Aquila is its extreme literalism. Greek idioms and 
 even grammar are violated, in order that an exact 
 adherence to the Hebrew may be preserved. This 
 literality of rendering, while worthless as to the sense, 
 would have been most valuable as respects the text 
 of the Old Testament, if larger portions of the 
 version of Aquila had reached our day. But only a 
 
OLD TESTAMENT VERSIONS AFTER CHRIST. 225 
 
 few fragments remain, and these do little more than 
 illustrate the principles on which the version was 
 formed. There can be no doubt that Aquila was a 
 good Hebrew scholar, and his work, though not 
 generally liked by the Christians, is sometimes 
 highly praised by the most learned of the Fathers, 
 such as Origen and Jerome. The version of Aquila 
 is referred to by Irenaeus (about 185 a.d.), and 
 appears to have been completed in the reign of 
 Hadrian, say 129 a.d. 
 
 About half a century after Aquila, a version of 
 the Old Testament into Greek was also formed by 
 Theodotion. This may perhaps rather be styled a 
 revision of the Septuagint than an absolutely new 
 version. Its author is said to have been by birth 
 an Ephesian, and by profession an Ebionite, that is, 
 a member of the early sect of Christians who held a 
 low, or merely human, view of the person of Christ. 
 The work of Theodotion was largely used by Chris- 
 tians generally, and to this day his version of the 
 Book of Daniel is usually found in printed editions 
 of the Septuagint, in place of the translation which 
 properly belongs to it. Theodotion, as well as 
 Aquila, is referred to by Irenaeus as having given 
 an inadequate rendering of the Hebrew word trans- 
 lated 'Wirgin" in our Authorised Version in Isa. 
 vii. 14. 
 
 Symmachus, who is said by some of the Fathers 
 
 15 
 
226 OLD TESTAMENT REVISION. 
 
 also to have been an Ebionite, but is called by 
 others a Samaritan, was the author of a third Greek 
 version, which appeared about the end of the second 
 century. It does not seem to have been known to 
 Irenaeus, since, if so, he would probably have re- 
 ferred to it, as he does to the versions of Aquila 
 and Theodotion. Very little can be said respecting 
 the work of Symmachus. It apparently occupied a 
 middle place among the three versions mentioned, not 
 being so exact as that of Aquila, nor so inaccurate 
 as that of Theodotion. The author is said to have 
 lived under the Emperor Severus, as already indicated. 
 Besides these versions of Aquila, Theodotion, and 
 Symmachus, there were also some other fragmentary 
 Greek translations, of which Origen made use in his 
 great work bearing the name of Hexapla. Before 
 acquiring a knowledge of Hebrew, Origen appears 
 to have compiled a work called the Tefrapla, or 
 'Tour/old Bible, containing the versions of Aquila, 
 Symmachus, the Septuagint, and Theodotion, in 
 parallel columns. But, after he mastered the 
 Hebrew language, this mighty worker proceeded 
 to the formation of a Hexapla, or Sixjold Bible, 
 comprising first the Hebrew text, next, the same 
 in Greek letters, and then the versions as arranged 
 in the Tetrapla. In his greater work, according to 
 Eusebius, he included the fragmentary translations 
 which have been mentioned. 
 
OLD TESTAMENT VERSIONS AFTER CHRIST. 227 
 
 We now proceed to glance at the Syriac versions 
 of the Old Testament. 
 
 A special interest attaches to the earliest Syriac 
 translation of the Old Testament, as having been 
 the first version after the time of Christ which was 
 made directly from the Hebrew. Its date cannot 
 be accurately fixed. Some have argued that it was 
 formed long before the Christian era, and others 
 that it arose about the end of the apostolic age ; 
 but the probability is, that, like the Syriac version 
 of the New Testament, it was made some time in 
 the second century of our era. The celebrated 
 Syrian writer, Ephraem, who lived in the fourth 
 century, refers to it in terms which seem to imply 
 that even then it was regarded as ancient ; and for 
 this reason, among others, we are led to assign its 
 origin to the date which has been mentioned. 
 
 By whom this Syriac version of the Old Testament 
 was made is utterly unknown. We cannot even say 
 with certainty whether it sprung from a Jewish or 
 Christian source. The fact that it was formed 
 directly from the Hebrew would seem to point to 
 a Jew as its author, since a knowledge of the 
 Hebrew language hardly existed among Christians. 
 But as the version was undoubtedly intended for 
 Christian use, the probability is that its author, or 
 authors, were Jews who were acquainted with ancient 
 Hebrew, and had been converted to Christianity. 
 
228 OLD TESTAMENT REVISION. 
 
 The truth, however, is that on this point we have 
 nothing to trust to' but conjecture.* 
 
 This version of the Old Testament, along with 
 the Syriac version of the New Testament, was, at a 
 later period, known by the name of Peshito, that is, 
 simple^ and was perhaps so called as adhering closely 
 to the original, and avoiding allegorical interpreta- 
 tions. Both from its age and character as a version, 
 it would be of supreme importance for aiding in the 
 settlement of the true Hebrew text, were its own text 
 in a satisfactory condition. But, unfortunately, such 
 is not at present the case. A critical edition of the 
 Peshito version of the Old Testament is, like a 
 similar edition of the Septuagint, still among the 
 desiderata of Biblical science. 
 
 Until such editions have been prepared, nothing 
 positive can be determined as to the relation be- 
 tween this Syriac translation and the Septuagint. 
 In the meantime, all that can be said is, that the 
 Syriac version is found to be coloured from that of 
 the Seventy, and agrees with it not unfrequently 
 
 * Canon Westcott appears to speak more strongly than the 
 data will warrant when he says, *' The Old Testament, no less 
 than the New, was certainly translated by a Christian, and the 
 whole work was probably revised and completed early in the 
 second century, at Edessa, which was at that time the centre 
 of an important Christian school." — The Bible in the Churchy 
 p. 132. 
 
OLD TESTAMENT VERSIONS AFTER CHRIST, 229 
 
 against the existing Hebrew text. But, like the 
 Septuagint, the Syriac gives a general support to the 
 Hebrew, as at present accepted. 
 
 Another Syriac version of the Old Testament was 
 made from the Greek about the beginning of the 
 seventh century of our era. This version was based 
 on the Hexapla of Origen, formerly described. It 
 contains the marks and references which existed in 
 that great critical work, and is, indeed, the source 
 from which we obtain our chief acquaintance with 
 the results of Origen's labours in connection with 
 the text of the Old Testament. When a critical 
 edition of the Septuagint comes to be prepared, the 
 version now referred to must play an important part 
 in its construction.* 
 
 The next subject which calls for notice is a con- 
 sideration of the Latin versions of the Old Testament. 
 
 We here enter a region of the deepest interest. 
 With the exception of the Septuagint, no version of 
 the Old Testament can vie in importance with the 
 Vylgate. Both the two great classical languages have 
 been highly honoured in connection with the sacred 
 Scriptures. The Greek, as we have already seen, was 
 the first language into which the Old Testament was 
 translated, and furnished in the Septuagint version the 
 
 Dr. Tregelles in Smith's Diet, of Bible, iii. 1625 fif. 
 
230 OLD TESTAMENT REVISION. 
 
 Bible of the early Christians, of the inspired Apostles, 
 yea, of the Divine Redeemer Himself. A peculiar 
 and pre-eminent distinction has thus been conferred 
 upon the Greek language in connection with the 
 history of Christianity. But the Latin has hardly 
 fallen short in glory. It was, for ages, the language 
 of the whole Christian Church. It remains, far 
 beyond any other tongue, the depository of sacred 
 literature. Hymns and prayers and expositions 
 and dissertations innumerable are enshrined in it. 
 To this day it forms the medium through which 
 the far-spreading Church of Rome presents her 
 worship. It is therefore with peculiar interest that 
 we approach the subject of the Latin versions, and 
 inquire into the history of what is known as the 
 Vulgate at the present day. 
 
 As might have been expected from the wide 
 acquaintance with Greek which existed throughout 
 the civilized world at the commencement of our 
 era, the Septuagint version sufficed for the majority 
 of those peoples then living under the sway of 
 imperial Rome. In Italy especially the Gre^k 
 language had taken deep root, and was everywhere 
 current. As I have elsewhere said, ** In the reign 
 of Tiberius, as Valerius Maximus, a contemporary 
 writer, informs as, the Senate resounded even to 
 deafening with Greek debates ; and Dio Cassius 
 relates that the same emperor was accustomed very 
 
OLD TESTAMENT VERSIONS AFTER CHRIST. 231 
 
 frequently to hear cases argued, and himself to in- 
 vestigate them, in the Greek language. Suetonius 
 bears equally striking testimony to the very general 
 use of Greek by the Romans under Tiberius and 
 Claudius ; and, by the account which he gives of 
 the efforts made by the former emperor to dis- 
 courage its use in certain cases, shows how greatly 
 it had encroached on the vernacular language. In 
 the reign of Domitian, as we infer from Martial, 
 it was proof of absolute rusticity not to be perfectly 
 familiar with the tongue of Greece ; while in the 
 reign of Trajan, as we learn from Juvenal, that 
 language was continually employed by his fellow- 
 citizens for all sorts of purposes. And in these, as 
 well as other similar intimations contained in the 
 classical writers, we find proof that while, during 
 the period in question, almost countless dialects, 
 in addition to the native Latin, might have been 
 heard among the vast and multifarious population 
 of Rome, the various tribes there mixed together 
 possessed in the language of Greece, then become 
 the language of the world, a means whereby they 
 could communicate with one another."* 
 
 Such, then, being the linguistic condition of Italy 
 at the time referred to, we are not surprised to find 
 
 * See my Discussions on the Gospels, p. 30 (2nd ed.), where 
 the passages referred to are quoted in the originals. 
 
232 OLD TESTAMENT REVISION. 
 
 that no need for a Latin version of Scripture was 
 felt in that country for many generations after 
 Christ. And, in fact, the first Latin translation did 
 not arise in Italy at all. It had its origin in North 
 Africa, where a knowledge of Greek, which certainly 
 was at one time possessed, seems to have died out 
 in the course of the second century. 
 
 Accordingly, it is from Tertullian, himself an 
 African, and the earliest of the Latin Fathers, that 
 we first hear of a version of Scripture in the proper 
 language of the Romans. His words clearly imply 
 that a popular Latin version of the Bible circulated 
 in his day (about 200 a.d.) among the churches of 
 Africa. This is known as the *' Old Latin," and its 
 formation may probably be dated about the middle 
 of the second century. A goodly number of manu- 
 scripts of this version, more or less perfect, are still 
 in existence, and testify to the peculiar Latin — 
 vigorous and racy, but very different from that of 
 the classical writers — in which it was composed. 
 
 So long as the old Latin version was confined 
 to Africa, it seems to have remained substantially 
 unchanged. But very different was its fate on being 
 introduced into Italy. As the Greek language still 
 continued to be pretty accurately and widely known 
 in that country, corrections were naturally made on 
 the old Latin : its errors were replaced by better 
 renderings, and its provincial roughnesses were 
 
OLD TESTAMENT VERSIONS AFTER CHRIST, 233 
 
 smoothed and softened. At length a recension, 
 known as " the Italian," was formed, and seems to 
 have obtained some degree of authority over the 
 others. But great embarrassment as to the Latin 
 text continued to prevail. There was no standard 
 to which a general appeal could be made, and the 
 differences of rendering in the various copies were 
 most perplexing and vexatious. At last, towards 
 the close of the fourth century, a man was raised 
 up by providence, who was eminently fitted for 
 remedying this uncertainty and confusion. 
 
 That man was found in St. Jerome,* next to Origen 
 the most learned of all the Fathers of the Church. 
 Born in 329 a.d., he spent a very long life (died 
 420 A.D.) in the most devoted Biblical labours. 
 Among his other vast undertakings was an improved 
 translation into Latin of the sacred Scriptures. The 
 discrepancies and corruptions which had been in- 
 troduced into the various existing texts could no 
 longer be tolerated ; and, at the urgent request of 
 Damasus, then Bishop of Rome, Jerome set himself 
 to the work of correction. Having begun his work 
 with the Gospels, he proceeded to the Old Tes- 
 tament, intending only at the first to amend the 
 existing version which had been based upon the 
 
 * His full name was Eusebius Hieronymus Sophronius, but 
 he is usually spoken of as St. Jerome. He was a native of 
 Stridon in Dalmatia. 
 
234 O^^ TESTAMENT REVISION. 
 
 Septuagint. But after he acquired a knowledge of 
 Hebrew, nothing would satisfy him but a translation 
 direct from the original. This accordingly he pre- 
 pared with great toil and care, and the work thus 
 produced is, in substance, the Latin Vulgate, as in 
 use by the Church of Rome at the present day. 
 
 Jerome, however, experienced the usual fate of 
 reformers. His work, though a vast improvement 
 on previous Latin versions, was bitterly assailed by 
 his contemporaries, and for long lay comparatively 
 neglected. It was not till some centuries afterwards 
 that the new version completely supplanted the old, 
 though it had steadily been winning its way to public 
 favour. Gregory the Great, about the close of the 
 sixth century, acknowledged that Jerome's translation 
 was equally in use with the old Latin, and it was 
 almost universally accepted in the course of another 
 hundred years. As could not but happen, it too 
 suffered much corruption in the course of time. It 
 was revised oftener than once, until at last it assumed 
 a printed form about a.d. 1455, being the first book 
 that ever issued from the press. 
 
 As thus printed, the text of the Latin Vulgate was 
 very far from pure. Nor was much done for it in the 
 editions which followed, until the religious contro- 
 versies of the sixteenth century directed special 
 attention to the subject. The Council of Trent 
 passed a decree on April 8th, 1546, bearing upon 
 
OLD TESTAMENT VERSIONS AFTER CHRIST. 235 
 
 the sacred Scriptures, but a considerable time 
 elapsed before any practical step was taken towards 
 securing an amended and authorised edition. At 
 length, after various tentative efforts, a revised 
 text of the Vulgate was put forth under the auspices 
 of Pope Sixtus V. in 1590. But the imperious cha- 
 racter of the Pope had led to the insertion of many 
 false readings, and this edition, though issued under 
 pontifical sanction, was soon felt to be eminently 
 unsatisfactory. Various clumsy and disingenuous 
 efforts were made by the popes immediately suc- 
 ceeding to account for and correct its errors, but 
 a thorough revision of it did not take place till two 
 years afterwards. In 1592, a decidedly improved 
 text was issued by Clement VIII., and the Clementine 
 text henceforth superseded, in the estimation of all 
 competent judges, the Sixtine, as well as all previous 
 editions of the Vulgate. 
 
 As thus issued and authorised, the cun-ent Latin 
 Bible remains at the present day, no thoroughly 
 critical edition having yet seen the light. Much 
 still requires to be done before its own text can be 
 regarded as satisfactory, or before its full value can 
 be brought out as perhaps the most important means 
 at our command for the final settlement of many 
 critical questions connected with the Greek and 
 Hebrew Scriptures. But taking it as it stands, the 
 version bears undoubted witness to the substantial 
 
236 OLD TESTAMENT REVISION. 
 
 accuracy of the received text of the Old Testament. 
 One of its most remarkable discrepancies is found in 
 Gen. iii. 15. As is well known, the Vulgate there 
 reads ipsa, for ipse, so that the rendering of the 
 passage into English must be, '* she shall bruise thy 
 head," instead of that which is found in our Author- 
 ised Version. Every one knows that this rendering 
 has been supposed to imply that there is a reference 
 in the passage to the Virgin Mary. But there can 
 be no doubt that it is a false translation of the 
 Hebrew. The form of the pronoun is masculine in 
 the original, and this is preserved in the Septuagint 
 version. There seems to be even good reason to 
 believe that the primitive reading in the Vulgate 
 itself was ipse;"^ and if so, it is much to be desired 
 that the correct rendering should be restored, that 
 one great cause of wrangling between Catholics and 
 Protestants may be finally removed. 
 
 Before quitting the subject of the venerable Latin 
 version, I desire to express my full concurrence in 
 the following eloquent and generous words of Dr. 
 Eadie :— " Yet, in spite of such points in its history," 
 referring to the many discrepancies between the 
 Sixtine and Clementine editions, " the Vulgate has 
 many claims for the place which it so long held, and 
 
 * See on this and other points connected with the Vulgate 
 the exhaustive article of Canon Westcott in Smith's Diet, of the 
 Bible, iii. 1689 flf. 
 
OLD TESTAMENT VERSIONS AFTER CHRIST, zyj 
 
 for the good which it so often effected. It was, in 
 the absence of the original, the only accessible Bible 
 in mediaeval Western Europe, — *a light shining,' 
 though with veiled lustre, * in a dark place.' It did 
 its appointed work, and brought peace and strength 
 to many hearts, opening up to them a glimpse of the 
 glorified One above and beyond the crucifix, creating 
 a fulness of trust that felt no need of saintly media- 
 tion, nursing a loyalty to Him so intense and absorb- 
 ing, that it looked down upon the keys of St. Peter 
 as a paltry symbol, while it sustained a confidence in 
 Him that hard dogma could not deaden, and an 
 adoration of Him which a complicated and inflexible 
 ritual could not petrify. The religious community, 
 whose book it was, kept the Roman empire from 
 falling into barbarism at its dissolution. In spite of 
 its growing superstition and tyranny, the Western 
 Church scattered round it many blessings. Music, 
 painting, and architecture were fostered by it; the 
 figured windows in the churches were the poor man's 
 Bible, where he saw in vivid group and colouring the 
 power and pity of the Son of Mary. Its compact 
 organization gave it a great power, which it often 
 wielded for the good of society in days of ignorance 
 and war. It broke the bonds of the serf, opened an 
 asylum for the exile and outcast, restrained the fury 
 of the oppressor, and softened the haughty rigour of 
 the nobility. Grandees quailed before its ministers 
 
238 OLD TESTAMENT REVISION, 
 
 invested with a superhuman authority which they 
 were afraid to resist, and were unable to define, for 
 its mastery stretched into the invisible world. The 
 abbey was often a rebuke to the castle, and was an 
 almshouse for the poor, a hospital for the sick, an 
 inn for the traveller, and a retreat for the weary and 
 forlorn in heart. Its farms presented the best speci- 
 mens of tillage, and its blooming orchards were a 
 reproof to all who loitered in the * vineyard of the 
 sluggard.' In the midst of many drawbacks, incon- 
 sistencies and errors, the Latin Church may glory in 
 pointing to the heroic and self-denying toils and 
 sufferings of its missionaries and martyrs, whose 
 romantic lives are grander than fiction, and who met 
 their death, not merely with saintly calmness, but 
 prophetic exultation. Those noble souls were bap- 
 tized with the Holy Spirit ; the true unction filled 
 them with a seraphic devoutness, which did not 
 depend on a gorgeous service, with its music, in- 
 cense, and images. The mystics, who had felt the 
 power of the unseen, and were rapt into hidden 
 communing with God, did not rest on a sacerdotal 
 ministry. The Houses, especially of the Benedictine 
 class, so magnificent in architecture, often and 
 honestly strove in earlier times to realize the ideal of 
 their founder. In them was conserved whatever of 
 science or art was known ; and in them was copied, 
 for circulation, the Latin Bible, which preserved for 
 
OLD TESTAMENT VERSIONS AFTER CHRiST. 239 
 
 centuries the knowledge of the Gospel, and gave 
 their first inspiration to the Reformers."* 
 
 We now proceed to a brief consideration of other 
 ancient -translations of the Old Testament. 
 
 The jEthiopic version seems to have been formed 
 not long after the introduction of Christianity into 
 Abyssinia in the course of the fourth century. The 
 Old Testament translation was made, not from the 
 original Hebrew, but from the Greek version, and, 
 when thoroughly investigated, will thus aid in the 
 formation of a critical edition of the Septuagint. 
 The author of it is totally unknown. He was evi- 
 dently but an imperfect Greek scholar, as he frequently 
 confounds words which are similar in form, but 
 totally different in signification. 
 
 Two Egyptian versions, at least, were also formed 
 certainly not later than the fourth century. By that 
 time the Greek language, which was once so preva- 
 lent in Lower Egypt, appears to have died out, and 
 the Scriptures were therefore translated into Coptic, 
 the mother-tongue of the people. One version, now 
 known as the Memphitic, circulated in Lower Egypt, 
 and the other, which is styled the Thebaic, was 
 prepared specially for the inhabitants of Upper 
 Egypt. Some fragments of what has been deemed 
 
 • The English Bible, ii. I ID, 
 
240 OLD TESTAMENT REVISION. 
 
 a third version have also been discovered, but are of 
 no importance. The Thebaic and Memphitic ver- 
 sions, however, are of great value for the purposes of 
 criticism. They were formed independently of each 
 other, but both from the Greek. Here, then, again 
 are furnished valuable materials to assist in the 
 preparation of that trustworthy edition of the Septua- 
 gint which does not yet exist, but which is, for many 
 reasons, so earnestly to be desired. 
 
 We have next to notice the ancient and important 
 Gothic version. More is known respecting its forma- 
 tion than is generally the case with the early transla- 
 tions of Scripture. Its author was the celebrated 
 Bishop Ulphilas, who died in the year 388 a.d. It 
 is said that he held Arian or semi-Arian views, but 
 hardly a {race of doctrinal bias is to be found in what 
 remains of his translation of the Scriptures. Unfor- 
 tunately nothing more than fragments of the Old 
 Testament have yet been discovered. The version 
 was made from the Greek; and as its date is not 
 later than the middle of the fourth century, it would 
 form another valuable witness to the text of the 
 Septuagint then current, were larger portions of it to 
 be found. From what has already happened, such 
 an event is not altogether hopeless. The late 
 Cardinal Mai, on examining some palimpsest* 
 
 * This expression literally means what has httn scraped again, 
 and, as applied to manuscripts, denotes that an attempt has been 
 
OLD TESTAMENT VERSIONS AFTER CHRIST. 241 
 
 manuscripts, discovered that the Gothic version was 
 the original writing over which the latter had been 
 inscribed, and something similar may occur again, 
 with perhaps larger results. 
 
 Of the Armenian version little requires to be said. 
 It was not formed before the fifth century, since up 
 to that period the Armenian Christians made use of 
 the Syriac version. The first attempts at translation 
 into the language of Armenia were based not on the 
 Greek, far less on the Hebrew, but on the Syriac. 
 Some Armenian delegates, however, attended the 
 CEcumenical Co,uncil held at Ephesus in a.d. 431, 
 and brought back with them copies of the Greek 
 Scriptures. Eff'orts were then made to obtain a 
 knowledge of the Greek language, and an Armenian 
 version of the Septuagint and the Greek New Testa- 
 ment was ere long completed, the former unsatis- 
 factory translations from the Syriac being set aside, 
 although their influence may still be traced. The 
 Latin Vulgate was also made use of in forming the 
 Armenian version, but, to a considerable extent, it 
 is possessed of an independent character. 
 
 Descending now to a considerably late date, we 
 encounter the Slavonic version, which seems to have 
 been formed, as a whole, in the course of the ninth 
 century. With this may be classed the Arabic, 
 
 made to erase a first writing, that the parchment or paper might 
 receive a second. 
 
 i6 
 
242 OLD TESTAMENT REVISION. 
 
 Persian, and Anglo-Saxon versions, none of which 
 can be regarded as having much authority with 
 respect to questions bearing on the original texts. 
 Some of them were based on the Septuagint, and 
 others on the Vulgate ; but all are too modern to 
 have much weight in determining the primitive 
 rea lings of the versions from which they were 
 formed. 
 
 It must be obvious, from what has been said in 
 this chapter, how much yet remains to be done in 
 connection with the text of the Old Testament. The 
 early versions of it which were made require to be 
 far more thoroughly investigated. Beginning with 
 the Septuagint, which is, in many respects, the most 
 interesting and important of all, an earnest effort 
 must be made to establish its true text. As has 
 been before suggested, this is one of the greatest 
 desiderata in Biblical science, and whosoever accom- 
 plishes the task will perform a service of inestimable 
 importance to the cause of sacred criticism. And 
 then the same thing requires to be done with respect 
 to the Syriac and Latin versions, not to speak oi 
 those less important authorities which have been 
 mentioned. 
 
 Till these important preliminary processes have 
 been accomplished, any amended version of the Old 
 Testament can only be tentative and provisional. 
 
OLD TESTAMENT VERSIONS AFTEJi CHRIST. 243 
 
 As we shall see in the next chapter, our common 
 English translation is the result of labours carried 
 on by many different men, and with very various 
 appliances and advantages. Means of improving 
 upon it now certainly exist to a large extent, and 
 will, no doubt, be diligently employed in the prepara- 
 tion of the forthcoming revised version. But much 
 still remains to be done ; and perhaps one of the 
 most valuable effects flowing from the revision now 
 in hand will be the stimulus it will give to scholars 
 to enter zealously on those labours that have yet to 
 be gone through in connection both with the text 
 and the translation of the Old Testament, 
 
CHAPTER XII. 
 
 ENGLISH VERSIONS OF THE OLD AND NEW 
 TESTAMENTS. 
 
 IT has appeared in the preceding chapters that 
 there are not a few corrections which require 
 to be made in the current English version of the 
 Old Testament. In fact, there is probably not a 
 single passage of more than a few verses in which 
 a nearer or more accurate approach to the meaning 
 of the original may not be made. This is not to 
 be wondered at : the wonder rather is that such a 
 high standard of general excellence was reached, 
 considering the time and circumstances in which 
 the version was formed. To these I shall now 
 briefly direct the reader's attention. 
 
 It is stated on the title-page of the Authorised 
 Version, that that version was " translated out of 
 the original tongues." But that statement must be 
 taken with some qualification. While the translators 
 no doubt always had the original texts before them 
 as they prosecuted their work, they nevertheless 
 leant very much on the results attained by those 
 
246 OLD TESTAMENl REVISION. 
 
 who had preceded them. It has been correctly- 
 said, with respect to the work which they produced, 
 that * " former translations and comments, nearly 
 twenty in number, were the real sources, not the 
 original texts. Instead of the latter being the 
 fountain, they furnished mere corrections of former 
 versions. The translators' own words imply this : 
 'Truly, good Christian reader, we never thought 
 from the beginning that we should need to make 
 a new translation, nor yet to make of a bad one a 
 good one, but to make a good one better, or of 
 many good ones one principal good one, not justly to 
 be excepted against : that hath been our endeavour, 
 that our mark.'" * Such being the state of the case, 
 we must necessarily glance at those efforts which had 
 been put forth to translate the Bible into English 
 before the appearance of our present Authorised 
 Version. 
 
 It is an interesting fact, that, at a very early period 
 in the Irlstory of our country, attempts were made to 
 translate portions of the Bible into the language of 
 the people. Among those who laboured for this end, 
 the names of the venerable Bede (died 735 a.d.) 
 and the great King Alfred (died 901 a.d.) stand 
 forth conspicuous. Bede is well known to have 
 
 * Dr. Davidson On a Fresh Revision of the English Old 
 Testament, p. i. 
 
ENGLISH VERSIONS. 247 
 
 died while dictating his translation of the last verses 
 of St. John's Gospel, and of Alfred we are told that 
 he set forth in the mother-tongue a version of part 
 of the Book of Exodus (ch. xx. — xxiii.), while he ex- 
 pressed a desire that every one should be able to 
 read the Scriptures in the then language of England. 
 Indeed, he was credited in later traditions with 
 having been a translator of the whole Bible. ''^ 
 
 Various attempts at translating portions of Scrip- 
 ture into the language of the English people con- 
 tinued to be made. One of the most important of 
 these is known as the Ormulum, and may be dated 
 about the close of the twelfth century. It consists 
 of 20,000 lines, embracing the Gospels and Acts in 
 a kind of iambic verse, of which the two following 
 lines from the dedication of the author, Orm, to his 
 brother, may be given as a specimen : — 
 
 ** Ice hafe wennd inntill Ennglissh 
 Goddspelless hallghe lore,"f 
 
 which may be thus represented in our modern 
 speech : — 
 
 •* I have turned into English 
 The Gospel's holy lore." 
 
 Several other metrical versions of parts of Scripture 
 
 * Smith's Diet, of Bible, art. Auth. Vers., p. 1665. 
 f Eadie's English Bible, i. 30. 
 
248 OLD TESTAMENT REVISION. 
 
 followed, and fragmentary prose translations still 
 exist, which must be referred to much the same 
 period 
 
 But it is not till we reach the times of John 
 Wycliffe (about a.d. 1360) that we meet with a 
 complete translation of the Bible into the English 
 language. This version of Wycliffe has attracted 
 much attention, both from the circumstances in 
 which it was produced, and from the inherent in- 
 terest attaching to the work. It was in the face 
 not only of much discouragement, but of great 
 personal danger, that the devoted Rector of Lutter- 
 worth prosecuted and completed his vast under- 
 taking. No law of the Church had, indeed, as yet 
 been passed against vernacular translations. They 
 had, on the contrary, been patronised by various 
 papal authorities in high position. But Wycliffe was 
 already a marked man before he entered on the work 
 of translation. He had boldly protested against 
 several of the corruptions of Romanism, and it 
 seems marvellous that he escaped the fate of 
 martyrdom. He was, however, in God's good pro- 
 vidence, saved from that violent death which his 
 bitter enemies would so gladly have seen inflicted 
 upon him, and died peaceably at his rectory in 
 1384. But the spirit which the Church cherished 
 towards him and his work was. painfully evinced in 
 
ENGLISH VERSIONS. 249 
 
 the next century, when the Council of Constance 
 (141 5) ordered his remains to be disinterred and 
 burnt. This impotent and barbarous decree was 
 actually carried out in 1428, and his ashes were 
 cast iiito the streamlet Swift, which runs by the 
 spot where his remains were burned. Upon this 
 the Church historian, Fuller, has happily remarked, 
 in well-known words, ''Thus this brook hath con- 
 veyed his ashes into Avon, Avon into Severn, Severn 
 into the narrow seas, they into the main ocean. 
 And thus the ashes of Wycliife are the emblem of his 
 doctrine, which is now dispersed all the world over." 
 Wycliffe's translation was, of course, made from 
 the Vulgate. A striking proof of this is furnished 
 in Gen. iii. 15. Wycliffe's version there has, "'She 
 shall trede thy head," thus adopting the false ren- 
 dering of the Latin, which, against both the original 
 Hebrew and the Septuagint version, refers the 
 bruising of the serpent's head to the woman, in- 
 stead of her seed. In fact, Wycliflfe probably knew 
 little or no Greek, and certainly no Hebrew. But 
 his work is nevertheless possessed of great merit. 
 Its dialect is the Midland English, which, being 
 used also by Chaucer, became the standard of our 
 tongue. In style he is racy and striking, while the 
 general air of his version is dignified, in spite of its 
 seeming quaintness and familiarity. Nor is Wycliffe 
 difficult to read, even at the present day. As Dr. 
 
250 OLD TESTAMENT REVISIOJST. 
 
 Eadie has remarked, '* One is surprised to see how, 
 when WyclifFe's work is modernized in spelling, it 
 so closely resembles subsequent translations in the 
 general aspect of the version, in the flow and posi- 
 tion of the words, in the distinctive terms and con- 
 necting particles, in the rhythm of its clauses and 
 the mould of its sentences. Several of its phrases 
 must have passed early into the language, especially 
 those which, from their currency, had acquired a 
 kind of proverbial power, such as * strait gate ' and 
 'narrow way' (Matt. vii. 14), 'beam' and 'mote* 
 (ver. 3), and being adopted by Tyndale, they have 
 kept their place unto this present." * A few examples 
 of Wycliffe's phraseology may be added. He uses 
 the verb " comfort " in its original sense of " to 
 strengthen." Thus we find in Isa. xli. 7, the ren- 
 dering, "And he comforted him (the idol spoken 
 of) with nailes," while in Phil. iv. 13 we have, "I 
 may alle thingis in Him that comforteth me." He 
 uses the verb " nappen " for " to sleep : " thus his 
 rendering of Ps. cxxi. 4 is, " He shall not nappe, 
 ne slepen." And not unfrequently, it may be re- 
 marked, Wycliffe uses forms which still exist in 
 Scotch, though they have died out in English. 
 Thus he has "gett" for "gate," "tak tent" for 
 "take heed," and "toun" for "piece of ground,'* 
 
 * English Bible, i. 72 
 
ENGLISH VERSIONS. 251 
 
 as in Luke xiv. 18, "I have bought a toun," the 
 toun being still a familiar expression in some parts 
 of Scotland for a farm-house and its surroundings. 
 In many such cases, it appears from Wycliffe's ver- 
 sion that what have often been deemed Scotch 
 corruptions really preserve the original form of the 
 words more accurately, with respect both to sound 
 and sense, than does modern English. 
 
 We now pass on to William Tyndale, the 
 greatest of all the translators of our English Bible. 
 He was born in 1477, and studied both at Oxford 
 and Cambridge, having been attracted probably to 
 the latter University by the presence at it of Erasmus 
 from 1509 to 1 5 14. From a comparatively early 
 age, the life of Tyndale was devoted to the great 
 work of Bible translation. His high ambition was 
 to bring about such a state of matters that " a boy 
 that driveth the plough " should become better 
 acquainted with the Scriptures than the majority of 
 the clergy had up till then been. He was excel- 
 lently prepared for the work to which, with an 
 unflagging enthusiasm, he dedicated his existence. 
 Not only was he a good classical scholar, but in 
 addition to an acquaintance with Greek, he possessed 
 a considerable knowledge of the Hebrew language. 
 He thus occupied this position of advantage over 
 Wycliffe, that he could translate directly from the 
 
252 OLD TESTAMENT REVISION. 
 
 original. And it is obvious that, while he availed 
 himself of all the helps he could command, he 
 never servilely adopted any previous renderings, but 
 carefully compared them, for his own guidance, with 
 the sacred text. Tyndale's first care was given to 
 the New Testament. The translation of that portion 
 of Scripture was finished and printed at Cologne 
 and Worms about 1525. Vast numbers of these 
 and other editions were speedily brought over to 
 England, where, however, by order of the popish 
 authorities, multitudes of copies were committed to 
 the flames. But Tyndale possessed in the printing 
 press a valuable ally unknown to any previous 
 translator of the Bible in English. While the 
 number of the copies of Wycliffe's version which 
 still exist shows that even it must have been very 
 widely circulated, the art of printing, of course, was 
 far more effective in securing constant reproduction 
 than could be the process of transcription. Accord- 
 ingly, though bonfires of Tyndale's New Testament 
 were made in this country, fresh supplies were 
 constantly sent from abroad, and were largely 
 circulated among the people. 
 
 Meanwhile the author was busily preparing a 
 translation of the Old Testament. As need not 
 be said, this was at that time a very formidable 
 task. It would, indeed, have been comparatively 
 easy to take the Vulgate and translate it into English 
 
ENGLISH VERSIONS. 253 
 
 But such was not the plan of Tyndale. He meant 
 to furnish a version direct from the original, and 
 he set about this in the absence of any trustworthy 
 Hebrew grammar or lexicon, and without any one 
 to aid him in his anxious labour. It was a noble 
 effort, even though it could not prove altogether 
 successful. Tyndale did not possess that minute 
 acquaintance with the Hebrew or the cognate 
 tongues, which might have secured an approach to 
 absolute accuracy in the version which he produced ; 
 nor was he permitted to finish the work in which 
 he had engaged. It is certain that he had com- 
 pleted his translation of the Pentateuch, and 
 probable that he had proceeded as far as the end of 
 Second Chronicles with the historical books, when, 
 by the treachery of a professed friend, he was be- 
 trayed into the hands of the papal authorities at 
 Antwerp. Having been at once conveyed to the 
 castle of Vilvorde, situated some eighteen miles 
 from Brussels, he was there kept a close prisoner 
 for more than a year. At length a body of ecclesi- 
 astics was appointed to try his case, among whom 
 were some divines of Louvain, who had only a 
 few years before sent a letter of congratulation to 
 the Archbishop of St. Andrews in Scotland, when 
 Patrick Hamilton was in 1528 burned at the stake. 
 The issue of a trial conducted by such men could 
 not be doubtful, and Tyndale was accordingly 
 
254 OLD TESTAMENT REVISION. 
 
 condemned to death. On the 6th of October, 1536, 
 having, there is reason to believe, first been strangled 
 — and in so far more mercifully dealt with than had 
 been the youthful Scottish martyr — his body was 
 reduced to ashes. As is well known, his last fervent 
 utterance, the moment before death, consisted of 
 these earnest words, — ''Lord, open the king of 
 England's eyes."* 
 
 The pre-eminent merits of Tyndale's work are 
 universally admitted at the present day. To it more 
 than to any other is our Authorised Version indebted 
 for the happy renderings and prevailing melody 
 which belong to it. " From first to last," as has 
 been well said, ** his style and his interpretation are 
 his own; and in the originality of Tyndale is included, 
 in a large measure, the originality of our English 
 version. For not only did Tyndale contribute to it, 
 directly, the substantial basis of half of the Old 
 Testament (in all probability), and of the whole of 
 the New, but he established a standard of Biblical 
 translation which others followed. It is even of less 
 moment that by far the greater part of his translation 
 remains intact in our present Bibles, than that his 
 
 * The writer of the art. " Authorised Version," in Smith's 
 Dictionary of the Bible, says that these words were uttered by 
 Tyndale " as the axe was about to fall," but it is certain that the 
 martyr was not beheaded. (See Life of Tyndale by Demaus, 
 p. 481.) 
 
ENGLISH VERSIONS, 255 
 
 spirit animates the whole."* Again, it has been 
 remarked, " All the exquisite grace and simplicity 
 which have endeared the Authorised Version to men 
 of the most opposite tempers and contrasted opinions 
 — ^to J. H. Newman and J. A. Froude — is due mainly 
 to his clear-sighted truthfulness. The desire to 
 make the Bible a people's book led him in one 
 edition to something like a provincial rather than a 
 national translation, but on the whole it kept him 
 free from the besetting danger of the time, that of 
 writing for scholars, not for the people ; of a version 
 full of ' ink-horn ' phrases, not in the spoken 
 language of the English nation. And throughout 
 there is the pervading stamp, so often wanting in 
 other like works, of the most thorough truthfulness. 
 No word has been altered to court a king's favour, or 
 please bishops, or make out a case for or against a 
 particular opinion. He is working freely, not in the 
 fetters of prescribed rules. With the most entire 
 sincerity he could say, * I call God to record, against 
 the day we shall appear before our Lord Jesus Christ 
 to give a reckoning of our doings, that I never 
 altered one syllable of God's Word against my 
 conscience, nor would this day, if all that is in the 
 world, whether it be pleasure, honour, or riches, 
 might be given me.' " f 
 
 * Westcott's History of the English Bible ^ p. 21 1. 
 f Smith's Diet, of Bible, Auth. Vers. 
 
256 OLD TESTAMENT REVISION. 
 
 The translation of the Scriptures prepared and 
 published by Miles Coverdale next calls for 
 notice. Although both Henry VIII. and his bishops 
 were determinately set against giving any counte- 
 nance to Tyndale's version, yet, as we have seen, 
 many copies of it had been clandestinely imported 
 into the kingdom, and had excited a strong desire 
 among the people at large, that an authorised 
 English translation should be issued. For the exe- 
 cution of this important work, Coverdale, a friend of 
 Cromwell, afterwards niade Earl of Essex, was 
 selected. The personal character of Coverdale was, 
 in every respect, excellent and attractive, but he had 
 no pretensions to great force of mind or depth of 
 erudition. Unlike Tyndale, he seems to have been 
 little, if it all, acquainted with Greek or Hebrew, 
 and was content to make his version from the German 
 and the Latin. His first edition came out in 1535, 
 but met with no favour. Having been printed abroad, 
 probably at Zurich, it was suspected of the taint of 
 heresy, and lay neglected. Its flattering dedication 
 to King Henry did not help it into favour the less, 
 perhaps, because coupled with his name is that of the 
 unfortunate Anne Boleyn, who is described as his 
 " dearest, just wife, and most virtuous princess." 
 This mistake, however, was speedily corrected, and 
 the name of Queen Anne exchanged for that of 
 Queen Jane. A second edition, published in 1537, 
 
ENGLISH VERSIONS, 257 
 
 obtained the royal sanction ; Henry, after being 
 assured by the bishops that it contained no heresies, 
 having exclaimed, " Let it, then, in God's name, go 
 abroad among our people." The version of Cover- 
 dale, in one of its parts, is still very familiar to 
 Englishmen, having formed the basis of that transla- 
 tion of the Psalms which is read in the Prayer Book 
 of the Church of England.* The style of the work 
 is animated and idiomatic, and, as has been justly 
 said, " No little of that indefinable quality that gives 
 popular charm to our English Bible, and has en- 
 deared it to so many generations, is owing to Cover- 
 dale. . . . Tyndale gave us the first great outline, 
 distinctly and wonderfully etched, but Coverdale 
 added those minuter touches which soften and 
 harmonize it. The characteristic features are Tyn- 
 dale's in all their boldness of form and expression , 
 the more delicate lines and shadings are the 
 contribution of his successor, both in his own 
 version and in the Great Bible revised and edited 
 by him." t 
 
 A few quaint renderings, out of many collected 
 by Dr. Eadie, may be quoted from the version of 
 Coverdale. In Gen. viii. 11, he has, "And she 
 (the dove) bare it in her nebb'' — this last word 
 
 * See afterwards, under Great Bible, 
 f Eadie' s English Bible, i. 302. 
 
 17 
 
258 OLD TESTAMENT REVISION. 
 
 being now in use only among the lower classes in 
 Scotland. In Job xviii. i, the patriarch is made to 
 say, *' I am hard at deathes dore^^ a metaphor which is 
 also still to be heard among the Scottish peasantry. 
 In Psa. xci. 5, we find the words which now sound 
 to us so strangely, — " Thou shalt not need to be 
 afraid of eny bugges by night; " and in Jer. viii. 52, 
 we read, " There is no triacle in Galaad," the word 
 "triacle" (our ''treacle") being used in the sense 
 of "ointment," having originally denoted in Greek 
 a medicinal compound used as an antidote against 
 the bites of wild beasts, and gradually assuming the 
 various significations of "healing unguent," and 
 ** remedy " in general, until it became restricted in 
 our language to the meaning it bears at the present 
 day. 
 
 Another English version of the Scriptures appeared 
 in 1537, bearing the name of Thomas Matthew. 
 Since no one of this name is conspicuous in the 
 history of the period, scholars are generally agreed 
 that the real editor of the work was the celebrated 
 John Rogers, the first martyr under the reign of 
 Queen Mary. The translation consisted simply of a 
 combination of what had been previously done by 
 Tyndale and Coverdale. But, strangely enough, 
 the work obtained the sanction of Henry VIII., and 
 a copy was ordered to be got by every church, the 
 
ENGLISH VERSIONS. 259 
 
 cost being divided between the clergy and the laity 
 of the parish. Thus the Bible of Matthew, or 
 Rogers, became, in fact, the first authorised 
 version. It is strange to think that in this way 
 Tyndale's work, after having been so severely con- 
 demned, secured royal and national recognition. 
 As has been strikingly said in regard to the compi- 
 lation made by Rogers, ** Two-thirds of Matthew's 
 Bible are Tyndale's, and one-third is Coverdale's. 
 Tyndale had done his work * in much patience, in 
 afflictions, in necessities, in distresses ; ' his name 
 had been * cast out as evil ; ' King Henry had 
 hated him ; Sir Thomas More had employed all his 
 learning, eloquence, and wit to hold up his version 
 to malediction and scorn ; Cromwell had frowned 
 upon him ; Tunstall had made a goodly bonfire 
 of his volumes ; Longland's heart had been rejoiced 
 by the secret simultaneous search for them in the 
 capital and the two universities; Stokesley had sent 
 men to the flames for reading them ; the translator 
 himself had been proscribed, * Judasly betrayed ' by 
 English agents, and burned ; but in less than a year 
 after his martyrdom his translation acquired the 
 royal right of free sale and dispersion, having been 
 mysteriously accepted as forming the larger portion 
 of an authorised version for the English people." * 
 
 * Eadie, i, 324. 
 
26o OLD TESTAMENT REVISION. 
 
 One Richard Taverner, a good Greek scholar, 
 published in 1539 a revised edition of Matthew's 
 Bible, but this work had not much influence on 
 subsequent revisions of the English Bible. Rogers 
 himself, the real Matthew, seems to have been a man 
 of the most dauntless character. It is recorded that 
 having been condemned to die by fire, he slept 
 peacefully throughout the night preceding his 
 execution, and was only awakened after " much 
 shogging." Being informed that he had to die 
 that day, he calmly remarked, **Then I need not 
 tye my points ; " and, after an affecting meeting 
 with his wife and children on his way to the stake, 
 he met his terrible doom in the most triumphant 
 spirit, " waving his hand," says Foxe, " in the flame, 
 as though it had been cold water." 
 
 What is known as The Great Bible sometimes 
 bears the name of Cranmer, although that illustrious 
 archbishop and martyr seems to have had little or 
 nothing to do with it beyond giving it his sanction. 
 It is also at times referred to as Whitchurch's Bible : 
 such, for instance, is its name in the instructions 
 given by James VI. to his revisers. Whitchurch 
 was simply one of the printers of the first edition : 
 he afterwards married the widow of Cranmer. The 
 name of *'the Great Bible " was given to it from its 
 size, as it was far larger than any of the other 
 
ENGLISH VERSIONS. 2.(i\ 
 
 editions, its pages measuring over fifteen inches in 
 length, and over nine inches in breadth. The text 
 of this Bible is, in substance, a revision of that of 
 Matthew, with many modifications suggested by the 
 Latin version of Erasmus. The work was done by 
 Coverdale, who was ever ready to correct and im- 
 prove what had already passed under his hand. 
 It was in 1539 that the first edition of the Great 
 Bible was published, and another with some changes 
 came out in 1541. This Bible was very popular, 
 and continued to be the "■ authorised version " 
 of England till 1568,* the years of Mary's reign 
 being, of course, excepted. This accounts for 
 the fact that most, if not all, of the passages of 
 Scripture contained in the English Prayer-books 
 of 1549 and 1552 were taken from this edition. 
 The Psalms still stand in the Book of Common 
 Prayer as the Great Bible presented them ; for 
 though, in the revision which took place in 1662, 
 the Gospels and Epistles were conformed to the 
 present Authorised Version, the Psalms were left 
 unchanged, the reason assigned being that "the 
 choirs were accustomed to the old Psalter, and its 
 
 * As Doctor Eadie has remarked, "In the strict sense it is 
 the only authorised version still ; for the Bishops' Bible and the 
 present Bible never had the formal sanction of royal authority." 
 (i.383.) 
 
262 OLD TESTAMENT REVISION. 
 
 language was considered more smooth and fit for 
 song."* 
 
 There next falls to be noticed the once very- 
 popular Geneva Version. This translation was 
 the work of some of those exiles who were driven 
 from England during the reign of Mary. The 
 more rigid section of them had betaken themselves 
 to Geneva, and there they set about the prepara- 
 tion of a fresh revision of the Scriptures. Several 
 reasons led them to enter on this task. For one 
 thing, the Great Bible was too large and costly for 
 common use. It was also too colourless as respected 
 doctrine, having no expository or dogmatic notes. 
 The Genevan exiles therefore commenced a transla- 
 tion of their own, which should be practically more 
 convenient, and doctrinally should utter no " un- 
 certain sound." They were well qualified .for the 
 work in which they engaged. Whittingham, whose 
 scholarship was well known, acted as editor, and he 
 was supported by such able coadjutors as Sampson, 
 Gilby, Goodman, and Coverdale himself, who has 
 already been frequently referred to in connection 
 
 * Eadie's English Bible, i. 386. It is interesting to know 
 that this translation anticipates in substance the rendering of 
 2 Tim. iii. 16, which has been adopted in the revised version 
 — " All Scripture given by inspiration of God is also pro- 
 fitable," etc. 
 
ENGLISH VERSIONS, 263 
 
 with earlier versions of the English Bible. Besides 
 these, John Knox and other well-known men of 
 the period have sometimes been named as having 
 had a part in the work. Moreover, the translators 
 doubtless availed themselves of the labours of Calvin, 
 Beza, and other learned men then resident at Geneva, 
 who had long been familiar with the study of Scrip- 
 ture. The men who had probably most to do with 
 the formation of the version were the editor, William 
 Whittingham,* a man of eminent learning, who was 
 afterwards, for sixteen years, dean of Durham ; 
 Thomas Sampson, distinguished as an able Hebrew 
 scholar; and Anthony Gilby, afterwards rector of 
 Ashby-de-la-Zouch, and author of a commentary on 
 some of the minor prophets. They were engaged on 
 their work '* for two years or more, day and night." 
 The New Testament was first issued by itself in 
 1557, and then the whole Bible in 1560. The 
 completed work was dedicated to Queen Elizabeth. 
 
 There is no question as to the great merits of the 
 Genevan version. It rested on Tyndale's version 
 and the Great Bible, but often departs from both, 
 generally for the better. The popularity which it 
 at once secured was long retained. In fact, our 
 
 * Dr. Eadie is, for once, in error when he states (ii. 5) that 
 "Whittingham married the sister of John Calvin. It has been 
 proved that he married the sister of Calvin's xvife. (See 
 Stoughton's Our English Bible^ p. 190.) 
 
264 OLD TESTAMENT REVISION. 
 
 present authorised version only gained slowly upon 
 it. In Scotland especially, the Genevan Bible was 
 highly prized, both for its own merits, and as having 
 proceeded from a place which was almost deemed 
 sacred, as well as from the hands of men for whom 
 the greatest veneration was cherished. It was 
 not till about the Restoration that the Genevan 
 Bible * was entirely superseded by the Authorised 
 Version. 
 
 We have now to glance at what is known as The 
 Bishops' Bible, which was first issued in 1568. 
 The reason for preparing it was good and sufficient. 
 When Elizabeth succeeded to the throne in 1558, 
 the English Bible, which had been forbidden to be 
 read during the five years and four months of the 
 reign of Mary, was again allowed a free circulation. 
 But it existed in many different forms. The Great 
 Bible was re-established by the Queen as the author- 
 ised version, but the Genevan version was greatly 
 preferred by the people, and the versions of Tyndale 
 and Coverdale were also in circulation. It was 
 natural that, in these circumstances, a desire should 
 be felt for»yet another version, which might, by its 
 
 * The Genevan version is sometimes spoken of as " The 
 Breeches Bible," from its rendering of Gen. iii. 7, "They 
 sewed fig-leaves together, and made themselves breeches." 
 But the word " breeches " had already been used by Wycliffe. 
 
ENGLISH VERSIONS. 265 
 
 superior merits, unite the great body of Englishmen 
 in its favour, and so supersede all the rest. Arch- 
 bishop Parker, then at the head of the English 
 Church, was very zealous in the prosecution of this 
 object, and was strenuously supported by a number 
 of the most learned among the bishops. The arch- 
 bishop himself undertook a large part of the work, 
 while the remaining books were assigned to men of 
 acknowledged erudition. From the fact that most 
 of the translators were bishops, this version received 
 the name of the Bishops' Bible, and great efforts 
 were made in various ways that it might prove a 
 decided success. 
 
 Failure, nevertheless, attended it. " Of all the 
 English versions," it has been said, **the Bishops' 
 Bible had probably the least success. It did not 
 command the respect of scholars, and its size and 
 cost were far from meeting the wants of the people. 
 Its circulation appears to have been practically 
 limited to the churches which were ordered to be 
 supplied with it." * The Bishops' Bible professed 
 to be a revision of the Great Bible, and did very 
 largely adopt its renderings ; but it originated some 
 happy expressions of its own, which still survive, 
 such as "middle wall" and "fellow-citizens" (Eph. 
 ii. 14, 19), and "less than the least" (Eph. iii. 8), 
 
 * Smith's Diet, of Bible, iii. 1675. 
 
266 OLD TESTAMENT REVISION. 
 
 all of which have a place in our present Authorised 
 Version.* 
 
 We enter a different region altogether when we 
 now turn to The Rheims and Douai Version. 
 This translation of the Scriptures was formed under 
 Roman Catholic auspices. Sorely against the gene- 
 ral feeling of the Romish Church, it was extorted by 
 the pressure of circumstances, in order to counteract 
 the evil which was being done by what were called 
 the corrupt Protestant versions. It was, of course, 
 based upon the Latin Vulgate as being ''authentical," 
 and as really having in the Papal Church a practical 
 superiority assigned to it over the Greek and Hebrew 
 originals. Like the Genevan Bible, the version now 
 under remark was the work of English exiles. Many 
 Romanists left England when Elizabeth succeeded 
 to the throne, and a number of these settled at 
 Douai, in Flanders, in 1568. There a seminary for 
 the education of priests was established, but being 
 broken up, it found refuge at Rheims, in France ; 
 returning, however, to Douai in 1593. It was at 
 Rheims that the New Testament was published in 
 1582. The chief translators were Gregory Martin, 
 who was reputed "an excellent linguist," and 
 William Allen, who was afterwards made a car- 
 dinal, and was intended to be the Romish Primate 
 
 * Eadie's Eng, Bib.y ii. 92. 
 
ENGLISH VERSIONS. 267 
 
 of England, had the Spanish Armada met with 
 success. The Old Testament, though ready even 
 before the New, was kept back "for lack of good 
 meanes," and only came out at Douai in 1609-10. 
 
 The English of this version is of a very peculiar 
 character. As Fuller has remarked, '' the translation 
 needs to be translated." The following are a few 
 specimens of its renderings : — Deut. xvi. 2, ** Thou 
 shalt immolate the Phase to our Lord thy God ; " 
 Ps. iv. 6, '* The light of Thy countenance, O Lord, 
 is signed upon us ; " Ps. xxiii. 5, "■ Thou hast fatted 
 my head with oil, and my chalice inebriating, how 
 goodlie is it;" Isa. xiii. 22, "And the Syrach owls 
 shall answer, and mermaids in the temples of plea- 
 sure;; " Luke xxii. 18, "I will not drink of the gene- 
 ration of the vine;" i Cor. v. 7, "Purge the old 
 leaven, that ye may be a new paste, as you are 
 Azymes;" Gal. vi. i, " If a man be preoccupated in 
 any fault;" Rev. i. 10, "Dominical day;" Rev. 
 xxii. 17, " Let him take the water of life gratis." 
 
 Yet, w^hile admitting multitudes of such absurd 
 renderings, the Rhenist translators struck out not 
 a few happy expressions, which still live in our Au- 
 thorised Version. Among these may be mentioned 
 "hymn" in Matt. xxvi. 30; "decease" in Luke 
 ix. 31 ; "commendeth" in Rom. v. 8; "bridleth his 
 tongue" in James i. 26 ; and a considerable number 
 of others. 
 
268 OLD TESTAMENT REVISION. 
 
 We now come to the Authorised Version — the 
 inheritor of the excellences of all the preceding 
 English translations. This version, which has so 
 long and so happily been the representative of the 
 sacred Scriptures in our language, may almost be 
 said to have resulted from a seeming accident. 
 Some words, uttered apparently without previous 
 intention, fell from the lips of Dr. Reynolds, at the 
 famous Hampton Court Conference in 1604, as to 
 the desirability that a new translation of the Bible 
 should be prepared. This proposal at once com- 
 mended itself to King James, as being quite in the 
 line of his own predilection for Biblical and theolo- 
 gical studies. Ere long, therefore, the seed which 
 had been casually dropped germinated and pro- 
 duced fruit. Within a few months, the king wrote to 
 Bancroft, then Archbishop of Canterbury, that he 
 had appointed a body of fifty-four scholars to carry 
 the idea of a new translation into effect. Forty- 
 seven were soon actually at work. Many of these 
 men were well known as admirably qualified for the 
 great work which lay before them. Some of them, 
 indeed, such as Andrewes, Overall, and Kilbye, were 
 among the most learned men of a very learned age. 
 They were instructed not to aim at an absolutely new 
 translation, but to take the Bishops' Bible as their 
 basis, and subject it to a thorough revision by every 
 means at their command. Now, the Bishops' Bible, 
 
ENGLISH VERSIONS. 269 
 
 it will be remembered, was itself a revision of the 
 Great Bible, and that again a revision of Matthew's 
 Bible, which was, in fact, a combination of Cover- 
 dale's and Tyndale's translations; so that our Au- 
 thorised Version is genetically connected with all 
 the previous English versions which had been made 
 directly from the original Scriptures. 
 
 There is no need to dwell on the excellence of the 
 result. Eulogies innumerable, and hardly one of 
 them exaggerated, have been passed on our English 
 Bible. The very fact that it has reigned without a 
 rival so long is a sufficient proof of its superiority. 
 Especially does this, strike one when the thought 
 recurs, that so many translations preceded it within 
 a very limited period. In less than a century, all the 
 versions enumerated above had been ushered into 
 the world, and had seriously contested each other's 
 claims to be generally accepted as the standard 
 English Bible ; while, during the two centuries and 
 a half which have now fully elapsed since the Author- 
 ised Version was formed, no rival, that had the 
 slightest chance of successfully competing with it, 
 has entered the field ; and it still stands supreme at 
 the present day. 
 
 Is there, then, no need for a revised version } 
 Marvellous indeed would it be, if _ such were the 
 case. Has Biblical learning made no progress in 
 the course of the last 270 years } and have no 
 
270 OLD TESTAMENT REVISION. 
 
 changes taken place in our own language during 
 that long period, which call for a revised version of 
 our English Bible? Having in a previous work* 
 answered these questions as respects the New Testa- 
 ment, I shall now, in a few words, glance at them in 
 their bearing upon the Old. 
 
 Sufficient proof has been brought forward, in some 
 of the preceding chapters, that there are many- 
 passages in the authorised version of the Old Testa- 
 ment which admit of being more accurately trans- 
 lated. To these multitudes of others might be easily 
 added. Hebrew and the cognate languages have 
 been zealously and fruitfully studied since 1611 ; and 
 the meaning of the original is now, to a large extent, 
 better understood. The natural-history terms, which 
 occur so largely in the Pentateuch, may, in particular, 
 be here referred to as of themselves amply justifying 
 and calling for a revision. 
 
 And then let us look at the number of obsolete 
 expressions to be found in the Old Testament. Page 
 after page might be filled with lists of these. Among 
 them occur the following, in addition to those 
 formerly mentioned : bosses, taches, knops, haber- 
 geon, tablet, botch, silverling, wimple, etc., and such 
 phrases as ''make a road" (for raid), "evil occur- 
 
 * Companion to the Revised English Version of the New Testa- 
 ment. Cassell, Fetter, Galpin and Co. 
 
ENGLISH VERSIONS. 271 
 
 rent" iiox coming against), "dissolving doubts" (for 
 resolving), "woe worth the day," ^* and many such 
 others. It may be doubted if one English reader 
 out of a hundred attaches any meaning, or, at least, 
 anything like the correct one, to these words and 
 phrases ; and they ought therefore, beyond all doubt, 
 to be exchanged for others that are more generally 
 intelligible. 
 
 All that seem» necessary has already been said in 
 connection with the text of the Old Testament. No 
 changes of any great importance require to be made 
 in the translation in consequence of alterations in the 
 text which have as yet been demanded by the pro- 
 gress of Biblical science. The revision of the Old 
 Testament differs greatly in this respect from that of 
 the New. There is no passage in the Hebrew 
 Scriptures analogous, as regards change or omission 
 of text required, to i Tim. iii. 16, and i John v. 7, 8. 
 And there is also one other great difference between 
 
 * This idiom has, indeed, survived to our own day, as in S i 
 "Walter Scott's lines in The Lady of the Lake: — 
 
 worth the chase, woe worth the day 
 That cost thy life, my gallant grey ! " 
 
 But though most readers may have a vague idea of the m eaning, 
 probably few know that worth simply stands for is, being con- 
 nected with the German werden, so that the import of " woe 
 worth the day " is just " woful is the day." 
 
272 OLD TESTAMENT REVISION. 
 
 the two revisions. While the essential meaning of 
 the Greek has only in a very few places been missed 
 by our common English translation, it will, beyond 
 doubt, be found that positive mistakes in that ver- 
 sion, as to the real signification of Hebrew words and 
 phrases, have given rise to the great majority of the 
 diiferences perceptible between its renderings and 
 those of the revised version of the Old Testament. 
 
INDEX OF TEXTS. 
 
 
 
 PAGE 
 
 
 PAGE 
 
 Genesis ii. 4, 5 
 
 - 
 
 45 
 
 Exodus xii. 35 - 
 
 - 51 
 
 iii. 15 - - - 
 
 - 
 
 236 
 
 xii. 36 - - . 
 
 - 51 
 
 iv. 8 - 
 
 - 
 
 168 
 
 xii. 40 - 
 
 - 171 
 
 viii. II - 
 
 - 
 
 257 
 
 xvii. 14 - 
 
 - 33 
 
 X. 21, 24 
 
 - 
 
 I 
 
 xix. 2 - - • 
 
 - 35 
 
 xi. 5 - 
 
 - 
 
 220 
 
 xxiii. 20 
 
 - 90 
 
 xii. 6 - - - 
 
 - 
 
 43 
 
 xxiv. 4 - 
 
 - 34 
 
 xii, 9 - - - 
 
 - 
 
 46 
 
 xxxiii. 14, 15 - 
 
 - 90 
 
 xiii. 18 - 
 
 - 
 
 46 
 
 xxxiv. 13 
 
 - 52 
 
 xiv. 13 - 
 
 - 
 
 46 
 
 xxxiv. 27 
 
 - 33 
 
 xvi. 5 - 
 
 - 
 
 144 
 
 xxxiv. 33 
 
 - 53 
 
 xviii. I - 
 
 - 
 
 46 
 
 Leviticus v. 16 
 
 - 54 
 
 xxviii. 70 — 22 
 
 - 
 
 46 
 
 vi. 21 - - ■ 
 
 - 54 
 
 xxxi. 19, 34, 35 - 
 
 - 
 
 47 
 
 vii. 12 - 
 
 - 54 
 
 xxxii. 24 - • 
 
 - 
 
 41 
 
 viii. 15 - 
 
 - 54 
 
 xxxiv. 30 - - 
 
 - 
 
 87 
 
 xi. 6 
 
 - 188 
 
 xxxvi. 24 - - 
 
 - 
 
 48 
 
 xiii. 46 - 
 
 - 41 
 
 xxxvii. 28 • - 
 
 - 
 
 48 
 
 xvi. 8 - - . 
 
 - 54 
 
 xxxix. I - - 
 
 - 
 
 48 
 
 xviii. 18 
 
 . - 56 
 
 xliv. 5 ■ 
 
 - 
 
 34 
 
 xviii. 21 
 
 - 209 
 
 xlvii. 31 
 
 - 
 
 140 
 
 xxvi. 46- 
 
 - 34 
 
 xlix. 10 - 
 
 - 
 
 48 
 
 xxvii. 29 
 
 - 41 
 
 Exodus ii. ii, 12 
 
 - 
 
 50 
 
 xxvii. 34 
 
 - 34 
 
 iii. 22 - 
 
 - 
 
 51 
 
 Numbers v. 3 - 
 
 - 41 
 
 ix. 5 
 
 - 
 
 51 
 
 x. 32 - 
 
 . . 63 
 
 x. 14 - 
 
 - 
 
 41 
 
 xi. 5 - 
 
 - 35 
 
 xi. 2 - 
 
 - 
 
 51 
 
 xiv. 21 — 23 - 
 
 - 57 
 
 xii. 12 - 
 
 - 
 
 41 
 
 xxiii. 7 — 10 .- 
 
 - 14 
 
 10 
 
274 
 
 INDEX OF TEXTS. 
 
 
 PAGE 
 
 
 PAG- 
 
 Numbers xxiii. 18—24 
 
 - 
 
 57 
 
 Job iv., v. - 
 
 - 9« 
 
 xxiv. 3 — 9 
 
 - 
 
 59 
 
 vi. 14 - 
 
 - IC 
 
 xxxiii. 2- 
 
 - 
 
 34 
 
 xviii. I - 
 
 - . - 25^ 
 
 Deuteronomy ii. 23 
 
 - 
 
 77 
 
 xix. 25 — 27 - 
 
 - 10; 
 
 vi. 4 - 
 
 - 
 
 144 
 
 xxii. 29 - 
 
 - IC 
 
 vii. 5 - " " 
 
 - 
 
 63 
 
 xxxiii. 23, 24 - 
 
 - 10^ 
 
 xvi. 2 - - - 
 
 - 
 
 267 
 
 xxxvi. 29—33 
 
 - IO_ 
 
 xvi. 21 - 
 
 - 
 
 63 
 
 xxxix. II 
 
 • 5^ 
 
 xxvii. 4 - 
 
 - 
 
 170 
 
 Psalms i. 3 
 
 - 9. 
 
 xxxi. 9 - 
 
 - 
 
 36 
 
 ii. 12 - - 
 
 - 9. 
 
 xxxii. 40, 42 - 
 
 - 
 
 64 
 
 iv. 6 
 
 - 26 
 
 xxxiii. I — 29 - 
 
 - 
 
 65 
 
 xvi. I — 4 
 
 - 9 
 
 Joshua v. 14 - 
 
 - 
 
 71 
 
 xviii. 31 
 
 - i< 
 
 viii. 31, 32 . 
 
 - 
 
 30 
 
 xix. I — 4 
 
 - 9 
 
 Judges iv. 10 - 
 
 - 
 
 75 
 
 xvii. 12 - 
 
 - I 
 
 V. 18 - 
 
 - 
 
 75 
 
 xxii. 21 - 
 
 - 5 
 
 V. 15—31 
 
 - 
 
 72 
 
 xxiii. 5 - 
 
 - 26 
 
 XV. 19 - 
 
 - 
 
 83 
 
 xxiv. 6 - 
 
 - 9 
 
 XX. 26 - 
 
 - 
 
 83 
 
 xxx. 5 - 
 
 - 20 
 
 I Samuel xv. 22 
 
 - 
 
 39 
 
 xl. 6 - 
 
 - 3 
 
 xvii. 8 - 
 
 - 
 
 221 
 
 xlvi. 5 - 
 
 - 9 
 
 XXV. 22 - 
 
 - 
 
 87 
 
 Ii. 16, 17 
 
 - 3 
 
 2 Samuel xiv. 14 
 
 - 
 
 13 
 
 Ixxx. 8 - 
 
 - I 
 
 I Kings ii. 3 - 
 
 - 
 
 30 
 
 Ixxxiv. 4 — 7 - 
 
 - 9 
 
 iii. 4 - - - 
 
 - 
 
 210 
 
 xci. 5 - 
 
 - 25 
 
 iv. 24 - - - 
 
 - 
 
 76 
 
 xcii. 10 - 
 
 - I 
 
 xvii. 6 - 
 
 - 
 
 4 
 
 xcvi. 10 - 
 
 - 15 
 
 XX. 42 - 
 
 - 
 
 41 
 
 cxix. 92 - 
 
 - 21 
 
 2 Kings vii. 3 - 
 
 - 
 
 41 
 
 cxxi. 4 - 
 
 - 25 
 
 2 Chronicles xxx. iS 
 
 - 
 
 iO 
 
 cxxiv, 3 - 
 
 - 9 
 
 Ezra iii. 2 - - 
 
 - 
 
 30 
 
 cxxvii. 2 
 
 - 9 
 
 iv. 2 — 6 - 
 
 - 
 
 176 
 
 cxxxvii. 9 
 
 - 7 
 
 iv. 8 — vi. 18 - 
 
 - 
 
 19 
 
 Proverbs v. 16 
 
 - 16 
 
 vii. 12—26 - 
 
 - 
 
 19 
 
 viii. 22 — 31 - 
 
 - 10 
 
 Nehemiah vlii. I 
 
 - 
 
 30 
 
 viii. 31 • - 
 
 - IC 
 
 Esther ix. 7 - 
 
 - 
 
 145 
 
 xi. 16 - 
 
 - 10 
 
 Job iii. 20 — 24 - 
 
 - 
 
 15 
 
 xiv. 17 - 
 
 - I 
 
INDEX OF TEXTS. 
 
 275 
 
 
 
 
 
 PAGE 
 
 
 
 
 
 PAGE 
 
 ECCLE";IASTES 
 
 xii. I 
 
 -7 
 
 - 
 
 109 
 
 Malachi iii. i - 
 
 
 - 
 
 - 
 
 89 
 
 SAIAH ii. 2 
 
 
 
 - 
 
 209 
 
 iv. 4 
 
 
 - 
 
 - 
 
 30 
 
 V. I 
 
 
 
 . 
 
 10 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 V. 7 
 
 
 
 - 
 
 77 
 
 APOCRYr: 
 
 I A. 
 
 
 
 vii. 14 — 16 
 
 
 
 - 
 
 78 
 
 I Esdras iv. 38- 
 
 -41 
 
 . 
 
 . 
 
 118 
 
 vii. 14 - 
 
 
 
 - 
 
 225 
 
 TOBIT V. 16 
 
 
 . 
 
 - 
 
 121 
 
 viii. 19, 20 
 
 
 
 - 
 
 78 
 
 Wisdom iii. 4 - 
 
 
 . 
 
 . 
 
 127 
 
 ix. I 
 
 
 
 - 
 
 79 
 
 V. 8— 16 
 
 
 . 
 
 . 
 
 128 
 
 ix. 5 - 
 
 
 
 - 
 
 150 
 
 xi. 26 
 
 
 - 
 
 . 
 
 127 
 
 xiii. 22 - 
 
 
 
 - 
 
 2 5/ 
 
 Ecclesiasticus 
 
 xi. 
 
 7 
 
 . 
 
 129 
 
 xxvi. 20 - 
 
 
 
 - 
 
 208 
 
 xiii. 9, 10 
 
 
 
 - 
 
 129 
 
 xli. 7 
 
 
 
 - 
 
 230 
 
 xiii. 23 - 
 
 
 - 
 
 - 
 
 129 
 
 lii- 13-15 
 
 
 
 - 
 
 79 
 
 xviii. 8 — 13 - 
 
 
 - 
 
 - 
 
 130 
 
 liii. I — 12 
 
 
 
 - 
 
 80 
 
 XXV. 20 - 
 
 
 . 
 
 . 
 
 129 
 
 Ivi. 10 - 
 
 
 
 - 
 
 10 
 
 xxxviii. 25 
 
 
 _ 
 
 - 
 
 129 
 
 Ix. 8 - 
 
 
 
 - 
 
 210 
 
 1. 5—10 
 
 
 - 
 
 - 
 
 129 
 
 Ixiii. 9 - 
 
 
 
 - 
 
 90 
 
 I Maccabees ii. 
 
 5- 
 
 -13 
 
 - 
 
 133 
 
 Ixvi. 23 - 
 
 
 
 - 
 
 :-IO 
 
 iv. 14 — 24 
 
 
 
 - 
 
 133 
 
 Jeremiah vii. 
 
 22 
 
 
 - 
 
 1>1 
 
 2 Maccabees iv. 
 
 13 
 
 - 
 
 - 
 
 160 
 
 vii. 21 — 24 
 
 
 
 - 
 
 38 
 
 V. 20 - 
 
 
 . 
 
 . 
 
 134 
 
 xvii. 9 - 
 
 
 
 - 
 
 Si 
 
 viii. 18 - 
 
 
 - • 
 
 . 
 
 134 
 
 XXV. 20 - 
 
 
 
 - 
 
 77 
 
 xiii. 26 - 
 
 
 _ 
 
 „ 
 
 134 
 
 EzEKiEL xxvii. 
 
 II 
 
 
 - 
 
 Zi 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 Daniel ix. 24 
 
 -27 
 
 
 - 
 
 III 
 
 Matthew vi. 13 
 
 
 . 
 
 . 
 
 44 
 
 HOSEA iv. 18 
 
 
 
 - 
 
 83 
 
 vii. 14 - 
 
 
 . 
 
 . 
 
 250 
 
 vi. 6 
 
 
 
 - 
 
 39 
 
 ix. 9—17 
 
 
 - 
 
 - 
 
 194 
 
 xii. 4 
 
 
 
 - 
 
 41 
 
 ix. 13 . • . 
 
 
 . 
 
 •- 
 
 39 
 
 xiv. 8 - 
 
 
 
 - 
 
 84 
 
 xii. 7 - - 
 
 
 - 
 
 - 
 
 39 
 
 Joel ii. 2 - 
 
 
 
 - 
 
 41 
 
 xxi. 42 - 
 
 
 - 
 
 - 
 
 190 
 
 iii. 4 
 
 
 
 - 
 
 84 
 
 xxii. 24 - 
 
 
 . 
 
 . 
 
 30 
 
 Amos v. 17 
 
 
 
 - 
 
 41 
 
 xxiii. 23 
 
 
 . 
 
 . 
 
 40 
 
 Nahum iii. 8 
 
 
 
 ^z. 
 
 169 
 
 xxvi. 30 - 
 
 
 . 
 
 . 
 
 188 
 
 Habakkuk iii 
 
 . I — 
 
 16 
 
 - 
 
 85 
 
 xxvii. 9 - 
 
 
 _ 
 
 . 
 
 Z^ 
 
 Zephaniah iii 
 
 •3 
 
 
 - 
 
 10 
 
 Mark ii. 13 — 22 
 
 
 . 
 
 . 
 
 194 
 
 Haggai ii. 7 
 
 - 
 
 
 - 
 
 88 
 
 V. 41 
 
 
 _ 
 
 . 
 
 190 
 
 Zechariah xi 
 
 13 
 
 
 - 
 
 88 
 
 x. 4 . 
 
 
 . 
 
 . 
 
 30 
 
 xiv. 20 - 
 
 - 
 
 - 
 
 - 
 
 146 
 
 xii. 24 - 
 
 
 - 
 
 - 
 
 190 
 
76 
 
 INDEX OF TEXTS. 
 
 
 
 
 PAGE 
 
 
 
 PAGE 
 
 Luke v. 27 — 39 
 
 - 
 
 - 
 
 194 
 
 Acts xxi. 40 
 
 
 181 
 
 ix. 31 - 
 
 
 - 
 
 267 
 
 Romans v. 8 
 
 
 - 267 
 
 ix. 52, 53 
 
 
 - 
 
 170 
 
 ix. 5 - 
 
 
 - 150 
 
 xiv. 18 - 
 
 
 - 
 
 251 
 
 2 Corinthians iii. 
 
 13 
 
 - 53 
 
 xxii. 18 - 
 
 
 - 
 
 267 
 
 Galatians iii. 17 
 
 
 - 172 
 
 xxiv. 27 - 
 
 
 - 
 
 179 
 
 vi. I 
 
 
 - 267 
 
 xxiv. 32 - 
 
 
 - 
 
 190 
 
 Ephesians ii. 14, i< 
 
 ?- 
 
 - 265 
 
 John iv. 9 
 
 
 - 
 
 170 
 
 iii. 8 
 
 
 - 265 
 
 V. 3» 4 - 
 
 
 - 
 
 44 
 
 Philippians iv. 13 
 
 
 - 250 
 
 V. 39 - 
 
 
 - 
 
 179 
 
 I Timothy iii. 16 
 
 
 - 271 
 
 vi. 31 - 
 
 
 - 
 
 180 
 
 Hebrews i. 6 - 
 
 
 - 186 
 
 vii. 19 - 
 
 
 - 
 
 30 
 
 xi. 21 - 
 
 
 - 146 
 
 vii. 41 - 
 
 
 - 
 
 190 
 
 xi. 35—38 - 
 
 
 - 136 
 
 Acts iv. 25 
 
 
 - 
 
 94" 
 
 James i. 26 
 
 
 - 267 
 
 vii. 6 
 
 
 - 
 
 172 
 
 I John v. 7, 8 - 
 
 
 - 271 
 
 vii. 37 - 
 
 
 - 
 
 44 
 
 Revelation i. 10 
 
 
 - 267 
 
 XV. 16, 17 
 
 
 - 
 
 186 
 
 xxii. 17 - 
 
 
 - 267 
 
 XV. 21 - 
 
 a 
 
 - 
 
 30 
 
 
 
 
GENERAL INDEX. 
 
 Aben Ezra on Hebrew punctua- 
 tion, 151 
 Accent, importance of, 148 
 Addison quoted, 97 
 ^schylus, text of, referred to, 
 
 yEthiopic version, 239 
 
 Alexander the Great, influence 
 of, 159 
 
 Alexandria, Jews in, 160 
 
 Alford, Dean, quoted, 196 
 
 Angel of the Covenant, 90 
 
 Apocrypha, meaning of word, 
 116 
 
 Apocrypha referred to in New 
 Testament, 136 
 
 Apocrypha, value of, 115, 134 
 
 Aquila, version of, 224 
 
 Aramaic version of Old Testa- 
 ment never existed, 183 
 
 Aramaic, its influence on He- 
 brew, 18 
 
 Aristeas, letter of, 162 
 
 Armenian version, 241 
 
 Ashtaroth, 64 
 
 Assonances in Hebrew, 13, 77 
 
 Astruc on Genesis, 44 
 
 Augustine, St., on Septuagint, 
 167 
 
 Authorised version, caprices of, 
 77 
 
 Authorised version, how formed, 
 
 245 . 
 Authorised version, vagueness 
 
 of, 72 
 
 Azazel, 54 
 
 Balaam's prophecies, 57 
 Bancroft, Archbishop, 268 
 Baruch, Book of, 131 
 Bishops' Bible, 264 
 Bissell, Dr., on Apocrypha, 125 
 Bleek on disuse of Hebrew, 182 
 British Quarterly Review quoted, 
 
 151 
 
 Cabala of Jews, what, 207 
 Ccesar quoted, 59 
 Chalmers, Dr., quoted, 41 
 Christology of Old Testament, 
 
 49 
 Clementine Vulgate, 235 
 Contemporary Review quoted, 
 
 207 
 Cornhill Magazine quoted, 193 
 Council of Trent, 234 
 Coverdale's version, 256 
 Criticism, object of, 50 
 
 Daniel, Aramaic passage in, 19 
 
 Additions to, 132 
 
 Book of, 11 1 
 
278 
 
 GENERAL INDEX. 
 
 Davidson, Dr. S., quoted or 
 
 referred to, 77, 83, 95, 135, 
 
 246 
 Deborah, song of, 72 
 Deceased wife's sister, marriage 
 
 with, 56 
 Delbos quoted, 12 
 Demaus referred to, 254 
 Deutsch, Em., quoted or referred 
 
 to, 20, 171, 184, 202, 218 
 De Wette referred to, 18, 156 
 Discussions on the Gospels quoted, 
 
 Dogmatic bias supposed in 
 
 A. v., 81 
 Douai version, 266 
 
 Eadie, Dr., quoted or referred 
 to, 247, 250, 257, 259, 261, 
 263, 266 
 Ecclesiasticus, Book of, 128 
 Egyptian versions, 239 
 Eichhorn referred to, 196 
 Elijah's ravens, 4 
 Eliphaz, first speech of, 99 
 Esdras, First Book of, 118 
 
 Second Book of, 119 
 
 Esther, Additions to, 124 
 Evolution of doctrine, 185 
 Ezra, Aramaic passage in, 19 
 
 Farrar, Canon, quoted, 9, 191 
 Fathers, early, on Septuagint, 
 
 166 
 Frankel on Septuagint, 165 
 Fuller on Rhenish version, 267 
 
 Gemarah. meaning of word, 204 
 Genesis Book of, 28« 
 Geneva version, 262 
 Gerizim, Mount, 177 
 Gospels, objection of learned 
 
 Jew to, 199 
 Gospels, problem of, 193, 197 
 Gothic version, 240 
 
 Great Bible, 260 
 Greek, spread of, 158 
 Greek, usual language of Christ, 
 190 
 
 Haggadah, what, 205 
 Halachah, what, 205 
 Hall, Robert, quoted, 128 
 Hamilton, Patrick, referred to, 
 
 253 
 Havernick quoted, 1 12 
 Hebi-evv accents, 148, 15 1 
 
 Bible, contents of, 20 
 
 language died out, 19 
 
 onomotopoetic, 13 
 
 of New Testament, what, 
 
 181 
 
 occasional ambiguity of, 3 
 
 roots, number of, 8 
 
 patois of Palestine, 190 
 
 very metaphorical, lO 
 
 manuscripts, 144 
 
 why so called, i 
 
 Hengstenberg referred to, 41 
 Henry VHI. sanctions Matthew's 
 
 Bible, 259 
 Hershon, Mr., on Talmud, 203 
 Hertzogon Hebrew language, II 
 Hexapla of Origen, 226 
 
 Irenseus quoted, 155 
 Itala, what, 232 
 
 James VI. at Hampton Court, 
 
 268 
 Jeremiah, Aramaic passage in, 
 
 Jei-ome's, St., version, 233 
 Jews in time of Christ bilingual, 
 
 192 
 Job, Targum of Book of, 221 
 Jonathan, Targum of, 220 
 Josephus, canon of, 20 
 Josephus, passage in, explained, 
 
 192 
 
GENERAL INDEX. 
 
 279 
 
 Jowett, Prof., on St. Paul's 
 
 knowledge of Hebrew, 187 
 Judith, Book of, 122 
 Justin Martyr referred to, 155 
 
 Kabala of Jews, 207 
 Karaite Jews, 154, 206 
 Kitto, Dr., quoted, 4 
 Knox, John, referred to, 263 
 
 Lagarde, Prof., referred to, 56 
 Latin versions of Old Testament, 
 
 229 
 Literal translation unsuitable, 87 
 Logos doctrine, 107 
 Longfellow quoted, loi, 207 
 Louvain, divines of, 253 
 Lowth, Bp., quoted, 15, 16 
 Lucretius, text of, referred to, 
 
 139 
 
 Luther on Apocrypha, 126, 135 
 Lyndsay, Sir David, quoted, 76 
 
 Maccabees, First Book of, 133 
 
 Second Book of, 134 
 
 Manasseh, Prayer of, 132 
 Marsh, Bp., referred to, 196 
 Massorah, meaning of word, 142 
 Massorets, labours of, 142 
 Matthew's version, 258 
 Memphitic version, 239 
 Messianic passages, 49, 62, 1 13 
 Midrash, meaning of word, 205 
 Milton quoted, 150 
 Mishnah, meaning of word, 204 
 Mistakes in A.V. of Old Testa- 
 ment, 272 
 
 Night noughts, Young's, quoted, 
 
 128 
 Noldeke referred to, 140 
 
 Obsolete terms in A.V., 52, 270 
 Old Latin, what, 232 
 Onkelos, Targum of, 219 
 
 Ormulum referred to, 247 
 
 Palestine for Philistia, 84 
 Paradise, supposed language of, 
 
 II 
 Parallelism, various kinds of, 15 
 Parker, Archbp., 265 
 Pentateuch, the Mosaic author- 
 ship of, 30, 34, 37 
 Pentateuch, interpolations in, 43 
 Peshito, meaning of word, 228 
 Pilgrim^ s Progress referred to, 
 
 205 
 Plautus referred to, no 
 Polano, Mr., quoted, 214 
 Psalms, translation of, 93 
 
 translation in Prayer 
 
 Book, 261 
 
 Punctuation, importance of, 149 
 
 Quarterly Review referred to, 
 
 202 
 Quotations of Old Testament in 
 
 New, 187 
 
 Rabbis, exaggerations of, 212 
 
 quibbling of, 209 
 
 Redeemer of Job, 102 
 Renan on Hebrew roots, 9 
 Revision, need of Old Testa- 
 ment, 269 
 Rheims version, 266 
 Rogers, John, courage of, 260 
 
 Samaritan Pentateuch, 157 
 
 value of, 
 
 168 
 Samaritans and Jews, 170 
 Saturday Review quoted, 203 
 Scotch language, 251 
 
 wi'iters of last century, 
 
 193 
 
 Scott, Sir Walter, quoted, 271 
 Scriptures among the Jews, 181 
 Semitic speech, 2 
 
28o 
 
 GENERAL INDEX. 
 
 Septuagint, the Bible of Christ, 
 
 185 
 Septuagint, how esteemed by the 
 
 Jews, 163 
 Septuagint, traditional account 
 
 of, 160 
 Se.ptuagint, value of, 168 
 Shigionoth, meaning of word, 
 
 Shiloh, how to be rendered, 48 
 Sixtine Vulgate, 235 
 Slavonic version, 241 
 Smith, Dr. R., quoted, 24, 26, 
 
 138, 169, 181, 187 
 Speaker s Co»it?ienfary,^'], 65. 68 
 Stanley, Dean, candour of, 164 
 quoted, 35. 176, 
 
 188 
 Strack on Hebrew MSS., 153 
 St. James' Epistle, diction of, 126 
 Symmachus, version of, 225 
 Syriac versions, 227 
 
 Talmud, what, 203 
 Talmudic period, 205 
 
 Targums, what, 217 
 Taverner's Bible, 260 
 Teraphim. what, 47 
 Tetrapla of Origen, 226 
 Text of Old Testament, 271 
 Thebaic version, 239 
 Theodotion's version, 225 
 Thrupp, Mr., on Hebrew MSS. 
 
 152 
 Tobit. Book of, 120 
 Tregelles, Dr., referred to, 229 
 Tyndale's version, 251 
 
 Versions of Old Testament, 242 
 Vulgate, Latin, 234 
 
 Welihausen, Prof., referred to, 
 
 38 
 Westcott, Canon, quoted, 228, 
 
 254 
 Whitchurch's Bible, 260 
 Whiitingham and Geneva ver- 
 sion, 262 
 Wisriom, Book of, 126 
 i Wibcman, Cardinal, quoted, 191