YALE
DIVINITY SCHOOL
LIBRARY

Gift of
Library of
Dean Charles R. Brown

BOOK BY BOOK

BOOK BY BOOK
popular SbtwUies on tfit ©anon of S>tttptute
OLD TESTAMENT

The Right Rev. the Lord Bishop of TForcester
The Very Rev. Dean Spence, D.D. Frof. James Robertson, D.D.
Prof A. B. liavidson, B.B., LL.D. Late Professor W. G. Elmslie, D.D.
Prof. Stanley Leathe.9, D.D.

LONDON
ISBISTER AND COMPANY Limited
15 & 16 TAVISTOCK STEEET COVENT GAEDEN
1896

LONWON :
PRINTED BY J. o, VIltTUE AND CO.,
CITY ROAD.

PEEFACE.
These studies by eminent divines originally appeared as
Introductions to the various Books of Holy Scripture in
"The New IUustrated Bible," pubUshed by Messrs. J. S.
Virtue & Co., Limited. In 1892 they were issued under
the title " Book by Book," and thus presented in a single
volume a complete and scholarly survey of the questions
affecting the Sacred Canon which have of recent years
caused so much discussion.
In compUance -with frequently expressed wishes it has
now been decided to pubUsh the work in two volumes.
The present volume is devoted to the Books of the Old
Testament. THE PUBLISHERS.

CONTl^NTS.

iNTEODtrCTION GenesisExontrs

THE PENTATEUCH.
By Prof. James Robertson, D.D.

17

Levitiod'S
NUMBEES

25 I Deuteeonomt

PAflB
. 33
. 41

HISTORICAL BOOKS.
By Prof. James Robertson, D.D.

The Book op Joshua . . .58
The Books of JunaES & Ruth . 67
,, ,, Samuel . . 77
,, KiNQS . . . 92

The Books op Cheonioles . 110
,, ,, EZEA AND NeHE-
TSIKB. . . 120
The 'Book of Esthbe 131

THE POETICAL BOOKS.
By Prof. A. B. Davidson, D.D., LL.D.
The Book of Job 
By the Right Rev. the Bishop of Worcester.
The Book of Psaims  . .

136

150

VUl

CONTENTS.

THE POETICAL BOOKS (Continue^.
By Prof. A. B. Davidson, D.D., LL.D.

PAGE 172

The Book of Peoveebs
Ecclesiastes; oe, the Pebachee 185

The Sono of Solomon

FAOB
. 193

THE PROPHETICAL BOOKS.
the Very Rev. H. D. M. Spence, D.D.

The Book of the Peophbt Isajah 198
The Book of the Peophet Jeee-
MIAH  217

The Lamentations of Jebe-
mlah .... 230

By Prof. Stanley Leathes, D.D.

The Book op the Peophet
Ezekiel .... 233

The Book of Daniel

. 241

Hosea Joel .
Amos .
Obahlah
Jonah .
MiOAH .

THE MINOE PROPHETS.
By tlie late Prof. W. G. Elmslie, D.D.

251
. 260
269
. 278
. 284
. 291

Nahum Habakkuk
Zephaniah
Haoqai ZeohaeiahMalachi

. 299
. 307
. 315-
. 321 327
. 338

INTRODUCTION TO THE
PENTATEUCH.

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

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

INTRODUCTION TO THE PENTATEUCH. 8
ritual character, but the purpose for which they are given is
always distinctly held up to view. Prior to the giving of the
law is the choosing of the people; and the law is given to
educate them for their high destiny. Such expressions as "I
am the Lord," " Thou art an holy people," are ever recurring
as reasons for the promulgation of a statute or motives for its
observance ; and underlying the enactments of the law there
is the establishing of a covenant. When God promises Abraham
a numerous seed and the possession of Canaan, He makes a
covenant with him (Gen. xv. 18, xvii. 2) ; when He reveals
Himself to Moses in the bush, there is a new declaration of the
same covenant (Exod. vi. 4) ; and the great transaction at Horeb
is spoken of also as a covenant (Deut. v. 2 ; compare Jerem.
xxxi. 31).
The whole legislation of the Pentateuch points back to the
choosing of a people for a special purpose, and points forward to
the unfolding of that purpose in their history.
3. Plan. — Thus the two streams of narrative and legislation
come together, and the current tends onward, mainly in chrono
logical order, to one great end. The Book of Genesis is complete
in itself, yet the reader at its close is aware that a great plan is
being unfolded, and asks what is to foUow ; and at the close of
Deuteronomy there is not only a distinct retrospect to aU that
preceded, but there is a great plan stUl in progress.
And what is the plan ? It is to trace the rise, selection, and
consohdation of a covenant people who have, in God's purpose,
a great work to perform in the world. And in the unfolding of
this plan, the narrative is not content with starting from the
time when the people existed as a nation, but traces them back
ward to a chosen famUy, of which Abraham was the head.
This family is again traced back to its source, and that again to
a higher source, tUl the origin of the human race and of the uni
verse is reached. Or, to change the point of view, there is from
the beginning onwards a kind of pyramidal structure, each
succeeding stage of which is narrower than the preceding.
Thus, when "AU flesh had corrupted its way on the earth," a
new beginning is made in the family of Noah ; in this famUy a
limitation is made to the descendants of Shem ; from among
them the family of Abraham is selected, and the patriarch him
self is made the depositary of the promise. Again, there is an
eUmination of Ishmael and the Keturseans, and the promise
centres in Isaac ; one son of Isaac is set aside, and the blessing
runs in the Une of Jacob and his descendants, among whom
Ephraim and Judah are speciaUy designated to future pre
eminence. B 2

BOOK BY BOOK.

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

INTEODUCTION TO THE PENTATEUCH. 5
composition of the Pentateuch. The Jews indeed, from the
earliest times at which we find them stating their tradition as
to the origin of the various books of the Old Testament, without
hesitation ascribe the Pentateuch to Moses, using the expression
"Law of Moses," or "Book of the Law of Moses," convertibly
with the " Five-fifths of the Law."
This belief was accepted without question by the early
Christian Church on the authority of the Jewish synagogue,
and so the Pentateuch has come to be commonly described as
the Five Books of Moses. A tradition so persistent is not to be
BummarUy set aside, for it may be concluded that it rests on
some soUd basis of fact, but neither is it to be accepted as decisive,
because this is a matter of minute detaUs in which tradition
cannot be expected to be precisely accurate. The occurrence
of a great event, or of a series of great events, or the activity
of a great personage, may make such an impression on the
memory and the Ufe of a people that tradition cannot go astray
in reference to it ; but the handing on of a book or books
through a series of generations, when the art of printing was
unknown, and through a history f uU of remarkable vicissitudes,
is a different matter.
Jewish tradition itself ascribes to Ezra an undefined but not
inconsiderable share in the work of reducing the Pentateuch and
other Scriptures to their present shape, and from the time of
Moses to that of Ezra we have no definite information as to the
process through which the earlier -writings passed. But it is to
be observed that it was not on the strength of their being written
by this or that person that the ancient Jews accepted their
sacred books. These books had come down to them from
ancjent times, many of them being anonymous compositions,
though no doubt some tradition of authorship attached to each
of them ; but it seems to have been only when they were being
coUected or after they were coUected into a canon, that each had
its authorship assigned to it. The historical books from Judges
onwards give no intimation of the hands by whom they were
written, and the traditions of the Jewish synagogue, of a later
time, are very uncertain.
It is particularly to be noticed that in the books of the Pen-
tateueh itself the Mosaic origin is not claimed. In the Book of
Genesis there is no mention of authorship whatever ; and in the
three succeeding books the few passages that might be taken
as direct assertions that Moses wrote what has come down to us
in the Pentateuch, wiU be found on examination to refer only
to certain specific things, though of course they do not exclude

6 BOOK BY BOOK.
the writing of other things.* And the same is to be said of the
similar statements in the Book of Deuteronomy xxxi. 9—11, 22,
24 — 26. What aU these passages directly sa}- is that Moses
was commanded to write and did put do-wn in writing certain
matters, both of history and of legislation, "for a memorial;"
and thus, indirectly, the Pentateuch itself leads us to the con
clusion that he had to do with the two great streams of which
we saw it is composed. So also the Book of Joshua makes dis
tinct mention not only of a law, but of a book of the law, the
-writing of -which is ascribed to Moses.f It is remarkable that
neither in the Book of Judges nor in those of Samuel is there
any direct mention of such a written work ; but notices of it again
appear in the Book of Kings, and are continued in the succeed
ing historical Books of Chronicles, Ezra, and Nehemiah. These
notices are either in general terms, such as those that have just
been adduced, or consist of references to special laws and ordi
nances ascribed to Moses. They become more precise in the
priestly Books of Chronicles ; and in the time of Ezra, who was
" a ready scribe in the law of Moses, which the Lord God of
Israel had given" (Ezra vii. 6), there is a detaUed account
(Nehemiah viii.) of the public reading, with ceremony, of a
formal "Book of the Law of Moses," "from the morning tiU
midday," in the audience of the people.
6. Traditional View. — We need not therefore wonder at the'
tenacity of the tradition which ascribes the Pentateuch to Moses.
On the one hand, the work of the great leader had deeply
impressed itself on the memory of the nation and moulded its
history, as testified by succeeding events and by the constant
appeal of the prophets. On the other hand, there were these
distinct references to his -work as a -writer and legislator,
-warranting the impression that the legal system handed down
from old time was derived from him. Nothing was more
natural, when the sacred books were coUected and accepted as
a basis of faith and practice, than that the Pentateuch should
be summarily accepted as of Mosaic authorship. If ever there
was a time in the history of Israel when laws and ordinances
were particularly needed to shape the nation's life, it was at
such a time and in such a situation as the history assigns to
Moses. The time of youthful hope, in nations as in individuals
is the time when plans are made for the future ; at such a time
and in sueh circumstances also, a nation would become conscious
of the fact that it had a destiny and a history before it.
* The passages should be examined in their connection :— Exodus xvii 14 •
XXIV. 4, 7 ; xxxiv. 27. Numbers xxxiii. 1 — 2. ' '
t Josh. i. 7, 8 ; viii. 31, 34 ; xxiii. 6 ; xxiv. 26.

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

b BOOK BY BOOK.
theirs in the Dark Ages. The discovery of the law book in the
reign of Josiah (2 Kings xxii.) is like the discovery by Luther
of the New Testament in the monastery ; and when at last Ezra
reads the law to the returned exiles, it is as new to them as the
Bible was to the people at the Eeformation. But whose hands
preserved the original -writings during all this time ? By -what
pens were they copied from generation to generation, and in
what form were they handed down tUl they came into the posses
sion of Ezra the Scribe ?
These questions suggest a second point which we have to bear
in mind in considering this matter, viz., the mode in which books
were transmitted in ancient times. We know with what care
the Jews have preserved and handed down their sacred books
from the time that they were collected into a canon ; but that
time falls comparatively late, and, whatever may have been the
cause, we have not, as in the case of the New Testament,
manuscripts of the Old Testament reaching back to a period
reasonably near the time at which the books were composed.
The oldest known manuscripts of the Old Testament belong to
the tenth century after Christ, and though versions of an older
date show that -the text was fixed centuries before, yet we have
no means of knowing what aids were employed to secure the
correctness of the text, or, indeed, on what principle the text
was fixed. And -when we look at the books themselves, and con
sider the mode in which other Eastern works have been handed
down, there are some noteworthy features that strike us.
The anonymous character of all the historical writings of the
Old Testament would lead us to conclude that the ancient
Hebrews had not the idea of literary property which we '
attach to authorship. Joshua, as we have seen, wrote certain
things in the Book of the La-w ; and whole passages are found
repeated, with variations, in diflerent parts of Scripture.* Even
in two contemporaneous writers the same piece occurs, without
any information as to whether the one borrowed from the other
or both from a common source, t Whatever documents or
sources were employed in the Pentateuch, they are simply
appropriated, and only on rare occasions J is the quarter named
from -which they are taken. Besides this absence of marks of
quotation, we have to note the absence of marginal or foot-notes,
such as are common in modern works of history. Yet, unless
* Compare 2 Sam. xxii. -wilh Psalm x-yiii., and 2 Engs xviii. 13— xx. 19,
with Isaiah xxxvi. — xxxix.
t Compare Isaiah ii. 1 — 4, -with Micah iv. 1 — 3.
j As ta Numbers xxi. 14.

INTEODUCTION TO THE PENTATEUCH. 9
the Hebrews were very different from other Orientals in this
respect, they must have written on the margins of their manu
scripts. In Eastem works that have been handed down in
nianuscript, it is the commonest thing to find marginal notes
by a later hand by way of explanation or commentary, and not
an uncommon thing to find, on the margin of one work, a com
plete treatise cf another author on the same or a kindred
subject. Now a scribe copying a work with marginal notes, especially
if it were a work m regard to which the question of literary
property did not occur to him, might naturaUy transfer such
notes into the text ; or an editor, wishing to have a complete
edition, might combine two or more longer pieces into one whole,
adding to the fulness of the work, yet allowing the joinings of
the original parts to be seen. Of course, when once the books
were coUected into a canon and the text fixed, this was no longer
admissible ; and the Jews have most carefully handed down the
books of their canon, without venturing to change a word or a
letter. But what happened to these anonymous works while
they were in process of completion is not a matter of direct
historical knowledge. It is a legitimate task for criticism to
examine the books themselves, as other ancient books are
examined, with a view to determine, if possible, by what
process their materials were brought together and handed
down. 8. Composite Character of the Pentateuch. — It is long since the
composite character of the Pentateuch was observed. Even the
earUer Jewish writers, who claimed Mosaic authorship for the
whole, except the concluding verses of Deuteronomy, which
record the death of Moses ; and some of the more acute thinkers
of a later time were struck by the occurrence of expressions,
phrases, and passages which could hardly have come from his
hand, but seemed rather to be later additions.* Several writers
in the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries drew attention to
other features in the books pointing in the same direction, and
advanced theories to account for them ; but it was not till the
middle of the eighteenth century that a line of investigation
was started which determined the future course of systematic
criticism. * It is impossible, in an introduction like the present, to go into details,
or even to refer to many of the phases which critical discussion on this
subject has assumed. The reader -who is conversant -with the subject -wUl
observe that the aim is to lead on, as briefly as possible, to the present position
of the discussion.

10 BOOK BY BOOK.
Astruc, a learned French physician, accepting Moses as the
author of the Book of Genesis, set himself to discover and
exhibit the documents that Moses had made use of in the
writing of it. He pointed out that certain parts were distin
guished by the employment of the name Elohim, rendered God
in our EngUsh version, whUe other parts emplo3fed the name,
¦usuaUy written Jehovah in English, and rendered in our version
The Lord. He supposed that these different names indicated
different original documents, and that out of these two larger
documents, and a certain number of smaUer ones, Moses con
structed the existing Book of Genesis, and the opening chapters
of Exodus. On the line of enquiry thus started it has been the
endeavour of modern criticism to determine the component
elements of the Pentateuch and their relative dates.
9. Literary Criticism. — It was observed by the critics that this
peculiarity in the use of tho Divine names was not confined to
Genesis, but extended to the other books. It was also noted
that the portions using these different names had other character
istics distinguishing them from one another ; moreover, that the
Book of Deuteronomy had a style and tone different in important
respects from both, and that aU these literary features are
found also in the Book of Joshua. The problem, therefore, was
to account for this diversified character of composition, to deter
mine the relations of the various component parts to one another,
and to fix their respective dates.
In the course of an inquiry, prosecuted with the utmost labour
and ingenuity, various theories were put forward, agreeing in
certain main points, but exhibiting differences of detail as
numerous as the writers who engaged in the discussion. The
theory of fragments, advanced by some, according to which
the Pentateuch was composed of isolated pieces, put together
without any internal connection, was admitted to be inadequate
to explain the manifest coherence of the whole. The hypothesis
of two independent original works, the one Elohistic and the
other Jehovistic, combined by a later hand, did not account for
the fact that certain Elohistic parts adhered so firmly to the
Jehovistic work that they could not be separated. And the
theory that an original Eloh-.stio work had been supplemented
by a Jehovistic writer, left unespltined the fact that the supposed
supplement appeared to be, so far, a document complete in
itself. The main points on which critics came to be agreed, about a
quarter of _ a century ago, were : — that there was, first in order,
an Elohistic document (in which were incorporated some elements
of an ancient date), running through the Pentateuch and beyond

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

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

INTRODUCTION TO THE PENTATEUCH. 13
In the first place, it is manifest that the principle of denying
the existence of a law on the ground that, at a stated time, or
for a certain period, there is no historical proof of its observance,
is one that cannot safely be applied. The history of the Chris
tian Church during the nineteen centuries in which the New
Testament has been accepted as the authoritative rule of faith
and Ufe is a standing refutation of it ; for have there not been
doctrines and practices lying in abeyance, sometimes for centuries,
in spite of the -written word? On this principle it might bo
concluded that the second commandment was not known in
Solomon's time, because there were " graven images " of bulls
under the great brazen laver in the Temple court ; and from the
way in which Jeremiah speaks of the practices of cutting and
making bald for the dead (Jer. xvi. 6), it might be inferred that
the laws forbidding these things (Deut. xiv. 1, Lev. xix. 28) were
unkno-wn to him. The Law of the Covenant itself was syste-
maticaUy -violated in its essential part, the prohibition of
tampering with idolatry, down to the close of the nation's
independence. It wUl be the proper place in the chapters on the
succeeding books to speak of their aUeged sUence as to the
Mosaic legislation, and the accounts they give of the antecedent
history. It is sufficient here to observe that the historical books
oontinuaUy assume Israel's unfaithfulness to the law and the
covenant, that the prophets had a higher function than to enforce
the observance of ceremonial laws, and that aU succeeding
-writers assume the truthfulness of the history of the Mosaic
period. In the second place, when the theory is appUed in detail it is
found to raise more difficulties, and difficulties of a more serious
nature, than those which it professes to remove, (a) It puts a
weight upon the age of Ezra and his successors which it wiU not
bear. It is plain from the Books of Ezra and Nehemiah, and
from what we know of the succeeding time, that that age was not
one of such productiveness as this theory demands. These men
rested upon a past, and but for a general belief in the authority
of an existing law they could not have induced the people to
accept the reforms which they introduced. Moreover, (5), tho
Samaritans could not have received their Pentateuch later than
the time of Ezra and Nehemiah ; it is virtuaUy the same book as
the Hebrew one, and in -view of their jealousy of the leaders at
Jerusalem, their possession of it implies their belief in its exist
ence and authoritative character at a much earlier time. Again,
(o), this theory fails entirely to explain the activity of the
prophets before the ExUe. For it represents them as the virtual
originators and founders of the monotheistic religion, and the

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

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

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

GENESIS.
1. Name ofthe Booh. — The names given in the Hebrew Bible
to the five books composing the Pentateuch consist merely of a
word or words taken from the opening verse of each ; and so this
first book of the series is simply designated by the expression
translated " In the beginning " , . . Jewish writers sometimes
employ other names descriptive of the contents, calling the book
before us the "Book of Creation ; " and, on the same principle,
the HeUenists and Church Fathers applied to it the name we now
use. Genesis, i.e. Origin or Genealogy. The name is not inappro
priate, in view of the commencement of the book and the
recurring genealogies which are found in it ; but it would be
inadequate, if taken to imply that the chief aim of the book is to
give an account of the origin of the world. In the opening chapters
we have indeed an account of the Creation and of the early history
of the human race ; but this is but preparatory to the main part of
the book, beginning at the eleventh chapter, viz. the history of
the chosen famUy of Abraham, which at the close of the book is
seen expanding into the chosen nation of Israel.
2. Plan and Form. — A definite plan is more observable in the
Book of Genesis than in the other books of the Pentateuch.
Starting with the origin of the world and of the human race, it
teUs of the entrance of sin (i. — iv.), the spread of mankind and
the increase of evU leading to the infliction of Divine judgment
in the Flood (v. — -viii. 4.). A new commencement is made with
righteous Noah and his famUy, and there is a new expansion and
increase of evU, culminating in the judgment of Babel (viii. 16 —
xi. 9). The chosen succession is again limited to the Une of Shem
and the famUy of Terah (xi. 10 — 32), and at this point the
patriarchal history commences, the remainder of the book being
occupied with the fortunes of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob and
his family, who at the close are transplanted to the soil of
Egypt, from which they are to come forth as a nation.

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

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

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

GENESIS. 21
writers know and have learned on other subjects they will teU,
so far as these bear on the matter in hand, and in a manner
which the readers for which they wrote could comprehend. Aa
the historian of Christianity goes back to Judaism, to show the
connection of the old faith with the new, so the historian of
Israel goes back to the time before the nation had a separate
existence, in order to explain its origin and standing. But in
the one case, as in the other, the writer passes by much that
might be interesting, because it has no special bearing on his.
subject. As the stream of religious history is traced upwards
to i-ts source, there are many things seen on its banks, to Unger
over which would divert us from the main purpose, which is not
to satisfy curiosity on aU subjects, but to show the bearing of all
on the one point in view. The facts of modern science were then
hidden from men, and without scientific process and scientific
language, could neither have been described nor understood ; and
to expect early Hebrew -writers to teach us exact geological, or
astronomical, or ethnographical science, is as unreasonable as
to expect them to write in a .modern language.
The book of nature is open to aU, and what man can learn
from it God leaves him to learn ; but God Himself is known
only to those to whom He makes Himself known. The secrets
of nature He has left mankind to learn by slow degrees through
out the ages for themselves; but in mercy He made Himself
known to men in the earUest times, and has revealed himself with
increasing clearness as they could bear it. That the sacred writers
themselves did not contemplate scientific accuracy on subjects
that have a scientific reference we may see from the varying
modes in which the work of creation is represented in different
places. By a hard and literal interpretation it might be con
cluded from chap, ii. 19 that the creation of man is made to
precede that of the beast of the field and the fowl of the air ; yet
the writer or compiler of the book must have seen no inconsis
tency in the accounts of the first and second chapters. And
there are other passages which,, if pressed UteraUy, would
exhibit remarkable variations from the account of the first
chapter : * but, with unvarying voice they all proclaim the
one great fact, that God is the Creator and Preserver of alA
things. In like manner we perceive that the traditions of early times,
in proportion as the events recede into the distance, are clothed
in more general and pictorial or poetical forms, while detaUs
* See Job xxvi. 7 — II ; xxxviii. 4 — 7 : Psahn xxiv. 2 ; Prov. viii. 24 — 29.
In Psahn civ. the order of Q-enesis i. is followed, but no reference is made t<-
the six days.

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

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

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

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

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

EXODUS. 27
labour favoured the increase of the race, their subject condition
kept them from feeling at home. Moreover, the cultivation of
letters in the land of their sojourn and the existence of an organised
civil Ufe around them, must have had an educative influence, not
only on Moses and the leaders, but even on the people as a
whole. Bezaleel of the tribe of Judah and Aholiab of the tribe of
Dan, and other ' ' wise-hearted ' ' men, are found fitted to undertake
the difficult technical work of constructing the Tabernacle in the
wUderness, though, at a later time, Solomon had to caU to his
assistance the skUled workmen of Tyre for the construction of the
Temple. Even the conditions of the hard labour in which they
were employed had the counterbalancing advantage in this respect,
that it brought into prominence the native chiefs and heads of
famUies among the IsraeUtes, who were made responsible to
the Egyptian taskmasters for the work to be accompUshed.
It is also to be noted that the contest represented by the plagues
of Egypt, which must have extended over several months, would
in various ways prepare the people for the Exodus. As the hope
of deliverance grew stronger, the feeling of national unity and
independence would increase ; and the relenting of Pharaoh from
time to time furnished an opportunity, on every occasion on
which he promised to let the people go, for a rehearsal, so to
speak, of the Exodus. And thus, instead of its being a tumul
tuous flight, as we are sometimes inclined to regard it, the
departure from Egypt took the form of an orderly march.
This book, however, rests upon the Book of Genesis, and
would be incomprehensible apart from it. Though a great space
of time intervenes between the two, the narrative of Exodus
is a continuation of that of Genesis ; and though we have here
the beginnings of the national life of Israel, the elements of the
national Ufe are to be sought in an earlier period. There is not
only community of race among the IsraeUte bondmen, there is
also a community of reUgion which, more than their separate
abode, preserves them from intermixture with their neighbours,
and at once binds them together and furnishes the motive for
their desire to depart. The servitude of centuries has not
crushed out their feeUng of brotherhood nor obliterated tha
recoUection of the promise given to their fathers. It is impos
sible to explain the soUd movement of the whole body, notwith
standing their own cowardice, and in spite of the oppression of
Egypt, except by the fact that they had already a consciousness
of a Di-vine caUing and the prospect of a settled home. What
ever may have been their religious observances in Egypt, they
evidently did not acknowledge the gods of the country, but
regarded themselves as belonging to a God who made Himself

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

LEVITICUS. 3.5
3. Arrangement. — The foregoing summary is sufficient to show
how Uttle regard has been had to systematic arrangement of the
materials of the Book of Leviticus ; and a closer inspection
reveals other literary pecuUarities of a striking kind. It is
observable that the laws appear in the form of separate coUec
tions, the several groups being very often provided with special
headings and conclusions ; that laws relating to the same matters
are not aU found in the same place ; that there are repetitions of
the same laws in different parts of the book ; and that matters of
a very dissimilar nature stand in close proximity.
The commands are aU expressly or implicitly ascribed to God ;
but the mode in which they are proclaimed, and the persons to
whom they are addressed, are very various. As a rule it is said
that "the Lord spake unto Moses," but sometimes we have " the
Lord spake unto Moses and unto Aaron," and we find even "the
Lord spake unto Aaron" (x. 8). And when it is Moses that is
primanly addressed, he is told sometimes to "speak unto the
chUdren of Israel," sometimes "to speak unto " or " command
Aaron and his sons," at other times to " speak unto all the con
gregation of the chUdren of Israel," or to "speak unto Aaron
and his sons, and aU the chUdren of Israel." These are not aU
the varieties in the modes of address, and the laws with similar
headings are found scattered up and down the book in the most
striking manner. Even the fijst seven chapters, which seem to
form a code by themselves regulating the offerings, and have a
formal conclusion (vii. 37, 38), are interrupted several times by
such separate headings. Again, a comparison of chapter xviii.
¦with chapter xx. wiU bring out the fact that many of the regula
tions are repeated in the same or similar words ; and there are
many other instances of repetitions in other places.
The laws, in fact, seem to bear on their own face that they
were given forth " at sundry times and in divers manners." A-nd
when we remember that the whole period intervening between
the setting up of the Tabernacle described in the end of Exodus,
and the departure from Sinai, was but a month and twenty-
days,* within which time the events recorded in the early chap-
tors of Numbers took place, it will appear far from probable that
the laws in this Book of Leviticus were promulgated in one body
during the brief remaining time. Far more Ukely is it that
just as Moses was enjoined to make the _Tabernacle " after the
pattern that was shown him in the Mount, "f so we have here
before us the detailed regulations for the worship and life of
Che people which, according to the revelations received by him at
* Compare Exodus xl. 17 -with Numbers x. 11.
t Exodus xxv. 40 ; xxvi. 30 ; xxvii. 8.
D 2

36 BOOK BY BOOK.
Sinai, were given forth from time to time to the persons con
cerned, and that they were preserved in their separate form.
4. Character of the Legislation. — It is also observable that,
though we have in this book regulations extending to the
minutest details of worship and Ufe, these are, in many cases,
stated in such terms as to imply that the persons to whom
they are addressed had already some acquaintance with them.
Observances are referred to as if they were already understood,
and the laws bearing upon them have the appearance of
regulations of practices already existing. Thus the very first
laws of the book begin with the words, "If any man of you
bring an offering unto the Lord," &c. (i. 2, U. 1, iii. 1), as
if it were a well-established custom to do so. In the same
way, the regulations in regard to vows (xxvii.) presuppose the
custom of making such ; and many of the prescriptions, as, for
example, those relating to the rending of clothes and the cutting
of the flesh for the dead (x. 6, xix. 27 — 28), have reference to
customs which evidently are well known and commonly
practised. It is thus implied, as it is everywhere impUed in the
Pentateuch, that God's people had a religion and a worship
before the time of Moses. Cain and Abel bring offerings, which
are both denominated by a general name, which in Leviticus is
used exclusively to denote the bloodless offering (Gen. iv. 3 — 5) ;
Noah builds an altar and offers burnt offerings (Gen. vui. 20 —
22) ; Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob buUd altars and call upon the
name of the Lord ; and the covenant with Abraham is ratified
over the bodies of such animals as are prescribed in the law for
sacrifice (Gen. xv. 9 — 21). So also, during the struggle with
Pharaoh which preceded the Exodus, the leaders repeatedly
demand that the people shoiUd be aUowed to go and worship and
offer sacrifices to their God in the wUderness.*
The peculiar form which the pre-Mosaic offeringa exhibits,
and the general terms in which they are mentioned, show that
the writer of the Book of Genesis does not seek to transfer to
patriarchal times what was a later institution, but that he
regards them as instances of a more primitive usage. The dis
tinction of clean and unclean animals, also, is pre-Mosaic, and
so is the prohibition of blood. We know, moreover, that the
nations with whom Israel was early brought into contact had
weU-defined systems (?f worship. Phoenician and Assyrian
monuments sho-w that these nations had sacrificial and other
rites resembling those of the Hebrews, and the Egyptians had
a most elaborate priestly system. Laban the Syrian is al
famUiar with sacrifice as his kinsman Jacob (Gen. xxxi. 64), and
* See Exodus, § 4, p. 29.

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

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

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

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

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

42 BOOK BY BOOK.
sion of lepers from the camp, the law of restitution for trespass,
the ceremony of the water of jealousy, the law of the Nazarite,
and the formula to be employed by the priests in blessing tho
people. The seventh chapter describes the offerings brought by
the princes of the tribes, on twelve successive days, on the occa
sion of the dedication of the Tabernacle ; and the eighth relates
to the lighting of the lamps of the golden candlestick, and
describes the consecration of the Levites to the service of the
sanctuary. In the ninth chapter we have an account of the
observance of the Passover at Sinai, and regulations for the
observance of a supplementary Passover in the second month by
any who should be ceremoniaUy unable to do so at the statutory
time. This section concludes with an account of the manner in
which the pillar of cloud regulated the movements of the camp
(ix. 16 — 23), and the way in which the silver trumpets were
employed to give signals for concerted action (x. 1 — 10).
The second section of the book (x. 11 — xxii. 1) is concerned
with the journey from Sinai, to Moab, and covers the period from
the twentieth day of the second month of the second year to the
fortieth year of the Exodus. It does not jDrofess to give an
account of aU that passed in this long period ; it does not even
give a condensed and orderly account of the doings and move
ments of the people. It gives rather a series of episodes in the
wUderness life, with various laws, arranged, however, mainly in
chronological order, up to the time when the people " came into
the plains of Moab beyond the Jordan at Jericho." Thus we
have the murmurings and unbelief of the people at Taberah,
where they were punished by burning (xi. 1 — 3) ; at Kibroth-
hattaavah, where the Spirit was poured out upon the seventy
elders, and the people were rebuked by the sending of the quads
(xi. 4 — 36) ; and finally at Kadesh, after the return of the spies,
when the sentence of forty years' wandering was pronounced
(xui., xiv.). So -we have the revolt of Aaron and Miriam against
¦the authority of Moses punished by the leprosy of Miriam (xii.);
and the revolt of Korah and his company punished by the death
of the revolters and rebuked by the sign of Aaron's rod (xvi.,
xvii.)._ Interspersed with these historical notices, we have various
laws, in chapters xv., xviii., and xix., conspicuous among which
is the ceremonial of the water of purification made from the
ashes of the red heifer (xix.) The next two chapters describe
the journey from Kadesh, round Edom, and through the terri
tories of Arad, Sihon, and Og, into the plains of Moab, with the
episodes of the unbelief of Moses and Aaron at Meribah (xx.
2 — 13), and the visitation of the fiery serpents (xxi. 5  9).
In the last section of the book (xxii. 2— xxxvi.) the IsraeUtes

NUMBEES. 43
are in the plains of Moab. Balaam, sent by Balak to curse them,
pronounces on them a remarkable blessing (xxii. 2 — xxiv. 25) ;
the relapse into idolatry at Shittim is signaUy punished (xxv. ) :
another numbering of the people is made (xxvi.); Joshua is
designated as the successor of Moses (xx-vii. 12 — 23) ; the two
tribes and a half receive their inheritance on the east of Jordan
(xxxii.) ; directions are given for the division of the land to the
remaining tribes (xxxiv.); and regulations made for setting
apart forty-eight cities of the Levites, of which six are to ba
cities of refuge (xxxv.). In the midst of these matters this
section also has a chapter relating to the encounter with the
Midianites, through whose instigation Israel had been led into
sin at Shittim (xxxi.) ; a list of the wilderness stations (xxxiii.
1 — 49) ; and. a number of laws, on inheritance, the relation of
Israel to the heathen nations, and feasts and offerings (xxvii.
1 — 11, xxviii. — ^xxx., xxxiii. 50 — 66, xxxvi.): the whole con-
eluding -with the words " These are the commandments and the
¦judgments which the Lord commanded by the hand of Moses
unto the chUdren of Israel in the plains of Moab by the Jordan
at Jericho."
3. Period covered by the Booh. — A long and important period of
the history of Israel is covered by the book of Numbers. If we
deduct the fourteen months spent in the journey from Egypt to
Sinai and in the vicinity of the sacred mountain, the whole
remaining portion of the forty years spent between Egypt and
Canaan faUs within the book.
No-w, when we remember that the first ten chapters refer to
the sojourn at Sinai, and that the rest of the book, as we have
seen, consists mainly of episodes in the remaining journey, with
laws and regulations of considerable amount, it will be seen that
we have almost no record of about thirty-eight years of the
desert Ufe. There is, indeed, a marked difference in the manner
in which the journey to Sinai with the events that occurred there,
and the subsequent journey to Kadesh, are related, and the
brief account given of the movements of the succeeding thirty-
eight years. Whereas we can trace the advance of the host
from the shores of the Eed Sea to the foot of the sacred mount,
and can foUow the Une of their progress from Sinai to Kadesh,
the long years of penal wandering are passed over in a few
words ; and a bare Ust of the stations, with a few episodes of the
journey, make up aU the notice we have of the whole period.
Events are crowded into fourteen months in a manner that makes
it difficult to find room for them, but the events of thirty-eight
years, if we except those of the closing year, are left almost
entirely to conjecture.

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

NUMBERS. 45
The Desert of Sinai itself, it is now known, was capable of
supporting a large population at the time of the Exodus. The
Pharaohs of that time maintained a garrison in the peninsula to
look after the numerous workmen employed in iron, copper, and
turquoise mines. The remains of smelting furnaces prove that
a large amount of timber must have been consumed in these
operations ; although timber has now entirely disappeared, and
¦with it what must have been a considerable f ertUity has vanished.
Even at the present day the peninsula contains many valleys
watered by pleasant streams and teeming with natural vegeta
tion ; and the trees that in certain spots have been spared, as
weU as others that had been planted by old monkish colonists,
show how the mountain torrents which are common at certain
seasons, and plentiful rain, such as we know f eU when Israel
was in Sinai,* may be restrained and turned to good account.
With an almost total neglect of cultivation, and a simple depen
dence on what Nature sends, the country supports a large number
of Arabs with their flocks,t and must have been immensely more
productive at the time of the Exodus.
It is also possible to foUow the general course of the IsraeUtes,
though perhaps as yet not to identify their successive halting-
places, as they emerged from the rocky peninsula and entered
upon the wUderness of Paran, in which they spent the years of
wandering. Here also the country must have undergone great
physical changes. The district immediately to the north of the
Desert of the Wandering, kno-wn as the Negeb or South Country,
retains numerous traces of extensive vineyards and careful culti
vation, and, though it is now Uttle else than a barren waste,
must have been at least as fertUe as the cultivated parts of
Palestine are at the present day. The bUght of barrenness,
however, has faUen upon the whole country, and shows itself in
increasing intensity as we proceed southward. We are there
fore safe in concluding that the wilderness of Paran, bare and
bleak as it is now, was in former times proportionately fertUe.
The numerous traces of human dweUings, even in what are now
the barest portions, and, in more favoured places, the remains
of dams and terraces to husband the rainfall, show that the
country was capable of supporting a large population.
5. The Desert Life. — From the physical conditions of the coimtry
• See Psalms lxviii. 7 — 9 ; Ixxvii. 17.
t The lamented Professor Palmer, to whom we are indebted for the best
recent information, as the result of his expedition at the outbreak of the
Egyptian rebellion, estimated the whole number of Sinai Arabs capable of
military service, taking the Desert aa far east as Petra, and the peninsula
itself, at about 60,000.

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

NUMBEES. 47
from the narrative in Joshua v. we gather that distinctive require
ments of the la-w had not been observed in the wilderness. We
thus perceive, at the very outset of the nation's history, that
anomaly which has perplexed criticism, of a law ordained and
in force, while it was, to a great extent, neglected or held in
abeyance. There is an apparent inconsistency between the accounts of
the setting up of an elaborate Tabernacle service and the state
ments of the prophets * that Israel in the wUderness served
strange gods; but it is not the inconsistency of contradictory
-written accounts, but the inconsistency of human nature, of
which Israel is ever a striking example. It is not necessary to
go to the historical books, whether pre-Exilian or post-ExUian,
for proofs of the non-observance or violation of the law. The
books of the Pentateuch, which record its institution, give the
most glaring instances of its -violation ; the golden calf was made
under the very shadow of Sinai ; the sin of Baal-Peor and the
commotion of the mixed miUtitude show how deeply ingrained
were the elements of heathenism ; and from these books, which
detaU so minutely the ritual and worship, we cannot gather
much as to the extent to which the ritual and worship were
observed. Even at this early stage of their history, the people
of Israel, chosen not for their own merits, and beloved in spite of
¦their sins, are a •witness to the eternal truth of the grace of God.
7. Literary Features. — The Book of Numbers, as a Uterary
work, has the same features as the other books of the Pentateuch.
The minute circumstantiaUty of detaU, and the special suitability
of many of the laws to the desert life, show that these materials
belong to that early period. On the other hand, the expression
"WhUe the chUdren of Israel were in the wilderness " (xv. 32)
gives indication of a later hand in the composition ; the "Book
of the Wars of the Lord," from which a quotation is made
(xxi. 14), was evidently an older production than the book that
quotes it, and probably the same may be said of the other
snatches of song quoted in the same chapter (verses 17. — 18,
27 — 30). Again, the fact that Moses is said to have written the
Hst of stations given in chap. xxxiU. affords a presumption that
he did not write the narrative which refers to it.
We find also the same indifference to strictly chronological
order, and the same mixture of legal and historical matter that
we find in Exodus ; and some of the laws in this book are repe
titions or supplements of laws already given in Leviticus. f But
* Hosea ix. 10 ; Amos v. 25 fE. ; Ezek. xx. 15 ff. Compare Lev. xvii, 7.
t Compare, for example, Num. xv. 1 — 16 ¦with Lev. i. — vii. ; Num, v.
6—10 ¦with Lev. v 5 ff., vi. 5 ff. ; Num. xv. 22—28 -with Lev. iv. 13 ff.

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

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

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

DEUTERONOMY. 51
people once in seven years, -and the command of God to Moses to
deliver to the people, in the form of a song, a recital of aU His
deeds for them, that it may in generations to eome be a witness
against them. The song itseK is given in chapter xxxii, ; the
following chapter has, also in poetical form, "the blessing where
with Moses the man of God blessed the children of Israel before
his death " ; and the closing chapter, in brief but exalted style,
tells how the great lawgiver, at God's command, went up "unto
Mount Nebo, to the top of Pisgah," viewed the land on which
he was not to set foot, and " died there in the land of Moab, ac
cording to the word of the Lord."
3. The Situation. — The hortatory character of Deuteronomy is
in keeping with the situation in which the book presents -Israel
at this period. The wandering in the desert was at an end, the
tribes -were assembled in an orderly camp, and only the narrow
stream of the Jordan separated them from the land which for
generations they had been taught to regard as their inheritance.
Everything depended on their fideUty to the God who had in
covenant taken them for his pecuUar people. Moses, recognis
ing that he had only been the temporary minister of an abiding
covenant, seeks to impress upon the people that the foundation
of their existence a,s a nation lay in God's choice (vu. 7, 8 ; x. 15),
and that the only hope of their achie-ving His purpose lay in
their obedience to His law.
To impress the former point, he reviews at length the wonder
ful dealmgs of their God with them in the desert, and the
earnest of the inheritance He had already given them in the
partial possession on the east of the Jordan ; and in doing so,
he is not careful to state events in their strictly chronological
order, but -groups them as best to suit the purpose of his exhorta
tion. In regard to the latter point he speaks as a prophet. As
he is convinced of the unchanging purpose of God, so he knows
how prone the people had been from the beginning to swerve
from the path of obedience, and, with unerring intuition, warns
them of the dangers to which they would be particularly liable.
Like aU succeeding> prophets, he deals in broad and general terms
when he refers to the actual occurrences of the future : speaks
as if the crossing of the Jordan would be foUowed by a sudden
and almost peaceable possession of Canaan, and aUudes in the
most general way to the place which should ultimately become
the religious centre, and the mode of government which in course
of time would be set up. But with him, as with aU other pro
phets, the moral and reUgious issues of the future are certainties :
he sets before the people Ufe and death, blessing and cursing
(xi. 26, 27; xxx. 15, 19), assuring them that by no possibUity
e2

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

60 BOOK BY BOOK.
(viii. 30 — 35). The Gibeonites by craft procure a treaty of peace
with Israel (ix.) ; and the league of the Southern Kings is
broken by the great battie of Beth-horon (x.). With the defeat
of a similar confederacy of forces in the north in a battle near the
waters of Merom (xi.), the conquest of the whole country is prac
ticaUy secured, a list of the conquered kings being given in
chapter xii.
In the second part of the book, after a general statement of
the boundaries of the land to be divideij (xiii. 1 — 7), and an indi
cation of the limits of the territory which had already been
aUotted to the two tribes and a-half on the east of Jordan (xiu.
8 — 33), Joshua and Eleazar, having first assigned Hebron to
Caleb (xiv. 6—16), proceed to divide the western territory, giving
portions, first of aU, to Judah, Ephraim, and half of Manasseh
(xv. — xvii.), and then, after the setting up of the Tabernacle at
Shiloh, to the remaining tribes except Levi (xviii. — xix, 48), a
special inheritance being set apart to Joshua himself (xix. 49 — 51).
The cities of refuge and the Levitical cities are designated (xx. —
xxi.), and the two tribes and a-half are sent home to their o-wn
territory with an injunction to maintain faithfuUy the national
religion (xxii.).
In the concluding part of the book Joshua solemnly addresses
the people, warning them against the idolatry of the neighbour
ing nations, caUs them to Shechem, -where the bones of Joseph
had been laid, and there renews the covenant, incorporating a
record of the transactions in the Book of the Law, and setting up
a commemorative stone under the oak that was by the sanctuary
of the Lord (xxiii., xxiv. 28). The book closes with- a brief
account of the death and burial of Joshua and of Eleazar (xxiv.
29—33). 3. Literary Featwres. — In style as weU as in contents the dif
ferent parts of the book have 'their individual pecuUarities. The
first part is historical, both in form and substance ; the second,
whUe historical in style, is in contents chiefly topographical. It
may be said to be also legislative, for the partition of territory is
carried out in an official manner, Joshua, the successor of Moses,
and Eleazar, the successor of Aaron, representing the prophetic
and priestly authority, and the sacred lot giving Divine sanction
to their proceedings. The concluding portion is in the hortatory
style of Deuteronomy.
Certiiin variations in language also have been observed in
th ese different portions. The original word for ' ' tribe ' ' employed
in the chapters relating to the conquest is different from that
used in those relating to the partition of the land. In the earlier
part, and also in the concluding section, the officials associated

THE BOOK OF JOSHUA. 61
with Joshua are usually designated elders, heads, or officers,'^
whereas, in the middle part, they are styled heads of the fathers.]
Now, it has been observed that these pecuUarities correspond
¦with usages found in the Pentateuch. In portions which are
known as Jehovistic {e.g. Exod. v. 14, 15, 19; Num. xi. 16), as
also in Deuteronomy, the "officers" are frequently mentioned,
and " elders " occur less frequently than in the Elohistic sections,
in which "the heads of the fathers" are also characteristic
(Exod. vi. 14, 25 ; Num. vii. 2, xxxii. 28, xxxvi. 1). Again,
Eleazar, who in the second portion of this book is associated with
Joshua in the partition of the land, is not mentioned at all in the
earUer portion, not even -where the priests appear, and it is main
tained that all the places in the Pentateuch where he is men
tioned are Elohistic.
For such reasons modern critics have concluded that the Book
of Joshua is of the same composite character as the Pentateuch,
and assume that, in its original form, it was closely joined to the
preceding work, the whole forming a connected history ending
with the conquest : and so they are in the habit of speaking of
the Sexateuch, or book of six portions, as distinguished from
the present Pentateuch. J The Book of Joshua, however, in its
present form, has features that show that it was intended to be
complete in itself ; and the fact that the Samaritans have sub
stantiaUy the Pentateuch as it exists in the Hebrew, but a work
widely divergent from the Book of Joshua, is proof that, if the two
were once connected, the separation must have taken place before
they assumed their present form. The references to the ' ' Book
of the Law of Moses " (i. 8, viii. 34, 36, xxiv. 26) presupposes
the existence in a formal and independent shape of something
corresponding to the legislative part of the Pentateuch. The
ending of the book with the death of Joshua and Eleazar, just
as the Pentateuch ends with the death of Moses, shows that the
writer wished to make his work a completed composition. Cer
tain peculiarities also in the spelling of proper names betray a
different hand from that employed on the Pentateuch ; and the
division of the eastern territory and the designation of the cities
of refuge, which form part of the subject of the Pentateuch, are
here treated at length anew, as if the author wished to give com
pleteness and independence to his work.
* See i. 10, iii. 2, vii. 6, vui. 10, 33, xxiii. 2, xxiv. 1, in some of which it
¦wiU be observed judges also occur. In ix. 15, 18, 19, 21, we have "princes
(or chiefs) of the congregation."
t See xiv. 1, xix. 51, xxi. I, xxii. 14, '21, 30, and note the variation,
"heads of the thousands." In xvii. 4 ¦we have also "princes."
J See Introduction to the Pentateuch, §§1,8, 9, pp. I, 9, 10.

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

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

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

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

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

THE BOOKS OF JUDGES AND
EUTH.

1. The Names. — The Book of Judges is so named from the
series of distinguished leaders who appeared in Israel from time
to time between Joshua and Samuel, and whose deeds form the
principal subject of the book. The name given to these leaders
is not to be taken to imply that the primary office of the judges
was the exercise of judicial functions. The word "judge" in
the Old Testament has the usual sense (as may be seen in Psalm
xUii. 1, compared with Exod. ii. 14) of maintaining the cause, or
asserting the right, of any one ; and the history shows that the
, judges were raised up, when Israel was in straits, to maintain
the cause of God's people against hostUe nations, and to assert
the principles on which the Hebrew nation was founded. Hence
they are caUed saviours (chap. iii. 9 ; compare ii. 16).
Judicial functions are not, however, excluded ; for, in a state
of society such as that depicted in this book, the leader who comes
to the front in a time of pubUc necessity is invested with wide
powers, and held in general regard. And thus, when Moses and
Joshua, who had held office for Ufe, had passed away, and a
permanent head Uke a king had not yet been appointed, the
mUitary leader for the time would naturally wield also an
authority in civil matters. What is particularly mentioned of
Deborah (iv. 5), that "the chUdren of Israel came up to her for
judgment," was doubtless true of others; and Samuel, who may
be taken as the l^t of the Une, representing tho transition to the
monarchical rule, not only himseK exercised such functions, but
appointed his sons also as judges (1 Sam. viii, 1). The office
was not hereditary, the judge being raised up at the time and in
the place of special need : it was thus in keeping with the con
dition of the period, which was one of transition from the rule of
Moses and Joshua, who governed by dhect instructions from
r2

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

THE BOOKS OF JUDGES AND RUTH. 69
who appeared during the subjugation of Israel by Moab, with
Ammon and Amalek, and achieved deliverance by slaying the
Moabite kiag, Eglon (iu. 12—30); Deborah of Ephraim and
Barak of Naphtali, who defeated Sisera, the general of Jabin,
king of the Canaanites, at the battle of Tabor (iv., v.) ; Gideon
of Manasseh, who repelled the invasion of the Midianites and
" the ChUdren of the East " (vi. 1 — viU. 32), but by his impru
dent assumption of a show of permanent authority gave occasion
to the ambition of his son Ahimelech, whose upstart reign is the
subject of vui. 33 — ix. 67 ; Jephthah of GUead, who was called
by his countrymen to act as leader against the Ammonites (x. 6
— xii. 7) ; and Samson, the Danite, who " began to deUver "
Israel from the oppression of the PhiUstines (xiii. — xvi.). The
six who are but briefly mentioned are : Shamgar, who performed
an exploit against the Philistines (iii. 31), Tola of Issachar (x. 1,
2), Jair of GUead (x. 3 — 6), Ibzan of Bethlehem (xii. 8 — 10),
Elon of Zebulon (xii. 11, 12), and Abdon of Pirathon (xii. 13 —
16), in regard to whom we are told only the period over which
their rule extended, and some detaUs as to their famUies and
social position.
The appendix contains two episodes belonging to the time of
the judges, ¦viz., the story of the image- worship of Micah the
Ephraimite, in its connection with the settling of the Danites in
the north of the land (xvii. — xviii.) ; and the account of the out
rage committed at Gibeah, which led to the war of extermination
waged against Benjamin by the other tribes (xix. — xxi.).
The Book of Euth, so far as the subject is concerned, may be
regarded as another appendix, relating the episode of the young
Moabitish widow, who became a mother in Israel and an ances
tress of the royal house of David. Though the duration of the
various oppressions and the time of the rule of the judges, and
of the "rest" which the land enjoyed after each deliverance,
are carefuUy given in most instances, it is impossible from these
numbers to construct a system of chronology for the period of the
Judges which would harmonize with other fixed dates in the
history. From the frequent recurrence of the number forty, it
would seem probable that the whole period of four hundred and
eighty years, which, according to 1 Kings vi. 1, elapsed between
the Exodus and the commencement of the building of the Temple,
was divided by the Biblical writers into twelve round periods of
forty years. But, seeing that a simple addition of the numbers
mentioned in this Book of Judges would make the period far too
extensive, it is most probable that there was an overlapping of
several of the periods mentioned ; and the probability is all the
stronger when we regard the fact that the judges appeared in

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

THE BOOKS OF JUDGES AND RUTH. 71
chap, xviii. 30, in reference to the idol-worship set up at Dan,
it is said that " Jonathan, the son of Gershom, the son of Moses,*
he and his sons were priests to the tribe of the Danites until the
day of the captivity of the land ; " and in chap. xx. 27, 28, we
read that Phinehas, the grandson of Aaron, was alive and minis
tering before the ark at the time of the war with Benjamin.
The time to which the Book of Euth relates is indicated in the
genealogy at the close (Euth iii. 18 — 22), which shows that Boaz,
the husband of Euth, was the grandfather of Jesse, the father of
David. 4. Composition. — These different materials have the appearance
of having come from different hands, but we have only the most
general indications of the sources from which they are derived,
and the periods at which they were composed. From the recurring
statement in the closing chapters (xvii. 6 ; xviii. 1 ; xix. 1 ; xxi.
25), " In those days there was no king in Israel," we may gather
that these portions, and the related introduction, which regards
the period of the Judges as a completed -whole, were written in the
time of the monarchy, by one who wished to magnify the kingly
offlce, or, at least, that they come from a writer who wished to
show the superiority of the regal period over a time when
" every man did that which was right in his own eyes." The
Book of Euth also, -which begins by referring to " the days when
the judges ruled " (Euth i. 1) and ends by showing the genealogy
of David (Euth iv. 22), evidently belongs to a time when the
Davidic line was established on the throne.
There is some doubt as to the reference of the words, " until
the day of the captivity of the land," in chapter xviii. 30. Some
suppose that the time implied is the same as that mentioned in
the succeeding verse, viz., " aU the time that the house of
God was in Shiloh," and an ancient manuscript actuaUy
reads " until the day of the captivity of the ark." If the refer
ence is to the overthrow of the northern kingdom, it would follow
that the latest hand traceable in the book belongs to the time of
the Captivity, but it is quite likely that the expression ' ' capti
vity " was applied to other national calamities, although, as
it is said in the Talmud, " a greater captivity causes a former
one to be forgotten." At all events, there can be no doubt that
the Book of Judges contains elements of a much earlier date.
The song of Deborah (chap, v.) has all the freshness and fire of
a contemporaneous production, and is regarded on all hands as
belonging to the time whose stirring events it relates.
* So the Re-vised Version now reads. The name Moses is believed to have
been purposely changed to Manasseh by pious scribes, out of respect to the
memory of the Lawgiver.

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

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

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

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

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

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

78 BOOK BY BOOK.
period covered by the books which bear his name ; so that the
older title of the hooks is more feUcitous than that given to them
in the early versions.
2. The Period. — The history embraced in the Books of Samuel
extends from the close of the period of the Judges to the death
of David. As in the case of other books, a connection is main
tained with the preceding and the succeeding periods, zo as to
present a continuous history. Thus, at the commencement, the
judgeship of Eli is introduced to prepare for that of Samuel,
who may be reckoned as the last of the judges ; and, at the
close, the reign of David, is represented as at an end, although,
in fact, its final scenes are only first described in the First Book
of Kings.
From the manner in which the narrative breaks off before the.
death of David some have concluded that the writer, who cer
tainly lived after David's time (see 2 Sam. v. 6), did actuaUy
carry down his history tUl the close of David's reign, or even
until the time of Solomon. It has even been supposed that the
opening portion of the First Book of Kings may have originally
been joined to the Books of Samuel. Considering, however, that
Solomon actually began to reign before the death of his father,
and looking to the manner in which the concluding chapters of
2 Samuel introduce a variety of matters belonging to the close of
David's reign, without arranging them in strict chronological
order, it is more probable that the present division is the original
one, and that the absence of strict Uterary finish is to be ex
plained by the fact that the author had written materials before
him which he put together in the form in which he found them.
The history contained in these two books thus centres round
the three principal personages who were prominent in the period.
The period of Samuel extends to 1 Sam. xii., the reign of Saul
to the end of the first book, while the second book narrates the
events of the reign of David.- But these periods, again, are so
closely interwoven with one another that they cannot be repre
sented independently. Samuel's activity begins while Eli is stfll
judge, and is continued even after his own demission of that
office. So under Saul's reign David is already the anointed
king, and the events related in that period concern David as
much as Saul ; and finaUy, David's reign is not ended when the
activity of Solomon begins. All this wiU be more apparent if
we now take a summary view of the contents of the two books.
3. Contents of First Booh. — The first book opens at the time
when Eli -was priest at Shiloh and the recognised judge of Israel.
Samuel, the son of a praying mother, is dedicated by his parents
to the service of the Lord, and grows up leading a pure priestly

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

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

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

82 BOOK BY BOOK.
they have not come from the same hand as those before us. For
example, there is no mention in the Books of Samuel of the
Captivity, nor any reference to it, or even to the decline of the
kingdom of the ten tribes ; whereas the writer of the Books of
Kings has in view the catastrophe of the kingdoms, and narrates
the downf aU of both of them.
Again, in the Books of Samuel, the law is not quoted, and ia
only once referred to (in 1 Sam. x. 25), whereas the author of the
Books of Kings sees in the past history which he relates the
causes of the disasters which he has to record, passes condem
nation on one king after another for departing from the ordi
nances of the law, and connects the national decline with the
forsaking of the national religion and the tampering with
idolatrous worship. So also, while the writer of the Books of
Samuel makes no distinct citations of any -written materials which
he may have employed, except in one place in which he refers to
the Book of Jashar (2 Sam. i. 18), the writer of the Books of
Kings, standing at a greater distance from the events which he
records, cites his authorities, and refers to writings of which he
has made use, wherein are to be found fuUer detaUs than those
which he thought it his province to rejpeat.
Besides those differences the whole style and manner of
composition show that the Books of Samuel constitute an inde
pendent work. As to the time of its composition, we have only
slight indications to guide us to a decision. The absence of
reference to the Captivity would prove that it was written before
the Exile. That the writer Uved a considerable time after the
events which he relates may be concluded from the formula "tiU
this day " which repeatedly occurs (1 Sam. v. 5 ; vi. 18 ; xxvii. 6 ;
xxx. 26; 2 Sam. iv. 3; vi. 8; xviii. 18), and also from the
reference to a usage existing " beforetime in Israel" (1 Sam.
ix. 9), and the antiquarian remark as to the dress of the king's
daughters (2 Sam. xiii. 18). Again, when the fuU number of
years that David reigned both in Hebron and Jerusalem is stated
(2 Sam. V, 6), it is plain that the writer wrote after Da-vid's
death; and when it is said (1 Sam. xxvU. 6) that "Ziklag
pertaineth unto the kings of Judah unto this day," we must infer
that the schism of the kingdom had by this time taken place (if
indeed, the reference is not even, as some suppose, to the time
when the kingdom of Judah alone existed).
Such references are, however, very general and indecisive,
GspeciaUy as we know so little of the process through which the
Old Testament books may have passed before they assumed their
final form ; and, accordingly, whUe some would place the com
position of the Books of Samuel in the first decades after the

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

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

THE BOOKS OF SAMUEL. 86
late and unhistorical conception. One would expect a later
writer to strive after a harmonising of accounts rather than to
introduce a contradiction ; and the fact that different documents
which formaUy present discrepancies are aUowed to stand side
by side is a strong presumption that they both came from ancient
sources, and were believed by the compiler to be reconcilable
from some point of view. It is most certainly an excess of
criticism to assume that certain accounts of events that are
similar and are stated to have occurred more than once, are
merely different forms of a tradition of onp and the same event.
Twice the rejection of Saul is pronounced (1 Sam. xiii. 8 — 14,
and XV. 12 ff.) ; twice he is spared by David (xxiv. and xxvi.) ;
twice David flees to the Philistines (xxi. 10 — 15, and xxvii. 1 f.) ;
twice the prophetic excitement comes upon Saul (x. 10 — 12, and
xix. 22 — 24) ; and twice the " evU spirit of the Lord " seizes
him (xviii. 10 f., and xix. 9 f.). But there is nothing im
possible or, in the circumstances, improbable in aU this ; whUe
the detaUs in the different cases vary so much that the rise
of the two narratives from one common event is not by any
means clear.
7. The Prophetic Order. — Perhaps the most striking feature
that presents itseK in these books is the prophetic activity which
begins with Samuel himself, and takes its place as a permanent
influence in the religious development of the succeeding history.
No explanation of the origin of prophecy is given ; it is- spoken
of as a thing well recognised and understood ; but some of its
earlier manifestations are not a little remarkable. It is in
connection with a communication of the Divine purpose to
Samuel that it is said that " all Israel, from Dan to Beersheba,
knew that Samuel was estabUshed to be a prophet of the Lord "
(1 Sam. iii. 20). And this is in keeping with the idea of the
prophet expressed in the Pentateuch ; he is one in whose mouth
God has put His words, and who speaks to the people aU that
God has commanded (Deut. xviU. 18). He was of old time called
a seer (1 Sam. ix. 9) ; even in the writing prophets a prophecy
is caUed a -vision (Isaiah i. 1), and Amos teUs us the words which
he saw.
The prophetic activity of Samuel's days, manifested in the
excitement and musical exercises of bands of prophetic men, has
by some recent writers been explained simply as the result of
high-strung patriotic feeling, which in Israel was always closely
related to religion ; and these mauKestations have been regarded
as altogether different from the regular activity of the prophets
whose written words have come down to us. But this seems to
be a confusion of cause and effect, for it is more natural to

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

THE BOOKS OF SAMUEL. 87
reconstruct these prophetic societies and to trace back to them
various similar movements of later times. And though a great
deal of this speculation has been unprofitable, the fact cannot be
ignored that from this time is to be dated, if not the beginning,
yet certainly the formal embodiment of a movement which lasted
throughout the history of Israel, and -was a most powerful
feature in the moulding of the national reUgion and life.
8. Poetic Activity. — The connection of music with the prophetic
activity of Samuel's time is noteworthy in several respects. The
company of prophets whom Said met coming down from the
high place had "a psaltery and a timbrel, and a pipe, and a
harp, before them" as they prophesied (1 Sam. x. 6) ; and the
association of music with prophecy seems to have been perma
nent, for we read of Elisha, on one occasion, caUing for a
minstrel, and "when the minstrel played the hand of the Lord
came upon him " (2 Kings iii. 16). This musical element throws
much light on the account of Saul's contact with the prophets.
The word denoting "to prophesy" is, in fact, used also of the
king's accessions of madness (1 Sam. xvui. 10), and is appUed to
"raving" generaUy. Thus a son of the prophets who came
-with a message to Jehu is contemptuously called a "mad feUow "
by Jehu's brother officers (2 Kings ix. 11), and "to bemad"
and " to act the prophet " are by Jeremiah spoken of as synony
mous (Jer. xxix. 26). Yet the same word is employed to denote
the prophet's normal activity, which was not necessarily accom
panied with ecstaticutterances. And so when the writer of the
Books of Chronicles is describing the provision made for the
regular and orderly Temple music, he says, "they separated for
the service certain of the sons of Asaph, and of Heman, and of
Jeduthun, who should prophesy with harps, with psalteries, and
with cymbals" (1 Chr. xxv. 1 — 3, E.V.), which is explained
farther on of " giving thanks and praising the Lord."
It is natural, indeed, to suppose that, as prophetic utterance
was not always ecstatic, music was not always boisterous ; and as
prophecy did not die when the excited phase had passed, neither
did music continue to be always associated with excitement. The
time of Samuel was not the first period in the history of Israel
when national song was caUed forth by the stirring of national
feeling ; but it was a time well fitted to give a special stimulus
to the spirit of patriotism and religion to which the national
songs of Israel give expression. Hence we may conclude that,
as prophecy from this time onward took its place as an abiding
element of the religious life of the nation, sacred song also from
this time received a new impulse and entered upon a course of
more regular development.

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

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

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

THE BOOKS OF SAMUEL, 91
the wiU of the people, much less according to his own arbitrary
wUl, but by the will of God, and, equally with the most humble
IsraeUte, he was a subject of the God of Israel, the Lord of
Hosts. Saul, choosing to reign Uke the kings of the nations,
forfeited his position, while David, recognising the constitution
by which he ruled, had " a sure house." Closely identifying
himself with the prophetic movement, he showed himseK to be
in sympathy with the spirit which kept the nation alive ; careful
for the outward observance of worship, and solicitous for the
buUding of a Temple which should form a fitting centre for its
exercise, he showed how sensible he was of the importance of
maintaining a visible and striking manifestation of the faith
which the nation professed. His own religious feeling and con
fident trust In God gave emphasis to these public acts ; so that he
became to the people the ideal of the Lord's anointed, identified
with his people, the embodiment of the idea on which Israel, as
a kingdom of priests, was constituted. From his time onward
grew the expectation of a Messiah, who, as King, Priest, and
Prophet, at the head of an ideal state, was to fulfil all things.
The influences that were to educate the people to higher
spiritual conceptions were now at work, and the settled arrange
ments of a consolidated state afforded the framework within
which these influences were to operate. God works slowly : in
His providence the foundations we're thus laid for compacting
the nation that was to be the bearer of light to the world ; and,
though it needed the discipline of centuries to bring it to matu
rity, there was planted at this early time the seed of a kingdom
that would never be moved. In its outward aspect the age of
David is, in many respects, rude enough. The wars that he
waged, the generals who served him, the people who followed
him into battle, are very much Uke what we see elsewhere in
" secular " history ; the character of the king himself is far from
perfect ; and the historian gives the best guarantee of the truth
of his narrative in placing all these things faithiuUy on record.
But when we look 'beneath the surface, we see that the strivings
and strugglings of men in human passions were being guided
by a Divine hand ; and only thus can we explain the fact that
whUe great empires have crumbled into oblivion, the little king
dom set up in the person of David, the son of Jesse, survived the
calamities of neighbouring states and handed down to the world
an imperishable inheritance of blessing.

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

THE BOOKS OF KINGS. 93
frequently recurring formula "till this day" seems always to
refer to the period before, and chiefly to the period immediately
before, the Captivity.
Expressions of this kind favour the supposition that a his
torical work, similar to the work before us, was composed shortly
before the Exile, and that what we no-w have is a revision or
later edition of the same, continued to the point at which its
history closes. In one passage, the seventeenth chapter of the
second book, we may even detect traces of the different editions ;
for in verses 18 and 21, belonging to the original work, Judah
is represented as stiU a kingdom, whereas verses 19 and 20,
added by the last -writer, indicate that the southern kingdom also
had been swept away. The statement of the Talmud Is that
Jeremiah wrote the Books of Kings, and certain similarities of
style give a show of support to that view ; yet the literary
resem"blances are such as can be accounted for by the writers
Uving about the same time and moving amid the same circum
stances ; and, moreover, it is most probable that the last chapter
of the Book of Jeremiah, which most closely resembles the cor
responding narrative of the Books of Kings, was added by an
editor to the writings of the prophet. The truth is, there is no
conclusive evidence to determine who was the author of the
books before us.
2. Divisions and Contents. — The combined work embraced in
these two books may be divided, according to the matters treated
of, into three parts : the flrst relating to the reign of Solomon,
the second to the divided kingdom, and the third to the surviving
kingdom of Judah.
(i.) The first part, extending from chapter i. to xi. of the first
book, is confined to the reign of Solomon. It has been noted In
the chapter on the Books of Samuel (§ 2) that these chapters are
closely related to the conclusion of those books, inasmuch as
Solomon began his reign during the lifetime of his father Da-vid.
By the wisdom and foresight of the prophet Nathan, who had
been David's close friend and faithful counseUor, the throne was
secured for Solomon in the face of an attempt at usurpation on the
part of Adonijah (chapter i.). The young king, being publicly
proclaimed and exhibited to the people, receives his father's last
charge, and, after David's death, takes such measures against
those who had conspired to exclude him from the succession, that
his throne is firmly secured (chapter ii.). The writer then gives
an account of the internal condition of the kingdom during
Solomon's reign (ill. 1 — ix. 9). The wisdom of the king is shown
in the matter of the dream which he had at Gibeon (Ui. 1 — 15),
and in his decision of a difficult matter referred to him for

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

THE BOOKS OF KINGS. 95
of Judah, during which, owing to a marriage alliance of the two
reigning famUie§, the northern kingdom stood in close friendly
relations with the southern ; and the third reaching to the down-
f aU of Samaria, when the two kingdoms are again less friendly,
or even at hostUIty.
(a) In the first period (1 Kings xii. 1 — xvi. 28) the historian
shows how the discontent of the people broke out on the death
of Solomon, and how it was, by the incapacity of his son Eeho-
boam, goaded to open revolt under Jeroboam ; how the schism
was recognised by the prophets as a thing "from the Lord;"
and how it was widened and perpetuated by Jeroboam's setting
up of sanctuaries at Dan and Bethel, and his appointment of
priests who were not of Levitical extraction (xii. 1 — xiv. 20).
In the southern kingdom, Eehoboam and Abijam hold the reins
of government with weak hands, and the former suffers humi-
Uatlon from the forces of Egypt, whUe both are in constant
hostUity with the northern kingdom (xiv. 21 — xv. 8). Asa, how
ever, brings about a reformation, and, by the aid of Benhadad,
king of Syria, Is successful in his confiict with Israel (xv. 9 — 24).
In the northern kingdom, the dynasty of Jeroboam comes to an
end with the death of his son Nadab, after a reign of two years ;
Baasha usurps the throne, and, after a reign of twenty-four
years, is succeeded by his son Elah, who, after a reign of two
years, is murdered by his own servant Zlmrl. But the murderer
had no sooner seized the throne than he was successf uUy attacked
by Omri, the head of the army, between whom, again, and Tibni
there arose a civU war of four years' duration, resulting in tho
success of Omri and the founding of the dynasty which came to
bear his name.
(b) The second period, which covers the duration of the house
of Omri, is treated of in 1 Kings xvi, 29 — 2 Kings xi, 20. Ahab,
the son of Omri, during a reign of twenty-two years, raises the
northern kingdom to a condition of great outward prosperity,
the capital being finaUy fixed at Samaria. But having married
Jezebel, the daughter of the king of Phoenicia, he introduces the
worship of the Tyrian Baal and Astarte as the state religion.
Against this a vigorous protest is raised by the prophet EUjah,
6y whose exertions, in the face of the queen's opposition, the
priests of Baal are slain and the people of Israel brought back
in a measure to the recognition of Jehovah as the national God
(1 Kings xvi. 29 — xix. 14) ; intimations of further judgments on
the house of Omri and more thorough reformatloD. of religion
being given in the selection of Elisha and Jehu to carry on the
work which Elijah had begun (xix. 16 — 21). Aliab wages suc
cessful war against Benhadad, king of Syria, but the tyranny of

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

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

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

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

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

THE BOOKS OF KINGS. 101
work he makes constant reference, at the close of the various
reigns, to certain records by name from which he apparently
drew his materials, and to which he refers his readers for " the
rest of the acts," and so forth, of the kings whose doings he has
briefly related.
The works thus referred to are : "The Book of the Acts of
Solomon," for the reign of that king (1 Kings xi. 41) ; and for
succeeding rulers, "The Book of the Chronicles of the Engs of
Israel," to which there are seventeen references (1 Kings xiv.
19, &c.); and "The Book of the Chronicles of the Kings of
Judah," referred to fourteen times (1 Kings xiv. 29, &c.). Some
have supposed that these were formal compositions of a historical
character, of the nature of a work referred to in 2 Chronicles
xxiv. 27, as "The Story of the Book of the Kings," and that
our author made quotations from them for his account of the
different reigns. But it is more probable that they were tha
State records of the two kingdoms, of a pohtical and statis
tical character, kept by the offlcial recorders or scribes, who are
enumerated among the court officials.* This is rendered the
more probable by the nature of the references. Thus, for
example, the records of the kings of Judah are, under the reign
of Asa, referred to for the rest of his acts, " and aU his might,
and aU that he did, and the cities which he built " (1 Kings xv.
23) ; and those of the kings of Israel, under the reign of Ahab,
for " aU that he did, and the ivory house which he made, and all
the cities that he built" (1 Kings xxii. 29).
It is remarkable that the few cases in which there is no refe
rence to these records at aU are cases in which, the reign came to
a sudden or violent end, as those of Joram of Israel and Ahaziah
of Judah, who were both swept away in the furious onset of
Jehu (2 Kings ix. 21 — 28), and of Hoshea of Israel, and Jehoa
haz, Jehoiachin, and Zedekiah of Judah, who close their reigns
amid the ¦wreck of their respective kingdoms. From this we
may infer that the records in question were made up at the close
of each reign, and that in the cases mentioned they were left
unfinished in the disasters which overtook the kings. . Besides
these documents of a more offlcial description, it is pretty evident
that the writer made use of other compositions of a more general *
and popular character, in which were related the sayings and
doings of men like EUjah and Elisha, who figure so prominently
in these books.
It will be observed that the passages which refer to these two
prophets are interspersed in the general narrative, and form
• The Books of Samuel, § 6, pp. 83, 84.

102 BOOK BY BOOK.
connected pieces by themselves, capable of being removed
without disturbing the adjacent history. Elijah is introduced
abruptly, without explanation. Into the narrative (1 Eongs xvii. 1),
and the accounts of his doings and those of his successor, EUsha,
which are written in a more flowing style than the main portion
of the books, are such as would not naturaUy have found a place
in the State annals.
6, Prophetic Activity. — The prophetic activity which is seen
commencing In the time of Samuel* was in fuU operation in the
time of the kings ; and the books before us, not merely by the
personal notices they give of Uves and acts of individual prophets,
but by the close connection in which they represent these men as
standing with the political and religious movements of the times,
furnish materials for a history of prophetic activity as much as
they exhibit the material and political gro^wth of the nation.
Thus, at the crisis of the handing over of the reins of govern
ment to Solomon, at the opening of the books, Nathan the
prophet is even a more prominent person than either the king or
his aged father (1 Kings i. 22 ff.). Ahijah of ShUoh, watching
the course of events that was leading to the rupture of the king
dom, declares to Jeroboam with a voice of authority the destiny
that is before him and the Divine purpose controlUng the evente
(1 Kings xi. 29 — 39) ; and with equal authority he pronounces
at a later time the doom which would bef aU the house of Jero
boam for their wickedness (xiv. 6 — 16).
On the other hand, Eehoboam Is warned by Shemaiah, "the man
of God," to desist from attempts at forcible union of the northern
tribes, because the thing was "from the Lord" (1 Kings xu.
22—24). So did Jehu, the son of Hanani, denounce the sins of
Baasha and foretell his fate (1 Kings x-vl. 1 — 4, 7, 12). The
contest of Elijah with Ahab, and the Influence of EUsha on
pubUc affairs in his time, are not less remarkable than their
general prophetic work, and the writer purposely shows how
'these men were as important factors in the history as the kings
whose affairs they controUed. So we have the fearless Micaiah,
son of Imlah, deUverIng an unpleasant "word of the Lord" to
two powerful kings and in the face of the flattering testimony of
a crowd of false prophets (1 Kings xxii. 5 — 8). Isaiah, the son
of Amoz, In the reign of Hezekiah, occupies a far higher position-
as adviser to the king than any court official (2 Kings xix.
20—34, XX. 1 — 19) ; and Huldah, the prophetess, in the time of
Josiah, when the law-book was found in the Temple, is resorted
to for advice by priests and high officers of State (2 Kings xxu.
* The Books of Samuel, § 7, pp. 85, 86.

THE BOOKS OF KINGS. 103
14 ff.). Besides these, whose public Influence is more apparent,
we have a reference to the prophetic activity of Jonah, son of
Amittal, of Gath-hepher (2 Kings xiv. 23) ; and notices and
words of unnamed prophets, as of the " man of God " who came
out of Judah to Bethel, and cried against the altar of Jeroboam
(1 Kings xlli. 1 — 32) ; of others who assured Ahab of victory
over Benhadad of Syria, and reproved him for not slaying his
enemy (1 Kings xx. 12. — 16, 28, 35—43); and of the prophets
who at Jerusalem foretold the ruin of the southern kingdom for
the iniquities of Manasseh (2 Kings xxi. 10 — 16).*
Some of the details regarding these prophetic men may, as
has been already said, have been drawn from special composi
tions in which the Uves and teaching of the prophets were
recorded ; but In the great majority of Instances where the
prophetic Influence Is exerted, the narrative of the historian
would lose aU its point and force, and reduce itself to the barest
chronicle of events, if the prophets and their work did not appear
in his pages. Even as it is, we know, by a comparison of the
writings of prophetic men that have come down to us, that many
events which here occupy little space and receive but slight
notice, were pregnant with meaning for good or ill to Israel ;
and we require to read those writings along with the Books of
Kings in order to obtain anything like an adequate conception
of the history which Is here briefly related.
6. Standpoint. — It is the prophetic tone wliich has just been
alluded to that makes these books history, as distinguished from
a bald chronicle. The historian leaves us In no doubt as to the
spirit in which he treats his subject. His whole aim is to exhibit
the course of events as so controlled by the Divine Hand,, that
faithfulness to God ensured blessing and unfaithfulness brought
down His displeasure and led to national decline. Just as the
writer of the Book of Judges sums up the period of which he
treats in a comprehensive survey,f so the writer of the books
before us is continuaUy reminding his readers of his guiding
principle, and now and then expands it into a general review of
the whole cycle of events, frora beginning to, end, which he has
,set himself to relate. Passages of this kind are found in 2 Kings
xvii. 7 — 23, 32 — 41 ; xxiii. 27. In such passages the writer
* It is somewhat remarkable that the prophet Jeremiah, who plays so
important a part in the closing history of the kingdom of Judah, is not once
mentioned in these books ; and some would take this as an indication that he
had a hand in their composition, according to the statement of the Talmud
(see § 1) . But it is -hardly possible that he waa the final editor, for hy the
time the work was completed he must have been, if stiU alive, of a very g-reat
age. t See the Book of Judges, § 3, p. 70.

104 BOOK BY BOOK.
insists on the fact that it was because Israel forsook their God
and walked in the statutes of the heathen that they lost their
national independence.
Writing at a period when the influences, human and divine,
which had moulded the history, had had time to show their
developments, he holds these up to light In his pages, exhibiting
at once what God had done for His people, and the manner In
which they had requited His goodness. In the true spirit of
prophecy he does not reprove the people for their neglect of
outward ordinances nor insist on the ceremonial part of the law,
but reproves them for forgetting the God that brought them out
of the land of Egypt, for turning a deaf ear to the prophets, and
for rejecting "His statutes and His covenant that He made with
their fathers, and His testimonies which He testified against
them" (2 Kings xvii. 16).
This is the aspect in which the prophets always regard the
law, as a fundamental principle underlying its specific obser
vances ; but though our author makes only such general
aUusIons to the Mosaic law, neither he nor any other Old
Testament writer gives any foundation for the idea of some'
modern writers that the law was nothing but the "instruction"
of the prophets conveyed from time to time as occasion called it
forth. He declares that the Lord testified ' ' against Israel and
against Judah by aU the prophets and by aU the seers, saying.
Turn ye from your evil ways and keep my commandments and
my statutes, according to all the law which I commanded your
fathers, and which I sent to you by my servants the prophets "
(2 Kings xvii. 13). In numerous passages there are such
aUusIons to "statutes" and "judgments" and "command
ments," the very terms which the Pentateuch ItseK employs,
which can only refer to some code or codes which were sufficient
to regulate the moral and reUgious life of the nation, and must
have been known to the people whom the prophets addressed.
It is customary, among those who believe that the Book of
Deuteronomy originated about the time of Josiah, * to say that
the -writer of the Books of Kings had his conceptions of the law
coloured by the code which was the only one of any extent kno'wn
in his day ; and they point to the minuteness of detail which he
exhibits In his description of the building of Solomon's Temple,
and his palliation of the worship on the high-places before that
time (1 Kings Ui. 2), in proof that he attached great importance
to a central sanctuary. But as It was not by any means Impos
sible for Moses, at the beginning of the nation's history, to fore-
* See Introduction to the Pentateuch, § 10, pp. II, 12, and Deuteronomy,
§ 6, p. 56.

THE BOOKS OF KINGS. 105
see the dangers to which Israel would be exposed from heathen
worship In Canaan, and to guard against such dangers by legis
lation, so also it was but natural for a writer, living at the close
of the nation's history, and seeing the havoc wrought by the
idolatrous practices of evil times, to condemn in the severest
terms the worship of the high-places and kindred heathen cor
ruptions, which in both kingdoms had caused so much mischief.
To conclude that there was no ceremonial prescribed before
the time of Solomon, and no recognised code of law beyond the
Book of the Covenant up to the time of Josiah, is not warranted
by anything stated in the Books of Kings, nor, it may be added,
by the omission of anything which is not stated. It is seK-
evident that an orderly Temple service is necessary in a recog
nised Temple, and the very condemnation of the sacrifices of the
heathen implies legaUsed and authoritative sacrifices. It is in
credible that a writer should continually uphold the honour and
dignity of a priesthood that had no prescribed functions, and
blame the people for worship on the high-places if they knew no
other worship to practise.
Whatever may have been the law-book that was found in
the reign of Josiah (and, after aU has been said, it is not proved
that it was nothing but the Code of Deuteronomy), the writer of
our books proceeds on the supposition that there was one central
sanctuary from the time of Solomon at least, and Implies that
Israel was in possession of laws and ceremonies distinctly
opposed to those of the nations around them. If he does not
furnish us ¦with details of the history of ritual worship, it is
simply because this lay beyond the purpose he had before him,
and was only remotely connected with his guiding principle.
7. Credibility. — As records of the history of the Israelite
people during the time that they enjoyed national independence
as a monarchy, these Books of Kings have their credibility
amply attested by the records of neighbouring states, so far as
these are avaUable. The Moabite Stone, discovered in 1868,
with an inscription of Mesha, king of that country, recording
his successes, besides its interest as an early specimen of writing,
had a special value in that it referred to events touched upon in
the books before us (2 Bangs Hi. 4 — 27). Not only did it confirm
the account there given of the relations subsisting between the
IsraeUtes and the Moabites, but it impUed, and could only be
rightly understood by assuming, the details which the BibUcal
writer communicates ; so that, read along with the passage just
referred to, and 2 Chron. xx., it enables us to construct an in
teresting history of the movements that took place at that time
on the eastern borders of Palestine.

106 BOOK BY BOOK.
Of late 3-ears also we have gained an ever-increasing mass of
materials, In the Assyrian Inscriptions, to compare with the
Hebrew records for the events that brought the great empire of
the East upon the scene of the affairs of Israel and Judah. As
these monuments have been from time to time brought to light
and deciphered, they have not only confirmed the statements of
the Old Testament writers, but have made clear many points
which their brief narratives left In obscurity. It is interesting
to note that on these inscriptions the kingdom of the ten tribes is
almost uniformly spoken of as "the land of the house of Omri,"
Jehu himself being styled "son of Omri," showing, as the
Moabite Stone also indicates, that that dynasty, the first of
whom, according to 1 Kings xvi., 24, made Samaria the capital
of the northern kingdom, enjoyed a high reputation among
foreign peoples. More particulq,rly, the successes and reverses
of the kingdoms of Israel and Damascus, in their various col
lisions, which are only lightly touched on by the writer of the
Books of Kings, are shown by these monuments to have been
mainly Influenced by alUances made by the one or the other with
the great empire of the East, just as the same power also con
trolled the relations of Ahaz to his northern neighbours.*
In general, It may be said, that for the period preceding the
fall of Samaria (b.c. 722) the Ass3rrlan inscriptions largely sup
plement the slight notices of the Books of Kings, and for the
succeeding period they are found to confirm in many minute
details the accounts, which become fuller in these books and in
the prophetical writings, on aU subjects in which they are
mutually concerned. It has, for example, been now definitely
ascertained that Pul, mentioned in 2 Kings xv. 19 f., as to whose
identity there was much doubt, Is the same person, under a
Babylonian name, as Tiglath-pUeser, the king of Assyria, and
that he styles himseK, on the monuments, " king of Babylon"
as well as "king of Assyria,"
This discovery has tended to reduce, to a certain extent, a ¦wide
divergence which at that point of the history existed between
the Assyrian and the Hebrew dates ; though it cannot be claimed
that the difficulties in the chronology of the Biblical 'writers
have been settled by the newer discoveries. Eesearch has brought
to light very complete lists of Assyrian rulers, after whom the
years were reckoned ; and from these and the so-called canon of
Ptolemy (which mentions eclipses and other astronomical phe
nomena), a well-defined system of chronology has been com
puted, by which the exact dates of the notable events in Assyrian
and Babylonian history are determined. On the other hand, the
* See e.g. 1 Kings xx. ; 2 Kings x. 32—36 ; xv. 19, 20 ; xvi. 5—10, &o.

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

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

THE BOOKS OF KINGS. 1C9
It has been objected against him that In literary style he is
even behind his predecessors, stiff and pedantic in his mode of
representation, and so narrow and circumscribed in view that he
measures everything by the ideas of his own late age. But,
however It may be as to Uterary achievement, the author had his
fixed view of the history, and, from his late standpoint, having
seen the course which the history had run, he laid special stress
upon the points on which it had turned. And we are bound to
say that the experience of the world has confirmed his view. He
does not lose himself in a multipUcity of details. It was of little
moment to him that the proud house of Omri had raised the
northern kingdom to greatness by brilUant deeds ; a matter of
comparative Indifference to him that a king was rich and power
ful, if he did not walk in the way that was right. In his brief,
dry records of the doings and f ailings of the rulers of Israel and
Judah, he has pointed out where the strength or weakness of a
kingdom Ues, and given us the most valuable lessons on poUtical
freedom. How many patriots and reformers, since his day, have
been nerved to brave the fury of princes and do vaUantiy for the
truth by the example of Old Testament prophets as set before
them in these pages ! And had the author of the Books of
Kings done nothing more than this he had rendered incalculable
service to the world.
His views may not be -wide, but he does not deviate from hia
main position that a state stands secure only when it is foimded
on God's truth, and that it is preserved from danger only by His
constant defence. He sees also, and the whole world has seen,
that God had a special purpose in setting up the house of David
at Jerusalem, and that His promise to that house did not faU of
effect. The great empires of the East, with aU their magni
ficence, have passed away and contributed but Uttle to the
world's good. The house of Omri perished and nearly involved
the house of David in its faU ; but the little kingdom of Judah,
amid baekslidings and shortcomings, was preserved tiU it was
enabled to hand down to the world an enduring spiritual
blessing. The fabric of an organized state held together tUl the
seed of Divine truth had time to germinate and take deep root
in the minds of those to whom it was revealed, and the decay of
the outward state, and the faUures of the best of human rulers,
were the means by which these chosen ones were led to look for
a kingdom which is not of this world.

THE BOOKS or CHEONIOLES.

1. Title and Place in the Canon. — The name by which these two
books are designated in the English Bible owes its suggestion to
Jerome, who described them as "a chronicle of the whole of
sacred history." After him, some editions of the Vulgate en
titled the work " Chronicles," or "Book of Chronicles," and our
translators adopted the name. It expresses pretty accurately the
meaning of the title given In the Hebrew Bible, which Is, lite
rally, "The Acts," or "Affairs of the Times," — «'.«. journals or
annals. This was the name given to those records, kept hy
officials of the kings, which contained an account of the notable
events In each reign ; * and it was natural, when books of history
came to be written mainly out of materials drawn from such
registers, that they would receive a similar name, although, .of
course, they would be less restricted in their compass and mode
of treatment. The Greek translators of the Old Testament,
however, were not satisfied with this general name, and designated
ila.es,e \)Q6ks Paraleipomena, meaning "things passed over" or
" left out," from the idea that their author took up things which
the writers of previous books had omitted or not fuUy related.
This name, though aiming at greater precision, is not an accurate
description of the books, as we shall presently see.
Like the Books of Samuel and Kings, the two Books of Chro
nicles originally constituted one work, the division into two
being made by the Greek translators, although no doubt a pause
of some kind existed In the original at the point where the
division has been effected. The work is of late authorship.
Besides many features in the original which show a decaying
period of the language, we may observe that the mention of
Cyrus (2 Chr. xxxvi. 22) and the tracing of the descendants of
David to the sixth generation after Zerubbabel (1 Chr. iii. 19 ff.)
• See the Book of Kings, § 4, pp. lOOj IOl.

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

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

THE BOOKS OF CHRONICLES. 113
(xv., xvi,), and David's purpose to build a temple is unfolded;
but the execution of this work is postponed by prophetic advice,
and a special blessing is pronounced on David and his descen
dants (xvii).
In chapters xviii. to xx. we have a summary of the wars that
David waged with surrounding nations, with a Ust of his chief
offlcers and high officials (xviii. 15 — 17). It is then related how
David was induced to number the people, and in consequence a
plague broke out among them ; and how, on the occasion of a
sacrifice offered at its discontinuance, the king received instruc
tions as to the site of the future place of worship, and set about
making preparations for its erection (xxi., xxii.). Here foUow
Usts of the Levites and priests according to their courses and
offlces (xxiu — xxvi.), and simUar lists of the divisions of the army,
chiefs of the tribes, and royal functionaries (xxvU.). Then, at a
pubUc assembly held at Jerusalem, David in a formal manner
makes arrangements for the succession of Solomon, charging
him speciaUy to persevere with the completion of the Temple
(xxAoU., xxix.), and having finished his work the king dies "in a
good old age, fuU of days, riches, and honour, and Solomon his
son reigned in his stead."
4. Contents of Second Booh. — The second book continues the
history on the same principle, nine chapters being devoted to
the reign of Solomon, and the rest to those of the succeeding
kinga. The author's predUection for aU that pertains to the ob
servances of religion shows itseK again in his treatment of the
reign of Solomon, six chapters being given to detaUed descrip
tions of the various operations connected with the buUding and
adornment of the Temple and provision for its services, and the
solemn ceremonial observed at its dedication (ii. — ^vU.) ; whUe
the arrangements made for the administration of the kingdom,
and the account of the king's wealth and greatness, are com
prised in two chapters (vUi., ix.).
In what foUows the writer gives, in chronological order, as in
the Books of Kings, the successive reigna, confining himseK,
however, to the kingdom of Judah, and bestowing most attention
on those reigns in which worship was properly observed, and
rehgion flourished and Jerusalem prospered. He introduces the
various prophetic men who appeared from time to time, especi
aUy when their message bears upon the observance of the
national religion.
Thus we have an account of the reign of Eehoboam and the
schism of the kingdom (x. — xU.), ¦with the prophetic work of
Ahijah the ShUonite (x. 15), and of Shemaiah "the man of God "
(xi. 2, xu. 5); of Abijah and his victory over Jeroboam (xiii.);
I

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

THE BOOKS OF CHRONICLES. 115
Zedekiah, a short statement of the deportation, and, in a broken
sentence, taken up again in the opening verses of the Book of
Ezra, a notice of the restoration from captivity.
6. Sources. — The sources from which the author of these books
drew the materials for his work are in part mentioned by himseK
and in part may be inferred from the nature of the materials pre
sented. First of aU, he makes frequent reference to what seema
to have been one work, though it is designated by him sometimes
as the " Book of the Kings of Judah and Israel " (2 Chr. xvi. 1 1 ;
xxv. 26 ; xxviii. 26 ; xxxii. 32), and sometimes as " the Book of
the Kings of Israel and Judah" (2 Chr. xxvii. 7; xxxv. 27;
xxxvi. 8). It may be the same which in one place (2 Chr. xx. 34)
is briefly caUed ' ' the Book of the Kings of Israel, ' ' for by the time
to which he then refers the kingdom of Israel in its limited sense
had disappeared.
The work thus variously, designated cannot have been the
records to which the writer of the Books of Kings makes con
stant reference,* for these were the separate registers and state
papers of the individual kingdoms, whereas the work here named
was a combined account of the two. Nor can it have been our
present canonical Books of Kings to which the writer of
Chronicles referred ; for the work in question is said to have con
tained the deeds of the monarchs " first and last," and all their
wars and a?? their ways (2 Chr. xxvii. 7), and it is referred to for
events and sayings which are not found in the Books of Kings. It
would seem to have been a comprehensive work of a historical
kind, relating to both Israel and Judah, and based no doubt on
the respective annals of the two kingdoms.
That such historical works, of greater or less compass, had
been produced before the author's time is in itself probable, and
it may be to such a work that he refers for the reign of Joash,
under the name of " the story of the Book of the Kings " (2 Chr.
xxiv. 27), a'nd to another, for the reign of Abijah, under the namo
of "the story of the prophet Iddo " (xiii. 22). At the same time
we have to remember that the canonical Books of Samuel and
Kings were in existence by the time the Books of Chronicles were
written, and were doubtless employed by the author in writing
,'his own history. The great simUarlty of his language to that of
those books, in parts which treat of the same subjects, may arise
from his having quoted either directly from them or from the
sources which they had in common. We can see, moreover,
from the manner in which events recorded in the earlier hooka
are implied -without being actuaUy related by the chronicler,
* See the Books of Kings, § 4, pp. 100, 101.
I2

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

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

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

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

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

THE BOOKS OF EZRA AND NEHEMIAH. 121
from the earliest times tiU the eve of the return from capti-
¦vity. In our English Bible, however, Ezra and Nehemiah foUow
Chronicles, and can be read as a sequel to the history of these
books. It wUl be observed that the closing verses of Chronicles
(2 Chron. xxxvi. 22, 23) are almost identical with the opening
words of Ezra — a feature which has led many to believe that
the works originaUy formed one continuous composition, and
which, at all events, shows that the Books of Ezra and Nehemiah
were recognised as forming a natural continuation of the history
of the Chronicles. Those books had brought down the history to
the first year of Cyrus, and the books before us contain the his
tory of the re-estabUshment of the Israelite society by the return
of colonists, their settlement in Jerusalem, the rebuilding of the
Temple and city, and the reorganisation of IKe and worship.
The narrative begins in the Book of Ezra at the first year of
the reign of Cyrus, b.c 638, and it is dropped in Nehemiah soon
after the thirty-second year of Artaxerxes, B.C. 432; so that the
two books together carry us over a space of about a century. The
whole history of this time, however, f aUs Into three clearly defined
periods. The first, treated of in the first six chapters of Ezra, is
the time that elapsed from the first return of exiles to the com
pletion of the Temple ; the second, of which an account is con
tained in the remaining chapters of Ezra, is the period of his
activity as leader of the second colony that came to Judsea ; and
the third, covered by the Book of Nehemiah, is the period of the
activity of the two men in the reconstitution of the new commu
nity at Jerusalem. It wiU be convenient to speak of these three
periods separately.
2. First Period. — The first period extends over twenty-three
years, viz. from the first return of exiles in 638 till the comple
tion of the Temple in the sixth year of Darius B.C. 615. The
whole of this period was anterior to the coming of Ezra, and
chapters i. — vi. of his book contain a succinct account of what
was an arduous and almost hopeless struggle on the part of the
first colonists to estabUsh themselves in the city of their fathers.
From the Books of Haggai and Zechariah, who belonged to that
period, we gain much additional Ught on that troubled time ; and
the condition of the great empire under whose protection the
colonists effected a settlement, as It is known to us from his
tory, enables us to understand many things which are but Ughtly
touched upon in the canonical books.
What we learn froni the Book of Ezra is that Cyrus, in the
first year of his reign, gave permission to as many of the Israelite
exUes as were so disposed to return and settle in their native

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

THE BOOKS OF EZRA AND ; NEHEMIAH. 123'
g-ested to the author (or editor) by the subject In hand. Having
stated that the opposition lasted tlU the time of Darius, he adds
that it was continued even later, and proceeds to give Instances
of how it manifested itself ; but In verse 24 he returns to the'
point to which he had come, at which a temporary change in the
circumstances of -the colony took place.* In the second year of
Darius, he proceeds to say, the prophets Haggai and Zechariah
urged the people to a more vigorous prosecution of the work ; and
under their impulse the buUding was resumed.
It was a time when the great Persian empire was shaken to
its base, and Darius was making tremendous efforts to retain the
sovereignty over revolted provinces ; and it may have been
thought that, at such a time, the king's attention would not be
turned to the operations of the little colony at Jerusalem, and
that the work -would be aUowed to proceed in peace. But the
enemies of Judah were on the watch ; and no doubt it was at
their instigation that Tattenal, the Persian satrap of Syria,'
demanded from the Jews a proof of the authority by which they-
were carrying on their work. The Jews referred him to the edicfc
of Cyrus ; and while correspondence was going on between hlm^
and the court of Darius to verify their statement, we may believe
they would continue to push on the work of building (chapter v.).
At all events, Darius, now at rest from his enemies, made search
for the old edict, found it, and confirmed It, giving orders to his
governors to aid the Jews In their work. And thus, in the sixth-
year of his reign, the Temple was finished, a joyful feast was-
held at the dedication, and the Passover was observed in tho-
same month (chapter vi.).
3. Second Period. — The second period begins with the seventh
chapter of Ezra, and extends to the close of the book. These
chapters will teU us how Ezra brought the second colony from
Babylon and settled them in Jerusalem In the seventh year of
King Artaxerxes I., called Longimanus, i.e. in the year B.C. 458
(Ezra vii. 8). Since the former period ended with the sixth year
of Darius, or 516, and this begins with the seventh year of
Artaxerxes, there is thus an interval of fifty-seven years passed
over without record. This space represents the remaining thirty
years of Darius, the twenty years' reign of Xerxes, and the
opening seven years of that of Artaxerxes. As has been stated
in the last paragraph, the passage Ezra iv. 6 — 23 Is best explained
as referring to this Interval. Verse 6 simply says that, in the
reign of Ahasuerus (Xerxes), in the beginning of his reign, they
wrote an accusation against the Jews, but the verses that follow
* Observe that, on this view, the verse Ezra vi, 14 must also be regarded
aa an anticipation of the succeeding hiptory.

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

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

12fr ' BOOK BY BOOK.
this, in the beginning of the seventh month, Ezra again
appears. At a great public assembly he reads the law to the people,
being supported on the right and left by priests, and attended
by Levites who explain what is read, the service being continued
from early morn till mid-day, and the day observed as a time of
holy joy (viii. 1 — 12). This was foUowed by a great observance
of the Feast of Ta'bemaoles, during the continuance of which
there was a similar daily reading of the law (viii. 13 — 18) ; and
then "the seed of Israel separated themselves from aU strangers"
(Ix, 1 — 3), and bound themselves by a solemn covenant to keep
the law, and particularly to abstain from mixed marriages, to
sanctify the Sabbath, to observe the Sabbatical year, and to tax
themselves for the maintenance of the Temple worship (ix. 4 —
X. 39). Measures were then taken for gathering Into the city a
sufficient population from the surrounding country (xi.), and the
Completed waUs were dedicated by a solemn procession (xii.). .
Nehemiah, however, was recaUed to the court of Persia in the
thirty-second year of Artaxerxes (xiii. 6), and returning after an
absence of some undefined time, found that the old abuses had
again crept in, the chief offender being the high priest himseK,
whose name is significantly absent from the list of those who
had signed the covenant twelve years before (x. 1 — 28).
It appears that he was related by marriage to Sanballat (xiii.
28), and that he had actuaUy assigned to Tobiah, Sanballat's
associate, a chamber In the Temple which should have been
appropriated to sacred purposes. The governor, enraged at the
profanation, cast forth the household stuff of 'Tobiah, cleansed
the chamber, recalled the Levites who had been driven to Uve on
theh lands outside the city, and appointed treasurers to look
after the payment of tithes in future (xiii. 1 — 14). The book
comes to rather an abrupt close while Nehemiah is stiU en
gaged in such works of reformation, its last words being his
oft-repeated prayer: "Eemember me, 0 my God, for good"
(xiu. 23—31).
5. Literary Features. — ^Looked at as literary compositions these
books present features which prove they could not. In their
present form, have been written by the men whose names they
bear. Certain portions of both books are written in the first
person,* Ezra and Nehemiah being presumably the authors,
whUe in other parts these men are spoken of In the third person,
as K by another writer. Since the narrative in Ezra begins at a
point some eighty years before his arrival in Jerusalem, If Ezra
* Viz. Ezra -vii. 27 — ix. 16 ; Nehemiah i. — -vii. ; xii. 27 — 43 ; xiii. 4—31.

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

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

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

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

THE BOOK OF ESTHEE.
1 . Title and Place in the Canon. — The Book of Esther stands in
the English Bible at the close of the historical books ; it does not,
however, form a link in the connected series, as it only relates to
an episode In the history. It has, moreover, features of its o^wn
which distinguish it broadly from the historical books, and indeed
from aU the other books of the Old Testament. It takes its name
from the Jewish maiden who became queen of the Persian king
Ahasuerus, and it was written doubtless with the primary pur
pose of explaining the institution of the feast of Purim, which
originated mainly through her means. In the Hebrew Bible it
stands among the Hagiographa, the third division of the canonical
books, as one of the five rolls,* and by the later Jews has come
to be esteemed almost as highly as the law itself.
Its authorship and date are unknown ; but from the indication
in the first verse of the time at which the events to be narrated
took place, we may conclude that it could not have been written
tUl a considerable time after the close of the reign of Ahasuerus.
This king is now generaUy beUeved to have been Xerxes (named
* The number of books in the Old Testament is reckoned by the Jews as
twenty-four, divided into three collections, Law, Prophets, and (Sacred)
"Writings or Hagiographa. The niunber twenty four is made up as follows : —
I. The law, viz.. Genesis to Deuteronomy . . 5 books
II. Theformer prophets — Joshua, Judges, Samuel,
and Kings  4
The latter prophets — Isaiah, Jeremiah, Ezekiel,
and the twelve minor prophets counted as one 4
III. The three ao-called poetical books — Paahna, Pro-
verba. Job  3
The five roUs — Canticles, Euth, Lamentations,
Eccleaiaates and Esther .... 6
The three books, Daniel, Ezra-Nehemiah, and
Chronicles . . .... 3
In all . . .24
K 2

132 BOOK BY BOOK.
in the Persian inscriptions Kshyarsha), who succeeded Darius on
the throne of Persia In 486 B.C., and reigned twenty years.* The
composition of the book may ¦with some probability be placed
not earlier at least than that of the Books of Chronicles, Ezra,
and Nehemiah, i.e. towards the close of the Persian or in the
early part of the Greek domination, f
2. Contents. — Though attempts have been made to resolve the
Book of Esther into different constituent parts, it presents itself
most naturaUy as one composition. It Is graphic in its delinea
tion of details, and the plot of the story is unfolded with almost
dramatic vividness. Ahasuerus, the powerful king of Persia, at
a great feast in the third year of his reign, being heated with
wine and elated with pride, repudiates his queen Vashti for
refusing to obey his foolish command ; and in the seventh year
of his reign the orphan Jewess Hadassah (Myrtle), who had been
brought up by her kinsman Mordecai, a Benjaml^te, is chosen for
her "beauty and demeanour to take the place of the repudiated
queen, receiving apparently the Persian name Esther (Star).
Mordecai, who may have been in court employment, and had
rendered special service to the state by the discovery of a plot
against the king's life, wounds the pride of Haman, the king's
minister and favourite, by refusing to stand up and do him
honour in the king's gate. At this Haman conceives a bitter
hatred for the whole race of the Jews, and forms a plan for their
extermination. Finding, by the employment of the lot {pur), an
auspicious day for the accomplishment of his purpose, he prevails
upon the king to issue an edict that, in aU parts of his dominions,
on the thirteenth day of the tweKth month, or Adar, the whole
race of the Jews, "both young and old, little chUdren and
women," should be put to death. Mordecai communicates intel
Ugence of the plot to Esther, imploring her to use her influence
with the king to save her people from destruction. She resolves
to risk her Ufe in the attempt, and prepares for the execution of
her purpose by a fast, in which the Jews of Susa, the capital,
join her.
Venturing into the royal presence she invites the king and
Haman to a banquet, at which, being pressed by the king to
prefer her request, she invites them to another banquet on the
f oUo-wing day. Haman goes home boasting to his friends of the
honour done to him, and, confldent of the success of his scheme,
prepares a gaUows for ¦the execution of Mordecai. The same
night, however, the king, unable to sleep, has the registers of
the kingdom read to him, and is reminded of the former service
* See Ezra and Nehemiah, §§ 2, 3, pp. 121 — 6.
t Chronicles, Mj p. 110 ; Ezra and Nehemiah, § 5, pp. 126, 127.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

144 BOOK BY BOOK.
inflicting a mortal wound upon himself. He misses the rectitude
of God not only in his own instance but in God's general rule of
the world (chap. xxiv. 1). But this was to pluck the moral Sun
out of the heavens. This terrible thought of an unrighteous
God paralyzed Job's heart. It was not his afflictions in them
selves that dismayed him, it was that God was unrighteous in
inflicting them : " Therefore am I troubled before him : when I
consider, I am afraid of him. For God maketh my heart soft
(terror-stricken), and the Almighty troubleth me " (chap, xxlli.
15). And the question was not a mere speculative one, as it
might be nowadays : it was a profoundly reUgious one. Job had
hitherto lived, as he thought, in the feUowship of a great and
righteous Person, whose gracious providence had everywhere
preserved his spirit (chap. x. 12), and memories of this fellow
ship in the haUowed past and yearnings for its renewal again in
the present, crowd into the sufferer's mind and give a deeply
reUgious colour and a singular pathos to aU the struggles of his
intellect. As the question of the sufferings of the righteous was not of
old a mere inteUectual one but one of practical reUgious hfe,
many answers are suggested to it. The answer given from the
side of God in the speeches from the storm (chap, xxxviii. seq.)
is, in the words of the Apostle : ' ' Nay, but who art thou, 0 man,
that replieth against God ? " — although this answer is not made
by God without such a revelation of HimseK in making it as to
give It power to compose the perplexed heart. The answer with
which the pious soul stUls its own trouble amidst a darkness
which It cannot pierce is : "Nevertheless I am continuaUy with
thee : thou holdest my right hand " (Psahn IxxUi. 23), an answer
given many times in Job's speeches. These are practical answers
sufficient for the hour. Tet the reUgious mind craves for some
principle which wiU carry it through its perplexities and justify
the ways of God to man. Such a principle the author of the
book suggests In the prologue, and further Ulustrates in the
epUogue. And he allows Job to rise to a solution, which has In
it aU the elements of a universal one and satisfies the cravings
of a human heart. This solution is reached in the weU-kno'wn
passage (chap. xix. 26) : —
' ' But I know that my redeemer liveth,
Aud in after time he shall stand upon the dust,
And, after this my skin is destroyed,
And without my flesh, I shall see God."
Job's redeemer is God, and he is assured that when his disease
has brought him unto death he shah see God, no longer, his

THE BOOK OF JOB. 145
enemy but in peace. To suppose that Job expects this vision
of God on this side of the grave is to contradict the whole
scope of his language throughout the book. He is assured that
his malady is mortal, and his malady was to him token of
God's displeasure and the hiding of His face. On this side of
death he shall not see God, but beyond his eyes shall behold Him.
He expresses his assurance that he shaU die under God's
ehastening hand with an unvarying consistency ; he has no hope
of God's favour in this life, but, assured that God knows his Inno
cence, he has an invincible certainty of it in the future. Hence In
chap. xiv. the idea rises before his mind that after death he might
be restored to a new life upon the earth to enjoy God's favour :
" Oh that Thou wouldat hide me in Sheol,
That Thou ¦wouldat keep me secret till Thy ¦wrath be past,
That Thou wouldst appoint me a set time and remember me —
If a man die shall he hve again ? —
All the days of my appointed time would I wait till my release came ;
Thou wouldat call and I would anawer Thee,
Thou wouldat have a desire to the work of Thine hands."
And in chap, xvi, 18, after appealing to the earth not to cover
his blood unjustly shed, he adds his assurance of being justified
in the future : " Even now behold my witness is in heaven, and
he that shaU vouch for me is on high." And this thrusting of
the final solution of the mysteries of God's providence beyond
the borders of this life is in harmony with those other passages
where Job pushes his principles to their proper extreme. He
shows not only that he himseK and other righteous men die
with their righteousness unrecognised in this world, but on
the other side ¦wicked men die in fuU prosperity and peace ;
inneither case is the ultimate solution seen in this Ufe.
Of course we must beware of attributing to any saint of
that age such clear conceptions of the condition after death as
subsequent revelation has given to us. Job has absolutely no
knowledge of a condition after death, except the idea common
in his day, that deceased persons descended into Sheol, the place
of the dead : "A land of darkness as darkness itself, and of the
shadow of death, without any order, and where the Ught is as
darkness " (chap. x. 22 ; iii. 17 — 19). Hence his redeemer " wiU
stand upon the dust " ; his assurance is that though he die under
his malady, as he is certain he shaU, yet notwithstanding hia
¦death he shaU yet see God reconcUed to him, and be vindicated
by him. His assurance is a rehgious necessity, a postulate of
faith. Hence he rises to this lofty anticipation only for a moment,
and falls back again into the demand to know the meaning of
his afflictions.

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

THE BOOK OF JOB. 147
of EUhu (ch. xxxu. — xxxvii.) do not belong to the original look,
but are the insertion of a later time. The grounds of this
¦view are such as these : — 1. That EUhu is unknown both to
the prologue and epUogue ; 2. That Job makes no reply to him ;
3. That his citations from the book are so exact as to betray a
reader of the poem ; 4. That the language of his speeches
shows signs of deterioration, marking a later age, and that he
is characterised by a mannerism quite unlike the other speakers ;
5. That his speeches destroy the connection between the chal
lenge of Job (ch. xxxi. 35 seq.) and the reply of the Almighty ;
and 6, finaUy, that EUhu occupies virtuaUy the same grounds
with ¦the friends, and that there is nothing in what he advances
against Job which the latter would have regarded as any real
answer to his complaints. It is also argued that where Elihu
differs from the three friends, it is rather in a more advanced
view of sin and a greater insistence upon the goodness of God in
his afflictions, as weU as in a deeper repugnance to the language of
Job ; thingsbetraying a later date, and suggesting that the original
book perplexed pious midds by its extraordinary boldness. The
character of Elihu is very distinct. He is of a very devout
nature ; his reverence of God and fear before Him are very great.
It is this feeUng that makes him come forward to meet the asser
tions of Job — he wIU ascribe right to his Maker (xxxvi. 3).
This reverent sensitiveness in regard to God constitutes the chief
charm of .EUhu's speeches, and the book would be decidedly
poorer for the want of them.
9. Age and Authorship of the Booh. — The age of the book must
not be confounded with the age of Job himseK. Job is repre
sented as Uving in the patriarchal times, and the author of the
book has skUfuUy thrown the colours of this age over his com
position. Thus the divine names which the speakers employ are
the patriarchal ones : God, God Almighty, but not Jehovah (cf.
Ex. vi. 2, 3), though the author uses this name itseK, xxviii. 28.
Like the great forefathers of Israel, Job is rich in cattle (chap.
i. 3 ; Gen. xu. 16) ; he is also the priest of his family (chap. i. 5),
and offers the patriarchal " burnt-offering ; " and all historical
events aUuded to are those of the patriarchal world (xvUi. 15 ;
xxU. 15). But though Job himself belonged to this age, the
author ' is an Israelite, and the book is a reflection of tho
religious Ufe and religious thought in Israel.
The date of such a book as Job, which contains few aUusions
to historical events, can be determined only approximately.
The Uterature of Israel is, more than any other literature,
national. It was the nation or people that was In covenant with
Jehovah, and hence it is the destinies of this subject, th© people,
i2

148 BOOK BY BOOK.
that the reUgious mind foUows with keenest interest. The literary ,
compositions of any age reflect the conditions and state of mind
of the people of that age, and the question to be put Is : Of
what period in the chequered history of the people is the Book
of Job a reflection ? The opinion expressed by the Talmud that
Moses was the author of Job is unworthy of any attention.
The antique colour of the book suggested to uncritical minds
that It was an ancient composition, and such minds are always
ready to ascribe an anonymous writing to some weU-known name.
Neither the Mosaic age, however, nor the times that foUowed it —
times of stirring enterprise and warfare — were favourable for the
production of a work of deep reflection such as Job. And there
is evidence in the book Itself that the author was famiUar with
writings usuaUy ascribed to the age of David ; the passage chap.
vii. 17, betrays a knowledge of Psalm viU.
The earliest period to which the book can be assigned is the
age of Solomon, and Luther appears to have placed it in this
period, a view in which he is foUowed by many ¦writers stUl.
If we look into the great coUections of the Proverbs, however,
such as chap. xxv. — xxix. or x. — xxU., we flnd that though their
purpose Is to exhibit the operations of God's pro^vidence, there is
not a trace In them of the disquieting problems of providence
which fill the Book of Job. History had not yet forced such
questions on men's minds. The coUection Prov. i. — ix. probably
belongs to the seventh century, but Job xxviU. is in aU prob
ability posterior to it. In Prov. viU. ¦wisdom, i.e. a general and
satisfying conception of God's operations in the world, is held
out as attainable by man ; in Job xxvui. such comprehension
of providence is spoken of as beyond the range of man's naind.
The moral disorders of the world, the sorrowful destinies of many
pious men baffled the reUgious mind of the time.
These two general facts, then, first, that questions of pro
vidence have entered upon a new phase, and that not its general
course but its problems absorb men's attention ; and secondly,
that a condition of great disorder and misery forms the back
ground of the poem — both point to a late period in the history
of Israel as that to which the book is due. When we read such
passages as these: "The earth is given into the hands of the
wicked ; He covereth the faces of the judges thereof " (ix. 24) ;
" The tabernacles of tyrants prosper, and they that provoke God
are secure " (vii. 6); " Out of the city the dying groan, and the
soul of the wounded crieth out, yet God regardeth not the
wrong" (xxiv. 12) ; and much more of the same kind, we
feel that the picture is one of the pubUc condition of the
world, and not the mere creation of a sick and gloomy mind.

THE BOOK OF JOB. 149
There are other arguments, also, which suggest a period not
earUer than the Exile, e.g. the very lofty doctrine of God ; and
the inwardness of the morality taught (chap, xxxi.), and the
points of contact which the book presents with Jeremiah and
the ideas of his age, and the paraUel between Job and the
servant of the Lord in Isaiah xl. — lxvi. Most writers have
felt that Job iu. and Jer. xx. 14 seq. are not independent of one
another. Job iii. is highly elaborate and artistic; but the
passage in Jeremiah, just on account of its greater simpUcity
and naturalness, is probably to be considered the original. The
coincidences of Job with Isaiah xl. — ^Ixvi. are very numerous.
These chapters are now usually considered to belong to the
period of the ExUe, and the great probability is that the Book of
Job owes its origin to the trials and religious perplexities of the
same period.
We have been left in complete ignorance who the author ofthe
book is, just as we are ignorant who the authors of many other
parts of Scripture are. The book has been attributed to Job
himseK, Elihu, Moses, Solomon, Heman the Ezrahite, author of
Psalm Ixxxvui., Isaiah, Hezekiah, author of the hymn Isaiah
xxxviii., Baruch, the friend of Jeremiah, and others. Conjec
ture is enthely vain. _No literature contains so many great
anonymous works as that ot Israel. It ¦was onlv the propheta
that usually put their names to theiFwrltings. The writers of
the Old Testament did not speak their own words but those of
the Lord, and having delivered their message they passed out of
sight, forgetting themselves and being speedily forgotten in name
by others.

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

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

152 BOOK BY BOOK.
to David as a master of sacred song (1 Chron. xv. 7 — 21, xvi.
5 : Neh. xii. 46) ; (IU) Heman (mentioned 2 Chron. xx. 19 as a
famous musician), who as a member of the Korahite guild is
said to have written Psalm Ixxviii., for this seems to be the
meaning of the double title . of that psalm : (iv) Ethan the
Ezrahite, who, like Heman, is named only as the author of one
psalm, the 89th. The only other authors to whom particiUar
psalms are ascribed are Moses, who is said to have written one
psalm, the 90th, acknowledged on aU hands to be a psalm of great
antiquity, and Solomon, who is said to have written two, the
72nd and the 127th.
There are indeed certain variations in the titles as they stand
in the Septuagint and in other ancient versions. For instance,
in the title of Ps. cxxxvli. the LXX. add the name of Jeremiah
to that of David. In Psalms cxxxviii., cxlvi., cxlvii,, cxlviii.,
they gave Haggai and Zechariah as the authors, the three last
being anonymous in the Hebrew text. In Ixxi. they add to the
name of David, " Of the sons of Jonadab and of those that were
first led captive," thus indicating their belief that this was a
psalm dating from the Captivity, whilst retaining the name of
Da^vid as they found it in their copies. We see then that by far
the larger number of the psalms were tradltlonaUy held to be
David's, or to have been written by Levitical singers appointed
by him for the musical service of the Temple and inspired by
his influence and example ; and hence the whole coUection came
to be styled "Psalms of David," just as the Book of Proverbs
was called "Proverbs of Solomon," though a large part of it
belongs to a later time.
3. The Formation and Arrangement of the Psalter. — When we
come to examine the Psalter more closely one of the first things
that strikes us is that besides its division into five books it con
sists of a number of smaUer coUections. Groups of psalms
supposed to be by the same author and having a common purpose
are placed together. Thus the First Book consists almost
exclusively of psalms ascribed to David ; the second of a series of
Psalms by the sons of Korah, and another series by David;
the third has a group by Asaph, foUowed by a second group of
Korahite psalms ; In the fourth, Psalms xcii. — c. form one great
prophetical anthem ; in the fifth we have besides "the Pilgrim
Songs" (cxx. — cxxxii.) and the " HaUelujah Psalms," the
group cxlii. — cxviii. which is called "the HaUel." AU these
were originally no doubt separate collections, smaller hymn-books,
which were at length combined so as to form our present Psalter.
In the main, as might be expected, the arrangement is chrono
logical. The Fourth and Fifth Books carry upon their face

TIIE nOOK OF PSAI.MS. 153
the evidence of a later date. They are full of allusions to the
ExUe and to the Eeturn. The earUer books are of a different
character. We may assign the first two in the main to David
and his contemporaries. The Third represents a later period
of Jewish song and may have been coUected by "the men of
Hezekiah." But the chronological order is not always observed.
There is one psalm in the Second Book, the 44th, which is
certainly not of David's time, and has been brought down by
many critics to the time of the Maccabees. In Uke manner the
74th and the 79th in the Third Book have been held to refer to
the destruction and profanation of the Temple by Antiochus Epi
phanes. On the other hand, the 101st and the 110th Psalms in the
Fourth Book are almost certainly Davidic. StUl in the main, as
I have said, the earUer psalms are to be found in the earUer
books, the later in those with which the coUection closes.
Let us now look at thephenomena presented bythe severalbooks
with special reference to the supposed authorship of the different
psalms. The psalms in the First Book, except four, the 1st,
the 2nd, the 10th, and the 33rd, which are anonymous, are
ascribed, as has been said, to David. But the 1st Psalm was
commonly regarded as a general introduction to the book, and
according to an ancient arrangement the 2nd Psalm was united
¦with it, which would account for the latter having no title.
SimUarly in the version of the LXX. the 10th Psalm forms one
with the 9th, and the alphabetical arrangement, which though
broken is stiU discernible running through both psalms, lends
colour to the theory that they were originaUy one poem. On the
other hand, the LXX. give Psahn xxxiii. to David.
At the end of the Second Book we read, " The Prayers of
David the son of Jesse are ended." In point of fact Psalms
U. — Ixxi. are attributed to David with the exception of three
which are anonymous in the Hebrew, but at least two of them
are by the LXX. given to the same author. But the first haK
of this book (Psalms xhi. — 1.) is a collection of Korahite poems.
It is scarcely credible that the subscription could have been
added by the general editor. He would not have inserted the
twelve KoraHte psalms so as to break the series of Davidic
hymns, which but for this insertion would run on continuously
from the beginning of the First Book (Psalm iii.) to the end of
the Second. There is another important circumstance to be
noted. In the First Book the Divine Name almost exclusively
employed is Jehovah (Yahveh), whereas the abstract term Elohim
is quite exceptional. In the Second Book, on the contrary, the use
bf Elohim is the rule and the use of Jehovah the exception. That
this is deUberately done is shown for instance in such a Psalm

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

THE BOOK OF PSALMS. 155
5. But as we have no reason to suppose that Da-vid prefixed
his name to his o-wn poems, and as in accordance with Oriental
custom they were probably handed down for some time by
word of mouth, sung or recited, before they were committed
¦to writing, it is easy to see how psalms the authorship of which
was doubtful or unknown would be given as a matter of course
to the greatest of the national poets. The most that can be said
is that these titles represent the tradition at the time when the
first collection. Psalms i. — xli., was made. How easily the
Davidic authorship of any hymn came to be accepted we see from
the statement in the First Book of Chronicles (xvi. 7) that, when
he appointed the Levitical singers, David delivered a psalm into
their hands ¦which Is a mere cento of quotations from other
Psalms, chiefly from the 105th and 106th, which are both as
late as the Exile, the 106th having a distinct reference to it
(ver. 46, 47). And it strikingly illustrates the uncritical
method of procedure which could assign this composite psalm to
David, that not only is this reference to the Captivity put into
his mouth (1 Chron. x^vi. 35), but, as has aheady been observed,
even the doxology slightly varied with which the Fourth Book
concludes, though the division between the Fourth and Fifth
Books Is unquestionably later than the Exile.
6. As regards the series of Davidic psalms found in the
Second Book, Psalms li. — Ixx., except lxvi. and Ixvii., which
are in the Hebrew anonymous, the same remark applies to the
titles of these as to those of the First Book : the contents of the
Psalm are often at variance with the reputed authorship. The
69th Psalm may be taken as an instance In point. It is said to
have been written by David, "when Saul sent, and they watched
the house to put him to death." But the aUusions in the psalm
to the -writer's enemies are quite inconsistent with the supposed
circumstances. Saul's emissaries could not possibly be described
as making their rounds every evening as a patrol about the city,
uttering oaths and curses, howling Uke unclean dogs seeking
their garbage, men whose curse it is to wander about for bread,
men finaUy whose overthrow wiU make the name of the God
as God's holy mountain, which David must do, after he had brought the ark
to Jerusalem, but allude to the Temple in which the singer of Psahn xxvii.
desires to live continually. But the house of God at Zion in David's time
was not a temple but a tent." I have, however, sho-wn in my commentary
on the Sth Paalm that the word translated "temple" maybe uaed of any
considerable structure, as it was for instance of the Tabernacle and the s-ur-
rounding buildings at Shiloh ; and on the 27th Psalm I have pointed out that
the author expressly calls these same structures " a tent.!' Obviously, as at
Shiloh, there was not merely the tent but buildings of a substantial kind
(doors are mentioned) which enclosed it.

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

THE BOOK OF PSALMS. 157
With one exception they are aU very short, and must have con
stituted originally a smaU separate hjrmn-book, intended appa
rently for the use of pilgrims going up to Jerusalem to keep
the national feasts. The title of these psalms, which is strictly
"Songs of Ascent" (or going up), denotes the purpose which
the coUector had in view. Other interpretations have indeed
been given of the title, but this seems the most probable, and it
is that with which the contents of the coUection harmonise ; some
of these poems referring directly to incidents of the journey,
and others expressing the feelings of the pilgrims as they came
in sight of the Holy City or stood within its gates. But there
are also in these little songs constant aUusions to the return from
the Captivity, showing 'that they could not have been written
earUer than the times of Ezra and Nehemiah. Hence
some critics have supposed that the " going up " of the title
refers to the return from Babylon, which was spoken of as a
"going up "to the Holy Land. The other explanation, how
ever, is the better, as being the more comprehensive. The
coUection consists of post-Captivity psalms, but it was intended
for pilgrimages to the Second Temple, and hence the double
aUusions by which it is marked. The custom of going up to
keep the feasts with music and song was ancient, as we learn
from Isaiah xxx. 29.
9. The psalms which are assigned to the Levitical singers are
not by their titles associated with any particular circumstances
in the history. But it is perfectly plain that such historical •
psalms as the 74th and 79th, describing the devastation wrought
in the Temple and the profanation of it by the erection of
heathen emblems, could not have been written by the Asaph who
was the contemporary of Darid. Hence some critics have main
tained that "Asaph" stands for "the sons of Asaph," and
that these psalms were composed by members of the Leritical
guUd, either after Nebuchadnezzar's destruction of the Temple,
or after the havoc and profanation wrought by Antiochus
Epiphanes. It is noticeable, however, that we never find " the
sons of Asaph " in any of the Psalm inscriptions, though we do
find the phrase in the Book of Chronicles.
These two groups of psahns by Levitical singers are marked
by certain peculiarities. In those ascribed to Asaph God is fre
quently spoken of as the Shepherd of Israel, which is His flock,
and as the Judge both of Israel and of aU the nations of the world.
There are many references to the giving of the law on Sinai, to
the march through the wilderness, and to other portions of the
ancient history, such as do not occur in the psalms of the first
two books. In these psalms both the Divine names, Elohim and

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

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

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

THE BOOK OF PSALMS. 161
scribed to the Lerites. In like manner, Z'<^o<?«A(" for thanks
giving"). Psalm c, may have been intended to signify that the
psalm was to be sung when the thank-offering was presented.
(U.) Musical. Under this head come — (a) The different names
by which a psalm is described, as Shir, " a song," Mi%m6r, "a
psalm," denoting that it was to be sung with instrumental
accompaniment; Michtam (LXX. aTq\oypa.(j)la), perhaps "a
golden poem " ; or " a mystery," a song of deep spiritual import ;
Mashil, " a skiKuUy constructed ode " (LXX. o-uyeVeajs, e(s
o-weo-ti'), a meaning which seems to be required by the use of
the word in the, body of a psalm (xlrii. 7 [8]), where it must
mean " in a skUful strain," or " a skiKuUy constructed song ; "
Shiggaion, "perhaps a dithyrambic ode," as being irregular in
form or metre. But this and other explanations are very
doubtful, as we have in Hab. ill., " Upon Shiggionoth," which
may, however, denote that the song was to be sung "after the
manner of dithyrambs " or " to dithyrambic measures." Com
pare the expressions "Upon Alamoth," "Upon the Sheminith
(or octave)."
(J) The instruments which were to be employed when the
psalm was sung in the Temple serrice: " Upon Nehiloth" (in
scription of Psahn v.), "To the flutes," or with flute accom
paniment;* "On Neginath" (Psalms iv., vi., Uv., Iv., Ixrii.,
ixxvi.), i.e. "vrith accompaniment of stringed instruments;"
and similarly, though with a slight variation of form, in
Psalm Ixi.
{c) Particular tones or measures to which the psalm was to he
sung. 0» .^ZoMott (Psalm xM.), "after the manner of maidens;"
and Upon Sheminith (vi. xU.), "upon the octave" (found also
in the historical books, 1 Chron. xv. 20), the former referring, it
has been conjectured, to the women's voices — maidens we know
joining in the singing and music of the service (Psalm Ixriii. 25)
— and the latter to the bass voices upon the (lower) octave ; Upon
Gittith (Psalm viii.), " after the manner of Gath," some measure
or style which the Hebrews had borrowed from their PhUistine
neighbours in that city ; To Jeduthun (xxxix.) or Upon Jeduthun,
" after the manner of Jeduthun," one of Darid's famous singers.
(d) Besides these notices, there are several others which pro
bably indicate the first word of other, apparentiy secular, poems
* It has been objected to this explanation that it is not likely that 'wind
instruments would be employed in sacred music as an accompaniment to the
singing, but Delitzsch has observed that the use of the flute in divine wor-
ship ia attested by Is. xxx. 29 (of. 1 Sam, x. 5 ; 1 Kings i, 40) . In the second
Temple, on twelve daya in the year, the " HaUel" 'waa simg to the accom
paniment of flutes. See Delitzsch, Commentary on the Psalms (Eng. trans.),
part i., pp. 43, 155. M

162 BOOK BY BOOK.
to the airs of 'which particular psahns were commonly sung.;
There is nothing incredible In this. In the sixteenth century
Clement Marot's metrical translations of the Psalms in French
were often sung to popular airs. Eeuss teUs us that he has
himself heard in missions organised by the Jesuits, after the
restoration of the monarchy In France, religious hymns sung to
the airs of the operas then in vogue. What more natural than
that something of the same kind should have taken place in
Jerusalem, where, as we know, singing and music were the
constant accompaniments of banquets (see e.g. Is. v. 12; Am. vi,
6, viii. 10), and where there must consequently have been a
large number of secular songs, every trace of which has disap
peared except so far as they have been preserved In these titles.
Thus, for instance, in the inscription of Psalm xxii., we have
(see Eevised Version) "set to Aljeleth hash-Shahar," that is
"the hind of the morning," because it was set to the same music
as some song beginning with those words. So again In Psalm xlv.
we have '¦' set to Shoshannim," that is "lilies," the song be
ginning with the word llUes. Or again Psalm Ivi. the melody
was one which was originaUy that of a, song beginning, " The
silent dove of far off (lands)," or as others interpret, "The dove
of the distant terebinths." Or yet again, as in Psahn Iviii. the
melody was borrowed from a rintage song, the words " Al tash-
heth," "Destroy not," being perhaps the first words of the song
of which we may have a further trace, as Dr. Eobertson Smith
suggests, in the Prophet Isaiah (Ixv. 8), " When the new wine
is found in the cluster, men say, 'Destroy it not, for a blessing
is in it.' " But as regards aU these musical notices we must speak
with due reserve. They were enigmas even to the Septuagint
translators, and the most recent investigations have added nothing
to our knowledge.
{e) The same may be said of another musical sign, the word
Selah, which does not indeed occur in the inscriptions but in the
body of the psalm. It occurs most commonly at the end of a
otrophe, but sometimes in the middle of a verse, and even where
it interrupts the sense, as e.g. in Iv. 19 [20], Ixvii. 7 [8], .33 [34].
The LXX. translate it by &a0aA/ia, evidently supposing that it
denoted the intervention at the particular place of a musical
symphony. The voices ceased and the musical instruments
alone were heard. The word, derived from a root signifying
"to lift up," was intended as a direction to the musicians to
strike up In a louder strain. Of the many interpretations which
have been given of the word, this seems on the whole the most
probable. 14. The Psalms as a Collection of Religious Poetry. — ^The Psalms

THE BOOK OF PSALMS. 163
are a phenomenon unique in literature ; there is no other coUec
tion of sacred poetry in the world that can be compared with
them. The Psalter indeed is not one book, but many. It con
sists not of one but of several collections of hymns and spiritual
songs put together at various times. It covers a period of weU
nigh a thousand years, from David, the great master of Jewish
song, down, perhaps, to the last great struggle for national
independence in the time of the Maccabees. It covers a still
wider space if the 90th Psalm was written, as its title indicates,
by Moses, and indeed that psalm must be in any case of very
considerable antiquity. The Psalter is thus the marvellous
record of human hearts pouring themselves out from age to age
and from century to century in communion with God. It traverses
aU the vicissitudes of human Ufe. It is both national and per
sonal. It sings the praises of God in nature and in grace. It
goes down into the deepest depths of human anguish ; it soars
to the highest heights of human joy. But, above all, the Psalms
glow with a depth and tenderness of personal affection towards
God such as has never been surpassed even in the hymns of the
Christian Chureh.
In prayer and praise God and man draw nigh one to the
other ; and the Psalma have this distinctive feature, and it is to
be foimd in all of them, they are true In their representation of
God, true In their representation of man's heart and man's needs
and aspirations.
(i.) They are true in their representation of God. It is the
same God who is the stay of all their hearts. It is not as in
heathen prayers and hymns, a number of different and rival
deities who are the objects of worship and praise ; it is the One
God, Elohim or Jehovah, whom aU aUke adore. The names may
be different, the Being is one. Who is this God who thus binds
them to HimseK? Who is this God for whom words seem
too weak to express His glory or to celebrate His lovingkindness ?
He is the God who has revealed HimseK to them and to their
fathers, and taken them into His holy covenant. He is not Uke
-the gods of the heathen, the impersonation of the powers of
Nature, or the merely exaggerated image of degraded and
profligate men. The gods of the heathen were, at the best, gods
of the wood and the river and the sea, gods of the winds and the
storms and the sxmrise ; and too often were monsters of cruelty
and lust and - passion and rindlctiveness, beings whom men
-supposed they could propitiate by sacrifice and offerings, but
bangs, like themselves, capricious, revengeful, Ucentious, such
as no true heart could honour, much less adore and love'.
But the God of the Psahns is not only one. He is not only the
ii2

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

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

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

THE BOOK OF PSALMS. 167
as these : " Set thou an ungodly man over him, and let Satan
stand at his right hand;" "Let his prayer be turned into
sin;" "Let him be blotted out of the book of life," and the
like ? The unnatural strain which must be put upon words to
make them fit into such a system of exegesis ought long ago to
have led expositors to abandon it.
(iii.) Others again would regard these psalms as predictive.
They remind us that the 69th Psahn is again and aga-tn quoted
in the New Testament as haring its fulfilment in the circumstances
of our Lord's earthly Ufe or in the history of the Church ; that
words from the 69th Psalm (ver. 26), and the 109th IPsalm
(ver. 8), are referred to by St. Peter as "the Scripture which
must needs be fulfilled which the Holy Ghost spoke before by
the mouth of David conceming Judas." Hence instead of
saying, " Let their table become a snare," "Let their habitation
be made desolate," "Let them be blotted out of the book of
Ufe," &c,, these interpreters would have us render, " Their table
shaU become a snare ; " " Their habitation shall be desolate ; "
" They shaU be blotted out of the book of Ufe," &c.
But even if the laws of Hebrew grammar did not forbid such
a rendering as the substitution of the future for the expression
of a wish, it must be observed that there are imperatives which
cannot be so explained: "Pour out thine indignation upon
them," "Add iniquity to their iniquity," and the like. And in
any case how can we put words like these into the mouth of
our Blessed Lord in the hour of His passion ?, It was indeed
true of Him, as it had been of some saint of old, that "when
He was thirsty they gave Him rinegar to drink " (Psalm Ixix.
21) ; but who can for a moment beUeve that thoughts of awful
vengeance such as those in the psalm dwelt in the heart of the
Divine Sufferer, whose every word from the cross was a word
of tenderest pity and love, who did not condemn even the
unrepentant robber, who prayed for His murderers, "Father,
forgive them ; for they know not what they do " ?
(iv.) An ingenious attempt has indeed been made in the 109th
Psalm, where the imprecations are the most awful, and the most
elaborately drawn out, to escape from the difflculty by putting
them into the mouth of the Psalmist's enemies and regarding
them as directed against himseK. At the end of the 4th verse we
are ,to supply the word " saying," which is not uncommonly
omitted in Hebrew poetry {e.g. Psalm ii. 2, xxii. 7), and to read
it thua : " They have rewarded me evil for good and hatred for
my good wiU ; saying. Set thou an ungodly man over him," and
so on through the whole string of anathemas, to ver. 20, where
the Psahnist, haring thus quoted the words of his enemies, com-

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

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

170 BOOK BY BOOK.
one-haK are drawn from the Psalms. The Psalms then are pre
dictive ; the poet is a prophet. Such psalms as the 2nd, the
20th, the 21st, the 46th, the 72nd, the 110th, where a king is the
object ; or such psalms as the 16th, the 22nd, the 40th, the 69th,
where a prophet or a servant of God who is a sufferer for
righteousness' sake are portrayed, are all quoted in the New
Testament as having their fulfilment in Christ.
Yet there are expressions in some of these psalms — as in the
40th, where there is a confession of sin, "Mine Iniquities are
more in number than the hairs of my head; " as in the 16th,
where the poet exclaims, " Their drink offerings of blood wiU I
not offer, neither take up their names (those of idols) in my
lips ; " as in the 69th, where the sufferer breaks forth, as has
been aheady said, into burning imprecations — which certainly
cannot be regarded as suitable on the lips of our Lord. How
are we to explain these ? How Is it that whilst we find in these
psalms words which the New Testament ¦Writers put into the
mouth of our Lord or teU us are fulfiUed in Him, there are yet
other words which cannot possibly find such an application?
Only on the principle that prophets and kings of old were types,
and consequently imperfect adumbrations, of the Christ who
was to come.
They spoke out their own feeUngs, and hence the strictly human
element in their poems ; but as foreshadowing the true Prophet
and the true King they were carried beyond themselves. One
higher and fairer than any son of man was before their eyes
and in their hearts as inspired seers. Christ is in the Psalms.
Who can read the 22nd Psalm without seeing there the mar
vellous portrait of the Divine Sufferer ? The words express the
real feeUngs of some suffering saint of God or of the suffering
nation, but they go far beyond their first occasion. Where,
indeed, in the world shall we find anything approaching to this
exact correspondence between prophecy and fulfilment ? Even
in the Gospel itself we scarcely behold so consoling a rision of
the crucified Eedeemer as In this psalm, written centuries before
He appeared upon earth.
Looking then at the Psalter as a great collection of sacred
poetry, we may sum up its power and its teaching in the words
of Luther.
First, as he says : " A finer book of the lives and legends of
the saints has never appeared on the earth, nor ever can appear.
For if we were to desire that out of aU the lives, legends, and
histories the best were picked out and brought together and set
forth to the best advantage ; why the book thua produced would
be just the Psalter we now have."

THE BOOK OF PSALMS. 171
And next : " The Psalter ought to be precious and dear to ua
were it for nothing else but the clear promise that it holds forth
respecting Christ's death and resurrection, and the prefiguratlon
of His kingdom and of the whole state and system of Chris
tianity ; insomuch that it inight be well entitled a Little Bible,
wherein everything contained in the enthe Bible is beautifuUy
and briefly comprehended and compacted into an enchiridion or
manual. ... It seems to me as if the Holy Ghost had been
pleased to take on HimseK the trouble of putting together such
a Bible, or book of exemplars, touching the whole of Christianity
or all the saints ; in order that they who are unable to read tho
whole Bible may nevertheless find almost the whole sum com
prehended in this httie bools."

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

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

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

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

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

THE BOOK OF PROVERBS. 177
It was this that made his study of life so fascinating, and gave
unity to it. And it was not life merely on its religious but
particularly on its mental side, as an embodiment of sense or
intelUgence, that attracted him, for underneath every aspect of
it there was a divine reaUty or thought, upon which it was his
delight to lay his finger.
The wise man, however, does not merely observe Ufe and
give a dispassionate photograph of men and their conduct ; he
is a teacher, and passes judgment. Yet his observations are
always good-natured, and never betray dishke of his feUow-
men. He walks through the bazaars and observes the methods
of Oriental marketing. "Itia naught, it is naught, saith the
buyer ; but when he is gone hia way then he boasteth " (xx. 14).
Or he observes how our natural selfishness cuts into ua some
what deeper, and describes it with a certain kindly sarcasm :
" AU the brothers of the poor man do hate him ; much more wiU
his neighbours go far from him " (xix. 7). Sometimes his ex
pressions border on humour, as when he makes the sluggard
express his deadly terror of labour by his cry, " There ia a
lion in the road ! a lion in the streets ! " (xxri. 13) ; or describes
him as too tired to lift his hand from the dish to his mouth,
or too lazy to wash that which he took in hunting (xxri. 15).
But usuaUy he shows a kindly sympathy with the feeUngs of
every sentient creature, which descends even to the lower
creation. "A merciful man regards the natural desires' of hia
beast" (xU. 10). Thence every emotion and natural feeUng of
the indiridual is of interest, and he sympathises with it, whether
sorrow or joy : " Sorrow in the heart of a man bears him
down " (xu. 25) ; and, on the other hand, "A merry heart doeth
good hke a medicine " (xvu. 22). And he is delicate enough
to perceive that however grateful the sympathy of others is to
us ordinarUy, there are times when we must be left alone with
our own feeUngs. " The heart knoweth his own bitterness,
and a stranger intermeddleth not with his joy " (xiv. 10). Yet,
on the other hand, we Uve in one another, we stretch out our
hands to the future, and sometimes the "half of our soul"
embarks on the sea or wanders in distant lands, and we long to
know how he fares. " Hope deferred maketh the heart sick"
(xiu. 12) ; " A good report maketh the bones fat " (xv. 30) ; and
" As cold water to a thirsty soul, so is good news from a far
country " (xxv. 25).
Nothing human is aUen to the wise man ; he is phUanthropic
in every sense. And aU the broad distinctions created by God,
as man and woman, father and chUd, youth and old age, he
dwells upon as each beautiful in its place, and seizes on that

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

^^'¦^ BOOK BY BOOK.
is seen to furnish a powerful apologetic for his time. His
deep sympathy with men in their sorrows, and the under
tone of melancholy in his mind, enables him to speak with
effect. He has gauged the evil fuUy. Then in spite of the
evil his faith in God and His moral rule, and in human duty,
remains unshaken (ill. 17 ; viii. 12 seq. ; xi. 9). And the wise
practical counsel which he offers, his kaleidoscopic handling of
the elements of human Ufe, showing the good side of what is
usuaUy thought evil, and the evU side of what is considered
good — aU this was fitted to give a firmer tone to men's minds.
9. The Preacher rejects the idea of what we caU " culture," a
disciplining of the indiridual mind by reflection and the
experiences of life. A culture to which death put an end could
not satisfy a spirit like his. Then he was too sick at heart to
cherish the conception of a progress of the race, a widening of
its life in the circuit of the suns. Society was too disintegrated,
and the flrst principle of moral order too habituaUy disregarded
for such an idea to sustain itseK. Again he was not certain of
a conscious Immortality of the individual. And he was stUl
entangled in the beUef, which was the cross of aU afflicted men
in Israel, that the outward lot of men in the world was a true
reflection of the mind of God towards them. The Preacher
prepares for Christianity by showing the need of it. He is a
voice " crying in the night." His cry may justiy be caUed
prophetic. The Ught and immortaUty brought to Ught in the
Gospel would have changed his "vanity of vanities" into an
actirity of gladness. When Christ said, "God is spirit, and
they that worship must worship Him in spirit," He not only
stated a necessity. He gave a deflnition. Eeligion is feUow-
¦ ship with God in spirit. And to one having this feUowship
the world no moro appears, as it did to the Preacher, an
external machine, crushing him to pieces; he feels himseK
with God at the centre of it, and can say to his soul. All things
are youra.

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

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

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

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

THE SONG OF SOLOMON. 197
occurrence at so early a period awakens doubt. Altogether it
must be acknowledged that much obscurity stiU continues to hang
over both the date and the interpretation of the book.
In the Eevised Version the spaces left between the verses indi
cate the different speakers.
A few notes -wUl suggest how the poem is read on the modem
view : —
Chapter i. 2 — ^ii. 7 : Shulamite, daughters of Jerusalem, king. (Shula
mite, 2 — 4, speaks of the beloved, who is absent ; 9 — 11, the king addresses
her ; 12 — 14, ahe indirectly repels him. If 15 — ii. 3 be a dialogue between
her and the king, he must be understood to apeak to her, while she apeaks of
the beloved, who is absent.)
Chapter ii. 8 — iii. 5 : Shulamite, daughters of Jerusalem. (8 — 14, Shulamite
narrates a visit of the beloved and Ha words, aud her own reply, 15 — 17.
The -words, 15, are auppoaed to be a verae of a vineyard aong; ui. 1 — 5,
Shulamite narratea a dream or an occurrence.)
Chapter iii. 6 — iv. 6 : Spectators, king, Shulamite. (6 — II, spectators of
the approaching litter of tiie king ; iv. I — 6, the king addresses the Shula
mite.) Chapter iv. 7 — ^v. 1 : Beloved, Shulamite. (7 — 16, beloved; laat worda of
16, Shulamite ; v. 1. beloved.)
Chapter v. 2 — -yi. 3 : Shulamite, daughters of Jerusalem. (2 — 8, Shula
mite narratea a dream ; 9, daughters of Jerusalem ; 10 — 16 ; Shulamite ;
vi. 1, daughters of Jerusalem ; 2, 3, Shulamite.)
Chapter vi. 4— vii. 9 ; King, daughters of Jerusalem, Shulamite. 4 — 9,
king, 10 — 13, give an account of the first encounter of the Shulamite -with the
royal cortege ; vii. 1 — 9, king.)
Chapter vii. 10 — viii. 14 : Shulamite, daughters of Jerusalem, beloved.
(10 — viii. 4, Shulamite ; 5a, a spectator witneaaing approach of Shulamite and
¦beloved ; 6i — 7, Shulamite to beloved ; 8 — 12, Shulamite narratea an epiaode
of her girlhood, with refleotiong; 13, beloved to Shulamite ; 14, Shulamite •
in reply.)

THE BOOK OF THE PROPHET
ISAIAH.
1. The Prophet Himself. — To write anything like a biography
of Isaiah is simply impossible. We have no materials for such
a work. Like so many other of the great ones who, in the Old
Testament story, worked so weU for their Master, Isaiah, as
regards himself, was usually studiedly silent.
From notices scattered here and there in his writings W8
gather, however, the foUowing particulars respecting himseK.
He was the son of Amoz. A Jewish tradition relates how this
Amoz was a brother of King Amaziah. This is improbable, as
such a relationship woidd make Isaiah too old. But that in
some way Amoz was connected with Amaziah is not unUkely. It
is clear that Isaiah belonged to an influential house, from the
fact that from early days he was admitted to the friendship of,
and evidently had great influence with. Kings Jotham and Heze
kiah. It has been suggested by Dean Plumptre that Isaiah was
a priest, as the vision which he saw (chap. vi. 1) was from the
court which none might enter save the sons of Aaron. The
explanation, however, of this scene is, that Isaiah saw and heard
what is related in chapter vi. when in a trance.
His life was a long and busy one. He lived and worked
under five kings — Uzziah, Jotham, Ahaz, Hezekiah, and Manas
seh — apparently under circumstances of great intimacy, roughly
speaking from B.C. 779 to B.C. 690, some ninety years. The
rabbinical tradition teUs us how, under the last-named monarch,
having refused to obey some of his idolatrous ordinances, the
aged prophet was cruelly put to death : placed, so runs the story,
between two planhs, Isaiah was hilled by being sawn asunder. The
reference in Heb. xl. 37 'is not Improbably an allusion to the
great prophet's fate. Compare Talmud, treatise Sanhedrim,
ciii. 2. The Fathers Justin Martyr, TertuUIan, Jerome, and
Augustine accept this tradition as authentic.
It was a stormy and eventful period during which Isaiah

THE BOOK OF THE PROPHET ISAIAH. IS 9
lived and preached and wrote. In his earlier years he dwelt in
the midst of the comparative wealth and luxury enjoyed by
Judah during the prosperous reign of Uzziah. He witnessed
the sister kingdom of Israel first rendered tributary by the
Assyrian monarch Pul, and subsequently conquered by the same
people under Tiglath-Pileser. He watched the last struggles of
Israel and the desperate resistance of Samaria, when the rem
nant of the iU-f ated northern division of the chosen people were
carried into captivity.
Isaiah, we know, with his own immediate circle, belonged to
the higher and wealthier classes. He was on terms of intimacy
'with the high priest, and his usual residence was in the capital.
As time went on, his infiuence increased, and in middle and
later hfe he was undoubtedly the foremost man in the nation,
exercising a peculiar power over the sovereign of the time and
his advisers. His mighty and enduring influence was due, in
the flrst instance, to his great natural abilities, to his earnestness
and singleness of purpose, to his true patriotism and passionate
desire to see his countrymen once more restored to the favour of
the invisible King to whom the nation owed name, and laws,
and political eristence. But behind these things which any
great and patriotic statesman might have possessed, Isaiah was
indubitably regarded by king and people as possessing, in an
eminent degree, those rare and supernatural powers which, ever
and anon, belonged to the great reUgious heroes of Hebrew
story, men like Samuel, Nathan, and EUjah. After D^vld,
Isaiah is possibly the most conspicuous personage in the history
of Israel.
When Isaiah lived there was little left in Israel or Judah of
real reUgious life. There was the formal, elaborate ritual of
service and of sacrifice still maintained in the Temple, but it
was generally hoUow and meaningless, and the old friendship
between the individual IsraeUte and the Eternal of Hosts com
paratively unknown. In the northern kingdom of Israel, the
cup of iniquity was fiUed, as we have seen, in Isaiah's time, and
the prophet-statesman was a witness of the final Invasion, the
utter defeat of its armies, the storming of the capital city,
Samaria, and the hopeless captivity of the people.
In the southern kingdom of Judah, it was Isaiah's life work
to bring about a reformation, and to ward off a ruin similar to
that which was witnessed In their kinsmen ofthe northern king
dom. The internal order of Judah, in the days when Isaiah
wrote, has been graphically described as foUows : * " Wealth
* See Professor Eobertson Smith, The Prophets of Israel, lecture vi., "The
Eeign of Ahaz."

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

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

202 BOOK BY BOOK.
suggested by Dean Bradley*: "Isaiah was transported by
God's Spirit into a time and region other than his own ; ... he
is led In prolonged and solitary visions into a land that he
has never trodden, and to a generation on. whom he has never
looked. "The familiar scenes and faces among which he had lived
and laboured have grown dim and disappeared. All sounds and
voices of the present are hushed, and the interests and passions
into which he has thrown himself, with all the Intensity of his
race and character, move him no more. The present has died
out of the horizon of his soul's rision. . . . The voices in his
ears are those of men unborn, and he lives a second life among
events and persons, sins and sufferings, fears and hopes, photo
graphed with the minutest accuracy on the sensitive and
sympathetic medium of his own spirit ; and he becomes the
spokesman of the faith, and hope, and passionate yearning of
the exiled nation, the descendants of men living when he wrote,
in the profound peace of a renewed prosperity."
Very roughly, then, the writings of Isaiah may be dirided
into three great divisions —
The First. The book of warnings, denunolatlon, and woe.
The Second. The historical episode of the conversion of Israel
under Hezekiah, and how the Lord awaked as one out of sleep
and raised once more the Glorious Arm In defence of the people
whom he loved.
The Third. The book of consolation, written during the hap
pier days of Hezekiah — the outcome of what he saw in vision
and trance concerning the coming Eedeemer and the future of
the Israel of God.
3. The Authorship of Chapters xl. — lxvi. — The authorship^
of the last great section of "Isaiah," chapters xl. — Ixri., in
recent times has been frequently caUed In question. In Old Tes
tament criticism these famous chapters occupy in some respects
a somewhat similar position to St. John's Gospel in the New
Testament, both suggesting searching Inquiry, owing to the deep
importance of both these writings in Christian theology.
The question is. Did Isaiah write these chapters ? After
* The passage occurs iu a University aermon, and was pubUshed iu the
Undergraduates' Journal (Oxford), Feb. 18, 1876, and is quoted by Professor
Cheyne in these words (" Isaiah," vol. ii., essay 6) : " No one, perhaps, haa
better expressed this -piew than the preaent Dean of Weatminster, who does
not, however, venture to decide upon its merita " The view iu question was
that Isaiah xl. — Uvi. was a monograph -written by Isaiah in a quasi-ecstatic
atate, not necessarily at one time. St. John not improbably refers to some
such quasi- eohtatio condition when he -writes, " I waa in the spirit on the
Lord's Day, and heard behind me a great voice,'' &c., &c. (Rev. i. 10).,

THE BOOK OF THE .PROPHET IS.41AH. 203
weighing the various arguments it seems indisputably clear that
he and no other was the writer.
The f oUo-wing is a summary of the main points of the evidence
which leads us to this conclusion.
(I.) The Clear Testimony of History. — It may be asserted with
aU confidence that for eighteen centuries no Jewish tradition
existed which even suggested a different author of this latter
part of the "Isaiah" prophecy; on the contrary, aU ancient
authority from the earliest times contradicts any suspicion of the
authorship of chapters xl. — lxvi. So the Septuagint, the Greek
version of the Old Testament scriptures, put out b.c. 286 — 160,
ascribes the entire contents of the book to Isaiah, son of Amoz.
While in the book of Psalms — then as now populariy ascribed
to David — the LXX. translators are careful in their headings to
particular psalms, to give the name of the traditional composer
of the special psalm — such as Moses, Asaph, Ethan, "the chief
musician," and others.
Jesus the son of Sirach, the author of the book "Ecclesias
ticns," distinctly ascribes to the Isaiah "who lived in the days
of Hezekiah " the authorship of chapters xl. — lxvi. of the great
prophecy. This son of Sirach was famous in his days for great
learning and wisdom. He lived and wrote his important work
circ. B.C. 150.
About 170 B.C. the Haftarahs, or prophetic lessons read in the
synagogue on Sabbath days, festivals, and fasts, were authori
tatively arranged by the Jews. Sixteen of these lessons are
taken from Isaiah ; of these thirteen are taken from these
disputed chapters.
Josephus, the weU-known Jewish historian, very early in the
Christian era gives it as a received tradition among his country
men that Cyrus published his decree for the rebuilding of the
Temple (Ezra i. 2) after he had been shown Isaiah's prophecies
about himself (Isaiah xliv. 28 and following).
¦ Among the early Christians no doubt as to the authorship of
these chapters existed. The New Testament writers constantly
quote them as Isaiah's. The first suggestion that the writings
contained in chapters xl. — Ixri. were not the work of Isaiah
came from the Jewish writer Aben Ezra, who wrote in the
twelfth century bf our era — nearly two thousand years after the
first appearance of the great prophecies. During those two
thousand years these -writings had been read and studied and
pondered over by Jew and GentUe, by friend and foe, with
varied feelings, but with the deepest interest and closest atten
tion. But no idea of another than Isaiah having been their
author seems ever to have occurred to either friend or foe.

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

THE BOOK OF THE PROPHET ISAIAH. 205
No one, save he whose heart is hopelessly hardened and
whose eyes are eternally blinded, can read these words, written
seven hundred years before the Passion tragedy, without being
conscious of something of the Impression that this solemn, awful
prophecy produced upon the Earl of Eochester, of whom Bishop
Bumet writes: "As Lord Eochester heard it read, he felt an
inward force upon him which did so enUghten his mind and
conviction that he could resist it no longer, for the words had an
authority which did shoot like rays or beams in his mind, so
that he was convinced, not only by the reasonings he had about
it which satisfied his understanding, but by a power which did
BO effectuaUy constrain him, that he did ever after as firndy
believe in the Sariour as if he had seen him in the clouds."*
But the famous second part of Isaiah does not merely contain
these vivid pictures of that strange sweet life which, seven hun
dred years later, was to be Uved in Israel and Judah. It containa
plain and unmistakable statements respecting the great doctrine
— ^the keystone of Christian theology — vicarious atonement. In
the famous passage, chapter Ui. 13 — 15, and chapter UU., it is
plainly taught in language none can mistake. The servant of
the Lord successfuUy makes intercession for the many sinners,
and by the sacrifice of HimseK atones for their sins. It is true
that this is the master-thought which runs through the whole
of the Law of Moses, but it was left to Isaiah (in the so-caUed
second part of the book of his prophecy) to explain how this
great atonement was to be made and who was the Person to
make it.
It was necessary that this aU-important explanation should be
made in order to explain the latter part of that wonderful Psahn
xxu., which, next to these chapters of Isaiah, contains the
clearest anticipation of Jesus Christ in the Old Testament ; for
there is a gap between the former and the latter part of this
psalm, which can only be fiUed up by assuming the vicarious
atonement given by Isaiah UI. 13 — 15, lui. "The writer of the
psalm foresaw, as it were In a vision, the sufferings of Christ
and the glory that should foUow, but it was not revealed to the
Psahnist how these sufferings produced so immense a result."t
Isaiah, in certain of the later chapters of his prophecy, fiUs up
this gap, and completes the prophetic story of the future great
Eedemption, not of Israel, but of aU the world.
(ii.) The Arguments i/ipon which Critics, since the end of the
Eighteenth Century, home based the Assumption that Chapters xl. —
lxvi. wert the worh of other hands than Isaiah's. — These chap-
* Quoted by Professor Cheyne, "Isaiah," vol. ii. p. 208.
t See Professor Cheyne, " Isaiah," vol. ii., essay III (4). '

206 BOOK BY BOOK.
ters would have been written with greater probability by a
Jew living at the time of the return from Babylon. The name
and history of Cyrus (chapters xUv., xlv.) would have been
known to such a writer, whereas, if these prophecies were
Isaiah's, a special revelation of the name and work of the great
Persian monarch must have been made to the prophet in a trance
or otherwise. But such an argument here can have little weight.
The whole of the great prophecy known as Isaiah's is undoubtedly
studded with such special revelations : for instance, prediction
of the fall of Babylon, of the most definite kind in chapter xiii,,
xiv., xxi. Again, granted that chapters xl. — ^Ixvi. were the work
of a Jew or Jews contemporary with the return from Babylon,
what but a special revelation had enabled the writer or writers
to have written this marveUous detailed story of the passion of
Jesus Christ, more than five centuries before this strange, a-wful
drama was acted under the shadow of Herod's temple in the
Jerusalem of Pontius Pilate ?
If the modern critic gets rid of the difflculty which the pre
diction of the doom of Bab5'lon, or the restoration by the Persian
Cyrus, confronts him with, he is met with the far more important
question : Who told the writer the Passion story ?
(iii.) The Local Colouring of the Late Chapters. — Absolutely
nothing can be made of this argument. These notices of scenery
can be pressed with equal force by the critics, or by those
scholars who prefer to walk along the old paths of Je-wish and
Gentile tradition.
(Iv. ) The Question of Style. — Considerable stress has been laid
by the school of modern critics on the change of the style of the
different divisions of the book. They suggest that the Book of
Isaiah, in the form we possess it, was the work of four or five,
or even more hands (Ewald suggests seven). Now it is clear
that the prophet-statesman lived to a great age, and that a very
large, portion of his long life was passed in activity, now as a
preacher of righteousness, now as a prophet or seer in the highest
sense of the word, now as a statesman. The book, as we have
it, represents his work in all these different epochs of his long
and varied career, a public career which was contemporary with
the reigns of five kings — Uzziah, Jotham, Ahaz, Hezekiah, and
Manasseh^a period of between sixty and seventy years.
The sUght differences In the style and diction of this book —
for after all the differences are but slight — are exactly what
would be expected from a writer writing during a period extend
ing over so many years and addressed to such varied audiences.
It is, in fact, what we find in authors o? our own age. Then
too, the style of a writing devoted to passionate exhortation or

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

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

THE BOOK OF THE PROPHET ISAIAH. 209
famous passages which exempUfy this, the foUowing are especiaUy
notable — Isaiah vii. 14, &c. ; the strange and supernatural
manner of Messiah's birth — Isaiah ix. 12 ; the GaUlean ministry
of Messiah; and chief est of all, Isaiah Ui. 13 — 16, UU. ; the
manner in which the work of Messiah was accompUshed. Many
other sections and passages might be quoted to exempUfy this
last characteristic feature, notably Isaiah 1x1. 1 — 3.
(ii.) The Messiah or servant of Jehovah in His work of
governing and redeeming the world is Himself Divine. This
runs through various parts of the prophecy. EspeciaUy, how
ever, should be noted Isaiah ix. 6, where the prophet states how
the "Child Messiah" was to be styled "The Mighty God,"
the same lofty and awful title given in the next chapter (x. 21)
to Jehovah. Thus in the prized volume of the most revered
prophet of the monotheistic Jew is the coining Messiah termed
"The Mighty God"!
(iU.) WhUe presenting a picture of a Messiah glorious and
triumphant (see such passages as Isaiah Ixui. 1 — 6), this book
paints in plain, unmistakable colours the sad true figure of this
Messiah winning His glory and triumph through an a-wful suf
fering (as in Isaiah lu. 13 — 16, UU.). The striking and ample
references in Isaiah to a suffering and, through His suffering,
triumphant Messiah, supplement and iUustrate with a startling
clearness older and more obscure references to the same awful
suffering to be endured by the coming Divine Deliverer in the
Psahns and older prophets. It was no doubt mainly owing to
these references, especiaUy to the Isaiah passages, as weU as to
oral traditions, that the great Jewish teachers, before and after
the Christian era, whose teaching is embodied and- crystaUised
in their loved Talmud, owed their doctrine of a suffering Messiah.
This doctrine of the Talmudists is weU iUustrated by the foUow
ing beautiful apologue taken from the Talmud : " Eabbi Joshua
Ben Levi found EUjah, who, in Jewish tradition, was to be the
pioneer of the Messiah, standing at the gate of Paradise. Eabbi
Joshua asked EUjah, 'When cometh the Messiah?' EUjah
repUed, 'At the Lord's good pleasure.' Again Eabbi Joshua
asked, 'When cometh the Messiah?' EUjah answered, 'Go
thyself and ask him.' Eabbi Joshua went on, 'Then where
dweUeth he ? ' Elijah told him, ' Messiah was at the gate of
the city (Eome), and was sitting among the poor and sick, and
there was tenderly dressing one wound after the other.' " —
Talmud, Treatise Sanhedrim, 98a.*
* Quoted by Professor Cheyne, " Isaiah," essay ii. 219, from Wunsohe —
"LeiderdesMeaaiaa." Leipzig: 1870. See Dr. Westcott, " Introduction to
the Study of the Gospels," chap. xi. P

210 BOOK BY BOOK.
(iv.) The doctrine of the vicarious atonement (in the sense
Christians understand it) is plainly taught by Isaiah. A suffer
ing Messiah was no new idea in Hebrew theology; and the
thought of the vicarious atonement which this Divine sufferer
was to accomplish, had appeared in even the earUer Books of
the Old Testament. Effectual intercession of the righteous for
the sinful Is a thought running through the entire Old Testament
(cf. such passages as Genesis xviii. 23 ff. Exodus xxxii. 32 ff, ¦
Psalm cvi. 23, and Amos vii. 1 ff *) : and though we knOw there
is a height which guilt may reach at which God wUl no longer
accept the Intercession of his servants (Jeremiah xv. 1, xi. 14 ff),
the way Is prepared for the revelation of One greater than any
of the created sons of men ; of One not only perfectly righteous
Himself, but able by uniting them mystically - to Himself to
make the many righteous ; of One whose sacrifice of HimseK
was so precious that It could be accepted even for a people which
had deliberately broken its covenant with Jehovah, and which
was therefore legaUy liable to the punishment of extirpation.
The thought too was perpetuaUy before the eyes of the
children of Israel in their simple sacrifices, from the days of
Adam to Moses, and after the time of Moses in the elaborate
ritual of the Tabernacle and the Temple. But the thought was
embodied by Isaiah in language new and possibly for the hearers,
strange and startling.
6. The Character of Isaiah the Prophet. — Although we are not
in possession ot materials which would enable the writer to put
together a life of Isaiah, yet from the sixty-six chapters which
we possess of his, we can form a fairly accurate knowledge of
the character of the greatest of the Hebrew prophets, the one
who— of all that strong, mighty band who occupy a unique
position in the world's story — has most powerfully infiuenced
not merely the generations among whom he lived and worked,
but their descendants for some 2,600 eventful years.
The most conspicuous feature of this true hero, and the one
which must most weightily influence those souls who, more or
less closely, have communed with the book of his prophecy. Is
his reverence for, his awful fear of, the Lord. It seems as though
the rision which he saw when on the threshold of active Ufe was
ever present with him, as though he ever looked on the Lord
high and lifted up, the seraphim, or burning ones, standing by
the a-wful Presence, keeping solemn watch and ward.
6. Isaiah in a Vision had loohed on God. — As a preacher and teacher
he delivered his message, often a hard stern message, fearlessly.
* Oeh^en, 0. T. Theol. ii. 425 (trans.).

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

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

THE BOOK OF THE PROPHET ISAIAH, 213
many different sections. It cannot be looked upon as originally
one book.
The whole of the great work has evidently passed through
the hands of a compUer, who has chosen for his purpose only
certain extracts from the writings of the great author. Yet
this coUection or compUation is of most ancient date. Isaiah,
as we now have it in our English Bible, was read and studied
in the synagogues and schools in the time of our Lord, nearly
nineteen centuries ago. In more remote times we stUl find
"Isaiah" in its present condition. The Septuagint translation
was made about 260 B.C. from the same Hebrew "Isaiah"
which we now possess. The rerision or compUation must then
have been made at some epoch between 750 B.C. and 250 B.C.
The question then presents itself : How, and when, and by
whom was this work of coUecting and selecting, and possibly
of recasting the Prophet's writings, carried out? We possess
no detaUs here, no tradition of names remains to us. After the
return from the Captivity, when the chosen people were once
more settled in their ruined city and loved land, but under
sadly changed conditions : shorn of their old power and wealth,
reduced in numbers and in influence, scarcely owning a name
even among vassal races, in these times of regret and almost
hopeless mourning the people cared for the memory of the
great heroes who had been friends of God in a way their
ancestors had never cared for the living men themselves. It
was to satisfy their national cravings to learn more of a past
life irrevocably lost, of a life iUumined by the nearer presence
of a God the memory of whose very name was lost, that there
arose among the "returned from exile" a great and pecuUar
Uterary class — the scribes or Sopherim — whose function was
coUecting and editing, and probably subsequently expounding,
the scattered records of prophetic revelation. Much of the Old
Testament as we now possess it was the work of these earnest
and devoted men. But though these Sopherim or scribes may,
probably did, put the larger part of our Old Testament into ita
present shape, its devout reader need never think that the old
loved words are not the words of Moses or Samuel, or the ex
pressions of Darid or Isaiah. It is hard to beUeve that a scribe
ever altered a word or changed an expression ; he abbreviated
and made selections — that was aU.
When we call to mind the deep spirit of intense reverence for
every letter of their ancient records which, with all their faults,
certainly characterised the Jewish nation after the return from
the Captivity, when we remember the strange and pecuUar
respect for every jot and tittle of the sacred memoirs of their

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

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

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

THE BOOK OF THE PROPHET
JEREMIAH.

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

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

THE BOOK OF THE PEOPHET JEREMIAH. 219
was blinded, the best of the poor remnant of the people left by
Nebuchadnezzar were carried into Babylonia. Gedallah, a friend
of Jeremiah, was appointed governor of the now desolate and
almost deserted land.
GedaUah was shortly after murdered by some self-styled patriot
Jews, who, after their deed of blood, fied, carrying Jeremiah, an
unwiUIng captive, with them to the city of Tahpauhes, in Egypt
Here we lose sight of the aged and desolate prophet. A tradition,
weU supported, relates how his angry countrymen, infuriated at
the mournful reproaches and eamest remonstrances of Jeremiah,
stoned the dreaded and hated prophet some time after the arrival
of the fugitives at Tahpauhes.
The following tables of dates and principal historical events
which happened in the Ufe of Jeremiah wiU be useful to the
reader, but it must be borne In mind that though roughly the
general chronological arrangement is fairly reUable, any exact
chronological arrangement of this period is precarious and cer
tainly open to criticism. The first table is generaUy taken from
Professor H. Brandos' "The Eoyal Succession of Judah and
Israel, according to the Biblical Narrative and the Cuneiform
Inscriptions," quoted by Professor Cheyne, "Jeremiah" in the
"Pulpit Commentary."
Mauabseh, iu whose reign laaiah waa, according to tradition, put to death.
Amon.
B.o. I
641 Krst year of Josiah. In thp thirteenth year of Joaiah, the ' ' Word
of the Lord " came to Jeremiah. The ministry of Jeremiah
especially belongs to the last eighteen years of Josiah's reign.
611 Thirty-first year of Josiah.
610 Jehoahaz.
609 Firat year of Jehoiakim.
399 Eleventh year of Jehoiachin.
598-7 Jehoiachin. Beginning of the Captivity. ,
597 Zedekiah appointed Mug.
696 Eirst year of Zedekiah.
586 Eleventh year of Zedekiah. EaU of the kingdom of Judah.
After the Fall of Judah as a Kingdom.
Gedaliah is left in Judah as governor of the remnant of the people allowed
to remain in the land.
Jeremiah remains with him.
Gedaliah ia murdered, and Jeremiah is carried away by the Jews who
murdered Gedahah into Egypt.
At Tahpanea, in Egypt, probably not long after, the Je-wish fugitives
murdered Jeremiah.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

THE BOOK OF THE PROPHET JEREMIAH. 227
far beyond the Hebrew people, his beautiful and touching plaints
have become folk-songs and f olk-jiroverbs ; such as : —
" Is there no balm in Gilead ;
Is there no physician thtre ?
"Why then is not the health of the daughter of my people recovered ?"
(vii. 22.)
" Stand ye in the ways, and see.
And ask for the old paths, -where ia the good way,
And walk therein, and ye shall find rest for your souls.
But they said. We -will not walk therein." (vi. 16.)
" Why is my pain perpetual, and my wound incurable ? " (xv. 18.)
" A voice was heard in Eamah, lamentation, and bitter -weeping ;
Kaohel weeping for her children, refused to be comforted for her children,
Because they were not." (xxxi. 15.)
5. The Language and Style of Jeremiah. — For general readers
Jeremiah has far less interest than Isaiah or Daniel, and with
the exception, perhaps, of Ezekiel, finds fewer students outside
the Jewish world than any book of the Old Testament. Certain
passages are very famiUar, but, outside these, comparatively Uttle
is commonly known.
The language is charged with monotony and the style witis.
diffuseness, as dealing with a period characterised with a dreary
sameness of sin and folly, and unrelieved by any recitals of
specially heroic deeds ; and which, unlike to the usual story of
Israel, ia never iUumined by any conspicuous interposition of the
Glorious Arm of Jehovah.
To a considerable extent these and such-like popular criticisms
are just. Its monotony could not be helped, for one subject, the
sin of the people, their blindness and self-will, and the sure and
certain ruin at the end of a comperatively speaking short period
of time, too plainly foreseen, in all its melancholy details, by the-
prophet — one subject fiUed his heart from the hour of his firs\
solemn caU to that sad day when we lose sight of him, the un
popular prophet, the author — as some afflrmed — of their woes,
at Tahpauhes in Egypt.
To the ordinary GentUe reader, too, the prophecy of Jeremiah
seems diffuse, for it is the same old story told again and again.
It wants the art of Isaiah, and we miss the poetry and the lofty
imagery which form the beautiful characteristic of eo many
passages in the other prophetic books. But It has been urged
with great justice that in Jeremiah, " His poetic fiights were
restrained by his presentiments, and his utterances duUed by
tears. . How could he exercise his imagination in depicting: woes
which he aheady so fully reaUsed ? " *
* Dean Payne Smith in " Pulpit Commentary."
q2

228

BOOK BY BOOK.

Another commentator, with considerable truth, loves to com
pare this prophet with Dante, and thinks that In the pages of
Jeremiah " the great Florentine found one of the founts of his
inspiration, for he quotes him again and again, both in his poetry
and in his prose, even borrowing from him the opening symbolism
of the Dirina Commedia." *
6. The Divergences between the Masoretic {Hebrew) and LXX.
Greek Text. — There are some curious divergences between the
Masoretic text as contained in our Hebrew Bible (from whence
our English Authorised Version was made) and the Greek text
of the Septuagint. But although the variations are extremely
numerous, and the position of a large section of the prophecy is
different in the Greek and Hebrew, the variations are really of
an unimportant description. We may fairly speak of the Maso
retic (Hebrew), and the LXX. texts aa being substantiaUy the
same. All the chapters containing the group of the prophecies " on
foreign nations " are differently arranged. In the Hebrew text
this particular group is found in chapters xlvi. — U. In the LXX.
they are found after chapter xxv. 13.
But the variations of the LXX. text are far more singular. It
has been computed that the Greek (LXX.) version omits some
2,700 words of the Masoretic (Hebrew) text. It adds but a very
few. Words and phrases which ever and again occur in the
Hebrew are dropped in the Greek version. For instance, Jere
miah is rarely termed the prophet ; Jehovah rarely has the title
" of Hosts " added ; the formula "saith Jehovah " is left out hy
the Greek translators more than sixty times. It would thus
appear that, for some cause or other, the Greek text aimed at
abbreviating the original Hebrew, but it evidentiy studiedly
avoided omitting anything which reaUy bore on the sense. This
careful abbreviation, which really only affected titles and redun
dant and purely rhetorical words and phrases, was a most valu-
arble indication to us of the estimation in which the prophecies of
Jeremiah were held when the LXX. translators did their work
for the Greek-speaking Jews of Egypt, b.o. 286 — 150. With an
evident strong desire, for some reason or other, to abbreriate as
much as possible, they carefully refrained from taking away one
of the precious sentences of the prophecies and exhortations of
their loved and revered seer.
It is, of course, quite possible that two editors, so to speak, of
Jeremiah existed, and that the LXX. translators had before them
the shorter edition or revision. Dean Payne Smith, -with great
• E. H. Plumptre, Dean of Wells.

THE BOOK OF THE PROPHET JEREMI.iH. 2'29
ingenuity, sugg-ests a reason for this " shorter edition." After
the death (probably a violent death) of Jeremiah in Eg-\ jn.
Baruch and the faithful companions of the prophet uo doubt left
in aU haste a country so hostile to theu- loved master. Naturally
'they would carry back with them to Palestine, as their ehiefest
treasure, the 'writings of the great teacher. But among the
fugitive Jews in Egypt there were doubtiess "true believers, who
would not aUow such a precious document to be tr.keu away
¦without a copy being left behind." Such a transei-ipt would in
the nature of things be a hurried one ; superfluous words and
phrases, likely enough, would be omitted. Probably, too, no
definite place in the ¦writings had been at that time assigned to
the "displaced" section containing "the prophecies concerning
the nations," which, no doubt, possessed a less interest for the
people than the inspired words relating to themselves. This is a
most ingenious conjecture, but stUl only conjecture. The pheno
menon of the strange divergence between the texts, the Hebrew
and the Greek, of " Jeremiah " is reaUy unexplained. The only
two omissions, however, of any real importance are chapters
xxxiu. 14 — 26, xxxix. 4 — IS.
7. The Death of King Josiah. — Between the IKe and work of
Jeremiah and Isaiah there are many interesting paraUel scenes,
none perhaps so interesting for the general student as the Ufe
and fate of King Josiah. The two great prophets both Uved
¦through several reigns. In both instances these reigns, with one
exception in each case, were productive of grave evil for Judah
and Jerusalem, the sovereigns and ¦their courts setting generaUy
a shameful example. But one considerable portion of the Ufe of
both the prophets was passed in the company of a noble and
heroic king, who loved the law of the Lord. In the midst of
¦their successful and comparatively happy reigns the angel of
death overshadowed Hezekiah and Josiah. Hezekiah, o^wing to
the intercession of Isaiah, was spared for ten more glorious and
successful years. Josiah, though acting under the direct adriee
of Jeremiah, was slain, fighting for his country, on the fatal field
of Megiddo. Men are tempted to question often the Di'rine
decree when a good and useful Ufe is suddenly cut off. The death
of Josiah, theifavourite— as he has been termed— "of God and
man," wUl supjily an answer to such querulous questioning. We
see the reason of his early death quite clearly. Josiah had done
his work faithfuUy, but the work we know was a faUure, and
the hero-king was taken away fitjm the evil to come. To have
prolonged Ms Ufe, Uke Hezekiah's, would have been a sad
guerdon. The glorious death on the battie-fijld and the eternal
hereafter ¦with Ms God was for Josiah the best.

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

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

232 BOOK BY BOOK.
by Ezra and the Men of the Great Synagogue ; but these ancients
never placed it in the position it now occupies in the Septuagint
and Vulgate, or in an English Bible. It appears in the Masoretic
(Hebrew) text between Euth and Koheleth (Ecclesiastes), among
-the generaUy nameless K'thuvim or Hagiographa.
There is no question as to the high estimation in which these
sweet sad songs were held by the people from very early days.
It is erident that Zechariah at the end of the Captirity is quot
ing them in his first chapter, verse 6. On the 9th day of Ab, a
very ancient fast-day, commemorating the burning of the Temple,
these plaintive and touching Lamentations were read in the
synagogues. Pilgrims, who after aU these many centuries of
exile, still gather in Jerusalem at the " place of walling" bythe
wall which yet remains of the ruins of their holy beautKul house,
are said to often use these sad songs as they weep and pray.
In the Latin Church in Holy Week the Book of Lamentations
ia used on the three last days of the week : and the Church of
England, at the last revision * of her lectionary, has woven them
into the beautiful tapestry of her services for the same solemn
season. * In the Re-vision of 1871, chapter iU. and portiona of chapters i., ii., aud
iv. were ordered to be read on the Monday, Tuesday, aud Wednesday of
Holy Week. Portions of Lamentations had been appointed to be read in
Holy Week in the firat book of Edward 'V^I., but that uae was not continued
in the aecond book of Edward VI., or iu any subsequent revision of the
Prayer Book until I87I.

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

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

THE BOOK OF THE PROPHET EZEKIEL. 235
of whose ministry, as we have seen, nearly corresponded with
that of his own captivity.
3. His Name. — As was so often the case with the prophets and
other biblical celebrities, the name of Ezekiel was significant,
though in this instance its significance was of general rather
than specific appropriateness. There is always room for doubt
as to the exact way in which the component words are intended
to be understood in the case of proper names, and all that we ¦
can be sure of here is the existence of the two elements, " God,"
and the verb " strengthen," in the name Ezekiel, but whether it
implied that God would strengthen, or " prevail," or " hold by
the hand," it is difficult to say. Freely, the name might be
understood to mean the " strength of God," but what was the
more precise significance of the word it would be hard to deter
mine. In probable reference to Ms own name, Ezekiel says of
himself, in iii. 14, " the hand of the Lord was strong upon me."
(Cf. vv. 8, 9.) In 1 Ch. xxiv. 16, we find mention made of a
priest of this name In the time of Darid ; but, with this excep
tion, the prophet stands alone as the bearer of it.
4. Personal Details. — In reading Ezekiel it is always to be
borne in mind that he was distant in space frond the scenes he de
scribes, e.g. in ch. xxiv. he is bidden to name a particular day,
which was found afterwards to be the very day when the siege
of Jerusalem began, he being then in the land of his captivity
by the river Chebar. In like manner, in ch. viii. he describes In
detail the idolatrous abominations perpetrated in the temple at
Jerusalem, which he is shown in vision, ' though far away. The
latest date given in the book is the twenty-seventh year of Jehoi
achln's captivity, 627 B.C. (ch. xxix. 17). TMs is seventeen years
later than the date of the first verse of the same chapter. The
¦rision of the restored temple (ch. xl.) is dated In the 26th year.
We learn incidentally from ch. xxiv. 18 that Ezekiel was mar
ried, and that Ms wife died in the ninth year of his exile,
590 B.C. ; also from iU. 24 ; viii. 1, that though in exUe he never
theless had a house of his own. Probably, therefore, the con
dition of the captives, at aU events in certain cases, was not an
oppressive one, but its bitterness consisted in expatriation from
the land of their fathers, which was itself intolerable to the Jew
with- his highly developed and sensitive patriotic feelings. Of
Ezekiel's later history nothing is known. There is every reason
to believe that he died in exile, where it is evident that he was
recognised as a prophet and held in honour by his fellow country
men, as we see by the fact of the elders of the nation often
assembling themselves to receive his prophetic counsels and
admonitions. As these were by no means of chastened severity,

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

THE BOOK OF THE PROPHET EZEKIEL. 237
and 2 Pet. iu. 4, Ezek, xii. 22.) It is obvious also that there is a
general correspondence between parts of Ezekiel and the Apoca
lypse of St. John.
6. Analysis and Contents. — There are four main divisions ofthe
book. 1. Chaps, i. — xxiv. cMefly directed against the Israelites
and specially the inhabitants of Jerusalem ; the only exception ia
the discourse against the Ammonites In chap. xxi. 28 — 32, or in
the Heb. xxi. 33 — 37. There is often a date given of the year,
month, and day, reckoning, as has been said, from Jehoiachln's
captirity. In tMs section the people are reproached for their
sins, idolatry, sun-worsMp, &c., wMch was carried on by the
elders, especiaUy Jaazaniah, the son of Shaphan (riii. 11). Zede
kiah is reproached with Ms Egyptian aUiance (xril. 15, &c.),
which is so far evidence of Ezekiel's acceptance of Jeremiah's
prophetic authority, who had consistently discouraged tMs aUi
ance with Egypt. The prophet tMeatens Mm with captivity
(ver. 20), as he had preriously done with dying in the land
without seeing it (xU. 13). In xxi. 25, he is also severely threat
ened and rirtuaUy deposed in language which is at once a
distinct reference to the prophecy of Jacob (Gen. xlix. 10), and
the basis of the angelic announcement (Luke i. 12 — 33). Chap.
XX. is that wMch so mysteriously foreteUs the dispersion among
" the 'wUdemess of the peoples," not " people," as A.V. ; a dis
persion which had already begun in the prophet's own day, but
wMch was to be continued for long ages till our own and our
? chUdren's days possibly, to be foUowed (ver. 41) by some signal
manifestation of dirine action wMch should declare God's ways
as plainly as the first return from captivity which was distinctly
promised (vi. 8, 9; xxu. 16). Chap. xxi. represents the king of
Babylon as hesitating whether to go up against Jerusalem or
Eabbath first. He decides for the former (ver. 22), but the
prophet assures the Ammonites that they shaU not escape (ver.
28). This accounts for the apparent interruption of a series of
prophecies otherwise directed whoUy against Israel. Chap. xxii.
declares the judgment of the " bloody city." Chap. xxiU. relates
the idolatrous apostasy of Aholah, "her tent," and AhoUbah-
"my tent is in her," or of Israel (Samaria) and Judah (Jem,
salem), under the image of two women thus named. Chap. xxiv.
contains the death of the prophet's wKe.
This ends the first dirision of the book ; the second includes
chaps, xxv. — xxxii., wMch are cMefly prophecies against foreign
nations, that in chap. xxv. against the . Ammonites, Moabites,
Edomites and PMUstines is without date. Chaps. :s.'Si-<n., xxvii.
and xxvui. are against Tyre and Zldon, and are dated, in the
eleventh year. Chaps. xxix.-=-xxxu. are against Egypt and

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

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

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

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

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

THE BOOK OF DANIEL. 213
acknowledge either ; and for this reason it is easy to see that a
disposition to reject either may -weU tend to a prejudgment of
Ihe genuineness or authentlcitj' of Daniel, not on the actual merita
of the question, but in accordance with preconceived opimona
upon miracles and prophecy.
3. Canonicity. — Our business, however, is -with the grounds
¦upon wMch Daniel has been accepted as canonical and beUeved
as an integral part of the Holy Scripture. And these are two
fold : (a), external ; (J), internal.
(i.) It must be admitted that externally the Book of Darnel
comes to us as weU authenticated as any other canonical book.
First, there is the reference in the first Book of Maccabees, ii.
59, 60, " Anamas, Azarias, and Misael by beUeving were saved
out of the flame ; Daniel for his innocency was deUvered from
the mouths of Uons." This is mentioned in conjunction with
Darid and EUas, and it is eridentiy regarded as of the same
character and authority as what is related of them. It is true,
of course, that the speech in which it occurs may be an imaginary
one of the ¦writer's, which he has put into the mouth of the
dying MattatMas, but at aU events we must regard it as one
wMch he might have spoken.
At tMs time, therefore, the Mstorian saw nothing improbable
in MattatMas being acquainted with the history of Daniel, and
as we have no history in which these events are recorded but this
Book of Darnel, he must have learnt them from it, and at any
rate proof is afforded that when the book of Maccabees was
¦written the canonical position of Daniel was secure. Now the
first Book of Maccabees was probably written in the last quarter
of the second century before Christ, that is to say, about two
generations after the time of Antiochus Epiphanes. It foUows
therefore that, K Darnel waa a late production, it had managed
to work ita way into reception on a level with the rest of Scrip
ture in the short space of sixty or seventy years. TMs is by no
means likely, as the first Book of Maccabees itseK was not so
received, nor is there any reason to believe that any other book
of the same period was aUowed a place in the canon.
(ii.) Again, tMs first Book of Maccabees not only presupposes
the existence of Darnel, wMch it does merely as a matter of inde
pendent testimony, just as MUton's aUusion to Shakespeare
proves that he Uved after Shakespeare's time, but it displays
acquaintance also with the Alexandrian version of the book, so
that the Semitic original must have been in existence long
enough to find a place in an authorised translation like that of ,
the LXX. ; e.g. in 1 Mace. i. 54 we read that " they set up the
abomination of desolation upon the altar," meaning no doubt the
b2

244 BOOK BY BOOK.
heathen idol, and quoting the remarkable words of Dan. xi. 31,
as they are in the Greek (cf. Dan. ix, 27). So in 1 Mace, ix 40,
the words Kat hr^o-ov Tpavy-ariai ttoXXoi are an echo of the Greek
of Dan. xi. 26, Kat Treaovvrai Tpav/jLariai iroWol, and In 1 Macc. ix.
27 there is close correspondence with the language of Dan. xu.
I. It seems, therefore, fairly certain that the writer of the first
Book of Maccabees was acquainted with the Greek version of
Daniel, which necessitates an earlier existence of the book than
the age of Antiochus Epiphanes, even K the Septuagint version
itself is not of earUer date than that.
(Hi.) The narrative in Josephus (Ant. xi. 8, 6), that when Alex
ander the Great in his conquering march came to Jerusalem, the
Book of Daniel was shown to him, and that he took to himseK
the prophecy in it that a Greek should destroy the Persian em
pire, and was much pleased therewith, is clear proof that in the
opinion of Josephus the book was in existence then, whether or
not we accept the story, whUe it shows that he could have known
of no incident or tradition which made its existence then impos
sible. As a matter of historical fact, however, it is true that
Alexander treated the Jews with marked favour, which gives
some colour of probabUIty to the story of Josephus, and itseK
must be accounted for by some predisposing cause such as this
would have furnished.
(iv.) Lastly, had Daniel first appeared in Maccabean times, as
the natural product of them, there would probably have been
other books of a like kind, but we have no evidence of any,
and therefore this book must stand enthely alone K not
genuine, and however appropriate certain portions may be to the
requirements of that time, it is hard to see the special bearing
of others upon them, and therefore the theory of Maccabean
origin, while it affords a plausible motive for some parts, offers
no explanation of others wMch are equaUy characteristic, any
more than it explains why the one part shoidd have been
linked so closely with the other, if it was not a whole from the
beginning. It is important to estimate these positive and substantive facts
at their true value, because they seem to furnish defimte mate
rial, which it is ahke impossible to set aside and to reconcUe with
any theory of the late origin of Daniel. However we are to deal
¦with the miraculous and prophetic elements of the book, it is at
aU events not fah to minimise the value of these facts in order
to depreciate the ostensible importance of the miracles and pro
phecies contained in it. If we are honest and earnest students,
therefore, we cannot ignore the fact that tho external testimony,
direct and indirect, to the eristence of Daniel at a time antece-

THE BOOK OF DANIEL. 243
dent to the age of Antiochus Epiphanes is very strong. It would
certainly be held to be conclusive in the absence af any motives
for setting it aside.
(v.) Another point deserves to be more carefuly noted than it
seems commonly to have been. We have in the prophet Ezekiel
distinct reference to the eristence of the prophet Daniel in his
time. In the fourteenth chapter he twice couples him with Noah
and Job, as a notable instance of deUverance, and In chap, xxviii.
3, he says of Tyre, "Behold thou art wiser than Daniel, there
is no secret that they can hide from thee." Ezekiel and Daniel
were contemporaries. It is plain that Ezekiel knew of Daniel as
one who had either wrought some great deliverance for others,
or had been himseK the subject of it, and also as of one who
was a great revealer of secrets. Now we may not assume that
Ezekiel was acquainted with the Book of Daniel, but as these are
the only two references we have to Daniel in the Hebrew litera
ture, we must either assume, if the book was late in date, that
it was a story based entirely on these two meagre and frag
mentary references to the Mstory of Daniel, which were conse
quently sufficient to supply the foundation and framework of it,
or else that more extensive traditions sufficient for supplying it
were in existence, and had surrived in adequate measure for the
space of three centuries and a half tlU they suggested the remark
able compUation wMch we now know as the Book of Daniel.
It seems to me that this is a point that is well worthy of note,
and we may be absolutely certain that the writer of Daniel in the
second century before Christ either fabricated his romance
entirely out of the materials supplied by Ezekiel, or else made
use of traditions of wMch there is no trace elsewhere, or else
gave the rein to Ms imagination to create a story in substantial
agreement ¦with the brief allusions to Daniel in Ezekiel. I do
not beUeve that any of these courses was probable or possible,
nor do I beUeve that the whole compass of literature supplies any
case corresponding to what tMs would have been. The fact that
certain stories, such as that of Bel and the Dragon, and of
Susanna, became attached to the Book of Daniel, but did not
find a place in the Hebrew canon, serves at least to show that
there was felt to be an Intrinsic difference between them, whether
it was that of age or anything else, and neither of these
stories can have originated in the way it is assumed that the
Book of Daniel arose from a deshe to encourage the Jews whei)
suffering under the severities of the Antlochlan persecution,
though indeed it is useless to speculate as to what may or may
not have been the possible origin of any book whose apparent
and traditional origin is disputed.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

254 BOOK BY BOOK.
rival empires of Egypt and Assyria. His son Zechariah, after
a brief reign of six months, was dethroned and slain by Shallum,
who within a month was massacred by Menahem, With the
aid of Assyria Menahem held the throne for some years, but hia
son Pekahlah in two years was murdered by Pekah, and he in
turn was slain by Hoshea, the last king of Samaria. The period
was one of frightful violence and confusion ; all ties of social
Ufe were loosened ; immorality, irreligion, superstition, panic,
and despair contributed to the common misery and ruin ; it hardly
needed prophetic Insight to foresee the inevitable end in the total
dissolution of the state.
Corresponding to this change of character In the national con
dition and fortunes, there is a sharply defined distinction between
the opening chapters (i. — iii.) of Hosea and the remainder (iv. —
riv.) of the book. The first part belongs to the earlier period
of prosperity, for it pictures national plenty and rejoicing (II. 6,
8, 13), and only threatens famine and disaster. The people are
accused of Infidelity to Jehovah and of attendant immorahty,
but not of such moral disintegration as marked later times.
Moreover, the throne is stUl occupied by the dynasty of Jehu
(I. 4).
With equal decisiveness we have in the second part the
atmosphere of the dark and distracted age that followed the
decease of Jeroboam (iv. 1, 2; v. I, 2, 13; vii. 7, 11, &o.).
Everywhere wo are confronted with the lawlessness, the dissolute
ness, the plotting factions, the mad daUying with the great
powers, and a thousand unmistakable indications of the last
years of Israel's decUne and decay. But, while there can he no
hesitation in assigning the whole of this section to the period in
question, it is almost a hopeless task to divide it into separate
utterances, and to attach these to particular stages of the do'wn-
ward career of the Mngdom. TMs difficulty is due partly to the
peculiar style adopted by the prophet, whose utterances flow on
in one long, impassioned monologue, in which we rather dimly
divine pauses than clearly discern them. Moreover, the references
to contemporary incidents and current circumstances, though
numerous and detaUed, are too vague to help us much In our
extreme ignorance of the actual course of events, wMch are
chromcled in the most summary fashion in the historical books.
The following identifications have been proposed, hut are none
of them proved. The phrase, "Now shaU a mouth devour them"
(v. 7) refers to Shallum ; " AU their kings are fallen " (vii. 7) to
Menahem, as also viii. 4 and 9 — 10, on account of his relations
with Assyria (2 Bangs xv. 19); while the mention of Shalman
(x. 14) is held to indicate the reign of Hoshea. This last would

Ji J

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

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

HOSEA. 257
Ms care and shelter. She feU into a condition of slavery and
misery. The old love was not gone from Hosei's heart. The
thing was almost beyond the humanly possible, but a voice
within him said, " Go, love her stIU, and by firm and tender
handUng win her back to purity."
It was the voice of God. Nay, it was the spirit of Jehovah
in Hosea reproducing the feeling, thought, and action of God in
His treatment of Israel. The prophet's first ardent attachment,
Ms pain and grief under Ms wrongs, Ms loathing of the sin, his
jealous indignation, his relenting, and patience, and forbearance,
the loring sternness of discipline, the clinging affection that
followed the unhappy outcast, the compassion for her in her
degradation, the more than human loyalty of love and strength
of goodness that recovered and redeemed her — these emotions,
and conflicts, and experiences In Hosea are echoes and expres-
rions of the very heart of God. This is the secret of Jehovah
and of His providential leading of His people.
5. Conception of Jehovah. — Armed wl-th this understanding of
Hosea's ruling thought, we have a clue, if not to the logical
order of the somewhat Intricate maze of Ms monologue, at least
to its emotional unity and its spiritual contents. Jehovah is a
being, not of mere natural energies and physical bountif ulness,
but He is a God of moral forces, of justice, truth, and love.
FeUowsMp with Him must live and move in these attributes, or
it cannot be at all. A social order that Is unrighteous, a religious
worsMp that is immoral, a national existence based on earthly
guarantees, may call themselves by Jehovah's name, but In truth
they are a deflection from His feUowsMp, a defiance of His
authority, and an outrage on His love. The local Baals, at
whose sMInes Israel sacrifices and feasts, with practices and
beliefs contaminated by Canaanltlsh paganism and Impurity ;
the gold-plated calves, that are adored as the embodiment of
Israel's god, tUl the worsMppers have forgotten that He Is moral
and not material ; these are not Israel's true Divine husband,
but usurpers of His place and of His rights. They are in fact
and in practice other gods, and indeed no gods at aU, while their
cult is a profanation and an infidelity perpetrated in the face of
the Uving God.
A twin act of desertion and unfaithfulness is the separate
national existence of the northern kingdom, perpetuating as it
does an Ul-omened scMsm cleft in the unity of Jehovah's chosen
people, and cursed by the instabUity of government, the lawless
ness and violence, and the lack of moral and rehgious stamina
wMch are the inevitable weaknesses of a community founded on
revolt, held together by material interests only, and not rooted
s

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

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

JOEL.
1. Character and Author. — The arrangement of the minor pro
phets in the Hebrew Canon, and in the earliest of the versions,
the Greek Septuagint, is the same for the last six, but differs
considerably In respect of the earUer ones. The respective orders
are as follows : —
Hebeew. — -Hosea, Joel, Amos, Obadiah, Jonah, Micah.
Septuagint. — Hosea, Amos, Micah, Joel, Obadiah, Jonah.
It Is evident that in both the relative position of Hosea, Amos,
Micah is Identical, whUe the discrepancy arises in connection
-with the points where Joel, Obadiah, Jonah are introduced.
These three books lack any indication of date in their super
scriptions, and apparently at an early period canonical editors,
thrown back on Internal evidence, arrived at diverse conclusions.
It is even probable that, while the great groups of the coUection
are placed chronologlcaUy {i.e. Assyrian, Babylonian, Persian),
the position of indiridual books has b^en determined by con
siderations of a more Uterary character, such as affinities of
thought, theme, or even phraseology. Therefore the canonical
rank of Joel does no more than teU us that he was reckoned to
belong to the early period of prophecy.
The title of the book adds Uttle to our information. The
prophet's name means Jehovah is God. He was the son of Pethuel,
but of Ms birthplace and condition in Ufe we are told nothing.
That he prophesied, wrote, and pubUshed his memoir in Jeru
salem seems certain (II. 16 — 17, &c.). From the prominence
wMch the Temple and Its functionaries and ritual have in Ms
oracle It has been conjectured that he belonged to the priestly
order. The guess is neither proved nor disproved by the manner
of his references to the priests (I. 9, 13 ; ii. 17), As to the time
when he Uved and worked there is no definite statement either
in the title or in the body of the book. The date must be
purely a matter of inference from its general character and
contents.

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

2G2 BOOK BY BOOK.
The third division, opening with a terse historical statement,
tacitly assuming that penitence has been done, and declaring
God's forgiveness, proceeds to unroll a new chart of the future.
The prophet had foretold the approaching doom of impenitent
Israel. He must now unfold the changed character of coming
events In view of the great fact of a penitent Israel. The main
elements of the programme are depicted in five sections. With
repentance and restoration to Divine favour Israel's relation to
the great elements of God's government is entirely altered.
The impending judgment Is withdrawn. Their present distress
is reUeved and passes into plenty and prosperity. In this de
liverance the supreme effect of gladness is the assurance of
God's presence with them and His unchanged purpose of grace
and glory in them (U. 18 — 27). Therefore the prophecy must
proceed. Temporal relief Is not enough. Israel is destined for
more than physical prosperity. The world's consummation Is
drawing on. To play their part in the grand fulfflment of
history, Israel must have a holiness beyond that of the present
reformation. The nation must become the perfect instrument
of God, inhabited by His character. Inspired by His aims, entirely
consecrated to His serrice.
Such a new nature must be created, not by Israel's own act,
but by a Divine deed, by a gift from above. The nation must ,
be inspired by God's Spirit In every individual member. Then
wHl the end of all things be near. With Israel's complete fit
ness to the Divine purpose the consummation of the world's
drama must speedily foUow. The outpouring of the Spirit is
the precursor of judgment. The day of the Lord comes— a day
of dread to evil-doers, but of deliverance to aU who call on God's
name, and whom God caUs (Ii. 28—32). The final act of judg
ment has, therefore, no menace any longer for God's people, but
directs Its violence against the heathen nations, who, persistently
impenitent, have remained hostile to Jehovah and His people
(UI. 1 — 8). With weird colours and terrible dramatic power the
destruction of the nations in the vaUey of Jehoshaphat {Jehovah
judgeth) is depicted (ui. 9 — 17). And the prophecy concludes
with a glowing picture of the happy repose of finished judgment
and mercy, in which all God's enemies are seen to be vanqmshed,
and Israel, prosperous and conferring prosperity, is established
for ever and ever (ill. 18 — 21).
3. Differences of Interpretation. — Several points in the interpre
tation of the book furnish matter for dispute, and, according as
they are decided, materlaUy affect our conception of the pro
phecy. Contrary to the line taken in the preceding sketch, it is

JOEL. 263
held that the seer is throughout describing future calamities,
and not disasters already begun. The theory is possible, but
improbable, in the face of such expressions as occur in i. 2,
16 — 20, and the warm personal and presential feeling breathed
into the recital (i. 13 ; ii. 15 — 17). Again, the prophecy is some
times construed as one continuous utterance without change of
circumstance, and the verbs in ii. 18 are translated not as pasta
describing an occurrence, but as futures enunciating a principle
of Divine dealing, or expressing a deshe that God may so deal
with the suppUcants. The rendering Is grammaticaUy possible,
but, reducing as it does the whole second part of the book from
a direct Divine declaration to a mere human wish or Inference, it
involves an artistic blunder hardly conceivable in a writer of
such Uterary skill, and a construction practicaUy impossible in a
prophecy. Another question concerns the locusts. They are taken
literaUy, and the occasion of the oracle Is assumed to have been
some terrible period of famine produced by this scourge and
aggravated by drought and heat. Another view holds them to
be, either in chapter ii. or in both chapters I. and ii., an aUe
gorical piece of imagery, used to portray the devastation of
definite invading armies. A third theory counts them to be an
apocalyptic device, employed without regard to actual historical
events, but with the vag^e reference and eschatologlcal futurity
of the locusts described in Eevelation ix. This last notion has
little to commend it, and is already discounted if the aUegorical
view faUs to hold its ground. The natural impression of an
unbiassed reader is certainly that the locusts are locusts. The
burden of proof or disproof, therefore, rests on the second
theory. It ia argued that tMngs are ascribed to the locusts proper
only to human beings and responsible agents, or contrary to
the habits, or beyond the powers of locusts, and that generaUy
the intensity of the feeling and the sombreness of the represen
tation are out of all proportion to a mere plague of locusts. But
the calamity is a famine, gaunt, deadly, and inexorable, such
as a prolonged plague of locusts might readily produce in a
smaU and mainly agricultural country, as was Judaea when the
prophet wrote, while the incompatibilities and exaggerations
aUeged either exist only in the objectors' fancy or are finely felt
strokes of imaginative delineation on the part of the prophetic
author. On the other hand, K the locusts are merely symbols for an
invading army, then in chapter ii. we have the symbolic locusts

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

Jor.L. 2f>'j
appearg gulfici'-ntly in tho fac-t that dates have boon ii.Hf.'n^jiitd
him ranging ov-r five i-.i-jiUin'-,'.. I'rficticdily tfir; qiji.-Htio/i at
]ir(!Hi:nt lies b';t,w';(;a two, vi/., tlio b<-ginniiij^ of the rojgn ol'
.loach ("May ji,(;. SliO; ct iu the po«t-l'^.'^ili'; period ahoiit tho tiinoof
.Vohomiiili (nay d.';. 11.')). Tho oarlior has in itn favour tho [losi-
tion of our book in tho oanon, and may thorr;fVjro claim to bo i;i
pOH«c«»ion. It KU()|)ortK and doii/ioH its lo-OHumptioriH by a poni-
tivo t:i)iif,\.riii:i\iiii of tho hUt^^rioal loforo-noo.s of tho profihocy.
Jool, it irt naid, knowH .Johoshaphat'H triumph 'iii. 2; 2 'Jliiou.
XX.), IMom'M rovolt (iii. 19 ; 2 Kin^« viii. 20^, and tho rhilihtlno
invaHJoii undor .fohoram ^iii. 4 ; 2 Oiron. x.'ci. I'ij, whilo ho dooH
notknow tho A».yrian trouhloH, ii'^r Aniiiziah's rovongo <iri ivlorri
(2 KiiigH xiv. 7j, nor tho Syrian attempt on .Jcnisaloni in tho
cloeo of .Joash'H rfcign ^'J. Kings xii. 18;. Ho inuht, thoro-l'oro, bo
later than li.o. HH.O and oarlior than ii.o. 840. Within this period
the pif.-turo of tho interriiil condition of tho orjinrnunity oxohides
tho yoars of Ahaziah and Athalia, and alHO tho later ovil years
of .ioahli, whilo it ariswors exactly to tho pr;ri.od of .Joash'a
minority nndor tho rogeney of tho high prioKt Jehoiada, say
about if.c. 86.5.
Agaiust this combination tho dofondorH of tho poHt-I'l.'^ilic date
urge tliat tho hixt/jrieal argument is arbitrary, and that tho
internal featuroK that toll for Joasli's minority tell moro stron^^ly
for Nehemiah's inr/-,, while certain krgor considerations co(;j(i
exproHHiy to (ixoludo any early date. Tho issue is flne and coni-
plioatod. It is impos.nitdo to do moro tliaii inarHhal tho ovidonce
and indicate its grmeral bearing. Tho historical combinations
already cito-rl toll strongly for tho early date, if .loel has parlioiilar
hostilities in view beyond inero border fjuarrels and slavo-Ktoaling
and dealing. Hut tho weight is diminished by the regularity
with which tliri nations named appear as Israel's enomioH, in
prophetic denunciations, both before and after tlie Exile. Tho
trade in slaves to tho Levant (iii, 6) and to South Arabia (ill. 8),
which was always carried on through the I'hilistine and l'\i<i:iu-
clan seaports and tho I'ldoniito and Arabian caravans, furnishes
no clue from the balanced character of .biel's reforenees.
Tho strange silene*! — asHiinjing ii. 20 lo r(;fer to locusts — con
cerning Assyria, Bafjyion, and t'ersia, suggestH that Joel wrote
before or after tlie era of those great world [jowers. I'erhaps
the last, though un mentioned, might have been exiMlent, since
it did not rank with the first two in f(oiiit of injury and hatred.
Agairist the time of Nehemiah is tlio abKo-ii/jo of HamaritauH,
Moabites, and Arnmoniles in the list of the foes of JeruHa,leni.
But still raore adverse to tho pro-Exilic date is tho extraordinary

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

JOEL. 267
approach to unanimity, till scholars are more agreed as to the
general course of Israel's history, and tho principles that must
determluo our Interpretation of prophecy.
Lines of roasoning are led of a still more doctrinaire descrip
tion, turning on the prophet's religious conceptions, but their
value is merely psychological. One method of investigation re
mains to be mentioned, viz., the literaiy relations of Joel to other
books ot the Old Testament. Ideas and phrases of this book
recur from Amos onward along the whole Une of prophetic
writers. In regard to Amos especially a very plausible case has
been made out for Joel's priority, but It is met by strong denial.
Perhaps the one sure inference is that Joel is either the first or
tiie last in the prophetic succession. He is either the original
prophetic quarry or the latest conglohierate. Looking at his
indubitable artistic genius, the second half of the alternatives
jars on one's critical instinct. Meantime the question of the
book's date remains open, and will hardly be closed except as
part of the general settlement of the groat controversy concerning
the history of Israel.
5. Style.- Aa might be Inferred from what has been already
said, tho style and thought of Joel are strikingly oharncteristio,
notwithstanding numerous assonances of detail with other pro
phets. In tiie first half we are under the speU of a descriptive
poet or word painter, but the prophetic orator asserts himself in
the second half. Language and structure are pure, flowing, and
artistic, but the literary exceUence is not an argument for either
date, but rather a difficulty in the wa}- of his being either the
fii'st or the last of the prophetic authors. Personal traits appear
in the detailed deUneation of the physical aspects of the disaster,
in the contrasting vagueness as to the sins that caused it, and in
the predominant and all-possessing engrossment of the seer in
the grand conception of the day of- the Lord. These mental
quaUties of the writer may account for certain features in his
work that ai-e put foward as proof of post-Exilic times.
Tho limitation of the prophet's religious range and the par
ticularism of his aspirations have been exaggerated. He em
phasises the ritual of penitence, doubtless, but he declares it
worthless savo as the expression of reality (ii. 13). EartMy
well-being bulks largely, but as the prelude, promise, and plat
form of spirituid attainment, privilege, and service (II. 28 ;
iU. IS). Tho outpom-Ing of the Spirit is probably confined to
Israel, j'et salvation depends not ou Jewish birth but on spiritual
citizen^Ipm^ God's kingdom (il. 32). The Messianic future is
buUt on existing conditions and relations, has ita home on Zion,

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

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

270 BOOK BY BOOK.
There Is more room for reasonable difference of opinion In
determining the prophet's precise condition In life. In the super
scription of his book he Is described as " one of the herdmen of
Tekoa" (I. 1). But the word noqedh, translated herdman, may
mean either one who tends flocks or one who breeds and owns
them, in which sense it is used of the king of Moab (2 Kings
ill. 4). Again, the designation, " a dresser of sycamore-trees "
(vii. 14), leaves it uncertain whether he was a proprietor of
sycamore plantations, or whether, as a shepherd hireling, he
eked out meagre rations by gathering wild sycamore flgs, the
coarsest fruit of Palestine, and eaten chiefly by the poorer classes.
It is generally held that the balance of probability Is turned In
favour of the second opinion, by the prophet's declaration that
the Lord took him "from following the flock" (vii. 15). But
the active pursuit of the pastoral calling is not Inconsistent with
ownership, or at least sonship to the owner (compare 1 Sam.
xvi. 11), and the Idea of the prophetic office with Its necessity of
absolute and instant disposal at the Divine bidding seems to
require, not. Indeed, a man of wealth (as the Jewish rabbis
would have it), but certainly a man who was Ms own master ia
the full sense of the word. Nothing positive can be deduced
from the degree of culture manifested In the book.
Spite of a floating tradition to the contrary, wMch still surrives
in popular circles, we shaU see later on that the Uterary merits
of the production must be rated very high. The general inf orma-
tlon of the writer Is comprehensive and minute. He can j)aintia
detaU the reUgious customs, the social conditions, the local cir
cumstances and vicissitudes of every part of the northern kingdom.
With the geography and history, the aUIances and feuds, trade
relations, national institutions, and aspirations of the neighbour
ing nations, he Is thoroughly famiUar. He is possessed of pro
found ideas about nature, proridence, the movements of races,
and their place and function in the world's government.
For breadth of survey, for strength and massiveness of con
ception, alike In morals and in reUgion, he is not surpassed hy
any of the prophets. He is a poet, an orator, a philosopher, and
a statesman. But in those days and in his social environment,
he might be all this without being a man of books and cities.
Native genius, interest in the traditions of his people, intercourse
with passing caravans, personal vhlts to distant parts, and a
spirit awake to the presence and working of God In human
history, past, present, and future — these were influences potent
enough to educate the man, and admirably adapted to prepare
the way for the prophet. And this school was equaUy open to
him, whether he was a poor man, living by Ms labour, now in

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

272 BOOK BY b;;ok.
strong and prosperous, free from hostUe menace, flushed with
recent triumphs, arrogant in their confidence of security, and
demoralised on the one hand by the cost, and on the other by
the booty, of successful wars. This fits exactly the culmination
of Jeroboam's career, when, released from the harassing rivalry
of Damascus by the crippling attacks made on that state by
Assyria, he seized the opportunity to develop the Internal
resources and extend the frontiers of Ms kingdom, tiU he had
re-established Israel's rule from Hamath in the north to the
brook of the Arahah in the south. (Compare 2 Kings xiv. 25,
with Amos vl. 14.) This, of course, meant wealth and prosperity
to the military chiefs and official families, as also to the commer
cial and monied classes.
But war, whether fortunate or unfortunate, Is always a crush
ing burden to the common people, and especially to the peasantry.
Besides the expenditure of blood and treasure, -which they have
to supply, there Is the loss of devastated or neglected harvests,
and the heavy taxes and levies made to maintain a large army,
a drain on the country that seems to be referred to in the peculiar
phrase, " the king's mowings " (vii. 1, compared with 1 Kings
xviii. 6, 8, 1 Samuel vIII. 14, 15). Apart from actual oppression,
the small yeoman holders of the soil get behind, fall Into the
hands of money-lenders, have to part with their produce at unfair
prices, mortgage their ancestral lands, and ultimately lose them,
becoming either hired labourers or out-and-out bondsmen. In
the towns also property and wealth accumulate In the hands of
the upper ranks, while the condition of the poor and dependent
classes deteriorates. The usual ethical mischiefs supervene, in
luxury and sensuality on th^ one hand, and on the other dis
content and loss of self-respect, to the corruption of pubhc
morality and religion, and ultimately the dissolution of society.
That is precisely the process of national demoralisation which
looks at us out of the pages of Amos. It is the same sad sight
that confronts us in the first portion of the prophecy of Hosea,
who was either contemporary with or a little later than Amos.
In both cases it marks with convincing force the period of these
prophetic utterances, and compels us to locate them In the after
noon of Jeroboam's briUiant reign.
4. The Prophets Mission.. — Though a citizen of the southern
kingdom, Amos was divinely commissioned to work in the
northern. Whether he speaks directly of Israel, or more Imagi
natively of Joseph (v. 6, 16 ; vi. 6), or Isaac (vii. 9), or uses forms
of Indirect address. It is always Ephraim that he has in view,
Ephraim that he threatens, Ephraim that he appeals to. There
is but one or at most two exceptions, when, in vi, 1, he couples

AMOS. 273
Zion with Samaria, and possibly he may mean to include Judah
in the words, " the whole famUy, wMch I brought up out of the
land of Egypt " (iii. 1). It is not contrai-y to our assertion that
the fiat of judgment proceeds from Zion (i. 2), nor that Judah
makes one of the doomed states (ii. 4, 5), with the certainty of
whose destruction he preludes the denunciation of Israel, nor
-that Ms ideal picture of the restored nation ' groups itseK about
the Davidic throne. Hence it is needless to suppose that the
introduction of Judtea in these places is an afterthought, not
put in execution tiU the time when the actual utterances against
Israel were committed to -writing. They fit in quite naturaUy
¦with their ricinity, and rather tMow into reUef the fact, that the
prophet's field of work was in the north, and his Uving audience
Israel. It is the common supposition that the whole of these prophecies
were deUvered in one jet of impassioned utterance and on one
single occasion ; that, in fact, the prophet's mission was summed
up and exhausted in Ms appearance at Bethel. There is much to
suggest and support tMs idea. In the pecuUar way in wMch the
incident of Amos' s collision with the priest Amaziah juts out in
the mid-stream of Ms prophecy, and in the seemingly intentional
limitation in the titie of his action to a point just two years before
the earthquake. But all we may certainly argue from these
features is, that the testimony of Amos reached its supreme
achievement in the scene at Bethel, wMle he may have been
labouring preriously in EpMaim, and indeed afterwards as weU ;
for it is not said that the prophet was immediately either expeUed
by force or sUenced by motives of personal prudence. The con
tents and arrangement of his book tend rather to the opposite
condurion. A more prolonged and -widely-diffused actirity is
impUed in the intimate acquaintance displayed by the seer with
the fortunes and nusfortimes of EpMaim ; in the pMases wMch
suggest futile pleadings -with them in the past ; in the ririd direct
ness of the appeal to the haughty and heartless ladies of Samaria ;
and especiaUy in Amaziah' s assertion that Amos had conspired
against the king in "the midst of the house of Israel" and
that "the land" was not able "to bear aU Ms words" (rii. 10).
It would therefore be improper to maintain dog^matlcaUy that
the contents of our book were deUvered entire to the gay crowd
before the sanctuary at Bethel ; or that, K delivered, the appeal
was not a recapitulation of a prerious ministry of some duration .
EquaUy impossible is it to attempt to define what part of the
book was oraUy uttered and what was not. Like the other
prophetic Scriptures, the book is in aU UkeUhood a condensed
record of the outstanding truths taught during a more or less
T

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

AMOS. 275
nations are to be punished are violations of humanity, but it is
more consistent to think that, as In the case of Judah and Israel,
tho common cause of judgment is thwarting God's wIU in His
gracious government of mankind.
The next great division (III. — vi.) consista of five parts, marked
by similar headings and order of thought. The first emphasizes
the certainty of judgment. As surely as effect follows cause and
proves its existence, the prophet's mission argues God in motion
for judgment, the Dirine anger postulates sin in Israel, and sin
must bring ruin (iii. 1 — iv. 3). Next we have the hopelessness
of moro moderate chastisements producing an adequate repen
tance (iv. 4 — 13). Then, as a natural sequel, foUows an impas
sioned exposure of the ineradicable fixedness of their rehgious
and social declension (v. 1 — 18), which, in the two closing sec
tions, expands into a woe pronounced, first, on theh rellgloua
debasement (v. 18 — 27), and, second, on their moral corruption
(vi. 1—14).
The last large division (vii. — ix.) is framed upon five visions,
devised to depict powerfuUy the dork destiny of the nation. We
have, first, destruction by locusts ; second, by fire ; third, the
waU condemned upon appUcation of the plumb lino (vii. 1 — 9).
At this point occurs the interruption of the altercation with the
priest Amaziah (vii. 10 — 17). Eesuming, the prophet pictures
under the symbol of ripe fruit the nation's readiness for destruc
tion, and works out the thought at some length (vui. 1 — 14).
Finally he presents God standing over the altar in the sinful
temple, hurling it in ruins on the heads of the worsMppers,
pursuing to his death the last one of the fugitives, and maHng
an end of old impenitent Israel (ix. 1 — 10). But with accom
pUshed judgment comes the recoU of recollection, and the prophet
proceeds to show how the sifting of Israel among the nations wiU
end In restoration. Once more the ideal Davidic rule and empire
shaU be estabUshed, and in more than earthly prosperity and
permanence God's people shaU possess Q^d's land and be God's
kingdom on earth (ix. 11 — 16).
6. Literary QiMlities. — Jerome remaa-ks that Amos was ' ' rude
in speech but not in knowledge " ; and Je^wish tradition has been
pleased to credit Mm with a stutter or impediment of speech.
TMs is probably the origin of a mistaken idea that Ms book is
badly written, or at least betrays the rusticity of its author. On
the contrary, the Hebrew of Amos ranks among tho purest and
most powerful compositions of the Old Testament. His language
is choice and melodious, possibly in a few peculiar spellings
recording a pro^vincial pronunciation, or more likely the aUps of
copyists' pens. His s'tyle is terse, dramatic, and simple, but very

276 BOOK BY BOOK.
pointed and forcible. He loves brief uninvolved sentences, though
occasionally carried away into passionate appeal or lyrical out
bursts of poetic delineation. He indulges much in question,
apostrophe, and exclamation. He is an orator more than an
artist or a bard. With aU his simplicity we find traces of
paranomasia, rhythmic arrangement, and rhetorical construction.
His exposition abounds in rich and varied Imagery derived from
nature, and striking iUustrations taken from every-day life. The
ordered arrangement, compact style, and general literary finish
of his book suggest slow, careful, and leisurely construction,
while the fire of Its invective, the Impetus of its appeals, and the
terrible directness of Its denunciation prove it the record and
embodiment of speech originaUy oraUy delivered.
7. The Prophet's Teaching. — The teacMng of Amos is deter
mined by the wants of Ms auditors, coloured by the character of
his own personaUty, and Umited by the attainments of his time.
His prophecy is not a system of theology nor a treatise of moral
philosophy. It is a matter-of-fact protest against definite sins
and errors, and a practical preparation to secure the triumph of
religion In Impending strains and changes. Israel, intoxicated
by success, and lured by the flesh, had forsaken the true Jehovah.
The god of the calf-worship was a physical and carnal deity,
pleased with a sensual service, pacified by sacrifices, ' careless of
justice and truth and mercy. The IKe of the nation may be
eaten out by oppression, and corruption, and luxury, and lust,
but Israel is Jehovah's people, and — so they argued — He wiU
not for personal pride permit them to suffer loss, but the day of
their need wUl be the day of His gracious and triumphant inter
vention. This blind superstition was destined speedUy to he
shattered by the overwhelming avalanche of Assyrian invasion.
If faith was to survive, then the lesson of Proridence must be
interpreted beforehand and set in its true Ught.
This was the mission of Amos and of the prophets that foUowed
Mm. Jehovah was not the God the people fancied Him. Sacrifices
and incense are nothing .to Him whose tMone is the imiverse.
Jehovah is a God of mercy and righteousness. With this corrupt
Israel He is not pleased, but displeased. Them Indeed He chose
out of aU the nations of the earth to be His people. But, there
fore. He wUl not favour them. He wIU the more sternly punish
their sins. His day of visitation is at hand, but for unrighteous
Israel It wUl be a day, not of deUverance, but of vengeance. He
has aheady gathered the fires of His fury together, and is about
to launch them on the states of Palestine, and to execute just
retribution on His guUty people. These were startUng and crea
tive conceptions, whose value in the growth of revelation was

AMOS. 277
immense. For a national and fleshly notion of the covenant tie
between God and Israel this teaching substituted an ethical and
reUgious. In place of a merely natural explanation of the world's
course, it presented the sublime thought of a righteous govern
ment and guidance of human history. Beyond all else, it set forth
the ethical nature of the Creator and Euler of the world In unap
proachable majesty and might. In the words of a v6ry helpful
writer : — " Morality Is that for the sake of which all tMngs exist ;
it is the alone essential thing in the world. It is no postulate, no
idea, but at once a necessity and a fact, the most intensely living of
personal powers — Jehovah the God of Hosts." That is a great
lesson, and one that religion is too apt to forget.
On the surface Amos may seem to make too much of mere
moraUty, but it is only an appearance. With him, to do right
is to serve God, and the motive must be the love of God and of
our neighbour. The central note of Ms prophecy rings like a
prelude of the great definition of the Apostle : — " Pure religion
and undefiled before God and the Father is this. To visit the
fatherless and ¦widows in their affliction, and to keep himself
unspotted from the world."

OBADIAH.
1. Authorship and Date. — The brief prophecy of Obadiah con
cerning Edom, which stands fourth among the minor prophets
in the Hebrew Bible and fifth in the Septuagint, presents Uttle
difflculty to the expositor, but confronts the critic with very per
plexing problems. The title declares it to be a record of the
vision of Obadiah, and tells us nothing about him. It mentions
neither his father nor Ms birthplace, and In the book ItseK there
is no positive statement of the period in which he lived, nor any
quite definite clue to determine the date of Ms prophecy. All
we know certainly about him is his name. That Is a derivative
of a word meaning servant or worshipper, and the sacred namo of
Israel's covenant, Jehovah God. It is a type of name common
in Semitic languages (Abdeel, Abdallah, &c.), and it occurs very
frequently of persons mentioned In the Old Testament — especiaUy
of members of the tribe of Levi. Among these the best known
are a captain of King Ahab's (1 Kings xriii.) and a prince em
ployed by Jehoshaphat in the reUgious reform attempted in his
reign (2 Chron. xvii. 7).
Tradition, quick to utilise its opportunity in the absence of
information, has Imagined our prophet Identical with several of
these, but the combinations are now umversally recognised as
simply plays of devout fancy, though one or two modern scholars
have expressed some favour for the identification with Jehosha
phat's prince. On such conjectures clearly no argument for the
date can be founded, and unfortunately not much can be gathered
from the place assigned to the book in the canon of the minor
prophets. For the order has been determined by other considera
tions besides chronology, and the arrangement Is not the same
in the Septuagint.
In both, however, Obadiah holds an early place, and it may be
taken for granted that the coUectors went, at aU events, generally
on the plan of placing first the pre-ExIUc works. But the pre
sumption in favour of an early date springing from this generah-

OBADIAH. 279
sation can hardly be pressed in face of the doubts as to the date
of Joel, Jonah, parts of Micah, Zechariah, &c. And on other
grounds as weU, critics of aU schools prefer to explain the place
of Obadiah after Amos by the idea that it was inserted here in
order to serve as an amplification of the curt reference to Edom
in the closing words of that prophecy.
If we tum to the book ItseK and look in it for some historical
allusion or other sure mark of age, we find ourselves stiU desti
tute of any soUd foothold. An expression in ver. 20 has been
seized on by some ingemous interpreters and held to indicate that
Obadiah was one of a company of exUea settled on the coast of
Phoemcia, or in Egypt, or in Babylonia. But it is a question
whether the word means "host," or "stronghold," or "sandy
coast," and the proper rendering of the present text of the entire
verse is doubtful. If we could settle the locaUty of the Sepharad,
named in the same verse, we might have sometMng to g^ide us.
But it is variously identified by the Ancients ¦with the Bosphorus,
Spain, and France, and by modern scholars with a Saparda in
Media, or a Qparda near loma (probably Sardis), both of wMch
names occur in the cuneKorm inscriptions. Beyond these there
is no local or drcumstantial detaU to serve as a key to the time of
the prophecy. We are, therefore, relegated in our conjectures
to the general impression produced on our minds by a study of
the atmosphere, aim, and actual contents of the book.
2. Analysis of the Contents. — The prophet Is conscious of a
miUtary movement among the nations. It is instigated by Jehovah,
directed against Edom, and ¦wiU result in its downf aU and humi-
Uation. Spite of the strength of their rocky fastnesses, they shaU
be defeated and their wealth plundered. Trusted allies shaU
betray them, and eo with aU their vaunted wisdom and might the
children of Esau shaU be caught in the snare of their own selfish
pohcy and utterly destroyed (¦w. 1 — 9). The cause of their doom
is the wrrong done to their Mnsmen, the IsraeUtes, whom they
abandoned in their dire extremity, aiding their foes, rejoicing
in their calamity, sharing in the pUlage, cutting off the fugitives
and selUng them into slavery (vv. 10 — 14). For the Divine
judgment, now complete on Israel, must pass on to his heathen
enemies and requite their injuries. In the general retribution
the rescued people of Jehovah shaU dweU safe and holy on Mount
Zion, regain their old possessions, bum up Edom like stubble,
overflow into the lands of the surrounding peoples, estabUsh a
strong govemment in Zion, and then " the kmgdom shaU be the
Lord's " (w. 15—21).
3. The fulfflment of Obadiah's prediction of the destruction of
Edom, even K we coiUd fix the date 'with precision, would not

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

OKAfXAn, 281
m^mU that at tlw timo Rlom wm huh^enijimt, f^oog. \n(m-
peroii«, arwl in high repuf* to wwchwn artd wmUh, Th« vmetmm
{vmt, 7) i» t'/ndcAlttrnim iniksaim that /'>h/w b?t<i ftntxred into
eiXWame with a j/^/wer or pow<»« ItfMil^; to .T<id»^!a. So far th<j«o
app(»arawj<i!» smt admiraMy tha ('hnhlcmi o/mihtnii^ifin, hit aro
probftMy <KjLiiaUy eon«i«t«iit with tlio fiiaT'li/;!" d^if/*,
Tb« mlUfwing passage (vv. Uh~H), who«0 imi>f>ra.tire (s^o
"Rmmtil Ymi^oa) eon*tittU«# not a latnra wa,rmnf( hut a dratimti^j
'knniu^tion, <UmMbm a *eri/« ol cpttel and tremhetmrn injttri««
infliiiiod ort tW .Jew* l)y thar JAnmttn.n ]dnmmm.. Tb<j vannth of
th© iftvf<^-tjv<; yrovm th« aetnality of tJw wrong, and eith«r it*
r<r«mt (KUMnnw/; or th« indelihl/;i nature of tb© rewmtnwjnt etmied
by it. Now iOkmite treachery and cru/slty Itad oxi«ted all along
and fee«n ren^snted hy I«ra«l (Ar/i/* i, 6, 9, 1 1 ; ix, 12, &»,), but
in tb« ftedm tana, and dotail of tb« (Mmm and in th« intomsify
of th« indignation rarodn«ed we find nothing coioparabk till wo
fsorrw* f/» certain Exui« «tteranee« (Jfe«k, xxy,, xxxr, ; f/ara, iv, ;
I'ialm exxxvit), which read a» if tWy bad heori writton in ohoru*
with tb/* h/!at and paanon of tho one oefore iw*. Thi# ntnaTiiliUinwf
i« not a woof, Iwt it make* a strong iir<;niiti)\ii'um itm tlus later
origin of our propheCT^.
It k perbap* truo tnat the form, in which th/( conception of tho
day of urn Imd {ren, 15) appears, indicate* an advanced point in
tl»o progres* of proj^/fi^^, Imt a mii/^h Tw»re »olj<l argiiroisnt may
l>e huilt upon the picture of I«raol'« dkmtm; and restoration. It
i« not morely a disabled itato or a fdHhiUy plundered capital
thatwe have deUne^ted, but a di»nj4M»bered and dispossessed and
di«per»ed nation. Moreover, tbo chosen yo/iiiU) no J//riger exi«te
in the dividwl kingdoms of J'lpiimim and Judah, fw in the
iUtMmatmt tho latt^heari* both narnos (vw, 18), and i« to occupy
tho land« that amd to belong to tho former ^vct. 19), Tlw im-
preftsion i» hardly to be re#i«tod, that this /rituation i» incompatible
with any earlier period than the Oliald*ftn conouest, and that tho
prophet regard/* it wit, m a di«a«tor antidpatea, tmt as a calamity
already Mt and experienced,
Tbi« etitml eon«truction of the dato might he allowed to hold
the field unchallenged, were it not far one grave difficulty that
Atand* in tbe way. Tbe opening section of Obadiah i« i^epro-
duced, frequently with rerhal exaotno»#, in a prophet' against
Edom found in the fortf'flintb chapter of Joremiab, The resom-
blance i« too close to allow a doubt of tho relationship, Tho only
question k, which is the parent and which tb.e child, unless,
tadeed, th^ should prove to be brothers, Tn. Obadiah the ideas
appear in a natural order and logical progrfi>««ioTi, making a har
monious and compact picture, wWle in Jeremiah they are reversed

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

OBADI.\H. 283
adapted it to meet the doubts and perplexities and to satisfy the
demands of faith in the spedal circumstances and relations that
foUowed the great coUapse of Israel's national existence ? The
supposition is one that meets aU the points of the problem. It
explains certain variations of atmosphere and point of riew in
the book, the correspondence of Jeremiah with one dirision only,
the remarkable resemblances between certain pMases in the
other dirision and the Book of Joel, and fits admirably into the
suggestions of the particular place assigned to the prophecy in
the canon of the minor prophets.
4. Object of Prophecy. — In later times Edom came to be the
supreme antipathy and the typical enemy of Je-wry. So, when
the actual Edomites ceased to be, the name was transferred first
to tyrant Eome and then to persecuting Christendom, and the
impassioned words of Obadiah became a favourite vehicle for
the expression of national and reUgious hatred. That is a mis
understanding and a misuse of the book. The prophecy is,
indeed, instigated by indignation against Edom, and the retri
butive destruction of that people is its theme. But the subject
ia worked out in a large fashion that precludes the suspicion of
petty vengefuMess, and justifies the book's place in the record
of revelation. The motive is not the gratification of national
spite, nor is the aim to either warn or edKy the Edomites. The
seer speaks out of the need of his own heart and to the hearts
of Ms people. What creates his vision and compels its utterance
is an indestructible sense of the eternal justice and fideUty, and
of the Dirine destiny of Israel in buUding up the kingdom of
God on earth. The tragedy of Edom is but a part in the great
drama. It is therefore presented on a vast stage, and has the
world's Mstory for its background. Yery real and concrete to
the prophet, no doubt, are the antagonisms of Israel and Ms
enemies, but none the less really and consciously, even if in a
fasMon grand beyond Ms conceptions, it Is the coUIsion of uni
versal forces and everlasting prinriples, that is embodied in them.
Limited and material the presentment of those issues may be,
but they carry in their bosom the consummation of the ages.
Within the rivalry of Edom and Israel there was wrapped the
etemal antithesis of truth and falsehood, good and eril, and the
vision of an eartMy Mngdom on Mount Zion is finding its f td-
filment in the silent, slow, but sure advent of the kingdom of
God and of our CMist.

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

JONAH. 285
tradition or were embodied in written records. But no specimen
of his work has come down to us, unless he is the author, as has
been suggested, of the ancient prophecy against Moab, incor
porated in Isaiah xv. and xvi. ; but this is at best no more than
an ingenious conjecture. "In the Greek revision of the Book of
Tobit (riv. 4) the tMeat of Jonah against Nineveh is quoted,
and there are several references to him in the New Testament
(Matt. xu. 39—41, :s.Yi. 4 ; Luke xi. 29—30).
The Jewish tradition, mentioned by Jerome, that he was the
miraculously restored son of the widow of Zarephath is on the
face of it eridentiy a play of rabbinical fancy, founded on the
resemblance between the meaning of the name Amittal (truth)
and the exclamation of the glad -hearted mother — "Now by this
I know that thou art a man of God, and that the word of the
Lord In thy mouth is truth" (1 Kings xvii. 24). The grave of
Jonah is shown at El-Mesched, and among the ruins of Nineveh
there is a mound named after him, Nebbi Junus.
3. Salient Features. — The saUent features of the story may be
summarised as foUows. Jonah, commissioned to denounce doom
on Nineveh for Its wickedness, recoils from the task. He fears
that the city may repent and God relent, and he either counts
such a result detrimental to his professional repute, or is reluc
tant to be the minister of salvation to the hated heathen capital.
To avoid tMs repugnant mission to the East, and to escape from
the presence of Jehovah, he takes ship for TarsMsh in the
extreme West. Pursued by a storm, detected as the culprit by
the casting of lots, Jonah submits, confesses his guUt, and, to
save Ms innocent companions from sharing Ms fate, causes him-
eelf to be tMown overboard. Instantly the storm ceases ; the
• sailors fear Jehovah, offer sacrifices and make vows ; whUe
Jonah, now penitent and submissive, is preserved from drowning
by a great fish, prepared by God to swaUow him up aUve, and
convey Mm back to the shore.
In this position of imprisonment, but also of deliverance,
Jonah composes a poem of grateful thanksgiving to God, and
after tMee days and three nights of confinement is cast out upon
the dry land. Despatched anew to preach to Nineveh, Jonah
comphes, enters the great city, proclaims Its destruction in forty
days, produces universal panic and repentance, whereupon God
pities and pardons the contrite capital. FUled with chagrin at
the foreseen result of Ms mission, the prophet complains of the
Divine compassion, and Is rebuked. StIU dissatisfied and rebel
lious, he is sharply dIscipUned, and finally put to shame by the
startUng inconsistency between his excessive regard for and
sorrow over the loss of a plant wMch he had not worked to pro-

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

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

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

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

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

MICAH.
1. Name and Birthplace of Micah. — The sixth book of the minor
prophets is described in the titie as a coUection of the teacMng
of the Judsean prophet Micah. In a reference to Ms work con
tained in the Book of Jerenuah, the name is -written in a lengtMer
form as Micajah. It was a common name among the Hebrews,
and occurs many times of various indiriduals in the Old Testa
ment. There is a remarkable divergence in the spelling. The
oldest and full form seems to have been Micahjahu, intended to
express the central article of Je-wish faith in the chaUenge,
" Who is Uke Jehovah ? " Some of the variations are probably
eccentricities of speUing, and others contractions in famUiar use-
It is somewhat surprising not to find the fuU form in the titie of
the prophet's book, at aU eventa K it is original or early.
He is distinguished as "theMorastMte," wMch is not a patro
nymic, but a designation of Ms birthplace. TMs was not, as
some have supposed, the Mareshah, mentioned in i. 15, but
Moresheth-gath (i. 14), an obscure hamlet in the western lowland
of Judsea, bordering on the Philistine country. In Jerome's time
the place was known in the richuty of Eleutheropolis ; it claimed
.the prophet's grave, and a CMistaan church was buUt over it.
Details of his personal relations and career are found in Jewish
and Christian traditions, but they are f uU of palpable blunders
and deserve no credence. The confusion of our prophet with
Micaiah, son of Imlah, who Uved in the time of Ahab, is probably
due to the fact that in the Hebrew text of 1 Kings xxii. 28 the
opening words of tMs book are ascribed to the earUer prophet,
but it is noteworthy that in the Septuagint (with the exception
of one codex) the ascription is not found. The identification is
of course baseless, and in the faee of Micah's distinctive appel
lation as the MorastMte somewhat surprising.
2. Mission and Date. — ^Apart from the record of his prophecies we
have but one absolutely authentic reminiscence of the Ufe-work
r2

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

MICAH. 293
Mm as belonging to the later portion ofthe epoch, which includes
Amos, Hosea, and Isaiah. The great manKesto mentioned in
Jeremiah may have been the culmination of a protracted career.
and in it he may have summed up the scattered elements and
lines of Ms earUer prophetic teacMng. To disentangle and date
these in Ms memoir is a task rendered impossible by its summary
and often enigmatic arrangement. Like many other records ol
prophecy, it is a condensation of speeches and predictions
emitted on many and various occasions, and was probably put
together during the first years of HezeMah, perhai>s on the
particular occasion referred to in Jeremiah.
3. Unity of the Book. — Of recent years the unity of tho book has
been strongly questioned. If it is one continuous composition by
the same pen, we are compeUed to recognise several very abrupt
transitions and enormous dianges of scene. That is, nevertheless,
a feature found in other prophecies, and any excess of it in
Micah's style may be due to mental make, as in the case of
Hosea, or perhaps to the fasMon in wMch prophetic memoirs
were compUed.
As the book stands there seems to be a formal dirision into
three parts, viz., chapters i.— U., iii. — v., ri. — ^rii., each section
introduced by the invocation " Hear ye," starting -with denun
ciation of SID, passiag on into menaces of judgment, and ending
-with promise. In the first of these the element of tMeatening
preponderates ; in the second the promise is predominantiy dwelt
upon ; wMle the third vindicates tiie justice, certainty, and inner
meaning of the Divine dispensation. So far, then, the structure
seema inteUigible, consistent, and coherent. But it is pointed
out that the promise at the end of the first section (ii 12 — 13)
comes in very abruptly and is embodied in two single verses.
If these be removed then we get a more massive and simple
division. For the denunciation of judgment roUs on unbroken
through chapters i. — iu., wMle the background of promise fills
the second act in chapters iv. — ^v. It is, therefore, su^ested
that the couple of interrupting verses did not stand in the original
plan of the book. Either they were a marginal note that has
crept into the text, or, belonging to some other point in the pro
phecy, they have somehow got misplaced.
The assumption is not of such consequence a& to need discussion.
A more important criticism is as to the origin of chapters ri. — -rii.
As we pass into them we are conscious of a distinct change of
atmosphere. The tone is more subdued. The antagonisms
present to the mind of the speaker are altered in character. Sin,
social disorder, aUenation from God are there, and in even
aggravated degree; but the kind has changed. There is the

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

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

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

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

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

NAHUM.
1. Meaning of Name. — The place assigned to Nahum in the
succession of the minor prophets is the same in the Hebrew
Bible and in the Septuagint. Nor after this point is there any
divergence in the arrangement of the books that foUow. The
order is identical in the Massoretic canon and in the Greek, the
oldest of the versions. The word Nahum probably means the
comforter, and in conformity with the name the prophet's oracle
is a message of consolation. In form it is an impassioned anti
cipation of the destruction of Assyrian Nineveh, the oppressor of
God's people, but its inner motive is an undying faith in God's
redemptive purpose, and its destination to comfort the heart of
Israel well-nigh sick -with hope so long deferred.
2. The Prophet's Personality. — Of Nahum we know notMng
except what we can gather from Ms book. The name was pro
bably not uncommon, though no other person bears it in the Old
Testament. There is a Nahum among the ancestors of Joseph
(Luke ill. 25) ; our prophet is mentioned in the apocryphal books
of Esdras ; and the name possibly appears in the inscriptions of
Phoenician origin. In the titie prefixed to the prophecy Nahum
is caUed " the Elkoshite." From the form of the word this can
not be a patronymic. It might indicate a famUy stem, but none
such appears in the Hebrew Usts. It may be taken as certain
that it is meant to designate the prophet's native place or Ms resi
dence. Unfortunately we have no reference elsewhere in the
Bible to any Elkosh. The very pronunciation is uncertain. In
the Septuagint it is -written " Elkesite." Yet this phrase is aU
we have to go upon in determining the personal circumstances of
the seer.
At a comparatively early period tradition located Elkosh in
Galilee. Jerome tells us that he was sho-wn as the prophet's
birthplace a smaU viUage with traces of the ruins of ancient
bmldings, which the Jewa beUeved to be the place of Nahum'a
nativity. If the concluding statement rests on Jerome's own
knowledge, then there must attach to the tradition more weight

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

NAHUM, 301
its origin, and prove it to have been composed either in Palestine
or Assyria. The expectation ia a natural one, but experiment
provea it not quite aatisfactory. Study of the contents and form
of the book does not lead to one conclusion. Each side of the
alternative is stoutly maintained by competent scholars. It ia
urged that Nahum must have lived in the neighbourhood of
Nineveh, for that great metropolis dominates all Ms thought,
engrosses his attention, is described with a knowledge of topo
graphy and local colour possible only to an eye-witness, intrudes
into the writer's vocabulary, and interests him in its fortunes as
no remote city known only by hearsay could have done. On the
contrary, Judah is but cursorUy mentioned, and the reference is
seen to he that of a speaker far away when it is compared vrith
the paraUel aUusion to Assyria of a prophet in Judsea (Zeph. ii.
13—15). There is truth in some of tMs characterization, but it seems
-twisted to a wrong conclusion. The prophecy is indeed engrossed
in Nineveh, but in the reaUsation of Nineveh's destruction, and
in Nineveh's destruction conceived as Judsea's deliverance. The
reference to Judsea ia not, therefore, correctiy deacribed as a pass
ing aUusion, but is the central address of the whole impassioned
rision, placed therefore in the climax of the utterance, and form
ing the crown and keystone of the structure. That is not what it
would have been K the vmter had been an exUe addressing his
feUow-exiles. It is the appeal of a prophet in Judsea speaking
to the heart of Judsea, stirred not by the woes of Ms banished
brethren, but by the crippling woimds and desolations of the
mother country bereft of her cMldren (i. 13 — u. 2).
If local colour is to be appealed to, we have the citation of
Bashan, Carmel, and Lebanon (i. 4), and would no doubt have
more Palestinian tints were Nineveh not our author's theme.
There are in Ms book at most two or tMee Aaayrian words, and
these— we ean see from other Old Testament books — such as an
author in Palestine might naturaUy know and use in -writing of
Assyrian affairs. If the topographical references, the detaUed
touches, and the grapMc realism of the deUneation of the taMng
and destruction of Nineveh are held decisive of personal know
ledge, the same conclusion would attach to the author's minute
and imrii picture of the physical surroundings, material resources,
mUitary strength, and terrible overtMow of Egyptian Thebes (iii.
8 — 10). The truth is that the appearance of detaU is due, not
only here, but in other elements of the piece, not to observation,
but to a powerful and picturesque imagination, operating on Infor
mation conceming Nineveh possessed by aU the peoples interested
by conquest in the capital of their conqueror. There is, in fact.

302 BOOK BY BOOK.
a remarkable absence of names of localities, persons (Huzzab is
erroneous, ii. 7), and events, such as would colour the composi
tion of a writer actually on the spot. The argument is, of
course, too much one of personal Uterary instinct to be made
much of, but the trend of critical opinion is certainly against
assigning to Nahum an Assyrian home and career.
4. Contemporary History. — The period of the prophet's activity
is not specified in the superscription. It must be gleaned, as
nearly as we can, from the contents of the prophecy. TiU recent
years our knowledge of events was not such as to permit of any
one certain combination. There was, therefore, a very wide
divergence of opinion as to the probable date, ranging from the
beginning to the end of the seventh century. The three most
respectable theories locate the composition respectively under
Hezekiah (about B.C. 700), under Manasseh (about b.c 660),
under Josiah (about b.c 630).
In the Ught of fresh discoveries opinion gravitates to the
middle date. TMs conclusion might have been arrived at from a
thorough study of the character of the book. Israel Ues bound
and helpless in the grasp of Assyria (i. 13) ; haK of her people,
the northern kingdom, has been emptied out (ii. 2) ; through her
midst the -wicked one has passed (i. 16), and Judah is left broken
and despoiled (ii. 2). If the description is general, it would
apply to Israel at any time subsequent to the terrible Invasion of
Sennacherib during the reign of Hezekiah. If it indicates a par
ticular calamity it most probably refers to that disaster. If a
later experience must be found, it is possible to faU back on the
narrative in 2 Chron. xxxiii. 11, wMch speaks of a captivity of
Manasseh, that must have been the act either of Esarhaddon
(b.c 680?), or of Assurbanipal (b.c 648). Several phrases in
the wording (i. 11, 12, 14, 15; ii. 13) resemble, reaUy or seem
ingly, features of the narrative of Sennacherib's invasion in
KJings and Isaiah. But the sImUarity comes far short of proving
the combination, wMle even if this be the reference it does not
foUow that the passage is contemporaneous. Such a crisis of
terror, permanent crIppUng, and national depression would live
fresh and ever present In the people's mind tUl they were either
retrieved, or by stUl worse calamities ecUpsed.
Nothing, therefore, shuts us up to HezeHah's age, whUe there
is something that irresistibly demands a later era. One of the
most outstanding pictures in the book is the delineation of the
overtMow of No-Amon, i.e. Thebes on the NUe. From an early
date there had been hostiUty between Egypt and Assyria, and
such a disaster might have happened at any time, say, under
Sargon or Sennacherib, to tally with the theory of early origin,

NAHUM. 303
But the inscriptions have decided the matter by giving us a
definite account of the capture and spoliation of Thebes by the
army of Assurbanipal about B.C. 662. No doubt the great city
may have been sacked at an earlier period, but coupled with
other evidence we have a moral certainty that Nahum vra'ote sub
sequent to that date.
Turning now to the theory that he ¦wrote long subsequent to
this period, about the year b.c 630, we find that the only argu
ment for it is the prejudice, that the impulse and basis of Nahum's
. prediction must be found in an actual menace to the existence of
Nineveh, such as did exist about that time in the hostile move
ments of the Medes and Babylonians, while earlier than this date
the Assyrian empire was in the meridian of its might and glory.
But the supposition is mistaken from first to last. If anything
is manKest in Nahum's prophecy, it is that his certainty of
Nineveh's overthrow is not a poUtical forecast but a religious
inspiration. It is a deduction from the eternal laws of justice
and divine grace, not an inference from an Mstorical survey of
existing facts. The actual executioner Is God, and there is not
the faintest indication of the eartMy agents. Moreover, Ms pic
ture is not of a decaying Assyria that has already received its
death-blow, but of an Assyria In the plenitude of its power and
arrogance, gorged with the plunder of wars and the profit of the
world's commerce, defiant aUke of men and of God (i. 12, ii. 13 —
14 ; iii. 15 — 17). It is precisely that, the apparent invIncIblUty
of the heathen world power, that Inspires the Hebrew prophet to
his daring flight of faith. Just when sight and reason and pro
babiUty are most adverse to hope, then is religion's opportunity,
then is faith's hour to be certain in spite of sense, then Is pro
phecy needed to comfort and assure the heart of God's people.
If this be the true genesis of prophecy. If this be the law of its
origination and action, what season more suitable to assert the
reaUty of the world's Divine government and to declare Nineveh's
certain doom than just in the hour of its supreme triumph, when
over the ruin of its great rival Egypt it stood the unchaUenged
mistress of the world? Either then, in connection perchance
with Manasseh's disaster, or some time later, if that calamity did
not faU so early, the heart of Nahum was roused to indomitable
confidence in coming deUverance, his spirit was stirred with an
irresistible certainty of slow but sure retribution of old wrongs,
and in thoughts that glowed and words that burned he chanted
the death dirge of the world's colossal oppressor. With aU but
complete assurance we may place Nahum about the middle of
the seventh century. Earlier we have no right to locate Mm,
not indeed any moral or religious inducement. Later he could

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

NAHUM. 305
great rival Egypt, he asserts the possibility of the catastrophe,
and founds its certainty on her impotence in the hour of need,
the faU of her fortresses, the demoraUsation of her soldiers, and
the failure and destruction of her last defences (Iu. 8 — 13).
FinaUy he taunts her with her helplessness, pictures the destruc
tion of her commerce, the scattering of her potentates, the dis
persion of her populace, and the reUef and rejoicing that her fall
¦wUl create in aU nations, for wide as the ¦world has been the
curse of her oppression (iu. 14 — 19).
6. Literary and Religious Featwres. — Among the prophetic writers
of the Old Testament Nahum, brief as his book is, claims high
rank in respect of Uterary exceUence. By general consent he is
counted a master of Hebrew style. His vocabulary includes
some pecuUar words and exceptional forms. But what has some
times been reckoned GaUlean provinciaUsm or the betrayal of a
late or deteriorating style, is more probably the result of de
fective copying. Identities of pMase and idea may be traced
between his book and several other prophetic writers, but tMs,
when used to determine age or originaUty in favour of one author
rather than another, is apt to prove a two-edged sword. For
fiery rigour, glowing colour, dramatic impressiveness, wealth of
imagination, and pictorial imagery, Nahum stands pre-eminent.
He is, as it were, hurried away by Ms own passion, and has not
time to do more than sketch Ms riridly conceived pictures in a
few daring strokes. Perhaps aU the more on that account Ms
delineation seems to actuaUy Uve and move and make itseK heard
with the real clash of arms, and hurry of panic-stricken feet, and
the awful hush of ruin and desolation.
As to the prophet's rank in the series of inspired teachers, it is
suggested that his message is meagre, and Ms conceptions narrow.
He has notMng to say about Israel's Messianic character and
future. He has no rebuke for her sinfulness and unworthiness.
His soul is consumed with unreasoning indignation against
Assyria, and he is devoid of that lofty conception of the world's
govemment wMch enabled earUer prophets to recognise in
Assyria Jehovah's scourge for His people's stubbornness and the
chastening rod of Hia gracious discipline. In contrast to that
large and religious interpretation of proridence, Nahum appears
as the representative of a retrogression into narrow, national
particularism. Now it is to be admitted that the form of Nahum's
oracle lends itseK to this misreading, but the spirit and aim of
the prophet ought to have prevented it. Besides the wrong of
Israel, more than once in his short utterance he presents Assyria as
the oppressor of mankind, whose avenger Jehovah is (Iii. 4, 7, 19).
Nor even in the contemplation of Ms own people's injuries Is the
X

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

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

308 BOOK BY BOOK.
Therefore, although we have only one short composition from
Habakkuk, and that apparently composed to be read, not orally
delivered, we may safely tMnk of the author as one whose Ufe
was devoted to the ministry of prophecy. The concluding dirision
of his book Is a poem, prorided ¦with metrical or musical dhec-
tions and notes, exactly similar to those used in the Psalter, and
clearly indicating that the piece was set to be sung with musical
accompaniment in the Temple worsMp. From the pMase, on my
stringed instruments, used in the terminal instruction (iU. 19), it
Is held that he was a Lerite, and occupied some offlce in connec
tion with the service of praise. TMs beUef finds either a dubious
confirmation, or more likely an ancient echo, in the statement
inserted in the superscription of the story of Bel and the Dragon
in the version of the Septuagint in Origen's " Tetrapla," that
Habakkuk was "the son of Joshua, of the tribe of Levi." It
is very far from certain that the Temple choh and orchestra
consisted of Levites alone, and eminentiy unUkely at tMs early
date. A very simUar statement terminates the poem ascribed to
Hezekiah (Isa. xxxriU. 20) on occasion of Ms miraculous recovery
from a sickness that seemed to be unto death. Moreover, the
acknowledged state of the Hebrew text suggests hesitation in
bmlding large inferences on such a smaU basis as the letter
wMch represents the pronoun. Nor would dogmatism be prudent
in riew of the possibility that the musical setting of tMs magnifi
cent poem does not date back to its first pubUcation, but was the
outcome of a later and Uturgical desire to make devotional use
of an expression of faith and hope men would not wUUngly let
die, or leave unused in times of national need. Besides these
vague possIblUtles, there is no further biographical matter to be
gleaned in the pages of the prophecy. Tradition, Jewish and
CMIstlan, has plenty to teU us, but it is either, for the most part,
aUegory and devout fancy, or baseless and sometimes manifestly
false legend. For instance, he was employed to convey food in
a miraculous fasMon to Daniel in the Uons' den. He was son
of the lady of Shunem, to whom EUsha promised that she should
embrace a son (2 Kings iv. 16) ; or, again, the watchman set
(Isa. xri. 6) to look out for tokens of the faU of Babylon. He
was born at Bethzocher, removed before the destruction of
Jerusalem to Ostraclne, died two years prior to the return of the
exUes, and was burled at Keilah, in Judah, or, according to
another tradition, at Chukkok, in Naphtali. The human mind
does not wUUngly accept the principle, that, where we have not
knowledge, the fact of ignorance is better than the pretence of
information.

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

310 BOOK BY BOOK.
belong to the prophecies promulgated during the days of Josiah,
in ah likelihood in the opening years of his reform. This would
seem to exclude the Jehoiakim date, and between the two earUer
it would rather favour the Manasseh theory, in whose time,
moreover, we are told that prophets pronounced just such oracles
of evil as this (2 Kings xxi. 10 — 15).
But of late years, reasoning based on assumed Uterary rela
tionship has been gravely discredited, and in the present case
the evidence is slight and far from sufflclent to establish either
priority, or the bare fact of actual indebtedness, while K Manas
seh's age had its harbingers of doom, there were certainly aa
many In the later decades of this fateful century (Jeremiah,
Zephaniah, Huldah, &c.). Against a very early date it is urged,
that by his use of the phrase in your days (i. 6), the prophet fixes
the Chaldean invasion within the lifetime of his own generation,
and as he addresses not the infants but the adults of Ms time,
that aUows us an Interval of not more than twenty or thirty
years between prediction and fulfilment. That this is a fair
estimate seems clear from passages of a similar description (Joel
i. 2 ; Jer. xvi. 9 ; Ezek. xii. 25). The time of Manasseh Is, there
fore, put out of the question, and we must date bur prophecy not
earlier than b.c 630. Fault can hardly be found fairly with this
logic by those whose theory of prophecy permits them to reason
from the historical fulfilment back to the announcement. But
apart from definitely timed predictions, such a line of reasoning
seems at least precarious in the Ught of ascertained facts, and in
view of the subordinate place expressly assigned to the element
of time in the delivery of prophecy (1 Peter i. 11).
At the same time, if the argument is questionable In form,
the conclusion is probably sound. Certainly the prophet's use
of the phrase proves that he felt the disaster of Judtea imminent,
as he equally clearly presents the downfaU of Babylon in the
remote future (ii. 3). A clue might have been hoped for from
the picture of Judah's condition in i. 2 — 4. If the violence, law
lessness, and paralysis of justice refer, as some hold, not without
plausible grounds (compare I. 13; ii. 4, 8, 17), to injuries infiicted
by the Chaldeans, then clearly chapters ii. and iii. depict accom
plished facts, and we must date our prophecy in the time of
JehoiaMm, and late in his reign rather than early. But the
majority of interpreters are agreed that the verses in question
depict internal corruptions, not external injuries, and that aU
that foUows is future, is indeed the puMtive sequel of present sin.
This is in all likelihood the true scope of the passage, and it
deprives it of any defining value, for the dark picture is appUc
able to periods in the reigns of each of the three monarchs in

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

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

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

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

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

316 BOOK BY BOOK.
The point is not one for dogmatic assertion, and we must re
main in unwUlIng uncertainty whether in Zephaniah we have
or have not a prophet of the blood royal and of the seed of
Darid. Tradition represents him as of Mount Sarabatha, of the
tribe of Simeon, and his grave is assigned to Geba in Lebanon.
An apocryphal book chculated in the early Church under his
name. Unfortunately neither the historical books of the Old
Testament nor Ms own prophecy furnish any biographical
details, AU we can assume from his writing with moral cer
tainty is that he prophesied, wrote, and published Ms book in
Jerusalem. 2. Date. — The title, whichis singularly full and reliable, places
the prophet's activity " in the days of Josiah, the son of Amon,
king of Judah" (i. 1). The reign of Josiah was a long one.
extending from b.c, 640 to 608. There is notMng in the book to
justify the faintest suspicion that it does not belong to this period.
Neither is there, unhappily, anything that enables us with
certainty to define the particular portion of these thirty years
that -witnessed the pubUcation of Zephaniah's prophecy. The
conception of the oracle carries with it a certain universality
that excludes concrete treatment and historical allusion. The
great judgment threatening the world, wMch is the -writer's
theme, is indeed embodied in the imagery of war and conquest
(i. 13, 16 ; Ii. 12; iii. 15), but there Is nowhere any delineation
of the Divinely designated scourge, nor passing hint that might
mark a definite personality. This striking vagueness meana
either that the prophet spoke in a moment of panic in the pre
sence of a palpable menace of invasion, or that the plan of hia
oracle made Mm deliberately throw the eartMy minister of ven
geance into the background, that the picture might be fiUed -with
the presence of the Divine Judge HimseK.
If the prophecy were prompted by an actuaUy impending
danger, it cannot have been Assyria or Egypt, since both are
represented as sufferers. The instrument of retribution must
have been the new Chaldean power, which was slowly but surely
rising on the decay of Assyria during Josiah's reign, or else the
terrifying irruption into Asia and Palestine of the ScytMan
hordes, which took place between b.c 630 — 620, and is asserted
to be the peril that lends a lurid colouring to the early prophecies
of Jeremiah. In view of the studied Indefiniteness of Zepha
niah's drafting, there is no need to find the personal instigation
to his prophecy in any single one of contemporary causes of
anxiety and bodeful anticipation. The ultimate inspiration of
his action Ues deeper, and is not to be sought in the realm of
sense, wMle the apocalyptic character of Ms message is not the

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

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

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

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

HAGGAI.
1. Personal Traditions. — The series of minor propnets is closed
bj a group of throe post-ExUic writers, of whom the first In order
and the earliest In actual date is Haggai. The appellation is
peculiar to the prophet, though it ia very closely akin to the
names Haggi ('Gen. xlvi. 16; Num. xx-vi. 15) and Ilagglah
(1 Chron. vi. 30). It is derived from a root descriptive of excited
or rapid movement, such as dancing, whli^h came to be specially
used of the celebration of religious festivals. If it is not an
abbreviation, then tMs particular formation bears the meanihg
festal, and may have been attached to a child born on the anni
versary of some great religious feast. It is less likely to be
connectod with the cheering character of Haggai's message. A
very probable suggestion, on the other hand, is that the name is
a contraction of Hagarlah (Jehovah girdcth), as tho Ilobrew of
Zacchrous is of Zechariah. In the Book of Ezra Haggai is men
tioned along with Zechariah, as the prophets who stirred the
people to the rebuilding of the temple ; and his name occura in
the Apocrypha under the form Aggeus.
The title of his book describes him simply as Haggai the pro
phet, without name of father, statement of birthplace, or any
othor detail. In this absence of information, founding probably
on tho phrase the Lord's messenger (i. 13, compared with Mai.
iii. 1; ii. 7), devout Imagination early suggested that Haggai
and Malachi, together with John the Baptist, were not ordinary
men, but angels in human form. Tradition, both Jewish and
Christian, has much to tell of our prophet. According to the
Taliiiud it was he who indicatod the site of the formor altar amid
the temple ruins, who readjusted the orders of the priestiiood,
who gii.vo jHu-niissIon for the law to be written In the Assyrian
soripi , &o. OhviHtian writers record that he was born in Babylon,
•wont as a young man to Jerusalem, and was buried by the tombs
of tlui priests.
It is vain to attempt to extract anything reUable from such
Y

322 BOOK BY BOOK.
sources, and we are relegated to conjectures, more or less pro
bable, Ijased on the contents of his prophecy. From that we
should conclude that he was certainly one of the exiles who
returned under the decree of Cyrus ; that he was possibly a
priest, and probably a very old man, who had passed through
the destruction of .Jerusalem, survived the Exile, and played an
important part In the Eestoration. His advanced age Is Inferred,
fancifully perhaps, from his literary style, but more forcibly
from the personal turn given to Ms appeal to those who had seen
the first Temple, from the very brief duration (four months) of
his recorded activity, and from the fact that two years later his
(younger ?) contemporary Zechariah appears as chief of the pro
phets in Jerusalem.
On the ground of styUstIc afflnities, alone with other chcum
stances, Haggai has been suggested as the author of some of the
older portions of the Book of Ezra. In the Septuagint, Syriac,
and Vulgate Ms name, in association with that of Zechariah, Is
found in the superscriptions of certain psalms (notably the psalma
numbered cxxxviii., cxlvi. — cxUx. in the English Psalter), but
the ascription varies, and is wanting in some MSS., and probably
means merely that in certain quarters these psalms were asso
ciated with the writings, or the devotional use of the writings, of
these prophets.
2. Date and Character of the Period. — The recorded prophetic
action of Haggai occurred in the second year (B.C. 620) of Darius,
son of Hystaspes, who must be clearly distinguished from Darius
Nothus, whose reign f eU a whole century later. Some sixteen
years bfefore, the return from Erile had taken place (b.c 536),
and, according to the traditional interpretation of the difficult
narrative found in the Book of Ezra, the foundation of the new
temple was laid early In the foUowing year. Little jjrogress was
made with the building ere the work had to be abandoned, owing
to the intrigues of jealous neighbours at the imperial court. An
altar had, indeed, been at once inaugurated and the routine of
sacrificial worship estabUshed, but the temple edifice was left
untouched during the reigns of Cyrus, Cambyses, and the usurper
Pseudo-Smerdls. It is, indeed, even a question whether the
ruins had been at this early period dealt with to such an extent
as to permit of a formal foundation laying. There is much reason
CO suppose that this ceremony only took place in the second year
of Darius (compare Hag. U. 15, 18 ; Zech. Iv. 9 ; vIII. 9), and that
the description in Ezra (Iu. 8 — 13) reaUy applies to this event.
In any case the position of tMngs was profoundly dangerous
and discreditable to the newly founded community at Jerusalem.
The enthusiasm that had steeled the exUes to the sacrifices, and

HAGGAI, 323
stirred them to face the toils and hazards of the return, was the
inspiring thought of rebuUding their holy and beautiful house
on Mount Zion, and of once more finding in the restored Temple
a centre of national life, and faith, and hope. The abandonment
of the enterprise, under external opposition and personal dis
heartenment, meant practicaUy the acknowiedgpneut of political
impotence and the renunciation of their patriotic aud religious
destiny. That the work waa one of immense difficulty, that they
were few in number and poor in resources, that discouraging and
unforeseen obstacles supervened, these things were their misfor
tune, and not their fault. But that they supinely resigned
themselves to defeat, that they too readUy interpreted difficulties
into insuperable barriers, or that, actually checkmated for the
time, they too easily sat down under defeat, and tumed to an
exclusive and speedily all-engrossing concern for their own
material prosperity, these symptons of spiritual decline and
demoralisation were at once their disgp-ace and their warning.
No doubt there was much to excuse and account for this
sudden collapse of zeal and recoU from lofty aspiration to faith
less self-seeking. Like other enthusiasts, they had taken up
their Mgh caUing ¦with genuine devotion, but with many a fond
illusion. They had invested their eager hopes in a difficult
enterprise, and had prematurely promised themselves the haivest
of rich returns, discounting a future that was much farther off
than they dreamt of. The glowing imagery and poetic imagina
tion of an Isaiah, guaranteeing the leveUing of mountains and
the fiUing up of vaUeys ; beholding God himself bearing them
on eagle's •wings over every obstacle ; picturing Jerusalem
restored and the Temple rebuilt for forgiven Israel by the labour
and largess of heathen peoples and their monarchs — these and
slmUar outbursts of prophetic faith they had takeji literally, and
reckoned on rictory without confUct, acMevement without weary
waiting, and the immediate reaUsation of the prophet's gorgeous
risions of Zion's Messianic glory and triumph.
Instead, they found themselves, a smaU and despised colony.
confronted with the heart-breaking task and stupendous toil of
rebuilding ruins, reclaiming a soil spoUed tjy neglect, hindered
and thwarted by petty enmities on every side, deceived by large
imperial promises that were forgotten, or delayed by official
indolence, or intercepted by the intrigues of rivals, with no
prospects before them but a slow, desperate, »nd unaided hand-
to-hand combat with untoward circumstances, adverse surround
ings, and the depre.ssion of a mean and sordid existence. Human
nature is but human. Eeaction was Inevitable. No wonder
that enthusiasm gave way to despondency in lace of such ob-
y2

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

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

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

ZECHARIAH.
1 . Account of the Prophet. — The eleventh book of the minor
prophets is assigned in the title (i. 1) to a prophet called " Zecha
riah, the son of Borechiah, the son of Iddo," who began his
career in the " eighth month of the second year of Darius." His
early utterances deal with the rebuilding of the Temple, and we
may therefore with absolute certainty identify him with the
Zechariah mentioned in Ezra (v. 1 ; vi. 14), as the colleague of
Haggai in spurring on the people to achieve this grt at and ardu
ous enterprise. It is true that in Ezra Zechariah is caUed " the
son of Iddo," but It is probable that this curt designation, linking
Mm immediately with his grandfather (cf. Gen. xxix. 5 ; 2 Kings
ix. 20), is due to the fact that Berechiah died prematurely, and
so Zechariah succeeded directly to the rights and dignities of Ms
grandfather. This presumption is confirmed by the fact, that in the table of
priestly succession in Nehemiah xii, (cf. vv, 4, 16) an Iddo who
returned with Joshua from Babylon is followed by a Zechariah,
who can hardly be other than the author of these prophecies. That
being so, we must refuse to find in our prophet the Zechariah,
son of Jeberechiah, of Isaiah's time (Isaiah viii, 2), or the martyr
Zechariah, whom our Lord cites as slain between the temple and
the altar (Mat. xxlil. 35). But we may reasonably Infer that this
prophet of the Eestoration was of priestly birth, and compara
tively a young man when he commenced his proiihetlc Work
The name is one of the most common in Hebrew history, ai d haa
been explained to mean memory of Jehovah, or who rem 'mbers
Jehovah, but the analogy of similarly constructed names lather
points to the signification whom Jehovah remembers. Of our
prophet tradition has much to relate that is curious, but presents
nothing quite reliable. There is a certain likelihood In the state
ments that he lived to a great age, and was buried near to
Haggai in the priests' place of sepulture.
2. Unity of the Book. — The unity of the book, ascribed to
Zechariah, has long been contested. More than two centuries
ago the EngUsh scholar, Mede, raised the question in the interest

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

ZECHARIAH. 329
consisting of an admonitory prelude ; (2) chaps, i. 7 ; vi. 15, in
the four-and-twentieth day of the eleventh month of the same
year, consisting of a seven-fold vision, with its termination (vi.
1 — 8), and an appendix (vi. 9 — 15); (3) chaps, vii. 1 — viii. 23,
in the fourth day of the mnth month of the fourth year of Darius,
consisting of a judgment concerning fast days and feasts. Zecha-
rlah's prophetic action Is a warning appeal to the people's melan
choly past. Bygone calamity should not create despond but
inspire wisdom. The prophets of old and their admonitions were
unheeded. Preachers and hearers are dead and gone, but the
Divine judgments foretold have come terribly true. All that is
human passes away, but the will of God prevails and abides.
That alone must be done (i. 1 — 6). But where is the promise of
a glorious restoration of God's kingdom in Judea ? The
land lies desolate, and the great world to aU appearance is
inert. _In a vision the prophet sees the heavenly couriers, that ride
tMough the world, and reaUses the watcMul Interes^t in men's
affairs of Divine providence. Beneath the seeming neglect and
inactivity there are present and working an impassioned zeal
of God for His People, slow but sure resentment of the
heathen's excesses, and Israel's imminent restitution to power
and prosperity in the exercise of His Divine vocation (I. 7 — 17).
Is this possible in a world where Israel's foes are so formidable,
and God's people so ruined and reduced? The horns that scat
tered Israel may tower aloft stupendous enough and menacing,
but the secret resistless forces of Jehovah's righteous rule of the
world are filing their roots through, and they must suddenly
topple down in impotence (i. 18 — 21). The Jerusalem of to-day,
slowly and insignificantly emerging from its ruins, may seem
small and stripped of great possibilities in the future. Neverthe
less God's city shall so expand that no walls can contain it, nor
for Itsdefence shall it require earthly ramparts, secure in God's
keeping as within a waU of fire. Therefore let God's people quit
their homes of exile amid the doomed heathen, and hasten to Zion,
sacred as the chosen dwelUng-placeof God, and the cradle of the
world's destiny (II. 1 — 13).
But can a lo^t vocation be resumed, and bygone guUt atoned ?
Does not the sordid present prove that the past Is irretrievable,
and Israel's election gone beyond recall? The high priest, clad
in stained garments, stands before Heaven's judgment throne,
accused by Satan, but the Divine judge himself rebukes the
adversary, vindicates his claim of access to God, Invests Mm
anew in priestly robes of acceptance, pronounces the saved
remnant of Israel the object of God's love and high election, and

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

ZECHAUIAH. 331
the promised prosperity ; and above all to practise truth and
righteousness. So shall God give you a future of unapproach
able splendour, in which Israel shall be the centre of the world's
aspiration and faith, because in Israel God lives and moves and
rides (vii. 1 — ^viii. 23).
4. Style. — The language of these prophecies is remarkably
pure Hebrew, containing few. If any, traces of Aramaic in
fluences. The style is mostly plain and prosaic, as befits descrip
tion ; but there are impassioned passages, where the speaker is
moved in ethical appeals or in the delineation of Messianic
glories. The form of his utterances, in respect of vision, inter
pretation, &c., is allied to the methods of EzeMel and Daniel,
though similar phenomena are present in earUer prophets, viz.,
in Amos, &c. Some of the features, such as the Divine couriers,
angels, the female personification of Wickedness, the accusing
Satan, &c., remind us of characteristic ideas of the Books of Job
and Proverbs.
On the surface the prophet's conceptions and personal feeUngs
might be accused of Jewish particularism and Levitical con-
trastedness of interest. When we aUow for circumstances, the
necessity of teUing on Immediate hearers, and when we search
the seer's hopes and aspirations to their depths, we shall not
refuse to see in Ms mood and theology the elements of limitation,
that lent themselves to later Judaism ; but we shall much more
wonder at Zechariah's miracle of faith and invincible loyalty to the
promise, and recognise in him a strong and indispensable comba
tant for the triumph of righteousness and of God upon earth.
5. Summary ofthe Second Division. — The second portion of the
Book of Zechariah is clearly divided into two main sections, each
introduced by the phrase. The burden of the Word of the Lord,
which also stands at the head of the following prophecy of
Malachi. The first section consists of three pieces, which may
roughly be divided as in the chapters of our Authorised
Version. Divine retribution is approaching from the north. The Syrian
peoples are overthrown; the Phoenician cities subdued; the
Philistine states depopulated, repeopled by a mixed race, and
made vassals to Judah ; while God's people shall remain un
harmed, encompassed by God's care. Zion's long looked for
king comes, powerful to save, lowly of heart, resistlessly imposing
peace on the peoples. Israel's bondage is over : Ms prisoners
shall return ; his warriors — Judah and Ephraim combined —
vanqMsh the sons of Greece, irresistible in might Divine ; and
the land is crowned with prosperity and joy (Ix. 1 — 17).
From God alone must Israel's weU-beIng be sought, and not

332 BOOK BY BOOK.
from false guides and hurtful leaders, against whom God's angei
burns. Jehovah Himself will fight for Israel, restore the housea
of Judah and Joseph, overtMow the power of Assyria and Egypt,
recaU the exiles and re-erect the theocratic kingdom (x. 1 — 12).
Invasion from the north Is rolling onward, and falls with
destruction on the chosen land. For God's people have been
wayward and rebellious. He would have delivered them from
heartless shepherds and tended them HimseK, securing for them
favour with the nations and unity among themselves {i.e. between
Ephraim and Judah). These shepherds were cut off in one
month ; but they wearied Jehovah, and He broke the rod of
favour that shielded them from external hostility. Finally
rejected as their shepherd. He next broke the brotherhood be
tween Ephraim and Judah, and delivered them over to the cruelty
of a worthless shepherd, to their undoing and that ultimately of
the shepherd (xi. 1 — 17).
The connection of this piece with the two foregoing discourses
is hard to make out, if we are to take It as the sequel. One can
hardly help asking, If it is not rather a mournful retrospect of
Israel's history up to the Exile, showing the people's wilful guilt
and Jehovah's unwilling but necessary rejection of them. It is
also a question whether originally the passage (xiii. 7 — 9) did
not conclude this delineation, though where It now stands Its
presence Is justified and, indeed, essential.
The second section falls into two discourses, and differs from
the previous passages In taking no more note of Ephraim, wMch
is perhaps predominant over Judah In the former. God, who Is
Lord of human destiny, has set Jerusalem to be the world's
centre, and the test of the fortunes of all other peoples. AU
nations, combined In attack upon it, are smitten by God with
blindness, and the cityis delivered. The deliverance commences
in the country districts of Judsea, and the whole people are in
spired with preternatural prowess (xii. 1- — 8). A spirit of contri
tion seizes on the house of David and the inhabitants of Jerusa
lem, and they bewaU him whom they pierced with a universal grief
like the national mourning for Josiah slain in the battle of Me
giddo (xii. 9 — 14). A fountain of cleansing shall be opened In
the land, and the people shaU purs:e themselves of aU sins,
especially of Idolatry and false prophecy (xill. 1 — 6).
Again disaster looms out In the opening of a last great oracle.
By God's ordering Israel's shepherd is slain and the flock are
scattered, one-third only surviving, but refined and purified they
are restored to Divine favour and their high vocation (xiii. 7 — 9).
Jerusalem, assailed by all nations. Is already t^ken, pillaged,
and half the people led away captive. Suddenly Jehovah inter-

ZECHARIAH. 333
venes, cleaves Mount OUvet in two, and saves His people In the
deft, and so " at evening time there shaU be light " (xiv. 1 — 8).
From Jerusalem living waters fiow out to the world ; God reigns
there, the land is transfigured, and densely and happily re-
peopled (xiv. 9 — 11). The heathen foes of Jerusalem are des
troyed by plagues, disunion, and internecine war, and their
wealth transferred to God's people (xiv. 12 — 15). The surviving
heathen go up to Jerusalem to keepthe feast of tabernacles and
worship Jehovah, recalcitrants being destroyed by plague and
drought, while in Jerusalem holiness pervades even the most
common things of daUy life, and henceforth nothing intrudes
alien, unclean, or hurtful (xiv. 16 — 21).
6. Theories of Commentators. — A perusal of this analysis, much
more a careful study of the book, wiU suffice to show how remark
able a contrast there is between the first eight chapters and the
concluding six. In the former we are surrounded by the sights
and sounds of the rebuUding of Jerusalem, and at every step we
know where we are ; but as soon as we leave them, where are
we ? We seem to pass at one step from solid earth and trans
parent sunlight into an obscure labyrinth or a country in the
clouds, where all things are shadowy, confused, and Inter
mingled. So vague and perplexed is the interpretation of these
oracles, that the best commentators are hopelessly dirided in
their allocation, distributing them respectively over a period of
five or six hundred years.
The most probable theories may be reduced to tMee. First,
it is maintained that the second half of the book contains prophe
cies penned by the Zechariah of the first half, but after a very
long Interval, in old age, and altered circumstances. Secondly,
the latter haK of the book Is broken into two portions, of which
chaps, ix. — xi. (usually with xui. 7 — 9 added) are the work of a
pre-ExUic prophet about the time of King Ahaz (b.c 736), pos
sibly the Zechariah Ben Jeberechiah mentioned In Isaiah viii. 2,
wMle chaps, xii. — xiv. {minus riii, 7 — 9) are the production of a
prophet In the time of Jeremiah (b,c 606), possibly the Urijah
referred to in Jeremiah xxvi. 20. Thirdly, the six chapters, as
a whole or possibly in separate sections, are assigned to a much
later period than the age of Zechariah, varying from the
beginning of the third to the middle of the second century before
CMist. An Immense range of considerations Is involved in the discus
sion of the problem, and some of the most valuable evidence Is
of a very subtle literary description. It Is impossible here to do
more than indicate some of the palpable and most soUd argu
ments that go to determine the issue. We shaU refer to the

334 BOOK BY BOOK.
three divisions, i.e. chaps i. — viii., Ix. — xi., xii. — xlv. as Parts .1.,
II,, and III. for the sake of brevity and cnnvenlence.
7. Literary and Historical Evidence. — The language of the
several sections of the Book of Zechariah has been subjected to
careful scrutiny and minute analysis with very conflicting results.
Evidence of divergent vocabulary has been neutralised by
alleging the reasonableness of diversity In view of the changes
of theme, and is confronted by proof of community In the use of
certain characteristic expressions and idioms, but nothing signifi
cant has been by either side established. The difference of style
between the prosaic periods of Part I., and the oratorical and
imaginative flights of Parts II. and III. ; the absence in these of
the visions, interpreting angel and allied Imagery of the early
chapters ; the lack of definite and dated headings in the later
portion, and the failure to ascribe the utterances to Zechariah or
any other ; the striking change of scene and theme ; the vast and
dim and distant ristas that replace the earlier near view and cir
cumscribed horizon ; these and a host of other contrasts are real
and significant, but do not in themselves estabUsh separate
authorship, though they go to prove lapse of time in produc
tion, and a decisive transformation of situation, mood and aim.
When we proceed to search for definite historical allusions, or
disclosures of actual background, that might positively fix the
origin of these six chapters, we encounter a remarkable conflict
of probabilities. In chap. ix. disaster descends on Syria,
Hamath, and the cities of Phoenicia and Philistia, whUe Israel
is preserved ; and in chaps, x. Assyria and Egypt are presented
as the powers that on either side have Injured and stIU threaten
Ephraim and Judah. Moreover, these two exist as co-ordinate
and warlike states, while apparently in chap, x, there is refe
rence made to the anarchy of the last years of Ephraim. AU this,
it is urged, points conclusively to the period of Hosea and the
early years of Isaiah. But against this construction there is
much to be said. Apparently from ix. 13, at the time of this
prophecy, Israel's worst enemies and oppressors are' the Greeks,
which could hardly be put forward prior to the ExUe.
It may be said, that what is meant here, as In Joel Hi., is simply
that at an early period Hebrew slaves had been sold to the
lonians ; but surely the manner of the reference implies that
Greece was then Israel's worst enemy, which points to the open
ing of the fifth or the end of the fourth century. If the discourse
is purely a general forecast, the former might well be the period,
and into that age Zechariah may easily have survived and
prophesied. If on the contrary a particular occurrence shapes
this ninth chapter, unquestionably what fits it best is Alexander's

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

336 BOOK BY BOOK.
earthquake of King Uzziah in riv. 6. The manner in which the
house of David is Introduced (xii. 12) and the absence of any
mention of a king favour the post-ExUic theory, while the cita
tion of idolatrous practices and false prophecy as prevalent sins
does not exclude the later dates, when we consider the reason of
Nehemiah's stern resistance of mixed marriages, and the state
ments of post-Exilic literature, both sacred and secular (Neh. xiu.
26 ; Mai, iii. 5 ; Joseph. Antiq, viii. 2 — 5, &c.). The special
reference to Egypt of xiv. 18, 19, while it peculiarly suits the
period of Josiah and Jehoiakim, is too undefined and too natural
at any time to serve In fixing the date, and the same may be said
of the suggested allusion to Manasseh's persecutions (xU. 10),
and other proposed combinations.
A very valuable line of investigation has been led, but awaits
further and more exact prosecution, in the shape of determining
relationship between the language and ideas of these chapters and
the various books of the Old Testament prophetic literature. It
is impossible to enter into the details of the process, but, whUe
much may stIU be doubtful, It seems fair to say that a number of
points of contact exist between these six chapters and the prophets
of the Exile, and that it Is hardly possible to believe that these
have borrowed from Zechariah ix. — xiv. Moreover, while much
of the wording of the prophecies in question recaUs earlier times,
it can hardly be denied that the general atmosphere is priestly,
apocalyptic, post-ExUIc. Much of the imagery leads to the same
conclusion, and the Messianic conceptions and expectations belong
to the later prophetical developments.
If these impressions be well-founded — and the flow of critical
opinion is setting in the direction of the theory of post-ExUic
origin — then we must account for those features of language and
aUusion, which suggest an early date, in one or other of two
ways. Either the author, as has been suggested of Obadiah,
took up ancient oracles, that lent themselves to his purpose, and
especially In chaps, ix. — ri. adapted them to express the fears
and hopes and faults of Ms own day. Or else, in conformity
with a Uterary affectation or custom of his age, or from personal
reverence for what was old and venerable, he deliberately clothed
his messages to Ms own age In an archaic dress, and framed them
in a more or less allegorical form.
Both suppositions are easily possible, and might be supported
by many similar phenomena. But It Is probable that it wUl for
many a day remain an open question, whether Zechariah ¦wrote
the entire book, the first part In youth, the second in old age ; or
whether the oracles of two earlier seers, existing in manuscript
without note of authorship, came in later times to be appended

ZECHARIAH. 337
to the genuine work of Zechariah ; or whether the production of
a prophet in the time of the Ptolemies was first combined ¦with
the work of MalacM, receiving aimilar headings, the whole sub
sequently placed in the canon after the origmal Zechariah, tUl in
course of tune theae chaptera came to be taken as part of Zecha
riah's own prophecies. Between these last suppositions there is
Uttle to choose, for in the one case how came a work of the eighth
century to be tagged on to Zechariah, and in the other how came
a second or third century piece to find its way in among the
prophets instead of going to the Hagiographa ?
Whatever the origin of theae prophecies, aU wIU umte in
admiration of their majestic, if sometimes weird and sombre
grandeur. They are couched in a style of much power and
imaginative beauty. The reUgious conceptions, marked as they
are by ineritable imperfections, are in their essential contents
profound and creative. How great has been their influence can
only be measured by those who are acquainted with Jewish and
Christian apocalyptic ¦writings. The part they play in the Mes
sianic delmeations of the New Testament needs not to be
recounted. In each and aU of its elements and influence the
Book of Zechariah has amply vindicated its right to a place in
the Mstory of the Old Dispensation, and beyond the measure of
many other prophecies has prepared and heralded the advent of
CMist and the estabhshment of Hia Kingdom.

MALACHI.
1. Authorship. — The canon of the minor prophets ia closed by
the Book of MalacM, who has therefore been caUed by the Jews
" the seal of the prophets." Of the author we know absolutely
notMng. It is even doubtful K we are in possession of Ms real
name. The word Malachi, K it is not an abbreriation, means
either angelic, or my angel, or messenger. More probably it is a
contraction for MalacMjah, as AM (2 Kings xvui. 2) is for
Abijah (2 CMon. xrix. 1), and signifies messenger or angel of
Jehovah. In any case the meaning of the name is remarkable.
The name itseK is not borne by any other person in the Old
Testament, nor is our prophet mentioned in the Books of Ezra
and Nehemiah, though they contain such elaborate Usts of the
famUies and personages of the period. The word (Malachi = my
messenger) occurs in a characteristic passage of the book (Ui. 1).
The title (i. 1), wMch gives no patronymic, or birthplace, or
detaU of any description, is curiously similar to the headings of
the closing sections of Zechariah (ix. 1 ; xU. 1). Consequently
the idea early arose that the word is not the ¦writer's proper
name, but either a nom de guerre employed by himseK, or a con
venient title of reference attached to the book by some scribe or
editor, suggested by the most picturesque and outstanding pMase
of the prophecy. The Septuagint prefixes to the prophecy the
heading Malaehias, but translates the titie, The burden of the word
of the Lord to Israel by the hand of His messenger or angel. The
Targum inserts the note, Malachi, whose name is Ezra the scribe.
The idea of a nom de guerre, though rejected by a majority of
writers, found favour ¦with not a few Je^wish Eabbis and early
CMIstlan authors, whUe some eminent modem scholars argue
strongly for the ascription of the book to Ezra. Unquestionably
the facts aheady cited create a considerable degree of uncertainty
about the name. But that Ezra shoidd have been the author, in
face of the absence of Ms name and differences of style, is hard

MALACHI. 339
to believe, while the notion of anonymity has against it the
general custom and essential character of the prophetic function,
and in addition the peculiar dlificulty, not to say impossibUity,
of concealment in the circumstances of the restored Jewish com-
luunity. 2. Date. — The period of MalacM's activity may be dotormlned
with approximate exactness, Aa in the case of Haggai and
Zechariah, we find ourselves among the Jews of the Eestoration,
but at a much later point in their Mstory. The question of the
prophetic urgency ia no more the rebuilding of the sanctuary.
Tho Temple oxists, and tho routine of sacrifice has been long in
operation. Unliko the dosolationH of Edom, tho ruins of Jeru
salem have beoiL repaired. The Jewish colony is established on
a flrm footing, but tho enthusiasm of a restoration, that has
jirovod only partial, has given way to disappointment and doubt.
In the doprossiou of weary delay, faith has sunk into scepticism,
and religious iudill'oronco has engendered various disorders; iu
particular, a scandalous degradation of divine worship, grave
irregularities in the priesthood and perversions of their office,
widespread social oppression and injustice, and especially a
dangerous readiness to intermarry with heathen neighbours.
Tho picture corresponds minutely with the delineations in the
Books of Ezra und Nehemiah, and therefore points unmistakably
to a period commencing about half a century alter the Eestoration,
and terminating with the second administration of Nehemiah
(say B.C. 476 — 426). Tho book has beon dated earlier and
also later, but practicaUy the question narrows itself to a choice
between the timo of Ezra's first reforming activity (b.c 468) and
the final intervention of his successor and coadjutor, Nehemiah
(b.o. 425). So far as the abuses dealt with by tho prophet are
concerned, they were probably as provahuit on Ezra's arrival as
on the occasion of Nehemiah's second visit. We know that it
was 80 with regard to the laxity of marriage (Ezra ix., x.), and
who can doubt that the kindred corruptions existed likewise ?
StiU there is not that minute detail of correspondence which we
find between the prophecy and the narrative of Nehemiah's
reformation (Neh. xiii.)
Moreover, had MalacM worked so oarly, the fact could hardly
but have been chronicled in the history, while if he laboured at
the later date, the failure to mention him ' is not inexplicable in
a record of such brevity. If the roforonce to tho ruins unrepaired
of Edom (i. 3) imidies the rebuilding of Jerusalem's walls, that
would fix us to a point subsequent to Nehemiah's first governor
ship (b.o, 43;j). If it be the case that prior to this time the
z 2

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

MALACHI. 341
oral deUvery. It is addressed to an age of overt, though
rinavowed, national discontent and disaffection. Theocratic
Hceytidism, bom of moral obtuBen«?8, is the eril wMch MalacM
confronts. The people look at their slow and humbling recovery,
in place of the rapid and glorious progress prophecy had led
them to anticipate, and they ask bitterly, " Is tMs God's peculiar
love of His people ? " The prophet's reply x>oints them to the
significant fact of Jehovah's persistent restoration of Israel to
national existence, in contrast ¦with the irretrievable downfaU of
their kinsmen the Edomites. That the reverses of fortune should
be Edom's destruction, but Israel's discipline, is proof that Israel
possesses a unique place and destiny in the Dirine jiurposes
(i. 1-5).
The answer is adequate, but requires to be supplemented by
an explanation of what is painfiU and perplexing m the present
situation of tardy recovery. This is done by jKfinting out that
the delay in fulfiUing Israel's destiny is due not to Divine slack
ness, but to Israel's imworthiness and disloyalty to the covenant
The indictment consists of two parts, of wMch the first seizes
and scathes 'with burning scom the degradation of Dirine wor
sMp, the corruptions of the x>riesthood, and the social ¦wrongs
among the people (I. 6 ; ii. 16;, wMle the second lays bare their
roots in rehgious doubt of God's moral earnestness, the profitable
ness of His serrice, and His fidelity to fulfil the promises of the
covenant (ii. 17 ; iv. 6).
Tbe people are unwilling to admit theh eulpabUity, and it is
necessary for the prophet to drive Ms charges home. Sons honour
their fathers, servants their masters, but Israel has no reverence,
not even bare respect for God. For His worsMp they select the
sorriest beasts of their flocks and the shabbiest remnants of their
possessions, such as they would never think of presenting to the
d-ril ruler, and in this loveless insult jiriests and people are un-
blushingly combined. Better far to shut theTemple and to quench
the altar's fire, for already in every land a worship ascends to
Jehovah pure and warm and aceejitable in His sight (i. 6 — 14).
The priests, chosen by God to be the fountain of law and
Justice and religion, promised therefore the Dirine favour and
the people's honour and support, have perverted their office,
corrupted justice, aUenated the laity from religion and moraUty,
and have, therefore, in just recompense forfeited their power to
bless, destroyed the dignity of their high vocation, and incnrred
universal obloquy and contempt (u. 1 — 9).
The people, forgetful of the obligations of theocratic brother
hood, reckless of the risk to religion and the continuity of a holy

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

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

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

BOOK BY BOOK

BOOK BY BOOK
popular ^tu&fcs on tljj ©anon of ^ciiptuw
NEW TESTAMENT

The Eight Ber. thi Lord Bishop of Bipon
Thf Very Btv. Dean Farrar, D.D. Rev. Canon Maclcar, D.D.
Prof. JFilliam Sunday, D.D. Bev. Geo. Salmon, D.D., LL.D.
Late Prof. WiUiam jmiUgan, DJ).
Prof. Marcus Dods, D.D.

LOISTDON
ISBISTEK AND COMPANY Lnm-ED
15 & 16 TAVISTOCE; STREET COYEXT GARDEN
1896

LONDON :
PRINTED BY J, S, TIBTUR AND CO. LIMITKl),
CITY KOAD.

PEEFACE.
These studies by eminent di-rines originally appeared as
Introductions to the various Books of Holy Scripture in
" The New Illustrated Bible," published by Messrs. J. S.
Virtue & Co., Limited. In 1892 they were issued under
the title " Book by Book," and thus presented in a single
volume a complete and scholarly survey of the questions
affecting the Sacred Canon which have of recent years
caused so much discussion.
In compliance with frequently expressed wishes it has
now been decided to publish the work in two volumes.
The present volume is devoted to the Books of the New
Testament. THE PUBLISHERS.

CONTENTS.

THE STNOPTIC GOSPELS.
By Prof. TVilliam Sanday, D.D.

PAQB
Genbeai, Inteod-uotion . . 9
The Gospel aocokding to St.
Matthew . . . 37

The Gospel aoooeding to St.
Mabe .... oO
The Gospel acooedino to St,
Luke . , . . 59

Bg George Salmon, D.D., LL.D.
THE WRITINGS ASCRIBED TO ST. JOHN .

By the Very Rev. F. W. Farrar, D.D.
THE ACTS OP THE APOSTLES . . . ,

72

92

THE EPISTLES OF ST. PAUL.
By Prof. Mareus Dods, D.D.

The Epistle to the Romans . 108
FiEaT AND Seoonh Epistles to
THE COEINTHIANS . . . 115
Epistle to the Galatians . .120
Epistle to the Ephesians . . 124

Epistle to the Philippians . 130
Epistle to the Colossians . 134
Eikst and Second Epistles to
THE Thessalonians . . . 140
The Epistle to Philemon . 157

¦ By the Right Rev. the Lord Bishop of Ripon.
Epistles to Timothy and Titus 

147

VIU CONTENTS.

By Canon Maclear, D.D. PAOE
Epistle to the Hbbre-w-s  160

THE REMAINING EPISTLES.

By Canon Maclear, D.'D.
PAGE
. 170 I The Seoox:
The Fiest Epistle oi- Petee . 180 The Epistle of Jude . . 198

PAGE
The Epistle op James . . 170 I The Second Epistle op Petee . 191

By Prof. TVilliam MilUgan, D.D.
THE REVELATION OF ST. JOHN THE DIVINE . . .208

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

10 BOOK BY BOOK.
them from it and bring out into clear reUef this leading charac
teristic, a name has been coined from the Greek which means
" capable of being seen In one vle-^v," or, as we might express it,
" capable of arrangement in paraUel columns."
It Is weU kno-wn that harmonies have frequently been at
tempted, both in English and in Greek, dra-wn up in this man
ner; among the best of wMch may be mentioned Robinson's
" Harmony of the Eour Gospels in Greek" (Xew Tork, 1845),
with an EngUsh edition adapted from the work of the eminent
American traveUer and scholar ; EuUer's " Harmony of the Gos
pels" (London, 1875), and Dr. E. A. Abbott's "Common Tra
dition of the Synoptic Gospels" (London, 1884). Literature does
not contain another group of biograpMes which lends itself to
such treatment in anything Uke the same degree.
Tbe problem, however, consists not merely in the one rela
tion of resemblance — wMch, If it stood alone, would not be so
diBficuLt to account for — but in the combined relation of resem
blance and difference. The question is, what hypothesis wiU
satisfactorUy explain the phenomena, and explain them not
only In general terms but when it comes to be appUed in close
detaU ?
It Is practicaUy agreed at the present time that the problem is
a purely scientific one, and that it Is not foreclosed by any theory
of inspiration. Inspiration, as CMIstlans are coming to see, is
concerned -with the substance of revelation rather than with its
outward form. The very same inquiries wMch bring out the
natural human element in Scripture, also show -where that ele
ment ends. They point to causes at work -which are rightly
called not human, but in a special and pecuUar sense Divine ; and
over and above this, the Christian wiU also beUeve In a Provi
dence wMch shapes the ends and determines the course of aU
causes and operations, however indirectly associated with revela
tion ; but tMs does not absolve Mm from, the duty of seeking to
trace the action of those causes by such methods as are alone
open to Mm. He wIU write a-iiv ©tS, "under God," over every
theory that he may be led to form ; but subject to that reserva
tion, the fact that a theory accounts (humanly speaMng) for the
facts, is enough to give It a legitimate place in the gro-wing body
of organised kno-wledge.
We ask, then, what account is to be given of the very remark
able phenomena at once of agreement and of difference -wMch
characterize the first three, or Synoptic Gospels? The reaUy
scientific discussion of the question may be said to be Uttle more
than a century old. In earUer ages (if we except some isolated
expressions in the writings of the Fathers) a natural and laudable

GENERAL INTEODUCTION TO THE SYNOPTIC GOSPELS. 11
but, as we have seen, mistaken instinct of reverence put a veto
upon the mquiry before It was weU begun. But within the last
hundred years a very great amount of acumen and industry has
been brought to bear upon it. Almost every conceivable hypo
thesis has been started, appUed, and criticised; and though a
general agreement has not yet been reached, and the diflB.culties
are yet some way from being aU removed, real progress has
nevertheless been made, and gUmpses at least may be obtained
of what promises to be a final solution.
To attempt to record all, or even any considerable part, of the
hypotheses that have been raised, would only leave upon the
reader's mind an impression of infinite confusion. It will there
fore be best to select just a few saUent or representative theories,
wMch either have in the past attracted, or at present attract, the
greatest amount of attention. These may be said to be : (1) The
theory that after the writing of Gospels had once begun, the suc
ceeding evangehsts each made use of the work of Ms prede
cessor or predecessors. TMs we wUl caU the theory of successive
dependence. (2) The theory that aU tMee Gospels alike are based
upon a common foundation of tradition, more or less fixed in its
form, though committed to -writing for the first time in our pre
sent Gospels. TMs we wiU eaU the theory of oral tradition.
(3) The theory that the Gospels derive their common element
not merely from their dependence upon a common tradition, but
from the common use of certain -written documents. TMs we wIU
caU the theory of documentary sources.
In attempting to understand and to estimate each of these
tMee hypotheses, it wUl be weU to bear constantly in mind the
conditions of the problem wMch we have to solve : viz., the com-
bmed presence of resemblance and of difference, and that no
solution can be successful which does not account for both at
once, and wMch does not show itself capable of being carried
into detaU.
1 . The Theory of Successive Dependence. — -This is the oldest theory.
It goes back as far as to St. Augustine, who tMnks that tho
Evangehsts were acquainted -with each other's -writings, and
were inspired m some respects to supplement them. Thus, in
the genealogies, wMle St. Matthew gives the descent of the
Saviour in the royal Une, that of Solomon, St. Luke gives the
priestly descent, or that wMch is not royal, through Nathan.
St. Mark he regards as simply the abbre-vdator of St. Matthew.
{De Cons. Ev. i. 2, § 4). But St. Augustme spares himself the
necessity of grappUng with the difficulties of tMs view by con-
fimng its expression to a few very general sentences, and by
making no attempt to explam in detaU why the later -writers

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

GENERAL INTEODUCTION TO THE SYNOPTIC GOSPELS. 13
(U.) It is true that one systematic attempt has been made to
supply a motive for the variations in the Synoptic Gospels — the
attempt connected with the name of Dr. Ferdinand CMistian
Baur (died 1860), a writer distinguished as much for width of
-view and command pf daring hypothesis as for lucidity of expo
sition. The key to unlock the intricacies of the problem he found
in the party leanings of the authors of the Gospels.
Parties certainly there were in the Apostolic age as much as
in any subsequent period of the Church's history ; and no one has
ever brought out their significance more clearly than Baur did.
At the root of them aU was the great division of Jew and GentUe.
Converts from Judaism and converts from GentUe heathenism
came to Christianity with such very different antecedents that It
was impossible that they shoidd at once see eye to eye with one
another. Most of aU was this rendered impossible by the fact
that the Jew regarded himself as occupying an altogether higher
platform than the Gentile ; the Gentiles were described by the
sweeping designation of " sinners" (Gal. ii. 15); the Jew was a
member of the chosen people, heir to all the promises.
The two bodies had tMs much In common, that both confessed
Jesus to be the Messiah ; but that left a number of questions
stUl open. On what terms were Gentiles to be admitted ? The
Mosaic law had not been formally abrogated. What degree of
compUance -with that law was to be required of them ? We can
not fail to see that questions like these left room for great dif
ferences of opinion. Such differences no doubt existed, from the
extremes of strictness and exclusiveness among the partisans of
Judaism, to the extremes of laxity and latitudinarianism in the
converts from heathen religions.
Between these extremes there were a number of intermediate
positions of wMch many traces have come down to us in the pages
of the Acts and in the Epistles of St. Paul. Much lively contro
versy, much open antagonism, split up the Church Into sections
as widely separated from eaoh other as any that exist in our own
day. What wonder if they also left their mark upon the compo
sition of the Gospels ?
(iii.) There was a good primd-facie case for looking for the
indications of party infiuence. As far back as the second cen
tury St. Matthew's Gospel had been regarded as in a special sense
the Gospel of the Jews, and St. Luke's as In a special sense the
Gospel of the Gentiles ; whUe St. Mark, the associate at once of
St. Paul and St. Peter, seemed to stand half-way between the
other two. Baur took hold of these admitted facts and developed
them with great subtlety and acumen. By means of them ho
sought to explain the deviations of the evangehcal writers from

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

GENERAL INTRODUCTION TO THE SYNOPTIC GOSPELS. 15
wholes ; they were not aU of a piece. The dependence of one
upon the other could not be a dependence of the complete Gos
pels as they have come down to us. A process of dissection
began, in wMch the dividing Unes were drawn by the tendency
observable in the different portions. We must not attempt to
foUow aU the speculative results of this dissecting process. A
prominent part in it was played by two rather shadowy docu
ments of which mention was made by early writers : one was the
so-eaUed Gospel according to the Hebrews, the other -was a pecu
liar abridgment of St. Luke said to have been used by the
Gnostic Marcion.
A Gospel according to the Hebrews would naturaUy represent
the earUest stage of evangelical composition. At the opposite
pole to this would naturaUy be the work approved by one who
accepted only the -writings of St. Paul, and hated everything that
savoured of Judaism. Given these two documents, it would not
be difficult to conceive how they might be buUt up into our pre
sent Gospels by gradual accretions and modifications. For such
a process time was necessary ; and the Tubingen School, as it
was caUed, from its headquarters in the University of Tiibingen
where Baur was professor, did not hesitate to draw freely upon
time. It supposed that the Synoptic Gospels did not reach their
present shape untU the period 130 — 170 a.d., when the unmis
takable aUusions to them first begin.
(vi.) We must not stay to point out the impossiblUties in this
construction of Mstory. An alternative scheme, which seeks to
evade those impossibUities, wiU be presented shortly. Enough
to remark that the theory is no longer that of " successive depend
ence." It has become a form of the theory of " documentary
sources," in wMch the leading feature is that the modifications
introduced into those sources are supposed to be due to the dog
matic leanings of the -writers, who one after another reviewed
and recast them.
(vii.) The theory so conceived was far too one-sided to account
for the facts. On the one hand, it led to many strained and
far-fetched interpretations. Dogmatic leanings were suspected
everywhere, not only in places which reaUy involved doctrine,
but in others wMch were guUtless of any such intention. The
Evangehsts were transformed from cMonlclers not devoid of art
of a simple. Oriental, or Hellenistic kind, into nineteenth-century
pamphleteers ; or rather pamphleteers whose recondite, indirect,
and aUusive style of recommending their doctrines was that of no
century whatever.
The perversion arose from attempting to make a single cause
do duty for a number of causes. It was natural that the writers

16 BOOK BY BOOK.
or compUers of our Gospels should be influenced by their attitude
towards the leading questions of their own day. A certain pro
portion of the variations in the Gospels can be accounted for in
this manner, but by no means aU of them. The critic must keep
Ms eye open to aU the influences at work, and must not aUow
himself to lay an exaggerated stress upon one to the exclusion of
the rest.
(viU.) The theory of Baur was, as we have seen, the most
elaborate attempt to explain the variations m the Gospels, on the
hypothesis of the successive dependence of one upon the other or
others. Even it did not represent that hypothesis in a pure form.
The truth -was, that it was beset by such fundamental difficulties,
that as soon as it came to be applied in detaU it was seen to be
impossible. The hypothesis of the general dependence of the
successive Gospels upon each other is dow nearly extinct, if not
qidte. Even in the qualified form in wMch it was held by the
Tiibingen critics, it has been for some time on the decline. It
has met with the fate of many other theories. The elements of
truth in it have been absorbed in the common stock of know
ledge, whUe its own adherents have borrowed freely from rival
systems. (is.) There is just one modified appUcation of the dependence-
theory wMch stUl retains its -vitaUty. Of recent years there has
been a gro-wing tendency among some leading critics to beUeve
that St. Luke had before Mm the works of both Ms predecessors.
TMs, however, is combined -with a form of the documentary hypo
thesis : although these critics assume that St. Luke had access to
our present Gospel of St. Matthew, they only suppose Mm to
have made a quite subordinate and subsidiary use of it. The
real foundation of St. Luke's Gospel they regard as laid in
other documents, but they think that the EvangeUst either occa
sionaUy glpnced into the finished work that has come down to
us, or at least had seen it and was affected by Ms recoUection
of it.
2. The Hypothesis of Oral Tradition. — The inherent and in
superable objection to the dependence- theory is that, wMle it
accounts readily enough for the resemblances of the tMee Gospels
to each other, it does not account, and reaUy makes it impossible
to account, for their differences. The theory of oral tradition is
just the opposite of tMs. It accounts for the differences. The
question is, can it also account for the resemblances ?
(i.) Of course, any theory as to the origin of the Gospels must
start from oral tradition. ' ' The Gospel ' ' at first meant, not any
tMng written, but preaching by word of mouth ; it was the ' ' glad
tidings of good tMngs." TMs oral teaching had too, at first, a

GENEEAL INTEODUCTION TO THE SYNOPTIC GOSPELS. 17
different content from our written Gospels. That Jesus of Naza
reth was the long-expected Messiah ; that He was also in a wider
sense the Son of God ; that He died for our sins ; that He rose
again the tMrd day ; that He would come a second time to judge
the earth — ^were the propositions with which it was chiefiy
concerned. These propositions are the basis of the body of theology In
St. Paul's Epistles. We can see that they were the points on
wMch he was in the habit of insisting ; but we can see further
that they were no peculiar property of his, but that he shared
them with the rest of the Apostles, and with aU other CMistian
teachers. They are the hinges on which Christianity as a sys
tem of doctrine turns. He who could really take them into Ms
heart and soul did not need to "know CMist after the flesh."
And yet such more mundane knowledge could not but have
the deepest interest and fascination for Christians. St. Paul waa
a beUever of very exceptional mould. He was capable of em
bracing an abstraction with an intensity of fervour wMch few
others could give. The mass of manMnd craved for something
concrete. In order to become loyal subjects of the Messiah it was neces
sary that they should know what manner of man He was when
He walked the earth. Only so could their fuU enthusiasm be
caUed out. Nor were they more eager to hear than the Apostles
and others who had actuaUy companied with the Lord would be
eager to teach. TMs would be especiaUy the case in the mother
church of Jerusalem, where the greater number of the Apostles
and of the original disciples were gathered together, and where
the CMistian community were most settled and of longest stand
ing. Here it was less necessary to ' ' lay again the foundation "
of moral and religious teacMng. There would be time to enlarge
more fuUy upon the detaUs of the Lord's life. We can imagine
how knots of interested listeners would coUect round the members
of that little company who had themselves seen the Lord, and
heard and could repeat His words. Meantime they were in
close and constant intercourse with each other. Particulars that
were known to one would soon become the common property of
aU. So would gradually grow up a more or less fixed cycle of
narration. The oft-told story would have a tendency to stereo
type itself. The same incidents, the same sayings would find
their way into it whoever was the narrator.
And all this would be oral. • It was not the custom of the Jews
to commit what they had to say to writing. A Eabbi discoursing
and Ms pupils Ustening, was the established method of communi
cating knowledge. Nor were they attended by the shorthand

18

BOOK BY BOOK.

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

GENERAL INTRODUCTION TO THE SYNOPTIC GOSPELS. 19
spoke many parables which have not been recorded. He re
minded Chorazin and Bethsalda of the " mighty works " which
had been done in them., yet no one of all those mighty works
has found its way into the Gospels ; but for this one sentence the
very names of these cities, as scenes of His ministry, would be
unkno-wn. "How often," He says, had He tried to gather to
gether the cMldren of Jerusalem ; yet so far as we can teU from
any direct statement in the Synoptic Gospels, the occasion on
which He said this was the first on which He had paid a visit to
Jerusalem since His baptism. St. John, at the end of his Gospel,
after he has himself largely supplemented the synoptic narrative,
adds with a pardonable hyperbole, that so much stIU remained
wMch Jesus did, that if it were aU to be written down, "the
world itself would not contain the books that should be
¦written." These are only a few proofs among many, that the Synoptic
Gospels omitted far more than they recorded ; and yet the frame
work of the narrative is practically the same in all three ; it con
sists very largely both of the same events and of the same
discourses. TMs, however, is not aU ; not only is the selection
of incidents fundamentaUy the same, but the order in which
they are related has a Uke fundamental identity, and the words
in which they are told remarkably agree.
(v.) The identity of order is somewhat disguised and only re
veals itself to attentive study. If we wish to discover the succes
sion of incidents which the three EvangeUsts had before them,
we must look for it in St. Mark. It is true both St. Matthew
and St. Luke diverge considerably from this, but a comparison
of the three Gospels shows that where they do so it was for some
special reason. In spite of their divergence it is clear that they
were acquainted with St. Mark's order, and that they were con
tent to foUow it whenever it did not interfere with some pecu
liarity of structure of their own.
The Gospel of St. Mark may be divided into three sections,
the first of wMch ends at iU. 6, the second at vi. 13, while the
third extends from that point to xvi, 8, which forms the close of
the Gospel in an important group of authorities. Now in the
first of these sections St. Matthew diverges, but the order of
St. Mark is substantiaUy that of St. Luke ; in the third section
St. Luke diverges, but again St. Mark agrees substantiaUy with
St, Matthew. In the intervening section, iii. 7 — vi. 13, the rela
tions are not so consistent, but even here St. Mark is supported
for tMee or four consecutive paragraphs at a time, first by
one of the companion Gospels and then by the other. There
could hardly be more Batisfactory proof that the order of St.
B 2

20 BOOK BY BOOK.
Mark really underlies and is presupposed in the other two
Gospels. We can see, too, why they depart from it. It is characteristic
of St. Matthew to group events and discourses. But between
Matthew iii., where the threefold narrative begins, and the end
of Matthew xiii., there are tMee such groups of discourse (the
sermon on the Mount, the discourse at the sending out of the
Apostles, and the collection of parables in chap, xiu.), and one
group of representative incidents (those contained in Matthew
viii., ix.). It is this massing of simUar matter which causes St.
Matthew to desert the common order. Again, the most distinc
tive feature in the Gospel of St. Luke is the " great insertion "
(Luke ix. 51 — xviii. 14). Such a wholesale importation into
the text which the third Evangelist had before Mm naturaUy led
to much dislocation. This and the special knowledge which
St. Luke displays of matters relating to the court of the
Herods, sufficiently accoimt for the greater part of his divergence.
(-vi.) The order of St. Mark is the fxmdamental order. If that
order had simply foUowed the cMonology of the events, that
would not have been so very surprising. But those who have
looked Into the matter agree that though St. Mark retains,
roughly speaking, the outline of our Lord's ministry, Ms order
is yet not entirely cMonological. There is an element of artifi
cial combination about it as weU. Can we think that so fixed
and peculiar an order as this would be given merely by oral
tradition ? Is it not the more probable view that the first
and the third EvangeUsts had before them sometMng Uke it in
writing ?
(vU.) If we lean to that conclusion, we shall see a confirmation
of it in the verbal coincidences between the three Gospels. The
extent of these coincidences may be seen set forth with great
exactness in Mr. Eushbrook's sumptuous " Synopticon" (Lon
don, 1880 — 81). It has been calculated that the Gospel of St.
Mark contains in aU 11,158 words. Of these no less than 6,618
are common to one or both of the other two Gospels. More
exactly, 2,651 are found in aU three Gospels, 2,793 m St. Mark
and St. Matthew, 1,174 in St. Mark and St. Luke.* Is that a
proportion which we should expect to exist in three independent
biographies, no matter how closely connected by common matter ?
Here again, too, we observe that the coincidences do not occur at
random, but that St. Mark is the meeting-point of the other two
Gospels as regards diction, just as he is the meeting-point be
tween them as regards order. Once more the relation between
• Schaff, " History of the Christian Cihnroh," i. 696, £ New York, 1882.

GENERAL INTRODUCTION TO THE SYNOPTIC GOSPELS. 21
the threefold narratives appears to require some moro tangible
explanation than that supplied by oral tradition. It seems to
conduct us up to a written source or sources.
(viii.) We may add to this another objection. The advocates
of oral tradition invariably and naturaUy look to Jerusalem as
the home of that tradition. Is it not then strange that it should
say so Uttle about the work of our Lord at Jerusalem ? Here is
a tradition which is supposed to have been formed and circulated
for some forty years at Jerusalem, and yet its contents are
almost entirely taken up, not with those visits to Jerusalem of
which St. John has so much to say, but with the ministry in
GalUee. Are these two things easily reconcilable ? It does not
seem so.
3. The Hypothesis of Documentary Sources. — On the continent of
Europe, and especiaUy in Germany, the theory that our first
three Gospels are derived from some common source or sources
has been most in favour of recent years. It seems beforehand
to hold out a better prospect than either of the competing theories
can do, of doing justice to both sides of the problem. The coin
cidences, whether of selection, of order, or of expression, are at
once naturaUy and simply accounted for if a common document
or documents lie at the base of aU three Gospels. Nor do the
differences cause any real difficulty If we allow (1) for the pos
session by each Evangelist of some special sources of information
besides those which he has in conjunction with Ms feUows,
and (2) for the natural idiosyncrasies of style and mode of
treatment. (i.) There is this difference between the theory which we have
now before us and the other two, that whereas they take our
present Gospels as they are, and in the case of the dependence-
theory account for the form which they have assumed by direct
modifications of the earlier Gospels in the later, and in the case
of the oral theory, make them grow immediately and without
intervening breaks out of the common ground-stock of tradition,
the theory with which we are now deaUng confessedly goes
behind our present Gospels and accounts for the phenomena
wMch they present by means of certain hypothetical documents
which are supposed to have existed antecedently to them. '''
(Ii.) The mere fact that the documents are hypothetical — that
they are found In no extant MS,, and that their text cannot be
* It should be observed that though the common names " St. Matthew"
and "St. Mark" are used, it is not intended to prejudge the question
whether the whole of our first and second Gospels is the work respectively of
St. Matthew and St. Mark. In any case it is the opinion of the present
¦writer that the third Gospel came as we have it from the pen of St. Luke ;
and in regard to the other two Gospels he has tried to state the probabilities

22

BOOK BY BOOK.

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

GENEEAL INTEODUCTION TO THE SYNOPTIC GOSPELS. 23
The true ground, however, for the assumption of these older
Gospels is not the evidence of Papias, or at least not that taken
alone but in connection with theresiUts of an analysis of the texts
of the first tMee Gospels. It does not need a very profound
study of these Gospels to see that their contents fall under three
heads. (1) From the ministry of the Baptist onwards the main
outlines of the Mstory are substantiaUy the same in all three. (2)
Interspersed, however, with this, there are a number of scattered
coincidences, sometimes longer, sometimes shorter, between St.
Matthew and St. Luke, which relate for the most part to sayings
or discourses. (3) Besides this matter which is common either
to all three Gospeh or to two out of the three, St. Mark to a very
shght extent, and St. Matthew and St. Luke to a much larger
extent, have sections peculiar to themselves and standing apart
from the main body of the evangehcal tradition. Conspicuous
examples of tMs would be the first two chapters of St. Matthew
and St. Luke.
(v.) As regards that broad substratum of narrative which
underUes the greater part of aU three Gospels we have aheady
seen that the order of the successive sections is substantially that
of St. Mark. The statistics as to diction wiU also prepare us for
the conclusion that here, too, St. Mark contains the largest pro
portion of the common language. Short as the second Gospel
is, this shortness is obtained by the absence of whole sections,
and not — except in very rare cases — by the abridgment of what
remains. Augustine caUed St. Mark an " epitomator," but Ms
Gospel is no epitome. When the tMee narratives are placed
side by side his is almost invariably the fuUest of the tMee. It
may be weU to give an example of this in order that the relations
of the three Gospels to each other in tMs respect may be under
stood. The resemblances which are indicated by the use of
different type are those in the Greek original and not in the
EngUsh version.
Words prmted in thick t3^e are common to aU tMee
Gospels. Words printed in small capitals are common to St. Matthew
and St. Luke.
Words printed in EOMAN CAPITALS are common to St.
Matthew and St. Mark.
Words printed in ITALIC CAPITALS are common to St.
Mark and St. Luke.
Words printed in italics are peculiar to the Gospel in which
they occur.

24

BOOK BY BOOK.

CALL OP LEVI. FEAST IN LEVI'S HOUSE.

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

Maek ii. 13—17.
AND SE WENT
FORTS again by the sea
side; and all the multi
tude resorted unto him,
and he taught them. And
AS HE PASSED BY,
HE &A.'W LEVI the son
of Alphaus sitting at
the place of toll, and
HE SAITH unto him,
Follow me. And he
arose and followed him.
AndlTCAmeTOPASS that HE was SlTting
AT MEAT in BIS
house, aud many publi
cans and SINNERS sat
DOWN WITH JESUS
AND HIS DISCIPLES:
for there were many and
they followed him. And
the SCRIBES of the
Pharisees, WHEN
THEY SAW that he was
eating with the sinners and
publicans, said UNTO
his disciples, Se eateth
AND DEINKeth with
publicans and sinners.
AND whea JESUS
HEARD IT, he saith
unto TSEM, They that
are WHOLE have no
need of a physician but
they that are sick: I
caME not to call the
righteous, but sinners.

Luke v. 27—32.
AND after these thinga
SE TVENT FORTS,
and beheld a publican,
named LEVI, sitting at
the place of toll, and
said unto him, Follow
me. And he forsooh all,
and rose up and foUowed
him. And Levi made him
a great feast in SIS
house : and there was a
great multitude of pub
licans and of others that
were sitting at meat with
them. And the Pharisees
and their SCRIBES mur
mured against his dis
ciples, saying, Why do ye
eat AND DRINK with
the publicans and sin
ners I AND JESUS
answering said unto
TSEM, They that are
whole have no need of a
physician; but they that
are sick. I am not eome
to call the righteous but
sinners to repentance.

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

GENERAL INTEODUCTION TO THE SYNOPTIC GOSPELS. 25
(vii.) Thus both the order of the narratives and the language
in wMch they are couched converge upon the same conclusion.
They seem to prove that St. Mark has preserved more nearly
than either of his fellow EvangeUsts the original form of that
common authority (whatever it was) which lies at the base of
the whole evangelical tradition. If we assume that this common
authority was something nearly resembling our present St. Mark
we can then explain both the paraUel columns from St. Matthew
and St. Luke. Two writers, both copying independently, and
both copying freely from the same source, would naturaUy
reproduce different features characteristic of that source : one
set of expressions would appear in the one, another set of
expressions would appear in the other.
The alternative hypothesis, that the text of St. Mark was
made up by taking here a word from St. Matthew and there a
word from St. Luke, implies a process that really is not credible.
And what applies to the diction of the parallel sections applies
quite as clearly to their order. The inference has been contested,
but it is one that every day is receiving a greater amount of
recognition, that the common foundation of the Synoptic Gospels
must be sought in close connection with St. Mark. Whether
that foundation was an oral tradition, or whether it was a written
document, in either case St. Mark has reproduced it most
exactly. (vui.) It would greatly simplify matters if we could go a step
farther and say not only that this foundation was to be sought
in connection -with St. Mark, but that it was St. Mark as we have
it : in other words, if this relation which we have seen to be so
preponderant was not merely preponderant, but an absolutely
constant relation. Unfortunately it is not this. In the passage
wMch we have just analysed, and more oi less tMoughout
the Gospel, there are words, phrases, clauses, sentences which
would have on our plan to be printed in smaU capitals, as
representing an agreement between St. Matthew and St. Luke
against St. Mark.
(ix.) Here is one of the great perplexities of Synoptic criticism.
If the proposed solutions of this part of the problem seem diffl
cult and far-fetched, these phenomena are mainly the cause. We
wUl mention a few such solutions without discussing them,
which would take up much space and lead to no assured and
final result.
{a) The original document which all three EvangeUsts are
following was somewhat fuller than our present St. Mark, and
contained those expressions which have dropped out of our St.
Mark, though they are retained by St. Matthew and St. Luke.

26 BOOK BY BOOK.
(b) Our St. Mark is a composite work, and embodies to a
subordinate extent another document, which Is reproduced more
exactly in St. Matthew and St. Luke.
(c) St. Luke, though following in the main a document Uke
our St. Mark, had also had sight of our St. Matthew, and
introduced some expressions from It.
This Is the position in which the question stands at the present
moment, and the ultimate answer to it cannot yet be foreseen ;
it wIU need very close and careful examination.
Under the second head {b) we placed those passages which
were found in St. Matthew and St. Luke, but which were absent
from St. Mark. It is not absolutely necessary that aU these
passages should have the same origin. By far the majority of
them, however, are similar In kind, consisting of discourse
rather than of narrative. Now a possible interpretation of the
language of Papias was that St. Matthew wrote a " collection of
discourses." If this were granted, then the hypothesis lay near
at hand that the discourses found alike in St. Matthew and St.
Luke were taken from this primitive coUection, the true work
of the publican- Apostle. And it would also be an easy step to
explain the attribution of the first Gospel to St. Matthew as
due to the fact that it embodied so much of that work, on the
principle nominetur a potiori.
Here again was a solution in which there was much that was
attractive. But again it is necessary to suspend judgment. Once
more the statement in general terms is a different thing from
the detailed testing. The task has been attempted with com
mendable zeal, diligence, and courage, but it is by no means
easy to reconstruct this original "collection of dl3courses,"
and to give an intelligible account of the manner in which it
came to assume the form it does in the first and third Gospels.
This is another question which must be regarded as stUl sub
judice. (x.) The portions of each Gospel which are peculiar to that
Gospel are less difficult to deal with. In any case they woidd
owe their present shape to the final editor. Within limits, we
can form a probable conjecture as to whether they were origi
naUy oral tradition or written. The strongly Hebraistic bias of
the first two chapters of St. Luke make us suspect that the writer
had a Palestinian document before him. At the same time the
presence of so many touches of style which are characteristic of
the author of the third Gospel and the Acts induces us to believe
that he worked up the contents of this document in language
that was largely Ms own. On the other hand, the allusions
(wMch aU hang together) to facts connected with the court of

GENEEAL INTRODUCTION TO THE SYNOPTIC GOSPELS. 27
the Herods clearly rest on information the source of which would
be oral.
The theory as a whole no doubt leaves unsolved problems. It
is only thought that these are on the whole fewer and less for
midable than those which attach to other theories. Time alone
and critical Investigation can dispose of them.
4. Date and Historical Character of the Gospels. — The main cause
of the obscurity which hangs over the origin of the Gospels is
the multiform and apparently conflicting character of the data.
"Even where the evidence distinctly preponderates in one direction,
there wiU stiU be some residuary phenomena which point in
another. If a number of arguments tell in favour of written
documents as the base of the common tradition, others still
remain wMch seem to raise a presumption that the original tra
dition was oral ; if five out of six of the data point to the priority
of St. Mark, the sixth will seem to give precedence to St. Matthew
or St. Luke ; if it is difficult to think that our first Gospel as a
whole lay before the author bf the third, there are yet some
places which hardly seem as if they could be independent of each
other. (i.) In regard to the date of the Gospels something of the same
state of things obtains, though in a modified degree. We can
assert with great confidence that the mass of our Synoptic Gos
pels, even if not actually committed to writing, had at least
assumed its present form before the faU of Jerusalem in 70 a.d.
That event was a dividing Une in the Mstory of the Church such
as it has perhaps never seen since. The year 70 saw a fugitive
little community at Pella, which was nearly aU that remained
of the Hebrew-bom and Hebrew- or Aramaic-speaking Christ
ians. Meantime in Syria, Asia Minor, Macedonia, Greece,
in Eome itself, and if not already, yet within a very short time,
in Egypt, Gentile CMistianity was advancing "by leaps and
bounds." The Church had no longer a fixed centre and metropolis ; its
leaders were scattered to the four winds, and the daughter
churches vied with each other in the vigour and elasticity of their
growth. Where there had once been a single centre, now there
were a number of centres, and it seemed quite an open question
wMch would command the rest. CMistianity at this moment
was a diaspora without Jerusalem, even without Palestine. If
ever any one thing could be pronounced impossible, it is that
our Gospels should have arisen under such conditions. They are
Jewish to the core, not in tho sense that they do not transcend
Judaism, but that their root is firmly planted in Judaism, however
much they may pass out beyond it.

28 BOOK BY BOOK.
We need not perhaps deny that some forlorn seeker among
the rains might have Mt upon the rather recondite detaUs of
topography that are found in the Synoptic Gospels, on Chorazin
and Bethsalda, Bethany and Bethphage, Nain and Emmaus. He
might have caught and reproduced those treating of Syrian
peasant life, which were not pecuUar to a single generation. The
fishermen on the Sea of Galilee (though sad havoc must have
been made among them by the war), with their casting-nets and
drag-nets ; the toll-office ; the labourers waiting to be hired, and
then working through the hot wind in the vineyard ; the cere
mony of a Jewish funeral, the bier and the paid mourners ; the
lepers and possessed who were so common an object of pity
or repulsion ; the different grades of officials of various kinds —
not only the ordinary toU- collectors but their chiefs (Luke xix. 2),
not only the members of the committee of the synagogue, but
the one in particular who regulated its services (Matt. ix. 1 8 ;
Mark V. 22), the verger or attendant who brought out the sacred
roU and gave it to or received it from the reader (Luke iv. 20),
the local courts, the Mgh cchirt (Matt. v. 22), the Sauhedrin at
Jerusalem. Many even of these details woMd hardly have come
naturally to a Ohristian of the generation which foUowed the
extinction of Jewish independence. Nor should we expect such
a one to draw those graphic pictures of the Pharisees in the
height of their power and glory, ' ' making broad their phylac
teries," praying ostentatiously at the corners of the streets, going
up with parade to the Temple, pronouncing some meats clean and
others unclean, prescribing ablutions, evading the law on wMch
they laid such stress by their casMstical distinctions.
All these things we cannot but feel are drawn from the Ufe ;
and stUl more from the Ufe, and only from the life, could a Chris
tian writer depict the Master whose name he here, in confiict
with these men, caUed like them "Eabbi," but arraigning their
dearest principles ; exposing their- hoUowness and formalism ;
propounding larger and higher views of the Sabbath, of marriage
and divorce, of the resurrection, yet pursued by them with the
same casuistry which they practised among themselves, in the
hope that He might be caught tripping ; asked Ms opinion about
"biUs of divorcement," about Satanic agency in the casting out
of devils, about the position of the woman in a case of Levirate
marriage, and about the reconciUng of a passage in the Old
Testament which spoke of the Messiah at once as " Lord " and
" Son." Least of all would any Christian of this later date have repro
duced as our Evangelists have done so many phases in the history
of the Messianic expectation and its graduaUy revealed fulfil-

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

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

GENEEAL INTEODUCTION TO THE SYNOPTIC GOSPELS. 31
culation. We cannot suppose that there was any formal pubU
cation such as took place in the case of Greek or Eoman classics
at tMs date, when the author publicly recited his new piece In a
lecture-hall fiUed with Ms friends and admirers, and when some
famous publisher like Atticus undertook to have it copied in
wholesale quantities and launched upon the market. The early
Christians had command of no such machinery. They were as a
rule drawn from the poorer classes. Many of them must have
been UUterate. The few who dIstlngMshed themselves by com
position had picked up the art as it were by the wayside — in
some pubUc office like the coUecting of market dues and toUs, or
in the ranks of a provincial profession. W6 are not to think of
authors like these as surrounded by the shorthand writers and
caUgraphers who attended upon the Uterary men of Eome or
Alexandria, who took down and transcribed their productions in
clear and beautiful characters like those of the Bankesian lUad
or of the famous " Codex Yaticanus,"
Many signs point to the conclusion that the period of greatest
acti-vity in the composition of Gospels included the years just
before and just after the faU of Jerusalem — an anxious and
troubled period, when the wisest course for Christians was to
avoid public notice as much as possible. Under these circum
stances of constraint and secrecy the Gospels were written, very
probably on rough material, with linked letters, not exactly in
the later cursive hand, but in the hand used for everyday busi
ness transactions, wMch feU some way short of the purity and
clearness of the book-hand. So written, the first copies would be
passed about privately from hand to hand, often suffering in the
process, and becoming more degenerate as bad copies were pro
pagated. TMs would account for the many variants that are
found in the early texts.
But there is one particular feature which we must keep speciaUy
in view. The private persons who possessed and circulated these
copies, and even the church officers who from time to time had
charge of them, would not feel exactly bound by the obligations
of professional copyists. They would not reject an opportunity
of enriching their MS. with additions from the oral tradition,
which, if they were not part of the original Gospel, might have
been, so far as their contents were concerned, and were very
possibly quite as authentic. In this way not a few slight but
deeply interesting and important additions have come down to us
which are wanting in what we caU " the best MSS.," and upon
the purest line of transmission, but which for aU that we may be
very glad to have preserved.
Nor can we suppose that the same persons who accepted these

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

GENEEAL INTEODUCTION TO THE SYNOPTIC GOSPELS.

33

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

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

GENERAL INTRODUCTION TO THE SYNOPTIC GOSPELS 35
order different from that with which -we are now most familiar.
St. John he compares to the Lion, St. Luke to the Calf, St.
Matthew to the Man, St. Mark to the Eagle. A usage which
has reached this reflective and speculative stage is clearly one of
long standing.
From the time of Ireneeus onwards aU obscurity has vanished.
Up to Ireneeus, or we may say up to the year 185, we are obliged
to piece together one item of evidence with another from the
scanty literature which has come down to us, and to reconstruct
a hypothetical view from imperfect materials. But from the date
we have mentioned aU becomes clear : evidence pours in on every
side. Irenseus, as we have seen, is quite uneqmvocal. Perhaps
a year or two before Irenseus, or just upon the threshold of Ms
great work, comes a remarkable document caUed from its dis
coverer the Muratorian Fragment. This fragment is the first
canonical Ust of the Books of the New Testament. It is muti
lated at the beginning, but there can be no doubt that it origi
naUy contained an enumeration of our four Gospels. Not long
after Irenseus is Clement of Alexandria (flourished 193 a.d.);
soon after Clement TertuUIan (writing 194 — 221 a.d.) ; contem
porary with Tertullian Hippolytus (died 236 a.d.); and but a
little younger than Hippolytus Orlgen (died 253 a.d.), who
again overlaps the Latin writers Novatlan and Cyprian (mar
tyred 258 A.D.)
These names stand at the head of a voluminous literature, and
their testimony is practicaUy unanimous. The Alexandrian writers
are somewhat freer than the rest in their use of extra-canonical
books, but their deliberate language is essentiaUy the same. The
only Gospels "received without dispute in the Church under
heaven "* are our present four.
We need not pursue the Mstory of the reception of the Gospels
farther. Its pages are really closed. There has been no appre
ciable difference in the attitude of the Church towards the Gos
pels from the Muratorian Fragment to our o^wn day. It is true
that in recent years a sharper controversy has gathered round
them : their dates, their authorship, their historical character has
been questioned. In these questionings criticism and hyper-
criticism have been largely mingled, and the end of the process
has not yet been reached. Only perhaps we can trace, not
expressed in any formula, and often not consciously realised, a'
sort of sUent gravitating towards a view more nearly akin to that
of the first age than of subsequent ages ; a tendency to treat the
Gospels as in the first instance historical authorities for the acts
• Origen, ap, Eus. S.E., vi, 25.
C 2

36 BOOK BY BOOK.
and words of CMist, not altogether perfect or infalUble autho
rities, fragmentary, incomplete, varying from time to time In the
nature of their authentication, and embodying along with the
facts something also of the conceptions of simple and unscientific
sninds ; and yet guarded against any wide possibUities of error
by the assured primitlveness of their date, bearing on their face
a thousand marks wMch stamp them as the product of a stiU
Uving and faitMul tradition, and guaranteed above aU by their
consistent presentation of a smgle unique and commanding
figure, which neither their authors nor any other hand of man
could have invented. There is a tendency to detach tMs por
trait from its framework, and to see m the Gospels primarily,
what Papias and his contemporaries saw in them, the record of
" Oracles of the Lord."

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

38

BOOK BY BOOK.

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

THE GOSPEL ACCORDING TO ST. MATTHEW. 39
extant fragments of an undoubtedly Hebrew or Aramaic work
like the Gospel according to the Hebrews, the idioms of the
latter are seen to be Hebrew where those of the former are not.
(ii.) So far the line of argument is somewhat precarious. There
are translations and translations. In some the transfusion of
thought and language is much more thorough than in others.
But a further examination of our Gospel reveals phenomena
which it is more difficult to reconcUe with the theory of an Ara
maic original. The treatment of Old Testament quotations in
the Gospel Is pecuUar ; and a kind of law seems to run through
them. Those wMch occur in the parts of the Gospel which have
no paraUel, frequently show the infiuence of the Hebrew, and
present many points of contact ¦with the Targums, or Aramaic
paraphrases which have preserved for us the traditional inter
pretations used in our Lord's time in the synagogues.
On the other hand the quotations in those parts of the Gospel
which have direct paraUels in the other synoptics' are taken from
the Septuagint. Good examples of the first class would be Matt.
U. 6 (= Micah v. 2), a passage expressly applied to the Messiah
in the Targums, and one the form of which bears every appear
ance of ha^ving been infiuenced by oral parapMase ; and Matt.
ii, 23, where " He shaU be caUed a Nazarene " is best explained
by a play upon the Hebrew netser, " a Branch " {vide Isa. xi. 1) ;
Matt. xii. 18 — 21 = Isa. xlii. 1 — 4, which diverges widely from
the Greek, is an example of a comment inserted into the body of
the Evangelical narrative. Quotations like Matt. xiii. 14, 16, or
XV. 4, 8, 9, which belong to the common synoptic matter agree
¦with the Greek. There are some seventeen quotations which are
thus common to aU three synoptics, besides a number more which
are common to St. Matthew and St. Mark, or St. Matthew and
St. Luke.
3, Our present St. Matthew a Composite Worh. — These pheno
mena, which are clearly marked, strongly suggest the conclusion
that our present Gospel is a composite work. We have aheady
seen that tMs was probably the case from a comparison of the
three Gospels with each other, and now our previous argument
is confirmed from another side. An analysis of the first Gospel
resolves it into three main parts. One of these is the matter
peculiar to the Evangelist, a characteristic feature of which we
have just been considering. A second comprises the whole
framework of narrative from the Baptism of John to the Eesur
rection. The third consists of certain great blocks of discourse,
inserted at intervals In the midst of the narrative. It is hard to
believe that the first and second of these parts came originaUy
from the same hand. Some common welding together they have

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

THE GOSPEL ACCORDING TO ST. MATTHEW. 41
but St. Matthew did compose the collection of "Oracles" em
bodied in our Gospel, and that most distinctive part gave the
Gospel its name. The original coUection, as an independent
work, written on fraU papyrus, and exposed as we may weU
believe to perUs both by land and by sea, perished. In that
time of harassed movement and distress which environed the
destruction of Jerusalem, there is nothing in this to surprise us,
even though the scanty Christian cMonicles (which owe nearly
aU they have to teU us to the Jew Josephus) take no notice of
the fact. But, before it perished, St. Matthew's Uttle roll had
been already copied, and either that copy or another was soon
Incorporated, with such changes and rearrangement as the
transfer necessitated, into our present Gospel.
This is a hypothetical view of the way in which our present
Gospel arose. The impression must not be given that it is free
from difficiUtles, or that it has as yet been completely substan
tiated by proof. It has aheady been implied that tMs is not the
case, nor would the writer of this venture to claim for it a greater
degree of acceptance than it deserves ; he only puts it forward
as the theory which seems to him most likely. In Its main lines,
to hold its own.
5. Doctrinal Character and Purpose of the Gospel. — The doctrinal
character and purpose of the Gospel was very early apprehended,
and on this point, too, we have anticipated somewhat In the pre
ceding chapter. If the Gospel was written "for Hebrews, in
Hebrew," it naturaUy foUowed that it would be written in such
a way as would. most commend the faith of Christ to the Jews.
The great stumbUng-block for the unconverted was the claim
that the crucified Jesus, from the despised GalUean city Nazareth,
was the Messiah ; and the great turning-point for those who
accepted CMistianity was the con-viction of His Messiahship. To
this then the EvangeUst addresses himself, and he seeks to prove
that Jesus of Nazareth was reaUy the Messiah of Je-wish pro
phecy, reaUy the legitimate descendant of Abraham and David,
heir, in a grander sense than David Mmself had ever reaUsed,
to the Davidic empire. Accordingly he dweUs in minute detail
not only on the direct fulfilments of prophecy, but also on those
many particulars in the Gospel narrative wMch seemed to repro
duce features or incidents connected with the ideal figures of the
Old Dispensation.
The wonderful birth and symbolical Name of which Isaiah
spoke pre-figured the Birth and Incarnation of the Messiah. He
was the Deliverer whom Micah had foretold as to be born in
David's city. The walling -which attended the carrying away
captive of the " children of Eachel " {i.e. inhabitants of Judah

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

THE GOSPEL ACCORDING TO ST. MATTHEW. 43
with him Is the exception, with St. Matthew is the rule, laid
down with unequivocal precision.*
And yet the first Evangelist is no narrow-minded or illiberal
CMistian. He thoroughly accepts the admission of the Gentiles
into the Church, and records many sayings which anticipate that
admission. He alone describes the visit of the eastern sages ;
he takes notice of the words of the Baptist demolishing the pre
tensions of the Jews as the children of Abraham ; he mentions
the announcement to the faithful centurion that many should
come from the east and west and sit down with the patriarchs In
the heavenly kingdom ; with true Mstorical perspective, as the
history advances and the confiict grows deeper, declarations of
this kind Increase in number,f tUl the Gospel finally closes with
the command to " make disciples of aU nations."
The EvangeUst — who thus if he is not St. Matthew himself,
most probably retains to the full the spirit of St. Matthew —
stands midway between two worlds. His roots are struck deep
into the past ; he is impressed with the strict continuity of
the dispensations on the dividing line between which he was
Uving ; and yet he also looks forward into the' future with no
-unfriendly or reluctant gaze ; as the prophets had foreseen the
coming of CMist, so he recognises that Christ had foreseen the
throwing wide of the gates to those whom the Old Law had ex
cluded. He has not discarded Judaism, but with Mm it is a
Judaism of the spirit and not of the letter : Judaism enlarged
and Christianized. Jew among Jews, as he is, the EvangeUst
does not look to the high-placed Pharisees and Sadducees as the
true representatives of his people. He turns rather with tender
sympathy to the poor and suffering, and he sees in them the true
" children of the kingdom." The "poor in spirit" ; the angels
of Christ's Uttle ones who behold the face of His Father ; the
Gospel hidden from the wise and prudent and revealed unto
babes ; the light yoke and easy burden of Christ, are pMases
peculiar to this Gospel. St. John speaks of the "new birth"
which the beUever must undergo, but St. Matthew has portrayed
that new birth with the most deUcate and feeling touches. He
has caught and saved for us those wordi of Ms Master which
most truly express the innermost essence of Christianity.
6. Analysis of the Gospel. — Bearing in mind the results which
have been so far reached, both as to the critical history and
doctrinal character and purpose of the Gospel, we are now In a
position to attempt an analysis of its contents, such as may at
once bring out the leading features of its structure, and also
• Matthew v. 17—19. t Matthew xxi, ?8— 32, 42, 43 ; xxii. 1—10.

44 BOOK BY BOOK.
help to iUustrate the foregoing discussions. We wiU do this,
premising once more that we are not deaUng with assured con
clusions — no such conclusions as yet exist — but only with such
as seem best to commend themselves for provisional acceptance.
The three sources of the Gospel appear to be (I.) the Marh-
Gospel (which we call by this name so as not to prejudge its exact
identity with our St. Mark) ; (Ii.) the Oracles, originaUy com
posed in Hebrew by St. Matthew; (ill.) Oral Tradition, speciaUy
coUected by the Evangelist.
The structure of the Gospel is determined by its leading idea,
the presentation of Jesus of Nazareth as the Jewish Messiah.
The first two chapters bring together a number of notes in the
birth and early life of Jesus, marking Him out as the Messiah of
prophecy. In the remainder of the Gospel materials, which the
Evangelist found already existing, are worked up In such a way
as to throw into relief His Messianic character. From this point
of view the climax is reached when the reserve and deUcate,
indirect self-manifestation of Jesus Himself, with the corres
ponding prolonged hesitation of His disciples, are at last broken
by St. Peter's explicit confession. This height, however, is no
sooner reached and the confession confirmed by the glories of
the Mount of Transfiguration than the road begins to lead down
wards into the VaUey of the Shadow of Death. Another aspect
of the Messianic office is brought out : the Messiah was not only
to reign as King over His people, but He was also to suffer for
the sins of mankind.*
The Earthly Career, Character, Mission, and Death of Jesus,
the Messiah.
I. Preliminary history : Birth and chUdhood of the Messiah in
fulfilment of prophecy (i., ii.).
Abrahamic and Davidic Lineage — Virgin-Birth — Visit of
the Magi— Flight into Egypt — Massacre of BetMehem 
Eeturn to Nazareth.
Except the genealogy, which was probably -written, Oral Tradition
collected by the evangelist. '
II. Inauguration to the Messianic office (HI. 1 — Iv. 11),
Ministry of John — Baptism — Temptation.
Outline from Marlc-Oospd -with additions from Oracles.

* In the Greek text pubUshed by Drs. Westcott and Hort, attention ia
called by the mode of prmting to the fact that in this Gospel tho formula
which marks the commencement of our Lord's public ministry (iv. 17) ia
exactly repeated at_ the point where He first begins to prophesy ilis ap
proaching death (xvi. 21). Both are critical moments which correspond to
each other.

THB GOSPEL ACCORDING TO ST. MATTHEW. 45
III. GalUean Ministry of the Messiah, in a series of scenes or
pictures, partly narrative and partly descriptive or typical.
1. First scene. Typical examples of His words and works
(iv. 12— is. 34).
i. Historic introduction, dating from the imprisonment of
John (iv. 12— V. 2).
Settlement at Capernaum — Call of Apostles —Circuit of
Gahlee.
Erom Marh-Oospel.
U. Typical discourse[s] on the Messianic Kingdom (v. 3 —
vU. 29).
Character approved by the Messiah in the members of
His Eangdom — The Messianic Eighteousness — Laws
of the Kingdom — Devotion — Duties — Eules of Life.
TVom the Matthean Oracles.
iU. CoUection of representative works (vUi. 1 — ix. 34).
The Leper — The Centurion's Servant — ^Peter's Wife's
Mother — Healing — Followers — Storm at Sea — Two
Gadarene Demoniacs Paralytic at Capernaum — Con
necting Narrative : CaU of Matthew, and Discourse at
Ms House — Euler 'S Daughter — Issue of Blood — Two
bUnd Men — Deaf and dumb Demoniacs.
Mainly from Jfari-ffospeZ; many think that the healing of the cen
turion's daughter came from the Oracles.
2. Second scene. Mission of the Twelve with its sequel
(ix. 35 — xii.).
i. Circumstances of the Mission (Ix. 35 — x.).
Description probably from Oracles.
u. Discourse on the Mission (x. 5 — 42).
Mission for Israel — Charge to the Missionaries — Their
Eeward.
Mainly from Oracles.
iU. Thread of Narrative continued : Rising opposition ; the
Uttle flock of BeUevers (xi., xii.).
Question and character of the Baptist — Chorazin and
Bethsalda — ^The Gospel of babes and toUers — Two
Sabbath Anecdotes* — Gentleness of the Messiahf —
Casting out devUs by Beelzebub — ^The Messiah's
fame.* '
Mainly Irom Oracles; sections marked* from Marie-Gospel; that
marked \ » comment by the evangelist.
3. Third scene. ParaboUc teacMng of the Messiah ; con
tinuation of narrative (xui., xiv.).

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

THE GOSPEL ACCORDING TO ST. MATTHEW. 47
i. Entrance into Jerusalem (xxi. 1 — 17).
The triumphal Procession — Cleansing of the Temple — Babes
and Sucklings.
From Mark-Gospel.
ii. Discourses and controversies (xxi. 18 — xxii. 45).
The Barren Fig-tree — Authority of Messiah — The two
Sons f — Wicked Husbandmen — The Messianic Banquet f
— The special Eobe t — Plots frustrated.
Mainly from Mark- Gospel ; sections marked t from Oraclea,
iU. Denunciation of the Pharisees (xxiu.).
Another group of sayings from Oracles.
iv. Discourses on the last things (xxiv,, xxv.).
Apocalyptic Discourse — WatcMul Servants — Virgins —
Talents — Last Judgment.
The apocalyptic discourse mainly from Mark- Gospel, rest from Oracles.
IV. Passion and Eesurrection of the Messiah (xxvi. — xxviii.).
1. Two days before the Passover (xxvi. 1 — 16).
Fourth announcement of Passion — The Eulers' Plot —
Anointing for Burial — Treachery of Judas.
Mainly from Mark- Gospel.
2. i. The Last Supper (xxvi. 17—35).
The Paschal Meal — Betrayal foretold — Institution of the
Eucharist.
ii. On the way to Gethsemane — Dispersion of the Disciples
and Peter's denial foretold.
From Mark- Gospel.
3. Arrest, trial, and crucifixion ; fulfilment of prophecy
noted (xxvi. 36 — xxvii. 56).
Gethsemane — Arrest — Trial before Caiaphas— Peter's
Fall— §End of Judas-Trial before PUate— §PUate's
Indecision — The Sentence — Mocking — Simon of Cyrene
— Crucifixion — §Attendant Wonders — Witnesses of the
Crucifixion.
IVom Mark- Gospel, with traces of special tradition in passages marked § .
4. The Burial (xxvu. 57— -66).
Joseph's Tomb — §The Pharisees' Guard.
From Mark- Gospel; passages marked § from Special Tradition.
5. The Eesurrection ; After Appearance (xxviii.).
Tho Messiah Elsen- §Appearance to the Women — §False
Eeport — gAppearance in Galilee — §Concluding Charge.
From Mark- Gonpel and Special Tradition.

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

THE GOSPEL ACCORDING TO ST. MATTHEW. 49
it or allusions to it occur by aU the so-caUed Apostolic Fathers
except Hermas. It is clearly presupposed by the recently dis
covered Teaching of the Twelve Apostles. In the Epistle of Barna
bas a quotation from it Is introduced by the significant "it is
written," a pMase which though it implies authority, stUl does
not exactly imply what we should caU canonical authority, as
apocryphal books are quoted in a simUar manner. In the works
of Justin quotations from St. Matthew hold a prominent place ;
and Tatian, the disciple of Justin, included it in his DIatessaron
or Harmony of the Four Gospels. The coUection of Four
Gospels, and no more, was by tMs time weU established, and
apocryphal works were rapidly driven out of all competition with
them. Among these four the first place was almost universaUy
assigned to St. Matthew. The place of the other Gospels might
vary, but that of St. Matthew came first in all the great and
authoritative coUections. The few exceptions are rather accidents
of the MSS. than expressive of any dehberate opinion.

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

THE GOSPEL ACCORDING TO ST. MARK, 51
there are often wide gaps between them, and we have only to
turn to the Gospel of St. John to see how extensive and how
important is the matter which is omitted. St, Mark says nothing
about a Judean ministry ; the acts of our Lord in no way turn
with Mm round the Jewish feasts ; the only feast which he men
tions is the last passover ; yet we might be sure that our Lord,
as caUed upon " to fulfil all righteousness," would attend other
feasts besides tMs, precisely as the fourth Gospel makes Him
attend them.
3. Order of the Narratives. — So far aU is satisfactory : the
phenomena of the Gospel duly tally with the description given
by Papias. But is tMs equally the case with the second condition
— the absence of order ? There are many who maintain with
much show of reason that it is. The informant of Papias, they
say, took as his standard some particular order — such as the
order of St. Matthew, or the order of St. Luke, or the order of
St, John. Either of the last two might well be taken ; for St.
Luke claims to -write in order,* and St. John maps out Ms narra
tive by bold chronological landmarks which are wanting in the
other Gospels. Judged by such standards as these the Gospel of
St. Mark might seem to have no systematic order. And yet on
the other hand, as we shaU see presently, it has a very good
disposition of its own.
It has a well-marked beginning and a well-marked ending,
and the intervening narrative is laid out in such a way as to
offer no glaring anachronism or inversion — the successful open
ing of the pubhc ministry, the growing controversies, the excur
sions from Capernaum, Peter's confession foUowed by the first
prophecy of death, the Transfiguration, the slow journey to Jeru
salem, and so on. But the most remarkable phenomenon In regard
to the order is how, whatever it may be in itself, it appears to
supply the common outline for the order in the other two
Gospels. The other Evangelists appear, rougMy speaking, to
follow the lead of St. Mark ; where one deserts that lead (as
St. Matthew does in the earlier part of the narrative and
St. Luke in the later) the other keeps closely to it. In the
middle for a short space the three diverge somewhat ; but on
the whole it may be said that while by assuming the order of
St. Mark we can explain the order of St. Matthew and St.
Luke, we cannot in Uke manner take either St. Matthew or St.
Luke as a key to the two remaining narratives.
4. Origin of the Gospel. — There seems here to be some pre-
eumption, though not perhaps a decisive presumption, against
* Luke i. 3.
D 2

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

THE GOSPEL ACCORDING TO ST. MARK. 53
with " immediately " Matt. xxiv. 29) does it seem as if a wider
interval were left between the lesser catastrophe and the greater.
So sUght a change as this might be introduced after the publica
tion of the Gospel, in the way In which other slight variations
crept in, but not without betraying themselves in the extant
MSS. The most conspicuous example of a passage, which seems
to have been absent from the original text of the Gospel though
very early appended to it, is supplied by the last twelve verses of
the concluding chapter.
The genuineness of these verses is a weU-known subject of
controversy. They are wanting in two MSS., which are not
only the oldest in date but are! found in a very great number of
instances to have preserved readings which there is strong
reason to accept as the true ones. The Church historian Euse
bius, who Uved In the early part of the fourth century, and
besides being the leading scholar of Ms day had access to the
library of Origen, and may be so said to be at the centre of the
critical situation, says expressly though in somewhat varying
language, that the verses are not current " in some copies," "in
the accurate copies," " In almost aU the copies of the Gospel."
Further, a few MSS. and a group of early and important versions
have a different and shorter conclusion which clearly took the
place of the longer In widely separated districts.
Surveying the whole of the evidence a delusive appearance of
unanimity is seen to be given by the great mass of MSS. which
support the verses. The farther we go back in time the slighter
does the evidence for them become : from the second century
Irenseus, whose work contains many certainly wrong readings,
and perhaps Justm, who does not represent a pure BibUcal text ;
from the third century no direct evidence, but only inferential
evidence from data, which themselves belong to the fourth. An
examination of the verses themselves confirms the conclusion
thus suggested. They are found to be not continuous with the
previous part of the chapter, but to involve an altogether new
beginning. Thus considerations of external and of internal
evidence aUke converge to make us believe that the Gospel as
at first issued was without them. For some reason or other,
wMch we cannot now determine with certainty, the original
Gospel ended abruptly ; either it was not finished, or the last
column or columns of writing were torn off or defaced, and the
defect was made good In various ways, one early writer substituting
the shorter conclusion, and another the longer as we now have
it. The latter, if not taken from a written document, was adopted
from the stiU Uving oral tradition ; and, therefore, though the
facts of the narrative have not quite so good a warranty as

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

THE GOSPEL ACCOEDING TO ST. MAEK. 55
There is only a difference as to whether it was composed during
Ms lifetime or after his death. The latter version has the earUer
and better authority.
7. Character, Style, and Doctrinal Standpoint of the Gospel. —
The influence of St. Peter is discernible on the Gospel. St. Mark
himself was not an eye-witness, but he has caught sometMng of
the vividness and fulness of detail characteristic of an eye
witness. The paralytic who is healed at Capernaum is carried
on Ms couch by "four" bearers, who "take up the tiles"
probably of the corridor of the house where Jesus was, and so
let down their patient into His presence. When He heals the
withered hand He looks round Him " with anger." The Gada
rene demoniac wanders about " among the tombs and among the
mountains, crying out and cutting himself with stones." At the
cleansing of the Temple not only are the buyers and the sellers
turned out, but the further detail is added that no one is aUowed
to "carry a vessel" tMough the Temple.
In another way touches of nature appear in the narrative. At
a distance from home the memory of St. Peter dwells fondly on
particular expressions used by his Master in His own Aramaic
speech (" Ephphatha," "Talitha Cumi" or "Cum"). Here,
too, we have a verification of the tradition that the writer himself,
as weU as his informant, came from Palestine. A foreigner
would never have thought of preserving such expressions ; nor
woMd tradition have preserved them long after it had begun to
travel beyond Palestinian soil. On another side the tradition ia
confirmed when it speaks of Eome as the place where the Gospel
was written. The Latin names to which we have referred are
one proof of this ; a stiU better is suppUed by the incidental
men-tion of "Eufus " (Mark xv. 21), who appears to be the same
as the Eufus of Eomans xvi. 13 ; pure Latin names are not
common among the early Christians.
Attempts have been made to fix a dogmatic tendency upon the
Gospel. AU must agree that if there is any such tendency it is
marked by great moderation. Hence the Evangelist has been
claimed for opposite sides, by some as a representative of Pauline,
by others as a representative of Jewish Christianity. He is
really no partisan, though he reflects the conscience of the Church
at the comparatively later period at which he is writing. The
only object of the Gospel appears to be to give an adequate idea
of the wondrous and wonder-working life of Christ. It is a
fiUIng-out of the programme sketched by St. Peter in Acts x.
37 — 41 : " That saying ye yourselves know which was published
throughout aU Judea, beginning from GaUlee, after the baptism
wMch John preached, even Jesus of Nazareth, how that God

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

THE GOSPEL ACCOEDING TO ST. MARK. 57
II. The Public Ministry of Jesus.
1. Baptism (Messianic anointing), and Temptation, sum
marily narrated (I. 9 — 13).
2. Beginning of GalUean ministry, dating from imprison
ment of John (i. 14, 15).
3. CaU of four aposties (i. 16—20).
4. Opening day of the ministry at Capernaum (i. 21 — 34).
5. Circuit of teaching In Galilee ; the leper (i. 36 — 45).
6. Capernaum :
i. Eising opposition (II. 1 — Hi. 6).
The Paralytic — CaU of Levi— Fasting — ^Two Sabbath
Anecdotes.
u. Miracles and Teaching (ill. 7 — iv. 34).
Crowds attracted — Choice of the Twelve — Casting out of
Devils— Eelatives of Jesus — Parables.
7. Various movements, with alternations of work and con
troversy.
i. Across the lake ; Decapolis ; Capernaum ; Nazareth ; a
second circuit (iv. 35 — vi. 13).
Storm at Sea — Gadarene Demoniac — Jairus's Daughter —
Incredulity of Nazarenes — Mission of Apostles.
u. Herod Antipas (vi. 14 — 29).
Effect on Herod — Parenthetic mention of Death of John.
iU. Across the lake ; Gennesaret ; longer journey through
Tyre and Sidon ; DecapoUs ; further side of the lake
(Dalmanutha ?) ; Bethsalda (vi. 30 — ^viii, 26).
Feeding of Five Thousand — ^Walking on the Sea — Heal
ings — Controversy with Pharisees from Jerusalem —
The Syro-Phoenician Woman — The Deaf and Dumb —
Feeding of Four Thousand — ^A Sign — Leaven of the
Pharisees — Blind Man Healed.
8. Culmination of the GalUean ministry.
i. Csesarea PhlUppi (viii. 27 — ix. 29).
Peter's Confession — First Announcement of the Passion —
TaMng the Cross — The Transfiguration — The Epileptic
Boy.
ii. Eeturn to Capernaum (ix. 30 — 50).
Second Announcement of the Passion — "Who shaU be
gTeatest? " — " Not against us, for us " — Offences.
9. Last journey to Jerusalem.
i. On the way through Persoa (x. 1 — 45).
BIU of Divorce — Little ChUdren — Eich young Man— TMrd
Announcement of the Passion — The Sons of Zebedee.
ii. Jericho (x. 46 — 52). Blind Bartimseus.
iu. Jerusalem and Bethany (xi, — -yiii),

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

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

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

THE GOSPEL ACCOEDING TO ST. LUKE. 61
apostohc authority for their own opinions, and for the documents
which gave countenance to them.
On aU these grounds the tradition comes to us with a strong
presumption in its favour, and that presumption is heightened
by the argument based on the certain identity of the author of
the thhd Gospel -with the author of the Acts. We must not go
into this question here. Suffice It to say that it is stUl by far the
most probable view that the Book of Acts was reaUy written by
a companion of St. Paul, who was included in the group spoken
of as " we " in Acts xvi. 10, and many places afterwards. There
are only tMee possibUities : either the -writer was really one of
St. Paul's companions; or a diary written by one of St. Paul's
companions has been incorporated into the book ; or some other
person has sought to pass for a companion of St. Paul's, and has
deUberately given his narrative the colour of proceeding from
such a companion. AU these views have been held, but in Eng
land the balance of opinion stUl is, and is likely to be, decidedly
in favour of the first. And if it is once agreed that the anony
mous writer was one who had accompanied St. Paul on Ms jour
neys, then it has been elaborately proved that no other name
satisfies the conditions so weU as St. Luke's, so much so that even
those who do not ascribe the whole book to Mm, stiU for the most
part either see in Mm the author of the incorporated diary, or
else beUeve that it was sought to suggest his authorship. Taking
the question as a whole the present writer is of opinion that,
except for the Pauline Epistles, as strong a case can be made out
for the traditional authorsMp of the tMrd Gospel and the Acts as
for that of any other book of the New Testament.
As to the personaUty of St. Luke, what we reaUy know of him
is derived froni the Acts and the Epistles of St. Paul. He was a
physician by profession, and is first found in the company of St.
Paul when he decided to cross over from Asia Minor to Europe.
Together they sailed from Troas, and together they arrived at
NeapoUs and PhUippi. Here, if we may argue from the dropping
of the first person in the narrative, St. Luke was left, perhaps
tMough some private connection with the place, though the
inference dra-wn by M. Eenan that he was a native of PMUppi
has not enough to bear it out. At PhlUppi he would seem to
have stayed, or at least to have made it Ms headquarters, tMough
out the. interval, wMch, on a probable cMonology, would extend
from the year 54 to 58, for it can hardly be a chance coincidence
that the first person plural is resumed (Acts xx. 5) in the nar
rative of the Acts from St. Paul's arrival at the same point on
Ms return journey from Greece, when he was on Ms way to
attend the feast of Pentecost at Jerusalem.

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

THE GOSPEL ACCOEDING TO ST. LUKE. 63
institution of the cup, or making it repeated twice over. That
the narrative should have been fiUed out at a very early date by
borrowing from the language of St, Paul Is in accordance with
other phenomena of the text, and Is a hypothesis by no means
improbable. This would reduce the points of special contact
with St. Paul to the mention of the appearance of the risen Lord
to St. Peter (Luke xxiv. 34, compared with 1 Cor. xv. 5), which
is without doubt something more than a chance coincidence.
Other supposed points of contact cannot be pressed.
When St. Luke's Gospel comes to be examined In detail it is
found possible to map out its contents according to the probable
sources from wMch they were derived. EspeciaUy is this the
case if we may accept as probable the theory as to the origin and
composition of the Synoptic Gospels wMch has been put forward in
the previous chapters. In part the composition of St. Luke would
be paraUel to that of St. Matthew. H we lop off from both the first
two and the latter half of the last chapters, then what remains
wiU be found to have the same fundamental structure. The out
Une of the narrative appears to be supplied by a document closely
resembling, if not identical with, our present St. Mark. In this
are inserted masses of discourse which we may believe to have
been taken from the original " Oracles " of St. Matthew. If this
were the case we should then know two at least of the " eye
witnesses and ministers of the word " to whom St. Luke expresses
Ms obligations ; they would not be excluded by the fact that their
testimony is spoken of as " delivered," a word which in the Greek
is most commonly used of oral tradition.
The tradition to wMch St. Luke refers was partly written and
partly oral, and the Gospel of St. Mark and Oracles of St.
Matthew did not make up the whole of It. Two other sources
at least are discernible in the narrative as It has come down to
us. The first two chapters (deducting the Preface) stand by
themselves. They are full of Hebralsing expressions which give
them a stamp of their own; such would be " walMng In the
commandments and ordinances," " stricken in years," " great In
the sight of the Lord," "filled with the Holy Ghost," "spirit
and power of Ellas," "take away my reproach," "hast found
favour with God," &c. These two chapters then we may mark
off as having a special source of their own, which was probably
in -writing. Most of the occasions of which we hear of St. Luke
have their scene at a distance from Palestine ; but at one time he
would seem to have been for fuUy two years within the limits of
the Eoman province wMch bore that name. He accompanied
St.Paul on Ms last recorded journey to Jerusalem, stayed with
Mm for some time at the house of PhiUp the "Evangelist" at

6-1 BOOK BY BOOK.
Csesarea, went up with him to Jerusalem, and, as we infer,
remained not far away from his person during the time of Ms
later confinement at Csesarea.
Though PMlip was not an " EvangeUst " precisely in the sense
in wMch we now give the name to St. Luke, but rather as an
itinerant preacher or missionary than the author of a -written
Gospel, stUl he too would have to make inquiries for facts as to
the life of the Lord, and in Ms company It is very possible that
St. Luke may have met others who would be able to give Mm
information more or less at first hand. We are not without indi
cations as to one of the quarters from which such information
came. St. Luke displays a special knowledge of matters relating
to the court of the Herods. He mentions by name a woman
whom none of the other EvangeUsts mention : "Joanna the wife
of Chuza, Herod's steward : " * and in like manner in the Acts he
speaks of Manaen "foster-brother of Herod." Here we have a
glimpse of a circle from wMch St. Luke probably got Ms account
of the quarrel and reconciliation between PUate and Herod, as
weU as of the circumstances of the death of Herod Agrippa I.,
and of facts relating to Agrippa II. f
One shght indication would perhaps suggest that we owe to
the same source the narrative of the walk to Emmaus ; the name
Cleopas (short for Cleopatros) is just such as would he affected
in the surroundings of the Herodian court. Herod the Great at
one time greatiy curried favour -with Antony and Cleopatra, and
such a name might weU descend among the dependants of his
house. The name (unlike Cleopas, which may =: Alphseus) was
not one which would be borne by a strict Jew. TMs Herodian
source may very possibly have been oral. St. Luke has besides
tMs a quantity of pecuUar matter in regard to which it is difficult
to say how far it came from a single source, and how far from a
number of sources. To some extent the pecuUar portions are
sImUar in subject. Thus we have a number of incidents relating
to Samaritans. J We have some typical cases of the dealings of
CMist with pubUcans and sinners ; § and also examples of Hia
teaching as to the admission of the outcast and pemtent. || On
the other hand, the opposition of riches and poverty is strongly
brought out ; ^ and occasionaUy narratives are inserted with a
* Luke -vui. 3 ; compare Acts xiii. 1.
t Luke xxiii. 7 — 12 ; Acts xii. 20 — 23 ; xxv. 13, &o.
J Luke ix. 51—56 ; x. 30—37 ; xvii. 11—18.
§ Luke -rii. 36—50 ; xix. 1—10.
II Luke XV. 1—7; 8—10, 11—32; xviii. 9—14.
H Luke i. 52, 53 ; vi. 20, 21 ; xvi. 19—31.

THE GOSPEL ACCOEDING TO ST. LUKE. 65
strongly Jewish cast, Uke those of the " daughter of Abraham
whom Satan had bound " with a spirit of infirmity.*
4. Character, Style, and Analysis of the Contents of the Gospel. —
Owing to this diversity of origin of its different parts, the Gospel
presents a many- coloured appearance, now seeming to favour one
set of views and now another. Eich and profound teaching, such
as that which the EvangeUst records, presented a number of
different sides, of wMch different minds would take hold. The
course of events and the evolution of Mstory would tMow Ught
upon sayings wMeh had at first lain dormant and attracted Utile
attention. The first coUectors of the evangelical traditions would
vary much m their o-wn standpoint and width of outlook. Some
would contemplate the past, others the future ; some would be
intent on their o-wn immediate surroundings, others woMd Uft
up their eyes to a more distant horizon ; some would think rather
of the Jews and of Palestine, others of the gro-wing Gentile
Church and of the -wider destuues of the world. These differ
ences were impressed on the materials of wMch St. Luke made
use, and he has faithfuUy reproduced them. He is Uke the
householder in the parable who brings out of Ms treasures
" things new and old." He has Ms own leanings, and those
leanings appear in the Gospel. The predominant tone is such
as we shoidd expect in the compamon and disciple of St. Paul.
Most characteristic is that chapter (xv.) wMch contains the
parables of the lost sheep, the lost piece of money, the lost or pro
digal son. It is not the outcasts of Palestine alone who are in -view,
but those dispersed abroad tMoughout the world. These deU
cate and tender pictures are no inventions. They lay in a side
room apart from the pubUc gallery of the first age, and the pre
ceding evangelists had passed them by. St. Luke brought them
out never again to be lost sight of. Tet he, too, sets by their
side pieces conceived m another spirit, touches of particularism
which had escaped his predecessors. He is a true Mstorian who
coUects what he can wherever he finds it.
St. Luke has more Uterary ambition than his feUows. He
spreads Ms canvas more elaborately and more after the manner
of the secular artists. He alone endeavours to connect the
Gospel narrative -with the annals of the province of Syria and
the Eoman empire. It is a mistake to say that he had read
Josephus ; but Josephus is not the only authority who dealt with
the Eoman government of Judea and its border territories. At
Antioch, at Csesarea, at Eome, he would have abundant oppor-
tumties of becoming acquainted -with the fasti of the province or
* Luke xiii. 11—17.

66 BOOK BY BOOK.
provinces of which it fell to Mm to treat. In this way he has
come to speak of the census of Quirlnlus, the fifteenth year of
Tiberius Csesar, I.ysanlas of Abilene, and the like. All his data
may not be exactiy right ; he had not the facilities of one who
enjoyed the favour of emperors like Josephus, or who belonged
to the foremost Eoman aristocracy like Tacitus ; but he made, at
least, a conscientious attempt, and the historical detaUs of the
Acts show that he attained a high standard of success.
These are some of the characteristics of the Gospel, of which
we may now proceed to give a brief analysis, bearing, as far as
we can, those characteristics in mind.
History of the Life on Earth of the Saviour of the World.
I. Preface, explaining the sources and object of the Gospel
(i. 1-4).
II. Birth and early years of the Saviour and His Forerunner
(i. 5— u. 62).
Announcement of tho Bhth of John and of Jesus — Birth
of John — Birth of Jesus at the first Census of Quirinius
— His Circumcision and Presentation in the Temple —
Visit to the Temple at the age of twelve years.
From peculiar source or sources.
III. Judean Ministry of the Saviour.
FoUowing for the most part the outline of St. Mark.
Note that St. Luke uses Judean in a wide sense so as to
include GaUlee.'
1. The Mission of the Baptist (IU. 1 — 20).
The fifteenth year of Tiberius — Preaching of John — His
Prophecy of Christ — Notice of his Death.
From Mark- Gospel, with enlargement perhaps from Oracles.
2. Inauguration of the Ministry of Jesus (ill. 21 — iv. 13).
Baptism of Jesus— Genealogy — Temptation.
Mark- Gospel, special source, and Oracles.
3. Jesus in GalUee (Iv. 14 — 44).
Preaching in GalUee — Discourse at Nazareth and Incre
dulity of Nazarenes (antedated) — Settlement at Caper
naum — A Day's Ministry — Circuit.
Mark- Gospel, with special source for Discourse.
4. Narrative continued (v. 1 — vi. 15).
CaU of four Aposties — the Leper — The Paralytic — CaU of
Levi — Fasting — Two Sabbath Anecdotes.
Mainly from Mark-Gospel, first subject expanded from special
source.

THE GOSPEL ACCOEDING TO ST. LUKE. 67
'5. The so-caUed Lesser Interpolation. Discourses, Miracles
of Healing, and other incidents not aU connected with Galilee
(vi. 12— viu. 3).
*ChoIce of the Twelve — f Sermon on the Mount ("level
place" St. Luke) — fCenturlon's Servant — §Widow's
Son at Nain — f Question and Character of John —
§ Jesus' feet anointed — §The Ministering Women.
Passage marked with * from Mark -Gospel, those marked t
probably from Oracles, those marked § from sources peculiar to
St. Luke.
6. Narrative continued (-viii. 4 — 56).
Parable of the Sower— Eelations of Jesus — Storm at Sea
— Gadarene Demoniac.
From Mark-Gospel, perhaps -with slight influence from Oracles
in earlier portion.
7. Height of the Galilean Ministry (ix. 1 — 50).
Mission of the Twelve — Effect on Herod — ^Feeding of Five
Thousand — Peter's Confession — First Announcement of
Passion — TaMng the Cross — Transfiguration — The
EpUeptic Boy — Second Announcement of Passion —
" Who shall be greatest?" — " Not against us, for us."
Mainly from Mark-Oospel.
TV. The Greater Interpolation, consisting largely of matter
pecuUar to St. Luke (ix. 51 — xvui. 14).
TMs is sometimes caUed the "Persean Section" or
" Samaritan Section " because of ix. 51 — 56 ; x. 30 — 37 ;
xvU. 11 — 19.
1. First Section (ix. 51 — xiu. 35).
i. §The Samaritan VUlage — fFoUowers — §The Seventy —
-j- Chorazin and Bethsaida — §f Eeturn of Seventy — *The
Greatest Commandment — §The Good Samaritan — §Mary
and Martha.
ii. t§ Prayer — *f Casting out De-vUs by Beelzebub — §True
Blessedness — Sign of Jonah — f Lamp of the Body — f The
Pharisees denounced — f Boldness in Confession — §The
Inheritance — |The Eich Fool — -fCares — fTreasures —
f Watchful Servants — f " Not peace but division."
iu. §The Slaughtered GalUeans — § Parable of Fig-tree —
§ Spinal Curvature healed — * Mustard Seed — f Leaven —
f"Who are the saved?" — Departure from QaMee:
gMessage to Antipas — f Jerusalem.
2. Second Section (xiv. 1 — ^xvU. 10.)
i. §Dropsy Healed— §Banquets—tThe Messianic Banquet—
E 2

58 BOOK BY BOOK.
t§ Counting the Cost— jThe Lost Sheep— § The Lost
Drachma — §The Lost Son.
u. §The Clever Steward— fShort Sayings— §EIch Man and -
Lazarus — *Offences — *Faith — §Servants' duties.
ui. §The Samaritan Leper — §tComing of the Kingdom —
§The Unrighteous Judge — §Pharisee and Publican.
Passages marked * mainly from Mark-Gospel, those marked t
mainly from Oracles, those marked § peculiar; combined signs
denote combination of sources.
V. Journey to Jerusalem completed ; Jesus in Jerusalem and at
the Mount of OUves (xvUi. 15 — xxi. 22).
i. Little Children — ^The Eich Young Man — Third Announce
ment of the Passion — Blind Man at Jericho — §Zacchseus —
§The Mlnse — Triumphal entry — ^Lament over Jerusalem —
Cleansing of the Temple.
U. Authority of Jesus — Wicked Husbandmen — Tribute to
Csesar — ^Levirate Marriage — David's Son and Lord — The
Scribes — The Widow's Mite — Apocalyptic Discourse.
Mainly from Mark-Gospel ; passages marked § peculiar.
VI. Passion and Eesurrection of the Sa-viour (xxii. 1 — ^xxiv. 12).
1. Two days before Passover (xxii. 1 — 6).
Treachery of Judas.
2. The Last Supper (xxu. 7—38).
The Paschal Meal — ^Institution of the Eucharist — Betrayal
prophesied — "Who shaU be greatest?" — Prophecy of
Peter's Demal — §A Turning-point.
3. Arrest, Trial, and Crucifixion (xxii. 39 — ^xxui. 49).
Gethsemane : §The Agony — Arrest — Peter's Demal —
Trial of Jesus before the Presbytery — Trial before PUate
— §Jesu8 sent to Herod — Sentence — Simon of Cyrene
— § Daughters of Jerusalem — Crucifixion : § The two
Criminals — ^Witnesses of the Crucifixion.
4. The Burial (xxui. 50—56).
6. The Eesurrection : After-Appearances (xxiv.).
Women at the Empty Grave — §Walk to Emmaus — §Ap-
pearance to Simon — § Appearance to the Eleven —
§(The Ascension?).
Main outline from Mark-Gospel ; passages marked § peculiar.
5. Date and Early History of the Gospel. — ^We have already
seen that the Gospel was probably composed about the year
80 A.D., during the period wMch St. Luke himself caUs "the
times of the GentUes" (xxi. 24), i.e. the period ushered in by
the fall of Jerusalem, during which the GentUes were to be the
appointed ministers of Divine vengeance. We have also seen

THE GOSPEL ACCOEDING TO ST. LUKE. 69
that the Gospel was written, in the first instance, for a private
person named Theophilus. That this was its original destina
tion is confirmed by the apparent significance of some remark
able phenomena in the text. The Gospel appears at a very early
date to have undergone certam additions, wMch have left traces
of themselves in the MSS. The additions in question would
seem from the authorities wMch support them to have been made
at two distinct times.
On one occasion there were only added the two verses which
describe the agony of the Saviour as " drops of blood " in the
garden of Gethsemane (xxii. 43 — 44), and those most important
and precious words — ^which are certainly authentic as a statement
of fact, whatever their textual character — ^the prayer for forgive
ness of those who caused His death (xxui. 34).* On the other
occasion a longer string of additions was made. Foremost
among them would be m aU probabUity the insertion of worda
borrowed from 1 Cor. xi.. 24, 25, expanding the account of the
institution of the Eucharist (xxu. 19, 20), and the words
describing the Ascension (" and He was carried up into heaven,"
xxiv. 51), with several other less important pMases in
Chapter xxiv.
Both these sets of additions were introduced at such an early
date that some (including Bishop Lightfoot) have supposed that
St. Luke himself actuaUy issued two editions of his Gospel. It
appears, however, to satisfy the conditions rather better, if we
suppose that they were introduced after they had left the hands
of the evangelist, but so soon after that the most natural person
to think of in connection ¦with them is, if not the ¦writer of the
Gospel, yet the person to whom the Gospel was ¦written, the
"most excellent TheopMlus." Additions like these are just
such as woidd be made by the private possessor of a ¦written
narrative, who, after it was received, feU in with some additional
incidents which came to Mm ¦with good authentication, or who
thought himself justified in fiiUing out a point here and there
by a process of legitimate inference. Such an one would think
that he was only doing what he would ¦with his own ; that he
himself was the gainer ; and that no harm could possibly come
from Ms zeal. And we at tMs distance of time, may in most
cases heartily endorse his action, and express our gratitude to
him for preserving words wMch we should indeed not willingly
"let die."
If we may carry our speculations a step farther we should say,
putting together what we know of the origin of the particular
• This addition perhaps belongs rather to the next class.

70

BOOK BY BOOK.

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

THE GOSPEL ACCOEDING TO ST. LUKE. 71
dence to show that he used it in a text wMch aheady, even at that
early date, bore traces of corruption. The Gospel which he used
about the year 140 cannot have been a new production, but must
have been current for a considerable time and have passed
through a number of hands.
A littie later than Marcion {circa 150) Justin Martyr also cer
tainly used our present Gospel, and in Ms time it already con
tained the verses describing the Bloody Sweat wMch we have
some reason to think were not in the original copy. It was one
of the four works which went to make up the "DIatessaron"
of Tatian, Justin's disciple (160 — 170). When we come to the
Muratorian Fragment we have an account of the origm of the
Gospel, wMch seems to be made up from Scriptural data but is
proof of the estimation in which the Gospel was held. When
the corrupt text is emended it appears to run thus : " The third
book of the Gospel, ' according to Luke,' Luke the physician,
composed after the Ascension of Christ, when Paul had taken
Mm with Mm as the compamon of his journeying, in Ms own
name from hearsay (he had not Mmself seen the Lord In the
flesh), and as best he could, beginning ¦with the birth of John."
"With Tatian, the Fragmentist, and Irenseus the Gospel is aheady
what we should caU " canonical,''' and it does not go back from
this position.

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

THE WEITINGS ASCRIBED TO ST. JOHN. 73
good grounds for questioning the earlier tradition as to its
authorship than because the contents of the book were not
acceptable to many Christian readers. But by the end of the
fourth century aU opposition had died out, and the book has
been for ce«turies universaUy accepted in the Christian Church
as the record of a divine revelation made to one of the twelve
aposties. In modem times all the traditional opinions con
cerning the authorsMp of the New Testament books have been
subjected to free examination by critics who own no Mgh respect
for Church authority. Under this examination the Apocalypse
has fared better than some other books of the Church canon,
this book being recognised as St. John's by many critics who
refuse the like acknowledgment in the case of the four other
books traditionaUy ascribed to the same author.
In the present introduction we have thought it advisable to
confine ourselves to topics on which the mere English reader is
competent to pass judgment. We therefore do not attempt to
produce in full the testimony of early CMistian Fathers, in order
to appreciate which some learned discussion would be necessary
as to the meanmg of the passages cited, and as to the credit due
to the ¦writers. We shaU content ourselves with testing by
internal evidence the various points of the traditional belief. It
is necessary to begin by examining whether the five books with
which we have to deal have been rightly ascribed to the same
author, because on the determination of this question depends
whether inferences drawn from one of these books can properly
be combined with those drawn from another.
2. Common Authorship of Gospel and First Epistle. — If it is
possible to prove anytMng by internal evidence the identity of
authorship of these two works may be regarded as certain. The
simUarity of style and phraseology, though no doubt more striMng
in the original, is obvious enough in a translation. No style
presents more marked peculiarities than that of the Fourth
Gospel. The most careless reader is conscious of the difference
when he passes on to this Gospel from the study of the preceding
three, and equaUy so when he passes on from this Gospel to the
Epistles of St. Paul or St. James or St. Peter. If he proceeds
to examine wherein the peculiarity consists, he finds among
other things that in the Fourth Gospel each sentence usually
stands by itself, and that while there is continuity of thought
there is little in form of expression. The sentences are linked
together only as the propositions in Euclid are linked together,
where, though one proposition prepares the way for those that
come after, yet it is complete in itself, and there is notMng in
its enunciation to indicate that others are to follow.

74

BOOK BY BOOK.

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

THE WEITINGS ASCRIBED TO ST. JOHN. 75
all" (i. 5) ; "is truth and is no lie" (ill. 27), &c. In connection
with the second example it may be added that both In Gospel
and Epistle we find the statement that a proposition Is true, sup
plemented by the statement that to assert the opposite would be
to teU a Ue (John viu. 55 ; 1 John i. 6, 8 ; U. 4, 22 ; iv. 20).
Compare also Eev. ii. 2 ; iu. 9.
(iv.) The words and phrases which are favourites with the
Evangelist are also prominent in the Epistle. We have already
had some instances of this. For example, the word " witness,"
already noticed, may be said to be one of those favourite words.
It is comparatively rare in the Synoptic Gospels, but either the
noun or the corresponding verb occurs some fifty times In the
Fourth Gospel. It is needless to say what a prominent place the
word "love" holds, both in Gospel and Epistle; and we cannot
be wrong in finding In the " commandment " of love, 1 John iv.
21, a reference to the "new commandment," John xlii. 34, for
the " new commandment " is expressly mentioned, 1 John ii. 8.
So likewise the contrast between those who " abide In the Ught "
ind those who " walk in darkness," 1 John i. 6, 7 ; Ii. 9, 11, has
not only its counterpart in the Gospel, ill. 19 ; viii. 12; xi. 9 ; xii.
46, but the very same words are found both in Gospel and Epistle,
" He that walketh in the darkness knoweth not whither he goeth "
(John viu. 35 ; 1 John u. 11).
The same contrast is also in both books spoken of as one
between " death " and " Ufe " ; and here too, in identical words,
" have passed from death unto Ufe " (John v. 24 ; 1 John iii. 14).
" Eternal life " is the constantly recurring theme in both books,
and of this Ufe not only is our Lord described in the Gospel as
the source, but He is given the title "the Life " (John I. 3 ; xi.
25 ; xiv. 6). At the very beginning of the Epistle we have (i. 2)
" the Life was manifested " ; this word " manifested " being also
a favourite word with the EvangeUst, and applied by him to our
Lord's appearance m the world (i. 31); and the Epistle closes
with "this is the etemal Life" (v. 20) ; see also v. 11, 12. Other
titles given to, our Lord in both Gospel and Epistle are " Only
begotten " {John i. 14 ; 1 Johniv. 9), and "Saviour of the world"
(John iv. 42; 1 John iv. 14).
The latter coincidence deserves the more attention because the
title indicates a total change from the Messianic conception when
Jews had looked for a successor to David who should restore the
independence of their people and raise them to sovereignty.
They now beUeve in one who was the "propitiation, not for
their sins only, but for the sins of the whole world.'* It would
be too long to go through several other coincidences between the
two books in connection with this word " world," One may be

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

THE WRITINGS ASCRIBED TO ST. JOHN. 77
character of the Greek of this book, on the unUkeness of which
to the Greek of the Gospel has been founded one of the principal
arguments for the diversity of authorsMp of the two books. But
if we take into account how very different are the subjects of the
two books, the English reader wiU be much more struck with
their likeness than with their unUkeness. In the present case
the study of the books in a translation is not without advantage ;
for one of the methods by which those who hold both books to
have proceeded from the same author account for the difference
of Greek style, is by the hypothesis that this author who, it will
be readily admitted, thought in Aramaic, employed In the two
books different hands to translate Ms thoughts into Greek. If
tMs were so, differences of style introduced by the translators
would be apt to disappear when the hooks were translated into
another language. Thus by examining the books m a transla
tion we are able to separate their fundamental points of likeness
or unUkeness from those pecuUarities of diction for which it is
possible not the author but his secretary may be responsible.
Of the striking agreement between the doctrine concerning our
Lord taught in the Gospel and in the Apocalypse we shall
speak a Uttle later on ; at present we deal with more superficial
points of resemblance. The Evangelist lays particular emphasis
on the piercing of our Lord's side at His crucifixion and the
issuing therefrom of blood and water as an incident that he had
witnessed himself (xix. 35). We have already seen that the
Epistle also makes mention of the water and the blood (v. 6).
Now in the very beginning of the Apocalypse we find a reference
to the piercing of our Lord with a clear use of the same words of
the prophet Zechariah that are expressly quoted in the Gospel ;
and it may be added that the two books agree in using the same
translation of that prophet's words, not that of the Septuagint.
Let us return now to the opening words of the Gospel, "In
the beginning was the Word." TMs titie, " the Word," it wUl
be observed, is used by the EvangeUst only in his prologue ;
not only is it never put into our Lord's own mouth, but the
disciples are never introduced as using it when speaMng of Him.
We have not laid stress on the fact that the Epistle also begins
by speaking of "the word of Ufe," because it admits of question
whether tMs pMase is here to be understood as the name of a
person ; but there certainly is a coincidence with the prologue of
the Gospel in the next verse of the Epistle, for the " eternal Ufe
who was with the Father" is clearly identical with " the Word
who was w«<A God." In the Eevelation (xix. 11) our Lord ia
given the appeUation " Faithful and true," and (v. 13) His name
is said to be the Word of God. The former appeUation sends

78

BOOK BY BOOK.

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

THE WEITINGS ASCRIBED TO ST. JOHN.

79

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

80

BOOK BY BOOK.

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

THE WRITINGS ASCRIBED TO ST. JOHN. 81
dwelt on in the latest Gospel. It will be well, therefore, to
examine how far internal evidence supports the correctness of
this ancient opinion; for it must be owned that this is a point on
which modern critics are far from being agreed, many of those
who believe the Fourth Gospel to have been written by the
Apostle John not admitting that he could have been acquainted
with any of the other Gospels.
6. The Supplemental Character of the Fourth Gospel. — Whether
it be intended or not, the fact is certain that the Fourth Gospel
is supplemental to the other tMee. These tMee resemble each
other in general character, and have In common a number of
incidents and discourses, even related in nearly the same
words, so as to suggest that each EvangeUst intended his
work for readers not supposed to be Ukely to have met with the
others. But it Is quite exceptional if we find in the Fourth
Gospel anytMng that had been recorded in the others ; and when
we do, there is usuaUy some ob-vious reason for its insertion.
Thus, though the miracle of feeding the five thousand related in,
John -vi. had been told In the other Gospels, it is used by St. J6hn ,
to introduce a discourse which the previous EvangeUsts had not
recorded. Except in this -chapter St. John relates no miracle
recorded in the other Gospels, whUe he gives six which they had
not mentioned, the turning water into wine (Ii.), the healing of
the nobleman's son (iv.), the cure of the impotent man at the
pool of Bethesda (v.), the giving sight to the man bom blind
(Ix.), the raising of Lazarus (xi.), and the miraculous draught of
fishes (xxi.)
Now the question is, can this avoiding of topics sufficientiy
dealt with In the other Gospels be reasonably ascribed to acci
dent ? If different persons had attempted Independently to com
mit to writing the leading facts believed in in the CMistian
community concermng the Ufe of its Founder, together with some
specimens of His discourses, although some things might be
omitted by one that were told by another, there surely would be
a number which any two would agree in regarding as too Im
portant to be omitted. It would be a feat little less difficult than
that in the old ordeals of walking bUndfold amid hot plough
shares without tO'Uching any, if a narrator without knowledge of
what three predecessors had told, managed to keep clear of
everything they had related.
But we are under no temptation to avoid the most natural
explanation of the characteristics of the Fourth Gospel now under
consideration. For aU critics agree In ascribing to this Gospel a
date considerably later than that of any of tho other three. Those
who beUeve the Apostle John to have written it beheve that he

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

THE WRITINGS ASCRIBED TO ST. JOHN. 83
he does relate (i. 45 ; vu. 41, 52) that it was made a ground of
objection to the acceptance of Jesus as the Messiah that he was a
GaUlean, the son of Joseph, whose father and mother they knew
(vi. 42), whereas it had been foretold that the Messiah should be
bom in Bethlehem, and of the house of David. The Evangelist,
as we shall presently see, beUeved in the Old Testament, and
habituaUy takes pleasure in tracing the fulfilment of Old Testa
ment prophecies in the life of our Lord. We may be sure
therefore that he Mmself believed that Jesus, whom he accepted
as the Messiah, had been born as the prophets foretold He-
shoiUd. And he certainly would not have placed a stumbling
block in his readers' way by telling them of the Jewish objection
without ever telling them the true answer to it, unless he knew
that they were already in possession of that answer in some more
authentic shape than mere traditional rumour.
The examination made in the present section was necessary,
because there can be no sound criticism of the Fourth Gospel
without a correct decision of the question whether or not the
author intended it ae a complete account of the Sa-viour's Ufe.
It is an undoubted fact that the Fourth Gospel omits many tMngs
told in the previous Gospels, and relates much which they omit.
It is necessary to decide whether on this account we are to regard
tMs witness as at variance with his predecessors, or whether we
are at Uberty to combine what he and they have told, making
the assumption that the later writer was designedly concise
where his predecessors had been fuU, and fuU where they had
been concise.
7. The Evangelist was a Jew. — ^The earUest dissension that we
read of in the Christian community arose out of the opposition
made by men of Jewish birth to the doctrine preached by Paul,
namely, that the middle waU of partition between Jew and
GentUe had been thrown down and that Jew and Gentile were
thenceforward one in CMist Jesus. On this question the Fourth
Evangelist takes his side with those who were in favour of the
widest opening of the portals of the CMistian Church. When a
question was raised as to the rival claims of Jerusalem and
Mount Gerizim our Lord is recorded as answering (iv. 21), "that
the hour cometh, when ye shall neither at Jerusalem nor in this
mountain worship the Father." Our Lord is represented as
announcing (x. 16) that He had other sheep "not of this fold,"
whom also He must bring so that all should become one flock.
Jesus is recorded as predicting (xii. 32) that He should draw all
men unto him. His death is stated (xi. 52) to be not for the
Jewish nation only, but "that also he should gather together in
one the cMldren of God that were scattered abroad." The
F 2

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

THB WRITINGS ASCRIBED TO ST. JOHN. 85
with the weU-authentlcated tradition that the Fourth Gospel Is
the latest of the four and that it made its first appearance In Asia
Minor. But this work, though written at a distance from Jeru
salem, exMbits minute acquaintance with the topography of the
Holy Land. He mentions the foUowing localities (some of them
being but smaU places), and In some cases exhibits minute
knowledge of them: Cana of Galilee (ii. 1, 2 ; iv. 46; xxi. 2) ;
Bethsaida (i. 44) : Bethj,ny beyond Jordan (I. 28) ; Bethany,
near Jerusalem (ii. 18) ; the city EpMaim, near the wilderness
(xi. 54) ; JEnon, near to Sallm, where John baptized (ill. 23) ;
Sychar, the city of Samaria where Jacob's Well was (Iv. 4). At
Jerusalem the EvangeUst knows the pool of Bethesda, near the
sheep-gate, with its five porches, the treasury at the Temple,
Solomon's porch, the pool Siloam, the brook Kedron, the place
that is called the pavement but in the Hebrew Gabbatha, the
place of the skuU called in Hebrew Golgotha.
8. The Date of the Gospel. — ^We have already said that it cannot
be placed in the very earUest days of the Church, but neither
can It be placed, as some have done, so late as to be quite outside
the limits of the apostolic age. We can at least say that it must
be antecedent to the Gnostic heresies which broke out quite
early in the second century. The problem that most occupied
the minds of the Gnostic speculators was how to account for the
origin of evU ; and the solution they generally agreed in offering
was that evil was inherent in matter. It foUowed that the
creation of matter could not have been the work of the good
God, and since the God of the Jews claimed the work of creation
as His own, that He must be a being different from, and, accord
ing to many systems, hostUe to the supreme God. Thus the
authority of the Old Testament was rejected. Further, those
who held these views found It impossible to beUeve that the
Saviour could have assumed a material body, and so they were
led to maintain that in His earthly life He was only in appearance
Uke other men. Again, they could not beUeve that the existence
of matter would be prolonged beyond the present life, and so
they rejected the doctrine of the resurrection of the body. And
as they conceived that perfection was to be attained through
release from the dominion of matter, they inculcated an ascetic
mode of life, abstinence from animal food and from wine, as weU
as from marriage through which the material Ufe is perpetuated.
Now it is not merely that the Fourth Gospel gives no counte
nance to any of these theories, but there Is no trace that the
Evangelist had ever heard of them. The authority of the Old
Testament is assumed as a matter about which there can be no
question. The Temple which the Jews had buUt for the worship
of their God is claimed by Jesus as His Father's house (Ii. 16).

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

THE WRITINGS ASCRIBED TO ST. JOHN. 87
that he had no need to consider what others had said before
Mm.
The traditional account of the authorship of the Gospel ia
further confirmed by the perfect knowledge which the writer
exhibits, how unlike the Messianic conception of a "Kingdom
not of this world," which early came to be that of the Christian
Church, was that expectation wMoh prevailed among the Jewa
at the time of our Lord's coming, of a temporal deliverer who
should restore sovereignty to their nation. This Evangelist
tells that, the impression produced by the miracle of feeding the
multitude was such that they were about to come by force to
make our Lord a king, and that He was obliged to withdraw
Himself from their importunity to a mountain alone. He repre
sents the prudent Jewish rulers as resolved to put down the
prophesying of Jesus, because they feared that the political
consequences of His assertion of His kingdom would be an unsuc
cessful revolt wMch would be disastrous to their nation (xi. 48).
And he brings out the fact that it was as a pretender to temporal
sovereignty that the Jews accused Him before Pilate, who,
though personally inclined to dismiss the complaint, was with
held from doing so through fear of exciting the jealousy of his
emperor by his remissness if in such a matter as this he showed
himself not Ctesar's friend (xix. 12).
This state of Jewish feeling coidd scarcely have been so vividly
represented except by one who had himself experience of it. But
it was quelled by the destruction of Jerusalem under Titus, so
that we are led to think of the Fourth Evangelist as one who had
lived through the time before that event. There was indeed a
revival of Jewish national feeling leading to the unsuccessful
rebeUIon under Barcochba, which was put down a.d, 135. But
considerations already brought forward, besides those to be pre
sently adduced, forbid us to place the Fourth Gospel so late.
9. The Johannine Authorship. — It is a fact with which we have
got to deal that the Evangelist four times expressly claims to
have been an eye-witness of our Saviour's life (i. 14 ; xix. 35 ;
xxi. 24; 1 John i. 1). In one of these passages (xxi. 24) the
author is identified with Mm whom it describes as ' ' the disciple
whom Jesus loved," and even if there had not been this explicit
declaration, the way in which that disciple is introduced, xiii. 23;
xix. 26; XX. 2; xxi. 7, 20, and probably xviii. 15, Irresistibly
conveys the impression that the Evangelist wished the readers
to understand that he himself was that disciple. It does not
admit of serious question that by this disciple the Apostle John
is intended. Now It is a curious feature of this Gospel, which
records things said by Apostles of whom the other three Gospels
teU us little (Philip, vi. 7 ; xiv. 8 ; Andrew, vi. 9 ; Thomas,

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

THE WRITINGS ASCRIBED TO ST. JOHN. 89
that day was after John the Baptist was cast into prison (Mark
i. 14), and St. John undertakes (iii. 24) to teU much that took
place before John was cast into prison.
Now, although if we had St. Mark's Gospel only we might
take up the idea that Simon and Andrew, James and John, had
not known Jesus until they received His command to leave their
fishing and become fishers of men, yet no such statement ia
made by the Evangelist, and St. John, so far from contradicting,
throws great light on the preceding narrative when he explains
that it was not at the bidding of an unknown person that the
disciples forsook all. We learn from the Gospel that before the
disciples thus forsook their avocations to foUow Jesus, they had
aheady learned under the guidance of John the Baptist to
recognise Jesus as the prophet who should come Into the world.
The three Synoptic Gospels had each related the descent of the
Holy Ghost on our Lord at His baptism without stating on what
testimony their narrative was founded. St. John infornis us,
what when we tMnk on it seems most natural, that the Church
learned tMs fact on the testimony of the Baptist himself, who
though, as St. Matthew teUs us, he had already known enough
of Jesus to feel that He had no need of baptism of Ms, yet was
then first assured that it was He who was to come baptizing with
the Holy Ghost. Great stress is laid on this testimony of the
Baptist, which is appealed to as part of His credentials by our
Lord Himself (John v. 32). But the fact that John had been
witness to Jesus is indirectly attested by the Synoptic Gospels,
which give us to understand that there was such a connection
between John and his Successor that any who acknowledged the
Divine mission of the Baptist would be bound in consistency to
own the authority of Jesus (Matthew xxi. 25 ; Mark xi. 31 ;
Luke XX. 5).
If St. Mark's narrative might have led us to think of the
calUng of the Apostles to forsake their ordinary avocations as
immediately following the Baptism, St. Luke's narrative would
lead us to think that there was some Intervening time, so that
there is nothing to stumble at if St. John's narrative makes us
understand that the interval was stiU longer than we might
otherwise have supposed.
Neither Is there anything to stumble at if we are told that
during that Interval our Lord attended feasts at Jerusalem.
Nay, rather we should have cause for surprise if the fact were
not so ; if He whom St. Matthew records as having said that it
became Him " to fulfil all righteousness," whom St. Luke relates
to have been brought up by His parents to attend a feast while
stiU a boy, neglected to fulfil this duty of ordinary Jewish obli
gation. Nor would it be strange if some of His Apostles, before

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

THE WEITINGS ASCRIBED TO ST. JOHN. 91
This quite falls in with the account that the Gospel was written
when St. John had attained a great age, but before he died.
Against the hypothesis that the Gospel was written by an
unknown person Is the evidence yielded by the third Epistle
ascribed to St. John, which we have already found good reason
to think was written by the author of the Gospels. TMs Epistle
carries the evidence of its genuineness on its face by revealing a
state of things which no forger had any motive for inventing, or
was ever likely to Imagine as possible. The writer, it appears, had
sent brethren as bearers of a letter from him to a particular
Church, and they, instead of being received with the hospitality
usual among Christians, were treated as heretics, the man who
claimed to take the leading part in the government of that Church
actually threatening excommunication to any who should afford
them hospitality. 'What uninspired writers tell with one consent
about St. John Is that he spent the last years of his life settled in
Asia MIno r, and ruling the Churches of that district. It is a con
ceivable tTo-ing that before his arrival he may have sent messen
gers with a letter, possibly, from his place of banishment in Pat
mos ; and as we know from the Epistles to the Corinthians and the
Galatians that the Apostolic Church was not free from dissensions,
there is nothing Incredible in the supposition that the estab
Ushed rulers of the Asiatic Churches may at first have given an
unfriendly reception to a new teacher.
But no one in the next century would be likely to imagine
apostolic messengers meeting such a reception ; and certainly it
would be absolutely contrary to the Interests of a forger to repre
sent the hero of his fiction treated with disrepect. Assured as
we are then that the Third Epistle is no fiction, but the real letter
of a great Church ruler preserved after the circumstances which
had drawn it forth had been forgotten, it follows at once that the
author is no unknown person hiding his personality un der the
cover of a great name. He comes forward in his own person,
claiming great authority, sending Ms legates to an old-est ablished
Church, and treating resistance to his claims on the part of the
rulers of such Churches as idle " prating," which he is confident
that by Ms presence he wUl at once put down. And according
to aU appearance his anticipations prove correct, and Ms rule
over the Churches of Asia is completely acquiesced In. When
such a man publishes a Gospel containing a clearly implied claim
on the part of the writer to be the " disciple whom Jesus loved,"
we cannot suppose the claim to be made on behalf of some one
else, but must regard it as exhibiting the grounds of the authority
which the writer himself exercised. Those who deny him to have
been the Apostle John are bound to teU who else he could pos
sibly have been.

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

THE ACTS OF THE APOSTLES. 93
and as a book indisputably genuine .(o/toXo-yduyuevov*). Of tMs
fact no doubt was ever expressed tUl towards the close of the
ninth century, when Photius makes the aatonishlng statement
that, whUe some considered the book to hi»,.e been written by
Luke, others attributed It to Barnabas, or Clement of Eome. To
conjectures so ignorant and baseless Photius himself attributes
no Importance, and he says that the question of the EvangeUst's
authorsMp is evident on the surface.
The only statement in any of the Fathers which can be
regarded as derogatory to the authority of the Acts is the
incidental remark of St. Chrysostom, at the beginning of his
HomUies (a.d. 401), that many persons knew nothing of the
existence of the book. Probably the remark only applies
to persons at Constantinople, who may have been but recently
converted, and who were probably very ignorant of aU the
sacred books except the Gospels. It must be remembered that
manuscripts were rare and precious, and as the Acts was
addressed to one individual it was less Ukely than other books
to get into universal circulation. The suggestions that it was
-written by any other author than St. Luke have been so contrary
to aU avaUable evidence, and have found so few foUowers,
that it is quite unnecessary to enter into anyserious refutation
of them.
For indeed the internal e-vidence that the book was written
by the Third Evangehst is even stronger than the external.
(i.) Both the Gospel and the Acts are prefaced by,a carefuUy
composed introduction m which the works are dedicated to a cer
tain TheophUus, to whom in the Gospel is given the honourable
title of "most exceUent."
(U.) In both treatises there is a remarkable identity of style.
Nearly a hundred pMases and idioms are common to the Gospel
and Acts. Some words seem to belong characteristicaUy to
St. Luke and St. Paul almost alone among the sacred writers.
Thus the beautiful word x"P'5, "grace" or "favour," does
not occur in the first two EvangeUsts, and only in one brief
clause of St. John, (i. 14—17); but it occurs eight times in St.
Luke's Gospel, seventeen times in the Acts, and very frequently
in the Epistles of St. Paid.-)- The verb ^"ptXo/^ai occurs only in
the Epistles of St. Paid and seven times in -the Gospel of St.
Luke and the Acts.
(iii.) Further than this, it is a curious fact that St. Luke, both
in the Gospel and the Acts, has two styles. His own proper style
* It also occurs ten times in 1 Peter — an Epistle which in many respects
shows a Pauline tone.
t Euseb., S. X iii. 25.

94

BOOK BY BOOK.

is more correct and classical than that of any other writer in
the New Testament ; but there are entire cha])ters, alike in the
Gospel and the Acts, in which we find a totally different style,
largely coloured by Hebraisms, which shows at once that the
writer, by a method peculiarly Ms own, is Incorporating writ
ten documents or has verbaUy taken down the testimony of eye
witnesses. (iv.) Besides this curious unity of style and literary charac
teristics, there is a close resemblance in tone between the Gospel
and the Acts. Both are marked by a fine geniality, a delicate
insight, a singular sweetness, which becomes still more fuU of
charm from its alUance with a fervid enthusiasm. The writer
is a consummate artist who produces the greatest effect by the
fewest touches. Partly because he is dealing with facts known
to him either directly or mediately at first hand, and partly be
cause he was endowed with a high but unconscious literary sMU,
he gives us the most vivid delineation of characters and events.
"Without any long descriptions or psychological analysis, Philip,
Barnabas, Stephen, James, Herod Agrippa I., Felix, Festus,
Herod Agrippa II. , GaUio, and many other personages, both
heathen and Christian, are made to stand out in distinct person
ality from the fewbrief pages wMch furnish us with so vast a
range of priceless information.
(v.) There is further a unity of thought in the Gospel and the
Acts. They reveal to us that the author was a man of large
sympathies, who, in Ms general theology no less than in sepa
rate expressions, was attached to that view of the Gospel doc
trine — ^that "Gospel to the GentUes" — of wMch St. Paid was
" the vessel of election."
We may then regard it as unquestionable that St. Luke
was the author of the Acts. With supreme modesty he entirely
suppresses Ms own name, and he is only mentioned tMee times
in Scripture, as "the beloved physician" (Col. iv. 14), the
" feUow-labourer " and most faithful companion of St Paul in
Ms first and second Eoman imprisonments (Philem. 24 ; 2 Tim.
iv. 11). From the context of the first passage it has been m-
f erred that he was not " of the circumcision," and there can there
fore be but little doubt that he was " a proselyte of the gate."
That he was a Syrian of Antioch is probable from internal evi
dence, as well as from the statements of Eusebius and Jerome •
and if the reading "while we [i7/xoi>/] were assembled together ''
in Acts xi. 28 be genuine,* he first made the acquaintance of
St, Paul at Antioch.
• It is found in D (the Codex Bezse), and was kno-vra to Augustine.

THE ACTS OF THE APOSTLES. 95
AU that we further know about him is deduced from those sec
tions of the Acts in which he uses the word " we " throughout.
These " we " sections, as they are called, show us that ho
joined the little missionary band of the Apostle at Troas (Acts
xvi. 10), and, becoming one ofthe earliest Evangelists of Europe,
accompanied him to Macedonia, probably in his character as
" a physician," since at that time St. Paul had been suffering
from an acute attack of his " thorn in the flesh." He seems to
have stayed behind at PMUppi (xviii. 1 " they "), where we stUl
find Mm after a lapse of seven years (xx. 5). He was appointed
one of the delegates to collect and convey to Jerusalem the
contributions of the Gentile CMIstlans (2 Cor. viii. 18), and he
went with St. Paul to the Holy City (xxi. 18). It is probable
that he stayed with St. Paul during his two years' Imprisonment
at Csesarea, and that during that time his Gospel was partly
written. He accompanied the Apostle on his disastrous voyage
to Eome, and lived with Mm, in all probability, until Ms
Uberatlon. TheophUus, to whom he dedicates his work, may have been
the wealthy Antiochene Christian mentioned in the Clementines
as having lent his house to St. Peter for Christian assemblies;
and if so St. Luke may have been his physician-slave or freed-
man. Contractions, like Lucaa for Lucanus, are common in
the names of slaves. There is not the sUghtest evidence that
he was a painter, and our earliest authority for his bupposed
martyrdom is a vague reference of St. Gregory of Nazianzus to
wards the close of the fourth century. That he was famUiar
with the sea is clear from the accurate though unprofessional aUu
sions made In Ms minute descriptions of St. Paul's voyages, and
it is not an unreaEonable conjecture that he may have some
times practised his healing art In the huge and densely-crowded
merchant ships which whitened the Mediterranean with their
sails during the summer months. His knowledge of medicino
is abundantly iUustrated by the medical language which is found
in both of his writings, and which has even left some marked
traces on the phraseology of St. Paul.
2. The Main Subject of the Booh. — The contents are indicated by
the title, " The Acts of the Apostles ; " but whether tMs title
came from the author MmseK or not is very uncertain. The
manuscripts vary between "Acts ; " " Acts of Apostles ; " " Acts
of the Apostles ; " and "The Acts of the Apostles." ' "Acts"
is the title given in the SInaltIc Manuscript, and is a name fre
quently used also In apocryphal literature, to describe what we
would caU "Memoirs." The book was quoted by the learned
Clement of Alexandria as "Acts of the Apostles."

96 BOOK BY BOOK.
Strictly spes.Mng the fuUer title — The Acts of the Apostles —
is not accurate. It errs by excess ; for the eleven, as a body,
play but a very subordinate part in the book, and of individual
Apostles we hear very Uttle except of St. Peter and St. Paul.
The mention of St. John is quite incidental, and he only appears
in a secondary capacity on tMee occasions (Iii. 1 ; iv. ; xu. 2).
The martyrdom of St. James the Elder is mentioned (xu. 2),
but nothingfurther is told us about any of the rest of the eleven
except St. Peter. On the other hand we have certam " acts " of
the two deacons PMlip and Stephen, and of James, the Lord's
brother. (I.) But even the recorded "Acts" of St. Peter and St. Paul
are extremely incomplete. St. Luke tells us notMng about St.
Peter after the Council of Jesusalem, and makes no mention of
Ms memorable dispute with St. Paul at Antioch, Ms subsequent
journeys, or his martjTdom at Eome. And minute as are many
of the details furnished about St. Paul, the EvangeUst narrates
but a tithe of his manifold adventures. If that part of the Acts
wMch narrates his mission-labours deserves the title of "the
CMistian Odyssey," it Is an Odyssey both fragmentary and
discontinuous. Absolutely invaluable as a source of information respecting
large portions of the Apostle's life, yet the Aets does not even
mention so much as one of Ms five scourgings with Jevdsh
thongs ; one only of Ms three beatings with Eoman rods ; one
only of the three ship-wrecks which preceded the one so elabo
rately recorded. Two only are mentioned of Ms traditional
seven imprisonments.* Nothing Is said of the night and day in
the deep. There are even whole classes of the Apostle's hard
ships and perils wMch are passed over without notice ; such as
the perUs of rivers, perils of robbers, perils in the -wilderness,
perils among false brethren, and the miseries of hunger, thirst,
fasting, and nakedness. f
It Is stiU more singular that although St. Luke, as a friend of
St. Paul during Ms long Eoman imprisonments, must have been
famUIar with his letters, and may even have acted at times a.s
his amanuensis, yet he does not so much as aUude to the fact
that the Apostle ever -wrote a single Epistie. Titus was a be
loved, faithful, and able companion of St. Paul, yet Ms name
is immentioned ; nor does the writer aUude, except very inci
dentaUy, to his own labours In the cause of the Gospel. Ob-vi-
ously therefore the Acts does not pretend to be a complete
Mstory. Considered In that Ught it would be fragmentary and
* Clem. Eom. Ep. ad Cor. 5, tn-rdeic hcixd ihookaac
t 2 Cor. xi. 2a— 27. ^ ^

THE ACTS OF THE APOSTLES. 9*
imperfect. It is only by combinuig the numerous data of St.
Paul's Epistles with the events narrated in the Acts that we are
enabled to grasp their fuU significance, or to gain an adequate
conception of aU that the Apostle of the Gentiles was or did.
(ii.) How we are to account for tMs phenomenon -wiU be seen
in the 5th and 6th sections of this chapter, when we deal with
the obj ect which the -writer had in view, and the method which he
adopted. MeanwhUe we may pause to observe that the avowed
fragmentariness of the narrative furmshes us with the most
ample and unsuspected means for testing its accuracy. That it
was -written independently of St. Paul's Epistles is admitted, and
it is certain that errors would have been detected in hundreds of
incidental allusions if the narrative had not been entirely faith
ful. As it is, the separate detaUs furnished by the Epistles
furmsh us -with a multitude of undesigned coincidences, and
may be tesselated with St. Luke's narrative into a perfect mo
saic. Paley in Ms BLora Paulinee has furnished a striMng proof,
and one that might be indefinitely elaborated, that the Acts can
thus stand the severest test of comparison in the minutest de
taUs -with a series of genuine and (so to speak) accidental com
positions of the very Apostie with whom the narrative is mainly
concerned. (ui.) The book covers a period of about thirty years in the
Mstoiy of Christianity, from the Ascension, in a.d. 33 of the
received chronology, to the close of St. Paul's first Boman
imprisonment, about March, a,d..63. We see at a glance that it
falls into two great sections, of wnich the first (i. — xu.) is mainly
occupied -with the work of St. Peter ; and the second (iui. —
xxviu.) is devoted almost exclusively to the missions, sufferings,
and controversies of St. Paul. On another principle of division
we might regard the first section as consisting of chapters i. — ix.
31, which narrate the estabUshment of the Church in Palestine ;
and the second from ix. 32 to the end of the book, as designed
to teU the Mstory of the extension of church membership to
GentUes, and the radiation of the Church over Asia Minor,
Greece, and the Western world as far as Eome.
(iv.) The first fourteen verses are introductory. "We may
infer their preciousness from the fact that in these alone we
learn that only forty days elapsed between the Eesurrection and
the Ascension. They mention the inauguration of the Mngdom,
and record Christ's " promise of the Father " and of "the bap
tism by the Holy Ghost." These were the true secret of that
stupendous victory gained over the world " by the irresistible
might of weakness " wMch sceptical Mstorians have vainly
endeavoured to explain. The eighth verse nught weU stand as
G

98 EOOIl BY BOOK.
the motto for the whole book : "Ye shaU receive power when
the Holy Ghost is come upon you ; and ye shaU be my witnesses,
both in Jerusalem, and in all Judasa, and In Samaria, and
unto the uttermost parts of the earth." The first section of the
book records the fulfilment of the earlier part of this promise,
and carries us down to the conversion of St. Paul ; the latter
portion of the book illustrates the triumphant beginmngs of its
complete and final accomplishment.
(v.) The analysis of the book is, briefly, as foUows : —
Introduction, i. 1 — 3.
I. The Founding ofthe Church (i. 4 — II. 47).
The Ascension and last instructions of Christ (i. 4 — ii.); the
election of Matthias (i. 12 — 26). The Day of Pentecost and the
state of the primitive Church (Ii, 1 — 47).
II. The Church in Jerusalem (Hi, — vll.).
Miracles, testimony, and sufferings of St. Peter, together with
the first persecutions (iii. — v. 42).
The election of deacons (v. 1 — 7).
The Acts of St, Stephen (vi. 8— vU. 60).
III. The Church in Judcca and Samaria (-viii. — ix. 43).
The Acts of Philip ; the visit of Peter and John to Samaria ;
the conversion of the Ethiopian eunuch (viu.).
The conversion of Saul (is. 1 — 30).
The Acts of Peter at Lydda and Joppa (ix. 31 — 43).
TV. The Transference of Chureh Membership to the Gentiles.
The vision of Peter and the conversion of Cornelius (x.).
The objections of Je-wish particularism broken down (xi.
1—18). The capital of CMistianity graduaUy transferred from Jeru
salem to Antioch, by the combined work of Barnabas aud Saul
(xi. 19—30).
Persecution of Herod Agrippa I. Martyrdom of James. Death
of Herod (xii.).
V. The Church among the Gentiles, and their relation to the Jewish
Christians. a. First missionary journey of Paul and Barnabas tMough
Cyprus, Pamphylia, and Pisidia (xiii., xiv.).
The CouncU of Jerusalem (xv. 1 — 35).
yS Second missionary journey of Paul with SUas and Timothy
to Asia Mmor and Europe (xv. 36 — xviii. 22).
y Third missionary journey to Asia Minor, Macedonia, and
Greece, and Paul's return to Jerusalem (xviii. 23 — xxi. 16).
VI. Final Acts of St. Paul.
His arrest, imprisonment, and defence before the Sanhedrim
(xxi. 17 — ^xxiu. 11).

THE ACTS OF THE APOSTLES. 99
His removal to Csesarea, and Ms trials before Felix, Festus,
and Herod Agrippa II. (xxiii. 12 — xxvi. 32).
His disastrous journey to Eome (xxvii. 1 — xxviii. 15).
His imprisonment and work at Eome (xxviii. 16 — 31).
(vi.) But an analysis alone can give no impression of the
Mstorical value of the facts recorded. St, Luke, and he alone,
enables us to take our stand by the very cradle of the infant
Church; E-ven in the first chapter we learn the priceless details
that the disciples who first met at Jerusalem were only one hun
dred and twenty in number; that the free attendance of holy
women at that earUest gathering inaugurated a new era of
emancipation for half the human race ; and that the Eesurrection
— for obviously no other adequate explanation can be suggested
— had so powerfuUy affected the minds of " the Brethren of the
Lord," that, whereas they had Mtherto been cold if not hostile
to His Messianic claims, they henceforth left the world to
which they had once belonged,"* and braving its hatred fiung
in their lot with the foUowers of the obscure and persecuted
GaUleans. (vii.) How important again is the account of the sweet and
simple Uves of the early believers ; of their mistaken attempt at
communism, and its impUed failure ; of the wise attitude adopted
by Eabbi Gamaliel, the worthy grandson of the noble Hillel ;
of the brUliant career and eloquent speech of St, Stephen, which
is the earUest attempt at a complete philosophy of Jewish history ;
of the first persecution ; of St. Paul's conversion ; of the epoch-
maMng vision of St. Peter at Joppa, which practically decided
that Christianity was not to be a Jewish sect, but the religion of
the world ; of the manner in which the narrow and rigid Juda
ism of the Pharisaic Christians of Jerusalem was gradually
expanded into universality ; of the abandonment of insistence
on circumcision and on the distinctive signs of Jewish pros*ly-
tism, wMch was eitorted, by the revelation of God in history,
even from the strict Judaic attitude of St. James the Lord's
brother ; of that first Christian Council at Jerusalem, which was
to be the precursor of such numerous gatherings, but in which
laymen no less than presbyters took a prominent part !
How instructive again is the glimpse which St. Luke gives us
that the bold initiative of preaching to uncircumcised Gentiles
was due to unkno-wn disciples who had been scattered by the
very persecution in which the future Apostle of the Gentiles had
taken the foremost place ! f
How much should we have lost had we not learnt from his
pages the origin and first use of the name. " CMistian," once a
* John vii. 4; Mark iii. 21, &c. f xi, 20 ; read "Grreeka."
G 2

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

THE ACTS OF THE APOSTLES. 101
the best and greatest, brief and discontinuous as it is. It has
been well observed that only from the Acts of the Apostles are
we able to understand that union of the apparently antagonistic
elements of Judaism and Christianity, which would otherwise be
as impossible to explain as a confluence of the waters of the
Tiber and the Jordan. To very few since the world began has
it been granted to render to mankind two services so unique as
those rendered by the retiring and modest Evangelist. In his
Gospel — "the most beautiful book in the world " — he has given
us an exquisite picture of the Saviour of Mankind ; and in the
Acts — narrating events of wMch he was often an eye-witness,
and in which he took so honourable a share — ^he has used his
sacred gifts of patient research, keen insight, lucid expression,
and large-hearted cathoUcity, to enable us to watch the dawn of
Christianity as it broadened and brightened into the boundless
day. The Gospel and the Acts occupy but a few pages, but those
few pages are among the most valuable wMch were ever penned
by a human hand.
3. Where was the booh written ? — The place where the book was
-written cannot be stated -with any certainty, but as it suddenly
drops the curtam upon St. Paul after he had spent two years
as a prisoner in his own hired room at Eome, it is at least
possible that it was -written during the enforced leisure which
the Evangelist enjoyed during that period, and may have been
given to the world at the conclusion of those two years, about
A.D. 63.
4. What were the sources on which St. Luke depended? — The
answer to this question furnishes an iUustration of St. Luke's
method. It was obviously not Ms object to narrate aU the facts
with wMch he must have been acquainted. He selected his ma
terials, partly no doubt because he made it Ms literary habit to
do so, but partly because he had special objects in view. At the
beginning of Ms Gospel he lays claim to that thorough knowledge
which is derived from careful and independent research. In
-writing the Acts he reUes partly on facts which he had observed
as an eye-witness, and partly on those which he had derived from
trustworthy sources. The "we sections" (xvi. 10 — xvii. 1, and
XX. 5 — xxviii. 31) are broken by the years which St. Luke ap
pears to have spent at Philippi, but they are marked by the
inimitable detail and -vividness which are intrinsic signs of truth.
For aU the later portions of his history he could rely on the
personal testimony of St. Paul, obtained during long hours of
daUy familiarity. If, as seems probable, he was with St. Paul
during Ms incarceration at Csesarea, he would there have had
ample opportunities of seeing and consulting the members of the
Churches of Palestine, who had been famUIar from the first with

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

THE ACTS OF THE APOSTLES. 103
name of Sergius Paulus, discovered by General Cesnola, are aU
unsuspected witnesses of Ms truthful care ; and Jewish and
Pagan historians bear him out to the letter in his account of the
famine in the days of Claudius ; the vanity and the strange deaith
of the popularity-hunting Agrippa I. ; the cosmopolitan insouci
ance of his son, Agrippa II. ; the greed of Felix ; the fairness of
Festus ; the disdainful retirement of Gallio ; the existence of an
Italian band at Csesarea ; Claudius's decree for the expulsion of
Jews from Eome ; the dialect of Lycaonia ; the traces left by the
local legends of Baucis and PMlemon, in the antique Paganism
of that rude district; the sUver aediculae of Artemis, which
formed a staple trade at Ephesus ; the Ephesian love of amulets
and magic ; the colonial privUeges of PMUppi ; the mode of
deaUng with Eoman prisoners, and the minutest detaUs of ancient
navigation. Places so obscure as the Fair Havens and Lassea at Crete can
stUl be identified by the indications of St. Luke ; and he has
been proved, to be exact even in so smaU and remote an incident
as the soundings, the nature of the bottom, and the conformation
of the shore off Point Koura, on the north-east side of the island
of Malta.*
5. What was St. Lutce's object in writing the Acts ? — The first
and simplest answer to this question is, of course, that St. Luke
had received the charism of a sacred historian, and wished to
delineate " alike the individual, the congregational, and the eccle
siastical Ufe of the Christians." With a prophetic conviction of
¦the awful importance of eventa which occupied but a very smaU
portion of the world's attention, he determined to commit to
¦writing, for the benefit of TheopMlus and of the Church in
general — but with special reference to Gentile Christians — the
tMngs which he had seen and known. No one felt more strongly
than St. Luke that the course of the world's history was being
guided, not by might nor by power, but by the Spirit of the
Lord of Hosts. The Holy Spirit is alluded to more frequently
than in any other book of the Bible — no less, indeed, than
seventy-one times. The Acts might almost he caUed "the
Gospel of the Holy Ghost."
But beside this general object I see no reason to doubt that
he was guided by special considerations.
It has been charged against St. Luke, almost as if it were a
* It is true that there is au unsolved difficulty about Theudas (Acts v. 36),
in which St. Luke has fallen into an anachronism if he and Josephus are
speaking of the same person and if Josephus is right. But there is no proof
that the Theudas of St. Luke may not be a different person ; and it the
Theudas intended be the same, we have far more reason to trust St. Luke
than to trust the careless and often untrustworthy Jewish historian.

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

THE ACTS OF THE APOSTLES. 105
i. St. Luke has been charged, not only with producing a
picture which was purposely toned down to disguise the diffe
rences of opinion between the Judaic and Ohristian party in the
Church — a charge wMch rests on complete misapprehension of
the scope of Ms work — ^but with the graver fault of manipulating
Ms narratives so as to suggest an unreal paraUel between the
two great Apostles whose acts he chiefly sets forth. Thus, it is
said, both St. Peter and St. Paul heal a cripple ; they both raise
the dead ; they both confront sorcerers ; the prominent events in
the Ufe of both are preceded by visions ; both are at times
severe ; both are worshipped. The answer to this charge is very
simple. So far as there is any resemblance between " the signs
of an Apostle" wrought by either of them, they are resemblances
which arise from the analogous circumstances by which they
were surrounded, and the analogous gifts with which they were
endowed. Moreover, the sUghtest examination suffices to show
that the differences of the events and miracles are at least as
observable as their general likeness.
ii. St. Luke's method has been described by the German word
sparsamkeit, which implies the economical selections of those
details only which seemed alike Illustrative and permanently
valuable, with the further conditions that he could vouch for
them if possible by personal testimony, or, if not, by documents
or information of indisputable authority. The special points on
wMch he desired to lay emphasis have been variously stated
because his book is many-sided in its character. We may safely
assert that his primary object was to illustrate the growth of
Christianity in the Church itself and its spread tMoughout the
world, and to show that this was due to "the power of Christ's
resurrection " and the grace of the Holy Spirit. AU other objects
were subordinate to that of setting forth how CMIstiamty burst
the swaddUng-bands of Judaism, and conquered the hostUity of
the heathen. In furtherance of this design the book begins at
Jerusalem and ends at Eome; it begins when Christianity ia
stUl a strictly Jewish sect of the circumcised consisting of one
hundred and twenty persons, and it ends when converts could
be counted by thousands, and aU Gentile Christians were autho
ritatively emancipated from the minute and burdensome require
ments hitherto demanded of aU proselytes to the Mosaic law.
ui. Judged from this point of -view there is no real abruptness
in the close of the Acts. It ends with a word of the most weighty
and sonorous cadence, dxajAvTajs, an epitrite (o  ) evidently
chosen as a suitable termination ; just as the word lird^irep, an
antispastus {<j - - J), is, in accordance with ancient laws of taste,
chosen as the first word of the Gospel. We may be sure that
St. Luke ends where he intended to end, and by breaMng off at

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

THE ACTS OF THE APOSTLES. 107
fuUy than the Pagan world was shaken by the sack of Eome in
A.D. 410. There is not so much as a single allusion to Imply
that the Holy City was not still existing -and flourishing when
the book appeared. We have therefore good reason to believe
that it was permitted to see the light as soon as it was finished,
and that this was soon after the period at which it closed.
8. Characteristics. — I wiU conclude with two remarks.
One is the poetic grandeur which attaches. If not to the com
position of the book itself, yet to the historic circumstances
wMch it so vividly narrates. One of the finest descriptions In
the mighty iambics of Greek tragedy is that in which .iEschylus
teUs how the fire-signals of Agamemnon flashed from MU to MU
the message of the fall pf Troy, and how the " courler-fiame "
gleamed from Ida, and leapt over the sea till its last blaze from
the summit of Cithseron aroused the watchman on the roof
of the Atridse. The story of the Acts has always reminded me
of this noble scene. St. Luke, a poet and more than a poet,
sets forth with exquisite sklU how the beacon-lights of Chris-
tiamty shone from Jerusalem to Antioch, and from Antioch to
Ephesus, and to Troas, and then, leaping over the sea to Philippi,
gleamed on to Athens and Corinth, until at last they were
kindled in the very palace and Praetorian camp of the Csesars in
Imperial Eome. The beam of dawn which had shone amid the
wintry darkness at Bethlehem had broadened so gloriously that
in one short generation it had filled Asia, Greece, and Italy with
the light of heaven.
Lastly, the Acts of the Apostles, besides its supreme historic
interest and Importance, is full of the deepest spiritual lessons.
Luther said with justice that it might be regarded as nothing
less than a comment on the Epistles of St. Paul. Church history
often furnishes very sad reading, except to those who delight in
the growth of formalism. But this faithful and glowing history
of the Church's earliest days shows us her pure ideal before her
orange-flower had begun to fade. It reveals to us the true secret
of the Church's invincIbUIty as consisting in her simplicity, her
sincerity, her faith and courage even in tfie""mid8t of savage
persecution. ' It shows us that " God is the only final public
opinion," and that "one with God is always in a majority."
Never can the golden candlestick of any Church be removed if
it be true to the high lessons of faith, and hope, and love, which
enabled the Church of the Apostles to triumph over the banded
antagonism of the world's vice and hatred, and to prevail, not
only over the idolatry without, but also over the false types of
orthodoxy and false types of goodness which sometimes arise
within her fold.

THE EPISTLE OF PAUL THE APOSTLE

ROMANS.

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

THE EPISTLE OF PAUL THE APOSTLE TO THE ROMANS. 109
But before leaving Corinth for Jerusalem he writes this Epistle
to the Eomans to intimate his intention, and as far as possible to
pave the way for his teacMng.
2. Date. — From the Book of Acts (xx. 1 — 3) we learn that
Paul's journey to Jerusalem -with the contributions for the poor
saints was made at the close of his -wintering in Corinth, and pre
sumably in the spring of the year 59 a.d. This also was the date
of his letter to Eome, wMch he sent apparently by the hand of
Phoebe (xvi. 1), a deaconess of the church of Cenchrea, the port
of Corinth. He wrote it whUe living in the house of Gains
(xvi. 23), who was a Corinthian (1 Cor. i. 14). It would also
appear from 2 Tim. iv. 20 that Erastus, -who sends Ms saluta
tions to the Christians in Eome (xvi. 23), was chamberlain of
Corinth. 3. The Church in Rome. — Such being the immediate occasion of
tMs Epistle its contents would necessarUy be determined by the
character of the Church to wMch it was addressed. Unfortunately
very Uttle is known of the origin and constituent elements of the
Church m Eome. For more than a hundred years there had been
a large and gro-wing and influential Jewish population m Eome,
and tius population was necessarily in reg^ular commumcation with
Jerusalem. Jews from Eome heard Peter preach at Pentecost, and
when they returned to the capital they no doubt carried with
them the Gospel they had heard. And so far the tradition wMch
ascribes to tMs Church a Petrine origin is probably correct. The
nucleus of a Christian commumty thus formed would be aug
mented in the natural course of the ceaseless communication
wMch was maintained between Eome and the outlying provinces.
And yet from the accoimt given us in the Book of Acts (xxviii. 17)
of Paul's reception in Eome, it would appear as if even at that
time, nearly thirty years after Pentecost, the leading Jews of
Eome knew littie of the CMistian Church or its tenets. This
ignorance on their part, whether real or feigned, cannot be
accepted as evidence that there were no Jewish Christians there.
For both the edict of Claudius, which a few years before had
expeUed the Jews from Eome on the ground of riots connected
with Christianity ( Chresto impulsore), and the massacre of the CMis
tians by Nero in the year 64 a.d., show that, though Uttle might
be kno-wn of their belief, CMistians were recognised as an appre
ciable element in the Eoman population, and that to a casual ob
server the Christians and the Jews were not distinctly separable.
4. Gentile and Jewish Elements. — If we examme the Epistle
itself -with a view to discover whether the Jewish or the Gentile
element predominated in the Church at Eome, we are led to the
conclusion that whUe the majority of the Christians were GentUes,

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

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

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

THE EPISTLE OF PAUL THE APOSTLE TO THE EOMANS. 113
righteous, no, not one " ; and what it says it of course says to
them who are under the law ; to Jews, not to Gentiles. It means,
"There is no Jew righteous, no, not one" (ill. 19). If, then,
men are to be justified, it must be not by the Jewish law but by
faith ; by that which the Gentile as weU as the Jew may have.
Jew and Gentile alike must put away boasting, and on an equal
footing of humlUty accept God's grace. Thus was even Abraham
justified (iv.) ; righteousness was imputed to Mm without works
meriting it and without circumcision. As he beUeved God, and
trusted that God would bless him, and did not think of earning
the blessing God promised of His own grace, so must we accept
the peace offered us in Christ. For it is in Christ God's love is
now sho-wn, and in CMist His righteousness is now revealed
(v.). Neither wiU our abandonment of the idea that we must
earn the blessedness God gives lead us to undervalue holi
ness and Uve in sin. On the contrary, the acceptance of Christ
and the life that is in Christ involves renunciation of sin and
consecration of the whole self to God. The spirit of life which is
in Christ makes men truly sons of God, and carries them on to
perfect righteousness and lasting glory (vi. — viu.).
But the very triumph Paul feels In so saving a Gospel suggests
to Mm the condition of his unbeUeving f eUow-countrymen, and
in chapters ix., x., and xi. he discloses his thoughts regarding
their future. His turning to the Gentiles was not agreeable to
Ms feelings. Not only so, he was perplexed in his mind by the
apparent f utUity of the Gospel among the very people who, in so
many respects, were most carefuUy prepared to receive it. The
Jews seemed to have been intended to be speciaUy Christ's people,
but CMist's coming had reaUy alienated and ruined them. This
unexpected result demanded a phUosophy of Mstory or scheme of
providence wMch might satisfactorily account for it. Wherever
Paul went he found that the prepared Jews did not accept the
Messiah as readUy as the GentUes did. What did tMs mean ?
Have the Jews no advantage ?
Many of Paul's enemies might think that he, the universalist
who broke down aU waUs of partition, would say the advantage
was small. Many of the GentUes might suppose that he who
had been insulted, beaten, outraged by the Jews would be care
less of their fate. But, on the contrary, his heart bleeds for them
and yearns over them. He would accept any fate for himself,
if thereby he could alter the fate they had brought on themselves
by their unbelief. He wiU not suffer the GentUes to suppose
that, because he turns to them, the Jews are for ever cast off' by
God. He Is convinced their rejection is but for a time, and that
their acceptance of CMist wUl be as a new bhth to the world.
H

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

FIEST AND SECOND EPISTLES OF PAUL THE APOSTLE
TO ITT'W
CORINTHIANS.
1. Corinth. — At the date of St. Paul's visit to Corinth it was
the cMef city of the Eoman province of Achaia and the head
quarters of the Proconsul. Its natural situation on the Isthmus,
commanding on the eastern side the port of Cenchrea, and on
the western that of Lechseum, had from the earliest times given
it importance. Eather than encounter the risks of doubling
Cape Malea "of bad fame," the seamen bringing goods from
Asia to Italy preferred to unlade at the one port and relade at
the other. So commonly was this done that arrangements were
made for conveymg the smaUer ships themselves across the
Isthmus, and shortly after the Apostle's visit the Emperor Nero
cut the first turf of a proposed, but never finished, canal. To
one approacMng the Isthmus from either sea, the most con
spicuous object was an abrupt and massive rock, nearly two
thousand feet Mgh, known as the Acrocorinthus. On a slightly
elevated platform at the northern base of tMs citadel the city of
Corinth was buUt.
But in the year 146 b.o. the ancient city was completely
destroyed by the Eoman general Mummlus. For a century it
lay demoUshed and deserted ; but in the year 44 B.C. Julius Csesar
rebuUt and repeopled it, cMefly with Eoman veterans and freed-
men. Hence, many of the Corinthians mentioned by St. Paul
bear names wMch indicate their Eoman or servUe origin, Quar-
tus, Crispus, Gains, Justus, Fortunatus, Achaicus, The city
soon regained its former size and opulence, and also, unfortu
nately, its old reputation for profligacy. As Eenan says, ' ' the
whole city was Uke a vast pandemonium, where the numerous
strangers, the saUors particularly, resorted to spend their wealth
fooUsUy." "To Uve as they do at Corinth " was, in St. Paul's
time, the equivalent for Uving in luxury and Ucentiousness. It
H 2

116 BOOK BY BOOK.
was a city, too, in which Eoman brutaUty and Oriental -vice were
not the only obstacles to Christianity. Greek factiousness and
vanity, the sophistries of a shallow phUosophy and the verbal
victories of the demagogue, found for themselves a congenial
soil in this mixed population. No city could give a fuUer repre
sentation of the various weaknesses and vices of the ancient
world, or seem a less promising field for the Gospel.
2. Condition of the Church. — How the Apostle of the GentUes
reached this focus of heathenism, how he founded a CMistian,
Church, and how he defeated the machinations of the unbelieving
Jews may be read in the Book of Acts, c. xviii. For eighteen
months he remained In Corinth, partly, no doubt, induced by Ms
success, partly by perception of the dangers ahead. At length,
in the spring of the year 54 a.d., he leaves to be present at
Pentecost in Jerusalem. After celebrating the feast he proceeds
to Antioch, where he spends "some time," and after visiting
Phrygia, Galatia, and other parts of Asia Minor, he reaches
Ephesus either late In 54 or early in 65. Here he remains for
a'bout three years. MeanwhUe, ApoUos, who had made a marked
impreeslon In Ephesus, had gone to Achaia, and was no doubt
helpful in restraining the evil tendencies of the Corinthian
Church. But in spite of all Christian effort the pressure of their heathen
surroundings was too much for many of the Corinthian converts,
and in 1 Cor. v. 9, 10, there is trace of a letter previously -ynritten
to them by St. Paul, In which he had prohibited intercourse
with fornicators. Idolaters, covetous persons, and extortioners.
Either wilfully or Ignorantly misunderstanding him, they had
replied that society in Corinth was wholly composed of such per
sons, and that compliance with Ms prohibition Involved their
going out of the world altogether. With this reply they
laid before him a number of other difficulties ( 1 Cor. -vU. 1 •
viii. 1 ; xii. 1, &c.). This letter from Corinth, together with the
oral Information he had received from members of Chloe's house
hold, who had come to Ephesus, calls forth the first extant
Epistle to the Corinthians.
3. The Questions before the Apostle. — The sad state of matters in
the Church of Corinth, which is disclosed in this Epistle, shows
us the kind of work required of one who in those days had the
care of aU the Churches. A host of difficult questions poured
in upon him, questions regarding the very foundations of the
faith, questions of morality and of casuistry, questions regardmg
public worship and social intercourse. Are we to dine with our
heathen relatives ? May we intermarry with them ; or, if aheady
married, are we to divorce our heathen partners ; or may we

FIRST AND SECOND EPISTLES TO THE CORINTHIANS. 117
marry at all ? Can slaves continue in the service of heathen
masters ? Can we restrain those who speak with tongues and
are inspired ?
But the mere difficulty of answering such questions was not
that which filled Paul's eyes with tears as he answered their
inquiries (2 Cor. ii. 4). It was the self-satisfied vanity that shone
through even their request for advice (viU. 1), the evidence
wMch some ot their questions bore to the presence of a restless
Gfreek intellectualism (xv. 36) and Utigiousness (vi. 1 — 11), and
of a potent residuum of Corinthian sensuaUty (vi. 16 ; x. 8 ; xi. 21),
and above all, the tidings that had reached Mm of their party-
spirit and of -their scandalizing even the heathen by retaining in
their communion a man who had married his step-mother (v. 2) ;
it was this which excited in Paul's mind the deepest misgivings
regarding the future of the Church.
The calmness and good temper with which he exposes the sin
of getting drunk at the Lord's table or the scandalous disorder
of their meetings for worship are not less remarkable than the
sagacity with which he pronounces upon their various difficulties,
and the ease, promptitude, and finality with which he sets them
free from errors of opinion. We can never be sufficientiy
thankful that in that primitive age, when the Christian Church
was " pawing to get free " from its natal clay of heathenism, it
found one strong hand to help it, one sane and balanced judg
ment to mark out boldly and clearly the boundaries of right
and wrong.
4. Scope of the First Epistle. — No analysis of tMs Epistle neej
be given, for its divisions are weU marked. It consists of luciiX
judgments ou a series of points, and not of one prolonged argu
ment whose steps might call for explanation. After the usual
introduction the writer rebukes their divisions and party -spirit
(i. 10 — iv. 21) ; in chapters v. and vi. he aUudes to the scandals
wMch had arisen by unlawful alliances and by a readiness to carry
brethren before heathen tribunals ; he then discusses the ques
tions relating to marriage in vii., and in viii, ix., and x. the diffi
culties arising in connection with idol-sacrifices. The abuses which
had crept into their meetings for worship, the unveiling of women,
and the Irregularities in administering the Lord's Supper, are
rebuked and corrected In c. xi. This leads to a full explanation
of the principles of Christian feUowship, of the relative value of
the diverse gifts possessed by the various members of the body
of Christ, and of the order which should be observed In the use
of these gifts (xii., xiii., xiv.). Then foUows the argument in
favour of the resurrection (xv.), and the Epistle closes with the
usual personal explanations and greetings.

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

FIRST AND SECOND EPISTLES TO THE CORINTHIANS. 119
7. Date of the Second Epistle. — The relative, though not the
absolute date of 2 Corinthians, is also easily fixed from the
various aUusions to the -writer's movements wMch it contains.
By these aUusions (i. 8 — 10 ; ii. 12, 13 ; vii. 6) we can trace St.
Paul's movements and feelings as he passed through Asia Minor
from Ephesus to Troas, and thence to Macedonia, where at length
Titus joined Mm with reassuring news from Corinth. It was on
receipt of this news he penned the Second Epistle, so that it is
separated from the First by only a few months, and was sent
from Macedonia while Paul was on Ms way to Corinth.
8. Its Purpose. — The object of the letter was chiefly to express
Ms satisfaction at the good results of Ms former letter and of the
mission of Titus. He first of aU endeavours to remove any sore
ness wMch might be lingering in the minds of the Corinthians
owing to his visiting Macedonia before coming to Corinth. He
had originaUy Intended to pass tMough Corinth on Ms way to
Macedonia (i. 16), and had abandoned this plan not because of
mere fickleness, or beause it now suited Mm better to adopt
another, but because he could not bear to come among them
merely to rebuke and find fault (i. 17 ; U. 13). 'While waiting
for such tidings from Corinth as would enable him to visit them
in friendliness and with approval he preaches the Gospel as ha
has opportunity, and the mention of this leads Mm to indulge in
a glowing eulogy of the Gospel and its power (ii. 14; vi. 10).
At this point In the Epistle (vi. 11) he reverts to the condition of
the Corinthian Church, and urges the necessity of Christians
living separate from scandalous sinners. This he believes the
Corinthians were now endeavouring to do ; so Titus has told
him ; and therefore he does not regret having pained them by
warnings and rebukes which have borne this good fruit (vU.).
He is also happy to acknowledge their charity in contributing to
the support of the poor of Jemsalem (viii., ix.). But this grate
ful and encouraging tone is changed when in the tenth chapter
he proceeds to expose those who had come among them professing
to have their Gospel from Christ Himself, and striving to under
mine the authority of St. Paul. In a singularly powerful and
eloquent passage he disposes of their pretensions, and explains
on what his own authority rests (x., xi., xii.). These things, he
concludes by saying, he prefers to write, that when he comes he
may have nothing disagreeable to say.
These two Epistles are accepted as authentic by even the most
hostUe critics.

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

EPISTLE OF PAUL THE APOSTLE TO THE GALATIANS. 121
2. The Occasion of the Epistle. — If " the Churches of Galatia"
had meant the Churches In the Eoman province of Galatia,
then we should have a full account of their foundation, for no
part of Luke's narrative is more complete and distinct than that
which tells of the Apostle's preaching in Iconium, Derbe, and
Lystra. But, so far as can be gathered from Acts, in Galatia
proper Paul apparently did not even mean to preach, but while
passing through the country on Ms way to Troas or BIthynIa
he feU iU, and was compelled to interrupt his journey (Gal. iv.
13). Seizing the opportunity afforded by this enforced delay,
he preached the Gospel and found extraordinary acceptance (iv.
14, 15). The Galatians were unconscious of, or seemed to over
look anytMng insignificant or repulsive in Paul's appearance, and
showed Mm the utmost attention.
At first the new converts "ran well," but when Paid visited
them about two years after, on his way from Jerusalem to Ephe
sus, he perceived symptoms of defection and weariness in weU-
doing which caused him anxiety. Judalzing teachers had found
access to these young GentUe communities, and had to some extent
persuaded them that only by passing through Judaism could
any one become a CMistian. The law of Moses, the right of
circumcision, the observance of Jewish fast days were pressed
upon them, and so skilfully that many were wavering. Paul's
visit was opportune, and no doubt helpful in checking defection
from the pure faith he had taught. He " strengthened all the
disciples " (Acts xviii. 23). But his departure was the signal
for further relapse. Shortly after his arrival in Ephesus such
accounts of the success of the Judaizers reached Mm as impeUed
him to -write this Epistle.
3. Nature ofthe Controversy . — St. Paul himself does not seem
to have known who these teachers were. " Who hath bewitched
you?" he says (Ui. 1). It is not Ukely, therefore, that they
used the name of any of the older Apostles. And no special
reason for their coming to Galatia need be sought ; for the
question of the relation of GentUe Christians to the Mosaic
law was sure, sooner or later, to emerge in every Church in
wMch there were any Jewish Christians. The prompt and easy
solution of the difficulty, or Its elevation into a matter of serious
dissension and irreconcilable party strife, depended of course on
how it was met and dealt with. The Judaizers who maintained
that to become a Christian a man must first become a Jew, had
much to say for themselves. The law was a divine institution
and could not be abrogated or neglected. The promises were
given solely to the Jews, to Abraham and Ms seed. The Messiah
was the Messiah of the Jews. Jesus Himself was circumcised
and kept the whole law ; the original Apostles did the same.

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

EPISTLE OF PAUL THE APOSTLE TO THE GALATIANS. 123
faith" (Hi. 1 — 5). It was so even in the case of Abraham, the
typical, justified man. Whatever blessing he had he received
by faith (ill. 6 — 9). The law Indeed has power only to curse,
and from this curse Christ came to redeem us (III. 10 — 14). Be
sides, long before the law was heard of, the promise had been
given to Abraham, and could not be made of none effect by any
institution which succeeded it. The promise was first and held
the field. Not that the law was useless ; far from it. The law
was added to show men what sin and righteousness are, and
to stimulate men to long for the fulfilment of the promise, the
coming of the Spirit. The law thus discharged the function of
the slave who took the boys to school, or of the guardian who
took charge of persons under age ; but when the fulness of time
comes the guardian is no more needed, the full-grown son
receives the spirit of his Father and needs no outward control.
This Is what has happened in CMist (ill. 15 ; iv. 7). But the
Galatians had persisted in carrying their chUdish customs into
their mature years. Lastly, from the law itself Paul convinces
them that there is a better thing, even freedom. This he does by
using as an allegory the story of Ishmael and Isaac (iv. 21—31 ).
In the third division of the Epistle (v.) he proceeds to vindi
cate Christian freedom against all aspersions ; first of all exhort
ing them to stand fast in their liberty, and not to put themselves
under bondage to minute observances (v. 1 — 12), and then warn
ing them against using this liberty as an occasion to the fiesh (v.
13; vi. 10). In a brief conclusion, written with his own hand
in the large letters (vi. 11) that distinguished his writing from
the more clerkly writing of his amanuensis, he contrasts his own
affectionate attitude towards them with the selfish aims of the
Judaizers. 5. Date of the Epistle. — Owing to the absence from this
Epistle of allusions to the writer's circumstances, and to those
who were with him, it is not easy to fix its date. In the address
he unites with himself " all the brethren who are with me " (i.
2), but names none. The stress laid upon the suddenness of the
Galatlan declension — " I marvel that ye are so soon removed from
him that called you" (I. 6) — has inclined some to place the letter
as early as possible in the Apostle's Ephesian residence. It has
also been argued from 1 Cor. xvi. 1, that before these words
were written, that is before the last year of the writer's residence
in Ephesus, he was again on good terms with the Churches of
Galatia. On the other hand it may very reasonably be argued
that if the Epistles to the Corinthians were written after that
to the Galatians, there would be discernible deeper traces of the
conflict with Judalzing teachers.

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

EPISTLE OF PAUL THE APOSTLE TO THE EPHESIANS. 125
character and contents of his preaching, or could only have
become acquainted with it by report (Eph. ill. 2; iv. 21). More
over, while in the Acts there is evidence that the Ephesian
Church must have been largely composed of Jews, it is In this
Epistle addressed as a Gentile Church (II. 11, 19; ill. 1 ; iv. 17).
But in point of fact the words of the inscription, " at Ephesus "
(Eph. i. 1), are not read in our two oldest MSS., the Vatican and
the Sinaltic. And thers is no doubt that the early CMistian
writers had difficulties about the inscription. Basil teUs us that
the words cited were not in the oldest MSS. Origen certainly
did not read them. Marcion caUed the Epistle, " the Epistle to
the Laodiceans," and Tertulllan's reply to him is unsatisfactory.
With these facts before us it is natural to suppose that as the
letter left the hand of the -writer it was without any particular
address, and was intended to be read not only by the Church at
Ephesus, but by other Churches of proconsular Asia in which he
was not personally known. The letter was carried by Tychicus
(Eph. vi. 21), who was also the bearer of the letter to the Colos
sians (Col. iv. 7), and whose commission probably extended to
other Churches of the district. It is, indeed, quite possible that
this "Epistle to the Ephesians" was the "Epistle from Laodicea,"
which the Apostle instructed the Colossians to read (Col. iv. 16).
That Epistle cannot have been addressed particularly and exclu
sively to Laodicea, else Paul could not have sent his greetings
to the members of the Laodicean Church through the Colossians
as he did (Col. iv. 15). Had he been writing directly to the
Laodicean Church he would certainly have sent greetings dhectly.
The "Epistle from Laodicea" must therefore have been of a
general character, such as that to the Ephesians, and there is no
reason to beUeve it was not that letter itself.
If this is the right construction to put upon the incidental
aUusions found in these Epistles, then we conclude that Tychicus
was entrusted with this "Epistle to the Ephesians," and was
instructed to read it to the Churches he visited. These Churches
of proconsular Asia had not been founded by Paul Mmself, and
were considered by Mm as essentiaUy Gentile-Christian, and are
so addressed. When his letters were coUected this circular letter
to the Churches of Asia would naturaUy be inscribed with the
name of the metropoUs and mother church, and be subsequently
known as the Epistle to the Ephesians.
3. Its Theme and Purpose. — The contents of the Epistle quite
bear out this idea of its destination. For a circular letter no
subject could be more appropriate than the unity of the Church.
Unity is the key to this Epistle — the unity of the Church with
God, the unity of the two great sections of the Church — ^the

126 BOOK BY BOOK.
Jewish and the Gentile ; the unity of the individual members
with one another in the one body of the Church CathoUc. " In
Christ all things, both which are in heaven, and which are in
earth, are gathered together in one" (I. 10). This is God's
eternal purpose, hid from former ,ages (ill. 5), but now made
known (iii. 5, 9). To reconcile all things to God — that is the
purpose which through aU the ages has been running on to
fiUfilment. It Is In Christ this purpose is fulfilled, for as in
the Epistle to the Colossians Paul had taught that ' ' in Christ
dwelleth all the fulness of the Godhead bodily," so in this
Epistle he teaches that as Christ Is the fulness and as It were
body of God, so is the Church " Christ's body, the fulness of
Him that fiUeth all In all." Union with God Is not mechanical
in the case of men ; they are brought into true feUowship with
God, being "chosen in Christ to be holy" (i. 4). In reconciling
Jew and Gentile alike to God, Christ has reconciled them to one
another, "making of twain one new man" (ii. 16), and giving
" both access by o»fi Spirit unto the Father" (ii. It). In order
to come into this true reconciliation with God, and be " fiUed
with all the fulness of God" (Hi. 19), Christ must dweU in the
heart by faith tUl the sovereignty and dominion of His love over
aU things be in some measure understood (Iii. 17 — 20). As soon
as churches and members of churches recognise that " there is
one body and one Spirit, even as they are caUed in one hope of
their caUIng, one Lord, one faith," &c. (iv. 4 — 6), they are
ashamed of bitterness, -wrangling, fraud, and feel themselves
bound to promote the good of the whole body by each performing
his own function.
The practical injunctions into which these doctrinal statements
run are ruled by two Ideas. The Idea of unity excludes lying,
"Speak every man truth with Ms neighbour, for we are members
one of another " (iv. 26). Anger, stealing, foul conversation are
also excluded by the law that binds us to do and to say what
may minister to those about us (iv. 29). The idea that the
radical relationships of life are pure also plays its part. In
opposition to the Gnostic asceticism, which taught that these
relationships must be abandoned if men would be holy, Paul
shows that in these relationsMps the highest Christian grace, the
very love which Christ bore to men, is to be cultivated.
4. Conjecture as to its Occasion. — Weiss is of opinion that the
Epistle had a more definite and urgent historical occasion than
the mere accident of the journey of Tychicus to Colossse. He
thinks the contents of the Epistle can only be accounted for if
we suppose that Paul saw in the Churches of Asia symptoms
of the same dangers which had grown to such magnitude in

EPISTLE OF PAUL THE APOSTLE TO THE EPHESIANS. 127
Galatia. "The Phrygian disturbances had again reminded the
Apostle how readily the old antagonism which he had overcome
in Ms legally-minded Pharasaic opponents might spring up
again in a new form ; hence it occurred to him to show that it
might be got rid of hy admitting the Gentiles to the possession
of the salvation and the promises of free Israel, and must neces
sarUy be dissipated on the part of the Gentiles by the laying
aside of all heathen practices, and the regulation of the whole
moral life in a Christian spirit, which makes all legal or ascetic
restrictions superfiuous." That there were Jewish Christian
Churches In Asia he considers is involved In the Inscription of
St. Peter's First Epistle, and the many reminiscences and echoes
of that Epistle which occur in the Epistle to the Ephesians are
accounted for on the supposition that the same Churches were
in the writer's view. It must, however, be acknowledged that in
the Epistle there is little evidence even of an embryonic hostility
on the part of the Jewish Christians, whatever shyness on the
part of the GentUe Christians may be discerned. [Material for
a comparison of the Epistle to the Ephesians with 1 Peter will
be found in Weiss's " Introduction to the New Testament,"
i. 366.]
5. Its Similarity to " Colossians." — Knowing as we do that the
Episties to the Ephesians and Colossians were dispatched, and
therefore probably written, at the same time, we are not sur
prised to find that many of the thoughts and many of the
phrases are the same In both. The writer is evidently moving
in the same circle of ideas, the cosmic significance of the person
and work of Christ, the purpose of God towards the world, and
the arrangement in accordance with this purpose of the ages or
dispensations in history. Paul in both Epistles calls attention
to the fact that he had been entrusted with the ministry by a
special dispensation of God's grace, that he might make known
the mystery which in former ages had been hid (Eph. iii. 1 — 9 ;
cp. Coloss. i. 23 — 27). In both Epistles the work of Christ is
spoken of as a reconciling work (Eph. ii. 13 — 19 ; Col. i. 20). In
both Christ is presented as embodying and making available for
man the fuMess of God (Eph. i. 23 ; Col. i. 19), and as the head
of the body the Church (Eph. i. 22 ; iv. 16 ; Col. i. 18). The
condition of men apart from Christ is described in simUar terms
in both Epistles (Eph. ii. 5 ; Col. ii. 13) ; the results of Christ's
work are also simUarly described (Eph. i. 7 ; Col. i. 14), and the
transition from the natural to the Christian life is in both spoken
of as a "putting off the old man" and putting on the new
(Eph. iv. 22 — 24 ; Col. IU. 9, 10). The graces which the " new
man " exMbits, and the conduct becoming his high calling, are

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

EPISTLE OF PAUL THE APOSTLE TO THE EPHESIANS. 129
and love, by modifying the Paulme thesis of justification, and
making concessions to Judaism with its righteousness of works,
and by an external union of Jews and Gentiles tMough the
aboUtion of the law, i.e. essentiaUy of circumcision.
7. Authenticity. — But considering the amount of attestation the
Epistle receives from the sub-apostoUc -writers, it is impossible to
doubt its authenticity. Clement of Eome (i. 46) seems to have
it in Ms mind when he says, "Have we not one God, and one
CMist, and one Spirit of grace poured out upon us, and one
caUing in Christ.''' Ignatius, in his Epistle to the Ephesians {circa
110), mentions Paul's Epistle to them, and imitates the intro
duction of the apostohc letter in Ms own. In chapters ix. and
XV. he also makes use of the idea of a temple buUt of living
stones as naturaUy suggests the similar language of Paul.
Polycarp also quotes this Epistle ; and it is included as Pauline
in the Canons of the second century.

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

EPISTLE OF PAUL THE APOSTLE TO THE PHILIPPIANS. 131
PhUippi. He had come to Eome as the bearer of a gift from
the Apostle's friends in Philippi, and had thrown himself so
sympatheticaUy into the work of CMist in the metropolis, that
he had contracted serious iUness (ii. 30). On recovering and
hearing how anxious - his friends had been on Ms account, he
naturaUy desired to return to PMUppi, and Paul could not send
Mm home without putting in his hands a written acknowledg
ment of the kindness he had received from the Philippians. He
wished also to prepare the way for Timothy's visit (ii. 19), and
to incite them to unity and joyfulness of spirit.
2. Date and Place of Composition. — The Epistle, then, bears on
its face that it was written from Eome towards the close of Paul's
imprisonment. Though stIU in bonds he was Uving in expecta
tion of a speedy decision in Ms case. To himself personally it
mattered littie whether this decision should consign him to a
martyr's death, or should set him free to face once more the
toUs and risks and contumely of an Apostle's life. But though
on his own account he had much reason to long for emancipation
from the privations and hardships of life, and for entrance into
the joy of his Lord, he was quite wiUing to spend himself for
others, and incUned to tMnk that he was destined to be used
stiU in Christ's cause on earth (i. 20 — 26). And he was recon
ciled not only to the termination of his imprisonment, whatever
its issue might be, but he was now in a position to see how
much the Gospel had been furthered by that very confinement
wMch had threatened to obstruct his usefulness. The soldiers
who guarded Mm could not but talk in the barracks of the
Pretorian guard (i. 13) of the strange words that feU from his
lips. The reality of his character and the truth of his teacMng
penetrated even into the household of Csesar (iv. 22), and a
gospel which might have been contemptuously ignored, had it
been proclaimed in the Jewish quarter, was now the talk of
Eome. Besides his pertinacity and joy in prosecuting still his
Apostolic function gave new confidence to the foUowers of CMist
in the metropoUs (i. 14) ; and even those who grudged him his
influence, were by their envy (i. 15.) stirred to greater zeal in
proclaiming the Gospel.
Paul tells them how his sufferings had thus tended to "the
furtherance of the Gospel," that they may be encouraged to
expect a simUar resiUt from their sufferings (i. 27 — 30). His
imprisonment must not discompose them, nor are -they in Ms
absence to suffer their faith or their love to fail ; but following
their Lord in His humUity, they are to accept a lowly place, and
so work out their own salvation, depending not on the presence
of an Apostle, but on a Mgher and stronger wUl (ii. 1 — 13). He
I 2

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

EPISTLE OF PAUL THE APOSTLE TO THE PHILIPPIANS. 133
authenticity of the Epistie. Baur conceived the Epistle to be
concUiatory, and thus summarises his objections : " What
appears suspicious to me in the Phlllppian Epistle may be
reduced to the following three heads : 1 . The appearance of
Gnostic ideas in the passage ii. 6 — 9. 2. The want of anything
distinctly Pauline. 3. The questlonableness of some of the
historical data." Schwegler, following Baur, finds an allusion
to the two opposed Church parties in the two women of Iv. 2,
and Peter is the "yoke-feUow" appealed to by Paul. Thh
criticism, however, has been repudiated by the more recent
chiefs of the modem school, Hausrath, Holtzmann, Pfleiderer,
and HUgenfeld, who maintain the authenticity of the Epistle.
Holstein has indeed reopened the question, instructively ana
lysing the doctrine and the language of the Epistle, but Ms
reasoning has not materiaUy altered the attitude of criticism
towards 'the authorship.
Eeaders of the Epistle wUl be disposed to agree with Weiss,
who says, "It Is in fact hard to understand how an Epistle
containing so little that is properly doctrinal, and for the forging
of which no object whatever can be conceived, should be spurious.
The, purely personal outpourings of the Apostle's heart respect
ing his feelings towards the Philippians, his frame of mind and
prospects in captivity, would appear to be entirely at variance
-with such a view ; especially does It seem inconceivable that a
pseudonymous writer should have put into the mouth of the
Apostle the expectation of being set free, although such expecta
tion by the assumption of criticism was not actually fulfiUed."

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

EPISTLE OF PAUL THE APOSTLE TO THE COLOSSIANS. 135
gathered from the Epistle itself, in which Paul warns the Chris
tians against them. That they were Jews is evident from their
enjoining circumcision (Ii. 11; iii. 11), and the observance of
the Mosaic ordinances, sacred days and seasons, and so forth
(ii. 14 — 22). So far they resembled the Judaisers who had
marred Paul's work in Galatia and elsewhere. But with this
Judaism the Colossian teachers mingled a " phUosophy " (ii. 8),
a "worshipping of angels" (ii. 18), and an ascetic "neglect of
the body " (ii. 23) wMch were not characteristic of Judaising
teachers. It would also appear that their philosophj' or theo-
sophy endangered the supremacy of Christ, probably by ascrib
ing to angels the work of creation (i. 16), of giving and enforcing
the law (ii. 15), and of mediating in redemption between God
and man (ii. 18). And it is plain that aU this was taught as a
mystery or as esoteric doctrine imparted to the initiated alone,
and under seal of secrecy (ii. 3 ; i. 27) ; and the' emphasis laid
on the non-exclusiveness of the Gospel i. 28, in the three times
repeated " every."
3. The Colossian Heresy. — But no sooner are these characteristics
of the Colossian heresy stated than it is obvious that point by
point they coincide with Gnosticism. The very terms used by
Paul are Gnostic terms.* Gnosticism, as the name itself implies,
asserted the supremacy of knowledge (gnosis). Faith may suffice
for the multitude, but the initiated, the select few, are saved by
knowledge. The esoteric doctrine they imparted was a doctrine
of creation devised to save God from the responsibility of being
the author of evil. God, who is absolutely good, cannot by His
immediate act have produced the world, for had He done eo, it
also must, like its author, be only good. Besides this moral
difficulty there was ever clamouring for solution the metaphysical
difficulty of connecting the Absolute God with the material world.
Both these difficulties the Gnostics claimed to solve by their
theory of emanations. God expressed Himself by giving birth
to a being worthy of Him ; and that being again reproduced a
tMrd, and so on through successive emanations, each naturaUy
in proportion to its distance from the source having a feebler
divine ingredient, until contact with matter and the work of
creation become possible. Between the supreme perfect God and
the world there is thus interposed a graduated series of beings,
which appear sometimes as personal, sometimes as impersonal, in
the various Gnostic systems, and which are variously known as
emanations, scons, or angels. Underlying this whole theory is
the Oriental dualism which ascribes the origin of evil, not to the
• "Pleroma," ii. 9 ; "Principalities and Towers," &o., i, 6.

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

EPISTLE OF PAUL THE APOSTLE TO THE COLOSSIANS. 137
strenuous opposition which the Apostle^p offered to the incipient
tendencies towards this corabination. It would be strange,
indeed, if in an age when East and West were mingling, when
amalgamations and combinations of every kind were attempted,
when men seem to have come to distrust each separate philosophy,
and to imagine that truth might be found by combining all, no
attempt had been made to combine CMistianity and Gnostic
specMations. This Epistle is the most trustworthy evidence we
have of any actual attempt of tMs kind, and in these Colossian
teachers we see the spiritual progenitors of Cerinthus and the rest,
6. Historical Place of the Colossian Heresy. — Bishop Lightfoot has
materiaUy aided the endeavour to posit this Colossian heresy in
its proper historical place by showing that it has Its natural pre
cursor in a weU-known form of Judaism, which existed in the
time of our Lord and His Apostles. He has shown that Essenism
was Gnostic Judaism, and that this type of Jewish thought had
established itself in Phrygia and Asia in the Apostolic Age. The
Essenes represented, among the Jews, legalism, mysticism, and
asceticism. They were scrupulous in their observance of the
Mosaic law, though they looked with horror on bloody sacrifices ;
abstained, as it would seem, from eating fiesh and drinking wine,
and discountenanced marriage. It is easy to recognise the prin
ciple which lay at the root of this asceticism — the principle that
matter is evil, and that to be delivered from sin man must, as far
as possible, be emancipated from all dependence on matter. They
betrayed their genealogical connection with Persian speculation
by their worship of the sun and their doctrine of angels.
What that doctrine precisely was it is impossible to say, for
the initiated was sworn "to conceal nothing from the members
of the sect, and to report nothing concerning them to others . . .
not to communicate any of their doctrines to any one otherwise
than as he himself had received them . . . and to guard carefuUy
the names of the angels." The Essenes would thus seem to
have possessed three of the characteristic notes of Gnosticism :
" This Jewish sect exhibits the same exclusiveness in the commu
nication of its doctrines. Its theological speculations take the
same direction, dwelling on the mj'steries of creation, regarding
matter as the abode of evil, and postulating certain intermediate
spiritual agencies as necessary links of communication between
heaven and earth. And, lastly, its speculative opinions Involve
the same ethical conclusions, and lead in like manner to a rigid
asceticism." If, then, Essenism came In contact with Christianity
and sought to form an aUiance with it, there would result a con
glomerate distingmshable by the very features of this Colossian
heresy.

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

EPISTLE OF PAUL THE APOSTLE TO THE COL0SSI.4.NS, 139
gence of the flesh " (ii. 23). The true deliverance from carnality
and earthliness is to be found in fellowship with Christ, in so
truly beUeving and in loving Him that our affections are carried
with Him to things above (IU. 1 — 6).
8. Authenticity. — The authenticity of the Epistle is externally
attested by echoes in Barnabas, Clement, and Ignatius ; by
quotations in Justin Martyr, and by its reception into the canons
of the first century. Mayerhoff was the first to throw suspicion
upon it by exhibiting its resemblances to the Epistle to the
Ilpheslans. Eenan argues strongly for its genuineness, and
among other grounds urges that if Ephesians was an imitation
of it this impUes that the imitator accepted Colossians as PauUne.
HUgenfeld holds with Baur, that " the Colossian letter has to do
¦with an already fully developed Gnosticism, and this carries us
not merely beyond Paul's Ufetime, but beyond the first century."
It is, however, impossible to imagine a letter such as this to have
been written in presence of the fuUy developed systems. Oppo
sition to these systems would have been more detailed and
pronounced. The difficulties which have been found in the style of the letter
are explained by Paul's want of famUiarity with this novel
teaching. He was on ground he had not traversed before, using.
the suggestions of heresy to elucidate new aspects of Christ and
His Gospel. The easy and natural manner in which this letter
links itself to the Epistle to Philemon (cp, iv. 9^14, with Phil.
23, 24 ; iv. 17, with Phil 2) Is, as Eenan shows, strong proof of
authenticity. It may be added that the descriptions given of
those who send salutations correspond with the fact that Paul
and his constant companions had not been at Colossse. Baur's
idea, that Luke and Mark are brought together with " reconcil
ing " intention is too ridiculous.
¦ The mention of "the Epistle from Laodicea" (iv. 16) has
given rise to a number of theories, which are classified and
examined by Lightfoot. His own opinion is that the Epistle
here referred to was that to the Ephesians, which was intended
as a circular letter, to be read first by the Ephesians, then by the
Laodiceans, and then by the Colossians. The spurious Laodicean
Epistle is given by Lightfoot. It is a mere cento of pMases
and clauses from the PauUne letters, and is entirely wortMess.

FIEST AND SECOND EPISTLES OF PAUL THE APOSTLE
TO THE
THESSALONIANS.
1. Thessalonica. —At the date of Paul's visit to Thessalonlca, it
was a city of some importance both commercially and politically.
Lying, as it does, at the head of the Thermaic gulf, with the open
sea In front and a rich country behind, it could scarcely fail to
become a prosperous seat of commerce, and as it was also very
capable of defence, Cassander rebuilt and enlarged it, and gave
it the name of Ms wife Thessalonlca, a sister of Alexander the
Great. When it passed into the hands of the Eomans its im
portance was still recognised, and it became the chief city of
Macedonia Secunda, and ultimately the metropoUs of the whole
of that province. At the time of Paul's visit it was in the enjoy
ment of the rights of a free city, electing its own politarchs,
although subject to the Eoman proconsul.
Thessalonica was therefore a city in which the Apostle
might expect to find a centre from which the Gospel might be
disseminated both Inland and seaward. Besides, unlike PhUippi,
it contained a synagogue to which his Jewish birth would give
him entrance, and in which his message would at least be
listened to with inteUigence. It happened also that his o^wn
trade, the manufacture and preparation of goat's-hair cloth, was
one of the staples of Thessalonica, as it stUl is of its modern
representative Salonlki. For three Sabbaths Paul was allowed
to address the Jews in the Synagogue (Acts xvU. 2), with the
result that some believed, while a large number of " the devout
Greeks and of the chief women " also accepted his teaching. The
unbelieving Jews, however, here as elsewhere, compassed the
dismissal of Paul from the city.
2. Date of the First Epistle. — The order of events from the
compulsory departure of the Apostle from Thessalonica to the
date of the First Epistie to the Church there, is clearly described

FIEST AND SECOND EPISTLES TO THE THESSALONIANS. 141
in the Book of Acts (chaps, xvii. and xviii.). From that source
we learn that after leaving Thessalonlca with his companions,
Silas and Timothy, St. Paul proceeded to Berea and thence to
Athens. Whether Timothy was sent back to Thessalonlca from
Beiea, or from some other point, does not appear; but It Is
certain that when St. Paul found It impossible to return Mmself
(1 Thess. Ii, 17, 18), he dispatched Timothy to encourage and
establish the young converts in that place. Meanwhile the
Apostle went on from Athens to Corinth, and there Silas and
Timothy coming from Macedonia overtook him (Acts xvlil. 5).
It was the tidings which Timothy brought which prompted
the letter (1 Thess. ill. 6). The Epistle therefore would seem
to have been written two or three months after the Apostle's
visit, and most probably in the early part of the year 53 a.d.
Between his visit and his letter, time must be given for the
occurrence of such events as he alluded to in the letter, the death
of some at least of the Thessalonian Christians (iv. 13), and
the fame which their faith had attained not only in their own
neighbourhood but in more remote locaUties (i. 8). But for
these events two or three months is quite sufficient. The
Epistle is therefore the earliest extant Epistle of St. Paul.
3. The Occasion of Writing. — As Timothy's arrival in Corinth
enables us to fix ¦the date of the Epistie, so must we find the
occasion of it In the tidings brought by that messenger. The
report was in the main favourable. Though suffering some per
secution, the faith of the young converts was firm, their love for
one another was still apparent, and their affection for St. Paul
himself unabated (IU. 6). At the same time Timothy had not
concealed their shortcomings, but had reported that some Greek
vice still adhered to the new Christians (iv. 1 — 8) ; and also that
the motives of the Apostie in bringing the Gospel to them had
been called in question. Pa.ul felt it necessary both for Ms own
and for the Gospel's sake to defend Ms character from these accu
sations. There were also one or two irregularities appearing in
the Uttle Christian community which it was advisable tp check.
The persecution to which the Christians were subjected, though
it did not avail to destroy their faith, made them more ready to
Usten to highly coloured pictures of the kingdom and coming of
CMist. And such was the excited expectancy which the idea of
the speedy return of Christ produced that some of them gave up
their secular employment and became dependent idlers (iv. 1 1 ;
V. 14). Others again were disturbed in their minds because they
feared that their friends who died before the coming of Christ
inight miss the glory and joy of that event.
There was quite enough then in the condition of this young

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

FIEST AND SECOND EPISTLES TO THE THESSALONIANS. 143
had been proved by their being made an exemplary instance of
God's power in converting idolaters and bringing them to the
true God (i. 4 — 10). The two conspicuous features of Ms visit
to Thessalonica had been those which he mentions in i. 9, the '
power which had characterized his own preaching, and the un
usuaUy striking effects of it.
In tie second chapter he first expatiates on the former, and
then on the latter of these features. In ii. 1 — 12 he repels the
calumnies and insinuations wMch had been set in circulation
about his interested motives, and appeals to the Thessalonians
themselves as witnesses of his blameless life, his freedom from
avarice and indolence, and his confidence in the value of the
message he delivered to them. In the paragraph ii. 13 — 16, he
appeals to their steadfastness under persecution in proof that
his Gospel was the word of God ; and, therefore, by implication,
that he was God's commissioned servant. In Ii. 17 — iii. 13, he
continues to defend himself, but now against the aspersion of
cowardice and ficUeness which were supposed to be shown
in Ms sudden abandonment of Thessalonica, leaving Ms con
verts to fight their own battle. To this he replies that he
had striven to return, that although absent in body he was
with them in spirit, and lived by their prosperity and progress ;
and he further reminds them how he had been content to remain
alone in a strange and hostUe city that he inight send his com
panion to aid them and bring news of them.
TMs forms the true body of the Epistle, and the rest is
supplementary, as is shown by the connecting phrase " Further
more," or, as the Eevised Version more accurately has it,
"Finally, then." In this supplement the Apostle admonishes
his readers to hold fast to the commandments of the Lord which
he had made known to them, and especially to beware of un-
chastity, Uttle as it might be thought of among their heathen
friends (iv. 1 — 8). Of brotherly love he would not have spoken
had not some manifestations of their spirit endangered that love ;
he exhorts them, therefore, to increase in love, and to study to
be quiet, and to earn their own bread (iv. 9 — 12). And as it
was the expectation of the Lord's coming which had led some to
give up their ordinary employments, so the same expectation had
led them to curious and unwise questionings regarding the fate of
those who die before that event, and regarding the time at which
it is to be expected. These questionings St. Paul deprecates.
Those who die before the Lord's coming are at no disadvantage,
and the precise time no one can teU ; the children of light wiU
not be taken unawares (iv. 13; v. 11). The Epistle then passes
into a series of admonitions, not as a river loses Itself in a marsh,

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

FIRST AND SECOND EPISTLES TO THE THESSALONIANS. 145
which was being made to their work agrees very well with the
account given In Acts xviii. 12, of the disturbances in Corinth
which resulted in the appeal to the Proconsul. Grotius, indeed,
maintained that this so-caUed Second Epistle was in reality the
First, and in this idea he is foUowed by Ewald, Eenan, and
other critics ; but there is reaUy no plausibUity in such a sup
position. The Second Epistle not only presupposes, but expressly refers
to the First (ii. 15). In the First the allusions to St Paul's recent
work in Thessalonica are, as was natural, abundant and vivid ;
in the Second such aUusions are rare. The Parousia, which is
spoken of as imminent in the First Epistle, is in the Second more
guardedly, though more definitely, explamed. The hostiUty of
the Jews, wMch at the date of the earlier Epistle had begun to
make itself felt, has at the date of the Second become formidable.
8. The Object of the Writer. — The object of tMs Epistle was
to remove some misunderstandings of what Paul had said in
Ms previous letter regarding the coming of the Lord. The
ThessaloMans had received the impression that " the day of
Christ was at hand " (Ii. 2), and in consequence they had on
the one hand been perplexed to find that the months went by
¦without any fulfilment of ¦ this expectation, and on the other
hand they were led into idle and disorderly conduct. That
they were stUl exposed to persecution, and found no relief from
the manifestation of the Lord, St. Paul assures them is only a
more certain proof that a maMf estation for the judgment of their
enemies and for their deUverance wiU one day take place (i. 4
— 12). And as they are not to be disturbed by their continued
suffering, so neither are they to be disturbed by the non-inter
vention of the Lord's judgment, as if this had been definitely
predicted as speedily to take place. For much must first take
place ; lawlessness must come to a head in a person before the
personal coming of CMist destroys it (U. 1 — 12). They them
selves were chosen to salvation, wMch they should attain by
holding fast what he had taught them (ii. 13 — 17). After asking
their prayers he concludes by giving them stringent instructions
regarding such members of their Church as walked disorderly,
being carried away by the expectation of the Second Coming.
9. Authenticity. — The authenticity of this Epistle has frequentiy
been caUed in question. Weiss says that "the rejection of the
Second Epistle has become almost as uMversal in the modem
critical school as the recognition of the First." TMs rejection bases
itself on two grounds. It is thought that the view taken of the
Parousia in the one Epistle disagrees with that taken in the
other. The First Epistle speaks of it as imminent; the Second

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

THE EPISTLES OF PAUL THE APOSTLE
TO
TIMOTHY AND TITUS.
1. Authorship. — ^When any book arrests our attention, we
begin to feel an interest in the author. What manner of man,
we ask, was he who put do-wn those words wMch seem to live
and which have such power to move our hearts ? This is a
natural question ; and with the answer to it comes renewed
interest in the book. As we know sometMng of the -writer, the
significance of Ms words and pMases is found to deepen and
-widen. Our attention becomes more sympathetic. We hear as
it were a human voice behind the words. The writer has been
brought nearer to us ; and our hearts kmdle with the conscious
ness of personal friendUness.
But it should be remembered that the value of the book waa
established in our minds before our curiosity concerning ita
authorsMp was awakened. We may indeed read a book which
was written by a friend, and we may be tempted to give it a
fictitious value because of our friendsMp ; but the great worka
of the world have not been treated thus. They have made their
way in the world -without the support of patronage or the par
tiality of friendship. They were their o-wn patrons : their value
to the nunds and souls of men is m one sense whoUy apart from
their authorsMp. We are not interested m the book because of
its author : we are interested in the author because of the book.
We have only to recaU the books wMch have made good their
hold upon humamty to feel the truth of tMs statement. The
"Imitation of Christ" has had a circulation beyond aU other
books, except the Bible. The question of the authorsMp can
hardly be considered as absolutely answered. The force of the
book awakens the mterest in the -writer. The "lUad," by ita
own colossal worth, claimed a world--wide fame, and thus caUed
forth the contest between the cities wMch claimed the honour of
K 2

148 BOOK BY BOOK.
being the author's birthplace. The Bible itself gives iUustra
tions of this principle. Ecclesiastes and Job stir our interest
and curiosity to know sometMng of their writers ; but their
true value remains whether the question of authorship can be
answered or not.
We turn to these Pastoral Epistles. They have a value apart
from their authorship. Doubtless there are reasons why the
question of authorship must impart special significance and
importance to these letters ; but it is a mistake to treat them as
though they had not a value independent of the writer. We need
only open the Epistles and read to convmce ourselves of their
value. The end of the charge is love out of a pure heart and a good
conscience and faith unfeigned (1 Tim. i. 5).
Faithful is the saying and worthy of aU acceptation, that Christ
Jesus came Into this world to save smners (1 Tim. i. 15).
Every creature of God is good, and nothing is to be rejected,
if it be received with thanksgiving ; for it is sanctified through
the word of God and prayer (1 Tim. iv. 4, 6).
God gave us not a spirit of fearfulness, but of power and
love and discipline (2 Tim. i. 7).
Howbeit the firm foundation of God standeth, having tMs
seal. The Lord knoweth them that are His : and. Let every one
that nameth the name of the Lord depart from unrighteousness
(2 Tun. u. 19).
'When the kindness of God our Saviour and His love toward
man appeared, not by works done in righteousness, wMch we did
ourselves, but accordfing to His mercy. He saved us tMough the
washing of regeneration and renewing of the Holy Ghost which
He poured upon us ricMy tMough Jesus CMist our Lord (Titus
iu. 4—6).
Words such as these carry a message to the heart and the
conscience. We do not need to ask who -wrote them. Their
message is for us. The truths they embody are independent of
author or of age. They live on the pages of these Epistles for
the eternal help of humankind. They are messages from Heaven
to earth. The human hand that wrote them down was, we think,
St. Paul's, but, even were it another's, the messages would remain,
and they would speak -with abiding force to the hearts of the
sons of men. " The reUgious consciousness which was quickened
by the words of prophets and apostles in turn ratified their
-writings." The profit wMch we may gain from the study of these letters
i:^ not wholly lost by reason of any doubts thrown upon their
authorshi-n.

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

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

EPISTLES OF PAUL THE APOSTLE TO TIMOTHY AND TITUS. 151
quotations, but the foUowing wiU iUustrate the general posi
tion. Irenseus quotes from these Epistles, and quotes them as the
Apostie's, using the phrase — "As the Apostle says," or, "As
Paul commands." Clement of Alexandria quotes these Epistles
frequently : he recognises them as St. Paul's, and explains that
BasiUdes rejected them on doctrinal grounds. TertuUian's
evidence is in the same direction. The Peshito- Syriac Version
contains the Epistles, and they are recognised in the Mercatorian
Fragment. In addition to these -witnesses, phrases and words
occur m Clement of Eome, Ignatius, Polycarp, Hegesippus,
Athenagoras, which imply an acquaintance with these Epistles.
One Ulustration of the evidential value of this early acquain
tance -with these Epistles may be of mterest. In the Epistle
wMch Clement addressed in the name of the Eoman CMistians
to the CorintMan Church, three names are mentioned (Ep. ad
Cor.), Claudius Ephebus, Valerius Bito, and Fortunatus. These
men are described as "falthfiU and prudent men who have
walked among us from youth unto old age unblameably." Men
who have reached " old age " must be able to carry back their
memories over thirty or forty years at least. The date of the
Epistle in which they are mentioned is A.D. 95. Their recoUec
tion must have reached back to the imprisonment of St. PaM.
St. Paul must have been a venerable memory to such men.
Whatever -writings of Ms remained would be cherished : forged
¦writmgs claimmg his name would hardly escape denunciation,
especiaUy if they dealt largely with names of those who must
have been personaUy known to these Eoman Christians. In any
case, a forged or doubtful letter of the great Apostle would hardly
be used, or its phrases used with approval.
But in this very letter to the Corinthian Church, wMch was
carried to Corinth by men who must have known St. Paul,
aUusions to the Pastoral Epistles are found. We can hear the
echoes of famUiar pMases. We hear ofthe "Ufting up of holy
hands," of walking in " witness of Spirit" (cf. 1 Tim. ii. 8), and
we are renunded that our Lord and Master Is ' ' King of the
Ages" (cf. 1 Tim. i. 17). It is difficult not to feel that these
expressions came naturaUy to the writer, and are used as phrases
wMch reverent affection delights to employ. Of course it is quite
conceivable that such words carry memories of St. Paul's teach
ing whUe he was at Eome. They may have been heard from
his Ups by the Eoman Christians, and so they may have been
famUIar to them not through the Pastoral Epistles, but through
Ms ministry among them. But the occurrence of such famillaT
pMases, taken in conjunction with the undoubted opinion of the

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

EPISTLES OF PAUL THE APOSTLE TO TIMOTHY AND TITUS, 153
craft as a tent-maker, was just the kind of man who would mingle
as freely as he could among the crew of his ship, and while seek
ing the good of the men, glean up many a sailor's phrase, and
gain a sympathetic knowledge of Ms companions' work ? To
such a man every journey would mean enlargement of knowledge
and enrichment of language. And the statistics of his language
bear this out. It is not in the Pastoral Epistles alone that we
find this exuberance of language and the use of peculiar words.
In the Epistie to the Eomans there are one hundred and eleven
peculiar words ; one hundred and eighty-six in 1 and 2 Corin
thians ; fifty-seven in Galatians, and fifty-four in Philippians.
With these figures before us, and bearing in mind the activity
and versatiUty of the Apostle's mind, the objections raised on
the ground of language become, to say the least, of doubtful
value. 6. Alleged Doctrinal Discrepancies. — It is further urged that
the theological position in these Epistles differs from that taken
up m those letters which are the undoubted works of St. Paul.
" Faith, wMch in Paul's ¦view had been the subjective act of the
surrender of the heart to CMist, acquires now a completely
objective, dogmatic significance ; it is sometimes soundness of
beUef, or submission to the form of teaching sanctioned by the
Church ; at others it is really identified with that teacMng and
so becomes thus doctrinal beUef (Jides qucc creditur), which
already begins to be definitely fixed in formula as a regulafidei,
after the manner of creeds. . . . Faith consists simply in a
dogmatic assent to the doctrine of the Church : it can no longer
of itself bring justification, but requires to be supplemented by
love and other virtues ; further, though at first the meritorious-
ness of good works is denied, they acquire even greater signifi
cance and value, so that the First Epistle to Timothy is able to
see m them a great foundation and degree of salvation."
On tMs we may remark that the scientific aspect (if we may
use the pMase) of CMistianity and its administrative order
would be naturaUy given a prominence in those' Epistles which
are addressed to an official of the Church. A man necessarily
varies the tone of Ms language, and of the order of his thoughts
as he addresses different classes. But, further, even aUowing
for tMs, I think that the passage which I have quoted gives a
somewhat harsh view of the position adopted in the Pastoral
Epistles. Take the single word faith. TMs, it is said, has in
the Pastoral Epistles lost its subjective meaning, and has found
a dogmatic one. It is fides quce creditur. It is true that the word
faith is used in these Epistles in this sense, but not in aU the
passages wMch are cited in support of the theory advanced. If

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

EPISTLES OF PAUL THE APOSTLE TO TIMOTHY AND TITUS. 155
wiU have all men to be saved " (1 Tim. ii. 1 — 4) ; and in the
same spirit the writer says later that God Is ' ' the Saviour of aU
men." In this latter case, he is defending society against the spirit
of extravagant asceticism which he foresees will develop with
the growth of ecclesiastical pride. Men wUl come to look upon
external matters as maMng the difference between man and
man. Marriage wiU be forbidden, and questions of bodily exer
cise wUl occupy men's attention. It will be forgotten that the
inward spirit of godliness is of the first importance. Men may
differ much in outward action. Many things are indifferent, but
the spirit in which they are done is of measureless importance.
GodUness is profitable unto aU things. Every creature of God
is good and nothing to be refused, if it be received with thanks
giving (1 Tim. iv. 4). The one thing to be dreaded is the outward
form without the inward life (2 Tim. Ui. 5). The real foundation
of men's spiritual life is inward — spiritual and ethical — not
external (2 Tim. ii. 19). Outwardly there wiU always be variety.
Vessels of various forms, materials, and uses will be found in
the Master's house. To be a clean vessel and serviceable is the
matter of main importance for each man's self. For the rest,
the Master of the house must judge. Hereafter the division wiU
be made by Him who cannot err. For the present, the real caU
of the grace of God is a caU to godliness, temperance, righteous
ness, to good works and not to profitless questions and contentions
(Titus ii. 11 — 14 and Ui. 8, 9). More might be said, but there
is enough here to show that the same ethical spirit which urged
the claims of righteousness, toleration, and charity elsewhere
(Gal. V. 16 sqq. ; Eom. vi. 11 sqq. 12, 18) is not wanting in these
Epistles. 6. The Balance of Critical Opinion. — But whatever may be said
on this subject, we are met with the frankest confessions of the
Pauline character of these letters. Thus Ewald, Pfleiderer,
and Hausrath see, in two passages of the Second Epistle to
Timothy (ch,ap. i. 15 — 18, and iv. 9 — 21) genuine Pauline ele
ments. Eenan, after having explicitly said that these three
Epistles were forged, proceeds to say, " Some passages in these
three Epistles are also so beautiful that the question might be
asked whether the forger had not some authentic letters of St.
Paul in his possession which he embodied in his apocryphal
compositions." (" The Christian Church, " chap, vi., p. 52, in the
EngUsh translation.) In other words, the force of St. Paul's
hand is felt. It Is like the question of the genuineness of a
picture. The hand of the master is recognised somewhere even
by those who cannot accept it as completely genuine.

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

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

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

THE EPISTLE OF PAUL TO PHILEMON. 159
Church took very slight notice of the Epistle, and did not draw
from it these lessons.
4. Effect of the Epistle. — That the Epistle to Philemon had any
considerable eflect In ameliorating the condition of slaves, or in
accomplishing their emancipation, was not to be expected. From
the first, slaves were freely admitted into the Church, and some
of them rose to office in it. Their servUe condition was no bar
to their admission to Church privileges, while of some of these
privileges it greatly enhanced the value. But as a general rule
Christian masters retained their slaves in slavery, although the
force of CMist's spirit tanght them to deal more justly and ten
derly with them, and graduaUy it came to be considered a reli
gious act to emancipate or ransom slaves. But no general
emancipation was thought of until the ninth century. Indeed
the Church herself frequently held slaves as ecclesiastical pro
perty. The emancipation of slaves and other great social changea
have been effected not by edicts issued by CMist and his Aposties,
but by the gradual and inevitable pervasion of the whole of
human hfe by the spirit of Christ.

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

EPISTLE OF PAUL THE APOSTLE TO THE HEBREWS. 161
The fitrst distinct mention Is in Clement of Alexandria, a.d. 165
— 220, who ascribes it to St. Paul, and often quotes it. But
Eusebius records (E. H. vi. 14) from one of his lost works Ms
modification of St. Paul's authorship, as far as regards the form
in wMch we have it, " Clement, in Ms Outlines, to speak generally,
has given concise explanations of aU the Canonical Scriptures.
. . . And, moreover, he says that the Epistle to the Hebrews is
Paul's, but that it was written to the Hebrews in the Hebrew
dialect, and that Luke, ha-ving carefully translated it, pubUshed
it for the use of the Greeks. And that it is owing to the fact
' that he translated it that the complexion of this Epistle and that
of the Acts is found to be the same. Further he remarks that it
is natural that the pMaSe Paul an Apostle does not occur in the
Subscription, for in writing to the Hebrews, who had conceived
' a prejudice against Mm, he was wise in not repelling them at the
beginning by affixing Ms name. And then, a little further on,
he adds : and as the blessed presbyter before now used to say,
since the Lord as being the Apostle of the Almighty, was sent
unto the Hebrews, Patd, through Ms modesty, inasmuch as he
was sent to the GentUes, does not Inscribe himself Apostle of the
Hebrews, both on account of the honour due to the Lord and
' because it was a work of supererogation that he addressed an
Epistle to the Hebrews also, since he was herald and apostle to
the GentUes." The " blessed presbyter " spoken of Is probably
Pantsenus, Clement's predecessor as head of the Catechetical
School of Alexandria. TMs carries the tradition of St. Paul's
being the writer a long way back towards the ApostoUc age.
Clement receives it and passes it on, adding the statement about
St. Luke, whether from tradition or as Ms own conjecture.
Origen succeeded Clement in his office, and Eusebius tells
us how he expressed Mmself on the subject. "In addition to
these statements he (Origen) thus discusses the Epistie to the
Hebrews in Ms HomiUes upon it : Every one who is competent
to judge of differences of diction would acknowledge that the
s'tyle of the Epistle entitled To the Hebrews does not exhibit
the Apostle's rudeness and simplicity in speech, though he
acknowledged Mmself to be simple in his speech, that is in Ms
diction ; but it Is more truly Greek in its composition. And
- again, that the thoughts of the Epistle are wonderful, and not
second tb the acknowledged writings of the Apostle, every one
who pays attention to the reading of the Apostle's works would
also grant to be true. And, after other remarks, he adds : "If
I were to express my own opinion, I should say that the thoughts
are the Apostle's, but the diction and composition that of some
one who recorded from memory the Apostle's teaching, and, as

1G2 BOOK BY BOOK.
it were, Ulustrated with a brief commentary the sayings of Ms
Master. If, then, any Church hold this Epistle to be Paul's,
we cannot find fault with It for so doing ; for it was not withou-t
good reason that the men of old time have handed it down as
Paul's. But who It was who wrote the Epistle, God only knows
certainly. The account which has reached us is [manifold], some
saying that Clement, who became Bishop of Eome, wrote it, whUe
others assign it to Luke, author of the Gospel and the Acts." —
E. H. vi. 25. Here Origen goes beyond Clement of Alexandria
in giving it as his opinion that the writer was not St. Paul, but
one of his scholars, the teaching being identical, so that it might
be said to be ultimately his. Accordingly, in Ms own quotations
he speaks of It as a writing of Paul or" the Apostle." In tMs
sense the Church of Alexandria continued to accept It. Eusebius
Mmself agreed with Clement that Paul wrote it in Hebrew, but
he was inclined to tMnk that Clement of Eome was its translator
— E. H. IU. 98.
The Pauline authorsMp waa assumed, apparently without
entering further into the matter, by the other Greek Fathers of
the fourth century. Thus, in aU the Greek Churches of the
East, it seems to have been always recognised as Canonical,
deriving its authority directly or indirectly from St. Paul. Simi
larly, in the native Syrian Church it was included among the
Canonical Books in the old version (Peshito), but it found a
place after PMlemon, and was not attributed to St. Paul in the
Title or Subscription : while Jacob of NIsibis in the earUer and
Ephrem Syrus in the later part of the fourth century treat it as a
writing of St. Paul.
(II.) The history of its reception in the Western Church is very
different. We have seen the high estimation in which it was held
by Clement of Eome. After him there foUowed a long sUence
about It. The testimony of Irenseus, though writing in Gaul in
the latter part of the second century, strictly belongs to the
Church of Asia Minor, whence he came in Ms youth. Eusebius
tells us that he mentioned the Epistle in one of his works and
quoted from it, and a few coincidences of language are found
in his extant writings, but he was said not to have considered
that St. Paul was th^ author. Of those who strictly belonged
to the Latin Churches TertuUIan is the fisrt who mentions it by
name. He does so in one place only (de Pudlc. 20), and then
not as the writing of Paul, but Barnabas, assigning it a secondary
authority, which shows that it had no place in the Canon of the
Church of North Africa. And this is the more remarkable
because the passage quoted is vi. 4—8, which at first sight
favours his Montanist views, so that he would have every

EPISTLE OF PAUL THE APO.STLE TO THE HEBREWS. 1G3
inducement to claim the highest possible authority for the
Epistie. It was not quoted by Novatlan nor St. Cyprian. Eusebius
mentions its rejection by the Church of Eome In his own day —
E. H. ui. 3. It is not before the middle of the fourth century
that we find it used by Western writers, first by Hilary of Poitiers,
and subsequently by St. Ambrose and PMlastrlus of Brescia.
These writers speak of the support which the Novatians affected
¦to derive from it, which may have encouraged Church writers in
¦their disinclination to acknowledge it. But new influences had
now set in. The Arian Controversy made the different parts of
¦the Church better acquainted with each other, and the Western
divines were impressed by the recognition of the Epistle wMch
they found in the East.
In A.D. 397 it was reckoned as St.- Paul's along with his
thirteen Epistles in the Canon of the Third Council of Carthage.
Jerome and Augustine lent their powerful help in the same
direction, treating the Epistle as possessed of the authority of
St. Paul, though not conceaUng the uncertainty of themselves
and others as to the degree in which he was its actual author.
After their time it came into fuU recognition everywhere, and
was mostly thought to have been written by St. Paul.
(iU.) Enough has been said about its canonicity, but we must
pursue the question of authorship. It arose again at the time
of the Eeformation. Erasmus and Cajetan on the one side, and
Luther and Calvin on the other, were satisfied that it was not
¦written by St. Paul. The chief reasons for not assigning it to
hhn are : (1) The improbabUity that he would write to a Church
the members of wMch to a great extent regarded him with dis
hke. (2) In U. 3 the ¦writer classes himself eilong with Ms readers
among those who had received the Gospel at second-hand, from
those who had heard the Lord; whereas St. Paul was accus
tomed to ¦vindicate his authority by the direct revelation and
commission which he had received — cf. Gal. i. 1 ; ii. 2, 6. (3) The
difference of style, wMch in St. Paul shows no trace of art.
Speech was to Mm merely an instrument of expressing Ms
meaning in the readiest way, and consequently it was a reflection
of the impetuosity of Ms feeUng and the rapid transitions of Ms
thought. The writer of the Hebrews has a stately manner,
showing its cultivation in Ms most moving utterances. His
sentences are rhythmical and balanced, and Ms words carefully
chosen, frequently -with a view to a peculiar effect depending on
the repetition of sounds, wMck is lost in translation. (4) The
quotations in tMs Epistle are introduced in a different way
from St. Paul's; they are taken from the LXX., commonly
L 2

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

EPISTLE OF PAUL THE APOSTLE TO THE HEBREWS. 165
agreement of the teaching with that of the Apostle, the great
intimacy with Ms language, and what is said about Timothy,
lead us to look for Mm within the circle of St. Paul's com
panions. We have seen that in ancient times it was thought by some
that Clement of Eome (PhUippians iv. 3) or St. Luke had trans
lated the Epistle from St. Paul's Hebrew original. But the
fancy of its being a version is universally abandoned, as for
bidden by the phenomena wMch its language presents. They
were also considered by others to have been Its authors. This
notion finds Uttle support as regards Clement. But St. Luke's
title, not so much as writing independently though full of the
thought of St. Paul, as under his direction and superintendence,
has been ably maintained. The striking resemblance between
the language of the Epistle and St. Luke's writings is the chief
evidence. But after aUowing for the difference between Mstorical
compositions and an argumentative letter, the dissimilarity of
style is too great. And the Epistle is evidently written by a
feUow-countryman, whUe it is inferred from Col. iv, 1,0 — 11, 14,
that St. Luke was a GentUe.
Tertullian says that . Barnabas was the author. Several cir
cumstances are in favour of this. He was a Levite of Cyprus,
and consequently an HeUenlst, but also, an early member of the
Church at. Jerusalein, wMch might account for the relations
existing between the writer and that Church, if it be the one
addressed, see xiii. 18 — 19, 23. We should not,, however, expect
him, being probably older than St. Psi!ul (cf . Acts ix. 36 — 37 ;
vii. 58), to be writing after his death. Nor are we prepared by
what we read of him to find the peculiar abiUty, or the Alexan
drine culture which appear in the Epistle. But these are negative
considerations ; and the confident way in which TertuUIan
speaks produces the impression that he was not expressing an
individual opiMony but the view -wMoh was current in Africa and
at Eome.
The most attractive suggestion, however, is that of Luther,
who fixed upon Apollos. In Acts xviii. 24 — 28, we read that he
was a Jew, an Alexandrian by race, eloque.nt or learned, and
mighty in the Scriptures ; and that he mightily convinced the
Jews at Corinth, proving from the i Scriptures that Jesus was
Christ. The character of his work there was such that a party
was formed which looked on him as their head (see 1 Cor. i. — iv).
They were probably drawn to him by that literary training and
style of thought which he brought from Alexandria. His inti- ,
macy with St. Paul appears in 1 Coj xvi. 12 ; Titus iii. 13. And
the former of these passages is thought to contain proof of Ms

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

EIISTLE OF PAUL THE APOSTLE TO THE HEBEE^WS. 167
3. Object and Character. — The Epistle is called- a " word oi
exhortation " (xlii. 22). This expresses its aim. The Jewish
CMistians were suffering persecution, and not only felt its
burden, but were cast down by disappointed hopes of the
glorious coming of the Lord (x. 36 — 37) ; while their unbeUeving
countrymen were elated with that confidence in the victorious
mission of Israel which made them defy the Eoman power.
They had found the difficulty of dispensing with the external
support of the ordinances of the Law. The splendour of its
Eltual still impressed them, and aU the more from its contract,
with the simple worship of the Church. They were at a stanfi. •
stUl in sphitual Ufe and inteUigence, or rather had gone back (v.
11 — 12), and gave cause for fearing that they would faU away
(vi. 3—8).
FuU of Ms purpose and the sublimity of his subject, the -writer
puts aside as inopportune all preface and personal aUusion, and
states the sum of his arguments at the very beginning, com
pressing it into the tMee first verses. Here he declares the
finaUty of the work on our behalf of CMist, in whom God com
pleted His gradual revelation of Himself, His exalted nature,
and the glory which received Him in heaven. In developing
his argument he begins with a point of dignity belonging tb the
Old Covenant m having been introduced by the ministry of
angels, wMch was more prominent in the contemporary Jewish
teaching than in the Pentateuch, and shows the superiority of
Christ to the angels ; which leads to the honour put upon human
nature by His assuming it, and the part which suffering has in
perfecting the Captain of our salvation in His office, and further
to its place in the perfecting of ourselves. The superiority of
CMist to Moses, the human agent in the giving of the Old
Covenant, is then established.
The third part of the argument is the temporary nature of the
Je-wish Ceremonial and the Covenant with which it was con
nected. Old habits of thought made the Hebrew believers feel
that a Divine Institution must be permanent. The writer
reminds them of its imperfection, and shows that the ideal priest
hood belongs to Christ, and that the ideal sanctuary is in heaven.
He confirms his teacMng by recalling the fact that the Old
Testament prepared them for a new covenant (viii. 8 — 12 ; Jere
miah xxxi. 31 — 34), and for a new form of priesthood, after the
order of Melchlzedelc (Psalm ex. 4). He was a relic of the com-
bmation in one person of the offices of king and priest, which
was found elsewhere in simple times (compare, ' ' Rex Anius, rex
idem hominum Phcebique sacerdos." — Virg., ^». iii. 80). It seemed
fitting at one time that the Mng, who was a representative of

1G8 BOOK BY BOOK.
God's government, should also personate his subjects in their
atonements and thanksgivings. But the Inability of one man to
discharge such weighty offices led to their separation. Yet
absolutely it was the higher order of things, and so m Abraham,
the forefather of the Levitical priests, "the less was blessed of
the greater." Many hundred years after this event the Psalmist
set before his countrymen in the person of Melcbizedek the type
of that higher order which was to be restored, when the Inade
quacy of the ceremonial ministration of Aaron's sons should be
replaced by a true priest, and misrule should come to an end
under a true king, both titles meeting in the person of Messiah.
As the meaning of this type was not obvious, it is elaborately
explained, more stress being laid on the perpetuity of Melchlze-
dek's priesthood than on his kingly office. The tendency of aU
this was to establish their hearts. The Inherent completeness of
Christ only needed the experience of suffering and the discipline
of obedience. Thus perfected. He sat on God's right hand. And
He makes His brethren perfect by the one offering of Himself
and by His help. But they must be content to suffer in faith
and patience that they may receive the recompense of the
reward. The -writer's practical object is never lost sight of. A trace of
this is seen in the way in which he confines his words to the
Hebrews. In ii. 6 — 16 the broader prospect which the Incar
nation opens (9, 14) is narrowed to the seed of Abraham ; and ,
the width of meaning which those words had gained, so as to
include the GentUes, though doubtless present to his own mind, ,
is nowhere brought forward.
The argurhent, it wUl be noticed, is directed to Christian Jews,
not to those who were unconverted. The Incarnation and the
facts of our Lord's life on earth are taken for granted. TMs has
to be remembered in reading some of the passages cited from the
Old Testament, e.g. i. 5; ii. 12, 13. They are adduced on the
principle that its full meaning is found in Christ. We may
mention further that some of the quotations, e.g. ii. 7 ; x. 6 ; ,
xii. 26, are adapted to the purpose for wMch they are cited only
m the form in which they appear in the LXX.
Some apparent inaccuracies, such as in ix. 2 — 4 (where the
altar of Incense is omitted, or more probably is intended by the
word which is translated " censer," in which case it is wrongly
placed within the veil), have been regarded as signs of a want ,
of familiarity with particulars. But this can hardly be a case of
ignorance. It is more Ukely that, in accordance with Ms habit
of looking at things in their Mgher relations, the writer asso
ciates the altar of incense with the Holy of Holies, to which it

EPISTLE OF PAUL THE APOSTLE TO THE, HEBREWS. 169
belonged symbolicaUy more than to the Holy Place. .In the
same manner he speaks only of the Tabernacle, never hinting at
the existence of the Temple. He cleaves to the idea, and dis
regards departures from it.
4. Analysis.
i. 1 — 3. God's successive revelations completed in His Son.
4 — U. 18. Superiority of Christ to the Angels. — Shown by a com
parison of God's language to Him and them, 4 — 14. Warning,
ii. 1 — 4. Shown in God's subjection of aU things toman, 5 — 16.
First mention of Christ as High Priest, 17 — 18.
iii. 1 — 6. Superiority of Christ to Moses.
7 — iv. 13. Warning. — Not to imitate the unbelief of Israel in
old time, and so faU to enter into rest, 7 — 19 ; the promise of ,
whichis unfulfilled, iv. 1 — 8. It is a Sabbath rest like God's,
9 — ^11. Disobedience cannot escape detection, 12 — 13.
iv. 14 — X. 18. Superiority of Christ's Priesthood. — Hortatory,
14 — 16. Characteristics of a high priest, v. 1 — 4. The last of
them Ulustrated in Christ. First mention of Melcbizedek, 6 —
10. Digression, in which they are rebuked for dulness of
hearing, 1 1 — vi. 20. Explanation of the type of Melcbizedek,
vu. 1 — 28. Christ is the ideal Priest, vui. 1—13. The
non-ideal nature of the Tabernacle and the Old Covenant, ix.
1— X. 18.
lO^xui. 17. Exhortation and Warning. — Having a new and
Uving, way to draw near to God and to hold fast their profession,
and to' remember the fomier times, 19 — 39. , Examples of Faith ,
xi. 1 — 40. Exhortation, xii. 1 — 17. Contrast between Mount
Sinai and Mount IZion, i.e. the heavenly Jerusalem, 18 — 29.
Miscellaneous exhortations, xiii. 1 — 17.
18—25. Conclusion. — The writer asks their prayers that he
may be restored to them, 18 — 19; he prays for them. Doxology,
20 — 21. He begs them to bear the word of exhortation, 22.
The release of Timothy, and a promise to come to them ; saluta
tions, 23—24, '

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

THE EPISTLE OF JAMES. 171
tone of authority, not expressed but Implied, points to tho more
conspicuous of them. This was the Lord's brother, who appears
as chief in authority in the Church of Jerusalem In -the latter part
of the Acts of the Apostles and in the Epistle to the Galatians.
On the other hand, no separate mention of the son of Alphseus,
any more than of the greater part of the apostles, occurs after
that wMch is found in Acts i. 13. StUl we may ask, if the writer
was the brother of the Lord, why he does not give himself that
title. The answer seems to be that, in the spirit of the words
recorded in Matt. xii. 48—50, Luke xi, 27 — 28, he placed himself
on the level of all those who served the risen and ascended Jesus.
In the same way Jude, another of our Lord's brethren, is con
tented to caU Mmself ¦the " servant of Jesus Christ, and brother
of James."
(u.) The names of these brethren of the Lord were James, Joses,
Simon, and Judas (Matt. xiii. 55), where Ms sisters are also men
tioned, but not by name. What we read further of them in the
New Testament may be stated thus. They accompanied Jesus,
His mother, and His disciples, to Capernaum (John ii. 12) ; they
did not beUeve m Him (John vii. 2 — 9) ; and this is confirmed by
St. Mark's statement (IU. 21), that His friends, i.e. His brethren
and mother (see verse 31), " went out to lay hold of Him, for they
said, He is beside Himself."
(iii.) We may stop here to inquire what was the nature of their
relationsMp. The natural inference from the way in which they
are spoken of is that they were brothers in the strict sense, sons
of Joseph and Mary. This opimon was held by a few respectable
names in antiquity, and has its supporters at the present day.
It was the leading tenet of a sect who were branded as heretics
in consequence, but its most prominent defender was Helvidius, a
Eoman lawyer, a.d. 383. He was attacked by St. Jerome with
unmerited fierceness, for he did not wish to dishonour the Lord's
mother, but to uphold the sanctity of marriage.
Jerome himself originated the -view that "brethren" meant
kinsmen, or, more definitely, "cousins," the sons of Alphseus and
the sister of the Lord's mother. This met with immediate approval,
and became the prevailing interpretation for centuries, displacing
the more ancient one, that they were sons of Joseph by a former
wife, the chief supporter of which was Epiphanius. The question
is one which raises strong and even passionate feeling, but there is
one matter of fact which has not perhaps been attended to enough.
When our Lord was upon the cross He entrusted His mother,
not to any of His . brethren, but to St. John. It Is not probable
that He would have dono so if they had been her own sons. On
the other hand, the close connection with her in which they are
constantly found, and the mention of His sisters also, as weU as

172

BOOK BY BOOK.

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

THE EPISTLE OF .TAMES. 173
spread of the Gospel among the Gentiles. The mother Church
retains the respect due to it, but it is forced by povertj' to accept
. the alms of the converts from the heathen . A further blow was
struck by the destruction of Jerusalem and the Temple. It must
have led them to reconsider their position, and have opened their
eyes to the transitory character of the Mosaic Law and worship.
And their flight to PeUa in anticipation of that event marked
them out in the eyes of their countrymen as traitors to the national
cause. The persecution of them by Barcochab during Ms rebellion
against the Eomans, a.d. 1 32 — 135, tended to sift them still more.
Many abandoned their claim to the privileges on which they had
prided themselves, and blended with their brethren cf Gentile
origin, wMle the rest took up a sectarian posltipn, and Ungered
on under the name of Ebionites into the fifth century. ' . .
(vii.) Our further information about St. James is derived from
a fragment of Hegesippus, the first' historian of the Church, circa
. 170, preserved in Eusebius (E. H. ii. 23), and from Josephus.
The former teUs us that he was caUed " The Just " by aU men,
and that "he was holy from his mother's womb.. He drank no
¦wine nor strong drink, neither did he eat flesh. No razor ever
touched his head ; he did not anoint himself with oil ; he did not
use the bath. He alone was allowed to enter into the holy place.
For he wore no wool, but only fine Unen. And he would enter
into the Temple alone, and be found there kneeUng on Ms knees
and asking forgiveness for the people."
There is no reason to doubt the general reverence in which he
was held, nor the strict sanctity of Ms Ufe. He may have been
an Ascetic, but there is no trace of it in Ms Epistle, and his
continual intercessions are very probable. , But , fabulous matter
runs tMough the whole of Hegesippus's account, wMch he is
supposed to have drawn from Ebionite sources. , It , appears
especiaUy m the dramatic narrative of St, James's martyrdom.
Owing to the progress of the Gospel the Pharisees became
alarmed and placed Mm on the pinnacle of the Temple at the
Passover, in order that he might ' ' persuade the multitude not to
go astray after Jesus." But he took the opportunity of |Confess-
ing Him. The enraged Pharisees threw him do-wn, after wMch
he was stoned, and at length kiUed by a blow from a fuUer's club.
Josephus, who was contemporary, gives a different and mora
probable account (Antiq. xx. 9. 1), according to which Ananias,
the High Priest, brought James, the brother of Jesus, who was
called Christ, and certain others before the CouncU on a charge
of breaMng the law, and ordered them to be stoned to death. He
had chosen for tMs purpose the interval between the death of
Festus and the arrival of Ms successor. But the dissatisfaction
wMch this proceeding caused amongst the most eqmtable of the

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

THE EPISTLE OF JAMES. 175
abuse of it. This led to Luther's weU-known description of the
Epistle as "a letter of straw." And In a later and more re
spectful mention of it, he stated as one of his reasons for not
holding it to be the work of an apostle, that it contradicted Paul
and all other Scripture in giving righteousness to works. On
the other hand, the greater part of the older divines employed
themselves in showing the agreement between St, Paul and St.
James, in spite of appearances. But more recent inquiry leads
_ to the conclusion that the two teachers were not opposed, because
they had different objects in view, whUe using simUar language.
St, James speaks of faith In one God — the distinguishing belief
of Israel (ii. 19) — and declares that mere faith wIU not justify.
The error wMch he opposed was a barren Pharisaic orthodoxy,
aMn to the reUance on the privUege of being Abraham's seed,
wMch John the Baptist denounced (Matt. Hi. 9, cf. Eom. ii. 17 —
29). We learn from Justin Martyr, in the next century (Dial.
c. Tryph., p. 370), that there were Jews in Ms day, and others
Uke them in this respect (Jewish-minded Christians), who said
that " even if men are sinners, but know God, the Lord will not
impute sin to them." But St. Paul combated the slighting of
God's grace in CMist Jesus, which is ours through faith, on the
part of those who looked for justification to their strict observance
of the law of Moses.
St. James's rebuke was directed against a trust in a dead faith,
wMch led to no works, " the opus operatum of faith ;" St. Paul's
feU on a trust m self-righteousness. We aire apt to look upon
St. Paul as the first to give prominence to faith, and the ori
ginator of the term "justification;" but there is evidence that
these matters were discussed, along with the example of Abraham,
before his time, in the Jewish schools, to which both he and St.
James were indebted.
(iv.) If this view is right it bears on a question of more im
portance than the date of the Epistle. We find m it no injunctions
as to the observance of ceremonial ordinances. If tMs was un
necessary owing to the agreement on this point of the writer
and Ms readers, it stUl shows that it was not regarded as open
to attack. TMs of itself is an objection to the view of the
Tubingen school, which imagines that a fierce contest on this
subject raged durmg the life of St. James and long afterwards.
But at first sight Ms teacMng about faith gives an encourage
ment to the idea of an hostiUty to St. Paul. On further exami
nation this, too, disappears, and there remains nothing to disturb
our conception of the fundamental unity of the leaders of the
Church, to wMch we have testimony in Acts xv. and the Galatians.
4. Character, Style, Quotations. — The tone of the whole Epistio
is practical, earnest, and stern in parts. It was occasioned, no

176 BOOK LY EOOK.
doubt, by the existence of the faults which he corrects — the
results, perhaps, not so much of deterioration as of slow progress.
When the law and the Gospel were blended In the convictions of
the same person, the latter element may often have been smaU
and its influence shaUow. Thus we find warnings against respect
for the rich (Ii. 6, 7)* a barren faith (14 — 26), forwardness in
becoming teachers (ill. 1), bitter language (III. 9, 10), defamation
and uncharitable judgment (iv. 11, 12), fierce contentions and
sensuality (iv. 1 — 3), and dishonest oppression of the poor (v. 1
— 6). But it may be doubted whether the worst features, such as
iv. 2, V. 1 — 6, belong to members of the Church, and do not
rather refer to their imbelieving countrymen, to whose con
sciences the writer appeals, so far as Ms words will reach them.
There was need, also, of encouragement under trial. The various
exhortations are enforced by the solemnity with which St. James
looks forward to the Lord's coming.
(I.) There is little of distinctively Christian doctrine. Every
thing of the kind relates to the conception of our Lord's person
in respect of His example (v. 11), authority (I. 1 ; v. 10), glory
(Ii. 1), power (v. 14 — 16) ; and His coming to judgment (v. 7 —
9) ; or to the word of truth, the instrument of a new birth (i. 18,
21). But the Gospel is not named. The rule of the Ufe is the
Law, but as advanced by our Lord into a "law of liberty " (u.
12) ; itself delivered from the restrictions imposed at first for the
hardness of men's hearts, and from narrowing traditions, and
bestowing liberty in turn tMough freedom from sin (cf. John
viii. 33 — 36). No mention occurs, as we have seen, of Jewish
ordinances. And, on the other hand, the low value of mere
externals is indicated by the fact that in the description of pure
religion — ^the word used refers to the outward aspect of it — aU
that is ceremonial is omitted, and works of charity and habitual
purity take its place. We are reminded throughout of our Lord's
teaching as recorded in the three first Gospels, rather than of
that side of it which is found in St. John, or the truths revealed
after Pentecost.
(ii.) In respect of the organization of the Church, we find men
tion of elders who are to be summoned to pray for the sick man,
and anoint him with oU in the name of the Lord (v. 14 ; cf. Mark
vi. 13, xvi. 18). It has been inf erred from Hi. 1, that no definite
arrangement had yet been made for instruction in these Churches.
(ui.) The language is a very pure specimen of HeUenlstic Greek.
This is what might not have been expected. The style is simple
and inartificial. There Is Uttle attempt to foUow a distinct plan,
or develop the connection of thought. The continuity of the
whole is the writer's earnestness, culminating In the thoughts
wMch belong to the second advent. From tMs point of view the

THE EPISTLE OF JAMES. 177
abrupt way in which the Epistle ends, -without even a "Fare ye
weU," is not inappropriate ; it shows the pressure of the ex
pectation under wMch the appeal is made to save an erring
brother wMle there is time.
(iv.) Among the quotations from the Old Testament, Lev. xix.
18, " Thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself," is distinguished
by the title of the Eoyal Law, in consequence, no doubt, of the
prominence given to it by our Lord, Matt. xix. 19; xxii. 39.
The Book of Proverbs is twice quoted, Prov. iii. 34, in iv. 6, and
Prov. X. 12, in v. 20. And it is thought that St.. James used the
kmdred teacMng of the Book of Ecclesiasticns, the strongest
resemblance being between i. 13 and Ecclus. xv. 11 — 12. In
regard to the New Testament, the echoes of our Lord's teacMng,
and particularly of the Sermon on the Mount, are numerous, cf . i.
2, Matt. V. 10—13 ; i. 4, Matt. v. 48 ; i. 6, Matt. vU. 7 ; U. 13,
Matt. -vi. 14—15 ; iu. 17— 18, Matt. v. 9 : iv. 4, Matt. vi. 24; iv.
11, Matt. vu. 1 ; V. 2, Matt. vi. 19; v. 10, Matt. v. 12 ; v. 12,
Matt. V. 33; compare also iv. 10, Matt, xxiii. 12 ; iv. 12, Matt.
X. 28 ; iv. 9, Luke vi. 25. The passages wMch seem parallel with
others in St. Paul have been spoken of above. The quotations
from the Proverbs are found again in 1 Peter v. 6, iv. 8, with
the same deviations from the LXX. The resemblance between
i. 12 and Eev. ii. 10 has been accounted for by the supposition
of an unwritten saying of our Lord underlying both passages.
5. Authenticity.— Eusehins quotes the Epistle, but places it
among the books wMeh were disputed, but acknowledged by
most (E. H. iii. 26), and he says (E. H. ii. 23), that not many of
the ancients mentioned it. We find accordingly that the first
who speaks of it by name is Origen (e. 230), who quotes it some
times, and in one place as the Epistle "current" as that of
James. Before Mm, traces of its use are only found in Irenseus
and the Shepherd of Hermas, wMch brings us to the middle of
the second century. It was accepted early by the Syrian Church,
and included m their version. It had not apparently a place in
the Old Latin, nor is it named in the Muratorian Canon. After
the time of Eusebius the recognition of it kept extending, and it
ranks with the other books of the New Testament in the Canon
ofthe Third CouncU of Carthage, a.d. 397. In the fifth century
it was universaUy acknowledged.
The critics of the present day, who supposed it to have been
written in the name of St. James after Ms death, mostly belong
to the Tiibingen school. To what has been said in reply to them
already in section 3, we may add that the sUence about the
controversy in respect of circumcision may Indeed be accounted
for by supposing that the Epistle was written after it had entirely
ceased, as weU as before it began. But if so, how late are we
M

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

THE EPISTLE OF JAJIES. 179
become teachers is dangerous In case of stumbling, 1. One of the
cMef occasions is forwardness to speak. The man who stumbles
not with his tongue is perfect, 2. The importance of It is not to
be measured by Its size. Bridles and rudders are Instances of
the power of smaU things, 3 — 4 ; so the tongue is small but
boastful, 5a. Another Instance is the great conflagration which
is Mndled by a Uttle fire, 5b. The defiUng and inflammatory
character of the tongue, 6 ; which Is less tameable than wild
beasts, 7 — 8. The inconsistency of blessing God and cursing
man is opposed to the analogy of natural things, as a fountain,
fig-tree, and vine, 9 — 12.
13 — 18. True Wisdom. — The works of a good life done in the
meekness of wisdom, are a proof of its presence, as jealousy and
envy are of its absence, 13 — 14. These last are not the -wisdom
from above, the description of which foUows, 15 — 18.
iv. Carnal-mindedness and Presumption.
1 — 10. Source of their contentions. — These come from flesMy
pleasures, 1. Ye desire and strive to satisfy your wants by vio
lence, which after all is in vain. Prayer would secure their
supply, but not your prayer ; because its aim is to spend the
results on your pleasures, 2 — 3. TMs is (spiritual) adultery,
forsaMng God's friendship for the world, which His jealousy
-wUl not permit, 4 — 6. Exhortation to submission and change of
life and feeUng, 7 — 10.
11 — 12. Against Presumption in slandering and judging. — The
man who judges his brother sets himself above the law (wMch
forbids it), 11. There is only one law-giver and judge, 12.
13 — 17. Carnal confidence. — The forming of plans without
reference to the uncertainty of life, 13 — 14; and to the wUl of
God, 15 ; a presumption in wMch ye glory, 16 — 17.
V. The Lord's Coming.
1 — 6. Against rich oppressors. — The calamities coming on them,
1. The decay which attacks their treasures, 2 — 3. God hears
the cry of the labourers whom they defraud, 4. Their luxury,
injustice, and -violence, while punishment is impending, 5 — 6.
7 — 18. Encouragements and directions. — Duty of patience tlU
the Lord's commg, which is nigh, after the example of the
husbandman who waits for the early and later rain, 7 — 8. Mur
mur not against one another — the judge stands before the door.
Consider the example of the prophets. Job, and the end of tho
Lord, 9 — 11. Patience shown in forbearing to swear, 12.
Affliction to be met ¦with prayer, as cheerfulness is to be conse
crated with songs of thanksgiving, 13. The healing of sickness
to be sought in the ministry of the elders, and in mutual
confession and prayer. Example of Ellas.
19 — 20. An urgent appeal to reclaim an erring brother.
TV1 9.

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

TUE FIRST EPISTLE OF PETER, 181
art Peter ; " and Ms special responsibility in receiving the keys
of the kingdom of heaven Is then marked, as elsewhere (Matt.
xviii. 18), the power of the Apostles coUectlvely to loose and
bmd. Peter had been the leading disciple, and he was encouraged
to continue to be so by our Lord's charge, " And do thou, when
once thou hast tumed agam, stabUsh thy brethren" (Luke xxii.
32— Eev. Ver.).
Jesus appeared to Mm separately on the day of His resurrec
tion (Luke xxiv. 34 ; 1 Cor. xv. 5). What passed at that solenm
meeting we are not told, but it must have been a relnstatal of
Peter after his denial. And subsequently he received a commis
sion once more, "Feed my lambs, feed my sheep" (John xxi.
15—17). Accordmgly, we find Mm the cMef figure in the early part of
the history of the Church. It was his proposal to fiU up the
vacant place in the Apostolic CoUege (Acts i. 16 — 26). He is
the speaker on the Day of Pentecost (ii. 1 — 41), and again to the
multitude after the heaUng of the lame man, and to the CouncU
before which he and John were summoned in consequence of that
miracle (iii. 1 — iv. 22) ; and when aU the Aposties were arrested
(v. 29 — 32) ; and in the punishment of Ananias and Sapphira
(v. 1 — 11). The sick were brought into the street that even Ms
shadow might fall on them (v. 15). He and John were delegated
by the Apostles to visit Samaria, where PhiUp had made many
converts ; and Simon asked him to seU the power of bestowing
the Holy Ghost (viU. 14—24).
In the rest enjoyed by the Churches of Judsea, GalUee, and
Samaria they were visited by Mm, his stay at Lydda being
marked by the healing of .iEneas, and at Joppa by his raising
Dorcas to life (ix. 31 — 43). Here, too, he had the vision wMch
prepared him for obeying the summons to Csesarea from Cor
nelius, and for recogpiismg without reserve the indication of God's
will in the gift of the Holy Ghost to him and his household.
"Can any man," he said, " forbid water, that these should not
be baptized, which have received the Holy Ghost as weU as we ? "
(x. 1 — 48). He was not the first to admit a Gentile into the
Church. PhiUp had not hesitated to baptize the eunuch without
the authorization which Peter, it may be, would have needed
(¦viU. 36 — 39). But the case of Cornelius was more important.
The notice of the Church was caUed to it, and Peter had to defend
Ms conduct on his return to Jerusalem. His plea was that he
had followed God's guidance. And for the fact of the gift of the
Holy Ghost to men uncircumcised he appealed to the testimony
of the six brethren who accompanied hira to Csesarea, and whom
he had prudently brought ¦with him to Jerusalem. The Church

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

THE FIRST EPISTLE OF PETEE. 183
imitated the conduct of others of their brethren on a previous
occasion (Acts xv. 1 — 24), expressing disapproval of what they
witnessed. Peter, out of fear of them, separated himself from
the Gentiles, as did aU the other Jewish members of the Church
of Antioch, and even Barnabas. St. Paul speaks of their
" hypocrisy," as acting In opposition to their own convictions.
And he charged Peter -with his inconsistency in the presence of
them aU. "If thou, being a Jew, livest after the manner of
the Gentiles and not as do the Jews, why compellest thou the
Gentiles to live as do the Jews?" (Gal. ii. 10 — 14). He does
not teU us the effect of his rebuke, but we can hardly doubt that
it was successful, for Peter had acted against Ms own principles.
"He stood condemned" (Eev. Ver.).
It was not the first instance of Ms yielding to fear, nor of Ms
swift repentance. In his legendary history these traits continue
to the end. Yielding to the entreaties of the faitMul at Eome
to flee from the death wMch tMeatened Mm, he was said to
have left the city. He met the Saviour on the Applan Way
bearing His cross. " Lord, whither goest thou ?" he said. The
answer was, "To Eome, to be crucified again." Peter turned,
went back weeping, and faced Ms death. The scene of the story
was formerly marked by the church of Sanota Maria ad passus,
but now by one which is called Domine, quo vadis? St. Paul
mentions Mm agam as regarded by a party in the CorintMan
Church as their head (1 Cor. i. 12 ; cf . Iii. 22) ; and as commonly
accompanied in Ms journeys by his wife (1 Cor. ix. 6).
The rest of Ms history is uncertain, except that we may feel
sure that the division of labour described in Gal. ii. 7 — 9, by
which it was arranged that Paul should go to the Gentiles and
Peter and the others to the circumcision, was in the main
respected. What light is to be derived from 1 Pet. v. 1 3, wUl
be seen below. We are left to traditional accounts which are to
some extent untrustworthy. According to the statement com
monly received in old times, he was Bishop of Antioch for five
years. This is not credible if we consider the origin and cha
racter of that Church (Acts xi. 19—26; xiii. 1—3; xv. 1—2).
It appears to have been suggested by Ms visit mentioned by St.
Paul in the Galatians. After that he was said to have preached to
the Jews, to whom he writes in this epistle (Euseb. E. H. Hi. 1) ;
but it contains no signs of his being known to them personaUy.
The Church of Corinth also seems to have claimed him as a
joint founder with St. PaM, according to the letter of its Bishop
Dionysius, which he wrote to the Eomans in the time of their
Bishop Soter, a.d. 168—176 (Euseb. E. H. u. 26). This may be
derived from 1 Cor. i. 10 ; and he could not have had a hand in

184 BOOK BY BOOK.
founding the Church, of which St. Paul was the spiritual father
(1 Cor. iv. 6). Yet the memory of a residence of his at Corinth
may have been preserved In that Church. But Eome was said
to have been the chief scene of Ms labours. He went there in
the second year of Claudius to oppose Simon Magus, who' had
turned heresiarch, and became the first bishop, holding the see
during the last twenty-five years of his life. The story of his
contest with Simon Magus at Eome is derived by Eusebius (E. H.
ii. 16) from Justin Martyr. The probable origin of it was sho-wn
in a remarkable way. Justin had appealed, for the proof of
Simon's visit to the capital and Ms powers of imposture, to the
fact that a statue dedicated to Mm as a god, Simoni Deo Sancto,
was to be seen in the island of the Tiber. Here, In 1574, a
statue was discovered bearing the name of the Sabine deity,
Semo Sancus. St. Peter's foundation of the Eoman Church and
long episcopate are Inconsistent with what we know from St.
Paul's Epistle to the Eomans and the account In the Acts of
the Apostles of his first Imprisonment. Strictly speaking, neither
St. Paul nor St. Peter founded that Church, whose origin Is un
known. But St. Paul's influence was so great that he might be
caUed one of its founders ; and if St. Peter spent any time there,
there would be good reason for speaking of him in the same way.
The account of St. Peter's death in its fullest form was that
he suffered at Eome under Nero on the same day with St. Paul,
being crucified with Ms head do-wnwards (the first authority for
this is Origen in Euseb. E. H. iii. 1), obtaining this favour as
unworthy of the position In which Ms Master died. St. Paul,
on the other hand, was beheaded as a Eoman citizen. The tra
dition was expressed In the Mediseval couplet : —
' ' Ense coronatur Paulus, cruce Petrus, eodem
Sub duce, luce, loco ; dux Nero, Eoma loons."
The manner of his death is aUuded to in John xxi. 18, and
Clement, who was Bishop of Eome, in the letter which he -wrote
to the Corinthians about the end of the first century, gives early
testimony to his martyrdom. There is no good reason for
rejecting the tradition that it took place at Eome, though some
of the circumstances may be picturesque additions. From the
middle of the second century onwards this was the account uni
versaUy received, and it would seem to have been handed on by
the earlier age. There is no trace of any other place having
claimed to be the scene of his death, whereas Caius, a Eoman
presbyter, writing just after the end of the second century, speaks
of being able to point to the " trophies " of the two Apostles,
which must mean some kind of monument, one on the Vatican,
the other on the road to Ostia.

THE FIRST EPISTLE OF PETER. 185
There is no complete proof of St. Peter ever having been at
Eome. But a personal relation on Ms part to that Church is
implied at as early a date as that of Ignatius's letter to it, circa
107, in chap. iv. And there must have been some ground for a
tradition which was undisputed in antiquity. It has been conjec
tured that the part claimed for St. Peter as weU as St. Paul in
¦the foundation of the Eoman Church is to be explained by the
supposed existence of two churches side by side, the one GentUe,
and the other Jewish, the latter bemg formed of such as with
drew after St. Paul's arrival (cf. PhU. i. 15—18, with Col. iv. 11) ;
and that these Churches stood in a near relation to St. Paul and
St. Peter respectively. The harmony between the two Apostles
would tend in the direction of reunion, wMch was completed
before the end of the century in the time of Clement.
2. To whom Written. — The Epistle is addressed to "the elect
who are sojourners of the Dispersion in Pontus, Galatia, Cappa
docia, Asia, and BIthynIa " (Eev. Ver.). This would prepare us
for finding that Jewish CMistians are alone contemplated. But
as the Churches in three, at least, of these countries were mainly
founded by St. Paul, the Jewish element must have been the
smaUer ; and it seems unlikely that St. Peter would address one
portion of them only. And, in fact, passages such as Ii. 9 — 10 ;
iv. 2 — 4, accordmg to the Eevised Version (cf. i. 14, 18; Hi. 6)
are more appUeable to CMistians of GentUe origin. St. Peter
regards these converts as adopted into the true Israel, and
includes them in the sojourners of the Dispersion. It is plain
from Ms beseeching them " as strangers and pilgrims to abstain
from flesMy lusts " (ii. 11) that the position of all God's servants
on earth, and absent from their true home, is in his mind (cf.
Ps. xxxix. 12 ; cxix. 19).
In Ms exhortations against heathen -vices (U. 11, 16), retaUa-
tion and revUing (iii. 8 — 12), and the love of gain and power on
the part of the elders (v. 2—3), he may have aimed at faults
among them which had come to Ms knowledge. Another
motive was their encouragement under the trials to which they
were exposed, and to fortify them against the severer persecu
tion wMch was impending. A third purpose is hinted at
rather than fuUy expressed : "I have written briefly, exhorting,
and testifying -that tMs is the true grace of God wherein ye
stand" (v. 12). The exhortations meet us everywhere. The
testimony seems confined to this passage, whUe its importance is
marked by its place at the end. He wished, apparently, to dis
sociate himself from sympathy with Judaizers, and to express his
agreement with St. Paul. These Churches were not of Ms own
planting, and he wished to give his witness to the truth of tJie
teaching which they had received from Ms brother Apostle, in the

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

THE FIRST EPISTLE OF PETEE. 187
precise date cannot be fixed. The mention of persecution only
helps us to a certain degree. The circumstances of these Chris
tians of Asia Minor were those of unpopularity and ill-treatment;
but the trial was not severe as yet, though it was about to
become so. It was this unpopularity of the Christians at Eome
which tempted Nero to turn aside from Mmself on to them the
suspicion of having set fire to the city, St. Peter may have
written in the foresight of what was coming, though there had
been no example as yet on a great scale. In this case, we may
place the writing of the Epistle a short time before the Neronlan
persecution in a.d. 64. On the other hand, though there is no
evidence that tMs pei secution extended to the provinces, it is
likely that the example set at Eome would not be forgotten.
And St. Peter may have had in view the approach of persecution
resulting from it.
The mention of Mark is some guide to us. He was with St.
Paul at Eome during Ms first imprisonment, a.d. 61 — 63, but
was about to go into Asia Minor (Col. iv. 10). Some years later,
during Ms second imprisonment {circa 67 or 68), the Apostie
wished Timothy to bring him when he came to him (2 Tim.
iv. 11). In this interval we may place Mark's visit to Peter
(v. 13) and the writing of the Epistle. And It cannot be later if
we adopt the traditional account of Ms death. But those who
do not feel themselves bound by it, and who think that he could
not have written to Churches In which St. Paul's authority was
chiefiy recognised during his Ufetime, refer it to some time later
than Ms death.
St. Peter wrote from Babylon (v. 12), but It has been a matter
of dispute whether the old capital of the Chaldeans is meant,
which, though ruined and going to complete decay, still con
tained a large popMation, in which there were many Jews ; or
whether Eome is intended, the mystical Babylon, an interpreta
tion as old as Papias (Euseb. E. H. ii. 15). There is no doubt
that this is the meaning in Eev. xiv. 8 ; xvi. 19 al. But such a
use of the word is as sMtable to the character of that book as it
seems unsuitable here. But whether St. Peter's presence so far
to the East was only a visit, or belonged to a residence of greater
length, we are unable to determine.
4. Style and Character. — The topics foUow each other In no
premeditated order, and the successive thoughts belonging to
them often seem suggested by the one next before. But the
whole form of the Epistle has a great likeness to those of St.
Paul. We see it in the greeting at the beginning, followed by
an introductory passage of some length (i. 3 — 12), in the saluta
tion at the end, and the doxologies (Iv. 11; v. 11). But the
simUarity does not stop here. The pMaseology Is frequently

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

THE FIEST EPISTLE OF PETER. 189
he does not merely echo him. He has his own mode of pre
senting doctrine, Ms own words, and Ms own grammatical
pecuUarities. In accordance with Ms desire to give encouragement under
trial, he turns to the future in hope (i. 3 — 5, 13 ; iii. 9 ; v. 1, 4,
10, 11). His doctrinal teaching is subordinate to his practical
purpose. But it is much fuller than St, James's, as we might
expect from Ms position midway between him and St, Paul. 'We
meet with the office of each person in the Trinity (i. 1 ), and the
power of the Spirit (i. 12, 22). He enters more iMo the work of
our Lord, through whom God receives His glory (iv. 11), and we
our caU (v. 10). He speaks of his sufferings (v. 1) in connection
with their example (ii. 21 — 23), and their power of cleansing and
reconciUng (i. 1 ; ii. 24, 25 ; iii. 18 ; iv. 1) ; of His Eesurrection,
which is the source of belief (i. 21), and of regeneration (i. 3, 23 ;
ui. 21); of His Ascension, and the subjection of the angels to
Him (iu. 22). He does not mention the Law, and his spiritual
conception of the Church is seen in u. 5 — 9, and of baptism in
iu. 21. And yet the treatment and expression in these points is
not the same as St. Paul's, and the characteristic teachmg about
justification does not occur.
The Old Testament is frequently quoted, but we do not find in
it what we read about the prophets in i. 10 — 12. And we learn
through St. Peter alone the interest taken by the angels in the
Gospel (i. 12), but cf. Eph. Ui. 10, and our Lord's preacMng to
•the spirits in prison (iu. 19).
5. Authenticity. — 'TMs was rmdisputed in antiquity. It was
among the books universaUy received. The first aUusion to it ia
in 2 Peter iii. 1. It is repeatedly quoted by Polycarp — the great
Unk between the apostohc age and the one which foUowed it —
in Ms Epistle to the PhUippians. He does not name it. But
this is done more than once by Irenseus, and by Clement of
Alexandria, TertuUIan, and Origen. It is not mentioned in the
Muratorian Canon, wMch admits of explanation ; but it waa
included in the old Latm and Syriac versions.
In modern times it has been caUed in question, on the ground
of the want of originality wMch is seen in the use of other men's
-writings — a thing unworthy of an Apostle — and the absence of
such a distinct individuality as would befit St. Peter. These
points have been dealt with above. A relative originaUty ia
apparent m it, though not an absolute one. It is said, also, that
the characteristics of the persecution agree best with that wMch
was carried on in Trajan's time, of wMch we read in the corre
spondence between Pliny, when he was Governor of Bithynia,
circa a.d. 112, and the Emperor (Pliny's Letters, x. 97, 98). But
the thne of Trajan is not so suitable as that of Nero, or one near

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

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

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

THE SECOND EPISTLE OF PETER. 193
list which Eusebius gives of the Books of the New Testament
in the first part of the fourth century (E. H., HI. 25), he states
that the greater part were generaUy received. He caUs others
of them " controverted but weU-known and recognised by most."
These are Hebrews, James, 2 Peter, 2 and 3 John, Jude, and
the Apocalypse. But tMs distinction soon disappears, and we
have other Usts belonging to the same century either identical
¦with our own, as that of Athanasius, Epiphanius, Jerome,
Eufinus, and Augustine, or almost so, as that of C,>ril of Jerusalem,
in wMch the Apocalypse is omitted. To the same age belongs
the earUest judgment on the subject by Councils of the Church.
The Acts of the CouncU of Laodicea in Phrygia, a.d. 363, contain
a Ust of canonical books which is the same as Cyril's. Its genuine
ness is doubtful. But no doubt attaches to the Canon of Scripture
as recognised by the Third Council of Carthage, a.d. 397, which
agrees entirely with that which we inherit. Neither these CouncUs
nor the writers just mentioned professed to do more than record
the testimony of the earlier periods as it had come down to them.
After this only reminiscences appear from time to time of the
doubts entertained as to parts of the Canon, chiefiy in those
particular regions in which they were once unknown.
(i.) The ground on wMch a book was acknowledged to be
canomcal was its ha-ving for its author an Apostle or apostohc
man. TMs was a matter on wMch the Church of the earliest age
was able to pronounce. Existing as it did before the writmg of
any of the books of the New Testament, they were successively
entrusted to its recognition and care, under the guidance of Divine
providence, as "the Keeper and Witness of Holy Writ." But
the knowledge of them was not everywhere complete at the same
time. In the case of the Epistles the Churches to which they were
originaUy written cherished them from the first, and became
centres from which the knowledge of them spread. But it took
time and intercommunication between the widely-separated com
munities, in an age when such mtercourse was more difficult than
it is now, before the whole Church became familiar with aU ita
possessions of tMs kmd, and distinct in the enumeration of them.
TMs result was helped on by conflicts with heresies, and above
aU by the demand made by order of Diocletian upon the CMis
tians to suarender the Scriptures in order that they might be
destroyed. TMs persecution, carried on in the early years of the
fourth century, directed the attention of aU to the practical, ques
tion as to which books, ¦witMn the whole range of Christian
Uterature, were or were not Scripture.
The full expression of agreement on this point belongs, as we
N

194 BOOK BY BOOK.
have seen, to that period. It was not the effect of any corporate
act of the whole Church, but an agreement still found In the
pages of the leading writers, as to what had been held from the
first. We cannot recover the whole process by which it was
attained. The entire evidence which was relied on has not reached
us ; but it is Instructive to trace the separate lines of testimony
supplied by the earlier periods, such as quotations in orthodox
and heretical writings, and the admission or exclusion of certain
books from the most ancient versions. These sources, from the
character of the literature of the two first centuries and the
fragmentary condition in which it has descended to us, must be
imperfect. And yet the information actuaUy supplied is remark
able. TMs is true not only of the undisputed, but, in a less degree,
of the controverted books. But the Second Epistle of Peter haa
the least amount of this kind of support. There is no undoubted
trace of it in Church writers before Origen, who ¦wrote in the
first part of the third century. His words are preserved in
Eusebius (E- H,, ri. 25) : "Peter again, on whom the Church of
Christ is built, against which the gates of hell shall not prevaU,
has left behind an Epistle generaUy acknowledged, perhaps also
a second, for it is a disputed question." There is additional
mention of it in Ms ¦writings, and even quotations from it, but as
they are only In the Latin version of Eufinus, who was in the
habit of supplementing his author's text, they are not to be
trusted. Again, m the interval between Origen and Eusebius,
no reference to it is found except one which is implied in the
words of FIrmllian, Bishop of Csesarea in Cappadocia, and a
disciple of Origen, In a letter which he wrote to St. Cyprian,
A.D. 266. Nor did it form part of the old Syrleic version, nor of
the old Latin. There is no mention of it in the Muratorian
Canon, but this is true also of 1 Peter, about which there was
no doubt.
Thus it must be admitted that the evidence for it in detail is
extremely small. StIU the fact remains that the Church, which
had been m no hurry to recognise it or the other disputed books,
ultimately pronounced in its favour, as it did in thehs. But
there is one point which must not be passed over. It is hard to
explain how a writing proceeding from one in the position of St.
Peter could have failed to find Immediate and universal acceptance.
Our wonder is lessened to some extent by the few signs of acquaint
ance with the first Epistle, which appear for a long time in one
quarter. " It must be noticed that the actual traces of the early
use of 1 Peter in the Latin churches are very scanty. There
is not the least evidence to show that its authority was ever

THE SECOND EPISTLE OF PETEE. 195
disputed ; but, on the other hand, it does not seem to have been
much read, The Epistle is not mentioned in the Muratorian
• Canon, though no stress can be laid on that fact. It is more
strange that TertuUIan quotes it only twice, and that, too, in
writings which are more or less open to suspicion." (Westcott,
"Survey of the History of the Canon of the New Testament,"
p. 260, n.) Even on the supposition of its not being genuine,
the obscurity of 2 Peter Is perplexing. We might have expected
to have found it denounced. It is clear that we are not acquainted
with all the circumstances.
(ii.) Internal difficulties operated in some degree against it.
We have seen what Jerome said about the effect of the difference
of style in the two Epistles. And we learn from Mm that the
authority of Jude was questioned on account of its use of Apocry
phal writings. TMs would be Ukely in a degree to affect the
reception of this Epistle. Objections to it of this nature have had
great infiuence in modern times. It contains an accumulation
of points open to criticism. An anxiety on the part of the writer
to be recognised as an Apostle has been detected, contrasting with
the modesty of the earUer letter. It may be replied that the
Apostle's aim now was to speak out in Ms own name, and to use
the authority which he had, whUe the other tone was in agree
ment with Ms purpose there.
It has been said that St. Peter's life does not aUow for an
interval between the Epistles long enough for the rise of a new
set of circumstances completely changing Ms aim. But spiritual
evils are often of rapid growth, and noticed in their early stages
by those whose duty it is to be on the watch. A mark of later
date is seen in the term "holy mount" applied to the scene of
the transfiguration (i. 18), as if it were a recognised namo for it
to the prejudice of Mount Zion. But it seems to Imply no more
than that the readers were acquainted with the event referred to.
And the confining of the apostohc witness to that one incident In
our Lord's Ufe, to the omission of His passion and resurrection
dwelt on in 1 Peter, is taken as showing a want of the sense of
proportion not to be expected in one of His companions. Yet It
is in keeping with the view of the whole Epistle. The first
coming of the Lord was not denied by the scoffers. It is His
" eternal kingdom " into which St. Peter incites 'his readers to
secure an entrance (I. 11). He assures them of the power of
Jesus Christ, and His coming in glory by Ms testimony to the
sight of His majesty which had been granted beforehand to him
and the two other Apostles. Again St. Paul's Epistles are placed,
perhaps with other contemporary ¦writings, in the same rank
apparently as the Scriptures of the Old Testame^nt (HI, 16). It is
N 3

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

THE SECOND EPISTLE OF PETEE. 197
16 — 21. Grounds for expecting the Lord's coming. — His majesty
witnessed beforehand by the Apostle on the Mount, 16 — 18
the teaching of prophecy, 19 — 21.
(ii.) 1 — 22. Fahe Teachers to be expected ; their punishment. — There
shaU be false teachers among them, as there were false prophets
in Israel, 1 — 3 ; God knows how to deliver the godly out of
temptation, and to keep the ungodly under punishment tlU the
day of judgment ; as shown by the example of Noah and Lot,
on the one hand, and by that of the sinful angels and Sodom
and Gomorrha, on the other, 4 — 10. Description of these teachers
(so far as they have aheady made their appearance), 11 — 16;
their influence, 17 — 22.
(Hi.) 1 — 10. The Lord's coming defended against Soof ers. The aim
of tMs and the former Epistle is to remind them of the words
of the prophets and the Lord, 1 — 2. Scoffers wIU come derldl;ng
their expectation of Him, 3 — 4. They wUfuUy forget that God,
who once destroyed the earth by water, wiU do so again by fire,
5 — 7. His delay is long-suffering, 8 — 9 ; but He wUl come, and
suddenly, 10.
11 — 18. Concluding Exhortations, including mention of St. Paul's
Epistles. Doxology.

THE EPISTLE OF JUDE.
1. Authorship. — The seventh and last of the so-called Catholic
Epistles claims (verse 1) fo be the work of " Jude, the servant of
Jesus Christ, and brother of James." Of the several persons in
the New Testament bearing the name of Jude only two can be
said In any way to answer to this description of our writer,
viz. : —
(I.) "Jude of James," a member of the band of Apostles,
Luke vi. 16 ; Acts i. 13 ; John xiv. 22. This phrase is translated
by a somewhat unusual method in the Authorised Version,
"Jude, the brother of James," in order to make the title agree
with that by which the writer of this Epistle definitely names
himself ; but the ordinary significance of tMs form of expression
in Greek demands rather the translation, "Jude, the son of
James," as It is rendered in the Peshito Version, and hy Tyndale,
Cranmer, Luther, and most modern critics ; and indeed In the
case of the other Apostles so described, the eUIpse Is thus suppUed
in the Authorised Version, e.g. "James, the son of Alphseus."
The twelve members of the ApostoUc body in all the lists
(Matt. X. 2 ; Mark UI. 16 ; Luke vi. 14 ; Acts i. 13) faU into tMee
groups of four. In the first two lists the name " Jude of James "
does not occur, but its place is represented by the name " Thad-
dseus," in consequence of wMch "Jude of James" has been
identified with Thaddseus, who was — according to some MSS. of
the Greek Testament, foUowed by Jerome — also called Lebbseus.
Also, since in all four Usts of the Apostles, James, the son of
Alphseus, is the first name of the group in which the meniber
Thaddseus or Jude of James Is also always placed, it has been
generally thought that this James Is the father intended in the
title, Jude the son of James.
TMs Jude, therefore, was — {a) an Apostle; (J) also called
Thaddseus ; (c) the son of James the Little and grandson of
Alphseus. (ii.) Jude, the brother of the Lord, mentioned In Matt. xiu.
66 ; Mark vi. 3, together -ndth a brother named James.

THE EPISTLE OF JUDE. 199
These two men have been by some critics regarded as one and
the same person.
According to this supposition Jude is the brother of James, he
and James being both sons of Alphseus ; Alphseus is the same as
Clopas, the husband of a Mary (Mark xv. 40 ; John xix. 25), who
is regarded as the sister of the Virgin Mary, so that Jude and
James would be the cousins (in Greek " brethren ") of our Lord,
and agree with the names recorded in Matt. xiii. 55 ; Mark -vi. 3.
Against this view, however, are the two facts— first that, as
already stated, it is unusual to interpret the Greek phrase, "Jude
of James, "_ in any other manner than " Jude, the son of James ; "
next, that it is distinctly remarked in John vii. 5, that our Lord's
brethren did not believe in Him, and therefore it is impossible
that they could have been among the Apostles ; and indeed from
Acts i. 13,, 14, it is clear that they were distinguished from the
Aposties after their conversion. It would seem safer, therefore,
to regard "Jude of James," or Thaddseus, the Apostle, as one
person, and Jude, the brother of the Lord, as another distmct
from Mm.
If this be the case, which of the two may we more probably
regard as the author of the Epistle ?
The writer styles himself (verse 1) "the servant of Jesus
Christ, and brother of James," from which it would appear;
first, that he was not Jude, the son of James, the Apostle ; next,
that he was not an Apostle at aU, or he would have mentioned
the fact in the usual manner (as St. PaM In the first verse of
almost aU his Epistles, and St. Peter in the opening of Ms two
letters), and by identifying himself as an Apostle of Jesus Chriat
he would not have been obliged to fix Ms personality by the
description "brother of James."
In accordance with this conclusion is the fact that nowhere in
his Epistle does the writer speak as an Apostle, but perhaps
rather as one outside the Apostolic body, e.g. in verse 17, " Ee
member ye the words which were spohen before of the Apostles."
And the absence of the Epistle in the Peshito (Syriac) Version of
the New Testament may perhaps also be -taken as a sign that it
was not the work of the Apostle Jude Thaddseus, to whom
tradition assigns the foundation of the Syrian Church of Edessa.
For these reasons, therefore, the writer would appear to have
been Jude, the brother of the Lord and of James, who had
probably been converted to the faith after the Lord's resurrec
tion (see Acts I. 14 ; 1 Cor. Ix. 5). If so, Ms brother James must
have been a well-known person at the time, from the Introduc
tion of the relationship In the opening words of the letter, and
he was therefore perhaps the James who was the first Bishop

200 BOOK BY BOOK.
of Jeruaalem (Acts xii. 17; xv. 13, 19; xx-vi. 18; Gal. ii. 9, 12),
and posslblj' the author of the Epistle bearing that name.
Against the identification of our author with the brother of
the Lord, and in favour of the writer's being the Apostie Jude,
it has been alleged —
(i.) Thatthe phrase, "servant of Jesus Christ," woy convey
the idea of Apostieship, as in Eom. i. 1, Tit. i. 1. But in these
passages, as in 2 Pet. i. 1, it is coupled with, and apparently
distinct from, the title of Apostle ; and in Phil. i. 1, it is appUed
also to Timothy, who was not an Apostle ; and, lastly. It may be
noted that, as the phrase certainly does not of necessity imply
the Apostolate, it would assuredly he an insufficient aUusion to it
in a solitary letter from one of the less-known members of the
Apostolic body.
(ii.) That if he were reaUy the brother of the Lord, the writer
would certainly have described Mmself as such rather than as
the brother of James. But it is probable, as the author of the
" Adumbrationes " ascribed to Clement of Alexandria long ago
pointed out, that from motives of modesty he preferred to veU
Ms casual relationsMp with the Lord under the general and less
distinctive title, "the servant of Jesus Christ," as expressing
Ms more important spiritual union with Him who had been by
the Eesurrection exalted as the Son of God, for the union tMough
faith ecUpsed the union through the flesh (Matt. xii. 49, 50 ;
Heb. ii. 11). Indeed, as Dean Alford remarks, "had such a
designation as the brother of the Lord been found in the address
of an Epistle, it woMd have formed a strong d priori objection
to its authenticity," as savouring rather of " those superstitious
feelings with which the next and foUowing ages regarded His
eartMy relatives."
It seems, therefore, more in accordance with the natural and
simple bearing of the evidence to assume that the author of the
Epistle was Jude, the brother of the Lord (whatever exact rela
tionship that designation may imply), and not Jude Thaddseus,
the Apostle, the son of James and grandson of Alphseus.
As to the after history of the writer: — The traditions con
nected with the name of Jude (aU of wMch appear to be of
late origin) relate to the Apostle Jude Thaddseus, except the
interesting story preserved by Eusebius ("Eccl. Hist." iu. 20)
from Hegesippus, that the descendants of Jude, "the reputed
brother of the Saviour according to the flesh," were viewed with
suspicion by the Emperor Domltian from their connection with
David, the ancestor of the coming Messiamc Bang, as likely to
prove leaders In any Jewish rising against the Eoman power ;
but they were eventuaUy dismissed by him with contempt as

THE EPISTLE OF JUDE. 201
harmless rustics, when he found on examination that their ideas
of the Mngdom to come were not what he had imagined.
2. Authenticity. — The exact personality of the author being
uncertam, we are not surprised to find that the canonicity of the
letter has been a matter of doubt, not merely in modern times,
but also in the early ages of the Church when it was not univer
saUy known.
The evidence bearing on the authenticity of any work naturaUy
f aUs under two heads : —
Internal evidence gathered from the contents of the -writing
itself.
External e-vidence, consisting of points in the writings of
other authors, or of facts in history, wMch in any way
connect themselves with the work in question.
(i.) The evidence of genuineness which the letter itself presents
is chiefly of a negative character, and may be summed up as
follows : —
(a) No portion of it gives ground for the faintest suspicion
that it was written with intent to impose upon the
Church in any degree. The simple and indefinite
description of the writer Is In itself a mark of the
straightforward character of the work. Accordingly
we find that the doubts as to its canonicity have
never been based upon any supposed traces of
forgery in the Epistle.
(5) Neither the personage of the author, nor the nature
of the contents, are sufficiently ambitious to render
any fraud probable. Eelatively speaking, the
Epistle is of Uttle importance either for novelty of
revelation or for special appUcation of doctrine;
and a forger would have aimed at some more
definite and significant object in order to obtain
acceptance for his work. And it is from this com
paratively unimportant character of the letter that
the doubts as to its authenticity have mainly arisen,
the question in the minds of the ancients being
whether it seemed to fiU any real gap in the fabric
of Holy Scriptures.
(ii.) Passing to the evidence relating to the letter from external
sources, we may briefly trace its history as follows r —
It is not noticed by any of the Apostolic Fathers, nor in the
so-caUed Epistle of Barnabas and Shepherd of Hermas, nor Is
there any vestige of its existence in the writings of Irenseus and
Papias. As already stated, it is absent from the Peshito Version
of the New Testament (a work of untraceable antiquity) in com-

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

THE EPISTLE OF JUDE. 203
Churches would be to increase rather than to diminish the force
of prejudice.
3. Object. — The letter is addressed (verse 1) "to them that
are sanctified by God the Father, and preserved In CMist Jesus,
and called." TMs salutation Is so general as to be applicable
to aU CMistians, and thus serves to Ulustrate the aim of a
" Catholic" Epistle in the simplest sense of this term. Similarly
the exhortations and warnings throughout the Epistle would
apply equally to all branches of the Church.
But perhaps two hints seem to point to a particularly Jewish
Church as the primary destination of the letter : —
(i.) The description of the writer as the " brother of James,"
which would not only be a sufficient Identification, but would also
have a special ' significance to Palestinian CMistians, if that
brother were James, the famous Bishop of Jerusalem.
(ii.) The thoroughly Jewish historical aUusions ; e.g. the
Eedemption from Egypt and purification in the wUderness (verse
5) ; the overthrow of Sodom and Gomorrha (verse 7) ; the Eab-
bimc legend about the body of Moses (verse 9) ; the slnsof Cain,
Balaam, and Korah (verse 11) ; the traditions concerning Enoch
(verses 14 and 15), aU of wMch imply a Jewish turn of mind In
the recipients of the Epistle.
It would therefore appear that the letter was originaUy written
to Hebrew-Christians in Palestine, and this may perhaps be cor
roborated by the aUusion to Apostolic teaching, as a whole, in
verse 17, where it seems to be implied that the readers of the
Epistle had themselves heard the Apostles generaUy.
The object which St. Jude had in writing to them is stated
(verse 3) to be "to exhort them that they should earnestly contend
for the faith which was once delivered unto the saints;" and
tMs exhortation Is said (verse 4) to be rendered necessary by the
e-vU examples of certain reprobate members in the Church, against
whom he directs Ms efforts to warn Ms readers by a vehement
exposure of their wickedness. These offenders appear to have
been carnaUy-mlnded libertines who used the freedom of CMIstlans
from the literal obligation of the Mosaic law as a cloke for vice,
Uving in licentiousness themselves and railing contemptuously
against aU authorities and rulers both ecclesiastical and civil.
The handUng of the subject wiU be more evident from an analysis
of the letter; it Is modeUed throughout on a careful plan —
bordering on the artificial — the main, divisions, subdivisions, and
instances all being arranged on a threefold system.
(A) Preface ; verses 1 — 4 : '
I. Salutation : verse 1 — 2.
II. Object of the letter : verse 3.
III. Eeason for this object : verse 4.

204 BOOK BY BOOK.
(B) Warnings ; ¦verses 5— IQ:
I. Three Instances of Divine punishment for corporate wicked
ness applied to the case of these libertines : verses 6 — 10 :
(a) The rebeUious IsraeUtes In the wilderness : verses 5, 8.
(b) The unfaithful angels In contrast to the faithful:
verses 6, 9.
(c) The sensual cities of the plain : verses 7, 10.
II. Three instances of Individual wickedness iUustrating the
sins of these e-vU-doers : verse 1 1 :
{a) Cain = disobedience.
(b) Balaam=greed.
(e) Korah = railing.
III. Three vivid descriptions of these latest rebels, with three
tokens by which their condemnation maybe evident; verses 12
—19: (a) IUustration of their state by images from Nature :
verses 12, 13 ; to be recogmsed from its agreement
with the words of Enoch : verses 14, 15.
{b) By their base thoughts and language : verse 16 ; ful
filling the prophecies of the Apostles : verses 17, 18.
{c) By their unfaltUul conduct, attested by their lack of
spirituaUty: verse 19.
(C.) Exhortations ; verses 20 — 25 :
I. As to themselves (verse 20, 21) let Ms readers be firm in :
(a) Faith : verse 20.
(b) Love: verse 21«.
(c) Hope: verse 215.
II. With reference to the libertines (verses 22, 23) let the
faithful treat :
(fl) Some of them with gentle measures : verse 22.
(b) Others with strong remedies : verse 23fl.
(c) But all their sins with utter disapproval : verse 23}.
III. As regards God : Doxology (verses 24, 25) let aU join in
thanks to Him for :
(a) His support against similar falling away : verse 24fl.
(b) His grace In sanctification : verse 24j.
(c) His wisdom in overruUng everything : verse 25.
4. Date, Place, etc., of Writing. — On these points we have no
direct information, either internal or external : aU the indications
are so slender that the inferences deduced from them have varied
considerably In everytMng except uncertainty.
(I.) The story preserved by Eusebius (quoted above) seems to
imply that the descendants of St. Jude were summoned from
Palestine to the Emperor Domitian ; and as we found that the
writer appeared to claim a Palestinian reputation in the opening

THE EPISTLE OF JUDE. 205
of Ms Epistle, we may perhaps most reasonably conjecture that
the letter was written somewhere in the Holy Land.
(Ii.) In verse 17 the teaching of the Apostles is alluded to as
a thing of the past ; " the woris -which were spohen before" . . . .
"how they told you." This language, however, cannot be forced
to mean more than that the Apostles had passed away from
that particular part of the world where St. Jude's readers
resided, and were carrying on their work elsewhere.
(Hi.) The internal condition of the Church to which the Epistle
points is certainly not very far advanced. There appears to have
been no definite code of discipUne ; notorious offenders are still
members of the Church, and present at the Agapse, or Love-
feasts, which united aU Church-members : even the most violent
upholders of new opinions are not ecclesiastically deposed, and
are only just beginning to separate themselves (verse 19). The
reaction of the escape from Judaism is stUl fresh, as in the case
of the recipients of some of St. Paul's Epistles, and shows Itself
in the laxity of these Ubertines ; their excesses are of a primitive
nature, and their heresies are not yet developed into a system.
(iv.) It is noteworthy that the destruction of Jerusalem (a.d.
70) is in no way alluded to, which would appear to point to a
previous date for the composition of the letter. It has indeed
been asserted that the event is in no degree connected with the
subject of the Epistle, and that therefore there is no cause for
surprise In the omission of aU reference to It, although It might
have already taken place. But the writer expressly bases Ms
warnings on the most notable judgments of God for disobedience ;
and therefore, with such a subject in hand, he would have found
the destruction of Jerusalem and overthrow of the Je-wish nation
signaUy to the purpose, if it had been accomplished, as a recent
instance paraUel to that of the Church In the wilderness (verse 6)
or of the fallen angels (verse 6).
The result of these slight indications is to point to a date
towards the close of the era of general Apostolic labour, yet
previous to the faU of Jerusalem, i.e. some time between a.d. 60
—70. As to the language in which the Epistle was originally written,
there is not sufficient warrant to suppose that the letter ever
appeared in any other than the Greek dress which it now wears.
Attempts have been made to prove that the original was in
Hebrew ; but the fact that the language is Greek written by a
Jew is enough to explain any apparent Semitlcisms wMch may
be noticeable in places.
5. Peculiarities. — Besides the impetuous and intensely earnest
style, which must be an evident token of the -writer's character.

206 BOOK BY BOOK.
this short Epistle presents in an Important degree the interesting
pecuUarity of definitely referring to events in the ancient history
of the Church of God which are not contained In the Canonical
Books of the Old Testament, even going so far In one startling
instance as to quote directly from the Apocryphal Book of Enoch.
(I.) In verse 9 we are informed of a conflict between the
Archangel Michael and the devil on the body of Moses, and it ia
natural to inquire whence the writer obtained this allusion.
In the "Adumbrationes" assigned to Clement of Alexandria,
and in Origen's work " De Principiis " III., Ii. 1, mention is
made of an apocryphal book caUed " The Assumption of Moses "
(parts of which have been discovered in a Latin translation), as
containing notice of this conflict ; and this, according to Didymus
of Alexandria, was the reason why the Manlchees rejected the
Epistie. But we' are not in a position to say that this book was in exis
tence at the time of St. Jude, nor that — supposing itwere written
before his day — he was actuaUy acquainted with it, though, ac
cording to some late writers. Gal. v. 6; vi. 16, is a quotation
from it by St. Paul.
It Is more probable that St. Jude's knowledge of tMs legend
was derived from the same source as that whence the author of
" The Assumption of Moses" received it, viz., from the tradition
of the Jewish Eabbis. The original groundwork of the legend
is doubtless the passage in the Targum of Jonathan (which is
supposed to have existed in oral form at the timo of our Lord),
on Deut. xxxiv. 6, which states that the grave of Moses waa
placed under the care of Michael. Eound this centre floated a
whole cycle of legends, traceable here and there in Eabbinic
literature, of which St. Jude here adopts one — without neces
sarily investing it with any canonical authority — to iUustrate his
purpose, as being kno-wn to Ms readers and sho-wing the feeUngs
of right-minded men — apart from inspiration — against certain
conduct. SimUarly, St. Paul takes up names current amongst the Eabbis
for the Egyptian magicians who imitated the miracles of Moses
before Pharaoh (2 Tim, iu. 8), or employs the Eabbinic legend
of the Eock following the IsraeUtes in the wilderness, to draw
out a spiritual lesson (1 Cor. x. 4) ; compare also Acts vii. 22, 23,
30 ; Gal.-ili. 19 ; Heb. U. 12 ; xi. 24, for a somewhat similar use
of Eabbimc tradition to supplement the narratives of the Old
Testament. The case is analogous to St. Paul's applications of
the sayings of heathen poets in Acts xvU. 28 ; 1 Cor xv. 32 •
Tit. i. 12. '
(ii.) In verses 6, 14, 15, we have passages which appear to be

THE EPISTLE OF JUDE. 207
derived from the Book of Enoch. TMs book is now generaUy
assigned — at least in its earUest portions — to a date quite a century
before our Lord, and the widespread acquaintance with It In the
ecclesiastical -writings of the second century a.d. seems to render
it probable that St. Jude derived Ms language in these verses
rather from the book itself than from Independent tradition after
wards Incorporated into the book. The Book of Enoch is an
important early work of the apocalyptic class modeUed on the
style of the latter part of Daniel.
It was used by the early fathers — Justin Martyr, Irenseus,
Clement of Alexandria, Origen, TertulUan, Augustine — though
TertuUIan alone regarded it as canonical. After their time, how
ever, the book as a whole was lost, and aU that remained of it
was represented by the quotations in these and other writers.
But in 1773 the iEthiopic translation of the book was discovered
and brought over to England by the traveUer Bruce. This trans
lation was made durmg the fourth century a.d. from the Greek,
but the original language in which the book was written is gene
rally thought to have been Hebrew.
It contains, in one hundred and eight chapters, a series of
visions claiming to have been accorded to Enoch and Noah, and
explaining the working of Providence in the world — from a
Jewish point of view.
The substance of Jude, verse 6, is contained repeatedly in the
book, and it seems preferable to refer his traditions to this work
rather than to Gen. vi. 2, of wMch the interpretation is uncertain
and much disputed.
The passage in Jude, verses 14 and 15, is contained almost ver
batim in Enoch, chap. U;
On the remaining important point to notice, viz., the relation
between the Second Epistle of St. Peter and that of St. Jude—
see the chapter on the former Epistie.

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

THE REVELATION OF ST. JOHN THE DIVINE. 209
prophecy," should be, at first sight at least, the one most difficult
to comprehend.
Yet the Church would under no circumstances be entitled to
despair. If she has good reason to beUeve that the authenticity
and genuineness of the work are estabUshed by a chain of
evidence, as unbroken and strong as In the case of any other
book of the New Testament ; more especially if the evidence
points to St. John, "the beloved disciple" of Jesus, rather than
to some wholly unknown person, as the author, she must believe
that the difficulties connected with the subject are capable of
being, and will be finaUy, overcome. NotMng can be more
inconsistent -with the whole idea of revelation, notMng more out
of keeping -with God's other dealings in creation, providence, or
grace, than to imagine that a book has been put into our hands
designed to perplex and trouble us. And this is the more evident
when we observe that the -writer of the book distinctly states that
he writes for the encouragement and comfort of Ms "brethren,"
of those who were " companions with him in the tribulation and
kingdom and patience which are in Jesus ; " that he feels that
he has a divine commission to "show unto God's servants the
tMngs which must shortly come to pass ; " and that in the seven
epistles of chaps. H. and HI., which contain an abslai'act of aU
that is afterwards unfolded in the book, we have the seven times
repeated cry, " He that hath an ear let him hear what the Spirit
saith to the Churches" (chaps, i. 1, 9, H., IU.).
The expectation thus founded in the nature of the case is
confirmed by results. It can hardly be denied that the more
recent interpretations of the Apocalypse have exMbited greater
unity of view as to its meaning than had been -witnessed for
several centuries. As the storms of the period immediately pre
ceding and foUowing the Eeformation passed away, light began
to break again in the Church's sky, and the mistaken interpre
tations of a time of disuMon and discord among bretMen to dis^
appear, tUl at last we seem to be on the verge of a period when,
if opinions are not less discordant than ever regarding some
external critical questions affecting the Apocalypse, they are
approaching harmony as to the principles upon wMch it is, if
received, to be understood.
In these circumstances it would be at once faitMess and
cowardly to despair. The writer of the book did not only under
stand what he was saying. The sublime march of Ms periods ;
the grandeur of Ms figures when we look at them with Jewish
eyes ; the at one time terrible, at another pathetic, eloquence of
Ma language; the glow, in short, of prophetic and poetic enthu
siasm wMch Is diffused over every part of Ms work, show that he

210 BOOK BY BOOK.
was Mmself cheered, roused, and transported by what he saw.
As he saw he would have us see ; and we must be as he was if
we would see with him. Let the Church therefore only approach
her task of endeavouring to see with meekness, humUity, and
love ; let her rise above the thought of different, of too often
jarring, sections of her body ; let her remember that she is one,
and that it is with the whole body as the Bride of Christ that she
has here to do, and there can be little doubt that the darkness
BO often complained of wiU be dispeUed, and that she too, by what
she sees, wUl be not less cheered, roused, and transported than
the beloved disciple was to whom the vision was first given.
2. The Unity of the Apocalypse. — In turning our attention more
particularly to the book before us, recent events have shown that
one point in connection with it requires fuUer notice than would
have been thought necessary only a few years ago. The unity
of the book has been of late seriously disputed. It had been so
before, but the controversy had been apparently exhausted ; and
so general was the agreement that one author only had taken
part in its composition, that commentators had begun in their
prolegomena to leave the question of its unity undiscussed. Volter
and Welzacker at Tiibingen, and Vischer and Harnack at Mar
burg, have recently revived the controversy, and it is necessary
to say something in regard to it. It is unneeessay, indeed, to
speak at any length either of Welzacker or of Harnack. "The
former In his elaborate work, "Das ApostolischeZeltalter," 1886,
has simply intimated Ms belief that the Apocalypse is in many of
its parts more or less interpolated ; the latter, in Ms " Texte und
Untersuchungen," vol. ii. part 3, 1886, has done notMng more
than adopt, with a few commendatory suggestions, the views of
Ms pupU Vischer. The real attack is by "Volter first and Vischer
afterwards. • (i. ) The first of these critics pubUshed Ms views in 1 8 82, and after
wards in a second and enlarged edition of his pamphlet In 1886.
They amount to tMs, that instead of proceeding as a whole from.
one author, the Apocalypse consists of five different parts, belong
ing to eras of the Church more or less remote from each other,
and written by at least four different persons. The book had
been at first very brief, and greatly limited in its scope ; but so
much had it been valued, that it was repeatedly enlarged, and
different recensions were produced, the last of wMch appeared
between a.d. 160 andA.D. 170. The attempt is made to show that
there Is a correspondence between the different parts of the book
and contemporary events so close as to justify the conclusion that
the former were taken from the latter. It is needless to add that,
under the process, the spiritual life and power of the book whoUy

THE EEVELATION OF ST. JOHN THE DIVINE. 211
disappear, and that it becomes a narrative relating only to the
craft and foUies of cunning impostors, wicked kings, and deluded
peoples. The second critic named pursues an entirely different course.
Under the Impression that there are two distinct lines of thought
in the Apocalypse, especially in its Christology, and that these
two Unes cannot be traced- to one mind, Vischer supposes that
the groundwork of what we now possess was a Jewish Apocalypse
wMch had passed into the early Christian Church, and attained
great reputation there ; that an unknown member of the latter
body had resolved to adapt the book more thoroughly to Christian
uses, and that for tMs purpose he had interpolated It with
CMistian thoughts, more particularly prefixing the first three
chapters, adding the latter part of the twenty-second chapter, and
introducing now the word " lamb," now again the word "Jesus"
or " Christ," but occasionally also finding room for whole para
graphs, such as the second vision of chap, vii., the first vision of
chap, xiv., and several verses associated in chaps, xxi. and xxii.
¦with the descriptions there given of the millennial glory and of
the New Jerusalem. The re-worker thus, as It were, baptized the
old Je^wish Apocalypse in a CMistian font, and a Jewish became
'a CMistian child.
(ii.) We may be spared dweUing at any length upon the views
of the two ¦writers named, for this reason, if for no other, that
¦they have taken up each an attitude of determined opposition to
the other. Vischer in publishing his theory was careful to de
monstrate the weakness of Volter's ; Volter in self-defence held
np Vischer's theory to ridicule and scorn. The two critics may
be left to bring their controversy to a close at the time most con
venient for themselves. MeanwhUe it is sufficient to say that
neither has gained anything Uke a general, or even a widespread,
acceptance for Ms theory. Volter has failed to account for that
similarity of style wMch marks the whole book and is inconsistent
with the supposition of so many different authors having been
engaged on it, wMle his correspondences of place and time are
only gained by forcing the text Into meanings which It Is impos
sible for it to bear. Vischer, on the other hand, whUe proceeding
upon the simple plan of cutting out aU direct Christian aUusions
in the book, leaves us as a Jewish work what no Jew could have
¦written, expectations and hopes inconsistent with those which we
know to have been entertained in Israel, and long passages which,
even when such words as "the lamb" or "Jesus" have been
removed from them, can only be accounted for on the supposition
that they are the product of a CMIstlan pen. Both writers, too,
ignore the fact that a spiritual interpretation of the Apocalypse,
o 2

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

THE REVELATION OF ST. JOHN THE DIVINE. 213
moment only the first of these t-wo points. It may be observed that
there is nothing in. the book inconsistent with the supposition
that it may have proceeded from one belonging to a company of
poor and unlettered men. The poetic fire which It displays, the
rich exuberance of figures and symbols which it emplovs, the
strong and impassioned language m wMch it speaks, are not the
- result of education in any age, and least of aU of the education
given in Jewish circles at the beginning of the Christian era.
The formalism of the Eabbis of that time, their narrow devotion
to the letter only of what they studied, their dependence upon
the sayings of their predecessors in theu- schools, and their re
pression of aU originaUty in their pupUs, would tend powerfuUy
to check the development of that spuit wMch the Apocalypse
reveals. We can understand the writing of such a book if its author
came to Ms task either from direct study of the old prophets of
Ms people or from personal contact with the Ufe of Jesus, for in
both cases conventionaUties had been broken tMough, mannerism
had been overcome, and freedom, ahke of thought and style,
had burst the bonds of that trifiing occupation -with the smaUest
particulars of the Divine Word, in wMch its general spu-it had
been lost sight of and its great end missed. But we cannot so
weU understand it if we are to look for the writer among those
who were educated, in the sense m wMch education was then
given, among the "-wise and prudent" rather than among the
"unlearned and ignorant" (Acts iv. 13). Nor is there an im
probabUity m the idea that its author should have pursued, at
least in early Ufe, the occupation of a fisherman upon the Sea of
GalUee, and that he should never have risen abbve an estate of
poverty. A similar objection might be urged against the idea
that " The PUgrim's Progress " was written by a poor tinker of
Bedford. Depth of emotion, insight into the dealings of God
¦with the soul of man, hatred of sin, conviction of righteousness,
and a strong persuasion that, notwithstanding aU appearances
to the contrary, there is a righteous Governor of the universe
who -wiU yet avenge His elect, may be found not less among the
poor and suffering than among the rich and prosperous. Nay,
¦they are more natural to the one than to the other, for the former
know, by an experience such as the latter can hardlj^ have, by an
experience wMch penetrates the inmost fibres of theu- being, what
the trials of this world are, and what that " patience in Jesus"
(Eev. i. 9) is wMch alone can meet them. We can have no diffi
culty, therefore, m accepting the conclusion that, striMng as the
characteristics of the Apocalypse are, that book may have
proceeded from one of om- Lord's Aposties, or even from
St. John.

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

THE REVELATION OF ST. JOHN THE DIVINE. 215
difficulty is not so great as might at first appear. It reaUy resolves
itself into the question. Could the same writer, at the same age
and surrounded by the same circumstances, entertain the calm
thought of an Mstorical life lived in the past, side by side with a
poetic and prophetic vision of the future, which the Leader of that
life had Himself suggested at moments when He rose to loftier
than ordinary heights of prophetic utterance ? There seems no
good reason why that question should be answered in the nega
tive ; and if the two pictures could dwell in his mind, he could
certainly present them to Ms readers. It is too often forgotten
that, in our Lord's own language, we have two entirely different
styles of thought ; and that if these could coexist In Him, they
might also coexist in one to whom He was so drawn by some
wonderful affinity that He regarded Him as ' ' the disciple whom
He loved."
(ii.) With not less confidence it is urged that the tone and
temper of the two books are so different, that If St. John be the
author of the one he cannot also be the author of the other. But
this objection rests upon a failure to estimate the true character
of the Gospel similar to that of which we have just spoken In
regard to the utterances of Jesus. There can be no greater mis
take than to speak of the Fourth Gospel as a calm and peaceful
idyl, revealing nothing but the outgoings of a tender heart to- ,
wards loved disciples, and breathing nothing but serenity and
repose. Such is certainly not the character of the Apocalypse, but
it is not less false to fact to say that It Is the character of the
Gospel. If the one is fuU of tumult, war, and excited passion,
the other is not less so. There are, no doubt, passages in it
which exhibit the spirit ascribed by partial observation to tho
whole. Such are chaps, xiii. to xvii., in which Jesus finds Him
self in the bosom of the little family He is shortly to leave, and in
which He speaks to them ¦with all the sympathy and tenderness of
a dying father who knows that he is about to be taken from his
chUdren, and that after his departure they wUl be, exposed without
the support of his immediate presence to the coldness and opposi
tion of the world. But these chapters are not the neutral portion
of the book. That portion we must seek for In the chapters closing
with chap, xii., in which the Saviour's struggle with the world ia
so strikingly presented to us. In these chapters, accordingly, we
meet the very same characteristics as those by which the Apoca
lypse is marked — a constantly increasing opposition between the
worid and Jesus, the hatred of the former to the latter, as weU
as the severity of the latter's judgment on the former, ever
deepening In intensity and force. There is excitement, tumult,
war in the one book as much as In the other. In each the compas
sionate Eedeemer, who purchased His people with His blood and

216 BOOK BY BOOK.
weeps with them in their sorrows. Is also the judge of men and
the triumphant conqueror over aU His enemies.
(IH.) A difference of teaching has also been urged as separating
the two books to an extent wMch shows that, if St. John be the
author of the Jewish Gospel, he cannot also be the author of the
Apocalypse. The subject thus opened up is wide ; but it may be
sufficient to say that when the Apocalypse Is, as it ought to be,
interpreted according to the exegetical rules suggested by Itself,
not oMy Is there no difference In the teaching of the two books :
their similarity in tMs respect is rather their most striking feature.
Every one wiU admit that, in each of the New Testament writers,
there is, as we might expect, a type of teaching peculiar to Mmself.
The substance is the same, but the point of view from wMch it
is looked at and the form differ. No one -wIU contend that St.
James, St. Peter, St. Paul, and St. John are not, in the manner in
wMch they present the truth, clearly distingMshable from one
another. Much is the same, but much also is so peculiar to each
that we at once feel ourselves entitled to say, " This is his, and no
other's ; tMs is characteristic of one of them, and not of the other
three." Bearing this in mind, let us now take the most character
istic parts of the teaching of the Apocalypse, and It wiU be found
that they present a mode of thought differing from that of all
the other New Testament -writers except St. John ; and, further,
not only not differing from him, but resembling Mm in the closest
and most remarkable degree.
The force of these remarks can be fuUy appreciated only when
the doctrinal teacMngs of the two books are carefuUy studied and
compared throughout. But in confirmation of what has been said,
we may refer the reader to the mode in which they present the
truths connected with the Person and Kingdom of CMist ; the
field of His worMng, and the work He has to do in it ; the appro
priation of redemption, and the relation of believers to their Lord ;
the moral freedom of man ; and the final judgment. It is not too
much to aUege that on every one of these points there is a most
singular degree of correspondence between the way In wMch the
author of the Apocalypse and the author of the Fourth Gospel
think. We are compelled to come to the conclusion that the
former cannot be St. James, or St. Peter, or St. Paul, but that,
in so far as striking simUarity of thought In two books leads us
to identify the same person as the author of both, he may be, and
probably is, St. John.*
Enough has been said upon the question immediately before us.
* The similarity alluded to above has been unfolded at considerable length
by the present -writer in his " Eevelation of St. John," 2nd Edition, 1SS7 in
the Appendix devoted to a comparison of the Apocalypse and the Fourth
Grospel. To this he is compeUed by want of space here to refer the reader.

THE REVELATION OF ST. JOHN THE DIVINE. 217
External evidence Is, by the admission of aU mquirers, strongly in
favour of the Johannine origin of the Apocalypse. Internal e-vi
dence alone occasions difficulty ; but the more minutely the book
is examined the more do the difficulties suggested either by its
contents or their form disappear. We may therefore take the
book into our hands, and without hesitation feel that we are
listening to the words of that Apostle who was known In the
early CMistian Church by the beautiful name of Epistethios, the
leaner upon the breast.
We turn now to the question wMch most of aU concerns us
when we take an Apostolic or divinely-inspired book Into our
hands. 4. The Meaning. — In what sense are we to understand the
book ? What is it designed to teach us ? What does it mean ? No
book of the New Testament has been so singularly tossed about
among different and contradictory explanations. It Is not wonder
ful that it should have been so, for the Apocalypse affords oppor
tunities for variety of interpretation -such as few books do. The
wonder only Is that the Church should have so largely acquiesced
in this state of matters, and should not have been more Impa
tient of conclusions fatal to the intelligent reception of a book
proclaimed by her to be di-vine. Is there any way then by which
we may be guided through the labyrinth, any test that we may
apply to determine wMch of aU the varying interpretations has the
chief claim on our regard ?
We start, of course, with the supposition that each, to a certain
extent at least, may fairly represent the meaning of the words, and
that, at the beginning of our efforts, we are not entitled to put
aside any of them as absolutely impossible. Our test, then. Is one
strictly fair. Does the interpretation we adopt, whUe violating no
law of language, give unity, harmony, completeness, to the book ?
We have ah-eady, it wIU be remembered, seen that the book is
one. It comes from one author, and that evidently an author of
originality and force. It foUows, therefore, from the best known
laws of the human mind, that the meaning of the book must be
one, that every part of it will bear upon one result, and that no
part wUI be inconsistent -with the rest. Let this great law of
interpretation be fulfiUed m the case of any book that we are
endeavouring to understand, and we shall have no smaU reason to
believe that we have obtained possession of the key which unlocks
its meaning.
Before entering directly upon this, however, there Is one pre
possession to which it seems desirable to allude. We are told by
not a few leading scholars that it is Impossible to listen to any
other Interpretation of the Apocalypse than that which simply sees
in it the reflection of the historical circumstances In the midst of

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

THE EEVELATION OF ST. JOHN THE DIVINE. 219
been far too much overlooked by inquirers that chaps, xiii. and
xvii. of our book do not proceed upon the supposition of the pre
valence of a popular rumour that Nero had not died, but would
again return from his place of exUe to his old dominion. They
proceed upon the supposition of an actual death and of an actual
resurrection from the dead. Such an idea, however, had never
entered mto the popular mind ; and, if the Apostle entertained it,
he was simply false to the very circumstances upon which it is
believed that his whole description rests.
Again, the proposal has been made by Mommsen to find in the
second beast of chap. xiii. the imperial representatives In the
provinces, especiaUy the Eoman Governors in the Asiatic pro-
-vinces. The proposal is said by Harnack to be " very probable "
and to rest " on good grounds."* But can any one who gives
due attention to the fact that the Jewish Apocalyptlst speaks of
tMs second beast as " the false prophet," and who says of it that
'.' he doeth great signs, that he should even make fire to come
down out of heaven upon the earth in the sight of men " (chap.
xiU. 13), imagine for a moment that a merely secular, not reli
gious, authority could have supplied the foundation of the figure ?
The thing is impossible. But these Governors were purely secular
authorities. If the theory is correct the Apocalyptlst is again
false to his facts.
Once more, Harnack urges that the three-and-a-half years,
so often spoken of, must be taken UteraUy, " The three-and-a-
half years in xi. 2, xii. 14, xiu. 5 are taken from the Apoca
lypse of Daniel, and no deeper meaning is to be sought In
them." f In that case, however, the writer, if he writes in the
year 68, is not dealing with facts of which he is cognisant ; he
is predicting ; and, if he writes near the year 80, he is supposing
a state of affairs at variance with what he must have known to
have been the course of history.
The consequence of all tMs is that notMng can be done to
solve the important question of date. Difficulties of one kind
or another meet us at each step, and Harnack himself Is com
peUed to resort to the supposition, for which there Is not the
sUghtest evidence, that the book, after having been written under
Galba, underwent various revisions under Vespasian, about 75
to 79, and perhaps under Domltian, 93 to 96.
Thus it appears that the historical Interpretation, In the sense
above spoken of, faUs to explain the phenomena. It would cer
tainly be no sound argument for rejecting it that, did it afford
the only meaning of the book, the Apocalypse would not be
worthy of a place in the canon of Scripture. Proof that it is
not worthy of Its place there is open to any one who can estab-
* IT. S., p. 499. t TJ. S., p. 500, note 2.

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

THE REVELATION OF ST. JOHN THE DIVINE. 221
ment of principles in events ; but this, for the most part, only
because it Is necessary to give principles, in order that we may
see them, a, concrete form. Though, however, the two methods
of revelation have thus a good deal in common, they are in their
main characteristics distinct, and we are not to look in the Eevela
tion of St. John for any prediction of events beyond that great
event of which the whole New Testament is fuU — the manifesta
tion of the glory of the now exalted but hidden Lord, together
with His complete and final -victory over aU e-vU. The Apoca
lyptic writer, indeed, was hardly in a position to think of any
important succession of events. These could not happen without
presupposing a long time. for their evolution. But no sueh long
time was before Ms eyes. " The things wMch must shortly come
to pass" were what he saw. "The time is at hand" was the
feeling with which he contemplated their occurrence. " Behold,
I come quickly," was the cry which sounded in Ms ears from
the glorified Eedeemer for whom he waited (i. 1, 3; xxii. 20).
In so far as he thought of time at all he thought of it as con
tracted, hurried, brief. At any moment the Lord whom he loved',
and who was alive for evermore, might appear in glory.
The Apocalypse, accordingly, is only prophetic in the sense in
wMch the great discourse of our Lord Himself, contained In the
first tMee Gospels (Matt, xxiv., xxv., and paraUels), is prophetic.
"When carefully studied in its whole form of articulation and
substance, it appears to be simply an expansion of that discourse.
We may weU suppose that upon no words of Ms Lord would the
"beloved disciple" more constantly or more fondly dweU than
upon those wMch, if they told of Ms Master's going away, told
not less of His coming again — the Bridegroom of His Church,
the Master of His waiting servants, the Friend who united Him
self so closely to the humblest member of His Body (Matt. xxv.
1, &c., 14, &c., 40). As he lingered upon the great truths con-
tamed In that last discourse of Jesus they took shape in the figures
which the Old Testament and his Jewish training had made fami
Uar to him ; and the Apocalypse was the result. We shaU bs
-wrong, therefore, if we treat the book as predictive, and if we
seek m particular events either of the Church's or the world's
Mstory for the fulfilment of its supposed predictions.
(U.) The book is mainly occupied with the enunciation of the
Tgat principles wMtirh guicte'theafitioil Of the Church's Lord untU
Cetinie "of His return. It has sometimes been said of late that,
after the first Introduction of the Sa-viour in chap, i., we hear
nothing of Him again untU He comes forth at the head of His
armies in chap. xix. There cannot be a greater mistake. The
whole book is the action of Jesus, though of Jesus glorified;
and in tMs respect it corresponds to the Acts of the Apostles

2L"J BOOK BY BOOK.
as related to the Third Gospel. In that book the writer looks
back to something which he had previously written, and begins
what he has now to say with the words, " The former treatise I
made, 0 TheophUus, concerning aU that Jesus began both to do
and to teach, untU the day in which He was received up " (chap.
i. 1). Thus speaking he indicates by the word "began," that
he Is about to take up the thread of his earlier narrative, and to
explain to us the action of Jesus after He "parted from His
disciples and was carried up Into heaven" (Luke xxiv. 51). Thus
also is it with St. John in the Eevelation, and there is no -vision
of the book In which the action is not that of Jesus glorified.
There is this difference, indeed, that whUe the Acts of the
Apostles shows us, in the events of Mstory, how the great King
and Head of all founds and propagates His Church in the world,
the Apocalypse shows us in symbolic representation the prin
ciples upon which He does so. The latter book thus becomes the
emblematic delineation of that great struggle between Ught and
darkness, between righteousness and unrighteousness, between
CMist and Satan, wMch constitutes the essence of the Church's
and the world's Mstory. The Church and the world, in its Johan
nine sense, are fundamentally opposed to one another, and both
make ceaseless efforts to rule the heart and to control the destiny
of man. We are invited by St. John to take our stand upon a
commanding height, and to watch the struggle from its begin
ning to its close. Nor can it be said that to confine the Apoca
lypse to this one thought is to give it a field meagre, hmited,
and at last made tame and wearisome by constant repetition.
"Whether we aUow it at first or not, this is really the history of
humanity as it passes onward to that goal to wMch aU tMngs
both around and withm It point, and for which ' ' the whole crea
tion groaneth and travaUeth in pain together untU now " (Eom.
viii. 22). There is the mustering of the hosts ; there is the shock
of battie ; there is the deepening eagerness of the combatants ;
there are angels looking on as well as men ; there is the pre
servation of the righteous ; there is the overthrow of the wicked ;
there are the haUelujahs of heaven and earth as good gains its
victory ; there are the lamentations of aU who had been made
rich by the world's dainties as, like a great mUlstone cast into
the sea, "Babylon, the great city, is cast down, and shaU be
found no more at all " (chap. xvui. 21). The manifestation of
principles Uke these can never paU upon us. They are rather a
source of profound and endless interest, untU we feel that we can
no longer sit inactive spectators upon our height, but must come
to the help of the Lord, to the help of the Lord against the
mighty (Judges v. 23).

THE EEVELATION OF ST. JOHN TIIE DIVINE, 223
(Ui.) The action of the book covers the whole Christian era
from its beginning to it's end. Perplexed by such words as those
which have been aheady quoted regarding the shortness of the
time, and seeing in the visions of the Seer representations only
of events contemporaneous with Mmself, many commentators have
thought it necessary to limit St. John's field of vision to things
passing around Mm at the moment when he wrote. Only a shght
inspection of the book is sufficient to show that such limitation
is impossible. It is true that St. John did start from the events
of Ms own day, but he beheld in them illustrations of principles
wMch had marked the dealings of God with His people in aU
past ages of His Church, and wMch would continue to mark His
deaUngs to the end. That end is constantly before him. It is
not reached either in the destruction of Jerusalem or in any
prospect of the overtMow of the Eoman power. It comes only
with the final manifestation of the Lord, with the final judgment
of the ¦wicked, and with the casting of death and Hades into the
lake of fire.
No eventa in the previous Mstory of the Church or the world
can possibly exhaust the meaning of the visions seen by the
Apostle. He passes on tMough aU intervening time to the instant
when sin and Satan shaU be for ever crushed, and when they who
have overcome by the blood of the Lamb shaU be confirmed in
their everlasting triumph. Other commentators who have felt
tMs have resorted to an entirely different expedient In order to
meet the difficulties which beset them. Instead of referring the
Apocalypse to the opening, they have Umited it to the closing
years of the CMistian age. They have supposed that the Seer
takes Ms stand in the far distant future, and that he deals with
nothing but what is immediately to precede the winding up of the
present dispensation. This view, however, is not less untenable
than the one la,st mentioned. It is Inconsistent with any fair
interpretation of the Seer's own language. It renders it neces
sary to understand such phrases as these, "The things which
must shortly come to pass," "The time is at hand," "Behold,
I come quicHy," as meamng, not that, reckoning from the
point at which the Seer stood, they would soon happen, but
that when they did happen no more than a brief period would
be required for the carrymg tMough of aU that was involved in
them. Sueh cannot be the ineamng of the words. If one thing con
nected with the book is clearer than another, it is that St. John
wrote to the men of his own day, that he felt for their trials
and temptations and sorrows, and that he designed to show them
that there was an aspect of their circumstances wMch ought to

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

THE EEVELATION OF ST. JOHN THE Dl^VINE. 225
then standing, and in the very same sentence to understand sym-
boUcaUy the words, "measure them that worsMp therein " ? Yet
upon this nuxture of literal and symboUcal interpretation is
founded what may, -without impropriety, be caUed the mam
argument for assigning the book to a date prior to the destruc
tion of Jerusalem. One prmciple or another ought to be adopted,
and to be appUed consistently throughout.
To nothing do these remarks apply more than to the interpre
tation of the numbers of the Apocalypse. The use of numbers,
of 3, 4, 7, 10, 12, lOO's, lOOO's, forms one of the most remarkable
phenomena with which, in reading the book before us, we have
to deal. To connect with numbers thoughts of a kind altogether
different from numerical Is so strange to us that we have the
greatest difficidty in working ourselves into the stilte of mind
wMch leads to it. That, notwithstanding tMs, they often have
such a force m the Apocalypse can be denied by none ; and the
old question returns. Is this only occasionaUy, or is it mvarlably
the case ? The same answer as before must be given. To inter
pret at one time UteraUy and at another time symboUcaUy can
lead to nothing but confusion ; and unless, therefore, instances
can be adduced m wMch the hteral meaning is obviously neces
sary, it is our manifest duty to abide by the symboUcal. What
an amount of unprofitable speculation would have been saved to
the Church had this principle been adhered to in the interpretation
of chap. XX. it is unnecessary to say.
There is, mdeed, an idea m many minds that " symboUcal " is
no more than another name for "¦wilful" Interpretation; that m
applying the principle every interpreter is left to the play of Ms
own fancy ; and that, when we take it as our guide, we may make
anything of Scripture that we please. No idea can be more un-
phllosopMcal or more inconsistent with the reahties of the case,
Symbolical language may be a not less definite exponent of
human thought than any other form of speech that we employ.
The same symbol may be used, and on the lips of a true teacher
wUl be used, as strictly as any word that literaUy expresses Ms
idea. The meaning may. In the present instance, be at first
more difficult to discover, because m the West, wMch is so
much colder and more pMegmatic than the East, we are accus
tomed to give much less play to the imagination than is done
in regions at once warmer, grander, and more mysterious.
But of tMs we may be assured, that a distinct meamng Ues be
neath the figures that are employed, and that, even when we
may not be able to discover every particular of that meanmg, we
may at least discover enough to put us in possession of the
writer's mind.

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

THE REVELATION OF ST. JOHN THE DIVINE. 227
her relation to the world ; in her strength and in her weakness ;
in her steadfastness and in her declensions ; In her prosperity and
in her sufferings ; in her outward poverty and in her true riches ;
in the distinction existing between the real and nominal foUowers
of Christ ¦within her borders ; in the just indignation of her
Supreme Head against the one, and in His leading the other to
the fuU possession of His own triumph In the presence of His
Father and their Father, of His God and their God.
In the first three chapters of the book we have thus the subject
of which it Is to treat set before us. That subject is the Lord
Jesus Christ, not so much in the essential and external glory of
His divine Sonship as in the glory belonging to Him as the Head
of His Church. In other words, the si^bject of the Apocalypse
is the Church in Christ ; and the object of the book Is to present
to us a picture of her trials and struggles in the world until the
time when, at His Second Coming, her Lord makes His glory
manifest, and completes His victory over aU her enemies.
{e) The fourth and fifth chapters, again, are to be regarded a
songs of triumph sung even before the contest begms, and con
veying to us an assurance of what wiU be the issue. It wIU not
be forgotten that this Is elsewhere the manner of St. John.
Before the great contest dehneated in the Fourth Gospel, wMch
begins at chap, v., we have the victory of the Eedeemer over
Nicodemus, the woman of Samaria, and the GaUlean nobleman.
When speaking in Ms First Epistle of the struggles of CMistians
with the world, St. John uses the words, "And tMs is the victory
that hath overcome the world, even our faith" (chap. v. 4). He
does not speak of the weapons with which the CMistian soldier
prepares himself for the battle, but of the " victory " with which,
as if it were his armour, he is from the first equipped. In other
words, it Is St. John's manner of thought to sing Ms song of
triumph before the fight begins, and that is exactly what he does
in the fourth and fifth chapters of the Apocalypse.
(d) At chap. yi. the real drama of the book opens, and from
that point onward to chap. xvui. 24, we have before us the
struggle of light with darkness and of good with e^vil. That
struggle is mainly suggested by the tMee series of visions known
as the Seals, the Trumpets, and the .Btiada.(.thfir. last being- im
proper^ spoken ot in the Authorised Version as vials). As
compared with the two series which f oUow it, the first series, that
of the Seals, is general, including, as it does, the deaUngs of
God both with the world and the Church. It carries us onward
to the end of the present Dispensation, to the time when that
Eedeemer whom the world scorned and persecuted, and whom
even a large portion of the Church domed, ¦wiU return, " ren-

228 BOOK BY BOOK
dering vengeance to them that know not God and ¦to them that
obey not the gospel of our Lord Jesus," but "to be glorified in
His saints and to be admired in aU them that beUeved" (2 Thess.
I. 8, 10).
After a short interval in chap, vii., in wMch we have two
visions of encouragement and consolation, assuring us of the
safety of God's cMldren amidst aU their trials, we enter upon the
second great series of visions, that of the Trumpets. This series
Is occupied mainly with the judgments of God upon the world,
and it, too, after visions of consolation introduced at exactly the
same point as in the previous series, brings us, at chap. xi. 18,
to the end, to "the time of the dead to be judged, and the time
to give reward to God's servants the prophets, and to the saints
and to them that fear God's name, the small and the great ; and
to destroy them that destroy the earth." The tMrd series of
visions still remains, that of the Bowls. These Bowls, in which
the seven last plagues of the -wrath of God are fiUed up, relate
mainly to the Church, and in so far as they teU us of judgment,
they apply to the degenerate and apostate Church, that great
outward Church out of which CMist's true people have to be
called, as His true sheep had been caUed by Him when He was
on earth out of the fold of Israel. We have to do, however, in
the first instance with the universal Church, the vine of God's
planting, the Institution charged to carry on the contest with the
enemies of God.
These enemies, then, we ought to know, and hence the position
of chaps, xii. and xlii. In these chapters the three chief adver
saries of the real klngd6m of God in the world are described.
The first Is the dragon or Satan. The second Is the power of
the world strl-ving to withdraw our thoughts from the unseen
and eternal, and to confine them to the seen and temporal. The
third is the spirit of a carnal reUglousness, Uke that which so
bitterly opposed Jesus in the days of His flesh, and sought to
substitute its superficial and hoUow forms for the depth, the
sincerity, and the freedom of a true life with God, These two
last agencies always work together, and help one another against
Christian truth. NotMng so welcome to the mere politicians of
tMs world as a faithless Church wMch wUl help them to use
men for their own selfish ends. NotMng so welcome to a faith
less Church as the honours, the riches, and the spoUs which the
mere pohticians of the world have to bestow.
In this part of the Apocalypse, therefore, the passion of the
Seer bums with its intensest flame. The degenerate Church is
represented under the figure of Babylon. In quick succession
the contents ofthe bowls are poured out upon her, untU she is

THE EEVELATION OF ST. JOHN THE DIVINE. 229
cast Uke a great miUstone into the sea; and company after
company of those who had been enriched with the abundance of
her dainties lament -with piercing cries her disastrous and irre
mediable fate. TMs series, Uke the two former, brings .us to the
end. (e) Then, in chap. xix. and the earlier part of chap, xx., the
King of kings and Lord of lords comes forth in His victorious
progress, accompanied by the armies of the redeemed, who ride,
like Him, upon white horses, and share His triumph.
(/) In the latter part of chap. xx. and in chap. xxi. to chap.
xxii. 5, aU Christ's enemies are destroyed, and the happiness of
the saints is perfected. Upon the mUlennlal bliss of the re
deemed, and upon the glory and happiness of the New Jerusalem,
It is not possible to dweU. Suffice it to say that we are to behold
In the former a figure of the perfected and eternally secured life
of those who not only die but rise with CMist ; and that in the
latter we have a bright and beautiful, as weU as elevating,
picture of that new condition into which the foUowers of Jesus
are introduced even on this side the grave, and amidst the labours
and trials of their present pilgrimage.
Nothing, we are persuaded, has tended more to perplex the
interpretation of the Apocalypse than the idea that that holy city
which St. John saw "coming down out of heaven from God,
made ready as a bride adorned for her husband," is Intended to
represent a glorious state into which the redeemed shaU enter
sooner or later after the close of their earthly pilgrimage, but
before they obtain possession of their eternal Inheritance. Taking
such a -view it is impossible to interpret fairly aU the expressions
of the passage, while it deprives us at the same time of the
thought of those subUme privileges which, as we are everywhere
taught in Scripture, are not the future only but the present in
heritance of God's chUdren.
It is true mdeed that even they who are " in " Christ Jesus
are stUl surrounded by a darkness which has no place in the
heavenly Jerusalem, that they have stUl to shed tears which
are there washed away, and that they have stUl to fear that they
must meet that death which shaU there be swaUowed up of
victory. CalUng these things to mmd it can be no matter of
surprise that many have difficulty m beUeving that the bright
ness and glory of tMs celestial city can under any point of view
represent an eartMy scene through wMch we are thankful if we
may but grope our way, " fightings without and fears witMn."
Yet let them remember that the Christian Ufe has two sides, those
two wMch are brought forward so prominently by the Apostle
when he speaks of himself and his feUow ministers " as dying.

230 BOOK BT BOOK.
and behold we Uve ; as chastened, and not kiUed ; as sorrowing,
yet alway rejoicing ; as poor, yet making many rich ; as having
notMng, yet possessing aU tMngs" (2 Cor. v. 1, 9, 10). Let them
remember that, if the foUower of Christ dies daily with his Lord,
he also rises with Him daily, and ascends to the heavenly places
and is set down there, Ms life not maintained amidst the things
of earth but "Md with Christ in God." Let these thoughts be
ever present to their minds, and they wIU not have much diffi
culty in seeing that in the description of the New Jerusalem we
have the ideal side of the CMistian' s position, elevated to its
highest point and iUuminated with its brightest colouring, but
stIU a side that Is true to one aspect of Ms present state.
One of the great lessons of the Apocalypse, indeed, consists in
this, that it unfolds such a bright view, not of a world beyond
the grave, but of this present world, when we contemplate it -with
the eye of faith, and penetrate through the veU of sense to the
great springs of spiritual action by wMch it is reaUy moved. It
may be do-abted if In this respect there is one single picture of
the Apocalypse appUcable only to the future inheritance of the
saints. What is set forth in its apparent visions of future happi
ness is rather the present privUege of beUevers, when they look
at what they possess in the light of that CMistian revelation in
wMch old things pass away, and aU tMngs are made new. If
we enter upon the study of it with this feeling, and it is a feeling
wMch, as the spirituaUty of the Church increases, -wiU more and
more commend itself to the CMistian mind, the visions of tMs
book wUl be to us what they were to the Apostle who first beheld
them. They will give us feUowship on the loneliest rock of the
wide ocean of human Ufe, and they wUl Ughten the darkest spots
of earth with a heavenly and unchanging glory.
(g) The EpUogue of the book, beginning at chap. xxu. 6,
closes all

THE END,

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

The Tenderness of Christ.
Crown 8vo, 3s. 6d.
Questions of Faith and Duty.
Fourth Thousand. Crown 8vo, 5 s.
Contents: — The Personal Life — The Home — Christ
Crucified — Christ Risen — Christ Ascended — Secret
Faults — Sorrow — Service, &c., &c.
" They should awaken the careless, stimulate the godly, and confii-m
the waverers." — Record.
The Yoke of Christ.
Twelfth Thousand. Crown 8vo, 5s.
Contents : — Marriage — Illness — Letter - Writing —
Friends — Money — The Loss of Friends.
"The six essays which make np the volume are the ripe fruit of twenty
years' meditation, and they have the 'nuttiness ' of age about them."
Saturday Review.
The Gospel of Christ.
Sixth Thousand. Crown 8vo, 4s. 6d.
" May well take its place amongst the classics of experimental religion. "
Record.
The Claim of Christ on the Young*
Thhd Thousand. Crown 8vo, 2 s. 6d.
" They deserve to be ranked amongst the most remarkable pulpit
utterances of modern times." — Churchman.
The Presence of Christ.
Twentieth Thousand. Crown 8vo, 3s. 6d.
On the Loss of Friends, sewed, 3d.
On Being 111. sewed, 3d.
ISBISTER & CO., Limited, Covent Garden, London.

By the Venerable F. W. Farrar, D.D.
Archdeacon and Canon of Westminster.

The Lord's Prayer. Sermons
Preached in Westminster Abbey. Third Thousand.
Crown 8vo, 3s. 6d.
"Most racy and readable." — Expository Times.
The Voice From Sinai; the Bases
of God's Moral Law. A Series of Discourses on the Ten
Commandments. Second Thousand. Crown 8vo, 3s. 6d.
" This book is one which speaks to the conscience and the heart, and
it sets an example of fearless, faithful, and practical preaching, which
ministers in general would do well to imitate." — Scotsman.
Every-day Christian Life ; or, Ser
mons by the Way. Sixth Thousand. Crown 8vo, 3s. 6d.
" Altogether a kindly, manly book, meeting a real need of a practical,
earnest age, in an able, refreshing, and understandable Way." — PaU MaU
Gazette.
Truths to Live By. A Companion
'Volume to " Every-day Christian Life." Fourth Thousand.
Crown 8vo, 3s. 6d. _
" No theologian is better qualified to speak with lucidity of the cardinal
tenets of the Christian creed. Canon Farrar has attempted to set forth
those tenets ' in simple and untechnical language,' and he has admirably
succeeded." — Daily Telegraph.
By the Bight Hon. W. F. Gladstone, 31. P.

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

,y...^. ^
J"*'. ...I-

¦ I : I'

¦TftS"

;•¦"'

•'>.

j- ¦:-•.¦:

w.

^:''|,'. ¦'

1;'. ¦

•V.V^-,'..:..

^;.;v ? • ,.

¦". ',

:*¦•,¦¦?¦¦.•'¦¦

'\> \

1. . ¦ 1

.'• ' , V '

- ..'¦¦'.',1

<\'

¦ -V'-i •
?V.V. ':''..' .
¦ ,'., .' • .,..
."•'. ¦¦'.¦.¦¦'¦.'
vi}'^'
¦i. 1 **• V. ¦
¦ ¦',' j< . ¦
.-. ¦.¦,¦,'¦>,•. 1
tiA-
¦ ,iV ¦• : ¦¦¦
" ' .'\'. ' ¦,
•'^Jrf'^
rht'
W^j'^P^a:
. ^i-'i::' ¦•
nm^;i
-.•:,,,V'-".v,w;';,
m;-'M""^
w:mM
!.,VV 'v .
ftVR
¦Av^';'^-..-:'''>-, •
• .'*';';•*..,'
*.;¦', .-i-^
^i"^'!
';fe:',0.;f'i..-
..K-; ¦'¦¦•'
f^^'
¦'5.1G0V. .'.',¦¦ ¦
j'.r
¦''-•.' '
W
iKf;^;sK';''
/jife^i
¦ V *
.WA
*,'.."',^-.*'v';'j(i
1 "f;
'.iiiv;
. '..'.-c ', :,*¦ ,,yw
I.I _-,•¦¦
5t
f--W
"'« y'" -^
"' •''¦¦ .
'^•
'•''• •'? '-i'-*! '
-A rilM^'
;^?i?^'^
^|<
^^'f
,-,'-'.• '/.• \
Sii-^L.!!^
¦¦¦»¦¦ 1, ¦ ¦ ¦
'.•V
•i-'ij '» '
¦O^IW*^
I,'.'. ;¦
'.-¦'¦
¦• •¦' \
S.'. ¦g,
J-jS\.'. ..¦?¦ ,
^r
v^'
'¦V..";. . ¦.
•¦;4
¦r^
^
tS:ii:-
••'J
-V
SpjlJ!Wij^'!,';.i!.
/./^^ r. ;
'.' 'V
i
M
;•¦ '1 ¦ •,
¦Vj* ¦ *
%.¦¦ ¦« 1 •
",-(,•
^^¦0X'^i'fk
S'^'X^V
ji-i^--.- ¦
fr^
'•¦•'f >!•'!'¦.'''',¦''!'¦
¦¦;¦;;¦¦;•• '¦
m;*.jv-
;j^-'/
.;,;'¦, 'i'.'A'?-'''
rt.,"<i.. .^  ¦
¦¦ « .
¦yt..
.•JJr
^&^ / • ' ' ¦
7.!. ft! .¦.'!.'! '¦¦¦'.¦
ff'W'rt*.'! ' .. ¦